Ego and Archetype: Sinner and Salvation

In his book Ego and Archetype, Dr. Edward Edinger discourses on the Jungian psychic life cycle, also known as the process of individuation. This process consists of four basic stages through which the individual theoretically passes in order to complete psychological development. The first stage—inflation—exists before the development of the conscious, when the Self subsumes the ego—this stage depicts psychological infancy. During the second stage, the ego begins to emerge from the Self and alienation occurs—this period is characterized by feelings of subconscious rejection. In stage three, the ego breaks into the consciousness of its need for and subordination to the Self. For mortals, the fourth stage of the psychic life cycle exists only in theory: this stage comprises complete ego-Self separation.

Experiences in my own life attest to the validity of many of the characteristics of the Jungian psychic life cycle. As a Christian, I appreciated Dr. Edinger’s references to biblical material, and also found his inclusion of other belief systems (past and present) intriguing. I acknowledge the commonalities (archetypes) linking the various faith stories and recognize their representation of a “trans-personal” element (64). I have done my best to synthesize my own life experiences through the lens of the psychic life cycle.

Due to the nature of the stage, I am largely unconscious to the details of the first stage of my psychic development; however, events Dr. Edinger associates with stage two, but which often originate in stage one, have been present in my own life, which seems to confirm my passage through both stages. For example, I have struggled with anxiety and depression for much of my life, and I have always believed maternal rejection during infancy might have played a part. When I read Edinger’s description of the psychological symptoms of the “experience of parental rejection” upon the development of “the child’s personality” (40), and how it frequently results in “states of alienation which can reach unbearable proportions” (55), I thought of my own battles with “attacks of anxiety” and “depression” in recent years (56-7). Interestingly enough, I can even trace my psychic development back to a time when I am positive I was “facing the problem of whether or not [I] was justified before God” (56-7). That period of my life was dark indeed, and—while I do not believe I ever would have acted on any dark impulses—I frequently feel that my life has since been saved in more ways than one.

My psyche and my spiritual beliefs developed along the same lines as Edinger’s assessment of the third stage. I spent several years feeling I was an inadequate sinner with no way to justify myself before God (alienation); then, miraculously—as Otto would put it—I experienced the “numinous” (Melani). My encounter with God—or the “Self,” in Edinger’s terms—occurred once I finally realized that payment for my sins required “more than was originally taken,” according to Edinger’s phrase, but—awesomely—God had already paid the price for my sins through the sacrifice of his son. All I had to do was to accept this gracious gift, and I would be “cover[ed]” (Melani). Since that time, I certainly have not achieved stage four—the perfect relationship between the ego and the Self, or between myself and my Creator. Still, I can testify to the power, relief, and mental and spiritual healing of this encounter with the numinous.

Though I acknowledge strong parallels between my experience and Edinger’s interpretations of Jung’s ideas, I agree moreso with Rudoph Otto’s ideas as expressed in The Idea of the Holy regarding experiencing the numinous than I do with Edinger’s ideas about the parallel stage in psychological development. Otto believed the numinous was a “non-rational, non-sensory experience or feeling whose primary and immediate object is outside the self” (Melani), which he attributes to God; For Edinger, God and Self are essentially the same, and the awakening comes from the ego’s realization of its subordination to the Self.

Furthermore, Otto’s concept of the numinous exists within a spiritual framework, while Edinger’s models of the ego and the Self are self-sufficient. Nothing about life is self-sufficient. The fact that life continues on this planet is evidence enough that a higher being cares whether we continue. Otto’s model refers to a being outside of the ego or the self, which is more accurate based on my experiences. I have experienced the “stupor” at the “mysterium tremendum”—that which “is wholly Other”—not awe at that which is Self. Otto and I believe these two terms are anti-thetical; Edinger seems to view them as simultaneous.

In the Preface to Ego and Archetype, Edinger’s parting hope is his wish that his work would be “a small contribution toward…the reconciliation of science and religion” (xiii). However, like Rudolph Otto, I believe that only one “Other” can reconcile science and religion, or the Self and the ego, or the self, the ego, and God for that matter: Jesus Christ. And really, Edinger might give more credit to the only human who has ever achieved stage four of the psychic life cycle.

Works Cited

Edinger, Edward. Ego and Archetype: Individuation and the Religious Function of the Psyche. New York: Putnam’s Sons, 1972.

Melani, Lilia. “Otto on the Numinous.” Brooklyn College, 2003. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.