If Jesus were to walk into an LDS church meeting today, how would He be received? If the latest article in a church magazine on the subject of dress and grooming is any indication, Jesus very likely would be asked to leave. Why? Well, let’s start with hair: in all the pictures I have seen of Jesus, He has long hair. And, typically, He is shown wearing open-toed shoes. According to an LDS church General Authority, such things are offensive to God.
In the June issue of the New Era, the LDS Church’s official magazine aimed at adolescents, Elder D. Todd Christofferson of the Presidency of the Seventy (the governing council just below the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and First Presidency in the church’s hierarchical ecclesiastical structure) reprised a talk he gave to young people in 2004 titled “A Sense of the Sacred.” This issue is not yet available online at the church’s web site.
Here are the lowlights of the article with my comments on the same:
A Sense of the Sacred
Awhile back a young woman from another state in the United States came to live with some of her relatives for a few weeks. On her first Sunday she came to church dressed in a simple, nice blouse and knee-length skirt set off with a light, button-up sweater. She wore hose and dress shoes, and her hair was combed simply but with care. Her overall appearance created an impression of youthful grace. Unfortunately, she immediately felt out of place. It seemed like all the other young women her age or near her age were dressed in casual skirts, some rather distant from the knee; tight T-shirt-like tops that barely met the top of their skirts at the waist; no socks or stockings; and clunky sneakers or flip-flops. One would have hoped that seeing the new girl, the other girls would have realized how inappropriate their manner of dress was for a chapel and for the Sabbath day and immediately changed for the better. Sad to say, however, they did not, and it was the visitor who, in order to fit in, adopted the fashion of her host ward. This example illustrates one of my concerns.
So, the standard is
now knee-length skirts. Are you saying,
Todd, that the Lord is offended by young women wearing skirts that do not fall
to the knee or lower? I had never
pictured the God of the Universe looking down from his throne on the planet
nearest the star Kolob with a measuring tape in hand to determine with
exactness the length of skirt his young female worshippers were wearing.
And are only “light”
sweaters with buttons acceptable to the Lord? Or can a young woman wear a heavy sweater without buttons? Todd, you imply that young women who fail to
wear hose to church are dressed inappropriately. This seems a strange
requirement to me, as the wearing of hosiery is often designed to accentuate
the attractiveness of a woman’s leg for the pleasure of men. For this reason, strippers and prostitutes
often wear pantyhose as a means of eliciting a sexual response in their male
customers. Todd, I am sure this is not
your motivation for encouraging teen girls to wear stockings or pantyhose to
church. I do have another question for
you on this subject, though: is it better for a young woman to wear fishnet
stockings or attend church barelegged?
Years ago my ward in Tennessee used a high school for Church services on Sundays while our chapel, which had been damaged by a tornado, was being repaired. A congregation of another faith used the same high school for their worship services while their new chapel was being constructed. I was shocked to see what the people of this other congregation wore to church. There was not a suit or a tie among the men. They appeared to have come from or to be on their way to the golf course. It was hard to spot a woman wearing a dress or anything other than very casual pants or even shorts. Had I not known that they were coming to the school for church meetings, I would have assumed that there was some sort of sporting event taking place.
So, let me get this
straight, Todd. You want to dictate to
people of other faiths how they should dress for their services as well as
dictate to young people how they should dress for ours? And you think that one reason people of other
faiths should dress the way Latter-day Saints do is so that you, as an
observer, won’t be confused about whether they are going to church or a
sporting event? Your “shock” at seeing
how people dress for their worship activities reminds me of some folks I have
read about in the scriptures: “And it
came to pass that after much labor among them, they began to have success among
the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues
because of the coarseness of their apparel—therefore they were not permitted to
enter their synagogues to worship God, being esteemed as filthiness; therefore
they were poor; yea, they were esteemed by their brethren as dross.” Alma 32:2-3. Congratulations, Todd, you have much in common with people from the Book
of Mormon, even the Zoramites! Oh, and why do you capitalize the word “Church”
when referring to the LDS church but not when referring to other
“churches”? Is that a subtle arrogance
It offends God when we come into His house, especially on His holy day, not groomed and dressed in the most careful and modest manner that our circumstances permit. Where a member from the hills of Peru must cross a river to get to church, the Lord surely will not be offended by the stain of muddy water on his white shirt. But how can God not be pained at the sight of one who, with all the clothes he needs and more and with easy access to the chapel, nevertheless appears in church in rumpled cargo pants and a T-shirt?
