What does the phrase "Christened in husband" mean?

Question

Does anyone know what the phrase, "she was christened in second husband, Thomas Thorne" means ?

I found it on the worldconnect.rootsweb.ancestry website about my Lee ancestors.   I have also ran across a similar phrase in other places.

Thanks.

Comments

When child is born often Mother unable too attend.This is my guess,

her Husband attends Christening.I have never seen that term.

---

I'm going to throw a small corkscrew but it could also mean that one of them didn't want the other christened (baptized) so she couldn't get christened until her second marriage.

---

It's just garbled.  Something accidentally got deleted, or pasted in the wrong place, or something.

Answer 1

I have never seen it before, but it might be worth looking at the dates to see if this might have been a child conceived during the first marriage and subsequently accepted by 2nd husband Thomas Thorne as being christened using his name.

Answer 2

If it's not in the original document, then I suspect this is something to do with vicarious Mormon baptisms (aka baptisms for the dead). As you may or may not know, the Mormons are very interested in genealogy, because they believe that dead people can be baptized as Mormons and enter Heaven that way. This is a very controversial topic, as they've done things like posthumously baptize Holocaust victims and the like. Anyway, Mormons also believe men and women can be sealed to one another as spouses in eternity (and, of course, men can have multiple wives but women only one husband in the afterlife). I suspect that this entry has something to do with the dead woman being vicariously baptized so she can be the wifely partner of a dead man in Heaven. In other words, perhaps she was sealed to him or christened for him.

Comments

This isn’t the terminology used by LDS. The don’t christen by proxy. They would use the ordinance term and say sealed or possibly baptized but christening isn’t a temple ordinance that I’ve ever seen.

---

Looking for examples, I found a document on FamilySearch that has the phrase a lot. It appears to be from a genealogy software package that didn't put anything in for blanks with anything so the freeform text has lots of bizarre things in it because no one bothered to proof read when it was generated. Then people copied the phrase without doing any sanity checking on it and it has propagated around the Internet.