Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 120
Gosh, I was at a Waldorf PR meeting once, and all these gals there were
saying how ridiculous it was that one parent had become offended when the
faculty and staff did a ―dance to Lucifer.‖ The parent, like me, was Christian. I
said, ―Well, I would be upset by such a dance, too.‖ And, they all stared at
me, then said Lucifer is actually not Satan but the ―light-bearer,‖ see, and
basically that the parent was unenlightened...Sincerely, Patti M. (M, 1999)
Conclusion
Often, when ―difficult‖ tenets of Anthroposophy are brought up in connection with either
private or public Waldorf schools, the defense is made that Anthroposophy is not taught in
the schools. They claim that only Steiner‘s teaching methods are used, and that they take
what‘s good and discard the nonsense. I believe Waldorf without Anthroposophy might be
possible, but it would be so difficult that I would be surprised if it ever actually happened.
Anthroposophy is so tightly interwoven into the Waldorf movement that removing it would
leave little but a constellation of pedagogical techniques that, taken separately, aren‘t
unique to Waldorf.
If there is such a thing as ―Waldorf Method‖ or ―New Waldorf‖ without Anthroposophy,
where are the teaching handbooks and curriculum resources? Everything available comes
from Anthroposophy. Where are the periodicals? All the periodicals are Anthroposophical.
Where are the associations, conferences, and conference proceedings? They are all
Anthroposophical. Where is the teacher training? It‘s all done by Anthroposophists.
Everything in the Waldorf education movement comes from Anthroposophy.
In the United States this creates a legal problem if tax money is involved. Public funding of
religious teacher training is illegal, but school districts send teachers to Rudolf Steiner
College for Waldorf training. In hiring teachers, a publicly-funded Waldorf school can‘t
discriminate against Anthroposophists teachers with more Waldorf training should be more
desirable, not avoided. But asking Waldorf-trained teachers to omit Anthroposophical beliefs
is a paradox. Violations are inevitable. It is impossible for a school board to monitor
religious content in a public Waldorf school. What could they do, have philosophy police
monitoring the school? It‘s like having a ―Catholic-inspired‖ charter school. Would that be
allowed? Not likely.
People for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools, Inc. (PLANS) respects the right of
Anthroposophy to exist and to carry on its many activities, and the right of parents to
choose Waldorf education for their children. However, PLANS wants to inform the public
about the cult-like nature of Anthroposophy, to give warning about Anthroposophy‘s
deceptive practices, and to end violations of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
PLANS is demanding that publicly-funded Waldorf schools be closed or converted to private
schools. PLANS is suing two Northern California school districts for violation of the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The judge wrote:
...PLANS has presented evidence that SCUSD teachers received training in
Anthroposophy and that Twin Ridges sought and employed teachers with
Anthroposophical training. As observed by the Supreme Court, ―[w]e cannot
ignore the danger that a teacher under religious control and discipline poses
to the separation of the religious from the purely secular aspects of precollege
education.‖ Lemon, 403 U.S. at 617. Additionally, as noted above, PLANS
presents evidence that state funds are expended in implementing the Waldorf
teaching method, and that the Waldorf education methodology is directed by,
and grounded in, assumptions about learning and child development that can
only be understood with reference to Anthroposophy. Assuming, for purposes
of this motion, that the Waldorf teaching method and Anthroposophy are in
fact ―inseparable in theory as practiced by defendants,‖ state surveillance of
Gosh, I was at a Waldorf PR meeting once, and all these gals there were
saying how ridiculous it was that one parent had become offended when the
faculty and staff did a ―dance to Lucifer.‖ The parent, like me, was Christian. I
said, ―Well, I would be upset by such a dance, too.‖ And, they all stared at
me, then said Lucifer is actually not Satan but the ―light-bearer,‖ see, and
basically that the parent was unenlightened...Sincerely, Patti M. (M, 1999)
Conclusion
Often, when ―difficult‖ tenets of Anthroposophy are brought up in connection with either
private or public Waldorf schools, the defense is made that Anthroposophy is not taught in
the schools. They claim that only Steiner‘s teaching methods are used, and that they take
what‘s good and discard the nonsense. I believe Waldorf without Anthroposophy might be
possible, but it would be so difficult that I would be surprised if it ever actually happened.
Anthroposophy is so tightly interwoven into the Waldorf movement that removing it would
leave little but a constellation of pedagogical techniques that, taken separately, aren‘t
unique to Waldorf.
If there is such a thing as ―Waldorf Method‖ or ―New Waldorf‖ without Anthroposophy,
where are the teaching handbooks and curriculum resources? Everything available comes
from Anthroposophy. Where are the periodicals? All the periodicals are Anthroposophical.
Where are the associations, conferences, and conference proceedings? They are all
Anthroposophical. Where is the teacher training? It‘s all done by Anthroposophists.
Everything in the Waldorf education movement comes from Anthroposophy.
In the United States this creates a legal problem if tax money is involved. Public funding of
religious teacher training is illegal, but school districts send teachers to Rudolf Steiner
College for Waldorf training. In hiring teachers, a publicly-funded Waldorf school can‘t
discriminate against Anthroposophists teachers with more Waldorf training should be more
desirable, not avoided. But asking Waldorf-trained teachers to omit Anthroposophical beliefs
is a paradox. Violations are inevitable. It is impossible for a school board to monitor
religious content in a public Waldorf school. What could they do, have philosophy police
monitoring the school? It‘s like having a ―Catholic-inspired‖ charter school. Would that be
allowed? Not likely.
People for Legal and Nonsectarian Schools, Inc. (PLANS) respects the right of
Anthroposophy to exist and to carry on its many activities, and the right of parents to
choose Waldorf education for their children. However, PLANS wants to inform the public
about the cult-like nature of Anthroposophy, to give warning about Anthroposophy‘s
deceptive practices, and to end violations of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
PLANS is demanding that publicly-funded Waldorf schools be closed or converted to private
schools. PLANS is suing two Northern California school districts for violation of the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The judge wrote:
...PLANS has presented evidence that SCUSD teachers received training in
Anthroposophy and that Twin Ridges sought and employed teachers with
Anthroposophical training. As observed by the Supreme Court, ―[w]e cannot
ignore the danger that a teacher under religious control and discipline poses
to the separation of the religious from the purely secular aspects of precollege
education.‖ Lemon, 403 U.S. at 617. Additionally, as noted above, PLANS
presents evidence that state funds are expended in implementing the Waldorf
teaching method, and that the Waldorf education methodology is directed by,
and grounded in, assumptions about learning and child development that can
only be understood with reference to Anthroposophy. Assuming, for purposes
of this motion, that the Waldorf teaching method and Anthroposophy are in
fact ―inseparable in theory as practiced by defendants,‖ state surveillance of
