Modesty for Men

Many, many churches set rules for what is modest for a woman to wear. But how many of them set rules for what a man can wear and still be modest? Why do so many of them ignore the male modesty issue but tread so heavily on the modesty of women?

This has been something that I have yet to figure out. And one of the reasons why I have respect for the Duggar family. They emphasize modesty for not only their girls, but also their boys.

The Bible does not simply mean that a woman must dress modestly and a man can wear whatever he like, he still has to follow the modesty guidelines set forth by scripture. Isaiah 47:2-3 says 2 Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. 3 Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.

Although we might say this scripture referrs to a woman uncovering her thigh, can we really say that if a woman's thigh would be nakedness, a man's thigh is not?

As I've mentioned in a post a while back, many of the Conservative Mennonite churches have "guidelines" which are more than guidelines for what is modest...for women. They say, a woman should wear a cape dress, with sleeves that are ____ length, colors in the following families: ____, yes or no to patterns, yes or no to ribbon, yes or no to zippers, etc at all times. The men? Should wear pants and a long sleeve shirt for church. Nothing further stated on what men should wear during the week.

I had the opportunity to chat with someone I met last summer for a few minutes yesterday when she and her husband came into the restaurant where I work today. She said those "regulations" were the main reason why she left the church I am currently attending and went to the church where they go now. As she put it, the men do not have the same regulations as the women do, you would not know a Mennonite man except for his wife. She attends a church now that simply states modest clothing, with some shoulder, a high neckline and skirts that are at least knee length. The woman must also wear a veil, but the size, color and shape are up to her and her husband. The men would dress like "English" guys you would see wearing jeans and t-shirts or polos during the week but khakis or black dress slacks and a nice shirt for church on Sunday.

Should we teach our boys that tank tops are modest? If they are not modest for girls then they are not modest for boys. Should we teach them it is okay to let their trouser's waist set at their knees and that it is modest to do so? Not if we consider it immodest for our girls to do so. Although women do not tend to fall toward physical lust as often as men may, there are still sisters who are physically attracted to men passing by.

Not only should we stress modesty for both men and women, but if we are saying the women must dress to show that they are "set-apart" from the English lifestyle, then why are the men allowed to dress like the English? If we need to dress the set-apart style it should fall on the men's shoulders as well. This is one area where I do have lots of respect for the Amish, they require set-apart dress for both men and women in their churches.

Jesus taught by example and lead by example, that should be how a Christian man should be -- leading by example. The man is to be the leader of the household, how can a leader hold the people under him to a higher standard than he holds himself to? IMHO, if we set one standard for our women, we need to uphold our men to the same standard. If elbows are not to be shown, it should be on both men and women, if ankles are not to be shown, it should go for both men and women.

Blessings in Christ,