by Fe2O3Girl 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
It is clear that there is no scriptural basis for disapproving of facial hair, coloured shirts or women wearing trousers at meetings or while preaching. Some of these rules seem to be regionally variable, but I think the rules on women's clothing are the same everywhere.
My question is - has there ever been any specific comments on any of these type of rules in any Watchtower publication, ever? And if not, how do we all know the rules?
Clever, isn't it?
It is clever.
The BO tells the DO's they tell the CO's, they tell the elders.
But there is a lot of variety. Cultural cloating is normally accepted.
Here in some terretories women are advised to wear jeans.
Do you believe it if I told you I have given a public talk with a skirt on?
You are somewhat correct that dress and grooming are the "unwritten law".
Notice the following statement (from the Benefit from Theocratic Ministry School Education page 133):
Rather than imitate the world, how much better to allow the fine example of spiritually mature men and women in the Christian congregation to influence you dress and grooming! Young men who hope to be public speakers someday can observe the attire of those who already qualify to give public talks. All can learn from the example set by individuals who have loyally shared for many years in the public ministry. -1 Tim. 4:12; 1 Pet. 5:2, 3.
JWs do recognize cultural differences from region to region. You will see circuit overseers in the ministry in Guam with an open collared shirt, no tie. The July 1, 2005 Watchtower (page 23) show as JW fellow from Lapland with hair long enough to tuck behind his ears.
But what gets me is that JW standards are only old "worldly" standards. JWs are basically stuck in the 1950's. Why is that so sacred?
Don't tell me it's "professional" dress standards either. CEO's have been sporting goatees and "business casual" for a decade now.
And don't go back too far in fashion history. In 1900, beards were the norm and ladies wouldn't show their ankles. Wouldn't that generation be shocked to see women at the hall today!
Constant reinforcement that the pictures in the magazines were the example for us all...
Suits and dresses, no beards, are the order of the illustrators' day.
Do you believe it if I told you I have given a public talk with a skirt on?
You share Mr Midwich's hobby I see.
"Rules" on Slacks over the last 50 years in the WTS
***
w51 10/1 pp. 607-608 Questions from Readers ***When
Deuteronomy 22:5 says that a woman should not wear a man’s clothes, does it mean that women should not wear slacks?—J. P., Pennsylvania.Deuteronomy 22:5 (Da) reads: "There shall not be a man’s apparel on a woman, neither shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever doeth so is an abomination to Jehovah thy God." This text certainly was not recorded with the thought in mind of preventing modern women from wearing slacks. Men did not wear slacks or trousers when this was recorded, but what we would view as dresses today. In parts of the Orient, in fact, the men wore dresslike robes and the women wore pajamalike trousers of varying styles. So the wearing of slacks or even work pants, such as around a farm, is not forbidden by this text and is an individual matter. The women can use good judgment as to time and place and what is accepted as proper in the section where they reside(*this is how it gets on the elder level to decide). In some sections where winters are severe many women wear trousers or ski suits or some similar garment that covers and protects their legs. Such is not Scripturally wrong.
At Deuteronomy 22:5 the Bible is not dealing with fashions or fretting over styles, but apparently it is here forbidding persons of one sex from wearing the clothing of the opposite sex for purposes of deceit, to appear of the opposite sex, to hide the true facts. Men should not try to deceitfully dress like women to hide the fact that they are men, nor should women try to dress in men’s clothes to hide the fact that they are women. Being more specific, the Bible seems to be striking a blow against the sin of sodomy. It was a disgrace for a woman’s hair to be shorn like a man’s, and it was a dishonor for a man’s hair to be allowed to grow long like a woman’s. (1 Cor. 11:6, 14) The woman was not to appear masculine by having short hair like a man’s or by wearing clothes like a man’s. It might suggest to others that she was available for unnatural sex uses. Likewise the man. If he wore long hair like a woman’s or garbed himself in women’s clothes he would certainly appear effeminate and open to propositions from men for unnatural sex use. So it is this deeper meaning with sodomy in view, and not a mere switching of clothes in itself, that brings this practice under prohibition and makes it deserve the severe judgment: "Whoever doeth so is an abomination to Jehovah thy God."
***
w72 11/1 pp. 671-672 Questions from Readers• In view of what is written at Deuteronomy 22:5, is it proper for a woman to wear slacks?—U.S.A.
Deuteronomy 22:5 reads: "No garb of an able-bodied man should be put upon a woman, neither should an able-bodied man wear the mantle of a woman; for anybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah your God." This text is not discussing styles of clothing. The prohibition concerns one’s putting on things specifically designed for the opposite sex.
The distinction between the sexes is of divine origin and the law set forth at Deuteronomy 22:5 served to preserve that distinction. When it comes to appearance and attire, the usual thing is for a man to want to look like a man and for a woman to look like a woman. For an Israelite to have acted contrary to this deep internal sense of what is fitting could have led to homosexuality. Thus the law at Deuteronomy 22:5 also opposed this sin.
At the time the law was given, both men and women wore robes. But there was a definite difference between the garb of men and that of women. Similarly, in some parts of the earth today both men and women wear slacks. But styles of slacks for women differ from those for men. Accordingly, the principle taught at Deuteronomy 22:5 would not rule out a woman’s wearing slacks or pants.
Moreover, Christians are not under the Mosaic law. (Rom. 6:14) Insistence on applying the letter of this law would therefore be contrary to Christian teaching. So if a woman were to put on a worn-out pair of her husband’s trousers to do a job around the house or on the farm, she would not be going against the evident purpose of the law, namely, to prevent confusion of sexual identity and sexual abuses.
The fact that Christians are not under the Mosaic law but are guided by its principles calls for them to use discernment, good judgment and to exercise their conscience. A Christian woman appreciates that whether it would be proper for her to wear slacks or pants depends upon factors other than her personal likes. She would not want to be the cause for stumbling others or bring reproach on the Christian congregation. Clothing that may not be looked on with disfavor if worn in the privacy of one’s home or at work may be objectionable if worn at Christian meetings and when publicly proclaiming God’s Word or carrying on other public activity.(NOW THE STUMBLING CLAUSE ) Attitudes, too, may differ from area to area.(THE ELDER CLAUSE) The Bible’s counsel is that women "adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, . . . in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works."—1 Tim. 2:9 10.
***
w75 8/15 p. 500 Do Not Let Yourself Be Ensnared by Fads and Entertainment ***If slacks or pantsuits for women are frowned upon by many in the community, likely some different style of apparel for public dress would be advisable for a Christian sister (STUMBLING CLAUSE). During cold weather she likely could arrange to be exposed to the weather for shorter periods of time, or pause more frequently to warm herself. But in frigid climates, where everyone in the community wears clothing appropriate to the weather, such as slacks, surely it is proper for Christian women to do the same. In some places, pioneers have been aided thus to maintain robust health for putting in long hours in service. If a Christian sister is unsure about a particular style, she can discuss the situation with her husband or an elder in the Christian congregation.(ELDER CLAUSE) The elders should not seek to impose their own preferences on others, but likely are in position to offer advice on what might be acceptable in their respective communities.(ELDER CLAUSE AND STUMBLING CLAUSE COMBINED) Children should be obedient to their parents in the matters of dress and grooming.
***
g76 8/8 p. 26 Dressing in a Modest and Attractive Way ***Besides encouraging that others be taken into consideration, the Bible counsels Christian women "to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, . . . in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works." (1 Tim. 2:9, 10) When a Christian woman’s apparel causes others to question whether she is true to her religious professions, her clothing obviously is no longer modest. The determining factor in this is not whether the item is a dress, skirt or a pair of slacks but what is expected in that locality of one who ‘professes to reverence God.’
Certain clothing, such as slacks, may be worn by both men and women. When that is the case, care has to be exercised not to wear a style that would make it difficult to distinguish a man from a woman. This would be in line with the spirit the law recorded at Deuteronomy 22:5: "No garb of an able-bodied man should be put upon a woman."
***
w84 7/15 pp. 24-25 Deuteronomy Exhorts Us to Serve Jehovah With Heartfelt Joy ***22:5—In view of this prohibition, is it proper for a woman to wear slacks?
The evident purpose of this law was to prevent sex abuses and confusion of sexual identity. In appearance and attire, normally a man wants to look like a male and a woman like a female. For an Israelite to act contrary to this internal sense of propriety could have led to homosexuality. Although both men and women then wore robelike garments, there was a difference between the garb of males and that of females. Similarly, in some parts of the earth today, both men and women wear slacks, though the styles differ for each sex. The principle in this text would not rule out a Christian woman’s wearing slacks sometimes, as when working around the house or on a farm. And according to local custom and necessity, slacks may be the desired attire in very cold climates. The Bible counsels women to "adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind."—1 Timothy 2:9, 10.
