Temple Grooming Standards

[Duncan]

21 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Just wondering: are "perfume" and "cologne" euphemisms?

aren't scents called that?! here people call it that! Eau du Buffalo!

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

Just wondering: are "perfume" and "cologne" euphemisms?

I smell a pun somewhere around here.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

Blue, I have similar feelings to yours, but the temple does not request that women wear a specific hair style; it does ask that men be clean shaven.  When I worked in the temple I was clean shaven, yet for all the other years of my adult life I have had some type of facial hair; either a full beard or a goatee.    

To me this is akin to Moses raising up the brass serpent in similitude of the need for the Redeemer to be lifted up.  The children of Israel needed to look at the brass serpent to be healed - if they did not look they were not healed.  It is such a simple thing, but it was absolutely required if one desired to be saved.  Male temple workers are asked not to have facial hair.  There can be exceptions, but for the vast majority it is asked of us.  It is so simple, but some will kick against it and complain and lose the opportunity to serve while others without a second thought shave their beard and serve.  

My issue is, some male temple workers are asked to be clean shaven. Others aren't. 

Which means that it's based on the individual temple president's feelings and not on anything doctrinal. And sacrifice just for sacrifice's sake can cause more problems than it solves.

I agree that following the dictates of the temple president isn't a difficult thing, but I hope that someday soon we won't have to follow arbitrary standards. 

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

All us Gui men have heavy dark beards. My son Artistifero uses his as an art medium. Two of them, Hairsuticus and Bushy, had to shave twice a day while at BYU especially when they went to the testing center. My lawyer son Abogatofero is a veil worker but he shaves for the one day a week assignment and has a healthy shrub by the next week. If I let mine grow long I look like Gabby Hayes, so most the time it stays short. At one point last summer for our family reunion all 8 of us had beards...kind of a tradition. Our Arkansas son-in-law had a James Longstreet that was awesome. Fortunately our daughter Bellisima does not have that problem. I was in the last BYU class that was allowed to have beards and had to remove my goatee , but in the summers I went full Robert E. Lee at times. I got busted for too droopy a mustache one year at BYU registration.

Most here may see me as about as rigid a Mormon line toer as there can be, but I do have my fleeting moments of non-conformity. I understand the reason for banning them in the 60s, but those things have passed. Time to move one.

You sir are an artiste.  

[mfbukowski]

47 minutes ago, bluebell said:

My issue is, some male temple workers are asked to be clean shaven. Others aren't. 

Which means that it's based on the individual temple president's feelings and not on anything doctrinal. And sacrifice just for sacrifice's sake can cause more problems than it solves.

I agree that following the dictates of the temple president isn't a difficult thing, but I hope that someday soon we won't have to follow arbitrary standards. 

Interesting.  Where I live we have one temple for a few million people so I do not experience many others, only on rare occasions do I attend another.

So you HAVE seen ordinance workers with facial hair?

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Interesting.  Where I live we have one temple for a few million people so I do not experience many others, only on rare occasions do I attend another.

So you HAVE seen ordinance workers with facial hair?

Robert Smith share his experience with a temple worker who had a full beard. 

[CV75]

In the not-too-distant future:

Edited February 5, 2017 by CV75

[Jeanne]

13 minutes ago, CV75 said:

In the not-too-distant future:

Yeah.just add  diaper to the white shirt!

[Bob Crockett]

On 2/4/2017 at 5:23 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

Why is being clean-shaven, which is obviously a modern policy, necessary for an individual to be a temple worker? 

With rules like this for temple workers, is it any wonder there is rampant Pharisee-ism in the church? 

If that offends you, well then don't go play for the Yankees.  They don't let this in either.

[Ginger Snaps]

My in-laws are ordinance workers. My MIL has mentioned many times that the workers are not to be a distraction to the patrons. It's sounds like an astounding amount of behind-the-scenes work happens to keep the focus on the ordinances. We've had some fascinating discussions about things they are instructed to do/not do for this reason--things that have never occurred to me as a regular temple-goer. It's really no surprise to me that there are strict dress and grooming standards. 

