Need help, please to find parents marriage [closed]

Question

Marguerite Arpin Potvin who on her baptism record is recorded as the daughter of Joseph Arpin Potvin and Marguerite Duval is in the wrong family.  I currently have in the family of Joseph Arpin Potvin and Marie Catherine Bergevin-Langevin as that was where I initially found her at PRDH. This is PRDH family 114624 and it clearly shows two children born a few months apart.  Seeing this problem, I checked all of the baptism records and found Marguerite's correct parents. The problem is I cannot find their marriage nor any record of them.  I do not want to detach Marguerite until I have the correct place to put her.

I have found lots of Joseph Arpin dit Potvin and various combinations in PRDH and BMS2000 as well as a number of records for any Catherine Duval in the same databases, but NO marriage of these two.

The baptism record says "baptized under condition", but parents had a legitimate marriage. Anyone know what this means?

LDS Church: St-Pierre-de-Sorel; 1802-1827; image 491 of 722. Baptism of Marguerite Potvin Arpin June 21, 1821.

Need some help, please finding the correct family and connecting them into WIkitree.

Answer 1

well, found 2 other acts naming those specific parents, a baptism for Marie Angélique on 28 Apr 1808 in St-Ours and her funeral there on 18 July.

Earlier there is the same scenario again in St-Ours bapt 26 Dec 1805 of Étienne, funeral of same @ 7 months, died 22 Jul 1806 buried 23rd.  On these two acts the mother is listed as Marie Amable Duval.

I find no marriage for them with those names, and I tried searching without given names, no more luck.  Either the father has another name additional to Arpin & Potvin, or else the mother has one that we don't know.

But since she is definitely impossible in that family, I would detach her and let her float.  Someone may eventually find her and link her to her family.

Comments

Hi Danielle: Thank you for looking.  I will check out those other children for any possible clues.  As I am related to the Arpins or Potvins of the St-Ours area, I have quite a lot of information on them and I will see if I can find the father's line.

You are maybe aware that the name has many variations, such as Potevin, Poitvin and they are sometimes used as a "dit", but also together without the "dit".  BMS2000 and PRDH allow wild card searching, so I tried a lot of variations and only with the forenames and still no luck.

I will detach her and will keep track of her in case I do one day find where she belongs.

Cheers, Jim

---

Drouin Institute search feature includes variations in spelling.  They actually manage PRDH now.

---

If we search with fathers named Joseph Arpin and all mothers with forename Marie Amable or Catherine, surname Duval or Laprade, parishes Sorel or St-Ours, can we puzzle out the story of one or more couples?

---

not really Karen, don't know where the name Laprade comes into play here, but I ran with Duval in my search, no given names entered at all for either spouse.  LImiting to Sorel or St-Ours would be counterproductive, Sorel is the oldest parish in the area, but has large gaps in early records.  Another is Contrecoeur, also covering same general area in early days, same story, gaps.  We had travelling missionaries going from place to place, they sure walked around a lot.

---

Hi Karen: Thank you for your comments, but as Danielle has just said, we have searched any parish, any date and there is only one marriage for any male Arpin / Potvin ( Search looks for any variations), to any female Duval. This is Oct. 12, 1824 at St-Ours for an Antoine Potvin and a Marie Marguerite Duval.  Names are not correct and this is after the three children we have found for these parents; births 1805, 1808, 1821. All three of the baptism records and both burial records said the parents had a legitimate marriage.

As Danielle has also stated, I do not know where you are connecting the name Laprade.  I have gone over the three baptism records and the two burial records for the children and the only name that I can connect with is the God mother of the 2nd.child, Angelique Marie Arpin Potvin. The God mother is recorded as Marie Angelique Bergevin. I believe she is a younger sister of my 2X GG grand mother, Marie Catherine Bergevin, or my 2X GG grand aunt.  So, at least the families knew each other, but not sure how I can use this to narrow down the family without a marriage record.

---

I just noticed a bunch of acts in Sorel and St-Ours with the mother having the name Marie Amable or Catherine Laprade and wondered if they could connect. Here's a list of all the acts I found for a man named Joseph Arpin Poitvin and a woman named Duval or Laprade in ANY parish, and I'm wondering how many couples are actually involved (and why there's only one marriage found). There are no cases of children born within nine months, but there is definitely one child per year for a long stretch. I'm not saying these are all one woman, but it's certainly biologically possible when you interleave all the acts.

Marie Amable Regeas Laprade was baptized 1781-08-31 in Berthierville, the daughter of Jean Louis Regeas Laprade and (wait for it...) Catherine Duval.

