Mrs. White Enters the Dress Discussion

It is in this setting that Mrs. White began to write on the subject of dress reform. We wish to give, in chronological order, her principal statements on the matter. We quote, first, from her statement in 1863:EGWC 142.2

“No occasion should be given to unbelievers to reproach our faith. We are considered odd and singular, and should not take a course to lead unbelievers to think us more so than our faith requires us to be.EGWC 142.3

“Some who believe the truth may think that it would be more healthful for the sisters to adopt the American costume, yet if that mode of dress would cripple our influence among unbelievers so that we could not so readily gain access to them, we should by no means adopt it, though we suffered much in consequence. But some are deceived in thinking there is so much benefit to be received from this costume. While it may prove a benefit to some, it is an injury to others.EGWC 142.4

“I saw that God’s order has been reversed, and his special directions disregarded, by those who adopt the American costume. I was referred to Deuteronomy 22:5: ‘The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.’EGWC 142.5

“God would not have his people adopt the so-called reform dress. It is immodest apparel, wholly unfitted for the modest, humble followers of Christ.”—Testimonies for the Church 1:420, 421. (Testimony No. 10.)EGWC 142.6

Mrs. White’s comment on the American costume is strong presumptive proof that it was distinctly mannish. But to speak of a costume with a dress falling to within nine inches of the floor, as that “which pertaineth unto a man,” would hardly make sense.EGWC 142.7

Notice that Mrs. White describes “the American costume,“ as “the so-called reform dress.” It was this kind of “reform dress” that she said “God would not have his people adopt.”EGWC 142.8

If Canright, whose charges are quoted in this chapter, had only remembered what he wrote in the 1860’s, he would have answered most of the charges that he brought against Mrs. White in 1919 in the matter of dress reform. Reporting through the church paper in 1867 on his visit to the church in Portland, Maine, and of his endeavor during that visit to promote a true reform dress, he declares:EGWC 143.1

“The extreme short dress had been worn here before by Sabbath-keepers; hence some prejudice existed against everything that bears the name of short dress. But the reform dress and the American costume are two very different things. All could readily see this.”—D. M. CANRIGHT in The Review and Herald, June 18, 1867, p. 9.EGWC 143.2

No wonder we find Mrs. White warning the sisters against the “so-called reform dress.” Note that the critic, writing in 1867, states explicitly that the reform dress being promoted among Seventh-day Adventists was not the American costume.EGWC 143.3

Turning again to what Mrs. White is saying in that Testimony No. 10, written in 1863, we find her adding this:EGWC 143.4

“We do not think it in accordance with our faith to dress in the American costume, to wear hoops, or to go to an extreme in wearing long dresses which sweep the sidewalks and streets. If women would wear their dresses so as to clear the filth of the streets an inch or two, their dresses would be modest, and they could be kept clean much more easily, and would wear longer. Such a dress would be in accordance with our faith.”—Testimonies for the Church 1:424.EGWC 143.5

“There is a medium position in these things. Oh that we all might wisely find that position and keep it.”—Testimonies for the Church 1:425.EGWC 143.6