- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
12. If you have previously received your temple endowment: Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple? 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? To enumerate the covenants you made in the temple, here is the a quote from a public speech:
Ezra Taft Benson, BYU Devotional, 12 April 1977, wrote:Celestial laws, embodied in certain ordinances belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ, are complied with by voluntary covenants. The laws are spiritual. Thus, our Father in Heaven has ordained certain holy sanctuaries, called temples, in which these laws may be fully explained, the laws include the law of obedience and sacrifice, the law of the gospel, the law of chastity, and the law of consecration.
full talk here
so according to Benson’s words:1. Law of obedience and sacrifice
2. Law of the gospel
3. Law of chastity
4. Law of consecration
In addition, the question asks, “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?”
The instructions in the temple are simply to wear the garment throughout your life. Specific logistical details as to how often or when it is to be worn are not provided in the temple. While “throughout your life” is interpreted (note passive voice) as being day and night, such instructions are not explicitly given in the words of the temple ceremonies. The ‘covenant’ of the garment, the two-way promise is that if you wear it throughout your life, and do not defile it, it will be a shield and protection to you.
‘do not defile it’ is often thought of as treating the garment like a flag: never let it touch the floor, etc., etc. I think whoever put these words out had something else in mind.
”shield and protection’ — the folklore is around ‘magic underwear’ — lots of faith-promoting stories around miraculous saving from bullets, etc. This isn’t a real benefit — but be that as it may.
The garment, to me, is a inward symbol of the temple covenants. Such symbols are common in other religions: sikhs and jews wear sacred underwear of some sort. It’s a symbol of commitment. How and when I wear that symbol is entirely up to me, imo.
My answer to the question is “Yes” to all points.
Yes for me, insofar as my natural mortal limitations allow. I do wear the garment though I find the idea of magic underwear very funny. I see them as representative of the mortal body, skins in which we were clothed before we entered this telestial world. Not defiling my “garment” has a much richer meaning in that light and I intend to remain clothed in it right up until I finish my work on this earth
Thanks for compiling all of this. After reading everything you have written, it is striking how much church culture and tradition has added to the official instructions that have been given. It reminds me of modesty standards: Growing up it was totally acceptable within the church for youth to wear tank tops and shorts above the knee. Now, at least where I live, it isn’t. Not a policy change but a cultural one.
I currently am not. (I voted no.) I am preparing to do it in the near future. Mike from Milton.
I understand that the LDS church recently either read a letter and/or added verbiage to the temple recommend interview to give a specific example that you should wear garments while gardening? Is this the case? Which was it? I guess this comes down to the same issue we continue to circle around. Either you answer the question based on the intent you believe the LDS church has in writing the question or you interpret the question however you feel fits your personal spirit of the law. I would submit that if you go the second route, you can think long and hard enough to justify answering yes under just about any circumstance.
Which is fine really. In the end my interpretation of that is simply that the LDS church has no business being a gatekeeper of personal worthiness – which I 100% agree with.
I jumped the gun in this discussion on #8.
Many of the covenants are attitudinal I think. The church doesn’t really come to call to ask you to sacrifice your life. It doesn’t really come to ask for your all of your possessions. Even though in the covenant you have covenanted that they can. So it’s really more a question of attitude if you would be willing to do these things. Perhaps it’s also a question if you are doing these things insomuch as the church is requesting it. One could argue that if you are not accepting & fulfilling callings, a faithful home teacher, etc. that this is a breach of these covenants.
Personally I find the sacrifice covenant especially to be the most concerning. It is quite clear that you are to make the sacrifice for the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”, not to God. Also the idea that there are no boundaries in what you will give if asked is concerning. In a sense this does come to play in a practical sense. For example, I think bishops feel compelled to say yes when called as bishop – even at times when it causes a real hardship on their family. Happily the days of leaving your family alone and destitute while serving a 3 year mission are long past.
It also find it interesting that this question includes intent. You don’t necessarily need to be doing these things perfectly – just make an effort with real intent.
I do, to the best of my ability and understanding. That’s pretty much how I can answer every question, but I usually just shorten it to, “Yes.”
Having said that, I am very open about maintaining a proper balance in how I use my time and money. If I feel I simply can’t do something, I don’t do it – but I try to make sure my leaders know that I would if I feel I could.
I think my heart’s in the right place, so I am at peace with a simple, “Yes.”
I answered yes. 1. Law of obedience and sacrifice
Yes. I will obey God and keep his commandments (or at least do my best at it). I have no problem with that. It isn’t the same thing as obeying any mortal person though, and certainly doesn’t correlate precisely to orders issued through the LDS chain of command. I obey God, as God reveals instruction to me personally through the Holy Ghost and through personal revelation. I strive to obey my conscience.
2. Law of the gospel
It’s interesting that this explicitly says what is contained in the Bible and the Book of Mormon. It DOES NOT for some reason include the D&C and Pearl of Great Price… That seems to leave out a LOT of the quirkiness that people in faith transition have a problem with. In fact, it leaves out the COJCOLDS as a entity completely.
The additional charges of avoidance seem really anachronistic to a certain form of 18th & 19th century morality. I guess I avoid loud laughter, etc., as much as anyone else who goes to the temple. I’m not really going to stress out about that minor stuff. I try to sustain and make my leaders successful at what they do. So I don’t feel I speak evil of them or try to undermine them, even if I am critical at times of things they do.
3. Law of chastity
I do not have sexual intercourse with anyone but the woman to whom I am legally and lawfully married.
