One Common Faith | Page 6

realization of justice is central to the Divine purpose.
Nor, in their essential features, do the lives of heroes and saints seem
any less meaningful than they did when those lives were lived centuries
ago. For many religious people, therefore, the most painful aspect of
the current crisis of civilization is that the search for truth has not
turned with confidence into religion's familiar avenues.
The problem is, of course, twofold. The rational soul does not merely
occupy a private sphere, but is an active participant in a social order.
Although the received truths of the great faiths remain valid, the daily
experience of an individual in the twenty-first century is unimaginably
removed from the one that he or she would have known in any of those
ages when this guidance was revealed. Democratic decision-making
has fundamentally altered the relationship of the individual to authority.
With growing confidence and growing success, women justly insist on
their right to full equality with men. Revolutions in science and
technology change not only the functioning but the conception of
society, indeed of existence itself. Universal education and an
explosion of new fields of creativity open the way to insights that
stimulate social mobility and integration, and create opportunities of
which the rule of law encourages the citizen to take full advantage.
Stem cell research, nuclear energy, sexual identity, ecological stress
and the use of wealth raise, at the very least, social questions that have
no precedent. These, and the countless other changes affecting every
aspect of human life, have brought into being a new world of daily
choices for both society and its members. What has not changed is the
inescapable requirement of making such choices, whether for better or
worse. It is here that the spiritual nature of the contemporary crisis
comes into sharpest focus because most of the decisions called for are
not merely practical but moral. In large part, therefore, loss of faith in
traditional religion has been an inevitable consequence of failure to
discover in it the guidance required to live with modernity, successfully
and with assurance.
A second barrier to a re-emergence of inherited systems of belief as the
answer to humanity's spiritual yearnings is the effects already
mentioned of global integration. Throughout the planet, people raised

in a given religious frame of reference find themselves abruptly thrown
into close association with others whose beliefs and practices appear at
first glance irreconcilably different from their own. The differences can
and often do give rise to defensiveness, simmering resentments and
open conflict. In many cases, however, the effect is rather to prompt a
reconsideration of received doctrine and to encourage efforts at
discovering values held in common. The support enjoyed by various
interfaith activities doubtless owes a great deal to response of this kind
among the general public. Inevitably, with such approaches comes a
questioning of religious doctrines that inhibit association and
understanding. If people whose beliefs appear to be fundamentally
different from one's own nevertheless live moral lives that deserve
admiration, what is it that makes one's own faith superior to theirs?
Alternatively, if all of the great religions share certain basic values in
common, do not sectarian attachments run the risk of merely
reinforcing unwanted barriers between an individual and his
neighbours?
Few today among those who have some degree of objective familiarity
with the subject are likely, therefore, to entertain an illusion that any
one of the established religious systems of the past can assume the role
of ultimate guide for humankind in the issues of contemporary life,
even in the improbable event that its disparate sects should come
together for that purpose. Each one of what the world regards as
independent religions is set in the mould created by its authoritative
scripture and its history. As it cannot refashion its system of belief in a
manner to derive legitimacy from the authoritative words of its Founder,
it likewise cannot adequately answer the multitude of questions posed
by social and intellectual evolution. Distressing as this may appear to
many, it is no more than an inherent feature of the evolutionary process.
Attempts to force a reversal of some kind can lead only to still greater
disenchantment with religion itself and exacerbate sectarian conflict.

"The dilemma is both artificial and self-inflicted. The world order, if..."
The dilemma is both artificial and self-inflicted. The world order, if it

can be so described, within which Bahá'ís today pursue the work of
sharing Bahá'u'lláh's message is one whose misconceptions about both
human nature and social evolution are so fundamental as to severely
inhibit the most intelligent and well-intentioned endeavours at human
betterment. Particularly is this true with respect to the confusion that
surrounds virtually every aspect of the subject of religion. In order to
respond adequately to the spiritual needs of