XVI.

SNEAKING IT IN

Waldorf education generally sneaks Anthroposophical beliefs into the classroom at all grade levels. But one portion of the Waldorf curriculum is especially guilty of pressing Anthroposophical doctrines on the students. Sadly, cruelly, it is a part of the curriculum aimed at the youngest students, those who are least able to think for themselves, the ones who are least able to resist. Many of the stories told to Waldorf students in the lowest grades embody Anthroposophical theology. Indeed, the "Biblical" stories told to young Waldorf students often bear only the most tangential relation to the actual contents of the Bible — the stories are often subtly modified to be Anthroposophical, not Judeo-Christian. Likewise, the myths and legends and fairy tales told to Waldorf students often contain Anthroposophical beliefs.

In some instances, Waldorf teachers make their Anthroposophical messages plain to their students; in other cases, they do not. Sometimes the surprising, occult "content" of the stories exists mainly in the teachers' minds. In these instances, the students may not receive the messages the teachers intend. But in other instances, when the teachers are more forthright, the Anthroposophical belief system makes clear appearances in the classroom, and then the children are distinctly subjected to indoctrination.

Here are a few examples.

Norse Myths

The myths usually given greatest importance in Waldorf schools are those of northern Europe: Norse myths. [See "The Gods".] Steiner taught that Norse myths convey special insights into human evolution and, indeed, he said that they parallel many of his spiritual "discoveries." Here is Waldorf educator Charles Kovacs indicating how teachers should introduce Norse myths to young Waldorf students. Imagine him standing at the head of a classroom, talking to the children:

“The stories I am going to tell are very special. They are wonderful stories of strange beings called ‘gods’ and of giants and dwarfs [1] … These stories were not just made up; they came about in a different way ... As long as Adam and Eve were still in paradise they could see God [2] ... Then came the children of Adam and Eve, and their children’s children; they could still see God, but not very often … The more people became used to living on earth...the less they could see God [3] ... [B]ut very many of them, not just a few, could see the angels ... There were many peoples in the world who worshipped the angel-gods, and they had wonderful stories about them. [4] The most wonderful stories were told among people who are called Norsemen ... When these brave, fierce Norsemen had fought a battle, they came home to celebrate their victory with a great feast ... The most important part of the feast was when a man called a ‘bard’ took a harp and sang or recited a poem ... These bards could see the angel-gods better than the others. This is how the stories I am going to tell you came about. They are stories that these wise bards among the Norsemen heard from the angels, from the angel-gods. [5]” — Charles Kovacs, NORSE MYTHOLOGY, Waldorf Education Resources (Floris Books, 2009), pp. 7-9.

In this little speeech, Kovacs creates a weird blend of pagan myths and Biblical teachings. He goes from gods, giants, and dwarfs to Adam and Eve and then back to the Norse angel-gods. The blurring of distinctions is typical of Anthroposophy generally and Waldorf education in particular. Overall, Kovacs follows the Steiner/Waldorf line: Norse gods really exist and Norse myths are true (they are not fictitious; they were not "just made up"). This is how, far too often, Norse myths — and, to a lesser degree, other myths and legends — are presented to impressionable young children in Waldorf schools.

◊

[1] Norse myths are polytheistic: There are many, many gods. In addition, there are other beings invisible to ordinary vision, such as dwarfs (gnomes) and giants (the gods’ enemies).

[2] “God,” in the polytheistic Anthroposophical universe, is a sort of metaphor for the highest gods and the amorphous Godhead. [See “God”.]

[3] This is the Anthroposophical account of mankind’s gradually changing consciousness as we have descended into physical existence. 

[4] In Anthroposophy, “Angels” are gods one level higher than humanity. Steiner taught that there are nine ranks of gods. [See "Polytheism".] Here, the children are told that after people lost the ability to see the highest gods, they could still see the lowly “angel-gods”.

[5] Thus, Norse myths are true: They are the tales the “wise bards among the Norsemen heard from…the angel-gods.”

◊

Let's turn our attention to the way Bible stories are represented in the Waldorf worldview. Here, for instance, is an Anthroposophical account of the first day of Creation. Note that this account is drawn from a book published by an association of Waldorf schools:

Genesis

The creation of the world, as described in Anthroposophy, bears little resemblance to what we find in the Bible. Here is how Anthroposophist Jakob Streit says the first day of Creation should be described to Waldorf students. Compare it with the account given in Genesis; the differences are stark.

“As God Father [1] sat upon his throne, he called out seven words through heaven. The seven colors of the rainbow appeared and shone in seven circles around his throne [2] … Behind the rainbow, majestic fire angels [3] lifted a great cloud curtain, revealing a hall of heaven [4] that had never been seen before. In the hallway were thousands upon thousands of sleeping souls [5] … The fire-angels lowered the curtain and opened the gate of heaven [6] … Light began to shine, to blaze and sparkle brightly. The darkness withdrew to the depths. Fire-angels stripped flames from their garments, and the new world grew warm. It bubbled and flamed and flashed. Thunder rumbled and rolled so loudly that the evil spirits in the deep [7] huddled in fear. Above them the angels’ eyes, like a thousand suns, sparkled from the bright light of the first day of creation.” — Jakob Streit, AND THERE WAS LIGHT (Association of Waldorf Schools of North America, 2006), p. 13.

◊

[1] "God Father" may appear to be Jehovah — but in Anthroposophy, Jehovah is a rather minor god, not the One and Only Lord of Creation. [See “Genesis".] The name "God Father" echoes the term "God the Father” — but in Anthroposophy, God the Father is the god of Saturn, not a member of the Triune Christian God. [See "The Father”.] "God Father" also echoes "All Father," the designation of Odin, the highest Norse god. [See "The Gods".] According to Steiner, Odin All Father really exists.

[2] Seven words, seven colors, seven circles… In Anthroposophy, seven is a magic number — Steiner called it the number of perfection. [See "Magic Numbers".] Here, Waldorf students are introduced to the importance of the number seven as well as the spiritually potent effect of language — "he called out seven words." (Streit does not specify the seven words, but he is probably alluding to the esoteric belief that the number seven has mystical importance in the Bible. Thus, Genesis 1:1, in Hebrew, consists of seven words. In the standard English translation, these become ten words: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.")

[3] In Anthroposophical doctrine, fire angels or "Fire Spirits" are gods two levels above man, and they played a major role in the Creation. [See "Polytheism".]

[4] To minds steeped in Norse mythology, the term "hall of heaven” will likely evoke thoughts of Valhalla, the hall in Asgard, land of the gods. [See "The Gods".] Both halls are populated by souls — overseen by a pantheon of gods — awaiting their summons onto the field of action.

[5] I.e., human souls waiting to be incarnated.

[6] Streit’s account starts with an apparently monotheistic perspective, but it quickly shifts to a more polytheistic view. Note that the more active spirits are the Fire Angels, not God Father.

[7] According to Waldorf belief, evil beings are consigned to the Abyss — the deep chasm separating Earth from the higher worlds. [See "Hell" and "Higher Worlds”.]

◊

Steiner taught that not only are myths true, but so are fairy tales: Like myths, they reveal the clairvoyant knowledge possessed by ancient peoples. [See "Fairy Tales".] In THE INTERPRETATION OF FAIRY TALES, Waldorf teacher Roy Wilkinson advises other Waldorf teachers how to find the “real” meaning in the fairy tales they present to their students. Wilkinson addresses the teachers, not — directly — the students.

Snow White

Here is "Snow White", Waldorf-style: 

“In human development there are certain obvious stages of development. For the first seven years of its life the child is, so to speak, carried by heavenly powers. [1] Then a change takes place ... [W]hen Snow White is seven, it is she who is the most beautiful. She has grown into her own being to a certain extent. The significance is that a new type of human being is coming into existence [2] … When the queen thinks she is eating Snow White's lungs and liver, she aims at acquiring the new powers [3] … Snow White...wanders alone in the woods and comes to a little hut which is the home of the seven dwarfs. The significance here is that the child's soul (and the human soul in general at a certain stage) is still in connection with the elemental powers [4] … The negative powers [5] now attack the developing soul ... The elemental beings can assist humans to some degree but some things are beyond their powers ... [A] higher power is needed to awaken [Snow White]. The power of the higher self, in the form of the prince, arrives ... [T]he old magical powers must die. It is the beginning of a new era. [6]“  — THE INTERPRETATION OF FAIRY TALES, pp. 16-17.

[1] “Human development,” in Anthroposophy, is the spiritual evolution described by Steiner. The “stages of development” include the three seven-year-long phases of childhood. [See "Incarnation" and "Most Significant".] The “heavenly powers” are the many gods recognized in Anthroposophy. Steiner taught that young children remain in contact with the gods (they are "carried by heavenly powers"). [See "Thinking Cap".]

[2] According to Anthroposophical belief, at age seven a child incarnates its etheric body. [See "Incarnation".] This is a key turning point, a major transition. At a higher level, Snow White is evolving to become a more spiritualized, more advanced human being possessing new spiritual powers. This is the journey that the maturing child should ultimately take: becoming, truly, a "new type of human being."

[3] The Queen wants to gain the new powers possessed by Snow White; she thinks she will get them by eating Snow White’s organs. (Snow White, of course, escapes.)

[4] In Waldorf belief, dwarves or gnomes really exist. They are a type of nature spirit or elemental being. [See “Gnomes” and “Neutered Nature”.] 

[5] Steiner taught that elemental beings are amoral. Far more "negative" are various demons. [See "Beings" and "Evil Ones".]

[6] The basic narrative of Anthroposophy traces our evolution into new historical epochs; time and again, "It is the beginning of a new era." The death of the Queen/witch shows human spiritual evolution, as we set aside old powers ("the old magical powers") and move toward our new, higher powers. The handsome prince who awakens Snow White embodies the "higher power" of the evolved human spiritual ego, the transformed Self.

◊

Thus is Anthroposophy snuck into the Waldorf classroom. The children are told stories that appear innocent (colorful myths, "Bible stories," Snow White!), but the stories are freighted with Anthroposophical meanings. Gradually, core Anthroposophical beliefs are conveyed and absorbed.

