Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks, Volume 8: Journals NB21–NB25 [Pilot project. eBook available to selected US libraries only] 9781400866342

Table of contents :
CONTENTS
Introduction
Journal NB 21
Journal NB 22
Journal NB 23
Journal NB 24
Journal NB 25
Notes for Journal NB 21
Notes for Journal NB 22
Notes for Journal NB 23
Notes for Journal NB 24
Notes for Journal NB 25
Maps
Calendar
Concordance

Citation preview

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS

B RUCE H. KIRMMSE GE NERAL EDITOR

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS VOLUME 8 Journals NB21–25

Volume Edited by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Alastair Hannay, Bruce H. Kirmmse, David D. Possen, Joel D. S. Rasmussen, and Vanessa Rumble

Published in cooperation with the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Copenhagen

Princeton University Press Princeton and Oxford

KIERKEGAARD’S

JOURNALS and NOTEBOOKS Editorial Board Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Alastair Hannay, Bruce H. Kirmmse, David D. Possen, Joel D. S. Rasmussen, and Vanessa Rumble in cooperation with the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, Copenhagen Volume 8, Journals NB21–NB25 Originally published under the titles Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: 24 Journalerne NB21–NB25 and Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: K24 Kommentarer til Journalerne NB21–NB25 © 2007 by the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Foundation, Copenhagen The Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Foundation at Copenhagen University was established with support from the Danish National Research Foundation. English translation Copyright © 2015 by the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Foundation at the University of Copenhagen, and the Howard and Edna Hong Kierkegaard Library, St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minnesota Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to Permissions, Princeton University Press Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 6 Oxford Street, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1TW press.princeton.edu All Rights Reserved Library of Congress Control Number 2011925169 ISBN: 978-0-691-16618-6 British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available The publication of Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks is supported by grants from the Danish Ministry of Culture, the United States National Endowment for the Humanities, and Connecticut College. Any views, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for the Humanities. Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks is based on Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter, which is published with the support of grants from the Danish National Research Foundation and the Danish Ministry of Culture. Except as otherwise noted, all photographs have been provided by the photographic studio of the Royal Danish Library. This book has been composed in Palatino and Optima by K.Nun Design, Copenhagen, Denmark Text design by Bent Rohde Printed on acid-free paper. ∞ Printed in the United States of America

CONTENTS

Introduction

........................

Journal NB 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Journal NB 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii 1 97

Journal NB 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Journal NB 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

199

Journal NB 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

441

Notes for Journal NB 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

541

Notes for Journal NB 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

593

Notes for Journal NB 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

661

Notes for Journal NB 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

743

Notes for Journal NB 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

799

.............................

849

.......................... Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

857

Maps

Calendar

319

865

vii

Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks Introduction to the English Language Edition Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks is based on Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter (hereafter, SKS) [Søren Kierkegaard’s Writings] (Copenhagen: Gad, 1997–2012), which is a Danish scholarly, annotated edition of everything written by Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), and comprises fifty-five volumes. SKS divides the entirety of Kierkegaard’s output into four categories: 1) works published by Kierkegaard during his lifetime (e.g., such well-known titles as Either/Or, Fear and Trembling, and The Sickness unto Death); 2) works that lay ready―or substantially ready―for publication at the time of Kierkegaard’s death, but which he did not publish in his lifetime (e.g., titles such as The Book on Adler, The Point of View for My Work as an Author, and Judge for Yourself!); 3) journals, notebooks, excerpts, and loose papers, collectively titled Kierkegaard’s “journals and notebooks”; and 4) letters and biographical documents. Clearly, Kierkegaard was not only a prolific author, he was also a prolific writer, and his literary activity found expression not only in his published works but also in the mass of writings that were not published in his lifetime. It is these writings, the third category listed above, titled Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks (hereafter, KJN) that constitute the material of the present English language edition. For a detailed account of previous Danish and English language editions of Kierkegaard’s unpublished writings, see pp. vii–xii of the “Introduction to the English Language Edition” in volume 1 of KJN.

I. Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks Based as it is on the new Danish edition of SKS, the present English language edition of Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks employs the SKS principle of organization by archival unit: journals, notebooks, and loose papers. The materials constituting the present edition of KJN consist of the documents mentioned above as the third category of materials included in SKS as volumes 17 through 27. The eleven volumes of KJN contain the translated text of these eleven SKS volumes,

viii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

plus most of the explanatory notes contained in the eleven SKS commentary volumes that accompany SKS 17–27. Specifically, the textual materials constituting KJN consist of the following documents: a) a set of ten journals to which Kierkegaard affixed labels designating them “AA” through “KK” (as “I” and “J” are identical in the classical Roman alphabet, there is no journal titled “II”); b) fifteen notebooks, designated “1” through “15” by the editors of SKS, sequenced according to the dates on which Kierkegaard first made use of them; Kierkegaard himself assigned titles to four of these notebooks, and the editors retain these titles in parentheses; c) a series of thirty-six quarto-sized, bound journal volumes to which Kierkegaard affixed labels designating them journals “NB,” “NB2,” “NB3,” through “NB36”; and d) a great variety of materials―a large number of individual folio sheets, pages, slips, and scraps of paper―which the editors of KJN, following the editors of SKS, title “loose papers.” There is a good deal of chronological back-and-forth in Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers. Kierkegaard often made use of several of the first twenty-four documents―the ten journals designated “AA” through “KK” and the notebooks “1” through “14”― simultaneously, and there is thus much temporal overlap among these journals and notebooks. (Indeed, it was only after they had been in use for some time, probably in mid- or late 1842, that Kierkegaard assigned the designations “AA” through “KK” to the journal volumes bearing those labels.) Nonetheless, the abovementioned archival units do fall into several broad temporal categories, and these twenty-four journals and notebooks can be collectively assigned to the period 1833–1846. Notebook 15, however, which is entirely devoted to Kierkegaard’s relationship to Regine Olsen, his onetime fiancée, stems from 1849. The journals titled “NB” through “NB36” were assigned their numbered titles in chronological order by Kierkegaard himself and stem from the period 1846–1855, though here, too, these journals contain additions and emendations, some of which stem from later periods, disrupting the general chronological sequence of the journals. The final group of materials, the “loose papers,” spans the entire period 1833–1855.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

KJN follows the editors of SKS in the choice of a two-column format, which best reflects Kierkegaard’s practice when keeping his journals and notebooks. Like many of his contemporaries, Kierkegaard’s usual custom with his journals and notebooks was to crease the pages lengthwise (vertically) so that each page had an inner column for the main text and a somewhat narrower outer column for subsequent reflections and additions. In this way, further reflections could be―and very often were―added later, sometimes much later, often on several subsequent occasions, e.g., when Kierkegaard read or thought of something that reminded him of something he had written earlier. As has been noted above, a certain degree of chronological organization is present in the documents themselves, but a strictly chronological presentation of all the material is neither possible nor, perhaps, desirable. A strict and comprehensive chronological organization of the material is impossible, for while we can often detect the sequence in which Kierkegaard altered and emended an original passage in a notebook or journal, it is frequently not possible to ascertain when these alterations and emendations took place―though in his earlier entries Kierkegaard often dated his marginal additions. Furthermore, there are also cases in which the very sequence of such changes cannot be determined with certainty. Finally, even if it could be established, a rigorously chronological sequencing of all the material would not necessarily be desirable, because such a serial presentation would render it more difficult to see the manner in which Kierkegaard could return to a passage on multiple subsequent occasions, adding to, deleting, and altering what he had originally written. (It is hoped that upon completion of all eleven volumes of KJN it will be possible to produce an electronic edition of the entire series; this would make it possible for readers to organize and search through the materials in a variety of ways.)

II. The Format and Organization of the Present Edition 1. Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks (KJN) and Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter (SKS) As already noted, KJN is a translation of Kierkegaard’s journals, notebooks, and loose papers, using the text as established by the editors of SKS. The great majority of the materials included in the present volumes is taken from Kierkegaard’s surviving manuscripts, but some manuscripts were lost in the production of the

ix

x

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

first published selection of Kierkegaard’s papers, H. P. Barfod’s nine-volume edition of Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (hereafter, EP). Thus, particularly in the early volumes of KJN, our only source for a number of Kierkegaard’s journal entries is the version originally published in EP. When this is the case, KJN indicates that the source is the published version from EP by employing justified right-hand margins, while most of the text of KJN, taken as it is from the surviving manuscripts, employs a ragged right-hand margin. In addition, there are a number of cases, typically involving short or fragmentary entries or lines, in which the only surviving source is Barfod’s catalogue of Kierkegaard’s manuscripts, while in still other cases material in the original manuscripts deleted by Kierkegaard has been deciphered and restored by the editors of SKS; both these sorts of material are reproduced in KJN without text-critical commentary. Scholars interested in these source details are referred to the text-critical apparatus of SKS. In addition, there are some cases in which Kierkegaard’s original manuscript cannot be read meaningfully, and the editors of SKS suggest a proposed reading of the passage in question. KJN has adopted all such proposed readings without comment. In some cases Kierkegaard’s spelling is erroneous or inconsistent or there is missing punctuation. On rare occasions the editors of SKS have corrected errors of this sort silently, while in other cases missing punctuation has been supplied (but placed within square brackets to indicate that this is the work of the editors of SKS), and in still other cases Kierkegaard’s errors of spelling or punctuation have been allowed to stand because they are indicative of the hasty and informal style that often characterizes his unpublished materials. Where they do not cause significant difficulties for English language readers, the editors of KJN have followed the editors of SKS in allowing a number of Kierkegaard’s spelling errors (e.g., of proper names) and punctuation lapses to remain. On the other hand, where the retention of Kierkegaard’s errors might cause significant difficulties for English language readers, the editors of KJN have absorbed without annotation the corrections made by the editors of SKS (both the silent and the bracketed corrections), and have occasionally corrected instances of erroneous spelling and missing punctuation that have been permitted to remain in SKS. Here―as in the above-mentioned cases involving materials that have their source in Barfod’s catalogue or in text deleted by Kierkegaard and restored by the editors of SKS―scholars who require access to the entire text-critical apparatus of SKS should consult that edition.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

2. Two-Column Format in the Main Text As already noted, a two-column format is employed where necessary in order to emphasize the polydimensionality of the original documentary materials; thus, for example, providing a spatial representation of a draft’s character as a draft with multiple alterations. 3. Typographical Conventions in the Main Text a) In Kierkegaard’s time, both “gothic” and “latin” handwriting were in common use among educated people. Generally, when writing Danish and German (which of course accounts for the bulk of his journals and notebooks) Kierkegaard used a gothic hand, while when writing Latin or French (which he did much less frequently than Danish or German) Kierkegaard used a latin hand. Following the editors of SKS, the editors of KJN have sought to preserve this feature by using ordinary roman type to represent Kierkegaard’s gothic hand, and a sans serif typeface to represent Kierkegaard’s latin hand. Greek and Hebrew appear in their respective alphabets. b) As in SKS, italic and boldface are used to indicate Kierkegaard’s degrees of emphasis. Italic indicates underlining by Kierkegaard. Boldface indicates double underlining by Kierkegaard Boldface italic indicates double underlining plus a third, wavy underlining by Kierkegaard. 4. Margins in the Main Text a) The SKS pagination of the journals appears in roman type in the margins of the present edition. This permits the reader to refer to SKS, which contains the entire apparatus of text-critical markers and notes concerning the manuscripts, including indications of Kierkegaard’s own pagination of his journals and notebooks. b) Two separate italic line counters are included in the inner and outer margins in order to facilitate specific line references to each of the two columns. c) The boldface entry numbers in the margins are not Kierkegaard’s own but have been added by the editors of SKS in order to facilitate reference to specific entries. Each journal or notebook has its own entry numbering in arabic numerals, e.g., “AA:1,” “DD:8,” “Not3:2,” etc., which refer to the first entry in Journal AA, the eighth entry in Journal DD, the second entry in Notebook 3, etc.

xi

xii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Kierkegaard’s marginal additions to journal or notebook entries are indicated with lowercase alphabet letters, e.g., “AA:23. b,” which refers to Kierkegaard’s second marginal addition to the twenty-third entry in Journal AA. If a marginal addition itself has a marginal addition, this is also indicated by another layer of lowercase alphabet letters, e.g., “DD:11.a.a,” which refers to the first marginal note to the first marginal note to the eleventh entry in Journal DD. When Kierkegaard left a reference mark in his main text referring to a marginal note, the marginal note referred to is preceded by a lowercase alphabet letter, set in roman, with no enclosing brackets, e.g. “a.” When Kierkegaard did not leave a reference mark in his main text for a marginal note, but the editors of SKS are not in doubt about the point in Kierkegaard’s main text to which the marginal note refers, the reference symbol (a lowercase alphabet letter) preceding that marginal note is set in roman and is enclosed within roman square brackets, e.g., “[a].” When Kierkegaard did not leave a reference mark in his main text for a marginal note, and the editors of SKS could not determine with certainty the point in Kierkegaard’s main text to which the marginal note refers, the reference symbol (a lowercase alphabet letter) preceding that marginal note is set in italic and is enclosed within italic square brackets, e.g., “[a].” In these cases, the editors of KJN, following the usage of the editors of SKS, have situated Kierkegaard’s marginal additions approximately where they are found on the pages of Kierkegaard’s own journal manuscripts, which, as noted, employed a two-column format. If more specific reference than this is necessary, the system of KJN volume number, page number, and line number on the appropriate line counter is employed, e.g., “KJN 1, 56:11,” referring to a passage in the first volume of KJN, page 56, line 11 on the line counter for the inner column. If a marginal note (thus, a note in the outer column of the page) is referred to in this manner, the reference is in the format “KJN 9, 56m:3,” referring to a marginal note found in volume 9 of KJN, page 56, line 3 on the marginal or outer column line counter. 5. Footnotes in the Main Text a) Kierkegaard’s own footnotes are indicated by superscript arabic numerals, both in the main text and at the beginning of the footnote itself, and are numbered consecutively within a journal entry, with the numbering beginning at “1” for each new journal

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

entry. Kierkegaard’s footnotes appear at the bottom of the text column or at the end of the entry to which they pertain, whichever comes first, but always above the solid horizontal line at the foot of the page. When the source for a footnote by Kierkegaard is Barfod’s EP rather than an original manuscript, the placement in the main text of the superscript reference number for that footnote is of course not known from Kierkegaard, but only from EP; in such cases, Kierkegaard’s footnote will appear at the bottom of the page (though above the solid line) as with all other footnotes by Kierkegaard, but the superscript reference number preceding the footnote will be followed by a close-parenthesis, e.g., “1).” b) Translator’s footnotes appear below the solid horizontal line at the foot of the page. 6. Foreign Language in the Main Text Foreign (non-Danish) words, expressions, and quotations that appear in Kierkegaard’s text are left in the original language. English translations of foreign language text are provided in translator’s footnotes at the foot of the page, below the solid horizontal line. In the event that extreme length or some other technical difficulty makes it impossible to accommodate a translation of a foreign language passage at the foot of the page, it will appear in the explanatory notes at the back of the volume. English translations of the titles of foreign language books, articles, poems, etc. are always in the explanatory notes, not in the translator’s footnotes. 7. Photographs of Original Manuscripts Selected photographs of original manuscript material are included in the main text. 8. Orthography of Classical Names The orthographical standard for all ancient Greek and Roman names and place names is The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 9. Material Included at the Back of Each Volume a) A brief “Critical Account of the Text” gives a description of the physical appearance, provenance, and whatever chronological information is known concerning a document. If the document is

xiii

xiv

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

related to others―for example, in the cases where Kierkegaard is known to have used one of the journals in the AA–KK group in tandem with one or more of the notebooks numbered 1–14, which stem from the same period―this is also indicated. b) Each journal or notebook is accompanied by “Explanatory Notes.” In some cases, notes included in SKS have been shortened or omitted in KJN. In a number of cases, notes that do not appear in SKS have been added to KJN; typically, these serve to explain geographical or historical references that are obvious to Danes but are not likely to be known by non-Danes. Notes are keyed by page and entry number to specific lemmata; that is, to key words or phrases from the main text that appear in boldface at the beginning of each note. The running heads on each page of notes indicate the journal or notebook and entry number(s) to which the notes on that page refer, while the numbers in the margins of each column of notes indicate the page and line number in the main text where the lemma under discussion is found. When the text of a note mentions a lemma explained in another note for the same journal or notebook, an arrow (→) accompanied by a large and a small number–e.g., →110,22―serves as a cross-reference, indicating the page and line number (in this case, page 110, line 22) where that lemma occurs in the main text. Each journal or notebook is treated as a separate unit with respect to explanatory notes; thus the notes for a given journal or notebook contain no cross-references to notes for other journals or notebooks. (The explanatory notes for Notebooks 9 and 10 constitute an exception to this rule because those two notebooks are so closely connected that they should perhaps be considered a single document.) The notes are usually confined to clarifying historical, biographical, geographical, and similar information not readily available in a standard English language desk reference volume. Notes do not engage in critical interpretation or in discussions of the scholarly literature. As noted under 6 above, on some occasions―which presumably will be very infrequent, if they occur at all―it may not be possible to translate foreign language passages in translator’s footnotes at the foot of the main text page, and in such cases the translated passage will appear in an explanatory note at the end of the volume. There are no markers in the main text denoting the existence of an explanatory note pertaining to a particular word or passage. c) Maps of nineteenth-century Copenhagen, Denmark, etc., are provided where appropriate. d) Calendars of the years covered in the volume, indicating days of the week, holidays, etc., are provided.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

e) Illustrations referred to in Kierkegaard’s text are reproduced. f) A concordance to the Heiberg edition of the Papirer is provided in order to facilitate using the present edition in conjunction with works, including previous translations of Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers, that refer to the Papirer. 10. Abbreviations a) Abbreviations used in the main text In the main text an attempt has been made to preserve something of the feel of the original documents, in which Kierkegaard made liberal use of a great many abbreviations, shortening words in accordance with the common usage of his times. Naturally, many of these abbreviations cannot be duplicated in English, but where it has seemed appropriate a number of commonly used (or easily decipherable) English abbreviations have been employed in order to provide a sense of Kierkegaard’s “journal style.” b) Abbreviations used in “Critical Accounts of the Texts” and in “Explanatory Notes”

ASKB

The Auctioneer’s Sales Record of the Library of Søren Kierkegaard, ed. H. P. Rohde (Copenhagen: The Royal Library, 1967)

B&A

Breve og Aktstykker vedrørende Søren Kierkegaard [Letters and Documents Concerning Søren Kierkegaard], 2 vols., ed. Niels Thulstrup (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1953–1954)

B-cat.

H. P. Barfod, “Fortegnelse over de efter Søren Aabye Kierkegaard forefundne Papirer” [Catalogue of the Papers Found after the Death of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard]

Bl.art.

S. Kierkegaard’s Bladartikler, med Bilag samlede efter Forfatterens Død, udgivne som Supplement til hans øvrige Skrifter [S. Kierkegaard’s Newspaper Articles, with an Appendix Collected after the Author’s Death, Published as a Supplement to His Other Works], ed. Rasmus Nielsen (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 1857)

d.

Died in the year

xv

xvi

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

EP

Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer [From Søren Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Papers], 9 vols., ed. H. P. Barfod and H. Gottsched (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 1869–1881)

Jub.

G.W.F. Hegel, Sämtliche Werke [Complete Works]. Jubiläumsausgabe, 26 vols., ed. Hermann Glockner (Stuttgart: Friedrich Frommann Verlag, 1928–1941)

KA

The Kierkegaard Archive at the Royal Library in Copenhagen

KJN

Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks, 11 vols., ed. Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Alastair Hannay, David Kangas, Bruce H. Kirmmse, George Pattison, Joel D. S. Rasmussen, David D. Possen, Vanessa Rumble, and K. Brian Söderquist (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007–)

KW

Kierkegaard’s Writings, 26 vols., ed. Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978–2000) Occasionally, the explanatory notes will employ different English translations of the titles of Kierkegaard’s works than those used in KW. For example, Kierkegaard’s En literair Anmeldelse, which is translated Two Ages in KW, may appear in the explanatory notes as A Literary Review. All such departures from the English titles as they appear in KW will be explained in the explanatory notes in which they appear. Generally, however, the English titles used in KW will be used; these titles have been assigned standard abbreviations as follows: AN BA C CA CD CI COR

“Armed Neutrality” in KW 22 The Book on Adler in KW 24 The Crisis and a Crisis in the Life of an Actress in KW 17 The Concept of Anxiety in KW 8 Christian Discourses in KW 17 The Concept of Irony in KW 2 The “Corsair” Affair; Articles Related to the

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

Writings in KW 13 Concluding Unscientific Postscript in KW 12 Either/Or, part 1 in KW 3 Either/Or, part 2 in KW 4 Early Polemical Writings: From the Papers of One Still Living; Articles from Student Days; The Battle Between the Old and the New Soap- Cellars in KW 1 EUD Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses in KW 15 FPOSL From the Papers of One Still Living in KW 1 FSE For Self-Examination in KW 21 FT Fear and Trembling in KW 6 JC “Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est” in KW 7 JFY Judge for Yourself! in KW 21 LD Letters and Documents in KW 25 M “The Moment” and Late Writings: Articles from Fædrelandet; The Moment, nos. 1–10; This Must Be Said, So Let It Be Said; What Christ Judges of Official Christianity; The Changelessness of God in KW 23 NA “Newspaper Articles, 1854–1855” in KW 23 NSBL “Notes on Schelling’s Berlin Lectures” in KW 2 OMWA On My Work as an Author in KW 22 P Prefaces in KW 9 PC Practice in Christianity in KW 20 PF Philosophical Fragments in KW 7 PV The Point of View for My Work as an Author in KW 22 R Repetition in KW 6 SLW Stages on Life’s Way in KW 11 SUD The Sickness unto Death in KW 19 TA Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age, A Literary Review in KW 14 TDIO Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions in KW 10 UDVS Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits in KW 15 WA Without Authority: The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air; Two Minor EthicalReligious Essays; Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays; An Upbuilding Discourse; Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays in KW 18 CUP EO 1 EO 2 EPW

xvii

xviii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS WL WS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Works of Love in KW 16 “Writing Sampler” in KW 9

NKS

Ny Kongelige Samling [New Royal Collection], a special collection at the Royal Library in Copenhagen

NRSV

Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha (see part c below)

NT

New Testament

OT

Old Testament

Pap.

Søren Kierkegaards Papirer [The Papers of Søren Kierkegaard], 2nd ed., 16 vols. in 25 tomes, ed. P. A. Heiberg, V. Kuhr, and E. Torsting (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1909–1978)

SKS

Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter [Søren Kierkegaard’s Writings], 28 text volumes and 27 commentary volumes, ed. Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Joakim Garff, Anne Mette Hansen, Johnny Kondrup, and Alastair McKinnon (Copenhagen: Gad, 1997–2012) The 28 text volumes of SKS are referred to as SKS 1 through SKS 28. The 27 commentary volumes that accompany the text volumes are referred to as SKS K1 through SKS K28. (The reason there are 27 rather than 28 commentary volumes is that a single commentary volume, SKS K2–3, accompanies the two text volumes SKS 2 and SKS 3, which together comprise the massive two-volume work Enten―Eller [Either/ Or].)

SV1

SV2

Søren Kierkegaards Samlede Værker [Søren Kierkegaard’s Collected Works], 1st ed., 14 vols., ed. A. B. Drachmann, J. L. Heiberg, and H. O. Lange (Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag, 1901–1906) Søren Kierkegaards Samlede Værker [Søren Kierkegaard’s Collected Works], 2nd ed., 15 vols., ed. A. B. Drachmann, J. L. Heiberg, and H. O. Lange (Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag, 1920–1936)

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

c) The Bible. All biblical quotations are from the following English translations: Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989) (Standard for references to the authorized Danish translation of the New Testament from 1819 and used for many other biblical references.) The Bible: Authorized King James Version with Apocrypha (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997) (Often used for references to the authorized Danish translation of the Old Testament and the Apocrypha from 1740 and occasionally used for other biblical references.) Occasionally, in order to help the reader understand the text of a journal entry, the translators of KJN may make minor modifications to one of the above Bible translations. Books of the Bible are abbreviated in accordance with the abbreviations used in the NRSV:

Old Testament Gen Ex Lev Num Deut Josh Judg Ruth 1 Sam 2 Sam 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chr 2 Chr Ezra Neh Esth Job Ps Prov

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Job Psalms Proverbs

Eccl Song Isa Jer Lam Ezek Dan Hos Joel Am Ob Jon Mic Nah Hab Zeph Hag Zech Mal

Ecclesiastes Song of Solomon Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

xix

xx

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Apocryphal Books Tob Jdt Add Esth Wis Sir Bar 1 Esd 2 Esd Let Jer Song

Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) Baruch 1 Esdras 2 Esdras Letter of Jeremiah Prayer of Azariah

of Thr Sus Bel 1 Macc 2 Macc 3 Macc 4 Macc Pr Man

and the Song of the Three Jews Susanna Bel and the Dragon 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees 3 Maccabees 4 Maccabees Prayer of Manasseh

New Testament Mt Mk Lk Jn Acts Rom 1 Cor 2 Cor Gal Eph Phil Col 1 Thes 2 Thes

Matthew Mark Luke John Acts of the Apostles Romans 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians 1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians

1 Tim 2 Tim Titus Philem Heb Jas 1 Pet 2 Pet 1 Jn 2 Jn 3 Jn Jude Rev

1 Timothy 2 Timothy Titus Philemon Hebrews James 1 Peter 2 Peter 1 John 2 John 3 John Jude Revelation

11. Variants While KJN does not include the full text-critical apparatus of SKS, a number of textual variants, deemed by the editors of KJN to be of particular interest, are included in the explanatory notes for each journal or notebook. The notation used to indicate different types of variants is explained below. (A list of selected variants for KJN 1 is included in volume 2, immediately following the explanatory notes for Journal KK.)

I NTRODUCTION first written:

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

changes determined by the editors of SKS to have been made in the manuscript at the time of original writing, including: (a) replacement variants placed in the line, immediately following deleted text; (b) replacement variants written directly on top of the original text; and (c) deletions

changed from: changes determined by the editors of SKS to have been made in the manuscript subsequent to the time of original writing, including: (a) deletions with replacement variants written in the margin or on top of the original text, and (b) deletions without replacement text added:

additions determined by the editors of SKS to have been made to the manuscript subsequent to the time of original writing

12. Symbols []

enclose the KJN editors’ supplements to the SKS text; also enclose reference symbols, added by the editors of SKS, to marginal annotations or footnotes for which Kierkegaard did not leave a symbol, but whose placement is beyond doubt

[]

enclose reference symbols, added by the editors of SKS, to marginal annotations for which Kierkegaard did not clearly assign to a specific locus in a specific main entry

Acknowledgments I am happy to acknowledge the support for Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks that has been provided by the United States National Endowment for the Humanities, the Danish National Research Foundation, the Danish Ministry of Culture, and Connecticut College. Bruce H. Kirmmse, General Editor, for the Editorial Board of Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks.

xxi

JOURNAL NB21

JOURNAL NB21 Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Journal NB21 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 1

7

1

•

1850

NB21. 11th September 1850.

3

4

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 2

•

1850 8

What Is Christianity or Rather What Christianity Is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Does a Person Become Christian? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What I Have Wanted and Want . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mynster’s Meaning for My Entire Work as an Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. p. p. p.

22. 36. 118. 194.

2

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 3 1850 •

9

3

Concerning texts for sermons on Fridays see the blank page at the front of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday discourse Journal NB17 p. 30.

5

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 4

•

1850

7

11

4

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

12

Disgust with Life―and yet Joy of Life. Surely there is scarcely anyone who would not (if, in private conversation with him, I were to say: my whole misfortune is that I have no livelihood, no official position, that’s why people contend with me)―who would not quite coolly say: that too is fundamentally how things are―and then smile wisely. This wise smile, then, was at my expense― that I am mad enough to want actually to be self-disregarding, to want actually to serve the idea etc., and then, we are all Xns, and there are 1000 salaried teachers of Xnty―disgusting! There are no doubt only very few who privately do not have, yes, even a great sense of the standard according to which I am right. But say it; no, none, no one will do that, or risk it. It is as if, in a kind of silent conversation with me, contemporaries said to me: die―then it will be said loudly and clearly enough, but not in living life. Disgusting! And when I am dead―alas, how profoundly this thought hurts me, that here again the true state of affairs will not be revealed, the world acquires the appearance of being an excellent world. For the moment I am dead the declaimers will overbid one another in declaiming, and this declaiming may, perhaps even in tears, look deceptively like true ardor. It cannot be verified―for our contemporary, he is now dead; and that contemporary whom they now abuse, yes, that is something else, as it is said: he is not the truly great―perhaps until he is dead. Disgusting! And that’s why I have a desire to live. Possibly we might even live to see someone in living life achieving both: the abuse―and then being triumphant, so long as it was an honest pers. Would to God, were it to fall to me, that I would be honest. For it has often occurred that a man who has suffered abuse has then triumphed; but look, he was simply out for his own advantage and then, when he had triumphed, he was happy and pleased and

[a]

Only one came forward, gave the impression that he was, and took credit for being, the one person who dealt fairly and squarely with my cause; and this first performance was precisely the deception that has affected me most painfully―Alas, and even I have not dared assert my right, for fear that it was impatience in the face of God, as though I would spare myself.

1

5

10

8

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 4–5

•

1850

not mad enough to rake up the past―ergo the world got away with it. The honest pers. who loves the truth, not himself, loves to make peop. attentive, not [to] himself; on the contrary he himself, at the very moment that he triumphs and everyone has wanted to join him, and the lie is in full swing with “it’s what we always said about him,”―those who have abused him become no one, become something rather in the way one says to the child it was the cat that did it―he, the honest pers. will precisely use that moment to say: No, stop, what do I care about this recognition that is just as untrue as was the abuse; but now I will talk of the abuse and show you how things go in the world. This is what has been achieved here: it was the same peop., and it was in relation to the same person―cheating is impossible here―if, finally, this same pers. loves the truth rather than himself. Clearly it can cost him dearly, since these same people will be extremely provoked because they could not get permission to transform the whole world into balderdash. Alas, but a beautiful task for an honest pers., it gives an appetite for life! Oh, you noble peop., you who through a long, long, long life’s bitter, bitter days, day after day, became victims of human baseness and were never proved right; then the grave closed over you, and only now was the most atrocious injustice done to you, now the declaimers came forward―and wept and declaimed, and it was an excellent world: Oh you noble peop., you nod to me your support. Without anger, without bitterness, I wanted just one thing: that I should succeed in catching the human baseness in the act, in such a way that the declaimers should not give me the slip. Oh, that this should be offered to me, the greatest honor and regard ever tendered a hum. being―and yet, my God, my God keep me so upright that I use the moment in an upright way, reject all this and just ask one thing, willingly, without anger, but certainly not without sadness, to make them attentive to what confusion life is―then I ask no more.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

“Christendom” Is Nonsense. I undertake to prove, so clearly that the plain man can grasp it, that if someone wants seriously to give expression to what is Christian in his life, things will go wrong for him. That is, insofar

5

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 5–7

•

1850

10

as all of us get along quite well in the world, not to speak of those who even make a success of it, then the reason for this is that we abstain from Christian practice. But then what do we need the 1000 priests for? What helps us and the priests decently through life is that we refrain from doing what is Christian. So are the 1000 priests there in order to help us refrain from doing what is Christian? Yet what else can it be than balderdash when such a thing as Xnty is supposed to be the life-view of everybody, by the millions.

6

A Motto.

13

5

15

I have read in Scriver that there was a man whose motto was: Aliis inserviendo consumor, It fits my life, I am sacrificed for others. Allis inserviendo consumor.

7

A Priest’s Difficult Situation.

20

A widow dies. While alive she had a very substantial pension, she left some fortune. On the other hand, she has been a great benefactor. Well, that’s what the priest can say. But he is inspired, he feels (perhaps uninvited, as one says, though we certainly know what that means) called upon to speak in loud tones of this rare beneficence, he says: She was not just generous, no, like that widow in the gospel, she gave the last penny to the poor. Now this is both a lie, and―yes, now comes the satirical difficulty!―it is a lie, this can be proved―amazing!―it can be proved by the priest’s oration. If the widow had quite literally given the last penny to the poor, then she would not have left one single farthing―and accordingly neither had she left anything with which to pay the priest, and then what? She would not have had any funeral oration, at least not such a beautiful funeral oration, which is not too dear at the price of 50 rix-dollars.

25

30

35

14 Aliis inserviendo consumor] Latin, Serving others, I consume myself. (See also explanatory note.)

9

10

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 8–10

•

1850

About Myself. And they accuse me of pride, that I want to stand alone. Oh, you who speak, ask yourself honestly, how am I to find one more person who (in addition to the preliminary requirements, had the time and the preconditions to work in that direction) would unite with me, not about enduring something so as to triumph (no, that could certainly be achieved), but to hold out so as to triumph―and then to use the triumph not to achieve anything, to use it to shed light on the truth, a light that might perhaps embitter contemporaries once more and even more strongly.

Blasphemy. Although in Christendom there is Sunday talk of Christ being the exalted prototype that the Christian strives to resemble, it is always implied that no one is foolish enough to attempt any such imitation. This, you see, is what Christendom calls piety, fear of God. If, however, anyone makes an attempt so to place “the prototype” in actuality that there might be a little earnest in this imitation, then they say “It is blasphemy”―that is, earnest is blasphemy.

Mynster’s Art of Governing. If it is commendable from the viewpoint of political prudence, from the Christian point of view it is indefensible, since it is in principle the diametrical opposite of Christianity. What has concerned Mynster above all, and still does, is that on no account should anyone’s life be allowed to give expression to there being something in and for itself. This in and for itself, together with the fact of its existing, is what is most dangerous for secular and temporal government, it causes disquiet; so if anyone wants to do something gratuitously, this is in Mynster’s eyes a crime; for then he and his existence become incommensurable. No, if someone, e.g., has an urge to preach, then this must find expression in his procuring a position, and thus in everything. There is to be no infinite as such; no, it must come out even; everything must be explicable in terms of the relative

14

8

5

10

9

15

20

10

25

30

15

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 10–12

5

10

•

1850

and must be subsumed into the relative. Then it is a pleasure to govern, yes, an almost voluptuous pleasure. One allows (and does it oneself) the infinite to be talked about in lofty tones, that noble enthusiasm that wills the good alone―but also makes sure that this remains only a manner of speaking, because for actuality there is always an annotation interpreting it in the relative and by the relative. One is of the view that religiousness has its place―but there is concern above all to keep it from emerging into actuality, to confine it to certain quiet hours. In such a quiet hour the speaker (and one does it oneself) may gesticulate violently in the pulpit― but then no more; this sublimity has no place in actuality. So it is with everything Mynsterian. It is political pedagogy but the diametrical opposite of Christianity.

