THE WORD "OBEY."

Press, Volume L, Issue 14909, 24 February 1914, Page 2

THE WORD "OBEY."

SOME LOCAL VIEWS ON THE

QUESTION

A cablegram from England yesterday stated that the question of eliminating the word "obey" from the marriage service was briefly considered by the Convocation of Canterbury, wnen a motion to effect the reform, proposed by tiie Bishop of Lincoln, was withdrawn. The Bishops of Winchester and Hereford, however, hinted at sympathy with tne propo_.l, aitnough it was recognised tnat the opposition at .the moment was too strong to be conquered. \\ nen this question was reierred to the itcv. 'Jayior, vicar of st. Luke's, wno arriveu only recently irom _ugl_id, iie pointed out that in reality n was a much bigger question tnan was suggcsteu oy mc lueru piuposai ui_t tne word "obey ■' snouiti be mopped. Ino whoie or tao (Jnuicn or _u_iand marriage service, no indicated, was bated upon tlio subject position of wouion, aud if tne wortl was to oo omit tea, a oompiete re-drafting of the service wou.u Do necessary. Tne present service was ueauuruiiy designeu, and most impressive, and in its ideal iora included tne communion service. In every feature, almost, it was bunt upon the predominating position ot man, and the Übjirch was so committed to tnis the relationship of tho so.-ies that it was very cioubuul'it there would be any change in aocoruanco with the desires of the movement urging the equality of woman. Tho actual word "obey" occurred twice in the service. In the first instance tho woman was asked by the priest, "Wilt thou have this man to be thy wedded husband, wilt thou obey him, love, honour, and serve him.'" The. man is asked a similar question, but without tho obligation of obedience. In tho second case tha bride is/required to say, "I tako thee for my wedded husband, to love, cherish, and to obey till death do us part." In addition to these definite avowals-the whole service is cast in tho form of recognising the predominance in authority of the man, and any alteration in this respect would involve a complete re-modelling. While admitting that there was a distinct agitation in England for the removal of tho word from the service, Mr Taylor said that it had not affected thc public to any extent at all. He had been in orders for seventeen years, and the question had never come before him in any shape or form. This showed that the agitation made no impression on ordinary life. So far as the clergy, too, were concerned, ho did not know that the question had been beforo them in any official way, but probably the committee on tho revision of the prayer-book, which had been sitting during the last few years, would havo some recommendations to make. Some ministers had taken upon themselves the responsibility of omitting the word, but these were often raranged matters betweensome actress or suffragette and the halfpenny" Press for "copy" "I have found," said tho Rev. v J. J. mi l l m asked for his opinion, that frequently both the bride and bridegroom suggest that the word obey should be omitted. I take this as, an indication that the general public does not want it and regards it as to some extent obnoxious. Personally, I never use tho word myself in services at which I officiate. We are not bound by any forms or ceremonies and so ™ay delete it without question." Tho Rev. C. H. Laws, of Durham street, confessed that for years past ho had always omitted the word in _3 services. The word was in the book of offices governing thoir services, -but lie, with many other ministers, did nj>t use it. The Methodist Church had set up a committee to revise the book of offices, and amongst other recommendations being proposed was that of the omission of the word "obey." This matter would come before tho conference to he held in Dunedin (immediately. The Rev. J. Mackenzie, of St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church, stated that the Presbyterian Church had" no prescribed order of servicos, and a good deal of liberty was allowed. Ministers could omit the word at their discretion, and many did so. although somo refused' to do so. He himself used a form which did not involve the use of the word. The difficulty about the word was. that it was taken out of its connotation which was "wives obey your husbands in the Lord." People misunderstood the real meaning of the rord in that connexion. It was not a demand for unconditional obedience, but obedience consistent with the law of Christ. In the Presbyterian Church both opinion and" practice differed upon the subject. The simplest form of marriage of all, however, is that provided by tho Registrar. In this case there is no question of "obedience" or not. -All that is necessary •. is that each person shoujd affirm. "I do solmehly. declare that I know not of any lawful impediment why I may not be joined in matrimony to ." Afterwards each person says to the other, "I call upon these persons here present (two j witnesses) that I do take thee to be my lawful wedded wife (or husband." That is all.