DiscussMormonism.com

canpakes wrote:It is odd how moving to the next step beyond using solely the middle initial, to using the whole middle name, ends up making one sound like a person being identified as a serial killer.

Do You think about Joseph F. Smith (6th) and Joseph Fielding Smith (10th)?

"There are too many Smiths among general authorities...) --- who has said this?

moksha wrote:Commoners cannot use middle initials. This has been clearly codified in both Burke's Peerage and the Unwritten Rules of the Saints. The presence of such an initial helps to establish the noble status of such Church officials and let the membership know who to obey.

Here! Here!
Phil. O S. Offee

Since we know from his frequent testimony that he does not visit this den of blasphemous dissent, it is purely by blind coincidence or through the watch-making of Providence that our Wordy Friend has weighed in:

Danihel Petersonius Verbosius Provoniensis wrote:Every once in a while, I read a complaint by some critic of the Church or other about the odd and uniquely Mormon habit of using middle initials in the names of Church leaders — leaders like Heber J. Grant, David O. McKay, Harold B. Lee, Spencer W. Kimball, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson, Russell M. Nelson, Dallin H. Oaks, and Henry B. Eyring.

This complaint always reminds me of still other Mormon leaders, such as Ulysses S. Grant, General Robert E. Lee, Rutherford B. Hayes, James A. Garfield, Chester A. Arthur, Warren G. Harding, Herbert W. Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, General George A. Patton, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon, Edward M. Kennedy, William F. Buckley Jr., and Gerald R. Ford.

Mormons are so weird!

I note that all of the ruling elite he mentions—white and male all—happen to be dead The only ones, incidentally, from the 20th century who regularly used their middle initial were JFK (with aristocratic pretensions), LBJ (not to be outdone by JFK and his aristocratic hero FDR), and William F. Buckley, another wannabe aristocrat and one whose pretentiously Latinate verbosity worked much like Peterson's does: a veil for thought. These days class pretensions are best achieved by seeming not to have any, so you don't see many politicians, businesspeople, military leaders, and such using middle initials. That is why Church bosses stand out by continuing with this archaic onomastic display. Mormons are so weird!

In any case it only proves the point. The use of these middle initials is to lend names a formality and authority to match on the plain of names the rank of the people bearing those names in the fields of power. That's how they function in the Church as well. Bishops and Stake Presidents don't use them—to say nothing of the lowly members!—but everyone above them does.

canpakes wrote:It is odd how moving to the next step beyond using solely the middle initial, to using the whole middle name, ends up making one sound like a person being identified as a serial killer.

The really famous people can be recognized by just one name. The notorious use three names.

We have:

Cher
Prince
Oprah
Lincoln

Who killed Lincoln? John Wilkes Booth

Hilarious Symmachus and obliblish.

Business culture has totally changed. If I receive an email with a highly customized signature from _ C. _ II in bubble font with the person's full title, location, and a sig line, I know I'm receiving an email form an oblivious nobody who sees himself as important. If I receive an email that's barely comprehensible and signed with first and last initials "TP", then it's probably a senior executive ready to clean house. I'm conscientious about how I sign my name. If it's people I know, then I sign "- Gad". If It's people I don't, I type in my full name, not Gadianton P. Robbers, but Gadianton Robbers and I somewhat understate my title, and never an auto sig. Funny enough, while it's clueless to do the auto sig with big font etc., I've only seen a couple of underlings sign with their initials, and I would never do that because people would recognize that -- whether they realize it or not -- such an individual is on a power grab, and could potentially piss off ranking executives. Spelling mistakes need to be monitored as well. It's good to have one or two, but many more than that is senior exec territory and tread carefully there.

At a start-up I worked for several years ago, there were serious issues with a major US retailor because the exec handling our account overplayed the incomprehensible, all-of-you-are-beneath-me gibberish correspondence and our CEO seriously couldn't make out what he was trying to tell us. It was a protracted effort to escalate so that his superiors could get him in line and we could actually do business.

Anyway, the fact that LDS church leaders are playing "bubble font" self-importance nearly a century behind the times is proof the Church is false. And for apologists to defend the practice knowing a Phd philologist is watching shows severe lack of self-reflection.

My email signature includes my name, title, company, and contact information. It's well-formatted, but formal. It's in Georgia, which I find to be a tasteful typeface. At least there's no bubble letters. I'm not a barbarian.

EAllusion wrote:My email signature includes my name, title, company, and contact information. It's well-formatted, but formal. It's in Georgia, which I find to be a tasteful typeface. At least there's no bubble letters. I'm not a barbarian.

Do you include a middle initial?

I kinda doubt it, "Esoteric C. Allusion".

If so, get rid of it.

Gadianton wrote:

EAllusion wrote:My email signature includes my name, title, company, and contact information. It's well-formatted, but formal. It's in Georgia, which I find to be a tasteful typeface. At least there's no bubble letters. I'm not a barbarian.

Do you include a middle initial?

I kinda doubt it, "Esoteric C. Allusion".

If so, get rid of it.

No. I've never seen anyone do that in an email.

Paracelsus wrote:Do You think about Joseph F. Smith (6th) and Joseph Fielding Smith (10th)?

I think I've told this story before, but I was once marked down on a religion test at BYU because I wrote "Joseph Fielding Smith" instead of "Joseph F. Smith." I managed to argue the points back with the teacher. I mean, Joseph F. Smith's name is, in fact, Joseph Fielding Smith. I did have the earlier JFS in mind when I wrote the answer, I just didn't know Mormons take this initials stuff so seriously.

A friend of mine who served as a bishop said there's an actual church policy somewhere that says you have to use an initial in your name, either first or middle.

People who don't have middle names are the exception, I guess.

MsJack wrote:

Paracelsus wrote:Do You think about Joseph F. Smith (6th) and Joseph Fielding Smith (10th)?

I think I've told this story before, but I was once marked down on a religion test at BYU because I wrote "Joseph Fielding Smith" instead of "Joseph F. Smith." I managed to argue the points back with the teacher. I mean, Joseph F. Smith's name is, in fact, Joseph Fielding Smith. I did have the earlier Joseph Fielding Smith in mind when I wrote the answer, I just didn't know Mormons take this initials stuff so seriously.

A friend of mine who served as a bishop said there's an actual church policy somewhere that says you have to use an initial in your name, either first or middle.

People who don't have middle names are the exception, I guess.

In Mormonism everybody has a bombastic name and or/title. It's part of the embryonic deity training.