Positive Explanation

Rev. VanderWal is especially to be commended for his fine exposition of Matthew 5:43-48, in the November 1, 2002 issue of the Standard Bearer.

The history of the Protestant Reformed Churches has necessitated a refutation of the teaching of common grace. God be thanked for that refutation so faithfully maintained all these years!

Nevertheless, because of the necessity to refute common grace, I believe that discussion among Protestant Reformed people about this passage has almost always been limited to what the Scripture here does not teach, namely, common grace. Hence, it has seemed to me for a long time that positive exegesis of these verses was overdue.

It was refreshing and edifying to read an article that clearly teaches what the Lord requires of us in this passage of His infallible Word. May we have grace to believe it and obey it!

John Hilton

Waterville, ME

Dress at Church

It is disappointing that Rev. Kleyn would weaken his description of Reformed worship by imposing his personal convictions concerning proper church attire. (“Worship Acceptable in God’s Sight,” Standard Bearer, January 15, 2003.) By insinuating that women and girls who wear something other than dresses to church do not have an acceptable attitude of worship, Rev. Kleyn condemns the common practice of vast numbers of humble, godly daughters ofZion, including many in my own congregation. This kind of broad-brush accusation about a debatable matter can be hurtful and breed dissension in the body of Christ.

Surely, Paul’s instruction inRomans 14 applies here. If in a local congregation, the brothers and sisters are strong, and so the women may exercise their freedom to forego dresses for other items of clothing, they do this unto the Lord. If in another congregation the brother and sisters do not have this strength, and so the women wear only dresses, they also do this unto the Lord. Neither the strong nor the weak believers should condemn the others for their practice. But more importantly, we should all echo Paul and say that the kingdom of God (and the acceptable worship of God) is not a matter of dresses or slacks, but of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.

Stephen VanderWoude

Crown Point, IN

Response:

In worship, as was stated in the article to which the above letter refers, we consciously enter the presence of our holy God. This requires proper attitudes of heart, such as godly fear, reverence, humility, etc. Our attitude of heart is certainly the most important thing when we worship God.

But one’s attitude is reflected in his or her appearance. A casual appearance indicates a casual attitude. When one does not wear his or her “Sunday best” to church (please note that the mention of dresses in the article was just one example of “Sunday best” among various others), it appears that he or she does not have a true understanding of the majesty and glory of God. It is true that that is not necessarily the case. We cannot see and judge another’s heart. But the proper attitude of heart ought to be reflected in our appearance.

I disagree with the idea that a congregation is “stronger” if women in it forego dresses, and that another congregation is “weaker” if the women in it wear only dresses. In this connection, I would ask the following (directing these questions both to men and women): Why do we desire to wear more casual clothing? Is it because we are mostly interested in being comfortable, fashionable, or progressive? Or is it because we think such clothing is the most appropriate to wear when we enter the presence of our great and holy God, before whom even the angels hide their faces (Isaiah 6)?

— (Rev.) Daniel Kleyn