Alison's Ridvan vision: first reactions

These are some of my first reactions to Alison's Ridvan vision.

I was very happy to see it. For years I've been dreaming of seeing more online displays of fellowship between followers of Baha'u'llah who openly disagree with the House of Justice and those who don't. It's already happened here and there between Karen and me, and between Steve and me, and maybe some others, but I would like to see it happen a lot more, and I would like it to be a lot more visible. I sometimes think of what Jesus said: "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."

I know that there are such friendships, and always have been, but I keep wishing for them to be more visible. Alison's post about rapprochement might do a lot to help. In any case, it's wonderful confirmation and encouragement for me.

It's popular in the Baha'i community to imagine that the only thing that protects the Faith from schism is declaring people Covenant breakers, and shunning them. I see much, much more in the Will and Testament than that, including friendship with enemies. Apart from that, here's my idea of what can protect the Faith from schism:

"If any differences arise amongst you, behold Me standing before your face, and overlook the faults of one another for My name's sake and as a token of your love for My manifest and resplendent Cause."

Some time ago I made a compilation about fellowship, with this vision in mind.
http://www.geocities.com/geotalk/fellowship/fellowship.html

Baha'u'llah says that the goal of fellowship excels every other goal, and calls it "the monarch of aspirations." Part of my purpose in writing "Glimpses of the dialogue/Talisman chronicles" was to help non-protesting Baha'is relate personally to Talisman liberals.

Alison wrote: "If I have hurt any of you in any way, I unreservedly apologise."

She has never hurt me. The worst I've ever felt was that maybe she wasn't much interested in me and my ideas, and I don't even know if that was true. Even so, she always treated me very kindly and made me feel welcome.

Alison wrote: "I recall, when I was a member of the community, there used to be people who would come to Baha'i events but who were not enrolled members of the community."

That's even more true today. One of the central elements of current Baha'i community goals and plans is including non-members in the devotional meetings, study circles, children's classes and cluster reflection meetings that are now at the heart of community life. People who despise the Ruhi courses might still attend devotional gatherings, and bring their ideas to cluster reflection meetings. In localities where unenrolled Baha'is are practicing their own ideas of Baha'i teachings, related to the Dawning Place for example, non-protesting Baha'is might participate in those activities.

It's very hard for enrolled and unenrolled Baha'is to practice fellowship together on the Internet, because there are no Baha'i forums where one group or the other does not feel unsafe and unwelcome. We might be able to do it in non-Baha'i forums, multifaith forums for example. Another thing that makes it hard for us to practice fellowship is being persecuted by vigilantes on both sides when we do it. For example someone very near and dear to me threatened to incite someone to kill someone in my family, because of my friendships with Karen, Fred, Wahid and Dermod. When that failed, he threatened to get himself killed. There are a few people who disparage and malign me in every Baha'i forum, because of those friendships.

Another thing that makes it hard for me is the lack of open reciprocation. Steve and Rod are the only protesting Baha'is I can think of who are openly friendly to me on the Internet, after more than six years of being openly friendly towards all of them,and defending them in Baha'i bandwagon forums and on my Web pages, and being maligned and harassed from all directions because of it. In fact, the lack of visible reciprocation of my friendship towards unenrolled Baha'is, might discourage other enrolled Baha'is from following my example.

The few non-protesting Baha'is I know who are aware of the dialogue/Talisman feud are immersed in it themselves, or consider it inconsequential, or both. I don't see it as inconsequential, no matter how few people are involved. How can any such feud involving*any* number of followers of Baha'u'llah be inconsequential?

After years of effort, I've given up hope of any change in the behavior of the worst feuders. What I still hope for is more visibility of the fellowship that is happening.