Early Anabaptists and clothing

[Bootstrap]

Early Anabaptists didn't seem to be concerned much about clothing from a religious perspective at all. There is just barely anything written about it.

True? False? Has anyone here studied this question?

[Bootstrap]

JC Wenger wrote about this:

Christianity and Dress

He cites some very early writings:

John Kessler (1502-74), the Swiss chronicler, says that the Anabaptists avoided costly clothing, wore coarse cloth, wore broad felt hats and carried no weapons (Mennonitisches Lexikon, Bd. I., p. 228).

The greatest leader the Mennonite Church ever had was probably Menno Simons (1496-1561). Menno is vigorous in his condemnation of conformity to the world in attire. In explaining that the kingdom of which Christians are members is not an earthly one, Menno says (Complete Works, I, pp. 95 f.)

It is an eternal, spiritual and abiding kingdom, where there are no eating and drinking, but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. There no king reigns, but the true King of Zion, Christ Jesus. He is the King of righteousness, the King of peace, the King of kings, who has all power in heaven above, and on earth beneath. Neither the King nor His servants bear any sword but the sword of the Spirit.

This is not a kingdom in which a display is made of gold, silver, pearls, silk, velvet and costly finery, as is done by the proud wicked world.

Menno also makes the following protest (Ibid., I, p.144):

They say that they believe, and yet there are no limits nor bounds to their accursed wantonness, foolish pomp, show of silks, velvet, costly clothes, gold rings, chains, silver belts, pins, buttons, curiously adorned shirts, handkerchiefs, collars, veils, aprons, velvet shoes, slippers and such like foolish finery; never regarding that the enlightened apostles, Peter and Paul, have in plain and express words forbidden this to all Christian women. If this is forbidden to women how much more then should men abstain from it, who are the leaders and heads of their women. Notwithstanding all this they still want to be called the Christian Church

He cites some other early Anabaptist sources. He also cites Cyprian for an early church witness:

Those who recognize the Biblical character of the doctrine of nonconformity in attire will not be surprised to find numerous sections on dress in the early fathers of the Christian Church. One of the great men of the early church was Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who was martyred for his faith in Jesus in the year 258. The following quotation (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Edited by Roberts and Donaldson, Scribner's, 1925, Vol. V, pp. 275f.) is a touching account of his conversion and his new life in Christ:

While I was still lying in darkness and gloomy night, wavering hither and thither, tossed about on the foam of this boastful age, and uncertain of my wandering steps, knowing nothing of my real life, and remote from truth and light, I used to regard it as a difficult matter, and especially as difficult in respect of my character at that time, that a man should be capable of being born again-a truth which the divine mercy had announced for my salvation-and that a man quickened to a new life in tile laver of saving water should be able to put off what he had previously been; and, although retaining all his bodily structure, should he himself changed in heart and soul. . . . When does he learn thrift who has been used to liberal banquets and sumptuous feasts? And he who has been glittering in gold and purple, and has been celebrated for his costly attire, when does he reduce himself to ordinary and simple clothing?. . .

But after that, by the help of the water of new birth, the stain of former years had been washed away, and a light from above, serene and pure, had been infused into my reconciled heart-after that, by the agency of the Spirit breathed from heaven, a second birth had restored me to a new man-then, in a wondrous manner, doubtful things at once began to assure themselves to me, . . . what before had seemed difficult began to suggest a means of accomplishment, what had been thought impossible, to be capable of being achieved. Epistle I, 3, 4.

But he also says that uniformity was not part of this:

It would not be correct to conclude from the evidence cited above that all Mennonites all through their history, or even at any given time, looked exactly alike: the Krehbiel observations (referred to above) are clear on this point. There always have been variations in the applications by individuals of the doctrine of nonconformity. It is clear, on the other hand, that those who maintain that all dress regulations among the Mennonites are of recent American origin, are grossly mistaken.

I am not a Plain Mennonite - I did dress plain for 3 years in the 1970s, but not since. But I do think that simplicity and modesty in dress is a good thing for Christians.

[JohnH]

Those are great citations, Boot - the distinction I see is that there was no practice of "plain" clothing.

