Beards

[EllenMaksoud]

OK, so in RS, we just got done studying George Albert Smith, and now we are starting on Lorenzo Snow. I think the studies are great, and I am just completely mesmerized by the principles that are taught within our church.

One thing I have noticed is that both these men had facial hair. But, I keep hearing that men aren't supposed to grow hair there. I thought I saw a thread where all this was discussed but can't find it.

[Hamba Tuhan]

It's actually scattered throughout the thread you started before: http://www.mormondia...d-lds-messages/.

There is no official Church policy against facial hair for the general membership. I'm the second counsellor in our bishopric, and I have some. Our first counsellor came back from holidays with an awesome beard.

I'm not entirely certain how the whole 'no facial hair' fallacy spreads, but I suspect it may have something to do with dress and grooming guidelines for missionaries getting Paharisee-ised. (If it's good for missionaries, then it must be good -- no, a commandment! -- for everyone.)

Edited January 8, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[HairBear]

I've had a beard, in one form or another, since I was 17. And I doubt I'll ever be totally clean shaven as it makes me look way too young. No one has ever asked me to shave it, and I've even had comments from Stake Presidents and Sevenities on how good I look with it. I've even attracted a few ladies when I also had long hair who said I looked like their favourite picture of Jesus. I do hope the Church relaxes the view of facial hair, as long as it's kept neat I don't see that there will be a problem.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I do hope the Church relaxes the view of facial hair.

To be accurate, 'the Church' doesn't have a 'view of facial hair' in relation to most members -- strict, relaxed, or otherwise. Search both online handbooks. There isn't a single mention of facial hair in either one of them. I know some of you seem to live in places where members of the Church have an issue with facial hair, but I'm guessing even then one only finds pockets of such people. I visited Salt Lake City one weekend about eight years ago, and I just picked a random ward to attend on the Sunday. The bishop, one of his counsellors, and the visitor from the high council all had beards. I was back there two-and-one-half years ago, and again I attended a random sacrament meeting before catching my flight overseas. Once again, a visitor from the high council was speaking. He was a ski patrol guy and had a very nice beard ... as did fully half of the men in the chapel with me, with goatees especially popular. So it's obviously not a SLC thing. I have wondered on occasion if maybe it crops up in areas where historically large numbers of young adults have gone to BYU to study?

[Tacenda]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that temple ordinance workers are not allowed facial hair. Maybe this how it got started along with no facial hair allowed at the BYU schools.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Tacenda

[Hamba Tuhan]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that temple ordinance workers are not allowed facial hair.

It was mentioned in Ellen's earlier thread. This is a recent change, however, appearing only about a decade ago. I was working in a temple in America at the time, and, as I mentioned in the other thread, the introduction of dress and grooming standards by the temple department was accompanied by a cover letter which basically explained that such standards were being introduced because people had been complaining about lack of consistency and asking for them.

[canard78]

It's one of those cultural things that has no doctrinal foundation. It started becoming more popular as an idea in the 1960s when David O Mackay was president. He had no beard, hippies had big beards. Given it was a time of a transitioning world and a time of modernising the church, it's not a surprise that beards were out in favour of a more professional (non-rebel!) appearance. I think it would be unfair to say that this was driven by the church, but more the church leaders responding to social norms and wanting to be seen in a good light by other organisations. Some have also suggested church leaders moved away from beards to disassociate themselves from the images of beard-wearing, polygamy practicing mormon fundamentalists in the mountains. A lot of this is speculative as there's not really ever been an official mandate 'no beards.'

As for 2012:

A full-time missionary and a BYU student must not have a beard (occasional exceptions with written permission at BYU). Given many church leaders are RMs (and some both RMs and BYU grads) some of those ideas stick and get applied to their general church attitudes. This is understandable. At a time when they felt the most "enlightened," they were smart and beardless... it's probably going to have an impact on how they view things in future. Especially as it's re-enforced by the corporate environment they graduate into.

At BYU:

If worn, moustaches should be neatly trimmed and may not extend beyond or below the corners of the mouth. Men are expected to be clean-shaven; beards are not acceptable. Earrings and other body piercing are not acceptable.

I had no idea until I looked it up that guys at BYU can have with a tache. Funny. Apparently they're making a comeback.

Men who serve in the temple are asked to shave, but I can't find this anywhere in writing. I read on another thread that "no-beards" for temple workers came as a 'usually' and a guideline (not a mandate), but don't CFR that as I don't have one. A male member can attend the temple with a beard.

There is no written rule against beards.

Here's the only reference to male grooming in the current church handbook of instruction (and it only applies to administering the sacrament):

Those who bless and pass the sacrament should dress modestly and be well groomed and clean. Clothing or jewelry should not call attention to itself or distract members during the sacrament. Ties and white shirts 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.

