I was trawling through old archives looking for something, when I came across a whole bunch of letters I’d written. They are, I guess, an anatomy of my “apostasy” from the Baha’is.

====

November 16th, 1998

Dear Members of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the United Kingdom,

I am writing in regard to the recent National Spiritual Assembly’s “Spirit and Form” seminar being hosted by Local Spiritual Assemblies throughout the United Kingdom.

First let me congratulate the Assembly’s endeavors to fully implement the instructions of the Universal House of Justice in improving the practice of its financial affairs and safeguarding the assets of the Faith, as well as imparting this knowledge to the body of Local Spiritual Assemblies and believers under its jurisdiction. I heartily welcome this seminar as a sign of the continuing maturation of the institutions of the administrative order of the Blessed Beauty.

I recently attended one such seminar hosted by the Local Spiritual Assembly of S— in which the National Spiritual Assembly’s Treasurer Mrs C— W— instructed the participants that it was the National Spiritual Assembly’s desire to abolish the use of “Fund boxes” at Nineteen Day Feasts.

My concern is not with the use of the actual Fund boxes themselves, but that I believe such a policy would practically remove the ability for believers to contribute small sums of money anonymously, conflicting with the Guardian’s instructions in this matter.

As Mrs W— rightly pointed out, the Baha’i Faith is perhaps the only religion in the world in which non-adherents are forbidden from contributing funds. Given this fact, it is a logical extension that fund-receiving institutions must make sure all monies come from Baha’i sources. Thus, the only vehicle of which I am aware that Baha’is may contribute anonymously, is by using a receptacle provided at the Nineteen Day Feast: by virtue of the fact that only Baha’is may attend. Removing Fund boxes makes giving anonymously unattainable.

Nevertheless in a letter written on behalf of the Guardian, he clearly stated that it is the right of the believer to decide not only the amount and purpose of any monies donated, but that it is also the right of each Baha’i to decide the nature of his or her donation.

While appeals of a general character, carefully worded and moving and dignified in tone are welcome under all circumstances, it should be left entirely to the discretion of every conscientious believer to decide upon the nature, the amount, and purpose of his or her contribution for the propagation of the Cause.

Furthermore he clarifies the right of the believer to donate anonymously by instructing:

The friends can give their contributions to the treasurer, or, if they wish to remain anonymous and give small sums, a receptacle can be provided. The Local Assembly can decide this matter.

It is true that due to the expanding nature of the Baha’i Faith, we must be ever vigilant in our accounting methods, if only to protect the Baha’i Faith from charges of corruption, and that the Universal House of Justice has instructed the administrative bodies in charge of the financial affairs of the Faith, that every contribution should be meticulously receipted and accounted for.

My question thus becomes: may Baha’is still donate funds anonymously, and if so how?

Whilst all believers have the option of privately approaching the Treasurer of their local community, there are those, such as myself, who wish to avail themselves of the ability to donate monies anonymously: a right I am not aware the Guardian made conditional upon anything other than it being the wish of the conscientious Baha’i.

In closing, let me say that I truly welcome any and all steps the National Spiritual Assembly has taken in regard to improving the functioning of the accounting methods of its own body as well as demonstrating these skills to the Local Spiritual Assemblies, and ask that the National Spiritual Assembly give instruction as to the permissibility and practicality of giving funds anonymously.

I remain yours sincerely,
—
Shoghi Effendi: Directives of the Guardian, page 15.
From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, September 29, 1951: Baha’i Funds and Contributions, a compilation of extracts from the Guardian’s letters on the subject dated January 1970, from the Universal House of Justice to the National Spiritual Assemblies of the World, quoted in Lights of Guidance, page 31.

====

15 August, 1999

Dear Friends,

It is after much prayer and heavy contemplation that I feel I must resign from the Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of S—. Difficult as it is for me to embark on this course of action, I feel it is my duty and responsibility to God, to myself and to you my friends in the S— Bahá’í community: I feel I can no longer, in good conscience, remain a member of the Assembly.

For some time now I have felt a growing separation between my identity as a Bahá’í and what I perceive is that required of an active member of the S— Bahá’í community. I have been through many tests over the last few years and last September I sought to rejoin the Bahá’í community. At the time I had not clearly defined the totality of my beliefs, but I did feel I could honestly say I believed in God, that I believed Bahá’u'lláh was a Manifestation (whatever that might mean) of God, and that I was willing to live by the teachings Bahá’u'lláh brought.

