David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
by David Yeagley"/>
Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and his theories of sexual energy form the foundation of modern psychology. It is not wrong to also attribute to him the indirect rudiments of Carl Jung (1875-1961), and his theory of archetypes. Together, their theories illuminate the birth of the Virgin Mary, and its intense popularity. Add a pinch of the miraculous, and we have a nearly irresistible brew of temptation, all perfectly natural, all perfectly suited for human gratification.
When I taught a literature course for Humanities at the University of Central Oklahoma, I focused on the subject of love. Love, in the literary sense, takes two separate, independent entities. The story is always about how and to what extent they come together. Mystical union is an ever-present quest, in one way or another, in the human experience. Freud said the libido was consumptive. It was the aggressor, seeking, not really to unify the second entity, but to consume it. To become one with it. For example, Alexander Scriabin (1972-1915), the Russian composer, wrote a piano sonata (No. 4 in F# Major) depicting a simple mystical union. A man contemplates a distant star, more and more until he finally swallows it, and beams brightly as the star itself in him. Freud sees even cannibalism as a form of union. In the earliest times, primitives believed that by eating another person, his powers were obtained and continued. But these are the more direct (gross) forms of libido. Human sexuality (male/female) itself was then actually a kind of sublimation. A token expression.
Alexander Scriabin, composer (1872-1915)
Great love stories often involve unconsummated love, distant love, impossible love. This kind are easily made into religious stories, involving intimate religious sentiments. Myth and story, according to Freud, usually outline some path of sexual energy, all perfectly disguised, of course.
Carl Jung (pronounced “yoong”), who did have, temporarily, an intellectual, professional relationship with Freud in the early 1900′s, had already expanded on the theory of the Unconscious. Where as Freud had counted it the secret drive of libido, or sexual energy, Jung had posited that the Unconscious was part of a larger, “collective” human memory. It wasn’t in fact an individual idiosyncrasy, but a valid piece of the entire human experience, from time immemorial. The Collective Unconscious indicated some long forgotten memory, striving to reveal itself in coded images and symbols. These images and symbols Jung called “archetypes.”
Jung identifies many of them in The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, trans. R. F. C. Hull (Princeton/Bollingen, 1959). Everything from circles, serpents, crosses, and virgins recur ubiquitously in ancient cultures the world over, otherwise completely unrelated, and on different continents. Taking a kind of linguist’s approach to the evolution of human language, Jung concluded that all of these archetypes represented some vast, singular experience of humanity in some infantile unity. This memory, this Collective experience, was somehow imprinted deep in the Unconscious of every individual person’s mind. (In a way, it is like Jewish teaching in the Kabbalah. All was once one light, then became diffused into myriad stars.
Little Gelfin Jen, and the Master meditator–a mystic union seeker.
The children’s movie, The Dark Crystal (1982) is based on such an original unity.
But now we’re into something more professionally defined: the occult.
Freud and Jung exchanged thoughts about that subject, with surprising candor. Jung recalled a conversation in Vienna, in 1910:
I can still recall vividly how Freud said to me, “My dear Jung, promise me never to abandon the sexual theory. That is the most essential thing of all. You see, we must make a dogma of it, an unshakable bulwark.” He said that to me with great emotion, in the tone of a father saying,” And promise me this one thing, my dear son, that you will go to church every Sunday.” In some astonishment I asked him, “A bulwark against what?” To which he replied, “Against the black tide of mud”–and here he hesitated a moment, then added–”of occultism.”
C. G. Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (1989), p. 150.
Jung was taken aback. To him, occultism represented everything that philosophy and religion had learned about the psyche. What was aberrant about the occult?
What is amiss about the virgin goddesses of the ancient world, and their adoption by the Roman form of Christianity?
We touched on this in our previous blog, Catholic Celibacy and the Lure of Sublimation. The idolizing of an archetype, that is, the willful investiture of personhood into an imaginary being, is a kind of psychic set-up. When connected to the interminable complexities of reality, and the wash of endlessly evolving circumstances, the projection of human personality to the idol can be quite convincing. In a way, it is a sublimated recreation of the self. One perfects personality in the imagination, in the person of the idol. The idol is human, minus the weakness. Add a touch of the supernatural, and you have a most convincing act.
But what of the supernatural? Is there in fact supernatural to be experienced? If God and Satan are not the same entity, not the same energy, not the same reality, then we’re greatly imperiled.
