omnium-gatherum part deux

[temporal1]

Im sure this has been discussed before I ever got on this forum, but I thought I'd ask anyway.
Ive read in several places where early Anabaptists allowed for remarriage of the injured spouse.
I've also read that most conservative Anabaptist churches become more strict in the past 100 years.

So my question is why would a group of supposedly merciful christian believers, believe that they should cause more pain and suffering on top of the pain and suffering already caused upon someone whose spouse committed adultery against them and left them with 9 kids and no means of support, instead of showing mercy which would be consistent with Christs teachings.

The early Anabaptists who allowed for remarriage were operating based on the Roman Catholic view of marriage. The church leaders decided who was fit to remarry and who was not.

As the Anabaptist movement matured, so did their understanding of the scriptures.
No longer was it a matter of marrying inside or outside the church but rather,
“What did God intend from the beginning?"
The scriptural texts (and their interpretation of them) became the authority on who could remarry, rather than the church leaders.

Also, it became clear to conservative Anabaptists that the whole theme of NT restoration becomes nearly impossible if a person remarries.
This includes restoration to a spouse as well as restoration to the Lord.

Few spouses are "won by the conversation of their wife" if they remarry.
Conservative Anabaptists have dozens of stories of spouses who faithfully prayed for their estranged spouse and eventually were able to see the fruit of their prayers.
CA churches have typically supported spouses who have chosen to take this path.

If I'm understanding correctly, it does seem to me that your question puts the focus on the injured spouse and how to reach out to him/her.

The CA position puts the focus on the perpetrator and how to reach out to him/her.
(The focus of the book of Hosea.)
If a CA church does well with this, the injured spouse will also feel the care and support of the church community during this time of grief.

http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272

[temporal1]

Welllll, i did the “on sale” Ancestry DNA test. Heirbyadoption’s post encouraged me.
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1232

Re: $ - Sales / Good buys Page 1

by Heirbyadoption » Mon Apr 23, 2018 10:45 am
Having done a couple different ones for adoption reunification purposes, I would recommend at least AncestryDNA over 23&Me, as it had access to a much larger database and offers more genetic information.

Having said that, I've met family that only did 23&me, so if you can afford to do 2 or 3 or 4 of the primary tests, its worth your time.

After you do so, I highly recommend downloading your results from each test onto GEDMatch if you're trying to find family connections...

It was complete ‘way faster than i imagined, instructions were to expect 6-8 weeks.

i’ve got the results. hardly know what to make of them.
the biggest puzzle is, it’s showing 35% Scandinavian, the majority.
never a word about Scandinavians in my family, no names come to mind. what is this? to add to it, only remote connections to Germany, in spite of my German surname, and other German names ??

i’m confused.

in 2005, we sent in a (double-blind) DNA sample of my mother for the National Geographic Genome study. this was to search for “DEEP HISTORY” ancestors, this study was largely on the male side, the female science was in development.

her 2005 results showed the Scandinavian connection, a big surprise, but, we discounted this because, “deep history” was meant to be so remote, it was hardly applicable to present time.
an example of “deep history” they described was when the present British Isles were a peninsula, not islands. people walked there.

all kinds of things have happened in history.
not sure where this will lead. i don’t have time to seriously concentrate on it right now.
it appears our family stories/documentation of migration through Pennsylvania-Virginia are accurate .. maybe that’s where the German name came into it?

the early Scandinavians in the U.S. had a rough time, as did all/most.
lots of people did more denying of their ancestral roots than (bragging) about them.
many came here to “be Americans!” they very much wanted this new beginning and new identity.
only in the 60-70’s, did the hyphenated, “African-American,” then others, become desirable.
some still prefer to downplay these former connections.

in the past, esp before DNA, people believed they had a lot more control over who they were, according to what they chose to believe. DNA changed that.

in similar ways that X and Y chromosone science certainly changed “what people believed” about which parent determines the sex of their children! in history, women were blamed or credited, science surprised with finding men contribute the deciding chromosone.

this was a most fortuitous finding for women.
women not producing the desired sex in marriages could be cast aside, or beheaded.
not much is said about that sort of thing anymore.

aborting females for sex selection is a contemporary phenomena.
to the point of causing “too many males,” in some cultures.

i’ve read, different women go to Canada for sex-selection abortions; Canada having “at-will” abortion laws, up until full-term birth. others may know more about this ..

.. young Kirikou in Finland might be a distant cousin? ..

[temporal1]

i’ve found “this guy” in Switzerland.
his paper trail ends there, at least, for now.

