Zhang Xiaochen: On the Thought of the Separation of Education and Religion in Marxist Classics
Abstract: The idea of the separation of education and religion in the modern West arose following the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment. Building upon these modern Western foundations and integrating them with concrete social issues, Marx and Engels gained a more profound understanding of the negative impacts brought about by the religious monopoly over education, thereby demonstrating the necessity of their separation. The separation of education and religion is a vital component of the relationship between church and state. The classical Marxist writers constructed a theory for this separation from two perspectives: expounding on church-state relations based on the fundamental tenets of Marxism, and emphasizing the private nature of religion to promote the separation of church and state. Furthermore, the classical Marxist writers explored practical paths to achieve this separation through the lenses of atheist propaganda and education, the expropriation of church property, and the establishment of a secular system of national education.
In the Middle Ages, as Christianity was the mainstream ideology of Western society, the Christian Church became the most important ruling force. “The Middle Ages had attached all other forms of ideology—philosophy, politics, jurisprudence—to theology and made them subdivisions of theology.” Consequently, Western education during the medieval period possessed a thick religious hue. The Church directly monopolized the cultural education and the entirety of spiritual life in Western European feudal society. The content of cathedral and monastic school education was permeated with the spirit of theology; instructional methods consisted of rote memorization of sacred dogmas; and the purpose of education was to train clergy and talents to serve the Church. It was not until the Renaissance that the promotion of an active, optimistic attitude toward life and an enterprising spirit liberated humanity from the oppression and confinement of the divine. This also liberated education and science from religious shackles, allowing education to gradually shake off the rule of religion, develop toward secularization and universalization, and eventually embark on the path of separation from religion.
Based on the modern Western tradition of separating education and religion, the classical Marxist writers engaged in a critical inheritance of these ideas, making the “separation of education and religion” a vital component of the Marxist view of religion and, moreover, an important element of Marxist theory.
I. The Historical Foundations of the Classical Marxist Writers’ Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion
The classical Marxist writers’ thought on the separation of education and religion originated from modern Western thought on the same subject. This modern Western thought emerged alongside the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment.
1. Changes in Educational Goals and Content: The Seeds of Western Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion
The Renaissance was a humanist new cultural movement launched by the emerging European bourgeoisie against feudalism and theology in the realm of ideology. Humanists proposed the exaltation of human nature and lauded human capacity and agency. Their ideal of cultivating a versatile and well-rounded “complete man” [1] exerted a significant influence on the educational transformations of the Renaissance. The seeds of the idea of separating education and religion appeared during this period, manifesting prominently in two aspects: First, the shift in educational goals, with a greater emphasis on the role of education in cultivating the human person. Based on their understanding of human nature, Renaissance humanists rejected the Christian doctrine of “original sin,” criticized Church-controlled schools and scholastic education [2], and opposed educational goals aimed solely at training clergy. In response to the practical needs of the emerging bourgeoisie, they proposed the educational ideal of the “complete man.” Second, the continuous expansion of educational content, with a greater emphasis on the study of the humanities. Humanists opposed divinity, theocracy, and religious constraints, advocating instead for human nature, human rights, and individual freedom. Consequently, humanist educators opposed the asceticism, otherworldliness, and ignorant, blind faith promoted by the Church. They prioritized the study of Greek and Roman classical works, which gradually supplanted the previous dominance of theology. Under the influence of humanist thought, some universities also broke the monopoly of the scholastic curriculum, and the proportion of humanist courses increased steadily, driving the secularization of Western education.
While the seeds of the separation of education and religion were sown during the Renaissance, because the movement was born out of the Middle Ages, the education it advocated still retained some religious color. Humanist educators continued to value the cultivation of a student’s religious character; they simply hoped to educate students with a religion imbued with secular and humanistic tones. Simultaneously, humanist education during this period was distinctly aristocratic, failed to achieve widespread implementation in practice, and contained many utopian elements in theory.
