Waldorf Problems

This essay is my (harrumph) greatest hit. At a conservative guesstimate, I'd say that, oh, dozens and dozens of people have read it. Or more. Versions of the essay are also available at
http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/two.html
and
http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/waldorf.html

A longer, annotated version is accessible through
http://skepdic.com/steiner.html
http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles.html
and
http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/one.html

THE WALDORF SCANDAL 

Can American democracy survive the tide of religious fervor that has risen in the nation? Large numbers of Americans today profess fundamentalist religious zeal, and many seek to enforce their beliefs through the political process. Americans who do not share this evangelical enthusiasm—including churchgoers whose religious practices may be more temperate—are concerned for the nation’s future. Author Garry Wills affirms religious values in his works; nonetheless, he worries that the essential nature of the United States is being undermined:

“America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of Enlightenment values—critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more...we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity.... It is not too early to start yearning back toward the Enlightenment.” [1]

A particularly troubling element in the “fear of and hatred for modernity” involves education. While there are undoubtedly some fine religious schools at which children can receive genuine educations, think about the many other religious schools where children are subjected to indoctrination rather than receiving what was once proudly termed a liberal education. Think how many children far below the age of reason are being trained in attitudes and beliefs that they are expected to live and die by. How many of America’s religious schools produce graduates who are enlightened, open-minded, rational, and humane? Surely rational, humane citizens are precisely what we, and all nations, need. What might our society become in their absence?

To my embarrassment, I have a pertinent story to tell about my own education. From ages seven to eighteen, I attended an occultist school that was devoted to a radical variant of Christianity. The curriculum of the school was based on the teachings of Rudolf Steiner, a European mystic who, among other astonishing pronouncements, prophesied a worldwide racial apocalypse. Being a student at such a school was a weird experience, far out on (or beyond) the fringe of normality. Few people, I suspect, would see a connection between my life on the fringe and the experiences that many American children undergo in their own schools. Moreover, my tale may seem dated: I was a schoolboy long ago, in the 1950s and ‘60s. But the weirdness of what I have to report, and the time that has passed since my schooling, are actually helpful for the discussion that I propose to open here: They throw the issues into sharp relief and add the clarity of perspective. My tale is relevant today in at least one narrow sense: Any school that operates in accordance with the teachings of Rudolf Steiner (and there are many) will necessarily be, in many ways, similar to my old school. I believe I can offer a more general relevance, as well. In the largest sense, my focus is not on the school I attended or even on the strange religion it espoused. My topic is the penalty being paid by many thousands of American students today who are receiving educations that oppose the Enlightenment principles on which our nation was founded.

I was a student at the Waldorf School in Garden City, New York. It was a lovely place, with caring teachers, and pleasant, carefully selected classmates. I enrolled as a second grader in 1953 and graduated from the twelfth grade in 1964. For the most part, I enjoyed those years. The school was small: twenty or so students at each grade level. The ambience was close and comfortable. As Rudolf Steiner would have wanted, Waldorf was a religious school, but with a twist: It hid its faith. Waldorf projected the image of a nonsectarian, arts-intensive preparatory school with a progressive curriculum. This appearance undoubtedly led many parents to enroll their children at Waldorf without realizing what they were letting them in for. Even after enrollment, families found Waldorf’s disguise hard to penetrate. We students memorized no passages from holy books, we sang from no hymnals. Yet a strange aura hung about the school. There was a pervasive but unspoken spiritualistic vibe in almost every lesson, in almost every activity. If it was hard for most parents to detect, we students all felt the vibe to one degree or another. It was in the air we breathed, it defined the tenor and subtext of our days. Ultimately, it shaped and colored our educations at least as effectively as if priests were delivering sermons to us.

Waldorf was an unusual school, but it was not completely alone in its esoteric beliefs. A number of other, similar school were scattered around North America and Europe. The first of these schools was established by Rudolf Steiner himself in 1919, in Germany: It was commissioned by the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory for the children of its employees. Other schools followed, at first slowly, then with increasing momentum. Today there are over 800 schools that draw their inspiration from Rudolf Steiner’s teachings. Many of these schools, like mine, have adopted the name of Steiner’s prototype: Waldorf. But some have chosen to be called Steiner schools, while others have selected different names altogether. [2] Whatever they are called today, all 800+ are generally considered to be part of the Waldorf School movement (which by some reports is one of the fastest-growing independent school movements in the world). Most of these schools are small, and they generally attract little notice. Yet when they have come to the public’s attention, they have often gotten good press. They typically enjoy excellent student/teacher ratios; their walls are hung with striking examples of student art; their teaching methods aim to develop students’ various faculties, not just the intellect; and most important, the schools almost never make loud, public professions of Steiner’s mystic doctrines.

