A question about disagreeing with upper members of the church.

[FunkyTown]

Recently, there was a thread that was closed that had a member disagree with one of the presidents. In this thread, he was warned that it was derogatory. In defense of the warning, I would say that derogatory is a very subjective thing:

Derogatory means, 'Detracting from the character or standing of someone' or 'Expressive of a low opinion'. I'm not certain the poster was expressing a low opinion so much as disagreeing with him.

I think it's important to love and respect the leaders, but I can promise that they want to be accountable.

I'm going to quote Elder Erasmus Snow here from the April 1880 General Conference:

And it becomes us to lay to heart the word spoken, and it should begin with the Apostles, Presidents of Stakes, Bishops, the Presidents of Quorums, and heads of families and run through all the organizations of society, and the spirit of repentance, of reformation and of purification should flow in our midst, flow through the people in all our organizations until every man, woman and child shall feel that the Spirit of God rests upon them; we should put away evil, and endeavor to overcome the world, to withstand the influences of the hosts of hell, to resist the example of evil minded persons, to resist temptations of pride and vanity, and cease to be hypocritical; in other words, to be honest before God and one another, for his eye is upon us. Our ways are openly known unto him.

- End quote. He's exhorting everyone - Because everyone needs to be exhorted. If there is only one perfect person, then it means that -everyone(Even Presidents of the church) will make mistakes. I will agree that in doctrine, we will not be led astray, but we must be prepared to question respectfully(Like we would any other) when we feel a mistake has been made.

Ultimately, my question is this and I would appreciate an open and honest opinion: Would you say that any disagreement with the prophet is derogatory? I would say it could be dangerous, as I am certainly not as wise as the likes of President Monson or President Uchtdorf. Is any disagreement necessarily a bad thing?

[miztrniceguy]

i would say that being in disagreement is not derogatory, but how you express that disagreement certainly could be.

[Guest Seraphim]

It appeared to be a judgment of President Monson's character, not just disagreement.

[VisionOfLehi]

From a forum standpoint:

It's up to the moderators.

From a non-forum standpoint:

I don't think it's easy to constructively criticize your leaders, especially if you're not in their position. It's very easy to point fingers and say this or that...

But I don't think it's your place. If you have specific issues with one leader, you talk to the leader above them, or however it works, and you let them take care of it.

If the leader is someone like a President, like Thomas S. Monson or George W. Bush, then the person you need to go to when you think they're in error is the LORD, in prayer.

There's a system in place that catches all those who're in error and has them held accountable.

[FunkyTown]

It appeared to be a judgment of President Monson's character, not just disagreement.

And I don't want you to think it's an attack when I make a post like this. Historically, the church has run in to problems when it's ignored the council of their prophets(Ldslibrary.com has the 1925 October General Conference and the leaders suggested that, in the height of American prosperity prior to the stock market crash, members should not purchase things on credit and company owners should treat their employees better) but it's something that needs to be done. I believe in our Presidency, but we do need to keep them accountable for non-doctrinal things.

[VisionOfLehi]

If they're off the mark, even the Prophet is subject to disciplinary council, as explicitly stated in D&C.

[Jason76]

Elder Dallin H. Oaks has said it is not right to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true. We will never be wrong for following the counsel of our leaders. As was stated before, church leaders are human an make mistakes. They may say things that are unintentionally not correct. However, they are our chosen leaders and we are to follow them. Those who continue to kick against the pricks, who seek to question their leaders rather than follow inspired counsel, will not be worthy of the guidance of the Spirit and will have their eternal salvation jeopardized.

Edited July 14, 2008 by Jason76

[Moksha]

Apologists frequently point out that Church leaders also speak as men. While an obvious point, I think it is sometimes overlooked.

Putting Church leaders on high pedestals is unfair to the Church leaders.

[california_ave]

I remember reading a biography of John Henry Smith, an apostle and briefly a counselor to JFS, where an excerpt from Elder Smith's journal was shared. Elder Smith had a heated disagreement with a fellow apostle over an issue discussed in quorum meeting. Both left angry and frustrated over the incident. The next day, Elder Smith came to the apostle he felt he had offended and offered a heart-felt apology. Both embraced afterward as the offenses were forgiven.

This story has been an example to me that though we may disagree, we can't harbor ill feelings and must quickly repent. From scripture, remember that Paul and Barnabas "sharply" disagreed on mission companions and went their separate ways. They later repented and reunited. To disagree is acceptable, following is more important than agreement.

[kona0197]

I will admit that there are a few general authorities that I do not trust...

[Kirajo]

If you are faithful LDS and know without a doubt this gospel is true, sometimes even blind faith is what you do. If the prophet says something, it's time to excercise faith and believe with all your heart that he speaks truth and recieves revelation along with the fact that he IS human and can make mistakes. you just have to balance those two ideas. If you're struggling with the idea of the church, excercising opinion and asking questions is a must. So I don't think it's derogetory as a whole, but has it's little rough patches. haha. There's my complex view of it all.