In this quick review, we have only scratched the surface. The process of occult Anthroposophical indoctrination typically goes on day after day, month after month, year after year in Waldorf schools — in the earliest grades and in all the grades that follow. Anthroposophy is conveyed in multitudinous ways, not just in the sorts of stories we have discussed here. To dig into this further, see, e.g., “Sneaking It In” and “Indoctrination”.

XVII.a.

CAUTIONARY TALES

It is easy to find testimonials that make Waldorf schools sound good. But it is also easy to find first-person accounts that make Waldorf schools sound bad. The latter should at least give us pause. Why do so many people have bad or even terrible Waldorf experiences?  

Here is a compilation of excerpts from troubling statements people have made about their Waldorf experiences. Most were written by individuals who were once deeply involved with Waldorf, who indeed loved Waldorf initially only to become disillusioned later. A few were written by people who disliked Waldorf from the get-go. One or two were written by individuals who still find much to admire in Waldorf and who would probably be surprised that their statements can be taken as cautionary tales. 

Critics of Waldorf schooling find compelling arguments against Waldorf in the sorts of things you will read here. Some themes run like threads through many of these accounts: charges that Waldorf schools misrepresent themselves, that they secretly try to induct children into an occult worldview, that they are defensive and insular, that they discriminate unfairly, that they tolerate bullying and abuse, that they are torn by jealousies and bickering, that they are staffed by overworked teachers who do not know their subjects well, that... 

But I'm giving the plot away.  

Here are the excepts. For more complete versions — and for many additional testimonials — see, e.g., “Cautionary Tales”, "People for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools", and "The Waldorf Review".

Here, then, are the excepts: 

"It frustrates me when people deny that Anthroposophy is a religion and [claim] that the schools don’t teach Anthroposophy to children ... My daughter’s books [i.e., class books created by copying from the chalkboard] show that indeed she was taught Anthroposophy, in picture form as well as in written form. ‘The human being is like a little universe inside a big one. Sun, moon and stars find their likeness in mans head, trunk and limbs’; ‘The Sylphs, Salamanders, Gnomes and Undines are the earth’s scribes’; ‘The body is the house of the spirit,’ etc. If you deconstruct the lessons, the curriculum and the pedagogy, you cannot ignore the fact that Waldorf is a mystery school, a magical lodge for juniors." — Sharon Lombard 

◊

"...[T]he main issue in all kind of problems in Steiner schools is the role of the teacher ... Most Steiner teachers consider anthroposophy more important than academics. I saw this in my own experience as a student at an anthroposophical college. So it’s not surprising that parents, experts, insiders, and critics always come to the same conclusion: Most teachers in Steiner schools just don’t know how to teach!” — Ramon de Jonge 

◊

“I worked at this [Waldorf] school for seven years ... I began to question the legality of Anthroposophical religious indoctrination in staff training sessions led by uneducated, unaccredited Anthroposophists brought over from Europe. Both staff and students were subjected to nonacademic, occultist activities through the Waldorf training and pedagogy adopted from the Rudolf Steiner College, a nonaccredited Anthroposophical religious institution located in Fair Oaks, California. I quit in frustration over the academic dearth of Waldorf education and grief at watching...students being subjected to occultist religious indoctrination in the place of [i.e., instead of] a sound academic program.” — Kathleen Sutphen 

◊

"Over the year and a half my son was in the school, I became increasingly disturbed about three things: 1. Weird science ... [W]hen I obtained Waldorf curriculum guides, I discovered that the inadequate and erroneous science [I had observed in the school] was part of the Waldorf system. 2. Racism. I was shocked to pick up a Steiner book [containing racist passages] for sale at the school ... 3. Quack medicine. An 'Anthroposophical physician' gave a lecture to the parents ... It was classic quackery…." — Dan Dugan

◊

“I was involved in a Steiner school for quite a few years … The kindergarten was a disaster … The bullying was awful. The teacher ignored it, capitulated in it, or simply showed all these little kids how to do it best … The kids at that school were and are so angry because the parents were so busy arguing and getting exhausted and keeping up appearances and trying to hold down jobs as well so they could afford a certain kind of right-on organic whole-foods yoga-mum lifestyle in North London AND the Steiner school fees as well AND the time they were supposed to put in [volunteering at the school] ... [I]t made them all totally wired-up, short-circuiting really, quite crazy and paranoid and twitchy to be around…." — Suzanne Slack 

◊

"Because Waldorf is a private school, it does not adhere to the laws governing public schools, or any laws as we would soon discover. Parents are ruled by the school. I tried talking to the teacher and different members of the faculty only to be told to do what they ask and our child will benefit greatly. Any resistance on my part would have a negative impact on my daughter's education. So we did everything they asked. Did not question the ridiculous nature of what was asked, but went along with the herd. It was beginning to feel like a cult." — Carol Wyatt  

◊

"Anthroposophy has a very screwed-up psychology, full of beliefs that are not conducive to mental health, such as (one of my favorites), ‘Thoughts are living reality,’ which leads a person to try to repress bad thoughts or bad emotions rather than accept and deal with them. Instead you're encouraged to project anxieties and fears and anger on spirit entities (e.g., gnomes). This stuff is also inflicted on the children, and it is particularly explosive with children, makes them extremely angry and uncooperative. So you have situations building in the classroom every day where lots of people are getting angrier and angrier, both teachers and students, and have no healthy outlets for it, particularly because with children, you can't talk about anything directly ... We had a lot of teachers walking around who were anger time bombs, and the occasional explosions were truly memorable." — Diana Winters

◊

"[F]aculty meetings were a disaster ... It didn’t take me long to realize there were too many Indians and not enough chiefs in the room. I think because there was no recognized leader and because the school was small everyone seemed to believe that we could hold an informal conversation every Thursday after school and organically figure it out ... One of the reasons why faculty meetings felt like a root canal was not only due to the fact that no one seemed to be able to speak [succinctly] thus toying with my nerves, but because of Mrs. Bear ... Because the concept of clear and concise never entered a faculty meeting (a salt and pepper combination essential to everyday living), I started to react physically. After one particular name-calling session between Mrs. Bear and Mr. and Mrs. Turtle, I got sick with the flu...." — Lani Cox

◊

"For many years, we were enthusiastic about the [Waldorf] school in spite of many red flags. Ultimately, however, we became disillusioned, in particular by what we considered to be Waldorf’s low academic standards … When my daughter went from Waldorf third grade to public school fourth grade, her new teacher told me she was two or three years behind grade level. Later in the year, she corrected that estimate and said that my daughter had been more than three years behind grade level. Walking around the public school classroom on parents' night, looking at the children's work, said it all. The children had written essays that were easy to follow, even with the occasional mistake here and there. Our daughter's essays were incomprehensible. She had made brave attempts to write words, guessing at the letters involved, but not succeeding in spelling a single word correctly. The other children's work was the result of four years of public education. Our daughter's was the result of four years of Waldorf ‘education’ … We discovered our children had been surreptitiously exposed to Anthroposophy in many different ways, such as through rituals, 'art,' history classes filled with ancient myths, and a boring form of movement called ‘eurythmy' … Much of it might might seem harmless, but in the long run it affects the development of a child's thinking. One of my children, now an adult, is still angry at having been led to believe things that were not true." — Margaret Sachs 

XVII.b.

CAUTIONARY TALES

(Continued)

Some people sing the praises of Waldorf schools; some say they have had delightful experiences in Waldorf schools. Others level harsh criticisms at Waldorf, reporting dreadful ordeals undergone there.

The former, upbeat testimonials are not surprising. Waldorf schools tend to be beautiful; they are full of art and artistic activities; they usually evince a comforting spiritual atmosphere; they let kids play and dabble, while placing them under minimal academic pressure. 

But, given this pleasing picture of the Waldorf environment, why are there so many reports of awful events occurring in and around the schools?

Here’s a continuation of my little compilation of excerpts from first-person accounts of Waldorf traumas and failings. Anyone thinking of sending a child to a Waldorf school should at least mull the possible significance of such accounts. For more complete versions — and for many additional testimonials — see, e.g., “Cautionary Tales”, "People for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools", and "The Waldorf Review".

◊

"I had been assigned [as classroom assistant] to the ‘main lesson’ teacher of a 2nd grade class [in a Waldorf school] … In this class, forty-two (!) children sat in pairs at double desks, all facing the teacher. The organic form of the room and the pastel-colored walls didn't compensate for such an arrangement … Every school day [at Waldorf] was so ritualized that a large part of the morning was taken up by the recitation of verses … [The verses] carried a distinctly Christian-Anthroposophical world view, which, in my opinion, should only have a place in religious instruction … The actual instruction in [a Waldorf] class was executed...rigidly ... No matter whether students wrote, drew, or calculated, everything was done in rigid monotony ... Each of my shy questions about the reasons for the various measures and schedules was answered with a reference to Rudolf Steiner's works. For [Waldorf teachers] the maxims Steiner had developed in the [1920's] contained clear and unconditional truth, and they were never questioned.” — Claudia Pangh 

◊

"I have attended countless [Waldorf] open houses ... I have seen scores of [student] notebooks, copied and illustrated with enormous care and devotion and riddled with all kinds of errors, placed where parents and visitors are most likely to see them ... Copying is the curse of the Waldorf Schools. There is altogether too much of it, and it is not confined to the elementary school. In high school, where there is much less excuse for it, it still goes on. The way in which many [Waldorf] teachers organize their work implies that they consider that the whole object of the course is the creation of a gorgeous notebook. And the way in which some teachers judge the work of other teachers implies the same thing.” — Keith Francis 

◊

"My math teacher [at Waldorf School X], whose ominously apropos nickname was Tomcat, Tommy for short...was famous for molesting all the teenage girls. He had even gotten one of them pregnant ... [Yet] he went right on being a respected community member and teaching math at [X] and molesting every other girl he could get his mitts on ... He started coming over and taking me on 'walks' after dinner, ostensibly to give me guidance and sympathy because I seemed to be having 'a difficult time' but in fact to lead me into the deserted fields and rub his hard-on against me while trapping me in his arms as I struggled to break free ... I loathed and feared him ... He didn't actually rape me, but some of my friends weren't so lucky." — Kate Christensen 

