Peregrinator

Not that long ago back in England anyone caught stealing anything worth more than five shillings, about 14 cents could be hanged. Each shilling was 20 pence, and there were 12 shillings to a pound sterling, meaning each shilling was worth an ounce of silver. An ounce of silver is currently trading at $28.23 so five shillings in today's money would be $141.15. Not that I advocate the death penalty for theft but let's put things in perspective.... ;-)

And though it is only through the article, make it sound like the attitude is guilty until proven innocent, not the other way around. I would never go in as a parent with the attitude of guilty until proven guilty.. Also a parent I would see as the paster of the church.. Calling in the Bishop, is more like calling in the Police to investigate (or some sort of big guns). I suppose it depends on the article. Of course certain people have already made up their minds about the Girl Scouts so they'll play up the "investigating" angle. But I think at this stage the bishops are just asking questions. As far as the pastor is concerned, he doesn't have the same authority as the bishop and there are relationships at the diocesan level anyway, not just the parish level.

If equality advocates are an outside pressure group, than the bishops are equally so. I don't think the two are quite the same since (as far as I know) equality advocates aren't chartering/sponsoring troops in either BSA or GSUSA, or if they are, not to the extent that Catholic parishes are.

I gave you all kinds of sources,still available on line the Vatican Bank scandal is not only online but was on every news program and newspaper in the country. They were not accusations but truth, in fact Interpol seized three million dollars of the Vatican Banks funds as a result of the investigation. Do you live on a deserted island or just too lazy pere geesshh. I asked you to document a specific allegation you made (4th ranking criminal money laundering operation according to the State Dept.) and you're either unwilling or unable to do so. Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur. I'm not going to document your claims for you. As I've pointed out above, I am well aware that the Vatican Bank has been embroiled in scandals. I'm well aware of the other scandals afflicting the Church. That doesn't mean that one can make accusations willy-nilly without backing them up. moosetracker, isn't it reasonable that if Catholics are making accusations against the GSUSA that their bishops should follow up on them? If your kids come home and tell you that their teachers are filling their heads with hogwash -- even if it could well not be true -- isn't it your duty as a parent to follow up on their claims? The relationship of Catholics to their bishops is, or at least should be, one of a child to his (or her) spiritual father. So if Catholics make these kinds of accusations, repeatedly and over a period of time, then the bishops are duty-bound to follow up on them, even if they might not be true. I will add that the GSUSA's denials of having a relationship with Planned Parenthood or of taking a stance on sexuality, birth control, and abortion ring hollow in light of the CEO's admission in 2004 that the GSUSA does have relationships with Planned Parenthood.

As far as gay priests, after a 5 min internet check, showed there are numerous references listed, including wikipedia which states, from various source, that gay priests number 15-80% whereas the other sources cited figures on the higher end of that scale. Vatican Bank, the NCR online and numerous other sources describe the scandals in vivid detail. I was thinking of the specific charges you made against the Vatican Bank: "The Vatican Bank has been listed by our own government as the 4th leading criminal money laundering institution in the world." What Catholic publication printed that? I'm well aware of the scandals surrounding the Vatican Bank in particular and Catholic Church in general. If one is going to cite facts then he ought to have references for them. I'll add, further, that the bishops are not "attacking" the GSUSA. They are asking questions of them. Is it unreasonable for an organization to ask questions of another organization that they sponsor (though I understand that sponsorship of GS troops is nothing like chartering Boy Scout troops)? I've noticed some comments on the web of people calling for the GSUSA to "investigate" the bishops. If there is some sort of relationship between the two, then that is certainly reasonable. If the values of the Church and those of the GSUSA are in conflict, then it is not surprising that the bishops would want to ask questions of the GSUSA. What is surprising is that the GSUSA would want to be involved with the Church.

The number of homosexual priests was published in two catholic magazines,(Catholic Register & American Catholic) about two years ago, a study that was initiated by the Vatican as they were dealing with pedophile issues among their clergy. The Vatican Bank from a report published by Homeland Security about 3-6 months ago. My Google skills are pretty good but I can't find a reference to that statistic from the National Catholic Register. Didn't check American Catholic. Would you happen to have one handy? As far as the Vatican Bank stuff is concerned, I've not been able to find anything that says that there is more than a risk of money laundering due to its policies (and, I must say, the timing is ironic ... one would expect it would have been on the list long before considering the extent of Vatican Bank scandals in the past). The "4th leading criminal money laundering institution in the world"? Let's see a reference for that. You are quite right that many Catholics do not take what their bishops say seriously. It makes me wonder why one ought to take your local bishop's ban on the AHG seriously. As an aside, when I try to Google that information, all I get are results about the Girl Scouts. I suspect you are right that the GSUSA will not be much affected by bishops' prodding into their alliances. Their membership will probably continue to decline along the same slow line that it has for years.