Hans Hacob Wottli (Wohttli)
“Born 1640, Zofingen, Bern, Switzerland”
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Wottli-3

i am not yet searching in earnest, only casually. evenso, interesting info pops up.

still, no Scandinavian names or connections (that i recognize.)
new names in Germany, France, Switzerland .. Scotland, too.

[temporal1]

i have been so curious to know my family’s relationship, or whatever parts they may have played amongst Anabaptists, and, during the Reformation .. being Lutheran was not part of my family’s recent history. in fact, we were a bit “suspect” when we made that choice. but, not outrightly hindered. no (family) infant baptism. we did not join Lutherans with infants.

my family was always, at least, interested+respectful of Anabaptists.
so much so, as i grew older, it piqued my curiosity about why that was.

in recent years, finding the 1600’s Quaker link coming from Ireland+England, that helped me recognize family traits (i take for granted, and, so far as i know, none of my living relatives knew about our Quaker roots-until i asked them.) my mother-father might have known “something” but they passed before i knew to ask.

there is “something” to be found. i just do not know what it is.

now that i’m getting closer, i’m becoming fearful of what i may find.
as i posted about Hans Hacob Wottli above, i began to fear, “what if he was a marauder, or persecutor?!” do i want to know?

earlier, learning about history, with only broad guesses about roots, i speculated -
going back that far involves lots of people! these big world events divide people, including families.
this was something my mother seriously grieved, “brother against brother, cousin against cousin.”
she strongly prayed this would not happen again. in the Cold War, she grieved for Russians.

she was not casual about loathing war. this is my clue, our family did not go unscathed.

through my parents’ eyes, from the little they ever spoke, they hated war, no matter where, due to real human sacrifice at the “working”/ordinary people, end of it; the soldiers and their families.
“all this,” but they were not COs. (but, Quakers!) so, there were COs in my relatively recent family history .. 1600’s through the U.S. Civil War years.

my parents were conflicted. they never shared details.

like many who came to the U.S., my father was adamant, “we are not going to bring the old wars+division to this new country!” the many people who felt this way, HOPED by letting go of history, they could offer a new beginning for the future. the “United States,” not the Old World sort of strict borders, separate small countries, languages, currencies, et al. - esp not all those old wars! people wanted to be done with war.

everyone living today has ancestors who “were somewhere” in the world, who, somehow survived (at least to the extent of leaving progeny) .. through all the wars+peace, feasts+famines, pandemics, common disease, accidents, “acts of God,” etc.

we all had ancestors, somewhere, when Jesus walked on earth.

where were they? what were they doing? what roles did they play?
many had big families! many farmed.

i’ve long believe, “statistically,” it only makes sense to expect, retracing all lines, there must have been family conflicts. or, simply family not in agreement on all matters; they would not have all known one another.

today, i see on FB, family members i do not agree with! we avoid discussion.
we have a family tradition of not talking politics. (see? .. now, “that” must have come from somewhere! - the Quakers?) i do not know. but, for instance, in decades of family reunions, politics have been taboo. the elders would not allow.

.. and, the men did not talk about their work.
i suppose, the temptation of getting engrossed in “shop talk,” etc., was too great.
reunions were to be family time!
as well, who wants to be the target of a sales pitch from a zealous one with a new job? ..
like, selling vacuum cleaners, was an old one, or, encyclopedias!

to this day, i hardly know what any of my uncles did for a living!
they all worked, had families, mothers at home. no divorces. none.

each reunion began in prayer led by a male family elder. always male. never spoken, no necessity.
there was no formal segregation, but, every year, men with men, women with women.

(this post began with intent to simply say,
“i’m now afraid of what i might find in my family history.”)

i digress.
(i suppose those two words should be my signature line.)

[ohio jones]

we have a family tradition of not talking politics. (see? .. now, “that” must have come from somewhere! - the Quakers?)

Quakers may practice silence during worship, but historically have not been silent about politics. In 18th century Pennsylvania, they were politics.

[temporal1]

we have a family tradition of not talking politics. (see? .. now, “that” must have come from somewhere! - the Quakers?)

Quakers may practice silence during worship, but historically have not been silent about politics. In 18th century Pennsylvania, they were politics.

yes.
and, Quakers divided. and remain divided.

i’m reluctant to mention Quakers casually IRL, because, most people would be likely to come across the liberal side, which, in my limited view, is so political, i’m not sure why they even bother with using a Quaker label. their Meeting Houses are places for lib political gathering+organizing. and, i doubt they would even contest that analysis. they would be proud of it.

unfortunately, this state of things is now found in all faith groups, to greater or lesser degrees.
generalized labels are not enough.

