Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The royal christening
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
Prince George was christened today.
I like the idea of the royals aiming to serve God in humility. The Queen seems to be genuine in her faith. I would like to think that Prince George will be brought up in the Christian faith, as the christening indicates.
What are your thoughts about this? Is it likely that the number of christenings will increase now that this example has been set?
-------------------- Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
He's a cute baby. And no.
-------------------- Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
Christenings? Possibly not. Attempts to copy the royal Christening gown that will actually just look cheap and tacky? Quite possibly.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
It's just a bit more window dressing in the campaign to support the anachronistic royal family and indulge the tendency so many British people have to avoid being properly grown-up and taking responsibility as citizens for the sort of society we have.
-------------------- My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by hatless: It's just a bit more window dressing in the campaign to support the anachronistic royal family and indulge the tendency so many British people have to avoid being properly grown-up and taking responsibility as citizens for the sort of society we have.
Or it could be a Christening.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Anglican't: quote: Originally posted by hatless: It's just a bit more window dressing in the campaign to support the anachronistic royal family and indulge the tendency so many British people have to avoid being properly grown-up and taking responsibility as citizens for the sort of society we have.
Or it could be a Christening.
That, too. It's just a Christening for a baby. At another level it's a media event, and means other things. [ 23. October 2013, 23:25: Message edited by: hatless ]
-------------------- My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Raptor Eye: I like the idea of the royals aiming to serve God in humility.
quote: The duchess carried her newly christened son out of the chapel after the ceremony, and the guests then left for tea hosted by the Prince of Wales at Clarence House.
Attending a reception at Buckingham Palace after the event, the Queen told guests how much she had enjoyed the ceremony.
I'm sure there are lots of ways to describe having a ceremony presided over by the Archbishop of Canterbury before returning to the palace where you live, but "humility" isn't a word that automatically springs to mind. This seems like projection.
-------------------- Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Humility is relative.
(Insert your preferred joke here)
-------------------- I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
I couldn't care less about that Christening... but for some reason I really loved how that Prince Whatever-He-Is-Called gives a kiss left and right on the cheek of his grandmother (I assume), steps back, and ... bows his head to the Queen.
Now, that is class, right there.
-------------------- They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by IngoB: I couldn't care less about that Christening... but for some reason I really loved how that Prince Whatever-He-Is-Called gives a kiss left and right on the cheek of his grandmother (I assume), steps back, and ... bows his head to the Queen.
Now, that is class, right there.
In Argentina, the police do this in reverse: saluting their superior, then planting kisses on both cheeks. I have suggested this to my friends in the RCMP, but to date they have not embraced the practice.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
If the dictionary is to believed, "Christening" goes way back to Middle English. I've seen it in older American texts, but it seems to have died out in North American English.
-------------------- Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
Is this a morse on Bishop Chartres' cope? I've never seen one quite like that (and don't know that I care to!).
-------------------- "...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe." ~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
Brits call it both, depending on churchmanship (lower church folk tend to prefer baptism IME), but 'Christening' is the lay/folk term. It's the anglo-saxon term.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Chapelhead
I am
# 21
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by hatless: It's just a bit more window dressing in the campaign to support the anachronistic royal family and indulge the tendency so many British people have to avoid being properly grown-up and taking responsibility as citizens for the sort of society we have.
I think I'd agree with that sentiment more if 'the anachronistic royal family' was replaced by 'religious belief'.
-------------------- At times like this I find myself thinking, what would the Amish do?
Posts: 9123 | From: Near where I was before. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Unlike many of the baptisms in our church, at least at this one it is certain that at least some of the relatives are churchgoers and have some belief.
-------------------- Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
Brits call it both, depending on churchmanship (lower church folk tend to prefer baptism IME), but 'Christening' is the lay/folk term. It's the anglo-saxon term.
I had the impression that Christening was also used in a wider sense for giving thanks and naming (and hence primarily used when it wasn't baptism). So you could get Christened and then much later Confirm it at Baptism. Or Christened at Baptism and much later Confirmation. Not sure if it's true or if it's only a misconception on my part.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
I don't think so - baptism = christening in the church of England. And churches that do thanksgiving services don't use the term christening.
-------------------- mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jay-Emm: quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
Brits call it both, depending on churchmanship (lower church folk tend to prefer baptism IME), but 'Christening' is the lay/folk term. It's the anglo-saxon term.
I had the impression that Christening was also used in a wider sense for giving thanks and naming (and hence primarily used when it wasn't baptism). So you could get Christened and then much later Confirm it at Baptism. Or Christened at Baptism and much later Confirmation. Not sure if it's true or if it's only a misconception on my part.
No, christening is just another name for baptism, they are identical. Also, christening/baptism is not a naming ceremony - candidates are already named! Many babies who are christened/baptised are never confirmed anyway. There are thanksgiving services used by those who believe in credo-baptism but they are not called christenings.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Also, christening/baptism is not a naming ceremony - candidates are already named!
