Saturday, February 05, 2011

A Short Jungian Interlude 7

Humankind's Learning Capacity:

Rodin Museum, Paris, October, 2007
One reason I love reading Jung so much is that I always come away with a new and deeper insight into human nature, or more specifically into the human psyche.  He opines learnedly that the question of the nature of human instinct is far from simple and that it is a quality almost exclusive to humankind.  It would be hard to gainsay the psychiatrist here.  He goes on to aver that this capacity for learning, indeed this drive for learning, is "based on the instinct for imitation found in animals."!  (The Undiscovered Self, Routledge, 1958, 2010) 

Now, it is the nature of this instinct for learning that differentiates humankind from its brothers and sisters in the animal kingdom.  Further, it is also in the nature of this drive to knowledge to disturb other instincts and even modify them.  He points to the case where birds can learn new melodies and songs from other birds, or as we know today even imitate the sounds of alarms - either of house or car.

Estrangement and Alienation

I have already pointed out humankind's disturbing feeling of self-alienation or self-estrangement.  I also alluded to the fact that this latter theme was very much one common to the existentialist writers of the early and middle twentieth centuries.  Here, in this short book, however, Jung does not refer to any work of any contemporary philosopher as he wrote this short classic as a work for the lay person, and it has now become a good introduction to his thoughts on the human condition in general and on the human psyche in particular.

Jung locates much of our dark or shadow side, namely our propensity for evil in all its various guises, firmly within the effects of the drive to knowledge on the other native drives found in our human condition.  However, these effects are the by-product or the shadow of the more positive results of this drive to knowledge, namely, everything that civilization has gifted humankind with, viz., science, technology, culture in all its forms: literature, art, drama, music and so on and so forth.  The wonderful thing about reading Jung is that he is nothing if not holistic and eclectic in his approach - in anything he researches he seeks to cover it in all its aspects, especially its positive and negative aspects.  Hence, while he throws light on much of the unconscious in human beings he is also aware of the evil shadow these latter have cast upon themselves, upon each other and upon the very environment in which they live, namely Mother Earth or Gaia.  If humanity is the guardian of the Earth, at the same time it is her destroyer.

Being Uprooted

Another Rodin sculpture, Paris Museum, 2007
I have always loved this metaphor for humankind's self-alienation.  I came across many years ago when I was studying philosophy in the late 1970s.  I well remember reading Albert Camus' stark "L'Étranger" in English translation, of course, and Fyodor Dostoyevski's Notes from Underground and his wonderful Brothers Karamazov under the tuition of our astute philosophy lecturer Fr. Patrick Carmody, M.A., M.Phil.  It was he, through these wonderful writers, who first introduced me to the existential theme of alienation or uprootedness.  I later came across it in Irish Gaelic literature in the poetry of one of our brilliant 20th century poets in that language, Máirtín Ó Díreáin, and specifically in his poem called "Stoite" which means "Uprooted," and, indeed, this poet went on to coin his own substantive from that adjective to give us the wonderful abstract noun called "stoiteachas" in the Gaelic, which is an exact translation of Jung's word "uprootedness" in the following ad rem passage:

It [the drive for knowledge] is also the source of numerous psychic disturbances and difficulties occasioned by man's progressive alienation from his instinctual foundation., i.e., by his uprootedness and identification with his conscious knowledge of himself, by his concern with consciousness at the expense of the unconscious.  The result is that modern man can know himself only in so far as he can become conscious of himself - a capacity largely dependent on environmental conditions... [H]e forgets himself in the process. losing sight of his instinctual nature and putting his own conception of himself  in place of his real being.  In this way he slips imperceptibly into a purely conceptual world where where the products of his conscious activity progressively replace reality.  (Op.cit., pp. 57-8)
The Split in the Human Psyche:

They say rather humorously here in Ireland that the first item on every political agenda in this country is "the split."  Jung is not referring to the split between people here at this stage in this chapter, rather he is pointing out how the human being is by nature a duplex not a simplex - his terms. (See ibid., p. 60)  Or to put it in other terms there is a psychic split between the Conscious and the Unconscious in human beings, with the latter being very strongly to the forefront or very strongly in the ascendant to use two distinct but appropriate metaphors.  Another pair of opposites we could use are the Rational and the Irrational.  Jung uses another pair of opposites in this little classic, and indeed throughout his whole oeuvre to mean the exact same as this pair, namely, Rational and Religious, the latter which he sees to be obviously irrational.  Another pair we could mention in this context is Head and Heart (as Blaise Pacal put it rather astutely: "Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point": "The heart has its reasons of which reason knows absolutely nothing!")  Rational and Instinctual would be yet again another oppositional pair.

