- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Here’s a talk from Gordon B. Hinckley from the October 1990 general conference: Mormon Should Mean “More Good”He says interesting things in that talk.
Quote:Six months ago in our conference Elder Russell M. Nelson delivered an excellent address on the correct name of the Church. He quoted the words of the Lord Himself:
…
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.”
Takeaway. This has been a pet issue for RMN for some time. And GBH has already given the reasons why we won’t shake the nickname… in a general conference address no less.
And he goes on to say:
Quote:“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.’ (The Prophet Joseph Smith first said this in 1843; see Times and Seasons, 4:194; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 299–300.)”
His statement intrigued me—Mormon means “more good.” I knew, of course, that “more good” was not a derivative of the word Mormon. I had studied both Latin and Greek, and I knew that English is derived in some measure from those two languages and that the words more good are not a cognate of the word Mormon. But his was a positive attitude based on an interesting perception. And, as we all know, our lives are guided in large measure by our perceptions. Ever since, when I have seen the word Mormon used in the media to describe us—in a newspaper or a magazine or book or whatever—there flashes into my mind his statement, which has become my motto: Mormon means “more good.”
That last paragraph was interesting. GBH seems to acknowledge that “more good” isn’t a literal translation for Mormon but it’s a definition that he’s accepted and adopted and that’s good enough for him.
Great quotes nibbler!! We would get greater traction with a response like “Mormon means more good” than asking everyone to call us “The restored gospel of Jesus Christ”
Thumbs up to GBH!
:thumbup: I remember a teacher in Institute saying how we should be proud to be named after Mormon. Maybe. What’s the odds on this getting buried like the Ensun business (I already say En(d) Sign)?
Two out of three ain’t bad though. Ministering? Good idea. High priests’ merge. Also good. This one? I’ll get back to you.
Appendage names? Mormon Tabernacle Choir??
Shall we change it to:
Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ Tabernacle Choir?
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Choir?
“Mo-Tab” is out the door…
mormon.org?
Mormon Channel?
Mormon Newsroom?
All of the LDS social media groups…can’t now change their name to reflect the whole church name. That isn’t allowed, so many are scrambling to figure this one out.
“I’m a Mormon. I know it. I live it. I love it.”
Gotta change that one.
I’m a member of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. I know it. I live it. I love it.
Hmm – not as catchy.
:think: Poor Sister Dibb. She was just inadvertently chastised.
What about: LDSSA? Is it now: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Student Association?
Aren’t there more pressing issues to address?
Minyan Man wrote:
Aren’t there more pressing issues to address?
This is actually a very interesting question to me and I’ve been pondering all day.
Because here is the prophet:
Quote:The Lord has impressed upon my mind the importance of the name He has revealed for His Church, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
So…for many of us in church today…it has been talked about a lot.
[url=https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/08/17/us/mormon-church-name-trnd/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2FCNN
][/url] This seems to be “impressed” on the mind of the prophet from God himself.
It makes me wonder a lot about what matters at church, what are the important things to our leaders vs what is important in my eyes…and if there is a gap…what does that mean??
It really is an important question for me to think about the importance of a prophet.
With so many things going on in the world…why is this something God decides to speak to the prophet about?
It’s a sincere question…not flippant. Why this? Why now?
Heber13 wrote:
Because here is the prophet:
Quote:The Lord has impressed upon my mind the importance of the name He has revealed for His Church, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
This seems to be “impressed” on the mind of the prophet from God himself.
I honestly think saying “the Lord has impressed upon my mind” should be taken in the same light as “God has blessed me with this opporunity” or “God has given me my family”. Since the Lord created everything, and all is according to His plan, you can pretty much attribute everything to Him (except Evil). I take RMN’s saying to mean, “I’ve been thinking a lot about _____ lately”, with an extra spiritual twist, because he’s an extra spiritual person.
TBH, I think the Church will always need something to fight for and struggle against. “Onward Christian Soldiers”, “Armor of God” and all that. This seems like a pretty harmless focal point.
It was a big topic during PH today. I came dangerously close to making a comment but people were loving the news and I didn’t want to ruin the spirit of the meeting. I figure we’re still riding that wave of excitement of there being a new revelation in town. If this topic spills into subsequent weeks I may eventually say something. I haven’t been to PH in a while and the lord picked the wrong week to impress upon my mind the importance of coming back. To be completely honest, I feel like the topic only served to help me rediscover why I stopped attending PH in the first place.
dande48 wrote:
TBH, I think the Church will always need something to fight for and struggle against. “Onward Christian Soldiers”, “Armor of God” and all that. This seems like a pretty harmless focal point.
