Unholy Garments?

[The Nehor]

30 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

That is what I did in the Army...this was long before the Church came up with color garments (tops). It was fine in Germany where it was not so hot. When I came back to the U.S., it was soooooo hot. 

I usually wear something with more support (particularly when I work out) and then wear loose mesh garments over it. Does not make me any more hot then I would be without them.

Not sure I like the garments but I like what they represent. I only have another 30-40 years of them so I can probably last that long.  

[Rain]

33 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I have struggled with the right fit all my endowed life. And I dislike that my husband's garments are a dirty gray real soon after he buys them and wears them only a few months. They peak out of his shirt and it looks like his garments are filthy.

It may be a combination of the type of fabric he chooses and hard water washing, unless you have a water softener. Some fabrics pick up the minerals? better from the hard water.  You might have better luck if he picks garments in another fabric.  

 

[strappinglad]

The problem, people, is that people are people , and if given an inch, will take it upon themselves to stretch something 20 miles. Soon we would have polka dots and flowers and dragons ( not that there is anything wrong with that ). There would be leather ( somehow appropriate ) and neoprene,  embroidery, and rhinestones. A quick look at the youtube videos on bridal gowns will show just how creative people are. The divide between some semblance of control and anarchy can be very thin.

[cinepro]

8 hours ago, strappinglad said:

The problem, people, is that people are people , and if given an inch, will take it upon themselves to stretch something 20 miles. Soon we would have polka dots and flowers and dragons ( not that there is anything wrong with that ). There would be leather ( somehow appropriate ) and neoprene,  embroidery, and rhinestones. A quick look at the youtube videos on bridal gowns will show just how creative people are. The divide between some semblance of control and anarchy can be very thin.

In the Church, don't we call that "agency"?

[Sleeper Cell]

10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I usually wear something with more support (particularly when I work out) and then wear loose mesh garments over it. Does not make me any more hot then I would be without them.

Not sure I like the garments but I like what they represent. I only have another 30-40 years of them so I can probably last that long.

May you live long and perspire.   

[The Nehor]

26 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said:

May you live long and perspire.   

Not sure. I have no strong desire to die but I also have little desire for a long life here. I like to think I trust God in this matter but it is also possible I am just too lazy to care either way.

[Coreyb]

21 hours ago, cinepro said:

That's quite possibly the silliest thing I've ever heard.

What you mean to say is probably that "according to current policy, the Church really, really doesn't want you to make your own garments."

The garments are simply underclothing with symbols sewn into them.  If you make your own with the same symbols, then they are still underclothing with symbols sewn into them.  They aren't "blessed" or "consecrated" at the factory.  And the markings are in the public domain, so the Church has no copyright or trademark claim in them. 

For decades, garments were made and sold by private firms and advertised in Church magazines and newspapers.  The idea that they must be made by the Church in order to be valid is relatively recent.  While I can understand many peoples' inclination to respect the current policy, let's not overdo it...

 

 

If you look at the history of LDS garments, I don't think there is any "eternal principle" that can be discerned from their design, other than the shape and general placement of the symbols. 

Could they have buttons or did they have to be tied?  Buttons weren't introduced until the early 1900s. 

Short sleeves and bottoms, or long?  Obviously they had to be long sleeved and legged, until they didn't. 

Do they have to be one piece?  Many thought they did until the 1970s. 

Do they have to be white?  Yes, unless they aren't.

I think the only constant in garment design is that the current generation is far too limited in imagination as for what might be possible in the future.  If you took a set of modern two-piece "dry corban" short garments back to 1910 and showed them to an LDS they would probably accuse you of being a heretic.  The same goes for today.  I suspect the garments of the future will be amazing for comfort and adaptability compared with what we put up with today, only because future generations won't put up with it.

This is very similar to my thinking on the subject. My opinion is that a garment would be valid as long as it falls within the explanatory description given during the final lecture of the endowment.

[strappinglad]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

In the Church, don't we call that "agency"?

You've got your agency. Wear them or don't wear them. Next thing you will want to do is decide exactly how you will be baptized. Can we just have water poured on the head? How about only a little spritz? Wouldn't want to mess up milady's new hair do.

