Sarah Palin is Right

31

No, this isn’t about politics.

This is about the unbelievable torrent of anonymous criticism unleashed upon Sarah Palin by certain unnamed sources within the McCain campaign since the election on Tuesday night. Yesterday she fired back. In an interview from the governor’s office in Anchorage, she said of the anonymous criticism, “It’s mean-spirited, it’s immature, it’s unprofessional, and those guys are jerks"

She is absolutely right. 

That’s not a political judgment. That’s just a fact. 

Let me add my two cents. Anonymous criticism is cowardly. If you don’t have the courage to put your name to what you say, then don’t say it.

When I was a pastor, I told the office staff not to show me unsigned letters or notes because I wouldn’t read them. For that matter, I told the staff never to bring anonymous criticism to a staff meeting. We had a simple rule that no one could say things like . . .

"Some people don’t like this idea."
"I’ve been getting some negative feedback."
"I can’t say who told me this."
"I promised not to mention any names."

Anonymous criticism is unfair because opinions should be weighed, not counted. Negative statements and strong disagreements are fine, but you need to know the context. It’s unfair because there is no way to dialogue with your critics. And in really rough times, anonymous criticism is a Gestapo tactic, a way to intimidate people with vague, unsourced gossip and slander. 

I would give the same advice to President-elect Obama or to any Democrat or Republican. And I think it’s a good rule for pastors and for all church leaders. 

Ignore anonymous criticism. 

Man up.
Sign your own name.
Stand behind your opinions.

As I’m writing this entry, I’m surprised by how strongly I feel about this. But I’ve seen too many good people hurt by anonymous criticism. 

It’s destructive, it’s wrong, and no one should do it. 

That’s what I think. And in case you wonder . . .

I’m Ray Pritchard and I approve this message.

*Screen Name:
Question or comment:
	This is a private message or question
	Notify me of follow up comments via e-mail
	* denotes required field

Visitor Comments:

