For this weeks topic, I've decided to take a suggestion from one of my "many" readers. The following question was posed,
"Should one wear tank tops (i.e. immodest clothing) before going to the temple?"
For the sake of writing ease, I'm going to act as if you are all LDS. If you aren't and have some questions, feel free to email me and I will do my best to answer them.
My answer is a huge, capital, NO!
I have always found it strange when parents and leaders in the church do not make modesty a non-negotiable behavior. I realize that in today's world it is hard to find fashion forward clothing that is modest. But it's also hard to go into any restaurant that does not serve alcohol, and yet it's accessibility does not make it right for us to automatically partake. So why should wearing immodest clothing be any different?
We strive to teach our children when they are young correct principles and patterns to follow in their lives. We teach them basically from day one the importance of family and personal prayers, scripture study, church attendance, etc. I strongly feel that if we want our children (especially our daughters - since they seem to have the most temptation in this area) to respect the temple and the covenants made there, than we should start at a very young age to have them act like they have already been there. Then when they do go, no major shift in their attitudes and dress will need to occur. To me it seems like a no brainer.
I strive very hard to do this with my daughter. I have never allowed her to wear a sleeveless dress without a shirt underneath. Even when she was a little newborn. I saw no purpose in it. I have struggled greatly with finding modest shorts for someone her age. She wore shorter shorts than I was comfortable with last summer, so something will have to change this year. Fortunately I know how to work a sewing machine, so cutting off pants and hemming them may be the answer. While not the easiest option, it is an option to make sure I teach her the importance of modesty to me and more importantly to the Lord.
There is a scripture that I think addresses this subject very well. It is found in Proverbs 22:6. It reads, "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."
I see no difference in the diligence we should give teaching modesty in comparison to all the other patterns and life style choices we hope our young children and youth will learn while in our care.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree whole-heartedly. As for the shorts, the children's place has long shorts that are so cute. They are 16, so I would try to wait for a sale or something. But I was so excited!
ReplyDeleteyou present your case very, very well.
ReplyDeletei can see your point. but truth be told, i disagree with you. although i do see the importance of having respect and reverence for temple covenants, i don't think my daughter wearing a tanktop or a sundress is completely sabatoging her in the long run.
ReplyDeletemy good friend actually usese baptism as the gate to introduce modestly and covenanting making to her girls. i agree with her approach, rather than completely outlawing it. my parents never made an issue of it, but as i got older, i noticed and felt the importance of it on my own. i'm glad that my parents allowed me to come to that realization on my own.
like adrianne, i see your point, but i also disagree with you on this.
ReplyDeleteand here's why: i do not think that garments define modesty. if i did, i couldn't argue with what you wrote. but garments weren't created strictly for defining modesty; at least, that's not what we're taught in the temple. think about what happened to adam and eve in order to cover themselves; they initially used fig leaves. "clothes" weren't put on them until they left the garden of eden. elder asay said that garments serve three purposes: "a reminder of the sacred temple covenants, a protective covering, and a symbol of modesty," not the definition of modesty. even President Packer said that "the garment fosters modesty," again, not defines.
even the church isn't consistent with their definition of modesty. for some reason, at BYU-I, even shorts are considered immodest, however at BYU-Provo, this isn't the case. some garments are more low-cut than others and some hit the legs at different points. so one day a pair of shorts is modest, but the next day, they're suddenly not?
what if someone was to walk out of their bedroom wearing one of two outfits: strictly garments or a swimsuit; which would be more modest? i believe the swimsuit. our garments are our underwear and our clothes should cover them. but a little girl of age 4? her clothes should cover her underwear too, but that could be accomplished by wearing a sundress, even one without sleeves. and does the church tell us to wear a t-shirt and long shorts when we swim? nope. (of course i don't advocate wearing swimsuits 24-7. please don't think that's what i'm saying.)
in isaiah 28:10, we see that things are given to us "precept upon precept; line upon line; here a little, and there a little." and i think this scripture applies here. i'm sure that we all expect our children to fast at some point. however, we don't generally impose that from the day they are born. but we teach them the principles so that one day, they'll be ready to live the law of the fast. i will teach the same concerning the temple covenants and what the garments will mean when my children actually receive their own endowment. but i simply won't require garment-covering clothes on six-month old, nor a sixteen-year old. but i will require my children to be modest.
p.s. man, i wish i had taken debate. not because i want to fight you on this, but i think it would help me to present a more cogent argument. oh well.
I agree 100% with you Megan. I always dressed more modestly than my sister and she was allowed to wear immodest things growing up. I think it is a bigger issue than some like to think. I still dress more modestly than my sister who has been to the temple but chose to buy garments that fit her snugly so that she could still wear some fashions of the world. I disagree with her choice but hope that my little girl will follow after my example.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei guess i will add a little more here since everyone else did. :) i'm such a wishy-wash person and can see both sides of many issues. this one included.
ReplyDeletebut i have to say from my experience i would tend to lean towards my sister's comments. i wore tanks, sleeveless shirts, short shorts all growing up - including BYU summers.
i always knew, however, that one day i would wear garments and that those clothings would not be appropriate. i did not feel they weren't appropriate at that time as i had not entered into temple convenants.
also, i did not have a difficult time adjusting to wearing garments and getting rid of my non-garment conforming clothing. i was taught and i knew and so it was not a big deal.
i've seen very immodest garment wearers and very modest non-garment wearers (if that makes any sense). so, again, i guess i agree with erin (and her quoted sources) that garments do not define modesty.