[jadams_4040]

Recently, there was a thread that was closed that had a member disagree with one of the presidents. In this thread, he was warned that it was derogatory. In defense of the warning, I would say that derogatory is a very subjective thing:

Derogatory means, 'Detracting from the character or standing of someone' or 'Expressive of a low opinion'. I'm not certain the poster was expressing a low opinion so much as disagreeing with him.

I think it's important to love and respect the leaders, but I can promise that they want to be accountable.

I'm going to quote Elder Erasmus Snow here from the April 1880 General Conference:

And it becomes us to lay to heart the word spoken, and it should begin with the Apostles, Presidents of Stakes, Bishops, the Presidents of Quorums, and heads of families and run through all the organizations of society, and the spirit of repentance, of reformation and of purification should flow in our midst, flow through the people in all our organizations until every man, woman and child shall feel that the Spirit of God rests upon them; we should put away evil, and endeavor to overcome the world, to withstand the influences of the hosts of hell, to resist the example of evil minded persons, to resist temptations of pride and vanity, and cease to be hypocritical; in other words, to be honest before God and one another, for his eye is upon us. Our ways are openly known unto him.

- End quote. He's exhorting everyone - Because everyone needs to be exhorted. If there is only one perfect person, then it means that -everyone(Even Presidents of the church) will make mistakes. I will agree that in doctrine, we will not be led astray, but we must be prepared to question respectfully(Like we would any other) when we feel a mistake has been made.

Ultimately, my question is this and I would appreciate an open and honest opinion: Would you say that any disagreement with the prophet is derogatory? I would say it could be dangerous, as I am certainly not as wise as the likes of President Monson or President Uchtdorf. Is any disagreement necessarily a bad thing?

When we disagree, we need to pray,ponder,study and then ask for an answer once again thru prayer. We do not "blindly" follow the leaders, we follow the spiritual confirmations, if we disagree with authority study and prayer will give you an answer of absolute proof you are seeking.:)

[Snow]

I will admit that there are a few general authorities that I do not trust...

That's so odd because they assure me that they trust you.

[Palerider]

I will admit that there are a few general authorities that I do not trust...

your kidding....right

[kona0197]

Nope. There are a couple that I get bad vibes from.

[drjme]

Healthy questioning I believe is fine. I am a questioner, I cannot do the blind faith deal, sometimes I wish I could, but it's just in my nature to question -not doubt- but just ask questions.

GA's have been known occassionally to disagree with each other on various matters, political, spiritual and personal.

[breeb]

Even Nephi questioned his father (1Nephi 2:16). It was the way he went about it that is the difference. While Lamen and Lemuel rebelled Nephi knelt in prayer to know of the truth. I'll say it again....EVEN NEPHI QUESTIONED HIS FATHER. Have faith in the Lord and kneel down in prayer.

[MarginOfError]

I will admit that there are a few general authorities that I do not trust...

That reminds me of a certain Area President I had to report to. In some ways he was a truly inspired and wise man. In others things, however, I was convinced that there was not an ounce of inspiration in his decisions. However, I imagine that's true of all of us. There are some things in which we will rely on the Lord, and others that we already think we can handle, so we rely on ourselves (for better or worse). If you haven't already considered this, perhaps you can investigate if you're getting bad vibes just in certain areas, but not being exposed to the good vibes? (Just a thought, I don't know enough of your situation to say anything definitive).

As for 'blind faith,' it has its limits. Kira said:

If the prophet says something, it's time to exercise faith and believe with all your heart that he speaks truth and receives revelation along with the fact that he IS human and can make mistakes.

and I do agree with this so far as the prophet is speaking in a doctrinally appropriate setting, such as a General, Stake, or Area conference. However, there are venues in which I hesitate to accept the words of the Presidents of the Church as the express and literal word of God. Examples of such venues include things President Young may have said to the Territory's legislative body; what President Hinckley may have said on 60 Minutes; what President Kimball writes in The Miracle of Forgiveness. In certain venues and media, even prophets get to express their opinions, and these should be weighed carefully by the Spirit. But when they speak in Conferences, it's best just to accept and adopt it.

[Palerider]

Healthy questioning I believe is fine. I am a questioner, I cannot do the blind faith deal, sometimes I wish I could, but it's just in my nature to question -not doubt- but just ask questions.

GA's have been known occassionally to disagree with each other on various matters, political, spiritual and personal.

thats right they are human......they can do that....and they have even stated that they don't always agree....what matters though is when it comes down to sustaining the motion.....then they all sustain it and go from there....they are allowed to voice their opinions...thats the point in having meetings.:)

[MarginOfError]

I really want to disagree with you, Palerider, but I'm intimidated by your suit of armor. Perhaps if all the General Authorities wore those we'd never hear of people not sustaining them.

