My son and I decided to do a temple trip. Rather than visit Mt. Timpanogos Temple, we went to the Oquirrh Mountain Temple to do baptisms for the dead. At Timp, most patrons are barefoot to enter the water. At Oquirrh, they asked everyone to put on socks. It seems to me that socks make it easier to slip on a wet floor, but I suppose it could be argued the other way as well. I don’t think I’ve ever worn socks in chapels, or any other temples I’ve visited, but maybe my memory is rusty. I was told that they always ask patrons to wear socks at Oquirrh, but to my knowledge, this is the only time I’ve ever done that. Is this a safety or modesty issue? What do they do in your temple?
Church Policy, Modesty, Mormon, Mormon Culture, Temple
Socks in font?
Wheat & Tares 
From my most recent experience with youth baptisms at the London temple, I recall they wore socks. If I remember correctly, on one occasion there were some pretty nifty socks of the “slipper sock” variety with rubbery non-slip bits on the sole. On another occasion, the workers did seem fairly cautious about the potential for slipping, but still socks were required.
In Logan, where I am an ordinance worker, no socks are required for either initiatory or baptism ordinances, but they are provided for comfort/convenience if the patron wants them.
I find it puzzling that you would think this might be a modesty issue. I can only imagine it being a safety or health issue (plantar warts are commonly spread on wet, ‘poolside’ surfaces, for example). Interesting that it’s required at that particular temple. Never seen this anywhere else and we’ve been to several temples with our kiddos.
p.s. I hate going barefoot in public places so I always opt for socks when in the baptistry or doing initiatories.
I was in the St. Louis temple doing a regular temple session. I got called out by a temple lady boss because I was wearing my regular nude pantyhose with my white temple slippers. She said I needed to wear white hose or socks. Apparently nude colored hose is immodest or something. Because the top of my foot, completely covered by my floor length white temple dress, was just too much.
I bit my tongue in half, forced my eyes to remain still in their sockets and took her lecture on proper temple dress just because I didn’t want to be held out of the session where my husband was.
Next time, I won’t make the same mistake.
I won’t mind a bit if I get to sit in the parking lot, listening to NPR news and taking a nap, just as Jesus wanted.
It’s been so long since I’ve done baptisms . . . but tangentially, why do women have to wear white socks in the sealing room but men can keep their dark dress socks?
I would be surprised if the socks at baptisms were for any reason other than hygiene. I would also be very surprised if they were a documented requirement. As with so many things in the temple, what is and isn’t required seems to vary by the ordinance worker.
Kristine, I don’t think women are required ,per se, to wear white socks to sealings, but that people are required to wear socks. If you arrived wearing your own socks, you probably wouldn’t meet any resistance. (Though my previous disclaimer would apply)
I can’t recall any experience with whether socks were or were not required in the temple baptistry. I’m thinking generally not.
I do remember when I was in the Salt Lake Missionary Home (a precursor to the MTC), being told that we should wear socks in the font because nobody wants to see your hairy feet at a baptism. It was also recommended that we wear a white tie when performing a baptism. “And people always ask, ‘doesn’t that ruin the tie?’, and I say, ‘yes, perhaps it does; and I hope you ruin lots of ties on your mission.'”
Perhaps “covering your hairy feet” is what is meant by “modesty” in this context?
Glory……we truly are a most peculiar people. Where’s my tonic?
livinginzion – the requirement for white socks or white hose has nothing to do with modesty, it’s simply part of the ceremonial temple clothing.
In the Regina Saskatchewan Temple if you are baptizing then yes you wear socks but if you are getting baptized then no, you don’t wear socks. If you are the recorder and the others people then you wear socks and slippers
I remember from my days as a youth it just depended on who was working. Some occasions I got the impression socks were mandatory and other times socks weren’t even handed out with the rest of the baptismal clothing.
Oklahoma City temple: they are optional. If you ask for them they are available but they are not required. I’m pretty sure this is a non-essential day to day protocol issue determined by each individual temple’s leadership. I wonder if it might be that they are less often required by mini temples with tiny laundry rooms than by bigger temples that have larger laundry facilities.
White hose or stockings are part of the temple clothing for when you are participating as a patron in endowment and sealing ordinances, not because of what they cover but because they are white (as opposed to whatever shade of brown your nude pantyhose is). However, temple workers are instructed not to lecture patrons about clothing. So, Livinginzion, the St. Louis worker, though correct, was out of line. I’m sorry you had to experience that.
Mt. Timp Temple is a large temple with a laundry–they do not require socks. Oquirrh Mountain is a much smaller temple. They require socks. I do not know if they have a laundry or not.
I have done baptisms in Denver, where everyone wore socks in the font. In Salt Lake, I was given socks so I wore them, but a worker was instructing people to remove their socks just before entering the font. In Manti, they don’t even issue socks if you don’t ask. Clearly it is different by temple. I am happy to be barefoot as much as possible and socks in the font never made sense to me anyway.