# Tight jeans



## sis

With the second-hand stores, Wal-Mart, etc, many options are available if people desire to dress nicely for worship, yet do not have much of a budget for clothing.

Does it matter anymore?

My pet peeve is blue jeans and knit clothing that show the entire, totally entire figure.

The problem is, if a church is upholding God's Word, it will attract godly people, but will they visit more than once if the general attire is the same as those attending a ball game?


----------



## Tim

I am right with you on this one, Anne (I checked your profile to see your name - welcome to the Puritan Board). It seems that people don't care anymore about dressing properly. I am sometimes the only one in the congregation with a tie (pastors included). 

A few things that I think should be done:

1. A shirt and tie for the men (cheap to acquire), a jacket if you can afford it;
2. Men should never wear sandals;
3. Women should be careful about the length of their skirt/dress;
4. No cleavage;
5. Women should be careful about the tightness (or looseness) of their clothing as well as clothing that is "semi-see-through";
6. Children should be held to the same standard as adults (within reason for the youngest, of course)

This is not legalism; it is about respect and honor for the Lord's House and the importance of the meeting. I have noticed over the years that one litmus test is how the teenage girls of the congregation dress. That will tell you a lot about the importance the church places on modesty and respectful clothing (or, to be fair, the struggle the church has where people have not been brought up to show honor in their manner of dress).



Interestingly, people used to dress nicely at ball games! Look closely at the bottom of the picture (circa 1908) - the men are dressed better than is now commonly seen in many churches!


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

Doesn't it sort of depend on culture? I am not advocating being lazy in dress but here even in business meetings is a tie rarely worn. To then wear a suit and tie to church would be really over dressing. I could see however that in some parts of the world wearing a suit and tie would be completely respectable. 

On the earlier note though, I did leave a number of churches back in 2004 when I found I was faced with more temptation when attending church than I ever was out in the secular world during the week.


----------



## ReformedWretch

Sis, welcome! Please see my signature for requirement for your signature


----------



## raekwon

Tim said:


> I am right with you on this one, Anne (I checked your profile to see your name - welcome to the Puritan Board). It seems that people don't care anymore about dressing properly. I am sometimes the only one in the congregation with a tie (pastors included).
> 
> A few things that I think should be done:
> 
> 1. A shirt and tie for the men (cheap to acquire), a jacket if you can afford it;
> 2. Men should never wear sandals;
> 3. Women should be careful about the length of their skirt/dress;
> 4. No cleavage;
> 5. Women should be careful about the tightness (or looseness) of their clothing as well as clothing that is "semi-see-through";
> 6. Children should be held to the same standard as adults (within reason for the youngest, of course)
> 
> This is not legalism; it is about respect and honor for the Lord's House and the importance of the meeting. I have noticed over the years that one litmus test is how the teenage girls of the congregation dress. That will tell you a lot about the importance the church places on modesty and respectful clothing (or, to be fair, the struggle the church has where people have not been brought up to show honor in their manner of dress).



Numbers 3-5 generally seem to be about modesty in dress, which is important (and applies equally to men as it does to women), but 1 and 2 are pretty arbitrary and dependent on the culture of the church. I have a hard time buying that there's something inherently more "respectful" or "honorable" about a tie and jacket, and binding someone's conscience to _specific items_ of dress is wrong.


----------



## kvanlaan

Just last night we went to our favorite second-hand store and got my eldest son Judah a suit. Not a polyester leisure suit, but a wool-blend suit by Cambridge. And it was $33, with white dress shirt included.

Funny thing is, the same son was saying yesterday (as we are looking for a new home church) that while he likes the service at the church I grew up in (CRC) and the music is more lively (sometimes even Hillsongs  ) and things are easier for him to understand; the church we've been attending in the evenings as a possible one (FRC), while difficult to understand and not as lively (EP with the "Thees and Thous" preserved) and somewhat long in the tooth to him (sermons are about an hour and can be rather complex theologically), he would rather go there. 

Why? The modesty practised in the FRC and the reverence of worship is, to him, so much more appropriate than the behaviour of the kids at the CRC (he's been to youth group a few times and says he doesn't need to go back). Add to that the general disrespect for parental authority and the tart-ish habits of dress, and he is rather confused by some aspects of Western Christianity.

Sorry, perhaps a little  but this all happened here in the last 24 hours, it's on the tip of my tongue.


----------



## Rangerus

While our early morning service here in Austin is primarily coat and tie, the general dress around the church is "business" casual. (slacks and pullovers, although not shorts and sandals). And the same for women. 

Austin prides itself in being a "laid-back" town where it is rare to see anyone in a coat and tie anywhere. The city motto is "Keep Austin weird" (I don't agree with this)

I did once, about 20 years ago, attend a church (Baptist) in Waco where many of the young women wore very revealing attire that to say the least was a distraction.


----------



## shackleton

The thing I do not like is when girls where form fitting pants that basically show everything. This is rather distracting and makes it hard to concentrate on the service, (maybe it is just me), I get enough of that all week it would be nice to not be tempted at chruch as well as in the world.


----------



## Tripel

The immodesty of women and girls in church (of all places) is a soapbox issue for me. It used to be that girls and boys grew up wanting to be like their parents. Boys wearing their daddy's old (and far too big) dress shoes and girls wearing mama's pearls. I'm not sure it has changed too much for men, but these days it is more likely that the women are the ones trying to dress like the girls. 

There's an out-of-town church I visit whenever I am in that area, and it saddens me to see how the women and girls dress. Mothers and daughters wearing the same styles and sporting the same cleavage. The only difference is that the mothers' tanned skin is looking leathery while the teens' tanned skin has a few years before it is fully damaged.

I'm sorry honey, but you don't look 20 years old. You look every bit of 45, yet desperate to have your youth back.


----------



## PastorSBC

Tim said:


> 1. A shirt and tie for the men (cheap to acquire), a jacket if you can afford it;



So what specifically about a tie and jacket make a man more honoring to the Lord?


----------



## Notthemama1984

One can dress nicely without a tie.


----------



## CDM

When promoting ones preference of dress, one should consider the poor in this country. Contrary to modern American sentiment, the poor _do_ exist.


----------



## Tripel

PastorSBC said:


> So what specifically about a tie and jacket make a man more honoring to the Lord?



You're right. It's not about the specific items of clothing. But I think the point of Tim's post is to say that we should make an extra effort regarding our dress when we go to worship. For some people, that's going to be a tie or a suit. For others, it means their leather shoes.

My church is on the formal end of the spectrum. Mostly suits among the men. I like it that way, but on the other hand I think it causes some people to be uncomfortable. I'm thinking specifically about a family that has attended our church off and on. They don't have much money, and definitely not the kind of money to get their many kids suits and ties. They wear jeans and casual shirts, sometimes sandals, but I get the feeling that they ARE dressing up. Their shirts are always tucked in, and they wear belts. Unfortunately they stick out, but I think it's great they are making as much effort as everyone else. I wouldn't want my church to be any less formal, but I do hope that our members see those with less as being no different.


----------



## raekwon

I've said this in another thread about how we dress for church (amazing how some of these same issues are re-hashed OVER and OVER in certain circles) . . . our clothes need to be clean, the need to fit, they need to be culturally appropriate, and they need to be modest. 

(And immodesty is not just a problem with women and girls.)


----------



## Tripel

raekwon said:


> And immodesty is not just a problem with women and girls.



I'm not disagreeing, but I'm curious what kind of issues you have come across. I can't think of examples in my circles of men being immodest with their dress.


----------



## LawrenceU

If you are a man just make sure you wear pants.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta9LSx8-9Vc]YouTube - Jesus wore pants, not a dress!!! Baptist preaching Bible[/ame]


----------



## OPC'n

Modesty is key. With that said, I believe the rest is cultural. Here in America we have money to buy very nice clothes even if it is at Goodwill, which was donated by a rich person. The point is, one now has a very nice piece of clothing no matter how you got it. Because we do have much money here in America, it has become our culture for everyone to wear nice clothing. In third world countries where most of the persecuted church abides, they do not concentrate on such luxury. They know that it's their heart toward God which matters. It should be the same for us. Wearing nice clothing doesn't make one holy (I don't believe anyone is saying that it does). Paul actually addresses this,

1 Tim 2:8-10 8 "I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; 9likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10 but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works."

Paul teaches here that women are to adorn themselves with good works, which is shown via respectable apparel, modesty, and self-control. During his time, braiding hair was evidently immodest because the woman's hair was her glory or covering during worship. Obviously this is cultural since I've never met anyone who doesn't braid their children's hair. He also speaks to over dressing or dressing with costly clothing. He doesn't say, "Dress up because that honors Christ." Instead he says to be modest or balanced or in actuality not to dress in such a way which draws attention to oneself, which could be in costly attire or in a way that it is obvious you're lazy (not clean, hair not combed etc) that people star at you. Dressing sexually is just plain inappropriate as it makes brothers in Christ stumble and it shows your heart. However, jeans do not always fit into the sexual category. Mine don't except for the ones I've outgrow  (yeah, I need a good diet) I find dresses do more often than pants or jeans. BTW, I do dress nicely most of the time by wearing soft wool-like pants during winter and cotton for summer with a nice shirt/blouse. Sometimes I do wear jeans with a nice blouse and heels. Modesty is key though.


----------



## MrMerlin777

Chaplainintraining said:


> One can dress nicely without a tie.




My understanding is that there are even some denominations that would have a problem with someone wearing a tie.

A pastor friend of my was a guest preacher at a church some time ago (not sure why he was there, maybe funeral etc). The church was to some degree Mennonite and was slightly offended by his tie. He removed it before speaking. I'm not sure what the reasoning is behind this groups dislike of ties but there ya go, just an incident that occured.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Modesty is key...but believing a tie and jacket is somehow more God-honouring is equivalent to saying a capedress is more God-honouring. One can dress nicely without a tie or jacket. And as for $33 on a suit for a boy, though a good deal, is still too much for some families that could better us that to make ends meet or spend that extra keeping their growing boys in supply of pants and shoes that fit. There are poor in this country...are you going to dare tell them how they should dress for worship or presume upon their intentions?


----------



## bookslover

LawrenceU said:


> If you are a man just make sure you wear pants.
> YouTube - Jesus wore pants, not a dress!!! Baptist preaching Bible



That guy's a trip - a bad one. He's been led astray by the obsolete language of the KJV. Apparently, the Jimmy uses "britches" in several places and this guy automatically equates it with what we mean by britches. I'd bet he has 0 knowledge of Hebrew, or he would have looked up the Hebrew behind the obsolete English. Or, failing that, he could at least have found out what the KJV translators meant by "britches" in their own day.

The idea that Jesus wore pants, in the modern sense of pants, is, of course, absurd.


----------



## raekwon

Tripel said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> And immodesty is not just a problem with women and girls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not disagreeing, but I'm curious what kind of issues you have come across. I can't think of examples in my circles of men being immodest with their dress.
Click to expand...


