Garments


Grunt
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Junior said:

I'm sorry if someone asked already but I didn't read the whole thread and I have never had an endowment but I was reading about the ceremony and garments. Can someone who has been endowed ever be told not to wear their garments the same way you can be told not to take the sacrament? 

 

Certainly if they’ve been excommunicated.  I can’t recall off-hand whether it can be a condition of lower degrees of Church discipline.  Your bishop would know for sure.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2019 at 9:25 AM, Nighttiger said:

Please respond respectively. This is not an opinion. I'm asking why the garments for sister's are made so low in the back. My wife's back shows with a fitting dress about 4-5 inches below the back and front of the neck still covering the garment yet I can't even wear a V-neck shirt which is a the same or higher. I'm starting to see responses that don't answer what I'm asking. There's a double standard when it comes to the design of the garment. I'm just asking out of curiosity why this is.

I'm somewhat confused by this.  It's not really the garment that causes immodesty.   Maybe I just don't pay attention, but I don't see a bunch of LDS women wearing dresses that the 4-5 inches below the back and front of the neck.  My wife's garments aren't like that either and even if they were, this has no bearing on the dress she would wear.  A dress (should at least) cover more than just the garment.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Certainly if they’ve been excommunicated.  I can’t recall off-hand whether it can be a condition of lower degrees of Church discipline.  Your bishop would know for sure.

I guess I mean can you still wear garments if you have lost your temple recommend? Or if you can't take the sacrament? Can you still wear your garments ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Junior said:

I guess I mean can you still wear garments if you have lost your temple recommend? Or if you can't take the sacrament? Can you still wear your garments ?

You wear garments until/unless instructed not to by your bishop or other authorized leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Junior said:

I'm sorry if someone asked already but I didn't read the whole thread and I have never had an endowment but I was reading about the ceremony and garments. Can someone who has been endowed ever be told not to wear their garments the same way you can be told not to take the sacrament? 

The temple garment is a symbol of the highest promises we make to God in the temple.  If a person completely betrays those promises, then they should not be wearing the signs of those promises.  Practically speaking, this comes into play during serious church discipline instituted by a church leader (for example ex-communication).  

29 minutes ago, Junior said:

I guess I mean can you still wear garments if you have lost your temple recommend? Or if you can't take the sacrament? Can you still wear your garments ?

It depends on the why and the individual course of action.

For example, if a person is ex-communicated, they are asked not to wear their garment.

If you're actively fornicating, things depend on that individual and their individualized plan with their bishop.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

The temple garment is a symbol of the highest promises we make to God in the temple.  If a person completely betrays those promises, then they should not be wearing the signs of those promises.  Practically speaking, this comes into play during serious church discipline instituted by a church leader (for example ex-communication).  

1 hour ago, Junior said:

It is all over my head. Unfortunately, I don't know about the temple ordinances but I was wondering how temporal are the covenants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Grunt said:

I know someone who left the church but still wears garments.

Just leaving the church is different than being ex-commuicated.  And even with an ex-communication, it's a request to not wear garments.  It's not like anyone is going to break into your house and steal part of your wardrobe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Just leaving the church is different than being ex-commuicated.  And even with an ex-communication, it's a request to not wear garments.  It's not like anyone is going to break into your house and steal part of your wardrobe.

I realize that.  I was stating it more because I found it odd.  It gives me hope, maybe?

Edited by Grunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junior said:

It is all over my head. Unfortunately, I don't know about the temple ordinances but I was wondering how temporal are the covenants. 

It is simple really....  When one is trying to repent they need to stop digging deeper into sin.  Just changing your sin of choice is not really helpful.

When one goes through the temple they make promises and are given instructions.  This includes directions on wearing the garment.

If a person is trying to repent they should not think that is is wise or helpful to disobey the instructions given by the Lord through his leaders.  Therefore someone who is temple endowed and trying to repent should be also trying to faithfully obey every command (including wearing the garment).  

