The Universal House of Justice has just released a long essay, called *One Common Faith*, which is commended "to the study of the friends" i.e. it is primarily addressed to Baha'is. I found it interesting, so I'd like to make some comments about it, and these major statements are very important for understanding the direction that the UHJ wants to take the Baha'i Faith -- however, it is such a long document that it would be impractical to put it all on one blog entry, or for me to try to do that in one sitting. So, I'm going to have to do this in installments, and over a long time:
THERE IS EVERY REASON FOR confidence that the period of history now opening will be far more receptive to efforts to spread Bahá'u'lláh's message than was the case in the century just ended. All the signs indicate that a sea change in human consciousness is under way.
Early in the twentieth century, a materialistic interpretation of reality had consolidated itself so completely as to become the dominant world faith insofar as the direction of society was concerned. In the process, the civilizing of human nature had been violently wrenched out of the orbit it had followed for millennia. For many in the West, the Divine authority that had functioned as the focal centre of guidance-however diverse the interpretations of its nature-seemed simply to have dissolved and vanished. In large measure, the individual was left free to maintain whatever relationship he believed connected his life to a world transcending material existence, but society as a whole proceeded with growing confidence to sever dependence on a conception of the universe that was judged to be at best a fiction and at worst an opiate, in either case inhibiting progress. Humanity had taken its destiny into its own hands. It had solved through rational experimentation and discourse-so people were given to believe-all of the fundamental issues related to human governance and development.
It always makes me a bit nervous when I hear the UHJ denouncing "material interpretations of reality" because it was, at least partly, on that basis that Baha'i academics and intellectuals were persecuted. But, leaving that aside for the present, the UHJ here is complaining that "materialism" rather a religious outlook had become dominent "insofar as the direction of society was concerned", leaving religion to the individual. I'm not sure why they think this is a bad thing; after all, it is because of that freedom that the Baha'i Faith has been able to spread all over the world. A religion largely composed of converts has good reason to be grateful for the separation of church and state, which allows for individual choice in religious matters. Iran has got rid of such "materialistic" ideas in its philosophy of government, and it hasn't worked very well -- and most certainly has not been a benefit for the Baha'is there. At the same time, the U.S. which separates church and state completely, is manifestly a better society according to any measure you want to name, and has the strongest Baha'i community in the world. American society is also profoundly religious, as far as individual participation in religious and spiritual activities -- certainly much more so in European countries where there usually are "established" churches. Certainly, the events of history have proven that the best thing a government can do for religion is to leave it the heck alone to develop in its own way, with individuals free to make their spiritual choices. Religious viewpoints certainly influence politial ones -- in fact, so much so that I simply have to disagree with the UHJ here that American society, at least, religion has ever stopped exercising a profound influence. (Just find me an American politician that doesn't claim to be "a man of faith" or who admits to being an atheist!) We *have* a religious society; we don't have a religious government -- which most of us think is a good thing. It just goes to prove 'Abdu'l-Baha' right when he said that freedom in religious matters causes religion to flourish.
2 comments:
It seems to me that the analysis here is well placed, necessary and possibly refreshing. However, I would like to make a few simple observations. Certainly, no one should feel it necessary to be defensive of what they have written, so please take these few words for what they are worth.
I think that we, as limited as our human capacity to understand and comprehend is, tend to read more into a passage than what is actually there. I always try to shy away from this. Understanding a hidden meaning or profound concept is still necessary, however, it has been my observation that people tend to project their own interpretations onto the text.
With that in mind, I will simply point out a few basic examples within the analysis presented here.
Before this, I just wanted to mention that I am unsure as to the direction of the first sentence in which it seems to display the principle of nervous feelings over the statements of the Universal House of Justice. The assumtion is that The Supreme Body is denouncing something whereas this might simple be overly exaggerated. In addition, I would modify the concept pursued by saying that Baha'i academics and intellectuals were persecuted on the basis of there spiritual view of reality and not that of the material.
Next, is the assumption that the House of Justice is "complaining". For all we know, this may be an inaccurate description of the theme that is presented. Not to mention the statement on how: "they think this is a bad thing". This is unfortunately out of context. It is not the fact that religion has been left to the religion that is at question here (no doubt this has yielded many positive outcomes, not to mention is the source for the fulfillment of the expectation for 'individual investigation'). What is in question is the effectiveness of "materialism" on the general direction of society; here it is wise to consider the extremes of corruption, wealth, unethical practices and excessive lifestyle that plagues the west as well as the entire world in large-part.
