Odd Title - to me anyway!

[Sue1]

Whilst searching for my Rowlands today I have come across the attached - the record turns out not to be irrelevant to my search but I am curious about the title the baptising minister gives himself:

"Protestant Dissenting Minister"

Anyone seen this before? Sue

[Janet in Yorkshire]

He was stating that he was a non-conformist, dissenting from the rites of the Church of England.

Jay

[Sue1]

I am surprised his superiors allowed him to put that on Church Records especially as he was carrying out the rites of the C of E - bit like saying "I don't want to keep my job". Clearly he felt strongly about it. Sue

[Janet in Yorkshire]

What date was it and what kind of records and which denomination were they for?

Jay

[Sue1]

It was late 1600s (1696 I think - I discarded as not being mine) and the family had been C of E all the way back but that was my family - as I say it actually turned out not to be relevant to my Tree so I can't be sure what the actual denomination of the person being baptised was - there was nothing on the handwritten document to say what denomination the place of baptism was. Perhaps my husband was right when he said he was/had been probably RC but I would have thought to say that in writing was more dangerous in that case than losing your job!

Sue
(typo in first post - I meant "relevant")

[Uncle John]

This was a time of considerable change in the Protestant church in England. Less than 40 years later, in 1738, John Wesley had his evangelical conversion. Although he remained a CofE clergyman, that was the start of Methodism. By that time various other sects were well-established, such as the Moravian church.

[Sue1]

Many thanks for that - it has clarified things and I hadn't realised Wesley had ever been a C of E Clergyman. I thought he was the chap who rode around on horseback doing baptisms etc or was that his brother Charles (I have a vague recollection from long ago of learning about the Wesleys in School) and that the brother was not a member of the Clergy ..................must google!
Recently was looking at registers of Clandestine marriages in London and I am sure one of the Register's had "Wesley's Book/Register" written on or in it.
Sue

[Rick]

A Protestant Dissenting Minister had separated from the Church of England, so the baptism was by some other Christian denomination. Once pre-printed baptismal registers and birth certificates became common, you would even see the term used on those forms. Here's a 19th century example...Capture.jpg

[Sue1]

Thanks Rick, The document you have posted is exactly the same as the one I saw.
I learn something every day!

Sue

[Rick]

I've got a lot of non-conformists in my tree !! That one is from a Congregational Church - they were Calvinistic Methodists. if you're lucky, you often find both a baptism and a birth registration and extended information such as grandparents names - it has proven invaluable to me.

[Janet in Yorkshire]

It was late 1600s (1696 I think - I discarded as not being mine) and the family had been C of E all the way back but that was my family - as I say it actually turned out not to be relevant to my Tree so I can't be sure what the actual denomination of the person being baptised was - there was nothing on the handwritten document to say what denomination the place of baptism was. Perhaps my husband was right when he said he was/had been probably RC but I would have thought to say that in writing was more dangerous in that case than losing your job!

Sue
(typo in first post - I meant "relevant")

Might it have been in the late 1700's rather than the 1600's? (Seems like you've had it sorted!)

Jay

[Sue1]

I have quite a few Quakers on my Tree - brilliant birth, marriage and death records now they are online.
I presume my Quakers would be regarded as non-Conformists.

Sue

[Sue1]

Yes, thanks Jay. The non-Conformist history is coming back to me also. I had never thought of what non-Conformists are quite honestly - I thought they just didn't agree with the religion of the country which I suppose is exactly true. That would include quite a lot of groups I suspect.

Sue

[Sue1]

Had a sudden thought - C of E is the religion of the UK sort of officially BUT I have heard them referred to as Protestants .......................... how very odd. No wonder religion often causes problems!

[Olde Crone Holden]

Sue

Protestants are so-called because they protested against the Catholic religion which was of course the national religion for many centuries in England.

Wesley's Methodism was originally considered a branch of the C of E and indeed still today there is a branch called the Church of England Methodists.

My research experience is that there was quite a lot of tolerance, official or otherwise, to all religions EXCEPT Catholicism! Even that was a matter of how strong the catholic influence was in the area and my ancestors from Stoneyhurst in Lancashire were prtty much protected under the umbrella of the great Catholic centre there.

Freedom to xpress your religion depended a lot on how much you had to rely on society's approval. If you didn't, you could worship as you wished.

OC

[Rick]

Wikipedia has some information which might help understand it, Sue. The introduction before the Contents and section 2.3 (both parts) describes Protestantism, the split of the CofE from Rome and the development of dissent.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation

[Sue1]

Thanks OC and Rick - the article is incredibly interesting. What a strange old world we live in.

Sue

[Sylvia C]

One of OH's ancestral families moved back and forth between Whittington in Lancashire and the Preston Patrick area of Westmorland.

It turns out that they were Quakers from way way back ............... and often suffered religious persecution, which is when they moved to the other area.


One probable connection even went to Pennsylvania in 1682 on the second ship to be sent out .................. unfortunately he died of cholera 6 months after arriving, and his family were later excommunicated


The problem that we have is that there are actually two branches of Hayhursts, both fond of using the forenames Cuthbert and Gilbert for their sons, and most marrying Elizabeths. Both branches were Quakers, both were corn millers and farmers, and both moved back and forth between Whittington and Preston Patrick, even exchanging mills at times.

Iain's 4x gt grandfather was a renowned preacher at Briggs Flatt Meeting House in Yorkshire



Yet they all got married, baptised etc at the local CofE church



It was a Cuthbert who went to Pennsylvania .................

there HAS to be a connection between the two branches, sometime before 1600 ............. if we could only find it!!


All the Hayhursts in America are believed to descend from that Cuthbert .............. and, as you know, Americans will leave no stone unturned in the attempt to discover their ancestors. Even they have not managed to get further back than 1540, and have not been able to connect the 2 branches

[Janet in Yorkshire]

.............. and, as you know, Americans will leave no stone unturned in the attempt to discover their ancestors. Even they have not managed to get further back than 1540, and have not been able to connect the 2 branches

I think we ALL try to leave no stone unturned! But there are two problems:
1) sometimes the stone no longer exists
2) we need to take great care that it's the RIGHT stone we unturn.

Jay

[Sue1]

I must admit I have noticed that quite a few of my lot have "changed" their religion - usually in the context of the man being one religion and the wife another and ALWAYS they have married in the husband's denomination. In the case of my x3 G Grandfather and mother he was C of E and she Quaker and she came from Essex which has/had a lot of Quakers. They went out of town to Bishops Stortford and married in the C of E.
I have also come across, in my own working life, a girl who was engaged to be married. She was C of E and he was R.C. - his family objected to the marriage but it was grudgingly decided that they could marry (both over 21 anyway) BUT only in the R.C. Church - it was a long engagement as the girl refused. Eventually they did marry - in the C. of E. Basically, she said she was OK about marrying in his church but did not agree to bring any children up as R.C. which she would have to agree to to marry in his church.
Shame religion causes so many problems - is it the religion though or is it people?

Sue