The cape dress: Its origins and evolution over the ages

[Ernie]

In fact, this is the entire dress code. Most public high schools around the country have something quite similar.

Are colleges different, and if so, why?

[Josh]

In fact, this is the entire dress code. Most public high schools around the country have something quite similar.

Are colleges different, and if so, why?

Based on my experience working at 3 colleges, one of them public, yes, they are different. There isn’t really a dress code at all. The one that claimed to be an evangelical Christian college sort of had one but it wasn’t enforced.

The Roman Catholic college/university is frankly where I saw the worst immodesty in terms of pushing the envelope I have seen in any environment. It created a disruptive environment with my student workers. Since the men I worked with would talk indecently about what young women were wearing (or not wearing), I would have to regularly file reports with HR in case a student overheard this and felt sexually harassed.

[Ernie]

There is a lot about growing up and living in a society that doesn't directly relate to something mentioned by Jesus. Dress, diet, exercise, punctuality, being considerate, putting cans in the proper recycling bin, cleaning up your room, understanding distinctions in social settings, and so forth. Not everything you teach your child needs to be accompanied by a Bible verse. But you know that.

Yes, I don't know that I have ever tried to define modesty as found in I Tim 9 other than the way you define it. We teach our children various values and don't generally accompany them with Bible verses unless the Bible specifically addresses something.

I don't know of any Christians in the world who think we should obsess about what people wear and nit-pick their appearance and disregard what is on this inside. So I am not sure who you are addressing. Who is the audience that you are trying to enlighten?

I'm answering your question not trying to enlighten an audience here. But I'm talking about this sort of thing mentioned here recently:

To not go deep…

There was recently a twitter thread started by some conservative Evangelical women about all the negative things they had been told about there dress and appearance in church and it just went on page after page after page of hoor stories about young women facing endless inconsistent criticism about appearance. If you think this sort of thing doesn't happen, including in some Mennonite churches too you are naive.
I'll see if I can find that thread to enlighten you.

I know Mennonites who obsess about clothing and do nit-pick about appearance. But they would not say that they do this, and they would not say that anyone should do this. But you and I looking on, conclude something different by the way they act.
Likewise, when you declare that certain kinds of dress are modest, and others looking on conclude that this is not modest... well... its your word against our word. I think there is a such a thing as modesty, as God understands it, which is the way it is, regardless of what you or I think about it. We all have people we trust to help us determine what is modest. You've indicated that use the surrounding American society to determine that... we use the opinions of Christians in history to help us decide what is modest. If there is such a thing as objective modesty... I may be wrong, or you may be wrong, or we might both be wrong, but we can both be right.

3. Nowhere in the Bible to I see rigid conformity of dress taught as any sort of virtue. Not in the Old Testament or New Testament.

Rigid conformity is taught in the Old Testament but you do say that you ignore that. So in light of that, am I understanding correctly that there aren’t any principles that we as Christians should be learning from this Old Testament instruction?

Here's Leviticus 19: 19 “You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material."
Do YOU follow THAT Old Testament law? If not, why not?

I think it is possible to learn something of value from an OT law, without following that law. I try not to ignore anything in the Bible.

Here are various definitions for which I use the word "modesty"
1. Not wearing costly array
2. Dressing humbly, simply, and without ostentation
3. Covering the body
4. Wearing loose clothing and clothing that helps conceal a person's figure

I am curious if you teach these same values to your daughters, or are some of these neither here nor there to you?

#1 and 2 I addressed. My girls do that without my help. Too much so for my wife's taste at times.
#3 and #4 are not based on any New Testament Biblical teaching. Not even the Amish adhere to those rules. Did you make them up or borrow them from Islam?

As I said above, I borrow them from Christians that I trust as well as other Christians from the last two millenium. I've also tried to learn what the Bible has to say about these two things. #3 is definitely in the Bible. I haven't found anything in the Bible related to #4. So that is more subjective. However, I agree with Barnhart that the men's attire of the Renaissance Faire is not very appropriate, and I think the majority of Christians from around the world would agree. Just because the majority of Christians think something is appropriate does not sway me at all, but if the majority think something is in appropriate, including the most godly of all Christians, I'm probably not going to disagree with them unless the Bible teaches that this or that practice should be done. We definitely don't find anything in the Bible that promotes the men's clothing in the Renaissance Faire.

No, I don't tell them that they must keep their bodies covered and wear loose clothing that conceals their shape.

I think you should, even if you don't think you should.

It isn't the responsibility of young women to avoid provoking every kind of man out there.

Of course not. But neither should women be provoking men unnecessarily. And vice versa. As seen in the Renaissance Faire.

