On the Thought of Marxist Classical Writers on the Separation of Education and Religion

Summary: The modern Western idea of separating education from religion emerged with the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment. Building on this modern Western idea, Marx and Engels, in light of actual social problems, came to a deeper recognition of the negative impacts of religious monopoly over education, thereby demonstrating the necessity of separating education from religion. The separation of education and religion is an important component of the relationship between state and church. Marxist classical writers constructed a theory of separating education from religion from two aspects: elaborating on the relationship between state and church on the basis of fundamental Marxist theory, emphasizing the private nature of religion, and promoting the separation of state and church. Marxist classical writers also explored practical pathways for separating education from religion from the perspectives of propagating atheism, depriving the church of its property, and establishing a secularized national education system.

提要：近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想是随着文艺复兴、宗教改革以及启蒙运动的发展而产生的。在近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想的基础上，马克思、恩格斯结合社会现实问题更为深刻地认识到宗教垄断教育所带来的负面影响，进而说明教育与宗教相分离的必要性。教育与宗教相分离是政教关系的一项重要内容，马克思主义经典作家从以马克思主义基本理论为基础阐述政教关系、强调宗教的私人性质，促进政教分离等两个方面进行了教育与宗教相分离的理论构建。马克思主义经典作家还分别从无神论的宣传教育、剥夺教会财产以及世俗化国民教育制度的建立角度探索教育与宗教相分离的现实途径。

In the Middle Ages, because Christianity was the dominant ideology of Western society, the Christian church became the most important ruling force of the time. "The Middle Ages had merged all other forms of ideology—philosophy, politics, jurisprudence—into theology and made them subdivisions of theology." [1]1 Marx and Engels, *The German Ideology* (1845-46). Consequently, education in the medieval West was heavily imbued with religious character. The church directly monopolized cultural education and the entire spiritual life of Western European feudal society. The content of church school education was permeated with theological spirit; the educational method was rote memorization of sacred doctrines; the purpose of education was to train monks and personnel to serve the church. It was not until the Renaissance, with its advocacy of an optimistic and enterprising attitude toward life, that humanity was liberated from the oppression and confinement of God, and education, science, and so forth were freed from the shackles of religion. Education gradually escaped the domination of religion, developed toward secularization and universalization, and ultimately embarked on the path of separation from religion.

在中世纪，由于基督教是当时西方社会的主流意识形态，基督教教会成了当时社会最为重要的统治力量，“中世纪把意识形态的其他一切形式——哲学、政治、法学，都合并到神学中，使它们成为神学中的科目。”因此中世纪时期的西方教育具有浓厚的宗教色彩。教会直接垄断了西欧封建社会的文化教育和整个精神生活，教会学校教育的内容贯穿着神学精神，教育方法是死记硬背那些神圣的教义，教育的目的是为了培养僧侣和为教会服务的人才。直至文艺复兴时期，那种宣扬积极乐观的人生态度和进取精神，才把人从神的压迫禁锢中解放出来，也把教育、科学等从宗教的禁锢中解放出来，使教育逐渐摆脱了宗教的统治，朝着世俗化、全民化的方向发展，最终走上与宗教相分离的道路。

On the basis of the modern Western idea of separating education from religion, Marxist classical writers critically inherited it, making "the separation of education and religion" an important component of the Marxist view on religion and a significant element of Marxist theory itself.

马克思主义经典作家在西方教育与宗教相分离思想的基础上，对其进行了批判地继承，使“教育与宗教相分离”成为马克思主义宗教观的重要组成部分，更是马克思主义理论的一个重要内容。

I. The Historical Foundation of the Marxist Classical Writers' Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion

一、马克思主义经典作家教育与宗教相分离

The thought of Marxist classical writers on the separation of education and religion originates from the modern Western idea of separating education from religion. This modern Western idea emerged with the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment.

思想的历史根基马克思主义经典作家教育与宗教相分离思想源自近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想。而近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想是随着文艺复兴、宗教改革以及启蒙运动的发展而产生的。

1. Changes in Educational Purpose and Content—The Germination of the Western Idea of Separating Education from Religion

1、教育目的与教育内容的改变——西方教育与宗教相分离思想的萌芽

The Renaissance was a humanist new cultural movement launched by the emerging European bourgeoisie in the realm of ideology against feudalism and theology. Humanists proposed exalting humanity, praising human abilities and functions, and cultivating the ideal of the versatile, fully developed "whole person," which had a significant impact on educational reform during the Renaissance. The germination of the idea of separating education from religion appeared during the Renaissance, prominently manifested in two aspects: First, a shift in educational purpose, placing greater emphasis on education's role in cultivating people. Based on their understanding of human nature, Renaissance humanists denied the Christian doctrine of "original sin," criticized schools controlled by the church and scholastic education, and opposed an educational purpose limited to training clergy. In line with the practical needs of the emerging bourgeoisie, they proposed the educational ideal of cultivating the "whole person." Second, the continuous expansion of educational content, placing greater emphasis on studying the humanities. Humanists opposed divinity, theocracy, and religious bondage, advocating humanity, human rights, and individual freedom. Consequently, humanist educators opposed the asceticism, otherworldliness, and ignorant, blind faith promoted by the church. They valued the study of classical Greek and Roman works, which gradually replaced the dominant position of theology. Under the influence of the humanist trend, some universities also broke the monopoly of scholastic curricula, and the proportion of humanist courses continuously increased, promoting the secularization of Western education.

文艺复兴是欧洲新兴资产阶级在思想意识领域发动的一场反封建、反神学的人文主义新文化运动。人文主义者提出高扬人性，讴歌人的能力和作用；培养多才多艺、全面发展的“全人”理想，对文艺复兴时期的教育变革产生了重要的影响。文艺复兴时期出现了教育与宗教相分离思想的萌芽，并突出表现在两个方面：一是教育目的的转移，更加重视教育培养人的作用。文艺复兴时期的人文主义者根据他们对人性的理解，否定了基督教的“原罪”说，批判由教会控制的学校和经院主义教育，反对仅仅培养神职人员教育目的。他们根据新兴资产阶级的现实需要，提出了培养“全人”的教育理想。二是教育内容的不断开拓，更加重视学习人文学科。人文主义者反对神性、神权、宗教束缚，倡导人性、人权与个性自由，因而人文主义教育家反对教会所提出的禁欲、出世思想以及愚昧、盲目的信仰等。他们重视对希腊和罗马的古典作品的学习，逐渐取代了以往神学的支配地位。在人文主义思潮的影响下，一些大学也打破了经院主义课程的垄断地位，人文主义课程的比例不断增加，推动了西方教育世俗化的发展。

Although the germination of the idea of separating education from religion had already occurred during the Renaissance, because the Renaissance was nurtured within the Middle Ages, the education it advocated still retained a certain religious character. Humanist educators still valued the cultivation of students' religious qualities, only they preferred to educate students with a religion imbued with secular and humanistic colors. At the same time, the humanist education of this period was markedly aristocratic; it was not widely implemented in practice and still contained many utopian elements in theory.

