Fundamental Verities

12 November 1996 

Dear Bahá'í Friend,

With regard to your email of 8 August 1996, we have been asked to say that it is true that Shoghi Effendi considered that his letter to the Bahá'ís of the West dated 8 February 1934 outlined certain fundamental verities of the Faith, and, therefore, it should be given primary importance in the systematic study of the Cause. However, as you further observe, the term is used in a variety of contexts, since it also refers generally to the basic beliefs, teachings, laws and principles of the Faith. Three such instances help illustrate the range of referents to which the Guardian was wont to apply the term. First, he wrote in a letter to the All-America International Teaching Conference which gathered in 1953 that the House of Worship is, "dedicated to the three fundamental verities animating and underlying the Bahá'í Faith -- the Unity of God, the Unity of His Prophets, the Unity of mankind". Elsewhere, he emphasized that

“The education of the members of the community in the principles and essential verities underlying the Covenants of Bahá'u'lláh and of ‘Abdu'l-Bahá as well as the Administrative Order of the Faith -- the twin pillars sustaining the spiritual life and the institutions of every organized Bahá'í community -- must, at all costs, be vigorously pursued and systematically intensified.”

And in still another letter, the following clarification is offered on behalf of Shoghi Effendi:

“By ‘verities of the Faith’ he means the great teachings and fundamentals enshrined in our Bahá'í literature; these we can find by reading the books, studying under Bahá'í scholars at summer schools and in classes, and through the aid of study outlines.”

Moreover, the term fundamental verities was often used in the correspondence of the Guardian when introducing the basic aspects of the Faith in which all of the believers should be deepened and grounded, as for example:

Authenticity of the words of Abdu'l-Bahá as recorded in collections such as ‘Paris Talks’, ‘Abdu'l-Bahá in London’, and ‘The Promulgation of Universal Peace’; Correspondence from the World Center signed on behalf of the Secretariat; Materials prepared by the Research Department

22 October 1996

Your email message of 2 October 1996 has been received by the Universal House of Justice, and we have been asked to convey the following information in reply to your questions regarding the authenticity of certain texts and documents.

In response to your first question regarding the authenticity of the words of Abdu'l-Bahá as recorded in collections such as "Paris Talks", "’Abdu'l-Bahá in London", and "The Promulgation of Universal Peace", we enclose a memorandum from the Research Department at the Bahá'í World Centre which specifically addresses this issue.

Also enclosed is a memorandum prepared by the Research Department at the request of the House of Justice on the subject of the authenticity of letters written by the Secretariat, on his behalf, which we believe answers the first part of your second question.

As to whether there is a distinction between correspondence from the World Centre that has been signed "The Universal House of Justice" and that signed on behalf of the Secretariat: In brief, the manner in which each of these letters is prepared depends upon the contents of the letter. Drafts of letters which contain newly formulated policies are consulted upon and approved during a meeting of the House of Justice; correspondence dealing with previously enunciated policies, or with matters of a routine nature, are prepared, as delegated by the House of Justice, by its Secretariat and initialed by at least the majority of the members of the House of Justice before being dispatched. All letters written over the signature of the Department of the Secretariat are authorized by the Universal House of Justice.

Electioneering

18 August 1996

Dear Bahá’í Friend,

The Universal House of Justice has received your fax letter of 2 May 1996, and appreciates your clearly heartfelt concern that reports of Assemblies should be presented in ways which are in accordance with Bahá’í standards of propriety and that any suggestion of electioneering be avoided. It has asked us to send you the following reply.

Electioneering is a practice foreign to the spirit of Bahá’í administration. However, it is necessary to distinguish between electioneering and those activities which should be entirely natural and normal in Bahá’í communities. Bahá’ís travel and teach the Faith, they go pioneering, they represent the Faith in relation to non-Bahá’í agencies, they serve in positions of responsibility. There is no reason why such services should be carried on anonymously. Bahá’í voters have to acquire the maturity to estimate the character and true capacities of their fellow-believers, to be able to distinguish between a person who is self-sacrificingly serving the Cause with all due modesty, and one whose activities are carried out with the primary purpose of bringing himself or herself to the attention of the friends.

Bahá’ís, nevertheless, are subject to all the pressures and standards of the prevalent culture of the society in which they live, and can only too easily be unconsciously influenced in their behavior by the accepted norms of that culture. One of our challenging tasks as Bahá’ís, however, is to establish, through our personal conduct and through the pattern of life in our communities and institutions, those cultural standards which Bahá’u’lláh wishes us to uphold. In a description of the characteristics of those who are called upon to serve in Bahá’í administrative institutions, Shoghi Effendi says:

Criticism

July 2, 1996 

Dear Baha'i Friend,

The Universal House of Justice has received your letter of May 19, 1996. It appreciates the clarity with which you have expressed your profoundly felt concern, and has asked us to send you the following reply.

