Beliefs Culture Jana Riess: Flunking Sainthood Opinion

Mormonism: A country club with a strict dress code

Today’s guest post from Mette Harrison hit home for me. I recently learned that a family in our ward that has stopped coming to church was turned off by, among other things, a judgmental comment from a ward member about what the family was wearing. I also had a phone conversation last month with a young Mormon mom who was stopped in the hallway of the chapel because she had worn pants to church — not as a political statement, but for practicality and comfort. The criticism was deeply hurtful and unnecessary.

This kind of judgmentalism doesn’t create the pure, clean environment that the clothing police are seeking. Instead, Mette is right: it drives people right out the door. — JKR

women's shoes

A guest post by Mette Harrison

A friend recently told me that she was tired of our church seeming more like a “country club with a strict dress code” than a church where people could come to find help and comfort, share in God’s love, and commune and worship together.

What is a country club? It’s a place for social interaction with those who are of the same class and share certain interests. By nature, it’s also a place that excludes certain groups of people, usually by virtue of a yearly fee to join.

Is that what your religion is—a place to keep out people who aren’t like you by using tithing as a fee to exclude? I hope mine isn’t.

But I wonder. One year, the Young Women’s leader in my ward sent out a notice to all the young women to announce that shorts were unacceptable attire for weekday activity meetings. Pants or “capri-length pants” were all that would be allowed. She asked that girls who had sports activities where they wore shorts go home after their activities, change, and then come to church, even if it made them late.

I’m sure that she had good intentions, but after reading her note, I suspected that she ended up “inviting” certain girls right out the door because of her attitude that modesty was more important than participation or inclusion.

We spend far too much time at my church talking about what constitutes “modest dress,” particularly for young women. If we insisted everyone wore the same uniform of dress, would this problem be instantly solved?

Or would we then move on to other things, like discussing who was wearing too much makeup, whose bra wasn’t supportive enough or showed its straps the wrong way, or whose hair was too big or too short or too colored? I suspect the latter is the case.

Why do we focus on such shallow markers of social class in church, where our example was Christ, who resisted at every turn the temptation to see people on the surface? He kept company with publicans and sinners, healed the daughter of a Roman soldier, associated with the Samaritans—and made them heroes of His stories.

Are we following this example, not just by giving to the poor and going out of our way to serve them, but by making sure that our churches are welcoming, nonjudgmental spaces?

When my husband served a mission in Haiti, one of the biggest barriers to getting people to attend church after baptism was the lack of shoes. It was a huge status symbol to own a pair of shoes. Many Haitians who were baptized believed in the church but couldn’t bring themselves to face the social humiliation that would come from attending church without shoes when so many others in the building had them.

Are Mormons doing the same thing by extension? I think it far more likely that a Mormon Young Women’s group would offer to buy “more appropriate” clothing for a young woman who couldn’t afford what the other girls were wearing. But would the young women and their leaders be willing to go to church without shoes—or without their normal attire—in order to make sure other people realized that those things weren’t important to us?

Please, let’s not see church as a place where we are supposed to feel comfortable. If we’re trying to be better people, wouldn’t that be more likely to make us uncomfortable? Isn’t part of that stretching beyond our normal expectations, including dress? Can we learn to see beyond the superficialities of life to the heart, the way that our Savior did? Can we try harder to spend less of our lesson time talking about conformity and more of it talking about how we can help others, whoever they or and however they look?

I hope so. That’s what the church I want to be part of would do.


OTHER GUEST POSTS BY METTE HARRISON:


Mette Ivie Harrison

(courtesy of Mette Harrison)

Mette Ivie Harrison

Mette Ivie Harrison is a regular guest blogger for Flunking Sainthood and also writes about Mormonism for the Huffington Post.

She is the acclaimed author of many novels, including the Linda Wallheim mystery series that started with The Bishop’s Wife.

About the author

Jana Riess

Senior columnist Jana Riess is the author of many books, including "The Prayer Wheel" (2018) and "The Next Mormons: How Millennials Are Changing the LDS Church," which will be published by Oxford University Press in March 2019. She has a PhD in American religious history from Columbia University.

