I’m going to step onto some thin ice here but I feel it is an important time to do so within an appropriate context. For many years the Boy Scouts of America have had an explicit ban on openly gay scouts and openly gay or lesbian scout leaders. In response to this ban in the past few years the United Way (and other money granting organizations) has ceased to provide funding to the BSA because they feel that out of conscience they cannot support an organization that they feel violates civil rights and contributes to misunderstanding and antagonism toward gay and lesbian persons. A few weeks ago, the Boy Scouts of America made the difficult decision to allow openly gay scouts to participate in all BSA programs. At this time, though, the BSA decided not to allow openly gay scout leaders. This is important to our congregation because our church has a Boy Scout Troop and Cub Scout Pack.
There is often a misunderstanding about the relationship between a church (or other organization) and their troop. A lot of people think we just let the scouts use the building on certain nights. That’s not the way it is. That’s what our relationship is like with the Fayette County Choral Society, the CORE parenting classes, and even with the Girl Scouts. However, the Boy Scouts do things differently. First Presbyterian Church holds the charter for our troop and pack. What that means is that they don’t just use the building; they are a part of us. Actually, in terms of the building it means that the building belongs to the scouts just as much as it belongs to one of our Sunday school classes or to our bell choir. To think of it in business terms, we don’t just host a Boy Scout troop; we are the franchisees of a scout troop and pack. Our church actually owns everything that our troop uses. That isn’t Troop 112’s trailer; that’s FPC’s trailer that we purchased to use for our Scout Troop. Again, scouting is a program of our church. Therefore, it is implied that whatever the Scouts stand for, we stand for because they’re our scouts.
This charter organization and scout troop relationship is the reason that the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant “denomination” in the USA, is meeting today to (in all likelihood) strongly encourage all of their member congregations to break their charters (or refuse to renew) with their scout troops and to stop all affiliation with BSA. They will then be encouraged to find or found organizations for boys that will (the way I read it) not concentrate so much on being good citizens but more specifically on being good Christians. Although the Roman Catholic Church has encouraged its churches to keep their troops, some individual parishes have already started the process of separating themselves from their scout troops. Surprisingly (to me), The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Days Saints (Mormons), who have more BSA troops than any other religious organization, has declared that they support the scouts and will retain all troops.
So all this raises the question, what should we as a congregation do in regard to our troop? Ultimately, it is the session’s (board of elders) choice what to do, but I’m going to utilize the rest of this post (a long one at that) to give my personal opinion. At this point, I will not get into my thoughts on whether or not there should be openly gay adult leaders.
Here’s what I think we as a congregation should do:
We should continue to support our Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts as we always have.
If the Southern Baptists feel they cannot charter scout troops any longer out of conscience then that is their prerogative. They are our Christian brothers and sisters but that doesn’t mean we’re going to agree with them on everything. It is already pretty apparent that we, as a denomination and as a local congregation, don’t agree with the Baptists on a lot of things. To name a few of the biggies, we don’t agree with them on the meaning and mode of baptism, on who should be allowed at the Lord’s Table, on appropriate methods for biblical interpretation, on appropriate ways to offer pastoral counseling to members, on the role of women in the church, in the family, and in society. It’s okay if we don’t agree with them on the Boy Scouts too. Some among their ranks will blast us for that, but to be honest with you a lot of Southern Baptists I know gave up on the PC(USA) a long time ago most notably because we baptize babies and ordain women. Our support of the Boy Scouts will just add to the list.
The benefits that are offered by the programs of the BSA are too valuable for boys and too needed for our society for us to deprive our community of them. I agree with my friends and neighbors who feel our culture is headed down some tragic and destructive roads. Drugs are rampant, divorce is often not a last resort but an easy out, abortion is often used as a form of birth control, violence has erupted into our schools, children are neglected, and the rich continue to get obscenely rich while the poor get poorer. All of these societal diseases are harmful and exploitative of others. However, those who are lesbian and gay have nothing to do with these societal ills. Do you know what the safest neighborhood is in the often very violent city of Chicago, the area with the least amount of crime? It’s called Boystown. I’m sure you can guess how it got its name.
Gay and lesbian people are not the reason that 50% of marriages end in divorce, that the wealthiest 10% of the population holds 75% of the wealth, that companies have left the USA for China or South America, that Christian youth have sex at the same rates as non-Christian youth, or that mentally disturbed people keep finding ways to gain access to stockpiles of deadly weapons. In fact, if we look deeply into the decline of many aspects of our moral and communal lives we will find that the largest problem group is heterosexual men who are unwilling to fulfill their responsibilities to others, whether to women, to children, or to those in need. I believe whole heartedly that the church’s war on gay and lesbian people is a war that is being fought on the wrong front. Gay and lesbian people are easy targets because they are a small minority (between 5-10%) and because, although this is changing, popular opinion has been against them for so long that a good ol’ anti-gay rant will garner a lot of instant support. However, while they have been an easy target in the past, that does not mean they have been the right target.
As I mentioned above, in my opinion a large number of our problems come from men (almost always heterosexual men) who do not seem to feel that they are responsible to anyone besides themselves. They can use, abuse, abandon, or exploit others to get what they want or to make their own life easier with fewer commitments. Either that or they can just sit around and play video games or spend all their family’s money on beer and cigarettes without earning a living to support their family. I don’t look around at our society and say, “Man, those gays and lesbians are really making a mess of this country.” I look around and say, “We men, whether straight or gay (but mostly straight) need to muster up our concern for others and for the common good.” What kind of organization could help address what Orthodox Rabbi Shmuley Boteach calls “the Broken American Male?” Perhaps an organization that teaches boys and young men to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent. Where could we ever find such an organization? Oh yeah, it already exists. It’s called the Boy Scouts of America. I think our country would be a better place if a lot more boys, gay or straight, were scouts. I am glad now that I will never have to try to explain to my son, Wyatt, who is a Wolf Cub Scout, why another boy who wanted to become a more responsible American citizen and a quality man who will contribute to our community couldn’t do so through scouting.
