Asked not to wear pants to church


Recommended Posts

Guest MormonGator
Just now, Grunt said:

 it's not like I go around looking to see what people are wearing.

Smart man. 

Just now, Grunt said:

Could be.  I go to a very small ward in the country.

I think you are right. A ward in the city is much more likely to be accepting of tattoos, long hair on men, facial hair, and the ultimate sin women wearing pants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paracaidista508 said:

Interesting quote....generally the men do... and the women and girls wear.

Implication is males have a choice and females dont.

I'm not quite sure I understand.  You're saying that the implication is that men have a choice to wear something other than pants?  Like what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Smart man. 

I think you are right. A ward in the city is much more likely to be accepting of tattoos, long hair on men, facial hair, and the ultimate sin women wearing pants. 

I rarely wear a white shirt with my suits.  My suits are all conservative, though.  One of the ladies suggested my wife get me one for Christmas, which she did (not knowing I have them, I just don't like to wear them).  Sometimes I wear it.  More often I don't.  Nobody has ever said a word to me, I still bless and pass the Sacrament, teach my class, and enjoy my Sabbaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jedi_Nephite said:

Actually, it's not an unspoken cultural standard.

As stated in the manual, "The Gospel of Jesus Christ":

"Dress:

Men and boys generally wear suits or nice pants with a shirt and tie. Women and girls wear dresses or skirts."

Source: “Worship with Us,” The Gospel of Jesus Christ (2005), 22–23

https://www.lds.org/manual/the-gospel/worship-with-us?lang=eng&query=dress+standards+at+church

Thanks so much for the link.

I find it really disturbing that apparently I can't wear pants to church.  It says so right there on the LDS website, I can't believe it, and from 2005 as well.  I am having a huge problem with this.

Also I am overwhelmed with all the responses, thank you everyone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
8 minutes ago, Grunt said:

I rarely wear a white shirt with my suits.  My suits are all conservative, though.  One of the ladies suggested my wife get me one for Christmas, which she did (not knowing I have them, I just don't like to wear them).  Sometimes I wear it.  More often I don't.  Nobody has ever said a word to me, I still bless and pass the Sacrament, teach my class, and enjoy my Sabbaths.

When I went, I'd usually wear a suit with a blue shirt. I refuse to wear a white shirt, and no one asked me to. Now when I go I wear a polo and khakis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

I find it really disturbing that apparently I can't wear pants to church.  It says so right there on the LDS website

Uh...no, it doesn't. It gives general guidelines for how members dress for Church. It does not prescribe what you (or we) are allowed to wear.

The purpose of the chapter, as its name suggests, is to help visitors be comfortable at Church. Some non-LDS churches conduct their worship services with the congregation (and sometimes the pastor) wearing jeans and t-shirts. Were you to show up at an LDS worship meeting dressed like that, you would be welcome -- but you would likely feel out of place, since everyone would be dressed in traditional "Sunday best" while you're sitting there in old jeans and a t-shirt.

Honestly, if dress traditions bother you that much, you are likely to have much deeper issues with the gospel of Jesus Christ. God seeks to remake you from the ground up, to help you to become the Godly person you can potentially be. Believe me, wearing a tie or a dress to Church is the absolute least of the sacrifices God will call on you to make. It's a joyful journey, not to be feared -- but if you get all bent out of shape because LDS men normally wear ties and LDS women normally wear dresses, then there will certainly be a learning curve in store for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Jedi_Nephite said:
2 hours ago, paracaidista508 said:

Interesting quote....generally the men do... and the women and girls wear.

Implication is males have a choice and females dont.

I'm not quite sure I understand.  You're saying that the implication is that men have a choice to wear something other than pants?  Like what?

I expect paracaidista was hyperfocusing on the word "generally" for the men, from which he (wrongly) inferred that men are excused in wearing a wider latitude of clothing types to Church than women. If anything, the opposite is true -- but whatever. It's a silly thing to worry about in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

Honestly, if dress traditions bother you that much, you are likely to have much deeper issues with the gospel of Jesus Christ. God seeks to remake you from the ground up, to help you to become the Godly person you can potentially be. Believe me, wearing a tie or a dress to Church is the absolute least of the sacrifices God will call on you to make. It's a joyful journey, not to be feared -- but if you get all bent out of shape because LDS men normally wear ties and LDS women normally wear dresses, then there will certainly be a learning curve in store for you.

I don't have a problem with the Gospel of Jesus, that is not what this is about at all, this is about how the LDS church believes women should dress for church and then to say so in back and white.  I find it very controlling that they would go into detail like that.  Surely it is more appropriate to say 'neat casual dress' rather than 'women wear skirts or dresses'.  It obviously has an effect on the members otherwise this man would not have felt the need to say something to me.  I can understand now why he did, he is just agreeing with what the church said on their own website.  However, I most certainly do not agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

Thanks so much for the link.