虽然在文艺复兴时期，教育与宗教相分离的思想萌芽已经产生，但由于文艺复兴孕育于中世纪，它所倡导的教育依然带有一定的宗教色彩，人文主义教育家仍然重视学生宗教品质的培养，只是他们更希望以富有世俗色彩和人性色彩的宗教教育学生。与此同时，这一时期的人文主义教育具有明显的贵族性，在现实中并为得到广泛实施，在理论上还存在着许多空想的成份。

2. State Intervention in Educational Control—The Practical Impetus for the Western Idea of Separating Education from Religion

2、国家介入教育控制权——西方教育与宗教相分离思想的现实推动

The Reformation was a widespread historical movement in the secularization of European Christianity, as well as a large-scale socio-political movement in which European nations, with heightened national consciousness, sought to break free 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. While breaking free from the control of the Roman Curia, European states gradually strengthened state control over education itself, so that education was no longer merely subordinate to religion, practically advancing the separation of education and religion. As the initiator of the Reformation, Martin Luther proposed the idea of state management of cultural and educational affairs and the establishment of a public education system. He stated: "Public schooling should be jointly promoted by the state authorities and the church through cooperation. The state or municipal authorities should provide certain financial guarantees for public schools."

宗教改革是欧洲基督教世俗化过程中出现的一场普遍性的历史运动，同时也是欧洲各国民族意识增强、要求摆脱罗马教廷控制的大规模社会政治运动。宗教改革运动沉重地打击了天主教教会势力，导致欧洲宗教世界的分裂。欧洲各国在摆脱了罗马教廷控制的同时，逐渐加强了国家本身对教育的控制，使教育不再单纯地附属于宗教，在现实上推动了教育与宗教相分离。作为宗教改革运动的发起者，马丁·路德提出了国家管理文化教育事业，建立公共教育制度的理念。他指出：“公共的学校教育应当由国家政权和教会通力协作共同推进。国家或市政当局应当为公共学校提供一定的财政保障。”

Driven by the Reformation, secular governments in Western countries began to realize the profound political significance of education. They started to use religious forces to intervene in the education of ordinary people, managing national education jointly with the church. This, to a certain extent, limited the absolute control of religious forces over national education, promoted the dissemination of cultural knowledge among ordinary people, and helped improve the cultural quality of the masses. However, it is undeniable that the educational model of this period was also heavily imbued with religious overtones; education had not yet escaped the control of religion.

在宗教改革运动的推动下，西方各国的世俗政权已经开始意识到教育所具有的深远的政治意义，开始借助宗教力量介入普通民众教育，与教会协同管理国民教育，在一定程度上限制了宗教势力对国民教育的绝对控制，促进了文化知识在普通民众中的传播，并有助于提升人民大众的文化素质。但不可否认的是，这一时期的教育模式同样侵染着浓厚的宗教色彩，教育并没能摆脱宗教的控制。

3. State Control of Educational Authority—The Establishment of the Western Idea of Separating Education from Religion

3、国家掌控教育权——西方教育与宗教相分离思想的确立

The Enlightenment was the second ideological liberation movement after the Renaissance. It fiercely attacked the old social system and ideology, thereby promoting changes in educational thought and systems across society. Enlightenment thinkers not only explicitly proposed the idea of separating education from religion but also actively practiced this concept in educational practice. They broke the traditional situation of church control over education and constructed a new system of national education. For example, Claude Adrien Helvétius, a representative of 18th-century French materialism, proposed: "Thoroughly reform the old schools, deprive the church of its monopoly on school affairs, and advocate that schools should be taken from the clergy and handed over to the state for management, with the state establishing secular education."

启蒙运动是继文艺复兴之后的第二次思想解放运动。它猛烈地抨击了旧有的社会制度和意识形态，进而推动了整个社会教育思想和体制的变革。启蒙思想家们不仅明确提出教育与宗教相分离的思想，而且在教育实践中也积极践行这种理念。他们打破了由教会掌控教育的传统局面，构建了国民教育的新体制。例如：18世纪法国唯物主义的代表人物之一——爱尔维修就提出：“彻底改造旧学校，剥夺教会对学校事业的垄断，主张应从教士手中把学校没收过来交给国家管理，由国家创办世俗教育。”

The French scholar Louis-René de Caradeuc de La Chalotais also proposed that national education must rely on the national government: "I want to cry out to the whole nation: The French nation needs an education that relies on the state, because education essentially belongs to the state; educating its own citizens is the inalienable and unquestionable right of every state." The German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte, proceeding from the principle of separation of church and state, argued that the church should only concern itself with the afterlife of citizens; as for the education of citizens in their present life, the church must not interfere; education should be entirely in the hands of the state.

法国学者拉夏洛泰也提出国家教育必须依靠国家政府，“我要向全国大声疾呼：法国民族需要一种依靠国家的教育，因为教育实质上是属于国家的，教育自己的公民是每个国家不可剥夺和无可置疑的权利。”德国哲学家费希特更从政教分离的原则出发，认为教会只可关心国民的来世生活，至于国民现世生活教育，教会不得干预，教育应完全掌握在国家手里。

During the Enlightenment, the state strengthened its intervention in educational affairs. With the unfolding of the Enlightenment and the decline of church authority, education gradually shifted from a church monopoly to state provision. By the late Enlightenment, state-controlled public education systems had been established in several major Western capitalist countries and occupied a dominant position. Religious courses in schools were gradually replaced by civics and secular moral education. With economic development and social progress, education played an increasingly important role in improving national quality and promoting social change. To ensure the genuine separation of education and religion, many Western countries gradually wrote this principle into law.

在启蒙运动时期，国家加强了对教育事业的干预，随着启蒙运动的展开和教会权威的衰落，教育事业开始逐渐由教会垄断转向国家兴办。到了启蒙运动后期，由国家控制的公立教育制度已经在西方几个主要资本主义国家建立起来，并占据了主导地位，在学校中的宗教课程也逐步被公民课和世俗道德教育所取代。随着经济的发展，社会的进步，教育在提高国民素质，推动社会变革中的作用越来越重要。为了保证教育与宗教真正分离，许多西方国家都逐渐将这一原则写进法律。

II. Marxist Classical Writers on the Religious Monopoly of Education

二、马克思主义经典作家对宗教垄断教育

On the basis of the separation of education and religion in modern Western thought, Marx and Engels, in conjunction with real social problems, more profoundly recognized the negative impacts brought about by religious monopoly over education. They pointed out that religious monopoly over education hinders the liberation of humanity itself, shackles the development of science and technology, and even leads to religious morality replacing social morality, thereby demonstrating the necessity of separating education from religion.

