The cape dress: Its origins and evolution over the ages

[Sudsy]

I do object to the notion that conforming to and enforcing one particular style of dress or costume over another is more Christian or Biblical. That is all.

I don't know of anyone on MN who is trying to make a case for this. Do you know of anyone?

The only thing that I know anybody is trying to make a case for is the privilege of a person or a church or a group of churches to continue wearing something similar to what they've always worn, rather than feel pressure from folks like Ken and Sudsy to adjust their clothing to whatever the majority of society happens to be practicing in any particular era.

When I question the reasonings behind certain practises and what they might be doing to spreading the Gospel, I am not pressuring others to change their habits or convictions, however they want to put it, but I'm inviting those that do these practises to respond to what I think these practises are or could be producing. And I believe some chose not to respond and that is OK too. I don't believe we should go along with the crowd or majority but I am interested in traditions we have and why they are held to.

I think there is a fairly common belief that changes away from traditions is a step in a worldly direction. I experienced this in Pentecostalism and to some extent I think they were a drift into worldliness. However, in other traditions, I think they were more of a hindrance to spreading the Gospel than they were a benefit. Jesus sure challenged various traditions in His day. This got Him into considerable conflict especially with the traditions of the Pharisees. But there were some traditions He said to abide by. I believe there are good traditions and bad traditions and some that just are not as good as they once were as our settings in the world change.

[Ken]

I don't know of anyone on MN who is trying to make a case for this. Do you know of anyone?

I don't know about Mennonet.

Ok. It seemed to me that you didn't know of anyone so now we are in agreement on that point.

I see it with my own daughters and my wife and we try to teach them to resist the whims of fashion, especially when inappropriate.

Why would you tell your daughters this sort of thing if dress is not mentioned by Jesus?
A can a church do the same sort of teaching that you and your wife do, or are parents the only one's that are allowed to do this?

I also have reservations about conservative churches that focus on conformity of dress. Let me be clear. It isn't the actual dress I object to. I have absolutely on problem with cape dresses or any other kind of dress. It is the message that both outward appearance and conformity are important Biblical values. They are not.

We live around lots of people who share the same conclusions, so at least you have lots of company.

I think we are sending young women the wrong message when we obsess about what they wear and nit-pick their appearance. Especially compared to what is inside.

I agree. And I am not aware of anyone on Mennonet who disagrees with you. In fact, 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?

Look, I clearly come from more of an egalitarian mindset than many here. That much is obvious. I spend my days teaching HS students and I see the pressures on young women to conform to fashion, make themselves attractive to boys, and so forth. This society very much over-sexualizes young women. And yes, it is mostly young women. Young men have other different pressures for the most part. Such as the pressure to excel in athletics. I spend my days encouraging both boys and girls to ignore the relentless pressures to be cute and fashionable and don't base their self-worth on looks. But rather to value their knowledge and abilities and what is inside. It can be an uphill battle to be sure.

Likewise I have criticism for religious groups that place a similar importance on the appearance of young women from the other direction. This isn't just plain Anabaptists but also my Muslim students who are forced by family and culture to wear headscarves. The message they are getting is that a woman's appearance is of primary concern and that the duty of women is to avoid giving any visual temptation to men. This is an equal sexualization of women from the opposite direction and it gives the same message to young women that their outward appearance is of upmost importance, and also that young men are sexual aggressors and it is THEIR responsibility to avoid giving them any temptation. I think this sends an equally wrong message to young women as the world of fashion--that their outward appearance and sexuality is of primary importance. And what is inside; their interests, abilities, and values, less so.

[HeIsRisen]

Just a couple thoughts:

Actually Jesus does mention clothing (even on the sermon on the mount!)
Matthew 6:
25 Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.
33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Technically, worldy culture teaches conformity of dress, too (but conformity to the world).

My church doesn't have written standards on dress. I do think there is some value in a dress style encouraged by the church that is not conformed to worldy fashions, but regardless of how separation from the world is practiced in dress, if we start to care too much about it, it's just as sinful as caring too much about our appearance to conform to the world. It's important to not fall in either ditch.

[Ernie]

And Jesus says this...

As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to behold? A reed shaken by the wind? Why then did you go out? To see a man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, those who wear soft raiment are in kings’ houses. Why then did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.” Matthew 11:7,9

The principle I take from this is that you don't expect zealous prophets of God to live in king's houses or wear the kind of expensive clothes king's households might.

