Screaming Your Priorities // Modesty pt. II


Yesterday, I wrote about what gets me fired up. I do not want to see the Gospel distorted and God’s principles negated. It makes me very frustrated. This week I am taking a look at the biblical principles for modesty. Yesterday’s post covered the first principle of modesty which was: God created clothes to cover nakedness. Today we will look at the second reason we should be modest.

2. God created us to be worshippers.

This is not something we think about every day when we put on our clothes, but it is something that we should think about. When I get dressed in the morning, am I putting on clothing that communicates I am a worshipper of the most High God? Or do I just look like the rest of the world?

Mary Kassian writes, “Clothing is an outward symbol of an inward spiritual reality!” She goes on to say that our clothing bears witness that we need to be covered by Christ in order to be presentable before God (Principle #1).

Furthermore, not only should your clothing communicate that you are a worshipper, but it should not distract others from worshipping. Girls, modesty is more than what you wear. It is an attitude. Are you trying to draw attention to yourself or attention to your King?

I love this perspective by a 19 year old guy:

 A girl’s dress proclaims her priorities and values louder than if she got on a chair and screamed them to the world. When critically examining a woman’s get-up, I consider the following: Could she get down on the floor and play with a group of toddlers without losing several articles of clothing? Could she get away from a threatening situation without spraining an ankle? Could she prepare and maintain a house and its members easily? Could she be the Proverbs 31 woman dressed like that?

I don’t know about you, but that is convicting to me! Ladies, what do your dress proclaim? Does it say that your are a worshipper of the Most High God or not?


3 thoughts on “Screaming Your Priorities // Modesty pt. II

  1. love your points and the fact that they lead straight to the heart of the issue..
    i think that quote is unhelpful only because it presents a slightly legalistic view on the side of the young man who wrote it. spraining an ankle when fleeing a threatening situation (obviously referring to wearing high heels) is by NO means an indication of 1. modestly 2. heart issues or 3. anything that needs to be remotely considered when assessing your attire. Its all about 1. your heart 2. your appearance (overly sensual//unkempt) 3. how you carry yourself.
    All in all we cant make a list that says what you can or cant wear. i think its important to draw a line between biblical truth (ie:covering nakedness and created to worship) and preference (a woman being able to sprint away from danger…HUH?). quotes like that drive me crazy because they are ultimately more unhelpful that useful. it disregards occasion, which, contrary to what many women say DOES play a factor in what we wear. Jeans to a wedding is as inappropriate as wearing a ballgown to a baseball game. could a woman get down and play with toddlers in her wedding dress? no.. does that make her immodest? no….
    sorry for venting. that quote just frustrates me for SO many reasons.
    In 95% of other sin issues we are SO quick to draw the line and assign responsibility correctly: ie: if someone is rude to you with that they say, all would agree that it does not make you respond wrongly and sin. Our hearts are naturally sinful. As much as one can tempt us, they can not make us sin…we are born and wired that way. That being said i think that mention of men stumbling should be extremely minimal in the discussion on modesty. You can check every item off a list and a man can still lust. So when are we relieved of responsibility? Hence that argument proves unhelpful and cyclical. YES we can be responsible for tempting a man or being failing to be a servant in love and humility. But an unregenerate woman can and will wear what ever on earth she wants (as a slave to sin). and, no she is not responsible for the preexisting lust, pride and lack of self control existing in the hearts of men. Just as men aren’t responsible for the pride, rebellion and self focus that goes into a believer dressing immodestly.

    • Dear Reader,

      Thank you so much for your response! I appreciate your perspective and your honesty. You are right, that quote does not take into consideration the occasion or the motivation behind wearing something. Honestly, I was not trying to draw lines about what you should or should not wear. The reason I used that quote was to challenge our perspective about modest dressing and to get us to think critically about what we wear. (Which the quote obviously prompted your thinking and I am glad it did!) The purpose of the quote was more to provide a framework for thinking through things than to put limitations on what you can wear. I found it refreshing to hear a quote (albeit a conservative one) like that from a young man. I think my main idea was that when we get dressed in the morning are we putting on clothing that is appropriate to serve the Lord in the way that He has called us to do that? And am I reflecting Him or drawing attention to myself? Does that make sense?

  2. Pingback: For Your Husband’s Eyes Only // Modesty Pt. III | titus2minutes

Share your thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s