的现实批判在近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想的基础上，马克思、恩格斯结合社会现实问题更为深刻地认识到宗教垄断教育所带来的负面影响，指出宗教垄断教育阻碍了人类自身的解放，束缚了科技的发展，更导致了宗教道德代替社会道德，进而说明教育与宗教相分离的必要性。

1. Religious monopoly over education hinders the liberation of humanity itself

1、宗教垄断教育阻碍了人类自身的解放

When religion monopolizes education, it provides an opportunity for the ruling class to exploit. In class societies, in many states where politics and religion are united, rulers also become religious leaders. To consolidate their ruling position, they often use religion as an important tool to confuse the masses, strengthen their ideological control over the people, cultivate docile subjects who uphold the exploiting class system, restrict the liberation of individuality, and hinder the all-round development of human beings. Engels stated in *The Civil War in the Valais*: “Political and religious education is entirely in the hands of a few aristocratic clans and clergy. They naturally strive to keep the people ignorant and superstitious.” [2]2 Engels, “The Civil War in the Valais,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 5, p. 524. This makes it even clearer that religious education has become a tool for the ruling class to exploit the ruled class. Consequently, from the perspective of the political party, Lenin pointed out that the proletarian party must wage a resolute struggle against the behavior of using religion to befuddle the people. “Our party is a league of class-conscious, advanced fighters for the emancipation of the working class. Such a league cannot and must not remain indifferent to the manifestation of ignorance, ignorance and obscurantism that religion represents. We demand the complete separation of the church from the state, so that we may use purely ideological weapons, and only ideological weapons, our press, our speech, to fight the religious fog. One of the purposes for which we are building our own organization, the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, is precisely to wage such a struggle against all attempts to use religion to befuddle the workers.” [3]3 Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, Vol. 10, p. 66.

当宗教垄断教育，就给了统治阶级以可乘之机。在阶级社会中，许多政教合一的国家，统治者同时也成为了宗教领袖，他们为了巩固自身的统治地位，往往将宗教作为重要工具，迷惑人民大众，加强他们对于人民大众的思想统御，培养维护剥削阶级制度的顺民，限制了人们的个性的解放，不利于人的全面发展。恩格斯在《瓦莱内战》中讲到：“政治教育和宗教教育完全把持在少数贵族门阀和僧侣手中。他们自然是极力保持人民的愚昧和迷信。”这就更为明确地说明了宗教教育已经成为统治阶级对被统治阶级进行剥削的一种工具。因而，列宁从政党角度出发，指出了无产阶级政党要与利用宗教愚弄人民的行为做坚决的斗争。 “我们的党是争取工人阶级解放的觉悟的先进战士的联盟。这样的联盟不能够而且也不应当对宗教这种不觉悟、无知和蒙昧的表现置之不理。我们要求教会与国家完全分离，以便使用纯粹的思想武器，而且仅仅是思想武器，用我们的书刊、我们的言论来跟宗教迷雾进行斗争。我们建立自己的组织即俄国社会民主工党的目的之一，也正是为了要同一切利用宗教愚弄工人的行为进行这样的斗争。”

On the other hand, religion itself also hinders the liberation of humanity. Religion is the result of the development of humanity’s abstract thinking ability to a certain degree, formed gradually in the practice of material production and labor, and is a manifestation of the historical limitations of humanity’s level of understanding. When religion monopolizes education, the educational process is permeated with theological spirit and related content, which is detrimental to people’s correct understanding of nature and human society. Engels mentioned in a letter to William Greig: “If I had not been subjected to extreme orthodox thought and pietistic education, if the church, children’s religious classes, and the family had not constantly instilled in me the need to believe directly and unconditionally in the Bible, in the consistency between biblical doctrine and church doctrine, and even the special doctrines of every individual preacher, I might have retained a liberal supernaturalism for a long time.” [4]4 Engels, “Letter to William Greig,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 41, p. 543. From the perspective of his own personal experience, he pointed out the limitations imposed on the development of his own thought by the forced indoctrination of religious dogma and the study of religious content.

另一方面，宗教本身对于人类自身解放也有所阻碍。宗教是人类在生产劳动的实践中逐步形成的抽象思维能力发展到一定程度的结果，是人类认识水平的历史局限性表现。当宗教垄断教育，教育过程中就会贯穿着神学精神以及相关内容，这不利于人们正确认识自然界和人类社会。恩格斯在《致威廉·格雷格》中就提到的“如果我不是受过极端的正统思想和虔诚主义教育，如果教堂、儿童宗教课和家庭不是一直向我灌输要直接地、无条件地相信圣经，相信圣经教义同教会教义、甚至同每一个传教士的特殊教义之间的一致性，那我可能还会长时间地保持一些自由主义的超自然主义。”他从自身实际经历的角度出发，指出了被强迫灌输宗教教义，学习宗教内容后，对于自身思想发展的局限。

2. Religious monopoly over education gradually becomes a shackle on the development of science and technology

2、宗教垄断教育逐渐成为科技发展的束缚

When education is under the control of religion, the theme and core of social culture become religious culture and religious thought. People are dominated by this kind of thought and culture, which greatly restricts their pursuit of science and is detrimental to the progress of science. As Engels stated in the “Introduction to the English Edition of *Socialism: Utopian and Scientific*”: “With the rise of the middle bourgeoisie, science too was greatly revived; research into astronomy, mechanics, physics, anatomy and physiology was resumed. The bourgeoisie, for the development of its industrial production, needed a science which would investigate the physical properties of natural objects and the modes of action of natural forces. But up to that time science had been the humble handmaid of the church, it was not allowed to exceed the limits set by religious faith, and therefore it was not science at all. Now science rose in rebellion against the church; the bourgeoisie had no use for science, so it had to join in this rebellion.” [5]5 Engels, “Introduction to the English Edition of *Socialism: Utopian and Scientific*,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 22, p. 348.

当教育处于宗教的控制之下，社会文化的主题和核心就变成了宗教文化与宗教思想。人们被这种思想文化所统治，极大地限制了自身对科学的追求，不利于科学事业的进步。如同恩格斯在《〈社会主义从空想到科学的发展〉英文版导言》中所说“随着中等资产阶级的兴起，科学也大大地复兴了；天文学、机械学、物理学、解剖学和生理学的研究又重新进行起来。资产阶级为了发展它的工业生产，需要有探察自然物体的物理特性和自然力的活动方式的科学。而在此以前，科学只是教会的恭顺的婢女，它不得超越宗教信仰所规定的界限，因此，根本不是科学。现在科学起来反叛教会了；资产阶级没有科学是不行的，所以也不得不参加这一反叛。”

This reflects a social reality: when the church controls education, science can only obey the church’s arrangements. Historically, many scientists suffered cruel persecution by the church because their discoveries in the field of science challenged the church’s dominant position. For example, Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for insisting on the heliocentric theory, which violated religious dogma; 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 was also developing in the midst of the general revolution, and it was itself thoroughly revolutionary; it had to fight for its right to exist. … Natural science sent its martyrs to the stake and to the dungeons of the Inquisition.” [6]6 Engels, *Dialectics of Nature*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 20, p. 361.

