Dress codes and Church Discipline

Status
Not open for further replies.
Last summer, on one particularly hot and humid Sunday morning, I remember that there were eight (in a church with maybe 100 people) women with one or two inches of cleavage showing. I remember seeing the first one, then the next, then the next, and then my scientific analytical mind took over and I started counting just out of curiosity. It does not surprise me with the young things who all dress that way anymore, but some of these were 40, 50 or 60.

We had a few this summer that left me staggered. I gotta be careful what I say as this is a public board but one was a leaders wife and her sundress had three inches at least of cleavage hanging out. I was aghast inside and polite outside. We had a few others I won't go into but high heels is nothing.

Let me add that I don't think I am prudish. I wear shorts and tank tops in the summer and normal bathing suits ( one piece) at the beach. I'm not walking around in a long dress all day. But I do think the upper anatomy is meant only for the eyes of a husband. Cleavage should be covered, and not by something that looks like it was spray painted on.

I also think women know exactly what they are doing. Maybe not a 13 year old, but grownups do. There is no doubt in my mind that on some level they are aware of what is motivating them.

I wondered many times if I should say something but always got the sense that the dress is only a symptom of a deeper problem. You wonder why they need male attention so bad; as I recall most of them are married to real nice guys. I think it is lack of intimacy with God ultimately - no man can fill the inner void.

I have to admit that if I walked around like that my husband might not rebuke me, although he'd be honest if I asked him straight out. But he'd probably prefer to avoid conflict over the subject. I suspect a lot of nice guys would rather not say anything and avoid conflict. Is it really up to elders to set the women straight, or is it up to them to maybe ask the husbands to say something to the wife who has it all hanging out? Don't the husbands even care, that guys are going to look at his wife and start thinking something that isn't exactly the latest doctrinal debate?

I was at a church once years ago with about 450 people and one week during the short "free time" before the sermon ( read a scripture, pray, give a "testimony") a woman who worked with teens walked up to the mike and told the women in that it was entirely inappropriate to have your cleavage hanging out, it was immodest and sinful. She laid it out graphically for at least 2-3 minutes. She was so earnest and it came out so holy that it was beautiful, not condemning or self righteous. Perhaps this is a subject where older women need to teach the younger, not the elders. I don't know.

Its getting worse every year, that's for sure.

Amen. I know of one pastor who approached a young girl and told her she was dressed too immodestly and please don't return next week to church like that. He was very nice about it. He didn't tell her she was a gutter slut and was going to hell. Of course it would have been better had a woman admonished her, but it was what it was. And that congregation ran that pastor out of the church for encouraging that girl to obey the seventh commandment. That's absolutely wicked.
 
Amen. I know of one pastor who approached a young girl and told her she was dressed too immodestly and please don't return next week to church like that. He was very nice about it. He didn't tell her she was a gutter slut and was going to hell. Of course it would have been better had a woman admonished her, but it was what it was. And that congregation ran that pastor out of the church for encouraging that girl to obey the seventh commandment. That's absolutely wicked.

Not to get off topic, but for his own protection, he should have at least had a woman present when he did this. I'm sure this wasn't his intent at all, but approaching a young girl to talk about the modestly of her clothing this could be interpreted as sexual harassment. Pastors and elders must be so careful in situations like this - especially if they are approaching a young girl as opposed to an older woman.
 
I think when you compare how we women dress for church and how unsaved women dress they would be sufficiently impressed. I really don't think us wearing high heels and jewelry is going to leave them with the impression that we are dressing inappropriately.

This may reveal the mindset of a specific age group. Certainly my father's generation would think quite differently.

Really, I would be quite content to wear a burka so that I wouldn't have to get dressed up or do my hair or make-up for church. However, I'm thinking that would draw too much attention..........seriously!!!! High heels and jewelry is a problem?? I use to be this legalistic until I realized that it wasn't a sin and that I should actually identify my sins and work on those instead of making up laws that I could live up to on my own. This is even worse than other threads I've been apart of in the past. Well, almost....I did have to defend my wearing of pants on another site. I am glad my pastor and others in my church are not this legalistic.....at least most of the time I'm glad as there are some days when I'm really lazy and don't feel like dressing up....then hand me the burka! :)
 
Amen. I know of one pastor who approached a young girl and told her she was dressed too immodestly and please don't return next week to church like that. He was very nice about it. He didn't tell her she was a gutter slut and was going to hell. Of course it would have been better had a woman admonished her, but it was what it was. And that congregation ran that pastor out of the church for encouraging that girl to obey the seventh commandment. That's absolutely wicked.

