FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Question: When, if ever, is it okay to disagree with Church leaders?
Question: When, if ever, is it okay to disagree with Church leaders?
Introduction to Question
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a large and well-established organization of leadership. This video outlines that leadership in detail:
The President of the Church, considered to be the prophet, receives revelation on behalf of the entire Church. Each person receives revelation for his own position and sphere of influence in the Church.
Occasionally in the Church, it is asked when it is ever okay to disagree with the decisions of local and/or general Church leadership.
This article will outline those occasions when it is and is not okay to disagree with leaders of the Church.
Three Important Considerations
Before we get into the occasions when it may be okay to disagree with Church leaders, it is important to keep in mind three things.
The Ideal: Agreeing with and Defending as Much of the Prophet’s Words as Humanly Possible
First, we should lay out what the ideal is for every Latter-day Saint is in relation to the leaders of the Church. That is:
We should try and agree with and defend the words of all leaders of the Church as much as humanly possible.
This is what it means to sustain a leader: to uphold their influence in human hearts as much as possible. When we disagree with them or criticize them, they can start to lose their influence either in our own hearts, the hearts of other people that hear our criticism, or both.
Over and over again in the scriptures we are told that the prophets are holy.[1] We should try and treat them and their words as such.
We are also told in scripture to receive the prophet's word as if from the mouth of God in all patience and faith.[2] Additionally, we are told that if we do lift our heels against them and say they have sinned when they haven't, that we will be cursed.[3] Latter-day Saints who have gone through temples to receive their endowment have covenanted to not speak evil of the Lord's anointed.
This is absolutely not to say that we make an assumption that the leaders of the Church are incapable of error. The scriptures expressly declare that the prophets are capable of error. The first section of the Doctrine and Covenants declares that when leaders make errors, it shall be made known.[4] It also declares that when they sin, they will be chastened so that they will repent.[5] All this means, again, is that we agree with and defend them as much as possible so as to uphold their influence on human hearts and minds.
Recognizing a Fault or Mistake vs. Criticizing and Backbiting
Church leaders have consistently taught that there is a difference between the type of differences of view that members can have with Church leaders and criticism or backbiting. Elder Dallin H. Oaks noted that there is a difference between the type of criticism that is "the act of passing judgement as to the merits of anything" and "the act of passing severe judgement; censure; faultfinding" which Church members are to refrain from in relation to Church leaders. Elder Oaks notes that the latter is condemned repeatedly in scripture.[6] There is a large difference between recognizing that what some Church leader said is mistaken or wrong and openly criticizing them and faultfinding. When we have disagreements, we can do the former and not the latter.
The strongest word that the scriptures use in relation to addressing the faults of top leaders is admonish which means "[t]o warn or notify of a fault; to reprove with mildness."[7] That word is used twice in scripture in relation to leaders of the Church and only directed to people that have close relationships with the prophet. In the first instance it is with Oliver Cowdery in 1829 before the organization of the Church:
- 19 Admonish him in his faults, and also receive admonition of him. Be patient; be sober; be temperate; have patience, faith, hope and charity.[8]
In the second instance it is given to Thomas B. Marsh who was the President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles:
- 12 And pray for thy brethren of the Twelve. Admonish them sharply for my name’s sake, and let them be admonished for all their sins, and be ye faithful before me unto my name.[9]
In this latter scripture, it does say to admonish "sharply." But, again, it's used in relation to someone who is already in high positions in the Church.
Five procedures to follow if you have differences with Church leadership
Elder Oaks then gives five things that members can do when they have differences with Church leadership.
- Overlook the difference
- Reserve judgment and postpone any action on the difference
- Take up our differences privately with the leader involved.
- Communicate with the Church officer who has the power to correct or release the person thought to be in error or transgression.
- Pray for the resolution of the problem.[10]
There may be times where we believe that personal revelation has told us something that contradicts the prophet’s revelation. In these cases, review the principles and procedures outlined in this article.
Occasions When One May Disagree With Church Leaders
Now we list the occasions in which one may disagree with Church leaders. These are not all automatic exceptions. Disagreement should be handled in a spirit of charity, prayer, and seeking the good of the Kingdom of God.
