# Church Attire: A Poll



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Admittedly, I am not a church-going-man (I'm a bit of a heathen really :devil, but I will be attending a service in the coming weeks. A cousin of mine will be serving a religious mission, and the farewells are tacked on to the normal service. I'm planning on wearing a blazer and tie, and I feel fine with my decision, but I am curious as to what most of you wear to church (or what you would wear to church).


----------



## sowilson (Jul 27, 2009)

What's church? I dress in appropriate temple wear when I go (comfortable pants for sitting on my knees and a decent shirt).


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Warmer months: patterned shirt with no tie or a casual tie. Cooler months: blazer or sport jacket and tie. This is average or perhaps slightly dressier than average for men at our Presbyterian Church in So. Cal. (There's a wide range.)

I recently attended a Baptist church in the area and saw a lot of guys in suits. I was in summer mode and wished I'd dressed up a bit more.

At the Mormon church across the street, I would wear navy blazer and tie with a white shirt.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

sowilson said:


> What's church? I dress in appropriate temple wear when I go (comfortable pants for sitting on my knees and a decent shirt).


You got me, sowilson. Despite not being a Christian and considering myself an open-minded fellow, my mind is often skewed by the social environment I was raised in, a predominantly Christian one. Thank you for calling me out on this one.

All answers are, of course, welcome from any religious affiliation and without regard for what the building in which one worships is called.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> Warmer months: patterned shirt with no tie or a casual tie. Cooler months: blazer or sport jacket and tie. This is average or perhaps slightly dressier than average for men at our Presbyterian Church in So. Cal. (There's a wide range.)
> 
> I recently attended a Baptist church in the area and saw a lot of guys in suits. I was in summer mode and wished I'd dressed up a bit more.
> 
> At the Mormon church across the street, I would wear navy blazer and tie with a white shirt.


The church in question happens to be an LDS/Mormon church. I assume you may have guessed that from my locale (and the mention of a mission) :icon_smile_big:.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

Will this poll let you awnser A, B and D? During cold/cool weather I will wear a suit or sport coat/blazer with a tie. During warm/hot I typically wear a pair of dress trousers and a dress shirt. I will always wear a suit and tie on Holy Days of Obligation, Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, Good Friday, and Easter


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Unfortunately at my local Catholic Church slobwear is the norm. Tee shirts and jeans abound. Athletic wear and your favorite team jacket obviously are de rigueur also. Men wearing slacks are in the minority. And you can probably count the number who wear a blazer/jacket and slacks (which is what I'm in) on one hand. Forget about a tie. Only a couple of ushers are in those. It's a pathetic state of affairs.

However, for important events like Christmas or Easter I am in a suit and tie (sometimes a bow tie). No ifs ands or buts.


----------



## DeepSouth (Oct 22, 2009)

In hot and humid Alabama, Poplin suits work well from early spring until fall, regardless of being a "summer suit." Pretty much everyone wears a suit and tie year-round though.


----------



## Andy (Aug 25, 2002)

Usually a sport jacket, dress trousers, dress shirt and pocket square! To sit with my fellow worshipers in shorts or jeans and Hawaiian shirts! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

I wear a suit on Sundays, usually a sportcoat (sometimes a sweater) on Wednesdays. I think your choice of blazer and tie sounds very appropriate.

There's certainly nothing wrong with you asking what you would wear to church since that's where you are going.


----------



## Sir Cingle (Aug 22, 2009)

I suppose this depends a lot on the congregation. Some are surprisingly informal, as a few other posters have noted. But I think that church/temple service is the sort of thing for which one can never look out of place wearing a blazer and tie, even if your fellow worshippers all wear very casual stuff. If you can't dress up in church/temple, where can you dress up?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I wear a coat and tie, but only about half of our congregation does. (A lot of churches have few if any jacket and/or tie wearers.)

We tend to be a more formally-dressed bunch at AAAC; you might just want to ask your friend what you should or can wear.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*An alb*

From Labor Day through Pentecost (or Memorial Day, whichever comes later), I wear an alb (AKA a "robe"), a stole (AKA a "scarf") in the liturgical colors of the church-year season, and a pectoral cross. No cincture, as they increase the heat and don't look good with my figure!

During the summer months, I wear the alb, stole, and cross for festivals and for baptisms, marriages, and funerals; otherwise, for "Ordinary Time" Sundays, I wear wool trousers and a polo shirt and a smallish pectoral cross. Yes, I'm the pastor.

While the nave is A/C'ed in the summer, the chancel does not benefit from A/C ducts. They have some small fans hidden here and there. (If only I had long hair to blow in the wind!...)

When I was younger, I'd wear clerical shirts (either with the tab collar or the full "dog collar") in the summer, often with the stole and cross. Such practice is now "old fashioned" and smacks of clericalism for some, at least in this context for male clergy (where our denomination is the majority [think of "Lake Wobegon"]). I imagine it is a different world Out East?

(Over at the parish hall [a separate bldg!] for coffee hour and such, I wear a sport coat, a dress shirt, no tie, and wool trousers.)

To wear a sport coat with tie, let alone a suit, is to set yourself apart, and people fear someone has died. Someone wise said for clergy to dress better than 80%, and worse than 20%. Seems right in my experience.

In this particular congregation, no men wear a tie, a few wear a sport coat; most wear "casual Friday," though some wear "a step above field clothes." This is fairly characteristic. In one congregation I served, there several men wore suits or sport coats with ties, while most wore casual Friday (this was a congregation populated with 3M executives, scientists, and program managers).

Pr B (AKA The Rev. Dr. B)


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

KenR said:


> Unfortunately at my local Catholic Church slobwear is the norm.


Recently I spotted Priests with black sneakers under their vestment while at the altar. 

When I was young (30+ years ago) I admired the REALLY nice Italian shoes they wore, usually souvanirs after a visit to the Vatican.

Black sneakers at the Hospital, maybe.

During the Eucharist, NO!!

Oh, me??

At least a jacket and tie, for more special events, a suit.

From now on; always nice shoes!!


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Sir Cingle said:


> I suppose this depends a lot on the congregation. Some are surprisingly informal, as a few other posters have noted. But I think that church/temple service is the sort of thing for which one can never look out of place wearing a blazer and tie, even if your fellow worshippers all wear very casual stuff. *If you can't dress up in church/temple, where can you dress up?*


Quoted for truth.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*WDJW?*

Of course--with a smart-alecky grin--one must remember WDJW, What Did Jesus Wear? E.g., during worship at the synagogue in Nazareth, or during the last supper?! Undoubtedly, a robe and sandals. Common street-wear of the times. But then, they also probably had only one set of clothes then.


----------



## Cardcaptor Charlie (Jul 7, 2008)

Suit and tie. 

In the UK, we also wear full academicals to evensong at certain university churches.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

KenR said:


> *Unfortunately at my local Catholic Church slobwear is the norm.* Tee shirts and jeans abound. Athletic wear and your favorite team jacket obviously are de rigueur also. Men wearing slacks are in the minority. And you can probably count the number who wear a blazer/jacket and slacks (which is what I'm in) on one hand. *Forget about a tie. Only a couple of ushers are in those. It's a pathetic state of affairs*.
> 
> However, for important events like Christmas or Easter I am in a suit and tie (sometimes a bow tie). No ifs ands or buts.


The suburban Catholic Churchs in my area are the same for the most part. However I got to a Jesuit Church in Downtown so the level of dress is often better. Not to mention I feel like I am in a church instead of an auditorium. I hate going to the suburban churchs cause there will always be a kid next to me eating dry Cherios and playing with his Cars. The users downtown ask these people to leave.

While I am not an user, about half the Sundays I am wearing a suit, I am asked to help with the collection.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

OH-CPA said:


> The users downtown ask these people to leave.


Ouch. I hope they say, "You might feel more comfortable over here in this other section," rather than just "Please leave."


----------



## rlfsoccerdad (Mar 28, 2008)

I guess I will offer two views. First if your goal is to fit in with the rest of the worshippers, then at an LDS service then a dress shirt, coat, and tie. Now for the second view, if what you want is to show delectable to the missionary, then same advice. Alternatively, go in
what makes you comfortable, I expect you to be warmly received regardless of your attire.

My general practice is a suit and bowtie.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

Kurt N said:


> Ouch. I hope they say, "You might feel more comfortable over here in this other section," rather than just "Please leave."


Actually they will ask you to behave appropriately in church, if you do not comply they ask you to leave. Playing with cars in church is not appropriate, nor is eating.

I should apologize for my poor spelling on my last post. I don't think the ushers would appreciate being called users.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Ole & Lena*

'Round these parts, up by Lake Wobegone, where Lutherans are dense (!), we often tell parables in the genre of Ole and Lena stories. In this story, it was Mr Haugesteun.

Mr Hagesteun, a Norwegian bachelor farmer, hadn't been to church for a couple Sundays now. Pastor was concerned. Had Mr Haugesteun fallen back into drinking? 
So Pastor visited. "Mr Haugesteun, I noticed you haven't been in church for a couple Sundays now. Is something wrong?"
"Oh, no, Pastor. It's just, well, you see, my old suit has finally gone threadbare. I've nothing to wear. I'm too ashamed to wear my overalls to church."
And so Pastor gives him a 20-dollar bill (this was some time ago), "I'd like you to go into town and get yourself a new suit. And I'll see you in church."
Well, two more Sundays come and go, and Mr Haugesteun still hasn't been in church. 
Now Pastor is right worried, and he drives out to Mr Haugesteun's place. "Mr Haugesteun, now, I gave you that $20 a couple weeks back to go buy yourself a new suit, so you can come back to church. But I haven't see you. Have you fallen back into drinking? Is that what you spent that money on?"
"Oh no, Pastor. I did just like you told me. I went and got a new suit. And what a fine suit it is. Why, it's so nice, I go to the Episcopal church now!"


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

OH-CPA said:


> Actually they will ask you to behave appropriately in church, if you do not comply they ask you to leave. Playing with cars in church is not appropriate, nor is eating.
> 
> I should apologize for my poor spelling on my last post. I don't think the ushers would appreciate being called users.


I figured that's what you meant!!!! (LOL)


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Quiet Toys*

We have bags for the kids at church. Filled with age-appropriate books, quiet toys (no little cars, they can be loud on the wooden pews!), and a small, factory-sealed bag of Cheerios. Families with younger kids tend to sit in the back, so the kids can get up and go to the bathroom or get a drink, and not be distracting.

In one church I served, there the kids--and some adults!--would get up and walk around during the service, including the sermon. Maybe it was the layout (rather sloped floors and no windows behind the pews), but it never bothered me up front.