Oftentimes, indeed far more often than not, human beings who are weighed down under the weight of this psychic split join together to form movements which foment uprisings, revolutions and wars of freedom.  They also join humanitarian movements in an attempt to cure the ills of a very fragmented world.  However, Jung is at pains to point out, and it is hard to gainsay him on this point, that such a drive within any human being to join such movements and attempt to bring about more freedoms of all types for his fellow human creatures is itself an externalization of the inner split, of the desire to seek the wholeness (holiness, integrity, unity, one-ness) of the psyche.  This, I believe is an astute and profound insight given us here by Jung:

The accumulation of individuals who have got into this critical state starts off a mass movement purporting to be the champion of the suppressed.  In accordance with the prevailing tendency of consciousness to seek the source of all ills in the outside world, the cry goes up for political and social changes which, it is supposed, would automatically solve the much clearer problem of the split personality. (Ibid., p. 58)
Neglecting our Instincts leads to Conflict and War

This sub-heading, while not Jung's, is exactly one of the points he goes on to make rather forcefully in this chapter of this wonderful classic.  When we neglect the other pole of our esentially duplex nature, that is, when we concentrate all our energies on the ego and on our consciousness to the detriment of the unconscious, then we are setting ourselves up for trouble, conflict and eventually war.  Remember that this book was written in 1957 and published in 1958 at the height of The Cold War which is alluded to many times throughout.  Also remember that Jung was in his 83rd years and had lived through the atrocities of The Second World War.

Jung then goes on to point out what he considers the worst catastrophe of modern living, namely that humankind has almost totally forgotten that it has a shadow side.  It is through the integration of the shadow or evil side to us into the psyche that we can become whole (holy, one, integrated, individuated).  When we neglect the shadow we begin to externalize it and project it out onto others as Hitler and the Nazis did with the Jews and all other "lesser forms of life!" as this brutal régime would have it.

Neglect of Instincts leads to Ill-health both Mental and Physical

This hardly needs to be said nowadays, but Jung is right to remind his readers that when we neglect the Unconscious, the Gut, the Instincts, the Unconscious, the Heart, the Feeling side of us and allow the Conscious side, the Head, the Thinking side or the Rational part to have an upper hand we are setting ourselves up for illness - either physical or mental.  Physical in so far as all neglect of the psyche leads to psychosomatic problems which come to a head in heart attacks, ulcers, blood pressure, strokes and so on.  Mental in so far as one can pick from as many forms of neuroses that one wishes: unipolar depression, OCD and a myriad of phobias which as many strange names as anyone could care to remember.  In short Jung says:

Violation or neglect of instinct has painful consequences of a physiological and psychological nature for whose removal medical help, above all, is required. (Ibid., p. 59)
Forgetting what is of our Nature or Natural

As I have pointed out this is not a textbook or indeed a book for the cognoscenti.  Rather it is one for the general public or for the lay person.  Hence, Jung has avoided practically all learned terms and jargon of any type.  That's why this book is an ideal introduction to his thought in general for the beginner student of his work.  He tends, like a good teacher or lecturer, to repeat his points in many different ways.  I remember once reading some criticism written by the great Anglo-American poet Thomas Stearns Eliot where he reponded rather profoundly, if not wittily, to a criticism of his work which stated that he had repeated his themes very often.  Eliot replied that even though he did, he always said it in an entirely different way.  There is a lot of wisdom in those words from the modernist poet.  In like manner, Jung also repeats his points in many different ways.  This I find good as it holds my attention and teaches me to grasp his points better.

He returns again to the point that if we do not deal with the integration of our shadow side we will externalize it in the world out there by projecting onto others as Hitler and the Nazis did with the Jews and so on.  Also he maintains that we will then use the Leader as our scapegoat and blame him for the faults of our own shadow, for our own temptations and even our own weak surrender to evil in its many forms.

