I know. Besides it isn't contemplated on the CIC, and I don't even know if it's actually possible for a woman to do that... It would be like this modernist practice of the "altar girls". Mmh. Maybe she only grabbed the child and kept him quiet. Maybe... You know what... I'll ask a priest.
Baptism Titles
- Thread starter steelblue57
- Start date
Not a lot of point in looking at the current CIC. It dates only from 1983, and the previous one only from 1917. Before that canon law was a bit of a nebulous mess. A woman can, of course, baptise in an emergency as well as any layman, but if there is a priest present then there is no need. Some priests hold the baby, the clever ones insist that the mother or godmother do it while he pours the water, so there is no need for a Ministry of Baby Holder either. I'm stumped!
Don't get me started...
I agree. Who are those women is a real conundrum.
Last edited:
Some of those 'laba' names seem to correlate with one of the godparents (under "pathen"), in the first and fifth row for example.
So it may well be the one who held the child over the baptismal font.
So it may well be the one who held the child over the baptismal font.
Is Labatrix an archaic spelling of Lavatrix?
No. I just think who wrote mixed up "b" and "v". It is a wild idea, because it might be a Czech or German word as well. Tomorrow I'll ask a priest, but I don't know if he'll be able to give me relevant information. The best advice I can give you is to go back in the diocesis where you took that register and ask a priest from there if he knows what was the custom back then, maybe he will ask others and help you out. It's worth a try if you are making a research on your ancestors. Aim at old priests or young ones that wear a cassock. Avoid young priests that wear jeans and colourful bracelets on their left wrist, unless they are the only option.
Edit: He doesn't know. Good luck with your research.
Edit: He doesn't know. Good luck with your research.
Last edited:
"B and V confusion" is a recognised linguistic phenomenon.
A recent copy of Family Tree magazine in the UK mentioned some unusual baptism entries in a parish register. Unfortunately I gave the magazine away so I can't give details, but the unusual thing was that each entry mentioned both baptism and christening for the same child. The conclusion was that baptism is the sacrament welcoming the subject into the church, christening is simply a naming ceremony. These functions are usually combined into one ceremony but presumably can be split, albeit in the same place on the same day. Maybe that is what is happening here.
A recent copy of Family Tree magazine in the UK mentioned some unusual baptism entries in a parish register. Unfortunately I gave the magazine away so I can't give details, but the unusual thing was that each entry mentioned both baptism and christening for the same child. The conclusion was that baptism is the sacrament welcoming the subject into the church, christening is simply a naming ceremony. These functions are usually combined into one ceremony but presumably can be split, albeit in the same place on the same day. Maybe that is what is happening here.
Well, that would be a really weird and silly distinction. I don't think the Czech clergy could distregard the CIC to that point. I mean, in the Church of the Origins the Baptism was also a "photisma" (φῶς , light), the baptismal font was therefore a "photisterion" too and the baptized were called "photismoi" - "the enlightened" as well (the Biblical roots of this are in Is 26,19: "quia ros lucis ros tuus est" and basically all John is about light). This multiple nature had, however, some basis.
But to distinguish between "baptism" and "Christening" would be really preposterous. There are some formal requirements I had never thought about so far. Now I see why having rules for sacraments makes sure the descendants can easily trace their origins. Adherence to the CIC now can spare a lot of difficulties in the future.
But to distinguish between "baptism" and "Christening" would be really preposterous. There are some formal requirements I had never thought about so far. Now I see why having rules for sacraments makes sure the descendants can easily trace their origins. Adherence to the CIC now can spare a lot of difficulties in the future.
I have no idea if it is related, but children used to be baptised as soon as possible after birth, in case they died within the first few days.
It's true. I don't know though. The register is really messy.