Should Pastors Enforce Modesty Standards at Church?

Many assumptions, both negative and inaccurate, were made about the intent and substance of what I said. In response, I felt it necessary to write this short article to clarify my position and provide guidance for local church leaders and pastors on why they must enforce modesty standards within their congregations.

Let me begin by saying this conversation would not have been controversial in any previous century of the Christian Church. Modesty at church was a universal ethic upheld by nearly all people—lost and saved until the 1960s. Even as a child in the early 1990s, it would be unheard of for a woman to wear to church what many women wear today.

Modesty and the Local Church

In response, several people argued how my position would exclude the very people Jesus would embrace. They spoke of the outcast women whom Jesus ministered to, comparing that to the context of my post. However, embracing an immodest woman on the streets during public evangelism is much different than embracing an immodest woman in the Lord’s Day assembly, where God’s people (men, women, and children) are gathered for worship under the shepherding care of divinely accountable pastors. Furthermore, even prostitutes in Jesus’s time were dressed more modestly than many woman in the West. For instance, when Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute in Genesis 38:14, she veiled herself, emphasizing that even in illicit contexts, women were expected to cover their bodies​. In ancient Israel, modesty was standard among even the most promiscuous women. Women typically wore long, loose garments that covered most of the body. Today’s hyper-sexualized culture that embraces minimal clothing like thong bikinis, crop tops, and form-fitting outfits would have been utterly foreign and shocking in ancient Jewish society. Ultimately, our society has become so steeped in sexualization and immodesty that even Christians have grown desensitized to it (Ephesians 4:19, Romans 1:24-25). This cultural shift has invaded even the pastorate, where modesty is now treated as a generally irrelevant issue, despite clear biblical teaching (1 Timothy 2:9).

What’s worse, many pastors have been influenced by the feminist overtones in society, causing them to lose their vigilance and courage in addressing this issue among women. Pastors who once upheld these standards now hesitate, fearing backlash from feminists making women the most pastorally neglected segment of the church. Any attempt to correct or guide in this area is seen as oppressive, controlling, or “mansplaining” and this fear has led many church leaders to remain quiet.

Pastoral Responsibility to Correct Immodesty

While the sin of immodesty finds it root in the failure of fathers and husbands, pastors also share in this responsibility. Pastors are called to shepherd the flock and provide spiritual oversight, which includes nurturing biblical values like modesty and purity within the church community (1 Peter 5:2). A pastor’s primary duty is to care for the flock entrusted to him (1 Peter 5:2, Acts 20:28). This includes preaching on modesty but it also includes safeguarding the spiritual environment so that it remains conducive to holy worship and free from unnecessary temptations.

When visitors enter a congregation dressed in ways that accentuate sensuality—such as leggings worn as pants, revealing dresses, or outfits with excessive cleavage—it can become a stumbling block to others. Jesus Himself warned, “Woe to the world for temptations to sin…But woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!” (Matthew 18:7).

It is not loving or protective to allow such temptations to hinder the purity and worship of the local church body on the Lord’s Day.

As a pastor, my duty is first to the spiritual well-being of my congregation, not to accommodate the inappropriate dress of visitors. If a woman’s clothing is likely to stumble the men, distract the women, or influence the children toward sensuality, it is my responsibility to kindly ask her to change or leave (Romans 14:13). Such actions are not punitive but protective. Like many institutions—schools, workplaces, restaurants—churches also have standards for conduct. Now, are these corrected individuals welcome back? Certainly but only when they come in a way that will not blatantly threaten the flock with temptation.

I acknowledge that men are responsible for managing their thoughts and desires, a point I regularly emphasize in our church teachings. However, women also have a role to play in promoting modesty. Historically, immodesty has been primarily a concern with women, and even Scripture addresses modesty exclusively in the context of women (1 Timothy 2:9, 1 Peter 3:3).

I also understand that modesty can vary depending on cultural context and the norms of different churches or countries, but there is a general principle that should guide us: if a woman’s attire draws attention to her body rather than her face, it warrants pastoral discernment. In some cases, correction may be necessary—ideally involving the pastor’s wife or an older woman in the church (Titus 2:3-5)—to guide women toward understanding the importance of modesty in reflecting godly character. This approach is not about legalism but about helping the entire congregation, both men and women, pursue holiness in the way they present themselves (1 Peter 1:15-16).

