Nothing. For Baha’is, Baha’i Scripture is everything penned by
The Bab and Baha’u’llah, and the interpretations by Baha’u’llah’s son
‘Abdul-Baha, and where Shoghi Effendi (‘Abdul-Baha’s grandson) wrote in
his capacity as official interpreter of Baha’i Scripture. It is a source
of pride for many Baha’is to be able to state that we have
authoritative scripture. That is to have access to the actual texts (or
accurate translations of texts) as the sources for Baha’i Scripture.
“Unity of doctrine is maintained by the
existence of the authentic texts of Scripture and the voluminous
interpretations of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi, together with the
absolute prohibition against anyone propounding “authoritative” or
“inspired” interpretations or usurping the function of Guardian. Unity
of administration is assured by the authority of the Universal House of
Justice.”
Universal
House of Justice, to the National Spiritual Assembly of the
Netherlands, March 9, 1965: Wellspring of Guidance, pp. 52-53
The only mention of homosexuality in authoritative Bahai text (not
Scripture) is in five letters written by secretaries on behalf of Shoghi
Effendi penned between 1949 and 1955.
The authority of these letters is unclear. It seems clear that they were
intended as advice for the addressee but the authority of this advice
is not clear:
“The exact status which Shoghi Effendi has
intended the friends to give to those communications he sends to
individual believers is explained in the following statement written
through his secretary to the National Assembly on November 16, 1932:
“As regards Shoghi Effendi’s letters to the individual Bahá’ís, he is
always very careful not to contradict himself. He has also said that
whenever he has something of importance to say, he invariably
communicates it to the National Spiritual Assembly or in his general
letters. His personal letters to individual friends are only for their
personal benefit and even though he does not want to forbid their
publication, he does not wish them to be used too much by the Bahá’í
News. Only letters with special significance should be published there.”
“
Published in the US Bahai Newsletter, No. 71, February 1933, pp. 1-2
However it is clear that Shoghi Effendi did not wish the status of
these letters penned by secretaries to be confused with the authority of
his own writing nor that of Bahai Scripture.
“I wish to call your attention to certain
things in “Principles of Bahá’í Administration” which has just reached
the Guardian; although the material is good, he feels that the complete
lack of quotation marks is very misleading. His own words, the words of
his various secretaries, even the Words of Bahá’u’lláh Himself, are all
lumped together as one text. This is not only not reverent in the case
of Bahá’u’lláh’s Words, but misleading. Although the secretaries of the
Guardian convey his thoughts and instructions and these messages are
authoritative, their words are in no sense the same as his, their style
certainly not the same, and their authority less, for they use their own
terms and not his exact words in conveying his messages. He feels that
in any future edition this fault should be remedied, any quotations from
Bahá’u’lláh or the Master plainly attributed to them, and the words of
the Guardian clearly differentiated from those of his secretaries.”
Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, 25 February 1951 in The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha’i Community, p. 260)
However if you do a search on the internet you will find Bahais
stating that it is a Bahai Teaching that homosexuality is forbidden and
many Bahais have told me that Baha’u’llah forbids homosexuality. If
Baha’u’llah had written on the topic of homosexuality we would have
access to this by now. I think it is a stroke of genius by Shoghi
Effendi to have secretaries pen these letters so there can be no
confusion with anything he penned himself. Shoghi Effendi also stated
that not everything he penned [footnote 1]
is to be considered as authoritative on a par with Bahai Scripture, but
given that he did not write on the topic of homosexuality there’s no
need here to discuss what should be considered part of the canon of
Bahai Scripture.
So if homosexuality is not mentioned in Bahai Scripture why do so many
Bahais think it is? Prejudice against homosexuality has been around for a
long time so that’s one reason. Another is that in 1983 the compilation
book “Lights of Guidance” was published. It is a valuable source of
quotations however, unfortunately, the author doesn’t make distinctions
between what is Bahai Scripture and what isn’t, and she presents the
Bahai Teachings as list of rules. If this book is used as a way to
locate sources, all good and fine. I use it myself in this manner. But
if it is used as a book of rules… well see screenshot below.
Screenshot from a page in the 1983 book,
Lights of Guidance, edited by Helen Hornsby.
Below I have noted the sources
1221. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, 1954
1222. Jan 12, 1973 letter from the Universal House of Justice.
1223. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, 1950
1224. refers to Baha’ullah’s reference to ‘boys’ (paederestry) + the notes added by the Universal House of Justice
1225. March 14, 1973 letter from the Universal House of Justice.
1226 + 1227. January 9, 1977 letter from the Universal House of Justice.
