Do You Like This Story?
Screen shot 2012 08 28 at 8.08.07 AM Would you submit to a man in your wedding vows?

Alys’ wedding.

 

 

 

 

 

by ALYS GAGNON

As a married person, as a woman and a feminist – and as a lifelong Anglican – I have watched with horror as the Anglican Diocese of Sydney have insisted on the archaic notion that women ‘obey’ their husbands.

Julia Baird, in the National Times, writes; “Sydney Anglicans are introducing a new, supposedly more modern marriage vow, where women promise to “submit” to their husbands (instead of to obey, which, you will have noticed, means exactly the same thing).”

When I got married six months ago, in an Anglican ceremony in a teeny tiny church in the middle of a paddock just outside of Canberra, our priest (a woman, by the way) gave a very beautiful sermon on the word “honour”.

In the Anglican ceremony, as with most traditional Christian ceremonies, couples say the words “With all that I am and all that I have, I honour you,” as they exchange rings

Honouring means that my husband and I are considerate of and respect each other’s needs, aspirations and feelings. We compromise together. We make choices together. Sometimes it is not be easy, but we face the world together.

That’s because modern relationships involve the partnership of equals.

Churches must acknowledge that equality of partners in modern relationships.

Churches cannot exist in a vacuum.

They must respond to the world in which they exist if they plan to survive.

This whole ‘submit’ and ‘obey’ thing is merely the tip of the iceberg for the leadership of Sydney Diocese.

Sydney Diocese will not ordain women priests and have been the main block in the past preventing the wider Anglican Church in Australia from consecrating women bishops. They promote a model of family where a woman is subordinate to a man.

Some in the authority of Sydney Diocese believe it is sinful for a woman to preach to men and so women are consigned in their ministry to that which is considered women’s work.

They endorse a view where women and men are equal but that there is an order to the genders in which men come first.

They believe that, somehow, submission and equality can co-exist.

Alys Gagnon 380x573 Would you submit to a man in your wedding vows?

Alys with her husband

And all of this they claim to base on the teachings of the bible.

The bible is not a life manual. Oh, if only life were so simple, that one could dip in and out of a book to get all the answers to life’s complexities. I truly believe that there are great life lessons for us today within the bible but it is still a document that must be considered within its historical context.

Absolutely no one takes the whole bible completely literally.

For example, Leviticus 5:3 suggests that a person who touches the waste of a human has sinned gravely. I know that, in the course of one or two exploding nappies from my son, I have come into contact with human waste.

Leviticus continues in this chapter that as soon as this sin is discovered the sinner should have a priest sacrifice a female sheep or goat. Now, there are a number of young families amongst the ranks of Sydney’s Anglican Churches, and yet I’m guessing there hasn’t been any ritual sacrifices lately.

Why then, can we not also understand the biblical descriptions of women within an appropriate historical context?

As I have grown over the past decade, from an opinionated teenager with a tendency to jump to conclusions to a woman who happens to be a wife and mother, I have tried to learn that assumptions and easy conclusions often lead to unwise judgements.

But, the more I read and learn about the leadership of the Sydney Anglican Diocese, the more I am convinced that there is a sinister anti-woman agenda at play.

And that disturbs me as a woman, as a wife and as an Anglican.

Alys Gagnon is a mother, a wife and works in politics. She is the daughter of an ordained Anglican priest, grew up in the Anglican tradition and is a former member of the Anglican Synod of Canberra Goulburn Diocese.

Would you be comfortable agreeing to ‘obey’ or ‘submit’ to your husband as part of your wedding vows?

View more posts on:

Comments

Comment Guidelines : Imagine you’re at a dinner party. Different opinions are welcome but keep it respectful or the host will show you the door. We have zero tolerance for any abuse of our writers, our editorial team or other commenters. So if you’re rude, mean-spirited, snarky, aggressive, defamatory or bitchy, your comment will be deleted (so will any replies to the original comment – so don’t bother arguing with rude people, instead just hit the ‘alert moderator’ button).
And if you’re offensive, you’ll be blacklisted and all your comments will go directly to spam. Remember what Fonzie was like? Cool. That’s how we’re going to be – cool. Have fun and thanks for adding to the conversation…

Use your profile to comment: Or, comment as a guest:
(Max file size is 150kb & jpeg's only - if you need help resizing go here »)

145 Comments so far

  1. Pollen Burst

    i have been pondering on the idea of making a blog for a while just like this one but im alittle unsure of how to go about it do you have any advice for me i would much appreicte it thanks. Pollen Burst http://www.beyond-tangy-tangerine.co.uk/

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  2. rosy@kempsey

    not even back in 1959…..

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  3. Chris

    Thank you to the team at mamamia.com and Alys Gagnon for this post. I agree that ‘submit’ in our context conveys negative attributes and in Sydney (a city that desires progressive practice) seems medieval. The word ‘submit’ does come from Ephesians chapter 5 in which the vows are based on. In this chapter as you have correctly stated submission and equality are held hand in hand. But in the same chapter, men are called to love their wife as Christ loved the church; this is to be a sacrificial love as a husband gives up his own rights and privileges for the sake of his wife.