The mystical core of my Waldorf School was kept well hidden. Only rarely did anyone get a clear glimpse of it. But on a single, dramatic occasion, the core was startlingly exposed. This occurred several years after I graduated—and long before I’d fully grasped what had been done to me at the school. In early 1979, THE NEW YORK TIMES ran an article about my alma mater: “‘Psychic' Ex-Student's Influence Shakes Waldorf School.” [3] Coming upon the article in a library, I was galvanized. The TIMES revealed that a former Waldorf student had started claiming that he had paranormal powers—he could converse with spirits. And, shockingly, several teachers—including the headmaster, the former headmaster, and the high school principal—accepted his story and began making use of him as a clairvoyant sage. The result was that they ceded control of the school to the young man and his spiritual contacts, turning to them for supernatural decisions in matters large and small, ranging from curricular decisions to the selection of records played at school dances. When word of this remarkable administrative arrangement inevitably leaked, the occult beliefs of the school’s leaders emerged, fleetingly, into plain view.

The scandal nearly ripped Waldorf apart. Scores of parents, appalled to learn what had been going on, yanked their kids out. The school seemed doomed. Nevertheless, after considerable tumult leading to the firings and/or resignations of those who were most deeply implicated in the scandal, Waldorf survived. It is still in business today, graduating class after class. And rather than renouncing Rudolf Steiner or disavowing an interest in the spiritual realm, it today says operates under the following mission statement: “To nurture toward compassion, to balance toward wholeness, to challenge toward excellence and achievement—these are the goals to which the Waldorf School of Garden City aspires. Based on the insights of Rudolf Steiner, and enriched by the diversity of our community, our methods of teaching reflect an understanding of the growing child and acknowledge the spiritual origins of humanity.” [4]

Rudolf Steiner was a charismatic, spiritualistic lecturer. He was intelligent and articulate (although not always easy to follow), possessing an impressively retentive memory and a genius for systemization. With a strong academic background, he had numerous talents and interests. But his great interest lay in what he called the “supersensible” world, the spiritual realm that cannot be perceived using our ordinary senses—clairvoyance is required, and Steiner claimed to be clairvoyant. Having served for some time as leader of the German Theosophical movement, in 1912 Steiner established his own religious system, which he dubbed Anthroposophy (meaning, literally, “human wisdom”). This amalgam of mystic doctrines is the bedrock faith upon which Steiner-inspired schools function.

Adherents of gnostic faiths often find it unwise to profess their beliefs too openly, knowing that they risk inciting opposition from those who would find their views heretical or dangerous. (Steiner was acutely aware of this—see the quotation at the end of this essay; also see endnote 50.) Prudence may lead the followers of such faiths to erect a barrier of silence and denial around their inner circle. Waldorfers usually keep quiet about Steiner’s otherworldly interests, going no further than innocuous-seeming references to man’s spiritual nature. They almost always deny that the schools are tightly bound to Anthroposophy; they generally claim that Anthroposophy is not a religion; and they consistently assert that Waldorf schools have no religious purposes. At the Web site of the Association of Waldorf Schools of North America (AWSNA), the following answer is given to the question whether Waldorf are schools religious:

“Waldorf schools are non-sectarian and non-denominational. They educate all children, regardless of their cultural or religious backgrounds. The pedagogical method is comprehensive, and, as part of its task, seeks to bring about recognition and understanding of all the world cultures and religions. Waldorf schools are not part of any church. They espouse no particular religious doctrine but are based on a belief that there is a spiritual dimension to the human being and to all of life. Waldorf families come from a broad spectrum of religious traditions and interest.” [5]

Aiming at “understanding of all...religions” suggests that quite a bit of time will be spent studying religion, while recognizing a “spiritual dimension to the human being” suggests that such study may not be unbiased. (In fact, Anthroposophy draws from religious and spiritualistic traditions from around the world, so studying multiple faiths may serve as preparation for conversion to Anthroposophy.) Despite these two chinks, however, the AWSNA denial seems nearly categorical.

