Forums

I could write a whole lot on this from personal experience, but to keep it brief: as @InquisitiveScouter and I have exchanged posts on in the past, being an "OA member" is a one-time occurrence, of having completed the Ordeal and being sashed within the Ordeal ceremony. Similarly, sealing Brotherhood or sitting Vigil are also one-time occurrences. Both are intended to charge the Arrowmen to continue to serve the OA and Scouting in general, but you can't go back through the ceremonies again as "candidate". Where there is a difference in "being a member" versus "being an active member" exists with those who continually pay dues to the National OA- and the only mechanism for that is through Lodges. The casual member may not know all the ins-and-outs of the OA in current events, but the changes that have been expressed outwardly that all can see (regulating the Native American theme, stopping the giving of Vigil names in Lenape, dropping adult camping requirements, etc.) have had a number of changes behind the scenes as well. There used to be numbers of adults who would attend NOAC- and that filtered down to Section and Lodges too- years ago who were not active members of BSA. That had to change, and it ticked quite a few off, but at the end of the day the OA cannot function in todays youth protection safeguards climate in what had become to some as an alumni association. Closures of camps in the summer of 2020 had a very profound effect on youth participation for many Lodges, in same manner as it did units. Lodges also saw engagement from older youth drop, in the same way units did (both from COVID and non-COVID reasons). Ultimately, the OA today is just "Scouting's National Honor Society", and the "honor camper" part was dropped long ago as part of that tagline. While many of the few who post here regularly testify that their program is active and following (if not going above and beyond) the outdoor component of the program, sadly, Lodges become reflections of the units within their councils. If the other units in your city/town or the city/town next door are pencil-whipping rank requirements, viewing the various camping experiences of Camping MB as "suggestions", and seeing all of the Scouting program as "ticking a box" then that is going to reflect in the youth in the Lodge. If youth within units don't want to accept (or actually perform) POR, then that is going to show up in youth that are in the Lodge.  The OA has gone through so many revisions of the "JTE", like units have endured, over the past 10-15 years that have been trying to "strengthen the OA", but the criteria are so heavily focused on activation (how many youth got elected that year versus how many was the Lodge successfully able to get through Ordeal) and how much $$$ the Lodge was able to pass off to their Council. Actual quality of the weekend program being delivered, how many youth attend multiple events in a year, etc. went out the window long ago. As I told the current National Chief and his brother several years ago now, the youth are not the voice running this at the top, it is the adults. I appreciate thoughts on how to revitalize the OA and keep it relevant, but ultimately the success of the OA is viewed through the same lens at the National level as Scouting America as a whole is- membership, revenue, etc. To improve the OA, you have to improve what SA is turning out within its' programs. My $.02.        

This is basically an advertisement to not become a legacy fellow unless/until a person is in the OA. 

For several years the OA has had official language to the degree that adult selection is based on what the adult can do for the OA. What that means in my council is that if you have something (meeting space, money, connections, etc ... ) the OA wants or needs you get offered membership.  I would actually go in a slightly different direction and make OA simply about camping and supporting council camps. Instead of a rolling camping nights requirement I would set Ordeal, Brotherhood, and Vigil levels at numbers of nights camped and numbers of summer camps attended.  Something like Ordeal (12 nights, at least 5 of which must be resident camping), Brotherhood (24 nights, 10 of which must be resident camping), Vigil (36 nights, 15 of which must be resident camping). I would also create some sort of maintenance requirement such as must camp so many nights a year in subsequent years to maintain Brotherhood and Vigil.  I think we all need to just accept that when you set a higher level of membership, whether that be rank, honor, merit badges, etc ... it sets goals for people to achieve. When you tell people that they should just achieve Vigil or Eagle or Summit, etc... organically on the journey you are also telling them that once the experience has been had nothing else matters. Once someone has had the experience and they have no goal to achieve they move on. I think the overall membership numbers reflect that. How many car camping experiences can a person have before they decide that they can have a higher quality experience with fewer rules outside the program at a better price point? 

This seems to me to reflect the misdirection of intent.  IF the ORDER is an honor group dedicated to service, and once focused on enhancing the outdoor programs within the units and Councils, becoming Vigil or even Brotherhood should be secondary to simply following the spirit of the ORDER.  Similar to putting becoming Eagle as the primary reason to be a Scout.  Just the old curmudgeon's personal point of view.  

On a secondary thought, if it is not lodged, try to make a vigil working only at the troop level.   If a youth wants vigil 1. Be part ofthe ceremoniall team 2. Lodge officer 3. works at summer camp and has seen my advice work many times.