What is wrong with ripped jeans, leggings, spaghetti tops, etc.? Isn't this nitpicking about clothes?

It is out of dress code for most schools in the country including the one I teach at now. And therefore, not appropriate school wear. Neither are t-shirts with inappropriate messages such as beer ads or logos which is nowhere in the New Testament either. Not every social rule is Biblical. Most of them in fact are not.

But what makes it inappropriate? Is it inappropriate because of what most schools think?

Raising children and teaching them is not just about obedience. It is also about teaching them to think for themselves and become increasingly independent.

You've decided that clothing is one thing your daughters should decide for themselves. We think that is one thing the church should help us decide. There are other things we give our children a lot of latitude in.

And then the conversation might go along the following lines: "why don't you go put on something nicer for church". "Ah mom...what's wrong with what I have on? Do you think God cares?" "Just do what I tell you. We dress nicer for church to show respect for the institution and God. I'm not taking you to church looking like you just rolled out of bed."

Oh... But I thought raising children was not all about obedience, but letting children think for themselves. Why should your daughters need to consider their mom's worldview if the Bible does not say we should show respect for the institution and for God and that we shouldn't look like we rolled out of bed? Shouldn't they be able to draw their own conclusions without being told how to dress?

And I promise you that my daughter knows exactly what my wife means without her having to cite scripture to make her point.

This is the point I have been trying to make all along... that there are good values and good things to do that are not spelled out in the Bible.

[Ernie]

Some remaining questions to answer...

The oldest went through a rebellious phase in middle school and early high school in Texas and wanted to push the envelope with school dress. Mostly ripped jeans, leggings, spaghetti tops, etc. My wife got tired of fighting with her every morning and took to calling the school secretary to have her "dress coded" since the school had a strict dress code.

In the settings where I circulate, if a mom was having trouble getting her girls to cooperate, she would ask her husband to get involved. I can't every remember a time in the churches and communities where I circulate whenever a mom called on the school to force a child to do something at school that she couldn't get them to do when they left for school. Why would your wife need to enlist the help of the school? What is up with this? Where is the dad?

I don't think those individual style choices have the slightest thing to do with their value as individuals and Christians.

I don't either, and I don't know of anyone on MN who believes this. In fact, I don't know of anyone who believes this. Again, who is the audience you are trying to enlighten?

I think home, school, and church should at least be "safe spaces" where they can relax a bit and not have to face constant judgment about their appearance. So they most definitely don't need male bishops or deacons or pastors wives or school administrators hassling them about their clothing choices as long as they are not being immodest and generally dressing appropriately to the occasion.

So you told us about a mom who "hassled" her daughter about her clothing, and she got the school to also "hassle" her daughter about her clothing.

But homes and schools are supposed to be "safe places" where daughters "can relax a bit and not have to face judgment about their appearance"?

Does that answer your questions or am I off on a different tangent?

This did not address my earlier questions and only raised lots more questions.

[Ernie]

When I was in my mid-twenties, I was telling a counselor that I neither hate my dad nor feel any love towards him. I told him that I want to benefit from whatever I can from my dad, but otherwise chart a different course. (I had heard sermons advising this very thing.)

After talking a bit my counselor told me, "Well... if you continue on in the path you are on... 20 years from now you will be a splitting image of him..." It was then that I first learned about "the law of a negative focus". "What you don't want to become, you will become, if there is any unresolved anger and bitterness in your heart."

Sometime later, a married man with a number of children came for counseling at the facility where I was now a counselor. His father was a pastor and beat his wife and children. This married man vowed he would never beat his wife and children, and here he was, a grown man who was beating his wife and children.

I find that when people react unhealthily to their past or react to something that actually has some good in it... they generally end up doing the very sorts of things that thought they would never want to be guilty of doing.

Life is too short to spend it living out of reaction.

[Ken]

Some remaining questions to answer...

The oldest went through a rebellious phase in middle school and early high school in Texas and wanted to push the envelope with school dress. Mostly ripped jeans, leggings, spaghetti tops, etc. My wife got tired of fighting with her every morning and took to calling the school secretary to have her "dress coded" since the school had a strict dress code.

In the settings where I circulate, if a mom was having trouble getting her girls to cooperate, she would ask her husband to get involved. I can't every remember a time in the churches and communities where I circulate whenever a mom called on the school to force a child to do something at school that she couldn't get them to do when they left for school. Why would your wife need to enlist the help of the school? What is up with this? Where is the dad?

I don't think those individual style choices have the slightest thing to do with their value as individuals and Christians.

I don't either, and I don't know of anyone on MN who believes this. In fact, I don't know of anyone who believes this. Again, who is the audience you are trying to enlighten?

