Hi, Andrew.

You are SO right about other Baha’i traditions having a different stance on homosexuality. I fall into the habit of using the term “Baha’i Faith” to refer to the Haifan bunch, and that is really not accurate or fair of me. Thanks for pointing that out- it’s an important point.

Are you still working on your blog for Naw Ruz? I’m looking forward to it.

godlessly, Amanda

I know of at least two (structurally and theologically) different Baha’i communities (Covenant-Breaker Alert! Not In Communion With Rome! Er, I mean Haifa!) that welcome homosexual singles and couples as members. If one believes that “the Baha’i Faith” is synonymous with “acceptance of the authority of the UHJ in Haifa” then no, the Baha’i Faith isn’t gay-friendly. Quite the contrary, as many gay Baha’is can attest to.

Fortunately, since I’m darkly swimming in such spiritual darkness (swimmingly, I might add) that I think such a notion is nothing less than ludicrous — “unity” used as a spiritual shibboleth, so to speak — I can assure gay Baha’is that there are, indeed, Baha’i-identified communities where they will be welcomed, and where they will not be repeatedly lectured, regaled, insulted, ridiculed, admonished or harangued. Neither of these “denominations” can boast of having “millions” of members, or that one day there will be more of them than there are Christians or Muslims (they’re small communities, but they’re not completely delusional). But they do exist, and they seem to reflect many of the demographic, socio-economic and cultural characteristics of “emerging” faith communities. If you read Gretta Vosper’s book (”With or Without God”), this will give you some idea of what I’m referring to.

It goes without saying that the Haifan UHJ will no more “recognize” the Baha’i religious identification of these emergent neo-Baha’i communities than the Magisterium of the Catholic Church will ever “recognize” the Catholicity of non-Roman communions. But that’s irrelevant. We live in a very fertile time for new and emerging religious movements, and the horse left the barn long ago. I suspect such communities will continue to grow (albeit slowly) and evolve, the usual tired and predictable tirades to the contrary.

So Amanda — keep up the good work! I’m an atheist, too! God bless!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PxAER3cBMs

I’m an atheist, myself, but…
“Yes, Virginia, gay-friendly religions DO exist.” The Baha’i Faith just isn’t one of them.

See:

http://www.progressivechristianity.ca/ccpc/index.php

“Many have used passages within the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] to warn members that to venture beyond its teachings is a treacherous thing. Often, in the more conservative corners of Christianity [the Baha’i Faith], the young are taught to disparage higher education lest it lead one straight into the arms of the devil [spiritual isolation]. Those who venture from the faith [Baha’i Faith], in some instances, experience what is called disfellowshipping, a practice used by Jehovah’s Witnesses [Baha’is] to shun individuals who have rejected some or all of the doctrinal beliefs of their communities.

“If you are going to move forward though, you need to have an open mind, a mind that might end up in the evening with different stuff in it than was there when it awoke in the morning … It will allow that our perspective can’t have, nor provide, all the answers. An open mind will be eager to be understood to the point of being challenged. It is non-defensive and able to suspend judgment, holding ideas tentatively as they are assessed. It will be comfortable with complexity and ambiguity, not needing to have all the answers all at once. Ideas that have been offered to you are just that, ideas. They are malleable. They can be shifted around, stewed over, seen from different angles. They are mere food for thought. Your own thought. The church [UHJ] has worked very hard to hold on to their responsibility to do that for you. Take it back.

“We believe that the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] is a human construction, and it is, therefore, full of both human promise and human error. We believe that no humanly constructed book can be the authoritative word of God and that we, who recognize this, are responsible to challenge such claims and behaviour that suggests such claims, particularly where we find it in our own tradition … We believe that much of what is described in the Bible as the activity of God is destructive of relationship and equality, that it is tribal and divisive, that, despite the best attempts that the authors were making to describe their experience of the divine, they have created a legacy of judgment, horror, and despair, and we no longer choose to burden ourselves with that legacy. We believe it is wrong to call such words holy or sacred.

“Believing as I do that all religious, philosophical, and ideological understandings must be challenged by their adherents so that we might all move into a place where foundational beliefs are shared and held in common, reviewed and revised as necessary, challenged and changed when appropriate, I extend the confrontation that is this book. May it irritate us all into the growth we so disturbingly need.”

I love this book and humbly seek its guidance because every word, letter and silence from it is impregnated with God’s own love for humanity.

!!!!!
!enjoy!
!!!!!

Yep. Unfortunately it’s the truth for any fundamentalist religion. Stay in the closet and we’ll accept you fully. Just don’t dare peak out of that closet or else!