Anyway, this is a topic that has always irked the crap out of me. When I was a new convert, I wore new slacks to church my first two Sundays. The third Sunday, I felt like wearing a sundress. After church, a counselor in the bishopric came and thanked me for my “appropriate clothing”. I know he meant well, but I seriously felt about 2-inches tall. And he seriously said it in the nicest way possible, but nevertheless, I understood what he meant. That weekend, I went to JC Penney and bought two dresses on my meager student’s salary.

Dialogue recently printed an article entitled, “A Style of our Own: Modesty and Mormon Women, 1951-2008.” The paper did a great job of chronologging the change in emphasis in women’s clothing in the church. The “dress feminine” push to not wear slacks was apparently a direct response to 2nd wave feminism. That alone is going to be my motivation for wearing slacks this Sunday at church

When I was a kid growing up in Montana & Washington DC & Maryland & Denmark… I do not remember everyone wearing a white shirt. When did it change to being the appropriate or required attire? In some places there are people who do not have or can not afford a dress or a white shirt or??? Do you think the Lord would send them away because they weren’t in the right clothes? In July I was on vacation in MA and went to church with my kids. I did not bring a dress in my suitcase so I wore a nice pantsuit. I was worried about it because I knew I would be received negatively in Utah in that attire & didn’t want to embarress my kids. But I wanted to go with them also. So I did. When I was sitting in RS I noticed that maybe a fourth (?) of the women were in pants. My daughter-in-law explained that there were some really poor families in their ward. I saw an older woman (in a dress with nurse type shoes) roll her eyes and shake her head at a young mother that walked in in pants. I felt like going over to her and asking her if Jesus would like her wearing her nurses shoes to church. When I was a child in Denamrk, a missionary came up to me at church and said, “Shame on you for wearing saddle shoes to church!” They were the only shoes I had. I hated them too, but that is all I had. Would barefoot have been better? I think it is ridiculous that there is a stigma for dress. Being clean and modest is one thing… but really, don’t you think the important thing is to go to church?! Instead we went up to the young woman and welcomed her there and visited for a bit after the class.

I also think that visiting and welcoming people to the ward is an important part of being a good person. Walking absolutely silent into a meeting, no, and sitting there silently ok, but then checking on others on the way out & on the way to class & after church is important. Those who just go to church & think they are better than anyone else because they go to church…& don’t do anything good for others at any time… do not impress me as being good Mormons. Those who call a single mom and tell her that “We are having a Valentines Day Dinner party at the church and you are not invited because it is for couples.” has something wrong with them. Someone who would walk up to a man, who was investigating and brought to an Elder’s party by his wife, and say to him: “What are you doing here, You’re not an Elder.” has something wrong with him… What happened to fellowshipping?

I believe our Heavenly Father loves us in pants and in skirts and does not love us less for our choice or ability to conform to accepted/expected norms.

And I really don’t think our Saviour will turn any of us away because they were only able to, or felt more comfortable attending services in a pant suit or flip flops or a sarong, etc.

I don’t wear hose. Ever. When it’s cold I wear socks in my boots. When it’s hot I wear sandles. I wear shoes I can walk a few miles comfortably in. Flip flops are a more affordable version of sandles and if my teens want to wear them, I’m fine with that. An ugly closed-in old lady high heeled shoe that you cannot walk in is not more holy than my daughters’ flip flop.

Jesus does not care one bit what you wear on your feet, but Jesus certainly did a lot of walking, which should have been more the discussion topic in yesterday’s Relief Society lesson.

Jesus was a homeless, unemployed man. His focus was on acceptance and love, not conformity to a 1950s dress code.

It broke my heart!!! I had been a faithful member of the church for about 20 years. In the past I had worn a skirt but having put on weight I now felt not only comfortable, but looked more professional and better dressed in a suit.

Well I got released, and when I said I would wear a skirt I was recalled to another position. By then my heart would not heal and I never felt comfortable coming to church. I could only find 2 skirts that fit me and I dreaded getting dressed for church each week.

In the end I moved ward, for a couple of reasons, but mostly because I wanted to enjoy coming to church again and not having to worry that I was not wearing a ‘skirt’.

I believe Heavenly Father loved me no matter what I was wearing. But even wearing pant suits I was always well dressed, and I believe I was able to do my calling successfully whether I was wearing a skirt or not. My wardrobe is expensive because of the career I am in, so pants were of high quality, as was the rest of my outfit.

The interesting thing was that this bishop was quite young and I am surprised it became an issue for him.

Answering one question pretty much clarifies any gospel and/or cultural nuances….

Would I be comfortable with this ________________(attire/appearance/music/movie/humor/entertainment/attitude/action/behavoir/thought/etc.)in the presence of my Savior?

If I answer yes, then great…
If I can adjust to answer yes, even greater!

Smiles!
GlasFam4Ever

I agree with this. A young man in our ward did an Eagle project where he collected white shirts and ties for members in South America and Africa. There’s nothing wrong with that, of course, but I wondered if all that time and leadership might have been put to better use than trying to “Mormon-ize” people in other cultures.

