This is a revised version of the first article I posted on the welcome page. I moved the original welcome page, with the original article, to the attic.
The first topic I discussed was a series of posts by George Dannells in his blog "Baha'i Views," about "apostate," "marginal" and "unenrolled" Baha'is; and about an "oppositional coalition"/"anti-baha'i society." I see that "Baha'i Views" was featured in the March/April 2008 American Baha'i. There might be many more Baha'is reading "Baha'i Views" now, and some of them may be tempted to follow its example of promoting and extrapolating Moojan Momen's "marginality and apostasy" stereotypes; labeling, stereotyping and depreciating people collectively and by name; and promoting estrangement.
I've sometimes seen people excusing such behavior as "defending the Faith." I urge anyone who might see it that way to prayerfully study and practice the guidance below from the Universal House of Justice, about responding to attacks on the Faith in Internet discussions. I haven't found any place where I can link to it on the Internet, but it can be found in the Ocean Software Library and on the BahaiResearch Web site. The path is Baha'i/Authoritative Baha'i/The Universal House of Justice/Letters/1999 November 22, Attacks on the Faith in Internet Discussions.
I would also caution anyone who is tempted to repeat the statement that "unenrolled" means "expelled" ( On Another Word for "Unenrolled": Expelled ), "for reasons of behavior following a long process in which they were invited to change their behavior," not to do so without confirmation from authoritative Baha'i sources that every person who calls herself an "unenrolled Baha'i" was indeed expelled from the Faith for those reasons. Consider the possible implications of repeating that statement without such confirmation.
First, that is a very damaging statement. Apart from the issue of backbiting, certainly a person needs to be sure such a statement is true, before repeating it to others.
As of 15 April 2008, the Unenrolled Baha'i Yahoo Group has 238 members. I personally know one person who calls herself and some other people "unenrolled Baha'is." What that means to her is people who call themselves Baha'is, who aren't members. She says that she withdrew voluntarily, without any institutions finding fault with her behavior before she withdrew. I don't know how many other people call themselves "unenrolled Baha'is." It may be dozens, or even hundreds. I only know of three people who might be called "unenrolled Baha'is," who say they were expelled.
I've never seen any statements about any of that from any authoritative Baha'i source, but I know at least one person who calls herself an "unenrolled Baha'i," and says she was not expelled, and there may be many more. To say that "unenrolled" means "expelled," and suggest that it was for reasons of behavior following a long process in which they were invited to change their behavior, is not only a potentially false damaging statement, but also an allegation that all the people who call themselves "unenrolled Baha'is," and who say they were not expelled, are lying!
Apart from that, "Baha'i Views" looks very attractive to me, in presentation and content. I wish I had such a beautiful blog! I especially like stories about cluster development. Some of my other favorites are the ones about Green Faith Heros, the new look at the Baha'i Library Online Forum, Martha's Barn, and Resources for Baha'i Education and Children's Classes.
Jim
Extracts
from a letter dated 22 November 1999 from the Universal House of
Justice on the subject: "Defending the Cause against its Opponents"
Recurring
attacks on the Cause and misrepresentations of its teachings,
particularly on the Internet, have moved a number of believers to raise
questions about the propriety of their undertaking responses. Aware as
they are of Baha'u'llah's injunction to avoid contention in matters of
religion, these friends wonder whether this principle precludes efforts
on the part of Baha'is to correct serious misrepresentation of the
Faith by individuals who, rather than being merely confused about its
history and teachings, seem deliberately bent on doing it harm....
While
counselling His followers not to view with too critical an eye the
sayings and writings of men, but to approach diverse opinions in the
spirit of open-mindedness and loving sympathy, Baha'u'llah makes it
clear that deliberate attacks on the Faith are to be treated in a quite
different manner:
It is incumbent upon all men, each according to his ability, to refute the arguments of those that have attacked the Faith of God.... He that wisheth to promote the Cause of the one true God, let him promote it through his pen and tongue, rather than have recourse to sword or violence.... By the righteousness of Him Who, in this Day, crieth within the inmost heart of all created things: God, there is none other God besides Me! If any man were to arise to defend, in his writings, the Cause of God against its assailants, such a man, however inconsiderable his share, shall be so honored in the world to come that the Concourse on high would envy his glory.
That the
Faith will increasingly become the target of attacks from within and
without is a subject that has been dealt with at considerable length in
the writings of the Guardian. Speaking of "the forces that are destined
to contest with God's holy Faith", the Guardian foresaw some decades
ago the emergence of problems of the kind that have begun to concern
present-day Baha'is, especially those friends who participate in
Internet discussion groups:
They will assail not only the spirit which it inculcates, but the administration which is the channel, the instrument, the embodiment of that spirit. For as the authority with which Baha'u'llah has invested the future Baha'i Commonwealth becomes more and more apparent, the fiercer shall be the challenge which from every quarter will be thrown at the verities it enshrines.
