Question about garments

[Ldsjones]

Hi all, first time posting here. I had an interview with my bishop to renew my temple recommend today and was asked the typical “Do you wear the garments as instructed in the temple” bit. Anyways it made me realize that I don’t actually remember how I was instructed to wear them when I went through the temple (over a decade ago). Furthermore it seems like the instructions may have changed since then - no reference to wearing them night and day anymore in the recommend interview.  I know they read the blurb about how we should wear the garment at the bottom of the interview -https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-temple-recommend-letter.pdf

But my question is - is the instruction given in the temple the same as the instructions given in the temple recommend interview? Is the wording the same? Is there more or less instruction given in the temple given about wearing the garments? And If the wording is different Is there a place in the temple I can go to review what the current instruction is?

I’m familiar with what the current guidance in the church handbook is. I’m specifically trying to figure out if that is the guidance that is currently given inside of the temple

 

 

[Carborendum]

17 hours ago, Ldsjones said:

But my question is - is the instruction given in the temple the same as the instructions given in the temple recommend interview? Is the wording the same? Is there more or less instruction given in the temple given about wearing the garments? 

I can go chase that down, but it isn't rocket science.  And we don't need to get all lawyerly about it.

You wear them all the time except those times that you for all practical purposes cannot.  You obviously cannot wear it when bathing.  And we don't wear them when swimming.  Apart from that you wear them. 

Issues arise when people say they "can't wear them" when what they're really saying is that it is just annoying or inconvenient.  What's worse is that some people remove them so they can wear a particular outfit that is very revealing.  Well, one of the purposes of wearing the garment is to ensure that our outer clothing is modest.

Perhaps more important than anything else is to remember what the garment is to remind us of:

• Coats of skins given to Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness.
• Be constant reminders of our covenants.

I've said that the second one is more important than the first.  As I get changed in the morning, putting on my garments is a spiritual experience.  When I'm working in the garden in the hot Texas sun and I'm sweating like a horse who just ran across the state, I feel the garments sticking to my skin and I realize that gardening is just a way of the Lord teaching me how life works.

[LDSGator]

Welcome to the forums! 

[zil2]

Welcome, @Ldsjones!

I can't remember what I was told in the temple either (though I remember the room we sat in as one of the female temple workers talked to us, and who else was there with me - 4 of us).  I've always just assumed it was basically what that letter said, and what @Carborendum said.  I don't think it would hurt a thing to talk to your bishop or stake president about it, either.

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Perhaps more important than anything else is to remember what the garment is to remind us of:

• Coats of skins given to Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness.
• Be constant reminders of our covenants.

While "the Atonement of Jesus Christ" could be included in either of those (in a sense), I would add it as a third bullet point.

[scottyg]

I wear the garment anytime an activity can reasonably be done while wearing it...which is pretty much all the time. Ultimately, we are to seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit regarding personal questions about wearing the garment.

[Ldsjones]

14 hours ago, Carborendum said:

You wear them all the time except those times that you for all practical purposes cannot.  You obviously cannot wear it when bathing.  And we don't wear them when swimming.  Apart from that you wear them. 

 

That’s just the thing though. I know a lot of members share in your interpretation (and I did too before getting married) but that’s pretty much why I was trying to figure out what those darn temple instructions were. I feel like the instructions in the temple were (are?) to simply wear them throughout your life.  That’s a little different than ‘wear them at all times unless you’re doing something that prevents you from being able to wear them’ .  It leaves it as more of a personal decision on what that means to each individual. For instance I can wear my garments throughout my life, but still take them off each night to sleep naked with my wife if that’s what we choose to do. (Personally I wonder if that’s one of the reasons they removed the ‘night and day’ wording on the recommend interview but I digress).  I understand that the church encourages members to wear them at all times unless we reasonably can’t. I’m just trying to separate encouragement from what we actually agree to in the temple.

 
 

I completely agree that the real importance here is that the garments serve as a symbolic reminder of our covenant. Asking whether we should or shouldn’t wear them in x situation is probably the wrong question.