[cinepro]

21 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

You've got your agency. Wear them or don't wear them. Next thing you will want to do is decide exactly how you will be baptized. Can we just have water poured on the head? How about only a little spritz? Wouldn't want to mess up milady's new hair do.

If God is okay with the person not even being physically present in order for the baptism to count, I suspect his views on the exact mechanics are much more liberal than we suspect.

[strappinglad]

18 minutes ago, cinepro said:

If God is okay with the person not even being physically present in order for the baptism to count, I suspect his views on the exact mechanics are much more liberal than we suspect.

I suspect your suspicions are suspect.

[The Nehor]

29 minutes ago, cinepro said:

If God is okay with the person not even being physically present in order for the baptism to count, I suspect his views on the exact mechanics are much more liberal than we suspect.

I suspect he is interested in sincerity and attempts to do the right thing.

[Coreyb]

1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

You've got your agency. Wear them or don't wear them. Next thing you will want to do is decide exactly how you will be baptized. Can we just have water poured on the head? How about only a little spritz? Wouldn't want to mess up milady's new hair do.

I think you are getting a bit carried away with the slippery slope mentality. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century people made their own garments and it didn't cause a change in the ordinance of baptism.

[Calm]

Well, the slippery slope has certainly appeared in other areas dealing with clothing.  Just look at the past 60 plus years of modesty standards.  My mother was from a very devout LDS family (and Grandma was obsessed about appearance) and she and a number of other LDS young women over the next few decades often wore strapless prom dresses.  Sleeveless shirts for non-endowed girls and women were seen by me (and many worn by me until my own endowment) at church often during summer until the 90s iirc.  Nor did I see any lessons teaching four year olds in the Friend that sundresses required T-shirts until the last decade or so.

And now we get stuff like this:

https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/woman-holding-book-candle-rane-183369?lang=eng

Edited September 13, 2016 by Calm

[Guest]

14 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I usually wear something with more support (particularly when I work out) and then wear loose mesh garments over it. Does not make me any more hot then I would be without them.

Not sure I like the garments but I like what they represent. I only have another 30-40 years of them so I can probably last that long.  

I am a cotton-poly guy myself. 100% cotton stretch out to quickly, as for the mesh...I don't care for the feel. My sons wear some new athletic type; is that what you are talking about? When my wife and I (and my two oldest children) went to the Swiss Temle to be sealed, they had just come out the two piece garments. Everyone who went with my wife and I, we're happy...especially the men, because we were all military. That was back in 1981, but they were cotton as memory serves. 

[Calm]

I got married in 80.  They had the two piece in all the same materials as the one piece as well as a few more.  

[strappinglad]

4 hours ago, Coreyb said:

I think you are getting a bit carried away with the slippery slope mentality. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century people made their own garments and it didn't cause a change in the ordinance of baptism.

Maybe I picked the wrong emoticon. .  For Calm, the passed couple of decades have seen a massive jump in the sexualization of particularly very young ladies. There has been a reaction to this in church circles and that includes the leadership. They seem to be trying to forestall the current worldly fashion values. As always, good luck with that.

[JLHPROF]

On Monday, September 12, 2016 at 1:00 PM, cinepro said:

If you look at the history of LDS garments, I don't think there is any "eternal principle" that can be discerned from their design, other than the shape and general placement of the symbols.

Could they have buttons or did they have to be tied?  Buttons weren't introduced until the early 1900s.

Short sleeves and bottoms, or long?  Obviously they had to be long sleeved and legged, until they didn't.

Do they have to be one piece?  Many thought they did until the 1970s.

Do they have to be white?  Yes, unless they aren't.

I think the only constant in garment design is that the current generation is far too limited in imagination as for what might be possible in the future.  If you took a set of modern two-piece "dry corban" short garments back to 1910 and showed them to an LDS they would probably accuse you of being a heretic.  The same goes for today.  I suspect the garments of the future will be amazing for comfort and adaptability compared with what we put up with today, only because future generations won't put up with it.

The fact that they have been changed from the original patterns doesn't mean at all that there is no eternal design to them.

