Get Ready For New Requirements In Faith

[Eagledad]

YOU should not have to offer pat answers that they can memorize in order to 'get around' the issue at a BOR. There shouldn't have to BE a handbook on "How to Survive a Board of Review".

H'mmm...Interesting. I think it might be fun to write such a handbook. Anyone up for some intense satire?

 

Sure, just about every troop uses them to prep the BOR committee. Just take a look on the web.

 

This is more realistic; "Johnny, what knot would be best to pull a log out of the road? Umm, I'm not sure, I never heard of that." "Ok, we'll tell us about the meal you planned and and prepared to sign off the requirement? Umm, well a bunch of us planned and prepared that meal. I don't remember specifically my part, but it was good."

 

See, pack, we can also make this stuff up to based on real experiences. Only my examples are more realistic to everyday scouting.

 

For some reason you think reverence is the hard part and that all scout leaders are looking to "ambush?" Innocent young scouts. I you tell that reverence is easy and the other requirements are hard. Oh, now the requirement forces adults to ask the question. And I say it only encourages those adults who dodge the responsibility in the first place to think about how to approach the question just like they have to think about the others. In fact, maybe now they will try to understand how reverence benefits a boys personal Scoutlike experience instead ignoring it out of ignorance. And, I really don't think those adults are the predators you fear anyway.

 

As for the adults looking to trap a scout, not about knots, cooking, first-aid and so on, but on reverence, you have already shown us that those adults didn't need the requirement in the first place to behave badly.

 

So as I stated, very little is changing except for more paperwork on the unit, which I think is a much more practical and levelheaded reason to challenge National. In fact I propose we make a deal with National to trade the "bring a guest to a meeting" requirement for this requirement because that one really is stupid in the context of developing men of character.

 

Barry

Edited April 18, 2015 by Eagledad

[Eagledad]

The danger is that when someone says "that rock is god", we might fail to understand what that really means. It might be something really profound (and it might not). Faith is a very personal thing, and it can be very complicated. There is a reason we are not supposed to judge a scouts faith.

Yep, and I think I've said something to that over and over.

 

Barry

[Gone]

So Mozart, you can mutter to yourself, and not say anything to your scouts about it.. But walk into an EBOR with a big stick ready to use it on anyone on that board who dares to ask the question.. Thereby doing damage to your scouts reputation as being confident enough to handle the situation for himself.. Or you can take the advise being offered in this thread and figure out a way to prepare your scouts to be able to navigate this line of questioning for themselves..  

...or we as adults can follow the right thing to do and not ambush kids with questions we can't answer or ideals we ourselves cannot live up to. You keep missing my point.

 

This is not about preparing our Scouts. We do that. We do that well. But who can ever be prepared for the line of questioning @@packsaddle has outlined? The Scout handled it well, so how to handle it is NOT the issue.

 

The issue, in short, is making sure the adults follow the process, don't ask stupid questions and go in with a positive attitude. We ALWAYS train our boys how to handle themselves, but I also find out who is on that BOR or EBOR and make sure they know their "perspective". I don't want axe grinders on any BOR. They don't belong in Scouting....at least no where near my unit.

[packsaddle]

"For some reason you think reverence is the hard part and that all scout leaders are looking to "ambush?" Innocent young scouts."

Eagledad, What I think is that a person's faith is impossible for anyone else to judge, unlike how to tie some knot. Faith might seem simple to someone who does not grasp the personal nature of a person's faith but failure to grasp that doesn't thereby make it simple or easy outside that one person's mind. 

An 'ambush' by asking a scout about a knot is something that has commonality among all scouts. We all know, or have the ability to know what a 'square knot' is. And it is easy to demonstrate that someone knows or doesn't know how to tie it..or what it's use might be. That's merely a skill - some would put it in the realm of (what's that term?) 'scoutcraft'. Comparison of knot-tying to religious faith is, well, ridiculous.

 

The ONLY way reverence becomes easy is when almost any utterance regarding reverence is accepted by the person asking the question. And what, then, does that mean? If 'reverence' is so important that it must be singled out in the requirements, how can almost any answer qualify as satisfying that requirement? If this is the case then BSA at once both emphasizes the importance of one element in the requirements and then minimizes that importance by accepting almost any response to it. What is the point? Why go through this stupid charade in the first place? 

