# The Spiritual Assembly as Arbitrator

*Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-18 — 1 clipping.*

---

> Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: John B. Cornell, The Spiritual Assembly as Arbitrator, bahai-library.com.
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
> 
> The Spiritual Assembly as Arbitrator
> 
> John B. Cornell
> 
> 1997
> 
> `Abdu'l-Bahá said in Some Answered Questions, "When a difficulty
> occurs
> between two individuals with reference to private rights, it is necessary for a third to
> settle the question...." (P. 276) When in the U.S., He said, "It is necessary that the
> nations and governments organize an international tribunal to which all their disputes and
> differences shall be referred. The decision of that tribunal shall be final. Individual
> controversy will be adjudged by a local tribunal." (PUP, p. 301)
> 
> More than sixty years ago, Shoghi Effendi explained that for
> Bahá'ís, this local
> tribunal is the local spiritual assembly. In May, 1936, his secretary wrote, "The Guardian
> wishes to emphasize the importance of avoiding reference to civil courts of cases of
> dispute between believers, even in non-Bahá'í issues. It is the Assembly's
> function to
> endeavor to settle amicably such disputes, both in order to safeguard the fair name and
> prestige of the Cause, and to acquire the necessary experience for the extension of its
> functions in the future." (DG, p. 13)
> 
> How do you settle disputes amicably? In His Will & Testament, the Master said
> of nations, "Should differences arise they shall be amicably and conclusively settled by
> the Supreme Tribunal, that shall include members from all the governments and peoples
> of the world." (W&T, p. 13)
> 
> Dispute resolution is not amicable if it is ruinously expensive, if adversarial
> procedures increase hostility, and if long delay drags on the controversy. We
> hear that in
> our public court system a poor man cannot afford justice. The adversarial system is
> based on trial by combat in which each party tries to ridicule, intimidate and defame or at
> least discredit the other party. Shakespeare described the law's delay as among the
> sorrows of life.
> 
> Arbitration is known as an amicable way to settle disputes because of great
> savings in cost, because of emphasis on a search for truth rather than on hurting each
> other, with private hearings that avoid publicity, with informality of procedure that
> allows the parties "to unburden themselves in a way impossible in courts," and "speedy
> disposition of the dispute, which our courts, with their congested calendars, cannot even
> remotely match." (Separation Agreements & Ante-Nuptial Contracts, Chapter 29,
> Arbitration) Hearings may be held at the convenience of the parties and of the
> arbitrators, so that there is no disruption of business or of employment with loss of
> income. Hearings may be held at any place they wish, such as in a living-room, in an
> office or in a private room in a restaurant.
> 
> "Arbitration is the adjudication of a controversy by an impartial person, or by a
> board of impartial persons, whose decision is called an award and is final and binding.
> Unlike a dispute taken to court, arbitration is entered into voluntarily; the parties
> themselves define the issue, select the arbitrator or arbitrators, and prescribe the rules to
> be followed. Almost any dispute that can be litigated can be settled by arbitration if the
> two sides so desire.
> 
> "Since arbitration involves dispute determination, it is in the nature of the
> judicial
> process. It differs from mediation or conciliation through which the parties reach an
> agreement with the aid of a third person. In arbitration, the dispute is referred for
> adjudication, not for settlement by compromise." (Ibid.)
> 
> The main difference between arbitration and civil court is that one is private
> and
> the other is public. In education, we have private schools and public schools. Many
> prefer private schools because they are free to experiment, free to be different, free to be
> progressive, and not at the mercy of politics as public schools are. In private courts of
> arbitration, there is freedom to select judges and to decide what rules to follow.
> Bahá'ís
> are free to choose the spiritual assembly to serve as a board of arbitrators, and we can
> stipulate that proceedings shall follow the laws, principles and teachings of the
> Bahá'í
> Faith.
> 
> What is the attitude of government toward arbitration? That all depends on who
> makes the laws. Before 1920, with no legislation about arbitration, courts were free to
> decide what position to take. Some judges were hostile. Probably they felt insulted and
> jealous when merchants preferred others to judge their disputes. Also, they said
> arbitration was redundant because after arbitration, if one party did not like the award he
> could litigate in public courts. Advocates of arbitration talked to legislators and in 1920,
> the State of New York enacted a law requiring courts to recognize an agreement to
> arbitrate as binding on the parties. Did this violate anyone's rights? "This statute was
> deemed not violative of a party's constitutional prerogatives to a jury trial, because such
> constitutional rights are waivable, and the agreement to arbitrate implies such a waiver.
> 
> "Therefore, if arbitration is clearly and expressly provided for in the parties'
> agreement, the arbitration will be considered the sole available remedy. Basically, the
> rationale is that a party can relinquish the right to have future controversies litigated in
> the civil courts.