I think home, school, and church should at least be "safe spaces" where they can relax a bit and not have to face constant judgment about their appearance. So they most definitely don't need male bishops or deacons or pastors wives or school administrators hassling them about their clothing choices as long as they are not being immodest and generally dressing appropriately to the occasion.

So you told us about a mom who "hassled" her daughter about her clothing, and she got the school to also "hassle" her daughter about her clothing.

But homes and schools are supposed to be "safe places" where daughters "can relax a bit and not have to face judgment about their appearance"?

Does that answer your questions or am I off on a different tangent?

This did not address my earlier questions and only raised lots more questions.

I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at here.

Whether you or me or teenage boys and girls agree with it, nearly every HS in the country has some sort of dress code. Schools are about teaching at it is part of teaching children about appropriate behavior and dress in different circumstances. Dress is only a part of it. Yes they are societal and community norms because it is adults in society that make them. I'm sure school dress codes looked much different 100 years ago because norms change. We also teach kids to raise their hands, not run in the halls, not fight and be kind to each other. Because school isn't "Lord of the Flies" and and we are teaching them to be good adults.

Part of teaching children is teaching them the consequences of their decisions. The consequence of wearing inappropriate clothes to school is having to change into baggy school sweats that said "I LOVE MIDWAY" on the front and legs (the name of that HS in Texas) which is kind of like walking around with a scarlet letter in HS because all your friends in every class get to laugh at you and say "ha ha ha...you got caught. What were YOU wearing" My wife wanted to make sure our daughter faced the consequences of her decisions and not just skate through school because her teachers weren't bothering to seriously enforce the dress code that day. Which more often than not is what happened if you were a popular kid and weren't disruptive in class or drew negative attention to yourself.

Some kids need to learn things the hard way. They have to touch the stove when it is hot. Others not so much. Dress codes have never been the slightest issue with our other two daughters. That's just the way it goes.

I don't object to dress codes. I think they are sometimes necessary but they should at least be fair and reasonable. I don't object to cultures promoting different dress for different reasons. That is part of what makes the world interesting. I don't object to any sort of religious garments such as cape dresses or coverings or head scarves or whatever.

What I do object to is teaching girls that Christianity demands that you dress in this very specific way if you so that you can be closer to God or Jesus. I don't think that is true or healthy, especially if the message is accompanied by the "because boys will be boys" counterpart. I don't think Christianity teachings anything of the sort. And yes, it happens. I grew up seeing it happen but only with the girls. And I have heard and read plenty of similar stories.

As my youngest daughter told me recently: "It seems like Christianity tells us that men are in control of everything except their own sexual desires"

Something to think about.

[Josh]

As my youngest daughter told me recently: "It seems like Christianity tells us that men are in control of everything except their own sexual desires"

The Bible explicitly teaches that women should dress modestly and discreetly, but not because of anything about men’s desires.

[Ernie]

What I do object to is teaching girls that Christianity demands that you dress in this very specific way if you so that you can be closer to God or Jesus. I don't think Christianity teachings anything of the sort. And yes, it happens.

And it is sad when this happens.

And my points are:
1. People make value judgments about things that are not specifically found in the Bible. You, your wife, I and most other people do this.
2. When people react to something, they end up becoming like what they react to - they just do it in different ways and with different applications.

[Sudsy]

Seems to me God made it quite easy for us to know what is modest and what is not. And if one stops trying to define it for all to follow by saying this is OK and that is not OK for a Christian but actually believes that God has given us the Holy Spirit to guide each one of us in the way that we should go, then these things will be as they should.

It may take more time for some than others to learn to live by the Holy Spirit that lives within us and we should be patient with one another and trust the Holy Spirit to do His convicting work in His way and in His timing.

I believe the NT does give us guidance but it requires the Holy Spirit to allow us to understand and apply it correctly. I don't see where the NT says that we need to make lists expanding on the word 'modesty'. If any Christian is willing to be lead by the Holy Spirit and will seek His guidance in what being modest requires of them, I believe He will guide them.

IMO, when any church starts to dictate how exactly a Christian should live beyond what scripture indicates in it's context, then they could be slipping back into a form of legalism, believing they are the correct example of living holy.

So, in the area of sanctification, I am a believer in the Holy Spirit guiding each believer and as He does the guiding, we don't all need to be at the same place in our Christian walk with a list of rules that everyone must follow. We have been set free from the law and we don't need to make up a new set of laws but rather trust and encourage one another to live by the Spirit.

If a Christian lady is personally convicted by the Holy Spirit to wear a cape style dress or certain style of head covering, then she should follow her leading. However, if another Christian lady does not have this conviction in the local church, she should be allowed to follow her leadings. And both of these ladies not take a 'holier-than-thou' or a 'more set free' attitude toward each other.

