I’m usually optimistic about most things, but not this one. How will Catholic boys remain boys as opposed to sponges for the gay agenda?I’ve been thinking about this for a while now and I’ve come to the conclusion that there are two principal ways that us Catholics are approaching what has happened here: a corporate approach and an individual approach.
From the corporate perspective (which seems to me the perspective of the NCCS and the bishops), we look at the whole. We have half a million Catholic boys in BSA. Even if the bishops and NCCS said we had to cut ties completely, they know that not every single one of them will leave scouting. A significant number of Catholics would still be there. And by cutting ties, they would leave those Catholic youth in that program with no religious guidance whatsoever. This seems unnecessary in light of the fact that the new policy as it is written does not contradict Catholic teaching.
From the individual perspective (which seems to me the perspective of many concerned parents and others), we look at what it means for us personally or the people we know. If we have sons at the threshhold of the scouting program and we’re looking at the potential of investing countless hours and dollars into the program over the next 10 years, it is quite legitimate to attempt to read the “writing on the wall” and be reticent about making such an investment in light of an uncertain future. From this persepctive, leaving now – even if things aren’t immediately in conflict with our faith – is quite reasonable as we don’t want to have to shift gears later on after we are even more invested in the program.
I placed the bishops into the “corporate perspective” category, but I know they are also aware of the individual perspective and I’m sure that factors into everything for them as well. They tend to do their best to try to be all things to all people.
I can understand and sympathize with both views. I am concerned that a mass exodus of strong Catholics and Christians from Scouting will only hasten and make more certain any future changes in policy – basically making it a self-fulfilling prophecy that things will get worse. Then, those who left will then be able to say “I’m glad we left when we did”, even though by staying perhaps things could have turned out differently. But I can’t say I don’t understand why they’d want to leave and leave sooner rather than later.
In the coming months, the BSA will be fleshing out the application of this policy change. I’m inclined to want to wait and see what they come up with and to see the NCCS response before making any decisions. Perhaps safeguards will be put in place that will make it more clear going forward that Catholics will be able to be Catholics in the program.
Unfortunately, yes, it is.Is the BSA the only group that the NCCS is affiliated with?
The NCCS is dedicated to the BSA. In fact the name of the committee is a registered trademark owned by the BSA.Or, if NCCS is going to be specifically dedicated to the BSA, will the USCCB establish another org to provide similar services to other Catholic boy development programs?
Yes, it’s role is that of an advisory body to the BSA.The past two weeks have been all about damage control. I feel sorry for the adult leaders who have invested years and time into the BSA to see it come to this. I am equally disturbed that the NCCS is playing BSA “supporter”. Is the BSA the only group that the NCCS is affiliated with?
:bigyikes:The NCCS is dedicated to the BSA. In fact the name of the committee is a registered trademark owned by the BSA.
Then if we want an alternative Scouting program we need to change venue and start lobbying NFCYM. Camp Fire is coed, so there’s nothing preventing NFCYM from sponsoring another dual gender/split for activity program like FNE or a boys program like Fraternus.On the girls side, the NFCYM offers Catholic religious programming for Girl Scouts, Camp Fire and AHG.
What is so confusing here? If an organisation welcomes homosexuals and places them in a situation where there is plenty of temptation, it is reasonable to expect that certain things will happen. The examples of sexual abuse happen often enough, even when an organisation does not accept homosexual behaviour as normal and positive, such as the church. That is what the examples show. Sex abuse happens and relaxing the rules about sexual conduct is likely to make it even more common.I don’t at all understand LSN’s use of these examples in building a case against the Boy Scouts. Someone could just as easily switch out the names of the scout leaders and replace them with the names of some Catholic priests who have been convicted of abuse to use as a reason to stay away from the Catholic Church.
I am not gay. Peter Brownstein told me he’s not gay. I believe him.III Scraping Below The Clever Cosmetics
…gay militants…
The term Scouting is trademarked by the BSA; so it would make sense that the NCCS term is also trademarked by the BSA. But the committee is not owned by the BSA. The NCCS is an independent group with a liaison to the National Catholic Committee on Scouting and a priest chaplain. If bishops wanted to setup a group to assist with your organization, Cat Herder, they can do so and just call it something else.:bigyikes:
See, I told you guys to ignore NCCS as hopelessly biased. So now we know for sure that they are going to remain hopelessly biased, because… The BSA OWNS THEM. They are as Catholic as Nancy Pelosi.
Get AWAY from the BSA.
