Question on BSA and religion.

[Kudu 186]

Reverence to God ... is the basis of every form of religion.

 

The first sentence of the above quotation is, of course, factually wrong. Had Baden-Powell simply written that "reverence is the basis of every form of religion," he would have been closer to the truth, although for some Buddhists an attachment to reverence itself can also be an obstacle to enlightenment.

 

It is significant that Baden-Powell placed "Duty to God" under "Service to Others," one of his four methods of "Boy Training" ("Character Training; Physical Health and Development; Self-Improvement for Making a Career; and Service for Others [Chivalry and Self-Sacrifice the Basis of Religion].")

 

BSA Scouting is currently based on the so-called "Eight Methods of Scouting." "Duty to God" was long considered one of the "Ideals" of Scouting until a recent BSA religious edict proclaimed that Duty to God is not an ideal, it is an "obligation."

 

However, nowhere in the writings of Baden-Powell does he suggest that we kick a boy out of Scouting if he does not believe in God. A Scout was considered to be on the correct path so long as he at least went through the motions of Service to Others ("Practical Christianity") and the close study of Woodcraft ("The Religion of the Woods"). For Baden-Powell, belief in "God" was the inevitable result of the "Game of Scouting." There was no need for the undertow of religious fundamentalism which imagines that people can be coerced into goodness.

 

This is the significance of the last sentence in SSScout's quote:

 

"But there is no difficulty at all in suggesting the line to take on the human side, since direct duty to one's neighbour is implied in almost every form of belief."

 

What is needed in the United States is a separate Scouting movement that is concerned more with "reverence" and less with the "God" of exclusion.

 

What Baden-Powell suggests as the "line to take on the human side" is what Michael Lerner calls the "Left Hand of God," a spiritual movement based on love & kindness ("Service to Others") and awe & wonder ("The Religion of the Backwoods").

 

Kudu

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Kudu, I have come to respect your intense passion for the original scouting program. When the question was asked about who said "once a scout, always a scout" it reminded me about a recording I heard in B-P's voice where he attributes the quote to Lord Kitchener. By the time I found the link, someone else had identified the quote and provided the requested complete quote. While I listened to the recording, I noticed B-P mentioned that in the speech that a scout was first tested on his honor to carry out the scout promise which is first the work of God and King and secondly service to others. I havent transcribed the complete quote, but it does seem he values the work of God and King over service to others.

 

The speech may be heard at : http://www.chsscout.net/rescenter/video/index.shtml#section4

 

The first speech, Address to Scouts

 

Do you know the circumstances of the speech heard? It does seem he is placing God and King over service to others, but I may have the context wrong

 

PS, I love listening to the speeches. It allows one to imagine what a person B-P was by hearing and watching him speak. You get a feeling for the man, his sense of humor and just how much he loved the program(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Kudu 186]

Do you know the circumstances of the speech heard? It does seem he is placing God and King over service to others, but I may have the context wrong

 

OGE,

 

I believe the clip is the sound track of a film of his "chat" to Scouts at a Jamboree. In part he says,

 

"My brother Scouts, I want to remind you in a very few words of what your duty is as Scouts (...)

 

First of all, of course you are tested on your honor to do your best to carry out the Scout Promise which is

 

first to work for God and the King.

secondly to help other people.

thirdly to keep the Scout Law...."

 

Baden-Powell was summarizing his Scout Promise which reads:

 

On my honor I promise that I will do my best:

To do my duty to God and the King;

To help other people at all times;

To obey the Scout Law

 

The term "Service For Others" is one of his four methods of "Boy Training." He places the Scout Promise, which includes both "Duty to God" and "To help other people at all times," under "Service For Others" in the same way that the BSA places their Scout Oath under the "Ideals" Method.

 

In the same clip he tells the Scouts "Don't forget a very important part of your duty is quite a small thing and that is to do a good thing for somebody every day." In his model of Scouting, Good Turns are one of the five Scouting practices by which the first and second point of the Scout Promise are "inculcated":

 

 

 

 

SERVICE FOR OTHERS

(Chivalry and Self-Sacrifice the Basis of Religion)

 

 

 

 

Qualities to be developed.