----------



## swb120 (Aug 9, 2005)

I attend a fairly normal, medium-sized Presbyterian Church, and I wear a suit w/tie in the fall/winter, a blazer w/tie in the spring/summer.


----------



## Bruce Wayne (Mar 10, 2008)

I'm Jewish and as such I go to synagogue instead of church. I assume we are basically talking about the same kind of situation as church and synagogue "dress codes" have the same standard IMO. I wear a blazer and tie as I don't own a suit. When I do get a suit though, I will probably wear the suit interchangeably with my blazer and odd trousers when I attend services.


----------



## csheehan (Feb 27, 2004)

Since the only time I'm in a church is for a wedding or a funeral, its a suit.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

I'm a satanic worshipper which you'd think would be all dungeons and dragons, but it's pretty trad. Blazer and tie for me except on Halloween, which involves sheep's blood, etc.


----------



## OH-CPA (Jun 12, 2008)

Pr B said:


> We have bags for the kids at church. Filled with age-appropriate books, quiet toys (no little cars, they can be loud on the wooden pews!), and a small, factory-sealed bag of Cheerios. Families with younger kids tend to sit in the back, so the kids can get up and go to the bathroom or get a drink, and not be distracting.


I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. To me toys and food are inappropriate at church, so I will stay at my downtown church, and leave the suburban churchs to those who think this is okay.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Generally I wear a sportcoat and tie but, occasionally I'll wear one of the four suits remaining in my closet, subsequent to the purge of Sept/Oct 2007.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Thanks, gents. Your responses are most appreciated (by no means am I saying this poll should be closed; answer away!).


----------



## Tonyp (May 8, 2007)

Since most of my praying is done at home, it varies. but when I attend temple ( I am Jewish), I usually wear a jacket and tie or a suit depending on the occasion.


----------



## Srynerson (Aug 26, 2005)

Joe Beamish said:


> I'm a satanic worshipper which you'd think would be all dungeons and dragons, but it's pretty trad. Blazer and tie for me except on Halloween, which involves sheep's blood, etc.


Ah, Harris tweed with surgeon's cuffs on the jacket for that day then? :devil:


----------



## The Reverend (Aug 17, 2009)

This is an interesting thread, and one I wanted to start myself, but for another reason. I am an ordained minister, as per my user name. 

The general rule for me especially when I am visiting or even speaking at another church is to dress up rather than dress down. There are churches, and their pastors included, where the norm is to dress in a hawaiian shirt with slacks and flip flops. However, in the more traditional churches especially in the South where I was for 9 years, the norm is a suit and tie. I've found over the years that most people will not complain if your attire is dressier, but will do so if your dress is more casual. So, my suggestion is dress up.


----------



## AJLP (Oct 12, 2007)

My answer depends on the season as well as the time of day. Sunday morning mass in the summer finds me in a seersucker suit, khaki or olive poplin suit, or blazer -- always with an ocbd and bow tie. I often attend Sat pm mass and wear an olive poplin suit (in the summer) or blazer/soportcoat with ocbd and bow (any time of the year). I teach at a Catholic School :teacha: with weekly Fri mass -- khakis, blazer, ocbd, bow. If I am flying solo on the week ends,  my wife is an OBGYN and sometimes on call, I reluctantly ditch the bow and go khakis, ocbd, and blazer, -- sorry the bow tie is just one more thing and with three kids I'm doing well just to fulfill the Sabath obligation.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

KenR said:


> Unfortunately at my local Catholic Church slobwear is the norm. Tee shirts and jeans abound. Athletic wear and your favorite team jacket obviously are de rigueur also. Men wearing slacks are in the minority. And you can probably count the number who wear a blazer/jacket and slacks (which is what I'm in) on one hand. Forget about a tie. Only a couple of ushers are in those. It's a pathetic state of affairs.
> 
> 
> > Ditto for my church in Augusta. I'm amazed at how it can be cold and rainy and you see people in shorts and flip-flops.
> ...


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

I always go in jacket, button down shirt and no tie. Apart from one other old-timer, I'm the only one with a jacket, and often the only one not wearing t-shirt, shorts, polo, etc. That is Australia for you.

"Playing with cars in church is not appropriate, nor is eating."

I thought this was interesting given that the focus of the church-gathering as presented in the Bible is a meal.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

The Reverend said:


> This is an interesting thread, and one I wanted to start myself, but for another reason. I am an ordained minister, as per my user name.
> 
> The general rule for me especially when I am visiting or even speaking at another church is to dress up rather than dress down. There are churches, and their pastors included, where the norm is to dress in a hawaiian shirt with slacks and flip flops. However, in the more traditional churches especially in the South where I was for 9 years, the norm is a suit and tie. I've found over the years that most people will not complain if your attire is dressier, but will do so if your dress is more casual. So, my suggestion is dress up.


Whatever else anyone here takes away from this thread, please have some sympathy for the clergy, who have to try to deal with expectations from all quarters about what worship should look like. Some folks want their male pastor/priest/etc. in a coat and tie and are happy to tell him so. Others ... they might not complain, but they're liable to go elsewhere if to them the worship leader looks stuffy and unapproachable. Ditto in spades for the perennial problem of restless children. The clergy have strike some sort of balance and know that they can't please everyone.


----------



## AJLP (Oct 12, 2007)

Kurt N said:


> Whatever else anyone here takes away from this thread, please have some sympathy for the clergy, who have to try to deal with expectations from all quarters about what worship should look like. Some folks want their male pastor/priest/etc. in a coat and tie and are happy to tell him so. Others ... they might not complain, but they're liable to go elsewhere if to them the worship leader looks stuffy and unapproachable. Ditto in spades for the perennial problem of restless children. The clergy have strike some sort of balance and know that they can't please everyone.


I agree, though as a Catholic, clergy attire is less of an issue. I've belonged to Franciscan led parishes where the Friars traditionally wore sandals and been to parishes where priests wore tailored shirts with French Cuffs under their vestments. As divergent as the two may seem they were both "traditional," yet some people felt compelled to comment, negatively. I can only imagine the difficulty faced by women clergy.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Miket61 said:


> I would think at least a sportcoat and tie for an LDS service. As I recall, though, some of their services are closed to non-members. This is often an etiquette issue during weddings, because people feel slighted at having only been invited to the reception.


You are correct that some ceremonies in the LDS church are members only. These are the ceremonies held in the Temple. This one won't be. It's just part of their Sunday service (otherwise I would not be on the guest list :icon_smile_big.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Pr B said:


> We have bags for the kids at church. Filled with age-appropriate books, quiet toys (no little cars, they can be loud on the wooden pews!), and a small, factory-sealed bag of Cheerios. Families with younger kids tend to sit in the back, so the kids can get up and go to the bathroom or get a drink, and not be distracting.
> 
> In one church I served, there the kids--and some adults!--would get up and walk around during the service, including the sermon. Maybe it was the layout (rather sloped floors and no windows behind the pews), but it never bothered me up front.


At my Lutheran church we have the same "quiet bags" for the kids. Our church has a lot of young families and the bags help keep the kids quiet during the service. There is also a "crying room" at the back of the church where parents can sit with their children and still see and hear the service. Our pastor would rather have the young children in church rather than in the nursery even if it means a distraction now and then.

Most people dress in business casual with suits worn by the older men. I usually wear a sportcoat and no tie, sometimes a sweater on cold days. I wear a suit on Reformation Day, Christmas, Easter etc.


----------



## fat paul (Aug 26, 2008)

I go to a baptist church in a converted bar. There is one other gent that wears a tie. The rest of the congragation dress in a very casual style. I tend to wear an odd jacket, chinos, ocbd and tie/bow tie. Since I am a musician the rest of the congragation just views me as eccentric.
cheers, fat paul


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Sympathy for Clergy*



Kurt N said:


> Whatever else anyone here takes away from this thread, please have some sympathy for the clergy, who have to try to deal with expectations from all quarters about what worship should look like. Some folks want their male pastor/priest/etc. in a coat and tie and are happy to tell him so. Others ... they might not complain, but they're liable to go elsewhere if to them the worship leader looks stuffy and unapproachable. Ditto in spades for the perennial problem of restless children. The clergy have strike some sort of balance and know that they can't please everyone.


Thank you. 
At one church I served, I started to grow a beard for deer hunting season. Now, this was in northern Wisconsin, where many men have beards year 'round. Furthermore, many male Lutheran clergy in the Upper Midwest have beards. Well, several folks expressed shock or said, "no! you cannot have a beard." Now I never tell folks what they can or cannot do with their hair. The patriarch marched up and said that the beard had to go. I said that when I was in the Air Force, I promised to myself when I got out, that I'd grow a beard, grow a pony tale, and get an ear pierced. (I have not done either of the last two!) He looked thoughtful, and said, "well, I guess one of those three is okay. But don't do the other two."


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Suburban?*



OH-CPA said:


> I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. To me toys and food are inappropriate at church, so I will stay at my downtown church, and leave the suburban churchs to those who think this is okay.


For the record, my church is a small, country church. Exurbia has yet to come out there.


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

When we do go to church, which is increasingly rare these days (as we don't particularly like our pastor that much and haven't had the time to find a new church home), I tend to wear a sports coat or blazer with a tie. In the warmer months, I ditch the tie. I am increasingly in the minority. Sad state of affairs.


----------



## Beefeater (Jun 2, 2007)

Cassock and a surplice, usually.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Pr B said:


> Thank you. At one church I served, I started to grow a beard for deer hunting season. Now, this was in northern Wisconsin, where many men have beards year 'round. Furthermore, many male Lutheran clergy in the Upper Midwest have beards. Well, several folks expressed shock or said, "no! you cannot have a beard." Now I never tell folks what they can or cannot do with their hair. The patriarch marched up and said that the beard had to go.
> I said that when I was in the Air Force, I promised to myself when I got out that I'd grow a beard, grow a pony tale, and get an ear pierced. (I have not done either of the last two!) He looked thoughtful, and said, "well, I guess one of those three is okay. But don't do the other two."


Our assistant pastor and DCE have beards. I've been growing mine out too...deer season (rifle) is just around the corner. :icon_smile:


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Pr B said:


> Thank you. At one church I served, I started to grow a beard for deer hunting season. Now, this was in northern Wisconsin, where many men have beards year 'round. Furthermore, many male Lutheran clergy in the Upper Midwest have beards. Well, several folks expressed shock or said, "no! you cannot have a beard." Now I never tell folks what they can or cannot do with their hair. The patriarch marched up and said that the beard had to go.
> I said that when I was in the Air Force, I promised to myself when I got out that I'd grow a beard, grow a pony tale, and get an ear pierced. (I have not done either of the last two!) He looked thoughtful, and said, "well, I guess one of those three is okay. But don't do the other two."