Edited February 6, 2017 by Ginger Snaps

[mfbukowski]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

Robert Smith share his experience with a temple worker who had a full beard. 

My question was whether you had as well

[Duncan]

to be completely honest who are these people distracted by a beard? I can see maybe a multi colored beard or one that's dragging on the floor, but even with that you get over it and move on with your life. To me it's not something that I am like, 'heavens to murgatroyd I can't even right now with this man and his beard, since when did they allow cavemen in here?'. I see people with facial hair all the time and it's NBD

Edited February 6, 2017 by Duncan

[bluebell]

6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

My question was whether you had as well

I answered the way I did because I thought you were asking for a reference to support my statement. Me having seen it personally seemed irrelevant. 

But to answer your specific question, not that I know of. I have never put any effort into checking and I've never noticed otherwise because whether or not a man has facial hair isn't noteworthy or distracting on its own.

I'll be paying attention now though.

[Storm Rider]

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

My issue is, some male temple workers are asked to be clean shaven. Others aren't. 

Which means that it's based on the individual temple president's feelings and not on anything doctrinal. And sacrifice just for sacrifice's sake can cause more problems than it solves.

I agree that following the dictates of the temple president isn't a difficult thing, but I hope that someday soon we won't have to follow arbitrary standards. 

I think there is an important distinction you may be missing.  The guideline for male temple workers to be clean shaven is set by the temple department and not by the local temple president.  The exception - which is rare and I never saw such during my eight/nine years serving in the temple - is approved by the local temple president.  Exceptions are given for viable reasons reviewed and approved by the local leader.  I don't fault a temple president for making exceptions.

Your desire for a day when arbitrary standards are not needed is admirable - I look forward to the same day - but that will only happen when the members begin to act uniformly as committed disciples of Jesus Christ, denied the influence of their carnal natures, and moved beyond any desire for sin and hunger for righteousness and holiness.  

[HappyJackWagon]

On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 5:30 PM, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

It is only Temple callings, and serving as a GA, I have served in many callings, including Stake callings and in the Bishopric. 

This is totally leadership roulette. Our current Bishop just recently shaved because he was asked to after a GA visited.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

to be completely honest who are these people distracted by a beard? I can see maybe a multi colored beard or one that's dragging on the floor, but even with that you get over it and move on with your life. To me it's not something that I am like, 'heavens to murgatroyd I can't even right now with this man and his beard, since when did they allow cavemen in here?'. I see people with facial hair all the time and it's NBD

I think the idea is that if any potential distraction can be easily avoided, it should be. Paul's concept of not being a stumbling block for others comes to mind.

You make concessions, sometimes, to do the things you really want to do.

Throughout my 30-plus year career at my current job, I've never been permitted to have facial hair. And even if I could now, I wouldn't. It would make me look old and grizzled.

Edited February 6, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[HappyJackWagon]

On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 9:28 AM, BlueDreams said:

Pharisee-ism is more a product of consistent rigidity in expectations, not a specific calling. It also is more tenable in specific populations...particularly if they're fairly homogenous and conservative in attitudes. That does not just apply to UT (for those about to say as much) I've seen that in TX. When I was down there I snuck in on my bro's mission prep and saw a moment of such with my old drake president who I've known to be not super flexible when it comes to perceived rules and regulations. 

 

With luv, 

BD

Your definition of Phariseeism seems to fit quite well in the temple setting.

Consistently rigid- yes, Temple rules are quite specific and rigid

Applied in a fairly homogenous group- yes

 

 

[HappyJackWagon]

17 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Has this rampant Pharisee-ism just not gotten to my neck of the woods yet?

When I'm speaking of Phariseeism I'm referring to the extremely ritualized rules & required  practices of life. Clothing & grooming requirements, dietary requirements, Sabbath observance, and the like. I think there may be some confusion about how I'm using the term because I'm not speaking about hypocrisy which many people equate with Phariseeism.

