The Baha'i Studies Listserv

Don Calkins wrote:

 >

Seems to me that one of your articles should at least touch on the
claim that various pretenders to the station of Guardian are
legitimized thru' being "adopted" into the Aghsan...
One of the interesting things is, as I see it, that Remey never made
the argument himself; it's been Marengella and his followers and
schismatics.


Dear Don:

The implications of the Master establishing the Guardianship as a 
"hereditary office" are described here:
http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/2009/03/spiritual-and-physical-requirements-for.html
 


I never quote from CB documents, unless Shoghi Effendi or the Hands or 
the House of Justice has quoted from them, and I urge the same posture 
here on this list, i.e. not quoting CB materials later in this 
discussion.  Shoghi Effendi quotes Khayrullah in God Passes By; the 
Hands quote Remey in Ministry of the Custodians, and the House of 
Justice quotes Remey in one of its letters, and our quoting those 
materials will, on the other hand, strengthen the readership in the 
Covenant.

The matter of the hereditary nature of the office of Guardian is well 
settled as I explain here, quoting the Hands:
http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/2009/03/must-guardian-of-cause-be-descendant-of.html
 


This posting thoroughly addresses the subject that the Guardian must be 
the descendant of the Manifestation:
http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/2009/04/mason-remey-covenant-breaker.htm
and includes this explanation of the implication of Remey not making his 
claim until a full two years after Shoghi Effendi's passing:

Yawning Inconsistencies in the Conduct of Mason Remey

Since Mason Remey had concocted this claim, he either had to admit that 
he did not know during that entire two-year period that he was the 
Guardian, which was inconsistent with his claim to be the infallible 
interpreter of the Word of God; or he had to say that he had known, and 
he was hiding this from the Baha'i world, which was inconsistent with 
his claim to be the infallible protector of the Cause of God. In both 
cases, it is impossible that a true Guardian of the Cause would conduct 
himself as Mason Remey did.

In letters written on his behalf, Shoghi Effendi had stated that the 
Guardian of the Cause "is guided in his decisions to do that which 
protects it [the Baha'i Faith] and fosters its growth and highest 
interests," <http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/se/LANZ/lanz-40.html#pg55> 
and that the Guardian of the Cause "is infallible in the protection of 
the Faith." 
<http://bahai-library.com/file.php?file=uhj_infallibility_history_guardian>

The divinely-guided Guardian of the Cause always acts in the best 
interests of the Faith, and is infallible in its protection. Mason Remey 
claims to have been the Guardian of the Cause throughout 1958 and 1959, 
when he was one of the Hands of the Cause of God, whose actions during 
that period he later condemned. How could he condemn his own actions, 
which he claimed were divinely guided? How could the divinely-guided 
Guardian of the Cause act against the Faith's best interests for two 
years? If he was divinely-guided, why didn't he recognize from the 
outset that the direction the Hands were taking was the wrong one? How 
could the divinely-guided Guardian of the Cause not know that he was the 
Guardian? How could he claim that the designation of him as the 
Interpreter of the Word of God was hidden in the messages of Shoghi 
Effendi, when he himself had missed their import? How could he be the 
infallibly-guided Guardian, yet formally and repeatedly deny that there 
was a Guardian? How could he be infallible in the protection of the 
Faith, yet withhold his identity as the divinely guided one---the 
essence of protection of the Faith---from the believers? And how could 
he be the successor to Shoghi Effendi, when he even denied that Shoghi 
Effendi was the Guardian, stated that Shoghi Effendi had grievously 
misinterpreted the Master's Will, and undertook to undo Shoghi Effendi's 
entire life work?

This is sheer nonsense. Mason Remey's selfish motives are transparent. 
It is quite astonishing that anyone ever accepted his claims.


------

Nothing is more explicit and more clear than the successorship in the 
Baha'i Faith, and that is addressed here
http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/2009/03/unmistakable-clarity-of-covenant.html

Brent



__________________________________________________
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:arch...@mail-archive.com
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:leave-522332-274...@list.jccc.edu
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.edu
Or subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st
News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai...@list.jccc.net
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu

Reply via email to