Re: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception
Some people do confuse immaculate conception with the virgin birth. But this is a major issue of those days. And there was even a view among Protestants that Christian traditions reflected in the Qur'an expressed the Catholic idea of the Immaculate Conception. Gibbon and others speaks of this, so it is very doubtful that Shoghi Effendi could have mistaken the terminology or missed the larger sectrarian debate of his time. Gibbon, perhaps his favorite author, seems to have seen the immaculate conception of Mary suggested by the Qur'an and it is the quranic version of Mary's sufferings that Baha'u'llah cites in the Iqan. Further, it is the Iqan that Shoghi Effendi seems to correlates with the immaculate conception, depending on how one reads the Promised Day Is Come (since he may have only been correlating it to the Virgin Mary). But, in light of Gibbons, one would naturally assume he means to correlate it with the immaculate conception of Mary. The evidence that he (improbable) or the secretaries (more probable) didn't understand and/or appreciate the specific significance of the terminology (i.e., its clear cultural identification with the dogma expressed in the 1854 Bull) is the October 1948 letter the 'Immaculate Conception' or what we really mean is the Virgin Birth (for the two are different.) It is also interesting that letter four says: 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. This seems exaggerated, even if one really believed that Promised Day Is Come was a direct affirmation of the 1854 Bull and Catholic doctrine, since the Baha'i Faith doesn't appear to be in full agreement with any Catholic doctrine. On the other hand, the plural doctrines suggests both the virgin birth and immaculate conception. Three sources known to Shoghi Effendi are 1) Sale's translation of the Koran (1734), 2) Gibbon's Decline and Fall (1737-1794) , and 3) Rodwell's translation of the Koran (1861): 1) The Sale's footnote to verse 3:31: The wife of Imran is Hannah or Anne... Although Muhammad had no direct access to the Apocryphal Gospels, yet these may have influenced, or at any rate, contained much in common with, the ordinary traditions of S. Syria. And of this, the Immaculate Conception of the B. V. Mary, supposed by Gibbon (ch. 50) to have been borrowed from the Koran, probably formed a part.] Sale also adds: It is not improbable that the pretended immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary is intimated in this passage; for according to a tradition of Mohammed, every person that comes into the world is touched at his birth by the devil, and therefore cries out: Mary and her son only excepted, between whom and the evil spirit GOD placed a veil, so that his touch did not reach them. And for this reason, they say, neither of them were guilty of any sin, like the rest of the children of Adam: which peculiar grace they obtained by virtue of this recommendation of them by Hannah to GOD's protection. (Al Koran, p. 35) 2) Of the Qur'an, Gibbon wrote: The wonders of the genuine and apocryphal gospels are profusely heaped on his head; and the Latin church has not disdained to borrow from the Koran the immaculate conception[87] of his virgin mother. Yet Jesus was a mere mortal; and, at the day of judgment, his testimony will serve to condemn both the Jews, who reject him as a prophet, and the Christians, who adore him as the Son of God... [Footnote 87: It is darkly hinted in the Koran, (c. 3, p. 35,) and more clearly explained by the tradition of the Sonnites, (Sale's Note, and Maracci, tom. ii. p. 112.) In the xiith century, the immaculate conception was condemned by St. Bernard as a presumptuous novelty, (Fra Paolo, Istoria del Concilio di Trento, l. ii.)] 3) Rodwell writes: Footnote 4, to 3:32: According to a tradition of Muhammad every new-born child is touched by Satan, with the exception of Mary and her Son, between whom and Satan God interposed a veil. Hence this passage may imply the Immaculate Conception of the B. V. Mary. See v. 37 below. With regard to Rodwell, he did *also* use language similar to Shoghi Effendi: Qur'an translation: And her who kept her maidenhood, and into whom[3] we breathed of our spirit, and made her and her son a sign to all creatures. (21:91) [Footnote 3: See Sura [cix.] lxvi. 12. It is quite clear from these two passages that Muhammad believed in the Immaculate and miraculous conception of Jesus. But this doesn't mean Rodwell is in any way confusing the two, just referring to both together. Sale, Rodwell, and Gibbon, are arguing that when the Quran says made her *and* her son a sign this accords with the Catholic idea that both Mary *and* Jesus are born miraculously, thus Immaculate [conception of Mary] and miraculous conception of Jesus [i.e., virgin birth]. One could
Re: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 December 2003 19:03 Subject: Re: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception If the concern regarding the idea that the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary implies that Mary having been 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 is the same as Christ found existence through the spirit of God; then it seems to me that the Conception of Mary and the Birth of Jesus were miracles. Richard. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 12:18 AM Subject: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception 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
Re: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception
The Tablet of the Master mentioned in number eight is in Arabic and can be seen in the first volume of `Abdu'l-Baha's Letters, published in 1910 in Egypt, page 9. It is very famous among the Iranian Baha'is. If the provisional translation is needed, it can be provided. Faruq Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now -- 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)
Re: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception
If the concern regarding the idea that the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary implies that Mary having been 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 is the same as Christ found existence through the spirit of God; then it seems to me that the Conception of Mary and the Birth of Jesus were miracles. Richard. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Baha'i Studies [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 12:18 AM Subject: Questions concerning Immaculate Conception 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?
