The Universal House of Justice has sent a letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the Netherlands instructing them to remove Mr. Sen McGlinn from the membership rolls of their Baha’i community.
There is to be a meeting of the Local Spiritual Assembly (of which McGlinn is a member) without him on Thursday, December 1st 2005. I expect that after this meeting they will inform McGlinn officially.
It is still not definitively clear what reasons the House is using for this action. However, the purported letter to the NSA contains very much the same selective quotation of his words from the foreword of his recently published book, Church and State.
I will be writing more as more information becomes available.
Dear Mr. McGlinn,
The Universal House of Justice has advised us of its conclusion that, on the basis of your established pattern of behaviour and the
statements you have published, you cannot properly be considered as meeting the requirements of Baha’i membership.Accordingly, we have removed your name from our membership roll and have informed the Baha’i institutions concerned.
Sincerely
…[signature]
The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the Netherlands
Related Links:
Letter of the House of Justice to the NSAs regarding McGlinn’s book.
Alison’s commentary in three parts: one, two, three.
To my mind Baha’u'llah and Abdu’l-Baha clearly taught that individuals should think in a morally and spiritually responsible way for themselves by individual conscience in the New Day and only in this was the safety of mankind to be established in the world. And that we should only function in groups when it is noble and highly effective to do so.
This is how I read the Kitab-I-Iqan in Paris three decades ago. That all bets are now off and everyone must administer their own heart for themselves and
not turn it over to some other agency on Earth to do one’s thinking. No ignorant Mullahs or self assigned Popes or Princes of the Church are needed in the new cycle of human development. No sullen organization of a spiritually dead self appointed clergy class who sends people to the stake for thought crimes. We have now therefore become a self defeating oxymoron. No true New World Age educated Baha’i would ever join the Baha’i Faith as it currently exists!
Something is going to break and very, very soon. This level of cognitive dissonance cannot be sustained much longer by any system or organization. It is too great of a drain of intellectual, spiritual, and emotional energy. Living is hard enough without this completely unnecessary folly.
Where is “entry-by-troops” happening anywhere in the world in the soulless and spiritually barren Ruhi Substitute Faith? Where?
Ain’t going to happen. No spiritually advanced person or any thinking person anywhere in the world would ever join or stay in something run this poorly.
So who will take the responsibility when there is not only zero growth but massive “exit-by-troops” clearly before the rank and file of the entire world by Ridvan of next year? Who?
These men have essentially infallibly decreed that the Baha’i Faith is to be completely destroyed in the world. Even thiough it hurts after all these years of service as a BIGS I must accept their Divine Guidance and watch the Faith I served die.
So be it.
Thanks Baquia for providing us with the explanation.
The following extract from the letter of the UHJ provides me with the answer:
« …an individual has declared himself a “Bahá’í theologian, writing from and for a religious community,” whose aim is “to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Bahá’í community, to enable Bahá’ís to understand their relatively new Faith and to see what it can offer the world”. Assertions of this kind go far beyond expressions of personal opinion, which any Bahá’í is free to voice. As illustrated, here is a claim that lies well outside the framework of Bahá’í belief and practice. Bahá’u’lláh has liberated human minds by prohibiting within His Faith any caste with ecclesiastical prerogatives that seeks to foist a self-assumed authority upon the thought and behavior of the mass of believers. Indeed, He has prescribed a system that combines democratic practices with the application of knowledge through consultative processes.”
In 1976 I wrote my medical thesis on « an introduction to the Baha’i concept of Health ». Page after page I repeated that no one at this time could fully apprehend a concept that was projected into the future and that my purpose was to help future scholars by bringing side by side Baha’i writings and the current trends in medical concepts. Under no circumstances would I have dreamt of attempting « to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas » of the Bahá’í or of the medical community, although I sincerely hope that my work has been of assistance to some people.
Galileo Galilee did _indirectly_ “criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Christian community”. I understand that he cautiously gave a version of facts that were at variance with the ideas current amongst his contemporaries, without telling the Pope that his purpose was to give a lesson to his contemporaries.
I understand this as an unfortunate mistake in essai writing from Sen, and I sincerely hope that he will be forgiven for this.
Actually Farhan, there is no explanation. You and others are of course free to imagine one or try to “read the mind” of the UHJ, as you seem to have done here.