Again, he returns to the nature of humanity, namely that it has an Animal (instinctual, gut, heart, feeling, driven or irrational) side as well as a Human one (Rational, Cortical, Sophisticated, Educated, Intellectual).  The first he points out is an objective reality while the second is wholly subjective.  This, for this reader, was an insightful comment from which he has learned much about both the nature of consciousness and that of the unconscious:

The forlorness of consciousnbess in our world is due primarily to the loss of instinct, and the reason for this lies in the development of the hu,man mind over the past aeon.  The more powerv man has over nature, the more his knowledge and skill went to his head,l and the deeper became his comntempt for the merely natural and accidental, for that which is irrationally given - including the objective psyche, which is all that consciousness is not.  In contrast to the subjectiveism of the conscious mind the unconscious is objective, manifesting mainly in the form of contrary feelings, fantasies, emotions,, impulses and dreams, none of which one makes oneself but which come upon one objectively... It seems a positive menace to the ego that its monarchy can be doubted.  The religious person, on the other hand, is accustomed to the thought of not being sole master in his own house.  He beliueves that God, and not himself, decides in the end.  (Ibid.,. p. 61)
In the above we see that Jung sees Religion as having very much a psychic role.  He sees it as a firmly Irrational stance towards the conscious world.  In fact, he states at various junctures in this little classic that Religion as such is essentially a psychic tool that keep humankind aware of the duality (or duplex-ness, or even duplicity??) of his nature that is essentially is split between the Conscious and the Unconscious.  In so doing, it performs a necessary function in so far as it balances the human psyche in the hopes that through deep personal work that human being may learn to integrate both aspects of the psyche into a integral whole in the process of Individuation.  Again Jung has little time for Religion as a Theism or a mere list of tenets, doctrines or dogmas which for him, though important, are solely signs and synmbols never to be taken literally because they point always to the psychic reality of the great collective unconscious as well as the small individual one.  He finishes this altogether interesting and most chapter by alluding to the true nature of Religion in the experience of a relationship with the transcendent, or quite simply Religious experience is essentially a psychic reality which works to keep the human psyche balanced!

Thursday, February 03, 2011

A Short Jungian Interlude 6

Chapter five of Carl Gustave Jung's short book The Undiscovered Self is entitled "The Philosophical and the Psychological Approach to Life."  Once again, I must remind our readers that this book was written in 1957 at the height of The Cold War when our man was some 83 years of age.  To this extent it is a dated book by way of its references to Marxism and Communism.  These "-isms," as it were, sought to mould humankind in the image and likeness of the State, while Religions sought to mould our species into the image and likeness of the Godhead.  Hence, our basic convictions as human beings have become ever more rationalistic, Jung argues.  Our philosophy, in turn, has become an intellectual and academic affair rather than a way of life as it was in the old days.  In other words, philosophy had the heart knocked out of it to the advantage of giving its head the place of prominence.

Rupture between Faith and Knowledge:

St Peter's, Rome, the bastion of Roman Catholicism!
I have already outlined how Jung is stressing that a one-sided take on humanity (like the Marxist one), which reduces it to a mere physical or material reality, is very reductionist. Religion, then, in the Jungian take on things adds the balance, because it takes humankind's psychic reality into consideration. 

He then gives some interesting insights into the purpose and nature of religious ceremonies.  These, he points out, caused absolutely no difficulty during the Middle Ages because the sciences were in their infancy then and psychological science did not exist at all.  Medieval man was a deeply religious species.  However, to the modern scientific mind, such religious ceremonies, with their symbols and symbolic actions, seem to be arrant nonsense.  Despite this suspicion, there is a paradox going on in the modern world, and that is, that somehow, despite all the advances in human knowledge, a deep instinct bids humankind hang on to these old ideas.  Why do we hang on to these old ideas despite obvious evidence to the contrary?  This is an important question that Jung asks here, a very important one indeed!

He goes on to answer the questions raised in the preceding paragraph clearly and succinctly thus: "The obvious purpose of this is to prevent him from falling into the abyss of nihilistic despair." (Op. cit., p. 52)  This point here strikes me deeply, and indeed in a serendipitous, if not synchronistic manner, in that this morning I chanced to listen to a wonderful interview on The John Murray Show on RTE 1 Radio Station which broadcast a wonderful illustration of exactly what Carl Gustave Jung's point is in the just quoted sentence.  It was an interview with author Neville Sexton on the life and death of his six-year old son Craig.  Indeed Mr Sexton has just written an obviously inspiring book on his late and wonderful son - really obvious from the passion and conviction with which he told his moving tale this morning.  Craig's story is a moving and inspiring tale of a young boy’s life, his death, and his family’s belief that he still lives on.  Mr. Sexton, a rational human being, who studied applied physics at university, informed his interviewer and listeners that if he were not to believe that somehow his brave and wonderful son was still living on at some other level of existence that he would have crumbled into hopelessness and despair.  He informed us also that it was impossible for him to go on with his life given a nihilism which denied an ultimate meaning to life.  In other words, here was a man, a human being, a husband and a father declaring for meaning, for belief in signs and symbols.  At one stage in the grieving process the young father broke down into a fit of uncontrollable weeping when he was alone after his son's death and in desperation he cried out into the emptiness around him:  "Craig, give me a sign you are still there!"  The father told us that his dead son has given them both several signs that he lives on since his death.  I won't relate them here as some of you may want to buy the book.  See these links here: Craig The Boy Who Lives for the book and Murray-Sexton Interview Podcast for the interview itself.

The Church of St John Lateran, Rome, May, 2008
However, Jung is quick to point out that he is against a complete literalism of signs and symbols which allows rationalists to excoriate religion as literalistic, narrow minded and obsolescent.  While such signs and symbols are not literal, they, nevertheless "possess a life of their own on account of their archetypal character."  I like this understanding of religion which Jung argues strongly for here, namely for its psychological import.  Religion and its symbols matter, not because they point to a life beyond this, but because they point to a deep life within us, the deep life of the psyche in all its dimensions.  Hence, we have the term depth psychology.  Rationalism would seek to deny this latter reality.  In other words it would literally throw the child out with the bathwater!

The contrast, Jung argues, between Faith and Knowledge has become so stark, so self-contradictory, so contrary that he can apply only one word to it, namely "incommensurable."  We cannot even compare them.  I remember learning many definitions of faith when I was a young theology student, e.g., "Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things unseen." (St Paul)  "Faith is a knowledge born of love." (Bernard Lonergan, S.J.) and many others which do not come to mind at this moment.  They all possess a mystery and a depth, or, if you like, a quintessential paradoxical sense of what faith is - a deep belief in something despite the lack of obvious evidence.  Oftentimes in matters of the psyche we have to believe in certain things despite this lack of empirical evidence.  Faith uses indicators, signs and symbols.

Interestingly, Jung goes on to criticize the contemporary trends in theology, namely demythology and demythologization which were very popular in Protestant theology at that time and which were spearheaded by the Lutheran New Testament scholar Rudolf Bultmann.  This approach argued that all the layers of myth had to be painstakingly peeled away from the Gospels in an effort to get at the real facts of the life of Jesus.  Bultmann argued that, after such scholarship, the only fact needed for faith was essentially the historically verifiable fact that Jesus was crucified.  In this manner,  he succeeded in completely splitting faith from history.  Needless to say, such views caused consternation in some quarters.  After all history is not bare fact anyway - it's always interpretation, and whoever makes one or other interpretation is always important too.  Then, is not faith in its many forms different various interpretations of history as well?  However, it is the lessening or reduction, if not the implied outright rejection, of the inherent and native power of symbols that Jung takes offence at in Bultmann's view on demythology.  After all, and Jung argues this cogently, is not mythology "an integral component of all religions?"

Now, the split between Faith and Knowledge is itself a symptom of "the split consciousness which is so characteristic of the mental disorder of our day." (Ibid., p. 53)  There is an obvious "mental dissociation" or a "neurotic disturbance" in the psyche of modern humankind - pulled one way now and another way later.  There is no balance or equanimity to be found at all - all is disturbance.

(To be continued).

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

A Short Jungian Interlude 5

The Individual's Understanding of Himself continued

Jung affirms that there is what he calls "a will to individuality" in everyone. Both science and the Churches regard this thrust in humanity to be "egotistic obstinacy."  Science devalues this will to individuality as mere subjectivism: after all what matters in science is objectivity almost exclusively.  Churches condemn this will in humanity morally as heresy and spiritual pride.

