Black and White Christianity

[Grace]

Black-car churches mandate they because before cars were around, they mandated simple, black buggies. There is nothing deeper than that.

I never heard that one. What I always heard was that base model cars were black. Any other color cost more and was considered a luxury. Eventually some Anabaptists thought the uniformity was a good thing and "as long as we keep it black, we won't have to make decisions about what colors are appropriate and which ones are not."

As far as black clothing, up until the 1800's, black clothing was more expensive, and some Anabaptist churches forbade it because of that. Then it became the same price as everything else, and became a fad, and then by the late 1800's, it was the color of choice. And then like black cars, Anabaptists liked their uniformity, and so they started mandating certain articles of black clothing.
I don't think any group only wears black. But I may be mistaken.

White headcoverings for women go way back....

Back in the late 1920’s There was a struggle whether to accept automobiles or not, in the Old Order Mennonites of Lancaster County. Some thought cars as to progressive, others felt they should be allowed. In 1927 there was a split over the cars. Those who banned automobiles were led by Joseph Wenger and those who accepted the cars were led by Moses Horning. One of the stipulations for any automobiles were, that they had to be black with even the bumpers painted black. To this day, the Groffdale Conference Mennonites are known as “Joe Wengers” or “team Mennonites”. Weaverland Conference Mennonites are known as “Hornings” or “Black Bumpers”. However over the years the black bumpers went to the wayside, for the most part. But the requirement that the cars be black still stands.
-John Ruth. "The Earth is the Lords"


Black is supposed to signify, not just “mourning”, but also more plain and humble. I always loved the color red, but my mother frowned on wearing the color “red”, as she always said “red” is the “harlots” color.

[barnhart]

... What I always heard was that base model cars were black. Any other color cost more and was considered a luxury. Eventually some Anabaptists thought the uniformity was a good thing and "as long as we keep it black, we won't have to make decisions about what colors are appropriate and which ones are not."

Another possible factor is that colors for cars (other than standard black) entered as a marketing ploy designed to entice desire instead of relying on necessity to sell cars.

[Ken]

... What I always heard was that base model cars were black. Any other color cost more and was considered a luxury. Eventually some Anabaptists thought the uniformity was a good thing and "as long as we keep it black, we won't have to make decisions about what colors are appropriate and which ones are not."

Another possible factor is that colors for cars (other than standard black) entered as a marketing ploy designed to entice desire instead of relying on necessity to sell cars.

The first cars like the Model T were black because that is the cheapest and easiest color to use for the baked enamel finish that is required for painting sheet metal with paint that won't fade or scratch off.

It wasn't until about the 1920s that Dupont developed artificial pigments in other colors that could be used in auto paint without fading or peeling. Ford, because it was the more conservative company stuck with black while General Motors distinguished itself by painting its new models in a rainbow of colors. In fact, General Motors more or less partnered with DuPont to develop new synthetic pigments and faster-drying paints in 1923 called Duco and color was part of their marketing strategy to compete against Ford. Ford didn't cave and start using colors until 1927 https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotiv ... w-of-hues/

So yes, call it a marketing ploy if you want. But it was really part of the history of ruthless competition between Ford and GM.

[Valerie]

Interesting thread, Sudsy. Being a liturgical church, the RCC has designated colors for the feasts and seasons with the note that theses colors may vary in a different nation.

Regarding black and white: in the West and Europe, black vestments are worn for funerals. Yet in Taiwan and other Asian nations, white is the color of mourning and so the white vestments are worn. I think it has to do with specific cultures

Thanks MacPC. I wonder why 'black vestments' are used for funerals. Is this perhaps the colour/shade that is worn to identify with human suffering of the lost of a loved one ? If so, I can see others sharing in that temporal loss by wearing black but the use of white for mourning would, to me, best represent that we do not sorrow as those who have no hope and would be more the opposite of those who die and will remain in darkness.

That is interesting to know about these varying practises of colour/shade use.

At least in the RCC colors are very symbolic: white for purity and heaven; black for mourning (in the West); green for hope; red for the Passion of Christ and martyrs, etc.

They say black is very slimming too but what do I know?

That is true in Orthodox as well.

I understand black is worn f of r example by monks (Orthodox, and I believe RCC) as symbolic of death to "the world".

[ken_sylvania]

... What I always heard was that base model cars were black. Any other color cost more and was considered a luxury. Eventually some Anabaptists thought the uniformity was a good thing and "as long as we keep it black, we won't have to make decisions about what colors are appropriate and which ones are not."

Another possible factor is that colors for cars (other than standard black) entered as a marketing ploy designed to entice desire instead of relying on necessity to sell cars.

The first cars like the Model T were black because that is the cheapest and easiest color to use for the baked enamel finish that is required for painting sheet metal with paint that won't fade or scratch off.

