 IS ANTHROPOSOPHY A RELIGION? including TWO FALSEHOODS and THE GOETHEANUM
Anthroposophists and Waldorf faculty members deny many things. Crucially, they often deny that Anthroposophy is a religion. For instance, at the Waldorf Answers Web site, the denial is absolute: “No, anthroposophy is not a religion, nor is it meant to be a substitute for religion.” [1] Yet there is persuasive evidence to the contrary. Here are the words of Christopher Bamford, editor-in-chief of SteinerBooks: “[S]teiner felt ... he had to infuse Theosophy, which had an anti-Christian bias, with the real meaning of Christ....” [2] Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, the author of several books on occult and esoteric subjects, puts the matter this way: “Rudolf Steiner ... a pivotal figure of twentieth-century esotericism ... blended modern Theosophy with a Gnostic form of Christianity, Rosicrucianism, and German Naturphilosophie.” [3] To cite one more authoritative source, the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION says “Anthroposophy is continuous with the Rosicrucian stream of the Christian esoteric tradition.” [4] Summarizing, then, we can say that Anthroposophy combines Theosophy, certain gnostic or esoteric forms of Christianity, and perhaps another spiritualistic thread or two. There can be no doubt that Christianity, in whatever form, is a religion. If Anthroposophy is Christianity blended with other spiritualistic traditions, we are justified in at least suspecting that Anthroposophy is indeed a religion. But let’s delve deeper. Bamford and Goodrick-Clarke agree that Steiner “infused” or “blended” Theosophy with Christianity. Steiner himself made no secret of the importance of Theosophy in his life and thought [5], and he was outspoken in his admiration for one of the founders of Theosophy: “One thing can be said of the writings of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Only one who does not understand them can underestimate them. Anyone who finds the key to what is great in these works will come to admire her more and more.” [6] Is Theosophy a religion? Here is Madame Blavatsky’s own answer: “It is perhaps necessary, first of all, to say, that the assertion that ‘Theosophy is not a Religion,’ by no means excludes the fact that ‘Theosophy is Religion’ itself. A Religion in the true and only correct sense, is a bond uniting men together — not a particular set of dogmas and beliefs. Now Religion, per se, in its widest meaning is that which binds not only all MEN, but also all BEINGS and all things in the entire Universe into one grand whole ... Thus Theosophy is not a Religion, we say, but RELIGION itself ... ” [7]  So the two major sources from which Steiner drew, Christianity and Theosophy, are religions. The result, the blending of these sources, must necessarily be a religion as well. Of course, to find the most compelling evidence of the religious nature of Anthroposophy, we need to examine Steiner’s work and words. Note, for example, that Steiner wrote many prayers for others to use — a compilation of his prayers is titled PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN. [8] Writing prayers for use by others is the activity of a religious leader, while reciting prayers written or prescribed by a religious leader is the activity of faithful adherents. In this context, it is important to note that Steiner wrote prayers to be recited by students in Waldorf schools. Here is one: 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. [9] Steiner attempted to disguise the nature of this prayer, just as Waldorf schools generally deny that they are religious institutions [10], just as Anthroposophists generally deny that Anthroposophy is a religion. Steiner cautioned his teachers against allowing outsiders to know that Waldorf students are required to recite prayers. With specific reference to the prayer I just quoted, Steiner said: “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.’” [11] So the teachers were not allowed to admit the truth, which is that the “verse” is self-evidently a prayer. Not only does Steiner call it a prayer, but the substance and phrasing are clearly those of a prayer: The children address God, thanking her/him, and offering him/her love. They are praying. Also revealing is Steiner’s decision to hold Sunday services for Anthroposophically inclined students: “We hold the Sunday services within the context of the school. They are part of the school ... I would certainly deny any association with a Sunday service outside the school. It only makes sense if there are a number of children receiving religious instruction from an anthroposophical basis and there is a Sunday service in our school for these children. Thus, we would never admit someone from outside the school." [12] Children who are taught about religion don't need Sunday services; only children who are taught to embrace a religion need them. Because the services were held on Sundays, we can infer that the religion being practiced was Christianity or an offshoot of Christianity — i.e., Anthroposophy. Steiner’s meaning is clear. "[R]eceiving religious instruction from an anthroposophical basis" is tantamount to being taught Anthroposophy. Steiner often denied that Waldorf schools teach Anthroposophical dogma, and I believe this is generally true. But as I have argued in other essays, Anthroposophy can be injected into a child's psyche/soul by subtle, indirect, manipulative methods that I have called brainwashing. [13] Children at Waldorfs can absorb the spirit and viewpoint of Anthroposophy without needing to learn the precise phrasing of the dogmas. Explicitly, Steiner said that “there are a number of children receiving religious instruction from an anthroposophical basis,” and he wanted to provide appropriately Anthroposophical religious services for them. ◊◊◊◊ Not all Anthroposophists deny that Anthroposophy is a religion and that Waldorf schools are religious. Here are two statements made by Anthroposophist Eugene Schwartz:  "I'm glad my daughter gets to speak about God every morning: that's why I send her to a Waldorf school. She's learning stories from the Old Testament, or the Hebrew Scriptures ... She's learned that God created the world in seven days; she's learning about Abraham, and the terrible existential struggle he had when he was asked by God to sacrifice his son. She's going to learn about the king, the battles, the Israelites. [S]he's learning it as truth. She comes home filled with this, bubbling up with it. She speaks about it as she crochets socks for her sister, she talks about it as she gets out her violin and begs to practice. She's filled with it. That's why I send her to a Waldorf school. She can have a religious experience. A religious experience. I'll say it again: I send my daughter to a Waldorf school so that she can have a religious experience." [14] And: "I would like to say if a public school superintendent came up to me and said [he would] like to start a Waldorf program, can you help me? ... I would say "Yes, let me give you these ten books by Rudolf Steiner, starting with THEOSOPHY, OCCULT SCIENCE, THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM. Read them and let's talk.’ And if he came back and talked I'd go further: ‘Do you realize how much Christianity there is in our school? Do you realize that we are thinking about these children in the light of reincarnation and karma? That's how a teacher's working with them. Do you want me to say this to your parents? Do you know, Mr. Public School Superintendent, the degree of courage that it's going to take to have a Waldorf program in your district?’ If he hasn't jumped out of the window by then, maybe we can work with something. But how many public school superintendents have courage? Do we really think they are the people who are going to move Waldorf education forward into the future? I doubt it." [15] ◊◊◊◊ The following is an excerpt from a message Peter Staudenmaier recently posted on the free speech forum, waldorf-critics: groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/ “The leading historian of anthroposophy today is Helmut Zander, whose background is in the history of religion. In a 2002 article, Zander thoroughly explores the question of whether anthroposophy is a religion: Helmut Zander, ‘Die Anthroposophie — eine Religion?’ Hairesis (Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, supplemental volume no. 24), Münster 2002, pp. 525-538. Zander's basic argument there is that Steiner rejected the label of 'religion' for his own spiritual teachings in order to posit anthroposophy as the transcendence of religion and science, a move that Zander considers unconvincing to non-anthroposophists. “Other German historians of religion share this view, and characterize anthroposophy as ‘the most successful form of “alternative” religion in the [twentieth] century.’ (Stefanie von Schnurbein and Justus Ulbricht, Völkische Religion und Krisen der Moderne, Würzburg 2001, p. 38) One of the better overviews of Steiner’s place within the broader religious landscape of early twentieth century Germany is Thomas Nipperdey's book Religion im Umbruch: Deutschland 1870-1918 [Religion in transition: Germany 1870-1918] (Munich 1988), pp. 145-46. “Such classifications are by no means uniformly contested by anthroposophists themselves; consider for example the entry ‘Anthroposophy’ by anthroposophist Robert McDermott in Mircea Eliade, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion (New York 1987), pp. 320-21. “For further background on this question, I recommend the very extensive discussions of anthroposophy in Wouter Hanegraaff's book New Age Religion and Western Culture: Esotericism in the Mirror of Secular Thought (Leiden 1996).” [16] ◊◊◊◊ Having established that Anthroposophy may fairly be termed a religion, let’s shift focus slightly and ask how often this religion shows up in Waldorf classrooms. Steiner, as we have seen, claimed that Waldorf schools are not meant to teach Anthroposophy to the students. Here’s another denial: “We are not interested in imposing our ‘dogmas,’ our principles, or the content of our world-view [sic] on young people ... We are striving to include in our instructional methods a way of dealing with individual souls that can originate in a living spiritual science.” [17] Steiner was propounding a distinction without a difference. If Waldorf pedagogy arises from “a living spiritual science” (i.e., Anthroposophy actively employed), then the “individual souls” of the students are continually being worked upon by Anthroposophy. Steiner came close to saying as much when he explained “[W]e believe that spiritual science differs from any other science in filling the entire person ....” [18] A little set of logical deductions: a) If children are to be worked upon by living spiritual science, and if spiritual science fills the whole person, then the children will be filled by spiritual science. b) If