Let there be no doubt about it, the culture as represented in clothing adopted by the general society, called casual by those that favor it, and grungy for those who do not differentiate variety in the casual style, has affected Christians, both personally and in the congregation in the new millennium.  There have been many clothing styles during my lifetime, some that have come and gone, and taken as signs of whether or not the person is a fuddy-duddy or with it in modernization.  Of the breaks with moving changes that generally mark society, some have not been adopted by the elders in society and church attendees.  At this writing casual has been adopted across the board for young and old, secular and religious, educated and uneducated.  The list extends to nearly all representatives in current culture.  Never has one style (casual) been so widely adopted in America for all contexts and never have we seemed so poorly instructed on what that means to persons and society.  I was born during the Flapper Age when women wore funny hats, bound their bosoms so to appear a bit more like men, wore short skirts that were often bead decorated and seemed fitting to the Charleston, a popular dance style at the time.  The depression killed that foray into the Fitzgerald/Hemingway world.  There was a short period when many young men wore what was termed the zoot suit and included a broad brimmed hat to carry an impression.  The suit looked like it was two or three sizes larger than the body in it.  The ladies went through another change abandoning certain undergarments in the claim that it proved their freedom.  It didn’t seem to last long, as the Marilyn Monroe influence arose accenting the female figure for women, and the boys reverted only to return in the sport suit, which lasted for about three years.  For the more petite, the model became the president’s wife, Jaqueline Kennedy, with straight line dresses and bouffant hairdos, partly accented by a sense of world culture and showmanship.  Following Mrs. Kennedy there arose some general feeling that all this was tinsel, uncomfortable, unnecessary, and needed amendment.  Men stated that ties were uncomfortable, and suits were not really reflective of the natural man.  Women commonly preferred trouser like garments to dresses.  Jeans gained popularity reducing much of the difference in the genders.  The casual became the norm and has held up to this time of writing.  Uniforms have held up to protect some professions.

The reason for these observations on clothing style is that there is something gained or lost related to the clothing we choose to wear, when we have the right of choice, and follow the rules of modesty in meeting the audiences of our lives.  I am a traditionalist using the casual style around my family and home, but dressing somewhat differently in public situations like church, or attendance at an entertainment in an auditorium, or on a shopping tour, or a lunch appointment.  I have discovered, from a number of close observations including my own experience, that a step or two higher than casual gets better service and attention than too much casual look.  I am aware that if the casual is able to hold in general society that the disadvantages of it may decline, and casual may prevail for several generations.  It began with the principle of the camel getting his nose into the tent when casual Fridays were introduced in business, and have now taken over for workers for all the days.  The camel is in the tent of society.  It has taken over. It is popular even in television programming where poorly groomed persons have been reduced in context to crude language, confrontational experiences, and shallow stories.  In this tinsel life has lost some culture.

Scripture has much to say about style for worship and representation of God that should give us pause. Even in the desert experience difficult for refined conduct, Aaron had to dress a certain way for the Tabernacle, and priests were guided even to their underclothing and the treatment of their beards.  The New Testament refers to the devotional approach even to the head covering for women.  This last is an intense matter for Muslims, and followed, whether lightly or in the detail, in Muslim culture.  It remains a gesture in some Catholic communities, among the Amish and other religious groups.  There is a point made that there is something non-verbal that speaks to us in the way we dress, and that it tends to affect other things we do – not only with other persons but with God.  Our style is part of our witness.  Does it win our goal? *Mark W. Lee, Sr.2016, 2020