Spiritually Safe Structures

When they can afford to do so, Anthroposophists build Waldorf schools and other Anthroposophical structures in a Steineresque style, employing organic forms and nonstandard doors and windows. If they cannot afford to erect entire buildings in this style, they often equip their buildings with fittings constructed according to Steiner's principles. They try to avoid right angles wherever possible (it is often not possible), and they are usually careful to avoid constructing peaked arches, which Steiner said are the mark of the arch-demon Ahriman.

“Anti-Christian influence is directly visible in Moorish architecture with its arches that run up into a point instead of being rounded. This is the mark of Ahriman. In architecture Ahriman worked as the Antichrist when he replaced rounded Romanesque arches with horseshoe and pointed arches.” — Rudolf Steiner, ARCHITECTURE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1999), p. 153.

Anthroposophical architecture is expensive and difficult to build, but Steiner's followers elect it when they can. Ideally, Waldorf schools embody forms that invoke the beneficent spiritual powers while deflecting the destructive efforts of demonic powers such as Ahriman. Below is a large Waldorf school in Germany:

Überlingen Waldorf School.

[See WALDORF EDUCATION,

by Christopher Clouder and Martyn Rawson

(Floris Books, 1998), p. 126;

I have added a purple tint.].

To investigate Ahriman and his wiles,

see "Ahriman".

If you become interested in the subject of demons,

as described by Steiner,

you might also look at "Lucifer" and "Evil Ones".

Ahriman: 

a bust attributed to Rudolf Steiner.

[Public domain image.]

Words of Fervor

To really grasp what goes on in Waldorf schools, it is necessary to become familiar with Anthroposophical terminology. Below is a statement in which Steiner tells Waldorf teachers to bring religious fervor into the classroom. 

The statement alludes to several Anthroposophical concepts. Let's review them quickly before handing the microphone to Steiner:

◊ "Astral bodies" and "etheric bodies" — these are invisible bodies that Anthroposophists believe children develop in addition to their physical bodies. 

◊ "Animal forms" — Steiner taught that animals evolved downward from us, we did not evolve upward from them. Animals are incomplete in themselves, each animal supplying just a single tone to the music of the spheres or the music of creation.

◊ "Musical understanding" — Steiner taught that human beings are the symphonic fulfillment of the creative words spoken by the gods. 

◊ The "world composer" — this is not God or Jehovah as usually understood, but the creative spirit that Steiner taught initiated evolution. 

◊ "Go beyond the intellectual view" — Anthroposophists believe that the brain and its operations, such as intellect, provide little or no real knowledge; real knowledge comes from clairvoyance. 

◊ "World mysteries" — Anthroposophists believe that real knowledge is occult, hidden, mysterious (and they believe that they possess such knowledge, whereas you and I do not).

◊ "Education must not come from accumulated knowledge" — Steiner and his followers reject most findings of science and modern scholarship; they think they find knowledge within themselves because of their clairvoyant powers; knowledge that is merely accumulated in the brain (memory) is "dead," they think.

There are more bits of Anthroposophical doctrine in the statement below, but what I have laid out here probably provides a sufficient introduction. The main point is that Steiner urges Waldorf teachers to operate as priests, with religious fervor, bringing into the classroom the "streaming down from above" that is the beneficence of the gods. (Remember quotations we saw at the top of this page: "The position of teacher becomes a kind of priestly office." And "[W]e are, in a certain sense, the means by which that streaming down from above will go out into the world.”)

Okay. Here is Steiner reiterating the religious nature of Waldorf schooling:

“[W]hen we determine humankind's relationship to the animal kingdom through observation, we find the relationship between the astral body and the outer world. We must apply a musical understanding to the astral body. I gaze into the human being, and out toward the myriad animal forms. It’s as if we were to take a symphony where all the tones sound together in a wonderful, harmonious, and melodious whole and, over the course of time, separated each tone from the others and juxtaposed them. 

“As we look out into the animal world, we have the single tones. As we look into the human astral body and what it builds in the physical and etheric bodies, we have the symphony. If we go beyond an intellectual view of the world and have enough cognitive freedom to rise to artistic knowledge, we develop an inner reverence, permeated with religious fervor, for the invisible being — the marvelous world composer — who first arranged the tones in the various animal forms, and then created the human being as a symphony of the phenomena of animal nature. This is what we must carry in our souls as teachers. If I understand my relationship to the world in this way, a true enthusiasm in the presence of world creation and world formation will flow into my descriptions of the animal forms. Every word and gesture in my teaching as a whole will be permeated by religious fervor — not just abstract concepts and natural laws. 

“Such things show us that instruction and education must not come from accumulated knowledge, which is then applied, but from a living abundance. A teacher comes into the class with the fullness of this abundance, and when dealing with children, it’s as though they found before them a voice for the world mysteries pulsating and streaming through the teacher, as though merely an instrument through which the world speaks to the child.” — Rudolf Steiner, THE ESSENTIALS OF EDUCATION (Anthroposophic Press, 1997), pp. 64-65.

