Comments on: Mormons Please Answer, Underwear?

By: Amazing!

Amazing! — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 20:24:53 +0000

I like that you’re researching the issue properly, and not just laughing, like everyone else tends to do.
Personally, I wear my regular underwear beneath my garments, but that’s just me – I like my Victoria’s Secret too much to give it up completely. And fellow saints, that is OK – I checked with two Temple Matrons. The garment then makes me feel as though I have an extra layer protecting me from the evil of the big bad world.
I have to admit though, it’s true that garments are far cheaper to buy that regular underwear – cost price only, although they are more expensive here (about £3) than in the US because they have to be imported. They are also far more comfortable, plus no VPL, no riding up, and no wedgies. And I love that they are available in so many fabrics and styles, and that you can get leaflets explaining which are good for a particular climate, or for wearing under particular clothes. (Carinessa is best under clingy sportswear, for example.) The Church has really thought about our comfort and practicality.
My own theory is that it’s underwear rather than, say, some kind of headwear or badge, because not all members have been to the Temple and taken the covenants which entitle them to wear the garment. If we wore something outwardly to show that we have been endowed in the Temple, it would immediately identify those members of the congregation who HADN’T been endowed, and others might start to wonder why not. Is she unworthy or just waiting for her husband? Does he have a cigarette habit, or can he just not afford the journey? It could lead to gossip, speculation and even accusations.
This way, even though some of us are in a special Covenant relationship with God, and others are not, no one can tell who those people are.
I also think it’s underwear because it forces us to dress modestly. The garment must remain covered, so we can’t wear strappy or sleeveless tops or short skirts, and men cannot wear short shorts or go bare chested. I like that. It’s important to me to look elegant and well dressed, but properly covered and not trashy.

By: Tartan Duck

Tartan Duck — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 20:14:11 +0000

If you’re asking why *underwear* (instead of, say, clothing worn on the outside where they are visible to everyone), I guess it’s so we don’t draw attention to ourselves. You see preachers and other clergy who wear special religious outfits, and their clothing carries with it a certain meaning or significance. The same goes for temple garments. They carry a special meaning to the wearer, but they are not worn as the outer layer of clothing because there is no need for everyone else to see them. As far as cost goes, they are pretty cheap; I haven’t purchased any in quite some time, but I seem to remember they were less than five dollars.

By: bran7207

bran7207 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 19:44:35 +0000

you make some very nice points.

By: tjsgigan

tjsgigan — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:59:48 +0000

the other answerers gave you good answers, but I wanted to add to pinkadot-imo they are A LOT more comfy than victorias secret-also : )

By: Pinkadot

Pinkadot — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:37:01 +0000

So where’s the question? What about the garment?
The answers you suggest in your added details make sense though.
Edit: Why not underwear? It doesn’t cost too much–certainly not more then you would pay for other underwear. Just pay the cost of the stuff, the church doesn’t seek to make a profit off the stuff.

By: Pinkadot

Pinkadot — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:27:27 +0000

Why underwear? why is it underwear? how much does it cost?
(I assume these are your questions?)
Basically, they are our underwear because we wear them under our clothes. Why? Because that is what we have been instructed to do. IMO because we want the symbol of the covenants we have made to be as close to us as possible… hence touching our skin.
Each top and bottom cost between $2 and $3. Alot cheaper than Victoria’s Secret I used to buy!
Any other ?’s email me.