The Peregrinator

I wanted to revisit this topic (maybe this series will just continue indefinitely! But this post ought to be brief) as I’ve been reading some material on-line lately that I think could be cause for confusion.

I should preface this post by noting that I do recognize that parental involvement in exploring and guiding is crucial. One can’t run a unit without the parents who volunteer their time and energy to fill the many roles required in a well-functioning den, troop, or company. What I want to address is whether all parents (especially fathers) should be involved to the point at which they are all effectively leaders in their children’s (especially their sons’) units.

Exploring (or what Lord Baden-Powell called “scouting”) isn’t fathers taking their boys camping. This is not to say that there is something wrong with fathers taking their sons camping — there isn’t, in fact it is a fine thing — but let’s call it what it is: family camping.

As Baden-Powell wrote in Aids to Scoutmastership, exploring is “a game for boys under the leadership of boys, in which elder brothers can give their younger brothers healthy environment and encourage them to healthy activities,” and “a jolly game in the out of doors, where boy-men and boys can go adventuring together as older and younger brothers, picking up health and happiness, handicraft and helpfulness.” That is, the boys are led by other boys (in girls’ units, the girls are lead by other girls), ideally those who are older and more experienced, while the leaders are present to give advice, direction, ideas, and generally facilitate the playing of the game. (It goes without saying that younger boys need considerably more direction than older boys!) We see the genius of that particular method in which units are divided into patrols each of which is comprised of a range of ages.

Children often learn best by doing things for themselves, and in order to do things for themselves they have to be able to make mistakes, they have to be able to try and fail. Without the possibility of failure there is no real success. This is not, by the way, unique to exploring, but is a general principle of youth ministry. But our emphasis on the outdoors (God’s creation is our primary textbook) can give some parents particular qualms about letting their children learn for themselves. The outdoors is, after all, dangerous — and I say that without my tongue in my cheek. Some parents can find it difficult to let their children make mistakes when a mistake means a scraped knee or a loose tooth! Still, exploring is a safe activity and its safety is not enhanced by the presence of a multitude of parents.

Again, this is not to say that parents should not be involved. An Explorer unit could not run without the help of the parents in it and we appreciate all the help that a parent offers. But parents do need to take a step back and let their kids work things out on their own, or better yet under the guidance of older kids.

I’ve seen enough of war to want to keep away from the military idea. Woodcraft, handicraft, and all those things are invaluable. First aid and all that goes with it is excellent; but the boys should be kept away from the idea that they are being trained so that some day they may fight for their country. It is not war-scouting that is needed now, but peace-scouting. The explorers, the pioneers, the persons who are always on the lookout to do something for the benefit of humanity, are the ones who count, and that should be the motto of every boy scout.

1912 Chicago Address, emphasis mine.

I had not intended to write another post in this series, but recent events surrounding the formation of “alternative” youth associations convinced me that at least one more post might be helpful.

In any association that claims to be inspired by the work of Lord Baden-Powell, the program is paramount, and the heart of the program is the Promise (by some called the “Oath”) and the Law. This is especially true for associations that are explicitly Christian. As our FNE national religious adviser writes:

The Explorer Law is a concrete expression of the Gospel, a practical translation of principles posed by the Decalogue. Our law emerges in the heart of children and opens up into the most beautiful Christian virtues that nature and God’s grace make fruitful.

The Venerable Fr. Jacques Sevin, S.J., put it even more simply: “The [Explorers]’s law is sacred and the holy Bible its perfume. The [Explorers]’s law is our Lord Jesus’ law.” Is it a coincidence that there are ten articles in the Explorer Law (the original 1908 Law had but nine articles, but this grew to ten in 1911) and ten commandments in the Decalogue? And just as the Decalogue is primary in the moral life of a Christian, the ten articles of the Law are primary in the way of life proposed by the Baden-Powell method. Observance he Law isn’t optional for the Explorer (or Rover or Pathfinder) any more than observance of the Decalogue is optional for anyone in the wayfaring state on earth.