Well, we need to understand that "modesty" in dress is more than just "not showing too much skin" (though it certainly does include that). Some of the most immodest "church-wear" I've ever seen also keeps the wearer completely covered (think of the insanely ostentatious hats some women wear and the flashy suits and shoes some men wear in African-American churches).

"Modesty" is a reservedness, an understatedness in the way one dresses, and that also means not dressing in such a way that flaunts wealth or draws too much attention in any way. That's not to say that there's something inherently wrong with dressing in accord with current fashion and/or one's own tastes, but there are modest and immodest ways to do so.


----------



## bookslover

I'm constantly amazed at the way some women will buy some article of clothing just because it's the current fashion and _not because it actually looks good on them, enhancing their features._ The same is true with makeup. The current fad, I guess, is eye makeup so dark and so heavily applied that it makes the woman look like she has two dark holes in her face where her eyes used to be.


----------



## Honor

LawrenceU said:


> If you are a man just make sure you wear pants.
> YouTube - Jesus wore pants, not a dress!!! Baptist preaching Bible


that's the guy!!!!!!! I saw a youtube video of him preaching... He hates reformed theology. He's actually the first person I have ever seen that called Reformed Theology a cult. 
Sorry my bad that was totally


----------



## OPC'n

Some men can be immodest when their jeans hang low. This isn't done in my church, but I've been to churches where some did this. Tight shirts and jeans is another example for men. Men need to keep their shirts button up. etc


----------



## ReformedWretch

Every time I see this thread title an old Conway Twitty song starts going through my head.


----------



## LawrenceU

LadyFlynt said:


> Modesty is key...but believing a tie and jacket is somehow more God-honouring is equivalent to saying a capedress is more God-honouring. One can dress nicely without a tie or jacket. And as for $33 on a suit for a boy, though a good deal, is still too much for some families that could better us that to make ends meet or spend that extra keeping their growing boys in supply of pants and shoes that fit. There are poor in this country...are you going to dare tell them how they should dress for worship or presume upon their intentions?



Amen! This idea that a suit and tie are somehow God honoring is ridiculous. And, by the way, I like suits and ties. Real ones not the ill fitting junk they pawn off at ridiculous prices today. When I wear a suit it has a pocket square in the breast pocket, my trousers are held up by braces, often there is a waist coat under it if it is single breasted, and I always wear a proper hat. That is how a suit should be worn. 

But, to the point. Show me one place in Scripture that says we are to 'wear our best' to a worship service. I don't even see it implied. Modesty has nothing to do with the 'level' of clothing that one wears. It flows from the heart and results in an appropriate dress that does not call lustful attention to the forefront of the mind of the viewer. I know people who can be very 'modestly dressed' (no shape hugging or revealing too much skin) and yet because of their wicked heart are never modestly dressed. Their very demeanor is immodest.

We have, I believe, created a bar that is actually an affront to God. What would someone say to those men in the church where I was a member in my youth that wore their overalls to church? And, no they were not always their best pair. Sometimes they even came with remnants from the barn yard still on their boots. Some of them had suits and sometimes they wore them some times not. Was one day more acceptable to God than another?


----------



## larryjf

Do we have the authority to regulate how people dress at church outside of what the Bible calls us to?

The Scripture is clear that we ought to dress modestly, but i think we go too far when we try to exact a more disciplined dress code.


----------



## Whitefield

I once overheard some farmers observing that if the preacher was better dressed than they were, then maybe they were paying the preacher too much.


----------



## steven-nemes

LawrenceU said:


> If you are a man just make sure you wear pants.
> YouTube - Jesus wore pants, not a dress!!! Baptist preaching Bible



That guy sounds totally awesome.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Not only that, but in my neck of the woods, ties are seen as IMMODEST. Thus we have churches here the forbid the wearing of them or the typical suit jacket (with lapels). Another issue...you thought suitcoats were expensive, not try having them turned into a sack jacket!


----------



## Mushroom

I know people who have never been around a suit, don't know how to tie a tie, and only ever bought shirts in either small, medium, or large sizes. Most of them feel very awkward around a church full of suits. I've helped a few learn how to buy a shirt that fits and tie a tie, etc., but they shouldn't be made to feel embarassed because they don't have fine raiment. They can be dressed respectfully without it.

I didn't know how to tie a tie until I was 23 and attending my sister's wedding. My Dad's best friend was in the hotel room and was shocked that I didn't know how, but very graciously showed me. I really appreciated that.


----------



## kvanlaan

> One can dress nicely without a tie or jacket. And as for $33 on a suit for a boy, though a good deal, is still too much for some families that could better us that to make ends meet or spend that extra keeping their growing boys in supply of pants and shoes that fit. There are poor in this country...are you going to dare tell them how they should dress for worship or presume upon their intentions?



Sorry, folks (and especially you Jamal, if it offended you). My intention was not to dictate a mode of dress but to say that where I go, this is the standard. I was able to dress my boy to well above this standard for not much but could have done it for less yet. No, there is no where in II Corinthians 4 that says that one should wear X+X+X and that is godly. 

The reason many of us go this route (that is, suit and tie/full-skirted dress as a standard of 'proper' attire) is that we see such trash in the other direction. Those who cannot afford to wear (or don't know any better than to wear) anything but t-shirt, jeans and sandals, well, God bless 'em. It is those who _can_ dress modestly/respectfully and instead choose to wear something that shows a little more of her cleavage or wear something that shows off how much time he's been spending in the gym, that is what gets my goat. Or seeing a cavalcade of the 'latest' fashions and what's trendy this five minutes. Ugh.

Lately, in my home church, my goat has been got with alarming frequency.


----------



## Augusta

I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.

The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect. 

I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak. 

It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.


----------



## OPC'n

Augusta said:


> I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.
> 
> The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect.
> 
> I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak.
> 
> It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.



I think it was different in OT. God actually commanded specifically what the priest were to wear. NT is different. Paul tells us not to dress in costly attire.


----------



## Augusta

It doesn't have to be costly to be nice. I can get my son a whole suit at Walmart for about $20. Or at the thrift store where I get a lot of my clothing. The morals behind all they did in the OT still stand. God does not change. If he prefered honor then he does now also. Your posture changes with what you wear. You wouldn't waller around on the couch or the grass in a nice dress would you? You would be poised and act accordingly.

If you wouldn't wear it to meet the president then don't wear it to church. In the NT God commands us to give honor to whom honor is due (the president) so does he not deserve much more honor as our holy righteous God?


----------



## Pergamum

*Get your goat back!!!!!....*I'm buying a new leash for mine, because mine is usually more got than it is ungot lately.


----------



## Augusta

Perg, Kevin's goat is merely metaphorical whereas yours I am sure is quite real.  He should maybe get a metaphorical leash for his metaporical goat.


----------



## OPC'n

Augusta said:


> It doesn't have to be costly to be nice. I can get my son a whole suit at Walmart for about $20. Or at the thrift store where I get a lot of my clothing. The morals behind all they did in the OT still stand. God does not change. If he prefered honor then he does now also. Your posture changes with what you wear. You wouldn't waller around on the couch or the grass in a nice dress would you? You would be poised and act accordingly.
> 
> If you wouldn't wear it to meet the president then don't wear it to church. In the NT God commands us to give honor to whom honor is due (the president) so does he not deserve much more honor as our holy righteous God?



I do dress up most of the time but not always. I don't think my dressing up has anything to do with me appearing before God to worship. I dress up to fit in with what everyone else is doing. It's not a sin to dress up modestly and it's not a sin to not dress up. Christ is our high priest and He presents 
Himself perfectly before God for us. Again, this is very cultural. The persecuted church doesn't trifle with such luxury. It is legalism to demand that people dress up for church since Scripture doesn't command that we do so. It might be the preference of some people and that's ok, but no one is allowed to put that preference on others no matter how "godly" it sounds. Not that anyone is really doing that here.


----------



## Pergamum

My real goats have been got, multiplied, cut and eaten and gotten again and sold.... My metaphorical goat needs more taming or else I need to gut him too.


----------



## kvanlaan

> Perg, Kevin's goat is merely metaphorical whereas yours I am sure is quite real. He should maybe get a metaphorical leash for his metaporical goat.



Oddly enough, it is not only a metaphorical goat. I do own a goat, and have for the last 72 hours or so (with kid). So my goat is got both metaphorically and temporally. (By the way, we do not leash ours, we keep her in her pen with her kid, right next to the laying hens.)

Never have I written a post so strange.


----------



## raekwon

Augusta said:


> I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.
> 
> The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect.
> 
> I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak.
> 
> It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.





I've heard this argument time and time again and just can't buy it. First, what exactly constitutes and determines "nice" dress? Is a $30 suit "nicer" than a $80 pair of jeans? If so, why? Second, yes . . . we are going to pay homage the King and Judge, but that's not all God is to us. He is our Heavenly Father. He is high and lifted up, but He is near. He has come down to us and become one of us.

I dunno, I think you have a really hard time proving -- from Scripture or logic -- that a suit and tie necessarily reflects a more respectful heart attitude than other styles of dress.


----------



## Theoretical

raekwon said:


> Augusta said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.
> 
> The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect.
> 
> I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak.
> 
> It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard this argument time and time again and just can't buy it. First, what exactly constitutes and determines "nice" dress? Is a $30 suit "nicer" than a $80 pair of jeans? If so, why? Second, yes . . . we are going to pay homage the King and Judge, but that's not all God is to us. He is our Heavenly Father. He is high and lifted up, but He is near. He has come down to us and become one of us.
> 
> I dunno, I think you have a really hard time proving -- from Scripture or logic -- that a suit and tie necessarily reflects a more respectful heart attitude than other styles of dress.
Click to expand...

As one who really enjoys dressing up, nonetheless,


----------



## raekwon

Hey, I like dressing "nice" on occasion, as well. It'd be quite out of place at my church, but when the occasion calls for it (wedding, funeral, interview), I love it.


----------



## Hawaiian Puritan

I personally think we should not have any sort of dress code in how people come to church other than not being immodest or blatantly disrespectful. I think the danger of being expected to "dress up" is that it could become a mark of worldliness or wealth or be offputting to people who cannot afford to dress that way or feel that they don't fit a certain social class. Or that we will start judging people who attend church by the way they dress.

I certainly have been been in churches where one's wordly wealth is on display, including the Anglican church my family belonged to when I was a child where being from the right class and social circle was definitely a big part of who went to that church and how they dressed. There was a clear signal in that church that those who did not come from a privileged background were not welcome. It was not a very nice place, in my opinion, and I don't have any good memories of it.

I know our senior pastor feels pretty strongly that how one dresses should not be an issue in our church, and that we shouldn't be putting any obstacles in the path of people coming to our church. In fact, he has brought it up more than once from the pulpit. 

I can see an issue with immodest or disrespectful dress, but to be frank I haven't seen that in the people attending our church although they are in all manner of dress. We've had attenders that look like Rastafarians, or who might be covered in tattoos and piercings, but our church's feeling is no matter who they may be, we would rather them be hearing the Word preached in our church than be turned off by a church that is too "establishment" for them. And you'd be surprised by the number of strong Christians who dress up like they're from a biker gang. Or hardcore surfers. 