students will be filled with spiritual science (Anthroposophy), then a clear function of Waldorf education is to spread Anthroposophy. The spreading can occur by pouring spiritual science into the students (usually without divulging the dogmas), or by arousing adult interest in the schools (perhaps divulging a few dogmas, a little at a time), or both. As Steiner said: “One of the most important facts about the background of the Waldorf School is that we were in a position to make the anthroposophical movement a relatively large one [i.e., one of the most important functions of the schools is to spread Anthroposophy]. The anthroposophical movement has become a large one.” [19] Steiner was reasonably candid about the importance of Anthroposophy to Waldorf schools. “The anthroposophical movement is the basis of the Waldorf School movement.” [20] Still, he continued to maintain that Waldorfs don’t teach Anthroposophy. “[W]e had to create our curricula and educational goals on the basis of a true understanding of the human being, which can only grow out of the fertile ground of anthroposophy. Then we would have a universally human school, not a school based on a particular philosophy or denomination ....” [21] It is impossible to know whether Steiner believed his own statements, but we can usually understand his meaning. In this case, his position was that Anthroposophy is not a philosophy or denomination. It is “spiritual science.” It is objective truth. It represents “true understanding.” Thus, Steiner could argue that a Waldorf is “not a school based on a particular philosophy or denomination,” because he had waved his wand (metaphorically speaking) and defined Anthroposophy as being neither of these things. Switching metaphors, this was verbal sleight of hand.  Steiner himself sometimes undercut his claim that Anthroposophical dogma is not taught at Waldorf schools. For example, he said: “For the seventh, eighth, and ninth grade independent religious instruction we could move into a freer form and give a theoretical explanation about such things as life before birth and after death. We could give them examples. We could show them how to look at the major cultural connections and about the mission of the human being on Earth. You need only look at Goethe and Jean Paul [i.e., Johann Paul Friedrich Richter, a German author] to see it. You can show everywhere that their capacities come from a life before birth.” [22] Teaching students about reincarnation, in a school which has its “basis” in “[t]he anthroposophical movement,” would clearly be teaching them Anthroposophical dogma. Karma and reincarnation are central tenets of that faith. Steiner’s most important, inadvertent admission came in the following statement, which he made in private during a meeting with Waldorf faculty members: “You need to make the children aware that they are receiving the objective truth, and if this occasionally appears anthroposophical, it is not anthroposophy that is at fault. Things are that way because anthroposophy has something to say about objective truth ... Anthroposophy will be in the school when it is objectively justified, that is, when it is called for by the material itself.” [23] Since Steiner promoted Anthroposophy as the one system that provides true explanations of virtually all phenomena, physical and spiritual, he was here effectively acknowledging that it will pervade virtually every subject in the Waldorf curriculum. When will Anthroposophy be “called for by the material”? Almost always. Waldorf teachers have little choice in the matter. Anthroposophy is, for them, the truth. To omit Anthroposophical perspectives from academic classes would be to omit the truth, in which case the teachers would be knowingly telling the students falsehoods. The good intentions and professionalism of the teachers would prevent them from doing so. When will Anthroposophy be present in the school? Almost always. The primary purpose of Waldorf schooling is to promote Anthroposophy. Here's how Steiner put it when addressing Waldorf teachers:
"The Waldorf school must succeed; much depends on its success. Its success will bring a kind of proof of many things in the spiritual evolution of humankind that we must represent. “... Let us especially keep before us the thought, which will truly fill our hearts and minds, that connected with the present-day spiritual movement are also the spiritual powers that guide the cosmos. When we believe in these good spiritual powers they will inspire our lives and we will truly be able to teach." [Rudolf Steiner, PRACTICAL ADVICE TO TEACHERS, Foundations of Waldorf Education (Anthroposophic Press, 2000) p. 189.] Spiritual evolution is a central Anthroposophical doctrines. The "spiritual powers" are the many gods recognized by Anthroposophy. The "present-day spiritual movement" is Anthroposophy. As devotees of this movement, Waldorf teachers must "believe," and by their faithful actions they must create a "proof" of the doctrines of their faith. In brief, Waldorf teachers serve the gods, and in this service they work to promote the "true" religion: Anthroposophy. Here is some artwork created by Waldorf students in recent years: If you find the spiritualism in Waldorf schools attractive, be sure you understand the form of spiritualism practiced there. It is not Christianity, for instance — nor is is Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, or any other major faith. It is Anthroposophy, which consists of very specific — and very odd — doctrines. [Images courtesy of PLANS.] TWO FALSEHOODS The first Waldorf school opened in Stuttgart, Germany, in 1919. On Feb. 5, 1924, Rudolf Steiner had a long discussion with the school's teachers and administrators about the relationship between the school and the Anthroposophical Society (the formal organization responsible for Anthroposophical activities, based at the Goetheanum, in Dornach, Switzerland). Steiner had recently formalized his own connection with the Anthroposophical Society, becoming its official leader. He was also, at this time, head of the Waldorf School. During the discussion, Steiner made clear that maintaining official separation between the school the the Society had been advisable to date, but he now was considering how the two organizations might draw closer together, even if only informally. Background: The Anthroposophical Society had become more explicitly, openly esoteric as a result of actions taken at a conference during the previous Christmas. The Waldorf School had always presented itself as neither esoteric in general nor Anthroposophical in particular. But Steiner's remarks during the faculty meeting on Feb. 5 show how this has been largely a pose — while not formally associated with the Anthroposophical Society, the school has been from the start Anthroposophical to its core. During the meeting, Steiner exposes this secret as well as the other great secret underlying Waldorf schooling: He admits that Anthroposophy is a religion. Here's a play-by-play. (The entire discussion lasts for many pages. If you want to read it all — which I recommend — you'll have to get the book, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, Vol. 2.) Toward the beginning of the discussion, Steiner says, "Formally, the Waldorf School is not an anthroposophical institution; rather, it is an independent creation based upon the foundations of anthroposophical pedagogy. In the way it meets the public, as well as the way it meets legal institutions, it is not an anthroposophical institution, but a school based upon anthroposophical pedagogy." [24] Note the careful phrasing. The school is not "formally" Anthroposophical. "In the way it meets the public" it is not Anthroposophical. But the underlying reality is quite different. Picking up the same passage where it left off: "...a school based upon anthroposophical pedagogy. Suppose the Independent Waldorf School were now to become officially related to the School of Spiritual Science [the education wing of the Anthroposophical Society] in Dornach. Then the Waldorf School would immediately become an anthroposophical school in a formal, external sense. Of course, there are some things that would support making such a decision. On the other hand, consider whether the Waldorf School can fulfill its cultural tasks better as an independent school with an unhindered form than it can as a direct part of what emanates from Dornach." [25] Steiner prefers the latter course — the school is not Anthroposophical "in a formal, external sense" (i.e., as perceived by outsiders). But we can see that informally, internally the school is deeply Anthroposophical. After all, the only reason to even consider attaching the school to the Society is that the school is committed to Anthroposophy. The school's Anthroposophical nature is what "would support making such a decision." Steiner contemplates the possibility of tying the school more tightly to the Anthroposophical Society, but he also stresses the benefits of maintaining the legal and public-relations fiction that the school is independent. "[I]f the school suddenly became an [openly] anthroposophical school, that would upset both the official authorities and the public." [26] The public would be upset, in part, because the school would be exposed as an occultist institution. German educational authorities would be upset, in part, for this reason, but also because the school would be revealed as taking orders from a foreign organization, the Society based in Switzerland. Steiner wants the public and the officials to be misled, but he speaks candidly to the teachers. "[W]e have to remember that an institution like the Independent Waldorf School with its anthroposophical character, has goals that, of course, coincide with anthroposophical desires. At the moment, though, if that connection were made official, people would break the Waldorf School's neck." [27] That, basically, says it all. Waldorf is Anthroposophical, but out of a need to mislead outsiders, the school has to pretend otherwise. The survival of the school depends on denying Waldorf's "anthroposophical character," a character that creates goals that "coincide with anthroposophical desires." Steiner discusses various useful misrepresentations and misconceptions about the Waldorf School. The school was named "Independent," and the Waldorf School Association is generally perceived as the institution controlling the school. "You see, the outside world views the Waldorf School Association as the actual administration of the school." [28] But in reality, the school is run by Anthroposophists for Anthroposophical purposes. Specifically, the school is actually guided by Rudolf Steiner himself, who now is officially the head of the Anthroposophical Society. The school's only openly acknowledged involvement with the Anthroposophical Society is that the Society provides some of the religious instruction in the school. This arrangement