I’ve been thinking of doing this post for some time, and have indeed written several thoughts on it in the past.  Its rather imperative that we come up with a concrete definition, being that we throw the idea around quite a bit.   We could go about it several ways, like just copy pasting the words of another man, or the ‘handbook’ of Brighams feelings, or of the general perception of the people.  However, I think all of these fall short in that they are simply the musing of men, the opinions as it were of men or committees.  This is dangerous, since the definition arrived at serves to put label people.  In other words, it is a manner of Judgment.  AS the Lord said, judge not lest ye be judged.  For that reason we should be careful what our standard is, lest we judge wrongly and are thus judged ourselves.  Thankfully  the Lord has provided for us in the last days who like to throw the term around, a definition in the scriptures.

In scriptural terms, we have two references to apostasy.

The first is in section 85, “And also their manner of life, their faith, and works; and also of the apostates who apostatize after receiving their inheritances.”  this is a reference to a person who has been given the Laws of Zion, and refused them.  They have been given and inheritance in Zion and refused to consecrate and keep those covenants.  They are at odds with Zion, the only society that Christ approves of.  Who here is apostate under this definition?

Remarkably, the only other reference to apostate is in the very next section.  Sections 85 and 86 are written as companion chapters.  One describes the wheat from the tares in personal terms, the who and how and why, section 85.  The next is a parable in story terms of the same event, leaving with a promise to Israel, allowing us to apply the contents, section 86.  Its no wonder both sections use the term, exclusively.

the verse in 86, ” And after they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon, that maketh all nations to drink of her cup, in whose hearts the enemy, even Satan, sitteth to reign—behold he soweth the tares; wherefore, the tares choke the wheat and drive the church into the wilderness. ”

The Lord starts out telling HOW tares are sown in the church.  But, before that, it is told why it is allowed to happen, the Apostles fall asleep.  The apostate here is Satan, especially in reference to the culture that he created amongst us.  BABYLON is the apostate.  Thus, Zion is the unit of measure.  Are we doing all we can to seek to bring again Zion?  If not, we are in apostasy.

This people is embedded in the business practice and the seeking and earning, laboring for money.  WE have our money and investments invested in babylonian businesses, in the stock market, in real estate. We put our money and backing in Babylonian Banking institutions, like the one with the name Zion on it.  We build up those who wear their nice clothes and fancy apparel, we command each other to do the same.  We only allow tithes and offerings to be paid in the from of BAbylonian paper currency, with no real backing besides the words of men in excess.  WE thus force our people to labor in babylon for money in order to get by day to day.  To blend into society and be good citizens, in order to build our ‘church’ wherever we are.  We discourage the Zionistic movement of Gathering out, in favor of staying where we are to change where we are.

If a man were to labor today, in Babylon, for the welfare of others, accepting no payment, would mean financial and personal ruin.  They would end up a vagabond, however enriched.  A beggar on the street unable to be a “provident provider” for his family.  In todays society, and under the direction of our leaders, he would become a destitute of sorts unable to support a family.

In Zion, this same man who labored for others would be exalted through inheritance, and increased in family.  AS Nephi Points out; “Wherefore, if they should have charity they would not suffer the laborer in Zion to perish.”  But force them to perish we do.

thus they have not charity, forcing those who seek Zion to do the same, instructing them to seek babylonian education, that they might excel according to their genius and hard work. The tools of Babylon, Goal setting, Hard work to advance, getting gain, and Education that you might prosper.  As the Anti Christ said, “every man fared in this life according to the management of the creature (goals, organize); therefore every man prospered according to his genius (get an education), and that every man conquered according to his strength(work hard)”.

Thus, IMO apostasy is only applicable in reference to Zion.  Those who are embedded in Babylon and teach us how to excel in that society are thus apostate.  Those who invest in babylonian infrastructure, build it and exalt it are in apostasy.  Those who teach others to do the same are in apostasy.   Those who teach others that they must conform ot the precepts of men, that what men are teaching is more important to our welfare than the scriptures, are in apostasy.

In section 101 the land of promise was taken away and Zion had to wait for a season, because the people continued to seek Babylon.  We continue to do so, building our cities and towns were we live, being industrious and investing in our own personal welfare.  By doing so we remain in apostasy as a people.  Apostate from Zion, apostate from the society of Christ.  Apostate from his revelations, his covenants, his laws, all of which build Zion.

I was preparing a rather lengthy diatribe on this matter, but have since decided against it.  Beginning to feel this as a very personal area of thought.  In other words, though there are TONS of scriptures on the matter, that of clothing, it seems really to be quite simple of an idea, one worth pondering.  With that being said, I have a couple of thoughts on the matter, and want to turn this one loose for discussion.  It seems base or trivial, but I assert that it is not.

