 The first sections of this page repeat material presented in "I Went to Waldorf" and "Unenlightened". (Originally, the various versions of my little memoir appeared on different websites, addressed to different audiences.) If you have read either of those pieces, you may want to skip ahead. THE WALDORF SCANDAL Golden School Daze I. Starting when I was seven years old, and continuing until I was eighteen, I attended an occultist school that was devoted to a heretical variant of Christianity. The curriculum was based on the teachings of Rudolf Steiner, a European mystic who, among other deplorable doctrines, taught that a worldwide racial apocalypse is historically necessary. My experiences at the school may seem dated, now — I attended from 1953 until 1964 — but increasing numbers of kids are being sent to such schools today, with potentially damaging consequences for them individually and also for our society as a whole. [1] I am writing with those students in mind. The past — especially my own small history — has value only if it can provide lessons for the future. I went to the Waldorf School in Garden City, New York. It was a lovely place, with caring teachers, and pleasant, carefully selected classmates. For the most part, I enjoyed my Waldorf years. The school was small: twenty or so students at each grade level. The ambiance was close and comfortable. The occult doctrines to which the school was devoted were rarely expressed openly; instead, they were conveyed to the students in covert, roundabout ways, in a process of gradual spiritualistic conditioning. The same process is followed at many Waldorf schools today.  As Rudolf Steiner would have wanted, our school projected an image of a nonsectarian, arts-intensive preparatory school with a progressive curriculum. This appearance undoubtedly led many parents to enroll their children without understanding what they were letting them in for. Even after enrollment, students and their 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 place. There was a pervasive but unspoken spiritualistic vibe in almost every lesson, in almost every activity. To one degree or another, it got to most students, sometimes deeply. It was in the air we breathed, it defined the tenor and subtext of our days. Our Waldorf was an unusual school, but it was not alone in its esoteric beliefs. Nearly 1000 similar schools are scattered around the world today. The first Waldorf school was established by Rudolf Steiner himself in 1919, in Germany: It was commissioned by the owner of the Waldorf-Astoria cigarette factory for the children of his employees. Other schools followed, at first slowly, then with increasing momentum. Many of these schools 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 these schools 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. II. The mystical core of the Waldorf school I attended 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 deferring to 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 to be 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 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] III. Here is a separate account of the scandal at my old school, written by an individual who says he was present. “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....” [5] 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.
IV. Let's put the scandal in context. 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 greatest 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 occult 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. 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 mankind’s spiritual nature. They almost always deny that their 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 nonsectarian [sic] and non-denominational [sic]. 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.” [6] 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. V. But the denial is false. Consider, for example, the morning prayer that Waldorf students recite in unison. Addressing the teachers at his first Waldorf school, Rudolf Steiner prescribed how each school day should begin. Notice that Steiner wanted to promote religious activities at the school while disguising them: “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.’” [7] Later, in a comment that clearly endorses some form of 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.” [8] Bear in mind that Steiner's Christianity is wildly heretical. For example, he said that Christ was the Sun God. (See my essay "Was he Christian?" here at Waldorf Watch.) One "verse" Steiner 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. [9] For a detailed analysis of this and another "verse" Steiner wrote for Waldorf students, see my essay "Prayers" here at Waldorf Watch. 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. [10] Anyone reading this brief historical record must, I think, begin to suspect that Waldorf schools have a religious purpose, despite their denials. 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.” [11] And here are Steiner's own words, spoken in private to Waldorf school 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." [12] There you have it: Waldorf schools push the religion of Anthroposophy, but they can't say so openly or their necks would be broken (as the neck of my old Waldorf school was almost broken). ◊◊◊◊ 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.
— Roger Rawlings
 [R.R., 2010.]
