Proper attire for Sunday meetings

[sixpacktr]

Mnn727,

Sorry to have gotten you so upset.

But you took my one statement about micromanaging out of context. In answer to Lattelady's statement about how people do micromanage, it is my responsibility in my ward, with the calling I have. to teach doctrine. I also said afterwards that people can do as they wish after being taught that doctrine. Granted, I do not have the same responsibiity on this board as I do in my ward, but I feel that we should teach doctrine whenever possible. When I enter the realm of my opinion, I post that I am stating my opinion, not something that I have been taught and have had backed up by GC talks, scriptures, handbooks and the like.

As for the uniform remark, yes I know that the church says we should not wear a uniform. Do you know what a uniform is? I worked for 19 years in the Japanese automotive industry. A uniform mean everyone dresses the same, from pants to shirt to tie to whatever. We cannot nor should not stipulate that you have to buy a certain suit, or have the same tie, or the same shoes, etc. But I am proud to say that a white shirt and tie, when I am acting in my PH office, is my uniform. It shows that I have dressed the part to do my duty as a PH holder. That was my use of the word uniform.

Hope you have had a good night's sleep and can take this in the spirit it was given. But somehow, I expect another 'flame war' (on Collegehumor.com, BTW, they have a song called 'I didn't start the flamewar'. Unfortunately lots of crude language, but true and funny nonetheless).

[Guest Believer_1829]

I think this horse has been beaten, stabbed, buried, dug back up and burned.

[mnn727]

Sixpacktr, you say its doctrine, ok, prove it, show me in the Standard Works, or approved statements of the brethern.

[sixpacktr]

Apparently you forgot to have your milk and cookies last night before bed.

I have stated what I have stated. I suggest this:

But this may detract from the 'drawing attention to yourself' prohibition....

Have a good day...

[Vort]

Apparently you forgot to have your milk and cookies last night before bed.

I have stated what I have stated. I suggest this:

But this may detract from the 'drawing attention to yourself' prohibition....

Have a good day...

You're just jealous because I make that pink tutu look good.

[sixpacktr]

My 'thanks' is actually a ROFLMBO....

Why do some threads have 'laugh' and some don't??

[mnn727]

Apparently you forgot to have your milk and cookies last night before bed.

I have stated what I have stated. I suggest this:

But this may detract from the 'drawing attention to yourself' prohibition....

Have a good day...

Suggest what - there is nothing there. You made the claim, time to back it up or admit you are wrong.

[john doe]

Okay, I'll say it. A white shirt and tie for men and a dress for women for Sunday meeting dress is not doctrinal. It is modern practice, direction and advice from our church leaders. Straying from that advice does not condemn a person to hell.

[mnn727]

Okay, I'll say it. A white shirt and tie for men and a dress for women for Sunday meeting dress is not doctrinal. It is modern practice, direction and advice from our church leaders. Straying from that advice does not condemn a person to hell.

You and I know that, but sixpacktr apparently does not and is, according to his own words "teaching it as doctrine"

Thats 100% pure wrong. I've known people to leave the Church over things that were taught as doctrine, when they were in fact not doctrinal at all.

Teachers have an obligaton to their students to know what they are talking about. This is vital when you're talking about matters of someones salvation/exaltation. I personally know a recent convert who when the EQ was asked to pass the sacrament when the young men were at some scouting thing, showed up very nicely dressed with a pastel shirt on. the Elders Quorum President pulled him aside and told him he could not pass the sacrament because he wasn't in a white shirt (never mind the fact that the shirt he was wearing cost more and was in better shape [clean, pressed, starched]than the EQ Presidents entire outfit). The guy stewed about it all that day and then never showed up again. My point is, one person spouting off affected this mans exalation, he will now miss out on all the blessings that could have been his because someone told him something was doctrine when it wasn't -- was he too sensative? perhaps, but words matter, especially when those words are wrong.

He has stated thats its Doctrine -- then it should be easy for him to post its source.

Edited August 19, 2009 by mnn727

[sixpacktr]

Mnn,

Grrrr....

Let it go already.

[Saguaro]

What it says is that the PH holder SHOULD wear a white shirt and tie.

