Catholic Boy Scouts Substitute: Scouts Of St. George

[PhuturePriest]

I have mixed feelings on this. I have had the opportunity to work with a variety of Troops and Adventure Clubs while working in youth ministry. There are Troops who are quite active and others that are there to teach and never give experiences.

 

The Troop that my parish charters is absolutely amazing. I have no qualms in saying that all the "boys" that are involved are truly young men. This stretches from the 17 year old Eagle Scout to the 11 year old completing his first year as a scout. Sure they have moments where they are boys and they are learning to grow, but they are amesome young men. These are a fine group of young men and leaders. Although chartered by the parish most of the leadership is Catholic and even those who are not Catholic choose to abide by Catholic guidelines when with the scouts. The Troop is roughly 60% parishioners and 40% other denominations and the families have chosen to stay with this troop because they embody all the Values of Scouting including those regarding religion. Each trip they take one scout is appointed as chaplain to lead his fellow scouts in prayer for the entire trip, whether it's to start/end the day or grace before a meal.

 

Currently the USCCB is looking into the changes and is ensuring that Scouting is still "compatible" within Catholic parishes. I will continue to pray for our Bishops that they make a well informed choice consistent with our Catholic faith.

 

That being said, I believe there are a few components missing with the Scouts of St. George. One is the opportunity for Boy Lead Activities. On the last event I helped with, as an outside volunteer, I had never seen so many young men step up and joyfully teach younger scouts skills that will help enrich their lives. Two young men from our parish, an Eagle and a Life (almost Eagle) Scout, stepped up and taught 15 younger Scouts about First Aid and CPR under the aid of a certified instructor. Did this make them First Aid Certified, no, but they were able to impart new knowledge upon them with the ability that they could. (Their First Aid Cert will come when they are older.)

 

Secondly, what about utilizing groups already in place such as the Squires, through the KoC? The author states that the Squires aren't maintained for this purpose. But what about including activities that allow for growth in faith, stewardship and all around manliness?

 

Lastly, as "charter organizations" will these first few groups acknowledge the traditions and customs from which they were derived? These groups will need to develop skills and traditions of their own but until then what structure will there be? We as Catholics are steeped in tradition, if an organization is created through those traditions which will be incorporated into the initial charter and guidelines.

 

God bless-

LGLG

 

I'm confused. When did the author of the link say they wouldn't allow boys to teach other boys, and that they wouldn't have group activities together? As for the traditions, I don't know what you are complaining about. That part confused me.

[filius_angelorum]

The only way that I would ever consider supporting this organization is if the BSA actually stated that it was in favor of homosexual behavior. As it is, the Boy Scouts have only stated that no boy "will be denied membership on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone" and that "any sexual conduct, whether homosexual or heterosexual, by youth of Scouting age, is contrary to the virtues of Scouting". Sounds pretty much like the Catechism 2357-2359 to me. 

 

Even in that case, however, I would probably look for some other well-established organization, such as the Squires (given my background with the Knights of Columbus), rather than this proposed organization. It is too reactionary for my tastes, and I would rather my (hypothetical) son develop positive relationships with people from diverse backgrounds. 

 

I posted about this on my blog, in fact.

[Gabriela]

"The people" would include me then, although the timing isn't the sole reason why this makes me feel iffy. It just feels so...exclusionary? And if exclusionary, that's lame. I don't know, I feel that parishes can have father/son camping trips and other events without labeling it "Catholic Scouts."

 

Anyway, I know BSA was founded on Christian principles, but non-Catholic Christian ones - so why is it a surprise if some of what they do clashes with Catholic teaching? Regardless, I don't see anything in Catholic teaching that encourages the exclusion of kids who struggle with their sexual orientation. Just because gay boys/teens can be "out" in the Scouts doesn't mean the BSA has lost their moral compass. As long as they don't promote the lifestyle I don't see what the problem is.

 

I think I see where you're coming from, HCF. When I first heard about it, I also thought, "Aww, that's a shame. It's nice that a bunch of old-fashioned Christian kids get to hang out together regardless of denomination. It teaches them to love each other."