Revealing the heterodox religious program that actually guides Waldorf schools will occupy a large portion of this essay. But we can establish certain basic facts by starting with a simple matter: the morning prayer. Consider the following words uttered by Rudolf Steiner. He was addressing the teachers at his first Waldorf school, telling them how each school day should begin. Notice that Steiner wanted to disguise the religious activities at the school: “We also need to speak about a prayer. I ask only one thing of you. You see, in such things everything depends upon the external appearances. Never call a verse a prayer, call it an opening verse before school. Avoid allowing anyone to hear you, as a faculty member, using the word ‘prayer.’”[6] Later, in a comment that clearly endorses Christianity, Steiner said, “It would be nice to begin instruction with the Lord’s Prayer and then go on to the verses I will give you.”[7] The verse Steiner then prescribed for use by students at his school is this:

The Sun with loving light
Makes bright for me each day;
The soul with spirit power
Gives strength unto my limbs;
In sunlight shining clear
I reverence, O God,
The strength of humankind,
That Thou so graciously
Hast planted in my soul,
That I with all my might
May love to work and learn.
From Thee come light and strength,
To Thee rise love and thanks.[8]

With his concern for external appearances, Steiner hesitated to order recitation of the Lord’s Prayer and he enjoined his teachers from using the word “prayer.” Yet his prescribed “verse” uses Bible-like language (“I reverence, O God,” “To Thee rise love and thanks,” etc.) to address and honor God. It is undeniably a prayer. Thus, Steiner had his students begin their day with a religious act.

In the modern era, students at many Waldorfs have continued reciting Steiner’s “verse” or variations of it. “A Sense of Ethics,” (THE ATLANTIC ONLINE, September 1999 [http://www.theatlantic.com]) reports “The verse for the first through fourth grades, for example, says in part, ‘I revere, Oh God, the strength of humankind, which Thou so graciously has planted in my soul....’” Also of interest: Although Steiner refrained from prescribing general use of the Lord’s Prayer, in 1923 he told at least one Waldorf teacher to supplement the “verse” with the Prayer.[9] Anyone reading this brief historical record must, I think, begin to suspect that Waldorf schools have a religious leaning, probably in the direction of some version of Christianity. This suspicion can only be heightened by the following reference to Anthroposophy in the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION: “Anthroposophy is continuous with the Rosicrucian stream of the Christian esoteric tradition.” [10]

In discussing the morning prayer and citing one reference book, we have only scratched the Waldorf surface. But already we can see the pattern of denial surrounding Waldorf schools start to break down. In fact, considering how small Anthroposophy is compared to major religions, how odd many of its beliefs (when they are revealed) seem to outsiders, and how much it is centered on the pronouncements of a single inspirational leader, Anthroposophy can most accurately be classified as a cult. And to the extent that various Waldorfs embrace Anthroposophy, to precisely that extent they associate themselves with the cult.

[This essay is actually the first section of a much longer work. If you’d like to examine that work, please use this link

http://homepage.mac.com/nonlevitating/one.html

This will take you to my main Web site. After you are finished there, you can return to Waldorf problems by using your "previous page" function or by using a search engine to find waldorf-problems.com. ]

[1] Garry Wills, “The Day the Enlightenment Went Out,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 4, 2004, p. 25.

Wills’ books include WHAT JESUS MEANT, WHAT PAUL MEANT, WHY I AM A CATHOLIC, and SAINT AUGUSTINE.

[2] In this essay, when I refer to “Waldorf,” I usually mean the school I attended. When I use such terms as “Waldorfs” or “Waldorf schools,” I’m referring to the entire set of Steiner-inspired schools, whatever their individual names may be and however strictly they adhere to Steiner’s doctrines. Finally, when I refer to “Waldorfers,” I’m referring to teachers and students at these various schools, especially those who are most attuned to Rudolf Steiner’s teachings (i.e., those who are Anthroposophists or who feel deep affinities with the schools’ curriculums and methods). I have attempted to make my meaning clear in each instance.

To confirm that many Waldorf schools today function much as my Waldorf did, see the articles and archives at http://waldorfcritics.org/ and the ongoing discussion at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/.

