You know, I’m really blessed to have such amazing participants here. Although I may not agree with everyone, I’m thankful that each one of you is here, contributing your thoughts and asking some fascinating questions.
Once in a while, a question or comment is so thought provoking that it merits more than a simple reply from me but an attempt, no matter how feeble, to give it the exposition it deserves. So for that purpose (as well as to give it a relevant thread of its own, as the original blog post was on another subject), here is the featured question…
“Curious” asked:
My first question is why is there a need to go through an election for UHJ members if the complete Baha’i congregation is not suppose to question the UHJ decisions? In other words, if everyone is meant to assume that everything the UHJ does is absolutely correct, what is the logic in reelecting the members. Wouldn’t it just be obvious that the same members are kept in all the time? Shouldn’t the election just be for the case when a position opens on the UHJ? So why do the Writings call for elections?
After receiving a non-answer, Curious tried again:
I understand the UHJ members get old and tired and resign. That leaves a vacancy which I understand needs an election to fill. My question is why the need to reelect every 5 years (I believe)? If these 9 men are infallible on a collective level in their arbitration, why do they need to be reexamined via election? How does this create stability? It seems very time consuming and costly. And in the end aren’t they usually reelected anyway? So why did the Master and Guardian call for reelection? What is the true purpose?
Before I try to answer this question, let me say that the Baha’i community is starved today for such thinking and such questioning. We need less and less Baha’i Ruhi-style, spoonfed “answers” and more thought expanding questions. Compare and contrast the 1970′s LA Class‘ penchant for questions and Ruhi’s fetish for “answers”. Sigh.
For Pete’s sake! As Baha’is we have a whole month named after them… but how often do we really devote time and mental space to explore really good questions? Not enough. This is the biggest mistake that Baha’is make.
Now to attempt an answer. First, the Universal House of Justice is infallible, only under certain conditions. For example, we have guidance from Abdu’l-Baha regarding means by which the UHJ should come about and function. If those conditions and prerequisites are discarded, that is, if the process isn’t followed, then the result lacks the intended meaning.
Second, I don’t believe in the infallibility that you don’t believe in. By that I mean that probably the second biggest mistake that Baha’is make is to misunderstand the meaning of infallibility. This, no doubt, stems from the first mistake – for had they actually questioned and investigated, they would most assuredly find the truth. In actuality, “infallibility” does not mean “factual inerrancy”. Anyone who attempts to argue otherwise is not only ignoring simple logic but the Baha’i Writings themselves.
For a tongue-in-cheek reductio ad absurdum exposition see: Magic 8 Ball or a dart board for “infallible” decision making. But Curious‘ question takes things to another level by asking, if this body is “infallible” then why hold elections? Brilliant.
The reason why Curious‘ question is so useful is that if we are to attempt a real answer, it pulls away the superficial assumptions that we may have and forces us to really try to understand what is at the heart of the Baha’i Administration.
Yes, it is true that the UHJ membership for the vast majority, has been a life-long affair. At one point members were not even allowed to resign due to health or age but actually served until death. That has thankfully changed and we recently saw two members resign to enter retirement. However, this brings us to another issue. That the membership of the UHJ has come from a narrow subset of the Baha’i community. Even more damaging, this subset is itself appointed by the UHJ. So in effect we have the UHJ choosing candidates by appointing them to the ITC and then these (male) members of the ITC are elected to replace retiring UHJ members. This closed system is an accurate description of the current state of the Baha’i leadership but it doesn’t mean that it was meant to be this way, nor that this is ideal.
In fact, most recognize that this is detrimental to the well-being of the worldwide Baha’i community. For the past 20 or so years we are witness to an ossification at the highest levels. But who do we have to blame? Ourselves. We are the ones that elect the same members of the LSA over and over again. We are the ones that send the same Baha’is, year in, year out, to be delegates. Furthermore, this is clearly not what Abdu’l-Baha intended since the appointed arm and the elected arm of the BA were delineated in duty and responsibility, as well as authority, with no overlap whatsoever.
Finally, to return to some semblance of brevity: the Baha’i Writings call for regular elections because the purpose of the UHJ is the highest in the world – that of servitude.
Related Previous Discussions:
The Concept of Infallibility in the Baha’i Faith
Is the Universal House of Justice Infallible? (Part I)
Is the Universal House of Justice Infallible? (Part II)
Individual Conscience Within the Baha’i Faith
Meditations on Baha’u’llah: Infallibility 1
Meditations on Baha’u’llah: Infallibility 2
Meditations on Baha’u’llah: Infallibility 3
He cannot override…
Commentary on the Divine Unity
Pingback: BahaiFaith by kawthar - Pearltrees