allows the school to deny that it is, itself, religious. Instead, the Anthroposophical Society and other, outside religious institutions provide religious instruction at Waldorf. "When the school was founded, we placed great value upon creating an institution independent of the Anthroposophical Society. Logically, that corresponds quite well with having the various religious communities and the Anthroposophical Society provide religious instruction, so that the Society provides religious instruction just as other religious groups do." [29] Pause again. THIS says it all. Steiner acknowledges that the Anthroposophical Society is a religious group: "the Society provides religious instruction just as other religious groups do." The Anthroposophical Society is one of a number of "religious groups" involved in the school. The Society is a religious group. Anthroposophy is a religion — and here we have Steiner saying so. Picking up the last quotation where it left off: "...just as other religious groups do. The Anthroposophical Society gives instruction in religion and the services. That is something we can justifiably say whenever others claim that the Waldorf School is an anthroposophical school." [30] Discussing how to mislead outsiders, Steiner clearly states the very things he wants to deny. The Waldorf School is Anthroposophical; and Anthroposophy is a religion; hence, the Waldorf School is a religious institution. But Steiner remains committed to denying these realities — he stresses how Waldorf "can justifiably" make its denials. The justifications are, however, a matter of legalisms and hairsplitting: legally, formally, the school is not associated with the Anthroposophical Society; and, apparently, the school is run by the Waldorf School Association, which is not legally, formally Anthroposophical. But the truth is that the school is run by Anthroposophists who are devoted to the religion of Anthroposophy. (Offering instruction in other religions also conforms to the aims of Anthroposophy, which borrows doctrines from many faiths.) During the meeting, Steiner both reveals the truth and continues to stress denials of the truth. "A teacher: `Hasn't a change already occurred since you, the head of the Waldorf School, are now also the head of the Anthroposophical Society?' Dr. Steiner: `That is not the case. The position I have taken [as head of the Society] changes nothing about my being head of the school." [31] Perhaps the teacher and Steiner found this answer cogent, but none of the rest of us are likely to. If Steiner, head of the Waldorf School, had recently become head of the Communist Party, there would clearly be reason to think that something important had been revealed concerning the Waldorf School. Steiner’s new post at the Anthroposophical Society has the same sorts of implications. As the meeting continues, Steiner considers ways to bind the school more closely to the Society without getting the school's neck broken. He wants to satisfy the Waldorf faculty's desire for direct connection with the Anthroposophical Society's School of Spiritual Science: "I think you should decide to become members of the School of Spiritual Science as individual teachers, but with the additional remark that you want to become a member as a teacher of the Independent Waldorf School. I think this will achieve everything you want, and nothing else is necessary for the time being." [32] Thus, the Waldorf School itself would not be formally connected to the School of Spiritual Science, but the Waldorf teachers would establish connections for themselves as individual representatives of the Waldorf School. The effective result would be to tightly bind the school to the Anthroposophical Society without doing this openly or formally. "Through such an action, you would accomplish something you actually want, namely, making the Independent Waldorf School part of the overall cultural mission of anthroposophy." [33] Independent, my eye. The school would remain, in name, independent; but in reality, it has always been deeply immersed in Anthroposophy, and now the immersion will become even deeper: "part of the overall cultural mission of anthroposophy." To summarize: We here see Steiner describing the deceptions that the Waldorf School has been involved in; he reveals the real nature both of the school and of Anthroposophy; and he proposes possible future steps that would bring the school into closer connection with the Anthroposophical Society without establishing an official bond (which might cause the school to get its neck broken). Steiner's two biggest lies were 1) Anthroposophy is not a religion, and 2) Waldorf schools do not promote Anthroposophy. Here we have seen him revealing the truth hidden behind these lies. Whether or not he lied intentionally, knowingly, is irrelevant. We need to see his falsehoods for what they are, misrepresentations, and adjust our thinking accordingly. The Waldorf school movement is built on falsehoods, especially the falsehoods we have examined just now. The deceptions practiced by many Waldorf schools today began with the establishment of the very first Waldorf School, in accordance with the wishes of Rudolf Steiner himself. For Steiner's moral preachments, please see "Morality" For Steiner's views on sin, see "Sin" To learn about damnation, Steiner-style, see "Hell" For more about prayers, mantras, and mediations in "spiritual science," see "Power Words" For information about "psychic phenomena" please use this link: "Clairvoyance" AFTERWORDS I. Not long ago, I wrote the following in response to a message posted at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/. The message included these statements by Steiner: “Now anthroposophy will never make the claim that it somehow wants to become a religion. However....” And “The discovery of the spiritual world in a wholly new form is necessary.” [34] My reply returns to the ground I covered, above, but it also adds some additional thoughts. Rudolf Steiner declared that Anthroposophy is not a religion but a science, employing the tool of “cognition” (which for Steiner meant clairvoyance) to probe metaphysical mysteries. “Spiritual science” thus approaches spiritual matters without, Steiner claimed, sacrificing its objectivity. But the truth is that Anthroposophy assuredly is a religion, albeit an odd one. According to Steiner, Anthroposophy shows humanity’s “true” relation to the “gods,” and it directs its adherents toward salvation (which in Steiner’s terms is an evolutionary progression toward spiritualization and ultimate deification). To attain the glories Steiner promised, we must follow his teachings; otherwise, we will not evolve properly, and the result will be dreadful. “Those who use the life in the body for anything more than an opportunity to gain ego-consciousness [35] will descend into the abyss and form the evil race. They have [sic] turned away from the impulse of Christ Jesus, [36] and out of the ugliness of their souls they will again develop the animal form man possessed in former ages. The evil race, with its savage impulses, will dwell in animal form in the abyss." [37] Such talk amounts to an updated rendition of the old fire-and-brimstone threat that preachers sometimes employ: Attend to me, or you will go to Hell. In this case, the preacher is Steiner. Anthroposophy sprang from Theosophy. Helena Blavatsky, a founder of Theosophy, said that Theosophy is not a religion — it is religion: “[T]he assertion that ‘Theosophy is not a Religion,’ by no means excludes the fact that ‘Theosophy is Religion’ itself. A Religion in the true and only correct sense, is a bond uniting men together — not a particular set of dogmas and beliefs. Now Religion, per se, in its widest meaning is that which binds not only all MEN, but also all BEINGS and all things in the entire Universe into one grand whole ... Thus Theosophy is not a Religion, we say, but RELIGION itself ... ” [38] Steiner modified Theosophy, largely by emphasizing Christ. In other words, he took the religion of Theosophy and semi-Christianized it. The result is hardly consistent with real Christianity — Anthroposophy is heretical, for instance in its polytheism — but a heretical religion is still a religion. Essentially, Steiner’s adaptation seeks to meet Blavatsky’s criterion, that true religion is a spiritualistic system binding together all elements of the universe. That is the type of religion Anthroposophy is meant to be. Steiner placed a version of the triune God at the top of a series of spiritual hierarchies, but he populated those hierarchies with numerous other gods. Central to Steiner’s enterprise is his claim that few humans aside from himself grasp the real significance of Christ Jesus. Theosophy fails to give Christ the importance He deserves, yet Christian churches also go astray. Indeed, all conventional denominations are erroneous: “I want you to understand what is religious in an anthroposophical sense ... [R]eligion connected with a specific church is not actually religious....” [39] What is religious, “in an anthroposophical sense,” is Anthroposophy, which Steiner taught possesses esoteric or mystery wisdom. Steiner usually employed cool, detached, “scientific” language, which is a great relief compared to Blavatsky’s bombast. His self-possessed tone convinces some people that Steiner was an objective, “scientific” observer, as he claimed. This is one way that the real nature of Anthroposophy is disguised. There are others. Anthroposophy dispenses with many of the trappings of ordinary religions. It has no steepled churches, for instance, and no grandly robed clergy. But such things are just trappings. An offshoot of Anthroposophy called the Christian Community is overtly religious, which is suggestive, but it does not prove that Anthroposophy as a whole is a religion. [40] If we want to understand Anthroposophy’s spiritualistic purposes and how they show up in Waldorf schools, we need to look elsewhere. To get at the truth, consider Anthroposophy’s prayers, many of them written by you-know-who. Steiner filled a traditional role for religious leaders by writing prayers to be used by his followers. See, e.g., PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN. [41] At least one of Steiner’s prayers — usually disguised as a “morning verse” — is recited in unison by students and teachers in the lower grades at many Waldorf schools. The prayer includes the words “I reverence, O God,/ The strength of humankind,/ That Thou so graciously/ Hast planted in my soul/ ... From Thee come light and strength,/ To Thee rise love and thanks.” [42] Speaking directly to God, the children and their teachers praise and thank Him. This is worship. The inevitable conclusion is that Anthroposophy actually does have churches, in the form of those Waldorf schools that truly abide by Steiner’s intentions; and Anthroposophy does have clergy, in the form of devout Anthroposophical Waldorf