The Fear of the Unconscious: 

Fishing Boat, Howth Harbour
Freud regarded the personal unconscious as a cess-pit of repressed motivations and desires and all manner of "sins" for want of a better word.  Jung acknowledges interestingly that Freud, the very founder of psychoanalysis and the populariser and re-discoverer of the notion of the unconscious was also troubled by the contents of that unconscious.  As evidence of this Jung recounts the fact that on one occasion Freud had confessed to him that "it was necessary to make a dogma of his sexual theory because this was the sole bulwark of reason against a possible 'outburst of the black flood of occultism'."  Let us quote more fully Jung's own words here:


It is this fear of the unconscious psyche which not only impedes self-knowledge but is the greatest obstacle to a wider understanding and knowledge of psychology.  Often the fear is so great that one dares not admit it even to oneself.  (The Undiscovered Self, p. 37)

A Short Jungian Interlude 4

The Problem of Self-Knowledge

Jungian Mandala
If there is one thing most philosophers and psychologists agree upon it is the difficulty we have in getting to know ourselves.  Indeed can we really know ourselves is a question that concerns both subject areas.  Jung entitles his fourth chapter The Individual's Understanding of Himself.  Here follow the prescient words of our learned psychiatrist:

The contradiction, the paradoxical evaluation of humanity by man himself, is in truth a matter for wonder, and one can only explain it as springing from an extraordinary uncertainty of judgement - in other words man is an enigma to himself.  This is understandable, seeing that he lacks the means of comparison necessary for self-knowledge.  He knows how to distinguish himself from other animals in point of anatomy and physiology, but as a conscious reflecting being, gifted with speech, he lacks all criteria for self-judgement.  He is on this planet a unique phenomenon he cannot compare with anything else.  The possibility of comparison and hence of self-knowledge would arise only if he could establish relations with quasi-human mammals inhabiting other stars. (sic, presumably he means other planets!)  (op. cit., pp.  31-32)
In a sense, then, Jung is beginning in a Socratic fashion, acknowledging first our ignorance of ourselves in depth and then proceeding from there.  This is a classical approach to epistemology or the theory of knowledge.  Certainly we know little about ourselves on an unconscious level.  To expand our self-knowledge in that area is the goal of all kinds of psycho-therapeutic approaches.  Jung is also correct where he states that psychology is the youngest of the empirical sciences.  I have already alluded many times in these pages to the fact that Dr. Sigmund Freud, scientific researcher, medical doctor and psychiatrist always considered his brainchild psychoanalysis to be a science.  Whether this is true or not would require my going off on an altogether unrelated tangent here, but I have written about that controversy here before, and if the reader wishes to explore that he should search for the relevant post.

Then, Jung uses quite a relevant metaphor where he contends that what is needed is no less than a Copernican revolution in psychology akin to that in astronomy.  However, he also cautions balance in any such a revolution.  The mystery of the psyche must certainly be freed from the spell of mythological ideas that are used literally.  In other words the mind or psyche is not "a wholly unapproachable and recondite matter" on the one hand or "a mere epiphenomenon of a biochemical process in the brain." (Ibid., p. 32)  In short the mind is neither one nor the other but both at the same time.  Fine, the psyche is unique and has hidden depths and hidden heights that colour each individual so differently - in this sense it is an enigma - but it is also a chemical phenomenon, too.  How these two aspects of the psyche inter-relate is extremely complex and is obviously still a complex and perplexing problem for psychologists and philosophers today even.  Jung also cautions his readers not to dismiss too cavalierly the findings of parapsychology.  In short, the mind which somehow "inhabits" the human brain ascends to a consciousness "beyond" the brain.  It would seem also that it descends to an unconsciousness "below" the brain.  These directional prepositions and verbs of ascent and descent are mine not Jung's, but I believe I am capturing what he is getting at in these pages:




Without consciousness there would, practically speaking, be no world, for the world exists as such only in so far as it is consciously reflected and consciously expressed by a psyche.  Consciousness is a precondition of being.  Thus the psyche is endowed with the dignity of a cosmic principle, which philosophically and in fact gives it a position co-equal with the principle of physical being.  The carrier of this consciousness is the individual, who does not produce the psyche on his own volition but is, on the contrary preformed by it and nourished by the gradual awakening of consciousness during childhood.  If the psyche must be granted an overriding empirical importance, so also must the individual, who is the only immediate manifestation of the psyche.  (Ibid., p. 34)