Not to get off topic, but for his own protection, he should have at least had a woman present when he did this. I'm sure this wasn't his intent at all, but approaching a young girl to talk about the modestly of her clothing this could be interpreted as sexual harassment. Pastors and elders must be so careful in situations like this - especially if they are approaching a young girl as opposed to an older woman.

Absolutely. It was definitely not handled correctly.
 
I use to be this legalistic until I realized that it wasn't a sin and that I should actually identify my sins and work on those instead of making up laws that I could live up to on my own.

That is good, and hopefully that will serve as a reminder that we should not be legalistic over this.

Just to clarify for the sake of the subject of this thread, church disciple does not pertain to sins per se, but to scandals, which may or may not include sins. In Acts 15 the elders of the church came to a decision which also seemed good to the Holy Ghost that certain things should be omitted even though they were not sinful in themselves.

I suppose this is why the idea of dress reflecting servanthood appeals to me. It avoids legalism and at the same time takes seriously the demand to deal charitably with all men.
 
sarah...I read an article by two female missionaries in a muslim nation. They said that in the marketplace men pinch and grope and touch worse than anything you'd ever see in the west. The muslims are crazed with lust and they don't even know what's under that burka, if it is a pretty girl or an 80 year old withered woman. They grab anyway. Disgusting, but the point is, women have to work on clothes and men have to work on lust. You can cover it all up and some guys will still have trouble.
 
Wow. I am really impressed by the amount of attention I galvanized here. Quick clarification, though. It seems that people are taking my example at face value, so let me clear the air. I do not think that all high heels are wrong or immodest. Like I said in the first post, this area is difficult to diagnose. By allowing you guys to respond--women especially since the post is very much concerned with the decorum of women in the church--I think that there is a lot that needs to be revisited. By all intents and purposes, I think that we can all agree that there is a problem in the church and that it is in desperate need of attention. Can we all agree? Second, What I propose is something similar to what raekwon suggests:
I'd say that if a woman -- or a man, for that matter -- struggles consistently with modesty in dress, then that person should be approached lovingly by Christian friends about the issue.
The method is just as important as the manner which the woman's dress (=decorum). I don't think that every instance of "immodesty" is similar in all cases; and I believe this is the reason why this is difficult to diagnose. Ultimately, I think that if there's an overwhelming problem, then I definitely think that the elders should be apprised of the situation. I will post more responses as I will read all your entries.

-----Added 10/1/2009 at 11:09:30 EST-----

Women should not be infringed based of what she wears in the church, i.e., high heels.

This is where you lost me.

OK. It could possibly be due to my rhetorical style. Let me see if I can clarify this point for you. In my debate with those who hold what I call a "cavalier" approach, I set forth their argument in the first two headings or subheads. A rough paraphrase would run like this: No one, even elders, should have the right to tell its member how to dress or correct their dress. If someone has an issue with a sister in the church, it is a personal sin and should be treated (=medical verb or a practical form of "treatment," e.g., I have a headache, therefore you should take an aspirin) personally. I granted that point only to a certain degree; and I even mentioned that there is a disparity in diagnosing this problem. It isn't easy; it is a hard issue as there are different definitions of "modesty." Hope that helps.
 
I can't understand why footwear would cause someone to stumble.

If a heel broke, she'd do more than stumble, she would go straight to the ground with an injured ankle. Sorry, couldn't resist. :lol:






Okay, back to the serious discussion.
 
I can't understand why footwear would cause someone to stumble.

Some of the high heels I've seen I can't understand how women can walk in them, and I'd think they would be much more prone to stumbling (and the same can be said for platform shoes). :rofl:

-----Added 10/1/2009 at 11:14:53 EST-----

I can't understand why footwear would cause someone to stumble.

If a heel broke, she'd do more than stumble, she go straight to the ground with an injured ankle. Sorry, couldn't resist. :lol:






Okay, back to the serious discussion.

Sorry, I didn't see you caught the same funny I did!
 
I can't understand why footwear would cause someone to stumble.

