Once upon a time, LDS young women were organized into three classes for instruction and activities: Beehives, MIA Maids, and Laurels. In late 2019, the Church announced that these names were no longer to be used. I’ve heard there were problems using these titles in different languages, and that seems reasonable. Even untranslated, they seem a little hard to explain. Since 2019, without titles, I guess they have just been referred to as “the twelve and thirteen year olds” or “they used to be Beehives” and similar for the other age groups.
After what was apparently a seven-year effort to find new names for the classes, the LDS Newsroom (itself a victim of a name change!) has posted the following: “New Young Women Age-Group Names Emphasize Faith, Hope, and Light.” Here are the full names for each age group:
- Builders of Faith
- Messengers of Hope
- Gatherers of Light
There’s also a blurb and a scripture attached to each. For the formerly MIA Maids, these are: “A Messenger of Hope carries Christ’s message of hope to the weary, speaking peace, sharing comfort, and lifting hearts through the power of the Spirit (see Mosiah 18:8–9).”
I’m not here to criticize. Could you have done any better? I’m reminded of the story about Steve Jobs when an Apple development team presented its new assistant feature to him, named “Siri.” Jobs didn’t like the name. After a few days he got back to the team, saying he couldn’t think of anything better so Siri it is.
Read the whole article for the various practical details. For a ward or branch with few Young Women, they can be combined for Sunday classes. But deep down, they are still Builders, Messengers, or Gatherers.
Let’s ponderize.
- Could you have done any better? Were you happier with the original Beehive, MIA Maids, and Laurels names?
- As long as we’re changing names, what about “the Relief Society”? That name is rooted in 19th-century improvement societies and sounds a little odd in the 21st century. Any suggestions? Matriarchs of Truth?
- What about “Primary”? It’s usually an adjective, so it’s odd to use it as a noun, as in “the Primary.” The primary what?
- The harder you look, the stranger most LDS names appear. We call teenagers “Elders.”
- There are a few gaps in the nomenclature system. How about LDS men who, for whatever reason, are not ordained? They were once called “prospective elders,” but we can do better. Rejectors of Righteousness? The Maybe Next Year Club?
.
Wheat & Tares 
If I did not know better, I would suggest that this announcement came out about 19 days later than it was supposed to (April 1, right?).
Some (of the legion of) obvious problems with these labels:
* They sound like a poorly written YA fantasy series
* They could easily be new levels in the Scientology hierarchy
* Nobody–except maybe the most virtue-signaling, want-to-be-seen-as-extra-righteous members will use them in their entirety
* The vast majority of YW will recoil at these class names
* Deseret Book will make an absolute fortune selling new label-related swag (e.g. shirts for girls’ camp)
* The typical YM will have a field day making sarcastic comments about them (e.g. every 12-13 year-old girl will be called “Bob”…)
* They will be shortened to Builders, Messengers, and Gatherers within three weeks…then Bs, Ms, Gs after a couple of months
* Using these class names are more of a victory for Satan than using Mormon
If it were up to me, I would just go with Younger, Middle, and Older. So no, I can’t do any better. These are at least better than the old ones.
I agree with Sociopath that they will quickly be shortened to Builders, Messengers, and Gatherers. However, that’s as far as it will go. Nobody uses Ds, Ts, and Ps for the YM; why would they use Bs, Ms, and (especially) Gs for the YW?
I think the adjective “inartful” fits here.
Rather than deciding on these names in secret by a small committee, I think much better results might have been found if we crowd-sourced this among the church’s young women.
And who says we need a single church-wide answer? How about letting different areas use different names to better fit their cultures? Maybe standardization could occur over time.
Yeah, they might be abbreviated as Builders, Messengers, and Guides – that would be better than BOFs, MOHs, and GOLs.
I can understand moving away from the Beehive and Mia Maid names. They’re both Utah-centric, unrelatable to the international Church, and the MIA acronym (mutual improvement association) is a relic of an organization that disbanded over 50 years ago. I’m more surprised that they kept Mia Maids as a name until 2019, especially since the mutual improvement association had long disappeared from the Mormon subconscious.
But Laurels? What could be more empowering than being named after an ancient symbol that Christians of the primitive Church used to symbolize victory over death, redemption, and eternal glory? I guess “gatherers” will do, though it definitely feels like a not-so-subtle nod to traditional gender roles than the other two names (men=hunters, women=gatherers).
