This is fine if you’re willing to jettison your religion in the name of “maturity” and “finding yourself”. It’s a shame some people will be taken in by this. The author’s approach is not even logical; first she defines the need for faith in something greater than ourselves as an archetype, then dismisses this “archetype” as immature and useless, insisting that this impulse must be denied in order for a person to reach what she calls “maturity”. Yet she then insists that our every other impulse and desire must be honored and indulged: sexual desires, career goals, ambition, creative urges, etc. In other words, she has a double standard: on one hand she insists our inner needs and drives must be honored, on the other she claims the drives that lead us to religious expression must be denied. Rather than presenting a truly universal model of psychological development, she holds up her own rejection of fundamentalist protestantism as the epitome of personal growth.
