Jump to content

To Mormon or Not to Mormon?


LDS Guy 1986

  

57 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you agree with President Packer that members should stick to the official name of the Church over Mormon church?

    • Yes
      33
    • No
      15
    • Undecided
      3
    • I'm not LDS so this doesn't apply to me.
      6


Recommended Posts

In Conference President Packer pointed out that while many outside our Church tend to call the Church "The Mormon Church" that as members we should not use such terminology but instead use the official name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or the abbreviated name of Latter-day Saints.

Personally I have always had the habit of saying Latter-day Saints instead of Mormon, because I like that name better, I think it sounds better personally and explains my faith better than saying I am a Mormon.

In his remarks he said that the importance of using the official name is it highlights that we are a Church that believes in Jesus Christ and that we are Christians.

I agree with him on this personally, but I want to know what me fellow members think about this?

Non Members are also welcomed to comment, but I would ask that non members not cast a yes, no, or undecided vote since the question in the poll is directed at members only!

Thanks!

Link to comment

Hah that is true. When I am talking about the church I usually refer to the LDS church. I am not LDS myself, but I guess it has just become habit.

LDS Guy 1986:

I really don't care either way.

BTW. It will still be called the Mormon tabernacle choir. :P

Link to comment

It is quite often referred to on the official website's Newsroom as the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. If one does a search on "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" and "Tabernacle Choir" for only General Authorities one comes up with about the same amount of references to Mormon Tabernacle as just Taberncle (a very rough count by sight alone while eliminating duplicates).

Link to comment

In Conference President Packer pointed out that while many outside our Church tend to call the Church "The Mormon Church" that as members we should not use such terminology but instead use the official name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or the abbreviated name of Latter-day Saints.

Personally I have always had the habit of saying Latter-day Saints instead of Mormon, because I like that name better, I think it sounds better personally and explains my faith better than saying I am a Mormon.

In his remarks he said that the importance of using the official name is it highlights that we are a Church that believes in Jesus Christ and that we are Christians.

I agree with him on this personally, but I want to know what me fellow members think about this?

Non Members are also welcomed to comment, but I would ask that non members not cast a yes, no, or undecided vote since the question in the poll is directed at members only!

Thanks!

It's not the name that matters, it's the reputation. Call it whatever people recognize, that's what I say. To be honest, Latter-day Saint as an abbreviation doesn't say anything more about Jesus Christ than The Mormon Church.

H.

Link to comment

Yes, I think we should always try use some form of the actual name. Especially because it gives us a chance to emphasize Jesus Christ whcih is good for attracting members and good for sticking in the craw of antiMormons who claim to be christian. I don't think it's necessarily bad to say "Mormon Church" simply for ease and familiarity otherwise.

Link to comment

My general practice is to start with the full name and then move down from there.

"I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," thinking the song in my head.

"Uh huh?" Confused facial expression reply.

"LDS?"

Some: "Oh," with recognition; but most: "Oh...?" confused look is still there.

"I'm a Mormon." I say clearly.

"Oh," with a nod of acknowledgement.

Then I wait for a good question, like, "Do you practice polygamy?" or "Do you all believe in Christ?" or "Don't you all worship .... ?"

or even better,

"I knew a Mormon once."

Link to comment

My general practice is to start with the full name and then move down from there.

"I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," thinking the song in my head.

"Uh huh?" Confused facial expression reply.

"LDS?"

Some: "Oh," with recognition; but most: "Oh...?" confused look is still there.

"I'm a Mormon." I say clearly.

"Oh," with a nod of acknowledgement.

Then I wait for a good question, like, "Do you practice polygamy?" or "Do you all believe in Christ?" or "Don't you all worship .... ?"

or even better,

"I knew a Mormon once."

Hehe, I should do this more =).

Link to comment

I think we should use the full name of the Church as much as possible, and give clarification when necessary. We do not worship Mormon, nor depend on him for our salvation. It is only through Christ that salvation comes. So, I think it would be nice to include the name of whose church it is.

