In order to accept the claims of the leadership of the sans-Guardian Bahá'ís, you would have to believe the following plainly erroneous ideas. It astounds me that so many Bahá'ís have blindly accepted their leadership without being critical of these radically wrong concepts:
1) Shoghi Effendi was unable to appoint a successor for the reason that
(choose all that you wish to believe): a) there was no Aghsán; b) he had no
children; c) there was no one in the Holy Family still loyal; d) there were
not 9 elected Hands to confirm the appointment. [The correct answer is, of course, none of the above. The Hands were obligated to accept any person the Guardian appointed]
2) The Hands had authority to seize control of the Faith after the passing
of Shoghi Effendi (because they were the "Chief Stewards" and since Shoghi
Effendi did not leave a Will, they might as well just take over). [Of course, they had no authority whatsoever]
3) The Hands had authority to call for the election of the headless UHJ
(because they were supposedly faced with a situation not covered by the
explicit Text so they needed a UHJ to ask what they should do). [The correct answer is that Shoghi Effendi had already established the International Bahá'í Council, the embryonic Universal House of Justice. If they needed guidance, then why didn't they consult this body?]
4) The headless UHJ has the authority to interpret the Texts as for
example....
a) that there is no way to appoint a second Guardian to succeed Shoghi
Effendi;
b) there is no way to appoint Hands;
c) the UHJ can supervise the Hands in the absence of the Guardian;
d) the UHJ can accept the Huqúq in the absence of the Guardian
[interesting that they found a way to take the Huqúq but could not find a
way to do the other things-- kind of selective, isn't it?]
e) that there was no guarantee in the Writings that the Guardianship would
never be broken [contrary to the explicit statements made by Shoghi
Effendi].
f) that the UHJ can appoint a Continental Board of Counselors to replace
the Hands [even though there is no such Institution called for in the Writings]
[By the way, the UHJ has no authority to interpret the Texts under any circumstances; that is the sole province of the living Guardian]
5) The headless UHJ can function properly without a Guardian [despite the
fact that Shoghi Effendi clearly stated that it could not].
6) The headless UHJ does not need a Guardian to "define the sphere of
legislative action" [despite the fact that the Master's Will says that it is
needed].
7) The headless UHJ can be infallible even though it does not have a
Guardian [even though the Master defined the UHJ as having the Guardian as its sacred head].
8) Covenant breaking means opposing the headless UHJ [even though
historically, in the Writings, it meant opposing the Center of the Covenant
and later, the Guardians, and this definition was unilaterally changed by the UHJ].
9) The headless UHJ has the right to expel its own members [contrary to the
explicit statement of the Master's Will that this is the right of the Guardian].
They say that the Orthodox Bahá'ís claims are far-fetched. But all we ask that you believe is that the teachings of the Faith that existed prior to 1957 continue exactly the same today, and that none of it has been abrogated. I think it is far-fetched to believe the above 9 erroneous statements.
Jeffrey
Comments