He drew a circle that shut me out,
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win,
We drew a circle that took him in.

Keep up your good work,
Robert

“You’ll recall that the U.S. was ‘dragged’ into WWII with the attack on Pearl Harbor. Our boys were sleeping off Saturday night while the enemy schemed — but America soon woke up. So when you see the U.S. in Cambodia or in Vietnam — or when you see America’s young men in Lebanon, or knocking around in the Balkans — ‘please, will you be quiet and let God do His work!’”

- Glenford Mitchell

Member of the Universal House of Justice

“We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our
individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha’i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to ‘taking partners with God’ which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith.”

- Douglas Martin

Former Member of the Universal House of Justice

I have been a dedicated card carrying Baha’i for 36 years and I
know that whatever the individual members of the Universal House
of Justice say has great weight AMONG ALL MANKIND. In fact many
current members of the rank and file hold that what any member of
the Universal House of Justice thinks, believes, or feels is the
actual Voice of God on Earth.

Even though the Central Figures of the Faith all taught the importance of World Peace and the terrible human tragedy and monumental catastrophic sadness of war for both individuals and nations as well as the sanctity of the individual human conscience (Shoghi Effendi even said that members of the Universal House of Justice THEMSELVES should actually use their own individual conscience to make decisions for the Faith!!!), I would not want to suggest anything counter to what Glenford Mitchell or Douglas Martin said to large Baha’i audiences and risk being branded an “apostate” Baha’i as I am currently very much a Baha’i in good standing.

But for the hope of World Peace in accordance with what I feel
Baha’u'llah and Abdu’l-Baha actually taught and in accordance with
my own individual conscience even though this is now deemed
“taking partners with God” I am asking here on the PUBLIC INTERNET WORLDWIDE for the Universal House of Justice of the Baha’i Faith and the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the United States to support this important legislation now proposed in the Congress of the United States. Our Institutions MUST ACT and make a spiritual and moral statement for posterity even though it is
against the current version of our Teachings.

Further, even though we are not to participate in political issues
(unless it involves the civil rights of Iranian Baha’is) I ask
that we as a worldwide community VIGOROUSLY SUPPORT this proposed very strong legislation even if it is vetoed by President Bush.

Sometimes one has to make a stand on spiritual and moral principle
even though some Baha’is might deem it “political”.

PLEASE SUPPORT THIS POLITICAL LEGISLATION EVEN THOUGH USING YOUR OWN CONSCIENCE IS A VIOLATION OF THE CURRENT TEACHINGS OF THE BAHA’I FAITH AS STATED BY MEMBERS OF THE UHJ. PLEASE. FOR THE SAKE OF HUMANITY IN THESE TROUBLED TIMES - WE MUST ACT.

http://tinyurl.com/yv8hcw

And who, pray tell, defines what constitutes “truth seeking”? Those who accuse dissidents of suffering from “ressentiment”? When the well has already been poisoned by years of adversarial propaganda (much of it inflammatory and grossly inaccurate) by those who claim sole ownership of its contents, it takes more than good intentions left over from paving the road to Hell.

“It is my observation that argument, debate, and contention come from traditions, systems, or cultures where the intended result is that there is a clear winner or loser and therefore a division of the community in which the argument, debate or contention occurred.”

I think your observation is biased in favor of a religious culture of control and intimidation in which public dissidence is strongly disapproved of, not to mention caricatured, derided, and ridiculed.

“What I also observe is that often when persons engage in a discussion and do not find immediate agreement that there is a tendency to begin a process of assumption about the other person, accusation, and dismissal, that can eventually lead to provocation, insult, and violence (whether verbal or physical).”

Indeed: witness the the latest article to come out in “Religion,” writren by Moojan Momen, called “Marginality and Apostasy in the Baha’i Community.” I can’t think of a better example than this of assumption, accusation, and dismissal.

“I perceive this current state, which I concede may be accurate in some jurisdictions, as a stage of adjustment between cultures of conflict and the emergence of a culture of true unity where the ideals of adversarial systems which seek to use conflict to bring about truth and the ideals of the Bahai Faith for unity can both be realized.”