teachers. (Other Anthro churches can be found in other Anthro structures, the foremost of which is the Goetheanum, the cathedral of Anthroposophy, located in Switzerland. [43] Other Anthro clergy can be found among the scribes who pore over Steiner’s utterances, cataloging, annotating, and repackaging them in Anthro publications, and among those modern-day Anthroposophists who present themselves as clairvoyant seers and sages.) The practices and observances of Anthroposophy largely consist of following Steiner’s spiritual instructions. He told his followers how to find Christ, how to know higher worlds, how to stay in touch with dead loved ones, how to connect with guardians angels, and so forth. [44] Much of this is solitary work, undertaken by the devout within the privacy of their minds and souls. But — as we’ve seen with group prayers — some Anthroposophical religious activities involve gatherings of various sorts. The observance of Christian and seasonal festivals is important among Steiner’s followers, and consequently it can be found at many Waldorf schools. [45] The arts, too, play an important occult role in Steiner’s teachings. Steiner taught that creating, performing, and receiving the spiritualistic effects of art works can plug us into transcendent realms. He didn’t mean this in a metaphorical sense, but quite literally. Concerning an odd form of dance called eurythmy, for example, he said “Eurythmy shapes and moves the human organism in a way that furnishes direct external proof of our participation in the supersensible world [i.e., the invisible spirit world]. In having people do eurythmy, we link them directly to the supersensible world.” [46] The arts as displayed in Waldorf schools often have such esoteric purposes — see my essay “Magical Arts” on this Web site. Performances or readings of Steiner’s mystery plays allows Anthroposophists to manifest some of their beliefs in particularly dramatic form. [47] All in all, committed Anthroposophists have many ways to observe religion Steiner-style. Steiner’s followers usually hold their occult secrets closely, as Steiner encouraged, but occasionally they openly attest to their faith. Eugene Schwartz, an American Anthroposophist and Waldorf educator, once said on the record that he sent his daughter to a Waldorf school for religious reasons. "I'm glad my daughter gets to speak about God every morning: that's why I send her to a Waldorf school ... She can have a religious experience. A religious experience. I'll say it again: I send my daughter to a Waldorf school so that she can have a religious experience." [48] Obviously, children can shared, repeated religious experiences in a Waldorf school only if religion is consistently present there. [49] What form of religion prevails inside Waldorfs? Steiner told the teachers at the first Waldorf school, “As Waldorf teachers, we must be true Anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling.” [50] In its tone, this is a somewhat unusual Steiner statement. It doesn’t sound like the language of science, does it? “We must be astrophysicists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling.” Scientists don’t talk that way, but people of faith do. The religion underlying the morning prayers at Waldorf schools is Anthroposophy, espoused by deeply committed followers of that religion — teachers who are supposed to feel their unusual faith to the very core of their being. Near the end of his life, American Anthroposophist John Fentress Gardner wrote a pamphlet, TWO PATHS TO THE SPIRIT: Charismatic Christianity and Anthroposophy. [51] In it, Gardner says “Both paths acknowledge Christ Jesus as the ultimate Shepherd of human souls, finding in His life the archetype of all human experience, and seeing in His Baptism, Crucifixion, and Resurrection the pivotal events of human history.” [52] In declaring the essential equivalence of charismatic Christianity and Anthroposophy — he says both are valid spiritual paths — Gardner underscores the religious nature of Steiner’s doctrines. Full disclosure: Gardner was headmaster at the Waldorf school I attended. I knew him. I can attest that he rarely if ever attended church. Yet he was deeply religious — he believed in the immanence of spiritual beings all around, and in the upward-yearning transcendent path to salvation. He was a believer, as his pamphlet shows. British Anthroposophist Richard Seddon published an anthology of Steiner’s work — the rather shocking quotation about the abyss, quoted above, can be found in it. [53] After many of the prose selections that Seddon offers, we also find “meditative verses” written by Steiner. Most of these “verses” can be understood only as religious ruminations and/or prayers addressed to spirit entities. E.g., “Spirit triumphant!/ Send flame through the weakness/ Of timorous souls./ ... That selflessness,/ ... May rule as the well-spring [sic]/ Of spiritual rebirth.” [54] The religious content of these lines is undeniable — spirit, soul, “spiritual rebirth.” Or consider this, again by Steiner: “May God’s grace-bringing guardian ray/ Brim-over my expanding soul/ That it may apprehend/ Strength-giving forces everywhere.” [55] The verse goes on to say that the strengthened soul “[b]eholding thus God’s power” vows to work “as God would work/ With everything it has.” [56] Seeking to work as God would work may strike some as blasphemous — can we really compare ourselves to God? [57] But this is part of Steiner’s theology, as is the belief that we may ultimately become gods ourselves — arguably another blasphemy. Seddon describes humanity’s final triumph this way in THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY AND THE EARTH AS FORETOLD BY RUDOLF STEINER: “At the end of Vulcan [i.e., our last evolutionary phase], mankind has the form of an archetype in Higher Spiritland. [58] This is a fully purified condition of godliness or divine bliss, the highest stage accessible to humanity, into which the fruits of all planetary evolutions are gathered. [59] Then one can truly say, ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega’ ....” [60] The quotation at the end of the passage repeats a statement attributed to God in the Book of Revelation: “‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ declares the Lord God, ‘the one who is, who was, and who is coming, the Almighty.’” [61] Steiner would have us put God’s words in our own mouths, as if we ourselves are to become the Almighty. To many, this is rank blasphemy. But to Anthroposophists, it is an article of faith — their faith, their heretical religion. Let’s circle back to the subject of students praying aloud, in unison, in Waldorf classrooms. Having attended a Waldorf school, I can remember reciting “morning verses.” The “verse” I quoted above was penned by Steiner for use in the first four grades. Older Waldorf students and their teachers often recite a somewhat more august Steiner prayer, which includes these words: “God’s spirit, ‘tis to Thee/ I turn myself in prayer.” [62] The students reciting these words are, indeed, reciting a prayer. The Waldorf classroom in which they do so is, then, a prayer site. The prayer the children utter comes to them from the creed known as Anthroposophy. The highest prophet of that creed is Rudolf Steiner. [63] II. On May 2, 2009, I posted a summary at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10108 . Adding a few small revisions, I'll append here: Anthroposophy certainly is a religion. It's a queer religion, with few of the ordinary outward indicators; parish churches or temples, clerical robes, and so forth. But it is a religion: • It offers the one sure path to salvation (as many other religions do); • it requires faith (critical thinking, Steiner said, must be eliminated); • it entails prayers and meditations; • it is focused on the spirit realm; • it has a theology; • it specifies correct behavior and mindset; • its headquarters (the Goetheanum) is a cathedral; • it prescribes spiritualistic observances and practices; • it is a pairing of gnostic Christianity (a religion) with Theosophy (a religion). It is a religion. III. Steiner said he used "exact" clairvoyance. This means that anyone else using "exact" clairvoyance would necessarily confirm his observations. "Anthroposophy seeks for what may be called exact clairvoyance, again to borrow a term from scientific usage; that is to say it seeks to develop a knowledge and perception of the spiritual worlds which is no less exact, no less conscientious in the sense of exact science, than is the best tendency and striving of our natural scientific age." [64] If Steiner attained "exact" clairvoyance, then his insights would be scientifically precise and unarguable. But, did Steiner attain this level of exactitude? Anthroposophists for the most part say that he did, which means his teachings are virtual gospel. "Modern exact clairvoyance, as developed by him [i.e., Steiner], reveals spiritual facts to spiritual vision as clearly as men's ordinary senses reveal to the intellect the facts of the physical world." [65] Another example: Franz E. Winkler was a leading German-American Anthroposophist. On April 8, 1955 he delivered a lecture to the Anthroposophical Society in New York. The title was "Our Obligation to Rudolf Steiner in the Spirit of Easter". What a title, and how much it tells us about the Anthroposophical attitude toward Steiner. Winkler was not saying that Steiner was Christ or a god, but his essential summary for Anthroposophists is this: "[W]e have learned to believe in Rudolf Steiner's teachings." [66] The important point is that Winkler spoke of "believing" Steiner's teachings. This is not a scientific attitude, it is a religious attitude, an attitude of faith in the teachings of an extremely reliable spiritual savant: R. Steiner. Steiner himself sometimes slipped up and revealed the importance of belief — not careful scientific inquiry — in the forms of "truth" he offered. Here is how he describes the future period when physical reality begins to disintegrate, giving way to a new, more-fully-spiritual stage of human evolution. Good, upwardly-evolving people will gladly move on to the next stage. They will be able to do so because of, what? Belief. Able to believe, the good humans will be aware of things spiritual and thereafter they will escape spiritual death. But the bad, degenerate humans of that time will be trapped — unable to believe in things spiritual, they will have nowhere to turn when their illusory physical realm comes a cropper: “[W]hen things of the physical world of the senses cease to be all-important and fade into shadow, human beings will either find that the physical is vanishing while they remain incapable of believing in the spiritual realities before them or they will be able to believe and preserve for themselves an awareness of these spiritual realities — and for them there will then be no spiritual death.” [67] What do we find in such words? The