It wasn't until about the 1920s that Dupont developed artificial pigments in other colors that could be used in auto paint without fading or peeling. Ford, because it was the more conservative company stuck with black while General Motors distinguished itself by painting its new models in a rainbow of colors. In fact, General Motors more or less partnered with DuPont to develop new synthetic pigments and faster-drying paints in 1923 called Duco and color was part of their marketing strategy to compete against Ford. Ford didn't cave and start using colors until 1927 https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotiv ... w-of-hues/

So yes, call it a marketing ploy if you want. But it was really part of the history of ruthless competition between Ford and GM.

What you described sounds exactly like a marketing ploy.

[Sudsy]

Thanks MacPC. I wonder why 'black vestments' are used for funerals. Is this perhaps the colour/shade that is worn to identify with human suffering of the lost of a loved one ? If so, I can see others sharing in that temporal loss by wearing black but the use of white for mourning would, to me, best represent that we do not sorrow as those who have no hope and would be more the opposite of those who die and will remain in darkness.

That is interesting to know about these varying practises of colour/shade use.

At least in the RCC colors are very symbolic: white for purity and heaven; black for mourning (in the West); green for hope; red for the Passion of Christ and martyrs, etc.

They say black is very slimming too but what do I know?

That is true in Orthodox as well.

I understand black is worn f of r example by monks (Orthodox, and I believe RCC) as symbolic of death to "the world".

That is interesting that they did associate the colour black with death but in a way of dying to the world. That is a new slant to me.

[MaxPC]

Thanks MacPC. I wonder why 'black vestments' are used for funerals. Is this perhaps the colour/shade that is worn to identify with human suffering of the lost of a loved one ? If so, I can see others sharing in that temporal loss by wearing black but the use of white for mourning would, to me, best represent that we do not sorrow as those who have no hope and would be more the opposite of those who die and will remain in darkness.

That is interesting to know about these varying practises of colour/shade use.

At least in the RCC colors are very symbolic: white for purity and heaven; black for mourning (in the West); green for hope; red for the Passion of Christ and martyrs, etc.

They say black is very slimming too but what do I know?

That is true in Orthodox as well.

I understand black is worn f of r example by monks (Orthodox, and I believe RCC) as symbolic of death to "the world".

In some monastic orders yes. In others the color is determined by the vow of poverty and the least expensive fabric for an entire community of monastics. Most often the colors reflect the charism of the monastic order.

Several orders chose white wool because it was cheaper than black wool. With the passage of time that color became the traditional color of the habit. There is even an order of nuns who wear a pink habit. I have no idea why they do though.

[Sudsy]

Several orders chose white wool because it was cheaper than black wool. With the passage of time that color became the traditional color of the habit. There is even an order of nuns who wear a pink habit. I have no idea why they do though.

Perhaps the pink habit might represent that we have not yet be given our pure white robes and the blood of Jesus is continuing to cleanse us from all unrighteousness and the red in the white results in a pink colour. Now thats a wild guess but it would make sense to me.

[Ken]

Another possible factor is that colors for cars (other than standard black) entered as a marketing ploy designed to entice desire instead of relying on necessity to sell cars.

The first cars like the Model T were black because that is the cheapest and easiest color to use for the baked enamel finish that is required for painting sheet metal with paint that won't fade or scratch off.

It wasn't until about the 1920s that Dupont developed artificial pigments in other colors that could be used in auto paint without fading or peeling. Ford, because it was the more conservative company stuck with black while General Motors distinguished itself by painting its new models in a rainbow of colors. In fact, General Motors more or less partnered with DuPont to develop new synthetic pigments and faster-drying paints in 1923 called Duco and color was part of their marketing strategy to compete against Ford. Ford didn't cave and start using colors until 1927 https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotiv ... w-of-hues/

So yes, call it a marketing ploy if you want. But it was really part of the history of ruthless competition between Ford and GM.

What you described sounds exactly like a marketing ploy.

I never claimed it wasn't. Most of automobile design for the past century has been about marketing rather than necessity. Culminating in the ridiculous monstrosities that pass for full size trucks today. Car companies want to sell cars and trucks, and coming up with new features is how they do that.

[ken_sylvania]

The first cars like the Model T were black because that is the cheapest and easiest color to use for the baked enamel finish that is required for painting sheet metal with paint that won't fade or scratch off.

It wasn't until about the 1920s that Dupont developed artificial pigments in other colors that could be used in auto paint without fading or peeling. Ford, because it was the more conservative company stuck with black while General Motors distinguished itself by painting its new models in a rainbow of colors. In fact, General Motors more or less partnered with DuPont to develop new synthetic pigments and faster-drying paints in 1923 called Duco and color was part of their marketing strategy to compete against Ford. Ford didn't cave and start using colors until 1927 https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotiv ... w-of-hues/

So yes, call it a marketing ploy if you want. But it was really part of the history of ruthless competition between Ford and GM.

What you described sounds exactly like a marketing ploy.

I never claimed it wasn't. Most of automobile design for the past century has been about marketing rather than necessity. Culminating in the ridiculous monstrosities that pass for full size trucks today. Car companies want to sell cars and trucks, and coming up with new features is how they do that.

I never claimed that you claimed it wasn't!