Baha'i rift: Baha'is upset with Orthodox Baha'i Faith

The Baha'i faith is not a sect of Islam, it is an independent religion.

This article makes it seem as if the Orthodox Baha'is have many followers. However, their numbers barely reach 100. This is clearly not a great schism as the article claims. In all of the monotheistic religions where divisions occurred among sects, thousands initially followed these sects. If you want to cite Protestantism, they now number in the millions! As such, one cannot compare Orthodox Baha'is with cataclysmic sects.

The Chicago Tribune does not get to the heart of the matter, which is that the Baha'i scriptures very clearly state, in explicit terms, who would have the auhority of succession in the Baha'i Faith. Mason Remey did not fill the qualifications by any measure and those who followed him have no just claim on the marks and institutional names of the Baha'i Faith. The "Orthodox Baha'is" and one or two other miniscule groups (probably fewer than 100 people each) deliberately attempt to confuse Baha'is and others through internet sites and postings wherein they misrepresent themselves as if they were ostensibly the Baha'i Faith. It is this group itself which launched a number of lawsuits to attempt to get courts to give them title to Baha'i poperties around the country, despite clear documentation to the contrary. Any fair-minded investigator who reviews the entire record of these groups will see that it is the "Orthodox Baha'is" who are not standing on firm ground.

Kendra,

This article describes the Orthodox Baha'i as a "tiny band of believers".
Also, Jesus, at first, had 12 disciples. While their numbers are few, the Orthodox Baha'is try to follow the truth and share it with others. If the numbers are so insignificant, why is the larger group so bent on suing them?

Correction: The statement "Charles Mason Remey, then in his 90s, said Effendi had addressed him in letters as his son or spiritual descendant." is not the teaching of the Orthodox Baha'is. Instead, they believe that Shoghi Effendi appointed Mason Remey as the second Guardian in conformity with the Will and Testament of Abdu'l-Baha, when he appointed Remey as the President of the embryonic Universal House of Justice he called the International Baha'i Council.

This is guaranteed to happen when a myth is taken literally. Childish arguing about which fantasy is the "correct" one. Amazing to find adults behaving so foolishly; but then religious believers have always been at one anothers' throats because there is no substance in any of their dogmas. Personal attacks then bloodletting always follows.

According to the court documents themselves there are only about thirty followers of the so-called Orthodox Baha'i Faith (or Remeyites, as I prefer to call them.) But the real problem with this article is that it distorts what this court case is really all about. The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States is merely attempting to enforce an *existing* court order which came as a result of a lawsuit the Remeyites had themselves filed in 1964 where, under Mason Remey's direction, they themselves attempted to claim a monopoly, not only over the term "Baha'i" but to claim all Baha'i properties as well. Had Mason Remey
believed this was something that should be decided in hearts and
minds, and not in the courts, this court order would never have been
issued in the first place. Remey, by the way, accepted that court order and ordered his organization to disband and stop using the term "Baha'i." That is when Joel Marangella broke with Mason Remey and claimed the Guardianship for himself, forming the "Orthodox Baha'i Faith." Their argument has been that since they are a separate organization they are not bound by the court order issued against Mason Remey's organization. The National Spiritual Assembly holds that this new organization was but a subterfuge around the court's original decision. This is what is being argued before the Court of Appeals. It is an issue of who owns the Baha'i trademarks, not which faction is really 'orthodox.' The National Spiritual Assembly is not trying to infringe on anyone's religious liberty, merely to safeguard the names and symbols of their own organization.

This story appeals to the all-too-human attraction to stories of division and disunity that compete in the world with our deeply spiritual desire for unity -- the unity of God, religion, and mankind. The movement towards unity and peace is irrepressible and inevitable, but not automatic. Each person is tested along the way. We do have free will, and can make the right choice or the wrong.

The fact that a number for Baha'is is given, but a current figure for so-called "Orthodox Baha'is" is not seems like a gross oversight.

If something is of God, it lasts. If it isn't of God, it doesn't. What is remarkable about the Baha'i Faith is that it has grown exponentially and remained unified.

I grew up in Downers Grove and graduated from the U of I in Champaign, which is where I became a Baha'i in the 1960s. When I was a Baha'i there were about 14,000 Baha'is in the U.S. There were 164,765 Baha'is in the U.S. as of a few weeks ago, the time of the annual National Baha'i Convention.

It's easy to play with numbers and come up with different interpretations. To me these numbers define growth and confirmation. A mere handful of people holed up in New Mexico does not a world religion make.

