>In the Old Parish Registers of Births is there a difference between the >natural child of and the lawful child of and if so, what? > >Thanks, >Jan Hi Jan, A natural child is the same as illegitimate. As the parents' names are usually given in the OPRs, and the place of residence also usually stated, one often finds that the father lives at one place, whereas the mother lives in another - further evidence that the two were not married at the time of the child's birth and baptism. If one looks at the Kirk Session Records of the parish in question about the time of the baptism of the 'natural' child, a better picture can be seen of the circumstances. Often one or the other of the parents refused to admit to the affair and pursuit of the case could go on for some time, even years. In many instances, the pressure of the Kirk Session ended with the couple being coerced or cajoled into marriage then and there. Another frequent mention was the very descriptive "ante-nuptial fornication," meaning that the parents entered a relationship and were then married after the pregnancy was evident. In some parishes, the Session was rather lenient in these cases and only a small fine had to be paid into the "poors' fund." In other parishes all transgressions of the 'carnal' type meant weeks of sitting on the 'stool of discipline' in sackcloth. Yet, the Session was usually relentless in pursuit of a wrong-doer and would refer to miscreant to the Presbytery if he or she wouldn't submit. I have found one ancestor who defied the Session for more than twenty years over a single case and was finally excommunicated. His solution was just to move to another parish, but the Session went so far as to write to the minister there and he finally had to confess all or be completely ostracized by the community. All interesting stuff... All best wishes, Doug Nicol, Santa Rosa CA