Jump to content

Definition of the term Latter Day Saint/Mormon when referring to a person


Recommended Posts

I decided to post a discussion wondering what a Latter-Day Saint/ Mormon is after noticing Navidad's thread titled "Definition of the term Christian when referring to a person." Is it sufficient to believe that Joseph Smith was a genuine prophet of God to qualify as a Latter-Day Saint/Mormon? Is the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the only authentic Latter-Day Saint/Mormon church? Is there any Priesthood authority in different Latter-Day Saint/Mormon branches? Also, if you think that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only branch of the Mormonism with the right to exercise the priesthood, then please explain why.

Link to comment

We are not exclusive with the term Latter-day (lower case ‘d’) Saint.  There are other Latter-day Saint movements that we recognize as such.  

Why do we only have the right to exercise the priesthood?  It is all about keys.  We believe we are the only church, even among Latter-day Saints, who hold all the keys to exercise the priesthood.

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, pogi said:

We are not exclusive with the term Latter-day (lower case ‘d’) Saint.  There are other Latter-day Saint movements that we recognize as such.  

Aren't we the only one that uses the lower case 'd' in the name though?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

Also, if you think that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only branch of the Mormonism with the right to exercise the priesthood, then please explain why.

Because we believe we are the only one that has authority from God to exercise priesthood keys.  Others obviously disagree.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

I decided to post a discussion wondering what a Latter-Day Saint/ Mormon is after noticing Navidad's thread titled "Definition of the term Christian when referring to a person." Is it sufficient to believe that Joseph Smith was a genuine prophet of God to qualify as a Latter-Day Saint/Mormon? Is the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the only authentic Latter-Day Saint/Mormon church? Is there any Priesthood authority in different Latter-Day Saint/Mormon branches? Also, if you think that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only branch of the Mormonism with the right to exercise the priesthood, then please explain why.

I consider these terms to refer to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

If someone uses them to refer to an offshoot, or by any other criteria than membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, that will have to come out in the conversation, and I can go along with that for the sake of discussion. But best to refer to members of churches by their church's name.

Is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the only authentic Latter-Day Saint/Mormon church? Yes, if you insist on calling members of the Church by that name.

Is there any Priesthood authority in different Latter-Day Saint/Mormon branches? No (if by "branches" you mean offshoots or other versions / corporations and not the formal organizational unit named the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

Only the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the restored keys of priesthood authority upon the earth (explanation: our doctrine).

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

I decided to post a discussion wondering what a Latter-Day Saint/ Mormon is after noticing Navidad's thread titled "Definition of the term Christian when referring to a person." Is it sufficient to believe that Joseph Smith was a genuine prophet of God to qualify as a Latter-Day Saint/Mormon?

Not that difficult.

If you have been baptized by an LDS priest, you are a member of the church.

Period. Yes Joseph was baptized.

How and when is easy to find out in his history 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, pogi said:

There are other Latter-day Saint movements that we recognize as such.  

I am even more generous!

I would even recognize any latter day saint movement as a latter day saint movement!

And that is eternal truth!

A=A is an Eternal Truth in the logic of humans!

Hope I don't get excommunicated now...  ;)

 

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Eschaton said:

I really don't know who claims LDS other than the SLC-based denomination? Does anyone claim "Mormon" anymore? 

Yeah, we are now in a Less-mon mode 

Ok

I will now shut up. Happiness to all! ;)

 

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment

Just one more!

Does that now mean I can start the "Mormon Church"?

🤔

Link to comment
9 hours ago, pogi said:

We are not exclusive with the term Latter-day (lower case ‘d’) Saint.  There are other Latter-day Saint movements that we recognize as such.  

What other groups are there today that self-identify by the name Latter-day Saints? I can think of only one, the Strangites, and it has only about 130 members spread throughout the United States. 
 

Even the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints dropped that name many years ago and today calls itself the Community of Christ. 
 

Maybe the Temple Lot group still uses the name. I’ll have to look it up and see. 
 

Added Later: No, they are officially called the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) and informally are known by the appellation Hedrickites. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What other groups are there today that self-identify by the name Latter-day Saints? I can think of only one, the Strangites, and it has only about 130 members spread throughout the United States. 
 

Even the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints dropped that name many years ago and today calls itself the Community of Christ. 
 

