View Single Post
Old 09-25-2005, 09:53 PM
truebeliever truebeliever is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,768
Default Re: Carl Jung. New Age Subversive Or Genuine Truth Seeker?

Christians need to learn enough about Jung and his teachings to be warned and wary.
Fair enough. I agree. They should also read books by the man himself and not just half assed criticisms by people either outright lying or quoting completely out of context.

Jung's legacy to "Christian psychology" is both direct and indirect. Some professing Christians, who have been influenced by Jung's teachings, integrate aspects of Jungian theory into their own practice of psychotherapy...
"Christian Psychology"...i agree thats completely stupid and I'm sure Jung would not approve. That is reducing the SPECIFIC religious experience DOWN into the "nothing but..." of psychology.

Jung's legacy has not enhanced Christianity.
I disagree. It's enhanced my understanding greatly and many others I know. It has of course threatened people because of many reasons, one of which is Jungs haphazard application of this and that in a flood of ideas and theories that for many do not flow into a "coherent" whole. His "stuff" is being applied willy nilly here and there by all and sundry. Jung is to blame for this. He is simply not explicit enough about certain things and one must remeber...his work ranged for over 50 years. What you write in your early 20's is VASTLY different from your writings at 80. To quote from his exciteable 20's is not fair and an obvious attempt to satisfy the anxiety brought on by Jungs work. Fair enough. But people should again be more honest when critiquing him. It simply makes thinking people consider people writing in the name of Christianity as desperate "Jung Deniers".

From its inception psychotherapy has undermined the doctrines of Christianity.
It certainly has. That of "organised" Christianity but not that of Christs words in the Gospel.

Sigmund Freud's attitudes towards Christianity were obviously hostile, since he believed that religious doctrines are all illusions and labeled all religion as "the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity."
I agree. Freud was a "materialist" par excellance. He once told Jung that psychotherapy had to be made a "bullwark" against the "black mud tide of occultism". Freud made a good Communist if you had'nt noticed.

His one-time follower and colleague Carl Jung, on the other hand, may not be quite as obvious in his disdain for Christianity.
That is ABSOLOUTE SHIT! He admired "Christ" openly and warned time and again that Westerners should NOT fall into the trap of taking on Eastern religions over the top of their Western heritage. He considered Christianity the proper religion for the West. he also noted that some people simply had NO attachment to this faith as they required something more...a direct experience of the divine - ala, Paul on his way to Damascus.

However, his theories have disdainfully diminished Christian doctrines by putting them at the same level as those of all religions.
Crap. Not true. He simply states that Eatern religions evolved out of the genetic structure of the peoples and their places. Again and again Jung warns of Westerners taking on other cultural practices as the "thing" for the day.

While Jung did not call religion a "universal obsessional neurosis," he did view all religions, including Christianity, to be collective mythologies - not real in essence, but having a real effect on the human personality.
NEVER once did Jung in ALL of his writings claim that Christ was a "mythic" figure. He simply stated that Christ was the expression of an age old archetypal pattern...that of God incarnating into "this" world to deliver a message to his people. He warned against the "nothing but..." attitude of psychology and it's reductionism. There is a great passage about Jung during a particularly trying time. He says..."i learned as never before the concept of Christ as my brother." That is indicative of Jungs attitude to Christ and Christianity. It proves nothing over all but i put it here as a defence that Jung considered Christianity as a "nothing but...". Even if it was useful.

While Freud argued that religions are delusionary and therefore evil, Jung contended that all religions are imaginary but good. Both positions are anti-Christian; one denies Christianity and the other mythologizes it...
That is simply the view of the author. That is simply not the case when taking the work of Jung in it's totality. Again, i see the highly selective quoting of certain things out of context in ALL critiuqes of Jungs work.

...the break between Jung and Freud was complete. Jung departed from Freud on a number of points, particularly Freud's sex theory. In addition, Jung had been developing his own theory and methodology, known as analytical psychology.
Why does'nt the author go into more detail? This was the pivotal pointof Jungs career and spoke volumes on the mans integrity.

The break was BITTER. Jung complained that Freud was reducing the miracle of man down to an obsessional theory of "nothing but..." with his dogmatic application of a dubious "sexual theory" of "everything" which Jung considered ridiculous. He found Freud dogmatic and "reductionist" to the point of denying "truth" which to Jung was EVRYTHING. Jung is difficult for most people in that he refused to mould it down into a "nice" set of rules for living. For Jung truth was a continuing revalation of unfolding that NEVER ended. Jung is simply not for just anyone who is looking for "certainty".

However, because Jung left room for religion, many Christians felt more comfortable with his ideas.
WTF! "Left room". That was his central point! Lack of a spiritual life WAS the central cause for all mans woes! Hence his absoloute despising of Communism and the talk that he was a "NAZI" sympathiser. Yes, like most of middle class Europe and above who trembled at the thought of a Bolshevick invasion.

Thus it is important to look at Jung's attitudes towards Christianity. His father was a Protestant minister, and Jung experienced aspects of the Christian faith while growing up. He wrote the following about his early experience with the Holy Communion, which seems to be related to his later ideas about religions being only myths:
That is a fucking lie! Outrages and indicative of peoples writings on Jung. I GAURANTEE the author has not even read Jungs Collected Works.

Slowly I came to understand that this communion had been a fatal experience for me. It had proved hollow; more than that, it had proved to be a total loss. I knew that I would never again be able to participate in this ceremony. "Why, that is not religion at all," I thought. "It is the absence of God; the church is a place I should not go to. It is not life which is there, but death."
What a blatently obvious example of selective quoting. The author should have included the 300 other statements by Jung on this matter. That the Protestant Church specifically was nothing more than a social gathering where "nothing" happened. That the ceremony was bereft of the original meaning and that God was simply NOT present in the building. The EXACT reason I attend NO Church. They are "dead" places for me personally where the adherents have become mere social workers and sychophants to political power and not the saver of souls.

From that one significant incident, Jung could have proceeded to deny all religions, but he didn't.
What a ridiculous statement! Like a sooky little kid who has lost his dummy. Pathetic. He NEVER denied Christian faith! He denied the DEAD CHURCHES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And that is why THEY hate him! Because he points out the obvious. The churches are simply extensions of worldly power with NO connection to the divine. What could be more obvious today then the dead and corrupt churches?

Instead, he evidently saw that religion was very meaningful to many people and that religions could be useful as myths.
Yes, the vast majority of ancient religions and inparticular the Eastern philosophies and the Greek myths were indeed "useful myths". Jung was quite specific on what a "myth" was and when a particular event takes place in time and space it takes on a "mythical" quality that enables it to last down the eons as it speaks an eternal truth present in the very genetic structure of man. Jung NEVER denied Christ existed. He simply stated the archetypal nature of the event. Just as George Washington crossing the Potamiac "happened" and takes on the "mythic" quality of the hero...standing tall on the's a pretty easy concept to graps. Just as the "trintiy" is easy to grasp.

That Jung's theories constitute a religion can be seen in his view of God as the collective unconscious and thereby present in each person's unconscious.
Are you ready Dear we go...are you sure you're ready...take deep breathe...

"The Kingdom of God is within You".


He also used dreams as avenues into the psyche for self-understanding and self-exploration. Religion was only a tool to tap into the self and if a person wanted to use Christian symbols that was fine with him.
"Religion was ONLY a tool"...WTF again! Who is this idiot author? For Jung religion IS the DIRECT expression of the Self. Pure and simple. "A tool"? This is typical of the ridiculous grasping of critics of Jung, who's agenda is QUITE clear. To protect themselves and their world view in a "reactionary" way rather than making a sincere and balanced critique of Jungs work. If Jungs work is misused then blame the "wielder", not Jung who warned throught his work of the perils of delving into the subject. A tool for "self exploration" would be dream work and Astrology. Not for predicting the futue but revealing ones unique God given potentials.

One can see why Jung is so very popular among New Agers.
People he considered idiots.

To Jung, conversion simply meant a totally dramatic experience that would profoundly alter a person's outlook on life. Jung himself had blatantly rejected Christianity and turned to idolatry. He replaced God with a myriad of mythological archetypes.
No, he simply pointed out that the human being is made up of many different potentials that are expressed at certain times in certain places. He considered God to be the "organising principle" around which the human psyche "held together" and attemted to put the errant ego back on track. He also spoke of God as "out their" in his work with Wolfgang Pauli and the quantum physists. But that gets into the complex nature of "inner'" and "outer".

The "Self/God" ensures the sinful ego does not stray too far from the divine plan for the individual.

Jung's neo-paganism and his desire to replace Christianity with his own concept of psychoanalysis can be seen in a letter he wrote to Freud:
A letter he wrote early on in his career.

...and in this way absorb those ecstatic instinctual forces of Christianity for the one purpose of making the cult and the sacred myth what they once were - a drunken feast of joy where man regained the ethos and holiness of an animal.
He is not saying that man return to the state of an "animal". He is saying after man has forged an ego seperate from God, he must regain the capacity for the full expression of his being and in doing so give direct expression to the will of God. If you are a split and repressed soul you cannot give expression to the will of God but simply spend all day holed up in your 4*2 mansion expending all your energy denying the impulse to life. God is about joy and love...the sheer excitemtn that we even EXIST! It is a miracle and that is what Jung wanted the Church to return to...the ecstatic expression of the miracle of life itself instead of the dead and dry deadness it had become. A simple method of political control over the instincts of man for wholeness and completeness which competes with the centralised power and certain direction of a power mad few.

Thus Jung's goal for psychoanalysis was to be an all-encompassing religion superior to Christianity, reducing its truth to myth and transmogrifying Christ into a "soothsaying god of the vine."
NEVER! He considered his work a "tool" to regain contact with the "divine spark". "The water of life". That gives "meaning" to ones VERY existence. To ones "specialness" and "divine origens". Again, the above quote is simply the idiot authors opinion and has NOTHING to do with the actual work of Jung. Nothing.

Organised Christianity and the Churches in general better "get a life" or they can consider themselves dead and buried.

The massive turning away from the faith is because of the REFUSAL of the Church Fathers to give the tools to know God to the faithful but instead seek to centralise their power and fall into Satans trap of simple "rule following" and "order" keeping.

The Churches are as "materialist" and as dead as Communism.

"The Kingdom of God is within You".

Now who said that?
[size=medium]\"The Office\" is the greatest comedy...ever. [/size]
Reply With Quote