|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Primitive Methodists (Read 234 times)
|
Nick Carver
RootsChat Aristocrat
 Offline
Posts: 1234
|
Is it a good thing to trace a family back to a Primitive Methodist setting? On the one hand their numbers were presumably smaller making them easier to trace, but conversely presumably these records are more difficult to trace.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
E Yorks - Carver, Steels, Cross, Maltby, Whiting, Moor, Laybourn
W Yorks - Wilkinson, Kershaw, Rawnsley, Shaw
Norfolk - Carver, Dowson
Cheshire - Berry, Cooper
Lincs - Berry
London/Ireland/Scotland/Lincs - Sullivan
Northumberland/Durham - Nicholson, Cuthbert, Turner, Robertson
Berks - May
Beds - Brownell
|
|
|
Clincher
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1191
|
I believe Methodists (in general) were a group which, led by John Wesley, broke away from the Church of England in late 18th century to form their own denomination. I believe they organised their meetings/churches into circuits which probably were unable to cover every town or village. Consequently they probably had to travel further to practise their faith than if they had stuck with the C of E.
If the Essex Record Office is typical, the archives of Methodist BMDs would be entirely separate from the parish records of C of E and a separate index to the Non-Conformist records would be available.
I know the FRC have some very helpful leaflets (probably down-loadable) about the resources which they have at Myddleton Street.
I suspect that the Methodists were probably a bit more independent of thought than the typical English bod (and no I'm not a Methodist) and joining the Methodists involved a bit of a risk because they may not have been able to apply under the poor law if they fell on hard times and the Methodists did not have enough funds to help them out...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Chris in 1066Land
Global Moderator
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 5600
"Forever Searching, Forever Learning"
|
Hi there
According to my 'Oracle'
NON CONFORMIST REGISTERS:
All Demoninations other than the Established Church.
Non Conformists do appear in Established Church records – indicated by:
Use of word ‘Born’ instead of Baptism.
Use of word ‘Interred’ instead of Burial
Non Parochial Registers surrendered 1837.
Catholics and Society of Friends (Quakers) initially refused – but did deposit registers in 1840
All Registers are at PRO – available on microfilm
Those deposited in 1840 included on the IGI
Dr Williams Library: Important Register of Births
Register commenced 1742 by combined body representing:
Presbyterians
Baptists
Congregationalists
There was a Failure of many Congregationalists to keep proper records
All Marriages except Quaker & Jews had to be celebrated by C of E to be legally valid.
Monumental Inscriptions may be only record available
In 1880 Non-Conformist Ministers given right to perform Burial in C of E Churchyard.
METHODISTS
John Wesley (1703 – 1791) did not want to separate from the C of E – Methodist Chapels were called Preaching Houses.
Parish Church was used for Bapt. Marr and Bur.
Earliest Registers date from 1795 when baptisms commenced in some chapels and burial grounds were established.
Between 1837 and 1899 many chapels were licensed for marriages only in presence of Registrar who kept official record. Chapel record was optional and not always kept.
On John Wesley’s death a number of schisms occurred:
Wesleyan Methodists Primitive Methodists
Methodist New Connection Bible Christians
But they all came back to Methodist church in 1932
Chris in 1066Land
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bee
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1858
Wm & Sarah Ellis - 1916
|
"Here endeth the lesson" 
thanks Chris , that should help me because I've got 1 or 2 Primitive Methodist in my tree.
Bee
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Dinsdale, Ellis, Gee, Goldsmith,Green,Hawks,Holmes, Lacey, Longhorn, Pickersgill, Quantrill,Tuthill, Tuttle & Walker, in E & W Yorks, Lincs, Norfolk & Suffolk. Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
Chris in 1066Land
Global Moderator
RootsChat Marquessate
Offline
Posts: 5600
"Forever Searching, Forever Learning"
|
Hi Bee
Sorry, it wasnt meant to be a lesson - honest 
I was just trying to save typing by cutting out the irrevelent words and just give you the facts
Accept my apologies, pleaseeeeeee
Chris in 1066Land
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bee
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1858
Wm & Sarah Ellis - 1916
|
Don't apologise Chris, it REALLY will be of use to me, I'm a bit of a thicko when it comes to these things. 
My 'here endeth the lesson' was tongue in cheek.
Bee
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Dinsdale, Ellis, Gee, Goldsmith,Green,Hawks,Holmes, Lacey, Longhorn, Pickersgill, Quantrill,Tuthill, Tuttle & Walker, in E & W Yorks, Lincs, Norfolk & Suffolk. Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk |
|
|
Nick Carver
RootsChat Aristocrat
Offline
Posts: 1234
|
Thanks for everybody's input. I gather that the circuits referred to were sometimes rather large (geographically speaking), so if more than one county is involved, tracing their current whereabouts might be rather difficult. Still, they ought to be in the records office of one of the counties involved. Sometimes I think genealogy is rather like solving complex algebraic problems, with a series of equations containing umpteen variables and only one (usually far from obvious) way of solving the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
E Yorks - Carver, Steels, Cross, Maltby, Whiting, Moor, Laybourn
W Yorks - Wilkinson, Kershaw, Rawnsley, Shaw
Norfolk - Carver, Dowson
Cheshire - Berry, Cooper
Lincs - Berry
London/Ireland/Scotland/Lincs - Sullivan
Northumberland/Durham - Nicholson, Cuthbert, Turner, Robertson
Berks - May
Beds - Brownell
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
