August 1. On this date in 1996, Deepen magazine published an article titled "Flow of Divine Authority" by Brent Poirier addressing the question "What is the scriptural authority for the Universal House of Justice to function without the presence of the Guardian of the Cause?"

August 1. On this date in 1996, Deepen magazine published an article titled "Flow of Divine Authority" by Brent Poirier addressing the question "What is the scriptural authority for the Universal House of Justice to function without the presence of the Guardian of the Cause?"

The article notes in particular...

"Divorced from the Institution of the Guardianship"
Any discussion of the authority for the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly without the presence of the Guardian must address the following passage from Shoghi Effendi's The Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh:
"Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh would be mutilated and permanently deprived of that hereditary principle which, as 'Abdu'l-Bahá has written, has been invariably upheld by the Law of God. "In all the Divine Dispensations," He states, in a Tablet addressed to a follower of the Faith in Persia, "the eldest son hath been given extraordinary distinctions. Even the station of prophethood hath been his birthright." Without such an institution the integrity of the Faith would be imperiled, and the stability of the entire fabric would be gravely endangered. Its prestige would suffer, the means required to enable it to take a long, an uninterrupted view over a series of generations would be completely lacking, and the necessary guidance to define the sphere of the legislative action of its elected representatives would be totally withdrawn." ["Quotation D"]
"Severed from the no less essential institution of the Universal House of Justice this same System of the Will of 'Abdu'l-Bahá would be paralyzed in its action and would be powerless to fill in those gaps which the Author of the Kitab-i-Aqdas has deliberately left in the body of His legislative and administrative ordinances."45 ["Quotation E"] Some of the friends have experienced particular difficulty in accepting the ability of the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly without the presence of the Guardian, because they believe that those words from the Guardian in Quotation D were a direct warning about that very circumstance. A reader of this passage might naturally ask whether Shoghi Effendi when he wrote those words in 1934, confident that there would be future Guardians,46 was elaborating the horrible consequence s to the Cause of God if the line of Guardians were to end. From the Guardian's phrase "Divorced from the institution of the Guardianship," should we understand his intention to have been a description of the mutilation of the Cause that would occur if the Universal House of Justice were to function without a living Guardian?
The House of Justice has provided the key to understanding this subject when it elucidates "the principle of inseparability," and gives several examples of the application of that principle to the institutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice.47
In order to understand the meaning of "divorced from the institution of the Guardianship" in Quotation D, we have the benefit of other passages in Shoghi Effendi's writings where he uses similar, sometimes identical language to illustrate this principle. We have seen in Quotation A, how Shoghi Effendi warned that to "divorce" or "dissociate" the institutions established by 'Abdu'l-Bahá from the underlying laws of Bahá'u'lláh would "amount to a repudiation of one of the most sacred and basic truths of the Faith."48 In yet another passage, he used strikingly similar language to elaborate the scriptural authority for the functioning of the Bahá'í institutions:

"It should be remembered by every follower of the Cause that the system of Bahá'í administration is not an innovation imposed arbitrarily upon the Bahá'ís of the world since the Master's passing, but derives its authority from the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, is specifically prescribed in unnumbered Tablets, and rests in some of its essential features upon the explicit provisions of the Kitab-i-Aqdas. It thus unifies and correlates the principles separately laid down by Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, and is indissolubly bound with the essential verities of the Faith. To dissociate the administrative principles of the Cause from the purely spiritual and humanitarian teachings would be tantamount to a mutilation of the body of the Cause, a separation that can only result in the disintegration of its component parts, and the extinction of the Faith itself."49 [Quotation F]

Please note that the Guardian described such a "dissociation" as a "mutilation of the Cause." This is another illustration of what the Universal House of Justice terms "the principle of inseparability." A careful reading of Quotation F will show that the Guardian's purpose is to elaborate the unity of the components of the Bahá'í Faith, not to issue a warning about possible future events. The "mutilation" would be to knowingly misunderstand this important verity of the Faith.

