harrowing by which the farmer prepares the ground for his crop. And we can measure the extent of this preparation if we take the pains to find out how much nearer now are the popular views to the Teachings of the Cause, than they were at the beginning of the last century. Since Bahá’u’lláh first proclaimed His principles, the world has, through the work of these progressive teachers and the various societies they have founded, advanced so much towards the Bahá’í teachings that we would not be in the least astonished, if from now on people would join the Cause in whole groups rather than as isolated individuals. As some one aptly said, "if the Bahá’ís do not make the world Bahá’í, it will, through its natural development, become so."
This view may give rise to another question, namely, "If these movements aim at the same thing, could we not join them rather than the Cause, and through them bring about the Millennium?" Though many points may be advanced in answer to such a suggestion we need mention here only a few.
First, these movements have taken up only one or two of the principles and focused attention upon them. They therefore could not do more than partially improve the social condition of the world. Moreover, in many of these movements we find that the teachings are either presented in a less perfect form than the Cause, or are incorporated with other less desirable doctrines.
Bahá’í Teachings are inclusive. If we study the principles laid down by Bahá’u’lláh, we will see they are interdependent and have to be taken up all together in order to achieve the desired result. His ideal League of Nations, for example, cannot be realized unless the Unity of Mankind be proclaimed; unless the spirit of narrow nationalism be abolished; unless the economic problems be solved and class hatred cease to breed internecine war; unless inter-religious disputes be forgotten; unless man become more religious and the idea of the League be planted in his heart.
Two alternatives are, therefore, left to us. Either to accept the Cause and thereby uphold all these teachings in their purest and most practicable form, or to unite all the other progressive movements under one banner, reform their principles, and marshal them for the great Armageddon. The latter alternative is impracticable, not only because of the jealousy and want of harmony between these various movements, but also because it lacks two important factors. In the first place there is a want of that dynamic power, that outpouring of the spirit, which is so conspicuous in the Bahá’í Movement. This executive Power is the only thing that can save a high principle from remaining a mere theory, an ideal never to be realized.
In the second place the Cause has a brilliant history behind it, the history of Divine Founders and noble and valiant martyrs. No one can deny the effect past achievement has in determining the development of a nation. It forms a source of ideals and examples on which future generations can draw. What Cause shows a more brilliant history and greater heroes to inspire its followers and rouse them to glorious effort?
Why has not the Bahá’í Cause spread more quickly? “If the Cause occupies such a high and sure position,” it may be said, “why has it not spread as quickly as the other, less important, movements?” Before answering this question we may remind ourselves that the rapidity with which a movement spreads is no sure measure of its importance. History shows us quite definitely that the movements which spread most rapidly were not generally the ones to