Some of the high heels I've seen I can't understand how women can walk in them, and I'd think they would be much more prone to stumbling (and the same can be said for platform shoes). :rofl:

-----Added 10/1/2009 at 11:14:53 EST-----

I can't understand why footwear would cause someone to stumble.

If a heel broke, she'd do more than stumble, she go straight to the ground with an injured ankle. Sorry, couldn't resist. :lol:






Okay, back to the serious discussion.

Sorry, I didn't see you caught the same funny I did!

:lol: I kind of asked for this with my phrasing... I'm surprised it took so long for someone to catch it!
 
I like to wear high heels to church sometimes because I'm short. Period.

I like to wear high heels to church sometimes because I'm tall. And I like being taller.

Edit: I should clarify that this is tongue in cheek. (Although I definitely understand/agree with Megan and Sarah's point about needing heels to make surer your trousers fit properly).

Again, I would recommend that you read my latest responses. I never said that wearing high-heels is bad. I do, however, object to the cavalier attitude that some sisters take in their manner of dress. I happen to like girls in high-heels. I think it exemplifies femininity. But there are those other heels that portray a very sumptuous repertoire in physical appearance. And that is the problem that I am raising. There is nothing inherently evil about wearing them. However, I think that women should be mindful as my subheads A-B under number two in my original post suggests.

-----Added 10/1/2009 at 11:24:59 EST-----

Do you classify high heels as inappropriate for women to wear to church?

No. I don't think it is inappropriate. You should read the latest response. I think it answers that question in detail.
 
Julio, I think I did misunderstand your post. You seemed to be criticizing women who wore heels. I'm glad to see that's not the case.

I think the issue goes far beyond certain garments or accessories and into attitudes. As to cavalier attitudes, as I said, my comment about liking to wear high heels because I am tall was made in jest. (Although I do wear heels - I view them as a more formal type of footwear and flats as less formal and a little less feminine - but that's another discussion for another time)

I'm certainly not suggesting that women be cavalier (IN fact, I don't think anyone is suggesting that). On the other hand, we cannot make women responsible for every man that may stumble.
 
Objective criteria?

The funny aside, I'd have to say that there isn't much in the way of objective criteria for saying what is or what is not modest. If you think of tribal women in places that are hot nearly all the time, it would be normal for them to go around topless and it would not be considered "sexy". If a woman here did the same, they would likely be arrested.

What I'm getting at is cultural norm. If wearing a loincloth is the cultural norm, then it would not be considered immodest. If wearing a burka was a cultural norm, then having ankles uncovered would be considered immodest. The reaction of men to what is different is more to do with what is common verses what is commanded.

Clothing: you must wear some.

The only reason I have for saying this is that after the fall (if we were innocent, we would not need clothing) all of mankind is aware of our nakedness, and it was God that provided clothing (more than fig leaves) for Adam and Eve. We are not told what is modest or not in scripture, and therefore I would tend to think it is heart attitude (and cultural norms) that control.

I would not want my wife or daughters to show up in church in thong bikinis, but I would not want them to feel like they had to wear a burka either.
 
Modesty is definitely a problem in our generation. There are a few places in Scripture addressed to it, particularly toward the way women dress (though the concept of modesty involves more than that).

Many may not think of it this way, but the way a woman dresses reflects something of love for neighbor. There should always be concern about causing a man to stumble, not an excessive concern, but one nonetheless. We can't biblically take the self-centered attitude that it's only about what I want to dress like because I want to because what I want is all that matters.

Nor can a woman entirely hide herself simply because the Lord made her physically beautiful.

Only a couple of thoughts:

It is appropriate, in the ordinary course of things for the elders and Sunday School teachers to teach on this.

It is especially appropriate for mature and godly women to privately admonish other women in this regard- that can be done in many ways, including modeling modesty.

If an older woman sees a young woman carelessly and provocatively dressed, she can if there is a relationship established, quietly admonish the younger lady. This is quite appropriate (and even encouraged in scripture, as per Titus 2).

This is not the focus of the church, nor of fellowship, only an incidental part of it, so don't overdo it. There are a lot of tastes and preferences involved. I would not expect a session to be unduly focused on this beyond teaching it in the ordinary course of teaching godly living and exhorting others to live that way.

