Garment Complaints:

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RC Vikings

This doesn't stop a lot of people. They either need to wear longer shorts (look like women's capris), just wear long pants or just put on a pair of whitey tighties when they are wearing shorts.

Some even go commando.

[RC Vikings]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

is this wrong? I mean is it really wrong to have them showing?

I think it is. It bothers me when I see people in the gym with them on and the bottom hanging out or out golfing and the same thing. I know they are just trying to do what is right but really I just wish they would put on some AP (Aaronic Priesthood) underwear for a couple of hours.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RC Vikings

I think it is. It bothers me when I see people in the gym with them on and the bottom hanging out or out golfing and the same thing. I know they are just trying to do what is right but really I just wish they would put on some AP (Aaronic Priesthood) underwear for a couple of hours.

At the gym?

For crying out loud.

Sweat in workout clothes, live in garments.

I did call SLC about the workout material being available for garments and they stated if I wanted to pay a boatload of money, they could be made, about 100 bucks. I declined. In my mind, the best material on earth is the stuff we use for running shorts and the like.

[RC Vikings]

Originally Posted by Archaea

At the gym?

I see it all the time. I even went on a ride a couple of months ago where the guy had them tucked up in his cycling shorts. I guess they feel better doing it but it sure looks uncomfortable to me.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RC Vikings

I see it all the time. I even went on a ride a couple of months ago where the guy had them tucked up in his cycling shorts. I guess they feel better doing it but it sure looks uncomfortable to me.

I know one guy who says it reduces chafing for riding. Well my conscience is blown to smitherines any how, so I say the the three "S's" still apply, "Sex, sports and showering" don't require garments.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

I actually design my own garments. I like my white doe skin pair the best--very supple. (I got the idea for white doe skin after learning that Wilford Woodruff had a white doe skin set for use in the Temple--pretty cool, heh?)

I'm currently designing a pair made out of Aerogel for those frosty Utah winters (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...le2284349.ece).

On a serious note, J. Reuben Clark tried to convince his cousin Heber J. Grant to drop the requirement to have garments at all:

"Despite five years of residence near Utah temples and his periodic visits to Utah, Reuben did not participate in LDS temple ceremonies for more than twenty-five years after the day he received his own endowment. By contrast, his wife Lute attended the temple regularly to receive ordinances as 'proxy for those who have died.' Reuben also complained about wearing the undergarments required for those who had received the endowment, and he advised the First Presidency to 'abolish them.' * He accurately prophesied that leaders eventually would shorten the sleeves and legs of the wrist-length and ankle-length garments. However, with typical loyalty to his covenants, he continued to wear the required garments even during the oppressive summers of Washington, D.C. Nevertheless, he would not bear to let anyone in Babylon see his temple garments, so he routinely mailed them to Luacine in Utah for laundering."

Elder Statesman: A Biography of J. Reuben Clark, Jr., D. Michael Quinn p. 23

*most footnotes are omitted but the one after the "abolish them" quote is: JRC scrapbook and office diary, September 1934, 15 June - 11 July 1935.

Fortunately for J. Reuben, he was called to high office before temple recommend bar coding; otherwise, I'm sure his lack of temple attendance would've prohibited his being called. In DC, revelation is 90% persperation, as "they" say.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree. Can you imagine someone being inactive for over 25 years--totally inactive, not paying tithing, not going to church meetings, not going to the temple--and then getting called into the 1st Presidency? I can't.

Not to mention that JRC was twice accused of sexual impropriety with women not his wife.

The guy is one of my heroes and I have the greatest respect for him--the church needed him without question. But the guy was a bundle of walking contradictions.

I can imagine how you (meaning you personally Tex) would react today if some middle-aged inactive lawyer started writing to the First Presidency telling them to abolish garments. It wouldn't be pretty. You would have a conniption fit.

Of course I am the way I am because I have read too many biographies of modern Apostles and realize that steadying the arc is the most noble tradition of smart young members who later become church leaders themselves. (Not that I will ever be called--but as JRC's example shows, history of personal worthiness isn't an inviolate prereq.)

I don't know enough about Clark's biography to dispute some of this, but I have to say I find the portrayal dubious. 25 years almost covers the entire distance from his temple marriage to his call to the First Presidency.

As for steadying the ark ... I'm sure Uzzah thought he was doing Israel a great service.

As for personal worthiness ... regardless of what vetting practices were in place in 1933, today it is taken very seriously. "Is there any sin or misdeed in your past, even repented of, that were it brought to light could embarrass the church?" asked an apostle of one of my mission president friends.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

"Is there any sin or misdeed in your past, even repented of, that were it brought to light could embarrass the church?"

None of your bees wax.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

"Is there any sin or misdeed in your past, even repented of, that were it brought to light could embarrass the church?"

Well, I murdered one of the apostles (Stephen). Is that a problem?

[MikeWaters]

Dang, you know they call some folks to callings in order to spur their activity, but I didn't think the First Presidency was one of those callings!