Is it wrong to Question?

[Guest saintish]

Is it wrong to question things you don’t understand or seem to be incongruent? Some have suggested that to question any facet associated with the church is tantamount to treason and hypocrisy. When is it ok to question and when isn’t it?

Joseph Smith Questioned which religion was right, was that ok?

Brigham Young questioned who should be the successor of the church, was he a hypocrite?

Members in the twenties questioned wearing full length (ankle and wrist) garments, were they wrong?

Many more members questioned the priesthood ban before it was lifted, were they disloyal?

How different would the world be if no one had the intestinal fortitude to question what is established?

[MarginOfError]

I encourage people to question anything and everything. But just because there is a question doesn't imply that there is a simple answer. (Nor does an answer guarantee a simple question--42).

[Just_A_Guy]

There's a right way and a wrong way to question. It's perhaps an oversimplification, but generally private questioning is fine. It's public questioning that can become problematic. I think Elder Holland made some cogent comments in the PBS documentary The Mormons, regarding blacks and the priesthood:

There's no issue in all my life that I had prayed more regarding -- praying that it would change, praying that it would come in due time. I was willing to have the Lord speak, and I was loyal to the position and the brethren and the whole concept, but there was nothing about which I had anguished more or about which I had prayed more. And for that to be said in my lifetime, when I wasn't sure it would happen in my lifetime, ... it was one of the absolute happiest days of my life. ...

(Transcript here, emphasis added.)

And, in point of fact, I think Brigham Young would argue that he was not publicly "questioning" anything during the succession crisis; he was merely distributing teachings that had already been given to the Twelve by Joseph Smith himself and shutting down unauthorized pretenders to Smith's mantle for good measure.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

When is it ok to question and when isn’t it?

I can't believe you would even ask that.

[Soulsearcher]

I can't believe you would even ask that.

It's quite a valid question considering the reactions of some on this site when even the smallest simplest question is asked.

[MarginOfError]

It's quite a valid question considering the reactions of some on this site when even the smallest simplest question is asked.

I think Vort agrees with you. Just a hunch.

[Guest saintish]

I can't believe you would even ask that.

Well then why don't you elaborate on your opinion?

[Guest saintish]

There's a right way and a wrong way to question. It's perhaps an oversimplification, but generally private questioning is fine. It's public questioning that can become problematic.

I would say it’s ok to question publically, if something is wrong it’s wrong. But I don’t think you should go out of your way to criticize leaders or attack them personally. On the same token I don’t think the lord will find fault for someone calling a duck a duck.

[Just_A_Guy]

Well, and there's also the issue of what you're questioning.

It's one thing to question the three-hour block or the Church's current PR campaigns or even (heaven forbid!) green Jell-O.

Questioning, say, the Church's view of the Law of Chastity or the required elements of repentance, is something else entirely.

[applepansy]

I would say it’s ok to question publically, if something is wrong it’s wrong. But I don’t think you should go out of your way to criticize leaders or attack them personally. On the same token I don’t think the lord will find fault for someone calling a duck a duck.

Unless the duck isn't a duck and only looks like a duck because of perception. In which case it would be better to clarify privately before questioning publicly.

[Soulsearcher]

I think Vort agrees with you. Just a hunch.

With Vort it can be hard to tell........

[Guest saintish]

Well, and there's also the issue of what you're questioning.

Questioning, say, the Church's view of the Law of Chastity or the required elements of repentance, is something else entirely.

But is it wrong? If you honestly feel that it is incongruent does it really matter what the issue is?

Look at the changes in the garments for example, during the twenties there were some strong statements made about how the design was inspired and shouldn't be altered, and then it was. Granted it was the church that ultimately approved the change but there were obviously plenty of people altering their garments or they wouldn’t have bothered to make the change.

[estradling75]

I would say it’s ok to question publically, if something is wrong it’s wrong. But I don’t think you should go out of your way to criticize leaders or attack them personally. On the same token I don’t think the lord will find fault for someone calling a duck a duck.

The problem with this position is that most people don't see the whole picture... They can't... They see one little slice, one little thing done wrong locally and then blow it up to a world wide crises and demand, "Why hasn't the Prophet stamped this out and made everything go the way I want?"

Of course things go wrong, its the nature of mortality. It's been my experience that when leaders mess up it is because of one of two things. First is that they have not been properly trained. The solution to that one is simple. The second on is that they choose differently. Agency. The leadership has it just like everyone else does. They are perfectly entitled to run to the end of their leash and hang themselves just like any other sinner. And just like anyone else they are going to be held responsible the people they influence and take down with them.

I think one of the biggest challenge many of us will face is how we respond to a church leader that has (or appears to) have gone astray. How do we hold to our promise to support and sustain while not being lead astray?

For me going public isn't wise, because even if I can do so without losing faith, I can't be sure about anyone else that might hear such a public declaration. If someone were to hear me and think hey its okay for me to disobey and disregard the leaders, and fall away because of that... well I wouldn't want to be in my shoes when that subject came around during judgment. Problems should be dealt with in private meetings, bumped up the chain if necessary all the way to leaving it with the Lord if it comes down to it. It is his church, have faith that he will respond and answer in ways that are best even if we don't get it.