2. State Intervention in Educational Control: The Practical Impetus for the Separation of Education and Religion in the West
The Reformation was a pervasive historical movement occurring within the process of the secularization of European Christianity; it was also a large-scale socio-political movement in which European nations grew in national consciousness and demanded liberation from the control of the Roman Curia. The Reformation dealt a heavy blow to the power of the Catholic Church, leading to the fragmentation of the European religious world. As European countries broke free from the control of the Vatican, they gradually strengthened state control over education, ensuring that education was no longer purely subordinate to religion, which practically advanced the separation of the two. As the initiator of the Reformation, Martin Luther proposed that the state should manage cultural and educational undertakings and established the concept of a public education system. He noted that public schooling should be advanced through the collaborative efforts of state power and the church, and that the state or municipal authorities should provide a certain degree of financial security for public schools.
Driven by the Reformation, the secular regimes of Western countries began to realize the profound political significance of education. They started utilizing religious forces to intervene in the education of the common people and collaborated with the church to manage national education. To an extent, this limited the absolute control of religious forces over national education, promoted the spread of cultural knowledge among the masses, and helped improve the cultural quality of the general public. However, it cannot be denied that the educational models of this period remained deeply saturated with religious color; education had not yet escaped religious control.
3. State Control over Educational Authority: The Consolidation of Western Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion
The Enlightenment was the second Great Awakening [3] following the Renaissance. It violently attacked the old social systems and ideologies, thereby driving a transformation in the educational thought and systems of society as a whole. Enlightenment thinkers not only explicitly proposed the idea of separating education and religion but also actively practiced this concept in educational reform. They broke the traditional pattern of Church-controlled education and constructed a new system of national education. For example, Claude Adrien Helvétius, one of the representatives of 18th-century French materialism, proposed "thoroughly transforming the old schools, stripping the Church of its monopoly over school affairs, and advocating that schools should be confiscated from the hands of the clergy and handed over to state management, with the state establishing secular education."
The French scholar Louis-René de Caradeuc de La Chalotais also proposed that national education must rely on the state government: “I am going to claim for the nation an education which depends on the State alone; because it belongs essentially to the State; because every nation has an inalienable and indefeasible right to instruct its members.” The German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte went further, starting from the principle of the separation of church and state, arguing that the church should only concern itself with the afterlife of the people; as for the education regarding their earthly life, the church must not intervene, and education should be held entirely in the hands of the state.
During the Enlightenment, the state strengthened its intervention in educational undertakings. With the unfolding of the Enlightenment and the decline of ecclesiastical authority, the responsibility for education began to shift from a Church monopoly to state provision. By the late Enlightenment, public education systems controlled by the state had been established in several major Western capitalist countries and had occupied a dominant position; religious courses in schools were gradually replaced by civic classes and secular moral education. Along with economic development and social progress, the role of education in improving the quality of the citizenry and promoting social change became increasingly important. To ensure the genuine separation of education and religion, many Western countries gradually incorporated this principle into their laws.
II. The Classical Marxist Writers’ Practical Critique of the Religious Monopoly over Education
Building upon the modern Western ideas regarding the separation of education and religion, Marx and Engels integrated social realities to gain a deeper understanding of the negative impacts of religious monopoly. They pointed out that the religious monopoly over education hindered human liberation, shackled the development of science and technology, and led to the substitution of social morality with religious morality, thereby demonstrating the necessity of the separation of education and religion.
1. The Religious Monopoly over Education Hinders Human Liberation
When religion monopolizes education, it provides the ruling class with an opportunity. In class societies, in many states where church and state are unified, the rulers also become religious leaders. To consolidate their ruling position, they often use religion as a vital tool to deceive the masses, strengthen their ideological dominance over the public, and cultivate submissive subjects who uphold the system of the exploiter class, thereby restricting the liberation of individual personality and detrimental to well-rounded human development. Engels mentioned in The Civil War in the Valais [4] that political and religious education was entirely in the hands of a small number of aristocratic families and the clergy, who naturally did their utmost to keep the people in ignorance and superstition. This clearly illustrates that religious education has become a tool for the ruling class to exploit the ruled. Consequently, from the perspective of the political party, Lenin pointed out that the proletarian party must struggle resolutely against the behavior of using religion to fool the people: “Our Party is an association of class-conscious, advanced fighters for the emancipation of the working class. Such an association cannot and must not be indifferent to lack of class-consciousness, ignorance or obscurantism in the shape of religious beliefs. We demand complete disestablishment of the Church so as to be able to combat the religious fog with purely ideological and solely ideological weapons, by means of our press and by word of mouth. But we founded our association, the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party, precisely for such a struggle against every religious bamboozling of the workers.”