◊

"My Waldorf school, and the kindergarten, too, was very violent; violence was around all the time. There was lots of bullying, and I've read others state that the school was well-known for its problems with bullying. Nothing was ever done to stop the bullying … You could count on being thrown into the wall, cupboards or into rocks, being hit, being pushed, those kinds of things — every day. I've been scratched 'til I got bruises, been kicked in my back 'til I couldn't breath, been hit with a wooden 'club' on my head so that I saw stars (but no angels). But that's just the tip of an iceberg.” — Alicia Hamberg  

◊

"I think it is very important to at least try to understand what some children go through in Waldorf/Steiner schools — especially those where Anthroposophic extremism is the norm. There are the obvious questions around 'is Anthroposophic education good for children?' And then there are other issues: I've known more than a few children who were hit, screamed and sworn at by Waldorf teachers — with virtually NO repercussions, other than pathetic suggestions that those who raise concerns do not understand karma. Fact is there were no other available teachers, so the wild ones stayed, believing (and being supported by peers) they were destined to be with the children in their class. That is what Steiner says.” — Steve Walden 

◊

"My daughter, being defiant...was labeled a demon by her [Waldorf] teacher and was bullied for years...cutting herself and finally going into a mental breakdown. [Waldorf School Z] denies any responsibility — despite years of permitting this to go unchecked … Waldorf is not harmless and Steiner's ideas are used by very insensitive people to harm children in the name of Waldorf! And everyone else stands by and watches. Why?" — Pete Karaiskos 

◊

"Unfortunately we experienced the school to be a highly religious sect with no respect whatsoever for legal contracts, and with no continuing professional development, and [no commitment] to what we regard to be social responsibility. In very subtle ways, and with a mild and friendly smile, they assure you that the children’s education is in the best of hands. But, as time showed us, their teacher-training consists exclusively of the spiritual fantasies of one single man [i.e., Rudolf Steiner]. And having done teaching there ourselves, we found their curriculum not comparable to what is required from the state, nor [is it what they] claimed." — Kristen A. Sandberg  

◊

[Speaking to an old Waldorf schoolmate] "Don’t you remember how, in kindergarten, the teachers often held you on their knees? Don’t you remember, later in the lower grades, the frequent caresses of our teachers? How they took us in their arms, sat next to us in class, draping their arms around our necks while we wrote or drew? ... When I did my training in the Institute Rudolf Steiner de Chatou [training to become a Waldorf teacher], the future kindergarten teachers said they were often told to be physically demonstrative with children ... [What begins innocently can easily lead to something else.] During my training at the Institute Rudolf Steiner de Chatou, one of our trainers systematically used sexual images as he spoke of the process of learning in children ... Rudolf Steiner himself...continually drew a parallel between sexuality and knowledge ... [Children may be abused in such an atmosphere, but this can never be acknowledged.] For Steiner, the school and the teaching he founded are direct emanations of the spirit world, they are true incarnations of celestial Anthroposophy, a pure gift of the gods ... [Waldorf] teachers see it the same way. Steiner is the prophet of an educational revelation for them! Their schools therefore manifest the presence of the divine on Earth. But as soon as they have to choose between the welfare of the children and the reputation of the school — or its survival — won’t they be tempted to run any risk rather than sacrifice an institution they consider sacred? Won’t they deliberately risk endangering the children to save the school, if those are the alternatives they perceive?” — Grégoire Perra  

◊

"There was deceit everywhere ... The financial statements were literally made up ... Unpaid payroll taxes, marked as paid, were seized from our bank account ... [T]he school wasn't making enough money to pay rent, salary, and the electricity bill. One classroom was red-flagged for sewage backing up in the tub … [A]t parent gatherings...the teachers would stand on the stage with their arms around each other, singing songs, while the parents beamed ... [B]ehind closed doors [these teachers] were all backstabbers...insecure people competing for the top position on the Anthroposophical dog pile ... Board meetings were always exhausting because you could cut the tension between the teachers with a knife….” — Debra Snell 

◊

As I said at the start, it is easy to find testimonials that make Waldorf sound good.* Bear in mind that what you have read here — critical testimonials — represent just one point of view. Yet surely we must ask why so many people have awful Waldorf experiences, and why are these experiences often so similar? We are justified in at least suspecting that there are deep, widespread problems in the Waldorf movement. Bear in mind, too, that this little collection of quotes merely scratches the surface. Many, many more can be produced. (See the reviews collected by Pete Karaiskos, for instance, at his website "The Waldorf Review".) Parents have every right to send their children to Waldorf schools; no one should infringe on this right. But to be fair to their children, parents should carefully consider all the evidence — pro and con — before choosing a type of schooling that may well be fundamentally flawed.

* Some, unfortunately, are plainly unreliable. Some have been planted by Waldorf authorities; others have been produced by parents and students under pressure from Waldorf authorities. See, e.g., the following critique, posted in 2010: “Most of [the positive] reviews are written by board members and parent council. If you choose this school, make sure you get answers often and check on your child's progress. I strongly suggest observing in the classroom, I was truly shocked when I did that. The children in 8th grade cannot spell or write a complete sentence, they cannot do even the basics. They can however draw a great picture and most of them can knit and play recorder if they watch the teacher’s fingers, can't read words well, music not at all.” — http://thewaldorfreview.blogspot.com/2012/05/journey-charter-school-reviews-by.html [scroll down].

XVIII.

INTERESTING MINDS

“Waldorf schools present themselves as aimed at a ‘holistic’, child-centred and age-appropriate education towards freedom. This depiction is misleading, since for anthroposophists, these words have very specific meanings that cannot be easily inferred by an outsider if he has not been initiated into Steiner’s occult teachings. Freedom means freedom for anthroposophy. Child-centred and age-appropriate refer to anthroposophical dogmas on childhood development, depending on mumbo-jumbo conceptions surrounding the number 7.” — Peter Bierl, “A Pedagogy for Aryans” [http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/BierlFinal.htm]

Kids who graduate from Waldorf schools are sometimes praised for having “interesting minds.” They are “original” thinkers; they "think outside the box.” This sounds fine, and it would seem to support the claim that Waldorf schools prepare students to make original, free choices during their adult lives. But what Waldorf grads typically display is not so much originality as the result of an unconventional form of mental training. Waldorf students are taught to rely on their imaginations and intuitions, to “feel” more than “think.” Ultimately, Anthroposophists believe in clairvoyance, not rational thought, and the effects of this belief can infect the consciousness of students educated by Anthroposophists. [See “Thinking Cap” and “Steiner’s Specific”.]

What does this mean for freedom? Waldorf teachers generally want their students to reject normal thinking and conventional values. They believe, by and large, that most of modern culture is wicked, most of modern technology is demonic, and most of modern science is wrong. The “freedom” they typically advocate is the freedom to reject convention and even rationality — it is the freedom to choose the one true path, unconventional though it may be: the path of Anthroposophy. 

For freedom to be meaningful, we must have a variety of potentially good choices to select from — each person can opt for what s/he wants while others make other choices. But this is not what Waldorf education contemplates (even if some Waldorf teachers think it is). We have only two real choices, according to Anthroposophical teachings, and only one of them is good. We may “freely” choose to follow the teachings of Rudolf Steiner and his adherents, in which case we will evolve to marvelous spiritual heights; or we may “freely” turn our backs on the teachings of Rudolf Steiner and his adherents, in which case we will — sooner or later — lose our souls. This paradigm abolishes freedom. We can go one way and live, or we can go the other way and die. No sane person would take the second option, which means that all sane people are compelled to take the first option. [See “Freedom” and “Hell”. For more on “the path,” see “Soul School”.]

True-believing Waldorf faculties attempt to train children in unconventional forms of thought, inculcating unconventional values while directing kids toward unconventional life journeys. The "freedom" Waldorf schools promote is, broadly speaking, the freedom for Waldorf students and graduates to choose the Waldorf religion: Anthroposophy. [See “Is Anthroposophy a Religion?”]

◊

Returning to Bierl’s statement, above: He mentions the Waldorf conception of “holistic” schooling and the strange power of the number 7. You can get a taste of Waldorf’s unconventionality by looking into “Holistic Education” and “Magic Numbers”.

◊

The “interesting minds” of Waldorf students and alumni are sometimes marked by distinct self-confidence. At least some kids emerging from Waldorf schools — the kids the teachers favored, anyway — have had their egos bolstered to an abnormal degree. Former Waldorf student and teacher Grégoire Perra has offered this description:

“There is an overemphasis on the ego and exaggerated exaltation of the mystic realm. Indeed, Steiner-Waldorf teachers place the highest possible value on dreamy and mystical attitudes. As a student, I indeed could see how our teachers showed the highest esteem for those who retained longest the attitudes of gullible children transported by imaginative stories. The student who seemed to be in a dreaming state was placed on a virtual pedestal in comparison to his peers. Later, as a teacher, I often heard teachers in faculty meetings praising the receptive qualities of students who were dreamy, naive, and enthusiastic. It was said of such students that they knew how to keep the soul intact and pure. We often even said that in principle a good Waldorf education should slow the maturation of students' intellectual faculties as far as possible. In addition, teachers flattered and lavished praise on students for abilities they didn't really possess, trying to keep them as long as possible in a sort of ‘floating’ disconnection from reality. This is why the egos of students leaving Waldorf schools are so developed. At first sight, these students seem to have a self-confidence that could be considered a good quality. But looking more closely, we very often see that this colossal self-assurance is based on nothing but empty air. Quite often these students have done virtually no academic work for years: Rituals, religious chants, and preparing for holidays take up so much time in Waldorf schooling that the time devoted to actual school work is literally reduced to a trickle.” [See “He Went to Waldorf”.]

