Re: Devastating stampede

[Rich Ater]

Mark A. Foster wrote: Rich, At 05:02 PM 9/5/2005, you wrote: We're not sociologists, we're Baha'is and we go by the Baha'i definitions of Covenent Breakers and their followers.<< Not everyone on this list is a Baha'i. This is also not a "Baha'i" list. It is a Baha'i studies list. That would include sociological, historical, economic, psychological, etc. approaches to the study of the Baha'i Faith. I wouldn't. The Faith, not the university, is the arbiter here.<< Again, this is a Baha'i studies list. "The Faith" is also not a monolith. Baha'is have different perspectives. Some of those perspectives are academic. The stance on these groups, from the standpoint of the Faith should be taken from the writings of the Central Figures of the Faith and the administration, not from Durkheim and Strauss, or whoever the pet theorist in sociology is these days.<< On this list, perspectives from Durkheim, Strauss, and even Freud are welcome. The followers are not considered covenant breakers, true, they are also not considered Baha'is.<< They are not considered Baha'is by the Universal House of Justice. However, if they define themselves as Baha'is, as a sociologist, I have to recognize them as such. Mark,     My point was that the Gilberto made a statement about how Baha'is react to or regard covenant breakers. While I can respect your methodology, I think in the case given I think it muddied the picture rather than making it clearer.     I agree that Durkheim, straus, and Frued are welcome here, when they are to the point. I just don't think your comment was to the point. I don't mean that to sound judgemental, and looking back I did sound so. I apologize for that. I guess, what troubles me is that appears that there is a willingness to ignore or shuffle off the Faith when we put on our academic hats. Non Baha'is on the list, at least to me, seem to be asking for Baha'i responses not academic responses. While I believe that scholarship can indeed help the Faith, it's job is to help us understand the teachings, not relace them. I with Aquinas, where Revelation and Reason collide, Revelation is correct. Again, I'm sorry if I offended you Mark, I hold you in the greatest respect. I just don't agree with you here. Rich     The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") is sent by the Johnson County Community College ("JCCC") and is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts or other legal rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately notify JCCC by email reply and immediately and permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.     __________________________________________________   You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:archive@mail-archive.com Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:bahai-st@list.jccc.edu Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st News - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Public - http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.net New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/bahai-st@list.jccc.edu