November 8, 2008, 8:39 AM Paul Barreca says:
	Amen, Ray! We follow the same policy regarding unsigned letters and anonymous criticism. It saves us much heartache. It also takes this weapon out of the hands of cowardly critics. Everyone could learn from this advice.
November 8, 2008, 8:59 AM Butch Gow says:
	Ray, What you have said probably rankles many who are very immature. That being said, I’m on board with your thoughts. Here in these days I believe more than ever that in order to establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity, we must be first honest with ourselves, second honest with others without being mean spirited, and third, we must be willing to stand up and be counted for what is truly right. Now I know some people will criticize me for that last statement of “what is truly right.” In defense of myself, and for others, all you have to do to know what is right is to re-read this preamble to the constituion. This is only part of it, so google it and re-read the whole thing again Our fore-fathers knew what they were doing, when designing the constituion and there was much wrangling and compromising to get a document that could be followed. It wasn’t easy, and according the James Madison’s notes, there was a lot of disagreement all around. But nonetheless, the constituion was hammered out, no not perfect, yet I believe it was God ordained. Now I also know that many will think Butch you have to read the bible to know what is right. That is also true, but I felt that it goes without saying. Come on guys give me some credit. Sorry for the long rant, however when we do what is right, we know it don’t we?
November 8, 2008, 9:53 AM stu says:
	I also approve of your message!
November 8, 2008, 11:17 AM Ray Pritchard says:
	Our churches would be stronger if the leaders adopted a “no anonymous criticism” policy, explained it to the congregation, and then lived by this principle. I didn’t learn this in seminary. I learned this the hard way—which is how we learn most of what really matters in the ministry.
November 8, 2008, 12:02 PM Ray sherman says:
	I agree Pastor Ray. If someone can;t look you in the eye and criticize you, or put their name on what they have written about you, don’t do it at all. Have the guts to admit it. Ray S.
November 8, 2008, 4:23 PM andersondills at aol dot com says:
	Ray, thanks for this good word. Also, thanks for an outstanding weekend at Harvey Cedars Bible Conference. Hal and I really appreciated the ministry of you and Marlene and found your format really refreshing. Hal and I went to see Fireproof today....as a date. You two are an inspiration. Joyce Anderson
November 8, 2008, 4:53 PM RodneyOlsen dot net says:
Rodney is a husband, father and radio broadcaster from Perth, Western Australia.	This can be a real problem online where people never need to know who you are. There have been times that I’ve read something on a blog or in a forum and felt like leaving an anonymous comment. Then I’ve thought, “No. If I’m not prepared to put my name to it, I’m not saying it.”
November 8, 2008, 5:02 PM Harlin S. Neal says:
	I’m Harlin Neal, and I also approve this message. If you don’t have enough stones to show yourself when you’re criticizing someone, then shut up.
November 8, 2008, 5:08 PM Deb says:
	Amen brother! people talk behind people’s back and think if I don’t say names It’s ok. We in the Christan coummunity and the busniess should have a little more class.
November 8, 2008, 5:54 PM Ray Fisher says:
	Gov. Palin is th e best thing going from this marathon P. campaign. I hope we hear more from her & that she’ll be an inspiration for others to stand up to speak out to refute the “intelligencia” who want to take over this great country ;a land whose governmental .foundation was laid thru the spilt blood of our founding fathers who made sure that Jesus Christ was the Chief Corner Stone! I feel we should encourage her every way we can! RF
November 8, 2008, 6:02 PM Peggy McGilligan says:
	Anonymous tips do have their place. That being said however, how unprofessional is it for any so called news agency to report innuendo without first checking the validity of the facts, without first doing its homework? In this case, sloppy journalism, unsubstantiated facts, spurious comments, only serve as allegations for the maligned individual to repudiate. Character assignation; insult to injury. Simply put, the press oftentimes reports what they should not report, while failing to report that which they should: http://theseedsof9-11.com
November 8, 2008, 8:50 PM houner says:
	I totally agree with the comment.. This is very present in the house of God. Pastors don’t even know people but stand in judgement upon them on some elses words. We think the only sins are those such as drugs & other world called sin. But what about gossip, backbiting, busy body, slander such as you speaking about. The bible says know sin is greater than another. God bless you & your Ministry. Bishop Melvin L. Shivers.esq. Bishop at Large
November 8, 2008, 8:56 PM Angela Thomas says:
	I agree with what you say. I wasn’t sure if I liked Gov. Palin at first, but over time, I began to respect this woman who has turned into the scapegoat. I didn’ t agree with the selection, but it is wrong of those who chose her to suddenly say she is the reason they lost. She deserves better than that.
November 8, 2008, 11:55 PM Bruce Smith says:
	This post really gave me a good chuckle. You couldn’t be more correct.
