Carl Jung (1874-1961) has affected Western thinking differently.
His grandfather was alleged to have been an illegitimate son of the German poet Goethe, and the grandson's capacious untidy mind, roving imagination, voracious curiosity, and love of the mysterious makes him more akin to his alleged forebear than to men of science like Pavlov and Freud. He was also a natural spell-binder. There are numerous reports of the fascination he exercised as a conversationalist and personality. But none of this by itself explains his reputation.
To understand his influence, we have to distinguish between Jung the psychiatrist and Jung the spiritual guru and founder of a quasi-religious cult. It is in the latter capacity that I am concerned with him here. No other famous modern psychologist has mixed up psychology and religion to the same extent.
As a psycho-therapist, Jung began to explore the unconscious around the same time as Freud, and together they founded the psycho-analytical association of which Jung was for a time president. But in 1912, believing that Freud was over-emphasising the role of infant sexuality, Jung broke away and founded his own school of analysis.
For Jung the therapist, the human psyche was a realm of complementary and sometimes conflicting opposites, and the goal of his therapy was to reconcile or integrate them in a way that allowed each of them adequate room for expression. He called the process "individuation." To him we owe the terms "complex" (for a cluster of subconscious or semi-conscious hang-ups); "introvert" and "extrovert" (for the two most common psychological types); "animus" and "anima" (for the masculine and feminine personality traits supposedly present in each individual); "collective unconscious" (for the genetically transmitted memories of racial experiences which he believed each of us carry with us along with drives having their origin in personal experiences), and "archetypes" (for the images through which those collectively acquired drives or ideas express themselves).
Using these principles and ideas, the great majority of Jungian therapists are said to have about the same rates of success and failure as analysts of other schools and to know little about their master's more bizarre religious ideas.
If they are aware of them, they mostly presume them to be symbolic ways of describing psychic phenomena. This is partly because of the volume and obscurity of much of Jung's writings, partly because he only confided the full range of his religious theories to an inner group of initiates, and it is only recently that those ideas have been coming fully to light. 135 They strike a very different note.
As the father of a religious cult, Jung was a typical representative of the fin-de-siècle decadence which I described in Chapter 20 of Turmoil and Truth as one of the factors influencing early modernism. From adolescence on he was fascinated by oriental religions, gnosticism, magic, Hermeticism, alchemy; spiritualism and the occult. He was also influenced by Wagner, Nietzsche and the Germanic movements and cults reviving Teutonic paganism in the thirty years before the First World War.
Eventually, combining the fruits of his wide reading on these subjects with his experiences as a psychiatrist, he put together what a distinguished ex-Jungian has described as "a mystical pagan polytheism in which the 'multiple images of the instincts' (Jung's most concise definition of the 'archetypes') are worshipped as 'gods.' 136 Just as many of the mystery religions of the ancient world re-enacted the descent of a hero into the underworld, from which he emerged purified after a series of tests and battles with subterranean powers, so the adepts of Jung's path to salvation reach their goal after battling with spiritual powers in the depths of the unconscious. Of these "the terrible Mother," representing the principles of matter and the earth, is the most fearsome.
Did Jung himself see these powers as purely psychic phenomena? Or did he attribute an objective reality to them? The answer seems to be the latter. Throughout his life Jung dabbled in spiritualism and believed in a spirit guide he called Philemon.
In Jungian religion and spirituality; the instincts and drives of the unconscious appear as reflections within the individual psyche of the activities of transcendental beings, who, like the gods and goddesses of Greek mythology are always fighting and quarrelling with each other. The role of the Jungian neophyte is to conquer and tame them so that from their union can emerge the higher being whom Jung calls the Self (with a capital "S"). As in Hermetic philosophy, the One God is born from the union of the many. The Self is the "God within" or "the God-image in Man" that Jungians are always urging us to make contact with. But, as will be seen, it is not the God of Judaeo-Christian revelation; it seems to be closer to the "Universal Self" or "World Soul" of Hinduism, through which the enlightened man discovers that in his ultimate self he is God too.