1228. July 16, 1980 letter from the Universal House of Justice.
1229. July 16, 1982 letter from the Universal House of Justice.
1230. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, 1955
Link to this index page on the Bahai Library
You will note only 3 of the sources refer to letters on behalf of
Shoghi Effendi and all the others refer to policy of the Universal House
of Justice. Since 2010 the Universal House of Justice no longer refers
to homosexuality as a condition that needs curing or to be overcome and
instead urges the Bahais to stand up for the rights of gays and
lesbians. Therefore, I will only focus on the letters written behalf of
Shoghi Effendi.
In the Bahai Faith we have two sources of authority. One is Bahai
Scripture and the other is the authority of the Bahai Administration,
headed by the 9-member Universal House of Justice.
‘Abdul-Baha made it clear that the Universal House of Justice was free
to make and change its own policy and that in fact this flexibility to
change policy is important. “(S)ubsidiary
laws are left to the House of Justice. The wisdom of this is that the
times never remain the same, for change is a necessary quality and an
essential attribute of this world, and of time and place.”, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá,
“Rahíq-i-Makhtúm” vol. I, pp. 302-4; “Bahá’í News” 426 (September
1966), p. 2; cited in “Wellspring of Guidance” pp. 84-6 [footnote 2]
There is also a 4th letter
written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi in the same book. These 4 letters
have been repeated so often that it seems as if there are more, so I
thought it was time to have these letters listed together with as much
context as I can find for easy reference. There is a 5th letter too but
I’ll come to this.
In the column on the right is the context for the 1953 letter which
is below. I have inserted white spaces between each point so it is
easier to read. The original flows as one text.
Clearly the tone of the whole letter is one of giving information and
advice and not that of setting down Bahai law and definitely not a
letter that could or should be confused with the status of Bahai
Scripture.
There is a world of difference in meaning between how the text is
presented on the right and how it is presented in the book Lights of
Guidance which I have copied below. In the book, the editor has added
the title.
“185. Homosexual Acts Condemned by Bahá’u’lláh”
“Regarding the question you asked him about one of the believers who
seems to be flagrantly a homosexual–although to a certain extent we must
be forbearing in the matter of people’s moral conduct because of the
terrible deterioration in society in general, this does not mean that we
can put up indefinitely with conduct which is disgracing the Cause.
This person should have it brought to his attention that such acts are
condemned by Bahá’u’lláh, and that he must mend his ways, if necessary
consult doctors, and make efforts to overcome this affliction, which is
corruptive for him and bad for the Cause. If after a period of probation
you do not see an improvement, he should have his voting rights taken
away. The Guardian does not think, however, that a Bahá’í body should
take it upon itself to denounce him to the Authorities unless his
conduct borders on insanity.”
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the National Spiritual Assembly of Canada: Messages to Canada, p. 39)
|
Haifa, Israel,
June 20, 1953.
National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of Canada.
Your letters … have been received by the beloved Guardian, and he has instructed me to answer you on his behalf.
He regrets very much the delay in answering your letters.
Unfortunately he has had to delay in replying to all national bodies
during the last year, because of the pressure of work here, which has
steadily increased during this Holy Year.
ACQUISITION OF NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS AND SHRINE
The purchase of your national headquarters, he feels, was an important
milestone in the history of the Faith in Canada, and he hopes that it
will be put to good use, during the coming years, by your Assembly. To
this institution you will soon be adding the Maxwell Home+E18 in
Montreal, which should be viewed in the nature of a national shrine,
because of its association with the beloved Master, during His visit to
Montreal. He sees no objection to having one room in the house being
used as a little museum associated with Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell.
He was most happy to hear that all of your goals were achieved. This
augurs well for the future of your activities, especially during the Ten
Year
Plan just launched. He wishes through your body to thank all the
pioneers, teachers and Bahá’ís who helped achieve this great victory.
They have every reason to feel proud of themselves, and grateful to
Bahá’u’lláh. Undoubtedly His divine assistance, combined with their
determination and faith, enabled them to fulfill their objectives.
He was very happy to know that Charlottetown not only achieved
Assembly status, but that the believers there are mostly
self-supporting, as this is a sound basis for the expansion of the work
in any place, especially in such a difficult one.
The Bahá’í Exhibit held at the Canadian National Exhibition was an
excellent means of obtaining publicity. He hopes that advantage will be
taken of similar opportunities in the future.
He urges your assembly to press for recognition of the Bahá’í
marriage in Ontario, and, gradually, where the Cause is strong enough,
in other Provinces.
Regarding the question you asked him about one of the believers who
seems to be flagrantly a homosexual–although to a certain extent we must
be forbearing in the matter of people’s moral conduct because of the
terrible deterioration in society in general, this does not mean that we
can put up indefinitely with conduct which is disgracing the Cause.
This person should have it brought to his attention that such acts are
condemned by Bahá’u’lláh, and that he must mend his ways, if necessary
consult doctors, and make efforts to overcome this affliction, which is
corruptive for him and bad for the Cause. If after a period of probation
you do not see an improvement, he should have his voting rights taken
away. The Guardian does not think, however, that a Bahá’í body should
take it upon itself to denounce him to the Authorities unless his
conduct borders on insanity.
The Guardian attaches the greatest importance, during this opening year
of the Ten Year Campaign, to settling the virgin areas with pioneers. He
has informed, or is informing, the other National Assemblies that there
is no reason why believers from one country should not fill the goals
in other countries. In other words, Canada should receive foreign
pioneers for her goals, who would operate under her jurisdiction;
likewise, Canadians could go forth and pioneer in other countries’ goal
territories if the way opened for them to do so. Naturally, they must
feel their first responsibility should be toward the Canadian part of
the Plan, as they are Canadians, but sometimes health, business openings
or family connections might take people into other goal countries.
He realizes that the objectives in the far north are perhaps the
hardest. On the other hand, the harder the task, the more glorious the
victory.
You may be sure that he is praying for your success, and, what is more,
he is confident that this young, virile Canadian Community can and will
succeed in carrying out its share of the World Spiritual Crusade, so
vast and challenging, upon which we are now launched.
With warmest Bahá’í love,
R. RABBANI.
|
Below is the context for the letter which was given the title “1223. Through Advice, Help of Doctors, and Prayer, Can Overcome This Handicap ” in Lights of Guidance.
The letter was written by an American who was serving as a member of
the National Spiritual Assembly at the time the letter was written.
Do note that below the letter penned by the secretary, Ruhiyyih
Khanum, Shoghi Effendi’s own note is a note of encouragement while
making no reference to the content of the letter itself.
In Lights of Guidance the excerpt from following letter, shown here in full, is titled: “1221. Acts of Immorality”
21 May 1954
To an individual believer
Dear Bahá’í Sister:
Your letter of April 19th has been received by the beloved Guardian, and he has instructed me to answer you on his behalf.
He is very happy to have this opportunity of welcoming you personally
into the service of our Faith; and hopes that, both in your professional
career as a social worker, and in your life as a Bahá’í, you will be
able to help many needy and troubled souls.
Amongst the many other evils afflicting society in this spiritual low
water mark in history, is the question of immorality, and overemphasis
of sex. Homosexuality, according to the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, is
spiritually condemned. This does not mean that people so afflicted must
not be helped and advised and sympathized with. It does mean that we do
not believe it is a permissible way of life; which, alas, is all too
often the accepted attitude nowadays.
We must struggle against the evils in society by spiritual means, and
medical and social ones as well. We must be tolerant but uncompromising,
understanding but immovable in our point of view.
The thing people need to meet this type of trouble, as well as every
other type, is greater spiritual understanding and stability; and of
course we Bahá’ís believe that ultimately this can only be given to
mankind through the Teachings of the Manifestation of God for this Day.
He will pray that you may be successful in your services to mankind as a Bahá’í.
With kind regards,
R. Rabbani
[From the Guardian:]
Assuring you of my loving prayers for your success and spiritual advancement,
Your true brother,
Shoghi
[
The above letter is online here]
For the following letter I have only been able to find the excerpt as it is recorded in Lights of Guidance.
“The question of how to deal with
homosexuals is a very difficult one. Homosexuality is forbidden in the
Bahá’í Faith by Bahá’u’lláh; so, for that matter, are immorality and
adultery. If one is going to start imposing heavy sanctions on people
who are the victims of this abnormality, however repulsive it may be to
others, then it is only fair to impose equally heavy sanctions on any
Bahá’ís who step beyond the moral limits defined by Bahá’u’lláh.
Obviously at the present time this would create an impossible and
ridiculous situation.
He feels, therefore, that, through loving advice, through repeated
warnings, any friends who are flagrantly immoral should be assisted,
and, if possible, restrained. If their activities overstep all bounds
and become a matter of public scandal, then the Assembly can consider
depriving them of their voting rights. However, he does not advise this
course of action and feels that it should only be resorted to in very
flagrant cases.” From
a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to the National Spiritual
Assembly of the United States, August 20, 1955; cited in Lights of
Guidance, #1230, p. 367-368.
However you might note that the latest letter written on behalf of
Shoghi Effendi on the topic of homosexuality stresses tolerance and to
only to take action in exceptional cases. In Lights of Guidance, the
title given to this letter, “Homosexuality, Immorality and Adultery Are Forbidden in the Faith”
misses what appears to be the main point: tolerance and the possibility
of the loss of voting rights in extreme cases where it could or would
be a matter of public scandal. Bahais could understandably read the
title “Homosexuality, Immorality and Adultery Are Forbidden in the
Faith” and interpret the title as a Baha’i law.
If anyone has more context for this letter or any of these letters
please let me know. Indicate with the word “private” if you do not wish
your response to me to be made public. I will then cut and paste your
comment so you can remain anonymous.
I found reference to a 5th letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi
in a 1993 compilation published by the Universal House of Justice, but
the excerpt is so short I cannot be sure about the context. Here is the
excerpt:
“Bahá’u’lláh has spoken very
strongly against this shameful sexual aberration, as He has against
adultery and immoral conduct in general. We must try and help the soul
to overcome them.” 25 October 1949
In the Kitab-i-Aqdas Baha’u’llah refers to shame – “We shrink, for very shame, from treating of the subject of boys.”
Perhaps in the 1949 it was a common assumption among Baha’is to think
this referred to homosexuality? It refers to a practice of the time, in
parts of the Middle East, for a man to take a younger male as a form of
sex slave. The word Baha’u’llah uses can also mean slave. [
footnote 3]
However, it seems to me that the reference to adultery and immoral
conduct in the excerpt indicates that the secretary who penned this
letter is thinking of the quotation by Baha’u’llah where he mentions
liwat and not homosexuality. See my blog where I look at the original text by Baha’u’llah
Until 2010, when the Universal House of Justice wrote “to regard those with a homosexual orientation with prejudice or disdain would be against the spirit of the Faith,” [Footnote 4] letters from the Universal House of Justice referred to homosexuality as “an aberration subject to treatment” (22 March 1987) or “ “abnormality,
handicap, affliction, problem, etc.”… the House of Justice feels that
just such words can be a great help to the individuals concerned.” (16 March 1992) [Footnote 5]. Searching on the internet will show that Baha’is still prefer to refer to this earlier policy.
In the same 2010 policy the Universal House of Justice wrote “The
Baha’i Writings state that marriage is a union between a man and a
woman and that sexual relations are restricted to a couple who are
married to each other. Other passages from the Writings state that the
practice of homosexuality is not permitted.”
The Universal House of Justice does not have the authority to interpret
Baha’i Scripture, that is to say what the Bahai Scriptures mean, so in
my view, the way to read this statement is that this understanding
underlies their policy. Their understanding and their policy can change.
I am not suggesting that I know whether, or how, the Universal House of
Justice may change its policy on Bahai marriage and I see the wisdom in
not issuing any statement until Baha’i communities around the world
have ceased to associate homosexuality with ideas such as handicap or
affliction. But this poses a catch 22 for gay Bahais, unless their local
community takes an approach of tolerance or their Assembly provides an
exemption should a Bahai choose a civil wedding ceremony because a Bahai
one is not possible. It also poses a problem for the local Bahai
community if the law of their country considers this discrimination. My
next blog will consider the principles that apply if a married same sex
couple wish to join the community. For me personally, being part of a
community where members appear to believe there is anything wrong with
homosexuality is a problem in itself. I believe such displays of
discrimination do not fit with the Bahai concept of “unity in
diversity,” and this dissonance has inspired me to write on this topic.
Notes
1. In a 1974 letter from the Universal House of Justice, the
House refers to two letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, the
1944 one (sorry I have no further information about the dating of this
letter) states: “The infallibility of the
Guardian is confined to matters which are related strictly to the Cause
and interpretation of the teachings; he is not an infallible authority
on other subjects, such as economics, science, etc. When he feels that a
certain thing is essential for the protection of the Cause, even if it
is something that affects a person personally, he must be obeyed, but
when he gives advice, such as that he gave you in a previous letter
about your future, it is not binding; you are free to follow it or not
as you please.”
You can read the rest of the 1974 letter here.
