Just Curious about Bap. Entry 1835 Newoundland

[Phenmark]

I wonder what others may conclude from the Anglican baptism of Job Baker, 1835, Harbor Grace, NL. These entries are under the heading "Private Baptisms". I understand baptisms were performed at the house of very sick infants.
It appears Job's name was added sometime later. The other 2 children baptized that day (Nov 16th) are not named. I assume this is because Job survived, but would like to hear others' thoughts or experience with similar records.
Thanks!
Stephen
Add: John and Sarah were from Carbonear.

[Neale1961]

I suspect the 2 or 3 baptisms recorded below Job Baker are from December. There seems to be a joining line suggesting this. The page has been cut off, so it is not possible to really know what is going on without seeing the whole document.

I don’t think you can assume that those infants / children died. It may be simply that their names were not recorded. The church cleric may have forgotten to do it, or did not know what the names were.

It looks as if the document was written in June 1836, about baptisms that had occurred 7 or 8 months earlier. The record may have been pulled together from the notes of a travelling reverend. Again, it is not possible to know for the small snip provided.

[Phenmark]

I suspect the 2 or 3 baptisms recorded below Job Baker are from December. There seems to be a joining line suggesting this. The page has been cut off, so it is not possible to really know what is going on without seeing the whole document.

I don’t think you can assume that those infants / children died. It may be simply that their names were not recorded. The church cleric may have forgotten to do it, or did not know what the names were.

It looks as if the document was written in June 1836, about baptisms that had occurred 7 or 8 months earlier. The record may have been pulled together from the notes of a travelling reverend. Again, it is not possible to know for the small snip provided.

Thanks, Neale. Good points. Yeah, I wish I had the full page. I actually requested the record directly from the pastor of the church, and he was kind enough to send me this via email.
Thanks again,
Steve

[Neale1961]

There is another version of the baptism record here.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9398-2792-5F?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQK9Y-QLT2&action=view&cc=1793777&lang=en&groupId=M9S4-14M

[hanes teulu]

I was drawn to the 1st entry - Edwin Mayne. Private baptism recorded here
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9398-2792-ZR?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQK9Y-Q8PQ&action=view&cc=1793777&lang=en&groupId=M9S4-14M

Where a child was privately baptised at home, and survived, the baptismal process was completed by the child being "received" into the Church. This was not a 2nd baptism involving water. There can only be one baptism.

I note Edwin's being received is recorded against his private baptismal entry "Recd into the Church Jun 13 1856". Unusual to see the "receiving" element recorded.

[Phenmark]

There is another version of the baptism record here.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9398-2792-5F?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQK9Y-QLT2&action=view&cc=1793777&lang=en&groupId=M9S4-14M

Yes, those were lists compiled in the 1940s from voluntary submissions of churches. I prefer the original whenever possible. Unfortunately, fires and other disasters took a lot of originals out of circulation. Carbonear was one such place where that happened.

[Phenmark]

I was drawn to the 1st entry - Edwin Mayne. Private baptism recorded here
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:9398-2792-ZR?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQK9Y-Q8PQ&action=view&cc=1793777&lang=en&groupId=M9S4-14M

Where a child was privately baptised at home, and survived, the baptismal process was completed by the child being "received" into the Church. This was not a 2nd baptism involving water. There can only be one baptism.

I note Edwin's being received is recorded against his private baptismal entry "Recd into the Church Jun 13 1856". Unusual to see the "receiving" element recorded.

Thanks for that insight. That's interesting. It makes me wonder if Job's name was added at the time of his being received if he did, in fact, survive.
Thank you.

[hanes teulu]

Recording baptisms on the church was imposed by the civil authority in the form of Thomas Cromwell 5 Sep 1538 (very poor take up!). Parish registers were very slow to take off.
A baptism at home was required to be recorded in the register. There was no requirement imposed to record the ceremony/rite of "receiving". It really depended on the whim of the officiating minister.

The baptismal registration was usually endorsed with a P or Private to indicate the private nature of the baptism. It helped when the child might be presented for "receiving". The officiating minister was charged with establishing if the correct procedure was practised at home. If he'd performed the previous ceremony - no problem.
Rites/Sacraments of the Church - 1762
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_sYUAAAAQAAJ&redir_esc=y

"Search inside" key = private
Click on page "The Ministration of Private Baptism ...."   

[MollyC]

Assuming this was an Anglican church - for another post I recently looked up what the prayer book says about private baptisms here -
Baptism entry. (rootschat.com)
reply#4, para. 2.

When the child was received into the church later, the minister would need to have noted the details of the private baptism, so he could certify them in public.  Therefore he had the opportunity to make a note in the register then.