"In the Parliament of men, the Federation of the World," and the Scottish bard declared, "It's coming yet for a' that When man to man, the world o'er, Shall brothers be and a' that." We can easily conceive how these ideas would penetrate the Near East and how Baha Ullah in Turkey caught an echo of them and was happily influenced to become himself an advocate of peace. But what becomes of the claims of Abdul Baha and other Bahais, mentioned above, that Baha, in 1863-1867, "_instituted_ the movement for peace and arbitration" that he advised it to kings "when it had not even been thought of," "before the attention of Western thinkers had to any degree been directed towards universal peace." They are like so many claims made by Bahaists, utterly groundless. Such statements, when made by Abdul Baha, we may attribute to ignorance of the history of the Occident, but this does not excuse American advocates of Bahaism for endorsing such errors. I need not discuss the assertion of Bahais that the Millennium began in 1844[124] or at latest in 1892, nor the announcement that the Most Great Peace will be inaugurated in 1917, which they declare to be the end of the 1335 days of Dan. xii. 12.[125] _Another claim made for Bahaism is that it is a rational and undogmatic religion._ Remey[126] says: "It does not put forth doctrine or dogma.... It is a religion free from dogma." It is "logical and reasonable." Dreyfus denounces "dogmatic religions," and claims that Bahaism has paved the way for the harmony of religion with free thought."[127] With these accord the words of Abdul Baha to Pastor Monnier in Paris.[128] "Our aim is to free religion from dogmas. Dogmas are the cause of strife. We must give up dogmas." Now it is evident that Bahaism has not a fixed body of doctrines: that it has not a definite and clear system of theology. But it is very dogmatic in the common usages of that word. Webster defines it as (1) positive, authoritative, and (2) as asserting or disposed to assert with authority or with overbearing and arrogance. Is not Bahaism a mass of assertions? For example, Baha declares that "the universe hath neither beginning nor ending." Abdul Baha adds the comment:[129] "_By this simple statement_ he has set aside elaborate theories and exhaustive labours of scientists and philosophers." Similarly he is said to have settled by a single word all discussions about divine sovereignty and free agency. Abdul Baha might be called the Lord of dogmas, for from his dicta none must vary by a hair's breadth. Remey himself dogmatizes as follows: "The religion of Baha is the cause of God, outside of which there is no truth in the world." Much in Bahaism must be taken on faith, without logical proof. Professor Browne[130] puts it mildly when he says: "The system appears to me to contain enough of the mysterious and the transcendental to make its intellectual acceptance at least as difficult as the theology of most