In hindsight I think I can honestly say I was hoping I might be able to search after a clearer definition of what it meant to “believe in Bahá’u'lláh” and indeed what “Manifestation” meant whilst fellowshipping with a group of people who I believed were working together to help build a unified, peaceful, diverse world.

To be frankly honest, I also wanted to provide my future children (God willing) with the kind of Bahá’í home and community life I was blessed to experience. I wanted to raise them in a community atmosphere of acceptance, love, respect and (most of all) spiritual joy. I had known many wonderful Bahá’í individuals during my childhood and teenage years and I also felt I had come into contact with individuals in S— who were reminiscent of my dear Bahá’í “family” back home in Australia.

Throughout this past year I have spent much time agonising over what it is that I believe but I know I fundamentally believe that God dearly loves and cherishes all of humanity, that He wants us to know and love Him, and that He has infused the world with spiritual teachings that transcend belonging to any one religious group, and which will ultimately be accepted and practised by the peoples of the world. Ideas such as the harmony of science and religion, the equality of women and men, the importance of education, the necessity of the establishment of justice and so on.

I have also come to believe that the practical implementation of these ideals in the world is more important than the establishment of the primacy of one religious group. As such I honestly feel it is fundamentally more important for Bahá’ís to teach themselves and others how to put these ideals into practice, than it is for the Bahá’í religion to become the numerically largest religion in the world.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá said:

A man may be a Bahá’í in name only. If he is a Bahá’í in reality, his deeds and actions will be decisive proofs of it. What are the requirements? Love for mankind, sincerity toward all, reflecting the oneness of the world of humanity, philanthropy, becoming enkindled with the fire of the love of God, attainment to the knowledge of God and that which is conducive to human welfare. (The Promulgation of Universal Peace, page 336)

At the recent Assembly meeting in which the proposal submitted by K— W— and myself was discussed, it became clear to me that the primary goal of the S— Bahá’í community is to convert as many people as possible to the Bahá’í Faith. That this is viewed as being more important than endeavouring to help the people of S— develop their own spirituality especially if it meant such an activity did not produce a (preferably large) quantity of people officially joining the Bahá’í religion. In fact it became clear to me that the Assembly feels that people can only truly develop their spirituality by becoming Bahá’ís, that if they do not choose to become Bahá’ís, they have somehow failed in what is seen as being a primary duty as a human being. The first verse of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas was referred to in that meeting. It reads in its English translation:

The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition of Him Who is the Dayspring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof hath gone astray, though he be the author of every righteous deed. (KA:1)

I looked up an accompanying reference from the words of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá saying:

This blessed verse means that the foundation of success and salvation is the knowledge of God, and that the results of the knowledge of God are the good actions which are the fruits of faith. (Some Answered Questions, page 238)

On a fundamental level I believe this verse is absolutely true. The primary purpose for the creation and existence of the cosmos is to know and love God, and that as human beings, created with the divine spark, if we fail in this duty to seek out the knowledge of God through His manifestations we have indeed gone astray. But I also believe the entire creation witnesses to God’s existence. That when a person looks to learn about, know, love and worship our Beloved Creator through any of His emissaries, then she has fundamentally fulfilled her primary obligation outlined in this verse. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says the results of this primary duty, of seeking the knowledge of God, are the good actions which are the fruits of faith. That I have met spiritually pure and good Buddhists, Muslims, Christians and members of other religious denominations, points to the truth of this statement.

Ultimately I believe it is the knowledge of God; the recognition of His manifesting Himself in the world and the spiritual fruits of a life lived in willing submission to the Creator that determines whether a person has fulfilled his life’s aim.