November 9, 2008, 8:48 AM awprust810 at inbox dot com says:
Born again Christian	Bro. Ray, If one is not brave enough to sign their NAME behind their own criticism or praises you have to someone you should not even voice it. I believe you are putting the ball in other person’s court. You have done what you believe is right and the Bible says go to your brother if you don’t agree and work things out with each other. Throughout my later years in life I have found if I can’t sign my name for what I stand for what I believe to be right than don’t slander someone else. I approve of your message wholeheartly Bro. Ray. May God con’t to Bless you in your ministry for HIM. Jennie Prust
November 9, 2008, 5:23 PM David Peterson says:
	Sins of Anonymous Notes 1 No accountability for what I say. 2 Never a loving confrontation. 3 No interest in an explanation. 4 Hurting someone intentionally or unintentionally without any possibility of restoration.
November 9, 2008, 7:58 PM Janine says:
	I love this!! Amen, Pastor Ray! :-)
November 9, 2008, 11:20 PM John Finkelde says:
Leader, author, pastor, husband, father www.finkelde.com.au	Absolutely spot on! I do the same with my staff - generally I’ve found if people say “A lot of people are saying ...” it generally means only 1 or 2
November 10, 2008, 1:50 PM Raymond says:
	Governor Palin always reminds me of a girl who was “Queen of the Hop” back in my California High School days in the 1950s. So, I call her “Sarah, Queen of the Hop.” So, in her political “fatwa” denouncing those phantom enemies she says their anonymous attacks are “mean-spirited” “immature” and “unprofessional” and then calls them jerks. But when she calls them “jerks” this is not “mean-spirited” “immature” and “unprofessional” because she is a governor and is identifying herself. Right? In any event, “anonymous criticism” is not a “Gestapo tactic.” Anyone familiar with that organization after Hitler came to power knows that the Geheimstaatspolizei (Secret State Police) were anything but anonymous. When they came to get you in their SS uniforms there was no mistake about who they were. Thanks. My name is Ray Sifdol.
November 10, 2008, 2:29 PM Raymond says:
	Ray Sifdol with a concluding comment on the “Sarah Palin Is Right” article and my one previous comment. I am sure we have not forgotten that President Elect Obama has also been under attack with barrages of criticism (anonymous and otherwise) before and after his election. He has been called a “terrorist” and a “socialist” among other things by a lot of right wing crazies, not to mention at least a few right winger, Whitey type “Christian” organizations that can’t stand the fact that an Afro-American has been elected. Sarah Palin is Governor of Alaska, and I bet we will be hearing a lot more about Senator/President Elect Obama in the future than we will hear about her. We need to face reality now and realize that Americans are clearly fed up with the Republican Party for at least the time being. Don’t forget that it is an outgoing Republican (maybe Repooplican is a better word) that has left us with an economic disaster of the first water, not to mention two disastrous wars with no end in sight. So, cheer up because the best or the worst is yet to come.
November 10, 2008, 2:50 PM Raymond says:
	Ray Sifdol again for the last time on this article. Readers should make no mistake that my comments on Pastor Pritchard’s article on criticism of Sarah Palin is in no way an “attack” on him or anyone else who made comments on this article. It is just my opinion, and I very much appreciate the opportunity to express my opinions on this site. It is a privilege and not a right to do so, since the site belongs to Pastor Pritchard. Otherwise, the best Christian sermons and articles I have ever seen I have found on this site.
November 10, 2008, 3:36 PM Pastor Ron says:
	For my little two cents worth, I agree 100%! As a pastor who has been the object of anonymous criticism... to the detriment of the church as a whole... I agree 100%! As a minister of the Gospel I have seen churches torn apart (Ones I served in) and ministries horribly damaged because of people not willing to take responsibility for what they say. I find myself getting passionate about this topic as I write this comment myself. In a court of law the accused has a right to be confronted by his accusers. In church the accusers are protected by a pseudo-confidentiality agreement. Scripture teaches that accusations against elders require two witnesses before it is even LISTENED TO... but all it takes is “I’ve been getting negative feedback” in a Deacon’s meeting and the minister is on the hot seat. You and Gov. Palin are right! Those who won’t man up and put their name to what they are saying are spineless little imps who are nothing more than divisive tools of the adversary attempting to hinder God’s Kingdom’s work. And I don’t think that is being too harsh either. Thank you for posting this. I’m Ron Ethridge and I approve this comment.
November 10, 2008, 3:56 PM Raymond says:
	From the comments on this article I can tell that most of the comments are probably from Republicans. I live in Kansas which as people know is no longer straight Republican. However, I voted a straight Republican ticket to get rid of one Democrat in Congress and keep another Republican in. But so what? I voted for McCain because I thought he would serve the military best. Neverthless, his choice of Palin probably lost him the election. But again, So What? What if McCain had selected Colin Powell as VP and he had accepted? Would he have won? As it turns out, Powell who worked for a Republican admin. supports Obama. Politics breed strange bedfellows. Bet if Obama was under attack by anonymous sources there would hardly be a peep on this blog about it. Our politics are showing. The reality is - Obama is President elect. So, grow up and deal with it!