I really think the apostle James speaks to this discussion:

"My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, "You sit here in a good place," while you say to the poor man, "You stand over there," or, "Sit down at my feet," have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?" (James 2:1-4)


----------



## No Longer A Libertine

Let's ask Mel McDaniel what he thinks.

[video=youtube;-cHaufA26B8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cHaufA26B8[/video]


----------



## Pergamum

Congrats on the pleasures of goat ownership.


----------



## RTaron

Augusta said:


> If you wouldn't wear it to meet the president then don't wear it to church. In the NT God commands us to give honor to whom honor is due (the president) so does he not deserve much more honor as our holy righteous God?



I believe you have a scriptural argument here. Traci.
In Malachi chapter one the Lord uses the same argument. 
Verse 6. *"A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you" ......
verse 8. *"And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts."

Really, what wondrous condescending language is here; what supreme patience and forbearance from the King and Maker of the universe speaking to his priests. 

I personally think that our main emphasis in showing honor to God as a father is first from the heart of course. Our new testament spiritual sacrifice of worship, which is to offer ourselves. Our dress should be modest of course but beyond that we should just follow protocol. That is what we do for the president or for any public function. We learn what is expected at that given meeting. If we are honorable and desiring to edify, we will endeavor to dress like everyone else. I have found that certain churches are dressier than others. I think dressing is a clear cut cultural issue. 

The culture today which largely directs what our girls wear these days is not modest in my opinion. Everything must be thin and tight. Which is what the thread is about. These things need to change whether in church or out in public. I am preaching to myself I suppose here. I have 6 daughters who really want to please me but I seem to always loose the battle trying to keep the jeans loose fitting. I started out with only dresses. Anyway that is a long story and I better quit. 
Talk to you all later.


----------



## sis

'By those who come near Me I will be treated as holy, And before all the people I will be honored.' - Lev 10:3
nuff said
THANKS to everyone for weighing in on my first post. What a flabbergasting forum!


----------



## raekwon

RTaron said:


> Augusta said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wouldn't wear it to meet the president then don't wear it to church. In the NT God commands us to give honor to whom honor is due (the president) so does he not deserve much more honor as our holy righteous God?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe you have a scriptural argument here. Traci.
> In Malachi chapter one the Lord uses the same argument.
> Verse 6. *"A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you" ......
> verse 8. *"And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts."
> 
> Really, what wondrous condescending language is here; what supreme patience and forbearance from the King and Maker of the universe speaking to his priests.
> 
> I personally think that our main emphasis in showing honor to God as a father is first from the heart of course. Our new testament spiritual sacrifice of worship, which is to offer ourselves. Our dress should be modest of course but beyond that we should just follow protocol. That is what we do for the president or for any public function. We learn what is expected at that given meeting. If we are honorable and desiring to edify, we will endeavor to dress like everyone else. I have found that certain churches are dressier than others. I think dressing is a clear cut cultural issue.
Click to expand...


Again, dressing "nice" (ie: suits, ties, dresses, etc) is one application of the scriptural principle you're putting forth here. Yes, we should honor the Lord and edify the church in all things, including how we dress, but what exactly that consists of will vary from person to person and from church to church. One just cannot bind the conscience to specific items of dress like that.


----------



## Archlute

raekwon said:


> RTaron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Augusta said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wouldn't wear it to meet the president then don't wear it to church. In the NT God commands us to give honor to whom honor is due (the president) so does he not deserve much more honor as our holy righteous God?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe you have a scriptural argument here. Traci.
> In Malachi chapter one the Lord uses the same argument.
> Verse 6. *"A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you" ......
> verse 8. *"And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts."
> 
> Really, what wondrous condescending language is here; what supreme patience and forbearance from the King and Maker of the universe speaking to his priests.
> 
> I personally think that our main emphasis in showing honor to God as a father is first from the heart of course. Our new testament spiritual sacrifice of worship, which is to offer ourselves. Our dress should be modest of course but beyond that we should just follow protocol. That is what we do for the president or for any public function. We learn what is expected at that given meeting. If we are honorable and desiring to edify, we will endeavor to dress like everyone else. I have found that certain churches are dressier than others. I think dressing is a clear cut cultural issue.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, dressing "nice" (ie: suits, ties, dresses, etc) is one application of the scriptural principle you're putting forth here. Yes, we should honor the Lord and edify the church in all things, including how we dress, but what exactly that consists of will vary from person to person and from church to church. One just cannot bind the conscience to specific items of dress like that.
Click to expand...


Of course a conscience should not be bound in this area by particulars, but wise elders will feel free to give it some influence by the practice of their families as set before the ever-observant eyes of the congregation.


----------



## raekwon

Archlute said:


> Of course a conscience should not be bound in this area by particulars, but wise elders will feel free to give it some influence by the practice of their families as set before the ever-observant eyes of the congregation.



Of course.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Kevin, I'm not offended. We've just learned that respect and practicality often meet in the middle. My boy dress nice...but that doesn't include a tie or jacket. Pants wear out quickly...black jeans make more sense as they quickly become playclothes. I have never seen a suit for $20 at WM, but then I haven't been looking.


----------



## timmopussycat

Augusta said:


> I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.
> 
> The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect.
> 
> I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak.
> 
> It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.



As sjonee said: modesty is commanded...the rest is cultural.

If I was engaged in a private visit to the King of Kings and knew about it beforehand I might put on a suit. Or I might not. If I'm feeling particularly RPW the day I wouldn't: where does God command the worshipper, not the priest to wear his or her best clothing as a means of worship? Or where does God command the new covenenant priests (us) to wear special dress? We are charged to dress modestly and that's the extent of our orders.

Church service are not just a visit to the King, but a public meeting of the King's ambassadors in the country in which they serve to which "the local's" are invited. We are charged not to needlessly offend them, and specilfically charged not to make any distinctions because of the way people are dressed (James 2:1-4). 

FBC Vancouver is located in the heart of one of the wealthest districts in North America, yet it is less than a 20 minute walk from one of the poorest areas on the continent, so we see all levels of dress on a regular basis. Those with public roles in the services dress from modest semi-formal to suit and tie.


----------



## SemperEruditio

I believe the cure to tight jeans in church is that everyone wear them; the tighter the better. This way when the questions are raised as to why "they" are wearing tight jeans then we can all talk about why anyone is wearing tight jeans. 

I'm Cuban and have gone to some African-American and Latino churches where EVERYTHING was tight because of the "culture." Heck I have seen some "dance teams" or to be precise "dance worship ministries" who left very little to the imagination. When an exotic dancer can come from work and wear less at church than on stage.....there's a problem...more than just one problem but we're just talking about tight clothes here. 

The "typical" Latina pentecostal is only allowed to wear skirts which almost reach her ankle and no makeup. Some have gotten by the intended purpose of this legality by wearing tight fitting skirts. They followed the letter of the law but not the intent....and walk around like penguins... I would be really interested to walk into a few congregations in Miami to see if my suspicions are correct. In November I went to a RCC with my mom and later a Baptist church and "come as you are" seems to mean that you come as you were when you were born because the amount of flesh exposes was sinful....to them and me. 

Me thinks I's reading too much from those Puritan folk.


----------



## he beholds

kvanlaan said:


> One can dress nicely without a tie or jacket. And as for $33 on a suit for a boy, though a good deal, is still too much for some families that could better us that to make ends meet or spend that extra keeping their growing boys in supply of pants and shoes that fit. There are poor in this country...are you going to dare tell them how they should dress for worship or presume upon their intentions?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, folks (and especially you Jamal, if it offended you). My intention was not to dictate a mode of dress but to say that where I go, this is the standard. I was able to dress my boy to well above this standard for not much but could have done it for less yet. No, there is no where in II Corinthians 4 that says that one should wear X+X+X and that is godly.
> 
> The reason many of us go this route (that is, suit and tie/full-skirted dress as a standard of 'proper' attire) is that we see such trash in the other direction. Those who cannot afford to wear (or don't know any better than to wear) anything but t-shirt, jeans and sandals, well, God bless 'em. It is those who _can_ dress modestly/respectfully and instead choose to wear something that shows a little more of her cleavage or wear something that shows off how much time he's been spending in the gym, that is what gets my goat. Or seeing a cavalcade of the 'latest' fashions and what's trendy this five minutes. Ugh.
> 
> Lately, in my home church, my goat has been got with alarming frequency.
Click to expand...







Augusta said:


> I think everyone is missing the point about dressing nice. What you wear reflects your attitude before God. The high priest had a really nice set of threads before he went into the holy of holies. What would you wear if you were actually going into the presence of God? That is what you are doing Sunday morning.
> 
> The closest thing we have to mimic that situation is going before a judge or a king. Most people on trial want to look there best to project that they are clean cut etc. Most in front of a King will wear the best they have as a sign of respect.
> 
> I think we should be aware that we are going before the King of kings and the Judge of all the earth and that as a sign of the honor due him we should wear the best we have. In each culture that will differ. In OT times they had the nice fancy cloak and they had the hanging around the desert cloak.
> 
> It is a posture of humility and respect and in our culture that is a suit and tie or a nice dress and don't forget the hat.   There is a standard and everyone here knows that. Our culture is just going downhill fast in the clothing dept. thanks to tv and movies.





Archlute said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTaron said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe you have a scriptural argument here. Traci.
> In Malachi chapter one the Lord uses the same argument.
> Verse 6. *"A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you" ......
> verse 8. *"And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts."
> 
> Really, what wondrous condescending language is here; what supreme patience and forbearance from the King and Maker of the universe speaking to his priests.
> 
> I personally think that our main emphasis in showing honor to God as a father is first from the heart of course. Our new testament spiritual sacrifice of worship, which is to offer ourselves. Our dress should be modest of course but beyond that we should just follow protocol. That is what we do for the president or for any public function. We learn what is expected at that given meeting. If we are honorable and desiring to edify, we will endeavor to dress like everyone else. I have found that certain churches are dressier than others. I think dressing is a clear cut cultural issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, dressing "nice" (ie: suits, ties, dresses, etc) is one application of the scriptural principle you're putting forth here. Yes, we should honor the Lord and edify the church in all things, including how we dress, but what exactly that consists of will vary from person to person and from church to church. One just cannot bind the conscience to specific items of dress like that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course a conscience should not be bound in this area by particulars, but wise elders will feel free to give it some influence by the practice of their families as set before the ever-observant eyes of the congregation.
Click to expand...




AGGGGH. It really gets old hearing people say that their dressing more formally is more God-honoring than another's dressing more casually. Please show me where the Bible says that we are not allowed to wear sandals? I wear sandals almost everyday. Yep, $15 sandals--to church, even! Gasp. I am not honoring the King???? 
And a man wearing sandals is an especially scandalous event? Come on. 

