- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I read recently on another forum that some sisters in the church are choosing to no longer wear the temple garment. My question is this: If someone chooses not to wear the garment, can their temple recommend be revoked?I read the following from the temple recommend interview list of questions and it would seem to me that if an endowed member chooses not to wear the garment, they are not temple worthy. Is my understanding correct?
If you have previously received your temple endowment: Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?I look forward to your responses.
There are all kinds of people that decide not to wear garments (brothers and sisters) on some level or another. It isn’t anything new. Wearing the garment is one of the questions they ask in a temple recommend interview, so yes, people are not going to get their temple recommend renewed if they tell their Bishop or Stake President that they no longer wear garments at all, ever.
As far as being “revoked,” that implies some type of active effort on the part of leadership to take away a temple recommend. I am not sure how they would know, unless someone went out of their way to make a vocal issue of their changed practices.
I am not sure why this would seem mysterious or be a question though. There’s a list of questions asked in a temple recommend interview. Everyone knows them in advance. It isn’t a surprise or anything. If someone clearly tells their Bishop or Stake President they are not practicing any one of those requirements, or that they no longer believe, well … they aren’t going to get a new temple recommend when their old one expires. That makes logical sense to me.
That question now is being asked in the interview. I have never heard of a Bishop who will “revoke” a recommend for not wearing the garment (meaning take one away from someone prior to the renewal time), but I’m sure there are such Bishops in the Church.
The best, most honest answer I’ve heard for those who don’t wear the garment “religiously”
Quote:I am willing to do so in order to attend the temple.
(with perhaps an additional)
Quote:I have been for some time now, since I know I need to do so to get a recommend.
Iow, the person makes a commitment to accept that requirement in order to receive a recommend, but then wears it in accordance to their own best understanding thereafter. Believe me, I understand the fine line that walks, and I would not recommend that answer for someone who has no intention of wearing the garment ever again except in the temple – but it’s better, imo, than a strict parsing of the actual words (
how funny is that, coming from me?) and the rationalization that if I wear the garment during the day occasionally and at night occasionally I can answer that I do wear it both day and night – and just leave off the clarifying “not everyday and night”. 😆 Btw, fwiw, garments for women is one of the things that I really love about the temple and Mormonism, since it is the one thing that says starkly to me that women actually do “hold the Priesthood” in an important and powerful way – even if they aren’t “authorized” in our current culture to “exercise keys”. Seriously, the visual representation of being “clothed in the garment of the Priesthood” and carrying Priesthood symbols with you as you leave the temple and enter the world is a wonderful imagery to me. Iow, if I can say it in this manner, when you get past the outward appearance and how the world sees us to what is “below the surface” and how God sees us, all men and women who leave the temple carry the exact same Priesthood symbols with them – just as they both can perform Priesthood ordinances while they are in the temple. Wearing the garment, to me, is more about taking the temple out into the world (being protected from evil in the world as if you still were in the temple) than it is about anything else – which is the main reason I personally don’t struggle at all with the concept of garments.
Finally, I know this is tangential to the actual question in the post, but I encourage women who don’t like the fit of garments to wear regular “underwear” next to their skin and the garment over that. There is no issue whatsoever when women do so when hygiene requires it at some point during the month (how’s that for careful wording?) or when they are nursing – so the principle isn’t being violated in the slightest if they do so as the norm. Also, with the coverage provided (or not provided) by lots of modern underwear, garments can be worn over them and still be “next to the skin” more than not.
🙄 How long do you have to be “clean” to get a temple recommend? I’m not sure how to answer that question, Sam. There are too many possible meanings to “clean” – and there is much latitude for individual Bishops and Stake Presidents (mostly Bishops). If you want to ask in more detail, feel free to send me a Private Message.
Quote:but then wears it in accordance to their own best understanding thereafter. Believe me, I understand the fine line that walks, and I would not recommend that answer for someone who has no intention of wearing the garment ever again except in the temple – but it’s better, imo, than a strict parsing of the actual words (how funny is that, coming from me?) and the rationalization that if I wear the garment during the day occasionally and at night occasionally I can answer that I do wear it both day and night – and just leave off the clarifying “not every day and night”.
😆 I generally do not wear garments when I do physical (sweaty) work, which is several days during the week. Most days when I’m home I wear a pair a shorts and no shirt and that’s it. I wear garments to my job, and when I go to town and shop, when I’m going to be socializing, to church events, and most days during the winter. I wear garments at night (until I go to bed at 10-11 PM) —- so in my warped world, I’m able to say that “yes, I wear garments both day and night.” Rationalization? Maybe – but I do what I have to to make it work.
Kalola, is this something you have talked about in real life with believing members or online somewhere with believing members? I do know that I am noticing a few sisters who have stopped wearing them (in addition to myself). However, I am not sure if they believe-or what level they believe anymore. Not sure about temple attendance either. I agree with Brian that it isn’t anything new. There have always been different levels of observing the garment instruction.
As far as getting a TR or getting it revoked, I agree with the pp’s.
I think garments are probably a lot bigger deal for females. I know my wife does not like them, the way they fit, and the way they restrict what she can wear. She is petite and has dark olive skin, and looks hot when she shows a little shoulder or back, BUT, rarely does she dress that way. -sigh-Garments are certainly not conducive to a good sex life either. They smell by the end of the day, and they are not sexy, in fact, they look horrible on females — which I think they were meant to do (modesty thing). The other problem I have is I don’t like to stink, and I doubt my wife wants me to stink, and I don’t want her to stink, so we shower each night before bed. What I’m suppose to do – put on my stinky garments before I crawl into bed? Or burn a clean pair just to sleep in? I don’t think so.
Hope this isn’t too much information.
😳 Not TMI. WTMTMI. (WAY too much too much information) 
J/K – ur ok – ttyl
Quote:Garments are certainly not conducive to a good sex life either.
Yeah, I prefer to not be wearing them . . . Wait a minute . . . Not what you meant.
😳 Old-Timer wrote:I’m not sure how to answer that question, Sam. There are too many possible meanings to “clean” – and there is much latitude for individual Bishops and Stake Presidents (mostly Bishops).
If you want to ask in more detail, feel free to send me a Private Message.
Well, it’s a general question.
I’ll rephrase it – for how long do you have to be actually “temple worthy” before you get the temple recommend?
cwald wrote:Garments are certainly not conducive to a good sex life either. They smell by the end of the day, and they are not sexy, in fact, they look horrible on females — which I think they were meant to do (modesty thing). The other problem I have is I don’t like to stink, and I doubt my wife wants me to stink, and I don’t want her to stink, so we shower each night before bed. What I’m suppose to do – put on my stinky garments before I crawl into bed? Or burn a clean pair just to sleep in? I don’t think so.
Hope this isn’t too much information.
😳 No, in the real world we all have bodily functions.
Quote:for how long do you have to be actually “temple worthy” before you get the temple recommend?
There isn’t a universal answer, but I think the average for most Bishops – if there are no official discipline issues – will be 3-6 months (perhaps less for extraordinary situations).
cwald wrote:I’ll rephrase it – for how long do you have to be actually “temple worthy” before you get the temple recommend?
I guess that depends whether or not you can decide for yourself if you can answer the questions truthfully.
Quote:Garments are certainly not conducive to a good sex life either
The conventional wisdom back when I was first thinking of marriage was that you weren’t supposed to take of garments for sex. I remember an elderly patient coming to see me after remarrying. He told me he was advised by people in the temple to sleep in old fashioned tie front garments to make having sex easier.
As far as what does it mean to answer the question about wearing garments day and night, there’s an interesting take on that in a thread on
http://www.ldssdc.org .
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.