being under authority...
The Boy Scouts are not part of civil government, the family or the Church.
Though Churches sponsor some groups, the Boy Scouts report up through their national leadership. The Boy Scouts organization therefore is separate and distinct from the particular Church denomination organization. Some Churches are involved in their troops, some not very much at all.
It’s simply two different organizations, even if they both have “good intentions”.
A Church can’t order the Boy Scouts to alter their moral teachings, but at the same time a Church that is Scriptural must insist upon their members adhering to their specific teachings.
One only has to carefully review the Family Life merit badge, required for Eagle, to uncover not only unscriptural teaching, but teaching that is right out of the statist/new world order playbook. I leave the meticulous analysis of this as an exercise for the reader; simply compare a solid Reformed Christian text on child rearing with these merit badge activities. The entire content of the badge covers subjects that parents should be teaching to their sons exclusively by themselves in a Scriptural fashion. In terms of Biblical parenting, parents certainly should not be delegating the instruction of these topics. Mind you, this is the first badge I reviewed in this way.
Also, a Church has no legitimate authority over non-members; the most serious Church discipline is excommunication. So what that means is a Church is sponsoring an external organization over which it has no doctrinal control, children are turned over to this organization, which may then teach contrary to the particular Church’s interpretation of Scripture. Doesn’t make much sense for a Church unless they exclusively staff the whole thing - and then edit Boy Scouts teaching to conform to their own, which would not fly with the Boy Scouts. One then would think that a Church should simply make its own youth organization, which actually is also unscriptural in that since the teaching of youth is such a predominant and important topic in the Bible, if youth groups were acceptable to God they would without a doubt be mentioned in Scripture, yet they are not. There are only the ordained Church offices, i.e., O.T. priest, teacher, etc., none of which are ever commanded to organize youth groups of the congregation’s children in the Old or New Testament, and the head of household that provides for family leadership. This would then mean that adding youth groups to Churches would fall under the category of sinfully “adding” our own innovations to Scriptural definitions of Christ’s Church.
Only a few short years ago I was completely oblivious to most of these concerns.
The totally isolated Christian society is, of course, false doctrine. Christians need to bring the Gospel to unbelievers, to be “salt” and “light”, which requires them to participate in the world - to that end. Of course, there is also the command to separate ourselves from the evil of this world. So clearly this means that if our participation in the world starts tempting us to sin, we need to back off that particular approach and use another. Certainly we need to not only be out and about in culture, business, science, etc., but lead wherever we can, thus furthering Christ’s Kingdom. We need to remember, however, that the Bible defines the roles of family, government and Church.
On that difference perhaps we can’t quite agree; I would only highlight the concept of statism always starting out in very tiny, innocuous measures, and the key controlling point of weapons should always raise a flag. The right to weaponry is unqualified; it is the punishment of wrongdoers and the process of self-defense that restrains (but does not promise to eliminate) wrongdoings committed with weapons.
We certainly do agree on the sitiation as it stands now. It’s time for people to form their own clubs, exactly per their own wishes. They have every right to do so. Don’t bother thinking about tax exemption, IMHO; make it informal or incorporate normally.
Yes, I do agree on this point. There's a way to use the best ideas and curriculum from existing organizations and grow it organically without state or corporate sponsorship. The bylaws can be a collaborative effort.
The one thing that local BSA packs relied on was investigation of anyone who volunteered for a leadership position. The national BSA did a criminal and financial background check with aliases. They keep a history of investigations and outcomes. They also required and tracked various training classes for dealing with kids. Those are all rather advanced protective and instructive activities, which is nearly impossible to duplicate for a small, organic group. The human and legal provisions are what helped the BSA to protect members (adult and child) for 100 years, and until 2013, fend off predators.
And to add a salient point - the fish rots from the head...
CEO of Ernst & Young and Boy Scouts Board Member supports ending ban on gay scouts and scout leaders
CNBC exclusively broke the news tonight that James Turley, the Global Chairman & CEO of Ernst & Young who is also a Board member of the Boy Scouts of America, issued a statement in which he disagrees with the ban on gay scouts and scout leaders and supports a proposed resolution to end the ban:“Ernst & Young is proud to have such a strong record in LGBT inclusiveness. As CEO, I know that having an inclusive culture produces the best results, is the right thing for our people and makes us a better organization. My experience has led me to believe that an inclusive environment is important throughout our society and I am proud to be a leader on this issue.”
I'll make it easy for the Freepers:
So, no one belonging to a church can work for a private or public company that isn't scripturally approved by some church authority.
"It’s simply two different organizations, even if they both have “good intentions”. A Church can’t order the Boy Scouts to alter their moral teachings, but at the same time a Church that is Scriptural must insist upon their members adhering to their specific teachings.
Your "arguments" may work in a vacuum, but not the world we live in. We can debate indefinitely like Jesus did with the Pharisees, but I'm afraid we'd come to the same conclusion. There is religion, and there is Godliness. They are not the same.
[Please read my bio before you attack me as an apostate (if that's your next line of attack / defense)].