Is this actually the case, and is it controversial amongst most Bahai faithful?

[TheLightWithin]

This little short video includes a man saying he is no longer Bahai, probably for more than one reason, but the reason he states here has to do with a conflict between the teaching of equal rights between men and women, BUT that women are forbidden from serving in the highest decision making body in Bahai?
Is this man correct about either of his claims? If so, is it something that is controversial within Bahai?

 

[Sen McGlinn]

This little short video includes a man saying he is no longer Bahai, probably for more than one reason, but the reason he states here has to do with a conflict between the teaching of equal rights between men and women, BUT that women are forbidden from serving in the highest decision making body in Bahai?
Is this man correct about either of his claims? If so, is it something that is controversial within Bahai?

Hmmm... he doesn't seem too happy about it. Would it be possible to contact the video maker and point him to the "Service of Women" research paper?
The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith.

There is more research on this, more texts that have been translated, but in a very brief version, Baha'u'llah said,
"O ye Men (rijal) of Justice! Be ye in the realm of God shepherds unto His sheep... "
and
" Today the handmaidens of God are regarded as gentlemen (rijal). Blessed are they! Blessed are they!.."

This might make him smile
Yes, it is very controversial. There's arguments, and counter-arguments, and counter-counter-arguments, and an avalanche of evidence. Ultimately, people have different characters: some seek the certitude and finality of an absolute, some are open to God's will working through a process whose end is not foreseen.

 

[Sen McGlinn]

Hmmm... he doesn't seem too happy about it. Would it be possible to contact the video maker and point him to the "Service of Women" research paper?
The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith.

There is more research on this, more texts that have been translated, but in a very brief version, Baha'u'llah said,
"O ye Men (rijal) of Justice! Be ye in the realm of God shepherds unto His sheep... "
and
" Today the handmaidens of God are regarded as gentlemen (rijal). Blessed are they! Blessed are they!.."

This might make him smile
Yes, it is very controversial. There's arguments, and counter-arguments, and counter-counter-arguments, and an avalanche of evidence. Ultimately, people have different characters: some seek the certitude and finality of an absolute, some are open to God's will working through a process whose end is not foreseen.

and a third group just think sideways about everything.
My approach is that the present exclusion of women from the Universal House of Justice is one problem we have: a problem of consistency with our own principles of justice and equality, specifically for women. A second problem we have is that the creation of the International Teaching Centre in 1973 has given the Counsellors who serve on it such prominence that the male members are almost inevitably elected to the Universal House of Justice.
All the present members of the Universal House of Justice were members of the ITC before their election, and none today have any extensive experience on a National Spiritual Assembly. When the present members appoint men to serve on the ITC, they are in effect selecting their own, like-minded, replacements. And while these replacements may have been good Counsellors, the skills and knowledge suited for serving on a National Spiritual Assembly or the Universal House of Justice are different to the skills required of a Counsellor.

These two problems add up to one opportunity: by appointing only women to the ITC, and indeed to all the high-visibility appointed positions in the Bahai community, the Universal House of Justice can ensure that a substantial portion of the incoming members of the House of Justice will have accumulated administrative experience and proved their abilities, as long-standing members of the National Spiritual Assemblies. The National Spiritual Assemblies are the electoral college for the Universal House of Justice. If they were unable to vote for the Counsellors, they would likely vote for male NSA members with strong records.
Moreover, if the Universal House of Justice selects the women best suited as Counsellors to the ITC, and to the Continental Boards of Counsellors, the quality and continuity of these institutions will be assured, as the electors cannot co-opt these women to serve on the Universal House of Justice. The UHJ members will also avoid the appearance of hand-picking their own successors. And by appointing only women, the Universal House of Justice can make at least the senior levels of the Bahai administration a shining example of what can be done if a community is really confident that women have all the capacities needed to participate at every level and in every branch of activity.

More : Let’s talk ….

 

[Tony Bristow-Stagg]

This little short video includes a man saying he is no longer Bahai, probably for more than one reason, but the reason he states here has to do with a conflict between the teaching of equal rights between men and women, BUT that women are forbidden from serving in the highest decision making body in Bahai?
Is this man correct about either of his claims? If so, is it something that is controversial within Bahai?

Since I have been a Baha'i the issue has not been raised, in any meeting I have attended, in a controversial manner. We have had discussions on the subject and given personal opinions. In the end, we have all accepted the statement of Abdu’l-Baha at face value, that, as the Administrative process unfolds, the wisdom will be made manifest.

The controversial aspect is raised and expounded by some people outside the faith, hoping to prove that it does negate the teaching of the equality of women and men given by Baha'u'llah, which it does not.

In a world where a vast majority of Women still do not have equality, it is only an over liberated western mind that can find controversial implications on one teaching.

It can also be controversial for those that achedemically, think their studies have found loopholes, loopholes that have not yet been considered by the Universal House of Justice, yet Baha'u'llah has promised that if the Universal House of Justice consults in the spirit and virtues outlined in the writings, then they will be protected from error. The statements they have made to date confirm the current view on this teaching. Any Baha'i can get clarification on any subject from the Universal House of Justice, many have done so on this subject, and as the Universal House of Justice have responded to this issue many times, each time supporting the current view of this teaching, I am not sure if it can and will change in the future.

With the election of the Universal House of Justice, that also follows a process, a process that will also mature in time. The election of those members also requires great spiritual contemplation on ability, virtue and morality. It is logical that if a beleiver who is active and travels, will become better known by those that will cast a vote. How in the future this process allows all the members to consider people less observable, I also can not foresee. It maybe that we begin to consider that if we are in the position to cast such a vote, that we have the spiritual responsibility to explore and consider a larger range of candidates, as there is no canvassing for votes in the Baha'i Process and no promotion of individuals by other Baha'i.

Regards Tony