The San Francisco call., 1896-02-16

grandmothers knelt before the al
tar and blushingly promised to
"obev' their husbands.
The first of the new women, or such of
them as chanced to take the marriage VOW,
objected TO the word. at was relic of
barbarism." they declared, and they in
augurated 8 campaign against the an
achronism that has almost resulted in its
annihilation.
Witness, for instance, the views of some
of San Francisco's representative preach
ers.
DR.. W. W. Case, pastor of the Howard
street Methodist Church. is nothing if not
emphatic.
1--WE do not require VOW of obedience"
be said. The women wouldn't keep it.
anyhow, so what's the use. We avoid
everything that is unnecessary. Besides
II is a matter of princi pie with US. Woman
was made from mans rib in order that she
might walk by his side.
lit is abomlnable to ask a woman to
obey the man just as it would be to ask q
man to obey a woman. The effect of such
promise would be to stultify woman.
What 90 [ think of 'Pauls advice
That 1t is misunderstood.
The position of Rev. w. P. Boynton,
pastor of the First Baptist Church, would
woman.
II can see no reason why women should
assume obligations to obey any more than
men should" he said. Il have used the
word but once in performing marriage
ceremony, and that was when nice little
woman asked me to do so.
Il believe in a common purse in the
home. L believe in complete confidence
there, that the wife should have no secret
from the husband, nor the husband from
the wife. A liberal and fair Interpretation
of the scriptural teaching relating to mar
riage shows that the charges TO the hus-
band are practically Synonymous with
those made TO the wife.
"A relic of the dark ages is what Rev.
}. Cumming Smith, pastor of Trinity Pres
byterlan Church, pronounced the old mar
riage service.
''Most men give no thought to the phrase
ology OF the service" said Mr.. Smith,
but the man who insists that his bride
adopt the formula pledglng her TO obedl-
ence | regard as a coward. Speaking for
myself l say that there are strong reasons,
scriptural and common sense, why a
woman should not be com PEELED to prom
ise TO obey. As far as l know Paul is the
only one responsible for such advice as
Wives be submissive TO your husbands,
and Women, keep silence IN the churches.
You know Paul was an old bachelor, as
well as one of the most intellectual men oi
his time, and he could not rise entirely
above It's prejudices, one of which was
that women should live in seclusion
Furthermore, it was a matter of policy f OIL
if women asserted any of the independence
of thought and action that characterize
the Christian woman of our day the pagan,
OF their time would have pronounced them
off color
II cannot say, that the Presbyterian
church is a unit in the matter. In fact
DR.. Hodges manual, which is an authority
to many of my ministerial brethren, in
cludes the word obey in its form for the
marriage ceremony and a good many still
follow it."
''The form of marriage in vogue for SO
long time and which is being superseded
by formule adopted by the churches and
modified by the ministers, is not up to the
light of the present." said Rev. w. D.
Williams of Plymouth Congregations
Church. Ii a candidate for wifehood
asks me to use it, or rather if she insist:
upon it l do, but am averse to it. 1t viii
not bear the fire of criticism. 1t was de
signed for the time when people lived like
cattle, not for this age of enlightenment
For instance, that form requires wife
TO 'forsake all others and cleave unto heI
husband Now, do not intend that my
wife shall forsake all others in the sense of
friends and relatives. By no means!
Should it be necessary for her TO take such
a VOW she would be unworthy of me.
81 like the new fol m and its modifica-