Reader comments
LDS Church emphasizes 'Mormon' distinctions

196 comments | Read story

XGI | 9:48 a.m. July 11, 2008

Does any church have the power to proclaim only them selves SAINTS. There were former day Saints and now there are Latter Day Saints. Who determins who is who.

Beowulf | 9:53 a.m. July 11, 2008

While I sympathize with these people wanting to call themselves "Mormons", I also understand the LDS Church's concerns. It is not merely a matter of semantics or touchiness. Did anyone notice the announcement last week that LDS missionaries from America or other countries will no longer be sent to Russia? The missionaries are being harassed by Russian state authorities who think (in their ignorance) that they are cracking down on polygamist nutcases. In other words, people, this confusion over the meaning of "Mormon" is threatening the safety of our missionaries overseas. And THAT's why the Church is speaking out now.

Karl | 9:54 a.m. July 11, 2008

Yes, Warren is a good guy and a Prophet.

What is it again that he has done for mankind?

Comments continue below

XGI | 9:54 a.m. July 11, 2008

If you are doing right and living the goapel you can expect to be persecuted. Don't you LDS people understand that? Can't you stand the pressure? Joseph Smith did. Brigham Young did. John Taylor did.

to Baptist | 9:56 a.m. July 11, 2008

Your comment wasn't very Christian-like, now was it? kathyn

to Repent | 10:01 a.m. July 11, 2008

You're right! Each of us needs to repent every day so that we can become more Christ-like in our lives. However, I have to disagree about who the real prophet is. I follow Pres. Monsen. That's what's so wonderful about freedom of choice; we can each choose for ourselves. I believe that Heavenly Father wants us to live our religions to the best of our understanding. We will be judged by what laws we know and understand.

Bruce | 10:12 a.m. July 11, 2008

In the fundamentalists' view, they ARE the original mormon faith. It's the mainstream church that traded priesthood authority for statehood and "fitting in" to secular society.
The fundamentalists' certainly have the right to use the word "mormon".
Maybe the LDS church should stick with something more descriptive...like "mormon lite".

Cats | 10:26 a.m. July 11, 2008

Mahonri: You speak like a true apostate. You are misinformed. The LDS Church owns the trademark to the name "Mormon."

Also to Baptist: The misperceptions that you express are a clear example of the lies and misunderstandings about Mormons that exist in the world. That is why we need to do everything we can to protect ourselves from our name being misappropriated by apostates like the FLDS and "Principle Voices."

These people are apostates and no matter how much they protest, they are still apostates.

James | 10:24 a.m. July 11, 2008

Mormons have suffered and continue to suffer more persecution than any other religious group in US history. They were victims of rapes, murders and an extermination order. They were driven from their homes in Missouri, driven from their homes in Nauvoo. They had the army sent against them in Utah. Their prophet Joseph Smith was murdered. Their prophet John Taylor was forced into hiding. Their current prophet Warren Jeffs sits in jail. Their children were taken away by a Texas court. And now a splinter group in Salt Lake City is trying to take away the name Mormon from them.

PP | 10:35 a.m. July 11, 2008

---Mormons have suffered ....Their prophet John Taylor was forced into hiding. Their current prophet Warren Jeffs sits in jail. Their children were taken away by a Texas court. And now a splinter group in Salt Lake City is trying to take away the name Mormon from them.---

This made me laugh (not in a bad way) but it is important to remember one teaching from Joseph Smith. "Always follow the majority of the apostles". As far as I know there were 0 church leaders that split off with the apostates. I know this is a tough pill to swallow but the FLDS church members are no longer Mormons because they quit following the teachings of Joseph Smith and their current leaders.

Johnny Utah #9 | 10:37 a.m. July 11, 2008

This issue is similar to the way Christians don't want Mormons to call themselves Christians, isn't it? Too bad LDS people...you can't have it both ways. The FLDS people are closer to the foundations of "Mormonism" than any current LDS will ever be. Unfortunately you'll never be able to bury your past.