[Guest saintish]

If someone were to hear me and think hey its okay for me to disobey and disregard the leaders, and fall away because of that... well I wouldn't want to be in my shoes when that subject came around during judgment.

Thats a good point but i don't think questioning automatically gives you the OK to disregard.

[applepansy]

I think one of the biggest challenge many of us will face is how we respond to a church leader that has (or appears to) have gone astray. How do we hold to our promise to support and sustain while not being lead astray?

I had this experience and it was tough. I've posted about it here on other threads.

Our bishop at the time made a decision that had very serious adverse consequences for my then 12 yo son. I did not voice my thoughts out loud, not even to my husband for many months. Then I talked to my Dad. He gave me the best advice I've ever received on this subject. He told me that if we are to stay on the right side we have to support and sustain our leaders, even if we disagree. Most especially if we are endowed and are under covenant to support and sustain our leaders. He gently told me I needed to repent.

I'm outspoken and opinionated and was even more so back then. I'm surprised I kept my mouth shut about it. And as a mother I was angry at the harm the decision was doing to my son. After much prayer I swallowed my pride and apologized to the Bishop. He was surprised that I had felt the way I did, but accepted my apology. No one, especially my children, was aware of my feelings. If they had been I can only imagine the irreparable damage that might have caused my children or anyone else who might have been influenced.

After apologizing amazing blessings came our way and a cloud was lifted from my heart. I learned an important lesson and I completely believe that even when a leader is wrong, if we are obedient we will be blessed. The sin/problem/issue is on their head. If we are disobedient then we are the one who is sinful.

Yes, its ok to question. We just need to be careful how we go about it.

[Suzie]

Is it wrong to question things you don’t understand or seem to be incongruent?

Absolutely not.

[Just_A_Guy]

But is it wrong? If you honestly feel that it is incongruent does it really matter what the issue is?

Well, let's switch perspectives. Do you think the Lord has as much issue with those who suggest City Creek was a bad investment, as He does with those who suggest that the Law of Chastity is an antiquated dogma promulgated by sexist old men?

Look at the changes in the garments for example, during the twenties there were some strong statements made about how the design was inspired and shouldn't be altered, and then it was. Granted it was the church that ultimately approved the change but there were obviously plenty of people altering their garments or they wouldn’t have bothered to make the change.

Can't speak as to that particular controversy; but I understand that in the 1970s several people were excommunicated for voicing opinions that the Church openly tolerates--if not affirmatively adopts--today.

So I would submit that the propriety of "questioning" depends partially on the manner in which it is done, and partly on how non-negotiable the Church deems the policy or doctrine being questioned.

Thats a good point but i don't think questioning automatically gives you the OK to disregard.

Well, again, it depends on the type of questioning.

If someone asks, "How could the Lord allow the Church to do something so obviously wrong"--quite bluntly, that line of inquiry has little logical end besides creating an intellectual foundation for disregarding the Church's position.

On the other hand, I see little harm in "The Church's position is X, and I find this hard to swallow. What reasons might the Church have for doing it this way, and how can I reconcile myself to that?"

[Dravin]

I agree that in principle there is nothing wrong with questioning, it is how we obtain answers. I mention in principle because asking those you trust in private, or asking the Lord is very different than people who use questions as a way to publicly rail (though if you're railing I'm not sure privately makes things much better) against leadership and policies. Kinda like how there are questions like those who come here in sincerity looking for understanding, and there are questions like those who come to this site with anti intent who seek not answers but a 'palatable' veil for railing, criticism, and faith destruction.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Dravin

[Suzie]

I learned an important lesson and I completely believe that even when a leader is wrong, if we are obedient we will be blessed.

I know another Church leader gave a similar quote. I may understand it (not necessarily agree) if for instance the Bishop decides to cancel Church meetings after Sacrament on Christmas day because he feels members should be with their families...he may be wrong or not, I may agree or not but it's something pretty trivial.

However, if the issue at hand is related to safety for instance or other serious issue that I KNOW may affect the lives of my own family or other people (negatively) then I think it's wrong to obey knowing the possible outcome.

Let me give a quick example of what I'm talking about.

Many years ago, a member in my very small ward sexually abused his 5 year old niece. He was excommunicated and served time in jail. When he left prison and many years passed, the Bishop (who was new) decided that it will be a good idea to have him teach a class in primary. I just couldn't believe it. Of course, most of the members didn't know about his past so there were no issues there. I knew it because I happen to know his family quite well. I talked to the Bishop about it but he disregarded my concerns by saying people "change" (the point I was trying to make was that the issue isn't that but proper Church procedure). When his name was called for sustaining vote, I raised my hand in opposition.

I refused to let my young son attend primary by himself and instead I chose to stay in the class to ensure also the safety of the other kids. I took the matter to the Stake Presidency who investigated the matter and things changed from there...

