I have worked with the youth within the Church for several years, and among both boys and girls the way they dress directly influences their reverence factor, in my opinion. When we plan a spiritual meeting or activity we ask the girls to come dressed in Sunday attire specifically for this reason. It often makes a difference in their level of reverence. I assume the same applies to the deacons passing the sacrament.
byersjen said:
QUOTE |
It's also deeply disturbing to me that it seems to be left to the discretion of a leader to turn away a WORTHY & WILLING servant of the LORD based upon the color of his shirt. Please understand, this question came up in my ward NOT because the child was underdressed, but overdressed. |
I remember attending a dance as a young aduilt. I had traveled to Phoenix from California to visit my then girlfriend. Seeking something wholesome to do on a Friday night, we journeyed quite a distance to an LDS chapel in Mesa for the event. Upon arriving, I dressed in white slacks and a long sleeve turtle neck sweater, and my girlfriend Kerna dressed in a modest off-white business pant-suit we were greeted at the door by the YSA committee president and told we were dressed inappropriately for admission. My girlfriend had only recently moved from California and I had come from there where our dress more than met the standards of "modest dress" and where we would have been welcomed by any YSA group at any of the functions. But in Phoenix, we were rejected.
Now ironically, we watched numerous YSA's enter the chapel, pay their $2 and go into the dance and a high percentage were basically meeting the letter of the law (dresses for YW and shirts w/ties for YM) but clearly not the spirit of it's intent. Some young men had cut the sleeves off their shirts. YW were wearing spaghetti strap and even strapless gowns that cut several inches above the knee. Yes they were wearing the clothing proscribed by the council's edict, but were clearly not dressed modestly.
The point to remember is that when we listen to what is pronounced at the pulpit level, even from the highest pulpits within the church, we must be careful about what we hear. The doctrine of Tithing for example is actually about "increase" and not "income" as they are not the same. Wearing of white shirts and little uniforms, forcing boys to participate in scouts, doing certain things that is mostly of a cultural nature rather than of a spiritual nature...that's what concerns me.
I mentioned to the PH leader, a stake High Councilman in attendance at that dance that he and his committee had forced the three of us to bid elsewhere for a wholesome evening date and began to leave. The counselman noting that only I and my date were standing at the entrance to their chapel asked, "Three, but I see only two of you." I responded, "Sir, you have denied entrance to the Lord's house to three of us, myself, my girlfriend, and the Lord Jesus Christ whom we bid to come with us in prayer prior to leaving her mother's home. He's not welcome either because you see, he's dressed in a long robe and has shoulder length hair!"
The PH leader litterally staggered backwards and leaned against the receiving table and brought his hand to his mouth as if in shock. He humbly realized that what I was saying was true. Uniforms dress the outer person, but the heart governs who we are and what we do. He apologized and turned to his YSA president and suggested that in their monthly meeting, they look hard at their newly adopted dress code. He went on to explain how they had labored for over an hour to come up with the notion that a shirt and tie and dress made sense. I suggested he simply substitute, "modest dress" for admission and the realities of the situation would change for the better. He concurred and even his YSA president sitting at the entry desk noted clearly they had been so concerned about codefying compliance, they forgot the intent of the code to begin with. Modest dress.
Let's NOT become Pharisees. It is not what goeth into the mouth that defileth a man, but what comes forth because it originates in his heart.
Copernicus:
QUOTE |
The point to remember is that when we listen to what is pronounced at the pulpit level, even from the highest pulpits within the church, we must be careful about what we hear. |
I agree. I have four daughters and a son. As he was growing up, it became somewhat customary for he and I to dress a little alike. He liked green so we each had green dress shirts. I liked burgandy so we each had one of those. We had snappy ties to boot. Now the fact is at one point after he had been ordained to the PH, his bishop scolded him for wearing a colored shirt to church. To be frank, the man had no business speaking to my son about his dress without first talking to me. But then this particular bishop had the gaul and audacity to tell my children a lot of things without speaking to me first.
Such is the sad case with people who think they are given a little authority and they usurp a lot of authority. If he had issue over my son's shirt, he should have come to me about it. People often love to tell other people how to live and what to do. There is an air of superiority involved. I have power, station and an opinion to force upon others. That bishop was called and annointed by God's servant. But having a calling is not a guarantee that the servant is working God's will.
All too often we fail to remember, many are called but (precious) few are actually chosen (D & C 121) and why? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world. As a PH leader, I would NEVER discuss anything of a personal nature about a child without first considering the necessity of it and the possibility that it be first brought to the parent. Furthermore, I think if the parent deems his/her child's "dress" appropriate enough to bring them to church, then the discussion MUST be between the PH Leader and the parent and may really not be appropriate unless there is something otherwise immodest about the child's dress.
