There was no dispensa given in the first one, but the information was sent as "just in case" likely because the groom didn't know quite well the requirements, there is usually a consent from either the mother of father of each party, He got none but the priest says since he is 24 years old he did not needed it. The bride was adopted and the extra note was to let the "office" know that she didn't knew it but non the less there are no civil or blood lines "undercovered". Really interesting documents, I wonder if Juariti was a variation of Juaregui.

After the Mexican Independence the Catholic faith was obligated until the Benito Juarez reforms, thus people would try to comply with this independently of their true believes and some would go as far as re-baptizing or getting dispensas like the second link, although some people just didn't mention it. No as much freedom as the school books keep telling us :)

Thanks for sharing.

RJ Quiralta

Hello Kathy, so glad to hear from you again.

I believe that in the first Dispensa the priest is showing extreme caution. As he says in the letter, the groom is adopted and the son of a wonderful family. He wants to ensure that there are no problems for the couple in the future.

The second Dispensa, to me, seems more odd. The groom is from England and a widower. It appears that the groom is wishing to convert to the Catholic religion in order to be married in the church. The priest mentions all of the specific details that he has instructed him on, that the groom understands, and that he even signed his acceptance.

Thank you for providing this service which I know is very tedious and time consuming.
Deedra Corona