What's with the middle initial?

[_Maksutov]

Russell M. Nelson. Jeffrey R. Holland. Gordon B. Hinckley. Where do they get this middle scheiss? From Jesus H. Christ and El O. Him?

[_Fence Sitter]

I would expect that it was a hold over from the past leaders who were mimicking what past Joseph Smiths did to distinguish themselves from other past Joseph Smiths.

I find it pretentious.

Signed

Fenc E Sitter.

[_I have a question]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.busi ... ter-2014-5

If you want people to think you're an intellectual, use your middle initial.

"People's middle initials have a particular and powerful effect on how people are perceived by others," say psychologists Wijnand A.P. Van Tilburg of the University of Southampton and Eric R. Igou of the University of Limerick.

"The display of middle initials increases the perceived social status of these people," they write in the European Journal of Social Psychology, "and (it) positively biases inferences about their intellectual capacity and performance."-

by I Have A. Question

It’s a pathetic power move by people who know that they have no other credibility outside of a small cult following who seem determined to prove Manson’s Law Of Avoidance.

[_moksha]

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.

[_Maksutov]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/middle-initials-make-you-look-smarter-2014-5

If you want people to think you're an intellectual, use your middle initial.

"People's middle initials have a particular and powerful effect on how people are perceived by others," say psychologists Wijnand A.P. Van Tilburg of the University of Southampton and Eric R. Igou of the University of Limerick.

"The display of middle initials increases the perceived social status of these people," they write in the European Journal of Social Psychology, "and (it) positively biases inferences about their intellectual capacity and performance."-

by I Have A. Question

It’s a pathetic power move by people who know that they have no other credibility outside of a small cult following who seem determined to prove Manson’s Law Of Avoidance.

I think you're right. No one would be inspired by a Tom Eliot or a mere Burrhus Skinner.

[_Symmachus]

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.

I'm sure that is right. Consider that the hierarchy consists, basically, of a handful of families. Especially in the 19th century, many forecast brilliant Church careers for their children by giving them names commemorating their Mormon-aristocratic lineage—and signalling it to the plebs in the process. (Joseph Smith>Joseph F. Smith>Joseph Fielding Smith; George A. Smith; George Albert Smith; Hyrum Smith > Hyrum M. Smith, etc.). Partly it served a practical distinction so that peasants could distinguish between their overlords and their overlords' sons whenever one of them came to demand the hand of yet another daughter in marriage. But those distinctions mattered little—did it matter which Smith had your daughters—in comparison to the connection the aristocracy it signaled, because that connection is what extracted your consent. Over time, however, the use of the initial became a marker of Church status in itself.

I had a Stake President named James Martino who suddenly became James B. Martino upon promotion, an increase in authority, though not likeability.

Like all forms of status-signalling, it has become absurd: it's one thing to use a middle initial, but a first initial?

Exhibit A: Apostle Melvin J. Ballard > M.(elvin) Russell Ballard.

Surely, the "Ballard" part should be enough to distinguished M. Russell from Russell M. (of the Nelsons), just as the "Russell" part should be enough to distinguish "Russell Ballard" from "Melvin Ballard."

It may not be about distinguishing between individuals of similar names (and families), but it is a tool for distinguishing and reinforcing more fundamental differences between the nobility and the peasantry.

[_Fence Sitter]

I have never noticed, or maybe my local leadership does not do this, but is this common among stake presidents or even bishops?

[_Maksutov]

Joey and Brig didn't need no stinkin' 'nitials. Clear evidence of latter day pussification.

[_Dr Exiled]

Yet another silly tradition in Mormon corporate land, just like the white shirt and tie.

Exiled O. Mainstreet

[Jersey Girl]

If the Church had adopted hyphenated family names, then surely there would be great prestige in being named Symmachus Kimball-Smith, Quasimodo Taylor-Woodruff, or Moksha Alger-Young.

If you were into Mormon politics, perhaps Daniel Bcspace-Droopy would carry great weight.