December 21, 2006
Here's a thought.
Perhaps people shouldn't name their children after saints, because if the children get canonized, then we are stuck with more of these cumbersome two-or-three-named saints: Francis de Sales, Francis Franco y Bahamonde (or Francis of Madrid), Thomas Aquinas, etc. When we really like to have one name saints: St. Jude, St. Barnabas, etc.
Otherwise the litany sounds a bit like a phone directory:
Lisieux, St. Therese of, pray for us!
Avila, St. Teresa of, pray for us!
And if this keeps up, which it hopefully will, because we hope that all of these folks become saints, we will have to go with something horrible like this:
All saints named John, Pray for us!
All saints named Peter, Pray for us!
Perhaps we should give all children unique names, so that if they are canonized, the Roman Calendar doesn't get too confusing.
Of course we could end up with a St. Aardvaark, as unique names would start having to take some strange turns.
Aardvaark is a really good name, though.
Just a thought.
Posted by erik at December 21, 2006 12:04 PMThat would be St. Golden State Erik. Of course, since I am in no danger of canonization, we don't have to worry about that.
Of course think of the advantages of playing the regional card: if you don't build me a proper church, I will move to Fremont!
And ten years later: "Press agents for St. Erik have announced that they are in negotiations with San Jose. However, knowing that he loathes San Jose, the chances of that are about as good as, well, his canonization. The smart money is on San Francisco with Berkeley running as a strong second."
Posted by: Erik Keilholtz at December 21, 2006 9:50 PMI don't know-"St. Erik of the Bay Area" sounds pretty good, and that way when you've left us both A's and Giants fans can pray to you when their clubs are slumping.
Posted by: John Salmon at December 21, 2006 6:10 PM