☝️🤓 Name "Mormon"¶
Estimated time to read: 19 minutes
Because of the Book of Mormon, we are frequently called the Mormon Church, a title we do not resent, but it is really not accurate.
— Guided by the Holy Spirit, President Boyd K. Packer, President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, General Conference 2011 April
At the end of the day, one growing problem that the LDS church is facing is that continuing revelation has to fit with existing revelation. This is compounded by the idea that religious leaders are obligated to say something inspiring twice a year in Conference, and sometimes each month in the LDS churchs’ official magazine publication, Ensign Liahona. This gets further compounded by the idea that we have no fewer than fifteen people we sustain as prophets, seers and revelators at any given time. They are going to encounter logic problems and conflicting information, because they have to continue dispensing information to prove legitimacy. They will inevitably do or say something that contradicts past teachings that were presented as immutable and inerrant, and then have to justify it. They have to do this. They have no choice. If they do not, they cease to prove their value. If they don't present anything new, why are we listening to them under the pretense of continuing revelation?
Are nicknames acceptable?¶
1990¶
“Thus shall my church be called in the last days, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” (D&C 115:4.)
Note carefully the language of the Lord. He did not say, “Thus shall my church be named.” He said, “Thus shall my church be called.” Years ago, its members were cautioned by the Brethren who wrote: “We feel that some may be misled by the too frequent use of the term ‘Mormon Church.’” Before any other name is considered to be a legitimate substitute, the thoughtful person might reverently consider the feelings of the Heavenly Parent who bestowed that name.
— “Thus Shall My Church Be Called”, Elder Russel M Nelson, General Conference April 1990
I'd paraphrase the talk as saying “we should be more specific and deliberate about the names we use to refer to our faith.”
I'll also observe that the document cited by Nelson describing "too frequent use of the term 'Mormon Church'" hasn't come up during my online searches. Maybe I didn't try hard enough, but... I would like to see the document and who it attributes those words do. Nelson was called as an apostle in '84, precluding the possibility of Nelson quoting himself.
Many of our people are disturbed by the practice of the media, and of many others, to disregard totally the true name of the Church and to use the nickname “the Mormon Church.”
...
I suppose that regardless of our efforts, we may never convert the world to general use of the full and correct name of the Church. Because of the shortness of the word Mormon and the ease with which it is spoken and written, they will continue to call us the Mormons, the Mormon church, and so forth.
They could do worse. More than fifty years ago, when I was a missionary in England, I said to one of my associates, “How can we get people, including our own members, to speak of the Church by its proper name?”
He replied, “You can’t. The word Mormon is too deeply ingrained and too easy to say.” He went on, “I’ve quit trying. While I’m thankful for the privilege of being a follower of Jesus Christ and a member of the Church which bears His name, I am not ashamed of the nickname Mormon.”
“Look,” he went on to say, “if there is any name that is totally honorable in its derivation, it is the name Mormon. And so, when someone asks me about it and what it means, I quietly say— ‘Mormon means more good.’”
— Mormon Should Mean “More Good”, Gordon B Hinckley, General Conference October 1990
I'd paraphrase the above quote as “we can’t stop people from calling us Mormons. Might as well lean into it… besides, they could be calling us worse things!”
Meaning "more good" is cited as a quote from Joseph Smith himself (1, 2, 3), and oh boy is that a baffling display of etymology.
The matter was put on the back burner for another 20 years or so. We got a few gentle reminders once in a while.
M Russell Ballard¶
While Mormon is not the full and correct name of the Church, and even though it was originally given by our detractors during our early years of persecution, it has become an acceptable nickname when applied to members rather than the institution. We do not need to stop using the name Mormon when appropriate, but we should continue to give emphasis to the full and correct name of the Church itself...
— The Importance of a Name, Elder M. Russell Ballard, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, General Conference 2011 April
The term Mormon can be appropriately used in some contexts to refer to members of the Church, such as Mormon pioneers, or to institutions, such as the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. Church members are widely known as Mormons, and in interactions with those not of our faith, we may fittingly refer to ourselves as Mormons, provided we couple this with the full name of the Church.
— Following Up, Elder M. Russell Ballard, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, General Conference April 2014
Maybe I'm just a grump, but I think we could have just left it there. This sounds very reasonable. "Mormon" as a shorthand, but don't overlook the full name of the LDS church. If your conversation partner already understands the connection, go nuts.
That is, until President Monson passes away. Conveniently, that's when God decided to shake things up. Not the prophet, he's only the mouthpiece!
2018¶
And if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended.
To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan.
When we omit His name from His Church, we are inadvertently removing Him as the central focus of our lives.
Taking the Savior’s name upon us includes declaring and witnessing to others—through our actions and our words—that Jesus is the Christ. Have we been so afraid to offend someone who called us “Mormons” that we have failed to defend the Savior Himself, to stand up for Him even in the name by which His Church is called?
— The Correct Name of the Church, President Russel M Nelson, General Conference October 2018
Nelson. My guy. My main man. Calm down.
If someone should ask, “Are you a Mormon?” you could reply, “If you are asking if I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, yes, I am!”
Thus incites the insufferable corrections from pedantic missionaries the world over.
I am not a mathematician. Someone who is good with numbers, please help me determine which term's count of syllables is fewer:
| mor-mon | a mem-ber of the church of je-sus christ of lat-ter day saints |
|---|---|
| 2 syllables | 15 syllables |
If you, dear reader, have had an interaction like the above quote from Nelson correcting someone when you both know goddamned well what the word means, tell me: has the correction been received graciously?
For kicks, here's a side-by-side video comparison of Hinckley vs Nelson's arguments on the matter:
What offends God?¶
However, it ultimately is impossible for another person to offend you or to offend me. Indeed, believing that another person offended us is fundamentally false. To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else.
— And Nothing Shall Offend Them, Elder David A Bednar, General Conference October 2006
“He who takes offense when no offense was intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense was intended is usually a fool.”
— Brigham Young; quote taken from Forgiveness: The Ultimate Form of Love, an Ensign address in Jan 1974
These men were both sustained as a spokesperson for God, right?
Right?
Oh, were they speaking as a man? My bad.
God wasn’t offended when Brigham Young had slavery legalized in Utah, or when he said Christ’s atonement wasn’t good enough and people needed to have their throats slit to cover the more egregious sins. God doesn’t seem offended by those who kill in his name. He isn’t offended by church leaders sexually abusing children, SEC fraud, short-selling stocks, or misrepresenting His teachings... but don’t you dare say “Mormon”!
We have a living prophet today, who speaks in behalf of God. Turns out, when we have a land war in Europe, racial injustice and political upheaval, uncertainty pertaining to a viral disease, the only thing God really wants is for us to not call church members Mormons anymore.
Ok. Sure thing, buddy.
As you think celestial, you will find yourself avoiding anything that robs you of your agency. Any addiction—be it gaming, gambling, debt, drugs, alcohol, anger, pornography, sex, or even food—offends God. Why? Because your obsession becomes your god. You look to it rather than to Him for solace.
— Think Celestial!, President Russell M. Nelson, President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, General Conference 2023 October
Imagine the creator and governor of the entire known universe, whose creations extend well beyond our mortal comprehension— "worlds without number have I created," as revealed to a prophet.
Now imagine that same God just getting so upset and angry because you called yourself a Mormon.
How petty would He have to be? Doesn't He have bigger things to worry about?
A name given by enemies¶
[T]he name Mormon, and Mormonism, was given to us by our enemies, but Latter Day Saints was the real name by which the church was organized.
— Joseph Smith, Letter to Isaac Galland, 22 March 1839, p. 54, The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed May 26, 2024, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/letter-to-isaac-galland-22-march-1839/4#10621821545696261506
"enemies" has a footnote; let's expand that.