I recognise however, that the S— Bahá’í community has interpreted the Bahá’í message to mean that as a community its primary duty is to seek the conversion of the general populace to the Bahá’í Faith. I do not quarrel with this interpretation, but it is not one that I hold. As such, I cannot work for aims and goals in which I do not hold a fundamental allegiance. It has caused me increasing stress to attempt to align myself with such a philosophy, but I also believe it is a form of proselytising. The Auxiliary Board Member S— R— clarified that the Universal House of Justice has interpreted “proselytising” to mean:

Proselytising implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith. It is also usually understood to imply the making of threats or the offering of material benefits as an inducement to conversion. (5 May, 1982, quoted in an email from S. R— 15 August, 1999)

However according to standard dictionary definitions (how non-Bahá’í English speakers would normally understand the word), the word is defined as:

Proselytize: Convert a person or people, esp. from one religious faith to another. (Oxford Dictionary)

Even if we were to take conversion as a yardstick, however, I think the general public will resist such a method. For too long, members of religions have spent their time and energy trying to convert each other, and it has caused misery and suffering in the world as the boundary between “sharing the gospel” and “proselytising” is blurred. In the time the S— D— Teaching Project has been in existence, I am aware of only three people having actually converted, two of which are not involved in the community and who have seemingly indicated they do not consider themselves Bahá’ís.

I also think the pursuance of this missionary goal has been detrimental to the community as a whole. Rather than developing a happy and joyful community life marked for its unity in diversity, it is my perception that members of the S— Bahá’í community feel weary and obligated. Lack of attendance at Feasts, Deepenings, Firesides and other events such as those connected with the S— D— Teaching Project, lead me to assess the community is not in good spiritual health. I do not think this phenomenon is simply because people are “busy”, but that the S— Bahá’í community has unintentionally neglected the happiness and spiritual wellbeing of its own members. This is not to say that individual Bahá’ís in the community are not wonderful people - they are - but I perceive as a whole the community is suffering.

I have resisted resigning for a number of reasons. Firstly I felt I had an obligation as an elected Assembly member, to serve the S— Bahá’í community to the best of my ability until such time as I was either elected off the Assembly or had physically moved away from S—. However, I believe my philosophical outlook is of such a different nature to the rest of the S— Bahá’ís that the situation has moved beyond my simply resigning over a difference of opinion. I have also resisted, for perhaps more selfish reasons – in that having resigned from the Bahá’í Faith before – I did not wish to appear superficial or unreliable. But to continue to hide my difference of philosophy because of the sake of appearances is uncivil to God, to myself and to my Bahá’í friends.

And so my friends, I think the only honest thing to do is to resign from the Assembly. May God guide all of us.

Yours truly,

====

10 September 1999

Dear Friends,

Further to my recent meeting with two of the Assembly members T— R— and B— D—, I have spent some time praying and meditating on the best course of action for me to take in light of my decision to resign from the Assembly.

At the meeting I agreed that whilst I felt I could not cope with serving as Assembly secretary, I would consider remaining on the Assembly itself to contribute in solving Assembly / community problems.

First let me say that I regret what has been developing over the course of the year: that I feel I am no longer able to serve on the Assembly due to the internal stress of being placed in a situation where I feel I am asked to compromise my basic philosophical and moral beliefs whilst being required to maintain loyalty and give support to the group that I perceive is asking me to compromise those beliefs.

However having said that, I must point out that I feel I have reasonably attempted to use every legitimate avenue to seek to resolve and heal what I perceive are signs of ill health in the Bahá’í community to which I belong. That the Bahá’í community appears to be unwilling to hear me or even acknowledge that I have been attempting to resolve these issues, only adds to my distress. It makes it clear to me that the only course of action left to me is to stop donating my time and energies to a community in such poor spiritual health that it refuses to hear those who would point to the disease and attempt a cure. In short, there is only so long I can continue to batter my head against a brick wall before causing myself brain damage.

To give you three examples: in March 1999 I proposed (through the Feast) that:

“a working group or committee be created for the purpose of social and economic development in S—. Such a group would be responsible for assessing how the Bahá’ís could best devote some of their time, energy and resources to helping the poor, the needy and the underprivileged. By making the Spiritual Assembly aware of such needs, the Assembly could then decide to initiate projects for charitable and social and economic development; either as organised official projects, or by encouraging individuals to action. Such projects would be carried out with a charitable motive rather than as specific teaching or propaganda vehicles.”

Whilst it would be easy for me as an individual to simply support already existing charitable and philanthropic groups in the larger S— community, I felt that this could be a way that the S— Assembly could live up to its mandate to “do their utmost to extend at all times the helping hand to the poor, the sick, the disabled, the orphan, the widow, irrespective of color, caste and creed.” That through this, the S— Bahá’ís might develop a spirit of service which would help the Bahá’í community to develop group virtues such as inclusiveness, realism, commitment, acceptance, humility and so on. Despite being accepted as a generally good idea, it is yet to be acted on. Without someone to lobby for its existence (something contrary to correct Bahá’í procedure) the proposal has fallen by the wayside.

