Jump to content
CherokeeScouter

Eagle and recommendation from the pastor

Recommended Posts

Yah, @@vumbi, yeh do understand that Pastafarianism really is a satire, right? :)  Though it's become a favorite in my local Italian restaurant.  It's also well enough defined, I reckon, for a lad to know what he's about.

 

In terms of the boy you mention, my question for yeh is why did the lad think a BOR was a test in the first place, eh?    Seems like his troop set him up for failure.  No need to make a board into The Test in the lad's mind.

 

I'd also wonder why the troop's program didn't afford the lad opportunities to express his faith in ways that would help him build confidence?  We've got these lads for a lot of years between age 10 and when they come up for Eagle rank.  Years of talkin' about and tryin' to live da Oath and Law.... Duty to God and Duty to Country and Reverence and all da rest as a matter of personal character.   We've spent years of havin' lads of different faiths tryin' to live their faiths while livin' together respectfully...  somethin' that's downright unusual in much of the world. 

 

If we didn't do our job to help a lad Be Prepared to be comfortable with his own belief (and doubts), and comfortable and respectful when encounterin' the beliefs and questions of others, that's on us, eh?  We failed the lad.

 

Beavah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, @@vumbi, yeh do understand that Pastafarianism really is a satire, right? :)  Though it's become a favorite in my local Italian restaurant.  It's also well enough defined, I reckon, for a lad to know what he's about.

 

I've heard similar or worse about Scientology, LDS, etc. from adults. The boys don't engage in this kind of 'labeling'. My example is real, not some contrivance.

 

In terms of the boy you mention, my question for yeh is why did the lad think a BOR was a test in the first place, eh?    Seems like his troop set him up for failure.  No need to make a board into The Test in the lad's mind.

 

He didn't in the first place. He did once his faith began to be examined. This is YOUR assumption about a situation of which you are ignorant in order to maintain support for your approach.

 

I'd also wonder why the troop's program didn't afford the lad opportunities to express his faith in ways that would help him build confidence?  We've got these lads for a lot of years between age 10 and when they come up for Eagle rank.  Years of talkin' about and tryin' to live da Oath and Law.... Duty to God and Duty to Country and Reverence and all da rest as a matter of personal character.   We've spent years of havin' lads of different faiths tryin' to live their faiths while livin' together respectfully...  somethin' that's downright unusual in much of the world. 

 

On what basis have you concluded that he didn't have these opportunities? Time to try some other logical fallacy.

 

If we didn't do our job to help a lad Be Prepared to be comfortable with his own belief (and doubts), and comfortable and respectful when encounterin' the beliefs and questions of others, that's on us, eh?  We failed the lad.

 

Yes, the process failed the lad when a review became an examination of his own faith by someone who shared your penchant for the application of 'labels'  (such as 'smart alec'), The boy was sincere at the outset. The board might have thought it was as well, but if I detected the tone, like the boy did, it wasn't just a matter of one person's misconception. Like I wrote, that board member will not do that again. The others learned a lesson as well.

 

Beavah

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know many of the most popular Faith's LOVE to talk about them especially to, you know, evangelize. There are many faiths that are more personal in nature and discussing them with others is not encouraged and for good reason obviously.

 

The BSA seems intent on forcing "lads" to violate their own religiosity, in hopes of finding a "gotcha" moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A really good discussion here on the Chaplaincy and Faith forum.     

 

Here we have an example of one of the three (four?)  divisions of faith.  

Faith or belief in a Creator, a bigger than I am "something", an ultimate "reason". We are here with purpose, maybe mine, maybe yours, maybe we won't ever know the real, ultimate "reason""""", but it seems like we are doing something for a reason....  Einstein said "God does not play at dice."

Faith in the idea that there is no "ultimate", that  God(s) is (are)  a fiction created by humans out of a need of humans to have something bigger than themselves to depend on/blame/ask for help from/use to make sense of.  (Yes, Lack of Faith is a faith IMHO)

Faith that maybe, just maybe ... there is a "something", out there, but I am not sure about the definitive what it/him/her is (are).  I will wait and see.