15

11

20

Mynster. If Mynster had governed according to his principles of government―and for the sake of caution lived in poverty and strict abstention, the matter would be otherwise; there would then be no doubt that it was a principle that had determined him, that it was actually for the sake of the principle. Now it’s another matter, for now it may be doubted whether he might not have governed in the way he has governed―in order to spare himself, in order to enjoy life, and the like.

25

12

30

16 35

The Illusions. Mundus vult decipi. Let me use myself―and oh, only do me the favor of being willing to understand. When I was reduplicating most vigorously, using most of my energy in removing illusions, my reputation was low. Then I risked the extreme, threw myself at the rabble. I saw then that for a moment the task was too big for me; I nearly had to fear mob violence against me in the streets. So I withdrew a little. I was seen a little less frequently on the street. I turned a little toward keeping up connections with the 27 Mundus vult decipi] Latin, The world wants to be deceived. (See also explanatory note.)

11

12

1

[a]

in the way we represent truth

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 12

•

1850

elite; my behavior was somewhat altered; I did not involve myself with people so much, kept them at a distance―and my standing increased―alas! for there was a little illusion involved. Why has Mynster’s reputation been so high? Because he has been supported in such an exceptionally strong way by illusions. But then, doesn’t his reputation rest on his talents and so on? Talent and genius? Forget it. No genius was ever born so powerful as to be assured of the esteem of the crowd―without making use of illusions. That it has to be like this is easy to see. If the crowd were to recognize the truth without illusions, then the crowd itself would of course have to be in the truth. But take it from me, it is an extremely rare person who can recognize the truth without illusion. But, if the crowd cannot recognize the truth without illusions, then of course it is also impossible for them to be able to honor and esteem it. Ergo, there must be illusions if one is to attain honor and esteem. The geniuses are therefore ranked according to the energy with which they can dissolve the illusions, or remove them―but so much less the esteem among their contemporaries. If the truth all by itself could be recognized by the crowd and esteemed as such, God would have benefited when he wanted to reveal himself. But what happened? The very opposite; he was mistreated and put to death. Why? Precisely because he has the power of the divine to dissolve the illusions. What helps us hum. beings is that we do not have such energies and such purity to dissolve illusions― there will always be[a] a portion of illusion left over and also to that extent, for us, some esteem. It is this, among other things, that I want to make peop. aware of, and for this purpose I mean to use my own life. With God’s help I will not be tricked into the illusion that my growing reputation has any other ground than that I have been forced to set up a little illusion―alas! I am just a poor wretch of a hum. being, but calling attention, that I can.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

17 40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 13–15

13

5

10

1850

13

The System―The Hidden Inwardness. “The System” has practically vanished. If two students converse and mention the System, they begin almost involuntarily to smile. I hope that, with God’s help, “hidden inwardness” will go the same way: when two preachers converse and mention hidden inwardness, they begin involuntarily to smile. “The Public” too, is well on the way. What joy when the concept one day succumbs, along with “the majority,” “the ballot,” etc.

14

Plus dolet, quam necesse est, qui ante dolet, quam necesse est. Seneca ep. 98.

15

Mynster―and Me

20

M. hasa preached Xnty into an illusion, fixedly into an illusion―that too is why my operations had to be as dialectical as they were. M. has this similarity with Louis Phillip: without this boost from the idea, without existential pathos, but with the judicious use of petty means, and with the understanding that making a living is what rlly rules the world, and that the person who has livings in his gift rules fairly securely.

25

•

20

30

15 Plus dolet . . . necesse est] Latin, The person who feels pain before it is necessary feels more pain than is necessary. (See also explanatory note.)

a

(not that what he said was not Xnty, no―but he said it by means of the sort of preaching that was not Xnty)

1

The main part of entry NB21:16 was written in a latin hand; the marginal addition to it was written in a gothic hand.

16

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 16

•

1850

What Is Christianity? Or Rather, What Christianity Is Christianity is no doctrine. Christianity is a believing and a correspondingly quite definite kind of existing, imitation. Note. Christianity is not to be defined as a faith that tends toward “doctrine,” but is a believing. 1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

[a] Christ, who never gets involved with proving his teaching’s truth or with giving a reason for it, uses only one proof: “Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own.” This implies that a situation of action is required in order to come into the tension in which the decision of belief can come into being; it is a deed of daring. It is not then (in the way hum. beings have turned it around) first the proof, then the daring (which is also a self-contradiction and balderdash); no, first the daring and then comes the proof afterward―you will experience that the teaching is truth. But people do not want to take a risk; they have therefore made Xnty into a doctrine that one can sit down and prove without there occurring any essential change in one’s personal existence. And deflated, one blows oneself up with the certainty of three reasons; more inflated than a pasha with three horsetails, one turns up one’s nose at the Socratic “If there should be an immortality.” One calls it the purely subjective: and yet Christ also recognizes just this one proof of the teaching: If anyone will … he shall experience.

That is, Christianity is a believing and an imitation. One can make faith the first and imitation the second, insofar as it is after all necessary that what exists for me in faith is what I am to imitate.―One can make faith the first and imitation the second, insofar as it is necessary that through one or another action that more or less has the mark of conforming somewhat with Christian ethics (the unconditional), I must collide with the world in such a way that I am brought into a situation and into the tension of the situation in which for the first time there can be properly be talk of becoming a believer. This, that the action- or deed-situation is the presupposition for becoming a believer, that is, that believing corresponds to the situation: this proves the reciprocal relation between faith and imitation.

16

5

10

15

20

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 17–18

•

1850

17

21

17

5

10

15

20

The Voluntary. That Christianity’s talk of suffering, self-denial is about something voluntary is implied in the very nature of the matter, for how in the world could self-renunciation be unavoidable[?] But self-denial has been utterly abolished; common hum. sufferings (sickness, poverty, and so on) have been put in its place, reducing Xnty to teaching patience in what is unavoidable, which one then tries as far as possible to avoid. But then what meaning can there be in Xt’s words about taking up one’s cross daily, if by “cross” we here understand one or another suffering that comes my way, and which in fact is unavoidable. If it be sickness―then indeed it is self-evident that as long as I am sick, I am sick, and there is really no need of any admonition about taking up my cross if by “cross” we are to understand this sickness. Oh, but with the priests the whole thing has become balderdash.

18

“Christendom” Is Nonsense

25

Just a genius (that is to say a miserable, lowly hum. being; and what power does he really wield over himself with regard to dying to the worldly and to putting all his energy into the idea―what power? rather, how trifling). Merely a genius, the situation in our time will then be this, which the few who are competent will admit: We dare not speak with that pers.; what he says is true, only all too true, but he forces us too far out, we want to enjoy life a little more; we cannot do it―that is, we cannot overcome the earthly in ourselves. And then Xt! The infinite dying away from the world, the idea itself, which therefore demanded an unconditional break with everything in order to fol-

30

35

[a]

That what is Christian is the “voluntary” can be seen in the very word used: self-denial. With regard to the unavoidable, the necessary, that which comes from outside etc., it is another power (Governance which by means of circumstances, through other peop. and the like) that denies me it. But what I deny myself (self-denial), that after all is something voluntary, something I had in my own power to attain, if I did not deny myself. But here again we have an example of how Xndom has abolished Xnty: that by “cross” is meant suffering, instead of Xt’s understanding of the suffering of self-denial.

1

5

10

15

18

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 18–22

•

1850

low him―and that we then talk nonsense about (or are seduced by priests into talking nonsense about) their longing to have been contemporary; and that peop. in their millions are Christians, while regarding the infinitely lesser and easier course of following a genius, the more capable of our contemporaries say, no, we cannot.

22 5

Montaigne says somewhere (in the 5th vol.): For those who are to rule it is not enough to have sound human intelligence, not enough to be able to do what we are able to do. When they do not stand high above us, they stand far beneath us.

19

Ea non media sed nulla via est, velut eventum exspectantium, quo fortunæ suæ consilia applicent. Livy 32, 21. It is excellent about those who “must first see the outcome” before passing judgment.

20

Wanting to See the Outcome before Passing Judgment.

21

This has its basis in the misunderstanding that one thinks of the outstanding person as the only one up for examination―we, the rest of us, shall simply judge―instead of every living person being up for examination through being alive, so that in casu he is himself the one who is judged, and his judgment: that he would not pass judgment before seeing the outcome.

10

15

20

25

Finding a Place for the Idea in Denmark is the hardest work one can imagine; for Denmark is just about as far from the idea as possible. The country’s misfortune is not even that it is small, but rather that everything is a certain ordinary well-being, to some extent a deification of this. But no greater distance from the idea is possible. Poverty, misery, and the like are closer to the idea; wealth, abundance are closer to the idea; but such ordinary well-being is the most dangerous thing 13 Ea non media . . . applicent] Latin, It is not a middle way but no way at all, just as when one wants to await the outcome in order then to make one’s decisions conform with whatever way it turns out. (See also explanatory note.) 22 in casu] Latin, in the case in question.

22

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 22–24

•

1850

of all. This is how it is in Denmark, which though inclined to an unusual degree to compassion, is where turning to the idea looks like an impossibility. 23

23

10

15

20

25

24

35

Existentially the Highest―and Existentially the Lowest. Let us begin with the poet. In his songs the poet makes use of and immortalizes those, e.g., like Juliet, who make away with themselves in sorrow etc., etc.―this is already a rarity in actual life. The ethical-religious now comes along and declares such aestheticism to be despair and praises the precise opposite, e.g., in Juliet’s case, wanting to live. But now the priests come along and, as always with them, drivel. They do not take note of the fact that viewed externally, the purely philistine resembles the most elevated ethical-religious position. By no means did Karen, Maren, Mette, etc. make away with themselves, even though bereaved of their respective lovers―ergo these honored ladies rise, with the much honored priest’s support, far above Juliet. The priests fail altogether to notice the secret, that if an existence such as can be used by “the poet” is as rare as the poet insists; how rare then must be a true ethical-religious existence! No, the priests canonize bourgeois philistinism. And now that we Protestants have abolished the Catholic canonization of ascetics, martyrs, and the like, shareholders in the philistine guild are canonized by way of compensation, and quite right, they are canonized by that last clerical order to arise in Protestantism: the livings brethren.

The Extraordinary, Ethically, and the Priestly Sermon’s Betrayal. Ethically, the extraordinary relates with no further ado to each individual (the ethical is indeed precisely what is universally human), that he can be that, yes, that this is really what he should be. Here there is no aesthetic differential between ability and inability based on conditions that are not within each person’s power.

19

20

1

5

10

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 24–25

Humility and modesty are quite out of place where there is talk of suffering, of making sacrifices, and the like. To be “too modest, to feel oneself too insignificant etc.” to give one’s fortune to the poor, to be whipped etc., is to satirize oneself. The truth is that one is weak. One should then admit it; one should not be a hypocrite.

•

1850

Take now, in respect of being a Christian, the extraordinary in ethical respects, which is to become a witness for the truth, martyr, and the like. What does the priestly sermon then do? Instead of expressing that each individual is to render account to God as to why he did not become a witness for the truth, and confess that the mistake lay with him in his weakness, worldliness, and so on, together with humbly acknowledging that it is an indulgence shown him if he is a Christian all the same. Instead, the priest turns it around, and makes what is extraordinary in ethical respects into what is extraordinary in aesthetic respects, the differentially extraordinary, and then says: Such heights I have not dared hope for, to be an extraordinary of that kind. Aha! Instead of getting a minus, that he did not become what could in the strictest sense be demanded of him, he even gets a plus for humility and modesty. If this is not to make a fool of God then I do not know what it is to make a fool of God.

Answer to an Objection to My Tactic of Throwing Light on Xnty. “You make it so that no one goes in for Xnty.” Well, from the idea’s point of view that is altogether immaterial. But nor is that the way things will go. There will be fewer but more able. And in the end there are doubtless quite a number who, when it comes seriously to actually abandoning Xnty, then choose rather what is more rigorous. What has caused damage is the disgusting way in which hum. beings have had Xnty foisted on them, so as to make it seem something almost pitiful― which is basically what the priests have done in order to spare themselves, instead of doing what shall be done: uphold the ideal, not spare oneself.

5

24

15

20

25

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 26–29 26

5

An Apostle―and a Priest Nowadays. Paul’s introduction to becoming an apostle was “not to confer with flesh and blood” (Galatians). Nowadays a young divine uses ten years in which he scampers from Herod to Pilate, continually on errands under the heading of conferring with flesh and blood―this is the introduction.

25

27

15

Marriage of the Clergy. If it were not for this accursed, supine tradition that a priest must be married, that it cannot be otherwise, or else he is not a proper priest; then perhaps there would be one or another young divine who might think of beginning as a priest right away, without being demoralized by this running after an official appointment.

28

The Only Thing Always Assumed in Life

20

is: the most important, the absolute, the one thing needful. That a future priest should know even the least trifle regarding the appointment is not assumed as a matter of course, but that he is a true Christian, in his innermost being (in hidden inwardness) is willing to sacrifice everything for Xnty: naturally this is assumed―oh, naturally.

25

29

30

How Does a Person Become a Christian? Quite simply. Take any Christian rule for action, venture to act accordingly. The action that you thereby come to situate in actuality will then bear the mark of the unconditioned, for this is the mark of everything truly Christian.

•

1850

21

22

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 29

•

1850

In the same instant you will, with this action, come into collision with the environing world, which essentially has its life in [“]to a certain degree.[”] The collisions will now be such that, in a certain sense, if you come to discover the Christian aspect and its collisions―while at the same time discovering that you need Christianity in order to endure these collisions because you come to suffer for the good that you did, but then in addition also discover in this tension that, in relation to the ideal itself you are nonetheless a poor wretch―then you need unconditioned grace. Without situation, without this situation, which isolates him almost to despair and always in inverse proportions, a person never comes to believe. This is also what Xt says, the only proof possible for the truth of Xnty: if anyone will act according to what I say, he will know from experience whether I am speaking on my own. But a truly Christian action, an action with the mark of the unconditioned, and marked Christianly by the unconditioned, is a huge rarity―and yet in no other way can one come into the situation where faith can actually come into existence. Dare to give all your wealth to the poor and you will certainly experience the truth of the teaching, just by experiencing the scale on which you need the teaching in order to persevere in what it is you dare. Dare once, for the sake of truth, to let yourself be absolutely open to everything, and you will certainly experience the truth of the teaching, experience how it alone can save you from despairing or from succumbing, for you will need Xnty both to protect yourself against others and to keep yourself upright when the thought of your own imperfection would weigh you down. For it is all very well to go around babbling about one’s imperfection in common with the others; but truly, the person who by an unconditioned act has broken with everything, so that the others now do everything to label him as mad or as an egotist or as a hypocrite, etc.: he will, in an inner spiritual trial, discover his own imperfection on a

5

26

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 29–31

5

10

27 15

20

30

25

dreadful scale, even though he was right 10 times over in what he did, right in relation to the others; he will discover his imperfection before God and thus have need of Xnty. But this has been completely done away with; such things are never mentioned in sermons; they have amassed this heap of reasons and proofs and God knows what. What Christ, who never involved himself with proofs, demanded was unconditioned action: break with everything in order to join with me. So when someone did this, it was indeed through the relation to Xt that he became a Xn, but it was also by way of the break with everything, by coming out into this enormous tension, so that the one and only way of keeping going was by keeping to Xt. Even though someone who, without breaking with everything, without being unconditioned, had chased after Christ all day, talked with him day in and day out, had been witness to all his miracles, that person will never in all eternity become a Xn.

Mynster’s Preaching. Becoming a Christian is a life-and-death struggle, a prolonged life-and-death struggle, full of the most terrifying episodes (which dying to the world, in keeping with dying itself, must naturally be). Who would ever think of such a thing from reading Mynster’s sermons[?]

30

31

35

Sadness. Lucky in a certain sense is that person who can live on with the idea that if only his strength were greater than it is, greater and greater, then he would prevail more and more triumphantly. Lucky in a

•

1850

23

[a]

Dare, without conditions, to break with everything in order to get a clear picture of what Xnty is, and you’ll see, you yourself will become a Christian; you will experience such collisions and become so turned inward, alone in the consciousness of your imperfection, that you will certainly learn to need Xnty in order to hold out―then you become a Xn even though you were not one to begin with. And, on the other hand, someone who began with the idea that he was something of a Xn, even though, if this were possible, he presented Xnty quite accurately without daring anything, will scarcely become a Xn himself.

1

5

10

15

24

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 31–32

•

1850

sense, for he is luckily ignorant of the fact that there is a point called the extraordinary, and that when that point is reached, everything turns around, that on the other side of the straightforwardly superlative (the greatest) lies the extraordinary, and the more extraordinary it is, the more certain the downfall.―Lucky the person who can live on with the idea that, should he succeed in portraying the truth quite truly, then he should triumph unconditionally, lucky in a sense, for he is luckily ignorant of the truth’s secret, that the more he succeeds, the more certain the downfall.―Lucky that person who can live on with the idea that what is needed is to have the errors removed, so that everyone will then submit to the truth; he is lucky in a certain sense compared with the person for whom it is only too clear that he need only produce a little gibberish for the truth to get through.― Lucky in a certain sense that person from whom it was hidden that those words of a dead person, whom thousands wanted to admire―were he to utter them in living life, woe, woe to that person. And furthermore, here, on this point, there is an impenetrable confusion, impossible ever to put right, yes, even if the one who died were himself to rise up and utter them again―he is certain to share the same fate, for people can only tolerate the truth when it is at a poetic distance.―

It is, after all, ambiguous to declaim in honor and praise of the departed, someone who has been your contemporary and you have opposed. It is just as ambiguous as shouting hurrah for a man on his going away when this can mean: Thank heavens you are leaving. But justice is never done to the deceased. He himself cannot indeed rise from his grave and shout to the declaimers: you lie in your teeth. And if some living contemporary of the declaimers takes it upon himself to show that the declaimers lie, then they hurl themselves en masse upon one such; he receives just about the same fate as the departed, until he too is a departed, and the declaimers then concern themselves with him, while a new one comes forward and shows that the declaimers lie, until the declaimers then concern themselves with him, too, etc. This is the history of the world. Many, many declaimers can live in Christian fashion off of someone who has truly willed something true; how many mil-

5

10

28

15

20

32 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 32–33

5

10

29

•

1850

lions of declaimers have not lived in a Christian fashion from Xt’s having been crucified for the truth[?] In a certain sense, saying it does not help. Even with all my policelike investigative ingenuity, it is impossible to safeguard myself against―declaimers. What I have said here can be cleverly exploited by a declaimer for the purpose of declaiming―and if there is an honest person who decides to act accordingly, his fate is certain. And therefore it is also foolish to judge a pers. according to his words; no, his life is the verdict. If you have preached that the truth suffers in the world, and have yourself had success in this preaching, then you are in fact a deceiver. The law is always: what you preach produces the same effect as the one you preach about produces, or the effect of the preaching is what is preached.

15

33

20

25

30

35

God. I could almost be tempted to say: it must be awful to be God. To have had, and to have, to do with these millions of Xns, who all assure him that they would so much like to devote themselves entirely, that they so very much want to inquire into what it is that he wills, etc., etc.―and then we are all tricksters, more or less, who with a conscious or unconscious native cunning defend ourselves just a little―which God sees with a millionth part of an eye. We don’t simply want to exempt ourselves from venturing, we even want to have it decked out with self-satisfaction―and that is why we call it daring to tempt God. Oh, my God, should wanting to suffer for the truth, should wanting to be a witness to the truth and against untruth―should that be to tempt you! No, no, no, I will not talk in that way. I will honestly confess that I am like every person who would rather spare himself. Quite generally, the sermon ought to speak extraordinarily truly. It is after all not so inexplicable that a hum. being, flesh and blood, should be afraid of getting wholly involved with God (spirit). This we would confess and then commend ourselves to God; he will no doubt help along.

25

H. P. Barfod has drawn a line through entry NB21:35 and written the word Anvendt (Danish, “used”) in the margin.

28

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 33–34

•

1850

But, oh, how disingenuous are our dealings with God[!] One person prays for good days, a safe outcome, domestic happiness etc., and he says, I shall then also sing and speak in praise of you, oh God, so that it will stir many. Alas, this is how we are, this is how I am, like an artful child that wheedles to get its will. And then it is indeed at times (when it is otherwise well meant) as though God said, almost smilingly with an accommodation (as when the superior speaks to an intelligent young girl), Yes, little friend, you are a clever fellow, but you do not deceive me, I see well enough how things are; but, oh, consider that I am spirit, and if you truly want to speak in my praise, then deny yourself―it is the worship that speaks more powerfully than all eulogies and all hymns. But we, we would rather treat God as one treats the superior, it is almost as though we feared that God might not know just how exalted he is―so we will celebrate him in song―and then, in return, be free from self-denial, i.e., with the help of wonder and worship we want to defend ourselves against the real worship: self-denial. To sing in celebration of God in superabundance―yes, even if it is a master-stroke the like of which was never seen and stirred the whole world―yet, before God there is no truer worship than poverty, in poverty to praise God existentially. But what cannot we humans come up with in order defend ourselves in the face of God―and it must always have the appearance of wanting so much to devote ourselves to him entirely. It is this that I will take care to oppose.

5

10

32 15

20

25

The Single Individual―Crowd―before God.

34

What was great about Socrates was that, even in the moment when he stood accused before the people’s assembly, his eye saw no crowd but only individuals. Spiritual superiority sees only individuals. Alas, but we humans in general, we are sensate and therefore no sooner is there a gathering than the impression changes: we see an abstraction, the crowd―and we become different. But before God, the infinite spirit, for him all the millions who have lived and live now, form no crowd; he sees only single individuals.

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 35–37 35

5

•

1850

A Passage in My Dissertation. Influenced as I was by Hegel and by everything modern, lacking the maturity to comprehend greatness, I was unable to resist pointing out in a passage somewhere in my dissertation that it was a shortcoming in Socrates that he had no eye for the totality but only paid attention, numerically, to the individuals. Oh, what a Hegelian fool I was; precisely that is the great proof of how great an ethicist Socrates was.

33

36

15

20

37

30

Human Greatness and Divine Greatness. Human greatness is to come as close as possible to the truth, but constantly holding one’s own so that one becomes the victor, aware of oneself standing above the whole. Divine greatness is to submit oneself in such a way that one sinks down under the truth, happy only to get the truth ahead. It is as though to guide truth forward in triumph, now in order to propel it onward, to throw oneself under the chariot, happy to succumb in this way, happy that God’s glory be promoted in this way. This I understand. But for me, it seems as if it were too high; I sink back to a less elevated stage―but call attention to it, make room for those glorious ones who accomplished it. Oh, my God, you will surely help me to do that.

A Memento for Clerical Speakers. One should constantly bring home to peop. what Quintilian says somewhere, that he has seen theatrical actors who allowed themselves to be so carried away by their tragic roles that they even wept at home. Moreover, Quintilian, says that he himself, when he once had undertaken to awaken in everyone a definite passion, had appropriated it to such a degree, and felt so much taken by surprise, that not only had he himself wept over it, but even turned pale, and felt quite like someone who had succumbed to the pain.

29

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 37–41

•

1850

But think here, too, of what Hamlet says about the actor who speaks of Hecuba. Every true poet will have had the same experience. But the danger with the speaker is that he fails to make the distinction, that possibly he may be putting himself into it only poetically.

Montaigne: Everyone takes care when going to confession― one should do the same in acting. But the boldness with which one makes mistakes is to some extent compensated for, and kept in check by, the boldness with which one confesses one’s mistakes.

5

38 10

34

Seneca: quare vitia sua nemo confitetur? Quia etiam nunc in illis est. Somnium narrare vigilantis est. (Ep. 55.).

Possibility―Actuality It is what I can never stress enough as being decisive for a true presentation of Christianity: what seems so extraordinarily inviting as a possibility, when made into actuality, becomes just the opposite; or that the actualizing, the realization is not a superlative of what is presented as possibility, but that here everything is now inverted. To be able to present the truth in glowing terms―one can make a huge success out of that. If one then thinks, how much more will he succeed by doing what is even higher, by himself acting in accordance with it. No, thanks, this is where the turnaround comes: the more you do that, the more you will come to suffer.

39

40

20

25

30

About Myself and My Operation The discretion with which I indisputably proceed has, besides, a very good guarantee: that I, who am surely the one who best 15 quare vitia . . . vigilantis est.] Latin, Why will no man confess his faults? Because he is still in their grasp. Only he who is awake can recount his dream. (See also explanatory note.)

41

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 41–42

5

10

35 15

20

25

30

•

1850

understands how serious the matter is and can become, would gladly have the most reasonable terms possible Also, I have a human love of being human, have not as yet been cauterized into pure spirit―but of course I can be forced farther and farther. But at every moment I proceed as gently as possible. Regarding a presentation of Christianity that is several marks nearer the gospel than the official presentation (even though I am also a long way from the gospel’s requirements), it cannot really be said to be an exaggeration, whereas the truth is that the official proclamation has lowered the price outrageously. But of course I am only a single hum. being; the others have the power, and I feel obligated to follow my cause to the limit. For every time it is decreed that this presentation is an exaggeration, the price is quoted somewhat higher, but always as leniently as can be in these circumstances, for I, too, would gladly spare myself. Thus I am as far as possible from being a muddlehead or a misanthrope who has plunged ahead and gone blindly on the attack. Alas, no, I have even produced proof all along that I am right. I did not begin by simply attacking―I have supported the established order, then put forth my presentation (which in relation to the gospel is only too altogether too far from being an exaggeration) and, look, they shouted: What an exaggeration. But precisely this, you see, is the guilt and the proof that I am right. One may say, as I do: “It is too lofty for us, we take comfort in grace;” but truly, one has no right to say it is an exaggeration in the sense of not being Xnty, for then Xnty itself becomes a quite dreadful exaggeration. And this is exactly where the fundamental guilt lies: that peop. want presumptuously to decide for themselves what Xnty is to be according to what suits them.

42

Christianity’s Proclamation.

35

The true Christian proclamation has in its major premise that which is proclaimed, and in its minor premise, or as auxiliary, a dialectically determined existence [i.e., life] (from this one also sees, among other things, how decisive personality is for the true proclamation of Xnty).

31

32

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 42–44

•

1850

Let us consider one of these well-informed emissaries sometimes sent by Governance to proclaim Xnty. At the place assigned him, he finds that the main damage is that “grace” has been taken in vain. So what does he do? Does he refrain from preaching grace? No, not at all; that would be to distort Christianity in another way. But let us assume that he, e.g., is rich. So he gives everything to the poor―and then he preaches “grace,” that it is from grace that a hum. being becomes blessed; and he preaches this more fervently and sincerely and more enthusiastically than any priest. Then see, this preaching is properly orchestrated: the major premise “grace,” the minor premise: one who has complied with the most rigorous demands. But a proclaimer like that is of course an embarrassment. For peop. would rather that “grace” meant that they could keep their money.―Or he exposes himself to all kinds of persecution and maltreatment for the sake of truth, and then he proclaims: It is sheer grace that a hum. being be saved. This is again properly orchestrated: major premise: grace; minor premise: one who complies with the most rigorous demands. But he is an embarrassment, for people want “grace” to mean that they get out of taking the risk.

Christendom’s Guilt is not even that we are the mediocre Christians we are, but that peop. have presumed to re-brand Christianity instead of upholding what Xnty is and then confessing their own frailty. The guilt is aggravated lèse-majesté.

5

10

36

20

43

25

An Ill-Omened Reversal.

44

Because the priests, the sextons, the undertakers, together with the other clerical personnel―partly from fear of man (so that no one ventures an opinion without that of others), partly from consideration of a livelihood―have need of human beings, the proclaiming has finally been turned around so that it is Christianity that has need of human beings.

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 45–46 45

5

10

37

15

20

25

46

30

35

•

1850

The Official Proclamation of Christianity――and Mine. This is how the official proclamation of Xnty ought to have received mine. They should have said: “This proclamation is quite true, but for us it is too elevated, as the author himself in fact admits with respect to himself. But even if it produces no other benefit, it is does have the advantage that it could draw attention to how lukewarm we are in our Xnty, we who scarcely want to get involved in the lenient Xnty that is now proclaimed.” And then to that I would say: That is absolutely true, except for the latter, for I believe one becomes more readily involved in Xnty if it is a little more rigorous. But I will hardly get many to believe this yet awhile. The immediate impression is against it, and one will therefore not persuade many to believe it. I will throw light on this with an illustration. There are times in the year (item this can also happen in apartments, e.g., when there is only a little sun) when one opens the windows and lets in warmer air―but this idea of opening windows to let in warmer air, or of keeping windows shut in order not to let too warm air in, this no maid-servant can be made to understand. She stays in the old rut: shutting windows so that it will not get too cold―even if she is told 10 times to open the windows to let a little warmth in. On the other hand, in the heat of summer she opens all the windows so as, so she thinks, to make it cool―even if she is asked 10 times if she would keep the windows closed, especially at noon, in order not to let in too much heat.

About Myself If I could never in another sense be tired of repeating, again and again, what is so true in me, that I can never thank Governance enough for the infinite good that has been done for me, so much more than I had ever expected, or could have dared expect―then I could in a single moment of despondency be tempted to say that Governance had been all too hard toward me. My suffering is that, in a certain lower sense, I am not properly a hum. being, and am all too much spirit. I have no resort to others. Never have I said a single word to any pers. at all about what I rlly suffer―I cannot. God is my only resort. That, you see, is why he has me so fearfully in his power. And then, of course, 15 item] Latin, as well as, furthermore.

33

34

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 46–49

•

1850

it seems harsh to give me the appearance of being just like the others, to drive me in among them―and then with this secretive communication to have me in his power on a scale far different than the others. Oh, but I can nevertheless never thank Governance enough for the indescribable good it has done me, so infinitely much more than I had expected, could or dared have expected.

5

38

Nullæ sunt inimicitiæ nisi amoris acerbæ.

47

Properts.

10

“Defending” Xnty in Xndom!

48

But then in Xndom everyone is a Xn―so who are those who attack it? Against whom does one “defend” Xnty? Aha, so the attackers are also Xns of a kind too―Oh my God! The first thing one must surely do if one wants to “defend” Xnty, and thus imagine an attacker, is to demand that at least the attacker stop calling himself Xn. But even this didn’t catch on―alas no, the “defenders” were far too closely related to the attackers, themselves höchstens only half convinced of Xnty’s truth; so Xnty itself, even in the eyes of its “defenders” and for their sake, was in need of defense.

The Official Proclamation of Christianity contains the tacit assumption that this is merely something for quiet hours of a Sunday, that no one is so mad as to act accordingly on Mondays. That this is, in this way, a tacit assumption can be seen from the fact that the presentation turns all existential situations upside down, as everyone would discover were he to begin to live accordingly.

9 Nullæ . . . acerbæ] Latin, There is no enmity as bitter as that of love. (See also explanatory note.) 20 höchstens] German, at most.

15

20

49

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 50–52 50

5

39

51

•

1850

The Old Xnty’s Life-View―The Present One. In the old days it was found almost strange that there should in fact be any joyful days in this life (the same thing is expressed in one of the morning and evening prayers in the hymnal), because they understood that this life was dedicated to suffering, suffering also for Xnty. Nowadays Xnty has come to be enjoying oneself and clinging to this life more and more in a purely worldly way.

An Incomprehensible Sum.

20

Take an association of 5 people, each of whom puts 5/8 of his strength into working jointly for the same cause―and take one who has no more strength than each of these 5 but invests all his own strength: Who will accomplish the most? All sensible peop. will be unanimous in backing the combination: I back the one. Putting all one has into something differs infinitely from a high sum of fractional efforts; it is dedication―it is spirit―the other is hum. bungling. But how many in our day sense what is of the spirit?

52

About Myself.

15

25

30

35

I have been brought up strictly in Xnty, was early further along than perhaps quite a number of priests ever come; then I studied theology; became a theology graduate―I could then have sought a clerical office. If I had become a priest, I might by now already have been dean, maybe have come up with something in the administration, become Knight of Dannebrog. This one could call my natural development, which could be continued further so that I might even have become a bishop, have accomplished much for Xnty―and there was one thing about which I could in that case answer: yes, naturally, why in all the world does it occur to you to ask me such a thing, for the question was: Are you really a Christian?

35

36

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 52–54

•

1850

For me it is now otherwise. In an odd way, my natural development has been halted at the question I came to ask myself: Are you a Xn? From that time on, I have had more to do than any priest, and even any dean―but always this, as a priest or a dean would call it, this dawdling of a straggler. True enough, I am as if an eternity behind all this bustling actuality, which begins by naturally assuming the only important thing, so as then to get devilishly busy with church and school and parish statistics, and procreation, item cultivation of flax, etc., etc.―so that there is hardly any time to give, in response to the question, “Are you a Christian?,[”] Oh, yes, of course.

Against the Disastrous Confusing of the World’s Development with Xnty’s Development. Luther (in the sermon on the Epistle on the 23rd Sunday after Trinity Sunday) says: “for God neither heeds nor needs the whole world, except solely for his Xns’ sake.” It is what Anti-Climacus expresses (in Practice in Xnty), that the world is there simply to be the element in which the examination for becoming and being a true Xn can be administered.

5

40

10

53 15

20

Christendom’s Misfortune Is to Have Made Xnty into Nothing but a Doctrine.

54

In an older time, when it was at any rate understood that Xnty is an existing, an imitation, the preparation for becoming a teacher was then of an essentially disciplinary nature: learning obedience, to be practiced in renunciation and self-denial, asceticism, etc. When Xnty became nothing but doctrine, the test for becoming a teacher became learned examinations―there were absolutely no questions at all about existence. Then, by degrees, these tremendous sciences arose, and with the sciences new doubt etc., because they had cancelled the imitation that would have given hum. beings something quite other to think of than coming upon doubt.