If He who said “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me” (Exodus 20:3), and “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness,” (Exodus 20:4), and also said “The dead know not anything…their love and their hatred, and their envy, is now forgotten,” (Ecclesiastes 9:5,6), and finally condemned all pretended communication with departed spirits of human beings (Isaiah 8:19,20), were to evaluate the Virgin Mary phenomenon, what could we expect His verdict to be? If Mary is dead, then who’s doing the magic? Who’s working the miracles?
I believe this is a matter of grave concern. Should we not have concrete thoughts settled on the subject? The Revelation of Christ given to John depicts a world ending in a state of religious deception, combined with economic-based tyranny. A global power rises that wields supernatural power–”that deceiveth them that swell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do.” “He doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.” Revelation 13: 14, 13.
I do believe this is related to the state of the dead, or, to our understanding of the conditions of death. It is a fantastic seen that John attempts to describe. The personification of images and spirits pertaining thereunto must be brought under investigation.
Neither Freud nor Jung pretend to contemplate the Hebrew God and the adversary the Devil (Satan) as literal persons. The occult is about energy, not personality. Freud’s sexual theory is as irrelevant as Jung’s Collective Unconscious, but it is more than curious that Freud would warn against the occult. And I must say, only the Hebrew adversary, Satan, has real personality. He is a man of a thousand faces, infinite disguises, unlimited lies. If every religion has a beautiful virgin at it’s core, I’d say Freud’s warning is well taken. The management of sexuality ought to be a lot easier than understanding the Collective Unconscious, or the occult of Satan.
18 responses so far ↓
1 WHEELER // Nov 29, 2011 at 1:03 pm
In some ways your post about this:
“”Everything from circles, serpents, crosses, and virgins recur ubiquitously in ancient cultures the world over, otherwise completely unrelated, and on different continents. Taking a kind of linguist’s approach to the evolution of human language, Jung concluded that all of these archetypes represented some vast, singular experience of humanity in some infantile unity. This memory, this Collective experience, was somehow imprinted deep in the Unconscious of every individual person’s mind.”"
This is what Socrates/Plato taught. The forms, circles, crosses, serpents are re-ocurring things in the human psyche. Plato taught that philosophy was about re-awakening this hidden knowledge inside the human soul. The Soul saw all this before being born in the body.
Socrates taught that “Concept precedes Knowledge”. You can’t know anything without a previous concept. This is true. What all these symbols are, are concepts laid down. The religion of Mithras is very similar to Christianity. It laid down the concept. St. John the Baptist was a precursor. Life is full of precursors. It is a Law of Nature. No farmer can plant a field unless it has been first prepared. This is true for human life and culture. The religion of Mithras and St. John the Baptist and Plato were all used to prepare the ground for the coming of Christ.
This is part of the psychological makeup of humans.
2 Pamela K. // Nov 29, 2011 at 4:03 pm
What about the symbolism of the famous Serpent Mount? Was this a sacred site used to study the heavens?
Is it true that the serpent or snake represents vital energy, or the true essence of man in some American Indian cultures?
Muscogee Creek traditions revere the image of the Horned Serpent. said to possess the powers of divination. Hopi Indians in Arizona perform the snake dance as a way to pray for rain.
Many Meso-American Indian cultures believed the serpent represented the veil or curtain separating life and death.
Are there any serpent beliefs in Comanche culture?
Just curious!
3 David Yeagley // Nov 29, 2011 at 4:35 pm
We were “the snakes that came back.” We’re supposed to be related to the Shoshoni- the Snake Indians, but I think that’s because they lived by the Snake River. (I personally don’t believe the Comanche are related–to anyone!)
The universal sign (in sign language) for the Comanche is the wiggling snake motion. I remember how my Grandfather made it. It isn’t like Clint Eastwood made it in the movie Josie Wales.
Deep in the recesses of Comanche ways, there was a snake dance.
I don’t think there was too much myth about it, though. Comanches were not into complexity. It was superfluous. Physical skills is all that counted. Comanche were pragmatists, not religionists. No community ceremonies or worship, or anything like that. Not in the old, free days.
4 David Yeagley // Nov 29, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Wheeler, to you allow for the Adversary, as a person, an active, intelligent agent, or individual person?
Maybe I should ask, do you allow for God as an individual, independent person, active, with feeling?