Most likely you just haven't noticed. But don't worry. The Pharisee's in Jesus' day didn't notice a problem either  

[hope_for_things]

On 2/4/2017 at 6:23 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

I recently received an email from our local temple presidency reminding us of grooming standards for ordinance and veil workers. In light of the recent conversation about white shirts, I found this particularly interesting. 

While I agree that individuals serving in the temple should be clean and well-groomed, these rules strike me as Pharisaical. 

Are others justified at being offended by my clothing? Or should temple patrons be encouraged to follow Elder Bednar's counsel to not be offended?

Is limiting jewelry to 1 set of earrings really important enough to warrant handbook instructions?

Why is being clean-shaven, which is obviously a modern policy, necessary for an individual to be a temple worker? 

Are white tennis shoes really so undignified that a handbook restriction is needed? Isn't it possible that temple workers may need the comfort and sturdiness of non-dress white shoes from time to time?

 

With rules like this for temple workers, is it any wonder there is rampant Pharisee-ism in the church? 

Happy,

I believe our church is hyper focused on the external, on appearances, on the correct family structure, on the correct order of experiencing things in life, on the ideal, and this ideal is an idol.  Personally I have worshiped at this idol for most of my life, and I still have a difficult time not automatically praising those people that follow the "right way".  

Let me be self reflective for a moment.  On Sunday we had a Sunday School teacher that brought up Oliver Cowdery's divining rod and Joseph Smith's seer stones as part of the lesson discussion.  She was a substitute teacher, and I was so pleased that someone actually talked about some of the extra historical material that is available this year for teachers (this is the first time a teacher referenced the new historical material in class since 2017 started in my ward), that I felt the need to go and thank this teacher after class for bringing this material into the Sunday School lesson.  

The teacher followed what I personally believe is the "right way" of teaching and therefore she got my praise.  This is a remnant of my Mormonism still strongly influencing my mindset.  I still feel programmed to look for those that align their teaching, their appearances, their family structure in certain ways that I find validates my world view.  I've still fallen prey to this Pharisaical way of thinking that plagues Mormon culture, I just have an unorthodox way of looking for those people who validate myself. 

I suppose this is human nature, and not unique to Mormonism.  It just seems like a very difficult problem to try to escape.  It seems to me that we should wrestle with this problem as part of trying to live the gospel.  That we ought to surrender our desire to control, to worship the ideal, to praise those that we agree with, to correct those that we disagree with.  This seems to be a call of the gospel that I'm certainly falling short on.  Thank you for the post and for making me think.  I'm a very flawed person and I need to do better....

Hope_for_things

[bluebell]

45 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I think there is an important distinction you may be missing.  The guideline for male temple workers to be clean shaven is set by the temple department and not by the local temple president.  The exception - which is rare and I never saw such during my eight/nine years serving in the temple - is approved by the local temple president.  Exceptions are given for viable reasons reviewed and approved by the local leader.  I don't fault a temple president for making exceptions.

Your desire for a day when arbitrary standards are not needed is admirable - I look forward to the same day - but that will only happen when the members begin to act uniformly as committed disciples of Jesus Christ, denied the influence of their carnal natures, and moved beyond any desire for sin and hunger for righteousness and holiness.  

Or, it could happen when we get better at not looking beyond the mark.

It doesn't have to take the millennium occurring for us to realize that a well trimmed beard is not anymore a distraction than curly hair or badly done but minimal eyeliner on a woman (both of which i've actually been distracted by while in the temple yet are perfectly acceptable regardless).

Don't get me wrong, i appreciate that temple workers go out of their way to minimize distractions.  It's just that we make things a distraction by drawing attention to them.  You can bet that i will now be paying attention to the footwear of temple workers to see what they look like because now i know that the temple presidency thinks that some are appropriate and some aren't.  I won't do it out of spite or course, it's just a natural consequence of highlighting certain aspects of someone's clothing-people notice what has been highlighted.

