A question for Fuzzy Bear

[dan]

 

A few years ago, a young man stated that he was an atheist during his Eagle BOR. He made a point to direct his comment to me. I didn't answer him right away not because I was patient but because I knew he was somehow manipulating me and the Board with his answer. I was certain that my answer to him would be correct without any doubt. The other leaders also were absolutely sure and we all agreed. We recessed for two weeks and spoke with his religious leader and his parents. When we returned, we apologized for our lack of knowledge and he was given his Eagle. We were given credit for doing a good job from people from several counties away (most unusual). Many had heard of our "great" insight and ability at resolving the situation but that was not the case at all. I found it hard to forgive the young man because he had used the situation as a kind of a twisted joke. Finding humor in had to come first.

 

Are you saying that a Scout said he was an atheist, and The Eagle Committee asked his parents and other people and they said he did, so he got his Eagle?

What am I missing here? I am trying to see how the committee could do that. Am I missing part of the story?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Dan,

 

Yes, I deliberately left that part of the story out to make a point to another interested practitioner. The individual stated a problem but was not seeking an answer. It was a rouse to make a condemning judgment based on a personal belief. When we are quick to arrive at an answer that on the surface appears to have no other solution, we need to be patient and look ever so slightly underneath the surface because there most probably exists quite a different answer. It is a common flaw for most all of us. It happens when our perspective is warped by absolutes. We fully believe that we know the answer to a problem and we are so impatient for the quick fix when we perceive a paradox that we overlook the obvious. This has happened repeatedly for centuries with religious thought and science which inevitably has lead to persecution of those that have discovered something "new" but is sometimes just a different viewpoint of the same thing.

 

Now for the part left out:

The Board of Review consisted of four Christians that almost fell over backwards when the young man stated his belief. We were set for the kill but we withheld our judgment until we checked with his parents and his religious leader. The young man directed his statement towards me because I think he thought I was the easy "mark". He was right and wrong. It was because he set me too far back so I called the recess. During this cool down period we perceived the underlying statement but didn't have a clue of the answer.

 

We found that the young man was perfectly within his religious rights to deny God because it was accepted as a way to grow within his faith. It was a way to express questions and seek answers about God. He was considered to forever be one his fellowship no matter where his thoughts led him. His faith is an old faith, one that takes God quite seriously but also knows the character of youth and gives leeway to their desires to find truth, ask the big questions, expose hypocrisy, and eventually return home. They are quite accepting of such actions because they know and understand God and Man and feel assured and confident that in the end God will capture our heart.

 

I am still amazed.

 

 

FB

[dsteele]

Was he a member of the Disciples of Christ, Wesleyan, or other?

 

Unc.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Unc,

That is an interesting but incorrect answer. It doesn't match the description. You must have had a similar experience. Do you mind sharing?

FB

[NJCubScouter]

We found that the young man was perfectly within his religious rights to deny God because it was accepted as a way to grow within his faith. It was a way to express questions and seek answers about God. He was considered to forever be one his fellowship no matter where his thoughts led him. His faith is an old faith, one that takes God quite seriously but also knows the character of youth and gives leeway to their desires to find truth, ask the big questions, expose hypocrisy, and eventually return home....

 

Rather than play guessing games, I'll just ask directly: What faith is it, FuzzyBear?

 

[dan]

I am still confused. How could someone become an Eagle scout if they said they where an atheist. Did he later say he was not? I am really curious on what faith allows one to say they are an atheist.

[Fuzzy Bear]

NJS, I don't see it as a game but if you do and are offended, please accept my apologies. FB

 

Dan,

When this happened to me, I was confused also and still do not know the depth of it.

You may have heard the term,"Once saved, always saved?"

How do you understand that statement?

Where do you think it was dervived?

FB

[Rooster7]

"Once saved, always saved" is a teaching that stems from Romans 8 and was made popular by John Calvin. The 5th point of Calvinism, "Perseverance of the Saints" expounds on this teaching. It, in part, says this:

 

"If man cannot save himself, then God must save him. If all are not saved, the God has not saved all. If Christ has made satisfaction for sins, then, it is for the sins of those who are saved. If God intends to reveal this salvation in Christ to the hearts of those whom He chooses to save, then, God will provide the means of effectually doing so. If, therefore, having ordained to save, died to save, and called to salvation those who could not save themselves, He will also preserve those saved ones unto eternal life to the glory of His Name."

 

In short -"Once saved, always saved".

 

How does this relate to the Scout in question? And Fuzzy...perhaps you should change your name to "Dancing Bear", because you've done your best to dance around this question. What faith was the boy supposedly practicing?

 

[Bob White]

It really does not matter. The boy, by his own admission, did not accept the exitence of God. And while his religion may believe that God has not given up on him, neither God not the religion were seeking the Eagle rank. The boy was and he admitted he did not meet the requirements of membership or advancement in the BSA.

 

While there is no point in reprimanding those involved for ignoring their duties it can serve as a lesson to others who may be in a similar situation to be more responsible in seeing that the scout has indeed met ALL the requirements for the rank they are applying for.

