Baptism entry 23 years late

[england100]

hi, Baptism at Harthill, Chershire,England. Peter and John sons of Catherine Wright was re entered in the baptism book on 9/10/1825, with a note saying vicar was informed that these children had been baptised on 19/6/1803 in a private baptism but records missing by say so of parent.

Why would it have been necessary for the children to be re inststed in the baptsm records at such a late date?

Thanks.



 

[groom]

Private baptisms at home usually took place because a child wasn't expected to survive, it was entered with Private next to it. If they survived they were often welcomed into the church with another service and this may also have been recorded in the Parish records. It looks as if in this case, neither was done. Perhaps this came to light when one of the sons wanted to get married.

[Viktoria]

You say “ Vicar”, so was it in The Church of England?
The Baptists did not baptise babies ,preferring that adults should know and understand what they are committing to.
The people’s second Baptism might have been because they joined the Baptists and would need adult Baptisms .
Just a thought.
Viktoria.

[stanmapstone]

Before civil registration in 1837, the only usual record of a persons birth would be a baptism record,

For example when the Old Age Pension was introduced under the Old Age Pensions Act 1908, for those aged 70 and over, it was recognized that some difficulty would be found in many cases in determining the age of the claimant, and acceptable documents were, a certificate of birth, a certificate of baptism a certificate of service in any of the Crown's forces, a certificate of membership of any friendly or provident society or trade union and certificate of marriage.
although that did not apply here.
Stan

[PaulineJ]

I've certainly seen baptism recorded shortly before the bride/groom got wed.

Just to ensure it had been "done" I suppose.

Pauline

[stanmapstone]

If this was in the Church of England then 'The Book of Common Prayer', has this comment: "It is convenient that the new-married persons should receive the holy Communion at the time of their Marriage, or at the first opportunity after their Marriage." You had to be baptised to receive Communion, so this is why, sometimes, people got baptised before their wedding.

Stan

[england100]

Thanks for your help, one of the boys did marry early the following year so that was probably the reason.

[ThrelfallYorky]

I've got a rellie of my OH who was baptised as an adult, shortly before he married in late 19th C as R.C., to wed a girl of Irish R.C. origin in Lancashire. Probably happened quite often, I'd guess.

[KGarrad]

My daughters are now 42, and have never been baptised!