The truth is hard to swallow. Many can not admit what damage has been done with misguided Faith.
Australia apologized to the Aborigines of this country for what was done in the past in the name of Faith. It all came a bit late, the damage was done and it nearly destroyed and ancient culture that had a lot to offer spiritually.
The healing begins with the first step and the first step is always admiting to the problem and that help is needed.
It matters not how good the remedy is until the first step is taken.
Regards Tony
Tony, I want to see if I'm understanding your point.
I quoted the House of Justice saying that the greater part of organized religion is paralyzed in the grip of the same dogmas and claims of privileged access to truth that have been responsible for creating some of the most bitter conflicts dividing the earth's inhabitants. Vinayaka objected to that, and in response to that objection you brought up the apology of Australia's Prime Minister to Australia's Stolen Generations.
It looks to me like you might be using the Prime Minister's apology as an example of the value of admitting to a problem and that help is needed, as a first step in healing. I don't think that the Prime Minister is the first person who has ever admitted to that problem and the help that is needed. I'm wondering what is the significance for you in a public apology from the Prime Minister, compared to all the public discussions of the problem and the help that is needed, that have already been happening for decades. Maybe you think that an apology from the government might have significantly more impact, as a step towards healing. I have some doubts about that, but however that may be, would you agree that "sorry is not enough"? You called that a "first step." What steps do you think need to come after that?
I don't think that Baha'is are an exception to what the House of Justice said in that letter. I think that multitudes of Baha'is were, and multitudes still are, in the grip of dogmas and claims of privileged access to truth, and that some bitter conflicts have resulted from that. I think that some steps need to be taken by Baha'is, to heal the damage that has been done by those conflicts, and which I think is still a long way from being healed. For example, there is someone very close to me who is still shunning me because of my friendships with some Baha'is and former Baha'is involved in those conflicts. The open feuding has subsided, but those conflicts are still going on, and I'm still seeing discussions on the Internet among Baha'is, and between them and other people, being poisoned by those conflicts.
For me, the importance of this issue goes beyond ending those conflicts and healing the damage that has been done by Baha'is. It's also about the healing influence that the Baha'i Faith could be having, far beyond what it has been having, not only on the damage that has been done by its own members, but on all the damage that has been done to all people by all the ills of society. In its 2005 message to Baha'is, "One Common Faith," the House of Justice said "... the accelerating breakdown in social order calls out desperately for the religious spirit to be freed from the shackles that have so far prevented it from bringing to bear the healing influence of which it is capable," that "the concern of Bahá’ís must be with their own responsibility in the matter," and that "If they are to respond to the need, Bahá’ís must draw on a deep understanding of the process by which humanity’s spiritual life evolves." It commended that letter to the thoughtful study of Baha'is. To me that means that the House of Justice sees an urgent need for
Baha'is to study that letter, to improve
our own understanding of that process, to free
ourselves from the shackles that have so far prevented the spirit of the
Baha'i Faith from bringing to bear the healing influence of which it is capable.
ETA:
In more than fifteen years in Internet discussions, I have seen dozens of Baha'is feuding with each other and with other people, contrary to Baha'u'llah's prescriptions and explicit advice from the House of Justice about Internet discussions, but I have
never found even one who was found very few willing to have any discussion with me to try to resolve any conflicts of interest between us in a friendly way, which is part of what I think is needed, to help free the spirit of the Baha'i Faith from its shackles.