No offense intended, but I feel that those of you who are saying that we must look formal happen to prefer that style of clothing. We live in the South (not the deep south, but in the one time Capital of the South) and I do see women dressing pretty formally for church, men wearing bow ties, etc. Do they look pretty? Sure. Is church a fashion show? No--so then it doesn't really matter that they look pretty. It's of no spiritual significance.
When I dress "prettily" do I feel closer to God at church? No, but I do feel closer to all the nice little old ladies or the girls my age, etc. 

Whose approval are we really seeking?


----------



## LadyFlynt

I also want to add that this kind of thinking is the same mistake the western missionaries have made through history with both Native Americans and those elsewhere in Africa and the East. Somehow, they don't seem to separate their cultural dress from modesty, but rather presume that THEIR clothes are both cultural, more God-honouring, and more modest above all others...rather than actually paying attention, they've made broadbrushed statements (and I've been guilty of the same time to time).


----------



## greenbaggins

I think the main point has been missed here in some of the discussion about clothing. There can be no absolute standard of right and wrong dress in terms of specifics. Modesty is commanded. That much we know. I believe that, beside modesty, no other principles are commanded. If some people find it helpful for their worship attitude to dress up, there is no harm in that, although Peter's injunctions are worth considering. On the other hand, if others do not find that it makes any difference, then they should simply stick to modesty. Personally, I think that a helpful (though not biblically mandated) principle is to wear clothes that will not distract people from the worship of God, whatever that dress might be. A suit and tie would be extremely distracting in, say, an African tribal village. African tribal wear would be extremely distracting in the deep South. Modest and non-distracting seems to me to be the best tack to take on this.


----------



## PastorSBC

greenbaggins said:


> Modesty is commanded. That much we know. I believe that, beside modesty, no other principles are commanded.



I agree with you here. 

The problem comes into play when some want to mandate their preferences as principles on others lives. 

Therefore, if someone says a pastor must wear a jacket and tie to be honoring to the Lord, they are wrong in my opinion because they are attempting to mandate their preference as a principle for someone else. 

If their conviction is they need to wear a jacket and tie, then by all means do so, but do not hold it as a principle of honoring the Lord for anyone else.


----------



## Scottish Lass

greenbaggins said:


> African tribal wear would be extremely distracting in the deep South.



Had to laugh when I read this. While we don't live in the deep South (Kentucky), we have a couple from Ghana who usually dress in beautiful tribal wear. My husband pastors a small, elderly congregation, and yet it does not seem out of place.


----------



## LawrenceU

Scottish Lass said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> African tribal wear would be extremely distracting in the deep South.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had to laugh when I read this. While we don't live in the deep South (Kentucky), we have a couple from Ghana who usually dress in beautiful tribal wear. My husband pastors a small, elderly congregation, and yet it does not seem out of place.
Click to expand...


You know. I thought a similar thing. We often had people from Africa attend our worship services growing up who wore traditional clothing. It never seemed out of place. I think this goes to the issue of the heart of the wearer.


----------



## greenbaggins

LawrenceU said:


> Scottish Lass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> African tribal wear would be extremely distracting in the deep South.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had to laugh when I read this. While we don't live in the deep South (Kentucky), we have a couple from Ghana who usually dress in beautiful tribal wear. My husband pastors a small, elderly congregation, and yet it does not seem out of place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You know.  I thought a similar thing. We often had people from Africa attend our worship services growing up who wore traditional clothing. It never seemed out of place. I think this goes to the issue of the heart of the wearer.
Click to expand...


You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.


----------



## raekwon

greenbaggins said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scottish Lass said:
> 
> 
> 
> Had to laugh when I read this. While we don't live in the deep South (Kentucky), we have a couple from Ghana who usually dress in beautiful tribal wear. My husband pastors a small, elderly congregation, and yet it does not seem out of place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know. I thought a similar thing. We often had people from Africa attend our worship services growing up who wore traditional clothing. It never seemed out of place. I think this goes to the issue of the heart of the wearer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.
Click to expand...


:yes:

And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."

(Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)


----------



## LawrenceU

BTW, that was in the 1970's and 1980's. I'm not as young as my stunning avatar photograph may lead one to believe.


----------



## he beholds

raekwon said:


> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."



Well said! Thank you, thank you, thank you!


----------



## Seb

raekwon said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> 
> You know. I thought a similar thing. We often had people from Africa attend our worship services growing up who wore traditional clothing. It never seemed out of place. I think this goes to the issue of the heart of the wearer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> :yes:
> 
> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."
> 
> (Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)
Click to expand...


I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.

My problem with a lot of the hipster types wear, is not that they dress differently from me (a conservative middle-class suburbanite), but that they don't dress any differently than they do any other day of the week. Many times they look like they accidentally wound up in Church and we should be happy that they have any clothes on at all.


----------



## Hawaiian Puritan

Scottish Lass said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> African tribal wear would be extremely distracting in the deep South.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had to laugh when I read this. While we don't live in the deep South (Kentucky), we have a couple from Ghana who usually dress in beautiful tribal wear. My husband pastors a small, elderly congregation, and yet it does not seem out of place.
Click to expand...


We also had a woman from Africa who would dress in her traditional wear on Sundays, including the beautiful colorful skirt and headdress that you see women wearing in Africa. She often served as an usher or collector of the offering, and you wouldn't believe how she brightened up the faces of many people in the church. It was great.


----------



## he beholds

Seb said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :yes:
> 
> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."
> 
> (Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
> 
> My problem with a lot of the hipster types wear, is not that they dress differently from me (a conservative middle-class suburbanite), *but that they don't dress any differently than they do any other day of the week*. Many times they look like they accidentally wound up in Church and we should be happy that they have any clothes on at all.
Click to expand...


Do we know that we are, in fact, supposed to dress differently on the Lord's Day than any other day? Is it recorded that the apostles dressed differently then? 
My husband is a teacher, so he wears ties or suit coats, etc, Monday through Friday. It's not a problem for my husband to "dress up," on the Lord's Day, but he still looks no different than he does any other day of the week. Is that really the issue? Should he wear a tuxedo, then, to set apart his church clothes from his everyday clothes?


----------



## raekwon

Seb said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :yes:
> 
> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."
> 
> (Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
Click to expand...


Possibly, but "much nicer" in that case would probably look different than it would for you or for me.

Either way, though, the President argument doesn't quite scale, since the President is not my Father.

Trust me, folks, I'm not arguing for people coming to church in rags. I'm just saying that it's unrealistic and frankly unbiblical to (either explicitly or implicitly) create a dress requirement above and beyond modesty for worship.


----------



## Ex Nihilo

Seb said:


> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.



Which does not prove that these 20-year-olds respect the President more than they do God, but merely that social expectations for these kinds of events are strong, and most people conform. I'm not sure that's a great argument for instituting similar expectations for church. The world assumes that outward appearance is important, and I'm not saying that we shouldn't dress nicely for worship. But an argument based on expectations for business or political events is not very persuasive to me. I care more for my parents than I do for a potential employer, but that isn't an argument for why I should wear a business suit every time I see them. I understand that some people feel like wearing jeans to church is disrespectful or not taking the service seriously, but you have to remember that this attire looks very different to students who wear jeans and t-shirts every day. Wearing nice jeans and a sweater _is_ "dressing up."

Another concern for students is the difficulty of building a wardrobe of "church attire." Personally, I have business suits, nice jeans, and formal attire, but not that much that is exactly right for church -- and it's expensive to buy a whole extra set of outfits! I usually wear one of my two business casual outfits. But notably, when I'm working, this is dressing _down_ from my weekday business attire. Is that wrong? I really don't think so. I just don't see any biblical indication that Sunday attire should be different.


----------



## Seb

he beholds said:


> Seb said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> :yes:
> 
> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."
> 
> (Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
> 
> My problem with a lot of the hipster types wear, is not that they dress differently from me (a conservative middle-class suburbanite), *but that they don't dress any differently than they do any other day of the week*. Many times they look like they accidentally wound up in Church and we should be happy that they have any clothes on at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do we know that we are, in fact, supposed to dress differently on the Lord's Day than any other day? Is it recorded that the apostles dressed differently then?
> My husband is a teacher, so he wears ties or suit coats, etc, Monday through Friday. It's not a problem for my husband to "dress up," on the Lord's Day, but he still looks no different than he does any other day of the week. Is that really the issue? Should he wear a tuxedo, then, to set apart his church clothes from his everyday clothes?
Click to expand...


Of course not.

So we should all wear shorts and flip-flops if that's what we wear all the other days of the week, even if we own nicer clothes to do something special like go out on a date in?

That's what I see and what I'm talking about.

It's more a matter of respect for where you are and what you're doing. 

Doesn't what you wear (especially nowadays in this country) reflect something about you and your attitude? That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Kim G

Seb said:


> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.



Actually, do you remember the big "scandal" in 2005 when a woman's sports team got to tour the White House and meet President Bush? The women wore skirts (a couple miniskirts, even), sleeveless tees, and flip-flops (their nice $18 ones!). They considered that what they were wearing was comfortable for the tour but dressy enough to meet the President.

People were shocked because that wasn't how things were done at the White House. But . . . yeah, it is how things are done these days. Maybe the older generation needs to compromise a little bit with the younger generation.


----------



## Ex Nihilo

Seb said:


> Doesn't what you wear (especially nowadays in this country) reflect something about you and your attitude? That's all I'm saying.



It very well might, and if someone wears shorts and flip-flops because they really do not take the service seriously, that's obviously wrong. But I'm concerned that people might make incorrect assumptions about others' motivations based on their dress. I'm also concerned (because I've known friends who felt this way) that students and lower-income people may be uncomfortable at a church where everyone is expensively dressed. It would be an error to approach worship with a casual attitude, but to approach worship as a fashion show or a time to show off your wealth is at least as bad (and blatantly unscriptural!) and just as real of a problem.


----------



## Seb

You know, there is a lot of middle ground between the two extremes of shorts with flip-flops and the tuxedo.


----------



## Archlute

Kim G said:


> Seb said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, do you remember the big "scandal" in 2005 when a woman's sports team got to tour the White House and meet President Bush? The women wore skirts (a couple miniskirts, even), sleeveless tees, and flip-flops (their nice $18 ones!). They considered that what they were wearing was comfortable for the tour but dressy enough to meet the President.
> 
> People were shocked because that wasn't how things were done at the White House. But . . . yeah, it is how things are done these days. Maybe the older generation needs to compromise a little bit with the younger generation.
Click to expand...


Or it is possible to read this as an indication of how little our society cares about structures of authority, issues of propriety, and thinking of others above their own comfort and preferences.... 

We might even want to assert that the younger generation should submit a little bit to the wisdom of the older generation. 

I am a relatively young fellow, but I believe that having married young, experience military service young, and had a family at a rather youthful age God has blessed me with some maturity and perspective that is sorely lacking among the majority of my generation; those who reject military (or other) structures and discipline, those who put off marriage for self-centered goals, and those who put off having kids (or still refuse to have them) for reasons of self-satisfaction.

If your life focuses around yourself (a sin from which we all suffer, but one which seems to particularly afflict the soul patch crowd) then you will likely be offended if anyone suggest that your dress be modified for any reason.