Joseph Arpin Poitvin married Marie Amable Laprade 1803-11-14 at St-Ours. He is son of Pierre Arpin Poitvin and Marie Varquer Veilleux.
She is daughter of Jean Louis Laprade and Marie Catherine Duval.
 

Children of any Joseph Arpin Poitevin with any Laprade or Duval or Regeas woman in PRDH:

1. Joseph born & baptized 1804-09-02 St-Ours, mother Marie Amable Laprade
   Joseph married Marguerite Payan Stonge 1830-01-12 Sorel, Marie Amable Laprade
2. Joseph born & baptized 1805-12-26 St-Ours, mother Marie Amable Duval
3. Etienne died 1806-07-22, buried 1806-07-23, mother Catherine Duval
4. Marie Amable born & baptized 1807-04-18 St-Ours, Marie Amable Laprade
   Marie Amable married Paul Dumas 1828-01-08 Sorel, Marie Amable Laprade
5. Marie Angelique born 1808-04-27 St-Ours, mother Catherine Duval
   died 1808-07-17, buried 1808-07-18
6. Louis born & baptized 1809-05-10 St-Ours, Marie Amable Laprade
7. Andre born & baptized 1811-02-19 St-Ours, died 1811-10-13, Marie Amable Laprade
8. Francois born & baptized 1812-05-09 St-Ours, Marie Amable Laprade
9. Joseph Xavier 1817-06-29, baptized 07-01 Sorel, mother Catherine Laprade
10. Marguerite born 1821-06-08, baptized 06-09 Sorel, mother Catherine Duval
11. Edouard born 1823-03-12, baptized 3-13 Sorel, mother Amable Laprade
12. Hilaire Poitvin born 1824-12-02 in Sorel, mother Amable Rejas
    died 1824-12-23 Sorel, mother Amable Rejas

---

Hello Karen: Wow, great sleuthing. One of my life long friends who is a very serious genealogist always says we have to be part CSI (crime scene investigators) to do genealogy.  I should have though of that possibility as I have run across this scenario before.  Looks like this is a clear error by the priest. He must have known the parents very well and for some reason put down grandma's name for the mother.  This certainly makes sense.

Strange the way the name switches back and forth and then what is with Rejas for the last child? This will keep me busy for some time, going over all of these records.

Jim

---

Hi Karen: Ok, I see it now. Mother's full name was Marie Amable Regeas Laprade. so the last child works also. I'll go with priest error for the Duval name as it is her mother. Thanks again. Jim

---

Hi Karen: I am checking the parish records at LDS. I believe child 2. is actually Etienne's baptism, then he died at the record you number 3. So these are the same child.

Thanks again for all of your great detective work. Jim

---

note:  Joseph born in 1805 is an error in the registry, when you look at the act, it is written Joseph in the margin but Étienne in the body of the text.  And the boy who died is the right age and name.

---

Hello Danielle: Using the LDS Church records, I am looking in the St-Ours registry for 1805-1806 and both the baptism and burial records that I am looking at record Etienne in the margin and the body of the text. I do not see any margin note for Joseph.

Joseph was the first son, born in 1804. No record of his death. He married in 1830.

The PRDH family group sheet No. 101889 has it this way also.

Thanks, Jim

---

well, I'm talking about the 1805 birth, and in the Drouin copy it clearly has Joseph in margin and Étienne in the text.  And Étienne died the next year.  Just so you know, the Drouin copy and the LDS copy are not always identical, often one is photographed from the church record kept at the church and the other is from the record kept in central registry for the area.  The priests were required to make 2 copies, one to keep and one to send on, the only way to tell what was the correct data was for usage after the fact.  Have run into this sort of discrepancy before, and asked Drouin institute about it, and this is the explanation they gave me.  Priests made mistakes sometimes when transcribing their records.

---

Hi Danielle: Thank you for the explanation. So which one do you think is the original?  I had understood that the LDS Church microfilmed from the parish copy, which I thought was the original. I am quite aware of the year end copies that were made, as there is often a one page report about it at the end of each year.

It would be unusual for a family to name two sons in a row the same name unless the first had died, then it was quite common, however in this case, the first born son, Joseph 1804, lived to adulthood.  I am leaning towards thinking that Etienne is the correct name for the second son, born in 1805, died 1806. As PRDH is managed by Drouin, I would expect that the PRDH family groups were compiled from the Drouin copies, so they would have been aware that the "Joseph" margin note in the 1805 baptism was an error.

Lots of interesting anomalies with this family. I am adding notes in the BIOS to explain what we know or at least the facts as we have found them. Found a later baptism record for one child where mother's name is recorded as Marie Amable Laprade, but the surname entry had clearly been erased and Laprade written over it. Could not make out what the error was.

