What do you think?
Rate this book
Jungian and Catholic? The Promises and Problems of the Jungian-Christian Dialogue
"It would, I think, be fair to characterize the present state of scholarly relations between Jungian psychology and theology as chaotic," wrote James Heisig, in introducing his thorough bibliographical essay, "Jung and Theology". He continued, "If one takes the trouble to study the shelves of books and the reams of articles that have appeared on the subject, one is consistently left with the impression of an adventuresome, potentially fruitful and perhaps even revolutionary inter-disciplinary project that has somehow failed to make a presentable case for itself."Even though Heisig's work covered the literature through August 1972, and progress has been made since then, his words are still uncomfortably accurate. The shelves of books and the reams of articles have multiplied, yet the foundations for a Jung-Christian dialogue are not firmly in place, and its promise has not been realized.PART I examines the basic positions that have emerged during the course of the discussions and debates between Jung's psychology and Christianity. They range from an identification of the Christian life with Jung's archetypes and the process of individuation to an outright rejection of his psychology as a threat to it. In contrast to these extremes a genuinely interactive approach holds the most promise for the future.PART II looks at the relationship between Jung's psychology and the philosophical psychology of Thomas Aquinas.PART III examines the impact that Jungian psychology could have on a theology smart enough not to accept Jung's comments on the Trinity as theology, but daring enough to use his psychology to explore how revelation is effected by being received into an archetypically conditioned psyche.PART IV touches on how Jung's psychology could meet the great need the Church has for a viable empirical psychology which could be employed in the field of Christian spirituality.
128 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 1, 1991
4 people are currently reading
4 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 21, 2022
Carl Jung has rightly exerted enormous influence on the shape and direction of Psychology. Putting his thought into conversation with a Christian tradition like Catholicism is potentially going to raise some very interesting questions. But the book doesn’t deliver on that promise.
In fairness, some of this is because the book was written before important research materials were in the public domain. The correspondence between Jung and the Catholic priest Victor White was not published until the decade after the book was first produced. That correspondence contains some critically important discussions of issues, but it was not available for inclusion in the book.
The book also seems to jump into a very detailed account of Jungian Psychology but it doesn’t take a step back and ask questions about it. Are all Jung’s views still considered to be equally valid? Jung insisted that he was an empirical scientist, but his views on Synchronicity are sometimes dismissed by other scientists as a pseudo science of coincidence. This raises questions about Jung himself, which need to be addressed if he is to be used as a fruitful dialogue partner in exploring Christianity.
The book is sometimes a little overly deferential to Jung. When pressed the author admits that Jung’s inner experiences are completely different to Christian faith (67%) and Jung’s insistence on interpreting religious claims as claims about individuals actualisation means that there can be no place for an objective Revelation in a Jungian perspective (71%). Those kinds of admissions cut to the heart of Christianity. They raise the question of whether Jung’s psychology is in fact an alternative to a religion like Christianity (?) Perhaps the collapse in the conversation between Fr White and Jung is far more revealing, in that respect?
The book hints at potential confusions within Jung’s philosophy but it doesn’t press the issues. Jung insisted that he was an empirical scientist and that he was not going to do philosophy. But his science presupposes Philosophical insights (especially Kantian ones). He insists that people cannot talk about God, and that they can only talk about their ideas of God. And he thinks that Christianity is a (deficient) penultimate step on the road towards ‘actualisation.’ These views all involve elements of Philosophical critique, but Jung refused to engage explicitly with Philosophy. This raises some serious questions about the overall coherence of Jung’s thinking.
By the end of the book, the reader encounters a lot of detail about Jung, and some detail about other writers like Jacques Maritain. But it is far less clear why the author seems to think that there is a genuine scope for enrichment in a Jungian-Christian dialogue.
Overall, this is text written 30 years ago. It is broadly accessible to general readers who are willing to give the text some serious concentration.
In fairness, some of this is because the book was written before important research materials were in the public domain. The correspondence between Jung and the Catholic priest Victor White was not published until the decade after the book was first produced. That correspondence contains some critically important discussions of issues, but it was not available for inclusion in the book.
The book also seems to jump into a very detailed account of Jungian Psychology but it doesn’t take a step back and ask questions about it. Are all Jung’s views still considered to be equally valid? Jung insisted that he was an empirical scientist, but his views on Synchronicity are sometimes dismissed by other scientists as a pseudo science of coincidence. This raises questions about Jung himself, which need to be addressed if he is to be used as a fruitful dialogue partner in exploring Christianity.
The book is sometimes a little overly deferential to Jung. When pressed the author admits that Jung’s inner experiences are completely different to Christian faith (67%) and Jung’s insistence on interpreting religious claims as claims about individuals actualisation means that there can be no place for an objective Revelation in a Jungian perspective (71%). Those kinds of admissions cut to the heart of Christianity. They raise the question of whether Jung’s psychology is in fact an alternative to a religion like Christianity (?) Perhaps the collapse in the conversation between Fr White and Jung is far more revealing, in that respect?
The book hints at potential confusions within Jung’s philosophy but it doesn’t press the issues. Jung insisted that he was an empirical scientist and that he was not going to do philosophy. But his science presupposes Philosophical insights (especially Kantian ones). He insists that people cannot talk about God, and that they can only talk about their ideas of God. And he thinks that Christianity is a (deficient) penultimate step on the road towards ‘actualisation.’ These views all involve elements of Philosophical critique, but Jung refused to engage explicitly with Philosophy. This raises some serious questions about the overall coherence of Jung’s thinking.
By the end of the book, the reader encounters a lot of detail about Jung, and some detail about other writers like Jacques Maritain. But it is far less clear why the author seems to think that there is a genuine scope for enrichment in a Jungian-Christian dialogue.
Overall, this is text written 30 years ago. It is broadly accessible to general readers who are willing to give the text some serious concentration.
Displaying 1 of 1 review