The letter mentions “ecclesiastical prerogatives” which is downright preposterous in light of Sen’s work (if one bothers to read it). Sen can no more “hoist self-assumed authority” on other Baha’is than your essay could. All we can do is share and enter into dialogue. Am I hoisting “self-assumed authority” when I write this blog? are you when you comment?
But even if one were to assume that Sen was somehow guilty of this charge - that is, if we ignore his clear words that he is only voicing his own understanding in the VERY FIRST SENTENCE OF THE BOOK!… you are still assuming that this is the reason because the House makes no such claim nor do they say this is why they unenrolled Sen.
As well, whether you used the same words or not, your essay did in fact do all of those things - and if it didn’t, well, then it was a poor one. It is beyond ridiculous to require an academic work include repeated references of the kind you made. How many would be enough? one for every 5 pages? two per paragraph? please enlighten us!
And again, this is assuming that the UHJ did indeed unenroll Sen because of this… which we don’t know… unless you somehow have the ability to read the mind of the 9 members as a collective when they made the decision.
Oh and by the way, the elephant is restless and pooping in the corner… but I’m sure it will be alright if we just ignore it. Right?
I am truly saddened to see an otherwise intelligent person put away their God given ability and responsibility to investigate the truth by at least reading the book before jumping to such preposterous conclusions. There is no other word for this than taqlid or imitation - well, so and so says this so well, it must be this. Sad. Truly. Sad.
The letter presents the Faith in extremely bad light and as a Baha’i I lament that it was sent out in the first place because of this. It has taken a few sentences from Sen’s book out of context, and omitted his clear and unmistakable refusal to seek any such “authority” and charged Sen with the crime of wanting to become some sort of clergy within the Baha’i Faith:
Well, Sen does unequivocally say that the book or thesis is his opinion. But of course, that part is not included in the quoted text in the letter.
In my view, anyone who can not see this is either willfully ignorant or simply devoid of intellectual capacity to begin with.
Although it still does not explain why Sen was unenrolled, this book review may shed some light on the matter.
But please… PUH-LEASE… do NOT let anything I or anyone else says persuade you in any way to actually read this book. Oh no… we can’t have that. Let’s just continue to slam the book and the author without having so much as cracked the covers. That is the Baha’i way, right?
Dear Farhan:
this was not a mistake, but you have to read the whole sentence to understand it. What the UHJ quoted was only half a sentence, and gives quite the wrong impression.
Either theology is one of those sciences which begin and end in words, or it serves a purpose. If theology does serve a purpose, then you need to know what its proper purpose is: the purpose gives you a standard to say whether a particular theology is a good one or not. For instance, if the purpose of medicine is to improve the quality of human life, then a medical discovery that serves only to make the discoverer rich and famous is not good medicine - even if it meets every clinical standard and is duly footnoted and referreed etc.
Now, here’s what I really wrote in _Church and State_ pages 1 and 2:
So what I am saying is that this is a faith-based, value-orientated approach: it is theology, not the objective study of religion. That does not mean that the standards of proof are any lower. For comparison: a biologist who studies ecologies and extinction mechanisms could observe the decline and extinction of a species objectively, taking care not to interfere with the process he is studying. It would be a successful study if it yielded understanding. An ecological activist could study the same species — using exactly the same techniques, the same standards of proof — but with the purpose of saving the species. He will be delighted if the species survives: that is a value, which is not consistent with an objective, value-free approach. In the same way, I have a commitment and moral purpose in my study and, especially when writing in a university setting, the reader has a right to know what it is. That exonerates me, and my supervisor, from the accusation that we are doing theology but presenting it as the objective study of religion; it provides a standard for evaluation, and it identifies possible biases. I might for instance be overly optimistic about the future of the Bahai Faith in a postmodern society, simply because I want it to be a success.
In Church and State I defined my purposes as “to criticize, clarify, purify and strengthen the ideas of the Bahai community, to enable Bahais to understand their relatively new faith and to see what it can offer the world.” The list is not exhaustive, but I am not persuaded that it is wrong.
Theology is critical, in the sense of testing its assumptions and looking for real weaknesses, but also in the sense of seeking to enhance appreciation. Literary criticism for example is not primarily devoted to denouncing bad writing, its positive role is to help us to appreciate good writing.
Clarification follows from the systematic and critical method of theology, which exposes vague expressions used without thought about their meaning, and uncovers muddles. For instance, Bahai discourse — and my own thinking up to a certain point — have generally confused the issues of Shoghi Effendi’s not appointing a successor to the Guardianship, as required by Abdu’l-Baha’s Will and Testament, and the Guardian apparently not writing a Will as required by the Kitab-e Aqdas. The observation that these are two separate issues, because the terms of Abdu’l-Baha’s Will and Testament do not allow the appointment to be made in the Guardian’s own Will, clarifies both issues, by distinguishing things that had been confused. Similarly, Church and State addressed the Baha’i teachings concerning the House of Justice and the International Tribunal, which had been conflated in footnotes to the earliest translations of Some Answered Questions and in some influential early Baha’i books. As soon as it is noticed that two separate things are being discussed, the texts themselves become largely self-explanatory, because the apparent contradictions were due to approaching the texts with a confusion of concepts.
Purification is an aspect of theology’s self-critical method: as we study the Bahai texts in a systematic way, it becomes evident that some of what we thought were ‘Bahai teachings’ are contaminations, resulting from the adoption by Bahais, in various generations, of assumptions accepted in their various societies and political environments. It is difficult to detect and escape the gravitational pull of our philosophical, religious and cultural backgrounds, but we can try to do so by returning to the source texts in a systematic way.
Finally, theology strengthens the ideas of the religious community, first by removing muddles, and then by locating the scriptural roots of the various teachings so distinguished. But more important is the role of any open discussion: whatever is discussed remains alive and lived, while what is merely taken for granted quickly becomes a dead letter. Thus a good theology is not necessarily one that brings about a change in ideas. A theology which takes what is known and ‘makes it new’ has also strengthened the ideas of the community.
For those who want to read the whole of the Foreword and Introduction to _Church and State_, I’ve put them up as a PDF at
http://www.sonjavank.com/sen/articles.htm
It’s the second on the list, click on the blue pdf button to start it
Baquia wrote:
“Actually Farhan, there is no explanation. You and others are of course free to imagine one or try to “read the mind” of the UHJ, as you seem to have done here.”
Baquia,
I am not explaining anything, but trying to understand a situation I am starting to discover and which I deeply regret. It would be impossible to judge from a few messages the situation of Sen. I am sharing my own experiences.
Society is in a state of transition and the adaptation effort is a great strain for the majority of citizens not accustomed to intellectual exchange as we are. It takes time, patience and love to foster intellectual procedures in the masses of people. There is this French pilot who was arrested in LA for making a joke about his own shoes.
Once in a Baha’i Medical association meeting in a university, a Baha’i lady stood up and said the Baha’i view point presented by myself was “too intellectual”; the chairperson, a non-Baha’i, defended my view point. To this person, anything beyond Paris talks must have been felt “dangerous”.
Outstanding Baha’is in the 1970’s complained about me putting secular teachings side by side with Divine teachings… it took time for Copernicus, Bruno, Kepler and other heros to introduce their ideas into society; why should we expect humanity to accept these things in a flash? Is our generation more advanced in adaptation talents than those generations? Are we to reject those who are unable to adapt in an instant? The implementation of the Institute Process is a typical adaptation crisis for us, in terms that Alvin Toffler coined as the “future shock”.
Baha’u'llah Himself insists that revelation, like the sun, rises progressively, allowing all things to adapt to it’s light. He even destroyed many tablets for which the world was not ready. There are so many verities that cannot be unveiled until the time is ripe. I know of a historian who prepared a dissertation, only to realise that it’s untimely publication would become a source of persecution for many Baha’is.
I cannot say why the UHJ took this precaution, and this in no way means that Sen’s book is banned ; I will gladly study it, but I have no doubt whatsoever that the move of the UHJ must have been a painfull decision to them and only taken in the loving interests of humanity.
Transformation of humanity it is a long, slow process: may God protect us from slipping during tests. Abdu’l-baha said his knees trembled when He thought of the tests of God. My loving compassion goes to all those who slip and fall.