Two other things are to be noted. Jung's psychiatry aims at reconciling complementary facets of the personality which are good in themselves — things, for instance, like masculine vigour and feminine tenderness, or the need to balance work with play. His religion aims at reconciling good and evil. In forcing the warring instincts to lie down together like the lion and the lamb of Scripture, the Jungian neophyte, like the Nietzschean superman, passes beyond good and evil into a realm where these categories no longer apply. For Jung the spiritual guru there are no evil instincts or passions. What we call "evil," Jung would call the dark side of life, and darkness is just as necessary a part of existence as light. All instincts and drives are in theory good. I say "in theory," because Jung would certainly not have recommended robbery or murder as socially acceptable forms of behaviour. What he chiefly seems to have been preoccupied with was the free enjoyment of sensual pleasures without feelings of guilt which, like other cultivated Europeans of his period reacting against strict Protestant upbringings, he erroneously appears to have regarded as the hallmark of pagan antiquity.
It is therefore not surprising to find his religion containing a decidedly erotic element. This he justified in terms of alchemical theory and practice. In the reconciliation of complementary opposites, or good with evil, he saw an analogy with the alchemist's blending of base metals to produce gold, a work which, in alchemical literature, was often carried on with the help of a "mystical sister" (soror mystica) and culminated in a mystic marriage from which was born a bi-sexual being or "androgyne."137
In a Jungian context, the analyst would be the alchemist, his patient (if a woman) the soror mystica, the climax of the analytical process the mystical "marriage," and the fully individuated person resulting therefrom, the bisexual offspring — bisexual because giving equal expression to the masculine and feminine sides of the psyche. That, in practice, the mystical marriage could have a physical side seems to be well established. "Jung himself, and a small number of his closest disciples," Dr Satinover tells us, "had found a way to live out not only symbolically but explicitly the core practices of occultism." Jung's principal soror mystica was his mistress for 40 years.
All this explains why Dr Satinover can say that most Jungian analysts have no idea what they "have been fellow travellers to" and that "the occult ideas embedded in Jungian theory and practice, even taken symbolically, tend to undermine moral standards." The psychology, as it were, floats on top of the "spirituality," absorbing some of the "brine?' as the hull of a wooden boat would absorb sea water.
Jung and Christianity
Jung was also, beneath a lot of seemingly fair words, deeply anti-Christian. As an expression of psychological and spiritual realities, he considered Christianity greatly inferior to the gnostic, Hermetic, occult ideas on which his own theories were based. Descending from the shamans of the remotest times, known to the mystery religions of the ancient world, repressed by Christianity for two thousand years, those ideas had survived in the teachings of heterodox sects but could now be directly tapped by psychoanalysis and the interpretation of dreams. Here, rather than in Christianity; lay the deepest wisdom of the human race.
Christianity was a grossly patriarchal, "misery" religion. There might be value in some of its symbols and doctrines, but to be of any use today they would have to be radically re-interpreted. "The Christ-symbol lacks wholeness in the modern psychological sense," Jung tells us, "since it does not include the dark side of things but specifically excludes it in the form of a Luciferian (sic) opponent." 138 To rectify the situation Jung, at one point, suggested including the Blessed Virgin in the Trinity. To be psychologically correct, the Trinity must have a shadow side. It must be a Quaternity rather than a Trinity. And this, without knowing it, was what the Church had made it with the dogma of the Assumption. Mary had been taken into the Trinity to become the necessary fourth person. The Church's only mistake was making her a symbol of purity and light. Jungians should see her as the principle of maternal darkness. 139 Other reinterpretations have a typically Manichean ring. In his Essay on Job, Jung represents the Lord God as a senseless tyrant indifferent to human misery. Eventually, under the influence of his second wife Sophia or Wisdom (Jung gives the Lord two wives: Israel is wife No.1) God repents and becomes a man to atone for his sins.
"What Jung foresaw as a possible future for Christianity," writes the eminent Jungian analyst Murray Stein, "would in many ways be continuous with Christian tradition, but also very different from it...The NewTestament would become for the transformed version what the Old Testament became for Christianity, a prefiguration and forerunner of the new revelation." 140
It would be truer to say that Jung not only foresaw the transformation of Christianity, he intended it and worked for it. He did not mean his psychologised neo-paganism to remain the preserve of his intimates for ever. With or without a Christian veneer, he intended it for the spiritual regeneration of the whole world. 141
By a different road to the early modernists, Jung arrived at much the same goal. Since religious knowledge wells up from the subconscious and speaks to the conscious mind in myths and symbols, there is no need for a public revelation, a Church, or sacraments — except in so far as they are themselves useful as symbols.
How much should all this be, or have been, a matter of concern for the Church?