None of the Apostiles were clean shaven.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

gtsecc said:


> None of the Apostiles were clean shaven.


Really? Do you have a photograph of them?


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*John*



gtsecc said:


> None of the Apostiles were clean shaven.


Traditionally, John, the Beloved, is depicted as younger than the rest, and thus clean shaven.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Beefeater said:


> Cassock and a surplice, usually.


+1

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Orgetorix said:


> Really? Do you have a photograph of them?


No.
Photography had not been invented; however, painting had been.
There are paintings of them all.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Pr B said:


> Traditionally, John, the Beloved, is depicted as younger than the rest, and thus clean shaven.


Great point!
As I am sure you know, that is in medieval paintings which depict him quiet young. In his iconography, he always has a beard.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Later, I suppose*



gtsecc said:


> Great point!
> As I am sure you know, that is in medieval paintings which depict him quiet young. In his iconography, he always has a beard.


Ha! I suppose he is depicted as beardless in his younger, John the Beloved Disciple phase, and as bearded in his older, John the Evangelist phase?!


----------



## hbs midwest (Sep 19, 2007)

Beefeater said:


> Cassock and a surplice, usually.


Byzantine/Slavic-cut black cassock (podrosnik) and Dalmatic (stihar) and stole (orar) in colored brocade over street clothes. I'm an Orthodox subdeacon; I usually wear the cassock without the vestments at coffe-hour and when visiting parishes not my own, unless invited to serve in the altar.

Since a necktie does not fit under the cassock neckline, I usually dispense with it.

When I do wear "civvies" it's inevitably at least blazer/OCBD/tie.

Enjoy the weekend, all!:icon_smile:

hbs


----------



## hbs midwest (Sep 19, 2007)

Pr B said:


> Ha! I suppose he is depicted as beardless in his younger, John the Beloved Disciple phase, and as bearded in his older, John the Evangelist phase?!


In the Byzantine iconography of the Four Evangelists, all four are bearded.

sdn hbs


----------



## hbs midwest (Sep 19, 2007)

Pr B said:


> Traditionally, John, the Beloved, is depicted as younger than the rest, and thus clean shaven.


Only in the Medieval West.:icon_smile_big:

hbs


----------



## EastVillageTrad (May 12, 2006)

I always wear at least a sportcoat & tie, even if the parish is adorned in jeans & fleece...


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Beefeater said:


> Cassock and a surplice, usually.


Please tell me you wear nice shoes and not black sneakers!!


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Have you seen this? Sounds quite inappropriate.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

gtsecc said:


> No.
> Photography had not been invented; however, painting had been.
> There are paintings of them all.


But not paintings taken while they were alive, nor, I think, within several generations of anyone who knew them.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Orgetorix said:


> But not paintings taken while they were alive, nor, I think, within several generations of anyone who knew them.


We have some that are very old.
We certainly have paintings of paintings from the time period.
We don't have the original moon shot footage either.
I see no reason to doubt that all those men had beards.
There is not a shred of evidence to the contrary.
Why would anyone dispute this?


----------



## Beefeater (Jun 2, 2007)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Please tell me you wear nice shoes and not black sneakers!!


White Jack Purcell's actually. Just kidding. Always proper black shoes, sometimes brogues, usually cap-toes. No sneakers at the altar.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

"We certainly have paintings of paintings from the time period."

There isn't even anything textual that predates about AD 95, and that is a generous dating of P66. It contains a few words and is hardly bigger than a postage stamp. The oldest image that I know of with respect to Jesus is a Roman graffito drawn by a mocker, portraying Jesus as a donkey. We also don't have pictures of the priestly family, Pilate or anybody else from 1st century Palestine that are reliable (which is why, in the Western tradition, the Jewish men always end up looking like they are Scandinavian).

Sorry if this is too far afield.


----------



## Mr. Rider (Jan 5, 2009)

Some time ago I began to over-dress for church compared to many others with whom I share a pew. I agree with the premise that all are acceptable at church regardless of attire. That's how I once went to church. However, I have come to believe you should wear the best you have. In my business, I wear a suit when meeting my best customers. If President O'bama invited me to the White House, I would wear a suit instead of showing up in Levi's and OCBD. Why should I show less respect to the Almighty than I would to best customer or the President?

Do I stand out? Yes. Do I care? No.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

P Hudson said:


> "We certainly have paintings of paintings from the time period."
> 
> There isn't even anything textual that predates about AD 95, and that is a generous dating of P66. It contains a few words and is hardly bigger than a postage stamp. The oldest image that I know of with respect to Jesus is a Roman graffito drawn by a mocker, portraying Jesus as a donkey. We also don't have pictures of the priestly family, Pilate or anybody else from 1st century Palestine that are reliable (which is why, in the Western tradition, the Jewish men always end up looking like they are Scandinavian).
> 
> Sorry if this is too far afield.


???P66 contains entire NT gospels and is closer to 100 pages long.
We have fragments of potery with quotes of Christ dating from 1st century, possibly as old as his life. We have entire sections of the city of Jerusalem which were burried durring the seige in 70 AD. It is like saying Micky Mouse never existed, we don't have any originals from Walt Disney, so we can't prove he had red pants and black ears.

Look, it is possible, I suppose, to make the case that none of the New Testament stuff happened. But, then you are still stuck with the community that made it all up saying that they all had beards.

But, the point I was making is simply that it is highly ironic for anyone in a church to suggest something is wrong with beards.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

gtsecc said:


> ???P66 contains entire NT gospels and is closer to 100 pages long.
> We have fragments of potery with quotes of Christ dating from 1st century, possibly as old as his life. We have entire sections of the city of Jerusalem which were burried durring the seige in 70 AD. It is like saying Micky Mouse never existed, we don't have any originals from Walt Disney, so we can't prove he had red pants and black ears.
> 
> Look, it is possible, I suppose, to make the case that none of the New Testament stuff happened. But, then you are still stuck with the community that made it all up saying that they all had beards.
> ...


I think P Hudson was referring to P52, and got the number wrong.

I agree with your main point--it's virtually certain that many of the Apostles, at least, had beards, and it's ridiculous for churches today to have anything against them.

Nobody has made any case here that the NT events and people were made up; I just don't think there's any good evidence that we know what Jesus or the Apostles looked like.


----------



## Bermuda (Aug 16, 2009)

we are Methodist (laid back). I just wear a nice collar shirt, trousers, and dress shoes....if I wore a tie I would look too dressed up I think


----------



## PJC in NoVa (Jan 23, 2005)

I always wear a shirt with a collar (in summer that's usually a golf shirt) and long pants that aren't jeans (mostly that's chinos).


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Mr. Rider said:


> Some time ago I began to over-dress for church compared to many others with whom I share a pew. I agree with the premise that all are acceptable at church regardless of attire. That's how I once went to church. However, I have come to believe you should wear the best you have. In my business, I wear a suit when meeting my best customers. If President O'bama invited me to the White House, I would wear a suit instead of showing up in Levi's and OCBD. Why should I show less respect to the Almighty than I would to best customer or the President?
> 
> Do I stand out? Yes. Do I care? No.


It seems like this is an area where clothing relates to personality and demeanor. If a pastor or churchgoer can still wear his (or her) best while coming across to others as friendly, approachable, and non-judgmental, that would be ideal. But if one has a reserved personality and formal demeanor, dressing up may unintentionally contribute to an "I'm better than you" aura. Maybe there are ways to mitigate that, like leaving the coat unbuttoned and wearing cheerful colors. But it's worth thinking about. This is a somewhat offbeat application of the rule that clothes make the man.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

Coleman said:


> Admittedly, I am not a church-going-man (I'm a bit of a heathen really :devil, but I will be attending a service in the coming weeks. A cousin of mine will be serving a religious mission, and the farewells are tacked on to the normal service. I'm planning on wearing a blazer and tie, and I feel fine with my decision, but I am curious as to what most of you wear to church (or what you would wear to church).


I'm a practicing Mormon here in Utah. You are certainly welcome to wear whatever you wish to an LDS service, but I applaud your desire to be appropriate for the occasion. That seems to be something of a lost art in society today. You'll be fine in a blazer and tie.

As for me, I wear a suit most weeks, occasionally a blazer. Rarely a sports coat, as I usually only wear those casually.


----------



## Calvin500 (Jan 16, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> It seems like this is an area where clothing relates to personality and demeanor. If a pastor or churchgoer can still wear his (or her) best while coming across to others as friendly, approachable, and non-judgmental, that would be ideal. But if one has a reserved personality and formal demeanor, dressing up may unintentionally contribute to an "I'm better than you" aura. Maybe there are ways to mitigate that, like leaving the coat unbuttoned and wearing cheerful colors. But it's worth thinking about. This is a somewhat offbeat application of the rule that clothes make the man.


^^ Well put, and I agree.

I'm about to head to a church "work day". I haven't worn jeans since Valentine's Day, and am shooting for a year _sans_ sort of as a personal challenge. I guess that means worn chinos and a beat up blue oxford and my seminary ball cap.

Being the Associate Pastor is a bit tricky because you can't dress too much nicer than your boss. One lady always tells me to relax and take my tie off on Wednesday nights, even while her husband is in a suit and tie. I can't figure her out. Other than that, I pastor a downtown southern (AR)Presbyterinan church so I can get away with wearing what I like (suits, white point-collar and tie Sundays; trousers and sport coat/blazer, necktie, bow tie, ascot or no tie M-F) without seeming too snooty. I'm 29, so I take it that much of my congregation thinks it's "cute" or "costumey" that I dress like this. Only a handful probably reckon it pretentious or clericalistic.



Coleman said:


> You got me, sowilson. Despite not being a Christian and considering myself an open-minded fellow, my mind is often skewed by the social environment I was raised in, a predominantly Christian one. Thank you for calling me out on this one.
> 
> All answers are, of course, welcome from any religious affiliation and without regard for what the building in which one worships is called.


*Coleman:* To take and expand AlanC's comment a bit: you don't have to apologize for specifying "church" as the place/event you're concerned about dressing appropriately for, just because not all worship spaces/events are called "church." If a one-time temple visitor had posed the question as to folks' temple-going attire, it would be laughably ridiculous or worse for church-goers to suggest that such a poll/question was inappropriately narrow because it didn't envelop church-goers.