5 Sioux // Nov 29, 2011 at 7:57 pm
I reject the concept of collective consciousness -because individuals all react to experiences differently. King David speaks of how God knit us in the womb in our own specialness and individuality. Am I misunderstanding what collective consciousness is?
Dr. Y- do you remember in your studies anything about Freud discovering that some of his hysterical female patients revealed thru psychoanalysis that the origin of the pathology was due to incest perpetrated by the woman’s father – this was so shocking in the medical community that Freud was threatened to abandon this because these were women from prominent families.
6 David Yeagley // Nov 29, 2011 at 8:45 pm
Oh, certainly. That’s the whole point. The neurosis was caused by guilt, by repressed rage. There were no physical causes for the malfunctions or symptoms.
Fascinatingly, the remedy proved to be “talking it out.” Confession. The couch. Helping the patient to first discover it, and to face it. Then to deal with it.
As far as I can tell, as a superficial Freudian, his sexual theories developed along with his practice. I could be very, very wrong on that, but it is a very, very important question. I’m just not that intimately familiar with his practice. I know he published some case studies…
7 Pamela K. // Nov 29, 2011 at 10:03 pm
Didn’t Jung’s research on the Archetypes focus primarily on the Anima and the Animus, which represents, respectively speaking, the feminine side of the male and the masculine side of the female?
Jung believed we carry the qualities of both sexes within us and that the male will be in touch with his Anima, and the female with her Animus. However, if either the Anima or the Animus becomes dominant, the balance of the self becomes undermined.
He argued that a man who is dominated by the Anima experiences exaggerated moodiness and emotions, while a woman dominated by the Animus exhibits over assertiveness and can be very ruthless.
Jung further believed that like all archtypes, the Anima and the Animus can be projected outward in the form of idealized images of the opposite sex, leading a man to be forever seeking an unattainably perfect and beautiful woman to love -like a goddess or a fairy tale princess- while a woman might seek, often in vain, for a paragon of male virtues-the proverbial Knight in Shining Armor, to protect and cherish her.
In all the famous fairytales, the Anima usually takes the form of the damsel in distress or a mysterious young woman, as in the Wilkie Collins’ novel, “The Woman In White, who guides the hero or plays an active part in helping him while embarking on a dangerous mission. The Animus appears as a willful and headstrong young man, who appears courageous and resourceful, but because of his tendency to act first and think second, often ends up imperiling himself while on that dangerous mission.
Lesser known archetypes are The Shadow, which represents the dark side of human nature and embodies the instinctive and primal qualities that we hide, sometimes even from ourselves.
Jung believed that if The Shadow is not acknowledged however, that it remains liable to suddenly burst out of us in a rash of uncontrollable behavior, especially in times of deep stress, causing us to act of character and may be do something that we will later regret.
Nevertheless, Jung believed there was a positive side to The Shadow. He believed that once it’s energies are realized and subsequently tamed, they might help develop the powers of self-assertion and self-determination.
An even lesser known archetype is The Trickster.
According to the book, “The New Secret Language of Symbols” author David Fontana writes, ” The Trickster represents those things that go unaccountably wrong, that snatch away the fruits of success, play cruel games, and challenge or upset the natural order of things. At an inner level, the Trickster prompts self-doubt, reminding us of our anxieties; we appear foolish just when we want to impress.”
However, like The Shadow, the Trickster is not entirely negative.
Fontana writes, “It (The Trickster) can help us find the unconventional side of ourselves or remind us that we are indulging in self-deception. Furthermore, it can remind us that life is unpredictable, that we should not take ourselves too seriously, or become complacent, or imagine that anything in this life is permanent or success always assured.”
Doesn’t “the unconventional side of ourselves” sound more like having a conscience and allowing your conscience be your guide than the influence of ‘The Trickster’?
8 WHEELER // Nov 30, 2011 at 8:02 am
The Minoan civilization of Crete had a worship of snakes. If you look at the cultic artifacts of that period, you have bare breasted women holding in each hand a wriggling snake. Figurines of snakes are also found at that site.
It is curious that the Dorians started their immigration/conquest in 1200 B.C. they came upon Delphi which was the center of Gaia worship that centered around a snake. The mythology states that Apollo, the God of the Dorians, killed the snake. From then on Delphi was the cultic center of Apollo. They went on to conquer Crete.