Link to comment

I wonder if Pres Packer has been on the Internet lately? Seems like someone forgot to tell him about the Church's "I'm a Mormon" campaign.

I could have not said it better. I am sure the Church would avoid it if possible but running a "Mormon" campaign is so much easier for them on the internet. It just so happens that running a "Mormon" campaign helps with Google searches (and so much more) and reaches their target audience better. Funny that when it is convenient they will use Mormon as their name. However, I agree with what they are doing. It is important for people to have a greater chance in finding the information God wants them to find. Still laughing at your comment.

Biz

Link to comment

I'm not LDS and voted accordingly.

I dunno what I would think if I actually were LDS about that subject.

From my particular point of view, I would disagree with Packer on the usage abbreviated "Latter-day Saint" rather than "Mormon". IMO it's a preferential view. Likely Packer feels that LDS is a more attractive word, given the criticisms that are more readily associated with Mormon.

Perhaps there is a concern on Packers part that by offering, "I am a Mormon." as an answer, will close more doors than it will open.

If his position actually is that when someone asks you something like... "Hey I heard you were a Mormon, is that right?"

that you should say "no I am not, I am LDS". Well, at worst, that is an obfuscatory approach that I don't even think he would agree of. But at best it is an aversive view that doesn't accomplish anything.

LDSToronto nailed it in his post. Either word looses meaning when you detach Christ from it.

Surely he meant that "Mormon" should not be your preferential self identifier. That would make a good bit of sense. I just don't see that saying "LDS" instead matters much, instead.... Perhaps, President Packer is being assertive and assumptive that "LDS" will convey "Christian" to folks.

Since you did gratuitously offer for non-LDS to give their thoughts on the matter. I will offer mine.

I think about Paul and how he approached different groups. He met with Jews and observed Jewish customs and laws, as a disregard for such would have put him outside the circle, so to speak, and his audience would have been lost. He met with gentiles and discarded such notions regarding Jewish laws, as they also put him outside the circle and stood in the way of his message of the Gospel. Paul placed the transmission of the message of the Gospel in preeminence.

I don't think Paul was being deceptive to either group. Rather he was willing to change his methods to transmit his message. The message was the same regardless, as it should have been. If the Holy Spirit does actually work through the message that LDS/Mormons/members of tCoJCoLDS transmit and that message is also the Gospel of Christ. Then I think the best course would be to use whatever methodology necessary to reach that end.

I don't see President Packers sentiment actually yielding anything conducive to dialogue. That is, if he is actually saying something like, "You guys need to drop Mormon as a term and switch to using LDS."

For me, if someone asks "What are you?" respective to belief. I answer, "A Christian." and see where it goes from there.

Link to comment

I would have thought "saints" to be commonly understood to mean "Christian" due to the scriptures, for example:

Romans 1:6-7 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ: To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be asaints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Link to comment

I would have thought "saints" to be commonly understood to mean "Christian" due to the scriptures, for example:

I think it's a good point. IMO, the term has gotten lost a bit though.

Take, "I am a Saints' fan" for example.

Link to comment

I am uncomfortable with the term Mormon Church because it implies it is built in Mormon's honor (http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/27.8?lang=eng#7) . I consider us being called Mormons a huge complement, sort of like an intelligent person being called an Einstein or a great warrior being called a CuChullain.

Link to comment

Granted that we now have a new living prophet . . . didn't the Church have this "discussion" sometime in the late 80s or 90s? There was a person in General Conference, I don't recall who, that made this same assertion that we should say "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" and not Mormon. President Hinckley then got up and basically said (as I heard it), "I'm proud to be a Mormon." Anyone else have a better memory than I on this?

I had never thought about the issue before that time, but since then I have made sure when people ask me about my religion, I say I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and sometimes I will say I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints; you may have heard us called Mormons . . . or some variant of this. I really love making sure people know it's the church of Jesus Christ but I also want them to know that I love being a Mormon. And the counsel back in that day I took as, again, making sure people know we believe in Jesus Christ, but neither should we be ashamed of being called Mormon nor will the universe implode if we happen to refer to ourselves that way.