49 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • Though I agree with the tone of this comment, and also don’t have much use for Mormonism in general, I have to disagree to some extent. The Failure to make a minimal effort to dress somewhat decently is a real problem in this country, at least from the point of view of one somewhat elderly man. People rarely dress even halfway well for anything anymore. We were going to a fancy restaurant in San Francisco a few weeks ago, and my nephews wore T-shirts. I suggested to them that they wear a little nicer shirt for this very nice restaurant, and that comment was met with a shrug. The worst part of this was that so many people at the restaurant were dressed any better than my nephews work. T-shirts were common.

    If you are going to church, at least try to look different than you do for yard work.

  • With all due respect, going to a fancy restaurant is a lot different from going to a church where quite frankly, most people aren’t as fancy as they pretend to be when they’re there. Christians are supposed to model themselves after Jesus and Jesus certainly never dressed nice and I’m not aware of any instances of him dressing differently when he went to the synagogue to pray than when he was outside with the poor. Yet even in a lot of non-Mormon churches, while wearing pants is thankfully less controversial than this article’s situation, people will still freak out if you wear shorts on a Wednesday night. Like I can understand dressing a little more professionally on Sunday morning and even advising against wearing short shorts on a Wednesday night, but regular shorts should not still be an issue in the 21st century when Jesus never dressed fancy, even on Sunday. And I always thought Christians were supposed to put aside worldly matters when they gathered and were supposed to focus on worshiping God and stuff. It all just seems rather arbitrary. I wish Christians were more concerned about helping out their church’s food pantry for the poor than what people’s clothes were.

  • Hmm. Didn’t see this one coming. Just because of what people wear (or can / can’t afford to wear), BEN is getting judgmental?

  • That wasn’t the point of the article or my comment. I think dressing decently, or at least as well as you can afford to, is a sign of respect. I think respect is a good thing,

    When I had my business, I always asked the groom what he was wearing for his wedding. If he wore a tux, which most did, then I wore a tux. If he wasn’t wearing a tux, then I would wear a suit or sport jacket. I probably didn’t wear at least a sport jacket in probably 10 out of 1000 weddings.

  • So, Mette and Jana, how do we change this? Where do we
    start? What do we do first?

    I propose we learn not to be offended and teach our children
    and grandchildren not to be offended. We cannot control what other people say
    and do but we can definitely control how we respond. When we are offended, we
    have chosen to be offended. It is the same as it is with anger. We choose how
    we react when we allow ourselves to get angry. We choose to swear, throw
    things, break things, or internally explode. Nobody makes us. We do it
    ourselves.

    The proof of that statement is, if a counselor in a
    Bishopric, while the Bishop is not there, chides the entire ward, during a
    Sacrament meeting, some will be offended and some will not be offended. Take a minute – think that through.

    Can we please teach our youth, that principle, over and over
    again? Also, it belongs in the Missionary lessons.

  • I am not offended because either the offender[‘s]:

    does not have the correct information;

    social skills are frozen;

    is blinded by the mote and beam thing;

    has so little self-worth they must put you down in order for them to feel up;

    feels an overwhelming sense of duty, allowing themselves to be blinded by their
    emotions;

    or a dozen other reasons.

  • I would love to wear robes into church. Shirts and ties are so uncomfortable and they choke my neck. Also, I would be warmer in the winter.

  • Heh, San Francisco. This actually takes the edge off of things a bit. Try wearing a suit to a job interview at a lot of tech companies for a fun fresh re-examination of what “nice” or “appropriate” dress means.

  • Your response sounds like “blaming the victim” to me. Telling someone to just “suck it up” and stop being offended is a typical response in Mormonism. It’s like beating your kid and then telling him to stop crying.

    I would propose that people are taught not to offend! Teach your ward/stake members to not be judgmental (another typical issue with Mormonism). Teach them to ACCEPT everyone (as Jesus did) regardless of what they wear. Teach them that it’s not about the clothing but about the character (among other things) of the person.

  • Today, while on vacation, I wore shorts, sandals and a golf shirt to church. I was comfortable and convinced that the Savior would rather see me in church than not in church. What I wore was all I had at the moment. It is true that there are a lot of “holier than thou Mormons.” It is too bad. I am very active and these people bug me too. However, they do not have anything to do with my testimony. My testimony isn’t based on what people say or don’t say. I feel bad for people who become offended. It is sad. It is sad because it shouldn’t happen, but it is also sad because we shouldn’t let it offend us. All I can say, is if you become so offended by what someone says or does and it takes you away from the church, your testimony isn’t grounded in the gospel. The church/gospel is true or it isn’t true and the answer to that question should not, in any way, be based on what humans do our say.

