Mystery of our missing granny

Jellybaby_1

It's one of those brick walls for lots of people when a woman marries a second time and nobody knows her name. With the good weather recently I managed to catch up with some friends involved in genealogy and we got to talking about Boris Johnson and how he was married in a Roman Catholic cathedral despite his two previous divorces. I'm open to correction on this - seemingly the RC did not recognise his Protestant marriage and as he was getting married in the Catholic church he was deemed to be a single man. What did this make his previous wives and children then? But that's a different matter to my dilemma. Could this be the answer to my mystery - if my grandmother married a Catholic would she have been seen as a spinster if she was a Protestant widow?

pinkypinky

In Boris's, I think that's how their spinning it. I read somewhere that he was baptised a Catholic but never confirmed as well.

In your granny's case, I am presuming she married within the civil registration era? Without knowing the circumstances, and meaning no disrespect, if that were what happened, it's more likely that she lied than that the priest knew about her Protestant husband. Why not say she was a Catholic widow, for example?

Mick Tator

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

It's one of those brick walls for lots of people when a woman marries a second time and nobody knows her name. With the good weather recently I managed to catch up with some friends involved in genealogy and we got to talking about Boris Johnson and how he was married in a Roman Catholic cathedral despite his two previous divorces. I'm open to correction on this - seemingly the RC did not recognise his Protestant marriage and as he was getting married in the Catholic church he was deemed to be a single man.

I’m unsure that is correct? I think that the RCC does recognise Protestant ceremonies (certainly since Vatican II?) and the reason Johnson could marry in a RC church is that the RCC does not accept that a civil ceremony is religiously valid. So as a divorced man, he was regarded as a bachelor? Were his earlier marriages in a CofE church or simply civil registry office affairs?

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

But that's a different matter to my dilemma. Could this be the answer to my mystery - if my grandmother married a Catholic would she have been seen as a spinster if she was a Protestant widow?

In 1856 my 2nd great grandmother married. She was a Protestant and in the week before her marriage converted - the RCC baptismal register says "....and was today admitted into the Catholic Church by me ." A later note on the entry states "I married her to a Catholic."

So, the widow possibly might have needed to be baptised. I also have a thrice married relative (1839-93) and her birth surname was entered each time along with the surname of the deceased husband.

Jellybaby_1

pinkypinky wrote: »

In Boris's, I think that's how their spinning it. I read somewhere that he was baptised a Catholic but never confirmed as well.

In your granny's case, I am presuming she married within the civil registration era? Without knowing the circumstances, and meaning no disrespect, if that were what happened, it's more likely that she lied than that the priest knew about her Protestant husband. Why not say she was a Catholic widow, for example?

Yes it was within the civil registration era. I really don't know, this goes back to after 1920 when she was widowed so I never knew her. But surely if she pretended to be RC wouldn't she have to have some confirmation from her 'parish P.P.' that she was free to marry in the other RC parish, the PP who married her in the second marriage would not have known her.

Jellybaby_1

Mick Tator wrote: »

I’m unsure that is correct? I think that the RCC does recognise Protestant ceremonies (certainly since Vatican II?) and the reason Johnson could marry in a RC church is that the RCC does not accept that a civil ceremony is religiously valid. So as a divorced man, he was regarded as a bachelor? Were his earlier marriages in a CofE church or simply civil registry office affairs?

In 1856 my 2nd great grandmother married. She was a Protestant and in the week before her marriage converted - the RCC baptismal register says "....and was today admitted into the Catholic Church by me ." A later note on the entry states "I married her to a Catholic."

So, the widow possibly might have needed to be baptised. I also have a thrice married relative (1839-93) and her birth surname was entered each time along with the surname of the deceased husband.

I don't know where Boris Johnson's previous marriage took place.

Right, so if granny was baptised into the RC then there must be a record of it and I'll need to see the church record. Problem is, I don't know IF she married again to a Catholic, and even if she did, I've no idea what parish she might have got married in. More puzzles to solve!

pinkypinky

I'm confused. You don't know if she married again? What makes you think she did?

tabbey

pinkypinky wrote: »

I'm confused. You don't know if she married again? What makes you think she did?

Seems to be a lot of unknowns here.
Was she a Protestant widow? If she might or might not have remarried, the civil records would be the place to search.
She also could have gone to Northern Ireland, Britain or further afield.

LapsypaCork

Your details are a bit vague so it’s difficult to answer correctly especially not knowing the jurisdiction everything took place in. If it were after 1920 and she was widowed when she remarried, her 1st married surname may not have been recorded on the marriage register, lots of widowed women were recorded by their maiden name on marriage register for 2nd marriage. Also, a lot of times, it was up to the local church to send the register to the registrars for entry into the register so if I were you, I’d find the locality and start with the church records. Have you tried the Irish Genealogy database?

Jellybaby_1

Sorry if some thought my post was vague, but in my defence, I did say 'IF my grandmother married a Catholic would she have been seen as a spinster if she was a Protestant widow?' I was once told that she did remarry but I have never found a marriage record anywhere. I was just wondering as I can't find her anywhere is it because she MAY have remarried in a RC parish and not recorded as a widow? Every bride with the same name that I did find, is registered as spinster.