I don’t think this will fly. The Baha’i Faith has been in existence for almost 150 years. Unlike Christianity or Islam, it developed in the industrial age and has matured (as much as it ever will, I suspect) in the information age. When Baha’i dissidents present knowledge and insights in support of their positions, they’re simply dismissed as malcontents who suffer from “ressentiment.” This is like trying to lock the barn door after the horse has bolted.

“I really do think that we as a world community are really still learning how to achieve true unity.”

I would like to believe this is true. I really would. But it seems to me that when presented with every opportunity to acquire new insights and alter their perceptions, the upholders of Baha’i orthodoxy consistently express a shared intransigence and distrust of dissidence and modernity. This does not bode well for the development of a mature religious faith, and virtually ensures that the Baha’i religion will remain a marginal phenomenon, limited to a relatively small cadre of devout adherents who are unable to accept the evolving social environment or culture. In other words: at best, a sect; at worst, a cult.

I am not sure what you mean by “Sincere Friend and I are definately not in the same Bahai cult” but the Spirit of Bah ullah is greater than any difference that may exist and when we keep that foremost in mind we will undoubtedly all attain to the city of Unity.

Sincere Friend and I are definately not in the same Bahai cult but we just as assuredly agree that consultation will bring about peace and unity.

Robert Clifton

It has been my experience that consultation, when undertaken in a spirit of loving kindness, truth seeking and service does produce true unity.

For consultation to be successful this spirit must first be present, and that is why prayer is such an important part of the consultative process.

When differences of opinion that are divisive arise then they must be resolved in this same spirit or by further discussion to remove misunderstandings.

It is my observation that argument, debate, and contention come from traditions, systems, or cultures where the intended result is that there is a clear winner or loser and therefore a division of the community in which the argument, debate or contention occurred. This produces the unsavory effect of simmering resentments and undercurrents of hatred for particular personalities or entities as a result of the pain of defeat suffered by the particular egos who lost the argument, debate, or contention.

It is true, as you so rightly quote Abdul Baha as saying “The shining spark of truth comes forth only from the clash of differing opinions.”,
but then what? How is unity then achieved?

What I also observe is that often when persons engage in a discussion and do not find immediate agreement that there is a tendency to begin a process of assumption about the other person, accusation, and dismissal, that can eventually lead to provocation, insult, and violence (whether verbal or physical). This obviously is not the way of unity.

I think the comment you make about the facade of unity and the conformity of automatons is a perception that implies dissatisfaction with what seems to be the current state of the Bahai community. I perceive this current state, which I concede may be accurate in some jurisdictions, as a stage of adjustment between cultures of conflict and the emergence of a culture of true unity where the ideals of adversarial systems which seek to use conflict to bring about truth and the ideals of the Bahai Faith for unity can both be realized.

I really do think that we as a world community are really still learning how to achieve true unity, and that when we do, under the guidance of Baha u llahs teachings and His Covenant and whatever relevant science can be applied, that it will fulfill both the desire of those like you who seek for individuality and explicit truth such as the better parts of the traditional adversarial cultures have provided, and those who are seeking to achieve the practical institutional goals of true unity in diversity.

In the spirit of loving kindness,
Sincerely

“The essence of our Faith is Unity. Consultation is the process whereby unity is achieved. Argument, debate, contention, all seek to defeat, divide and conquer. That is not the way of unity, nor of consultation.”

Uniformity of organization under the banner of visible unity is merely a façade of unity. It is a uniformity of automatons.

The belief that argument, debate, and contention all seek to divide and conquer is convenient to those who have found it to be convenient. That does not, however, make it true. Far from it.

`Abdu’l-Bahá writes:

“The shining spark of truth comes forth only from the clash of differing opinions.”

I’m certain Sincere Friend will find a way to explain away the words of `Abdu’l-Bahá. Nothing I haven’t read before, of course.