Maybe, Dr. Yeagley you can write a post on Serpentry in man’s ancestry. With this world wide serpent worship, maybe this is a carryover from the Garden of Eden.
On your question of Adversary, I didn’t not understand what you are asking about. If I understand correctly; Yes, I believe Satan and fallen angels are very real, have real personalities. Yes, God is a person, has feelings, and active in this world. This is just standard Christian theology, is it not?
9 WHEELER // Nov 30, 2011 at 8:04 am
Here is a link to the picture of the Minoan cultic priestess with snakes:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Minoan+art&view=detail&id=1F392086C9C253E8AE6552191D0EEBAF7A6DD1BE&first=0
10 David Yeagley // Nov 30, 2011 at 7:01 pm
So, it’s all about snakes and women, eh? A likely story!
Wheeler, what I’m saying is this: if Satan does what the Bible says he does, deceive, then we would have to expect the truth to be employed to strengthen a lie. I don’t believe evil exists independently. I believe it is a perversion of the truth. It is partial truth, misstated truth, abused truth–in order to drive the thoughts into some manifestation of disobedience to God.
It happens through words. Wrong words, or words that do not represent reality. The first evil is a breach of words and reality. That would be the Serpent’s lie to Eve.
At is was all about DEATH. This I find supremely interesting. In the Hebrew version of reality, the problem rests with the concept of DEATH. The Serpent contradicted God.
It looks like, to me, most of humanity has taken the Serpents bate. All but the ancient Hebrews believe that something continues on after death. You don’t “surely die,” but you become “as gods.”
Very effective lie.
11 Pamela K. // Nov 30, 2011 at 10:59 pm
“It happens through words. Wrong words, or words that do not represent reality. The first evil is a breach of words and reality. That would be the Serpent’s lie to Eve” .-David Yeagley
Here’s a good example of “a breach of words”:
Jabez Stone: “What does it mean here, about my soul? ”
Mr. Scratch: “Why should that worry you? A soul? A soul is nothing. Can you see it, smell it, touch it? No. This soul, *your* soul, are nothing against seven years of good luck. You’ll have money and all that money can buy.”
Jabez Stone: “You promised me happiness, love, and friendship!”
Mr. Scratch: “Just a minute. I promised you money and all that money could buy. I don’t recall any other obligations”
-From the short story, “The Devil and Daniel Webster” by Stephen Vincent Benet
12 WHEELER // Dec 1, 2011 at 9:17 am
Dr. Yeagley, that is why the Jews are materialists. They are not a transcendent people. Your argument is the very proof of Christianity. Yes, the Sadduccees, not the Pharisees, are the true Hebrews. They express traditional Hebrew thought. Atheism is very akin to Judaism. Judaism accepts atheists as equals. You can be a good Jew and an Atheist at the same time. Judaism nowhere commands “belief”, just don’t mix the diary and the meat and you’ll be all right. Jews are materialists. They don’t believe in the hereafter, but in the here and now!
This is one of the big divides. There is no such thing as “judeo-Christianity”. Never was. You’re trying to slide the difference of having one foot in Judaism and one foot in Christianity.
The Law of Nature is Incrementalism or gradualism. God always uses the metaphysical laws of nature. He is obedient to them, for they are him. In the creation of revelation was done the same way. The Hebrew religion was basic 101. Just the basics. You forget Dr. Yeagley that Moses saw the BACKSIDE of God—Moses NEVER saw the fulness of God.
When Christ came—we saw the FULLNESS of God. The religion became complete.
Another proof of this paradigm is that the Hebrew language is basic language. All it has is consonants. There is not vowels. It is an IMPERFECT language. The Hebrew language is about 6000 words. It is baby talk. It is language 101. The Hebrew language is a metaphor of the its religion.
Christianity is a Greek religion, the fullness of revelation. The language has 60,000 words or more. The written language has both consonants and vowels. The Greek language is a metaphysical language which Hebrew is not. The Greek language shows its perfection. It is a metaphor for the Christian religion. We are called to perfection and the fullness of Truth.
Again, Truth lies in the Golden Mean, the mean between deficiency and exageration. All heresies lie in the extremes of deficiency or in exageration. Your going back to Hebrew paradigms and way of thought, is going to the deficiency and not to the fullness of revelation.
