The Evolution of the Temple Garment and the Question of Religious Authority
In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), the temple garment holds deep significance as a sacred symbol of the covenants made in the temple. For many members, it is a physical and spiritual reminder of their relationship with God and their commitment to live according to His teachings. However, as with many religious symbols, the meaning, function, and practice surrounding temple garments have evolved over time, leading to important discussions about the intersection of tradition, religious authority, and personal autonomy.
From its origins as a priestly vestment to its current role as an everyday undergarment for many Latter-day Saints, the temple garment has undergone significant changes. These shifts have prompted members to question the appropriate role of the Church in such personal aspects of their lives. As the garment has become more integrated into daily life, issues of gender, control, and identity have surfaced, particularly regarding how much influence the Church should have over members’ private choices.
In this blog, we will explore the historical evolution of the temple garment, how its role has changed, and what this ongoing evolution reveals about the balance between religious authority and personal agency.

The Origins: From Priestly Vestments to Sacred Garments
The concept of sacred garments is not unique to the LDS Church. Throughout history, many religious traditions have used specific clothing to symbolize devotion, authority, and consecration. In the early days of the LDS Church, temple garments were introduced by Joseph Smith as part of the sacred endowment ceremony. These garments, much like the priestly vestments of other religious traditions, were intended to be worn during temple rites and represented a link between the individual and the divine.
Initially, these garments were reserved for temple use, emphasizing their sacred and symbolic nature. For early members of the Church, the garment served as a physical reminder of the covenants they had made and the commitments they had undertaken as part of their spiritual journey. At this point in its history, the garment was a vestment—a special, set-apart symbol reserved for specific religious ceremonies.
Shifting to Everyday Wear: Expanding the Role of the Garment
By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the role of the temple garment began to change. The Church instructed members to wear the garment beneath their everyday clothing as a constant reminder of their covenants. This marked a significant shift in how the garment was perceived and used. No longer reserved for temple worship alone, the garment became a part of daily life for many members of the Church.
This change had far-reaching implications. As the garment transitioned into an everyday undergarment, it took on a dual role: it remained a sacred symbol, but it also became a practical part of life. This expansion of the garment’s role introduced new challenges, as members were asked to adhere to specific guidelines regarding how and when the garment should be worn. Over time, the garment became not only a symbol of faith but also a marker of religious identity and conformity within the LDS community.

Recent Changes and the Question of Authority
In recent decades, the Church has introduced adjustments to the design of temple garments, aiming to make them more practical and comfortable for everyday wear. While these changes have been welcomed by many members, they have also sparked conversations about the evolving role of the garment in LDS life and the level of control the Church exercises over such intimate aspects of members’ daily routines.
For many Latter-day Saints, the temple garment remains a deeply personal and meaningful symbol. However, some members have expressed discomfort with the extent to which the Church’s guidelines dictate when, how, and even in what circumstances the garment should be worn. The question arises: How much influence should the Church have over something as personal as what members wear beneath their clothes?
Valerie, along with guests Jody England Hansen and Maxine Hanks, recently discussed this tension on Latter Day Struggles. They explored how the temple garment’s evolving meaning—from sacred vestment to everyday requirement—has led some to question the appropriate boundaries of religious authority. At what point does guidance become control? And how can members maintain a sense of personal agency when dealing with something so deeply connected to their spiritual lives?
Gender, Identity, and the Impact on Women
The conversation around temple garments also highlights important gender dynamics within the LDS Church. Historically, clothing has been used to reinforce gender roles, and the temple garment is no exception. For women, in particular, the guidelines surrounding how garments should be worn often intersect with issues of modesty, body image, and personal autonomy.
Valerie, Jody, and Maxine noted that the Church’s control over such intimate aspects of women’s lives can have a profound impact on their sense of agency and identity. When religious teachings extend to the most private parts of life—such as what one wears beneath their clothing—it can create a sense of external control that conflicts with an individual’s autonomy. This raises further questions about the balance between personal spirituality and institutional authority, particularly when it comes to gendered experiences within the Church.
Personal Autonomy vs. Religious Conformity
The broader issue at play is the balance between personal autonomy and religious conformity. Religious institutions often provide guidelines to help members live according to shared values and principles. However, when those guidelines extend into highly personal areas of life, such as the daily wearing of temple garments, they can begin to feel restrictive rather than spiritually meaningful.
For some members, the expectation to wear garments continuously can feel more like an obligation than a personal, meaningful expression of faith. This sense of imposition can diminish the symbolic power of the garment, turning it into a marker of religious conformity rather than a spiritual reminder. As Valerie and her guests discussed, religious symbols like the temple garment are most powerful when they invite personal interpretation and resonate deeply with the individual. When members feel pressured to adhere to rigid guidelines, the meaning behind the garment may become lost.

Where Does the Church’s Role End?
At the heart of this discussion is the question of where the Church’s role in regulating personal behavior should end. Religious institutions provide structure and guidance for living a life of faith, but when that guidance becomes overly prescriptive, it can interfere with personal spiritual exploration and autonomy.
For the LDS Church, this balance is particularly relevant as more members begin to question traditional practices and seek ways to integrate their personal spirituality with their daily lives. Allowing room for individual interpretation of sacred symbols like the temple garment can empower members to take ownership of their spiritual journeys while still maintaining their connection to the Church.
Finding a Balance Between Tradition and Autonomy
The evolution of the temple garment from a priestly vestment to a daily symbol of faith reflects the broader tension between tradition and modern life within the LDS Church. As the garment’s role continues to evolve, so too must the conversations around its meaning, purpose, and the level of control the Church exerts over its members.
Ultimately, the question of where the Church’s influence should end is one that requires ongoing reflection. By fostering a balance between institutional guidance and personal autonomy, the Church can create a space where members feel empowered to engage with their faith in a way that is meaningful and authentic to their individual experiences. The temple garment, like all sacred symbols, should invite reflection, inspire connection, and ultimately deepen the personal relationship between the individual and the divine.