I realise that relying on a letter on behalf of Shoghi Effendi is not as
reliable as anything penned by Shoghi Effendi himself. When I find a
suitable text penned by Shoghi Effendi I will add it here.
2. In his text, “The World Order of Baha’u’llah” under the heading:
‘A Living Organism,’ Shoghi Effendi explains why it is important that the Universal House of Justice is free to change its own policy.
“…the machinery of the Cause has been so
fashioned, that whatever is deemed necessary to incorporate into it in
order to keep it in the forefront of all progressive movements, can,
according to the provisions made by Bahá’u’lláh, be safely embodied
therein. To this testify the words of Bahá’u’lláh, as recorded in the
Eighth Leaf of the exalted Paradise: “It is incumbent upon the Trustees
of the House of Justice to take counsel together regarding those things
which have not outwardly been revealed in the Book, and to enforce that
which is agreeable to them. God will verily inspire them with whatsoever
He willeth, and He, verily, is the Provider, the Omniscient.” Not only
has the House of Justice been invested by Bahá’u’lláh with the authority
to legislate whatsoever has not been explicitly and outwardly recorded
in His holy Writ, upon it has also been conferred by the Will and
Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá the right and power to abrogate, according to
the changes and requirements of the time, whatever has been already
enacted and enforced by a preceding House of Justice.”
(Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha’u’llah, p. 22-23)
3. See my blog:
mainly-about-homosexuality/#paederasty
4. “Baha’is are enjoined to
eliminate from their lives all forms of prejudice and to manifest
respect towards all. Therefore, to regard those with a homosexual
orientation with prejudice or disdain would be against the spirit of the
Faith. Furthermore, a Baha’i is exhorted to be “an upholder and
defender of the victim of oppression”, and it would be entirely
appropriate for a believer to come to the defense of those whose
fundamental rights are being denied or violated.”
Universal House of Justice, 27 October, 2010
5. Both quotations are from a 1993 compilation by the compiled by Research Department of the Universal House of Justice,
which is here.
The Universal House of Justice does not have the authority to interpret Baha’i Scripture, that is to say what the Baha’i Scriptures mean, so in my view, the way to read this statement is that this understanding underlies their policy”. The UHJ is an infallible source of guidance in their decisions and they do have the authority NOT YOU! Your outrageous claim contained above proves you are a covenant breaker, plain and simple.
Bahá’ís may have differing views, and we are even taught that “The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions.” (Selections from the Writings of Abdu’l-Baha, p. 87). In this light finding a differing opinion looks like a promising ingredient to make a further step in our own understanding about which we have been told in one of those letters written on behalf of the Guardian (August 25th 1926) that “The more we read the Writings, the more truths we can find in them, the more we will see that our previous notions were erroneous.”
For sure, no individual has any right to declare anybody covenant breaker, no matter how much their opinion goes against our own best understanding. This is presumptios, it is no contribution to unity and it is no step towards better understanding either.
Thanks for your thoughts. I’ve spent most of my day today thinking about this subject, and though our conclusions differ, Im grateful to you for inspiring me to think, research and verbalize my thoughts on this matter.
With respect, Liv.
I quote:
“I wish to call your attention to certain things in “Principles of Bahá’í Administration” which has just reached the Guardian; although the material is good, he feels that the complete lack of quotation marks is very misleading. His own words, the words of his various secretaries, even the Words of Bahá’u’lláh Himself, are all lumped together as one text.
This is not only not reverent in the case of Bahá’u’lláh’s Words, but misleading. Although the secretaries of the Guardian convey his thoughts and instructions and these messages are authoritative, their words are in no sense the same as his, their style certainly not the same, and their authority less, for they use their own terms and not his exact words in conveying his messages. [emphasis added]
He feels that in any future edition this fault should be remedied, any quotations from Bahá’u’lláh or the Master plainly attributed to them, and the words of the Guardian clearly differentiated from those of his secretaries.”
Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha’i Community, p. 260
What this doesn’t tell us, is whether the ‘authority’ of the letters by secretaries is an extension of the Guardian’s executive authority as head of the Faith — meaning, “it must be obeyed by the addresse” or of the Guardian’s authority as authorised interpreter of the writings, meaning “they become part of the sacred text.” What we can say is there is nothing explicit to indicate that a letter by a secretary can share in the Guardian’s unique role as authorised interpreter.
There is also nothing explicit to say that the Guardian’s secretaries do **not** share the authority of interpretation. However the phrase “their authority less” seems to suggest this, because an executive authority can be greater or less, direct or indirect, can apply to a local or individual situation or to all Bahai communities, but when the Guardian interprets scripture that interpretation becomes part of the scripture concerned.