    My question is; do you believe equality within a marriage can exist if this ‘sacrificial’ love is present?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • AlysJ

      Hi Chris,

      Thanks for your thoughtful question. I don’t think that “submit” and “sacrificial love” are the same thing, no. And, I don’t believe that a partnership in which one person is expected to submit to another, instead of both partners showing “sacrificial love” or compromise, respect & honesty as I prefer to think of it, is equal.

      You can find me on twitter @alysj if you’d like to discuss further – I know I would!

      Take care now.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  4. daughtersisterwifemother

    Very “tongue in cheek” comment here … but this is too funny not to share….

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lrJg8NMsFw

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anon

      Don’t forget, if you get an education you’ll grow a beard.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  5. co

    good article

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  6. mags

    Oh my gosh! There’s still a fuss about this!?

    Has anyone bothered to look at the husband’s vows? He has to love his wife like Christ loved us/the church. Christ DIED for us. That means dying to your own wants every day and giving yourself to your wife.

    So in essence, they are both submitting to each other.

    This just quotes one part of the vows, taking it completely out of context.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • mags

      woops, I just read some of the comments. So I joined a chorus :)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • AlysJ

      If it’s the same thing, as you say, that both are submitting to each other, then why are the vows different?

      There absolutely still is a fuss about this. Language is important.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  7. Z

    only if he submitted back

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  8. Jessica

    Did you know there were 121,726 marriages last year (not sure how many were actually done in a church) and a staggering 50,240 divorces were granted the same year. Now dont get me wrong – I dont believe in having to promise to “obey” or “submit” to your partner (whether your man or woman) but so many are up in arms about this vow – which based on the stats I mentioned, almost half are not honouring the vows anyway. So with the huge amount of divorce growing day by day, does it really matter what we promise – the promise is being broken anyway.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  9. Bono on my wall

    It always amuses me to see a discussion using obscure Old Testament passages. My belief is that once Jesus came into this world, things changed and ritual slaughters were no longer required.

    I also believe that men and women are not equal. They each bring different characteristics, skills and emotional structures into a relationship. Why can’t this be recognized and valued?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Anonymous

      Why? Because this is biological determinism, which has been widely discredited and is now considered bunk.

      Believe whatever you like, the biological science and the sociological research won’t support you. How can you possibly argue that all differences in character and skill are based on gender (ie biology) rather than on environment, nurture, education and social conditioning?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Kris2040

      Why do differences necessitate one person submitting to the other though?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Anna

      So Jesus came to change some things in the old testament, like ritual sacrifices and uncleanliness laws – but he didn’t give a list as to which ones so we have to figure that out? We can decide which ones he meant? That explains how people continue to believe in creationism, obviously.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • aura

        No, it’s not something that you just decide on for yourself and have to figure it out – sacrafical mosaic law was replaced by the sacrifice of Christ, and many other laws were held due to reasons of hygeine and so on as at the time the Hebrews were living in the dessert and had picked up many un clean and un hygienic practises from other tribes and people. AS it said in this article, it has to be taken in with the context it was written in. And I also don’t appreciate your stab at people who believe in creationism, I for one do, but am also very logical and high educated.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  10. Kadriye

    We were married in an Anglican church and chose to use the traditional vows. We felt they suited us and our marriage. That doesn’t mean they’re for everyone.
    My parents have had some run-ins with the church in the past and were ejected from one as their relationship did not follow the traditional roles. According to them, my mother was too out-spoken with her views and my father should have kept her under better ‘control’! This was less than 10yrs ago. Thankfully, they’ve since found a more open-minded church.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  11. Anonymous

    I appreciated this article and the way it covered a sensitive and charged issue. I want to add:

    1. The head of the Sydney Diocese is Archbishop Peter Jensen – he is an ultra-conservative Anglican and a leading member of what can only be described as a break-away schism called the “Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans” – they oppose gay marriage, gay ministers, and the ordination of women. As the author correctly states their views are distinctly anti-women, although they would deny that under the cover of the spurious argument that men and women are ‘separate but equal’ in their outlook and abilities.

    2. Plenty of Anglicans in Australia would – and do – disagree with Peter Jensen’s views on all of the above. Jensen doesn’t speak for them and he certainly doesn’t speak for me. I was married in an Anglican church and the suggestion that we use the word ‘obey’ was laughed off, most loudly by the darling minister who married us. He knew it was a prehistoric notion for most modern-thinking couples and basically dismissed it out of hand.

    I can only hope that the more progressive and moderate voices in the church in Australia will ultimately prevail, because I doubt if Jensen is going to change his mind any time soon.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  12. Ali Flint

    This is an 1800 year old dilemma for church patrons. Jesus himself never subordinated women. Read his words if you want to be a Christian, and not the words of one Saul of Tarsus (otherwise known as Paul) whose doctrines do not even once mention the teachings of Jesus. Paul makes up his own as the result of his own personal visionary experience. He never met Jesus. And it is as a result of his teachings against women that all of this has been going on for so long. It is unanimously agreed by theologians, linguists and historians alike that half of his epistles in the Hebrew bible are what is called “pseudepigraphic”, which means in real terms that they are written by somebody else under the pseudonym of “Paul”. The parts of Pau’ls genuine epistles relating to the subordination of women are insertions by a later author, inserted deliberately for the aim of such subordination. It worked for 1800 years and it has to be exposed for what it is and stopped. I seek to do such a thing. Scholars (including theologians) have discredited these insertions concerning female submission. For the first 200 years of Christian history, women played a very important role in the church indeed, especially in the eastern churches. My own tertiary education is in Early Christian Literature and Papyrology, and I have verified all of the above for myself – I read the early manuscript tradition (in Greek) and I agree with the scholarly opinion of modern times. There is no New Testament validation for female subordination. Please Alys pass this important information on to all church patrons you know.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • steggz