The main thing true-believing Waldorf teachers bring into the classroom is themselves; they offer themselves to the students as models of incarnated consummation (they carry the symphony of creation in their souls; they overflow with "a living abundance;" they are instruments "through which the world [i.e., Creation, the universe] speaks"). They bring not knowledge or information as such (mere "accumulated knowledge") but their own occult empowerment. They stand as living embodiments of Truth (which, for Steiner's followers, means Anthroposophy). Children fortunate enough to be taught by a true-believing Anthroposophical Waldorf teacher find "before them a voice for the world mysteries pulsating and streaming through the teacher."

The teacher as an individual virtually vanishes; the teacher becomes "an instrument through which the world speaks to the child.” The voice of the teacher becomes, in effect, the voice of the cosmos. The teacher stands in the classroom, then, as the representative of "the marvelous world composer."

Religious fervor fills the room, and instead of ordinary instruction, the purpose becomes religious inculcation.

The Fundamental Flaw:

Clairvoyance

The Waldorf system depends on clairvoyance. A leading Waldorf educator, Eugene Schwartz, has written the following: 

“Must teachers be clairvoyant in order to be certain that they are teaching in the proper way? ... The teacher's faculty [of clairvoyance] must be cultivated and brought to a stage of conscious awareness on the part of the teacher.” [1]

Other prominent Waldorf teachers have made similar statements. So, for instance, a widely published British Waldorf teacher said the following:

“[Acquiring] spiritual perception [i.e., clairvoyance]...is the...path that should be followed by every teacher who takes his vocation seriously.” [2] 

Such statements are consistent with Rudolf Steiner's own remarks, indicating that all Waldorf teachers should either possess the power of clairvoyance or they should accept the results of clairvoyant investigation ("spiritual-scientific research") into such critical subjects as human nature:

"Not every Waldorf teacher has the gift of clairvoyance, but every one of them has accepted wholeheartedly and with full understanding the results of spiritual-scientific investigation concerning the human being." [3]

Steiner ascribed great importance to clairvoyance:

◊ “Clairvoyance is the necessary pre-requisite for the discovery of a spiritual truth....” [4]

◊ “[E]xact clairvoyance...is in effect an imperative requirement of our age. Clairvoyance, which is the basis of the modern science of initiation, has always existed.” [5]

◊ “Along with exact clairvoyance, you must also achieve something I refer to as ideal magic.” [6]

The problem all this creates for the Waldorf movement is enormous. Clairvoyance is a delusion; it does not exist. [See “Clairvoyance”.] Thus, Waldorf schooling depends on a power that is a mirage, a chimera, a pipe dream. Or, to put this more plainly, there is no basis for the Waldorf approach. Waldorf depends on clairvoyance, which does not exist.

For more on these matters, see, e.g., "Exactly",

"The Waldorf Teacher's Consciousness", and "Magic". 

Footnotes for "The Fundamental Flaw"

[1] Eugene Schwartz, WALDORF EDUCATION: Schools for the Twenty-First Century (Xlibris Corporation, 2000), p. 17. 

[2] Roy Wilkinson, THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1996), p. 115. 

[3] Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY,  Vol. 2 (Anthroposophic Press, 1995), pp. 224-225.

Non-clairvoyant Waldorf teachers may receive "the results of spiritual-scientific investigation" by reading Steiner, who claimed to be highly clairvoyant. [See “Exactly”.] Or they may accept guidance from colleagues —  fellow Waldorf teachers — who claim to be clairvoyant. (Steiner said that not all Waldorf teachers are clairvoyant, but he thereby idicated that some Waldorf teachers are clairvoyant.)

[4] Rudolf Steiner, THEOSOPHY OF THE ROSICRUCIAN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1966), lecture 1, GA 99. 

[5] Rudolf Steiner, RUDOLF STEINER SPEAKS TO THE BRITISH (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1998), p. 27.

[6] Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 2 (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 18. 

Here is a more complete version, and an extension: 

“Along with exact clairvoyance, you must also achieve something I refer to as ideal magic. This is a kind of magic that must be differentiated from the false magic practiced externally, and associated with many charlatans ... If, however, people want to enter the spiritual world — in other words, want to attain ideal magic — they must not only intensify inner thinking so that the recognize the second level of existence, but they must also free their will from its connection to the physical body.” — Rudolf Steiner, WALDORF EDUCATION AND ANTHROPOSOPHY, Vol. 2 (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), pp. 18-19. 

Here, as usual, Steiner says that a certain mystical phenomenon — in this instance, magic — really exists, and he can tell us about it, but we must not confuse it with the false forms ("false magic") that can be found in other quarters. [See "Magic".]

“If while on Earth you are receptive to the illumination that comes from Spiritual Science [i.e., Anthroposophy], then you are truly helping on the leadership of [the Archangel] Michael ... [T]his is the true ‘ideal magic’. It is the true ‘white magic’ as it was called in olden times....” — Rudolf Steiner, MAN’S LIFE ON EARTH AND IN THE SPIRITUAL WORLDS (Health Research, 1960), lecture 6, GA 218. 

Steiner taught that the archangel Michael has spiritual authority over own historical period. [See "Michael".] An important goal for Steiner's followers, Anthroposophists, is to help Michael in his work. ("Anthroposophy is also called the School of Michael." — Waldorf teacher Henk van Oort, ANTHROPOSOPHY A-Z (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2011), p. 78.)

