Following the Polzeath seminar, Cary de Angulo wrote a paper on “Individual Relationships.”
She began by noting:
In the last two or three sessions of our summer school at Polzeath, we discussed the possible contribution to be made by Analytical Psychology to the “church” of the future .
We meant by this ill-omened word church, the inevitable form which will be assumed by the ideas of today that tend toward a new synthesis of subjective experience ….
The special contribution of analysis was thought to be the building up of the right sorts of relationships, both individual and collective, and the vision of a future in which one came into full self-expression through relationships instead of skulking into them hemmed by a thousand fears, was very enticing.
As she saw it, for there to be real relationships, a higher degree of consciousness than had hitherto been possible was necessary, and it was the task of analytical psychology to facilitate it.
She proposed a written symposium on the subject and circulated her paper.
Emma Jung wrote a response, indicating that she was essentially in agreement but thought that further consideration needed to be given to “the complications that arise when the principles should come into life.”
She highlighted the need for a maximum of consciousness, mutual equality, and candor, describing unconsciousness as the “only sin.”
The value of a relationship, she said, could be measured by “the ability it has of making appear and live the individuality of the persons involved.”
For Jung and his close circle, such questions were existential as well as theoretical. ~The Black Books, Vol. I, Page 84