***
w88 8/15 p. 17 Manifest Trust in Jehovah—By Practicing the Things Learned ***We need to "dress modestly, with decency and propriety," especially when engaged in spiritual activities. (1 Timothy 2:9, New International Version) The issue is not whether a certain style is extremely fashionable but whether it is appropriate for one professing to be a minister of God. (Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 6:3) Overly casual or tight-fitting clothes can detract from our message. Styles that blatantly and deliberately feminize men or masculinize women are definitely out of order. (Compare Deuteronomy 22:5.) Of course, local customs may vary, according to the weather, occupational needs, and so forth, so that the Christian congregation does not make hard-and-fast rules to cover the worldwide brotherhood. Nor should elders impose their personal tastes on the flock. However, if a Kingdom publisher’s style of grooming generally disturbs the congregation or detracts from the ministry, kind counsel is in order. Would you respond to such counsel in humility, manifesting trust in Jehovah?—Hebrews 12:7.
***
w97 6/15 pp. 17-18 "Male and Female He Created Them" ***For a man or woman, boy or girl, to act in or dress in a sexually provocative way would not enhance true masculinity or femininity, and it certainly does not honor God. Many people in the world go to extremes to flaunt masculine or feminine sexuality in dress and in conduct. Others obscure the differences between the sexes because of immoral objectives. How thankful we Christians can be that the Bible reveals God’s thinking! Jehovah declared to ancient Israel: "No garb of an able-bodied man should be put upon a woman, neither should an able-bodied man wear the mantle of a woman; for anybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah."—Deuteronomy 22:5.
17
In this regard, you will likely enjoy reviewing what The Watchtower of August 15, 1988, said on page 17: "The issue is not whether a certain style is extremely fashionable but whether it is appropriate for one professing to be a minister of God. (Romans 12:2; 2 Corinthians 6:3) Overly casual or tight-fitting clothes can detract from our message. Styles that blatantly and deliberately feminize men or masculinize women are definitely out of order. (Compare Deuteronomy 22:5.) Of course, local customs may vary, according to the weather, occupational needs, and so forth, so that the Christian congregation does not make hard-and-fast rules to cover the worldwide brotherhood." (WORD FOR WORD FROM 1988 WT)
This is the thought that I always was baffled by in all this:
A Christian woman appreciates that whether it would be proper for her to wear slacks or pants depends upon factors other than her personal likes. She would not want to be the cause for stumbling others or bring reproach on the Christian congregation. Clothing that may not be looked on with disfavor if worn in the privacy of one’s home or at work may be objectionable if worn at Christian meetings and when publicly proclaiming God’s Word or carrying on other public activity
Just how in God's name does one get stumbled due to a woman wearing slacks? And how could this in one's wildest imagination bring reproach on the congregation? As for the statement that this may be objectionable to others - the only objection I ever heard from men, women, those inside and outside the witness forum - was objection against the society's strict standards. I never heard anyone defend it as clearly proper with the exception of a few old women from the congregation who would have had the same objection had they belonged to any church - they were just from the old school. They were the same ones that insisted in riding in the back seat if a brother picked them up for a meeting because it might look bad. Who would think that a young witness dressed in a suit and tie was picking up an 80 year old widow also dressed for church, with some evil intent? Geez.
This is just wide-eyed pathetic reasoning to me to support a plethera of laws with no scriptual support. Why did I not see this for all the years I was in the borg?
Jeff
Just how in God's name does one get stumbled due to a woman wearing slacks?
It probably would have a Century ago - and don't forget, mentally, that's where the present Governing Body are. I stumbled most of the Congregation in 1915 after accidently showing an ankle.
It's amazing that religious leaders would need to worry themselves about minutiae such as pants.
The thing that always got me was the facial hair. I meen Jesus is depicted in publications with a BEARD. But we can't wear one? I used to to buy that old logic about beards being unaccepted in the world, and that we would freak people out at the doors with one on. That's a bold faced lie. The former poster is right, beards and goetees are worn by many CEO's. In my line of work I have worked for six Electrical Contractors in the past 10 years. 4 of them (men who own their own companies, and who deal with the public on a daily basis) wore a beard or goetee.
It seems that the WTBTS are the only ones who are offended by facial hair. They are merely propetuating their own fears.
The first thing I did when I started bucking the Watchtower system, was grow a goetee. It was great fun to watch the elders squirm when they would run into me on a local jobsite!
