How Did America Become a Nation of Slobs?

“What does our own sloppy dress tell us about ourselves? Are we too pressed for time to dress a little up rather than way down? Are we rebelling against the idea of beauty and culture? Or are we just too lazy to pull on a pair of slacks instead of wearing the sweats we slept in?” Intellectual Takeout

Discussion

[TylerR]

Larry:

My church has this on the website - but we actually mean it (honest!):

We don’t enforce a dress code, so don’t worry about “looking right.” Nobody will frown at you if you don’t have a tie, grimace if you don’t wear a jacket, or stare if you aren’t wearing a dress. Honest.

You don’t follow your statement up with anything like my “Step #2” (see my post above).

I feel almost silly adding the qualifier, but these are serious questions for those who agree with this :

we believe very strongly that God deserves our best in every area and casualness doesn’t promote the Biblical attitude that God’s people should have when they meet to worship.

What’s considered “casual” and what’s considered “best” are social constructs. So, why do you assume that the clothes that I’m wearing affects my heart’s approach to worshipping God? Why not assume that I disagree with you about definitions of things that are social constructs? If you don’t assume that what I’m wearing affects my heart’s approach to worshipping God, why insist on rules in this area? Why not simply leave it up to the conscience of individuals?

It doesn’t bother me if someone wears a suit. It does mystify me that other people care about other people’s clothes so much.

Some people do. I don’t. I think our idea of a suit and tie = our best is a social construct. Dressy clothes will look very different in a different culture. the other pastor at my church spent 36 years in Bangladesh, and they dress very differently! I’m not sure if people spend much time talking about dress. I don’t. I don’t care what people wear. But, if they’re in front of the congregation in a leadership capacity, I expect a collared shirt for men (e.g. a polo shirt).

That’s about it for me!

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

It strikes me that, sad to say, a pastor who truly wants to demonstrate that “Sunday Best”, or “attire of 1960s professionals and today’s lawyers”, is not necessary might have to demonstrate that from the pulpit by deliberately not wearing a tie or coat from time to time, and by encouraging other church leaders to do the same. It doesn’t mean you need to wear ripped jeans, or never wear a coat or tie, but I think it was very healthy when a former pastor of mine deliberately did an “English professor” vibe with a turtleneck and tweed coat and the like.

Along those lines, I would have to guess that the attire of the Apostles would have resembled fisherman’s garb more than that of the Roman magistrates, orators, kings, and the like, too. At the very least, when Paul was collecting funds in Macedonia and Corinth to help make sure the Jerusalem church didn’t starve, I would think that any suggestion that he upgrade his robe to a finer wool or linen would have been met with a look meaning “Are you out of your mind? People are starving!”. I’d guess you’d have gotten about the same response if you’d made the same suggestion to the apostles in Jerusalem, some of whom may have pawned off some of their attire to buy food for brothers and sisters in Christ. James would likely have asked “you want to look like the rich people who are dragging you into court and impoverishing you? And make such attire a requirement for fellowship? Seriously? Did you listen when my letter was being read at all?”.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

I thought Lee’s observation was excellent.

As far as ties go, I sort of like them. Men’s suits are rather boring without them! Off course at 100 degrees I’d rather be boring.

Richard E Brunt

Some Sundays I wear a tie and jacket, some times slacks and a collared shirt or polo. No jeans or tee shirt because I’m 70 years old and I’d look stupid. Some Sundays my wife wears a dress or skirt and blouse and sometimes slacks. Every Sunday there’s someone else in church who dresses like we do.

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Much is uncertain in this area. A few things are quite clear, though.

  • Clothing choices do convey/express meaning.
  • What we wear does affect our attitudes.

If you doubt either of these, wait until the next time someone you love dies and consider wearing a clown suit to the funeral.

Two more points maybe less clear…

  • James is talking about we treat people at different social and economic levels, as revealed in part by how they dress. The question of what attire is best for worship and the question of how we treat low-income people are related but distinct questions.
  • Treating an issue as a matter of conscience isn’t the same as treating it as something unimportant. (Most matters of conscience are important and worth trying to explain and defend and encourage others to consider.)

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

I think it’s best if we avoid hyperbole, even if the intent is humorous. Some of our brethren don’t understand that we’re kidding when we talk about clown suits at funerals or bikinis at church.

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

Aaron wrote:

What we wear does affect our attitudes.