Thanks dande….I agree with you… Just still wondering today and pondering… If everything we hear at church is something that is “impressed on our minds” or is a blessing in our lives… Then it seems we are trying to embellish things into incredible miracles that are really random or typical life day to day stuff that happens inside or outside of church…and therefore it doesnt matter if we have prophets or not…. It’s all just like every other church… Just people trying to do their best and are nice people. It is what it is.
When church makes a press release about it…and Pres Nelson speaks as the prophet about something that we have work to do and in coming weeks will be putting big efforts towards things… It catches the eyes of people as important…even CNN covers it.
…while life goes by with real issues…we talk about these things?
If we dismiss these things we hear being talked about…what is left in church we don’t dismiss? What matters?
I’m gonna just be chill about it and let it go. It’s just interesting to think about for me.
There are bigger fish to fry.
nibbler wrote:We talk about things that do not relate to my life or help me with life’s challenges and we elevate them to the status of new issues I have to deal with.
This is kinda the feeling I’m wrestling with as well.
nibbler wrote:
It was a big topic during PH today. I came dangerously close to making a comment but people were loving the news and I didn’t want to ruin the spirit of the meeting. I figure we’re still riding that wave of excitement of there being a new revelation in town. If this topic spills into subsequent weeks I may eventually say something.Were we in the same meeting? Or are we the same person? Because this described my experience to a T.
Heber13 wrote:
.. Then it seems we are trying to embellish things into incredible miracles that are really random or typical life day to day stuff that happens inside or outside of church…and therefore it doesnt matter if we have prophets or not…. It’s all just like every other church… Just people trying to do their best and are nice people. It is what it is.
I’m not going to blanket statement this with an “all”, but I’d say this accurately describes most religions. I’m not even sure this is a bad thing. Maybe ordinary life is a miracle. Maybe the value of having a prophet, is that the authority he is given from man and God, gives him the confidence to come up with some pretty radical ideas, and place them into practice. Having a prophet gives us the consistancy and confidence we need from religion, while allowing us to evolve.
Heber13 wrote:
…while life goes by with real issues…we talk about these things?There are bigger fish to fry.
What bigger issues do you think they should cover?Quote:Great quotes nibbler!!
We would get greater traction with a response like “Mormon means more good” than asking everyone to call us “The restored gospel of Jesus Christ”
Thumbs up to GBH!
:thumbup: I agree. And before GBH said it, Joseph Smith wrote a full dissertation on it. % paragraphs breaking down the word and history of it from Joseph’s point of view and wrapping it up in the final paragraph with “Mormon means “More Good””
After wrestling it all week I am staying Mormon or Marmon if you choose. It’s what my people have been all my life. Everyone else can call it whatever they want. If I get pushback, I am sourcing Joseph Smith and GBH.
The following article appears in Deseret News today: https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900028690/were-correcting-a-name-church-president-russell-m-nelson-tells-latter-day-saints-in-canada.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900028690/were-correcting-a-name-church-president-russell-m-nelson-tells-latter-day-saints-in-canada.html The gist of the article is fine, it’s about RMN commenting on his “impression” while visiting Canada. And I agree with this (although I’m actually fine with LDS Church):
Quote:The topic first came up during his evening devotional before a group of 4,000 in the Palais de congrès de Montréal, as President Nelson testified of the truthfulness of the church by using and emphasizing its full, formal name. “And I might add that it’s not the Mormon Church. It’s not the LDS Church. It’s not the Church of the Latter-day Saints,” he said.
However, this makes me wonder a bit if he’s not a little deluded:
Quote:Summarizing the media response to Thursday’s announcement as “they’re pretty excited about it — ‘it can’t be done,’ ” President Nelson repeated the difficulty with a clarification: “I know it can’t — but it’s going to be, because the Lord wants it that way.”
If the Lord wants it that way, I think he’s going to have to tell them personally and even then I’m not so sure they’ll comply.
Quote:If the Lord wants it that way, I think he’s going to have to tell them personally and even then I’m not so sure they’ll comply.
This is where I miss GBH – his ability to roll out a plan, whatever or whoever it was to reach, was golden. He always had the details clear. Everyone understood it. He never bit off more than others could chew. The recipient of the plan was always on his mind.
These keep running rough shod over everyone and everything. We have Stake Conference next week. The entire thing is dedicated to Ministry. We have some low level GA coming “to help” us out.
Are the next six months discussions the name change discussion?
And what happens when he and Oaks pass?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.