Is the "Mormon" label fading?

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

What I have found that does not fit right into the temple atmosphere is people obsessing that other people ought not be there. In fact, one of the training videos for workers focuses on this topic, emphasising that anyone who shows up with a temple recommend is to be admitted and treated with kindness and respect regardless of dress and/or grooming. It is not the role of a temple worker to recommend any changes in appearance specifically to avoid making a person feel unwanted. In this training video, it shows young people in the baptistery with coloured hair, piercings, painted nails, and woven bracelets if my memory is accurate.

By the way, the training videos frequently show male patrons with facial hair as well. I doubt this is a coincidence, but who knows?

I don’t believe it’s a coincidence either. But I’ve never seen any ordinance workers depicted with facial hair in those videos. Have you?

As hands-on as the First Presidency is  regarding temple content, there’s not a particle of doubt in my mind that those training videos have each been carefully scrutinized by the First Presidency.  

So what are we to make of this? Is it a double standard, as has been suggested here? 
 

Or does it perhaps reflect an attitude on the part of the Brethren that ordinance workers, because of the special role they play and because of who/what they represent are to adhere to certain standards of appearance, as do missionaries and the General Authorities themselves? 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

He wrote: 'Mormon was cool for President Monson but not for President Nelson'.

Which you immediately misread as defending the use of 'Mormon Church': 'What do you mean it was “cool for President Monson”? Throughout his presidency and before, the Church position and the teaching of the Brethren has been to ask us not to use the term “Mormon Church.”  And they were apparently united on that'.

He clarified that he was defending the use of the term 'Mormon' in general and referenced the 'I'm a Mormon Campaign' as an illustration.

But before that he misread your 'they were apparently united on that' to mean the general use of the word 'Mormon'.

That's how we end up with the poorly written, poorly punctuated statement, which I will ghost edit as follows: 'Despite Scott's incorrect claim that the Brethren were united [on the term 'Mormon'] throughout Pres. Monson's presidency, the Church position and the teaching of the Brethren has [only] been to ask us not to use the term "Mormon Church", [not "Mormon"]'.

A cursory review of this board (and even this thread) will demonstrate that I disagree with JLHPROF most of the time, and I would happily do so again here if required, but this whole 'squabble' has just been silly.

Just curious: If it was apparent to you that JLHPROF charged me with making an “incorrect claim” because he had misunderstood me, why did you pick me to go after instead of him? 

[let’s roll]

59 minutes ago, Calm said:

And why shouldn’t temple workers themselves be treated with the same level of kindness?  I just don’t understand the mentality that drives some to complain.

I was an ordinance worker for a number of years and always had a few brothers on my shift with beards.  I don’t recall beards ever being discussed/mentioned.  I grew one a couple of different winters, and got compliments each time.  Got rid of it both times because it’s as much, or more, work to keep it groomed than it is to shave.

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Peacefully said:

I wonder how many are made to feel as if they don’t belong by people like my sister who care more about outward appearances than the person on the inside? 

Some years back, one of our bishopric counsellors showed up for church in jeans and a very rumpled shirt. Almost no one knew, but his (now ex-) wife had thrown him out of the house the night before, forced him to sleep in the car, and hadn't let him inside to shower and/or change, so he'd just come to church anyway and joined the bishop on the stand. One would think that everyone would immediately recognise that he was less than OK and reach out supportively, and most did. But one miserable old member called him out for it. The counsellor's response was to look at him in silence, like Jesus before the Sanhedrin. It infuriated me, but I agree that people shouldn't be forced to defend themselves. Crazy.

One of my non-member mates attended both sessions of stake conference this last weekend. He attended the adult session in jeans and a flannelette shirt. Sunday morning, he added a nice jumper to his ensemble. The visiting area seventy went out of his way both days to make this man feel both welcome and special. He even remembered his name the second day and used it.

I've been urging my mate to seriously investigate the Church for about six years now. He's finally starting to get serious. If people had chosen to treat him shabbily and drive him away instead, I would be inconsolably indignant!

Edited March 23, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

Pres. Hinckley was quite practical and good at making use of the tools he had, imo.  Pres. Nelson is more idealistic.  We need both approaches imo, the first to build a strong foundation and the second to build as high as we desire to go.

I love the way you put that and I agree.  I do think we need both kinds of thinkers.

[Tacenda]

c/p'd a quote from an Exponent ll article below. Is this something happening, and if so, does anyone know why labeling heavenly mother with lower caps is so important, vs upper case like Heavenly Father?

"Recently there’s been yet another crackdown from top church leadership to avoid discussion of Heavenly Mother online and in church meetings, verified by multiple reliable sources and causing a visceral reaction throughout the online LDS community. Stake presidents and stake leaders are receiving training from general authorities and apostles to stop seemingly harmless activities such as capitalizing the words Heavenly Parents (because only Heavenly Father can be capitalized, and it should be “heavenly parents” and “heavenly mother”). We also aren’t supposed to include or credit Her for a role in creation or the Plan of Salvation, refer to or teach about her at church, and as always – no communicating with anyone but Heavenly Father in prayers."

