Source: Page 19 of White Noise Keywords: "notes," "extra," "child," "proof"

From: myths@ic24.net (cecilia) Subject: Re: Do you think Date: 14 Jul 2003 Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.computing

Singhals wrote: > ...my branch of Christianity does not *do* infant baptism.... > I can get back to 1800 and not have any godparents to find. My branch of Christianity (C of E) is keen on infant baptism, but (Book of Common Prayer) includes godparents even for adults - for both age-groups, it is the godparents that give the name to the person conducting the baptism, and they are to keep the baptised person in mind of the solemn vow that has been made, and encourage him/her to do what is necessary to grow in grace. But there has not, as far as I can see, been a general feeling in the past that such sponsors (for either age-group) should be detailed in parish registers (though I believe things changed relatively recently). As it is possible to have proxy godparents, I have never felt that godparent = witness. <grin> During their lifetimes, my mother found it slightly unsatisfactory that her "godmother"/aunt could not remember the baptism (though she said she was sure it had occurred) and so could not identify the location. Indeed, the only "proof" my mother could offer her children that she *had* been baptised was the likelihood that the paper-work would have been checked at confirmation (an event she could remember). Last week, I found reference to sponsors in corrections sent to London of C of E baptisms in Madras in 1842. (There had been no suggestion of godparents in the original returns.) In cases I saw where the child was baptised privately, when mortally ill, or when the army was on the point of marching, those present were listed instead of sponsors (possibly because they were only proxy godparents - the real ones, who would be in contact with the growing child, to be sorted out later). Otherwise, the only references I have found to godparents - or, rather, godchildren - have been in wills. Going back to the question of what to do with the extra information (should one have it), Notes seem fine to me (no reason not to put it in notes for both persons, if appropriate). I find time of birth mildly interesting - it becomes more interesting if one also knows time of commencement of labour. But again - that's what Notes are for, and also for birth weight, length, head circumference, date of first smile etc. Godparents, like marriage witnesses, can show where ties of affection are intertwined with ties of blood. But there are other ties - I have a case where the three families in a firm of solicitors (Antrobus, Wood and Brown) are linked in marriage with three different lines of a single family (Vardon). I can imagine a database that, as well as parent/child relationships, allows "other connections", and a screen that has an "other connections" button that leads on to any such. I can even imagine a GEDCOM that passes the information across. Where I have difficulty is imagining all lineage-linked programs being able to accept such, particularly as the number of such connections pales beside the number of parent/child connections. If all one wants is a way of listing more details about basic events, to me, Notes are fine.

Back to 2004 Archive, "The Usenet Project" - Back to Starve.Org Main Page - Contact - Starve Archive