Edited April 18, 2015 by packsaddle

[moosetracker]

But what do you consider stupid?...  Should it only be those on the Eagle Board with the positive attitude?

 

You questioned our board asking the Scout to discuss how he follows the 12th point of the Scout Law..  You felt to do so was an ambush and was being preachy.. Yet from all I have learned from this thread, the head of our board not only asks the question in a perfectly correct manner, the scout may explain something about his spiritual beliefs or he could skirt around anything personal and just state actions he does in his everyday life that shows he is being reverent.. Action rather then philosophical discussion..  But, if the scout goes down the trail of his religions beliefs he knows to be accepting of what he hears no matter how off the wall it could be, this is how he has trained everyone on his board to be..

 

I am now suspecting the head of our board is so spot on, that he did not come up with this on his own.. I suspect he went to some sort of National training about how to conduct a proper Eagle Board..

 

In short the adults on my districts Eagle Board ARE following the process.. They are not asking stupid questions and they have a positive attitude.. Yet in your book they were suspect as being abusive.. You simply leapt to that conclusion.. 

 

So if National is recommending Eagle Boards to add this question to what they ask (If they haven't been doing so for years now), and you find out your Board will ask some form of this question at the board based on your interrogation of all the Adults on the board before you allow your scout to attend... Are you going to attack them immediately for the question, or will you simply make sure they hold the correct attitude on how to receive the answer?  What will you do if you decide your scout can not attend the EBOR because the board will ask him about Reverent or Duty to God?  If you complain to the Council or National about them asking this question, do you really think they will agree with you that it is a question which should not be asked?  If not, will you tell the scout he will have to forget about making Eagle because he can not attend an EBOR?

[Eagledad]

First of all, don't belittle the challenges of scout skills in a BOR because they aren't challenging to you, the smartest guy in the room. They are the perfect comparison because even the simplest of skills can be a challenge to both the adults and scouts.

 

Second, stick with your point that these changes are going to give all adults permission to challeng a scout in his faith. You have a personal grudge against god in scouting and use every extreme example to imply its harm.

 

Adults have always had the permission to ask the scout a question in his reverence through living the oath and law, this is not some new boogy man that will change the program. The real problem for you is as long as the BSA keeps god in the program AT ALL, adults have permission to use spiritualality in each scouts experience, just like the last 80 or so years.

 

You consistently try to paint scout leaders and the program as a whole under the worst possible situations to push your bias, but my experience is the vast majority of scout leaders have nothing but the scouts best interest as a priority. They will handle this requirement same.

 

This is much ado about nothing and will not have an effect one way or another. It's that simple. I don't see National taking god out of scouting before your great grand kids are of age, so you have some tough choices a head.

 

Barry

[moosetracker]

The ONLY way reverence becomes easy is when almost any utterance regarding reverence is accepted by the person asking the question. And what, then, does that mean? If 'reverence' is so important that it must be singled out in the requirements, how can almost any answer qualify as satisfying that requirement? If this is the case then BSA at once both emphasizes the importance of one element in the requirements and then minimizes that importance by accepting almost any response to it. What is the point? Why go through this stupid charade in the first place? 

 

packsaddle - Isn't that pretty much any question asked in a SMC or in an BOR or EBOR... Questions that try to get the scout to think, ponder, perhaps are difficult for him to come to a decent answer without some thought and reflection.. But, which really have no right/wrong answer...

 

If you could change anything in the troop, what would it be?

What is the most challenging part of Leadership to you?

What was your most challenging Merit Badge and why?

What will you do as an Eagle Scout to give back to Scouting?

[TAHAWK]

2006 Version of BSA Board of Review Training

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/18-625.pdf

 

 

 

Duty to God Scouting maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise, the member declares, "On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law." The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgement of his favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members. No matter what religious faith a Scout might be, this fundamental need of good citizenship should be kept before him. The Boy Scouts of America, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and the organization of the group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life. In practical terms, this means that the Scout is expected to subscribe to these principles. Bear in mind that a Scout is trustworthy and further that he and his parents have subscribed to these principles when he joined Boy Scouting and that he has pledged his duty to God each time he recites or pledges the Scout Oath and Law.

 

The Boy Scouts of America does not define God for a Scout, nor does it interpret God’s rules. Those are matters, as said above, left to home and to the religious body to which the Scout belongs. The board of review does not serve as an inquisition into the correctness of a Scout’s perceptions, rather it seeks to determine whether the Scout has fulfilled his duty in a way he sees fit, keeping in mind his profession of a particular faith.