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 54–55

5

41 10

15

•

1850

What are all these sciences? They are humankind’s attempt to defend itself against Xnty―but under the guise of it really being an investigation into what it pleases God to be his will. Indeed, thank you! No, everyone must admit that the N.T. is basically easy enough to understand―but hard for us hum. beings, flesh and blood as we are, to do. “Give everything to the poor”―is that hard to understand? Surely not. But I would rather be free of it, and I haven’t the courage straightforwardly to say No. So I hit upon science; I say I am willing enough to do it if only it is certain that it stands in the N.T.; but they say there are variants, that the readings are not quite certain. There, you see, all the textual criticism came to help, etc. etc. Everywhere where someone who manages even moderately to make lives strenuous, there one will also straightaway come up with a science to defend oneself against him and convert him into mere doctrine. If he is of such stature that one dare not directly admit that the science is designed to defend oneself against him, then it will come out under the guise of it being designed in order to understand him properly.

20

55

25

30

35

40

And This Is Also How They Have Contributed to Abolishing the True Proclaiming of Xnty. Yes, the priest says, there is a God in Heaven, a father who is quite literally concerned even with the slightest thing in a person’s life. Now, if someone believes this, then I tell you, he needs neither more help nor any other help. As for, What Xnty is?―it is God’s will that with respect to this matter every hum. being before God relate himself to the Holy Scripture, and all this jabbering between one hum. being and another is precisely what God does not want. The person who does relate to God in this way, such an individual becomes an actual individual; what he invests in life will be the fruit of a prolonged silence, and as he himself acquires character in this way, so will his actions have an arousing effect, an ability to precipitate crisis in the environing world. But, there you see, peop. found that living in that way (not gabbling about it on Sundays), too much of a strain. Wily as hum. nature always is, they found out that it was pleasing to God, that it was humility and modesty and cordiality―instead of relating to God, as each person can and should―to jabber

37

38

1

a

, obedience,

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 55–58

•

1850

with one another about what Xnty is, thereby abolishing Xnty’s sovereignty. Only in character am I rlly allowed to talk of what Xnty is; to confer in commodious jargon (heartily!) with others about it is an attempt on Xnty’s life. Lack of respect. The true situation:a what God wants, that the individual keep to him, was given another stamp as pride and arrogance, which was despised―the untrue, the commodious, the jabbering, that was also what was cordial, humble, what was pleasing in the sight of God.

5

10

42

“But Surely We Cannot All Be Martyrs?” Answer: is it better then, that we all say, each one of us: I cannot. If it is wrong that all should be it―then it is surely also wrong that simply no one will be it.

Nullum unquam exstitit magnum ingenium sine aliqua dementia. The explanation is quite simple. In order for there truly to be a great genius, he must be the exceptional. But in order for being exceptional to be a serious matter, he must himself be un-free, forced into it. Here lies the significance of his dementia. There is a fixed point at which he suffers; he cannot come to run with the pack. This is his anguish. This dementia of his may have nothing at all to do with where his real genius lies, but it is the pain with which he is personally tormented into isolation―and isolated he must be if he is to be great; and no one is able to endure isolation freely; if it is to be serious, he must be forced into it.

“Xnty Is No Longer Persecuted” yes, what wonder, when Xnty as an existing, an imitation, has been abolished, and it has been made mere doctrine. Doctrine doesn’t embarrass in a way that could incite to persecution. One doctrine more or less is to the world neither here nor there; in relation to everything that merely wants to be nothing but doctrine, 17 Nullum . . . dementia] Latin, There has never been any great genius without a degree of madness. (See also explanatory note.)

56

15

57

20

25

58 30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 58–60

5

•

1850

the world is as tolerant as the piety of the Romans: what difference does one god more or less make? That someone presents the teaching about self-denial and secures his livelihood thereby: this causes the world no embarrassment at all; on the contrary, the world is happy to have one more means of livelihood. But that someone should deny himself―this causes embarrassment. Let the imitation return―and the persecution will soon follow.

43

59 10

15

20

25

30

60 35

Regarding Bashfulness in Relation to the Sexual. Montaigne says somewhere that it is indeed strange that there should be something so detestable about that to which we all of course owe our existence. Thus he thinks that bashfulness was almost a bit prudish. And so indeed have many a strong intellect thought. But the answer to this must be: it is only in one respect true that a hum. being owes his existence to the act of procreation; a creative moment is also present that must be referred to God. It is not with the hum. race as it is with an animal species, that each is only an example. The person who really becomes spirit, for which he is planned, there is a point where he takes over (by choosing himself, as it is said in Either/Or) his whole being, and thereby demotes propagation to something merely lower. What wonder, then, that there is bashfulness in relation to the sexual! Those who are procreating represent only the lower side, just as they themselves in the act of procreation are determined in the lower aspect of their being, or in the farthest extremity of the synthesis from spirit. But precisely this, that the direction is away from spirit, precisely this is bashfulness; spirit is precisely bashfulness, or, the fact that the hum. being is determined as spirit is bashfulness. The animal has no bashfulness, nor does the bestial; and the less spirit, the less bashfulness.

The Priests. If one were to say that most priests make only a frugal living and that, from a Christian point of view, even by the strictest

39

40

1

a

and he almost doesn’t come to be a priest without wife and children.

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 60–61

•

1850

standards, this is nothing to make a fuss over, the rejoinder must be: so long as these gentlemen could have secured a more generous living in another way, or whether this is not the most they could achieve with their abilities and qualifications, item if they do not aspire pro virili to a larger living as soon as possible. For only then, from a Christian point of view, would this “frugal living” have any essential significance, that is, if they were men who could have secured a better living in another way but chose the more frugal one in order to serve Xnty. Incidentally, one could also ask where in the N.T. does it say that a priest absolutely should be married, should absolutely have enough to be able to support a wife and children, should absolutely be guaranteed the expedient and excuse, should dare not take any risk, that he does it out of consideration for his wife and children―that is why, in preaching Xnty, he has to comply with the others, why he must abstain from witnessing for the truth and against untruth―aha, perhaps this is even why he has wife and children. Just as, among writers, the use of formulas― this is just a rough draft, I haven’t the time to develop it fully, etc., thereby safeguarding themselves against the critics―so, too, do we have 1000 married priests, who are all, each and every one, supposed to show what stout fellows they are―if only they didn’t have wife and children. And so that everything can be as it should be, the greatest care is taken to see to it, as far as possible, that every priest is married. We do not want to have unmarried priests, say the congregations and the Church administration, and the priests say, we do not want to be unmarried―for we are then all assured of a pleasant security, for the priests cannot come to do anything on account of wife and children.a To castrate a man is called to unman him. The question is whether the intention, spiritually speaking, is not to unman him with respect to spirit, insofar as it takes a quite extraordinary man really to serve the idea with wife and children.

5

44

15

20

25

30

35

Montaigne It is splendidly put (Book 1, chap. 28, on solitude): “…as for the decorous language used as a cloak by greed and ambition (perhaps he ought to have said sensuality), ‘That we are not in this world merely for our own sake, but for the common weal’ 5 pro virili [parte]] Latin, with all one’s strength.

61

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 61–63

5

•

1850

(and that therefore we must not withdraw into solitude), let us venture to refer to those who have joined in the dance (those who are now dancing); let them bare their consciences and confess whether rank, office, and all the bustling business of the world are not, on the contrary, sought in order to gain private profit from the common weal. The evil methods that men use to get ahead clearly show that their aims cannot be worth much.[”] This is excellent: also this―that the use of base means is immediate proof of mediocre aims, which is extraordinarily true.

45 10

62

Conversation. A. Christianity simply does not exist. B. What nonsense, how can Christianity not exist when there are 1000 priests[?]

15

A. Yes, that’s what the fidget says: How can I not have a great deal of business, I who employ 4 clerks and will soon have to take on a couple more[?]

63

The Difficulty in Becoming a Xn―in Xndom.

25

30

The difficulty is, having been brought up in this religion from childhood, one has exclusively been given an impression of its leniency, item has been involved with it almost as a kind of mythology―and now, at a much later time in life, one is properly to discover how strict it is. This is the situation: the heathens who are to be Christians―in their case the first impression is of the rigor, of all that is forbidding, and only then the leniency. But it is a huge difficulty being accustomed to this doctrine as sheer leniency and almost as hum. candy. Yet obviously most peop. simply don’t come upon this difficulty (in only later becoming properly aware of its rigor), because they have some childhood impression of great things, [and] from the moment they become older, there isn’t really any time to spend on the question of becoming Xn.

41

42

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 64–65

•

1850

Child Baptism, the Child’s Upbringing in Xnty and the Like. Joh. Climacus shows correctly that, with regard to becoming and being Xn, the emphasis falls absolutely on self-concern, that the single individual is absolutely concerned for himself, until, if required, to break with all relationships and break all ties. But in Xndom the situation has been turned around: one is concerned for the children, most of all for the children. Oh, there is no longer any idea of Xnty: there is an unchristian lack of resignation, thus the parents without further ado place being a Xn under the category of generation; it is an unchristian form of love (that is, really the love of race) that parents will not comprehend that becoming Xn is a decision that determines the individual qua spirit, that in this respect one hum. being can do nothing for another, that their child baptism, that their instruction, in fact provides no guarantee that their children are Xns, or can serve to make them so. Ah, but that decision to be Xn, people have utterly forgotten what it means and so have turned back to paganism’s or Judaism’s definitions of inwardness in terms of family love; and the part about even hating mother and father, and so on, that has become a fable, yes, not only that, but it is as though Xndom wanted to say: God save Xnty if it again comes up with that language about making life strenuous in that way. No, in Xnty we have now gemütligt adapted ourselves to the family and to all earthly comforts―and it is Xnty.

Pointing Out That There Is No Xnty and a Curiosity Associated with This will become an extremely thankless job. The fact alone that what, up to now, can be had dirt cheap, something that could just about be bought at the doors of priests who for the sake of their livelihood pressed it on peop., or by politicians who thought it was good to take it along: that now this should be forced up to such an enormous price! 25 gemütligt] Danicized German, heartily, cozily.

64

5

46

10

15

20

25

65 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 65–67

5

10

47

66

•

1850

And now the priests over whom a satirical light will always be cast if they don’t know how to put in a low bid at the opportune time. And then there is the curious fact that in private conversation nearly everybody will admit that there is rlly no Xnty. But this must not be said. Every individual says, I neither can nor dare say it―and en masse they speak out against the one who dares say it. Ah, if only the rope’s end could be tied fast, that it is what it is about. It continues to be a perpetual and never-ending whirling around with every individual privately very well knowing it but unable or not daring to say it―and also that they would then all stick together against the one who would say it.

Aristotle’s Well-Known Proverb Oh, my friends, there is no longer any friend to be found. (Montaigne, book 1, chapter 27).

67

The Ideal.

20

Every step toward the ideal is a step backward; for the progress of course consists precisely in my further discovering the ideal’s perfection―and accordingly my greater distance from it. One cannot love the ideal selfishly, for then the progress would only gladden me if I straightforwardly came nearer the ideal―yes, I would then in a certain sense wish that the ideal were not all that perfect, or that I didn’t come to know too much about its perfection―that I would be better able to reach it. Truly to love the ideal (so that the step forward is a step backward, or that my making progress means that I step back out of respect, because I see its sublimity still more perfectly) is for that reason like hating oneself.

25

30

43

44

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 68–69

•

1850

Direct Attack. If the established order wanted a direct attack, well, here is one: in order not to say too much, and not to proceed far too quickly to what is most sublime, the established order has taken Luther in vain; the guilt of the established order is to have taken Luther’s achievement in vain. Luther rescued “imitation, the imitation of Xt” from a fanciful misunderstanding―but the present order has altogether secularized Luther as though that was what Luther meant.

The New In the future martyrs must become long-term martyrs. What has to be combated is prudence. The world is now so cunning and wily as to be frightening. If peop. have to admit that one among them is in the service of the good, the spectacle is far from inspiring them to support him, or to be like him. No, with great prudence one says quite calmly: he must fall―and simply waits for the moment to rush forward and declaim. Now take the short-term martyrs. Things are brought together there as quickly as possible to the denouement. The martyr cares solely about his idea, and then he falls as a sacrifice―and just look, the declaimers hurry forward and profit from the martyr; and the big question becomes, how much good the martyr has done. No, especially when the world is as thoroughly prudent and thoroughly demoralized as it is now, the martyrs must be longterm martyrs. The martyr’s task will be to inconvenience worldliness and worldly sensibleness, as it inconveniences a person to be under continual police surveillance. The martyr will have to take up a position a couple of points higher than that of the most capable of the established order; as far as that goes, he would have it in his power to be topmost. But this he does not do; he remains within quite ordinary categories; he is as good as nothing and then finds incessantly room for the ideal, brings it to mind. It is annoying, for what worldliness wants is to be rid of this ideal. It will therefore also regard it as a kind of treason on the part of such a person who, instead of being the superlative, and thus dropping the ideal, decides to be as

68

5

48 10

69

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 69–71

5

49

15

20

25

70

•

1850

good as nothing simply in order to show how sublime the ideal is. It is, humanly speaking, treason that the person who can be No. 1―and if he assumed that position he would be placing the crown on the relativities and on “to a certain degree” as being the highest that one can go, which is something that pleases flesh and blood―that he defines himself as No. 0 simply in order to make room for the ideal, thereby annoying the relativities, which had nothing against him being No. 1 in earnest (for then the relativities would become earnest as well), but have very much against him, whom they have to admit stands above them, for placing himself at No. 0. This is police business, enormously strenuous. Yes, I remain convinced that no one can manage this unless, through quite special daily suffering, and having quite especially broken with life, one receives special support; for otherwise flesh and blood, and the environing world, will one day fool him into becoming the superlative, something he is constantly capable of doing. This is a long-term martyrdom, and as mentioned, the martyr must with special daily suffering be so much in the power of Governance that it is this that presses on him at every moment and keeps him awake; otherwise it cannot be done. He must be in the hand of Governance like the clipped-wing bird, the decoy, which the bird-catcher has entirely in his power in order to catch others. This is how he must be in the hand of Governance, and then his work is comparable to that of an agent in the secret police or a detective.

The Difference between the Poetic―and the Religious.

30

No wonder, indeed, that wine (external conditions and the like) inspires; but that water (self-denial, renunciation, and the like) inspires: yes, that is religiousness. And that is the difference between existing religiously and existing poetically.

71

Montaigne says somewhere that, to his knowledge, man is the only creature whose worth is determined by what he has on him (titles, external circumstances, and the like). After all, it wouldn’t occur to anyone to determine the worth of a horse by the saddle on its back, or a dog by the collar around its neck.

45

46

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 72–74

•

1850

The Priests. Priests have finally so much ceased to be what rlly they should be that, with regard to what being a priest rlly means, what now counts for their success and being honored, respected, and esteemed, etc. is totally irrelevant: that they socialize well, that they are people who can take part in everything and make arrangements, deliver occasional addresses, in short a kind of more meticulous edition of an undertaker.―Or in another way, that what in fact they are esteemed for is really irrelevant to what it is to be a priest, e.g., being somewhat scholarly, etc. Rlly Xnty has been abolished, and we therefore haven’t rlly known what to do with a priest, and being a priest has pretty well become a charade; no one can definitely say what it is; it is an indefinable something but someone who is in this way present at all kinds of solemn occasions, a mannerly man, neutrius generis (neither ecclesiastical nor secular) or generis utriusque, an ecclesiastical-secular hermaphrodite.

50

72

5

10

15

The Priest.

73

One sits in state with all possible perquisites and then prepares a work of art to be delivered on Sunday, and which we admire.― But this is of course a poetic relationship. And that is in fact what it is; we have changed listening to the sermon into enjoyment. To preach is: with oneself fighting against life’s hardships (and especially against those of which one speaks), to find occasion and to have a desire to speak encouragingly and instructively etc. to others. But the main thing is the existence, from which one goes forth to preach and to which one returns from preaching.

25

30

An Inconsistency of Luther’s. In his sermon on the gospel for the 1st Sunday in Advent, right at the beginning, Luther says that it is part and parcel of 16 neutrius generis] Latin, neuter. 17 generis utriusque] Latin, two-gendered.

74

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 74–77

51 5

75

10

15

20

76 25

•

1850

every proper gospel to proclaim first faith and then works, and every gospel in which this is the case is a proper gospel. But what, then, will it mean to appeal to scripture as the only norm? Luther here has himself made a norm, according to which he determines what is a proper gospel.

Appointment to Priesthood. This alone would be entirely different from what is now customary and provide a satire on the current way of calling clergymen―namely, as Wesley (See Joh. Wesleys Leben, etc., translated from English, published by Krumacher, Hamburg, 1841, pt. II, p. 203), called for a threefold test: (1) their theological competence, (2) their gifts of speech, (3) their reasons for believing themselves to be called by God to preach. The last is never asked about nowadays. It has all become as secular and profane as possible, a question of a living, for which one qualifies by taking 3 examinations. Regarding No. 3, successfully bringing others to conversion qualified as proof of the call. If the applicant passed, he was accepted first for a shorter trial period and later for a 4-year probation.

Wesley puts it well when he commends the Methodist hymns when compared with others: It is not that miserable doggerel, but songs more likely to make a Christian out of a critic than a critic out of a Christian.

77

What I Have Wanted and Want.

30

I have never in the remotest manner suggested or attempted to extend the cause in the pietistic direction, to pietistic strictness and the like. No, but what I want is truth in our talk and above all in our preaching, and not, as now, almost pure untruth respecting the

52

47

48

1

a

to spare themselves.

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 77–79

•

1850

existential so that not only is what is higher abolished but the lower even placed in its stead; the prototypes are misused, nothing is made present, and possibility and actuality and their existential relations, etc., etc., are dealt with quite wrongly. Just a quite simple example. If someone wants to spare himself and dare not witness either for the truth or against untruth; that’s all right, even here I do not coerce him. But he cannot be allowed to turn things around so that excusing himself also becomes laudable wisdom, and daring becomes mere fantasy and foolishness.― And so it is everywhere. Why was I sacrificed to Denmark? Was it because the rabble was able to do it by itself? No, it was because those who should have dared what I did not only spared themselves but even turned things around so that it became laudable wisdom,a what I did became foolishness This is the kind of untruth I want to have done with both in our talk and our preaching: that almost everywhere where the Christian thing to do would be to make a little admission concerning oneself, peop. have even managed to make this into a virtue that is honored and celebrated.

5

10

15

20

A Methodist, Walsh, a former Catholic, exceptionally gifted but whose frail body could not sustain his spirit and spiritual exertions, said of himself, [“]The sword is too sharp for the sheath.[”]

78

High-Ranking Clergy

79

If we are to have high-ranking clergy, then in Christian consistency such a clergyman, the more distinguished he becomes, the more emphatically must he express and emphasize heterogeneity with regard to worldliness, e.g., through asceticism and the like, so that his distinction, high rank, etc., merely prove to be there in order for him to guide and lead.

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 80–81

•

1850

49

53

80

5

10

15

20

The Difference between the Profane and the Faithful Views of Xt’s Life. This difference permeates everything, also every outward fact of Xt’s life. E.g., people meet him with jubilation―yes, that is how the faithful view it; but the profane view, which sees in Xt a fanatic and fantast, edits the same fact somewhat differently: a disorderly mob, a throng. Thus it is in every situation. Just take ordinary hum. situations. When it is the recognized king―then the official newspaper says: the people greeted him with jubilation; the opposition call it a disorderly mob. If it is one of those irrelevant notables who have no official status that draws just as large a crowd, then it is called a disorderly mob. The outward fact remains in a sense unchanged in the different situations (that there was a large number of peop.), yet there is something utterly different, because the way it is viewed is rlly decided by who the reporter takes the main person to be. The same conduct in one and the same pers., but in whom the one reporter sees the extraordinary, the other a dreamer, cheat, and the like, will in the one account perhaps be: this noble sublimity, this worthy person―and in the other account: this affected, far-fetched plebianism, etc., etc.

81

Very Good!

30

Wesley had been unmarried for a long time and had also written a book about the unmarried state. As an older man he wanted to get married. He felt the incongruity himself as regards the earlier situation. “For the sake of appearances he called in or sought the advice of some religious friends so that they might encourage him to follow his inclination.” (See Wesleys Leben, translated from English, published by Krumacher, Hamburg, 1841, pt. II, p. 295). That, you see, is why we have friends. It is what I have always said.

35

[a]

The difference between the profane and the faithful views of Xt’s Life.

1

50

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 82–83

•

1850

Dialectic. By “motion” one means unrest, hubbub, etc., and yet see how, carried to its utmost logical conclusion, “motion” is like a magic spell that puts everything at rest in the external sense. In the best sense, “motion” is the movement of the ideal―and this separates peop. absolutely, makes them single individuals, and every single individual introspective, so that he has enough to do with himself―but then of course there will be not the slightest hubbub, etc.

54

82

5

10

The Ideal. … But this is to be untrue, when someone, having becoming aware of the ideal, dares be neither the one thing nor the other, finally hardly daring to exist. And when you come to think of it, there is a kind of vanity in fancying oneself capable in some degree of being somewhere near the ideal. No, full of cheer, like a child, confidently, one scurries as best one can, sometimes with humor in one’s delight, sometimes in fear and trembling, grieving at the thought of how worthless one is―but then cheerful again, and above all indescribably happy at least to understand the ideal, happy that to let the ideal exceed oneself in this way, thus to one’s own annihilation. Or is it not proper love properly to feel that one is a worthless fellow, and if someone were to say, [“]No, then I dare not fall in love[”]―in that case he is sick and about to become worthless in a pitiful sense. No, this is precisely why I feel a desire to be in love, in order properly to feel what a worthless fellow I am and in order properly to feel what a power love is.

83

15

20

25

* * Giødvad told me yesterday that most likely there were one or two theology graduates whom I had scared off from becoming priests through making the presentation so ideal. I answered that for someone like that it would be the same with everything; if I presented ideally what it is to be a hum. being, I could ultimately scare him off from being a hum. being; so it could end in suicide. Then I showed him that such sickness lay in egotistically loving

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 83–84

•

1850

51

oneself, instead of loving the ideal and hating oneself, loving the ideal that makes one a worthless fellow―and then always cheerful and happy again over existing. 55

5

84

10

15

20

25

30

35

A Passage in Anti-Climacus (Practice in Christianity, No. 2) Regarding the Angels’ Hymn of Praise at Xt’s Birth. Anti-Cl. says that when Xt decides to become the world’s savior, it is as though a sigh went through all humanity: Why do you do this, you make us all unhappy―because to be truly Xn is indeed the greatest human suffering, because Xt, as the absolute, explodes all the relativity in which we humans live―in order to make us spirit. But to become spirit one must go through crises of a kind that humanly speaking make us as unhappy as possible. Now, to this it might be objected that, on the contrary, at Xt’s birth the angels’ songs of exultation were heard. The reply to that has to be that it is the angels who sing. Furthermore, when one simply takes the word “savior” and lets peop. decide for themselves what is meant by it; yes, no wonder peop., too, exult spontaneously. But this is taking Xnty in vain. In defining more explicitly what it means to be savior, God’s understanding of it emerges, and Xt carries that out absolutely. So here it is again; it is, in hum. terms, the greatest suffering for a hum. being to become a Xn, to be saved in that sense. Luther rightly says in the sermon on the gospel for Christmas Day that there is nothing else to say about Xt other than that he is “a great joy”―but, yes, but “for utterly crushed consciences”― otherwise not. Otherwise he is taken in vain. Look! the part about a great joy comes so quickly―the part about “utterly crushed consciences” is so enormously resistant. But all is taken in vain. The word “savior” is picked up, bandied about, and what is understood by it is something quite other than Xnty. The words “a great joy” are picked up―and then off and away; one wants nothing to do with a more precise understanding of it. It is this shamefully frivolous employment of what is Xn that has abolished Xnty under the guise of preserving it; for the word

[a]

Anti-Climacus.

1

52

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 84–85

•

1850

is, “After all, we say the same thing, we call Xt a savior, say his birth is a great joy”―Ah, fiddlesticks, how can that help if what you understand is something else and you omit the more precise understanding in which the words first become true in a Xn sense.

The Proclamation of Christianity for a Congregation―and My Proclamation, Particularly through the Pseudonyms. Denmark is such a little country that there can scarcely be a question of anyone except priests undertaking to preach Xnty. By having a congregation, these are only all too well versed in having to lower prices and take a consideration, or many considerations, into account. Insofar as priests publish their sermons in print, this again is essentially in the key in which they are accustomed to delivering them to the congregation. The result is apt to be that Xnty’s ideal price is simply not quoted. But it must not be like that; it must be quoted. But this preaching is not for the congregation but rather for priests, or like a spiritual voice, which doesn’t require this price to be the everyday one but that the daily price should not be purely indolent habit. This is to indicate the corrective. A corrective is not an attempt to displace an established order and to make itself into an established order, but, if possible, to inspire, to deepen. If someone said: yes, you can very well talk, after all it is you who has wanted to take it upon yourself to deliver the corrective and it is we others who have to put up with being judged, I would answer: (1) I have judged no one; (2) if there is anyone else who will undertake to do it, I will gladly step aside; (3) the corrective judges me equally much; (4) it is a huge responsibility to have to quote the ideal price, sheer spiritual struggle; (5) one exposes oneself to many an unpleasantness from people. So I do not believe, after all, that I have had the easiest task.

56 5

85

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 86–87 86

57 5

•

1850

A Remark by Anti-Climacus (in Practice on Xnty, No. 3) and My Preface to the Book. He says: If I should sink under the weight of the criterion, etc.: my situation expresses that I have sunk, that the ideal is mainly to be used for humbling in order to bring “grace” to bear and not to startle one into impatient striving.

87

The Single Individual―Association.

10

To be the single individual is a higher form of existence than: Let some of us keep together. This is especially Xnty’s view, and, again, from a Christian point of view it is particularly true that, if in a given generation there is no individual capable of greatness, then it cannot be accomplished in that generation, for it is impossible to accomplish through association. But this “Let us form a group” makes life easier and more commodious etc. If that is what someone chooses, I have no objection to that but certainly to the mendacity that, here too, has reversed the order and turned being the single individual into daydreaming, untruth etc. but has made association (the easier life) into the truth and into what is the highest. It is disgusting to hear or read the conceit with which every registered student, graduate, storekeeper, etc. talks disrespectfully of being the single individual as something inferior and imperfect. And it is no less disgusting to see how those who ought to know better abjectly and effeminately support this mendacious inversion. But truth I will have. I will not strain one single person’s life more than he has hitherto been accustomed to―but he is to be honest: he must say that the easy life is what is highest.

15

20

25

30

53 [a]

Anti-Climacus.

1

54 1

[a]

Anti-Climacus

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 88–89

•

1850

Regarding the Impression That Will Be Made by the Latest Book by Anti-Climacus (Practice in Xnty). Today I talked with Tryde. He opined to me that it was too harsh to say that Xnty had been abolished through “observation.” He had, for his own part, laid stress on the subjective, and this was also the case with all the more competent preachers. Oh, my God, how much I have had to endure about being purely subjective, not objective etc.―and now the same peop. plead that they too put the stress on the subjective. Moreover, the point is that, in defining the concept of preaching, they never get further than the discourse, the talking, taking no account at all of existence. A public official, shackled in 17 ways to finitude and objectivity―however subjective he makes his talk, avails nothing. A nobody who preaches for free on the street―be his reflections ever so objective―will be nevertheless a subjective and vivifying person; and one who is ever so subjective, but trapped by his position and the like in all possible worldly considerations to do with the office and the like, his preaching will remain essentially nothing but observation, for one can easily see that he has made it impossible for himself to realize, even moderately, what he is preaching about. But I must make one observation about Tryde, something complimentary, that he did not deny that he had been inclined to be objective. No doubt he thinks that the whole passage about the sermon having become observations is a dig at him. He said that he could have liked to say that Søren Kierkegaard was no more able than he to make it subjective, and that he had inspected my discourses to satisfy himself that this was so. The Right Reverend gentleman overlooked the fact that there will always be that big difference that he is a public official, occupying a very large living―and that I have done it for free, have been nothing, have exposed myself to persecution by the rabble, lived on the street, all of them specifications of subjectivity.

88

58

10

15

20

25

30

35

Prayer―Faith. It is an excellent saying that I read in Scriver, which he attributes to another author without saying who:

89

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 89–92

•

1850

55

Prayer is a daughter of faith, but the daughter must support the mother.

59

90 5

10

15

91

20

25

The Miracle. That Christ makes little into much, as with the feeding of the 5000, is usually put down as a miracle. But Xt also works a miracle inversely, making something, much, little (everything that wants to be something) into infinitely nothing in humility. One might think that this miracle is much easier, but it is not so. Every qualitative change, every infinite change in quality, is rlly a miracle. One human being can perhaps point out the other’s weakness, but showing it to be infinitely nothing, that only the divine can do, and the human being cannot even by himself humble himself in this way.

Experiment. Mynster―Luther To understand what I mean by when I say that the established order must make a small admission, let us make this experiment. Let Mynster, one Sunday, instead of holding a sermon himself, take one of Luther’s, particularly one that is characteristic of Luther, and read it aloud―and the whole thing will sound like a satire on Mynster, unless he is quick to make a small admission concerning himself. Or is Luther’s preaching also perhaps an exaggeration; in that case we have to that extent become Lutherans! Yes, eulogize Luther, I dare say one can do that―but read Luther aloud!

[a]

Mynster―Luther

30

92

A Proposal Aimed at Improving the Presentation of Sermons. They have skimped as much as possible in getting God’s word rlly heard. A little snippet is read aloud―but the sermon drops it almost altogether.

[a] A Proposal Aimed at Improving the Presentation of Sermons.

1

56

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 92–93

•

1850

My proposal is then: (1) One must see to it that the whole N.T. (with the possible exception of Revelation) is read aloud during every Church year. (2) There are to be readings aloud of sermons by the orthodox teachers of the Church from the different ages. And this is not to be done so as to allow a possible selection to be made (in which one excludes what is not desired), but so that, when the Sunday is for reading instead of preaching, the reading corresponds to the gospel or the epistle for the day as to whether it is the morning service or vespers. Nor may the congregation know in advance on which day the priest is not to preach but will read aloud. This must be monitored in every possible way. Every honest pers. must confess that even the most honest quite quickly delight in their own method if not subjected to a completely different light. Have Martensen read one of Luther’s sermons aloud, not to mention one in which Luther talks about speculation―then no one will need to write against Martensen. And of course, when the priest has finished reading the sermon, he shall not be allowed to add one word. Very likely that would be especially insisted upon under the pretense of ensuring that the sermon he had read was properly understood. No, thank you, we are well enough acquainted with the theologians’ concern with ensuring the proper understanding. A sermon that Luther delivered to a congregation can be well understood. And the priest is not to be allowed to add one word more.

1

[a]

Anti-Climacus and My Preface.

Anti-Climacus’s Attack and My Preface to the Book. To my mind it is easy to see that, if not through talent then existentially, I am a few points ahead of those who preach Xnty hereabouts. Now this is something I could have used, made myself into the standard and then knocked them down. I have not done that; I have used a pseudonym and let him take the matter to such a height that the judgment falls upon me as well. What could have been more lenient? But then, on the other hand, the pseudonym cannot exempt anyone, e.g. Bishop Mynster. For one thing, in the middle of an investigation that is

60 5

10

15

20

25

93 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 93–96

•

1850

10

maintained at such an ideal level that it could just as well be set in Germany as here, a pseudonym cannot suddenly mention a specific name like Mynster; for another thing, it is also untrue to exempt him when the standard is to be so ideal that I myself bow beneath it. Were I to speak in my own name, I would not say what Anti-Cl. says: that he has not read or heard a sermon that was in the strictest sense Christian; speaking in my own name I would have exempted Mynster. But when I let the pseudonym judge myself, too (as I have expressed in the Preface), then no one is to be exempted.

94

Faith.

61 5

If you do not have faith, then at least believe that you will indeed acquire it―and then you do have faith after all. 15

95

20

25

96 30

The Gospel about the Paralytic. Understood spiritually this is how it is with the person who thinks he himself should do the directing, must make the calculations himself etc.―alas, through many years he perhaps drags himself along, tormented by all these calculations, drags himself like a paralytic: until faith comes and he hears the words: Stand up and walk. Take up your bed and walk, this is the expression for how strong he has now become, that what previously carried him he now carries, so little does he have need of support of that kind.

About Myself. What, among other things, I must look on as my life’s task is to give expression to there being enthusiasm on the other side of understanding.

57

58

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 96–98

•

1850

But what happens to me in the contemporary situation? Every time I take one of these intense actions (e.g., when with just a single word I threw myself against the rabble), the contemporary understanding cries that very moment: he is mad. Then a year passes, two, three; the contemporary understanding sees that it can be done, it sees that I have even developed and the cause has been furthered; it begins to have the courage to fall in with the cause―something now almost comes of it, and the contemporary understanding says: yes, there was a higher good sense. There it stays. When contemporary good sense has then come to accept that, after all, I am rlly good sense―then follows a new intense action, and contemporary good sense cries out at that very moment: no, now it is obvious that he is mad―until some time has passed and good sense begins to make another offer― and then intense action follows again. Here one sees on a small scale what can help in observing history. Good sense sticks purely to the outcome, explains faith and enthusiasm retrospectively as a higher good sense and prudence. Like Goethe, people think that they are also friends of revolutions when these are justified, e.g., Xt’s coming, Luther. Yes, thanks, but no thanks: with help of the result, Goethe in fact sees something quite different―he sees, to stay with the point I just made (and not, like Goethe, profanely dragging Xt into a larger group that includes other reformers―as Goethe does, for the words I cite are Goethe’s own) the fruit of rational calculation in what was in fact an act of faith, something that Goethe would never have embraced at the time, any more than Erasmus Rotterdam did.

About Myself.

62

10

15

20

25

97

I can with a certain emphasis say of myself that I have been an author with all my might―and with all my fortune, since it has not made me rich.

When Christ drove out those who were bargaining in the forecourt, he made a whip out of rope. This whip he swung with authority. The whip of satire is always without authority.

98

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 99–101

•

1850

63

99

5

10

100

15

20

25

101

Older Tactics―My Tactics. The method in use nowadays is to leave out the passages in the N.T. that put a strain on existence. They are suppressed―and we then arrange easier and more reasonable conditions for ourselves. Perhaps we think that if we do not mention these passages, then neither does God know that they are in the N.T. I think it is nevertheless better to include them, to admit that these provisions are to be found in the N.T.―and then make a confession of our own weakness.

