Members of the BSA we are specifically asked to affirm the Declaration of Religious Principle –
The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares, “On my honor I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law.” The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome precepts in the education of the growing members. No matter what the religious faith of the members may be, this fundamental need of good citizenship should be kept before them. The Boy Scouts of America, therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member, but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious training. Its policy is that the home and the organization or group with which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious life.
The Guide to Advancement (5.0.5.0 Religious Principles) also states “All that is required (for advancement) is the acknowledgment of belief in God as stated in (emphasis added) the Declaration of Religious Principle and the Scout Oath, and the ability to be reverent as stated in the Scout Law.”
The declaration defines God as “ruling and leading power in the universe”, a specific, single entity to whom”grateful acknowledgment” can be directed, and as a male “His favors and blessings”. A sentence or two later there’s what looks like a pretty basic contradiction; “The Boy Scouts of America… is absolutely nonsectarian…“.
Nonsectarian is defined as “not affiliated with or restricted to a particular religious group”. Some confuse nonsectarian with non denominational; the “sect” in “nonsectarian” is a religious group and denominations are divisions within a given religious group.
I’d agree that the BSA is nonsectarian so far as the three major monotheistic religious groups (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) are concerned as all three share beliefs that would meet the definition in the declaration. However I don’t see how the definition can be accepted by other religious groups approved for participation in the BSA’s religious emblems program. (Religious emblems are developed and administered by each religious organization, not the BSA.)
Buddhist – The two main schools of Buddhism, Theravada and Mahayana, are non-theist. Buddhism takes many forms, but it is safe to say that most are anti-speculative about God while others are specifically atheistic.
Hindu – Hindu approaches to defining God are many and varied, including no belief in a creator, or the grateful acknowledgement of his favors and blessings.
Unitarians – Some Unitarian Universalists are non theists.
Jainism – Jainism does present God as a creator or the ruling and leading power in the universe to whom grateful acknowledgment can be directed, but that every living being has a potential to become God.
Religious Society of Friends – Quakers, or friends, include a variety of individual approaches to understanding God, including non-theism.
The inclusion of Buddhism, Hinduism, Unitarianism, Jainism, and the Religious Society of Friends in the religious emblems program seems to indicate that the BSA is already accepting of those who would meet the definition of atheist or agnostic, even though the declaration of religious principle seems to contradict this.
I think we should revise our declaration of religious principle to better reflect our respect to the convictions of others in matters of custom and religion and offer alternative versions of the oath or promise to ensure we are, indeed, “absolutely nonsectarian” and to extend our welcome to those who are humanist or have no affirmed faith.
I’d suggest adopting the World Organization of the Scouting Movement definition of “duty to God” as “a person’s relationship with the spiritual values of life, the fundamental belief in a force above mankind.”
This kind of thing is not unprecedented, in 2014 the Scouts Association (UK) introduced an additional alternative version of the Scout Promise for Scouts and Scouters with no affirmed faith and humanists. The details and reasoning of this decision are explained in this article published in UK Scouting Association’s Scouting Magazine, and stated briefly here.
Alternative versions of the Scout Promise have been available for nearly 50 years been used by Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists … This new additional alternative Promise will now add to the suite of alternative versions to ensure we are inclusive to adults who are humanist or have no affirmed faith who wish to volunteer for Scouting, and young people who are humanist or with no affirmed faith who wish to join Scouting.
The existing core Scout Promise remains in place and The Scout Association remains fully committed as a Movement that explores faith, beliefs and attitudes as a core element of its programme.
The existing Scout Promise:
On my honour, I promise that I will do my best
To do my duty to God and to the Queen,
To help other people
And to keep the Scout Law.New alternative wording of the Promise:
On my honour, I promise that I will do my best
To uphold our Scout values, to do my duty to the Queen,
To help other people
And to keep the Scout Law.
I think the BSA has some catching up to do in the way we explore faith, beliefs and attitudes.
Stating that “The Boy Scouts of America does not define what constitutes belief in God or practice of religion” in one place when what constitutes belief in God and the practice of religion is very specifically defined in the declaration of religious principle; “The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship” is confusing at best.
Many Scouts I have worked with have had few opportunities for spiritual development outside of what they receive in Scouting. Why would we want to exclude them if they, or their parents, are uncertain about these things? Can’t we work out a way for all people of good will, no matter what their belief system, to take advantage of, and be welcomed into Scouting?
Our membership policies and the words of the Scout oath should not be a stumbling-block, but a gateway to mutual understanding and fellowship.
I’m not suggesting we remove the word “God” from the oath, just that we approve additional alternative words that allow everyone to accurately express their dedication to the spiritual aspect of Scouting, and more accurately reflects what the BSA seems to be saying in the first place.
That doesn’t seem like a lot to ask, does it?
UPDATE 9.10.15
The tool I usually use to collect and publish Facebook comments has not worked on this particular post, There’s been some very active discussions about this that you may find interesting, so here’s an embed of the Facebook post –
Our membership policies and the words of the Scout oath should not be a stumbling-block, but a gateway to mutual understanding and fellowship.
Posted by Scoutmaster Blog on Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Many of the negative comments assert that suggesting approved alternative words somehow nullifies the presence of God in the oath, or removes God from Scouting. I have not suggested that the oath change for those who find it describes their own spiritual journey, just offering an alternative wording for others.
I am honestly at a loss to see how that diminishes anyone or anything. Are systems of belief so fragile that they are diminished by respectfully recognizing that others exist? If a soda fountain that offered one flavor of soda provided an alternative choice of a second flavor would the original flavor change or disappear?
I appreciate that the vast majority of comments I have received are positive and supportive. Discussions like this are always challenging, and civil disagreement is difficult. I especially appreciate this thought:
I have a deeply Christian faith. But I do not understand the theist contention that requires exclusion of anyone who is not theist from our “non-sectarian” activities. Nor do I understand why a church could not use the scouting program as part of its outreach just because the BSA permits other ideas about what is a Scout’s responsibility to people, nature and ideas above ourselves.
Jim Hillard via Facebook
I am puzzled that the general reaction of the privileged, (in this case the privileged folks are those whose belief systems are reflected in the present wording of the oath), to merely suggesting “hey, how about you share that privilege?” is to perceive an attack that diminishes their standing. People say some terrifically cruel and thoughtless things in response that I would not publish here.