Is There Room For Loyal Opposition In The Church?

[teddyaware]

So the general member should except in extraordinary situations, basically shut up and do his/her calling and pay ones tithing? Is that where we are?

I would say we are not "shutting up," as you put it, but rather dynamically engaged and vocal within our own callings and sphere of influence. Plus, in our day, with the advent of the computer and social networking age. we can spout off lots, and I bet at least some of the stuff posted on sites like this one will get noticed by some of the brethren.

Bottom line? The Kingdom of God is going to come off triumphant, with or without the arksteadiers. The mind, will and work of the Lord will not be thwarted by the imperfections of men...

Edited July 21, 2013 by teddyaware

[Erin15]

So the general member should except in extraordinary situations, basically shut up and do his/her calling and pay ones tithing? Is that where we are?

Why so pejoritive in your choice of words?

Edited July 21, 2013 by Erin15

[canard78]

Why so pejoritive in your choice of words?

This from the person recently effectively calling Mattsson an agent of Satan??

[Erin15]

This from the person recently effectively calling Mattsson an agent of Satan??

Please link the post you are referring to.

[Scott Lloyd]

People are one thing ideas are another. I think it would be dumb and improper to say that President Sting Van Halen is a yo yo where as ideas have lives of their own such as is Elder Bruce C. Hafen criticizing Pres. McKay idea that no ther success can compensate for failure in home when he said,

“While no other success of ours can compensate for our failures within or outside our homes, there is a success that can compensate when we cannot, after we conscientiously do all we can. That success is the Atonement of Jesus Christ, which can mend what for us is beyond repair.”

Bruce C. Hafen

you tell me

I don't see this as contradicting or criticizing President McKay's statement. More a matter of ensuring it was understood in the proper context (that is, worldly honors and pursuits don't make up for abdicating one's family duties and responsibilities).

Incidentally, pres. McKay did not originate the statement; he was quoting somebody else.

[Duncan]

I don't see this as contradicting or criticizing President McKay's statement. More a matter of ensuring it was understood in the proper context (that is, worldly honors and pursuits don't make up for abdicating one's family duties and responsibilities).

Incidentally, pres. McKay did not originate the statement; he was quoting somebody else.

that's fair!

[Stone holm]

Why so pejoritive in your choice of words?

Okay you are probably right. So except in extraordinary situations the ordinary member should keep his opinions to himself or herself, and just do what he or she is told to do and support the Church financially. Does that sound nicer.

[Robert F. Smith]

......................................

“When the Prophet speaks the debate is over.”

Eldon Tanner, Ensign, Aug. 1979, pp. 2-3.

...................................................

You have here conflated two separate quotes and cited both, carrying the capitalized "Prophet" over from Elaine Cannon's comment, which President Tanner quoted with approval, and his own quote without the caps.

Having observed this, Pres. Tanner was not speaking ex cathedra, but on his own. This was not part of a First Presidency Letter or announcement, and so is not automatically part of the doctrine of the Church, but is to be considered in the proper context He is defending the LDS Prophet speaking for God on moral and ethical questions of the day. We should pay close attention to what is said by any of the Brethren, and then pray for our own witness that it is correct.

[Robert F. Smith]

For what it is worth, this is THE question which makes me "persona non grata" to most conservative Catholics. I am a loyal opposition guy. There exists among the majority of practicing Catholics today, a belief in the personal impeccability of the successor of Cephas (St. Peter), the pope, which is not compatible with Scripture or Catholic Tradition.

This passage of Scripture is critical to my view of the highest ecclesiastical authority, and how one who faithfully loves the church must sometimes offer resistance to authority:

---Gal. 2:11

I am an outsider to this as an LDS question, but I tend think that if "loyal opposition" is compatible with an ecclesiology that sometimes claims infallibility for the highest authority, it is assuredly the right course when there is no infallibility.

3DOP

Thanks, Rory,

That brings to mind the important role of Hugh Nibley as the loyal opposition of his day: as social critic and scholar who demanded much of his best students. I have witnessed him deliver harsh criticism with some of the Brethren there sitting on the dais. They loved him and laughed at his jokes. They repeatedly invited him to come up to SLC to council them privately on issues of his expertise. He once asked them whether he should stop writing the critiques he authored directed at the foibles of Mormon society -- they replied with an emphatic "No!"

