“A disease of our time”: The Catholic Church's condemnation and absolution of psychoanalysis (1924–1975)

Abstract

The present paper is focused on the evolution of the position of the Catholic Church toward psychoanalysis. Even before Freud's The Future of an Illusion (1927), psychoanalysis was criticized by Catholic theologians. Psychoanalysis was viewed with either contempt or with indifference, but nonpsychoanalytic psychotherapy was accepted, especially for pastoral use. Freudian theory remained for most Catholics a delicate and dangerous subject for a long time. From the center to the periphery of the Vatican, Catholic positions against psychoanalysis have varied in the way that theological stances have varied. In the middle decades of the twentieth century, some Catholics changed their attitudes and even practiced psychoanalysis, challenging the interdict of the Holy Office, which prohibited psychoanalytic practice until 1961. During the Cold War, psychoanalysis progressively became more and more relevant within Catholic culture for two main reasons: changes in psychoanalytic doctrine (which began to stress sexuality to a lesser degree) and the increasing number of Catholic psychoanalysts, even among priests. Between the 1960s and the 1970s, psychoanalysis was eventually accepted and became the main topic of a famous speech by Pope Paul VI. This paper illustrates how this acceptance was a sort of unofficial endorsement of a movement that had already won acceptance within the Church. The situation was fostered by people like Maryse Choisy or Leonardo Ancona, who had advocated within the Church for a sui generis use of psychoanalysis (e.g., proposing a desexualized version of Freudian theories), despite warnings and prohibitions from the hierarchies of the Church.

Italy and “the problem of the unconscious”: The first Italian translation of a book by C. G. Jung.

“…Mussolini favored autarky both from an economic and cultural point of view, so that not so many books and ideas coming from abroad could be easily known in Italy. On the other hand, the Catholic Church, which was the second most important power in Italy, had a complicated relationship with psychoanalysis (Foschi et al, 2018). There were blatant and crass interventions by the ecclesiastical hierarchy, but there was also interest on the part of Catholic psychologists.…”

“…Agostino Gemelli cited Jung as early as 1910 in his work Non moechaberis (Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery; Gemelli, 1910), in a not unfavorable way. Actually, Gemelli knew the works of Freud and Jung (Gemelli, 1943) very well and read them extensively in German, but his very negative attitude toward them would become clear only after World War II (David, 1966;Foschi et al, 2018). In 1938, a brief entry on Jung was written by the well-known analyst Emilio Servadio (1904Servadio ( -1995Servadio, 1938) in the appendix of the Enciclopedia italiana (Italian Encyclopedia, founded in 1925), which was intended to be and really became a sort of official seat of Italian thought.…”

“…Often, censors were not sufficiently competent to understand which orthodoxy they should support. Even a generic allegiance to fascism and/or the Catholic Church could lead them to a position contrary to depth psychology (Foschi et al, 2018; Innamorati & Taradel, 2018). Probably, in this case, it was not the Church that was responsible for the backlash, because it is probable that Psychology and Religion (Jung, 1928/1958) was the book that created fewer problems for censorship.…”

Between sacred and profane: Possession, psychopathology, and the Catholic church.

“…The original opposition of the Church was progressively transformed into an attempt to establish a dialogue, with the intention of either shaping these ambits according to its own ends and needs—or at least of making their interpretation compatible with Catholic doctrine. Thus, psychoanalysis, born as a materialist theory and seen as such by the Church as a dangerous adversary, gradually became an acceptable discipline that could also be used by Christians for therapeutic purposes and even, with Eugen Drewermann, a possible interpretative tool in the theological field (Foschi, Innamorati, & Taradel, 2018). Other scientific ideas, once harshly condemned by the Church as incompatible with Christian theology, were progressively accepted or even reinterpreted as a confirmation of Catholic doctrine.…”

Review of Cold War Freud, Psychiatry in Communist Europe, and Psiquiatría, Psicoánalisis y Cultura Comunista: Batallas Ideológicas en la Guerra Fria [Psychiatry, Psychoanalysis and Communist Culture: Ideological Battles in the Cold War].

“…In Europe this did not happen, and especially in Italy, where the powerful Agostino Gemelli (1953) saw in the same speeches a strong condemnation of both Freud and Jung. Gemelli’s positions actually prevented Italian Catholics from accepting psychoanalysis until the 1960s (Foschi, Innamorati, & Taradel, 2017).…”