... 'married irregularly and rebuked before the session'

[Maggie1895]

I was just looking at 2 entries on a parish register in the late 1820s.  Both gave the names of the couple concerned, and recorded that " they were married irregularly on the xx last, were rebuked before the session and had their marriage confirmed'  The marriage dates were taken to be that date, not the previous 'irregular' date.

Remembering some of the Elders in my childhood (by no means all though) I can envisage a young couple being rebuked before the session, but what exactly did the 'married irregularly' mean in Scotland at that time?    As I remember this was before the schism so it's not Wee Frees v. established Church - it's the regular parish record.

Was it that they had made some sort of handfasted declaration without benefit of the church, or was it that there had been a child born to the union?  They can hardly have nipped down to their neighbourhood Register Office!   If the latter, (child born out of wedlock) that wouldn't have constituted irregular marriage would it?   So what other form of marriage was there at that point that the church regarded as irregular? 

Any light on the subject much appreciated

[behindthefrogs]

There was no registry office in 1820 but there were many denominations outside the established church.  They could well have been married within one of those.

David

[Maggie1895]

Thanks David, you could well be right, but if they were to have already married in the Episcopal Church (C of E equiv), or if they were Roman Catholics, why would they then go to the Minister and Session of the parish church later? 

Maybe I'm overlooking a few denominations

[behindthefrogs]

Have a look at the following:

http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/scottishwayofbirthanddeath/marriage/

David

[sancti]

Marriage Forms and Practices
From the time of the Reformation and the founding of the Church of Scotland in 1560, marriage ceased to be a church sacrament. It became a civil matter based upon the consent of adult individuals. How the marriage took place, meaning its form, might have been regular or irregular, but it was a binding union.

A regular marriage took place before a church minister following the reading of banns. An irregular marriage came about in one of three ways: by mutual agreement, or by a public promise followed by consummation, or by cohabitation and repute. In all cases, for regular and irregular marriages, both bride and groom had to be free to marry, not within forbidden degrees of kinship and over the age of consent (12 for brides and 14 for grooms).

[Maggie1895]

Thank you both so much - all is now quite clear.  I had been on the right track when I wondered about handfasted, but now realise I was only just scratching the surface.   

I've written this before, and I will no doubt do so many times again - this board is brilliant.    The expertise so freely given means I am continually learning.

[macmoffat]

Thank you for the information. I know it's been a long time and I do appreciate it. Perhaps given due to the present circumstances I can resume research again. xx

[Rena]

My ancestors Thos Bell and Alison Young, both of Cramond, Midlothian had an Irregular Marriage, as described here:-

'irregular' marriage, in which a man and a woman made a declaration in front of two witnesses, hence the other name ‘marriage by declaration’. By showing proofs of their marriage the parties could obtain a warrant of a sheriff or sheriff substitute to have the marriage registered by the local registrar.

Thomas and Alison then confessed at the local Kirk Session that they'd had an irregular marriage - the kirk forgave them and married them.   I think they probably couldn't have their children baptised in the kirk if they hadn't had their union blessed in church.

[TunjiLees]

I have ancestors in the 1760s who, although they were both natives of Kinnaird in Perthshire, travelled to Edinburgh to get married there before returning to their home parish.

When I investigated the priest who married them, I discovered he was notorious for performing irregular marriages without the calling of banns.

Perhaps the couple wanted to elope, or maybe they feared disapproval from future in-laws.

I transcribed this entry about them from the Kinnaird Kirk Session records;
17th August 1767
After Sermon session met and was constituted by prayer. Robert Whittet [should read David Whittet] and Agnes Anderson both of this parish having some weeks ago gone to Edinr and there married in a Clandestine way were this day called before the session and interrogated upon, acknowledged themselves married there, marriage Lines were produced and read, they were then rebuked for their irregular conduct and declared by the matrimonial consent to be married accordingly before the session and desired to Live as married persons. Session closed with prayer.