His craving for alcohol
Letters of C. G. Jung: Volume 2, 1951-1961
To William G. Wilson
Dear Mr. Wilson, 30 January 1961 Your letter was very welcome indeed.
I had no news from Roland H. any more and often wondered what has been his fate.
Our conversation which he has adequately reported to you had an aspect of which he did not know. The reason was that I could not tell him everything.
In those days I had to be exceedingly careful of what I said.
I had found out that I was misunderstood in every possible way. Thus I was very careful when I talked to Roland H.
But what I really thought about was the result of many experiences with men of his kind.
His craving for alcohol was the equivalent on a low level of the spiritual thirst of our being for wholeness, ex- pressed in medieval language: the union with God.
How could one formulate such an insight in a language that is not misunderstood in our days?
The only right and legitimate way to such an experience is that it happens to you in reality, and it can only happen to you when you walk on a path which leads you to higher understanding.
You might be led to that goal by an act of grace or through a personal and honest contact with friends or through a high education of the mind beyond the confines of mere rationalism.
I see from your letter that Roland H. has chosen the second way, which was, under the circumstances, obvi- ously the best one.
I am strongly convinced that the evil principle prevailing in this world leads the unrecognized spiritual need into perdition, if it is not counteracted either by a real religious insight or by the protective wall of human community.
An ordinary man, not protected by an action from above and isolated in society, cannot resist the power of evil, which is called very aptly the Devil.
But the use of such words arouses so many mistakes that one can only keep aloof from them as much as possible.
These are the reasons why I could not give a full and sufficient explanation to Roland H.
But I am risking it with you because I conclude from your very decent and honest letter that you have acquired a point of view about the misleading platitudes one usually hears.
You see, alcohol in Latin is spiritus and you use the same word for the highest religious experience as well as for the most depraving poison.
The helpful formula therefore is: spiritus contra spiritum. Thanking you again for your kind letter,
I remain,
Yours sincerely,
C.G. Jung
“As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, 0 God” (Psalm 42:1). Carl Jung, Letters Vol. II, Pages 623-624
Twelve Defining Moments in the History of Alcoholics Anonymous
Introduction
There is a long history of recovery mutual aid groups that pre-date the
founding of Alcoh0lics Anonymous—Native American recovery “circles”; the
Washingtonians; Fraternal Temperance Societies; Ribbon Reform Clubs;
institutional support groups such as the Ollapod Club, the Godwin Association, and
the Keeley Leagues; and early faith-based recovery fellowships such as the
Drunkards Club and the United Order of Ex-Boozers (White, 2001).
There is a similarly rich history of modern adaptations and alternatives to Alcoh0lics Anonymous that include an ever-growing list of Twelve Step fellowships, as well as explicitly religious (e.g., Alcoholics Victorious, Overcomers Outreach,
Liontamers Anonymous, Celebrate Recovery and Ladies Victorious) and secular
(e.g., Women for Sobriety, Moderation Management, Secular Organizations for
Sobriety, Rational Recovery, LifeRing Secular Recovery) frameworks for
addiction recovery (Kurtz & Kurtz, 2007).
Alc0hol!cs Anonymous (AA) has earned its place as the benchmark by
which all other mutual aid groups are compared (Kurtz & White, 2003).
That distinction is the product of AA’s: Historical survival and longevity (White, 1998)
Growth (nearly 2 million members and more than 106,000 local groups)(Alc0holics Anonymous, 2007) Geographical dispersion and accessibility (150 countries)(Alcoh0lics Anonymous, 2007)
Role in inspiring larger social reform movements (Johnson, 1973; Roizen, 1991)
Influence on the modern treatment of alcohol!sm and other drug dependencies (White, 1998), and its Influence on the popular culture (Room, 1989, 1993).
Because of its emergence as an enduring, international movement, AA has
been subjected to a level of scrutiny beyond that of any of its predecessors or
current rivals.
In 1994, Pittman and Bishop published a bibliography of AA literature that listed more than 2,900 books, dissertations, theses and articles written on AA.
Such attention, particularly scientific attention, has since increased, as has the literature of an AA backlash movement whose books/articles have spawned their own mini-industry (See the writings of Peele, Bufe, Ragge and Trimpey as illustrative examples) and Internet websites (e.g., http://www.orangepapers.org/orange-not_good.html,
http://www.aadeprogramming.org/index_frames.html).
Often responding to such public criticisms of AA are recently sobered and grateful alcoholics–the least qualified persons to speak about what AA is and is not, for given the value that AA places on humility and tolerance and its traditions of anonymity and noninvolvement in outside issues, the AA member who is the first to step into the limelight to defend AA is by definition the least qualified to do so.
The ever-growing definitions of AA have reached a point where they tell us
more about each author than about AA as an organization or a framework of
alcoholism recovery (Miller & Kurtz, 1994). AA has been variably depicted as a
society (Wilson, 1949), social movement (Room, 1993), culture of recovery
(White, 1996), system of beliefs and speech event (Makela, et al, 1996); spiritual
program (Miller & Kurtz, 1994), and a religious cult (Bufe, 1991).
One of the most pervasive characterizations of AA is that of a “treatment” for alcoholism (Bebbington, 1976; Tournier, 1979; Emrick, 1989; Najavits, Crits-Christoph, & Dierberger, 2000; McGovern & Carroll, 2003).
In 1994, psychologist William Miller and AA historian Ernest Kurtz, wrote a
seminal article noting popular and professional misconceptions about AA.
Using AA’s own literature, Miller and Kurtz challenged these misconceptions.
alcohol problems; (2) moderate drinking is impossible for everyone with alcohol problems; (3) alcoholics should be labeled, confronted aggressively or coerced into treatment; (4) alcoholics are riddled with denial and other defense mechanisms; (5) alcoholism is a purely physical disorder; (6) alcoholism is hereditary; (7) there is only one way to recover; or (8) alcoholics are not responsible for their condition or their actions (Miller & Kurtz, 1994, p. 165)
This chapter extends the work of Miller and Kurtz by using AA’s own history to elucidate the essential character of AA.
That historical evidence confirms that AA is not a treatment for alcoholism and that such a characterization distorts the nature of and diminishes the potential value of both AA and alcoholism treatment.
There are moments in the lives of individuals, families, organizations and countries that can profoundly and permanently shape character and identity.
Each of the following seminal events in the history of Alcoholics Anonymous offers a window of insight into those dimensions of character that separate AA from other recovery mutual aid groups and from professionally directed alcoholism treatment.
Unless otherwise noted, the historical incidents described are drawn from four AA publications which will be subsequently referenced using their acronyms, Alcoholics Anonymous Comes of Age (AACA), ‘Pass It On’: The Story of Bill Wilson and How the AA Message Reached the World (PIO), Dr. Bob and the Good Oldtimers (DBGO) and Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions (TSTT), and Ernest Kurtz’s scholarly study, Not-God: A History of Alcoholics Anonymous.
Jung’s Refusal
In 1926, Rowland Hazard, a Yale graduate and prominent Rhode Island businessman, was treated for alcoholism by the renowned psychoanalyst Carl Jung (Bluhm, 2006). Following a relapse in 1927, Hazard requested further treatment from Jung.
Jung refused this request on the grounds that Hazard had received the best of what psychiatric and medical science had to offer and that hope for future recovery would have to be found elsewhere.
In this communication with Hazard, Jung added that the rabid appetite for alcohol had been quelled in some alcoholics through the medium of a powerful spiritual or religious experience.
He suggested Hazard seek such an experience.
That recommendation led to Hazard’s subsequent involvement with the Christian evangelical Oxford Group. Sobered within the Oxford Group, Rowland Hazard began carrying his message of hope to other alcoholics.
In November1934, Hazard carried such a message of hope to Ebby Thacher.
On the verge of being sentenced to Windsor Prison, Thacher was instead 4 released to Hazard’s custody.
In late November 1934, the newly sobered Thacher carried that same message of hope to his long-time friend Bill Wilson.
Thacher’s visits created no instantaneous conversion, but they did start a new “internal dialogue” that triggered a crisis in Wilson’s drinking and served as a catalyst for the subsequent events that marked the founding of Alcohol!cs Anonymous (PIO, 1984, p. 115).
https://carljungdepthpsychologysite.blog/
