Comments on: How do temple garmets become sacred?

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 26 Jul 2005 00:54:11 +0000

“But we don’t put on the garment until after the intiatory is done.”

You may want to go again.

By: Bret

Bret — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 03:02:07 +0000

I think Amy’s got it right. When they clothe you in them, then they become sacred. I think it is the same with how only the symbols make them sacred. That’s why we can cut them out when we’re done with them and use the fabric as dust mops and stuff. (it’s funny when people get nervous from that. We seem to want to religious-ize everything we can>:)

By: don

don — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 01:04:03 +0000

Amy, Maybe you’ve hit on it. Since I haven’t done intiatory work in the temple for a very long time I don’t remember what is said. But we don’t put on the garment until after the intiatory is done.

So is it something said during the intiatory that makes the garment sacred?

Are the garments sacred because of the initatory and that applies to all garments, or does placing the marks in any kind of under clothing make them sacred?

By: Amy

Amy — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:37:57 +0000

Sorry, that last one was by me…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:35:30 +0000

I think NFlanders is right, that only the symbols make them sacred, not some special dedicatory prayer on them once they’re manufactured. (I could be wrong, but I’ve never heard of anything like that.) I can’t remember the exact wording in the initiatory, but it is there that the garments are authorized for our use and take on their sacred and symbolic meaning.

This made me think of a sister I met on my mission who, before hearing of the Church, found some temple garments at a thrift center and bought them to wear as pajamas. I considered laughing at her, until I realized how many members wear only their garments to bed…

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 04:33:00 +0000

You used to be able to make your own garments, but this is no longer the case (since I think Correlation).

By: Steve H

Steve H — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 04:16:44 +0000

I don’t know for sure, but I knwo that the garments you buy at the distribution center say that they are the approved pattern, so I think that would mean that Haynes would be out. I did know a missionary that was short enough that there were no garments short enough to fit him, so he had his mom make them for him. AS I remember, however, they never came lower than about mid-thigh, which is, I would suspect, the danger of having people make their own, they might get made to the length most convenient for the clothes we want to wear, making the don’t fit your garments to your clothes injunctive literal. Of course, perhaps the people that would do that would be rolling or cuffing their garments anyway.

By: Steve EM

Steve EM — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 02:08:38 +0000

Let me get this straight. Pres Grant saddles us w/ the no coffee, tea, booze or tobacco (I won’t say WofW, because that’s not what’s imposed on us) and shortens the G’s. Was it some kind of trade?

I’m advocating non-fabric “G’s” (http://mormonopenforum.blogsome.com/2005/07/05/temple-fashion/)

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 01:17:41 +0000

Seems to me that I recently read that we are no longer to make our own in less it is an exigency.

I think my favorite story (if I remember right) is that of an lady who pickets and refuses to wear Pres. Grant’s shortened garments.

By: NFlanders

NFlanders — Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:59:30 +0000

I thought I heard somewhere that the Church will provide the pattern if you wanted to make your own. I am pretty sure that the early saints also made their own.

I think only the symbols make them “sacred.” As long as you could find boxers long enough, I don’t see why you couldn’t make your very own Hanes brand garments.