Saturday, August 2, 1997

Respect not a matter of clothing

By MICHAEL O'CONNOR / Abilene Reporter-News

I was sitting at my desk this week, being harassed by a couple of gnats. For some reason, they get in the building and then fly around your head while you're trying to work or eat a snack.

I was amazed at the bugs' presence, though, because with all the gnat-straining that's been going on in town, I didn't think any of the pesky critters could be left.

Though I've already addressed the issue obliquely, I'm going to write one more piece on the issue of shorts in church and will never touch the subject again, no matter how many letters I read in the paper.

Let's understand first that the issue is not a matter of respect for God. Clothing conventions are cultural. What's considered disrespectful in one situation is entirely appropriate in another. Few would insist that worshipers attending worship in a camp setting should be dressed the way they would for Sunday morning worship, yet the same God is being worshiped.

I was privileged to go on a mission tour of India 20 years ago and attended a number of worship services while there. The only people I saw at one of those services dressed like we would for an average Sunday morning were the missionary leading the tour - if he was preaching - and the district superintendent. Pastors in the rural areas dressed like their parishioners. I suspect that dress in other countries tends to reflect local convention rather than American standards.

To insist that any mode of dress is the only appropriate way to show respect is to insist that only our way is right - something Western missionaries often found would pretty much scuttle their work.

But does the Bible have anything to say about all this? Did God lay out a dress code? Sure, if you're talking about an Old Testament priest, whose garments symbolized God's nature to worshipers. Respect wise, the only requirement was that priests had to wear undergarments so their nakedness would not be exposed to the altar.

But David doffed his robes and danced in celebration before God. His wife Michal despised him for his unseemly behavior, but the chronicler of the event makes it clear that she's the one in the wrong.

Speaking of David, he'd have never been king if he'd been chosen on the basis of physical appearance, and the story of his being chosen was to emphasize the point that we are the ones who are concerned with appearances, not God.

Paul outlines a dress code for women in his first letter to Timothy, but if you pay close attention, he tells them not to fix their hair and leave the fancy clothes and jewelry at home. Judging from the congregants I see at First Big Church Anywhere, a lot of women are violating the dress code.

And please don't write and point out the word modest in the passage. Remember that trip to India? Most of the women wore saris, with midriffs exposed and no slips, but were considered to be modest when they covered their heads. That culture thing again.

James also made a point of mentioning the way congregants dressed. Look at chapter 2. He would appear to be talking about Abilene - at least if you read letters to the editor. The poor are to be accorded the same respect as anyone else, even if their clothes are shabby. In fact, how we treat each other is the measure James uses to determine whether our faith is genuine, whether we love and respect God.

Want to show your respect for God? Go visit a widow or a prisoner. Spend some time listening to a lonely person. Help feed the hungry. Encourage your preacher instead complaining about him or her. Be a servant in your church instead of insisting of wielding power. I have a feeling He'll be a lot more impressed with that than whether you avoided wearing shorts to church.