Although not directly related to the S— community, but nevertheless adding to my disillusionment I have yet to receive a response to my November 1998 letter (cc’d to the S— Assembly) in which I asked the National Assembly for clarification on whether it is permissible (and if so how, given the abolition of the use of fund boxes) for Bahá’ís to donate monies anonymously to the Cause. I felt - as I do still - that it is extremely important for the believers to be able to exercise their right to decide on “the nature, the amount, and purpose of [their] contribution”. That to deprive the Bahá’ís of that right, despite the added tax advantages that covenanting offers to the National Assembly funds, is against the spirit of the Faith. Despite a confirmation that the National Assembly did indeed receive my letter and another response that it was looking into the matter, I continue to wait for an answer.

After experiencing a growing sense of discomfort and pinpointing fundamental problems with the main (in fact only) project of the S— Bahá’í community – the S— D— Teaching Project also known as “The T— Z—” – in May 1999, K— W— and I submitted a proposal to the Assembly. Rather than pointing out faults and failures of the current project so as not to make any of the SDTP contributors feel offended, we attempted to phrase the proposal in such a way as to make a number of positive suggestions for a new project developing out of the T— Z— experience. From the very moment the proposal was submitted to the Assembly, it was doomed to failure. Before even being read by the Assembly, an emotional outburst by a member of the SDTP co-ordinating committee (who had briefly flicked through the proposal document during a coffee break to prepare to discuss the proposal) intimated that the Assembly would be failing to support the SDTP co-ordinating committee by taking the proposal seriously. This had the devastating effect of ensuring the proposal would never get a ‘fair’ hearing. In fact instead of being consulted upon at that meeting, it was delayed seemingly indefinitely. When we asked the Auxiliary Board Member S— R— to help us get the Assembly to even look at the Proposal, he declined instead suggesting that the three of us look at the proposal as interested individuals. It wasn’t until K— W— actually took the matter up with the National Assembly that the Auxiliary Board member and the S— Assembly set a date to consult on the proposal.

When the Assembly finally looked at the proposal, it was some three months later, with little preparation given before the actual meeting. Whilst I cannot say definitively, I would be surprised if the Assembly members actually did read the whole proposal in the week or so before the meeting. Thus being stale in memory, the proposal was addressed in an ad-hoc fashion during the meeting with large sections of the proposal missed entirely. At that meeting, the chairman being absent, the vice-chairman (who was the same Assembly member who objected to the proposal in the first place) directed the meeting in such a manner that every single suggestion of the proposal was dismissed entirely as either having been “tried before”, “currently done” or “inappropriate”. Not one single suggestion of the proposal was adopted.

The entire meeting was a farce and effectively reinforced the status quo with the result that none of the philosophical points behind the suggestions were even addressed. Because of the presence of a non-Assembly member, no votes were taken on any part of the proposal, however due to its surreally strange nature the discussion on the proposal was considered finished with no appointment for consultation as an Assembly. In effect the proposal became dead and buried.

Meanwhile, the co-ordinating committee took a different route in having its ideas addressed. Rather than submit a detailed proposal for a major project (the City of T—) to the Assembly for consideration, influential members of the wider S— community were approached and the community was lobbied for its support of the City of T— idea. The Assembly was given a brief outline by the co-ordinator but did not even have the chance to separately consult on the idea as an Assembly before tentative approval was given to the co-ordinator.

These are but three major examples that led me to question my involvement with the S— Bahá’í community, and in particular my work as secretary of the Assembly. I believe, as a member of the human race, that God asks me to commit a proportion of my time helping out my fellow creatures. Accordingly I have a duty to consciously reflect on my activities to make sure that they are in the best spiritual interests of both myself and those with whom I interact. As part of my covenant and promise to God to serve humanity, it is my duty to make sure that any and all of my time donated to this cause, actually has the effect of being good for myself and for others.

The growing stress I have experienced in my dealings with the Bahá’í community have caused me to become spiritually despondent – in fact it was only when I consciously made the choice to resign from the Assembly and direct my energies elsewhere that I felt the heavy yoke ease. I began redeveloping my spirituality, I began having a joyful prayer life again, I felt the presence of God in my life, instead of the frustration, the stress, the anger and the cynicism that my dealing with the Bahá’í community had developed.

