Case LX: In Rebuilding a Parish Church, May the Name Be Changed?

In a certain parish, composed chiefly of working-people, the church was found to be too small, and a new building was imperatively necesssary. From many quarters the wish was expressed that the new church should be dedicated to St. Joseph, patron of the working classes, particularly because the patron saint of the church is a saint little known. May the title of this church be changed?

^* By A. Pachinger.

Ever since the time of the apostles every church receives a name, as does man in Holy Baptism. It is self-evident that the patron of a place or of a country has nothing to do with the title of a church.

Churches may be dedicated to the Most Holy Trinity; to Christ; or to one of the mysteries in His life, as, for instance, the Transfiguration; the Blessed Virgin and events from her life, such as the Annunciation; the Angels and Saints. A church can not be dedicated without special permission from Rome to a servant of God only declared Blessed or Venerable. Generally a church has only one patron Saint, but there are numerous cases where a church is dedicated to several Saints, as Cosmas and Damian, and even when their feasts are celebrated on different days, as Saints John and Francis.

Rome adheres to the principle that the title or name of the church should not be changed lightly. It would indeed hurt the Christian feeling, if without any ado a patron saint, after having been regarded for centuries perhaps as the intercessor of a parish, should be suddenly deposed. The Apostolic See has nevertheless regard for the wishes of t'.ie people by consenting to the addition of a second name, or patron, to the old one.

Gasparri (de Euch. 1, 93) writes: “The title of a church generally ought not to be changed; that is, neither should another be added, nor, if the title is multiple, should any one be suppressed or another substituted. This change can be made when a church that has been destroyed is rebuilt; but even in this case it is most fitting that the same title be retained and, at most, a new one added, as the Sacred Congregation of Rites prescribed on January 16, 1885.”

In the year 1843 the question was proposed in Rome: Whether, once a titular patron has been assigned to a church, it is lawful for the bishop for a reasonable cause to change him for another; and, insofar as the answer is negative, the bishop earnestly begs that by apostolic indult this faculty be granted to him in the case. The answer was: To 1: it is not lawful. To 2: the favor is granted of taking St. Anne as co-titular with St. Andrew the Apostle.

In Rome the question introduced at the beginning has been before decided that: The old title is to be retained, and a new one can be added to it. Gasparri introduces three such decisions (l. c. p. 92.) and summarizes the result in these words:

“The Sacred Congregation of the Council judged that, when a parish church is transferred to another church recently erected, the old title is to be retained and transferred to the substituted church, but that a second title may be added.”

Important is the observation of this famous canonist: “When by an act of the Holy See a new title has been added to the old one, the old title does not lose its prerogatives, and all the titles are to be regarded as equally principal. A bishop cannot by his own authority add another title to an existing one without a new dedication of the church.”

In our case the pastor can therefore safely elect St. Joseph as contitularis, asking the Bishop, at the dedication of the new building, to add this new name to the old one. The previous patron saint must, however, be retained, and his feast day is to be observed as heretofore according to the rubrics; the new one, now aeque principalis, will be treated by the parish priests in Breviary, and holy Mass, exactly the same as the old patron saint. “If a church has several titular patrons, not as one but separately, the feasts of all are to be celebrated on their proper days with the indicated rite, provided they are all equally principal” (l. c. 94).