I find it really disturbing that apparently I can't wear pants to church.  It says so right there on the LDS website, I can't believe it, and from 2005 as well.  I am having a huge problem with this.

Also I am overwhelmed with all the responses, thank you everyone

I agree with you, it does say that, which means the church at the very least 'recommends' that girls wear dresses or skirts.  It bothers me too, I'm sure you looked perfectly respectable in your dress pants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truthseaker, you are visiting a foreign country that speaks a slightly different dialect than you're used to. I'm a native of that country, so I'm confident that I actually understand my country better than you do. And I'm telling you that your impression about the Church being "controlling" is incorrect. If there is truth in anything you are saying, it's not true in the way you understand it.

The Church is not about "controlling" its members; it's about teaching correct principles. There are also cultural things involved which may not be part of the gospel of Jesus Christ, more like how people in that culture act. Again, it's a foreign country, we do things a bit differently from what you're used to.

If you will overlook the unfortunate comment of the gentleman on Sunday and exercise some patience, you will get a much better understanding in the coming weeks, months, and years. If you instead insist on establishing your current interpretation as The Ultimate Truth, then you will miss what's really going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

I don't have a problem with the Gospel of Jesus, that is not what this is about at all, this is about how the LDS church believes women should dress for church and then to say so in back and white.  I find it very controlling that they would go into detail like that.  Surely it is more appropriate to say 'neat casual dress' rather than 'women wear skirts or dresses'.  It obviously has an effect on the members otherwise this man would not have felt the need to say something to me.  I can understand now why he did, he is just agreeing with what the church said on their own website.  However, I most certainly do not agree with it.

I'm a bit confused 

On 3/9/2018 at 5:29 PM, truthseaker said:

It was cold, I wore very nice pants, what is the big deal?

If you don't believe it should be a big deal, why is it a big deal to you?  It's one thing for you to be upset by someone else saying something to you -- which is apparently arguable based on the responses so far.  But consider what you're actually saying about the pant suit.

I realize that currently you don't subscribe to the faith.  But that isn't really the point.  You're investigating it.  You're wondering if this is it.  So, I'm wondering if you have a certain set of thoughts in your head.  I'd preface these with the fact that I'm not criticizing or accusing you.  I'm trying to get you to see what exactly your thought patterns COULD be that express themselves in the thoughts you're having on a conscious level.

  1. If they're going to be so particular about how to dress to church then this must not be the true Church of Jesus Christ.
  2. Wearing a pant suit is so important to me that if this is true, I'm not going to have anything to do with it.
  3. That guy was such a jerk that I can't believe a church filled with people like that are true representatives of Jesus Christ.

Your original post made me believe you were talking about #3, which I don't blame you for being surprised at.  But this last post leans more towards #1 and #2.

Of those, I would think you'd shy away from the first two.  But if you really do some introspection and you determine that, "Yeah, perhaps, that was my thought process.  That was pretty illogical now that i think about it.  I guess a dress or skirt isn't so bad.   Why not?"

If you are thinking #3, I'd ask you to consider how your interaction was with everyone else?  Did everyone seem to be as rude/cold as he?  Were most Mormons like that?  If so, I wouldn't blame you for running away.  We are supposed to behave better than that.  And I'm sorry you had such a negative experience.  I've been to a lot of wards (congregations) in my life.  And most Mormons are very open and caring people.

If everyone else did behave kindly to you, then I'd ask you to consider that you shouldn't let one bad apple spoil the experience for you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

Truthseaker, you are visiting a foreign country that speaks a slightly different dialect than you're used to. I'm a native of that country, so I'm confident that I actually understand my country better than you do. And I'm telling you that your impression about the Church being "controlling" is incorrect. If there is truth in anything you are saying, it's not true in the way you understand it.

The Church is not about "controlling" its members; it's about teaching correct principles. There are also cultural things involved which may not be part of the gospel of Jesus Christ, more like how people in that culture act. Again, it's a foreign country, we do things a bit differently from what you're used to.

If you will overlook the unfortunate comment of the gentleman on Sunday and exercise some patience, you will get a much better understanding in the coming weeks, months, and years. If you instead insist on establishing your current interpretation as The Ultimate Truth, then you will miss what's really going on.

I'm not saying the church in its entirety is controlling, but I do find the fact that they put forth ideals on what they expect women to wear to church controlling, especially when it effects other members so much that they feel the need to say something about it to someone.

I am not new to going to church, I have attended quite a few different church in my life and have never had anyone speak to me like that, I find it very unkind and insulting to be honest.  Am I writing the entire church off because of it? Of course not. But it is obviously a cultural problem that is, in part, backed up by church teachings.  I have a problem with that and I am allowed to have a problem with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

I'm a bit confused 

If you don't believe it should be a big deal, why is it a big deal to you?  It's one thing for you to be upset by someone else saying something to you -- which is apparently arguable based on the responses so far.  But consider what you're actually saying about the pant suit.