Scouts are Friendly and Helpful. The way I repeated the Scout Promise was a promise to a set of principles, values and laws. Not a promise to a corporation.IV What Can be Concluded
…the way I repeated my Scout’s Promise…
Those who attended the Utah gay pride parade in uniform did so in explicit violation to BSA rules and a direct instruction from the Scout Executive of their council.IV What Can be Concluded
When I was in scouting as a member myself , the way I repeated my Scout’s Promise , didn’t say anything about “only while I’m in uniform”, but rather the inference was at all times- but especially in uniform. Today’s scout’s oath or promise is no different. So if not to disagree rather vigorously with the statement by Rick Barnes
We may at least remark that it is perplexing why any “Scout” who the Scout’s Law says is “trustworthy” and who takes an oath to “ do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law . . . To keep myself . . . mentally awake and* morally ***straight” ,should ever have been encouraged to attend a gay pride parade in the first place ? It is not tacit, but rather explicit via participation, blatant **approval and confirmation of active homosexuality **– which Fr. John Hardon says is “always morally indefensible.”.
Scouts are Friendly and Helpful. The way I repeated the Scout Promise was a promise to a set of principles, values and laws. Not a promise to a corporation.
Up until the time I was 13 years old, the Scout Promise never had the suffix “… unless I suspect you are gay.” That was in the year 1978. The same year Russ Buffkins, Director of Public Relations of Boy Scouts of America Headquarters wrote his secret memo banning homosexuals from the Boy Scouts of America. This secret memo was codified into policy in 1991 when the Boy Scouts of America Executive Board published the anti-gay policy.
The anti-gay policy effectively put an asterisk after every beautiful Oath, Law, Promise, and Slogan in Boy Scouts Code. The anti-gay policy polluted something beautiful. The anti-gay policy’s explicit disloyalty is a taint which has corrupted the entire institution with it’s penetrating stink.
My aim is to return the Boy Scouts beautiful Code to it’s pre-anti-gay policy state.
The Scout Law:
1910-1991
A Scout is Trustworthy
A Scout is Friendly
A Scout is Cheerful
A Scout is Loyal
…
1991-2013
A Scout is Trustworthy, unless we suspect you are gay
A Scout is Friendly, unless we suspect you are gay, or suspect you sympathize with gays
A Scout is Cheerful, unless we suspect you are gay
A Scout is Loyal, unless we suspect you are gay - in that case we excommunicate you
I am not blazing a new trail. I am renewing blazes on an old trail. A trail which was abandoned in 1991 with the publishing of a wicked policy. The trail is overgrown and fallow. Help me clear away the brush.
Scouting seeks to develop good habits and moral uprightness in boys and girls, but without Christ. A scout must believe in some god, but scouting cannot tolerate belief in Jesus Christ alone as the only basis for a really righteous life.
I think now, I see this older Wisconsin Lutheran statement is the best way, a Scout should have Jesus Christ only as their God, that is the Holy Trinity and there are many organizations to take up that slack. The Scouts should be a Christian organization.
The Boy Scouts of America, by their charter and by-laws is purely nonsectarian. That is one of the beauties of the Boy Scouts. I know a number of men whose first exposure to a Catholic mass was attending one at a Jamboree or Camporee.I think now, I see this older Wisconsin Lutheran statement is the best way, a Scout should have Jesus Christ only as their God, that is the Holy Trinity and there are many organizations to take up that slack. The Scouts should be a Christian organization.
I don’t see it as a beauty to have a creedless God and reject Jesus Christ.The Boy Scouts of America, by their charter and by-laws is purely nonsectarian. That is one of the beauties of the Boy Scouts. I know a number of men whose first exposure to a Catholic mass was attending one at a Jamboree or Camporee.
Indeed. This was the intent. The point is that BSA itself violates its own code (Laws, Oaths, Promise, Slogan). However: “Once an Eagle, always an Eagle” applies. My current Eagle Project is to demonstrate that with moral fortitude brave individuals can stand in the face of institutional bullying with impunity.Those who attended the Utah gay pride parade in uniform did so in explicit violation to BSA rules and a direct instruction from the Scout Executive of their council.
Boy Scouts are not required to have a creedless God or reject Jesus.I don’t see it as a beauty to have a creedless God and reject Jesus Christ.
Daniel did not violate his oath in the Lion’s Den. He was put their for fidelity to God, not promotion of sexual immorality. But hey, if sexually immorality is your new God, I guess the comparison could stand. At least Brownstein demonstrated clearly that this is a real agenda and not a civil rights issue. Next will come homosexual scout leaders, NAMBLA, pedophiles, and who knows what is in the wings.Daniel did this in the Lion’s Den. Peter Brownstein did it again last Sunday in Salt Lake City.