Duty to God

[Old_OX_Eagle83]

I didn't say one that I should have. I respect that heck out of the OP for exploring this topic with an open mind, and all of those who have posted, and done the same. SSScout gave us a historic reminder of how volatile this topic is, and just how far we have came as nation, and an organization.

 

Dale, in the end your committee can't add "Duty to God" as part of the definition of "Scout Spirit", as it's already there, being part of the scout oath. Your SM can't judge a scout's performance of his "Duty to God", as his role is neither religious leader, nor God. BSA has not better defined Duty to God, as it is not BSA's place to do so, and should your unit attempt to better define "Duty to God" it's adding/changing rank requirements, which is a violation of the BSA Charter Agreement.

 

In the end this is a well intentioned journey that goes in a big circle, but in many cultures the circle is the symbol of introspection, self evaluation, a powerful learning tool. Through this journey we have come to a fuller understanding of the program, our roles, and how to best guide the young people in our charge.

[Peregrinator]

the Catholics and Protestants fought over religious hegemony in Maryland

That's an odd statement. Maybe you mean that Catholics (such as the Calvert family) tried to resist Protestant attempts at religious hegemony?

[Peregrinator]

When the Puritans moved to New England' date=' they did so to escape religious persecution.[/quote']

I don't think the Puritans were persecuted. They did, however, do their share of persecuting once they took power in New England.

[TAHAWK]

When I was fourteen and I noted to Ken Takahashi that he did not seem to be joining in the prayer that ended our "non-denominational service," I drew the reply, "No one to pray to."

 

His reply was consistent with what I have found on the subject, from books and people, over the generations.

 

[quiote]In Buddhist literature, the belief in a creator god (issara-nimmana-vada) is frequently mentioned and rejected, along with other causes wrongly adduced to explain the origin of the world; as, for instance, world-soul, time, nature, etc. God-belief, however, is placed in the same category as those morally destructive wrong views which deny the kammic results of action, assume a fortuitous origin of man and nature, or teach absolute determinism. These views are said to be altogether pernicious, having definite bad results due to their effect on ethical conduct.

 

The Vision of the Dhamma. Kandy, Buddhist Publication Society.(1994)

 

If Jains believe in devine beings, they expressly do not believe in a creator deity, to your point about different ways of looking at things. Are the Jains' devinities recognizable to the corporation's spokespersons as "God"? But we are prohibited by the corporation from asking a candidate at a board of review if he believes in God.

 

Not simple. But that should be OK.

 

[SSScout]

Gee it's nice to have a Faith and Chaplaincy forum to correctly discuss this stuff in... oh , right. I forgot.

 

Couple of responses: Yes the Puritans left England to go to NEW England to escape religious persecution, then they did their own persecution of "them"..

 

And, in 1649, the Maryland colonial legislature passed "A Law of Maryland Concerning Religion"", requiring folks to not quarrel over religion, IF you were at least a Christian. (didn't help Jews or others). Helped for awhile . Later, the Catholics and Protestants/Puritans did have a bit of a battle near what is now Annapolis over whether the colonie would be "tolerant" or have an "official" religion. It seemed to depend who was the Lord Proprietor at the time. Things weren't better until the Revolution. Good as any reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinc...lish_Civil_War and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/0...Maryland-Wars#

 

[scoutergipper]

Adult Leaders should, of course, always remember that they are supposed to be modeling the behavior embodied in the Oath and Law and the behavior they want their Scouts to exhibit.

[Peregrinator]

And' date=' in 1649, the Maryland colonial legislature passed "A Law of Maryland Concerning Religion"", requiring folks to not quarrel over religion, IF you were at least a Christian. (didn't help Jews or others). Helped for awhile . Later, the Catholics and Protestants/Puritans did have a bit of a battle near what is now Annapolis over whether the colonie would be "tolerant" or have an "official" religion. It seemed to depend who was the Lord Proprietor at the time. Things weren't better until the Revolution. Good as any reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provinc...lish_Civil_War and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/0...Maryland-Wars#

 

Right, Catholics in Maryland favored "tolerance" (they were in the minority after all), Protestants favored "official." I don't think Catholics in British colonies sought anything more than tolerance (not that there weren't Catholic confessional states elsewhere in the New World, such as Mexico).

 

Maryland Protestants revoked the 1649 religious tolerance act almost as soon as they came to power (they came to power in 1652 and revoked it in 1654; it was reinstated in 1658 and lasted until 1692).

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland_Toleration_Act

 

As an aside, the reference in the article to "Unitarians" is an anachronism as there probably weren't any (and certainly none who called themselves such) in North America in the 17th century.

[Old_OX_Eagle83]

TAHAWK,

 

If your post was in response to mine they don't like up well. All of your definitions of the Divine, God if you will, include "creator", whereas I never mentioned creator. This is a very important distinction with comparing western and eastern belief systems, and the Jewish, Islamic, Christian family of beliefs to most anything else.

 

Buddhism is a tough nut because it's not so much what most would call a religion, as a system and philosophy on how you view, and interact with everything, including your faith, which could be anything.

 

To break out of the western mind set you need to be able to put aside the image of God as being similar to a human in thought - form - process - action - perception - understanding - motivation, and move into the ream of a divine pattern/process that functions beyond simple human comprehension.

[skeptic]

It seems to me that all serious discussion of religion or the religious is a philosophical discussion. Most issues arrise when the discussion stops being a discussion, instead becoming one upmanship or I know better than you or "mine" is superior to yours and so on. In scouting, the religious element is supposed to be relegated to the scout and his family. As such, we as leaders should not be intruding on that directly. Thus, we should not respond negatively to a scout's lack of a concrete religious or spiritual understanding when we breach the subject in general. Most scouts certainly have not yet reached the point of absolute denial, even if they may state something along those lines. This too comes from the family, or is a result of family rebellion. Just like we should not treat the scout as a fully developed adult in other areas of education or mental and physical maturity, we should not expect them to have arrived at their absolute spiritual destination. Most of us, even as adults, have changed direction to some extent over our lives, sometimes drastically.

 

Absolutes are seldom that. They are prone to change, especially if they are of the ephemeral nature. But even what we perceive as unchangeable in the natural world usually does change, if only imperceptually.