Interestingly, the Bible does not mention Adam and Eve’s nakedness until after the Fall. There was nothing inappropriate or unnatural about their unclothed condition. It could be said that they were clothed. They were clothed in innocence. True innocence—not to be confused with ignorance or naiveté—is the most beautiful and complete clothing they could wear.

       A realization of their nakedness was the first thing mentioned after the opening of their eyes (Gen 3:7). It was not that their bodies suddenly became objects of shame. Instead, their eyes were suddenly opened to their loss of innocence. They were no longer clothed in innocence. This loss of innocence left them feeling exposed to evil possibilities they had been unaware of before their eyes were opened.

       Adam and Eve promptly made coverings for themselves from fig leaves (Gen 3:7). After God met with Adam and Eve and articulated the implications of the Fall, we read, Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them (Gen 3:21). We are not given any details as to the design or extent of covering that these clothes provided. However, it seems reasonable to assume that if the purpose for the first clothing was to cover the nakedness, then we should not seek to uncover, whether by lack of clothing or by clothing that reveals rather than conceals.

       The world has done several unbiblical things regarding attire:

       1. They have uncovered what God has intended (since the Fall) to be covered.

       2. They have used attire to make non-God-honoring statements. 

            A. By dressing up (formality to the point of excess and waste)

            B. By dressing down (informality to the point of slovenliness)

            C. By identity with ungodly people and ungodly values

       So, why are God’s people separate in their clothing choices?

       The short answer is this: The Christian is not of this world. Jesus said in John 15:19, If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

       The “world” is any person or any program that is not under the lordship of Jesus Christ and is not accepting the Bible as the Word of God.

       In John 17:9, Jesus said, I pray for them [His believers and followers]: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me.

       Jesus was several days away from leaving this world and going to His heavenly home. He was very concerned that His followers would be kept from the world while living in the world. He says in John 17:12-14, While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name … And now come I to thee … I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 

       Verse 15 is the center of the in, but not of theology of nonconformity to the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.

       Jesus is clearly using the word world in two ways. In verse 15 He entreats the Father to keep “His own” from the evil of the world they were living in. In verse 16, He repeats the thought that even though “His own” were living in the world, they were not of the world.

       In verse 17, He asks the Father to sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

       Toward the end of John 17, we are faced with two huge challenges. As if being in the world but not of the world were not a big enough challenge, He does not allow us to retreat in isolation from the world; He actually commissions us to go into the world.

       In other words, at one level, it is true that the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein (Psa 24:1). However, at another level, much of the earth and its inhabitants are not “His own” in the sense that Jesus is referring to in John 17.

       When Jesus taught his disciples to pray in Matthew 6, he petitioned the Father, Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

       To build this kingdom, He sends us forth into the world. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world (John 17:18).

       Jesus was expecting His kingdom to grow due to this going into the world. Verse 20, Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word.

       The final challenge is to do all of this “as one.” Verse 21, That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

       In summary, Christ gives us four guiding principles for our role in this world:

       1. In the world, but not of the world

       2. Into the world, but not of the world

       3. “As one” with others that are not of the world

       4. “As one” with the Father and with His Son

       He states His purpose in verse 23, That the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 

In the world, but not of the world.

       There are several reasons for the widespread lack of visible separation among Christians. By “Christian,” we are not referring to nominal Christians, but to Christians who claim to be born-again followers of Jesus Christ and claim the Bible to be the Word of God on all matters pertaining to life and godliness (2Pet 1:3).

       Lack of separation from the world in clothing choices is symptomatic (arising from a different cause). The first cause is the tendency to acculturate to the world rather than separate from the world.

       In 2 Corinthians 6:14-18, Paul instructs us not to “yoke together” or expect to find “fellowship” with unright-
eousness. Then he says, Ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore [because of this] come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. 

       If Christians are taking many or possibly most of their cues from the world, we can hardly expect them to be separate from the world in their manner of life and doctrine.

       Only as we allow ourselves to be sanctified through the truth of God’s Word (John 17:17) can we be one with the Father and His Son (John 17:21).

Into the world, but not of the world

Nonresistant Christians typically do not attempt to “Christianize” the culture. Rather, they attempt to call people from the kingdom of this world into the kingdom of Christ.

The nonresistant approach operates from the belief that changes in the broader culture are a result of a “trickle-down” effect. Jesus said, “Ye are the salt of the earth … Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid…. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matt 5:13,14,16).

Within the church, nonresistant, conservative Mennonites utilize a more intentional culture-forming approach. They typically believe that obedience to Christ and the Word will produce a distinctive Christian culture. The area of attire is one of the most visible, and in some cases one of the most traditional expressions of their faith walk. There is a strong argument that the traditions of attire have brought a certain level of rest and stability to an area of life that is in constant unrest and instability in the world, particularly the Western world.

Whenever a church group has long-established traditions springing from Biblical principles, such as in the area of attire, the question often arises, “Should that standard be carried with the group as they carry the gospel into areas with a culture distinctly different from their own?”

For example, should a church group that requires the sisters in the church to wear a cape dress, require the same of sisters from a culture that wears a sari? We will sidestep that question by asking another question. If it is important to not offend a culture very different from the sending churches, why is it not also important to avoid offending the church cultural traditions that formed who we are?

My personal observation has been that typically the more a person claims the Biblical model of “being all things to all men,” the less they use that model for the family / church culture that forms their own background.