On the other hand, religion itself poses an obstacle to human liberation. Religion is the result of the development of the capacity for abstract thinking to a certain level, formed gradually through human practice in productive labor; it is a manifestation of the historical limitations of human understanding. When religion monopolizes education, the educational process is permeated with the theological spirit and related content, which is detrimental to people’s correct understanding of nature and human society. Engels mentioned in his letter to Wilhelm Graeber [5] that if he had not been raised with extreme orthodox and pietistic education—if the church, children’s religious classes, and home had not constantly instilled in him a direct and unconditional belief in the Bible and the consistency between biblical doctrine and church doctrine, or even the specific doctrine of every preacher—he might have remained a liberal supernaturalist for a long time. Speaking from his own experience, he pointed out the limitations placed on his own ideological development by being force-fed religious dogmas and studying religious content.
2. The Religious Monopoly over Education Gradually Becomes a Shackle on Scientific and Technological Development
When education is under the control of religion, the theme and core of social culture become religious culture and thought. People are dominated by this ideology and culture, which severely restricts their pursuit of science and is detrimental to the progress of scientific endeavors. As Engels stated in the “Introduction to the English Edition of Socialism: Utopian and Scientific”: “With the rise of the middle-class, science again revives; astronomy, mechanics, physics, anatomy, physiology, were again cultivated. And for the theoretical development of its industrial production, the bourgeoisie required a science which ascertained the physical properties of natural objects and the modes of action of the forces of Nature. Now, up to then science had but been the humble handmaid of the Church, had not been allowed to overstep the limits set by faith, and for that reason had been no science at all. Science rebelled against the Church; the bourgeoisie could not do without science, and, therefore, had to join in the rebellion.”
This reflects a social reality: when the Church controls education, science can only follow the Church's arrangements. In history, many scientists suffered cruel persecution by the Church because their discoveries in the scientific field challenged the Church's ruling status. For instance, Giordano Bruno was sent to the stake for persisting in the heliocentric theory, which violated religious dogma; Michael Servetus was persecuted by Protestants just as he was about to discover the process of blood circulation. These events severely hindered the development of science. Engels described this in Dialectics of Nature: “Natural science at that time also developed in the midst of the general revolution and was itself thoroughly revolutionary; it had even to win in struggle its right of existence. ... Natural science provided its martyrs for the stake and the prisons of the Inquisition.”
3. The Religious Monopoly over Education Leads to the Substitution of Social Morality with Religious Morality
"Religious morality is a morality opposed to secular morality and built upon the foundation of faith in God; it is the sum total of behavioral norms and criteria that are subordinate to fundamental religious dogmas and canons, which regulate the relationship between believers and the God they worship, and which utilize faith in God as the fundamental standard for evaluating good and evil." Consequently, religious morality differs from social morality and must not be conflated with it. Marx clearly pointed out the distinction between the two in Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction: "An independent morality offends the universal principles of religion, and the particular concepts of religion are contrary to morality. Morality recognizes only its own universal and rational religion, while religion recognizes only its own particular and real morality... For the basis of morality is the autonomy of the human spirit, whereas the basis of religion is its heteronomy [6]."
However, when religion monopolizes education, morality is reduced to an appendage of religion. This causes religious morality to replace social morality, becoming the basic principle of people's daily lives. Regarding this, Marx also noted that "genuine Christian legislators cannot recognize morality as an independent sphere that is sacred in itself, for they describe the inner universal essence of morality as an appendage of religion." Engels, in The Condition of the Working Class in England — From Personal Observation and Authentic Sources, further mentioned: "In all English schools, moral education is always tied to religious education, and the results produced by this moral education are evidently no better than those of religious education. The simple principles intended to regulate human relationships, which are already highly disordered due to existing social conditions and the war of all against all, cannot but feel profoundly bewildering to uneducated workers when these principles are mixed with incomprehensible religious dogmas and appear in a religious form as arbitrary and groundless mandates." Based on the realities of English society at the time, Engels pointed out that religious control over moral education leads to religious morality replacing social morality, thereby bringing negative impacts upon the people.