You are, of course, allowed to frame the question however you want, and if you want answers from any and every religious community worshipping in any and every type and nomenclature of building, with all levels of formality and informality, that's perfectly fine, and it makes for an interesting poll.

But it's not intolerant to regard the specific religious affiliation and the name of its worship facility. Just like in the area of beliefs, there are real and purposeful differences in practices, and these differences often effect what sort of dress might be most appropriate.

Thanks for starting an interesting thread.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Calvin and Alan

You are both correct, and don't worry, I'm not beating myself up over it. :icon_smile:

But, like I said, I already feel fine with what I plan on wearing and really just wanted to to get a good mix of answers and experiences (and like you said, Calvin, the responses have been quite interesting and worthwhile).

Thanks for the great posts, all.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

I think it's interesting to note too that Suit & Tie has pulled ahead. I assumed (apparently incorrectly so) from previous threads in the Trad forum that mention church attire, that Blazer or Sport Coat & Tie would be a clear winner.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Would make a nice illustration for a basic stats text. "The modal response and the median response are two different things." :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Lancer (Jan 5, 2009)

About 50% wear jackets w/no tie or suits. The rest wear casual. For me, church is something to be taken seriously so I attend wearing my best suit regardless.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Since I answered the question a couple days ago, my church has decided to merge with an older more traditional congregation which has dwindled down to a rather small group. We have a lot more people; they have a nice old building. The result is that, along with all the other benefits of a less material nature, I'll be adding a tie to my jacket and OCBD on occasion. In fact, I might even put on a suit if I happen to be preaching.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Discretion*

I would hesitate to say that those folks who do not dress up for church are not taking it seriously, or that they do not honor/respect God. There are healthier metrics for one's maturity of faith.

As a megatrend throughout history, there is a pendulum swing between understanding God as transcendent--as other, and understanding God as imminent--as friend. And there are class differences, cultural/contextual differences, denominational and congregational emphases, different places in one's journey, etc. I suspect "appropriate attire" is more reflective of culture, than of church.

I would suggest dressing appropriate to your self.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Kurt N said:


> It seems like this is an area where clothing relates to personality and demeanor. If a pastor or churchgoer can still wear his (or her) best while coming across to others as friendly, approachable, and non-judgmental, that would be ideal. But if one has a reserved personality and formal demeanor, dressing up may unintentionally contribute to an "I'm better than you" aura. Maybe there are ways to mitigate that, like leaving the coat unbuttoned and wearing cheerful colors. But it's worth thinking about. This is a somewhat offbeat application of the rule that clothes make the man.


How are the people judging someone with a coat and tie as "unapproachable" any less judgemental that traditionally dressed people who judge people in jeans or with a beard???


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

^ Hmmmm. I would say ...

1. If you judge someone to be unapproachable _merely_ because s/he is dressed up, yes that's judgemental.

2. If you judge someone to be unapproachable for a combination of reasons, one of which is that they're dressed and another of which is how they talk to you, that may or may not be judgmental. It would depend on the total picture.

3. Really, whether someone is judgmental or not is, for me, not the main point. The clergy, and also lay people who are committed to making a house of worship a welcoming place, need to take into account that some people have a prejudice, if you will, that well-dressed = unapproachable. Sure, one hopes those folks will get over it. But in the meantime, doesn't it make sense to try to minimize that little "trip hazard" if you can find a way to do it?


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

Pr B said:


> Thank you.
> At one church I served, I started to grow a beard for deer hunting season. Now, this was in northern Wisconsin, where many men have beards year 'round. Furthermore, many male Lutheran clergy in the Upper Midwest have beards. Well, several folks expressed shock or said, "no! you cannot have a beard." Now I never tell folks what they can or cannot do with their hair. The patriarch marched up and said that the beard had to go. I said that when I was in the Air Force, I promised to myself when I got out, that I'd grow a beard, grow a pony tale, and get an ear pierced. (I have not done either of the last two!) He looked thoughtful, and said, "well, I guess one of those three is okay. But don't do the other two."


Next time, confuse them with this:

"Nor shall you cut your hair roundwise: nor shave your beard." Leviticus 19:27

:icon_smile_big:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Kurt N said:


> ^ Hmmmm. I would say ...
> 
> 1. If you judge someone to be unapproachable _merely_ because s/he is dressed up, yes that's judgemental.
> 
> ...


No more sense than it would to discourage informally dressed people from coming to church because it offends some more traditional dressers. A lot depends on whether you are worshipping or marketing, I suppose.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

^ Who's talking about discouraging anybody from coming? Did you think that's what I meant? I definitely didn't.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Is there such a thing as predetermined thread drift?


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Did you mean "predetermined" or "predestined"? :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> Is there such a thing as predetermined thread drift?


Been thinking about this. I _think_ what forsbergacct2000 is expressing is something like the following: "There is nothing wrong with dressing up, and dressing conservatively, and keeping one's jacket buttoned, and it has _nothing_ to do with being unfriendly. If there people out there who think it does, why feed that? Why kowtow to that prejudice?"

Whether or not that's what forsbergacct2000 is thinking, I sympathize with that view. And I have no real problem with someone taking that attitude when it comes to job interviews, social events, or whatever. Your clothes, your business.

However, in _my_ understanding of _my_ faith tradition (trying not to get into a religious debate here), this attitude simply isn't an option when it comes to church. We have a sacred obligation to be flexible on nonessentials.

C. S. Lewis says something about church music that applies here, so I will take the liberty of adapting his thought and changing the application. We don't know whether G-d likes it when people dress up or likes it when they feel comfortable enough to come into His presence dressed casually. The only sight we can be sure pleases G-d is the churchgoer who dresses _differently from what s/he would naturally prefer_ in order that others might have a better worship experience.

I think this is faithful (no pun intended) to the topic with which this thread began. Again, not trying to derail the thread and not trying to challenge anyone else on their understanding of their faith tradition.


----------



## Orgetorix (May 20, 2005)

Kurt N said:


> However, in _my_ understanding of _my_ faith tradition (trying not to get into a religious debate here), this attitude simply isn't an option when it comes to church. We have a sacred obligation to be flexible on nonessentials.
> 
> C. S. Lewis says something about church music that applies here, so I will take the liberty of adapting his thought and changing the application. We don't know whether G-d likes it when people dress up or likes it when they feel comfortable enough to come into His presence dressed casually. The only sight we can be sure pleases G-d is the churchgoer who dresses _differently from what s/he would naturally prefer_ in order that others might have a better worship experience.
> 
> I think this is faithful (no pun intended) to the topic with which this thread began. Again, not trying to derail the thread and not trying to challenge anyone else on their understanding of their faith tradition.


I agree wholeheartedly. I wear a suit to church most weeks, and I'm in a minority of about 10-20% who are wearing a jacket and tie. I like to dress well, and I have my doubts about the common assumption that informality=authenticity=pleasing to God.

BUT, if I ever had the slightest inkling that the way I dress at church was an obstacle to someone else worshiping God or feeling accepted in the church, I'd change my dressing habits so fast it'd make people's heads spin. Others' engagement with God is way more important to me than my own preferences.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Most men at my church wear a suit.
A close second is a coat and tie.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Orgetorix said:


> I think P Hudson was referring to P52, and got the number wrong.
> 
> I agree with your main point--it's virtually certain that many of the Apostles, at least, had beards, and it's ridiculous for churches today to have anything against them.
> 
> Nobody has made any case here that the NT events and people were made up; I just don't think there's any good evidence that we know what Jesus or the Apostles looked like.


I think the reaction against beards and long hair started because it was associated with the young hippies who were offensive to traditional values.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

...and sense of smell. :crazy:


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Jovan said:


> I think the reaction against beards and long hair started because it was associated with the young hippies who were offensive to traditional values.


At least in the Christian tradition, that's an astonishing statement. The (albeit few) hippie friends I had at the time came much closer to living what Jesus actually preached, compared to myself, my family and most of my friends.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I'm not so sure about that.

There is a tendency for liberal folks to forget that the ten commandments are important.

There is a tendency for conservative folks to forget that Jesus said, "Love thy Neighbor as Thyself."

Let's try to keep this out of the interchange and get the focus back on clothes, please. At least clothes were peripherally involved when we were discussing judging people.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

To talk about clothes, I find it interesting that in practically any thread on the board the consensus is to trend toward formality of attire until someone brings up dressing for religious services. Suddenly dressing in a traditional manner is putting up barriers and we need to be 'comfortable'. 

If you want to know what I wear to church just look at my Sunday posts in the WAYWT threads.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*The Other*

I suspect that is because we are more cognizant of "the other" (i.e., other folks, especially those "less well off" than ourselves) when in our houses of worship.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

In my view it's about being charitable. If you feel better dressing up to attend religious services, I think that's great. But if you find yourself judging other people when attending these services, simply by how they're dressed, IMO you're missing the point.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

And if you are assuming that people who dress up are judgers, that's also missing a point.
Some may be; certainly all aren't.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

^ forsbergacct2000, you are getting me thinking a lot today.

Now for sure, I wouldn't want to say that everyone who dresses up is necessarily a judger of others. But if someone is on record as believing that the Lord Himself wants us to dress up in church--in other words, that we're not doing as the Lord wants when we fail to dress up--then I don't think it's too far-fetched to suppose that _that_ sort of person, seeing someone at church dressed very casually, has thoughts along the lines of "S/he should have dressed better, tsk, tsk."

The same conclusion could apply, I think, to (cough) someone who hinted that churches where folks dress down to create a welcoming atmosphere are engaged in (cough) marketing rather than worship.:icon_smile_big:

I'm just saying! No offense intended.

EDIT: By the way, I used to dress up for church and found myself looking down on the less-well-dressed. Recognizing this to be a bad thing, I stopped dressing up. Now, having learned so much on this forum, I am able to dress up for church again. Why? Because instead of looking down on others, I sit there and think "Crap, I'm the only guy with a tie and no jacket today--that's gauche, isn't it? And my choice of socks was lame. And people can probabably tell that my shades aren't real Ray-Bans." I have a harder time paying attention to the sermon, I grant you, but at least pride isn't the problem anymore.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

It's obvious that a true Christian will not look down on others just because of superficial qualities like dress. I think you can dress traditionally without doing that. I acknowledge that some who dress traditionally do think this way.

There is just as much prejudice, if not more, in the other direction (if you dress well, you are judgemental,) and right now, our culture seems to support that at least to some extent. It does not make either type of judging correct.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Be careful not to make the presumption that the ill-dressed are also suffering of socio-econmic hardship.

Many are not. 

