Renthia Kaimbi
A video circulating widely on social media showing religious leaders in Namibia burning wigs and cosmetic products they describe as evil has sparked debate over Christian teachings on personal appearance, the interpretation of scripture and the authority of religious leaders to pronounce certain practices sinful.
The footage has raised questions about whether wigs, makeup and other cosmetic products are inherently sinful or whether their use is a matter of personal conviction and denominational teaching, as church leaders express differing views on modesty and acceptable appearance among believers.
The debate also comes amid concerns raised by theologians about the growing use of self-appointed religious titles such as “prophet” and “papa”, warning that religious authority must be grounded in proper formation, accountability and recognition by a faith community.
Pastor Brian Mundia, explaining the Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Church’s position on wigs, jewellery and cosmetics, said the denomination emphasises simplicity, modesty and neatness, encouraging believers to reflect their Christian character through their conduct rather than outward appearance.
The church drew on biblical passages including 1 Timothy 2:9, which advises modest dressing and cautions against elaborate hairstyles and costly ornaments, while 1 Peter 3:3-4, emphasises inner character over external adornment.
Mundia said the SDA church traditionally discourages ornamental jewellery, elaborate, expensive or artificial hairstyles, including outrageous wigs, while heavy or excessive makeup is also discouraged.
However, he stressed that avoiding cosmetics or jewellery does not earn a person salvation, but is a personal and spiritual choice guided by biblical principles.
“Many modern members, particularly younger generations and people in different global cultures, view these practices as a matter of personal conscience rather than strict church law, and enforcement by local congregations has softened significantly,” Mundia added.
The practice varies among congregations and generations, with some believers regarding restrictions on cosmetics and jewellery as matters of personal conscience rather than strict church rules.
At Saint Peter Claver Parish in Okahandja, the parish priest Father Veranus Shiimi said the Catholic church does not impose a blanket prohibition on wigs or cosmetics, provided congregants dress decently and do not distract others during worship.
“We don’t have that in our church. A person must only be decent, without distracting others from praying when they enter the church. The bottom line is decency. God says ‘Come as you are’,” the Shiimi said.
He added that the church welcomes people from different circumstances and focuses on maintaining an environment in which everyone can participate in worship.
The differing positions highlight how Christian denominations interpret biblical teachings on modesty and personal appearance differently, raising questions about the distinction between discouraging certain practices and declaring them inherently evil.
Religious titles and authority under scrutiny
Beyond the debate over wigs and cosmetics, a theological opinion piece by Jeronimo Kateya, Johannes Paulus and Adalbertus Kamanzi has questioned the growing trend of individuals adopting religious titles without adequate theological training, institutional oversight or accountability.
In their writings titled, The Sanctity of Academic and Vocational Titles Must Be Safeguarded: A Decolonial Critique of Self-Anointed Religious Authority in Contemporary Africa, the authors argue that titles such as “Pastor”, “Prophet”, “Apostle”, “Papa”, “Man of God” and “Bishop” should reflect proper formation, communal recognition and responsibility rather than self-proclamation.
They warned that social media has made it easier for religious personalities to gain public recognition without necessarily undergoing the scrutiny associated with established church structures.
“This phenomenon is amplified by digital media and trending, where visibility substitutes for vetting,” the authors wrote.
The authors further argued that religious leadership requires more than a public following, saying titles should be backed by theological understanding, accountability and recognition from the relevant faith community.
Drawing on the African philosophy of ‘ubuntu’, they state that leadership and social roles should be conferred through communal recognition rather than individual declaration.
“In ubuntu philosophical thinking, personhood and role are not self-declared but communally conferred,” they said.
They cautioned that when religious titles become instruments of personal status, commercial gain or influence rather than service, they can undermine legitimate religious institutions and leave congregants vulnerable to exploitation.
The authors also raised concerns about the commercialisation of faith and the potential misuse of spiritual authority, arguing that the absence of proper formation and accountability can damage public trust in religious leadership.
They called for stronger theological education, mentorship, institutional oversight and responsible use of media to ensure that those leading congregations are adequately prepared for their responsibilities.
“The sanctity of a title lies not in the word itself, but in the process that produces it,” the authors stated.
Although their writings do not specifically address the burning of wigs and cosmetics shown in the circulating video, their arguments raised questions about the theological grounding and accountability of religious figures who publicly declare certain practices sinful.
The debate highlights the influence religious leaders can have on personal choices and beliefs, particularly when their teachings spread rapidly on social media.
It also highlighted the distinction between established denominational teachings, individual interpretations of scripture and pronouncements made by religious figures whose authority may not be recognised by established church structures.
