Anglican Church playing God again.

[princealbertofb]

Actually the church is insuring a 'Godly' way of life for its members/believers.

This is really not a thing about going out to undo the past 100 years for everyone. Hell if you don't like the wording of an Anglican Marriage Ceremony, then go to a Justice of the Peace or a Wiccan Priest (jump the broomstick) or whatever other religious vow ceremony floats your boat.

The Churches (plural, there are many) who use the bible as a framework for its system of operation (beliefs) are constantly trying to balance out this modern world with ancient traditions. It isn't easy, its not like a new prophet emerges every generation to set the record straight and amend/parse previous laws and edicts send down from General Operations Director (G.O.D.)

While liberal women have burnt their bras and have taken up careers and the odd fad of wearing pants, the more conservative women actually love the idea of the traditional 'submit to your husband' ideal.

Freedom of/from religion is a two way street. Whilst you may not cotton to the whole notion of women being subject to their husband, I fear that conservative Anglicans do cotton to it, and they should be allowed the same freedom to pursue their religious beliefs as you do to pursue whatever it is your beliefs include.

From the article this is to affect only the Anglican Church, it doesn't appear that other brands of faith or the courts will have to legally change the vows to reflect submission.

Or did I miss that?

I think that, again, the point is being missed that some women who belong to that church and maybe that particular parish may not want their ceremonies to be changed to something as backward as this, but this kind of forces them out of the parish / community if they want to have what they had before. Shall we say that the move doesn't sound all that democratic... but then again, is democracy something churches should encourage or indulge in? Not so sure. I'd got the impression that the Anglican Church was trying to integrate women more in its decisions than before. I may have been wrong.

What appeared to me was that the contract was being very one-sidedly changed to benefit just one gender without necessary consensus.