I attended a fireside recently in which a female speaker mentioned that she had served in a temple. One of the women came to the temple “with a color of hair not found in nature.” She noted that the woman had lots more jewelry than most, and that while the dress she wore was white, it was not typical of traditional temple dresses worn by women. She said seeing this woman took her out of the frame of mind of worship.
I guess I can see her point, but I also remember an old bishop who said his favorite smell in sacrament meeting was cigarettes because it meant a person was either not a member, or was probably trying to repent and get his life in a better spot. I also remember a few posts by Mormon Heretic in which he described the Church of Saints and Sinners, as well as the Tattooed Mormon. A few scriptures came to mind from the Topical Guide:
- for man looketh on the outward appearance: 1 Sam. 16:7 .
- Judge not according to the appearance: John 7:24 .
- Do ye look on things after the outward appearance: 2 Cor. 10:7 .
We are often told that we shouldn’t draw attention to ourselves. But is this woman unfairly judging based on appearance? Who is more at fault for “interrupting” someone’s worship: the person with the unconventional apparel, or the person judging? Should we completely ignore what someone wears, or should we be grateful they are worshiping with us? Where do you draw the line? Do you like the smell of repentant sinners in your sacrament meeting as this bishop mentioned?
Wheat & Tares 
The problem with a culture of conformity is that folk come to expect others to conform. I see that as the problem.
Personally I love diversity. I love that we are all different. And I love it when people feel able to express that difference in choice of dress, hair, style of worship etc.
What Hedgehog said. And I’ll go further: Another problem with the culture of conformity is that it cultivates an intense suspicion/fear of diversity and difference. We see this in things like the BYU dress code (it’s NOT an “Honor Code”) and in the unspoken (and unfounded) but pervasive ideas about what’s acceptable for women and men to wear not only to church but just generally in the world. The incident described above is no better than shaming a woman for what she’s wearing by telling her it could arouse the men who’ll be looking at her. To answer your question, it is the judgmental worshipper who is entirely at fault for the “interruption” of their worship. The scriptures, such as the ones you quoted, are quite clear that we aren’t able to see the content of someone’s heart/soul. That’s why it’s God’s job, not ours, to judge. And the temple is, frankly, the very last place on earth we should be exercising our superficial, flawed and ultimately unfounded judgement. We should be much better than that.
What Hedgehog said, plus, the Mormon church just strikes me as so provincial. I mean, imagine a scarified, tattooed Maori tribesman visiting an LDS worship service. How would that fit with the dress code? For a supposed world-wide church, the LDS church barely acknowledges other cultures. Sure, it gives lip service to diversity only insofar as it feels it can win converts, but it’s only lip service. You only need to look at the vast majority of Mormon artwork, media presentations, and the makeup of the highest levels of leadership to see the reality. It’s pretty much white people from Utah trying to pretend–and, perhaps, wishing that–it’s the 1950’s.
I think the sister felt justified complaining because of this church guideline for temple attendance: “Avoid extremes in dress and grooming, just as you would in a sacrament meeting.” Also in the FAQ: “the fact that all are dressed alike in the temple creates a sense of unity and equality.” Many members don’t see any difference between unity and conformity. (Quotes from this webpage: https://www.lds.org/church/temples/frequently-asked-questions?lang=eng)
On a related note, the church has recently released videos under the heading “Unity in Diversity.”
@Anon –
Your post made me laugh. As a teen, we had a gentleman from Africa join our ward. He was very tattooed and had extreme facial scarring. The ward loved him and absolutely accepted him. But he did conform in every other way (white shirt and tie on Sundays, etc.). And somehow that conformity was like a proof that he was trying to ‘overcome’ his native culture. As a teen, I always hoped he’d show up in a wildly native outfit just to shock everyone, but he never did.
It seems to me that we should rethink this notion that our “worship” has to exist in a bubble that can be easily popped. Why are we so fragile? Isn’t worship supposed to shake us out of our stupor? To provoke us to change? It seems like the distraction in this story is the person’s inability to focus, and her lack of humility. Do we expect the other people around us to blend into the wallpaper? How can people be a distraction from the gospel when the 2nd greatest commandment is to love our neighbor?
I had a friend at BYU who asked me if I thought everyone would look the same – like LITERALLY the same – in the Celestial Kingdom–same race, hair, clothing, etc. I laughed at the idea and thought what a strange idea that was, and why would anyone think that it was a heavenly notion for their to be no physical difference between people. That was my reaction after a scant few months in Utah, but now I see why someone from Utah would have been conditioned to equate conformity with righteousness. It still blows my mind.
There’s a family at my (large conservative Presbyterian) church with three teenage daughters who dye their hair in bright colors (sometimes blue, sometimes purple, etc.). One of my favorite moments was one Sunday as we were leaving the sanctuary, one of the girls (bright sea-green hair that week) walked past the usher, and old man in a suit-and-tie, and the usher said “You know,. your hair is just beautiful.”
