Comments on: My Experiments with Plainness

By: Marie Berg

Marie Berg — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 19:39:05 +0000

Most informative and interesting. I have been plain dressing all my life because I cannot abide the vapid spiritual bankruptness of the fashion world, even at it’s simplest, because it is still fashion. It is the plain dressing of the thrift store, mostly jumper dresses mended and unstained,very clean and ironed, which leaves me completely free tolet my light shine and to address myself to the issues which need attention in these times.

By: Martin Kelley

Martin Kelley — Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:43:12 +0000

Hi Dana,
Steven Scott’s “Why Do They Dress That Way?”:http://www.anabaptistbooks.com/services/amazon/whydress.html is a great, very readable introduction that hightlights a lot of different plain dressing groups. If I remember rightly, I think he actually was raised Baptist; he’s some variation of Brethren now, but because he grew up more “mainstream,” he’s good at explaining things.
Your Friend, Martin

By: Dana Renner

Dana Renner — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 21:39:02 +0000

I find this very interesting I am not Quaker, but belong to a Baptist Church we are not into plain dress as a group, but I am wondering if there are any books on the subject. How would I get information on Quaker Plain Dress?

By: Isabel Penraeth

Isabel Penraeth — Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:18:38 +0000

I am addressing my comments to Pam.
I am a plain-dressing Quaker living in Colorado. I have been plain dressing for four years, give or take.
Any spiritual observance can become an empty form. And any everyday act can be blessed by Grace. That is God’s action in this world, not man’s. I have found it is not for me to judge anything as intrinsically graced or lacking in grace. What I have found is that I am to seek God’s will for me today, this day, and to live in the Life this moment and then the next moment and the next moment after that as best I can.
So, for me, this living in the Life has come to mean plain dress. I was forced to abandon plain dress for a month or so some time back. God made it clear I was to set it aside, and the struggle I had in complying proved to me the pride that had become attached to it. I can remember quite clearly thinking what a fool I would look, having already had to play the fool by adopting plain dress, now even more of a fool to set it aside. But I managed to humble my heart and submitted. When I was given this witness back, I accepted its return with joy and have made sure to keep the eyes of my heart on God and not what others think of me. For good or for ill.
My plain dress witness isn’t about being divided from others or united with others. It is about doing what I am supposed to do in this life.
God’s will. Not my will.
Isabel

By: Pam

Pam — Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:30:33 +0000

I have been intrigued by plain dress for a while now. I find, though, that I haven't been 'led' to change my mode of dress (nudges toward simplifying, but nothing really about "plain") though I remain intrigued. hmmm. I have wanted to post about it on my own blog (which is new, and I am not confident in it as yet) but it's not really "my thing" so I haven't really known what to say. I'm not sure I understand how plain dress is meant to "shake things up" among quakers. If it comes from the same place that the desire for tie dye in anti-tie-dye environment does, that's VERY different from its original intent (it was a unifying, rather than a divise choice, wasn't it?) I have a concern about it becoming an "outward form" - I find myself realizing that the way I am, drawn to do it would have me looking quite unlike a 'plain dressing quaker' and probably quite unlike mainstream society as well. The appeal or lack of appeal of these for me if based entirely in desires for conformity and rebellion, and I am yearning for some understanding of where God (or truth) fits into all this, if not for me, then for other people.

By: Phillip

Phillip — Sat, 10 Sep 2005 03:06:17 +0000

For me thee can’t recreate the past, the past is that the past though it is nice to plain dress it can be hard to find the clothes and can cost a lot. So for me is to ware black pants , white or dark blue shirts with out a collar and black hat and if cold black coat as plain as I can get and black pull overs.With a hat a Quaker, plane type of hat thay cost a lot so I am looking at buying a black hat plain as I can find, but it does not have old Quaker look . With dressing plain the money comes in to it like the hat Quaker type cost $140 and the other type cost $45 and much harder wareing so which would you buy? So the way I dress plain is what I can aford. The other way would end up costing thousands. What do thee think .Would like to hear what thee thinks .Please email me horsecounty@yahoo.com.au

By: beatnik

beatnik — Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:39:02 +0000

RE: “release us from vanity”
The Quaker testimony in attire speaks stongly to the issue of vanity and pride. One can wear jeans and a t‑shirt or one can wear TOMMY jeans and an ABERCROMBIE-FITCH t‑shirt [with appropriate logo]. So much of worldly attire is an exercise in vanity, pride, status, and social/economic class.

By: Amanda

Amanda — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:33:58 +0000

Thank you so much for that message and for the link. I am still so young in this journey and appreciate all the help I can get.
I think the adivce in both is good enough to be applied generally to most instances in my life.
A specific example (and the one most in my mind these days) is — to give up alcohol altogether. This is a big one for me for many reasons, not the least of which is — it is the main social context for perhaps 3/4 of my human interaction. I feel in many ways that this is a discipline I should bow to, and (not coincidentally) mostly because I think, if I took away that 3/4 of human interaction in bars and at parties, what other, perhaps more spiritually beneficial interaction might replace it? It’s scary because I would profoundly alienate many of my friends — if we go out and I drink diet coke, they are personally affronted. I don’t in the least feel *ready* to take on that challenge, whether I should or not. So canI then just pat myself on the head and tell myself “Well, then, you don’t have to take on this question, because you just don’t feel *ready*. Well, to me that feels soft and sloppy. However, the other extreme — just strong arming myself into it because “I ought” is not only often ineffective, but also condusive to pride. (“Hey, check out this wil-power I’ve got! Ha!”)
I don’t mean to make a mountain out of a molehill, but applying those tests for discernment even to something as seemingly frivolous as this immediately brings a certain amount of calm to the whole situation. I am a bit of a drama queen and can angst eternally over some questions. One of the things I love so much about Quaker philosophy and theology as I have encountered it so far is how grounded it is in common, experienceable sense.
Thanks,
Amanda