Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Scott Clark  Daniel,
May I query you on this?
Didn't the fellows who gave us the RPW wear them? They have historically been worn as a sign of special office. Not every Christian holds special office (minister, elder, deacon). The loss of the Genevan gown has not been due to principle (esp. not the RPW) but due to the relentless leveling tide of democratic populism.
I realize the dangers of enlarging the category "circumstance" unduly but we still do distinguish between elements and circumstances and aren't matters such as clothing a circumstance (along with place, time of day, posture etc)?
My concern is not to lose the RPW inadvertently by identifying circumstances with elements.
rsc Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Ritchie Distinct ecclesiastical garments are a breach of the regulative principle. 
If we are going to have special clothes for ministers, then why not for the elders and deacons as well? | |
Is it documented that the Divines wore gowns for the purpose of 'magnifying' the office? Or were they going along with the culture? Did they wear wigs for the same reason and does that mean we should also wear wigs?