Church prefers full name but is accepting more Mormon uses
I can live with it both ways.
GmaxD is absolutely right - the designation of members of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-Day Saints as 'Mormon' was, historically, provided by our
detractors as an insult. This was so prevalent at the end of the 19th and the
start of the 20th century that you can find discourses by Leaders of the Church
referring to both 'Mormons' and 'Latter-Day Saints' in rather different ways -
'Mormons' being those who have learned of the gospel, but no longer keep the
tenets of the faith, while 'Latter-day Saints' describe those active members
keeping the tenets of the faith. This was over 100 years ago, though, and I
believe few today know that the term 'Mormon' was used in this manner. I am a
proud member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and hold fast to
the gospel. However, if someone calls me a 'Mormon', I don't take offense. Why
take offense at something that was never meant to be offensive?
In continuation to last comment: if for public eye sake- if there need be a name
on the building then it should be the Church of Jesus Christ. As far as being
later day saints- I see no problem with that being added on. I think we should
all simple keep in mind that spiritual things are of God;the Holy Spirit is of
God and not of this world. The Kingdom of God is not of this world;nor is our
spirit. The things written in the Bible and the Book of Mormon are spiritual-
and spiritual things are applied to the heart and spirit/thus our actions and
what comes out of our mouths reflect who we are. Its not about a name- people;
and to argue about such is a worldly debate- not of God and shows who and where
a person is spiritually. We go to church to hear and learn about God - no one of
God should be set apart like in a sect- Mormons over here- and another group
over there etc. we should all be one!
Yes- It is Jesus Christ that receives each person as a part of the body of
Christ- since no one else can save accept Jesus Christ! The book of Mormon is
about what Mormon passed down from generation to generation via the records. We
don't follow Mormon and I don't think he would be happy to hear that people do.
Nor are we mormons. We are children of God-saved by the Lord Jesus Christ. God
calls and Jesus saves! The fact that men/women debate regarding the issue
reveals within itself that the issue is man made- not of God. God,Jesus, nor
Mormon stated that anyone should bear the name of Mormon. Man chose to do so. It
is a battle of conflict amongst man/thus it is of the Advesary. The fact that
humans debate regarding the issue really takes away from the credibiltiy of the
book of Mormon. If you go by the book of Mormon and the Bible- it states in
neither that we are to take on any name. Even the name Christian was developed
Thank You NightTrader. I didn't see the explanation for SEO when I read itthe first time through.Probably read it too fast or my glasses
need repair or possibly both.If the Words "search engine
optimization" were Capitalized like the abbreviation,I might have
seen it the first time. Never heard that set of words before. It's always good
to learn something New each day.Thanks again NightTrader
Wow, it is all in a name isn't it. Interesting reading to an English major, no
doubt.When I was younger, all of my Mormon friends called
themselves... you guessed it... "Mormons." Now it seems more
fashionable to not use that term.Ah, rewrites, they are wonderful.
Mankind just keeps moving on, eh.
The best way of removing the any negative connotation of unwanted moniker is to
accept and change the public perception of it. I totally agree with the need to
be identified positively with the name that most of the world, for better or for
worse, knows us by. If the Church wasn't readily identified when someone
searched for "Mormon" on the search engines... all they would find
would be the anti-mormon railings. The policy makers at the church have done the
right thing by embracing the term. I too am proud to be a Mormon. Where I am
from, there is no negative connotation to the term. We are well known,
respected, and appreciated by most.
@Brother Paul - the very first time SEO is used in the article, they acronym is
explained. "And then there is the SEO factor search-engine
Let's just put it this way! When I became a member of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints, I became a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints. When I got confirmed, the words were something to the effect
of "we confirm you a MEMBER of the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY
SAINTS..." not "we confirm you a MORMON..." With that in mind,
my brothers and sisters, let's not bow to the uneducated and the uninformed of
the world and let them call us what we aren't. That would be like us calling
Jews 'abrahamians' or 'judians' or something that sounds border-line derogatory.