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

c/p'd a quote from an Exponent ll article below. Is this something happening, and if so, does anyone know why labeling heavenly mother with lower caps is so important, vs upper case like Heavenly Father?

"Recently there’s been yet another crackdown from top church leadership to avoid discussion of Heavenly Mother online and in church meetings, verified by multiple reliable sources and causing a visceral reaction throughout the online LDS community. Stake presidents and stake leaders are receiving training from general authorities and apostles to stop seemingly harmless activities such as capitalizing the words Heavenly Parents (because only Heavenly Father can be capitalized, and it should be “heavenly parents” and “heavenly mother”). We also aren’t supposed to include or credit Her for a role in creation or the Plan of Salvation, refer to or teach about her at church, and as always – no communicating with anyone but Heavenly Father in prayers."

It's written both ways (sometimes with caps and sometimes not) on the church's website.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Stake presidents and stake leaders are receiving training from general authorities and apostles to stop seemingly harmless activities such as capitalizing the words Heavenly Parents (because only Heavenly Father can be capitalized, and it should be “heavenly parents” and “heavenly mother”).

We had our stake conference last weekend. The visiting area seventy conducted two hours of training yet, mysteriously, never brought this all-important matter up ... 

[JustAnAustralian]

39 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

We had our stake conference last weekend. The visiting area seventy conducted two hours of training yet, mysteriously, never brought this all-important matter up ... 

The GA that did a multi-stake priesthood leadership training session here recently didn't bring anything like that up either. Neither did the other GA that was unavailable that day so sent a video recording.

They more interested making sure that stake leaders helped people progress in the gospel.

 

[Calm]

8 hours ago, Tacenda said:

c/p'd a quote from an Exponent ll article below. Is this something happening, and if so, does anyone know why labeling heavenly mother with lower caps is so important, vs upper case like Heavenly Father?

"Recently there’s been yet another crackdown from top church leadership to avoid discussion of Heavenly Mother online and in church meetings, verified by multiple reliable sources and causing a visceral reaction throughout the online LDS community. Stake presidents and stake leaders are receiving training from general authorities and apostles to stop seemingly harmless activities such as capitalizing the words Heavenly Parents (because only Heavenly Father can be capitalized, and it should be “heavenly parents” and “heavenly mother”). We also aren’t supposed to include or credit Her for a role in creation or the Plan of Salvation, refer to or teach about her at church, and as always – no communicating with anyone but Heavenly Father in prayers."

The main gospel topic page on Heavenly Mother has her name capitalized.  If that gets changed or they edit Heavenly Mother out of the Gospel Principles manual, I might think there was something in the rumor.  I can understand telling people not to capitalize Heavenly Parents because that makes it appear the phrase is a name or title, when it hasn’t been used as such and we typically don’t do that in English…as in we often use Mother or Father as someone’s name, but I have never seen “Parents” used as a name (think how we refer to Mr. and Mrs. Robinson or the Robinsons…would “Parents” ever feel like a natural replacement?).

https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/mother-in-heaven?

The inconsistencies make for an awkward look as evidenced by how this author uses both the capitalized Her and the lower case her in the same sentence…but this is an editing issue, imo, and not a doctrinal one.

Quote

also aren’t supposed to include or credit Her for a role in creation or the Plan of Salvation, refer to or teach about her at

Let me just rant again about the search function on church’s website…it is the WORSE!!! (It is just spastic today, not even trying to search)

Edited March 24, 2022 by Calm

[Tacenda]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

The main gospel topic page on Heavenly Mother has her name capitalized.  If that gets changed, I might think there was something in the rumor.  I can understand telling people not to capitalize Heavenly Parents because that makes it appear the phrase is a name or title, when it hasn’t been used as such and we typically don’t do that in English…as in we often use Mother or Father as someone’s name, but I have never seen “Parents” used as a name (think how we refer to Mr. and Mrs. Robinson or the Robinsons…would “Parents” ever feel like a natural replacement?).

Yeah, supposedly this is a new change, but maybe it's rumor as well. I just thought I'd bring it up to see if anyone else heard of it. No biggie I guess. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Yeah, supposedly this is a new change, but maybe it's rumor as well.

I wouldn't call it rumour, exactly. I suspect it's more a fantasy of the permanently aggrieved -- a bit like discovering that one's TikTok account has been suspended and immediately blaming it on the Church ...

[Calm]

One of the commenters said this:

Quote

Just to clarify something—as I have read the notes of people in these meetings and talked with a few sources, it seems they are ONLY worried about capitalizing Heavenly Parents. Heavenly Mother IS capitalized in the church essay.

 

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I wouldn't call it rumour, exactly. I suspect it's more a fantasy of the permanently aggrieved -- a bit like discovering that one's TikTok account has been suspended and immediately blaming it on the Church ...

No TikTok account here. Just thought I'd ask, the woman's Exponet ll article mentioned how she felt the temple lacked heavenly mother as well. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

30 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

No TikTok account here.

