CoTipperary-L Archives

Archiver > CoTipperary > 2004-12 > 1102273476


From: "Rosemary Eisenhauer" <>
Subject: Re: [CoTipperary]Clougheen Church in 1855??
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 14:04:43 -0500
References: <41B1207A.6030609@pacbell.net> <004001c4dace$48dedde0$0d01a8c0@xphome>


Hello, Lorraine

The title of Vicar and the use of the Community Hall in Clougheen in 1855
strongly suggests a Protestant marriage for your ancestors. If so, you are
in luck. Marriages of non-Catholics were being registered by the central
government from 1845. (Registration of Births & Deaths for this group, and
BMD's for RC's did not begin in Ireland until 1864..)

You will want to check with the General Register Office, Dublin (just use
this term in your browser window to reach their website). The fees are
minimal, although you may have to wait a while for their response.

In the process, BE SURE to include any nicknames for each partner!! Was John
called "Jack," for example? Was Catherine nicknamed "Cat," "Kate," "Katie,"
"Kitty", etc., etc.? The GRO could not find the birth of my grandmother,
Sarah Walsh, until a good friend checked out the original records in Dublin.
She was registered all right, but under her nickname, "Sally" Walsh. All
other data dovetailed so we knew she was the right person. Frequently such
nicknames were given to the children at birth and the individual might never
have known his/her true name. Iliteracy in the 19th c. didn't help either
because the individual might not know what the clerk wrote down on the
records.

What puzzles me is that both partners, John Flynn and Catherine Hogan Foley,
possess Irish surnames that are usually associated with the RC Church. So
why the Protestant marriage? For any number of valid, human reasons. Perhaps
the RC Church building was already scheduled full. June has always been a
popular month for marriages. However, there are other reasons. Among them,
the most common circumstance I can think of is that the young lady might
have been pregnant. If they waited for the publication of the Banns in the
RC Church on 3 successive Sundays (really covers about 4 weeks), it would
have been difficult for the parents to claim an "early delivery" for the
child later. To avoid public disgrace and to legitimize the child, the two
would have sought their marriage as quickly as possible anywhere they could
get it.

However, such marriages were often followed later by an RC service which
solemnized the union and they were welcomed back into the fold. Or, in
another scenario, perhaps the couple was so mad at the Church for the
artificial delays that they never returned. Others simply left the RC Church
for doctrinal reasons or perhaps for survival during the "Troubles." Or,
perhaps your ancestors just needed to book passage right away for Australia
and wanted to sail as a married couple? When did they arrive? At least, this
gives you something to chew on.

The answer to your last question about John Flynn's brother who was an RC
priest is, "yes." There are some registries for them and their assignments
to the U.S. My impression is that these would be located at the Seminary in
which the individual priest studied or at least was associated with. and you
would have to know beforehand which one it was. In the 19th c. I believe
there was an active Seminary in Thurles, for example. But there may also be
more venues for you to explore. I will have to leave this point for other
Listers who have search experience in the subject.

Good luck, Rosemary



From: "Lorraine Fisher" <>

> I have just received another piece of family folk-lore which says that on
> June 4th, 1855, my John Flynn was married to widow Catherine Hogan Foley
> at the Clougheen Community Hall, which was formerly known as Shanahan's
> Church of Ireland. There is also mention of a Vicar named Fraser / Frazer.
>
> Does any of this make sense to anyone, please?
> Is it possible to trace the marriage details?
>
> Also, John Flynn had a brother who was a Roman Catholic priest who went
> to the US. Would there be a record of RC priests in Tipperary or
> Waterford?







This thread: