Posted on 06/12/2013 9:04:27 PM PDT by Rashputin
SBC doesn’t call for Boy Scout exodus
A highly anticipated resolution condemning the Boy Scouts’ new membership policy affirms churches and individuals that sever ties, while calling for greater engagement by those that don’t.
By Bob Allen
The Southern Baptist Convention stopped short of urging churches to sever ties with the Boy Scouts of America in a June 11 resolution condemning the organization’s recent decision to drop its ban on Scouts who are openly gay.
The non-binding resolution expresses “continued opposition to and disappointment in the decision of the Boy Scouts of America to change its membership policy” and called for the removal of Scout leaders who pushed for the policy change.
It affirms “the right of all families and churches prayerfully to assess their continued relationship with the BSA” and expresses “support for those churches and families that as a matter of conscience can no longer be part of the Scouting family.”
Meanwhile it encourages churches and families “that seek to remain in the Boy Scouts to impact as many boys as possible with the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ.”
The resolution urges churches that choose to end sponsorship of Scout units to continue ministering to boys by expanding the Royal Ambassador ministry, “a distinctively Southern Baptist missions organization to develop godly young men.”
It also cites “well-founded concern that the current executive leadership of the BSA, along with certain board members, may utilize this membership policy change as merely the first step toward future approval of homosexual leaders in the Scouts.”
They do not have the authority to mandate.
They set a clear path.
First, call for the removal of the perverts at the top. Ie. fight back
Second, wrap up your dealings witg the scouts and move to anotherprogram.
It find the resolution clear and firm.
That's what I was thinking about which is exactly why I asked SBC folks how they see this.
My post was not a call to tax churches. Christians are instructed to follow the civil law, unless or until said law requires the Christian to disobey the Creator. Civil authorities have pushed their way to the point that to keep 'tax exempt' status allowance and inclusion of perversion is nearly required by civil law.
It is one thing to have perversion all around, but it is quite another to invite perversion into God's House, by any church claiming to be Christian. We are forewarned what would be again even to the point of Christ warning us to 'Remember Lot's wife.' She was not a participant in the perversion, but she sure was not bothered by the activity. Her acceptance did not end well for her.
True, staying with the Boy Scouts or the Girl Scouts for that matter, is implicit acceptance of premeditated perversion and whether adults can split the hair or not, kids are going to see it as total acceptance of perversion.
After all, when will there be a lecture about perversion being a sin that's an affront to God when perverts are accepted members of the gang?
For the time being I am expecting very few. I am reminded of Amos 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:
Based upon what is happening today it sure appears the famine is well underway.
Im sorry,I thought we were discussing Boy Scouts and why churchs should or shouldnt support them.Why did you feel the need to praise Mary?
They’re a convention not a rigid hierarchy. They called for the entire leadership of the BSA to resign, not exactly weak tea there. They strongly encouraged any of their membership who didn’t separate themselves to work from within to change this.
I expected the SBC to tell everyone to leave the BSA and stop supporting them that's why I was asking how people understood this message.
In 2000, the Commission on United Methodist Men filed an amicus brief that argued that the Boy Scouts, as a nonprofit, should have the right to set its own course without interference from the government. (An amicus brief or "Friend of the Court Brief" is typically filed by those who are not a party in the case but to offer the court information which may have bearing. SCOTUS Rule 37 states that it must contain relevant material which may be of considerable help to the court.) Joining the brief were the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.
3/27/2013 – The Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod President, Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, sent a letter to the BSA explaining the seriousness of the potential membership policy change and described the “crisis of conscience” that may force congregations to reconsider their support of the organization. Excerpt below …
“… (A) “challenge for our churches in allowing the decision to remain local rather than national lays in the fact that some communities have larger and more politically active gay and lesbian groups. In these communities, the local Boy Scout Council may impose the acceptance of homosexual scouts and scout leaders upon troops sponsored by the local congregation. Should this occur, the Boy Scouts effectively will have superseded the authority of our church teaching, of the local pastor and of the congregation — perhaps even placing us in legal jeopardy.” In the letter, Harrison also pointed out that this policy change could mean that “scouts from troops sponsored by congregations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod potentially would be interacting with openly homosexual scouts and scout leaders at regional and national scouting activities….”
