A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One
Posted By: Linda Sutton
A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 05:50 AM
A request has been made for me to post the manuscript that I wrote about dress reform. Because it is many pages long, I will post it chapter by chapter. Following is the first chapter. But first a little background.
Ellen G. White had a lot to say about dress reform and proper dress. Her writings expanded on the words of scripture which show how we are to dress, especially women. This topic has interested me for many years, and about 8 years ago I began studying what the Bible and Ellen White says about dress and researching the history of dress, particularly that of the nineteenth century. This was necessary in order to define the principles of dress reform and apply them today. From that study and research came a manuscript I will begin posting here. It has never been printed or published. It is my desire simply to help others learn what God expects of us.
I want to point out that EGW mentions three different items that are not to be made a test of fellowship: Tithing, vegetarian diet, and dress reform. That doesn't mean they are unimportant. We are not to judge our sisters and brothers by what they wear. But each should see for him/herself how God expects His children to dress. The world judges the truth of our profession of Christianity by what we wear, what we say, and how we act.
The entire manuscript is actually divided into three sections, one each for dress, speech, and deportment. May God bless you as you read. Ask questions if you like. It is certain that we will not all be in agreement on every point. It is best to take what the Bible and SOP say, study and pray about it, and seek God's guidance in applying the principles to your own life.
________________________
Even so come, Lord Jesus
Linda[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited August 14, 2000).]
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 05:54 AM
APRONS, COATS, AND GARMENTS OF LIGHT
"In the beginning was the Word,...and the Word was God" who is "clothed with honor and majesty" and covers Himself "with light as with a garment." He makes "his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire," (John 1:1; Ps. 104:1,2,4).
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." "All things were made by Him." He "created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created he them." "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good." (Gen. 1:1; John 1:3; Gen. 1:27,31). The male and the female, Adam and Eve, came forth from the Creator's hands perfect in every way.
quote:
He was of lofty stature and perfect symmetry. His countenance bore the ruddy tint of health and glowed with the light of life and joy. Adam's height was much greater than that of men who now inhabit the earth. Eve was somewhat less in stature; yet her form was noble, and full of beauty. (PP 45:3).
"And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed." (Gen 2:25). They were perfect, not only in physiology, but spiritually, as well. "The sinless pair wore no artificial garments; they were clothed with a covering of light and glory, such as the angels wear. So long as they lived in obedience to God, this robe of light continued to enshroud them." (PP 45:3). They were clothed with "the light of God." (COL 310:4).In perfect innocence, peace, and happiness, the pair began life in Eden, a beautiful garden planted by God Himself for their contentment. True happiness was theirs, the happiness that is found "in communion with God through His created works." (PP 49:3). They had been given dominion over every living thing and not one thing had been withheld from them that would bring them joy and delight.
While Adam and Eve continued obedience to their Maker, they continued to be clothed with the garment of light, which is the righteousness of saints. "Light is sown for the righteous," "and he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light." (Ps. 97:11; 37:6). "This light illuminated everything which they approached. There was nothing to obscure their perception of the character or the works of God." (MH 461-2). That light allowed them to read nature aright, to discern the character of God in his works.
quote:
The book of nature, which spread its living lessons before them, afforded an exhaustless source of instruction and delight. On every leaf of the forrest and stone of the mountains, in every shinning star, in the earth and sea and sky, God's name was written. With both the animate and inanimate creation — with leaf and flower and tree, and with every living creature, from the leviathan of the waters to the mote in the sunbeam — the dwellers in Eden held converse, gathering from each the secrets of its life. God's glory in the heavens, the innumerable worlds in their orderly revolutions, 'the balancings of the clouds' (Job 37:16), the mysteries of light and sound, of day and night — all were objects of study by the pupils of earth's first school. (Ed 21:3).
With undimmed vision they could study with microscopic detail the inner workings of leaves and flowers. Through telescopic vision they could study the heavenly bodies of the far flung universe. Oh, what a wonderful garment to have, this garment of light which was the light of God. How great were the opportunities their cloaks gave them for incomparable study of nature and the joy and delight of discovery. But Adam and Eve would keep their garments only as long as they maintained their loyalty and obedience to God.Tragically, there came a day when things went terribly wrong. Eve wandered away from Adam, and became fascinated by a talking serpent — so fascinated that she ate of the one tree in the garden God had said they must not eat of. Adam, horrified by the thought of being separated from Eve, also ate of the forbidden fruit. Loyalty and obedience had been flung aside and the darkness of sin entered their lives; alas, it entered the whole world. "And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked." (Gen. 3:7). As they looked at themselves, at each other, they were, for the first time, aware that they had no covering. The light, the precious light, was gone. They were no longer righteous, no longer perfect. Though their eyes were opened, their vision was dimmed. "In losing the garments of holiness, they lost the light that had illuminated nature. No longer could they read it aright. They could not discern the character of God in His works." (MH 462:0). What fear must have found its way into their hearts, what recriminations must have formed in their minds as the world around them went dark, as the glorious wonders of creation grew dim and gray to their eyes.
quote:
The halo of glory, which God had given holy Adam, covering him as a garment, departed from him after his transgression. The light of God's glory could not cover disobedience and sin. In the place of health and plenitude of blessings, poverty, sickness, and suffering of every type were to be the portion of the children of Adam. (1SM 270:1).
Standing alone in the twilight, trying to find some excuse for what they had done, shivering in the coolness of the evening air — shivering? They had never felt chilled before. And they felt so naked. So "they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons." (Gen. 3:7). Clothed in the garments of their own making, they heard a familiar voice calling their names. Fear, shame, and embarrassment flooded over them, and instead of running to meet their Lord, they hid among the trees. But the One who knows all things and sees all things came to their hiding placed and called, "Adam,...where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee thou shouldest not eat?" (Gen. 3:9-11). Standing before the Lord covered only in the skimpiest of garments, they had to face the horrible, terrible reality. Nothing was ever going to be the same again. Everything had been forever changed.
quote:
After Adam's transgression he at first imagined that he felt the rising to a new and higher existence, But soon the thought of his transgression terrified him. The air that had been of a mild and even temperature, seemed to chill them. The guilty pair had a sense of sin. They felt a dread of the future, a sense of want, a nakedness of soul. The sweet love, and peace, and happy, contented bliss seemed removed from them, and in its place a want of something came over them that they never experienced before. They then for the first [time] turned their attention to the external. They had not been clothed, but were draped in light as were the heavenly angels. This light which had enshrouded them departed. To relieve the sense of lack and nakedness which they realized, their attention was directed to seek a covering for their form; for how could they meet the eye of God and angels unclothed?Their crime is now before them in its true light. Their transgression of God's express command assumes a clearer character. Adam censured Eve's folly in leaving his side, and being deceived by the serpent. They both flattered themselves that God, who had given them everything to make them happy might yet excuse their disobedience, because of his great love to them, and that their punishment would not be so dreadful, after all. (1SP 41-2).
[This message has been edited by Linda Sutton (edited August 14, 2000).]
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 05:59 AM
But as they stand looking into the face of Jesus, as they hear Him pronounce the curse upon the serpent and on themselves, a sense of the enormity of sin begins to pervade their senses. They hear, with joy, the promise of hope, that a Redeemer will come and die that they might be pardoned. Then the
quote:
angels of God were commissioned to visit the fallen pair and inform them that although they could no longer retain possession of their holy estate, their Eden home, because of their transgression of the law of God, yet their case was not hopeless. They were then informed that the Son of God, who had conversed with them in Eden, had been moved with pity as he viewed their hopeless condition, and had volunteered to take upon himself the punishment due to them, and die for them that man might yet live, through faith in the atonement Christ proposed to make for him. Through Christ, a door of hope was opened, that man, notwithstanding his great sin, should not be under the absolute control of Satan. Faith in the merits of the son of God would so elevate man that he could resist the devices of Satan. Probation would be granted him in which, through a life of repentance, and faith in the atonement of the Son of God, he might be redeemed from his transgression of the Father's law, and thus be elevated to a position where efforts to keep his law could be accepted. (1SP 50-1).
Standing there in their brief garments which are typical of man's righteousness, the plan of salvation is laid out to them. They are told that God's law requires the punishment of death for disobedience, that until the Redeemer should come, a lamb will represent Him. The lamb is brought forth, a quiet, gentle creature; Adam, with a breaking heart, must slay this animal and burn its flesh upon an altar. How their hearts must have wrung, how the inhabitants of heaven and the unfallen worlds must have watched with grief and amazement as the lamb died. There had never been death before in the universe. Not so much as a leaf or an insect had died, for God is not the bringer of death but of life. But the transgression of the law required the shedding of blood.
quote:
When Adam, according to God's special directions, made an offering for sin, it was to him a most painful ceremony. His hand must be raised to take life, which God alone could give, and make an offering for sin. It was the first time he had witnessed death. As he looked upon the bleeding victim, writhing in the agonies of death, he was to look forward by faith to the Son of God, whom the victim prefigured, who was to die man's sacrifice. (1SP 53:1).
Now, the Lord takes the skins and from them He makes two coats, one for Adam and one for Eve. These are garments long enough to cover their nakedness, a coat with sleeves to protect from the chilly air. Man had made himself only an apron and that from fig leaves which would dry up and crumble in just a few days. God made coats from skins which both covered their bodies and were long lasting. Why did man feel satisfied with such a minute covering as his apron of leaves? With our dimmed vision we have little sense of our unrighteousness, our unfitness to stand before the King. We're quite content with only a little covering, but all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, or a fig leaf apron. But when Jesus comes, He illuminates our eyes and we see our nakedness. In our distress, we give ourselves into His hands, He forgives our sins, and gives us coats of His righteousness so that the shame of our nakedness does not appear.
quote:
Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment. And I said, Let them set a fair mitre upon his head. So they set a fair mitre upon his head, and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the Lord stood by. (Zech. 3:3-5).
Morning by morning as Adam and Eve arose, they would look upon their coats and were reminded of the death of the lamb, and the future death of their own Creator. They were reminded daily of the consequences of sin, that He whose hands had fashioned these coats would one day come to earth as a man, and live and die that they might be restored to their Eden home. Man today must continue to wear the coat made for him by Jesus' hands, a robe invisible to the human eye, but not to the heavenly intelligences. "This robe, woven in the loom of heaven, has in it not one thread of human devising. Christ in His humanity wrought out a perfect character, and this character He offers to impart to us." (COL 311:4). This robe is a robe of Christ's own righteousness, a robe of light. Jesus has promised that when we "confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleans us from all unrighteousness." (1John 1:9). "Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." (Isa. 1:18).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 06:00 AM
quote:
When we submit ourselves to Christ, the heart is united with His heart, the will is united with His will, the mind becomes one with His mind, the thoughts are brought into captivity to Him, we live His life. This is what it means to be clothed with the garment of His righteousness. Then as the Lord looks upon us He sees, not the fig-leaf garment, not the nakedness and deformity of sin, but His own robe of righteousness, which is perfect obedience to the law of Jehovah. (COL 312:0).
"I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels." (Isa. 61:10). We cannot manufacture for ourselves garments of salvation or robes of righteousness. These are put on us by God; we accept them by faith in Jesus' spilled blood. When we try to cover ourselves, it's as though we are weaving spider's webs into garments. "Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands." (James 2:17). Works alone will never cover us; they must be the outgrowth of a life that has been given into God's hands, of accepting that we can of our ownselves do nothing, but that we can do all things through Christ who gives us strength.
quote:
Since that first sin committed by Adam and Eve, men have tried to sew together fig leaves to cover the nakedness caused by transgression. They have worn the garments of their own devising, by works of their own they have tried to cover their sins, and make themselves acceptable with God.But this they can never do. Nothing can man devise to supply the place of his lost robe of innocence. No fig-leaf garment, no worldly citizen dress, can be worn by those who sit down with Christ and angels at the marriage supper of the Lamb.
Only the covering which Christ Himself has provided can make us meet to appear in God's presence. This covering, the robe of His own righteousness, Christ will put upon every repenting, believing soul. (COL 311:1-3).
Someday soon, if faithful, Jesus will pronounce of His saints: "They shall walk in white, for they are worthy." (Rev. 3:4). They have prayed, as did Moses, "Lord, show me thy glory" and as they beheld the Lord, "The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin," they were changed "into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (Ex. 33:18; 34:6,7; 2Cor. 3:18).
When this mortal shall have put on immortality, the garments of light will be restored. In the city that has no need of sun nor moon, whose light is the glory of God and the Lamb, the "saved shall walk in the light of it." (Rev. 21:23-24).
quote:
There, when the veil that darkens our vision shall be removed, and our eyes shall behold that world of beauty of which we now catch glimpses through the microscope; when we look on the glories of the heavens, now scanned afar through the telescope; when, the blight of sin removed, the whole earth shall appear in "the beauty of the Lord our God," what a field will be open to our study! There the student of science may read the records of creation and discern no reminders of the law of evil. He may listen to the music of nature's voices and detect no note of wailing or undertone of sorrow. In all created things he may trace one handwriting — in the vast universe behold "God's name writ large," and not in the earth or sea or sky one sign of ill remaining.There the Eden life will be lived, the life in garden and field. "They shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands." Isa. 65:21,22.
There shall be nothing to "hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, saith the Lord." Isa. 65:25. There man will be restored to his lost kingship, and the lower order of beings will again recognize his sway; the fierce will become gentle, and the timid trustful. (Ed 303-4).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 06:01 AM
Since the day millennia ago when "the eyes of them both were opened," and Adam and Eve saw their nakedness, man has had to cover his body with artificial garments of skins and furs, of vegetable and synthetic fibers, for the garments of light have been removed from the human race. In their demoralized state of sinfulness, men and women have always been content with only the most minimal covering, the briefest of garments. The more pagan and idolatrous a culture has been, the more immodest their clothing and demeanor has become, until virtual nudity has become the rule in some cultures and areas of the world. But God's presence brings about a change in people's lives and in their customs and habits. Wherever Christ has come, the people are dressed. "Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame." (Rev. 16:15). While these words refer to that spiritual robe of righteousness, should we not also consider that the same God who spoke these words also made the coats Adam and Eve wore to cover their nakedness? God requires of His children modesty of dress, simply and tastefully arranged upon the body.
Down through the ages God has given counsel again and again regarding the dress of His children. He has been most specific with regards to modest clothing, covering nakedness, and use of adornment. When the children of Israel were in the wilderness, God commanded that there be no steps up to His altar, but rather a ramp that the priest's "nakedness be not discovered thereon." (Ex. 20:26). The priestly garments made for Aaron and his sons included "linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach." (Ex. 28:41). God gave specific commands concerning the garments for the whole of Israel.
quote:
God had commanded the children of Israel to have a ribbon of blue in the border of their garments, upon which was embroidered words of the law, which expressed in short the ten commandments, to remind them of their duty to love God supremely, and to love their neighbors as themselves. (RH 3/4/73).
They were ever to remember that they were a peculiar people, set apart to God as is the Israel of today. To us are given the commands to clothe the naked, dress modestly, and to not let the shame of our nakedness appear. We are not to be unnecessarily concerned with what we wear but rather seek "first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and these all these things shall be added unto you." (Matt. 6:33). Our heavenly Father knows we have these needs and He has promised to supply them when we make God first in our lives.
