Be Christlike! (Except For The Beard)
I outed myself as a “liberal” Mormon today at work.
A co-worker was talking about a Stake Conference she attended this weekend presided over by a general authority of the LDS Church. She told the story about how the general authority during his talk called out two young men from the congregation. One of the young men had been home from his mission for a month and a half and the other young man was just getting ready to go. The speaker spoke to the young men and pointed out to the congregation differences between the young men and their physical and spiritual development then focused on the return missionary’s goatee. The person telling the story said that the speaker then scolded the young man for having facial hair and asked him to committ to shaving it off as soon as possible.
Stories like this drive me crazy. I foolishly blurted out something about how the speaker must be a complete weiner to do something like that in a stake conference. I don’t think my comment went over very well but I didn’t care and I launched into a few more complaints about situations or stories like this I’ve heard.
I’m not proud of my inability to keep quiet but I get so frustrated with examples like this that in my mind contribute to the idea that members of my religion might be more concerned with the outward display of piety than inward faith, obedience and humility.
14 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I guess that means that about a quarter of the men in my ward are going to Hell, myself included.
Comment by Jesse Harris — January 26, 2007 @ 12:39 pm
I would never want to be a man in such a position where my every move is scrutinized and digested by hundreds or thousands. I am too human and would make countless mistakes.
While I don’t excuse all such behavior, I learned a lesson a few years ago when a co-worker told me that they had seen an LDS church president in a store in St. George one weekend, and that person was quite grumpy and not outgoing that day. They were dismayed at this. Not long after that, I read about an earlier President of the LDS church who always came home grumpy on Wednesdays for lunch with the family. His children asked why they didn’t move family lunch to a day when he was less likely to be grumpy, to which he replied that the whole reason for Wednesday lunches with family at home was because of the fact that it was always his worst day, as he had to pore over and sign hundreds of temple divorce cases each Wednesday morning, and that he would come for lunch at home for his family to lift him back up to sanity.
Whenever I hear these cases, I give the benefit of the doubt to the leader who may still be learning to control his emotions as we all are. It would be quite embarrassing and humbling to be personally picked on in front of such a group, but I would hope that I would realize the humanity and bad luck of the situation and move on.
Here are a couple of quotes from Dallin H. Oaks pertaining to the subject:
I am weary of having young people tell me how most of our Church leaders in earlier times wore beards and long hair, which shows that these are not inherently evil. Others argue that beards cannot be evil because they see bearded men enjoying the privileges of the temple. To me, this proposition seems so obvious that it is hardly worth mentioning. Unlike modesty, which is an eternal value in the sense of rightness or wrongness in the eyes of God, our rules against beards and long hair are contemporary and pragmatic. They are responsive to conditions and attitudes in our own society at this particular point in time. Historical precedents are worthless in this area. The rules are subject to change, and I would be surprised if they were not changed at some time in the future. But the rules are with us now, and it is therefore important to understand the reasoning behind them.
There is nothing inherently wrong about long hair or beards, any more than there is anything inherently wrong with possessing an empty liquor bottle. But a person with a beard or an empty liquor bottle is susceptible of being misunderstood. Either of these articles may reduce a person’s effectiveness and promote misunderstanding because of what people may reasonably conclude when they view them in proximity to what these articles stand for in our society today.
A young bishop of my acquaintance can testify to the impact of unkempt appearance on those around us and its relationship to the drug culture. One evening last June, Bishop E. Wayne Nelson of the South Shore Ward in Griffith, Indiana, received a telephone call from a jailer in an Indiana city, fifty miles from his home. The jailer was holding two Mormon boys who were charged with possession of narcotics. Bishop Nelson made several visits as these young men waited in jail for their cases to be heard. He learned that both were from Utah, the sons of active Latter-day Saint parents. Both had tampered with drugs in this state. Both had adopted an unkempt appearance, including shoulder-length hair. Soon after they arrived in Gary, Indiana, to look for work, and while they were walking down a street, a peddler of narcotics approached them and invited them to make a purchase. Faced with that temptation at that time in that place, the boys chose not to resist. Soon after this transaction they were arrested and charged with possession of the drugs they had purchased. After the bishop heard their story in jail, he asked them, “Why do you think the peddler approached you?” One boy responded, “I guess it was our appearance; we just looked like users.” These young men had taken upon themselves the badges of the drug culture, and they were easily identified and approached by those who sought to profit from their weakness.
