Lutherans Sign Accord with Boy Scouts of America

[Jerome]

The document is available on both groups' websites:

http://www.scouting.org/filestore/pdf/lutheran_misso_synod.pdf

https://www.lcms.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=726&DocID=2583

the Boy Scouts of America will respect the spiritual and moral responsibility of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod’s chartering congregations with the understanding that there is no Boy Scout authority which supersedes the authority of the local pastor and the congregation in any phase of the program affecting the spiritual welfare of those who participate

 

[InTheLight]

Can't easily read the document on my phone. So it appears to me that if A Missouri Synod church sponsors a Boy Scout troop and there is a gay child in the troop they must allow him membership. Correct?

 

[annsni]

It actually seems like it's stating that they respect the Boy Scout's stance but that the church's stance takes a higher priority and any troop that works with the church CAN have a child turned out of the troop for being gay.

"Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod will respect the membership standard of the Boy Scouts
of America, including the stipulation that membership in Scouting may not be denied to a child on the basis of
sexual attraction alone, and the further stipulation that the local pastor of the chartering congregation and the
leaders of the local troop have the authority to set boundaries, including the determination of whether a Scout is
promoting a particular social or political agenda, advocating for a moral view that is inconsistent with the church,
or becoming a distraction to the troop, and take such action to enforce set boundaries up to and including removal
from the troop; therefore be it finally ...."

 

[InTheLight]

Looks to me that gay children must be allowed so long as they don't promote h@m@sexuality.

 

[Yeshua1]

Looks to me that gay children must be allowed so long as they don't promote h@m@sexuality.

That is the Christian position though, isn't it, that a "gay person" would be allowed as long as not active/nor promoting it?