© 2024 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All content by The Interpreter Foundation, unless otherwise specified, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here.
Interpreter Foundation is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted as the opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.
One way that the “Mormons were different” was in maintaining a legal system apart from the official Federal territorial courts. That history is discussed in detail in the book Zion in the Courts, by law professors Edwin B. Firmage (University of Utah) and Richard Collin Mangrum (Creighton University Law School). Legal disputes over property, contracts, and torts were taken before Bishop’s Courts and High Council Courts, so long as the parties were both members of the Church. The Church courts did not necessarily feel bound by the laws of the United States or of the Territorial legislature, but instead emphasized fairness and the need for unity among the Saints. Did West take note of that unique system of justice that took the Latter-day Saints out from under the Federal court system created by Congress?
He really did not, which I think again is part of his idea that the Latter-Day Saints are different and not like the rest of the West.
“the refusal by the publisher or author to at least attempt to vary from the institutional moniker can be seen as part of a larger refusal of many to respect the self-identification of the Church and many of its members.”
There is nothing at all wrong with the use of the “moniker” Mormon. It is in no sense a slur, and professional historians of Mormon culture and history have long understood that the institutional Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not identical to the term “Mormon.” So much so is this true that surveys made decades ago demonstrated that California Mormons differed markedly in their views from Utahns generally (both LDS Church members and non-members together). Indeed, some hard-core Latter-day Saints have even claimed (tongue-in-cheek) that it is only outside Utah that one can find the “true” Church.
In advising all of us that it would be nice if everyone would at least use the official name of the Church on first mention, President Russell Nelson was not giving an order to be obeyed by all parties, but merely making a recommendation. Why? Because he wanted us all to call attention to Jesus Christ — just as he did in changing the official Church logo to an image of Jesus Christ. Seems like a very good idea, which does not need to be rigidly adhered to by historians or social anthropologists who are studying Mormons as an ethnic group. The same applies to the study of Jews as a people, and Judaism as a religion.