I cannot say why the UHJ took this precaution, and this in no way means that Sen’s book is banned ;
——————–
Well I can. What religious authority in history has ever appreciated followers that think for themselves? (well maybe with the exception of Abdul-Baha encouraging the clash of opinions). Independent thinkers don’t follow with closed mouths and dropped heads. Indpendent thinkers question things like “what does infallibility mean?”, “were women really banned from the UHJ?”, “why are UHJ members consistantly elected from the teaching center?”, etc. etc. The Pope, the UHJ, the mullahs- it’s all the same.
This doesn’t make any sense. No what told Sen what to think, just that his conclusions and statements are incompatible with membership in the Baha’i community, moreover, when he begins telling others that these views are sound, cited and proven then it becomes a point of disagreement and dis-unity as opposed to faithful attitude untainted by contemporary political outlook–which is ultimately irreligious in nature.
P wrote:
“What religious authority in history has ever appreciated followers that think for themselves? (well maybe with the exception of Abdul-Baha encouraging the clash of opinions). Independent thinkers don’t follow with closed mouths and dropped heads.”
P, there moderation, a time and a place for everything.
We can at the same time encourage free thought, AND encourage obedience.
A musicians can practice freely for hours, AND closely follow the maestro when he is in the orchestra;
You can kick around the ball as you wish, feely on your own, AND stay in your position AND obey the referee when you are playing in a match.
No one forbids you to empty your bladder, you are free and even encouraged to do so, AND there is a right time, method and place for doing it when you are in a society. They fined this guy for fouling the side walk in Paris and he complained that even dogs had more liberty than he did.
Individual enterprise is encouraged in the Faith, AND if we wish to live and work with others, there are times when we have to follow rules for harmonising our collective enterprises.
Read the compilation “Unlocking the Power of Action” posted on this site. I can provide further illustrations if needed.
AMAN, you are a piece of work, brother! Have you ACTUALLY EVER READ Sen’s book yet before running off your Baha’i rote indoctrinated group think mouth? It is a plain, straight forward, very academic study. Read it and think about what Sen says. It is not any kind of revolutionary 300+ page tract AT ALL! No need to burn Sen at the stake yet as a threat to your mental “World Order”! As I told him, all his exhaustive research and quite excellent chapters on ideas of civil governance within Islamic history is wonderful. The spectacular failure of the Baha’i Faith in it’s current free fall is actually small potatoes. I served it for 32 straight years of total dedication in the hope that it would hit it’s stride, but now I have to face the horrible reality that the religion is hopelessly dysfunctional on every spiritual and human level and will never find it’s way unless there is courageous spiritual revolution from the bottom to the top.
If he took all the issues regarding the Baha’i Faith completely out of the book and expanded the analysis of various ideas on civil governance within the various thought systems within Islam and the actual reality of the history of civil governance within Islam over 14 centuries he would have a WORLDWIDE BEST SELLER. The world right now is VERY INTERESTED in the actual world historical track record of these Islamic “ideas” in the current hapless age of deluded group think imitation suicide bombers and the slow burning fuse of World War III on the front page of every newspaper and Internet news portal and news blog out there with the ongoing Iraq War and the looming ideological confrontation with Iran.
Sen should take the material about the Baha’i Faith out of the book, expand the rest, and he would find a public that would, unlike the FEARFUL and TREMBLING lifetime incumbent brain trust running the Baha’i Faith, find his effort very useful to understanding the history of the ideas now in play in the greater world in many countries.
Sen’s chapters on this fascinating history (just like everybody else in the history of “organized religion” whatever the stripe Islamic societies very rarely practiced what they preached either!) don’t even mention the Baha’i Faith for a hundred pages! This material was very interesting to me. But current “Ruhi Baha’is”, even members of the UHJ, I am sure to a man do NOT read ANY books any more within the air tight cult bubble of the Baha’i Faith. If you read a book, you are (gasp) the enemy of God in the NEWTHINK Baha’i Faith. If you read non-pre-approved and non-pre-sanctioned books you just might NOT be keeping a “faithful attitude untainted by contemporary political outlook–which is ultimately irreligious in nature.”
But keep writing your apoligist diatribes for posterity up here for the historical record as you send us all to the re-education camp to start YEAR ZERO in your mind! Marching everyone into the jungle to the re-education camps and starting YEAR ZERO to “re-create society” is the final brain chemistry of organized ideologies. Such thinking was Big Time in the 20th Century. It is all SO OVER now! Your mentality is on it’s way out among mankind. And the current version of the Baha’i Faith with it.
