Interesting. I run into both names frequently, but I had no idea there was any preference between them besides the formality of the context you're referring to the church in. The article touches...
Interesting. I run into both names frequently, but I had no idea there was any preference between them besides the formality of the context you're referring to the church in.
The article touches on it a bit in reference to journalists, but does / will anyone here let this change how they refer to the church? I'm unsure where to fall on this for my own usage. I certainly don't have the greatest amount of respect for them, but does that mean I shouldn't let them be referred to as they want to be? It doesn't stop me from being critical, so it feels a little petty...but also right, maybe?
I did some quick research before posting this article, and it seems there is a schism between the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints and some other followers of the Book of Mormon. I...
I did some quick research before posting this article, and it seems there is a schism between the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints and some other followers of the Book of Mormon. I learned that there are such things as Mormon fundamentalists, who hold themselves apart from the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints - particularly in their support for plural marriage and something called the "United Order", which seems to be a form of religious communism.
The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints actually excommunicates people who practise plural marriage, and these polygamists call themselves Mormons, so this insistence on not calling the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints "Mormon" might be just a way for the mainstream church to dissociate itself from polygamists (since the Church has disallowed plural marriage for more than a century).
Yeah, there's some fun backstory to it that you've probably never been exposed to as an Aussie...when Utah wanted to become a state, the federal government basically said "renounce polygamy or...
Yeah, there's some fun backstory to it that you've probably never been exposed to as an Aussie...when Utah wanted to become a state, the federal government basically said "renounce polygamy or GTFO". They finally gave in and decided statehood was worth ending plural marriage. So it was as much a political move as a theological one.
If you want to learn more, Oregon Public Radio did a colloboration with Longreads called Bundyville that went into a dispute with the federal government over cattle grazing rights that has its roots in Mormonism, the libertarian independent streak in the western US, and that particular lawless spot near the Arizona-Utah border I linked to above.
Interesting. I run into both names frequently, but I had no idea there was any preference between them besides the formality of the context you're referring to the church in.
The article touches on it a bit in reference to journalists, but does / will anyone here let this change how they refer to the church? I'm unsure where to fall on this for my own usage. I certainly don't have the greatest amount of respect for them, but does that mean I shouldn't let them be referred to as they want to be? It doesn't stop me from being critical, so it feels a little petty...but also right, maybe?
I did some quick research before posting this article, and it seems there is a schism between the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints and some other followers of the Book of Mormon. I learned that there are such things as Mormon fundamentalists, who hold themselves apart from the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints - particularly in their support for plural marriage and something called the "United Order", which seems to be a form of religious communism.
The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints actually excommunicates people who practise plural marriage, and these polygamists call themselves Mormons, so this insistence on not calling the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints "Mormon" might be just a way for the mainstream church to dissociate itself from polygamists (since the Church has disallowed plural marriage for more than a century).
Yeah, there's some fun backstory to it that you've probably never been exposed to as an Aussie...when Utah wanted to become a state, the federal government basically said "renounce polygamy or GTFO". They finally gave in and decided statehood was worth ending plural marriage. So it was as much a political move as a theological one.
The remaining FLDS groups in the US are located mostly in Arizona, northwest of the Grand Canyon - remote, even by the standards of the US Mountain West.
If you want to learn more, Oregon Public Radio did a colloboration with Longreads called Bundyville that went into a dispute with the federal government over cattle grazing rights that has its roots in Mormonism, the libertarian independent streak in the western US, and that particular lawless spot near the Arizona-Utah border I linked to above.