The Guardian again illustrates the principle of inseparability when he explains that the distinct periods of Bahá'í history must be understood as one whole; to see them in isolation from one another and thereby dissociate them from one another, would be to "mutilate" the Cause and pervert the truth:

"The century under our review [1844-1944] may therefore be considered as falling into four distinct periods, of unequal duration, each of specific import and of tremendous and indeed unappraisable significance. These four periods are closely interrelated, and constitute successive acts of one, indivisible, stupendous and sublime drama, whose mystery no intellect can fathom, whose climax no eye can even dimly perceive, whose conclusion no mind can adequately foreshadow. Each of these acts revolves around its own theme, boasts of its own heroes, registers its own tragedies, records its own triumphs, and contributes its own share to the execution of one common, immutable Purpose. To isolate any one of them from the others, to dissociate the later manifestations of one universal, all-embracing Revelation from the pristine purpose that animated it in its earliest days, would be tantamount to a mutilation of the structure on which it rests, and to a lamentable perversion of its truth and of its history . . . .

These four periods are to be regarded not only as the component, the inseparable parts of one stupendous whole, but as progressive stages in a single evolutionary process, vast, steady and irresistible. 50

In yet another instance, the Guardian uses the same terminology to apply the principle of inseparability to the Bahá'í institutions of the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar and its Dependencies.51 I suggest that it is clear from all of these instances that it is the design of Bahá'u'lláh that the Guardian is speaking of.

In all of these cases, whether he uses the term "divorced," "dissociated," or "isolated," the purpose of Shoghi Effendi is to communicate to his reader the inseparability of the components of the Faith. This is his way of imparting a spiritual truth to us — the "principle of inseparability" in its various applications. In all of these instances, the Guardian is using this language to communicate to us something our minds have never previously grasped: The wonder of this "vast and unique" Order, of this "colossal," this "mighty Administrative structure."52 He is not warning us of the consequences of the loss of any Bahá'í institution, nor speaking of such a loss as a "mutilation" of the Cause of God. Rather, through use of this powerful language he infuses our understanding with his vision of the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh.

The article concludes...

Conclusion
Shoghi Effendi referred to the Bahá'ís as the "stewards" of the Faith,58 and designated the Hands of the Cause of God as its "Chief Stewards."59 'Abdu'l-Bahá gave the Hands the specific protective function of expelling Covenant breakers.60 They were not endowed with infallibility; their capacity to lead the Bahá'í Faith was explicit in only one word: "Chief." The generality of the Bahá'í community was, as yet, unaware of the provisions in the Kitab-i-Aqdas for the transmission of authority to the Hands of the Cause and would not learn of this verse for over a decade.61
Despite these limitations on their office, despite the fact that they possessed, in the mind of the generality of the friends, only one word of authority, it is worth reflecting on the power of that one word to keep the Cause of God united until the Universal House of Justice was brought into being. One of the first acts of the Universal House of Justice was to express its heartfelt love and gratitude to the Hands.62
In contrast, the authority of the Universal House of Justice to function infallibly with only its elected members is explicitly provided in a number of passages in the Writings of both Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá. One can only wonder at the power of such emphatic language, the power of the Covenants of Bahá'u'lláh and of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, to keep the Cause of Bahá'u'lláh united behind "[T]he divine and Universal House of Justice...that central pivot of the people of Bahá...."63.
Shoghi Effendi wrote, "Only those who come after us will be in a position to realize the value of the surprisingly strong emphasis that has been placed on the institution of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship."64 Among the "surprisingly emphatic language"65 to which he refers, are surely these words from the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá:
"The sacred and youthful branch, the guardian of the Cause of God, as well as the Universal House of Justice, to be universally elected and established, are both under the care and protection of the Abha Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of His Holiness, the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). Whatsoever they decide is of God. Whoso obeyeth him not, neither obeyeth them, hath not obeyed God; whoso rebelleth against him and against them hath rebelled against God; whoso opposeth him hath opposed God; whoso contendeth with them hath contended with God; whoso disputeth with him hath disputed with God; whoso denieth him hath denied God; whoso disbelieveth in him hath disbelieved in God; whoso deviateth, separateth himself and turneth aside from him hath in truth deviated, separated himself and turned aside from God. May the wrath, the fierce indignation, the vengeance of God rest upon him!"66
We may derive conviction from these words with which 'Abdu'l-Bahá closes His Last Will and Testament, words which will ring down through the centuries:
"All must seek guidance and turn unto the Center of the Cause and the House of Justice. And he that turneth unto whatsoever else is indeed in grievous error. The Glory of Glories rest upon you!"67