Does it really matter what we wear?  Does what we wear determine whether or not we are disciples of Christ, builders of Zion? As a matter of principle, scripturally it appears that yes it indeed does.

In my mind (a Murky place, so we’ll stay out of it for the most part), it is rather apparent and obvious to any members of the LDS church, and I would venture even to those out of it, that what we wear as ‘mormons’ to church and during the week are part of our ‘worship’.  I would leave a ton of quotes here from the leaders of the church on this fact, but don’t see the need.  Here is a quick one though, to get us started.  It is found in the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet which the church gives to all of its youth, and even encourages adults to read and comply with.

” When you are well groomed and modestly dressed, you invite the companionship of the Spirit and can exercise a good influence on those around you.
Never lower your dress standards for any occasion. Doing so sends the message that you are using your body to get attention and approval and that modesty is important only when it is convenient.”

Before of moving into the meat of the subject, allow me a few sentences to discuss this quote in particular.  It manifests the attitude and belief of the leadership as well as the church as a whole.

First off it is laughable that we would assert that the grooming and attire you wear are what invites the spirit of God.  Find that in the scriptures. Tell that to Alma and Amulek naked in prison, or John alone on the isle of patmos, or to Noah stuck on a boat with hundreds of dirty animals and no razor, or the Savior wandering from town to town, full manly beard and all, or perhaps to Isaiah as he walked entirely buck Naked and prophesied under the Lords direction for three years, or Samson who was commanded by God to never cut or shave his hair, etc.  The idea that  being ‘well groomed’ (inherently subjective) equals having the spirit doesn’t seem to hold up very well.  Though it does speak well for Nehor, James Bond, Julius Cesear  and Adolf Hitler.

We do see however the point of the quote when it states the purpose of grooming as to “exercise a good influence on those around you”.  They’ve,  made our point for us.  Attempting to exercise influence on others is the main premise of the treaty.  What others think of you is the real point here, since the spirit argument can’t hold water.  This is of course the babylonian way.  The Pharisees put on their phylacteries, Satan wore his robes of priesthood, and I have to get ‘dressed up’ to go into a Job interview for Babylon.  Why?  Because in a world where Satan rules and deceives by appearance, the haircut and clothing will be the test of virtue (thank you hugh).  The outward appearance is what makes a man in a culture of people who see nothing else.  Complying with such means is merely to build up that system.

The Lord of course argues this point when he states that God doth not look on the outward appearance like men do, he only cares about the heart.  However, the Gospel being full of conundrums, descriptions of Clothing and apparel of the righteous uniformly do tell us what a righteous man will wear and how he will appear.  AS we will find, he doesn’t look on our outward appearance as a matter of Law, though he gives us keys of outward appearance to understand and adhere to as a matter of principle.

Speaking of righteous women Paul says, “Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. (1 peter 3)”  In further speaking of the haughty daughter of Zion in the Last Days (women of Happy valley listen up), ISaiah tells us that the bonnets, fancy dresses, earrings, fancy boots on the legs, etc… will be purpose for the cursings that fall on them. But Its not just the women, indeed, we can drag the men in this too.

When the utopia of 4 Nephi was finely killed, one of the first indications that is was gone is described thus, “there began to be among them those who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world.”  This same indictment is held many times in the book of mormon, that as a people came out of living truth, they began to put emphasis on apparel as a means of life.  As pointed out here in 4 Nephi, this is an indication of pride.  Alma’s lament in Alma 31 could well be a description given by a man sitting in our congregations today, “Behold, O my God, their costly apparel, and their ringlets, and their bracelets, and their ornaments of gold, and all their precious things which they are ornamented with; and behold, their hearts are set upon them, and yet they cry unto thee and say—We thank thee, O God, for we are a chosen people unto thee, while others shall perish.”

I find that term “ornaments” very interesting and even quite helpful in determining the right from the wrong.  An ornament serves no real purpose other than to look good, to deceive by appearance, especially as an article of clothing.  I recall recently a leader of the church (will remain anonymous) describing how he had to loan a pair of cuff links to a colleague who had forgotten his own.  Another thought is those zealous brethren who honestly believe that putting on the ornament of a neck-tie is necessary to practice priesthood.  Priest-craft perhaps, but priest-hood?  They even save one in the bishops office for deacons who ‘forget’ theirs!  How about the gold  and silver watches (bracelets)?  Go ahead, apply it to yourself.  Do we really look that silly to God when we bear a testimony liek these Zoramites on their podium, while wearing these ornaments to please men?

