My wife sent me a picture that popped up on Facebook yesterday of Ms. Cindy Schaap wearing jeans while taking a picture with her daughter and 2 other girls in high shorts.
I believe this will ring in the final death of the "No Pants on Women" standard. Despite everything, Ms. Cindy was and still is an influence on thousands of HAC attendees. If she can do it, then they certainly will believe that they can too!
In full disclosure, I used to preach the standard but quit about 10 years ago. The Biblical basis was always very sketchy. To me, it always came down to "Men should dress like men and women like women." The major distinction between men and women's clothing was pants and dresses. Thus, women must wear dresses to dress like women. It later dawned on me that there are men and women's socks, shirts, gloves, shoes, scarves, hats, ect... that look very similar, but are still distinct. Why couldn't there be pants for men and pants for women.
What does this mean for one of the primary foundations of IFB culture? I think most preachers have already abandoned the standard as a conviction and mostly speak of it as a "good idea" and not a standard. They will nod and wink to their faithful women who still adhere to the dresses only, but they will not preach it from the pulpit. Choir members, Sunday School Teachers, and others will still wear dresses to Church out of respect, but they will wear mostly pants the rest of the week. The remnant that still outlaws pants will become their own "camp" in IFB politics, but they will begin to lose their mainstream status. HAC and other Christian Colleges will still require dresses on their ladies just like they require ties on their men. Not because of sin, but because of identity and tradition.
The new "standard" will be about modesty. Pants are ok, but not too tight. Shorts are ok, but not too short. Sleeveless shirts are ok, but not if they are cut low or reveal too much.
"Oh the times...they are a changing"
I believe this will ring in the final death of the "No Pants on Women" standard. Despite everything, Ms. Cindy was and still is an influence on thousands of HAC attendees. If she can do it, then they certainly will believe that they can too!
In full disclosure, I used to preach the standard but quit about 10 years ago. The Biblical basis was always very sketchy. To me, it always came down to "Men should dress like men and women like women." The major distinction between men and women's clothing was pants and dresses. Thus, women must wear dresses to dress like women. It later dawned on me that there are men and women's socks, shirts, gloves, shoes, scarves, hats, ect... that look very similar, but are still distinct. Why couldn't there be pants for men and pants for women.
What does this mean for one of the primary foundations of IFB culture? I think most preachers have already abandoned the standard as a conviction and mostly speak of it as a "good idea" and not a standard. They will nod and wink to their faithful women who still adhere to the dresses only, but they will not preach it from the pulpit. Choir members, Sunday School Teachers, and others will still wear dresses to Church out of respect, but they will wear mostly pants the rest of the week. The remnant that still outlaws pants will become their own "camp" in IFB politics, but they will begin to lose their mainstream status. HAC and other Christian Colleges will still require dresses on their ladies just like they require ties on their men. Not because of sin, but because of identity and tradition.
The new "standard" will be about modesty. Pants are ok, but not too tight. Shorts are ok, but not too short. Sleeveless shirts are ok, but not if they are cut low or reveal too much.
"Oh the times...they are a changing"
