LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 2003-03 > 1048922132


From: "J.Oakes" <>
Subject: Re: [Lon] Late christening?
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 18:16:16 +1100
References: <01d801c2f519$3b164d20$1b900050@v9n3j0> <007601c2f55f$48318ba0$6648bb42@jans>


Does anyone have any idea why a child would be christened 14 years after
she was born?
Her siblings were all christened with in a month or two of their
birth......
All theories gratefully recieved!
Thanks,
Elaine
...........................................................
Hi,
I could be way off beam here, but my Great great grandfather was
christened at age 17, in line with something I feel sure I read on the list,
the only acceptable marriage, was one carried out by the accepted church, ie
the church of England. It's my belief that in some cases, christening was
not an issue, until one was approaching a time when marriage would be a
consideration.....Of course, Eve or some other more learned member might
like to correct me if this is an incorrect notion on my part
Regards
Blinky Bill in Australia

Hi Elaine,
I was christened fourteen years after my birth, too! It was because I was
raised Baptist and they didn't do infant baptisms. One chose to be
Baptized.........

Good luck - what an interesting question!
Cheers - Jan
Winnipeg, Canada

Does anyone have any idea why a child would be christened 14 years after
she was born?
Her siblings were all christened with in a month or two of their
birth......
All theories gratefully recieved!
Thanks,
Elaine


This thread: