Morning Dress for Church?

[Rabbit]

I raised the question because I've seen very many photos of American weddings over the past few years, the vast majority of which have clearly taken place during the daytime (I know evening weddings are also common in the US. I don't believe they happen at all across the UK, with the exception of Scotland), and also have the men in black tie...

Black tie during daytime weddings, that's an interesting new phenomenon. I would speculate that it might have to do with an easier accessibility of dinner clothes compared to morning dress, but who knows.
I didn't know about evening weddings in Scotland! Maybe that's where the Americans got it from?

Anyhow.... my point is that for the average man in the UK nowadays to wear a lounge suit to get married, and especially just to go and watch somebody else get married, is much more formal, relative to the day to day norm, than it would have been in the days when you wore a lounge suit to these things because that was simply your clothes, what you wore. For many folks back then it must have been the equivalent of wearing your nice, new jeans that you keep for going clubbing. Which is not a slight, merely an observation that perhaps increasing casualization isn't hitting every social occasion as hard as we tend to think sometimes. [huh]

I agree with your point about the perceived higher formality of today's weddings.
I would argue that it's the increasing casualization that causes today's weddings to be so often held in just lounge suits for both groom and guests. Being accustomed to the sight of people who either don't wear suits at all or, if they do, who look like they'd rather be wearing something else, a solid navy suit with white shirt and a wedding tie does look dressed up very prettily - and I would be the last to oppose that notion. In fact, someone who is attuned to current fashions might be inclined to think of any more formal clothing as being too stiff or too outdated for a such an occasion.

I understand what you mean. I suspect the difference is that, subconsciously, albeit that there is still more room for manoeuvre than with white tie, we still tend to think of black tie as a form of 'uniform', where the purpose is to blend in rather than stand out. Hence wearing white tie when everyone is in black tie would be a bit of a faux pas, whereas casual occasions tend to be "wear what you like", so if what you like is a lounge suit....

The psychology of clothing is fascinating, isn't it?

It certainly is! The relative freedom of black tie dress code does allow for a lot of variation in the degree of formality. To me as the wearer - rather than the other guests who usually don't know the difference - wearing a shawl collar DB instead of a peak lapel DB or a three-piece can make all the difference if I feel that I still blend in, in a vintage-biased sort of way, admittedly.

 

[Rabbit]

A lot of people do dress poorly now when required to wear 'formal' clothing. I suspect it's often as simple as that so many will never wear a collar and tie outside of a Sunday service / wedding / funeral that they're simply loathe to spend more on it than they absolutely have to. Of course, it could also be as simple as that's just their aesthetic preference, for whatever reason. Maybe they like that look, or maybe (like the current London Mayor), they like to give the impression, however calculated, that they don't much care about how they look. To be honest, I think we in a place like this often forget that many people 'out there' really don't care that much about how they look, and would be happy in the same shoes / shirt / trousers / jeans forever.

Indeed. I got the impression that today's men in their 20s and 30s, aside from other reasons, prefer not to wear suits because the few times they do wear them, it kind of traumatises them. What I mean is, consider what a man stepping into a clothing store, whether virtual or brick and mortar, will likely get when he buys his suit outfits. He'll get an ill-fitting suit that has very little to offer for any human anatomy, then a shirt with a stiffish fused collar, possibly in an ill-advised collar size and with a slim cut that restricts movement just as much as the suit itself does. A pair of shoes that make their feet hurt after a day's wear will finish off people's desire to wear such an outfit more often than they have to. I don't blame them.
I sometimes wonder if this is another "which came first, the egg or the hen" question - did it start with people feeling ill at ease in ill-fitting suits, or was it the hightened interest in casual and functional/sportsclothes that made the RTW industry ditch the anatomically fitting suit cuts for good? It could also be neither one nor the other.
The vintage option which is so obvious to us simply is too farfetched to become popular. As you said, you can't expect people to be that much interested in clothes to begin with.

 

[Nick D]

I sometimes wonder if this is another "which came first, the egg or the hen" question - did it start with people feeling ill at ease in ill-fitting suits, or was it the hightened interest in casual and functional/sportsclothes that made the RTW industry ditch the anatomically fitting suit cuts for good? It could also be neither one nor the other.

Individual fit just doesn't work with mass production. Even if two people were the same height and weight, custom suits will have subtle differences even with the same features. Modern clothes are cut-and-shut, one size fits as many as possible. Overhead drops, profits rise, style dies.

That's my take, anyway. Casualization perhaps just didn't give clothing manufacturers any incentive to change their business model.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Hmmm.... liking suits is about personal taste, doesn't have to be about one's age or even the quality of the suit - vintage Savile Row or otherwise. I'm 50 I have worn a suit maybe 4-5 times in my life. I have a lot of tweeds and cords and leather. I just don't need a suit in my work or life, which works out well since I personally don't like the look. Happy for others to celebrate them, just as long as it isn't mandatory.

 

[Benny Holiday]

I would question whether or not church was the appropriate place for petty passive aggressiveness, irrespective of what one is wearing. My $0.02.

+1 My thoughts on the matter precisely.

 

[Abraham]

I'm so glad someone else has noticed this. It drives me insane. I don't know about other denominations, but I'm also Catholic and I've noticed the exact same phenomenon at many churches here in Southern California and it boggles my mind. Add the to list an obscene number of baggy trousers hemmed four inches or so above the top of the shoe, jackets a milllion sizes too big, etc. As much as we on the Lounge may find lacking in the high fashion side of modern suits, these guys don't even come close to that (low) level of quality. It's like a bunch of Chaplin-esque tramps raided a thrift store full of mismatched low-quality menswear from the 1980's.

Two things about this strike me as really odd. I used to assume that such gentlemen were in reduced circumstances, but I've noticed the phenomenon is just as bad or worse at churches in more well-to-do areas. Also, this large contingent seems to be almost exclusively seniors doubtless old enough to remember a time when such a thing would never have been acceptable. What gives?

With quality menswear so hard to find and with so few role models to show how to do it correctly I can relate to why so many people revert to modern casual attire. If it's at least decent (button down shirt with nice-ish jeans) it's not great but at least better than what those guys are wearing, sad to say.

That said, if anyone wants to sport some properly done morning attire I say more power to you! Even if it's unorthodox in your setting, I think pulling it off is all about feeling confident in your own clothes.

Thanks for your comments. I'll add three things:

Those pushing the hardest for suits/coats/ties are often those dressed in old suit coats, short sleeved "dress shirts", odd-width ties, khakis, and white stocks.

The above often have plenty of $$$.

The often serve as ushers which results in plenty of double-takes from visitors.

 

[dudewuttheheck]

Interesting situation. My Catholic church is one of the larger ones in the county and almost nobody wears suits or anything very formal. I only need to wear a shirt with a collar as part of the band (drummer), but I always wear at least leather shoes/boots (no sneakers for me ever), but I usually wear jeans or chinos. There are girls showing up in softball outfits sometimes and essentially the attitude of the pastor and other priests is they are just happy that people are showing up. Honestly, I am just surprised this is even an issue as I rarely see too many people dressed too formally at most regular masses even at other churches.

I agree that if you want to pull off full morning suit, then I would admire you for it! At my college only last year, there was a guy who dressed in a full three piece suit and tie with a fedora every day. He stood out like a sore thumb... an incredibly well dressed sore thumb! I always wanted to go up and compliment him. He looked great every day, his suit fit him well, and he stood out in the best way possible. However, pressuring people into dressing more formally certainly doesn't add to your parishioner numbers.

In general, people dress pretty terribly at my church, my well fitting jeans, button up shirt, boots, etc make me one of the best dressed people in the church (I am not bragging, just pointing out how poorly dressed most people are at church and just in general.)

I think Rabbit makes excellent points about suits. I do know enough to at least tell tailors how to get my suits right, but at this point, suits are just a bit too formal for me (in my early 20s) and I love jeans. I still dress more formally than probably 98% of anyone within 10 years of my age (outside of a work environment) which I think is sad. Maybe when I get a bit older, I will be brave enough to wear more suits.

 

[Eddie Derbyshire]

I'm not a Church goer, although I have been to a few services over the years, and got married in a 12th Century Anglican Church last year. I initially wanted to wear full morning wear, but in the end opted for a stroller suit, and I'm glad I did. I think it was right for the situation, without being ostentatious. I was inspired by photographs of some of my great-uncles at their weddings in the fifties, and went with that. Also, it meant that, seeing as I was having the suit made for the occasion, I could then match other stuff to it later, and it kept it versatile. Instead of the classic sponge-bag trousers I went for chalk stripe ones, because I had seen a great (Esquire I think?) advert from the 1950s showing chalk stripe trousers as an alternative to the norm. It also meant I could have a great chalk stripe suit made to them later on

But, echoing the sentiments of some on here, does it really matter? I thought Church was a place of worship and inclusiveness, not a cat-walk. Wear what you like. Beauty is only skin-deep, and clothes don't even go that far!