Thirty years ago one would probably have said "very little." Jung was never a household name the way Freud became. His appeal was initially limited to spiritually uprooted middle-class Europeans and North Americans looking for a meaning to life, with a smattering of Christians like the English Dominican Fr Victor White, an early enthusiast for Jungian psychiatry. Jung's early Christian admirers do not seem to have appreciated the extent to which his psychiatry was a wrapping for a rival religion. However, in the 1960s the situation changed dramatically. As the number of spiritually uprooted Westerners soared, so did Jung's following, both inside and outside the New Age Movement. Ten years or so later, religiously disoriented Catholics started moving in the same direction.
Since the late 1970s, writes Dr Satinover, "Jungian and Jungian-related spirituality, with its emphasis on gnostic 'wisdom,' sexual freedom, eastern mysticism, pantheism, goddess worship and accommodation with evil has infiltrated deeply into the churches (especially in the Anglican and Roman communions)," and a stream of newspaper reports over the last decade and a half are there to confirm his words. According to the US journalist, Paul Likoudis,"Catholic spirituality as it is taught in the majority of US dioceses is almost entirely Jungian"; advertisements for retreats show that a high proportion are Jungian inspired; the best selling books on spirituality in many Catholic bookstores are by popularisers of the Jung cult. 142
A spirituality that is truly Jungian is, of course, no longer Catholic. Catholic spirituality aims at helping the individual draw closer to God, with the help of grace, through self-forgetfulness, the practice of virtue and mortification, and submission to God's will. The goals of Jungian spirituality are self-enhancement, self-fulfilment and inducing feelings of psychological well-being. The former lifts the soul into the supernatural order, the latter, in so far as it has any contact with reality, leaves it firmly planted in the natural or exposed to the praeternatural.
Catholic education is also suffering from injections of Jungianism. In A New View of Religious Education [Twenty-Third Publications] we find an American author, Dr Kevin Treston, advising teachers to "compose a prayer service with the theme 'the Earth our Mother'" telling them that "Christians are being challenged to listen to and celebrate the divine revelation in the various religious stories and traditions of the world" and asking, "Have you noticed that our myths and symbols are disintegrating?" This is pure Jung. As an English reviewer shrewdly comments, "to these people, symbols means sacraments and myths doctrines."
English Catholic teachers are receiving similar doses of Jung mixed with New-Ageism. In a talk given under diocesan auspices, by a priestly "social scientist," Fr Diarmuid O'Murchu, a member of the Sacred Heart Missionaries and author of a book titled Reclaiming Spirituality, a group of teachers were told that "official religion" is "not merely inadequate; it may in fact be a great delusion, based on the inflated patriarchal instinct of a power-crazy species. We need to shed the whole thing with its trappings of dogmas, ritual, laws and regulations." In contrast, Witchcraft, totemism, shamanism, divination merit a fresh evaluation ... to dismiss worship of sun, moon or elements of nature as primitive pagan practices highlights the appalling spiritual ignorance of 'civilised' humanity."
After reading stuff like this, one does not find Richard Noll's verdict, that Jung represents the greatest threat to the Catholic Church since Julian the Apostate, as startling as one might otherwise. Gently correcting Noll, Satinover calls Jung "the greatest threat ... since the father of gnosticism, Simon Magus, with whom and his disciples Basilides and Valentinus, Jung openly and explicitly identified both himself and his work." One can at any rate say that, faced with a choice, Jung's "spirituality" looks more dangerous than Freud's crude atheism.
It is perhaps indicative of the disoriented state of the Western intellectual and spiritual life that Alfred Adler (1870-1937), Freud's other early disciple/ associate, who, like Jung, eventually broke away and founded a school of his own, should be the least known and least influential of the three pioneers.
Adler did not construct a grand system like Freud and Jung. If less imaginative, his grasp of basic realities was firmer, and although for most of his life he had little time for religion, he was not hostile and his ideas are more adaptable to Christian use. Life, he maintained, presents us with three tasks: family, work and social living. Neurosis is the result of running away from them, and successful therapy is getting the patient to face up to them. The ego, not the libido, is the really important part of the psyche, and the will to power, not sex, is the dominant subconscious drive. Reinforcing the ego, the rational self, was the heart of his therapy. 143
Some Later Figures
After its initial launching by the original triumvirate, modern psychology produced numerous different schools and talented freelances, of which, for present purposes, I only need mention two: the developmental psychology of the Swiss, Jean Piaget (d. 1980), and his Canadian disciple, Laurence Kohlberg, and the humanistic or non-directional psychology of Carl Rogers (d. 1987).
