TAHAWK

Everyone should speak up for fairness, but I only have David's words. Do you have an independent source of knowledge? I thought he had non-parishioners in the troop. Perhaps he meant they were only students in the school. He has not said that the IH created the rule, although that may very well be true. We just do not know. He attributed the rule to "my CO." "extracurricular"? Scouting is part of the Youth Ministry of the church. By "unit ban" I meant no more than it is a rule known only to apply in this one unit. I did not understand that it applied to anyone in the congregation who was not a Scout. Perhaps it does.

"With Scouts and leaders coming from a variety of church backgrounds there is opportunity to learn real appreciation for each person’s expression of faith in many cooperative experiences. Families not served by regular programs of any church often find a relationship to the local church through Scouting. Time and time again families get involved in various opportunities that provide moments of shared common ventures and growing closeness." National Catholic Committee on Scouting "It is important for youth to go beyond their family, parish, and school communities to serve the greater Church community. Catholic service leaders have a duty to reach out to young people in order to form them as young disciples who can bear witness to the gospel message. Service organizations are communities where youth can learn about joyful giving while being spiritually challenged to love others as Christ does. " United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Renewing the Vision - a framework for Catholic youth ministry "The starting point for the ministry of Evangelization “is our recognition of the presence of God already in young people, their experiences, their families, and their culture. …Evangelization, therefore, enables young people to uncover and name the experience of God already active and present in their lives." Youth & Young Adult Ministries Diocese of Dallas “Youth ministry is the response of the Christian community to the needs of young people and the sharing of the unique gifts of youth with the larger community.†Renewing the Vision: A Framework for Catholic Youth Ministry, Office for Publishing and Promotion Services, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1997. "Evangilization . religious emblems programs, Scout retreats, pilgrimages, days of reflection, Scout Sundays, Mass attendance while on weekend trips, values in Cub Scout Promise and Law of the Pack, Scout Oath and Scout Law, Venturing Oath and Venturing Code, adults witness faith to youths, youths witness to one another, outreach to unchurched members of the unit." National Catholic Committee on Scouting, Scouting is Youth Ministry, The Vision of Youth Ministry and Renewing the Vision, "[The] Eight Components of Youth Ministry (essence of ministry with adolescents) " "The National Catholic Committee on Scouting (NCCS) operates under the auspices of the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops and NCCS has a long tradition of cooperation with the Boy Scouts of America dating to 1937" The Archdiocese of Chicago Someone will be teaching youth values, by example or by words. Who will that be?

"My CO has a service requirement that members are expected to complete as part of their preparation for Confirmation. The CO doesn't want boys to be doing any other service projects that might compete with their time and energies until after they have received the Sacrament of Confirmation." As described by David, this unit's ban on participating in (Scout?) service projects until Confirmation is completed is not limited to the Eagle Scout Service Project or to 13-year-olds. I would be happy if there is a different meaning to be ascribed to the quoted words and ask David to tell us how he understands his troop's policy beyond his posts. I am in no position to correct David as to his description of his unit's policy, with love or otherwise. Even the harshest critic in this thread has accepted the honestly and accuracy of David's description, if not the validity of the policy reflected in those words.

Beav, I thought it was an interesting issue and raises the question of how a CO can best promote the values shared by Scouting and the church according to the National Catholic Committee on Scouting and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops - exclusion or inclusion. You take it personally, as sometimes appropriate for an advocate. Your choice. As for your final paragraph, that issue is addressed in the other thread. The ban on Scout service projects is said by David to last until the Catholic Scout completes Confirmation, however long that takes.

That is your interpretation and,apparently, your CO's interpretation of a rule requiring confirmation before a Scout can Eagle - or do any Scouting service project. The B.S.A. disagrees. That I agree with the B.S.A. matters little.

Sure. It can be complicated. The troop of my youth was mostly military dependents and had Scouts with Shinto moms and Catholic dads, Buddhist moms and Baptist dads, and Catholic moms and Jewish dads - all in a troop "sponsored" by a Methodist church. The statement was that someone without a religion would be excluded ipso facto. We could ask David to clarify, but he has declared this thread "idiotic," so I doubt that he will oblige.

The original post asked about exclnding boys from a troop because they were unchurched.

"Before anyone rants at the absurd context, the policy as described in by the other thread is to suspend service projects for a few months. Poor little 8th grader if he's taken two years to advance to Scout and can't take the heat because he has to wait until the end of the term. " David can clarify this, but I thought the "suspension" was for as long as it takes for the Scout to complete Confirmation. No Confirmation, no Eagle - because a Scout once finished Eagle before finishing Confirmation. .

Please. I know it's hard. Can we stick to this subject? Or not if you can't.

Boys join Scout to have fun with friends. Having "caught" the boys, Scouting tries to make them better people and better citizens who are sound in mind and body. If our only goal is to enable them to have fun, we are vastly overthinking the program.

And if they never had the opportunity . . . ? That old 100 Scouts list said 14 had never been in a church until they joined Scouts. Do you have a better source of statistics? Lots on the Internet but little agreement.

Please read the OP. For example, does excluding the unchurched miss an opportunity to evangelize those who were excluded? Remember the "For every 100 Scouts" sheet that claimed that seven found religion because of joining a Scout unit?

So now that we have changed the prohibition of engaging in service projects to those who are "confirmation candidates," what is a "confirmation candidate"? My CO defines Confirmation candidates as those who: > are between the ages of thirteen and eighteen > have received the sacraments of Baptism, Reconciliation, and Eucharist. > are practicing their faith > are in the state of grace > demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the responsibilities of a member of the Catholic Church > are aware of the initiation aspect of the Sacrament of Confirmation and be committed to continuing the faithful practice and study of their religion > have a sincere desire to receive the sacrament as well as an appreciation of sacramental life. > register with the parish for the sacrament of Confirmation This makes it quite possible for an Eagle candidate in our troop to be other than a candidate for confirmation.

Hey Beav! Lawyering? Mens rea?

We have recently been told that there is a troop, whose CO is a Roman Catholic church, that excludes or would exclude any boy who does not identify a religious faith as part of his Duty to God. Before discussing what the B.S.A. and the Roman Catholic Church in the United States say on the topic, what is the members' experience with that issue? Does your church, temple, or synagogue exclude boys who do not identify as belonging to a religion? Next, should the a boy be excluded on the sole grounds that he does not profess membership in a religion?

It surely is and was intended to be. But it's not as bad as accusing someone of lying, Sunshine.

Well, Sunshine, why don't you ask him directly if your Co may add requirements to those set out by B.S.A. and see what he says.

Since you asked. You seem to forget that we agreed on the best practical advice. It is, on balance, unfortunate that it was, apparently, not followed. However, folks confronted by violations of rights are often angrier than they are crafty. And yes, I disagree with you in my belief that a Scout has a right to advance when he has met B.S.A.'s requirements, a belief that seems to be shared by B.S.A. given my service on Appeal Boards. I did not claim in my email to Mr. Lo Vecchio that I was involved in the troop or the council. I accurately presented David's position and, since I will be teaching Scouting about this subject in a few days, asked for his advice. And I understand why you would want to try to change the subject. Your invocation of unspecified rules (rules!) "for employees about Communications" while ignoring Mr. Lo Vecchio's actual statement does seem a tad like a defense attorney trying to get his client off on a technicality. "But Your Honor, the cop stopped him for speeding and only then saw the drugs." We do not, and never will, agree on the supposed right of a CO to add to or subtract from advancement requirements, whatever their good motives. I believe that, first, becasue B.S,A. says clearly that such changes are prohibited. Publishing advice that is directly contrary to clear B.S.A policy and rules ought not to go unchallenged due to the risk that someone might believe it's correct advice. Secondly, and more important, I regard the advancement requirements set out in the Handbook to be a form of promise to the Scouts as to the consequences of meeting those requirements, rather than some adult's idea of what is "better." Adults, individually and collectively as COs, ought to keep promises. That is part of what "Adult Association" is about. I hope to accomplish demonstrating that your client's position violates clear B.S.A. rules and policy and that, in defending and adopting that position you do not speak for Scouting, a role you repeatedly adopt by use of the pronoun "we." I think that encouraging conformity to the promises made to Scouts is helpful to Scouting and that the assumption by certain adults of the power to break those promises is not helpful to Scouting. And becasue I conclude that David's CO, like David himself, does what is done out of good motives, I do not predict that it will destroy part of its youth ministry out of pique over having to comply with its promise. From the language on its webpages, the Archdiocese of Chicago seem unlikely to abandon Scouting over correcting the decision of one troop not to follow B.S.A. advancement rules. We can, again, ask the Archbishop. I lack information to come to any such conclusion about the OP's CO., recognizing that we have only one source of information.