 

[mikbone]

The 3 S’s

Sex, Sports, Swimming (bathing).

I’ve heard of women wearing garments during childbirth…

I’d add surgery to the above.  

[Vort]

Skullduggery

[Ironhold]

As I explained elsewhere, I have a deformity in my skeletal structure. One effect of this is that it makes certain hygiene tasks a touch more difficult than normal for me to accomplish, and so I do go through undergarments at a faster than normal pace. 

The nearest temple is a six-hour round trip, a very difficult journey due to the deformity and my spinal injuries; I have to periodically stop to stretch or else I end up in pain. 

Ordering garments is also dicey, as we've had porch pirates in my neighborhood, and the Amazon drivers who service this area rarely ring the doorbell or otherwise let people know that packages have arrived. 

In contrast, there are at least six national chain retailers within about 20 minutes of me that sell regular ol' skivvies in my size. One retailer is so close I could actually walk there if the weather was agreeable.  

While I do have garments (at least, I think I do; they might have gone into the storage facility when we had to strip and clean the house last year due to ants in our food storage...), I thus save those for very special occasions because of how hard they are for me to replace. 

[Traveler]

There is a history concerning the sacred temple garments.  In my youth it seemed all my family (including aunts and uncles) were Church members married in the temple.  I recall my grandmother talking about wearing the sacred garment.  Her generation strongly believed in the protection of the sacred garment.  My grandmother told me that she never completely took off her garment – for anything.  When she bathed, she always kept at least one arm or leg in the garment.  When changing the process was similar, an arm or leg was left in the old garment until another arm or leg was in the new garment.  During her generation the garment was one piece.  The arms covered down to the wrists and the legs were covered to the ancles. 

When I received my garments, things had changed but the garment was still a single piece.  However, there was a special garment required at the temple that was the old style that my grandparents used.  There were problems in the military with the garments because it was not government issue uniform.  While I was in the army the church came out with a military garment that was not white but the same color as the government issued military undergarment.  And it was in two pieces, so it did not stand out as something different.  Generally, it was not acceptable in the church to wear the military garment with civilian clothing but many former military did.

Within a few years the Church came out with a two-piece garment and eventually the old style required at the temple garment was dropped.  Many older members still preferred my grandparent’s style and refused to wear the more modern styles.  Some older members though those that wore the newer styles were less righteous.   This was an interesting era in the Church.  The style of clothing was changing, and ladies liked to wear shorter dresses that did not cover the knees.  The garment was intended to extend over the knee, but many ladies found ways to wear the shorter dresses regardless.  A serious problem arose in the Church as ladies sat on the stand at church with the shorter dresses.

When I returned from my mission and having spent time in the army – I was personally disgusted, especially with the young ladies at BYU and their short dresses.  During that era the young ladies usually were not endowed until they married.  I had great difficulty accepting what I thought was immodesty among the young sisters.  The problem was so bad with the ladies and their short dresses that the Church built half walls for the chapel stand in the churches to compensate.  This is now standard and required.

Later, after I married, I began to compete in cycling.  I found it difficult to compete while wearing the garment because the garment was not designed for rigorous cycling and I would overheat – especially in summer heat.  I wrote a detailed letter to the first presidency with a design for a garment for sports that would allow the body to breath and not overheat.  I also suggested that my cycling jersey could be modified (similar to what was done for the military).  I received a response from the first presidency that a special sport garment was unacceptable because the brethren were concerned it would be worn when not participating in sports.   It was suggested that while participating in sports that I not wear the sacred garment.  I was quite troubled with this and fasted and prayed much concerning this suggestion.  It was hard to adjust but I was able to compete at a much higher level.  I am still bothered that something special is not done for sports, but I understand why this blessing is not offered – because it would be abused.

