QUAKER-ROOTS-L ArchivesArchiver > QUAKER-ROOTS > 2000-02 > 0949512851
Subject: Re: [Q-R] Marriage Customs - Part 2
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2000 12:34:11 EST
The pregnancy aspect of this discussion (as well as the other part) has
been carried -very, very well- by some well-informed
Some clarification please on "8th or 9th month.
Our second daughter was born about midway in her 8th month,
Not because we had "sinned" -we had been married 5 years, but
1)was "due" 6 weeks later according to the OB/GYNs
2)she weighed less that 4 lbs at birth.
Clearly, Ob/Gyn has made major advances in 200 years :-)
I'm wondering whether those Quakers of 200 years ago -absent
the kind of medical expertise we now have, actually DID count
to 9 determine whether a couple had exceeded the "bundling"
In a message dated 2/2/00 12:05:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
 If the intended bride were pregnant and the couple did manage to
"Pass the Mtg" and married in mtg, and if a child were born 7 or 8
months later, both husband and wife were summarily disowned. In
some cases the reason is suppressed in Hinshaw. Where it is given
it would be "unchastity" as I recall.
--> In the few examples I have seen with this situation, the process was
the same as for other discipline - the couple was visited with concern and
if they did not acknowledge their improper behavior to the meeting they
were disowned. I recall both an example of acknowledgement where the
couple remained in the meeting and another of being disowned. Rarely was an
action taken without some effort being made to get the individual involved
to acknowledge his or her misbehavior, and if they made appology to be