As early as June 1830, an outside observer noted that because JS’s followers “believe in the Book of Mormon, they bear the name Mormonites.” In the 1830s, journalists called the religion “Mormonism,” with church members referred to as “Mormonites” and “Mormons.”
🤔 Would I be wrong to conclude that this comment of the prophet Joseph Smith's words equates 'outside observers' and journalists as enemies? Historically, those who think of journalists as enemies have been trying to conceal something nefarious.
We can't really read tone through text. Is Smith's comment resentful of the name Mormon to refer to religious adherents? Or is he indifferent and willing to just roll with it? For what it's worth, the footnote does have numerous citations and sources for the claim; at the time of writing this document, I haven't examined those sources.
Moreover, you might recall near the beginning of this page Joseph's 1843 etymology analysis concluding that ". . . The word Mormon means literally, more good." (1, 2, 3) It seems that between the 1839 quote above ("name given to us by our enemies") and publishing etymological findings in 1843, it's no longer offensive or upsetting... at least to us lay common folk. So how then should we interpret the idea that it's a pejorative "name given to us by our enemies?" Our enemies are, knowingly or unknowingly, calling us "more good." Calling people "more good" offends God, clearly. Is it because of atrocious grammar? "More good missionaries," "more good neighbors," "more good temples," "more good apologetics..."
“I’m a Mormon” campaign¶
Honestly. Unironically. Demonstrate to me that calling someone “Mormon” was offensive between the Brighamite sect break-off and 2018. Did any of the "Mormon pioneers" get in a huff and correct Omaha residents by asserting "we're actually 'a member of the church of Jesus Christ of latter-day saints' pioneers"?
If you can demonstrate that the word "Mormon" was a mean-spirited derogatory slur at some point in time, I will direct your attention to a multi-million dollar marketing campaign going in the opposite direction, leaning into the nickname and actively promoting that LDS members should be called Mormons. This campaign included ads on those huge screens in Times Square.
The I’m a Mormon campaign was really the centerpiece of my mission. Those were THE pass-along cards I was given to distribute. I had DVDs to hand out of that feature-length documentary. You can still watch it online if you want. I would bring investigators to the visitor’s center with the explicit intent and purpose of showing them the cool rooms fashioned around the campaign, to show them videos of that campaign. And you know what? It worked. And so imagine my surprise when, under President Nelson, this entire successful campaign was "a major victory for Satan." Under Monson, it was divinely inspired.
🙄 Not anymore, I guess.
Name changes¶
The name of the modern LDS Church has undergone numerous name changes. Most notably is the second iteration.
1830: Church of Christ is founded Reading through that recorded revelation has "church of Christ" appear once mid-sentence. 19th century grammar may just be throwing me off.
... ye are an Elder under [Oliver Cowdery's ordination] unto you that thou mightest be an Elder unto this Church of Christ bearing my name & the first Preacher of this Church unto the Church & before the world...
Maybe I'm just being contrarian, but that doesn't sound to me like an authoritative declaration of naming an organization. Oh well.
1834: Church of Latter Day Saints 1,2 Four years after the church is formally founded, Joseph Smith himself recorded some minutes of a meeting where they decide to change the name from the Church of Christ to the Church of Latter Day Saints.
After Prayer the conference proceeded to discuss the subject of names and appellations, when a motion was made by Sidney Rigdon, and seconded by Newel K. Whitney, that this church be known hereafter by the name of the church of the Latter Day Saints. Remarks were made by the members after which the motion passed by unanimous voice.
If God is offended when Christ’s name gets taken out of the church is omitted for conversational brevity, how do we come to terms with the prophet Joseph Smith himself literally taking Christ’s name out of the church? This is not a rhetorical question, I really do want an answer to this one.
1838: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
[Verily] thus Saith the Lord unto you ... my faithful Servants, who are of the High Council of my Church in zion (for thus it shall be called) and unto all the Elders and people of my Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints...