 

Discussion of a Scout’s religion is very appropriate at a board of review, but it should be done with respect and appreciation for the variety of faiths and beliefs in the United States. An openended question like “How do you honor the 12th point of the Scout Law?†will allow the boy to discuss his religious beliefs. A blunt “Do you believe in God?†should be avoided as there are some religions that do not use the name “God†for their supreme being or higher power.

 

A Scout may fulfill this duty without being a member of a particular denomination or religion. In these cases, a board will want to understand, through informal discussion, what a Scout feels about this particular duty, how he sees himself in relation to his beliefs, and how he fulfills them. It is very common for adolescent boys to question religion, particularly formal religion. If a candidate indicates that he is not certain about religion, the board should ask how he is trying address his uncertainty and to fulfill his duty to God.

 

As in many questions asked at boards of review, the older the Scout, the more sophisticated the board may expect the answer to be. For a very young Scout, going to religious services regularly may be a complete answer to the question. For an older Scout, you may expect a description of service to his fellow man or the community. You may even find that a Scout will state his inability to meet his own expectations of duty, but that he strives nevertheless to do so. It may be that this humble answer is a sign of the greatest devotion.

[packsaddle]

Moosetracker, I'm so very glad for you and the perfect EBOR in your district. 

 

Which ones of those questions that you list are mandated in the new requirements? List those and I will gladly respond.

 

Eagledad, How is it that you think you know my thoughts and then feel competent to inform everyone of what they are? 

I do not think ALL scouters are prejudiced. I know for sure that some of them are, however. I do not have a "grudge against god in scouting". I object to persons who USE God in scouting as a means to push their own prejudices regarding religious faith. Since I have also observed THAT in real life, I can only conclude that some scouters DO engage in that sort of thing.

Your statement that I have bias sounds a little like a pot accusing a kettle.

 

What I DO think is that there IS a difference between the skillset of knot-tying and a person's religious faith. I'm sorry you do not understand the difference, but that fact merely emphasizes my concern that not all persons will apply this new requirement in a way that is respectful or constructive. Because I HAVE observed scout leaders 'ambushing' scouts regarding religious faith, I have no reason to think adding a requirement like this will diminish that practice. 

Lastly, I am surprised to learn that you find knots to be such a personal challenge.

[moosetracker]

Thanks TAHAWK ...  I am correct, that the head of our Eagle Board definitely took this training... WOW.. even the question he uses is pretty much word for word..

[moosetracker]

Packsaddle - we crossed in posts..  Actually you and Eagledad arguing over knot tying at a BOR or EBOR seems strange to me, because that is a question that is taboo.. It is considered retesting, and you are not to retest....  So both of you are wrong to even think it is appropriate to ask at a board..

 

As you can see with what TAHAWK showed with the current Training on BOR's it is not mandated, but highly recommended..

 

So with that - For normal BOR's highly recommended is always that the boy come in and give the scout salute and do the scout law and oath... (These all may be considered to have right/wrong answers).. But unless the boy is First Class or Life, you don't ding them too much if they get flustered.

 

Highly recommended is definitely some form of questioning to get the boy to tell you in some way ways to improve the troop.. So the "If you could change anything in the troop, what would it be?" would be highly recommended or  some form of..

 

Also for Eagle Boards I know the highly recommended Question is something like "What will you do as an Eagle Scout to give back to Scouting?"  Because they want the scouts to know that it is not the end of the road once they earn Eagle, but rather that people will expect and look for certain things from him if they know he is an Eagle scout..

Edited April 18, 2015 by moosetracker

[Rick_in_CA]

I do not think ALL scouters are prejudiced. I know for sure that some of them are, however. I do not have a "grudge against god in scouting". I object to persons who USE God in scouting as a means to push their own prejudices regarding religious faith. Since I have also observed THAT in real life, I can only conclude that some scouters DO engage in that sort of thing.

The vast majority of scouters I have met are good people trying to do their best, and that includes trying to be respectful of people of different faiths. If that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t be a scouter.

 

But I too have met a few scouters that are not. I have met a scouter that said non-Christian scouts "don't count†and we don’t have to respect their faith. I have been told to my face by a scouter that my religion (Unitarian Universalism) is "not a real religion and shouldn’t be allowed in scoutingâ€. I have met a scouter that told me the story of how he was basically run out of his previous council for daring to lead a prayer to Allah at a district round table.

