Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 94
Enemies Within:
Conflict and Control in the Baha’i Community
Karen Bacquet
Abstract
The Baha‘i Faith, best-known for its liberal social teachings and tolerance
towards other religions, has an authoritarian governing structure that has
caused a high level of disillusionment among adherents. Because of the
religion‘s stress on unity, there is considerable insecurity about the
expression of dissent and a fear of internal enemies. Conformity is enforced
by sanctions, excommunication, and shunning, and information is controlled
through a system of censorship. Although the religion is governed by elected
institutions, they are not held accountable to the electorate. Moreover, the
supreme governing institution is believed to be infallible. While the spread of
the Internet in the 1990s has weakened the administration‘s control of
information, the Baha‘i leadership has threatened and sanctioned liberal
intellectuals for the expression of their opinions on e-mail forums.
While other movements that swelled with converts in the 1970s were exposed as cults,
using unethical tactics to recruit and control members, the Baha‘i Faith has maintained a
remarkably positive public image since it was first established in the U.S. in the 1890s. The
religion‘s publicity campaigns have left the impression, even among detractors, that its
beliefs are socially progressive and without a strong doctrinal core, somewhat akin to
Unitarian-Universalists. However, Baha‘i, like other religions in the Abrahamic tradition, is
based on a set of texts that are believed to be divinely revealed. Liberal principles are
contained in these scriptures, but so are authoritarian elements. Baha‘is, then, can be as
fundamentalist as the adherents of any other Western religion.
While these authoritarian elements can perhaps be called ―cult-like‖ it would be wrong to
regard the Baha‘i Faith entirely as a cult. In any case, the line between ―cult‖ and ―non-cult‖
is far from absolute. Many, perhaps most, religious groups have various requirements that
adherents are subject to, and control mechanisms to enforce them. Dennis Tourish and Tim
Wohlforth (2000), in a recent Cultic Studies Journal article, described religions as falling on
a ―continuum‖ rather than simply on one side or another of a ―cult‖ definition:
At one end stand healthy well functioning groups, in which dissent is
respected, people participate in decision making, and members at all times
retain a foot in the real world. At the other end we find totalitarian enclaves
in which conformity is prized above all else and people are frequently
manipulated against their will for the greater good of the cult leader. People
and organizations can move back and forth on this continuum depending on
events. Organizations are not necessarily either cults or non-cults. They can
be both at different times.1
So, on the extreme end one could place a destructive cult such as the Branch
Davidians, which is clearly quite totalitarian compared with the Jehovah‘s Witnesses,
who in turn more strictly control their members than does the Roman Catholic
Church, which has more control mechanisms than the Unitarian-Universalists do.
Even within a single religion, the application of disciplinary measures can vary over
time and circumstances, and individual experience of pressure and manipulation can
differ, with some adherents more vulnerable than others.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 95
The Baha‘i Faith clearly lacks many of the features that are usually associated with
dangerous cults. It does, however, include some doctrines and practices that put it closer on
the ―cult-like‖ end of that continuum than even most conservative religious groups, and that
are starkly at variance with its tolerant public image. It does not, for example, have a
living, charismatic leader, but it is governed by an elected body that is believed to be
endowed with divine guidance and that cannot be challenged. While outright exploitation is
rare, Baha‘is are encouraged to make considerable voluntary personal sacrifices for the
good of their faith. Unlike cults that insulate their members from outside influences, Baha‘is
do not consider the rest of the world evil, and in fact are encouraged to mix among people
of various faiths. However, the existing governmental systems of the world, including
Western democracy are considered inferior to the system of Baha‘i governance and doomed
to eventually go by the wayside. Baha‘i institutions also express fears over external
threats, especially those that might endanger the religion‘s reputation. This is often given as
a reason for the careful screening of publicly-available information. More marked, however,
and perhaps the most ―cult-like‖ aspect of Baha‘i belief and practice is the fear of internal
enemies that threaten to disrupt the religion‘s unity and undermine its self-definition as the
agent of mankind‘s salvation.
The Baha‘i Faith views the establishment of world unity as its primary mission, and this is
believed to be dependent on the Baha‘i Faith‘s remaining united as a single religion that
completely avoids the schisms that other world religions have experienced in their history.
This has created anxiety about the articulation of dissent which, in turn, has resulted in
severe limits imposed on individual free expression concerning Baha‘i beliefs, community
affairs, and institutional decisions. Hence, the Baha‘i Faith places adherents in a
psychological bind by simultaneously upholding liberal ideals, which attract intelligent and
creative people, while at the same time exerting pressure towards obedience and
conformity. This conformity is enforced by the attitudes of fellow adherents, intimidation by
Baha‘i officials, and sanctions, including excommunication and shunning, limitation of
participation in community affairs, and most recently, simply dropping nonconformists from
the membership rolls. At the same time, Baha‘i leaders deny that censorship exists or that
individual opinions are stifled, describing its position as upholding moderate freedom in this
area.2
Historical Background
The Baha‘i Faith was founded in the nineteenth century by the Iranian nobleman, Mirza
Husayn ‗Ali Baha‘u‘llah. He had been part of the millenarian Babi movement, established by
the prophet known in the West as the Bab, meaning ―gate‖. This young merchant from the
southern Persian city of Shiraz proclaimed himself the Qa‘im, the messianic figure expected
by Shi‘ih Islam. After a short, dramatic mission of six years, the Bab was executed and
thousands of his followers were massacred, driving the movement underground.
Baha‘u‘llah had been beaten, imprisoned, and sent into exile. In 1863, Baha‘u‘llah declared
that he was the Manifestation of God promised by the Bab, and while there are strong
theological continuities between the two faiths, the Baha‘i Faith is far less militant and
radical, promoting ideals of tolerance and peace. The religion was brought to America in the
1890s by a Syrian Christian convert and experienced slow steady growth through most of
the twentieth century, with the exception of the ―Youth Boom‖ of the early 70s. Missionary
efforts have established Baha‘i communities in most countries of the world.
The initial appeal of the religion lies in these progressive social principles: religious
tolerance, the elimination of racial prejudice, equality of the sexes, free inquiry, the
harmony of reason and religion, and the promotion of world peace.3 However, for those
that actually convert and become members, the impact of the writings of Baha‘u‘llah is
usually the deciding factor. These writings, along with promoting the principles just
mentioned, are also rich in spiritual imagery, akin to that found in Sufi literature, which has