Of course, kids demeaned by their teachers — kids whose egos have been crushed, not artificially inflated — may come out of Waldorf schools feeling great distress, confusion, and anger. Consider such testimonies as this:

"My name is Sarah ... I attended a Waldorf school from first grade to the beginning of sixth grade ... I have ADD [attention deficit disorder] ... Waldorf is totally in the dark about ADD-related disorders and other types of disabilities … My teacher was a man who I will refer to here as Mr. M, who was and is...a teacher bully ... Mr. M went out of his way to give me a hard time and bully me because of my difficulty paying attention, or if I made a mistake no matter how small ... I remember him in first grade screaming at me in front of the whole class, because I was having trouble understanding a math problem ... I remember in third grade, I misunderstood a homework assignment and he literally shamed me for the whole afternoon … Whenever dealing with my parents, Mr. M would pretend to act all sweet and nice, but when he was with me, he became a bully. My mom knows now that she should have taken me out of that school a lot sooner ... I recently learned that a lot of Waldorf students have stories like mine … As far as Mr. M is concerned, he still teaches at [the same Waldorf] school and has done this kind of thing to other students and the administration has done nothing about it.” [See http://waldorfcritics.org/active/articles/teacher_bullying_sarah.html and “Slaps”.]

Many factors have profound influences on children, potentially affecting them for the rest of their lives. Foremost, almost always, is the family. A child raised in a loving, supportive family may receive blessings that persist throughout life. The school(s) a child attends are often second in importance — less important than family, but still highly consequential. Like the effect of the family, the effect of a child’s education can be both deep and persistent. Attending a Waldorf school is no small matter; it can shape a child’s life to an extraordinary degree. Parents selecting schools for their children should think long and hard about the potential consequences of choosing a school run by Anthroposophists in service to Anthroposophy. Some Waldorf teachers are, of course, lovely individuals, and some children thrive in Waldorf schools. Then, too, some Waldorf schools are less permeated by Anthroposophy than others are. But the potential effect of making the wrong choice for your child can be severe. Parents almost always want the very best for their children, so they should always exercise the utmost care when making life-altering decisions for those beloved young ones.

XIX.

CHRIST THE SUN GOD

Christian religious holidays are generally observed in Waldorf schools: Christmas, Easter, Michaelmas, and so on. To many people, this is reassuring. Waldorf schools are based on a mystical faith, called Anthroposophy, that can seem alien and bizarre (gnomes, astrology, polytheism…). But if Anthroposophy is really just a form of Christianity, then all is well, right?

It depends on your perspective, of course. If you are not a Christian, you might bridle at finding a form of Christianity promoted in schools that declare themselves to be nondenominational and nonsectarian. And if you are not religious at all, you might bridle at finding any  religion promoted in schools that declare themselves to be nondenominational and nonsectarian.

But for the sake of argument, let’s agree not to bridle. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that most Westerners view Christianity as a generally unobjectionable faith, a cornerstone of Western culture and tradition. If Waldorf schools are essentially Christian, then they must be essentially okay. Right?

The problem is, the notion that Waldorf schools are Christian is a misunderstanding. The religion promoted by Waldorf schools is not in any ordinary sense Christianity. It is certainly not the faith found in any mainstream Christian churches. The religion promoted in Waldorf schools, Anthroposophy, is a whole different kettle of fish. 

We can begin to perceive the unchristian nature of Anthroposophy by focusing on the figure of Jesus Christ. According to mainstream Christian teachings, Jesus Christ is a singlular, unique figure: a human being who is, in a mysterious sense, God incarnate. The nature of Jesus Christ surpasses human understanding, but he is a singlular figure.

Anthroposophy, by contrast, speaks of two figures, not one: Christ (a god) and Jesus (a man). In fact, Anthroposophy speaks of three  figures, since Steiner taught that there were two different Jesuses. Thus, in Anthroposophy, we find Christ, and Jesus #1, and Jesus #2. And thereby hangs a tale.

Remembering what you may know about Jesus Christ as worshipped in mainstream Christian denominations, consider the following Anthroposophical teachings, and ask yourself whether they are Christian. 

Christ

According to Steiner, the divinity whom we perceive as Christ is not the incarnation of God Almighty, as mainstream Christianity teaches. Rather, he is one member of a vast throng of gods. Specifically, he is the Sun God — the same god who has been known by such names as Ra and Apollo. [1] Christ rules the Sun; he is the god of the Sun. 

“[T]he highest Ruler of Sun, the Sun-God, [appears to us] as the Christ.” — Rudolf Steiner. [2] 

Essentially all the peoples who have worshipped the Sun God have actually been worshipping Christ, Steiner said, although their understanding of Christ has generally been limited. Thus, for example, 

”[W]hen the Greek uttered the name of Apollo he was indeed referring to the being which later was revealed as the Christ, but he could only conceive of it in a kind of veiled form, as Apollo.” — Rudolf Steiner. [3]

Only now, by attending to Steiner, can we comprehend Christ properly, or so Steiner assured us. Christ's role is to steer us in the proper evolutionary direction. [4] He is our guide, our model, our prototype. [5] If we do not go where Christ directs us, we will fall into decay. 

“Had Christ not appeared on the earth, had He remained the Sun-God only, humanity on the earth would have fallen into decay.” — Rudolf Steiner. [6]

According to Steiner, Christ is not in any orthodox sense the Son of God or a member of the Triune God. Christ is a  god, one of many. The following is from a verse written by Steiner: 

“In the beginning was Christ,

And Christ was with the Gods,

And a God was Christ.” [7] 

Christ is a  god, one of many. He is “with the Gods," he is "a God.” This is a polytheistic vision, arguably a pagan vision; it is not consistent with Christianity, one of the world’s great monotheistic faiths. 

The Jesuses

The Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus are difficult to reconcile; they contradict each other in various ways. Steiner’s solution? There were really two different Jesuses, each born to a couple named Mary and Joseph. At a certain point, one of the Jesuses died, having bequeathed his essence to the other Jesus. The amalgamated Jesus (in essence, two Jesuses in one) then became the human host for the Sun God when the Sun God incarnated on Earth.

Steiner told us a remarkable story. But that’s not the half of it. While they were both still alive, Steiner taught, one of the two Jesuses held the spirit of Zarathustra, while the other Jesus was infused with forces stemming from Buddha. When they amalgamated, the two Jesuses created a Zarathustra-Buddha-influenced vessel for the descended Sun God to occupy. 

“[T]wo Jesus children were born. One was descended from the so-called Nathan line of the House of David, the other from the Solomon line. [8] These two children grew up side by side. In the body of the Solomon child lived the soul of Zarathustra. In the twelfth year of the child's life this soul passed over into the other Jesus child and lived in that body until its thirtieth year ... And then, only from the thirtieth year onward, there lived in this body the Being Whom we call the Christ, Who remained on earth altogether for three years.” — Rudolf Steiner. [9]

Didn’t anyone teach you this before? 

“[N]ot one but two Jesus-children were born ... The important thing is to understand clearly what kind of beings these two children were. Occult investigation [10] shows that the individuality [11] who was in the Solomon Jesus-child was none other than Zarathustra ... [Meanwhile] Buddha forces permeated the astral body [12] of the Nathan Jesus-child.” — Rudolf Steiner. [13] 

Zarathustra (also called Zoroaster) was the Persian prophet who created the religion called Zoroastrianism. [14] Buddha, of course, was the founder of Buddhism. [15] Whereas Christianity is a distinct religion, quite separate from Zoroastrianism and Buddhism, Anthroposophy contains traces of all three of these religions (and others). And, specifically, in the matter of the descended Sun God, Steiner injects traces of Zoroastrianism and Buddhism into the story of Jesus Christ and his ministry on Earth.

I invite you to look for references to Zoroaster and/or Buddha in the Bible.

Moving on: Because Buddha, in particular, is so important in the religion called Anthroposophy, we should take a peek at Buddha’s further adventures, as described by Steiner. Buddha served as a sort of Christ on the planet Mars. (Didn’t they teach you this in church?)

◊ “Buddha became a Redeemer and Saviour for Mars as Christ Jesus had become [Redeemer and Saviour] for the Earth … [T]he Buddha relinquished his activity on the Earth…in order henceforward to work in the Mars sphere.…” — Rudolf Steiner. [16] 

◊ “Buddha, the Prince of Peace, went to Mars — the planet of war and conflict … The souls on Mars were warlike, torn with strife. Thus Buddha performed a deed of sacrifice similar to the deed performed in the Mystery of Golgotha [i.e., Calvary — Christ on the cross.]” — Rudolf Steiner. [17] 

◊ “The Buddha wandered away from earthly affairs to the realm of Mars … [T]he Buddha accomplished a Buddha crucifixion there.” — Rudolf Steiner. [18] 

The actions of Christ on Earth were, thus, not unique, according to Steiner. Anthroposophy teaches that the Sun God incarnated on Earth in order to serve the population of the Earth, and Buddha incarnated on Mars in order to serve the population of Mars. The Sun God was crucified on Earth; Buddha — who, contrary to Christian teachings, was the real “Prince of Peace” — “accomplished a Buddha crucifixion” on Mars.

Didn’t anyone teach you this?

Anthroposophy is a religion. [See “Is Anthroposophy a Religion?”] It is an interesting religion. But it is not Christianity. It is a very different kettle of fish. 

This is the head of Christ as depicted in a monumental statue 

standing in the Anthroposophical headquarters building.

Although the statue is generally attributed to Steiner,

most of the work was done by sculptress Edith Maryon.

The statue — various called "The Representative of Humanity"

and "The Group" — also includes figures of Lucifer and Ahirman,

the arch-demons Christ holds at bay and in balance.

According to Steiner, this is the occult symbol for Christ. 

“Christ was always the representative of the sun, namely, the intelligence of the Sun ... The sign of the intelligence of the Sun is the following ... This is, at the same time, the occult sign of the lamb. The lamb receives the book with the seven seals ... The seven corners of the sign are called 'horns.' But what do the 'eyes' mean?