 

I still think it's a shame that the BSA can't be that anymore. And I whole-heartedly agree that if people are going to make a big stink of homosexual behavior, they ought to make just as big a stink about premarital relations and co-habitation and adultery. I think the reason why the homosexual behavior bit is such a big deal right now is because, in the larger societal picture, Catholics already feel they've lost the premarital relations/co-habitation/adultery battle. I mean, it is downright inconceivable that someone would not be allowed into any position because s/he lives with the significant other, who is not a spouse. But homosexual behavior is still something that's up for debate—at least, some people are holding out hope that it is.

 

So I don't think people are necessarily making more of a stink about homosexual behavior than premarital relations/co-habitation/adultery because they think that homosexual behavior is inherently worse. I think they make more of a stink about it because they feel they still have a chance of "winning" this one for American society. The others are lost causes. (I mean, with Christ, nothing is a lost cause. But culturally speaking, where we are right now... you know what I mean.)

 

I understand why you feel this is reactionary against homosexual behavior specifically, because in the narrow view, it is. But in the larger picture, I think those reacting against this by founding SSG troops aren't reacting just against homosexual behavior. Homosexual behavior has simply become the last straw in a LONG series of social acceptance of sexual disorders. They just can't take it anymore.

 

I agree with you, then, that it is a terrible shame that Catholic boys won't be able to scout with other Christian boys, and even with non-Christian boys. But at the same time, this is what it's come to, and in order for Catholic boys to REMAIN Catholic boys, I do think this is necessary. And hopefully, there will develop other groups or clubs or ecumenical activities that will be open to all denominations, in which all Christians can play and learn and grow together. There's nothing in the SSG "founding documents" that says a boy can be ONLY in SSG. He can participate in lots of activities. And I hope boys will. But I also hope that Catholic boys will participate in SSG, because I think it will be good for their faith. And for their manhood.

 

You follow me?

[Nihil Obstat]

It should be kept in mind that objectively speaking, homosexual sexual activity is somewhat graver than fornication or adultery or divorce.
Obviously they are all mortally sinful, but some are graver than others.

Off topic, but I feel that some people tend to forget.

Edited June 13, 2013 by Nihil Obstat

[Gabriela]

It should be kept in mind that objectively speaking, homosexual sexual activity is somewhat graver than fornication or adultery or divorce.
Obviously they are all mortally sinful, but some are graver than others.

Off topic, but I feel that some people tend to forget.

 

Not off topic at all. You mean because homosexual behavior is also against the natural law?

[filius_angelorum]

Yes, but if we are talking about the BSA decision, and the Catholic reaction to it, it should also be understood that the BSA resolution has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with homosexual OR heterosexual sexual activity.

[let_go_let_God]

I'm confused. When did the author of the link say they wouldn't allow boys to teach other boys, and that they wouldn't have group activities together? As for the traditions, I don't know what you are complaining about. That part confused me.

 

I didn't mean to make it sound that they wouldn't but it came across to me that it would be men teaching boys. I was also asking why not use established groups like the Squires to fill this gap by having more group activities like the Scouts. For traditions where will they be adapting them from? Will it be from Scouting or the Church or both? If it is from the Scouts they will need to give them a nod at least otherwise there could be lawsuits if Scouting or Scouts is considered a legal trademark of the BSA.

 

God bless-

LGLG

[PhuturePriest]

I didn't mean to make it sound that they wouldn't but it came across to me that it would be men teaching boys. I was also asking why not use established groups like the Squires to fill this gap by having more group activities like the Scouts. For traditions where will they be adapting them from? Will it be from Scouting or the Church or both? If it is from the Scouts they will need to give them a nod at least otherwise there could be lawsuits if Scouting or Scouts is considered a legal trademark of the BSA.

 

God bless-

LGLG

 

I think they are trying to emphasize men in the Church leading something because women are now a staggering majority of the teachers in the Church's many groups. But you have to remember the Boy Scouts is the same thing: Men teaching boys. That doesn't mean boys don't teach each other, though. That just means the men are the main leaders.

 

I think it's safe to assume they will be adapting traditions from both. They are obviously very Church-oriented, and they seem to have a lot of respect to Baden Powell. They will likely take traditions and teachings from the Church and Baden Powell (Obviously more-so on the former) and do with it what they will.