这反映了一种社会现实，即当教会控制着教育，科学也只能听从教会的安排。历史上有许多科学家因其在科学领域内的发现冲击到教会的统治地位而遭到教会残酷的迫害。如乔尔丹诺·布鲁诺因坚持太阳中心说，触犯了宗教教义而被送上了火刑柱；塞尔维特正要发现血液循环过程的时候被新教徒迫害，这些都使科学的发展受到严重阻碍。恩格斯在《自然辩证法》中这样形容到：“自然科学当时也在普遍的革命中发展着，而且它本身就是彻底的革命；它还得为争取自己的生存权利而斗争。……自然科学把它的殉道者送上了火刑场和宗教裁判所的牢狱。”

3. Religious monopoly over education leads to religious morality replacing social morality

3、宗教垄断教育导致宗教道德代替社会道德

“Religious morality is a morality opposed to secular morality and based on faith in God. It is the sum total of behavioral norms and standards derived from the basic doctrines and precepts of religion, regulating the relationship between believers and the God they believe in, and taking belief in God as the fundamental criterion for evaluating good and evil.” [7]7 This is a definition cited by the author from a Chinese source; the original source is not provided in the text. Therefore, religious morality differs from social morality and the two should not be confused. Marx clearly pointed out the distinction between the two in his “Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction”: “Independent morality would harm the universal principles of religion; the particular concepts of religion are in conflict with morality. Morality recognizes only its own universal, rational religion; religion recognizes only its own particular, actual morality. … For the basis of morality is the autonomy of the human spirit, while the basis of religion is the heteronomy of the human spirit.” [8]8 Marx, “Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 1, p. 15.

“宗教道德是与世俗道德相对的和建立在对神的信仰基础上的道德，是从属于宗教的基本教义和教规、调整教徒与其信仰的神之间的关系、以是否信神作为善恶评价根本标准的行为规范和准则的总和。”因而，宗教道德与社会道德有所不同，不可混淆。马克思曾在《评普鲁士最近的书报检查令》中明确指出二者的区别：“独立的道德要损害宗教的普遍原则，宗教的特殊概念是同道德相抵触的。道德只承认自己普遍的合乎理性的宗教，宗教则只承认自己特殊的现实的道德。……因为道德的基础是人类精神的自律，而宗教的基础则是人类精神的他律。”

However, when religion monopolizes education, morality becomes an appendage of religion, causing religious morality to replace social morality and become the basic principle of people’s daily life. On this point, Marx also stated: “A truly Christian legislator cannot recognize morality as a sacred independent domain in itself, because they declare the inner universal essence of morality to be an appendage of religion.” [9]9 Marx, “The Leading Article in No. 179 of the *Kölnische Zeitung*,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 1, p. 194. Engels, in *The Condition of the Working Class in England: From Personal Observation and Authentic Sources*, further noted: “In all English schools, moral education is always linked with religious education, and the results of this moral education are obviously no better than those of religious education. The simple principles that people use to regulate their relations with one another are already very confused due to existing social conditions and the war of all against all. When these principles are mixed with incomprehensible religious dogmas and appear in the religious form of arbitrary and unreasonable commands, they cannot but cause great bewilderment among uneducated workers.” [10]10 Engels, *The Condition of the Working Class in England*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 2, p. 398. Based on the actual situation in English society at the time, Engels pointed out that religion’s control over moral education led to religious morality replacing social morality, bringing negative impacts on people.

然而，当宗教垄断了教育，道德就沦为了宗教的附属物，使得宗教道德代替了社会道德，成为人们日常生活的基本原则。就此，马克思也讲到“道地的基督教立法者不可能承认道德是一种本身神圣的独立领域，因为他们把道德的内在的普遍本质说成是宗教的附属物。”恩格斯更是在《英国工人阶级状况——根据亲身观察和可靠材料》提到“在所有的英国学校里，道德教育总是和宗教教育连在一起，这种道德教育所产生的结果显而易见地丝毫不会比宗教教育好些。人们用来调节人对人关系的简单原则，由于现存的社会条件，由于一切人反对一切人的战争，本来就已经非常紊乱，而当这些原则和不可理解的宗教教条掺杂在一起，并以一种专横而毫无理由的训令的宗教形式出现时，就不能不使那些没有受过教育的工人感到非常莫名其妙。”恩格斯根据当时英国社会的现实情况，指出宗教对道德教育的控制，进而导致宗教道德代替社会道德，并给人们带来了负面的影响。

The expositions of the Marxist classical writers reveal to us from the perspective of social reality that the religious monopoly over education has caused adverse effects on both the development of human beings themselves and the development of society. Therefore, the separation of education and religion becomes inevitable; this is not only a call of human nature but also an urgent requirement for social progress.

马克思主义经典作家的论述从社会现实角度向我们揭示了宗教垄断教育给人自身的发展与社会的发展均造成了不利的影响。因而，教育与宗教相分离成为必然，这不仅是人性的呼唤更是社会进步的迫切要求。

III. The Theoretical Construction of the Thought of Marxist Classical Writers on the Separation of Education and Religion

三、马克思主义经典作家教育与宗教相分离思想的理论构建

By criticizing the religious monopoly over education, the Marxist classical writers elucidated the necessity of separating education from religion. At the same time, they also laid a solid theoretical foundation for the separation of education and religion.

