Scouting’s proposed change — an open letter to Scout leaders

Hello Randy and Bill,

I know that you and all our friends in senior leadership positions with the BSA (locally and nationally) are hard at work with serious and weighty national policy decisions. I have read with great care the “Membership Standards Resolution” (http://www.bsaseabase.org/licensing/sitecore/content/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Resolution.aspx) and the “Membership Standards Executive Summary” (http://www.bsaseabase.org/licensing/sitecore/content/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Summary.aspx) on the BSA web site. The issue has been and remains to crucial to me. My brother and I shared an Eagle Court of Honor in 1971 and two of my sons also shared an Eagle Court of Honor about 10 years ago. But as I said years ago in an opinion column in “The Orlando Sentinel,” my brother embraced a homosexual lifestyle and eventually died of AIDS in 1999. I said then and repeat now that though my brother earned Eagle Scout and was a proven leader (and even an ordained pastor), I would not be able to endorse his being a model, mentor, or leader in Scouting.

So, allow me to share with you several thoughts (which you are free to circulate or dismiss as you like). Thank you in advance for your patience to consider this.

First, as I read the executive summaries, my eye stopped short on a phrase early in text (and repeated in the FAQ section): “This [‘homosexuality’ from the context] remains among the most complex and challenging issues facing the BSA and society today.” With all due respect to the National leadership and writers of the summaries, such an issue is only “complex and challenging” for people who are confused about simple realities and millennia-old culturally tested and universally accepted (until the last 40 years) truths about human nature and social structures.

Over the past couple of decades, our nation has witnessed a massive public relations campaign aimed at approving and normalizing homosexual practice. The overwhelmingly successful arguments and rhetoric are consistently based on emotion and personal experience, lacking any semblance of logical (not to mention anatomical) coherence or historical support. I realize that such a statement today is deemed grossly offensive by many (again, an emotional reaction without logical support), but this is only because as a culture we look beyond the obvious to the popular. But as I have said many time to others, even if 99.5% of Frenchmen decide that 2+2 = 4.5 because they like it that way, such overwhelming popular and cultural opinion does not change simple truth.

Second, I was alarmed in reading the Executive Summary by the strong presence of politically-correct language. This may serve to mollify cultural anger and condemnation; but in many ways, it denies Scouting’s history (along with the last 4,000 years of Judeo-Christian Western culture). In reviewing how the new policy proposal was researched, I note that Scouting sought to “listen” to national voices. Again, it is clear that the culture is experiencing a tectonic change on this issue. But this does not mean this cultural shift is right or beneficial to our nation. We may not see the cultural upheaval and damage for decades. In fact, in my opinion, if we listen to the cultural voice and adopt the proposed policy change, such a change delivers a foregone conclusion that a wholesale change in Scouting is inevitable and the organization’s roots are all but gone. If recent cultural history is a judge, consider the numerous major religious organizations and church denominations which have embraced “new progressive policies” regarding homosexuality. Every single one is in a free fall with respect to membership numbers (while remaining quite proud of their “diversity”). I fear so too will the Scouting movement shrivel and become irrelevant in America should we adopt such a radical change.

Third, one “voice” that I did not see in the conversation (did I miss it?) is international Scouting. Will a BSA change alienate us from the world-wide movement (as has happened with so many other organizations)? But again, even if the whole world were to say “We are changing so should you,” this would not determine the truth of such a change. But I am interested how the rest of Scouting will respond.

Finally, though the military recently rescinded (at a growing cost to national security) their “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding homosexuality, I think such a policy would benefit the BSA youth membership qualification as well. From my 45+ years associated with Scouting, sexual expression has never been (nor should it be) a part of Scouting values. And I gladly saw this affirmed in the FAQs. When one chooses, in an open fashion, to identify one’s selfhood primarily on a sexual orientation, this should automatically be problematic for membership in Scouting – whether youth or adult.

If Scouting officially allows homosexual orientation in its youth, make no mistake, the issue will not be solved. The Gay movement’s history tells us it will not rests with unspoken or partial acceptance – it will demand total approval and embrace. But if Scouting passes the proposed change, then in my opinion, the camel’s nose is in the tent and it is only a matter of time before adult orientation and behavior will also be acceptable.

In closing, cultures change, technologies change, merit badges change. But when “character” changes, and “values” changes, the essence of a movement will have changed. I for one hope that does not happen. I hope Scouting remains constant, even if as such it incurs the wrath of the cultural elite but remains a safe haven for kids, a place of stability in a cultural sea of confusion and incoherence.

Most respectfully,

Michael S. Beates
Eagle Scout, Greater New York Council, 1971
Troop Committee and ASM, CFC Troop 234, Longwood, 1996-2003
ASM, CFC National Jamboree Contingent 2001
CFC Seminole Springs Troop Commissioner, 2005-2012
Unassigned Adult, 2012-

Advertisement

More of the same

I recently responded to a young friend who sent me the following link, one that so clearly and somewhat winsomely articulates a common position among many today. Here is the link, followed by response to my friend.

http://theawesomenessconspiracy.com/2013/03/28/wheatandweeds/

Because I continue to hold you in such high esteem with deep affection in Christ, I want to respond to this article you shared with me.

Biblical marriage (man and woman) is not a peripheral thing in Scripture, nor, as this piece contends, are there merely a handful of verses that condemn homosexuality. Even if there were only a few verses, does that mean we dismiss them? Are these verses (many of them actually) true or not? That is the questions this writer should be asking. There are hardly any verses about Trinity, but does this mean we doubt the reality? But in fact, [young friend], the Scriptures (Old and New) speak about same-sex relationships over and over again, both directly (as in Genesis 19; Leviticus 18; Leviticus 20; Romans 1; 1 Corinthians 6; 1 Timothy 1; Jude vs. 7) and indirectly included in 40-50 references  to sexual immorality which is a more general term understood (for 2000 years) to refer to any sexual activity outside of marriage – always (again until recent days) understood to be one man and one woman.

Marriage (from Genesis 1 to Jesus’ words in Matthew 19 about marriage, to the end of Revelation  and the marriage supper of the Lamb) has always been about a man and a woman becoming “one flesh” – which is often equated merely with a physical union (which is of course important). But the one flesh more profoundly refers to you and me – we are the product (every human being is the product) of male and female union.

Too many people miss this, but <children> are the one flesh result of marriage. Same-sex marriage can never do this. Marriage, by definition, is (at least potentially) a life creating, life giving, and self-denying and self-sacrificing relationship between a man and a woman. This life-creating aspect is something, sadly but truly, same-sex relationships (as loving and sincere as they often are) can never achieve.

I think one of the reasons we try to equate marriage with any commitment between two people is that our culture has failed so hugely on marriage with radical expansion of divorce, unfaithfulness, and co-habitation. But despite these sad realities, the fundamental nature of marriage has not changed . . . until we have tried (for the sake of “equality” and “tolerance”) to redefine marriage to be something is actually cannot be. I just posted on FB recently a link to a fine, philosophical piece about this – too many people can’t handle this kind of careful analysis, but you have a good mind – challenge yourself to read it:

http://salvomag.com/new/articles/salvo22/apples-oranges-gay-marriage.php

But let me say a few more things about the piece you sent me.

This blog post is right in this: the “wheat” and “tares” are difficult to distinguish – they do look alike. Jesus was saying that in the “visible church” – those who confess Christ – God alone knows the heart, and He alone is the Judge — Yes indeed! All good so far. But Jesus’ point was also that when people “look” like they are believers, following Jesus, we are not to throw them out. The question is: “Do people who engage in same-sex relationships look like they are following Jesus?” Are they seeking to please God with their bodies and their actions? All of Christian history has said “No, such people have rebelled overtly and clearly against the order that God has established.” Admittedly we are all rebels and sinner. The crucial aspect is that faith requires admitting sin and repenting, continually, from it.

This writer make a compelling emotional argument but, if I may say gently and humbly, a deeply confused argument intellectually and biblically. When he says, he (or she?) supports same-sex marriage because such a stance “fulfills everything I understand about what it means to follow Jesus,” because this is what he thinks the Bible means, he has placed himself outside of the overwhelmingly consistent teaching and practice of Christian faith for 2000 years. But he does this because he believes the Bible is primarily a love story.

Is the Bible primarily a love story? No, it’s the story about God glorifying Himself through creation, and redeeming creation from the Fall. Does this contain “love”? Certainly. But sometimes the most loving thing you can say to a friend is “listen to what God says about life – see your sin; admit it, confess it, and strive (even through continual stumbling and falling) to lean heavily on God’s grace for salvation. Can a homosexual be a Christian? Certainly – when they admit that their inclination (just as much as the inclination toward gossip, rage, envy, theft, or heterosexual lust or adultery admits their sin), and seek to battle it by the grace of God.

Are some Christians hateful and bigoted bone-heads? Certainly. But does that then nullify the truth of the Bible? Praise God, it does not.

And finally, does believing in same-sex marriage condemn someone or make them a non-Christian? No – thankfully Romans 10:9 is still true. Salvation is not achieved or proven by all the issues we support or believe in, right or wrong. Salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone. But even the Christians in Corinth had to be taught that Temple prostitution (quite the norm in first century Corinth!) was not an option for those who sought to live in fellowship with Christ and His people.

Don’t be persuaded by emotional arguments that are deeply flawed with respect to logic, history, and basic human complementary anatomy. I know you are a young woman who seeks to please God – keep working on this. Don’t take the easy, popular path to cultural acceptance. And, if you still want to read more, take a look at my blog post – it’s the article I just wrote on this for the Geneva Courier. Let me know what you think. It’s here: https://mikebeates.wordpress.com/. Thanks for listening [friend]. I spend the time to write to you because you are important to me. Thanks for listening.

 

 

Faithfulness in a Confused Culture

I wish I did not have to write on this particular subject. But with accelerating speed, Christians in our country are collapsing into the cultural confusion of our national moment. I don’t say anything you don’t already know when I say we now live in a sexually saturated culture. Consider that over Spring Break, I saw news focused on the following:

First, Victoria’s Secret has rolled out a plan to market their products toward middle school-aged girls. Not coincidentally, anecdotal data shows that one of the fastest growing demographics in using internet pornography is this same group of young people. And the Christian sector is by no means immune.

Second, news and blogs have been the focus on the U.S. Supreme Court’s current review of cases revolving around same-sex marriage. Sexually related saturation almost everywhere we turn in popular culture.

The first concern above is an example of how our culture is pushing to ever younger ages exposure to issues best left to more mature young people. Our young people need to remember Paul’s admonition to Titus, “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age” (Titus 2:11-12).

But my concern in this column is more on the second issue above. An overwhelming percentage of American teens and “twenty-somethings” now support normalization of what was unthinkable just 40 years ago. Adding to this cultural force are the voices of conservative politicians and even some quite popular “evangelical” leaders in recent days. Rob Bell, one of these popular speakers, recently was asked if he was in favor of “marriage equality.” Bell stated that he is “for marriage. I am for fidelity. I am for love, whether it’s a man and woman, a woman and woman, a man and a man. I think the ship has sailed and I think that the church needs to just. . . this is the world we are living in and we need to affirm people wherever they are.”

Of course, he and many others don’t really mean this when they say it. They don’t mean that they affirm all people wherever they are – including those who abuse others, or who, for example, practice pedophilia or other behaviors. The popular movement of inclusion and acceptance is quite selective. But something has happened to Christian thinking that has enabled so many, so quickly, to abandon historic Christian faith and practice in these areas.

What is a 30-, 40- or 50-something Christian parent to do?

First, the American experience over the last generation has elevated personal happiness and fulfillment to a sacrosanct level. Combine this with staggering advances in medical and reproductive novelty, and suddenly any combination of two people can, in some sense (according to the wisdom of our day), be parents of children and find their happiness and fulfillment in formulas that are contrary to all that has provided the building blocks of every culture on every continent for the last 5,000+ years.