Although confusingly there is a practice of referring to the name given at birth as the "baptismal name". And even more confusingly there is the practice in some cultures of taking a new name at the time of baptism.
-------------------- mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Both linguistically and liturgically this may be nonsense, but there's a sort of difference in usage. Babies tend to be christened. Adults tend to be baptised.
There was a strong impression in the past that until a baby had been baptised, he or she was not really named. This is partly a matter of traditional belief, folk religion, but it may also be a hang over from before the introduction of the registration of births, marriages and deaths. Before that time the first record of a new person is their entry in the baptismal register.
I had an elderly relative who, I was told, had the wrong name because the practice was that the butcher's delivery boy (on a bicycle) took the names down to the vicar the previous day, and he had got this little chap's wrong.
-------------------- Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Enoch: I had an elderly relative who, I was told, had the wrong name because the practice was that the butcher's delivery boy (on a bicycle) took the names down to the vicar the previous day, and he had got this little chap's wrong.
And once you've been christened 'Sausages' you're stuck with it....
(I seem to remember that makes up a chunk of the plot - if you can call it that - of Tristram Shandy) [ 24. October 2013, 08:19: Message edited by: Firenze ]
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Crœsos: I'm sure there are lots of ways to describe having a ceremony presided over by the Archbishop of Canterbury before returning to the palace where you live, but "humility" isn't a word that automatically springs to mind. This seems like projection.
The ABC is a priest, is he not? Is there something about being part of a service he is leading that inherently precludes humility?
Also, plenty of people have post-baptism receptions at their home. Does it matter where their home happens to be, or how nice it is?
Or is it just that you think it's impossible to be humble while having more nice things than most people? In which case the majority of the world's population laughs at any pretensions of humility you or I might have.
-------------------- Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
In anglophone (and Anglican) Canada, older people (pre-BAS) use Christening, but clergy and post-1980 types will use baptism. AFAIK anglophone RCs have always used baptism. I have a vague perception that Presbyterians and Presbie-roots UCC members use Christening, but other UCC folk use baptism, but that might be a local (Ottawa valley) phenomenon.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by hatless: It's just a bit more window dressing in the campaign to support the anachronistic royal family and indulge the tendency so many British people have to avoid being properly grown-up and taking responsibility as citizens for the sort of society we have.
I assure you that it is not only the British who avoid "being properly grown-up" but fear that it is rather universal (I might except the Icelandics on this), and likely totally unconnected with royal families, anachronistic or otherwise-- I would blame television more than the monarchy. My recent visit to Argentina suggests that kings and queens are not required for adolescent citizen consciousness.
In any case, archbishops of Canterbury have for the past thousand or so years functioned as chaplains to the head of state, and I daresay that Abp Welby didn't mind having an excuse to avoid GAFCON. Indeed, families of all classes wishing the archbishop's presence might check his foreign appointments calendar and help him out with invitations to baptisms on the Isle of Sheppey. He might even want to make himself free for a shipmeet.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
I appreciate the difficulties in this, but in my church (CofE), it's explicit that a christening is a public event, with vows made in public, before and in the presence of the local congregation who make promises to help the parents and godparents in their duties.
There is no such thing as a 'private christening', only one from which the people of the church have been deliberately excluded.
-------------------- Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Doc Tor: I appreciate the difficulties in this, but in my church (CofE), it's explicit that a christening is a public event, with vows made in public, before and in the presence of the local congregation who make promises to help the parents and godparents in their duties.
There is no such thing as a 'private christening', only one from which the people of the church have been deliberately excluded.
Having IRL many years ago touched the security world, it is difficult to underestimate the need for such things. In any case, I would compare it more to a baptism/christening held in an institutional chaplaincy setting, such as a military base or prison, where general access by the outside public is limited. Or to one of the very rare households where there is a private chapel and attendance at services features a congregation of family, friends, and employees. In these places there is no walk-in congregation, but the people of the church are there as the public, and doing their part.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwalchmai
Shipmate
# 17802
|
Posted
When I was a lad, many years ago, church people used to to refer to christenings and everyone else in the village to "getting the baby done". I do not recall anybody ever saying that the latest member of the family was being baptised on Sunday.
It was also usual in those days for christenings to take place at a private service on Sunday afternoons. It is much better that it is now the norm (in the CofE - I can't speak for other denominations) for baptisms to take place at the main Sunday service. I never understood how baptism could be seen as welcoming a new member of the Church when other members of the Church were conspicuous by their absence.
Board members in the UK will no doubt remember David Beckham's penetrating observation on the subject - "I'm going to get Brooklyn christened but I don't know which religion yet".