The discourses of the Marxist classical writers reveal to us, from the perspective of social reality, that the religious monopoly on education causes detrimental effects both to individual development and to the development of society. Therefore, the separation of education from religion became an inevitability; this is not only a call of human nature but an urgent requirement for social progress.
III. The Theoretical Construction of the Marxist Classical Writers' Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion
By critiquing the religious monopoly on education, the Marxist classical writers elucidated the necessity of separating education from religion. Concurrently, they constructed a solid theoretical foundation for this separation.
1. Elucidating Church-State Relations Based on the Fundamental Theories of Marxism
Dialectical materialism and historical materialism are the most fundamental and core contents of Marxism. It is precisely using dialectical materialism and historical materialism as cornerstones that the Marxist classical writers elucidated church-state relations. Since education is a vital component in the process of national development, the interaction between the state and religion is directly linked to the relationship between education and religion. Thus, the classical writers' exposition of church-state relations centered on fundamental Marxist theory provides a solid theoretical basis for the idea of separating education from religion. For instance, Marx elucidated church-state relations from the perspective of historical materialism: "It was not the demise of ancient religions that caused the destruction of ancient states; on the contrary, it was the destruction of ancient states that caused the demise of ancient religions." From the perspective of dialectical materialism, Marx also stated: "The political emancipation of the Jew, the Christian, and the religious man in general, is the emancipation of the state from Judaism, from Christianity, and from religion in general. When the state gets rid of the state religion—that is to say, when the state as a state professes no religion but rather professes itself as a state—only then does the state get rid of religion in its own form, in the manner inherent to its essence as a state." Here, Marx clearly pointed out that only when the state is separated from religion and liberated from religious shackles can the people achieve emancipation. Lenin, in The Attitude of the Workers' Party to Religion, proposed even more directly: "The entire worldview of the Social-Democratic Party is based on scientific socialism, i.e., Marxism. Marx and Engels repeatedly declared that the philosophical basis of Marxism is dialectical materialism, which fully inherited the materialist historical traditions of Feuerbach in 18th-century France and the first half of 19th-century Germany—that is, the materialist historical tradition of absolute atheism and resolute opposition to all religion." Based on the social conditions of his time, Lenin placed demands on the proletarian party—namely, to persist in atheism based on dialectical materialism.
2. Emphasizing the Private Nature of Religion to Promote the Separation of Church and State
According to general understanding, the separation of church and state refers to the separation of institutional religion from national sovereign power; this is, in fact, one meaning of the concept. Another, perhaps more important, meaning is the separation of institutional religion from the governance of the public social order, which naturally includes separation from the governance of public education. Religious organizations do not participate in or interfere with any secular affairs under government jurisdiction, but rather focus their spirit solely on pure religious matters that satisfy the religious beliefs of their followers. The idea of the separation of church and state emerged alongside the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment; it is the reflection of people's demands for democracy, freedom, and equality in the realm of religion. Driven by this thought, the state powers of various Western nations gained a degree of independence, gradually cast off religious shackles, and began to intervene in national education, thereby separating education from religion. It can be said that the separation of education from religion is a vital component of church-state relations. Therefore, the Marxist classical writers particularly emphasized the private nature of religion to promote the separation of church and state, thereby advancing the separation of education and religion.
Although religion is a social phenomenon with certain social organizations, it is in clinical reality an internal conscious experience of religious thoughts and psychology by the individual. Thus, it possesses a private nature. In The Holy Family, or Critique of Critical Critique — Against Bruno Bauer and Company, Marx and Engels emphasized this private nature of religion: "The state emancipates itself from religion when it abandons the state religion and allows religion to exist within the scope of civil society [7]. Similarly, the individual person is politically emancipated from religion when he no longer treats religion as a public matter but as his own private matter." By acknowledging the private nature of religion, religion becomes a matter for each individual in society rather than a matter for the state. Consequently, the state and religion are separated, laying the practical foundation for the separation of education and religion.