 

Attributes which they include.

 

Scout Law.

 

Scouting practices by which they are inculcated.

 

 

 

Reverence

Loyalty to God. Respect for others. Duty to neighbor.

Scout Promise. Scout Law 3

Personal example. Nature study. Good turns. Missioner's Work.

"Scout's Own."

 

 

Unselfishness

Chivalry. Kindliness. Self-sacrifice. Patriotism, Loyalty, Justice.

Laws 3,4,5,6.

Good turns. Friend to animals. First-Aid. Life-saving. Fair play. Games. Path-finders. Marksmanship. Debating societies. Mock trials. Court of honor. Old Scouts kept in touch with the Scout law and ideals.

 

 

His chapter on "Service for Others" can be found at The Inquiry Net:

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/b-p/scoutmastership/service.htm

 

Missioner Service is a Proficiency Badge based on serving invalids, see:

 

http://inquiry.net/traditional/badges/missioner.htm

 

Baden-Powell's version of Laws 3, 4, 5, & 6 cited above, can be found at:

 

http://inquiry.net/ideals/b-p/law.htm

 

Kudu(This message has been edited by Kudu)

[Kahuna 172]

Kudu, like OGE I respect your devotion to scouting as B-P intended it. I've read and studied a lot about B-P and his ideas and conclude he would be most distressed at the current state of U.S. scouting. I would love nothing better than to see the BSA reform itself to come more in line with the "real" scouting program.

 

Having said that, I can't see that a competitive organization would have a real chance in today's world. On another thread, I mentioned I felt that voting for a third party is throwing away your vote and influence, and I feel somewhat the same about this. Even if there were no issues about the use of the term "boy scouts," or uniform or badges or other legalities, I just don't see that there are enough people like yourself, who have both the insight into the original program and the dedication to delivering it to boys, as opposed to some on these forums who only want to destroy the BSA if they can't change it to suit their wishes.

 

So many organizations today are having trouble surviving, not because of changing within but because of changing values in the population. I wonder how a new scouting organization would be able to attract the relatively small amount of financing needed if you remove the professional structure from the equation without professionals to go out and sell it. Although the BSA, in the beginning was spread by well-intentioned people in the community, I don't see that there is that ethic in society today. Very few community leaders of real vision, I guess.

[Kudu 186]

Kahuna writes:

 

I would love nothing better than to see the BSA reform itself to come more in line with the "real" scouting program....voting for a third party is throwing away your vote and influence, and I feel somewhat the same about this.

 

Who are you trying to influence?

 

If you are trying to change the BSA, then the best strategy is to set up as many five-Scout BSA Troops as you can! As for voting for a "third party" Scouting association, the very existence of competition in the marketplace, no matter how marginal, will quickly influence BSA policies on issues that are not central to the political interests of the Religious Right. An outdoor Scout Uniform and a retreat from pointless rules for instance. If BSA Troops were truly "boy-led," how many Scouts would stick around if they could wear BDUs and play laser tag (not to mention girls) while still supporting Scouting's original methods and ideals? :-)

 

Most Scouters are content to influence the Scouts in their own Troops. Because of the BSA's policies, Scouters do not find support from their Unitarian-Universalist, Reform Judaism, and some Episcopal & Buddhist congregations to justify establishing a Scouting unit in their own church. They must volunteer elsewhere. If a new alternative Scouting program in such congregations includes a dozen boys (and/or girls) who would not otherwise be Scouts, it will make a difference to them and to that Scouter. The negligible impact on the BSA is not relevant.

 

I just don't see that there are enough people like yourself, who have both the insight into the original program

 

The original program is available through the "Baden-Powell Scouts," it does not need to be individually reconstructed from old books. "Traditional Scouting" was started in 1970 after the UK Scout Association (SA) made the kind of radical "modernization" changes to Baden-Powell's program that the BSA made to William Hillcourt's program in 1972. In the UK Scouters had the freedom to simply break away from the SA and continue to use the program which had remained essentially unchanged throughout the British Empire since Baden-Powell's time. The original program and badges will soon be available in the United States.

