LDS Church to Go Forward with Scouting Program

[gilliam]

SALT LAKE CITY —
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued the following statement Wednesday from the Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles regarding the Church’s relationship with the Boy Scouts of America:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appreciates the positive contributions Scouting has made over the years to thousands of its young men and boys and to thousands of other youth. As leaders of the Church, we want the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) to succeed in its historic mission to instill leadership skills and high moral standards in youth of all faiths and circumstances, thereby equipping them for greater success in life and valuable service to their country.

In the resolution adopted on July 27, 2015, and in subsequent verbal assurances to us, BSA has reiterated that it expects those who sponsor Scouting units (such as the Church) to appoint Scout leaders according to their religious and moral values “in word and deed and who will best inculcate the organization’s values through the Scouting program.” At this time, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will go forward as a chartering organization of BSA, and as in the past, will appoint Scout leaders and volunteers who uphold and exemplify Church doctrine, values, and standards.

With equal concern for the substantial number of youth who live outside the United States and Canada, the Church will continue to evaluate and refine program options that better meet its global needs.

mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-to-go-forward-with-scouting-program?cid=HP_WE_8-26-2015_dPAD_fMNWS_xLIDyL1-A

 

[gracepoole]

On Wednesday, Mormon church leaders issued a statement saying it would stay in Scouting — for now:

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appreciates the positive contributions Scouting has made over the years to thousands of its young men and boys and to thousands of other youths … we want the Boy Scouts of America to succeed in its historic mission to instill leadership skills and high moral standards in youth of all faiths and circumstances. …

“At this time, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will go forward as a chartering organization of BSA, and as in the past, will appoint Scout leaders and volunteers who uphold and exemplify Church doctrine, values and standards.”

washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/08/26/mormon-church-announces-it-will-stay-in-boy-scouts-despite-concern-about-end-to-ban-on-gay-leaders/?tid=sm_fb

 

[Theo520]

Makes sense, they appoint their own scoutmasters from within the congregation.

 

[SuperLuigi]

They have a religious exemption they seem satisfied with.

 

[SuS33]

Can someone please explain why does it matter if the leader was homosexual? Homosexuals are everywhere, and in many positions. I mean we are not talking about a gay priest who is openly active! That would’ve been different of course. I genuinely do not understand and appreciate it if someone would explain it to me.

 

[ltwin]

Can someone please explain why does it matter if the leader was homosexual? Homosexuals are everywhere, and in many positions. I mean we are not talking about a gay priest who is openly active! That would’ve been different of course. I genuinely do not understand and appreciate it if someone would explain it to me.

Because the Scout troops sponsored by the LDS are well sponsored by the LDS Church–this makes it a CHURCH-sponsored thing

AND

the LDS Church teaches that homosexual sex is wrong.

SO . . .

It would be counterproductive for the LDS Church to allow sexually active homosexuals to lead a CHURCH sponsored activity since this would be signaling to church members and children that sexually active, unrepentant homosexuals are role models approved by the LDS Church.

It’s about not sending mixed signals. The same issue holds for people shacking-up. Those aren’t the kind of people you want representing your church as leaders (and priests and clergy are not the only “leaders” within churches–anyone with responsibility should be expected to uphold the values and teachings of the church they belong to).

 

[Brendan]

Can someone please explain why does it matter if the leader was homosexual? Homosexuals are everywhere, and in many positions. I mean we are not talking about a gay priest who is openly active! That would’ve been different of course. I genuinely do not understand and appreciate it if someone would explain it to me.

If the person was living a chaste life, there would be no problem. The problem comes in with the recent SCOTUS decision on homosexual ‘marriage’.

Suppose you were at summer camp with your Catholic Troop. At the campsite next to you, two adult men get out of the their tent, and come over to say ‘Hi’. They introduce themselves to your Troop as Bob, the Scoutmaster, and John, the Assistant Scout Master.
No prob there.

But during the course of the conversation, they mention that they are married.

THAT is where a problem happens.

Part of the Scout Oath it to state that one will live morally straight. To a Catholic, that is an objective reality. You either are, or are not. Morality is the same for everyone

But here we have an example of two men who are claiming to be morally straight, but, at the same time, are publically declaring that they are not.

To a Catholic Scout, that is a clear and public violation of the Scout Oath.

At the Flag ceremony every morning, your Troop will see those men stand and make false promises.

 

[Theo520]

So…does this mean they will appoint homosexual leaders or not?
(and if not, how will they know if a potential leader is homosexual? They will ask him before hiring him?)

That would all depend on the individual, though they will have no shortage of hetero Dads who are superb candidates to be scout master etc.

With Mormons, suffering from same sex attraction is considered a burden, like alcoholism. You can be an active Mormon in good standing if you are not engaging in the sin of homosexual relations. They would not select leaders who are practicing homosexuals.

 

[SuS33]

If the person was living a chaste life, there would be no problem. The problem comes in with the recent SCOTUS decision on homosexual ‘marriage’.

Suppose you were at summer camp with your Catholic Troop. At the campsite next to you, two adult men get out of the their tent, and come over to say ‘Hi’. They introduce themselves to your Troop as Bob, the Scoutmaster, and John, the Assistant Scout Master.
No prob there.

But during the course of the conversation, they mention that they are married.

THAT is where a problem happens.