“In occult schools the signs of the seven planets are written next to the seven eyes. The seven eyes signify nothing other than the seven planets, while the names of the planets designate the spirits incarnated in them as their intelligence. 'Saturn' is the name of the soul of Saturn. The names of the planets come from the spirits of the seven planets found around the earth. These have an influence on human life. The lamb, Christ, contains all seven. Christ is the alpha and the omega; the seven planets are related to him like members to an entire body. The entwining of the lines of the sign portray in a wonderful way the interaction between the seven planets. From Saturn one rises to the Sun, from there down to the Moon, then on to Mars, Mercury, and so forth. The same thing is expressed in the names of the seven days of the week: Saturday, Saturn; Sunday, the Sun; Monday, the Moon; Tuesday, Mardi, Mars; Wednesday, Mercredi, Mercury; Thursday, Jeudi, Jupiter; Friday, Vendredi, Venus. Christ is the regent of all these world spheres; their actions constitute only part of his being; he unites them all. In Rosicrucian schools a lamb is often drawn as a sign for the intelligence of the Sun.” — Rudolf Steiner, READING THE PICTURES OF THE APOCALYPSE (SteinerBooks, 1993), pp. 19-21. 

[R.R. sketch, 2010, based on the one in the book.]

◊

[1] See "Sun God”.

[2] Rudolf Steiner, ROSICRUCIAN WISDOM (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2000), p. 100. 

[3] Rudolf Steiner, THE EAST IN THE LIGHT OF THE WEST (Rudolf Steiner Publishing Co., 1940), lecture 6, GA 113.

[4] See the entry in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia for "Christ Impulse”.

[5] See “Prototype”.

[6] Rudolf Steiner, THE FESTIVALS AND THEIR MEANING (Anthroposophical Publishing Company, 1958), III, lecture 3, GA 226. [See "Was He Christian?”]

[7] Rudolf Steiner quoted by René Querido in THE ESOTERIC BACKGROUND OF STEINER EDUCATION (Rudolf Steiner College Press, 1995), pp. 2-3.

[8] See the entries in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia for "Nathanic Jesus" and "Solomonic Jesus".

[9] Rudolf Steiner, THE OCCULT SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BHAGAVAD GITA (Anthroposophic Press, 1968), p. 59.

[10] I.e., the disciplined use of clairvoyance.

[11] I.e., spiritual being or soul.

[12] The astral body is the second of three invisible bodies that, Steiner said, fully incarnated humans possess. [See “Incarnation".]

[13] Rudolf Steiner, FROM JESUS TO CHRIST (Rudolf Steiner Press, 2005), pp. 133-136.

[14] See “Zoroastrianism”.

[15] See “Buddhism”.

[16] Rudolf Steiner, LIFE BETWEEN DEATH AND REBIRTH (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1975), lecture 5, GA 141.

[17] Rudolf Steiner, THE MISSION OF CHRISTIAN ROSENKREUTZ (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1950), lecture 7, GA 130.

[18] Rudolf Steiner, LIFE BETWEEN DEATH AND REBIRTH (SteinerBooks, 1985), p. 72.`

XX.

WOW!

Visitors to Waldorf schools are often wowed. Parents who enroll their kids in Waldorf schools are often, at least initially, wowed. Waldorf schools have an undeniable wow factor. (Whether the wow lasts may be a different story, of course.)

Here is an excerpt from a recent Waldorf-wow! posting:

"Ocean Charter is a Waldorf Education Public Charter School [in California, USA] and [it is] nothing like any other Public school I’ve seen. They learn by painting, drawing, creating, and/or singing songs (multiplication / division /mythology / geology / everything!)…instead of textbooks. Their teachers are not music teachers, they are not experts in any one subject — they teach all of it, and it is a strong and loving understanding between the teacher and student that the Teachers are learning along with the kids."  [2-16-2012  http://tiffanypeterson.com/tag/waldorf-education/]

This is a typical, wide-eyed, enthusiastic first impression of a Waldorf school. Many people respond this way when first seeing Waldorf education in action.

But many people also become disillusioned, sometimes quite soon. [1]

Pause and consider what the enthusiastic blogger is saying. "Painting, drawing, creating, and/or singing songs" are wonderful activities, and they should be included in all school curricula. But can kids really learn "everything" by doing these things? Physics? Algebra? French? World history? The main thing you learn from doing a lot of painting is how to paint. This is a good thing to learn. But it isn't a method for learning "everything." Ditto for "drawing, creating, and/or singing songs" — good activities, but not the end-all and be-all of education. (A teacher might come up with a clever song that lists all the Presidents of the United States in order, and kids might learn this song, but we would be fooling ourselves if we thought learning such songs is a substitute for actually studying American history.) [2]

What about the absence of textbooks in Waldorf schools? Do you really want to deprive your children of textbooks? Consider. The Waldorf approach means that the only source of information a child receives is the Waldorf teachers themselves. No other views will be presented, and no real authorities will be consulted. The Waldorf view, and only the Waldorf view, will be taught. [3] Parents are often impressed by the lovely lesson books that Waldorf students create, largely by copying what their teachers have written and drawn on the chalkboard. But creating such lesson books is no substitute for reading authoritative textbooks. [4]

Note that Waldorf teachers "are not experts in any one subject — they teach all of it." Is this really what you want? Teachers who do not know any subject in depth, but who teach all subjects? This is indeed what Waldorf schools typically offer, and it guarantees that students will often be taught by people who are unable to take them deeply into any subject. Everything will be superficial and, to one degree or another, wrong. [5]

Waldorf teachers are often loving individuals with good intentions. They tend to revere children, and this can be extremely attractive. To understand what is going on, however, realize that the teachers' attitude toward children grows out of the Waldorf religion, Anthroposophy. According to that religion, children have recently arrived from the spirit realm, where they lived — as reincarnating beings — before coming to Earth for their latest incarnation. Thus, children bring with them more recent memories of the spirit realm than the teachers themselves possess, and they should be honored for this. Also, Waldorf teachers believe it is their karma to teach these particular children, just as it is the children's karma to be taught by these teachers. [6] Thus, a reverential attitude is developed, but it is based on extremely dubious grounds — memories of life before birth, reincarnation, karma…

If you find yourself getting excited about Waldorf schooling, pause, gather yourself, and think carefully. Waldorf schools are often fun places full of beauty and good feeling. [7] They may not, however, be very good schools — i.e., places where kids get a good education. [8] The main Waldorf objective is not to teach children but to give them spiritual assistance in the process of incarnation and in the fulfillment of karma. [9] And, of course, the teachers hope to steer children toward truth — which, in their opinion, is Anthroposophy. [10] Do you want your children to become mystical occultists — that is, junior Anthroposophists? If not, Waldorf is almost certainly the wrong place to send the precious souls who are in your keeping: your children.

Waldorf schools often seem, at least initially, too good to be true: warm, sunny, loving, lovely. The same goes for presentations of Waldorf education — books, pamphlets, posters, videos, open houses, festivals, PR pitches of all kinds. Warm, sunny, loving, lovely. Do these presentations accurately reflect the real nature of Waldorf education? Possibly. Or possibly not. Do your best to learn the truth. (One piece of common advice may apply here. If something seems too good to be true, it probably is.)

A final note. The school that so wowed the blogger is a Waldorf charter school — that is to say, it is a Waldorf school that is supported by taxpayers; it is a Waldorf school that has been accepted into the public education system. [11] Taxpayers and education authorities may want to think carefully about the true nature of Waldorf education before granting charters, and public financial support, to such schools. And they may want to ask probing questions before renewing existing charters. Waldorf schools are essentially religious institutions, which have the purpose of promoting Anthroposophy. And, as I have argued, they may often provide very poor education for the kids. Is this really a good use of public funds? Is it even, in the USA, permissible under the Constitution?

Here are some images and pages from 

Waldorf lesson books, produced by students 

(sometimes with help from their teachers, 

and almost always created by copying work 

put on the chalkboard by their teachers): 

◊

“I have attended countless [Waldorf] open houses ... I have seen scores of [student] notebooks, copied and illustrated with enormous care and devotion and riddled with all kinds of errors, placed where parents and visitors are most likely to see them. I can assure you that I am not exaggerating … Copying is the curse of the Waldorf Schools. There is altogether too much of it, and it is not confined to the elementary school. In high school, where there is much less excuse for it, it still goes on. The way in which many [Waldorf] teachers organize their work implies that they consider that the whole object of the course is the creation of a gorgeous notebook. And the way in which some teachers judge the work of other teachers implies the same thing.” — Waldorf teacher Keith Francis, THE EDUCATION OF A WALDORF TEACHER (iUniverse, 2004), pp. 131-132. 

◊

[1] See, e.g., "Cautionary Tales".

[2] To look into the Waldorf emphasis on art, see "Magical Arts". To examine the curriculum followed in typical Waldorf schools, see "The Waldorf Curriculum" and the pages that follow it. To delve into Waldorf methods, see "Methods".

[3] I am primarily describing the situation in true-blue Waldorf schools — schools that aim to fulfill Rudolf Steiner's vision, schools that are staffed largely by Anthroposophy-believing teachers.

[4] See "Lesson Books”.

[5] A Waldorf teacher will often begin with a group of students who are entering first grade and stay with that group through fifth or even eighth grade, teaching most subjects at all of these grade levels. No teacher is truly qualified to do this. To look into Waldorf teacher training, see "Teacher Training".

[6] To dig into some of this, see, e.g., "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?", "Thinking Cap", "Reincarnation", and "Karma".

[7] Don't get carried away with this vision, however. Waldorf schools can also be dark and frightening places. [See, e.g., “Slaps".]

[8] See, e.g., "Academic Standards at Waldorf".

[9] Here are sample statements by Waldorf teachers explaining the real purpose of Waldorf schools:  

◊ “[T]he purpose of [Waldorf] education is to help the individual fulfill his karma.” 

◊ “Waldorf education strives to create a place in which the highest beings [i.e., gods], including the Christ, can find their home....”

◊ "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.” 

[For more, see "Here's the Answer". For more on incarnation and the four human bodies, see "Incarnation". For more on Christ — who in Anthroposophical doctrine in one of many gods — see "Sun God”.]

[10] See, e.g., "Here's the Answer" and "Spiritual Agenda".

