A Bereaved Farewell to the Boy Scouts of America

This year I turned 62. As we age, we learn more about bereavement. My latest bereavement is the Boy Scouts of America.

The first funeral I attended was as a preschooler. They included me in standing before the open casket to view the deceased. They told me he was sleeping. I knew that was not true, but I did not understand what was true, and could not enter into the strange behavior of the adults around me. I didn’t know bereavement.

In the last few years, my father, oldest brother, and a sister in law have died. Brother David died of liver cancer. Sister in law Mandy died of brain cancer. The illness leading to death drags out the suffering and allows a person a chance to catch up a little bit to what is happening, and thereby to enter into bereavement.

Things besides outright death can feel like bereavement too. My wife, Marilyn, and I experienced this strongly when our former Pastor, Rev. David Warner, was called from our congregation to become a missionary in Spain. Like the time between David’s and Mandy’s diagnoses to their deaths, the time between the call of Pastor Warner to his decision felt quite like bereavements from illness leading to death.

The time between when the BSA allowed openly gay Scouts to recently when it allowed openly gay leaders has been like that. You see, Scouting is part of my family. My brothers and I all are Eagles, Pro Deo et Patria (American Lutheran Church), and Order of the Arrow. One of my brothers and I went to National Jamborees, and my other brother went to a World Jamboree. Marilyn’s and my three sons all are Eagles and Order of the Arrow. All of my nephews are Eagles.

Now I have had to decide to terminate my financial support of what was part of my family, and furthermore to encourage Lutheran churches to cease sponsoring Scout troops and find alternatives.

In the first draft of this article, I provided an overview of the great things Scouting had done for our family and for so many others. As I reread it, I thought, what are you doing? This sounds like a brochure promoting Scouting, rather than sticking to the subject of explaining why my relationship with Scouting is ending. Rereading it again, I realized, no, that is not a promotional brochure. That is a eulogy. I was writing from bereavement. Eulogizing Scouting would be easy. It has been a great program and such a friend of our family.

Scouting always has had a tense relationship with Lutheranism. The relationship with Lutheran churches has worked only when a few very important things were held clearly. Scouting contributes nothing to a congregation’s life of Word and Sacrament, which are the core breath and blood of Lutheran life. It says nothing in support of the Gospel, without which, there is no Lutheranism. Insofar as religion is concerned, Scouting is pretty much (with the exception of optional things like Pro Deo et Patria) about the Law in two ways. First, it promotes civil righteousness in boys in the Lutheran understanding of the Law’s first use. Second, it promotes love of one’s neighbor in the Lutheran understanding of the Second Table of the Law. Scouting entails risks of syncretism and unionism. Certain parts of Scouting, such as the Order of the Arrow, entail risks relating to secrecy.

When these matters are held clearly in mind and the congregation exercises good control over selection of leaders and the manner in which the program is executed, the program can be and has been beneficial.

With the admission of gay leaders, however, Scouting has moved into an unworkable condition. It is one thing to allow openly gay Scouts. It is another to allow openly gay leaders.

One of the reasons my parents wanted us boys to be Scouts was the leaders. They wanted to extend their parental influence on us by putting us into association with and under the leadership of great people. My older brothers’ Scoutmaster was a devout member of our Lutheran church, and he was the Youth Probation Officer for our county. My first Scoutmaster was a devout Lutheran and a neighboring farmer who grew up near the farm where my Dad was born and raised. My Scoutmaster for most of my time in the troop was a devout Lutheran who held many positions in the congregation, was a lawyer, a legislator, a community servant, and the Best Man at Mom’s and Dad’s wedding.

My folks were holding these people up to us as models, and to show us that their civil righteousness, already becoming culturally unpopular in those days, was not weird, but shared by respectable people.

There is no getting around the didactic or teaching effect of who the leaders of a troop are. To have a gay Scout leader speaks. It teaches. It catechizes. It says being openly gay and practicing a gay lifestyle is a righteous way to live. It holds that life up as a model.