I can see where your logic is going. So would you suggest that the women in the church should have some kind of sponsored study by the church on being a godly woman and perhaps a future godly wife? I would like that to happen. I do think, though, that generally, the elders should admonish the church in proper church order. It doesn't mean that they should draw up a codex in what women are to wear. I think that breaches so many ethical boundaries. I would, at that point, just refer people to their creeds. One example was posted in the original post (HC 85). But at the same time, a local body will ultimately have to govern itself and follow the Scriptures as best as they could. This is where good sound judgment of the pastorate and the session should be noted and practiced.
 
I would have to say that we should "ALL" search our motivation for how we dress, whether in worship, or in the work place, or even to the market. God has called us as "Christians" to a higher standard than that of the world. However, I am not saying we should become legalistic, or extreme about it.
I do think we should be intentional about how we present ourselves to the world, but more importantly before God.
I may look at things somewhat different than others, both here and abroad, but I think about my appearance before the Lord even outside of Church. Again, I am not saying one should have to dress in a feed sack(women), or in coveralls(men), but to consider the intention of our heart.
 
Julio, I think I did misunderstand your post. You seemed to be criticizing women who wore heels. I'm glad to see that's not the case.

I think the issue goes far beyond certain garments or accessories and into attitudes. As to cavalier attitudes, as I said, my comment about liking to wear high heels because I am tall was made in jest. (Although I do wear heels - I view them as a more formal type of footwear and flats as less formal and a little less feminine - but that's another discussion for another time)

I'm certainly not suggesting that women be cavalier (IN fact, I don't think anyone is suggesting that). On the other hand, we cannot make women responsible for every man that may stumble.
I respect your candor. See, this is exactly what I was aiming for. There are some people, however, that would elicit a very cavalier approach. For instance, the argument would run like this: It is his personal problem, therefore I don't need to appease everyone. There are so many logical inconsistencies in this statement that I don't think I really need to analyze it, do I? What I responded to her (I will leave her unnamed) was this: if there is a significant number of men in the church who stumble at her sight--be that whatever her intentions are in her dress--I think at that point there is a problem. I used a narrative to illustrate that point. I said that if you are walking down the street and you smelled smoke (maybe they saw smoke) and they heard sirens, then there is a fair assumption via the use of induction, that there is a fire. The fact that there are more than three (any number above the norm really) people who struggle in a given church is clearly an instance of trouble. All I am saying is that there is a problem and perhaps someone needs to mention it. I would first suggest that a mature sister in the church should talk to the offending (I'm using that term loosely) sister, lest the pastors be apprised and deal with it individually. I don't think it needs to come to that. After all, unity in the church is a primary concern, is it not?
 
Last edited:
This may reveal the mindset of a specific age group. Certainly my father's generation would think quite differently.

I believe this hits the nail on the head. What one culture thinks immodest, another will think modest.

Brian,

I don't think that is what he was getting at, as much as condemning the drift away from a conservative biblical understanding that was held by a previous generation.

The problem with the statement that you made is a common one in our day, it presents no fixed moral standard, but one that shifts according the dictates of culture. Even cultures will be judged in accordance with God's word and character, and just because a particular culture does not see a thing as immodest does not make it chaste in God's eyes.
 
I don't think that is what he was getting at, as much as condemning the drift away from a conservative biblical understanding that was held by a previous generation.

The problem with the statement that you made is a common one in our day, it presents no fixed moral standard, but one that shifts according the dictates of culture. Even cultures will be judged in accordance with God's word and character, and just because a particular culture does not see a thing as immodest does not make it chaste in God's eyes.

Well noted, Adam.

Cultural standards should be framed according to the precept to honour father and mother. Those in positions of responsibility set the standards. Sadly we are about to face a third generation which abdicates parental responsibility, which means the cultural standards can only slip further.
 
Agreed but one slightly OT question popped to mind: to the elders, do men have responsibility for HOW they react to what a woman is wearing as much as she does for wearing something inappropriate? :worms:

Of course! But the Bible does specifically speak to the issue of female modesty in dress, likely because of the weaknesses of men. Our society has become increasingly sexualized and I am sometimes apalled at what Christian women will wear and how equally clueless they are as to its effect on men.

As an aside, no one seems to have commented on the fact that the brother who began this thread is clearly from a different culture. Modesty is to some extent driven by culture, which may have something to do with why he mentioned shoes.

Ladies, adorn yourselves with godliness. The guys will still notice.
 
This may reveal the mindset of a specific age group. Certainly my father's generation would think quite differently.