[11] In Britain, these are called free schools. [See “Coming Undone”.]

XXI.

IN OCCULTISM, WE

A worrisome word hovers over the Waldorf universe: “occultism.”

Rudolf Steiner was an avowed occultist. Among his books are several bearing such titles as 

◊ OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE

◊ OCCULT HISTORY

◊ AN OCCULT PHYSIOLOGY

and so on. [1]

Steiner did not flinch from the words “occult” and “occultism” (in German Okkult  and Okkultismus). Indeed, he openly identified himself as an occultist. Thus, he made statements such as this:

“In occultism…we speak of the Mars half of Earth evolution and of the Mercury half.” [2] 

And, 

“Recently in my occult research the following question arose….” [3] 

“In occultism, we…” “In my occult researches…” Steiner was a self-identified occultist.

For some people, references to the occult raise especially fearful thoughts: They associate occultism with satanism or devil-worship. Accordingly, Waldorf and Anthroposophy have sometimes been accused of being a satanic cult. [4] But on this score, we need to issue a clear verdict of Not Guilty. Steiner occasionally had nice things to say about Lucifer, but he did not promote devil worship. Anthroposophy is certainly a cult (one centered on the figure of Rudolf Steiner), but it is not a satanic cult (one centered on the figure of You Know Who).

Steiner’s references to occultism and the occult have a milder meaning. By “occult,” Steiner meant “hidden” or “secret.” Occult wisdom, he said, is hidden wisdom. The gods have concealed much important information from us — the universe is full of spiritual mysteries. We need to crack these mysteries — we need to acquire the hidden truths. In short, we need to become occult initiates. [5] Fortunately, the gods have provided an avenue leading to the Truth. It runs through Anthroposophy and the figure of Rudolf Steiner. If we heed Steiner, we will be privy to the gods’ secrets — or many of them, anyway.

Exactly why the gods would hide from us precisely the wisdom we need is — in and of itself — something of a puzzle (or a mystery). But we needn’t dwell on this conundrum at the moment. Instead, we should simply note that Waldorf education is built on Anthroposophy, which claims to possess hidden (mysterious, occult) spiritual wisdom. A portion of this wisdom is now available to humanity at large, chiefly through Rudolf Steiner’s books. Spiritual mysteries are less mysterious than they once were, thanks to R. Steiner.

But you need to realize that if some of the occult beans have been spilled, others have not. There are still secrets that must not be made accessible to the uninitiated (i.e., you and me). Thus, for instance, in OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE, Steiner declines to tell much about the Future Vulcan stage of evolution [6]; such knowledge must not be revealed, yet, to the general public. Steiner writes that people who have listened to him will evolve to glorious new heights, including Future Vulcan, which will be wondrous. But Steiner cannot describe Future Vulcan, yet, in a mass-circulation book. 

“[E]volved humanity…[will go forward] to the Vulcan evolution, any description of which would be beyond the compass of this book.” [7] 

OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE is, after all, only an outline. Steiner reveals some of the secrets of occult science (i.e., spiritual science, i.e., Anthroposophy), but he keeps other secrets locked away.

◊

This leads us to an important subject. Anthroposophy conceals some of its secrets, and so does the Waldorf movement. You, as an uninitiated outsider, must not be told various truths — including the real purpose of Waldorf schooling. Steiner often urged Waldorf insiders to guard their secrets well. He told them to conceal such matters as how many students have been slapped. [8] He encouraged them to deceive inspectors about the real workings of the school. [9] He told them to hide the Anthroposophical belief that various people are subhuman. [10] And so on.

One of the chief complaints made about Waldorf schools is that they misrepresent themselves. Waldorf spokesfolks often fib about the schools’ intentions. In truth (shh!), Waldorf schools are occultist academies intended to lure kids toward the religion of Anthroposophy. But Waldorf representatives almost never acknowledge this openly. Instead, they generally present Waldorf schools as enlightened, alternative, arts-based preparatory schools. Families are often shocked when and if the truth finally dawns on them. Thus, we get reports such as this, from a mother who sent her children to a Waldorf school: 

“I asked specific questions about Anthroposophy and its role in our local Waldorf school before enrolling our children … I later discovered the answers I was given were lies. I had no reason not to trust the information I was given. I've interviewed numerous private school directors and principals, and in those cases where my children ended up attending their schools there were no conditions or events that contradicted anything they told me about the schools … None of those schools had hidden agendas. There are some people you expect to lie, such as criminals, politicians, and teenagers. It is not normal, however, for schools to lie to parents of prospective students.” [11]

Many other parents have also reported being deceived about Waldorf schools. [12] They expected the schools to be one sort of institution, only to discover later that they are a very different sort of place. All parents considering Waldorf schools for their children should bear such reports in mind. And remember what you have learned about Waldorf occultism and Steiner’s instructions to Waldorf teachers: his instructions to mislead outsiders, and pull the wool over their eyes, and “worm our way through.”

Remember these things, parents, please. Make sure that you really understand a school before sending your children there. Look (carefully, carefully) before you leap. [13]

[1] See “Occultism”.

[2] Rudolf Steiner, THEOSOPHY OF THE ROSICRUCIAN (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1966), p. 80.

[3] Rudolf Steiner, LIFE BETWEEN DEATH AND REBIRTH (SteinerBooks, 1985), pp. 5-6.

[4] See “Satanic Cult?”

[5] See “Inside Scoop”.

[6] See "Future Stages" and "Vulcan".

[7] Rudolf Steiner, OCCULT SCIENCE - AN OUTLINE (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1969), p. 310.

[8] Steiner admonished the teachers:

“[D]o not attempt to bring out into the public things that really concern only our school. I have been back only a few hours, and I have heard so much gossip about who got a slap and so forth ... 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….” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER  (Anthroposophic Press, 1998), p. 10.

[9] Steiner said this:

"We must worm our way through. We have to be conscious of the fact that this is done in life…done with a certain mental reservation in response to external requirements. We have to be conscious that in order to do what we want to do, at least, it is necessary to talk with the [authorities], not because we want to but because we have to, and inwardly make fools of them." — Rudolf Steiner, CONFERENCES WITH THE TEACHERS OF THE WALDORF SCHOOL IN STUTTGART, Vol. 1 (Steiner Schools Fellowship Publications, 1986), p. 125.

[10] Steiner said:

“I do not like to talk about such things since we have often been attacked even without them. Imagine what people would say if they heard that we say there are people who are not human beings ... [W]e do not want to shout that to the world.” — Rudolf Steiner, FACULTY MEETINGS WITH RUDOLF STEINER, pp. 649-650. 

[11] Margaret Sachs, “Our Experience”.

[12] See, e.g., “Coming Undone”, “Moms”, and “Pops”.

[13] See “Advice for Parents” and “Clues”.`

XXII.

EVERYDAY CLAIRVOYANCE

In June, 2009, an Internet friend of mine left a message on the waldorf-critics discussion list. The message:

"I have a question. Imagining clairvoyance to be true... Isn't it fairly rare for people to be clairvoyant? Are the [Waldorf] teachers that go to sleep and ask questions about their children's souls using clairvoyance to get the answer?

"How do they say the answer comes to them?

"Would parents trust their teachers if they knew that they make decisions about their child based on an answer from the spirit world?

"[A Waldorf teacher may wonder about a student:] 'What should I do about so and so?'............. [Based on spirit advice, s/he may decide] expel him!

"What if the spirit world gets the answer wrong?" [1]

I posted the following answer:

"Yes, it is extremely  rare for anyone to be clairvoyant. In fact, there is no reliable evidence that anyone is clairvoyant or could possibly be clairvoyant. [2] The following is from one of the most widely used and reliable psychology textbooks. On the subjects of clairvoyance, ESP, and psychic powers in general, the author reports: 

'According to the U.S. National Research Council, "the best evidence does not support the contention that these phenomena exist."' [3] The author also writes, 'After thousands of experiments, a reproducible ESP phenomenon has never been discovered, nor has any individual convincingly demonstrated a psychic ability.' [4]

"And yet many Waldorf teachers think that they have — or should develop — clairvoyant powers. [5] The following is from leading Waldorf educator Eugene Schwartz. He asks a question that would strike most people as totally nuts, yet he is serious: 

'Must teachers be clairvoyant in order to be certain that they are teaching in the proper way?' [6] 

"Schwartz’s answer: 

'We may, indeed, need only the "clairvoyant" faculties that we are already using without being aware that we possess them.' [7] 

"According to Schwartz, Waldorf teachers don't need to be extremely clairvoyant, but they should use whatever clairvoyant abilities they do possess, even if they don't fully realize that they possess them.

"Schwartz says that almost everyone has 'everyday' clairvoyance. He writes: 

'Earlier in this book I spoke of the "everyday clairvoyance" which allows us to perceive the activities of the "higher bodies" of the human being without our necessarily being endowed with the degree of spiritual insight necessary to see the bodies themselves.' [8]

"Here Schwartz is saying that people can use clairvoyance to see the effects produced by other peoples' invisible, spiritual 'bodies', such as the 'etheric body' and the 'astral body.' [9] Waldorf teachers should be able to clairvoyantly perceive the activities of their students' invisible 'bodies.' Schwartz is quite clear about all this, for instance when he writes, 

'Using this everyday clairvoyance, it is possible to become aware of the third member of the young person, the astral body.' [10] 

"Schwartz's point is that Waldorf teachers can use ordinary clairvoyance in getting to know their students (including the students' invisible 'bodies'). And if the teachers develop higher clairvoyant powers, they will be able to actually see the invisible bodies, not just the effects of the bodies' actions. The more clairvoyant the teachers become, the deeper they can peer into their students' souls...

"This is astonishing nonsense, and it is frightening. Imagine having your child 'educated' by someone who thinks s/he is clairvoyant. It would mean that your child is in the care of someone who is deluded — someone who is, to one degree or another, out of touch with reality.

"But things could be worse. Some Waldorf teachers also think that they can converse with the dead. There's a Steiner book that tells them how: Rudolf Steiner, STAYING CONNECTED: How to Continue Your Relations with Those Who Have Died (Anthroposophic Press, 1999). [11] So, some poor kids are 'educated' by people who delude themselves into believing that they have magical powers of perception — clairvoyance — and  magical powers of mediumism — they can contact the dead.

