by 
One of the most difficult things to address in terms of modesty and what to wear is the fact that fashion and what society wears changes over time. We’ve previously discussed the concept that men have not always worn pants, and the cultural bearing on what we wear, but I’d like to look deeper into what’s going on in our world today.
The Sexualization of Society
I find it interesting that the very first thing that happened when Adam and Eve fell was that they found out that they were naked. Certainly this had to be a strange thing for them– they probably expected to die from eating the fruit, but instead they were overcome with shame and wanted to cover their bodies. This is one of the things that I find interesting about evolution. If we’re all descended from animals that don’t have shame nor do they cover, why do we? How did we evolve shame? But I digress.
From that time until this, people have had a natural desire to hide their shame and cover their bodies. Now, granted, each time period has things that they want to show, for different purposes at different times, but that doesn’t stop the natural inclination to cover up.
There has been, through time, clothing that indicates the intent of the heart. As early as Jacob and Tamar we see that if a woman covered herself and wore a veil that it signified that she was a prostitute looking for “work”.
Today we have seen sexual desire– a very powerful and good thing within marriage– being used to sell beer, cigarettes, auto loans, Internet domain names, and even used to get people to church! It seems that sex sells everything– and it’s gotten to the point that the image of the woman that is baring it all is reinforced from all corners.
Beauty vs. Body
The difference is that every woman is given a body, but not every woman is given true beauty. You see, just like Tamar looked the part of the harlot– which attracted Jacob physically– she could also dress the part of the widow and carry sobriety and reflect her true person.
What you wear has the effect of telegraphing the message of what you are inside. Just like the bride’s gown shows that she’s about to or just has gotten married, what you wear and how you carry yourself have a big impact on what you are advertising– more so than you would imagine.
You see, to me, a lot of the conversation in this area has to do with “how long a skirt should I wear”, “how tight is too tight” and “does this blouse go down too far.” Those are really the wrong questions. For one thing, if it’s so close that you’re asking, don’t wear it! Secondly, a lot of things that could be borderline can cross simply by who you are on the inside.
This is why you get questions like “Can Pants be Considered Modest?” The answer is more obvious than is seems– it depends on who the woman is that is filling them.
Attitude is Half the Battle
Take, for instance, this picture on the right. By all accounts this could be considered to be a modest top. The sleeves are capped so no shoulder is showing. There’s no obvious cleavage, though it does show a lot of chest. This would be borderline in my book.
And yet look at her eyes and her face. Obviously this is the look the woman was going for– a “come hither” look. And that’s what makes something that could be considered borderline go over the edge. Now this picture says to me that the girl is teasing, and is going too far.
But I’m Just Trying to Stay in Fashion!
Have you ever really taken a look at what’s coming down the runways. I’m sure there must be a blog somewhere poking fun at some of the more ridiculous things that people wear that’s declared high fashion. Some of it I’m sure they’re only able to squeeze into once!
But I know what you’re saying. No woman (or man for that matter) wants to look like his clothes are frumpy. However, we must have these things in mind when looking at clothing:
- They’re selling clothes to make women think they are sexy. They are selling the tease.
- They do not care whether or not you are modestly dressed, whether it fits, or what body parts are displaying. They are interested in sales.
- We must search for things that are modest without question.
If we keep these things in mind, and cultivate a pure heart, we will be radiating the beauty from within– and any attention that we get will go to the One that made us.
Good post on the subject of Attitude Modesty! I submitted a similar post to your blog carnival.
I registered for your site…so, umm…what’s supposed to happen? Will my avatar change?
~Anna
Thanks! I think the carnival is going to be a great thing, with a great focus.
I changed your avatar– sorry that it took me so long.
Did you register with the same e-mail address that you’re commenting with? Did you register for the newsletter or the register link? Because I don’t have anyone in my user list that has the same e-mail address that you are commenting with. I listed the benefits in a post about why you should register!
Hi, M, and thanks for another great post.
