Please watch this 30 second video, and let us know your comments.
Do you think Elder Oaks regrets saying this on the PBS documentary, The Mormons? Do you support Elder Oaks comments?
[poll id = 481]
[poll id = 482]
What are your thoughts about Al Pacino’s character saying essentially the same thing?
Wheat & Tares 
They’re not the same. He’s saying it’s wrong to criticize your leaders. This is not the same thing as always agreeing with them, nor is it the same as being unfaithful if you don’t agree with them.
It’s unhealthy to spend your time criticizing people, cause it’s completely detached from that person. It’s perfectly fine to have a discussion with someone you disagree with, to ask questions to better understand or help them understand. Criticism hurts you and whomever you spread it to.
Frank – obviously you are intelligent and mature enough to make the distinction between criticism and everything else. I’m not confident that a lot of church members are. I would anticipate that most members would take that as meaning don’t say ANYTHING about the leaders unless its a good thing.
I have had personal experience in this recently. I am just about to escalate something up to the Area President level. At all the previous lower levels where I have expressed concern about a particular issue (not criticism) I have been accused of criticising, speaking ill of, not supporting….whatever of my leaders. None of that has been true. I have been very careful to stick to the ISSUE, however the church leadership does not see it that way.
The other side of this is that there is NO real way of appropriately escalating issues in the church (as many have mentioned elsewhere). By the time I get to the AP level I will probably be told that I need to sort it out with the SP….the merry-go-round starts again.
I work in an organisation where I have been in a position where for a very serious matter I directly approached a Senior Executive officer. This officer was initially surprised that I would approach them directly, however was later grateful that I would bring it to his attention. Ultimately, the person concerned (another senior employee) left the organisation under a cloud. I only wish that such communication lines existed in the church. It seems that SP’s just do what they are told. If you have a concern AP’s send it back to the SP.
As for Elder Oaks, I don’t think he regrets what he said. That statement has set the tone for the communication lines between members and leaders, and probably will for some time to come….
I just want to point out that, at least when viewed on mobile, the thumbnail for this post has the green speech bubble coming out of Elder Oaks’ mouth. I’m assuming that’s intentional.
I’m on my tablet and there is no green speech bubble. I guess you’re lucky.
Frank, I agree with Lds_Aussie. Many LDS conflate disagreement with criticism, especially if the issue involves a hot button political issue.
I’d anticipate more those who are critical are doing their best to label it a disagreement. This post, for example, is critical, but the response would be “but everyone I know believes it’s true, and true things aren’t critical”
LDS_Aussie, I’d think your AP would see whatever your problem is as criticism, at first, simply because of the sheer number of criticisms he has to deal with all the time. It’s going to take work, without becoming critical about it, for him to see otherwise.
I’m with Frank (no. 1) on this one. We don’t always agree with our parents, or spouses, or children — but we shouldn’t criticize them, either.
False prophet says false things.
It’s all about HOW you voice disagreement with leaders.
There is an appropriate time and place that I would say is acceptable, and then there is just contentious and prideful ways that make leaders look bad.
Should we make them look bad? Sometimes they may seem to deserve it, but I don’t think you are respectful if you’re making them look bad.
I also wonder if it matters at what level the leader is.
I disagree with Elder Oaks, because right is right and wrong is wrong. But if that short clip was meant to say it is wrong to openly and publicly take a campaign to criticize leaders…I can see his point about the WAY it is criticized is not right, even if the criticism is correct. But I would disagree with any principle that all members are wrong to criticize in ANY way.
And I agree with the above comments, members won’t make that distinction, and it just promote passive aggressive behavior in the church.
Elder Oaks isn’t THE prophet so he is simply expressing his opinion (again).
#9 But why do I feel like he was referring to himself?
I support him 100 percent because I have sustained him therefore god will speak to me through him. I better heed his council or I risk judgement.
Ron – this is a big part of the entire problem. Elder Oaks was speaking there, not God. He was providing his personal opinion. He was not being revelatory or exercising powers as an apostle. I have sustained him too, but I’m confident that Elder Oaks would say that he was not speaking for the Lord when he said that. He could very well have said, “you shouldn’t walk around LA at night” It might be good advice, but it’s not the Lord telling us that. He is not the prophet, but prophets have been wrong before. Being wrong is ok. We are all wrong some of the time. But to think that prophets and apostles are always speaking for the Lord is simply not correct. They have said that themselves…
I’m sure Oaks regrets making that comment. Now, do I think he regrets it because he’s had a change of heart…? Nope. I think he regrets it because it’s getting blown up and thrown around like this – causing more bad PR.