Lenin also stated directly: "Religion is a private matter. Let everyone believe what they want to believe, or believe nothing at all. The Soviet Republic unites the laborers of all nations and defends their interests regardless of nationality. The Soviet Republic treats all religions equally. It stands outside all religions and seeks to separate religion from the Soviet state." "The state should have nothing to do with religion, and religious bodies should have no connection with state power. Everyone should be fully free to profess any religion they please, or no religion at all—that is, to be an atheist, which every socialist usually is. Discrimination among citizens on account of their religious convictions is wholly intolerable. Even the bare mention of a citizen’s religion in official documents should be eliminated... Complete separation of Church and State—this is the demand which the socialist proletariat makes of the modern state and the modern church." This clearly points out that religious belief is an individual act. The state respects the individual choices of the people and maintains freedom of belief, thereby ensuring the separation of the state from religion and laying a broad mass foundation for the separation of education and religion.
The Marxist classical writers used dialectical materialism and historical materialism to profoundly elucidate church-state relations; they further emphasized the private nature of religion and promoted the separation of church and state, laying a solid theoretical foundation for the ideology of separating education and religion. At the same time, they actively explored ways to realize this separation.
IV. The Implementation Pathways for the Marxist Classical Writers’ Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion
The separation of education and religion is the product of combining theory with practice. Upholding this separation requires us not only to correctly understand the relationship between education and religion but also to effectively implement this basic principle in practice. The Marxist classical writers explored the realization pathways for this separation from the perspectives of atheist propaganda and education, the expropriation of church property, and the establishment of a secular national education system.
1. Strengthening Atheist Propaganda and Education to Provide an Ideological and Mass Foundation for the Separation of Education and Religion
On one hand, the Marxist classical writers emphasized that socialists themselves must adhere to atheism: "Among socialists, there are also theorists, or, as the communists call them, total atheists, while socialists are called practical atheists." If this cannot be achieved, then one is not a true socialist and will be unable to persist in the separation of education and religion. Engels once mentioned: "As for the religious question, we cannot speak of it officially unless the priests force us to do so, but you will sense the spirit of atheism in all our publications; furthermore, we do not accept any group that has even the slightest religious tendency in its statutes." This further emphasized the non-religious purity of socialists, laying a solid ideological foundation for upholding the separation of education and religion.
On the other hand, the Marxist classical writers recognized that adhering to the separation of education and religion is a basic principle that must be followed in building a socialist state. Consequently, they emphasized the importance of atheist propaganda in the construction of a socialist country. In Socialism and Religion, Lenin said: "Our Program is at all times based on a scientific and, moreover, a materialist worldview. An explanation of our Program, therefore, necessarily includes an explanation of the true historical and economic roots of the religious fog. Our propaganda must also include the propaganda of atheism; the publication of the relevant scientific literature (which up till now has been strictly forbidden and persecuted by the autocratic-serf government) must now form one of the items of our Party work. We shall now have to follow the advice Engels once gave to the German socialists: to translate and widely disseminate the 18th-century French Enlightenment and atheist literature." This further demonstrates that it is necessary to propagate a scientific worldview among the masses and strengthen atheist education. Only by doing so can a good mass foundation be laid for upholding the separation of education and religion.
2. Expropriating Church Property and Advocating Church-State Separation to Provide a Political Foundation for the Separation of Education and Religion
"Declare the separation of Church and State, abolish all state expenditures for religious purposes, and turn all church property into state property." When state power is liberated from religious control and church property is confiscated, depriving the church of its economic support, people can obtain a degree of autonomy in all aspects of social life rather than serving religious beliefs entirely. The education sector can then be liberated from religious control. In The Civil War in France — Address of the General Council of the International Working Men's Association, Marx called out: "Having once got rid of the standing army and the police—the physical force elements of the old government—the Commune was anxious to break the spiritual force of repression, the 'parson-power,' by the disestablishment and disendowment of all churches as proprietary bodies. The priests were sent back to the recesses of private life, there to feed upon the alms of the faithful in imitation of their predecessors, the apostles. The whole of the educational institutions were opened to the people gratuitously, and at the same time cleared of all interference of Church and State. Thus, not only was education made accessible to all, but science itself freed from the fetters which class prejudice and governmental force had imposed upon it." It is clearly mentioned here that after the separation of church and state, people can escape the rule of the church and obtain a degree of freedom in the field of education. Engels, in A Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Program of 1891, further emphasized: "Complete separation of Church and State. All religious communities without exception are to be treated by the state as private associations. They are to be deprived of any support from public funds and of all influence on public schools." Furthermore, Lenin mentioned: "The Commune decreed the separation of the Church from the State, and the abolition of the state budget for religious faiths (i.e., state salaries for priests), and made popular education purely secular." It is evident that the separation of church and state ensures that religious groups no longer possess state financial support, preventing them from exerting influence on public schools and directly promoting the separation of education and religion.
3. Actively Advocating for a Secular National Education System to Provide a Practical Foundation for the Separation of Education and Religion
Based on the actual conditions of society at the time, the classical Marxist writers discovered that national education systems had already been established in some Western countries. For instance, after the 17th century, Britain gradually realized that the knowledge acquired by people through education is a component of national wealth and a vital factor in the development of production. Consequently, it was pointed out that the state should establish certain systems so that the entire populace could receive a basic education—including training in basic knowledge and skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic—using this as leverage for the state to accelerate the development of production. However, the degree of secularization in national education was not ideal: "These true national schools did not suit the purposes of the English; to destroy them, they founded sham national schools. To what extent secular matters are minimized in these schools can be seen from the following fact: the textbooks are compiled from excerpts of the Catholic and Protestant Bibles, and are approved by the Catholic and Protestant Archbishops of Dublin." [8] At the same time, the established church continued to interfere in national education, resulting in many national schools remaining under religious control or influence: "The established church founded its own schools, and their sole purpose in doing so was to keep the children of its own congregants within its fold, and if possible, to snatch the souls of some unfortunate children from other sects. As a result, religion—and precisely the most mindless aspect of religion (namely, the rebuttal of heretical doctrines)—became the most important subject; children's minds were stuffed with incomprehensible dogmas and various theological subtleties; sectarian hatred and fanatical bigotry were cultivated from childhood, while all intellectual, spiritual, and moral development was shamefully neglected. Workers have more than once petitioned Parliament to establish a purely secular national education system and leave religious education to the ministers of each sect, but so far, no cabinet has agreed to take such measures." [9] Therefore, the classical Marxist writers actively advocated for the establishment of a secularized national education system, reflecting their promotion of the process of separating education from religion from the perspective of social practice.
Through the study of the relevant discourses of classical Marxist writers, it is not difficult to find that the Marxist thought on the separation of education and religion is a critical inheritance of modern Western thought on the same subject. On the one hand, following the trajectory of modern Western thought regarding the separation of education and religion, they discovered the various negative impacts brought about by the religious monopoly on education. They clearly pointed out that this monopoly hindered human self-emancipation, fettered the development of science and technology, and led to religious morality replacing social morality, further illustrating the necessity of separating education from religion. On the other hand, they conducted a theoretical construction of the separation of education and religion based on the fundamental theories of Marxism regarding the exposition of church-state relations, emphasizing the private nature of religion, and promoting the separation of church and state. This laid a solid theoretical foundation for the ideology of separating education from religion. Furthermore, the classical Marxist writers integrated theory with practice, implementing the principle of separating education from religion from a practical standpoint. They actively advocated for the propagation of atheism, the expropriation of church property, and the establishment of a secularized national education system, thereby manifesting their implementation of the principle of separating education from religion. It is thus evident that the separation of education and religion is an important component of the Marxist view of religion and, moreover, a vital Marxist theory. Adhering to the separation of education and religion is a fundamental principle for us to correctly handle the relationship between education and religion under the guidance of the Marxist view of religion, ensuring the healthy development of both education and religion within a socialist country.