Well, I'm not a Vicar or Churchwarden as someone on the list asked for, but I was a candidate for Holy Orders in the Church of England at one time (and was even offered the living of Withernsea cum Hornsea by my cousin if and when I got ordained...) Anyway, one can only be "validly" baptised once according to the the Christian religion in all its branches so far as I know. Now, of course, some hold with infant baptism and some not, so for the latter, they may seek to baptise a child who has only been "christened". Of course, christening and baptism mean the same thing, but some churches don't use the terms christen(ing) (from "to Christian") at all, seeing it as the root of "the problem". This said, not all Christian denominations view each other as valid parts of the Church (meaning the community of the Christian faithful), so they might decide to conduct a "valid" baptism for converts from a "suspect" denomination. There are even cases where what most might not see as a Christian denomination do this (e.g. Mormonism, and to return the favour a convert from Mormonism to Anglicanism is normally baptised, because though the words they use may be correct the intention behind their use is doctrinally so divergent as to warrant a "proper" baptism). Now, turning to the case not discussed (whereas emergency or private baptism and later reception or half-baptism has been covered): there is conditional baptism. That arises in cases where the person requesting baptism or their sponsors (godparents and parents) may be unsure as to whether the person has been baptised before. In this instance, the officiant adds a small preamble to the baptismal sentence, basically saying that if this person is unbaptised, I baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost... Now, in High Church Anglican (and other) circles, it is quite usual to undergo a ceremony called the Asperges, where the blessed water also used for baptism is sprinkled or even sloshed over members of the congregation to symbolise their membership in the community of the baptised and emphasise the cleansing powers of the blessed waters of baptism. The accompanying chant speaks poetically of this. Also, it is quite usual now to baptise infants at Easter or another major feast day in a lengthy service in which all members of the congregation are invited to join in in the service saying the words to renew their own often infant baptismal vows (in which case they were made by the officiant and the godparents). One also comes across the baptism of "those of Riper years" (i.e. non-infants). This cropped up in my Wiltshire research where one son of my Quaker Harmer ancestors from Rodbourne Cheney sought baptism so that he could be married in the local parish church. For the Quakers this was a serious offence as was marriage by a priest, and so he was expelled, but then he would have known that this was the likely outcome. Quakers do not believe in ceremonies such as baptism, though they may feel that they have been baptised by the Spirit, with no outward sign of the event, except perhaps a new and holier mien. What was interesting about the baptism of my Quaker ancestral uncle was that the person who indexed the record thought that the Riper Years reference in the parish register referred to his parents, his mother in particular, which apart from being perhaps ungallant, led to some people's conclusion that she was a remarkable mother who had brought forth a child in her old age like Sarah bearing Isaac in the Bible. Not so, her son simply sought baptism as an adult. I may be useful for family historians to get hold of an old Book of Common Prayer (1662) to see what the "rubrics" (rules) for baptism and other church rites were. One of my mother's favourites as a child bored by long sermons was to read the "Table of Kindred and Affinity" of the Church of England. It is quite enlightening for people to see for instance that while it was uncanonical to marry one's mother/father etc. or deceased husband's brother (or wife's sister), it was never forbidden to marry a cousin of whatever degree (provided they didn't also fall into another forbidden category of closer kinship). By contrast, the Roman Catholic Church has long forbidden the marriage of cousins up to and including the eighth degree of kinship, but allowing uncles and nieces to marry (as I like to tell my nieces with an avuncular leer!), provided on got a dispensation from the religious authorities (ditto for cousin marriages). These dispensation papers can be very useful to researc! hers*. Richard Anglican mother/father originally a Roman Catholic rec'd into the One True Church before marriage (and correspondingly excommunicated from Rome!);) *=On my father's mother's side I have a delightful kinswoman who was born a Thauberger. Her parents were both born Thaubergers (one born in Canada, the other in Russia) and her father's parents both also Thaubergers. He maternal grandmother was the only non-Thauberger, but when asked revealed sheepishly that her own mother was indeed a Thauberger! I'd love to see those dispensation papers. BTW, my cousin is high-functioning and normal to all outward appearances...;) Richard Carruthers, M.A. (Oxon.) ---------------------------------------- > From: liverpud-49@rogers.com > To: e.newbery@btinternet.com > Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 08:00:05 -0500 > CC: BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [B&D] Two baptisms > > Hi Liz, > > Sometimes a child is privately baptised and then publicly. > Then a child might be sickly and the baptism is deemed to be urgent, > & the child recovers and is baptised again. The name part might be > just an afterthought for some reason. > > Edna - frosty Ottawa > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Eligible CDN College & University students can upgrade to Windows 7 before Jan 3 for only $39.99. Upgrade now! http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691819