Part of the Scout Oath it to state that one will live morally straight. To a Catholic, that is an objective reality. You either are, or are not. Morality is the same for everyone

But here we have an example of two men who are claiming to be morally straight, but, at the same time, are publically declaring that they are not.

To a Catholic Scout, that is a clear and public violation of the Scout Oath.

At the Flag ceremony every morning, your Troop will see those men stand and make false promises.

Now this is making some sense. I know nothing about Scouts and that helps.

So just to make it clear, it is just because of the violation the of Scout Oath? For example if these two men were your co-workers, you don’t quit your job do you?

 

[SuS33]

Because the Scout troops sponsored by the LDS are well sponsored by the LDS Church–this makes it a CHURCH-sponsored thing

AND

the LDS Church teaches that homosexual sex is wrong.

SO . . .

It would be counterproductive for the LDS Church to allow sexually active homosexuals to lead a CHURCH sponsored activity since this would be signaling to church members and children that sexually active, unrepentant homosexuals are role models approved by the LDS Church.

It’s about not sending mixed signals. The same issue holds for people shacking-up. Those aren’t the kind of people you want representing your church as leaders (and priests and clergy are not the only “leaders” within churches–anyone with responsibility should be expected to uphold the values and teachings of the church they belong to).

So is the LDS church changing it’s beliefs?

 

[Theo520]

So is the LDS church changing it’s beliefs?

Hardly, the LDS will not select any Boy Scout leaders that are known practicing homosexuals.

 

[zz912]

If the person was living a chaste life, there would be no problem.

Disagree. Even if the person is chaste, they are leading others, specifically young, developing boys who are turning into men. Having someone with an intrinsic disorder (even one they are controlling) lead young men is wrong.

The same reason that seminaries are instructed to deny entry to men who have homosexual attraction. They are not qualified to lead because of their disorder.

 

[gracepoole]

Morality is the same for everyone.

Oh, my. No, it certainly isn’t. It is (or should be) for all Catholics, of course, but plenty of people openly disagree on the morality or immorality of a host of topics. That’s why this issue isn’t viewed the same way by all.

 

[dcs]

Oh, my. No, it certainly isn’t. It is (or should be) for all Catholics, of course, but plenty of people openly disagree on the morality or immorality of a host of topics. That’s why this issue isn’t viewed the same way by all.

Whether people agree or disagree is immaterial. If something is intrinsically immoral, it is immoral for all regardless of circumstances. Likewise, if something is intrinsically disordered, it is disordered for all regardless of whether they agree.

 

[dcs]

That would all depend on the individual, though they will have no shortage of hetero Dads who are superb candidates to be scout master etc.

With Mormons, suffering from same sex attraction is considered a burden, like alcoholism. You can be an active Mormon in good standing if you are not engaging in the sin of homosexual relations. They would not select leaders who are practicing homosexuals.

From what I understand, Mormons do not generally volunteer for scouting leadership roles. They get a “calling” from their bishop. I gather that the likelihood of an open, practicing homosexual being “called” is pretty low. Honestly, given the Mormon emphasis on family, it’s pretty unlikely that a single man would be “called” to serve in that role.

 

[gracepoole]

Whether people agree or disagree is immaterial. If something is intrinsically immoral, it is immoral for all regardless of circumstances. Likewise, if something is intrinsically disordered, it is disordered for all regardless of whether they agree.

In a democracy? No, it’s not immaterial.

 

[Monkey1976]

In a democracy? No, it’s not immaterial.

Laws and morality are not the same thing. Should members of the “Christian Identity” or “World Church of the Creator” groups be allowed to own black slaves because such a thing is moral in their eyes? Or is there an underlying, universal morality which tells us that chattel slavery is always wrong regardless of what the laws might say?

 

[gracepoole]

Laws and morality are not the same thing.

Correct. And yet the common understanding of morality often heavily influences the legal system. They are not entirely divorced from one another.

Should members of the “Christian Identity” or “World Church of the Creator” groups be allowed to own black slaves because such a thing is moral in their eyes? Or is there an underlying, universal morality which tells us that chattel slavery is always wrong regardless of what the laws might say?

Some issues are viewed in like fashion by the majority: murder, for example. Some are not: same-sex marriage, for example. And that’s the point. A democratic community must respond to this disparity. (By the way, I’ve encountered members here who have argued in favor of some issues that as a fellow Catholic I find wholly immoral and frightening – have a conversation about the history and contemporary uses of chattel slavery around here sometime…)

Non-Catholics still live within moral systems – these systems may just not be aligned with Catholic teachings. Claiming that morality is Catholic or it doesn’t exist (the sentiment in another post to which I responded) is fairly meaningless to those who aren’t Catholic – and there are plenty of those folks who are impacted by our legal system.

 

[Brendan]

Now this is making some sense. I know nothing about Scouts and that helps.

So just to make it clear, it is just because of the violation the of Scout Oath? For example if these two men were your co-workers, you don’t quit your job do you?

No, but I would not involve my family, specifically my kids, in any work related events where they would present their relationship as one of marriage.

That would be a blatant falsehood.

 

[Brendan]

Oh, my. No, it certainly isn’t. It is (or should be) for all Catholics, of course, but plenty of people openly disagree on the morality or immorality of a host of topics. That’s why this issue isn’t viewed the same way by all.

It might not be VIEWED as such by all, but that does not change the reality that morality IS objective.