They are mearly careless and thoughtless slobs!! ic12337:


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

While it would be decidedly unchristian to judge someone ("Judge not, lest ye be judged."), particularly on a standard as superficial as clothing, it is appropriate to note the Biblical counsel that we should give back, that which is our best, to the Lord. If cut-offs and a printed-T are one's best, then it is not our role to judge but, it behooves each of us to strive to give our best back...even in terms of our dress standards while attending services!


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

eagle2250 said:


> While it would be decidedly unchristian to judge someone ("Judge not, lest ye be judged."), particularly on a standard as superficial as clothing, it is appropriate to note the Biblical counsel that we should give back, that which is our best, to the Lord. If cut-offs and a printed-T are one's best, then it is not our role to judge but, it behooves each of us to strive to give our best back...even in terms of our dress standards while attending services!


This is probably not the best forum to ask this question, but I wonder how many people in a religious service are truly unable to resist the temptation to think along the lines of WouldaShoulda.

You're there to worship God, not to attend a fashion show.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> This is probably not the best forum to ask this question, but I wonder how many people in a religious service are truly unable to resist the temptation to think along the lines of WouldaShoulda.
> 
> You're there to worship God, not to attend a fashion show.


You miss the point entirely.

It is not a fashion show by any means.

It is to be respectfully attired.

Anyone with any means whatsoever can achieve respectfully attired status with only a smattering of effort.

It is not about status, means or wealth.

It is about respect and effort.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
+1 and WouldsShoulda, very well said! Those are the points I was trying to get across but, didn't do so well, methinks.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

WouldaShoulda said:


> You miss the point entirely.
> 
> It is not a fashion show by any means.
> 
> ...


This is just a PC version of the same judgment theme. The terms "any means whatsoever" and "smattering of effort" are relative. The world is filled with people who likely do not measure up to your own standards.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

'Sunday Best' = suit in our family. And don't try to get creative with a non-white shirt ... :devil:


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> This is just a PC version of the same judgment theme. The terms "any means whatsoever" and "smattering of effort" are relative.


Let's just agree that a lazy slob is difficult to define, but like pornography, one knows it when one sees it!!


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Be careful not to make the presumption that the ill-dressed are also suffering of socio-econmic hardship.
> 
> Many are not.
> 
> They are mearly careless and thoughtless slobs!! ic12337:


Give me $20 and I can put practically anyone in a suit (or sportcoat), dress shirt and tie from thrift and discount stores. That's how I buy a good deal of my stuff. Pretty much no one can use the excuse of 'I can't afford it'.

Is a collared shirt or at least no t-shirts with sports/rock bands/whatever on them too much to ask? I'm not stopping anyone at the door, but a little effort would be nice.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

My Father started our own clothing thrift store at our Church about 30 years ago (along with the Thanksgiving and Christmas food-basket programs.) Since we have a lot of Men that wear suits to church (or to work) we seem to get a lot of nicer clothing donations and we organzed it into a 'retail shop' where people can get nice clothes that are in need for work, interviews, or whatever is necessary. We even drove around town and got racks and hangers donated by local stores like Burdines and Penney's. We even have our own trained 'associates', with a counter, "cash register", and bags. It's in a small building the church bought. It's sort of like a private shopper where you call and make an appointment (someone else usually calls for a person and takes them) and it's opened for you and you are helped by the associate, you try things on, etc. and then you "check out." We got the idea from going to Rutland's Men's store many years ago and it operates exactly the same as a high end clothing shop - only no money changes hands. Any donations that are received that can't be used in the store go to another charity. We work with not only families in the church, but we coordinate the clothing store with the homeless and work-release ministries. The idea was to create a way for people to have their dignity while receiving help and utilizing the resources already within our church.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

The larger issue is that nowadays different people interpret clothing in different ways. Many people perceive suits, jackets, and ties as uptight and pretentious, which is at odds with how they characterize their own values. I can't tell you how many times someone has invited me to remove my tie with the injunction to "relax!", their assumption being that all day long I've been imprisoning my body in abrasive agony in order to suck up to some boss somewhere. 

(Once at a job interview, I was asked by the prospective employer to remove my tie "because we tend to be pretty relaxed around here.")

And we're all used to language such as:
"No reason for you to get all gussied up. It's a relaxed occasion. Just be comfortable."

The argument being: Dressing in jeans and t-shirts = relaxed, comfortable, no airs, unpretentious, etc., being real, doing away with meaningless external trappings.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Joe Beamish said:


> The argument being: Dressing in jeans and t-shirts = relaxed, comfortable, no airs, unpretentious, etc., being real, doing away with meaningless external trappings.


I will not be converted by the preachings of such Mollycoddlers!!


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

This is probably the wrong forum to be discussing this topic, it's "like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500". :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> This is probably the wrong forum to be discussing this topic, it's "like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500". :icon_smile_big:


Nice, Frank. That's an hilarious analogy.


----------



## Mr. Mac (Mar 14, 2008)

My church is very traditional and we men wear suits predominately, but as a former lay member of the church leadership, I can say I'm far more concerned with what's in a churchgoer's heart than what he wears on his sleeve - attitudes OR clothing.


----------



## EBTX66 (Feb 25, 2009)

ksinc said:


> My Father started our own clothing thrift store at our Church about 30 years ago... The idea was to create a way for people to have their dignity while receiving help and utilizing the resources already within our church.


What an inspiring story. I am in Methodist seminary and serve as worship assistant in one of the biggest churches in the country. I bet we could set something up like that ourselves. Thanks for the idea.

Our "big" church service (traditional Protestant format) and our "high" service (the one I'm in: a more traditional, Anglican Mass-type service) tend to attract men who wear suits. The Contemporary service is the jeans, untucked, wrinkled shirt, and flip-flops crowd - including the pastors. They actually have to gently remind the ladies in that service that this is still church so they should try to be more modest during the warmer months.

I always wear a suit and tie and plan to do so even if I'm eventually assigned to do Contemporary. I just can't bring myself to wear flip-flops in public (a man's feet are real high up on my list of things I do not need to see). However, I've never seen someone I'd consider innapropraitely dressed unless it was a women too scantily glad (whether I enjoyed it or not is a different discussion), or a guy with some innapropriate saying on his t-shirt.

We actually had a guy show up once in a t-shirt that said "Real men love Jesus - Especially that thing he does with his tongue". I'm not easily shocked but that one stunned me.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

In church? Really???? Wow?? 

Quite the Tshirt choice. Someone likes attention - - -


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

EBTX66 said:


> a man's feet are real high up on my list of things I do not need to see


Jesus washed the feet of his apostles, and you're saying you don't even want to see the feet of men in your congregation.

Congrats, you just managed to peg the ironometer.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

EBTX66 said:


> What an inspiring story. I am in Methodist seminary and serve as worship assistant in one of the biggest churches in the country. I bet we could set something up like that ourselves. Thanks for the idea.
> 
> Our "big" church service (traditional Protestant format) and our "high" service (the one I'm in: a more traditional, Anglican Mass-type service) tend to attract men who wear suits. The Contemporary service is the jeans, untucked, wrinkled shirt, and flip-flops crowd - including the pastors. They actually have to gently remind the ladies in that service that this is still church so they should try to be more modest during the warmer months.
> 
> ...


You're quite welcome.

My Dad's attitude has always been that while he knows he is a "square" and wears a suit that the guy with the inappropriate saying on his t-shirt is EXACTLY the type of person he wants coming to Church. YMMV 

I sent you a link via PM you may be interested in reviewing.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> Jesus washed the feet of his apostles, and you're saying you don't even want to see the feet of men in your congregation.
> 
> Congrats, you just managed to peg the ironometer.


I think the snark is a bit unfair. The disciples were themselves turned off by the idea of a person of status washing someone else's dirty feet. Hence Peter's horrified reaction. If the disciples had come up to Jesus and said "Hey, wanna see my bare feet? Wanna smell 'em?" I think he would have found a way to let them know they were being inappropriate.

EDIT: In other words, I think clergy and lay leaders alike should be there for people in ways that might involve some ick-factor when someone is too poor or infirm to be "presentable" in the usual way. That doesn't mean they're not allowed to prefer that people wear shoes to church if they can afford them. (Really.)


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> That doesn't mean they're not allowed to prefer that people wear shoes to church if they can afford them. (Really.)


I do not know of a single living soul in North America that can not come up with proper shoes in which to go to church.

India, Haiti maybe, but not here.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

55% of American families are now surviving from paycheck to paycheck.

Let's try and remember this as we discuss "proper" shoes.

FROM FORSBERGACCT2000:

Please DON'T motivate me to discuss trolling. Please remember the rule about arguing with moderators. Please take the hint. You've made your point. 

More is tolerated in the interchange than here.


----------



## EBTX66 (Feb 25, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> Jesus washed the feet of his apostles, and you're saying you don't even want to see the feet of men in your congregation.
> 
> Congrats, you just managed to peg the ironometer.





Kurt N said:


> I think the snark is a bit unfair. The disciples were themselves turned off by the idea of a person of status washing someone else's dirty feet. Hence Peter's horrified reaction. If the disciples had come up to Jesus and said "Hey, wanna see my bare feet? Wanna smell 'em?" I think he would have found a way to let them know they were being inappropriate.
> 
> EDIT: In other words, I think clergy and lay leaders alike should be there for people in ways that might involve some ick-factor when someone is too poor or infirm to be "presentable" in the usual way. That doesn't mean they're not allowed to prefer that people wear shoes to church if they can afford them. (Really.)


Thank you both for your responses. I may not agree FrankDC's assessment of my feelings but in retrospect I can understand how he might see it that way. I am still learning how much (future) clergy and their words are viewed under a microscope. I just hope his response wasn't colored by cynicism or self-righteousness.

Kurt N was closer to the truth. One, I was being flippant. Two, I have spent many hours visiting the elderly in hospice and have been honored to hold their hands as painful and intimate procedures have been done to them. I have helped change their soiled clothes but I still have no desire to see them wear their colostomy bags outside of their clothes if they can help it. I guess that's just all part of being human. I would gladly wash someone's feet if I thought the gesture would bring them into a closer relationship with God. That doesn't stop me from thinking a grown man ought to wear a proper pair of shoes when he leaves the house.

Yes, that guy actually wore that t-shirt. He was college age too so he was definitely way past that high school rebellion stage that usually earns you a free pass. He was welcomed but we never saw him again. I actually made his shirt into a lesson the next week about loving someone no matter how hard they make it for you to do so. I hope he found a place to belong.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

FrankDC said:


> 55% of American families are now surviving from paycheck to paycheck.
> 
> Let's try and remember this as we discuss "proper" shoes.