What I find puzzling here is the lack of attention given to the Holy Spirit's personal guidance as if He is not where we should seek our guidance. I grew up with quite an emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit and I agree with those who point to some activity spoken of as by the Holy Spirit is not the Holy Spirit at work but rather the flesh or another spirit. Yet, as scripture says, we need His guidance and He comes to live within each true believer to guide them. I think we, self included, too often get in the way of the Spirit guiding us and He does not force His way on us.

Anyway, my thoughts this morning, fwiw.

[Ken]

As my youngest daughter told me recently: "It seems like Christianity tells us that men are in control of everything except their own sexual desires"

The Bible explicitly teaches that women should dress modestly and discreetly, but not because of anything about men’s desires.

Yes, in English there are many words that are ambiguous because they have two different meanings. An example is the word "hot" in reference to food. If you say a dish is "hot" do you mean it is hot off the stove or it has a lot of spice? There is no confusion in Spanish because they have separate adjectives to describe those two different meanings: caliente for temperature and picante for spice. Which actually means "sting" as in a bee sting. So in Spanish you describe spicy food as "stinging" the mouth which is much more accurate than using an adjective for temperature.

Similarly the word "modest" has different meanings in English. Various scholars have done deep dives into the Greek terms αἰδοῦς and σωφροσύνης which get translated to "modest" and which are very rare words used only in those verses. And it seems from the context that Paul and Peter are giving instruction to women on what NOT to wear (adornment and fancy dress, gold braids, etc.) rather than a prescription on what they should wear (conform to a specific religious uniform).

So a more correct interpretation seems to be that they are instructing women to be modest in the sense of dressing humbly. Rather than modest in the provocative sense of not showing an ankle or open toes or any glimpse of skin that might sexually provoke men. Or of revealing a woman's shape which was on Ernie's list above.

That does not mean girls and women shouldn't in most circumstances also dress modestly in the sense of not dressing provocatively. That is the point of school dress codes as well as written or unwritten codes for business dress. Each culture has its own norms and mores as to what is appropriate dress. Just like they have norms and customs all other human interactions such as how you greet people, touch each other (handshakes, hugs, kisses on the cheeks, etc.) and so forth. But those are issues of culture more than Christianity.

So while my wife will instruct my girls on occasion about what is appropriate dress in a given circumstance, she does so from the context of social expectations. She doesn't tell them "that outfit is sinful" or that they need to dress in a specific way to be closer to God. With our two younger girls it is almost always (or entirely) an issue of them dressing too casually for an occasion rather than too provocatively.

Dress codes change too. A decade ago torn jeans were forbidden at the school where I taught. Now they have given up on that since it is such the fashion and they only prohibit jeans that have holes above the fingertips (same standard for skirt and shorts length). Basically stand still with your arms at your side and don't show skin between your collar bone and fingertips.

From my point of view, young women already get enough pressure and judgement from society about their appearance and how they dress. They also don't need to be told they are SINNING if they do anything to provoke men. Which yes, very much happens. Not necessarily in the circle of Anabaptist folks posting here, but in many branches of conservative Christianity. The Duggars, for example, taught their girls that "immodest" clothing was sinful because it stirred up desires in boys and and men that could not be properly fulfilled. And they blamed their daughters in part for the fact that one of their sons was a sex offender and pedophile. And their girls were also taught that to dress in violation of the narrow dress code prescribed by their church and Bill Gothard (long plain dresses) would place them outside of God's protection. Seriously: https://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Free-In ... 400335817/

Times change on that topic too. My grandfather was outraged when his granddaughters and daughters would wear pants. Citing the one single verse in the Bible that addresses this topic: Deuteronomy 22:5. “A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God." However in the 20th and 21st century pants are not a man's garment. They are also a women's garment, cut to women's sizes and proportions, using designs and fabrics that are flattering to women, and sold in the women's section of clothing stores to women. So even if one wants to arbitrarily pick and chose specific Old Testament clothing dictates such as Deuteronomy 22:5 and ignore others such as Deuteronomy 22:11 (prohibiting blended fabrics). It still doesn't apply if my daughter goes to the mall and buys a pair of jeans from the women's section of the Gap. Because she is buying a woman's garment not a man's. Pants didn't even exist for men or women when Deuteronomy 22:5 was written. They came many many centuries later, brought into the Roman Empire from 'barbarian" northern tribes (Celts and Germans) who lived in climates where it was not conducive to wearing open robes like in the middle east.

And the odd thing about that whole previous generation's obsession with pants is that dresses are actually more sexually provocative than pants. Much easier to molest and assault a woman wearing a dress or skirt than one wearing pants.