      Sorry Ali, but I call shenanigans on your treatment of Paul. None of what you claim is unanimously agreed.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  13. contented

    Hi Mamamia,
    I have tried to post a reply to Kelly2 who replied to my post but neither reply is coming up. Could you let me know if the spam filter has eaten them or am I posting something wrong?
    Thanks :)

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  14. Ali Flint

    I have tried twice to post here. The spam filter took them both. Would you please retrieve them.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  15. Ali Flint

    The doctrine concerning the subordination of women in the Hebrew bible comes from the apostle Paul. Of all his epistles in the New Testament, only half of them are genuinely written by Paul. The other half, which includes ALL of the doctrine on subordination of women, is called in academic terminology “pseudepigraphic”. This means in real terms that they are written by somebody else under the pseudonym of “Paul”. I understand this because my tertiary education is in Early Christian Literature and Papyrology. I’ve read it all in manuscript form (Greek) and confirmed this for myself. It is unanimously agreed by scholars who are theologians, linguists and historians, as well as the philologists, that these epistles are falsely attributed to Paul. They have been deliberately inserted into the New Testament rather later than the others, and deliberately to encourage the subordination of women. Prior to the second century, in very early church history, and expecially in the eastern churches, women played a very prominent role in the church and were never subordinated to men. If all of these facts were known by church patrons, this article and the pernicious “submission” marriages would not even take place. I hope Alys can convey the contents of my post to all her church members and every Christian woman she encounters.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • AlysJ

      Hi Ali,

      This was my understanding of the New Testament as well. Thanks for posting it here.

      Cheers, Alys

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • steggz

      Sorry, but it’s a crap view of the NT. There is no unanimous view of the NT canon.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Ali Flint

        Sorry Steggz, but on the issue of the Pauline epistles, there most certainly is. The Canon was not mentioned by me, only the Pauline epistles, which is a part of the Canon. And in any case, are you familiar with the process through which it became “canonised”? The first canon was very different from the way we have it today. The “unanimity” arose by the way out of a branch of study called “literary criticism” and has over two centuries become a very refined discipline in modern theological studies.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • steggz

          Sorry, but the literary criticism viewpoint is most definitely not held by all theologians. As a theology student, I know that for certain that there are other views.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Ali Flint

            Of course there are other views, there always are and so it should be. They are not accepted by the majority, though. And you won’t read them in the most relevant studies. Certainly not in the major academic journals. Good luck with your studies. And I note from a previous post of yours that you appear to have no knowledge of Greek – its impossible to really study the NT without literacy in the Greek language – give yourself a treat and learn it so you can find out precisely what it says.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
  16. Cady

    Of course not – it’s probably bad luck to start of your life together with what you both know is a whopper of a lie.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  17. Malcolm

    Seriously, if you are a lifelong Anglican, you seem to be very poor in the theology department. Why are you quoting the purity regulations of the Old Testament? Surely you should be aware of the many references in the New Testament that these are no longer valid under the new dispensation. Any knowledgeable Anglican can tell you that – just as any knowledgeable Anglican can tell you Ephesians 6:22 is still valid.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • AlysJ

      There are many who disagree that Ephesians is a model for marriage.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  18. Felix

    I was married in the Anglican church 7 years ago and didn’t say obey. I told the minister I wouldn’t agree to obey anybody and he replaced the word with cherish. I was happy to agree to cherish my husband but I have never obeyed him!!! :) btw you look lovely in your wedding photos :)

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

      Beautiful dress, really unique

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • AlysJ

      Awww! Thank you!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Jacqui

      I did the exact same thing – our minister happily changed that for us also. Interestingly he had an issue with us lighting a candle – not our vows.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  19. Kylie2

    I was married in a High Anglican church by an Archdeacon 17 years ago.

    When we went for the marriage preparation discussions I was prepared to do battle on the “obey” vow but I didn’t need to. His own words were ” I stopped using that years ago because it’s old-fashioned and inappropriate for modern marriage.” I couldn’t agree more.

    I actually object to the word “submit” more than “obey” this move is a backward step.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  20. gee jen

    Other have responded really well to this explaining the Biblical origins of the vow and how it relates to both men and women (ie Steggz and contented)

    I just wanted to make comment on afew other things…

    “Absolutely no one takes the whole bible completely literally.” – actually yes i do and in regards to the Leviticus texts they were true for their time and then thankfully God sent his son to be sacrificed for all our sins so we no longer need to worry about these rituals.