Can I assume you were responding to me? If by "it" you mean the CHI, it most certainly does NOT say a "PH holder SHOULD wear a white shirt and tie". This is exactly what it says:

"White shirts and ties are recommended because they add to the dignity of the ordinance. However, they should not be required as a mandatory prerequisite for a priesthood holder to participate." P. 37

It very clearly says white shirts and ties are recommended. In my opinion, whenever possible white shirts and ties are the most appropriate attire to pass the sacrament, and any Bishop would probably agree, but it is not required and one should not be denied the opportunity to pass the sacrament just because he doesn't have a white shirt and/or tie.

[Justice]

six,

I understand the ISO stuff pretty well.

I take should to me "do this unless you can't." My guess is the manual means the same thing.

When we are told we should do something it means we do it unless we can't, IMO.

[john doe]

You and I know that, but sixpacktr apparently does not and is, according to his own words "teaching it as doctrine"

Thats 100% pure wrong. I've known people to leave the Church over things that were taught as doctrine, when they were in fact not doctrinal at all.

I'm going to presume to speak for sixpacktr for a moment. I think he misspoke when he said it was doctrine, rather he meant that it is what is taught by church leadership. I choose to give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Teachers have an obligaton to their students to know what they are talking about. This is vital when you're talking about matters of someones salvation/exaltation. I personally know a recent convert who when the EQ was asked to pass the sacrament when the young men were at some scouting thing, showed up very nicely dressed with a pastel shirt on. the Elders Quorum President pulled him aside and told him he could not pass the sacrament because he wasn't in a white shirt (never mind the fact that the shirt he was wearing cost more and was in better shape [clean, pressed, starched]than the EQ Presidents entire outfit). The guy stewed about it all that day and then never showed up again. My point is, one person spouting off affected this mans exalation, he will now miss out on all the blessings that could have been his because someone told him something was doctrine when it wasn't -- was he too sensative? perhaps, but words matter, especially when those words are wrong.

He has stated thats its Doctrine -- then it should be easy for him to post its source.

I've had a couple EQ Presidents like that, they are a nuisance. One literally chewed me out once (in church) for not getting my HT done that month. I told him the next time he did that he would wake up in the hospital. Another was not happy with me for holding FHE on Sunday instead of Monday, and also that sometimes they were not formally FHE, but family togetherness time. So the next 5th Sunday lesson was on holding FHE and he specifically had Monday stated as the night for FHE and no other day would be acceptable. He looked directly at me the whole time, letting me know that he thought I was wrong and he was right. He left our ward shortly after that.

I agree, sometimes the members cause more problems than they think they are solving. But that doesn't change the goals and general guidelines. The goals and guidelines are just that, something to strive for, and there are always exceptions to most rules. On the other hand, we should be working toward achieving those goals and guidelines as much as possible.

[sixpacktr]

Sag,

Now I gotta go home and look it up again after looking this morning.

It also states that the President of the Deacons quorum is responsible for making sure that there are enough people to pass. If there are not sufficient Deacons, then he (the Pres of the DQ, (not Dairy Queen)) CONSULTS with the Bishopric on who to have help pass the sacrament. Too often, the DQP goes off on his own or people volunteer to help pass. That is not the program, because the DQP may not know of circumstances that do not allow someone to pass (even if they are wearing the accoutrements of Babylon), and it can thus be controlled by the Bishop on who is allowed to pass.

And I'm pretty sure I read 'should' not just 'recommended.' That was why I brought up the ISO thing, because that used to be a big part of my other life and it struck me as such.

Another thing to remember: when it comes to the practices in a ward or stake, the Bishop/SP has a lot of latitude. Not every little thing is written in the CHoI, and if it isn't written specifically then the Bishop (in a ward) can set what he feels best. In my last ward we made it a requirement for the YM to be well groomed and to wear a white shirt and tie. And we were following the counsel of our leaders.

Feed on that for a bit. And let the flames begin!

