Dear friends,
While looking up references to Catholic confession, I also came across this
reference in Lights of Guidance (p. 159) to the Immaculate Conception.
"The churches teach doctrines--various ones in various creeds--which we as
Baha'is do not accept; such as the bodily Resurrection, confession, or, in some
creeds, the denial of the Immaculate Conception." (From a letter written on
behalf of Shoghi Effendi to the Baha'is of
Vienna, June 24, 1947)
According to this letter we do not accept the "denial of the Immaculate
Conception." I suppose one could argue that "Immaculate Conception" really means
"virgin birth" as stated in a later 1948 letter written on behalf of Shoghi
Effendi, but what pre-1947 Christian creed denies the virgin birth? Does anyone
know of one? I haven't found any. Or does this letter really mean Baha'is are
also obligated to affirm the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
This is the Catholic position or Pope Pius lX's definition of the dogma
of the Immaculate Conception: "We define the doctrine which holds the most
blessed Virgin Mary was, from the instant of *her* conception, by a singular
privilege by the omnipotent grace of God, through the application of the merits of
Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, preserved immune from all the
fault of original sin, that this is revealed by God and is to be believed by all
the faithful, firmly and constantly." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #
491, citing Pius IX in Ineffabilis Deus, 1854: DS 2803. Emphasis added)
Correct me, if I'm wrong, but presently it looks like the secretary
misunderstood the references to Immaculate Conception in Promised Day Is Come,
published early in the 1940s, assumed Baha'is should affirm the belief (as stated
in the 1946 letter below and this 1947 letter), and therefore took exception
to the Protestant and Eastern Orthodox denial of the Immaculate Conception.
If one were looking up creeds or information about the Immaculate
Conception, one popular available source at the time would have been Schaff's "Creeds
of Christendom" (vol. 1-3, published 1879, 1878, 1884, and reprinted 1931),
which, for example, discusses the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception at length and discusses its formal rejection by Protestants and the Eastern
Church (vol. 1).
Whatever the secretary's source for Christian creeds, it looks like the
secretary really thought this sectarian denial of the Immaculate Conception was
contrary to what was in Shoghi Effendi's Promised Day Is Come. And this
mistake could have been easily made, since the Guardian wrote:
"Count Mastai-Ferretti, Bishop of Imola, the 254th pope since the inception
of St. Peter's primacy, who had been elevated to the apostolic throne two years
after the Declaration of the Bab, and the duration of whose pontificate
exceeded that of any of his predecessors, will be permanently remembered as the
author of the Bull which declared the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin
(1854), referred to in the Kitab-i-Iqan, to be a doctrine of the Church, and
as the promulgator of the new dogma of Papal Infallibility (1870)." (Promised
Day Is Come, p. 53, 1941)
That is, one could assume that Shoghi Effendi is saying that the "Immaculate
Conception" is referred to in the Kitab-i-Iqan, rather than just the "Blessed
Virgin" is referred to in the Kitab-i-Iqan. But shortly afterwards it appears
that the secretary realized or learned the mistake and attempted to correct
it, but without acknowledging that a mistake had occurred. The 1948 letter
states: "At the time when you and your dear husband came into the Faith the
teachings were not as fully translated as they are now, and there were many
misapprehensions regarding certain matters. One of them seems to have been the
'Immaculate Conception' or what we really mean is the Virgin Birth (for the two are
different.)"
It seems hard to believe that Shoghi Effendi would have ever confused the
terminology for the two doctrines, since his own writings are so precise and
this controversial doctrine is perhaps the most significant and long-lasting
legacy of Pope Pius IX. Would it make more sense to assume that the secretary
either confused the terminology, or was confused for a time over which doctrine
the Faith affirmed?
Another alternative is to believe that the secretary distinguishes the
two doctrines only in this context for a reason not apparent from this letter
alone, but that actually both doctrines are affirmed by Shoghi Effendi and the
secretary knew this. Instead of letters affirming one doctrine using
terminologies that refer to two distinct Catholic doctrines, there are letters
actually
affirming two distinct Catholic doctrines and one letter also pointing out
that the two terminologies refer to distinct doctrines. Any thoughts?