Dallln H. Oaks, “Standards of Dress and Grooming,” New Era, Dec. 1971, 46
If you feel that you are a special case so that the strong counsel I have given doesn’t apply to you, please don’t write me a letter. Why would I make this request? I have learned that the kind of direct counsel I have given results in a large number of letters from members who feel they are an exception and they want me to confirm that the things I have said just don’t apply to them in their special circumstance. I will explain why I cannot offer much comfort in response to that kind of letter.. As a general authority, it is my responsibility to preach general principles. When I do, I don’t try to define all the exceptions. There are exceptions to some rules. For example, we believe the commandment is not violated by killing when pursuant to lawful order in an armed conflict. But don’t ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach the general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord. The prophet Joseph Smith taught this same thing in a different way when he was asked how he governed such a diverse group of saints. He said, “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.” I pray that the things that have been said this evening will be carried into your hearts through the power of the holy ghost with the same intent with which they have been uttered, which is to bless your life. To give comfort to the afflicted and to afflict the comforted.
Dallin H. Oaks, (May 01, 2005) The Dedication of a Lifetime
http://speeches.byu.edu/?act=viewitem&id=1457
Comment by cody — January 27, 2007 @ 9:21 am
The church’s contemporary stands on its leaders and those enjoying the benefits of a church subsidized eduction (BYU) not having beards are fair and I understand them.
If those standards are going to be passed out to the church as a whole then it should be done in a more public manner. The general authority who singled this guy out in stake conference wasn’t named because I have the same concerns for the stresses of that job as you mentioned. I still think it was a very lame thing to do…although the guy probably isn’t really a wiener.
Finally. The most well groomed and coolest looking president of the church was George Albert Smith. Enough said.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — January 28, 2007 @ 6:07 am
Hey Jesus, Brigham, go shave your beards!
What would Jesus say?
Comment by Rob Miller — January 28, 2007 @ 10:21 am
As Elder Oaks says in the first quote, “our rules against beards and long hair are contemporary and pragmatic.” He said that in 1971. Things that were contemporary in 1971 are no longer contemporary 36 years later. It’s about time that people recognize that we are not living in the hippy-filled 60’s–that was 40 years ago.
Comment by Daniel — January 29, 2007 @ 7:12 am
Oh really? Watching those anti-war demonstrations, complete with Jane Fonda, the other day sure brought back not-so-fond memories of the 60’s to this old soldier. That plus all the hateful anti-military crap the Loopy Left at OneUtah posts sounds exactly like the hippy-filled 60’s. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Comment by Part of the Plan — January 29, 2007 @ 7:29 am
I’d hate to have been in the GA’s shoes or in the RM’s shoes. Having been involved in a few of these kinds of events, the GA likely got the names of these young men from the stake president. The stake president likely hadn’t seen the RM he recommended for a few weeks and wasn’t aware he had facial hair. Since the whole point was to demonstrate how wonderful RMs are, the GA was probably expecting to get someone clean shaven. The young man he got didn’t exactly have the appearance he expected to use as a model for the teenage boys. Thus, the effectiveness of his object lesson was reduced. He was embarrassed and tried to recover by telling the RM to shave.
Would the Savior have handled it that way? I seriously doubt it. Having served in church leadership callings, would I have handled it in such a boneheaded manner? That’s far more likely. I think we can excuse the man. It doesn’t make this an example of the kind of behavior we’d like to model.
And while the church doesn’t give out clear standards on post-mission and adult grooming, much has been said, even quite recently about it. How you groom doesn’t necessarily denote your level of discipleship, but it can be a precursor to it.