[Ernie]

1. Jesus does not appear to speak on clothing anywhere in the Bible (correct me if I am wrong). It is not addressed in the Gospels so I don't consider it a central issue of Christianity in any way.

See former post.

2. Dress does come up in the various epistles such as 1 Peter and 1 Timothy, both of which actually have disputed authorship. I look to what they are actually saying and it is modesty in the humble (not showy) sense and women covering their hair which all but the most conservative sects to not actually follow literally. And neither do they follow the dictate that men leave their heads uncovered. I see hats everywhere.

Any man who wears a hat as a religious symbol in worship (as some orthodox Jews do) are in the same position as a woman who does not cover her head as the New Testament records.[/quote]

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.

It is taught in the Old Testament but you do say you ignore that. So in that case, am I understanding that you probably aren't attempting to learn something from that????

4. I ignore Old Testament Hebrew law on dress since everyone else does too, or arbitrarily picks and chooses which to follow. For example, I don't think any group follows the dictate on blend fabrics.

I don't ignore these things. I try to learn the principles and what God was getting at.

In summary, for both men and women, what is on the INSIDE is far more important than what is on the OUTSIDE. And in my personal experience, the focus on outward appearance and dress, especially for women, distracts from that. Whether it is churches mandating specific forms of plain dress,

My observation is the opposite. The hundreds of people I interact with find closely find that giving attention to the outside and the inside, helps them cultivate virtues that they wouldn't gain by only focusing on the inside.

[Ernie]

But the main question that comes to my mind is does a cape dress attract seekers to ask questions that lead to conversation about a person's soul ? Or is it more of an immediate turn off to possible seekers who are unsaved ?

The fine spiritual ladies I relate to closely, as well as my 12 and 15 year old daughters, find lots of opportunities to take an inquiry about their attire, into a testimony about their love for Jesus, their desire to follow his teachings, their godly contentment, etc. etc. We help provide a lunch to college students and internationals every Wednesday and have these folks to our home on Sunday, and this comes up all the time. We even have people wanting to dress up in our lady's clothes because they find the clothes very simple and attractive. We don't care whether it starts with our clothing, and they end up coming to know the Lord later, or whether they come to know the Lord first, and then want to start dressing modestly and identifying with some of his people.

The folks in our church who are the most against wearing traditional attire tend to be the ones that seeker's have the most difficulty relating to in a church setting.

[Ernie]

By contrast, my female cousin's memories of their grandfather are vastly different. Mostly all they remember is stern/angry old man with his leather King James Bible in hand, lecturing and hectoring them about their dress and hair. At every family event that was what they got. Judgement and disapproval of their outward appearance and lectures citing various scriptures. He barely knew their names and certainly knew nothing of what was inside, their hopes, dreams, interests, who they were. It was nothing but judgment and disapproval based entirely on outward appearance. Which was not immodest in any way. They were just not dressed in traditional Menno dresses with long hair tucked in buns under coverings like he wanted. Because it was the 1970s and they all attended mainstream Mennonite churches where that was no longer really done.

But just because your grandfather did this wrongly (assuming for now that he did it wrongly) doesn't mean that there isn't a helpful and beneficial to talk about these matters in churches where the young people are more attracted to contemporary values than the values of their forbearers.

I don't want my own daughters growing up with the message that their value as people and as Christians is dependent on something so trivial as dress. Not from the secular world of fashion, and not from old men and women in their churches.

I doubt they will ever have to deal with this as I don't suspect you will ever put them in a situation where this could happen. They may be exposed to other unhealthy things in their current setting, but probably not the one you refer to above.

I don't want my own daughters growing up with the message that their value as people and as Christians is dependent on how they dress either.
But if your daughter's dad is giving them the idea that how they dress is "trivial", and they hear from you the kinds of things we are hearing in this thread, they will likely never conclude that dress is often a reflection of what is happening in the heart, that appropriate dress is one of many important topics that Christians should consider, and that a woman can find communion with God as she adorns herself inwardly and outwardly. (They might pick up on these topics if they go back and study their ancestors and try to figure out what made their spiritual ancestors value the things that they did." (There are some grandchildren in situations like yours who do take an interest in the heritage that their parents never had a lot of appreciation for, but it doesn't happen very often.)

