In January of this year (1997), one of the participants in the newsgroup "soc.religion.bahai" responded to an extended series of postings by other individuals. in the newsgroup. His response included the following statement: "Over the past year or so in reading all these issues and the many and diverse responses and understandings of the friends I have yet to see consensus."
Whether the person who posted that statement was aware of the long-ranging implications of his words is not known, but from the perspective of the Orthodox Bahá'í Faith the statement highlights the problem faced by sans-Guardian Bahá'ís: Minus a Guardian of the Faith to resolve their differences, the heterodox Bahá'ís will continue to experience the same kinds of divisive arguments that caused schisms in previous religions.
The Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá is clear. The Master wrote: "It is incumbent upon the guardian of the Cause of God to appoint in his own life-time him that shall become his successor, that differences may not arise after his passing." 'Abdu'l-Bahá conclusively identified the function of his successors by using the words "guardian of the Cause of God" in relation to his appointment of Shoghi Effendi as the first Guardian. At the close of His Will and Testament 'Abdu'l-Bahá stated that "To none is given the right to put forth his own opinion or express his particular convictions. All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause [the Guardian] and the House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed in grievous error."
In His Will 'Abdu'l-Bahá bestows upon Shoghi Effendi and the successor Guardians the same interpretative power as He Himself was given by Bahá'u'lláh. Bahá'u'lláh stated of 'Abdu'l-Bahá: "Verily, I have appointed One Who is the Centre of My Covenant. All must obey Him; all must turn to Him; He is the Expounder of My Book and He is informed of My purpose."
The operation of this interpretive power was explained by 'Abdu'l-Bahá in one of the Tablets of the Divine Plan. He wrote:
In brief, O ye believers of God! The text of the Divine Book is this: If two souls quarrel and contend about a question of the Divine questions, differing and disputing, both are wrong. The wisdom of this incontrovertible law of God is this: That between two souls from amongst the believers of God, no contention and dispute may arise; that they may speak with each other with infinite amity and love. Should there appear the least trace of controversy, they must remain silent, and both parties must continue their discussions no longer, but ask the reality of the question from the Interpreter. This is the irrefutable command!
In his "Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh," Shoghi Effendi reaffirms what 'Abdu'l-Bahá has said regarding the interpretive function of the Guardian of the Cause, noting that though "the Guardian has been specifically endowed with such power as he may need to reveal the purport and disclose the implications of the utterances of Bahá'u'lláh and of 'Abdu'l-Bahá [it] does not necessarily confer upon him a station co-equal with those Whose words he is called upon to interpret. He can exercise that right and discharge this obligation and yet remain infinitely inferior to both of them in rank and different in nature." (The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh, 1955 printing, p. 151.)
The first Guardian then writes: "To the integrity of this cardinal principle of our Faith the words, the deeds of its present and future Guardians must abundantly testify." However, those who are now members of the sans-Guardian Bahá'í Faith maintain that Shoghi Effendi did not appoint his successor, claiming, among other reasons, that Shoghi Effendi apparently found no one who was worthy of the office after him. Orthodox Bahá'ís under the living Guardian, on the contrary, maintain that the evidence is irrefutable that Shoghi Efendi appointed his successor in complete conformity with the provisions of the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá.
But because there is no living Guardian to whom heterodox Bahá'ís now turn, they invariably find themselves arguing with one another over what the Bahá'í Writings say regarding a host of topics. Minus a living Guardian to whom they can turn to resolve their differences, they find themselves caught up in an endless loop of arguments from which they cannot obtain consensus. Recently one of the "soc.religion.bahai" participants wrote: “We will NEVER know what Bahá'u'lláh or 'Abdu'l Bahá had in mind when they wrote their numerous tablets and I believe it is futile to even attempt to guess. I believe that this is one of those 'things' in this Faith that are intended to be a 'test' for those of us who have difficulty with it. Some things you just have to take on faith.”
To which another participant asked: "If we can't know what They meant then how can we know how to correctly apply it?"
Some heterodox Bahá'ís do recognize that they have a problem. One of them recently stated the matter this way: "The question is seeking an answer which requires an authoritative interpretation. 'Who at this TIME in history has the authority?'"
One answer that the individual was given included these words: "if there were a Guardian today, he would surely have the right to interpret and expound upon the words of wisdom from those authorities that came before him. That right is now gone for anyone among us until 'Almighty God shall reveal His new Manifestation'" [promised by Bahá'u'lláh not to appear before at least the expiration of a full thousand years]. The respondent then provides the accepted heterodox position: "Until then, we have our Guardian [meaning Shoghi Effendi, who died in 1957] who - although not physically living - is still very much with us 'absolute and immutable'."
But as another individual has pointed out, the matter is not so simple as that. She wrote: "Hitherto the tendency has been to treat the statements of the Guardian or his secretary as being as authoritative in the present as they were in the past. I don't think this is entirely satisfactory, although as you rightly point out we presently have no one with the authority to make new interpretations."
She indicated that the sans-Guardian Faith needs to make "a full and critical study of Shoghi Effendi's work in order to examine the manner in which he made certain interpretations." She said that the questions asked as well as the answers given are required so that they can then "begin to adequately access the proper manner of applying his interpretations today."
In another posting, she stated: "Because there is no longer an 'authorized interpreter' no one can modify the interpretation which Shoghi Effendi gave last. The Universal House of Justice only has the authority to legislate, not interpret."
Such a position, though, apparently triggered a concern expressed by another individual who wrote regarding what constitutes 'interpretation'. She wondered about what will happen "when the House has to legislate on some issue not 'explicitly laid down in the sacred Texts', on which the Guardian never had occasion to issue an interpretation." She then suggested that "some sort of de facto 'interpretation' may be implicit in such legislation." Thus, she contended that "the line between what is 'interpretation' and 'legislation' seems a little fuzzy."
The difficulties experienced by the heterodox believers in establishing what constitutes an authoritative interpretation is exacerbated by the problem they face in determining which references of 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi can be considered as authoritative. A barrage of postings within the newsgroup "soc.religion.bahai" was concerned with the issue, and resolution was not achieved. As is frequently the case when an issue calling for interpretation has arisen, the sans-Guardian believers have cited statements from letters that Shoghi Effendi or a secretary of Shoghi Effendi had written dealing with the issue.
However, the heterodox believers cannot even be sure which of those letters they can accept as authoritative, and they have argued at length over such correspondence. Central to the matter are such questions as: Did Shoghi Effendi read through all the outgoing mail? Did he approve all the letters that were sent on his behalf? Do the letters that were sent on his behalf contain evidence of the first Guardian's approval of their contents? Without such evidence, how much authority can be attributed to the information contained in those letters?
One of the heterodox believers in the newsgroup indicated the need for precision in dealing with the "letters of the Guardian, letters on behalf (i.e., in the secretary's words) with a signature of the Guardian, and letters from secretaries", but ultimately those under the sans-Guardian Universal House of Justice cannot be precise. They cannot achieve resolution, for they cannot ask their "absolute and immutable" Guardian the simple question: "What does this mean?" And the matter is outside the prescribed domain of the Universal House of Justice which does not have the interpretative authority vested solely in the Guardian.
Without a living Guardian, the heterodox Bahá'ís surely will continue to contend with one another and continue to experience discord and divergence. That is the problem that has plagued all religions of the past and which is bound to exist with a sans-Guardian organization. It is a problem that the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh was specifically designed to eliminate in the Baha'i Dispensation-- by providing, first for 'Abdu'l-Bahá as the appointed Center of His Covenant and the sole Interpreter of His revealed Word, and through 'Abdu'l-Bahá in His divinely-conceived Testament, for a continuing line of appointed interpreters of the Word of God. Adherence to this Covenant, unique in religious history, is now found only in the Orthodox Bahá'í Faith.