Question about covenant breakers

Sep 2017
371
Earth
#1
I understand that the Bahá’í must Heal the world and ‘heal the ignorant’. We are to see all as noble and see God in them, this is what I am working towards. I understand associating with covenant breakers is contagious, but can somebody help me understand this statement.

The friends should, without too much dwelling on these negative things, be made to understand that some people are spiritually sick and that their disease is, alas, contagious. Some recover from it, as did ... whose heart could not rest till he returned to the fold; others do not. The Master and Bahá'u'lláh have taught us that associating with these souls is not likely to heal them at all, but on the contrary exposes one to grave danger of contagion. The history of the Faith has proved this over and over again.

The only way we can prove to such people that they are wrong is to censure their conduct; if we sympathize with them we only fortify their perversity and waywardness.
(From a letter dated 23 January 1945 written on behalf of the Guardian to individual believer)

The guardian says will ‘likely not heal them at all’ I understand they are contagious, but why would associating with some who are misguided not heal them at all? How can I view some misguided souls as unhealable at all and other misguided souls as healable ? If it was said to not associate with them as they are contagious that’s fine but I don’t understand how they can not be healed by associating with Bahá’ís? Or not likely? What’s the difference between them and other misguided souls?

Can anybody actually explain why we must shun covenant breakers anyway?
 
Mar 2013
570
Edwardsville, Illinois, USA
#2
A covenant breaker is someone who claims to be a Baha'i yet is not loyal to the Center of the Covenant (Abdu'l-Baha) or to those who are the Center of the Faith after Him (the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice). If someone is not a Baha'i and does not have faith in the guidance of the House of Justice, that is understandable, and perhaps in the future that person may come to believe in Baha'u'llah and the clear commandment in the Kitab-i-Aqdas to obey the House of Justice. If a person claims to be a Baha'i but goes around trying to convince others not to follow the guidance of the House of Justice, it is a deep attack on the foundation of the Cause. There is no point in talking about Unity with someone who is knowingly trying to tear the Faith apart. So, we leave that person to himself. If in the future his heart changes he may be welcomed back into the Faith, but only the Universal House of Justice can declare someone as covenant breaker, or to rescind that status and allow them back into the Faith. Fortunately, individual believers are not burdened with that concern.
 
Dec 2018
8
United States
#3
Is "covenant breaker" a title that can only be applied once a ruling is made by the UHJ? It doesn't seem like a term that should be casually thrown around.
 
Jul 2018
15
US
#5
Interesting topic. So if a person was a Baha'i and then leaves the Baha'i Faith and becomes a member of another faith, like Christian, Muslim, Hindu would that person be a Covenant breaker as well and to be left alone or not?



Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk
 
Jun 2014
1,081
Wisconsin
#7
Interesting topic. So if a person was a Baha'i and then leaves the Baha'i Faith and becomes a member of another faith, like Christian, Muslim, Hindu would that person be a Covenant breaker as well and to be left alone or not?



Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk
No, it's basically reserved for someone trying to actively schism the Faith, or assert some sort of special spiritual authority within it (like claiming to be the Guardian or the like).
 
Jul 2018
15
US
#9
Would you say that the decision to shun a Covenant breaker is for protective purposes, punitive purposes, and/or restorative purposes. I think, the hope is that the person or persons would return to the true Baha'i Faith, is that the correct? Is it also protective in the sense that one may protect themselves from their adverse influences by shunning them? Just trying to understand the reason behind it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 
Sep 2010
4,522
Earth
#10
Would you say that the decision to shun a Covenant breaker is for protective purposes, punitive purposes, and/or restorative purposes. I think, the hope is that the person or persons would return to the true Baha'i Faith, is that the correct? Is it also protective in the sense that one may protect themselves from their adverse influences by shunning them? Just trying to understand the reason behind it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
We are told that Covenant Breaking is a contagious spiritual disease.

Thus isolation is required. What we must remember is that prior to this sanction, the Universal house of Justice gives the person ample time to consider what they are doing is wrong. In the time of Baha'u'llah, Abdul'baha and even Shoghi Effendi, they kept them under their care as to protect the community.

Regards Tony
 
Likes: dale ramsdell

Similar threads