old religious claim: Those with faith will be saved, while those without faith will be doomed. Faith. Belief. Religion. THE GOETHEANUM The worldwide headquarters of Anthroposophy is the Goetheanum, located in Dornach, Switzerland. The structure is intended to embody, in physical forms, the spiritual meaning of Anthroposophy. We can gain an important insight into the nature of Anthroposophy, then, by noticing that the Goetheanum is, in effect, a cathedral. Steiner meant the Goetheanum to be the successor of humanity's previous temples and churches, and he hoped it would be the inspiration for many more Anthroposophical religious centers. Speaking to priests of the Christian Community (the openly religious Anthroposophical adjunct — see endnote 31), Steiner described the purpose of the Goetheanum thus: “[T]he inner spiritual impulse that is intended to flow from the Goetheanum through the anthroposophical movement always contains an aspect that goes far beyond any theoretical understanding, indeed beyond any understanding altogether ... The tasks human beings must undertake today are growing great again ... [H]uman evolution cannot proceed further unless forces from the Mysteries [gnostic revelations] enter into evolution once again....” [68]  Front face, Goetheanum. [R.R., 2009] The Goetheanum’s purpose — which surpasseth understanding — is to help Anthroposophy to save mankind by promoting our proper evolution, which requires a renewal of holy mysteries. This purpose is explicitly religious, albeit polytheistic: “It means that the human being is endeavoring to rise up with his forces into the divine, spiritual region; there he meets with the gods....” [69] Importantly, Steiner's words belie the usual claim made by Anthroposophists, that their ideology is a science, not a religion. "Spiritual science" aims for knowledge of the spirit realm. Knowledge. But note that Steiner said the impulse of Anthroposophy "goes far beyond any theoretical understanding, indeed beyond any understanding altogether." This is not knowledge but the transcendence of knowledge. This is religion. The Goetheanum is meant to manifest the thrust of this new religion, the new force that can bring the Mysteries "into evolution once again." The present Goetheanum, a concrete structure, was preceded by an earlier Anthroposophical cathedral, the first Goetheanum, which was built of wood. Both were/are huge buildings, with large central meeting halls or auditoriums. The wooden Goetheanum was destroyed by fire on New Year's Eve, 1922. Anthroposophists blamed right-wing arsonists, although no proof has ever been offered. By Steiner’s own account, that Goetheanum was used to establish a new priesthood. Addressing priests of that order, the Christian Community, Steiner said: “In that moment over there in the now burnt-down Goetheanum when you inaugurated a new priesthood in the movement for a Christian renewal, in that moment a new age of the mysteries began, a new age for the Act of Consecration of Man and for an understanding of apocalypse, of revelation.” [70] So on at least one occasion the first Goetheanum was used for an openly religious purpose. Indeed, that purpose — the investiture of priests — is precisely the sort of divine ceremony for which cathedrals are used. Note, also, that Christian Community priests — the immediate beneficiaries of the religious ceremony held within the Goetheanum — turned to Steiner for instruction about the true meaning of a book of the Bible, the Book of Revelation. Steiner’s relation to these priests is comparable to the Pope’s relation to Catholic priests. After the fire, a second structure, built of concrete, was erected as a replacement. Resembling a gargantuan outcropping of opaque crystal, Goetheanum #2 houses classrooms and offices in addition to the auditorium. The building’s stained glass windows, “organic” sculptural forms, and other features are intended to convey spiritualistic meaning. A large sculpture of Christ and other spiritual beings stands in a special recessed area. The domed ceiling above the auditorium displays a huge mural representing occult phenomena. The floor plan is cruciform, as in most cathedrals: a long axis intersected about two-thirds of the way up by a shorter transverse axis. [71] The auditorium, which has a large pipe organ, is used for diverse events including lectures, eurythmic performances, and presentations of Steiner’s mystery plays (see endnote 37). The stage sets often suggest portals into spirit realms. A rostrum resembling a pulpit can be set at the center front of the stage. [72]  The group that we might call the inner priesthood of Anthroposophy — the College of Cardinals, as it were — is headquartered at the Goetheanum, within the School of Spiritual Science. “According to its constitution, the task of the School of Spiritual Science is to conduct research in the field of spirit in ways that can complement and take further the results obtained by mainstream academic research ... In Rudolf Steiner‘s plan, three Classes were to form the core and esoteric practice of the School. This work was to be rooted in mantric and meditative of inner schooling. He was only able to create a First Class. ... The circle of First Class Holders has been conferring on the procedure leading to the appointment of new Class Holders.” [73] The members of the First Class provide spiritual guidance for Anthroposophists worldwide — they attempt to use their inner powers, bolstered by special spiritual practices, to attain clairvoyant knowledge of the spirit realm. They are the inner initiates. A quick reprise: Huge building, big meeting hall, stained glass windows, statue of Christ, pipe organ, cruciform layout, domed ceiling with a mural of the spirit realm, pulpit/rostrum, spiritualistic activities including the investiture of priests, center for the inner circle of initiates ... This is a cathedral. Steiner revealed perhaps more than he meant to when discussing the creation of the Goetheanum's stained glass windows: “These creations [the windows] will move the souls of those who gather together up there on the hill [the Goetheanum is on a hilltop] and show them the path leading to the spirit. [paragraph break] May this holy mood pervade this building; may every strike of the cutter on the glass be carried out with the feeling,: ‘I am shaping something for the souls listening up there on the hill, something that will lead them out through space into the realms of spirit.’” [74] The Goetheanum is a place of holiness. It leads people not just to knowledge of the spirit realm, but more than that, it leads them literally into the spirit realm. In serving the advancement of human evolution, it shows people the "path," the way toward humanity's ultimate perfection, its ultimate ascension to divinity. This is the path to salvation. "‘Find thus, O Man, the path to the spirit!’” [75] The holiness of the Goetheanum and its windows is that of the ultimate religion, the true path, Anthroposophy. Steiner taught that, by following the true path, humans will ultimately become gods. This is the evolutionary course followed by many upwardly evolving spirits superior to us in the celestial hierarchies. They have passed through their own "human" phase. If we are wise, we will follow them upward. “[T]he gods who dwell in exalted regions had not always been gods, but had once been human beings ... [H]uman beings can become a god [sic] only when they are ripe for that condition ... Two paths are therefore open to humanity. Either a person can live patiently in anticipation of ... deification (theosis), or one can imagine oneself prematurely already a god [hubris]. The first path leads to true deification; the second, to folly and madness.” [76] Ancient seekers understood but also partially misunderstood these realities. True comprehension of the true path has become available only since the advent of Christ, particularly Christ as revealed in Anthroposophy. Steiner’s formulation of these matters was often opaque and disingenuous. Still, we can glean his meaning. “Anthroposophy did not come to found sects or new religions. It came to call to life again what is the religion of humanity, the synthesis of all religions, the religion that is already there — Christianity. Not only is it able to call Christianity into fresh life, but for those who have been bereft of Christianity by modern science and the doubts arising from it, it is able to bring about, in the fullest sense, a resurrection of the religious life. Amongst all the other life-giving forces, Anthroposophy is able at this present time to enliven us and to bring about the resurrection of religious experience for all mankind.” [77] Christianity is the “synthesis of all religions,” Steiner taught, because it is the culmination of all religions. All previous faiths were steppingstones leading toward Christianity. But notice that Anthroposophy contains many elements not found in orthodox Christina faith: reincarnation, karma, multiple gods, Ahriman, Buddha... Anthroposophy itself is the synthesis Steiner advocated — it is the “Christianity” Steiner advocated. In this sense, “Anthroposophy did not come to found ... new religions” — Anthroposophy revived an existing religion, Christianity. This is sophistry, but we can recognize a truth within Steiner’s statement. Anthroposophy, aka an occult reinterpretation of Christianity, is a religion. It brings about “the resurrection of religious experience for all mankind.” The ultimate payoff for mankind in following the true path as described by Steiner will be stupendous: “[W]e shall have gradually achieved the transformation of our own being into what is called in Christianity ‘the Father.’” [78] Let's return to Steiner's comments about the windows of the Goetheanum: “If all our labours are made living by the spirit on whom I call here this evening, if all the work on this hill is filled with the spirit of love — which is at the same time the spirit of true art — then from our building there will flow out over the earth the spirit of peace, the spirit of harmony, the spirit of love. There will then be a chance for the work on this hill to find successors, so that many such centres of earthly and spiritual peace and harmony and love may spring up in the world ... The god dwelt in the Greek temple, and the congregation can dwell in Romanesque or Gothic churches. Now let the world of spirit speak through the building of the future.” [79] Here Steiner clearly pits the Goetheanum in a holy line of descent: temples, churches, the Goetheanum. The Goetheanum is not a collection of study halls, libraries, and laboratories. It does not embody a disinterested scientific examination of ultimate truths. It embodies a messianic intention, the potential salvation of humanity. Steiner said that love as well as wisdom will flow from the Goetheanum — as from Anthroposophy itself — spreading across the world. Humanity's eyes will be opened, the true path will be recognized, and many new Anthroposophical churches and cathedrals will rise, inspired by the first such cathedral, the Goetheanum, the "building of the future," the harbinger of mankind's future spiritual ascent. This, at any rate, was Steiner's vision. — Roger Rawlings ◊◊◊◊ For information about the Christian Community please use this link: "Community" To see images of the first and second Goetheanums, click here: Google/Goetheanum ◊◊◊◊ The statue in the Goethanum is dominated by the figure of Christ, but other figures — especially Ahriman and Lucifer — are present. The religious symbolism is undeniable. (In my self-defense, I should add that the statue is even more grotesque than my sketch of it. Ahriman looks like a being out of ALIEN, while Christ himself is strained and distorted. The work is impressive, but not .