Nearly 10% have no paycheck.

Yet flip-flops have become no more "proper" attire for church (or practically anywhere else for that matter) than they were during more prosperous times!!

There are simply no excuses.


----------



## Calvin500 (Jan 16, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> If the disciples had come up to Jesus and said "Hey, wanna see my bare feet? Wanna smell 'em?" I think he would have found a way to let them know they were being inappropriate.


Perfectly said.

An interesting scenario is when churches have "Come as you are" emblazoned on a banner in the front lawn. I read it as being intentionally more broad than "You're welcome here if you're a big sinner." I wonder how many "you know, you really don't have to wear the jacket and tie here" comments you'd get inside. "Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I was supposed to come as I was."


----------



## mt_spiffy (Apr 12, 2008)

I am a minister of music at an urban contemporary church. I usually wear a suit and tie, if I want to appear more trendy I my wear a rather dressy blazer with jeans. This is for Sunday service, we also have Tuesday service, to which I may wear a t-shirt or sweater, to a blazer with tie, but not a suit.

People that attend come in anything from their pajamas (yes, truly pajamas) to full three piece suits with ascotts (yes, truly ascotts). No one is looked down on for their choice of attire, however if you will be up in front of the people (ministering/singing, etc) you are expected to look presentable.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

IMO, this is a great thread, bringing our discussion of clothing into contact with another sphere that is clearly important to a good number of us. I find it fascinating that we have so many clergy and/or seminary students and professors here. I'm tempted to suggest that it relates to the intersection of trad with waspy traditional values, but that may not hold up in the face of the number of non-protestant clergy who walk among us. Is it then because trad clothes and trad values have some sort of relationship for many of us?

Ok, that question is much too vague, and has an obvious answer. Can anyone (1) sharpen it up a bit so that it has a bit of value and (2) offer an answer, or at least get us thinking, while (3) not moving the discussion so far from clothing that it goes to the interchange.

By the way, I wore tan khakis, LE boat shoes without socks, a short sleeve PPBD (temps in the 90s), and a J Press navy blazer to church on Sunday, but I wasn't preaching. I could never preach without socks.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
FrankDC: Thanks for a very powerful and moving post, in which you shared a piece of your personal history. I find myself genuinely touched by your words and while I doubt that I will change my own manner of dress for Sunday services, I suspect I will look upon others in a somewhat softer light. Thanks again.


----------



## Calvin500 (Jan 16, 2009)

P Hudson said:


> ...but I wasn't preaching. I could never preach without socks.


That's a good rule of thumb.

Possible exception: preaching under a tree outside a Sub-Saharan village to folks who don't have socks.

I've lately been chewing on what I would wear if our very traditional, buttoned-down, pipe-organ'd, downtown First Church offered a Sunday evening service especially pitched at both college folk and the non-WASPy folks that are actually neighbors to our church. I'd probably end up being the music leader (on guitar) and the primary preacher.

When I dream occasionally about being a bona fide performing singer-songwriter type, I imagine myself dressing up, just to be anti-establishment and all. But when I imagine what I'd wear in a service like the one described above, I think I would still "be myself" and wear my favorite sort of clothes, be churchly and preacherly, but probably not wear a tie. I'm thinking chinos, pennies, OCBD and a jacket.

A couple of propositions, summaries, or observations I'll offer at this juncture:

1. Though 30 years ago, "Sunday's best" was a widely and un-self-consciously held notion among churchgoers of all different means, it's not today.

2. In fact, in our age, clothing simply isn't worn un-self-consciously. It's one thing to inquire about appropriateness and expectations. But as this thread has demonstrated, the messages sent and received by clothing these days are never without ambiguity. You just plain ARE sending signals when you pick your outfit. These signals just plain ARE jumbled and interpreted in a zillion ways.

3. Nevertheless, there remains a cultural sartorial default--a uniform, if you will--in the present day: jeans and t-shirt, untucked. The church attire question cannot be answered without reference to this new default/uniform.

4. It's especially difficult to navigate this question when you're a clergy-type and you're trying to send appropriate implicit messages with the worship environment and your attire, all the while hoping that these implicit messages and their jumbled interpretations don't drown out the explicit message(s) that you're actually most concerned with. Implicit messages are not unimportant. They're just second-order.

Great thread, gents. I've laughed and thought a lot.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Calvin500 said:


> I've lately been chewing on what I would wear if our very traditional, buttoned-down, pipe-organ'd, downtown First Church offered a Sunday evening service especially pitched at both college folk and the non-WASPy folks that are actually neighbors to our church. I'd probably end up being the music leader (on guitar) and the primary preacher.


You are what you are no matter the audience.

I for one, would not pander to their predjudice. (If one exists)

But what REALLY gets me is when some will change their inflection or speach when addressing one audience to another.

It sounds as though you are on the right path!!


----------



## mxgreen (Jan 18, 2009)

I attend Catholic Church in South Florida. I think slacks and a shirtsleeves are appropriate. Needless to say, shorts, t-shirts and flipflops - things I see at virtually every mass - are not.


----------



## Oviatt (Jan 29, 2007)

If I had a tweed suit and lied in a colder climate, that is what I would wear--as it is, I am a blazer and tie kind of guy on Sunday mornings.


----------



## Tugger049 (Sep 16, 2004)

We attend a small Catholic church in a semi-rural area north of San Francisco. A number of men wear chinos and nice shirts, many wear jeans and T-shirts or the like. I doubt many go home and change after church: most are wearing what they will wear the rest of the day.

I wear levis, plain cowboy boots, and a nice dress shirt. No tie, rarely a sports coat.

On special days (Christmas, Easter) I dress up in a suit and tie. Since I am usually singing an important solo part of the service on those days (the Proclamation at Christmas, the Exultet at Easter), I think I ought to be dressed respectfully for my role and the occasion; members of the congregation are usually complimentary, if they bother to notice at all.

I sometimes would like to be wearing coat and tie every Sunday, but I honestly feel a bit conspicuous already, since I sing the solos at mass but I am known (kindly and in a friendly way on the congregation's part) to be non-Catholic and even only nominally "Christian," and gay as well. I seem eccentric enough as I am, surely.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

I just had an aha moment after reading the latest posts by Tugger049 and FrankDC. I've been dressing better for church but have worried about being thought too foppish--even though, under the influence of certain people (https://dandync.blogspot.com/, https://anaffordablewardrobe.blogspot.com/) I've developed a taste for more colorful clothes.

I now realize that dressing up in a strictly traditional fashion carries its own risk, namely unintentionally encouraging some people to think that there's a prescribed uniform for church, a code which I've mastered and they haven't. From now on I'm going to feel freer to mix it up--still nicely but with more color and variety. I'd rather risk coming across as foppish than as judgmental.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> From now on I'm going to feel freer to mix it up--still nicely but with more color and variety.
> 
> I'd rather risk coming across as foppish than as judgmental.


1. That's always a good idea.

2. Who gives a rat what other's think if it isn't so??


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Kurt N said:


> I just had an aha moment after reading the latest posts by Tugger049 and FrankDC. I've been dressing better for church but have worried about being thought too foppish--even though, under the influence of certain people (https://dandync.blogspot.com/, https://anaffordablewardrobe.blogspot.com/) I've developed a taste for more colorful clothes.
> 
> I now realize that dressing up in a strictly traditional fashion carries its own risk, namely unintentionally encouraging some people to think that there's a prescribed uniform for church, a code which I've mastered and they haven't. From now on I'm going to feel freer to mix it up--still nicely but with more color and variety. I'd rather risk coming across as foppish than as judgmental.


The code is not that difficult to master and as long as you are not overtly criticizing people, who cares. Only God knows what is in your heart.

I never have and never will indicate to anyone that they have not dressed adequately for church (and I'm an elder - that is one reason I tend to dress up most of the time.)

If people are going to be judgemental and make assumptions about my supposed snobbery or lack of acceptance, I'll take that chance. When I'm on vacation and we have coffee afterward, I've never dealt with people being unfriendly just because I'm wearing a tie, etc.

Edited to add - - Among some in the Tshirt wearing crew, there is also a fashion show going on based on how expensive the jeans are, etc. Human nature does not go away just because some are choosing to dress casually.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Ah, time for another C. S. Lewis quote, albeit from memory and in very rough paraphrase:

It is a bad thing to care too much what others think, but it is also a bad thing to care too little. Between the two, the latter condition is spiritually the more dangerous. Vanity is a sin, but because it involves a kind of respect (however misguided) for the opinion of someone other than yourself, it is a comparatively minor one.

With that, I think I will sign off from this thread, although of course I will read with interest what others have to say.


----------



## Calvin500 (Jan 16, 2009)

WouldaShoulda said:


> You are what you are no matter the audience.


To some extent, yes. That's a truism. But re: "pandering" and changing inflection and speech depending on the audience: I respectfully disagree. One preaches differently to farmers in SW Virginia than city slickers in Charlotte. Ask Timothy Keller who preached in West Hopewell, VA and now preaches in Manhattan. That doesn't mean if I'm addressing an African American congregation that I'm going to consciously alter my vowel voicing...but I may indeed end up getting a little more excited than if I were preaching to Presbyterians.

Paul went from being the holier-than-thou Pharisee with all of its ethnic and religious exclusivism to being Paul the preacher to the Gentiles (i.e., dogs, dirty pagans, etc.). His new attitude was to be all things to all men.

However much I think my foppery is a right, I'm going to have to be prepared to surrender that and all other sorts of rights because of what my overarching concern is. If my job was fashion designer or rock star or even lawyer, a GTH attitude and clothes to go with it would be perfectly legit, and perhaps even prerequisite! But because of my vocation, I'm not going to wear a tie and black lace-up bluchers if I'm speaking at the youth group gathering, and I'm going to use much more relaxed speech than I would in the pulpit on Sunday morning at a downtown church.

Great Lewisian wisdom, Kurt. Always welcome so far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I am mindful of what others think at work. If I worked in an office where coworkers or the boss minded if I dressed up I would not do so.

I guess I go to a relatively conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran Church. When I go and we are working with youth, etc. I will wear jeans or shorts and not think twice about it. When I go to services, I dress how I dress, especially if I'm helping to distribute communion, etc. I find it interesting that you have apparently decided that I don't care what others think when you don't even know me.

I seldom concern myself with what others wear unless it causes a problem at work (or is inappropriate for a band I'm playing with.) I suppose if it really caused a problem to dress up for church, I would not, but I don't go out of my way to look for a problem. There are obviously two sides to this issue.


