Covenant and the Foundations of Civil Society: Part II

Governance as Trusteeship

Governance is frequently mentioned in the Bahá'í writings as trusteeship, as the administering of a trust. This itself is an enduring concept, and it is worth examining why. Bahá'u'lláh speaks of the governors and administrators of society as "trustees" or "trusted ones" of God. He writes: "Know ye that the poor are the trust of God in your midst. Watch that ye betray not His trust. Ye will most certainly be called upon to answer for His trust on the day when the Balance of justice shall be set." ⁷¹ The relation of trusteeship is itself a kind of covenant--an agreement concerning the exercise of power under a set of circumstances determined by a relationship with ethical obligations implying proportional recompense: reward for fulfilling the trust and punishment for breaking it. Thus we can see why the preeminent virtue of governance is trustworthiness, described by Bahá'u'lláh as the "greatest portal leading unto the tranquillity and security of the people," and "the supreme instrument for the prosperity of the world." ⁷²

The salient fact in trusteeship is that power is being exercised on behalf of some person or persons who, for some reason are not in a position to do so directly--because they are absent, young, old, and so on; this principle operates also in professional ethics, where power is exercised on behalf of a vulnerable client or group. We can include as vulnerable creatures to which we stand in the relationship of trustees such entities as the environment, future generations, in fact all those who will be affected by the exercise of power. Although all persons are equal before God, as Bahá'u'lláh indicates it is really the most vulnerable whose interests and rights we need to be most concerned to safeguard, those who are without wealth, without social status or prestige; rather, it is those who do not have a voice to speak up whose rights need to be protected--the poor. In a covenantal order, it is not merely the governors of society who have an ethical duty to care for the best interests of their people. The sense of responsibility to the common good is a civic virtue that devolves on each member of the polity; as an ethical duty it increases in proportion to the power and influence individuals exercise whether formally or informally in various social roles, for example, as leaders of thought, scientists, authors, and scholars.

Anyone who governs or administers does so on the basis of this covenant of trusteeship. The content of the trust obligation thus is not reducible or subject to the desires or preferences of the individuals involved. They do not have a right to decide, for instance, to repeal a moral law because it is unpopular. And this is why mere majoritarianism (as the sum of the preferences of the many) is not a true entailment of any kind of representative government that occurs in a relationship of trusteeship, or covenant. Equity inevitably requires that some must get less than they might like to have so that others will not have to go without, and that some individuals must sacrifice their purely private interests when those conflict with the common good. Thus it is essential that there be a way to know what the common good is, in the cases where there is a conflict of preferences. And that means there must be a shared vision that characterizes that community as a moral order, defined by an idea of what constitutes human excellence: a set of values and principles that serve as terms of reference and the standard for evaluative decision making. In this perspective, the virtue of sacrificing self-interest for the common good is not something that can be imposed by an external source (otherwise it is not "sacrifice"), but it arises out of personal commitment and the genuine consciousness of a unity of interests that is best described as love. And where love is concerned, no sacrifice entails a net loss.

The virtue of trustworthiness implies strong accountability. The trustee, in this case the governors of society, will be "called upon to answer for His trust." But accountability can only have motivating force if it is real and inevitable, and not merely a chance of getting caught. Our own "best interests" are really only fused with those of "the poor," that is, an "other," by a certainty that how we act toward others determines how we will be judged, and what we will receive. Thus `Abdu'l-Bahá writes:

...a religious individual must disregard his personal desires and seek in whatever way he can wholeheartedly to serve the public interest; and it is impossible for a human being to turn aside from his own selfish advantages and sacrifice his own good for the good of the community except through true religious faith. For self-love is kneaded into the very clay of man, and it is not possible that, without any hope of a substantial reward, he should neglect his own present material good. ⁷³

The adoption of a spiritual perspective transforms that self-love into a reference point for understanding the needs of others and seeing their interests as linked with one's own: "O son of man!" Bahá'u'lláh reveals, "If thine eyes be turned towards mercy, forsake the things that profit thee and cleave unto that which will profit mankind. And if thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbor that which thou choosest for thyself." ⁷⁴