Posts: 133 | From: England | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Also, christening/baptism is not a naming ceremony - candidates are already named!
But centuries ago, it was, as I understand it. When baptisms typically occured within days of birth, it was the time when the name was conferred or announced.
As for "baptismal names," that can either mean the name given at baptism or the name used at baptism.
quote: Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut: In anglophone (and Anglican) Canada, older people (pre-BAS) use Christening, but clergy and post-1980 types will use baptism. AFAIK anglophone RCs have always used baptism. I have a vague perception that Presbyterians and Presbie-roots UCC members use Christening, but other UCC folk use baptism, but that might be a local (Ottawa valley) phenomenon.
I've never heard American Presbyterians use "christening." In fact, the only Americans that I've ever heard use "christening" rather than "baptism" are the occasional Episcopalians and a few Baptists who think that by saying "christening," they're denying that what's happening with the baby is really baptism.
"Christening gown," however, is common. [ 24. October 2013, 13:17: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
-------------------- The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
IconiumBound
Shipmate
# 754
|
Posted
Re: Baptism or Christening: I believe that the 1979 prayer book revised and emphasized the service of baptism and particularly eschewed the use of the word christening.
Ships are christened, babies are Baptised.
Posts: 1318 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut: quote: Originally posted by Anglican_Brat: Quick question [Tangent alert]
Why do Brits call it "Christening" when North Americans call it "baptism"?
In anglophone (and Anglican) Canada, older people (pre-BAS) use Christening, but clergy and post-1980 types will use baptism. AFAIK anglophone RCs have always used baptism. I have a vague perception that Presbyterians and Presbie-roots UCC members use Christening, but other UCC folk use baptism, but that might be a local (Ottawa valley) phenomenon.
I was born in the 1980's and will be around for the United Church's centenary, but while the United Church's dialect has many, many Scots terms (Minister, Session, manse, etc) it's baptism. Sessions approve baptisms. Our three service books, Celebrate God's Presence, The Service Book 1970 and the Book of Common Order all call or called it baptism and never used any other term.
-------------------- NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
A Private Baptism
Well, not really: the Chapel Royal is a proper working church. And it wasn't just members of the royal family present, there were six choirmen and the Children of the Chapel Royal (trebles to you and me) plus the Organist (Andrew Gant) and sub-organist.
At the moment Prince George's parents are based at Clarence House which is more-or-less part of St James's Palace - the Chapel Royal is therefore, in effect, their parish church.
And if you go to the communion on a Sunday it is not uncommon to find the Prince of Wales there... [ 24. October 2013, 16:02: Message edited by: L'organist ]
-------------------- Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
In western Canada, the term "to christen" has morphed into a celebration with alcohol. As in "we're christening my new chesterfield and ottoman, if you can drop by".
-------------------- Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety. \_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
That's become common in the UK, also. In fact, you can christen practically anything, even a bottle of whisky!
-------------------- I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stercus Tauri
Shipmate
# 16668
|
Posted
Our minister (presbyterian) insists that there is a great difference between christening and baptism, referring to christening as a naming ceremony for the child's family, whereas baptism is acceptance into the church family.
I'm not quite so fervent about it, but the Gospels tell the story (in English translations, anyway) of the 'baptism' of Jesus. I don't know when the term 'christening' first came into use, but clearly much later. A christening can be private, but a baptism is an open ceremony where the whole congregation promises to care for the child. So I always say 'baptism' on the grounds of historical usage and the fact that it is an inclusive event within the greater Christian community.
Maybe someone with more scholarly knowledge can straighten me out on this.
-------------------- Thay haif said. Quhat say thay, Lat thame say (George Keith, 5th Earl Marischal)
Posts: 905 | From: On the traditional lands of the Six Nations. | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by no prophet: In western Canada, the term "to christen" has morphed into a celebration with alcohol. As in "we're christening my new chesterfield and ottoman, if you can drop by".
When I was a school-boy, if you turned up at school in a brand new pair of shoes, your "mates" would "Christen" them by stamping on your feet.
quote: Originally posted by Jade Constable: Also, christening/baptism is not a naming ceremony - candidates are already named!
However, if you registered your child with the wrong name at birth, you can give them a new name at a baptism, as long as it's within 12 months of the original registration.
-------------------- there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help. Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
I wonder if this will cause an increase in the popularity of semi-private baptisims among American Episcopalians? Scratch an Episcopalian and you will often find an Anglophile, and American Anglophiles go gaga over the British Royal Family in a way that actual Brits find weird. So I expect lots of American Episcopalians to ask if they can have a family ceremony like the Royal Family rather than having their kid baptized at the main Sunday Eucharist. My current vicar is certain to say "no" to these requests because he's very much a 1960s type, and also a West Virginian with not a trace of Anglophilia in his soul. Also, yes, we will see imitations of the baptismal gown.