    I agree, we need to learn to not offend. But it is just as important to learn to be not offended.

  • Really, it is different than beating your kid. Come on. If you are going to try to show an example to support your point of view, at least come up with something that is on point. we are talking about a belief in God and religion. We are taught not to be judgmental. It just so happens that some people don’t get it. They think they are being helpful, when in reality they are being hurtful. Almost every time I have seen this happen, it is not intentionally done. Like I said above, if your testimony is grounded in what humans say and do, you will never believe any religion or religious thought. Life isn’t fair and sometimes we need to teach our kids to “suck it up” and go on without wasting your time on what someone else says or does.

  • Uteman, I can see how a person who feels deeply offended
    could interpret my comment as blaming the victim. However, that would be
    because they are not taking responsibility for their own emotions. They are
    blaming others for their negative emotions instead of taking personal
    responsibility. I sincerely hope that is not you. We need to own our emotions. Owning
    and dealing with our emotions in a mature manner is empowering. Empowerment can
    be one of the benefits of membership and activity in the Lord’s Church. “Suck
    it up” is a typical response of an old fart and I am afraid we have a few of
    those in the Church. BTW: Nice attack on a straw man for the “suck it up”
    comment.

  • Bob, I say AMEN! Our faith must be in Jesus Christ not in a
    Bishop, church leader, or a BYU professor. People fail and do stupid things. Christ
    does not. The Church is the True Church of Jesus Christ. I also observe that we
    do teach our people to not judge and not to be offensive. And the people follow
    that teaching about as well as they follow the “eat meat sparingly” rule. Some
    follow it and a whole bunch of members – not so much. However, I do take a pair of slacks and a
    white shirt when I go on vacation (big smile).

  • The “effort” you speak of is BEING THERE, not how you look. The respect you speak of is BEING THERE, not how you dress. Come as you are, full stop. Also, being hurt by people at church who police what you wear, and being offended are two different things. If everyone had the thick skin Bob Villa has, life would be great…but add into the mix alllll the complex situations out there….depression, self-concept, income, age, medical issues, and you’ve got the petrie dish that we are now in. We need to be better. Thanks for the article.

  • Try the Community of Christ. They’re Trinitarians, but still Mormons and don’t care what you wear, as long as you have Jesus.

  • this person obviously attended church in a high class neighborhood in slc, not a regular meetinghouse

  • I agree with the sentiment of just not letting it bother me. My in-laws’ synagogue has “Casual Shabbat” during the summer, with the implication that Saturdays during the year should be jacket and tie, I suppose. I’m sorry, I’m not packing a suit and the matching shoes every time I go down there. I dress respectfully, in nice clothes, out of respect for the occasion and the space. If people have a problem with that, they should be happy I’m there and know what’s going on.

  • My elderly uncle is a Mormon by marriage; he married my aunt who was a cradle Mormon and became one before they married. He has been a leader in his church and the area for decades. He sent the Mormon missionaries to see us and my Dad was always ready to sign up but the rest of us were like “no way.” He knew I was of different views but I visited once and he hesitatingly asked me to come with him to his church. I decided, “Why not?” but I was 55 then, not 25. It was OK – kind of bland compared to The Church of What’s Happening Now, but that’s a good thing.
    But what got me was every freaking male in the church wore a white dress shirt and tie and the bulk of the ties were one color or otherwise bland – no neckties with little Kansas City Chiefs logos or paisleys or whatnot in the bunch. For those who don’t know men’s fashion, the white shirt and bland tie went out about 1968. TV newscasters started wearing blue dress shirts because they looked better on color TV. This led to regular people wearing varied color dress shirts, wide 1970s ties, going tieless, guyaberas, polo shirts, etc., being considered appropriate men’s business dress. Now, of course I knew Mormon missionaries all wear black pants and dark one color ties with white shirts, but that is the way every man there but me was dressed that day. I wore a polo shirt and Dockers and stood out like a sore thumb. I was like, what kind of pod people are these? But that’s their selling point. A lot of people want to return to the 1950s and the Mormons play 1950s dress-up and apparently it works for them although it’s another reason I’d never become one and neither would most people.
    As for the women’s dress, I have to say it was like the Southern Baptist women we went to church with in the late 1970s – tasteful, bland, no hats like in an African-American church, and such. Hair carefully bound or pinned up. Definitely nothing sexy. Again, that’s my design. My aunt is in her seventies now and she always wore pants at picnics and bathing suits in the swimming hole but she was dressed like the others at church. I think in the past Mormon mothers would tell their daughters about how to dress, but as their communities are becoming more heterogeneous apparently some determined that wasn’t being done to the effect it was having fifty years ago.