... for thus shall my Church be called in the Last days even the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Eight years after being established, its proper name is revealed. Now it has the name we’re familiar with. I'll reiterate for emphasis that the Book of Mormon was put together in under 75 days, including a setback of losing 116 pages, but settling on the name of the organization took eight years. Eight years! To restore something to its original form when we have active, practicing prophets and apostles. A name took (365 * 8) / 75 = 38.9~ times longer than a foundational book. Make it make sense.
"church in Zion" also sounds like it's being presented (by revelation, no less) as the name of the religious organization headed by Joseph Smith, but I guess that's not the point we should focus on. Iterating this formally in D&C 115 ought to settle it.
I could imagine someone arguing that the 1830 & 1838 names were by revelation, and the 1834 (no Christ version) name was by counsel with feeble, imperfect, mortal humans prone to errors. Disregarding that each of them are called and ordained of God, and I suppose not one of them thought to pray about it ahead of time? Was the 1834 gathering not led by God? Did the opening prayer focus on blessing the donuts rather than being led by thy spirit?
I found a 1979 Ensign article about this:
... This alteration was not seen as a de-emphasis of Christ; on the contrary, it was done in hopes that the name of the Church would more clearly reflect the fact that Christ was at its head.
... Since Paul and Peter used the Greek word saint (“a holy person”) to refer to believers in Christ, the term Latter-day Saints implied that Church members were modern followers of Christ. Thus it also asserted the claim of restoration.
— What changes have been made in the name of the Church?
Oh.
Let's not lose sight of the whole reason we're even talking about this:
"To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan." "When we omit His name from His Church, we are inadvertently removing Him as the central focus of our lives."
Just... Don't lose sight of that, is all I'm saying. 🤷
Style Guide¶
I did some sleuthing to locate if the modern LDS church is fussy about the hyphen between the words latter and day, but I didn't find anything strongly worded about it. Some style guides (1, 2) do specify that the term should be hyphenated, but don't put a lot of weight on the idea. Closest I found was a guide for use within Wikipedia, but I don't think I'd call that definitive for general use.
Although, one thing I stumbled upon seems to have aged poorly:
When referring to Church members, the term "Latter-day Saints" is preferred, though "Mormons" is acceptable.
The term "Mormonism" is acceptable in describing the combination of doctrine, culture and lifestyle unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
— Style Guide — The Name of the Church, (archive link) Church Newsroom, 9 April 2010
lol. lmao.
Edit: Hold on, now. The Church Newsroom seems to have edited that page since I had copied that info. I've added a link to an archived version. The page's contents nor source have any indication that it has been modified since its publishing date in 2010. Very un-suspicious.
Vain Repetition¶
Melchizedek Priesthood¶
Why is the higher priesthood named after someone called Melchizedek? Wouldn’t it make more sense to name it after the Lord? The early Saints wondered about this, and the Lord explained it through the Prophet Joseph Smith:
“Before his [Melchizedek’s] day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God.
“But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek” (Doctrine and Covenants 107:3–4).
— Why is the priesthood named after Melchizedek?, lds.org
“God” isn’t even his name, though? ... Or is it?
God: Don’t call it the holy priesthood after the Order of the Son of God. That uses Jesus’ name & title too much. Nickname it after Melchizedek, a righteous guy.
Also God: Don’t nickname my church after a righteous guy, Mormon. That doesn’t use Jesus’ full name enough.
ಠ_ಠ
Jehovah in the Old Testament¶
Why then is Jehovah missing from our Bible translations? The answer can be found in the way His name has been treated by Jews since the days of Malachi and Zechariah. Jehovah is the name of God, and devout Jews, out of reverence for Him, never say His name. Instead they substitute Adonai, a Hebrew title meaning “Lord.” So whenever they speak of Him or read aloud His name from scripture, they substitute Adonai (Lord).
— LORD = Jehovah, Ensign, June 2002
I suppose we could argue that LDS faith is not Jewish, and has little connection there. But... why not? If we revere the Bible as much as we say we do, why don’t we observe this tradition?