This is a series of my postings on Bahai Rants from 30 May 2008, following a discussion of my book Church and State, which became in effect a question-and-answer session. Since I have often wished that people who post and publish things about me and Church and State would check their facts by asking, I think it worth posting - if only to demonstrate my willingness to answer courteous questions.
It corrects a statement about the publication and review of the book,
and answers a reference, in the comments section, to Susan Maneck's "A Review of Sen McGlinn's Article on Theocracy." The accusation is that I have ignored the Universal House of Justice's Guidance. Far from it. But I do not think one can ignore the Covenant while reading what the UHJ says, or ignore the UHJ while staying within the
Covenant. The Covenant is the framework, the House of Justice is one of its embodiments.
Posted on Bahai Rants, 30 May 2008
Response to questions arising from Susan Maneck's "A Review of Sen McGlinn's Article on Theocracy" which relates to "Theocratic Assumptions in Bahá'í Literature," published in Fazel and Danesh (eds) Reason and Revelation, 2002.
Posted on Talisman9, 21 March 2007
Some people have objected to my warning to the reader, on the first page of Church and State, that "my stance is not that of a historian or academic scholar of the science of religion, but of a Bahai theologian..." Is Bahai theology permissible? How should the Bahais relate to the divines and learned that live among them?
Posted 1 January 2007