Sunday, January 30, 2011

A Short Jungian Interlude 3


Il Colosseo, Roma, drante la Pasqua, 2007
 Chapter three of The undiscovered Self runs to a mere seven pages, the first four pages of which set the contemporary political scene, i.e., The Cold War and Iron Curtain politics mainly.  The title of the chapter is "The position of the West on the Question of Religion."  Jung was right in his suppostion that there were many opponents to the suppression of freedoms in the East and that such individuals would eventually rise up against their masters.

Then we read the following (penned in 1957 remember) which surely foreshadowed and presaged the current fundamentalist Islamic terrorist revolt against the West:

Even though the West has considerable industrial power and a sizable defense potential at its command, we cannot rest content with this, for we know that even the biggest guns and the heaviest industry with its relatively high living standard are not enough to check the psychic infection spread by religious fanaticism.  (Op. cit., p. 25)
The Abandonment of inner Experience:

According to Jung if religion is anything at all it is a faith stance - my words and my interpretation of his ideas here.  When religion is unhitched from the engine of faith or fiducial belief, that is, unhithched from a kind of native trust in the person of the Deity, it descends into a mere list of doctrines and tenets.  It lacks conviction and passion and commitment.  In this regard Jung laments the loss of real personal or inner experience:

The Churches stand for traditional and collective convictions which in the case of many of their adherents are no longer based on their own inner experiences but on unreflecting belief , which is notoriously apt to disappear as soon as one begins thinking about it.  The content of belief then comes into collision with knowledge, and it often turns out that the irrationality of the former is no match for the ratiocination of the latter.  Belief is no adequate substitute for inner experience. (Ibid., p. 26)
Faith according to Jung is a response to something that happened to us on the level of human experience.  He then goes on to argue cogently that the resurrection of Christ from the dead is a symbolic or metaphorical  occurrence and certainly not a real physical one.  Our psychiatrist argues that the Churches made and still make the mistake of taking their mythologies literally.  By understanding  the Christian mythology symbolically we will prevent it being ridiculed and wiped out because when it is rendered literal it contradicts fundamental common sense.

A Short Jungian Interlude 2

The Place of Religion in the Discovery of Self

Il Duomo, Catania, August, 2006
I have always found Carl Gustave Jung extremely insightful on the question of Religion.  Given his background - his father was a Pastor in the Swiss reformed Church, as were many of his in-laws - and the times during which he lived, this is not surprising.  I have also long believed that Jung used the word "religion" in a totally different sense than many adherents to such creeds would.  To my mind, for our learned psychiatrist Religion meant more a Spiritual Apprehension than a set of defined beliefs.  At times I have felt in reading his many writings that for him God was more a psychological (and in that sense spiritual) phenomenon than a theological or religious one.  When I was around 19 and studying Theology and English literature I heard a theologian over dinner dismissing Jung's insights into Religion as heretical, and immediately, like any good obedient young man, I began to read his writings! 

The second chapter literally does what it says on the tin.  Its title is its summary: "Religion as the Counterbalance to Mass-mindedness."  Bearing in mind once again that this book was written during The Cold War, the spectre of communism loomed large on the European horizon.  Such totalitarian movements had, of necessity, to cut the ground from under the religions so that every individual was merely a function of the State and nothing more.  In other words, totalitarian movements work by controlling their adherents and they will use every means, including the death sentence, to bring this about.  In this light I love Jung's definition of religion here:

But religion means dependence on and submission to the irrational facts of experience.  These do not refer directly to social and physical conditions; they concern far more the individual's psychic attitude.  (The Undiscovered Self, p. 13)
This short definition would support my contentions about Jung's take on religion, with which I agree profoundly as an erstwhile theologian.  Totalitarian régimes live very much in the external physical world while religions on the other hand live primarily in the internal spiritual world.  As well as that, one could add that the main monotheistic religions live by taking a transcendent world or the world beyond - whatever that may mean - as a focal point.  Anyway, Jung is stressing that a one-sided take on humanity, which reduces it to a mere physical or material reality, is very reductionist.  Religion, then, in the Jungian take on things adds the balance, because it takes humankind's psychic reality into consideration.

