Topics

Baptisms & Christenings Mismatch between BK and TNG

Nick Higton
 

I use Brothers Keeper (BK) as my offline program, and like the facility whereby an F3 search will show, for each individual, a baptism year if no birth year is available. When I have multiple people with the same name, this helps to locate the correct one.
I also have a website, created using "The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding" (TNG), and which I populate by exporting a GEDCOM from BK.  A person search using TNG will show a christening year if no birth year is available.  As my GEDCOM contains lots of Baptisms but no Christenings, a TNG person search returns lots of people with the same name and no year attached.
I realise that there is a small (at least to me) difference between a baptism and a christening, but I'm frustrated by the difference between the two programs and, apparently, the vast amount of work needed to amend every person's record individually.
Suggestions to resolve this would be gratefully received.

John Steed
 

Hi

Baptism normally involves water.  It can be for in infant or for an adult.

Christening normally involves naming.  It might also involve water for infants.

The words can be similar in some languages and in some religions, but they can be different some religions and places also.

You can change ALL of your baptism to christening if you want with one command.

From the main BK screen pick File, Utilities, Global Search and Replace, Change only the event type.

John Steed


From: BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io <BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io> on behalf of Nick Higton <nick@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2020 11:30 AM
To: BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io <BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io>
Subject: [BrothersKeeperGenealogy] Baptisms & Christenings Mismatch between BK and TNG
 
I use Brothers Keeper (BK) as my offline program, and like the facility whereby an F3 search will show, for each individual, a baptism year if no birth year is available. When I have multiple people with the same name, this helps to locate the correct one.
I also have a website, created using "The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding" (TNG), and which I populate by exporting a GEDCOM from BK.  A person search using TNG will show a christening year if no birth year is available.  As my GEDCOM contains lots of Baptisms but no Christenings, a TNG person search returns lots of people with the same name and no year attached.
I realise that there is a small (at least to me) difference between a baptism and a christening, but I'm frustrated by the difference between the two programs and, apparently, the vast amount of work needed to amend every person's record individually.
Suggestions to resolve this would be gratefully received.

Nick Higton
 

Thanks, John.  It's simple when (or because) you know how, and another example of the flexibility that BK offers.
I'd still prefer to use Baptism as the default terminology, but I suppose I'll have to convert to Christening until TNG catches up.

Nick Higton
 

Out of interest, I've been running a post on this topic on the Guild of One-Name Studies (GOONS) mailing list. My conclusion from the various replies is that there are no practical differences between baptisms and christenings from a genealogical standpoint, but that Baptism is the more widely-used of a somewhat confused pair of terms (the Church of England website states that the two terms are interchangeable).
So BK has it right, and TNG (and possibly other programs) have it wrong.

J. P. Gilliver (John)
 

In message <28136.1580417569786435006@groups.io>, Nick Higton <nick@...> writes:
Out of interest, I've been running a post on this topic on the Guild of
One-Name Studies (GOONS) mailing list. My conclusion from the various
replies is that there are no practical differences between baptisms and
christenings from a genealogical standpoint, but that Baptism is the
more widely-used of a somewhat confused pair of terms (the Church of
England website states that the two terms are interchangeable).
So BK has it right, and TNG (and possibly other programs) have it
wrong.
[]
BK expresses no view on the subject: it offers both as predefined events, allowing the user to use one, the other, or both. (I suppose the fact that it _does_ offer both could be read as it saying there _is_ a difference, but I suspect it's more that it's offering the user a choice.)

FWIW, I use baptism for most occasions, but christening if that's what the source says. (I think LDS/familysearch use c.)

A thought: I know BK uses the bap date in various tables and charts, where the birth date isn't known; I don't know if it does the same if only christening is known - if not, then it _does_ think they're different.

(What bugs me more is the number of genealogists who enter the bap date as the birth date - even where it's known to the day; birth and bap on the same day, though not unknown, are rare. Mind you, it's not just individual genealogists: FindMyPast in most cases enter at least the baptism year as the birth year when transcribing a baptism record, even when it has no record of the birth date [which it usually doesn't]; OK, that's a reasonable assumption, but not something I'd expect a professional genealogist or genealogical company to do when transcribing such records - baptisms years after birth aren't that rare, and also when the bap is in early January it's also likely the birth was in the previous year.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

`Ergonomic' =/= `dext-handed'

Barry P.
 

Birth and Baptisms on the same day are common - very common. Many of my
Scottish, & Irish before 1837 are so. Parishes were, in towns at least,
much closer communities during 1700s and early 1800s.

