I have to agree with Happy_LDS on this one. I really wonder if we are not becoming a little bit like the Pharisees when whe focus more on form than substance. As I understand it, there is only one man on earth who has the authority to pronounce policy for the Church, and I am not aware of any President of the Church who has ever thought that whether or not a Deacon wears a white shirt was a subject worthy of even mentioning. Anyone else who dares to make rules about what must be worn while passing the sacrament is guilty of usurping the authority of the President of the Church, and I think that we can safely say that anyone who is guilty of usurping the authority of the President of the Church is not inspired by the Lord. Hence, his advice can be safely disregarded.
Years ago, when President N. Eldon Tanner was serving as the Bishop of his ward, he tried to find out why the members of the Aaronic Priesthood were not attending their Sunday meetings. What he found out was that they were not attending because they did not have suits and coats and ties to wear to church like everyone else did. He promised his young men that he would wear his overalls to Church if they would wash and wear theirs. It worked. The young men started coming to their Sunday meetings because the Bishop was wearing, not the best that he had, but he was wearing overalls so that the young men would not feel out of place.
I hear people saying that the young men should wear the best that they have, and if they only have a t-shirt, then that is okay. But ask yourself this--how many young men would want to come to Church in a t-shirt if they knew that everyone else there would be dressed in white shirts and ties? They would feel out of place. But this is the very position that we put people in when we require our young men to wear white shirts and ties to Church.
In our ward, it has gotten to the point where a white shirt and tie is not enough. In order to either pass or bless the sacrament, a young man must be wearing a dress coat and white shirt and tie. It's called "the uniform of the priesthood." Did this come from the Prophet? I don't think so. My son did not have a dress coat, and I did not have enough money to buy him one. So, what did they do? They forced him to wear a borrowed coat in order to pass or bless the sacrament, even though the coat was too short for him and didn't really fit his long, lanky frame. That looked more ridiculous than if they had just allowed him to wear his white shirt and tie. Are we really honoring the ordinances of the Church when we adhere to such standards so strictly that we make our young men look ridiculous?
That's FANATICISM to its purest form. My issue is that from the top the Church does not seem to make the type of statements that are necessary for these leaders to hear so they won't commit these kind of mistakes you know what am I saying? Its ridiculous really.
What else can we expect? Once we start down the road to Phariseeism, where does it stop? Where do we draw the line? It starts with white shirts and ties and quickly turns into a game of one-ups-manship. Who is holier than who? Who is more righteous than who? You make your young men wear white shirts and ties? Well, we have gone one better than that. We require our young men to wear suit coats as well as white shirts and ties. It starts with white shirts and ties, and before you know it's white robes and candles. After all, if white is good, than more white is better, right? If white shirts show respect for a sacred ordinance of the priesthood, then white robes would show even more respect for a sacred ordinance of the priesthood. Isn't that how the robes of the Catholic Church started? Showing respect for the sacred ordinance of the Communion? And now they have a "uniform of the priesthood." How far away from that are we? The people in my stake are already talking about a "uniform of the priesthood." In our case it's a coat and tie and white shirt. Is there any guarantee that it will stop there? I guess the missionaries around here are "out of uniform" because they don't wear coats in the summer time, but our young men do. I guess President Ezra Taft Benson was "out of uniform" years ago, when he took off his coat in the Priesthood Session of General Conference. After taking off his coat, he said, "Do you want to know why I did that? Because I'm hot." But if our young men are hot they can't pass the sacrament without a coat on. Was President Benson "out of uniform"? Is there really a "uniform"? Apparently there is in our stake. And, like I say, where does it stop? And where do you draw the line? One ward draws it here and one draws in there. Who's right?
I think if the Lord really cared, He would have said something about it through His living Prophet, but since, as far as I know, the Prophet hasn't said anything about it, I suspect that the Lord doesn't really care about the color of our shirts.
Priesthood 'uniform' is as simple as it gets - white shirt and a tie, is that really so difficult that priesthood holders have to invent ways to maneuver around it?
You can think of this in an alternative way, consider how if we had no standard some might want to come with 'spiritual' outfits or at least what they thought made them more worthy than others. Having a standard keeps everyone the same.