"Higher than the highest human thought can reach is God's ideal for His children. Godliness — godlikeness — is the goal to be reached." (Ed 18:3). Every facet of our lives must reach to meet this goal, even our dress. The dress reform is as needful for us today as it was for the children of Israel, as it was for the apostolic church, as it was for the early Adventist church. To some, the instruction given in the Spirit of Prophecy may seem terribly old-fashioned, totally antiquated, and completely out of time with today's culture and lifestyles. It may seem so hopelessly old-fashioned that no way can be seen to implement the instruction given without looking as though we had stepped out of the nineteenth century. But God does not give us instructions which we cannot follow. We believe that "All His biddings are enablings." (COL 333:1 emphasis added). He can and will empower us to keep His precepts and counsels.
quote:
All true reformation begins with soul-cleansing. It is by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the mind through the power of the Holy Spirit, that a change is wrought in the life. (SD 105:2).
Unless you are willing to follow your Saviour wherever He leads, unless you are willing to take up your cross and follow Him, do not even consider dress reform. When you love Jesus so much you are willing to lay aside every weight of worldliness, when you are willing to perhaps be called odd, singular, and straight-laced, or narrow-minded and old-fashioned, then you will be willing to consider what God requires of His children in the areas of dress and adornment.
quote:
Something must arise to lesson the hold of God's people upon the world. The reform dress is simple and healthful, yet there is a cross in it. I thank God for the cross and cheerfully bow to lift it. We have been so united with the world that we have lost sight of the cross and do not suffer for Christ's sake. (1T 525:1).
"True dress reform regulates every article of clothing worn upon the person." (HR 1-1-1877). This is because dress reform is a part of health reform and is also part of victorious Christian living and overcoming the world. God designed and created our bodies and they are to be preserved to Him a living sacrifice which is our reasonable service. We belong to God and not to ourselves for we have been purchased with an infinite price. We must, therefore, keep ourselves in the best of health. We must dress in such a way that we do not draw other people's attentions to our poor, mortal bodies, but draw them to Jesus. Our clothing should reflect our connection with Him who is the Author and Finisher of our faith. When the world looks upon us they should see in us the inward adorning of a meek and quiet spirit "which God estimates as of great price. The apostle speaks of this as more excellent and valuable than gold or pearls or costly array. While the outward beautifies only the mortal body, the adornment of meekness adorns the soul and connects finite man with the infinite God. This is the ornament of God's own choice. He who garnished the heavens with the orbs of light has by the same Spirit promised that `He will beautify the meek with salvation' (Ps. 149:4). Angels of heaven will register as best adorned those who put on the Lord Jesus Christ and walk with Him in meekness and lowliness of mind." (SL 16:2). This is what it means to seek the kingdom of God first, to seek the inward adorning.
quote:
The suffering caused among women by unhealthful dress cannot be estimated. Many have become life-long invalids through their compliance with the demands of fashion. Health and life have been sacrificed to the demands of the insatiable goddess. Many seem to think they have a right to treat their bodies as they please; but they forget that their bodies are not their own. The Creator who formed them has claims upon them that they cannot lightly throw off. Every needless transgression of the laws of our being is virtually a transgression of the law of God, and is sin in the sight of heaven. The Creator knew how to form the human body. He did not need to consult the mantua-makers in regard to their ideas of beauty. God, who created everything that is lovely and glorious in nature, understood how to make the human form beautiful and healthy. The modern improvements upon His plan are insulting to the Creator. They deform that which He made perfect. (CTBH 87-8).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/15/00 06:03 AM
Most dress reform will be addressed to women, but not all. Very much in the precepts and principles of dress reform are applicable to all — men, women, and children, and there are special sections which deal with their needs specifically.
quote:
We are to reveal our faith in our dress. The time and means that are often spent on outward adornment are in God's sight worse than wasted. The teachings of the gospel are to make us Christians in practice as well as in profession; the truth we hold is to sanctify the soul. Christ bids us seek not that outward adornment, but the adorning of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. It is the spirit of Christ's righteousness that we so greatly need. (YI 4/27/09).Our words,our actions, our deportment, our dress, everything should preach. Not only with our words should we speak to the people, but everything pertaining to our person should be a sermon to them, that right impressions may be made upon them, and that the truth spoken may be taken by them to their homes. Thus our faith will stand in a better light before the community. (2T 618:0).
There is a little chorus young people like to sing whose words are meaningful here:
Do you know, O Christian, you're a sermon in shoes?
Jesus calls upon you to spread the gospel news,
So walk it, and talk it, a sermon in shoes.
To the world our profession counts but little; it is what they see in us that they use to judge our religion. We are indeed sermons in shoes, for what we wear and say and do is preaching our faith to all who see and hear us. "Too often the influence of the sermon preached from the pulpit is counteracted by the sermon preached in the lives of those who claim to be advocates of truth." (9T 21:1).
quote:
The life that Christ lived in this world, men and women can live through His power and under His instruction. In their conflict with Satan they may have all the help that He had. They may be more than conquerors through Him who loved them and gave Himself for them.The minds of many take so low a level that God cannot work for them or with them. The current of thought must be changed, the moral sensibilities must be aroused to feel the claims of God. The sum and substance of true religion is to own and continually acknowledge, by words, by dress, by deportment, our relationship to God. Humility should take the place of pride; sobriety, of levity; and devotion, of irreligion and careless indifference. (4T 582:3).
As we commence our study of dress, let us remember that Jesus is the Pattern we must copy, all that He says we must do, laying hold upon the overcomer's power which comes by faith in His promises.
quote:
In the night season I was in a company of people whose hearts were filled with vanity and conceit, and Christ was hid from their eyes. Suddenly, in loud, clear accents, the words were heard, "Jesus is coming to take to Himself those who on this earth have loved and served Him, to be with Him in His kingdom forever." Many of those in the company went forth in their costly apparel to meet Him. They kept looking at their dress. But when they saw His glory, and realized that their estimation of one another had been so largely measured by outward appearance, they knew that they were without the robe of Christ's righteousness, and that the blood of souls was on their garments.When Christ took His chosen ones, they were left; for they were not ready. In their lives, self had been given the first place; and when the Saviour came, they were not prepared to meet Him.
I awoke with the picture of their agonized countenances stamped on my mind. I cannot efface the impression. I wish I could describe the scene as it was presented to me. O, how sad was the disappointment of those who had not learned by experience the meaning of the words, "Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God"!
The treasure of the grace of Christ is of more value than gold or silver or costly array. When my sisters catch a glimpse of what Christ has suffered in their behalf, that they might become children of God by adoption, they will no longer be satisfied with worldly pride and self-love. No longer will they worship self, but God will be the object of their supreme regard. (RH 10/29/08).
End of chapter 1
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:15 AM
Below is chapter 2 from
A Christian Guide to Dress. There are illustrations that go with this chapter, but they cannot be posted here in the forum. I have put the figure number and caption in brackets [] where they should go in the text. I have prepared the graphics for sending by email. If you would like to receive them, please email me and ask for them.
WHY DRESS REFORM?
quote:
I was shown that the people of God should not imitate the fashions of the world. Some have done this, and are fast losing the peculiar, holy character which should distinguish them as God's people. I was pointed back to God's ancient people and was led to compare their apparel with the mode of dress in these last days. What a difference! what a change! Then the women were not so bold as now. When they went in public, they covered their faces with a veil. In these last days, fashions are shameful and immodest. They are noticed in prophecy. They were first brought in by a class over whom Satan has entire control, who, "being past feeling [without any conviction of the Spirit of God] have given themselves over to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness." If god's professed people had not greatly departed from Him, there would now be a marked difference between their dress and that of the world. The small bonnets, exposing the face and head, show a lack of modesty. The hoops are a shame. The inhabitants of earth are growing more and more corrupt, and the line of distinction between them and the Israel of God must be more plain, or the curse which falls upon worldlings will fall on God's professed people. (1T 188-9).
There is a "line of distinction" between God's children and the children of the world. We show by what we wear who has the allegiance of our hearts. "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." (2Cor. 10:18). To those who ask why we need dress reform, this is the answer. We are God's sons and daughters, bought with the priceless gift of calvary; we show our high calling in the modesty and simplicity of a life that is hid with Christ in God. By our fruits we are known; by our dress we are judged. When Ellen White first wrote of the need for dress reform among Seventh-day Adventists, the right arm of the message had not yet been revealed. Not until 1863 when she received the health reform vision, did dress reform take on an aspect of health. It is important to understand that dress reform involves both health reform and separation from the world with its devotion to fashion. We will study both sides of the issue; but before we do we must also understand that while this is an important subject, while it is indeed a required reformation that must take place among us as a people, it is not a test question.
quote:
The dress reform was among the minor things that were to make up the great reform in health, and never should have been urged as a testing truth necessary to salvation. (RH 10/8/67).
Notice that dress reform was a minor part of health reform which also includes reforms in diet, medical care, drug use and overall lifestyle. Minor does not constitute unimportant. Nor does it lessen the importance of dressing modestly and simply and not being a slave of fashion. Nothing is ever unimportant in the Christian life, especially to those who are striving to imitate the pattern, Jesus Christ.
quote:
Every effort made for the physical and moral health of the people should be based on moral principles. The advocates of reform who are laboring with the glory of God in view will plant their feet firmly upon the principles of hygiene; they will adopt a correct practice. The people need true knowledge. By their wrong habits of life, men and women of this generation are bringing upon themselves untold suffering. Physicians have a work to do to bring about reform by educating the people, that they may understand the laws which govern their physical life. They should know how to eat properly, to work intelligently, to dress healthfully, and should be taught to bring all their habits into harmony with the laws of life and health, and to discard drugs. There is a great work to be done. If the principles of health reform are carried out, the work will indeed be as closely allied to that of the third angel's message as the hand is to the body. (13MR 177:3).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:18 AM
"True dress reform regulates every article of dress worn upon the person." (HR 1/1/1877). "If women make the customs of the world their criterion, they will become unfitted, both physically and mentally, for the duties of life (CTBH 88:1). "Let women thensleves, instead of struggling to meet demands of fashion, have courage to dress healthfully and simply." (MH 294:1). For nearly 120 years such words of caution have been coming to us, urging us to leave off conformity to the world, and follow Jesus. We can no more serve God and mammon today than the Seventh-day Adventist pioneers could or the Jews could. Dress reform is as much for us in the 1990's as it was in the last half of the nineteenth century.
In the 1860's dress reform took on a new emphasis after the introduction of health reform. Movies and TV have romanticized the Victorian era with its long, street-sweeping dresses and helpless femme fatales. Many women imagine they missed something wonderful by not having lived in that era, but close investigation of the fashions of that time should make all thankful they did not. Most people are aware of hoop skirts and corsets, but they do not realize that these romanticized fashions were lethal torture devices pushed upon the populace by the tyrannical goddess of Fashion. She ruled, and still rules, with a heavy iron hand. Let's go behind the Scarlet O'Hara look and see what made God denounce these fashions as evil. [See figure 1 "The hoop-skirted dress of the mid-nineteenth century"]
By the 1850's skirt had become very full and had become long enough to sweep the ground. To extend, or hold out the skirts, petticoats, some of which were quilted, were worn in multiple layers. This required the use of up to 40 yards or more of cloth around the waist. The invention of the hoop skirt, called a crinoline, lessened the use of petticoats for now the skirt could be distended by means of this cage-like contraption. The hoop consisted of concentric circles of steel usually fastened together with tapes and reaching diameters of six feet or more. How does a woman walk through a three-foot-wide doorway in a six-foot-wide skirt? Some crinoline manufacturers tried to solve these problems in a variety of ways, but not one preserved modesty. The simplest way to get through the door was to lift the hoop and skirt high enough to pass through the door. Much the same process had to be followed when climbing stairs. Modesty at these moments was impossible.
quote:
I have traveled much, and have seen a great deal of inconvenience attending the wearing of hoops.... While traveling in the cars and stages, I have seen large companies crowding into the cars, and in order to make any headway, the hoops had to be raised and placed in a shape which was indecent. And the exposure of the form was tenfold more with those who wore hoops, than with those who did not. Were it not for fashion, those who thus immodestly expose themselves would be hissed at; but modesty and decency must be sacrificed to the god of fashion. (1T 277-8).
Ellen White and history both inform us that the hoops were first worn in a Paris brothel and their use spread out from there. Hoops were one of the evils women were to avoid. "From what has been shown me, hoops are an abomination. They are indecent; and God's people err if they in the least degree follow, or give countenance to, this fashion." (1T 278).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:19 AM
The crinoline went through a number of changes until it had metamorphosed into the bustle of the 1870's. Throughout those years the skirt length remained long and actually trailed upon the ground. By the 1860's, hoops had been flattened in the front while remaining full on the sides and back. This permitted the dress to have a small train in back. Such skirts were very dangerous and unhealthy. It was the age of industrialization and many young women were working in the factories and shops, wearing the crinolines and sweeping skirts. Imagine a showroom where glassware is displayed and a sales clerk walking through with her full skirts sweeping off glassware with one swish of her outfit. Other girls, clad in the same style, had their garments caught in the machinery at which they were working, often maiming or killing them before they could possibly be freed. In the fields, peasant girls would be lifted off their feet by strong gusts of wind blowing up their hoop skirts. Other women had the terrible misfortune of moving to close to a hot grate where a fire blazed and their skirts would catch fire. Because of the crinoline, it was nearly impossible to wrap the victim in something which would have smothered the flames. Many died as a result. Others were left scarred and deformed for the rest of their lives. [see figure 2: "Two examples of crinolines or hoops used to extend dresses"]
Because the skirts swept the streets, they gathered up everything lying in the streets or on the ground. If the ground was wet, the moisture would be soaked up by the skirts. Any filth, such as tobacco spittle, was also picked up by the skirts. There was all manner of filth in the streets and roads. The predominate transportation in service was animal conveyance, which polluted the often unpaved streets in a different manner than our modern cars do. Sister White listed five reasons why the long skirts were a serious health hazard, among other problems.
- It is extravagant and unnecessary to have the dress of such a length that it will sweep the sidewalk and street.
- A dress thus long gathers dew from the grass, and mud from the streets, and is therefore unclean.
- In its bedraggled condition it comes in contact with the sensitive ankles, which are not sufficiently protected, quickly chilling them, and thus endangering health and life. This is one of the greatest causes of catarrh and of scrofulous swellings.
- The unnecessary length is an additional weight upon the hips and bowels.
- It hinders the walking, and is also often in other people's way. (1SM 477 & 1T 459).
Catarrh and scrofula are old terms for diseases which still exist. The first is a naso-pharyngeal infection. Today we might call it a cold or it might be allergic rhinitis, hay fever. Scrofula is tuberculosis of the legs. TB is a disease which is currently resurgent in the U.S. Known mostly as a lung disease, called consumption in the Victorian era, TB can attack any part of the body. On the legs it caused swelling and disfiguring scars. Often, it never healed.
Beneath the long skirts, and multiple petticoats which hung around the waist and over the crinoline, was another instrument of torture which fashion used to maim, incapacitate, and snuff out the life of women. The corset. The history of the corset goes back several centuries and changed very little in its actual makeup during that time. Its sole purpose was to reshape the woman's body to conform to the current fashion. The corset was a garment which began at the bust and came down over the hips. They might lace up the front or the back or both. In the beginning they held their shape by means of whalebone stays. Later steel was used and the garments were steam molded on presses.
