Latin Translation Needed on Endnote on Ancestor Burial Entry

[c-side]

I've just finished transcribing some RC baptisms though a little more recent than this.  Baptisms carried out at home (or hospital) 'in danger of death' were recorded in the church register along with the other more usual baptisms caried out in the church.

I suspect that this record is like that but I can check it for you next week when the archives re-open

Christine

[Maiden Stone]

I found one today from 1850. The entry contained the additional  words "Coeremoniae sunt supplendae". Off the top of my head, that's something like "extra ceremonies were carried out".

Another example of a granddaughter of my 4xG grandparents.
Anna Lupton born 13th April 1815, baptised St. Peter's R.C. Mission  16th April 1815.
 The priest has written a note:
"Anna Lupton was not expected to live and was baptised on her birthday 'in periculo' by Joanna Blacoe. This is a supplementary baptism, complete with godparents."
A disused tithebarn was being used as a chapel at this time. I imagine that the priest visited the home to conduct the 2nd ceremony. Joanna Blacoe was a member of another staunch Catholic family which was related to the baby's family, ( probably several times over). She may have attended at the birth.

I remembered something else from my lesson on emergency baptism. The subject of stillborn babies and any which died within a very short time of birth was raised. (Cheerful topics for a class of 12 & 13 year-olds.) The nun's advice was to baptise them anyway. This, from the belief that the soul doesn't leave the body immediately at death. Not sure if her advice was in strict accordance with Canon Law, or simply the words of a kindly woman.

[c-side]

Where private baptisms occur in the Church of England (sometimes for emergency purposes and other times for extremely rural areas with no church) they are followed up by a notice that the child was 'received into the church'.  I'm thinking that these extra ceremonies may be the RC equivalent.

I've not come across them myself so very interesting.

Incidentally, there should never be a second baptism  - Canon Law dictates that a person is only baptised once.

Christine

[Maiden Stone]

A baptism "in periculo" of a child of a Catholic family can be performed by a lay person of any Christian denomination. The baby is being baptised into the  Christian church, not into a particular denomination. So, for instance a midwife or doctor in attendance may baptise the baby. Other denominations have different rules. An optional prayer at the emergency baptism  is the Apostle's Creed, known to most Christians. It is preferable, but not necessary, that 1 or 2 witnesses be present. The baptism should be notified to the church and entered in the register.
I checked up on baptising stillborn babies. Our nun's instruction was in accordance with Canon Law.  In such cases the baptism should be preceded by the words "If thou art alive" and is a "conditional " baptism.

[River Tyne Lass]

Thank you both very much for these additional responses.  It is very kind of you indeed, Christine to offer to try to find out more for me when the archives re-open next week.   I am intrigued now to find out more so I really appreciate this.

I really appreciate your posts too Maiden Stone.  I have been very interested to read the information you have provided. 

Baby Elizabeth also had a sister called Catherine who died about  toddler age and is also buried at St Mary, Hexham.  For those who may share the same family tree or be interested, the other children were Mary, Joseph, Simon Peter (my great Grandfather), James, John, Michael, Thomas; Catherine and Elizabeth were the two youngest.  My Great Grandfather, Mary and Thomas all remained in the North East.  My research suggests to me that Joseph and James went to live in America (Pennsylvania area) and that the latter died in a coal mine accident; I do not have a clue about how John and Michael ended their days.  Incidentally, Michael's birth/baptism is as 1859 on-line on his baptism record but this is incorrect.  I have looked at the record at Tyne and Wear Archives and he was actually born in 1857.  I can see how the error has been made because there is a little hook on the 7 which makes this look like a nine.  However, his entry is definitely with the 1857 entries and before the 1858 ones.  He was baptized at the Roman Catholic Church at Stella - St Mary & St Thomas Aquinas.  A James Conroy & Elizabeth Fitzpatrick also married at this Church in 1859.  I believe these are my Great x 2 Grandparents  and I have obtained a copy of the marriage certificate.  If what I suspect is true then their marriage took place after the births of several of their children.

Many, many thanks for all your help and information.  This is great!   

[josey]

I'd like to thank Maiden Stone & c-side for the useful information too. I've learned so much on RC 

[Maiden Stone]

River Tyne Lass. Were you able to submit a correction for consideration to the online site? I do this if I have evidence and sources.   

[River Tyne Lass]

Hi Maiden Stone,

Yes, I did notify the on-line site of the error a while back.  The response I received back was that unfortunately they would be unable to correct the error but they suggested that I could inform others myself.  This is the first time I have informed others on a public forum:

I found the correct year date for Michael at Tyne and Wear Archives on microfilm number 1799.  He was born on the 11 August 1857 and was baptised on 30 August 1857 at St Mary & St Thomas Aquinas Roman Catholic Church.  His parents were recorded as Jacobi Conroy & Elizabeth Fitzpatrick  and his sponsors were Patricius Maguire and Maria Conroy.

As I say, I can understand how the mistake occurred as the 7 does have a little round hook on the end which could make it look like a nine, so I don't blame the transcriber who made this error.  I suppose we all make mistakes.   I am just glad to have the opportunity to set the record straight at last.

[c-side]

I looked at the baptism today and I’m not at all surprised that you couldn’t read it.  There were three of us attempting the challenge and we still truly have no idea.  The problem is bad handwriting combined with a foreign language.

The first part is as translated for you early in this thread followed by et (and).  Then we decided it looked like ‘praces te ad hinbria’ though, apart from ‘ad’, none of these are latin words and I can’t think of any common baptismal phrase which comes close.  Maiden  Stone – does it remind you of anything?

Sorry not to be of help but I can confirm that this entry is simply a record of the home baptism and does not mean that the child was baptised twice.

Christine