Hi Mike Yes, it is still called a Marriage in the church. I married in a Catholic Church (I am not Catholic) but we were told that the priest was a Cannon and was licenced to perform marriages. That was in 1966 and it was still unusual. I've looked at the Church Registers in Bristol RO and can't remember if I've actually seen Marriages for the Pro-Cathedral - I rather think not as I don't have an actual marriage date for my MIL and FIL, just the Quarter. If I'd seen the records I know I would have all the details. My MILs Irish mother married in the Register Office in 1915 but I doubt they would have gone to the Church as she was ex-communicated:-) She was married to someone else but had 6 children by the man she eventually married! Oh, isn't family history interesting. Liz www.btinternet.com/~e.newbery OPC for Street, Somerset ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gould" <mike.gould@ndirect.co.uk> To: <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 7:46 AM Subject: Re: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin > Hi Liz, > > Thanks for your reply. I was interested to see that in your example the > church service was still called a marriage, even though the "official" > marriage had already taken place. Your possible reasons make a lot of > sense, so I think one of them is probably the right one. > > Thanks for your help, > > Best wishes, > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Liz > Sent: 07 March 2010 19:25 > To: bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin > > Hi Mike > > Certainly the Catholic Church were using the Latin names at that stage so > you are quite right there. The marriage that you have from the GRO would > probably be in the Register Office as the Catholic priests were not > licenced > > to perform marriages at that stage. Even my SIL had to go to the > Register's > > Office in 1962 - they then went to the Pro Cathedral where they had a > marriage in the Catholic Church...this was the same day. It may well be > that your ancestor went to the Register Office and thought that was that, > then if they went to have their children baptised the Priest may well have > found that they hadn't had a church wedding! Perhaps they didn't realise > they had to do that or, as you say, may be one or both of them converted > and > > it was suggested they should marry in the church? > > Liz > www.btinternet.com/~e.newbery > OPC for Street, Somerset > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Gould" <mike.gould@ndirect.co.uk> > To: <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 7:09 PM > Subject: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin > > >> >> Hi All, >> >> Having done some searching of the pilot family search site, I came across >> a >> record that puzzles me. It clearly concerns some relatives of mine - >> Lily >> GOULD and George BULLOCK - but their names are all written in a Latin >> form - >> Lilianum & Georgium - and the date given (1925) is 2 years after the GRO >> registration of their marriage. So although it is listed under >> Marriages, > >> I >> don't think it can be one. >> >> Can anyone help ? Is this perhaps a Catholic service where one or both >> have >> converted to catholicism and is a blessing of their marriage ? > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >