In an interview in the December Psychology Today with filmmaker David Cronenberg (A Dangerous Method), Cronenberg states, "In fact Jungianism is more a religion than a psychology." Indeed, those of us who have gained from Jungian insights have heard on the edges of scholarly discussion, the claims of Jung being a mystic, that depth psychology is a new religion to replace Christianity, new age gurus quoting Jung as one might quote holy scripture. Although we have attended institutes and universities and not seminaries to study Jung and his theories, the religion or psychology question continues to be posed by many, either favorably or as a means to damn the field in general.
Refuting the notion is too easy. I'm inviting responders to find within the Jungian phenomenon the reasons why such an image has not gone away. Is it in the way Jungians treat Jungian concepts? The rarefied language? The "denominations" that have developed, each claiming a deeper (thereby truer) understanding of Jungian thought? Any image that persists must be speaking to something in the psyche that needs expressing. So what is it???
Replies
"Don't lower yourself back into the level of those surrounding you"
Lee, I would say that the capacity to see non-dual reality allows one to see those surrounding us as fellow waves in the sea. Some are higher, some lower yet all are of the same substance. I make it a waking practice of meditation to see the world this way in its suchness and then there is no higher consciousness to escape to, no lower consciousness to descent to.
Your thoughts?
David
I think that people such as Cronenberg (ie., non-psychological/religious types) make this statement because they may be speaking from a, perhaps unconscious, awareness that both "Jungianism" and religion address matters of the soul. To the psychologically or religiously uninitiated, it may seem that anything that deals with the soul is of religion and anything that has to do with our minds or behavior is of psychology.
But in our times, it may be that religion has failed to carry through on it's promise of soul work. Religions often become the actual gods that the practitioners follow. And so, those who do not find "soul" in religion, and come across Jung's work, may find there that which they sought in religion but did not find.
I have come to this understanding after a life that, so far, has included 6 years in a Roman Catholic convent, a few years of studying Buddhism, a 30 career of working with emotionally disturbed children (lots of psychology psychological testing involved there!), an introduction to Shamanism and finally, studying for a PhD in Depth Psychology. The thread that runs through my life is a search for a spiritual home ---- and it wasn't until I found Shamanism and Depth Psychology that I ever had that sense of a "soul home". When I was deciding what to study, I started out looking at theology, then philosophy, then traditional psychology, and it wasn't until I found Depth Psychology that I found a course of study that felt right for me.
To be a religion, "Jungianism" would need to develop dogma and doctrine that becomes standardized, ritualized and "bureaucratized". And, unfortunately, the general public is generally only familiar with psychology as it deals with mind and behavior, and has not been exposed to the idea of psychology as soulwork. So I do understand why there are those who think of Jungianism as religion -- I just don't agree with them and just think they are ill-informed. But I do think that they may be responding to something in the unconscious that seeks to connect with Soul.
Shamanism is also often referred to as a religion, but I also disagree with this -- during my very first experience with Shamanism, it was explained to me as a "spiritual methodology" -- not a religion. This is part of what draws me to it. So it may follow that I think of Jung's work as "spiritual methodology". Probably little surprise that I have found my spiritual home in both of these "methodologies"!
My path is similar to yours (except the convent thing :) ) as I have been swinging through traditional psychology, philosophy, and theology most of my life until I "found" depth psychology where I feel most at home. However, now I'm in the process of trying to tie them all together in their essentials. (READ: Tie all of my parts together into a congruent whole.) I remember meeting my first shaman through a friend at Pacifica. The shaman knew I was a pastor and was VERY hesitant to meet with me due to a preconceived image of my trying to "save" her. I think she was surprised to find that I did more listening and asking questions than talking. :)
As to your comment about dogma and doctrine related to religion, it is sad to hear that there are "schools" of Jungian thought, especially in Europe, that attempt a standardized way of knowing who is in and who is out. No wonder Jung didn't initially want any institution in his name.
Shine on.
Ed
"attempt a standardized way of knowing who is in and who is out. No wonder Jung didn't initially want any institution in his name."
Yes, this is my fear ..... although I guess it is already in place with the current system of Jungian institutes.
Good quote from Fr. Sylvan:
"The mind sees the surface of a great teaching, steals from it what it likes, and invents a religion around it."
Now I really think this was an excellent discussion. Great contributions to the conversation by all.
Psychotherapists or the Clergy on pages 327-348 in Carl Jung's Psychology and Religion may be of interest.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/30925521/Carl-Gustav-Jung-Psychology-and-...
~Lewis
Interesting phrase "fit receptacle." I look upon such a moment as deep reaching to deep. We are already "full" yet unaware. Its the fullness of the individual life meeting and flowing with the fullness of existence, with the conscious endeavor to remove or, at least, diminish those blocks to the intermingling of moving waters.
Would love to hear more about how one does that. I imagine it takes a few tries to get there. (?)
First read Br. Lawrence while doing dishes at the seminary...synchronicity writ large.
And it is in the consideration of synchronicity that Jung came to that fine line of religious/depth psychological theorizing.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next