Makeup and Jewelry
From: Survivor Rites ~UNBROKEN: Evolution of Rules for Women in the 2×2 Workers’ Church with Cherie Kropp and Crystal Stiles Mandt, June 3, 2026
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO6skHPFDx8&list
My name is Cherie (Berry) Kropp. I was born and raised in the 2×2 Church, third generation. I inherited my beliefs from my parents without question and professed at age 13. I grew up on the Jackson, Mississippi convention grounds and attended meetings in California, Mississippi, Texas and Oklahoma until I left in 1990. I’m married to Ex-2×2 Chester Ehrig and we currently live in North Texas.
My purpose in giving these interviews is to enable listeners to better understand the difference between the Commandments of God and the Traditions of Men. Commandments are doctrine; traditions are human rules.
1. Crystal: To begin, help us understand the contrast between women’s traditions in the early 20th-century world and the traditions that developed in the 2×2 church.
Cherie: I grew up believing, as many of us did, that the 2×2 church and its rules were the same the world over. It was a rude awakening when I discovered that the same did not mean identical in every belief, practice or expectation. Standards varied across the United States and around the world. I also had not understood the difference between Commandments of God (doctrine/teaching) and Traditions of Men (rules).
In this Part 1 of 3 parts, I’ll focus on 2×2 women’s requirements concerning makeup and jewelry. Next week, I’ll discuss apparel and black stockings, and the week after that long hair.
2. Crystal: When you moved from West to East, did you notice differences in the church?
Cherie: Absolutely. We moved from California, where there were many workers, countless friends, and three or four conventions—to Mississippi, a state with only six workers, about one hundred friends total, and no convention. We went from large gospel meetings in halls in California to tent missions where workers lived in tent baches and used manual pump organs.
In California, there were many children in our meeting. In Mississippi, we were the only two children in our meeting and the only kids within about 65 miles of Jackson, the capitol of the state where we lived. When I was 10, we moved from a Western state where Jack Carroll was overseer to an Eastern state where George Walker was overseer. The gulf was so wide that some friends and workers in the East even questioned whether the friends and workers in the West would make it to Heaven.
The workers in the South were far stricter than those in California. Our parents gradually eased us into Southern standards without us realizing what was happening. Before we moved, Mom gave away our Christmas ornaments, saying there wasn’t room for them in the small trailer. After we arrived, our radio somehow never appeared. Radios were taboo in the South, though we owned one in California. Eventually, Daddy even removed the radio and antenna from our car. I was sixteen before I finally heard popular music on the radio at my first part-time job. With my own money, I bought a tiny radio I could hide easily. I listened to it on the way to work, but I never brought it into the house. When my jerk brother found out and told on me, there was a serious discussion with my parents. In the end, my parents let me keep the radio—and I promised not to bring it inside.
3. Crystal: The unwritten rules—where did they come from, and who made them?
Cherie: It is becoming more widely known that the 2×2 church began at the turn of the 20th century, and that it was founded by William Irvine in Ireland in 1897. I investigated that history and wrote about it in my book, Preserving the Truth that was published in 2022.
The rules started in July 1903, when Irvine organized about 70 men and women who wanted to be preachers. This inaugural convention was held on Willie Gill’s farm, Ashmount, in Rathmolyon, Ireland. Most of those early workers were quite young—around 20 to 22 years old. Irvine was 34, and only a few others were in their early 30s. George Walker was 22 and Jack Carroll was 26 when they entered the work. We visited Ashmount in 2004 and spoke with the current owners, the Stantons.
Irvine set out the standards, values, methods, and rules the workers were expected to follow: what to believe, what to teach, and how to behave. The convention was Orientation for the workers, and Irvine left no doubt about his expectations. At the end, men and women took vows of obedience, celibacy and poverty. Every worker gave all their money to a common purse. Irvine’s rules were not documented—they were unwritten. In other words, they were lex non scripta, the Latin phrase for unwritten law.
Key Point: The rules began in 1903 when Irvine, their unquestioned leader, united the workers into a cohesive group that submitted to his authority and standards.
4. Crystal: What is the difference between Traditions of Men and Commandments of God?
Cherie: For a long time, I did not know how to prioritize the beliefs and practices of my church. I didn’t know what was essential to salvation and what was not. What was major and what was minor. Like many others, I did not understand that Scripture draws a clear distinction between the Commandments of God and the Traditions or commandments of Men. Jesus said, In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men (Mark 7:7 KJV).