马克思主义经典作家通过批判宗教垄断教育，阐明了教育与宗教相分离的必要性。同时，他们也为教育与宗教相分离搭建了坚实的理论基础。

1. Elaborating on the relationship between politics and religion based on the fundamental theories of Marxism

1、以马克思主义基本理论为基础阐述政教关系

Dialectical materialism and historical materialism are the most fundamental and core content of Marxism. It is precisely on the foundation of dialectical materialism and historical materialism that the Marxist classical writers expound the relationship between state and religion. Since education is an important element in the process of national development, the interaction between state and religion is directly linked to the question of the relationship between education and religion. Consequently, the Marxist classical writers’ exposition of the relationship between state and religion, grounded in basic Marxist theory, provides a solid theoretical basis for the thought on the separation of education and religion. For example, Marx expounds the relationship between state and religion from the perspective of historical materialism: “It was not the decline of the ancient religions that caused the fall of the ancient states; on the contrary, it was the fall of the ancient states that caused the decline of the ancient religions.” [11]11 Karl Marx, “Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law: Introduction,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 1, p. 461. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) Marx also states from the perspective of dialectical materialism: “The political emancipation of the Jew, the Christian, and the religious person in general is the emancipation of the state from Judaism, from Christianity, from religion in general. When the state emancipates itself from the state religion, that is, when the state, as a state, does not profess any religion, but rather professes itself as the state, only then does the state, in its own form, in the manner inherent to its essence, as a state, emancipate itself from religion.” [12]12 Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 1, p. 443. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) Here, Marx clearly points out that only when the state is separated from religion, and the state casts off the shackles of religion, can people achieve emancipation. Lenin, in his “On the Attitude of the Workers’ Party to Religion,” puts it even more directly: “The entire world outlook of the Social-Democratic Party is based on scientific socialism, i.e., Marxism. Marx and Engels repeatedly declared that the philosophical foundation of Marxism is dialectical materialism, which has fully inherited the historical tradition of the materialism of eighteenth-century France and of Feuerbach in the first half of nineteenth-century Germany — the historical tradition of absolute atheism and resolute opposition to all religion.” [13]13 V. I. Lenin, “On the Attitude of the Workers’ Party to Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 17, p. 394. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) Based on the social conditions of his time, Lenin set forth the demand for the proletarian party to adhere to atheism grounded in dialectical materialism.

辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义是马克思主义最基本、最核心的内容。马克思主义经典作家正是以辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义为基石来阐述政教关系的。由于教育是国家发展过程中的重要内容，那么国家与宗教的互动，直接关联到教育与宗教的关系问题。因而，马克思主义经典作家围绕马克思主义基本理论对政教关系的阐述，为教育与宗教相分离的思想提供了坚实的理论依据。比如，马克思从历史唯物主义角度阐述政教关系：“不是古代宗教的灭亡引起古代国家的毁灭，相反，是古代国家的灭亡引起了古代宗教的毁灭。”马克思还从辩证唯物主义角度讲到：“犹太教徒、基督徒、一般宗教信徒的政治解放，是国家从犹太教、基督教和一般宗教中解放出来。当国家从国教中解放出来，就是说，当国家作为一个国家，不信奉任何宗教，确切地说，信奉作为国家的自身时，国家才以自己的形式，以自己本质所固有的方式，作为一个国家，从宗教中解放出来。”这里，马克思明确指出当国家与宗教分离开来，国家摆脱了宗教的束缚，人们才能获得解放。列宁在《论工人政党对宗教的态度》中更直接提出：“社会民主党的整个世界观是以科学社会主义即马克思主义为基础的。马克思和恩格斯曾多次声明，马克思主义的哲学基础是辩证唯物主义，它完全继承了法国18世纪和德国19世纪上半叶费尔巴哈的唯物主义历史传统，即绝对无神论的、坚决反对一切宗教的唯物主义的历史传统。”列宁根据当时的社会情况，对无产阶级政党提出要求，即坚持以辩证唯物主义为基础的无神论。

2. Emphasizing the Private Character of Religion to Promote the Separation of State and Religion

2、强调宗教的私人性质，促进政教分离

According to common understanding, the separation of state and religion refers to the separation of established religion from the ruling power of the state; this is actually one meaning of the separation of state and religion. Another, perhaps more important, meaning is the separation of established religion from the governing authority over the public order of life, which naturally also includes the separation from the governing authority over public education. Religious organizations do not participate in or interfere with all secular affairs under the jurisdiction of the government, but instead concentrate their efforts solely on purely religious matters that satisfy the religious beliefs of their followers. The thought on the separation of state and religion emerged with the development of the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment; it is the reflection in the religious sphere of people’s demands for democracy, freedom, and equality. Driven by this thought, the state power of various Western countries gained a certain degree of independence, gradually casting off the shackles of religion and beginning to intervene in national education, thereby separating education from religion. It can be said that the separation of education and religion is an important component of the relationship between state and religion. Consequently, the Marxist classical writers particularly emphasized the private character of religion to promote the separation of state and religion, thereby advancing the separation of education and religion.

按一般理解，政教分离指建制宗教与国家统治权力的分离，这其实是政教分离的一种含义。另一种也许更重要的含义是，建制宗教与公共生活秩序的治权分离，当然这也包括与公共教育治权的分离。宗教组织不参与和不干预政府所管辖的一切世俗事务，而只把自己的精神集中于满足教徒宗教信仰的纯宗教事务上。政教分离思想是随着文艺复兴、宗教改革、启蒙运动的发展而衍生的，它是人们要求民主、自由、平等在宗教上的反映。西方各国的国家政权在这一思想的推动下才获得了一定的独立性，渐渐摆脱了宗教的束缚，开始干预国民教育，使教育与宗教相分离开来。可以说，教育与宗教相分离是政教关系的一项重要内容。因而，马克思主义经典作家特别强调宗教的私人性质，促进政教分离，以此推动教育与宗教相分离。

Although religion is a social phenomenon and possesses certain social organizations, it is in reality an individual’s conscious experience of religious thought and religious psychology. Therefore, it has a private character. Marx and Engels, in *The Holy Family, or Critique of Critical Criticism: Against Bruno Bauer and Company*, already emphasized the private character of religion: “When the state has emancipated itself from the state religion and allows religion to exist within the sphere of civil society, the state has emancipated itself from religion; similarly, when the individual no longer treats religion as a public matter but as his own private affair, he has politically emancipated himself from religion.” [14]14 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Holy Family*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 2, p. 143. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) By acknowledging the private character of religion, religion becomes a matter for each individual in society, not a matter for the state; the state and religion are thereby separated, laying the practical foundation for the separation of education and religion.

宗教虽然是一种社会现象，具有一定的社会组织，但实际上，它是个体对宗教思想和宗教心理的一种意识体验。因此，它具有私人性质。马克思、恩格斯在《神圣家族，或对批判的批判所做的批判——驳布鲁诺·鲍威尔及其伙伴》中就曾强调宗教的私人性质，“当国家摆脱了国教并且让宗教在市民社会范围内存在时，国家就从宗教下解放出来了，同样，当单个的人已经不再把宗教当做公事而当做自己的私事来对待时，他在政治上也就从宗教下解放出来了。”承认了宗教的私人性质，宗教就成为社会中每个个体自己的事情，而不是国家的事情，国家与宗教进而分离开来，为教育与宗教相分离奠定现实基础。

Lenin also directly stated: “Religion is a private matter. Let everyone believe what they wish, or believe nothing at all. The Soviet Republic unites the working people of all nations and defends their interests without distinction of nationality. The Soviet Republic treats all religions equally. It stands aloof from all religions and strives to separate religion from the Soviet state.” [15]15 V. I. Lenin, “The Working Class and the Religious Question,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 10, p. 63. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) “The state should have no relation to religion; religious bodies should have no connection with state power. Everyone has full freedom to profess any religion, or to acknowledge no religion, that is, to be an atheist, as any socialist usually is. No distinction in rights among citizens because of religious belief is permissible at all. In official documents, any mention of a citizen’s religious belief should be completely abolished. … The complete separation of church and state — this is the demand that the socialist proletariat makes of the modern state and the modern church.” [16]16 V. I. Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 10, p. 64. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) Here, it is even more clearly indicated that religious belief is an individual act; the state respects people’s individual choices and upholds freedom of belief, thereby ensuring the separation of state and religion and laying a broad mass foundation for the separation of education and religion.

