It was once more common to hear people, particularly within the Bible Belt, to refer to a minority portion of the clothing hanging in the closet as “Sunday best.” According to the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs, “Sunday best” means, “one’s best clothing, which one would wear to church.” 1 However, what would be one’s best? Naturally, this would be dependent, to a certain degree, upon socioeconomics. Obviously, a wealthy individual’s best would be more expensive and of a different quality than what a poorer man could call his best.
Admittedly, this latter truth can lead to difficulty within the local church. James highlights this difficulty for us well.
My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. For if a man comes into your assembly with a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and there also comes in a poor man in dirty clothes, and you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, “You sit here in a good place,” and you say to the poor man, “You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,” have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil motives? Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court? Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called?
If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not commit murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment. (James 2:1-13 NASB)
Note what is actually being condemned within this passage, though. It is not the rich man’s clothing. It is, rather, the preferential treatment the rich man’s clothing caused him to receive. In the first century AD, it was commonly believed that one was wealthy because God was blessing him for his goodness. Yet, God “causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:45 NASB). Indeed, He shows no partiality (cf. Romans 2:11). (A discussion of our perception of the fairness of this truth would only prove distracting here. Thus, it shall be given no further treatment.)
Jesus demonstrates in the story of the rich man and Lazarus (cf. Luke 16:19-31) that a righteous man could be so impoverished that he longed to be filled with what fell from the rich man’s table. Contrariwise, a rich man, who fared sumptuously, could, by his disobedience to God’s message, as presented by Moses and the prophets, be cast into torment.
The only time expensive clothing is spoken against within Scripture is on the occasion in which Paul wrote to Timothy informing him that it is immodest to wear such clothing as this to make yourself into a spectacle (cf. 1 Timothy 2:9). By the same token, however, Paul, in the same verse, equally condemns the braiding of hair, if it, too, draws undue attention to the one so coiffed. (Commentators have pointed out that it was the practice of women at this time to braid coins or other such baubles into their hair as a sign of status. Therefore, I am willing to admit that it may not be a simple matter of ornate hair arrangement.)
I cannot stress enough that it is not clothing or accessories that is condemned. It is the preferential treatment that one may be tempted to show towards another so attired, and the practice of using such goods to make others fawn over you. (In case you are unfamiliar with the idiom, “fawn over,” it means, basically, that you praise someone hoping that they will do something for you. It is true that some like to hold out the possibility of doing favors for others so that they may hold any actual favors performed against them later, when they are wishing for a quid pro quo.)
Would it be beneficial for church leadership to propose a dress code to prevent this? I’ve heard of de facto dress codes existing before. My grandfather, Harold Mitchell, was a cotton farmer in the Mississippi delta. A church he attended, while he was a young man, refused to allow men to participate in the services of the church if they were not wearing a tie. Grandfather wore his best to the church, as was the custom to which we have already alluded. However, because he was a young farmer, having no need to wear a tie in his everyday life, my grandfather did not own one. (Poor farmers don’t normally attend black tie events, after all.)
One could understand such prejudice against a farmer if, because of his laziness or contentiousness, he came to the services of the church, smelling of fertilizer, and covered by the soil of the earth. Yet, for simply lacking a fashion accessory, why discriminate against him? Lacking a tie should not have been a disqualification for an eager man willing to serve the Lord.
Familial feelings about this matter aside, such a dress code is ridiculous. It causes people to judge others by appearance, and God reminded Samuel that He doesn’t look at appearances, but one’s heart (cf. 1 Samuel 16:7). Truly, God has no need for Ralph Lauren or Tommy Hilfiger brands. He will accept you even in Round House overalls and a white Arrow shirt.
Why, then, should we even concern ourselves with the type of clothing at all, and insist that people wear their best?
I wouldn’t counsel you to wear your best for my personal benefit. When I assemble with the church, it is to worship and study, not view a fashion show. However, I am going to wear my best because I want to demonstrate reverence to God. I am coming into His presence with the rest of the church, which we have previously seen comprises His household.
Let us make this more carnal. Suppose, you are invited to a dinner hosted by the President of the United States. If that were not amazing enough, this dinner will be attended by the heads of State of other countries, including the Queen of England. How would you dress? Why would you dress that way? It is true that you would not want to embarrass yourself. However, you would likewise want to show your respect to the authority and station of him who had invited you, as well as to those whose company you would keep. If we can show such honor to men, why is it difficult to show it to God.
At this point, it may surprise you to learn that I used to be more sympathetic to the casual dress crowd. What changed me? What psychological process goes into dressing better for the services of the church? These questions, as well as obvious exceptions to the principle, will be delved into next time.
WORKS CITED
1 “Sunday best.” McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs. 2002. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 1 Apr. 2015 http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Sunday+best