Go online and Google "Baha'i." What percentage of stories are by or about the group in New Mexico? One percent,a half of a percent, a tenth of a percent?

Those people who want to investigate further the issue of the unique and precious Covenant of Baha'u'llah may visit the following blogs, which by the way, are put out by individual Baha'is, and are not institutional. Of course, the official sites, http://bahai.us and http://bahai.org are pretty impressive in their own right and are relevant for further investigation,too.

Recently Baha'is held 41 conferences all over the world in places like Sükhbaatar, Mongolia, and Battanbang, Cambodia. Almost 80,000 attended them. A rather impressive display of unity in the world, if you ask me.

http://bahai-covenant.blogspot.com/
http://covenantstudy.org/

On the comment of Kendra M about Orthodox Baha'is who «around barely reach 100». There are such believers in Africa, in Canada, in Australia, in England, in Germany and for sure in the USA. It is quite fascinating to see the heterodox Baha'i organisation spending millions of dollars against them. As an Orthodox Baha'i from the province of Quebec, can only hope that freedoms of expression and religion will be respected in your country and elsewhere.

@Janice With respect to Mason Remey and his followers, comparing him to Jesus and Remey's small number of followers to Christ's twelve Disciples is, frankly, an insult to Christ and His Disciples.

@Martin The Baha'is are taking the Remeyites to court because of the misleading nature of their (your?) recent efforts. Were it not for the Internet, I'm guessing the Bahai's would let you go your merry way. It's on said Internet that your small numbers can be obfuscated by a fancy web site design, making it difficult for those seeking the truth to distinguish between the Worldwide Baha'i Community, 6 million adherents strong, and yours of 100.

Baha'is believe that Jesus Christ was a prophet of God, but the Baha'i Faith is not a Christian sect.

Baha'is believe that Moses was a prophet of God, but the Baha'i Faith is not a Jewish sect.

Baha'is believe that Muhammad was a prophet of God, but the Baha'i Faith is not an Islamic sect.

Any serious religion writer who wants to truthfully represent the history and beliefs of the Baha'i Faith should understand that just because the very first believers were Muslim, does not mean that the entire religion can be defined as a sect of Islam. Islamic authorities understand this very well, and made a point of making this clear to the Muslim world in edict and proclamations.

As Susan Said:
According to the court documents themselves there are only about thirty followers of the so-called Orthodox Baha'i Faith (or Remeyites, as I prefer to call them.) But the real problem with this article is that it distorts what this court case is really all about. The National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States is merely attempting to enforce an *existing* court order which came as a result of a lawsuit the Remeyites had themselves filed in 1964 where, under Mason Remey's direction, they themselves attempted to claim a monopoly, not only over the term "Baha'i" but to claim all Baha'i properties as well. Had Mason Remey
believed this was something that should be decided in hearts and
minds, and not in the courts, this court order would never have been
issued in the first place. Remey, by the way, accepted that court order and ordered his organization to disband and stop using the term "Baha'i." That is when Joel Marangella broke with Mason Remey and claimed the Guardianship for himself, forming the "Orthodox Baha'i Faith." Their argument has been that since they are a separate organization they are not bound by the court order issued against Mason Remey's organization. The National Spiritual Assembly holds that this new organization was but a subterfuge around the court's original decision. This is what is being argued before the Court of Appeals. It is an issue of who owns the Baha'i trademarks, not which faction is really 'orthodox.' The National Spiritual Assembly is not trying to infringe on anyone's religious liberty, merely to safeguard the names and symbols of their own organization.

Let me revise my original statement. The court documents indicated the OBF had less than forty members in the United States, not thirty as I indicated earlier. It should also be noted that the court case is not simply against the OBF but against all the successor organizations which formed after Mason Remey ordered his own organization dismantled pursuant to the court's decision and his own belief that there should only be one Baha'i Faith. The BUPC is also named in this lawsuit. In fact, it was their action of creating a website which misleadingly used a photo of the seat of the Universal House of Justice as representing their own organization which precipitated this current legal action. It would be like the FLDS using a photo of the LDS Salt Lake City Tabernacle as though it were theirs. In both cases, these buildings were constructed well after the split and to use them in this manner would clearly be a trademark violation.

If I may reiterate what Farman said, which i believe is the crux of the matter.
ATTENTION: The court case ruled that the existing ORTHODOX BAHAI organization is not bound by the previous ruling because in NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, does it bear any resemblance to the organization of the 1960's.
To me if i was an Orthodox Baha'i thats just a slap in the face.
And to me, the NSA didn't lose the court case, it essentially told the CB's that their CB organization is not what Remey made, but something of their own creation.

Lorenzo wrote:

"To me if i was an Orthodox Baha'i thats just a slap in the face."

This is the grounds on which the OBF argued their case for ignoring the court order. In so doing they are essentially repudiating Mason Remey's original lawsuit in which they themselves participated.

I am a Baha'i and this is of course a very difficult subject since it deals with paradox. In essence, to play our role in bringing about world peace, we would seem at times to have to "struggle" or "fight" to preserve our unity. However, to be clear to those who are not familiar with the Covenant of Baha'u'llah. Basically, he said, religion is for unity. Therefore my followers must be united. If not, do not call yourselves Baha'is, since Baha'i simply means a follower of Baha'u'llah. To me, then, the only recourse I would have if I stopped believing in my own Baha'i administration would be to resign completely. It would seem to me pointless to try to start Baha'i II, since it would so clearly contadict Baha'u'llah's purpose. Meanwhile, a basic Baha'i belief is respect for other's freedom of conscience. I feel the Baha'i Faith is safe. Therefore, it is clear the Orthodox Baha'is have a right to follow their consciences, and the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the U.S. has the right to pursue remedy in court for trademark infringement. I am quite sure everything will be worked out for the best. It really is about unity and respect for one another. And that means justice must also be done. We will abide by the decision of the courts, as a matter of principle of our Faith.

Janice wrote:

Kendra,
This article describes the Orthodox Baha'i as a "tiny band of believers".
Also, Jesus, at first, had 12 disciples. While their numbers are few, the Orthodox Baha'is try to follow the truth and share it with others. If the numbers are so insignificant, why is the larger group so bent on suing them?

-----
Read George Wesley Dannells's comment. Do you know how many sites, holy places, temples and just property in general the Baha'i Faith has? They are trying to protect that. Read.

I applaud the Chicago Tribune for allowing their readers to read and decide for themselves what they think about the lawsuit by the Baha'is of Wilmette against other US citizens, which is essentially seeking to deprive other Baha'is of their Constitutional right to religious freedom and conscience.

It should be noted that Judge Amy St Eve, considered an outstanding legal mind by her peers, ruled against the Baha'is of Wilmette in the lower court. In the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Diane S. Sykes stated to the lawyer for the Wilmette Baha'is that their attempt to deprive other Bahai denominations of essentially their religious freedom and liberty, quote, "Clearly raises some Constitutional concerns." Similarly, Judge William J. Bauer shared a similar concern when he repeatedly asked the lawyer for the Wilmette Baha'is what would be the outcome for members of the Reform Bahai Faith.

It is fortunate for Bahais of all persuasions, and our country, that we have judges capable of penetrating the obfuscation and going right to the heart of the matter. Anyone interested in hearing Judge Sykes and Judge Bauer's own recorded words in the Court room may listen to a 3-minute mp3 clip at the following link. http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/USCo... (There's a 30-minute clip also)

Despite the claims of many here, numbers of adherents are not important. The truth is important. Only the individual can decide that for him or herself. Members of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith and other Bahai denominations have followed their consciences and are entitled to their beliefs, before God, and before the legal bar of justice, and woe unto our country should that ever change.

While the Reform Bahai Faith was not a party to the lawsuit, it was slandered or mentioned in court in both lawsuits. Reform Bahais believe the purported will and testament of 1921 is a fraudulent document, despite both Wilmette and Orthodox Baha'is thinking otherwise, and find it sad that the Wilmette Baha'is especially have chosen to sue other denominations, which they also did as early as the 1940s against early Reform Bahais Julie Chanler and Ahmad Sohrab.

To our minds, the oppressive and dictatorial actions they have taken against their own followers for decades, such as requiring or pressuring wives to divorce their husbands (medieval and incredible as it may sound), demonstrates emphatically that they have strayed very from the Example of universality set by Abdu'l-Baha when he was in Chicago in 1912. This lawsuit is merely the latest for those interested enough to examine the truth independently for themselves, via the websites here linked to.

Frederick Glaysher
Reform Bahai Faith
http://www.reformbahai.org

In 1966 it was the Remey Baha'is (Under the Hereditary Guardianship) who sued the other Baha'is, not vice versa as you wrote.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2673615/1966-Court-...

According to Abdu'l-Baha "religion must be the cause of unity, harmony and agreement among mankind. If it be the cause of discord and hostility, if it leads to sparation and conflict, the absence of religion would be preferable in the world."