• Vincent Kundukulam

The dialogue between psychologists and theologians brings in manifold questions regarding the specific area of their engagement with the human person. The psychologists, given the self is the human subjective referent of all that a person says and does, approach the self from the psychological point of view. Whereas, theologians, when self’s object of speech and action is God, approach the expressions of the self from the theological point of view. Consequently, their judgments about the self may become mutually inadequate. For example, a statement regarding God which is adequate from the perspective of theology may appear inadequate according to the criterion of psychology and vice-versa.

The above-stated gap was obvious between Carl Gustav Jung and the theologians of his time. For instance, Victor Francis White, a Dominican theologian from Britan (1902-1960) and Robert M. Doran, an American-Canadian theologian (1930-2021) could not understand the psychological arguments of Jung regarding the self. According to Doran, there is within the ‘far reaches of the psyche’ a kind of experience that cannot be spoken in reference to human subjectivity. He believed to have two boundaries in the self: the upper one which is processed by the spirit and the lower one, processed by the psyche. And he thought that the upper end could have a radical experience of the Transcendent through faith.

On the other hand, to Jung, all words and all experiences about God remain psychological. He refused the possibility of spirit gaining mastery over the psyche in its movement towards self-transcendence. Having said this, Jung does not deny the fact that humans can have experience of the transcendent. His point is that there is no special territory reserved for the spirit in the self beyond the reach of the psyche. According to him, what happens is, the psyche itself is getting transformed into a transcended phase thanks to the correspondence between the structures of subjectivity and structures of objectivity in the self. How could Jung establish the change of psyche without denigrating the human subjectivity is now a relevant question.

To Jung, a close scrutiny of the structures of subjectivity and that of objectivity shows that both have almost similar tenets.  They are not, as Doran puts it, two separate entities inside the self; rather they are like two sides of the same coin. By submerging into the depths of subjectivity, one can discover the orders, structures and powers of objectivity. Hence a natural passage from psychology to theology and vice-versa is possible. This is made possible via, what he calls, ‘archetype’ which is both subjective and objective. The archetype possesses the property of ‘transgressivity’. Thanks to the faculty of transgressivity, the conscious orientation of the subject to the self becomes the orientation to God also.

Given that the conscious self for Jung is equal to God, individual’s active involvement with the unconscious shall lead to the growth of spiritual life. Thus, the individuation process, which happens through establishing a conscious relation between the ego and the self, becomes a religious process. Both function as mediators between human subject and God. If the individualization process is closely linked with the spiritualization, then the psychologists and priests must not consider themselves as rivals. They are not in fact doing two totally separate jobs; rather they do two distinct aspects of the same mission.

Jung envisaged that priests and psychologists work as collaborators because all neurotic problems are, at bottom, also religious problems. Hence, psychotherapy is a religious enterprise. It strives to establish a positive relation between consciousness and the fundamental structures of human subjectivity, reflecting the divine life with the Godhead. Through collaborative service, the clergy and psychologists can heal the vulnerabilities in psyche and make individuals authentically humane and spiritual. To Jung, a true psychology leads to a true theology. Psychologists are in a position to offer theologically substantial and constructive reflection for the spiritualization. Priest and a psychologist can healthily live side by side in a human person without any conflict.

• kundu1962@gmail.com