Bill Rushby might counsel on this.

.. but .. Quakers are CO, right?

[temporal1]

Just noticed Bill posted today. hope he sees this.

[temporal1]

Another brain twist for me.
On my father’s mother’s side: early Mormons.

They lived in Nauvoo, IL, were part of a covered wagon group that migrated to the Utah Territory, lived+died in Salt Lake City.

My family was part of the Edward Hunter overland travel group. (link below)

Never a word about this in my family. Talk about Mormons was discouraged.

“In early 1850, Church leaders advised emigrants that pioneer companies would travel on a new route on the south side of the Platte River. By taking this new route they avoided some river crossings on the north side which had proved dangerous because of high water in the previous year. They also expected to receive additional military protection on a new army supply road. This was a factor in their decision because they wanted to avoid conflict with the Plains Indians, who had been agitated during the 1849 California gold rush. The 200-mile long army road connected "Old Fort Kearny," located 50 miles below Kanesville on the Missouri River, to "New Fort Kearny" following the south side of the Platte River to the west.
The fifth company to depart from Kanesville was led by Edward Hunter. They were the first company to use donations gathered under the Perpetual Emigration Fund (PEF) to travel to Utah. Created in 1849, the PEF was a revolving loan fund established to help needy Saints emigrate. Bishop Hunter used $5,000 of the PEF donations received that winter to outfit the company. They traveled 18 miles south on the east bank of the Missouri River to the Bethlehem Ferry (across the river from present-day Plattsmouth, Nebraska), where they were delayed for two weeks while looking for reasonably priced oxen. While waiting here, they watched the remainder of the Mormon companies cross the river and start west.

Near the end of June they began crossing the river. By July 1, they had all crossed. They went a few miles from the ferry to 12-Mile Creek where they washed, cooked, and prepared the company for a real start. On 5 July they left their camp and followed the Plattsmouth-Fort Kearny trail south. They were at the rear of all the emigrant companies en route for Utah. There were 261 people and 67 wagons (some sources place the number of wagons at 42) in the company.

After crossing Weeping Water Creek on June 18 they followed a new trail west where they connected with the northward-arching new military road, which became known as the Ox-Bow Trail. After leaving Salt Creek they turned west on a cutoff trail near present-day Swedesburg, Nebraska. All of the companies except Andrus used this cutoff, which passed near present-day David City and Bellwood, Nebraska. This cutoff trail, which bypassed the Cottonwood/Wahoo Creek drainage, saved them 12 miles. On this shortcut route, they arrived at the Platte at a point about 20 miles west of the regular route taken earlier by Andrus.

They then followed the south bank of the Platte River a hundred miles west past Grand Island, where they joined with the Oregon Trail coming north from Missouri. At this juncture they continued 15 more miles to New Fort Kearny, which they reached on July 24. The army reserved grazing rights and companies weren't permitted to camp within a mile of the fort. So they camped there for two days while they lightened the wagons. They then continued up the south side of the river until they reached the Upper Crossing of the South Platte (located about three miles west of present-day Brule, Nebraska). They crossed and from here they followed a long dry ridge for twenty miles to Ash Hollow on the south bank of the North Platte. They arrived there on 9 August. They continued on and reached Fort Laramie on 25 August. They traveled through the Black Hills, crossed the Platte for the last time, and reached Independence Rock and Devil's Gate on September 8. Throughout the journey there had been two "divisions of Fifty" in the Hunter company-one headed by Lewis Wight and the other by Edwin D. Woolley. Often the two divisions were separated by as much as South Pass, and the leading Fifty (Woolley's) overtook Wilford Woodruff's company two days later. Woolley's Fifty reached Fort Bridger on September 25 and arrived in Salt Lake on October 2.

Wight's Fifty with Captain Hunter were days behind them and didn't get to Salt Lake until October 13-14, having a difficult time traveling through snow that was hub deep. Four people died in Hunter's company-only one a victim of cholera. The company also transported almost 5,000 pounds of freight destined for Brigham Young and Newel K. Whitney. In keeping with the PEF plan, the Hunter company sold its livestock upon reaching the valley and the money realized from the sale was put back in the fund to be used the following year.”

https://history.lds.org/overlandtravel/ ... escription

i’ve long-wondered where my ancestors fit into world history .. like, “where were they during The Black Plague?” i mean, everyone living today had relatives that somehow survived every world event (at least long enough to reproduce) .. whether they happened to be physically present at each historical occurence, or not. they were somewhere.

when we studied history in school, i always felt i was studying other peoples’ history.
as i’ve aged, i think more in terms of, “what were my family members doing at that time?”

my presumption is, they were doing what most people continue to do, trying to survive. praying for good health, and peace. seeking spiritual guidance.

