On May 12, 7:49 pm, singhals <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...  Having a fuzzy rule to tell you that it's > > normal to be baptised as a baby, while accepting that baptisms at all > > ages do occur, helps a computer assist you in finding that record. > > It's NORMAL to be baptised as a baby IF and ONLY IF: > 1) the child and parents are Christians > 2) the parents belong to a branch of Christianity that does > infant baptisms. > > Otherwise -- not normal.  Hindus, Moslems, Taoists, > Buddhists, and Confucians do not baptise at all. Most Jewish > branches do not baptise. Baptists, Methodists, Disciples, > and a fistful of other denominations insist on "adult" > baptisms (with varying definitions of adult). My point is that fuzzy rules *such as* these are useful, not that these specific rules are of universal applicability. In England, certainly until a hundred years ago, it was normal to be baptised as a baby. Yes, there were plenty of religious groups that did not do so, but in England at that time, it was not normal to be a member of one of those religions. In another country, or if the family you're researching is predominately of a minority religion, then a different set of fuzzy rules will apply. Maybe instead you need a fuzzy rule saying that a child is probably 12-14 for their Bar Mitzvah. The point is that for any given culture (whether national, religious or local) there are certain norms that, whilst not exclusively kept to, are a useful guideline. Richard