Chris Laurence | 10:39 a.m. July 11, 2008

The Mormon Church passed through a specific set of circumstances which sets it apart from others claiming the title. One of the more excruciating experiences was the transition from a Church encouraging plural marriage to a Church that excommunicates its members for engaging in such marriages. Anyone who has read the stories of ancestors and others who were caught up in that whirlwind of a transition can see sharp differences from those continue to flout the prophets and the law of the land. I support the Church's efforts to draw public attention to those distinctions. Polygamist groups cannot ride The Mormon Church's coattails toward legitimacy. There is only one path, and it was outlined in the first manifesto. I suggest polygamist groups read it. It is located in the scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (The Mormons).

Robot dance | 10:44 a.m. July 11, 2008

RE: James
The Mormons suffer because they want to control the lives of others and that of the whole world-- It's their own fault. So quit whining! The LDS people are the biggest whiners I have ever known. It's terrible what you Mormon men do to raise such neurotic whiny people. And Listen next time on the news to the FLDS whiny womens voices. It's quite pitiful that these people are such robots.

Just Wondering | 10:55 a.m. July 11, 2008

If Warren Jeffs is a prophet then why canï¿½t he just magically get out of jail?

Parker | 10:59 a.m. July 11, 2008

Let's make a deal:

The LDS Church can have exclusive rights to "Mormon" if they will quit calling themselves "Christian." Seems fair, right?

Matt | 11:01 a.m. July 11, 2008

Now let's take an HONEST look at the ORIGINS of the LDS organization and compare them to the Texas group.

Let us be honest with ourselves. To compare the ORIGINAL mormon church with the Texas group would open a lot of eyes.

Aaron Trulson | 11:04 a.m. July 11, 2008

I'm LDS and I could care less what the other Mormon sects call themselves.
If someone really wants to know the difference they will find out.
If they don't want to know the difference, I can assume they don't care about Mormonism anyway.

What name could describe us better than The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?
Shouldn't we have more faith in that name alone?

Kalie | 11:10 a.m. July 11, 2008

If Warren Jeffs is a true Prophet than my dog is Santa Claus.

Hey Mormons | 11:15 a.m. July 11, 2008

Mormons seem to be way too caught up in image. How many millions of dollars and hours do you think are spent sending out new press releases, making slick videos, and coming up with new revelations to make them stand out to the world? (No tattoos, only one set of earrings, etc.)

I had out of town visitors who couldn't even attend their own Church because they didn't have the right clothes. How silly is that?

To quote Shakespeare once more, this all seems like "much ado about nothing."

PP | 11:21 a.m. July 11, 2008

---I had out of town visitors who couldn't even attend their own Church because they didn't have the right clothes. How silly is that?---

What church do they belong to? I know in the LDS church you can wear casual clothes if you dont have anything else. I have worn shorts before because I did not have anything else. However, I wear nice clothes to church because it shows respect and dignity.

VF | 11:25 a.m. July 11, 2008

I am just finishing Elissa Wall's book about her ordeal with the FLDS and this poor lady has really gone through her hell on earth. If you read her book you will quickly see that the LDS and FLDS are extremely "DISSIMILAR." Joseph Smith said that we (LDS) believe in "obeying, honoring and sustaining the law" and yet the FLDS completely DISREGARD the law. In the hundred or so years since the FLDS was established their numbers have grown to a whopping 37,000 while the LDS church has grown in the last 178 years to a mere 13+ million members world wide.

Our savior warned us against false prophets and said that by their fruits we would know them. Warren Jeffs fits that description to a "T".

To Just Wondering | 11:32 a.m. July 11, 2008

"If Warren Jeffs is a prophet then why canï¿½t he just magically get out of jail?"

I think jail is where "prophets" like to spend their time the most. Lots of Biblical dudes. Abinidai from the BOM. And even Joseph Smith. It's where they get their best inspiration and revelations and have time to be closer to God. At least that's what I've red.

worst PR ever | 11:37 a.m. July 11, 2008

The Salt Lake based church's pr team seems very clueless on this for a number of reasons. First, they keep the issue alive by issuing statements and press releases on the topic even though it has been weeks since there has been any talk in the media about the raids on the Mormon compounds in Texas. Second, they don't need to respond to groups like Principle Voices, who nobody has ever heard of. Doing so only lends legitimacy to them. Third, they need to run their statements by one or two people who don't think just like them, and can offer some outside input. That way, they may avoid saying completely non-sensical things like: "Ultimately, these groups can define themselves any way the wish as long as they don't distort the well-established identity of a long-standing church." - a statement that leaves me unsure if I can or can't and wondering who got to make that rule. Finally, they need a realistic assessment of what people outside of their communicty actually think of "Mormons." Temples, missionaries, and the choir, yes, but those all probably run a distant 2nd, 3rd and 4th to polygamy. Sorry - its true.