 

So many organizations today are having trouble surviving, not because of changing within but because of changing values in the population.

 

Human nature does not change that much. The wilderness adventure that Scouting promises is still a draw, no matter what most people say. When I speak to auditoriums of sixth-grade boys, over half of them always sign the "Yes, I want to go camping!" sign-up sheet despite the fact that Scouting is "uncool." Convincing their parents to allow them to join Scouting is currently the bottle-neck. But despite all of our material goods, career-goal oriented behavior, and 21st century sophistication, humans all have deep spiritual yearnings to which, as Michael Lerner points out, currently only the Religious Right speaks. Scouting may never regain the mass-popularity that it once enjoyed, but the underlying needs that Baden-Powell addressed are timeless and are not unique to conservatives or even religious people.

 

I wonder how a new scouting organization would be able to attract the relatively small amount of financing needed if you remove the professional structure from the equation without professionals to go out and sell it.

 

Scouting programs based on Baden-Powell are all-volunteer and that means less overhead. Of course in most countries if you need information about Scouting, you talk to some volunteer's answering machine rather than a secretary sitting in a local air-conditioned million-dollar building. By definition this means a limited market-share, but nobody's job depends on meeting membership quotas and "modernizing" the program. So if in the entire United States there will only ever be as many Baden-Powell Groups as there are Troops in a typical BSA Council, or even District, so be it if that means we remain true to B-P's vision.

 

Although the BSA, in the beginning was spread by well-intentioned people in the community, I don't see that there is that ethic in society today. Very few community leaders of real vision, I guess.

 

I'm not convinced that human nature is forever changed. If well-intentioned people of the community no longer support the BSA and if this is not a result of obvious issues with the Religious Right, could it be the consequence of the professionalization of Scouting against Baden-Powell's advice?

 

Kudu

 

[jmenand 10]

I did not follow for much of the discussion, since I feel much of it is semantic arguments about interpreting what constitutes a belief in God.

 

One line caught my eye:

 

Ed said: "An agnostic & an atheist are not the same. An agnostic believes in a higher power but isn't sure about it. An atheist doesn't believe in any type of higher power."

 

I would agree that they are not the same. However, I do not think they are mutually exclusive.

 

- Atheist/theist is an ontological position, agnostic/gnostic is an epistemological position. They aren't mutually exclusive, as they speak to different topics. You really need to specify both.

- From its etymology, an atheist is simply one who lacks belief, while an antitheist would be one who believes in non-existence. If there are zero gods in which you have faith then you are an atheist, regardless of your feelings on the possibility of direct human spiritual knowledge. In this way, a person could have no god in which they believe and ALSO rationally conclude that there is no way a human can know for sure.

- People who are way too smug about being "agnostics" really hate having this pointed out. I speak of the type of person who uses the term agnostic to describe themself mostly because it is currently en vogue in our society.

 

Yes, common American usage mangles the terms in ways that violate their etymology, but you still end up having to make up strong/weak/positive/militant/etc labels in order to accurately describe your position, so it's a lot easier to just use the words properly, so we can all be as smart as the ancient Greeks.

 

So, for example: Without going into too much detail, I am a theist in that I feel a spiritual connection to the universe much in the way that B-P has been described to have had in this and other threads. This is the motivation for my morals. I am also an agnostic. This is not contradictory to theism because the process of my rationality and the conclusions I draw about the nature of knowledge does not affect my spiritual connection to the universe and the moral life I live as a result of that connection.

 

And in case anyone is wondering, I chose to interpret BSA's simplistic and incorrect assessment of agnosticism in a way that allows me to subscribe to what I feel their INTENT was: weeding out the nihilists and spirit-less individuals wishing to teach moral relativism to children.

 

In this way I do not feel conflicted about "belonging" in the BSA. I do share the concerns about the influence of Christianity/LDS- but until the BSA guidelines are re-written to exclude non-christians, I think I'm safe.

