Monday, August 8, 2011
"Mormon" and "Christian" Are Different
Some say that the LDS Church is hypocritical when claiming the "Christian" title despite others' refusal to grant it to us and, at the same time, separating ourselves from other groups (such as the FLDS) who call themselves "Mormon."
Although I don't begrudge the title of "Mormon" to anyone who believes in the Book of Mormon as scripture, I do want to point out that the difference in labeling is not as inconsistent as it seems. It all has to do with connotative meaning. The label "Christian" has been around for about two thousand years. It has weathered many splinter groups of Christians, and has a healthy history of being applicable to many different groups.
"Mormon," on the other hand, is only a few hundred years old, and is generally used to mean one particular group, namely the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I don't mind if anyone who believes in the Book of Mormon calls themselves "Mormon" if they like. But I do have a problem with someone telling me I am a polygamous wife simply because I am a Mormon. Just like I have a problem with people telling me I have to believe in the Nicene creed simply because I call myself a Christian.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Popular Posts
-
An email to Matt Walsh, after his response to Seth Smith's viral post : I have occasionally read your blog posts, and mostly agreed ...
-
I was pondering about what—and if—I should post any more about abuse. At the same time, I was still mulling over Dr. Oz's recent show (y...
-
"Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five ...
-
There is a fine line between control and persuasion. Sometimes it’s really hard to see the difference, particularly in ourselves. Particular...
-
I've been thinking a lot about toxic people and negativity. If it isn't already obvious, I've had a really hard time the last fi...
-
I don’t know if what I’m going to write represents more than just me. Maybe I’m alone in feeling this way, but it doesn’t matter. I need to ...
-
Sistas in Zion posted this to their Facebook page not long ago. It is a sentiment that I am finding expressed more and more often in the ...
-
I may be the only one in the world who deals with this, but in the chance that I am not, I thought to try to share what gets me through it. ...
-
Prologue: I recognize that some are going to want to attack me for these thoughts because they don't agree with them. Before you do so,...
-
I mostly grew up outside of the Mormon Corridor. When I was fourteen, my family moved from Germany to a small town in Idaho. The culture sho...
True. I think there is an important difference in the way the terms are used. Is there a particular conversation or event that prompted this post?
ReplyDeleteIt was an offhand comment on the polygamy post on JI. It just got me realizing how much I've heard it lately.
ReplyDeletePerhaps others have called it hypocritical, but to be fair Ben Park used the words deeply ironic. I can see both your point and deep irony. But I error on the side of allowing people to choose for themselves what they will be called. Especially if they have a valid historic claim.
ReplyDeleteI admit that I don't see the irony. The Church doesn't tell other groups they can't call themselves Mormon, it is trying to clarify what being a Mormon—in the sense of a member of the LDS Church—means. There is a difference.
ReplyDeleteSo, are Universalists not Christian for rejecting the Nicene Creed, for example?
ReplyDeleteFinger pointing can backfire.