Scripture teaches that homosexual desire and actions are sins. These sins, like others, can be forgiven for Jesus’ sake on confession and repentance. But those who believe, teach, and confess that these things are not sin do not confess or repent of them. People do not confess as sin what they deny is sin. They themselves, not Christ, Scripture, or the Lutheran church, close the door on forgiveness by refusing to confess and repent. Their exclusion results not from which sin they are involved in, but from the nondiscriminatory effect that refusing to confess and repent has with respect to any manner of sin, not just this one. The exclusion is indifferent toward which sin and mindful of refusal to confess and repent.

Approving homosexual living in leadership of a sponsored organization is inherently and inimically in conflict with the Lutheran church. Why? Because the communion and fellowship of Lutherans is our communion of confession, our fellowship of the teaching. Our words of communion and fellowship are, “We believe, teach, and confess.” We believe, teach, and confess what Scripture teaches. To not merely associate with, but to sponsor organizations who teach contrary to our confession is to fork our tongue. It is to squander one of our treasures, which is our confession.

Inevitably that kind of two-faced confession would bear an impact on various teachings including the Lutheran view of Scripture, the Lord’s Supper, ordination, qualification for congregational offices, and the Baptismal life of repentance. These impacts would not happen all at once, but that is no comfort, unless we are heartless toward our children, grandchildren, and others.

So I have had to terminate my financial support of the Boy Scouts of America, and to encourage Lutheran churches to terminate sponsorship of troops. I say it with no glee. It is like watching the color of a cancer patient’s skin turn grey when his blood stops circulating.

But there are worse deaths. Worse is the death that comes from loss of confession of the faith. Without repentance, that death is eternal. That death for ourselves and everyone we teach is what we risk when we corrode our confession.

Farewell, my Scouting friends. We have shared our last campfire. Would that we all would come to repentance.

About T. R. Halvorson

T. R. Halvorson was born in Sidney, Montana on July 14, 1953, baptized at Pella Evangelical Lutheran Church in Sidney, Montana on November 8, 1953, and confirmed at First Lutheran Church in Williston, North Dakota in 1968. He and his wife, Marilyn, are members of Trinity Lutheran Church (LCMS) in Sidney, Montana. They have three sons and six grandchildren. T. R. farms at Wildrose, North Dakota, and is Deputy County Attorney in Sidney, Montana. He has been a computer programmer; and an author, conference speaker, instructor, and consultant to industry in online legal information. He is among the authors of the religion column in the Sidney Herald at Sidney, Montana. He is the Editor of LutheranCatechism.com.

Comments

A Bereaved Farewell to the Boy Scouts of America — 70 Comments

  1. Over four and a half months ago, on June 2, 2015, the Missouri Synod leadership was informed by the Boy Scouts of America of its planned policy change to allow openly homosexual adults as Scoutmasters. That policy change was officially approved by the BSA on July 27.

    On July 28th, the LCMS leadership announced that a meeting would be held in early August to review the Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding between the BSA and the LCMS and to determine the best course of action for the LCMS.

    In the three months since then there’s been utter silence from the Purple Palace about the decision from the meeting, or even if the meeting was even held.

  2. Finally after four months, a decision on the Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding between the LCMS and BSA has been reached in a December 1, 2015, letter from LCMS President Matthew Harrison and ONM Executive Director Bart Day.

    The MOFU has been trash-canned.

    And the best course of action for the LCMS – a call “for the establishment of a task force to consider Scouting and the involvement of the LCMS going forward” and leap into action as it rides over the “landscape and interaction of church and the world — including Scouting.”

    Wait! Didn’t the Purple Palace just trashcan the MOFU with Scouting and its openly homosexual Scouts and Scoutmasters?!?

  3. There was nothing in the Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding that required four months of delay before it was deep-sixed. In fact, the MOFU should never have been signed in the first place!

    So one wonders if there were some other Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information or Special Access Program agreement between the LCMS and BSA that had to be deactivated first. We know such types of secret agreements exist between the LCMS and other church bodies with whom we are not (officially) in full altar and pulpit fellowship.

    And another thing. Regarding the claim–“Synod thus neither encourages nor discourages Scoutism [sic] in any congregation”–LCMS President Harrison and ONM Executive Director Day pontificated in their letter,

    “Unless the Synod in convention issues a change, this is still the case.”

    Pecksniffian poppycock! In 2013 an overture which would have issued a change was indeed appropriately submitted to the Synod in convention, whereupon it was sidelined by one of Harrison’s hand-picked Floor Committees.

  4. @Carl Vehse #52

    Please read the expanded letter also available on the LCMS website, which discusses the LCMS conversation with Trail Life. I think the creation of a taskforce is meant to discuss whether any kind of scouting, including Trail Life, is suggested for any LCMS congregation and also to determine the guidance to give individual congregations who continue to associate with the Boy Scouts.

  5. @Andrew C #55

    In case you hadn’t read it, my earlier post referenced the expanded letter.

    The discussion in the letter about the LCMS conversation with Trail Life contains nothing significantly new that had not already been discussed in the October 7, 2013, LCMS document, “Participation in Scout-type Organizations for Boys: Considerations for LCMS Churches and Individuals.” Also, the advice for congregations who continue to associate with Boy Scouts is the same offered in an October 8, 2013, Reporter article.

    Furthermore, please read the BSA Federal Charter which gives the BSA exclusive right to the names “Boy Scouts of America”, “Scout”, “Boy Scouting”, and “Scouting”, as used within the United States.

    Thus the letter’s paragraph referring to “the establishment of a task force to consider Scouting and the involvement of the LCMS going forward,” specifically refers to the BSA, or the GSUSA, which has a similar federal charter and exclusive used of “Girl Scouts”, “Girl Scouting”, etc.

  6. @Andrew C #55

    In case you hadn’t read it, my earlier post referenced the expanded letter.

    The discussion in the letter about the LCMS conversation with Trail Life contains nothing significantly new that had not already been discussed in the October 7, 2013, LCMS document, “Participation in Scout-type Organizations for Boys: Considerations for LCMS Churches and Individuals.” Also, the advice for congregations who continue to associate with Boy Scouts is the same offered in an October 8, 2013, Reporter article.

    Furthermore, please read the BSA Federal Charter which gives the BSA exclusive right to the names “Boy Scouts of America”, “Scout”, “Boy Scouting”, and “Scouting”, as used within the United States.

    Thus the letter’s paragraph referring to “the establishment of a task force to consider Scouting and the involvement of the LCMS going forward,” specifically refers to the BSA, or the GSUSA, which has a similar federal charter and exclusive used of “Girl Scouts”, “Girl Scouting”, etc.

  7. Thank you Pastor Halvorson for your remarks. I too share your grief.

    Carl, please allow me to respond as a Scout leader in a Cub Scout Pack at a Lutheran Church Missouri Synod where my son attends school. I am not Lutheran, yet I highly respect the way the leaders for the Missouri Synod handled themselves with this difficult decision. I sense some bitterness from you toward the Synod. The document drafted between the BSA and the LCMS was presented to me as a Scout leader as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Not sure where you’re getting the word Fabulous in all of this. Your sarcasm must be intended and I don’t find it helpful to the discussion at hand.

    As a non Lutheran I’m not sure what you mean by Purple Palace, but it must be another sarcastic reference to leaders in St. Louis with the LCMS. Again, not helpful. These men did everything they could to work with the BSA without compromising the doctrinal integrity of their churches. I highly respect them. This was not a knee jerk reaction. It was carefully thought out and unfortunately it was the BSA that lied to the LCMS and thus broke the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2013. The Pastor at our chartering church for my son’s pack cautioned me last summer that we should wait patiently on the decision of the LCMS and not act prematurely with knee jerk reactions. More often than not God’s word encourages us to wait upon the Lord rather than fire off spontaneous reactions that we may end up being sorry for later.

    If there’s any disappointment with all of this it needs to be directed toward the BSA and not the LCMS. It is they who have chosen to act in ways that are not befitting a Boy Scout. Not only have they changed the definition of morally straight, but their values of honesty and integrity are just as null and void as their debunked MOU (not MOFU) with the LCMS.