So it goes.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=sO8GhA8OdyQ
Craig wrote:
“But keep writing your apologist diatribes for posterity up here for the historical record as you send us all to the re-education camp to start YEAR ZERO in your mind!”
“Apologist diatribes? What apologist diatribes?” (Alfred B. [Baha’i] Neuman)
Here we go again Craig…
“I served it for 32 straight years of total dedication in the hope that it would hit it’s stride, but now I have to face the horrible reality that the religion is hopelessly dysfunctional on every spiritual and human level and will never find it’s way unless there is courageous spiritual revolution from the bottom to the top.”
From the bottom to the top…Exactly. That is the whole point of engaging the individual…Its clear that you havn’t done any of the Ruhi books, if you did any, it didn’t strike any spiritual chords. The bitterness and animosity you cling to is a testament not to the Baha’i Faith, but to your dysfunctional soul. Trying to institutionalize spiritual growth is no easy task and paranoiacs like you only see conspiracy. I feel liberated, free and moreover encouraged when I think about the initiative being advised by the Insitituions. You are the one that is way off base. You have no clue and like an untrained musician keep banging on the same chords in hoping of making music. Aint going to happen. The Baha’i Faith is reconsolidating and organizing its efforts, united and motivated to move forward and engage society on every level. 32 years in the history of a religion with only 160+ years is chicken scratch. By your unceasing critism, endless slander and misscharacterization you only toot your own horn.
You seriously lack perspective and context.
“To institutionalize spiritual inspiration is to deaden it.” (Marla Brettschneider)
Only if it forced and imposed. Only an individual can move closer to God. Ruhi is a small tool. No where has the UHJ made it obligatory or required…
Come now, get out of the cave and wake up.
This Marla Brettschneider is a part of the The Nehirim spiritual retreat. Which on the website states is a “soulful, heartful gathering where you can connect with your community, relax and refresh, and explore your spiritual path, forming connections that last a lifetime.”
Giving a venue toward spiritual growth and a means and method….hmmm…what is she talking about?
You amaze me.
Not anymore. Anyone read what the UHJ sent New Zealand? Just got this from a friend of mine…
“We are impelled to call upon all members of your Baha’i community to put aside any other concerns and join together in a united endeavour to pursue the objectives of the 5 year plan with the aim of increasing the number of intensive programmes of growth in New Zealand. With the guidance of your National Spiritual Assembly, reinforced by the Counsellors and Auxiliary Board members, a mighty effort must be made to ensure that the dear friends in New Zealand fulfil their commitment in this regard…”
So it is forced and imposed, and the UHJ has pretty much made it obligatory. Remember what I said about the pressure to do all this is unrelenting, and you didn’t believe me? Well, sounds like its going to get worse for Baha’is in New Zealand. Apparently enrolments in New Zealand are one third to one tenth of what they were in the 80s and early 90s.
Anonnymouz, it is obvious that you have not read Sen’s book nor anything he has written because of the statements you made. Fine, but it is slander (”the tongue is a smouldering fire,”) when you go around claiming he said things, he did not.
Some evidence please, written by Sen himself, or apologize for mistakingly attributing the above garbage to something associated with Sen. So when did Sen start telling others how to think?
You may naively think anyone (I am speaking of myself here, not Sen) who aims to be politically aware is concerned with things
but I assure you, I don’t think I’m the only follower of Baha’u'llah to be interested the world around me
Bahá’u'lláh, Gleanings
If I remember correctly, Anon mentioned that he had ordered the book from Kalimat and was going to read it before commenting further. Seems logical to me. I’m sure he/she is still awaiting the arrival of the book.
Indeed.
AMAN,
You are not reading my posts or you have not been through the archives here. I faithfully took Ruhi Book One on weekends over a six week period in early 2004. Amid all the controversy, I felt it was wrong to ever make a comment about Ruhi until I actually took a course. Up until then I never said a thing about it in any discussion or on-line because I had never taken any of it or knew anything about it. I tried to keep an open mind.
I have been through a lot in my life, and I can honestly say it was one of the worst spiritual experiences of my life. I was just amazed over those six weeks. It was far, far worse than I could have ever felt imaginable. Right out of Chinese Communist Indoctrination under the worst mindset of Chairman Mao on LSD. Right out of the North Korean Communist Party. Right up there with Golden Eagle Party Badges under the Third Reich direct from the Fuhrer system right out of Central Casting.