[PapilioMemnon]

I feel there's "safety in counsel" in the counsel of the prophets & apostles; I trust them because I do believe they are called of God, and are wiser than I am. When I hear a leader speak (GA or local) something that I don't understand or maybe "disagree" with what was said, and think my way/idea/approach is better or somone else's, I ponder it, then I pray to get a confirmation of what was said and taught. I have come to know, fortunately for me, through many painful situations, that they were right! There is safety in their counsel! I do not follow them blindly as I seek to know for myself of Heavenly Father about what they spoke/counseled me to do, and not do. If I had followed their counsel the first time, I probably would have avoided all the pain I went through, but then again, I'm grateful that it brought me to where I am now!

Criticism is not healthy (Spiritually) towards anyone and especially the leaders; humbleness and prayer are the answers. Whenever I have felt the need to criticize a leader usually was because I wasn't doing what I was supposed to be doing, and humbleness was far away from me. Again, pride is the issue.

I echo the words/feelings of Pres. Eyring "Every time in my life when I have chosen to delay following inspired counsel or decided that I was an exception, I came to know that I had put myself in harm’s way. Every time that I have listened to the counsel of prophets, felt it confirmed in prayer, and then followed it, I have found that I moved toward safety. Along the path, I have found that the way had been prepared for me and the rough places made smooth. God led me to safety along a path that was prepared with loving care, sometimes prepared long before." (Emphasis added)

LDS.org - Liahona Article - Safety in Counsel

Edited July 15, 2008 by PapilioMemnon

[MorningStar]

When disagreeing with church leaders, I think it's important to humble yourself and pray about it and "lean not unto thine own understanding". :) For instance, a lot of people had a bad reaction to the counsel not to wear more than one pair of earrings, but I wonder if they prayed about it to ask if the Lord had a good reason for this?

[Fiannan]

When disagreeing with church leaders, I think it's important to humble yourself and pray about it and "lean not unto thine own understanding". :)

I totally agree. When I joined the Church I was a die-hard pro-ERA individual as well as for legalized abortion. I just figured that I'd agree to disagree until I researched the issues as well as gaining insight through inspiration.

[Misshalfway]

I Love this church for a lot of reasons.....but one of them is that God doesn't require perfection of the leaders. Worthiness yes, of course, but not infallibility. Perfection is not a prerequisite for being trusted of the Lord. Anyone who has served a mission with Elders will know that!!! (just kidding Elders :))

Our ward just split and now I am part of a newly created ward. Our new bishop is 33 years old. His counselors are in the same age range. All as green as grass!!! As our SP introduced them, he made it very clear how powerful the Spirit was in preparing and calling these men, but that didn't mean they would never make mistakes. He said he called these men because they were men of faith who had learned to live their lives by following the Spirit.

I loved this information!! It applies to any of us who are called to serve.....which in this church means everybody!!! :)

A previous poster suggested that we have the responsibility to hold our leaders accountable. This statement caused me to pause. Do I really have that responsibility???? I seriously don't think I do. My job as a follower is to sustain and forgive and follow with my energies and my talents and in some cases my long suffering. It is the Spirit's job to censor.

When we join this church we better understand that our leaders are flawed. We trust them because of who they follow and obey! I loved that counsel from Pres Oaks. That we aren't to criticize, even if we are right! Our job is not to judge someone in that way. I think we become less loving....less obedient when we engage in denouncing leadership. Such attitudes and activities invite the spirit of contention. Didn't we learn anything from the early church and all the in-fighting over Bro. Joseph and his imperfections?

Moses 6:31-32

And when Enoch had heard these words, he bowed himself to the earth, before the Lord, and spake before the Lord, saying: Why is it that I have found favor in thy sight, and I am but a lad, all the people hate me; for I am slow of speech; wherefore am I thy servant?

And the Lord said unto Enoch: Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open they mouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good.

We serve Jesus! And part of that service is upholding His chosen servants.

Jesus is at the head of this ship! The efforts of this work WILL succeed in spite of our weakness as human disciples. Tearing each other down doesn't help anybody or the work. It puts us at odds with the bigger picture. What is it the NT says about the beam and the mote?

Edited July 15, 2008 by Misshalfway

[jimuk]

Thank you Misshalfway for your last post in this thread, i have been sitting back doing a lot of reading on the forum since i started a thread that i am thoroughly ashamed of starting, (opening my mouth before listening to my heart).

You and others on these forums can put a point across which makes me feel so good inside, i am not so good myself with words and sometimes when i am filled with the spirit i try to push my thoughts onto others, which i don't realise is wrong until it is to late and the harm is done.

Thank you again to yourself and others in unknowingly teaching me the correct way.