Who is Jannettie to be baptizing a child anyway? In the absence of the minister, the baptism should be performed by the church elders. Not that her baptism is necessarily invalid as longs as she included all the proper parts of the rite, but this is certainly peculiar and people liked things to be done properly. ----- Original Message ----- From: <ETHELKK@aol.com> To: <Dutch-Colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:49 PM Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Jannettie de Kleuse baptized a child!! > Would someone please explain this to me. Child was baptized "when the > father was from home, which is a thing which can never be tolerated by > those of > the Reformed religion . . " > > At a Court of Schout, Burgomasters and Schepens, holden in the City Hall > of > the City N:Orange on the first of May 1674. Schout De Mill, pltf vs > Jannettie de Kleuse, deft. Pltf says, that the deft baptized a child of > Reformed > parents on the 18th of April last, when the father was from home, which > is a > thing which can never be tolerated by those of the Reformed religion; -- > he > concludes therefore, that the deft shall be imprisoned and moreover be > condemned in a fine of one hundred guilders zewant, with costs. Deft > admits she > baptized the child thro' ignorance; and requests forgiveness, if she did > wrong. > The W:Court having considered the matter and likewise weighed the evil > consequences and other inconveniences, which might result and arise > therefrom, > condemn the deft for her profanation and disrespect of the Holy Sacrament > of > Baptism, that she shall be imprisoned and remain there until further > order. [RNA > Vol.7:82] > > Regards, > Ethel > <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free > email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at > http://www.aol.com. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi all, You know, I had the same thought: It almost sounds as if Jannettie did the bap. herself -- and not the minister. I looked for this bap. in churches in NY, Brooklyn, and Bergen and did not find it. Regards, Howard hswain@ix.netcom.com From: "Peter Christoph" <pchrist1@nycap.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:32 AM Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] another thought > Who is Jannettie to be baptizing a child anyway? In the absence of the > minister, the baptism should be performed by the church elders. Not that her > baptism is necessarily invalid as longs as she included all the proper parts > of the rite, but this is certainly peculiar and people liked things to be > done properly. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <ETHELKK@aol.com> > To: <Dutch-Colonies@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:49 PM > Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Jannettie de Kleuse baptized a child!! > > >> Would someone please explain this to me. Child was baptized "when the >> father was from home, which is a thing which can never be tolerated by >> those of >> the Reformed religion . . " >> >> At a Court of Schout, Burgomasters and Schepens, holden in the City Hall >> of >> the City N:Orange on the first of May 1674. Schout De Mill, pltf vs >> Jannettie de Kleuse, deft. Pltf says, that the deft baptized a child of >> Reformed >> parents on the 18th of April last, when the father was from home, which >> is a >> thing which can never be tolerated by those of the Reformed religion; -- >> he >> concludes therefore, that the deft shall be imprisoned and moreover be >> condemned in a fine of one hundred guilders zewant, with costs. Deft >> admits she >> baptized the child thro' ignorance; and requests forgiveness, if she did >> wrong. >> The W:Court having considered the matter and likewise weighed the evil >> consequences and other inconveniences, which might result and arise >> therefrom, >> condemn the deft for her profanation and disrespect of the Holy Sacrament >> of >> Baptism, that she shall be imprisoned and remain there until further >> order. [RNA >> Vol.7:82] >> >> Regards, >> Ethel >> <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free >> email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at >> http://www.aol.com. >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Quoth Howard:...It almost sounds as if Jannettie did the bap. herself -- and not the minister... - - - - That's what I thought. But is it not acceptable for a layperson to perform a baptism if the infant's life is in imminent danger and there's no minister present to do it? I know it is in some churches. And if not, is this really grounds for imprisonment? May I be forgiven for asking if a lay MAN who did the same thing would have gotten the same treatment? It looks as if they really had it in for poor Jannette, maybe for some other reason. I gather she was not the baby's mother; was she perhaps the midwife? Just curious. Edie in Maine

Perhaps the child was near death or in danger of dying immenently. Pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard Swain" <hswain@ix.netcom.com> To: <dutch-colonies@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:50 AM Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] another thought > Hi all, > > You know, I had the same thought: It almost sounds as if > Jannettie did the bap. herself -- and not the minister. > I looked for this bap. in churches in NY, Brooklyn, and Bergen > and did not find it. > > Regards, > Howard > hswain@ix.netcom.com > > > From: "Peter Christoph" <pchrist1@nycap.rr.com> > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:32 AM > Subject: Re: [DUTCH-COLONIES] another thought > > >> Who is Jannettie to be baptizing a child anyway? In the absence of the >> minister, the baptism should be performed by the church elders. Not that >> her >> baptism is necessarily invalid as longs as she included all the proper >> parts >> of the rite, but this is certainly peculiar and people liked things to >> be >> done properly. >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: <ETHELKK@aol.com> >> To: <Dutch-Colonies@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:49 PM >> Subject: [DUTCH-COLONIES] Jannettie de Kleuse baptized a child!! >> >> >>> Would someone please explain this to me. Child was baptized "when the >>> father was from home, which is a thing which can never be tolerated by >>> those of >>> the Reformed religion . . " >>> >>> At a Court of Schout, Burgomasters and Schepens, holden in the City Hall >>> of >>> the City N:Orange on the first of May 1674. Schout De Mill, pltf vs >>> Jannettie de Kleuse, deft. Pltf says, that the deft baptized a child >>> of >>> Reformed >>> parents on the 18th of April last, when the father was from home, which >>> is a >>> thing which can never be tolerated by those of the Reformed >>> religion; -- >>> he >>> concludes therefore, that the deft shall be imprisoned and moreover be >>> condemned in a fine of one hundred guilders zewant, with costs. Deft >>> admits she >>> baptized the child thro' ignorance; and requests forgiveness, if she >>> did >>> wrong. >>> The W:Court having considered the matter and likewise weighed the evil >>> consequences and other inconveniences, which might result and arise >>> therefrom, >>> condemn the deft for her profanation and disrespect of the Holy >>> Sacrament >>> of >>> Baptism, that she shall be imprisoned and remain there until further >>> order. [RNA >>> Vol.7:82] >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ethel >>> <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers >>> free >>> email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at >>> http://www.aol.com. >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >