The fact that the Faith, as the Guardian states, “enjoins upon its followers the primary duty of an unfettered search after truth”, should reassure any aspiring Bahá’í historian that there can be no question of any requirement to distort history in the so-called “interests” of the Faith. On the contrary, the combination of profound faith and freedom of thought is one of the great strengths of the Bahá’í religion. It does, however, place a great responsibility upon Bahá’í historians to put forward their views and conclusions with moderation and due humility. In this connection one of the Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh states: Thou hast written that one of the friends hath composed a treatise. This was mentioned in the Holy Presence, and this is what was revealed in response: Great care should be exercised that whatever is written in these days doth not cause dissension, and invite the objection of the people. Whatever the friends of the one true God say in these days is listened to by the people of the world. It hath been revealed in the Lawḥ-i-Hikmat: “The unbelievers have inclined their ears towards Us in order to hear that which might enable them to cavil against God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Whatever is written should not transgress the bounds of tact and wisdom, and in the words used there should lie hid the property of milk, so that the children of the world may be nurtured therewith, and attain maturity. We have said in the past that one word hath the influence of spring and causeth hearts to become fresh and verdant, while another is like unto blight which causeth the blossoms and flowers to wither. God grant that authors among the friends will write in such a way as would be acceptable (18 July 1979 to an individual believer) [68] 69: “The House of Justice had hoped that the publication of the statement...” The House of Justice had hoped that the publication of the statement(4) would stimulate discussion among Bahá’í scholars and encourage them to examine more profoundly all aspects of their work, and the effect it has upon both Bahá’í and non-Bahá’í audiences. The aim was not to instruct scholars to abandon any specific methodology but to warn them of the dangers of taking for granted the a priori assumptions of modern non-Bahá’í scholars and of allowing their thinking and their understanding of the Faith to be limited by criteria which they themselves, as Bahá’ís, would know to be in error. It was also the hope of the House of Justice that Bahá’í scholars would realize the significance of the manner in which they express themselves, and that they would guard against use of the proud and scornful language with which some had been publicly referring to their fellow believers who, nevertheless, were devotedly trying to serve the Faith of God. (8 October 1980 to an individual believer) [69] 70: “From your letter the House of Justice understands that you desire to...”