So no, I do not believe for a second that we should obey our leaders if they're wrong and even more if we know their decisions can affect others in a terrible way.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Suzie

[LDSJewess]

I think it is perfectly appropriate to ask and inquire about anything at anytime you have questions. If you do ot ask, you will not learn or progress.

BUT that being said there is a big difference between "asking" and "protesting" or "telling".

Every question deserves answers. Not that our answers will be immediate, and they may or may not be the answers that will satisfy our inquiry.

And then after we have asked auestions, studied, prayed and pondered, there may come a time when we simply need to accept the things we cannot change.

Since there have been past revelations regarding many things in the church such as polygamy, the style and length of garments, and banning of balcks in the priesthool, I think it is a matter of time that we will see more changes in our lifetime that is applicable to our life today that will bring about new revelations. I think it is probable sometime in the future for women to become priesthood holders.

Time will tell.

Meanwhile we can ask anything to help get a clearer perspective on it. I have to say that I asked my Bishop some questions regarding some very basic gospel beliefs, and I received very enlightening answers that strengthened my faith. And there was no judgement on the part of my Bishop for asking.

[Vort]

With Vort it can be hard to tell........

When Dravin (who is still floating on his honeymoon high) and MoE (who doesn't even like me) are the only two to laugh at my comment, it's clear that most participants are far too invested in this thread to see obvious, broad humor. Or maybe I'm just not funny.

Nah. Can't be that.

Well then why don't you elaborate on your opinion?

All right. If that's really what you want, here you go.

Is it wrong to question things you don’t understand or seem to be incongruent?

No. It is wrong to criticize, to ridicule, to eschew, to fail to value the words and teachings of the prophets. But questioning is expected. I encourage my children to question things. But that is a far cry from encouraging them to disbelieve, and is a world removed from teaching them the damnable attitude that they have no obligation to obey -- indeed, they ought not obey -- unless and until they receive a personal revelation that whatever principle being taught applies personally to them.

Some have suggested that to question any facet associated with the church is tantamount to treason and hypocrisy.

On this board? Can you cite examples? I have never seen any such thing here.

When is it ok to question and when isn’t it?

It is okay to question when you don't know the answer and you are sincerely seeking it. It is not okay to question when you are actually agitating for change and your questions are designed not to provide enlightenment to yourself, but to raise doubts and destroy belief in the minds of others.

Joseph Smith Questioned which religion was right, was that ok?

Yes.

Brigham Young questioned who should be the successor of the church, was he a hypocrite?

No.

Members in the twenties questioned wearing full length (ankle and wrist) garments, were they wrong?

If they refused to wear the authorized garment, then of course they were wrong. They were in violation of their covenants.

Many more members questioned the priesthood ban before it was lifted, were they disloyal?

If they acted disloyally, then yes. If they agitated for change, they were loathsome hypocrites. If they simply sought information and understanding and insight into the Priesthood ban, they were part of a sizable throng of Saints seeking such knowledge.

How different would the world be if no one had the intestinal fortitude to question what is established?

Quantitatively speaking, way different.

[MarginOfError]

When Dravin (who is still floating on his honeymoon high) and MoE (who doesn't even like me) are the only two to laugh at my comment, it's clear that most participants are far too invested in this thread to see obvious, broad humor. Or maybe I'm just not funny.

Nah. Can't be that.

The only time I don't like you is when you're stubbornly refusing to agree with me Vort. But even then, I usually you irritatingly humorous.

[Guest saintish]

No. It is wrong to criticize, to ridicule, to eschew, to fail to value the words and teachings of the prophets. But questioning is expected. I encourage my children to question things. But that is a far cry from encouraging them to disbelieve, and is a world removed from teaching them the damnable attitude that they have no obligation to obey -- indeed, they ought not obey -- unless and until they receive a personal revelation that whatever principle being taught applies personally to them.

You seem to be suggesting that some on this board have done that, care to share an example?

On this board? Can you cite examples? I have never seen any such thing here.

I'm sure I could poke around and find something if you would like?

When is it ok to question and when isn’t it?

It is not okay to question when you are actually agitating for change and your questions are designed not to provide enlightenment to yourself, but to raise doubts and destroy belief in the minds of others.

I guess the civil right leaders shouldn't have asked questions then?

If they refused to wear the authorized garment, then of course they were wrong. They were in violation of their covenants.

Nope, they just cut the sleeves and legs short and complained a lot.

[Suzie]

Or maybe I'm just not funny.

Ditto.

[Vort]

You seem to be suggesting that some on this board have done that, care to share an example?

Nah, pretty sure I suggested no such thing.

I'm sure I could poke around and find something if you would like?

Please do.

I guess the civil right leaders shouldn't have asked questions then?

That's a bait-and-switch, saintish. Ecclesiastical comportment is much different from social comportment. Agitating for societal change is acceptable; indeed, in a free society, it is vital. Agitating for doctrinal change is despicable in a revealed religion.