— IMO — attractive.) [R.R., 2009.]  The main hall of the second Goetheanum, showing pipe organ and stained glass windows. [R.R., 2009.] ◊◊◊◊ ENDNOTES [1] www.waldorfanswers.org/NotReligion1.htm [I checked this on Oct. 5, 2007.] Steiner called Anthroposophy “spiritual science.” He claimed that all of his teachings are objective reports of spiritual facts that he discovered through clairvoyance. He further said that anyone can confirm his teachings by developing similar clairvoyant powers. But, clairvoyance is almost surely a sham (we have very little evidence that anyone has ever had clairvoyant abilities, and Steiner’s own use of such claimed abilities led him to make many absurd statements, such as that the earth does not orbit the sun). Result: No one can confirm Steiner’s teachings; the only way to follow Steiner is to accept his unsubstantiated word. This boils down to having faith. For example, Steiner defender Richard Ramsbotham has written “I could not myself have carried out Steiner’s research” because it requires clairvoyant capacities Ramsbotham has not attained. Instead, Ramsbotham accepts Steiner’s word: “[M]any people have become able to place a certain trust in Steiner’s research.” Steiner’s followers develop their trust by “living with the results of this research” so that “over many years even [sic], they find this [i.e., their trust] not to have been disappointed by Steiner.” Eventually, their trust leads them to be “certain of what Steiner is saying.” Ramsbotham places himself firmly among those who trust Steiner. Note that “living with” Steiner’s teachings is not the same as confirming them — Ramsbotham has admitted that he cannot confirm them. So Ramsbotham must trust Steiner. But trust is faith — the words are synonymous — and faith is a requirement of religion, not science or reason. [Richard Ramsbotham, WHO WROTE BACON? (Temple Lodge Publishing, 2004), pp. 4-7.] [2] Rudolf Steiner, WHAT IS ANTHROPOSOPHY: THREE SPIRITUAL PERSPECTIVES ON SELF-KNOWLEDGE (Anthroposophic Press, 2002), p. 19, introduction by Christopher Bamford. Steiner’s gnostic Christianity veers so far from orthodox Christian doctrines that it may be considered actually antithetical to the essential teachings of Christ. [See my essay “Was He Christian?” on this Web site.] Nonetheless, this variant of Christianity is clearly a form of religion, as the next two references show. Anthroposophy is aligned with gnostic Christianity and/or Rosicrucianism. [3] Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, RUDOLF STEINER (WESTERN ESOTERIC MASTERS SERIES), anthology edited by Richard Seddon (North Atlantic Books, 2004, general editor's preface by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke), p. 7. Gnosticism was a heretical movement in the early history of Christianity stressing the need for mystery wisdom or gnosis to attain salvation. The term “gnostic” later was applied to all doctrines tied to the search for mystery wisdom. Rosicrucianism is a secretive, semi-Christian order claiming to possess esoteric knowledge handed down from the ancients. The order’s symbol combines a rose and a cross (hence the name). The form of Naturphilosophie, or nature philosophy, that influenced Steiner most was promulgated by Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, whose tenets include the idea that nature tends toward spirit, that the existence of nature shows the existence of the divine, and that man aspires to equality with God or the gods. “Suddenly, in place of the old rationalistic philosophy there appears in Schelling a real awakening of the ancient philosophy of the gods of mythology, a reawakening of the old gods ... I myself again and again returned to Schelling.” [KARMIC RELATIONSHIPS, Vol. 4 (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1983), p. 94.] [4] ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION (Detroit: MacMillan Reference, 2005), pp. 392-394. [5] Rudolf Steiner, THEOSOPHY: An Introduction to the Spiritual Processes in Human Life and in the Cosmos (Anthroposophic Press, 1994), and Rudolf Steiner, SPIRITUALISM, MADAME BLAVATSKY, AND THEOSOPHY: AN EYEWITNESS VIEW OF OCCULT HISTORY (Anthroposophic Press, 2001). [6] SPIRITUALISM, MADAME BLAVATSKY, AND THEOSOPHY: AN EYEWITNESS VIEW OF OCCULT HISTORY, p. 107. [7] H. P. Blavatsky, Is Theosophy a Religion? www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/IsTheosophyAReligion.htm [I checked this on Oct. 5, 2007.] [8] Rudolf Steiner, PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995). [9] Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 38. [10] According to the Association of Waldorf Schools in North America, “Waldorf schools are non-sectarian [sic] and non-denominational [sic] .” [www.awsna.org , Frequently Asked Questions, Are Waldorf Schools Religious? I last checked this on Oct. 5, 2007.] [11] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 20. Steiner told the teachers at the first Waldorf school “It would be nice to begin instruction with the Lord’s Prayer and then go on to the verses I will give you.” [Ibid., p. 38] Steiner is said to have recited the Lord’s Prayer each day, so loudly that his neighbors could hear him through his apartment’s walls. [Rudolf Steiner, START NOW! A Book of Soul and Spiritual Exercises (SteinerBooks, 2004).] However, the versions of the prayer he used are not those found in the Bible. (Matthew 6:9-13 gives the version usually recited in churches; Luke 11:2-4 is essentially the same, but shorter, omitting the final line “For Thine is....”) Steiner used one non-Biblical version before 1913, and a different one afterward. Let’s look first at the earlier version. Instead of beginning with “Our Father which art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name,” before 1913 Steiner recited “Father, you who were, are, and will be in our innermost being! May your being be glorified and praised in us in all things.” And instead of ending with the words recorded in Matthew, “For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever,” Steiner recited “May your power and glory work with us in all the cycles of time.” [START NOW! p. 218] After 1913, Steiner used the following words: “Father, you who were, are, and will be in our innermost being, your name in us is glorified and praised. May your kingdom increase in our deeds and our conduct. May we perform your will, as you, O Father, have laid it down in our innermost being ... May your power and glory work through us in all cycles of time.” [Ibid., p. 219] From an Anthroposophical perspective, these reworked versions of the Prayer are preferable both because they partially shift emphasis from God to us (“our innermost being,” “in us,” “with us,” “through us”) and because they allude to esoteric concepts (e.g., “cycles of time,” which is a shorthand for Steiner’s convoluted description of human evolution — see my essay "Everything" and the essays that immediately follow it). [12] Ibid., pp. 85-86. On other occasions, Steiner claimed that Sunday services were arranged for students of various religious backgrounds: Catholic, Lutheran, etc. But here, he clearly refers to “children receiving religious instruction from an anthroposophical basis.” [13] See my essay “Unenlightened” on this Web site. [14] “Waldorf Education — For Our Times Or Against Them?” Transcript of talk by Eugene Schwartz, Sunbridge College: November 13, 1999. Edited by Michael Kopp. www.waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/schwartz.html At the time he made the remarks I have quoted, Eugene Schwartz was in charge of Anthroposophical teacher training at Sunbridge. Reportedly, he was subsequently fired. Here’s the story as related by Dan Dugan, secretary of People for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools: “I asked Eugene Schwartz about the rumors, and he kindly told me his story.
“In March, 2000, Schwartz was dismissed as Director of Teacher Training at Sunbridge College. This was a consequence of his November, 1999, ‘Schools in Transformation’ conference, at which I was invited to speak, and Schwartz challenged the Waldorf movement to "come out" about its religious nature.
“After that meeting I said I hoped he would survive his next board meeting. Unfortunately, I wasn't far wrong.
“His firing in turn had the consequence of ‘a near revolt of the students,’ and ‘a serious dip in next year's enrollment.’ Schwartz feels that the resulting addition of some younger faculty and staff will have a beneficial effect on Sunbridge, though it was too late for him.” [Dan Dugan, May 30, 2000, posted at free-speech forum associated with waldorfcritics.org.]
[15] Ibid. Some parents at Waldorf schools do understand that Waldorfs are essentially religious — although they may not know much about the specific doctrines of Anthroposophy. The following is from a news account that appeared early in 2009. “At the private Eugene [Oregon] Waldorf School on McLean Boulevard south of 28th Avenue, three of every four of its nearly 200 students lack one or more of the vaccines Oregon requires against 11 diseases. Their parents have filled out religious exemption forms....” [Anne Williams, “Medical Authorities Want to Determine Why Certain Populations Shun Vaccines,” THE REGISTER-GUARD, Jan. 10, 2009.] Steiner generally opposed vaccinations. Do these parents in Oregon oppose vaccination because of Steiner’s guidance on the matter, or are their religious beliefs not specifically tied to Anthroposophy? Only they can answer. [16] groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/1286 [17] Rudolf Steiner, RUDOLF STEINER IN THE WALDORF SCHOOL: Lectures and Addresses to Children, Parents, and Teachers (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p.26. [18] Ibid., p. 79. [19] Ibid., p.156. [20] Ibid., p.162. [21] Ibid., p.186. [22] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 184. [23] Ibid., p. 495. [24] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 698.
[25] Ibid., pp. 698-699.
[26] Ibid., p. 703.
[27] Ibid., p. 705.
[28] Ibid., p. 707.
[29] Ibid., p. 706.
[30] Ibid., p. 706.
[31] Ibid., pp. 706-707.
[32] Ibid., p. 708.
[33] Ibid., p. 709. [34] Rudolf Steiner, THE ANTHROPOSOPHIC MOVEMENT (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993) http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/AnthroMove/AntMov_index.html. [35] Gaining “ego-consciousness” is to achieve true human selfhood, evidenced by the possession of an “I” — a nonphysical body, a divine essence or sheath. The only sure path to attaining higher levels of consciousness, Steiner taught, is laid out by Anthroposophy. By “more than” Steiner evidently means “less than” or “other than.” [36] Note that turning away from the “impulse” of Christ is different from turning away from Christ Himself. The subtle distinction is part of Anthroposophical doctrine. The main point for us, here, is that Steiner’s understanding of Christ is quite different from what is taught in orthodox Christian churches, that is, churches that base their teachings on the Bible as the one true Word of God. Steiner’s teachings derive largely from heterodox sources. [37] Rudolf Steiner, Richard Seddon (editor), UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993), p. 103. In Steiner’s teachings, there are at least three ways for humans to slip down into what we might call perdition: 1) Individual humans may descend to lower and lower stages in successive incarnations until they fall out of evolution. "Beings that stay behind at such stages appear in a later epoch as subordinate nature spirits." [Rudolf Steiner, NATURE SPIRITS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995), p.70.] 2) At the end of our current cultural epoch, evil humans will form an "evil race" that will be consigned to a hellish fate. "The evil race, with its savage impulses, will dwell in animal form in the abyss." [Rudolf Steiner, UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993), p. 103.] 3) In the distant future, when good humans are preparing to move on to Vulcan, those evil humans who have somehow remained will be sent to an "irreclaimable moon": “[A]t a certain stage, a separate celestial body becomes [i.e., will become] detached. This — as it were, an ‘irreclaimable moon’ — includes all the beings who have persisted in withstanding the true course of evolution. It enters now upon a line of development such as no words can portray....” [Rudolf Steiner, OCCULT SCIENCE - An Outline (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1979), pp. 309-310.] These are the dooms that the religion of Anthroposophy would save us from. The salvation offered by Anthroposophy is “correct” spiritual knowledge that permits us to move upward in an evolution leading to Vulcan and beyond. [38] H. P. Blavatsky, Is Theosophy a Religion? [39] Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998) p. 45. [40] “The Christian Community is part of an international movement for the renewal of religion, founded in 1922 in Switzerland by the eminent Lutheran theologian and minister Friedrich Rittlemeyer, with the help of Rudolf Steiner, Austrian thinker and mystic ... [T]he teachings are rich, varied and evolving. They are inspired by traditional Christian theology, the original work of Rudolf Steiner, and by independent research and insights of priests and members. There is room in this modern Christian theology to incorporate such ideas as reincarnation and karma, a truly cosmic conception of Christ, and the role of spiritual beings at all levels of existence.” www.thechristiancommunity.org/about.htm The Christian community is the overtly religious offshoot of Anthroposophy. Anthroposophy itself is covertly religious — although the cover is easy to penetrate. [41] Rudolf Steiner, PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995). [42] Ibid., p. 45. [43] Steiner considered German author Johann Wolfgang von Goethe to have been a sort of pre-Steiner. Steiner edited Goethe’s “scientific” writings, after which he adopted some of Goethe’s teachings while “correcting” others. When Steiner established the headquarters for the Anthroposophical movement, he named it the Goetheanum, in honor of Goethe. The Goetheanum houses the Anthroposophical Society and the School of Spiritual Science. The Society is a “public” organization open to those who have sincere Anthroposophical inclinations. The School of Spiritual Science devotes itself to the Anthroposophical study of mankind, evolution, and esoteric initiation. Steiner laid the groundwork for both the Society and the School. To see the official, carefully worded descriptions of the Goetheanum, Society, and School, visit www.goetheanum.org . [44] Relevant titles of Steiner books include HOW DO I FIND THE CHRIST? (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2006), HOW CAN MANKIND FIND THE CHRIST AGAIN? (Anthroposophic Press, 1984), HOW TO KNOW HOW WORLDS (Anthroposophic Press, 1994), STAYING CONNECTED: How to Continue Your Relations with Those Who Have Died (Anthroposophic Press, 1999), and GUARDIAN ANGELS: Connecting with Our Spiritual Guides and Helpers (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001). Bear in mind that Steiner did not actually write many of the books now attributed to him. Many consist of transcripts of lectures he delivered — the transcribers usually were devoted followers who wished to preserve every syllable he uttered. [45] Relevant titles of Steiner books include THE FESTIVALS AND THEIR MEANING (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998), THE EASTER FESTIVAL IN THE EVOLUTION OF THE MYSTERIES (SteinerBooks, 1988), THE CYCLE OF THE YEAR AS BREATHING PROCESS OF THE EARTH: The Four Great Festival-Seasons of the Year (Anthroposophical Publishing Company, 1956), SIGNS AND SYMBOLS OF THE CHRISTMAS FESTIVAL (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Company, 1941), and THE WHITSUN FESTIVAL: Its Place in the Study of Karma (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Company, 1945). Festivals at Waldorf schools sometimes seem to be innocent seasonal celebrations or, at most, mildly Christian observances. But the Anthroposophical meaning of the festivals is occult (as can be inferred, sometimes, from the odd costumes Waldorf students are urged to wear during the festivals). On the back cover of THE FESTIVALS AND THEIR MEANING, we find hints of the agenda: “...Festivals are not merely the commemoration of mighty historical events or truths within the Christian tradition, but are themselves — each year — spiritual events [sic], manifesting in seasonal and natural rhythms, which carry a significance that grows and deepens with the developing of human evolution.” Most of the festivals date from pagan celebrations of “seasonal and natural rhythms,” marking the passage of the Sun through the various signs of the zodiac. In Anthroposophy, Christ is a Sun god (see my essay “Was He Christian?”). Thus, according to Steiner, Christmas is not primarily the celebration of Jesus’s birth in Nazareth, but rather it is the observance of “the victory of the Sun.” [THE FESTIVALS AND THEIR MEANING, p. 5.] Or consider Steiner’s description of another Christian festival, a description that severely distorts traditional Christian meanings: “[T]he soul of the earth dwells within the earth during the winter, and is out in the cosmic spaces during midsummer time; while in spring it is emerging and ascending towards the cosmos. The Spring festival, the Easter festival, cannot therefore be fixed on a particular day ... but must take into account the constellations of the stars. A deep wisdom lies in this, which originated in an age when people were still able to perceive the spiritual nature of the year’s course through an ancient instinctive clairvoyance. We must come to perceive this once more.” [Ibid., p. 379] For Steiner, the “Spring festival” is designed to promote clairvoyant capacities in children. The other festivals have similar purposes — they are “spiritual events” that, supposedly, manifest and advance “the developing of human evolution” — in particular, they are focused on the students’ evolving spirit-souls, in order to improve the kids’ karmas for their future reincarnations. Students and their parents often are not told what is going on, but at any Waldorf school where Steiner’s intentions are followed, the festivals are occult Anthroposophical religious functions. (For more about Steiner’s evolutionary doctrines, see my essay “Evolution, Anyone?”) [46] Rudolf Steiner, ART AS SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 247. Note the title of this book. Other relevant titles include ART AS SEEN IN THE LIGHT OF MYSTERY WISDOM (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1996) and THE ARTS AND THEIR MISSION (Anthroposophic Press, 1964). Examples of Anthroposophical painting can be found in Rudolf Steiner, THE ILLUSTRATED CALENDAR OF THE SOUL (Temple Lodge Publishing, 2004), paintings by Anne Stockton. In many, swirling water colors, sometimes creating an impression of layered veils, reflect spiritual presences, some of which hover above human forms. [47] Mystery plays are, generally, pageants depicting Biblical themes and stories. The form largely died out after the Middle Ages, but some mystery plays continue to be performed. The most famous today is the Oberammergau passion play, about Christ’s crucifixion. Steiner wrote four mystery plays, which contain Christian elements alongside occult and gnostic elements: THE PORTAL OF INITIATION, THE SOUL'S PROBATION, THE GUARDIAN OF THE THRESHOLD, and THE SOULS' AWAKENING. [See, e.g., Rudolf Steiner, THE FIRST MYSTERY DRAMA (Trafford Publishing, 2006). The other three plays are also available.] Visually stunning performances have been staged at the Goetheanum (see endnote 34). [48] “Waldorf Education — For Our Times Or Against Them?” Transcript edited by Michael Kopp. [49] Any individual can have a religious experience at any moment, quietly, inwardly. But bear in mind that the religious experiences at a real Waldorf school include group recitations of prayers. For these experiences, the students depend on the words prescribed for them by Steiner and conveyed to them by their teachers. [50] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 118. [51] John Fentress Gardner, TWO PATHS TO THE SPIRIT: Charismatic Christianity and Anthroposophy (Golden Stone Press, 1990). [52] Ibid., p. 8. [53] UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING — see endnote 28. The book is also available as RUDOLF STEINER, Western Esoteric Masters Series (North Atlantic Books, 2004.) [54] Ibid., p. 173. Numerous other verses and meditations can be found in books such as Rudolf Steiner, START NOW! A Book of Soul and Spiritual Exercises (SteinerBooks, 2004). Tellingly, there are chapters on the “Esoteric School,” the “Rosicrucian Path,” and the “Christian-Gnostic Path.” Steiner drew from all these occultist sources, and he attempted to weave them together in