    “They [the church] must respond to the world in which they exist if they plan to survive.” – yes we must be relvant to the world but that doesn’t mean conforming to things which the Bible clearly speaks against. I’m not worried about my survival, I have God’s promise. The church is not a business, it is not our role to market ourselves to the world. I believe it is our role to witness to the world God’s love

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Kirsten

      Great point. Also I think it is important to note that as christians we are called to be ‘set apart’ and ‘not of the world.’ While we aim to remain relevant to the world, we are specifically called to NOT change what God says to fit with the times. In the SMH article that discusses this issue a young Christian wife Stephanie Judd (she is 26) sums it up beautifully ”’The husband’s love is one of sacrificial love, and to submit to that kind of love is not oppressive, but is actually a joy and a great freedom,”

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  21. Atheist

    NO, NO , NO, I would never submit, obey, bow down, etc to any man. Plus, I don’t have a religious bone in my body , so I wouldn’t get married in a church to start with.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  22. Scarlett Harris

    With the success of 50 Shades of Grey, “submission” is all the rage now, didn’t you know? ;)

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  23. JosieY

    Your spam filter hates me. As an (almost) priest of the Anglican Church, could you please find my comment?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  24. Singa

    I promised to obey. But he promised to worship me. So I thought that was a fair swap :-) we went traditional but the meaning to us is that he will make the final decision and drive so to speak. So were not arguing. Having power struggles.

    Because of this he does worship the ground I walk on. Everyone says this

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  25. Suki

    No, just no.
    If a man needs me to vow to submit, it’s probably best we don’t get married.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  26. dufflepud

    I really hope you all don’t mind if I quote a bit of Bible – the part that is relevant to this article? It just makes so much more sense than hearing “wives submit to your husbands” out by itself.

    Here’s the bit that probably sounds really wrong to everyone:
    “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”

    BUT it’s FOLLOWED BY:

    “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church.”

    Now that still might sound a extreme to lots of people, but the way I see it – If my husband vows to love me as his own body, and love me “as Christ loved the church” (remembering that Christ died for the church – was tortured, humiliated, abandoned by all his friends, and was crucified for the church) then yeah, I am ok vowing to submit to that man.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Marie

      Thanks for sharing the wider context. It doesn’t sway me, though. Why can’t both parties agree to love each other in this way. I could not agree to “submit” nor that “the husband is the head of the wife”.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Rasa

      Yes, dufflepud, that’s all very nice, the problem with it as I see it is that I can think of very few men indeed who keep to their end of this bargain! If husbands came through on this level of devotion – loving their wives IN THE REAL WORLD as Christ loved the church – then one might be more inclined to agree to submit/obey. But sadly the reality is that most men who go for the “obey” bit just feel “yeah, you have to obey me cos I’M THE MAN”. I like the ‘honour’ – mutual! – concept a whole lot better, as stated by other correspondents.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Leon

        A little bit of generalizing there Rasa……by most men, do you mean > 50% or 90%. Most of my friends (read 90%) who are married keep their end of the bargain and don’t subscribe to the “yeah, you have to obey me cos I’M THE MAN” attitude.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Anonymous

      The bible is a group of stories written 2000 years ago, before people had the benefit of science to explain everything they thought was “divine intervention”.

      It also says that it’s ok to stone people to death for working on Sundays that you can sell your daughters into slavery, that touching the skin of a dead pig makes you unclean (sucks if you like bacon, or you play sport with balls) and wearing clothes blended from more than 1 threat means you should be burned (hope you never purchased clothes from K Mart with a poly cotton blend or eeeeep, you’re in trouble!!)

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Becky

        Perfectly said Anonymous!! I’ll prepare myself to be stoned as I say this but I just want to say ‘Grow up! Santa’s not real either’ to these religious nuts. But just don’t being the nice girl that I am.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • AlysJ

        I see a fellow West Wing fan amongst us :)

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • aura

        First of all Science doesnt explain EVERYTHING, also, considering that you think that the Bible allows for stoning because you worked on a sunday means you really have not read the bible for yourself, and in the correct context (no one went to church on a sunday before the romans came along- the romans ‘changed’ the holy day from saturday to sunday (which I dont agree with), and there were many laws to help the hebrews keep hygienic practises. No one says you have to follow or believe the bible, but please don’t mislead everyone with your made up statements.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  27. Caz Gibson

    Thanks for that quote from St Paul…………I think it’s utter drivel.
    Those analogies are utterly silly and are typical of the kind of nonsense that’s confused and enthralled the “simple folk” for centuries – well, since the time of King James 1st of England anyway (the post-Elisabethan language of those times seems quite “magical” to some)……….for eg. A husband is not “the head of his wife” just because Christ is the head of the church – illogical……
    “Husband should love their WIVES” (plural) – hello ?…….
    “He made her clean blah, blah, blah”……what about “She made him clean” ?- but oh no , the man does all of this “cleaning and taking” business……
    ‘Sounds like an old man’s fantasy to me……lol.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • steggz

      It’s ‘husbands should love their wives’, and the washing is about how Jesus cleanses the church.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  28. Ros

    Hi all. We were married in an Anglican church in Brisbane. The standard Anglican vow for both people is to promise to “love, honor and cherish”.
    We both said this, but I added obey as well. The wedding photographer was spot on in their comment as we were “young, virginal and devout”
    I chose to add the “obey” because I trust my husband 100% to do the right thing by me, every time, without needing to be told what to do.
    That reality of our marriage is that we make our decisions together. If we don’t agree on an issue we keep thrashing it out until we find common ground.
    17 years older and wiser would I say the same thing now? Probably not – however not because I don’t like it, but because of the way it is perceived by the wider community.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

      Does he trust you in the same way? Why the difference in wording then?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  29. Save us all

    This is straight from the Catholic mass sheet of our local church last weekend.

