Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 100
the time the NSA intervened the cult leader had moved out of state. This young follower
was subjected to a two-hour interrogation in which he was accused of conspiring with his
former mentor.23 The possibility of tyrannical local leadership also seems to be revealed in a
number of allegations that emerged during the course of a lawsuit against the LSA of
Albuquerque. According to some reports, the Chairman of the LSA claimed to be ―the Voice
of God‖ in his community, and thus was to be obeyed without question.24
While this extreme level of high-handedness is unusual, strong-minded and pushy local
leaders are not uncommon, and many disgruntled Baha‘is report that they feel powerless to
influence local affairs, even though in theory problems are supposed to be solved through
community consultation.
The emphasis on building a millenarian future through converting others to the religion and
creating local assemblies has caused the Baha‘i communities to sacrifice certain qualitative
aspects of their collective life. Since most Baha‘i communities are quite small, they do not
have the resources to offer services that most Americans would take for granted from their
churches. Only the largest even have a public building to meet in, with most Baha‘i
communities meeting in private homes. Pastoral care can be inadequate and amateurish.
While the larger communities are fairly well-run, the scheduling of meetings can often be
slipshod and irregular in small communities where members are working Baha‘i activities
around other personal commitments. Baha‘is are often exhorted to be patient with these
things and told that the administrative order is ―embryonic‖ and that the quality of
community life will get better as the Faith grows. In this emphasis on future expectations,
rather than serving the needs of the membership, the Baha‘i Faith can be fairly compared
with the Jehovah‘s Witnesses, another strongly missionary group with a high turnover in
membership.25
Consultation and Baha’i Culture
Because Baha‘i scriptures give great importance to consultation as a method of problem-
solving, making plans and discussions of community affairs are a regular feature of Baha‘i
life. In theory, any individual may raise any issue or question at Feast, Convention, or with
any Baha‘i official or institution. However, once a decision is made, the community is
expected to unite behind it, with any individual objections stifled. Backbiting is strongly
condemned in Baha‘i scripture, and this prohibition is also extended to mean not only
individuals, but institutions, so voicing complaints or criticisms is difficult, and may meet
with disapproval. Also, some members simply feel intimidated by stronger personalities in
the community, and have trouble expressing themselves to a group. Public dissent is not at
all tolerated, although the rise of cyberspace in the ‗90s has weakened the administration‘s
ability to control this. In a revealing talk in 1988, then-Secretary of External Affairs Firuz
Kazemzadeh made these remarks:
It also must be stated that, within the Baha‘i community, there are
individuals, and sometimes they even become groups, who do question the
activities of the Baha‘i institution. They are welcome to raise those questions
in Nineteen Day Feasts. They are welcome to take those questions,
objections, wishes, to higher institutions. If somebody is dissatisfied with a
local assembly, he is not prevented from appealing to the NSA and actions of
the NSA can be appealed to the Universal House of Justice. It is something
else when whispering campaigns or petitions are sent around for signatures
objecting to the activities of the institutions. That also may be something
which is countenanced by American democracy but has nothing to do with the
Baha‘i Faith. We must always remember that our institutions are an unusual
and unique combination of theocracy in the best sense of the term with
democracy. The institutions of the Baha‘i Faith have not been created by us,
the time the NSA intervened the cult leader had moved out of state. This young follower
was subjected to a two-hour interrogation in which he was accused of conspiring with his
former mentor.23 The possibility of tyrannical local leadership also seems to be revealed in a
number of allegations that emerged during the course of a lawsuit against the LSA of
Albuquerque. According to some reports, the Chairman of the LSA claimed to be ―the Voice
of God‖ in his community, and thus was to be obeyed without question.24
While this extreme level of high-handedness is unusual, strong-minded and pushy local
leaders are not uncommon, and many disgruntled Baha‘is report that they feel powerless to
influence local affairs, even though in theory problems are supposed to be solved through
community consultation.
The emphasis on building a millenarian future through converting others to the religion and
creating local assemblies has caused the Baha‘i communities to sacrifice certain qualitative
aspects of their collective life. Since most Baha‘i communities are quite small, they do not
have the resources to offer services that most Americans would take for granted from their
churches. Only the largest even have a public building to meet in, with most Baha‘i
communities meeting in private homes. Pastoral care can be inadequate and amateurish.
While the larger communities are fairly well-run, the scheduling of meetings can often be
slipshod and irregular in small communities where members are working Baha‘i activities
around other personal commitments. Baha‘is are often exhorted to be patient with these
things and told that the administrative order is ―embryonic‖ and that the quality of
community life will get better as the Faith grows. In this emphasis on future expectations,
rather than serving the needs of the membership, the Baha‘i Faith can be fairly compared
with the Jehovah‘s Witnesses, another strongly missionary group with a high turnover in
membership.25
Consultation and Baha’i Culture
Because Baha‘i scriptures give great importance to consultation as a method of problem-
solving, making plans and discussions of community affairs are a regular feature of Baha‘i
life. In theory, any individual may raise any issue or question at Feast, Convention, or with
any Baha‘i official or institution. However, once a decision is made, the community is
expected to unite behind it, with any individual objections stifled. Backbiting is strongly
condemned in Baha‘i scripture, and this prohibition is also extended to mean not only
individuals, but institutions, so voicing complaints or criticisms is difficult, and may meet
with disapproval. Also, some members simply feel intimidated by stronger personalities in
the community, and have trouble expressing themselves to a group. Public dissent is not at
all tolerated, although the rise of cyberspace in the ‗90s has weakened the administration‘s
ability to control this. In a revealing talk in 1988, then-Secretary of External Affairs Firuz
Kazemzadeh made these remarks:
It also must be stated that, within the Baha‘i community, there are
individuals, and sometimes they even become groups, who do question the
activities of the Baha‘i institution. They are welcome to raise those questions
in Nineteen Day Feasts. They are welcome to take those questions,
objections, wishes, to higher institutions. If somebody is dissatisfied with a
local assembly, he is not prevented from appealing to the NSA and actions of
the NSA can be appealed to the Universal House of Justice. It is something
else when whispering campaigns or petitions are sent around for signatures
objecting to the activities of the institutions. That also may be something
which is countenanced by American democracy but has nothing to do with the
Baha‘i Faith. We must always remember that our institutions are an unusual
and unique combination of theocracy in the best sense of the term with
democracy. The institutions of the Baha‘i Faith have not been created by us,