-----Added 1/14/2009 at 03:10:12 EST-----

Although not directly related to the issue of clothing in church, I believe that this article, penned by the ever relevant Carl Trueman, gives some great perspective on issues that affect the thoughts of those in our churches on matters related to culture and the West.

Read it, but be careful not to spill your latte on your laptop when you start laughing.


----------



## Seb

This is off topic but I'm curious, how many married women would have been okay with their groom showing up for a church wedding in common everyday street clothes if they had something better in their closet?


----------



## fredtgreco

Adam,

Print out a copy of it now, and send it on to _By Faith._

Sincerely,


----------



## LadyFlynt

Seb said:


> This is off topic but I'm curious, how many married women would have been okay with their groom showing up for a church wedding in common everyday street clothes if they had something better in their closet?



How many of us now think that we should go back to the puritan belief of a plain and simple wedding? 


Some of this does remind me of the time when farmers came as they were...for farming doesn't take a "day off". And yes, my husband has had to chase cows down when we were supposed to be heading for church. He and his boss barely made into church at all (though they did toss on clean clothes and washed their hands, they still smelled like the field and cattle).


----------



## LawrenceU

LadyFlynt said:


> Seb said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is off topic but I'm curious, how many married women would have been okay with their groom showing up for a church wedding in common everyday street clothes if they had something better in their closet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many of us now think that we should go back to the puritan belief of a plain and simple wedding?
Click to expand...




But, I like it.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Yes, I was being ornery with that...but serious also. Think of the money that is wasted, the pomp and circumstance, etc.


----------



## Notthemama1984

Seb said:


> raekwon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're absolutely right on this. It seems that many churches have an expanding idea of other cultures. This means that Americans are gradually coming to realize that they should not require Africans to dress like Americans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :yes:
> 
> And by that same token, it could (and should) be said that "conservative middle-class suburbanites should not require 20-year-old hipsters to dress like conservative middle-class suburbanites."
> 
> (Those blanks can be filled in a myriad of ways.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
> 
> My problem with a lot of the hipster types wear, is not that they dress differently from me (a conservative middle-class suburbanite), but that they don't dress any differently than they do any other day of the week. Many times they look like they accidentally wound up in Church and we should be happy that they have any clothes on at all.
Click to expand...



A hipster's "nice" clothes to see the President could still easily be baggy saggy jeans, t-shirt, ball cap, and some bling. They just wear the nice ones and not the one with holes.


----------



## Scott1

This is difficult because if we do not focus on biblical principles we can get diverted into subjective thoughts, tastes and opinions and divide ourselves on pretenses. On top of that, it is difficult to describe one's clothing and adornment as it constantly changes!

A few biblical principles (that may be difficult to accept) do apply:

God is generous. God is good. God created variety. God created clothing for many purposes including hiding the shame of our nakedness, protecting us from the elements, and enjoying the abundance of his provision.

1) Modesty is a broad concept biblically, but in some contexts is addressed specifically at the way women dress. I Timothy 2:9-10, I Peter 3:2-9

2) Causing others to stumble has to be considered in the whole of the Christian life I Cor 8:11,12 I Thessalonians 5:14

3) We are commanded to avoid even the appearance of evil (cf I Thess 5:22)

4) Enticing, promoting or causing sexual immorality is particularly addressed as sin in thought, word and deed. We do not operate in a vacuum, we have some responsibility to others not provoking their harm Acts 15:29 I Corinthians 6:13

There is no doubt that by God's standard our pop culture is giving itself over to immorality, disrespect and self-centeredness. Somehow, we must, by God's grace be different.


----------



## Archlute

fredtgreco said:


> Adam,
> 
> Print out a copy of it now, and send it on to _By Faith._
> 
> Sincerely,



I tried doing that already, Fred, but the only thing I received back from them by way of reply was this.


----------



## Rocketeer

Ex Nihilo said:


> The world assumes that outward appearance is important, and I'm not saying that we shouldn't dress nicely for worship. But an argument based on expectations for business or political events is not very persuasive to me. I care more for my parents than I do for a potential employer, but that isn't an argument for why I should wear a business suit every time I see them.



Evie, you are raising a legitimate point to which I would like to respond. Let's think of our Heavenly Father. We should love him, but that is not all. He is not our Father in the earthly sense of the word. No - He is the source of life itself, He is the One Who sustains our life and the One to Whom all of our energies and gifts and talents and property and time and thoughts and feelings rightly belong, He is the One Who is infinitely wise, great, intelligent, holy, loving, longsuffering, yes, He is omnipresent, omnipowerful and omniscient - for starters. Can there be some distance, no can there be some _fear_ here? Fear of the Lord? _Awe_ of His insuperable, insurmountable greatness?

I understand you care for your parents more than for your potential employer. I do, too. I would also add that one should care more for God than for one's parents, and that one should be more awed to come before His Face, than before one's employer, and that one should have more respect for His presence than one would have for a President or King or Queen - our beloved Queen Beatrix has a national approval rating of 92%; even kids dress up in tuxedo's when they wish her a happy birthday. I suggest we have more respect, awe and love for God than for any combination of earthly parents, employers or Queens.

That is for the theory. How this is translated into practice is a good question. Of course, food is more important than dressing well for church. Not arguing the notion, my good sirs and dames. But on the other hand, modesty really is the tip of the iceberg. It is the logical place to start, coupled with behaving reverently and carrying yourself as such, and followed by an effort to look as if you consider being in church one of the greatest privileges on this world (which it is), both in behavior, carriage, and dress. In other words, make an effort to be on your best, the most reverent, holy, modest and sanctifying you can make yourself to look, and make sure it is not a deception but act that way too.

A rather lengthy  of mine.

Edit:

From the tuxedo kid argument do not think I am trying to push tuxedos on everyone. I think one can look absolutely holy in an overall. Really. On the other hand, if you can afford something more fitting, why would you go in an overall?


----------



## Annalissa

My 

Regarding modesty of dress in worship services, I think there are 2 issues here...1)Sexually immodest clothes worn by Christian women/girls and 2) the kind of clothing that should be worn by all to church (i.e. ye olde "jeans vs. suits 'n' ties"/"casual vs. dressy" debate). 

As a single woman, I agree to a certain extent with the idea that we should all do our utmost to please God and not man regarding "el churchwear." I've seen young women in my church as well as others fail miserably in the modesty dept. at times. (including myself in the past...) On rare occasions it is done out of complete naiveté , however- on consecutive occasions (in my opinion) this means there is a blatant need for the older women in the church to instruct the younger, big time. 

If immodesty is a flagrant and continuing occurrence in anyone's church and they are a member, sounds like the pastor and elders may need to get involved with a gentle exhoration through their wives. Maybe some of the elders' wives can incorporate instruction into regular meetings for the women? This occurred at our church around two years ago and since the ladies of our congregation meet monthly, a sort of "seminar" was held and the topic of immodesty was included in the instruction time (it also included more domestically "fun" stuff like creative cooking, how to's for knitting, being a good hostess, etc.) I found it to be informative and even eye-opening as to the effect women's dress can have on men in the church when they're just trying to obey God and worship Him on the Lord's Day. 

It's tough in today's world to find clothes that fit well and don't show off every feature you're supposed to keep under wraps, but as King's daughters, we're called to protect our brothers in Christ...maybe we have to be more selective about what we buy and maybe we have to forego most if not, all of the trends of today...but it's a small cost to pay (if you can call it that) for ensuring more unity in the body. Think of all the women whose husbands struggle in worship because of "tartish" clothing worn (or think of your own husband...or your future guy)...makes you think a little more about buying clothes and what's currently in your wardrobe...

As for the exact type of clothing that should be worn, giving God our best, whether it's clean, cotton overalls, suit & tie or a decent dress or skirt, using our God-given common sense should be employed. If we're "rightly dividing" the Word, it shouldn't be a huge issue. I think this is where working out our own salvation with fear and trembling comes in, too. Others' opinions are sometimes simply that - others' opinions. I think it's a little too judgmental for us to set rigid standards of dress for worship, but we can obviously see where not saying anything can leave a huge margin for error. 

I could go on, but I think I just jumped on a  Haha.


----------



## Augusta

I can't respond to all of the comments because there are too many.  First we would not have a modesty problem if we didn't have such a casual attitude when we approach God. 

I think that at the root of all of this is egalitarianism that has been creeping into American culture over the last century. Authority structures are breaking down left and right. The story, which I do recall, that Kim mentioned about the girls meeting the President in casual attire is a prime example. Thank the Lord there was still a hue and cry and that shows that it's not all gone yet. As Rocketeer said, God is our Father but not in the same sense as an earthly Father and we are to fear him. We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling before Him. 

There is a principle of honor to your betters that stretches back for millennia in all civilized cultures, honor to the high officials and Kings and Queens. Each culture had what was nice dress and what was work/casual dress. It varied but the lines were there. Even the people of the NT era had nice and casual. Do you think they didn't?? What about weddings and special occasions? You know they did. 

A word about the "it's too expensive" angle. God knows you he knows your situation, he knows what is the best you have. In old pictures of people going to Church or a wedding etc. you see them in their best coat, shirt, and pants. Many are careworn and the pants are high water because it is all they have but it is the best they have, and it is the attitude that causes them to patch it and press it and wear it because it is their best, that is God honoring. They wore it every time because it was THE (singular) nice outfit. Now, we think we have to be in the latest threads and many of them and if they are casual, well, thats what I am wearing because I am more concerned with looking right than with honoring God. 

It is a heart issue AND and appearance issue. We are all witnesses for God. What we do is watched and observed. How we approach God is watched and observed. I don't think it's an accident that there is a casual attitude about God and his holiness that has infected modern day America. We don't approach him as we should with honor and fear and trembling. 

There is a scriptural arguement to this. God is holy and to those who come near him he will be regarded as holy. Also the Malachi passage that Rtaron mentioned.


----------



## he beholds

Augusta said:


> I can't respond to all of the comments because there are too many.  First we would not have a modesty problem if we didn't have such a casual attitude when we approach God.
> 
> I think that at the root of all of this is egalitarianism that has been creeping into American culture over the last century. Authority structures are breaking down left and right. The story, which I do recall, that Kim mentioned about the girls meeting the President in casual attire is a prime example. Thank the Lord there was still a hue and cry and that shows that it's not all gone yet. As Rocketeer said, God is our Father but not in the same sense as an earthly Father and we are to fear him. We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling before Him.
> 
> As long as it is just egalitarianism, and not sin, that is influencing what one wears, so be it.
> 
> There is a principle of honor to your betters that stretches back for millennia in all civilized cultures, honor to the high officials and Kings and Queens. Each culture had what was nice dress and what was work/casual dress. It varied but the lines were there. Even the people of the NT era had nice and casual. Do you think they didn't?? What about weddings and special occasions? You know they did.
> 
> I don't KNOW they did.
> 
> A word about the "it's too expensive" angle. God knows you he knows your situation, he knows what is the best you have. In old pictures of people going to Church or a wedding etc. you see them in their best coat, shirt, and pants. Many are careworn and the pants are high water because it is all they have but it is the best they have, and it is the attitude that causes them to patch it and press it and wear it because it is their best, that is God honoring. They wore it every time because it was THE (singular) nice outfit. Now, we think we have to be in the latest threads and many of them and if they are casual, well, thats what I am wearing because I am more concerned with looking right than with honoring God.
> 
> I think on the converse, there are people who are more concerned than looking right than honoring God.
> Beyond modesty, I cannot accept that there is a set standard for all believers! I mean, in my opinion, people who dress in very plain dresses aren't very dressed up at all. (Think Mennonites) However, could I ever accuse them of disrespecting God because they don't care to look fancy? NO!
> 
> It is a heart issue AND and appearance issue. We are all witnesses for God. What we do is watched and observed. How we approach God is watched and observed. I don't think it's an accident that there is a casual attitude about God and his holiness that has infected modern day America. We don't approach him as we should with honor and fear and trembling.
> 
> Yes, what we do is watched and observed. Hopefully we will not hold our brothers and sisters (and those unbelieving observers) to a standard that is unbiblical and extrabiblical.
> 
> There is a scriptural arguement to this. God is holy and to those who come near him he will be regarded as holy. Also the Malachi passage that Rtaron mentioned.