November 11, 2008, 7:45 AM Helen says:
	I realize some people take advantage of anonymity to be mean. I am as against that as everyone here. However I think there are situations in which we should protect people who bring serious allegations. Children who are abused need a safe place to reveal that information and need protection from their abuser, not dialog with that person. If there is no safe place and protection, both the abused and abusers will be worse off, because the abused will continue to suffer and the abusers will not be held accountable and will not get help/be brought to justice. Some institutions, including some churches, are set up in such a way that the leaders hold all the power and there is no safe place or protection for people who know of serious problems. They are afraid to speak up; or if they do they suffer some sort of reprisal. I understand church leaders saying to their congregations “no anonymous criticism” but it feels one-sided to me. In order to make it two-sides, along with the “no anonymous criticism” message I hope they will create an environment in which there is a way for people ‘with no power’ in that community to share honest dissent or concerns without fear. I think this is important because the sooner problems are addressed, the less people are hurt by them. Whenever something very serious comes to light in a church it seems that some people knew about it for a while, but it was not possible for them to get a serious hearing. If it had been, the problem could have been addressed sooner and less people would have been hurt. I feel strongly about this because I feel that using power to suppress criticism is at least as evil as anonymous criticism - maybe worse because misuse of power is so against everything Jesus stood for.
November 12, 2008, 10:56 AM Ray Pritchard says:
	My original post was directed at what might be called snarky comments, the sort of personal criticism that would not be made if you had to attach your name to it. That sort of thing goes on all the time in every organization and most of it would end if people had to attach their names to what they say. Questions of child abuse are in another realm altogether. And I agree with the need to protect confidentiality in those circumstances. Plus the “no anonymous criticism” rule won’t work unless it is a two-way street. The leaders must not set themselves above the people as if they are better than others and immune to honest feedback. I can tell from the comments that many people have been hurt by anonymous criticism because in too many cases, it allows people to say anything they want with no accountability. For the church to be the church, we have to find ways to speak the truth in love—and to hear the truth spoken in love—even when it may not feel very loving to us at the time. Ray
November 12, 2008, 5:08 PM Becky says:
	Shades of Lee Roberson!!!!! I think anonymous letters were absolutely his pet peeve. And I agree with you both. I got into the local voting process this year, first by serving as a poll clerk for the primary, and last by serving as presiding judge of my precinct on November 4. The County Clerk promised me experienced help if I would serve. She did and I did. It was a great experience. I told my helpers that success would be defined by my not being a guest on ‘Good Morning America” on November 5. Looks like I’ll likely be appointed a judge by the commissioners court for elections for the next two years. Hopkins County is a funny place. Most everybody votes in the Democratic Party primary and then votes Republican in the general election. And, sure enough, all but two winners (sheriff and a county commissioner - both running for re-election) were Republicans. I suppose one could conclude that we have a bunch of closet Republicans here.
November 13, 2008, 9:36 AM Helen says:
	Thanks for your response, Pastor Ray.
November 13, 2008, 9:44 PM Ray Pritchard says:
	Becky, you’re right about Dr. Roberson. He hated anonymous letters. Had absolutely no use for them. And I imagine he got more than a few back in the day. I think Hopkins County is “yellow dog Democrat” country, except that they vote Republican nowadays. I didn’t see you on Good Morning America so you must have done a great job. Cheers, Ray
November 14, 2008, 7:01 AM Helen says:
	This doesn’t change the undesirability of anonymous criticism but it does relate to the post-election anonymous criticism of Sarah Palin. Apparently at least some of it was fake A Senior Fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence
November 14, 2008, 7:03 AM Helen says:
	Sorry, here’s a link that doesn’t need a login A senior fellow at the Institute of Nonexistence
November 14, 2008, 10:10 AM Derek says:
KBM Website Administrator	Great link, Helen. That whole story about how Palin didn’t know that Africa was a continent and not a nation seemed fishy to me from the moment I heard it. A good reminder to folks of all political persuasions to remember that not everything we hear in the media is necessarily true. If it sounds too far fetched to be true, it just might be.