Also, I do not think it’s wrong to criticize leaders – of anything. It probably isn’t healthy to spend ALL of your time criticizing, however, I don’t think it’s at all a problem to be critical, or to voice that occasionally. I believe it’s part of healthy productivity – both individually, and in organizations. I don’t think it would be helpful to be only positive all the time. It’s unrealistic. It seems to me that what’s important about it is that you have healthy ways of expressing criticism.
Frank,
Great comment, I totally agree
I remember watching the PBS movie and thinking, “Bro. Oaks couldn’t have meant what he just said. It was probably just taken out of context.” But he has continued to speak like this very openly since then, so I assume he meant it and honestly believes what he said.
The thing that makes me saddest here is that Bro. Oaks isn’t saying *he* shouldn’t criticize. He is so close to the top of the pile, and everyone underneath him is fair game to hear what he has to say. He criticizes/corrects/disagrees whenever he speaks publicly in a church capacity. If he sees something he disagrees with, say at a stake conference, he surely feels comfortable telling the stake president to change things. He’s obviously comfortable disagreeing with church members when he speaks in general conference or a press conference or to the missionaries at the MTC. So no, he’s not saying he shouldn’t criticize. He’s saying all the rest of us underlings shouldn’t criticize our betters.
And the reason that’s sad to me is that Jesus raised people up, tried to bring them closer to their potential, and empowered them. He knew everyone was lower in the pile than He was, yet He said He came as a servant, not as a task-master. And in His example, which presumably we are trying to follow, Jesus also criticized his church leaders when occasion called for it.
I have to choose between following Jesus and following Bro. Oaks on this issue, and I feel disappointed when that happens.
I agree wholeheartedly with LDS_Aussie. Joseph Smith also usually used “don’t speak ill of the Lord’s anointed” in a self-serving manner. There is a correct principle buried in there, and in Oaks’ use of “don’t criticize.” But, the Church has provided no process or precedent for all us followers to give sincere, well-meaning feedback. So, ALL feedback is automatically branded as “speaking ill” and as “criticism.”
I have observed (repeatedly during my 60+ years) that our leaders, both General and local, screw up or speak their own opinions officially so often that it is hard to discern that they are ever receiving “inspiration” from God, let alone all the time as they claim. Further, it is interesting to note that ALL the church’s progression on so-called social issues (cessation of polygamy, blacks getting the priesthood, improvements in respecting the rights of women, gay rights) and the teachings about them have come LONG after the wider culture made such progress. Does God’s revelations to the leadership on these and other issues consist of “OK, we are now far enough behind everyone else that you may proceed to teach the truth of it.” Is that because Mormons, much more so than most, “…will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions…”
We desperately need a “Suggestion Box” process that bypasses local leaders, manned (or womaned) by open-minded gate-keepers in SLC, so that the chosen 15 can actually hear some feedback. Or, they could just learn to use the Internet and learn to listen.
This is interesting to me. Just the other week Oaks made public statements in a press conference that the church (and thereby it’s leaders) does not make, or need to make, apologies. Bearing this mentatilty in mind, Why then should he feel regret over making these public statements?
I think Elder Oaks is simply saying that leaders are imperfect and make mistakes just like everyone else. And just like everyone else, they need our support , not our criticism. They’re trying to do their best and support is more helpful than criticism. We Mormons tend to judge rather easily from GA’s to the President of the United States–whoever it happens to be. Every President of the U.S.
leaves office with whiter hair–that’s enough for me to know he’s taking it seriously and doing his best . Leaders need support more than criticism. Actually, we all do. I don’t mean never disagree–just don’t denigrate the person.
Anarene, thank you for your comment above (#15). I agree with you completely!
It most certainly was taken out of context. The full quote can be found here:
He once gave an entire talk on the subject, which says something altogether different than what the single sentence quote implies:
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1987/02/criticism?lang=eng