Why so much hatred toward Orthodox Baha'i/Covenant breakers?

Seeker_of_truth

Well-Known Member
Messages
165
Reaction score
0
Points
0
This has always bugged me. Baha'is have a bad attitude toward Orthodox Baha'i and other Covenant breakers. Theres more animosity between Baha'is and Covenant than amoung Christian denominations. What happened to the love that all Baha'is have in common with Baha'u'llah's message?:(

-seeker
 
"With none of the leaders of the defection able to substantiate the conflicting claims they made, divisions continued to proliferate over the years. Most represented idiosyncratic agendas conceived by various individuals and largely unrelated to one another. Embroiled in charges and counter charges, abandoned by most of those who had originally taken them seriously, and entirely ignored by the Bahá'í community, the various Remey factions today provide a graphic illustration of 'Abdu'l-Bahá's description of Covenant-breaking over eighty years ago:
"These agitations of the violators are no more than the foam of the ocean, which is one of its inseparable features; but the ocean of the Covenant shall surge and shall cast ashore the bodies of the dead, for it cannot retain them."[1]"
[1] Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá (Haifa: Bahá'í World Centre, 1982), p. 210
(The Universal House of Justice, 1997 Jan 31, Mason Remey and Those who Followed him)

Covenant breaking is not a final sentence, a covenant breaker can repent and return, in the past many have.

Regards,
Scott
 
But why so much hate to the point where Baha'is are not allowed to talk to them or visit their websites in fear of getting a "disease"?
 
But why so much hate to the point where Baha'is are not allowed to talk to them or visit their websites in fear of getting a "disease"?

Nobody prohibits me from visiting ANY website or reading ANY book or document. If I have business dealings or social dealings with a covenant breaker I am expected to live up to my contracts and to be a friend to any. BUT, I take certain risks. I am well deepened and educated in the issues of why the covenant breaker groups broke away.

The idea of spiritual contagion, is a metaphor. We could actually see it play out during Mason Remey's rupture with the National Spiritual Assembly of France.

How successful are these CB movements? The truth is obvious. When self takes a greater part of one's concern than respect for the principles of the faith, then we have those like Remey who destroyed themselves for pride.

Regards,
Scott
 
Why should they do so?

For their own reasons, sincere or otherwise.

Abdu'l Baha`s half-brother was declared covenant breaker three times. Twice he repented outwardly at least and was welcomed back. I knew slightly three Native American Baha`i's who got in a pissing match with the institutions back in the early 1980's. Two of them repented and returned, the third did not.

Why did they do so? Ask them.

Regards,
Scott
 
I think this issue was discussed in another thread.
Lol Ill quote myself.

"Organizations like the military can dishonorably discharge someone from military service for fomenting divisive ideas. In the classroom students are often isolated from the classroom if they become too disruptive for the class. Often being sent to the principle for consultation about the behavior. This is because bad attitudes can become problematic if promoted by clever manipulation and can lead to the destruction of a particular organization or the hampering of its goals. The expulsion is to protect the goals and processes of the group. The Bahai Faith is a voluntary group at that. If one dislikes its ideas or wants to promote a contrary claim one can simply leave. But if one persistantly tries to replace the groups ideas with his or her own or severely undermines its goals while claiming to be a part of it, than the situation becomes problematic"
.
.."When dissent seeks to undermine the Authority of the very thing it wishes to propagate, the system falls apart. Especially when that Authority is the scriptually appointed safeguard."
Hence the expulsion and advise to keep away from Covenant-Breakers. They are trying to "illegally" replace the appointed Authority of the Bahai Faith and promote their own personal opinions. These people strike at the very Core that guides the activities of the Faith. Hence the reasonable advise to keep away from them. If you wish to be a part of the Faith and promote its goals you wouldnt want to focus on ideas and people who are opposed to them. It would hamper your groups progress. But covenant breaking is worse than that, its not just mere opposition its an attempt at subverting the intended message of Baha'u'llah to their own ideas all under the guise of the Bahai Faith. Any active attempt at this will obviously draw attention from the Appointed Authority, whose duty it is to protect and safeguard the Bahai Faith and its adherents. From this vantage point its comes as no surprise that Bahais are advised to stay away from covenant breakers.
 
I find this interesting:

They are trying to "illegally" replace the appointed Authority of the Bahai Faith and promote their own personal opinions

I've been given the impression that the Baha'i administration is effectively a self-proclaimed authority? Or did I misunderstand something?
 
Nope, IBrian, you understand correctly. The trade marked Baha'i Faith's administration is self-proclaimed. Not only that they had to do a little purging, namely of the LSA of France, to tidy up their self proclaimation.
 
I find this interesting:



I've been given the impression that the Baha'i administration is effectively a self-proclaimed authority? Or did I misunderstand something?