A defining characteristic of a Christian is that he is a man under authority, like the centurion in St. Matthew’s Gospel (Matthew 8:5-10). The chief authority is that of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, but He has deigned that there should be divinely established authorities here on earth as well. So a Christian association will seek the approval of religious authorities, and even civil authorities insofar as this is possible without offending God. A Catholic, then, would first seek the approval of his parish priest (pastor), then that of his diocesan Ordinary, and ultimately that of the Supreme Pontiff. Not every youth association needs the approval of the Pope, but the Ordinary’s approval is certainly required for an association to call itself “Catholic” (can. 216), and common sense tells us that an educational initiative that seeks to pass on the teaching of the Church should not be undertaken without at least the permission of the parish priest. (It goes without saying that the bishop can approve anything that a parish priest can, and the Pope, who has universal jurisdiction, can approve anything that any bishop throughout the world can. So if one has the approval of the Pope, then the approval of bishops and the priests subject to them is a good thing to have, but not strictly necessary.)

The FSE was founded on All Saints Day in 1956, established its current federal statutes in 1976 (when its official name became the Union Internationale des Guides et Scouts d’Europe – Fédération du Scoutisme Européen or UIGSE-FSE), and was approved by the Holy See only in 2003 (ad experimentum; definitive approval would follow five years later). All in all, over 50 years from foundation until final approval by the Holy See. But this approval could not have happened if there were no program. A youth association without a program is like a religious order without a charism. And a youth association without a Promise and Law is like a religious order without a rule. The program, informed by the Promise and the Law, comes first; only then can one hope for approval. For an association to lobby for approval before it has an established program is putting the cart before the horse.

It’s important to note that a “program” is not merely a series of requirements culminating in awards. It is rather the educational method for teaching those requirements. It is not enough to say that a boy must know how to tie a sheet bend and a bowline in order to wear a patch on his sleeve. A program tells us how we teach the boy a sheet bend and in what context. Requirements can no more make up a program than good works can make up the practice of Christianity.

I don’t doubt the good intentions of those who would seek approval before developing their program — Christians are, after all, supposed to be obedient to those whom God has set over them, both temporally and spiritually, and the approval of Divinely-appointed authority is a sign of God’s favor and a help for the perplexed in these confusing times. They are just going about things the wrong way, and need to rethink their approach.

In his Exposition of the Seven Penitential Psalms St. John Fisher talks about the gift of tears, the ability to weep for one’s sins. Several years ago I had an experience in which I believe I received this gift — one time only — on Good Friday thanks to the charity and solicitude of a great man of God.

I don’t remember the exact year — 2007, maybe — but Good Friday arrived and I made my way down to St. Peter the Apostle Church (the home of the National Shrine of St. John Neumann) at 5th and Girard in the morning. I was hoping to see some times posted for confessions, either on a sign or in the parish bulletin — St. Peter’s was known for having daily confessions and I thought I remembered their having confessions during the Triduum before. I did not see any signs and as far as the bulletin was concerned — I either could not find a copy or it said nothing about a confession schedule for Good Friday. I nearly despaired thinking that I would go through Easter, the holiest day of the year, in a state of sin. However, I went to the upstairs church, where the Repository was kept in a small side chapel, and saw a priest there speaking with one of sacristans. I knew the priest only by name and reputation — my wife had spoken highly of him — so I waited until I caught his attention and asked him whether he knew if confessions were scheduled for that day. He asked me to wait a moment until he finished with the sacristan, then simply asked me to follow him, sat down in the confessional and heard my confession.

I left the confessional and knelt before the Repository to say my penance. I cannot put into words everything I felt at that moment — yes, I know our religion is not based on feelings, but sometimes we are graced with the consolation of having our feelings correspond to the truth — thinking of the awfulness of my sins, the simple charity of this priest, the grace and mercy of God — and I wept uncontrollably.

That priest’s name was Msgr. George Tomichek.

Last night I heard the sad news that Msgr. Tomichek had died a couple of days earlier and it really took the wind out of my sails. Please, of your charity, remember him in your prayers! Perhaps even now he is bringing our petitions before Our Lord’s throne in heaven, just as he did on earth in Holy Mass and in the Sacrament of Penance. Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May he rest in peace. May his soul, and all the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

Like 57% of those who eat peanut butter, I prefer creamy peanut butter to crunchy. So imagine my horror when I opened a new jar of peanut butter to find that I had mistakenly bought crunchy! I don’t believe in returning things to the grocery store once they’re opened (if the mistake is mine, that is), so I resolved to slowly consume the vile substance over time.

This resolution proved to be too much for me, even for this Lenten season, so I started to consider alternatives. I could not give the peanut butter away (already opened) nor could I force it on my family, so I wondered, would it be possible to turn crunchy peanut butter into creamy? According to the Internet, the answer is yes — just a matter of running it through a blender or food processor. We don’t own the former, but the latter we do own, a throwback to the days when we fantasized about making our own baby food. (Of course, our two youngest children steadfastly refused to eat baby food when they were ready for it; the older of the two might have starved if not for avocados. But I digress.)