    Yes, pastor we do indeed grieve this loss that goes far beyond the issue of homosexuality. My son is 10 years old and I’m not sure he even knows that homosexuality is. But, we do talk daily about honesty and integrity. Unfortunately the BSA no longer has any.

  8. @Terra Collver #6

    This was well written and has helped me a lot. My son is working on his Eagle and I serve not only on my troop committee, but also at the district and council levels.

    Unless your troop has already enlisted gay leadership, I hope your son will finish his Eagle. It has meant a lot in the past, and whatever they do in the future can’t take that away from him.
    My sons and my grandsons are Eagle Scouts.

  9. @Michael #58: “I sense some bitterness from you toward the Synod.”

    Your sense is in error. My reaction to the Purple Palace efforts associated with the Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding is one of disgust.

    And this is not simply a single incident but rather another action on top of other actions by this Missouri Synod adminstration. These actions have left me with the conclusion that the Missouri Synod needs new and real Lutheran leadership.

  10. @Michael #58

    Michael, thank you for your kindly comments. Your skill at verbal expression enable me to sense that you and I are on the same wavelength. Our society is going through a clarifying and sifting time.

    All the best to you and yours.

    (PS. Thanks for the promotion, but I am not a pastor.)

  11. @Carl Vehse #60

    These actions have left me with the conclusion that the Missouri Synod needs new and real Lutheran leadership.

    Then start working for it at the DP level!

    Those are the men that control the majority of mission offerings [Texas sends a measly 20% forward] and in too many districts [including Texas] use the money to make Missouri less Lutheran.
    [As you know!]
    The SP has to depend on them to loose a few shekels to work with, and the IC has to work with them. Whatever they may be as individuals, in the aggregate the COP behave like a collection of cardinals, “princes of the church” (and hirelings who do not care for the flocks or the under shepherds entrusted to them).

  12. I understand well that often times denominational leaders do not always work to our liking. These are difficult times that call for support and unity among Christians as we face a more pluralistic culture of moral relativism. One could argue that the LCMS should never have entered the fray with the Memorandum of Understanding in the first place. I disagree. I was very encouraged to see them standing firm on Biblical convictions and trying to work through difficult issues with the BSA. Other denominations caved on these issues a long time ago. Not the LCMS. Christians have got to have a place at the table in whatever social issue we’re facing and I welcomed the involvement of the LCMS.

    When the MOU was issued, I reviewed it very careful with the pastor of the LCMS church that charters our pack. The issue for us was how could we maintain our Scouting unit while not compromising the doctrinal integrity of the church. We concluded that while we did not like policy changes in the BSA, we still believed that we could continue with Scouting while not compromising doctrine at the church. To be clear the MOU specifically stated that openly gay Scouts could no longer be prohibited from being a part of a Scouting unit. I’m a Cub Scout leader, not a Boy Scout leader. Think about this for a moment. We’re talking boys first through fifth grade. The chances of an openly gay third grader showing up at a den meeting, declaring, “I’m here and I’m queer, get used to it,” are highly unlikely. Even if it should happened the MOU specifically stated that this Scout could face disciplinary action from the Pack leadership and even dismissal. At the present time there are no merit badges, belt loops or Scouting requirements for sexuality. While we did not like the changes at the BSA, we felt we could still maintain a Scouting unit and the church could carry on their mission with no compromises.

    Let’s take this a step further. Are gay people welcome to attend our churches, Lutheran or non Lutheran? I certainly hope so. Jesus makes clear that our churches are not monuments to the saved, but hospitals for sinners. Sinners are not loved by God because they are attractive, they are attractive because the are loved by God. It is the responsibility of the church to love people openly and proclaim the truth. People are not loved when the truth is not proclaimed to them. The gay community has, by and large, fallen for a lie as Romans chapter one would make clear. More specifically they have exchanged the truth of God for a lie. It is interesting to me that this passage falls in the very same chapter that it is said where Luther after reading Romans 1: 16, 17, began a Reformation of the church that changed the modern world. This can be attributed to none other than the power of the Gospel so wonderfully described in verse 16. If the church does not have a place at the table as these issues are sorted out, where and how will people learn the truth?