 

I hope this makes sense!(This message has been edited by jmenand)

[packsaddle 753]

jmenand, in case no one has said this already, welcome to the forums! I read your post with interest. I agree with much of what you said. However, I would like to know your view on what you think 'moral relativism' is, especially why you think it is undesirable. I have heard and read the concept many times, usually in pejorative terms, but there has been great variation in the connotation, depending on the user. I would like to understand your view as well.

[jmenand 10]

Thank you for the welcome!

 

What follows are my personal feelings on the role of teaching morality in Scouting. If you wish to understand moral relativism, there are many better authorities than I on the subject.

 

I apologize for the length.

 

I see moral relativism as being contradictory to Scouting because Scouting is built on the premise that there are moral truths. Strict moral relativism says that moral truths are an illusion created by culture, historical traditions, and personal references. By recognizing a spiritual existence of any kind ("God," if you wish), a person is able to reject strict moral relativism and begin to, as I have, slowly recognize a system of moral truths.

 

I grew up in Scouting and personally attribute my morals to the guidance I received in Scouts. I recognize that this implies that the relativists are "right," (ironic) and that I was influenced by my Christian-American-Scouting culture; that the only reason I believe in moral truth is that I was somehow brainwashed. After much soul searching, I decided that I must trust my instincts about what is right and what is wrong, and also my instincts that the universe contains some kind of spiritual power that provides a foundation for that morality.

 

On the other hand I also feel that many Scouting adults, especially those with narrowly defined systems of morality based on their specific religion's teachings, some times take this a bit too far and attempt to inject their own interpretations of morality into the Scouting program. I personally feel that this betrays what I see to be Scouting's goal of teaching a structure of broad morals (e.g. Trustworthy, Loyal, etc.) while allowing each Scout to discover and come to understand the importance of said morals on their own.

 

The primary example of "injecting a personal interpretation of morality" is Scouting's position on homosexuality. The secondary example of this is what many people perceive to be an overly-Christian interpretation of "God" being used to describe "God" in most of BSA's materials.

 

The second example is a result of the very real Christian influence in the historical development of the BSA. But since the BSA continues to specifically allow all types of spirituality as long as an individual is able to follow all of BSA's other guidelines, I think that most people who are uncomfortable with this Christian influence should simply recognize the historical role of Christianity and accept it as a part of BSA's history.

 

Homosexuality is the primary example of a policy that, I feel, reflects an intrusion into a topic that Scouting should simply not be concerned with. Sexual preference is not an issue I concern myself with in my personal moral system, and I do not feel that it has a place in Scouting, either. The arguments against homosexuals in Scouting are in my opinion weak and thinly veiled attempts to conceal a conservative political interest injected into Scouting where no opinion is needed. To say that homosexual adult men are more likely to molest a boy is, based on the research I have read as well as my personal morals of "innocent until proven guilty" and "tolerance," a nonsense argument. I do not feel that installing and perpetuating a climate of ignorance and fear is in the spirit of Scouting.

 

However, the bottom line is that the BSA already discriminates against girls on the basis of gender. I am morally opposed to this as well, but because of the simple reality of the biological difference between males and females, I am willing to partially accept the argument in favor of a program for boys only. Because of the history behind the program, I recognize the benefits of having a boys-only program. Sexual preference, on the other hand, is a relatively recently politicized issue for the BSA, and I feel it has no place in scouting.

 

The problem is that homosexuality introduces a real problem for this traditional gender discrimination. One of the primary reasons boys are separated from girls in the BSA is, I imagine, to remove the sexual tension that adolescents experience. But if the boys might be sexually attracted to each other as well, it becomes a bit of a paradox. How ironic that by publicly rejecting homosexuals, the BSA made sexuality a major issue for the organization.

 

In the end, I feel the moral thing to do would be to recognize that the historic impetus for gender separation was overly-simplistic and short sighted, and create a co-ed Scouting program with this new understanding of the complexity of sexuality in mind. A new Scouting program which would recognize that sexuality is not the concern of the Scouting program and that the only way to ensure that sexuality is completely eliminated from the program is to have only one single scout in each troop.