From a Bahá'í perspective governance is really a spiritual practice, for the judgments we make are dependent on the inner orientation of the heart. In religious scriptures, the metaphor of the balance is invoked as the image of the administration of justice which is the measure of good governance. (Thus, even the familiar image of the scales of justice is an ancient religious concept.) Bahá'u'lláh, in His tablets, speaks of governance as spiritual accountability:

It behoveth every ruler to weigh his own being every day in the balance of equity and justice and then to judge between men and counsel them to do that which would direct their steps unto the path of wisdom and understanding. This is the cornerstone of statesmanship and the essence thereof. From these words every enlightened man of wisdom will readily perceive that which will foster such aims as the welfare, security and protection of mankind and the safety of human lives. ⁷⁵

Using a balance, or any measuring instrument, is a two-step process: before the scale can be used to weigh anything the justice of the instrument itself must be ensured, and this is only possible by orienting it to a standard that is outside of and transcends the self. The one who would govern must first govern the self, must come under the rule of divine justice, must set aside the self's inclination to place a thumb on its side of the scale, and must become a servant of the interests of the people, regarding their interests as one's own. In this respect it is worth recalling that to have "scruples" comes from the term for some of the tiniest of weights.

The covenant perspective also calls forth the virtues and the vision that make governance more than mere management, that is, the sense of being entrusted with "the care of a community." ⁷⁶ Governance, as trusteeship, is described in the Bahá'í writings as the care of a living organism, and institutions of governance as a channel through which the spirit that gives it life, that is, the promised blessings of the Covenant, flow. Bahá'u'lláh's exhortations to the rulers of His day invoke this sense of transcendent, loving obligation for the care of society as a living being: "Take ye counsel together," He wrote to Queen Victoria, "and let your concern be only for that which profiteth mankind and bettereth the condition thereof.... Regard the world as the human body which, though created whole and perfect, has been afflicted, through divers causes, with grave ills and maladies." ⁷⁷ To know what profits mankind and betters its conditions requires reference to a vision of human good, just as the physician must know not only what disorder the patient suffers from, but what remedy is required for the patient to become healed--something that depends entirely on a clear vision of what "health" is.

The Spirit of Covenant

What makes a covenant work is the spirit it engenders, which has been referred to as "loving-kindness" and "grace," and which Shoghi Effendi refers to as "transcending love." Elazar suggests that the spirit that characterizes covenantal relationships

really means the obligation of a partner to a covenant to go beyond the narrowly construed contractual demands of the partnership in order to make the relationship between them a truly viable one.... A covenant is, after all, a contract and the tendency in contractual systems is for people to act like lawyers, that is to say, to try to construe the contract as narrowly as possible when defining their obligations and as broadly as possible when defining the obligations of the other parties.

In contrast, the covenant spirit impels one to interpret "one's contractual obligations broadly rather than narrowly, the broader the better." ⁷⁸

The collective, social purpose of the great Covenant between God and humanity has always been the spiritual advancement of civilization, and this is reflected in the fact that, as Elazar has remarked, "one of the greatest achievements of covenantal societies" is "the institutionalization of reform," that is, the dedication, on principle, of political institutions to the improvement of social and economic conditions of all citizens. Citing the role of covenantal thinking in the abolition of slavery, and nineteenth- century reform movements in law and prisons, education, and mental health, he says: "a strong case can be made that the very idea of reform emerges from the covenant world view and is only possible where that world view exists." In fact, he claims, "The progress of civilization can be traced as corresponding to the periods in human history when the historical vanguard has recognized the covenant idea and sought to concretely apply it to the building of human, social, and political relationships." ⁷⁹