Second, we must remember that Truth is not determined by popular opinion. Truth is not the product of our subjective experience, but comes from something objective outside of us. I have often told students (with apologies to the Francophiles among us) that even if 99% of all Frenchmen were to decide that 2+2 = 4.5 because they like it that way, such an overwhelmingly popular consensus does not in any way change reality. Politician Rob Portman demonstrated both of these predilections in mid-March when, in an editorial he declared his support for same-sex marriage because, “Ultimately, it came down to the Bible’s overarching themes of love and compassion and my belief that we are all children of God.”

We do not have sufficient space to address all that this brief statement says. But suffice it to say, an initial error is that the Bible’s overarching theme is not love and compassion (as important as they are). The glory of God and the salvation of lost and broken people for God’s glory is the overarching theme. And the Bible is quite clear that while we are all created by God and in His image, His children are born by faith, not biology. Jesus clearly says that even within the religious professionals (Pharisees) in Israel, in fact, many were children not of God but of the devil (John 8:42-44).

Walt Mueller (who in the past has spoken to us at The Geneva School) recently wrote that when the Pharisees confronted Jesus with the woman caught in adultery, Jesus did not say to this woman, “This is the world we are living in and I affirm your adultery” . . . or “love and compassion trump the wrongness of your adultery.” Rather Jesus confronted her sin, forgave her, and implored her to “go now and leave your life of sin.” His recent blog on this issue is worth reading at: http://learningmylines.blogspot.com/2013/03/rob-bell-homosexual-marriage-and-our.html.

Another writer, Kevin DeYoung summarizes that our culture has been won over on this issue by the concepts of progress, love, rights, equality, and tolerance. What Christian can be against these wonderful qualities? His article (also worth reading at: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2013/03/27/why-the-arguments-for-gay-marriage-are-persuasive/) answers this well.

In light of all this I encourage you (and of course our students) to remember two things. First, the Good News of Jesus Christ assumes the fundamentally bad news that we (especially Americans) tend to forget: we are all – every human being — much more profoundly broken people than we care to admit. We are all in need of the saving grace of Christ. We seek not to live like Pharisees bound by rules and law that lack graciousness and tolerance. But neither should we fall into the mentality of our day that approves of things that God clearly condemns. We should, in accord with historic faith, boldly declare that we are sinners saved by grace and we seek to live humbly, not self-righteously, in accord with all that God has said. And we are well reminded that the list of sins condemned by the New Testament includes (in the same lists) not only homosexual behavior but also greed, envy, gossip, lying, drunkenness, and more (see for example, Gal. 5:19-21; 1 Cor. 6: 9-10; and 1 Tim. 1: 8-11).

And second, we need to encourage each other and our students, by the grace of God, according to Paul’s prayer for the Philippian believers: “it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ” (Phil. 1:9). Excellence, purity, blamelessness sound a lot like “goodness, truth, and beauty.”

Only genuine love for God will spare us from the loves of the world (1 John 2:15-17). As parents, we are called both to shield our children from and also train them to resist the world’s strongest fallen urges and passions, those which our culture too often calls us to tolerate, accept,  endorse, and even practice. We must seek to bring our students into being bright young people who love good, true, and beautiful things, so that they might “shine as lights in the world” (Phil 2:15). I have counseled some of our recent graduates, who are pressured daily on their college campuses to accept and endorse the current drift toward same-sex tolerance to reply respectfully like this: “I understand that there has been a strong cultural shift in the last 40-50 years toward normalizing and accepting same-sex relationships. With all due respect and humility, I choose to abide with the truth that has guided the Judeo-Christian tradition for the last three thousand years.” I have been castigated by young people in Facebook conversations for such a stance. Dismissively, some have said, “You are old, and your old ideas, like slavery, will die with you.” But I gently respond that Truth will still be true whether I live or die.

This is the issue our young people will face in their generation. May God give us the grace to understand this task and to stand against the strong currents which seek to sweep our children away into cultural confusion.