To Cats @ 9:26 | 11:41 a.m. July 11, 2008

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said, "If they want to engage in illegal practices they will have to take the consequences." Although you were referring to the FLDS, I think that is also true for the LDS. They did something that was illegal (back in the olden days) and they are STILL paying the consequences. All actions have consequences!

Realist | 11:42 a.m. July 11, 2008

Let me take a stab at this...it is all about power control and money. Let's be real about that! Salvation, I am not so sure! To LDS image is everything, but as well to a great many other religions. But it seems to me a great many do not want to acknowledge or take accountability for reality. The one's complaining about how the world views Mormon's/LDS/FLDS etc. as elitist, I say to you, why can't my kids play with yours? Or when I move into your neighborhood, you help me move-in, but soon as it is determined I am not LDS..I never see you again. Hmmmm and I do think that is the majority! 6 billion on this planet of different races, beliefs,long histories and locations...and your the only chosen ones! I will grant you this...it sure does make getting through life simplier!

Rednael | 11:48 a.m. July 11, 2008

I think the term "Classical Mormon" has a nicer ring to it then "Fundamentalist Mormon"

Look Out | 11:54 a.m. July 11, 2008

Again it appears that the Church is playing to the popular clamour and it will end in another compromise. It was not too long ago that the well loved President Hinkley preferred to be called a Latter Day Saint and considered the term "Mormon" derogatory. Go back and study the Mormon press no more than 10 years ago. Fundamentalist Mormons are a here to stay. That is a fact. Accepted or not, that is not the issue. The term Mormon will always be connected to the foundation principles of Mormondom. The Fundamentalist's are the embrassing relative to the mainstream Church who's worst public image enemy is itself. There is no reason to be embarassed. Most of your friends rather accept the fact that the Church has abandoned many of its fundamental values. If the Church had not abandoned those values than it would not have some of its friends. So let those that have it in their hearts to carry on - just let them do it and keep your friends. "True to the faith, whole heart and hand, faithful and true may we ever stand."

Tommy in Texas | 11:55 a.m. July 11, 2008

As an active LDS member, I've had to answer several questions from co-workers and non-member friends about the FLDS. I think the Church's proactive stance to provide the media with accurate information about the differences between us and the FLDS is the right way to go. As has been said before, when someone from our church is found in wrong-doing, it makes front page news. If we are to be held to a higher standard incurred by such public scrutiny, we have the right to establish ourselves, through the media or the courts, so that the distinctions are clear. We respect the rights of others to believe and practice their religion as they see fit and affirm our right to do the same and protect the good name of the church. We can live with our history and are sure of our future. If you aren't sure about yours, I'd invite you to come to one of our services on any given Sunday and find out why we can say that. :)

Chris Plummer RE: Carrick | 12:04 p.m. July 11, 2008

The FLDS and LDS have more in common then not. Shall we make a list for you? You can deny it all you want, but you are only kidding yourself.
I personally know they are different churches, but both share heritage that allows them to use the term Mormon. You can't deny them the name, and you never will, they will continue to use it. Good luck with your crusade.

Enough already ! | 12:07 p.m. July 11, 2008

Goodness gracious, haven't we about beat this dead horse to death? If you practice polygamy you are excommunicated from the LDS church .. period. Enough said. I don't know what the big deal about having mulitple wives running around with their own credit cards is ... YIKES, what a nightmare.