I realize that currently you don't subscribe to the faith.  But that isn't really the point.  You're investigating it.  You're wondering if this is it.  So, I'm wondering if you have a certain set of thoughts in your head.  I'd preface these with the fact that I'm not criticizing or accusing you.  I'm trying to get you to see what exactly your thought patterns COULD be that express themselves in the thoughts you're having on a conscious level.

  1. If they're going to be so particular about how to dress to church then this must not be the true Church of Jesus Christ.
  2. Wearing a pant suit is so important to me that if this is true, I'm not going to have anything to do with it.
  3. That guy was such a jerk that I can't believe a church filled with people like that are true representatives of Jesus Christ.

Your original post made me believe you were talking about #3, which I don't blame you for being surprised at.  But this last post leans more towards #1 and #2.

Of those, I would think you'd shy away from the first two.  But if you really do some introspection and you determine that, "Yeah, perhaps, that was my thought process.  That was pretty illogical now that i think about it.  I guess a dress or skirt isn't so bad.   Why not?"

If you are thinking #3, I'd ask you to consider how your interaction was with everyone else?  Did everyone seem to be as rude/cold as he?  Were most Mormons like that?  If so, I wouldn't blame you for running away.  We are supposed to behave better than that.  And I'm sorry you had such a negative experience.  I've been to a lot of wards (congregations) in my life.  And most Mormons are very open and caring people.

If everyone else did behave kindly to you, then I'd ask you to consider that you shouldn't let one bad apple spoil the experience for you.

 

 

Why do you go straight to ' this must not be the church of Jesus'? That's an extreme viewpoint and totally unnecessary and honestly a bit confronting. This guy was a jerk, but when I look closer I can understand why he felt the need to be a jerk.  There are 'guidelines' from 2005 saying that women should wear skirts or dresses so you can't blame him for saying something if that is what the church has on their own website.  

He was just sticking up for the ideals of the church's dress code.  So it is only natural to come to the conclusion that I have a massive problem with the church's dress code.  Its not the 1700s, women have been wearing pants for a very long time.  I believe the church needs to get rid of that recommendation so instances like the one I had to deal with don't happen anymore.

To be 100% clear, this guy was a jerk, no I don't think the whole church is not full of jerks nor do I judge the whole church off one bad experience.  I do have a big problem with the fact that the church's dress recommendations seem to be on the same side as this jerk.  They need to take that statement off the website if it really isn't a big deal if women wear pants to church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

It's important to remember that for investigators, everything is new-so some behavior can appear controlling, especially if you aren't used to religion in the first place. It can be a bit of an uncomfortable situation at first. The church doesn't control it's members, there are many free thinkers out there, for sure. I understand where both @Vort and @truthseaker are coming from

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

I believe the church needs to get rid of that recommendation

I'd say it's problematic if you're looking into the Church and one of your first impulses is to tell the Church how it needs to change. That doesn't bode well. I encourage you to put The Pantsuit Encounter behind you and start afresh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

Why do you go straight to ' this must not be the church of Jesus'?

I didn't. I was just wondering if you did.  The reason is that MANY MANY people do.  I saw way too many people who were all ready to accept all the actual gospel principles and decided to throw it all away because they couldn't get over a small issue.  I have no way of knowing if you were going down the same path or not.  So I asked.  I told you that I wasn't accusing or condemning.  I was asking.  And this is why.

15 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

That's an extreme viewpoint and totally unnecessary and honestly a bit confronting. 

I'm glad you think it's pretty extreme.  But I assure you that it is so common, that it was a perfectly reasonable question.  I'm glad that is not the person you are.

15 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

This guy was a jerk, but when I look closer I can understand why he felt the need to be a jerk.  There are 'guidelines' from 2005 saying that women should wear skirts or dresses so you can't blame him for saying something if that is what the church has on their own website.  

Ok.  So, the guy was being a jerk.  Which I believe most of us would try to apologize for.  But was he a jerk because of how he handled it?  Or is it the standard itself quoted at any time in any way whatsoever that would make someone a jerk?

Quote

To be 100% clear, this guy was a jerk, no I don't think the whole church is not full of jerks nor do I judge the whole church off one bad experience.  I do have a big problem with the fact that the church's dress recommendations seem to be on the same side as this jerk.  They need to take that statement off the website if it really isn't a big deal if women wear pants to church.

Well, I'm glad you are giving the rest of the people a chance to show the Church's true stripes.  Thank you.

Quote

He was just sticking up for the ideals of the church's dress code.  So it is only natural to come to the conclusion that I have a massive problem with the church's dress code.  Its not the 1700s, women have been wearing pants for a very long time.  I believe the church needs to get rid of that recommendation so instances like the one I had to deal with don't happen anymore.

