So Why did Joseph Smith and others remove their garments before Carthage?

[NOWmormon]

Theories?

[Not Buying It]

So he could seal his testimony with his blood. See, if he'd had his garments on they couldn't have killed him, the bullets would have just bounced off. Except his head, if they shot him in the head he'd still die.

Just kidding! My best guess is that the garments were so closely related to polygamy, and polygamy is what got him to Carthage (in that William Law's rejection of polygamy led directly to his publishing the Nauvoo Expositor, the destruction of which led directly to Carthage). Hope all that sex was worth it, because it got Joseph killed.

My best guess is that removing his garments was a sign of Joseph stepping away from polygamy, realizing he couldn't get away with it anymore now that the Expositor had put it out there.

[Charlotte]

There's a bunch of stuff at FAIR Mormon:

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Ques ... gamists%3F

I didn't read too closely. Of the four, three didn't wear garments. Of the three who didn't, two were killed, so no one explanation works for all of it. But the facts of the situation were certainly something to talk and wonder and speculate about. They have some diary entries, etc.

[oliver_denom]

The simplest explanation is the best. It was in the middle of the summer, these garments were full length from wrist to ankle with a collar at the top. They had to ride something like 25 miles to be arrested, so they probably thought it would be uncomfortable. I don't think the garment meant the same thing to them as it does to current members.

[Not Buying It]

There's a bunch of stuff at FAIR Mormon:

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Ques ... gamists%3F

I didn't read too closely. Of the four, three didn't wear garments. Of the three who didn't, two were killed, so no one explanation works for all of it. But the facts of the situation were certainly something to talk and wonder and speculate about. They have some diary entries, etc.

John Taylor said garments were sometimes removed because of the "hot weather"? Well dang, if Joseph and Hyrum and John Taylor could take theirs off when it got hot, I can too!

[AllieOop]

The simplest explanation is the best. It was in the middle of the summer, these garments were full length from wrist to ankle with a collar at the top. They had to ride something like 25 miles to be arrested, so they probably thought it would be uncomfortable. I don't think the garment meant the same thing to them as it does to current members.

I'm not sure if they even wore garments all the time back then, but the ones who had them and did wear them, were those involved in living polygamy. Of course, there's the apologetic reasons (they were too sacred for others to see....yada yada....), but I think Joseph was still being so secretive about polygamy that is most likely a big part of why he removed his.

I think that Willard Richards wore his (iirc). Bottom line is that we really do not know why Joseph and the others didn't wear theirs. It's obvious though that they felt differently about wearing them than members do today.

Also, it's not true that members have covenanted to always wear them, day and night. That is a blatant misrepresentation in the temple recommend interview.

[Red Ryder]

Ya'll are over thinking this.

They ran out of toilet paper in the jail. They improvised.

[asa]

The correct answer is because it was too hot. If you know any members from Brazil they usually do not wear garments in their summer for the same reason.Some members in Arizona do the same. Lots of members I personally know in Florida do the same.The Inititory says NOTHING about wearing them "day and night " only "throughout your life". This business about always wearing them is yet another false practice that has been foisted upon members by Pharisees

[Korihor]

I think we're overthinking it, I don't he gave it much thought, but a little.

It was a symbol of polygamy. If he had any foresight, he would have been concerned with drawing attention to himself and polygamy avoided them.

He seemed to be a rather wanted man, he was on the move frequently and simply didn't have time to plan his wardrobe choices for the day.

THey didn't give it the same amount of emphasis we do today. Of course, it would be important, but it wouldn't violate your covenants if you didn't wear them religiously.

[GoodBoy]

So he could seal his testimony with his blood. See, if he'd had his garments on they couldn't have killed him, the bullets would have just bounced off. Except his head, if they shot him in the head he'd still die.

Haha!! Love it.

[wtfluff]

The "Endowment" at it's inception was all about keeping Joseph's polygamous exploits a secret. The original garment was part of that "secret keeping".

If Joseph removed his garments, and told others to do so, it was because he was trying to hide something. That is all.

[2bizE]

So do the polygamy groups today wear the long garments? Is that why the women wear the prairie dresses?

[wtfluff]

So do the polygamy groups today wear the long garments? Is that why the women wear the prairie dresses?

Google says: Yes, they wear long polygamy panties.

[Hagoth]

So he could seal his testimony with his blood. See, if he'd had his garments on they couldn't have killed him, the bullets would have just bounced off.

For that kind of protection he deferred to his Jupiter talisman, which he apparently considered more powerful.

[Not Buying It]

So he could seal his testimony with his blood. See, if he'd had his garments on they couldn't have killed him, the bullets would have just bounced off.

For that kind of protection he deferred to his Jupiter talisman, which he apparently considered more powerful.

Yeah, I've known a couple of members who had one because they thought it was cool since Joseph had one at Carthage. Didn't seem to register with them that it obviously didn't work at Carthage.

[Just This Guy]

Wasn't the garments only worn as part of the temple ceremony at the time? I thought it didn't become a full time article of clothing until sometime after BY was in power.

[2bizE]

Also, it's not true that members have covenanted to always wear them, day and night. That is a blatant misrepresentation in the temple recommend interview.

This. I never thought about this until now. Wearing them day and night is not part of the covenant.

[AllieOop]

Also, it's not true that members have covenanted to always wear them, day and night. That is a blatant misrepresentation in the temple recommend interview.

This. I never thought about this until now. Wearing them day and night is not part of the covenant.

Actually we have not covenanted to even wear them at all....let alone day and night. There is no covenant in the temple regarding the wearing of garments.

Yet, here is the question we are asked in the temple recommend interview:

"Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?"


*******************************

[wtfluff]

Also, it's not true that members have covenanted to always wear them, day and night. That is a blatant misrepresentation in the temple recommend interview.

This. I never thought about this until now. Wearing them day and night is not part of the covenant.

Actually we have not covenanted to even wear them at all....let alone day and night. There is no covenant in the temple regarding the wearing of garments.

Yet, here is the question we are asked in the temple recommend interview:

"Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?"


*******************************

Yep, what Allie said...

Those of us who were endowed agreed to all of the "covenants" in the temple by doing what? (Bow your head and say yes.)

At what point in the ceremony did we "bow our head and say yes" to wearing garments 24X7? IT DID NOT/DOESN'T HAPPEN.

In the (creepy) initiatory, an old person "places the garment" on the person, and gives the speech that tells them they must wear it throughout their life. At no point during the initiatory does anyone make any sort of covenant at all.

In the endowment, when the garment and the initiatory is mentioned, and the phrase "wear throughout your life" is mentioned again, but again, there is absolutely no "covenant" about polygamy panties. No head-bowing, no yes-ing.

The temple recommend question about the garment is a blatant contradiction/misrepresentation/lie about any covenant that is made in the temple.

[Grace2Daisy]

Have any of you ever had to undress in front of someone who was not LDS and had no idea what special Underoos were?

It was always embarrassing for me, and maybe this was the case for the boys in Carthage Jail. Maybe, just maybe they were just embarrassed as I was being seen in them, and wouldn't be caught dead in them. . . . . . .