----------



## Calvin500 (Jan 16, 2009)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I guess I go to a relatively conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.
> 
> I find it interesting that you have apparently decided that I don't care what others think when you don't even know me.


1. I was LC-MS from 1990 to 2000.

2. Who exactly has decided this? Ambiguous reference there.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Calvin500 said:


> Paul went from being the holier-than-thou Pharisee with all of its ethnic and religious exclusivism to being Paul the preacher to the Gentiles (i.e., dogs, dirty pagans, etc.). His new attitude was to be all things to all men.
> 
> But because of my vocation, I'm not going to wear a tie and black lace-up bluchers if I'm speaking at the youth group gathering, and I'm going to use much more relaxed speech than I would in the pulpit on Sunday morning at a downtown church.


It would appear these results can be acheived without pretending to be what one is not!!

But PLEASE, no flip-flops or Jesse Jackson impersonations!! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I was not referring to you, Calvin.

I will admit that Kurt N does not deserve the harshness that is pretty obvious in my last two posts and wish to apologize.

We have an honest disagreement about the best way to dress for church and from my perspective how important it is to "fit in." Kurt clearly cares about the folks he goes to church with and probably has a pretty good heart in general.


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Just for the record: I meant no offense and in fact didn't intend to be singling out forsberg2000 in (what is now turning out to be) my next-to-last post on this thread. But I can certainly see how it looked that way, and I'm sorry I gave that impression.

He and I had a good exchange by PM, and while I think there are still some points of friendly disagreement, I believe we've cleared up any misunderstanding. forsbergacct2000, thanks for the kind words.:icon_smile:


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kurt N said:


> forsbergacct2000, thanks for the kind words.:icon_smile:


Ditto on that.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

"2. Who gives a rat what other's think if it isn't so??"

While this may be a good rule for life generally, if we're trying to make church a community that is at least accepting of others, if not actively reaching out to them, then I think we do need to consider what other people think, even "if it isn't so". 

Surely the one preaching has enough challenges trying to create a connection with people who have varying life-experiences (and often varying catastrophes in their every day) that what other people think needs to be considered in crafting the sermon. So as I walk down the street I don't care what others think about me (as reflected in my clothing) but when I'm in the pulpit or giving a lecture, I care a great deal about what they think about me and about everything else. Having said all that, I wear the same thing in different venues because as a foreigner in my late 40s, people just take me for what I am.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

P Hudson said:


> ...as I walk down the street I don't care what others think about me (as reflected in my clothing) but when I'm in the pulpit or giving a lecture, I care a great deal about what they think about me and about everything else.


I see there is a difference in perspective between a layperson such as myself, and actual clergymen, and respect that.

But I just can't get over the feeling, however, that a bogeyman is made of those considerate enough of others as to make the effort to be well groomed, while the inconsiderate and poorly groomed get a pass.

Not say me!!


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

WouldaShoulda said:


> I see there is a difference in perspective between a layperson such as myself, and actual clergymen, and respect that.
> 
> *But I just can't get over the feeling, however, that a bogeyman is made of those considerate enough of others as to make the effort to be well groomed, while the inconsiderate and poorly groomed get a pass. *
> 
> Not say me!!


Bingo!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

KenR said:


> Bingo!


That's Thursday night.

Feel free to wear all the sport jumpers, PJs and flip flops you like!! :devil:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

WouldaShoulda said:


> I see there is a difference in perspective between a layperson such as myself, and actual clergymen, and respect that.
> 
> But I just can't get over the feeling, however, that a bogeyman is made of those considerate enough of others as to make the effort to be well groomed, while the inconsiderate and poorly groomed get a pass.
> 
> Not say me!!


Yes; I was wondering when it was going to be pointed out that looking at someone well dressed in church and assuming they must be arrogant and judgmental is in fact being judgmental; and not very insightful.

This discussion slightly reminds me of pointing out who has their eyes open during prayer. If you have your mind where it's supposed to be, how could you possibly be aware of what other people are doing or not doing?


----------



## EBTX66 (Feb 25, 2009)

It's very eye-opening to read all of these posts. I had no idea people thought so intently about what they wore to church, though I suspect we as members of this site tend to think more about these issue than most people. 

I choose to wear a suit and tie to church simply because I tend to minister to elderly members and that's what they expect. I also remember my lesson from the Army about "command presence". Like it or not our society tends to make judgments about people based on their clothing and wearing a suit and tie tends to lend you an instant dose of gravitas. I certainly don't agree with this and I am very aware of scriptural lessons about superficiality but I am also aware that the faith has always made concessions to the culture of it's surroundings in order to be more effective.

I also find that a man in his mid-40's preaching to his congregation while sporting spiked hair, a untucked shirt, flip-flops, and a shell necklace to be just as contrived as wearing a suit. Both are simply reflections of the culture of their parishioners. I'm just lucky that mine wear and prefer suits because I'd personally feel uncomfortable dressing the other way.

On a related note I'd just like to publicly commend the members of this forum. I've been a member here for about 10 months but I've normally stuck to the trad exchange thread, and then just as a shopper, not a poster. I posted much more on the SF forum but I've for the most part stopped because of what I perceive as casual callousness in many of their exchanges. Granted, I was raised before the internet generation so those types of anonymous, biting emails may now be the norm. As for me, I prefer the much more respectful and gentlemanly environment that has obviously been fostered here. Cheers.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

You are very perceptive. Welcome.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I actually don't think that intently. I'm in the habit of putting the coat and tie on in the morning on Sunday and don't ordinarily think about it all and certainly don't really spend any time worrying about "messages" , etc. About a third of the other men in our congregation dress this way and I'm and elder and frequently involved with communion, etc.

I also don't spend much time worrying what others wear.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I also don't spend much time worrying what others wear.


Agreed. The only persons whose clothes I think about often are you all here, in the Trad Forum, because they are so amazing! :aportnoy:


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

I'll add the minor observation that the only people (so far as I'm aware) who have "judged" me by my clothes are biz-casual corporate Americans who really wish I'd lose the jacket and tie. At church we get all types, and none of us mind the variety whatsoever. But the biz-casual nazis are different.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Joe Beamish said:


> I'll add the minor observation that the only people (so far as I'm aware) who have "judged" me by my clothes are biz-casual corporate Americans who really wish I'd lose the jacket and tie. At church we get all types, and none of us mind the variety whatsoever. But the biz-casual nazis are different.


The biz-casual nazis are relentless too! I'm the only tie wearer at my work (if upper management asked me to not wear a tie, I wouldn't; it's the people on my level that attack me). It's ironic too that some of them use the argument that wearing a tie is conformist when they are the majority (in my workplace and the U.S as a whole) and are trying to make one conform to their standard.


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

I wish I'd said "none of us mindS...."

Much of my attempt at the "art" of dressing is driven by my need to casual-ize nice clothes in order to keep the corporate drones from crying foul. So, I often wear knit ties and narrow repps instead of typical repps, khakis (and even dark jeans) instead of wool pants, and tweed or cotton instead of worsted sport jackets. Of course in the colder months, a shetland crew neck sweater can also mute the tie considerably...a well known trick on this board.

Jeans-with-jacket-and-tie really throws 'em.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Coleman said:


> It's ironic too that some of them use the argument that wearing a tie is conformist when they are the majority (in my workplace and the U.S as a whole) and are trying to make one conform to their standard.


:icon_cheers:


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

I go to church to receive communion so that my family and friends don't guilt me with interventions to go (these aren't your born again Evangelicals you would find in the flyover states or Presbyterians either, we're talking broad church Episcopalians! Talking about religion is bad form so I'll stop here)

I say blazer (either tweed or navy blue, conservative lapel, three button, one patch, non-functional sleeve buttons, classic cut, no padding what-so-ever) chinos, and no tie. Alternatively, you can get away with chinos and a wool sweater; Brooks Brothers and LL Bean have great sweaters to choose. For footwear, you can do no wrong with moccasins or loafers. On the other hand, if your morning run is going to be later than expected then I'd recommend in running clothes (kidding here! Just miss communion that morning and set your alarm for earlier in the morning the next week)


Who say's wearing a tie means you're a conformist?!

(Bad form alert: Politics discussed below)

Just look at Nelson Rockefeller who ran for president back in the 70's. Nelson Rockefeller didn't only sit on the board of trustees to the Museum of Modern Art (not quite the Victoria and Albert Museum...) but ran for President! Talk about a maverick rebel who wasn't afraid to class sink for the benefit of the people by running for president*

*It's bad form to run for president or associate with politicians if your money goes back far enough. We really need an off-topic forum...


----------



## Kurt N (Feb 11, 2009)

Ah, philidor, I started to politely PM you about religion and grammar, but...you're trolling! *Almost* got me.

EDIT: Guess I was wrong! Discussion to be continued by PM....


----------



## philidor (Nov 19, 2009)

Kurt N said:


> Ah, philidor, I started to politely PM you about religion and grammar, but...you're trolling! *Almost* got me.


Do you know how to use footnotes on here? I hate having to constantly use parenthesis as I know I have that digression problem. I edited my above post as the first paragraph was sufficient, yet I was in a political and social commentary mental "zone" if you will.

Originally Posted by *Joe Beamish* https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?p=1009098#post1009098 
_I'm a satanic worshipper which you'd think would be all dungeons and dragons, but it's pretty trad. Blazer and tie for me except on Halloween, which involves sheep's blood, etc._

You'll get out of that phase when you graduate and go to college. I take it chapel bores you to tears and you simply want to rebel? Or want "Bad boy" credentials?


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

He was pretty obviously joking... or at least I think so. You'll get used to Mr. Beamish's brand of humour pretty soon. 

It's okay to talk about politicians' clothes and what they may convey to people to a _reasonable_ extent, but anything further is pretty much Interchange material. Just a heads up.

Please be sure to look over the rules governing the forums if you haven't already and PM a moderator if you're unclear on any. It's also a good idea to lurk (look without posting) on forums for a while to get a sense of the atmosphere.


----------



## ButtondownMind (Sep 24, 2008)

But I just can't get over the feeling, however, that a bogeyman is made of those considerate enough of others as to make the effort to be well groomed, while the inconsiderate and poorly groomed get a pass.

Not say me!![/quote]

I heartily agree, but may go a bit further and say that Cap'n Cargoshorts in the pew in front is actually presentd as the more virtuous:"It's not about the clothes, dude...." True. But I would think that it is not unreasonable to hope that when giving formal (i.e., ritual) thanks to your Maker you could put in the same effort regarding your appearance that you did for your date the night before, or for your job interview with the Asst. Mgr at Best Buy. Dude.
I've started attending Latin Mass at local Catholic church, and I've noticed the dress of the attendees (most of whom look to be born after Vatican II, as was I) is markedly better. So is the liturgy.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

The day finally came. Yesterday I was a church-goer.