“Secondly, a lot of things that could be borderline can cross simply by who you are on the inside.” This sounds like what I was trying to say in my post about Little Christ’s. It never works to set a rigid list of man-made standards – what may be right for one Christian may not be right for another. However, if we are seeking to honor Christ and live like Him, He will show us where we are wrong, and we will end up at the right place. (I always wonder if I make any sense! 🙂 )
“You see, to me, a lot of the conversation in this area has to do with “how long a skirt should I wear”, “how tight is too tight” and “does this blouse go down too far.” Those are really the wrong questions.”
That is why I believe the question should not be, “What is wrong with this?” but, instead, should be, “What is right with this?”
Hey Revka,
Certainly there are many things that can be defined by standards, but what it right and wrong for a person goes far beyond that. That’s why I think Paul had to spend such a long time talking about Christian liberty. He knew that some people would feel wrong wearing, eating, doing some things that others would have no problem doing. Particularly I see this in people that were “saved from” certain things. These brothers and sisters are more sensitive towards some things (be it music, drugs, smoking, movie going) than everyone else is, and they shouldn’t be discouraged because of something someone else feels the liberty in Christ to do.
There’s a line, and there’s liberty. Paul’s standard: make sure you’re doing it all to the glory of God.
Go a little further in what you mean by asking “What’s right with this?” Could you give an example?
Hi,
I think you make a very good point in this post. The attitude shouldn’t be ‘how much I can get away with?’, but rather, ‘what can I do to make sure I’m dressed modestly?’
Okay, an example.
The photograph of the girl in this post, for instance, shows a shirt that could be classified as borderline. When debating whether or not to purchase this shirt, I can follow one of two approaches:
1. “What’s wrong with that? It doesn’t show any cleavage, and my shoulders are covered.” In this example, my focus is on whether or not there is actually anything wrong with this shirt. I can get right up to the edge of my standard as long as I don’t cross the line.
2. “What’s right with this shirt? Is it unquestionably modest? Could it be a stumbling block to others? Is there the possibility that this could have a negative effect on someone else? Will this purchase please God?” The focus shifts from seeing how close I can get to that man-made standard (without crossing the line, of course) to the higher level of seeking to be above reproach.
It is my opinion that focusing on “what is right with this” eliminates much of what we consider to be gray areas when determining our standards.
Good post!
“What you wear has the effect of telegraphing the message of what you are inside”
And purity starts with the heart!!!
Good point, Revka– we want to stay as far away from the line as possible, and using a positive approach like you outlined can do just that. Thanks for taking the time to make it clearer.
Thanks, DulceDiana. Purity does start with the heart.
Revka, you really put it well. I applaud you.
Quote (MInTheGap)
“And yet look at her eyes and her face. Obviously this is the look the woman was going for– a “come hither” look. ”
Funny, to me that woman’s look comes off familiar but entirely modest. I definately don’t get the come hither effect. LOL!
Anyway, to get back to what Revka said, I think she is very much right and I would only take it a step further.
First of all, those who are trying to get as close to the line as they can without crossing it are just trying to serve man becaus those lines are drawn in the sand by men not God. Thank you for pointing that out. But let’s not entertain such things… if you are someone who is that concerned with what others think of you (myself included in certain areas and ways) then I know how hard it is to make God the central focus above other people’s oppinions, but let me encourage you to struggle with confidence for this is what God is calling us to.
Men can condemn or accept but the Lord has already paid the price for your sins, therefore be joyful and know that in Chirst you are made perfect!
If what we wear is just another law then it’s a law Christ fulfilled. But if what we wear is chosen out of a pure motive (Love) then it is a truly beautiful thing. Seek out the Lord and His ways… ask Him to purify your heart first. Then out of a good heart you will wear what is modest and good to wear.
One cannot come to anything in Christ out of a desire to fulfill the Law. The Law was not created as something for men to seek to fulfill, it was created to show men their faults and thereby show them their true need for a Savior.
Sometimes we focus entirely too much on what we must do to be righteous and holy… look at the rich young ruler who said “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” Jesus told him, “Why do you as me about what is good? There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”
Jesus was showing this young man that there was nothing he could DO to inherit the Kingdom of God, but that he must accept the Truth of the Gospel to inherit the Kingdom. That truth is that Christ is the One Good person who was given as a sacrifice for the sins of the world to fulfill the commands of the Law. By Him alone may we enter into life and fulfill the law.
