Baptised twice as a baby?

[suecee]

My 4xgt grandfather's birth and baptism record is in Dr. William's Library. (Non-Conformist records)
The first date given is the baptism date of 02 Dec 1784, the second date given is the birth date of 31 Aug 1783.  Then after parents details etc there is an extra bit of information -"Baptised 14 Oct 1783 by T. Urwick"

Looking at others on the same page, he is not the only one to have had two baptisms, either the earlier or the later one by T. Urwick.

Does anyone know why this was done.?

(I have researched Thomas Urwick and found out that he was the minister at Clapham Old Town from the late 1770s.)

[meles]

I recall that some non-conformists had the child christened in a C of E church, so it was properly registered; then had it baptised in their own church, so it was a proper member of their Church.

A couple of my ancestors seem to have two christening/baptism dates - but just the non-conformist lot!

Could this be the case here?

meles

 

[DianaM]

One of mine was baptised twice in the CofE!  Most confusing.

Diana

[suecee]

I don't know that that is the case here.
I have checked the parish registers for baptisms and came up with  nothing. I did find a couple of burials of siblings that I didn't know existed and the father's burial too but not a trace of the seven children I do know about.

This is why I looked for nonconformist records but I have only found two of the children listed in Dr William's Library.

It also appears to be only those that had a baptism by T. Urwick who were "done" twice.

[stanmapstone]

As far as the Church of England was concerned, the first baptism was not lawful, or "all things were not done, as they ought to be"
I don't know if this is the case in a non-conformist church.

Stan

[fizzybubble]

Some babies who were sickly and not expected to survive would be baptised at home and then if they did survive would be baptised again in the church.


Fizzy

[kerryb]

I was going to add that Fizzy!

I have some twice baptised children but I think I have found out they were non conformists, in their case I think baptists.

Kerry

[stanmapstone]

No, they were not baptised twice. You can't have a second baptism, unless the Parish Priest was deliberately kept in ignorance of the first one, or the first baptism was not lawful.
The first question asked at the Public Baptism of Infants in the Book of Common Prayer is "Hath this Child been already Baptized, or no?". Only if the answer is 'no' can the baptism continue.

See the thread at http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,246546.msg1352429.html#msg1352429

Stan

[kerryb]

Thank you Stan for clearing that up - a mine of information!
 

Kerry