Another aspect to consider is the unique definition of religion within the Baha'i world-view. Religion is not seen as the misunderstood and destructive organizations of a decaying world. Certainly this manipulated form of religion is not ignored. However, the emphasis is placed upon the renewal of religion brought by Baha'u'llah as well as the pure and original message of the Founders of each of the World's Great Religions.
The assesment of the U.S. Baha'i Community as the strongest is the world is misplaced. While it is true that the U.S. Baha'i Community has been pivotal to the growth of the Faith, its strength lies largely within its educated persons and its financial reasources. The U.S. Baha'i Community is not the strongest, it has been for quite some time far behind other nations in the development of the Core Activities, the change in Culture and in its general visibility. Even its manpower is limited. NOt to say that it is not strong and has not been strong, simply that materialistic views have also acted as a great hinderance to change and development in that community.
The final comment I have before I must go to eat, is that American society is not truly or profoundly religious. It is certainly not engaged in a general spiritual change until at least the most recent generations. This form of religion is manly superficial and is used as an excuse or ploy to manipulate or further other agendas.
I might also say that to diagree with the Universal House of Justice is certainly your right but is irrelavent to the analysis.
Thank you for the good forum.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments.
I think that we, as limited as our human capacity to understand and comprehend is, tend to read more into a passage than what is actually there.
The UHJ writes with a style that is very difficult to understand. Part of the reason I began my analysis of this paper was to try to figure out what they were saying.
I always try to shy away from this. Understanding a hidden meaning or profound concept is still necessary, however, it has been my observation that people tend to project their own interpretations onto the text.
That nearly always happens. After all, a person can only understand something with their own individual mind.
.
The assumtion is that The Supreme Body is denouncing something whereas this might simple be overly exaggerated.
This is an issue that I have followed closely, and have seen several statements from the UHJ about. They clearly are opposed to secular academic methods when it comes to writing about the Faith.
Next, is the assumption that the House of Justice is "complaining". For all we know, this may be an inaccurate description of the theme that is presented.
This is, of course, my own impression. Anyone is free to look at the statement themselves, and others may come up with a different view.
Not to mention the statement on how: "they think this is a bad thing". This is unfortunately out of context. It is not the fact that religion has been left to the religion that is at question here (no doubt this has yielded many positive outcomes, not to mention is the source for the fulfillment of the expectation for 'individual investigation'). What is in question is the effectiveness of "materialism" on the general direction of society;
It seems faily clear to me that they think that the influence of religion on the individual is insufficient, and the UHJ wants a greater influence of religion on society. Although, precisely what they mean by that and how they think it should be achieved remains vague.
The assesment of the U.S. Baha'i Community as the strongest is the world is misplaced.
It's a matter of definition. Historically, the U.S. community has been more influential than any other outside Iran. It still provides a great deal of the financial support and manpower for expansion of the Faith worldwide.
The U.S. Baha'i Community is not the strongest, it has been for quite some time far behind other nations in the development of the Core Activities, the change in Culture and in its general visibility.
There has been more resistance to the Ruhi courses here -- educated people find them rote and simplistic.
Even its manpower is limited. NOt to say that it is not strong and has not been strong, simply that materialistic views have also acted as a great hinderance to change and development in that community.
I think there are other factors involved.
The final comment I have before I must go to eat, is that American society is not truly or profoundly religious.
Name me a society that is! There's an old saying that religion in America is a mile wide and an inch deep. Nevertheless, rates of belief in God, and church membership are higher in the U.S. than anywhere in the developed world -- compared to many European countries where there is a state religion, while at the same time society is growing ever more secular.
I don't think there has ever been a society of "truly religious" people, nor any religion where the majority actually practice what they preach.
As Baha'u'llah reminded us in the Iqan, a true believer is as rare as the philosopher's stone.
I might also say that to diagree with the Universal House of Justice is certainly your right but is irrelavent to the analysis.
I'm not sure I understand this. My analysis simply presents the way I see this statement.
Love, Karen
Post a Comment