How To

Anthroposophists aspire to be wonderfully, powerfully clairvoyant, like Steiner claimed to be. Primarily, they pursue this goal by performing spiritual meditations and exercises prescribed by Steiner, especially those given in the book KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT. This is the how-to guide of the Anthroposophical movement, the chief text in which Steiner told his followers how to "do" Anthroposophy. Attaining clairvoyance like Steiner's will enable them to know the hidden spiritual worlds, or so Anthroposophists believe.

 [SteinerBooks, 2006.]

Here's something to cogitate about, perhaps. Rudolf Steiner published KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT in 1904 — more than a century ago. Many people have read it and tried to the follow the directions given in it, directions on how to become clairvoyant. Now, ask yourself: Why isn't the world today aswarm with people who are clearly, demonstrably clairvoyant?

It's puzzling, no?

No.

But bear in mind that when you step inside a Waldorf school, you will likley meet individuals who (probably secretly) believe they are clairvoyant. So here's a second question we all need to address: Do you want such people to educate your children?

To explore the contents of 

KNOWLEDGE OF THE HIGHER WORLDS AND ITS ATTAINMENT,

see "Knowing the Worlds".

Truth

We should return to the matter I alluded to in the section "To Tell or Not to Tell", previously. The matter I have in mind is something called telling the truth.

Anthroposophists — including Waldorf teachers — often conceal their real purposes and practices. They do this for what they think is an excellent reason. A crucial doctrine of Anthroposophy is that the deepest wisdom is "mystery" wisdom — it is occult, hidden. Only initiates should have access to the "truths" of mystery wisdom; the rest of us are unequipped to handle it. [See "Inside Scoop".] Thus, Anthroposophists think they are acting properly when they withhold certain kinds of information from outsiders. 

Even when dealing with "truth" that stands at a lower level than "mystery wisdom," Anthroposophists often want to withhold it. Steiner explicitly instructed Waldorf teachers to keep the general public in the dark, as when he said this:

"We should be quiet about how we handle things in the school, we should maintain a kind of school confidentiality. We should not speak to people outside the school...." — FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 10.

A more dramatic — and shocking — example: 

"Imagine what people would say if they heard that we say there are people who are not human beings [i.e., some people are subhuman] ... [W]e do not want to shout that to the world. Our opposition is already large enough ... We do not want to shout such things out into the world.” — FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 650. 

So Waldorf faculties often want to keep mum about various matters. We may see the results as dishonesty; Waldorf teachers generally see it very differently. True-believing Waldorf teachers think they are serving the Truth — that is, Anthroposophy — in all of their actions, and thus they typically deem their actions virtuous. They may even believe some of the denials and claims that they regularly make. They may believe that, truly, Anthroposophy is not a religion; and, truly, Waldorf schools do not promote Anthroposophy; and, truly, Waldorf schools foster freedom. They would be mistaken in all of this, but they would consider their views both honest and truthful. 

The mistakes Anthroposophists are prone to are not minor matters; they are not tangential. These mistakes arise from the core of Anthroposophy. Becoming an Anthroposophist requires you to detach from the truth — the real universe — and enter a fantasy realm instead. From within that fantasy realm, perception is generally quite blurred. For this reason, the ultimate victims of Anthroposophy's distortion of reality are Anthroposophists themselves — they convince themselves that what is false (Anthroposophy) is true, and what is true (verifiable objective knowledge) is false. Self-deception is central to Anthroposophy. [See "Fooling (Ourselves)", "Deception", and "Why? (Oh Why? Oh Why?)".]

Anthroposophists may be well-intentioned, caring, compassionate people who are entirely sincere in all that they undertake. The Anthroposophists who serve on Waldorf faculties may be especially well-intentioned, caring, and compassionate. But none of this excuses what Waldorf teachers do to youngsters. An informed adult may make a conscious decision to join a cult. But children are in no position to make such a choice, and Waldorf schools do not present them with such a choice. Instead, Waldorf schools immerse children in an Anthroposophical atmosphere, persistently and intensively. When this immersion lasts long enough, the ultimate result — whether or not all Waldorf teachers consciously recognize this — is to pull children toward Anthroposophical occultism. This is what Waldorf schools are set up to do; this is the outcome Waldorf schools are designed to achieve, whether or not all Waldorf teachers consciously recognize this.

Teaching the Kids Prayers

Q. If Anthroposophy is a religion, where are its churches? 

A. Virtually every Anthroposophic structure is, in effect, a church — including each Waldorf school. 

Here is Rudolf Steiner speaking to teachers at the first Waldorf school: 

“Let us think of a prayer. The children should, when asked to learn a prayer, be urged to be in a mood of devotion. It is up to us to see to this. We must almost feel a horror if we teach the children a prayer without first establishing this mood of reverence or devotion. And they should never say a prayer without this mood.” — Rudolf Steiner, EDUCATION FOR ADOLESCENTS - Eight Lectures Given to the Teachers of the Stuttgart Waldorf School (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 69.

Why do Waldorf teachers teach children prayers? Because they deem themselves to serve as priests.* And Waldorf schools thus become, in effect, churches — places of devotion, reverence, and worship.

◊

See "Schools as Churches"

and

"Prayers".

◊

* Steiner often said that Waldorf teachers are, in effect, priests. So, for instance:

"The position of teacher becomes a kind of priestly office, a ritual performed at the altar of universal human life ... Our task is to ferry into earthly life the aspect of the child that came from the divine spiritual world." — Rudolf Steiner, THE ESSENTIALS OF EDUCATION, p. 23.