Some of this inequality is because we tend to send to send our youngest, least-experienced Christians to the cultural situations most different from their sending churches. Ironically, in some cases the reason the older, more experienced Christians stay home is that we cannot figure out how to engage with the culture without compromising biblical principles and the resulting traditions that have served long and well. As a result, we have gravitated toward an emphasis on short-term missions, or a houseparent / voluntary service model that theoretically allows the missionary to have a foot in both cultures. This issue needs to be squarely addressed because of the often-quoted accusation that our mission endeavors and the ensuing issues such as separation in attire have been responsible for leading the church into apostasy.

“As one” with others that are not of the world

       Jesus indicates in His prayer in John 17:21, that when Christians are “as one” with each other and “as one” with the Father and Son, then the world will know that Jesus was sent into the world by the Father.

       In light of this, we should work diligently toward being “as one” as possible. Our subject at hand is “Why God’s People Are Separate in Their Clothing Choices.” On this issue alone, the “as one” testimony emanating from the Mennonite church has been seriously marred.

       First of all, at times we have failed to remember that God’s Word and God’s will are one. I remember a speaker at a church convention saying, “When God has given us His Word, we should never go seeking His will, because His Word and His will are one.” We could add that His Word and His being are one. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (John 1:1). 

       When God’s Word said that a lady’s head should be covered (1Co. 11:1-16), and a large portion of the church, including the Mennonite church, began to ignore this directive, the “as one” testimony was marred. Actually, at some point a separation from those that are ignoring God’s Word is not a separation from the body, but rather a separation from the world.

       There are several “as one” issues that are very timely.

       In the Mennonite church of the early and mid- 1900’s, there was a noticeable effort towards more distinctiveness and uniformity in the area of attire. The distinctiveness emphasis was partially a result of the increasing godlessness of the surrounding culture. Even if the church “just stayed where it was,” it became more distinct.

       The Mennonite church of the first half of the 20th century may have overemphasized the distinctive uniformity issue. However, the reaction of my generation and the generation following has almost completely destroyed the “as one” with others that are not of the world.

       Revival groups have taken a two-pronged approach to the issue. First, in some cases they have used the uniformity of the groups they have left as an indication that the group has died spiritually. It is claimed that “they have a form of godliness but have denied the power thereof.”

       There is a real irony in this, because almost always the bulk of the revival groups have their roots in one of those “dead” groups. Also, the “dead” group continues to be a feeder group. It needs to be admitted that even if formality has begun to strangle the group, a “fear of God” is often present.

       Second, revival groups often set about establishing their own traditions. There is nothing unbiblical about doing this. However, reaction often paralyzes any efforts toward retaining or regaining oneness in our testimony. It becomes important for the revival group to change traditions in order to justify their move, and to establish distinctives. This time at least part of the emphasis is on distinction from the group they left.

       The traditional group looking on is tempted to discredit any new distinctive even if the new application is more biblical or more practical than an existing application. We do well to break this cycle. Our distinctiveness needs to focus on being one with the Father and with the Son, rather than focusing on not being one with others that are not of this world.

       In the past decade, a new challenge has arrived. It was to be expected that the offspring of those who left ultra-conservative churches would be tempted to wonder if their parents had completed the journey toward less traditional expressions of their faith walk. It was also to be expected that the offspring of those who left apostatizing churches would be tempted to wonder if their parents had gone too far in their journey toward a more traditional expression of their faith walk.

       Sadly, these questions came of age at the same time that the individualism of post-modernism was making its inroads into the church.

       In many cases, we are seeing a wholesale rejection of life applications, particularly in the area of attire, that would associate them with the traditional groups of their background. This position usually stops just short of completely ignoring a Biblical directive. After all, at the very least, a conservative Christian needs to claim that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Light, and he also needs to claim that the Bible is the Word of God on all matters pertaining to life and godliness. However, if principles or commands are sufficiently reduced in application to lose any religious distinctiveness, the principle is lost in practicality.

       The loss is immeasurable in several ways. Biblical principles and time-tested practices are lost. Also lost are the last vestiges of oneness. This has the effect of alienating them from their traditional roots and marring the testimony that Jesus so desired in John 17.

“As one” with the Father and with His Son

       Jesus prayed in John 17:21 that his followers would be “as one” with others that were not of the world. Jesus also prayed that his followers would be “as one” with the Father and with His Son.

       As His followers were sanctified through the truth (v 17,19), they would become one in character and in conduct with the Son.

       Jesus says in Luke 17:20, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation [by seeing or inspecting it with our eyes]. The kingdom of God does not enter us, and we do not enter the kingdom, simply by observing it. Rather, the kingdom of God is within us (v 21).

       Ironically, this “within us” means that we are invested with the kingdom, or as Strong’s Concordance puts it, we “wear” it.

       As we “wear” the kingdom of God, we are at one with the Father and with His Son.

       As we “wear” the kingdom of God, we provide an opportunity for others to observe the kingdom of God.

       After all, Jesus had prayed in John 17:20-21, Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 

Summary

       Why are God’s people separate in their clothing choices?

       The short answer is this: the Christian is not of this world. This is our calling. This is our privilege. In the world, but not of this world. Into the world, but not of the world. “As one” with others that are not of the world. “As one” with the Father and with His Son.

Elmhurst, NY