Hands of the Bahá'í Faith

Critique (Part Four) of ITC study of Guardianship & UHJ

Part Four of a Critique by Hand of Cause of God David Maxwell of A Study for Auxiliary Board Members of the Guardianship & The Universal House of Justice Prepared by the International Teaching Centre (of the heterodox Bahá'ís). Click here for Part One. Click Here for Part Two. Click Here for Part Three.

WAS THERE REALLY NO WAY TO APPOINT A SUCCESSOR?

---ITC Position:

Soon after it was established, the Universal House of Justice clarified the issue in a message dated 6 October 1963 to all National Spiritual Assemblies: After prayerful and
careful study of the Holy Texts bearing upon the question of the appointment of the
successor to Shoghi Effendi as Guardian of the Cause of God, and after prolonged consideration of the views of the Hands of the Cause of God residing in the Holy Land,the Universal House of Justice finds that there is no way to appoint or to legislate to make it possible to appoint a second Guardian to succeed Shoghi Effendi. (21)

---Critique:

The bogus Universal House of Justice nailed this one. There is no way that they could
appoint or legislate a guardian; only a guardian can do that.

---ITC Position:

Was it anticipated that there would be no future Guardians?
Writing on the question of future Guardians, the Universal House of Justice has
explained that there was no guarantee of the continuation of the line of Guardians:
Future Guardians are clearly envisaged and referred to in the Writings, but there is
nowhere any promise or guarantee that the line of Guardians would endure forever; onthe contrary there are clear indications that the line could be broken.

---Critique:

Irrelevance, irrelevance, irrelevance. This paragraph is irrelevant to the issue at hand. True to form, the bogus UHJ uses bits and pieces of unrelated snips from various writings to justify their stance. They say there was a hinted-at possibility that the guardianship would not last forever. That may be true, the guardianship may not last forever. However, they say nothing about the issue at hand, the 1,000 year Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh'. The Institution of the Guardianship will endure with a succession of living guardians for the remainder of this Dispensation.

---ITC Position:

Yet, in spite of this, there is a repeated insistence in the Writings on the indestructibility
of the Covenant and the immutability of God’s Purpose for this Day. (22)

Indeed in the Most Holy Book, Bahá'u'lláh’ reveals the following passage which
anticipated precisely what actually occurred regarding the successorship of the authority
of the Cause of God:

Endowments dedicated to charity revert to God, the Revealer of Signs. None hath the
right to dispose of them without leave from Him Who is the Dawning-place of
Revelation. After Him, this authority shall pass to the Aghsán, and after them to the
House of Justice—should it be established in the world by then—that they may use
these endowments for the benefit of the Places which have been exalted in this Cause,
and for whatsoever hath been enjoined upon them by Him Who is the God of might and
power. Otherwise, the endowments shall revert to the people of Bahá who speak not
except by His leave and judge not save in accordance with what God hath decreed in
this Tablet—lo, they are the champions of victory betwixt heaven and earth—that they
may use them in the manner that hath been laid down in the Book by God, the Mighty,
the Bountiful. (23)

In the explanatory notes to the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, prepared under the supervision of the
Universal House of Justice, it is pointed out that this passage “has particular implications
. . . For the succession of authority following the passing of Bahá'u'lláh. . . and of `Abdu'l-Bahá.” (24) In connection with this section of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas the House of Justice has also written: The passing of Shoghi Effendi in 1957 precipitated the very situation provided for in this passage, in that the line of Aghsán ended before the House of Justice had been elected. (25)

---Critique:

The ITC, and in fact most heterodox Baha’is, insist that the lineage of the Aghsán plays
a significant part in guardian successorship. As shown in the above two paragraphs, it is
inferred that at one time the Aghsán were available for appointment to the guardianship.
Laying aside what the ITC and the UHJ have to say about Aghsán, let us examine the
thoughts of both ‘Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi. (It goes without saying that In a Court
of Law, both of their opinions would be viewed as expert testimony, well beyond that of
the contemporary ITC and UHJ individual membership.)

Shoghi Effendi identified the Aghsán as the sons of Bahá'u'lláh (“God Passes By“ page 239) and therefore the contemporaries of `Abdu'l-Bahá. They would never have lived beyond the ministry of Shoghi Effendi and been eligible, even if loyal, for appointment as his successor. Aside from this fact, it may be noted that whereas in Part One of the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá, (p.11 of the edition, "Issued by National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States and Canada, 1944, from text received at 104 Wall Street, New York, February 25, 1922, addressed by the Guardian to 'The beloved of God and the handmaids of the Merciful throughout the United States of America and Canada,'") it states: "It is incumbent upon the members of the House of Justice, upon all the Aghsán, the Afnán, the Hands of the Çause of God to show their obedience, submissiveness and subordination unto the guardian of the Cause of God…”

In Part Three of the Will (p.25), written at a later date, it states: "For he [Shoghi Effendi] is after `Abdu'l-Bahá, the guardian of the Cause of God, the Afnán, the Hands (pillars) of the Cause and the beloved of the Lord must obey him and turn unto him." It may be noted that significantly the Aghsán have been conspicuously omitted in this subsequent part of the Will as they obviously had already by that time become disloyal.
Yet, upon the passing of Shoghi Effendi, the Hands in their proclamation of November
25, 1957, (as recorded in the book "The Ministry of the Custodians") claimed as the
single reason why "no successor to Shoghi Effendi could have been appointed by him"
was because "The Aghsán (branches) one and all are either dead or have been declared violators of the Covenant." As this disloyalty had occurred prior to the ministry of Shoghi Effendi, and if it were true, as they erroneously claim, that their disloyalty had now precluded his naming a successor, they should have been asked why then would Shoghi Effendi, certainly aware of this, have still written all that he did so copiously about the Guardianship and its continuance and its essentiality to the World Order of Bahá'u'lláh in his writings and messages?

Beyond those significant and “deal-closing” facts, I must admit that I have never understood the logic of the bogus UHJ using the Endowments Dedicated to Charity and
the Huqúq'u'lláh to justify their position as being the central authority of the Bahá'í Faith.
They use the Most Holy Book, the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, to give credence to their twisted intent.
Yes, the line of the Aghsán had ended, but that had no direct impact upon the formation
of a Universal House of Justice. ‘Abdu'l-Bahá had already anticipated and taken care of
that in His Will. The Will and Testament has many facets, one of which describes what
could happen if an Aghsán was not available for succession to the guardianship. (Could
it not be that is precisely why ‘Abdu'l-Bahá included that in His Will? Although it is so
very obvious now, He knew the likelihood of the availability of the Aghsán was to be
either a non-issue or not very likely?) `Abdu'l-Bahá further discusses that another branch may be chosen under certain circumstances, not that the UHJ may be formed first, and then afterwards anoint itself to be the center of authority. The Will of `Abdu'l-Bahá stipulates in great detail the manner in which a proper UHJ must be structured in order for it to be the Universal House of Justice envisioned by Bahá'u'lláh. It clearly tells of the essentiality of the guardian of the Cause of God to provide the proper conduct of its responsibilities. Nowhere in any of the Holy Writings does it discuss that a UHJ may exist absent a living guardian. Quite the contrary, the Institution of the Guardianship is such an elemental factor in the activities of the Administrative Order that should there be a time that there is no living guardian, the wheels will immediately fall off, and the carcass of the Faith will turn to dust.