And what religion is practiced in Waldorf churches by Waldorf priests? Anthroposophy. 

"[T]he Anthroposophical Society...provides religious instruction just as other religious groups do." — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, p. 706.

On Deception

“Waldorf education takes a spiritual view of what it means to be a human being, and is grounded in a path of personal development called anthroposophy, developed by Rudolf Steiner. We do not see ourselves as a religious school, however, and students are not taught any particular religious or spiritual doctrine.” — Washington Waldorf School, "WWS at a Glance", downloaded February 19, 2011.

When Waldorf faculties make such statements, they may be telling the truth — as they understand it. On other occasions, when saying things of this sort, they may be quite consciously trying to mislead the public. But let’s be charitable and assume that most such statements by Waldorf schools are sincere. Where does this leave us?

Statements of this sort arise from a number of factors. For starters, Anthroposophists almost always deny that Anthroposophy is a religion. This denial is untrue, but it provides the essential first line of defense for Waldorf schools. If Anthroposophy is not a religion, then Waldorf schools are not religious institutions even if they teach Anthroposophical doctrines to the students. But Anthroposophy actually is a religion [see “Is Anthroposophy a Religion?”], so this line of defense fails.

The second level of the Waldorf defense — often invoked sincerely — is that the schools do not teach Anthroposophy to the kids, so therefore the schools do not function as not religious institutions even if Anthroposophy itself is a religion. But this denial, too, is flawed. Many Anthroposophical doctrines do indeed get imparted to Waldorf students [see "Sneaking It In"]. Generally this occurs through an indirect process of suggestion and implication, rather than through direct instruction — but it happens. If you were to observe this Waldorf class or that Waldorf class, on this day or that, you might detect little religious or esoteric content. But gradually, over time, such content makes itself felt among the students. The atmosphere in a Waldorf school is usually redolent with religious feeling, and the school year is punctuated by the celebration of religious festivals [see “Magical Arts”]. The schools may not openly profess their faith, but they enact it, and this certainly has an effect on most students, especially those who attend the schools for many years [see “Spiritual Agenda” — especially the section titled "We Don't Teach It"].

One more point needs to be made. Many students' parents and even junior Waldorf teachers are quite unaware of the religious nature of Waldorf schooling, at least initially. Thus, they may accept the prayers recited by Waldorf students as pretty “verses,” nothing more [see "Prayers"], and they may consider the celebration of festivals such as Michaelmas to be merely quaint seasonal festivities. But if so, they are fooling themselves. The inner circle within most Waldorf faculties is aware that virtually everything that happens at a Waldorf school has occult, spiritual significance. When Waldorf representatives deny this, we should not be taken in [see “Soul School”]. The deception and, indeed, self-deception practiced in Waldorf schools should not cloud our eyes.

Remember the summary statement given by the founder of Waldorf education. 

"It is possible to introduce a religious element into every subject, even into math lessons. Anyone who has some knowledge of Waldorf teaching will know that this statement is true." — Rudolf Steiner, THE CHILD's CHANGING CONSCIOUSNESS AS THE BASIS OF PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICE (Anthroposophic Press, 1996), p. 94.

[R.S. by R.R.]

Guru

Rudolf Steiner is, in several senses, an invented, mythic figure. Steiner invented this figure himself, portraying himself as a towering, clairvoyant, spiritual savant. And his followers have enlarged this already-imposing, stupendous caricature. Rudolf the man has disappeared behind multiple veils of myth-making and hagiography. Steiner, we are now told, is the greatest of all spiritual masters, the wisest of gurus, the most profound of philosophers, the most far-seeing of geniuses, the most polymorphous of polymaths.

Despite all the claims made for Steiner by his acolytes, he is virtually unknown to the wide world beyond the narrow bounds of Anthroposophy.

"If, as his followers claim, Rudolf Steiner is a genius in twelve fields, why do we not come across his name in colleges, in scholarly writings, and in the popular press? Experts in each of the fields in which he worked — including history, philosophy, science, art, social sciences, education, and Gospel commentary — seem equally unaware of his work ... Steiner's contributions in these fields have not been rejected so much as ignored ... As interesting as the results of Steiner's clairvoyance may be...it is the clairvoyance itself which accounts for the significance and neglect of his teachings and works. For many observers, the idea of someone tracking souls, reporting on Atlantis and on the historical function of spiritual beings such as Lucifer, Ahriman, and The Archangel Michael, tends to cast a suspicious shadow over [Steiner's contributions]." — Robert A. McDermott, THE ESSENTIAL STEINER (Lindisfarne Books, Anthroposophic Press, 2007), pp. 1-5.

Rudolf Steiner the man is largely unknown now. For most people, he is hidden behind a suspicious shadow. For his followers, he is hidden behind a brilliant, coruscating aura, a polychromatic searchlight-beam of transcendent brilliance.

For historians, determining who Steiner really was — as a man, as an individual human being — is important. But for the rest of us, perhaps this is not such an urgent matter. Especially if we are primarily interested in Waldorf education, then the mythic figure has far more relevance than the deceased individual behind the myth. The "Steiner" in Steiner education — the phantasmal presence who presides within the precincts of Waldorf (or Steiner) schools — sorts down to the accumulated store of occult preachments that provide direction for the Waldorf movement.