Stating that they have a lesser authority does not mean that anyone would not “give them real weight in making decisions of our actions” and I certainly take these letters seriously myself, but for me they are not Bahai Scripture and so for the following letter: “the Bahai Teachings, when carefully studied imply that such current conceptions like birth control, if not necessarily wrong and immoral in principle, have nevertheless to be discarded as constituting a real danger to the very foundations of our social life.” (October 14, 1935)
It is not an issue if most Bahais clearly do use some form of birth control. And they must or otherwise most Bahai families would have ten or more children in them.
I would consider it hypocritical to pick and choose, saying, oh that letter must be obeyed and that other letter not. So to bring us back to the topic of the blog above it is only in letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi where there is any mention of homosexuality. For me, this is no justification for Bahai communities to treat gays or lesbians any differently than any other individual. If the Universal House of Justice instructs Bahai communities to treat gays and lesbians differently, that is another matter. Then it is a policy of the Universal House of Justice, but this blog is about what is in Bahai Scripture, which means texts that cannot be changed.
I am of the view that Shoghi Effendi was very wise in assigning a lower and separate status to these letters so that the Bahais do not end up telling other Bahais, you must do this (not use birth control) when it is not a Bahai teaching.
If any individual wishes to treat these letters as if the advice applies to him or her, then of course, they are free to. I then add, but please be consistent and treat all these letters in this manner. Do just pick some letters and say, this is a Bahai Teaching. Instead I would say, go to Bahai Scripture for the Bahai Teachings.
“The Research Department at the Bahá’í World Centre has confirmed that the Guardian’s manuscript notes for the Codification of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, which includes in the list of prohibitions the word “homosexuality”, are in his own handwriting in English.”
http://bahai-library.com/?file=uhj_homosexuality_uganda
Since he himself wrote this, not a secretary or anyone else, the prohibition is authoritative, and the Universal House of Justice can’t change it.
The case is closed for this servant. What do you think, Sonja?
In the Kitabi Aqdas it is written — (1)Ye are forbidden sodomy (2)We shirk from shame, from the mention of boys. By boys H Bahaullah was referring to the use of teenage boys for purposes of sexual pleasure by dominant older males, a practice common to Ottoman Turkey 100 years ago
Id be curious at what the truth is. From my understanding the social laws of Kitabi Aqdas are there to be used as guidelines for future use. From my understanding H Bahaullah, as with all moral teachers, prescribes sex within marriage — ye are not allowed more than 2 wives — and same sex marriage was unknown 100 years ago.
Furthermore, although you do not mention the “2010 policy” of regarding prejudice and disdain towards homosexuals as much as some of your other blog posts, this servant would like to humbly refer you to a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice and dated November 23rd, 1995:
“To regard homosexuals with prejudice and disdain would be entirely against the spirit of Bahá’í Teachings. The doors are open for all of humanity to enter the Cause of God, irrespective of their present circumstances; this invitation applies to homosexuals as well as to any others who are engaged in practices contrary to the Bahá’í Teachings.”
http://bahai-library.com/uhj_homosexual_practices
Perhaps this quotation does not change your view that there has been a policy change regarding homosexuality. This servant simply wishes, for the sake of truth, to show that the attitude towards prejudice and disdain with regard to homosexuals is not as recent as 2010.
Have a wonderful day. Peace.
By new policy I am referring to the new policy of the U.H.J. where in reference to same sex marriage Bahai communities are asked not to take sides. I agree that the U.H.J. has been referring to Baha’u’llah’s words about standing up for the rights of all for decades.
Thank you for your dedication to finding truth. :)
I can give you three concrete examples of this. In 1996 the NSA of the UK addressed a London SACRE (Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education) with a formal statment arguing against equal rights for gays and lesbians. I refer to this here: https://justabahai.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/a-conversation/#nsauk
In 2007 the name of the Bahai community was associated with an anti-gay coalition. I wrote a blog summarizing what this was here. https://justabahai.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/getting-better/
To date the USA+Canadian NSA approved Bahá’í Network on Aids, Sexuality, Addictions, and Abuse (BNASAA) associate homosexuality with something negative. See https://justabahai.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/getting-better/#bnassa
So the change in policy by 2010 letter is a change in asking the Bahai community not to take sides on same sex marriage whereas earlier policy implied that homosexuality was not to be tolerated and therefore any community might assume this meant being against same sex marriage.