    A reading from the letter of st paul to the ephesians
    Give way to one another in obedience to Christ. Wives should regard their husbands as they regard the Lord, since as Christ is head of the Church and saves the whole body, so is a husband the head of his wife; and as the Church submits to Christ, so should wives to their husbands, in everything. Husband`, should love their wives just as Christ loved the Church and sacrificed Himself for her to make her holy. He made her clean by washing her in water with a form of words, so that when He took her to Himself she would be glorious, with no speck or wrinkle or anything like that but holy and faultless.

    I especially like the no wrinkle bit, lol

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  30. Amelinixon

    Well, I guess if woman keep submitting then men will keep on dominating and women can keep on feeling like rubbish unit they see that freedom is not just a word. Of course men will always try to regain their lost power, it seems that they cannot treat woman as equals so they fall back on this sort of rot.
    And don’t we expect this from the church which is why so many gave up on it a long time ago.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  31. jamilarizvi

    I really loved reading this article.

    I’m not religious, so it’s easy to dismiss this sort of thing as not my problem.

    But for Christian friends and family – the fact that the Church still has such anti-feminist and archaic practices in many aspects of what they do – is something they really struggle with.

    The reality is that for a religious institution to retain its relevance in the 21st century then it DOES need to modernise and adapt.

    For younger people of faith, it’s a big ask for them to maintain their devotion and their belief in the face of outdated and misogynistic moves like this one.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • steggz

      Sorry, but my faith in a restored relationship with God is not cancelled out by this. Some may disagree with it, but there would be few who would give up a belief in God because of this.

      I’m not saying it’s unimportant, and I’ve suggested why the move to use submit rather than obey is actually a good one. But to claim that people will give up on faith because of this is drawing a very long bow.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Lana

        The church’s treatment of and attitude towards women is the number one reason why I don’t feel I identify as a Catholic any longer. This is a massive issue for me and many of the young women around me.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • steggz

          Understandable. But identifying as a Catholic and believing in God are two different things.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Lana

            That is true, I do still believe in God. Just saying that I do not think it is not a long bow to draw that people may totally abandon their faith, and not just their church, in response to this.

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Kirsten

              I see your point however I am a young woman who is a christian and I have no problem with submitting in the way I am called by the bible to. My future husband will be leading me by serving me and that sacrificial leadership is one which is an honor to ‘submit’ to (a word which is used in a completely different way in society than it is in the bible)

              I also have a lot of christian friends who would not agree that this is ‘outdated.’ So while I understand it may be an issue for some, it is important to realise that is not the case for everyone.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
  32. Sparky

    When I was arranging to get married in my husband’s church 15+ years ago (a protestant church who though they were ‘progressive’) I was pressured to use ‘submit’ in my wedding vows in exactly the same context as the Anglican Diocese of Sydney is suggesting now. I refused to do so on the basis that I would be lying if I said that during the ceremony. I did end up attending at least a dozen other weddings in that church as a guest, before and after, and I can recall only 1 that didn’t include ‘submission’ by the bride.

    In the end I couldn’t take the pressure and cancelled the wedding at my husband’s church and got married at an Anglican church instead (my church and faith, albeit nominally). We chose to ‘love, honour and cherish’. Both of us. No obeying, no submitting.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  33. Pumba

    I didnt want to say those words, so we simply changed it to something else.
    My husband knew I had strong feelings on the matter and it was not an issue at all to just substitute with vows we felt more comfortable with.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  34. Sienna

    In our wedding vows we chose to say the words “Love, honour & cherish”!
    No obeys or submits!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  35. Kate

    I think the main issue people have with the submit/obey words in the Sydney Anglican church marriage service is that the submission is seen to only be the woman submitting to the man.
    I think the real Biblical idea is that of mutual submission: both husband and wife should submit to each other and to God. If husband and wife are always putting the needs of the other before their own, there will be a loving, giving relationship – with submission. Unfortunately, people do have a tendnecy to selfishness, so the idea of mutual submission doesn’t work perfectly in practice. This is true of all moral/ethical values – and anything else people believe they should do – because people aren’t perfect.
    I married my husband in an Anglican church ceremony and we vowed to love, honour and cherish each other. I believe that love is an action rather than a feeling and learning to truly love each other will be a lifelong journey.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  36. contented

    When I married my husband 14 years ago, I promised to submit to him and he promised to love me as Christ loved the Church. We are both followers of Christ.

    I object to the idea that what I said is old fashioned / anti-feminist or whatever. I don’t feel that way at all. I am not a doormat, and our household runs very much as a team / partnership. But I respect my husband and I respect what I feel the Bible says about marriage and wish to honour that.

    For me, there has only been 1 time in 14 years where my husband and I seriously disagreed on a bit issue. After a great deal of discussion, some of it quiet heated, I decided that this was a time when I would step back. He knew what I thought and why. I left it up to him to decide. He made what I considered to be the wrong decision. It was not a fun week. A week later, he apologised and made a different decision. One that was a bit of his idea and a bit of mine. I give that example to show what submission can look like on the ground level.

    That said, I cannot imagine how difficult it would be to be in a relationship where your partner is selfish and full of pride. I acknowledge that being married to a man such as my husband makes submission a non-issue.