"This is extremely sad and, more importantly, extremely scary. Imagine the harm such a teacher could do to a child." [12] 

My friend then posted the following reply:

"Thanks. That's what I thought I was being told at the Rudolf Steiner House open day last week, it was just a bit hard to believe." [13]

Later, in an email message, she explained that she had attended an open house at which Waldorf representatives acknowledged that such matters as clairvoyance and karma are important within Waldorf schools — but the students' parents are usually not informed. I will quote her email message, here, by her kind permission. I will withhold the name of the individual she mentions (I'll call that person X): 

"[T]hey were very open about karma but [X] admitted that teachers had to be careful what they said in front of parents and it is just not talked about in the school brochure."

◊

Here at Waldorf Watch, I discuss the problem of secrecy at Waldorf schools in the essay I call "Secrets". Steiner urged Waldorf teachers to keep mum about the inner workings of Waldorf schools. For the most part, Waldorf teachers have followed this directive — but sometimes they make revealing comments, as apparently happened at the open house my friend attended.

◊

Here is another interesting message posted at waldorf-critics [14]; it is from an Internet friend who was a student at a Waldorf school. (Her message quotes from a message I posted earlier, then it inserts comments about my words. For today’s transcription, I have marked my statements “R, quoted by A”, and I have marked my friend’s statements “A”.)

[R, quoted by A]  "Imagine having your child 'educated' by someone who thinks s/he is clairvoyant...someone who is, to one degree or another, out of touch with reality."

[A]  "Well, that is a common problem in Waldorf ... Reality isn't what they're most in touch with." 

[R, quoted by A]  "[S]ome poor kids are 'educated' by people who delude themselves into believing that they have...magical powers of mediumism — they can contact the dead."

[A]  "Yes, I had one such teacher. Although many teachers saw the spiritual world, elves, gnomes, etc., this lady actually told the class about her 'encounters' with the dead. They communicated through butterflies somehow."

[R, quoted by A]  "This...is extremely scary. Imagine the harm such a teacher could do to a child."

[A]  "It can be, absolutely. However, I was never the least scared of any of these things. I did think it to be a waste of time, but that was it, for me. [15] I grew up with a grandmother who was on medications because she had a disease. These medications had very bad side effects ... [They] caused her to have hallucinations; for example, she saw gnomes. Once she saw a brown bear in a window on the 4th floor of the building opposite ... [T]he things she experienced were sometimes not very different from what some teachers claimed they saw."

The same former Waldorf student ("A") later added the following:

"Perhaps my teachers didn't actually 'claim' clairvoyance, but they talked about fairies, gnomes, elves as though these beings were real. One teacher used to see elves dancing when he walked to school in the mornings. But such things were just everyday stuff in Waldorf ... Mist isn't mist, it's elves. Gnomes live everywhere. Butterflies 'communicate' messages from the dead." [16] 

My response:

"Sometimes when Waldorf teachers speak of fairies and the like, they may be, in part, speaking metaphorically. 'Look at all the dancing elves, children!' They want to inspire reverence, awe, and spiritual sensitivity in the kids. But when a young child hears an important authority figure speaking of invisible beings as if they are real, s/he is likely to take it literally. At a minimum, Waldorf teachers should not create confusion in children, requiring them to sort out metaphorical statements from statements of fact. 

"But it is also important to realize that Waldorf teachers often mean such statements quite literally. If they accept Steiner's doctrines, then they literally believe in the existence of gnomes, sylphs, Norse gods, and so forth. [17] And if they accept Steiner's doctrines, they know that they, as Waldorf teachers, are grand authority figures whose words should be accepted unquestioningly by their students."

◊

Parents considering Waldorf schools for their kids should certainly bear such matters in mind. Is this what you want for your children?

◊

[1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10997. Note that I have edited various messages, lightly, for use here.

[2] See “Clairvoyance”.

[3] David G. Myers, PSYCHOLOGY (Worth Publishers, 2004), p. 260.

[4] Ibid., p. 260.

The last bit ("a reproducible ESP phenomenon...")  was italicized for emphasis by the book’s author, not by me. — R.R.

[5] See “The Waldorf Teacher’s Consciousness”.

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

[7] Ibid., p. 17.

[8] Ibid., p. 34.

[9] For information about the invisible bodies, see "Incarnation".

[10] WALDORF EDUCATION: Schools for the Twenty-First Century, p. 34.

[11] A better example, one I should have used, is this, published by a Waldorf-affiliated press: WORKING WITH THE DEAD (Waldorf Early Childhood Association of North America, 2003).

[12] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/10999.

[13] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/11000.

[14] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/11001. 

[15] Different students are, of course, differently affected by Waldorf. I was far more taken in than A was. It boils down, often, to the personal strengths and weaknesses of individual students. All Waldorf students are endangered, some more than others. [See, e.g., "Who Gets Hurt".]

[16] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/waldorf-critics/message/11003.

[17] See, e.g., “Beings”.

XXIII.

FOUR-PART FALLACY

Waldorf schools typically claim to respect the individuality of each student. There is at least a shred of truth in this claim. Teachers at Waldorf schools generally do attempt to understand their students. But the Waldorf worldview makes success in this effort all but impossible. The Waldorf worldview leads to slotting kids into spurious psychological and spiritual categories where individuality tends to be lost. One clear example of this is the Waldorf belief in the “four temperaments.”

According to an ancient concept revived by Steiner, there are four primary human psychological types: phlegmatic, choleric, sanguine, and melancholic. [1] These four temperaments are said to be associated with bodily fluids: phlegm, yellow bile (or choler), blood, and black bile. Moreover, the temperaments are believed to manifest as four bodily types. Phlegmatic individuals supposedly tend to be fat; cholerics tend to be short; sanguines are well-proportioned; melancholics tend to be big-boned.

Waldorf teachers often divide students into these four groupings. 

“Following the principle of ‘like cures like’, the children should be seated according to their temperaments.” — Waldorf teacher Roy Wilkinson. [2] 

So, phlegmatics are often placed near the windows or in the back of the room, cholerics are put near the door, sanguines are clustered in the center of the room, and melancholics are consigns to the corners of the room. [3] Likewise, classwork and extracurricular activities may be geared to the four temperaments, with children assigned various activities accordingly. [4]

Like the nonphysical bodies that supposedly incarnate during childhood [5], the four temperaments are given great importance in Waldorf educational practices. Indeed, the nonphysical bodies and the temperaments are interlinked: 

"The 'four temperaments'...may be understood as a solution to the challenge of integrating the etheric body with its physical counterpart [6] … [For instance] ‘Where the etheric…body predominates, we speak of the phlegmatic temperament.’” — Waldorf teacher Eugene Schwartz. [7]

◊

Here are more extended descriptions of the four temperamental types, according to various Anthroposophical sources. [8]

Phlegmatics: dull, slow, deliberate, objective; affected mainly by phlegm, they tend to be fat; dark coloring, wispy hair, sleepy eyes; they dress conservatively; in math, they are adept at addition; they are good stewards; they make skilled pianists; the pictures they draw are often bland and apparently unfinished; if they need punishment, it should be meted out immediately; their auras [9] are often green. 

Cholerics: easily angered, they are abrupt and enthusiastic; affected mainly be yellow bile, they tend to be short and bull-necked; husky, with darting eyes; they prefer unusual, individualized costumes; they are good at division; they are natural leaders; they have a feeling for percussion instruments; the pictures they create often depict crises such as volcanic eruptions; if they need punishment, it should be postponed until their anger has subsided; their auras are often red. 

Sanguines: sunny and upbeat, but also often shallow and flighty; affected mainly by blood, they are physically attractive, well-proportioned; dancing eyes and quick smiles; their dress is colorful and stylish; they are adept at multiplication; they are attracted to brass and reed instruments; the pictures they draw are bright and full of movement; they rarely need punishment — a word of caution may be sufficient; their auras are often yellow. 

Melancholics: sad and moody much of the time, they are loners but empathetic; affected mainly by black bile, they are stooped, big-boned, with mournful eyes; they dress in drab and dark colors; they are good at subtraction; they have an affinity for stringed instruments; they may become thinkers or philosophers; the pictures they draw are bold but too busy; if they need punishment, it should be administered sympathetically but firmly; their auras tend to be blue.

There are many problems in all this. The chief problem is that the four-temperament paradigm is false. Long ago, the paradigm seemed plausible, but it has been set aside by modern science, medicine, and psychology. Today, you will find the paradigm embraced only in places where modern learning is largely rejected and ancient misinformation is embraced instead. [10]

Clearly, children may be damaged when false self-images are imposed on them. Thus, for instance, the link posited between temperament and body type means that profound — and unfounded — conclusions may be drawn about kids because of the way they look. (Fat? Phlegmatic, Short? Choleric.) The resulting psychological harm may be deep and lasting.

Even when assessments are made based on more than mere appearance, the results can still be harmful. A child pegged as phlegmatic, for instance, may suffer from this categorization permanently, whether or not the assessment was made for subtle reasons. And the problem is accentuated if the subtle reasons are erroneous. Subtlety, in the Waldorf universe, generally means the use of clairvoyance. To see children’s etheric bodies or their auras, clairvoyance is needed. But clairvoyance is a delusion; we should place no reliance on it. [11]

Steiner indicated that students may not always fit neatly into the four categories. A person may be primarily sanguine, for instance, but s/he might also have some traces of the other temperaments. In this sense, s/he may be a unique individual. Set against this, however, is the Waldorf practice of dividing students into the four categories, as when arranging classroom seating. Thus, all too often, individual variation is swept aside. 

We can’t truly honor human individuality by pinning false labels on people, no matter how much we refine, moderate, and sort those labels. And the harm caused by false labeling may extend far beyond individual self-image. The Waldorf approach leads children to make false assessments of others. This is the example set by their teachers; it is a prejudicial example, potentially leading to social discord. 