I should add that another institution comes into my story. The Myrin Institute for Adult Education was situated near the Waldorf School and was associated with it. Several of the individuals who helped establish Waldorf [http://www.waldorfgarden.org/our school/school history] were also important figures at the Institute. Echoing Rudolf Steiner’s advocacy of “spiritual science,” the Institute stated its objective as “contributing toward the reintegration of scientific and spiritual world concepts.” [Franz E. Winkler, THE INFLUENCE OF PSYCHOLOGY ON EDUCATION (New York: The Myrin Institute, Inc., 1955), p. 3.] The Institute held seminars and published booklets arising from these events. In this essay, I quote from various publications of The Myrin Institute, including some that were written by individuals whom I knew. I was not privy to any of these booklets when I was a student at Waldorf, but recently I have found them informative.

[3] John T. McQuiston, “’Psychic’ Ex-Student’s Influence Shakes Waldorf School,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, Feb. 18, 1979, p. 48.

A separate account, written by an individual who reports being a teacher at the school during the scandal, includes the following:

“The story of the collapse [sic] of the Garden City Waldorf School is very complex....

“In his twenty years as Faculty Chairman, John Gardner had carefully crafted a strong, clear [curricular] form based on the pedagogical teachings of Rudolf Steiner, but in recent years Dr. Gardner had begun to feel the limitations of the form he had created and felt that teachers needed to be guided more by the spirit instead of the outer forms, so he started encouraging some of the teachers to use their own spiritual perceptions in their educational approach....

“[Following a boycott by some parents and an emergency meeting of faculty]...we learned that everyone strongly aligned with the “spirit-led” group had either been fired or resigned.... In the end, it was simply a matter of finances...the only thing that keeps a school alive is the tuition paid by the parents.... About a dozen teachers were fired....” [Lawrence Williams, Ed.D., THE OAK MEADOW TRILOGY (Oak Meadow, Inc., 1997)—see http://www.oakmeadow.com/resources.]

The conclusion that “it was simply a matter of finances” suggests a strong reason for Waldorf schools to keep their Anthroposophical beliefs under wraps: They need to attract tuition-paying families, a task that would be greatly complicated by public professions of occult doctrines. Elsewhere in this essay, I suggest additional reasons for secrecy.

Understandably, the official Waldorf School history, posted on the school’s Web site (http://www.waldorfgarden.org), does not mention the scandal.

[4] The mission statement is reasonably forthright, although it leaves crucial terms undefined and fundamental questions unanswered. You can find it at http://www.waldorfgarden.org, at the bottom of the home page. [I last checked this on Oct. 30, 2006.]

I do not know how much or how little the school has changed since I graduated. In this essay, I attempt to explain what the Garden City Waldorf was in my day and what it did to its students. Others, if they like, may describe the school as it is today. My purpose is to discuss the potential lifelong consequences of attending a Waldorf school where at least some of the leading faculty members take Steiner’s doctrines as gospel.

Today, in the age of the Internet and other forms of mass communications, information on all subjects is more generally available than it once was. Perhaps for this reason, various Waldorf schools now include references to Rudolf Steiner and even Anthroposophy in their promotional materials. In doing so, they implicitly acknowledge the Anthroposophical basis of Waldorf education. But anything like full disclosure of Steiner’s doctrines remains extremely rare. (I don’t want to impugn anyone’s motives. It is possible—indeed, I hope it is true—that many Waldorf teachers today have not made a deep study of Steiner’s doctrines. If so, they may not recognize what their educational programs are ultimately intended to accomplish. Conceivably, they might be persuaded to change course.) You can find links to many Waldorf Web sites at http://waldorfworld.net.

[5] http://www.awsna.org, Frequently Asked Questions, Are Waldorf Schools Religious? [I last checked this on Oct. 28, 2006.]

[6] Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Hudson, NY: Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 20.

Throughout this essay, I quote Steiner as accurately as possible. He altered his views and terminology to some degree over time. To avoid unnecessarily complicating matters, I refrain from trying to trace such changes, which to non-Anthroposophists would generally seem minor. Steiner made each of the remarks I quote, and subsequent modifications of his teachings did not change the core of his mysticism nor the fundamental character of his teachings.

[7] Ibid., p. 38.

[8] Ibid., p. 38. The “verse” I quote is also included in Steiner’s book, PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN (London: Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995), pp. 44-45.

[9] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 38, footnote 1.

[10] ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION (Detroit: MacMillan Reference, 2005), pp. 392-394.