Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 96
a strong emotional attraction. It is not uncommon for converts to describe having ―mystical
experiences‖ while reading or reciting these scriptures. Baha‘u‘llah is the central figure for
Baha‘i devotion, holding much the same place in a believer‘s affections that Jesus does for
Christians.4
However, belief in the founder of the Baha‘i Faith is held to be inseparable from faith in and
obedience to a divinely-ordained administrative system. Key to the understanding of this is
the doctrine of the Covenant: In order to prevent his religion from falling into schism after
his death, Baha‘u‘llah appointed his eldest surviving son, ‗Abdu‘l-Baha as the leader of the
Faith (1892-1921) and authorized interpreter of his writings. This scriptural provision is
considered to be a covenant between Baha‘u‘llah and his followers, who were expected to
turn to this appointed center. A younger son disputed ‗Abdu‘l-Baha‘s claim to leadership,
causing a family rift which threatened to tear the new faith apart. ‗Abdu‘l-Baha
excommunicated these family members, called their followers ―covenant-breakers,‖ and
ordered that they be shunned. The term ―covenant-breaker‖ has been applied to any
opponent of the successive heads of the Baha‘i Faith, and the strategy has actually been
quite successful at marginalizing and discouraging schismatics and dissidents. While Baha‘i
splinter groups exist, none has ever seriously threatened the mainstream, and most have
withered away over time.
Even dissidents can harbor strong internal inhibitions about creating a breakaway
denomination, leaving them no option other than to submit to the expectations of Baha‘i
authorities or abandon any hope of interacting in a religious community unless they convert
to an entirely different religion.5 In a quite recent phenomenon, alienated Baha‘is have
found a sense of community on the Internet, which allows them to maintain private belief
while either resigning membership or remaining inactive within the Baha‘i organization. The
Universal House of Justice, in response to this, has called the position of leaving the
organization while still claiming to be a believer in Baha‘u‘llah ―self-contradictory,‖ and it
does not recognize such people as Baha‘is.6
Abdu‘l-Baha painted a vivid and fearful picture of the opponents he faced: Covenant-
breakers are regarded as spiritually sick and perverse knowing that they are in error yet
persisting out of pride and a quest for power. They are tricky and smooth-talking, and can
easily lure the unsuspecting into spiritual darkness. The only way to be spiritually safe is to
be ―firm in the Covenant,‖ that is, to obey the central authority and to shun those who have
―broken the Covenant.‖7 This image has carried over to later schismatics and dissidents,
creating a sense, at least among conservatives, that an adherent‘s spiritual well-being can
be measured by loyalty to the House of Justice. This attitude is found in letters from the UHJ
itself where dissent is termed a ―spiritual problem‖ and association with dissidents is called
a ―spiritual danger‖ and ―corrosive.‖8
In a radical departure from its Islamic background and in stark contrast to destructive cults,
the Baha‘i Faith invokes no censure upon those who give up belief in their religion. It is
Baha‘is who create or join an alternative to the main organization, or who refuse to stop
associating with them, that are condemned as spiritually dangerous. According to Baha‘i
law, only the UHJ can excommunicate and give the order to shun, but on a popular level,
internal dissenters and critical former members can be regarded as covenant-breakers.
Baha‘u‘llah envisioned his religion as being governed by elected bodies rather than
professional clerics, and ‗Abdu‘l-Baha further refined this system in his own Will &
Testament. In that document, he appointed his eldest grandson Shoghi Effendi Rabbani as
Guardian (1921-1957), a hereditary position granted executive power and the authority to
interpret scripture.9 Since this first Guardian had no heirs, there can be no further
authorized interpretations and it is largely Shoghi Effendi‘s vision of Baha‘i teaching that
prevails. The majority of the breakaway sects that Baha‘is call covenant-breakers in

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 97
existence today are followers of a claimant to the Guardianship after Shoghi Effendi‘s death,
Charles Mason Remey, and are split into several groups, each led by a different Remeyite
successor.10
The administration now consists of both elected and appointed officials. Local affairs are
governed by nine-member Local Spiritual Assemblies. Countries are divided up into
electoral units, where delegates are elected, which in turn elect the National Spiritual
Assemblies (NSA). The members of the world‘s NSAs function as delegates every five years
for the election of the Universal House of Justice (UHJ) in Haifa, Israel. This supreme
governing body is regarded by Baha‘is as infallible. While the meaning and scope of this
infallibility is a matter of much debate in intellectual circles, the UHJ is popularly perceived
as incapable of making any wrong decision.
The ideological spectrum within the Faith that runs from liberal to extreme fundamentalism
largely centers around attitudes toward the House of Justice and its infallibility. Liberals
point to scriptural limits on its authority, especially the fact that it was intended as a
legislative body without license to interpret or impose orthodoxy. 11 Fundamentalists regard
it as being completely and unquestionably infallible in all its statements and decisions. Most
mainstream Baha‘is can be fairly described as conservative in this respect and will generally
deny that any ideological differences exist at all. In online discussions, fundamentalists can
be provoked into a rage at the mere mention of the terms ―liberal‖ and ―conservative‖ in
connection with Baha‘is since this seems to belie the religion‘s unity. Besides being the
common position of most mainstream Baha‘is, the conservative view also prevails in the
administration, so that liberals are at risk of being investigated and/or sanctioned if they
become too vocal.
Baha‘is often describe their system of elected governing bodies as being more democratic
than those prevalent in the wider society, since voters may choose any member in good
standing. However, the election practices outlined by Shoghi Effendi prohibit campaigning
of any kind, and assembly decisions are presented as unified without recording dissenting
votes, so that it is impossible to know which policies any individual candidate supports. With
so little information as a basis for decision, a Baha‘i votes primarily on reputation and name
recognition rather than on any particular issue or agenda. This, of course, gives incumbents
a tremendous advantage, and suggestions have been made that current office-holders
deliberately control who becomes visible enough within the community to become elected
on the national level.12 The ban on campaigning also inhibits any formation of reform
movements from the grassroots. Even though they are elected bodies, Baha‘i institutions
are not considered to be accountable to the electorate, but only to God.
The appointed officials in Baha‘i governance consist of the Continental Board of Counsellors,
chosen by the UHJ. They, in turn, choose, Auxiliary Board Members (ABMs), who appoint
local Assistants. In theory, none of these are supposed to have any independent authority,
but act at the behest of the elected bodies. However, these officials are responsible for the
―propagation and protection‖ of the Faith, and the ―protection‖ aspect includes keeping a
watchful eye out for any signs of covenant-breaking. Since the reports they make to the
NSA or UHJ are often the basis for decisions to sanction members, they wield considerable
power.13
Disillusionment with Baha’i Life
The Baha‘i Faith in the U.S. claims to have 140,000 members, but it is axiomatic among
Baha‘is that half of these on the rolls are permanently inactive and have lost contact with
the community. The inactivity rate may well be higher one independent poll estimated the
number of Americans identifying themselves as Baha‘is to be only 28,000.14 There has, until
now, been a remarkable lack of concern about these many disillusioned. The common
attitude towards the complaints raised by former members is that their inability to conform