Head-scratching headline?

[rongo]

Isn't "the Latter-day Saint Church" as bad as "Mormon Church?" And from Tad Walch in the Deseret News?

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2022/4/7/23010650/lds-mormon-latter-day-saint-church-ukraine-shows-each-ward-is-a-humanitarian-organization

Granted, the copy editors probably wrote the headline, not Walch, but I'm stunned to see a headline like this. I mean, if the Deseret News slips like this, is it realistic to expect members not to?

Edited April 8, 2022 by rongo

[HappyJackWagon]

But isn't "Latter-day Saint" acceptable usage? I mean, I don't know why it would be any better than "Mormon" but I thought that was approved.

[Calm]

33 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But isn't "Latter-day Saint" acceptable usage? I mean, I don't know why it would be any better than "Mormon" but I thought that was approved.

It is approved for members.  Saint is associated with being a disciple of Christ in many denominations I believe.  The first part places it in the latter days and is connected with our official name, unlike Mormon and is not abbreviated like LDS, so people know the actual words.

Lol, I love that they are using us as an example of a Christian denomination:

Quote

one of God's chosen and usually Christian people

bcapitalized  : a member of any of various Christian bodiesspecifically  : LATTER-DAY SAINT

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saint

It is discouraged for the Church’s name, though closer to the actual so my guess would be it is preferred to Mormon Church

Quote

• In the first reference, the full name of the Church is preferred: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
• When a shortened reference is needed, the terms “the Church” or the “Church of Jesus Christ” are encouraged. The “restored Church of Jesus Christ” is also accurate and encouraged.
• While the term “Mormon Church” has long been publicly applied to the Church as a nickname, it is not an authorized title, and the Church discourages its use. Thus, please avoid using the abbreviation “LDS” or the nickname “Mormon” as substitutes for the name of the Church, as in “Mormon Church,” “LDS Church,” or “Church of the Latter-day Saints.”

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide

Since the c of church is lower case, Latter-day Saint can technically be describing the members and the phrase means the church that Latter-day Saints belong to or the church that belongs to the Latter-day Saints rather than a name of the Church itself.  I will be interested to see if this becomes typical…allowed with a lower case c, not allowed if capitalized.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

Also the phrase "ward congregation" seemed a bit odd.  Does anyone here say that?

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Also the phrase "ward congregation" seemed a bit odd.  Does anyone here say that?

Typo? Maybe meant ward’s?  I can see why they want to use congregation in case a nonmember read it and didn’t understand ward…but if they were looking for brevity, why not just drop “ward”?  Maybe the editor had a bad night…

[rongo]

51 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But isn't "Latter-day Saint" acceptable usage? I mean, I don't know why it would be any better than "Mormon" but I thought that was approved.

Not as the name of the Church --- in the same way that Mormon Church is not the name of the Church. I would think that "Latter-day Saint Church" is a "victory for Satan" under the same logic that "Mormon Church" is. For the record, I have never called the Church either --- neither before President Nelson's emphasis, nor after. I've either used the full name of the Church, or "the Church," depending on context and audience. 

I still do use "Mormons" for "members," and terms like "Mormonism" or Mormon as an adjective (just not with church). 

I am really surprised to see the Deseret News actually call the Church "the Latter-day Saints Church." I think this shows that even those most supportive of the emphasis don't follow it 100%. We've even had visiting 70s refer to Mormons, and then smile self-deprecatingly when they realize this. 

[HappyJackWagon]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is approved for members.  Saint is associated with being a disciple of Christ in many denominations I believe.  The first part places it in the latter days and is connected with our official name, unlike Mormon and is not abbreviated like LDS, so people know the actual words.

Lol, I love that they are using us as an example of a Christian denomination:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saint

It is discouraged for the Church’s name, though closer to the actual so my guess would be it is preferred to Mormon Church

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/style-guide

Since the c of church is lower case, Latter-day Saint can technically be describing the members and the phrase means the church that Latter-day Saints belong to or the church that belongs to the Latter-day Saints rather than a name of the Church itself.  I will be interested to see if this becomes typical…allowed with a lower case c, not allowed if capitalized.

yeah, I'm sure you're right- but I thought the whole point was to reference the name of Jesus when referring to the church.