I debated over whether to write this in my first resignation letter, but came to the conclusion that there was little point in so doing. I did not wish to alienate my Bahá’í colleagues by calling the shots as I saw them. As an individual I am not so important that without me, the S— Bahá’í community cannot chose to spiritually heal itself. In fact, perhaps it is through the exodus of people like myself, that the community will realise there is work to be done. In the meantime, I cannot let my spiritual and mental health suffer by directing my energies in spiritually unproductive ways.

So, I decided, after much prayer, to resign completely from the Assembly and I do pray that God guides all of us.

Yours truly,
—
Shoghi Effendi, Baha’i Administration, p.38
Shoghi Effendi: Directives of the Guardian, page 15.

====

23 September 1999

Dear Friends,

On Tuesday the 21st of September J— called me to discuss the email I’d sent to the Assembly the night before in which I said that after much prayer and consideration I felt unable to continue to serve either as Secretary or on the Assembly due to my previously stated reasons. In that conversation she conveyed the Assembly’s wish to instead meet with me to attempt to resolve any problems, which at that time I agreed to do.

I feel it is only honest to say, however, that since agreeing to meet with the Assembly at it’s 29/9 meeting, I have begun to feel stressed and trapped again. I appreciate the Assembly is taking the matter of my resignation seriously however since the process began on 25 August, I have not felt fully able to get on with renewing my spiritual life. To this end I felt if I explained my motives for resigning with more clarity, the Assembly might understand why I feel it is necessary for my own health, and for my commitment to being a moral and civil human being, that I took this action.

I joined the S— Bahá’í community on September 7 1998 at which time I made a statement of belief and agreed to live and work according to Bahá’í principles and teachings – fundamentally this has not changed.

However over the course of this past year I have felt increasing amounts of frustration, stress, at times anger and apathy, and perhaps most tellingly: a lack of spirituality with my involvement in community life. Initially I could not pinpoint the reasons for these feelings, and so I felt unable to deal with them. It began to feel as if my efforts to integrate myself more deeply in community life were only making the problem worse, rather than better. What started off as a niggling feeling here and there, began to snowball into jaundice and disillusionment despite attempting to ‘whole-heartedly and loyally support my Assembly and abide by its decisions, even if I saw them to be in error’.

In July of this year I made a strong personal commitment to honesty and civility which required me to examine the most fundamental relationships with the people and organisations in my life. The catalyst of the Assembly meeting on August 11 prompted me to clarify some of my most basic attitudes to life:

• I believe in God. I believe He is the Merciful, the Compassionate who is directly concerned and interested in His creation. He interacts with it and nourishes and sustains us all.
• I have made a promise to God to give my life to Him and do His will as He leads me. My duty is to willingly submit to His will.
• I believe it is the purpose of my life to learn about God and return to Him. I do not have all “the answers” now and so my beliefs and ideas about reality undergo change as I seek to draw closer to my Beloved Creator. It follows on from this that I am not required to produce an instant, complete theological set of beliefs just because I am asked for them.
• I believe God wants me to help my fellow creatures whilst I am on this journey toward Him. It is the antithesis of love for my fellow human beings to attempt to impose my beliefs about reality on them. Therefore I do not seek to convert anyone to my way of thinking, but I put first care and concern for my and their spiritual, physical and mental wellbeing.
• I am called to interact with my fellow creatures and always try and live the maxim “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.
• As well as spending a proportion of my time working to support myself and my family, I am called to spend a proportion of my time philanthropically. As such it is important that I carefully consider how that time is best spent in service to others.
• I reserve the right to make assessments and adjustments so that I am always serving my fellow creatures to the best of my ability.
• Once a year I will take time to make a major reassessment of my life.
• When donating my time and activity with any group of humans the following conditions should be met:

1. I have the right to worship God in a manner consistent with my beliefs
2. The group should practice “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.
3. The group should be trying to create “true community” (as described by M. Scott Peck in The Different Drum). As such this group should not habitually and consistently violate the laws of “true community” without seeking to heal itself.

• In return I will donate my time and energy to the group in order to serve my fellow creatures. I will do this to the best of my ability whilst trying to practice the rules of “true community” myself.
• I will commit myself to work through the good times as well as the bad, unless it becomes clear on reflection and prayer that the group no longer fulfils the conditions for my participation or I perceive that I could serve humanity better elsewhere.