 

As Stosh and Barry have said, there are good ways to address this subject in SMCs and BORs. I think the BSA suggested “How do you honor the 12th point of the Scout Law?†is a perfectly good question to ask (just like “How do you honor the 3rd point of the Scout Law?â€), and not just at an EBOR. Discussions of faith can be tricky things, but they can also be good things when handled well. It’s the handled well part that can be hard at times.

 

My worries over the new requirements are not in relation to the scouters like the “non-Christians don’t count guy†(actually I think he is off to Tail Life - good riddance), they are going to plow ahead doing their own thing no matter what national says. It’s the well meaning, good scouters that inadvertently make a scout feel uncomfortable and unwelcome through ignorance and misunderstanding that I worry about. A good Scout Master Conference is a conversation, not an a lecture. Questions and opinions go both ways. The new requirement is to effectively start up a conversation on the subject of faith in every SMC. Again, this can be handled well, but it also isn’t hard to find oneself in deep water without realizing it.

 

Scouts of minority faiths often feel a bit like outsiders already. I want requirements and directions from national that help make these scouts feel more welcome, not less.

 

I’ll wait and see how things turn out in May.

[packsaddle]

Rick, yes we'll see. What you described for well-meaning scouters making scouts feel uncomfortable or as you put it, unwelcome, is a couple of steps back from what I described in  my example AND what I have observed far more often than the extreme case I mentioned. 

Moosetracker, eagledad was the person who attempted to equate knot-tying with religious faith during BOR questioning. I merely responded. You're right. Retest is wrong in both cases but while a 'retest' of how to tie a knot is possible and probably happens frequently, what test is it that you think would be a 'retest' for religious faith? What possible response would fail such a test? 

 

As I read the guide, outside of professing absolute atheism, there is no answer that could fail. And if that is the case, why not just make it 'The Atheist Test'? Assuming, of course, that such a test did happen which is what I think the new requirement increases the risk of. There is no boy who will, during a BOR with improper questions, likely fail advancement because he can't tie a sheet bend. But then, that is not the focus of the new requirement, is it? 

 

If everyone DID adhere to the approach suggested in the guide, then all would be well. However....do you remember that suggestion I made earlier about providing a handbook to how to pass a BOR? The guide comes close, lol. It just needs a little spicing up with some humor (read, 'satire'). 

[moosetracker]

You see the whole point of the question as being a "test" to eliminate the atheists.. But you fail to acknowledge the real reason for the question, which is to push the scout to take the time to do some self reflection...  If they are not hit with the question for the first time at the EBOR, they will have had time to reflect on it..  If you regularly ask at a BOR "If you could change anything in the troop, what would it be?"   would you expect much from a tenderfoot more then "I don't know.."  but you would expect the answers to become better as the scout climbs up in rank and is not surprised by the question..

 

This is not retesting, it is not a requirement they got checked off on.. This is getting the scout to start thinking about a response when they get asked this question..

 

Yes, I too have the fear of the Adult leader not doing it correctly.. But, I don't start with the presumption it will be done wrong.. I will assume the best but simply keep my ears open for abuse, and figure out a way to nip it in the bud.. Depending on the circumstance how to do it would depend..  Never in front of a scout, and if I am hearing it 3rd party and it is not a unit I work with, then simply taking it to the DE for him to handle.  It is sort of like staying alert to child abuse, you don't go around assuming everyone is a child molester or child abuser, but you don't ignore the signs if you see them.. 

[packsaddle]

Moosetracker, you state your fear that the adult leader will not do this correctly but you don't start with a presumption that it will be done wrong. Why not? It is being done wrong right now even before the new requirement is in place...maybe by only a few scouters but it is being done nevertheless. Of COURSE you have to presume it will be done wrong in the future if it is being done wrong now. Do you really think that this new requirement is going to PREVENT it from being done wrong? Really?

 

YOU are the one who brought up the subject of 'retest'. I merely accepted your comment and responded to it. I do NOT see the whole point as being a 'test' to eliminate atheists.  What I do think is that if the only intent is to make the boy 'reflect' on his spirituality, or something like that, then specifying it in the requirements is a pretty strong way to get boys to do something that is pretty thin in content..since they cannot possibly fail...short of professing atheism.