BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: gnu
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 09:21 PM

"abomination"? I was told it was called "jerkin off" but abomination sounds a lot classier.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: IvanB
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 09:01 PM

I note that Pastor Davis (JiK's first link) quotes Galatians 3:28 but seems to gloss over the phrase "neither male nor female" in his glee over male dominance. After all, since there will be no procreation in heaven, what would be the use of a penis? Given his line of thought, use of a penis for, gasp, enjoyment would be an abomination.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 07:38 PM

I've heard a lot of far out things from extreme fundamentaiists, but some of the stuff in John's first link is new to me. Rejoice, all you women who have suffered from penis envy; when you get to heaven, you'll have one of your own!

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: gnu
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 07:37 PM

9.... I live in Canada. Spouses are equal in the eyes of the law.
Lawyers are not. Therefore, don't hire a lawyer.... read.

froggy... it's not? I am outraged! Appalled at least. Well, taken aback somewhat. >;-) ummmm, froggy? buddy? where did you read what you thought I said? BOTH spouses (or more... hey, it HAPPENS but that's another thread) must submit (enter contract) and if the vows of any persuaion don't reflect that, the entity at fault is living in the dark ages. Right, Eliza? >;)

BTW, the law in New Brunswick, Canada regarding marriage licences is totally fucked up. Twenty bucks? Are you shittin me??!! It should be at least one hundred large. And the divorce "licence" should be $20. >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 07:35 PM

It's difficult to argue with that logic.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 07:20 PM

It can't be sexist, because that's the way God wants it:

Heaven Has No Feminine Side

Only Married Women Can Go To Heaven

(just a couple of samples, without comment.)

John

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 07:16 PM

Oh for the equality days of SISTER FIDELMA'S WORLD.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:59 PM

ummm, gnu? If I understand correctly, "submit" isn't included in the vow for the groom, just the version for the bride. It might come off as a little strange if it was in both vows, but at least it would be equalized.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:48 PM

". . . interpretation is in the mind of [the] vower."

And their lawyers.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: gnu
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 06:46 PM

"Are these folk living in the Dark Ages?"

Ahhh... yeah. Sad innit?

If the shoe fits... ya oughta be kicked in the arse with it.

Although, let's get sommat straight eh? Submitting to the marriage and forsaking ALL OTHERS has it's place... it is a contract in which to be totally devoted to each other and the children. In that alone, "submission" to doing right by your spouse and your children is right as rain. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise. Submitting to a spouse carte blanche isn't what I believe is meant by the vows but interpretation is in the mind of vower.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 05:53 PM

UncleDaveO, oh yes, we were both aware of the cultural differences, and our ceremony was of necessity a civil one in UK, and didn't require promises to 'obey'. My husband has come to accept that women here are equal under the law. But I know it was hard for him at first. He had to get used to the fact I have my opinions and will express them, and that I wouldn't ask his permission to leave the house (as if!!) if I wanted to go out. Also, as I know much more about this country than he does, he has to follow my lead a lot of the time which isn't easy for him. Both my sister and I were brought up to see ourselves as equal to men and were given a good education and encouraged to pursue a career by our forward-looking parents. We were very lucky. I'm a practising Christian (C of E) but would never condone women 'obeying' men. Ridiculous and insulting!!

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 04:57 PM

Write your own vows.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 04:38 PM

"Submit" is of course taken from what St Paul wrote about marriage. I've always wondered whether he might actually have been writing tongue in cheek when he advised women to be submissive towards their husbands.

Maybe it should be translated "Wives, let your husband think he's in charge."

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 02:47 PM

Eliza, did you not know that was your groom's position
when you said "yes"? Or "I do", or whatever the form may
have been in your ceremony?

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 02:12 PM

Never never would I agree to 'submit' to a husband or any man. My husband is an African muslim, and this has been rather a problem with us. It's not a 'new' idea; in fact it's the traditional and age-old view that women are in some way inferior and should therefore bow to a man's 'better judgment'. In my husband's country of birth, and among muslim women (as I understand it) women must comport themselves at all times with humility and deference. I'm a University graduate and retired teacher.I have an independent income from my pension and own my own house. I see no reason why I should defer, humble myself or submit to anyone! Are these folk living in the Dark Ages?

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 12:44 PM

Well, whoever said that to her, Elmore was definitely out-of-line, even if he was a bishop.
...

As for Musket's "every Catholic church in Scotland, and apparently many in England too, giving a sermon today saying that Gay relationships are an abomination" I assume he's referring to the "pastoral letter" mentioned in this press release, the text of which it contains - and it doesn't actually say anything along those lines.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Penny S.
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 12:43 PM

Been reading 50 Shades, have they? Like I said somewhere else, we women aren't fully human to these guys.

Penny (oops, it says the message has to submit!)

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Elmore
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 11:37 AM

When my current and final wife inquired into becoming a Catholic, they told her she couldn't vote for a pro choice candidate.That was the end of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 11:23 AM

"Submit, me beauty!"
"No! Nay! Never!"
"Submit to my foul desires!"
"Never!"

Sounds like a good plot for a melodrama...does the groom get to tie her to the railroad tracks if she doesn't submit?

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 09:08 AM

It will be something of this nature that finally separates church and state.

Subject: RE: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Musket
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 08:46 AM

Aye, and over this end of the planet, we have every Catholic church in Scotland, and apparently many in England too, giving a sermon today saying that Gay relationships are an abomination.

So don't expect their sexist stance down under to be any better. Bigotry is bigotry is bigotry is increasingly irrelevant. I liked the bit about wording not being popular with parishioners. Especially as the whole idea is to tell them what they like, how to think, how to judge others....

Subject: BS: Church denies new wedding vows sexist
From: Sandra in Sydney
Date: 26 Aug 12 - 08:35 AM

One of the most conservative sections of a major Australian church, the Sydney/South Sydney diocese of the Anglican Church has raised controversy (once again) by denying it's new wedding vows are sexist. Other dioceses of the Australian branch of the Church of England (headed by the Queen of England!) have managed very ably with women priests & even Bishops or Arch Bishops for years, but this branch stays back in the olden days.


Anglican Church denies new wedding vows are sexist
The Anglican Church says new wedding vows which involve a woman pledging to 'submit' to her husband are not sexist.

Introduced as an alternative to the traditional vows that use the word 'obey', the new promises were written by the liturgical panel of the church's Sydney diocese.

The Bishop of south Sydney, Robert Forsyth, is on that panel and says the choice of the word 'submit' is based on the New Testament which talks about the church submitting to Christ.

"I can see why, if you just came upon this, not having read the New Testament about Christ loving the church, the church responding to him, it would look rather odd, just like the word 'obey' would look rather odd," he said.

"But to understand this you must locate it in its context of the New Testament's deep understanding about man and woman and Christ and his church.

Bishop Forsyth says some couples getting married in the church like having separate vows for men and women.

He says a different version was released last year, but the wording was not popular with parishioners.

"We're happy with this version, where the husband promised to serve his wife, to love his wife, and to protect her and she promises to love and serve and to submit," he said.

"The goal is we want men to give leadership in loving and protecting their wives and women respond to that."

sandra (not responding very well to this new? idea)