Pharisaic attempt? I fail to see the connection between the two. For me, it all boils down to obedience. If your Bishop is asking you to wear a white shirt to pass the Sacrament then why rebel against the person that was called by God to lead your ward? The spirit of rebellion isn't from God.
I disagree with Writer, as a piece of clothing may very well be necessary to ensure an ordinance is carried out correctly, which is paramount for it's validity as the LORD will not receive at our hands that which HE hath not appointed (cf. D&C 132:8-10). If our ordinances are to avail anything, we need to render perfect obedience to the law of GOD as it was revealed, and follow HIS rules. Otherwise our ordinances are void, or in the words of President Joseph F. Smith "we might as well baptize a sack of potatoes." Clothing may very well be significant, just read the Priest's dress as described in Leviticus. This is vital. The same thing goes for the Garment. The Garment that was revealed unto us from the Heavens cannot be changed or altered in any way, whether it is the cuts, the pattern, color or anything else without making it void. We cannot shorten it without shearing ourselves of the Light and Glory of GOD which it represents. If we alter it, we might as well not wear it.
Yet, this case of obedience is not required of men, no matter who they are, who they are appointed by. We are bound by Law unto the LORD, and unto the LORD ONLY. For those who shall trust the flesh shall fall. The prophets have always testified of our need for independence from men. We need to stand ourselves as priesthood bearers, for as such we are the prophets and lawgivers of our houses, and thus have the highest authority in these realms. Simply because one priesthood bearer, or even all of the highest ranking members of the priesthood decide a policy, or even a change of doctrine, it does not mean anything unless it is the word of the LORD. These men may be well meaning, but they cannot alter the truth. The Eternal Laws and Truths of Heaven cannot be altered in any degree. And we are to neither add nor take from them. For adding or taking ANYTHING is from the devil as we are informed numerous times in the scriptures. Requiring perfect obedience to men of truth is therefore not the spirit of GOD, but the spirit of the devil.
A white shirt and tie has not been revealed as a symbol, nor where we given any commandments in that matter. We have nothing like unto "Thus sayeth the LORD: unless ye shall wear white shirts, your ordinances shall be futile, and I shall ignore thy callings and praying, and ye shall fall away unto darkness. But unto all who wear white shirts I declare: ye are justified, and more so ye are promised to go into eternal rest amongst the great patriarchs of old."
Joseph Smith informed us that unless something is given by "Thus sayeth the LORD", we shall not consider it binding upon us. This has always been the case in the early church, but unfortunetly our modern church is streamlining, and becoming more "uniform." Brigham once taught "uniformity" is not something we should seek at all, and is contrary to the very nature of Zion. This seems to have been all forgotten in this modern church, for now we teach obedience to the church leaders, instead of focusing on obedience to GOD above all things and unrelentlessly, without ceasing and unstoppable.
This is what the prophets have said about such types of obedience:
President Joseph F. Smith said,
That is excellent information. That is exactly what I have been trying to say.
We have a similar topic in the mature LDS boards. I think you could add greatly to the discussions there.
Name: Ryan
Comments: The issue of whether or not a white shirt is or isn't required is a long debated topic. I think the correct principle is to wear a white shirt during a priesthood ordinance. With that said it is an individual matter for each member to come to terms with. Apostles of the Lord have made suggestions that we should wear white shirts when administering the sacrament. The question which remains is whether we want to follow the counsel of the brethren? It is really that simple. Yes personal worthiness is most important but with all things being equal and worthiness is not an issue (cause you are) then it most appropriate where possible to follow the counsel and put on a white shirt. Any less shows indifference (unless you don't own a white shirt...but most members have one or several)to the counsel of the Lord's servants.
We make excuses for everything. At the end of the day, how hard is it to follow simple counsel from the Lord's servants? It is a matter of personal conversion and only an individual can answer if they have truly been converted to the Lord and His church.
I don't see how this is a matter of personal conversion either. We are commanded to follow the words of God, not the words of men. The Lord nowhere commanded to wear white shirt and tie, and it wouldn't make any sense either. Suit, white shirt and tie is the business outfit of Babylon. How come we now consider it a matter of personal conversion how much we imitate Babylon?
It would literally make more sense if the church required us to wear tunics when administering the sacrament, or to have our heads covered, both Israelite customs. Wearing a prayer shawl would even make more sense! (that would even comply with the commandment to wear fringes on our garments).
The church wants to look neat. Is that bad? No. Putting a fence around the word of the Lord, and making others bow to the yoke of men, is sacrilege. Remember how frequently the Lord said that "whosoever sayeth more or less than this is not of me"? This is a case of the church adding to the word of God, not for bad intent I'm sure, but nevertheless adding to the word of God and expecting others to bow to their yoke just like the Pharisees expected others to bow to their "Oral Torah" and minhag.
I think it's sad how we know have to argue about wearing Babylonian clothing that the Lord never commanded, when the actual way the ordinance was administered has changed, and Joseph Smith taught that whenever there is a change in ordinances, there's a change in Priesthood (it's in TPJS, and doesn't sound too good, does it?) When was the last time you guys had a sacrament that was blessed with the officiator giving the sign of the Aaronic priesthood? When was the last time the officiator partook of the bread first, rather than a bishop or other high ranking officer? Does your bishop give the Deacons and Teachers jobs related to the administering of the sacrament, although the Lord specifically prohibited this in D&C 20 (like preparing the sacrament, passing it out)? Does your ward hand the sacrament through the rows, being passed indiscriminately between priesthood bearer and those not bearing the priesthood, though the church was instructed to have those handing it out give to each person individually? These all are real changes to the way the sacrament is administered and should give us more reason to think and debate than whether or not it is appropriate to wear a colored shirt during the administration of the sacrament.