But even here we face a dilemma. Many of Steiner's pronouncements are of dubious provenance. Many of the books ascribed to Steiner — including the books dealing most directly with Waldorf education — consist of transcripts of Steiner's lectures, conversations, meetings, and even casual remarks. Steiner's devout followers, determined to preserve every scrap of wisdom proceeding from their great guide, made and preserved these transcrips. But are these records of Steiner's words entirely accurate? Almost certainly not. Are they mostly accurate? Possibly. Probably. The very fervor of the faithful who flocked around Steiner gives us something like a guarantee: The goal was to record Steiner's wisdom, not to distort it. Probably. (But we can't always be sure.)

So "Rudolf Steiner" is a phantom, now; he is an idea; he is, for his disciples, an ideal. We can't see him as clearly as we might wish. We can't even know, with complete assurance, what he said on various occasions, or meant to say, or was heard to say. When we read books that Steiner himself wrote and approved for publication, we can be pretty sure that we know what the man meant. But otherwise, when we read other books and articles and snippets (reminiscences by his followers, analyses or defenses or criticisms by followers and by opponents), then the man and his message get troublingly misty.

This is the "Rudolf Steiner" we will deal with here at Waldorf Watch: a man who actually lived, but who is now wrapped in shadows and resplendences. A mythic figure. An oracle. Virtually a demigod (to his followers, anyway — including many Waldorf teachers). Arguably, this is the only "Rudolf Steiner" who really counts anymore, in Waldorf circles. This is the mighty silhouette looming over Waldorf schools (Steiner schools). This is the radiant master standing at the focal point of Anthroposophical reverence. He is the Waldorf / Anthroposophical guru. And Anthroposophists today tend to embrace the words of their guru as virtual gospel, even if they do not always understand Steiner's meaning with complete clarity. [See "Guru".] 

The "Rudolf Steiner" we need to try to understand — remember, he is the founder or Waldorf education — is the "Rudolf Steiner" who stands towering at the center of the Anthroposophical / Waldorf cosmos. 

Don't Be Misled

Waldorf schools are spreading far and wide.

But so is misinformation about them.

The following items are from the Waldorf Watch "news" page.

The first item is an excerpt from a newspaper story 

about a Waldorf school in California, USA.

The story appeared in a Malaysian newspaper.

1.

The Actual Essence 

From The Borneo Post:

[O]ne school in the United State’s Silicon Valley is actually taking a step back and barring computers and the Internet from its classrooms. The Waldorf School of the Peninsula does not lack in funds, nor is it a low performing school ... The Waldorf School subscribes to a teaching philosophy focused on physical activity and learning through creative, hands-on tasks ... A teacher at the Waldorf school, who was formerly a computer engineer, teaches fractions by having the students cut up food. 

[10-30-2011   http://www.theborneopost.com/2011/10/30/old-school-new-school/]

◊

Waldorf Watch Response:

News reports about Waldorf schools are often deeply misleading. Waldorf schools are superficially attractive — they are often physically appealing; they tend to be filled with colorful artworks; they generally exude a welcoming, low-key ambience. When news reports stay on this superficial level, they make Waldorf schools seem far better than they really are.

What reporters often fail to include is any detailed examination of Anthroposophy, the belief system on which Waldorf is founded. But by omitting Anthroposophy from their accounts, these reporters fail to confront the essential nature of Waldorf education.

Here's how the founder of Waldorf education, Rudolf Steiner, once described the importance of Anthroposophy for Waldorf schools:

“If...we are asked what the basis of a new method of education should be, our answer is: Anthroposophy must be that basis. But how many people there are, even in our own circles, who try to disclaim Anthroposophy as much as possible, and to propagate an education without letting it be known that Anthroposophy is behind it." — Rudolf Steiner, THE KINGDOM OF CHILDHOOD (SteinerBooks, 1995), p. 4.

On another occasion, Steiner asserted the Anthroposophy will almost always be present in Waldorf instruction:

"We certainly may not go to the other extreme, where people say that anthroposophy may not be brought into the school. Anthroposophy will be in the school when it is objectively justified, that is, when it is called for by the material itself.” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 495.

As for what this means in practice, there are various ways to put it, but they boil down to affirming the mystic doctrines of Anthroposophy. As a brief refresher, let's look again at a few relevant statements by Steiner's followers, including Waldorf teachers: 

◊ “[Waldorf] education is essentially grounded on the recognition of the child as a spiritual being, with a varying number of incarnations behind him, who is returning at birth into the physical world ... Teachers too will know that it is their task to help the child to make use of his body, to help his soul-spiritual forces to find expression through it, rather than regarding it as their duty to cram him with information....” — Anthroposophist Stewart C. Easton, MAN AND WORLD IN THE LIGHT OF ANTHROPOSOPHY (Anthroposophic Press, 1989), pp. 388-389.*

◊ “Waldorf education strives to create a place in which the highest beings [i.e., gods], including the Christ, can find their home....” — Waldorf teacher Joan Almon, WHAT IS A WALDORF KINDERGARTEN? (SteinerBooks, 2007), p. 53. 

◊ “Waldorf education is based upon the recognition that the four bodies of the human being [the physical, etheric, astral, and ego bodies] develop and mature at different times.” — Waldorf teacher Roberto Trostli, RHYTHMS OF LEARNING: What Waldorf Education Offers Children, Parents & Teachers (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 4. 

◊ “[T]he purpose of [Waldorf] education is to help the individual fulfill his karma.” — Waldorf teacher Roy Wilkinson, THE SPIRITUAL BASIS OF STEINER EDUCATION (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1996), p. 52. 

* Cramming kids with information — that is, teaching them things — is indeed low on the list of Waldorf priorities. Look at what Easton's colleagues identify as Waldorf goals in the passages quoted here. 

◊

The article from The Borneo Post is one of a large array of similar articles, published in newspapers around the world, that have implicitly praised Waldorf schools for downplaying computers and the Internet. [For more such articles, see the entry for "computers" in the Waldorf Watch Annex Index.]

There are good reasons to limit the amount of time children spend staring into computer screens. But to understand the Waldorf aversion to computers and the Internet, we need to dig into Anthroposophy.

Rudolf Steiner taught that modern technology can cause demons to incarnate on Earth. Even relatively simple technological devices, such as steam engines, can create this danger, he said:

“When we build steam-engines, we provide the opportunity for the incarnation of demons ... In the steam-engine, Ahrimanic demons are actually brought to the point of physical embodiment.” — Rudolf Steiner, “The Relation of Man to the Hierarchies” (ANTHROPOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT, Vol. V, Nos. 14-15, 1928). 

Steiner's followers generally take such warnings to heart. So, for instance, the Rudolf Steiner College Press has published a booklet entitled THE COMPUTER AND THE INCARNATION OF AHRIMAN, by David B. Black, an Anthroposophist. Along the same lines, a different Anthroposophist has written this:

"[T]he whole computer- and Internet industry is today the most effective way to prepare for the imminent incarnation of Ahriman ... The net of ahrimanic spider beings developing out of the internet around the earth...will serve [Ahriman] particularly effectively and offer him extremely favourable potential to work.” — Anthroposophist Sergei Prokofieff, "The Being of the Internet". [See "Spiders, Dragons and Foxes".]

Unless you share Anthroposophists' dread of Ahriman, you might well find that Waldorf schools — despite their superficial attractions — are wrong for you and your family.

2.

Compared to Regular Schools 

From the Charlotte Observer:

One morning near the end of my trip to Beijing last month, I picked up a copy of the China Daily to find this headline, "Schools that educate the whole child." It was the story of a new style of schooling that's becoming popular in China — schools that, according to the article, "emphasize interdisciplinary learning, creative thinking, and aims to develop a child into a free-spirited, morally responsible and integrated individual."

The schools, called Waldorf Schools, were based on principles developed by Austrian philosopher Rudolf Steiner. But to most Americans, they would look a lot like many U.S. public schools. 

[7-15-2011   http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/07/15/2454983/from-asia-to-america-on-education.html]

◊

Waldorf Watch Response:

Don't believe everything you read. Some reporters and columnists write about Waldorf schools without possessing any real knowledge of them. And others write with the intention of misleading readers about the occult basis of Waldorf schooling. [See "Secrets" and "Occultism".]

A Waldorf school would resemble a typical American public school only if 

     ◊ public schools in America began each day by having students recite, in unison, prayers written by Rudolf Steiner [see "Prayers"]

     ◊ the purpose of the lower grades in public schools in America was to slow down the development of young children [see "Thinking Cap"]

     ◊ the purpose of most grades in public schools was to help students incarnate their invisible bodies [see "Incarnation"]

     ◊ teachers in public schools considered the "whole child" to have invisible bodies, twelve senses, both a spirit and a soul, a karma, an astrological identity, etc. [see "Holistic Education"]

     ◊ public schools downplayed logical thought in favor of preliminary forms of clairvoyance [see "Steiner's 'Science'" and "Steiner's Specific"]

     ◊ teachers in public schools sometimes used clairvoyance, astrology, and dreams to guide their work [see "The Waldorf Teacher' Consciousness", "Horoscopes", and "Dreams"]

     ◊ teachers in public schools considered computers to be conveyances of the demon Ahriman [see "Spiders, Dragons and Foxes"]

     ◊ festivals having esoteric meaning were periodically staged in public schools [see "Magical Arts"]

     ◊ public schools' conception of freedom was distinctly Germanic and restrictive [see "Freedom"]

     ◊ teachers in public schools tried to help the kids fulfill their karmas [see "Slaps"]

     ◊ public schools divided students according to the four classical temperaments [see "Temperaments"]

     ◊ students in public schools were taught knitting in order to improve their teeth [see "Waldorf Wisdom"]

If, if, if... 

Actually, any resemblance between Waldorf schools and public schools is considerably less than skin-deep.

As for the "popularity" of Waldorf schools in China: Anthroposophists seek to plant Waldorf schools in all countries, in order to spread Anthroposophy. But so far there are very few Waldorf schools in China, and the number of students in them is miniscule compared to other forms of education. (And it will be interesting to see what the Chinese authorities do when the religious nature of Waldorf education becomes clear to them. [See "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?"])

3.