Mick Tator

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

I don't know where Boris Johnson's previous marriage took place.

Right, so if granny was baptised into the RC then there must be a record of it and I'll need to see the church record. Problem is, I don't know IF she married again to a Catholic, and even if she did, I've no idea what parish she might have got married in. More puzzles to solve!

I was thinking about this last night and looked at the scan of my gggmother's entry in the Baptismal Register. It didn't say 'baptised'. it said "was today admitted into the Catholic Church by me". So the word 'baptism' was noy used, she didn't have water poured on her, she probably repeated a word formula. Husband was from Cork, she was from Mallow, she was 'admitted' in Cork where she married in the same church 'with permission of PP Mallow'. So it was not a baptism but it was recorded in the Bapt Register.

Link- RCC doctrine site says:-
Since baptism is necessary for salvation and God wills the salvation of all, the Church recognizes all validly administered baptisms, even if Protestant. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
The ordinary ministers of baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of baptism for salvation. (CCC 1256)

I’m grateful to that priest – he gave her age (24) and her parents’ names, including her mother’s maiden name, which got me back to theirgeneration via the Ireland Diocesan and Prerogative Marriage Licence Bonds indexes 1623-1866.

VirginiaB

Boris Johnson's first two marriages were legal marriages. But as he was a baptized Catholic--tho confirmed in the C of E--and did not marry in the Catholic church, those two marriages were not recognized by the Church as sacramental. Therefore, as a baptized Catholic, he could marry this time in the Catholic church. However, he would certainly have had to have legal divorces. It is the difference between civil/legal and sacramental marriages. Awkward but not unprecedented by any means.

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

I was once told that she did remarry but I have never found a marriage record anywhere. Every bride with the same name that I did find, is registered as spinster.

On the civil register, her father's name would be recorded. Unless he had a very common name, it should be possible to identify the one you're seeking.

LapsypaCork

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

Sorry if some thought my post was vague, but in my defence, I did say 'IF my grandmother married a Catholic would she have been seen as a spinster if she was a Protestant widow?' I was once told that she did remarry but I have never found a marriage record anywhere. I was just wondering as I can't find her anywhere is it because she MAY have remarried in a RC parish and not recorded as a widow? Every bride with the same name that I did find, is registered as spinster.

I don’t see any reason to give her marital status as spinster, but widowed, the priest would have been making a false declaration on an official document. Now, another thing, if she was CoE and had very English surname, it may have been amended to show it as more Irish sounding. Depends on loads of circumstances, the priest, the area marriage took place etc. I see this a lot in my line of work dealing with certificates and following paper trails. It could also be very easy to find, you just need a starting point and best way to do that is speak to a living relative or find a civil certificate of a direct descendant and start from there.

pinkypinky

I've never heard of a name being amended to sound more Irish!

Person unlikely to be CoE in Ireland as well.

Jellybaby_1

tabbey wrote: »

On the civil register, her father's name would be recorded. Unless he had a very common name, it should be possible to identify the one you're seeking.

That particular family all have common names, and unfortunately the first name of her father keeps being repeated down the line, quite frustrating!

Jellybaby_1

Mick Tator wrote: »

I was thinking about this last night and looked at the scan of my gggmother's entry in the Baptismal Register. It didn't say 'baptised'. it said "was today admitted into the Catholic Church by me". So the word 'baptism' was noy used, she didn't have water poured on her, she probably repeated a word formula. Husband was from Cork, she was from Mallow, she was 'admitted' in Cork where she married in the same church 'with permission of PP Mallow'. So it was not a baptism but it was recorded in the Bapt Register.

Link- RCC doctrine site says:-
Since baptism is necessary for salvation and God wills the salvation of all, the Church recognizes all validly administered baptisms, even if Protestant. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
The ordinary ministers of baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon. In case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize by using the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of baptism for salvation. (CCC 1256)

I’m grateful to that priest – he gave her age (24) and her parents’ names, including her mother’s maiden name, which got me back to theirgeneration via the Ireland Diocesan and Prerogative Marriage Licence Bonds indexes 1623-1866.

Can I take it that the doctrine was in place in the early part of the 20th Century i.e. 1900 onwards?

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

Can I take it that the doctrine was in place in the early part of the 20th Century i.e. 1900 onwards?

No.

Jellybaby_1

tabbey wrote: »

No.

And so it doesn't apply to that period. Then it may be possible that the RC might have recorded a Protestant widow as a spinster at that time?

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

And so it doesn't apply to that period. Then it may be possible that the RC might have recorded a Protestant widow as a spinster at that time?

Anything is possible on any record but I very much doubt that a priest of any denomination would knowingly describe a widow as a spinster.
Anybody can make an error of recollection or if hearing is poor, mis interpret what he has been told. It is even possible that a party to a marriage might deliberately mislead the priest.
However the chances of any of these happening, are very remote.

