Since Nelson admonished members to drop nicknames for the church, why didn't he beckon members to stop calling missionaries as "missionaries." We all know that young people are called to serve as "representatives of Jesus Christ." That's the official calling or it was 25 years ago and we were admonished to use that long name of the church- then have to use the church nickname because people had no idea who we were <grin>.
So I guess Jesus isn't offended to use missionaries instead of representatives, but livid when Mormon is used incorrectly.
1. Does it contradict utterances of past divine leaders? check. 2. Is it impractical to implement? check. 3. Does it needlessly create more complexity? check. 4. Does it ultimately lead to more confusion and incoherence, rather than less? check.
I thought Nelson was supposed to be a smart guy. I guess Hinckley really hurt his feelings back in 1990 and Nelson hasn't been able to think clearly about this issue ever since. The phrase "consumed by pride" comes to mind.
My letter, issued some 39 years ago or so, says "You are hereby called to serve as a missionary of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints."
It didn't say anywhere "...representative of Jesus Christ." It did say "...representative of the Lord," leaving who "the Lord" was ambiguous, but that was immediately followed by "You will be an official representative of the Church."
From what I've seen, the letters are the same today.