Would a step parent ever appear as a parent on a church marriage record?

[Ghostwheel]

I was wondering if anyone ever saw a stepparent, especially a stepmother, appear as a parent on a Catholic church marriage record.

I'm guessing it wasn't policy, but I was wondering if it might have happened as a mistake.   If anyone ever saw clear evidence of a case where it happened.  I was just wondering if it was a possibility.

[Mike in Cumbria]

I can't see why they wouldn't appear as parent.

[Ghostwheel]

Mike,

I can't see why they wouldn't appear as parent.

Well, I think they were trying to prevent consanguinity.  So, maybe not a big deal, for the marriage itself, but somewhere down the road, if a younger generation were getting married, and they had to consult earlier records to determine if people were some kind of cousins or not.

Officially, I think third cousins weren't supposed to marry, so that is a lot of relationships to keep track of.  Of course, people could get dispensations, and many third or second cousins did marry.  With first cousins, it was also possible, but much rarer.

[Maiden Stone]

If the person being married said a step-parent was their parent, then yes. The person may even have believed s/he was their real parent if they'd never known the biological parent.
The priest conducting the wedding needed to know if the 2 people getting married were already related to each other.
The year may be relevant. When civil registration of marriages was introduced there would be instructions regarding what information should be recorded on a marriage certificate.
My English-born great-grandfather (married in C. of E.) and his sister (married in R.C. church), both of whom were born when their mother was single, had a fictitious father on their marriage certificates. They seem to have been brought up by their grandmother and her 2nd husband. The fictitious father's name consisted of their step-grandfather's 1st name + their surname. They may even have believed in the existence of the made-up father as they both named a son after him. They were born in a large town and moved to another town when they were children; no one outside the family would have known that the father on their marriage certificates never existed.   

[Maiden Stone]

Well, I think they were trying to prevent consanguinity.  So, maybe not a big deal, for the marriage itself, but somewhere down the road, if a younger generation were getting married, and they had to consult earlier records to determine if people were some kind of cousins or not.

Officially, I think third cousins weren't supposed to marry, so that is a lot of relationships to keep track of.  Of course, people could get dispensations, and many third or second cousins did marry.  With first cousins, it was also possible, but much rarer.

Catholics weren't supposed to marry their first cousins, except in exceptional cases. The closer the relationship, the higher up the system a dispensation request went, consequently taking longer and costing more. Parish priest had authority to grant a dispensation for a more distant relationship. Search for topics including consanguinity on the forum. I've contributed explanations and links to the topic several times.

[aghadowey]

I've seen it a few time- perhaps priest thought the step-parent was the actual parent and filled out register accordingly.
I do know of a case where a girl was in her twenties when she discovered that her 'mother' was really her stepmother. Her own mother had died in childbirth and father re-married soon after. Stepmother wanted child to feel she was as equally loved as (future) children from second marriage so made it condition when she married the child's father.

[majm]

I was wondering if anyone ever saw a stepparent, especially a stepmother, appear as a parent on a Catholic church marriage record.

I'm guessing it wasn't policy, but I was wondering if it might have happened as a mistake.   If anyone ever saw clear evidence of a case where it happened.  I was just wondering if it was a possibility.

And

Mike,

I can't see why they wouldn't appear as parent.

Well, I think they were trying to prevent consanguinity.  So, maybe not a big deal, for the marriage itself, but somewhere down the road, if a younger generation were getting married, and they had to consult earlier records to determine if people were some kind of cousins or not.

Officially, I think third cousins weren't supposed to marry, so that is a lot of relationships to keep track of.  Of course, people could get dispensations, and many third or second cousins did marry.  With first cousins, it was also possible, but much rarer.

Hi, 

I am sure that there has not ever been R.C. kindred or affinity lists that have banned marriages between  THIRD cousins.    A step mum named as mother on a R.C. marriage is not pointing to a bride or groom trying to avoid seeking dispensation for third cousins to marry, nor to anyone seeing to deceive, but rather it is simply a bride or groom answering verbally the questions the clergy posed, verbally.  And then the clergy  making notes of that, to transfer that info onto the parish register.   

JM

[heywood]

I was wondering if anyone ever saw a stepparent, especially a stepmother, appear as a parent on a Catholic church marriage record.

I'm guessing it wasn't policy, but I was wondering if it might have happened as a mistake.   If anyone ever saw clear evidence of a case where it happened.  I was just wondering if it was a possibility.

Do you mean that where the church record shows daughter of ..... the father and mother, your record shows father and stepmother’s name.
Does the record indicate that she is stepmother?
How old was the child  when that marriage happened?

[Ghostwheel]

Thanks, I appreciate the answers, so far.  To clarify, I was not considering consanguinity directly in this case.

Heywood,

I'm afraid my info is very sketchy.  Essentially, it boils down to this:

A woman remarried later in life.  I'm guessing she must have then been roughly about fifty.

The church record of her first marriage does not survive, and it was before civil records.  There doesn't seem to be a civil record for her second marriage that I can find.  The church record of her second marriage record - only an index on IrishGenealogy - no primary source available for the parish at https://registers.nli.ie/ - gives her parents' names.  Here's a summary of it:

Marriage of DANIEL CLIFFORD of TINIHALLY and CATHERINE DONOGHUE of W TULLIG E on 29 November 1890
Parents of Catherine: John Brennan and Honora Sweeny
Parents of Daniel: John and Ellen Clifford
Witnesses: Patrick Reilly and Johanna Dodd

(Killorglin Parish, Co. Kerry)

I have no other strong direct indication of the names of her parents, other than this record.  But it doesn't seem to be reliable.  The father's last name is slightly off - Brennan compared to the true maiden name Breen.  (though I am 100% sure it is the same woman, based on strong evidence) And I could easily believe that the father's name was misinterpreted, as elsewhere, I have seen Breen written so it could be misinterpreted as Brennan.

But the mother's name really throws me for a loop.  There is no couple like that in the surviving records, either with Breen or Brennan.  And I can guess the rough timeline when the daughter (the bride who remarried) was born with reasonable certainty.  Not the exact year, but within about +- 3 three years. Enough to know that her birth should probably appear in the surviving record, even if it was in a nearby parish.  Or, even if the page was damaged, I think a sibling would probably still appear.

One possibility that I was considering is that the mother listed in the record was really her stepmother.  If so, then there is a strong possibility that her father remarried during a gap in the records.  There is about a 22 year gap, or larger.

Unfortunately, though the woman (again the bride who remarried, age about 50) had many children, only two baptism records survive, so not a lot of clues in the sponsors names, to connect her to her parents, other than this marriage record.  Though, I have some very weak evidence, which allowed me to suspect two different couples, both living in the same townland.  In one case, the father's name was John Breen, but in neither case was the mother's name close.

In one surviving baptism record, the name Sugrue appeared.  This was the maiden name of both of the two mothers that I was considering.  A witness to the marriage of one of her sons was also named Sugrue, though it is a common name.  The other surviving baptism record had a couple as sponsors who lived in the same townland as both these couples