Love Jesus already!
-Art
BTW… thanx for the avatar… Alien… get it? Alien… think about it.
I think additionally for women when choosing something to wear one has to think of the positions the shirt/skirt/pants COULD put them in…first thing I think of when I see the above shirt is if I wore it and bent over to pick up one of my little ones there would definitely be too much showing. Why get that close to the line? If you cannot comfortably perform normal functions without worrying about your self showing too much, that is pretty clear to me.
And I agree about the pants/skirt thing. For me, I am mostly skirts at this point. It had alot more to do with my heart than feeling that everyone should wear only skirts.
Jana, you make a good point about positions. When I was a counselor at a teen music camp I remember a lecture by one of the faculty about how girls could stay modest when bowing after a performance– usually holding the instrument to your chest. Bending over, laying down– lots of positions that need to be taken into account– because I think that one of the biggest effects for guys is seeing “what shouldn’t be seen”.
You know, I don’t think that I could get used to wearing a skirt. Maybe a kilt, but even then it could get pretty chilly… 🙂
OK, this brings up a whole new point in my mind… Is the point here to wear what men won’t find sexual? Or is the point not to adorn oneself with flagrancies like elaborate braids and grand clothing that draws attention to one’s beauty?
We assume that Paul is talking about the sexualization of women here… but I honestly don’t see anything in the Scriptures that suggests this… could it be that a women’s modesty is not so much to spare the men but a true call to women’s hearts calling them away from vanity?
I wonder.
Ohh let me just add this: Is God trying to protect men from the sexual beauty of women or is He calling women to a modesty that seeks Him and not the ‘virtue’ of their own beauty? hmm… this is getting deep now!
I’m sure that Peter– the one that talks about dressing with modesty– is talking about adorning the inner woman and not the outer, or like we have said, letting the outer reflect the inner.
That being the case, the point is to have an inner life that is not all about attracting or seducing men, but having one with a pure heart and intentions.
They’re related.
Yes, Peter… I meant Peter of course! (LOL! Like I had any idea where that scripture is!) HA!
I think you made a good point when you said that sometimes it is not the garment in question that sends the signals, it is the person wearing it and how they choose to wear it. But Arthur touched on an important point as well: sometimes immodesty, like beauty, is in the eye of beholder.
Your right, Buffy. The more I’m thinking about this topic the more I come back to the same thought– that it’s all about the heart and what you’re trying to do with your clothes that makes the difference.
I think we as Christians get this sort of stuff confused alot. We get so hung-up on the particulars of what is right for us to do or wear, or more unfortunately, what is right for OTHERS to do or wear that we lose the focus on Christ and the renewing of our minds.
I was at my discipler’s house yesturday and his wife mentioned that the man who delivered his hay was a ‘real old fashioned, conservative Baptist.’ … as it turns out, she was talking about a church that holds women to a high standard of ‘modesty’. Wives are not to wear pants in public, and their every decision is to be made by their husbands without a word of objection.
While I have no problem with, and might actually be very impressed with and attacted to, a woman who yields to her husband and wears skirts and dresses by choice and exercises other displays of humility and servitude, it defeats the whole purpose when we impose these standards upon an unwilling or reluctant person.
The whole point is that a woman BE humble before God, not that she ACT humble before God. For that matter, this applies to men as well. Remember, however, that Peter (not Paul) was addressing women in the Church, not men in the Church. He never asked men to enforce these guidelines and he never got into the particulars of a women’s dress (any further than he actually did, speaking of elaborate braids etc… refer to the scriptures for clarification.)
The Bible does not make mention of how long a woman’s dress should be, neither is it up to the Church to decide this either by ‘prophecy’, authoritative dictation, popular vote or consensus. The Bible does not in the least recommend these sort of actions, yet they are so often practiced in today’s Church.
For a bit more on this, visit my blog.
Arthur, perhaps if you log out, you can add your blog’s link to the three fields for comments so we can follow it.