-- == --

The idea of "Christian name" is derived from centuries old (Great Britain
only?) practice when churches and their parishes were responsible for Taxes
and support of the poor. Consequently, the accepting a person, new born
usually, given a name, by the congregation as a member of the parish to be
in support of poor relief if needed. This stopped the practice of a person
being in receipt of relief from more than one parish or church.

The next step when a child is of sufficient maturity to decide for itself,
that confirmations are practiced. In these secular days, Confirmations or
Blessings or some other form of church rite is common in infants and
toddlers for those feeling some tradition.
**> As John Steed put it so well, A Christening is a church event that
might not use water.
Baptism always uses water. But in present secular societies,
interchangeability of the uses of the words in conversation is accepted and
there is no practical difference between the words. Well, note that as an
heirloom, Christening Gowns are rarely called Baptismal gowns. But the
church books are entitled Baptism Registers. Funny that.

A Baptism occurs when the person is mature enough to understand the
principles of the meaning and practice. A baptism can be performed by a
Minister of the cloth and does not require the consent of any congregation
and may be performed in isolation, in the open. Reflect on the Baptism of
Jesus. Often experienced in a Church none the less and the Congregation
become simple as witnesses to the profession of faith.

I can be observed that the baptism is practiced by many religions and their
churches in various ways according to their particular culture.

From a Family History perspective, A church event is a Christening, and
commonly expressed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS).

From a Database programming perspective, unless the programming is
particularly robust, only ONE event could be used to represent a birth date
or birth period. Then there are Adult Baptisms or are those Christenings?
Hmmmm.

The interpretations of any institution not in devotion are not to be
considered as authoritative unless, as we abide in our research, sound
sources. Notes in the biography of a person can easily accomplish the
various rites experienced by that person.

Tradition is great thing. It removes the need for significant thought.

Barry P.
New Zealand
--==--

-----Original Message-----
From: BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io
[mailto:BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io] On Behalf Of J. P. Gilliver
(John)
Sent: Friday, 31 January 2020 10:31 AM
To: BrothersKeeperGenealogy@groups.io
Subject: Re: [BrothersKeeperGenealogy] Baptisms & Christenings Mismatch
between BK and TNG

In message <28136.1580417569786435006@groups.io>, Nick Higton
<nick@...> writes:
Out of interest, I've been running a post on this topic on the Guild of
One-Name Studies (GOONS) mailing list. My conclusion from the various
replies is that there are no practical differences between baptisms and
christenings from a genealogical standpoint, but that Baptism is the
more widely-used of a somewhat confused pair of terms (the Church of
England website states that the two terms are interchangeable).
So BK has it right, and TNG (and possibly other programs) have it
wrong.
[]
BK expresses no view on the subject: it offers both as predefined events,
allowing the user to use one, the other, or both. (I suppose the fact that
it _does_ offer both could be read as it saying there _is_ a difference, but
I suspect it's more that it's offering the user a
choice.)

FWIW, I use baptism for most occasions, but christening if that's what the
source says. (I think LDS/familysearch use c.)

A thought: I know BK uses the bap date in various tables and charts, where
the birth date isn't known; I don't know if it does the same if only
christening is known - if not, then it _does_ think they're different.

(What bugs me more is the number of genealogists who enter the bap date as
the birth date - even where it's known to the day; birth and bap on the same
day, though not unknown, are rare. Mind you, it's not just individual
genealogists: FindMyPast in most cases enter at least the baptism year as
the birth year when transcribing a baptism record, even when it has no
record of the birth date [which it usually doesn't]; OK, that's a reasonable
assumption, but not something I'd expect a professional genealogist or
genealogical company to do when transcribing such records - baptisms years
after birth aren't that rare, and also when the bap is in early January it's
also likely the birth was in the previous year.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

`Ergonomic' =/= `dext-handed'

Nick Higton
 

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 02:03 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
I know BK uses the bap date in various tables and charts, where the birth date isn't known; I don't know if it does the same if only christening is known.
I hadn't considered the possibility that if I do a global search and replace with Christening instead of Baptism in BK, my tables and charts might not show any christening dates.

I already have the reverse problem with TNG, that shows christening dates but not baptisms.

