<< June 2005 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30

Welcome to my 2nd blog - or RosesandTea x 2. This blog is for more serious, controversial or specifically Christian entries. I hope you will enjoy your time here.

If you are interested in my craft work (especially crochet) or more of my everyday life (I don't blog about everything, but things that may be of interest, as I am an American living in England), please visit my main blog, Rosesandtea1962 .

Previous posts of note: Reviews of chapters of Created to Be His Help Meet: Chapters 5 & 6 Chapters 7 & 8 Chapters 9 & 10 Chapters 11 & 12 Chapters 13 & 14 Chapters 15 &16 Chapters 17 &18 Chapter 19 Chapter 20 (More of my thoughts which springboard from Chapter 20) Chapter 21 Chapters 22 & 23

If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:






Jun 7, 2005
chapter 19

Created to Be His Help Meet, by Debi Pearl.  This post is part of a series of reviews of this book which focusses on the woman's role in marriage.  Both of the Pearls call things as they see them and although never coarse, their writing can be uncomfortably direct for some readers.  I have not agreed with every little thing in this book but find it extremely Biblical when it gets down to the meat and bones of what a married Christian woman's role and task should be.  I recommend this book to those who are willing to explore - with the Bible alongside to test everything - both the Biblical mandates for women and the current errors of modern thinking and practice.  My reviews do go beyond simply reviewing the chapters though, as I use them as a springboard to present my own thoughts or direct readers to other writers.

I hope to do chapter 20 later today, or perhaps tomorrow.  I see that Sal of Stand Up and Walk has already got her post up.   Well done Sal. 
Chapter 19 features the directive "to be chaste" from Titus 2:4-5. 

Mrs Pearl spends most of the chapter speaking about the clothing that women professing Godliness should wear.  Nowhere does she lay down rules about color, type of dress (i.e. cape dresses, jumpers etc) or other things that some denominations find important.  Instead she shares with us letters from men that she and her husband have received, and a composite story picture taken from their years of counseling, that we may see the heart of men struggling to remain pure in thought as they are constantly confronted with the immodest dress of so many who call themselves Christian women.  I'll leave those letters and stories and Mrs Pearl's commentaries to those who read the book. 

She deals with the question of pants (trousers) by reminding us of how many times in the Old Testament the word skirt is used in talking about men's garments, and that in many cultures a type of skirt is still used instead of trousers as traditional male dress.  The issue is, she asserts, is one of forbidding cross-dressing. 

Now in my opinion we don't have a lot of trouble in the church with cross-dressing in the sense of deliberately dressing in the opposite gender's clothing in order to confuse or sexually arouse  but we do have too many ladies who are almost cross-dressing as they leave feminine clothing behind as they seek for comfort (as they assume feminine clothing to be uncomfortable or are unwilling to wear the types of feminine clothing that are comfortable), or for fashion, or frankly because they just don't like clothing that marks them as women.   Why this last reason, I wonder?  And it's not just about clothing, but hairstyles as well.  Among some women there is a noticeable rejection of femininity in how they dress - down to frequently wearing very masculine fabric in trouser suits.  No one needs to wear flowery fabric, but it is definitely possible to wear "power clothing" if one must, that is womanly - and modest - in nature instead of taking on more masculine attire, even if one is having to deal with corporate culture (and more to come on that in the next section, chapter 20) .  
By far the greatest problem in the modern church, and this is why Mrs Pearl devotes so much time to it in her chapter, is the lack of modesty in the women's dress.  The letters and stories spell out many of the things that are causing Christian men in their acquaintance to stumble.   And for the men I know who have talked honestly about it, the same things cause them trouble too.   

The bottom line is that what we women wear influences the men around us.   So many women try to deny this by saying men really aren't affected more visually than are women - just a little research at the library or on the internet (carefully!) will confirm that it is.  Honest, forthright talk  from men I have known confirm it too - men in general are visually stimulated in a way that women in general aren't.   So we women need to be careful with what we wear.

Now there are men that will find all sorts of things titillating, but there are some fairly typical things that we can point to.  Credenda Agenda has some very good articles and the Wilsons do a much better job of discussing the subject than I can.  I recommend this article entitled Modest Daughters
and this one called Careless Women.  There are other excellent articles out there to be read.

It always astounds me when women approach this issue with the comment "but that's HIS problem if he has a problem with it, not mine".  Well first we are commanded to dress modestly.  But even if we weren't, wouldn't Christian love dictate that we behave in a manner that does not tempt our brothers?

Oh I have so much more to say.  David made some comments this weekend that I'd like to share with you.   So I guess I will need to make another post tomorrow or the day after, since tomorrow I will likely be in Oxford meeting my former associate pastor and his wife and son as they visit Oxford.

So, please stay tuned for some more discussion on modesty, and for my review (or sharing of my own thoughts after bouncing off the springboard) of Debi Pearl's Created to Be His Help Meet, chapter 20.  Gotta get some new potatoes from Jersey into the pot, to serve with the crockpot meatloaf that has been cooking all afternoon.  Hubby's home!

Posted at 10:38 am by Rosesandtea

Posted by NameRuth S @ 06/10/2005 01:25 PM PDT
Ahh, yes, I do remember most of the women in the leadership in our church at one time having very short hair. Neal used to complain that it was all too masculine:)
Posted by Rosesandtea @ 06/10/2005 07:15 AM PDT
Well, yes, but pink candy is not really a "power statement" type or "corporate color! I'm sure you looked wonderful though. :)

Corporate colors are usually dark, that's true. But does a lady really need the pinstripes? And if she really does, does she need to wear them outside of that environment?

This is just my opinion, I know that. I just am trying to address the masculine nature of some types of clothing. Some women just seem to purposely eschew any sort of feminity.
Posted by NameRuth S @ 06/10/2005 02:53 AM PDT
Perhaps. I have to say though that I went to the Waitrose AGM in my pink cardy and flowery skirt. I *really* stuck out like a sore thumb! EVERYONE was dressed in black/dark blue. ROFL. :-)
Posted by Rosesandtea @ 06/09/2005 12:57 PM PDT
Hi!
I guess I was thinking of pin-striped trouser suits. I don't have a problem with trouser suits - but why not some more feminine colors, fabric and style.

You should see my mom. She can wear outfits that are definitely "powerful" but there is no question about her being a woman and womanly. I contrast that thought with suits that are designed for women, but just look like clones of menswear. Does that clarify?
Or other types, can't think of any right now. :)
Posted by NameRuth S @ 06/09/2005 12:38 PM PDT
Hi Karen,
I think I would have to agree with you on this one :-) Neal is very definitely turned on by the visual much more than I am. And I do think that's true of most men. Therefore we do have an obligation to 'not be a stumbling block'.

We are living in a society that is increasingly being de-sensitised to morals and sexuality. A lot of what is acceptable today was considered completely outrageous 50 years ago :-(

I would query the 'masculine fabric' though. What is that exactly?:-)
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry