Beliefnet Discussions - Beliefnet.com

Questions about Remey/Guardian?

This forum has moved!
Same people, same great conversations, new location.
Please join us in the new Beliefnet Community.

<Prev | Next> First Page | Last Page

This is a read-only area.

Messages: 1 - 4 (18 total)

	ERS83 7/7/2002 12:53 PM	1 out of 18
	Hello,maybe someone who believes Mason Rememy was appointed by Shoghi Effendi as second Guardian can explain a few things for me. (1)Why did Mason Rememy sign two documents along with the rest of the hands of the cause stating that Shoghi Effendi did not appoint a successor, then 3 years later claim that somehow he was the guardian? (2)If in fact Shoghi Effendi did appoint Mason Remey or intended to appoint him as guardian, Why did Remey WAIT 3 years to speak out saying that he was in fact the second Guardian? He wasted 3 years when he should have known that he was guardian, if in fact he was appointed. (3)Mason Rememy publicly appointed Donald Harvey as thrid guardian, then later on Joel Jan� Marangella said that Mason Remey was acting irrational when he made that decision, so joel Marangella assumed the position of third guardian. Can an infallible guardian act irrational? or was Joel Marangalla wrong? Maybe a member of the orthodox Baha'i Faith can answer these question, or anyone who believes thjat Mason Rememy was appointed by Shoghi Effendi. Best regards

	FDS 7/7/2002 6:39 PM	2 out of 18
	You ask: "1) Why did Mason Remey sign two documents along with the rest of the Hands of the Cause stating that Shoghi Effendi did not appoint a successor, then 3 years later claim that somehow he was the guardian?" First, one can never really know what another individual is truly thinking, but from what Mason Remey wrote in his "Daily Observations" it is clear that in the days of the first conclave of Hands he was not of a mind to push himself forward. It is also clear that there was a tremendous rush on the part of the other Hands of the Faith to declare the Will and Testament and the Guardianship "Bada", and, at the same time, there was surely great anxiety on the part of the other Hands that their actions be looked upon as unanimously supported. At that time, I would surmise that Mason Remey --like Ali when Abu Bakr was designated the successor to Muhammad ( Ali refraining from open rejection of the Caliphate) --would not have wanted to see any dissension or strife at such a critical time, and he signed the documents that were prepared at the time. It should perhaps be noted that he himself in those days did not perceive how he had been designated Shoghi Effendi's successor, and thus he did not press the issue of his successorship at that time. Over the next several years, he continued to remonstrate with the other Hands about the necessity for the continuing Guardianship and he continued to urge them to seek out the Second Guardian. However, once the Hands had started down the path that they took, they apparently weren't about to explore the possibility that they could have made a mistake. When Mason Remey publicly appointed Donald Harvey as the third Guardian, he had already activated the second International Baha'i Council and had turned the affairs of the Faith over to Joel Marangella. Thus, Joel Marangella became the third Guardian at the time the Council was activated, and Mason Remey was no longer the Guardian. The appointment of Harvey, therefore, was invalid. It was not until Mason Remey was no longer the Guardian that he began to make statements that were 180 degrees away from what he had stated over his many previous years as a Baha'i. Joel Marangella delayed in making his proclamation because of his concern about plunging the Faith into a fresh crisis over the matter of successsorship. He believed, quite rightly, that the sans-Guardian Baha'is would seize upon Mason Remey's changed views as proof of the falsity of his claim to the guardianship following Shoghi Effendi's passing. Can an infallible Guardian act irrationally? No, I don't think so. Was Joel Marangella wrong? No, I don't believe that either. Sincerely, Frank Schlatter

	ERS83 7/7/2002 10:06 PM	3 out of 18
	Thanks for the reply FDS. why did'nt shoghi Effendi leave a writen will and appoint a successor the way Abdul-Baha said to do? I know that he died suddenly but if he was indeed guided by God then you would think that he would have left a will so that differences would'nt arise in the manner that it did. I'm not bashing Shoghi Effendi it's not his fault, it was just a tragic event. Do you think that Shoghi Effendis death was a test sent by God? because if it was it sure worked lol

	FDS 7/7/2002 11:49 PM	4 out of 18
	Dear ERS83, I have a problem with "why" questions except when they pertain to my own behavior--and even then there are times when I may not be able to explain why I did or didn't do something. So when you ask why Shoghi Effendi didn't leave a will, I have no definitive answer for you. Many Baha'is of course consider Shoghi Effendi's "Dispensation" to be his will inasmuch as in the Maxwell Notes he is cited as saying that his "Dispensation" was his spiritual testament. But aside from clarifying a great many things related to the Faith, the "Dispensation" does not directly pertain to his appointment of his successor. It should be noted, though, that for the purpose of his appointment of a successor, a Will and Testament is not called for. The appointment was to be made in his life-time. So a Will would not be the kind of document employed in identifying his successor. There have been times when I have felt that Shoghi Effendi's death was a test sent by God. At other times I have simply felt that Shoghi Effendi's death was simply a means by which the believers' loyalty to every clause of 'Abdu'l-Baha's Will was tested. To me, it's clear from the Tablet of Ahmad that it is important for "the wisdom of every command" to be tested, and without doubt, if the Will is to looked upon as a series of commands, then it is important that those commands be tested. Interestingly enough, those of us who have witnessed the test have come to different conclusions as to the meaning of the test. Does that mean that there will be additional testing? Probably. Sincerely, Frank Schlatter

<Prev | Next> First Page | Last Page

This is a read-only area.