Re: A Scout is Reverent - what that means
Russ Jones (CSRTJ@TTUHSC.EDU)
Sat, 10 Jan 1998 02:19:06 -0600
At 09:04 PM 1/8/98 -0800, Kevin McClelland wrote, in part:
>Why is it so important that a Scout profess a belief in God? Would it
>hurt the program if we had Atheists? Do Athiests not need Scouting like
>the theist children of the Nation?
Kevin,
>From my viewpoint as a Christian lay person (with Southern Baptist roots,
but subscribing to no particular denominational affiliation at this point in
my life), I believe the reason for the BSA's insistence on a belief in God
has to do with the fact that only the concept of an omnibenevolent,
omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being can provide an immutable standard
against which to measure the rightness or wrongness--the goodness or
badness, if you will--of one's values, thoughts, and actions. One of the
great philosophical beauties of the Scouting movement is the idea that a
Scout should not be judged in comparison to other Scouts, but rather in
comparison to an established set of standards that are the same for all
Scouts. In matters of morality, in particular, no secular standard would
survive long enough to justify being called a standard. Human nature being
what it is, we quickly (and rightly) turn our backs on those who would set
themselves up as models of behavior only to soon, through their own human
frailty, dispell the illusion of infallibility which they seek to create,
and human history is replete with examples of those who have sought to
garner a following among the masses only to be exposed as having committed
the very failings they condemn in others. While it is human nature to want
to excel above all others, thereby setting the standard for others to
follow, it is equally natural for humans--eventually and without
exception--to fail to measure up to the very standards which they themselves
would set; and we find it impossible to maintain the will to emulate those
who cannot themselves accomplish what they would have us do.
Our ability to measure anything requires a frame of reference, and the more
constant that frame of reference is, the more confident we can be in the
validity of the measurement. But there is nothing constant in our world.
Buildings and even mountains crumble; oceans become deserts and deserts
become oceans; fortunes rise and fall; what is believed to be true turns out
to be false, what is believed to be false turns out to be true; promises are
broken; friends become enemies; and all living things grow old and die.
Everything changes except the fact that everything changes. In the midst of
all this physical change, the human species longs for spiritual constancy
and the assurance that, in the end, all will be as it should be. We are
uncomfortable with change, because we tend to define who and what we are in
terms of what we can measure around us, yet our frame of reference is never
constant. When something with which we are familiar and comfortable becomes
different and unfamiliar, we experience a sense of having lost something of
our own identity in the loss of some of what we once identified with. Our
discomfort with change is somewhat lessened when we can know or believe that
such change is occurring according to some plan laid down with our best
interest at heart, but we can never be entirely at ease with it unless we
have complete faith in the planner and, therefore, the plan. Belief in
God--as infinitely good, absolutely unchanging, perfectly loving of us, and
the Master Architect of the Universe and of all the change we perceive in
our world--provides not only the constancy we seek and the assurance we
need, but also the perfect, unchanging frame of reference against which to
measure our efforts to do what is good and right. Scouting is, above all
else, a movement which seeks to impart to its members a higher sense of
morality--an ideal of what constitutes right human behavior--so what better
standard of morality to adopt than the perfect morality that is, by
definition, God? Any other morality would necessarily be of human design,
and therefore inconstant and fallible--virtually useless as a standard for
human behavior.
As to whether or not the program would be harmed by the inclusion of
atheists and/or agnostics, I am of the opinion that they need what Scouting
has to offer as much as, if not more than, the theistic person. To the
extent that they can be accommodated without altering the standards of the
program, I favor their inclusion in the hope that Scouting will accomplish
what their parents and their other life experiences have not: namely, to
bring them to a realization of the existence of God as the Creator of all
things and their loving heavenly Father, who built the universe for them and
with whom they need to build and maintain the most meaningful of
relationships. However, I am adamantly opposed to any attempt to alter the
standards of Scouting in order to accommodate their lack of belief.
Scouting's standards are what Scouting is; they are what define Scouting.
If one compromises on even one of Scouting's standards, what remains is not
Scouting, but something less: if one begins with a dozen apples, and then
throws away one apple, one is left with what may be passed off upon the
unwary as a dozen apples, but it is not a dozen.
With regard to the Randall case, many of the recent postings to Scouts-L
have been, in my opinion, considerably off-target. As I understand it, the
crux of the issue is not whether the BSA must accept the Randall twins or
other agnostics/atheists as members, but rather, having accepted them as
members and allowed them to participate in Scouting activities (albeit under
duress pursuant to court order, based on the ill-advised and
subsequently-overturned decision handed down in Curran I), whether the BSA
must now compromise its standards for advancement by awarding the rank of
Eagle to the twins despite their inability to meet all the requirements
therefore, specifically, the requirement to live by the Scout Oath or
Promise and the Scout Law (in their entirety). To permit agnostics or
atheists to register and participate in Scouting activities is one thing.
To be forced to alter the standards for advancement in order to accommodate
religious non-belief--in direct opposition to a fundamental principle of
both the BSA and the WOSM--is quite another thing altogether, and both
issues are different still from the Curran case, where the issue is whether
or not the BSA can be forced to accept a homosexual as an adult leader. It
is my hope that the BSA will prevail in both cases, which would require that
the court uphold the finding of Curran II that the BSA is not, per se, a
business enterprise and, therefore, not subject to the provisions of the
Unruh Act.
Yours in Scouting,
Russ Jones <csrtj@ttuhsc.edu>
Scoutmaster, Troop 575
Advancement Chairman, Chaparral District
South Plains Council, Lubbock, Texas
Eagle Scout, class of 1965
"I used to be a fox..." SC-295
"I used to be a staffer..." SC-430, SR-110, SR-206
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City |
