private baptism 1799

[Wulfsige]

It seems that the same little girl was baptised privately in April 1799 and publicly in December 1799. Her name was Ann and her parents were John and Mary Gamson or Gameson (variously spelled). Both baptisms were Anglican. We know that the family moved from Merthyr Tydfil to Llangattock around that time; the private baptism was at Merthyr Tydfil, the public one at Llangattock. It is, of course possible that two little girls were christened Ann, with parents John and Mary and a surname Gam(e)son, one born to a family living in Merthyr, one to a family in Llangattock, both in 1799. But Occam's razor suggests two baptisms for the same baby. Can you suggest any explanations?

[Viktoria]

A hurried private Baptism would indicate that the baby was not expected to survive.Often done in the child’s home.
It was believed an unchristened child would not go to heaven but be “ In limbo” for all eternity.
Mainly this was held by Roman Catholics ,but by many Protestants too.

When the baby was stronger a public Baptism might take place ,with the
Godparents there and at the font in Church.
Does it give the baby’s age.?
Baptisms were usually done when baby was about three weeks old.
An old wives’ tale had it that the baby would not thrive if not Christened!
Rubbish of course!

Just one possibility.
Viktoria.
 

[arthurk]

If the baptisms are explicitly noted as Private and Public, then you may well be right, though it would also be a good idea to see if there were any children baptised at Llangattock to a John and Mary Gamson that definitely aren't your family - say from about 1790 before yours went there, and then for 7-8 years afterwards (ie were any of the children too close together to have the same mother?). To be even more thorough, you might need to check other parishes around Llangattock too.

Another possibility might be that the first Ann died and the following child was also called Ann, so it would be wise to check for burials in both Merthyr and Llangattock.

[Viktoria]

Yes it was not uncommon for a new baby to be named after a dead one especially if the name was a sort of family tradition ,after a grandmother for eg.
Viktoria.

[mazi]

I this case April to December is a bit close to be a second child also baptised.

Mike

[arthurk]

True, and that had occurred to me too. But if the first one was a couple of months old or more in April it would work.

[hanes teulu]

Following a private baptism (believed the child would not survive), if the child survived, they would be "received" into the church, not baptised a second time. The minister was required to check there was no previous baptism by questioning those present. However, there was no guarantee this was done  and a second "baptism" could happen.

[hanes teulu]

Extract from "The book of common prayer and administration of the sacraments, ..." published 1701 by the Church of England.

Where the Minister performing the follow up/second ceremony had performed the private ceremony
 
"Yet nonetheless, if the Child which is after this sort baptized (ie. privately), do afterwards live, it is expedient that it be brought into the Church, to the intent, that if the Minister of the same Parish did himself baptize the Child, the Congregation may be certified of the true form of Baptism, by him privately, before used: in which case he shall say this -
"I certifie you, that according to the true and prescribed Order of the Church, at such a time and at such a place, before diverse witnesses I baptized this Child."

If not the original Minister, he carries out something of an interrogation of those presenting the Child to determine if there was a previous ceremony.

"And if the minister shall find by the answers of such as bring the child, that all things were done as they ought to be; then shall not christen the child again, but shall receive him** as one of the flock of true church people, saying this

"I certifie you, that in this case all is well done, and according unto due order, concerning the baptism of this child, who being born in original sin, and in the wrath of God, is now by the laver of Regeneration in Baptism, received into the number of children and heirs of everlasting life. ...."

** - no "... or her!"

[BumbleB]

Apologies for this question - have you seen the parish register image for the Llangattock baptism?  The images are available on Ancestry, but I cannot see any entry for Ann in December 1799.