If during the process of working through one repentance with the bishop (or other representative of the Lord) they instruct one to stop wearing the garment for a time then that is the most current and most personalized instruction/commandment and it trumps the more generalized temple instructions while in force.

Thus the wearing or not wearing of the garment is an act of obedience (or disobedience as the case may be).  Obedience is helpful (and really required) to the repentance process while disobedience is counter productive to the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Certainly if they’ve been excommunicated.  I can’t recall off-hand whether it can be a condition of lower degrees of Church discipline.  Your bishop would know for sure.

Along the lines of what @estradling75 said, I think it would depend.  I know for a fact that the next lesser degree - disfellowshipment - doesn't automatically bar one from wearing it, but I don't know if that's always the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, estradling75 said:

It is simple really....  When one is trying to repent they need to stop digging deeper into sin.  Just changing your sin of choice is not really helpful.

When one goes through the temple they make promises and are given instructions.  This includes directions on wearing the garment.

If a person is trying to repent they should not think that is is wise or helpful to disobey the instructions given by the Lord through his leaders.  Therefore someone who is temple endowed and trying to repent should be also trying to faithfully obey every command (including wearing the garment).  

If during the process of working through one repentance with the bishop (or other representative of the Lord) they instruct one to stop wearing the garment for a time then that is the most current and most personalized instruction/commandment and it trumps the more generalized temple instructions while in force.

Thus the wearing or not wearing of the garment is an act of obedience (or disobedience as the case may be).  Obedience is helpful (and really required) to the repentance process while disobedience is counter productive to the process.

I understand it is possible that you have to break your temple covenant to repent.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Junior said:

I understand it is possible that you have to break your temple covenant to repent.

 

What part of

19 hours ago, estradling75 said:

  Obedience is helpful (and really required) to the repentance process while disobedience is counter productive to the process.

Perhaps you are confused by the fact that what the Lord commands you to do can change? That something can be commanded and even required by the Lord... and then the Lord can command it to stop.   Any Christian who has studied the bible knows this to be true.   Through out the Old Testament (and even parts of the Book of Mormon) the Lord commands that the people live the Law of Moses.  Then Christ comes and the commands changed.  A new law is given and the old is removed...  This is very clearly established in the New Testament (and the Book of Mormon).

As we progress in the gospel we become eligible for certain privileges. (Membership in the Church, the companionship of the Holy Ghost, Sacrament, Temple recommend/attendance, garment wearing etc)  When we become eligible/worthy the Lord commands us to partake.  When we sin we regress, we become ineligible, unworthy of the privileges and the privileges are removed.  We see this in the scriptures were it commands us to not let the unworthy partake the sacrament because the leads to the damning of their souls, we see this in the scriptural command to blot out the names of the members of the church who rebel.  We see this when we lose the companionship of the Holy Ghost due to sin.  It should not surprise us that other privileges can also be revoked/restricted.  Nor is it surprising that method used is pretty much the same (lost of the spirit and actions of church leaders)

When we lose a privilege due to sin we should not compound damnation upon our heads by partaking unworthy.  But rather we should understand that the command is really "partake worthily". (Please also note worthy does not mean Perfect) Thus we obey Gods command.  If we are worthy we partake, if we are not worthy we do not partake, but focus instead on becoming worthy again. Thus we obey.

Worthy to partake is not only measured by the person involved, but also by those that God has called, set apart and has given authority to to render such (Aka Bishops).  Thus if we are not worthy then the command is not to partake unworthily to our damnation... but rather to become worthy so we can partake again. Thus repentance is all about obedience and keeping covenants and never about breaking them.  Sin is were the disobedience and breaking of covenants happens 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Junior said:

I understand it is possible that you have to break your temple covenant to repent.

 

I would disagree with this.  A covenant is a two way promise.  Once someone breaks the covenant it is no longer in force.  If you break your covenant, you no longer have that covenant (thus the work "break") and thus you can be told by someone in Church authority not to wear the garment.  Not wearing the garment after church discipline is not breaking your covenant; the breaking of the covenant happens before that.  

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share