The night of the first experience I had to directly drive 60 miles to help my elderly Mother with something she needed to do in the town where she lives. I had to stop to get something to eat. I went through a fast food place and sat in my car in the parking lot and read ahead in Ruhi Book One.
I am a grown man, but tears rolled down my cheeks as I read page after page for the next sessions. These people had utterly destroyed the Baha’i Faith. But I went back and faithfully completely the whole six weeks shaking inside. When it was finally over I knew that this was the end of the road for me. I had taught the Faith to hundreds and probably even thousands of people over 30 years. But I knew I would never bring another human soul into such a brutal system of coercive group think.
I am a rational person. I fully recognize that in some places it could be done without iron fisted gloves like the wonderful Deepenings we had with the Daniel Jordan material back in the 70’s and 80’s where people could talk about their spiritual insights from their own life journey. People really enjoyed that kind of discussion back then.
But when any of that started in these sessions it was quickly cut off. We had to stick to the lesson frames and get through the rote exercises. No talking or discussion as is clearly set forth in the NOTES TO THE COLLABORATORS in Book One. After completing it I then had to go through trying to be recruited into the next book to become a Tutor of this material myself. Getting out of that hook was as intense as getting out of someone trying to get you to sell Amway. That happened to me once where I had to go talk to someone’s “Director” to not have to sign up for Amyway! The guy let me escape as somehoe being “ideologically” untainted by slacker American society because I was, afterall, ALSO an entrepreneur like him and had another business going on the side! Yay! He let me go from the predatory gun sight. It was exactly the same trying to escape the organizational need by someone to recruit me into the new “Amway Faith”! Is this happening all across society now in everything? That everyone is in some kind of badly written “pod movie”?
Both you and Farhan say there is no coercian in these matters. Have you read the historical account in the archives here of the UHJ’s Orwellian reaction to the US NSA Ridvan 2007 Convention Report that asked for reconsideration on the high handed methods. Read it. Read the words. How can you not say that issues about orgnaizational coercian are being raised by many people. Over 2400 people have formally left the Faith in the U.S. since 2001. Many of these were long time serving Baha’is.
I am sure the New Zealand letter just mentioned will be in a similiar vein. “Get with the program…or else.”
The Party has spoken. “Long Live Big Brother”. It has all been done before with much better fitting uniforms.
So write was you want to say about me in your psychoanalysis of me. I don’t care. But I did take Ruhi Book One. I have witnesses.
You write:
“You have no clue and like an untrained musician keep banging on the same chords in hoping of making music. Aint going to happen.”
Bad anology on me, my friend. I used to play rock and roll. I never got to this level but I could have played the bass line. But then again, I’d have to get some Viagra if I was dating Jennifer Aniston. More power to a young man in his prime.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4m0UnlrEI9Y
You and everyone else on this top down manufactured trip can smoke your books every day. For me it’s just a simple daily endeavor of my prayer to the Cosmos to just “Keep me where the light is.”
I did like these guys a lot too at Live Earth.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FOkEH3Dc50c
They used that Classic Rock 101 garage band basic drop down chord slur quite nicely! Artistry!
Do you think the BAO will ever get it together to that level?
I’m not aware of this and I live in New Zealand. I’d prefer to see the evidence. If you want to cite evidence of a quantitative decline in Baha’i identity in NZ, then the census figures are the place to look.
Please note that these figures do not necessarily show a decline in recruitment, or even a decline in membership.
Hi Steve,
My friend has been tracking enrolments reported in the NZ national newsletter since the 90s. Don’t know whether you keep all your newsletters.
Those census statistics are very interesting. Has anyone compiled data on Baha’i demographics from other countries?
Grover quoted the UHJ:
“…We are impelled to call upon all members of your Baha’i community…”
Grover,
since when “calling upon” is the same as “imposing”? Have a good look at the quotes baquia has kindly placed on this blog concerning Ruhi misconceptions, and you will notice that we are invited, advised, urged, encouraged, but by no means obliged to do Ruhi and in no way required to abandon what we were doing before.
