Jung and Christianity: The Challenge of Reconciliation

by Wallace B. Clift

Many men and women today are experiencing a crisis of meaninglessness. Religion has traditionally supplied the framework for the individual's quest for meaning, but the institutional church seems unable to perform this function for many twentieth century people.

Genres: Psychology, Religion, Christianity, Philosophy, Theology, Nonfiction, Psychoanalysis

184 pages, Paperback

First published September 9, 1982

Reviews

[Joshua · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good introduction to Jung and his thinking about Christianity. Some of the references to the church situation are a little dated, but much of the analysis is still relevant. The book could also have done with some editing to reduce repetition, although perhaps that's not such a bad thing, since many of the concepts are quite complex. The most interesting section was the middle part, although the closing two chapters had some interesting thoughts as well.

Clift starts with an introduction to Jungian thought, which is remarkably close to a religious metaphysic. A quote from Jung clarifies some of the terms he uses:

"instead of using the term God you say "unconscious", instead of Christ "self," instead of incarnation "integration of the unconscious," instead of salvation or redemption "individuation," instead of crucifixion or sacrifice on the Cross "realization of the four functions" or of "wholeness."

Jung saw humans as split between the conscious and unconscious, and starting life around the ego, or centre of consciousness. However, we strive for wholeness and seek to move towards a realisation of the self, or the integration of the conscious and unconscious; that is, reconciliation with God. We cannot control the unconscious, although we can observe and become receptive to it. The unconscious presents itself to us through archetypes and stories: it is the source of meaning in this world. We are thus offered the chance to participate in a larger reality. In addition, to paraphrase Clift, "Jung did not see the human psyche as bounded by space and time, and thus saw the possibility of a psychical existence or "life after death.""

One of the most interesting parts for me was the discussion of what a symbol is: to Jung, it is something that participates in both the unconscious and conscious/physical reality. Thus, they are essential in the path towards the integration of the self, for they allow us to access the unconscious. Moderns have cut themselves off from the unconscious, because we see the world as pure matter, nothing more. Thus, we lack meaning in our lives and how we perceive the world. Christian symbology was of great fascination to Jung, particularly the Mass, which he believed "symbolically expressed the necessary steps of psychical transformation in the movement towards wholeness." Christ, as God and man, is the ultimate symbol of the union between the conscious and unconscious.

The discussion of dogma (as separate from theology) was fascinating. Jung saw dogma as a codification of generations of experience with the unconscious. That said, Jung placed great importance on individual experience with the unconscious (against group experience); belief in dogma is not enough to convince us, and he saw groups as tending to dilute or lower our conscious experience of the unconscious. He believed that dogma, though valuable, needed to be constantly revived and revitalized to remain intelligible to each generation. Clift disagrees with Jung, however, that groups always tend to lower consciousness, and cites some therapeutic/clinical evidence to the contrary. He points out that while experience with the unconscious is undeniably moving on a personal level, such material needs to be interpreted, and it is only through groups that we can achieve a full interpretation.

The unconscious corresponds, more or less, to the spiritual dimension of reality. Jung saw the unconscious as God, although he saw evil as a necessary part of God. Christianity differs strongly at this point; while quite willing to agree that God as Spirit, angels and demons are presented to us in the unconscious, we deny that God is associated with evil in any way. Regarding angels, Clift has this to say:
"Thomas Aquinas's description of an angel as a "thought that thinks itself" is quite in accord with Jung's description of autonomous psychic complexes. In commenting on this "indivisible" realm, Tillich spoke of psychology's "rediscovery" of angels as archetypes of the collective unconscious. In the Systematic Theology he wrote, "In our terminology we could say that the angels are concrete-poetic symbols of the structures or powers of being."... perhaps Jungs's challenge will provide contemporary theology with a new incentive to take cognizance once again of the reality of good and evil beyond human choosing..."

This makes perfect sense from a Christian perspective: the principalities and powers that Paul refers to rule through spiritual means, manifesting themselves to us as archetypes and ruling through the stories they tell, for thus they capture our imagination. An ideologue is could thus be said to be "possessed" by a spirit, of say, Marxism. Because archetypes represent aspects of being, they contain truth. However, because they only represent part of the truth, and are not the source or ground of truth, to worship one (or more) is to worship a false god. This is perhaps why monotheist religions are so rare, because polytheist religions attempt to encompass the many aspects that make us up.

The Myer-Briggs personality test is very loosely based on a Jungian conception of the human psyche. Though it is not scientifically reliable as a predictor of human personality (the Big Five personality test is much better), the basis for the test may be more useful. For Jung, extroversion referred to people whose psychic energy flowed outwards, while introversion to people for who receive the flow of psychic energy. He then described four functions: sensing (telling you that something is), thinking (what a thing is), feeling (what the value of something is) and intuition (what the possibilities of something are). To digress slightly, using evidence from across cultures and times, Jung concluded that the number four symbolised wholeness, because it represents the union of two opposites. This is almost undoubtedly true; Rosen-Stockhussey's cross of reality corresponds to this supposition, as does the four-fold medieval method of interpretation, and other examples could also be drawn (and it is worth noting that Jung's four functions conrespond very closely with these two examples).

Jung was fascinated by Christianity and had much to say about the churches of his day. To put things very crudely, Jung saw Protestantism as rightly emphasising an individual's encounter with God, but lacked a connection with the achetypal world or with the Holy Spirit, and were unable to help many people connect with God. The Catholic Church he saw as having the opposite problem. Jung believed that those who thought the solution to the Western lack of connection with the unconscious was to go East were merely avoiding the problems posed by their own tradition. Moreover, he pointed out that the East's solutions only made sense in their cultural context or language of the unconscious.

All in all, it's worth a read. I have previously complained about the Protestant church's unwillingness to develop an intelligent conception of the spiritual world, that explains both human experience and the biblical texts and doesn't descend into wackery and quackery (which the charismatic movement seems hell-bent on doing). Jung and Jordan Peterson have, I feel, done a much better job at this than Protestants, particularly those in ministry (I'm sure there's some theologian out there whose sorted things out, but I have never heard anything in a pew anywhere). I hope to see more development in this area in the future.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not a page went buy where my mind and world were not being challenged, engaged, and widened. This is a book to digest piece by piece. And incredible and thoughtful engagement of Carl Jung's psychology of Christianity...
Clift is brilliant in his engagement of "Jung and Christianity: The Challenge of Reconciliation"

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

A PROFESSOR OF RELIGION PROPOSES A "DIALOGUE" BETWEEN THE TWO

Wallace Bruce Clift, Jr. (born 1926) is professor emeritus at the University of Denver, where he chaired the Department of Religion; he has written other books such as 'Symbols of Transformation in Dreams,' 'The Hero Journey in Dreams,' 'How to Make Love and Other Godly Thoughts,' etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1982 book, "Many Christians are put off by psychology. It seems to them to dismiss the reality of their experience.... On the other hand, many people who have found solace in Jung's psychology have felt Christianity to be at least one-sided and, in its institutional expression, quite unnecessary. Can these positions be reconciled? My answer to this question is both 'yes, in part' and 'no, not entirely.' However, the book suggests that a dialogue between the two---Jung and Christianity---can be constructive for both sides... I also offer a critique of psychology from the standpoint of Christian experience." (Pg. xii)

He states that Jung "viewed the psyche as a system regulating itself by virtue of a compensatory relationship existing between conscious and unconscious. As a self-regulating system, the psyche maintained its equilibrium just as the body did. Any process that went too far immediately and inevitably called forth compensations. For Jung, the theory of compensation was a basic law of psychic behavior." (Pg. 12) Later, he adds, "While Jungian psychotherapy has much in common with any other psychotherapy, it is this particular understanding of the psyche as a self-regulating system that accounts for the main differences." (Pg. 33)

He says, "In the course of the maturation process, which Jung called the path of individuation, there are a number of 'steps' or encounters that can be discerned. One of the first psychic entities usually encountered in an investigation of the unconscious is what Jung called the shadow. It is a composite of personal characteristics and potentialities of which the individual is unaware. Usually the shadow contains inferior characteristics and weaknesses that the ego's self-esteem will not permit it to recognize; however it does not always have a wholly negative content. In many cases, positive potentialities of the personality may reside, unlived, in the shadow." (Pg. 20-21)

He admits, "Jung has sometimes been criticized for his lack of attention to developmental factors in his theory of personality... The criticism that Jung paid no attention to developmental factors is justified only in the sense that Jung was not greatly interested in child psychology. His writings and therapy proposals focused on the development of the mature person." (Pg. 24)

He observes, "It was Jung's conclusion that myths and fairy tales gave expression to unconscious processes. The retelling of stories caused those processes to come alive again and be recollected, thus reestablishing the connection between the conscious and the unconscious." (Pg. 58) He adds, "Jung taught that the psychic experiences that give joy and meaning in life, that indeed make life possible in any meaningful sense, involve a union of opposites, a reconciliation of opposing possibilities. If Jung is right, his observation constitutes a major contribution to the psychology of religion." (Pg. 67)

He recounts that "Jung wrote of his early irritation with the Church... because of its failure to meet his father's needs. Jung... once overheard his father struggling desperately in a prayer to keep his faith. Jung said he himself was shaken and outraged at once, because he saw how hopelessly his father was entrapped in 'theological thinking.' The Church, he said, had blocked all avenues by which his father might have reached God directly... [At Jung's first Communion] He had expected, apparently, an encounter with God's presence, but had experienced only absence. He resolved not to participate in the ceremony again." (Pg. 115)

This is an excellent and very useful exposition of Jung's thought, and its relationship with Christianity (not of the fundamentalist sort, however) and religion.

[Lingui5t · Rating 4 out of 5]

Repetitive in places, but not always in a bad way.

My connection with Christianity is certainly in need of Jung's ideas.

[Garrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

I loved this book and found it very specific and helpful.

[Charlie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although there are some interesting and thoughtful, satisfying points to this book, it does not hold up as a consolidated resolution on religious faith, nor does it succeed with interpretative reason over belief in bible based divinities; even though it might have tried to... Clift does O.K. when representing Jung's views on Christianity, and even offers some of his own counter-points along the way - particularly toward the end of the volume. That was refreshing.
I liked the book overall, despite it's limitations: a lucid offering of considerations which can be easily shared with most readers, it is a worthy primer.

[Jeri · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hard to say just yet.