I can report that yes, the Internet is correct — you can turn crunchy peanut butter into creamy with a food processor. To say that it worked like a champ is an understatement — the oversized peanut chunks were swiftly crushed into nothingness. And the whole process only took about five minutes, three of which were spent spooning the peanut butter out of the jar and into the food processor.

Another public service announcement from the Peregrinator.

Food for thought from the St. Matthew’s Gospel (20:25b-27):

You know that the princes of the Gentiles lord it over them; and they that are the greater, exercise power upon them. It shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be the greater among you, let him be your minister: And he that will be first among you, shall be your servant. Even as the Son of man is not come to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a redemption for many.

J. R. R. Tolkien’s translation of Beowulf, which dates to the 1920s, will finally be published this year along with his commentary on the poem. Tolkien aficionados may know that it was his 1936 lecture on Beowulf, “Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics,” that secured his place in academia.

No word yet on whether Peter Jackson is planning a trilogy of movies based on the epic poem.

There are rules about this sort of thing. Specifically, in the Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici, or CIC for short), we read that:

Can. 216 Since they participate in the mission of the Church, all the Christian faithful have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action even by their own undertakings, according to their own state and condition. Nevertheless, no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.

For example, if I were to start a club for boys, I would not be able to call it “The Catholic Boys’ Club” without the permission of my bishop (it goes without saying that the Pope could also grant this permission). It doesn’t matter whether my parish priest approves; it doesn’t matter whether we meet on Church property; and it doesn’t matter whether we name ourselves after Our Lady or the saints.

The whole of this section of the Code of Canon Law, “The Obligations and Rights of All the Christian Faithful,” actually makes for some pretty interesting reading. Note that “obligations” are listed in the title before “rights”! This is not because we have many obligations and few rights — one need only read this section of the CIC to be disabused of that notion — but because obligations (an Explorer should read “duties”!) are logically prior to rights. There is no right to call one’s organization “Catholic” because there is no corresponding duty to do so. In some circumstances, there may be such a duty — but only the bishop has the authority to judge that.

What are the “alternatives” for a youth movement whose program is based on Lord Baden-Powell’s program?

That was the question many Catholics and other traditional Christians were asking themselves in May of last year (2013). However, some of the suggested “alternatives” were only alternatives in the broadest possible sense, akin to joining 4-H in lieu of playing organized football. My guess is that in their haste to pry people away from what they believed to be a corrupt organization, well-meaning commentators latched onto just about any Catholic or Christian youth organization and presented it as an alternative.

That some, maybe even all, of these organizations have merit is not subject for debate. The real question is whether one of these organizations is an adequate “substitute” (I mean no opprobrium here; no one likes to be a substitute, much less a merely “adequate” one!) for one that uses B-P’s educational method. I submit that it is not, unless the organization in question also uses B-P’s concepts and ideals. Lord Baden-Powell’s method has been explicitly approved by every Pope (with the exception of our current Pope, who as far as I know has not spoken publicly on the matter) since Pius XI. And before B-P published his book Scouting for Boys, he solicited the advice of Archbishop (later Cardinal) Francis Bourne of Westminster as well as the Benedictines of Downside Abbey.

Here are some things to look for in an organization to know that its program is based on that of Baden-Powell. Not every organization will have all of these features but if it uses B-P’s method then it should have most of them (and a few of them, in my opinion, are non-negotiable — such as wearing a uniform):

• Serves youth from the age of reason (about 7) through adolescence.
• Separate programs for young children (about ages 7-11) and older children (ages 12-17).
• Older children, at least, separated by gender.
• Rovering program for young adults (18-24+).
• Wears a uniform.
• Awards badges for achievement.
• Older children grouped into “patrols” or “squadrons” of 6-9 children.
• Patrols made up of children of diverse ages, rather than all of the same approximate age.
• Religious element.
• Instills a spirit of service in its members.

Of course, this list is just scratching the surface — there are many other features that might be listed as well. However, I do think this list will help families make an informed decision.

Phillies pitcher Justin De Fratus talks to NCR about how he found “brotherly love” in baseball.

I read this article to our boy Timber Wolves about a month ago and they, being part of a brotherhood themselves, understood it right away.