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church

One (vague) reference to beards and grooming is from Elder Nelson in 2003:

To bear the priesthood means you have a personal responsibility to magnify your calling. Let each opportunity to serve help to develop your power in the priesthood. In your personal grooming, follow the example of the living prophets. Doing so gives silent expression that you truly comprehend the importance of “the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God.”

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2003/10/personal-priesthood-responsibility?lang=eng&query=grooming#20-

That could be interpreted as 'no-beards' given the living prophet in 2003 had no beard. On the other hand, it has not been frequently repeated and is not in the current guidelines.

In 2008, Elder Hales suggested having a "well groomed appearance" will help you have the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

Well groomed does not mean shaven. It means to have a to clean and well-maintained appearance. It's also possible to be both well groomed and have a beard. In fact, President Monson once talked about George Albert Smith's "well-groomed beard."

Despite all that, there will still be some stake presidents and Bishops who require people in leadership to be clean-shaven and make it a matter of obedience. It has been asked of me and many friends and relatives. Is the priesthood leader going beyond the guidelines? I think so. Should the individual still accept that request for obedience. Perhaps. We are asked to sustain our priesthood leaders. Perhaps we should do, even when they are acting under cultural, non-doctrinal prejudice. I know I must do the same and if it helps them feel sustained then I guess I should chill and get on with it when asked (I have occasional beard, especially in the Winter).

One final thought. It seems the cultural implications of beards has long plagued the Lord's people (whether grown or not grown). In Isaiah 15:2-3 Moab howls because all their hair and beards are forcefully cut off. The institute manual states: "The clipping of the hair and beard was an indication of great shame in ancient Israel and in this verse means that Moab’s supposed pride and prominence would turn to shame and reproach."

Maybe I'm just too much of a Moabite.

[canard78]

While researching some answers for you, I found the following amusing bits:

From 'middle-aged mormon man's blog'

I don't agree the tone of his entire post of white shirts and beards - but I illustrates the underlying attitude to them.

I also liked the first comment on the blog from the life-long bearded member 'Paul' who said: "A young missionary I knew from my home ward thought it was odd that I was asked to shave to serve in the temple and he said he thought it was wrong to ask me. I responded that I would have happily shaved my head to serve in the temple."

[HairBear]

To be accurate, 'the Church' doesn't have a 'view of facial hair' in relation to most members -- strict, relaxed, or otherwise.

Then doesn't that mean that 'the Church' does have a 'view of facial hair' in relation to SOME members? I live in the UK, and even here we have had at least one Branch President in my branch had been told to shave his beard when extended the calling. Whether it's culture or written down in a handbook, it is still a view held by those in leadership positions in the Church.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Men who serve in the temple are asked to shave, but I can't find this anywhere in writing. I read on another thread that "no-beards" for temple workers came as a 'usually' and a guideline (not a mandate), but don't CFR that as I don't have one.

Handbooks for temple workers are not available online. It was I who wrote in the other thread that the new guidelines for temple workers state that 'generally' males should have no facial hair. (That was the message when I worked in the temple; I have no way of knowing if the language has changed since then.) As I pointed out before, this was precisely how the new policy worked in my case. When it arrived, I had facial hair, and I was also then acting in a film one of my mates was making in order to apply to film school. It took us 11 months to finish shooting the film, during which time my two years service in the baptistery came to an end, though I continued to serve with a beard. I simply explained my situation, and it was a non-issue for the temple leadership.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Then doesn't that mean that 'the Church' does have a 'view of facial hair' in relation to SOME members?

The members who are exceptions are fulltime missionaries, general authorities, and temple workers. That's simply not most of us.

Whether it's culture or written down in a handbook, it is still a view held by those in leadership positions in the Church.

No, it's held by a few individuals who happen to have leadership positions in the Church. That's a very different thing. I've been without some form of facial hair for exactly two years of my adult life (my mission), and I've never once been told to shave it off -- despite serving as an elders quorum president, a counsellor in a Sunday school presidency, a Young Men president, a ward executive secretary, a stake executive secretary, a ward mission leader, and now as a counsellor in a bishopric, all in several different countries/hemispheres. Thankfully, pockets of regional culture don't define the Church as a whole.

[canard78]

Handbooks for temple workers are not available online. It was I who wrote in the other thread that the new guidelines for temple workers state that 'generally' males should have no facial hair. (That was the message when I worked in the temple; I have no way of knowing if the language has changed since then.) As I pointed out before, this was precisely how the new policy worked in my case. When it arrived, I had facial hair, and I was also then acting in a film one of my mates was making in order to apply to film school. It took us 11 months to finish shooting the film, during which time my two years service in the baptistery came to an end, though I continued to serve with a beard. I simply explained my situation, and it was a non-issue for the temple leadership.