Clearly priests made mistakes sometimes with the originals and the errors were never caught.

Thanks again for your help, Jim

---

They are both originals, written by the same priest.  Not at year end, just at some time after the act was originally done.  No way to tell which is right except by usage in later times.  The other item which brought up the question had 2 given names for a boy on one copy and only one on the other.  He lived to marry, and later used only one of the names.  The year end report is something else entirely, and wasn't instituted that early.

Actually not unusual for 2 children to get the same name, often they got named for the godparent.  I have one family where there are 3 with the same name who all lived to marry.

PRDH did their research long before Drouin institute took over the management of the database.  No idea what they used to compile their data.

Yes, to err is human.  

---

I made note in reply to a previous question about name at birth that some priests really wanted their parishioners to include the name Joseph for ALL boys.  I have seen this in families in Massachusetts, specifically some Gariepy families.  So, the priest may have baptized a child "Joseph Etienne", but the family intended always to call him Etienne, and that is the name they gave in later records, if any.  So the priest added Joseph; he didn't consider it a mistake, just blessing the child with a holy name.

I have seen girls in these Fr-Cdn origin families whose names all started with Marie, but they were usually called by their second name.  A child who died at birth would also have been given Joseph or Marie, regardless of whether there was another in the family. (My family has one of those, too.)

---

Hi Joanna: Thank you for the comment. I have certainly found many cases of this throughout my research with most males in a family having the first name Joseph and females with the first name Marie. On another note, one of my distant cousins was married to a Gariepy.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Gariepy-464

Best wishes, Jim

Answer 2

I don't know about the parents, but here is something from Wikipedia on conditional baptism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_baptism

Conditional baptism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mainline Christian theology (including Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, Anglican, Lutheran and most other Protestants) has traditionally held that only one baptism is valid to confer the benefits of this sacrament. In particular, the Council of Trent defined a dogma that it is forbidden to baptize a person who is already baptized, because the first baptism would make an indelible mark on the soul. Likewise, "Methodist theologians argued that since God never abrogated a covenant made and sealed with proper intentionality, rebaptism was never an option, unless the original baptism had been defective by not having been made in the name of the Trinity."^[1] Therefore, in cases where the validity of a baptism is in doubt, a "conditional" baptism may be performed.^[2][3]

Comments

continued:

Description[edit]

Such uncertainty may result from questions about whether the Triune name of God was used by the person administering the baptism. In some cases, there are doubts about whether a church from which someone is converting baptizes in a valid manner. For example, the Catholic Church has said that the validity of baptisms in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (which does not practice conditional baptism) and in some other communions is doubtful. It is an issue where an infant is a foundling, and it is not known whether the child had been baptized before he or she was abandoned. Another example of a case requiring conditional baptism is when an emergency baptism has been performed using impure water. Then, the validity of the baptism is in question. In that case, a conditional baptism is later performed by an ordinary minister of the sacrament with certainly valid matter.

In a typical baptism, the minister of the sacrament (in the Catholic Church usually a deacon or a priest, but sometimes, especially when the baptized is in imminent danger of death, a lay person or even a non-Christian) says

I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit^[4]

while pouring water upon the head of the one being baptized, or immersing him or her in water. In a conditional baptism, the minister of the sacrament says

If you are not yet baptized, I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.^[5]

Other cases[edit]

Only the living can be recipients of Sacraments. Thus, if it is uncertain whether the baptizand is dead (i.e., his soul has parted from the body; this is the case for the first few hours or so after death in the modern sense), the formula is "If you are alive, I baptize [...]". In severe cases of birth anomaly, the (practically, always emergency) baptism formula is "If you are a human being, I baptize [...]".^[6]

Likewise, if an emergency baptism has been performed over a part of the body other than the head (practically: during birth), or on a pregnant woman's womb (for the unborn child), the child is to be conditionally rebaptized (with the usual "if you are not baptized") even though the emergency baptisms should be performed in this way if necessary.^[6]

Answer 3

Many of the baptisms that were conditional were due to the child being born before the marriage. You find them being baptized and a marriage taking place shortly afterwards. Other times one parent might be Protestant or unbaptized. Then the condition would be that the parent be baptized or confirmed into the Catholic Church. The reasons usually were attached to a promise, thus the condition. In this case I would look for a marriage after the baptism date.

Comments

Thank you to all who gave explanations for the "conditional" baptism.  As Danielle Liard has added that at least two earlier children of this couple had died as infants, it could be that this child was already in distress at the time of the baptism.  I appreciate all of your comments. Jim