Assistance with Latin Please

[Rossonero3]

I would like to know what the beginning of this church marriage record says starting beneath the Groom's name (Petrus Taormina) and ending at the Priest's name.
I'm also curious as to why this record takes place in Jan 1894 when the marriage happened in December of 1891. Is this when the marriage was recorded in the church or were they actually married in the church at this time in 1894?

Thanks

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903 ... at=1167816

[brogie62]

It looks to me that it just references the 3 publications of the banns, 31 December, 1 and 6 of this [month], and that no impediment was found.

Why do you say they were married in December 1891?

Kevin

[Rossonero3]

It looks to me that it just references the 3 publications of the banns, 31 December, 1 and 6 of this [month], and that no impediment was found.

Why do you say they were married in December 1891?

Kevin

Because I have a copy of their bans and marriage record from 1891. Attached is the cover page from the bans and the marriage record.

[Rossonero3]

Here's the marriage record...

[brogie62]

You got me!

[liviomoreno]

The 1891 civil marriage was not valid for the church, in 1894 the decided to have also a religious marriage.

[Rossonero3]

The 1891 civil marriage was not valid for the church, in 1894 the decided to have also a religious marriage.

Thanks Livio. I’m guessing this was common with all civil marriages and the church not recognizing them.

[erudita74]

https://books.google.com/books?id=zbEJf ... es&f=false

p. 49

[Rossonero3]

https://books.google.com/books?id=zbEJf ... es&f=false

p. 49

Great thank you!

[erudita74]

In my own research, I have found that things were the other way around, with the church marriage preceding the civil one, and not vice versa, as in your case. In any case, here's some info which you may find interesting concerning marriage issues between the Church and the civil state:

Many couples, who had church marriages prior to the unification of Italy, resisted the new civil laws and refused to then have a civil marriage. Some eventually did, but only many years later. As a result, the civil state did not recognize as legitimate their children who had been born after their church marriage, but before their civil one. So it took the couple marrying civilly for their children to be considered legitimate by the civil state. This meant that, until the parents had the civil marriage, the children could not, for example, benefit from inheritance laws. Their parents had to be married civilly, and their births legitimized by that civil marriage, in order for them to inherit property.

Another thing was the problem the new civil code caused between the civil state and the Church, with regard to subsequent marriages. According to article 98 of the new civil code, a man who had married in the Church, and who had children from that marriage, could leave his wife and children and marry another woman civilly. The town mayor could not refuse to marry him and this other woman, as the civil law did not recognize his previous church marriage, and therefore did not consider it to be an impediment to him marrying another woman.

(pp 118-119)- Family, Political Economy, and Demographic Change) by Kertzer and Hogan.


Erudita