@retx
“I always hoped he’d show up in a wildly native outfit just to shock everyone”
I find it somewhat hypocritical that folks worry about minutiae like cap sleeves, dyed hair, facial makeup, tattoos, piercings, and so forth. How about all the men and women show up *without* their power suits, expensive haircuts, close shaves, control top pantyhose, shaved legs, plucked eyebrows, fake eyelashes, girdles, hair dye, perms, and makeup–you know, the way God made them. Now *that* would be a shocker.
Not everybody in the world can afford a fancy 2 piece suit, a fancy dress, and jewelry. We happen to go to church in a poor parish–we live in a rather impoverished area–where folks wear blue jeans, sport shirts, and sandals to church. I can’t see as it makes any difference whatsoever to the spirit and gravitas of the worship service. I also don’t see anybody looking around judging each other on their appearance. They are all too busy worshipping God.
I’ve started wearing a t-shirt and jeans to church every week–not because I’m uncomfortable wearing dressier clothes (I’m an attorney, so I wear a tie to work every day), but because I want other people (newcomers as well as long-timers who could use the reminder) to know that they are welcome no matter what they are wearing.
As a 50+ yr old LDS woman, I am so tired of wearing dresses and pantyhose to church. Why do we LDS women still do that? My devout elderly mother missed the most recent temple wedding of a grandaughter merely because it is very difficult for her to manage/tolerate panty/hose for more than 1 hr. at this stage of her life. (She did wear pantyhose to attend the reception and yes, she could’ve made a different choice).
I have some nice dress slacks I could wear to church. If I l didn’t live in a fairly conservative area I think I would at least occasionally wear dress slacks. I’m already one of the few square pegs so, yes, I worry that I’ll be an outcast if I bravely wore slacks to church.
The focus on outward appearance–no beards, white shirts etc seems a relatively recent development in the history of the church. Am I wrong in thinking that?
Furthermore, perhaps if LDS women started dressing like the men–slacks, white shirts etc–we would be taken more seriously by leadership?
So I have a related question, Is it ever a worshiper’s responsibility to not be a distraction to others? Where does what we wear, how we speak, how loud we speak, etc become our responsibility to not be a distraction? Does it ever? Is this about conformity or is it about just being allowed to do what we want?
I really don’t know if I have an answer for some or any of those. However, judging someone based off appearance is wrong but, unfortunately something I believe most of us do. I teach my kids they can wear and do as they please but, they cannot control others reaction to their choices. If you dress like a thug you are likely to be treated like one.
Probably just rambling here but, the above are the questions I was lead to in reading article and comments.
I have not worn a white shirt to church since prop 8, my wife, who is 68, has short grey hair and since then has had between two and four coloured stripes across the front.
She is often complimented on her hair.
Before this time my wife was RS pres, and I was HP group leader, since we took on colour, neither of us has so much as given a talk. We are now temple cleaning supervisors.
Perhaps we are excluding ourselves by our choices? We certainly feel excluded.
Lois, “Furthermore, perhaps if LDS women started dressing like the men–slacks, white shirts etc–we would be taken more seriously by leadership?” Umm…no. If anything, violating cultural gender expectations is a good way to shut down a conversation with leadership before it ever starts. See Kristine’s post here for a real world example: https://wheatandtares.org/2016/09/16/gender-employment-at-byus/
While I think the temple worker did represent a small-mindedness among Mormons, and I’m kind of surprised such a comment would be made in a fireside, I feel to push back just a little against the commenters decrying “conformity”. Unity does not come from diversity. Unity comes from what we have in common, and is achieved despite diversity. I like diversity — it keeps things interesting, and can even be soul-expanding — but we feel unified when we rejoice in the things we have in common, not in the things we don’t.
I think the principle of not judging is really a principle of not condemning. We judge people by what their word choice, what they smell like, what mannerisms they use, and yes, by what they look like. All of these things can tell something about a person, and judge we must. But we must judge charitably, and we certainly shouldn’t look for opportunities to look down on somebody for a perceived weakness.
At the same time, the way we present ourselves does affect other people — it’s not just their responsibility to tolerate us. A woman who bathes in perfume and jumps on the treadmill next to me, or the guy who likes to hum to the special musical number in sacrament mtg, or the woman who likes to swing her bare buttocks as she saunters past me and my kids at the beach, all affect me. I can choose how I react, and I need to react charitably (especially since none of those people have any intent towards me at all), but they do affect me. Likewise, I may not intend to cut someone off on the freeway, and maybe I think the guy is overreacting because it wasn’t at all dangerous, but my actions affect him.
Because of this, it makes sense to have certain standards and cultural expectations. We’re not all going to prioritize all those cultural expectations equally. Some of us send thank you notes, some of us try to dress nicely for church, and some of us try to be on time. Those of us who don’t aren’t necessarily ungrateful, irreverent, or disrespectful, but if those are the norms of our culture, we have just as much responsibility for the messages we send people as they do to be charitable towards us if the messages we send aren’t up to their standards.