Jung says that when Religions compromise with the State they then surrender much of their power and become consequently mere Creeds or sets of tenets or lists of beliefs.  Let us hear his own words on this distinction which is a good one:

A creed gives expression to a definite collective belief, whereas the word religion expresses a subjective relationship to certain metaphysical, extramundane factors.  A creed is a confession of faith intended chiefly for the world at large and is thus an intramundane affair, while the meaning and purpose of religion lie in the relationship of the individual to God (Christianity, Judaism, Islam) or to the path of of salvation and liberation (Buddhism). (Ibid., p 14)
He goes on to say that these Creeds as they began developing their doctrines and dogmas compromised their essential religious (we would say spiritual today, I believe) element in their make-up.  In other words Jung is pointing up Religion as a saving factor in the psychological/spiritual sense, as being a balancing force to the State which seeks to enslave the individual by reducing him/her to a mere unit in society, a mere cog in the machine of the State.  He underscores religion's importance by saying that the life of the individual is not determined solely by the ego and its opinions or by social factors but by a transcendent authority as well.  Now, Jung goes on to express the psychological necessity of religion thus:

The Pantheon, Easter 2007: Linking Pagan and R. Catholic
It is not ethical principles, however lofty, or creeds, however orthodox, that lay the foundations for the freedom and autonomy of the individual, but simply and solely the empirical awareness, the incontrovertible experience of an intensely personal, reciprocal relationship between man and the extramundane authority which acts as a counterpoise to the "world" and its "reason."  (Ibid., pp 15-16)
It is also interesting for me as an erstwhile theologian that Jung equates transcendent with inner, and this fact again supports my contention that Religion for him is more a Spiritual reality in the sense of its being a Psychic reality which essentially saves the individual from being engulfed by the State with his/her identity being obliterated in the sheer mass of numbers.

On the one hand we have the individual reduced to anonymity in the masses - s/he is an intellectual, a rational, even a moral unit of the State.  On the other we have the important counterbalance of the Religious Principle which, to use a metaphor, hitches our mundane wagon to an extramundane star.  Religion balances humankind by adding in the irrational element (Jung), or as I would put it the non-rational element.

Our psychiatrist points out that in totalitarian régimes the party rule book becomes the creed, and Communism or Fascism the religion and the Dictator becomes the demigod, beyond good and evil, "and the votaries are honoured as heroes, martyrs, apostles, missionaries."  (Ibid., p. 17)

Jung goes on to state that religion is "an instinctive attitude" peculiar to humankind.  (Ibid., p. 18)  This is instinctive because humankind knows that there is much more hidden knowledge available to him in the unconscious realm of his psyche.  Religion with its cultic element, that is its liturgical rites (I remember when I learnt theology all those years ago that Religion was inseparably CODE, CREED and CULT, a wonderfully precise definition of what the Churches mean by Religion.)  However, Jung is here arguing that the various rites of the religions are in fact an external acting out of these instinctive, almost unconscious motivations and desires.  They are, as it were, a symbolic or metaphorical representation of the unconscious.  Jung mentions phrases that ring beautiful to my ears like the necessity we have for "rites d'entrée et de sortie" with their "magical efficacy" (read psychic for magical here!)  One feels here that "miraculous", "mystical" as well as "magical" are all synonyms for psychic!  (Jung contends, and he is so right, that all totalitarian régimes have their "religious" ceremonies in mass rallies, processions, parades etc.  Then, the "fear of God" is often replaced by "terror of the dictator."!

In this sense, Jung is also correct when he emphasises the fact that the Religious Sense or Instinct will always be with us because it is essentially an instinctive attitude which rushes in to counterbalance the onesidedness of mere uncoupled rationality in humankind's make-up.  Religion serves this balancing function by its "conscientious regard for the irrational factors of the psyche and individual fate."  (Ibid., p. 19)  Being a lover of classical allusions, our dear and learned psychiatrist uses a beautiful Latin phrase with respect to the persistence of religion or the persistence of the instinctual with which I will finish this post: Naturam expellas furca tamen usque recurret (You can throw out nature with a pitchfork, but she'll always turn up again).