Now if their dad taught them all the good values from the spiritual part of his Anabaptist heritage, and how blessed he is to have received this heritage, and the good values that Anabaptists have historically concluded about dress, the daughters might be a lot more eager to delve into this. But I think you are correct that with the way they have been conditioned, they aren't likely to take a lot of interest in this.

[Josh]

I think there is a fairly common belief that changes away from traditions is a step in a worldly direction. I experienced this in Pentecostalism and to some extent I think they were a drift into worldliness. However, in other traditions, I think they were more of a hindrance to spreading the Gospel than they were a benefit. Jesus sure challenged various traditions in His day. This got Him into considerable conflict especially with the traditions of the Pharisees. But there were some traditions He said to abide by. I believe there are good traditions and bad traditions and some that just are not as good as they once were as our settings in the world change.

As I've said before, the only people winning any converts where I live are the Pentecostals who maintain the strictest standard (in Pentecostal terms) of attire. (No wedding rings, women wearing their hair up, no shorts on men, and a few other things like that.) It appears that having a dress code and expecting converts to live up to it doesn't actually impact evangelism at all.

As a counterpoint, Mennonite groups that decided to drop any semblance of dress codes at all have not seem some huge success in leading unbelievers to Christ. They are just as stagnant as anywhere else.

[Neto]

....
We even have people wanting to dress up in our lady's clothes because they find the clothes very simple and attractive. We don't care whether it starts with our clothing, and they end up coming to know the Lord later, or whether they come to know the Lord first, and then want to start dressing modestly and identifying with some of his people.
....

This part reminds me of a Church Growth book we used in a missions course in Bible college. It told of a study done in India, where when men came to the Christian meetings, they asked them why they were interested. Many gave reasons such as "We want to send our children to your school." Then they "followed" the development of these men's spiritual development over a period of time, I think it was 10 years. They found that many of these men had not only come to Christ, but had become the leaders in the native churches. Of course some just got what they wanted - the schooling for their children, for which joining the church was never a requirement at all anyway, then drifted away. But for the others, it was the open door that 'gained a hearing' for the Gospel.

[Ken]

I don't want my own daughters growing up with the message that their value as people and as Christians is dependent on how they dress either.

But if your daughter's dad is giving them the idea that how they dress is "trivial", and they hear from you the kinds of things we are hearing in this thread, they will likely never conclude that dress is often a reflection of what is happening in the heart, that appropriate dress is one of many important topics that Christians should consider, and that a woman can find communion with God as she adorns herself inwardly and outwardly. (They might pick up on these topics if they go back and study their ancestors and try to figure out what made their spiritual ancestors value the things that they did." (There are some grandchildren in situations like yours who do take an interest in the heritage that their parents never had a lot of appreciation for, but it doesn't happen very often.)

To be clear, when I used the word "trivial" I mean in terms of their value as a Christian. Clearly dress is not always trivial and one must learn to dress appropriately for the circumstances.

Two honest questions for you First, when you write:

dress is often a reflection of what is happening in the heart, that appropriate dress is one of many important topics that Christians should consider, and that a woman can find communion with God as she adorns herself inwardly and outwardly.

Is this only an expectation you have of your young women? Or in your church and in your family do you ALSO teach your 15 year old boys that how they dress is a reflection of what is happening in the heart and that they can find "communion with God as they adorn themselves inwardly and outwardly?"

Secondly, the term "modesty" has two meanings in English. When Paul says in 1 Timothy 2:9 "Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,"

Do you think he is using the term "modesty" in the the sense of being humble and not showing wealth? Which would be consistent with a vast number of Jesus' teachings about wealth such as "And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

Or do you think he is using the term "modesty" in the modern sense of not being provocative towards men? And which of those two meanings of the word "modesty" do you think is more reflective of the original Greek and the intent of this passage?

Because those two different meanings impart vastly different messages to young women. The first being that as good Christians they should be humble and forsake the pursuit of wealth and wealthy trappings. And the second being that they are sexual creatures who should always take care not to provoke men and boys. And conversely, that men and boys are such sexual creatures that they can be "provoked" by a dress that doesn't disguise a woman's shape. Or perhaps a glimpse of a woman's leg without stockings or some such. And that it is a GIRL'S responsibility to make sure that does not happen to the boys and men around them.