J. P. Gilliver (John)
 

In message <11776.1580472463764364357@groups.io>, Nick Higton <nick@...> writes:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 02:03 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
I know BK uses the bap date in various tables and charts, where the
birth date isn't known; I don't know if it does the same if only
christening is known.
I hadn't considered the possibility that if I do a global search and
replace with Christening instead of Baptism in BK, my tables and charts
might not show any christening dates.
I already have the reverse problem with TNG, that shows christening
dates but not baptisms.
[]
Perhaps JS can clarify on this: in the same way BK presents baptism date in various places where birth date has not been entered, does it do the same with Christening? If so, does it - from a data handling perspective only, not religious etc. - treat both Events identically, just providing two different Event names for users' convenience, or does it treat them differently?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

/Downton Abbey/ presented a version of the past that appealed to anyone who
had ever bought a National Trust tea towel. - Alison Graham, RT 2015/11/7-13

J. P. Gilliver (John)
 

In message <000f01d5d7e6$7d3eb850$77bc28f0$@pycroft.co.nz>, Barry P. <@Barry_P> writes:
Birth and Baptisms on the same day are common - very common. Many of my
Scottish, & Irish before 1837 are so. Parishes were, in towns at least,
much closer communities during 1700s and early 1800s.
Interesting. I wonder if it's different in Scotland and Ireland. I don't think a single one of those in my database - with the possible exception of infants who died the same day, when haste was obviously required (at least for those who believe in souls and such) - was baptised the day they were born, WHERE THE DATE OF BIRTH IS ACTUALLY KNOWN. In the majority of cases it isn't: the standard printed baptism form doesn't have a column for it, though some vicars (etc.) were quite consistent in recording it in the left margin. This was the exception rather than the rule though. Before the printed forms, the hand-written line in the register _very_ rarely recorded the date of birth as well as that of the baptism (though I think I have a _few_) - the name of the mother is often omitted too, which makes our hobby harder of course.

How do you _know_ about yours? Maybe the Scottish and Irish baptism forms do have a specific field for the birth date.

-- == --
[]
The next step when a child is of sufficient maturity to decide for itself,
that confirmations are practiced. In these secular days, Confirmations or
Blessings or some other form of church rite is common in infants and
toddlers for those feeling some tradition.
(Is a toddler "of sufficient maturity"?)

**> As John Steed put it so well, A Christening is a church event that
might not use water.
Baptism always uses water. But in present secular societies,
interchangeability of the uses of the words in conversation is accepted and
there is no practical difference between the words. Well, note that as an
heirloom, Christening Gowns are rarely called Baptismal gowns. But the
church books are entitled Baptism Registers. Funny that.
Probably simply because "baptismal" is a slightly harder word to say (-:

A Baptism occurs when the person is mature enough to understand the
principles of the meaning and practice. A baptism can be performed by a
I thought that was "confirmation"; if you are right, then the common use of the term for the baby-naming (and -accepting/welcoming) activity is wrong (from the church's POV)? If that is the case, then what (again, specifically from the church's POV) is the difference between a baptism and a confirmation? [Except perhaps in the rare cases where the person takes a new forename (was that an alternative to the deed poll?).]
[]
I can be observed that the baptism is practiced by many religions and their
churches in various ways according to their particular culture.
Interesting point. I think in most of the English-speaking world the term would be _assumed_ to involve the Christian church if not explicitly stated otherwise (and "he was baptised into the Muslim church", for example, definitely sounds odd to me: I think some other word might be used), but that's probably because most of the English-speaking world _was_ by default Christian.

From a Family History perspective, A church event is a Christening, and
commonly expressed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS).
Though they have their own special slant on it: as I understand it (which is only through a glass darkly, as the expression has it), they consider that the souls of ancestors [who were never *ed for whatever reason (or, presumably, where no record of such can be found)] can be retrospectively rescued. (Hence the LDS's interest in genealogy.)

From a Database programming perspective, unless the programming is
particularly robust, only ONE event could be used to represent a birth date
or birth period. Then there are Adult Baptisms or are those Christenings?
Hmmmm.
BK acknowledges birth, baptism, and Christening as three separate event types (you can give any one person all three - and more than one of each for that matter, though in the case of birth it only - as it has to - uses one of them for calculations, charts etcetera [I think it uses the first, I haven't checked]); whether it provides the latter two as just a convenient alternative for users, or actually treats them differently, I have asked in another post.

The interpretations of any institution not in devotion are not to be
considered as authoritative unless, as we abide in our research, sound
sources.
(I don't quite understand you there - mainly as I'm unfamiliar with the word "abide" used like that.)

Notes in the biography of a person can easily accomplish the
various rites experienced by that person.
Though in BK, certainly in the Christian religion, I'd use the event(s) it provides (including the facility to record a second one, such as in adulthood), rather than general notes; even to explain (e. g. _why_ a second ceremony took place) I'd tend to use the event notes rather than general notes. But each to his own. (You may of course be talking generally rather than being specific to BK; I'm saying what I'd do in BK as this is a BK newsgroup/mailinglist/whatever.)

Tradition is great thing. It removes the need for significant thought.
(-:

Barry P.
New Zealand
[]
John G.
England (Kent, though not by ancestry)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

/Downton Abbey/ presented a version of the past that appealed to anyone who
had ever bought a National Trust tea towel. - Alison Graham, RT 2015/11/7-13