> 
> "The conclusiveness of awards is based upon the principle that the parties
> having
> chosen judges of their own and agreed to abide by their decision, they are bound by their
> agreement and compelled to perform the award." (Ibid.)
> 
> Since 1920, other states gradually adopted arbitration laws until now all 50
> states
> and the District of Columbia "have statutory schemes sanctioning arbitration and
> providing procedures for converting the arbitration award into a judicially enforceable
> judgment."
> 
> "The jurisdiction of arbitrators derives from and is restricted by the
> submission
> agreement." "Arbitration is a creature of contract and a party cannot be compelled to
> arbitrate unless he or she is a signatory of a contract calling for arbitration." (Ibid.)
> 
> What do Bahá'í writings say about the role of
> Bahá'í institutions in dispute
> resolution? In 1929, Shoghi Effendi wrote that a Bahá'í teacher in
> Isfáhán "was . . .
> highly elated to learn that the prestige, the integrity and ability of the local
> Bahá'í
> Assemblies in that province had of late stood so high that non-Bahá'ís,
> exasperated by
> the corruption and incompetence of their own judges, had more than once freely
> submitted cases of dispute to the judgment of the elected representatives of the
> Bahá'í
> community in their locality." (BA, p. 172) Fifteen days later, he wrote that "the
> Bahá'ís
> of Egypt . . . . have asserted their readiness and their qualifications to exercise the
> functions of an independent Bahá'í court, . . ." (WOB, p. 11) Seven years later,
> his
> secretary wrote to an American, "The Guardian wishes to emphasize the importance of
> avoiding reference to civil courts of cases of dispute between believers, even in non-
> Bahá'í issues. It is the Assembly's function to endeavor to settle amicably such
> disputes,
> both in order to safeguard the fair name and prestige of the Cause, and to acquire the
> necessary experience for the extension of its functions in the future." (DG, p. 13)
> 
> Eight years later, in God Passes By, he wrote of "Bahá'í elective
> Assemblies,
> now assuming the duties and functions of religious courts" in Iran. (P. 371) That same
> year (1944,) his secretary wrote, "All over the world the Guardian is constantly
> encouraging and enjoining the believers to learn to function according to Bahá'í
> laws and
> principles; members of Spiritual Assemblies must learn to face their responsibilities;
> individuals must learn to turn to them and abide by their decisions. When we realize that
> all marriages, divorces, disposal of inheritance, etc., are now handled in Egypt and Persia
> solely through the Assemblies and that the believers abide by their decisions, we see that
> in Western countries the friends still have a long way to go — the sooner they start the
> better for themselves and for the Faith." (LOG, p. 43)
> 
> In a letter to me, he emphasized the same theme two years later. His secretary
> wrote on his behalf, "The Guardian is constantly encouraging the friends and the
> Assemblies to fulfill their respective duties; the friends should learn to refer to, and lean
> on, their Assemblies, and the Assemblies should assume the responsibility of making
> decisions and carrying them out." (Light of the Pacific, #76, p. 4)
> 
> Pilgrims' notes are even clearer. Although not binding on us, we are welcome to
> read them and to think about them. May and Mary Maxwell (now Ruhíyyih
> Khánum)
> reported in their Haifa Notes of 1937 that the Guardian said, "The spiritual assembly's
> function is to help the community . . . . If appealed to they must settle disputes between
> individuals and non-Bahá'ís, between families. . . . The spiritual assembly has
> not only
> the right but the obligation to settle disputes if referred to them.
> 
> "If the individual, of his own accord, refers the matter to the S.A., they must
> handle it, not shirk it. In Persia the friends go with any problem to the S.A. In America
> they do not do it enough, particularly if the dispute affects the Cause. The duty of the
> S.A. is . . . to safeguard the Cause, the interests of the Cause have precedence over the
> interests of the individual and in such a conflict the individual must abide by the decision
> of the S.A., besides the S.A. must acquire enough experience to become a Bahá'í
> Court,
> ...in the future. . . . The first thing is to face, not shirk responsibilities; second is to base
> all their verdicts on justice, be animated by justice. Justice and not tempered by mercy."
> (Haifa Notes, Vol. II, pp. 4-5)
> 
> Agnes Alexander's 1937 pilgrim notes quote the Guardian as saying, "Divorce
> although permissible is highly discouraged. The Assembly should solve such cases, and
> then they should obey and if not they must cease to be voting Bahá'ís." (P. 3)
> 
> Whenever people are able to agree, they don't need outside help. It is only when
> agreement is not possible that we need help. I made the mistake of marrying a seriously
> mentally ill woman. When a child was born, I decided I had to divorce for the child's
> sake, so I could raise him in a conflict-free environment.
> 
> Having read all of the above about how spiritual assemblies should solve
> divorces,
> I asked the N.S.A. for permission to have arbitration by the nearest local Assembly.
