Dear
@Jim - since, by deliberate choice you have posted in a debate forum and it is unclear what exactly you want to debate (the "One Common Faith" document is 22 pages long after all), I would like to frame some questions for further discussion if I may. But first a bit of preamble to set the scene.
Regarding its 2002 letter and the purpose of the "interfaith" component of Baha'i activities, the "One Common Faith" document states in its foreword (my bold in all quotes below):
Above all, we expressed our conviction that the time has come when religious leadership must face honestly and without further evasion the implications of the truth that God is one and that, beyond all diversity of cultural expression and human interpretation, religion is likewise one. It was intimations of this truth that originally inspired the interfaith movement and that have sustained it through the vicissitudes of the past one hundred years. Far from challenging the validity of any of the great revealed faiths, the principle has the capacity to ensure their continuing relevance. In order to exert its influence, however, recognition of this reality must operate at the heart of religious discourse, and it was with this in mind that we felt that our letter should be explicit in articulating it.
And concludes by quoting Baha'u'llah's conviction that...
"...the Lord hath ordained as the sovereign remedy and mightiest instrument for the healing of all the world is the union of all its peoples in one universal Cause, one common Faith.”
This seems a very different approach to interfaith dialogue than, for example, the Dalai Lama's approach in dialogue between Buddhism and Islam in his foreword to the book
Common Ground between Islam and Buddhism which he says:
"...seeks to find common ground between the teachings of Islam and of Buddhism. It is my hope that on the basis of this common ground, followers of each tradition may come to appreciate the spiritual truths their different paths entail and from this develop a basis for respect for each other's practice and beliefs."
So my question for discussion - and elaboration especially from Baha'i people - is: should the aim of interfaith dialogue really be "One Common Faith" - or should it rather be a foundation for mutual respect?
And with that in mind, what useful purpose is served by phrases like:
"Throughout that part of the world where the vast majority of the earth’s population live, facile announcements that “God is Dead” had passed largely unnoticed."
This seems to relegate all non-theist - possibly even all non-monotheistic - conceptions of deity or spirituality into the waste basket altogether - despite the fact that it is perfectly obvious that the increasing influence of humanistic reasoning is perhaps the only common thread that can honestly be perceived as joining the varied cultural traditions of the 21st world together.
Again, this seems an opposite approach to that of the Dalai Lama who recently wrote a book called
Beyond Religion - Ethics for a Whole World - in which he seeks to find common moral ground for a peaceful human society that is not (necessarily) religious - essentially, I suppose, "one common humanity" rather than "one common faith".
"In the past, when peoples lived in relative isolation from one another—as we Tibetans lived quite happily for many centuries behind our wall of mountains—the fact that groups pursued their own religiously based approaches to ethics posed no difficulties. Today, however, any religion-based answer to the problem of our neglect of inner values can never be universal, and so will be inadequate. What we need today is an approach to ethics which makes no recourse to religion and can be equally acceptable to those with faith and those without: a secular ethics."
So OK - with all that in mind, now I have three questions:
1. Should the aim of interfaith dialogue be "one common faith"? And if so why is it so important that we all believe the same things?
2. Does the Baha'i approach mistake religious "sameness" for spiritual "oneness"?
3. Should secular humanism be part of the interfaith dialogue? Why or why not?