Piaget was an experimental psychologist mainly concerned with the mental development of children and their real or supposed capacity to take in or not take in different kinds of ideas and information at different ages. At each age or stage, the mind is said to produce its own special "cognitive structure," and trying to feed it with matter appropriate to a cognitive structure not yet in place is like trying to push software into the wrong kind of computer. From this the conclusion has been drawn by many Catholic educators that children are incapable of absorbing ideas of right and wrong or moral obligation until relatively far on in childhood, and should therefore not be taught about them till the necessary psychological equipment is supposedly in place. According to Piagetian principles, it can also be argued that small children do not have the cognitive structures for learning about the Trinity.
Kohlberg's chief contribution was maintaining that morality develops spontaneously and if it is to develop properly must above all not be taught. The teaching of specific moral principles he dismissed as "indoctrination" or the transmission of "a bag of virtues." Instead of instructing, teachers must help to stimulate children's moral understanding through reflecting on their own experience. Kohlberg was not a Catholic, but he was discovered by the generation of Catholic educators hit by the first tidal waves of post-conciliar misinterpretation.
Among the most influential writers of catechetical texts to apply these ideas to the teaching of faith and morals was Kohlberg's Canadian follower, Christianne Brusselmans, whose catechetical texts have been widely used on both sides of the Atlantic. In Brusselmans' books, the children are to reach their own ideas about morality through learning about peace, justice, sharing, caring and love, etc. Her text on preparing children for first Holy Communion, The Gold Book, teaches them that the Eucharist is about celebrating, making peace, listening, caring, sharing a meal, in which they receive a very special bread.
Piaget's and Kohlberg's theories also underlie the refusal of certain priests to teach children how to make their first confession before they make their first Communion. Often the children have lapsed before the appropriate "cognitive structures" are judged to be in existence, and so they never learn how to go to confession.
The American Carl Rogers, on the other hand, is famous for the large numbers of religious vocations he helped to destroy in the late 1960s and the '70s.
Starting as a disciplined therapist of strict Lutheran upbringing, he established his reputation in the Chicago area in the 1940s and '50s among mildly troubled or neurotic mid-Westerners, who, like Rogers himself, still had some religious principles. With people like this, his method and message worked well enough. By listening to whatever his patients said, without expressing approval or disapproval, Rogers made it easier for them to open up and, in doing so, to get back on the right track more or less by themselves. He had no arcane theories like the Oedipus complex or collective unconscious to confuse them with. Later, he headed a research team in Wisconsin. Meanwhile he had been pouring out books. By 1960 he was the best-known psychologist in America. Then in 1963 he moved to California, and California transformed him. From being principled and responsible, he became in the words of one critic a "70-year-old teenager"; in those of another, "one of the most important social revolutionaries of our time." The roles are not incompatible.
By this time his interests had switched to what he called "Therapy for Normals" (TFN), that is to say ordinary people without psychological problems. They might be normals, but Rogers believed that his non-directional therapy, by releasing the full "human potential" inside them, could turn them into "supernormals." In other words, he was moving out of psychology into spiritual direction or character formation.
To implement the idea, he invented the "encounter group" or "sensitivity session." In an encounter group, people explore their feelings together to discover "their real selves." The irony is that this is just what normal people, as long as they remain normal, don't usually want to do. They sense there is something unhealthy about it, and the results proved them right. Rogers' encounter groups were a recipe for turning large numbers of hitherto normal people into sentimental nincompoops or sexual libertines. Rogers was initially disturbed by the results, but pushed on nevertheless. The trouble was that he did not believe in the obvious fact that everybody's "real self" contains a great deal that is not very nice. He did not, in other words, believe in evil. Also his basic message had changed. "Be your real self" no longer meant "Do what you know is right," but "Do what your real self wants to do," and "anything you have been trained or told to do by someone else is not part of your real self." It is surprisingly like Jung's message without the sophisticated underpinnings. Fame and folly had turned Rogers into one of the founders of the permissive society, and fathers of the "ME generation." As a psychologist, he is no longer esteemed as he was. But the consequences of the revolution he helped to work remain.
This was the situation when, between 1965 and 1967, the heads of Catholic religious orders and organisations in America started calling on Rogers and his assistants to help them carry out the reforms called for by Vatican II, which had just ended. They had been told to renew their institutions in the light of the charisms of their founders. That for this purpose they too turned to psychologists rather than theologians or spiritual directors is revealing. "Dozens of Catholic religious organisations" received the Rogers encounter-group treatment. 144 They included Jesuits, Franciscans, and a raft of women's orders. The results were catastrophic. Priests and nuns, first by the score then in hundreds, discovered that their response to God's call had not come from their real selves. Some had affairs with each other or their therapists. Others left their orders without more ado. Demands to be laicised multiplied. Within about a year and a half, a well-known and respected women's teaching order was reduced to rubble: numbers dropped from 615 members to a bare two dozen; of their sixty schools, only one remains. Among Jesuits "the third way" was seriously discussed. The third way was proposed as a legitimate alternative to marriage and celibacy; it meant priests having girlfriends. 145
Rogers'. ideas have been influential in the field of catechetics as well. In his Freedom to Learn (1969), regarded as the Bible of "humanistic" education, he delivered himself of the following opinion: "To my mind the best education would produce a person very similar to one produced by the best psychotherapy," by which he says he means "an exploration of increasingly strange, unknown and dangerous feelings in oneself, this exploration proving possible only because the individual gradually realises that he is accepted unconditionally."
Bad psychology has also afflicted the Church outside the English-speaking world. In the late 1980s, a renewed exodus from the priesthood began in Germany provoked by the priest-psychotherapist Eugen Drewermann and his book The Clergy: Psychogramme of an Ideal (1989). This and Drewermann's 35 other books, said to have sold over a million copies, appear to be a blend of Jung and modernist biblical scholarship. The doctrines of the Church "have a symbolic character." They "are not expositions of facts external to man but contain a reproduction of his inward experience." They put us in touch with "an absolute person," through "images that are inherent in our spirit." However they are much better expressed by other religions. We would be more "truly Christian" with a good dash of ancient Egyptian religion. As for the Catholic Church, it is an institution "of constraint, repression, de-personalisation and the destruction of feeling." 146
The Drewermann case is interesting not because Drewermann has anything at all new to say — it is mostly threadbare stuff — but because of the support he has had from middle-class German Catholics and the weak response of the majority of the German hierarchy. Archbishop Dyba of Fulda, who spoke of Drewermann's "profound apostasy" seems to have been one of a minority. For Bishop Lehmann of Mainz (now Cardinal), the head of the German Episcopal conference and a leading theologian, Drewermann was "right in his attempt to rescue the treasures hidden in biblical faith" and he subsequently rebuked German theologians for "having failed" to follow Drewermann's lead.
The Church's Voice
As I explained at the beginning of the last chapter, the chief purpose of this brief survey of psychological theory and its impact on Catholics is not to write off psychology completely, but to show where it is lumbered with erroneous philosophical, ethical and religious ideas which it badly needs to shed if it is to reach its full potential as a science.
The first Pope to recognise this fact officially was Pius XII. The boom in psycho-analysis following the end of World War II had just begun. During the 1950s, he tackled the subject in four addresses (14th September 1952, 13th April 1953, 2nd October 1958, and 10th April 1958). He was mainly concerned to defend free will and moral responsibility.
While the Church "looks with satisfaction on the new psychiatry," he said, psychiatrists must "not lose sight of ... the obligatory precepts of ethics." Our psychic dynamisms "are not irresistible ... nature has entrusted their direction to the centre-post, the spiritual soul ... which is normally capable of governing these energies." Nor, "without further consideration" should psychotherapists treat inhibitions of the ego "as a kind of fatality" "Every man must be considered normal until the contrary is proven ... Abnormal psychological conditions are not always of compelling force."
In dealing with the limits of research and treatment, he cautioned against unrestricted exploration of the patient's sexual life. A "man is not free to arouse in himself, for therapeutic purposes, each and every appetite of a sexual order." Nor may he suppress at will the religious spirit, self-esteem, modesty and decency. The therapist, on his side, when faced with "material sin" (what is objectively sinful whether or not the patient realises it is such) cannot remain neutral. A therapist cannot counsel a patient to commit serious sin on the grounds that it would be without subjective guilt. Moreover, in regard to guilt, morbid guilt must be distinguished from real guilt. "No purely psychological treatment can cure a genuine sense of guilt." In the case of real moral fault, the means of eliminating it do "not belong to the purely psychological order."
