When Our Knee Should Not Jerk
By now, I suppose everybody has heard about the Boy Scouts of America's decision to allow homosexual members of the BSA's local Troops ... albeit maintaining the ban on homosexual adult leaders. As a good'ol Southern Bible-believer, I am naturally against that decision. But there has recently been flap about decrying their decision, or perhaps distancing the SBC from the BSA, at the national level. Taking some action, perhaps non-binding, via resolution at the Houston Convention next week.
That, I am against.
I have two reasons for this. First is, whether to associate with a local BSA Troop is a decision for the local church. And the local church can view this decision one of two ... that I can think of ... ways.
- #1: Awful terrible degrading thing they did and we can no longer be associated with them in any way except to pray for them etc.
- #2: Since very few ... I know of exactly none ... local SBC churches have their own program of outreach and ministry to homosexual boys, this decision now enables the local BSA Troop-affiliated church to actively minister to homosexual boys. (We wouldn't go to them, so Hallelujah! ... God brought them to us.
Can you imagine standing before God and hearing Him say that He arranged this to bring homosexuality among youth out in the open, so we could minister to it? And we "ran them off", so to speak?
God raised up the Babylonians to help whip Israel into shape; why couldn't He do this?
Besides, it's not about BSA organizationally. It's about the boys, and helping them grow up to be better men, better citizens, and better neighbors.
Which brings me to my other bone of contention with reference to churches and their affiliation with Boy Scout Troops. Within my knowledge, BSA is about training boys, and giving them the environment which will help them, to be better youth and adults. For a church to sponsor a group like that, which omits the only real way to become better boys and men, is unthinkable. Unless it includes the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the status of the natural boys & men as sinners before a Holy God. To lead folks to think they can be better off while omitting the Gospel, is, to me, unthinkable.
Same deal as the Masonic Lodge, which the SBC didn't have the gumption to address as they ought to have.
If the SBC wants to pass a Resolution disagreeing with the BSA's decision, fine. Just don't recommend that churches distance themselves from the local Troops.
Distance themselves from boys, who may now be admittedly homosexual.
If we want to be consistent about this, we'd have to study everyone with whom the church is in any way connected ... suppliers of churches' consumables ... the insurance companies with which Guidestone places coverages, annuities, etc ... the Utility Companies ... the hotels we stay at while at the Annual Meeting ... etc etc ... to assure ourselves that they all have the anti-homosexual beliefs and policies we want them to have.
Or run the risk of being hypocrites.