IGI - Complete?

[trish251]

Maybe I've just been unlucky, but I've rarely found anything of use in the IGI. Even records I've extracted from Registers myself don't seem to be on it - occasionally it points in the right direction, but the Parish coverage seems very thin in certain counties

Steve

Hi Steve

I guess from my point of view you have been unlucky. Fortunately my Scottish ancestors belonged to the Church of Scotland & most of the English the C or E, which seem to be quite well represented on the IGI. It may also relate to regions - I find very few of my London records on the IGI but many from small country parishes. I agree the coverage can vary by county.

Trish

[Necromancer]

Thanks Trish - I'm probably Googles best customer, and a fan of the Wikipedia .... but was interested in Guy's interpretation, because as far as I can see parish registers are the key to 'post-mortem' saving ordinances, so why are not all registers in the IGI ?

Perhaps due to lack of cooperation by the C of E and local authorities ? Norfolk springs to mind ...

Selective exaltation, sounds a bit discriminatory to me.

Having said all that  the IGI is a great resource, whatever its raison d'etre .....


Saving ordinaces are considered absolutely necessary for exaltation, and the church teaches that they may be performed on a person either during their lifetime or by proxy after the person has died.[27]

Therefore, church members participate in the saving ordinances on behalf of dead relatives and others whose names have been extracted from historical records.

The performance of these proxy ordinances are one of the functions of the church's temples. There have been certain exceptions to the church's policy of performing proxy work for all persons who have died: prior to the 1978 revelation admitting blacks to temple ceremonies, the church did not perform proxy ordinances for black men and women who had died, and since 1995, the church has agreed to discontinue performing ordinances for dead victims of the Jewish Holocaust.[28]

[MarieC]

Newfy

I've read that the Church of Wales (= C of E) declined to allow the LDS access to their registers, and I believe some English parishes have done likewise.

Certainly, when I mentioned the usefulness of the LDS and their IGI and microfilming of parish registers to a liberal Anglican priest I know here in Oz, his response was that the Mormons were heretics and he would not allow them access to any register he had control of, nor would he do family history research with them!    I was surprised and shocked.  I thought he may have had a different view. 

MarieC

[Nick29]

As I understand it, the Mormons want to baptise everyone who ever lived into the Mormon faith.  Now some would find this repulsive or offensive, and it all depends on your point of view.  I (being a totally lapsed Christian, now with no religious beliefs) don't really care what religions people want to baptise me into when I'm gone, but we have to respect the views of others, I suppose.

[trish251]

Thanks Trish - I'm probably Googles best customer, and a fan of the Wikipedia .... but was interested in Guy's interpretation, because as far as I can see parish registers are the key to 'post-mortem' saving ordinances, so why are not all registers in the IGI ?

I can only assume as you - that they did not receive permission to access some registers - but this would not account for the films they have that are not part of the IGI - I assume this is simply lack of volunteers to index same - but then again the family history concept sometimes looks to have overtaken the original reasons for the creation of the IGI   

Trish

[Necromancer]

Good point !

[Guy Etchells]

The ordinances Baptism, Endowment and Sealing are carried out (in proxy for deceased persons) in the various LDS Temples.
The IGI microfiche used to show these in the columns B.E.F. but the IGI online has these columns suppressed and may only be viewed at a FHC.

The IGI is made up from a number of sources the main being controlled extractions.
Controlled extractions come from a number of sources such as parish registers, bishop's transcripts (where permission to film parish registers was denied), private collections of pr transcripts such as Gibsons Oxford Marriage Index and many other sources.
It is also made up of patron submissions, i.e. submissions by members of the church and members of the general public.

Note as the IGI records Temple Ordinances it is correct if the particulars given at that ordinance are recorded correctly.
This means if a record was submitted as John Smith baptised Wakefield 31 February 1755 the IGI is correct in recording it as that even if the parish register gives the same baptism as John Smith baptised Wakefield 21 February 1755.

The IGI only records the details given at the ordinance nothing else, many family historians find this hard to understand.


For some years now controlled extractions have not been submitted for Temple Ordinances and therefore do not become part of the IGI such controlled extractions are now added to the Vital Records Index.
Cheers
Guy

[Necromancer]

Thanks Guy !

The IGI only records the details given at the ordinance nothing else, many family historians find this hard to understand.

Spot-on for me !

I dont understand why my Norfolk ancestors werent candidates.

Anyway, the question has been answered - Cheers 

[Lavenda]

The ordinances Baptism, Endowment and Sealing are carried out (in proxy for deceased persons) in the various LDS Temples.
The IGI microfiche used to show these in the columns B.E.F. but the IGI online has these columns suppressed and may only be viewed at a FHC.

The IGI is made up from a number of sources the main being controlled extractions.
Controlled extractions come from a number of sources such as parish registers, bishop's transcripts (where permission to film parish registers was denied), private collections of pr transcripts such as Gibsons Oxford Marriage Index and many other sources.
It is also made up of patron submissions, i.e. submissions by members of the church and members of the general public.

Note as the IGI records Temple Ordinances it is correct if the particulars given at that ordinance are recorded correctly.
This means if a record was submitted as John Smith baptised Wakefield 31 February 1755 the IGI is correct in recording it as that even if the parish register gives the same baptism as John Smith baptised Wakefield 21 February 1755.

The IGI only records the details given at the ordinance nothing else, many family historians find this hard to understand.


For some years now controlled extractions have not been submitted for Temple Ordinances and therefore do not become part of the IGI such controlled extractions are now added to the Vital Records Index.
Cheers
Guy

Guy sorry to be so dense but can you tell me , does this mean my relative whose marriage banns I found on the IGI has had an "ordinance"applied to them? Does this mean someone at the LDS  has applied for that to be done? Does this mean that they have  a family connection to the person in the IGI ?