Now, the interpretation you're making here about the Church standards is kind of odd.  But I'm still wondering why you think it's a big deal while you don't think anyone else should think it's a big deal.  Again, I'm not trying to criticize.  I really would like to understand you better.  Just consider me a child who doesn't know better.

You said that it wasn't about the truth of the Church, but why is this so important to you that -- even absent this jerk's behavior -- you still hold this standard against the Church?  Why is it such a big deal to you?  Many women wear dresses and skirts.  I know many who prefer it.  Is it so important to you that you don't?

How this guy applied it and spoke with you about it may be out of line.  But the standard itself?  I don't know any people make THAT big of a deal about it.  So, really, as nicely as I can, and hopefully as nicely as you can, please explain it to me as you would to a child.  Because I really don't understand.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Vort said:

I'd say it's problematic if you're looking into the Church and one of your first impulses is to tell the Church how it needs to change. That doesn't bode well. I encourage you to put The Pantsuit Encounter behind you and start afresh.

While I agree with you on this as far as the bigger things are concerned (doctrine for example). But, if the church is going to tell me I have to wear dresses (or at the bare minimum 'recommend'), then I'm going to tell it where to get off.

I will let it go as you suggest, but if he says anything to me again I will be saying something and taking it further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Ok.  So, the guy was being a jerk.  Which I believe most of us would try to apologize for.  But was he a jerk because of how he handled it?  Or is it the standard itself quoted at any time in any way whatsoever that would make someone a jerk?

Well, I'm glad you are giving the rest of the people a chance to show the Church's true stripes.  Thank you.

Now, the interpretation you're making here about the Church standards is kind of odd.  But I'm still wondering why you think it's a big deal while you don't think anyone else should think it's a big deal.  Again, I'm not trying to criticize.  I really would like to understand you better.  Just consider me a child who doesn't know better.

You said that it wasn't about the truth of the Church, but why is this so important to you that -- even absent this jerk's behavior -- you still hold this standard against the Church?  Why is it such a big deal to you?  Many women wear dresses and skirts.  I know many who prefer it.  Is it so important to you that you don't?

How this guy applied it and spoke with you about it may be out of line.  But the standard itself?  I don't know how many people make THAT big of a deal about it.  So, really, as nicely as I can, and hopefully as nicely as you can, please explain it to me as you would to a child.  Because I really don't understand.

I find it insulting that a stranger should feel the need to tell me how to dress at church.  I don't like that he can find 'back up' for this idea in church recommendations.  Its pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, truthseaker said:

I find it insulting that a stranger should feel the need to tell me how to dress at church.  I don't like that he can find 'back up' for this idea in church recommendations.  Its pretty simple.

It may be simple to you.  But I guess I'm not as perceptive as I like to think.  While I understand this last post, that wasn't really what my question was about.  But I guess I don't have to understand.  You'll take your path however you need to.  I was just trying to understand you better.  I guess I won't.  May the Lord guide you.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

It may be simple to you.  But I guess I'm not as perceptive as I like to think.  While I understand this last post, that wasn't really what my question was about.  But I guess I don't have to understand.  You'll take your path however you need to.  I was just trying to understand you better.  I guess I won't.  May the Lord guide you.

Perhaps you are looking into it too much.  Some guy told me what I should and shouldn't wear to church when I looked perfectly respectable, he had no right to do that.  I'm angry about it.  I'm even more angry after reading that the LDS church 'recommends' women wear skirts or dresses to church.  I like dresses, I like skirts, I like pants.  As long as I don't look like a hooker I should be able to wear what I like to church without being 'told off' by other church members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jedi_Nephite said:

I'm not quite sure I understand.  You're saying that the implication is that men have a choice to wear something other than pants?  Like what?

Maybe a dress. After all we have gay men in priesthood positions now, why not in drag

Before someone calls me out: http://mitchmayne.com

Edited by paracaidista508
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
1 hour ago, Vort said:

I expect paracaidista was hyperfocusing on the word "generally" for the men, from which he (wrongly) inferred that men are excused in wearing a wider latitude of clothing types to Church than women. If anything, the opposite is true -- but whatever. It's a silly thing to worry about in any case.

You are right. I'm just reading what was written, not what I want it to say ?

The author chose to make it two separate sentences. If the two ideas were separated by "and" instead of a period,  then perhaps it may not come off like it does. It says what it says and apparently many here agree. 

If one of my sister's would have tried to wear pants to church there would have been a mini Armageddon in our home. My parents were so ultra orthodox pioneer decendant hard core lds it would scare the crap out of some. That said, I dont  think it appropriate for Sunday services, but I don't care enough to call someone out on it.

And the white dudes who are not Polynesian or Hawaiian can leave those dresses home.

Edited by paracaidista508
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share