Yes, if I’m wearing a suit and tie I’m incredibly uncomfortable, grumpy, and have a harder time paying attention because of how the suit and tie has affected my attitude.

Aaron, I’m not sure if your comments referencing James 2 was in response to my PJ Media article or not. Just in case - the history of the necktie’s popularity is directly connected to how people viewed and treated those in the “incorrect” socio-economic class. I’m not claiming that wearing a suit a tie today carries with it the same attitude, I’m just pointing out that how we currently define “dressy” and “classy” has been shaped by sinful classism.

[Ron Bean]

I think it’s best if we avoid hyperbole, even if the intent is humorous. Some of our brethren don’t understand that we’re kidding when we talk about clown suits at funerals or bikinis at church.

Sometimes hyperbole is appropriate. There’s alot of it in the Gospels. In this case, I use the extreme example of the clown suit at a funeral because an extreme example seems necessary in order to get to recognizing a reality that is often denied, even though it ought to be beyond dispute.

If what we wear expresses meaning and attitude-impact in some situations what evidence is there that it has no meaning or impact in other situations?

So, while I can’t make a case for coat and tie, specifically, it’s pretty clear that the “it just doesn’t matter” view can’t hold up, if we think it through.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

I’m not sure that anyone is claiming that “it just doesn’t matter.” I know that I’m not. In this thread, I’ve written that cleanliness should be taken into account. I’ve also written that I wouldn’t insist on my rights if the Holy Spirit moved my family to a suit-wearing church; by God’s grace, I’d prefer others and wear a suit. I’ll add that modesty matters (for men and women). I’ll add that wearing clothes that bring attention to yourself should be avoided (while I’m sharing unpopular opinions - this last one is why my wife and daughter don’t get new dresses and hats for Easter. I believe that doing so runs the risk of being man-centered with the objective of drawing attention to one’s self).

I’m arguing that locking people into definitions created by social constructs and insisting that they adhere to those social constructs is elevating mans’ opinion to a position of prominence that is possibly Pharisaical.

Regarding the style making a difference, absolutely; James 2:2 notes this explicitly, coming out emphatically on the side of accepting people in “filthy raiment.” Prior to the invention of steam powered cotton gins, looms, spinning machines, and the like, that more or less meant that clothing worn by poor slaves would have holes, patches, fading, obvious wear, and the like.

In the same way, our brothers in the U.S. prior to about 1850 had about the same thing going, except for the wealthy. “Sunday best” historically does not mean the kind of clothes you’d wear to the Inaugural Ball or the Queen’s Coronation; it simply meant your better set of workingman’s clothes that you hadn’t worn while mucking out stalls yet. People would actually rent clothing for wedding pictures and the like if they wanted to have a different look—you can tell because it very often doesn’t fit well. (Shorpy’s is a great reference for this)

Again, the notion that we ought to dress like white collar professionals in order to go to church would have been largely unthinkable to the apostles and most of our ancestors. As a result, I’m very reluctant to endorse that notion. It simply tends to push people out of fellowship out of shame.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

When I was in a secular public school it was sad to watch kids who did not care about God, look down on other kids because of how they dressed. This was back when the cool kids had Guess jeans. That was to be expected in that setting, but it breaks my heart that we see some of the same things happening among Christians, but instead of Guess jeans, it is whether or not you have the right kind of suit and tie.

I’m arguing that locking people into definitions created by social constructs and insisting that they adhere to those social constructs is elevating mans’ opinion to a position of prominence that is possibly Pharisaical.

Isn’t anything any of is likely to wear to church — or anywhere else — likely to be part of a “social construct”? Whether it’s jeans and T’s or business casual or the dress shirt and tie, it’s all “man’s opinion” that determines the fashion, isn’t it? None of us is likely to attend church in an ascot and waistcoat, or a robe and sandals, or our pajamas. Why not?

Are there any clothing choices that will not be influenced mostly by man’s opinion? If I insist on only wearing what I feel like wearing at all times, without regard for what anyone thinks, isn’t it still man’s (one man’s) opinion? Why would my opinion be better than a bunch of other people’s opinions?

Anyway, does Scripture condemn “man’s opinion,” or does it condemn conformity to the cosmos (or aionos)? Is “the world” the same as “our culture” in whatever place and time we happen to live?

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

Aaron, I’m not arguing that people should wear whatever they want whenever they want wherever they want. I’m arguing that churches should stop binding people’s conscience by asserting that a suit and tie is the clothing choice that best honors God.