The problem in the eyes of many is that the lifting of this ban normalizes being gay or lesbian. It doesn’t ostracize these folks any longer or brand them with a scarlet letter as hell-bound sinners. It makes the statement that gay and lesbian people are, well, normal people. This is unacceptable to some based upon their particular interpretations of certain portions of the Bible. Those who oppose the lifting of the ban often use the phrase “morally straight” from the Scout oath for ammunition in the battle. The use of this phrase by many, however, betrays a level of ignorance. It shows that these folks must never have read (or understood) their own Scout handbooks because this is how the “morally straight” portion of the Scout Oath is officially defined: “To be a person of strong character, your relationships with others should be honest and open. You should respect and defend the rights of all people. Be clean in your speech and actions, and remain faithful in your religious beliefs. The values you practice as a Scout will help you shape a life of virtue and self-reliance.” This definition doesn’t say anything about sexuality whatsoever, but it is being used because of the word “straight,” which is a common way of saying “heterosexual,” even though that isn't how it's being used here. Being “clean in your speech and actions” has to do with not using profanity, not telling lewd jokes, not making crude gestures, and with treating others with respect. Remaining faithful in your religious beliefs does not require a scout to share the beliefs of the charter organizations and doesn’t even say that you have to abide by your church’s official doctrine. After all, my religious beliefs are quite a bit different from my Southern Baptist brothers and sisters, as well as from some others in the PC(USA), and even many within our own congregation. But did anyone else pick up on these two aspects of what it means to be “morally straight:” your relationships with others should be honest and open and you should respect and defend the rights of all people. If you think there haven’t been gay scouts for the past 102 years then you’re fooling yourself. There just haven’t been gay scouts who were allowed to fulfill their own oath by being honest and open in their relationships. Also, how can you take an oath to respect and defend the rights of all people, while excluding certain people? The ban, when enacted, was forcing our scouts to be hypocritical in their own scout oath!
I read an article today in which a conservative Christian pastor “explained that the Boy Scouts take an oath to be ‘obedient, reverent and morally pure.’” He said, “We feel this is an immoral act ... that it's an immoral sexual perversion.” I picked just this one quote but I have read countless other quotes like this. Now, I don’t doubt that he (and a whole lot of Christians) believes that the act is sinful. However, I think these folks are confusing things here. Who said anything about same-sex acts? Why would we assume that a sixteen-year-old scout who self-identifies as gay is sexually active? Do we assume that all heterosexual scouts are sexually active? Trust me, I’m pretty sure most scouts are not sexually active for a number of reasons. The lifting of this ban is not concerned with whether or not scouts are sexually active. The lifting of this ban deals with self-identified sexual orientation, not with any “act,” whether it is deemed moral or immoral. I am under the assumption that no scout should be sexually active. Many of the opponents of lifting the ban don’t even seem to know what is being addressed here.
Another point of opposition is that some fear what might happen if their straight boy ends up in a tent with a gay scout. This fear is based upon the assumption that a scout who is gay would inevitably be both inappropriate and physically aggressive, which are both counter to everything scouting stands for. It’s not like the boys are supposed to be getting undressed in front of each other one way or the other. And again, if you think there haven’t been gay scouts in tents with straight scouts for the past 102 years you are living in a fantasy world. Scout leaders and parents must be adamant with all scouts that inappropriateness and physical aggression of any kind will NOT be tolerated.
My final point is that I believe that my Southern Baptist brethren and I disagree on what the point is of chartering a scout troop. The purpose of scouting is not to make Christians; the purpose of scouting is to make boys into better citizens. There is a religious aspect to scouting but it is in a very vague, civic religion, “God Bless America,” Pledge of Allegiance, kind of way. It is not explicitly Christian. There are Jewish synagogues and Muslim mosques that charter troops. Also, I’ve known one Hindu Cub Scout and I worked with an Eagle Scout candidate who was pretty sure that at the age of eighteen he was an atheist. I didn’t judge him though because when I was nineteen I thought I was an atheist; he just beat me there by a year. If a parent wants to add a specific religious component to scouting that can be done in conjunction with their pastor (or other religious leader) through materials provided by P.R.A.Y. Ministries for Protestants or other publishing houses for Roman Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim scouts. The scouts can earn religious emblems that can be worn on their uniform but they are not provided by the BSA. Some Christians seem to feel that everything should exist to produce Christians (but only their particular brand of Christian) including public schools, science classes, museums, movies, music, and so on. They don't seem to realize or care that this would make us some kind of Christian version of Saudi Arabia. This isn't what the BSA is about. Scouting exists to benefit society through training boys and young men to be quality citizens who work toward the common good. Sunday school, Vacation Bible School, confirmation, and church camp exist to make Christians. (Don't misunderstand me, I do not mean to imply that I believe that being gay or lesbian excludes a person from being a Christian)
The Boy Scouts aren’t in the business of making Christians. That's not why First Presbyterian Church has a pack and troop. According to the articles I’ve read, many Southern Baptists are not satisfied with that. I am, however. I think our church (and all churches) should do whatever we can for the common good such as feed the hungry, help others in need, support quality schools, take care of our environment, and so on and so forth. In my own opinion, I think scrapping Boy Scouts for a more overtly conservative Christian mission training program isn’t necessarily going to contribute to the common good at all and in some situations it may actually harm the common good.
So that’s why my opinion is what it is. I hope you agree that:
We should continue to support our Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts as we always have.