 

BW

[NJCubScouter]

Fuzzy Bear, I am not "offended"; after some of the things I have seen in this forum, it would take a lot more than this to offend me.

 

However, I do not think you are being particularly "fair" with the other members of the forum. You have made a statement that seems highly doubtful to many people, including me, but you ignore requests to provide the piece of information that would allow other people to "test" the validity of the statement. Your statement, in effect, is that there is a "faith" (you do not say "religion," a fact that may or may not be significant) in which a state of "temporary atheism" in its members is not only accepted but apparently expected, and you further state (in effect) that this acceptance allows a youth to be a member of, and advance in, the BSA despite the BSA's requirement of a belief in a higher power. I hope I have paraphrased your statements correctly. Unlike BobWhite, I do not know for certain whether your statement (the part involving the BSA) is correct or not. And without the name of the religion, there is no way that I or anyone else can find out.

[packsaddle]

...I tried so hard to wait this one out. Perhaps a name for the religion will not help. We tend to rely on such typographical conveniences and we sometimes think they are a substitute for understanding.

For this particular topic, we are left with the certain knowledge that we do NOT understand the situation. And some of us have passed judgement anyway.

 

If Fuzzy does not relent, how do we proceed? We proceed as if the boy has asked us to take his religious convictions on faith. Which is, actually, what we do with each other anyway.

There is probably little chance that one of us can convey completely to someone else, our deepest religious convictions (as if it would be any of their business in the first place). So if a boy is simply asked, "Have you met this requirement?" and he answers, "Yes", that may be sufficient. It would be incumbent on the interrogator to prove him wrong...a task with doubtful objective success.

[dan]

I asked the question, because I could not believe anyone would say a scout pass an Eagle BOR after he said he was an atheist and his mommy and daddy said he was not, so he passed.

 

Packsaddle

The boy said he was an atheist!? I take it you are with Fuzzybear, that the boy once had a belief in God, now he does not, so once saved, always saved.

[Rooster7]

If in fact this boy's parents are claiming Romans 8 as the premise for their son's "faith" and salvation, I find it interesting. That is to say, most who believe in the "preservation of the saints" - claim this tenant to reassure those who are concerned that they may have lost their salvation. For example, a man commits adultery - realizes the gravity of his sin and subsequently starts to question his salvation. However, I have never heard anyone apply this to someone who does a turnabout and embraces atheism. To the contrary, given this boy's claim, I think most would deduce that he was not saved. In fact, a good Calvinist would exhort this boy to pray, repent, and to seek God.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Remember, that the boy's parents AND his religious leader agreed that the boy could not be anything other than what he was from his entry into his religion and/or his faith, no matter what he said he was later.

 

As far as anyone not doing their duty, it was our duty to look beyond his statement to make sure there wasn't something more, like a different perspective, which we found. I would have liked nothing better than to take the young man at his word and let the chips fall where they may but I would have been wrong.

 

The other people on the BOR were careful, appropriate and reasonable with their actions. To impugn them would be short-sighted. These gentlemen could hold their own with any person in Scouting then and today. I was the impatient one, so if there is a lesson to be learned, don't be like me, impatient.

 

NJS, As far as fairness and/or dancing goes,

Unc didn't answer my question. I respect his right to silence.

Dan didn't answer my questions. I respect his quietness.

Rooster has no confusion and needs no answers. I accept that also.

 

Read PS's statement. Obviously, he has been faced with an insoluble question before and instead of answering it from the perspective of one having the absolute answers, (*see Bob White's reaction) PS tried reason. It shows an individual strength of character that is necessary when faced with such difficulties. That is one of the three goals of the BSA and it is important that leaders in this program demonstrate it on a regular basis.

 

FB

 

 

FB

 

 

 

 

 

[Bob White]

There are not 3 goals in scouting (and never have been) if that is what the premise for your argument is FB then you have already run aground. There is one goal. To learn to make ethical decisions based on the values of the Boy Scout Oath and Law. Both of which the scout rejected by asserting he was an atheist.

 

The feelings or beliefs of any religion are irrelevant since the BSA does not require the scout to be in any specific religion. Since it is not the parents who are candidates for the award their beliefs are irrelevant.

 

The fact remains that the board was hoodwinked by this boy. "The young man directed his statement towards me because I think he thought I was the easy "mark"." that alone tells you volumes about his character doesn't it? If not, then consider this statement also from FB "I found it hard to forgive the young man because he had used the situation as a kind of a twisted joke." Is that the character of a Scout? Is it trustworthy, friendly, courteous, kind, brave, reverent?

 

Membership requires an acceptance of God. This boy rejected that. That disqualified him from membership. Without an acceptance of God he could not meet the advancement requirements for any rank let alone the highest one.

 

If he truly was an atheist then his decision to announce it, though ethical, disqualified him as a candidate under the regulations of the BSA.

 

If he was yanking your chain, as it appears, then his actions were unethical and he did not meet the requirements for earning the rank at that time.

 

The board in its effort to think beyond the requirements, changed them, and made a decision that while sincere was inappropriate according to the stated responsibilities of the bor and regulations of the BSA.

 

Patiently and thoughtful submitted,

BW