The Pope also addressed the wider question of the origins of religion. Referring to the possibility of a psychic dynamism directing man towards God, he said that, should its existence be demonstrated, it would merely confirm St Augustine's words: "You have made us for yourself, Lord, and our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee." However, he rejected the idea that such a dynamism was the basis of religious belief. "We know," he said, "that ... the natural and supernatural knowledge of God and the worship of Him, do not proceed from the unconscious or subconscious, nor from an impulse of the affections, but from the clear and certain knowledge of God by means of His natural and supernatural revelation."
However, any results that the Pope's admonitions may have had at the time when they were made, were quickly undone by those who took the lead in interpreting modern psychology to the faithful after 1965.
The beginnings of a restoration of sanity, at least in regard to sex and its significance, started in the early 1980s with John Paul H's allocutions at his Wednesday general audiences, in which he developed his "theology of the body." Removing sex from centre stage, the Pope returned it to its rightful place as the physical expression of a fundamentally spiritual, because personal, union, and in doing so restores its dignity. The message still has to permeate to parish level. But when it does, it will, I believe, have a tremendous attractive power for men and women in flight from the worldwide "Playboy"/"Playgirl" culture and mentality.
135. See Richard Noll, The Jung Cult, Princeton University Press, 1994, and The Aryan Christ, London, Macmillan, 1997. Dr Noll is a clinical psychologist and post-doctoral fellow in the history of science at Harvard. Ever anxious to protect his reputation as a scientist, Jung tended to give more or less place to his religious ideas depending on the audience he was addressing.
136. Dr Jeffrey Satinover, a former Jungian analyst, graduate of the C. G. Jung Institute in Zurich, and one-time president of the C. G. Jung Foundation of New York. The citation is from his long letter-article in The Wanderer for 27 July, 1995, quoting liberally from Jung's followers and admirers.
137. It is ironic that Freud, who is associated above all with sex, should have been more chaste than the reputedly "spiritual" Jung. For my account of Jung's "religion," I am indebted chiefly to Dr Noll and Dr Satinover. The latter's masterly article enables one to see the jungle of Jung's religious ideas in perspective.
139. Jung's reinterpretations of Christianity are taken from a paper by Dr Pravin Thevathasan MB BS MRCPsych
MSc, of Shrewsbury. England.
140. Satinover, op. cit In 1912, Jung, according to Noll, called for "an intrapsychic overthrow of custom, a revolution in the internalised European traditions that enslave the individual personality" (Likoudis, The Wanderer, 29 December 1994.)
141. Noll, The Jung Cult, p. 254. For Jung's belief that he had received a special call for this work, see Philip Rieff, The Triumph of the Therapeutic, (Harper Torchbook), pp. 112— 113.The author describes how, at the age of 12 Jung had a series of dreams, culminating with God dropping an enormous piece of dung on Basel cathedral and crushing it. Jung later described the incident, which gave him a prophetic sense of mission, as, in Rieff's words, his first and formative "experience of grace," and interpreted it as a call to "help those like his father, who suffered from the failure of the Christian miracle of grace, to a new grace."The father had committed suicide.
142. Likoudis, The Wanderer, Dec—Jan 1994-5. "The Kordes Enrichment Center, run by Benedictine sisters in the diocese of Evansville. U.S.A., has programmes with titles like, 'Discover how to heal yourself through dream analysis,' Nurturing spirituality and sexuality,' and 'Dreams and spiritual growth.'"
143. According to Fr. Louis Bouyer, before Adler died, he "arrived at a religious and Christian conversion through practising an individual psychology that was speculatively modest, but wholly honest in practice." The Invisible Father, Edinburgh. T.84 T. Clark, 1999. ch. II, pp. 35-36.
144. For this account of Rogers' ideas and career, see William Coulson: (1) "The Californication of Carl Rogers," in Fidelity, November 1987. and (2) "We Overcame their Traditions, in The Latin Mass, January—February 1994. Dr Coulson was for eight years Rogers' closest assistant.
145. In humanistic psychology, "the proof of authenticity ... is to go against what you were trained to be. to call all that phoniness, and to say what is deepest within you... What's deepest within you. however, are certain unrequited longings, including sexual longings. We provoked an epidemic of sexual misconduct among clergy and therapists." (Coulson, op. cit. 2).The encounter group has been one of modernism's most effective weapons in its campaign against Catholic faith and morals. As a method of changing people's attitudes and ideas it has proved quite as effective as machine guns and bombs in modern warfare.
Copyright © Philip Trower 2006, 2011, 2018