I was wondering if anyone could explain whether there was any procedural difference in a consanguineous marriage. (Catholic)
Like, did it require a longer waiting time? Or did it require some special fee? Or some kind of research work?
I'm basically wondering if there would be any motivation for lying and saying a consanguineous marriage was non-consanguineous.
I have a kind of suspicious case in mind.
The two mothers of the bride and groom had the same maiden surname. The mothers were born about in neighboring townlands. (That is, ignoring possible subdivisions)
What's more, I think one mother was living in the same townland as the other was born, when she was married.
The mothers had different fathers, so the bride and groom would have to be no closer than second cousins.
The groom had an uncle who married his second cousin, in a neighboring parish. I only understand the relationship through the notation. The records don't go back far enough to detail it out.
The bride and groom lived about 10 km apart in neighboring parishes. Mountainous country.
The marriage happened in America. I haven't read many pages of American church records, but I never noticed any notes other than for first cousins. Very different to Ireland, where I never saw first cousins being married, but lots of other notes for other relationships.
I was thinking that they would probably have viewed relationships more distant than first cousins less important in America, due to the lesser danger of inbreeding.
It also occurs to me that the records to outline any possible relationship would not have survived, and they might have known that, in a bureaucratic sense. That is, if formal research was required, the priest would have known it was impossible to carry out.
Of course, another possibility is that they were related more distantly than was required to be stated.