[rongo]

58 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But isn't "Latter-day Saint" acceptable usage? I mean, I don't know why it would be any better than "Mormon" but I thought that was approved.

What was approved (but with bad logic, in my opinion) was "Latter-day Saints" to refer to members. As some have explained it, this is because it is part of the full name of the Church, while Mormon isn't part of the name at all. But, the rationale behind this has never been explained by Church leaders. "LDS" is anathema.

I think it's clear that President Nelson's intent is to stamp out use of Mormon over time, to stamp out negative associations people have with that. 

[HappyJackWagon]

15 minutes ago, rongo said:

Not as the name of the Church --- in the same way that Mormon Church is not the name of the Church. I would think that "Latter-day Saint Church" is a "victory for Satan" under the same logic that "Mormon Church" is. For the record, I have never called the Church either --- neither before President Nelson's emphasis, nor after. I've either used the full name of the Church, or "the Church," depending on context and audience. 

I still do use "Mormons" for "members," and terms like "Mormonism" or Mormon as an adjective (just not with church). 

I am really surprised to see the Deseret News actually call the Church "the Latter-day Saints Church." I think this shows that even those most supportive of the emphasis don't follow it 100%. We've even had visiting 70s refer to Mormons, and then smile self-deprecatingly when they realize this. 

This isn't a criticism of your topic but I find the whole issue pretty silly  and a great example of being in the thick of thin things.

Was this issue addressed again during conference?

Edited April 8, 2022 by HappyJackWagon

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

Isn't "the Latter-day Saint Church" as bad as "Mormon Church?" And from Tad Walch in the Deseret News?

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2022/4/7/23010650/lds-mormon-latter-day-saint-church-ukraine-shows-each-ward-is-a-humanitarian-organization

Granted, the copy editors probably wrote the headline, not Walch, but I'm stunned to see a headline like this. I mean, if the Deseret News slips like this, is it realistic to expect members not to?

When I followed the link the headline currently reads, "How Latter-day Saints help others is baked into every ward congregation."

I couldn't find any instance of the phrase "Latter-day Saint Church" on the page. Maybe it has been changed?

 

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, Amulek said:

When I followed the link the headline currently reads, "How Latter-day Saints help others is baked into every ward congregation."

I couldn't find any instance of the phrase "Latter-day Saint Church" on the page. Maybe it has been changed?

 

Yes.  It was Latter-day Saint church (lower case) in the headline when I looked at it iirc.  I don’t know if it was capital C early.  Looks like it has been corrected.   Not in article either.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Calm

[the narrator]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

Yes.  It was Latter-day Saint church (lower case) when I looked at it iirc.

I just find it funny that the URL is packed with little satanic victories for search engine optimization

[Calm]

Just now, the narrator said:

I just find it funny that the URL is packed with little satanic victories for search engine optimization

Yeah, that got me snickering as well.

[rongo]

15 minutes ago, Amulek said:

When I followed the link the headline currently reads, "How Latter-day Saints help others is baked into every ward congregation."

I couldn't find any instance of the phrase "Latter-day Saint Church" on the page. Maybe it has been changed?

 

I figured it would be changed. Still, interesting that it made it "to print" in the first place. 

Still has the redundant "ward congregation."  

Edited April 8, 2022 by rongo

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Typo? Maybe meant ward’s?  I can see why they want to use congregation in case a nonmember read it and didn’t understand ward…but if they were looking for brevity, why not just drop “ward”?  Maybe the editor had a bad night…

I think you're right:  They were trying to communicate with non-LDS.

[caspianrex]

18 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I think you're right:  They were trying to communicate with non-LDS.

I'm asking because I honestly don't know the answer: isn't the readership of Deseret News mostly Utahns? And wouldn't the vast majority of Utahns, even those who aren't actually Latter-day Saints, be fairly familiar with LDS terminology? I mean, I'm fairly familiar with a lot of LDS terminology, and I'm a non-member from IL who lives in TN. (Neither of those states have very large LDS populations.) 

