I didn't read your message closely enough - bad habit - and thought it was twice as a baby. That did seem weird unless something happened that made the parents think the baptizer was a fake?
Sometimes it appears that a baby had 2 baptisms. Some reasons:
1. First baptism was a private one, perhaps for a delicate or ill child at home or hospital/workhouse infirmary. The baptism ceremony would have been brief and basic. If the child survived, parents may have taken it to church at a later date for " the full works" - reception into church, christening gown, godparents, relatives, a celebration at home, etc. or they might not. I noticed that several children who were baptised at Burnley workhouse, Lancashire, had another baptismal ceremony in church a few months later
2. Baptism took place at a chapel-of-ease, was entered in the chapel register and also in the register of the parish church.
3. Family changed religious allegiance. A great-aunt of mine made 2 trips to fonts in different churches during her first year.
4. Names of babies who weren't C. of E. sometimes turn up in C. of E. baptism registers, mostly pre 1800. They may also be in baptism registers of their own churches. The C. of E. listings were of births, for administrative or tax purposes. Some have been incorrectly recorded as baptisms, making it look as though the babies were baptised twice. Some recorded as births have been incorrectly transcribed as baptisms.
Re "the baptizer was a fake". According to Catholic Church rules, a person carrying out an emergency baptism on a child in danger of death doesn't have to be a priest. They don't even have to be Catholic. The priest should be informed of the baptism as soon as possible. Baptism register of a rural Catholic parish in late 18thC England has several children baptised at home by the same doctor. If there was any doubt as to whether a baptism was valid, there would be a conditional baptism at church when the baby was well.