This being the case, Shoghi Effendi drew attention to the clear obligation the situation creates for members of the Faith:
No opportunity, in view of the necessity of ensuring the harmonious development of the Faith, should be ignored, which its potential enemies, whether ecclesiastical or otherwise, may offer, to set forth, in a restrained and unprovocative language, its aims and tenets, to defend its interests, to proclaim its universality, to assert the supernatural, the supranational and non-political character of its institutions....
The Guardian's reference to the spirit that
should govern such responses on the part of the friends echoes the
perspective set out in many of 'Abdu'l- Baha's Writings:
You must withstand them with the utmost love and kindness; consider their oppression and persecution as the caprice of children, and do not give any importance to whatever they do. For at the end the illumination of the Kingdom will overwhelm the darkness of the world...
The
friends will find reflection on this perspective helpful in freeing
themselves from the natural distress that abuse of the Faith they love
can at times arouse, as well as from any temptation to respond
inappropriately. In correcting misrepresentations of the Faith made by
those who are hostile to it, our obligation is to set forth
Baha'u'llah's teachings cogently and courteously, but firmly,
supporting them with rational proofs. Once this has been done, the
challenge rests with our hearers, whatever their interests or
motivations, to consider our responses in this same spirit of courtesy
and objectivity. For Baha'is to go further than this, by engaging in
acrimonious debate, much less by reflecting on the character of others,
would be to cross the line that separates legitimate defence of the
Faith from contention.
Because circumstances differ so widely,
the responsibility must rest on each individual believer to determine,
on the basis of the specific situation, where that line applies. Under
most circumstances, it would seem worse than futile for a Baha'i to
attempt to defend the institutions or members of the Faith from the
kind of reckless slander that has become an all too common feature of
the moral deterioration of contemporary society, and that tends to
characterize much of the language of the Faith's current critics.
Similarly, for believers to be drawn into discussion of subjects which
the Writings themselves tell us will find clarification only through
the passing of time, such as the wisdom of Baha'u'llah's limiting
membership of the Universal House of Justice to men, the full
implication of the Will and Testament, and the process by which the
Baha'i Commonwealth will emerge, would tend to divert attention from
real and pressing issues. Such speculation may, indeed, be the real
reason why such subjects are often so ardently pursued by opponents of
the Cause.
Apart from the spiritual principles that must
determine Baha'i conduct in matters of this kind, it is important, too,
to bear always in mind the reaction that the discussion of
controversial issues, particularly in matters of religion, tends to
arouse in those who are merely casual readers and listeners. While
appreciating a lively discussion--and particularly the clarification of
important issues--, most well-intentioned inquirers are understandably
repelled by the spirit of argumentation.
Where opposition
chooses to assail the Faith on points where scholarly expertise in a
particular field is required, the challenge to respond falls directly
on those believers who are thus qualified, and the Baha'i community is
fortunate in having the human resources necessary to this purpose. For
discussions that are of a more general nature, a wider number of the
friends will be in a position to provide helpful comment. While the
initiative in all such matters rests primarily with the individual
believer, the institutions of the Faith are in a position to offer
guidance on how the Faith's interests can best be served. Indeed, where
discussions of this kind have a direct and immediate impact on the
perception of the Faith among the non-Baha'i public, the Guardian has
emphasized the importance of the friends' seeking "the guidance and
approval of the National Spiritual Assembly" in all attempts to counter
open attacks on the Cause....
Given the dramatic growth of the
Cause, opposition is likely to be an increasingly familiar feature of
the period immediately ahead. In this situation the friends will find
particularly helpful the perspective offered by the Guardian's brief
summary of the lessons to be learned from earlier stages in the same,
long historic struggle:
Viewed in the light of past experience,
the inevitable result of such futile attempts, however persistent and
malicious they may be, is to contribute to a wider and deeper
recognition by believers and unbelievers alike of the distinguishing
features of the Faith proclaimed by Baha'u'llah. These challenging
criticisms, whether or not dictated by malice, cannot but serve to
galvanize the souls of its ardent supporters, and to consolidate the
ranks of its faithful promoters. They will purge the Faith from those
pernicious elements whose continued association with the believers
tends to discredit the fair name of the Cause, and to tarnish the
purity of its spirit. We should welcome, therefore, not only the open
attacks which its avowed enemies persistently launch against it, but
should also view as a blessing in disguise every storm of mischief with
which they who apostatize their faith or claim to be its faithful
exponents assail it from time to time. Instead of undermining the
Faith, such assaults, both from within and from without, reinforce its
foundations, and excite the intensity of its flame.
See also:
Baha'i Internet Agency
Counselor Stephen Birkland's compilation
NASA photo of Earth
taken from Apollo