Monday, November 28, 2011
I was thinking today about the recent discussion with the Stake President (no I haven't heard anything back from him - but I've been away for a few weeks). Anyway, I was thinking about how a few of the facts of history and doctrine I gave to him, which seemed pretty basic to me, seemed to catch him cold as if they were news. Not until recently did I really consider the difficult position the Church puts on it's lay leaders.
The Church asks a lot of it's lay leaders, particularly in light of the fact that it does not share with them any more of the real facts of Church history, changed doctrines, and past actions than it does with the general membership. They are expecting these guys to stand up in public in ignorance (some may say faith) and teach/defend the positions of the Church without all the facts. Is there such a thing as clergy abuse?
Most of these guys who serve have no real knowledge of the inner workings of the church, the seamy details of some church actions, or the real truth about church history and doctrine. I've thought for a while that the personal liability of serving as a church leader, particularly with the youth on camps, etc., is potentially high. Maybe the risk of being used and abused by the corporate PR machine is even greater.