Paul asked why believers would be subject to ordinances such as touch not; taste not; handle not, which are after the commandments and doctrines of men (Col. 2:20–23). That raised an important question for me: How could I know which practices were of God and which were of men?
When I was 40, someone asked me, What is your church doctrine? I didn’t even know what the word doctrine meant. So I went to a Christian bookstore—which I wasn’t supposed to do—and found a book on basic Christian doctrine. That was a turning point. I finally began to be able to separate my inherited beliefs into essentials for salvation and the nonessential rules I had long struggled with that didn’t make sense. I related to the axiom: I have seen the truth and it makes no sense.
Many 2×2 unwritten rules are simply men’s traditions or preferences, presented by workers as though they were God’s requirements.
Historically, Christianity has understood the Commandments of God as non-negotiable instructions that are globally applicable, fixed and essential. However, many gray areas exist where the Bible is silent.
Traditions of Men refers to manmade, nonessential, extrabiblical rules that the Bible does not explicitly command, endorse or forbid. Examples include withholding participation or communion, not allowing workers to marry, teetotalism, restrictions on activities or possessions, and dress codes.
Key Point: Many 2×2 unwritten rules are nonessential manmade traditions or preferences—not Commandments of God.
5. Crystal: What is legalism?
Cherie: Christians often use the term legalism to describe the belief that salvation is earned through good deeds, human effort, or adherence to certain rules and methods. In other words, salvation becomes Jesus’ sacrifice plus human effort. Legalism is the practice of elevating manmade traditions/rules to the level of Commandments of God and viewing them as necessary requirements for salvation.
6. Crystal: What was the world like when Irvine started the workers’ church?
Cherie: When Irvine began his ministry and church in Ireland in the Victorian Era, Queen Victoria was reigning over the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. She reigned from 1837 to 1901—sixty-four years. Before mass media, historically, kings and queens were the primary fashion trendsetters of their nations. In the United Kingdom, where the 2×2 church began, Queen Victoria’s preferences set the styles for respectable dress and appearance.
Victoria married her first cousin, Prince Albert, in 1840, when she was 20. They had nine children, and by all accounts, theirs was a deep love match. Albert died of typhoid fever in 1861, aged 42. Devastated, Quen Victoria remained in mourning and wore black for the rest of her life—40 years. Depressed, she showed little interest in clothing, fashion or her own personal attractiveness.
Following their queen’s example, the respectable Victorian woman’s dress was modest and subdued: full-length skirts, thick black stockings, high necklines, long sleeves, and small hats. Bare legs or ankles were considered indecent, and women wearing trousers were viewed as vulgar.
In a similar way, workers often encouraged professing women to model themselves after sister workers in dress and appearance. As Howard Mooney said, We would like to think that for some of you young people, the effect of this convention would be that you sisters would be looking more like sister workers, and you brothers would have more of the spirit of a brother worker.
2×2 Women: When the 2×2 church began in the early 20th century, most 2×2 women came from middle, poor, and working-class backgrounds. Outwardly, they did not dress very differently from respectable women around them: no makeup, long dresses, long hair pinned up, and very little skin showing. Although 2×2 women’s appearance was often more severe and plain—no frills, shiny buttons, or feathers in their hats.
7. Crystal: What advice do you have for women who want to ask—or are afraid to ask—about rules concerning long hair, makeup, jewelry, or slacks?
Cherie: It is absolutely okay to ask questions. You have a right to ask, and you should ask. Scripture does not prohibit believers from asking questions; in fact, there is much Scripture to the contrary. According to the Bible, God’s children have a right to seek understanding.
A question is simply a request for information, evidence, or a reason to accept a practice or belief. When you ask a question, the other person has three choices: answer it, refuse to answer it, or evade it.
It took me years to understand how to determine whether a 2×2 unwritten rule/requirement is a Tradition of Men (nonessential) or a Commandment of God (essential). Here’s how to know.
Ask a worker: What Scripture supports this practice? (wearing long hair up, no slacks, makeup, etc.). If there is a biblical basis, most will gladly provide it. A simple answer from Scripture is the easiest answer. If there is no scriptural basis, many workers will respond with diversions, evasions, appeals or attacks. Two former workers, Darla DenHerder and Janna Whitley personally confirmed to me that this is the way it is often handled.
Sometimes the response is a personal attack on the character of the questioner rather than an answer. The old saying applies: When proof is lacking, mud is a good substitute.
Examples: You’ve been in this fellowship all these years and don’t know the answer?
If you had the right spirit, you wouldn’t question that.
A borderline saint asks borderline questions.
