In a nutshell not AFAIK. If you can get a hold of JA and PJ Khan's Advancement of Women: A Baha'i Perspective, pp.122-134 is the longest "official" discussion yet published. There are no letters cited therein subsequent to the 1988 letter arising from the Baha'i Studies Conference in New Zealand in late 1987, but there are some *earlier* excerpts from letters of Aug 9 1984 and 23 Jun 1987. In those cases they appear to be unpublished because the Khan's note permission to publish from the House of Justice.
Just while I am thinking about this, I think one of the first to "publicize" this issue was Marzieh Gail in the late forties writing in World Order magazine, but whose reference is not at hand, in any event its only in passing in the article. Interestingly Khan encourages others to keep working on this theological problem, if only to present it more palatably: "These are the kind of things we need to be thinking about and developing thoughts about this. Of course the question of the composition of the Universal House of Justice. We do need further thought on this subject, Janet and I devoted about 20 pages to that in our book on Advancement of Women, but we need more people to develop other ideas and to think further how can we can present our teachings on the subject of the male membership of the Universal House of Justice." Sydney talk August 2002. Personally I think the House of Justice feel judicially constrained to act because they see the issue "embedded in the Text" and not amenable to supplementary legislation, and they see themselves as keeping within their sphere of being supplementary legislators. However they are in a position to "deliberate upon all problems which have caused difference" (Will and Testament) and it may be that that given sufficient unrest then another judicial principle (oneness or unity) becomes a more privileged judicial principle then something being embedded in the Text. Your friends perhaps can be argued to have taken Abdu'l-Baha's advice to dispense with a religion if it causeth differences or is based on nonscientific postulates. This issue was also raised in an Australian television documentary on the Bahai Faith May 2003 where a Sydney academic raised this as an issue: http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s852253.htm (Chris Hartney was a programme consultant for the ABC but he seems to be an apologist for Caodaism which is a competitor religion which has a progressive revelation concept) The service of women is not the only topical issue. I see that CNN has been reporting the NSA of Guyana making a warning against some Human Rights legislation which would outlaw sexual orientation discrimination. http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americas/07/25/guyana.gayrig.ap/ As to whether a single issue leads to resignations and community exits. I suspect not. Exit trajectories from religions are much more multivariate than that. Cheers, Steve Cooney, Raumati, New Zealand. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ahang Rabbani Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2003 8:29 a.m. To: Baha'i Studies Subject: Anything new on the House and women question? About two weeks ago, I met a highly-educated, well-to-do couple in a social event whose conversation I greatly enjoyed. Out of the blue they mentioned they had been Baha'is (I had not given any indication about my religious affiliation). While I was collecting my thoughts to say something intelligent, the wife offered they were no longer Baha'is and if I knew anything about the Baha'is. She proceeded to tell me that they became Baha'i in a nearby community, had become very active, members of LSA, and she gave me a short fireside. But a few years later, they learned that women could not serve on the House and left the Faith. (I'm summarizing and using my own words, but she conveyed all of this with great emotion.) I don't want to open the never-ending discussion of "women on the House" and 1902 Tablet, etc, etc. I have a very specific and narrow question however: Is there anything from the World Centre since the publication of their letter some 15 years ago that sheds more light on the subject or attempts to deal with emotions and reactions generated as the result of that ruling? If so, I like to have a copy so I can share with these friends. Thanks in advance. ahang. This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html ---------- You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st news://list.jccc.net/bahai-st http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist (public) http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (public) ---------- You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Baha'i Studies is available through the following: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st news://list.jccc.net/bahai-st http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist (public) http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (public)