 

As for trademarks, I don't think the Boy Scouts can sue them. There are hundreds upon hundreds of small groups with the name "Scouts" in them, and they have never been sued for using that word in their name. Besides, it's kind of asinine to trademark a word in your name, anyway. Sure, you trademark your name, but trademarking a word in your name is just monopolizing the outdoors movement.

[KnightofChrist]

Yes, but if we are talking about the BSA decision, and the Catholic reaction to it, it should also be understood that the BSA resolution has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with homosexual OR heterosexual sexual activity.

 

Not completely true, outside organizations actually forced the BSA, by withholding commercial funding and a shame campaign, to make this first step, and yes it is just the first step to accepting Homosexuality fully.  When the open homosexual boys that are now allowed to join grow up to be men you don't think they'll want to rejoin and become Troop Masters? You don't think they'll cry discrimination? They will and they will also want their 'lifestyle' to be accepted and seen as normal as well. This move will embolden those who what the BSA to fully accept homosexual activity, which has been their goal all along. This move should and can be a legitimate wake up call to Catholic/Christian families who do not want their children belonging to such an organization.

[filius_angelorum]

Not completely true, outside organizations actually forced the BSA, by withholding commercial funding and a shame campaign, to make this first step, and yes it is just the first step to accepting Homosexuality fully.  When the open homosexual boys that are now allowed to join grow up to be men you don't think they'll want to rejoin and become Troop Masters? You don't think they'll cry discrimination? They will and they will also want their 'lifestyle' to be accepted and seen as normal as well. This move will embolden those who what the BSA to fully accept homosexual activity, which has been their goal all along. This move should and can be a legitimate wake up call to Catholic/Christian families who do not want their children belonging to such an organization.

 

I highly doubt that the Mormons who run the BSA will very easily be persuaded to adopt a change in their requirements for troop leadership or a change in the Scouts' position regarding sexual activity. And I was talking about the actual decision, not what "will" happen. Nonetheless, what you are predicting for the BSA will become a self-fulfilling prophecy if all the practicing Catholics remove their children from it. 

 

I think that we should interpret a document according to what it says, and be careful about taking a public stance which will be interpreted as a negative on positions with which we fundamentally agree.

[Basilisa Marie]

It should be kept in mind that objectively speaking, homosexual sexual activity is somewhat graver than fornication or adultery or divorce.
Obviously they are all mortally sinful, but some are graver than others.

Off topic, but I feel that some people tend to forget.

 

Although I agree on somewhat technical Thomistic grounds,  I think the emphasis we put on fighting the legalization of gay stuff is disproportional to the time we spend talking about other sexual sins, particularly premarital sex and the use of artificial birth control and such.  Seems like those sexual sins are a lot like a mostly-ignored log in our eyes.  It seems like people might have just gotten good at being quiet about those things, keeping them hidden from other parishioners, etc.  There's a staggering amount of people who engage in premartial sex and still present themselves for communion, and I'm not talking about people who make mistakes and are working to get better, I'm talking about those who actively engage in it, unrepentantly.  So while I DO think it's important for the Church to be a "prophetic witness" to society, aka stand up for sexual ethics and such, I think we should make sure we aren't also forgetting the people who HAVE signed up for the Catholic gig and aren't trying to meet the basic standard of practice.  I would personally argue that it's worse, or at least equally bad, because you've got the explicit "eating and drinking damnation upon your self" and "to whom much has been given much has been expected" verses that seem to spell it out pretty clearly in Christ's words in the New Testament.  I mean, isn't hypocrisy and scandal big reasons why we make such a big stink about denying communion public figures who support policies and activities that directly contradict Church teaching? 

But on the other hand, the Church DID do the "ZOmg you guys can't do that!" tango when Casti Connubii came out, I did a paper once on the American response and you can bet it was similar to homosexuality today. Ultimately a lot of people said screw you to Rome and did what they wanted, and many Church leaders may have decided to take a different approach with it.  Now some priests might talk about it a few times a year from the pulpit (usually if they're young and unafraid of backlash), but it seems like birth control has been relegated to special topics night at Adult Faith formation and marriage prep classes. 