Evangelism vs. Purity in the Church

Another major point of contention has been my refusal to compromise on modesty to accommodate a visitor who may need to hear the Gospel. Should I ignore this woman’s immodest clothing and it’s threat to the purity of my flock to ensure she hears the message of salvation? What if she walks in with a repentant heart? Adriel Sanchez, a fellow pastor and host of Core Christianity, criticized my stance, writing, “Woe to us if we shut the door of God’s kingdom to sinners rather than ministering to them and helping them leave their sins behind.” This is a complete strawman. Does anyone truly believe I want to shut the door of God’s Kingdom on sinners? I hope not. My goal is simply to protect our congregation from what the Bible clearly calls sin (1 Corinthians 5:6-7). If that requires asking someone to leave and return dressed modestly, it’s not about exclusion—it’s about upholding the standard of holiness that we, as Christians, are called to maintain (1 Peter 1:15-16). We can minister to sinners without compromising the spiritual purity of the church. Correction and invitation can go hand in hand, and asking someone to return appropriately dressed demonstrates love for both the sinner and the congregation by safeguarding against temptation and maintaining a godly environment (Galatians 6:1).

Sadly, pastors like Mr. Sanchez have been shaped by a church culture that prioritizes evangelism at any cost. To be clear, I would love to see any person come to Christ, but I will not sacrifice the spiritual purity of the congregation to do so.

To be clear, our church welcomed all types of broken individuals—drug addicts, homeless people, those freshly divorced or suicidal—without ever turning them away. Why? Because their presence doesn’t pose a direct threat to the purity of the church. But let’s consider an example to make my argument more clear: A 23-year-old woman enters your church after her Sunday morning workout, dressed in form-fitting spandex shorts. She sits right in front of two families and your liturgy requires several moments of standing where her rear will be visible by many in the church. The husband is now distracted, battling temptation due to her overt display of sexuality. His wife, rightfully upset, is worried about her husband’s purity and feels uncomfortable in what should be a holy space. Meanwhile, the 12-13-year-old boys sitting nearby who just entered puberty are being drawn into inappropriate thoughts. This church, which should be a sanctuary from the world’s temptations, has become a place where sexual impurity is present. Before dismissing this as an unrealistic scenario, this was actually a real example shared with me by a woman in a direct message. This situation isn’t hypothetical—it has happened and represents the kind of challenge pastors must be prepared to address.

As a pastor, your responsibility is to protect your flock. Allowing such behavior because you want to ensure she hears the Gospel misses the point. Again, correction and the upholding of biblical standards for modesty are not punitive—they are protective. It’s an act of love to kindly pull her aside and ask her to either cover up, change, or leave. Failing to enforce these modesty standards in the church is a failure of pastoral duty. Your primary responsibility is to the well-being of the congregation, not to appease visitors, no matter how well-intentioned the goal of evangelism may be (Acts 20:28).

Pragmatism Keeps Pastors us from Correction

This fear of correction preventing a person from coming to Christ, stems from an Arminian, seeker-sensitive, pragmatic view of church where visitors are treated as projects, dependent on our persuasion, rather than recognizing that God alone draws His people (John 6:44). If this visitor is one of God’s elect, a pastoral correction on her dress won’t hinder her from receiving the Gospel, because God’s grace surpasses all human barriers (Romans 8:28-30; 8:38-39). In fact, showing her God’s standard of righteousness may be the very means God uses to reveal her need for a Savior (Galatians 3:24).

We must not view correction as rejection.

Scripture commands us to “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Upholding biblical standards of modesty communicates God’s holiness, which is a form of love, not legalism (1 Peter 1:15-16). I also wouldn’t allow a man to come into church drunk and holding bottle of whiskey, I would ask him to sober up and return next Sunday. The same principle applies here: correction is a means of grace, not a barrier to it. If the Lord is drawing someone, correction according to His Word will not thwart conversion; rather, it may be the very tool He uses to bring about repentance and faith.

Lastly, evangelism is not the primary purpose of the Lord’s Day assembly, a fundamental misunderstanding within much of the Western church. According to Scripture, evangelism is an outward, external mission of the church, carried out beyond the Sunday gathering (Matthew 28:19-20). The assembly is primarily for the edification of the saints, designed to build up the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-13). The focus of the Lord’s Day is on the worship of God, the teaching of His Word, and the mutual encouragement of believers (Hebrews 10:24-25).

When we reorient the Sunday assembly to prioritize evangelism, we make the mistake of compromising biblical standards of doctrine and holiness, all for the sake of appearing winsome. This shift causes us to believe that dropping our standards will attract outsiders, when in fact, the church is called to remain distinct, holy, and faithful to God’s Word (1 Peter 1:15-16).

Upholding modesty and biblical standards in the church is neither legalistic nor unloving; rather, it is an act of genuine care for both the individual and the congregation. Protecting the purity of worship and safeguarding believers from unnecessary temptation is a pastoral responsibility (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:2). Far from being a barrier to the Gospel, correction grounded in love helps individuals understand God’s holiness and their need for transformation (Hebrews 12:11). True love doesn’t lower God’s standards to accommodate culture; it points people to Christ and His call to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:16).