The children of these unions were baptized as legitimate.
Moreover, there are many reasons why a couple might baptize their children in a parish where they had not married : relocation, convenience or tradition.
One of the spokespersons for the practice compared doctors who refuse to perform circumcisions to priests who refuse to baptize children.
These rumors are absurd and nonsensical, as the government has no intention whatsoever of baptizing us.
A child could be registered as baptized under one spelling and buried under a minor variant soon after.
And so, a week ago, he also wanted to be baptized, although he was so weak already that he could not raise his head.
This could indicate that the incumbent was willing to baptize children of consensual unions as legitimate.
But is there any way of testing whether those baptizing their children were representative of the parish as a whole?
