Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 18, 2001, Page 99
directly, it is usually accepted without much complaint. (Although the issue has caused
controversy on the Internet, and support for a change in this exclusion has been a
contributing factor for punitive action.)
A more important factor, however, is the central place administration holds in Baha‘i life. It
is not considered a mere church, or a convenient arrangement for governing the religion,
but an evolving world theocracy that is the ultimate salvation of mankind. The position that
Baha‘u‘llah meant to create a theocratic world state has been questioned by prominent
Baha‘i scholars, who insist that the founder of the Baha‘i Faith supported the separation of
church and state18, an idea that has been condemned by the House of Justice.19
The Baha‘i Faith‘s public position is that it does no proselytizing, but active efforts at
bringing in converts are essential to fulfill the theocratic mission. Some Baha‘is feel, quite
literally, that the problems of the world are on their shoulders, and can only be eliminated
by spreading the religion and its institutions. The convert will find himself pressured to
participate in ―teaching‖ and discovers that the word ―proselytize‖ has been redefined to
mean either conversion by force or door-to-door recruiting. There are, in fact, constant
appeals for Baha‘is to teach the Faith, and it is considered to be the primary job of spiritual
assemblies to create plans for teaching, so a good deal of time and energy is spent on
them.
Ironically, though, there are limits to the kinds of individual teaching projects that the
Baha‘i leadership will tolerate. For example, a Baha‘i of my acquaintance put a lot of time
and effort into a regional teaching project only to be told ―We can‘t give you a blank check,‖
i.e., the project was scrapped because it was not under institutional control. A Baha‘i in
Albuquerque was ordered to cancel her successful television show promoting the Baha‘i
Faith, and was told that her teaching ―would have no effect‖ because she was ―not in unity
with the assembly‖ in other words, she was perceived as being a trouble-maker and too
independent.20 This leaves a talented teacher in a bind: He or she is constantly told to
―arise‖ and convert others to the religion, but will be restrained by the perceived need for
institutional direction. Also, serving the religion in this way is no protection against being
threatened over the circulation of liberal ideas. Indeed, some of the scholars and
intellectuals attracting official disapproval have been overseas missionaries in dangerous
and difficult assignments.
Another aspect of this emphasis on spreading the religion is that great importance is
attached to forming Local Spiritual Assemblies, regardless of their level of functioning.
These bodies are not elected in response to the religion‘s growth, but are created in any
locality where nine or more Baha‘is reside. ―Homefront pioneers,‖ or missionaries,
deliberately relocate in order to establish LSAs, even though the move is sometimes a few
miles or just over a city limit. Even inactive believers and new converts can be elected to
serve, if they are needed to make up the nine necessary to form the assembly. The
religion‘s stress on the importance of maintaining these fragile assemblies is also a strong
incentive for proselytizing. It is not uncommon to see these marginal communities, which
make up the majority, collapse entirely if these efforts are not successful. 21
Once formed, these assemblies are generally left to develop a viable community life without
outside support. The NSA has on occasion directly intervened in the working of LSAs, even
to the point of dissolving the assembly itself. The criteria for when this intervention occurs
seem to be uncertain, and no clear pattern emerges, except where there is concern over
―covenant-breakers.‖22 Members can be left at the mercy of dictatorial or even abusive local
leaders, with higher levels of administration quite slow to act on complaints. In one
extreme case, an ex-Baha‘i recounts how as a young man in the 70s he fell under the
influence of a leader who had virtually his own cult within the Baha‘i structure and who used
drugs and punishments, such as locking his disciples in closets in order to control them. By
directly, it is usually accepted without much complaint. (Although the issue has caused
controversy on the Internet, and support for a change in this exclusion has been a
contributing factor for punitive action.)
A more important factor, however, is the central place administration holds in Baha‘i life. It
is not considered a mere church, or a convenient arrangement for governing the religion,
but an evolving world theocracy that is the ultimate salvation of mankind. The position that
Baha‘u‘llah meant to create a theocratic world state has been questioned by prominent
Baha‘i scholars, who insist that the founder of the Baha‘i Faith supported the separation of
church and state18, an idea that has been condemned by the House of Justice.19
The Baha‘i Faith‘s public position is that it does no proselytizing, but active efforts at
bringing in converts are essential to fulfill the theocratic mission. Some Baha‘is feel, quite
literally, that the problems of the world are on their shoulders, and can only be eliminated
by spreading the religion and its institutions. The convert will find himself pressured to
participate in ―teaching‖ and discovers that the word ―proselytize‖ has been redefined to
mean either conversion by force or door-to-door recruiting. There are, in fact, constant
appeals for Baha‘is to teach the Faith, and it is considered to be the primary job of spiritual
assemblies to create plans for teaching, so a good deal of time and energy is spent on
them.
Ironically, though, there are limits to the kinds of individual teaching projects that the
Baha‘i leadership will tolerate. For example, a Baha‘i of my acquaintance put a lot of time
and effort into a regional teaching project only to be told ―We can‘t give you a blank check,‖
i.e., the project was scrapped because it was not under institutional control. A Baha‘i in
Albuquerque was ordered to cancel her successful television show promoting the Baha‘i
Faith, and was told that her teaching ―would have no effect‖ because she was ―not in unity
with the assembly‖ in other words, she was perceived as being a trouble-maker and too
independent.20 This leaves a talented teacher in a bind: He or she is constantly told to
―arise‖ and convert others to the religion, but will be restrained by the perceived need for
institutional direction. Also, serving the religion in this way is no protection against being
threatened over the circulation of liberal ideas. Indeed, some of the scholars and
intellectuals attracting official disapproval have been overseas missionaries in dangerous
and difficult assignments.
Another aspect of this emphasis on spreading the religion is that great importance is
attached to forming Local Spiritual Assemblies, regardless of their level of functioning.
These bodies are not elected in response to the religion‘s growth, but are created in any
locality where nine or more Baha‘is reside. ―Homefront pioneers,‖ or missionaries,
deliberately relocate in order to establish LSAs, even though the move is sometimes a few
miles or just over a city limit. Even inactive believers and new converts can be elected to
serve, if they are needed to make up the nine necessary to form the assembly. The
religion‘s stress on the importance of maintaining these fragile assemblies is also a strong
incentive for proselytizing. It is not uncommon to see these marginal communities, which
make up the majority, collapse entirely if these efforts are not successful. 21
Once formed, these assemblies are generally left to develop a viable community life without
outside support. The NSA has on occasion directly intervened in the working of LSAs, even
to the point of dissolving the assembly itself. The criteria for when this intervention occurs
seem to be uncertain, and no clear pattern emerges, except where there is concern over
―covenant-breakers.‖22 Members can be left at the mercy of dictatorial or even abusive local
leaders, with higher levels of administration quite slow to act on complaints. In one
extreme case, an ex-Baha‘i recounts how as a young man in the 70s he fell under the
influence of a leader who had virtually his own cult within the Baha‘i structure and who used
drugs and punishments, such as locking his disciples in closets in order to control them. By