 

Finally, I am attracted to Scouting because of it's history of building character in an environment that encourages each scout to have unique and nuanced explorations of the basic moral framework they are being taught. Each leader must use their best judgement as to when it is "the right time" to inject "guidance" into a youth's process of spiritual and moral discovery. Some adults may feel that it is only appropriate to keep a scout "headed in the right direction," other adults may feel that constant and narrow direction must be demanded of each scout over every point of the scout law.

 

This is why a quality group of mature adults are needed in Scouting. It is an unfortunately slippery slope for some adults who have narrow definitions of morality and strict interpretations of the scout law. At some point we stop "building character" and we begin shoving character down their throats.

 

In the end, I feel moderation and consistency is the best policy.

[Trevorum 24]

Here and in other threads, we've discussed the reasons for, and source of, human ethics. Some folks argued that religious belief must be the source of ethics and morality. Recent research suggests that there may be some biological basis. This is interesting.

 

see: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070122/sc_nm/brain_altruism_dc

 

Focusing on altruism, the report states, "Altruism, one of the most difficult human behaviors to define, can be detected in brain scans, U.S. researchers reported on Sunday. ... [neuroscientist at Duke University] believes it is valid to try to assess altruism scientifically. 'It is hardly the case that all altruistic acts come from people who are religiously faithful; there are undoubtedly many altruistic atheists. And, a religious explanation would have considerable difficulty explaining why some animals help others of their species at significant cost or danger to themselves.'"

 

 

[Jeffrey H 25]

QUOTE:  This is why a quality group of mature adults are needed in Scouting. It is an unfortunately slippery slope for some adults who have narrow definitions of morality and strict interpretations of the scout law. At some point we stop "building character" and we begin shoving character down their throats.

 

Scouting is made of folks from different denominations and religions.  Interpretation of the Scout Law will typically be filtered though an individuals religion.  Narrow definitions of morality will exist, but so will broader definitions as well.  I have yet to encounter any Scouter from more conservative/fundamental denominations to cram anything down my throat.  They know the rules of Scouting and they respect the beliefs of others.  Im sorry you are experiencing the opposite.

 

I interpret the Scout Law within the framework of my religious beliefs.  As a Christian, the Scout Law complements my faith and fits well in my understanding of duty to God and service to others.  I dont force my religious understanding of the Scout Law upon others. 

 

QUOTE:  The second example is a result of the very real Christian influence in the historical development of the BSA. But since the BSA continues to specifically allow all types of spirituality as long as an individual is able to follow all of BSA's other guidelines, I think that most people who are uncomfortable with this Christian influence should simply recognize the historical role of Christianity and accept it as a part of BSA's history.

 

The history of Scouting is also the history of religion in the USA.  All organizations are influenced by the religious beliefs and practices of its members.  I personally dont like it when we appeal to the Great Scout Spirit at OA ceremonies, but I have to accept it as part of the BSAs history.  Christianity may be influential in the BSA, but so are Native American references to a higher power.  I would say there are just as many references to the generic Great Spirit than t

[Novice_Cubmaster 10]

Hi Jeffrey,

 

I never seen anyone ever involved with the BSA try to shove Christianity (or any other religion) down anyone's throat. However, there are quite a few people in the BSA that seem to think and act like the BSA is a Christian organization.

 

In our area, I don't remember ever hearing a BSA trainer or District/Council level leader explicitly state that the BSA isn't a Christian organization. And I think because so many units are chartered by churches, a fair number of leaders assume that the BSA must be a Christian organization (but that leaders & scouts of other persuasions are allowed to join).

 

Case in point, we have one District-level official that when he does the blessing at the start of Roundtable, just can't help ending it with " in Jesus' name".

 

Likewise, two years ago I asked if the God & Me Campout was open to non-Christian scouts or if there was an alternative available for them. The answers I got were basically, "Why would it be?" & "What would we need an alternative for".

 

I do truly believe that the BSA won't go to any great lengths to clear up this assumption - for fear of alienating some of the Charter Orgs (or their religious leaders).

 

NC