While we normally focus on expressions of noncanonical Christianity in ancient sources, today we look at the work of a key modern thinker: C.G. Jung. A critical figure in the establishment of modern psychology, a great deal of contention surrounds his works and thoughts. Are we to think og him as a psychologist? As a scientist? As a pseudoscientist? As a a mystic? As a literary theorist? Or something else entirely?
While these are fascinating questions, his overall corpus is not the focus of this post. Rather, we will be specifically exploring his perspective on the apostle Paul in Christianity and how a perhaps less-than-orthodox approach might help us to draw meaning from reading Pauline works– and perhaps about Jesus himself.
The below quote is from C.G. Jung's book, "Man and His Symbols":
"A sense of a wider meaning to one’s existence is what raises a man beyond mere getting and spending. If he lacks this sense, he is lost and miserable. Had St. Paul been convinced that he was nothing more than a wandering weaver of carpets, he certainly would not have been the man he was. His real and meaningful life lay in the inner certainty that he was the messenger of the Lord. One may accuse him of suffering from megalomania, but this opinion pales before the testimony of history and the judgment of subsequent generations. The myth that took possession of him made him something greater than a mere craftsman.
Such a myth, however, consists of symbols that have not been invented consciously. They have happened. It was not the man Jesus who created the myth of the god-man. It existed for many centuries before his birth. He himself was seized by this symbolic idea, which, as St. Mark tells us, lifted him out of the narrow life of the Nazarene carpenter.
Inner Certainty Above Institutional Validation
Paul experienced, on the road to Damascus, something profound and lifechanging. An experience with the resurrected– and ascended– Christ. This was an internal, subjective experience, the knowledge of which radically transformed his life. No wonder that many Gnostic thinkers– particularly the Valentinians – considered Paul to be one of their own.
And yet, many people have radical experiences beyond their understand. Why Paul? And when Paul, why did his actions change the world and, through the persistent spread and adoption of his writings, the course of human history? For C.G. Jung, the answer lies in Paul's "inner certainty that he was a messenger from the Lord". If his self-affirmation was contingent upon the church of his day, he surely would have failed– after all, his conflicts with Peter are legendary. But they were not. Internally, he fully adopted this identity, pulling it onto himself, wearing it as a mantle.
Possession By the Myth
For Jung, Paul did not just tap into something greater than himself for this confidence. Rather, he was possessed by it, consumed by it. At once his identity and soul were subsumed into something greater, this profound prophetic figure capable of challenging and redefining the fundamentals of the early Christian movement.
And, for Jung, it was likewise with Jesus. Imagine how limited would his ministry had been, how worthless his crucifixion, how valueless his parables, had he not attained profound and limitless certainty in his identity as the son of God. And how little his followers would have affirmed them, had not he passed that certainty onto them.
For Jung, while one can take a metaphysical/supernatural angle here, one need not do so– and one can take a naturalistic/psychological angle without discrediting or disrespecting the profound, world-changing impact. Jung argues that Christ's complete and total alignment with the myth, the symbol, the archetype of the god-man is what empowered him to do his works. It is what truly made him the "son of God". And is that really so different from being aligned with God's will, or being his child?
Myth as the Key to Escaping Mundanity
What then, are we to do? Are we to shift our identity into the myth of prophetic wunderkind like Paul, or of the god-man like Christ? Perhaps. But maybe not– for that, I encourage you to read his works (particularly here Man and His Symbols). He does, however, encourage us to place great importance in the myths we identify with.
Jung noted:
A sense of a wider meaning to one’s existence is what raises a man beyond mere getting and spending. If he lacks this sense, he is lost and miserable.
In our lives, under what myths do we operate? What stories do we tell ourselves?
Do we identify our importance as being derived from our friends? Our work or school? Our family? Our hobbies? Our passions?
Do we see ourselves as victims? As victors? As hopeless? As predestined for glory– or for damnation?
The goal here is not for me to tell you what myths you should believe, but to encourage you that you have the ability to critically reflect about them. Yes, Paul received a radical inner experience. But he also chose to embrace it, wear it as a mantle, and make it his myths.
What myths have you chosen to wear? Are they the right ones? And what would it look like for you to radically revisit the myths forming the inner and outer worlds you find yourself in?