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:21 AM
quote:
In my early life, I was intimate with a near friend who persisted in lacing. There was not much said in those days condemning this health-destroying practice. I knew but little of the evils resulting from tight lacing. I was solicited, at one time, to lace the corset of this friend. I drew the strings as firmly as I possibly could, which started the blood from the ends of my fingers. But this did not satisfy her, and she declared that I did not know how to lace one. She called for a stronger person, who also worked to the best of her ability to get her form squeezed to the desired dimension. But she scolded, and declared that we did not half try. She even shed tears.She then thought of a plan that might bring more strength to bear. She fastened the strings of her corset to the bed-post, and then wrenched from side to side, gaining a little at each effort, while two of us held fast what she had gained, that the strings should not loosen when removed from the bed-post. She seemed satisfied that she had done all she could to lessen her size....
This young lady was naturally a rare specimen of health. Her skin was clear, and her cheeks red as a rose. Her chest and shoulders were broad, and her form was well-proportioned, her waist corresponding with the healthy proportions of her body. She was a slave to the tyrant, fashion. She was literally deformed by lacing. Her broad shoulders and large hips, with her girded, wasp-like waist, were so disproportionate that her form was anything but beautiful. And the most of her time was devoted to the arrangement of her dress in keeping with fashion, and laboring to deform her God-given healthful, and naturally beautiful form. (HR 12/71). [see figure 3: "Deformation caused by corsets from a nineteenth century drawing" and figure 4: "A Standard Corset"]
The corsets which are again being generally worn to compress the waist is one of the most serious features in women's dress. Health and life are being sacrificed to carry out a fashion that is devoid of real beauty and comfort. The compression of the waist weakens the muscles of the respiratory organs. It hinders the process of digestion. The heart, liver, lungs, spleen, and stomach, are crowded into a small compass, not allowing room for the healthful action of these organs. (HR 11/71).
Where tight-lacing is practiced, the lower part of the chest has not room for action. The breathing, therefore, is confined to the upper portion of the lungs, where there is not sufficient room to carry on the work. But the lower part of the lungs should have the greatest freedom possible. The compression of the waist will not allow free action of the muscles. (HR 11/71).
By lacing, the internal organs of women are crowded out of their positions. There is scarcely a woman that is thoroughly healthy. The majority of women have numerous ailments. Many are troubled with weaknesses of most distressing nature. These fashionably dressed women cannot transmit good constitutions to their children. Some women have naturally small waists. But rather than regard such forms as beautiful, they should be viewed as defective. These wasp waists may have been transmitted to them from their mothers, as a result of their indulgence in the sinful practice of tight lacing, and in consequence of imperfect breathing. Poor children born of these miserable slaves of fashion have diminished vitality, and are predisposed to take on disease. The impurities retained in the system in consequence of imperfect breathing are transmitted to their offspring. (HR 11/71).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:23 AM
Corsets are an evil which have been found to have not even one redeeming value. It was an evil which harmed not only the woman who laced, but her children as well. Tight lacing was the cause of the vapors — fainting spells women frequently had. The fashionable combination of long skirts and corsets prevented women from exercising and they were shut up indoors. It is no wonder that women died young, that infant mortality was high, that tuberculosis of the lungs was epidemic. Women were bowing to the idol of fashion and sacrificing their lives on her altar.
In the midst of this fashion worship, a few voices were heard calling for change. In Seneca Falls, New York, Elizabeth Cady Stanton began a dress reform movement after her cousin visited her home wearing harem-like pants topped by a skirt which reached a little below the knee. This dress was to become known as the Bloomer Costume and was made high sport of. Those who adopted and wore this costume were mainly those who were pushing for women's rights; some spiritualists also adopted the costume. Subjected as it was to derision and jokes, it lasted only a few years but paved the way for the acceptance of modern pantsuits on women. Ellen White did not sanction nor approve of this dress; indeed she warned Seventh-day Adventist's not to adopt it. "Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of women's rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. Spiritualists have, to quite an extent, adopted this singular mode of dress. Seventh-day Adventists, who believe in the restoration of the gifts, are often branded as spiritualists. Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. The people would place them on a level with spiritualists and would refuse to listen to them." (1T 457:3). [see figure 5: "Amelia Bloomer in the Bloomer costume" and figure 7: The Bloomer costume from Currier and Ives"]
A reformation in women's dress was needed, but the Bloomer Costume was not the answer. In the vision at Otsego, Michigan, on June 6, 1863, now called the Health Reform Vision, Mrs. White was given the message for our people on dress reform. In keeping with her calling as God's messenger, she faithfully delivered the message calling for a dress reform. In condemning the fashions current in the 1860's, God did not leave His children without something better and healthier to replace it. In the Spirit of Prophecy it is referred to as the reform dress. It was, in a number of ways, radically different from the current fashions then in vogue. It consisted of a pair of full-cut pants, gathered and buttoned to a waist, the legs tapered in to the instep or gathered in a band about the ankle. Over this was the dress with a full-cut skirt and bodice with long sleeves and round neckline. The skirt was shorter than then fashionable, being eight to ten inches from the floor. The bodice was full-cut, allowing a woman a full, deep breath without any binding about the chest. Over this was worn a sacque or Jacket. The shoes were actually boots which came to about the top of the ankle. The entire dress was constructed in such a way that the weight was all suspended from the shoulders. It was cut loosely, allowing perfect freedom of movement, enabling a woman to take advantage of outdoor exercise in any weather. The cut and style of the dress prevented extension by wearing hoops or skirts (petticoats) which would make it look ridiculous. "This dress does not require hoops, and I hope that it will never be disgraced by them. Our sisters need not wear many skirts to distend the dress. It appears much more becoming falling about the form naturally over one or two light skirts." (1T 523:1). [see figure 6: "The Reform Dress, as pictured in the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 4/14/1868"]
It was to be made of durable fabric in modest colors, uniformly used. "Be particular to have the pants and dress of the same color and material, or you will appear fantastic." (1T 522:2). "When figured colors are used, those that are large and fiery, showing vanity and shallow pride in those who choose them, should be avoided. And a fantastic taste in putting on different colors, is bad, such as white sleeves and pants with a dark dress." (RH 4/14/68).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:25 AM
quote:
Our dresses are fitted to sit easily, obstructing neither the circulation of the blood, nor the natural, free, and full respiration. Our skirts being neither numerous nor fashionably long, do not impede the means of locomotion,but leave us to move about with ease and activity. All these things are necessary to health. (RH 4/14/68).
God did not provide an
exact pattern for the reform dress; rather, the sisters, working together with the information provided in the visions, designed the pattern to resemble, as nearly as possible, the dress Sister White had seen. In Battle Creek, a number of women made and wore the dress. The reform dress represented God's ideal, a costume for women that was simple, modest, healthful, and Christlike. It was not extravagant or showy, it wasn't ornamented nor fashionable. it did not foster pride in the wearer, nor flattering admiration in the beholder for it was designed to draw both to Jesus. At the same time it was becoming to the wearer.
In this dress, the legs and ankles were covered and protected from the cold and chill of exposure. The fashions of that time covered a woman's legs with only a pair of stockings and muslin drawers. The multitude of skirts worn were heavy and their length, plus tight lacing, kept most women confined indoors, unable to freely exercise or even to do her household duties properly. Should she go outside, her restricted ability to draw in a decent breath further prevented much motion or she might faint. Sleeves and bodices were also made tight, impeding movement even more. By adopting the reform dress, these restrictions of movement were removed; women could exercise and carry out their housework unhampered by fashionable dress, greatly improving her health. She could sit down anywhere and her skirts did not fill an entire sofa, she could climb stairs with ease, no more wet skirts slapped about her ankles when she went outdoors, and her internal organs were able to function normally.
In September of 1865, Sister White put on the reform dress. With the exception of "meetings, in the crowded streets of villages and cities, and when visiting distant relatives," she wore it everywhere. (RH 10/8/67). Eventually she wore it continuously until it was removed.
Wearing the reform dress involved sacrifice; a willingness to bear a cross which for many was too difficult to bear. It was not made a testing truth and Sister White did not make it one of the principle subjects of her talks as she traveled. "I do not consider the dress question of so vital importance as the Sabbath. Concerning the latter there can be no hesitation." (1T 522:1). Because of the prejudice against the dress, many women found it difficult to put it on. Many who did, did not use the pattern, but worked up something on their own. "In some places there is great opposition to the short dress. But when I see some dresses worn by the sisters, I do not wonder that people are disgusted and condemn the dress. Where the dress is represented as it should be, all candid persons are constrained to admit that it is modest and convenient. In some of our churches I have seen all kinds of reform dresses, and yet not one answering the description presented before me. Some appear with white muslin pants, white sleeves, dark delaine dress, and a sleeveless sacque of the same description as the dress. Some have a calico dress with pants cut after their own fashioning,not after 'the pattern,' without starch or stiffening to give them form, and clinging close to the limbs. There is certainly nothing in these dresses manifesting taste and order. Such a dress would not recommend itself to the good judgement of sensible-minded persons. In every sense of the word it is a deformed dress." (1T 521-2).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:26 AM
Sister White issued this plea:
quote:
Before putting on the reform dress, our sisters should obtain patterns of the pants and sack worn with it. It is a great injury to the dress reform to have persons introduce into a community a style which in every particular needs reforming before it can rightly represent the reform dress. Wait, sisters, till you can put the dress on right." (1T 522).
Many never put on the dress at all, others removed it rather quickly. They could not endure the sneers, the mockery, and the accusations of being a spiritualist. They couldn't bear to appear different from the rest of the world. To be censured and shunned for wearing so unfashionable a dress was more than their spirits could tolerate. In conforming to the fashions of the world, they were adopting the spirit of the world. Fashion fosters pride and a love of display in the human heart.
quote:
Many, in order to keep pace with absurd fashion, lose their taste for natural simplicity, and are charmed with the artificial. They sacrifice time and money, the vigor of intellect, and true elevation of soul, and devote their entire being to the claims of fashionable life. The more they indulge their pride and ambition in this direction, the more they are cultivating qualities of mind of a low order, which should be continually restrained and depressed, instead of strengthened by exercise. Pride and fashion, if not restrained, will finally become the overruling passion, controlling the entire being, bringing into abject slavery all the noble qualities of the mind. (HR 4/72).
We must understand that the dress reform was but a small part of health reform, but dress reform is far broader than health. Dress involves body, mind, and spirit. By our dress others judge our relationship to Christ. Dress reform was given to combat both the spirit of the world and the ill health of the fashions of the nineteenth century. Many girls, slaving away in factories, were such devotees of Dame Fashion, they would spend nearly their entire pay on dress. Poor women who could not afford to be fashionable, were driven to despair when surrounded in the church by their more fashionably dressed sisters on Sabbath morning. "Many will not attend the service of God upon the Sabbath because their dress would appear so unlike that of their Christian sisters in style and adornment. Will my sisters consider these things as they are, and will they fully realize the weight of their influence upon others? (4T 631:2).
The goddess of fashion is a despot. In the nature of all true tyrants she demands total devotion of body, mind, and soul.
quote:
Fashion rules the world; and she is a tyrannical mistress, often compelling her devotees to submit to the greatest inconvenience and discomfort. Fashion taxes without reason and collects without mercy. She has a fascinating power, and stands ready to criticize and ridicule the poor if they do not follow in her wake at any cost, even the sacrifice of life itself. Satan triumphs that his devices succeed so well, and Death laughs at the health-destroying folly and blind zeal of the worshipers at Fashion's shrine. (4T 434:2).
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:30 AM
The majority of the church must have been her devotees for in 1881 Sister White wrote;
quote:
It was the Lord's purpose to prove His professed people and reveal the motive of their hearts. At campmeetings I seldom had anything to say upon the subject. I avoided all questions and answered no letters.One year ago the subject of dress was again presented before me. I saw that our sisters were departing from the simplicity of the gospel. The very ones who had felt that the reform dress required unnecessary labor, and who had claimed that they would not be influenced by the spirit of the world, had now taken up the fashions they had once condemned. Their dresses were arranged with all the unnecessary ornaments of worldlings in a manner unbecoming to Christians and entirely at variance with our faith.
Thus has been developed the pride of heart indulged by a people that profess to have come out from the world and to be separate. Inspiration declares that the friendship of the world is enmity with God; yet His professed people have expended their God-given time and means upon the altar of fashion. (4T 637-8).
The reform dress was now to be laid aside. God had given His children more than fifteen years to adopt the dress which He saw as best for those who profess to represent Him. Some had worn it and worn it right, others had turned it into dress deform, still others had refused to touch it.
quote:
The question may be asked: "Why has this dress been laid side, and for what reason has dress reform ceased to be advocated?" The reason for this change I will here briefly state. While many of our sisters accepted this reform from principle, others opposed the simple, healthful style of dress which it advocated. It required much labor to introduce this reform among our people. It was not enough to present before our sisters the advantages of such a dress and to convince them that it would meet the approval of God. Fashion had so strong a hold upon them that they were very slow to break away from its control, even to obey the dictates of reason and conscience. And many who professed to accept the reform made no change in their wrong habits of dress, except in shortening the skirts and clothing the limbs.Nor was this all. Some who adopted the reform were not content to show by example the advantages of the dress, giving, when asked, their reasons for adopting it, and letting the matter rest there. They sought to control others' conscience by their own. If they wore it, others must put it on. They forgot that none were to be compelled to wear the reform dress. (4T 635-6).
Though this reform was not to be a test question, there were some who tried to make it so. They constantly urged it on their sisters and were unhappy with Sister White for not pushing it.
quote:
Much unhappy feeling was created by those who were constantly urging the reform dress upon their sisters. With extremists, this reform seemed to constitute the sum and substance of their religion. It was the theme of conversation and the burden of their hearts; and their minds were thus diverted from God and the truth. They failed to cherish the spirit of Christ and manifested a great lack of true courtesy. Instead of prizing the dress for its real advantages, they seemed to be proud of its singularity. Perhaps no question has ever come up among us which has caused such development of character as has the dress reform. (4T 435-6 emphasis added).
The reform dress was gone. God took it away. In 1897 a group of Adventist women wanted to return to wearing the reform dress, and Sister White was asked if they should do so. She answered:
quote:
The Lord has not moved upon any of our sisters to adopt the reform dress. The difficulties that we once had to meet are not to be brought in again. There was so much resistance among our own people that it was removed from them. It would then have proved a blessing. But there must be no branching out now into singular forms of dress....
Posted By: Linda Sutton
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 08/23/00 06:34 AM
quote:
I beg of our people to walk carefully and circumspectly before the God. Follow the custom of dress in health reform, but do not again introduce the short dress and pants unless you have the word of the Lord for it. (5MR 405-6).
God had not left His people without direction after removing the reform dress.
quote:
If all our sisters would adopt a simple, unadorned dress of modest length, the uniformity thus established would be far more pleasing to God, and would exert a more salutary influence on the world, than the diversity presented four years ago. As our sisters would not generally accept the reform dress as it should be worn, another, less objectionable style is now presented. It is free from needless trimmings, free from the looped-up, tied back overskirts. It consists of a plain sack or loose-fitting basque, and skirt, the latter short enough to avoid the mud and filth of the streets. The material should be free from large plaids and figures, and plain in color. The same attention should be given to the clothing of the limbs as with the short dress. (4T 640:1).
In 1897, Sister White clarified the above statement.
quote:
Some have supposed that the skirt and sacque mentioned in Testimonies, Vol. 4, page 640, was the pattern that all should adopt. This is not so, but something as simple as this should be used. No one precise style has been given me as the exact rule to guide all in their dress. Should our sisters think they must adopt a uniform style of dress, controversy would arise, and those whose minds should be wholly given to the work of the third angel's message would spend their time making aggressive warfare on the outward dress, to the neglect of that inward piety, the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. (MS 167, 1897 found in appendix of The Story of our Health Message).
