Seventh-day Adventists advocate neatness and simplicity in dress in harmony with good taste, and the avoidance of fashions that are detrimental to health. These principles have been summarized by Ellen White as follows: “I beg of our people to walk carefully and circumspectly before God. Follow the customs in dress so far as they conform to health principles. Let our sisters dress plainly, as many do, having the dress of good, durable material, appropriate for this age, and let not the dress question fill the mind. Our sisters should dress with simplicity. They should clothe themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety. Give to the world a living illustration of the inward adorning of the grace of God” (CG 414).
Since early in their history Seventh-day Adventists have spoken out against improper dress. The editor of the Review and Herald inserted in the July 10, 1855, issue John Wesley’s pronouncement on the evils of improper dress. At a conference held at Battle Creek, Michigan, May 27, 1856, Mrs. White delivered a message deploring the “conformity of some professed Sabbathkeepers to the world.” These, she said, “have a disposition to dress and act as much like the world as possible, and yet go to heaven” ( 1T 131).
In 1858 John Byington, later elected first president of the General Conference, wrote: “Are sleeves which are largest at the little end, and round tires like the moon, (or hoops,) [ Isa. iii, 18 ] articles of dress that are modest apparel? 1 Tim. ii, 9 . If so, let them be recommended to the church generally.”
These positions were taken at a time when the styles of women’s dresses were unhealthful and extravagant. It was the day of the hoop skirt, trailing skirts, bustles, and whalebone corsets. Many besides SDA s were protesting against the fashions of the day. For example, M. Angeline Merritt, writing in 1852, declared in Dress Reform Practically and Physiologically Considered: “Every lady who has any experience in domestic life must understand the abundant inconvenience attendant upon a style of dress, the dimensions of whose superfluities may be adduced in yards and pounds. The utility of skirts for sweeping floors and sidewalks, and for mopping stairways and passages, has become a proverb” ( p. 79).
In 1862 Ellen Beard Harman, another dress reformer, wrote in Dress Reform: Its Physiology and Moral Bearings: “Viewed in any aspect, the common style of dress for women is one of the greatest barbarisms ever known, especially considering the age in which we live. Only think of the women of the nineteenth century wearing apparel incompatible with the laws of their being—with health, comfort, and convenience, protection and neatness, disproportioned to the body, awkward and burdensome!” ( p. 26).
In an endeavor to correct these evils, some reformers went to extremes in the invention of dress styles so radically different as to be offensive to good taste. One of the more popular such fashions became known as the “American costume,” invented by a Ms. Austin, which has been described as being composed of mannish trousers covering the legs with a dress coming to the knees, and in some cases coming to midway between the hips and the knees. It was against both the extravagances of the prevailing dress styles and the fanatical extremes of some of the dress reformers that Ellen G. White wrote: “No occasion should be given to unbelievers to reproach our faith. We are considered odd and singular, and should not take a course to lead unbelievers to think us more so than our faith requires us to be.
“Some who believe the truth may think that it would be more healthful for the sisters to adopt the American costume, yet if that mode of dress would cripple our influence among unbelievers so that we could not so readily gain access to them, we should by no means adopt it, though we suffered much in consequence. But some are deceived in thinking there is so much benefit to be received from this costume. While it may prove a benefit to some, it is an injury to others.
“I saw that God’s order has been reversed, and His special directions disregarded, by those who adopt the American costume. I was referred to Deuteronomy 22:5 : ‘The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.’
“God would not have His people adopt the so-called reform dress. It is immodest apparel, wholly unfitted for the modest, humble followers of Christ” ( 1T 420, 421).
Seventh-day Adventists have considered proper Christian dress and ornamentation so important that a statement to that effect was included in the fundamental beliefs published in 1889: “XV. That the Scriptures insist upon plainness and modesty of attire as a prominent mark of discipleship in those who profess to be the followers of Him who was ‘meek and lowly in heart,’ that the wearing of gold, pearls, and costly array, or anything designed merely to adorn the person and foster the pride of the natural heart, is to be discarded, according to such scriptures as 1 Tim. 2:9 , 10 ; 1 Peter 3:3 , 4 ” ( SDA Yearbook [1889], p. 150).
In the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs prepared by the Battle Creek church in 1894 the same ideas were expressed in a slightly modified form: “That the Scriptures insist upon plain and modest attire as a mark of discipleship in those who profess to be followers of Christ, and therefore that the wearing of gold, pearls, and costly array, merely for adornment, is contrary to Scriptures, and should not be indulged in by Christians.”