Maybe the Temple Lot group still uses the name. I’ll have to look it up and see. 

My understanding is that some of the more traditional congregations of the CoC have reverted to using RLDS again while still being officially a part of that Church.  Iirc we had someone with connections to the traditionalists post on the board in the past.  I may try and find it if no one else remembers and it looks more like a false memory of mine.

According to wiki, there are also the FLDS and the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint that still use the name.

None of the others write it with a hyphen and lower case “d”.

added:  too paranoid about my memory, lol,  as soon as I posted I went looking…

https://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/52976-community-of-christ-vs-restoration-branches/

Quote

. Their bylaws commonly state that the members are RLDS & that they are not forming a new denomination. Some members did actually form new factional churches such as, Restoration CofJCofLDS & Remnant CofJCofLDS, but most did not do such a thing. Since the Community of Christ had changed so many doctrines/beliefs & even went so far as to change their church name (retaining RLDS for 'legal' purposes), many Restoration Branches used old church flags or seals in their chapels. Restoration Branch signs would state as example: 'Devon Park Restoration Branch, (small lettering)=Proclaiming the original doctrines & beliefs of the (larger lettering)=Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints' Restoration Branches throughout the Independence, MO area have such signs & have advertised this way since the 1980s along side Community of Christ advertisements in the newspaper without any problem. In 2005, the Community of Christ then filed registration for copyrighting the RLDS name & trademarks not with the intent to use these in the future, but rather to warehouse the church name so others couldn't use them. In fact, the Community of Christ had not produced anything new or formed a new congregation using the RLDS name or older church seal since 2001.

 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Calm said:

My understanding is that some of the more traditional congregations of the CoC have reverted to using RLDS again while still being officially a part of that Church.  Iirc we had someone with connections to the traditionalists post on the board in the past.  I may try and find it if no one else remembers and it looks more like a false memory of mine.

According to wiki, there are also the FLDS and the Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saint that still use the name.

None of the others write it with a hyphen and lower case “d”.

OK, that’s two. 
 

FLDS is Warren Jeffs’s church and, as such, has a storied and rather unsavory history. I don’t think it can truly be said that we identify with or recognize any familial relationship with that group. 
 

The Remnant Church is a break-away from Community of Christ (according to Wikipedia) and has a tiny membership, from what I understand. I think other C of C schisms are even smaller. 
 

Are there others? 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

OK, that’s two. 
 

The Remnant Church is a break-away from Community of Christ (according to Wikipedia) and has a tiny membership, from what I understand. I think other C of C schisms are even smaller. 
 

Are there others? 

Do there need to be others for my point to stand?

My point being that we are not exclusive with the term Latter-day Saint (or however any other group want to fashion it with or without hyphens or capitals).   

Quote

FLDS is Warren Jeffs’s church and, as such, has a storied and rather unsavory history.  I don’t think it can truly be said that we identify with or recognize any familial relationship with that group. 

Of course we do. We are from the same family tree.  That is like saying you don't identify with or recognize any familial relationship with your brother or child or cousin, because of their unsavory history.  However much you may want to disown them, you are still related.  We don't like being confused for them, but we can't erase our common religious roots.  If they wan't to use any iteration of "Latter-day Saint" to identify themselves, they have as much right to it as we do.  It is no secret what LDS stands for in FLDS, after all. 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
1 hour ago, pogi said:

Do there need to be others for my point to stand?

My point being that we are not exclusive with the term Latter-day Saint (or however any other group want to fashion it with or without hyphens or capitals).   

Of course we do. We are from the same family tree.  That is like saying you don't identify with or recognize any familial relationship with your brother or child or cousin, because of their unsavory history.  However much you may want to disown them, you are still related.  We don't like being confused for them, but we can't erase our common religious roots.  If they wan't to use any iteration of "Latter-day Saint" to identify themselves, they have as much right to it as we do.  It is no secret what LDS stands for in FLDS, after all. 

You can claim the Warren Jeffs group as family if you want, but your opinion is not binding on the rest of the Church, so don’t say “we” as though it were. You’ll search in vain, I’m sure, to find any among the leadership of the Church who support you in that claim. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You can claim the Warren Jeffs group as family if you want, but your opinion is not binding on the rest of the Church, so don’t say “we” as though it were. You’ll search in vain, I’m sure, to find any among the leadership of the Church who support you in that claim. 