It is now more than one hundred years later. Are we to return to the reform dress?
NO! God has left things just as they were in 1897; we have no word from Him that we are to return to the reform dress. Is dress reform viable today? After all, we no longer wear trailing skirts, crinolines, and corsets. Fashions have changed greatly in 100 years, but they are still Fashion. She is still a tyrant ruling the world. The world is still full of her devotees. The church is still full of her devotees. And there is much in current fashion which is harmful to health, but in different ways than tight lacing and heavy skirts. What we will do is search the counsel given for the principles and then see how they apply today. We are sill God's peculiar people.
quote:
Oh, the pride that was shown me of God's professed people. It has increased every year, until it is now impossible to designate professed Advent Sabbath-keepers from all the world around them. Much, I saw was expended for ribbons and laces for the bonnets, collars, and other needless articles to decorate the body, while Jesus, the King of Glory, who gave His life to redeem them, wore a crown of thorns. This was the way their Master's sacred head was decorated. He was a "man of sorrows and acquainted with grief." "He was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed." And the very ones that professed to be washed by the blood of Jesus, can dress up, and decorate their poor, mortal bodies, yet dare to profess to be the followers of the holy, self-denying, humble Pattern. Oh, I wish that all could see this in the light that God sees it, and showed it to me. It seemed to much for me to bear, to feel the anguish of soul that I felt as I beheld it. "God's people," said the angel, "are peculiar; such he is purifying unto Himself." I saw that the outside appearance was an index to the heart. When hung with ribbons, collars, and needless things,it plainly shows that all this is in the heart, and unless that such persons are cleansed from their sins, they can never see God, for the pure in heart alone will see Him. (4SGb 21-2).
Posted By: Paul Beach
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 12/03/00 03:58 AM
While the issue of dress is important to the individual believer, we must be careful not to make it out as a more important issue than it really is. Rather than being the issue itself, dress points to the larger issues of extravagance and sensible living.
quote:
Selected Messages Book 3, page 254, paragraph 4
Chapter Title: Dress and Adornment
The Sabbath question is a test that will come to the whole world. We need nothing to come in now to make a test for God's people that shall make more severe for them the test they already have. The enemy would be pleased to get up issues now to divert the minds of the people and get them into controversy over the subject of dress. Let our sisters dress plainly, as many do, having the dress of good material, durable, modest, appropriate for this age, and let not the dress question fill the mind. . . .
quote:
Testimony To the Brethren in Western New York, page 11, paragraph 2
My position upon health and dress reform is unchanged. I have been shown that God gave the dress reform to our sisters as a blessing, but some have turned it into a curse, making the dress question a subject of talk and of thought, while they neglected the internal work, the adorning of their souls by personal piety. Some have thought religion consisted in wearing the reform dress, while their spirits were unsubdued by grace. They were jealous and fault finding, watching and criticizing the dress of others, and in this neglected their own souls and lost their piety.
quote:
Ellen G. White Volume 4 The Australian Years 1891-1900, page 333, paragraph 2
Chapter Title: Sunnyside and Beyond--1897 The dress question is not to be our present truth. . . . I beg of our people to walk carefully and circumspectly before God.
Follow the customs in dress so far as they conform to health principles.
Perhaps this is the best counsel on dress yet.
Paul
[This message has been edited by Paul Beach (edited December 02, 2000).]
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/15/07 02:38 AM
for possible further discussion by the whosoever will.
Posted By: D R
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/25/07 11:00 PM
I strongly beleive that we should be dressed for Church!
What say ye?
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/26/07 08:20 AM
Better then the alternative.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/27/07 05:14 PM
We attended church a week ago yesterday...a friend of ours was being baptized. We have been having home-church for a while now, as it is so discouraging to go to church. Well, that Sabbath was no exception. When they took up the "Lamb's Offering" (I am not a fan of that either, I think it another way for them to get more money out of people, as well as teach the kids to be beggers :()The pastor's wife walked around with their two year old, collecting money, and she had on a low cut dress so that when she bent over at each aisle with him, you could see it all.
It really angered me. People in the world pay to see such things. Our husbands, sons and fathers come to church and are forced to see it! and what is worse - it is the Pastor's wife putting on the show.
Then, after our friend was baptized, a couple from Czech were brought in to the church on profession of faith. The woman's dress was so bad, my husband walked out in protest....it couldn't have been much worse. She looked like she was headed for the bar.
All I can say is that I'm so thankful we can have home-church...
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/28/07 12:32 AM
Tammy,
Aren't there other nearby SDA churches that you can attend?
Also, did you approach the pastors wife regarding what happened to you and others in what you saw in relation to her low cut dress?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/28/07 12:35 PM
This is the most conservative church within probably a hundred miles every direction.
Yes, 6 months ago, I emailed a copy of "The Ribbon of Blue" to the Pastor, as I overheard him say he was going to speak on "Dress Reform" in an upcoming sermon. So, I emailed it to him and told him that it might give him some food for his sermon and asked him to share it with his wife. I said I would like to give a copy of it to all the women in the church. He became very angry with me for sharing it with him....
I've pretty much given up on conference churches...homechurch is looking better all the time.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/28/07 05:28 PM
Did he ever give a sermon on dress reform? It would have been interesting what he would have said about it in his sermon.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/28/07 05:54 PM
No...no sermon...how could he? He preaches in very vague words, so that liberals can read into it what they want, and conservatives read into what they want, that way, they both come away from the sermon thinking he preached the truth...very deceptive....
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/29/07 05:22 PM
Tammy, what would you do if an under-dressed lady was interested in learning about Jesus at your home church? Would you instruct her on how not to dress? Or, would you first demonstrate the love of God by accepting her as she is, and then lead her into all truth?
I'm not asking this question to condone under-dressed church members who should know better, especially the pastor's wife. However, times have changed. Most members have never heard of dress reform, including pastors and their wives. Short skirts and low cut blouses are commonplace in the world and in the church.
Most men I talked to about it don't even notice it. It's like going into an African village where women go around topless and no one thinks about it. It's not an issue. The people who worry about it, nowadays, seem to be the ones who cannot control impure thoughts, which sadly seems to be those who hold up the highest standards.
I wonder why it is like that? Why does it seem to bother the most godly in the church and yet it seems not to phase the most worldly in the church?
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 02:28 AM
The people who worry about it, nowadays, seem to be the ones who cannot control impure thoughts, which sadly seems to be those who hold up the highest standards.
I wonder why it is like that? Why does it seem to bother the most godly in the church and yet it seems not to phase the most worldly in the church?
A possible answer is that the worldly may be
desensitized to it. Just as smokers are not bothered by 2nd-hand smoke, those who are accustomed to indulging impure thoughts are not bothered by temptations to indulge impure thoughts.
If you look at it that way, you might see why the ones who are not bothered may be those who cannot, or will not, control impure thoughts. OTOH, those who are intent on controlling impure thoughts, and crucifying self, are very sensitive to that which wars against their souls.
Jesus, our Example, reacted this way: "
... as the sinless one His nature recoiled from evil..." {SC 93.4} I think it bothers Him. So you shouldn't wonder why it bothers godly church members; they're in good company.
Plus, if something bothers the godly, but is accepted by the worldly, you should really stop and consider if that thing is good for your soul.
"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 06:10 AM
Yeah, I know what you mean. Please don't misunderstand me. I knew I was taking a risk in my last post. Again, I am not "condoning under-dressed" women or men. Nor am I trying to say ungodly members who choose not to control impure impure thoughts are setting a standard we should adopt. Please hear me.
I am talking specifically about people who are not bothered by impure thoughts when they see under-dressed members in church. As you say, they are desensitized, and it takes a lot more nudity to tempt them. Of course there are those who get aroused no matter what. Between these two kinds of people lies the majority.
I'm not so sure being desensitized is "evil". The dress reform Sister White spoke about totally condemns what we think is modest nowadays. Women wearing pants was considered evil even by worldly standards. But today when we see women wearing modest pants it does not tempt us with impure thoughts.
Why the change?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 01:19 PM
Mountain Man, one of the biggest reasons the church is in the condition it is, is because it employs so many Pastors that are soft on sin, like you.
However, times have changed.
Yes, times have changed, but God's standard hasn't changed at all. What was immodest before, is STILL immodest today, whether you are in the US or in Africa. The people in Africa who run around with no clothes are not the ones who have become Christians, they are the heathens...soon as they become Christians, they put modest clothes on...just like the two demon possessed men whom Jesus healed.
I'm not asking this question to condone under-dressed church members who should know better, especially the pastor's wife.
I find that hard to believe...we are talking about women who are members, not worldly women. And your very next words
However, times have changed. Most members have never heard of dress reform, including pastors and their wives. Short skirts and low cut blouses are commonplace in the world and in the church.
show that you are making an excuse for female members of the church, including Pastor's wives.
Most men I talked to about it don't even notice it. It's like going into an African village where women go around topless and no one thinks about it. It's not an issue. The people who worry about it, nowadays, seem to be the ones who cannot control impure thoughts, which sadly seems to be those who hold up the highest standards.
I have to say, you really anger me with statements like this. I don't know why you bother calling yourself an Adventist Pastor. You need to read the Spirit of Prophecy, cause if you did, you wouldn't be saying things like this.
Do not, my sisters, trifle longer with your own souls and with God. I have been shown that the main cause of your backsliding is your love of dress. This leads to the neglect of grave responsibilities, and you find yourselves with scarcely a spark of the love of God in your hearts. Without delay, renounce the cause of your backsliding, because it is sin against your own soul and against God. Be not hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. Fashion is deteriorating the intellect and eating out the spirituality of our people. Obedience to fashion is pervading our Seventh-day Adventist churches and is doing more than any other power to separate our people from God. I have been shown that our church rules are very deficient. All exhibitions of pride in dress, which is forbidden in the word of God, should be sufficient reason for church discipline. If there is a continuance, in face of warnings and appeals and entreaties, to still follow the perverse will, it may be regarded as proof that the heart is in no way assimilated to Christ. Self, and only self, is the object of adoration, and one such professed Christian will lead many away from God. {4T 647.2}
There is a terrible sin upon us as a people, that we have permitted our church members to dress in a manner inconsistent with their faith. We must arise at once and close the door against the allurements of fashion. Unless we do this, our churches will become demoralized. {4T 648.1}
Our churches
have become demoralized, because we have too many Pastors like you, who see no need to raise the standard. Not only do you see no need to raise it, you accuse those who do raise it of being
the ones who cannot control impure thoughts
.
[Excellent point, Asyago: quote]Jesus, our Example, reacted this way: "... as the sinless one His nature recoiled from evil..." {SC 93.4} I think it bothers Him. So you shouldn't wonder why it bothers godly church members; they're in good company. [/quote]
Why does it seem to bother the most godly in the church and yet it seems not to phase the most worldly in the church
By your own admission, you are admitting you are among
the most worldly in the church
. You have no business being a Pastor.
Most men I talked to about it don't even notice it.
Another false statement to support your liberal, worldly stand. It doesn't matter if it is Africa or the US, all people, whether in the world or in the church, know that men are turned on by nudity.
If you weren't an Adventist Pastor, I wouldn't speak so plain, but you are, and by your influence, you are leading many men to hell. I had no respect for you before, so I can't say I lost any here...but you have definently confirmed me in what kind of Christian I thought you were before.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself...I can promise you, God is ashamed of you. You ought to quit "playing church".
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 04:30 PM
Tammy, your accusations are unjustified. Please read my last two posts more carefully. I am simply stating the obvious, but by doing so I am not lowering the standard. I am fully sold on dress reform, but not exactly the way it is described in the SOP. I feel it is okay for women to wear modest pants nowadays. Do you agree? Or, do you think it is immodest and unholy?
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 07:17 PM
Mountain Man, one of the biggest reasons the church is in the condition it is, is because it employs so many Pastors that are soft on sin, like you.
Hmm, lets see here, I read something like this before in my overview study of christian thought. I think this idea might first have been raised by a group known as Donatists. Nothing new under the sun is there?
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/30/07 07:20 PM
Mike being accused of being a liberal? Now I must have seen it all...
Pauls letter to the Galatians anyone?
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 05:53 PM
Tammy, what would you do if an under-dressed lady was interested in learning about Jesus at your home church? Would you instruct her on how not to dress? Or, would you first demonstrate the love of God by accepting her as she is, and then lead her into all truth?
Dose it tell us anything, when so far this part of Mountain Man's question, has been totally ignored?
How would Jesus, our example relate to someone, who on outward appearance, doesn't conform to our "light" on dress?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 06:19 PM
Please don't confuse the issue. We are not talking about those who do not have the light. We are talking about seasoned SDA's and the wives of ministers. Have you forgotten how Jesus came into the temple and turned over the tables? There is a side of Jesus that says "enough is enough", like when He said, "you have made MY house a den of thieves...." Not long after that, He said, regarding the same "house", "YOUR house is left unto you desolate..." That is about where we are at, folks.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 06:24 PM
Well, considering that Jesus got a bad reputation among the defenders of public morality of his day, I think that Jesus would have respected the person and presented God and the choise to follow or not to follow clearly. Then He would have asked her to follow Him, to wich the woman would either have agreed or declined.
Remember the woman at the well, one whos reputation would likely make her life very hard if she was to join a church of the guardians of public morality, and remember how Jesus went out of His way to meet this woman as an equal and respect her, something unheard of in His day and age. Or the woman who "embalmed" Jesus as Simons, the guardian of public morality, house, remember whom Jesus ended up talking straight at that event.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 06:29 PM
Please don't confuse the issue. We are not talking about those who do not have the light. We are talking about seasoned SDA's and the wives of ministers. Have you forgotten how Jesus came into the temple and turned over the tables? There is a side of Jesus that says "enough is enough", like when He said, "you have made MY house a den of thieves...." Not long after that, He said, regarding the same "house", "YOUR house is left unto you desolate..." That is about where we are at, folks.
It would be the same thing if you can show that either the pastors wife or the seasoned SDA's dressed as they did for personal gain and not for Gods glory. But this you can not do unless you have recieved a special revelation from God for you to bring to these people. Unless God has thus spoken to you, making judgements of this kind is out of your depth as it is out of all our depth. Only God judges hearts and minds and we better remember that.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 06:34 PM
Again, you are confusing the issue...the woman at the well was not a Pastor's wife or a seasoned Jew.
Posted By: gordonb1
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 05/31/07 07:48 PM
Hello Thomas,
How can a person dressed like a harlot bring glory to God when they are in the tithe supported ministry?
They cannot, for they draw attention to themselves alone. Paul wrote "that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness, and sobriety...with good works" 1 Timothy 2:9, 10. This was his recommendation in the KJV. I realize your eBible may read differently, but it is a principal found in both Old & New Testaments, that the ministry provide a chaste and holy example for the people. They are meant to be God's representatives and are usually supported by tithe.
In Tammy's example, this women was passing the offering plate while advertising her wares. The overall issue is not money, but morals. Each of us is responsible for our influence. If my example leads another to stumble because I have lowered the standard, then I shoulder some responsibility and guilt. The same applies to denominations.
How many teen pregnancies and broken homes stem from our low moral examples?
As our brother's keeper, we would never place a stumbling block before others. Christ did not do this. Paul taught this principle, that leading another to stumble was a "sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat maketh my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." 1 Corinthians 8: 12,13.