Christ’s Abasement. Pascal says somewhere (in his Pensées XIV, Jesus Xt) “that it is ridiculous to be scandalized by Xt’s abasement, just as if this abasement were of the same kind as the elevation he shows.” It might rather be said that it would rlly be comical or ridiculous if Xt had come in earthly elevation and splendor, because the loftiness he was supposed to express was the very opposite of that. Existential transparency requires being what one teaches. It would be comical if someone who was to compete in a footrace were to come in a coat and cloak, with umbrella and the like―in short, like someone who was about to travel in a carriage and wanted to be well wrapped up. And that is how earthly elevation would have continually embarrassed and parodied Xt’s true elevation. Ideally the medium that corresponds most closely to being the ideal in the sense of truth is exactly to be literally nothing.

Established Christendom. Pascal says somewhere that it is dangerous to know God and not know one’s own wretchedness. But isn’t this rlly what we deserve, this danger we have brought about in established Christendom through the frivolous

59

60

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 101–103

•

1850

way in which all are indiscriminately allowed to become Xns, are provided with a notion of God, in particular of his love―but have not at all been made introspective so that we could recognize our own wretchedness[?] Xnty has―by being taken in vain―pampered peop. and demoralized them.

Pascal says (in his Pensées, XXIX moral thoughts 24): only a few peop. speak humbly about humility, few chastely about chastity, few doubtfully about doubt―in us there are only lies, duplicity, contradiction. This expresses what I argue in a still higher relation―reduplication. With Pascal, in fact, it still seems almost aesthetic; I press it further in the direction of existence. Incidentally, it is comical to think of the words “few speak doubtfully about doubt” in reference to a time now recently past―when doubt was taught. Martensen was just as dogmatically rigid when he lectured on de omnibus dubitandum as when he lectured on a dogma.

1

[a]

Anti-Climacus.

A Passage in Anti-Climacus’s Practice in Christianity No. 3. He says that Xnty cannot be an object for “observations.” To this it could be objected that indeed also in the old days “meditations” was a more common title. The answer to that must be: it especially depends on who the meditator is―if, e.g., he is a witness to the truth who suffers for Xnty, or if he is at any rate someone who existentially expresses the heterogeneity of Xnty with the world, yes, why not? But the danger comes when the auctor, the meditator, is a public official and it becomes more and more purely and simply, in a secular way, an official position for proclaiming Xnty. Anti-Climacus ought therefore have said, more completely: Xnty cannot become the object of observations, particularly the observations of public officials whose entire existence is otherwise 19 de omnibus dubitandum [est]] Latin, everything is to be doubted. (See also explanatory note.) 31 auctor] Latin, source, origin, author.

64

102 10

15

20

103

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 103–105

65

104

15

105

25

30

35

•

1850

61

heterogeneous with Christianity, whereas, as mentioned, it is a rather different matter when the one who meditates, the auctor, is someone whose life expresses that he very well understands that Xnty rlly cannot become an object for observations. Observations by someone whose life expresses that he converts the observations into existence is one thing; observations by someone who leaves his existing altogether on the outside―yes, even has it in quite opposite categories―is something else.

Pascal. He makes a good category here. He says (in Pensées, XXXI, Miscellaneous Thoughts, 5) that from the literal agreement of many on one matter, a huge conclusion, regarding an ideal agreement, is drawn. But this does not make it absolutely convincing that one can indeed wager on this assertion. This distinction: to convince absolutely―and to wager on something.

A Proposal toward a New Form of Preaching. If (admitting that it is out of human frailty, accommodating ourselves according to this: what good does it do to force the requirement so high that no one at all accepts Xnty, a view that is directly contrary to Xntyb), we then retain the milder preaching of Xnty, though, note well, in such a way that the ideal is constantly brought to mind (if for no other reason than to revive the milder form)―then I also think that an annual Day of Penitence and Prayer should be introduced, when one is made aware of the fact that we allow ourselves to make Xnty into something far milder than it actually is. The main thing is always that we be made conscious of where we are, that we do not brazenly make a fool out of God through having a Holy Scripture, leaving out whatever we wish to, and then, in the end, thinking that it just doesn’t exist.

[a]

A Proposal toward a New Form of Preaching

1

b

since it is a way of serving Xnty by means of human whimpering and worldly prudence.

5

62

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 106–109

•

1850

Slyness Once More. And so when I do what basically everyone who calls himself Xn is obligated by duty to God to do: drawing attention to where we are―people then turn the matter around so that they take it upon themselves to attack me. Accordingly, they exempt themselves from doing what should rlly be done―and then make my doing it into a crime, and the charge against me will presumably be in the name of Xnty. Excellent!

66

106

5

10

God’s Sublimity. He gives hum. beings a holy book containing his will but no middle terms with regard to the ideal―and then he leaves it to each one how to understand it. He does not let us hear from him, keeps perfectly quiet, testing the single individual, for indeed, it really seems to be left completely up to us how we will understand scripture. It goes without saying―judgment is coming.

What I Want My contention is that the whole of the present-day official preaching of Xnty is a conspiracy against Holy Scripture; we suppress what does not suit us. I will not be a party to that. I will include the requirement and then make an admission.

Sins of Omission In the book by F. W. Newmann, Die Seele ihr Leiden und ihr Sehnen, Leipzig, 1850, I find in a passage in the section on sin that sins of omission are the most dangerous of all, and they are precisely the ones at which the devout wince most.

107

15

108

25

109

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 109–110

•

1850

67

This is quite correct and reminds me of Anti-Climacus’s Sickness unto Death.

110

The Milder Xnty and How the Transition Is Made to Xnty in a Stricter Sense.

5

10

15

15

20

25

30

35

40

Let me imagine a very superior person in relation to a child or a young girl. He takes it on himself to do for the child or the young girl what this youngster is him- or herself unable to do and requires only this one thing: that the young person worries about absolutely nothing, that he or she is just happy and contented in his or her innocent way. Should the child or the young girl want to go and chatter nonsense about whether he or she could not at least do something to help, the superior person would frown at this and say: Just leave it all to me, all I ask is that you simply be happy and satisfied and let me take care of it. Should the child or the young girl ask at least to be allowed to sit the whole day and do nothing but thank him, this would also displease him; he would say: That is not what I want―I only want to make you happy. This is roughly how it is in the mild Xnty, which comes from being brought up in Xnty from childhood. The individual allows Xt to have done everything, which indeed is true unconditionally for all true Xnty, but the individual occupies himself in such a childlike way with the rest of life’s content, relying on Xt to take care of this matter of salvation and confident that all he himself has to do is be happy. The individual becomes not even reflective enough to be disturbed by the thought that this security and unconcern might be an ungodly flippancy. To that extent neither do this security and unconcern ever become a task for the individual, as though something to fight for, for in that case it becomes an enormous task―out of misplaced self-concern and the like―to win this security and unconcern. But here there is no mention at all in this entire context[b] of the imitation of Xt. This is where the more rigorous Xnty begins. It is of course just as certain that in respect to a person’s salvation Xt is everything, and that the hum. being himself is then capable of nothing; but regardless of that, or for that very reason, it is as though Xt says to the single individual: If you want to thank me, then become my imitator.

63

[a]

Although this kind of Xnty in childhood is also a rarity.

[b]

of the milder Xnty.

1

64

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 110–112

•

1850

Being born again then becomes something in earnest. Then come also all the collisions with the environing world, all the suffering. And even if imitation were not required, the Xn who really becomes turned inward, and consequently a Xn in a more rigorous sense, would still collide. For he is living now in this world, and if he does not want to adapt his life to this world―and that he cannot want to do―then he must eo ipso collide.

68

5

10

Marriage. If marriage were really a duty―as the moralists now pontificate―how arbitrary, then, to forbid the woman to propose to the man just as well as the man proposes to the woman. Failing to fulfill an obligation of course incurs guilt. A girl is dying unmarried―but she says in her defense: No one proposed to me. Is that a defense, if marriage were actually a duty[?] What nonsense: duty as the major premise, but as the minor premise, habits of propriety do not permit the woman herself to propose. How on earth can habits of propriety excuse me for not fulfilling a duty? If it is duty, then the habits must be changed. Ah, but people still harbor an anxiety from a remote past about the strenuous life that has an eye on the unmarried state. Now to secure themselves they even go to the length of making marriage a duty. We then forget in our distraction that if this is how it is, then the aesthetic or traditional notion that the woman cannot herself propose no longer applies.

In Richard Rothe’s Ethics I find this reason given, among others, for Xt’s not being married: that he could find “keine ebenbürtige Person.” Excellent!

8 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact. 31 keine ebenbürtige Person] German, no person who was his equal.

111

15

20

25

112

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 113–115 113

5

15

•

1850

Joh. Climacus―Anti-Climacus

65

[a]

Joh. Climacus―Anti-Climacus.

1

Just as Joh. Cl. kept the matter dialectically at a point where no one could see directly whether it was an attack on Xnty or a defense, but that it depended on how things were with the reader, what he got out of the book, so has Anti-Cl. brought the matter to the point where no one can see directly whether it is mainly radical or mainly conservative, whether it is an attack on an established order or precisely a defense.

10

114

15

A Sly Twist That May Be Given to My Cause. They want to make it look as though I wanted to introduce pietism, petty and pusillanimous renunciation with respect to indifferent things. No, thanks, of that I have never given the remotest indication. What I want is to spur people on toward becoming ethical characters, witnesses for truth, willing to suffer for truth and willing to renounce worldly wisdom.

20

115

25

30

About Myself. There is in my being something double. I am―I think I can risk saying it―in possession of eminent worldly wisdom and understanding, alas, and I am a child of our time insofar as I am not disinclined to want to find satisfaction in being the most worldly wise. So I see what is the wisest course in the given case. But further inside me there is a passion, a mournful sorrow that dwells on the great examples who show how truth must suffer―and I cannot persuade myself to act wisely―I do just the opposite. That, no doubt, is why my actions are so intense, but also for me so enormously strenuous, also with regard to the fact that I

[a]

A sly twist that may be given to my cause.

5

66

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 115–118

•

1850

so much bear the responsibility, because I did see so clearly what the wisest course was. It is a question of actions in faith, but at every weak moment these are indeed exposed to being pursued by spiritual temptation.

5

70

Worldly Wisdom. Worldly wisdom, after all, is rlly the only thing that is given heed to and respected in the world. When, for some time now, I had held back from publishing books, and in the meantime let Nielsen and Stilling do so―and then saw that, little by little, the opinion had formed that I was shrewd (God knows how unfair it was to me, understanding the matter quite differently as I did), that I let the others rake the chestnuts from the fire (I who have after all exposed myself to quite other dangers by hurling myself against the rabble)―then my status grew. When I have now, by publishing Practice in Xnty, again acted decisively, contemporary wisdom becomes doubtful, looks at me a little uncertainly, presumably until a few years have passed and with the help of the outcome dares begin having faith also in the correctness of this latter action.

116

10

15

20

Rousseau has an excellent observation on white lies (Reveries d’un promeneur solitaire, in Walk 4―quoted from Richard Rothe, Ethik, III, p. 569n): Cette question est très decidée, je le sais bien; negativement dans les livres, ou la plus austere morale ne coute rien a l’auteur; affirmativement dans la societé, ou la morale des livres passe pour un bavardage impossible a pratiquer. But the same also holds true of all the preaching of Xnty. We have one language in the churches―it disturbs neither the speakers nor the listeners; our conduct in life is different.

117

Human Slyness Again Regarding What Is Xn.

118

Actually to renounce all this life, to put everything solely in a hereafter, so that here on this side one has nothing but the effort 27 Cette question . . . dans les livres, ou [properly, “où”] la plus austere morale . . . dans la societé, ou [properly, “où”] la morale des livres . . . pratiquer] French, This question is very much decided, I know it well; negatively in the books, where the more austere morality costs the author nothing; affirmatively in society, where the morality of books is just a babbling impossible to put into practice.

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 118–120

5

71

10

15

119

20

25

•

1850

and the work and the sufferings―this is the most strenuous existence. Well, if perhaps it seems too difficult for a person, well, one can see to it, with the help of grace, by praying for oneself, that one gets off more easily. But what have hum. beings come up with? They have cheekily invented the idea that investing everything in the hereafter in this way is a very imperfect existencea―the perfect existence is the easier existence, or the easier is also the perfect. But look, this is impudent rebellion against what is Christian― and here is where there must be an intervention. The second lie is the dangerous one, and I believe no hound can trace its whereabouts more surely than my instinct, which tells me where this lie is. This lie is, namely, to take all Luther’s efforts in vain: it is Luther’s spirituality transformed into shameless secularism.

The Theater―The Church. Richard Rothe (Anfänge der christliche Kirke) lets the church merge into the state with the quite consistent result that (as in paganism) the stage will become divine service. In a peculiar, satirical manner this has already been achieved: the priests are not much more than stage performers. Altogether, it would be extremely helpful if someone would really throw light on the difference between a priest, a poet, an actor. Xnty has demanded “witnesses,” so the distinction is sufficiently obvious, but the current concept of the priest has much in common with a fusion of poet and stage performer.

30

120

35

The Man―The Woman …And compared with the man, the woman always has essentially more of what nowadays is certainly calculated to cause a pers. trouble and make him unhappy in the world, but which in another sense is life’s origin: she has more heart.

67

a

is “to live abstractly”

1

68

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 121

•

1850 72

My Conversation with Bishop Mynster, 22 October 1850, after He Had Read Practice in Christianity.

1

5

10

15

20

25

[a]

It must be remembered that prior to the conversation with Paulli, the book had already been out for something close to 3 weeks; from the establishment’s side there was not even the slightest thing or the least sign of any action by the government, not the least mention in any newspaper suggesting government disapproval; finally, Mynster had held a Sunday sermon after the book had come out, and far from holding a polemic in that direction, he even polemicized strongly against naturalism (a position I, too, favor): “that unfortunately we know only too well what peop. today think about miracles.” All this, you see, and those words of Mynster’s “the next time I visit him,” made me feel it my duty to take the hint and to view it as a lucky chance that the opportunity was thus offered; for I did have to go up to Mynster, and it would otherwise have been difficult to find an occasion. b

30

to which I then replied: no, I see you have no time today, so I would just as soon go. And then when he said he did have time, I stuck to my guns and left him in bona caritate.

33 in bona caritate] Latin, on good terms (literally, “in good love”).

I had spoken the day before to Pauli, who told me the following: The Bishop is very angry, these are his words, the minute he came into the living room that first day he said: “The book has provoked me intensely; it makes profane sport of the holy.” And when Pauli most obligingly asked him if he might say so to me, since he would presumably speak to me, Mynster answered, “Yes, and he will no doubt come up to see me sometime and I will tell him myself.” Perhaps, who knows, these last words are Pauli’s invention simply to try to keep me if possible from going to the bishop. But in any case I understood the matter otherwise. When Mynster says things like “The next time he visits me, I shall tell him so myself,” he has in effect given the book a permit and me with it. My mind was made up immediately. I went to him the next morning. Familiar as I am with his virtuosity in adopting superior airs (recalling the scene I once had with him when, as I made my entrance, he said with all his superiority: Have you any special business?b and so forth) I began at once by saying “Today I do have business of sorts. Pastor Paulli told me yesterday that you intend as soon as you see me to reprimand me for my latest book. I would ask you to regard it as a fresh expression of the respect I have always shown to you that I come to see you immediately upon hearing of this.” This is to my mind a happy inspiration. It put the situation to rights; there could be none of the vehemence or superior sarcasm that I consider unworthy in this case. No, the roles were prepared as venerableness in his case, as piety in mine. He answered: “No, indeed I have no right to give a reprimand. It is as I have said to you before, I have nothing at all against each bird singing its own

121

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

73

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 121

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

74 40

song.” Then he added: [“]Indeed people can say what they like about me.[”] He said this mildly and with a smile. But the added remark made me fear a little sarcasm nonetheless, and I immediately sought to rescue the situation. I answered that this was not my intention, and I would beg him to say if I had in any way distressed him by publishing such a book. Then he replied: [“]Well, it’s true I do not believe it will do any good.[”] I was pleased with this answer; it was friendly and personal. Then we spoke quite as we usually do. He pointed out that in whatever direction one turned, there had to be observations. I did not go into this aspect further for fear of getting into the existential, but I explained what I meant with a few common examples. There was nothing of note in the rest of the conversation. Except that at the very beginning he said: [“]Yes, half of the book is an attack on Martensen, the other half on me.[”] And later we discussed the passage on “observations” that he thought was directed at him. Otherwise the conversation was just as usual. I explained this and that about my tactics, also informed him that we were now over the worst, at least as I saw it at that moment―but I was a young man and therefore dared say no more than that this was how it struck me at the moment: that now we were over the worst. As I say, the rest of the conversation went quite as usual. God be praised. Oh, what haven’t I genuinely suffered. I saw it as my duty to hold the matter so as to let the established order, by taking steps against me, decide how far it would force me to go further. Nothing has happened yet, all have kept silent― and Mynster talked in that way. Perhaps what Paulli said is true―but of course that was the first day. Maybe, having changed his mind about doing something officially, Mynster actually thought of it privately but later gave up the idea. Still, he may well let fall a little barb in a sermon.

•

1850

69

70

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 122–123

•

1850

Mynster’s Meaning for My Entire Work as an Author.

122

My task has been to apply a corrective with respect to the established order, not to introduce anything new that might subvert or displace it. Now if I had taken this in properly from the beginning and there had been no Mynster, then I would first have had to create someone or other to represent the established order and have properly stiffened him up. But since I did not understand my task that clearly at the start, this would easily have escaped me, and the whole thing would have turned out differently, perhaps failed. But then Mynster stood there as a representative of the established order. This was a free gift, and for me it went without saying that I venerated Mynster and did everything to express that fact. That is how I came into my proper position. Here, again, you see my good fortune! Purely personally, my veneration for Mynster was for me a necessity― and then only later did I see that this was of great importance for my task, and for my being able to adopt the right position.

5

The Woman Who Was a Sinner. The woman who was a sinner is present almost only as if in effigy, and yet she is the one it is about, the one who is present.

10

15

20

25

123 30

75

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 124–125

124

5

15 10

15

20

125

30

35

Information on Dogmatics by Martensen.

•

1850

71

[a]

Information on Dogmatics by Martensen.

1

Here Martensen tells us that this introspection is something sickly that discovers every little speck― and in his Moral Philosophy Martensen lectures profoundly (so that even Richard Rothe cites it in his Ethik) that rlly there are no αδιαϕορα, that this simply lies in our shortsightedness (presumably tending toward introspection): that everything, even the least significant thing, is duty. There you have an authentic Martensenism. With regard to anything existential he rushes forward to warn us―but teach, that he does with might and main. He himself teaches the unconditioned with might and main―but in Information on Dogmatics he stands as representative of what is everyday and trivial and says: there must after all be a limit. On one condition, or under the assumption that no one will in the least way try anything existentially―Martensen then establishes the unconditioned; but if just a feeble attempt is made in the existential direction―straightaway it is exaggeration.

About the Inserted Lines in Practice in Christianity No. 1. So someone is bound to take it into his head to read them comically, as a piece of jollity. That’s what Pauli said to me, assuming an exceedingly troubled mien. Pauli, along with the whole bunch, is a gossip who does not lack for unction when spreading such things, as though true and not something they themselves have come up with. Well, even if it were true, what then? Such misuse can occur with everything that really does any good and is something new. 6 αδιαϕορα] Greek, matters of indifference.

[a]

About the inserted lines in Practice in Christianity No. 1. [b]

Peter thought these lines were too expansive; it would have been enough to point to them. Good God, is that supposed to be so wise? No, indicating is not enough, I have seen that in Works of Love, where I did it. The thing is that peop. want to get away from such things as quickly as possible―and instead of admitting it, there has to be this wise criticism about it being too extensive. But

5

10

15

Entry NB21:122 is written in a latin hand. Kierkegaard referred to this in the table of contents entry NB21:2.

74 1

5

10

15

20

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 125–126

Peter always keeps company with inconsequence, on which he has also frittered away his life. And so it always goes, writing such big books as I write is no art, we can all do that, and much more: with a single hint and a wave of the hand to teach the author how it ought to have been. It is real fun for mediocrity that there simply is no standard in Denmark. All of No. 1 in Practice in Christianity is rlly a violent breaking out from Sunday solemnity (a breakout in the sense in which we talk of a prisoner breaking out)―and then Sunday solemnity comes and says with great self-importance: Yes, a little of that, it might have been good―that is to say, Sunday solemnity, that’s what is rlly good. One wants the old and then a pittance worth of the new.

•

1850

As to the use made of the comical and the humorous in these lines, I will note the following. Take an aesthetic situation. The person who first began introducing comic roles in tragedy, believe me, he had to face the music; people found it offensive, and people have still not understood how comedy can be used as an intensification of the tragic. But forget the aesthetic. But why is it extremely important now to use the comic in religious discourse? Quite simple. Our age is very far from childlike naïveté with regard to wanting to strive for conformity with the ideal. What Xnty has come to a standstill in is a worldly wisdom that says goodbye to ideals and makes striving for them into fanaticism. This worldly wisdom is what we live in. But this worldly wisdom is now best served by the religious being represented solely by Sunday solemnity. This Sunday solemnity has become the sermon’s category―and worldly wisdom fills out the rest of life, tolerating the Sunday solemnity because it is as far as possible from being actuality. And that, you see, is why the comedy is needed in order to show the incongruity between this Sunday solemnity and the everyday. And that is why the worldly wisdom that arranges the Sunday solemnity becomes angry over this use of comedy, but this worldly wisdom carefully takes on the guise of religiosity, so now that is in fact what it is: it is neither more nor less than Sunday solemnity.

Christian Order of Precedence

78

5

10

15

20

25

30

126

I The apostles with a specific quality.

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 126–127 79

5

II The witnesses whose existence expresses the teaching, and are marked by sufferings for “the sake of the Word.”

III

10

15

20

127

25

30

What could be called the teachers of religion, or what are now called priests, whose view of Xnty is essentially that it is a doctrine. These are in turn ranked among themselves according to true rendering of the doctrine (orthodoxy), a certain imaginative fervor with respect to conviction (this fervor is nevertheless aesthetic, for if it were existential it would have to be a case of “witnesses”); according to acuity and depth for reflecting on the doctrine; according to imagination, feeling, skill in presenting the doctrine eloquently and the like. But all these mutual differences are of course only aesthetic differences.

Mynster―and Me. With regard to the Mynsterian I just want to position a poet out in front to quote the price of the ideals. I will neither subvert the established order nor in the strictest sense enter the fray, which so easily leads to the conceit of wanting to be the ideal oneself, nor will I myself, a poor hum. being, demand more of others. But I nevertheless think we owe it to God, to the N.T., to the ideals, constantly to bear in mind that we are living in far more lenient categories than those rlly demanded in the N.T.

•

1850

75

76

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 127–129

•

1850

It is rlly more in this turn that I differ from Bishop Mynster; but truly, it is not out of romantic dreaming or pietism that I make it. Just as the life we lead in other respects is so prosaic that poets are needed who bring the ideals to mind, so is the ordinary preaching of Christianity so prosaic that poets at least are needed in order to quote the price of the ideals. The point is this: the preaching of Xnty should rlly be higher even than the poet―but consider, the customary preaching of Xnty is lower than the poet. In the strictest sense Xnty requires imitation; the poet is content with portraying the ideals; but the ordinary Xnty in Xndom is even further behind than the poet, contents itself with mediocrity, which is then deified into being Xnty.

80

5

10

15

… The established order, I know then, can be secure enough; it has an Atlas in Prof. Martensen, a man in atlas.

128

Atonement.

129

Christ’s death is indeed atonement; only through it is satisfaction made for sin. One might in a way ask, How can Christ then forgive sins while he is alive? It has to be explained as an anticipation. Besides, the matter presents itself somewhat differently when Xt forgives sins during his lifetime and when his death is the atonement. In the latter case God the Father is presented as the one who forgives and Xt as the one who makes satisfaction and in this way effects God’s willingness to forgive. By the way, I don’t recall just now any passage where Xt uses the form: I forgive you your sins. In the story of the paralytic he says that he will show that the Son of Man has been granted the power to forgive sins; therefore he says: Stand up, take your bed and walk―then both, that is, are qualifications 20 atlas] German, satin.

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 129–131 81

5

130

10

15

20

25

131

35

82

•

1850

77

of the divine, but he doesn’t then say: I forgive you. To the woman who sins he says: Her many sins are forgiven―but not: I forgive you your many sins, and he even gives a reason for their being forgiven, because she loved much. To the woman taken in open adultery he says: Go and sin no more.

Church―State. Xnty―The World. Through many, many generations there has been a continual knocking off of the price of Xnty, making it milder and milder, more and more subdued, until finally it is not Xnty. No wonder, then, that people think that Xnty must ultimately coincide with the world. Never in all eternity can Xnty coincide with the world, any more than the single individual’s flesh and blood (natural attributes, worldliness, and the like) will ever as a matter of course coincide with Christianity, with the individual perhaps being born with self-renunciationa instead of with flesh and blood: so little will Xnty and the world ever coincide. This everlasting nonsense about Xnty more and more permeating the world is a quid pro quo, a talking backward, for the truth of the matter is that the world is more and more grinding off and gnawing away what is Christian from Xnty.

The Refined Immorality of the Age. There is no one who will take a risk, no one who will make any sacrifice, no one takes on anything strenuous―well, let that be. But it has gone further. Even the most exalted: a reformer, they have affected the very title. Let’s a few of us get together about reforming, doing it so very gingerly that there will 25 quid pro quo] Latin, something for something, or in return.

a

(which in turn, for another reason, would be rubbish, since self-denial assumes something to struggle against, that is, flesh and blood)

1

78

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 131–132

•

1850

be absolutely no danger, no sacrifice to make, but each one of us will become a reformer in name. Everything is taken in vain. The government’s orders and medals are so common that only not having an order is conspicuous. And so, too, with all other distinctions. To be a reformer, eager for reform, is a distinction everyone wears in his buttonhole, almost like a popinjay ribbon at the popinjay shooting―and nor is it more inconveniencing than that to be a reformer in that way. Communism cries out that ownership is theft― yes, to own the title of reformer in that way is truly theft.

The World Movement.

1

[a]

obviously not a new ideal, but a new definition of the relation to the old ideal, a new understanding of the old ideal.

That a movement has taken place in the world can be seen from the fact that it is necessary to redefine the hum. being’s relationship to the ideal; at this moment the hum. race has lost its compass. Luther’s definition is taken in vain; reason has blocked off communication with the ideal, but if Luther’s definition is to come again, it must be modified. All progress toward the ideal is now a regress (which I have pointed out elsewhere). Therefore I believe we shall come to characterize ourselves as Christ-lovers, because to be Christian has become too great a task. Childlikeness did not observe what an infinite requirement is involved in being a Xn, so it was able to believe in its possibility; nowadays it will appear that the requirement for being Xn is so enormous that human nature is to be satisfied with a relationship to it, a striving toward it. Really, the sequence was this: first, the universally human; then the poet with the ideals; then the religious, which required that the ideal be realized in actuality. But now a poetic form will be needed in presenting the religious domain itself. This is a step forward compared to the way things are now, when insignificance and mediocrity have rlly taken the

5

10

132

20

25

30

35

83 40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 132–135

5

10

133

15

20

134 25

place of the religious, so that the poet in the more ordinary sense is even higher than the religious. In any case, it is certain that something poetic must be introduced into the religious domain simply to get hold of, to come to grips with, any existential ideals once again. This will be the stopping point. Then it will become apparent whether a new generation will acquire the strength to make an attempt existentially to bring the ideals once again into actuality.

Curiosity. The other day Sibbern told me that someone had read the inserted lines in No. 1 of Practice in Christianity as purely comic―and thought that the clergy ought to intervene, so grave was the matter. Sibbern couldn’t help laughing when he told me this. Truly it would be a splendid satire on the present-day clergy, however far I am from wanting such troubles.

.… Basically, everyone knows I am right―including Bishop Mynster. That I am not acknowledged to be right we all know―myself included.

84

135

30

Strictness―Mildness. In his sermon on the gospel “the good shepherd,” Luther doesn’t bring it properly together. He speaks, and in the strongest terms, of Xt taking to himself the contrite etc., all quite true.

•

1850

79

80

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 135–136

•

1850

But then look, when it says in the same sermon that immediately on becoming Xn there is straightaway persecution for the sake of the Word, that this is a natural consequence of the gospel, so that the Word is more dear to a person than his neck. Furthermore, that at times Xt even leaves his own in the lurch, a new suffering in addition to the persecution of the world and inner anxiety. Moreover, that the suffering is so great and frightful that it is truly a question of not being offended by Xt. But, good God, is this doctrine so mild, then[?] Oh, no this is a half-truth that goes the rounds―well not with Luther himself, for he knows how to hold back―but as it is commonly preached. The matter is plain. If I were spirit I would then be so strong that I would have just one concern―for my sin and my soul’s salvation. That being so, then Xnty is the greatest possible mildness, for what is more mild than this, that in this respect I have nothing to be concerned about, that satisfaction has been given. But unfortunately I am not pure spirit, or I am not spirit, I am flesh and blood, a weak hum. being―and Xnty is then an enormous strictness. For Xnty will not apply its mildness without further ado (that would be taking it in vain) but wants first to transform me into spirit. If someone without a trace of the category of spirit within himself could grasp this, he would have to shun Xnty as the greatest plague. Yet however indifferently and faintheartedly one does it, there is nonetheless always some spirituality present in getting involved with Xnty, in wanting to begin the cure, to become Christian. But what has Xnty become nowadays? And then there are 1000 priests, and scarcely one of them has even the time seriously to read through a book that could, in the mildest form, nevertheless enlighten them about something. I stand of course as the impotent one―I have no living to give away, nothing to distribute, no profit to offer; I keep to the one thought, whether there might possibly be someone with a little love of truth.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

85

My Polemic. Xnty cannot be had on the condition under which it is offered nowadays in official preaching.

136 40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 136–138

5

10

•

1850

But at the same time I do not take issue straightaway by denying that those who offer it on this condition are Xns. No, by no means, for in private, before God, they may possibly make the admission that is all I fight for, namely, that owing to hum. weakness and pity, the price has been knocked down―similarly, I do not pass myself off either as someone willing or able to realize the strictest kind of Xnty’s proclamation. Accordingly, what I fight for is that, if the proclaimers of Xnty in question have made the confession in private, then we must have it declared, the price officially quoted. It must be declared that we do in fact knock down the price in this way. If this is suppressed, then that puts quite another complexion on it. And the trouble is precisely the fact that it is suppressed.

15

137

God as Father―and “the Neighbor.” No. 339 of the evangelical hymnbook begins thus:

20

25

30

God, to call you Father Is dear to every man, But who hates his neighbor Of child’s rights has none. Yes, not only does he not have the rights of a child, he has no “Father.” For God is not distinctly my or any person’s Father (frightful presumptuousness and madness!); no, he is Father only in the sense of the Father of all, thus my Father only in so far as he is everyone’s Father. If now I hate someone, or indeed deny that God is his Father, then it is not he who loses, but me―and then I have no Father. In these areas there is always the reversed echo.

86

138

The Strongest Expression for God’s Most Stringent Rigor. This is found in the gospel about the unforgiving fellow servant which ends by saying that if we do not forgive each other’s

81

82

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 138–140

•

1850

sins, God will be just as severe with us as we are with others―alas, alas, what a blow, for we know very well how severe we can be with others. The point is that God is a fellow player and thus acts toward us as we act toward others.

The Inverse Relation between the Greatness of a Passion and the Insignificance of the Object.

1

[a]

, as Visby did,

[b]

5

10

For this reason one cannot come in conflict with a stranger over a trifle; for indifference does not allow it. On the other hand, when friends or neighbors get into a dispute about a trifle (which can happen precisely because they are friends and neighbors), then it is no trifle, for the fact that it is between them, that now perhaps the whole relationship is lost, is no triviality.

It is often pointed out (and also today by Pastor Visby in the sermon on the unforgiving fellow servant whom he used as an occasion to preach about enmity) that what most arouses passion is just a little trifle. This, in my view, can be explained by the fact that there is a senseless or half-demented relationship between passion and object; once passion is aroused, it is inflamed by the senselessness of it revolving around a mere trifle. To the degree that one adduces[a]―as an example of how a trifle brings about the strongest passion― that partisan or sectarian disputes, religious disputes, civil wars are always the most violent―and this despite the fact that the contenders are so close to each other that most often it must be a trifle that divides them―it must be pointed out that it is a different matter here, and that is because at the root of this disunity there lies all the passion that had expected or desired agreement. At the root of a controversy or enmity between strangers lies indifference―at the root of the other controversy lies friendship, cohesion.

The Relation to God. When everything smiles around you, and you brim over with joy, or feel really happy with exis-

5

139

10

15

20

25

30

87

140

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 140–141

5

10

15

20

25

141

35

88

40

•

1850

83

tence―and you then think of God, then perhaps your expression flowers more strongly, more richly. When you are despondent, bowed down, then your expression is perhaps poorer―but, but, in this latter case it is undoubtedly clearer that it is you who needs God; and precisely this is the one thing pleasing to God, that you really and truly need him. When you exult, then your gratitude to God may well be the truth in you; yet it is still possible that it is not the proper need for God that stirs in you, however comely and well-intentioned your gratitude can be. Accordingly, the second is the more pleasing to God. For God is spirit; he takes no special pleasure in a person’s hymns any more than in the smell of sacrifice; but what pleases him is that a hum. being has real need of him, rightly feels that he has need of him. When you have as it were rich gifts to bring to God (the joyous riches of hymns of praise and the fullness of eloquence, and all this poetical side and, to be sure, honestly, for otherwise the whole thing is empty), then it is perhaps more pleasing to you to approach God; ah, but when you are poor, dispirited―then it is more pleasing to God that you approach him, think of him; for he has only one joy: to communicate―and the one most welcome, accordingly, is the one most needy.

Concerning “Practice in Christianity” and Its Relation to an Established Order. It is altogether conservative, will only or can only preserve an established order. But the thing is, its author is not a public official, or one who without further ado joins the established order in order to make an official career. My whole view is what I have always acknowledged, that the crowd, not the government, is the evil; that the true extraordinarii would have to aim at the crowd rather than the government. 39 extraordinarii] Latin, extraordinary persons.

[a]

Concerning “Practice in Christianity” and Its Relation to an Established Order.