    But please Mamamia, stop calling anything you disagree with old fashioned and making comments such as something being ‘so dark ages’.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Pia

      Mamamia’s job as a website is to allow other writers to contribute their own beliefs/stories through their writing – they don’t necessarily agree with every word their contributors say. So technically, your issues lay with Alys, not the whole staff of Mamamia.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • jamilarizvi

      Hi contented,

      Thanks for your comment. Mamamia is an opinion website and we are lucky enough to have hundreds of contributors – who each offer a different perspective.

      Just because we run an opinion article, doesn’t mean that we agree with everything that the author says. It just means we thought they had something really interesting to say on a particular issue.

      We’re not expecting you to agree with every writers’ position – in fact that would not only be impossible but it would make for a pretty boring website.

      We have a comments section so that you CAN disagree and put your point of view, which you have done quite eloquently here! I really enjoyed reading your contribution to the debate, but that doesn’t mean Alys is any less entitled to her make her contribution.

      Cheers,

      Jamila

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • contented

        Hi again,
        I realise I have come across as more cranky than I had intended. I am really sorry!

        Alys is absolutely entitled to her opinion. Absolutely. And I completely understand it and would not question it – her decision obviously works for her faith, herself and her husband. That’s great :) I never intended to question her right to an opinion.

        As for the comments about calling all views you disagree with archaic, that’s a general trend in Mamamia and all of society. Clearly I had enough of it this afternoon!

        Sorry for any offence called…just reacting to constantly being made to feel ‘out of date’ when I am usually a thoughtful, fairly well informed person, Mamamia is a great community and I love wading through the big issues and seeing different ways of thinking and living. My way is to have promised to submit to my husband….and it works for us without compromising my feminist choices.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • ash

          That’s good to hear contented.
          I personally consider myself a feminist and would be hesitant to use ‘submit’ in my vows, but appreciate that it works for you. Also your marriage sounds wonderful and I hope one day I have the same level of resect in a marriage of my own.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
    • Guest

      “But please Mamamia, stop calling anything you disagree with old fashioned and making comments such as something being ‘so dark ages’.”

      Hardly calling ‘anything’ old-fashioned. To vow to submit to your husband is old fashioned and archaic. Face facts. Fine if it makes you happy, your choice, but don’t kid yourself.

      This article is just calling a spade a spade.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
    • Kylie2

      I think that if you had a week of heated discussion on a matter you did not fulfill your vow to submit to your husband.

      By being honest about your thoughts you helped influence a better outcome for both of you. I agree that running your household as a team is ideal but a true partnership does not require one party to always submit to the other.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

        I agree, it sounds like a wonderful relationship that the church should be proud to have celebrated. But the term submit literally means “Accept or yield to a superior force or to the authority or will of another person.” your relationship thankfully sounds nothing like that.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
      • contented

        Hi Kelly2,
        I did post a reply to this last night but it’s not here! So I’ll try again.

        I absolutely agree with you that I did not honour my vow in that week. Absolutely. I should have explained what I thought we should do and why, and then, when I realised that we seriously disagreed, step away from the conversation and trust my husband to make the decision.

        I feel that would have been enough for my husband to have made a good decision that was mutually beneficial. Never in my entire marriage have I felt that I cannot be honest about my thoughts and ideas. In reality, I make most of the day to day decisions in our relationship and family. That is still submitting because my husband is great with that!

        You made the comment that a ‘true partnership does not require one party to always submit to the other”. I would say that in a secular or business partnership, I completely agree. But Christian marriage is different. And I would argue that my husband and I are true partners. As I said, in 14 years of marriage there has only been one time where I decided I needed to actively ‘submit’ as most people take the word. I reckon that moments like that happen in any relationship….we just call it different things. I know you will probably disagree with me on that, and that’s ok. Just wanted to explain and to acknowledge that you were right in saying I did not fulfill my vow that week!

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
  37. Anonymoose

    Our wedding vows didnt involve obeying or submitting but I dont think I see the harm in submitting to your partner because I know he would never ask me to do anything that didnt show full respect and love to me and I would do the same in return.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Sarah

      Yes but why should only women have to submit? Why cant a man vow to submit to his wife?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Anonymoose

        If you reread my comment you will see I have said ‘partner’ not husband.

        I should have clarified that I would have no problem saying submit if he was also saying it.If both partners love and respect each other I dont see a real problem with it.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Kris2040

          But the issue is that the vows are different for men and women.
          Also, for one person to submit, you need to acknowledge that one has power to submit to.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Kirsten

            Men and women ARE different and that is why the vows are different. Below is a great article which explains this: Hope it helps :)

            http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/men-and-women-are-different-and-so-should-be-their-marriage-vows-20120828-24yo6.html

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
            • Emmy

              Some of the comments on that article made me feel sick

              “The price for feminism is a lot of failed marriages, children from broken families, a lot of men who don’t trust women and a lot of women who don’t trust men.
              Peter is not a dinosaur; feminism is the unnatural belief we have now.”

              Ugh. I *guess* I can kind of see where Peter is coming from, but he makes it sound like it’s the man’s responsibility to “care for” his wife and essentially “run” the marriage. It doesn’t sound like an equal partnership and that makes me really not like it.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
            • Kris2040

              It reads to me that the woman IS submitting to the man, and again we see this crap about men giving up stuff to take a wife and make an honest woman out of her.

