Help rechecking google translation

[Lizz Denis]

I translated the bottom message on google translate from Danish but I think the translation came out a bit muddled.  Can someone double check the part about "could be prevented from to enter" and the "without previous ofifice of Eccl....copulerede"  Not sure I understand what this all means. It's a marriage record:

On the Monday the 11 Martii  ......in
Farum without previous Orifice of Ecclesiastes-
chair copulerede in the King's Letter of 5th
Martii 1805.
The above reported persons either by kinship or
Egteskabs vows to others could be prevented from
to enter into matrimony but another, wherefore
we signed liable as groomsmen.

Mandagen den 11 Martii........
Farum uden foregaaende Lysning af Prædike-
stolen copulerede i følge Kongebrev af 5te
Martii 1805.
At ovenmeldte Personer hverken ved Slægtskab eller
Egteskabs Løfter til andre kunne hindres fra
at indtræde i Egteskab men hinanden, derfor ere
vi underskrevne ansvarlige som Forlovere.

[Ivar Kjærgaard]

Hi Lizz

1) ...hverken ... eller -> neither .. nor (..either .. or -> enten .. eller)

2) men hinanden should be read as: med hinanden -> with each other

3) derfor ere vi underskrevne ansvarlige som Forlovere -> for this we signatory groomsmen are responsible

Kind regards
-ivar

[Ivar Kjærgaard]

Hi Again

I forgot:

without previous Orifice of Ecclesiasteschair -> something like:  without previous announcement from the pulpit

[Otto Kjærgaard]

Slægtskab means close family relationship.

Kings letter. A permission which had to be given if not all the condition for marriage were fullfilled.  In this case previous Orifice of Ecclesiastes-
chair. The letters was written in the name of the King and were very common. They had to pay for the letter and that was used as a source of tax for the State.
Divorced people also had to ask for a Kings letter is was also mandatory in case of under age marriage.

Ægteskabsløfte means marriage vows

The interesting thing you could look after in this case, are there any particular reason why there hasnt been a previous orifice?

[Peter Paluszewski]

Hi Lizz,

Some further explanation:
The couple had received permission from the king to marry without prior announcement, which was usually required by law.

The best men/groomsmen/witnesses assume responsibility that the couple are neither related or married (to someone else).

Regards,
Peter

[Ralph Rasmussen]

Taken as a whole:

(They were) married in Farum without reading of the banns from the pulpit, on Monday March 11, in conformity with royal permission dated March 5, 1805. 

We, the undersigned, take responsibility as guarantors (of this marriage) that the above neither in relationship [e.g. as cousins or guardians] nor in prior marriage commitments should be prevented from entering into marriage with each other.

Mandagen den 11 Martii........
Farum uden foregaaende Lysning af Prædike-
stolen copulerede i følge Kongebrev af 5te
Martii 1805.
At ovenmeldte Personer hverken ved Slægtskab eller
Egteskabs Løfter til andre kunne hindres fra
at indtræde i Egteskab men hinanden, derfor ere
vi underskrevne ansvarlige som Forlovere.