I’m gonna have to side with pogi on this. 
 

the Warren Jeff’s group more closely resembles my MORMON polygamist family’s past than my current living family. It is like we were the ones who are the offshoot. I still have polygamist family in Mexico and they have changed nothing since they were sent there to continue and expand polygamy. 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You can claim the Warren Jeffs group as family if you want, but your opinion is not binding on the rest of the Church, so don’t say “we” as though it were. You’ll search in vain, I’m sure, to find any among the leadership of the Church who support you in that claim. 

Our religious pedigree and relation is not really a matter of “opinion”.   It is a matter of factual history.

I have no doubt whatsoever that our church leadership consider them to be of the same Latter-day Saint restorationist family tree.  I cannot see them arguing that they can’t call themselves “Latter-day Saints (or however they want to stylize it)”.  We don’t own that title exclusively.

See graph and other info about relative denominations here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denominations_in_the_Latter_Day_Saint_movement

 

 

 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
On 11/19/2022 at 10:16 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

You can claim the Warren Jeffs group as family if you want, but your opinion is not binding on the rest of the Church, so don’t say “we” as though it were. You’ll search in vain, I’m sure, to find any among the leadership of the Church who support you in that claim. 

 

12 hours ago, pogi said:

I have no doubt whatsoever that our church leadership consider them to be of the same Latter-day Saint restorationist family tree. 

 

 

 

I said you would search in vain to find any Church leaders supporting your claim. Implicit in my statement was a challenge to you to find such expression from even one Church leader. The fact that you failed to cite such an expression is telling. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I said you would search in vain to find any Church leaders supporting your claim. Implicit in my statement was a challenge to you to find such expression from even one Church leader. The fact that you failed to cite such an expression is telling. 

 

You are diverting attention from the facts (that you wrongly frame as "opinion" - I'm still trying to figure that one out!) and flat out admit that you are sending me on a wild goose hunt instead?    I find that "telling".

No thanks!

You would also be searching in vain to find any Church leaders suggesting otherwise.   I "challenge" you, Scott to prove me wrong :rolleyes:

My original point remains unscathed, despite your goose hunt.  If you have anything of substance to offer/argue, please feel free. 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment

I am not sure it makes a difference in the above conversation, but while there may not be an acknowledged "family" relationship, it is certainly factual and without dispute that there are family relationships between many folks in the fundamentalist (Mormon) groups and the LDS. These relationships are not all early twentieth century either. I prepared a talk on this subject for the cancelled Rochester, NY MHA conference, I think it was in 2020.

I regularly speak to LDS family reunion groups who come down to the colonies to find out about their ancestors. One question I can predict getting is about the familial relationships, especially with the LDS Anglo-Mexican colonists and the Anglo fundamentalists (Mormon). The tragic deaths over on the pass between Chihuahua and Sonora in November 2019 only heightened both the interest and in some cases, incorrect denial of the familial relationships. I have to dig out the article and maybe submit it for publication to the journal. The LeBarons are in the news a lot right now. They are trying to be the first non-indigenous group to have their village declared autonomous under a provision for such in the Mexican constitution. The local and state press make virtually no distinction between the Anglo LDS and the other Anglo Mormons here. All are simply Mormons. A sample headline translated into English might be "Mormons Seek Independence for Their Colony."

I would guess than in 80% of the conference panels I serve on or talks that I give here in Mexico (typically about the history of religion in Mexico), I am asked something about the Mormons here in Mexico. Most of the time folks shake their heads in disbelief when I am introduced as a Mennonite. They just assume I am a Mormon! They tell me I can't be a Mennonite because I am a North American! Talk about confusion of identities. University students I lecture to here also are confused because they just assume that all Mormons in Mexico are Anglo.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

I said you would search in vain to find any Church leaders supporting your claim. Implicit in my statement was a challenge to you to find such expression from even one Church leader. The fact that you failed to cite such an expression is telling. 

I think pogi's point is that, as far as the FLDS is an offshoot from the JS tree, that makes them family in the same way that your cousin is family (whether your cousin is a crazy lunatic or not) because they come from the same tree as your grandparents.

Edited by bluebell
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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