In fact the UHJ points out that those who have done and those who have not done Ruhi should feel no demarcation between themselves.
However, some zealots did try to impose Ruhi on all, but this behaviour been clearly rejected by the UHJ.
When we read the terms in which SE called upon the Baha’i world to go pioneering in 1952, the terms are far more impelling, and some thousands did arise to pioneer, but those staying home were in no way declared as disobedient Baha’is!
This reminds me of Harlan Hober, the very active travel teacher, who Abdu’l-Baha advised to go to India. Hober did not fancy this move at that time and Abdu’l-Baha must have noticed, so a few days later He told Hober to go to the US. Surprised, Hober said that he thought he was going to India, to which Abdu’l-Baha replied: yes, so did Christopher Columbus.
Lol Farhan, how else can you interpret this?
impelled to call upon = forced to action
put aside any other concerns = forget about anything else
pursue the objectives of the 5 year plan = ruhi, children’s classes, devotional meetings
mighty effort must be made to ENSURE that the dear friends in New Zealand FULFIL their COMMITMENT = you must do this, bring out the thumb screws, lit splints, the rack, and force the buggers to do our will.
If your friend is looking for somwhere to publish his or her figures, I’d be delighted to do so. No, I don’t keep my newsletters. If I had, the enrolment trends would already be published.
It’s a bit of a struggle to find census data on minor religions without having to pay for the information. Generally, any religion that attracts under .1% of the population is lumped together with other minor faiths in broad categories such as “other-Christian” and “other-non-Christian”, in the summaries that are available for free download. Here’s an example - 20680-Religious Affiliation by Age - Time Series Statistics (1996, 2001, 2006 Census Years) - Australia.
I was quite lucky to get the NZ data.
Craig, It does sound as if you had a strange experience. I only wen’t through book one too and it was very light and fun. We had all the time time we wanted to talk about things and go off on tangents. It took us 6 months because we only did it once a week and were at a friends house for a couples hours. The facts are clear, the majority of people see through the surface purpose of Ruhi and a few on the fringe who have distorted perceptions and whimsical interpretations of how things should be done. Its too bad you didn’t stick to the sequence. The whole point is to have those who go through the training, at least be familiar with the basics, and then act. Go on service projects, devotions.
It is truly amazing to me that you fail to see the light in this method. And I see now why that is. You call everything top down, communist, uniformed, rote, etc etc. Now I know, and the majority of people know that this is simply not true. However, the one institution that is like this, and one that I am sure you have had much experience in, is the US military. That my friend is brainwashing. The Marines are the worst affected by this savage mission. You cannot tell me they do not train you and pound into your sub-conscious how to be a killer. How does it go? “Marine first…”
My observation here about how you have mistakenly transferred your sub-surface animosity toward such methods toward a spiritual endeavor has clearly proved fatal. It is you who feel this way and I assure you Ruhi is not the cause of widespread leave takers. Its from the UHJ, the Institution appointed by Baha’u'llah.
When I say you lack perspective you clearly have not thought about all the consultation, mediation, opinions, drafts, advice, dissension, debate or discourse that must have taken place before Ruhi was rolled out. Don’t you think they knew the consequences and moreover, the benefits before doing it? Of course some people would kick and scream because they thought they knew how to do this or that. Ruhi is a simply tool toward a huge endeavor and if you would have stuck around, you might have saw the purpose and maybe even one of the books entitled “Arising to Serve”, that “Serve” part doesn’t mean being a lacky. It means getting out into the bush with the locals and keeping a smile on your face and in your soul.
Grover wrote:
“Lol Farhan, how else can you interpret this?
impelled to call upon = forced to action”
My dear Grover, Freud would say you read what you wish to understand. A Freudian slip in your reading:
The UHJ said :
“We are impelled to call upon all members of your Baha’i community…”
They feel that THEY are impelled (by God, by their concience… )
To CALL upon us .
They do not say they are called upon to impell us, do they?
warmest
Farhan
Comic relief (courtesy of Bahais Online):
“We are not like the Catholics or any other faith that says ‘this is it, you have to follow this or you are out of our church,’” Huber said. “It’s nothing like that at all.”
http://www.northjersey.com/news/Gathering_of_faithful_will_honor_founder.html
No, nothing like that at all!!!
“What, me Ruhi?” (Alfred B. Neuman)