If "we" means B.S.A., we know exactly what B.S.A. says. Requiring a Scout to do more to be regarded as "active" AFTER he has already passed the requirement according to the then-existing troop standards is not what "we" do unless we elect to violate the rules we promise to follow.. Equally, requiring completion of Confirmation before allowing a Scout to do his service project is not what "we" do unless we elect to violate the rules we promise to follow.. B.S.A. 2013: “'Can my unit tweak this [advancement] requirement in this way?'†The answer is no. While program elements are customizable at the unit, district and council level, advancement is not. In other words: 'No council, committee, district, unit or individual has the authority to add to, or subtract from, advancement requirements. There are limited exceptions relating only to youth members with special needs. For details see section 10, ''Advancement for Members With Special Needs.' '" "Up until the most recent G2A, da SM had to approve the MB counselor, and approve the lad doin' the badge." I am aware of an SM who totally changed T-F advancement requirements - added and subtracted. He had blue cards printed up with the troop advancement requirements. (One change from B.S.A. advancement I recall was requiring lots more first aid.) He also refused to allow adults to be on Boards of Review. Was he "evil"? No. He was wrong. Out of the best intentions he broke his promise and the promise B.S.A. made to the Scouts in the Handbook.. He didn't need to be thrown out of Scouting. He needed to change his behavior to conform to B.S.A. advancement rules or to be replaced as SM. They got a new SM. (Section 7.0.0.3 allowing the Scout to begin working on a MB without the SM's approval was added in 2013, but that does not impact your argument.)

Perhaps, if buttered.

To respond to the question, I am asking why requiring rigid adherence to violation of even quite clear B.S.A. rules is more than just OK to some but refusing to adhere to B.S.A. rules, is, according to some, the very essence of proper Scouting. Given the above exchanges, I should make it explicit that I, at least, do not presume to speak for B.S.A., much less all of Scouting. Nor to I concede that anyone who has posted in this thread speaks for B.S.A. and all of Scouting, however sincere their opinions. When I quote B.S.A. language, that is B.S.A. speaking for itself: "Thank you for your questions and concerns. No chartered organization has the authority to add this or any other requirement. The Boy Scout Handbook and current 2016 Boy Scout Requirements book explicitly state the requirements for all ranks and these are the only requirements necessary to advance. The CO cannot and must not add the requirement for a Life Scout to be Confirmed before starting on his Eagle project. Eagle requirement #5 states: 5. While a Life Scout, plan, develop, and give leadership to others in a service project helpful to any religious institution, any school, or your community. (The project must benefit an organization other than the Boy Scouts of America.) A project proposal must be approved by the organization benefiting from the effort, your Scoutmaster and unit committee, and the council or district before you start. You must use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook, BSA publication No. 512-927, in meeting this requirement. (To learn more about the Eagle Scout service project, see the Guide to Advancement, topics 9.0.2.0 through 9.0.2.16.) Nowhere in this requirement does it state “You must first complete your Confirmation before startingâ€. Adding this requirement is contrary to national policy. As far as Duty to God requirement, please review the FAQ’s starting on page 4 at the following link: http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/2016BoyScoutrequirementsFAQs.pdf " Boy scouts of America Michael J. Lo Vecchio | Program – Advancement Specialist June 17, 2016 A little research will reveal that the national B.S.A. committee that developed the new Duty to God requirement that some find so offensive, included prominent religious leaders, including at least one "Bishop." " The committee included representatives from a variety of religions who recognized the deep and essential connection between Scouting and serving God. I have yet to identify all of them, but that can no doubt be done. In this thread, some have gone from "The CO adults can do whatever we think is right regardless of B.S.A.'s rules" to "Throw out anyone who disagrees with what we think is right." Sauce for the goose? Or is it sauce for the beaver? Differences as to right and wrong come looking for you, Hedge. Because people come here looking for advice, questionable advice ought to be challenged. Advice that promising to follow the B.S.A. program means do whatever you think is best, even when clearly contrary to B.S.A. program, ought to be questioned.

Take it up with B.S.A., possibly before promising to follow this "absolute nonsense" and "double-talk" as you have in writing annually. Officially, "Duty to God" is something between the Scout and his family. Outside adults may not judge him on the adequacy of his compliance with the adults' definition of Duty to God. But, of course, they can. Adults ignore the most basic rules of Scouting every day because they feel superior to those setting force those rules - and they can. B.S.A. Scouting has had Buddhist troops since 1920, Jewish and Catholic troops from 1910. The religions in B.S.A. Scouting today are many. But, to Beav's point, B.S.A. still has not figured out how to talk about the subject with any sort of consistent coherence. In an effort to please everyone and offend no one, B.S.A. is all over the lot, recognizing non-theistic units but requiring belief in God. Again, it is interesting that those adults who decry rigid adherence, or even colorable adherence, to B.S.A. rules also demand strict adherence in their units to rules that these adults have created.

You decide. It seems to be a matter of degree, As best I can figure out, ought to do (theoretically at least) vs. obligated to do. Not just a "good" thing but what society agrees should always be done.

Looked them up. Look nice. Good reviews. But the price is not for the faint-of-heart.

Please, supply us to a link at Scout Stuff.