Well, it’s nice to
know there is a “Peruvian Hillbilly Exception” to the Lord’s dress and grooming
standards. Of course, curses on the
Peruvian hillbilly who wears a blue shirt to church—that would, I am sure,
offend the Lord’s tender sensibilities. So, God is not only offended but “pained” by: flipflops, clunky
sneakers, skirts a half-inch above the knee, shirts that only barely meet the
top of a skirt, colored shirts, bare legs on women, cargo pants, and men who
don’t wear neck ties.
Some say dress and hair don’t matter—they say that it’s what’s inside that counts.
Yes, Todd, “some” do
say that. Who are some of these “some”? Here’s one: “But the Lord said unto Samuel,
Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have
refused him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the
outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.” 1 Samuel 16:7. Last time I checked, that was a Seminary
Scripture Mastery scripture. I guess
it’s a good thing the Lord did not need to rely on you, Todd, to find the man
who would become King of Israel. In a
Messianic prophecy, Isaiah said the Lord “shall not judge after the sight of
his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: But with righteousness
shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.”
Isaiah 11:3-4. And Jesus said “Judge not
according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” John 7:24. Todd, the Jesus I read about in both the New
Testament and the Book of Mormon seems to be foreign to the Jesus you claim is
“offended” and “pained” by people coming to worship Him however they are
dressed. As Hugh Nibley, Mormon
apologist extraordinaire, put it: “The worst sinners, according to Jesus, are
not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence
on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their
precious concern for status symbols, their strict legality, their pious
patriotism.” Approaching Zion at 54.
[T]hose who do not appreciate holy things will lose them. Absent a feeling of reverence, they will grow increasingly casual in attitude and conduct. They will drift from the moorings that their covenants with God could provide. Their feelings of accountability to God will diminish and then be forgotten. Thereafter, they will care only about their own comfort and satisfying their uncontrolled appetites. Finally, they will come to despise sacred things, even God, and then they will despise themselves. . . . Rather than letting your life drift into carelessness, may it be one of increasing exactness in obedience.
This is really an astonishing series of pronouncements, Todd. But perhaps I should not be surprised. You are merely following the GA formula for talks: tell a fanciful story or two that fits perfectly into the point you want to make, pronounce some guilt-inducing new requirement for the membership to worry about, induce fear with a parade of horribles that allegedly will follow failure to adhere to the new requirements, and close with a plea for greater obedience to the counsel of the Brethren. But I must say this is really off the charts. We are supposed to believe that the slide down the slippery slope begins with wearing flipflops to church or, for men, wearing a blue dress shirt instead of a white. From there, the descent into perdition and a state of self-loathing is sure to follow. The ridiculousness of these assertions to me is so obvious as to need no elaboration. But your audience, Todd, consists primarily of unsophisticated young people who have been indoctrinated their whole lives to “follow the Brethren” unquestioningly. So, your statements, while laughable to someone like me who can easily shrug them off, are irresponsible and dangerous to the impressionable young people who read the New Era. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for your fearmongering in the name of God. While you may be “concerned” about the length of skirts young women wear on Sunday, I am concerned about the harmful effects your despicable remarks may have on those same young people. That you are in a position of authority in a church that claims to be run by Jesus Christ Himself, and that you apparently have the blessing of those in the highest governing councils to peddle your nonsense, is enough to induce nausea.