Posted on 09/03/2003 6:23:54 AM PDT by hiho hiho
Inward purity & outward dress
Does it matter how we dress for worship?
Not too long ago, it was commonly held within all Christian denominations, from Orthodox through Roman Catholic to Baptist, that anyone going to a church service on Sunday should put on his best clothing (or at least his good clothing) for he was meeting not a human king or a human president, but the King of the kings and the Lord of the lords and the President of the presidents, even the Lord God, the Blessed Trinity. And "best" or "good" dress was defined in cultural terms as what was appropriate when meeting someone of great importance.
So one did not go to church on the Lord's Day in one's work clothing or in one's leisure attire. Along with this dress code, the basic affection of the soul that was seen as appropriate in entering the house of the Lord was "the fear of the Lord" (a sense of reverence and awe and sinfulness before the Infinite and Eternal, Holy God), for the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge and wisdom.
Today, semi-casual or even casual clothing are the norm in many denominations from Orthodox through Roman Catholic to Baptist, and "the fear of the Lord" has generally been replaced by "wanting a relationship with the Lord and [perhaps] with all [or some of those] who gather" (thus the spread of "the passing of the peace" or "the greeting" in the services of virtually all American denominations since the 1970s).
One can challenge this description claiming that the difference between 1950 and 2000 is not so marked. Yet any churchgoer who is 60 or more will be able to verify it, at least in general terms from personal observation.
But why this change in dress code and general attitude? One can offer all kinds of answers related to changing social and cultural mores, changing liturgical fashions, changing doctrinal teaching and a felt, greater sense of personal freedom and autonomy. But what seems to make sense, because we are beings with soul and body, is that there is a vital connection with what is believed, taught and confessed and how one dresses for worship and how one perceives and describes worship.
The move from dressing in one's best clothing to dressing in one's leisure or semi-formal clothing seems to be an outward and visible change of an inward disposition or attitude. Apparently the general perception of God, his nature, character & attributes, has changed and so has the sense of the place of a human being before him. Today we seem to think that we can easily enter the presence of God for he is the Friendly One who welcomes us just as we are. He is always ready to have "a relationship" with us. Yesterday, we apparently thought that to seek to enter the presence of God was an awesome calling, requiring reverence and penitence and that if He did establish a relation with us it was one of sovereign mercy.
The Lord's Day is not merely special, it is unique, for it is the weekly festival of the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Perhaps we should dress in an appropriate manner to celebrate the uniqueness of the Saviour and the Day!
The Rev'd Dr. Peter Toon M.A., D.Phil. (Oxon.)
LOL...tomorrow I have to go be a model for my daughter. She is a beautician, and works for Supercuts. They are going to start offering hair coloring and they all have to practice on someone. I get to be her guinea pig:) She just has to do highligts. I;m thinking of going red:) highlights. Something radical for a change. Becky
Are you trying to instigate something? Or are you possibly one of her seven children that just happens to live in McConnells? ;)
The primary doctrinal position is the total sovereignty of God. A belief that NOTHING happens that God has not ordained.
It teaches that it is God that acts in the salvation of man , God seeks the man, the man does not seek God. God chooses the man , the man does not choose God
I think your wife's testimony fits well with the doctrine of election. She was Gods all along, (as were you) He cause circumstances to occur that would bring you both to the gospel so that you would hear and respond. It was not an "accident " or a coincidence .God foreordained that moment before the foundation of the earth.
You have not chosen me ,I have chosen you
Follow the link
You are soooooo right
I was once a mild mannered Wesleyan/Arminian that battled for over a year against the Calvinists. I threw everything I had at them, after all it was sooo obvious they were WRONG
How could one believe that you needed to be regenerated BEFORE you got saved..when EVERYONE knows you have to be saved to be regenerated.
I did not consider that the dead do not grow or change or choose...Of course you can not see the Kingdom of God unless you are born again..
So a few months after the religious crusade was over and the Knights had all wandered back to their respective corners, one night I was reading the word and it jumped off the pages at me..They were correct ..I had been wrong
So BTL sometimes people's minds do get changed on FR
On the tract team:>)
Opps try again
On the track team:>)
That makes sense. He is the Alpha and the Omega and knows everything that ever was and all that is to be. I can see how you would call that as being ordained. I am with you so far.
It teaches that it is God that acts in the salvation of man, God seeks the man, the man does not seek God. God chooses the man, the man does not choose God.
Thats a sticky one there. Although it seems to go along with you first statement, I always believed that God gave us freewill and even the angles in heaven have freewill. I would have to think about that one.
I think your wife's testimony fits well with the doctrine of election. She was Gods all along, (as were you) He cause circumstances to occur that would bring you both to the gospel so that you would hear and respond. It was not an "accident " or a coincidence.
You will get no argument from me on this point. I have always felt God was walking with my wife and I, even when we were not walking with Him. You can choose to call it election or predestination if you wish, but I would prefer to call it by a less ambiguous term like love.
Thanks for the link. I promise I will read it tomorrow when I have more time.
Thanks for the info on Calvinism too. Very interesting.
RnMomof7, Thank you for sharing that with me.
To All: I find that I must offer a retraction and an appology for my statement, "you arn't goning to change anyone's mind around here" (meaning the Religion Forum). Fellow Freepers, I was wrong and I am sincerely sorry for what I said.
I said what I did before I learned of what happened with RnMomof7 and before I looked in my Freepmail box. When I looked in my email box, I was amazed to find overflowing messages. Some were from people who had posted to this thread, but more were from those who had not. They were all messages of encouragement, praise to God, blessings, inspiration, welcomes, and of God's love. Some were from people who have rethought, or who said they might have to rethink, their positions of dress in the church because of my wife's story. And a couple from people who are dealing with matters of dress in their own church and were encouraged.
I am deeply moved and I thank you all. Your kind words are a blessing. My wife is out of town now, but when she returns I will show her all of your wonderful posts and emails. I thank you on her behalf.
I never knew it could feel so good to be wrong.
To those who Freepmailed me: If I have not yet responded to your email be patient I will write you back. It is late now and I must get to bed.
Again, my appologies and thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.