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, caspianrex said:

I'm asking because I honestly don't know the answer: isn't the readership of Deseret News mostly Utahns? And wouldn't the vast majority of Utahns, even those who aren't actually Latter-day Saints, be fairly familiar with LDS terminology? I mean, I'm fairly familiar with a lot of LDS terminology, and I'm a non-member from IL who lives in TN. (Neither of those states have very large LDS populations.) 

More than likely, but they can track who is looking in and there may be stories that naturally appeal to a broader audience.  There is international curiosity about and interest in the Church and my guess is nonmembers would be highly interested in humanitarian efforts of any kind, so they are probably anticipating a significant nonmember, nonMormon Corridor interest.

[The Nehor]

Seen a lot of unfortunate typos today. Must be a bad day.

 

No, that really didn’t fix the problem.

Edited April 8, 2022 by The Nehor

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, rongo said:

Isn't "the Latter-day Saint Church" as bad as "Mormon Church?" And from Tad Walch in the Deseret News?

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2022/4/7/23010650/lds-mormon-latter-day-saint-church-ukraine-shows-each-ward-is-a-humanitarian-organization

Granted, the copy editors probably wrote the headline, not Walch, but I'm stunned to see a headline like this. I mean, if the Deseret News slips like this, is it realistic to expect members not to?

I don’t see “Latter-day Saint Church” in the headline. What am I missing? 
 

I wonder if you are misreading the taglines that apparently categorize the story. There are three: “Faith,” “Latter-Saints” and “Church of Jesus Christ.” They are meant to be read separately. 

Edited April 8, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t see “Latter-day Saint Church” in the headline. What am I missing? 

That it has been edited.

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, caspianrex said:

I'm asking because I honestly don't know the answer: isn't the readership of Deseret News mostly Utahns? And wouldn't the vast majority of Utahns, even those who aren't actually Latter-day Saints, be fairly familiar with LDS terminology? I mean, I'm fairly familiar with a lot of LDS terminology, and I'm a non-member from IL who lives in TN. (Neither of those states have very large LDS populations.) 

The implied readership of the newspaper is not exclusively Church members, and I can tell you as a former insider that the newspaper seeks a broader reach than that. With the advent of the internet, seeking a global readership is much more feasible. 
 

Besides, it has always been a general-circulation, metro daily, not an in-house publication. 
 

You could compare it to the Christian Science Monitor, which is published by the Christian Science church, but is meant for a general readership and not to be regarded as an ecclesiastical, in-house publication. 

Edited April 8, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

That it has been edited.

What was it before?

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Also the phrase "ward congregation" seemed a bit odd.  Does anyone here say that?

It is indeed redundant — like “Sierra Nevada Mountains” (sierra means mountains). 

[Scott Lloyd]

7 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

But isn't "Latter-day Saint" acceptable usage? I mean, I don't know why it would be any better than "Mormon" but I thought that was approved.

It’s better than “Mormon” because it is part of the proper, revealed name of the Church; “Mormon” is not. 

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What was it before?

When I saw it, it was “How the Latter-day Saint church….”  It was changed shortly after.  
 

I am thinking there are two, maybe three possibilities, that Rongo saw it with a capital C and someone temporarily changed it to lowercase thinking that might be acceptable, then “church” was removed to make it consistent with the approved style.  Or Rongo saw it with the little “c” and his brain switched it to uppercase as we usually write the Church.

Perhaps Happy Jack clicked on the link and looked as well, which means imo it was likely “C” first if his quote was a response to the headline and not Rongo’s post.  I double-checked given it wasn’t approved style and it may have been a capital C first and a lowercase c the second time, but the lower c was unusual and I paused and really looked, so I am positive it was “c”.  But there is a third possibility that I missaw it since I have been getting very little sleep this week.  But that is unlikely in my view.

Maybe Robert remembers what it was when he saw it.

I am thinking the link Rongo shows may have been the original title missing a few words.  Isn’t that typical?  But that doesn’t show capitalization.  I was originally fixated just on the name of the Church.  Until Robert mentioned “ward congregation”, I hadn’t registered that.  I think that was why I went back the second time and it was just long enough between the edit and my response to Robert to make one at 7 hours and the other at 6 right now, but it could have been the third time I checked when the ward congregation was registered confirming Robert’s reading.  Maybe Rongo can confirm if the headline matched the url more or the second half was always the same.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Calm