• Joseph F. Smith - "The Saints should know that the pattern of endowment garments was revealed from Heaven and that the blessings promised in connection with wearing them will not be realized if any unauthorized change is made in their form or in the manner of wearing them.
•  While they were living in Nauvoo that the Prophet came to my grandmother, who was a seamstress by trade, and told her that he had seen the angel Moroni with the garments on, and asked her to assist him in cutting out the garments. They spread unbleached muslin out on the table and he told her how to cut it out. She had to cut the third pair, however, before he said it was satisfactory.  - James Allred History
• "but let me inform you that when Peter came and sat in the Temple in Kirtland, he had on a neat woolen garment, nicely adjusted round the neck.' - Heber C. Kimball
• The whole garment to be a covering and a protection from the enemy.  The sleeves reaching to the wrist, and to the ankles.  This pattern was given to Joseph Smith by two heavenly beings.  - Zebedee Coltrin
• The first garments were made by Eliza R. Snow and Zina Young. They were cut out by the Prophet Joseph Smith and under his direction. They then asked him who showed him how, and he said. "An angel of the Lord." He stood over them while they were cut out. He also said, "The angel Moroni drew aside his robe and showed his marks."  - George Albert Smith

Either all these people were wrong, or there is definitely some eternal version of the garment.

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, cinepro said:

In the Church, don't we call that "agency"?

Yeah, but not all choices made with agency are good. Agency itself is good as it allows us to be blessed or damned but damn choices are damning and thus damn agency can cause damned problems.

[cinepro]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

The fact that they have been changed from the original patterns doesn't mean at all that there is no eternal design to them.

• Joseph F. Smith - "The Saints should know that the pattern of endowment garments was revealed from Heaven and that the blessings promised in connection with wearing them will not be realized if any unauthorized change is made in their form or in the manner of wearing them.
•  While they were living in Nauvoo that the Prophet came to my grandmother, who was a seamstress by trade, and told her that he had seen the angel Moroni with the garments on, and asked her to assist him in cutting out the garments. They spread unbleached muslin out on the table and he told her how to cut it out. She had to cut the third pair, however, before he said it was satisfactory.  - James Allred History
• "but let me inform you that when Peter came and sat in the Temple in Kirtland, he had on a neat woolen garment, nicely adjusted round the neck.' - Heber C. Kimball
• The whole garment to be a covering and a protection from the enemy.  The sleeves reaching to the wrist, and to the ankles.  This pattern was given to Joseph Smith by two heavenly beings.  - Zebedee Coltrin
• The first garments were made by Eliza R. Snow and Zina Young. They were cut out by the Prophet Joseph Smith and under his direction. They then asked him who showed him how, and he said. "An angel of the Lord." He stood over them while they were cut out. He also said, "The angel Moroni drew aside his robe and showed his marks."  - George Albert Smith

Either all these people were wrong, or there is definitely some eternal version of the garment.

Did you read those quotes before posting them?  Because the ones that describe the garment aren't describing anything like what is currently on sale at the distribution center. 

So unless you're suggesting the Church is in apostasy over the design of the temple garments, you may have made my point for me.

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, cinepro said:

So unless you're suggesting the Church is in apostasy over the design of the temple garments

...well....

Isaiah 24:5
But we've been down this road before.
The board even had a really interesting thread on beliefs concerning the garments a couple of years ago.

Edited September 13, 2016 by JLHPROF

[cdowis]

20 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I have struggled with the right fit all my endowed life. And I dislike that my husband's garments are a dirty gray real soon after he buys them and wears them only a few months. They peak out of his shirt and it looks like his garments are filthy.

That is related to the material (nylon?)  

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, cdowis said:

That is related to the material (nylon?)  

What cdowis, I don't understand the question.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, strappinglad said:

There has been a reaction to this in church circles and that includes the leadership. They seem to be trying to forestall the current worldly fashion values. 

Yeah, I get that.  I am not sure becoming equally obsessed is a good idea.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

Did you read those quotes before posting them?  Because the ones that describe the garment aren't describing anything like what is currently on sale at the distribution center. 

So unless you're suggesting the Church is in apostasy over the design of the temple garments, you may have made my point for me.

Except the first point specifies unauthorized changes. Who has the authority to make changes? Those who hold the keys of the temple endowment and supervise its administration.

[cdowis]

48 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

What cdowis, I don't understand the question.

Some garments turn a grey dingy color, and, as I remember from a Home Ec class, that was is what happens to 100% nylon.