By the way, I would have kindly asked the bishop if he were so commanding my son to wear a white shirt and tie. If that were the case, we would have complied as an act of obedience. But I would also have had a discussion with my son about getting too involved with the minutiae and frivolities of outward obeisance. Love doesn't require that you wear a specific shirt and tie and worthiness is not mantled by outward appearance.
It is NOT the appearance of sin that is to be avoided - as constantly misinterpreted and wrongfully quoted in 1 Thesselonians 5:22.... but rather the avoidance of sinful behavior when the opportunity appears as properly interpreted from Paul's original Greek. Christ supped with the publicans and sinners of his day and asked us to live in the world, but to be not of it. I happen to wear a white shirt and tie to church and am a high priest. But occasionally I wear a colored shirt and frankly, the same heart resides within. I lived in Utah for 13 years. I had men with calling and station and church status steal from me, cheat me, even bear false witness against me and yet all wore the appropriate clothing, an outward appearance of honor. It is not what a man wears that really matters to God, but how a man wears his life from within.
Edited: Copernicus on 11th Oct, 2007 - 1:45am
Name: Joey
Comments: Here's my issue. I'm the EQ president and 75% of the council I get from the stake is that I am required to wear a white shirt and tie when I do visits. My ward is about 40% inactive and if knock on the door wearing the shirt and tie, you see the blinds move a little, but no answer at the door. If I go casual, I can get in and meet the people. I understand how they feel too. When I look through the peephole and see 3 suits, I at least hesitate. I've been going dressed casual lately, and I have been getting all kinds of success where the rest of the ward is failing. I get comments like, "they told us they had moved" and "they refused our visit and asked us to leave". In both of those cases, they have now accepted to have home teachers in the house.
I've been told my stake president won't let people participate in any ordiance unless they are in the white shirt/tie including a guy who was going to be in the circle to ordain his little brother to the office of elder, and was told he couldn't participate because his shirt was light blue.
Last night the bishop had me over to his office to go over things in the quorum. I hadn't had 3 minutes to myself that night, and left for the meeting dressed casual. First thing he says is "can you go home and change to a white shirt and tie" I've just about had it. I told him, "sure, and if the shirt is wrinkly, I'll iron it, if its in the laundy, I'll wash it first. I'm busy, I'm not sure if I have time for all this" and he, obviously not happy with me said, "next time wear the shirt and tie".
We have a religious "uniform" as LDS members, but by design its private, and hidden. Why are people so intent on implementing a uniform over the prescribed garment?
For my own belief, I wear a white shirt and tie when I am going to be participating in an ordinance. This is so I don't detract from the actual ordinance. But this is my own belief that I follow myself, and I wouldn't dream of trying to impose this on others.
Is my stake run by control freaks who enjoy micromanaging 40 year old men by telling them how to dress themselves?
QUOTE (LDS_forever @ 30-Dec 02, 4:15 PM) |
Young Men usually are the ones who do not want to wear white shirts and ties, I guess they feel they're not 'cool' if they wear it, |
Name: Richard
Comments: Some years ago, my wife and I went to Manti to see the Manti Pagent. At about 2:00pm we wondered about going to the temple for an endowment session but the only clothes we had were casual ie. the type one would wear to see the pageant. We asked the advise of a temple worker close to the temple. He said that we should not go to the temple because we were not dressed appropriately. We didn't go and on reflection I felt the our decision was wrong. we should have gone to the temple. That would have been a perfect prelude to the pageant that night.
I am personally very much against this 'white shirt and tie' policy. I mean, what is important is to be dressed appropriately. Yes, there are times when we cannot dress the right way, and I consider it wrong for somebody to correct that person. Other than that, I think it is most important to have the right spirit, not the right shirt. Otherwise someday we'll have bishops say 'white strellson shirt and tommy-hilfigger tie.' That is not the spirit of Christ. That is the spirit of Babylon. I think the business type church outfit is purely from Babylon and DOES distract from the ordinances. It doesn't help. It makes people look on the outside. The Gospel tells us to wear simple clothing, of our own making, not 300$ suits. Following this policy we become more and more like the pharisees, thinking in a holier-than-thou fashion which is poison to spiritual progress. For example, I'm from TX. But I live in Germany. So sometimes when there was something important in church, I followed my dads advise and dressed up. I was wearing a western suit and a bolo-tie. My ward nearly kicked me out for that, saying I'm dishonoring God and the sabbath, yet I was actually 'dressed-up'. After that occurrence I started studying the topic and began thinking "whatever happened to the simple clothing of our own making?" People also tried to often correct me for wearing a beard. I have the same type of beard as Brigham Young had in his earlier days (around the face in a broad line, close cut). They claim it is irreverent and wrong. Yet in Lev. 19:27 men are COMMANDED to have beards, and the LORD gave never revelation otherwise. Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ and hosts of ancient Prophets always had beards. Messengers were not led before the king because they were shaved. Babylon says a man should be clean shaven. The church nowadays says I need to be shaven too, because otherwise it's inappropriate. Same game as with the white shirt. We are mimicking Babylon.