Some illustrations on each page are closely connected to the essay on that page; others are not — they provide general context. The school's original front door. The room on the right was my fourth-grade classroom; on the left, my fifth-grade classroom.  Above: THE story (1979). (For the full text, scroll down.) Below: THE yearbook (1964). O, alma mater...   [R.R., 2010.] Waldorf schools represent a worldview, Anthroposophy, that most people would surely consider weird. This apparent weirdness doesn't make Anthroposophy good or bad, right or wrong. But if you decide to associate yourself with a Waldorf school, you should understand what you are becoming involved in. Here is one example of the occultist thinking that underlies Waldorf schools. It isn't bad, it isn't good. But for better or worse, it is a sample of occultist thought: “Just as speech proceeds from out of the larynx, [and] the child from the womb, so the fully developed human being at about age 35 is born, as it were, from out of the cosmos ... the form of man, the complete human form, as a spoken word." [Rudolf Steiner, EURYTHMY AS VISIBLE SPEECH (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1955), p. 35.] Steiner meant that humans are the fulfillment of the "words" spoken by the gods. He taught that there are many, many gods. The swirling actions of the gods is a sort of dance. It is a dance of spiritual essences, divine thoughts, creative words. “We ask the divine powers which have existed from the beginning: How then did you create man in a similar way as the spoken word is created...?" [Ibid., p. 35.] As you can already see, when you begin to peel back the layers of Anthroposophy, you may discover surprises. The Waldorf worldview is polytheistic: Man was created not by God but by the words of many gods. Some people may find this an attractive idea, perhaps even a true idea. At Waldorf schools, it is accepted as revealed Truth. The gods' dance is reenacted in Waldorf schools through a form of interpretive movement called eurythmy. The stances and gestures in eurythmy are supposed to make visible the spiritual meaning behind spoken words — thus, they are supposed to convey and even create occult wisdom. Eurythmy is considered so important, so central to Waldorf's purpose, that all students are usually required to participate in it.
[R.R. sketch, 2010.] Here are details from windows at the Goetheanum, the worlwide Anthroposophical headquarters. The building is essentially a cathedral, the central spiritual center for Waldorf schools. The windows depict various Anthroposophical teachings. Even if you do not know Anthroposophy well you can see that Anthroposophy is a spiritualistic creed. It is the creed that suffuses Waldorf schooling.     [R.R., 2009.] If you visit a Waldorf school, you are likely to see some lovely art. It has occult meaning. Here is my copy of a portion of a mural on the walls of a Waldorf school.  [R.R., 2009, based on a mural painted by Walther Roggenkamp: see John Fletcher, ART INSPIRED BY RUDOLF STEINER (Mercury Arts Publications, 1987), p. 112. The original is lovelier than my copy.] Anthroposophy is an exceedingly complex body of teachings, describing what Steiner said is an exceedingly complex hierarchical structure of spiritual realms. Sometimes apparent contradictions in Steiner's works can be explained away as a necessary result of complexity — there are hidden, deep connections that rectify superficial conflicts. But sometimes this is not the case; sometimes we spot contradictions that seem to have no extenuation. Such instances reinforce the conclusion we may have already drawn from other evidence, that Steiner was perpetrating an exceedingly elaborate spiritual scam, trusting in elaborations and obfuscations to shield him from criticism. His followers, in any case, often find justification for their devotion in the sheer, stunning complexity of the vision Steiner presented for their awed acceptance. We do not need to follow their example. Steiner claimed that critical thought is destructive; the intellect, he said, kills. I'd like to assert the opposite. In dealing with Anthroposophy, critical intelligence is precisely what we need. It will not kill us; it might just save us. [R.R., 1990s.]  Entry to the high school wing of the Waldorf School in Garden City, New York, as depicted in the 1963 yearbook. [Juan Wilson.] Here is a message I posted late in August, 2011 at the Waldorf Critics discussion list [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/20823] The Waldorf school I attended — in Garden City, New York — was typical of Steiner schools in many ways, but it was dissimilar in some ways, too. The devotion to Rudolf Steiner was especially deep, but the effort to disguise the true nature or Waldorf education was especially strong. The school building was designed to look much like an ordinary US school (built of brick, long and low, boxy, rectilinear, with a big gym), and the faculty were extremely circumspect. As the headmaster, John Gardner, later wrote " ... I worked to gain understanding for [the school and its methods]. I minimized the difference between a Waldorf school and other schools." [John Fentress Gardner, "The Founding of Adelphi's Waldorf School," ONE MAN'S VISION: In Memoriam, H.A.W. Myrin (The Myrin Institute Inc., 1970), p. 48.] Appearances at our school were deceptive, and this produced a lot of confusion in students' hearts and minds. We students knew something odd was going on, but we couldn't be sure what it was. Anthroposophist Keith Francis, who became Faculty Chair at the Rudolf Steiner School in New York City, helps piece things together in his book, THE EDUCATION OF A WALDORF TEACHER (iUniverse, 2004). Francis confirms that a strong effort was made at the Garden City school to present a false face to the world. He refers to "the Garden City school, with its ... well-oiled financial machinery and its scrupulous attention to appearances." [p. 60.] He explains that the Garden City school operated in much the same manner as the Kimberton Farms School, a Waldorf school in Pennsylvania. The striking thing, he says, is that neither school looked Anthroposophical. Typically, Waldorf schools are built in accordance with Rudolf Steiner's architectural indications, which means incorporating organic, sinuous lines and planes while disavowing ordinary, rectangular shapes. "[T]he building at Garden City and the high school at Kimberton has been constructed specifically as Waldorf Schools, so why were they so unremittingly rectangular?" [p. 54.] Francis explains the situation at Kimberton in these words: "Kimberton is on what is known as the Main Line [a rail line from Philadelphia to New York City], and needed to earn its bread and butter by catering to upper middle class clients who would have been repelled by the appearance of anything 'weird.'" [p. 54.] So Kimberton wore a disguise, and the Garden City school did the same: "[T]he Garden City School was playing the same game as the Kimberton Farms School, but doing it a great deal more subtly and with a much more serious commitment to the anthroposophical foundations of Waldorf education." [p. 55.] Our school might have continued for a long time, possibly forever, as a successful, deeply disguised Anthroposophical front organization. But everything blew up when the headmaster changed his approach and decided to bring the spiritual mission of the school closer to the surface. The resulting upheaval made THE NEW YORK TIMES. Here is the article that appeared there. (I should add that this happened years after I graduated from the school. The TIMES article came as a revelation to me, helping to make sense of so many strange, confusing memories.)
