via Pew Research

 

 

A very dear Bahá’í colleague of mine wrote: 

Baha'u'llah wrote:

The purpose of religion as revealed from the heaven of God's holy Will is to establish unity and concord amongst the peoples of the world; make it not the cause of dissension and strife. The religion of God and His divine law are the most potent instruments and the surest of all means for the dawning of the light of unity amongst men. The progress of the world, the development of nations, the tranquillity of peoples, and the peace of all who dwell on earth are among the principles and ordinances of God. Religion bestoweth upon man the most precious of all gifts, offereth the cup of prosperity, imparteth eternal life, and showereth imperishable benefits upon mankind. It behoveth the chiefs and rulers of the world, and in particular the Trustees of God's House of Justice, to endeavour to the utmost of their power to safeguard its position, promote its interests and exalt its station in the eyes of the world. In like manner it is incumbent upon them to enquire into the conditions of their subjects and to acquaint themselves with the affairs and activities of the divers communities in their dominions. We call upon the manifestations of the power of God -- the sovereigns and rulers on earth -- to bestir themselves and do all in their power that haply they may banish discord from this world and illumine it with the light of concord.

(Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 129)

As I read it, he is telling the religious leaders, and the houses of justice in particular, "if something is good for society, it is also the law of God." The false dichotomy between religious teachings and progressive social measures is abolished, by "baptizing" whatever is good for society.

This teaching of Baha'u'llah makes an end-run around the defences some Bahais have constructed against allowing same-sex marriage to be recognized in the Bahai community, based on what a secretary told someone at a time when same-sex marriage did not exist and homosexuality was illegal in many countries, or based on what Shoghi Effendi might have meant by a marginal note he never published, or based on translations that render "partners" as man and wife, or based on conflating same-sex marriage with pederasty or anal penetration, etc etc. There are so many of these tenuous defences that no consensus is reached, because it involves paying attention to precise details of context and meaning, and only those with some commitment have the attention span to follow the argument, and in any case as one defence is refuted another is raised. It's whack-a-mole, and it's basically wrapping prejudice and fear of change in the "flag" of "scripture says so."

Baha'u'llah prefaces this passage with the premise that religion must NOT be "the cause of dissension and strife." The approach of "The progress of the world... is the law of God" is his solution to that strife - it creates unity within religion as well as leading to progress for the world. If we accept his approach, the argument must be about what really leads to progress, and this is a good argument we - Bahais and society -- should be having anyway. Each proposed measure must be examined on the facts, and compared to the alternative. Is a same-sex couple excluded from the Bahai community better than a same-sex couple included in the community? Is state recognition of (eg) same-sex civil unions better or worse than the denial of that recognition? What are the effects of each alternative, what has experience proven? This argument from outcomes is part of Abdu'l-Baha's approach in The Secret of Divine Civilization, as regards the religious acceptability of "non-Muslim" innovations such as democracy and the rule of law.

The attached poll is interesting. Let’s have the same debate in national Bahai communities. The policies must be national, given that state laws and social attitudes are among the factors to consider.