Well, maybe. I take this quote from The Universal House of Justice

"The Universal House of Justice was instituted when, in 1963, members of National Spiritual Assemblies from around the globe, in an atmosphere of deep reflection and profound devotion, elected nine individuals from among the Bahá'ís of the world as members of this institution. The occasion is considered by Bahá'ís to be, next to the appointment of Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian of the Faith, the most momentous event in the history of what is known as the "Formative Age" of the Bahá'í Faith. Even the manner of the election itself was befitting that institution described by `Abdu'l-Bahá as the "source of all good."13 Conducted by secret ballot, the Bahá'í electoral process prohibits the nomination and presentation of candidates, thereby giving maximum freedom of choice to each elector and avoiding the partisanship and power-seeking behavior so characteristic of conventional political elections. The election of the Universal House of Justice takes place every five years in the same atmosphere of spirituality and dedication. At the most recent international convention in April 1998, delegates from more than 160 national communities participated in the election."

So, it wasn't really self-proclaimed, but elected by representatives of all the National Spiritual Assemblies from around the world. At the time of the death of Shoghi Effendi, it was the Hands of the Cause of God that determined that the time was now for the Universal House of Justice to be formed, since Shoghi Effendi had not named anybody to succeed him. By the way, the Hands of the Cause of God were individuals that were appointed by Shoghi Effendi, 'Abdu'l-Baha, and Baha'u'llah as spiritually luminous souls. They were spiritual leaders and not administrative leaders. This group organized the election over the next 6 years, even as there were those that claimed to be the new leader, as had happened at the passing of each of the Central figures.

There is about two printed pages on the site I sighted above and worthy of reading if you would really care to get a better understanding of the Universal House of Justice.

Mick
 
Nope, IBrian, you understand correctly. The trade marked Baha'i Faith's administration is self-proclaimed. Not only that they had to do a little purging, namely of the LSA of France, to tidy up their self proclaimation.


Could you explain what you are referring too?
 
I find this interesting:



I've been given the impression that the Baha'i administration is effectively a self-proclaimed authority? Or did I misunderstand something?

The Administrative Order was proclaimed by Baha`u'llah(Kitab'i Aqdas & other documents), designed by Abdu'l Baha (Tablets of the Divine Plan and the Last Will and Testament of Abdu'l Baha) and implemented by Shoghi Effendi. Shoghi Effendi said the Universal House of Justice would be elected by the assembled National Spiritual Assemblies in 1963 (so stated at the beginning of the Ten Year Crusade in April of 1953). 1963 was chosen as that would be the centenary of Baha`u'llah's proclamation in Baghdad in 1863. In 1953 there were only twenty-some National Spiritual Assemblies. By 1963 there were slightly more than sixty National Spiritual Assemblies, who gathered in Haifa on the First Day of Ridvan and elected the first Universal House of Justice.

The Assembled Hands of the Cause (with the sole exception of Mason Remey) immediately put the questions of a successor to Shoghi Effendi and whether women could be elected to the Universal House of Justice. These were both questions that did not fall under the guidance of the Writings and the House is created to legislate what is not covered in the Writings.

So, no, the House did not proclaim itself, Baha`u'llah, Abdu'l Baha and Shoghi Rabbani Effendi did so. The other institutions of the Faith --the Hands of the Cause, the local and National Spiritual Assemblies(to become local and National Houses of Justice in due time) were already created before the death of Shoghi Effendi.

Regards,
Scott
 
This has always bugged me. Baha'is have a bad attitude toward Orthodox Baha'i and other Covenant breakers. Theres more animosity between Baha'is and Covenant than amoung Christian denominations. What happened to the love that all Baha'is have in common with Baha'u'llah's message?:(

-seeker

My friend,

I find the word "hate" to be a misnomer. Hate takes energy. In fact the definition of the word hate is "The emotion of hate; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action". For the most part, shunning or ignoring takes little effort. Only with the internet does it seem that this is discussed a lot and so gives the impression that there is effort given to "hating" them. Not true.

Personally, I have never met a covenant breaker. I have encountered some on the internet and have messaged with some as I have administered a couple of sites on the internet concerning the Baha'i Faith. I have even been apologized to by the son of one of the well-know covenant breakers for his aggressive and rude behavior.

Regardles, I don't hate them. I don't dislike them. I have no feelings concerning them and am not interested in debating with them as I am not interested in debating with anybody concerning religion. For the most part, we, as Baha'is, are teachers. Questions concerning the Baha'i Faith are welcomed. Debate isn't, well on my part it isn't, anyway.

Mick
 
Thanks for the replies - this is what I mean, from Mick's quote:

At the time of the death of Shoghi Effendi, it was the Hands of the Cause of God that determined that the time was now for the Universal House of Justice to be formed, since Shoghi Effendi had not named anybody to succeed him.

In other words, it was a secular appointment, rather than a direct succession. Shoghi Effendi did not directly appoint the members of the Universal House of Justice, therefore it wasn't a direct succession from the Bab -> Effendi where spiritual authority was inviolate?