I believe this hits the nail on the head. What one culture thinks immodest, another will think modest.

Brian,

I don't think that is what he was getting at, as much as condemning the drift away from a conservative biblical understanding that was held by a previous generation.

The problem with the statement that you made is a common one in our day, it presents no fixed moral standard, but one that shifts according the dictates of culture. Even cultures will be judged in accordance with God's word and character, and just because a particular culture does not see a thing as immodest does not make it chaste in God's eyes.

Okay, so were in scripture are the objective moral standards of dress? I cannot find them.

God's word is our only infallible standard of faith and life (and more, cf WCF chapter 1) and so we should find within its pages those things which are explicitly expressed or through good and necessary conclusion can be deduced. Length of dress (or even a dress as opposed to pants), height of heels, and many other things we do not find.

What we do find is a command to be modest. We find commands to self-control. We find commands to love one another. I may be mistaken, but I don't know as there is a command to women to cover their breasts (though I'm not advocating for topless woman!) If it can be concluded by necessary deduction from scripture, then I'm willing to hear the syllogisms and detachments that force the conclusion. I just have never seen them presented other than from a cultural context, which is not objective, but subjective.
 
This may reveal the mindset of a specific age group. Certainly my father's generation would think quite differently.

I believe this hits the nail on the head. What one culture thinks immodest, another will think modest.

Brian,

I don't think that is what he was getting at, as much as condemning the drift away from a conservative biblical understanding that was held by a previous generation.

The problem with the statement that you made is a common one in our day, it presents no fixed moral standard, but one that shifts according the dictates of culture. Even cultures will be judged in accordance with God's word and character, and just because a particular culture does not see a thing as immodest does not make it chaste in God's eyes.

I think you would have to define what you think is immodest. Is it pants, high heels, jewelry, etc? I know that I once went to a Baptist church and all the women were wearing skirts down to their ankles....I was wearing pants bc I didn't know that I was suppose to wear a skirt down to my ankles....I don't even have one and never will. So they clearly felt that pants or even shorter skirts were immodest. Is this your thinking?
 
Sarah, as far as I am concerned if a women's dress distracts me from worshipping Christ we both have a problem.

This thread has increasingly distressed me because the majority of women commenting seem not to care a whit about the moral struggles of their brothers in the Lord. What they seem to care about is what they want to wear.

Romans 14 has been batted around. Remember Paul taught that we should limit our liberty out of love for God's people.

I love my wife with all my heart but ladies, don't place a stumbling block in front of me with clingy clothes, high hemlines, and low necklines no matter how fashionable. I don't want to lust in my heart as I stand before God's people to preach. It is easier to do than you could possibly imagine.
 
Sarah, as far as I am concerned if a women's dress distracts me from worshipping Christ we both have a problem.

This thread has increasingly distressed me because the majority of women commenting seem not to care a whit about the moral struggles of their brothers in the Lord. What they seem to care about is what they want to wear.

Romans 14 has been batted around. Remember Paul taught that we should limit our liberty out of love for God's people.

I love my wife with all my heart but ladies, don't place a stumbling block in front of me with clingy clothes, high hemlines, and low necklines no matter how fashionable. I don't want to lust in my heart as I stand before God's people to preach. It is easier to do than you could possibly imagine.

How am I suppose to know how weak some men are? I don't wear plunging necklines, I don't wear high hemlines bc I don't wear dresses, I wear pants which might be considered clingy just as pants cling to men. So am I suppose to wear the ankle length skirt just to cover my bases in not making some men stumble? Do not those same men have the need to develop self-control?
 
Hi everyone, this is my first post woo hoo! Anyway, my wife and I were just talking about this and I would have to agree with Knoxienne on the heels issue. I believe that a godly woman in heels is drawing unnecessary attention to herself and not in keeping with a gentle and quiet spirit. Not all heals obviously and there is a time and place for them i.e. with a wedding dress or some formal gown. But I have always thought that a large majority of them come across to me as an attempt to be sexy. You hear the term often when someone complements particular heels. "Sexy" is not something a woman attending a Lords day service should be concerned with. But those were my thoughts when speaking with my wife...I thought I was just a bigot haha.
 
Sarah, as far as I am concerned if a women's dress distracts me from worshipping Christ we both have a problem.

Perhaps, though some men might have a problem regardless of what is worn.