So I guess what might be best is to make sure we're hammering everyone over the head with the full teaching on sexual ethics, and that people, especially priests, who feel called to do a lot of speaking out against gay stuff in society are also making sure that they're working to get Catholics who aren't up to par, up to par.  A sort of, "why not both?" thing. 

But to get back to the actual thread topic (whoops), I agree with GeorgiiMichael and a few others.  While I think it's probably not great that the Scouts of St. George are started as reactionary to the BSA allowing gay-identifying scouts to join, because it seems like it could be conducive to creating an environment that doesn't respect the dignity of all persons, I hope it does well and ends up being a great, fruitful alternative for parents who are uncomfortable with their sons participating in the BSA, or are unable to participate in the BSA for whatever reason.  

[HisChildForever]

You are the one that said calling it Catholic was exclusionary and unneeded. I was replying to what you said in that post. If you don't like how you worded your post, then clarify. But don't be surprised when people reply to what you said specifically.

 

No I didn't.

 

I said that parishes can have these kinds of events and activities without labeling it Scouts or creating a new Scouts organization. Because the immediate impression that people will get (whether they be Catholic or non-Catholic) is that the organization was created to thumb their nose at the BSA. The impression will be that Catholics want to exclude others and wrap themselves in their own little bubble. Anyway I'm just telling you how "outsiders" will view this.

 

Obviously the real idea behind the group is to incorporate Catholicism with Boy Scout-type activities, I suppose I just don't understand why a separate Boy Scouts has to be created for this when individual parishes could just support father/son camping trips and the like.

[KnightofChrist]

I highly doubt that the Mormons who run the BSA will very easily be persuaded to adopt a change in their requirements for troop leadership or a change in the Scouts' position regarding sexual activity. And I was talking about the actual decision, not what "will" happen. Nonetheless, what you are predicting for the BSA will become a self-fulfilling prophecy if all the practicing Catholics remove their children from it. 

 

I think that we should interpret a document according to what it says, and be careful about taking a public stance which will be interpreted as a negative on positions with which we fundamentally agree.

 

It's highly probable that little by little they'll give in subtle seemly "what's the big deal" ways. Much like many Catholic and formerly Catholic institutions, like colleges for example, have come to accept and even embrace numerous heresies and a multitude of immoral behavior. That didn't happen over night either, and because they were run by the Church or Catholics originally didn't stop them from falling head long over time into grave error. Homosexual advocates, who are very powerful, will not stop at this victory, they will indeed continue to push for complete acceptance of their lifestyle by the whole of society, not only the BSA. Even the Scouts of St. George or other similar groups will be targeted in time to accept homosexual behavior.

[KnightofChrist]

Although I agree on somewhat technical Thomistic grounds,  I think the emphasis we put on fighting the legalization of gay stuff is disproportional to the time we spend talking about other sexual sins, particularly premarital sex and the use of artificial birth control and such.  Seems like those sexual sins are a lot like a mostly-ignored log in our eyes.

I would like to take this opportunity to point out that this current debate on the never ending debate on Homosexuality wasn't really started by defenders of those who want to form groups like Scouts of St. George. It was started by those who detract from the formation of such a group because they didn't like the reason why it was created, and then preceded to pass judgement or just a little bit of shame upon those who would want to break away from the BSA because they fell it has begun to abandon christian morals. So it's a bit unfair to bring in the perceived unbalance between the condemnation of homosexual sins and heterosexual sins.

[PhuturePriest]

No I didn't.

 

I said that parishes can have these kinds of events and activities without labeling it Scouts or creating a new Scouts organization. Because the immediate impression that people will get (whether they be Catholic or non-Catholic) is that the organization was created to thumb their nose at the BSA. The impression will be that Catholics want to exclude others and wrap themselves in their own little bubble. Anyway I'm just telling you how "outsiders" will view this.

 

Obviously the real idea behind the group is to incorporate Catholicism with Boy Scout-type activities, I suppose I just don't understand why a separate Boy Scouts has to be created for this when individual parishes could just support father/son camping trips and the like.

 

Because you can organize it and make it a huge thing in the Catholic world. If you just did small unorganized camping stuff, barely anyone would do it. If this takes off, it could become a very big organization.