1

84

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 141–142

•

1850

But, on the other hand, an extraordinarius is something other and different than a public official. He must first position himself so that with the help of a dialectic intercrossing he does not cover up the irregularities of the established order―and then gets to see whether the establishment perhaps wants to push him away and, if possible, identify him with the movement in the sense of public opinion. In the old days the extraordinarii took aim at the government and looked for support in the people. This is no longer the case. The new situation will be that the extraordinarius takes the opposite position but does not allow the confusion of identity, such as when a public official identifies serving the established order with advancing his career and the like. It depends, then, on an established order being true enough to recognize such an extraordinarius. To operate in this way is, for the person concerned, enormously strenuous, sheer fear and trembling. This is especially so for me, I who after all have so much of the poet in me, and am therefore not in the strictest sense an extraordinarius, which is something I have always emphasized, but am nonetheless so full of presentiment about it that I can at least make people aware.

Strange Contradiction. The whole age is indeed radical, wants to begin at the beginning in everything, that is to say, wants to do away with tradition; and just look at everyday life; yes, it appears that in all praxis the same peop. understand very well that in everything it depends on getting a little help from tradition. A shopkeeper, e.g., advertises in the newspaper every single day, hoping with this continuity to attain the power of tradition that is otherwise only achieved through a succession of years. And so it is almost everywhere. Yes, it can be said the practice in our time in trade and commerce etc. is precisely to produce tradition by artificial means. That is, what peop. want is to do away with the tradition that does not suit them, that old time-honored tradition, and then as soon as possible people want to get themselves a surrogate tradition, a tradition produced by artificial means. As radicals, people scorn all that goes by the name of custom―and yet this is precisely what all journalists and the like 1 extraordinarius] Latin, extraordinary person.

5

10

15

20

142

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 142–144

89

143

10

15

20

25

144

30

•

1850

study: the art of pressing habits on the public in the shortest possible time―but note well, such habits as suit these benefactors of the human race.

The Middle Ages―Mynster. The Middle Ages thought that Christianity was renunciation, dying to the world, asceticism. Mynster thinks just about the opposite (and this is the modern view generally), that Christianity is cultivation. But this concept of cultivation, accepted without further ado, is highly dubious, and when it in fact becomes enjoyment, refinement, purely human cultivation, it is dead set against Xnty. If cultivation is supposed to be what is Christian, then it would have to be the cultivation of character, or the cultivation to be a person of character. And to some extent that is how I understand it. There would also be room here for self-denial, renunciation, mortification, though not in the extravagant sense as when people scourged themselves in the monastery. The pers. who is to remain standing in the world and witness for the truth will receive sufficient asceticism in his life. The Middle Ages have been accused of acosmism―well, cosmism is in any case not Christian. And yet this is in fact more or less the sort of cultivation with which people have wanted to identify Christianity, the sort of cultivation that ingeniously enough is designated by the expression: to have the world.

Bernard. He said it beautifully: “Let us not forget that Martha and Mary after all were sisters” (that is, that the other side of life is also to be included). I read this in Neander’s Bernhard, 2nd edition, p. 68.

85

86

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 145–147

•

1850 90

How the N.T. Is Read. We are now so used to the fact that there is a N.T.―and in having a mutual understanding that we are not to do what is written there. When, for example, I write a book where the requirements are set 50% lower than in the N.T., I know of cases of husbands saying to their wives: “You are not to read that book”; they fear that the reading would overtax them. And it never occurs to these same husbands to scruple about letting their wives read the N.T.―they naturally count on the certainty that it would not occur to anyone to do what is written there.

Faith.

145

5

10

146

It is clear that in my writings I have provided an unprecedented further definition of the concept of faith.

Bernard (in his life by Neander I) presents it as an imperfection to yearn for Xt as though he were here on earth. That is still, he thinks, a sensate kind of love. Perfect love is that which has no need of his material presence. Quantæ tenebræ. There we see an example of not making something present to oneself. Bernard is clearly of the opinion that Xt was directly cognizable, and that it was therefore very easy to be contemporary with him. Oh no, no, contemporaneity with Xt is the most difficult thing of all.

24 Quantæ tenebræ] Latin, what great darkness. (See also explanatory note.)

147 20

25

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 148–149

•

1850

91

148

5

10

15

What―and How. Between an established order and what is new within Xnty the law is quite simply this: the new is not a new What but a new How of the old What. Yet serving a How cannot be so easily conspicuous, or satisfy earthly passions that will displace the old so that they themselves come to prevail etc.; that is why it is so important for all impatient and worldly people that the new becomes a What, so that light can properly fall upon―the originators. When such a new How is served by its originator in true self-denial―and there are a few who join him or adopt his ideas, then, if these few do not exercise the same self-denial, what will happen is that he will soon be unable to satisfy their impatience. It will be so vital for them in their impatience to get it changed to his having brought in a new What, so that he can then be declared the master and there here can be promotion for those who have adopted his ideas. If he will not go along with it, then it will be easy for his very adherents to cry that it is treason against the cause, or weakness―well, yes, that is also self-denial.

20

149

25

30

35

A Remark by Abelard. In Neander’s biography of Bernard (2nd ed. pp. 246 and 247 top of page) Abelard’s view of miracles is presented, together with the fact that he regarded the subsequent absence of miracles as proof of the decline of faith and the secularization of Xnty. “And,” he adds, “miracles are needed right now more than when the teaching was introduced, now when what prevails is a dead faith.” Here Neander cannot help remarking that one sees how Abelard is merely looking for arguments against his opponents, since the need for miracles when the teaching arrived was something quite different, and since, besides, a dead faith clings most readily to miracles. Alas, alas, no, Abelard is right. True enough, if possible even more miracles are needed when it is a matter of tearing people out of the illusion that they are believers; for the conditions of

87

88

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 149–151

•

1850

contention and the task are far more difficult here than when Xnty deals with pagans. And in the second place, as to a dead faith being the more likely to keep to miracles, that holds only in relation to miracles at a historical distance. Dead faith cannot get involved with contemporary miracles.

Effusion. Oh, my God, how often have I not been happy, grateful, unspeakably joyful, recognizing how strangely things have gone many times: that I have come to do something―and only later did I fully understand how right and meaningful it was. But at times it has been even such that I had to say exultantly, My God, it is your wisdom that governs―with the help of my stupidity. I do not neglect to take everything into consideration as best I can― but then there comes an indiscretion, a foolishness and the like―and I am ready to lose courage at the thought that now it is all wasted―and then afterward I understand that you have transformed this very foolishness into something very wise. Infinite love!

92

5

150

10

15

20

25

The Increasing Difficulty in Connection with Spirit. The further one progresses the more difficult it becomes. It is not just that the world’s opposition increases, that is easy to understand; but then one is struck by small misfortunes, life’s annoyances, from which one had been spared up to now and of which one feels that one ought to be free, especially now. One could of course interpret this as meaning that one is on the wrong road and should take another. Oh, but have faith, and you will see, you will gain the courage to understand it otherwise―that this is

151

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 151–152

93 5

10

15

20

152

25

30

35

precisely in order to help in the task, so that it may be served with more a purely religious energy. The more significant the task, the more must God keep his eye upon the one he is dealing with, so that a confused genius does not get hold of the most dangerous tasks. These distresses, accordingly, are the conditio sine qua non for being entrusted with such tasks. When the rider wants to ride his horse properly, a sharp bit is put on and perhaps the amount of fodder reduced. The horse privately no doubt thought that just the opposite would happen. But if the rider and the horse could converse, the rider would say: It is only with the help of a sharp bit that you can learn to step like a parade horse. Even if you were to promise me 10 times over and resolve ever so honestly to conduct yourself like a parade horse―it will not work; no, if you are to step like a parade horse, you must be helped―and hence the sharp bit. And so, too, with the reduced fodder.

The Thanklessness of My Task. When the rabble raged at that time, I was the only one who took sides and exposed myself to everything and was decried as mad―now Goldschmidt is complimented; but no mention is made of my deserts in all this matter. And now the same story again. There exists a religious establishment. I then publish a book that will strengthen it and show precisely the way by which the established order can be guided through. But it is not immediately understood. I have therefore to endure anger and reproach for wanting to topple the established order, while the public officials enjoy the profit of there being an established order and are admired as well, especially in comparison with myself. And what then have these public officials done to preserve an established order? Nothing. 7 conditio sine qua non] Latin, necessary condition.

•

1850

[a]

89

It does not follow that a pers. is to endure this incessantly, but the idea is only that the divine is the exact opposite of the hum.― that when someone is to have a difficult task, is he to be coddled in every way[?]―No, then there must be still more torments, otherwise he will not solve it.

1

5

90

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 152–153

•

1850

They profit from it. What service has Martensen done to serve to strengthen the established order? Nothing. And then, when some time has passed, then the establishment will gradually have learned to make the turn that I pointed out to it―but my merit is forgotten, item how I was rewarded for it.

1

[a]

“Practice in Christianity”―The Established Order.

“Practice in Christianity”―The Established Order. It is really sad that the established order (at least the majority of those in it) know so little about governing that they promptly mistake Practice in Christianity for the opposition, from which it differs as far as possible; yes, it is the diametrical opposite. “The opposition” want to do away with government―what does Anti-Climacus want? He is a single individual (not in the remotest manner any party; yes, a hater of parties; yes, taking polemical aim at the crowd, the public, and the like; yes, stamped with the kind of danger with which every true supporter of the government ought to be stamped in our times), he addresses himself to the establishment more or less as follows: “For the sake of God in Heaven, how is it you sit and rule, you don’t know what it is to rule―so rule, then!” Is this opposition to the government? But those governing have lost the lofty notion of what it is to rule and, on the contrary, have grabbed hold of what it is to have a little power―thus they are capable of mistaking Anti-Climacus for the opposition, The matter is quite plain. The establishment in the ecclesiastical domain has in its fear of man to such a degree knocked down the price, bargained, haggled, that it has actually let go of the reins. In order to come to rule again, concessions have to be made. A new concession, I hear the establishment say―and it thinks a concession must be made to the opposition, as if enough concessions had not already been made. Oh, no, no, you who govern must make a concession to God and to Xnty, a kind of penance― and then see that you take up the reins again. This is the only way the established order can be guided through. Yet, with God-fearing cunning, the situation must be maintained in such a way that the established order is also subjected to an investigation concerning whether it would now like to transform Anti-Climacus officially into the opposition, thereby forcing me out into more rigorous categories. God knows I antici-

94 5

153

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 153–157

•

1850

pated in fear and trembling―also for my own sake―that the task might be too hard for me. But eh bien, I have risked it. As is always the case, here, too, I did not understand things in the beginning as clearly as I do now. 95

154

10

155 15

156 20

157

Bernard. In (Neander’s B’s Life, 2nd edition p. 268 note) is found the following: Aliud sequi Jesum, aliud tenere, aliud manducare. Sequi, salubre consilium; tenere et amplecti, sole[m]ne gaudium; manducare, vita beata.

Seneca says: It is not rlly courageous if courage does not grow with the danger.

Imitation. True imitation does not come about by preaching: [“]You must imitate Xt,[”] but by preaching about what Xt has done for me―if a person grasps and feels truly profoundly how infinitely much that is, then imitation is sure to follow.

Give to God What Is God’s. But of course everything is God’s, so that giving to God what is God’s is to give him everything, even what belongs to Caesar, because it is out of fear and love of God that I obey Caesar.

2 eh bien] French, oh well. 10 Aliud . . . vita beata] Latin, It is one thing to imitate Jesus, another to keep firm hold of him, yet another to eat him [i.e., at communion]. To imitate him is healing advice, to hold fast to him and embrace him is a festive joy; to eat him is eternal life.

91

92

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 158–159

•

1850 96

… Also this sorrowful situation is one I have experienced. As a wealthy person has to put up with the heirs simply longing for his death: so has one or another here at home wanted me dead, in order to inherit my cause.

158

Even Luther

159

does not properly combine the existential thoughts; so everywhere he has just one thought, and this one thought everywhere; also he is rhetorical. Where he wants to encourage children to obey their parents, servants to be faithful in the lowly task, the poor to fear God and the like, he declares that (if in fact those concerned are God-fearing) we thus see that God makes a famous doctor out of a poor wretch, a powerful man, a rich man out of poor manservant, and the like. This is Jewish piety: the mark of piety is that things go well for one in life; the fruit of God-fearingness is that things go well. Then, in other passages, where he speaks of being a true Xn, we learn something quite different―the true Christian must suffer in every way in this world, poverty and persecution and the like. How, then, am I to order my life according to these instructions? Where Luther exhorts to piety, he must surely mean Christian piety. But now, if he were to say at this point what he says about the fate of the true Xn is this world, there goes all the encouragement about amounting to something in this world. Where at all is the preacher who has only one thought about being a Xn and about the latter’s fate in the world? And on this point, as with so many points of the existential sort, there is a contradiction in Luther when one places them side by side.

5

10

15

20

25

30

97

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 160–161 160

5

10

•

1850

An Analogy in Our Time to Something in the Time of the Reformation. I have been told that the number of theology students has dropped off markedly, presumably because of apprehension that the old saying that studying theology is the surest way to bread is going out of use. It was just the same at the time of the Reformation. The concept of a priest that Luther established was not as appealing as the Catholic. I see (in Theobald Thamer by August Neander: Berlin, 1842, p. 5) that he informs us of this: “In den vorigen Zeiten, da nicht eine theologia sondern matheologia (μαϑαιολογια) vorgetragen wurde .... welche Schaaren von Priester streiften damals durch die Welt; jetzt aber ... fliehen wir dieses Studium, so daß man kaum unter Tausenden in der ganzen Schaar der Studenten [Einen sieht], der mit diesem Studium sich beschäftigen will ....”

15

161

20

25

30

35

Nonsense. Stilling told me that someone―it was prbly a priest―had declared to him that Practice in Christianity was an arrogant usurpation, “an arrogant usurpation for an individual to talk that way.” Good! In the end they will no doubt want there to be an association, a committee for presenting ideals. Oh, depth of nonsense! Either there has to be an individual who presents ideals―or these cannot be presented at all. When there are many―then there is relativity. The misfortune of the age, now, is exactly that sociality has completely strangled ideals. Finally, then, there is an individual who in the most modest way makes the attempt―but, as mentioned, an individual it has to be―and then it is called an arrogant usurpation by an individual. There is at bottom a natural cunning in this remark. For the very last thing one wants expressed is ideals; people want to stay with societal haggling. But in fact ideals can be presented only by an individual―ergo, they try to intimidate the individual into not daring, and then they escape the ideals. They may perhaps still find that there is something to the question―and appoint a committee, or drive around in a spacious four-seater Holstein carriage―to look for ideals. 9 In den vorigen . . . beschäftigen will] German, In earlier times, the lectures were not on theology but on matheologi (μαϑαιολογια [Greek, empty words]) …. what a flock of priests then roamed the world; but now … we avoid this study, so that among the whole flock of students one hardly sees one in a thousand who wants to occupy himself with this subject. (See also explanatory note.)

93

94

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 162–163

•

1850 98

The Movement―and Me. Really I am coming to be at cross-purposes with the movement. The trouble is simply that a whole generation has wanted to dabble en masse at playing the reformer. The same thing will happen with me regarding the movement as what is written in one of the three minor ethical-religious treatises by F. F. (which are in the tin box)―first of all there must come a police officer who clears out all these false reformers. The unreasonableness of the relationship between the established order and me is that they want me with no further ado to eulogize the old establishment simply because it is old, as if through its impotence in governing it were not also guilty of the whole generation’s hitting on the idea of playing reformer. No, the establishment must also be exposed, and if the established order wants to understand itself, it must be thankful that it has happened, since it has happened from a point of view that wants there to be governing. Really, the establishment ought to have made the admission on its own, before anyone on the outside reminded them of it, for it is the only way to get hold of the reins of government. Ah, when a whole generation wants more and more to cut the government back―if only the leader of the Church would summon up all his personal power and eloquence and say: [“] We confess that we have erred, that we have not governed; we implore God’s forgiveness and promise change[”]―truly that should make a great impression. It might then turn the whole thing around.

Pascal. There is a very good little treatise by Neander: über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der pensees Pascals. Berlin, 1847; it is in Athenaeum. I see from the essay that not until just recently has Pascal’s Pensées been published in its complete and original form, by Prosper Faugère, 1844, that the older editions have made omissions and changes, that Anton Arnold (Port Royal), who published them, permitted himself to make changes, thinking it better to

162

5

10

15

20

25

163

35

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 163

99

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

make small alterations than to constantly write apologies: il est bien plus a propos de prevenir les chicaneries par quelque petit changement, qui ne fait qu’adoucir une expression, que de se reduire a la necessité de faire des apologies. Neander rightly shows that Pascal promoted dissension between the theoretical and practical sides in a hum. being and established the practical as the highest. Cousin regards Pascal as an enemy of philosophy, so that, despairing of finding the truth through reason, he throws himself into the arms of an authoritative faith and combines “unbounded skepticism with convulsive piety.” N. rightly shows that this is a misunderstanding, that P. merely insists on the practical and “finds it equally ridiculous that reason wants to demand proofs of the heart for its first principles, as if the heart would require reason to have feeling for all propositions it proves in order to accept them.” Pascal says (this is something that is first found in Faugère’s edition): [“]One must have these 3 qualities: Pyrrhonist, geometrician, and a Xn who has subjected himself to faith. And these are in harmony with one another and temper each other, in that one doubts when one should, behauptet when one should, and submits when one should. It is reason’s last step to acknowledge that there are a multitude of things that are beyond its powers, if reason does not come to this, it is merely weak.” Pascal says that knowledge of the divine stands in inverse relation to knowledge of the human: the human is what one must first know, and then love; the divine one must first love, then know. What Pascal means is this, that knowledge of the div. is rlly a transformation of personality; in order to know the div. one must become another pers. It is this that is completely forgotten in our time, where all we have is bellowing about knowing and more knowing, while the ethical transformation (the slower kind of knowledge) is considered superfluous, to say nothing of the religious transformation. Peop. want knowledge and more knowledge and in order to satisfy the proud and vain and knowledge-hungry or inquisitive mind―but this is not how the divine wants to be known. Peop. would become anxious and fearful if they rightly knew how dangerous it is to know, how binding it is―whereas sure enough inversely, this is the only way the divine can be known. God does not sell at a discount, does not entrust the religious to every frivolous or inquisitive speculator― he entrusts it only to a pers. in relation to how he is transformed existentially. 1 il est bien . . . apologies] French, It is indeed better to prevent quibbling through some small alterations that merely render an expression more felicitous, than to be reduced to the necessity of making apologies. 21 behauptet] German, affirms.

95

96

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 164

•

1850

100

Practice in Christianity I have heard that some priests object: “This can’t be preached to congregations.” “Well, it is also for priests.” But the confusion in our age goes so deep that nothing seems more obvious to everyone than that priests, after all, must be Xns. It is assumed as an axiom. If someone were to maintain that there was a large proportion of the congregation who were not Xns, that would get a hearing. But the priests―every priest, unconditionally―how could he not be a Xn, he who is a “teacher” in Xnty, who has a living as teacher? And how could he not know what Xnty is[?] Yes, I dare say that would indeed be alarming― especially for those who appoint him just like that.

164

5

10

JOURNAL NB22

JOURNAL NB22 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Journal NB22 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 1

103

1

•

1850

NB22. Novbr. 13th, 1850.

99

100

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 2

•

1850

Anti-Climacus is not indirect communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Indirect Communication and Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On a Statement in the Postscript to “The Accounting” concerning My Direct Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . About the 1st Essay in H. H.’s Two Essays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An Either/Or in Relation to an Established Order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contemporaneity with Xt and Being a Disciple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Practice in Christianity―and Me . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Times and My Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 21. p. 25. p. p. p. p. p. p. p.

26. 35. 45. 54. 83. 143. 266.

104

2

5

10

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 3 1850 •

105

3

On texts for Friday sermons, see the blank page at the beginning of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday discourse Journal NB17 p. 30.

101

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 4–6

•

1850

107

10

..... No, unlike the youth who wanted to tear off the veil concealing the divine, I want to tear off the veil concealing all the human drivel and the conceited smugness of peop. who want to convince themselves and others that hum. beings so desperately want to know the truth. No, every hum. being is more or less afraid of the truth; and this is human because the truth has to do with being “spirit”―and that is especially difficult for flesh and blood and carnal desires. Dying away lies between hum. beings and the truth―look, this is why all of us are more or less scared.

5

“Imitation.”

4

5

15

20

When Christ finally sends out his apostles, he says: [“]Go forth and teach all nations, baptizing them . . . and he who believes.[”] Here he does not add: [“]He who imitates me;[”] here the great emphasis is on grace. As Exemplar, Christ is still part of the proclamation of the Law; Xt’s own life as Exemplar was indeed the very fulfillment of the Law. And precisely by fulfilling the Law he ransomed us from the Law unto grace. But then imitation shows up again, not as Law, but by grace and through grace.

25

6

30

108

The Medium of Imagination―Actuality. Pick up a stick. When you hold it in your hand it is straight. Throw it in the water and it looks broken. Then you can pick it up again and say, “My God, it is really straight”―indeed, but if you throw it into water again, it looks broken. This is how rhetoricians, etc., present Christianity. They remove it from the medium of actuality (they do not express it existentially), and therefore Christianity looks completely differ-

103

104

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 6–7

•

1850

ent from what it is in truth―but put it existentially into actuality and you will see that it looks completely different, that exaltation becomes abasement, etc.

5 1

[a]

Concerning “The Voluntary.”

Concerning “The Voluntary” A pers. cannot reasonably involve himself with “the voluntary” (the requirement of which is higher than the universal requirement) unless he has an immediate assurance that it is specifically required of him. Otherwise he will never even start, for if he lacks this immed. certainty, the voluntary will constantly be transformed into presumptuousness―for which he must repent. From the point of view of the universal requirement, the voluntary is in fact presumptuousness, and thus someone would have to have an immediate certainty that it was specifically required of him. The voluntary, therefore, cannot possibly be required of everyone, precisely because it is a special requirement. One cannot appeal to the examples in the gospel where Xt requires it of those who wanted to be disciples (the rich young man, the one who wanted to bury his father first, etc.) to prove that the voluntary is a universal requirement (which, as shown, is a contradiction), for these examples prove just the opposite: it was required of each of them as a special case so each of them had Xt’s own word that it was required of him. When Xt says: [“]Everyone who has abandoned his father and mother, etc. will receive tenfold,[“] or [“]there is no one who has abandoned, who did not indeed receive tenfold[”]―this in no way proves that the voluntary is a universal requirement; it merely shows the reward for the person who fulfilled the requirement of the voluntary if it were demanded of him. The universal requirement is simply to admit before God that you are a hum. being with various desires and wishes, who is working in a permissible way to achieve those things, leaving it up to Governance to decide whether or not one is to attain them, because fulfillment is of course at all times in the power of Governance. The universal is to leave it up to God to decide whether or not he wants to prevent you from achieving your desires or take them away from you―but not voluntarily giving them

7

10

15

20

25

30

35

109

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 7–8

•

1850

105

up, rather instead admitting, humbly that you do not have the strength to give them up, that you lack the immediate assurance of being a special case―and then, in other respects, resting in “grace.” 5

8

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Freedom of Conscience, Freedom of Belief, and the Like Ideally speaking, it can be quite true that every hum. being should be granted freedom of conscience, freedom of belief, and the like. But what are the implications? Where are the peop. who are so spiritually strong that they can make use of it, who are truly capable of standing absolutely alone, alone with God? Here lies untruth, the demagogical flattery that speaks as if everyone would be this kind of fellow if only there were no coercion, no law. Good God, my Father! No, the truth is that everyone who is subjective enough to consult with God and his conscience in absolute isolation and can endure it, does not even ask whether there are laws or regulations against it; for him such things are nothing but fluff. Indeed, if he is truly great, he even desires all sorts of opposition in order that he does not get lost or make mistakes―no, he is not afraid of being coerced by manmade rules: before God and in his conscience, he knows that he need not fear. But people want to do away with prohibitions and coercion and the like in order to play the game that we are such dauntless characters that we can stand alone without them―instead of this: it is precisely the opposition with which we are confronted that, when we overcome it, is the only thing that proves that we are dauntless characters of this sort. Remove all coercion, which is exactly what peop. need, especially with regard to our most important issues, and the mass of peop. will either dissolve into nothing or will fall into the hands of parties and the like. But it is so vain and so flatteringb to imagine that we would almost be like apostles, or at least like Luther―therefore, remove all coercion and that is what we will be. Oh, you fools or you sophists: the apostles, Luther, etc., were just what they were because they were confronted with all possible opposition and coercion. But they overcame it. Had there been no coercion, we

[a]

and logically, the more important the issue b

to vanity

1

106

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 8 1850 •

would never have been able to see that they were what they were. In our times, people want to have all coercion removed and then play the role of apostle―which is about the same as if someone wanted to remove cannons, gunpowder, bayonets, etc., and then play that one is a courageous soldier. There must be opposition and coercion precisely in order to show whether it is really true that “conscience” alone decides (not something regurgitated from the stomach, a lazy whim, caprice, confused thoughts, foolish mimicry, etc.). The idea of “conscience” is so inward that it takes all sorts of filtering to find it; but if it is found, if it really is the only thing that decides my course―then forget all the rules, I just laugh at them. And precisely because “conscience” is infinitely holy to the person who is even just moderately conscientious, precisely for that reason, he desires opposition, coercion. He would rather discover in time, with the aid of coercion, that it might not have been his conscience after all that led him to dare take one or another step, than discover after the fact that he was under an illusion, and an illusion concerning the holiest thing of all, concerning his conscience. The person who can truly stand alone in the world like this, consulting only his conscience, is a hero. And he might well say: Don’t worry about me―you may certainly make the coercion more intense; I would even welcome it. But take away all coercion and let us then flatter each other that every single one of us is a hero of this sort. There is a great outcry for freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, etc., nowadays, when it is already a great rarity to find someone who actually has an opinion. What do these outcries mean? Do they signify strength, heroism? Not really. They signify frailty; they signify that we are weaklings, coddled, and nonetheless are happy to play the role of hero if it does not cost us much. That is not how it was for our forefathers; when a berserker felt a power within him, he cried out for others to bring shields and, if possible, immobilize

5

110

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 8

5

111

10

15

20

25

30

35

him―for he certainly knew that he had power. Nor was it like this with the heroes of faith. They did not demand the removal of all coercion. Oh, no, on the contrary, they yearned for it, and they yearned for a sort of constraint that was utterly different from anything we can imagine. They yearned for imprisonment, chains, the stake, in order to show that they had freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, etc. Nowadays, people want the state to loosen every bond, to grant or perhaps make a gift of freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and the like―in the old days people believed that it was conscience that granted freedom of religion, that if it really meant something for a person to have a conscience, freedom would surely come, and on the other hand, that if all this coercion were eliminated and every bond loosened, it would at most make it as easy and convenient as possiblec to have no conscience whatever, while retaining the notion that one has one.

•

1850

107

c

for everyone

1

* * It is above all a totally mistaken dialectic to conclude that the greater and the more serious the good, the more intolerable is any coercion. No, no. With regard to insignificant things, even the slightest coercion is intolerable, as, e.g., it would be if wearing hats were prohibited by law and everyoned were required to wear a cap instead. The greater and the more serious the good, however, the more I am able to tolerate some coercion, so that I can have an opportunity to test myself and to get to know myself, so that the decisive steps are not made too easy for me―because in the end, there is really no coercion that can compel the spiritual person; at most it can make him pay a high price for freedom. All the talk about eliminating coercion therefore comes either from those who have been coddled or those who perhaps once had the power to fight but are now exhausted and find it easier to have all coercion eliminated.

d

that all men or every man

[e] Thus what people want is this: they want to avoid being forced into making decisions in which it becomes clear and obvious that they are endowed with conscience and act solely by virtue of that conscience. They should then say: We are weak and fearful; we lack such courage or power―and therefore we want coercion eliminated. That would at least make some sense. But in the mendacious cant of the day they say: We are fighting for freedom of conscience.

5

10

15

108

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 9–11

•

1850

From Anton Arnauld’s speech against the Jesuits: O utinam arguerem sic, ut non vincere possem: Me miserum, quare tam bona causa mea est?

9

5

Reuchlin, Geschichte Port-Royal, 1st vol., p. 94. 112

A line by Franz v. Sales to Angelica Arnauld, which she often repeated: um vollkommen zu sein, braucht man nicht besondere (singulieres) Dinge zu thun, sondern die alltäglichen und gemeinen Dinge müße man besonders gut thun.

10 10

Reuchlin, G. Port-Royal, 1st vol., p. 270. 15

The Dialectic of Offense.

1

[a]

see Reuchlin, Geschichte PortRoyal, 1st vol., pp. 521 et al.

When a given age has moved Xt into aesthetic categories and venerates him aesthetically―then when someone, in the interest of Xnty, brings forth debasement, people cry that he actually is debasing or insulting Xt. That is how it is everywhere. When Dr. A. Arnauld wrote against frequent partaking of communion (which the Jesuits irresponsibly defended) people cried that it was sacrilege, that it was leading people away from religion―thanks a lot, it was of course an attempt to prevent them from taking it in vain. It would be the same if someone were to show today that the real problem is that we have too much sermonizing and that it would be better if there were not so much of it.

4 O utinam . . . mea est?] Latin, Oh, would that my charge were such that I could not win! Wretched me, why is my cause so strong? (See also explanatory note.) 9 um vollkommen . . . gut thun] German, to be perfect, you need not do anything extraordinary (singular), but you must do everyday, ordinary things especially well.

11

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 12–14

12

5

113 13

10

15

14

20

25

30

35

•

1850

109

I could be tempted to say of my pseudonym what the bishops, in their letter to the pope, praise about A. Arnauld’s book on frequent communion: “he encourages great things without disparaging the lesser.”

Anti Climacus is not indirect communication because there is a preface by me. What is indirect is to juxtapose dialectical opposites―and then not a word of personal interpretation. One of the milder aspects of the more direct communication is that the communicator has a need to be understood personally, a fear of being misunderstood. Indirect [communication] is sheer tension.

Pascal writes in a letter to Mademoiselle Roannes (on the occasion of the miraculous healing of little Perrier in Port Royal): Only rarely and for few does God step forth from his concealment in nature’s secrecy. Before the incarnation he remained concealed within it. He concealed himself even more when he shrouded himself as a hum. being. For he was more knowable when he was invisible. He has now concealed himself even more deeply in the sacrament. All things are veils that conceal God; but Xns should recognize him in everything, and we owe him even more thanks for having revealed himself to us in sufferings, even as he hides himself from others (see Reuchlin, Geschichte Port Royal, vol. 1, bottom p. 680 and top p. 681). This is the dialectic Joh. Climacus argues for: A revelation, as revelation, is recognized through its

[a]

Anti-Climacus is not indirect communication.

1

[b]

But it goes without saying that even though this is not indirect communication―because the secret lies in the fact that this little preface is included, though people might not take the time to look at it, let alone to see what it implies― it can very well pose a question for the established order: How do you view what has been proposed here? Is it opposition, which you must rebut, or is it precisely something true, something you need, so that each and every person comes to make an admission before God?

5

10

15

110

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 14–17

•

1850

opposite: the fact that it is a mystery. God reveals himself―this is recognized through the fact that he conceals himself. Thus nothing is direct.

114 5

Hum. Ingratitude Just look at the sea, the clouds, the seagulls. Strain your every nerve to retain this image, for perhaps this is the first and last time you will ever have anything to remember. But who sees like this[?] And yet, imagine that it were the first and last time―and imagine that you forgot it and became blind― nonetheless, you can see the God that has created all this, and see him in abundance. O, how ungrateful we hum. beings are!

15

10

15

On Indirect Communication and Myself. Here it must be noted, above all, that I am indeed not a teacher who originally envisioned everything and who then made use of indirect communication, conscious of every move, but that I am someone who has developed during the process of productivity. It follows that my indirect communication is on a lower level than direct communication because the indirectness was of course connected to the circumstance that I myself was not clear about it from the beginning and therefore did not dare speak directly at the beginning. Thus I myself am the one who has been released and has developed through indirect communication.

On a Statement in the Postscript to “The Accounting” concerning My Direct Communication. It must be noted that here there is no question simplement of direct communication, for this is truly not the first example of 30 simplement] French, simply, here in the sense “purely and simply.”

16

20

25

17

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 17–20

5

10

•

1850

that, because of course all the edifying writing has been direct communication. No, it is direct communication about the authorship, about the authorship as a whole, an authorship that has consisted of indirect communication, helped by pseudonyms, and then of direct communication in the edifying works. But even the direct works remain indirect as long as I have not made any direct statements about the authorship as a whole, because in that case it would always have been possible that I rlly sided with the pseudonymous writings, rather than siding with them as something maieutic.

115

18 15

20

19

25

20

30

The French phrase seul à seul is a good expression for solitude or for being absolutely alone. I found it in Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, Stuttgart, 1840, p. 30, in Jacqueline’s (Pascal’s youngest sister) letter to her father about permission to enter the convent. Here she requests permission to withdraw (Retraite) to a religious house (Port Royal) for 14 days or three weeks in order to contemplate this step in solitude (seul à seul).

Ein Wahn, der mich beglückt, Ist eine Wahrheit werth, die mich zu Boden drückt. Quoted in Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, book two, beginning (on the Provincial Letters), p. 72.

The Jesuits. What Reuchlin says about the Jesuits in Pascals Leben, book two, is an excellent characterization. They were not like the Pharisees, who imposed heavy burdens on others but did not themselves lift a finger. No, the Jesuits themselves in fact lived rather strictly―but they preached a lax morality for others. 13 seul à seul] French, totally alone. 18 Retraite] French, Withdraw. 22 Ein Wahn . . . drückt.] German, An illusion that makes me happy is worth a truth that presses me to the floor.

111

112

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 20–21

•

1850

This is really an excellent characterization. The Jesuits wanted only one thing: to have power, influence, dominance over peop. And when one leads a disciplined life oneself―for otherwise one loses all respect―this is the surest way to win: to demoralize peop. by making life easy for them. What Reuchlin notes (loc. cit., p. 98) about the evolution of Jesuit discipline is also an excellent characterization―namely that Eskobar calls the father-confessor “the confessing person’s advocate,” defender―earlier he had been the judge.

5

10

116

Pascal.