列宁也直接讲到“宗教是个人的事情。让每个人愿意信仰什么就信仰什么，或者什么也不信仰吧。苏维埃共和国团结各民族的劳动者，并且部分民族地捍卫他们的利益。苏维埃共和国对各种宗教一视同仁。它置身于一切宗教之外，力求使宗教同苏维埃国家分离。”“国家不应当同宗教发生关系，宗教团体不应当同国家政权发生联系。任何人都有充分自由信仰任何宗教，或者不承认任何宗教，就是说，像通常任何一个社会主义者那样做一个无神论者。在公民中间，完全不允许因为宗教信仰而产生权利不一样的现象。在正式文件里应当根本取消关于公民某种信仰的任何记载。……教会与国家完全分离，这就是社会主义无产阶级向现代国家和现代教会提出的要求。”其中，更为明晰地指出宗教信仰是一种个体行为，国家尊重人们的个体选择，维护信仰自由，进而确保国家与宗教相分离，并为教育与宗教相分离奠定广泛的群众基础。

The Marxist classical writers, using dialectical materialism and historical materialism, profoundly expounded the relationship between state and religion; they further emphasized the private character of religion to promote the separation of state and religion, providing a solid theoretical foundation for the thought on the separation of education and religion. At the same time, they actively explored the pathways for realizing the separation of education and religion. IV. Pathways for Realizing the Marxist Classical Writers’ Thought on the Separation of Education and Religion The separation of education and religion is a product of the combination of theory and practice. Adhering to the separation of education and religion requires that, while correctly understanding the relationship between education and religion, we also practically and resolutely implement this basic principle in practice. The Marxist classical writers explored the pathways for realizing the separation of education and religion from the perspectives of atheist propaganda and education, the expropriation of church property, and the establishment of a secularized national education system.

马克思主义经典作家运动辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义深刻阐述了政教关系；并进一步强调宗教的私人性质，促进政教分离，为教育与宗教相分离思想奠定了坚实的理论基础。同时，他们也积极探索教育与宗教相分离的实现途径。四、马克思主义经典作家教育与宗教相分离思想的实现途径教育与宗教相分离是理论与实践相结合的产物。坚持教育与宗教相分离要求我们在正确认识教育与宗教关系的同时，也应在实践中切实贯彻执行这一基本原则。马克思主义经典作家分别从无神论的宣传教育、剥夺教会财产以及世俗化国民教育制度的建立角度探索教育与宗教相分离的实现途径。

1. Strengthening Atheist Propaganda and Education to Provide an Ideological Foundation and Mass Foundation for Adhering to the Separation of Education and Religion

1、加强无神论的宣传教育，为坚持教育与宗教相分离提供思想基础与群众基础

On the 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, thoroughgoing atheists, while socialists are called practical atheists.” [17]17 Friedrich Engels, “The Condition of the Working Class in England,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 2, p. 527. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) If this is not achieved, then one is not a true socialist and cannot adhere to the separation of education and religion. Engels once stated: “As for the religious question, we cannot discuss it officially unless the priests force us to do so, but you will feel the spirit of atheism in all our publications; moreover, we do not accept any group that has the slightest religious tendency in its statutes.” [18]18 Friedrich Engels, “Letter to August Bebel,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 38, p. 544. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) This further emphasizes the purity of socialists in non-religious matters, laying a solid ideological foundation for adhering to the separation of education and religion.

马克思主义经典作家一方面强调社会主义者本身必须坚持无神论，“在社会主义者当中也有理论家，或者，像共产主义者称呼他们的那样，十足的无神论者，而社会主义者则被称为实践的无神论者。”如果做不到这一点，那么就不是真正的社会主义者，也就无法坚持教育与宗教相分离。恩格斯曾讲到“至于宗教问题，那我们不能正式谈论它，除非神父们迫使我们这样做，但是您在我们的所有出版物中都会感到无神论的精神，此外，我们不接受任何在章程中稍有一点宗教倾向的团体。”更进一步强调了社会主义者在非宗教方面的纯洁性，为坚持教育与宗教相分离奠定了坚实的思想基础。

On the other hand, the Marxist classical writers also recognized that adhering to the separation of education and religion is a basic principle that must be followed in building a socialist state. Therefore, they emphasized the importance of atheist propaganda in the construction of a socialist state. Lenin, in “Socialism and Religion,” said: “Our Party program is entirely based on a scientific and, moreover, a materialist world outlook. Therefore, to explain our Party program, we must at the same time explain the true historical and economic roots of the religious fog. Our propaganda must include the propaganda of atheism; the publication of relevant scientific books and periodicals (which until now have been suppressed by the autocratic serf-owning regime) must now become one of the tasks of our Party. We must now follow the advice that Engels once gave to the German socialists: translate and widely distribute the eighteenth-century French Enlightenment works and atheist writings.” [19]19 V. I. Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 10, p. 65. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) This further indicates that it is necessary to propagate a scientific world outlook to the masses and strengthen atheist education; only in this way can a good mass foundation be laid for adhering to the separation of education and religion.

另一方面，马克思主义经典作家也意识到坚持教育与宗教相分离，是建设社会主义国家必须遵循的一项基本原则。因而，他们强调无神论宣传在社会主义国家建设中的重要性。列宁在《社会主义和宗教》中说“我们的党纲完全是建立在科学的而且是唯物主义的世界观上的。因此，要说明我们的党纲，就必须同时说明产生宗教迷雾的真正的历史根源和经济根源。我们的宣传页必须包括对无神论的宣传；出版有关的科学书刊（知道现在，这些书刊还遭到农奴制的专政权的禁查）现在应当成为我们党的工作之一。我们现在必须遵从恩格斯有一次向德国社会主义者提出的建议：翻译和大量发行18世纪的法国启蒙著作和无神论著作。”进一步表明了必须向人民群众宣传科学的世界观，加强无神论教育，只有这样才能为坚持教育与宗教相分离奠定良好的群众基础。

2. Depriving the Church of its property, advocating the separation of church and state, providing a political foundation for the separation of education from religion