Most of the money from GS cookie sales goes to the council rather than to the troop.

60% of priests? I call BS on that one as well as on #4. What Catholic publication published that one? I think most Catholics (at least the Internet-savvy ones) are pretty aware of the problems within the Church.

In the greater scheme of things no one really cares what the Catholic bishops have to say about the GSUSA, including many Catholics. It's odd, then, that you would post your local bishop's ban on the AHG as a strike against the AHG. If no one cares what Catholic bishops have to say about the GSUSA then no one ought to care about what they say about the AHG either.

AHG is a religious propaganda group preaching prejudicial and misinformation to its girls. I don't know whether AHG is a religious propaganda group or not. But logically, there is nothing preventing an organization from being both a religious propaganda group and a scouting group at the same time. There is nothing in the Scout Law that would preclude the establishment of a religious scouting organization -- as is the case in Europe. In fact some of the Catholic scouts in Europe are members of national federations which in turn are members of WOSM.

The shocking thing isn't that there is a woman somewhere who breastfeeds her toddler, the shocking thing is that she's pictured doing it on the cover of a national newsmagazine. Very poor taste IMO.

moosetracker: But I will state I do predict if I discussed my views with and Arch-Bishop I would be surprised if he said he agreed with my viewpoint.. So with the upper-clergy, there I will say I could be prejudice.. Although if we do not broach the subject matter, I have no idea if we could get along or not.. I see little opportunity to sit down and shoot the breeze with them guys though. Well, I did not find your posts anti-Catholic at all. It is hardly "anti-Catholic" to disagree with the Church, nor is it "anti-Catholic" to expect Catholic priests and bishops to uphold the teaching of the Church (would that that were true in all circumstances!).

For those interested in this sort of thing - the heroic virtues of Fr. Jacques Sevin, SJ -- one of the founders of scouting in France -- were recognized yesterday: http://www.news.va/en/news/decrees-of-the-congregation-for-the-causes-of-sa-3

I'm courious, does anyone know any other country now or in history where marriage was anything other than a man and wife? Nero. But then I'm not sure that's the precedent that proponents of gay marriage would like us to have in mind.

So the libertarian ideal is that two people can just get "married" based on their own definition of what marriage is ... by the same reasoning, a business owner (say, a restauranteur) could discriminate against them based on his own definition of what "clean" is ... or perhaps what "reverent" is. Somehow I don't think this is what gay marriage proponents want.

@moosetracker, this is the sort of thing I was referring to (comments on the North Carolina vote, not comments on the President's reaction to it): http://twitchy.com/2012/05/08/north-carolina-bans-gay-marriage-liberals-freak-out/ (Bad language warning!) I would agree that writing that the President will "fry in hell" is beyond the pale. But that is the nature of Internet communication, where people don't have to worry about p*ssing other people off and maybe getting punched in the face.(This message has been edited by Peregrinator)

"Really so now you not only go to hell for being a homosexual, and also you will go to hell for having an opinion different then that of a conservative?" If one believes that homosexuality is a sin, then is it not reasonable to hold that those who seek to give it legal sanction are accomplices in that sin? The point isn't that he has an opinion different from that of (most) conservatives, the point is that he is using his position to encourage others to commit sin. Whether Obama or anyone else will "fry in hell" (by the way, if you think that comment is ridiculous, you should see the comments from "liberals" urging bigoted, redneck North Carolinians to kill themselves) is not for me to judge. Coming out in favor of gay unions is encouraging (or, at least, enabling) people to enter into them and participating in their sin.