4. Law of consecration
I am willing to dedicate my time, talents and other things with which the Lord has blessed me to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Unfortunately, It doesn’t seem that I have ever actually done that monetarily through tithing in the past. All my money went to the Corporation of the President of the Church or the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop. It never went to the Church. My time and talents did though. So does my love and energy. The COJCOLDS is a concept, a trademark. When I spend time on this site, it is dedicated to God, to a church with no walls or location — the Church of the Lamb of God.
In addition, the question asks, “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?”
Yes. My garments at this point can only be seen with the spiritual eyes. They are made of a material that is physical, but more refined and ethereal. I wear these night and day. In fact, I never take them off.
Brian Johnston wrote:When I spend time on this site, it is dedicated to God, to a church with no walls or location — the Church of the Lamb of God.
I love this, Brian, and it’s exactly how I feel about everything I do with the intent of helping myself and others find peace, joy, and the love of God.
Church without walls… just the phrasing makes me want to go work in my garden, visit my favorite nursing home, or schedule some volunteer hours at the food bank.
Quote:When I spend time on this site, it is dedicated to God, to a church with no walls or location — the Church of the Lamb of God.
Thank you for doing so, it helps me.
I answered yes. 1. Law of obedience and sacrifice
Yes. I will obey God and keep his commandments (or at least do my best at it). I have no problem with that. It isn’t the same thing as obeying any mortal person though, and certainly doesn’t correlate precisely to orders issued through the LDS chain of command. I obey God, as God reveals instruction to me personally through the Holy Ghost and through personal revelation. I strive to obey my conscience.
2. Law of the gospel
It’s interesting that this explicitly says what is contained in the Bible and the Book of Mormon. It DOES NOT for some reason include the D&C and Pearl of Great Price… That seems to leave out a LOT of the quirkiness that people in faith transition have a problem with. In fact, it leaves out the COJCOLDS as a entity completely.
The additional charges of avoidance seem really anachronistic to a certain form of 18th & 19th century morality. I guess I avoid loud laughter, etc., as much as anyone else who goes to the temple. I’m not really going to stress out about that minor stuff. I try to sustain and make my leaders successful at what they do. So I don’t feel I speak evil of them or try to undermine them, even if I am critical at times of things they do.
3. Law of chastity
I do not have sexual intercourse with anyone but the woman to whom I am legally and lawfully married.
4. Law of consecration
I am willing to dedicate my time, talents and other things with which the Lord has blessed me to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Unfortunately, It doesn’t seem that I have ever actually done that monetarily through tithing in the past. All my money went to the Corporation of the President of the Church or the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop. It never went to the Church. My time and talents did though. So does my love and energy. The COJCOLDS is a concept, a trademark. When I spend time on this site, it is dedicated to God, to a church with no walls or location — the Church of the Lamb of God.
Quote:In addition, the question asks, “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?”
Yes. My garments at this point can only be seen with the spiritual eyes. They are made of a material that is more refined and ethereal. I wear these night and day. In fact, I never take them off.
Quote:Yes. My garments at this point can only be seen with the spiritual eyes. They are made of a material that is more refined and ethereal.
Well I suppose this ups the credibility of my hypothesis that rationalize anything is possible with “the spirit of the law”
Brian Johnston wrote:“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?”
Yes. My garments at this point can only be seen with the spiritual eyes. They are made of a material that is more refined and ethereal. I wear these night and day. In fact, I never take them off.
You get the award for the most out-there, elegant rationalization ever. I thought I was creative. I bow to your mastery!I’m not trying to step on any toes here, but it’s clear to me we are taught that garments are to be worn EVERY day and night:
Quote:The First Presidency prepared a letter to the Church on this subject. They wrote:
“Practices frequently observed among the members of the Church suggest that some members do not fully understand the covenant they make in the temple to wear the garment in accordance with the spirit of the holy endowment.
“Church members who have been clothed with the garment in the temple have made a covenant to wear it throughout their lives. This has been interpreted to mean that it is worn as underclothing both day and night. … The promise of protection and blessings is conditioned upon worthiness and faithfulness in keeping the covenant.
“The fundamental principle ought to be to wear the garment and not to find occasions to remove it. Thus, members should not remove either all or part of the garment to work in the yard or to lounge around the home in swimwear or immodest clothing. Nor should they remove it to participate in recreational activities that can reasonably be done with the garment worn properly beneath regular clothing. When the garment must be removed, such as for swimming, it should be restored as soon as possible…”
link
It appears they should be on almost constantly, since they should not be removed “to work in the yard or to lounge around.”We all know how it IS interpreted by most members and leaders. Quote:This has been interpreted to mean
This hasn’t always been interpreted to mean the same thing. Garments used to be for nothing but temple attendance. Thus, I have no problem taking the statement at its word and seeing the entire day and night, every day and night “interpretation” as just that – and interpretation and not divine, eternal command.
Remember, I say that as someone who wears the garment exactly as it now is taught in the quote you provided. I have no problems whatsoever personally with wearing it that way – but I will take it off any time I think it is not appropriate to wear it, even if that differs from what others might think. Since I insist on assuming that responsibility personally, I’m not about to tell someone else she can’t have the exact same responsibility for her own life – even if that means she removes it more often than I do.
My conscience is clear on the subject. All I can say is that everyone else has the right to act according to the dictates of their own conscience, as well.
Quote:this has been interpreted to mean
ya gotta love passive voice. it wonderfully absolves any responsibility to identify the source of the ‘doctrine’.As well, it’s one of many.
‘this has been interpreted to mean’ wear them day and night’. ‘this has also been interpreted’ to wear them only in the temple, and to set them aside reverently rather than defile them in daily use. Both statements are true, because neither says that ‘this has been interpreted to explicitly and exclusively mean’….
I find this depressing when an unsourced, passive voiced statement becomes commandment.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.