A questioning saint is a questionable saint.
Another common appeal is, Some things you just have to accept by faith.
Methods commonly used to evade questions are called fallacies. Fallacies are faulty reasoning. I highly encourage everyone to study logic and fallacies in particular. It will improve your critical thinking skills in your everyday life. Some types of fallacies are insults, ridicule, belittling, shaming, personal attacks, attempts to shut down the questioner. Your character and actions are irrelevant to your question! The Bible is your standard. Either it’s in the Bible—or it isn’t. You’re merely asking WHERE it is.
And perhaps respond: Well, since there is no scripture for why do we do X—seems reasonable not to expect me to continue the practice.
Key Point: If a Scripture cannot be provided, then the practice or belief is a Tradition of Men—not a Commandment of God.
Here’s an example:After learning about Irvine founding the church in Ireland in 1897, I couldn’t reconcile meetings being God’s only right way/church—not since it was started by a man. I searched and could not find any Scripture stating that God had only one right church/way. I thot SURELY I had overlooked it—it had to be in Bible somewhere. Why would anyone sacrifice a normal life as workers did without this rock solid basis in the Bible?!
So I asked Harry Brownlee, our overseer, for Scripture regarding God having only one right way. He stalled, telling me about his family’s experience when they first met the workers and various other filler material to divert my attention. If there had been Scripture, he would have given it to me—to get me off his back. But he couldn’t provide any Scripture because there isn’t any! I confirmed what I thought was true. Sometimes, no answer is an answer.
TIP: BE SURE when asking your questions to specify up front that you do NOT want to hear about experiences—You want scripture only.
8. Crystal: Why are 2×2 women not supposed to wear makeup?
Cherie: Largely because Queen Victoria preferred the natural look. A proper lady was expected to appear entirely natural—no visible tampering with hair or nail color and no obvious facial makeup. In the 19th century, the au naturel look was fashionable. Therefore, respectable Victorian women used makeup sparingly and secretly, if at all, because overt makeup was associated with actresses and prostitutes. Only after Queen Victoria’s death did makeup gradually lose its negative stigma and become more widely accepted.
The Makeup Evolution: During the twentieth century, doctors teamed with cosmetic companies who began producing safer cosmetics. Beauty became a booming business. Early inventions included swivel lipstick, pressed face powder and blush, mascara, liquid nail polish, and foundation. Cosmetic counters became common in department stores and pharmacies.
By the 1920s, many respectable women were using facial makeup. Few women would go in public without at least light makeup. By the 1950s, hair dye had become a normal beauty routine for many women.
2×2 Makeup and Cosmetics: When the 2×2 church began in the Victorian Era, workers were accustomed to women’s natural faces. As cosmetics became popular in the wider world, workers formed an unwritten rule forbidding professing women from wearing makeup. Women were expected to be satisfied with the natural face God gave them, and makeup was labeled vain.
9. Crystal: Is there a biblical command for this restriction?
Cherie: No! Blame it on Jezebel, the wicked queen who painted her face in 2 Kings 9:30. That Old Testament narrative is not a command about cosmetics. The Bible gives no instruction forbidding makeup. This is a gray area where Scripture is silent, which means the restriction is a preference, a ruling, a Tradition of Men. Some workers argue that makeup is vain, and may cite verses such as Let us not be desirous of vain glory (Gal. 5:26).
Some brother workers sincerely believe the reason women wear cosmetics is so others will admire them or to attract men. An example of this in the last 10 years: My ex-2×2 friend Dr. Darlea Wilbeck, was accused of being vain for wearing mascara by Lyle Schober (Texas Overseer). He approached her and husband about the possibility of hosting a union meeting in their home. He said could overlook their not spanking their children, but he had an issue with her eye makeup (she only wore mascara). Lyle said makeup is vain and believed she wore it only out of vanity and to attract the opposite sex.
Darlea admitted she might be vain but adamantly disagreed that she wore makeup to attract male attention. Said she had never been unfaithful to her husband and never would be. She explained that she wore makeup because it gave her confidence to face the world every day as a professional, a teacher at a university in Dallas. Lyle repeated he believed it was purely vanity, quoted a Bible verse and left her with the impression that wearing eye makeup created a division between her and God.
Countless women strive to be attractive for themselves alone. Many men, past and present, have assumed that women dress for the male gaze—sometimes they are right. But many women care about their looks even in situations where there will be no male gaze or when the male gaze is unimportant to them, and even when there’s no peer pressure from other women. For many women, their outward appearance is a part of their identity, self-esteem and self-confidence.