If I were to say any thing about the garment – I would say that it is perhaps the most sacred physical part of my covenant with G-d.  It has been a great protection for me – even when I am participating in sports.  The protection has been both physical and spiritual.  I have come to understand that the garment is not the covenant but the symbol of the covenant.  If I were to make any suggestion – it would be to find a way to maintain your covenants with G-d.  This recommendation is regardless of religion but for LDS I believe covenants are especially important.  If someone is LDS and has not received a manifestation of the spirit concerning the sacred and holy garment – I suggest that you consider becoming more serious concerning your covenants.  To paraphrase what Isaiah said to king Ahaz – you cannot believe in holy and sacred things because you are not loyal to your covenants.

 

The Traveler

[Carborendum]

On 7/18/2023 at 2:44 AM, Ldsjones said:

That’s a little different than ‘wear them at all times unless you’re doing something that prevents you from being able to wear them’ .  It leaves it as more of a personal decision on what that means to each individual. For instance I can wear my garments throughout my life, but still take them off each night to sleep naked with my wife if that’s what we choose to do.

If you're asking specifically about wearing them in bed after sex, here is what I was told by a stake president.  Take it as you will.

He likened it to going swimming.  You put on your swimsuit to go swimming.  But you'll wear it prior to actually going into the water.  And after you've gone swimming, you might refrain from changing and just sun yourself for a bit.  Who knows, maybe you'll go back into the pool for a while.  

When the "overall event" of swimming is complete then you'll probably go get changed back into street clothes again.

But one thing he said is that it would probably not be wise to go all night without putting them back on.

Take it as you will.

[CV75]

On 7/16/2023 at 8:09 PM, Ldsjones said:

Hi all, first time posting here. I had an interview with my bishop to renew my temple recommend today and was asked the typical “Do you wear the garments as instructed in the temple” bit. Anyways it made me realize that I don’t actually remember how I was instructed to wear them when I went through the temple (over a decade ago). Furthermore it seems like the instructions may have changed since then - no reference to wearing them night and day anymore in the recommend interview.  I know they read the blurb about how we should wear the garment at the bottom of the interview -https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-temple-recommend-letter.pdf

But my question is - is the instruction given in the temple the same as the instructions given in the temple recommend interview? Is the wording the same? Is there more or less instruction given in the temple given about wearing the garments? And If the wording is different Is there a place in the temple I can go to review what the current instruction is?

I’m familiar with what the current guidance in the church handbook is. I’m specifically trying to figure out if that is the guidance that is currently given inside of the temple

 

 

Inside the temple: attend and ask a member of the temple presidency. Answer the temple questions honestly and in good faith, and ask the interviewer any questions you may have in the same spirit.

[Grunt]

Wearing the Temple Garment

The temple garment is a reminder of covenants made in the temple and, when worn properly throughout life, will serve as a protection against temptation and evil. The garment should be worn beneath the outer clothing. It should not be removed for activities that can reasonably be done while wearing the garment, and it should not be modified to accommodate different styles of clothing. Endowed members should seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit to answer personal questions about wearing the garment.

It is a sacred privilege to wear the garment and doing so is an outward expression of an inner commitment to follow the Savior Jesus Christ.

[mirkwood]

I'm always surprised at endowed members who look for reasons to not wear their garments.

[Ironhold]

On 7/23/2023 at 10:19 AM, mirkwood said:

I'm always surprised at endowed members who look for reasons to not wear their garments.

Suffice to say that if you could view my X-rays you'd understand why I'm no longer keen on three-hour road trips in each direction. 

[Grunt]

1 hour ago, Ironhold said:

Suffice to say that if you could view my X-rays you'd understand why I'm no longer keen on three-hour road trips in each direction. 

I'm sorry you have to live with that.  Good thing you can order them online.

[Ironhold]

10 minutes ago, Grunt said:

I'm sorry you have to live with that.  Good thing you can order them online.

...Except for the porch pirates, that is. 

As I've noted before, ordering anything is dicey because we have them in the neighborhood. 

The local Amazon and FedEx drivers don't always ring the doorbell or otherwise signal us that they've made a delivery, leading to more than a few instances where I've literally tripped over items that were left sitting unattended on my front porch for hours on end (including a case of military rations that may have literally been out there overnight). 