I’m sure if young men ever give young women a hard time over the names, I’m sure the young women will retort by calling Deacons the “bringers of sacrament” or Priests as the “breakers of bread.”
My first reaction is why not just go back to the original names? Sure they were a little quirky but so is Mormonisn (or at least, it used to be). My second thought is if the previous names were lost in translation, I don’t see this problem going away with the new names (Is it “constructora de la fe?”). Finally, this whole struggle over naming of the yw programs shines a light on the fact that Joseph Smith (and certainly subsequent church leaders) never had any intention of doing anything for the young women and girls of the Church, besides getting them married off as soon as possible.
On a side note, when did we start calling it “mutual” again? Is it just me or did we bring back “mutual” when we dropped the old names?
mat, I’ve heard it called youth night, but not mutual.
The names… sigh…
Could I have done better. Probably not. Shortened they don’t sound any more ridiculous than the old names. But I did read that Gatherers of Light is rather to close to a translation of lucifer, which is unfortunate. Truth might have been a better choice.
Yes, I could have done better. I’d name them deacons, teachers and priests.
Many thoughts:
* My teenagers both had immediate, negative reactions to the new names. I suspect they won’t be the only ones.
* Several years ago my daughters class decided to name themselves. They chose “flaming taco cats”. This year the YW presidency decided to name the three classes Daisy, Lily and Dalia. (I think, they’re definitely flowers.) The president of the oldest class was set apart by the bishop at the “President of the Dalia class”. I suspect that our YW president isn’t going to be happy that her rebranding plan has been overwritten by SLC.
* I’m curious to see how these names are going to be applied to the individuals and the groups. Will they be the “Gatherers of Light” or the “Gatherers of Light class”? “Gatherers of Light President” or “President of the Gatherers of Light” or “President of the Gatherers of Light class”?
* Faith, Hope and . . . . Light? They couldn’t come up with anything else to pair with Faith and Hope?
Lostinthewoods said it before I could: Deacons, Teachers, Priests. Young Women: The Young Women’s Quorum? Relief Society: Women’s Quorum? Still not on equal footing with “Elders Quorum”. Primary: Children’s Group? Children’s Circle? Children’s Association?
In my professional experience of naming things (and naming things is very very hard), these will probably be shortened into the shorter words. Most likely first by the girls themselves. Talking with my faith-age daughter, she much more strongly connected with the shorter attribute names, rather than the longer “Builders, Messengers, and Gatherers”
It might vary a bit from location to location, but I’d bet they’ll more or less be known as “faith girls”, “hope girls” and “light girls”. The specifically did not call them “classes”, instead choosing to go with “age-groups”, which seems intentional.
I’m also going to struggle to not all the oldest age group “Charity”. Thanks Paul.
The old names were dated, jargony, Utah-centric, and difficult to translate in a multilingual church, so they had to go. Also “mia maid” contained a bit of purity culture as well. Coming up with new names that were none of those things I think is a genuine challenge, and no, I’m not sure I could have done better. It’s normal for people to find changing names of things awkward. I’ve worked for multiple employers that have done so. Eventually people get used to it. I’ll admit the names are a bit long, but par for the course in a church that insists on its full long name without offering shortened alternatives. I’m sure informal short names will evolve.
The names: Builders of Faith, Messengers of Hope, and Gatherers of Light imply who’s going to be doing the work. It doesn’t imply leading like the names in the Priesthood. I don’t think it’s a change that will help girls and women, but it is a change showing they are doing something without really addressing any issues in the church hierarchy, giving women more of a leadership role.
A gatherer is kind of like a gleaner. Full circle in 100 years I guess.
I’m less concerned about the names than I am about the effectiveness of the new program/curriculum. I’m old and my entire family has left the church, so I don’t have much close experience. However, my perception is that the last several years have not been good for the youth in my ward, if not the church as a whole. I hope this is the first of several steps forward!