21

(see Reuchlin, Leben Pascals, pp. 135 and 136) In the 10th letter (of the Provincial Letters) P. rants against the supposition that Xt brought us hum. beings a dispensation from the command to love God―that this is supposedly an advantage, so that previously, before his incarnation and death, we were obligated to love God in our deeds, but that now this is no longer the case. In den zerstreuten Gedanken Pascals heißt es: Die Liebe ist kein bildliches Gebot. Sagen, Xt, welcher gekommen, die Vorbilder wegzunehmen und die Wahrheit an ihre Stelle zu setzen, sey nur gekommen, um das Bild der Liebe aufzustellen und die wirkliche Liebe, die Verpflichtung dazu wegzunehmen, welche zuvor galt, das zu sagen, ist abscheulich. Der Messias soll nach den fleischlichen Juden ein großer, weltlicher Fürst seyn; nach den fleischlichen Xn ist er gekommen, uns von der Verpflichtung zur Liebe Gottes zu befreien und uns die Sacramente zu geben, welche Alles ohne uns wirken. Dieses ist so wenig die christliche Religion, als jenes die jüdische. But one must always remember that everything depends on who is being addressed. To the troubled, the sorrowful, to those who sink under the enormous burden of loving God entirely, yes, to

15

23 In den zerstreuten Gedanken . . . die jüdische.] German, In his Pensées Pascal writes: Love is not a metaphorical command. To say that Christ―who has come to take away the exemplars and to put the truth in their place―to say that he has only come to take away the image of love and actual love, obligation, that had previously been in force: to say that, is reprehensible.

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 21–23

5

•

1850

113

those who are almost tempted by the thought that it might even be presumptuous to attempt such a thing, to them one must indeed speak of grace, of a God who loves me. Pascal, on the other hand, rants against the Jesuits’ callous frivolousness, which would even make a profession of demoralizing hum. beings in this way, with the help of Xnty’s mildness―this, you see, is another matter.

10

117

22

15

20

Pascal.

[a]

See Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, p. 137

1

P. is right to note (in the 11th letter of the Provincial Letters) that the fact that people railed so much against his opposition to moral decline is proof of their indifference to the truth and their worldly attachment to life. If someone were to warn people against poisoned meat or a city infested with the plague, they would not take it ill or explain it as lack of love. In the same letter he says to the Jesuits that the 10 previous letters have almost been in jest; he has shown them the wound that could be inflicted, but has not yet inflicted it.

25

23

30

35

The Unrecognizability of What I Am Rlly Fighting For. When the debate is about doctrine, it is easy to keep the issue in focus. The difficulty of my task is of course that I say: In general, the doctrine, as it is presented, is entirely sound. Thus I am not fighting against that. My contention is that something should follow from this. But people continually want to drown this out by constantly saying, [“]Of course we are saying the same thing, we teach the same thing.[”] For the carnal Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to be a great, worldly prince. For the carnal Christian, he has come to liberate us from the obligation to love God and has given us the sacraments, which accomplish everything without our doing anything. This is no more the Christian religion than it is the Jewish.

[a]

The Unrecognizability of What I Am Rlly Fighting For.

[b]

I have read a similar observation somewhere in Neander’s Bernhard of Clairvaux, no doubt in connection with Arnold of Brescia or at any rate in connection with a reformation dealing with ethical matters, which thus concedes the truth of the doctrine and does not dispute about it.

5

10

114

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 23–25

•

1850

And because I have no intention of leading the matter into external works-righteousness (for then things once again become easily recognizable), and also because I continually underscore that everyone must seek refuge in grace, it seems as if I am fighting for nothing at all. And yet what I am fighting for is perhaps the greatest possible distinction: What the daily existence of the one who proclaims the doctrine is like―whether he suffers all sorts of losses because of it, or profits in all sorts of ways, etc.

5

10

About the 1st Essay in H. H.’s Two Essays It is stated there that a person has power to act only as long as he remains silent. If one is actually to be a martyr, he must not say it. In the recollected version of his talk at the Conventicle, Peter observed that there was an inconsistency here: here something was of course said.―Yes, quite right, for it was precisely because there had to be a halt in this direction. Furthermore, by taking such a step a person ought to give peop. occasion to act in accordance with it. And of course it is one thing to say: I will let myself be put to death―and something else to bring these thoughts forth anonymously, and thus poetically, and in this way still open the possibility of martyrdom: that peop. could be so incensed at his defense of the principle that a hum. being does not have the right to let himself be put to death for the truth that they put him to death for that reason. But all this is surely recorded in the journals from that period, and it is rlly superfluous to note it here, which I am doing only to avoid rummaging about in the old journals in order to be sure of it.

The Impossibility of Meritoriousness. Imagine someone, who, conscious of his guilt, genuinely wished to make things right again. Imagine that he succeeded to a most surprising degree―what then? Of course he finds himself in the position of having to

118

24

15

20

25

30

25

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 25–28

5

10

•

1850

thank God again and again for having been successful; perhaps he is in the position of having incurred new guilt by not having been properly grateful to God, perhaps by having at times even imagined that what he had done could earn a little something in return. But where did the meritoriousness come from? No, it is an impossibility. If meritoriousness does appear, it would be because of the guilt that follows, as they say, from a hum. being forgetting, in relation to God, whom it is he is talking to―from talking as we do with hum. beings when we stand and talk with one another, for in the relationship among ourselves, meritoriousness is not excluded.

119

26

Pascal.

15

. . . In short, if we want to say that humanity is too lowly to associate with God―then we would have to be very great in order to be able to judge about such matters. somewhere in Pensees, quoted in Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, p. 238.

27

Pascal. To know God only speculatively is not to know him at all. Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, p. 243.

28

30

Christianity There was a time when all the other sciences drew their prestige from Xnty, from theology: a natural scientist, a physician, etc.―it was to his credit if he were also a doctor of theology. Alas, now peop. have nearly managed to reverse this completely. The fact that Pascal was a famous mathematician is almost a credit to Xnty―in view of this, people think, we can at least listen to and reflect upon what he says. Alas, what a change.

115

116

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 29–30

•

1850

Mynster. If I had to find a beautiful expression for Mynster’s approach, something that would surely please him, I would cite a passage from Pascal’s Pensees where he speaks about how one should approach those who reject religion or who have an unfavorable attitude toward it: One should begin with proofs that it does not conflict with reason; next, show that it is venerable and try to inspire respect for it; then make it appealing (ingratiate it) and awaken in them the wish for it to be true, something one then is to demonstrate with irrefutable proofs; but most of all it is important to make it appealing in their eyes. cited from Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, p. 223.

29

5

10

15

120

Epictetus. My greatest objection to him is that one notices that he is a slave. The frightfulness of knowing that one is a slave―and then, that this is something permanently decided―makes such an impression of despair that he thereby discovers the pride of Stoicism. But we are not brought up in that way; we do not begin with such horrors. It is quite true that only horror to the point of despair develops a hum. being to his highest point― while of course many also succumb during this treatment―but it is also very beneficial to a pers. to be treated so harshly. Already in the first words of Epictetus: Some things are in our power, others are not in our power―already there, I hear the slave. And understood in this manner, there is a frightful passion in these cold words: one hears the slave sighing in his chains, or one hears the sigh from the time when

30

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 30–31

5

10

•

1850

117

he learned this, as a slave must learn it, learned to rehearse this distinction. The distinction is correct, but the passion with which it is practiced is very different. It is certainly true that in comparison with antiquity we are mollycoddled nowadays, and to a great extent the misfortune is surely to be found in the circumstance that we have not become truly unhappy―the external pressures are so lenient that we do not have the character to make ourselves unhappy― but nonetheless, character can also be purchased at too high a price: in a certain sense, character can be purchased at the cost of character.

121

31

20

25

30

35

Jacqueline Pascal. She puts it superbly (in her observations on the mystery of Xt’s death), where she speaks of good works: Nothing is as dangerous as that which pleases both God and hum. beings, for such actions have one thing that pleases hum. beings and something else that pleases God; e.g., the greatness of St. Theresa: what pleased God was her humility, what pleased hum. beings was her superior enlightenment (Erleuchtung) see Reuchlin, Pascals Leben, p. 258. (Appendix I). Incidentally, I understand her words somewhat differently than she herself does. What is dangerous in having what pleases God also be pleasing to hum. beings, or the danger in performing such works, is that there is a tranquilizing element. On the other hand, when what I do pleases God but not hum. beings, or vice versa, I am kept more alert―in the former case, I am preserved in the right sort of heterogeneity. And incidentally, there can always be a question as to whether it is the case that God and hum. beings actually are in agreement like that.

25 Erleuchtung] German, enlightenment.

[a]

She also says: fear death when there is no danger, but not in danger, for one ought to be a man. see loc. cit., p. 259.

1

5

118

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 32–34

•

1850

Virg. Mary. Somewhere, Reuchlin (either in his Geschichte Port Royal or in Pascals Leben) points out that it was a proof of the frivolousness introduced by the Jesuits that they especially understood the Virg. Mary as a symbol of the world’s pain, immersing themselves in the pain of this world, which pierced her heart.

An Either/Or concerning an Established Order. Either the established order―or the single individual, unconditionally the single individual, but nothing in between, which is half-heartedness, parties, sects, and the like. This is the way in which I support the established order, for there is scarcely one person in a generation who manages to be the single individual unconditionally―what they want is to dabble in parties and the like.

Christian Eloquence. In his Genius of Xnty Chateaubriand says that Christian eloquence is something that distinguishes Xnty from paganism―paganism did not have anything of this sort. And Tzschirner (in his Letters to Ch., Leipzig, 1828) agrees. In this connection it must be noted that this is an error. For understood from the Christian point of view, the entire concept of Christian “eloquence” is in many ways an error, an indirect proof that the existential element has been slackened. For as is demonstrated by all political analogies, the disintegration of states increased in tempo in proportion to the increase in eloquence. As far as that goes, the absence of ecclesiastical eloquence perhaps serves more as a proof of the greater existential capability of paganism. And furthermore, if paganism had something analogous to Christian eloquence, it was the eloquence of the Sophists. In accordance with its essence, eloquence is in large measure sophistry; the sophistical element is that eloquence is put in the place where action is called for.

32

5

33 10

122 15

34

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 35–36

35

5

10

123 15

36

25

30

35

•

1850

Ordinary Xns―Extraordinary Xns. The Sophists simply teach this distinction as something fixed: the great requirements are not for all of us―instead of there being only one category of Xns and having us all measured against the criterion of ideality in order to teach humility, but also for uplift―instead of the self-satisfaction that emerges when one is merely measured against one’s given relativity. The best example of this sort of thoroughgoing sophistry and indulgence is Le Moine’s book, la devotion aisèe, comfortable piety, Paris, 1652. a Jesuit. (There are excerpts in Pascals Leben by Reuchlin, pp. 296 et al., appendix X). Here it is made into a system, and mediocrity completely legitimized. The whole book deserves attention because it is just like the sermons that are customary nowadays. And if someone did this without mentioning its title or revealing that its author was a Jesuit, the average run of priests would find that it is true Xnty.

Sloppy Work. Messing about with matters of no significance is the characteristic achievement of our times. This is also what Peter is doing in the name of heartiness and conviviality, but this is how one becomes a success in our times, the age of envy and leveling. An actual accomplishment, the fruit of perhaps many years diligent effort, always insists upon a certain silence―which annoys, indeed outrages the times, which scent something aristocratic in it. It could scarcely occur to the author of such an accomplishment to request lenient judgment in a preface or to involve himself with people in that way at all, because he himself knows that what he has done has been carefully thought through and that it requires a judgment that has been calmly and carefully thought through. Ah, but how different things are with sloppy work! A man himself knows very well that he has not rlly worked through the matter fully―what wonder, then, that time and again he says, “I request lenient judgment,” etc., which

119

120

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 36–38

•

1850

titillates the power-hungry mob. Thus, what has been communicated is really not essentially higher than the average level of the public, the audience: this in turn pleases the power-hungry. The author has protected himself with all sorts of talk about his not having had time to work the matter through, about it being only a trial-run, etc.―and thus he is protected against every actual criterion and gains favor in the eyes of the insignificant who love only insignificance. In short, from top to bottom the age is a conspiracy against genuine accomplishment, just as it is a conspiracy against property, and the like. I, too, have a heart, and I have tried to keep having a heart― and therefore I have striven to keep it in the right place, so that I do not have it on my lips at one moment and the next moment down in my trousers, but never in the right place―and so that I do not confuse heartiness with chatter and nonsense.

5

10

15

124

Grundtvig and the Grundtvigians. Every nature has a need for its opposite, produces it itself, and thus often imagines that it is itself this opposite. With G., then, a powerful nature, strength, toughness, perseverance, and the like, are characteristic of him. That is precisely why he loves to talk so much about heartiness and the like: it is a necessary emanation. Now this is the aspect imitated by the Grundtvigians, who become real slobberers.

Majority―Minority. The truth is always in the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority because the minority is ordinarily made up of those who do, after all, actually have an opinion, while the strength of the majority is illusory, formed by the crowd that has no opinion―and which at the next instant (when it becomes clear that the minority has the stronger view) adopts the view of the minority, which now becomes that of the majority: that is, it becomes nonsense by having the whole of the crowd and numbers on its side, while the truth is once again in a new minority.

37

20

25

38

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 38–40

•

1850

With regard to the truth, the same thing happens to this awkward monster―the majority, the public, etc.―as we say happens to a person who travels for the sake of his health: He is always one station behind. 5

39

10

15

125

20

Contemporaneity with Xt―Being a Disciple. The places where Xt himself sets the requirement infinitely high are related to a person who wanted to be a disciple, that is, to someone who himself asked to become one. In other situations Xt of course performed charitable deeds for many sick and wretched people―without requiring of them that they leave everything and follow him or become disciples. Thus he required nothing more of them than their faith and gratitude. Yet one must bear in mind that contemporaneity with Xt is always an enormous strain. But now contemporaneity has been taken away, so the more lenient relation (that of gratitude, which, please note, does not express itself by imitating him) easily becomes too lenient and is easily taken in vain. Therefore it ought to be emphasized―also in order that the gratitude can be that much greater: that the criterion is to become a disciple―yet one must not act overly hastily and with foolish daring, but if one has not been called in this way, one becomes all the more grateful. This is what Anti-Climacus has done.

25

40

30

35

Yours―Mine. This is certainly how the Xn―alas, especially one who is only a Christian on more lenient terms―might speak with Christ: I call myself “yours,” not as if I had sacrificed everything in order to become yours, alas, no―I am an egotist. But you have sacrificed everything in order that I might be yours. I have not paid a high price or expressed at great cost that I am yours, but you have paid a high price and have expressed at great cost that I am yours. How strange! Thus once again, things are absolutely inverted here, as everywhere, in relation to the divine. For in other situa-

121

122

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 40–42

•

1850

tions, the superior person, who has perhaps even cheated another pers. out of his love, says: [“]I have not done everything in order to be yours, but you have done everything in order that I could be yours―thus, in a way, you are mine, but I am not yours.[”] Alas, in a way, this is how Xt is cheated by all of us. He does everything, sacrifices everything, so that we might be his―but we do not sacrifice anything for him in order to be his. And yet, when it sees that he has sacrificed everything, grace regards us as his. And in this sense the weak Xn calls himself yours.

The Distraction. The harsh interrogator knows that the strictest examination is to order the person being interrogated to look continually at one single point, e.g., a nail in the wall. But this is also what saves one: the only saving distraction (which is Xnty) is to gaze at someone else, at Xt, forgetting everything―every supposed bit of perfection, but also every grief and wretchedness and guilt―by gazing at him.

5

10

41

20

126

25

That Christianity Simply Does Not Exist. This thesis, which Anti-Climacus posits, has awakened some anger, as though it were a terrible exaggeration. The fact is that most people probably permit themselves to be deceived by an illusion that is inherent in numbers. Let us perform the following experiment. All of us who could be said to have at least some interest in Xnty: let each of us―indeed, just as in the party game played at Christmastime, when people are

42

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 42

5

10

15

20

25

127 30

35

40

sentenced to go out [“]and look at the stars[”]―let each of us go into a room alone. Each person closes the door behind him and is now alone and summons up the idea that God is present―then states his full name and says: [“]Dare you now, here, before God, dare you claim that you are a true Xn in the strictest sense[?”] I wager that not one single one will do so. Everyone says, [“]No. God preserve me, I take refuge in grace and limit myself to striving.[”]― ―Then we all come out again. With one person it will perhaps be noticed that it was painful for him to make that confession; with another, one cannot notice anything. But all this of course is of no consequence: in brief, each and every one of us has made the confession, and so we can surely play well together―or perhaps for this very reason we can play together best, because children who are alike play together best. Thus, of those who have at least some interest in Xnty, there was no one who dared say that he was a true Xn in the strictest sense. But all the many who do not even have an interest in Xnty: their existence certainly cannot serve as any proof that Xnty exists. But if there exists no one who is a Xn in the strictest sense, then neither does Xnty exist. When one dissolves the numerical, simplifying it, scarcely anyone is embittered. But of course everyone ought to simplify the numerical himself and not permit himself to be impressed by an illusion. The principle is this: as soon as there exists one single true Xn in the strictest sense, Xnty exists; and on the other hand, even there were 7 billion, 5 million, 696,734, or 35 Xns, sort of, to a certain degree, Xnty does not exist on that account. The numerical does not constitute a quality; on the contrary, it is indifferent with respect to quality. What holds here is unum noris omnes. We do not become angry when someone says: I am just as good a Xn as all the others. But we do become angry when someone says: I am not a Xn in the strictest sense, and the others probably are not, either. And yet, basically this is one and the same thing. 37 unum noris omnes] Latin, if one knows one, one knows them all. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1850

123

[a]

Viewed from another perspective, we hum. beings are perhaps well served by the fact that no Xns in the strictest sense exist, for one such would explode existence and would probably cause all of us others to fall away completely. Therefore it is the pseudonym who says that Xnty does not exist; I say (with the help of the preface) of myself only that I dare not call myself a Xn in the strictest sense.

1

5

10

124

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 42

•

1850

But the fact is that the numerical exercises a sensory power over us hum. beings. “The number,” which never changes, i.e., never produces a new quality, changes us. Every individual makes the confession that he is not Xn in the strictest sense, and to this extent, Xnty does not exist. But then people nonetheless want the sum of such individuals (which does not prove that Xnty exists or prove that it does not exist) to be the proof that Xnty exists. The numerical exercises a sensory power and transforms the hum. being. Take a very simple example. A shop clerk, for example, is used to having 300 [rix-dollars] pass through his hands every day. In the evening he counts the money completely mechanically and never makes a mistake. But assume that one evening there were, for example, 10,000 [rix-dollars]. Then he is transformed: the blood rushes to his head, his heart almost pounds, his hand is uncertain, he must count again and again, and yet it is only a greater number of the 5-rix-dollar bills with which he is so familiar. And this is also how it is in relation to numbers of hum. beings. The same men and women whom one knows individually, about whom one knows how much they know or do not know concerning one or another matter: when they are sitting in an auditorium and I am at a lectern, these same men and women (yes, they are the same men and women) transform me and seem to me to have been transformed―I am impressed; I think: Goodness gracious! The numerical transforms people, puts them in a rapturous state, a sort of possession, as if by being many they were something entirely different from what each individual is. They are enraptured, understanding everything differently. If, in such a highly honored public, someone happens to fart (concerning which everyone knows very well what his opinion would be under other circumstances) people are taken aback, people consider whether this might not be a voice of the spirit: that is how enraptured we are when we are a public. And by the same token, the numerical enraptures the speaker; he judges matters entirely differently than he would otherwise. And because so many love this confused, enraptured state, they also love to be in gatherings and to speak at gatherings.

5

10

15

20

25

128

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 43–44 43

5

10

15

20

25

129 30

44 35

•

1850

Christianity in God’s Interest―and Xnty in the Interest of Human Beings. The interest of human beings is for there to be a religious establishment; the more complex and grandiose it is, the better, all the more so because of the security and the distance from decisions―which we hum. beings love so much. God’s interest is that there be no religious establishment whatsoever, for the more everything is immediately subject to him, the more he has a hand in everything. But representing Xnty in God’s interest in the strictest sense is beyond a hum. being’s powers; at a minimum it requires an apostle. How, then, can these two ideas be united: an established order―there is no established order? In such a way that we hum. beings confess that the established order exists for the sake of our frailty―that is, that it is a concession that has arisen because each and every one of us has at one or another point reduced what it is to be a Christian in the strictest sense, and in that way has helped to establish an established order which in turn helps us to reduce [what it is to be Christian]. But the fact is that the loftiest thoughts are usually never included. So we think up an established order. In contrast to this we think of such lower categories as immaturity, party spirit, etc., etc. Yes, in that case an established order is naturally what is highest. But then it ends with people deifying “an established order.” People forget that beyond “the established order” there is, as the ideal, the thought: No established order. The order is: No. I―there is no established order. But this is so infinitely much too lofty for us hum. beings that we must pray to have an established order “by grace.” No. II―an established order. No. III―immaturity and party spirit dabbling at wanting to be something higher than the established order.

Is a Hum. Being Permitted to Speak about the Most Important Things with One Single Other Hum. Being? For I know very well that he is permitted to speak with him about the weather, and so forth. But the other idea is something I have concerned myself with for my entire life, and so much so that I do not know whether I

125

126

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 44–46

•

1850

dare utter this: Is a hum. being permitted, etc.―for at that very instant I would actlly have broken my relation of silence to God. God exists. His will is made known to me in Holy Scripture and in my conscience. This God wants to intervene in the world. But how is he to be capable of doing this without the help of, e.g., per hum. beings[?] Now, one can say―we can all say―Yes, he does indeed do this, but not per me. That means: none of us wants to be the single individual, for if God is to intervene, it must be per the single individual. And how does one become the single individual? Well, if he does not relate himself solely to God with respect to the highest things, saying, [“]Now I consider matters the best I can, and then act accordingly, so that you, o God, can take hold of me, and therefore I do not speak with one single other hum. being. I dare not[”]―if he does not do this, he does not become the single individual. The moment I speak with another hum. being about what concerns me the most, about what God’s will is for me, at that moment God’s power over me is already diminished. Oh, how many there are, indeed, who are capable of grasping this priority of God in a hum. being, so that even gaining permission to speak to another hum. being about what concerns one most is an indulgence, a concession, for which one must pray, because no mere hum. being can endure being the single individual unconditionally.

5

10

15

20

25

“The Single Individual”

45

This principle can only be employed poetically, for it would be presumptuousness if one put oneself forward as being “the single individual” in the eminent sense. Thus it is a striving. 130 30 1

Practice in Xnty.

[a]

Practice in Xnty.

People will say that it is unfair to introduce something like this at such a moment, when the clergy are under such pressure. But it is of course only in order to get them to strain even more at pulling things through, so that they do not back down improperly: thus the coachman lays on the whip just when things are most difficult. 6 per] Latin, by means of.

46

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 46–49

5

47

•

1850

People will say: The clergy have only just gotten back on their feet. Yes, thank you very much―how did they do that? In a purely worldly struggle for official positions and livings. That was precisely why it was important that a requirement be heard at this moment from a very different quarter: that it does not become pure and simple worldliness, a worldly struggle for worldly goods―true enough, by the clergy, but does that make it a spiritual struggle[?]

To Hit. When a coachman uses his whip, it can mean exact opposites: it can mean that the horses are to run, but also that they are to stand still. Let us not forget the latter meaning.

48

20

25

Apologetics in Early or Original Xnty―and Now. Of course the Christians made use of apologetics even in the beginning, but, be it noted, they did so in confronting others who by no means conceded that they were Christians, nor had they any desire to be. Now the scene is set in “Xndom,” where all are Xns. The fundamental untruth is in the confounded frivolousness with which we have taken care that everyone becomes Xn―while we nonetheless know that this is a lie, and then treat them as we would pagans, but do not require, above all, that they give up the name of Xn. To “defend” Xnty to―Xns is unfathomable nonsense.

131

49

30

Duty to Conscience The Quakers made it a matter of conscience that Xns not go to war. I would like to ask whether voting on what constitutes truth is not a matter of conscience for the true Xn. Is not this (balloting on “truth”) precisely the same old idol worship―the worship of the human race or the numerical―based on the idea that “the truth” has no higher origin, no higher authority[?]

127

128

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 50–52

•

1850

The Daily Press.

50

Its significance is rlly to transform the public into a sort of person―and then to consort with the public. 5

“Imitation” “Just as Xt humbled himself and assumed the form of a humble servant―thus ought the Xn, to whom God granted worldly might and power, live humbly amid all this splendor.” This comparison is not quite exact, however; it omits what is voluntary: genuine imitation. And that is what I do not like, that people act as though it were nothing when they omit something very decisive. After all, we could at least be truthful before God and confess our weakness instead of reducing the requirement.

“Imitation” The beginning must not be imitation, but “grace,” and then imitation should follow after as a fruit of gratitude as best one can. Take a love-relationship between two hum. beings. The relationship is not to be one in which the lover torments himself about whether at every instant he measures up to every possible requirement of the beloved, for this is not love, but earning love, wanting to earn it, and forgetting that the beloved is of course not a creditor but a lover. No, it begins with joy over being loved―and then follows an effort to please, which, however, is continually encouraged by the fact that even if it is unsuccessful, one is loved nonetheless. But in relation to Xt what is difficult is in fact to remain so spiritual that one truly grasps how infinitely much Xt has done for me, what an enormous evil sin is, and what an extraordinary good eternal blessedness is.

51

10

15

52

20

132

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 53–54

53

5

•

1850

129

“Imitation” But one must not talk about it as Paulli, who the last time I heard him (the gospel for the 26th Sunday after Trinity Sunday) said: [“]We have now followed after Xt through the series of holy days in the year that has passed.[”] This is nonsense, a slipshod word-play on the term “follow after,” merely an attempt to get it said, as if everything would then be all right, and one could not accuse him of omitting imitation.

10

54

15

20

25

133

30

35

On Myself. I am never really understood. Never, never in the least way, has it ever occurred to me to imagine that I was an extraordinary Xn, any more than it has occurred to me to want to found a party, a sect, and the like, so that we became a group who led one another to imagine that we were extraordinary Xns. Truly, nothing is more foreign to my being. No, what concerns me is truly a common concern. I myself feel that I am a weak hum. being for whom the requirements of ideality in connection with being a Xn are too high. Now I ask, how are we poor hum. beings to behave in order to get along with Xnty. To behave as we have until now, simply to edit Xnty, to omit everything strenuous, seems to me just wrong, and it seems to me that every truth-loving pers. must be of the same opinion. So my suggestion is that with the help of a humble admission each of us seek to come into a relationship to the ideal in such a way that it does not crush us, but humbles us. An apostle stands infinitely higher: he hates the world. Alas, understood in this way, I again see very well how far down I, and we hum. beings generally, are―but that is of course why the admission is to be made. (For one must surely take note of the presumptuousness of wanting to be an apostle with respect to the extraordinary things that were granted him, but it is not presumptuous to want to resemble him in dying away.) On the other hand, do I not defraud the truth by suppressing the ideal entirely[?]

[a]

On Myself.

1

130

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 55–57

•

1850

Contemporaneity with Xt or an Apostle. Certainly this contemporaneity makes the relationship into the most strenuous, for such an existing person jacks up the price of the ideal. But then it does help that there is someone who is so far out and who commands with authority. We hum. beings, as we live nowadays, höchstens we understand the ideal (it is something poetic), but in order merely to gain an approximation of the existential impetus, there must be such external rigor, a rigor and authority like that of an apostle― for I prefer to keep Xt entirely out of this in order that the matter not be taken too far. One can, however, be aware of possessing willingness―but what is lacking, if anything is going to come of it, is external rigor. It is impossible to provide this rigor for oneself, for every reduplication of the self cannot, after all, contain more than this self contains.

The Official Proclamation of Christianity. Were one to define categorically where it is and how it is related to the proclamation of Xnty in the stricter sense, one could say: It comes to Xnty, but not into Xnty. It takes all the wretchedness of earthly life, etc.―and Xnty is then consolation. But that this consolation is in its turn a peculiar business, that spiritual trial comes in here, that the consolation is not exactly straightforward, that Xnty requires that one suffer for the teachings, etc.: all this is entirely suppressed.

55

5

10

15

56

25

134

Faith―Works. In the sermon on the epistle for New Year’s Day, Luther says that a hum. being is saved by faith―works are only “exercise works.” 9 höchstens] German, at most.

57

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 57–59

5

10

•

1850

This is what I have often presented as follows: Grace is what is serious―my works are merely a jest―and then I go to it, the more vigorously, the better―but to me it is nonetheless a jest, and it must not mean anything more to me than that. And this is Xnty. Fortunate the person who only heard this teaching and never came to see the dreadful scale on which it is taken in vain, and thus never had occasion, because of that dismal knowledge, to experience anxiety about whether he himself had taken grace in vain and in that anxiety became something of a self-tormentor. Here again it can be seen how infinitely important it is in connection with Christianity to include the person who proclaims it. Because people took Luther’s doctrine about faith―but they forgot Luther’s life.

15

58

A German Proverb. Der Geitz ist sein selbst Stieffmutter. Scriver.

20

59

135

30

John the Baptist. He sits in prison and sends the disciples to Xt to ask: Are you the one who is to come? Perhaps it could be understood as follows: He has attacked Herod, and therefore he is now imprisoned. But Xt has taken no notice whatever of the entire affair. Perhaps it is not even approved of by Xt, who does not want him to be a prophet or a judge, but merely to prepare the way for Xt. Now he sits in prison and is perhaps impatient that Xt is not doing anything for him. Thus the words “Blessed is he who is not offended” are understood as applying to John’s impatience.

18 Der Geitz . . . Stieffmutter] German, Miserliness is its own stepmother. (See also explanatory note.)

131

132

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 60–62

•

1850

Numerical Relationships. Xt lived to be 34 years old. That is the duration of a generation. And the Temple was destroyed in the year 70. That is the normal duration of a hum. life.

The Spread of Xnty.

1

5

10

[a]

An individual man, seized by Xnty, becomes a missionary, and that is why Xnty is so peculiarly widespread, which is scarcely to be found in any other religion, any more than it would be likely to occur to an individual in one of the other religions mir nichts und Dir nichts to want to spread his religion.

8 mir nichts und Dir nichts] German, without further ado.

The spread of other religions is related to political events, as all other religions are more or less tied to national affairs. Simply by looking at the unique mission of Xnty it can be seen that Xnty relates to the entire hum. race.a The papacy is rlly the only attempt to tie the spread of Xnty to politics, but the idea of the papacy is also beyond national considerations and is related to the entire human race.

60

5

61

10

15

Fraudulent Oratory.

62

The moment someone speaks emotionally about how the believer finds joy in suffering contempt, takes pleasure in poverty, and the like―at that moment he is of course (precisely when he is speaking to an audience) being carried away by sensing the influence he has over his listeners, by sensing how he is elevated in their eyes, and the like: that is, he is in precisely opposite categories. The question is: At the moment a person suffers contempt, is he truly capable of finding joy in suffering contempt[?] If things remain like this, is it not almost superhuman not to use some sort of fraud to attain at least some honor by suffering contempt like this? Imagine that daring to preach that there is joy in being subjected to mockery is itself met with

20

136

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 62–63

5

10

mockery: then we will surely see what happens to the speaker. The trouble is that what makes “the speaker” is imagination―but this is by no means what is Christian. Christianity makes witnesses, and then good-bye to eloquence: a “witness” is altogether too earnest a man to be eloquent in the oratorical sense. No, like a poet, an orator needs to be pampered. This approach has situated Xnty in categories entirely other than Christian ones.

63

Clara Raphael.

15

Review.

20

25

30

137

35

A young girl. Full name: Clara Raphael. Age: 20 years. Appearance: pretty. Religion: freethinker. Employment: governess in the household of a steward. Character: original, which is attested to by herself, her friend Mathilde, and a number of respectable women and men from the district where she is a governess― conceives the not-so-original idea: I will indeed be original. Very original! Because it perhaps occurred to her that, after all, this category is altogether too impoverished, she searches for an idea for which she can live in the unmarried state―for she does not want to marry. Here is the idea: the emancipation of women. This is also the whole of it. From her letters one learns nothing more concrete about this idea of hers: it is sufficiently original. Were the idea more concrete, perhaps it would at least be possible that she could hold it in common with someone else, but she has safeguarded her originality.

•

1850

133

134 1

5

10

15

20

a

And even though, in its infinite abstraction, the idea she has chosen does not seem in the least way to be capable of preventing her from marrying, even to a widower with 10 children―Clara Raphael nonetheless is absolutely determined not to marry: she will live for her idea. Almost inconceivable originality! For of course, the less the idea causes problems, the more original it is to cling to it―though it is clear that if the idea is not nearly so abstract (i.e., empty; i.e., not an idea), then a decision is less necessary; then the idea basically decides on a person’s behalf; and then one comes not so much to decide again and again not to marry, as one comes to have no time to want to marry because the idea fills a person and a person’s time so completely.

b

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

c

and she does not know it

an extremely original turn, almost an indecent turn, concerning which everyone will probably agree with me, however far I may be in other respects from being as pedantically strict as Herr Zierlich, who finds it scandalous that men’s and women’s clothing should hang together in the same closet.

•

1850

a

One day she takes communion, which again is something very original for such a freethinker, who appears to possess a religious education that is certainly unusual in a young girl―which, as with the editor of the book, one cannot admire enough―and to have read a couple of pages in Magnus Eirikson’s book on the Baptists and the Trinity. She takes communion and promises God that she will live for her idea―a promise with which she has surely put God in an awkward position because of the originality of her idea: which is that she actlly has no idea. She promises this. Then she goes home―and falls in love. But Clara Raphael is not simply virtuous as Charles was: she is a heroine―she will not marry. How much she suffers from this decision, which leads her to her sickbed―no one knows how much she suffers, says her closest [female] friend, and because there is no one closer who knows this than sheb, it is true that no one knows it. No, she will belong to the convent, she will live for her idea―and then becomes the founder of an entirely new order: that is, she marries the beloved―but as brother and sister. Truly an original sort of convent. Just one more remark on the original idea: a marriage between a brother and a sister. Just as, from novels, we are acquainted with the phrase: [“]I certainly have respect for him, but I cannot love him,[”] so is there also this: [“]I can only love him as can a sister.[”] This, then, usually means that the two do not marry one another. This is not so original that one is incapable of understanding it. But that this should be the signal to marry isc. If one proceeds down that path, it will surely not be long before a couple of men want to be married, which is always just as respectable as a brother and a sister marrying.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

138

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63–64

5

10

15

20

25

30

This book has an unusual feature: A long-winded preface by the editord Herr Theater Director, Councillor of State, R. Heiberg. In this preface he does his best to demonstrate that this book is an extraord. production―which is perhaps the worst thing he could have done for himself and for the book. He shows that it is the idea of the Protestant monastery―which idea? To marry? No, not to marry, but this: not to marry as man and wife, but as sister and brother. In short, a theatrical marriage―that is what Protestantism understands by the monastery and by living, unmarried, for an idea. But the editor unconditionally concedes the merit for having made this discovery, and for having introduced it to the world, to his female client Raphael, even reserving for himself a few possible objections, e.g., in opposition to Clara Raphael’s doctrine of the Trinity, perhaps also calculating that this exceedingly important contribution concerning the dogma of the Trinity will prompt Prof. Martensen to deal further with the matter. Because he cannot possibly agree with her on this any more than in connection with her intended mixede monastery, because according to his Dogmatics, Prof. M. transfers the monastery to the other world, where all of us dead will refrain from marriage with absolute strictness, even more strictly than Adam did before Eve had been created.