It has been suggested that the power of covenantal unity is expressed in its ability to create a "founding synthesis": the basis of covenantal polity, not in common descent but in common consent, creates "kinships of greater dignity and sanctity" than mere ties of birth or ethnicity. ⁸⁰ Covenants, therefore, are more than instruments that bind, but are in fact "liberating devices that call into existence new entities," that create relationships and forge bonds of mutuality between different and formerly hostile peoples. ⁸¹ It is this powerful concept which, Bahá'ís believe, has the potential to unite the peoples of the world in a global political and moral order. In the idea of "founding synthesis," we can see the mutual relation of such Bahá'í principles as the unity and equality of humankind, the oneness of religion, and the abolition of prejudice. These bring together diversified elements, change their existing beliefs about one another, and change their relationship to one another, uniting them into a new structure. ⁸² In contrast, the ideology of rights-based individualism has no way to account for or evoke an altruistic ethic which moves people to become more concerned with giving to others than with getting their own share, an ethic that goes beyond respect for others at a distance to loving sacrifice so that others will have more than oneself. An altruistic ethic arises from a relationship that encompasses otherness as an embrace.

That call to human unity is expressed in Bahá'u'lláh's writings in the classic language of the eternal Covenant, as a summons to unite in a global moral community, authorized by a sacred obligation, in order to obtain the promised blessing of peace and prosperity:

O contending peoples and kindreds of the earth! Set your faces towards unity, and let the radiance of its light shine upon you. Gather ye together, and for the sake of God resolve to root out whatever is the source of contention amongst you. Then will the effulgence of the world's great Luminary envelop the whole earth, and its inhabitants become the citizens of one city, and the occupants of one and the same throne....

There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you. This, verily, is the most exalted Word which the Mother Book hath sent down and revealed unto you. To this beareth witness the Tongue of Grandeur from His habitation of glory. ⁸³

The unity of the human race that is both made possible and mandated by the Covenant, as Shoghi Effendi has explained, "implies the establishment of a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united, and in which the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded." ⁸⁴

A Universal Moral Community

It has been argued here that the foundations of civil society are themselves religious, that the structures and principles of law, order, and governance are dependent upon a world view which locates the purpose of life in a transcendent spiritual destiny that is realized in the idea of the eternal Covenant, and which entails a particular conception of human freedom as sacred. Like freedom, tolerance is not a secular, but a religious idea. The dignity of all humans, from which human rights arise, is a religious concept and depends upon a definition of human nature as spiritual in essence. Rejecting the notion that "an innate sense of human dignity will prevent man from committing evil actions and insure his spiritual and material perfection," `Abdu'l-Bahá states: "if we ponder the lessons of history it will become evident that this very sense of honor and dignity is itself one of the bounties deriving from the instructions of the Prophets of God," and is instilled only by education. ⁸⁵

The duty to respect each person's dignity, that is, as tolerance or "civility," is itself dependent upon "piety" as reverence for a higher authority to which one is accountable. ⁸⁶ It is piety that both justifies and commands tolerance as a duty which is inextricable from righteousness. Bahá'u'lláh writes:

The heaven of true understanding shineth resplendent with the light of two luminaries: tolerance and righteousness.

O my friend! Vast oceans lie enshrined within this brief saying. Blessed are they who appreciate its value, drink deep therefrom and grasp its meaning, and woe betide the heedless....

He goes on to recount: "At present the light of reconciliation is dimmed in most countries and its radiance extinguished while the fire of strife and disorder hath been kindled and is blazing fiercely," and then He delivers a warning against committing injustice and tyranny against people because of their religion, specifically in reference to the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe. Significantly, it is "two great powers who regard themselves as the founders and leaders of civilization and the framers of constitutions" who "have risen up against the followers of the faith associated with Him who conversed with God [Moses]." ⁸⁷ Clearly secular civilization and even constitutions are not sufficient to guarantee basic human rights.

The protection of tolerance depends upon having an order in which unity is based upon guiding principles anchored in a spiritual view. ⁸⁸ These alone enable us to determine the "constructive limits of freedom" that are essential if tolerance itself is not to be exploited for purposes of domination. Only spiritual principles enable us to answer the question, "Where does freedom limit our possibilities for progress, and where do limits free us to thrive?" ⁸⁹

An important feature of the divine Covenant in history has always been its power of renewal, through which guiding norms can be adapted to the requirements of the times, in light of the overall goal of the advancement of civilization. Today the critical requirement of the times is the consciousness of the oneness and wholeness of humanity. It is this concept which provides the perspective from which social discourse can be rescued from sterile contentious polarities, reconciling and integrating the necessary aspects of unity and diversity--equality and equity, rights and responsibilities, freedom and limits, individual and community.