  • I had to laugh inwardly once going to the Episcopal Church and seeing my lawyer’s partner who’s a local fixer in the Democratic Party and he was one of the ushers. He passed the collection plate wearing Docker-shorts and dress shoes with no socks (that last part was a preppie thing – “Nope, I won’t get a tattoo or wear a t-shirt, but, here, I’ll leave my socks off to show I’m a rebel within the bounds I’ve fashioned for myself.”).

  • You ought to read “Here I Stand” by the liberal Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, which is his autobiography. Spong’s fetishizing the Bishop’s various articles of clothing is hilarious. It’s sounds like a 12-year-old boy writing a story about sex the way he telegraphs how excited he was about being so dressed when he was consecrated as a Bishop.

  • OK, so let’s be on point. Would you agree that telling the victim to stop being offended is more appropriate than teaching the offender to stop offending?
    How do you teach the concept of “judge not that ye be not judged” and then turn around and teach all the ways to judge people, one of those being the clothes people wear?
    It’s extremely condescending that people like you think “having a stronger testimony” will cure all the hypocrisy in churches, specifically in the Mormon church (in this case). Being judged and attacked for what you wear, how you look, the car you drive, the home you live in, etc, isn’t what people expect from a Christian religion. I submit that the blame lies directly with the church and it’s leadership and believe it’s their responsibility to teach the concepts and leave nothing to interpretation.

  • So you just can’t get past blaming the victim? You propose that first; stop being offended. I propose that you first; teach the offender to not offend. It’s that simple.

  • You need to get on with your life and let go of whatever is hurting you. Forgive and move on. Quit blaming others and look inward. Good luck.

  • That’s right. Don’t respond to uteman’s point. Rather, suggest he has an issue to be dealt with. Great example of gaslighting, defined as to manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity. Common in Mormonism, which is my only experience in religion.

  • Please see my original post which clearly outlined my experience and thoughts. It is amazing that people allow others’ thoughts or comments to shape and influence their beliefs. It is particularly common among those who have left the LDS church. I’m not saying you should question your own sanity, only The reasons for your lack of belief.

  • First of all, I believe the scripture should say, “judge not unrighteously that ye be not judged unrighteously.” It is unfathomable that we are asked not to judge, as we judge everyday in everything we do. You do and I do.

    Second, I completely agree that it is absolutely appropriate to tell and teach people not to offend. We should shape our comments and actions so as not to offend. I have never been to church where we were taught to offend others. In fact, all I have heard is exactly the opposite.

    Third, there are people that become offended easily. You usually find what you are looking for. If you are expecting to be offended, often you are. On the other hand, if you expect the best from people and make an effort to interpret their comments as an effort to be helpful and constructive, then you will not be easily offended. In addition, if someone is intentionally offensive, laugh it off. Clearly they are in the wrong and humor allows us to shrug it off and not allow it to change our thoughts or actions. We have complete control over how we respond. Let’s respond positively.

    A perfect example: I get frustrated over people that sit and stare at the McDonald’s drive up window menu. I mean, who doesn’t know the McDonald’s menu by now. After sitting behind a lady in a minivan and waiting and waiting for her to make a decision, (the cars on the inside lane were going but we were sitting,) I stuck my head out and yelled, “Come on lady, it’s McDonald’s!” Without missing a beat, she stuck her head out and looked back at me and said, “Does somebody need a Happy Meal?” Her response was perfect. I laughed and sat and thought how dumb I was to be impatient. I will be forever grateful that she responded with humor and whit, instead of with anger or resentment. Her attitude completely changed mine. I will always remember her and think twice from now on.

  • You’re the one making people “victims.” It’s a popular trend, I know, but one that has little to no use in a place where people are taught that personal responsibility is still a virtue.

  • Not true. I agree with Dean in that one has to allow themselves to be a victim. In any case, the victim should be the last to be blamed. The perpetrator should be held accountable for their actions as it’s they who are the bully and should be taking personal responsibility first.

