Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 102
not only an intensification of the machinations of internal enemies, but a rise
in the hostility and opposition of its external enemies, whether religious or
secular, as the Cause pursues its onward march towards ultimate victory.
Therefore, in the light of the warnings of the Guardian, the Auxiliary Boards
for Protection should keep ―constantly‖ a ―watchful eye‖ on those ―who are
known to be enemies, or to have been put out of the Faith‖, discreetly
investigate their activities, alert intelligently the friends to the opposition
inevitably to come, explain how each crisis in God‘s Faith has always proved
to be a blessing in disguise, and prepare them for the ―dire contest which is
destined to range the Army of Light against the forces of darkness‖.30
Censorship and Restraints on Baha’i Scholarship
Before the rise of cyberspace, the Baha‘i administration exercised almost complete control
over both the public image of the Faith and information available to adherents.
One reason it has been exempt from outside scrutiny is that it has never captured the
attention of the academic world or of the press. The religion has avoided becoming publicly
offensive in the way many NRMs have. Nearly all scholars who have published academic
work on the Baha‘i Faith are either Baha‘is or ex-Baha‘is, and they have tended to focus on
the religion‘s early history in the Middle East, or on its sacred literature, so that research on
the contemporary community is relatively rare.
The main avenue of information control is that anything written by a Baha‘i about the Baha‘i
Faith, even if submitted to an academic or other non-Baha‘i publisher, must pass
―prepublication review.‖ It is claimed that this does not involve censorship, but is in place
only to preserve the ―dignity and accuracy‖ of the Faith. Shielding the religion from external
enemies is also given as a reason for reviewing public material about the Faith.31 In theory,
the review requirement could be enforced by the loss of administrative rights (voting,
holding office, participation in community consultation etc.), but there is no record of such a
penalty ever being imposed.32
This policy was first set in place during ‗Abdu‘l-Baha‘s ministry, and both he and Shoghi
Effendi described it as ―temporary.‖ It did not cause controversy through most of the
century, but the influx of young Baby Boomers in the early 70s created a class of bright,
intellectually-inclined Baha‘is, some of whom studied fields related to the Faith, such as
Middle Eastern History or Religious Studies at top universities. These young intellectuals
naturally chafed at the restrictions placed upon written ideas. One Baha‘i academic who
complained to the UHJ about this policy was told that Baha‘i scholars must ―accept
unreservedly‖ that this policy is ―in accordance with the Divine Will‖ and to present it as ―a
species of peer review that they welcome‖ to skeptical non-Baha‘i colleagues.33
In answer to those who want to end this restriction, the UHJ also points to predictions by
‗Abdu‘l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi concerning the opposition the religion is expected to face
as it grows in numbers and influence.
The Faith is as yet in its infancy. Despite its emergence from obscurity, even
now the vast majority of the human race remains ignorant of its existence
moreover, the vast majority of its adherents are relatively new Baha‘is. The
change implied by this new stage in its evolution is that whereas heretofore
this tender plant was protected in its obscurity from the attention of external
elements, it has now become exposed. This exposure invites close
observation, and that observation will eventually lead to opposition in various
quarters. So far from adopting a carefree attitude, the community must be
conscious of the necessity to present a correct view of itself and an accurate
understanding of its purpose to a largely skeptical public. A greater effort, a

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 103
greater care must now be exercised to ensure its protection against the
malice of the ignorant and the unwisdom of its friends.34
The fear of external enemies has also been fed by the Baha‘i Faith‘s history of persecution in
Iran. Concern over the safety of the Baha‘is in that country has been cited by defenders of
the administration as a reason for being cautious in its public presentations.
Besides the policy of prepublication review, Baha‘i scholars have also complained about lack
of access to primary materials, the discouragement of and interference with academic
projects,35 and, in one particular case, the deletion of passages from an important primary
source prior to publication36. While Baha‘i scriptures ostensibly support scholarship, and the
UHJ itself has made several statements about its importance, it has also has condemned
academic methods in current use as ―materialistic‖ and ―designed to ignore the truths that
make religion what it is‖37 Rank-and-file Baha‘is tend to be anti-intellectual, with little
understanding or sympathy for the problems academics face within the Baha‘i structure.
The nature of academic writing is also misunderstood, and Baha‘i scholars have attracted
criticism for failing to attribute events in Baha‘i history to divine intervention, or taking into
account contextual influences on the Faith‘s central figures.38
Another problem for those who study the Faith, but are unable to read Persian or Arabic is
that Haifa has been slow in producing English translations of Baha‘u‘llah‘s voluminous
writings. Unofficial translations are becoming increasingly available on the Internet,
however, and the UHJ has recently announced that more official versions will be
forthcoming.39
The Youth Influx and Baha’i Intellectuals
The composition of the Baha‘i Faith underwent a massive demographic shift during the
decade of the 70s. About 13,000 Baha‘is were on the rolls in 1969 compared to 75,000 ten
years later, with the bulk of the converts being young.40 Anecdotal evidence suggests that
the older generation viewed these newcomers with dismay and some suspicion, since they
brought with them a youth culture that was alien and threatening to them. Baby Boom
Baha‘is remember this time with fondness, however, and some of their drives toward reform
stem from disappointment that this energetic expansion could not be maintained.41
One of the first aspects of Baha‘i life that disillusioned the newcomers was that, although
the Baha‘i Faith proclaims several social concerns among its principles, any sort of political
involvement is completely forbidden to members. This left these young activists no outlet to
work towards achieving their ideals in any practical way, other than serving the goals of the
administration for the long-term Baha‘i future, One Baby Boom-era convert put it this way:
For Baha‘is of my generation, we became believers during the exciting and
turbulent Vietnam War years because we saw that Baha‘u‘llah offers humanity
the clearest direction for our inner spiritual growth and our work for saving
the planet. Most of my Baha‘i friends of my youth have left the Faith. Not
because they lost faith in Baha‘u‘llah or the teachings, but because they were
not allowed to express their ideals and activism as Baha‘is. And today, over
and over again, I hear from friends who are quietly leaving the Faith to
pursue their ideals in the peace movement, in the women‘s movement, in the
field of ecology, in music and dance, in religious discipline, because they are
not allowed to express their commitment to social change, artistic expression,
or a mystical path within a Baha‘i context.42
The UHJ replied:
It is not unusual for people to be drawn to the Faith because they see in it the
fulfilment of the ideals which are dear to their hearts. But, if a soul truly