But the current deification of difference for its own sake, the ideology of individualism and particularism, and its consequent aggressive anti-universalism, are all forms of mistaking the illness of the age--disunity--for normalcy. The danger is that a retreat inward to particularism (with the competition and adversarial struggle that implies) only exacerbates the problem and draws us away from the solution. The narrowing of the moral community to those most like oneself is a recipe for disaster, because it vitiates those conditions that foster respect for others and creates instead exactly the conditions that justify indifference to the suffering of others, prejudice, hostility, and violent conflict. ⁹⁰

To consider unity as the core truth of humankind is not to advocate a vague abstraction or a stifling notion of uniformity, but to stress the relationship of diverse parts to one another in a complex interdependent system. In contrast, when atomistic difference is viewed as the core truth, relationship is precluded; indeed, such concepts as equality, and even the very idea of universal human rights, become incoherent the more the idea of radical diversity is pressed, for such ideas as equality and human rights cannot be invoked without appealing to principles with universal validity, and without tacitly referring to a higher-order category in which the two entities being contrasted can be recognized as two kinds of one thing. The exclusion, in secular theories, of the possibility of a transcendent basis for a sense of human unity marks the limit of those theories to provide any integrating principle or framework for human community beyond criteria of shared material conditions such as location, kinship, class, and culture.

Yet even some who stress the urgency of locating shared human values find that project confounded by the fact of diversity in the existing communities of humankind. ⁹¹ As philosopher Paul Gomberg argues, a universal morality must be grounded in the possibility of universal community, and this is dependent upon a universal identity. Only such an identity can provide a more inclusive perspective than that of "parochial moralities" which confine the scope of obligation to the group. ⁹² As long as people's identities are formed with reference to small groups, that identity will determine the limits of their moral community and conception of justice. But there is no merely rational way to climb out of that impasse. Something else, beyond reason and enlightened self-interest, must create a larger sense of identity with others who are very different. The only possible source of such an identity, and consequently of global community, must be a spiritual one: only the spirit of transcending love has the power to unite people who are dissimilar in material conditions and background.

Bahá'u'lláh's charter for world order offers to the human civilizing process, at this critical moment in history, the renewal of the society-building power of the great Covenant. It is the transcendent principle implicit in the divine Covenant that has always been the agency of spiritual and social development, enabling the passage to each new stage in the history of the cumulative integration of human society. The Covenant is the fulcrum on which human vision is lifted to new heights of unity, where the moral community, previously confined to those who are akin, is expanded to embrace, integrate, and unify formerly contending peoples and kindreds into a single polity.

That vision is expressed in the words of Shoghi Effendi:

The Faith of Bahá'u'lláh has assimilated, by virtue of its creative, its regulative and ennobling energies, the varied races, nationalities, creeds and classes that have sought its shadow, and have pledged unswerving fealty to its cause. It has changed the hearts of its adherents, burned away their prejudices, stilled their passions, exalted their conceptions, ennobled their motives, coordinated their efforts, and transformed their outlook. While preserving their patriotism and safeguarding their lesser loyalties, it has made them lovers of mankind, and the determined upholders of its best and truest interests. While maintaining intact their belief in the Divine origin of their respective religions, it has enabled them to visualize the underlying purpose of these religions, to discover their merits, to recognize their sequence, their interdependence, their wholeness and unity, and to acknowledge the bond that vitally links them to itself. This universal, this transcending love which the followers of the Bahá'í Faith feel for their fellow-men, of whatever race, creed, class or nation, is...both spontaneous and genuine. They whose hearts are warmed by the energizing influence of God's creative love cherish His creatures for His sake, and recognize in every human face a sign of His reflected glory.

Of such men and women it may be truly said that to them "every foreign land is a fatherland, and every fatherland a foreign land." For their citizenship, it must be remembered, is in the Kingdom of Bahá'u'lláh. ⁹³