Below are all the letters related to this topic that I know of in
chronological order (excepting letter #9, which is undated). I collected these
letters from previous discussions about the virgin birth (where it turned out I was
wrong once again). It looks like there is something of a methodology with
regard to these letters. The first one is written by Shoghi Effendi himself. It is
not entirely clear but all the following letters may have been written by his
secretaries, though he added wording to letter #6. That is, he wrote the
first letter on a topic and secretaries mainly used this letter to answer later
inquiries on the same topic. But when "Promised Day Is Come" is published in the
early 1940s the terminology "Immaculate Conception" is introduced, and it
then appears in later letters, but then is clarified or corrected (?) in still
later letters. Perhaps Shoghi Effendi later reviewed some of the letters going
out or heard comments, orally communicated the distinction, and the
distinction/correction began to appear, if indeed it is a correction. The first
letters
after "Promised Day Is Come" show the secretary referring to various Baha'i
books and speaking of affirmations of "Catholic" doctrine. All the major
Protestant creeds affirm the virgin birth, so why single out Catholics? In fact, what
Protestant creed (pre-1940s) doesn't affirm the virgin birth?
On the other hand, since the Guardian wrote on the bottom of letter #6,
this suggests that he used the terminology "immaculate conception" to refer to
the virgin birth, or approved of it, or saw no problem with it, or actually
affirmed the doctrine of the immaculate conception. But I can't see anyway of
knowing for sure if he actually carefully read the contents of the letter, even
if he wrote on it. That is, he may have trusted the secretary to already be
informed on the topics addressed, or dictated various answers, and allowed the
secretary to use her own words without micro-managing the wording.
THE LETTER WRITTEN BY SHOGHI EFFENDI
[1]
"It would be sacrilege for a Baha'i to believe that the parents of Jesus were
illegally married and that the latter was consequently of an illegal union.
Such a possibility cannot be even conceived by a believer who recognizes the
high station of Mary and the Divine Prophethood of Jesus Christ. It is this
same false accusation which the people of His Day attributed to Mary that
Baha'u'llah indirectly repudiated in the Iqan. The only alternative therefore is to
admit that the birth of Jesus has been miraculous. The operation of miracles
is not necessarily irrational or illogical. It does by no means constitute a
limitation of the Omnipotence of God. The belief in the possibilities of
miracles, on the contrary, implies that God's power is beyond any limitation
whatsoever. For it is only logical to believe that the Creator, Who is the sole
Author of all the laws operating in the universe, is above them and can,
therefore, if He deems it necessary, alter them at His Own Will. We, as humans, cannot
possibly attempt to read His Mind, and to fully grasp His Wisdom. Mystery is
therefore an inseparable part of true religion, and as such, should be
recognized by the believers." (From a letter written by Shoghi Effendi to an
individual believer, dated 1 October 1935; published in Canadian Baha'i News, February
1968, p. 1; in Lights of Guidance, 1999 edition: #1641, p. 491)
LETTERS WRITTEN ON BEHALF OF SHOGHI EFFENDI:
[2]
"First regarding the birth of Jesus-Christ. In the light of what Baha'u'llah
and `Abdu'l-Baha have stated concerning this subject it is evident that Jesus
came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and
that consequently His birth was quite miraculous. This is an established fact,
and the friends need not feel at all surprised, as the belief in the
possibility of miracles has never been rejected in the Teachings. Their importance,
however, has been minimized." (From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian
to an individual believer, dated 31 December 1937, #1637 in Lights of Guidance,
1999, p. 490; cited in letter written on behalf of the Universal House of
Justice to an individual believer, dated 16 February 1996 at
http://www.bahai-library.org/uhj/vbirth.ency.admin.html)
[3]
"Again with regard to your question relative to the birth of Jesus; he wishes
me to inform you that there is nothing further he can add to the explanation
he gave you in his previous communication regarding this point. One thing,
however, he wishes again to bring to your attention, namely that miracles are
always possible, even though they do not constitute a regular channel whereby
God reveals His power to mankind. To reject miracles on the ground that they
imply a breach of the laws of nature is a very shallow, well-nigh a stupid
argument, inasmuch as God Who is the Author of the universe can, in His Wisdom and
Omnipotence, bring any change, no matter how temporary, in the operation of
the laws which He Himself has created.
"The Teachings do not tell us of any miraculous birth besides that of
Jesus." (From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual
believer, dated 27 February 1938; in Lights of Guidance, 1999 edition: #1638, p.