 

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Duncan said:

to be completely honest who are these people distracted by a beard? I can see maybe a multi colored beard or one that's dragging on the floor, but even with that you get over it and move on with your life. To me it's not something that I am like, 'heavens to murgatroyd I can't even right now with this man and his beard, since when did they allow cavemen in here?'. I see people with facial hair all the time and it's NBD

I think it may be mostly elderly patrons.  I never thought Mom would care about appearance of others (even if she is very concerned about her family's appearance), but she has suddenly flipped part of her brain off and is judging people like her mom did.  Most probably a form of dementia.  She gets distracted and turned off by the strangest of things and some not so strange.  Like if the person doesn't smile or has a bland face or wears the 'wrong' clothes, suddenly she is labeling them as "stupid" (I never heard her call anyone "stupid" in my life before, I saw it as a vulgarity growing up the way we were informed we shouldn't use it) and then obsessing about avoiding them because they will need her to take care of them instead of them helping her.

And given the high rate of elderly in the temple (which is beautiful imo as I think it helps remove much of the fear of death), I can see why they want temple workers to fade into the background unless needed due to the quirkiness of their ideas about others based on the smallest and oddest of things.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

...a well trimmed beard is not anymore a distraction than curly hair or badly done but minimal eyeliner on a woman...

Is my curly hair and a well trimmed beard really equivalent to badly done eyeliner?

On a side note, I actually had quite the afro back when I played in a rock-and-roll band. I remember showing up to church in high school with a giant afro and dressed like Angus Young from AC/DC with shorts and a white shirt and tie.  My parents were surprisingly cool with it, the bishop...not so much.  

The nice thing about the afro is that the hair grows up instead of down, so it is still in-line with BYU and temple standards which requires hair above the ears  

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, pogi said:

Is my curly hair and a well trimmed beard really equivalent to badly done eyeliner?

On a side note, I actually had quite the afro back when I played in a rock-and-roll band. I remember showing up to church in high school with a giant afro and dressed like Angus Young from AC/DC with shorts and a white shirt and tie.  My parents were surprisingly cool with it, the bishop...not so much.  

The nice thing about the afro is that the hair grows up instead of down, so it is still in-line with BYU and temple standards which requires hair above the ears  

Some things are noticeable, and that can be defined as a distraction, but there are so many different ways that a person can be noticeable that it doesn't make sense, to me, to outlaw some and allow others.  I don't want anyone not able to work in the temple because their make up skills or hair type stand out a bit (and my make up skills are not the greatest so no judgment there!)   

I have seen some amazingly odd eyebrows on some of the older women working in the temple-the kind that are drawn on but it's impossible to guess what look they were going for, other than making sure that they were three shades darker than their hair-and that can be really distracting (at first, it only takes a minute to process it and move on) but I don't care.  I feel love for those sisters and almost always feel love from them and that's all that I really care about.  I'm so glad they are there, helping me and being an example to me of ways to be a daughter in God's kingdom.

Making a policy that women were not allowed to wear make up while serving would solve those silly distractions, but to what end?  Then we'd all be distracted by seeing church members that we personally know without make up on for the first time!  

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

When I'm speaking of Phariseeism I'm referring to the extremely ritualized rules & required  practices of life. Clothing & grooming requirements, dietary requirements, Sabbath observance, and the like. I think there may be some confusion about how I'm using the term because I'm not speaking about hypocrisy which many people equate with Phariseeism.

Most likely you just haven't noticed. But don't worry. The Pharisee's in Jesus' day didn't notice a problem either  

Phariseeism is taking the law of God and adding additional rules on top of the Law as a sign of piety or to make extra sure you are pure. If the Temple mandated white clothing and someone insisted on picking a particular shade of white that would be Phariseeism. Insisting on only using extra virgin olive oil in blessings on the sick would be Phariseeism. 

Those poor Pharisees are always getting compared to everything people do not like. I almost feel bad for them.

Edited February 6, 2017 by The Nehor

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think the idea is that if any potential distraction can be easily avoided, it should be. Paul's concept of not being a stumbling block for others comes to mind.

You make concessions, sometimes, to do the things you really want to do.

Throughout my 30-plus year career at my current job, I've never been permitted to have facial hair. And even if I could now, I wouldn't. It would make me look old and grizzled.

How would that be any different?