Here is an editorial from the news page,

posted several years after the items above:

August 5, 2020

◊ EDITORIAL◊

IMAGINING WALDORF 

FREED  OF  STEINER 

The Association of Waldorf Schools in North America (AWSNA) seems to have taken a small step toward cutting its bonds with Waldorf founder Rudolf Steiner. At least, AWSNA has issued a statement disassociating itself from any racist statements Steiner may have made [1].

Devout disciples of Steiner — a cohort that includes many leaders of Waldorf schools — generally look on Steiner as a nearly infallible sage [2]. For them, it is nearly unthinkable that Steiner could have been wrong about any important subject. Even entertaining such a possibility would, for them, open terrible prospects. If Steiner was wrong about one subject, perhaps he was wrong about other subjects, too. And in that case, the entire edifice of Anthroposophy — the spiritual system at the heart of the Waldorf movement — might come apart. For Steiner's followers, this would be a catastrophe. Their entire worldview, the teachings that give their lives meaning, could crumble to dust.

Outsiders are often surprised to learn what Steiner's followers believe. Here are a few examples, assertions Steiner made that his followers generally embrace as truth. Steiner claimed to be clairvoyant [3], and he said he could teach his followers to develop their own clairvoyant capacities [4]. Steiner claimed that, due to his extremely high clairvoyant powers, he was able to probe the "higher worlds" above earthly existence [5]. He likewise claimed that he could divine much of the occult lore of the nine ranks of gods who control the operations of the cosmos [6]. Then, too, he said he could peer behind the veil of nature to understand the "nature spirits" — such as gnomes and undines — who dwell there [7]. He could explain the workings of karma [8] and reincarnation [9]. He could trace human evolution from its beginning in Old Saturn [10] to its future magnificence in Future Vulcan [11]. And so on [12].

If Steiner was wrong about the human races, could he possibly have been wrong about some of these other matters? Or could he even (oh no!) have been wrong about all of them? What, in short, if Anthroposophy is poppycock? Whither Waldorf then?

Of course, not all Waldorf schools in existence today are run by dyed-in-the-wool, true-believing Anthroposophists. Not all Waldorf teachers embrace Steiner's occult beliefs. Some Waldorf schools already function without relying absolutely on the guidance provided by Rudolf Steiner [13]. So it is possible (just barely) to image that the Waldorf movement could remain viable even if Waldorf leaders were someday to utterly renounce Steiner and all his works. (Don't hold your breath. Such a renunciation is not in the cards yet, and it may never be. But we can contemplate it, at least as a thought experiment.)

Would Waldorf education, wholly cleansed of Steiner's mysticism, be successful? Would Steiner-free Waldorf schools provide a good education?

The single greatest problem with Waldorf schools is that they tend to indoctrinate students in a soft form of Anthroposophy [14]. Indeed, luring kids toward Anthroposophy is the underlying raison d'être of the Waldorf movement [15]. Clearly, if Anthroposophy were wholly removed from Waldorf schools, then this problem would be resolved.

Mostly.

But an aftereffect of this problem would likely remain. Much of the Waldorf approach relies on hazy, feel-good methods [16]. These methods are attractive, even alluring. They may be intuitively appealing to many parents, especially those with spirit-tinged countercultural leanings. But these methods are based more on wishfulness than actual knowledge of psychology, child development, or educational principles. In the ethereal Waldorf view, children are pure, innocent spirits newly arrived from the great beyond. Childhood is thought to be a sort of golden interlude between a spiritual prenatal existence and pragmatic, earthly adulthood. Kids should be given plenty of free time for unstructured play. They should be raised in a warm, hazy atmosphere of art and imagination and myth. They should be shielded from the hurly-burly modern world with its whiz-bang technologies and whirring, flashing gadgetry. Children should be relieved of the need to master academic subjects or to begin absorbing the findings of modern science and scholarship. Even the study of reading, writing, and basic arithmetic should be postponed. Children should be cosseted, swaddled in soothing fantasies, and infantilized [17].

The Waldorf vision of childhood may feel right to many people, but whether it is right is a different matter. Waldorf teachers rarely consult the latest research about childhood education; they are rarely even aware of it [18]. Instead, they follow a pattern of schooling set down by a mystic (who was not a professional educator) a century ago. This pattern arguably served children badly from its inception, and it almost certainly serves them worse now, in the twenty-first century. Are children raised in the Waldorf way likely to be prepared for real life in the real world? Are they likely to be ready to begin real schooling, if for any reason this became expected of them? Or are they instead starting down a path leading, at least potentially, toward woolly mysticism and otherworldly impracticality? Even those of us who share some Waldorf values (respect for nature, for instance, and love of art, and a deep concern for child welfare) have good reason to worry about the effects Waldorf schools have on their students [19].

The problems with Waldorf schooling would certainly be alleviated if Steiner and Anthroposophy were wholly eliminated from Waldorf culture. Perhaps some Waldorf schools would then migrate toward the mainstream until they became essentially indistinguishable from other mildly "alternative" forms of education — arts-intensive charter schools, say. But what this means, really, is that Waldorf schools might become more or less okay if they ceased to be Waldorf schools.

And we should bring this discussion back into the realm of probability. Steiner and his doctrines are so fundamental to Waldorf schooling that in all probability they will remain present, to some degree, as long as Waldorf education exists as an identifiable movement. And this means that the otherworldly miasma within Waldorf walls will retain its Anthroposophical hues. Waldorf will remain a process that eases kids (and perhaps their parents) toward the occult faith promulgated by Rudolf Steiner.