What was the name of the Church that was registered when Joseph Smith and the
other 5 saints founded the modern-day church? I don't think that they founded
the Mormon Church. Why do we have to complicate such a no-brainer of an issue?
Like I said before, I am a MEMBER of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints. I don't belong to any other church with a different name, duh!!!!
NoWhere in this news article are the initials "SEO" defined.What is SEO?? A news story that refers to a group of lettersto
represent an abbreviation, should Define somewhere in the story what the
letters represent or stand for at least one time.Not everyone is up
to date on all the constantly changing abbreviations(alphabet soup stuff).
@ Southern Idahoan:I prefer not to go through life worrying about
another's intent, especially people that have been dead for over a century. It doesn't matter what people call us, but it matters what we really
Again Elder Packard reminded us just today during his GC talk to not call it the
"Mormon Church". We belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints. I have no problem being called a Mormon by members or non-members. I
just make sure the non-members understand what the name of our church is and
that we are not affliated with those groups who left the church many years ago
who may be called Mormon too. With the internet being used for
members to share our testimonies it is becoming more important ("what you
put out there stays out there") to correct the misunderstanding that the
sign outside our ward buildings and Temples says "Mormon Church".
A few hours ago, Elder Boyd K. Packer, instructed members of the Church of JESUS
CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints to refer to themselves as Latter-Day Saints, not
The Church's Newsroom site asks the press to "avoid the use of 'Mormon
Church', 'LDS Church' or the 'Church of the Latter-day Saints'. I think it's
interesting that even the Deseret News has trouble following this guideline.
They use "LDS Church" all the time, even in this article!
In the area I live in and you mention the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day
Saints people give you a weird look like the dont understand and than you
mention Mormon and than they even give you a weirder look. We are the definate
minority back here.
The prophet Mormon whom the book derives it's name was an honorable man...I
hardly think the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints or we as members
have any real need to fear or to be ashamed to be called by that name. Yes we
are aware that there are those uneducated and misled by those who practice the
art of priestcraft which has become a vocation of preaching, selling prayers,
blessings, and performing other so called ministries for profit...none of which
were neither practiced norcondoned in the Church originally organized by the
Savior himself. When their congregations start to dwindle then they have always
gone to the negative extreme to attack the other denominations who gained their
former members because without doubt they invariably feel the pain of their
pocketbooks when the collections subject them to the truth that they aren't
doing as good a job of preaching as some other denomination in the neigborhood.
That's why the term wailing and nashing of teeth is so appropriate. We have no
paid ministry...but we do have a good message. So why should we fear. I'm
proud to be..."A Mormon"
@Brave Sir Robin, Yep, and it does not change the origin of the term nor its
unmistakable intent. Just another hate word variant regardless of the strong
effort at adoption and brand management. Three cheers for SEO. It remains a
hate word and an expletive at best.
@Southern Idahoan...."Lets call mormon what it it: a hateful, bigoted term
used by enemies of the Church of Jesus Christ to demean and denigrate"Um, did you know that the LDS church owns the domain name 'mormon.org'?
Did you know that the LDS church's latest ad campaign features church members
stating "....and I'm a Mormon"?It may have started as a
negative, but kudos to church leaders for turning it into a positive.
The origin and use of mormon by mobsters and other malevolent characters is of
the same class and origin as bigoted terms coined by people who hated African,
Chinese and other minority groups. Lets call mormon what it it: a hateful,
bigoted term used by enemies of the Church of Jesus Christ to demean and
Antagonists use the nick-name "Mormon" to their advantage in attempts
to smear and tarnish the LDS Church by its ambiguous usage in reference to any
and all of the offshoot denominations from the LDS Church.
Yet another evidence that Google algorithms rule the world.
They definitely put a lot into managing the corporate brand.
There is no depends because we are both LDS and Mormons. Until people
understand that we are both and the same they will always call us Mormons
because of the Book of Mormon. I know that we are the same.
When asked for my religious preference (e.g. hospital) I always write: Church of
Jesus Christ of LDS. It is critical that Jesus Christ be in there. We can
abbreviate everything else.
Interesting...........next week we should start calling ourselves "Past