Is part of the issue perhaps that scouting is looked upon by some as a means to an end rather than an end itself? That is, perhaps some attach an undue importance to merit badges and rank because they believe it will get them somewhere in life? Or is it just a natural competitive spirit? Though I think if it were the latter, actual accomplishments and knowledge would outrank paper ones. :-)

FYI: HIKING You may say "yes, but I can't get to mountains, oceans and primeval forests. How then am I to see and understand the wonders of Nature and her messages?" Well, you can do almost as much in your own country if you will come away from the town and suburb and get out into the open, into the woods and meadows. With your page on your back and a staff in your hand or taking with you your little canvas home, your blanket or your cooking-pot -- and FREEDOM. Out in God's open air, drinking in the glories of sky and earth and sea; seeing the colour in the woods and fields, scenting the flowers and the hay, hearing the music of the brooks and birds and the whispering wind, getting to know the animals and their ways, till you feel that you are a comrade with them all and "find yourself" as a part of the great scheme of Nature. --Lord Baden-Powell, Roving to Success

IMHO walking around a paved track multiple times isn't hiking at all, it's walking. I don't think hiking necessarily involves a wilderness setting, I think one can do an urban hike but ISTM it should involve getting to a particular point and returning.

Affirm that you have heard them promise to live up to the scout law, and one point of that law is "kind." It's hard to imagine a point of the Scout Law that such a hazing procedure does not break! OK, I exaggerate but: "A Scout is a friend to all and a brother to every other Scout." Well, you don't spray your friends or your brothers with insect repellent, nor deliberately make bad memories for them. "A Scout is a friend to animals." A scout would never spray an animal in the face with insect repellent, would he (except perhaps an insect!). Then a fortiori he should not be spraying his brother scouts in the face with insect repellent. FWIW I agree with Venividi(vici!).

Also very relevant: http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50E10FB3D5417738DDDAF0A94D0405B828DF1D3 http://pinetreeweb.com/1929-times10.htm THE SCOUT PROMISE. "Stand up, stand up for Jesus," sung to the familiar tune "Morning Light," next filled the arena with music, and the Chief Scout spoke briefly on the brotherhood of service, and then called on the flagbearers to lower their flags and appealed to all to think over the Scout promise which he repeated to them: "On my honour I promise that I will do my best to do my duty to God and the King, to help other people at all times, to obey the Scout Law." He called on those willing to render service to their fellow men to hold up their hands, raise their flags and answer "I will." A great shout of assent was the response. Prayers for the King, the National Anthem, and the Blessing, pronounced by the Archbishop, brought the service to a close. Before it was over, however, there was a fresh deluge of rain, but the Scouts stood their ground. They cheered the King, the Archbishop, and the Chief Scout, and then remained while the Chief Scout said a few words to the veterans of the movement. At the High Mass of thanksgiving for Roman Catholics in the recreation ground Cardinal Bourne, Archbishop of Westminster, presided and preached. The celebrant was Canon Rooney, of Birkenhead. The Bishop of Shrewsbury was present, and the assistants at the throne were Canon Kelly and Canon Haslehurst. The proper of the Mass was sung by a special choir of Scouts from Birkenhead and Liverpool. The "Te Deum" was sung after Mass.

The GSUSA patterned their program much closer to the Girl Guides of Great Britian than the BSA did to Baden Powells Boy Scout program. One big difference was the emphasis in the BSA on religion and "a scout is reverent" which is not emphasized very much in any of these programs, except the BSA. In this vein I came across a great picture today: http://www.topfoto.co.uk/gallery/scouts/ppages/ppage7.htm

The other thing to consider is that while the WOSM model might be to not shop around, Europeans especially have other choices that may not be available to families in the U.S. For example, in France there are many different scouting organizations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scouting_and_Guiding_in_France If the Wikipedia stats are to be believed, the WOSM/WAGGGS representative has 120K members (but is itself a federation of smaller organizations), while the CFS has about 1/4 to 1/3 of that (and it also a federation of smaller organizations). Even in the UK there are options apart from the Scout Association (though I don't know how large the other scouting orgs are). In the U.S., though, the BSA is pretty much the only player in town. Plus troops can differ greatly depending on the chartering organization. So it makes a lot of sense to shop around. OwnTheNight wrote: My understanding from talking to friends in Europe, is that Scouting is a totally seperate entity and not connected with the church, at least in the sense of not being an active part of their outreach ministry. It depends on the organization. That might be the case with WOSM/WAGGGS but scouting isn't limited to those federations (and in Europe, you can even say that you're a scouting organization even if you aren't affiliated with WOSM/WAGGGS).

I think there is a difference between a ceremony's being secret, and an entire program's being secret. If AHG wants to have a secret induction ceremony, or something like that, then more power to them (as long as it is in the presence of parents).