LDS Garments: Why I Want Out of This Club

[clackamascoug]

Dropped by the local DC with the wife to pick up some new garments, since she's lost enough weight that new clothes and underwear were a necessity.

There ain't nothin' on the shelves at Desert Book/Distribution Ctr. There's nothin' in stock online. The claim is supply line problems, which I sort of understand. On the other hand, the church has pushed and pushed the "wear them constantly" instruction, so not having a source to replace worn-out garments doesn't work for me. At what point are we justified in just doing a lil snip-snip and transferring the patterns to Hanes?

I don't think it means - what you think it means.

I think old_gregg was a little too generous on his rating - unless he's in your ward.

[Bo Diddley]

Sounds like the Church is getting out of the military garment production business. We'll need to send in commercially produced underwear to be marked appropriately. This option has been available for quite some time. The difficulty is in finding products without logos on them. A quick search did not yield favorable results. What's interesting is that on the bottoms, they have no length requirement--only that they extend down the legs.

[BigPiney]

Sounds like the Church is getting out of the military garment production business. We'll need to send in commercially produced underwear to be marked appropriately. This option has been available for quite some time. The difficulty is in finding products without logos on them. A quick search did not yield favorable results. What's interesting is that on the bottoms, they have no length requirement--only that they extend down the legs.

They should do this with all, not just the military ones.

[Bo Diddley]

They should do this with all, not just the military ones.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised to see that happen sometime.

[Joe Public]

Sounds like the Church is getting out of the military garment production business. We'll need to send in commercially produced underwear to be marked appropriately. This option has been available for quite some time. The difficulty is in finding products without logos on them. A quick search did not yield favorable results. What's interesting is that on the bottoms, they have no length requirement--only that they extend down the legs.

DLATS?

[Moliere]

Sounds like the Church is getting out of the military garment production business. We'll need to send in commercially produced underwear to be marked appropriately. This option has been available for quite some time. The difficulty is in finding products without logos on them. A quick search did not yield favorable results. What's interesting is that on the bottoms, they have no length requirement--only that they extend down the legs.

Just mark your own. No one will know and you’ll still be in compliance.

[Bo Diddley]

DLATS?

That's one of the sources I was looking at. I haven't looked them up this time around.

[BigPiney]

New statement on garments for the recommend interview. Essentially added "day and night" and put it back on ASAP.

The garment of the holy priesthood reminds us of the veil in the temple, and that veil is symbolic of Jesus Christ. When you put on your garment, you put on a sacred symbol of Jesus Christ. Wearing it is an outward expression of your inner commitment to follow Him. The garment is also a reminder of your temple covenants. You should wear the garment day and night throughout your life. When it must be removed for activities that cannot reasonably be done while wearing the garment, seek to restore it as soon as possible. As you keep your covenants, including the sacred privilege to wear the garment as instructed in the initiatory ordinances, you will have greater access to the Savior’s mercy, protection, strength, and power

Also interesting to note is that they removed the language of about not modifying the garment. So tank tops it is.

[chrisrenrut]

New statement on garments for the recommend interview. Essentially added "day and night" and put it back on ASAP.



Also interesting to note is that they removed the language of about not modifying the garment. So tank tops it is.

They need to start selling iron-on kits for the symbols so we can buy whatever better fabric, quality, style, etc. underthings we want and apply them. If it’s really all about reminders, forcing us to use Beehive Clothing shouldn’t be the issue.

[falafel]

I don't love this language:

As you keep your covenants, including the sacred privilege to wear the garment as instructed in the initiatory ordinances, you will have greater access to the Savior’s mercy, protection, strength, and power

[Northwestcoug]

I don't love this language:

Don't we all have access to Jesus's mercy? Isn't that the gift we all get?

Sounds like a new doctrine.

[Northwestcoug]

Also, the veil is symbolic of Jesus Christ? That sounds new to me. Has it always been taught that way?

[LVAllen]

New statement on garments for the recommend interview. Essentially added "day and night" and put it back on ASAP.



Also interesting to note is that they removed the language of about not modifying the garment. So tank tops it is.

The thing is, I recall the instruction being to wear it throughout the life. Day and night, rushing to replace it, etc. wasn't part of the ordinance or promises. Could be wrong, I guess. Just seems like more hobby horse riding.

[Pelado]

Also, the veil is symbolic of Jesus Christ? That sounds new to me. Has it always been taught that way?

Maybe the idea that the Lord pulls us through the veil?

[LVAllen]

Maybe the idea that the Lord pulls us through the veil?

The Lord pulls us through something that is symbolic of the Lord? Like, a whole birthing process?

I don't understand how the veil (the thing keeping us from God, mentally, physically, and spiritually) could possibly stand as a symbol for Christ who is the only one capable of pulling us through the barrier, and who enploys no servant there.

Just doesn't make sense to me, and I don't think it's been taught or even suggested anywhere.