Bob

[Tacenda]

Thanks, Rory,

That brings to mind the important role of Hugh Nibley as the loyal opposition of his day: as social critic and scholar who demanded much of his best students. I have witnessed him deliver harsh criticism with some of the Brethren there sitting on the dais. They loved him and laughed at his jokes. They repeatedly invited him to come up to SLC to council them privately on issues of his expertise. He once asked them whether he should stop writing the critiques he authored directed at the foibles of Mormon society -- they replied with an emphatic "No!"

Bob

They were probably sick of all the "yes" people around them, just as so many famous people are.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

It seems like we Mormons sometimes have to tread a very fine line. On occasion the leadership of the Church may in their "official capacity", or in their heavily disclaimed "unofficial capacity", do something or say something which does not pertain to the core principles or mission of the Church. To some any criticism of any such action that an individual member may have constitutes ill speaking of the Lord's Annointed, or "steadying the ark", or look like the person is being a Judas. We strongly emphasize "obedience" in the Church.

So is it ever permissible to criticize a General Authority saying or doing something? Is it a zero tolerance of criticism policy, or is there a certain line which if observed allows a member to question an action or policy publicly, or in a forum such as this one?

aYes by not bring rude or hurtful in doubt do,

[Lightbearer]

So is it ever permissible to criticize a General Authority saying or doing something? Is it a zero tolerance of criticism policy, or is there a certain line which if observed allows a member to question an action or policy publicly, or in a forum such as this one?

Why would one want to criticize a General Authority saying or doing something? One can disagree all they want, but when you publicly come out in opposition to the Church, one is not being loyal to the Church. I do not separate my feelings toward the Lord and His Church. It is His Church, He knows the limitations of His servants and His hand is over them, if they need to be corrected or chastened He has the ability to do it and has an organization in place to deal with any error in the Church, it is called revelation. So I seriously doubt that you, or I could point out anything that God has overlooked.

Consider the following quotes:

(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith Section Four 1839-42, p.156) "O ye Twelve! and all Saints! profit by this important Key--that in all your trials, troubles, temptations, afflictions, bonds, imprisonments and death, see to it, that you do not betray heaven; that you do not betray Jesus Christ; that you do not betray the brethren; that you do not betray the revelations of God, whether in Bible, Book of Mormon, or Doctrine and Covenants, or any other that ever was or ever will be given and revealed unto man in this world or that which is to come. Yea, in all your kicking and flounderings, see to it that you do not this thing, lest innocent blood be found upon your skirts, and you go down to hell. All other sins are not to be compared to sinning against the Holy Ghost, and proving a traitor to the brethren."

A Key to Mysteries

"I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn other, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives. The principle is as correct as the one that Jesus put forth in saying that he who seeketh a sign is an adulterous person; and that principle is eternal, undeviating, and firm as the pillars of heaven; for whenever you see a man seeking after a sign, you may set it down that he is an adulterous man."

So while it may be all fine to disagree with the General Authorities of the Church, but I would look at my motives for such an opposition before I voiced it. Check out my sig line (the quote by Elder McConkie) to see how I feel about so-called "loyal oppositon." In fact one way of looking at it is Lucifer could have been considered the "loyal opposition" in heaven, that did not go so well for him. Also Cain was a loyal opposer to his brother Able. In fact all the prophets and apostles had those who opposed them. So I would be very careful in my opposition in fact Moroni warned us of this:

"Wherefore, take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is good and of God to be of the devil. For behold, my brethren, it is given unto you to judge, that ye may know good from evil; and the way to judge is as plain, that ye may know with a perfect knowledge, as the daylight is from the dark night. For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God. But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him. And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged. Wherefore, I beseech of you, brethren, that ye should search diligently in the light of Christ that ye may know good from evil; and if ye will lay hold upon every good thing, and condemn it not, ye certainly will be a child of Christ." (Book of Mormon | Moroni 7:14-19)

[ERayR]

Okay you are probably right. So except in extraordinary situations the ordinary member should keep his opinions to himself or herself, and just do what he or she is told to do and support the Church financially. Does that sound nicer.

It does sound nicer but the wrong attitude still shines forth. It would be better to spend some prayer time seeking an understanding for why they are taking the stance they are.

[ERayR]

And there you have it folks....

See my previous post.