-------------------- “I’m so glad to be a translator in the 20th century. They only burn Bibles now, not the translators!” - the Rev. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Hairy Biker: However, if you registered your child with the wrong name at birth, you can give them a new name at a baptism, as long as it's within 12 months of the original registration.
The old view, in all the text books forty years ago, was that:- a. One could change one's surname by deed, statutory declaration, or if female, by marriage. b. One could not change a Christian name given at baptism at all. One could add an additional Christian name at confirmation, but that would be an extra name, not a replacement.
I can't remember whether the text books said anything at all about whether people who had never been baptised could change their first names.
-------------------- Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Try: I wonder if this will cause an increase in the popularity of semi-private baptisims among American Episcopalians? Scratch an Episcopalian and you will often find an Anglophile, and American Anglophiles go gaga over the British Royal Family in a way that actual Brits find weird. So I expect lots of American Episcopalians to ask if they can have a family ceremony like the Royal Family rather than having their kid baptized at the main Sunday Eucharist...
I doubt it -- except for those who own their own palaces with private chapels (in other words, no one).
-------------------- "...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe." ~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Al Eluia
Inquisitor
# 864
|
Posted
In my experience (I'm American and Episcopalian) it seems people use the word "christening" when they perceive it as a social nicety and "baptism" when they perceive it as initiation into the Body of Christ.
Posts: 1157 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Enoch: quote: Originally posted by Hairy Biker: However, if you registered your child with the wrong name at birth, you can give them a new name at a baptism, as long as it's within 12 months of the original registration.
The old view, in all the text books forty years ago, was that:- a. One could change one's surname by deed, statutory declaration, or if female, by marriage. b. One could not change a Christian name given at baptism at all. One could add an additional Christian name at confirmation, but that would be an extra name, not a replacement.
I can't remember whether the text books said anything at all about whether people who had never been baptised could change their first names.
In England you have no government-mandated name. You can call yourself anything you want, as long as its not a deliberate attempt to pass yourself off as someone you aren't.
-------------------- Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
It's the same in the United States— there's just a lot of paperwork involved to change your name on government forms and the like.
-------------------- Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
It was nicely done, with a short memdia moment. Now if this had happened at say Westminster Abbey , or any CofE church the security would have been stifling and well it would have been messey. And with this select congregation the prom,ises will be followed up on. HM the Queen is an firm believer and I also believe HRH the Prince of Wales is. And when will we ever see 4 monarchs and successors in the same photo again ? Not in my lifetime .
-------------------- "He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by PaulBC: And when will we ever see 4 monarchs and successors in the same photo again ? Not in my lifetime .
The last time it happened was in the mid-1890s, when the future Edward VIII was baptized in the presence of his father, later George V, his grandfather, later Edward VII, and Queen Victoria.
That was almost a hundred twenty years ago. Maybe in another hundred twenty years, it will happen again.
Moo
-------------------- Kerygmania host --------------------- See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Actually the last time it happened was in 1896: although not at the baptism there is a picture of Queen Victoria with her heir (Edward VII), his heir (George V) and BOTH of his heirs (Edward VIII and George VI)
-------------------- Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galloping Granny
Shipmate
# 13814
|
Posted
[Tangent: A constitution of Archbishop Peckham (ob. 1292) directs that "ministers shall take care not to permit wanton names to be given to children baptized, and if otherwise it be done, the same shall be changed by the bishop at confirmation." So if you brought baby Betty to be baptized, the priest was to name her Elizabeth. End tangent]
-------------------- The Kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it. Gospel of Thomas, 113
Posts: 2629 | From: Matarangi | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hairy Biker
Shipmate
# 12086
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Moo: quote: Originally posted by PaulBC: And when will we ever see 4 monarchs and successors in the same photo again ? Not in my lifetime .
The last time it happened was in the mid-1890s, when the future Edward VIII was baptized in the presence of his father, later George V, his grandfather, later Edward VII, and Queen Victoria.
That was almost a hundred twenty years ago. Maybe in another hundred twenty years, it will happen again.
Moo
Not ever according to Christopher Lee, former BBC royal correspondent in the New Statesman. The monarchy is doomed he recons. As soon as the Queen is gone there won't be much interest in the rest of 'em. Current celebrity couple will be middle aged before he's on the thrown and we'll have had enough of them by then.
-------------------- there [are] four important things in life: religion, love, art and science. At their best, they’re all just tools to help you find a path through the darkness. None of them really work that well, but they help. Damien Hirst
Posts: 683 | From: This Sceptred Isle | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
People were saying the same thing in the 70's about Chuck. Unless George is an only child and a complete pillock, this celebrity family is not going anywhere.
-------------------- I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
The Act of Settlement is a wonderful thing, isn't it?
-------------------- NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|