I'm not trying to pour water on the faith here - simply that it's a common issue in religion that direct succession eventually requires a faithful "core group" to set up apparatus on which the faith can continue, and from what I'm reading here, this is what happened with the Baha'i faith.

Simply exploring the issue.
 
The Universal House of Justice is a part of the Administrative Order outlined in the Bahai writings. Even if there had been another appointed Guardian of the Faith the Universal Hous of Justice would have come into existence. Spiritual law was not violated and since it is not a secular idea but one embedded in the writings of the Faith's Founder.
 
That's what I mean, though - I'm reminded very much of early Christianity and Islam. At some point, a temporal institution having to interpret scripture without the same level of spiritual authority, except for what they claimed.

I guess that's why any such institution will tend to have greatest animosity for those nearest to themselves - because they are in a more direct position to challenge it.

Reminds me of a joke once posted on CR:

It seems that a man was about to commit suicide by jumping from a high bridge, when a second man ran up to him shouting, "Stop! Stop! Don't do it!"
"But I have nothing to live for," said the first man.
"Maybe I can help you," said the second man. "Are you religious?"
"Yes, I am," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Are you Christian, Jewish, or Moslem?"
"I'm Christian," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Are you Protestant or Catholic?"
"I'm a Protestant," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Are you Calvinist or Wesleyan?"
"Calvinist," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Are you liberal or conservative?"
"Conservative," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Evangelical or Fundamentalist?"
"Evangelical," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "Charismatic, Reformed, or Baptist?"
"Baptist," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man. "General Baptist, Conference Baptist, or Northern Baptist?"
"Conference Baptist," said the first man.
"Me too!" said the second man excitedly. "Conference Baptist of the 1932 Conference, or Conference Baptist of the 1946 Conference?"
"Conference Baptist of the 1932 Conference!" said the first man.
"1932??? Then die, infidel heretic scum!" And the second man pushed the first man off the bridge.
-Author unknown
 
LOL! Hadn't heard that one, but once I chose to do a paper on the Baptist Conventions. I still get a headache when I think about it.

InPeace,
InLove
 
Thanks for the replies - this is what I mean, from Mick's quote:



In other words, it was a secular appointment, rather than a direct succession. Shoghi Effendi did not directly appoint the members of the Universal House of Justice, therefore it wasn't a direct succession from the Bab -> Effendi where spiritual authority was inviolate?

I'm not trying to pour water on the faith here - simply that it's a common issue in religion that direct succession eventually requires a faithful "core group" to set up apparatus on which the faith can continue, and from what I'm reading here, this is what happened with the Baha'i faith.

Simply exploring the issue.

Actually, Mick is not quite right. Shoghi Effendi had planned all along for the House of Justice to be elected at the end of the Ten Year Crusade - 1963. The Ten Year Crusade was largely designed to increase the number of Baha`i communities in more nationas around the world to create a larger pool of National Assemblies who would do the actual VOTING for the Universal House of Justice.

The Hands of the Cause were also delegated with the responsibility for seeing to the protection of the Faith when the Guardian died without a successor or designate. The trick was that in all Baha`i consultative body, the authority is vested in the ASSEMBLY, not the individuals. When polled the Hands voted 25-0 to schedule the election, and bar the Hands and women from being elected to the first House. Once the first House of Justice was elected those questions, plus the possibility of appointing another Guardian were directed to the House of Justice for a decision.

So, in short, Shoghi Effendi planned the election of the first House, making it contingent on a doubling of the number of National Spiritual Assemblies during the Ten Year Crusade. The number of NSA's almost tripled in fact.

Add this:
"In studying the world-wide state of the Ten Year Plan, we have been forced to realize that the election of the eleven independent National Assemblies which must, in accordance with the Plan of the Guardian, be established in the European continent before the end of the Crusade, is much more difficult and presents a greater challenge than is the case in Latin America as the Local Assemblies must be quadrupled rather than doubled. We have therefore set the date for the election of these European national bodies for Ridvan 1962. It is our conviction that with constant and concentrated effort and sacrifice, our objectives can be accomplished there and the requisite number of Local Assemblies be brought into being by Ridvan 1961. The National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of Ceylon will likewise be elected in 1962.
With the formation of these national bodies, and we trust, circumstances permitting, of the two others specified in the provisions of the Ten Year Plan, a wide and representative foundation for the Universal House of Justice will have been laid."
(Custodians, Ministry of the Custodians, p. 167)


Regards,
Scott

P.S. The Universal House of Justice was never intended to be appointed.

"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 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! The mighty stronghold shall remain impregnable and safe through obedience to him who is the Guardian of the Cause of God. It is incumbent upon the members of the House of Justice, upon all the Aghsan, the Afnan, the Hands of the Cause of God to show their obedience, submissiveness and subordination unto the Guardian of the Cause of God, to turn unto him and be lowly before him. He that opposeth him hath opposed the True One, will make a breach in the Cause of God, will subvert His Word and will 12 become a manifestation of the Center of Sedition."
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Will and Testament, p. 11)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top