صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

ON FEMALE ATTIRE.

I BELIEVE that there is little real difference of opinion between 'Iota' and myself, but I am induced by the ambiguous terms of her letter, inserted in the Christian Lady's Magazine for January, 1836, to offer a few remarks upon the subject of which it treats. Her expression may be understood, either as reprobating costly array altogether, or as condemning only that excess of apparel which wherever it appears, indicates a vain and worldly mind. There is abundant scripture evidence to prove that woman's excessive love of finery is highly offensive to God. Isaiah iii. 16-23, &c.

Observation also furnishes daily examples of the evils which result from it. Under a belief however, that Iota intended to convey the former sense, and that many readers may attach that meaning to her words, I would submit the following considerations to their notice.

Outward ornaments, according to every one's rank in life, are not prohibited by the scriptures: the lawfulness of their use may be deduced not only from detached texts, but from the general tenor of God's word.

66

Holy women of old" who regarded the graces of the Divine Spirit as their most precious ornaments, wore, nevertheless, such attire as suited their stations in society.

Abraham, “the friend of God," and Isaac his son sent by the hands of the pious Eliezer of Damascus, a present of personal ornaments to Rebekah; the bride of Solomon, when Solomon was young and godly, was thus adorned; and the meek and devout Esther was (6 arrayed in royal apparel.”

Jewels appear to have been generally used by the Israelites sometimes during the wandering in the wilderness they were commanded to put off their ornaments in token of penitent humiliation; sometimes they afforded an occasion of testifying the peoples' love to their God, when "They came, both men and women, as many as were willing-hearted, and brought bracelets, and ear-rings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold; and every man that offered, offered an offering of gold unto the Lord." Yet too often they proved incentives to pride, licentiousness, and idolatry. It is said of the virtuous woman, that "Her household are clothed with scarlet," (or with double garments), that "she maketh herself coverings of tapestry," that "her clothing is silk and purple." From scriptural allusions such as Prov. i. 9; xxv. 12; Isa. Ixi. 10, and yet more strongly from the personifications of the Church as the Saviour's Spouse, in which her inward graces are described under the figure of outward ornaments, the lawfulness of attire corresponding with personal dignity may be inferred. Ezek. xvi. 10-13; Psalm xlv. 13. It is right that all classes in the community should dress, decently and moderately, according to the usages of their times, country, and station in life. Where the inward man of the heart is adorned

1 Ezekiel xxxv. 22.

with that “meek and quiet spirit which is in the sight of God of great price," there will be a tenderness of conscience, which will shrink from every approach to excess in apparel or outward decorations. It is a sad token of vanity of mind, a rude breach of social order, when each grade of society treads upon the heels of the one next above it in emulative finery. The democratic spirit of the present age has doubtless considerable influence in directing female vanity in the lower ranks of life to acquire or imitate the attire of the higher classes. The appropriateness of a certain style of dress to a certain station being forgotten, the woman who wants Christian discretion is easily led away by natural propensity or ill example. Modern manufacturers foster this evil in the poor people by imitating the pattern of costly clothing in cheap materials, and by mimicing gold and gems with tinsel and glass. Yet a peasant thus decorated is not a greater anomaly than a peeress in linsey wolsey. Christian gentlewomen should constantly inculcate upon their servants and dependants the infinite superiority of the Pearl of great price to all that worldly minds value the most, the duty of using proper and modest attire, and the privilege which is afforded even to those who eat bread in the sweat of their brow, of giving food to the hungry, and spiritual instruction to those who are perishing for lack of knowledge, by means of the spare pence saved by the exercise of a little self-denial. And should not the middle classes, should not Christian gentlewomen press upon their own consciences the force of these obligations, the greatness of this privilege, by the consideration of the influence of their personal example?

To a sincere and humble Christian very little of either dispute or discourse concerning this will be needful. A tender conscience, and a heart purified from vanity and weaned from the world, will be sure to regulate this, and all other things of this nature after the safest manner, and will be wary of lightness and fantastic garb in apparel, which is the very bush or sign hanging out, that tells that a vain mind lodges within; and also of excessive costliness, which both shews and feeds the pride of the heart, and defrauds, if not others of their dues, yet the poor of thy charity, which in God's sight is a debt too. As conscientious Christians will not exceed in the thing itself, so in as far as they use lawful ornament and comeliness, they will do it without bestowing much either of diligence or delight on the business.' Vide Archbishop Leighton, on 1 Peter iii. 3, 4. The Rev. Thomas Scott has written some excellent notes on the same text, and on 1 Tim. ii. 9, to which I would direct your reader's attention.

[ocr errors]

I will now take the liberty of offering a few remarks upon Dr. Judson's letter. There are conjunctures in which Christians are called upon to sacrifice lawful and useful things, rather than make a "weak brother to offend." On such occasions they will readily cashier either "meats" or trinkets.

[ocr errors]

Admitting, as I do, the unsuitableness of expensive clothes and ornaments to a missionary's wife, I cannot allow that to be a reason why all the female Christians in the United States should form Plain Dress Societies.' Such societies might possibly produce beneficial, civil, and moral results. That original sin, and personal vanity, that peculiar developement of it which adheres so universally and

so tenaciously to woman's mind, as to prompt the use of fish bones and reddle when better decorations fail, should be found among the Tharens, ought not to have been matter of surprise to one so long accustomed to study human depravity and its remedy. He would have done right in reproving their excessive vanity and its outward tokens. Suspecting his female convert of idolatrous fondness for her necklace, he would have done right in telling her that Christ must be supremely loved, and in advising her to cast it aside as a temptation and a snare. beautiful simple testimony, 'I love Christ more than this,' would still have been an attestation of her sincerity, and the accompanying act an example to her country women. But by his injudicious use of 1 Tim. ii. 9, as an absolute prohibition of all ornaments in dress, Dr. Judson himself set the stumbling-block over which his ignorant converts fell. I know that misapprehension and mistake are incident to man's limited capacity and darkened understanding.

Her

I know that the female mind is peculiarly prone to errors in judgment; and had I not the general opinion and practice of the church of God to support my individual sentiments upon the subject, I should not venture to offer them.

LOUISE.

[We do not wish to interfere with the free discussion, among our correspondents, of this subject, so truly important to Christian ladies; but it is very observable that the Old Testament is perpetually and exclusively quoted for sanctions which certainly would in vain be sought for in the New. Outward splendour formed a striking feature in the Jewish

« السابقةمتابعة »