For the purposes of preparing this note, we have been given access to the galleys of MacEoin's article 'Bahfi'f Fundamentalism and the Academic Study of the B~ibf Movement' (but, as it turns out, only shortly before its publication in Religion 16, 1986, 57-84) and limited by the editor of Religion to a maximum of 1800 words. Hence the telegraphic style of this note. Also, we have written a detailed reply, entitled 'The Bahfi'f Faith and Its Critics', to MacEoin's 'From Babism to Baha'ism . . .' (Religion i3, 1983, 219-255) and submitted it to Religion in April, 1985. Its publication was refused on the grounds that our 'right of reply' had been satisfied by the publication of our 'Western Ishlmic Scholarship and Bah~i'i Origins' (henceforth referred to as the authors as hopeless amateurs and 'outraged fundamentalists' (p. 57), incapable of assessing intelligently or judging fairly MacEoin's work. (2) Speculations about and a prosecution of the motives that have, in MacEoin's view, led the authors to write their article. (3) Attempts to stigmatize the Bah~i'f Faith and its institutions as fundamentalist, authoritarian, devious, and lacking intellectual integrity and respect for truth. (4) Attempts to picture MacEoin himself as an objective scholar with an unimpeachable desire for truth who has been unjustly maligned by our criticisms of various aspects of