Genealogy Chat

Any idea's anyone just why someone would bother to get christened aged 15yrs. I have just found a relly born 30.03.1804 christened 26.07.1819.

They may have decided for themselves that they wanted a service....much like some youngsters today are confirmed about that age............. but it may be that they were leaving home and the family thought of it as a 'safeguard' against anything bad happening to the young person. Some vicars required baptism before he would allow a couple to marry in his church. Gwyn

I have a friend who had to get herself Christened 15 years ago when she was 27, as the Vicar wouldnt marry her without it. Nicky

Thanks Gwyneth, I never thought about leaving home, just that she wasn't old enough to get married and I found it strange that a 15 year old would want this service particularly in East End of London. Thanks again Lin

People needed proof of baptism to get parish relief, which I'm sure is the most likely scenario.

Not a question of 'bothering' more a question of faith and people had more faith in the 19th century than they do today. As for being age 15 - this may be due to the fact that the family could not afford a christening at/near birth. You should also be aware that if a young lady wished to marry then it would probably be at the local church and if she had not been christened then the chances are that the vicar would refuse to marry her. As for not being old enough to marry - She was ! until 1929 girls were of age at 12 and boys at 14 - though parental consent was required. I tell you that I have researched a family in N.Wales where the whole family was christened, mother, father and four children of various ages from 4 to 14 ...... probably cheaper, as in supermarkets 3 for the price of one.

We~ll - they clearly weren't churchgoers! I suppose they put off 'doing the deed' and as we all know, the longer you put off doing something..... Perhaps their intention was to get all the children done as a 'job lot' - to save money, and the children just kept coming. Maybe in 1819 they wanted the help of the parish and in order to get that help would have needed to be OF the parish. These are just suggestions - hopefully someone will come up with definitive answers. Still any reply is better than none! Victoria

Thank you everyone, it's good to get other peoples opinions. My daughter recently had her baby christened and the vicar required the god parents to have been christened, one didn't want to undergo the ceremony aged 26 and had to step down from the duty. We were really surprised at this in this day and age.

Lou, To be a waterman or a member of one of the City livery companies one had to show proof of baptism. It may also be that the vicar wouldn't marry someone who was not baptised. Or as someone suggested, they had a religious conversion. Of course some denominations, such as the baptists, do only baptise adults. Peter

Can I ask why you were surprised, Lou? The purpose of godparents is supposed to be to help bring the children up as Christians, as I understand it - it's not supposed to be a formality. You can hardly blame the vicar for insisting that they're baptised.

We have a baptism in Bristol for a 16 year old - born 1824, baptised 1840. This girl was illegitimate, so we ponder if this was why she was not baptised as a infant, or perhaps because the family were non-conformists. Diane

Hi Lew my children (4) have not been christened I have left it up to them to make up their own minds what they want. Paul

My gt grandfather was the oldest of 5 children. He was baptised 5 months after birth. The 5th child was baptised aged 2 months. The 3 middle ones were baptised 3 months later, aged 7, 5 and 3 (all done on the same day). Perhaps somebody forgot to get them done, until the 5th child was done. The only thing about these 3 baptisms is that the name of the father is given as John, which is the name of their oldest brother (aged under 10), while their father was really William. So the lateness can be put down to either forgetfulness, or the cost, as somebody else has suggested.

Depends where they were living .......... but often there was no vicar to do the christening, so families had to wait until one came round on the circuit. Then all children born since his last visit would be christened. Not all that unusual in country areas. It does mean that one has to be a little careful in judging/guessing ages from baptism/christneing records!

I have one baptised at 14 - could have been for employment purposes in a 'Christian' household. A case of if in doubt, do it again. I have no idea if she and her siblings were bp as infants, as they were born all around the country and 1 in Norway and 1 in Scotland. Only one I can find on IGI is the one born in Scotland, so quite possibly they were. However, by the time my young lady was baptised at 14, her mother was dead and she was in the care of aunts and uncles, whilst the father continued to travel in connection with his work. The aunts and uncles finding a place of employment for her probably didn't know. Jay

When my grandson Callum was christened 3 weeks ago his dad Gareth aged 21 decided he wanted to be christened as well, as his mum hadn't wanted to have him or his sister christened as babies. Kath

My ancestor Daniel Jeffcoat was christened on his wedding day in 1815. He was a Quaker and hence hadn't been christened. The vicar wouldn't marry him to his intended without him being baptised. Perhaps this person had to be christened in order to be permitted to do something.

I think the vicar was 100% right in stipulating that the child's Godparents had to have been baptised. Reg

Before 1837, baptism was the equivalent of today's birth certificates - a proof of identity, and a necessity if you wanted something out of the system, be it parish relief, the right to get married in church, the right to work at certain jobs etc. Many employers also insisted on baptism, as someone else pointed out. I have quite a few pre 1837 though, where they were all baptised again, but into a nonconformist faith - religious conversion, in this case. OC

I have one family where 4 or 5 were all christened on the same day. The youngest was a baby, the eldest was about 14. Think in their case it may have been financial! Jill