For most of its nearly 200-year history, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints considered temple clothing — including what are known as “garments,” worn under everyday attire — too sacred to discuss, even within families or among friends.
That has slowly changed. In 2015, the Utah-based faith posted photos and videos of garments on YouTube to show the outside world that there is “nothing magical or mystical about temple garments.” And images of garments (especially the new sleeveless design) are posted on the church’s online store and by faithful Latter-day Saints themselves.
But how did the practice of wearing garments begin? What were early garments like? What did they signify to the wearers? And how have they evolved through the years?
(Amazon) "Mormon Garments: Sacred and Secret" tells the history of these Latter-day Saint underclothes.
Here are lightly edited excerpts from a recent episode of The Salt Lake Tribune’s “Mormon Land” podcast with Nancy Ross and Jessica Finnigan. They are authors, along with Larissa Kanno Kindred, of a forthcoming book, “Mormon Garments: Sacred and Secret,“ who discuss the history and purpose of this religious underwear:
When were temple garments first introduced and by whom?
Ross • The exact moment in which they are introduced is a little unclear, but they had been introduced by the time [church founder] Joseph Smith was murdered in 1844. John C. Bennett’s 1842 expose references a night shirt that offers protection. We also have an 1844 or 1843 letter or a memory recalling a conversation with Joseph Smith, where he is talking about garments in connection with Adam. That early history connects them with divine visitors. Joseph models [garments] after the clothing of the divine [beings] who have visited him after the [Book of Mormon’s] Angel Moroni and the clothing that he describes having seen in some of his earliest visions.
Any other influences?
Ross • He’s probably also a little inspired by the Freemasons, [including] the symbols that appear on their clothing and the fact that they use ritualized clothing in their ceremonies. He’s probably also a little inspired by a lot of contemporary concern in early 19th-century America over women’s clothing. Associations with clothing and health and ideas about dress reform are emerging during this period, where the idea is that maybe women could be healthier if they changed the styles of clothing that they wore.
How did early church leaders describe the purpose of these temple garments?
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) The emphasis on garments changed from Joseph Smith, left, to Brigham Young, the first two leaders of the Latter-day Saint faith.
Ross • There was a lot of evolution in that. The bigger social context is around health. Joseph Smith transforms contemporary ideas about clothing and health into clothing and protection, so that garments become a form of clothing that offers some degree of protection. With Smith being murdered when he was not wearing his garments, while the others at Carthage Jail were, this idea of protection is strengthened. Then, in 1846, [apostle] Brigham Young declared, “Let no man be without his garments.” There’s a lot of folklore that builds up at this time around Joseph’s death, even suggesting that he and [wife] Emma had a conversation where he would have to remove his garments in order to be martyred for the cause, because it would be impossible for him to be martyred otherwise. These stories end up taking on such a life of their own that Brigham runs with this idea. That’s an important early church history moment for garments.
Finnigan • Growing up, you hear those stories all the time, right? Like somebody survived a fire or a car crash, they’re just profound. There are a number of those stories in the ether that everybody hears, even as a child. Well before you wear garments, you hear those stories of protection.
What do you make of the church’s video downplaying the protection aspect by saying there’s nothing magical or mystical about them?
Finnigan • Recently the church has tried to move toward “spiritual protection” — if they talk about protection at all. That’s a more broad, more contemporary way of viewing religious protection versus I-survived-a-fire-and-my-garments-didn’t-burn type of protection. The church is still trying to put garments into that broader religious clothing category.
Did Smith mention Jesus wearing garments?
Ross • One of the ways in which the church community would authenticate [stories of angelic visitors] was to emphasize that that this item of clothing church members wear is in the likeness of what Jesus and divine visitors are wearing. So that is an important part of the early history of garments. Some of that is maybe less clear to church members now.
Were garments always meant to be worn daily or just on occasion?
(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) Two-piece garments, worn by faithful men and women. Sleeveless styles are now available for both.
Ross • We don’t have a sense that garments were worn day and night continuously [until] that Brigham Young [statement]. That idea comes to mean that they must be worn all of the time. Later, there are stories about Joseph F. Smith never taking his garments off completely. At some point, the church had to issue a letter telling church leaders that they need to stop telling members that they must wear them when they’re being intimate with their spouse.
When did the first garments look like?
Ross • Joseph Smith directed a seamstress to create a single- piece underwear that didn’t exist at the time, and it is certainly not representative. Joseph creating garments in the way that he does, with a particular vision, is doing something very progressive and very experimental [at the time].
When did garment patterns first change?
Ross • After World War I, underwear nationally becomes a lot smaller, covering a lot less of the body. The union-suit style underwear becomes the norm. People are wearing a lot fewer layers. Fashion changes very significantly. In 1923, after the death of some church leaders who are very committed to the original-style garments, there is an opportunity to make changes. They’re shortened to just below the knee and to the elbow. Ties are changed to buttons, collars are removed, and underwear no longer has a big open crotch. The church ends up adopting “a closed crotch,” but it’s really a split crotch, which those who wore pre-1979 garments will remember.
What happened in the 1930s?
Ross • There was a [church] report from the 1930s that included sleeveless garments, and the church adopted every single one of the recommendations, except for sleevelessness.
Why were they rejected?
Ross • There was the feeling that people would take too many liberties with sleeves and fashion. Concerns over women and their love of fashion and their vanity are a huge part of garment history. It’s always an easy reason to resist women’s requests to make changes.
What happened in the 1970s?
Ross • In the 1960s, Rose Marie Reid, a famous swimsuit designer who was also a church member, advocated for two-piece garments, but church leaders were not willing to adopt all her recommendations. It’s not really until she passes away [in the late 1970] that they adopt the two-piece garments. The change is announced in late 1979 and, by early 1980, they’re very popular. After that, we see the church make little changes, often without announcement, to make them more comfortable. There’s always pushback against those, but then eventually that brings us up to the present and our current sleeveless garments.
When did they move away from being seen as a protection for enforcing sexual mores?
Finnigan • A big change happened in the 1950s with [apostle and later church President] Spencer W. Kimball and his foundational BYU devotional, where he’s really telling young adults and especially women that their bodies need to be covered for sexual purity and that garments are enforcing his standards. The garments’ length is also enforcing skirt length.
Do you think garments are still seen as secret?
Ross • So much has changed with regard to secrecy. It’s hard to see whether this newfound openness is going to stick — or whether there will be a kind of backlash, and we will head back to secret land. The openness is trying to create transparency — which I love — but there’s always going to be a tension there, where Mormon distinctives are going to be challenging in the American Christian landscape. There is a lot of new language and new meanings attributed to garments around [Christ’s] Atonement, so the meaning of garments is just going to continue to evolve.
Finnigan• There’s always this tension. Like we’re changing the designs, we’ll give you some more fashion choices, but because it’s now attached to the Atonement, obedience is even more important, right? It’s not just the armor of God. It’s not just protection. It is a fundamental salvation discussion that is happening.
Note to readers • To hear the podcast, go to sltrib.com/podcasts/mormonland. To receive ad-free “Mormon Land” episodes, along with our complete newsletter and access to all Tribune religion content, support us at Patreon.com/mormonland. This story is available on Patreon and to Tribune subscribers. Thank you for supporting local journalism.