              GD Star Rating
              loading...
  38. Caz Gibson

    When we married years ago I think we used the word “honour” because we married in a church to keep the relatives happy ……neither of us had (or has) any patience with religion. It seems that every little personal aspect of one’s life just HAS to be that religion’s business.
    The rhetoric, the texts, the rules and obligations of organised religion are mostly steeped in fear and guilt and are devised to keep people controlled and obedient. Most church visits involve money. Tithing is utterly appalling and I think that “faith” is a form of self-hypnosis.
    It’s entirely possible that an “act of faith” could seem to have a positive result though, and of course I concede that people with an illness (for eg.) might be strengthened by having faith in something…..morals bother me because of their religious bias – I try to live by ethics.
    Many religious people fail to understand how Agnostic/Atheists live a good and ethical life with no expectation of “heavenly reward” for their good and unselfish deeds.
    Most religions were contrived by men and religious texts like the bible are covered in “human fingerprints” – mostly reworked over the centuries to accommodate the desires of men.
    It baffles me that women who are so desperate to be accepted into church hierarchies fail to see this…….the patriarchal attitude of these men is sickening – OBEY and SUBMIT ?……..I don’t think so.

    Wedding ceremonies don’t have to be religious to be loving and sincere……………our daughter’s wedding was beautiful – (the bride & groom did the legal one a couple of days before)……..all of the guests wore historical clothing (most are re-enactors) and her father conducted the ceremony (wearing a kilt) and read “Oh the places you’ll go” by Dr Seuss…..the bride & groom wrote their own vows……..
    People said it was the most beautiful ceremony they’d ever attended – “and no religion too”….lol.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  39. Anonymous

    So typical of posts in this substitute for Tribune! Anyone disagrees with gay marriage or think that Tony Abbott is actually an astute leader who will make a great prime minister gets howled down and someone dare have a different view about marriage and they are ridiculed. Not everyone agrees about this OK. Get over yourself!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Jules

      Why on earth would you choose to read a left-leaning, feminist blog if you so vehemently disagree with the core beliefs here?

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Anonymous

        My God…you’re right. What the hell am I doing here….I’m gone…and thanks again…

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Observer

          You’ll be back.

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
    • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

      I am a long time liberal voter, (although I vote on policy so if labors were better…) , and I have no idea how you interpret this as left leaning. It’s a site aimed at women. I don’t obey anyone,( except the law), the question here is how the Anglican church can justify their old fashioned mores in a modern context. Honestly I don’t think they can any more than the catholic church can preach tolerance and be anti gay. But that’s my right leaning opinion. Don’t think you are doing tony any favours in your post either!

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Jules (aka Miss Finance)

        Who are you responding to Mum of 2?

        I’m actually a Liberal (big L) voter myself but I do have some lefty views and agree with the basic core beliefs on this site generally. I was simply questioning why someone who doesn’t believe in gay marriage would ever find anything of interest on this site.

        I’d say most would agree with me that this site is slightly left of centre though… it’s certainly not right leaning anyway. You’re right, the site is aimed at women, I don’t think that means it can’t have a political leaning as well.

        I don’t have a problem with any site having a political leaning by the way, my comment wasn’t meant as a criticism.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

          I was responding to anonymous. This site certainly has some tendancy to lean left, but there are many contributors to that. I just have no idea how this particular article is left leaning? As many of my views on government and economic views are considered conservative some would say I’m right leaning- but surely the left aren’t the only ones that consider this old fashioned? Very strange

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Jules (aka Miss Finance)

            Ah – gotchya. Sorry, I thought that you were referring to my use of the term ‘left leaning’ and were saying this site is not that…. I see now you were referring to this particular article, not the site generally. I was a bit confused.

            Anyway, agree on all points!

            GD Star Rating
            loading...
  40. Haven Maven

    Oh sure. Just before the monkeys fly out of my arse….

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  41. Annacristina

    Fascinating – I wrote a comment about the basic theology and why the word is used – BUT IT”S NOT HERE!

    Why is that ?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • intern

      Hi!

      Sometimes the spam filter eats comments – I’ll have a look.

      -Megan, MM Moderater/Intern

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  42. Cunning like a weasel

    Personally, if Colin Firth begged me to marry him and wanted me to submit then it wouldnt be a problem. I attend weekly devotion at the Church of Peter Garrett so I know that once I get in I can just change everything anyway.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  43. Kat

    The timing of the post is interesting as I have been in a Facebook discussion with a friend from school after he posted that at his recent wedding his wife took this vow – both are in their mid-20s. I was curious to understand why – my knee-jerk reaction was to be horrified, but as my wise mother reminded me feminism is about choice (although I did suggest to her that in certain communities this choice may not be as free as she would like to think!)

    He explained to me that in the Bible the passage this draws from asks the groom to vow to love his wife as Christ loves the Church and bride to vow to submit to her husband as the Church submits to Christ. Essentially, both are asked to reflect God’s self-sacrificing love, but in different ways.

    I don’t necessarily agree with all of this – I like the idea of self-sacrificing love by both parties, but as we have learned from the US civil rights fight the idea of “separate but equal” has its issues. And I agree with the author that contemporary culture has be considered. But I do understand it a little more now – and I thinks that understanding has helped me to more truly respect my friend’s wife’s choice, even if it is not one I would make.