“The Boy Scouts have been open to our feedback, but we continue to watch the process closely,” said the Rev. Mark Kiessling, associate director of LCMS Youth Ministry, who serves as the LCMS representative to the BSA Religious Relationship Task Force.
5/17/2013 – The President of the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod released a statement regarding the upcoming vote on the membership standards resolution to permit open homosexual youth to be members of BSA.
From Pastor Matthew C. Harrison
President, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Western culture is at a crucial moment in history. After 103 years of existence, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) may vote to change drastically its membership policy. For those who may be unaware, the BSA, in recent months, has discussed allowing both gay Scouts and Scout leaders into its organization. Recently, however, the BSA has changed its course. Now the vote will determine only whether to include openly homosexual Scouts as members.
LCMS leaders have been carefully monitoring the proposed BSA policy changes. When news of the proposed change was made public, I sent a letter to BSA, imploring its leadership not to make the proposed policy change. And even though the initial proposal to focus on Scout leaders has been shelved, I believe the current proposal still has unknown implications for the future of BSA as well as LCMS support and involvement. The proposed change will highlight sexuality, which has not been and should not be a matter of focus for Scouts. I suspect it will make it more challenging to care for young people struggling with same-sex attraction and perhaps open our churches to legal action.
This vote matters to the LCMS. The proposed change in BSA policy on values and membership to include openly homosexual Scouts adversely affects, even supersedes, the authority of the local pastor and congregation by allowing and promoting a moral position that we as LCMS Lutherans believe is against the will of God and in opposition to Holy Scripture.
This vote matters because, if enacted, the proposed change to BSA policy on values and membership will cause a crisis of conscience for our church leaders, pastors, parents and congregations. Even if the decision of values and membership remains at the local level, Scouts from troops sponsored by congregations of the LCMS will be affected because, as part of the scouting program, they also participate at regional and national scouting activities.
This vote matters because, for more than a century, scouting has sought to uphold moral values at a level greater than that of general society. The capitulation now to societal pressures would mar the long and honorable history of the Boy Scouts to honor the natural law of God, which at least for now, is still reflected in the current scouting membership policy.
For these reasons, I and some 25 other Protestant church leaders have signed onto a statement, copied below, that implores BSA not to change its policy, noting that, “In our current culture, it’s more important than ever for our churches to protect and provide moral nurture for young people and for the Scouts.” The statement will be released in conjunction with its delivery to the BSA office and before the organization’s vote, which will take place May 24.
I share this with you today because it is difficult to know which of our LCMS BSA members will be part of the 1,400 members who will vote on the policy change later this month. I am hopeful that all of you will share this information with those in your congregation who are involved with BSA and even those in your community who will cast votes later this month.
As the church awaits the BSA vote, we still have much to do. We repent, and we pray. We confess Christ and elevate marriage among us. We do what the church does best: We bear witness to Christ, show mercy to those in our midst — including those challenged by same-sex attraction — and care for all in our life together.”
Pastor Matthew C. Harrison
President, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Prior to the vote Vicki Biggs, director of LCMS (Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod) Integrated Communications, said in an email, "We desire to maintain a relationship with BSA, but cannot compromise integrity to our religious beliefs. We will make a determination about our support and relationship with the organization after we've had time to review whatever final determination BSA arrives at regarding a change in its policies."
A motion was put on the floor at the 5/23/2013 annual (BSA) National Council business meeting to fire the chief scout executive and remove the president and national commissioner. It went no where.
If by "fight back" you mean move your male youth to another organization or join in the formation of a new Scouting organization apart from BSA, then I support your view. If you mean "fight the good fight" from within the BSA, then you are tilting at windmills. Cultural Marxism has taken firm root within the corporate members of the 1,400 member National Council. BSA, which has been on a negative growth slope for 40 years. BSA will continue to decline in membership, perhaps at an accelerated rate now due to the new membership standard.
An easy mistake to make. The SBC male youth organization is the Royal Ambassadors (RAs). RR is the male youth organization of the Assembly of God.
Thanks.
While they've disfellowshipped a few churches for compromising on homosexuality (University Baptist, Austin, TX and Broadway Baptist, Fort Worth, TX) I don't see this happening as much in the future. Meeting with rabid, unrepentant homosexual activists at last year's convention was a horrible mistake, and marks a softening in their stance on the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.