My regular USPS driver is pretty good about putting packages out of sight, but substitutes are an unknown quantity. 

If I try to order garments online, there's no guarantee I'll get to them before porch pirates do, and in my area there are plenty of people who would like garments for nefarious purposes. If I have to order them online, I'd have to clear the entire ETA period and just stay home. 

[Grunt]

Just now, Ironhold said:

...Except for the porch pirates, that is. 

As I've noted before, ordering anything is dicey because we have them in the neighborhood. 

The local Amazon and FedEx drivers don't always ring the doorbell or otherwise signal us that they've made a delivery, leading to more than a few instances where I've literally tripped over items that were left sitting unattended on my front porch for hours on end (including a case of military rations that may have literally been out there overnight). 

My regular USPS driver is pretty good about putting packages out of sight, but substitutes are an unknown quantity. 

If I try to order garments online, there's no guarantee I'll get to them before porch pirates do, and in my area there are plenty of people who would like garments for nefarious purposes. If I have to order them online, I'd have to clear the entire ETA period and just stay home. 

I suppose, but I think this stands more to @mirkwood's point.

[LDSGator]

11 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

...Except for the porch pirates, that is. 

As I've noted before, ordering anything is dicey because we have them in the neighborhood. 

The local Amazon and FedEx drivers don't always ring the doorbell or otherwise signal us that they've made a delivery, leading to more than a few instances where I've literally tripped over items that were left sitting unattended on my front porch for hours on end (including a case of military rations that may have literally been out there overnight). 

My regular USPS driver is pretty good about putting packages out of sight, but substitutes are an unknown quantity. 

If I try to order garments online, there's no guarantee I'll get to them before porch pirates do, and in my area there are plenty of people who would like garments for nefarious purposes. If I have to order them online, I'd have to clear the entire ETA period and just stay home. 

Could you have them sent to the ward or are they in a rough area too? 

Edited July 24, 2023 by LDSGator

[Grunt]

Just now, LDSGator said:

Could you have them sent to the ward or are they in a rough area too? 

We have people in apartments send things to the Bishopric at times.

[Ironhold]

7 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Could you have them sent to the ward or are they in a rough area too? 

The chapel's not safe, either. 

It's been the target of vandalism, break-ins, and even actual desecration. Yes, someone decided to paint a pentagram on the front lawn and then pin a dead deer to it. It was found by the seminary kids the next morning. 

When my dad was building manager, he had to have all of the cleaning supplies and other materials shipped to the house because it wasn't safe to have it shipped to the chapel directly. And yes, we had to block off entire days to make sure that someone was at the house accordingly. 

[LDSGator]

49 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

The chapel's not safe, either. 

It's been the target of vandalism, break-ins, and even actual desecration. Yes, someone decided to paint a pentagram on the front lawn and then pin a dead deer to it. It was found by the seminary kids the next morning. 

When my dad was building manager, he had to have all of the cleaning supplies and other materials shipped to the house because it wasn't safe to have it shipped to the chapel directly. And yes, we had to block off entire days to make sure that someone was at the house accordingly. 

Sorry to hear that my friend. That’s awful 

[JohnsonJones]

On 7/24/2023 at 5:55 PM, Ironhold said:

The chapel's not safe, either. 

It's been the target of vandalism, break-ins, and even actual desecration. Yes, someone decided to paint a pentagram on the front lawn and then pin a dead deer to it. It was found by the seminary kids the next morning. 

When my dad was building manager, he had to have all of the cleaning supplies and other materials shipped to the house because it wasn't safe to have it shipped to the chapel directly. And yes, we had to block off entire days to make sure that someone was at the house accordingly. 

Is it possible to have things shipped to you where signature is required for delivery?

[LDSGator]

@JohnsonJones, welcome back. We missed you bro

[Ironhold]

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Is it possible to have things shipped to you where signature is required for delivery?

That raises the prospect of signature forgery.