Knowing what I know about lust, and it’s far reaching, destructive effects on the minds of men (and even women) I would be stupid to let my young daughters prance around freely in tank tops and spaghetti straps.
ReplyDeleteI wish to allow them the innocence of child hood in every way imaginable – but never at their own risk. We just don’t live in that kind of world anymore.
I can imagine that in our Fathers house the body is not regarded lustfully, there couldn’t be lust in Heaven. So I come to the conclusion that most of the issues with modesty/ and seeing our bodies are a symptom of sin and being mortal and that our experience in the next life is nothing we can comprehend here.
So we look to the garment for protection? From what? From ourselves, from temptation, from others, from injury?
Does the garment physically protect us? Or does it serve as a symbol, a constant reminder of the covenants we have made? Yes, we have all heard stories. But, in our ordinary daily lives what purpose does wearing it serve?
Is the need for protection greater once we achieve the age of attending the temple?
Do our infants, children and teenagers in their innocence and naievete need protection?
I met my dear husband at the age of 17. I was 5 foot 8 and 110 lbs. I felt awkward and I was scared to death of people. He swept me off my feet and made me feel like I was the most beautiful thing that walked the earth. It changed me. I quickly learned the power my body gave me. I quickly became hooked on the feelings that came when I was treated sexy. The focus of the following 4 years of my life became all about my looks. From my clothing and shoes to my make up and underwear – I was obsessed with keeping him excited about me. I went to many inappropriate extremes and I spent a lot of money. I became inactive and lead a lifestyle that I never could have imagined for myself. Before we were even married he began to look elsewhere – and the more he looked - the harder I tried to bring him back to me.
Even after we finally turned some things around in our life and prepared to go to the temple - - -
Over the years I believed that if I could just work a little harder, get a better tan, learn a better way to do my hair, have more money for sexy lingerie or seductive clothing that I could get him to love me again.
So I have struggled so hard to be modest. Giving up that type of dress has been a very painful process. I have waivered often. I have had long periods of time when I was convinced that problems in our marriage were my fault because I was driving him away by wearing the garment.
I spent three years with undiagnosed diabetes where I was so hot all the time that I would have preferred to run around au naturel and was constantly tempted to go with out that extra layer.
I sometimes long for that type of clothing – to feel sexy again. I wonder if that temptation will ever stop.
I wonder if part of my gaining weight and keeping it on is some sort of protection for me so that I don’t dress that way – because let’s face it – that would be gross.
I have a close friend Roy who adamantly insists that his daughter will not wear tank tops, spaghetti straps, etc. I realize that he can say this because he is being honest.
As LDS women we do not look at our little children and see sexual creatures. Not all minds think like ours. Not all minds are safe.
Above and beyond the moral code is an entirely different side of the issue. Protecting our skin.
I am a survivor of Malignant Melanoma – the deadliest form of skin cancer. I was lucky. I may not be as lucky next time.
I should be an advocate of sunscreen, long sleeved clothing, hats, sunglasses, the works.
I am vain. I want to be pretty. I hate to be too hot.
Ultimately I have to say if you say it’s just fashion – you are kidding yourself.
If you think you can dress on the edge and you are safe at church – you are wrong.
If you wonder at all – or feel defensive about what you’re wearing – you probably shouldn’t be wearing it.
I put my little girls in sundresses and I wonder … is this inappropriate? They are so beautiful.
Because I love them so much – I want to give them a strong foundation of a moral code. I want them to feel a conviction for the truth and not this same inner struggle I have had to face.
After spending a miserable dinner in a smoke filled restaurant I wanted to scrub my self clean inside and out. After talking about how yucky it was, stripping us all of reaking clothes, and bathing us all, I got out the eye drops and nasal spray. My eyes and nose were itching fiercely and I worried about my girls sensitive little bodies.
They bravely looked to the sky as I washed their eyes clean – free of the smoke that had contaminated them.
A few days later as we went into a gas station we passed someone who was smoking. When we got back in the car the girls immediately started talking about the smoke and asked me if I had any eye drops.
If you – or if I – think that our children are too little to learn valuable moral lessons – we will miss out on our most important teaching moments.
Finally, I guess the thing I try to remember for myself is that the 1st law of Heaven is obedience. I want to be obedient. Even when there is a part of me that doesn’t! I know that if I am obedient I am blessed, I am taken care of, I am at peace. In this phase of my life I am not willing to risk the consequences of choosing the other path.
"Sisters, you were not born at this time and place by chance. You are here because this is where the Lord wants you to be....
"... Strong women are needed, women who will stay morally clean when all about them do not, women who will establish homes that are a little bit of heaven and where the family is upheld and little children are cared for and given love and attention by their own mothers, women who will shun pornography – not just older women, but young women too, who will seek personal and social refinement, who will strive to become more cultured, who will respect the authority of the home and the priesthood. As the Church grows, there will be a need for more women who are leaders, for more women everywhere who have the courage to proclaim their testimony of Jesus Christ, women who will pray and study to find out what the Lord requires of them and who will then make right choices and put themselves in the hands of the Lord."
Betty E. Brown