1. It is okay to disagree with Church leadership when what they teach it is out of harmony with the Standard Works
The first place where it would be okay to disagree with any Church leadership is when they say something that is out of line with the standard works. Joseph Smith left clear revelation that the canonized scriptures should govern the Church.[11] This since they have been revealed by the Lord's duly appointed prophet,[12] submitted to and approved by all members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve,[13] and submitted to the general body of the Church for ratification.[14] Scripture should be read contextually (that is, in the historical context of the people who would have first heard the revelation) and holistically (seeing everything scripture has to say on the topic at hand) to acquire accurate theological conceptions that they judge every person's doctrine against. This article explains in more detail how to read the scriptures.
Joseph Fielding Smith wrote:
It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man¹s doctrine. You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards of doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted.[15]
2. It is okay to disagree with Church leadership when they try and claim revelation for something that is outside the bounds of their calling
As mentioned before, Church leaders have a specific sphere of influence that they are given with their calling and they are only allowed to receive revelation for that calling.
Elder Oaks taught:
First, we should understand what can be called the principle of “responsibility in revelation.” Our Heavenly Father’s house is a house of order, where his servants are commanded to “act in the office in which [they are] appointed."[16] This principle applies to revelation. Only the President of the Church receives revelation to guide the entire Church. Only the stake president receives revelation for the special guidance of the stake. The person who receives revelation for the ward is the bishop. For a family, it is the priesthood leadership of the family. Leaders receive revelation for their own areas of responsibility. Individuals can receive revelation to guide their own lives. But when one person purports to receive revelation for another person outside his or her own area of responsibility—such as a Church member who claims to have revelation to guide the entire Church or a person who claims to have a revelation to guide another person over whom he or she has no presiding authority according to the order of the Church—you can be sure that such revelations are not from the Lord. “There are counterfeit signals.”[17] Satan is a great deceiver, and he is the source of some of these spurious revelations. Others are imagined. If a revelation is outside the limits of your specific responsibility, you know it is not from the Lord and you are not bound by it.[18]
3. It is okay to disagree with Church leadership when their decisions don’t come from revelation
- Members may disagree with Church leaders' decisions when those decisions do not come from revelation. When a decision, new doctrine, new policy, etc. is claimed to come by revelation, this adds a confirming, divine witness on that action and disagreement with that decision may very likely be disagreement with God.
4. It is okay to disagree with Church leadership when their conduct clearly does not fall in line with the moral standards and other statutes laid out in scripture
Another area in which members can disagree with Church leadership is when their conduct does not clearly fall in line with the moral standards and other statutes laid out in scripture.
As mentioned before, the Doctrine and Covenants expressly states that when Church leaders make errors it will be known. It also states that when they sin, they will be chastened so that they will repent. No one is exempt from the laws of the Church given through prophets by God via revelation. All must be held accountable before the appropriate authorities for their transgressions.[19] The Doctrine and Covenants even provides a procedure for excommunicating the President of the Church.[20]
Conclusion
It is the hope of the author that these principles and ideas will serve productively to show that there is room for disagreement in the Church without undermining the essential governmental structure and authority of Church leaders.
Notes
- ↑ For just three of dozens of references, see 1 Nephi 3:30; 5:13; 13:20
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 21:5. This revelation in context referred to Joseph Smith but easily applies to his successors.
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 121:16
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 1:25
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 1:27
- ↑ Dallin H. Oaks, "Criticism," Ensign 17 (February 1987). "Faultfinding, evil speaking, and backbiting are obviously unchristian. The Bible commands us to avoid 'evil speakings.' (See 1 Peter 2:1.) It tells us to 'Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you.' (Ephesians 4:31.) Modern revelations direct us to avoid 'backbiting,' 'evil speaking,' and 'find[ing] fault one with another.' (See Doctrine and Covenants 20:53–54; Doctrine and Covenants 42:27; Doctrine and Covenants 88:124; and Doctrine and Covenants 136:23)."
- ↑ "Admonish," Webster's 1828 Dictionary, accessed June 16, 2021, http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/admonish. Emphasis added.
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 6:19
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 112:12
- ↑ Ibid.
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 42:12–13, 56–60; 105:58–59
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 21:4–5; Doctrine and Covenants 28:2
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 107:27
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 26:2; 28:13
- ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1954–56), 203–204.
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 107:99.
- ↑ Boyd K. Packer, “Prayers and Answers,” Ensign 9 (November 1979): 19–20.
- ↑ Dallin H. Oaks, "Revelation," New Era 11 (September 1982).
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 107:81
- ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 107:82–84