Nauvoo, IL. hmm.
i’ve always heard it’s a beautiful place to visit.
https://www.historicnauvoo.net/

[temporal1]

i’m adding a few links for reference here. not really interested in discussion on Mormons.

i’m baffled as to why/how any in my family tree got involved with them.
unlike my family that chose to be early Quakers, i do not see the attraction.

the Mormons i have met IRL have been great people.
our children had Mormon friends in school. big families, responsible, caring, giving, intelligent, talented, “salt of the earth” sort of folks. industrious. political, but not in ways of “evangelizing,” i suppose, is what i’ve encountered -

in those years, we did not discuss faith/religion. maybe rarely.
we’ve always lived around lots of different-believing people. including non-Christians/atheists.
there is a lot of mutual respect, without emphasis to become “of one mind.”
after being on this forum, it seems funny to think,when it comes to religion, “don’t ask, don’t tell,” is the common way. at least, for a lot of folks. “live, and, let live.”

public life, separate from home+church life.
this does not mean people do not live their faith! faith can be lived without discussion.

Mormons - reference pages:

Leaving Nauvoo 1846
http://www.mrm.org/leaving-nauvoo-1846

5 Times Mormons Changed (regarding slavery)
https://gregkofford.com/blogs/news/five ... on-slavery

Race and the Priesthood
https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the ... d?lang=eng

Ask Gramps - Did (LDS) church members own slaves?
https://askgramps.org/did-church-members-own-slaves/

Mormonism for Dummies - Tracing Conflict between LDS and the outside world (scroll down)
https://www.dummies.com/religion/christ ... ide-world/

Mormonism for Dummies - Understanding Polygamy in Mormon History (scroll down)
https://www.dummies.com/religion/christ ... n-history/

LDS / Military and Church
http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Military_and_the_Church

Reuters / Romney, military, politics
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... HA20121103

this must have been a difficult+painful time in my family’s history.
little wonder discussion was discouraged.

thankfully, so far, i have not found any connection with (LDS) slave ownership, or polygamy, in my family. i found a note of protest of slavery within the family (i.e., not public protest).
(in these links) these practices were reported as not widespread in LDS. they were contentious!
they were not CO.

the governor of Illinois asked the Mormons to leave the state. that indicates, “contentious.”
those early years were heated. there was fighting+destruction, on all sides.

[temporal1]

i found another. John Robert Solomon 1816-1856
born in England, died in Michigan.

he comes with a handsome, “polished,” picture, and, puzzles.

it’s recorded he was born in 1816, but, his christening is recorded in 1814!

“christening?” not typical in my family records. i searched.
Hoo St Werburgh, Kent, England. hmm.
his father was a bricklayer.

in a later Michigan Census, he is recorded as working in an “Ag Lab.”
what would that be, in early 1800’s?
is this an explanation of his “polished” appearance? not a farmer or bricklayer?
not sure. people did “dress” for pictures.
an 1800’s ag lab might not have been “clean” work? so many puzzles!

from FamilySearch (i access their free membership)
https://www.familysearch.org/

“HOO, or St. Werburgh, a parish, and the head of a union, in the hundred of Hoo, lathe of Aylesford, W. division of Kent, 4½ miles (N. E.) from Rochester.[1]

Hoo St Werburgh is a village and civil parish on the Hoo peninsula in the Medway district of Kent.Hoo Peninsula Wikipedia Hoo St Werburgh Wikipedia
Hoo St Werburgh is an Ancient Parish in the Diocese of Rochester.

The church is 12th century and occupies the site of an earlier 8th century church chronicled as part of a Mercian monastery in the time of King Aethelbald of Mercia. The church of St Werburgh Church Street Hoo St Werburgh has been designated a grade I listed building by English Heritage. British listed building
The graveyard contains the grave of Thomas Aveling the first British manufacturer of Aveling and Porter steam rollers.“ ..

This church is described as an “Ancient Parish.”
i suppose, it has been used for different Christian groups over those hundreds of years.
it must have began as Catholic? then, Church of England? Anglican? Episcopalian?
i want to sort through this.
for John Robert Solomon, early 1800’s, i presume, Church of England? not sure.

this has pictures. i will read:
http://www.hoochurch.org.uk/ourhistory.htm

this connection is through my mother’s mother’s side.

for much of my life, i wondered where my ancestors were in history, what were they doing?
they “had” to be somewhere! bit-by-bit, pieces are coming to light.