What I require of a faith community:

• collective worship of God
• service & philanthropy
• regular study of the Word of God
• joyful “true community” (or at least a commitment to it)

I feel urgently called to work towards implementing in society the principles of unity in diversity; abolition of prejudice; the necessity of justice; equality of women and men including the implementation of women taking their rightful places on decision making bodies in every sphere around the world; the separation of religion and politics whilst infusing governance with spirituality; the essential harmony of science and religion; the abolition of extremes of wealth and poverty; and the vital importance of education for every person on the planet. Also ‘Bahá’í’ administrative principles of consultation and consensual decision making; inclusive acceptance and tolerance of diversity; realism and honesty in governance; self-awareness at the cost of group egotism; graceful conflict; the practice of humbleness, peacefulness and respect for others. These are goals for which I will honestly devote nearly my every spare moment.

However I do not believe these principles belong to any one group of people on the planet. I believe God wants all his children (no matter their race, their culture, their sex, their religion) to benefit from these ideals and principles. If any group of people – no matter what the name by which they choose to identify themselves - neglect to implement them, then God simply chooses to aid and assist those who will. History is replete with examples of people claiming to be God’s representatives (be they Muslim, Christian or even Baha’i) being overshadowed by those living martyrs who really do do God’s work and build the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.

In our day we have Martin Luther King Jnr, Mother Theresa, Mahatma Gandhi, or even the Foundation for Community Encouragement, the Sufi Women’s Organisation, Plan International – I could go on - all who I believe worked or are working to implement God’s will on earth for today.

But on a level closer to home, I sat down and honestly assessed my life and realised that I was neglecting my relationship with God and neglecting to contribute to this divine work. It was not a quick decision. I gave, I feel, the S— Bahá’í community the best of my time and effort for a whole year – but after honestly and deeply meditating on the situation I have come to see that this time and energy is not effectively helping humanity, placed where it is, and it is this which is causing me so much stress and frustration.

As such I decided to withdraw from those activities I felt contributed to the problem and instead begin to be actively involved in philanthropic work in order to do my part in building God’s Kingdom. I knew I wanted to get involved in some sort of charitable work to begin with, and so God provided the avenue – I was able to offer my time, skills and energy to a nursing home.

Feeling a joy and vibrancy in committing myself to God, I also began to establish my regular prayer and meditation regime once again; something that had been neglected as part of my ever increasing despondency of the last year. I also started to seek out groups and communities with whom I might work and grow in spirituality.

Whilst these are only baby steps after a long year of neglect, the joy, ease and spiritual health that I am once again regaining is marked.

I know that I’ve been frank and not pulled my punches in this letter, however I need to be honestly clear that I do not feel I can remain on the Assembly for the above reasons. I know that you will probably view things differently, but I must be honest to myself, to you and to God.

Yours truly
—

====

Subject: November 1998 Letter
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2000 23:33:48 +0000
To: secretariat@bahai.org.uk

Dear NSA members,

In November 1998 I wrote to the NSA (please see attached document)
requesting advice on a matter of concern to me. I’ve not yet had a
reply to this letter and I wish to enquire whether a timeframe could be
given to me on when I might expect one.

Thanking you for your time
Regards
—

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:22:21 -0000
From: “C— W—”

Dear R—,

I understood that you were moving to Australia and the letter was, I
believed forwarded there. I am in the office the latter half of next week.
I’ll find a copy and repost it. Please forgive the misunderstanding.

With warmest regards,

C— W—
Treasurer

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 14:03:59 +0000
To: C— W—
CC: National Spiritual Assembly-UK

Dear C—,

As I’ve still not received the letter yet, I just thought I’d better
make sure you have my correct address.

20 A— Close
W—
S—
S– 7–

Of course if it is easier to send it in electronic format please feel
free to
address it either here (—) or my email address
—

Thanking you for your time
—
Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:11:16 -0000
CC: “NSA”

Dear R—,

I was unsuccessful in finding your original letter or the National Assembly’s reply in my recent visit to the Treasury Office, however I know
that your concern centred on the National Assembly’s decision to phase-out the use of the tradition Fund Box.