I know. Just trolling John Dehlin, who literally wrote the following, presumably with a straight face: 'It appears as though the Mormon church and its followers got our TikTok channel banned. So predictable'.

[Tacenda]

45 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I know. Just trolling John Dehlin, who literally wrote the following, presumably with a straight face: 'It appears as though the Mormon church and its followers got our TikTok channel banned. So predictable'.

I thought he thought it was Midnight Mormons that did, lol. Or headed it up. Could be possible though, maybe. ADD: I won't watch them (TikTok), or avoid at all costs. Even though some might think I'd like them, I don't. I think it's in terrible taste to do that to anyone's faith. So hopefully they stay banned.

Edited March 24, 2022 by Tacenda

[Calm]

There is a video on Twitter which I have reconsidered posting since I don’t know if released by the Church or not, but Elder Renlund is expressing concern about going further than has been revealed and making up doctrine, so if recent, there is likely some concern out there about beliefs being attached to Heavenly Mother, though he might be answering a question instead of giving a talk.

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Calm

[Tacenda]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

There is a video on Twitter which I have reconsidered posting since I don’t know if released by the Church or not, but Elder Renlund is expressing concern about going further than has been revealed and making up doctrine, so if recent, there is likely some concern out there, though he might be answering a question instead of giving a talk.

 

Is this concerning the upper case situation with heavenly mother?

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Is this concerning the upper case situation with heavenly mother?

No, it was about doctrine and not adding beliefs that were not revealed. 
 

I added that to what I wrote above. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Calm

[Avatar4321]

On 2/24/2022 at 12:31 PM, JAHS said:

We have been known as Mormons for so long I think it will take a few generations before the label is gone for good. There are a lot of church related websites that have the word Mormon or LDS in the title of their site. It's not an easy thing to rename those websites and still be noticeable as something having church related content. 

Sister Nelson said that President Nelson and the leading quorums are working on a 50-100 year plan for the Church.

It’s strange to think about, but they are not going to live to see the fruits of their labors

[Avatar4321]

On 2/24/2022 at 12:55 PM, Teancum said:

So if you drop Mormonism what you use? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintism?  LDSism?  IT is amazing with all the problems in the world that due to President Nelson's pet peeve, and that is what it is, so much is made over this.

I use the Restoration. I can’t speak for others

[Avatar4321]

On 3/23/2022 at 12:43 AM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Some years back, one of our bishopric counsellors showed up for church in jeans and a very rumpled shirt. Almost no one knew, but his (now ex-) wife had thrown him out of the house the night before, forced him to sleep in the car, and hadn't let him inside to shower and/or change, so he'd just come to church anyway and joined the bishop on the stand. One would think that everyone would immediately recognise that he was less than OK and reach out supportively, and most did. But one miserable old member called him out for it. The counsellor's response was to look at him in silence, like Jesus before the Sanhedrin. It infuriated me, but I agree that people shouldn't be forced to defend themselves. Crazy.

One of my non-member mates attended both sessions of stake conference this last weekend. He attended the adult session in jeans and a flannelette shirt. Sunday morning, he added a nice jumper to his ensemble. The visiting area seventy went out of his way both days to make this man feel both welcome and special. He even remembered his name the second day and used it.

I've been urging my mate to seriously investigate the Church for about six years now. He's finally starting to get serious. If people had chosen to treat him shabbily and drive him away instead, I would be inconsolably indignant!

It always puzzles me how some get more concerned about what others wear than the fact that they are there.

We want more people at Church worshipping the Lord!

[Avatar4321]

On 3/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

We had our stake conference last weekend. The visiting area seventy conducted two hours of training yet, mysteriously, never brought this all-important matter up ... 

I highly doubt it’s as big a problem in your area of the vineyard. It is becoming a problem on in the States

[JLHPROF]

6 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

Sister Nelson said that President Nelson and the leading quorums are working on a 50-100 year plan for the Church.

It’s strange to think about, but they are not going to live to see the fruits of their labors

It's stranger to think the prophet isn't expecting the millennial reign to start before the end of the next century.  Maybe they should just decanonize D&C 77.

Or change the name of the Church to reflect the "not so latter days".

[rongo]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

It's stranger to think the prophet isn't expecting the millennial reign to start before the end of the next century.  Maybe they should just decanonize D&C 77.

Or change the name of the Church to reflect the "not so latter days".

I've noticed this as well. All of the talk about "hastening" five or so years ago seems to be negated by the Church acting like the "winding up scene" events are nowhere on the distant horizon. 

I would include the Ensign Peak and real estate empire investments (high rises in London, etc.). There is nothing wrong with saving for a rainy day and being prepared, but the focus on this doesn't seem like the Brethren believe or are concerned with what past Brethren have said about economic, governmental, and societal collapse in the last days. When those things happen, stock and real estate portfolios will be worthless, and the "rule of law" won't be able to be depended on to defend things like title to land holdings. It seems like "trusting in the arm of flesh" too much.