490)
*****
PDC 1941 "the mystery of the Immaculacy of the Virgin Mary is confessed"
PDC 1943
GPB 1944 "[the Kitab-i-Iqan]...upholds the purity and innocence of the Virgin
Mary"
GPB 1945
*****
[4]
"With regard to your question concerning the Virgin Birth of Jesus; on this
point, as on several others, the Baha'i teachings are in full agreement with
the doctrines of the Catholic Church. In the Kitab-i-Iqan (Book of Certitude)
page 56, and in a few other Tablets still unpublished, Baha'u'llah confirms,
however indirectly, the Catholic conception of the Virgin Birth. Also
`Abdu'l-Bah� in `Some Answered Questions', Chap. 12, page 73, explicitly states that
Christ found existence through the spirit of God which statement necessarily
implies, when reviewed in the light of the text, that Jesus was not the son of
Joseph." (From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual
believer, dated 14 October 1945; published in Directives from the Guardian, #107,
p. 40; #1639 in Lights of Guidance, 1999, p. 491; cited in letter written on
behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, dated 16
February 1996 at http://www.bahai-library.org/uhj/vbirth.ency.admin.html)
[5]
"We believe that Christ only was conceived immaculately. His brothers and
sisters would have been born in the natural way and conceived naturally." (From a
letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to Dr. Shook, dated 7 November
1945; published in Directives from the Guardian, #107, p. 40; #1640 in Lights of
Guidance, 1999, p. 491)
[6]
[I'll have to go through my e-mail to discovery who kindly sent this source.]
"Here is a modest contribution to the discussion: the extract of a letter to
Lucienne Migette, a French Baha'i woman. She had apparently been asking some
questions in her letters dated march 12th and 15th, but unhappily I've not got
them. My text has been taken from a photocopy of the original. I think it's
never been published.
'Haifa, april 1st, 1946.
Dear Baha'i Sister:
Your letters dated march 12th & 15th have been received, as well as the
article you forwarded, and the beloved guardian has instructed me to answer you on
his behalf.
(...)
Concerning your questions (...)
no 5. Baha'is do believe in the immaculate conception, and no Baha'i should
ever try to minimize this doctrine.
(...)
With warm Baha'i love,
R. Rabbani'
[the remainder is in the hand of Shoghi Effendi]
May the Beloved bless yours efforts, guide your steps, deepen your
understanding of the essentials of his Faith, & enable you to promote its vital
interests, your true brother, Shoghi
[7]
....In 1978 I [Brent Poirier] wrote about this matter and provided these
quotes, and in a memorandum included with the House's response dated July 5, 1978,
the Research Department stated: "It is clear that the beloved Guardian
understood the difference between the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary and
the Virgin Birth of Jesus. In October 1948 one of the believers wrote to him
questioning Baha'i belief in the Virgin Birth, but referring to it as 'The
Immaculate Conception.' The Guardian's reply, which was written by his secretary
on his behalf, corrects this misunderstanding while answering the substance of
the question: 'At the time when you and your dear husband came into the Faith
the teachings were not as fully translated as they are now, and there were
many misapprehensions regarding certain matters. One of them seems to have been
the "Immaculate Conception" or what we really mean is the Virgin Birth (for
the two are different.) The Master clearly writes in a Tablet that Christ was
*not* begotten in the ordinary way, but by the Holy Spirit. So we must accept
this. Every Faith has some miracles, and this is the great miracle of the
Christian Faith.'"
[8]
"The Master clearly writes in a Tablet that Christ was not begotten in the
ordinary way, but by the Holy Spirit. So we must accept this. Every Faith has
some miracles, and this is the great miracle of the Christian Faith. But we must
not let it be a test to us. Our human minds are so small, and as yet so
immature compared to the men of the future, that we should have no difficulty in
acknowledging the Power of God when He chooses to show it in some manner
'illogical' to us!" (Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual
believer, dated 23 December 1948; cited in letter written on behalf of the
Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, dated 16 February 1996 at
http://www.bahai-library.org/uhj/vbirth.ency.admin.html)
***
PDC 1951 "the mystery of the Immaculacy of the Virgin Mary is confessed"
***
[9]
UNDATED:
"What science calls a virgin birth we do not associate with that of Jesus
Christ, which we believe to have been a miracle and a sign of His Prophethood. In
this matter we are in entire agreement with the most orthodox church views."
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi; published in High
Endeavours: Messages to Alaska, #87, p. 70)
******
warm regards
Michael
----------
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st
news://list.jccc.net/bahai-st
http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist (public)
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (public)