The cigarette thing is interesting because it’s not just simply a smell–it’s a public health hazard. And while the smell of tobacco isn’t going to kill anyone, there is the case of a woman dying from second-hand smoke (she was a severe asthmatic working in a bar–go figure.) https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080208101802.htm
I understand both the bishop’s point of view, as well as people who don’t want to smell cigarettes. But I do think there is too much shunning of people. Al Fox Carraway told several experiences inside and outside the temple of Mormons displeased with her tattoos. That’s not right, and we should be more welcoming.
I’ve also been to Catholic weddings where people wore sneakers, jerseys, and jeans, and thought “It wouldn’t kill you to dress up a little for a wedding.” I understand that some people don’t have nice clothes, but certainly you have something better to wear than a Dallas Cowboys jersey to church!
This issue is a perfect example of the external vs. internal problem that the Church (not the gospel) and BYU has. There is simply far too much focus on the external–one’s clothing, hair length, shaving, body piercings/art–as opposed to being concerned about the internal–one’s commitment to the gospel. Of course, the external is an easy test of “obedience” for those doing the judging; if you have your white shirt or dress on, have shaved within 18 hours, and only have a single earring (as long as you are not male), you have demonstrated your fealty to the teachings of the Church (allegedly). Yet there are so many people who project an outwardly obedient persona and wear/do/say all the “right” things while simultaneously lacking the internal commitment to the gospel…or have other issues…that belie their external appearance and attitude. Perfect example: my wife has a close friend whose husband projected the persona of a devoted father, spouse, and member of the church. Of course, privately he was cheating on his wife, emotionally abusing their children, hiding money from her, and later left the family and was engaged to someone else two weeks later.
At BYU, one can be summoned to the auto-da-fe (err., Honor Code office) for trying to check out a book with five o’clock shadow or attempting to take a test in yoga pants. Any of these supposedly egregious sins can be met with all manner of BYU-mandated penalties. Yet students who cheat–by definition, making one ineligible for a temple recommend (see the honesty question)–almost always get nothing more than a slap on the wrist. (Full disclosure: I am on faculty at BYU, so I have first-hand knowledge of these things).
External conformity and unity are absolutely not the same thing. To be sure, attitude does play a role–if I am dying my hair orange before going to the temple simply to make a statement, that could legitimately be considered to be questionable. But a woman wearing dress slacks to sacrament meeting or a man who wears a pink shirt with a three-day growth of beard should absolutely not be shamed or looked down upon by other members (well, unless the guy is living a Miami Vice fantasy, which is never acceptable), nor should they be excluded from callings because of their outward appearance. We are supposed to be striving to be Christ-like. I’m pretty sure that the Savior does not care about what one wears to church on Sunday….He is more interested in the fact that you show up and that you are doing so because of your faith and commitment to the gospel.
“I’m pretty sure that the Savior does not care about what one wears to church on Sunday….He is more interested in the fact that you show up and that you are doing so because of your faith and commitment to the gospel.”
I think the Savior would care about why you choose to wear what you wear to church on Sunday, and He would know. Your fellow congregants wouldn’t. Of course, it’s really not their business, but what you wear does send a message, and does affect people, if not very much (usually). I’m not arguing with DJ, because I agree with what he/she wrote. I will say, though, that BYU is NOT representative of the church as a whole, or even of the church in Utah. It’s kind of an artificial universe. I happened to watch a couple of those face-2-face things they did for the youth, and while most of those kids looked pretty BYUish, there was a least one dude with a scraggly beard and hair knob. (Hah — after saying this, watch this dude turn out to be one of the sound techs the cameraman accidentally got on camera!)
Does anyone know where to find the (I think) conference talk by oaks where he said that the only culture for members was church culture?? I swear it was real.
I have a beard, I’m tatted up quiet extensively, & wear blue shirts to church. I’m also a Sunday school teacher. If you are letting someone distract you from worship, then you don’t have your attention on god.
Probably one of the funniest conversations I’ve ever had was when one of my last bishops in Utah flat out told my wife how shocked he was that I was as well versed in the scriptures and LDS doctrine, & actually knew what I was talking about… he didn’t expect that by looking at me. Ps, sorry for the small multi-posts but my iPhone has had a hard time posting ever since the layout change.
Lois I’ve been wearing trousers to church ever since the first ‘wear pants’ – I haven’t worn a dress or skirt to church since. I love it, but I haven’t noticed anyone taking me more seriously. However, there are now more women in the congregation who would seem to feel more comfortable in trousers from time to time, including our oldest very arthritic sister.
I sat next to a heavily tattoo guy in the Temple last year and I had two thoughts.
1. I wonder what his story is?
2. Good for him!
but I did get a bit distracted thinking that if I got a tattoo, what would it be? Not his fault.
I need to wear a long knee brace and am female. I feel so sad that our ward will look down upon me if I wear pants that I do not attend Church. Our dress code is definitely keeping many good people from attending.