Chapter 17—Dress Discussed in the Churches

The ministers, as they visited the churches, regarded the newly adopted healthful dress as an important feature of the health reform, and gave it a place in their discourses. As they reported their work, they frequently mentioned the favorable reception of this portion of their message. Hence, Elder D. M. Canright, in commenting on a special meeting in Portland, Maine, wrote:SDARD 12.3

“The modesty of the short dress is not the smallest thing to be considered.... With the reform dress on, all exposure is entirely avoided. After seeing it worn, I think it is the most modest dress I have ever seen, and I am not alone in this opinion.

“All these things were freely talked over here. Nearly all decided in favor of it, and other had but very slight objections to it.... Most of the sisters resolved as soon as consistent to adopt it. My wife, who wears one, has assisted them in preparing their dresses. They have adopted the health reform quite thoroughly.”—The Review and Herald, June 18, 1867.

For about four years or more considerable was written in our denominational publications about the advantages accruing from the consistent use of the health dress. Many willingly and gladly adapted their garb to conform with the principles of health as well as of modesty, which prompted the designing of the “health reform dress.” But its acceptance was not general, and there was opposition and criticism. Some, forgetting “that none were to be compelled to wear the reform dress,” sought to control others’ conscience by their own. “With extremists, this reform seemed to constitute the sum and substance of their religion. It was the theme of conversation and the burden of their hearts.... Instead of prizing the dress for its real advantages, they seemed to be proud of its singularity.” So wrote Mrs. White in 1881 in answer to the question, “why has this dress been laid aside?” And she continued:SDARD 12.4

“To those who put it on reluctantly, from a sense of duty, it became a grievous yoke. Still others, who were apparently the most zealous reformers, manifested a sad lack of order and neatness in their dress.”—Testimonies for the Church 4:636.

Consequently, “because that which was given as a blessing was turned into a curse, the burden of advocating the reform dress was removed.”—Ms 167, 1897. ^{1Endnotes
Note: Some may ask, “Does the Lord ever lower His standards to suit people’s tastes or ways?” Elder G. I. Butler, in speaking of the reform dress, answers this question as follows:
“The Lord does accommodate His requirements to people’s ways, even when He would prefer they should do some other and better way. Though He does not always do it, or do it concerning some of His requirements, or generally do it, yet in matters of lesser moment, and of expediency where He has recommended a better way, He sometimes permits them to follow their own choice, though it always proves less beneficial to them than if they had done as He directed. We propose to prove this too plainly for denial.”
Several instances are cited, such as:
God’s provision for flesh food for Israel when they murmured because of the manna (see Numbers 11), and His giving Israel a king when they requested it, although such was not God’s original design (see 1 Samuel 8).]}SDARD 12.5