    As for the issues the Church has with women more generally – and for that matter with gay people – well, that is why I choose to no longer go to Church. I believe in God and the sacrifice of his son for man – sadly man, in the form of the Church, has done a pretty good job of perverting it since then!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • gee jen

      I really respect you for discussing this further with your friend and not just judging his decision

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
  44. 50 Shades of Grey

    I don’t have a problem with submitting.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • wellactually

      She did actually.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • 50 Shades of gone off half cocked

        Did she? I haven’t read it but I thought she liked it?

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • wellactually

          Yeah she did like the kinky stuff (kind of) but not the submissive aspect. She was a bad sub :)

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
  45. Ang

    I think that modern relationships don’t suit the cut and paste vows offered by organised religion. The fact that the Anglican church’s re-writing of traditional vows is mysoginistic is disturbing but it’s always baffled me why many couples opt to marry in a setting that is stuffy and conservative when they don’t follow or respect that doctrine.
    I complete understand that there are people like Alys who are practicising Christians, but for those who just want the pretty church for photos then they need to think more about the permanancy of marriage.
    When I married in a civil ceremony our vows weren’t about devotion and submission, they were about mututal respect and comittment to work at the marriage as that reflected our values and the nature of our relationship.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  46. Alex

    This is what we expect – the Anglican Church pulling the nutters in Sydney into line:

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/submit-vow-could-fall-foul-of-the-marriage-act-20120827-24woe.html

    Quite why the Sydney church turned into a bunch of men’s rights activists, I do not know.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  47. Guest

    Hmm not every Anglican church is like this when it comes to wedding vows.. But if you think back to Prince Williams wedding Catharine said ” honour” instead of obey.. FYI we don’t call them perists they are ministers, fathers or mothers or simply called by their first name.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  48. Elaine Fraser

    Using words like submit and obey bring out all the patriarchal stereotypes and encourage men and women to either submit and fall into the old roles or to totally go the opposite and be subject to no one. In the middle there is this idea that both parties should be giving and taking in a relationship.

    This is a much healthier point of view. Each couple should make their vows knowing what they mean by them.

    I respect my husband but if he tried to order me around I’d tell him where to go. The same with me, if I was, ‘ okay honey whatever you want to do, I’ll just be a doormat’, he would wonder what had gotten into me!

    Words are important and the meaning implied can be interpreted according to your own beliefs, values and understanding.In our day and age that words like submit and obey are archaic and perhaps send the wrong message.

    In 1 Peter it says that we should be mutually submissive, which to me, means ‘give and take’ on both sides. Submission in marriage is very much like being considerate; although it is more akin to loyalty and cooperation.

    Perhaps the Anglican Church should look at how wounding these words can be to people when used incorrectly and use a modern interpretation in order to focus on both parties being considerate to each other rather than a wife obeying and being submissive.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  49. Rima

    in india, you touch your husband’s feet for his blessing. btw…i decided against an indian wedding…

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  50. Anti-Christian

    I’m not a fan of religion, specifically, any form of Christianity. Can’t quite put my finger on it, but I have no real problem with Buddhism, Judaism, etc, but my back immediately gets up when I hear anyone saying “Oh I’m a Christian”.

    Maybe it’s because it was shoved down my throat throughout my schooling and I think it’s the most hypocritical of all the religions. I’d probably be less bothered by this annoucement by the Anglican church if it had been an annoucement by Islamic leaders in Sydney. Strange, but true.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    • Alys J

      I think a lot of our experiences as children colour our lives as adults. Certainly some people have shocking experiences with religion in schools. I’m really sorry that you did.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Anti-Christian

        I never said I had a bad experience, just that religion was rammed down my throat because I went to Christian schools.

        My parents weren’t really into religion so religion was something I had to do at school not something my family were really interested in. The nearest private (non denominational) school was about 400km away and Mum didn’t want us boarding or going to the local state high school, so the local Christian school was the best option in her opinion.

        If you call “realising that religion is a load of bollocks” and “science explains everything that people 2000 years ago thought was divine intervention” a bad experience, then I suppose you’re right. I wouldn’t call those realisations bad though, I’m glad I had them.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
    • Bradley

      You are shocked by this pronouncement from the Anglican church, yet the same pronouncement from the all male Islamic leaders of Sydney wouldn’t upset you at all ?

      Be fair dinkum is all I ask.

      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      • Anti-Christian

        Less bothered I said, not less shocked. Christianity is the dominant religion in Australia, so yes, I am more bothered when the dominant religion makes sexist decisions. Majority domination of a religion has a flow on effect into politics, culture and a society. Islam is not the dominant religion in Australia, so the tentacle effect wouldn’t be as far reaching.

        GD Star Rating
        loading...
        • Bradley

          But….if the Islamic leaders of Sydney made this pronouncement, surely it would be sexist in regards to how it would impact on the lives of Muslim women ?

          GD Star Rating
          loading...
          • Mum of 2 cheeky monkeys

            If the Islamic leaders of Sydney made this announcement there would be an absolute uproar! Can you imagine!

            GD Star Rating
            loading...

So, we have $1000 to give away... oh, would you be interested? Well step right this way.

To go in the draw to win, just LIKE us on Facebook, enter your email address and tell us in 25 words or less why you love reading Mamamia.

Close this popup



Full Terms & Conditions