Link to comment

I wonder if Pres Packer has been on the Internet lately? Seems like someone forgot to tell him about the Church's "I'm a Mormon" campaign.

His comments were were about usage of the name "Mormon Church", he wanted to use the official name of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or Latter-day Saints instead of Mormon Church you see used in the media.

Of course the media campaigns are going to refer to us as Mormons because if they said Latter-day Saint, most would not understand and if the public doesn't understand then it is a waste of money. A Public Relations Campaign is not official doctrine of the Church but a media campaign designed by advertisement experts, note though that in no ad is the Church referred to as the Mormon Church, but in every case refereed to by the proper name.

Seeing that President Packer was one of the men who approved the public relations campaign, I am pretty sure that he knows of it's content.

Link to comment

Elder Packer is simply reiterating what has been taught for well over a decade. He is right when he says the Church ought to be referred to by its full name, especially when the fine line between being a Latter-day Saint or a member of another branch of the Restoration becomes less distinct. That being said, I did not hear Elder Packer expressly declare that the terms "Mormon" and "LDS" should be dropped entirely from our vernacular. I will continue to use the term Mormon as I have for years. Seldom do contemporary missionaries approach investigators with a "Hey, we're Mormons" declaration. I learned this the hard way during an exchange nearly five years ago when a police officer assumed my companion and I were disciples of Warren Jeffs. First and foremost, we are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Once that important truth is established, I really don't think it matters what abbreviated form that title takes. What matters is that those not of our faith know that we are committed to Christ and that salvation comes through Him (Mosiah 3:17).

Link to comment

I don't think it really matters. If they're concerned about people not knowing that we believe in Christ, they could try TALKING about (not to mention worshipping) Christ more in our worship services. Honestly, I can't keep count of how many times I've attended sacrament meetings where Jesus was barely mentioned at all, outside of the sacrament ordinance itself, and it's no wonder visitors leave wondering if we're Christians! Fortunately, there has been some improvement, but we still have a ways to go, IMHO. Baptists call themselves "Baptists," but everybody knows they're Christian. Just sayin'...

Link to comment

I don't think it really matters. If they're concerned about people not knowing that we believe in Christ, they could try TALKING about (not to mention worshipping) Christ more in our worship services.

I hear this a lot but I have never hear a single lesson, talk, or temple ordinance where the name of Jesus Christ is not mentioned at the very least once. Every prayer and testimony is done in the name of Jesus Christ, every ordinance performed in the name of Jesus Christ, one doesn't have to be talking constantly about one of the 4 Gospels of the New Testament to be witnessing of the Lord Jesus Christ.

People are expected to be studying the Gospel daily as an individual and again as a family, if you are not learning of the Savior enough that is a personal failure not a failure of the Church, it is your responsibility to learn of the Savior not the Ward's responsibility to force feed you the Gospel every Sunday. The meetings are there to teach of the doctrine of the Gospel and how they relate to the Savior and the Plan of Salvation, not to force feed the teachings of the Savior to those who are too idol to do there duty and study the Gospel at home.

The Church is not the primary place of learning in our Church the home is, failure to learn the Gospel is a failure at home not a failure of the Ward. The Ward can help members who struggle, but they cannot and will not every force anyone to do there duty to Heavenly Father and study the Gospel at home to prepare for Sunday meetings.

If someone claims there isn't enough Jesus Christ in our services, IMO, it is because they are not looking for the savior's presence and how everything we do in the Church is in the Saviors name and for his glory.

Link to comment
I really don't care what you call it. At the end of the day, people will use the name they're most familiar with.

So it is up to us to make the name with which they are most familiar the one we prefer: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or The Church of Jesus Christ.

Lehi

Link to comment

What others call us isn't the question ---- they will use whatever they chose. But what we call ourselves can either reinforce our worship of Jesus Christ or miss that opportunity. Hopefully we opt for emphasizing our commitment to Him.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...