RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: buttercup on Monday 06 February 06 10:19 GMT (UK)
-
Hi everyone,
As i delve deeper into the past, surprisingly im coming across a few Catholic marriages... and as usual im getting somewhat confused :(
Ive taken references from freebmd and certificates have come back with the name of Catholic church etc, ok no problem there.
Then ive noticed the same marriages on Lancashirebmd but theyve occurred in the Register office?? Was this the norm ??? I wouldnt be surprised if im missing something here ::)
Also would Catholic baptisms and marriages be recorded on a site such as familysearch??? Would they even be available at family research centres? Or where would the best place be to search Catholic registers?
The reason i ask about baptisms is because knowing parents have married in a Catholic church ive found no trace of their childrens birth registers >:( And these births happened in the 1850's through to the 1880's, surely they would have been registered!!
Anyhoo, if someone could set my facts straight id be most overjoyed ;D
Regards Jen
-
Hi,
When a marriage took place in a Catholic Church, a Registrar has to authorise it, so either the Registrar attended the Church or the bride and groom went to the Register Office for a civil ceremony after the church. This is why they are noted on LancashireBMD as Register Office.
Personally, I haven't found any Catholic marriages on the LDS site, and in fact if you check Catholic Church Records which have been filmed for the Record Office, then they haven't (or at least those I've seen) been filmed by the LDS but by another company.
Last point about birth registrations, although it was a requirement after 1837 many births were not registered, especially if money was short. Parents would rather feed the children than register them. If you know the church were the parents were married, I would try the baptismal registers for the same one, or a church nearby.
Hope this helps.
Mary
-
Thankyou so much Mary!! :D
Certainly clears up some confusion...
I do know which church the parents got married in so i guess il see what i can do about getting access to records!
Thanks again for your help!
Regards Jen
-
Along the same lines ... I have a set of 3G-grandparents, both of whom were born in Ireland, and who were therefore almost certainly Catholic, wandering around Sussex in the early 1800s. I have found at least 4 children whose births are recorded in later census returns as Rye, Iden, Lock, and Pett (all within 10 miles of Rye) between 1801 and 1813.
I've done a little research,and it seems that there were no Catholic churches in or around Rye in those days, and none of these births are recorded by the LDS. So I'm guessing that baptisms would have taken place in some unofficial place of Catholic worship - perhaps the house of a prominent Catholic. But then, presumably, there would be no records.
Can anyone enlighten me as to whether this scenario is accurate?
Another thought ... the father was in the army - the army didn't keep records of births to enlisted men, did they?
Cheers
Tim
-
The army did keep a record of army baptisms by army chaplains but these wouldn't be Catholic. You will find them in the overseas section at the Family Records Centre. They go back as far as 1761.
At the beginning of civil registration in 1837 the government did a deal with most non-conformist churches to give up their registers. In return the government recognised them as legal documents. These registers are at The National Archives and were therefore available to be indexed on the IGI. Very few Catholic churches if any gave up their records. County record offices are Anglican diocesan record offices so this is where Anglican churches deposited their records and where they are ususally available to be indexed and filmed for the IGI (but not always depending on the dicoesan attitude to the Mormon church - which is why only about 3% of Northamptonshire and Somerset registers are on the IGI). Other non-conformist churches such as the Methodists may deposit their records at county record offices but this is not the norm for all non-conformist churches e.g. Quakers and Catholics. To find the whereabouts of Catholic registers I would contact the Catholic Family History Society.
http://www.catholic-history.org.uk/cfhs/
Before civil registration in July 1837 other than Jewish and Quaker marriages all marriages which did not occur in an Anglican church were illegal.
Mary's point about birth registration is quite correct up to 1875 when a fine was imposed for non-registration of births, however I think more births were registered than people assume when they find it difficult to find the birth or birth registrations they are looking for. Sometimes a little flexibility is needed for instance in the spelling of the surname or in other variations like that.
Regards
Valda
-
Thanks Valda. My army births were not overseas - they were while the father was serving in Sussex, so I guess that resource is not going to help.
Although very few Catholic churches may have given up their registers, my problem is much more fundamental - there was no church where my folks were born. Hence my question about whether it was likely they would have been baptized in an unofficial Catholic house of worship and, if so, whether it is likely that there ever were any records at all!
