Lol Preston. We call the theif 'Dismus'. No Catholic can say irrefutably if that's what his Mom named him. But so what? There is some evidence his name was Dismus and there is some its not.<quoted text>According to St. John Chrysostom, the thief dwelt in the desert and robbed or murdered anyone unlucky enough to cross his path. According to Pope Saint Gregory the Great he "was guilty of blood, even his brother's blood; (fratricide)".
The thief's conversion is sometimes given as an example of the necessary steps one must take to arrive at salvation through Christ: awareness of personal sin, repentance of sin, acceptance of Christ and salvation's promise of eternal life. Further, the argument is presented that baptism is not necessary for salvation since the thief had no opportunity for it.
and everybody ; DONT BELIEVE THE WORDS OF CLAY. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS NAME IS THE NAME OF THE MALEFACTOR. THIS NAME WAS GIVEN OVER 300 YEARS AFTER THE FACT AND IT ONE OF THEIR (TRADITIONS), NOT BASED ON BIBLICAL FACTS OR TRUTHS.
Its no big deal. You people never would have known there was a theif next to Christ on the cross had it not been for the Catholic Church preserving that gospel account and safeguarding it until you guys showed up and 'took over'.