Cool - thanks for checking this. I guess there's either a tighter policy now. There was discussion a few years back about our unit getting some set-apart veil workers ready. I was told (bearded at the time) that I'd have to shave. I was also in St George temple last year while visiting friends (I had a beard at the time). An old man working there came up to me and, placing his hand on my arm, said: "I love your beard. I'm a retired Alaskan fisherman. They made me shave my beard off when I came to serve here. I really miss it."

I think Cdowis made a fair point on the other thread. If a beard is warn as a sign of rebellion against church leaders, then it's probably a problem. If it's simply something one likes the look of (or ones wife likes it), I see no problem. My wife is a big beard fan, so I grow one from time to time as a gift to her. I guess there's a small element of individual expression in it - but if I was ever asked to remove it by a priesthood leader I most probably would.

[canard78]

Handbooks for temple workers are not available online. It was I who wrote in the other thread that the new guidelines for temple workers state that 'generally' males should have no facial hair. (That was the message when I worked in the temple; I have no way of knowing if the language has changed since then.) As I pointed out before, this was precisely how the new policy worked in my case. When it arrived, I had facial hair, and I was also then acting in a film one of my mates was making in order to apply to film school. It took us 11 months to finish shooting the film, during which time my two years service in the baptistery came to an end, though I continued to serve with a beard. I simply explained my situation, and it was a non-issue for the temple leadership.

The UK has the left-over influence of the 60s bearded culture in a lot of our stake presidency/high council age members. It's a misperception of church standards. But still becomes a question of whether to follow a priesthood leader or not. As a fellow Brit, I've heard it lots and lots of times from people who are in their 60s or older that priesthood leaders should not have a beard. Sometimes it's asked "as a favour" to the leader. Sometimes it's a positioned as a matter of obedience and sustaining your leader.

Give it another generation or two and it will probably be gone.

[HairBear]

The members who are exceptions are fulltime missionaries, general authorities, and temple workers. That's simply not most of us.

I never said 'most' you did. All I said was that I hope the Church relaxes the view of facial hair, which you said that the Church didn't have a view, and then contradicted yourself by saying that there are exceptions. Either it has a view or it doesn't, if there is no view on facial hair how can there be exceptions?

No, it's held by a few individuals who happen to have leadership positions in the Church. That's a very different thing. I've been without some form of facial hair for exactly two years of my adult life (my mission), and I've never once been told to shave it off -- despite serving as an elders quorum president, a counsellor in a Sunday school presidency, a Young Men president, a ward executive secretary, a stake executive secretary, a ward mission leader, and now as a counsellor in a bishopric, all in several different countries/hemispheres. Thankfully, pockets of regional culture don't define the Church as a whole.

Again, you say that I've said something wrong, and then contradict yourself by saying the same thing I did. Where did I say something that is different to what you said? I've served as a counsellor in the Elders Quorum three times, and like I said, I've had facial hair since I was 17.

[Storm Rider]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned that temple ordinance workers are not allowed facial hair. Maybe this how it got started along with no facial hair allowed at the BYU schools.

Temple ordinance workers not having facial hair is a rather recent policy. I suspect that it will change in the future and become a non-issue again. A standard image or appearance is desired in the temple. It is a small price to pay to serve in the temple; however, this policy has nothing to do with worthiness.

[sdc999]

I was only approached once by a member who asked if I would not look better without a beard but I thought nothing of it. Individuals spout about a lot of stuff. But, a return missionary, 3-4 weeks home, came to me irate once that a member of the stake presidency approached him in the foyer of the Temple and stated how disappointed he was that this young man would show up at the temple with a beard. He was a little distraught over it at the time. Several years later, this same guy was appoached in Sac. meeting by older HP. He (HP) said he thought it was time that they started teaching their son, age 2, to start wearing regular shoes to church, not sandals or crocs. This time, he was less diplomatic in his response.

The real problem is that when confronted with inaccuracies, people tend to tuck tail and run. Stand up for what you believe is right. I did and to this day, still have a reputation for saying what I believe. I nearly had a bishop's wife stroke out right in class because I said a Baptist would probably be standing next to her in Heaven.

[Tacenda]

I was only approached once by a member who asked if I would not look better without a beard but I thought nothing of it. Individuals spout about a lot of stuff. But, a return missionary, 3-4 weeks home, came to me irate once that a member of the stake presidency approached him in the foyer of the Temple and stated how disappointed he was that this young man would show up at the temple with a beard. He was a little distraught over it at the time. Several years later, this same guy was appoached in Sac. meeting by older HP. He (HP) said he thought it was time that they started teaching their son, age 2, to start wearing regular shoes to church, not sandals or crocs. This time, he was less diplomatic in his response.

The real problem is that when confronted with inaccuracies, people tend to tuck tail and run. Stand up for what you believe is right. I did and to this day, still have a reputation for saying what I believe. I nearly had a bishop's wife stroke out right in class because I said a Baptist would probably be standing next to her in Heaven.