•

1850

135

d

(formerly the gehorsamer Diener of the System, the unforgettable author of promises; subsequently, if not the actual, then the astronomically ascended professor; at present the defender and vendor of the convent―the Clara Convent or the Clara Raphael Convent)

e

not to mention couples’

If no one else is willing to take it upon himself to defend against this intrusion of aesthetic pandering into the religious sphere, at least I will not have remained silent.

139

64

Xnty―State. Guizot says: The only policy for the state is indifference toward all religion. 1 gehorsamer Diener] German, faithful servant.

1

5

136

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 64–66

•

1850

This is consistent with ancient Xnty, which said: Xnty is indifferent toward every arrangement of the state, can live equally well under them all. Alas, but this inversion: that it is now the state that wants to play the aristocrat, as if it had no need of religion―whereas it is religion that has no need of the state. This is the thanks Xnty gets after statecraft made use of it to establish states.

1

[a]

On Myself.

On Myself Often there does seem to me something sad about the fact that with all the capacities I have been granted, I always have to stand outside as something superfluous, an impractical exaggeration. The matter is quite simple. The situation is far from being confused enough for people to make proper use of me. Each one of those who take it upon themselves to rule flatters himself with the hope that he will certainly succeed in remaining in the majority. They do not venture forth into what is decisive: to grasp that the truth is in the minority, but that nonetheless it is the only governing power. But if that is the way things are, it is quite natural that they do not wish to involve themselves with me. They fear that I will begin by situating the matter so firmly in the minority and by acting so decisively that what they rlly live for will be lost. There is something to that. But they shall come to see that it will nonetheless end with the situation becoming so desperate that they will have to make use of desperate people like me and of those like me.

5

65

15

20

25

30

140 [a]

Prof. Nielsen.

Prof. Nielsen. If nothing else, he always retains this guilt with respect to me and what is mine: He has never truly revealed how little concept he has of truth and of service to the idea.

66 35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 66–69

5

He has also viewed me as a sort of professor who as such has some new ideas. Then he wanted to adopt them. And then he simply did not see that what was characteristic of me was precisely the life with which I have served these ideas, the sacrifices I have made, etc.b

67

How Things Are Going Backward for Xnty in Xndom

10

When Spener made his appearance, the established order was rigid orthodoxy, so Spener was accused of heterodoxy. Nowadays, pietism constitutes the only fragment of support orthodoxy has; the established order is lukewarm. The historical aspect of this observation I read both in Märklin, Darstellung und Critik des modernen Pietismus, 1839, and in Hosbach, Leben Speners, just at the end of the second part.

15

20

68

Les desirs innocens, et les chastes attraits Passent dans l’Elysée, et ne meurent jamais. I have read this cited somewhere, but not the source; it is cited in Fernow, Petrarcas Leben.

25

141

69

30

“I do not box as one beating the air.” no, truly, when one strikes oneself, “brings one’s own flesh into subjection,” then one never boxes in the air. Everyone who strikes others, however, is perhaps boxing in the air.

21 Les desirs . . . meurent jamais.] French, Innocent desires and chaste attractions pass into Elysium and never die. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1850

b

137

And incidentally, the following is true of his relationship with me: The circumstances, the surrounding world, forced him to understand what he of course ought to have understood himself: that it would be impossible for him to destroy Martensen if he did not make any admission regarding me. This was done, but as skimpily and grudgingly as made necessary by the circumstances―in order to strike Martensen. Privately, on the other hand, he has flattered me enormously.

1

5

10

15

138

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 70–73

•

1850

“They all run the race”

1

5

[a]

Yes, in one sense all of them do run: they run after money, honor, esteem, after women; they run with chatter, rumors, loose talk; with lies, fiction, and trifles; they run now to the east, now to the west, out of breath on busy errands, etc.―but they do not run the race.

Alas, times and circumstances differ. There was certainly a time when one could use this text as an occasion to preach about mistaking the goal, about it being useless to run if one runs the wrong way― and this is most likely what Paul had in mind. But now the theme must be: No one is running; everyone is sitting comfortably and quietly.

“What Good Can It Do?” you say, “What good can it do if I were to oppose the crowd as an individual?” “What good can it do?―well, perhaps it can at any rate help to save your soul, so that it does not go to hell! Or do you think that someday, when God and Eternity pass judgment, such talk can help you―have you no inkling that even to dare make such an excuse is guilt enough?”

Which Sin Cries Out to Heaven? Precisely the one that dwells most hidden and quiet inside a person. No, what cries out already here on earth―such as fornication, murder, thievery, etc.―is not rlly what cries out to heaven.

70

5

71

15

72

25

142

Inversion.

73

Oh how difficult it is in this situation for a pers. simply to resist and be true! For the lower one’s striving, the more effective he is in the moment. How easily, then, it can appear to him that this extensiveness also expresses that what he is doing is

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 73–75 something loftier than working in the service of the purer idea―which is purer to the same degree that it looks, at the moment, like something superfluous, a ridiculous exaggeration. 5

74

10

15

20

75

30

35

Publicity. Complete publicity makes “governing” absolutely impossible. For all “government” rests upon the idea that there are some individuals who are more insightful, and who thus see so much farther that they can guide; but complete publicity rests upon the idea that all should “govern.” No one has better understood that this is so than the daily press: no power has protected its secrecy concerning the whole of its internal organization, the identity of its employees, its real intentions, etc., as has the daily press, which has unceasingly cried that “the government” must be public. Quite right: the view of the press was in fact that it wanted to get rid of “government”―and then it would itself govern, which is also why it secured for itself the secrecy that is necessary in order to―govern.

It can easily be seen that even in proclaiming Xnty (in addition to what his entire existence as the degraded one does), Christ repels people. Does he not continually tell his disciples in advance how things will be for them if they remain faithful[?] Thus, he does not entice, for to entice is to remain silent about the final difficulty. He draws them to himself, but right away he says in advance: If you act accordingly, your downfall is certain. Therefore he also says that the person who wants to build a tower first sits down and considers how high a tower he can build.

•

1850

139

140

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 75–78

•

1850

Everything centers on this logical conclusion: If you do what is Christian, things will go badly for you. It is this final clause that is totally omitted, which has the effect that when peop. now hear true Xnty they regard it simply as madness, a ridiculous exaggeration. People have interpreted Christianity so that it is infinitely commensurable. On these terms, people surely think that they can accept Xnty without paying too high a price.

143

5

10

Illusions in Connection with Preaching. This is why the Sophists so very much want to have the churches in which they preach packed absolutely full: Were they to preach to an empty house, they would become anxious and afraid for themselves, for they would notice that it concerns themselves. But the packed church provides two illusions: 1) that the speaker does not come to think of himself, but becomes important because of this extremely earnest business in which he is accomplishing something, proclaiming the doctrine to these many thousands of people, sowing the seed, etc.; 2) the illusion that if there are so innumerably many Xns, then he, his own self, His Reverence, is indeed a Xn.

People laugh at the syllogism of the main character in The Busy Trifler: [“]Do I not have a great deal of work, I, who employ 4 clerks and soon must take on another[?”] This syllogism is more revealing: Does not Xnty exist, when there are 1,000 priests, not counting deans, bishops, etc.[?]

76

15

20

77

30

A Difficulty from Another Angle. And assume that there was a hum. being who had heroism enough, or acquired heroism enough, to actually be able to hate father and mother, etc. for Xnty’s sake. Oh, my God, it seems to

78

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 78–80

144

5

10

79 15

20

80

25

30

35

•

1850

me that it must be frightful to be able to do this and frightful to have to live alone like that. Assume the reverse: imagine the most supremely gifted hum. being―and then to imagine he has no other society than a sparrow. This, however, is not as frightful as for a hum. being (a poor hum. being) to have to live all day long, day in and day out, in the sole company of God. Is this because I think little of God[?] No, it is because I think that there is an infinite qualitative difference between God and hum. beings, so in that sense we cannot speak of society with God. A hum. being cannot endure that society or having only the notion of God present at every moment.

A New Turn by Pastor Paulli. Today (the day after Christmas) he preached on Stephen. Now he pointed out that this was not something one should “admire.” Quite right: it should in fact be put forward for imitation or for humbling. Though that was not the turn Paulli made: No, we should not admire it, but “give God the glory.” One can certainly say that, but the Pharisees said exactly the same thing because they did not want to be impressed by the fact that Xt had healed the person born blind.

Religiousness―Politics. It is increasingly clear to me that everything depends on “how” something is put into the world, upon the reduplication of a principle in the form properly related to that principle. Indeed, to put it very briefly one could say that the difference between politics and religion is that politics wants to have nothing to do with this reduplication―politics is too busy, too earthly, too finite. For reduplication is the slowest of all operations―it is rlly that of eternity. When Luther introduced the idea of the Reformation, what then? Then he, too, the great Reformer, became impatient: he did not reduplicate powerfully enough―he accepted the help of the princes, i.e., he actlly became a politician, for whom winning is more important than “how” one wins, because religiously, the only thing that matters is “how,” precisely because the religious

141

142

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 80–82

•

1850

person is eternally certain that he, or the cause, will win―indeed, that it actlly has won. Therefore he only has to take care of “how,” i.e., to reduplicate. Take a lesser example. What is rlly the error in the Spandet-Grundtvig proposal now before Parliament? It is that they do not reduplicate in relation to a religious matter, that is, that they do not serve it religiously, but politically, calling upon help from Xnty’s worst enemies in order to win by balloting. But this is irreligious. On the other hand, from a political point of view, Vespasian spoke the truth: One should not sniff money―that tax money from a whorehouse smells just as good as all other money. Here there is once again impatience, which understands that if one is to reduplicate―i.e., serve a religious cause religiously―in our times, it will take a long time to win. So they turn to superficial agreement with political radicalism, wanting to profit from it and to win with its aid. Truly, every such attempt prepares the way more and more for the downfall of religion because people have more and more contempt for religion. At the moment it looks as if religion has been helped, but that is precisely the path to its downfall―for afterward, politics despises religion because it can very well see that it is demoralized.

The Abolition of Confession a joint effort of congregation and priests. The congregation became afraid to go to confession: the confessional box brought the matter too close to a person. The priests became afraid to hear confessions: the matter became too earnest. And the whole of the proclamation of Xnty became oratory, eloquence, which, it is very true, omitted what was decisively Christian: the application, the individual.

The Turn in the Preaching of Xnty That Corresponds to the Situation of the Clergy. As long as people viewed the clergy as something elevated, something sacrosanct, Xnty was preached in its rigor. For even

145 5

10

15

20

81

30

82 35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 82–83

5

146

10

15

20

25

83

30

•

1850–51

if the clergy itself did not take it so rigorously, one did not dare dispute with the clergy, which surely could place burdens upon people and dare to be rigorous. But as this nimbus gradually disappeared, the clergy came into circumstances in which it was itself monitored. So there was nothing to be done but ease off on Xnty. And then they eased off so much that they finally arrived at total conformity with ordinary worldly comings and goings―which were then proclaimed to be Xnty. This is approximately present-day Protestantism. The good thing is that it is no longer permissible to be rigorous with others if one is not rigorous with oneself. In these times, only someone who is actually rigorous with himself can dare be rigorous or preach a more rigorous Xnty―and even so, things can go badly for him. Incidentally, what happens on a grand scale with the clergy also happens on a lesser scale. A power arises that public opinion views as having a right to be rigorous, to be rigorous toward others―and people do not consider being rigorous toward it. This was how opposition to governments arose in the various nations. Nothing whatever was required of the opposition with respect to being unselfish, etc.―no, attention was focused on the requirement that the opposition be rigorous toward the government. And the way in which the opposition paid itself off was something new: not by getting patronage appointments and the like, so people imagined that the opposition represented Truth. That is behind us now―and there is always something good about that.

Theme for a Sermon. Suddenly, some Sunday, act as if today were New Year’s Day―which in a certain sense is of course true―in order to get a proper impression of the disappearance of time. People are perhaps too well prepared for the ordinary New Year’s Day.

143

144

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 84–85

•

1851

“Bless the Lord, O My Soul, and Forget Not All His Benefits”

84

No, do not forget any―ah, but who has such a memory! Then let me at least not forget your benefit in forgiving my forgetfulness. 5

147

R. Nielsen’s Latest Book, Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated 1

85

[a]

R. Nielsen’s Latest Book: Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated

In the conclusion, where he speaks of his relationship to the pseudonyms and to me, it is really a farce. He knows very well what my judgment is, what I disapprove of, including, from the point of view of the idea, the attack on Martensen; he knows very well what he ought to have done, which would have been truer than the whole of his literary production; he has repeatedly acknowledged that he understands that I am right―but he thinks that if I were to present it publicly it would be so lofty that it would not be understood. Now, as to that latter point, we will see. But I find it inappropriate to complain publicly about how much his development owes to his conversations with me―it is beneath my dignity. Incidentally, it is perhaps a good thing that this is so. For if I did so, I would probably have R. N. as my most worst enemy―and in addition to profiting from my having rid them of R. N., Prof. M. et al. would crow over the fact that now I had once again done something that could be understood as madness in the eyes of the mob―because it would be too ideal. I cannot rlly speak out concerning Nielsen without complaining about what his development owes to his conversations with me (while I, by the way, have most conscientiously steered away from all of his works, from all knowledge about them, before they were officially released)―but as noted, it is beneath my dignity. If anyone is to speak concerning this, it must be Prof. Nielsen himself. But he seems to want to profit from having ideas given to him, which without further ado he then uses as his own. No one other than me is capable of presenting a really valuable understanding of my work as an author, of grasping the points properly, etc. So I spoke with Nielsen concerning these things― and now he wants to publicly present this as something he has grasped through reading, solely and exclusively through reading the writings. But the reason I have held out so long with him and have always felt an obligation to believe the best of him is that I have

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 85

5

10

148

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

treated the whole matter with him religiously. It was on the occasion of a more powerful than usual foreboding of death that I thought of making an attempt to acquaint another person with the cause. I chose N., who had himself sought to approach me earlier. But I did not die. Then the matter took on another meaning for me: now the question was whether, inasmuch as I had acquainted him with the cause, it might not be the will of Governance that I should take on at least one adherent. But nonetheless it was all treated as an experiment, which was why I scrupulously kept myself ignorant concerning the things he was writing at the time until they were published. But the relationship to him was always treated religiously, and therefore I felt obligated to believe―despite all the objections of my understanding―I felt obligated to believe him, all the more so because he incessantly said that, [“]little by little, he would surely come, that next time it would be better, etc.[”] But of course I can certainly see what he rlly wanted. Now, as far as the cause is concerned, this is not so important, for if in other respects he had correctly understood what had been communicated to him and had illuminated my cause properly, then let him get the credit for having independently―merely by reading the writings―acquired what he actlly owes to my conversations with him. But in a certain sense I have suffered greatly because of this relationship: there is something sad and something galling in seeing a deception right before one’s eyes. Still, I have profited very much from it, for I have learned a great deal. It would have been more encouraging to have seen a pers. won over to a purer service of the idea, and in this way further the cause, rather than this situation in which colliding egotisms now become alien to one another. For with me, N. no longer makes a secret of the fact that the difference between Martensen and himself is personal; he believes it is the concrete things in life that help a person to get going. And as for himself, he explains again and again that he is of course no better than the others―ah, but that was in fact what he wanted to give me reason to believe, right from the beginning. In other words, he now believes that he has attained more or less what he wanted: he has slipped past me and has gotten hold of Martensen. By virtue of his conversations with me he has been enriched with a literary production that will support him for a long time and concerning which he has no intention of revealing the source. Now he is in fact obligated to acknowledge what he uses from my published writings because

145

146

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 85–86

•

1851

the outside world has its eye on him (had this not been so, he would not have done that either, to which his first big book is a sad testimony), but of course no one other than myself can monitor his use of the other material―and to do that would be far beneath my dignity.

Scholarship―Xnty. I say again and again: Praise be to scholarship, etc. But the fact is that they have gradually tried to popularize all this scholarliness; it has seeped down into the populace―and true religiousness has vanished, existential respect has been lost. Take a child. Instead of commanding that in certain situations it must deny itself, to give it a lecture about self-denial, perhaps a world-historical overview of various conceptions of self-denial, etc.―such a child must of course go mad. And in religious matters, that is what the human race is: if not mad, then out of joint. There is nothing to be done here other than to split things apart, to take the single individual aside, take him existentially under the ideal. This is my work.

And now, as for theological scholarliness: it, too, is moving in entirely erroneous categories, presenting everything in straightforward categories. Take the category [“]Holy Scripture.[”] They say: If there is to be Holy Scripture, then there must also be internal agreement, even with respect to the least trifle. Nonsense! This is the hum. concept of the divine. No, a Holy Scripture demands “faith,” and precisely for that reason there must be inconsistencies, so that there can be a choice of faith, or so that faith becomes a choice and the possibility of offense can place tension upon faith. Just take a hum. relationship. If someone had a friend and wanted to test his faith or require faith, would he, for example, send him a message that was totally consistent, down to the least detail? No, he would say: Is this to require “faith”? No, he would permit small inconsistencies to creep in, and then it would become clear if the friend wanted to “believe.” It is the same with the concept Holy Scripture as with the concept “God-Man.” This, too, scholarship presents in straightfor-

5

86

10

149

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 86–88

5

87

10

150

•

1851

147

ward categories: If one is to be the God-Man, then this must also be absolutely certain in straightforward fashion, says scholarship. No, thank you, says God, you have in fact forgotten what it is to believe―there must not indeed be any straightforward recognizability, but the possibility of offense. Scholarship really ought to understand at least this much.

Backward. There are actually people in our day who pride themselves on not flattering kings and princes―who no longer have any power―and this is said flatteringly to: the crowd. But the tradition which holds that flattery means flattering kings and princes is still so much with us that in this way one can double one’s profit.

15 [a]

88

20

25

30

35

Practice in Christianity―and Me. Everyone, thus everyone who wants to be a teacher, is in the situation of being able, intellectually and with the help of imagination, to have at his command a much loftier view of existential truth than his own life actually expresses or comes to express. Because grasping the truth in this way requires much less than being it. Now here is the collision for the single individual. If he is egotistically infatuated with this worldly existence, he suppresses the higher view and makes the maximum expressed by his life into the maximum as such. In so doing he situates himself safely in self-satisfaction and is beloved by others as the one who did not make things too difficult. I myself have seriously considered this. For a moment, I thought that one ought not communicate that which existentially surpasses one’s powers. Furthermore, there is also something distressing about doing this, and one makes oneself vulnerable to many sorts of unpleasantness from people who do not like to have the matter taken to such heights and therefore do not forget to remind one of what one has, by the way, oneself admitted― that neither does one express it existentially oneself. But I believe that one owes it both to God and to the truth to do so. It is of course so easy and so pleasant to avoid mak-

Practice in Christianity―and Me.

1

148

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 88–89

•

1851

ing the criterion greater than what one can readily achieve, especially when one, in addition, is one of the most gifted, perhaps the most gifted, person on the scene. And on the other hand, when one decides to peg the price at the level of the ideal, one ruins one’s own chances, throwing all this away, and also makes oneself unpopular with people. Yet, as mentioned, in my view it is a duty owed to the truth, to the idea. What has caused the truth to retreat generation after generation is precisely the selfishness, the lack of courage, that no one has dared hate himself in order to make room for the ideal. This is also the “guilt” in Mynster’s position. For my part, I have made an attempt with the help of Practice in Xnty.

5

10

15

151

A Peculiar Difficulty.

89

They say, if you have worldly goods and the like, then enjoy them. [“]But,[”] the priest says, [“]you are also to consider that they could be taken from you at any moment,[”] and the priest says, [“]This observation will assist you in attaining true enjoyment.[”] Here, once again, there is something backward. For if a hum. being could actually cling fast to the notion that everything that provides joy in the human sense could be taken from him at any moment, if he actually can cling to that notion, he is essentially “spirit,” and at that very instant those worldly goods would rlly be of no importance to him. As usual, the priest here takes the higher category and acts as if becoming “spirit” were a good in a quite straightforward sense, instead of its being a good only if it is spiritually understood, and a good from which we hum. beings, who have not yet become spirit, actlly shrink. That it is possible at the same time both to be spirit (to understand at every moment that what gives me joy in the human sense can be taken away

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 89–90

5

10

15

•

1851

149

from me at every moment) and also to take joy in it: this is a modern caprice grounded in a person’s never clinging fast, with existential seriousness, to the notion that everything could be taken from one at every moment―and therefore, of course, that notion cannot in fact come to disturb a person in the enjoyment of worldly goods. The moment someone takes becoming spirit seriously, the consequence immediately manifests itself in the whole of worldly goods being lost for him. As we live nowadays, if we are to be truthful before God we must speak as follows: [“]I understand well that becoming spirit is the actual requirement, but could I not, through a little indulgence, be permitted by grace to keep such thoughts from coming altogether too close to me, for I would very much like to take childlike joy in worldly things, and Lord God, I am not making myself out to be any stronger than I am―I am only a child.[”]

20

152

90

25

30

Theme for a Sermon or 4 Sermons. 4 lines that I read somewhere in Scriver; he calls them a verse, though they do not rhyme, and relates that he has read them in a house, written above the door, or something like that―that is what people did in the old days; now we limit ourselves at most to writing a little over the entrance to a tomb, which, however, is of no use to the dead, because it is behind them. 1) As you believe, so do you live.b

35

Thus it is not, as people think, that one’s faith stands in an indifferent relation to one’s life, so that one can believe one thing and one’s life expresses something else. No, even if your mouth says something different, what your life expresses is your faith.

[a]

1

b

5

Is perhaps best done as confessional discourses, drawing heavily upon the situation of the confessional: before God as an individual. It is the old Socratic saying: when someone says he has understood that such and such is the right thing and then does not do it, he has not in fact understood it. The ridiculousness of assurances that one has a conviction, when the only reliable assurance is action. This can easily be seen in finite situations. If a financier were to give assurances and perhaps expound vehemently that at that moment the only right things to purchase were 3 percent bonds―and he himself purchases 4 percent bonds: was it really his conviction that that was the right thing[?].

10

15

20

150 1

5

10

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 90–91

[c]

In relation to the surrounding world, it is sufficient for you to say that you believe thus and such; we are incapable of checking up on a hum. being in that respect. But here you are before God, and the judgment of eternity will be: As you have lived, so have you believed. It does not help to say: [“]Lord, Lord[”]―faith is known by its fruits. [d]

15

20

25

The situation of the confession is similar to that of death: to be entirely alone, before God. 2) We distance ourselves as much as possible from the thought of death; we do not want to be disturbed by it―and Xnty wants to bring us as close to it as possible. Confess it: this is how we live, this is how we relate to Xnty, just like someone who puts some money in a burial society, a relationship of possibility, and we count on becoming Xn in death―but as you live, so do you die. [e]

30

35

40

45

3) Thus you are immortal. Do not trouble yourself with having doubts about it or with having it proven. You are immortal. You depart―and eternity is not the land of shadows―but that of clarity, of transparency, where everything is revealed, held up to the light―and this is also what confession is: consider it well. You are alone before God, and he is sheer clarity. He lives in a light that no one can penetrate, but he is a light that penetrates everything. Oh, make use of the moment voluntarily to become entirely manifest―afterward, in eternity, when you are compelled to become entirely manifest, it will be too late.

•

1851

2) As you live, so do you die. Death is of course possible at every moment― and late conversion is suspect. Dying is not something in itself, but is the product of one’s life. Not something that happens to a person, but something that belongs to one’s life.

5

3) As you die, so do you depart. Thus to die is not to go away, to conceal oneself in the earth, etc. 4) As you depart, so do you remain. Frightful earnestness! Thus, so it is decided, and as it is now, so does it remain. Who has strength enough to bear the weight of this thought! Even when a criminal is condemned to life imprisonment (that is, only for these few years, not forever), at the moment the judgment is announced to him, he almost faints. And yet he does not take it entirely literally; even at the first moment he adds the thought that after all, in the course of time a pardon is possible. But there is no course of time in eternity. Even when two friends or two lovers are parted and say to each other: We will never see each other again―it overwhelms them. And yet they do not understand this entirely literally, not even at the first moment. They add the notion that the future holds many possibilities and in time many things happen. But nothing happens in eternity. Everything remains as it is, and there is no future―and yet there is an eternal future. Frightful earnestness!

10

15

153

20

25

30

Contemporaneity with Xt―Grace. In contemporaneity not even Xt can reduce the requirement the least bit, for in that case his own

91

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 91–92

5

10

15

20

life would of course be changed: He was in fact to fulfill the Law to its fullest extent. Therefore, neither does he become angry that no one can be his disciple. Then he dies, and his death is the coming-into-being of grace. When he was dying,a he also reduced the requirement in relation to the thief;[b] Had he reduced the requirement during his lifetime, Xt would of course not have been the Savior of the world, because in being the fulfillment of the requirement he is also the requirement itself. He must express the requirement of the Law to the fullest extent―must explode existence. But then he departs from the world with the words: Believe in me. Here is faith―grace. During his lifetime the relationship must be; faith―imitation, even if he himself understood that no one of his contemporaries could express imitation, which at its maximum would be that one was oneself the Exemplar.

154

92

25

30

35

40

An Understanding of Xnty. One can say that Xnty absolutely did not come into the world in order to develop these great virtues in the individual―on the contrary, the great virtues and the heroic were precisely what were prominent in paganism. But then the situation was in fact that precisely because the ideal ϰατεξοχην was unknown to paganism, the individual was given occasion to imagine that he himself could almost become the ideal and take pride in it, so the contrast came to be between these heroes and all other hum. beings, who were more or less idiots. Then the true ideal revealed itself. The true ideal reveals that everyone has need of grace, humbling everyone. Differences built upon selfishness cannot hold―because confronted with the ideal, the strongest needs grace just as much as does the weakest. 30 ϰατεξοχην] Greek, to an extraordinary degree, “par excellence.”

•

1851

151

a

And indeed, during his lifetime he also did this in relation to the many for whom he performed charitable deeds and whom he allowed to leave without requiring imitation—only in connection with those whom he himself wanted to have as—or who themselves wanted to be—disciples did he have to be so rigorous.

1

5

10

[b]

for here there could be no talk of requiring “imitation.” Still, precisely because there cannot be any question of imitation in this case, neither can one say definitely that there was any reduction in the requirement. Here, however, it is shown that imitation qua talis is not an absolute condition, for in that case Xt would have to have performed a miracle, letting the thief climb down from the cross and giving him life―in order then to see what would become of his imitation.

18 qua talis] Latin, as such.

15

20

25

152

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 92–93

•

1851

And in a certain sublime sense, the ideal transforms into a jest all differences between one hum. being and another with respect to perfection. Thus Xnty did not come in order to develop these heroic virtues in the individual, but to remove selfishness and to set forth love: “Let us love one another.” Less time and diligence is used in perfecting oneself up to a certain maximum―which can so easily be a sort of selfishness―than in working for others. But this can in turn be taken in vain, so that in one’s preoccupation with working for others, one completely forgets one’s own development. Therefore, intensity must once again be brought to the fore. But it is always a risky business to insist too strongly upon the difference between true and false Xns if the former are described as being more heroic and the like, because this can so easily become paganism. Therefore I have always insisted that Xnty is properly for poor people, who perhaps work and slave all day and can scarcely earn their daily subsistence. The better off one is, the more difficult it is to become a Xn, for reflection can so easily take the wrong direction. It was thus always my wish to preach for the common man. But then the vulgar press did everything to present me as mad in the eyes of the common man, so for a time I had to abandon that wish, but I will certainly return to it.

5

10

15

20

25

156

Is a Hum. Being Permitted to Will His Own Destruction? No. Why not? Because something of this sort either has its basis in acedia and the like―in which case he ought to combat it―or in wanting to be more than a hum. being. For true enough, there are situations in which the hum. understanding can see that here a sacrifice would have an enormous effect, would truly clear the way. But to will one’s own destruction is nonetheless too exalted for a hum. being. Willing one’s destruction is so exalted that only the divine can will such a thing in perfect purity. In every hum. being who wants something of this sort there will always be an admixture of melancholia. This, then, is where the error lies. Perhaps it is a repressed wish, and the like, something over which he indeed

93

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 91

•

1851

Marginal addition NB22:91.a can be seen at the top of the page.

153

154

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 93–95

•

1851

arbitrarily despairs (because for God everything is possible), and so his passion hurls itself into this sort of heroism. But this is not permissible. A hum. being is to acknowledge his wishes before God, trying, in a hum. way, to get them fulfilled, pray God that He will do so―and then leave to God whether he is possibly to meet his destruction in this particular way. In short: a hum. being is to be a hum. being.

5

Leniency.

94

I believe I daresay of myself that I certainly have at my disposal a passion for proclaiming the leniency of Xnty such as is possessed by none of those who proclaim it among us―though of course this gift can be taken from me at any time. This is something that might be noticed by a psychologist of the more profound sort, for it is precisely the anxiety with which I present what is frightful that shows that I am fearful of the opposite sort of powers that have been entrusted to me, fearing that I might truly come to beguile people. Leniency is so characteristic of me that it is almost as though I cannot express it. To me, it seems as though if it were truly to break forth, I would expire in it, preaching peop. into a security that could almost become giddiness or sheer unconcern. Having leniency is like having a feeling―the more profound the feeling, the more anxious a person is about it being noticed in him, because he knows very well the enormous scale on which it would then break forth.

10

15

20

25

157

Salvianus Massiliensis adversus avaritium Opera p. 218: Multiplicatis enim fidei populis, fides imminuta est, et crescentibus filiis suis, mater ægrotat; factaque es, Ecclesia, profectu tuæ foecunditatis infirmior atque accessu relabens, et quasi viribus minus valida. Diffudisti siquidem per omnem mundum religiosi nominis membra religionis vim non habentia, ac sic esse coepisti 30 Multiplicatis . . . et decrescens.] Latin, Because while the peoples adhering to the faith have multiplied, the faith has become lesser, and while her children grow up, the mother lies ill; and you, Church, have become weaker with your fruitful growth, and with your progress you are set back, and you have, as it were, fewer powers. You have stretched your limbs across the entire world, which quite certainly has taken the name of the religion, but it does not have the power of the religion, and in this way you have become rich in masses of people, but poor in faith, and the richer in numbers, the

95 30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 95–97

5

10

96

15

20

97

25

158

30

•

1851

turbis opulens, fide pauper, quanto ditior multitudine tanto egentior devotione; largior corpore, angustior mente, eademque, ut ita dixerim et in te major et in te minor, novo pene et inaudito genere processus et recessus, crescens simul et decrescens. see Statsleben des Clerus im Mittelalter, by Sugenheim, Berlin, 1839, pt. 1, pp. 11 and 12 n. Salvianus de Gubernatione Opera p. 187: terras, quas Romani polluerant fornicatione, nunc mundant barbari castitate . . . Nullæ pene urbes lustris, nullæ omnino impuritatibus vacant, nisi illæ tantum, in quibus barbari esse coeperunt. See Sugenheim, pt. 1, pp. 15 and 16 n.

Remarkably Enough, it was Eve who seduced the man. By way of compensation, there is no undertaking that has such appeal to a woman as to be loved by someone who has gone astray and who now, by loving her, will permit himself to be led down the right path. This appeals to a woman to such a degree that she is not infrequently deceived in this way, because a person of that sort leads her to believe everything―and she believes everything―perhaps also because she finds the idea of being the man’s savior so satisfying.

Repentance. Terror concerning guilt and sin is surely not most powerful at the first instant. On the other contrary, when more time has passed and some progress in doing the good has been made― then, when such a pers. perhaps accidentally comes to hear or read about how another pers. who was guilty of the same thing has been lost: then terror awakens. In the first instant of guilt, sin has a power of self-preservation in a pers., and in a certain sense this gives him strength, physical strength, the strength of despair, not to want to dwell upon the guilt.

poorer in piety; and the greater the body, the more limited the spirit. You have, if I may put it this way, at the same time become greater in yourself and lesser in yourself, at the same time growing and contracting. 7 terras . . . esse coeperunt.] Latin, The lands that the Romans have sullied with prostitution, the barbarians are now purifying with chastity . . . Almost no city is without a bordello, almost none are free of debauchery, when one excepts the cities that the barbarians have begun to inhabit.

155

156

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 98

•

1851

The Modern, Profitable Preaching of Christianity.

98

Shrewdness Doctrine or (Quid quo pro. or Maren’s Secrets.) One can easily learn how Xnty should rlly be preached by merely skimming the N.T. But this is antiquated. Here are examples of the modern approach to the relation between doctrine and existence. For example, if what is to be presented is Christianity―the fact that Christianity does in fact prefer the unmarried state―and you yourself are unmarried: No, you must not teach this. You of course run the risk that the congregation would think that this is to be taken seriously, and then they would shout: Exaggeration, exaggeration[!] No, you must wait until a later point in your life, when you yourself are married happily and well―and then you can preach about it in a profitable way for the edification, contentment, and enjoyment of the congregation. If what is to be presented is Christianity―the fact that to the extent that Xnty involves itself with marriage, it insists that one marry only once― and you yourself are married for the first time: No, this is not for you. You run the risk that the congregation thinks that this is to be taken seriously, and then they would shout: Exaggeration, exaggeration[!] No, wait until you yourself have married for a second time, then you can preach about it in a profitable way for the edification, contentment, and enjoyment of the congregation. If what is to be presented is Christianity―the fact that the true Xn lives in want and poverty―and you yourself are a poor, wretched devil: No, this is not for you, it will be called an exaggeration. To preach about that you must wait until you have landed a good position; and if you have landed a very lucrative position, you can successfully preach about it in a profitable way for the edification, contentment, and enjoyment of the congregation. If you are “nobody,” you should not get involved with preaching that the true Xn despises the world’s esteem, its decorations and ribbons and titles. The congregation will shout: What an exaggeration[!] No, if you are to preach about it in a profitable way for the edification, contentment, and enjoyment of the congregation, you must at least be a Knight of the Dannebrog.―And if you ex-

4 Quid pro quo] Latin, Something given or received in return for something else.

5

10

15

20

25

30

159

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 98–101

5

99

•

1851

cel in this way of preaching Xnty, you will become an Excellency: as the philosophers say, it is a necessary development. In original Xnty the rule was that your life must serve as the guarantee of what you say. The modern version is that by expressing the exact opposite of what you depict so delightfully and grippingly, your life must serve as the guarantee that the whole business is silliness, theatrical enjoyment―then the congregation says: By God, that was a lovely sermon[!]