What others have also noted here is when you visit cathedrals and other worship places, usually the manner of people attending is more respectful of being in a place of worship: less chatty and more consciously intent on the worship experience. I’ve seen this when visiting Italian masses, and also when visiting Shinto shrines. Attendees are often dressed casually (though knees and shoulders are usually covered) and worship leaders are dressed very ceremonially. There is more a feeling of respectfulness than I’ve usually found in an LDS chapel meeting — reminds me in mood to an LDS temple, though in a much more accessible environment to outsiders. Not to say these are the “right” ways to worship; it just shows to me that valid worship and respect for deity needn’t fit a certain mold.

At an “opposite” is our church where the “dress code” is nice casual but some come dressed down more and some come dressed up more. It only seems “opposite” if a certain dress code is really the point of worship. Our worship is very upbeat and energetic (for the most part) and the preaching very well prepared and Christ-/Bible-centered. Again, I don’t wish to say it the “right” way to worship either. The point is that there is a tangible reverence for God and His gospel. One shouldn’t confuse that reverence is absent because attire is more casual and mood not somber. It is just a different manifestation and culture for worship.

I think it is a life-enhancing practice to seek out and experiences different kinds of worship, and to consciously choose an environment that personally leads one to God. When one’s tradition is chosen just because it is familiar, I think such reinforces detachment and alienation from abiding God in meaningful worship; It makes worship mundane. Whether worship is very liturgical or not, whether somber or energetic, it should stand out from everyday life — break one’s everyday mental routine. I think each individual should consciously and intentionally evaluate what they, their marriage, and their family needs, even if that is one’s family tradition or even if it isn’t.

The only tragedies in this discussion, IMO, are when some LDS assume the “Mormon Corridor” cultural norm is God’s preferred way of worship. A globalizing LDS church should work more intentionally to let local wards and branches manifest local cultures of worship style, rather than culturally imposing a religious franchising “McMormonism” identities. (Thankfully they are not always successful in accomplishing this.) And even more tragic is when this corporate cultural preference is justified by perverted prejudices and assumptions that one can judge the inward commitment of members by their outward appearance. Not only is this dehumanizing, alienating, “Pharisaical” and arrogant, but, in my opinion, is intently in opposition to Jesus Christ’s ministry and the gospel guidelines for His church contained in the New Testament.

Flip-flops was in references to a Jeffery Holland talk that mentioned Beach Wear. This was in GC a few years ago. Anyone have reference?

I enjoyed my peach-color shirt yesterday. I think I was the only one there. I also found it interesting that my deacon aged son came to me asking if it was ok that the sweater he was wearing only allowed the top of his collar (white) to be seen. (humor)

Thanks for the quotation, Andrew.

“The Church has not attempted to indicate just how long women’s or girls’ dresses should be nor whether they should wear pant suits or other types of clothing. We have always counseled our members to be modest in their dress, maintaining such standards in connection therewith as would not be embarrassing to themselves and to their relatives, friends, and associates.” (Statements of the LDS First Presidency, p. 123.)

As far as I can tell, that approach of teaching principles but not mandating a specific dress code still holds today. Consider this 2004 statement from “True to the Faith”:

“Your clothing expresses who you are. It sends messages about you and it influences the way you and others act. When you are well groomed and modestly dressed, you can invite the companionship of the Spirit and exercise a good influence on those around you.”

Although the Brethren have not set any specific dress code, I have unfortunately heard reports that stake and ward leaders have attempted to impose a specific dress code on their stakes and wards.

I don’t have a problem with that statement, but at issue for me are what constitutes “holy places and events” and “casual dress”.

When going to the temple or attending a meeting containing an ordinance, I’m pretty formal. At almost all other times, I dress down to be comfortable while trying to stay respectful by having my appearance fall within the range of “neat”.

The last time anyone commented on this was Friday, at a fireside meeting with Elder Russell Nelson speaking. My shirts were still at the cleaners, and I really wasn’t in the mood for a tie anyway, so I was casually but neatly attired. And I caught some heat from a couple of friends. My response was something along the lines of “Are you offended for yourself or for Elder Nelson? I’m pretty sure he doesn’t mind”

Side note: This event was an adult only thing, and I’m assuming it was a gathering of the “faithful”. Saw a lot of neatly trimmed facial hair spread through the congregation and liked it.

As far as I’m concerned, non-white shirts are more righteous.

In my own case, I wear a full suit with white shirt whenever I am attending the normal block of meetings and other instances where I am representing my Priesthood leaders, specifically because I have been asked to do so by my direct Priesthood leader as a result of my current calling. I generally wear dress pants and a polo shirt to the non-public leadership meetings I attend, especially when they are in the evening and I go there straight from work – because these meetings are *administrative* NOT for worship. (I would change that if requested directly, but that has not been mentioned – even though I often am the most casually dressed person in the room.) I often wear jeans and a t-shirt to fellowship dinners and ward or stake functions that don’t include the chapel – because these are gatherings of friends that are NOT “church-related”, per se. If I was involved in missionary correlation meetings Thursday night in our ward, I would show up in jeans or slacks – whatever I was wearing at the time.

Too many times, people equate any meeting arising out of our callings or relationships at church as “church meetings” that require “church dress”. Imo, “church dress” is a misnomer, since there are widely varying reasons and purposes for meetings and, therefore, widely varying models of appropriate “church dress”. I reserve “Sunday dress” for direct worship. Everything else is a step below that; therefore, so is the way I dress.

So apparently there will be a new accomodaions away from Jazz Age men’s cleanshavenness and women’s silk-stockinged legs under skirts towards men’s well-trimmed beards and ladies’ pantsuits?

(…JOKING!!…)