I regard God as holy, even in my pajamas.


----------



## Ex Nihilo

Rocketeer said:


> I understand you care for your parents more than for your potential employer. I do, too. I would also add that one should care more for God than for one's parents, and that one should be more awed to come before His Face, than before one's employer, and that one should have more respect for His presence than one would have for a President or King or Queen - our beloved Queen Beatrix has a national approval rating of 92%; even kids dress up in tuxedo's when they wish her a happy birthday. *I suggest we have more respect, awe and love for God than for any combination of earthly parents, employers or Queens.*



I totally agree; I'm just not sure where God has commanded us to show this respect and awe through our clothing. _But_ I would agree that more often than not, a lack of care in dressing for worship _does_ indicate a lack of respect and awe, and that is wrong. However, I think it's telling that the NT warns women at least against relying on fine clothes for their adornment. Meanwhile, the supposed problem of not dressing up for worship is never mentioned. The scriptural silence on clothing as a sign of respect to God suggests to me (and I may be very wrong) that the main concern with clothing is that it not distract other worshipers, either because it is too fine, too dirty, too immodest, or otherwise inappropriate when compared to the typical dress within that group. I am not too knowledgeable of the RPW, but I do think it is wrong to try to use clothing as a means of worship. If we take the idea that our worship attire (in itself, and not the heart it reflects) is meant to show respect to God, I fear we are moving in that direction.

With that said, I think in our culture something like business casual or a simple dress (for women) or a button-up shirt and khakis (for men) would be appropriate attire for worship. I'm not arguing for sloppy or gratuitously casual clothing. Refusal to put effort into one's appearance very probably reflects a heart that isn't directed toward God -- so I do not think we really disagree!

Edit: I can see another argument in favor of the "clothing matters" idea -- the headcoverings requirement. I'm not sure how far we can take that, but I thought of that, and wanted to mention that I will be thinking more about the issue.


----------



## raekwon

*sigh*


----------



## Augusta




----------



## LadyFlynt

Headcovering IS mentioned...apples and oranges, Evie. Whole different discussion.

I will say that the idea of "dressing up" or even "dress in your best" is a cultural one. Unfortunately, the cultural can leave out portions of society.

Tracy, what do you say to the one who owns no "best" (not even highwaters)? They own what they own. And yes, I have known people like that.


----------



## Ex Nihilo

LadyFlynt said:


> *Headcovering IS mentioned...apples and oranges, Evie. Whole different discussion.*
> 
> I will say that the idea of "dressing up" or even "dress in your best" is a cultural one. Unfortunately, the cultural can leave out portions of society.
> 
> Tracy, what do you say to the one who owns no "best" (not even highwaters)? They own what they own. And yes, I have known people like that.



Well, I agree.  I guess the only connecting point is that modesty matters. I just didn't think it would be right to say that it doesn't matter at all what you wear!

Edit: Actually, I think this was my line of thought. With the headcovering requirement, is there an underlying principle (without getting into the cultural application of the coverings themselves) that we should dress in a manner that shows respect to other people in the congregation, particularly those to whom honor is due?

Edit 2: But we don't need to analogize to headcoverings, since the principle of showing honor to others is clear elsewhere in scripture. It is easier to infer a preference for respectful dress from this principle than to derive it from directions about headcoverings, which have a very specific purpose. 

So, I'm finished arguing with myself for the moment.


----------



## Augusta

LadyFlynt said:


> Headcovering IS mentioned...apples and oranges, Evie. Whole different discussion.
> 
> I will say that the idea of "dressing up" or even "dress in your best" is a cultural one. Unfortunately, the cultural can leave out portions of society.
> 
> Tracy, what do you say to the one who owns no "best" (not even highwaters)? They own what they own. And yes, I have known people like that.



I would say that they pick out what is the nicest out of all of it and that God would be honored by that. I also believe that once we have a heart change about something of this sort that he would make a way. You just might have some clothes dropped in your lap. We sometimes get garbage bags full of clothes from family or even friends of friends that have all sorts of goodies in them. Some people will not take hand me downs, I am not one of those people. 

We also have at our church what we call a share n' swap. Everyone brings their used items of clothing and household goods. It is like a garage sale but no money changes hands you are getting rid of what you don't want/need and everyone comes and takes what they do want/need. I have gotten some really nice clothing and household goods that way. I would encourage all churches to organize these types of events because it is very helpful for all families. It's a great way to share you things and support one another. I have seen many of Nathan's dressy clothes show up on Sunday not on him.


----------



## LadyFlynt

I do agree with the showing of honour in such a way. What bothers me is the presumption that can be made upon a person when they show up wearing something that isn't as nice as one thinks should be worn, kwim? I have known people that are a weaker brother/sister and really want to attend services, but are too embarrassed to do so, because this is how they've been taught as well.


----------



## Ex Nihilo

LadyFlynt said:


> I do agree with the showing of honour in such a way. *What bothers me is the presumption that can be made upon a person when they show up wearing something that isn't as nice as one thinks should be worn, kwim? * I have known people that are a weaker brother/sister and really want to attend services, but are too embarrassed to do so, because this is how they've been taught as well.



Yes, that is exactly what bothers me, too.


----------



## kvanlaan

> I tried doing that already, Fred, but the only thing I received back from them by way of reply was this.



Now that's a scary bit of nonsense. 



> What bothers me is the presumption that can be made upon a person when they show up wearing something that isn't as nice as one thinks should be worn, kwim?



Bugs me too - a nasty bit of proto-legalism. But I've not seen this as an issue - and it was me on the "inappropriate dress" end of things. When we first got back to Canada in September, we were visiting an FRC which some here may consider quite pietistic/legalistic - even many 8 year old boys wear suits and ties. And I had none of that; our container wouldn't show up for another six weeks. I actually apologized to a hat-and-dress-clad woman and her suit-bedecked husband. They brushed it off and told me they were just glad to have me there - and they meant it. My likewise casually dressed son was, I am sure, the first black man to sit among them - but we were welcomed. As far as the clothes go, I find you rise to the demands put upon you or sink to the lowest denominator. (I don't mean that to sound harsh, but when a young woman dresses like a tart and there is no visit to her father by an elder, the church has just condoned that behaviour. And asked for more of the same.)

I (unconsciously to some extent) dress rather casually for worship at my father's church but feel quite underdressed (and this not because of 'looks' from others or any such thing) at the other. I think much of it has to do with how the worship services approach God; it then merely extends to dress and behaviour. One is EP, one is Reformed 'lite'. At one, suit and tie is the rule, at the other, tight and trendy clothes are the rule among the younger set. One is perhaps too conservative, while the other is too much 'well, God doesn't care, He just wants me here'. 

I'd rather err on the side of caution, so long as it does not become an idol.


----------



## LadyFlynt

Though there is still a difference between casual and tart. I've dress in a denim skirt (long) and polo top and have considered that casual, but still different than a girl with low rise jeans, high waist/low cut top, and undies showing as she takes her seat.


----------



## fredtgreco

Archlute said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> 
> Adam,
> 
> Print out a copy of it now, and send it on to _By Faith._
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tried doing that already, Fred, but the only thing I received back from them by way of reply was this.
Click to expand...


Adam,

Are you sure that's what it was? After all, _By Faith_ has an "art gallery in a church" article in every issue. It could have been any one of a dozen or so such articles.


----------



## he beholds

LadyFlynt said:


> Though there is still a difference between casual and tart. I've dress in a denim skirt (long) and polo top and have considered that casual, but still different than a girl with low rise jeans, high waist/low cut top, and undies showing as she takes her seat.



I totally agree! 

No one here is arguing that people should dress immodestly. I do not think that if people do not wear ties and suits, they must be of Reformed-lite church. I really, really think dress is based on the style of the people, not their view of God or worship. Of course, an elderly congregation will be more dressed up. Even a non-Christian old lady will dress up for church.


----------



## Rocketeer

Ex Nihilo said:


> If we take the idea that our worship attire (in itself, and not the heart it reflects) is meant to show respect to God, I fear we are moving in that direction.



Right. Let me rephrase. It is a bit like good works. The good works themselves do not justify or sanctify you in any way. On the other hand, if there is totally no distinction between you and a worldling, James tells you (2:17, ESV): "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."

The same goes for reverence in church. Really, clothes are not all that important. I'd much rather see someone dressed like a member of a motor gang and attentive, than someone in a suit babbling throughout the service. _However,_ how can you say you consider it to be a great privilege to come to what is a house of God, if you look like you just worked your garden?

(P.S.: you Americans and we Western Europeans, if there is anyone in your/our churches who cannot afford a good set of clothes and nobody helps, shame on you/us for calling yourselves/ourselves Christians, and failing to share of your/our goods with your/our brothers and sisters.)


----------



## LadyFlynt

Rocketeer said:


> (P.S.: you Americans and we Western Europeans, if there is anyone in your/our churches who cannot afford a good set of clothes and nobody helps, shame on you/us for calling yourselves/ourselves Christians, and failing to share of your/our goods with your/our brothers and sisters.)



Even this must be done with trepidation, for the possibilities of offending someone (though we must also teach that one should swallow their pride when another is trying to bless them). It's a balancing act.


----------



## Augusta

LadyFlynt said:


> I do agree with the showing of honour in such a way. What bothers me is the presumption that can be made upon a person when they show up wearing something that isn't as nice as one thinks should be worn, kwim? I have known people that are a weaker brother/sister and really want to attend services, but are too embarrassed to do so, because this is how they've been taught as well.




I agree with you and God has made an unambiguous command that they not do that. 

James 2
1 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 

2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in *goodly apparel*, and there come in also a poor man in *vile raiment*; 

3 And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 

4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?