The single greatest problem with Waldorf schools will probably remain the single greatest problem with Waldorf schools.

— Roger Rawlings

◊

Footnotes for this Editorial

[1] See "Stepping Away from Steiner?", July 26, 2020.

[2] See "Guru".

[3] See "Exactly".

[4] See "Knowing the Worlds".

[5] See "Higher Worlds".

[6] See "Polytheism".

[7] See "Neutered Nature".

[8] See "Karma".

[9] See "Reincarnation".

[10] See "Old Saturn".

[11] See "Future Stages".

[12] For an overview of Anthroposophical doctrines, see "Everything". Also see "Waldorf Wisdom".

Waldorf students are rarely taught these doctrines in so many words, but they are nudged toward receptivity to such ideas, for instance in the myths they study [see "The Gods"] and the prayers they are required to recite [see "Prayers"].

[13] See "Non-Waldorf Waldorfs".

[14] See "Indoctrination".

[15] See "Here's the Answer".

[16] See "Methods".

The techniques used in Waldorf schooling are based on Anthroposophical beliefs, such as belief in the incarnation of the so-called etheric body at age seven. [See "etheric body" in the The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.] If Anthroposophy were removed, the ideological justification for these techniques would melt away. Whether the techniques could be justified on other grounds is, at best, moot.

[17] See, e.g., "childhood" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia. Also see such pages as "Thinking Cap", "Incarnation", "Glory", "The Waldorf Curriculum", "Academic Standards at Waldorf", and "Play - Isn't Slow Learning Best?"

Children certainly should be protected and treated gently. But we may inflict great harm on kids, inadvertantly, even while we try to be kind. The purpose of genuine education is to help children learn to apprehend, and function in, reality. Some types of schools provide such education, to one degree or another. But other sorts of schools veer away, inculcating children with false beliefs and fallacious doctrines. Waldorf schools tend to make this error, working in service to mystical fantasies rather than providing clear, rational descriptions of reality. Children love make-believe and fantasy, and satisfying their desire for these is fine — up to a point. But we should not lead children into labyrinths of mysticism from which they may not be able to escape. The fantasies promoted in Waldorf schools tend to be reiterated and elaborated year by year until they become a full worldview: the dreamscape of Anthroposophy. Hypothetical Steiner-free Waldorf schools would no longer lead children toward Anthroposophy per se, but they might well continue to lead children into mystical and metaphysical confusions that could hamper them throughout life.

Rudolf Steiner downplayed the importance of the brain and brainwork. [See "Steiner's Specific".] The educational system he created is anti-intellectual, anti-scientific, and anti-rational. [See, e.g., "Reality and Fantasy".] If future "cleansed" Waldorf schools were to continue embodying these biases, they might continue to hurt students in the same ways Waldorf schools tend to hurt them now. [See, e.g., "Who Gets Hurt?" and "Mistreating Kids Lovingly".]

[18] See "Teacher Training".

[19] For a defense of Waldorf schools — and a rebuttal — see "Into the World".

Cut the Ties?

We asked, above, what Waldorf schools might be like if they cut their ties to Steiner. But we need to ask whether the schools are ever likely to do so. Won't their devotion to Steiner prevent them from contemplating anything of the sort? 

Here is a message, posted by historian Peter Staudenmaier at the Waldorf Critics discussion page, that bears on this question:

We've talked a lot in recent weeks about organizational aspects of anthroposophist institutions, and I thought some here might be interested in a recent article that examines this question in depth. It is co-authored by historian of religion Olav Hammer, who has produced excellent critical scholarship on Steiner's movement, and anthroposophical insider Karen Swartz. The interplay between their perspectives yields an especially useful analysis. The article is Karen Swartz and Olav Hammer, "The Show Must Go On: Corporate Narratives in the Anthroposophical Society" International Journal for the Study of New Religions 11 (2020), 91-117.

The chief focus of the article is on Goetheanum fundraising campaigns and annual appeals to donors from 1999 to 2019. It offers illuminating background on the Anthroposophical Society's chronic financial problems. One of the article's main arguments is that the organization cares much more about preserving Steiner's legacy than "such mundane concerns as a balanced budget." (113) As Swartz and Hammer note, "A state of permanent (financial) crisis seems to lie inherent in the organization" (110). They also observe that "The organization is in so many ways connected to the figure of its founder that his intentions (whether real or imputed) need to be respected at nearly any cost." (108) This dynamic is noteworthy at other anthroposophical organizations as well. 

Some of the most perceptive assessments come from their attentive reading of fundraising appeals sent out by the anthroposophist leadership over the last two decades. Their findings show that "the organization is linked to its past and to an ideological agenda that makes it resistant to change and therefore finds it difficult to overcome its organizational challenges." (112) This is not a distant historical phenomenon, but an ongoing and conspicuous element in Steiner's far-flung movement today. Those endeavoring to modernize Steiner organizations will need to heed these dynamics. Greetings to all,

Peter S.

1/29/2022

https://groups.io/g/waldorf-critics/message/32805

Your host,

Roger Rawlings.

(Photo by Lois Mateus, 2023.)

For background info, see

"Yours Truly"

and 

"I Went to Waldorf".