This thread has increasingly distressed me because the majority of women commenting seem not to care a whit about the moral struggles of their brothers in the Lord. What they seem to care about is what they want to wear.

If the attitude of a woman is what you are saying, then it is a problem. It is also a problem if men not only are tempted, but sin.

Romans 14 has been batted around. Remember Paul taught that we should limit our liberty out of love for God's people.

I love my wife with all my heart but ladies, don't place a stumbling block in front of me with clingy clothes, high hemlines, and low necklines no matter how fashionable. I don't want to lust in my heart as I stand before God's people to preach. It is easier to do than you could possibly imagine.

Agreed. Both men have an obligation to control their thoughts, and women have an obligation to show Christian love to their brothers within the church. Christian love does not tell someone that arrives at your house that is a teetotaler because of conscience that he should be able to drink because it is perfectly okay and serve wine with a meal (when one knows the person has scruples against drinking).
 
Hi everyone, this is my first post woo hoo! Anyway, my wife and I were just talking about this and I would have to agree with Knoxienne on the heels issue. I believe that a godly woman in heels is drawing unnecessary attention to herself and not in keeping with a gentle and quiet spirit. Not all heals obviously and there is a time and place for them i.e. with a wedding dress or some formal gown. But I have always thought that a large majority of them come across to me as an attempt to be sexy. You hear the term often when someone complements particular heels. "Sexy" is not something a woman attending a Lords day service should be concerned with. But those were my thoughts when speaking with my wife...I thought I was just a bigot haha.

You can't even see my high heeled shoes except for the toes of them bc I wear pants so I don't see how your theory could hold up. I think this is your own opinion and not based on Scripture. If high heels are sinful, then they shouldn't be worn with anything. You can't decide when all women should and shouldn't wear high heels unless you have Scriptural support.
 
Agreed but one slightly OT question popped to mind: to the elders, do men have responsibility for HOW they react to what a woman is wearing as much as she does for wearing something inappropriate? :worms:

Of course! But the Bible does specifically speak to the issue of female modesty in dress, likely because of the weaknesses of men. Our society has become increasingly sexualized and I am sometimes apalled at what Christian women will wear and how equally clueless they are as to its effect on men.

As an aside, no one seems to have commented on the fact that the brother who began this thread is clearly from a different culture. Modesty is to some extent driven by culture, which may have something to do with why he mentioned shoes.

Ladies, adorn yourselves with godliness. The guys will still notice.
It is very interesting that you mentioned the generational divide. You're right. I am from a different generation. I do agree that different generations will deal with different denotations of what constitutes "modest apparel." However, I do think that there is a trans culture/generational divide that would allow for some ethical commentary on the situation. I do think that a heel that accentuates too much of the female figure does exhibit an attitude of mutiny. It might not be explicit mutiny, but considering the generational divide, I think that the influences that are imbued in the female who wears these heels--again, I'm using that example loosely--should consider her presuppositions about what she wears. Again I would refer her to my rebuttal and subheads in the original post.
 
Hi everyone, this is my first post woo hoo! Anyway, my wife and I were just talking about this and I would have to agree with Knoxienne on the heels issue. I believe that a godly woman in heels is drawing unnecessary attention to herself and not in keeping with a gentle and quiet spirit. Not all heals obviously and there is a time and place for them i.e. with a wedding dress or some formal gown. But I have always thought that a large majority of them come across to me as an attempt to be sexy. You hear the term often when someone complements particular heels. "Sexy" is not something a woman attending a Lords day service should be concerned with. But those were my thoughts when speaking with my wife...I thought I was just a bigot haha.

You can't even see my high heeled shoes except for the toes of them bc I wear pants so I don't see how your theory could hold up. I think this is your own opinion and not based on Scripture. If high heels are sinful, then they shouldn't be worn with anything. You can't decide when all women should and shouldn't wear high heels unless you have Scriptural support.

I never said it was a sin and I thought I was making it clear that those were just thoughts I had. However, the response of the woman after being confronted about something such as heels can be sinful.
There is a time for everything and I was expressing that a Lord's Day service in my opinion is not the place to wear heals. I may not be able to see your heals and that is irrelevant. Many heals can be seen and if it stumbles a man or woman, it is to be abstained from. But it is also their responsibility of the individual stumbled by your dress to call it to your attention. At that point the ball is in your court and it is at that point that sin can be present.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top