I guess the thing that we have to wonder is: this church that this person and his wife attend, do they do so by choice? If they did, perhaps they truly believe what the church is “making them do.” I wen tot a college that had such standards. Even off campus the women were supposed to wear a dress outside of the house unless they were engaged in a sport or doing something in the lawn. I always chuckled at it, though, because I didn’t see how anyone could ever enforce it.
The point I’m trying to make is that people have a choice to go to the college, and they (no doubt) have a choice of whether to join or attend this church. I’m certain it’s not the only one around, so it may be a tad harsh to say that this church is extra-Biblical just because they have a higher standard or a different conviction regarding passages of Scripture than you do. If they are the weaker brother (i.e. they are ones that see more Biblical regulation) then they should not be looked down on, especially if they are doing it to the glory of God. If they, however, are doing it to exercise control, gain power, or force people in subservience outside of a desire to glorify God, then people should be encouraged to get out.
And yes, I totally agree that humility and modesty have to come from the heart first and foremost. However, what we think and do effects our attitude, and to some degree the actions that we performed, though forced at first, can become a part of us. If what they were requiring were anti-Biblical or bad (i.e. forcing their women to be slaves) then they should be confronted.
Well, I can’t speak for those individuals and whether both of them are happy at the church they attend or whether one or more is unhappy. However, it does behoove us as Christians to refrain from adding to the commandments of God and placing a yoke on our brothers and sisters that no man has been fit to bear.
My sister told me just the other day that she realized that what she was wearing had caused someone in her church to stumble. Well, my sister dresses overtly conservatively. She wears a dress to her ankles and hair down her back. She doesn’t wear makeup (that I can see) and if she braids her hair it’s a single, simple braid.
But this caused a man to stumble. Why? Because to this man a conservatively dressed woman is attractive.
OK, now here’s where I release some TRUTH and stop pretending like I don’t know what’s really going on here. My sister’s dress did in no way CAUSE this man to stumble! It is his own sin nature that caused him to stumble, probably with a little help from the enemy. Goodness sakes, Eve was NAKED and it never caused Adam to stumble… it was only after the fall that anyone decided to start wearing clothes in the first place. It is not one’s clothing that causes a person to stumble, it’s that person’s sin nature, their flesh, and it’s entirely their issue.
Sure enough, it’s polite for a woman to stay covered and plain to help a man with his struggles against the flesh, but this is clearly not the issue Peter was addressing. Peter does not say nor even suggest that women should concern themselves with men’s lust problems.
I QUOTE:
Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
What is the context of this passage? The strict context obviously lies within the framework of witnessing to unbelieving husbands. And how? Not by adorning oneself with materialistic forms of beauty but by the beauty within that the Holy Spirit grows and builds during the spiritual regeneration of a Chirstian. Peter is saying that the BEST witness you can have is NOT in the clothes you wear but in your inner spirit being renewed and made pure by God alone!
A wider context could easily forgo the unbelieving husband and apply this scripture to wives of believing husbands as well.
Still a wider context forgoes the husband altogether and is a directive for believers everywhere to live their lives as sacraments unto God. It is calling believers not to base their worth in the clothes they wear or in their worldly appearances or otherwise how they appear toward men, but in how they appear toward God.
Who’s sight does Peter call us to take into account here? Men? Nay! It is God!
Where does true beauty come from? Is it long skirts? NAY! it is ‘the beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit’ Got a problem with that? It’s not ‘my interpretation’ it’s the Word of God verbatim!
Woe to him who contradicts the Holy Word of God. My God is an awesome God and He shall reign! His words are like honey to my soul! Let all men rejoice and sing praises to Him who has freed us from the yoke of the flesh which cannot fulfill the law of righteousness! Praise Christ Jesus! You are free if you know the Truth!
QUOTE:
so it may be a tad harsh to say that this church is extra-Biblical just because they have a higher standard or a different conviction regarding passages of Scripture than you do.
Sorry I can’t let this go.
You call it a ‘higher standard’ … OH? Is there a higher standard than God’s Holy Word? Can we people take His Word and add to it particulars that He did not add?
Is it a higher standard that asks women to wear long dresses than a standard that asks women to be submissive and with a gentle and quiet spirit?
Can we say it is a greater sacrifice to wear a certain article of clothing that it is to have a meek spirit?