Cheers
Tim
-
If you don't know the church your Catholic ancestors attended, it is so hard to find them, for the reasons given in this thread.
I have found some of mine courtesy of info from a Rootschatter, kind Catholic authorities in London pointing me in the right direction and searching their registers for me, and luck!
I have found that my 3xggrandfather Thomas Martin, for his first marriage in 1793, married in the Catholic church (for his faith) and the following day in St Martin in the Fields (obviously for legal reasons!!!) So for those who know the names of your Catholic ancestors who married, you may find them on the IGI marrying in a C of E, and this may mean there was an (unofficial) Catholic marriage before or after.
Valda - could you clarify something for me, please? I had understood, perhaps erroneously, that Catholic marriages were legal after the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829. If it was not till 1837, that could explain two of my Catholics marrying in St Pancras Old Church in early 1837. Do please let me know!!!
Thanks,
MarieC
-
They married in Pancras Old Church precisely because Catholic marriages were illegal until July 1837, so they married in an Anglican church to make their marriage legal. That way their children would be legitimate in the eyes of the state. After July 1837 civil marriages before registrars became legal. That did not change the status of Anglican marriages where the Anglican clergy were treated by the law like registrars, but all other marriages in any other churches required a registrar present to make the marriage legal. Any marriages conducted in these churches without a registrar would have been illegal.
Concerning army baptisms - army chaplains were with the troops wherever they might be stationed, at home or abroad. Consequently they conducted baptisms and marriages both in Britain and overseas. Army registers for marriages and baptisms are held in the Overseas section of the Family Records Centre, despite the fact they will include some events that were not overseas.
However army chaplains were (until a later period) only Anglicansm, so Catholic servicemen and other non--conformists would not have had their children baptised by them and even Anglican servicemen might choose to use the local church, particularly where an army chaplain was not available.
I think before you know for certain there was no Catholic church in the area your ancestors were in (and non-conformists were prepared to travel distances to their nearest church) it would be best to consult the Catholic Family History Society about Catholic parishes in Sussex during the period you are interested in.
e.g. a quick search on the internet found this booklet at Brighton History Centre. It doesn't covered the right period and it is further west, but then it is Brighton History Centre information so you would expect that.
West Sussex Catholic registers of Arundel, Brockhampton, Burton, Cowdray, Slindon and West Grinstead 1698-1800 Baptisms West Sussex Catholic Registers Baptisms 1698-1800 SFHG Booklet 929.3 SUS
Regards
Valda
-
Hi Valda,
Would you know anything about converting to Catholicism. I have a marrige occured at St John Preston CE in 1858. Their first son was also baptised there. All susequent children were baptised in St wilfrids Preston which is RC. I can only presume the family converted. Would there be any records of a conversion? I wonder if the parents would have to be re-baptised and confirmed.
Pam
-
I think for this question you will probably have to ask someone who has converted to Catholicism, or knows their way around Catholic records better than me, but I would expect to see at least a baptismal record (which is only what you find in Anglican records when a non-conformist becomes an Anglican - the oldest example I hold is a baptism for a man of 55).
I'm presuming all the children were by the same parents and it wasn't a second marriage?
Regards
Valda
-
Thanks for your reply Valda. Yes, the parents were both the same. The children were actually baptised at 4 different churches. The first at CE and all the rest at 3 RC churches in Preston, as the familiy moved. I can only think they converted, there would be no other reason for an RC couple to marry or baptise a child CE in late 1850s -early 60s. It just doesn't make sense otherwise.
Maybe someone else reading this board, may know if a record was made for conversion to RC.
Pam
-
This just could be the reason for not finding the marriage of my Frederick Cox and Margaret Howe, about 1892 ish. It is almost certain she was Catholic, being brought up in an orphanage by Nuns in Walthamstow.
Lesanne. :-\
-
In 1892 there would be absolutely no impediment for Catholics not to marry in a Catholic church - all perfectly legal, or if one partner was not a Catholic and had no intention of becoming a Catholic marrying in a civil ceremony. They would at least be legal in the eyes of the state.