It is likely that Tammy has received a special revelation from God about dress. I know very many who have received this through reading the Bible and counsels of Ellen White. Both come from God and agree.
My clothes don't change my thinking - but my thinking will change my clothes. Our outward deportment (speech, manners, dress) reflect the inner man.
Does Jesus love the pastor's wife with her lavish display? Of course. He sees her great need for love, security and worth, as He sees it in all sinners. He sees our great lack; our poor, blind nakedness (Rev. 3:17). Are we fit to be His messengers and take from His treasury before receiving His robe of righteousness? No, we cannot be ambassadors if we do not represent the King.
Gordon
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/01/07 04:57 AM
Yeah, I know what you mean. Please don't misunderstand me. I knew I was taking a risk in my last post. ... Please hear me.
I think I understand what you're saying. I'm just giving you one possible reason why you see what you see. There are many other possibilities also.
I am talking specifically about people who are not bothered by impure thoughts when they see under-dressed members in church.
I suppose it is possible to get to the point where one is not bothered by impure thoughts. But whatever the details of that possibility is, it cannot contradict this truth:
There are thoughts and feelings suggested and aroused by Satan that annoy even the best of men; but if they are not cherished, if they are repulsed as hateful, the soul is not contaminated with guilt, and no other is defiled by their influence. {RH, March 27, 1888 par. 15}
Even in that case, I would suggest that people would still be bothered by under-dressed members, if for no other reason than that they may be a stumbling-block to those less mature.
As you say, they are desensitized, and it takes a lot more nudity to tempt them.
What I meant by
desensitized is that they are accustomed to the situation, not necessarily that the situation is not harmful to them. Remember my example of 2nd-hand smoke to the smoker. It's not that 2nd-hand smoke does not harm the smoker, it's just that he is used to it. Regardless of how he feels about it, the damage is done nonetheless.
I'm not so sure being desensitized is "evil".
I believe the desensitization that I am talking about is definitely evil. Do you agree?
Women wearing pants was considered evil even by worldly standards.
Actually, the so-called Reform Dress included pants. Pants were not considered inherently evil. However, they were considered inherently unfashionable.
But today when we see women wearing modest pants it does not tempt us with impure thoughts.
Why the change?
Here we get to more important issues.
"Modest pants do not tempt us with impure thoughts." Let's assume that is accurate. One possible reason for that may be that we have matured to the point where such things no longer prompt impure thoughts. IOW, we are generally getting better.
But the statement might only
appear accurate because our standard of purity has declined. IOW, what we used to know to be unholy we now consider acceptable.
Another possibility is that we have a more accurate understanding of what is unholy. IOW, what we used to think was unholy we now know to be acceptable.
But notice that the standard I go by is the objective standard of God's will. Fashion and whatever the rest of the world thinks is acceptable is of no relevance.
But as we discuss this, let's keep this in mind:
The Reform Dress.--The reform dress, which was once advocated, [THE "REFORM DRESS" ADVOCATED AND ADOPTED IN THE 1860'S WAS DESIGNED BY A GROUP OF SDA WOMEN IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A HEALTHFUL, MODEST, COMFORTABLE, AND NEAT ATTIRE IN HARMONY WITH THE LIGHT GIVEN ELLEN WHITE, WHICH WAS MUCH NEEDED AT THE TIME. SEE PP. 252-255. IT CALLED FOR LOOSE-FITTING GARMENTS HUNG FROM THE SHOULDERS WITH A HEMLINE ABOUT NINE INCHES FROM THE FLOOR. THE LOWER LIMBS WERE CLOTHED WITH A TROUSERLIKE GARMENT PROVIDING COMFORT AND WARMTH. SEE STORY OF OUR HEALTH MESSAGE, PP. 112-130.--COMPILERS.] proved a battle at every step. Members of the church, refusing to adopt this healthful style of dress, caused dissension and discord. With some there was no uniformity and taste in the preparation of the dress as it had been plainly set before them. This was food for talk. The result was that the objectionable features, the pants, were left off. The burden of advocating the reform dress was removed because that which was given as a blessing was turned into a curse. {3SM 253.2}
There were some things that made the reform dress a decided blessing. With it the ridiculous hoops which were then the fashion, could not possibly be worn. The long dress skirts trailing on the ground and sweeping up the filth of the streets could not be patronized. But a more sensible style of dress has now been adopted which does not embrace these objectionable features. The fashionable style of dress may be discarded and should be by all who will read the Word of God. The time spent in advocating the dress reform should be devoted to the study of the Word of God. {3SM 253.3}
The dress of our people should be made most simple. The skirt and sacque I have mentioned may be used-- not that just that pattern and nothing else should be established, but a simple style as was represented in that dress. Some have supposed that the very pattern given was the pattern that all were to adopt. This is not so. But something as simple as this would be the best we could adopt under the circumstances. No one precise style has been given me as the exact rule to guide all in their dress. . . . {3SM 254.1}
Simple dresses should be worn. Try your talent, my sisters, in this essential reform. {3SM 254.2}
The people of God will have all the test that they can bear. {3SM 254.3}
The Sabbath question is a test that will come to the whole world. We need nothing to come in now to make a test for God's people that shall make more severe for them the test they already have. The enemy would be pleased to get up issues now to divert the minds of the people and get them into controversy over the subject of dress. Let our sisters dress plainly, as many do, having the dress of good material, durable, modest, appropriate for this age, and let not the dress question fill the mind. . . . {3SM 254.4}
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/01/07 12:21 PM
But notice that the standard I go by is the objective standard of God's will. Fashion and whatever the rest of the world thinks is acceptable is of no relevance.
Amen!
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/01/07 06:31 PM
Arnold,
In Jesus day men also wore a robe rather than pants. Maybe the desenzitation starts there already. I suggest that if the wearing of pants in itself is a proof of desensitation and a source for temptation, then all of us, both men and women must reject pants for other kinds of clothes. How about getting out to buy a couple of scottish kilts?
Gordon,
Can a person dressed like a harlot bring glory to God? Well, just such an event is described at least twise (luk 7:37ff; Joh 8) in the gospels alone so it can be done. Does this mean that this is always the outcome? No, of course not, but Gods glory (and the white robe of His righteousness) does not sit in the clothes. What your reference to "tithe supported ministry" has to do with any of this, I have no idea.
Considering the recomendation from Paul in his letter to Timothy that you refered to, I trust that you always pray with your hands lifted up to God... However, it is true that Paul commends modesty. I would remember though, that modesty is relative and a dress that would be modest at the 4th of July party thrown by the President of USA would non the less be overkill and not modest whatsoever at a 4th of July party held by latin american immigrants newly arrived from Mexico. Again, I dont know what tithe has to do with this subject.
Teen pregnancies and broken homes are of course not a good thing. But they happen and how do we react to them? The way the church family reacts to a teen pregnancy or a broken home might be deciding factors for wether the teen parent or the broken families will trust in God and stay with the church or reject both God and church. A situation which risks leading into either of these events should be discouraged, but in such a way that it can do some good rather than cause increased damage. Hit me in the head with the bible and my head will hurt but it is highly unlikely that it will have changed its mind, and if it does change its mind it is more likely that it changes away from your possition than towards it.
You wrote
My clothes don't change my thinking - but my thinking will change my clothes. Our outward deportment (speech, manners, dress) reflect the inner man.
While this might, I say might for this has the same lacks as other generalisations, be true, it does still not mean that the opposite is true. That your thinking may change your clothes does not mean that you by looking at someones clothes can see what they think. That only works with Amish and Mormon missionaries.
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/01/07 09:58 PM
In Jesus day men also wore a robe rather than pants. Maybe the desenzitation starts there already.
If our standard is WWJD, then we definitely fall short in that department. Unless, of course, if the pants/robe issue is not really the issue.
I suggest that if the wearing of pants in itself is a proof of desensitation and a source for temptation, then all of us, both men and women must reject pants for other kinds of clothes.
If your premise is true, then your conclusion is sound. But I don't think it is. In fact, the "Reform Dress" included pants.
How about getting out to buy a couple of scottish kilts?
I would love to do that. I'd get a bagpipe too if it wasn't too expensive. Grab the nearest telephone pole and see how far I can throw it. Call myself Arnold McSy Go.
But you're not supposed to wear anything under the kilt. That would be questionable.
Furthermore, it could prove a stumbling-block to many. That's not good.
But even wearing a skirt is not enough. Another principle is that the hips should not bear a lot of weight. That means full dresses or suspenders.
That your thinking may change your clothes does not mean that you by looking at someones clothes can see what they think.
That's true.
A few years back, I dressed in casual clothes for church for a couple of weeks, instead of my usual suit. I was doing it for a particular purpose.
Nobody bugged me about it except for my grandmother. When I told her why I was doing it, she was OK. But now I wonder if other people were assuming things, but did not bother to talk to me about it.
Posted By: gordonb1
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/01/07 10:45 PM
Hello Thomas,
You have failed to address the questions, but instead have chosen to misquote what was written. This is the practice of lawyers and politicians. I hope you will see the light to leave these tactics behind you.
There is an expected difference of deportment for those in the ministry from those in the world. You can read of Eli's sons as an example. The women taken in adultery is not recorded as being dressed like a harlot or acting like a harlot after her conviction of sin. Rather she was contrite.
It appears you are more concerned with church reaction to a problem after the fact. There is some merit to this issue, but you beat on it constantly to denounce the church as unloving, judgmental, etc. Again, here you are also right in your observation. But this is not the solution to the problem. We should be much more concerned with helping others avoid the dangerous pitfalls of sin.
Are broken marriages good for anyone? If we promote and accept loose standards among church members, especially those in leadership and ministry, we cannot be our brother's keeper. This means we do not care about the flock of God. You may not see the connection between the ministry's example and the laity's behavior. You can comfort the child of a divorced marriage, but they will always tell you that prevention would have been much preferable.
Why dismiss Paul's counsel to Timothy? A sarcastic comment about prayer or a joke about Scottish kilts does not address the problems nor help the people. The Bible is meant to help us and direct us away from sin, our Guide for life. Why belittle and dismiss it's counsel? Is this what they teach in the seminary today?
Prevention and avoidance of sin was God's original plan. The clean up job He can do, but it Has cost Him 6000 years of pain and separation, and the death of His only begotten Son.
I agree that the Amish have a more modest & becoming style of dress.
Gordon
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 05:51 AM
1. Yes, it is interesting that Tammy is quick to label the church close to fallen. She also seems to think that pastors and their wives know the truth about dress reform. Where is the evidence she is right?
2. Where in the SOP is the wearing of modest pants condoned? I assumed the "pants" were worn under dresses.
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 07:08 AM
Mountain Man, one of the biggest reasons the church is in the condition it is, is because it employs so many Pastors that are soft on sin, like you.
Hmm, lets see here, I read something like this before in my overview study of christian thought. I think this idea might first have been raised by a group known as Donatists. Nothing new under the sun is there?
IMO You are stretch.............ing
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 08:51 AM
She also seems to think that pastors and their wives know the truth about dress reform. Where is the evidence she is right?
I also would assume that pastors who study at our institutions should know about dress reform. I can understand the ignorance of pastors of other denominations, but our pastors should know the light we have been given.
Where in the SOP is the wearing of modest pants condoned? I assumed the "pants" were worn under dresses.
Yes, I believe the pants were under skirts of some kind.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 12:39 PM
Mountain Man, one of the biggest reasons the church is in the condition it is, is because it employs so many Pastors that are soft on sin, like you.
Hmm, lets see here, I read something like this before in my overview study of christian thought. I think this idea might first have been raised by a group known as Donatists. Nothing new under the sun is there?
IMO You are stretch.............ing
Only a little.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 12:54 PM
She also seems to think that pastors and their wives know the truth about dress reform. Where is the evidence she is right?
I also would assume that pastors who study at our institutions should know about dress reform. I can understand the ignorance of pastors of other denominations, but our pastors should know the light we have been given.
Thank you, Asaygo....
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/02/07 01:32 PM
Gordon,
Maybe if you were to be a little bit clearer on what the question/s is/are? I have not had any intentions to misquote you, but maybe what you intended to write and what I acctually read was two different things.
It is true that the clothes of the woman taken in adultery arn't described, however, I would think that someone draged out of an adulterous bed would not be modestly dressed, if dressed at all.
There are two ditches to every road, and it appears to me that the part about prevention is more than adequately represented in this thread. My objective is to bring some balance. Outside of the context provided here, I would likely have said some very different things.
I think where we most of all are thinking differently is concerning what it means to be "brothers keeper". Does it involve worrying about his standing with God or does it involve refraining from causing him to be tempted.
Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, [but] not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
Yes, in the end, it is to God alone we stand or fall. So judging others is at best only a waste of time.
I did not dismiss Paul's counsel to Timothy. What I did do was that I jumped to some assumptions, such as assuming that you read that chapter of the letter selectively and quote the later half of the paragraph while ignoring the former part of the same paragraph. If I am right, that would make you a hypocrite and there is nothing funny nor sarcastic about that. Fact is, if you do not treat the councel about lifted hands in prayer the same as you treat the councel about dress, then you are no less belittling and dissmissing than what you accuse me of being.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 05:11 AM
A: I also would assume that pastors who study at our institutions should know about dress reform. I can understand the ignorance of pastors of other denominations, but our pastors should know the light we have been given.
MM: Where is the evidence our pastors and their wives have studied dress reform? I submit they are ignorant of the truths governing dress reform. I suspect it is not being taught at our schools. It is a non-issue. It is unfortunate, yes, but it is a reality. With this in mind, how can people like Tammy accuse pastors and their wives of being worldly and sinful based on what they haven't learned about dress reform?
A: Yes, I believe the pants were under skirts of some kind.
MM: Then you haven't answered my original question. Why is it that wearing pants was once considered immodest for women (both in the church and in the world), but nowadays neither the church nor the world perceives it as immodest?
1. Arnold, do you think it is immodest for women to wear modest pants?
2. Also, do you think it is immodest for men and women to wear knee length shorts and tee shirts and hang out at the lake or pool together?
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 05:53 AM
Where is the evidence our pastors and their wives have studied dress reform?
That's one of the frustrating things. There's very little evidence that they have studied it. If they have, they are rejecting it.
I submit they are ignorant of the truths governing dress reform. I suspect it is not being taught at our schools. It is a non-issue. It is unfortunate, yes, but it is a reality.
Perhaps you are right. If so, I believe it is an issue. But rather than being an individual issue with the pastor, it is an institutional issue with the school and/or conference.
With this in mind, how can people like Tammy accuse pastors and their wives of being worldly and sinful based on what they haven't learned about dress reform?
She said she sent the pastor something, and he got upset about it. Why would he get upset about it?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 04:04 PM
A: Perhaps you are right. If so, I believe it is an issue. But rather than being an individual issue with the pastor, it is an institutional issue with the school and/or conference.
MM: By my saying "It is a non-issue" I did not mean to imply I believe it is a non-issue. Just thought I'd clarify that in case it wasn't clear. Also, I agree with you, it is a corporate issue if it is not being taught in our schools or churches.
A: She said she sent the pastor something, and he got upset about it. Why would he get upset about it?
MM: If Tammy sent me something about anything I would be hesitant to accept it, too. She strikes me as harsh and insensitive, and I have hard time appreciating such people or learning from them. Knowing about dress reform and being convicted about it are two separate issues. It totally depends on how one learns about it.
