Roman Catholic Registers

[melba_schmelba]

I have found many baptism records annotated with details of a subsequent marriage, but not all are sadly - even in the same area - so i guess it’s a question of how thorough the priest was in his record keeping (much the same with all religions as seen from a large range of parish records).

The only notes i have seen on a marriage record is when one party was not a Catholic.

I have to say, I never realised this was a 'thing'. I presume this never really happened for people baptised in Ireland but married in GB or even further afield.

[Deirdre784]

Sorry, the baptisms i’m referring to were all in England and Wales.

[andrewalston]

I have seen baptism entries annotated with marriage details, but almost always where the marriage took place well outside the parish.

One such entry gave me the name of the bride, the date of the marriage, and the name of the church 4500 miles away in Canada. I had not even suspected that the man emigrated!

[Deirdre784]

To be married in the Catholic church you had to show that both parties had been baptised. If either party couldn’t provide a baptism certificate then they had to contact the church for proof. Maybe this is how the baptism entries were annotated in some cases.

I do have annotated baptism entries even when the marriage was in the same church or parish.

[melba_schmelba]

To be married in the Catholic church you had to show that both parties had been baptised. If either party couldn’t provide a baptism certificate then they had to contact the church for proof. Maybe this is how the baptism entries were annotated in some cases.

I do have annotated baptism entries even when the marriage was in the same church or parish.

But surely that was not practical, say, for Irish immigrants, even to GB in the 18th and early 19th centuries before any viable postal system even existed? Even when the proper postal systems were up and functioning and telegrams came in, I would still be surprised if priests always managed to contact the original parishes of baptism from London to Tipperary, or New York to Cork.

[heywood]

Pennines,
I'm in England without my GRO Certs and don't know if St Paulinus in Old Brompton is the same as St Paul's (there being a CofE parish of the same name in the Gillingham area). I just have my Ancestry entry to work with.

As best I know:
William Patrick Murphy
Mary Ann Hogg
m. 1874-02-15
the GRO Ref is "Medway Vol 2a Page 561"


What I was hoping to do was get a lead on his place of baptism (possibly Cork from the 1901 census), and anything extra on Mary (I have muddled up family names from my Grandmother's best effort at writing out what she recalled about her in-laws).

Here goes
Canuc

Where do you have him as William Patrick?
Free BMD just gives names William and Mary.

The marriage certificate would give his father’s name which might help you trace him- not exactly a rare surname 

[Pennines]

So Canuc -- if you have that actual marriage certificate it will give you the fathers' names of the bride and groom.

You could then check the RC Parish baptisms on the Ancestry site for a 'William Murphy' born about 1848 plus or minus a couple of years, with a father's name of (whatever it was on marriage cert) -- in Cork.

Often the Irish people would name their eldest son after the father's father as well -- which may provide another clue for you -- ie check the name of William and Mary's eldest son. (That's not cast in stone -- but was often the case).

(Edit -- sorry Heywood I have just repeated what you said about the certificate -- didn't mean to do that, but at least it shows I agree with you!!)

[eadaoin]

To be married in the Catholic church you had to show that both parties had been baptised. If either party couldn’t provide a baptism certificate then they had to contact the church for proof. Maybe this is how the baptism entries were annotated in some cases.

But surely that was not practical, say, for Irish immigrants, even to GB in the 18th and early 19th centuries before any viable postal system even existed?

this only became the rule after about 1908

[Maiden Stone]

To be married in the Catholic church you had to show that both parties had been baptised. If either party couldn’t provide a baptism certificate then they had to contact the church for proof. Maybe this is how the baptism entries were annotated in some cases.

But surely that was not practical, say, for Irish immigrants, even to GB in the 18th and early 19th centuries before any viable postal system even existed?

this only became the rule after about 1908

Easter 1908 after "Ne Temere " decree on marriage 1907 (my reply #1).
Marriages between a Catholic and a member of another Christian denomination still happened in Catholic churches after 1908.
"Ne Temere" required a Catholic to marry in a Catholic church, preferably in the parish of the bride, in the presence of the parish priest or a priest designated by him. Prior to 1908 the Catholic Church didn't require members to marry in a Catholic church; main requirements before then were that a marriage was performed according to the law of the country and that neither party had a living spouse.
Adding information about a marriage to a person's baptism register was an insurance against that person trying later to marry someone else in a Catholic church while their spouse was alive.
There have been several amendments to Catholic canon law between 16th and late 20th centuries. They were applied or not applied in different countries and even in different dioceses within a country at various times. That's why I began my first reply with "it depends when, where"

Catholic priests were operating illegally in England until very late in 18th century. There were no parishes, only missions. Decision to begin keeping a register would have been up to each chaplain or missionary. Some priests who kept registers (in small notebooks) took them away when they moved. Registers which remained in a place have big gaps  or resemble scrapbooks, even in 19thC.