The Statement of Fundamental Beliefs of 1931, although using a more general language, still expressed clearly the church’s positions on this subject: “17. That the followers of Christ should be a godly people, not adopting the unholy maxims nor conforming to the unrighteous ways of the world, not loving its sinful pleasures nor countenancing its follies. That the believer should recognize his body as the temple of the Holy Spirit, and that therefore he should clothe that body in neat, modest, dignified apparel” ( SDA Yearbook [1931], p. 379).
A year later the Church Manual (1932) dealt with the subject in a more explicit way. Among a list of principles of Seventh-day Adventism to be accepted by candidates for baptism the individual was to be asked: “17. In matters of dress will you follow the Bible rule of plainness and simplicity, abstaining from the wearing of gold as ornaments and costly array, observing the principles of modesty and Christian dignity?” ( p. 78).
The revised Statement of Fundamental Beliefs approved during the 1980 General Conference session in Dallas, Texas, include, under the section entitled Christian Behaviour, this sentence: “While recognizing cultural differences, our dress is to be simple, modest, and neat, befitting those whose true beauty does not consist of outward adornment but in the imperishable ornament of a gentle and quiet spirit” ( SDA Yearbook [1981], p. 7).
The statement was interested, like the previous one, in general principles. The more specific details were published in the Church Manual (1990). Relative to dress, it states: “Christians should avoid gaudy display and ‘profuse ornamentation.’ Clothing should be, when possible, ‘of good quality, of becoming colors, and suited for service. It should be chosen for durability rather than display.’ Our attire should be characterized by ‘beauty,’ ‘modest grace,’ and ‘appropriateness of natural simplicity( Messages to Young People , pp. 351, 352). That it may not be conspicuous, it should follow the conservative and most sensible styles of the time.
“The adoption of fads and extreme fashions in men’s or women’s dress indicates a lack of attention to serious matters. Regardless of how sensibly people generally may dress, there are always extremes in style that transgress the laws of modesty, and thus have a direct bearing on the prevalence of immoral conditions. Many who blindly follow the styles are at least partly unconscious of these effects, but the results are no less disastrous. The people of God should always be found among the conservatives in dress, and will not let ‘the dress question fill the mind’ ( Evangelism , p. 273). They will not be the first to adopt the new styles of dress or the last to lay the old aside” ( p. 143).
On the matter of adornment, referring to jewelry and ornaments, the Church Manual continues with this summary: “‘To dress plainly, abstaining from display of jewelry and ornaments of every kind, is in keeping with our faith’ ( Testimonies , vol. 3, p. 366). It is clearly taught in the Scriptures that the wearing of jewelry is contrary to the will of God. ‘Not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array’ is the admonition of the apostle Paul ( 1 Tim. 2:9 ). The wearing of ornaments of jewelry is a bid for attention which is not in keeping with Christian self-forgetfulness. . . .
“Let us remember that it is not the ‘outward adorning’ which expresses true Christian character, but ‘the hidden man of the heart . . . a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price’ ( 1 Peter 3:3 , 4 ). The use of cosmetics not in keeping with good taste and the principles of Christian modesty should be avoided. Cleanliness and Christlike deportment should be observed in the care and grooming of the individual who is seeking at all times to please and rightly represent Christ our Lord” ( pp. 143, 144).
The wedding ring has never been condemned by the church in countries in which the ring was considered to be a criterion of virtue, a symbol of a commitment and not an ornament ( ibid. , pp. 143, 144). In these countries it is considered imperative for married persons to wear a wedding band. Until recently, this was not regarded to be the case in the North American Division. However, changes in the understanding of the function of the wedding ring among church members in this division led the leaders to vote, in 1986, “to recognize that, in harmony with the position stated in the Church Manual ( pp. 145, 146 [1986]), some church members in the North American Division as in other parts of the world feel that wearing a simple marriage band is a symbol of faithfulness to the marriage vow and to declare that such persons should be fully accepted in the fellowship and service of the church” ( Adventist Review 165:31, Aug. 4, 1988).
In recent times many simpler and more healthful dress styles have been promoted, and the question of dress has become less of an issue among Seventh-day Adventists, but SDA s still are encouraged to dress in a manner that befits Christians, particularly Christians who are aware that they are living in the time of the final day of atonement ( Ex. 33:5 , 6 ; Lev. 16:29 , 30 ).