Comment by Reach Upward — January 29, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
This type of thing happened in a Stake Conference that I attended; however I was not aware it had happened. In the Closed Priesthood leadership meeting BEFORE the general sessions of Stake Conference Started the general authority gave counsel to many of the men IN ATTENDANCE that as Priesthood leaders in that area of the world they should reflect the attitude and appearance of the apostles. To such a humble teaching in the appropriate place the response was incredible, including one man who went to the bathroom immediately after the meeting and used a sharp pocket knife to cut his beard off while his wife brought him a razor from home. Another man in attendance shaved his long beard that he had been growing from his teenage days. This same general authority gave the missionaries there the same council that as Representatives of the church their attitudes behaviors and appearance should reflect those of the Apostles of the church. That was an appropriate way to teach, through the spirit in the right setting, not the public example.
Also notice to whom these teachings were directed! I agree that all members of the church should live to show who they are, and their lives should reflect how they believe. Having said that I ask is it possible for me to have a goatee and still reflect who I am and how I believe in my life? Does the goatee negate any and all other perceptions of who I am and how I believe?
I feel that my favorite quote from Pres. Benson applies to this subject. He said something to the effect that ‘when trying to determine where the line is (in regards to teachings of the church on chastity) faithful scripture reading Latter Day Saints will know how far is too far.’ I have had a goatee for the majority of my life because I like the way it looks. I am not trying to “be somebody else” or “fit in” I just like how it looks on me. And I have never once felt that it was the wrong thing to be reflecting.
Plus public example literally drives people with young faith away from the church. My wife and the majority of her family left the church at critical times in their faith because of people trying to teach inappropriately. It was very hard to help my wife see the difference between the church doctrine and its imperfect members interpretations of such doctrines. Adam’s belly button, LDS becoming Gods, Caffeine, goatees, Harry Potter is evil, sports are evil, denim dresses in church… These are teaching lines that are dangerous to get close to and perhaps are left better unsaid unless directly quoted from Prophets or Scripture at the appropriate time in the appropriate place. After all in the great scheme of things are these issues going to be the major factors? Or will it be such things as Faith in God, Repentance, partaking of the Sacrament, following the dictates of the spirit, and other such doctrines.
Comment by Dignin — January 30, 2007 @ 10:44 am
Dignan,
I know for a fact that you haven’t had a goatee for most of your life…unless you consider a small spattering of peach fuzz around your mouth a goatee
(since I’ve seen you only once or twice since your mission though maybe I shouldn’t give you too hard a time. You could have a full fledged Joseph F. Smith beard now!)
Your comment jives really well with the way I feel about issues like those you mentioned.
Comment by Jeremy Manning — January 30, 2007 @ 10:53 am
P.S. If I were to ever be called to a Priesthood leadership calling I would shave to reflect the leaders whom I am to emulate. But as for now…
Comment by Dignin — January 30, 2007 @ 10:55 am
Peach fuzz is it! I thought peach fuzz was all that was left on the top of your head!
(Sorry, I really didn’t mean it but you walked right into that one!)
Comment by Dignin — January 30, 2007 @ 11:14 am
Speaking of a goatee, I vote that Jeremy grows one.
Comment by Daniel — January 30, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
Large gut, bald head, and SWEET goatee are all available for your viewing here: http://www.themannings.org/mt/archives/002400.html
Comment by Jeremy Manning — January 30, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
As a seminary teacher I don’t have a choice if it were my choice I would have a flowing goatee. As or doctrine this is not! this is an opinion of a general authority. They can have opinions. Just like mormon doctrine is the OPINION of Bruce R. McConkie this book is not the doctrine of the church. If this GA sadi this in conference than this would be doctrine. My opinion is this you are viewed differently when you have facial hair! I was pulled over in Clinton UT years ago when I had a baseball cap on and a full goatee. THe officer made me get out of the car and walk the line and do other things thinking I was drunk driving. This was his preception from the way I looked. A few weeks later I had shaved for an interview and was returning my girlfriends car when I got pulled over same spot same cop. this time he was polite and smiled and sent me on my way not knowing who I was but treating me totally different. This GA may have had good intentions but portrayed himself with out much tact.
Comment by Derek Andersen — February 7, 2007 @ 2:08 pm