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas refers to endowments dedicated to charity as well as Huqúq'u'lláh,
the fixed money offering (the right of God.) However, it discusses them in two separate
categories. The Huqúq'u'lláh is the right of God, to be managed within the offices of the
guardian of the Cause, while endowments dedicated to charity is in the responsibility of
the UHJ. They comprise two separate categories, yet the bogus UHJ manages them
both and apparently combines them into one category.

The Huqúq'u'lláh was not intended to be involved in guardianship succession. I am reminded of an obnoxious slogan used by a noted politician in the United States during his successful presidential campaign: “It’s the economy, stupid!” Unfortunately, I find parallels of that within the approach the bogus UHJ uses in the justification of their
House of Justice. Any aspect of the handling of monetary issues smacks of materialism;
money is the fuel of materialism. Materialism is the antithesis of spirituality. Spirituality is the foundation of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas. It is no accident that monetary issues, Huqúq'u'lláh
and the endowments dedicated to charity are discussed within the Holy pages of the book of laws. How else will humans learn to overcome their materialistic bent?

The bogus Universal House of Justice uses the spiritually charged Kitáb-i-Aqdas, with its
mantle of spirituality, to give credence to their use of its words to justify their existence.
The problem with that is that the instruction they cling to was intended for the handling
of monetary matters; materialism. I daresay that protection from an avenue that can
lead to the peril and decay that materialism has brought to our present society definitely
has a place in the Aqdas. It is the pinnacle of irony that the bogus UHJ has to resort to a
matter of discussion dealing with materialistic overtones and twist its intent, for the
foundation of their supposedly spiritual Universal House of Justice.

The primary element that is missing in all the activities of the bogus Universal House of
Justice is the element of connectivity with the Holy Spirit, the Divine Linkage with God.
God’s Covenant with humans has always been in the forefront of any religious thought
and authenticity. The Ark of the Covenant is often emphasized in the hereditary lineage
of the religion. In any case, it is a given that a proper lineage is necessary in order that
an effective adherence to God’s Law may be realized. History tells us that this is the one
element of any revelation that becomes almost immediately flawed with the passing of
the Prophet, and thus has led to murky or corrupted lines of succession.

The most distinguishing feature of the Bahá'í Faith is that for the first time, humans were left with a clearly defined path to follow in order that the hereditary lineage to the All Knowing would be ensured. It logically follows that the avenue of the lineage must follow certain tests in order to be valid. The Will and Testament provides the touchstone for that to happen. If every Sacred Clause of the Will is not satisfied, there is most certainly error involved in whatever results are generated.

Do you follow every Sacred Clause of ‘Abdu'l-Bahá’s Will and Testament? One of the conditions of the Will is that a guardian must appoint his successor during his lifetime. Shoghi Effendi did that. In fact, every action performed by Shoghi Effendi was in compliance with the Will. Since the connection with the Holy Spirit flows through that
Institution, it is absolutely necessary for the guardian‘s pronouncements to be followed.

One of the requirements that Shoghi Effendi called an essential prelude to the establishment of the House of Justice was that a system of six national Bahá'í Courts be
established in the chief Islámic Eastern cities of Tihrán, Cairo, Baghdád, New Delhi, Karachi, and Kabul. In discussing the activities of the duties of the members of his
International Bahá'í Council, he related: “…To these will be added further functions in course of evolution of this first embryonic International Institution, marking its development into officially recognized Bahá'í Court, its transformation into duly elected
body, its efflorescence into Universal House of Justice, and its final fruition through
erection of manifold auxiliary institutions constituting the World Administrative Center
destined to arise and function and remain permanently established in close neighborhood of Twin Holy Shrines.”  -- Shoghi Effendi, Messages to the Bahá'í World: 1950-1957 pages 7, 8

Process of the unfoldment of the ever-advancing Administrative Order accelerated by
the formation of the International Bahá'í Council designed to assist in the erection of the
superstructure of the Báb's Sepulcher, cement ties uniting the budding World
Administrative Center with the recently established state, and pave the way for the
formation of the Bahá'í Court, essential prelude to the institution of the Universal House
of Justice.  -- Shoghi Effendi, Messages to the Bahá'í World: 1950-1957 page 13

It has been argued more than once by sans-guardian Baha’is on the newsgroup, talk religion bahai, that it had been impossible to establish a Bahá'í Court system then since
conditions were not amenable. Excuse me? That is the lamest of lame excuses. That is
like saying that God knew less about the establishment of the UHJ than they did. They
had no authority to by-pass one of the essential preludes to the establishment of a UHJ
simply because they pre-judged that it was too difficult. There was no pre-ordained
timeline for the development of that Court System other than in the minds of the Hands.
Had the Shoghi Effendi-appointed International Bahá'í Council convened, the Bahá'í Court System would have been accomplished and its growing stature would have led to the formation of a Universal House of Justice with a guardian at its head.

This concludes Part Four of the Critique.

By Hand of the Cause David Maxwell

Critique (Part Three) of ITC study of Guardianship & UHJ

Part Three of a Critique by Hand of Cause of God David Maxwell of A Study for Auxiliary Board Members of the Guardianship & The Universal House of Justice Prepared by the International Teaching Centre (of the heterodox Bahá'ís). Click here for Part One. Click Here for Part Two.

HIDING BEHIND THE CLAMOR OF THE DISCUSSION ABOUT NINE HANDS

---ITC Position:

3. Must be appointed by Shoghi Effendi

The Master made it explicitly clear that any future guardian must be appointed by Shoghi Effendi. He wrote:

It is incumbent upon the guardian of the Cause of God to appoint in his own lifetime him
that shall become his successor . . . .(13)

`Abdu'l-Bahá emphasised this particular condition by categorically excluding the possibility of anyone claiming the Guardianship: My purpose is this, that ere the expiration of a thousand years, no one has the right to utter a single word, even to claim the station of Guardianship. (14)

4. Nine Hands of the Cause of God elected from amongst all the Hands must give
assent to the choice

The requirement that the Hands of the Cause of God must give assent to the Guardian’s
choice was for the protection of the Cause and after the passing of Shoghi Effendi enabled them to ward off the attempt to usurp the position of the Guardian. Abdu'l-Bahá
stated in His Will and Testament: The Hands of the Cause of God must elect from their
own number nine persons that shall at all times be occupied in the important services in
the work of the guardian of the Cause of God. The election of these nine must be carried either unanimously or by majority from the company of the Hands of the Cause of God and these, whether unanimously or by a majority vote, must give their assent to the choice of the one whom the guardian of the Cause of God hath chosen as his successor.(15)

---Critique:

Since this critical issue is not understood by the sans-guardian Bahá'í’s, it must be emphasized that the purpose of this clause is to ensure that nine Hands must (MUST) give their assent to the one chosen by their current guardian, within his lifetime, in order that they may testify to all the believers after his passing as to the appointment’s validity. The Hands have no choice in the matter; they MUST assent to the guardian’s choice. And beyond that, Shoghi Effendi had not yet appointed a contingent of Hands at the time of his appointment of Mason Remey as the President of the first International Bahá'í Council on March 2, 1951.

Shoghi Effendi’s first contingent of 12 Hands was appointed on December 24, 1951. He
specifically defined each Hand’s area of responsibility by Continent, with three of them
to reside in the Holy Land; Amelia Collins, Sutherland Maxwell, and Mason Remey. Of the seven additional Hands he appointed February 2, 1952, none of them were assigned to that location either. In fact, Shoghi Effendi never directed nine Hands to meet together in the Holy Land. There was no need within the unique circumstances of appointing the Second Guardian for Hands to validate at any time his appointment. He had announced that appointment in “Messages to the Bahá'í World.” In that manner, all the world’s believers had access to the appointee information. The purpose of validation is to ensure to the believers the authenticity of a particular appointment.

Another point to be made is that even though a provision was made in the Will for confirmation of the appointee, that was not necessary within the unique circumstances
Shoghi Effendi found himself. He had announced his successor in “Messages to the Bahá'í World” in the only Proclamation he ever issued. When push came to shove after the death of the First Guardian, one of the hang-ups the Hands allowed themselves to become captive to was centered around the issue that Nine Hands had not approved the appointment. This has to rank right up there at the top of the all-time examples of
rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. By having spent time
arguing about the Nine Hands issue, they were self-satisfied that they had addressed the primary problem, solved it, and that they could move on.

---ITC Position:

The principle is referred to in a letter of the House of Justice in connection with the decision of all the Hands of the Cause after the passing of Shoghi Effendi: The nine Hands to be elected by the body of the Hands were to give their assent by secret ballot to the Guardian’s choice. In 1957 the entire body of the Hands, after fully investigating the matter, announced that Shoghi Effendi had appointed no successor and left no will. This is documented and established. (16)

---Critique:

As explained above, it was premature, unwarranted and ridiculous for a body to convene and announce the non-appointment of a successor. There will never be an instance in the 1,000 year Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh when Hands will truthfully announce that. Their only option will be to announce the newly designated guardian. You either believe `Abdu'l-Bahá or you don’t. Since He had commanded that a guardian must appoint his successor in his own lifetime, it was a given that Shoghi Effendi had appointed a successor. It was up to the Hands to find that appointee. And as to them collectively announcing that he did not leave a Will, that is a true statement. But so what? The Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Bahá says nothing about a guardian having to announce his successor in a (secular) will. The Will states only that he must appoint his successor in his own lifetime. (Emphasis added) The only qualification required is that of timing, during his own lifetime (before he becomes deceased.) Shoghi Effendi clearly did that in “Messages to the Bahá'í World.” There are other requirements in the Will, essentially spiritual in nature, but they have nothing to do with timing.

And speaking of timing, it should be noted that Rúhíyyih Khánum was appointed as liaison between Shoghi Effendi and the International Bahá'í Council some two months before she was named a Hand, on February 29, 1952, to replace her recently deceased father, Hand of the Cause Sutherland Maxwell. The sequence is Mason Remey being appointed President of the IBC, and later as a Hand. Later still, Rúhíyyih Khánum was appointed liaison between the First Guardian and the IBC prior to becoming a Hand.

Yet, it was Rúhíyyih Khánum who became the Hand’s de facto anointed leader during their meetings after Shoghi Effendi’s death. Appropriate leadership should have been by
the President of the IBC, Mason Remey, but the majority of them did not want that. In reading Shoghi Effendi’s instructions, it is clear that Mason Remey was the only one who had been given authority to convene the International Bahá'í Council, yet that was never allowed to happen. The Hands dissolved Shoghi Effendi‘s IBC and *elected* one of their own, which had no God-given authority whatsoever. This signaled the beginning of the end, when they finally removed the invisible thread of Infallibility from their midst. Shoghi Effendi’s instructions were never followed, and it was eventually Mason Remey who was belittled and banished by them. Upon leaving, Mason Remey took the invisible thread of Infallibility with him, leaving them naked. Up until then, they had that unacknowledged and hidden invisible thread in their midst; but now it was gone.

And another thing. The Hands that Shoghi Effendi appointed were accepted without question, while his International Bahá'í Council, the first stage of the unfolding embryo of
the Universal House of Justice, was completely ignored. This signals an early success in their finding a process that the believers would accept; they were then emboldened to
continue to pick-and-chose among the Writings. That solidified a pattern that allows
today’s bogus UHJ to justify its nefarious deeds from their seat of power in Haifa.
Additionally, it is clear that the Hands were aware of the contents of “Messages to the
Bahá'í World 1950-1957,” but for reasons known only to themselves did not want to
recognize many more of those instructions than their own appointments.

---ITC Position:

5. Must possess a “goodly character”
Regarding the stipulation that the noble heritage of the successor to the Guardian must
be “matched with a goodly character, (17) the Master stated:

He that is appointed must manifest in himself detachment from all worldly things, mustbe the essence of purity, must show in himself the fear of God, knowledge, wisdom andlearning. (18)

What happened to the successorship of Shoghi Effendi after his passing?
In His Will and Testament, the Master stated that “It is incumbent upon the guardian ofthe Cause of God to appoint in his own life-time him that shall become his successor, that differences may not arise after his passing.” (19) In light of this statement it may be asked why it was that Shoghi Effendi did not appoint a successor and why the line of the Guardians came to an end.

The Universal House of Justice has explained: At the time of our beloved Shoghi Effendi’s death it was evident, from the circumstances and from the explicit requirements of the Holy Texts, that it had been impossible for him to appoint a successor in accordance with the provisions of the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá. This situation, in which the Guardian died without being able to appoint a successor, presented an obscure question not covered by the explicit Holy Text, and had to be referred to the Universal House of Justice. The friends should clearly understand that before the election of the Universal House of Justice there was no knowledge that there would be no Guardian. There could not have been any such foreknowledge, whatever opinions individual believers may have held. Neither the Hands of the Cause of God, nor the International Bahá'í Council, nor any other existing body could make a decision upon this all-important matter. Only the House of Justice had authority to pronounce upon it. (20)

---Critique:

"Nor the International Bahá'í Council.” My God! Would you please go back and read those last two sentences? I missed it upon first reading and caught it later. This is a prime example of how misleading their statements can be. Even though it was in bold text, it does not stand out as being particularly more in error than most other things they
discuss. Those two sentences may be the nadir of their ego-infested position. Fact: The
International Bahá'í Council was the only, the only body that was authorized to lead the
search for the next guardian! That is precisely what Shoghi Effendi had in mind when he
formed the First International Bahá'í Council! That body provided his means of naming his successor. The announcements authorizing, and the formation of that body provided the avenue for instructing the believers that Mason Remey was the Second Guardian! Yet the Hands ignored and, in essence, ridiculed that body from the outset of their meetings. They not only refused to allow Mason Remey to convene the IBC that Shoghi Effendi named, but later dissolved it, *electing* an IBC of their own. The only power their IBC was invested with was their own. The IBC they destroyed, the one named by Shoghi Effendi, was the only one fueled by the power of the Covenant. They ousted the power of the Covenant and installed the power of the Hands. It has occurred to me that perhaps some of the Hands did *get it* and that is why they were so adamant about not allowing Mason Remey to have his say. From its actions, the ITC infers that both Bahá'u'lláh and `Abdu'l-Bahá did not know what they were doing, and that Shoghi Effendi was not the First Guardian! Why did the believers accept Shoghi Effendi’s station before he died, and then almost immediately thereafter refuse to accept his actions as First Guardian, when he had named his successor and established the beginning stages of the International House of Justice?

As cold as it seems, that is the result. The Hands began selectively believing Shoghi Effendi immediately upon his death, after he spent his 36 year ministry clarifying and developing the administrative order in compliance with ‘Abdu'l-Bahá’s Will and Testament, going so far as to announce to the Bahá'í World in 1951 that he was presenting to them the beginnings of the Universal House of Justice in embryonic form, and then naming his successor, Mason Remey. Later that year, he announced his first contingency of Hands of the Cause of God. The Hand’s appointments were accepted; that of the next guardian was not. Is this selectivity 101.1 or 101.17? Who knows; do they know? How many iterations of 101 are there?

The denial of Shoghi Effendi’s choice for the second guardian, Mason Remey, by the Hands and the believers, was the greatest act of arrogance by humans that could be imagined. Not only were they denying Bahá'u'lláh’s Command, they were actually denying all the prior Manifestations and God Himself.

The Message of God has been progressively developing for centuries, and will continue to develop for many centuries more, whether humans are ready or not. The only problem is that humans will suffer in not following His Will. God’s Will will eventually be fulfilled in the manner He Willed it from the beginning that had no beginning.

The ITC statement above that there were no prior conclusions made before they announced that the guardianship was ended is of itself questionable. It takes only a quick reading of the book “Ministry of the Custodians,” which has Rúhíyyih Khánum’s fingerprints all over it, to determine that the decision to end the guardianship was made,
if not immediately after Shoghi Effendi’s passing, then within mere weeks later.

All that the Hands had to do to find the second guardian was to accept and follow Shoghi Effendi’s copious writings about the Institutions of the Faith. “The World Order of Bahá'u'lláh,” with its section “The Dispensation,” includes the basic guidance they needed. “Messages to the Bahá'í World, 1950-1957” contains his specific actions and appointments. And to this very day, the present bogus Universal House of Justice could peruse those same documents, as originally written, and announce to the Bahá'í World that they had finally “found” both the second and third guardians, Charles Mason Remey and Joel B. Marangella.

Conclusion of Part Three of the Critique

By Hand of the Cause David Maxwell

Critique (Part Two) of ITC study of Guardianship & UHJ

Part Two of a Critique by Hand of Cause of God David Maxwell of A Study for Auxiliary Board Members of the Guardianship & The Universal House of Justice Prepared by the International Teaching Centre (of the heterodox Bahá'ís). Click here for Part One.

HOW AUTHORITATIVE IS YOUR INTERPRETER?

---ITC Position:

Individual interpretations based on a person’s understanding of the Teachings constitute
the fruit of man’s rational power and may well contribute to a more complete understanding of the Faith. Such views, however, lack authority. The believers are, therefore, free to accept or disregard them. Further, the manner in which an individual
presents his interpretation is important. For example, he must at no time deny or contend with the authoritative interpretation, but rather offer his idea as a contribution to knowledge, making it clear that his views are merely his own. (5)

---Critique:

Preposterous! The reader will note that in the first sentence of the above paragraph, the
word *Teachings* is capitalized. It is customary in the Bahá'í Faith that any time capitalization is used in describing the Writings, that particular passage is recognized to be from the pen of one the Three Central Figures. While the ITC says that “…Such views (of the believers), however, lack authority,” they encourage the believers to continue doing so. Now, why should the believers be encouraged to read and perhaps question the Holy Writings and retain those ideas rather than to be encouraged to search the Writings further for additional enlightenment that may lead to a correct understanding of issues? A truly enlightened Bahá'í knows that Holy Writ is simply that, and may never be questioned. However, she is entitled to present her question to the one authorized by `Abdu'l-Bahá to correctly answer the question. When a passage in the Writings seems perplexing, that believer should be entitled to have the auspices of the Institution of the Guardianship to correctly answer the question. The audacity of the bogus UHJ to deny their believers that right smacks of denial of the Faith itself, since those Writings are Holy Writ and carry the direction of God Himself! Only a guardian who is alive on this earth may interpret those Writings. Only a legitimate Universal House of Justice with a living-breathing guardian residing as its head may in any manner establish policy on any of those Writings.

What the bogus Universal House of Justice is promoting is that their authority transcends the authority of Bahá'u'lláh, and thus, God Himself!

No wonder there is confusion among the heterodox Bahá'ís who reject the Institution of
the Guardianship as the Center of the Cause in this day. The bogus UHJ invites them to
accept whatever each individual decides the Writings say to them, but they may not promote those ideas as “gospel” truth. After an individual comes to his/her own conclusion, they must ultimately turn to the bogus UHJ for the “final word” about the
Teachings. It appears that the UHJ must continually fabricate some reason or other as
to why they have no living guardian. With effort being consumed for merely justifying
their position one wonders whether any time is available for promoting the Faith?

How much simpler the Orthodox Baha’is have it. Everything they read from the Holy
Writings fits perfectly with everything else they read. They never have to ask about
perceived differences among the Holy Books. They read for themselves, and turn to the
Guardian for guidance only when they read something that they are not clear about. They never have to argue away anything. The living Guardian is their ultimate one-and-only-
God-inspired authority. The Guardian considers each facet of any Holy Writing within the context of all the other Holy Writings for the basis of his pronouncements.

While the Guardian relies upon the entire context and scope of the available information,
the bogus UHJ has to pick and choose among available segments for whatever they
believe will justify their position on any issue at any particular time. The process that the bogus UHJ demands of their believers, and it is my understanding that demand is the correct word, smacks in the face of one of the basic principles of the Faith, *the independent investigation of truth.* Humans are commanded by Bahá'u'lláh to search Holy Writ themselves (such Writings as written by the Three Central Figures of the Faith) to become educated in the ways and precepts of their Faith. Gleaning from the fount of knowledge of Holy Writ, being continually in its presentation and acting in conformance with that is the only manner in which a mature civilization may optimally function. How confusing to a believer it must be when an answer she receives may not fit with what she reads from the Writings the very next day. Is that not like being taught that two plus two equals five, then finding information in the Writings that postulates, just as you suspected, that two plus two equals four, rather than five?

The primary reason for there not being clergy in the Bahá'í Faith is that humans must now learn for themselves from the Holy Writings, and then apply that knowledge accordingly. The beauty of the Faith is that a means to reach pure understanding is always available to them. This is an essential blessing of these Teachings. Have not the sans-guardian believers elevated the members of their bogus House of Justice to the station of clergy, even though they do not classify them as such?

---ITC Position:

What conditions did `Abdu'l-Bahá set for the appointment of the Guardian after
Shoghi Effendi?

1. Must be hereditary
In His Will and Testament the Master “establishes the institution of the Guardianship as
a hereditary office” (6) He does so with these words: [A]fter him will succeed the firstborn of his lineal descendants. (7)

In numerous instances, Shoghi Effendi states categorically that the Guardianship is a
hereditary office. Below are two such examples: [I]n the explanation which `Abdu'l-Bahá,
in one of His Tablets, has given to, and the emphasis He has placed upon, the hereditary principle and the law of primogeniture as having been upheld by the Prophets of the past—in these we can discern the faint glimmerings and discover the earliest intimation of the nature and working of the Administrative Order which the Will of `Abdu'l-Bahá was at a later time destined to proclaim and formally establish. (8)

Moreover, he who symbolizes the hereditary principle in this Dispensation has been made the interpreter of the words of its Author . . . .(9)

---Critique:

It is interesting that the ITC mentions that the hereditary principle is symbolized by the
guardian, (and not the other way around.) While the statement they cite is absolutely
true as written, the bogus UHJ has *interpreted* it to mean otherwise. Those words from
the “World order of Bahá'u'lláh” page 153, are so clear as to not be open for interpretation. Had there been some other *hidden* meaning, no doubt the author of that statement, the First Guardian, would have told us so. He did not. It states that the
guardian symbolizes the hereditary principle, but mentions nothing about it being a part
of the authorization process for becoming guardian in the first place. Various conditions
outlined in the Will are intended for that. After satisfying the check-list in the Will, then
and only then, does the new guardian become the symbol of the hereditary principle.

---ITC Position:

2. Must be a male descendant of Bahá'u'lláh

In accordance with the hereditary principle, the Will and Testament of the Masterstipulates that the Guardian must be a lineal descendent of Bahá'u'lláh.

`Abdu'l-Bahá wrote:

Thus, should the first-born of the guardian of the Cause of God not manifest in himself
the truth of the words:—“The child is the secret essence of its sire,” that is, should he
not inherit of the spiritual within him (the guardian of the Cause of God) and his glorious
lineage not be matched with a goodly character, then must he, (the guardian of the
Cause of God) choose another branch to succeed him. (10)

The terms “first-born of the Guardian” and “another branch” [In Arabic Ghusn meaning
“branch” is the singular form of Aghsán which means “branches”] show that Shoghi Effendi was directed to appoint either his eldest son or, if he was unqualified, another male descendant of Bahá'u'lláh This is consistent with Shoghi Effendi’s statement that the term Aghsán “refers to Bahá'u'lláh’s descendants.” (11)

However, Shoghi Effendi had no children and by the time he had passed away “all the
surviving Aghsán had broken the Covenant.” (12)

---Critique:

The International Teaching Centre uses a paragraph obviously written by someone other than Shoghi Effendi, from a book of his authorship (the phraseology used is not in conformance with that typically found in Shoghi Effendi’s writings.) Additionally, the statement is in conflict with one that Shoghi Effendi obviously wrote at another time. The
statement they use is from (reference 11) The Bahá'í Publishing Trust, Lights of Guidance, 4th rev. 1996, 2001 printing page 472, #1548. Read it for yourself:

---ITC Position:

25 September 1934

Dear Dr. Mühlschlegel,

I am directed by the Guardian to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated August
29th, and to express his appreciation of your highly-valued efforts for the translation of
the "Kitáb-i-`Ahd" into German. He hopes that copies of this precious tablet will soon be
made available to all the friends, and that through its study their knowledge of the
Teachings will be deepened, and their zeal for their spread stimulated and sustained.
The term "afnán" means literally small branch, and refers to the relatives of the Báb,
both men and women. As the Báb's only son died while in infancy, the former had no
direct descendants. The "afnán" are, therefore, all indirectly related to the Báb.
As to "aghsán", it also means branch. But it is a bigger branch than "afnán". It refers to
Bahá'u'lláh's descendants.

The "Kitáb-i-`Ahd" is, as you know, Bahá'u'lláh's "Book of Covenant". It is entirely written
in His own handwriting.

And in the light of the objections raised by some of the believers concerning the Will and
Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá, it is highly significant to note that this Book of Covenant of
Bahá'u'lláh bears neither signature, nor seal, nor any date. It was shown to the believers, and was read in their presence nine days after Bahá'u'lláh's ascension. The manuscript was in the possession of `Abdu'l-Bahá all through His ministry, and after His passing it was found enclosed in His own will. These two precious documents, namely the book of Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh and the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá have both been carefully preserved and are now in the possession of the Guardian....

[From the Guardian:]

Dear and valued co-worker:

I greatly value these fresh evidences of your continued, your intelligent and most helpful
labours for a better understanding and a wider diffusion of the essentials and fundamentals of our beloved Faith.

You are indeed a pillar of the Administrative Order, which, despite the storms and tests
of recent years, is rearing its head in the heart of your beloved and promising country.
Persevere, be happy and confident. I will continue to pray for you from the depths of my
heart.

Your true and grateful brother,

Shoghi

-- Shoghi Effendi, The Light of Divine Guidance (Volume 1)

---Critique:

Upon reading the above segment, clearly written by two different individuals, please
direct your attention to the following from Shoghi Effendi’s book, “God Passes By,” page
239, wherein he clearly describes the Aghsán as the sons of Baha’u’llah:

“…and directs, in particular, the Aghsán (His sons) to ponder the "mighty force and the
consummate power that lieth concealed in the world of being." He bids them, moreover,
together with the Afnán (the Báb's kindred) and His own relatives, to "turn, one and all,
unto the Most Great Branch (`Abdu'l-Bahá)"; identifies Him with "the One Whom God
hath purposed," "Who hath branched from this pre-existent Root," referred to in the
Kitáb-i-Aqdas; ordains the station of the "Greater Branch" (Mírzá Muhammad-`Alí) to be
beneath that of the "Most Great Branch" (`Abdu'l-Bahá); exhorts the believers to treat
the Aghsán with consideration and affection; counsels them to respect His family and
relatives, as well as the kindred of the Báb; denies His sons "any right to the property of
others"; enjoins on them, on His kindred and on that of the Báb to "fear God, to do that
which is meet and seemly" and to follow the things that will "exalt" their station; warns all
men not to allow "the means of order to be made the cause of confusion, and the
instrument of union an occasion for discord"; and concludes with an exhortation calling
upon the faithful to "serve all nations," and to strive for the "betterment of the world."

While it is true, technically, that the sons of Bahá'u'lláh are included in His descendants,
why does the bogus UHJ rank as more important a statement made by one of Shoghi
Effendi’s assistants, rather than one made by Shoghi Effendi himself? Particularly when
Shoghi Effendi’s statement is more definitive than the one used by the bogus UHJ?

This concludes Part Two of the Critique.

By Hand of the Cause David Maxwell

Critique (Part One) of ITC study of Guardianship & UHJ

HOW DARE THEY ALTER THE MEANINGS OF PASSAGES IN BAHÁ'Í BOOKS THAT WERE COMPILED PRIOR TO THE DEATH OF THE FIRST GUARDIAN

Part One of a Critique by Hand of Cause of God David Maxwell of A Study for Auxiliary Board Members of the Guardianship & The Universal House of Justice Prepared by the International Teaching Centre (of the heterodox Bahá'ís).

Preface

The Third Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith, Joel. B. Marangella, asked me as Hand of the Cause of God to review this document prepared in March 2006 by the International Teaching Centre of the sans-guardian Bahá'ís in Haifa. He suggested that I comment on various of the statements and arguments contained in the study. In doing so I used the statements of the ITC, and have differentiated their passages from my own critique by the use of either --- ITC Position or ---Critique as a preface throughout, in order to separate my comments from theirs. The study was prepared by the International Teaching Centre for the use of Auxiliary Board Members and has no doubt been used extensively for their justification of not including a living guardian in their administrative order, even though Bahá'í Holy Writ ensures a continuous line of living guardians enduring the entire span of the Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh, lasting at least 1,000 years.

A red flag, an enormous red flag appears at the very outset of this enterprise when one considers that this document was prepared for Auxiliary Board Members. Pray tell why a teaching center has to tell ABMs what to believe and discuss about the most basic of the foundational elements of the Faith. Is it that complicated? No, it is not. Did the Three Central Figures use a means of explaining things that required extra direction? No, they did not. In all due respects, should not anyone who is an ABM be well-enough versed in the original writings to understand for herself the information that she acquired while involved in the independent investigation of truth before she became a Bahá'í?

However, along with countless other changes in the Faith since the death of the First Guardian, it appears that independent investigation of truth has been downplayed, particularly after one signs a declaration card, as if independent investigation of truth applies only to the initial seeker, and immediately ceases upon declaration. A recent visitor to the Temple in Wilmette noted that the independent investigation of truth is no longer listed among the primary elements in the study of the Teachings.

Now I agree that an International Teaching Center is a necessary focal point within the structure of any world-wide religious organization. But would it not be more timely and productive to emphasize such matters pertaining to the spiritual growth of its followers through their independent investigation rather than recreating the wheel as regards the basics of the Faith? Basics that the Three Central Figures and the First Guardian precisely defined? Seems to me that was their job, and that the ITC should believe every word and utterance they espoused, and go on from there.

Shoghi Effendi did a magnificent job of transferring the original Writings into very clear and authoritative English language. In hind-sight, that was one of his primary functions as First Guardian and he excelled at it. In my view, the utterances of the bogus UHJ and its ITC dilute and neutralize the power of the original Writings. It appears to me that the further we get from the history of the 1950s, a less-potent output of information is available for the mainstream Baha’is.

Another key issue for Baha’is is that a contributing factor to the neutralizing of the Faith by the bogus UHJ is their pattern of not only ignoring the original Writings in their activities, but actually changing key passage in many of the Bahá'í books. It should be understood by all Bahá'ís that its Publishing Trust has published books that contains text modified from the original of some of the books available from them since the passing of the First Guardian. Additionally, when perusing the listing of references immediately following the ITC study, many of those references cite the writings of the present Universal House of Justice for the justification of their existence. The reason for them doing so comes into question when in every instance they could have used topical Writings penned by the Three Central Figures of the Faith, Writings that are considered Holy Writ and the very foundational elements of the Bahá'í Faith. As a result, Orthodox Baha’is, and others who are concerned with authenticity should rely only on those books copyrighted and printed prior to 1957. In all cases of such modification, the author’s original intent has been compromised. I will cite one such example of modification from “Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era,” by J.E. Esslemont, a book that Shoghi Effendi said was one of the three most important for teaching the Bahá'í seeker.

My reference is a paperback copy of that book, copyright 1980. Text under the heading Bahá'í Covenant has been modified. The next to last paragraph of the bogus UHJ version, page 129, in reference to ‘Abdu'l-Bahá, contains capitalized letters in each instance (Him, His, etc.) whereas an earlier edition does not. This change appears to appropriately correct an oversight by Esslemont.  However, in reading the next paragraph on that page, a major, major modification provides erroneous information.

The first half of the original paragraph, which discusses successive guardians, is no longer there; the last paragraph on that page begins:

”…Bahá'u'lláh further arranged that an International House of Justice, representative of all the Bahá'ís throughout the world, should be elected to take charge of the affairs of the Cause, control and coordinate all its activities, prevent divisions and schisms, elucidate obscure matters, and preserve the teachings from corruption and misrepresentation…”

The bogus UHJ statement makes no mention that it was ‘Abdu'l-Bahá, Bahá'u'lláh’s chosen successor, who provided specific instructions for the election and functions of the Universal House of Justice within the pages of His Will and Testament. Bahá'u'lláh left no specific instructions for that activity. `Abdu'l-Bahá‘s Will clearly defined the role of a living guardian at the head of any Universal House of Justice. The bogus UHJ version has the audacity to refer to Shoghi Effendi as the guardian, as if he were still with us. It further admonishes the believers to follow the words of Bahá'u'lláh, `Abdu'l-Bahá, the guardian, and the decisions of the International House of Justice. It concludes with “…Anyone contravening these (UHJ) injunctions is considered a Covenant-Breaker.“

Following are Esslemont‘s original words, words that Shoghi Effendi was well aware of:

“The spiritual or Providential character of the Faith, furthermore, is further exemplified in the continuance, after `Abdu'l-Bahá, of the office of interpreter of the Sacred Writings in the person of the successive Guardians provided in `Abdu'l-Bahá’s Testament. The Faith, therefore, throughout its era will never suffer the disintegrating influence of schisms resulting from differences of interpretation, nor the deterioration which follows when generally prevalent materialism substitutes lower values for those revealed by the Founder. In relation to the needs of social progress, Bahá'u'lláh provided for the formation of an international House of Justice, whose election and functions are more specifically revealed in the Testament of ‘Abdu'l-Bahá. The fact that this supreme administrative body, the chairman of which will be the successive Guardians, can not only initiate legislation on all matters not defined in the Book, but also annul its own enactments when new conditions require different measures, assures for the Faith the vital continuity of a living organism. Established on universal truths, it is endowed with capacity to adapt to the conditions and requirements of each generation and age.”

“Since acceptance of Bahá'u'lláh involves acceptance of the social teachings and the social institutions He revealed and provided, or which have been instituted by `Abdu'l-Bahá, no Bahá'í can found a separate school or sect, nor justify any other basis for schism. The essential purpose of this Dispensation is to gather the races, peoples and nations into one Faith and one order.” -- J.E. Esslemont, “Baha’u’llah and the New Era,“ 1956 edition, pages 160-161

The bogus UHJ‘s elimination of the Institution of the Guardianship from that topical discussion, and the installation of themselves as successor to the guardian, speaks for itself and permeates the overall theme of the International Teaching Center‘s document.

David Maxwell

***********************************************************************************************

Following begins the presentation of the International Teaching Centre

INTRODUCTION (TO THE INTERNATIONAL TEACHING CENTER PAPER)

The Universal House of Justice and the Guardianship are the twin Successors to Bahá'u'lláh and `Abdu'l-Bahá. Shoghi Effendi wrote that Bahá'u'lláh and the Master have “in unequivocal and emphatic language, appointed those twin institutions of the House of Justice and of the Guardianship as their chosen Successors.”

(1) In His Will and Testament, `Abdu'l-Bahá perpetuated the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh by
appointing the Guardian of the Cause and confirmed the authority of the Universal
House of Justice, promising that they will be infallibly guided by the Báb and Bahá'u'lláh.

He promised blessings to those who turn to them, and warned those who would turnagainst them. This brief two-part study, structured in the form of questions and answers,
explores passages in the Writings that establish the authority and functions of theinstitutions of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice, and reviews their
relationship.

---Critique:

One has to wonder whether the implication of the above two paragraphs is to allude that
Bahá'u'lláh was succeeded by The Universal House of Justice, and that `Abdu'l-Bahá was succeeded by the Guardianship. This concept would help them to rationalize that since Shoghi Effendi “could not appoint a successor” that the Writings of `Abdu'l-Bahá are no longer potent, and would justify a position that since the guardianship is ended, that `Abdu'l-Bahá no longer needs to be as prominent in the structure of their organization. Among other things, this counters the concept that God reveals His knowledge to humans through progressively unfolding Truth. In the Bahá'í Revelation that concept is magnified and clearly delineated, describing the spiritually charged hereditary lineage of the Covenant of God through but one individual at a time.

Bahá'u'lláh appointed His successor, `Abdu'l-Bahá. In turn, `Abdu'l-Bahá appointed His successor to be the Institution of the (living) Guardianship. It should be kept in mind that
`Abdu'l-Bahá’s Will and Testament was a collaborative effort of both He and Bahá'u'lláh,
and that every Sacred Clause of the Will and Testament will ultimately be fulfilled.

---ITC Position:

THE INSTITUTION OF THE GUARDIANSHIP

What is the source of authority for the institution of the Guardianship? Shoghi Effendiwrites that certain verses in Bahá'u'lláh’s Most Holy Book by implication “clearly anticipate the institution of the Guardianship.” (2) But it was `Abdu'l-Bahá who explicitly established the institution of the Guardianship, naming Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian of the Cause of God, and directing the friends to turn towards him. He wrote: After the passing away of this wronged one . . . turn unto Shoghi Effendi . . . as he is the sign of God, the chosen branch, the guardian of the Cause of God, he unto whom all the Aghsán, the Afnán, the Hands of the Cause of God and His loved ones must turn. He is the expounder of the words of God . . . (3)

---Critique:

While it is true that `Abdu'l-Bahá asked the believers to turn unto Shoghi Effendi, the authors of this document stress that fact rather than the more important part of the command that `Abdu'l-Bahá actually appointed the Institution of the Guardianship as His
successor, and that secondarily, Shoghi Effendi was the First Guardian.

---ITC Position:

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 Abhá Beauty, under the shelter and unerring guidance of His Holiness, the Exalted One (may my life be offered up for them both). Whatsoever they decide is of God. (4)

What is the difference between authoritative and personal interpretation?
In light of Shoghi Effendi’s function as the authorised interpreter of the Bahá'í Teachings, one might ask if there is any room for personal understanding by individuals.

This question has been answered by the House of Justice:

The interpretations of `Abdu'l-Bahá and the Guardian are divinely-guided statements ofwhat the Word of God means and as such these interpretations are binding on thefriends. However, the existence of authoritative interpretations in no way precludes the individual from engaging in his own study of the Teachings and thereby arriving at his own interpretation or understanding. Indeed, Bahá'u'lláh invites the believers to “immerse” themselves in the “ocean” of His “words”, that they “may unravel its secrets, and discover all the pearls of wisdom that lie hid in its depths…”

Critique:

The bogus UHJ encourages the friends to investigate the Teachings and arrive at their own conclusions, in spite of divinely-guided statements that are binding on the friends. I
daresay that Bahá'u'lláh did not intend that the conclusions of independent study by the
friends would preclude any binding statements in the Holy Writings. Indeed, the above quote from Bahá'u'lláh asks the believers to immerse themselves in the ocean of His (Bahá'u'lláh’s) words, not to immerse themselves in the bogus UHJ’s interpretations of
His words. This concept clearly is not being followed by the bogus UHJ as shown by their all-too-frequent passion to tell the believers what a particularly passage in the Writings means, when in most cases the Writings themselves are self-evident. They explain that a living guardian will be available throughout the entire 1,000 year Dispensation of Bahá'u'lláh to interpret the meaning of the Writings, not to re-write them.

Holy Writ may never be changed. The position that the bogus UHJ now finds itself in is to have to continually justify or explain away why there is no living guardian in their camp, notwithstanding that a process for providing a living guardian is commanded in the Will, and Shoghi Effendi often made reference to a line of guardians.

Additionally, there was no option, none whatsoever, contained within the pages of the Will and Testament for there not being a successor living guardian at any time during this Dispensation. In addition to that, Shoghi Effendi never discussed, nor wrote about, there not being any guardians after him. Quite the contrary, the only option provided was that there would be additional guardians. So for the 29 year tenure of ‘Abdu’l-Baha and the 36 year period of Shoghi Effendi, 65 years of intensive Holy Foundation building, the only avenue for the continuance of the Faith required the Institution of the Guardianship precisely in the manner explained by them both. Putting it that way, the only option for the Hands during their conclaves after the passing of Shoghi Effendi was to find the successor that the First Guardian had named.

A careful reading of the above sentence perhaps will allow the Hands a little slack for their erroneous ways, but not much. They were indeed looking for a successor named by Shoghi Effendi (the man), whereas in hind-sight we now know they should have been looking within the spiritual bounds of the Institution of the Guardianship. They should have realized that Shoghi Effendi could name his successor only when he was wearing his spiritual mantle, that of the First Guardian, and the appointment would have to be couched within some sort of spiritual vehicle or terms. And that is precisely what Shoghi
Effendi did. He named his successor when he penned the only Proclamation he ever wrote during the 36 years he spent as the First Guardian.

I will digress here and re-emphasize that the Bahá'í Faith is about matters of the Spirit. Spirituality is the only reason for its being. Thus, humans are at this time in their history
being forced from their comfortable zone of the materialism that has permeated their
being for thousands of years. It is time for a spiritual maturity to pervade mankind in order that humans may evolve from the false glamour of materialism and begin to think
within terms of the spirit. It simply has got to happen in order for the shackles of depravity to be released from their lives in order that the onset of the Kingdom of God may be allowed to accelerate and mitigate some of the damage that has been done by this corrupt society. The Hands apparently failed to see that, and little progress has been made in the intervening years. The spirit must become a catalyst for elimination of materialistic bounds in order that human existence may reach for the next level.

The resultant mess of the misdirection and misapplication of purpose we find ourselves in as a society becomes even more curious when one considers that the bogus UHJ requires “unity above all else” as their mantra for the believers, with no permissible deviation at all from their definition of unity, that of complete submission to their Universal House of Justice. Spiritual growth for humans will ultimately evolve from a unity within the Divine Principles that Bahá'u'lláh provided. But, sadly, the difference between unity and Divine Unity has not yet been perceived by the masses, nor the bogus Universal House of Justice. At the very least, a concept has to come about that every Sacred Clause of ’Abdu’l-Baha’s Will and Testament must be believed, promoted and then fervently upheld. Through that one activity, the beginnings of a Divine Unity wil evolve and humans will find themselves in a much more beautiful place than now. Quite clearly, the trail outlined in the Holy Writings passes from Bahá'u'lláh to ‘Abdu'l-Bahá and His Will and Testament, and then to the Institution of the Guardianship. If one believes the words of the Will and Testament, he must in this day look within the lineage of the first three guardians to find the continuation of the thread of Holiness, Bahá'u'lláh.

While the Will talks of a Universal House of Justice, its Holy Writ defining the UHJ contains the essential requirement of a living guardian as its head. When a living guardian resides in the residency and the presidency of the UHJ, those two Holy Institutions then comprise the elements necessary for Holy fulfillment of all the Words uttered by Bahá'u'lláh and ‘Abdu'l-Bahá, and remain the only avenue to Holy efficacy in the deliberations of a Universal House of Justice.

This concludes Part One of the Critique

By Hand of the Cause David Maxwell

Are true Bahá'ís missionaries?

Shoghi Effendi officially wrote:

"It would...be helpful and instructive to bear in mind certain basic principles with reference to the Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, which together with the Kitab-i-Aqdas, constitutes the chief depository wherein are enshrined those priceless elements of that Divine Civilization, the establishment of which is the primary mission of the Bahá'í Faith.  A study of the provisions of these sacred documents will reveal the close relationship that exists between them as well as the identity of purpose and method which they inculcate. Far from regarding their specific provisions as incompatible and
contradictory in spirit, every fair-minded inquirer will readily admit that they are not only complementary, but that they mutually confirm one another, and are inseparable parts of one complete unit."