Many may find my words harsh, but I’d argue that it’s the very culture that you seek to seperate yourselves from and transcend beyond that has implanted this idea that I’m being harsh to call legalism what it is. And legalism is nothing more than the twisting of the Good News of God into a worthless code of rules.
QUOTE:
If they are the weaker brother (i.e. they are ones that see more Biblical regulation) then they should not be looked down on, especially if they are doing it to the glory of God.
Furthermore, to bring this scripture up, one would have to first analyze it’s meaning with careful discernment. After all, I’ve never met a Christian who thought they were the weaker brother. However I would tell you this: If I were in a Church that preached the Truth and some came who would not eat meat, I would not look down on them, neither do I look down on a man who preaches abstinence from meat, but that does not mean that I accept it as good and right and the Will of God! What is bound in Heaven may it be bound on earth! What is loosed in Heaven let it be loosed on earth!
I don’t look down on those who have believed a falsehood in the name of Christ, but I DO seek to enlighten them. But I shall not lend credence to deceptive teachings nor eat of leavened bread! (figuratively speaking… )
That being said, let it be known that I once believed, as I was taught that Peter was talking about women covering themselves for the sake of men’s lusts. But the Holy Spirit guides us into all Truth. Furthermore, though I speak passionately about this particular issue at the moment, I am still being drawn into greater understanding and one day even this will seem as an elementary teaching.
(In other words, when I was a more legalistic Christian, I thought I knew it all then too!)
I know my tone is strong, but if I speak meekly about the Passion of Christ then I do so only to please man for the Lord has not commanded nor has the Spirit prompted me to speak of His Word as a soft, bendable thing, but instead as a sharp two edged sword!
I will give you that the context of the Peter passage talks more about remaining modest because of heart attitude. I think that I’ve done a pretty good job saying that modesty is all about the heart– but we cannot disregard the component of our responsibility to other believers. Tomorrow’s post on modesty is all about whether or not we are “our brother’s keeper” and whether that should effect how we dress.
Women can dress modestly and still be a stumbling block, and just like if I were to go to the extreme to try not to offend anyone I would go mad, there is some burden on the offended to not judge the one with more liberty. There is a burden on a man to make sure that he’s not looking to lust, just as there is a burden on the woman not to attract attention to herself.
As far as your understanding of Romans 14, I would have to differ with you. How can you say authoritatively what the will of God is for someone else? That’s the whole point of Romans 14– if he’s not eating meat to the glory of God and giving God thanks– that is God’s will for him and you should not be trying to convince him otherwise. Same for people who have a conviction about wearing head coverings, or anything else that we don’t feel is clearly dictated by Scripture but they do, or they believe that they are doing it to God’s glory. We should be encouraging them, not discouraging.
Actually, when my sister told me that she believed she should be wearing a head covering, I was thrilled. I don’t particularly agree with the interpretation of the text there, but I was deeply moved that she was willing to do something so contrary to popular culture for God. And that’s what it is to hold one day more holy than others so to speak.
But that does not mean that if the scripture has shown me a better way that I should not share it with my brothers and sisters. Neither does it mean that true doctrine should be kept to one’s self or that false doctrine should go unchallenged. I have nothing but sympathy for my brothers and sisters in bondage to legalistic religion.
I see the drug addicts on the street who won’t come to Church with me because they got high and I know why they got high. They got high because they listened to the enemy who told them they were worthless, not fit for the kingdom of God, that they had ruined the name of Christ and destroyed their witness. They listen to the enemy who tells them they are not good enough, that all this Jesus stuff they’ve been believing is just a joke, something they can never live up to. They listen to the enemy when he throws their sin in their face and dares to suggest that they have never been redeemed.
So I will pay homage to peacemaking, but I will not pay homage to the yeast which grasps for righteousness in works of the flesh. Neither will I pay homage to the yoke of the law that no man is fit to fulfill but Christ alone. But I will pay homage to my Maker, the Almighty God of Abraham who has made me a new creation in Christ that I may be counted as blameless in His sight.
