Notice the following quote: “It would be pleasing to God if there was greater uniformity in dress among Christians.
The style of dress formerly adopted by the Friends (Quakers) is commendable.
-by Celina Richards I thought that the following article, by D. Robinson, would be of much help to our Christian sisters who are seeking to “adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.” 1 Timothy 2:9, 10.
This article discusses the history of Seventh-day Adventists and the God-given light regarding the reform dress.
There are many errors in the present style of female dress.” With these words Mrs.
In all the Northern States it has hundreds of representatives; and in number of them it has thousands. And while you adorn it to your taste, to please the eye, you are dying spiritually. Byington makes the following innuendo in the form of a question and a conclusion: “Are sleeves which are largest at the little end, and round tires like the moon, or hoops (Isa. Only four ladies, apparently ventured to respond to the question, with its implication. Close Observation During their three weeks’ stay at Our Home, Mrs. It is evident from this statement that up to that time, although Mrs.
It is known and worn in California, Canada East and West, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia. All these were agreed in condemning the first style, and three agreed that the wearing of hoops was a practice “unbecoming women professing godliness.” One, however, expressed her opinion that the hoops were unobjectionable and might be “recommended to the church generally in this season of the year, when used with moderation.”–Ibid, September 23, 1858. White said of this oddity, “Hoops, I was shown, were an abomination, and every Sabbathkeeper’s influence should be a rebuke to this ridiculous fashion, which has been a screen to iniquity.”–Ibid, August 27, 1861. White and her husband had opportunity to observe at close hand the mode of dress that she had formerly declared to be unsuitable for Seventh-day Adventists. White had “been shown” certain principles that should govern a reform in dress, there had been no detailed, specified pattern revealed to her.
The New York Tribune contained the first notice I saw of my action. ‘Bloomerism,’ ‘Bloomerites,’ and ‘Bloomers’ were the headings of many an article, item, and squib. For several years scarcely an edition of their journal failed to urge its adoption, or to print testimonials from enthusiastic readers who had received health benefits from it. This is well set forth in an editorial in a popular journal, from which we quote: “The cause for which the early dress reformers labored and suffered martyrdom has triumphed in almost all points, but in a very different way than they anticipated. In the one-piece dresses now in vogue the weight is borne from the shoulders, and the hips are relieved by reducing the skirts in weight, length, and number. It is possible for womanhood today to be clothed neatly, modestly, inexpensively, and healthfully, without the necessity of a wide divergence from accepted styles. Adoniram Judson’s Appeal And so it was also with most Seventh-day Adventists from the earliest days of their experience as a separate people.
The style, however, was considerably modified by Miss Austin, and soon became generally know as the “American Costume.” Praise and commendation on the one hand, and reproach and sarcasm on the other, were the lot of the dress reformers. The Quest for Moderation Having noted the fashions of the time, and the movements of the dress reformers, we should consider the attitude of Seventh-day Adventists to these questions. The salvation of souls was the burden of my mind.”–Life Sketches of Ellen G. While neatness and durability of dress were regarded as in harmony with the mind of Christ, unnecessary adornment was shunned as being sinful.