Major Modern Issues

Power & Authority

The third major development in modern Baha’i history has been the formal shift in the balance of power and authority. The Baha’i administration as it was conceived by Baha’ Allah, ‘Abd al-Baha’ and Shoghi Effendi had a balance between an elected arm (the rulers) and an appointed arm (the learned) both receiving divine inspiration (see Figure 1).116

Figure 1

With the death of Shoghi Effendi and the termination of the institution of the Guardianship (and following on from that the end of appointments of future Hands of the Cause), the Baha’i administration was adjusted and expanded (see Figure 2).

Figure 2

New appointed institutions of the Continental Board of Counsellors, the Auxiliary Board and Assistants to the Auxiliary Board were developed. The elected UHJ appointed Counsellors, and in turn Counsellors and Auxiliary Board Members worked closely with the elected national and local Spiritual Assemblies respectively. Although technically Counsellors had a higher rank than National Spiritual Assembly members, the two were envisioned to work symbiotically.

[Counsellors] duties will include directing the Auxiliary Boards in their respective areas, consulting and collaborating with National Spiritual Assemblies, and keeping the Hands of the Cause and the Universal House of Justice informed concerning the conditions of the Cause in their areas.117

and

[The] Auxiliary Board members [are] to establish contact with Local Spiritual Assemblies, groups, isolated centres and the individual believers, and through periodic and systematic visits to localities as well as by correspondence help in promoting the interests of the plan, assist in the efficient and prompt execution of the goals, watch over the security of the Faith, stimulate and strengthen the teaching and pioneer work, impress upon the friends the importance of individual effort, initiative and sacrifice, and encourage them to participate in Bahá’í activities and be unified under all circumstances.118

In January of 2001, however, the UHJ released a letter in which it defined the sphere of power of the appointed arm in precise terms.119 There was a general shift in balance between the appointed and elected arms as well as the further development of new organs of administration. While the UHJ retained ultimate authority as head of the religion, the appointed arm clearly had more weight, power and authority than the elected arm. This was viewed by some as a step “backwards” imitating religious hierarchies of the “past”, in which an unelected priestly elite retained ultimate control and power over the religion and the fortunes of its followers. That perception was further strengthened by the nature of the Baha’i electoral process in which the incumbent members of the House of Justice were virtually guaranteed re-election, and could control future membership through nominating favoured candidates to sit on the International Teaching Centre, signalling the House’s “approval” in the case of election for absent seats due to death or retirement.120

References

116See for example, Bahá’u’lláh, “Kitáb-i-Ahd”, Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed After the Kitáb-i-Aqdas (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1988) 221.

117Lights of Guidance 324.

118Lights of Guidance 41.

119Universal House of Justice, The, The Institution of the Counsellors, 29 Jan. 2001, (Haifa: Bahá’í World Centre, 2001), 21 Dec. 2002, <http://bahai-library.org/published.uhj/counsellors.html>.

120“Baha’i Faith in America as Panopticon”, 1963-1997 234-248. True to prediction, in the most recent UHJ election held in 2003, the two retiring members were replaced by two men from the International Teaching Centre. It will remain to be seen whether this pattern of indirect nomination of “approved” candidates continues.