The Religion of Psychoanalysis

If there are any readers who are hoping for a polemic, either for or against religion or for or against psychoanalysis, I am pleased to say that I hope to disappoint you. I am happy to be both an ordained Episcopalian priest and a newly certified psychoanalyst and member of the Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis. I believe that the traditions called Judaeo-Christian have much to offer psychoanalysis, and I also believe that the theories of health and neurosis that have been developed by Karen Horney and the members of this group equip an inquiring person to examine both the areas of the psychoanalysis of religion and the religion of psychoanalysis.

Excellent papers have been written by members of our group on the subject of the psychoanalysis of religion. Rubins,1-2 Apolito,3 Lussheimer4 and VolImerhausen5 have concentrated their concerns upon the application of psychoanalytic theory and technique to the furtherance of our understanding of the varieties of religion and religious belief. I can find no writings by members of our group on the subject of the religion of psychoanalysis, but, as I shall attempt to prove, I believe that this subject has been a concern of our group since it was founded. I did find, in my search of the literature, an excellent book by Jan Ehrenwald, Psychotherapy: Myth and Method.6 This book traces the role and effect of the mythic (or religious) in the development of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. Although I agree with Ehrenwald's central thesis—that it is impossible and counter therapeutic to divorce the mythic from psychoanalysis—in this paper I shall try to relate Horney theory to the basic question, “What are the constructive and neurotic aspects of religion in the theory and practice of psychoanalysis?”

But first I shall introduce my underlying stance by way of a brief and rather condensed historical digression. There is a scene in the movie of Fiddler On The Roof which has been very important to me. In it, the local Or