  • Yes, I figured your message to humanity is that if they experience something they may disagree with, they become “victims” and the people saying something disagreeable is a “perpetrator” and a “bully.” My work has a dress code too that I sometimes find disagreeable. It does not make them a “perp” or a “bully.” I am not a victim of abuse. A church activity has a dress code that reinforces modesty–big surprise. A person doesn’t become a victim by subjecting themselves to rules that they may find disagreeable. I’m not saying I agree with the rules (assuming the author is even being accurate in explaining a real experience). But your message of victimhood is useless in the real world and having rules that apply to everyone is not bullying.

  • Here, here with de-emphasizing or liberalizing the dress code!

    My now elderly mother has skipped the weddings of her grandchildren because she can’t wear a dress more than one hour and doesn’t feel right about changing into slacks afterward. I get tired of wrestling with the little girls in my primary class who can’t keep their skirts down. I so wish their mothers could/would bring them to church in pants. When I have been in the nursery it is the same thing. Slacks would be much more practical, more modest and more appropriate for nursery teachers to wear as well.

  • Years ago when my kids were young they (and their friends) wore polo shirts and khaki pants to church. But then I could never get them to wear polo shirts to school because they considered them to be “church shirts.”

    On the otherhand, some of my Catholic friends don’t give it a second thought to wear atheletic wear to Mass on Saturdays.

    I too, get a little frustrated when occasionally my young adult children, wouldn’t dress up a little bit more.

    Somewhere there is a happy medium. But I think there is an over-emphasis on clothing within the church the past 10 years.

  • I don’t disagree with this. maybe it’s because I’m older, but the dressing down trend has always been a bit of a “thing” for me.

  • Jesus was wearing a seamless garment when He was tried before his crucifixion. That was a more expensive garment at the time.

    Dressing nice for Church is not about dressing nice. It’s an outward expression of an inward disposition. We go to Church to meet and worship God in a particular and unique way. Dressing our best is an outward manifestation of bringing the best of ourselves to God. If that means we are barefoot, so be it. If that means we are somewhat unkempt because we barely made it, so be it. We are also a more casual culture, so our “good” dress is less formal than it once was, and that is also fine.

    Dress in Church is often done for the wrong reasons, but that is an indictment of the reasons, not the dress.

  • You hit the nail on the head with your “rules” statement. Show me the rules regarding dress codes in Mormondom and explain how they’re consistently applied throughout their Org. I know of 2; missionary attire and women covering their porn shoulders.

    Mormon members apply their own codes depending on zip code and enforce it through exclusion and bullying. Leadership is often the cause and the highest leaders are too afraid to correct the bad behavior for fear of losing revenue, (plus they secretly applaud the local efforts).

    BTW, your work dress code is a poor example and not even in the same universe.

  • Good article! I can sympathise with the Haitians. I’m a convert from Kentucky, and I don’t have a car, and honestly it’s humiliating asking for rides all the time to church and church events. Half the time I don’t attend church or events just because I can’t bear asking for rides.

  • Haha, you lose all credibility when you go ahead and just lump all “Mormons” together, like every single one is part of a grand conspiracy of terror. Then you go into the revenue bit, which is patently absurd because if revenue was our top goal as your opine, then the church would do so many things differently–including giving modesty the boot. The dress and grooming expectations are quite frankly pretty consistent, but may be emphasized differently according to region, as anything in the world is.

    My work dress code is the exact same. In both cases, you are willingly joining yourself to a group that has standards and and a group identity. Scouts have uniforms. Young men and women have dress standards at most church events. Religion has always had rules and standards that are hard to live up to and sometimes go against what we naturally want to do. And we choose that.

    Your idea of bullying is silly.
    –There is an activity. There are rules one submits to in order to participate in the activity. The rules are evenly applied. Everyone is invited to an activity, but if you come you must follow the rules. Some may choose not to. —

    That is not bullying. But maybe a spineless person can’t handle the whole personal responsibility thing and has to make himself and others a “victim.” Only then can your life have meaning, I guess.

  • You need to retake that logic class if you think I said that one has to allow themselves to be a victim! You are so far off the mark that you MUST be somehow emotionally tied to this position or you would think much clearer.

    If the river rises and your house floods, you are a victim.

    If you are raped, you are a victim.

    If you are bullied, you are a victim.

    But if someone tells a female her skirt is too short – that’s
    an opinion.