I learned about it in a loving environment and was sold on it immediately. I have friends, though, who were accused of being liberal and sinful because they did not accept the wearing of long sleeves as a necessary part of dress reform. Presentation has a lot to do with reception and conviction.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 04:12 PM
Arnold, you have a tendency of not addressing certain aspects of posts without explaining why. Rather than ignoring them, please state why you are unwilling to tackle them. Thank you. I am reposting the parts of my post you did not address. I would appreciate a candid and honest answer.
A: Yes, I believe the pants were under skirts of some kind.
MM: Then you haven't answered my original question. Why is it that wearing pants was once considered immodest for women (both in the church and in the world), but nowadays neither the church nor the world perceives it as immodest?
1. Arnold, do you think it is immodest for women to wear modest pants?
2. Also, do you think it is immodest for men and women to wear knee length shorts and tee shirts and hang out at the lake or pool together?
I realize that by answering these things you run the risk of losing Tammy's approval and acceptance, and becoming a victim of her harsh and insensitive condemnation. However, for the sake of truth, please be brave and share with us your true feelings about it. Thank you.
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 07:14 PM
Arnold, you have a tendency of not addressing certain aspects of posts without explaining why. Rather than ignoring them, please state why you are unwilling to tackle them. Thank you.
LOL I know what you're talking about.
I haven't had quality time on the internet for a long time. What I manage to write are just quickies, requiring little thought/research. The parts I don't address require thought/research, so I don't get to it. Or sometimes, there are bigger fish to fry.
But don't worry that I ignore some stuff to gain/retain man's approval. I don't mind getting on people's wrong side if it means being on God's side.
I'll get back to the pants. I'll tell you now that I have no inherent problem with modest pants, but I am partial to dresses down to the ankle.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/03/07 07:34 PM
I don't mind getting on people's wrong side if it means being on God's side.
:)If we all do that, we'll all end up, sooner or later, on the right side!
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/04/07 10:34 AM
Arnold, you have a tendency of not addressing certain aspects of posts without explaining why. Rather than ignoring them, please state why you are unwilling to tackle them. Thank you.
LOL I know what you're talking about.
I haven't had quality time on the internet for a long time. What I manage to write are just quickies, requiring little thought/research. The parts I don't address require thought/research, so I don't get to it. Or sometimes, there are bigger fish to fry.
But don't worry that I ignore some stuff to gain/retain man's approval. I don't mind getting on people's wrong side if it means being on God's side.
I'll get back to the pants. I'll tell you now that I have no inherent problem with modest pants, but I am partial to dresses down to the ankle.
Asygo, I know what you are talking about too, on the time issue of being able to address everything that comes up.
I read Linda Sutton's study a the beginning of this thread. I thought it was nicely done, with out seeking to push it as a salvation issue.
A few observations: I belong to a national organization that meets at the local level. In our community group we have a monthly meeting and a yearly district and state meeting. I believe that all the women at our local meeting wear pants. At the district meetings nearly all wear pants there may be one or two in a dress. Now I am one of the younger ones with some in there 70's and 80's. Pants seem to be the clothing of choice. All modestly arrayed. (I tend to note things like that, don't know why).
For myself I like pants in the winter (keeps me warm) and have a couple of dress ones for occasions when I attend church. For hot weather, (summer) I like dresses (preferably loose) (to keep cool) long (so I don't have to wear hose). That works for me and my preference.
I know some lovely SDA Christian women that follow "dress reform" that is fine. I just ask that they respect my way of dressing as well.
I also know some other SDA women who follow "dress reform" who do not appear to have the same type of loveliness as the fore mentioned. I think of one women in particular that I have seen another side of. It is ironic in that a man at a more LGSDA church got up in a meeting and brought up this woman as being an example of what a Christian woman should be. But the man was looking on the outward appearance. Yet a close family member had experienced lying and abusive behavior from this same woman.
It is interesting how people are judged on appearance. I recall a few millionaires that I have known. One couple had been to the gym and were still wearing their sweats when the decided to buy a new car, the other came in from his ranch in his old farm truck. Both had come to buy a new mercedes, however the salesmen were slow to assist them and came close to losing a sale. On the other hand someone else can be all decked out but not a cent in the bank and behind on the rent.
Man judges on outward appearance. I'm glad that God judges the heart.
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/04/07 06:30 PM
Man judges on outward appearance. I'm glad that God judges the heart.
Amen, my pants-wearing sister!
However, let's not forget the other side of the coin:
The external appearance is an index to the heart. When hearts are affected by the truth, there will be a death to the world; and those who are dead to the world will not be moved by the laugh, the jeer, and the scorn of unbelievers. They will feel an anxious desire to be like their Master, separate from the world. They will not imitate its fashions or customs. The noble object will be ever before them, to glorify God, and gain the immortal inheritance, and in comparison with this everything of an earthly nature will sink into insignificance. {RH, September 9, 1884 par. 7}
I saw that the outside appearance is an index to the heart. When the exterior is hung with ribbons, collars, and needless things, it plainly shows that the love for all this is in the heart; unless such persons are cleansed from their corruption, they can never see God, for only the pure in heart will see Him. {1T 135.2}
More importantly, let's not forget the solution:
There are many who try to correct the life of others by attacking what they consider are wrong habits. They go to those whom they think are in error, and point out their defects. They say, "You don't dress as you should." They try to pick off the ornaments, or whatever seems offensive, but they do not seek to fasten the mind to the truth. Those who seek to correct others should present the attractions of Jesus. They should talk of His love and compassion, present His example and sacrifice, reveal His Spirit, and they need not touch the subject of dress at all. There is no need to make the dress question the main point of your religion. There is something richer to speak of. Talk of Christ, and when the heart is converted, everything that is out of harmony with the Word of God will drop off. It is only labor in vain to pick leaves off a living tree. The leaves will reappear. The ax must be laid at the root of the tree, and then the leaves will fall off, never to return. {Ev 272.1}
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/04/07 06:32 PM
I don't mind getting on people's wrong side if it means being on God's side.
:)If we all do that, we'll all end up, sooner or later, on the right side!
Yes. We have one Leader, one Master. Let's not get confused who we should be following.
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 01:06 AM
I like the inspired solution that Arnold quoted from Ev 272.1 as it places the focus where it always ought to be, which is on the attractions of Christ. His love should be seen in us in what we say.
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 09:22 AM
Mountain Man, one of the biggest reasons the church is in the condition it is, is because it employs so many Pastors that are soft on sin, like you.
Hmm, lets see here, I read something like this before in my overview study of christian thought. I think this idea might first have been raised by a group known as Donatists. Nothing new under the sun is there?
IMO You are stretch.............ing
Only a little.
Well it added some interest.
I had to look up Donatists, so I learned something new.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 11:53 AM
A:
A: She said she sent the pastor something, and he got upset about it. Why would he get upset about it?
MM: If Tammy sent me something about anything I would be hesitant to accept it, too. She strikes me as harsh and insensitive, and I have hard time appreciating such people or learning from them. Knowing about dress reform and being convicted about it are two separate issues. It totally depends on how one learns about it.
I learned about it in a loving environment and was sold on it immediately. I have friends, though, who were accused of being liberal and sinful because they did not accept the wearing of long sleeves as a necessary part of dress reform. Presentation has a lot to do with reception and conviction.
The way something is "given" is one factor, the way something is "received" is quite another. Jesus gave everything He said, in love, and unfortunately, the ministers of His day, still set about to kill Him.
This is a copy of the complete email sent to the Pastor regarding the booklet, sent when we were on "good terms"
Oh! I think I over heard you saying today, that in the next few sermons, you would be speaking about practical things, diet & dress, etc. So, I wanted to email you this little booklet we stumbled on, years ago...called "The Ribbon of Blue" - it will fit right in with the Sanctuary series you are doing - remember, the priests wore a ribbon of blue at the bottom of their coats.... Please read it, it will take a little time, but it is a subject that is JUST AS IMPORTANT AS DIET REFORM, and desperately needs taught in our church. I'm anxious to hear your thoughts on it...please share it with your wife, it is something every woman in the church should read....I'll try to make copies one of these days to give the women.
Have a good night!
And this morning I received an email from a person who I sent "The Ribbon of Blue" to last week. I don't know this person, only ever read one post from her. This was her response back from receiving the litle booklet.
Greetings,
Thank you for the booklet. It's arrival is actually quite timely. I and 2 other young ladies plan to present something in the afternoon on dress and other 'female' related topics and there are more quotes there than I had found.
I had never heard of your ministry, it's such a blessing that you took the time to email me. it is great to know that we are not alone in this narrow way and it will be wonderful to meet in heaven. So many new friends to meet!
May God bless your ministry. As soon as I am done with this email I plan to look at your website.
I believe that just as much depends on the condition of the heart of the person who
receives the material given, as does the material itself. Remember the parable that Jesus told, called, "The Sower Went Forth to Sow" in Christ Object Lessons? The seed was all the same, but what determined the outcome of the growth of the plant was the "soil" or the "heart condition" of the ground the seed fell on.
It is interesting to me, that so many times, it is the ministers and leaders who rise up against the truth, the lay people are much more open. I guess it shouldn't be surprising though, as that is the way it has ALWAYS been in history...
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 07:51 PM
Honestly, it is also quite important to consider what you are sowing. I dont know in which way the 'gospel of dress reform' is not one of Pauls "another gospel" from his letter to Galatia. Weeds grow equally good on stony ground as it does on good soil. If you do have a "ministry" that has dress reform as one of its pilars Tammy, may God be mercifull.
Thomas
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 08:03 PM
Thomas,
Dress reform is not "another gospel"....it is part of the health message which is the "opening" wedge for the gospel. I don't try to force people to dress like me...I don't push the dress message...but...it just happens to be the subject here...so, if we are going to discuss the subject, we ought to really see what counsel the Lord has given us through the writings of Ellen White. We claim to be the last day church, because, one reason anyways, is that we have a "last day prophet"...yet, we seem to not like to read what the prophet says, when it comes to practical subjects, like how we dress, what we eat, etc.
The standard of modesty, in God's eyes, hasn't changed...
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 09:37 PM
The SOP says the arms should be covered as much as the chest. Does anyone here practice that? Wondering...
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/05/07 10:55 PM
The SOP says the arms should be covered as much as the chest. Does anyone here practice that? Wondering...
Hi Arnold,
My understanding of this is a little different than many, but, perhaps you will see some light in it. I just went and looked up a quote on clothing the arms and the legs, I'm sure there are more, but most of them, far as I know, say something very similar to this one:
These mothers dress their delicate infants as they would not venture to dress themselves. They know that if their own arms were exposed without a covering they would shiver with chilliness. Infants of a tender age cannot endure this process of hardening without receiving injury. Some children may have at their birth so strong constitutions that they can endure such abuse without its costing them life; yet thousands are sacrificed, and tens of thousands have the foundation laid for a short, invalid life, by the custom of bandaging and surfeiting the body with much clothing, while the arms which are at such distance from the seat of life, and for that cause need even more clothing than the chest and lungs, are left naked. Can mothers expect to have quiet and healthy infants, who thus treat them? {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 11}
When the limbs and arms are chilled, the blood is driven from these parts to the lungs and head. The circulation is unbalanced, and nature's fine machinery does not move harmoniously. ... {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 12}
I believe that for health sake, if it is "chilly" outside, or inside for that matter, so that your arms & legs are chilled...then you should be wearing long sleeves and something on your legs, as well. But, if it is hot outside, then it is not a matter of health to wear long sleeves.
About 25 years ago, Al and I lived in TN...it was a hot, humid Summer. Ty Gibson was just coming on the scene then, (preaching an altogether different message than he does today
)and we invited him the Collegedale area. He and James Rafferty were visiting us in our home, and I had on a long dress, cottony material, with short sleeves. They gave me a good talking to, telling me I was not following the dress reform, cause my arms were not covered...and that it was really immodest, and that if I would just try it, I would find out that it was cooler to wear long sleeves. Well, we lived in a little trailer and had no air conditioning, and it was Summertime in TN! We had a little fan in the living room. The whole time Ty & James was there, they stayed right in front of the fan...and when Al went to visit them at the boys dorm where they were staying, they had their long sleeves on, and were sitting on the air conditioner...
There is no doubt in my mind, when it is really hot and humid, short sleeves are much cooler. But, I do believe that no matter what the weather is, we must be modest at all times. There are some who say that short sleeves are immodest, I supposed they can be, but they sure don't have to be. I don't believe in sleeveless...
I believe the counsel for clothing the limbs is normally in context with the weather....and we should apply it accordingly.
What do you think?
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/06/07 06:44 PM
Thomas,
Dress reform is not "another gospel"....it is part of the health message which is the "opening" wedge for the gospel. I don't try to force people to dress like me...I don't push the dress message...but...it just happens to be the subject here...so, if we are going to discuss the subject, we ought to really see what counsel the Lord has given us through the writings of Ellen White. We claim to be the last day church, because, one reason anyways, is that we have a "last day prophet"...yet, we seem to not like to read what the prophet says, when it comes to practical subjects, like how we dress, what we eat, etc.
The standard of modesty, in God's eyes, hasn't changed...
Firstly, considering whom Paul was once writing about, people who came to churches he had established wanting to add to the clear word of the gospel, the question here of course is thus: does this add to the gospel in any way? Do you teach dress reform as something in addition to the gospel and do people whom you teach understand or experience dress reform as something additional to the gospel? If either of these are answered yes, then it is in fact "another gospel" wether you intended it to be so or not.
Secondly, dress reform as part of the health message as a wedge for the gospel. In my view, there was a time when education on dress reform did improve general health. But are not such times now gone by? People who have dirty clothes or not enough clothes or otherwise fall in a category who would benefit from dress reform for health reasons, are they still not aware of the health aspect but for other reasons are unwilling or unable to change the situation?
Also, the health message as a wedge for the gospel? Health messages are wedges for everything from breakfast cereals to New Age these days. It was wise to teach health in a time when noone else did so, but today when everyone and their mother are on the health message bandwaggon? How much more will it take to have a health message fatigue among people?
Thirdly, we have a last day prophet. We "have"? Ellen has been dead for almost 100 years now. In which way do we "have" Ellen as a prophet that we do not for instance "have" Paul and Peter as apostles? If Ellen had lived today and given her advice and prophecies into todays experience, would she have said the same things? Would her emphasis have been the same as it was then? No matter that some of the questions that people raised then are very different from some of the questions that people raise today? Ellen would have found little reason today to write about skirts gathering uncleanliness from the streets for the simple reason that only a very very tiny minority of people today wear such skirts. Maybe she would have suggested the wearing of long sleaved clothes on sunny and warm days as protection from unhealthy UV light instead?
Thomas
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/06/07 06:46 PM
Arnold, like you, I also prefer women in modest dresses, but I am not offended when they wear modest pants. I do not believe they are violating the principles of dress reform when they wear modest pants. What do you think about men and women wearing long shorts and tee shirts while swimming together?
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/06/07 07:47 PM
Tammy, I am not the unteachable liberal sinner you make me out to be. Like you, I embrace the principles of dress reform and apply them in a way that results in optimum health and modesty. You wear short sleeve shirts based on principle even though the dress reform advocated in the SOP calls for long sleeves.
Your assumption that the requirement of long sleeves applies only to chilly temperatures is unfounded. Women simply did not wear short sleeves. It was considered immodest. It is still considered immodest in countries where temperatures are very hot. The women also wear long head coverings in spite of the heat. And they manage just fine.