> Horace Holley wrote, "Divorce actions, after believers have completed a year of patience,
> can only be taken to the courts because no other agency can grant divorce. What the
> Guardian meant were matters like unpaid loans and other disputes which Assemblies can
> handle." Thinking otherwise, I asked the Guardian. He was far behind in his
> correspondence, so months went by with no answer. I cabled him and received his
> cabled reply, "APPROVE ARBITRATION." It was sent to me via Wilmette so a copy
> would be in the Wilmette telegraph office. I telephoned the N.S.A. and Charlotte Linfoot
> answered the phone. I read the cablegram to her and she asked, "All right, what would
> you like the National Assembly to do?" I said, "I would like the N.S.A. to appoint the
> Spiritual Assembly of Albuquerque to be arbitrator of the terms of divorce prior to going
> to civil court." She said, "All right, the National Assembly is in session right now, so I'll
> give them your message." In a couple of weeks, we received letters announcing that the
> N.S.A. had appointed the Spiritual Assembly of Albuquerque to be arbitrator of our terms
> of divorce.
> 
> At this point, we realized we were pioneering in a new field of
> Bahá'í
> Administration. Until then, the N.S.A. position had been that divorce arbitration by
> Bahá'í institutions in the U.S. was not possible. Suddenly this was reversed by
> the
> cablegram from the Guardian. There was no body of instruction on how a spiritual
> assembly should handle divorce. The local Assembly did not know what teachings to
> follow. I telephoned Horace Holley, who said that he did not know and invited me to
> make up a list of questions to ask the Guardian. He told me to submit my letter through
> the N.S.A., since the Guardian was many months behind in personal correspondence but
> answered N.S.A. correspondence promptly. I sent Mr. Holley my list of questions and in
> a few weeks he mailed me the Guardian's reply, dated November 5th, 1955.
> 
> His secretary wrote on his behalf: "Your letter of Oct. 3 has been
> forwarded to
> the beloved Guardian by the American N.S.A. as well as copy of document you enclosed.
> 
> "The Guardian has, at various times, given the N.S.A. certain brief instructions
> as
> to Bahá'í divorce; he does not consider that these should be amplified at the
> present time
> or elaborated, as it is premature.
> 
> "Bahá'ís should turn to their Assembly (first local and then
> National if necessary)
> in all questions of divorce. This is the advice he not only has given you and Mrs.
> Cornell, but all other Bahá'ís.
> 
> "He feels, as he has already stated, that you and Mrs. Cornell should seek the
> advice of the Assembly in your particular case and, as believers, abide by it. It is not
> possible for him, obviously, to go into such details himself and arbitrate the cases of the
> Bahá'ís."
> 
> He did not answer any of my questions. However, his letter written just two
> years
> before his tragic death confirmed that divorce arbitration is correct. We were no longer
> an exception to the rule. He explained which Bahá'ís should turn to which
> Assemblies
> and in which questions of divorce: All Bahá'ís, first to local and then National if
> necessary, in all questions of divorce.
> 
> My wife's father asked the Guardian for permission to fight me in court if the
> Assembly decision were not favorable to her. The Guardian cabled him, "URGE ABIDE
> ASSEMBLY DECISION."
> 
> The Assembly mailed us the terms it decided for us. Our attorneys composed our
> divorce decree in legal language according to terms decided by the Spiritual Assembly,
> and the judge signed it on December 20, 1955.
> 
> Horace Holley wrote us on January 6, 1966: "The National Spiritual Assembly
> approves the terms of settlement set forth by the Spiritual Assembly of Albuquerque
> acting as a Bahá'í Court of arbitration at the request of you both and also acting
> under the
> authority conferred upon it by the National Assembly. . . .
> 
> "According to the strict principles of Bahá'í administration
> Bahá'ís are not to
> carry law suits against other Bahá'ís to the courts but settle their differences
> through
> Bahá'í institutions, recognizing that only a civil court can actually annul or
> dissolve
> marriage, but the terms of the court action should be those agreed upon by both parties in
> consultation with a Bahá'í administrative body.
> 
> "In this particular case the National Assembly recognizes that there is an even
> stronger element involved, namely, the letter written to Major Cornell by the Guardian
> under date of November 5, 1955, in which it is stated that the Guardian feels that both
> parties should abide by the decision of the Bahá'í institution.
> 
> ". . . It should become a landmark in the development of such cases before
> Bahá'í
> institutions."
