Garments/Temple Robes Shown in new Church Video

[brlenox]

But people keep telling me I'm supposed to feel guilty about them. But I don't. So, sometimes, I feel guilty about not feeling guilty about them.

I sometimes wonder what became of a young man who was turned away from donating blood at an LDS blood drive in Seattle because of a recent tattoo. Our RS President - who had a kind of modified 'punk' haircut - asked him what he had had tattooed. He unbuttoned his shirt and showed us a beautifully wrought, large CTR emblem over his heart.

And yet at what point does the admonishment "in the world but not of the world" come to bear on these types of situations? I think it is great to be sympathetic and considerate of the role of agency in folks lives and to not inflict unnecessary condemnation on others but at some point we have to define right practices for the benefit of those who seek direction.

There is nothing of a tattoo that speaks to spiritual improvement, spiritual benefit, spiritual enhancement. Seldom, except for the most eccentric, would we expect someone to fast and pray and plead with the lord to help them pick out the appropriate tattoo for display on their backside just above their waist line. It is clearly a practice that has been associated with worldly mentalities and temporal states of mind...never of spiritual benefit. Are they ever mentioned in positive light in scriptures...nope not ever.

So be kind to others and do not judge or make observations that only serve to offend but do not perpetuate ignorance by being sympathetic to a worldly condition that should be called out for what it is - a tattoo is a worldly error in judgment and not of God.

[buffalo_girl]

So be kind to others and do not judge or make observations that only serve to offend but do not perpetuate ignorance by being sympathetic to a worldly condition that should be called out for what it is - a tattoo is a worldly error in judgment and not of God.

I suspect tattoos represent a decision made which isn't easily or obviously remedied should we regret it at some future point in time.

Having a tattoo is certainly NOT the worst decision a person can make. Many decisions are much more destructive of spiritual well being in oneself and to those within our sphere of influence.

Mothers tend to grieve over a child's tattoos.

[Bee Prepared]

We live in a weird world where privacy is being erased. The concept of sacred is disappearing.

There are photos of garments and temple robes all over online. At this point, I don't see anything wrong with displaying them and explaining what they are. You can see a temple robe at a public LDS funeral viewing and if you happen to be in a locker room with a Mormon changing, you'll see some garments with the symbols.

So it's not like the fabric itself must never be viewed by anyone. To the uninitiated, it's just fabric, in reality, it's just fabric, but to those who use it in proper contexts, it is an expression of faith. There may have been some policies about garments not being waved around in the past, but times have changed.

You have to decide what is better, to maintain a policy or adapt and help to educate people a little more. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing, a little unexpected and unfamiliar, but I don't see this as some kind of merging with Babylon or anything. That's my take.

This is the problem I see. The church has become an UTTERLY different entity by adapting to the government, societal norms and expectations, desire to raise more money, desire to fit in with the Kardashians.... The very things that were preached as necessary for exaltation, will now get you exed - spiritually damned. Something like posting garments on the internet - even for the purpose of educating others, would have gotten you in BIG trouble a year ago. The church used to have their own wineries because the Savior Himself said to use wine for the sacrament, now you can't go to the temple if you use wine for the sacrament (and might be exed for doing it in your own home without Bishop's "permission"). Someone can stand in the presence of the Savior but the church will ex them if they don't have their every thought lock-in-step with the brethren.

This isn't about garments, it's about the nosedive the church is taking into the volcano - backpedaling on everything they used to hold sacred to "fit in". The church wants to be one of the popular kids. People of God are NOT the popular kids. They do what God directs and what the Savior asks - regardless of how un-cool it makes them look. The church seems very hypocritical every time they come out and do something that utterly violates things that were once important and things that they used to punish members for doing.

A nosedive? Backpedaling? Do you not believe we have a Prophet Seer and revelator who guides this church? I do, and if things change it comes from revelation. You can go anywhere on the internet and find the temple ceremony, the clothing, etc., so why not stop the madness and become somewhat transparent? Makes sense to me.

[jair29]

No sure if anyone's seen this - but I thought I'd share since I saw it...

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=218&ad ... e&ad_cid=6" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Joel]

So what's the purpose of the video?

Not sure if this is legit:

Source: https://medium.com/@marysnap/im-mary-sn ... 937127a071

Mike started bragging about his Mitt Romney video, and at one point I seem to remember in one of the private groups he even shared either a screenshot, or actual video snippets of Mitt Romney. Whatever it was, it was credible enough to know he had something, and he was talking to New York Times and other reporters about releasing this footage to both ruin the Romney campaign, as well as hurt the LDS Church’s image. He gave a date this was going to be released in several private groups, and started to confirm this more publicly later on (remember “October surprise”?)

In about 2 days and me reporting to Mike Otterson (the Managing Director of Public Affairs and spokesman for the Church), members of the 70 and others, the LDS Church produced their most revealing video yet, showing garments and talking about the importance of religious garb. We had it all ready to release in the event Mike went live with the video. We knew he wanted attention and was willing to go to jail to get that attention so we didn’t want to give the attention he wanted unless he had already gotten it via other means.

Well, by the date of the “October Surprise”, Mike never released the video. I’m pretty sure his lawyers told him the Church would have sued him out of existence if he did. And frankly they probably would have. And the Church didn’t release that video for another year or two. But they did release it eventually on Mormon Channel and elsewhere.