Edited August 19, 2009 by sixpacktr

[sixpacktr]

JD,

We had FHE on Sundays for years. My daughters all had piano lessons on Mondays. Sometimes it was right after church around the dinner table, as we talked about the gospel, sometimes it was after my holy, sacred time for a Sunday afternoon nap.

I agree that Monday is when you should do it, but Sunday worked for us.

And thanks about the clarification for me on doctrine. That was what I meant, and while some may disagree with me, I tend to think that when the Brethren pronounce something we 'should' be doing, it makes it binding to me (hence my use of the word doctrine).

If that was Believers, Sags, Mnn's and the likes hangup, here is your bone. Lots of meat on it. I'm a bad, bad pharisee, counting my anise and mint while casting others into hell...

Feel better? :)

[Justice]

One more point to add about "should..."

It means "I should" not "you should." My job is to be concenred with myself.

Of course I don't mean we shouldn't care about others. But, I can't rightly and lovingly lift someone to a place I am not currently standing.

Edited August 19, 2009 by Justice

[sixpacktr]

mmmmm, hard to swallow, but it tastes so darn good!!

http://imgtn4.ask.com/ts?t=9787834269430127663&pid=23296&ppid=6

http://imgtn1.ask.com/ts?t=4011878254952162949&pid=23296&ppid=8

Edited August 19, 2009 by sixpacktr

[eternalpromise516]

I can't help myself. :) I've got to point out these lovely typo's.

M.

thanks for pointing out the error in my post. see guys, it proves that you never know when the grammer police will be patrolling your posts haha jk

[eternalpromise516]

My apologies for writing such a confusing response. Next time I reply to something, I will make sure it is easy for everyone to understand. Thanks for pointing it out.

[Canuck Mormon]

All I can say is WOW.

6 pages of bickering after someone asked his brother why he didn't wear a tie to church.

Here's the way I see it (ie. NOT DOCTRINE), I look to the example set by our leaders. If they are wearing a shirt and tie, why shouldn't I. Do I always wear a white shirt? No (I only have 3 that fit at the moment). Do I always wear a suit? No (I have none that fit). Do I wear dress pants and a dress shirt and tie? Yes. I recently had an interview about advancing to a High Priest with my Branch President, and he commented that he noticed that I was wearing a white shirt more often and he thought that was good. Does that mean I'm only going to wear white shirts to church from now on? No.

I think that people need to calm down, and not read so much into what others are wearing to church. If you are dressed your best, it's your best. No big deal.

[Traveler]

It appears that there is more than one issue being discussed.

First. Proper Sabbath apparel. It is interesting that many think their Sabbath covenants only concern what they wear to church. This appears to me to be a misunderstanding of Sabbath covenants. For the record – I do have a Sabbath covenant which I respect and keep concerning my efforts to prepare myself for meeting with the Saints at the House of the L-rd. Almost always I wear a white shirt and tie because usually that is the best I know to offer to my L-rd on most such occasions. But the white shirt and tie is not my covenant and I would be there if the best I could present myself was in rags.

The Second Issue. The oath and covenant of the Priesthood. I am sorry but I do not agree that it is wise to put a priesthood leader in their place because they are not as smart or as righteous as you. Personally I would clean toilets for my priesthood leaders and it is not because they are such smart, righteous and great leaders – It is because I have a covenant (which I hold most dear) to accept the L-rd’s servants and because I believe that I am in debt (big time) for the opportunity to hold the holy priesthood. If I was asked to do something foolish – I would first promise that I would do whatever I was asked but I would “counsel” with my leaders with my concerns – I would never make any threat or speak “evil” of the L-rd’s anointed. If my heart was still having difficulty I would seek the help of my next priesthood leader in succession. But I would never speak ill of my covenant priesthood leaders (including the Christ). That is not my covenant or how I keep it.

The Traveler

[sixpacktr]

You always cut right to the core of the matter Traveler...

Thanks.

[Moksha]

I loved the story about some waggish missionaries in the Philipines who asked the elders at the local ward, if when the Sacrament is being passed, is the shirt or the boy was the most important. The Filipino Eders immediately answered, "The shirt".

Since football season is right around the corner, I wonder if we here at LDS.net might field a game. Shirts against Boys.

:)