Look Out | 12:06 p.m. July 11, 2008

Another thought, all the good people in the world are not just LDS or Mormon. A little humility on the part of the Church and even the Fundamentalists should help realize we have a lot to go when compared to other devote members of other religions that hold more to their foundation beliefs than most of us do. Public image has nothing to do with this. This is something that starts at the homefire and hearth of every Latter Day Saint and not at the television set where we seem to be bringing the great religous debates. Joseph Smith fled from the religous debates into the woods to pray for the right course to pursue. Mormonism was founded to bring forth the truth. Many came out of the corrupted main stream churches of the day. Are we getting so mainstream that the Lord must send the truth through another avenue? Humility is the key and truth will prevail. Just a thought.

Good points | 12:09 p.m. July 11, 2008

To Rednael: I like your term "Classical Mormon" it does have a nice ring to it.

To worst PR ever: I agree the PR dept. of the Church could be a much better job of presenting itself. Your following example was a classic: "Ultimately, these groups can define themselves any way the wish as long as they don't distort the well-established identity of a long-standing church." - a statement that leaves me unsure if I can or can't and wondering who got to make that rule.

Not a penguin | 12:13 p.m. July 11, 2008

I might be an active Mormon is I could wear blue jeans to church. Blue jeans is all that I can afford. I cannot afford 200 dollar dresses 300 dollar suits for my family. And DI stuff looks worse than my blue jeans. I think it is awful when clothing gets in the way of religion. And to tell you the truth I really hate those penguin suits,and the women wear them too. Does God judge us by the clothing we wear? You can still be clean and neat and not wear a smelly penguin suit that goes to the cleaners after 4 wears.

To PP | 12:15 p.m. July 11, 2008

My friends were LDS. They didn't feel they could go to Church because they didn't have white shirts and dress pants. What LDS Church lets you wear shorts? I thought you couldn't even wear sandals. To me, fancy clothes are waaaay over-rated. Remember when those girls got into so much trouble for wearing open-toed shoes at the White House? Same thing, "much ado about nothing."

Calie | 12:22 p.m. July 11, 2008

Even Warren Jeffs wears a white shirt...lol!

obama republican | 12:28 p.m. July 11, 2008

Image, image, image, is that what this is all about. The church will grow or shrink based on how members behave worldwide not on how the media represents us.

We have a past and polygamy is part of it, I think we should embrace it not distance ourselves from it.

Some of the greatest leaders the church has ever known would never have been born were it not for the principal.

PP | 12:34 p.m. July 11, 2008

---My friends were LDS. They didn't feel they could go to Church because they didn't have white shirts and dress pants. What LDS Church lets you wear shorts? I thought you couldn't even wear sandals. To me, fancy clothes are waaaay over-rated. Remember when those girls got into so much trouble for wearing open-toed shoes at the White House? Same thing, "much ado about nothing."---

Just because your friends felt a certain way does not make it a church policy. Maybe they were just taking advantage of a chance to not go to church. The point is, you are not excluded if you have no other option. If you have another clothing option then you are being disrespectful to not use it. That was the problem at the white house, they had a better option they just thought their own opinion was more important than everyone elses. The term for that is ignorance (or arrogance).

Seriously! | 1:02 p.m. July 11, 2008

Why does anyone care what any denomination/group calls themselves? It's like the saying goes: Actions speak louder than words! To argue or complain about something such as this is not christian like at all. It only encourages the problems in organized religion when it turns into an argument regarding who is right and who is wrong. Christ's intentions had nothing to do with humans being self-proclaiming!!

Anonymous | 1:14 p.m. July 11, 2008

What Warren Jeffs needs is a pair of red slippers so he can skip on down the yellow brick road.

Tina | 1:18 p.m. July 11, 2008

I was just wondering do they have convalescent homes for FLDS, polygamist geezers? At least it would give the younger polygamist women a chance for a young guy.

Also I was wondering when the LDS church is going to allow women to be sealed to dead and living husbands?

What's In a Name? | 1:32 p.m. July 11, 2008

To Paul in Virginia,

Spoken like a true, self-conceited Latter-day Saint (or is that Mormon?)!

You should learn Christian history from somewhere other than James E. Talmage's obsolete, outdated, and erroneous book "The Great Apostasy". If you did, you would discover that there are literally hundreds of "orthodox" Churches that still use the name "Catholic" in their liturgy and in referencing themselves, and they also have an entirely different view of history that shows the "Roman" Church having LEFT THEM!