10. Crystal: What do vain and vanity actually mean?
Cherie: A modern Merriam-Webster Dictionary gives current English meanings coined as far back as before the 12th century. It does not provide the definitions of Hebrew or Greek words in the early manuscripts used when the King James Version was translated in 1611.
Word meanings change over time. For accurate interpretation, we have to know what a word meant when it was written. What was the word’s original intended meaning and purpose? How was it used in context: who said it, to whom, when, where, why, and under which covenant?
In consulting a Hebrew dictionary for the words vain or vanity in Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon, we find they all mean something like a fleeting breath or vapor. For example, beauty is vain in Proverbs 31:30 means beauty is fleeting, not permanent. Other translations use the words beauty fades, vanishes, disappears, does not last, or comes to nothing.
In other words, vain and vanity in those contexts refer to brevity or short duration. They do not necessarily carry today’s meaning of pride, conceit, or a desire to improve one’s appearance or attract the opposite sex.
Key Point: The no-makeup rule appears to come from resistance to change, rejection of worldly fashions/fads, and a desire to promote peculiarity—not from a direct command of God. Workers continued to promote the natural look as though it were divine command. It is NOT biblical—it was VICTORIAN. It was Queen Victoria’s preference.
11. Crystal: What about jewelry? Is the no-jewelry rule also a tradition?
Cherie: Yes. The no-jewelry rule is another manmade rule. It began in the very early days of the 2×2 church, when women professing godliness generally did not wear jewelry, with a few exceptions. Interestingly, this rule was not because of Queen Victoria—she wore expensive crown jewelry.
The basis for this taboo was derived from workers’ misinterpretation of two Scripture passages about women’s adornment. Both use a figure of speech called an idiom that minimizes one thing in order to emphasize another. As in: Not this—but rather this.
1 Peter 3:3–4 says, Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel—but rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God (NKJV).
Peter’s emphasis is on inward adorning and did not forbid outward adornment. His point is: It’s what’s inside a woman that matters—not the outside. It’s not about looking good—it’s about being good.
Paul uses a similar expression (idiom) in 1 Timothy 2:9–10 (NKJV). In like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety [shamefacedness KJV] and moderation [sobriety KJV], not with braided [broided KJV; elaborate NIV] hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but (which is proper for women professing godliness), with good works.
Scripture uses this kind of contrast often: not merely this—but especially this. Another Scripture example using this type idiom is 1 John 3:18: My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. Surely, John wasn’t saying not to express love verbally in words…
Workers have gone so far as to not only prohibit gold, pearls, or costly gems, but they also discouraged costume jewelry, silver, inexpensive gemstones, and most body ornamentation without a practical function.
In some areas, 2×2 women were allowed to wear brooches because originally, they were considered useful for ensuring a modest neckline. Over time, many women used them as decoration, and some had sizeable collections—I certainly did. For years, brooches, watches, and wedding bands were the only permissible pieces of jewelry, and even those were allowed only in some areas.
Eldon Tenniswood misinterpreted 1 Tim 2:9 to explain the no makeup ruling. He explained, ‘with shamefacedness.’ This simply means with a modest face, a natural face and sobriety —not a butterfly effect, but a serious and steady effect (1982 California Young Peoples meeting).
JEWELRY and CHILDREN. It’s so sad that some children have to suffer as they are forced to follow rules they don’t understand. Long before they reach the age of accountability (moral responsibility) and make their choice, they are restricted and made to be odd. Some babies were actually dressed in black stockings. Some little girls could not play with costume jewelry. Some had to wear their hair pinned up from very early age. Teenagers with acne could not cover it with makeup. Some girls cannot wear protective slacks in frigid weather or activities that would have kept them more modest. They had no choice! Unfortunately, making them suffer by following men’s rules turned some away from God. However, it wasn’t God who did this to them—it was hardened men.
One eight-year-old girl was the only child in her class without pierced ears, so of course, she badly wanted to pierce her ears. Her 2×2 mother read the adornment verses to her. The little girl replied, That’s fine. I’ll only wear silver or painted earrings. Mom held firm. She then tried her father: Daddy, you have a TV and you’re not supposed to. Why can’t I pierce my ears? He answered, That’s different. You can’t hide your ears in the closet. Eventually, her parents allowed it because they felt guarding her heart against bitterness was more important than two holes in her ears. They took seriously Proverbs 4:23: Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life.
A worker later said that if she were his daughter, he would have told her she could do what she wanted after she left home, but not before. That reasoning misses the point. Piercing her ears at 18 would never undo the pain and shame of being the odd one out as a child. And by the way—that little girl was my daughter, Julie Krista.
