RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Vasquez109 on Friday 17 October 25 21:02 BST (UK)
-
Evening all!
Just wondering if anyone has come across anyone being baptised twice? I believe William Durnell baptised in 10 Jun 1753 was baptised again on 27 Aug 1755 in Kemble, Wiltshire. I initially thought that the second William was another child, but checking the burial register there are no entries for a William Durnell (inc. the myriad of spellings).
Which makes me think, was he born in Jun 1753 and not expected to live and then rebaptised when he was a little older? The handwriting is the same, so assuming the vicar knew that William was baptised again? Maybe not...
Wondering what all your opinions are on this?
Thanks.
David.
-
I believe that often if a baby has been baptised twice the first often shows " P" private was because the child might not have been expected to live then I think the 2nd baptism might show " received into the church" , please correct me if I have this the wrong way round..LM
-
Yes, I have an ancestor who was baptised twice. The family had been removed to another place of settlement and the second baptism was arranged by the workhouse. No idea why, perhaps the parents couldn't prove the first baptism but it's there in the record for all to see.
-
Unless this burial date was transcribed incorrectly?
Name William Durnel
Event Type Burial
Event Date 19 Jul 1751
Event Place Kemble, Wiltshire, England
Document Type Bishop's Transcripts
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6D91-VCLP?lang=en
-
Oh thats a good spot! 19 Jul 1751 in the register is Sarah, daughter of Richard Darby!!!
-
It does seem odd that the vicar didn't notice the second baptism of a two year old, especially as the 1753 and 1755 baptisms are on left and right pages facing each other (assuming just one William). From number of baptisms and burials, Kemble doesn't seem to have a large population. Maybe William (1753) died, but his burial wasn't recorded. I have read that sometimes deceased infants got slipped into someone else's grave if there was a convenient one to hand.
-
Some errors occur because the PR entries are not always written at the time of the event, sometimes just noted on a piece of paper of paper and entered later. When that happens it can lead to errors. It just depends on how the Incumbent and/or Parish Clerk work.
-
I have someone who was baptised in one church and then two days later baptised in another church a mile away. No idea why.
Martin
-
I have found a few instances of an ancestor or ancestor sibling baptised twice. In 1806 an eldest child was baptised a week apart in Shoreditch and Bethnal Green.
My great gran was baptised as a baby in 1895 in Oxford, and again at a church in Stamford Hill, London in early 1910, but she had left home by then and was in a convent training for domestic service, so I guess she was unsure if she had been baptised as a baby or it was the house rules.
-
I have an interesting example of a baby baptised twice on the same day!
This was in LIverpool. The mother was Irish and the father was English and it was their first child. The baby was baptised in the local CofE and in a local Catholic church.
I imagine the CofE was the first baptism early in the day, and then after getting home, the mother was unhappy. Did she sneak out secretly to the Catholic church while her husband was at work? Or did she get him to acquiesce to her wishes?
Either way, the mother obviously won the final argument because all their future babies were baptised in Catholic churches (under Latin names, which helped to make them quite elusive to researchers).
UKgirl
-
Did the Catholic baptism name a Patrinus or Matrina?
-
Helpfully, the mother's maiden name was included.
Also, both parents' names were given in Latin. And of course, not everyone knows that the Latin version of William is Guilelmus. In cases where this is the father's name, such baptisms may remain unnoticed - hiding in plain sight, as it were. The first baptism in CofE would put you off the scent, especially when there is no family knowledge of a Catholic connection.
UKgirl
-
I repeat - was a Patrinus and Matrina named?
-
Yes, sponsors' names were given. If you are suggesting that this proves that on that first Catholic baptism, the father must have been aware of what was happening? I expect that he was. I was just trying to make a little joke (about him being at work and not knowing what was going on.)
But neither of the sponsors had the father's family name.
I imagine that they had a bit of a squabble and the father gave in to placate his wife. Perhaps he was a kind and generous man and didn't really care one way or another. Who knows what went on?
Or, perhaps the important thing for them was that they covered both bases?
It's worth noting that most of their children' births went unregistered - so probably the family was a bit wary of authority.