> 
> The N.S.A. said in its next Annual Reports, "The local Assembly, as the Guardian
> has stated, can act as a board of arbitration if the couple disagrees about the terms and
> conditions of divorce, and when it so acts the couple are to abide by its decision."( p. 27)
> 
> If our case were a landmark, it was the best-kept secret in history. Ten years
> later,
> I heard a Bahá'í worry about civil court divorce with his Bahá'í
> wife. I asked him why
> didn't he have arbitration by a spiritual assembly? He had never heard of such a thing,
> so I told him my story. Since he was on a spiritual assembly in the Salinas Valley and
> his wife on a spiritual assembly in Oregon, I urged him to ask the N.S.A. to appoint a
> neutral Assembly. The new N.S.A. Secretary, Dr. David Ruhe, replied that all questions
> on divorce must be taken to civil court. I gave the Salinas Assembly words of the
> Guardian and Horace Holley on assembly divorce arbitration. This was sent to Wilmette
> and the N.S.A. consulted on it. The result was N.S.A. appointment in 1965 of the
> Spiritual Assembly of San Francisco to be arbitrator of their terms of divorce.
> 
> In 1966, The Universal House of Justice wrote, "The local friends should
> understand the importance of the law of consultation and realize that it is to the local
> Spiritual Assembly that they should turn, abide by its decisions, . . . and seek its advice
> and guidance in the solution of personal problems and the adjudication of disputes,
> should any arise amongst the members of the community." (Unpublished letter to N.S.A.
> of U.S.)
> 
> Some ask if Bahá'í arbitration is a waste of time if parties don't
> want to carry out
> Assembly decisions. Can disappointed parties go to civil court to litigate for a better
> deal? Not when parties sign a submission agreement describing the dispute in writing
> and promising to obey the decision of the Assembly. According to laws in all fifty states
> and all provinces in Canada, such a signed agreement has the binding force of a contract
> enforceable by courts like any other contract. When such an agreement is signed, neither
> party can litigate disputes described in the agreement, because the parties have bound
> themselves to accept terms decided by the arbitrator, in this case the Spiritual Assembly.
> Rabbinical arbitration is recognized and enforced by courts, so there is no reason why
> Bahá'í arbitration should not be recognized and enforced when parties have
> signed a
> valid submission agreement
> 
> Another concern is whether an arbitration award by a local Assembly can be
> appealed to the National Assembly. Lawyers say that in arbitration the award is final and
> binding and there is no right to appeal. What they mean is that civil courts will not
> review decisions of arbitrators. There is nothing in any state law barring appellate
> arbitration. This is common in Europe and is recognized in the U.S. An example is the
> arbitration contract of the National Institute of Oilseed Products, which provides for
> review by a Board of Appeal when requested by any party. The contract states that no
> member of the Board of Review shall be one of the original arbitrators. "The Board of
> Appeal shall review the case upon the award, evidence and statements of all parties
> originally submitted to the arbitration committee. . . ." (Contract of National Institute of
> Oilseed Products, Chapter 11 - Arbitration of Disputes)
> 
> Thus, when Bahá'ís submit a dispute to a spiritual assembly,
> they can state in their
> submission agreement that either party has the right to appeal to the N.S.A. within thirty
> days after the local award. This will give everyone all of his rights as a Bahá'í to
> national review and will satisfy all legal requirements for civil court enforcement of
> Assembly awards.
> 
> It is my belief that arbitration by spiritual assemblies has been mandated by
> Bahá'u'lláh, `Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi as well as by the Universal
> House of
> Justice, and that modern arbitration laws make it an ideal forum for Bahá'ís to
> resolve
> disputes with each other as well as with any non-Bahá'ís willing to accept a
> spiritual
> assembly as arbitrator.
> 
> METADATA
> 
> Views12538 views since posted 1998; last edit 2012;
> 
> previous at archive.org.../cornell_spiritual_assembly_arbitrator;
> URLs changed in 2010, see archive.org.../bahai-library.org
> Language
> English
> Permission
> author
> Share
> 
> Shortlink: bahai-library.com/338
> Citation: ris/338
> 
> select Collection:
> Archives
> Articles
> Articles-unpublished
> Audio
> Bibliographies
> BIC
> Biographies
> Books
> Chronologies
> Compilations
> Compilations-NSA
> Compilations-personal
> Documents
> East-asia
> Encyclopedia
> Essays
> Etc
> Excerpts
> Fiction
> Glossaries
> Guardian
> Histories
> Introductory
> Letters
> Maps
> Music
> Newspapers
> NSA-documents
> NSA-letters
> Personal
> Pilgrims
> Poetry
> Presentations
> Resources
> Reviews
> Scripts
> Software
> Statistics
> Study
> Talks
> Theses
> Transcripts
> Translations
> UHJ-documents
> UHJ-letters
> Video
> Visual
> Writings
> 
> home
> 
> sitemap
> 
> series
> 
> chronology
> 
> search:
> author
> 
> title
> 
> date
> 
> tags
> 
> adv. search
> languages
> 
> inventory
> 
> bibliography
> 
> abbreviations
> 
> links
> 
> about
> 
> contact
> 
> RSS
> 
> new
>
> — *The Spiritual Assembly as Arbitrator (Used by permission of the curator)*