Thanks again for everyone's replies.

Yesterday's rig:
BB 346 hopsack, 3 patch pocket, 3/2 sack blazer
BB pink OCBD
BB red solid repp tie
Kent Wang white linen PS
LE Dark Charcoal Year-rounder trousers
J. Crew argyles
brown pebble-grain longwings
Leather Man hunter green surcingle
Timex Camper on an olive Central strap


----------



## mcarthur (Jul 18, 2005)

Coleman said:


> The day finally came. Yesterday I was a church-goer.
> 
> Thanks again for everyone's replies.
> 
> ...


sounds like a very nice attire


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

If it has not been said already, worry more about what the Priest is wearing.
Anything less than a damask Chasuable and you have to get up and walk out.


----------



## Coleman (Mar 18, 2009)

Thanks, Uncle Mac.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

I go to church once a year, on Christmas Eve. Most recently, I wore a BB dinner jacket with formal shirt, black studs and cufflinks, Robert Talbott red paisley bow tie, Orvis blackwatch trousers, black silk formal braces, BB black bluchers and red silk pocket square. This was a significant upgrade from the previous year, when I wore my navy Pressidential suit.

When you go once a year, I figure you have to make it count, especially when you don't know the words to the songs...


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

Sadly, I'm becoming a bit of a vestment snob. My pastors (Lutheran) wear the alb and stole. Not a chasuble in sight, sadly. What I really can't figure out is why the Bishop doesn't wear a mitre even though he wears a cope.



gtsecc said:


> If it has not been said already, worry more about what the Priest is wearing.
> Anything less than a damask Chasuable and you have to get up and walk out.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

welldressedfellow said:


> Sadly, I'm becoming a bit of a vestment snob. My pastors (Lutheran) wear the alb and stole. Not a chasuble in sight, sadly. What I really can't figure out is why the Bishop doesn't wear a mitre even though he wears a cope.


The worst offender is the cassockalb - where double knit polyester has replaced a black wool cassock and a white linen alb:

If that isn't enough, the website says this model now has a microphone pocket.


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

Hmm, come to think of it, this is what my pastors wear! Complete with microphone pockets. Another thing that gets me; snaps instead of buttons. Don't get me started on the fabrics....



gtsecc said:


> The worst offender is the cassockalb - where double knit polyester has replaced a black wool cassock and a white linen alb:
> 
> If that isn't enough, the website says this model now has a microphone pocket.


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

mmmmm...
In general, polyester and microphones are a bad sign. Look for wool and smoke. Something more like this:


----------



## gtsecc (Mar 25, 2008)

Maybe we should start a new thread on what are the professionals in your church wearing.


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

Ah, if only.........



gtsecc said:


> mmmmm...
> In general, polyester and microphones are a bad sign. Look for wool and smoke. Something more like this:


Bully idea!



gtsecc said:


> Maybe we should start a new thread on what are the professionals in your church wearing.


----------



## Pr B (Jan 8, 2009)

*Chasubles*



welldressedfellow said:


> Sadly, I'm becoming a bit of a vestment snob. My pastors (Lutheran) wear the alb and stole. Not a chasuble in sight, sadly. What I really can't figure out is why the Bishop doesn't wear a mitre even though he wears a cope.


We Lutheran pastors were "trained" in seminary to wear chasubles whilst presiding at services of Holy Communion. However, they tend to be rare because:
1. They agitate the "But that's what Catholics do" crowd.
2. It is hot enough in the chancel as it! (Where I'm at, there are no A/C vents up there!) I'm sweatin' like a pig too many Sundays, as is....
3. They are PRICEY. The stoles are $100-$500+, EACH. There are blue, white, green, purple, and red--as a minimum (there's also gold, scarlet, etc...). So, one year's set of colors of stoles costs $500-$2,500+. Chasubles are $200-$700+, each. One year's set of colors of chasubles would cost $1,000-$3,500+. The chasubles are worn over the stoles, so you can't save money there! In 99.44% of churches, vestments are the pastor's, not the church's. 
I'd LOVE to wear chasubles, but they're just too hot and pricey....


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

The sad thing is, the sewing group has offered to make them chasubles free of charge and the chancel is nicely air conditioned (I know - I'm in the choir loft.)



Pr B said:


> We Lutheran pastors were "trained" in seminary to wear chasubles whilst presiding at services of Holy Communion. However, they tend to be rare because:
> 1. They agitate the "But that's what Catholics do" crowd.
> 2. It is hot enough in the chancel as it! (Where I'm at, there are no A/C vents up there!) I'm sweatin' like a pig too many Sundays, as is....
> 3. They are PRICEY. The stoles are $100-$500+, EACH. There are blue, white, green, purple, and red--as a minimum (there's also gold, scarlet, etc...). So, one year's set of colors of stoles costs $500-$2,500+. Chasubles are $200-$700+, each. One year's set of colors of chasubles would cost $1,000-$3,500+. The chasubles are worn over the stoles, so you can't save money there! In 99.44% of churches, vestments are the pastor's, not the church's.
> I'd LOVE to wear chasubles, but they're just too hot and pricey....


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

Oh, my regular church attire consits of a black plastic bag (er, choir robe) with a silk stole-like neck garment ("choker") worn over a suit sans jacket. I'm still waiting for the return of the alb and cincture as our standard choir vestments.


----------



## El_Abogado (Apr 21, 2009)

welldressedfellow said:


> Sadly, I'm becoming a bit of a vestment snob. My pastors (Lutheran) wear the alb and stole. Not a chasuble in sight, sadly. What I really can't figure out is why the Bishop doesn't wear a mitre even though he wears a cope.


WDF, which synod? LCMS, AELC, Wisconsin?


----------



## welldressedfellow (May 28, 2008)

NC Synod of the ELCA. You?

Oh, you may notice a "Last edited by welldressedfellow" message under you post. I accidentally hit "EDit" which instead of "Quote." I do apologize.



El_Abogado said:


> WDF, which synod? LCMS, AELC, Wisconsin?


----------



## El_Abogado (Apr 21, 2009)

HAH! I did notice that line.

LCMS. And I meant ELCA, not AELC. They only merged 20+ years ago.


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

(5) I don't go to church.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
LOL. Then might we conclude, MikeDT, you wear nothing(!) to church?


----------



## MikeDT (Aug 22, 2009)

eagle2250 said:


> ^^
> LOL. Then might we conclude, MikeDT, you wear nothing(!) to church?


Well I wouldn't really know what to wear anyway, especially given the kind of 'church' I find around my neighbourhood.


----------



## nonnobis1 (Nov 19, 2005)

I attend a Presbyterian church regularly (live in MD). In the cooler months I usually wear a suit (white tab collar and my Adam Smith red and blue repp four in hand). I go seersucker and khaki after Memorial Day, sometimes a seersucker suit, sometimes with a navy hopsack blazer. Bow ties maybe once every other month.

I think I'm the only male in my congregation under 60 who wears a coat and tie to church every week. Makes me sad.


----------



## nonnobis1 (Nov 19, 2005)

Sorry, I forgot to mention i just turned 50. Don't feel it, though!


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

I was in church once. Didn't hurt a bit.


----------



## ptoll (Jan 12, 2011)

It looks like this thread recently picked up some renewed interest. Since I'm new here, I will add my two cents.

I was raised in a mainline protestant church and my parents insisted that my siblings and I look our best for sunday services. I carry that with me today when I attend church: conservative suit (navy or charcoal), white shirt, repp tie.

If brunch in a restaurant follows church services, the suit stays on. If brunch takes place at home, I may choose to replace the coat with a v-neck sweater. Unless there is a compelling need to remove my tie, I usually leave it on for the day.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

I am a member of a Southern Baptist Church. Here are a couple of pictures taken during one of our Sunday morning services. As you can see it is quite informal. I generally wear khakis and an OCBD. If the weather is cool I wear a sport coat.



















Cruiser


----------



## brantley11 (Mar 31, 2009)

Summer/Spring: Seersucker suit, oxford suit, poplin suits and linen sportcoats with bright tie or bow

Fall/Winter: Suits, tweed sportcoats, and Camel Hair Blazers with tie or bow

I dress up every Sunday whether is is 0 F or 110 F. I want to look my best to honor our Lord.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

brantley11 said:


> I dress up every Sunday whether is is 0 F or 110 F. I want to look my best to honor our Lord.


While that is a noble sounding sentiment, I can remember all too often the days of my youth when Church services were prone to turn into fashion shows with people trying to outshine their fellow Church members. It often became less about looking one's best to worship the Lord and more about "Hey, look at me." This was especially true with many of the women.

_"Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight."_

_1Peter 3:3-4_

There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with wearing a suit and tie to Church as long as one remembers to keep this in proper perspective and not judge those who don't dress to their personal standards.

Cruiser


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Cruiser: When you see as many people dressing disrespectfully at funerals as I have, it's hard not to get judgmental. Especially when these people, in their general demeanor, seem not to give a hoot either way.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Jovan said:


> Cruiser: When you see as many people dressing disrespectfully at funerals as I have, it's hard not to get judgmental.


You probably haven't seen as many as I have simply because I have a feeling that I've been to more funerals than you have; however, we are talking apples and oranges when we compare a funeral service to a Church service. Many, perhaps even most, Churches these days encourage informal attire in the congregation whereas the funeral service is still seen by the majority as an event where more formal clothing is considered most appropriate.

Cruiser


----------



## Preacher (Jul 5, 2008)

With my occupation i'm in church several times a week. I always wear a suit and white shirt. We are pretty traditional and most guys wear suits in the churches that i'm in.


----------



## inq89 (Dec 3, 2008)

I don't go to church regularly, but when I do, I find it disturbing that grown men can walk into service with a t shirt and athletic gear. I am 21yo and always wear at least pants and a button down shirt. I rarely see suits and ties but I sport one around the special occasions. (Christmas, Easter, and baptisms)


----------



## Joe Beamish (Mar 21, 2008)

Thus continues the battle between two principles in conflict:

-- Don't make some big joy out of your attire (except at big joyful occasions)
-- Dress sharp, show respect (except when sloppy is the thing)

In 1959 you could get away with doing both at the same time, but now it's very tricky and funny.

Both are what we'd call "trad" tenets, and I salute Cruiser for consistently representing the first listed. Cruiser, my man, you MUST be a Taurus. I'm just guessing.


----------