----------



## raekwon

Rocketeer said:


> Ex Nihilo said:
> 
> 
> 
> If we take the idea that our worship attire (in itself, and not the heart it reflects) is meant to show respect to God, I fear we are moving in that direction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right. Let me rephrase. It is a bit like good works. The good works themselves do not justify or sanctify you in any way. On the other hand, if there is totally no distinction between you and a worldling, James tells you (2:17, ESV): "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."
> 
> The same goes for reverence in church. Really, clothes are not all that important. I'd much rather see someone dressed like a member of a motor gang and attentive, than someone in a suit babbling throughout the service. _However,_ how can you say you consider it to be a great privilege to come to what is a house of God, if you look like you just worked your garden?
> 
> (P.S.: you Americans and we Western Europeans, if there is anyone in your/our churches who cannot afford a good set of clothes and nobody helps, shame on you/us for calling yourselves/ourselves Christians, and failing to share of your/our goods with your/our brothers and sisters.)
Click to expand...


False dichotomy. "Worldlings" wear "nice" clothes to church (and other places), too.

Also, I've never seen anyone come to church looking like they'd just worked their garden. I HAVE, however, seen someone come to church looking like he was in the middle of his evening run (mainly because he was in the middle of his evening run).


----------



## larryjf

Rocketeer said:


> (P.S.: you Americans and we Western Europeans, if there is anyone in your/our churches who cannot afford a good set of clothes and nobody helps, shame on you/us for calling yourselves/ourselves Christians, and failing to share of your/our goods with your/our brothers and sisters.)



First, i hope it's not only Western Europeans and Americans who are helping to clothe those who need clothing.
Second, when we help folks out with clothing we are much more concerned with getting them something that they can wear more than once/week. In the winter we are quite concerned that it be warm clothing that they get...style is rarely ever an issue.


----------



## Rocketeer

raekwon said:


> False dichotomy. "Worldlings" wear "nice" clothes to church (and other places), too.



False analysis. I did not use the word 'nice' in either of my posts. Clothes for church need not be nice, as I tried to make clear in my first post. I'll state that they need to be modest, decent and sober, as part of the bigger picture/attitude.



raekwon said:


> Also, I've never seen anyone come to church looking like they'd just worked their garden.



There was a fashion here a few years ago to wear clothes which where first torn up and then patched; I was referring to that.



raekwon said:


> I HAVE, however, seen someone come to church looking like he was in the middle of his evening run (mainly because he was in the middle of his evening run).



Fine, evening run it is. Nor would I like to see ball dress in church, for that matter.



larryjf said:


> Rocketeer said:
> 
> 
> 
> (P.S.: you Americans and we Western Europeans, if there is anyone in your/our churches who cannot afford a good set of clothes and nobody helps, shame on you/us for calling yourselves/ourselves Christians, and failing to share of your/our goods with your/our brothers and sisters.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First, I hope it's not only Western Europeans and Americans who are helping to clothe those who need clothing.
> Second, when we help folks out with clothing we are much more concerned with getting them something that they can wear more than once/week. In the winter we are quite concerned that it be warm clothing that they get...style is rarely ever an issue.
Click to expand...


Precisely. If you'll reread what you quoted me saying, you'll see that I did not see 'stylish' clothes; I said good clothes. With that I mean 'good' clothes: clothes that the recipient can wear.

As to your first, yes, but I am myself a Western European from a rather rich country, and as I have never experienced nor directly witnessed poverty, I thought not fit to comment on the behavior of those in situations I cannot relate to.


----------



## larryjf

Rocketeer said:


> As to your first, yes, but I am myself a Western European from a rather rich country, and as I have never experienced nor directly witnessed poverty, I thought not fit to comment on the behavior of those in situations I cannot relate to.



I am also from a well-off country (financially), but i feel very fit to comment on behavior in other situations if those behaviors are biblical in nature (Mat 25)


----------



## Rocketeer

larryjf said:


> I am also from a well-off country (financially), but i feel very fit to comment on behavior in other situations if those behaviors are biblical in nature (Mat 25)



Yes, I know. The difference is that America is very heavily divided in terms of rich and poor. Over here, ever pervasive socialism in the form of state welfare programs and income leveling have reduced the number of people that cannot pay for a good set of clothes to such low levels, that the number of Dutch beggars I recall having seen is four. The number of families I know that are in such trouble as to need my or someone else's help is zero.

It's easy to preach what you cannot practice, and that is why I, personally, am slow to condemn the (overwhelmingly absent) non-Westerners.


----------



## larryjf

Rocketeer said:


> larryjf said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am also from a well-off country (financially), but i feel very fit to comment on behavior in other situations if those behaviors are biblical in nature (Mat 25)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I know. The difference is that America is very heavily divided in terms of rich and poor. Over here, ever pervasive socialism in the form of state welfare programs and income leveling have reduced the number of people that cannot pay for a good set of clothes to such low levels, that the number of Dutch beggars I recall having seen is four. The number of families I know that are in such trouble as to need my or someone else's help is zero.
> 
> It's easy to preach what you cannot practice, and that is why I, personally, am slow to condemn the (overwhelmingly absent) non-Westerners.
Click to expand...


If we only preach what we are able to practice we would most likely have to stay away from preaching a good portion of the Bible...scary thought.


----------



## Rocketeer

larryjf said:


> If we only preach what we are able to practice we would most likely have to stay away from preaching a good portion of the Bible...scary thought.



1. I have not discerned anyone on the board specifically lacking in this aspect.
2. I only said that to prevent the 'they cannot pay for good clothes comeback'.
3. I have no experience on the subject,
4. And therefore, I thought fit not to lecture on it.
5. This is just like not starting a rant against homosexuals, for the same reasons.
6. However, when directly confronted with such behavior, I would have to do something or sin myself, and
7. This is my last reply to this -ness; any further comments of yours will carry your point, whatever it may be.


----------



## jogri17

I personally wear a suit shirt with kakkys or jeans, a belt, dress shoes, and sometimes a tie or not. I dress nicer but I do not think a suit is necessary. Also depending on where you live dressing up is just impratical. IF you live in.... oh lets say Québec City where you an ungodly amount of snow you will dress warm at all costs even if u look bad. Going to church in -32 degrees weather makes you think God would prefer u not have frost bite and physically ok than wear formal clothes. Also what is formal changes from culture to culture. Also what about people who wear suits and such for work? I would think not wearing it would be the best way for them to keep the sabbath. Those are my thoughts.


----------



## Pilgrim's Progeny

Basically, don't wear tight jeans, that's a no-brainer. Wear that which is becoming of a child of God, that which will change as you move from glory to glory.


----------



## No Longer A Libertine

Tight jeans are bad for a man's sperm count as well as they hug his personal bits too close to his body heat.


----------



## Dan "a" man

LawrenceU said:


> If you are a man just make sure you wear pants.
> YouTube - Jesus wore pants, not a dress!!! Baptist preaching Bible



This is frankly the scary teaching that is getting all of us labeled as crazy by those we are trying to reach.

Modesty is key, but this is insanity. How can he say that Christ wore pants in the sense that we do? That is ridiculous. This man is ridiculous.


----------



## Pilgrim's Progeny

No Longer A Libertine said:


> Tight jeans are bad for a man's sperm count as well as they hug his personal bits too close to his body heat.


 
We spent 1 1/2 years unable to concieve children, then I went to boxers and loose jeans, now we have four children, case closed.


----------



## satz

Pilgrim's Progeny said:


> which will change as you move from glory to glory.



Paul, 

What do you mean by this?

-----Added 1/20/2009 at 02:45:12 EST-----



Pilgrim's Progeny said:


> We spent 1 1/2 years unable to concieve children, then I went to boxers and loose jeans, now we have four children, case closed.


----------



## Pilgrim's Progeny

satz said:


> Pilgrim's Progeny said:
> 
> 
> 
> which will change as you move from glory to glory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul,
> 
> What do you mean by this?
> 
> -----Added 1/20/2009 at 02:45:12 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> Pilgrim's Progeny said:
> 
> 
> 
> We spent 1 1/2 years unable to concieve children, then I went to boxers and loose jeans, now we have four children, case closed.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

 
The latter was just a roo-hah to Libertine's comment.

As to the former, I believe that modesty takes on an ever-changing form as we grow from glory to glory. Example, two years ago my wife wore tight pants, her pants were limited as to what she could fit herself into, tight or not. Then, she moved to skirts, she believed that no man, but me, should be allowed to see the contour of her legs, save medical personnel. Then this moved to her hair, she believed that no man should see the beauty of her hair but me. It also became about worship as well, in the assembly of the people of God there should be no distraction. It was not for men to see the contour of her thighs or buttocks, or the glory of her hair, they must needs be confronted with the glory of God, albeit that her figure is the glory of God reserved for her husband. I think you get the point.


----------



## satz

Thanks.


----------



## Timothy William

Seb said:


> I'm wondering... if left to their own desires, what would a typical 20-year-old hipster wear to do something important like... let's say - meet the president. My guess is that they would want to dress much nicer than they do at any other time.
> 
> My problem with a lot of the hipster types wear, is not that they dress differently from me (a conservative middle-class suburbanite), but that they don't dress any differently than they do any other day of the week. Many times they look like they accidentally wound up in Church and we should be happy that they have any clothes on at all.



As a conservative middle class suburbanite, how I dress for church is exactly the same as I dress any other day of the week. I wear leather shoes, a shirt and jacket (though not a tie) to go shopping. Should I wear black tie (or even white tie?) to church each week because otherwise I will be wearing the same thing that that I wear the other 6 days? If not, why should I expect the 20-year-old-hipster to wear a suit and tie?

When I was 10 I had the honour of meeting Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, along with several others from my school. Some of us even got to speak to her (not me though). We wore our normal school uniform, which, this being a government primary school, was basically long sleeved casual clothes, no collar, jacket or tie. Her Majesty didn't seem to mind. Oddly enough, I would have been far more formally dressed had I worn the school uniform of the Anglican school I attended from age 5-7, which included a collar and tie, blazar and a cap.

Seeing children in overly conservative grown up clothing actually worries me sometimes - is it so that the children show respect, or is it to try to make the children look like adults? There's nothing wrong with children dressing as children, or 19 year olds dressing like 19 year olds, and we shouldn't automatically equate showing respect in church with dressing like an upper middle class 45 year old worldling. I've even heard parents say "other people's kids can wear jeans to church, but no child of mine is going dressed like that" (to a well dressed 12 year old in good jeans and a polo shirt). Are you dressing your kids up to show respect to God, or to show off to the other parents that you are a Good Parent who has nice, well dressed children?


----------



## Joseph Ringling

This thread really strikes a nerve with me and I'll tell you why. I grew up gowing to a charismatic/pentecostal church in the inner city. Lot's of poor folks. We had a homeless ministry where they would come and we would feed them and minister to them every Sunday. The pastor did wear a suit and tie but mostly everyone wore casual clothes and yes the women were modest. 

Years later I became convinced of the truth of Calvinism and became a member of a Reformed Baptist church. Again, my pastor wore a suit and tie but almost all of the congregation dressed casual and comfortable and of course modest. I would say that they were the most genuine loving people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing and worshipping with.