    My hope is that a new awakening, a new revival or Reformation will take place in these times we’re living in which our church doors are open and we all repent of sin and believe the good news of the Gospel. This will not take place through the Boy Scouts of America, but through our churches as God’s chosen vehicle for the message of redemption in our world.

    This summer the BSA, took a monumental step in threatening the doctrinal integrity of church sponsored Scouting units by imposing a radial gay rights agenda upon them. The LCMS was right to sever their ties with them and now individual congregations must work out the details. This is a teaching moment for everyone involved. We need to be united around the Gospel and we need to proclaim the truth.

    Our Pack is meeting with the pastor Wednesday night to work through this. Please pray for us and I’ll keep you posted.

  13. @Michael #63
    One could argue that the LCMS should never have entered the fray with the Memorandum of Understanding in the first place.

    Yes, and that train of discussion left the station back in 2013, after an Overture to the Synodical Convention, which would have prevented any kind of Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding (MOFU) from being signed, was derailed by a corrupt floor committee and was never brought up for consideration by the convention delegates. The MOFU was yet another doctrinal and moral flip-flop on the part of President Harrison.

  14. @Carl Vehse #64

    Carl,

    I just don’t get why you believe the LCMS should never have entered into discussion with the BSA and signed the MOU. I would contend that it was a fitting place for them to be and an important discussion for them to have. Trust me, the BSA heard from the gay community on this, why shouldn’t they also hear from the Christian community, especially considering how many LCMS churches sponsor Scouting units.

    Our message as Christians to the gay community cannot be “stop being gay” any more than it can be to an alcoholic to “stop drinking.” When we bury our heads in the sand and pretend the issue is not in the church we don’t help anyone. Our message cannot come at the expense of the truth, though, and that is the problem with the present leadership within the BSA. It is no longer tenable with the church. Please help me to understand where you’re coming from because it sure sounds to me that you feel the church has no voice in this issue. If that’s the case then I would contend that the sins of the culture are the sins of the church. This is not the age of the silent Christian.

  15. @Michael #65: “I just don’t get why you believe the LCMS should never have entered into discussion with the BSA and signed the MOU.”

    The March 27, 2013, Reporter article, “LCMS joins call for Boy Scouts to reject policy change,” reported President Harrison stating:

    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,” he wrote. 

    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.”

    In the October, 2013, about-face Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding, Pres. Harrison proclaimed:

    “The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod will respect the membership standard of the Boy Scouts of America.”

    In a May 16, 2013, statement about the upcoming vote, President Harrison wrote:

    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.

    In the October, 2013, MOFU, the official LCMS meme became:

    “The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod will respect the membership standard of the Boy Scouts of America.”

    In the May 16, 2013 public statement (which included signatures of support from various religious leaders), Pres. Harrison stated:

    “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.

    In the October, 2013, MOFU, President Harrison told the congregations of the Missouri Synod:

    “It is the mission of the Boy Scouts of America to prepare young people to make ethical choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law… The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod will respect the membership standard of the Boy Scouts of America.”

  16. First, I would kindly ask that you remove the addition of the word fabulous to your description of the Memorandum of Understanding that you have chosen to describe as MOFU. This is obviously an addition that you have adopted to suit your own purposes of constructing an acronym to express your disgust with the way the BSA treated the LCMS. Or, even your disgust with the LCMS for entering a dialogue in the first place. Whatever the case, I would hope our discussion about it would not sink to the level of vulgarity as you have chosen to do.

    Scout leaders have been shooting a moving target since the spring of 2013 with respect to this matter and the LCMS has also fallen prey to the vacillation of the BSA. All of us at the time were quite shocked by how an organization like the BSA that held so strongly to their values would so quickly succumb to outside forces who cared little of promoting the values of Scouting, but were focused solely on promoting a pro homosexual agenda.