I know that in writing these sorts of things many people will take offense. I plead with you not to indulge the enemy in this, but to take my words at face value. I’m not trying to offend anyone here and I certainly do not look down on anyone. Who am I to be proud for I was created from dust. And that is to say, how would I hold myself any higher than another man since I am the worst sinner I know? Believe me when I say that as man judges I have committed more heinous sins than most of humanity. But my spirit is redeemed though my flesh will not be made perfect until the day of Christ. I love you all and I hope you can find the Truth that you are made spirituall whole in Christ alone and no work either good or bad can augment that.
Love.
“But that does not mean that if the scripture has shown me a better way that I should not share it with my brothers and sisters.”
If this is the case the don’t you think that Peter would have stated that you should work with your weaker brother so he can learn that he can in fact eat meat sacrificed to idols and it will not cause him to stumble? It is clearly stated that not eating meat is something that a “weaker Christian” does. Shouldn’t this suggest that being able to eat meat sacrificed by idols is “better”?
The reality is that the way God sees things is different than the way we see things. While this world might view it as “better” to be able to exhibit more liberties I don’t think God sees it this way. If He did I think we would find that Peter’s directions would be filled with encouragement for the weaker Christian so they can move to the place of being able to eat sacrificed meat and not stumbling instead of telling believers to accommodate one another so that no one has to stumble. I think from this we can surmise that God is much more concerned that we are trying to serve Him and not stumbling in those actions then He is that we are aware of every last liberty we can exercise through Him.
Truly, there are many liberties in Christ I will never exercise. God is not going to see me at the end of days and say “You fool, did you not know you did not have had half-a-glass of wine at every meal”. He is going to look at me and see how I served Him, and hopefully I will hear “Well done, my good and faithful servant”. I do not think there will be any discussion about what I could have gotten away with.
With that said we must be very careful we do not add any additional rules in regards to what is needed for salvation. To do so discredits the price Christ paid. I would go so far as to say I would not fellowship with someone who thought there were extra requirements for salvation, as if salvation was somehow earned. At the same time I think God will honor the sacrifices we make in trying to serve Him (different from trying to earn salvation), even in those things he might or might not have asked us to do, and I would have no problem fellowshipping with someone who chose this. (E.g. MinTheGap won’t listen to even Christian Rock & Roll)
As a father I have gotten to see my son sometimes do several things in an attempt to honor me and follow my wishes which I probably would not have asked him to do. Not once was my reaction “You silly boy, I never wanted you to organize the lint, what were you thinking!”. Instead my reaction has always been “That’s great Peter! Thank-you. You know you don’t need to organize the lint in the future, but thank-you for thinking of me!”. I think highly of his heart attitude which I’m much more concerned with than his actions. I like Christ looks at us in a similar light. This is why it does not mater to Him if we eat meat or we don’t eat meat. It matters to Him that we’re trying to serve Him.
You bring up some interesting points brother.
Mark 7:19 (all foods clean)
Acts 10:14 (do not call unclean what God has made clean)
Romans 14:14 (no unclean food)
Romans 14:20 (no unclean food)
You’re right that God is more concerned with our heart attitudes than our actions and I certainly didn’t intend to write anti-laws for the sake of Christian liberty. Really what I was trying to speak of was not whether a person should wear this or not wear that or whether a person should eat this or not eat that. My point was that what is ok to eat and what is not ok to eat or wear is NOT the point at all.
I don’t mean to imply that we should go around ‘liberating’ people from their ‘oppressive’ clothes. But certainly if the Word of God tells us “Jesus declared all foods ‘clean.'” then it is a pretty clear matter that all foods are clean. So why, if I speak what is recorded in the Word, should I be rebuked for it? Or if I testify about my freedom, or encourage my brothers and sisters out from the yoke of the law?
I only seek to help those who are held back from the Gospel by legalism. I do not seek to rebuke those who by the overflow of love for God in their hearts abstain from foods or clothes or musics to His glory. So it is not the meek brother who refuses wine that I rebuke, it is the one who preaches abstainance from wine as a command from God. There is no such command afterall.
Definately though, the Word teaches us that it is not better to exhibit freedom, but it is better to lay down our freedoms for the spiritual edification of others.