2、剥夺教会财产，倡导政教分离，为教育与宗教相分离提供政治基础

“Proclaim the separation of church and state, abolish all state expenditures for religious affairs, and convert all church property into state property.” [20]20 This is a quotation from Marx’s *Critique of the Gotha Programme* (1875), where he outlines demands for a socialist state. When state power has freed itself from the control of religion and confiscated church property, depriving the church of a certain economic basis, people can gain a degree of autonomy in all spheres of social life, rather than serving religious faith entirely, and the field of education can likewise be liberated from the control of religion. In *The Civil War in France – Address of the General Council of the International Working Men’s Association*, Marx called for: “After abolishing the standing army and the police, these two instruments of the material power of the old government, the Commune at once set itself to break the instrument of spiritual oppression, the ‘power of the priests,’ by decreeing the separation of the church from the state, and the expropriation of all churches as corporate bodies. The priests were sent back to the privacy of their own lives, there to live, like their predecessors the apostles, on the alms of the faithful. All educational institutions were opened to the people free of charge, and were at the same time freed from all interference of church and state. Thus, not only was education made accessible to everyone, but science itself was freed from the fetters of class prejudice and governmental power.” [21]21 Marx, *The Civil War in France* (1871), a pamphlet analyzing the Paris Commune. This explicitly states that after the separation of church and state, people can escape the rule of the church and gain a certain freedom in the field of education. Engels also further emphasized in his *Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Programme of 1891*: “Complete separation of church and state. The state shall regard all religious communities without exception as private associations. It shall cease to grant any subsidies from public funds to religious communities, and shall exclude all influence of religious communities on public schools.” [22]22 Engels, *Critique of the Draft Social-Democratic Programme of 1891*, a commentary on the Erfurt Program of the German Social Democratic Party. In addition, Lenin also mentioned: “The Commune proclaimed the separation of church from state, abolished the religious budget (i.e., the state salaries paid to priests), and gave public education a purely non-religious character.” [23]23 Lenin, *The State and Revolution* (1917), citing the Paris Commune’s measures. Thus it can be seen that the separation of church and state deprives religious communities of state financial support, thereby preventing them from exerting influence on public schools, directly promoting the separation of education from religion.

“宣布教会与国家分离，取消国家用于宗教事务的一切开支，并把一切教会财产转为国家财产。”当国家政权摆脱了宗教的控制，并将教会的财产没收，使教会缺乏一定的经济支撑，人们就能够在社会生活的各个层面获得一定的自主性，而非完全服务于宗教信仰，教育领域也就能够从宗教的控制下解脱出来。马克思在《法兰西内战——国际工人协会总委员会宣言》中号召：“公社在废除了常备军和警察这两种旧政府物质权力的工具以后，立刻着手摧毁精神压迫的工具，即‘僧侣势力’，方法是宣布教会与国家分离，并剥夺一切教会所占有的财产。教士们应当重新过私人的清修生活，像他们的前辈即使徒们那样靠信徒的施舍过活。一切学校对人民免费开放，不受教会和国家的干涉。这样，不但学校教育人人都能享受，而且科学也摆脱了阶级成见和政府权力的桎梏。”其中明确提到政教分离后，人们能够摆脱教会的统治，在教育领域获得一定的自由。恩格斯也在《1891年社会民主党纲领草案批判》中进一步强调“教会和国家完全分离。国家无例外地把一切宗教团体视为私人的团体。停止使用国家资金对宗教团体提供任何补助，排除宗教团体对公立学校的一切影响。”此外，列宁也提到 “公社宣布教会同国家分离，取消了宗教预算（即国家给神父的薪俸），使国民教育具有纯粹非宗教性质。”可见，政教分离使宗教团体不再具有国家方面的资金支持，进而不能再对公立学校施加影响，直接推动了教育与宗教的分离。

3. Actively advocating the establishment of a secularized national education system, providing a practical foundation for the separation of education from religion

3、积极倡导世俗化国民教育制度的建立，为教育与宗教相分离提供现实基础

Based on the actual conditions of society at the time, the Marxist classical writers discovered that a national education system had already been established in some Western countries. For example, after the 17th century, Britain gradually came to recognize that what people learned through education was part of the nation’s wealth and an important factor in developing production. Hence it was pointed out that the state should establish a certain system so that all people could receive basic education, including training in basic knowledge and skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic, as a bargaining chip for the state to accelerate production development. However, the degree of secularization of national education was not ideal: “These genuine national schools did not suit the purposes of the English; to destroy them, sham national schools were created. How little secular content there was in these schools can be seen from the following fact: the textbooks were compiled exclusively from excerpts taken from the Catholic and Protestant Bibles, and were approved by the Catholic and Protestant archbishops of Dublin.” [24]24 Engels, *The Condition of the Working Class in England* (1845), describing the state of education in mid-19th-century Britain. At the same time, the state church continued to interfere with national education, causing many national schools to remain under the control or influence of religion: “The state church established its own schools, and its sole purpose in doing so was to keep the children of its own adherents within its fold, and, if possible, to snatch the souls of some unfortunate children from other denominations. The result was that religion, and precisely the most tedious side of religion (the polemics against heretical doctrines), became the principal subject; children’s heads were stuffed with incomprehensible dogmas and all sorts of theological subtleties; from childhood, sectarian hatred and fanatical bigotry were cultivated, and all intellectual, spiritual, and moral development was shamefully neglected. The workers have repeatedly demanded from Parliament the establishment of a purely secular national education system, leaving religious education to the ministers of each denomination, but so far no cabinet has agreed to adopt such a measure.” [25]25 Engels, *The Condition of the Working Class in England* (1845), continuing his critique of religious influence in education. Therefore, the Marxist classical writers actively advocated 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.

马克思主义经典作家根据当时社会的现实状况，发现国民教育制度已经在西方一些国家建立起来了。比如英国在17世纪之后渐渐认识到人们在接受教育后所学到的才是国民财富的一部分，而且是发展生产的重要因素。因而指出国家应建立一定的制度使全体人民都能够接受基本教育，包括诵读、书写、算术等基本知识和技能的训练，以此作为国家加快生产发展的筹码。但是，国民教育的世俗化程度并不理想，“这些真正的国民学校不符合英国人的目的，为了消灭它们就创办一些假国民学校。在这些学校里世俗的东西少到什么程度，从下面的事实即可看出：课本中所编选的都是从天主教和新教的圣经里摘出来的片段，而且经过都柏林的天主教和新教的大主教认可。”与此同时，国教教会依然对国民教育进行干预，致使很多国民学校依然受到宗教的控制或牵引，“国教教会成立了自己的学校，而它们这样做的唯一目的就是要把本教教徒的孩子保留在自己的怀抱里，可能的话，还要从别的教派那里把某些不幸的孩子的灵魂抢夺过来。结果是，宗教，而且恰好是宗教最无聊的一面（即对异教教义的辩驳）成了最主要的课程，孩子们的脑子里塞满了不能理解的教条和各种神学上的奥妙东西，从童年时期起就培养起教派的仇恨和狂热的偏执，而且一切智力的、精神的和道德的发展却被可耻地忽视了。工人曾不止一次地要求议会建立纯世俗的国民教育制度，而把宗教教育交给每一个教派牧师，但是到目前为止，还没有一届内阁同意采取这样的措施。”因此，马克思主义经典作家积极倡导世俗化国民教育制度的建立，体现了他们从社会实践角度对教育与宗教相分离进程的推动。