    If someone tells you that you should have worn your black
    shoes instead of flip-flops – that’s another insensitive person with an
    opinion.

    Ann Coulter was mercilessly roasted last week, without
    advance warning, while being filmed. One implied she looked like a horse
    another implied things would be better if she were dead (without the threat of
    violence.) She says she was not offended. She does not give other people power
    to offend her. You need to learn from Ann Coulter. Do not allow anyone to offend you. That gives them too much power over you. (I am banking that statement
    will be grossly offensive to you.)
    Or if you are LDS, do a search in the General Conference addresses for something like “be not offended”. Your eyes will be opened if your mind is.

  • Well that explains a lot. You’re an Ann Coulter fan.
    You believe words have power (conference talks), then state that people should brush off opinions as if those same words have no power. You are the typical, hypocritical mormon speaking out both sides of your mouth.
    A person can be victimized by being mistreated. Whether you believe that is a bad thing or not only shows your lack of compassion.

  • Seriously. In my early interviewing days I arrived at a tech company wearing a dress suit. It is what I thought was appropriate to the occasion, and I liked an excuse to wear them. This interview happened to fall on “casual Friday.” Casual, for the woman employee being a hoodie and leggings, and sloppy shirts and jeans for the men. I am not certain when the tech standard is jeans and a t-shirt why the notion of “casual friday” needs to exist.

  • With all due respect, LDS people are very competitive – often spending far too much time trying to surpass the Jones. I sincerely believe that this “judgementalism” is due in very large part to the fact that Mormonism is a works based religion. Because the fruits of the spirit are sometimes less visible that material possessions, score is kept. I will do more, have more, be more, & look better while doing it all! Some of my LDS family members are incredibly cruel – they notice anything and everything about others that does not meet with their petty expectations. It is exhausting at times.

  • Of course you didn’t mention the “Garments.” Today it will be in the 90s and very humid where I live and I thank God I will not have to wear that idiotic underwear. I’m still appalled by the way you seek to brain wash and control members by telling them what to eat, wear, and speak and completely ignore the use of the “Agency” you pretend to practice and often speak about, even though you rarely practice it. Fortunately I left the church with my hard earned self-esteem, self-respect and dignity intact. I made the decision when the Stake President asked me, a single retired journalist in her 80s, if I was wearing the sacred underwear and I admitted I was not. Do you realize how utterly ridiculous that is? I’m working on a novel now and can’t wait to include that scene in it somewhere. How dare a youthful male ask a dignified elderly woman such a rude question? It still shocks me.

  • And I, as a 67 year old man, see MYOB coming from a 9 month old comment as “you have too much time on your hands.”

  • If you are going to a meeting house to feel people’s love, which would be nice, you are going for the wrong reason. I go to feel the Savior’s love and show respect and love to Him. People are judgmental, it is human nature and one of the things we are trying to overcome. Church is for people who are not perfect. Why would a perfect person need church?

    I am a firm believer that you find what you are looking for. If you go looking to find people who are judgmental, you will find them. If you go looking to find people that are loving, caring, and trying not to be judgmental, you will find them.

    I can walk into any church/synagog, LDS, Catholic, Baptist, Greek Orthodox, Jewish, etc., and feel loved and accepted because that is what I am looking for. I recommend you start looking for love and acceptance rather than bigotry and unacceptance.

  • Wow, your comments are perfect. You said it well. I hate to see people offended, but some people relish, knowingly and unknowingly, being the victim. I can’t walk out of my house and interact with people without the possibility of being offended. Thing is, I chose not to be offended, therefore I am not.

    Those who tie their religious beliefs to what people say and do, will ALWAYS struggle to believe. I simply don’t care if Moses made mistakes, if David make mistakes or if Joseph Smith made mistakes. They are not the bases for my testimony.

  • I think it’s somewhere in the middle. I wouldn’t force someone to buy clothes they couldn’t afford simply to go to church. However, if that same person goes to the office in a suit and doesn’t to church, it would appear that the person who has self-respect in reaching their career goals clearly doesn’t while at church which should count more than work as work runs finite hours each day and each week. Church on the other hand has teachings which should be reflective of how you act and live every minute of your life. If I have a closet full of suit like attire for the office and board meetings, I really do think I should be wearing them to church. I wore church attire all day Sunday when was a little boy. I still think it’s appropriate but to each their own.

ADVERTISEMENTs