The Inevitability of Idealization: A Review of Terror and Transformation: The Ambiguity of Religion in Psychoanalytic Perspective by James W. Jones. East Sussex, UK:  Brunner-Routledge. 2002.  130 pp.

James Jones, who holds doctorates in both psychology and religion and teaches at Rutgers and Union Theological Seminary, begins his book by reminding the reader of the commonality of idealization across

all religious traditions, whether in the form of icons, symbols, or texts. In the mystical traditions of many religions, idealization is linked directly to romantic love, as the closest human equivalent of a psychological state of giving oneself over completely to God or some equivalent principle.

At the outset, Jones reiterates the claim made in his earlier book, Contemporary Psychoanalysis and Religion, (1991) that the relational turn in psychoanalysis provides a useful perspective for looking at idealization in religion by shifting one's view of personality structure away from instinctual determinants to the history of interpersonal encounters. In his current book, Jones develops this theme further, by detailing how he believes the interplay of idealization and one's history of interpersonal relationships creates a lens through which one experiences the sacred. He states, “relational themes echo and re-echo through our devotional practices, spiritual disciplines, cherished philosophical and theological convictions and our states of ecstasy” (p. 5). Along the way, he provides a refreshingly brief comprehensive review of how relational psychoanalysis from Fairbairn to Ghent views religious themes.

The core focus of the book is an excellent review of religious, psychological, and psychoanalytic perspectives on transformation. Jones points out that Freud viewed idealization as existing in opposition to reality testing: an idealized attitude toward one's parents must be overcome to come to terms with the reality of who they really are. Jones contrasts Freud's view of religion with Kohut's more positive one. In doing so, he presents the reader unfamiliar with Kohut with a challenge that is daunting, but ultimately rewarding.

Kohut, Jones explains, refutes Freud's contras