God-image

Definition

A term derived from the Church Fathers, according to whom the imago Dei (image of God) is imprinted on the human soul. When such an image is spontaneously produced in dreams, fantasies, visions, etc. it is, from the psychological point of view, a symbol of the self, of psychic wholeness.

C. G. Jung: “It is only through the psyche that we can establish that God acts upon us, but we are unable to distinguish whether God and the unconscious are two different entities. Both are border-line concepts for transcendental contents. But empirically it can be established, with a sufficient degree of probability, that there is in the unconscious an archetype of wholeness which manifests itself spontaneously in dreams, etc., and a tendency, independent of the conscious will, to relate other archetypes to this centre. Consequently, it does not seem improbably that the archetype produces a symbolism which has always characterised and expressed the Deity… The God-image does not coincide with the unconscious as such, but with a special content of it, namely the archetype of the self. It is this archetype from which we can no longer distinguish the God-image empirically.” (Psychology and Religion: West and East, Collected Works, Vol. 11, p. 468.)
“One can, then, explain the God-image… as a reflection of the self, or conversely, explain the self as an imago Dei (image of God) in man.” (Ibid., p. 190.)

Samuels, Shorter & Plaut

In psychological terms, J ung posited the reality of a
God-image as a unifying and transcendent SYMBOL capable of drawing
together heterogeneous psychic fragments or uniting polarised
OPPOSITES. Like any IMAGE, it is a psychic product different from the
object which it attempts to represent and to which it points. The
God-image points to a reality that transcends CONSCIOUSNESS, is
extraordinarily numinous (see NUMINOSUM), compels attention, attracts
ENERGY, and is analogous to an idea that in similar form has
forced itself upon mankind in all parts of the world and in all ages.
As such, it is an image of totality and ‘as the highest value and
supreme dominant in the psychic hierarchy, the God-image is immediately
related to, or identical with, the SELF’ (CW 9ii, para. 170).
Being an image of totality, however, the God-image has two sides;
one good, the other EVIL.
Clarifying and differentiating God and the God-image, Jung wrote:
It is the fault of the everlasting contamination of object and imago
that people can make no conceptual distinction between ‘God’ and
‘God-image’, and therefore think that when one speaks of the
‘God-image’ one is speaking of God and offering ‘theological’ explanations.
It is not for psychology, as a science, to demand a
hypostatization of the God-image. But, the facts being what they
are, it does have to reckon with the existence of a God-image …
the God-image corresponds to a definite COMPLEX of psychological
facts, and is thus a quantity which we can operate with; but what
God is in himself remains a question outside the competence of all
psychology (CW 8, para. 528).
Viewed psychotherapeutically, the God-image functions as a
church within, so to speak; as a psychic container, a frame of reference,
a system of values and moral arbiter. Jung accepted as a

God-image whatever an individual claimed to experience as God,
that which represented the person’s highest value whether expressed
consciously or unconsciously, and typical religious motifs which recurred
in the history of ideas, dogma, MYTH, RITUAL and art.
See RELIGION.

Sharp

Jung References

Further Reading

Translate »