"...those priceless elements of that Divine Civilization, the establishment of which is the primary mission of the Bahá'í Faith."

The Bahá'í Faith has a "mission".  Are not those women and men who participate in that "mission" missionaries?  And how could those participants share the knowledge of their "mission" with the great uninformed masses of humankind without mentioning the name of the Bahá'í Faith? It is self evident that they could not carry out their "mission" without mentioning their Bahá'í Faith.  And would not any attempt to prevent them from mentioning the Name of their Faith be an attempt to cancel/revoke their mission?

Who has the authority to cancel/revoke the "mission" of those to whom the Lord of this Age has assigned their "mission"?  Certainly not some group of elected individuals sitting behind marble pillars on Mt. Carmel or in Wilmette.

Are those elected individuals of the Heterodox/sans-Guardian Bahá'í leadership so pathetically ignorant about history that they are unaware that faithful followers of all Holy Manifestations of God since Adam have never permitted mere humans to revoke their missions, forcing them to disobey the Holy Prophets in Whom they placed their
Faith and to Whom they gave their hearts?

Faithful Bahá'ís do not permit mere women and men to muzzle them, preventing them from obediently sharing their precious faith with other women and men who need to hear their Message.

The current Court aggression intended to stifle the freedom of speech of Orthodox Bahá'ís exposes such ignorance on the part of that Heterodox leadership on Mt. Carmel and in Wilmette, which leaders evidently fail to understand the concept of faithfulness to Almighty God's Holy Prophets.

The website of the living Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith:
http://www.Bahai-Guardian.com

By Hand of the Cause Ross Campbell

The Center of the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh is `Abdu'l-Bahá, alone.

Ever since the ascension of Bahá'u'lláh, `Abdu'l-Bahá has been, is now, and will always be, alone, the Center of the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh.  That is His Station for the duration of our Lord's Covenant. He carried that Station with Him into the next world and does not pass the mantle of that Station to anyone.  Guardians of the Cause of God on Earth do not carry their station with them when they pass into the next world.  Their mantle of their station passes to the successor Guardian through force of the hereditary principle of the Bahá'í Faith, delineated by the Master in His sacred and immutable Will and Testament.

`Abdu'l-Bahá wrote:

"Inasmuch as great differences and divergences of denominational belief had arisen throughout the past, every man with a new idea attributing it to God, Bahá’u’lláh desired that there should not be any ground or reason for disagreement among the Bahá’ís. Therefore, with His own pen He wrote the Book of His Covenant, addressing His relations and all people of the world, saying, 'Verily, I have appointed One Who is the Center of My Covenant. All must obey Him; all must turn to Him; He is the Expounder of My Book, and He is informed of My purpose. All must turn to Him. Whatsoever He says is correct, for, verily, He knoweth the texts of My Book. Other than He, no one doth know My Book.' "

For that very reason:  "Whatsoever He says is correct", we clearly understand why Shoghi Effendi included this necessary quality of any woman or man for her/him to be considered to be a true Bahá’í believer:  "...loyal and steadfast adherence to every clause of our Beloved's sacred Will."

"every clause"  (Shoghi Effendi)

"Whatsoever He says is correct" (Bahá'u'lláh)

The website of the Center of the Cause of God, the living Guardian of
the Bahá’í Faith:

http://www.Bahai-Guardian.com

By Hand of the Cause Ross Campbell

Understand the hereditary principle in the Kingdom of ancient Israel

Symbolically, Almighty God spoke of Himself as the "husbandly Owner" of ancient Israel. (Isaiah 54:5) While Israel was a Kingdom, He was its Ruler.  David was appointed by Him to be His representative King on Earth. By hereditary principle, successive Kings inherited the Kingship. They were not elected.  It is recorded at 1 Samuel 16:12 that God specifically instructed Samuel His prophet to anoint David to be King.

To a certain degree, that Kingdom on Earth was a pattern for the future Kingdom of God on Earth prophesied by His Holiness the Christ and proclaimed by Him.  The hereditary principle exists in both Kingdoms except that it didn't work well in the ancient Israelite Kingdom because many men who inherited the Kingship were wicked and beastly rulers. `Abdu'l-Bahá in the Charter of the New World Order, His sacred and immutable Will and Testament, delineated the same hereditary principle to be a feature of the Administration of God's Kingdom on Earth, the Administration of the New World Order of Bahá'u'lláh, except that the vital ingredient which was missing in the ancient Israelite Kingdom has been included by the Master for the Kingdom of God on Earth. That vital missing feature is the choosing and appointing of a successor as head of the Bahá'í Faith who inherits "...of the spiritual within him (the guardian of the Cause of God), a successor who has "a goodly character".  (See the Will and Testament, paragraph 18)

Successors under King David inherited the Kingship genetically/biologically and thus many were unscrupulous, bad leaders.  That cannot occur in God's prophesied Kingdom on Earth, the World Commonwealth of Bahá'u'lláh, because the choosing by an infallible
Guardian a successor who has  "the spiritual within him", "a goodly character" ensures righteous rulership over God's Kingdom on Earth.

Each successor Guardian is simultaneously one of the "chosen ministers" of the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh as defined by Shoghi Effendi.  The Guardians are His "chosen ministers".

Elected individuals in the Bahá'í Faith are in no way directly connected to that hereditary principle of the Bahá'í Faith which principle ensures that an unscrupulous man will never become head of the Bahá'í Faith.  Elected individuals do not and cannot carry forward
the hereditary principle of the Bahá'í Faith.  For that very reason, we quickly perceive that something is very disastrously in error when we read these words recorded on page 397 of the Heterodox Bahá'í publication, The Bahá'í World 1954-1963:

"The members of all the National and Regional Spiritual Assemblies of the Bahá'í world, duly constituted in Ridván 1960, will take part in a postal ballot to elect nine members to the International Council. This International Bahá'í Council is to work under the direction and supervision of the Hands of the Cause residing in the Holy Land..."

True seekers and all sincere Bahá'ís will take careful note of that gross distortion of the Master's sacred Instructions which distortion eliminates the hereditary principle of the Bahá'í Faith, replacing the chosen and appointed head of the legitimate International Bahá'í Council, appointed by the first Guardian, with totally elected membership.

Furthermore, `Abdu'l-Bahá, the Center of the Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh,delineated immutably in His sacred Will and Testament that the "sacred head" of the Universal House of Justice, a Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith, must be the one who chooses, guides, urges and instructs Hands of the Cause, and here we see that in the Heterodox Bahá'í
administration the circumstance is the very opposite of the Master's sacred Instructions, namely a circumstance where Hands of the Cause are instructing and supervising all of the members of the supposed embryonic Universal House of Justice which they have established.

Having abandoned the prophetic pattern of the Kingdom of ancient Israel with its hereditary principle and its perfect fulfillment in the form of the Master's delineated additional feature related to that hereditary principle making that principle appropriate for the Divine Civilization which will fill the entire Earth under God's rulership, the Heterodox Bahá'í administrators have developed an apostate distorted system of completely elected individuals, fallible and impotent to interpret and apply the Laws of the Lord of this Age.

The website of the living Guardian of the Bahá'í Faith:
http://www.Bahai-Guardian.com

By Hand of the Cause Ross Campbell