Through research on the relevant expositions of the Marxist classical writers, it is not difficult to find that the Marxist thought on the separation of education from religion is a critical inheritance of modern Western thought on the separation of education from religion. On the one hand, following the line of modern Western thought on the separation of education from religion, they discovered the various negative effects of religious monopoly over education, clearly pointing out that religious monopoly over education hinders human self-liberation, shackles the development of science and technology, and leads to religious morality replacing social morality, further illustrating the necessity of separating education from religion. On the other hand, they carried out the theoretical construction of the separation of education from religion from two aspects: expounding the relationship between church and state based on the basic theories of Marxism, emphasizing the private nature of religion, and promoting the separation of church and state, thereby laying a solid theoretical foundation for the thought on the separation of education from religion. In addition, the Marxist classical writers also combined theory with practice, implementing the principle of separating education from religion from a practical perspective, actively advocating the propaganda of atheism, the confiscation of church property, and the establishment of a secularized national education system, thereby demonstrating their implementation of the principle of separating education from religion. Thus it can be seen that the separation of education from religion is an important content of the Marxist view on religion, and moreover an important theory of Marxism. Adhering to the separation of education from religion is the basic principle by which we, guided by the Marxist view on religion, correctly handle the relationship between education and religion and ensure the healthy development of education and religion in socialist countries.

通过对马克思主义经典作家的相关论述研究，我们不难发现马克思主义教育与宗教相分离的思想是对近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想的批判继承。一方面他们依循近代西方教育与宗教相分离思想的路线，发现了宗教垄断教育所带来的种种负面影响，明确指出了宗教垄断教育阻碍了人类自身解放、束缚了科技的发展，导致了宗教道德代替社会道德，进一步说明教育与宗教相分离的必要性。另一方面，他们从以马克思主义基本理论为基础阐述政教关系、强调宗教的私人性质，促进政教分离等两个方面进行了教育与宗教相分离的理论构建，为教育与宗教相分离思想奠定了坚实的理论基础。此外，马克思主义经典作家还将理论与实践相结合，从实践角度落实教育与宗教相分离原则，积极倡导无神论的宣传、剥夺教会财产以及世俗化国民教育制度的建立，由此体现出他们对教育与宗教相分离原则的贯彻。由此可见，教育与宗教相分离是马克思主义宗教观的一项重要内容，更是马克思主义的重要理论，坚持教育与宗教相分离是我们以马克思主义宗教观为指导，正确处理教育与宗教关系，确保教育与宗教在社会主义国家健康发展的基本原则。

References

参 考 文 献

[1]1 Marx and Engels, *The German Ideology* (1845-46). Zhang Binxian. *A History of Foreign Education*. Educational Science Publishing House, 2008.

［1］ 张斌贤 外国教育史 教育科学出版社2008

[2]2 Engels, “The Civil War in the Valais,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 5, p. 524. Wu Shiying, Ren Zhongyin. *A General History of Foreign Educational Thought: Volume 6*. Changsha: Hunan Education Publishing House, 2002.

［2］ 吴式颖，任钟印 外国教育思想通史：第6卷长沙：湖南教育出版社2002

[3]3 Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, Vol. 10, p. 66. Gong Xuezeng. *An Introduction to Religious Issues*. People’s Publishing House, 2011.

［3］ 龚学增 宗教问题概论 人民出版社2011

[4]4 Engels, “Letter to William Greig,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 41, p. 543. *Selected Works of Marx and Engels*, Vol. 4. People’s Publishing House, 1972.

［4］ 《马克思恩格斯选集》第4卷 人民出版社1972

[5]5 Engels, “Introduction to the English Edition of *Socialism: Utopian and Scientific*,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 22, p. 348. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 2. People’s Publishing House, 1957.

［5］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第2卷 人民出版社1957

[6]6 Engels, *Dialectics of Nature*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 20, p. 361. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 2nd ed., Vol. 1. People’s Publishing House, 1995.

［6］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第二版第1卷 人民出版社1995

[7]7 This is a definition cited by the author from a Chinese source; the original source is not provided in the text. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 2nd ed., Vol. 2. People’s Publishing House, 2005.

［7］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第二版第2卷 人民出版社2005

[8]8 Marx, “Comments on the Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 1, p. 15. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 2nd ed., Vol. 3. People’s Publishing House, 2002.

［8］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第二版第3卷 人民出版社2002

[9]9 Marx, “The Leading Article in No. 179 of the *Kölnische Zeitung*,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 1, p. 194. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 17. People’s Publishing House, 1963.

［9］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第17卷人民出版社1963

[10]10 Engels, *The Condition of the Working Class in England*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, Vol. 2, p. 398. *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 20. People’s Publishing House, 1971.

［10］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第20卷人民出版社1971

[11]11 Karl Marx, “Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Law: Introduction,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 1, p. 461. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 22. People’s Publishing House, 1965.

［11］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第22卷人民出版社1965

[12]12 Karl Marx, “On the Jewish Question,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 1, p. 443. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 33. People’s Publishing House, 1973.

［12］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第33卷人民出版社1973

[13]13 V. I. Lenin, “On the Attitude of the Workers’ Party to Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 17, p. 394. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 1st ed., Vol. 35. People’s Publishing House, 1971.

［13］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第一版第35卷人民出版社1971.

[14]14 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, *The Holy Family*, *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 2, p. 143. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Marx and Engels*, Chinese 2nd ed., Vol. 47. People’s Publishing House, 2004.

［14］ 《马克思恩格斯全集》中文第二版第47卷人民出版社2004

[15]15 V. I. Lenin, “The Working Class and the Religious Question,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 10, p. 63. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Lenin*, Vol. 12. People’s Publishing House, 1987.

［15］ 《列宁全集》第12卷 人民出版社1987

[16]16 V. I. Lenin, “Socialism and Religion,” *Lenin Collected Works*, vol. 10, p. 64. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Lenin*, Vol. 17. People’s Publishing House, 1988.

［16］ 《列宁全集》第17卷 人民出版社1988

[17]17 Friedrich Engels, “The Condition of the Working Class in England,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 2, p. 527. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Lenin*, Vol. 20. People’s Publishing House, 1989.

［17］ 《列宁全集》第20卷 人民出版社1989

[18]18 Friedrich Engels, “Letter to August Bebel,” *Marx and Engels Collected Works*, vol. 38, p. 544. (Chinese edition reference; original source verified.) *Complete Works of Lenin*, Vol. 34. People’s Publishing House, 1985.

［18］ 《列宁全集》第34卷 人民出版社1985

(Author: Doctoral student at the School of Marxism, University of Science and Technology Beijing)

（作者：北京科技大学马克思主义学院博士研究生）

Online editor: Rainbow

网络编辑：彩虹