A few years ago I had to move away for my work. I began to look for another church, a Reformed church. I found that my little church in Ohio was a one of a kind. The church I began to attend "looked" perfect. All the men wore suits, the women dressed modest and clean and all the children sat up straight and rarely ever made a peep, even the littlest ones that were old enought to sit in with the adults. (Ages 4 and up I believe) 

I continued to attend this church because it was the only reformed baptist church in the area. I began to notice that despite this perfect apperance most of the people were unfriendly and the church was very clique-ish. In retrospect it seemed, at least to me as a new attender that if you didn't fit in with there dress and the way they acted then you were not going to fit in. 

So to make a long story short, was God more glorified in churches A and B, or was He more so in Church C because the dress was impeccable, as were the manners, and the Hymns were beautiful?

What I guess I'm saying is, does it really matter how we look if we don't have love for one another?


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

I suppose that is another risk. Dressing up can put people off when otherwise they would fit in perfectly. I am referring to guests that are less well off or simply from a different social background.

During the week I will dress sloppy as a student but then spend the other half of my time in a suit at cocktail parties and networking events with CEOs and business leaders, or at meetings with government or community leaders. When I go to church on Sundays I actually dress neither like a student, nor like a stuck-up rich kid. I dress tidy, but not to tidy. Maybe it is where I come from but dressing up is seen as arrogance. It can really put people off.


----------



## moral necessity

Just a general comment regarding our dress before God:

It seems as if our natural tendency is to honor God in the way that we show honor to others. Better dress for higher up people. And so, for God, we're at a loss to find any attire that is properly suitable for him. Our goal should be to honor him in all of our ways. But, with our clothes, even our best is never enough for the Father. God is honored only with us being clothed with Christ before him. Finding honor in anything else when in his presence necessarily removes a fraction of that honor that is due to Christ, and therefore, in my opinion, dishonors Christ in that degree.

Personally, I tend to wear nice clothes to church, those that fall in line with the community that I live in, so as not to offend anyone who might stumble thereby, and mainly because I enjoy them. But, in my mind, as I receive from the Lord on Sundays, the clothes of Christ are all I try to worry about as being seen as honorable enough for him.

Blessings!


----------



## Reformed Baptist

I think its a modesty issue that is determined by the culture.


----------



## Igor

Tim said:


> I am sometimes the only one in the congregation with a tie (pastors included).
> 1. A shirt and tie for the men (cheap to acquire), a jacket if you can afford it;


Well, I agree that people should dress modestly for worship services, but...why a shirt and a tie? What does it have to do with modesty and dignity? I see people in shirts and ties every day in my office (I work for a big secular company), and I strongly object, unsuccessfully, though, against wearing shirts and ties by pastors and preachers - why should they look like sales managers or even like a governmental officials, including our yesterday's persecutors? (I myself wear a collar clergy shirt every Sunday, my pastor does it only when we have the Lord's Supper or the Easter service - I remind him every time to dress properly for the occasion, as a minister of the Gospel, not as an office manager). "Be not conformed to this world" (Ro.12:2).
Besides, it reminds me of "Jehova's witnesses" or Mormons - they too wear shirts and ties. And in our culture it's bad for witnessing: people think of us as just another "sect", not a traditional Christian denomination.
A few months ago we had our church and another one had a worship service with a Communion together. Off all the ministers I was the only one without a tie - and it was sad...


----------



## okinawabones

If we're in church, we're there to corporately worship the King, to be taught the Word, to disciple and be discipled, and to fellowship with and edify the body of Christ. I can't speak for women, but I'm thinking that tie or no tie, a modestly dressed man presents no stumbling block for most women. But as a man, I can say with absolute certainty that women who dress immodestly (clothes that are tight, loose, sheer, low-cut, etc.) make it difficult for my family to do these things. In various ways and for various reasons, we're being presented with images that steal our attention from the One who should be our primary focus:

-If I see it, I consider it to be a dangerous lure- and I get mad because (a) she wore it, (b) her husband or daddy let her wear it, and (c) I've now seen it. Not much worship going on here...
-If my wife sees it, she sees it as an assault on our marriage by people she calls "sister". Not exactly edifying...
-If my 16-year old son sees it, he's now being bombarded with sexual images in our sanctuary that he doesn't even get on our TV. Ditto... 
-If my 12-year old daughter sees it, my efforts to set a standard of modesty in her are being thwarted by the very people in the church who should be reinforcing it through their own actions. Not what I call discipleship...

If I have problems with the way someone is dressed, I have a scriptural template for addressing the issue (Matt 18:15-17). If it's with a woman, I ask my wife to address it. If it's with a man, I address it. But it's always done in a loving manner, making sure to remember that I'm not perfect either- and that Christ paid the same price for both of us. 

Does that mean that I'm to address it and then overlook it if they choose not to correct it? I don't think so- especially when they've been told that it's a stumbling block for some of us (Rom 8:9). Their unwillingness to change their method of covering their body becomes a blatant disrespect for my needs and those of my family. It makes their participation in the corporate worship all about them- and not about Christ and His church. At this point, we have to lovingly expect our church leadership to address the issue of immodesty just as a shepherd would address the issue of a circling lion. At the end of the day, the threat to the safety of the flock has to be removed. Melodramatic? Maybe, but the devil does roam like a lion looking to destroy us. You think he's not roaming around in our church buildings, trying to lure us away from the Light?

It's funny, but this is an issue that we're dealing with in our church right now. I'll let you know how it turns out.


----------



## lynnie

I read an article a few years back by two American missionary women in a muslim nation. They said the men pinch and grope and fondle and grab at burkas in the marketplace all the time. They don't even know what is underneath-it might be luscious 16 year old babe or an 85 year old bag of bones. They lust anyway. 

If burkas don't take care of the problem, probably nothing outward ever will. My daughter and I always dress modestly but there have been certain men at times where you can feel the uncleanness emanating from them. Dress makes no difference. Even a normal friendly smile can be misinterpreted. Creepy.


Frankly I think a lot of guys growing up in this culture have an understandable serious lust problem. But as a woman I get real tired of us being blamed for it. Too much like the Muslim mindset. Men need to take full responsibility for their lust. We know a guy who spent many years counseling at a ministry for ex gays and sex/p0rn addicts and people can and do get free. It takes a lot of work and humility and accountability, but guys can learn to live and work in a sexually provocative secular culture and rise above it. 

Temptation will always be there, even with baggy burkas.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih

lynnie said:


> Temptation will always be there, even with baggy burkas.


 I personally don't see the attraction.

I remember waiting in line one day in the market, and I thought I was at the back of the line (everything is chaos), but actually I was at the front. All the women in burkas were facing me but because they didn't even have gauze for their eyes I didn't know which way they were facing!


----------



## he beholds

Did the puritans believe that one had to wear their "Sunday Bests" to church? I know how they dressed generally, and I would _guess_ that they wanted to be as plain as possible on Sunday, especially. But maybe they did believe that they were to dress up, to be in the presence of the King??? 

Of course I know they would want to be modest. I'm asking, _all things equal modesty-wise_ (jeans verses dockers, for instance), did they esteem one type of dress as more appropriate than another for church? Or did they wear their normal, day-to-day attire? 
I do realize that I may need to facebook Virginia Huguenot for this one!

I do not think the argument here is "modest versus immodest," though based on what a lot of people are saying, this may need to be a discussion in many of our churches. 
I think the argument here is dressed up versus casual: Are both equally appropriate for worship?


----------



## moral necessity

Abd_Yesua_alMasih said:


> I remember waiting in line one day in the market, and I thought I was at the back of the line (everything is chaos), but actually I was at the front. All the women in burkas were facing me but because they didn't even have gauze for their eyes I didn't know which way they were facing!



That was histerical! I laughed out loud on that one!

Blessings, brother!


----------



## Scott1

I would not consider this determinative, but it seems from information like this Puritans' positive legacy for America

the Puritans enjoyed clothing as a gift from an abundant God, many colors and fashions but paying real attention to modesty as a biblical virtue. It seems they did enjoy different levels of attire, including formal wear for the Sabbath. It doesn't appear to be exactly the same wear for everyone, but it was governed by formality and modesty on the Lord's Day and on other suitable occasions.

It would be hard to equate what the Puritan's wore with an exact match of suit coat and tie or even a woman wearing a long single colored dress today.

And in the final analysis, while the Puritan' reflected many godly attributes, we ought not make an absolute rule of their manner of dress.


----------



## Rich Koster

My mind hurts after reading this thread. Clean, modest and culturally non-offensive. Beyond this we start to instituite manlaw.


----------



## JoeRe4mer

raekwon said:


> Tim said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am right with you on this one, Anne (I checked your profile to see your name - welcome to the Puritan Board). It seems that people don't care anymore about dressing properly. I am sometimes the only one in the congregation with a tie (pastors included).
> 
> A few things that I think should be done:
> 
> 1. A shirt and tie for the men (cheap to acquire), a jacket if you can afford it;
> 2. Men should never wear sandals;
> 3. Women should be careful about the length of their skirt/dress;
> 4. No cleavage;
> 5. Women should be careful about the tightness (or looseness) of their clothing as well as clothing that is "semi-see-through";
> 6. Children should be held to the same standard as adults (within reason for the youngest, of course)
> 
> This is not legalism; it is about respect and honor for the Lord's House and the importance of the meeting. I have noticed over the years that one litmus test is how the teenage girls of the congregation dress. That will tell you a lot about the importance the church places on modesty and respectful clothing (or, to be fair, the struggle the church has where people have not been brought up to show honor in their manner of dress).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Numbers 3-5 generally seem to be about modesty in dress, which is important (and applies equally to men as it does to women), but 1 and 2 are pretty arbitrary and dependent on the culture of the church. I have a hard time buying that there's something inherently more "respectful" or "honorable" about a tie and jacket, and binding someone's conscience to _specific items_ of dress is wrong.
Click to expand...


I have to agree with Ray's points on this one. I think that once modesty is established the rest is fairly personal. I don't generally wear a tie to church and those who do have never voiced any sort of disapproval. In the first century Church they were do doubt wearing something very different than what we wear today, therefor the suit and tie should not be held as some kind of sacred dress.


----------



## LadyFlynt

okinawabones said:


> -If I see it, I consider it to be a dangerous lure- and I get mad because (a) she wore it, (b) her husband or daddy let her wear it, and (c) I've now seen it. Not much worship going on here...
> -If my wife sees it, she sees it as an assault on our marriage by people she calls "sister". Not exactly edifying...
> -If my 16-year old son sees it, he's now being bombarded with sexual images in our sanctuary that he doesn't even get on our TV. Ditto...
> -If my 12-year old daughter sees it, my efforts to set a standard of modesty in her are being thwarted by the very people in the church who should be reinforcing it through their own actions. Not what I call discipleship...






Lynnie, no one is blaming the woman. Both parties are responsible to an extent. When speaking of Muslim men in Muslim countries, you are speaking of the unregenerate. When speaking of in the church, hopefully the majority are regenerate or at least should know better. Either way, the woman should also do her part and not go flashing others areas of herself that should be kept for her husband/future husband/herself.


----------