12. Crystal: What about wedding bands?
Cherie: In the early days, newly converted married couples often laid aside their wedding rings, and newlyweds did not purchase them. That practice continued in some areas for many years.
My parents came from two different states. Mom was from Mississippi, where the wedding ring was not approved. Daddy was from Texas, where it was approved. They did not have a ring ceremony when they married. When Mom asked a worker about the difference between state policies, the worker replied, You know you’re married, everyone who matters knows, and if you act like you’re married, why do you need a ring?
In 1948, my parents moved from Texas to California, where most married 2×2 women wore wedding bands. At the Bakersfield convention, Daddy reserved a motel room in his name only. When he and Mom returned to the motel, the clerk noticed Mom was not wearing a wedding band and refused to rent them a room because they weren’t that kind of place. After that embarrassing experience, my parents bought Mom a very slim gold wedding ring for $8.00 at Montgomery Wards.
I was also told of an incident in New Zealand. A grandmother among the early converts said the women cast their wedding bands into a pond on the South Island convention grounds because the wearing of gold was not of God.
The no-jewelry rule rests on a misinterpretation of Scripture. In the 1960s, when Hubert Childers was overseer of Ohio, he asked all the 2×2 women there to remove their wedding bands. At a later convention, Hubert openly from the platform asked forgiveness for the strictness he had imposed on God’s children and retracted his prohibition on wedding bands, wristwatches, and hair barrettes.
If only workers today would do the same and retract manmade rules governing women’s appearances! Eventually, most married 2×2 women began wearing plain wedding bands, and some men did also. Today, diamond engagement and wedding rings are not uncommon and other jewelry is being worn more often by some—though still rarely to meetings.
13. Crystal: What Last Words would you like to leave with our listeners?
Cherie: First, don’t hesitate to question what you don’t understand, especially when you are expected to believe or practice it.
Second, study critical thinking and learn to recognize faulty reasoning.
Third, make it your responsibility to know what you believe and why.
Fourth, learn to discern essentials from nonessentials—Commandments of God from Traditions of Men.
Fifth, take back your right to choose what is right for your appearance and grooming. Stop outsourcing your judgment.
Sixth, I highly recommend this short 61 page book.
Women’s Adornment: What Does the Bible Really Say?
by Ralph Woodrow. Very detailed and informative!
6 Chapters, one each for: slacks, jewelry, cosmetics, head coverings, cutting hair, modest apparel.
Available on Amazon: https://amzn.to/4dLQhcN
Go to Part 2 Women’s Apparel—including slacks and black stockings
Go to Part 3 Long Hair and Body Hair
RESOURCES
Rules for 2×2 Women
Traditions: The Unwritten Rules, Chapters 34-35 of my book:
Preserving the Truth (order book here:)Author website: http://cheriekroppehrig.com
History of 2×2 Traditions: The Unwritten Rules
The unabridged version is posted on TTT at:
https://tellingthetruth.info/history_articles/rules-history.php
(condensed version is in my book)
Book: Women’s Adornment: What Does the Bible Really Say?
By Ralph Woodrow. EXCELLENT! Very detailed and informative!
6 Chapters, one each for: slacks, jewelry, cosmetics, head coverings, cutting hair, apparel
Available on Amazon: https://amzn.to/4dLQhcN
Cherie Kropp’s Life Story
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/08/kropp-cherie-berry/
Women Professing Godliness: Does God REALLY Care about Women’s Appearances?
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/11/women-professing-godliness/
Expressions by Ex-2x2s Website: https://Ex2x2.info
Search Ex2x2.info for “Black Stockings” – read 3 memoirs
Black Stockings by Dot Berry
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/11/black-stockings-by-dot-berry/
“On Holy Ground” by Dot Berry (life on Jackson, Mississippi Convention grounds)
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/06/berry-dot/
Modern Millinery Etiquette (Delightful article!)
https://lady.co.uk/modern-millinery-etiquette
8 Rules of Interpretation
https://www.gcfchurch.net/resources/eight-rules-of-interpretation
Questions about Questioning:
Questioning: Is It Wrong to Question?
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/12/is-it-wrong-to-question/
Questioning: Why You SHOULD Ask Questions
https://ex2x2.info/2020/11/12/why-you-should-ask-questions/
Before You Ask (how to recognize and confront fallacious reasoning)
https://ex2x2.info/before-you-ask/
File: Part 1_6-3-26.docx