 A teacher who was at Waldorf at the time of the scandal has given a somewhat different account, although it, too, centers on the decision to bring spirituality to the fore. "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).]* In the end, the Garden City school survived, but it truly went through a near-death experience. Many participants here have spoken of the deceit practiced at Waldorf or Steiner schools. Following Rudolf Steiner's own instructions, the faculties try to push Anthroposophy while denying what they are up to. Talking to teachers at the first Waldorf, Steiner instructed them: "As teachers in the Waldorf School, you will need to find your way more deeply into the insight of the spirit and to find a way of putting all compromises aside ... As Waldorf teachers, we must be true anthroposophists in the deepest sense of the word in our innermost feeling." [Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 495.] But he also told them to keep their mouths shut. "[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." [Ibid., p. 705.] For most Waldorf schools, the "moment" for hiding the truth about themselves has stretched from that day to this. Lying to families is bad enough. Luring children, through clandestine means, toward an occult system (Anthroposophy) is worse. If Waldorf schools were honest about their agenda, then families could make informed choices: Go to an Anthroposophical institution or not. But by lying about their purposes, Waldorf schools betray everyone — including themselves.
 When I entered the school, it was associated with Adelphi College. When Adelphi became a University, the prestige of attending Waldorf grew. But Adelphi cut its ties to the school after the scandal.
* Here is an extended version of the report by Lawrence Williams, Ed.D. Bear in mind that many other people, including myself, would describe the school and its leading figures quite differently.
 [NASA.] Despite it all, I dote on my childhood as much as the next guy — I still cherish fondness for my old friends and my vanished youth... The major difference is that I now see it all within the context of the real universe.  [R.R., 2010.] ENDNOTES I wrote the first version of this essay in 2006. It is now 2009. Some Internet sources have changed in the interim. [1] Garry Wills, a writer who affirms religious values, has expressed his concern about America's drift away from its core values: “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.” [“The Day the Enlightenment Went Out,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, Nov. 4, 2004, p. 25.] Wills was not writing about Waldorf schools but about worrisome trends in American society as a whole. The proliferation of Waldorf schools, I would argue, is one symptom of this general problem. The opposition to “Enlightenment values” is certainly pervasive in Waldorf education. [2] 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/ . [3] John T. McQuiston, “’Psychic’ Ex-Student’s Influence Shakes Waldorf School,” THE NEW YORK TIMES, Feb. 18, 1979, p. 48. Understandably, the official Waldorf School history, posted on the school’s Web site (http://www.waldorfgarden.org ), did not mention the scandal, the last time I checked. [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. [The last time I checked, the mission statement remained as it was when I first recorded it.] 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] Lawrence Williams, Ed.D., THE OAK MEADOW TRILOGY (Oak Meadow, Inc., 1997) — see http://www.oakmeadow.com. The last time I checked, access to this page seemed to be blocked. Lets hope any such blocks will soon be removed — full and free information about Waldorf schools should be our common objective. [6] http://www.awsna.org Frequently Asked Questions, Are Waldorf Schools Religious? [Since I first recorded this, the site appears to have been changed to "whywaldorfworks".] [7] Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 20. Throughout Waldorf Watch, 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. [8] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 38. Bear in mind that the "Christianity" at Waldorf schools is heretical. Steiner used various versions of the Lord's Prayer — generally gnostic versions that cannot be found in the Bible. See "Was He Christian" here at Waldorf Watch. [9] Ibid., p. 38. The “verse” I quote is also included in Steiner’s book, PRAYERS FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1995), pp. 44-45. [10] Ibid., p. 38, footnote 1. [11] ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION (MacMillan Reference, 2005), pp. 392-394. [12] FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 750. |