UKgirl
-
Yes, sponsors' names were given. If you are suggesting that this proves that on that first Catholic baptism, the father must have been aware of what was happening?
I don't speculate. The father may not have been aware of what was happening. But the presence of sponsors indicates it was not "off the cuff"
-
Hanes Teulu, thank you for pointing that out.
I have just looked at the record again, just to double check. The baptisms took place on a Sunday, and there were 3 baptisms in the Catholic church on that day. And yes, there are 2 sponsors, one of whom I believe to be the sister of the mother. The male is unknown to me, but "seems" to have an Irish name.
Does it need a lot of planning to arrange a baptism with sponsors? Could it be a rush job: just grab your sister and some male you and your sister know? Or do you have to arrange it in advance?
I am surprised that it is on a Sunday - so morning worship & baptism in the CofE (presumably with the father's parents?) and afternoon/evening in the Catholic church (while the father was in the pub?)
The mind boggles!
UKgirl
-
I'm not familiar with the Catholic ceremony but the administration of the sacraments of the CoE required the officiating minister to meet parents
godparents** beforehand.
The baptismal ceremony opens with the question "Has this child been already baptized or no?" The administration of the sacraments specified a child must be baptized only ONCE with water.
As for Sunday see snippet
** - did not apply to godparents!
-
I'm not familiar with the Catholic ceremony but the administration of the sacraments of the CoE required the officiating minister to meet parents/godparents beforehand.
I wonder how many ministers really do. ;D
-
The pages aren't numbered but look for "Page 346/700"
https://archive.org/details/bookcommonpraye00chur/page/n345/mode/2up
-
I looked this up recently for another post about private/public baptisms in the C of E. Definitely no second baptism - the minister introduced the child to the congregation later.
Although we tend to view [public] baptism as a small family occasion, properly it seems to have been conducted during a regular service, after the second lesson. Therefore the child was normally received into the congregation at baptism.
- So probably on a Sunday.
-
The bigger the congregation the better - Sundays and Holy Days were the Church's recommended days.
-
Thats brilliant. Thank you!!
-
I looked this up recently for another post about private/public baptisms in the C of E. Definitely no second baptism - the minister introduced the child to the congregation later.
But this is 2 years later and neither baptism record is annotated private or received into church.
-
Because you cannot find a burial in the parish records you should not assume that the child baptised in 1753 did not die.
-
Because you cannot find a burial in the parish records you should not assume that the child baptised in 1753 did not die.
A I suggested in reply#5. The two year gap fits well with a typical gap between siblings
-
The bigger the congregation the better - Sundays and Holy Days were the Church's recommended days.
When tracing my maternal ancestry I discovered that the Manchester Collegiate Church (now the cathedral) operated an impressive production line for baptism almost every Sunday in the early 1800s - and I presume for a long time afterwards.
-
Because you cannot find a burial in the parish records you should not assume that the child baptised in 1753 did not die.
FindMyPast has transcripts only of the 2 baptisms. However, the earlier record reads 10 Jun 1754, not 10 Jun 1753 as posted. The FindMyPast entry could, of course, be transcribed incorrectly.
A I suggested in reply#5. The two year gap fits well with a typical gap between siblings
-
Because you cannot find a burial in the parish records you should not assume that the child baptised in 1753 did not die.
FindMyPast has transcripts only of the 2 baptisms. However, the earlier record reads 10 Jun 1754, not 10 Jun 1753 as posted. The FindMyPast entry could, of course, be transcribed incorrectly.
A I suggested in reply#5. The two year gap fits well with a typical gap between siblings
Actual images on Ancestry 1753 and 1755 on facing pages. Also mentioned in my replt #5
-
Unless this burial date was transcribed incorrectly?
Name William Durnel
Event Type Burial
Event Date 19 Jul 1751
Event Place Kemble, Wiltshire, England
Document Type Bishop's Transcripts
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6D91-VCLP?lang=en
I have found who this William was, so you can rule him out.
-
Interestingly, Wiliam's parents John and Esther (nee White) have two marriage records, one transcript says 3 November 1749 (Phillimore's transcript) and the other 3 November 1750 (Bishop's transcript) ::
-
I think that might be due to indexing, and taking Lady Day into consideration when converting to the modern calendar.