The Hebrews were supplanted as Christ said. It is the orthodox, catholic Christian teaching that the soul is immortal and lives after death. There are two deaths. The first one is of the body. The second death is those who are cast into hell in body AND soul. The saved do not experience the second death, but have life everlasting.
13 David Yeagley // Dec 1, 2011 at 10:25 am
My, my. And to think, I’ve always considered Jesus Jewish. I’ve always considered Christianity a sect of Hebrew-Jewish religion.
I know paganism, I think. I don’t like the limitations.
If my thoughts seem disjointed, it is because I have conjunctivitis in both eyes, a ripping sore throat, was on the road all day yesterday (Indian clinic in southeast OK), and didn’t sleep last night.
But, the dead are dead. I know there are spirits, but I despise them. They are liars. They are not the souls of departed human beings.
Parsimony points to Satan.
14 Pamela K. // Dec 1, 2011 at 10:26 am
“This is one of the big divides. There is no such thing as “judeo-Christianity”. Never was. You’re trying to slide the difference of having one foot in Judaism and one foot in Christianity.” – Wheeler
An excerpt from Romans Chapter 9, as written by Paul, a former pharisee and early Messianic Jew from the tribe of Benjamin:
“Just as He (the Lord) says in Hosea, “Those who were not My people I will call My people, and her who was not beloved, I will call My beloved.” (Hosea 1:10)
And Isaiah solemnly cries out over Israel: “Though the number of sons of Israel be like the sand of the sea, only a small remnant of them will be saved from condemnation!
For the Lord will execute His sentence upon the earth, He will conclude and close His account with men completely and without delay, rigorously cutting it short in His justice.” (Isaiah 10:22,23).
Is it just as Isaiah predicted, If the Lord of hosts had not left us a seed from which to propagate descendants, we Israel, would have fared like Sodom and have been made like Gomorrah. (Isaiah 1:9)
What shall we say then? That Gentiles who do not follow after righteousness, who did not seek salvation through a right relationship with God have attained it by faith, a righteousness imputed by God, based on, and produced by faith,
Whereas Israel, though ever in pursuit of a law for the securing of righteousness, right standing with God, actually did not succeed in fulfilling the Law (Isaiah 51:1)
For what reason? Because they pursued it not through faith, relying instead on the merits of their works. They have stumbled over the Stumbling Stone. (Isaiah 8: 14; 28:16)
As it is written, Behold, I am laying in Zion a Stone that will make men stumble, a Rock that will make them fall, but he who believes in Him (whether Jew or Gentile) shall never be put to shame, nor disappointed in his expectations.”
Romans 9: 25-33
15 WHEELER // Dec 1, 2011 at 10:57 am
And Jesus said:
“Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.” Matthew, Ch. 21
Jesus Christ is the Logos. The Logos of Divine Revelation and the Logos of the Natural Order. What is according to nature is true for nature was created thru Christ. The soul is part of the natural constitution of man. The Soul is immortal because it is the divine spark in us from God.
For 1500 years the Christian Church has always prayed to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Saints and the Martyrs for help. All the miracles throughout history attest to the fact that they live. It is a great testimony.
No Church Father considered the Faith a sect of Judaism but a New thing. It is a New/Old thing for it is the faith of Melkisadec with a whole new covenant.
16 David Yeagley // Dec 1, 2011 at 11:48 am
Jesus: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Matt. 5:17.
For one who based His message on Torah, I find it hard to imagine Jesus as something other than a Jewish folk-rabbi, culturally speaking.
I do not see Jesus as the vortex of some Jungian archetypal collage (though Jung did actually say that, in different words). That is irrelevant, in any case.
Jesus is measured by Torah. All truth is measured by Torah. Any other measurement is pristinely pagan.
I think the Gentiles pretty much ripped of the Jesus thing. Of course, Jewish leaders at the time sort of set him out on the doorstep, or on the curb. In any case, this kind of Christianity is the new foundation of anti-Semitism.
17 Magickal Media Blog » Blog Archive » News for Pagans, 12-1-11 // Dec 1, 2011 at 12:53 pm
[...] http://www.badeagle.com/2011/11/29/the-virgin-freud-jung-and-the-occult/ Discussion of Jung, Freud and the occult on the “Bad Eagle” website, which is from the perspective of First Nations people who are patriots. [...]
18 David Yeagley // Dec 1, 2011 at 12:56 pm
Now there’s an unexpected ad. I think I’ll leave that one.
You must log in to post a comment.