Normally when an entry says "received in the church" it means the original baptism was a private baptism, e.g. performed in the home, and therefore in the absence of the congregation. This could have been because the baby might not have been expected to live, or because it was thought more socially superior. As part of the function of baptism is to welcome the baptised person into the local congregation, this is (sometimes) subsequently recorded in the register. I assume when you say "the children had previously been baptised at the church" is that there is a previous entry in the register for that church, rather than you have some separate evidence that says there was a previous baptism ceremony actually in the church building. Note that while some ministers indicated "private" against private baptisms, by no means all apparently did. So in the absence of this mark, there is no guarantee that the original baptisms was actually in the church building. regards Keith Swindon UK > -----Original Message----- > From: norfolk-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:norfolk-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Jan Rockett > Sent: 14 September 2011 23:41 > To: norfolk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NFK] Received into church. Farrow. Farrar (er) > > > What I didn't say was that the children had previously been > baptised at the > church. > > Jan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Rockett > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 11:28 PM > To: norfolk@rootsweb.com > Subject: [NFK] Received into church. Farrow. Farrar (er) > > > I have an entry in the Wendling Parish Register for the Farrow (Farrar ) > family stating that John, Elizabeth, Jane,Mary, Ann and Sarah > were received > into the church. These were the son and daughter of John and Mary > nee Wilson > 25 June 1806. If they had already been baptised why would all this be > entered in the registered in one entry? > I have been trudging through these looking for my Rocketts. Elizabeth > married Thomas Rockett in this church in 1822. All along Thomas > had said he > was born Wendling but as yet I have not found his baptism. > > Jan > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > NORFOLK-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 > NORFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Keith, Yes I have found entries for them in the church registers. I made a mistake and quoted the mothers surname as Wilson when it should have been Gibson, sorry! I knew about the private baptisms but have never come across an entry like this when there is no obvious reason for it. Jan -----Original Message----- From: Keith Drage Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:27 AM To: norfolk@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [NFK] Received into church. Farrow. Farrar (er) Normally when an entry says "received in the church" it means the original baptism was a private baptism, e.g. performed in the home, and therefore in the absence of the congregation. This could have been because the baby might not have been expected to live, or because it was thought more socially superior. As part of the function of baptism is to welcome the baptised person into the local congregation, this is (sometimes) subsequently recorded in the register. I assume when you say "the children had previously been baptised at the church" is that there is a previous entry in the register for that church, rather than you have some separate evidence that says there was a previous baptism ceremony actually in the church building. Note that while some ministers indicated "private" against private baptisms, by no means all apparently did. So in the absence of this mark, there is no guarantee that the original baptisms was actually in the church building. regards Keith Swindon UK > -----Original Message----- > From: norfolk-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:norfolk-bounces@rootsweb.com]On Behalf Of Jan Rockett > Sent: 14 September 2011 23:41 > To: norfolk@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [NFK] Received into church. Farrow. Farrar (er) > > > What I didn't say was that the children had previously been > baptised at the > church. > > Jan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Rockett > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 11:28 PM > To: norfolk@rootsweb.com > Subject: [NFK] Received into church. Farrow. Farrar (er) > > > I have an entry in the Wendling Parish Register for the Farrow (Farrar ) > family stating that John, Elizabeth, Jane,Mary, Ann and Sarah > were received > into the church. These were the son and daughter of John and Mary > nee Wilson > 25 June 1806. If they had already been baptised why would all this be > entered in the registered in one entry? > I have been trudging through these looking for my Rocketts. Elizabeth > married Thomas Rockett in this church in 1822. All along Thomas > had said he > was born Wendling but as yet I have not found his baptism. > > Jan > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > NORFOLK-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 > NORFOLK-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 NORFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message