In our country, though, short sleeves and modest pants are no longer considered immodest. Even long shorts is not considered immodest. Wearing long shorts (below the knees) is no more immodest than wearing a short sleeved shirt. Showing your arms and showing your legs is basically the same thing.
Do you see what I mean?
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/06/07 07:51 PM
The SOP says the arms should be covered as much as the chest. Does anyone here practice that? Wondering...
Hi Arnold,
My understanding of this is a little different than many, but, perhaps you will see some light in it. I just went and looked up a quote on clothing the arms and the legs, I'm sure there are more, but most of them, far as I know, say something very similar to this one:
These mothers dress their delicate infants as they would not venture to dress themselves. They know that if their own arms were exposed without a covering they would shiver with chilliness. Infants of a tender age cannot endure this process of hardening without receiving injury. Some children may have at their birth so strong constitutions that they can endure such abuse without its costing them life; yet thousands are sacrificed, and tens of thousands have the foundation laid for a short, invalid life, by the custom of bandaging and surfeiting the body with much clothing, while the arms which are at such distance from the seat of life, and for that cause need even more clothing than the chest and lungs, are left naked. Can mothers expect to have quiet and healthy infants, who thus treat them? {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 11}
When the limbs and arms are chilled, the blood is driven from these parts to the lungs and head. The circulation is unbalanced, and nature's fine machinery does not move harmoniously. ... {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 12}
I believe that for health sake, if it is "chilly" outside, or inside for that matter, so that your arms & legs are chilled...then you should be wearing long sleeves and something on your legs, as well. But, if it is hot outside, then it is not a matter of health to wear long sleeves.
.......I believe the counsel for clothing the limbs is normally in context with the weather....and we should apply it accordingly.
What do you think?
I think this advice is still as relevant today. Maybe even more so. So often I see little ones hardly covered in cool weather. The mothers seem not to notice. More education in child care would be useful.
My mother had a cousin die at about two years of age, back in 1945. Some 30 - 40 years later, my aunt was talking with a woman, that claimed to have seen the child outside with hardly any clothes on looking a bit blue. (wonder why she didn't do something? Today someone would most likely report to social service) His mother was often off to some social or religious gathering and tended to neglect the offspring. Just leaving the younger at home with the other children. The children were left in soiled diapers for long periods.
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/06/07 08:22 PM
Besides the health issue, theres is the modesty issue.
There was a time that for a woman to show her ankles even when lifting the hem for a few seconds was considered quite titillating.
Now, you can see some women in skirts that barely cover the posterior.
I suspect that immodest dress in society in general is more of a symptom of the times. As in the days of Noah. . . .
Someone said to me that the further away from God what we are, the less we cover ourselves. Do you think there is anything to it?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/07/07 01:25 PM
Tammy, I am not the unteachable liberal sinner you make me out to be. Like you, I embrace the principles of dress reform and apply them in a way that results in optimum health and modesty. You wear short sleeve shirts based on principle even though the dress reform advocated in the SOP calls for long sleeves.
Your assumption that the requirement of long sleeves applies only to chilly temperatures is unfounded. Women simply did not wear short sleeves. It was considered immodest. It is still considered immodest in countries where temperatures are very hot. The women also wear long head coverings in spite of the heat. And they manage just fine.
In our country, though, short sleeves and modest pants are no longer considered immodest. Even long shorts is not considered immodest. Wearing long shorts (below the knees) is no more immodest than wearing a short sleeved shirt. Showing your arms and showing your legs is basically the same thing.
Do you see what I mean?
No MM, I do not see what you mean. Short sleeves (not sleeveless) cannot be compared to shorts. Please find me a statement in the SOP that says we should wear long sleeves for modesty?
Please consider the following two quotes:
The first garments to be worn by the child should be made of fine, soft material, with long sleeves, and little loose bodices, or waists, to support them from the shoulders. Thus warmth, protection, and comfort will be secured, and one of the chief causes of irritation and restlessness will be removed. The baby will have better health, and the mother will not find the care of her child so heavy a tax on her strength and time. {PHJ, June 1, 1905 par. 6}
Instead of Dick and Jane, the reader Ellen Harmon used had none other than a little girl named Ellen as a heroine. The sketches that illustrate the primer show Ellen wearing a long, straight, light-colored skirt. The hem had a little ruffle that came just to the top of her shoes. The blouse had a broad collar and short, puffed sleeves and was fastened down the front with hooks and eyes. Other pictures of the primer depict long-sleeved dresses for older girls and sometimes a hat with a gracefully upturned broad brim and a low, round top. One lesson about Ellen is titled "A Good Girl." {1BIO 26.1}
The first quote, like every other than I have found, always puts long sleeves in the context of "warmth, protection and comfort", NOT "modesty" as you are trying to imply.
The second quote, shows that people did wear short sleeves in those days, and it was not considered immoral.
You are trying to "muddy the waters" as they say, by comparing short sleeves to shorts. The legs of a woman are quite different than the arms of a woman, I can't say that I ever heard of a man who was staring at a woman's arms, but I've heard of many who couldn't keep their eyes off a woman's legs.
Here is what she says about woman wearing pants, and please, I pray that any woman reading this, will not be offended, but search and pray and ask God to show you the truth. It is not easy to give up wearing pants, especially if you are a "tomboy" type of woman...I threw all my pants out THREE times (over 10 years ago), before I was finally able to "pick up the cross" and carry it. And yes, Dress Reform is a "cross"...I'll give you that quote in a moment...
I saw that God's order has been reversed, and His special directions disregarded, by those who adopt the American costume. I was referred to Deuteronomy 22:5: "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." God would not have His people adopt the so-called reform dress. It is immodest apparel, wholly unfitted for the modest, humble followers of Christ. {1T 421.2}
There is an increasing tendency to have women in their dress and appearance as near like the other sex as possible, and to fashion their dress very much like that of men, but God pronounces it abomination. "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety." 1 Timothy 2:9. {1T 421.3}
Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights and the so-called dress reform (the world's version of "dress reform" was women wearing pants) might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. Spiritualists have, to quite an extent, adopted this singular mode of dress. Seventh-day Adventists, who believe in the restoration of the gifts, are often branded as spiritualists. Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. ... {1T 421.4}
With the so-called dress reform there goes a spirit of levity and boldness just in keeping with the dress. Modesty and reserve seem to depart from many as they adopt that style of dress. I was shown that God would have us take a course consistent and explainable. Let the sisters adopt the American costume and they would destroy their own influence and that of their husbands. They would become a byword and a derision. Our Saviour says: "Ye are the light of the world." "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." There is a great work for us to do in the world, and God would not have us take a course to lessen or destroy our influence with the world.
{1T 422.1}
(words in () are mine)
And here is the quote about dress reform being a "cross".
Many who profess to believe the Testimonies live in neglect of the light given. The dress reform is treated by some with great indifference and by others with contempt, because there is a cross attached to it. For this cross I thank God. It is just what we need to distinguish and separate God's commandment-keeping people from the world. The dress reform answers to us as did the ribbon of blue to ancient Israel. The proud, and those who have no love for sacred truth, which will separate them from the world, will show it by their works. God in His providence has given us the light upon health reform, that we may understand it in all its bearings, follow the light it brings, and by rightly relating ourselves to life have health that we may glorify God and be a blessing to others. {3T 171.1}
But, Jesus will help us carry the "cross", and honestly, it truly is as He promised it would be,
"Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." MM, please don't confuse people... The SOP has given us specific directions even as to how long our dresses should be...
In view of existing prejudices against the reform dress, it becomes our duty in adopting it to avoid all those things which make it unnecessarily objectionable. It should reach to within eight or nine inches from the floor. The skirt of the dress should not be distended as with hoops. It should be as full as the long dress. With a proper amount of light skirts, the dress will fall properly and gracefully about the limbs. {HR, September 1, 1868 par. 17}
I've never read anything how sleeves should be within so many inches of the wrist... As I said, you are mudding the waters and trying to confuse the issue. The principles as I read them, are #1. That our limbs should be covered for warmth and healths sake, according to the weather. #2. Women's legs should not be exposed for the sake of modesty.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/07/07 01:31 PM
Someone said to me that the further away from God what we are, the less we cover ourselves. Do you think there is anything to it?
I never heard that saying, Crater, but I think there is alot of truth to it! I wouldn't say though, that the converse is true...there are many who are very modest in their clothes, but it doesn't mean their heart is right with God.
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/07/07 10:05 PM
TR: ... (the world's version of "dress reform" was women wearing pants) ...
MM: The pants were worn under "a dress resembling a coat and reaching about halfway from the hip to the knee." Sister White opposed it, not because it was immodest, but because it resembled
"very nearly the dress worn by men."
1T 424
We do not think it in accordance with our faith to dress in the American costume, to wear hoops, or to go to an extreme in wearing long dresses which sweep the sidewalks and streets. If women would wear their dresses so as to clear the filth of the streets an inch or two, their dresses would be modest, and they could be kept clean much more easily, and would wear longer. Such a dress would be in accordance with our faith. {1T 424.1}
In wide contrast with this modest dress is the so-called American costume, resembling very nearly the dress worn by men. It consists of a vest, pants, and a dress resembling a coat and reaching about halfway from the hip to the knee. This dress I have opposed, from what has been shown me as in harmony with the word of God; while the other I have recommended as modest, comfortable, convenient, and healthful. {1T 465.1}
TR: Please find me a statement in the SOP that says we should wear long sleeves for modesty?
MM: I didn't find anything that addressed the length of sleeves. But my data base is not exhaustive. In the following quote she expounds upon the need to have the limbs uniformly clothed. Covering the arms and legs protects against cold in the winter and against dangerous UV rays in the summer.
Dress reform requires women to wear long skirts over pants both winter and summer. Nothing suggests that the pants should not be worn in summer. I myself wear long sleeves and pants in summer and I do not find it to be too hot. I realize, however, that long sleeves in the mid-west is unpleasant.
The limbs were not formed by our Creator to endure exposure, as was the face. The Lord provided the face with an immense circulation, because it must be exposed. He provided, also, large veins and nerves for the limbs and feet, to contain a large amount of the current of human life, that the limbs might be uniformly as warm as the body. They should be so thoroughly clothed as to induce the blood to the extremities.
Satan invented the fashions which leave the limbs exposed, chilling back the life current from its original course. And parents bow at the shrine of fashion and so clothe their children that the nerves and veins become contracted and do not answer the purpose that God designed they should. The result is, habitually cold feet and hands. Those parents who follow fashion instead of reason will have an account to render to God for thus robbing their children of health. Even life itself is frequently sacrificed to the god of fashion. {2T 531.3}
Children who are clothed according to fashion cannot endure exposure in the open air unless the weather is mild. Therefore parents and children remain in ill-ventilated rooms, fearing the atmosphere out of doors; and well they may, with their fashionable style of clothing. If they would clothe themselves sensibly, and have moral courage to take their position on the side of right, they would not endanger health by going out summer and winter, and exercising freely in the open air. {2T 532.1}
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/07/07 10:07 PM
Someone said to me that the further away from God what we are, the less we cover ourselves. Do you think there is anything to it?
I never heard that saying, Crater, but I think there is alot of truth to it! I wouldn't say though, that the converse is true...there are many who are very modest in their clothes, but it doesn't mean their heart is right with God.
I agree that the reverse is true. I told in an earlier post of the SDA woman who followed dress reform, but had a problem with lying and abusive behavior.
We cannot always tell from the way someone dresses, where their heart is.
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/07/07 11:03 PM
According to S A Nagel, at least four great principles enter into the subject of dress.
In the first place is plainness and simplicity.
The second principle of correct dress is modesty
The third principle is appropriateness.
The fourth principle is health.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 11:31 AM
TR: ... (the world's version of "dress reform" was women wearing pants) ...
MM: The pants were worn under "a dress resembling a coat and reaching about halfway from the hip to the knee." Sister White opposed it, not because it was immodest, but because it resembled
"very nearly the dress worn by men."
1T 424
We do not think it in accordance with our faith to dress in the American costume, to wear hoops, or to go to an extreme in wearing long dresses which sweep the sidewalks and streets. If women would wear their dresses so as to clear the filth of the streets an inch or two, their dresses would be modest, and they could be kept clean much more easily, and would wear longer. Such a dress would be in accordance with our faith. {1T 424.1}
In wide contrast with this modest dress is the so-called American costume, resembling very nearly the dress worn by men. It consists of a vest, pants, and a dress resembling a coat and reaching about halfway from the hip to the knee. This dress I have opposed, from what has been shown me as in harmony with the word of God; while the other I have recommended as modest, comfortable, convenient, and healthful. {1T 465.1}
True, the pants in her day were worn under a long coat, so they were not "immodest" in that they weren't revealing...but they were manly, confusing the sexes. And they are still that today, on top of many of them being immodest. (tight & revealing).
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 11:35 AM
TR: Please find me a statement in the SOP that says we should wear long sleeves for modesty?
MM: I didn't find anything that addressed the length of sleeves. But my data base is not exhaustive. In the following quote she expounds upon the need to have the limbs uniformly clothed. Covering the arms and legs protects against cold in the winter and against dangerous UV rays in the summer.
Dress reform requires women to wear long skirts over pants both winter and summer. Nothing suggests that the pants should not be worn in summer. I myself wear long sleeves and pants in summer and I do not find it to be too hot. I realize, however, that long sleeves in the mid-west is unpleasant.
The limbs were not formed by our Creator to endure exposure, as was the face. The Lord provided the face with an immense circulation, because it must be exposed. He provided, also, large veins and nerves for the limbs and feet, to contain a large amount of the current of human life, that the limbs might be uniformly as warm as the body. They should be so thoroughly clothed as to induce the blood to the extremities.
Satan invented the fashions which leave the limbs exposed, chilling back the life current from its original course. And parents bow at the shrine of fashion and so clothe their children that the nerves and veins become contracted and do not answer the purpose that God designed they should. The result is, habitually cold feet and hands. Those parents who follow fashion instead of reason will have an account to render to God for thus robbing their children of health. Even life itself is frequently sacrificed to the god of fashion. {2T 531.3}
Children who are clothed according to fashion cannot endure exposure in the open air unless the weather is mild. Therefore parents and children remain in ill-ventilated rooms, fearing the atmosphere out of doors; and well they may, with their fashionable style of clothing. If they would clothe themselves sensibly, and have moral courage to take their position on the side of right, they would not endanger health by going out summer and winter, and exercising freely in the open air. {2T 532.1}
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 11:40 AM
According to S A Nagel, at least four great principles enter into the subject of dress.
In the first place is plainness and simplicity.
The second principle of correct dress is modesty
The third principle is appropriateness.
The fourth principle is health.
I really enjoy reading S. A. Nagel's thoughts. Someone sent me some sermons by him, they had typed out. They were so good, I posted them on our website -
Sermons by S. A. Nagel The one about dress is powerful! (#5)
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 01:41 PM
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 02:46 PM
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting.
Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD...
We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle...
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 05:28 PM
Neither the world, nor catholicism, nor protestantism, nor the SDA church believes women wearing modest pants (not tight nor revealing) is sinful or immodest. Yes, there are people who believe it is sinful and immodest, and among them the details vary greatly. Some believe women should be loosely clothed at all times while in public from wrist to ankle to neck. There are those who believe short sleeves are acceptable in hot weather but long dresses over pants is required to maintain modesty. Still others believe it is not necessary to wear pants under long dresses. Then there are those who believe long shorts and short sleeves are modest. And finally some people believe bikinis are acceptable.