 

[brendanm720]

The church the Mrs. and I have been attending is very informal -- dress-wise -- and I almost always am overdressed in a pair of khaki dress pants and a button-down dress shirt. It was drilled into me at a young age that you dress up to go to church. (Our church was in a resort area and the retired executives for many down-state firms (like Post) attended. They were all very well dressed.)

That being said, when Easter rolled around this year, the gents rolled out their suits at our current church. One of the deacons (who usually wears slacks and a dress shirt was in a navy pinstripe 3 piece.

I think if you want to wear morning dress to church, then go for it. I think you'll get some strange looks unless it's Easter or Christmas. Maybe start with a Stroller and ease into a morning coat?

 

[dudewuttheheck]

I'm not a Church goer, although I have been to a few services over the years, and got married in a 12th Century Anglican Church last year. I initially wanted to wear full morning wear, but in the end opted for a stroller suit, and I'm glad I did. I think it was right for the situation, without being ostentatious. I was inspired by photographs of some of my great-uncles at their weddings in the fifties, and went with that. Also, it meant that, seeing as I was having the suit made for the occasion, I could then match other stuff to it later, and it kept it versatile. Instead of the classic sponge-bag trousers I went for chalk stripe ones, because I had seen a great (Esquire I think?) advert from the 1950s showing chalk stripe trousers as an alternative to the norm. It also meant I could have a great chalk stripe suit made to them later on

But, echoing the sentiments of some on here, does it really matter? I thought Church was a place of worship and inclusiveness, not a cat-walk. Wear what you like. Beauty is only skin-deep, and clothes don't even go that far!

I'm probably going to go for just a regular navy suit for my wedding. We aren't even going to have bridesmaids, a best man, or anything like that.

I agree completely. Inclusiveness is important; not just at Church, but at many other places.

 

[dnjan]

I would question whether or not church was the appropriate place for petty passive aggressiveness, irrespective of what one is wearing. My $0.02.

Though it would be nice if gentlemen at least tucked their shirts in (no, not square-cut Hawaiian shirts but regular tailed shirts).

 

[Fifty150]

I would really appreciate from input on how to wear morning dress

A lot of people do dress poorly now when required to wear 'formal' clothing.

 

[Edward]

@Fifty150 Quite. I'll leave it up to you to discern which of them I think most needs to read that book you recommend.

 

[Fifty150]

Boris Johnson. He needs the most help.

 

[GHT]

How did I ever miss this fabulous thread. It's wonderful. My wife and I attend the Roman Catholic Mass, we are about twenty five year absentees returning to the church. (It's a long, painful story,) perhaps for another time.
We dress for church the way we dress for anywhere formal, and do we get complimented.

Today's attire, be it church, your local bank manager or store manager, all dress in a style that I would describe as, dressing down. Our church congregation dress very much in similar vogue. Of late, the UK is experiencing something of a heatwave, so I wear a sports blazer. It's no cooler than a suit but it is psychosomatic in that summer, heat and blazers are what the French would describe as: "de rigueur." The lady, of course wears a dress, period style.

Does it really matter what you wear, if you are a believer and you attend a service, then as that brilliantly acerbic Irish wit, Dave Allen, would say: "May your God go with you."

 

[AeroFan_07]

I am active in a less formal church here in the Midwest. Just like much of corporate America, the dress code has all but fallen away into "wear clothes, perhaps without wrinkles."

I am personally thankful that we grew up in a tradition that encouraged ties, and often suit coats too. I am thankful as this was the way to learn to tie a tie, a feat which took me quite a while to master. I indeed still desire to learn to tie a bow-tie. Trying my best with YouTube videos & detailed instructions, I have still not managed it yet. There is hope for tomorrow!

Presently, I am in the midst of swapping up the church I am a member of. I have been drawn to slightly more formal places, and I believe I shall embrace it and pull back out the better ties, dress shirts, and even a sport coat for next week. However like others have indicated, I am certainly thankful for folks showing up to worship, I worry not what others may be wearing.