I can understand Builders of Faith (but who faith? that of the girls, or of others?), and Messengers of Hope (but messengers are by definition outward focused–are the BoF building outward or inward?). But Gatherers of Light befuddles me. Light is usually shared, diffused, or spread, and not gathered. The light goes out into the dark. A candle is not put under a bushel basked (gathered?) but is put on a candlestick so that all can see it. How does one gather light? Plants gather light for photosynthesis, and telescopes gather light for star gazing. I don’t know what light gathering means in a church context. This may be made clear soon as the program is rilled out. I can see Builders building for themselves and for others, but Messengers are only sent to others, and Light is not typically gathered. I am sure that the Brethern discussed all of this, and more. We selected Gatherers. Maybe gleaners would work, as mentioned above, but that would send too many people to a dictionary. And too many wouldn’t go to a dictionary and therefore would be clueless. I agree with PWS: I hope we are putting some life, vitality, meaning, and resources into our weekly youth programs.
I think these are hilarious.
Alternative suggestions Oak leaves, Oak branches, Oak trunks.
I agree deacons, teachers and priests.
I did a google search on the three titles and AI came up with the following:
“The expression ‘builders of faith, gatherers of light, messengers of hope’ captures the essence of the Christian missionary calling, as emphasized by Pope Francis in his 2025 World Mission Day message. Christians are called to build faith by nurturing spiritual growth in themselves and others, gather light by bringing understanding, truth, and guidance to those in darkness, and serve as messengers of hope by offering comfort, encouragement, and promise of God’s love to the afflicted and marginalized.”
Builders of Faith, Messengers of Hope, Gatherers of Light could also be used as the threefold mission of the Church.
Geoff, the littlest ones should be acorns.
When I first heard these, my thought was, the YW are not going to like them. At. All. Then we heard from a neighbor. The oldest girl just got out of YW, and she laughed at her little sisters who are still in. So, the first thing kids do is poke fun and use these as insults? No, I don’t think these will go over well. Why not just go with Faith, hope, and charity. The light thing is more than a little weird.
And steal an idea from Pope Francis? Did they really? When I heard it, it struck me as slightly familiar, especially the gathers of light bit. But I couldn’t place it. So, maybe that was where I heard it before.
And because I have little hope for the girls ever being deacons, teachers, priests, how about deaconess teacheress, and priestess. That last has a nice ring. Or goddess 1, goddess 2, and goddess 3. Or take a page from the temple and call them the priestess class, the queens class, and the goddess class.
And instead of asking if we could do better, maybe you should ask how it could be worse. I don’t like these at all, but then I haven’t liked much coming from church headquarters for quite a while
@Instereo
Not to worry! The brethren will no doubt soon demonstrate their commitment to equality by calling the boys Presiders of Faith, Presiders of Hope, and Presiders of Light.
I just shared this news to my appropriately aged daughter. She replied, “I don’t like building faith!”
Yes, I could have done better: Deacons (think of Phoebe in the Bible), Teachers, and Priestesses.
I think they’re fine.
The new group names for the young women sound very Cosmere.
Once this clicked in my mind, I was unable to see it any other way. For those who are not familiar, Brandon Sanderson is an extremely popular fantasy writer who happens to be LDS. Most of his books are in a connected universe called the Cosmere. In one of his book series, the Way of Kings, characters can gain special powers by becoming part of Radiant orders, which generally involves swearing an oath to uphold an ideal. These orders have names like Edgedancer, Truthcaller, etc.
I grew up with Beehives and Laurels and Mia Maids. So at first these new group names, “Builders of faith”, “messengers of hope”, and “gatherers of light” sounded cool but I wasn’t sure how they would be received.
Until I realized they sound just like Radiant orders. The Lightgatherers, the Hopecallers, the Faithmakers.
Now I’m totally on board. 🙂
After several seconds of dedicated pondering, I’ve decided my suggestion for better names should harken back to the original founding principles of Young Women, so Retrenchers, Dressmakers, and Twenty-Two-Year-Olds. You might think that last suggestion is weird but it’s mathematically less weird than calling 18 year old boys “elders.”
But if that last one won’t fly my runner-up idea is to name them after another of the original membership requirements and call them Daughters of Brigham Young.
The musical group Rival Sons made albums in 2023 with titles of Darkfighter and Lightbringer.
These new names give me a Games of Thrones vibe. I don’t think that is what they were goibg for…..
Am I the only one who envisioned Dumbledore’s “deluminator” upon hearing the name “Gatherers of Light” for the first time?