    It is important to note that all of the quotes you attribute to President Harrison were made prior to the official decision of the BSA that was not released until May 23, 2013. Again, President Harrison was shooting a moving target at the time and his remarks are more in line with what he feared might happen as opposed to what actually did happen. All of us feared at the time that the BSA was about to issue an all out endorsement of openly gay leaders being allowed into the BSA. That did not happen until this past summer, 2015 and President Harrison and others at the LCMS felt it necessary to enter into a dialogue with the BSA to help Scout leaders like myself work their way through this difficult issue.

    I personally found the MOU helpful in guiding our pack. When I discussed it with the pastor he mentioned that this was a no win situation for everyone. Yet, we must extend grace to the leaders of the LCMS for their best effort. I also knew that it was just a matter of time until the MOU would be obsolete. Perhaps the LCMS feared that as well. This was not due to the LCMS involvement with it, but with the atrocious leadership at the BSA. Clearly this is an organization that is about to implode.

    I have made clear from the start in my remarks on this blog that I am not Lutheran. Yet, I have held your denomination in high regard and still do. One problem I have however is your apparent position that it’s ok to disengage oneself as a Christian from the outside world around him that desperately needs the Gospel. Where, pray tell, is the mission of the church if one seems to pride himself in disengagement as you do? I have a hard time reconciling that with Scripture. To look upon a lost world and say, “FU” is totally unacceptable for a Christian of any denomination.

    My wife grew up in the LCMS and joined the church in eighth grade upon confirmation. She checked out after high school and her entry point back was with the education of our son at a LCMS school and Cub Scouts. We are members of a non-Lutheran church, but getting my wife’s name off the membership roster at the Lutheran church was something else. The pastor laughed hysterically when I told him that membership in the LCMS was like the hotel California. You can check out anytime, but you can never leave. There’s something favorable to be said of that, of course, but it’s also a strong indicator of a culture of disengagement that expects people to come to church rather than bringing the church to people who desperately need it. I find that troubling. I celebrate the efforts of the LCMS to break that barrier and I would hope you would too.

  17. I was extremely saddened that the BSA abandoned its core principles when it didn’t have to! Those who pushed for it are probably less interested in Scouting than in destroying any and all organizations which have a philosophy differing from their own.

    They can’t reach God. But they will attack the conservative churches.

  18. @Michael #67

    In my previous comments I have explained that the Memorandum of Fabulous Understanding is disgusting and contemptible because of its public acceptance of openly homosexual scouts into Missouri Synod congregation-chartered troops. The title I give to that document is and will remain symbolic of the MOFU’s own mockery of Christianity and of the Lutheran Confessions.

    Don’t link up with unbelievers and try to work with them. What common interest can there be between goodness and evil? How can light and darkness share life together? How can there be harmony between Christ and the devil? What business can a believer have with an unbeliever? What common ground can idols hold with the temple of God? For we, remember, are ourselves living temples of the living God, as God has said: ‘I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be my people’. (2 Cor. 6:14-16, J.B. Phillips translation)

    “I would hope our discussion about it would not sink to the level of vulgarity as you have chosen to do.”

    The Pecksniffian nature of your statement is evidenced by your subsequent ad hominem comments:

    One problem I have however is your apparent position that it’s ok to disengage oneself as a Christian from the outside world around him that desperately needs the Gospel… I have a hard time reconciling that with Scripture. To look upon a lost world and say, “FU” is totally unacceptable for a Christian of any denomination.

  19. There has been a lot said on BJS and other Lutheran lists about the Missouri Synod’s continuing association with BSA. (If you’re not familiar with the BSA controversy… Welcome to Planet Earth!)

    Now in Denver (and there are probably some Lutheran Boy Scouts there) another BSA issue, somewhat counterproductive to the LGBT slant in BSA, has been pointed out (in a manner of speaking) – Hooters.

    It seems that the Hooters restaurant chain sponsored a 3-day camp for Denver-area Boy Scouts (probably including their Scoutmasters). Here’s a photo of a (face-blurred) Scout showing the bird feeder he made at the camp with the help of restaurant employee volunteers.

    One of the Scout mothers who objected to the sponsorship, stated, “It wasn’t their clothes, it’s that intrinsically Hooters and Boy Scouts don’t feel like a natural fit.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.