Your concerns were considered during the National Spiritual Assembly’s meeting at length, with especial consideration given to the passage in the writings where the Guardian specifically states that a receptacle can be used for small donations. However, other passages from the Guardian, such as the is also must be considered:”all donations and contributions should be offered to the Treasurer of the Assembly, for the express purpose of promoting the interests of the Cause, throughout that locality or country. ”

Primarily, however, the National Spiritual relied on the guidance from the Universal House of Justice in the letter shared with you at the Spirit & Form seminar wherein the Universal House of Justice wrote: “Every contribution, including contributions in kind, should be meticulously
receipted and accounted for. Receipts should be pre-printed with sequential numbers, so that each receipt can be easily related to the contribution it acknowledges…”

Therefore after reconsideration, the National Spiritual Assembly is still requesting that local Assemblies phase out the use of the Fund Box and comply with the guidance from the Universal House of Justice.

I know this won’t be easy for some believers, but the National Assembly prays that they will draw comfort from their obedience and find solace in the certain knowledge that if a decision of the National Assembly is incorrect, if the friends obey in good spirit, the truth will be made right.

Again accept the National Assembly’s apologies for the apparent delay in responding.

Warmest love,
C— W—
on behalf of the National Assembly

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:48:47 +0000

C— W— wrote:

> Dear R—,
>
> I was unsuccessful in finding your original letter or the National
> Assembly’s reply in my recent visit to the Treasury Office, however I know
> that your concern centred on the National Assembly’s decision to phase-out
> the use of the tradition Fund Box.

Dear C—,

Actually my concern was not particularly with the fund boxes. I had a two part question which I feel, after some 14 months, is still unanswered. The issue of accountability is not relevant to whether or not Baha’is may donate anonymously given that the issue of giving receipts is easily solved by (for example) two Local Spiritual Assembly members counting the anonymous donations at the Feast in which they were collected and issuing a receipt in the name of the entire community.

At this stage, I do not feel happy with your reply. For 14 months I have been patiently waiting to hear a reply to a letter that I carefully wrote on an issue that was passionate for me. By patiently waiting I feel I obeyed the instruction “if the friends obey in good spirit, the truth will be made right” if a decision of the Assembly is incorrect.

I do not believe you have taken my letter seriously, you have not answered the questions I asked in it, and I would like to appeal this matter to the Universal House of Justice.

I understand that the correct procedure is to request the National Spiritual Assembly to forward my correspondences (including this email and my original letter) in a timely manner. I would request that this is done, and to this end I have attached my original letter to this email.

Please note that whilst I am traveling to Australia in February, I am still officially residing at 20 A— Close, W—, S—, S– 7– and all correspondences can still be sent there.

Yours sincerely
—

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 12:12:45 -0000
CC: “NSA”

Dear R—,

Thank you for your quick reply. As I explained, I did not have your original letter at my disposal, so please forgive me if all the issues weren’t addressed in my response.

Sadly however, you have not sent the attachments you refer to - so I still don’t have it. If you provide it as you expected to, I’m sure the National Spiritual Assembly will deal with this issue with haste as it has taken so long to discover our original error.

Although I no longer serve on the National Assembly, and am therefore not the National Treasurer, it next meets on the weekend of 11-13 February. Perhaps you could send the original letter by then.

I’m so sorry that you are not happy with the reply.

With warmest love,
C— W—,
on behalf of the National Spiritual Assembly

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:48:03 -0000

Thanks R—,

Would you like for me to have another go at answering your other points or
would you prefer that it just be sent on to the National Spiritual Assembly?

Love c
—– Original Message —–
Sent: 31 January 2000 14:01
Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter

> Dear C—,
>
> Thank you for your quick response. Rather than sending it as attachment I’ve
> included it as a text message at the end of this email.
>
> Yours sincerely
—

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:38:56 +0000

Dear C—,

> Would you like for me to have another go at answering your other points or
> would you prefer that it just be sent on to the National Spiritual Assembly?

I was given to understand by B— L— back in June 1999, that the National Assembly had consulted on this and that a reply of some sort was being prepared. All in all, I’d prefer to have access to the National Assembly’s official decision in this matter so that if I did wish to appeal to the Universal House of Justice, I could rest assured I’d followed the proper procedure of first appealing to the National Assembly.

Thanking you for your time
—

====

Subject: Re: November 1998 Letter
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 07:19:56 -0000

Its all forwarded this morning.

Love c

[Status to date: I never got an answer. Presumably they decided that once my conversion to Islam, the point was moot and the matter was not worth pursuing. I’ll never know.]