The purpose of this letter is not to enter into a detailed examination of the activities and statements of the friends to whom you refer, or to discuss the responses they have received over the years from institutions of the Faith. Rather, the House of Justice wishes to relate this situation to certain aspects of Baha'i belief, in the hope that thereby it may enable you to find answers to some of the questions which preoccupy your mind.

At the very core of the aims of the Faith are the establishment of justice and unity in the world, the removal of prejudice and enmity from among all people, the awakening of compassion and understanding in the hearts of all men and women, and the raising of all souls to a new level of spirituality and behavior through the vitalizing influence of divine Revelation. The course set forth by Baha’u’llah for the attainment of these aims is the double task of simultaneously building an ideal society and perfecting the behavior of individuals. For this dual and reciprocal transformation He has not only revealed laws, principles and truths attuned to the needs of this age, but has established the very nucleus and patter of those institutions which are to evolve into the structure of the divinely purposed world society.

Central to your perception of the statements made by the believers about whom you are concerned are their assertions that they are entirely obedient to the spirit of the Covenant and the institutions of the Faith; that they are merely voicing their disagreement with certain decisions and policies made by these institutions; are protesting against what they perceive to be unjust or improper actions by some people who occupy prominent administrative positions; and are suggesting modifications to Baha'i procedures to prevent such perceived abuses of authority. These assertions, however, overlook certain important Baha'i principles which provide the methods and channels for the voicing of such grievances or disagreements, and which are designed to lead to resolution of problems while preserving the unity of the community.

Infallibility, Omniscience, and the Decision-making Role of the Universal House of Justice

14 June 1996 

Your email message … has been received, and the Universal House of Justice has asked us to reply as follows to the questions perplexing you regarding the House of Justice.…

Your first question stems from a statement made by an individual on an Internet Bahá’í discussion group which asserts that “Shoghi Effendi has allowed for the Universal House of Justice reaching a wrong decision.” In describing the House of Justice, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá states clearly,

“Whatever will be its decision, by majority vote, shall be the real truth, inasmuch as that House is under the protection, unerring guidance and care of the one true Lord. He shall guard it from error and will protect it under the wing of His sanctity and infallibility. He who opposes it is cast out and will eventually be of the defeated.”

It is the exclusive sphere of the Universal House of Justice to “pronounce upon and deliver the final judgment on such laws and ordinances as Bahá’u’lláh has not expressly revealed.” It carries responsibility for the application of the revealed Word, the protection of the Faith, as well as the duty “to ensure the continuity of that divinely-appointed authority which flows from the Source of our Faith, to safeguard the unity of its followers and to maintain the integrity and flexibility of its teachings.” However, the Universal House of Justice is not omniscient, and the friends should understand that there is a difference between infallibility and omniscience. Like the Guardian, the House of Justice wants to be provided with facts when called upon to render a decision, and like him it may well change its decision when new facts emerge, or in light of changed conditions at some point in the future. We have found nothing in the writings of Shoghi Effendi which suggests that the House of Justice would on any occasion reach a “wrong decision.”

Regarding membership on the Universal House of Justice being restricted to men, you are correct in your understanding that Bahá’u’lláh was explicit about the matter, and consequently it is not within the power of the House of Justice to rule otherwise at this time or at any time in the future. As to the additional information on this matter which “has limited distribution” mentioned in the statement posted on the discussion group, it is unclear what this statement is referring to. In 1988, the attention of the House of Justice was drawn by the National Spiritual Assembly of New Zealand to an unpublished paper which was being widely circulated on this subject; the comments of the House of Justice on the subject were conveyed in a letter to the National Assembly of New Zealand, a copy of which is enclosed for your reference.

We hope the above comments are helpful in relieving any confusion you may have felt related to these matters. You are assured of the loving prayers of the House of Justice at the Sacred Threshold, that the Blessed Beauty may guide and confirm all of your efforts on behalf of His Cause.

Department of the Secretariat

(Baha’i Library Online)

Compilation of Extracts Regarding Arius

9 June 1996 

Dear Baha’i Friend,

Your email message of 15 May 1996, regarding the station of Arius, was received at the Baha’i World Centre and referred to the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice for further study. That Department has now completed its work, and we enclose a copy of the memorandum it produced, with three attachments, in response to your queries. We hope that this information will be of assistance to you.

With loving Baha’i greetings,

Department of the Secretariat

Enclosure with three attachments

(Baha’i Library Online)