But whatever makes your tiny little LDS world fit together so nicely, you go with it! The Truth and Reality have never much mattered to members and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. And it matters even less to the Mormons.

Unkind Words | 1:34 p.m. July 11, 2008

I know that Warren Jeffs is a prophet of God. In light of recent events, I've prayed about this fervently and the Holy Spirit has validated this to me. Please people don't slander and mock my Prophet!

Can't control message | 1:41 p.m. July 11, 2008

I think the information age as been unkind to people wishing to control the message.

You hear about Mormons and polygamy or Mountain Meadow. Next you go to Google these words.

You're buying a cell phone. Don't you go to reviews? If you want the truth about Ford quality you go to consumer reports.

People don't weight LDS.org the same as other sites. Once you start reading about seer stones, black hates, treasure hunting, reformed Egyptian and others, if you haven't started on milk, you soon find the meat distasteful and hard to digest.

Christian History | 1:44 p.m. July 11, 2008

If you want a good book on Christian History, read "The inevitable apostasy" by Tad R. Callister. He uses the actual writings of the early christian fathers as well as LDS writings and biblical scripture.
I agree, Talmage's book is a little out of date.

Not your world alone | 1:43 p.m. July 11, 2008

It's time for women to take lead of the Mormon church. We can get rid of all the polygamy and it's supporters. We ladies know what's best for our families as well. Polygamy is wrong and none of us need it in our lives. The men who indulge in this lewd act are not good men and we don't want them around.

WE women intend to be happy rather you men like it or not. It's time to fight back. It is not a mans world any longer!

John Lambert | 1:47 p.m. July 11, 2008

I am glad the church is pressing forward with this endevor. It is bad enough that people still claim that as members of the church we practice polygamy. Within the last month I have read a statement on a San Francisco Chronicle board that "every mainstream Mormon has at least two wives".
This is totally and completely wrong. The Church began excommunicating people for entering polygamy about 100 years ago. In the 1930s the church used the test oath to ferret out polygamy sympathisers and supporters who were not acting and quiet.
However when it changes from people saying we have not stopped polygamy to claiming that we even in the past supported command marriages or people marrying under legal ages of the time a protest has to be put out. Brigham Young never went around telling women he had a revelation saying who they should marry. He even told men not to force anyone to marry them.
Some of the accusations against Warren Jeffs and his associates may well be false. However, it is even clearer that to assume they are the same as Brigham Young is totally and completely false.

Breakoffs | 1:51 p.m. July 11, 2008

If people break-off a group, then they are no longer apart of that group and therefore should NOT have its name. I do not care what the difference is once they break off they are a completely seperate entity and should be treated as such. If the Mormon church has a leader and they decide to seperate and establish another leader then they just cut their ties with the mormons and its church. THis is stupid that things like this are even brought up.

FLDS is just impersonating and running the name of the mormon church through the mud and it shouldn't of ever come to this point. Again, once broken off from something you are not apart or distinguished by that name or group again, end of story.

John Lambert | 1:55 p.m. July 11, 2008

To here we go again,
If the FLDS had actually ever "seperated" from the Mormon Church you might have an argument. They did not seperate, they were excommunicated. This happened for various of their founders over many years.
John Woolley who they claim as a spiritual father sepent much effort after his excommunication trying to get back into the church. Not even Joseph Musser ever tried to claim he had organized a new church, just that the church was only part of God's overall work.
The claim to actually have a church among the FLDS and their predecessors does not start until 1970. Maybe The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not have an unimpeachable claim to the title "Mormon Church" but the FLDS claim can clearly be impeached.
Beyond this there is no point where the FLDS can reject the succession. If they accept that Brigham Young was the legitimate successor to Joseph Smith, I guess they still could claim that Orson Pratt, Orson Hyde or Wilford Woodruff should have succeeded him instead of John Taylor. However they accept John Taylor. So they fall out of line while the church moves forward.

Gameshow Bob | 1:55 p.m. July 11, 2008

Isn't Warren hosting the Price is Right?

Sally | 1:56 p.m. July 11, 2008

These posts are more than i can contain in one life time. You people amaze me. However, you do make my day. very funny!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.