Not surprisingly, Jung also subscribed to this view -- and advanced it later on after his famous break with Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). Freud of course was a secularized Jew.
Dr. Sherry says, "Adopting Burckhardt's view of the assimilated Jew as the 'agent of modernity' he [Jung] was alienated more from their atheism rather than their ethnicity" (page 40).
After Jung's break from Freud, Freud, according to Dr. Sherry, dismissed Jung's new methodology as "'Aryan religiousness'" (quoted on page 41).
For his part, after his famous break with Freud, Jung constructed the elaborate contrast between Germanic and Jewish psychology (see, for example, page 118)
In a nutshell, Jung held out for an experience of religiousness over against Freud's explicit atheism. The experience of religiousness that Jung held out for was Rudolf Otto's experience of the numinous. Basically, what Otto refers to as the experience of the numinous is the equivalent of what Mircea Eliade refers to as the experience of the sacred in his book The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (1959).
But we should note that atheists and agnostics and people of monotheistic religious faiths and people of polytheistic religious traditions can all experience the numinous. We could say that the experience of the numinous is an equal opportunity employer. However, Jung and Freud had not figured this out.
As I read Dr. Sherry's book, I noted all the words associated with roots imagery: roots/ rootedness (pages 8, 59, 115, 126, 128, 212); rootless/ rootlessness (pages 25, 54, 59); uprooted/ uprootedness (pages 9, 127, 191, 211).
In the contrast that Jung constructed between Germanic psychology and Jewish psychology, he characterized modern Jews as rootless -- uprooted, presumably from their ancient Jewish religious roots (he always seems to be referring to secular Jews).