Yes, I could have done better. These are phrases, not names. Choose a word – extra points if it’s meaningful – and stick with it. Want to make it easy but controversial? Deaconess, Teacheress, and Priestess. We do use that priestess word in what is our most holy place, so seems like it could’ve been a great opportunity to normalize it outside. I suppose problematic in that we still don’t really know what it all means . . . Want the easy and not controversial option? Acorn, Olive, Juniper or some other vague nature related name. And while I agree that the old names are somewhat outdated, maybe that’s okay? I think many did not really dig into what the names meant, and those who did learned an interested bit about the church they belonged to. We commonly utilize words and phrases that don’t exactly make sense at first glance, but have interesting historical roots for the inquiring individual to find.
I like Geoff Aus suggestion and also agree these new names sound like they are straight from a Brandon Sanderson novel. Interested to see how the youths live up to these names.
The church title Elder does not translate to non-Christian countries and so in HK for example the youths simply made fun of us for thinking we are elderly. But the menfolk are stuck with our titles because they are right there in Joseph Smith’s scriptures. The women can literally be whatever they want to be. I had a handmaid’s tale idea but will keep it to myself as it’s not very kind.
Perhaps we could give the groups descriptive names by what they are not allowed to do (per the handbook and FSOY):
– Too young for Dancing
– Too young for Dating
– Too young for Missions
And collectively, we could refer to all the young women as:
– Too young for Marriage
unless, of course, you’re a 19th century prophet.
Yeah, those names sound like they’re from a fantasy novel, more specifically romantasy. This genre is stereotypically female. I prefer spaceships and a pretense of science. But naming them Red Shirts might not be very apropos. Romantasy has more panache.
So to have more zing, I think Sarah J Maas books should be unbanned and made into lesson manuals.
But my vote goes. ya know, to deacons, teachers, priests. Along with feisty princesses, morally grey fae, and reluctant assassins.
Here is a shot across the bow of restoration; the Order of Phoebe, the Order of Priscilla and the Order or Junia ( or maybe the Order of Mary (Magdala) but thats to long. All influencial female leaders of the early Christian church.But mre practical let every counryor even mission pick their own titles to corellation be damned.
1-younger than Helen Mar Kimball, 2-same age as Helen Mar Kimball, 3-barely older than Helen Mar Kimball
I agree with E–I think they’re fine.
The young men all get titles that are proper nouns. The girls all get titles that are verbs, which denote action. I guess they are preparing the YW for their proper role in the church, as a helpmeat unto their husbands, and never ending callings for service for the institution of the church. I might be a little bitter about the inequality within the church…
If we were to call the YM groups using action oriented titles, I think the most apt would be, Awkward Carriers of Plastic Trays, Ravenous Consumers of Unused Bread, and Supercilious Yammerers of Scripted Prayers
My teenagers reacted with revulsion
“I am NOT saying that!!”
“Have they ever actually talked to a teenager before in real life?”
“NO, JUST NO”
“haha I bet they only asked the kiss up brown nosers whose parents made them go and who just lied and said they liked it and then those same girls make fun of it more than anyone else”
It could be worse:
Beehives = Just shy of 15
MiaMaids = Excellent extra wives
Laurels = Walking pornography
The Tribune just published an article about this, saying it was “bottom up” from the girls who wanted their names to reflect purpose. Talk about gaslighting. I’m sure the girls had help with suggestions and guidance. The bottom can’t even talk to the LDS leadership but has to contact their bishop first.
I’m of the opinion that making and maintaining a strong community is the purpose of our church. With that in mind I would happily embrace:
Builders. Such a great title. Remember that one descriptor of the adversary is “the destroyer.”
Messengers. An equal term compared to Teachers.
Gatherers. What every community needs. It’s a hint to outreach.
+1 stephenchardy.
I actually really like the names. Once in a while, it’s nice to actually be able to say: home run, brethren!
To be clear: I really dislike the “of” part. Corny and preachy. I’m hopeful that the “of light”, “of faith” and “of hope” parts will either purposefully or through natural laziness fall away. Hopefully, statements like. “Let’s have the Builders organize a food drive” or “I think that the Gatherers should be in charge of the linger-longer next week” will become a thing.
Beacons, Preachers, and Priestesses