For example, in Eastern circles and to a lesser degree Nationwide, it is basically a tenet that Christians would obviously wear kapps and cape dresses, and that has always been their manner of dress. I find this kind of thinking really hard to deal with, and some of their intellectuals grasp at straws to find examples of this amongst early Anabaptists. (It's true that Swiss and Dutch women in the 16th century wore kapps, but it had nothing to do with plain dress or Anabaptist practice.)

I think a uniform or a code of conduct to ensure nonconformity is practiced is fine. I just don't think like the historical revisionism.

Early Anabaptists didn't seem to be concerned much about clothing from a religious perspective at all. There is just barely anything written about it.

True? False? Has anyone here studied this question?

I should have phrased this as "concerned about clothing from the religions perspective Anabaptists are concerned about it today".

Indeed, I feel some of the early Anabaptist concerns (particularly cost and being excessively fancy) have been lost today - for example, plain Anabaptists are comfortable with environmentally destructive synthetic fabrics and seem not to care about the role of slavery in the fabric and garment trade. Likewise, in some circles, Anabaptist attire can be quite expensive. I don't think it makes sense to buy expensive 2 piece suits and then spend more money to convert them to "plain suits".

[Soloist]

As a counter to this, the early anabaptists were not identified by dress but rather behavior like praying for their food.

[Bootstrap]

As a counter to this, the early anabaptists were not identified by dress but rather behavior like praying for their food.

Yes - that's how I understand it. Their dress was not distinctive, but it was not expensive. In my church, nobody's clothing stands out, nobody's clothing is expensive, but it isn't uniform either. That's how I understand their practice back then. They didn't spend a lot of time and effort preaching about clothing, neither do we.

[JohnH]

As a counter to this, the early anabaptists were not identified by dress but rather behavior like praying for their food.

The other interesting one is "not wearing weapons"... not normally something I think of about clothing...

I did observe a young man at the grocery store the other day who wore his pistol in a holster, openly visible. Perhaps in very "red state" areas, Anabaptists could become known by the fact we aren't seen carrying arms, taking photos of ourselves with guns on Facebook, bearing decals of firearm companies or silhouettes of guns on our trucks, and so forth.

[Bootstrap]

Those are great citations, Boot - the distinction I see is that there was no practice of "plain" clothing.

"Plain" in the sense of Mennonite tradition, or "plain" in the normal English sense?

decorated or elaborate; simple or ordinary in character.

Today's plain Anabaptists and Mennnonites dress in a manner that is simple, but very distinctive. It really stands out. It is not ordinary.

[JohnH]

I mean the Anabaptist rendering of "plain".

[Heirbyadoption]

Those are great citations, Boot - the distinction I see is that there was no practice of "plain" clothing.

"Plain" in the sense of Mennonite tradition, or "plain" in the normal English sense?

decorated or elaborate; simple or ordinary in character.

Today's plain Anabaptists and Mennnonites dress in a manner that is simple, but very distinctive. It really stands out. It is not ordinary.

Truth be told, it's not always simple either. Just ask someone who needs to have a cape dress or plain coat made, especially when it comes to conference or group specifics (how many pleats on a cap, heart shape vs standard vs hanging veils vs doilies, mesh vs organdy vs etc, size and colors of cap strings, cape styles, allowable fabrics/patterns, belt widths, skirt lengths, coat collars, hooks vs buttons vs snaps, pockets or no, long sleeves vs short, solid vs print materials, black shoes vs sneakers vs boots, black suspenders vs white (1", vs 1.5 or 2"), broadfalls vs zippers, straw hat vs crushable vs felt, brim size, round crown vs flat top vs dimpled crown, and that's just the beginning of the list...

Distinctive & Plain? Absolutely. Simple and plain? Let's not kid ourselves.

[Bootstrap]

Distinctive & Plain? Absolutely. Simple and plain? Let's not kid ourselves.

Buying broadfall pants and shirts from Gohn Brothers was simple and plain, I think. And a distinctive look for a college student at the time. But I have vivid memories of the coins in my pockets flying all over the place when I took my pants off ...