Faith that things can be explained, if not now, then eventually, by the human rationale intellect.  Nothing is "Supernatural",  all is "Natural" .  (Maybe #4 is #2?) . Coincidence is what miracles turn out to be.  Things happen because things have to happen.  "Alea iacta est".  

 

The Pastarfarian so-called faith I think, belongs in the area of the folks that are not sure, that have to create something of their own and not of someone else's  .

faith idea .   Would I make fun of such if espoused by a Scout in his EBoR?  Certainly not.  I would treat it in a serious manner and use my questioning to understand the Scout's understanding of his idea of his  faith. 

  

Here, I will mention William Penn's  suggestion that  ""It is a sad Reflection, that many Men hardly have any Religion at all; and most Men have none of their own: For that which is the Religion of their Education, and not of their Judgment, is the Religion of Another, and not Theirs.""

 

I would welcome a well thought out dissertation by an Eagle Candidate on Pastafarianism  rather than a half hearted recitation of someone else's religion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard similar or worse about Scientology, LDS, etc. from adults. The boys don't engage in this kind of 'labeling'. My example is real, not some contrivance.

 

What are yeh talkin' about, mate?  The boys all know that da FSM is a satire.  That's part of the fun of the thing, especially for teenagers.

 

We should all be able to laugh at ourselves a bit, of course, and take satire or parody for what they are.  At the same time, sometimes satire can become mean-spirited and irreverent, eh?   When yeh put da FSM in place of the traditional depiction of God on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, we all know the intent is to poke a bit of fun at da Christian idea of a personal Creator God.   That's not havin' your own beliefs and symbols, that's takin' someone else's beliefs and symbols and satirizing 'em, eh?  Can I hear a RAmen!  (parodying the Judeo/Christian assent "Amen"). 

 

Where the line should be is an interestin' ethical dilemma worthy of the attention of an Eagle Scout.  Is it OK to make fun of Catholics makin' the sign of the cross by makin' the sign of the Mozzarella

 

I confess I've seen younger lads reduced to tears by older boys using da FSM to be a bit cutting and critical of their family's religion.  Sometimes because the younger lad is wearin' his heart on his sleeve a bit, sometimes because the older boy was crossin' the line.   The choice to parody the beliefs of others isn't really value-neutral.

 

We're here in Scoutin' to Associate with the boys as adults, eh?   Thoughtfully and respectfully to be sure, but also genuinely.  We're part of helpin' 'em think about things, and the impacts of their choices.  We're part of helpin' them deepen their own faith and come to respect da faiths of others, and also to think about their choices and actions.

 

I'm sorry if some fellow at an EBOR stepped over the line, @@vumbi.  Not bein' there I'll have to take your word for it, eh?  I've seen that happen too with a few of our more evangelical colleagues; it's one of da challenges of havin' district folks who don't know the unit or the boy on EBORs.   IMO lots of conversations are more appropriate for campfires than EBORs... or actually I prefer EBORs to be conducted around campfires.  :cool:   Sets da tone better.   

 

Anecdote ain't the same as data, though, and anecdotes cut both ways.  I've had boys not of my faith write me years later thankin' me for BOR or campfire discussions about their religion, and how it helped 'em deepen their own faith.  Just because one adult may have not done well at a task doesn't mean everyone else should avoid it. 

 

Beavah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beavah, I'm glad things have gone so well for you. I asked the boys on our outing today if they'd ever heard of the church of the FSM? Not a single one. I'm guessing it must be regional or something.

 

Anecdotes only cut one way when producing a result that is destructive. And just as I agree with you that parody of others' beliefs is not value-neutral, I also maintain that questioning someone about their beliefs isn't either. And the questioner doesn't get to decide whether or not the question is welcomed or causes hurt - the boy being questioned does.

I wish you the best of success in the way you approach these things. I will continue to tread very lightly on matters of faith.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×