Anthroposophy. It might be helpful to think of Anthroposophy as a sort of Occultisms R Us superstore. How much to buy from the store is, of course, up to each shopper. But you can get some guidance by “Working with the Dead” (START NOW!, pp. 226-238). [55] Ibid., p. 89. In plainer English: The devotee asks for a beam or ray of God’s protective (“guardian”) grace to fill his/her soul to the brim, in order to see (“apprehend”) — and consequently use — the strengthening spiritual forces that are available at every hand. [56] Ibid., p. 89. Other books containing Steiner’s meditations and prayers include THE ILLUSTRATED CALENDAR OF THE SOUL: Meditations for the Yearly Cycle, VERSES AND MEDITATIONS, and START NOW! A Book of Soul and Spiritual Exercises. [57] Steiner accused the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche of blasphemy (“[H]e formulates his tremendous indictment of Christianity, which of course is blasphemous”). What did Jesus say about motes and beams? [58] For any who may not be entirely up on this stuff: Higher Spiritland is one of the “Stages of Form,” which are phases of our evolution. There are seven Stages of Form, which we might call Higher Spiritland, Lower Spiritland, Astral Stage, Physical Stage, Perfected Astral Stage, Perfected Lower Spiritland, and Archetypal Higher Spiritland. Basically, we move from Higher Spiritland downward to our present existence in the Physical Stage of Form, and then, transformed/transforming, we ascend back up to a different version of Higher Spiritland. You may say that none of this makes sense. I may answer, Don’t look at me. An archetype is a Platonic or Goethean transcendent being or axiom, from which particular objects or conditions in the real world are derived. For humans to become archetypes is to be purified, raised to the level of the transcendent. See, e.g., UNDERSTANDING THE HUMAN BEING, p. 143. Steiner: “Goethe’s archetypal phenomena are empirical axioms ....” Seddon: “The Archetypal Stage. All that now remains is raised to Higher Spiritland, where everything is again in formless, seedlike [sic] condition. This realm comprises the creative forces and purposes of the archetypes....” THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY AND THE EARTH AS FORETOLD BY RUDOLF STEINER, pp. 98-99. [59] Steiner’s evolutionary scheme, which he essentially lifted from Theosophy, is preposterously convoluted. The seven largest phases of our evolution are named for planets (Saturn, Earth, etc.). Within these are nestled seven recapitulating Kingdoms (we’re now in the Mineral Kingdom). Within these are nestled seven recapitulating Stages of Form (see endnote 18). Within these are nestled seven recapitulating Epochs (we’re now in the Present, which seems to make sense). In general, each lower phase is recapitulated in each higher phase: wheels within wheels, cycles within cycles. [60] Richard Seddon, THE FUTURE OF HUMANITY AND THE EARTH AS FORETOLD BY RUDOLF STEINER (Temple Lodge Publishing, 2005), p. 127. During or on Vulcan, we recapitulate — in a finer form — everything that has come before, including the archetypal perfection we attained at the end of Archetypal Higher Spiritland. Don’t look at me. [61] THE HOLY BIBLE, Book of Revelation 1:8, International Standard Version. Alpha and omega denote the beginning and the end. [62] PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN, p. 47. [63] True spiritual seekers can learn from children who “have a respect that forbids them, even in the deepest recess of their heart, to harbour any thoughts of criticism or opposition.” [Rudolf Steiner, KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Company, 1923), p. 10.] Critical thought is taboo — in the religion and in its extension service, the Waldorf school movement: “A youth whose childhood has been touched by the blight of 'critical thinking' will come to the moment of independent insight badly crippled ... Because skepticism has long since robbed him of part of his heart, he will now feel unable to embrace enthusiastically what he has come to understand.” [American Anthroposophical educator John Fentress Gardner, THE EXPERIENCE OF KNOWLEDGE (Waldorf Press, 1975), pp. 127-128.] [64] Lecture, "Knowledge and Initiation - Cognition of the Christ Through Anthroposophy", April 14, 1922. [65] Floyd McKnight, RUDOLF STEINER AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, quoted on back cover, Rudolf Steiner, AN OUTLINE OF OCCULT SCIENCE (Anthroposophic Press, 1972) — http://wn.rsarchive.org/Books/GA013/English/AP1972/GA013_cover2.html [66] [Franz E. Winkler, M.D., OUR OBLIGATION TO RUDOLF STEINER IN THE SPIRIT OF EASTER (Whittier Books, 1955), p. 11. [67] Rudolf Steiner, EASTER: An Introductory Reader (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2007), p. 129. Despite denying that Anthroposophy is a religion — despite claiming that Anthroposophy is a science — Steiner repeatedly stressed the importance of belief and faith. Thus, he equated faith or the "faith body" with the astral body, one of our essential spiritual members. Losing faith would mean losing the means of evolving upward spiritually: “[T]he forces expressed in the word ‘faith’ are necessary to the soul. For the soul incapable of faith become withered, dried-up as the desert ... If we do not possess forces such as are expressed in the word ‘faith’, something in us goes to waste ... Were men in reality to lose all faith, they would soon see what it means for evolution. By losing the forces of faith they would be incapacitated for finding their way about in life; their very existence would be undermined by fear, care, and anxiety. To put it briefly, it is through the forces of faith alone that we can receive the life which should well up to invigorate the soul. This is because, imperceptible at first for ordinary consciousness, there lies in the hidden depths of our being something in which our true ego is embedded. This something, which immediately makes itself felt if we fail to bring it fresh life, is the human sheath where the forces of faith are active. We may term it the faith-soul, or — as I prefer — the faith-body. It has hitherto been given the more abstract name of astral body. The most important forces of the astral body are those of faith, so the term astral body and the term faith-body are equally justified.” [Rudolf Steiner, ESOTERIC CHRISTIANITY AND THE MISSION OF CHRISTIAN ROSENKREUTZ (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), pp. 162-163.] Belief must be paired to spiritual knowledge, Steiner said — his system, Anthroposophy, is intended to provide such knowledge. But belief is nonetheless indispensable; indeed, it is the "fruit" of Christ's cross: “Out of the womb of time there is born for us human beings that which is beyond time. If we stand on this firm support, we base upon it, not a blind belief, but a belief permeated by wisdom, truth and knowledge, and we may say: What must, will come; and nothing prevents us from throwing our best energies into what we believe to be inevitable. Belief is the real fruit of the cross.” [Rudolf Steiner, THE EAST IN THE LIOGHT OF THE WEST (Kessinger Publishing, 1999), pp. 2-3.] [68] Rudolf Steiner, THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND THE WORK OF THE PRIEST (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998), pp. 11-12. Steiner taught that religion, as such, will become unnecessary. It will be replaced by his own teachings, spiritual science; that is, religion will become unnecessary in the future because men will have esoteric knowledge and will no longer need faith. "Religion is the re-binding of the sensible with the supersensible. In an age of approaching materialism human beings needed religion. But the time will come when they will again be able to experience the supersensible world; then they will no longer need religion. The necessary antecedent of the new vision is that human beings shall be bearers of spiritual Christianity. This is the basis of the sentence of which I would ask you to realize the profound significance: Christianity began as a religion but is greater than all religions.” [Rudolf Steiner, THE CHRISTIAN MYSTERY (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 283.] Note that "Christianity" is not greater than all other religions; it is greater than any and all religions. This strange remark reflects Steiner's claim that his teachings are not a religion. "True" Christianity, he taught, is Gnostic, it consists of secret knowledge. His teachings (Anthropo-sophy: human knowledge) embody the secrets. That is, he possessed true Christianity; churches do not possess it. "I also want you to understand what is really religious in the anthroposophical sense ... [R]eligion connected with a specific church is not actually religious.” [Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, Foundations of Waldorf Education (Anthroposophic Press, 1998) pp. 44-46.] In this sense, Anthroposophy is the one true religion. [69] Ibid., p. 30. [70] Ibid., p. 21. [71] http://www.rsarchive.org/Pictures/goet2pln.php The original Goetheanum had a similar cruciform layout. See, e.g., Rudolf Steiner, THE DRUIDS (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2001), p. 15. [72] For photos of the building’s spiritualistic accouterments and the ceremonial productions enacted in the auditorium, see GOETHEANUM: School of Spiritual Science (Philosophical-Anthroposophical Press, 1961). A pulpit/rostrum is shown on p. 19. The image of a goblin, inscribed in a red window, is priceless. Steiner taught that goblins really exist. Why is there no altar in the Goetheanum? Because most Anthroposophical priests work at invisible altars. Steiner said that Waldorf school teachers fill priestly offices: "The position of teacher becomes a kind of priestly office, a ritual performed at the altar of universal human life." [Rudolf Steiner, THE ESSENTIALS OF EDUCATION (Anthroposophic Press, 1997), p. 23.] The implication, by the way, is that Waldorf schools function as Anthroposophical churches — but perhaps we shouldn't push this point too hard. The Goetheanum is clearly a cathedral; Waldorf schools may be churches, in a sense, but only in a sense. [73] http://www.goetheanum.org/uploads/media/JB2002en_01.pdf. [74] Rudolf Steiner, ARCHITECTURE AS A SYNTHESIS OF THE ARTS, (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1999), pp. 96-97. [75] Ibid., p. 94. [76] Rudolf Steiner, THE SPIRITUAL HIERARCHIES AND THE PHYSICAL WORLD (Anthroposophic Press, 1996, p. 54. [77] Rudolf Steiner, “Cognition of the Christ Through Anthroposophy”, lecture delivered 15th April, 1922. http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/19220415p01.html [78] Rudolf Steiner, THE LORD’S PRAYER (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2007), p. 17. [79] ARCHITECTURE AS A SYNTHESIS OF THE ARTS, pp. 97-98. |