What is your program about?”

[Laurie]

Twocubdad started a list:

"Compassion -- visit nursing home, or any number of service projects.

Resourcefullness -- survival weekend, Einstein kits

Courage -- COPE or obstacle course; program with a Medal of Honor recipient (this one we're trying to this with our pack)

Responsibility -- tie-in with shooting sports, whittlin' or totin' chip

Perserverence -- COPE or obstacle or any advancement which requires long-term project (fitness, personal finance, etc.)

 

Can any one else add more?"

 

Yes.

Compassion: was shown to my nephew who is battling cancer and is a Cub. He is limited in what he can do, yet the whole pack supported him by making sure he was as much a part of the program as possible.

 

Compassion: making cards to deliver to shut-ins. It was fun to do, and it touched someone else's life, and they gave without expecting or getting anything in return.

 

Cooperation: When we have den meetings and are making things, are the boys working together or trying to out-do one another? We stress helping one another and working as a team, and it begins with the adult leaders, who are seen working together by the boys.

 

Perseverance: Knots is the area that helps us to teach our Cubs perseverance (sp?). They found knots very challenging, but we simply supported them, encouraged them, and kept on trying. Cubs provides a safe place to try things that are challenging--to learn the art of perseverance.

 

Positive Attitude: Had a long day? Tired, kind of grumpy, not really into being at the meeting? You can spot that kid right away! A kind word, a gentle nudge in the right direction, and his attitude begins to improve. It starts in the pack and den meetings with leaders who aren't visibly stressed or entering the room frantic. Been there, done that, and it is NOT the way to model a positive attitude.

 

Some things I'm not sure how to fit neatly into one category. What about the boy who is reading out loud, gets really stuck on a word, and the boy next to him very quietly whispers the word. A need was identified, help was given, and it was done so in a way that kept the struggling boy's dignity intact. Small things often are very significant, and I could list a lot.

 

I think these all work together. A kind person is usually helpful and compassionate and has a positive attitude. Faith helps to accomplish those same things. Respect is hand in hand with it all too. If I think I have more value than you, I will not show you respect. It is my faith that has taught me that we all value and all are equal, and therefore that is what I try live, and it is what I try to help our boys to see. Back to prayer: I have strong feelings about prayer, but I will not judge another's prayer; I will encourage the Cubs to at least consider prayer and getting to know God, and to do so by talking to their families about it. Many don't take part in church and look at me rather blankly when I mention God, so we have to start somewhere. My view of Cubs and Boy Scouts is this: it is a way to introduce the aims with the hopes that the boys will learn, each in his own way, to grow into men of integrity.(This message has been edited by Laurie)

[NJCubScouter]

At last night's troop meeting I listened closely as the boys spoke into their folded arms (which of course muffles the sound) and what they are actually saying begins "May the Great Master of all good scouts..." As opposed to Great Scoutmaster. I did an Internet search and both versions and other variations appear, some with "good" and some without, and some with other words at the end, and some that use this as a preface to a much lengthier prayer.

 

I guess it's all a matter of custom. I'd be interested to know if the BSA has ever actually published these (or other) prayers anywhere. If so, I have not noticed them.

 

So, is "Great Master" better as opposed to "Great Scoutmaster"? It creates less of a chance that the boys will think they are importuning the man with the walrus mustache standing at one end of the room (who himself is speaking the benediction.)

[NJCubScouter]

I had decided I was not going to be the one to keep this thread going, and then a camping trip got in the way. (Pretty poor attendance due to the rain; and some poor communications about when this trip was going to be; and the high school and middle school sports schedules getting into full swing. I went mainly to induce my 11-year-old son into going, and ended up being the "second adult" behind the Scoutmaster, not counting the 18-year-and-2-month-old "Assistant Scoutmaster" who unfortunately by his conduct did not really count as an adult leader. But if I decide to go into that, it will be in another thread and probably a different part of the forum.)

 

But anyway, I can't really let FatOldGuy's statement about the "God of the Jews" go by, although I see Rooster already responded to it. Here it was:

 

As I read the Old Testament, the God of the Jews does not say that there is no other god, just that you can put no other god before him which would make him the Supreme God.

 

I'd say there are 3 issues here, translation, interpretation and actual belief, and the third one is really the only one that count. But just for the record, according to www.biblegateway.com (using the "default" version), the phrase can be translated as "no other gods before me" or "no other gods besides me. The latter translation, using "besides" in the sense of "other than," would have to be interpreted to mean, "You shall have no other gods" or if you like, "There are no other gods." Even the "before" translation can be interpreted to mean the same thing, though admittedly it is ambiguous. The "I am the only God" interpretation is also supported by the previous sentence which begins "I am the Lord thy God..."

 

But as I said, the most important thing is what Jews (and Christians) actually believe, not how you or I or anyone else would interpret it. And that believe is that there is one God, and that the passage in question means that there is one God.

 

I'd also add somewhat in response to what Rooster said, that there is another, less "symbolic" way to interpret the "other gods" reference. It was always my understanding that the "other gods" was a reference to the various local "gods" (Baal, etc.) and idols the Jews encountered while in the lands controlled by the indigenous peoples of Egypt and the Holy Land. Often the Jews themselves would "fall into" worshipping these idols, as in the story of the Golden Calf (which occurs after God gives Moses the Ten Commandments for the first time, but before the people actually see or hear the commandments.) After that (see Exodus 32 through 34) God says in effect "Hey, I really mean it. No more idols." So then, "no other gods before me" (or "besides me") means, these other "gods" you see being worshipped and who you have worshipped, are not God.

[Bob White]

returning to roosters original post in this thread, I can agree on parts and disagree on aothers. i will agree that scouting is a wonderful tool that can develop family and character in young and old alike. I believe that as long as a single scout unit exists that does not follow the scouting program, then there are too many units not following the program.

 

But keep in mind that much of what Rooster refers to are localized problems and can only be used to establish the program quality in his community. With all due respect Rooster as you said you are only going by what you see in your district, which is about 1/1000 of the entire program. Your not even seeing one piece of the pies. At best you are seeing a peice of crust of one tiny piece of the pie.

 

We are each responsibilble for the quality of the community we live in. And we each live in a variet of communities. In scouting that community could be your own family, unit, district, council or nation level of scouting. No matter which community we choose to embrace we have a responsibility to it's quality. If the unit you swerve is not keeping the promise of scouting then you have a responsibility to fix that. The same for your district. If you see the problems such as Rooster has observed the problem is not in the program but in the way it is delivered, and that means that as the adult volunteers the problem and the solution is us.

 

I would suggest the question should not be "What is your program about? but "do you understand what the scouting program is about and are you delivering it?" Good leaders ask this question of themselves before and after each meeting and event.

 

My two cents,

Bob White

 

 

 

[evmori]

Excellent points, Bob. But I think Rooster is right on the money.

 

The Scouting program can be delivered in many ways. Thoes ways depend on where se live. I'm sure the Scouting program is delivered different in inner cith New Yok than it is in the farmlands of Iowa. Sure the base program is the same throughout the country. But the delivery of that program can and should vary as needed throughout the country.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

I know of no real facts that supports your premise Ed.

 

I have been a scout leader in the midwest and in upstate New York and do not recall having to adjust any of the scout methods or aims to accomodate the change in region. I have worked with unit leaders all over the country and we have never found the need to change meeting agendas, unit operation, training content or any part of the scouting program.

 

Differences exist because we are a personality driven program. Each unit varies because the members of each unit are different. Changes within a unit invariably occur as personalities change. The one constant available for every unit is the official scouting program. Units that follow it have more in common with each other than units that do not.

 

The problems that Rooster sites in his initial post comes from units who have made a decision to not follow the program. The solutions he proposes in a later post can almost all be found within the written program resources.

 

If a unit or district want a better program then they need to follow the scouting program better. The fault is with the cooks not with the cookbook.

 

There is more to scouting than dressing like a scout.

 

Bob White

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[NJCubScouter]

BobWhite says:

 

The problems that Rooster sites in his initial post comes from units who have made a decision to not follow the program. The solutions he proposes in a later post can almost all be found within the written program resources.

 

This, by the way, is the reason why I did not discuss most of Rooster's suggestions: I did not have a problem with them. Although I do not have occasion to read the BSA's current "written program resources," most of these things sounded familiar either from my own Boy Scouting as a youth or from what my son's troop does now. However, Bob uses the word "almost," and my focus was on things that Rooster suggested that I felt were questionable within the Scouting program. So, hooking Bob's and Rooster's posts together, what I'd like to know is:

 

What do the BSA's program resources say about a suggestion that one "encourage heart-felt prayers, not just generic ones?" In other words, what does the BSA say about the idea that the generic group prayers heard at many troop meetings or other events are not "heart felt" and that everybody should be given the opportunity to pray in their own manner?

 

Second, what does the BSA say about encouraging boys to "debate political issues"? There was another thread about this, but in that case all the impetus came from the boys. Is this something the BSA actually promotes?

 

I would find out the answers myself on the Internet except that I know that the BSA's official program resources are copyrighted, and of course nobody would put copyrighted materials on the Internet.

 

[Rooster7]

NJ,

 

I like to think that the BSA gives adult leaders some credit for being intelligent and thoughtful folks capable of providing some ideas that can help the boys achieve their goals. Are you suggesting that adult leaders must not or should not come up with any ideas unless there is BSA documentation that specifically endorses the same? Certainly they support the idea of boys embracing their faith and being active citizens. That being the case, why would you suggest that encouraging boys to pray and/or to engage in political discourse is not kosher? They are consistent with the goals of the BSA.

 

[Bob White]

"What do the BSA's program resources say about a suggestion that one "encourage heart-felt prayers,"

 

My first thought is that A SCOUT IS REVERENT. I haven't thed slightest notion what a generic prayer is, but is someone has promised to be reverent I would hope that they would make every prayer meaningful in their own way.

 

"Second, what does the BSA say about encouraging boys to "debate political issues"?

 

I know that the BSA thinks that communication skills are important, and that citizenship is a key element in advancement, and that developing citizenship is an aim. So I see no problem in the use of debate to help hone speaking skills, encourage knowledge of current events and the electoral process.

 

HOWEVER, like any activity in scouting there should be some training involved first. And as the Sweet 16 of Safety points out, you should have an experienced person leading the activity. So I would recruit someone with actual debating experience to teach the rules and methodology of proper debating so that I was not just hosting a spitting contest.

 

(as an aside) I would have the scouts defend the view that was contrary to the one they held personally. This would be a good lesson in learning to see life from both sides before you take a stand on an issue. Plus it takes greater skill and energy to do it well.

 

Bob White

 

 

[NJCubScouter]

Rooster asks me:

 

Are you suggesting that adult leaders must not or should not come up with any ideas unless there is BSA documentation that specifically endorses the same?

 

Of course not. I am curious as to what BSA program materials do say about prayer. I want to know if the BSA confirms your opinion, mine or neither.

 

Rooster, this whole debate that we have on this subject really boils down to one sentence of yours from a previous post:

 

If the chartering organization has no religious affiliation (i.e., LDS, etc.), I don't feel it should be a unit decision. It should be the Scout or Scouter's decision as to how he says a prayer.

 

In the context of the discussion, you seem to be saying that in a non-religiously-chartered troop, the SPL should not stand up in front of the troop at the end of a meeting and lead the troop in a standard prayer (i.e. same one at every meeting.) That's what you are saying, right? If so, that's fine, we disagree. I was not "baiting" you as you accused me of earlier in this thread. I am not suggesting that every unit should do this. I am saying that there is nothing wrong with a unit doing this if that is what it decides to do. I asked if there are any BSA program materials to the contrary, and it does not seem like there are.

 

By the way, I do not know where my son's troop would stand in your personal view of things, but it is chartered to a religious organization (a Presbyterian church) AND at the end of every troop meeting the SPL leads the Scouts in the "Great Master of all Scouts" prayer. And I agree with Bob, it is the Scout's responsibility to make this prayer meaningful for himself. Or to paraphrase one of your posts, the Scout can silently change the address. I suspect that Buddhist, Hindi, Islamic etc. Scouts also do this when promising to do their duty to "God."

 

Rooster also says to me:

 

Certainly they support the idea of boys embracing their faith and being active citizens. That being the case, why would you suggest that encouraging boys to pray and/or to engage in political discourse is not kosher? They are consistent with the goals of the BSA.

 

And why would you suggest that I suggested that? I never did.

[NJCubScouter]

Bob says:

 

I know that the BSA thinks that communication skills are important, and that citizenship is a key element in advancement, and that developing citizenship is an aim. So I see no problem in the use of debate to help hone speaking skills, encourage knowledge of current events and the electoral process.

 

HOWEVER, like any activity in scouting there should be some training involved first. And as the Sweet 16 of Safety points out, you should have an experienced person leading the activity. So I would recruit someone with actual debating experience to teach the rules and methodology of proper debating so that I was not just hosting a spitting contest.

 

(as an aside) I would have the scouts defend the view that was contrary to the one they held personally. This would be a good lesson in learning to see life from both sides before you take a stand on an issue. Plus it takes greater skill and energy to do it well.

 

I agree with Bob. Personally I love "debate" especially in the formal sense that you are talking about. I did it competitively in high school (my parents still have the trophies on their bookcase) and judged high school debates while in college. I was going to respond in the "debate" thread, but I went camping instead.

 

I think the reason why some people might shy away from "debate" is that the word often evokes, in Bob's most delicate phrase, a spitting contest. These days, what passes for political debate is most often seen in places like Fox News Channel and CNN, and the level of discourse is deplorable. Most of the participants attack the person they are debating, or others, and the contest seems to be who can talk the loudest and fastest to drown out the adversary and the host. The positions are often transparently partisan, in other words the person is taking a position because that is the one that benefits his or her party. Often the issue becomes what is going to happen, rather than what should happen (which violates a rule of formal debate.)

 

But the idea of a formal debate, which I would suggest be on a specific issue-oriented proposition, rather than "which party is better," would be fine. The idea of switching sides is a feature of varsity high school debate, or at least it was 30 years ago. In the course of a one-day tournament there would be three or more different debates against different teams, and I would be on the "affirmative" side once or twice and the "negative" side once or twice. The topics were within a narrow range all on the same subject, so I often would be arguing contrary to what I had been a half hour earlier.

 

So I never meant to suggest that this is something the BSA would discourage. I was more curious about whether there are actually any written materials that encourage it. If there are, I hope they incorporate what Bob has suggested.

[evmori]

Bob,

Ever see urban Scouting in action? I don't mean from a hamlet in upstate New York either. I mean in a large metropolitan area where there is more crime & drugs than not. You can't deliver the BSA program in this type of environment the same way you would to farm boys on Indiana.

 

Not everything in Scouting is supported by facts, Bob. Sometimes we as leaders must think outside the box in order to have things work.

 

No one said anything about adjusting the methods or aims of Scouting. Just how they are delivered.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Bob White]

Awe shucks no Ed, us farm boys ain't never bin to see no big city scout'n.

 

Just for the record Ed I grew up in the Chicago area and I have organized three urban scouting troops all sponsored by either the Boy's Club or the Salvation Army. Each has lasted over 15 years of continual service and each follow the scouting program. Only the "where" changes not the "why" or the "how".

 

Not everything in scouting is supported by facts? I hope you are not suggesting that supporting it with fantasy is a good action plan.

 

Pardon me Ed but that philosophy doesn't even fly here in our primitive little hamlet.

 

Bob White

 

[evmori]

Condescending must be the 13th point of the Scout Law.

 

What's the difference between "where" changes & "why & how" changes?

 

Ed

[Rooster7]

I did not say all standard or generic prayers were wrong. By the way (just for Bob's edification), a generic prayer according Rooster's dictionary, is a prayer designed to be politically correct (not to offend), more than it is a true petition to God. A standard prayer is not necessary generic. Case in point, the Lord's Prayer is not generic, but I would describe it as a standard. A standard prayer is simply a known prayer that is repeatedly invoked. Nevertheless - NJ, my point seems to have escaped you. It was NOT that these types of prayers are always wrong. My contention was that troops (via their adult or boy leadership) should not force Scouts or Scouters to pray these prayers routinely and/or prohibit any other kinds of prayer simply because they are not generic and/or standard. I realize that there are exceptions, but I'd be willing to bet my house that the following is true - Troops that evoke standard and/or generic prayers routinely, recite them with the same kind passion of that a court stenographer might display. Furthermore, they are usually mumbled to the point whereas only those familiar with the prayer can fully recognize what is being said. I believe we should encourage actions that impassion our Scouts about their faith, not alienate them from it.