Yes I believe the culture in our church can be very offending and maybe the reason some might go inactive. I never thought it would happen to me, but see where it might be a problem now.

[JAHS]

Having facial hair was more of a concern 30 or 40 years ago but not so much anymore:

President Harold B. Lee told a story of a woman who wrote,

"Tomorrow my husband will shave off his long, full beard. Because of the request of the stake president and your direction in the Priesthood Bulletin, he must not have the appearance of evil or rebellion if he is to get a recommend to go to the temple." Then President Lee responded to the letter,

"Now, in your letter you tell me that you are saddened because with the shaving off of the beard and the cutting of the hair, which, to you, made your husband appear as the prophets Moses and Jacob, he would no longer bear that resemblance. I wonder if you might not be wiser to think of following the appearance of the prophets of today. President David O. McKay had no beard or long hair; neither did President Joseph Fielding Smith; and neither does your humble servant whom you have acknowledged as the Lord's prophet.

Why is it that you want your husband to look like Moses and Jacob, rather than to look like the modern prophets to whom you are expressing allegiance? "

http://speeches.byu.edu/?act=viewitem&id=400

David S. King, president of the Washington Temple, answering a question in the Feb. 1993 Ensign, said;

"Church leaders, recognizing that fashions go in cycles, are sensitive to the rich cultural diversity within the Church. For example, they have recently held that clean, neatly trimmed and managed beards and long hair for men—as well as certain other fashions that to some might seem “trendy”—are acceptable for the temple, provided they are not inherently offensive or vulgar."

Edited January 7, 2013 by JAHS

[Tacenda]

Especially with the "I'm a Mormon" campaign, I think the beard is going to be looked at as perfectly fine. Since it shows people with all sorts of looks, no cookie cutter looks.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Tacenda

[cinepro]

While researching some answers for you, I found the following amusing bits:

From 'middle-aged mormon man's blog'

Father: Son, if you want to borrow the car, you're going to have to cut your hair.

Son: But dad, Jesus had long hair!

Father: Yes, but he walked wherever he went.

[thesometimesaint]

Heaven forbid facial hair on men. Next we'll be allowing colored shirts in Sacrament Meetings.

[Garden Girl]

Yes I believe the culture in our church can be very offending and maybe the reason some might go inactive. I never thought it would happen to me, but see where it might be a problem now.

Really? Something so mundane as beards, etc would cause you to turn away from the gospel and the beautiful doctrines of the Plan of Salvation? Because of some cultural thing not based on any written policy, or doctrine for that matter?? Hmmmm...

Heaven forbid facial hair on men. Next we'll be allowing colored shirts in Sacrament Meetings.

Now TSS... you speak like colored shirts are not allowed... hopefully you're being facetious... my Gospel Doctrine teacher never wears white shirts. He has beautiful colors... blues, burgundy, greens, golds, with coordinated ties.

Hope this finds you well and looking forward to the New Year. All good wishes...

GG

[sjdawg]

It's actually scattered throughout the thread you started before: http://www.mormondia...d-lds-messages/.

There is no official Church policy against facial hair for the general membership. I'm the second counsellor in our bishopric, and I have some. Our second counsellor came back from holidays with an awesome beard.

I'm not entirely certain how the whole 'no facial hair' fallacy spreads, but I suspect it may have something to do with dress and grooming guidelines for missionaries getting Paharisee-ised. (If it's good for missionaries, then it must be good -- no, a commandment! -- for everyone.)

Our Stake President always asked people in leadership positions to be clean shaven. Not sure if he was given that directive from anyone or if that was just his personal belief.

[Tacenda]

Really? Something so mundane as beards, etc would cause you to turn away from the gospel and the beautiful doctrines of the Plan of Salvation? Because of some cultural thing not based on any written policy, or doctrine for that matter?? Hmmmm...

Now TSS... you speak like colored shirts are not allowed... hopefully you're being facetious... my Gospel Doctrine teacher never wears white shirts. He has beautiful colors... blues, burgundy, greens, golds, with coordinated ties.

Hope this finds you well and looking forward to the New Year. All good wishes...

GG

Heaven's no. I didn't mean it to come across that way. I'm speaking of the cultural things in the church getting in the way of doctrine.

[Tacenda]

GG:

And the culture is a lot more serious than facial hair. Polygamy for instance may or may not have been culture same as blacks holding the Priesthood. Closer to my situation is feeling sorry about my son not going on a mission or getting his Eagle in scouts, which is a big deal in my ward and my husband and I didn't want to do it for him, like some people have admitted doing for their son. You'd have to live in Utah to understand. I'm sure these feelings will pass but see how that mindset might cause one not to enjoy church circles right now.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Tacenda