My grandparents (though this in no way stretched as far as Catholicism - they were in theory low church Anglicans) got their children baptised (or entered into) the nearest church they happened to be living near at the time - which was why my mother the youngest of 11 was the only one to claim she started life as a Quaker.
For high church Anglicans the move to Catholicism would be less problematic.
Regards
Valda
-
Thanks Valda,
I already consulted with Rye Public Library, who were very helpful, and confirmed that in the early 19th century there was no Catholic church in Rye. As the other birthplaces for the children were all in hamlets around Rye, I'm sure there would have been no Catholic churches there either.
But you are righ - it would be worth identifying which was the nearest Catholic church to Rye in that era, in case the family made the effort.
Cheers
Tim
-
Thanks Valda
That explains the marriage in St Pancras Old Church in 1837. I'm still puzzled about his brother who married in the Catholic church in 1825 and I still haven't found a C of E marriage for him. Seems as though that marriage would have been illegal. There seem to have been no children, so perhaps it wasn't hugely important at the time...
MarieC
-
Along the same lines ... I have a set of 3G-grandparents, both of whom were born in Ireland, and who were therefore almost certainly Catholic, wandering around Sussex in the early 1800s. I have found at least 4 children whose births are recorded in later census returns as Rye, Iden, Lock, and Pett (all within 10 miles of Rye) between 1801 and 1813.
I've done a little research,and it seems that there were no Catholic churches in or around Rye in those days, and none of these births are recorded by the LDS. So I'm guessing that baptisms would have taken place in some unofficial place of Catholic worship - perhaps the house of a prominent Catholic. But then, presumably, there would be no records.
Can anyone enlighten me as to whether this scenario is accurate?
I know this is an ancient thread but I thought I'd suggest answers to a couple of questions.
England was a mission country for the Catholic church.
There were unofficial R.C. places of worship if there were enough Catholics to gather and if there was a priest in the area or visiting. It may have been in a house, inn, barn, room above a shop, if the owner was Catholic or sympathetic. There were "Mass rocks" in Ireland, used in penal times.
Catholic church buildings hadn't long been legalised when that family turned up in Sussex.
"Riding priests" travelled around to minister to their flock in their mission area.
Custom was to baptise a baby at home soon after birth; the priest, if there was one, visited the house. Priest may have had a notebook to record baptisms or he may not. He may have had one and lost it. Their registers were small notebooks which would fit into a coat pocket, a satchel or saddlebag. Those begun prior to 1837 might contain "illegal" marriages. Some doubled as account books or general notebooks if it was the priest's only notebook.
There may have been no priest. A baby or child who was thought to be in danger of death could be baptised by anyone.
A priest cousin of my 2xGGF from Lancashire, the R.C. stronghold of England, spent most of his ministry in the South of England, from 1840s. He used to say Mass in houses where there was no church. When there were enough parishioners to justify it, he looked for a site for a church. He was vicar-general (bishop's deputy who oversaw admin & legal stuff & commissioned architects) of Southwark Diocese, of which Sussex was then part.
The children were actually baptised at 4 different churches. The first at CE and all the rest at 3 RC churches in Preston, as the familiy moved. I can only think they converted, there would be no other reason for an RC couple to marry or baptise a child CE in late 1850s -early 60s. It just doesn't make sense otherwise.
Maybe someone else reading this board, may know if a record was made for conversion to RC.
A few Catholic couples continued to marry in C. of E. after 1837. It was simple as no registrar was needed. A pair of my R.C. ancestors married at a Preston C. of E. parish church in 1843.
Some Catholic churches had conversion registers. An adult might have had a conditional baptism which was entered in the ordinary baptism register.
It may have been a mixed marriage. They may have been Catholics who lapsed and then returned to the church, perhaps when eldest child was ready for school.
-
Thanks for this info Maiden Stone. I hadn’t thought about England being considered a mission area for Catholics priests. You conjure up quite a picture of lone priests rambling around on horseback, looking for a flock and any suitable place to worship. I agree in the 1800s, some of R/C faith would have married C/E. I suppose it was easier and probably less expensive too, not having to employ a registrar to record their wedding, making a marriage legal.