Lets look at another Book of Mormon dichotomy real quick.  Alma 1 is a fascinating study because of its discussion of the two fold path of churchiness.  As Nephi said, there are save two churches only and as we’ve pointed out many many times here, both churches exist all around us, including in our church groups, congregations and wards.  Within every congregation in the world those two churches stand affixed, with the ruler of appearance, babylon, ruling supremely.  I’ve found Almas division of ideas quite poignant on many occasions. I’ll try to stick just with the clothing portions of this story.

First the Church of Nehor is discussed, in particular Nehor himself; “he began to be lifted up in the pride of his heart, and to wear very costly apparel“.  Interesting how over and over again the Pride of a person is correlated with his insistence on wearing ‘costly apparel’.  I would say they are mentioned together often enough for us to consider that the wearing of such clothing is a sure indicator of apostasy, of the pride of the unjust.  This description is contrasted in verse 27 where we are told that the people of God “did not wear costly apparel, yet they were neat and comely”.  Again we are instructed that what a person wears does matter to God, its should not be costly, worldly, etc… but SHOULD be neat and comely.  By the way these two ideals are being described, I think we have a principle on our hands.

This is not a law, it is a principle, a key.  This principle is given us that we might discern truth from error.  Whenever you find the church of God you will find those who naturally are lean toward being neat and comely, but not of the world in ornamenting their bodies with clothing.  This does not mean that they don’t have nice comfortable or durable clothing, as pointed out in verse 29, they also had an “abundance of ^bsilk and fine-twined linen, and all manner of good homely ^ccloth.”  They had good quality things, even riches communally, as a result of taking care of each other, but did not use them to ornament their bodies nor insist that others should do so.  It does mean however that their clothing is separate, different from the world.  Indeed, they do as the Savior commands and find the spirit in him, no on an idol like clothing.  They groom themselves because it is natural to such a person, though they don’t see it as essential for a disciple of Christ.

We can be reminded of the poor of the Zoramites, when Alma found them he saw a people that were prepared to hear the word of God.  Yet the church of the land had done something amazing.  They had kicked the poor out of their synagogues because of the ‘courseness of their clothing’.  This may sound astounding, but I am not allowed to pass the sacrament in my ward or  to hold a calling with meaning or any authority without my nice white shirt and ornamental tie.  There are rare circumstances that are allowed, but in general it is frowned on.  Not only is it frowned on in this manner, but in social situations a person who does not fit the ‘standards’ of dress are literally looked down on, and not allowed to worship.  If I walked into the temple this day to worship my God, to seek his face, in a robe with or without sandals, I would either be turned around, looked down on and scoffed at or at least admonished.  I say this with experience, as I have been lectured for walking in there without a tie before.  And I am then given a tie to worship in the temple because, and I quote, ” we cannot worship in the house of the Lord without a tie”.   I would tell you who hold such postions to Repent of your blind and unjust prejudice.   I still have not found the reference to this during the temple lectures nor could I understand the symbolism (sarcasm intended).  Perhaps that is because the symbolism is negative, as Nephi pointed out Satan will lead those of his church around by a flaxen cord wrapped around their necks (sounds like a tie to me), begging them to wear fine twine clothing and a dark changeable suit to match.

I think perhaps what I am getting at is the idea of a principle, as discussed in the word of wisdom.  Those of the church of God recognize those inherit truths as right and are willing to align with them.  This idea is a principle in this manner, those who follow Christ will also follow his styling cues.  But in order to do so, we must understand the thing our principle is tied too and that is Babylon or Zion.  As Alma put it, come ye out from the wicked, touch not their unclean things.  We have to know what is unclean and what is not.  WE have to be able recognize Babylons tactics, its paradigms, its styles, its designs, etc…  and then be able to apply our own rational judgment to come from out of that.

Is it important?  I believe the Book of Mormon makes it clear that this principle is very important.  Throughout the book the authors go out of their ways to mention the clothing worn by a people when they were wicked and when they were not.  Recognize that fact, that this principle matters, it sets us apart into the culture we want to be in, the one we care about.  Those of the church of the Lamb see the facets of Babylon and are different.  Those of babylon remain blind to that very dichotomy.

As a final note I would like to leave one last scripture for those who might remain on the fence or even to seek after this principle.  DC 42:40,41 makes it clear hat the Clean things of Zion and the Dirty things of Babylon are contrasted in our clothing.  It makes it clear the our clothing is a matter of Pride if we are not willing to change and come out to Zion.  It goes so far as to give us instruction on the type of clothing we should wear, just how clean of the world, just how free of pride?  They should be plain, yet beautiful,  neat and comely.  In fact, if truly seeking the Zion of Christ we would bother to make them ourselves, thus fully ridding ourselves of the chains of Babylonian fashion.

“And again, thou shalt not be ^aproud in thy ^bheart; let all thy ^cgarments be plain, and their ^dbeauty the beauty of the ^ework of thine own hands; And let all things be done in ^acleanliness before me.”