Who is right?
Tammy believes people are liberal and sinful if they do not agree with her application of dress reform. She is convinced it is perfectly acceptable for women to wear short sleeves and long dresses over pants in hot weather. Protection against UV rays is not an issue. Any deviation from her strict application is considered sinful. Is she right?
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 05:42 PM
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting.
Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD...
We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle...
And if Ellen had lived in a time when people where aware that such a thing as UV light existed, would she then have mentioned it?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 06:01 PM
Neither the world, nor catholicism, nor protestantism, nor the SDA church believes women wearing modest pants (not tight nor revealing) is sinful or immodest. Yes, there are people who believe it is sinful and immodest, and among them the details vary greatly. Some believe women should be loosely clothed at all times while in public from wrist to ankle to neck. There are those who believe short sleeves are acceptable in hot weather but long dresses over pants is required to maintain modesty. Still others believe it is not necessary to wear pants under long dresses. Then there are those who believe long shorts and short sleeves are modest. And finally some people believe bikinis are acceptable.
Who is right?
Tammy believes people are liberal and sinful if they do not agree with her application of dress reform. She is convinced it is perfectly acceptable for women to wear short sleeves and long dresses over pants in hot weather. Protection against UV rays is not an issue. Any deviation from her strict application is considered sinful. Is she right?
MM, you are twisting what I have said and putting words in my mouth that I never said. Where did I say women should wear long dresses over pants in hot weather????? Protection against UV rays is not THE issue that EGW was commenting on.
I don't really care what "the world, nor Catholicism, nor Protestantism, nor the SDA church" think, when it comes to modesty...I only care what God thinks.
I don't like discussions with those who have an attitude like you do, so please excuse me from further conversation with you.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 06:06 PM
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting.
Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD...
We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle...
And if Ellen had lived in a time when people where aware that such a thing as UV light existed, would she then have mentioned it?
I don't know...I doubt there was near the problem in her day as in our day, because there were not near as many people exposing so much of their body to the sun. Even the world was a whole lot more modest. Imagine what the beach looked like in her day, compared to our day?
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/08/07 10:21 PM
Did women wear short sleeves back then?
Posted By: D R
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/09/07 03:02 AM
maybe it is time for full face coverings and to the ankle dresses.
-This is cracked! What is with us???
-Modesty in USA/CANADA can mean many different things to many different people!! This is a waste of time debating what we are to wear or not wear...I am just so thankful that He looks upon the HEART and not on the Hem Line!
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/09/07 03:02 AM
TR: Where did I say women should wear long dresses over pants in hot weather?????
MM: I beg your pardon, I assumed you agreed with the SOP on wearing long dresses over pants year round. My mistake. Do you believe hot weather warrants wearing long dresses without pants? If so, please post inspired statements to support your view. Thank you.
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/09/07 01:43 PM
Did women wear short sleeves back then?
You know, Arnold, I have never seen a picture of women back then with short sleeves...but...there is so much counsel about covering the limbs for protection from the cold and chilliness, that it makes me wonder, "Why would there have been the need for all this counsel if the women were wearing long sleeves?" And I did post that quote about a book that EGW read as a child that had a picture of a little girl with short sleeves...so if they made clothes for children with short sleeves, I would imagine they also made adult clothes with short sleeves. But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know. Do you know?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/09/07 01:49 PM
maybe it is time for full face coverings and to the ankle dresses.
-This is cracked! What is with us???
-Modesty in USA/CANADA can mean many different things to many different people!! This is a waste of time debating what we are to wear or not wear...I am just so thankful that He looks upon the HEART and not on the Hem Line!
It is true, that God looks on the heart, but are you aware that
The outside appearance is an index to the heart.--1T 136 (1856).
Posted By: Mountain Man
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/09/07 11:45 PM
TR: But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know.
MM: Tammy, you can ignore me, but we cannot ignore your theology based on speculation. You seem like a staunch and strict advocate of the old ways, the truth, and yet you have no problem, when it suits your taste, doing whatever makes sense to you. In spite of the fact you do not have inspired support for your version of dress reform (i.e., short sleeves during hot weather, dresses without pants) you go out on a limb. I don't get it?
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 02:20 AM
Here is a clear quote in relation to the dress reform, which also speaks about the pants part of this reform dress:
The Reform Dress.--The reform dress, which was once advocated, [THE "REFORM DRESS" ADVOCATED AND ADOPTED IN THE 1860'S WAS DESIGNED BY A GROUP OF SDA WOMEN IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A HEALTHFUL, MODEST, COMFORTABLE, AND NEAT ATTIRE IN HARMONY WITH THE LIGHT GIVEN ELLEN WHITE, WHICH WAS MUCH NEEDED AT THE TIME. SEE PP. 252-255. IT CALLED FOR LOOSE-FITTING GARMENTS HUNG FROM THE SHOULDERS WITH A HEMLINE ABOUT NINE INCHES FROM THE FLOOR. THE LOWER LIMBS WERE CLOTHED WITH A TROUSERLIKE GARMENT PROVIDING COMFORT AND WARMTH. SEE STORY OF OUR HEALTH MESSAGE, PP. 112-130.--COMPILERS.] proved a battle at every step. Members of the church, refusing to adopt this healthful style of dress, caused dissension and discord. With some there was no uniformity and taste in the preparation of the dress as it had been plainly set before them. This was food for talk. The result was that the objectionable features, the pants, were left off. The burden of advocating the reform dress was removed because that which was given as a blessing was turned into a curse. {3SM 253.2}
It seems like there was quite a stir over the wearing of the pants part of the reform dress back then. There definitely isn't such a stir about this today!
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 02:30 AM
Here is a clear quote in relation to the dress reform, which also speaks about the pants part of this reform dress:
The Reform Dress.--The reform dress, which was once advocated, [THE "REFORM DRESS" ADVOCATED AND ADOPTED IN THE 1860'S WAS DESIGNED BY A GROUP OF SDA WOMEN IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A HEALTHFUL, MODEST, COMFORTABLE, AND NEAT ATTIRE IN HARMONY WITH THE LIGHT GIVEN ELLEN WHITE, WHICH WAS MUCH NEEDED AT THE TIME. SEE PP. 252-255. IT CALLED FOR LOOSE-FITTING GARMENTS HUNG FROM THE SHOULDERS WITH A HEMLINE ABOUT NINE INCHES FROM THE FLOOR. THE LOWER LIMBS WERE CLOTHED WITH A TROUSERLIKE GARMENT PROVIDING COMFORT AND WARMTH. SEE STORY OF OUR HEALTH MESSAGE, PP. 112-130.--COMPILERS.] proved a battle at every step. Members of the church, refusing to adopt this healthful style of dress, caused dissension and discord. With some there was no uniformity and taste in the preparation of the dress as it had been plainly set before them. This was food for talk. The result was that the objectionable features, the pants, were left off. The burden of advocating the reform dress was removed because that which was given as a blessing was turned into a curse. {3SM 253.2}
It seems like there was quite a stir over the wearing of the pants part of the reform dress back then. There definitely isn't such a stir about this today!
I think it would create the same stir today, Daryl, if women wore the same kind of pants, under dresses as they did then. Again, in that quote, the pants were worn for "comfort and warmth". Today, when it is cold, we have "leggins", which are very warm and comfortable, and they serve the same purpose as did the pants under the dresses then.
Posted By: asygo
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 08:27 AM
Did women wear short sleeves back then?
You know, Arnold, I have never seen a picture of women back then with short sleeves...but...there is so much counsel about covering the limbs for protection from the cold and chilliness, that it makes me wonder, "Why would there have been the need for all this counsel if the women were wearing long sleeves?" And I did post that quote about a book that EGW read as a child that had a picture of a little girl with short sleeves...so if they made clothes for children with short sleeves, I would imagine they also made adult clothes with short sleeves. But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know. Do you know?
I don't know. I just realized that I have never seen pictures of adult women wearing short sleeves. So I wondered if anyone has any info.
But even if children wore short sleeves, that doesn't say anything about adults. There are suits for little boys that come with short pants, but I have never seen an adult wear one.
Posted By: vastergotland
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 09:48 AM
I think you are adding the part about "the dangerous UV rays in the summer". I only see where she says that the long sleeves protects from "chilling", which would imply winter and cold weather.
So it is the letter of her instruction that is important, no matter what the principal behind it might be? Interesting.
Of course not...but in ALL the quotes I could find, not ONE of them mention dressing the limbs because of HEAT...rather it is the opposite...it is because of the COLD...
We should adhere to the principle, not twist the principle...
And if Ellen had lived in a time when people where aware that such a thing as UV light existed, would she then have mentioned it?
I don't know...I doubt there was near the problem in her day as in our day, because there were not near as many people exposing so much of their body to the sun. Even the world was a whole lot more modest. Imagine what the beach looked like in her day, compared to our day?
But much more people where exposed to the sun through farm work. And in todays world, protection from the sun is most certainly a health issue as people are dying from skin cancers.
But you made more than clear that the health aspect of dress reform limmits itself to keeping warm in cold weather so I guess it is pointless to further discuss this. Meanwhile, the world is moving on...
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 12:30 PM
Did women wear short sleeves back then?
You know, Arnold, I have never seen a picture of women back then with short sleeves...but...there is so much counsel about covering the limbs for protection from the cold and chilliness, that it makes me wonder, "Why would there have been the need for all this counsel if the women were wearing long sleeves?" And I did post that quote about a book that EGW read as a child that had a picture of a little girl with short sleeves...so if they made clothes for children with short sleeves, I would imagine they also made adult clothes with short sleeves. But, that is all speculation, as I really don't know. Do you know?
I don't know. I just realized that I have never seen pictures of adult women wearing short sleeves. So I wondered if anyone has any info.
But even if children wore short sleeves, that doesn't say anything about adults. There are suits for little boys that come with short pants, but I have never seen an adult wear one.
That is true about suits with shorts for little boys... You may be right...I've never seen a picture of adult women with short sleeves either....but why then, would all the counsel be for covering the limbs?
Posted By: Tammy Roesch
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 06/10/07 12:40 PM
I did search for "bare arms" and found this statement...
The Medical Reporter, under the caption of "Dress of Children," has the following lucid and pointed remarks:-- {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 1}
"THE CHIEF CAUSE OF INFANTILE MORTALITY IS NOT MORE THE WEATHER OR FOUL AIR THAN THE IGNORANCE AND FALSE PRIDE OF THE MOTHERS. CHILDREN ARE KILLED BY THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE DRESSED, AND BY THE FOOD THAT IS GIVEN THEM, AS MUCH AS BY ANY OTHER CAUSES. INFANTS OF THE MOST TENDER AGE, IN OUR CHANGEABLE AND ROUGH CLIMATE, ARE LEFT WITH BARE ARMS AND LEGS AND WITH LOW-NECKED DRESSES.THE MOTHERS, IN THE SAME DRESS, WOULD SHIVER AND SUFFER WITH COLD, AND EXPECT A FIT OF SICKNESS AS THE RESULT OF THEIR CULPABLE CARELESSNESS. AND YET THE MOTHERS COULD ENDURE SUCH A TREATMENT WITH FAR LESS DANGER TO HEALTH AND LIFE THAN THEIR TENDER INFANTS. {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 2}
"A MOMENT'S REFLECTION WILL INDICATE THE EFFECTS OF THIS MODE OF DRESSING, OR WANT OF DRESSING, ON THE CHILD. THE MOMENT THE COLD AIR STRIKES THE BARE ARMS AND LEGS OF THE CHILD, THE BLOOD IS DRIVEN FROM THESE EXTREMITIES TO THE INTERNAL AND MORE VITAL ORGANS OF THE BODY. THE RESULT IS CONGESTION, TO A GREATER OR LESS EXTENT, OF THESE ORGANS. IN WARM WEATHER THE EFFECT WILL BE CONGESTION OF THE BOWELS, CAUSING DIARRHEA, DYSENTERY, OR CHOLERA INFANTUM. WE THINK THIS MODE OF DRESSING MUST BE RECKONED AS ONE OF THE MOST PROMINENT CAUSES OF SUMMER COMPLAINTS, SO CALLED. IN COLDER WEATHER, CONGESTION AND INFLAMMATION OF THE LUNGS, CONGESTION AND INFLAMMATION OF THE BRAIN, CONVULSIONS, ETC., WILL RESULT. AT ALL SEASONS, CONGESTION, MORE OR LESS IS CAUSED, THE DEFINITE EFFECTS DEPENDING UPON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHILD, THE WEATHER, AND VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES. {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 3}
"IT IS PAINFUL, EXTREMELY SO, TO ANY ONE WHO REFLECTS UPON THE SUBJECT, TO SEE CHILDREN THUS DECKED LIKE VICTIMS FOR SACRIFICE, TO GRATIFY THE INSANE PRIDE OF FOOLISH MOTHERS. OUR MOST EARNEST ADVICE TO ALL MOTHERS IS TO DRESS THE LEGS AND ARMS OF THEIR CHILDREN WARMLY AT ALL EVENTS. IT WOULD BE INFINITELY LESS DANGEROUS TO LIFE AND HEALTH TO LEAVE THEIR BODIES UNCOVERED, THAN TO LEAVE THEIR ARMS AND LEGS AS BARE AS IS THE COMMON CUSTOM." {HR, January 1, 1872 par. 4}
It looks like, from this quote, that the mother's arms were not bare, but for fashion, they clothed their children like that. Again, though, it seems like from everything I read, the counsel to cover the arms & legs had everything to do with the cold climate. I've not seen one statement that says to cover them because of heat or the sun. That was the purpose for the pants in the dress reform, as well as modesty. Now women have leggins that serve the same purpose...especially if they wear long enough dresses...which, from what I understand is about 9" from the floor.
Posted By: D R
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/01/07 05:18 AM
I might get in trouble now (not a fist for me LOL ) I wore a traditional Bermudian suit to my neice's wedding here in Cap-Pele New Brunswick (fairly Conservative region as far as the SDA population which is about 1 in 3,000) and I really was comfortablem and my wife really likes the look on me, and that is all that counts for me. The suit consists of a short sleeve button down shirt with a tie that matches my socks. Bermuda shorts (beige for this event) and with knee high socks and a pair of brown oxford shoes. I was in Bermuda recently and this outfit could have cost about $400 to put together but thankfully we have an amazing clothing store here (Frenchy's) and I put this outfit together for under $20 in total (all new clohes except for the lightly used shoes! )
-SO: I had bare arms and bare knees! The shame of it all!!??
-IMAGINE if I would wear my Welsh National roots KILT to Church, would this be considered inappropriate? fyi DM Richards created the Natioanl WELSH Tartan in 1967! (not me though, I was born in 1967!)
Posted By: crater
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/01/07 08:24 AM
The look didn't sound to bad until I came to the knee high socks.
But as long as your wife approves, why not.
Posted By: D R
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/15/07 03:39 AM
Crater:
Ya the socks i was not so crazy about, BUT the guys that dress this way in Bermuda did look sharp!
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/19/07 09:32 PM
So were you the hit or main attraction at the wedding?
Posted By: D R
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/22/07 03:23 AM
daryl, Ashley and Josh were the Main attraction and as long as I am a hit with my wife then all is well!
-Just wait untill i wear a kilt to church!
Posted By: Daryl
Re: A Christian Guide to Dress--Part One - 09/28/07 03:32 PM
I am scheduled to preach there on Sabbath, October 6th.