Hi Richard, This posting is a 'keeper'! I've never seen the situations pointed out so clearly in such a concise manner. Many, many thanks for enlightening my day. I've not snipped here because I think some listers might not have read your original posting and I wouldn't want them to miss anything. Regards, Nancy Frey Newcastle, Ontario, CANADA OPC for Ansford & Castle Cary, Somerset Moderator of Yahoo! Catsash Hundred Group Moderator of Yahoo! Glaston Twelve Hides Hundred Group Moderator of Yahoo! NorthWiltshire Group Moderator of Yahoo! SouthWiltshire Group Moderator of Yahoo! WestWiltshire Group Moderator of Yahoo! FULFORD_North Devon Group Moderator of Yahoo! DAVIDGE Connections Group ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Carruthers a.k.a. Carruthers-Zurowski" <leliwite@hotmail.com> To: <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com>; "Liz Hicks" <e.newbery@btinternet.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 10:56 AM Subject: Re: [B&D] Two baptisms > > Well, I'm not a Vicar or Churchwarden as someone on the list asked for, > but I was a candidate for Holy Orders in the Church of England at one time > (and was even offered the living of Withernsea cum Hornsea by my cousin if > and when I got ordained...) > > Anyway, one can only be "validly" baptised once according to the the > Christian religion in all its branches so far as I know. Now, of course, > some hold with infant baptism and some not, so for the latter, they may > seek to baptise a child who has only been "christened". Of course, > christening and baptism mean the same thing, but some churches don't use > the terms christen(ing) (from "to Christian") at all, seeing it as the > root of "the problem". > > This said, not all Christian denominations view each other as valid parts > of the Church (meaning the community of the Christian faithful), so they > might decide to conduct a "valid" baptism for converts from a "suspect" > denomination. > > There are even cases where what most might not see as a Christian > denomination do this (e.g. Mormonism, and to return the favour a convert > from Mormonism to Anglicanism is normally baptised, because though the > words they use may be correct the intention behind their use is > doctrinally so divergent as to warrant a "proper" baptism). > > Now, turning to the case not discussed (whereas emergency or private > baptism and later reception or half-baptism has been covered): there is > conditional baptism. That arises in cases where the person requesting > baptism or their sponsors (godparents and parents) may be unsure as to > whether the person has been baptised before. In this instance, the > officiant adds a small preamble to the baptismal sentence, basically > saying that if this person is unbaptised, I baptise them in the name of > the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost... > > Now, in High Church Anglican (and other) circles, it is quite usual to > undergo a ceremony called the Asperges, where the blessed water also used > for baptism is sprinkled or even sloshed over members of the congregation > to symbolise their membership in the community of the baptised and > emphasise the cleansing powers of the blessed waters of baptism. The > accompanying chant speaks poetically of this. > > Also, it is quite usual now to baptise infants at Easter or another major > feast day in a lengthy service in which all members of the congregation > are invited to join in in the service saying the words to renew their own > often infant baptismal vows (in which case they were made by the officiant > and the godparents). > > One also comes across the baptism of "those of Riper years" (i.e. > non-infants). This cropped up in my Wiltshire research where one son of my > Quaker Harmer ancestors from Rodbourne Cheney sought baptism so that he > could be married in the local parish church. For the Quakers this was a > serious offence as was marriage by a priest, and so he was expelled, but > then he would have known that this was the likely outcome. Quakers do not > believe in ceremonies such as baptism, though they may feel that they have > been baptised by the Spirit, with no outward sign of the event, except > perhaps a new and holier mien. > > What was interesting about the baptism of my Quaker ancestral uncle was > that the person who indexed the record thought that the Riper Years > reference in the parish register referred to his parents, his mother in > particular, which apart from being perhaps ungallant, led to some people's > conclusion that she was a remarkable mother who had brought forth a child > in her old age like Sarah bearing Isaac in the Bible. Not so, her son > simply sought baptism as an adult. > > I may be useful for family historians to get hold of an old Book of Common > Prayer (1662) to see what the "rubrics" (rules) for baptism and other > church rites were. One of my mother's favourites as a child bored by long > sermons was to read the "Table of Kindred and Affinity" of the Church of > England. It is quite enlightening for people to see for instance that > while it was uncanonical to marry one's mother/father etc. or deceased > husband's brother (or wife's sister), it was never forbidden to marry a > cousin of whatever degree (provided they didn't also fall into another > forbidden category of closer kinship). By contrast, the Roman Catholic > Church has long forbidden the marriage of cousins up to and including the > eighth degree of kinship, but allowing uncles and nieces to marry (as I > like to tell my nieces with an avuncular leer!), provided on got a > dispensation from the religious authorities (ditto for cousin marriages). > These dispensation papers can be very useful to researcers. > Richard > Anglican mother/father originally a Roman Catholic rec'd into the One True > Church before marriage (and correspondingly excommunicated from Rome!);) > *=On my father's mother's side I have a delightful kinswoman who was born > a Thauberger. Her parents were both born Thaubergers (one born in Canada, > the other in Russia) and her father's parents both also Thaubergers. He > maternal grandmother was the only non-Thauberger, but when asked revealed > sheepishly that her own mother was indeed a Thauberger! I'd love to see > those dispensation papers. BTW, my cousin is high-functioning and normal > to all outward appearances...;) > Richard Carruthers, M.A. (Oxon.)

Early on in Church history it was decided that to be valid Baptism had to be in the name of the 3 persons of the Trinity so presumably most churches might decide e.g JW's had not been properly baptised Ann >