Jellybaby_1

tabbey wrote: »

Anything is possible on any record but I very much doubt that a priest of any denomination would knowingly describe a widow as a spinster.
Anybody can make an error of recollection or if hearing is poor, mis interpret what he has been told. It is even possible that a party to a marriage might deliberately mislead the priest.
However the chances of any of these happening, are very remote.

Yes, I know, I'm scratching around now. If she was married locally someone could have ratted on her if she had lied. Somehow think she's not any of the married people I've found.

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

Yes, I know, I'm scratching around now. If she was married locally someone could have ratted on her if she had lied. Somehow think she's not any of the married people I've found.

When did this lady live, and where? Where and when was she last known ?
Presumably one of your parents, possibly both, knew her, and maybe aunts and uncles.

As a protestant living in parts of the 26 counties after independence, she may have felt uncomfortable and moved north of the border or across the Irish sea.

Some people do disappear, always have and always will, but most of our brick walls are further back in our history, and I feel there are more likely possibilities than getting remarried in a clandestine or misleading way.

She may have been admitted to a mental hospital or some other institution. In those days, many families were reluctant to discuss such matters honestly, preferring to make vague reference to the person. Suggesting that she may have remarried, without giving details, is typical of this sort of cover-up.

She may have had a dispute with her family and chosen to move. There are many possibilities, but I think the scenario mentioned in opening this thread is the least plausible.

Jellybaby_1

She lived 1890-1920's Dublin. I'm told by an 93 yr old lady she remarried, to whom and where I do not know. I'm told she lived in England, again I'm not sure where as over time the information has changed several times so I can't rely on that person's memory any further. No record has been found anywhere for a remarriage with her single name or her married name that absolutely ties up. That's why I'm clutching at straws with the Boris story as a possibility.

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

She lived 1890-1920's Dublin. I'm told by an 93 yr old lady she remarried, to whom and where I do not know. I'm told she lived in England, again I'm not sure where as over time the information has changed several times so I can't rely on that person's memory any further. No record has been found anywhere for a remarriage with her single name or her married name that absolutely ties up. That's why I'm clutching at straws with the Boris story as a possibility.

If she was in England in 1939 she should be in the 1939 register, a census substitute taken for rationing workforce and conscription purposes. It is on findmypast.
The difficulty is finding her on this, is if she remarried.
Free BMD is the volunteer website for searching marriage indices in England and Wales.
If you cannot find any likely marriage there or on the 1939 register, I would start looking at institutions here in Ireland.

Hermy

Just to note, the 1939 Register is now also available on Ancestry.

pinkypinky

One of the great things about the 1939 register is the ability to put in a precise DOB. It's actually not useful in earlier records - an older iteration of irishgenealogy.ie had a date search with exact d/m/y.

But if you're trying to find someone in 1939, they probably did know at least the month and day, if not the exact year. It has several times helped me narrow down a field of candidates.

Jellybaby_1

I already checked the 1939 register and never found her under either single or first marriage name or DOB. If she re-married lived in the UK and then emigrated somewhere else then I can't see how I'll ever find her unless some kind soul in her family turns up somewhere.

LapsypaCork

pinkypinky wrote: »

I've never heard of a name being amended to sound more Irish!

Person unlikely to be CoE in Ireland as well.

Yes, I’ve seen it a good few times and vice versa (Irish name to sound English), you would be amazed also to see each generation spelling a surname differently thus changing it completely over time. Given the fact also that most people had just primary school education lots of names were spelled phonetically which also changed the variation of surnames over time.

L1011

pinkypinky wrote: »

I've never heard of a name being amended to sound more Irish!

Well, its not unheard of.

tabbey

L1011 wrote: »

Well, its not unheard of.

Charles Burgess to Cathal Brugha,
Michael wilmore to Micheal Mac liammor.

But these are the oddball exceptions.

pinkypinky

Sure - there's examples. But what I meant was that I haven't seen much evidence of ordinary people doing it. Edward 'Eamonn' de Valera and his ilk are not exactly unknown masses.

LapsypaCork

A good example would be if an Irish man joined the British Army/navy and quite a lot of men did, they were often advised or even told, to take the Irish out of their names when signing up, some even gave different dates of birth. So, you could be looking for your great grandfather Michéal John Breathnach who joined the British army or went to England for work when you find him as Jack Wallace/Walshe /Walsh, similar but not as common with Irish girls who went to England.

spurious

Not specific to the UK, but certain names marked people out as Irish in a time it wasn't always a plus. Many 'Bridgets' used another name instead.

I had a distant cousin was convinced his great grandfather had married twice as while in the UK and Ireland his wife was Bridget but in the US and her grave she was Annie. Turned out she was a Bridget Anne.

pinkypinky

We're really getting off topic here & I'm not sure we can help Jellybaby_1 much more anyway.

Jellybaby_1

Thanks all. One day all will be revealed, but probably not to me!

tabbey

Jellybaby_1 wrote: »

Thanks all. One day all will be revealed, but probably not to me!

If you don't find the answer, who will?

Think about the suggestions you have received.

Good hunting.

Jellybaby_1

tabbey wrote: »

If you don't find the answer, who will?

Think about the suggestions you have received.

Good hunting.

I have always benefited from the expert advice I've received here. Many thanks.