◊

The four temperaments represent just one basis for separation and segregation in Waldorf schools. When they are true to Steiner’s teachings, Waldorf schools also categorize children by age, race, astrological sign, etc. Hence, all children of a specific age are believed to stand at a single mental level, recapitulating a particular stage of human history. [12] Also, all children of each race are thought to stand at a single evolutionary level along a scale that extends from low to high. [13] Moreover, all children born under the same astrological sign are thought to be subject to the same cosmic forces, distinguishing them from kids born under other signs. [14] If children are assessed according to all of these criteria, fine distinctions can presumably result. Thus, for instance, a 12-year-old white choleric born under Gemini can be given different treatment than a 11-year-old black sanguine born under Pisces.

But ask yourself whether any of this makes sense. Or is it irrational, unsupported by fact, and ultimately superstitious? Judging people by multiple, spurious standards is no better — indeed, it is arguably worse — than judging them by a single spurious standard. It represents falsehood piled on falsehood, and it takes us farther from — not closer to — true understanding. [15] Waldorf teachers try to get to know their students as individuals, but because they look at the kids through numerous distorting lenses, their judgements will tend to be inaccurate — perhaps extremely inaccurate. True individuality and true recognition of individual worth are lost. To speak of a child of a certain age who is a white choleric born under Gemini produces a portrait that is based on nothing real and reveals nothing real. The real child, in her true self, bears no relation to this grotesque distortion. The real child in her precious, irreplaceable individuality — her priceless heart, mind, character, personality, talents, powers, inclinations, and aspirations — disappears behind rolling clouds of superstitious, ignorant nonsense.

◊

[1] The concept of the four temperaments is usually attributed to ancient Greek physician Galen (129 CE-c.216 CE). For an overview of the Waldorf conception of the temperaments, see “Humouresque.

[2] Roy Wilkinson, THE TEMPERAMENTS IN EDUCATION (Roy Wilkinson, 1983), p. 9.

[3] See, e.g., Claudia Pangh, "The Phlegmatic Sits by the Window".

[4] See "Temperaments" and, e.g., the entry for "Olympics" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.

[5] See “Incarnation". Steiner taught that the “etheric body” incarnates around age seven, the “astral body” around age 14, and the “I” at around age 21.

[6] I.e., the physical body. (In Waldorf belief, a fully incarnated human being has four bodies. Only the physical body is visible to ordinary vision.)

[7] Eugene Schwartz, MILLENNIAL CHILD (Anthroposophic Press, 1999), p. 185. In the second part of the passage, Schwartz quotes Steiner.

[8] See “Humouresque" and "Temperaments". Roy Wilkinson’s THE TEMPERAMENTS IN EDUCATION is a particularly revealing source. It was reprinted in 1997 by the Rudolf Steiner College Press and is still in widespread use.

[9] See “Auras”.

[10] This applies, in varying degrees, to Waldorf schools. [See “The Ancients — Mistaking Ignorance for Wisdom”.]

[11] See “Clairvoyance” and “The Waldorf Teacher’s Consciousness”.

[12] Fifth graders are thought to stand at the level of ancient Greeks, for instance, and sixth graders at the level of ancient Romans. [See, e.g., “Oh My Stars”.] Of course, children change as they age. But it is manifestly false to assert that all kids of the same age stand at the same developmental level. Children mature in many ways at many different paces.

[13] This is, of course, an explosive topic. Most people today, including most Waldorf teachers, understand that racism is abhorrent; racism is rarely overt in any Waldorf school now. But Steiner’s teachings include many racist beliefs. [see “Steiner’s Racism” and “Races”.] Such beliefs continue to surface in Waldorf teaching materials occasionally, and some Waldorf teachers have recently been cited as still believing in white racial superiority. [see, e.g., the section in "Today" beginning with the words “Rudolf Steiner is by far”; also see “Embedded Racism”.] Note that Steiner said individuals may rise above (or fall below) their current racial level in their future incarnations; to this extent, a distinction must be made between the condition of a race as a whole and the condition of the individuals within the race.

[14] Like racism, astrology is unlikely to be openly espoused in most Waldorf schools today. But astrological beliefs infuse many Anthroposophical teachings and practices, and they lurk below the Waldorf surface. [See, e.g., “Astrology”, “Star Power”, and “Horoscopes”.] 

[15] Are these beliefs false? Check them off: 

◊ Galen’s four-temperament paradigm: false. 

◊ All kids of the same age stand at the same mental level: false. 

◊ Races stand at different evolutionary/spiritual levels: false. 

◊ Astrology: false. 

Only if you believe these things are true will Waldorf be right for you and, perhaps, your child.

XXIV.

THE DEAD

How should we end our visits to Square One? We haven’t said everything that needs to be said, by a long shot. Still, the series has gotten long, and it is time to move on.

So let’s end like this. I will shut up. Instead of opining further, I will simply offer a few closing quotations from a startling book: WORKING WITH THE DEAD.

The book was published by the Waldorf Early Childhood Association of North America. Let that sink in, please. WORKING WITH THE DEAD was published by a Waldorf educational association, an association focused on the instruction of young children.

(Ok, ok. I’m not shutting up. Not yet, anyway. But I’m getting there.)

The people for whom WORKING WITH THE DEAD was published are Waldorf teachers. The question for you is whether you want one of them to become your child’s teacher.

[Waldorf Early Childhood Association of North America, 2003.]

The intentions of the authors, editors, and devout readers of WORKING WITH THE DEAD are doubtless good. Some of the sentiments and thoughts expressed in the book are worthy of respect. And yet... And yet...

This is a book about communicating with the dead. It is a book about getting small children to serve the dead, and getting the dead to serve them.

Teachers at most other types of schools would rarely if ever read a book like this to guide them in their work. But Waldorf teachers quite often do so. The question for you is whether you want a devout reader of such books to become your child’s teacher.

So: four concluding quotations:

1.

"Should we foster ways to serve the dead with small children? [1] May we speak with them [2] about death and dying? … If death can live in adults’ attitudes as a heavenly birthday [3], then the children will approach it as a fact of life … Children who become accustomed to celebrating from a very early age the birthdays and death days of people who are part of their social life [4], learn to accept the spiritual world of beings as real. Thus they gain a basis for religious experience. [5]" [p. 2] 

2.

"At the death of a student:

You were given to us

By your parents’ will

That you might enter strongly

Into future earthly life. [6]

In the pain at the threshold of death

Only the winged words of soul

May be spoken that determine

A ripening life. [7]

So take with you,

Instead of school’s guidance

For earthly action and life,

The loving thoughts of the teacher

Beyond to that spirit-existence,

Where the soul is woven through

With the bright light of eternity

And the spirit experiences

The aim of God’s will. [8]" [p. 13] 

3.

"The moment of waking [9] is of particular importance for [receiving] a message from the dead … Whatever the dead person has to communicate to us, the living, is carried from the spiritual realms in the moment of waking." [p. 5]  

4.

"Verse for Those Who Have Taken Their Own Lives

Your will was weak,

Strengthen your will. [10]

I send you warmth

for your cold.

I send you light

for your darkness.

My love for you,

My memory of you,

Will expand.

May the truth in you

Dear friend

Be resurrected

Beyond the threshold [11]

Despite the ruins

Of your self-destroyed house. [12]

And we who follow your fate [13]

Will ourselves reflect

So that you too will reflect

And standing upright

Will look back at the ruins

Resolved to rebuild them

Into a new

Sturdy house. [14]" [pp. 33-34]

Breaking my silence again:

There are fine sentiments and lofty phrases in these quotations. But there is also much that should give us pause. So let’s pause. The book, published for Waldorf teachers, is titled WORKING WITH THE DEAD.

◊

At Square One, we have looked at numerous Waldorf beliefs and practices. Most of those beliefs and practices are distinctly flawed. Virtually all of the flaws are produced by a single cause: True-blue Waldorf schools embody Anthroposophy, which is severely divorced from reality. Parents who want to send their children to Waldorf schools should certainly have the right to do so. But all parents who are attracted to Waldorf schools would be well advised to think the matter through most carefully.

Signing off,

Roger Rawlings

◊

[1] I.e., should we help small children to develop methods for serving the dead? 

[2] I.e., small children. (Some parents may think that "death and dying" are unfit subjects for small children — too morbid, perhaps; possibly too traumatic. More parents may doubt that schools should teach children to "serve" or "work with" the dead.)

[3] People should celebrate the date someone died on Earth; s/he was born in the spirit realm on that day. It is the dead person's "heavenly birthday" or — a phrase used later — her/his "death day". (Some parents may doubt that schools should have young children celebrate death days.)

[4] Social life, as conceived in Anthroposophy, extends beyond death — we continue to interact with friends and loved ones who have died.

[5] This bears on whether Waldorf schools are fundamentally religious. [See, e.g., "Schools as Churches".]

[6] I.e., your parents chose to give you into the care of a Waldorf faculty, so that you would be properly prepared for your Earthly life.

[7] After your painful departure, the only proper words we may use are those arising from our souls, words that will help prepare you for your new, "ripening" life in the spirit realm.

[8] Instead of heeding our guidance for Earthly life (which is useless to you now), accept your teacher's empowering thoughts for life in the spirit realm — thoughts that will assist you in knowing or experiencing God's will. (In Anthroposophy, divine will is the Godhead. [See "God"; also see "divine cosmic plan" and "divine will" in The Brief Waldorf / Steiner Encyclopedia.]) 

[9] I.e., the moment when we wake in the morning. (We may pose a question for the dead before falling asleep, and we may receive the answer when we wake.)

[10] Suicide shows weakness. Strengthen your will during your new life in the spirit realm and/or during your coming Earthly incarnations. [See "Reincarnation".]

[11] I.e., the threshold of death — the boundary between life on Earth and life in the spirit realm.

[12] I.e., your physical body, which you destroyed.

[13] We "follow your fate" by reflecting on it. (We do not follow your example by killing ourselves.)

[14] I.e., strengthened by our reflections, you will resolve to build a new, sturdy "house" (a new physical body) for your next Earthly incarnation.

[Waldorfistical art by R.R.]