“Imitation” alas, it so often tends to be the case with this [imitation], that in a peculiar sense it can be said that it follows after, but so long after that it is as if it is not a following-after.

100

20

101

25

160 30

The N.T. is, indeed, like a satire on us. The N.T. contains consolation upon consolation for those who must suffer for Xt’s sake―it simply presupposes that the Xn suffers for the teachings, and then it announces consolation―and these texts are to serve as the basis of preaching to us, who do not want to suffer anything.

Opposite Direction. We are always moving toward perfecting the means of communication, so that nonsense communications can have ever greater distribution. And no one seems to consider that in fact the real task―in view of the nonsense and similar stuff in which states are perishing―could be to invent smoke-consuming machines.

157

158

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 102–103

•

1851

An Odd Sort of Honesty in a Criminal. In Thiele’s Die Jüdischen Gauner I read about someone named Löwenthal, a notorious burglar from Berlin. He was a Jew. He started out with all sorts of petty theft, but things went so badly that he made a solemn vow under the open sky (something to which Jews attribute special significance, at least that is what Thiele says), promising God that he would never again involve himself with that sort of thing. He kept the vow: from that moment on he became a burglar. Then, the last time he came out of prison, he again promised God that he would do no more burglary. He kept the vow: now he became a swindler. Thiele also relates that when nickel silver began to appear, he swindled in the following manner: He would buy nickel silver items and sell them as real silver, but he cheated by confiding to his customers that they were stolen goods and that this was why he could sell them so cheaply.

An Apostle in Our Times. Were I to imagine one such in our times, he would probably refrain completely from preaching, in order, if possible, to direct attention to existing―preaching by existentially expressing self-denial, the imitation of Xt, etc. In using his mouth, how could he compete with these oratorical artists who preach nowadays― and who completely conceal what it is to exist[?] They castrate a hum. being in order to make him a singer who can reach notes higher than any that can be reached by any natural hum. being. That is what it is like with these orators: understood from a Christian point of view, they are castrati, deprived of the genuine strength of manhood, which is something existential―but they can reach notes higher and more rapturous, etc., that no true Xn can.

102

5

10

15

103

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 104–106

•

1851

161

104

Satire on Bishop Mynster. Think of him―and then think of the words that describe the Xn: the Christian is like a stranger and a pilgrim in this world.

5

105

10

15

106

25

30

162

Superstition. What wonder is it, really, that geniuses, also criminals (which Vidocq has pointed out in part 2 of his Wahre Pariser-Geheimniße)―in short, all who in one or another way are situated outside the universal―are superstitious? Their feet leave no impressa vestigia; they proceed down unknown or forbidden paths; therefore, compared to other people, they are extraordinarily observant and notice different things than others do. The mass of peop. do not really live. They are mere repetitions; they lead their lives within the security of what is probable; therefore they are not superstitious―that is, they do not notice that their belief in what is probable and their security within the bounds of probability are in another sense an enormous superstition.

A Psychological Observation. When Vidocq (Wahre Pariser-Geheimniße, vol. 3) refers to his experience of having exclusively made use of convicted criminals in his police force (oddly enough: the secret security police) and that he has always found them trustworthy, then (if I have this right) we must not overlook the fact that there is perhaps no transformation that is as heartening to a criminal as that of becoming honest: specifically, the transformation from criminal―to police. In many criminals there is a need for adventure which, in addition to many other factors, keeps them on their criminal path. But this need is entirely satisfied when they become police officers. It is far more difficult for a criminal to remain safe when he is to go from having been a criminal to an ordinary civil employ10 impressa vestigia] Latin, footprints. (See also explanatory note.)

159

160 1

5

a

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 106–108

to quiet, everyday life, which offers no themes for his shrewdness and his ratiocination, no task for his imagination, none of the diversion inherent in a certain intellectual effort, etc.

•

1851

ment,a than when he is fortunate enough to become a police officer. Indeed, for this reason as well, I may say that the police should not refrain from making use of such people, in order, if possible, to make them into respectable people. A criminal who does not become honest when he is offered a chance to become a police officer will scarcely ever become honest.

5

10

Nonsense Begets Nonsense. When a man encounters a group of people and he knows a good deal about the subject that is being discussed, then no conversation results. People fall silent; they let him speak, and then they feel annoyed with him because they sense his superiority. On the other hand, if someone comes in and, upon opening his mouth, reveals that he knows no more than the others: there is a lively discussion. This is also how it is in matters of greater concern, in literature: a genuine achievement is never discussed, never reviewed. But when there is something that is no higher than the average level, all the journals toot their horns―and the genuine achievement remains merely the object of silent envy.

Brorson’s hymn no. 209 (“The Secret of the Cross”) :

Commend yourself therein, Then you are free.

107

15

20

25

108

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 109–112 163

109

5

Mockery and Misfortune Always Go Together the proverb says. Yet one must not immediately judge peop. so severely, as if they were actually so evil that they enjoy mocking misfortune. No, but particularly when misfortune succeeds good fortune that had perhaps been the object of envy, people avenge themselves with the help of mockery, unless a person―a little more grandly―avenges himself with: sympathy.

10

110

15

20

111

Misfortune, Suffering Is Guilt: The Greatest Guilt That of Being Unfortunate. Alas, yes, it is only all too true. But again, this is not to be judged as severely as might seem justified at first glance. There is a sort of instinct of survival in peop. They fear that learning of the misfortunes of others will disturb them in the enjoyment of their own good fortune―and in order to protect themselves completely they would very much like to explain the other person’s misfortune as guilt― for then it is not something that could happen to them.

. . . One became a Xn―without Xnty.

25

112

30

The Christian Emphasis. From a Christian point of view, the emphasis is not nearly so much upon the extent to which one succeeds in discharging or fulfilling the requirement, provided one does indeed strive, as upon the requirement manifesting itself to a person it its full infinitude, so that one properly learns to be humbled and to take refuge in grace.

•

1851

161

162

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 112–115

•

1851

To reduce the requirement in order that one might be better to fulfill it (as if this was what was earnestness: so that now it could more easily be seen that one is earnest about wanting to fulfill the requirement)―is opposed by the innermost essence of Xnty. No―infinite humbling, and grace, and then the striving of thankfulness: this is Xnty.

Priest. Becoming a priest is viewed as being just as worldly as any other way of making a living: it is a person’s career. A person wants to have a career―and in addition proclaim “the doctrine,” pure and unsullied. And trapped thus by every worldly consideration, one is embarrassed to have to preach on texts either about Xt himself (that would absolutely be absolute recklessness) or about an apostle whose life had been freed from every consideration.

Spirit is the power a person’s knowledge exercises over his life. The person who perhaps has an erroneous notion of God, but who nonetheless lives up to the self-denial this erroneous notion requires of him, has more spirit than the person whose learned and speculative knowledge of God is perhaps most correct but which exercises absolutely no power over his life.

164 5

113

10

15

114

20

25

The Way to Xnty is not that another pers. takes it upon himself to lead you to it by luring you and so forth. No: you must go through this “You shall.” This is the condition for unconditional respect. And then, behind this [“]You shall[”] lies grace, where everything smiles and all is leniency.

115

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 116–118

•

1851

165

116

5

117

15

118

20

25

30

In human terms, what is greatest is: to be so capable that it is as if one were indispensable to an entire society, perhaps a nation. In divine terms, what is even greater is this: with equally great abilities, equal diligence―nonetheless to be superfluous in the world, disdained by all practical people, for what is superfluous like this is truly and properly to the glory of God.

“He who sees his brother ‘suffer need and closes his heart,’[”]―yes, at that very moment he closes himself off from God. With love of God and love of one’s neighbor it is the same as with double doors that open up at the same time, so that it is impossible to open the one without also opening the other, and impossible to close the one without also closing the other.

God’s Governance. Even though God is not Governance in the sense that, viewed from without, he has everything else in the world in his power, he nonetheless does want to be Governance in relation to every hum. being. For within himself a hum. being is in fact a reduplication of the sort that, the moment he becomes untrue, the moment he makes use of impermissible means, etc., he is in a way his own fate―ah, despite all assurances that it is not so, there is no one who feels this more clearly than the very person involved, and then he also becomes uncertain and finally becomes his own downfall. The circumstances by which a person is now defeated are the same circumstances over which he would have triumphed earlier―the difference is that there was more truth in him at that time, and now he has become uncertain.

163

164

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 119–122

•

1851

Distance. St. John says that it is our duty to lay down our lives for our brethren―that is, in fact, for every hum. being, since of course we are all Xns: and then think of how we live.

119

166 5

Mynster―and Me. I can often become quite sad at the thought that M. and I have been contemporaries! I, who would so unspeakably gladly do everything for him―as long as the truth did not suffer from my doing so; I, who out of a sense of filial piety to someone deceased feel obligated to do everything in order to please him―and then, the fact that I am precisely the most dangerous light in which M. can actlly be seen! What is suspect about M. concerns just one specific aspect of the existential. Fortunately, then, what helps is that I understand it to be my task only to direct attention in poetic fashion. And M.’s virtuosity also helps, for he is indeed as great at being shrewd and circumspect as he is gifted in many other ways.

The Fear of God Is Profitable unto All Things, well, that depends on the circumstances. As the world is nowadays, the fear of God is likely to be the greatest possible impracticality―all practical people will surely agree that this is so. Here, as everywhere in the N.T.: this is the greatest satire upon Xndom.

Salvianus Massiliensis adversus avaritium Lib. 1 cap 8: Dura fortasse aliquis putat esse quæ dico. Dura, plane dura existimentur, nisi talia sint, ut in comparatione Apostolicæ severitatis mollia ac remissa videantur. Apostolus enim ad planctum divites vocat, nos ad remedium. Apostolus divitias ignem nominat (Jacob: aurum et argentum vestrum . . . manducabit carnes vestras sicut ignis), nos facere ex divitiis aquas cupimus ignem exstinguentes, secundum illud: sicut aqua exstinguit ignem, sic eleemosyna exstinguit peccatum. 28 Dura . . . peccatum.] Latin, Perhaps someone finds my words are

harsh. So let them think that they are hard, bone-hard, but in comparison with the rigor of the apostle, they appear lenient and gentle. The apostle, of course, called upon the rich to weep and wail; we call upon them to find a way out. The apostle calls wealth fire (James: Your

120

10

15

121

25

122

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 123–124

•

1851

167

123

5

124 10

15

20

25

30

35

Chrysostom. It is very well put in a letter to Theodore of Mopsuetia: “If the Christian does not harm himself, nothing will harm him: he is invulnerable.” See Chrysostomus by Neander, pt. 1, p. 15.

The Clergy. When a society is dissolved in the way it happened in ’48, it is not the fault of kings and princes and the like―but essentially of the clergy. Either Christianity has nothing whatever to do with the state― and thus remains in the original apostolic situation―or it wants to involve itself with the state and benefit from it after a fashion, so that it becomes a State Church and the clergy has the task of guaranteeing the state a continuing and sufficient foundation of good citizens who are politically indifferent, i.e., genuinely religiously engaged. In earlier times, it was these people who sustained the state. Xnty is political indifferentism: concerned with what is higher, it teaches subservience to all authority. In earlier times, this religiousness provided the state with good, peaceable citizens, who did not occupy themselves with wanting to govern or with bullying the government. But religiousness disappeared. The newspapers and the whole of public life did everything to get everyone involved in political affairs―and the clergy did not think of putting up any resistance, nor was it capable of doing so―not by participating in the discussion in the manner of Tryde, with foolish prattle against politics: No, by explaining the cause of the religious, which is political indifferentism. Now, everything is politics, and the clergy itself is the first to rush to Parliament. Now, if someone wants to explain that it is “the crowd” that must be countered, the clergy perhaps thinks this is a good idea, but it is itself as balloting-sick as the others. gold and silver will consume your flesh like fire), but we wish that your riches consisted of floods of water that can extinguish the fire, in accordance with the well-known biblical words: As water extinguishes a blazing fire, so almsgiving atones for sin. (See also explanatory note.)

165

166

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 124–125

•

1851

And that is why I have been unwilling to let matters be. In order to tackle the problem at its root, I have directed an attack at the clergy―without, however, attacking anyone by name. And it is also certain that the clergy bears an enormous responsibility. But I am not rlly understood. No one shares the faith I have in the rightness and victoriousness of my cause, and in our time faith has in fact become a great rarity. The few who are more or less in agreement with me say: Then let us band together against the crowd. But I see very well that the evil is lodged deeper than that. Even though I definitely struggle against “the crowd” and believe that the clergy is what actlly must be used, I by no means begin by simply allying myself with the clergy as it is, but begin precisely by attacking it. But hum. busyness and shrewdness are also the exact opposite of faith.

Upbringing by God. One could very well imagine a collision of the following sort. A religious individual prays to God: [“]You yourself bring me up, o God.[”] This prayer is heard. So what does God do? He takes a stick, as it were, and proceeds to beat the fellow. Alas, the poor wretch: Now he is quite confused. He truly believed himself to be the object of God’s love―and now this frightful beating. So he becomes very dejected. He believes that he has forfeited God’s grace. But God says: [“]If one has said A, so must one also say B―he himself demanded to be brought up (which is indeed very pleasing to me, because he has had confidence in me) and that is how it is truly going to be.[”] And God continues to beat him. Finally the fellow is utterly exhausted and collapses―and look, suddenly a transformation takes place and he exclaims: [“]O, my God, thank you,

168

5

10

15

125

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 125–127

169 5

10

oh thank you―I had indeed forgotten that I had prayed that you yourself would bring me up. Ah, when things were at their worst I could not come to my senses or grasp how to understand it, but now I remember it again.[”] This is fundamentally what happens to every hum. being who rlly involves himself with God. In an overconfident moment he is greater than himself, and he dares to involve himself with God. Then God keeps his word and involves himself with him. But look, then it overwhelms him; then it seems to him as if he has entirely lost God―until understanding once again returns, and with heightened blessedness.

15

126

20

25

127

30

A Beautiful Distinction. In “adversus avaritium[”] Salvianus says: Give your fortune to the poor (dare, alluding to the passage about the rich young man and to Proverbs 3: honora Dominum de tua substantia) and if that does not suffice, if it does not convince you, well, then pay God with it (reddere, with allusion to Sirach 4. redde debitum tuum). Hoc est, ut quem devotio non inliceret ad largiendum, necessitas cogeret ad exsolvendum . . . Si devotus es, da quasi tuum; si indevotus, redde quasi non tuum. (Lib I, VI.).

Chrysostom: “Perhaps what I am saying now seems obscure to many people; and if I say it more clearly it will seem unbelievable to many people to whom it previously had seemed obscure.” Neander, Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 49.

18 dare] Latin, give. 20 honora . . . substantia] Latin, honor the Lord with your substance. (See also explanatory note.) 22 reddere] Latin, pay. 23 redde debitum tuum] Latin, pay what you owe. (See also explanatory note.) 23 Hoc est . . . non tuum] Latin, That is, that the person whom piety does not induce to show generosity will be forced to pay by necessity . . . If you are pious, give as if it were your own; if you are not pious, pay as if it were not your own.

•

1851

167

168

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 128–129

•

1851 170

Decline in Xndom.

1

5

a

This comment is found in Neander, in his Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 51, where he calls this way of thinking: a way of thinking [“]die Stützen der Unsittlichkeit statt Vorbilder der Sittlichkeit sucht.”

First, Xt was the Exemplar. Then they abolished that aspect of the matter and took only his death. Then came the derived exemplars. But these, too, were too exhausting. Instead of letting them remain as exemplars, they were transformed into intercessors who prayed for a person.a In short, the hum. tactic has everywhere been to abolish everything called imitation. Thus the cunning with which people seek to smuggle a contemporary away and turn him into an object of admiration. Thus, e.g., also Socrates’ cunning in remaining in the background. Anti-Climacus also developed this in Practice in Xnty, pt. III.

Chrysostom vigorously opposes the fact that people have become accustomed to regarding priests merely as rhetoricians and the fact that in great cities, where Greek culture dominates, people tend to regard the spiritual discourse from almost the same point of view as the splendid orations of the Sophists. “In attending sermons, most people now behave like spectators at a prize fight, and we see how the crowd divides into parties, with one party on the side of one priest, the other party on the side of the other, and how they hear the discourse differently in accordance with their differing attitudes toward the priest.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 62. Further: [“]What are we to say about the internal squabbling and badgering among the believers, which are of no less magnitude than attacks from without and which cause no less trouble for the teacher[?] One of them wants, in presumptuous and 5 die Stützen . . . sucht.] German, that seeks the support of immorality rather than of exemplars of morality.

128

5

10

15

129

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 129–131

171 5

10

130 15

fruitless fashion, to fathom matters the knowledge of which would bring no benefit and of which knowledge is impossible. Others demand that he provide an accounting of God’s judgment and force him to measure the great abyss. Few are those who are truly earnest about their faith and their lives, while there are many who speculate about such things as are impossible for us to grasp―indeed, for which we incur the wrath of God by wanting to speculate on them.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 63.

In opposition to the objection that if we all were monks, it would be altogether too earnest, Chrysostom replies: [“]In truth, it is not earnestness, but lack of earnestness that has destroyed everything.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 22.

20

131

25

30

Religious Communication. In order truly to have existential benefit from the words of others, it is very important to know the state they were in when they said them, and this is something one rarely gets to know. Take the psalms of David. When David consoles his heart despite all sufferings―did he compose this and have this consolation at the moment of suffering, or is the entire poem a reproduction, at a later moment, when he had entirely conquered that pain and was now composing a song of consolation?

•

1851

169

170

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 132–134

•

1851

The Clergy

132

is to be an executive power in society by being in character. It is therefore the greatest possible error when the clergy become: instructive lecturers. 172 5

Chrysostom. When lay people objected that they did not have time to read the Bible, that they were so busy with their worldly business, and that Bible-reading was rlly something for monks and hermits, Chrysostom replies: No, on the contrary, precisely because you are so involved with worldly things, for that very reason you need to read the Bible even more than do monks and hermits.

133

10

Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, p. 192.

15

“The Objective Doctrine, the Objective” People shout about [“]the objective doctrine, the objective,[”] and they make light of subjectivity. Quite naturally, because people want to be freed of the inconvenience and the sacrifice of being subjectivities. Or was it perhaps the objective doctrine, the objective, which triumphantly penetrated the entire world? Infinite nonsense―no, the objective leaves that sort of thing alone, it never gets going. No, it was not the doctrine, not the objective, that conquered the world, but it was the blood of the martyrs and the sacrifices of the faithful―in short, it was the subjectivities who triumphantly carried the doctrine through in battle. But to be subjective like this is bothersome, and therefore people even make light of it instead of being honest enough to admit that they are not capable of it. Now the doctrine has long since been treated as the objective; being a subject has been abolished―and what, then, has become of the doctrine? Well, in this connection, Schiller’s words about money are now fitting:

134

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 134–137

•

1851

ein Wort es gehet vom Munde zu Munde das Herz giebt nicht davon Kunde. Things were different in the days when there were subjectivities. 173

135

10

15

20

136 25

Cunning. This, too, is or can be something cunning: when someone praises leniency or praises himself for leniency, etc. for not being judgmental about other people. For in fact sometimes it may be owing to cowardice, to worldly shrewdness, and the like, that a person does not want to expose himself to the dangers connected with actually passing judgment on someone. For in life, when one person passes judgment on someone else it is never the case that the matter is now decided―no, of course the latter person also possesses a certain amount of power which he will use against the former. Furthermore, in passing judgment on another person, the person who does so places greater obligations upon his own life, subjects himself to closer inspection, etc. Incidentally, here again there exists a special case in which one more or less automatically invokes the words of the gospel about refraining from passing judgment―perhaps also in connection with the person who, basing his actions on anything but the words of the gospel, decides to refrain from passing judgment.

Chrysostom: “The awakening of someone dead cannot contribute to the conversion of a pagan as much as can a pers. whose life is full of Christian wisdom.” Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, p. 219.

30

137

Chrysostom: The heavens do not tell of God’s glory with words, but the sight of the heavens prompts others to do so: thus also do those 1 ein Wort es gehet . . . Kunde.] German, a word goes from mouth to mouth / The heart has no news of it. (See also explanatory note.)

171

172

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 137–139

•

1851

who lead a truly Christian life praise God, even if they remain silent, for the vision of heaven does not have so strong an effect in filling the mind with praise of God as does the sight of a pure life. Neander: Chrys., pt. 1, p. 220.

5

174

Chrysostom.

1

5

10

15

[a]

This is the erroneous point in the whole of modern apologetics. On the other hand, older apologetics put the matter like this: At every juncture it showed how little Christianity coincides with hum. probability, making that point the criterion of the divine. Thus, too, with respect to the historical aspect of Xnty. It showed how improbable it was that Xnty should have been able to triumph―yet it triumphed, and from this, that is, from the improbability, the divinity is proven. Modern apologetics expounds everything in straightforwardness and probability.

Once he heard a Christian debate with a pagan who was proud of pagan science and art, and then the Christian wanted to prove that Paul surpassed Plato both in eloquence and in learning. Chrysostom disapproved of the Christian’s action, for he had fought against the very thing that was most advantageous to his cause. The very fact that the apostles were not learned and eloquent and yet were able to overturn the systems of the pagans―precisely this was the proof that Xnty was not hum. wisdom, but God’s cause. Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, pp. 227 and 228. How correctly Chrysostom grasped the problem [!] But what is the whole of modernity other than precisely the backwardness exhibited by that Christian. People expound Xnty in straightforward categories: as much deeper, more profound, loftier, etc. than Plato, etc.―instead of the category being: Xnty is foolishness to reason, the absurd.

Chrysostom says that the apostles must have had divine support in order to gain acceptance for a teaching like Xnty; he says: “The teaching was of a type that simply in and of itself would have to terrify the unbeliever: that one was supposed to worship someone crucified, who had been born, as God, of a woman in Judea! Who,

138

10

15

20

25

139 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 139–141

5

indeed, could have been convinced by this if it had not been preceded by div. power[?] Because everyone had seen that he had been crucified and buried, but no one other than the apostles had seen that he had been resurrected and had ascended to heaven.” Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, p. 231.

175

140

10

15

20

25

30

141 35

To Become Sober in the Christian sense is certainly very difficult for every hum. being, and surely very few are sober in the Christian sense. What is remarkable is also that becoming sober does not take place as one would naturally tend to imagine it, supposing it to be a quiet transition from clarity to clarity. On the contrary, there comes a crisis in which one is so mentally confused that one does not know one thing from another, so that it seems that now one is truly drunk, whereas previously one had been sober― and yet this is the crisis. Here it is just as it is with someone who has literally fallen to drink and wants to stop―then there comes a time when he seems much more intoxicated than when he was drinking, and this is precisely because he is refraining from drinking. In the spiritual sense, in order to be sober what is required, first and foremost, is the most thoroughly reflective isolation of oneself as an individual before God, alone before God; also the pure impression of the ethical and of what is ethically important, a clear and thoroughly examined consciousness of one’s own actual condition.

The “Highly Entrusted” One almost always finds that those to whom much has been entrusted by God, the real instru-

•

1851

173

174

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 141–143

•

1851

ments of God, had earlier bungled, corrupted, betrayed, ruined precisely the cause they were to serve. It is almost like a security bond God has in connection with them, and it also helps them by keeping them from being easily tempted by meritoriousness. For however humble a hum. being may be, if in connection with a cause entrusted to him by God it were the case that, humanly speaking, he had no guilt of any kind, how easy, indeed, it would be for some faint notion of merit to insert itself. For let us assume that such a person had much on his conscience, but then had served the cause all the more ardently: this is still dangerous. What provides security is that this is the selfsame cause he had previously failed. Thus Peter had failed the cause of Xnty by denying Xt―and it was Xnty he was to serve. Thus with Paul, etc.

5

176 10

15

Faith Does All. Without faith, one stumbles over a bit of straw (Peter became afraid of a girl―and denied Xt); with faith one moves mountains. The remark about Peter being afraid of a girl and denying is from Chrysostom.

Collision A pers. can be very rich and have powerful gifts―he thanks God infinitely for this, asking absolutely nothing more. But look, it can seem to him as though actlly something more has been entrusted to him, as though he is to go higher up―and perhaps approach what is extraordinary. And he understands that if this is the case for him, then, at that very instant, he will plunge to what, humanly speaking, is his downfall―for indeed, it is eternally certain that what is extraordinary can only succumb in this world. Look, this is what I call a collision. Now assume that he was the extraordinary one: then, at that same instant he would plunge to his downfall, humanly speaking. And indeed, then, at that same instant, the spiritual trial―the thought that now he himself has ruined everything―will continu-

142

20

143

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 143–144

177 5

10

15

20

144

25

30

35

178 40

•

1851

ally confront him with its power, and at every weak moment this is how things will seem to him. For the extraordinary can only exist unconditionally in a purely spiritual condition, suspended in the pure testimony of the spirit, which means―negatively―that all straightforward signs are dialectical or inverted. For the minor premise of being the extraordinary one is: to succumb in this world. And what is straightforward, humanly speaking, is to want to recognize the relation to God from the fact that things go well for a person, that everything succeeds for a person, or if it does not go well, that there is at any rate hope for the next time. But for the extraordinary person there is no such hope. For him, only one thing is certain: his downfall―if he does not go to what, humanly speaking, is his downfall, then neither was he truly the extraordinary one. What wonder, then, that things are as they always are with the extraordinary ones, God’s instruments―that God must constrain them into being extraordinary―for no one involves himself with that sort of thing of his own good will! But, as everything is taken in vain in Xndom, so also with the concept of the “extraordinary.”

What Does Xt Require? First and foremost, faith. Next: gratitude. In the disciple, this gratitude is “imitation” in the strict sense. But indeed, even the weakest Xn has this in common with the strongest disciple: that the relationship is one of gratitude. “Imitation” is not a requirement of the Law; otherwise we have returned to being under the Law. No, imitation is the stronger expression of gratitude in the stronger person. Imitation is not a requirement of the Law upon which a poor hum. being is supposed to torment himself. No, such a forcibly extracted imitation is in fact something that Xt opposed. He would surely say to a person like this, assuming he found that person to be grateful, [“]Do not be too hasty. Take your time. Then it will surely come, and in any case let it come as a joyous fruit of gratitude―otherwise it is not in fact ‘imitation.’[”] Yes, one would of course also have to say that such frightful, forcibly extracted imitation was rather a distorted mimicry.

175

176

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 145

•

1851

An Ecclesiastical Theater Review in Berlingske Tidende, January 17, 1851.

1

a

ity of having paid civil servants, etc., then your benefits ought also be on that level.[”]

There is indeed a frightful impudence about the aesthetic sumptuousness with which one describes the almost sensual enjoyment characteristic of a Catholic vesper service―and from that point of view criticizes the recently introduced vesper service, namely, that the illumination was poor, that it was so tasteless to have 8 candles in the vestibule, etc. Righteous God! There was a time when they coated Xns with pitch and let them serve as torches along the road: in those days, Xnty existed. Nowadays Xnty does not exist―and people criticize the lighting! And here, as everywhere, the priests remain silent. They seem to have entirely forgotten (perhaps misled by the example of Mynster, which is so misleading in this connection) that priests are like the police: that when crime got the upper hand, one has no more the right to say, [“]Where are the police?[”] than, when morality has broken down, to say [“] Where is the clergy―what does the state employ the clergy for, when it is not providing any benefit? For if you reduce Xnty so that you get a State Church instead of the apostolic Church, and the secur-a

145

5

10

15

20

25

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146

•

1851

177

179

146

5

10

15

20

On “Her.” On the occasion of her father’s death I wrote to Schlegel. He became furious and would not in any way “tolerate any interference of anyone else in the relationship between himself and his wife.” With this the matter is rlly decided. I rlly have nothing more to ask. But the fact is: Perhaps she did not get to know anything about the step I took, Schlegel has not told her about it. In that case, after all, she has not been treated justly. Recently, she herself seems to be more attentive. We see each other more frequently. Especially, in the course of the past 1 to 1½ months we have seen each other almost every blessed day, or at least twice every other day. I walk my usual route along the ramparts. Now she walks there, too. She comes there either accompanied by Cordelia or alone, and then she always goes back the same way, alone; consequently, she encounters me both times. This is certainly not entirely accidental.

[a]

On “Her.”

1

[b]

In church, generally the Palace Church, we have seen each other regularly all these years, and in recent times more often than usual. I have my regular place, where I invariably sit. She often sits quite nearby and then she often appears to be suffering a great deal. It was about three weeks ago. She sat right in front of me; she was alone. On other occasions, she generally sings a hymn after the sermon, which I never do. That day she refrained from doing so. Consequently we left at the same time. Outside the church door she turned and saw me. She stood in the curve of the path to the left of the church. I turned to the right as always, because I like to walk through the arcade. My head naturally inclines somewhat to the right. As I turned, I tilted my head perhaps a little more markedly than usual. Then I continued on my way and she went hers. Afterwards I truly reproached myself, or rather, I worried that she might have noticed this movement and interpreted it as a nod indicating that she should walk with me. Probably she did not notice it at all, and in any case I would have had to leave it up to her whether she would speak to me―and in that case my first question would have been whether she had Schlegel’s permission.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

178

1

5

10

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146–147

[c]

And I am not inclined to think that she dared not do so, for in fact, both during that time, as well as during the period that followed the end of our engagement and during the period of her engagement to Schlegel, she gave a little telegraphic gesture in search of a hint from me, and indeed she got it, signaling to her that she must give up, but also that she was dear to me, item that I was devoted to her. a

the idea be capable of being expressed, what is required is 1) that she be essentially satisfied with her marriage to Schlegel. 2) That Sch[legel] is pleased to give his consent to my speaking with her: then I am very willing to do everything in order to let my life express both her worth and the great importance I have attributed to her. But if there is anything dubious in connection with getting the idea expressed, then my idea requires not only that I not involve myself with this sort of thing, but indeed that I resist doing so.

15

20

25

d

30

35

And he can truly say that his cause is in good hands with me; for only if it has his consent does it interest me. A relationship with her in which there was the least trace of nefas: Oh, Good Lord, in that case people just don’t know who I am. What concerns me is the idea, wherever I am; I cannot be without the idea. But in order thata

e

40

Nor, indeed, am I the one who has officially expressed that I have given her up: it was of course she who married someone else.

12 item] Latin, as well as, furthermore. 34 nefas] Latin, crime, sin, ungodliness.

•

1851

If she wanted to speak with me, there have been plenty of opportunities.[c] But I cannot speak with her. No. The matter has a quite unique difficulty. It is not as in other situations, where a pers. could perhaps be reluctant to leave himself open to the possibility of being declared a scoundrel and the like. Oh, no, were there no other possibility, I would gladly, more than gladly, speak with her. But the problem is just the opposite: that I could come to know too much. Perhaps, however, she has more or less put me out of her thoughts―and by speaking with her I could perhaps disturb everything. Perhaps even the entire marriage is a mask, and she is attached to me even more passionately than before. In that case, everything would be lost. I know very well what she can do once she gets hold of me. And then there is Schlegel: I owe it to him to watch over everything as conscientiously as possible!d Thus, no.e The entire matter has affected me painfully, to the point that it coincided with my own thought of stopping as an author, and it was something of a strain to introduce the last pseudonym.

180

5

10

15

20

25

In Relation to God the most difficult situations are precisely those in which one is in the right, in a certain hum. sense, or at least not entirely in the wrong. Confronted with God, almost the easiest situation is when one can say, [“]I was a villain, I behaved like a villain, forgive me.[”] Repentance is absolutely the easiest and most natural relation to God. This is why, even in situations in which, humanly speaking, I myself indeed believe that I am in the right with respect to God, I prefer to assume, simply in order that I might have proper peace and rest, that nonetheless I was surely a villain, but that God will certainly forgive me.

147

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146

•

1851

The beginning of entry NB22:146, “On ‘Her.’ ”

179

Continuation of entry NB22:146, with marginal additions NB22:146.b and c.

182

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146

•

1851

Conclusion of entry NB22:146. Above marginal addition NB22:146.d can be seen its continuation, NB22:146.d.a.

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 148–150

•

1851

185

148

5

149

10

15

20

150 25

30

The Clergy is an executive power. Now imagine―in order properly to see the confusion―imagine now, for example, that the police, instead of taking action, began to deliver instructive lectures about thievery and the like.

Chrysostom, too, in fact reduces the price. He says somewhere that when a man’s wife’s child dies, and she accepts it patiently, she ranks with Abraham, because in intention she was willing; similarly, she ranks with a martyr, because in intention she was indeed willing. His words are as follows: Whoever endures suffering and thanks God has earned a martyr’s crown―for example, the child becomes ill and the mother thanks God: that is a martyr’s crown. Are her sufferings not greater than those of many martyrs[?] But she does not indeed permit herself to be coerced. The child dies. She gives thanks again. She has become a daughter of Abraham. Even if she has not sacrificed her son with her own hand, she was nonetheless willing to do so, joyously prepared to do so, etc. Neander, Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 249. Hom. 8 in Coloss. IV, 133.

Oblivion. When, for example, a serving maid has broken something, the first thing that concerns her is that the master and mistress not learn of it right away. Then, when some time, perhaps even a long time, has passed, she says: [“]Well, that was a long time ago[”]―and it seems to her nothing at all. That is how things are for most peop., both in lesser matters and in great ones. It is light-mindedness. Melancholia is the opposite: the longer it has been, the more frightful the guilt seems.

183

184

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 151–152

•

1851 186

“Christendom”―Christ. The entire art of Xndom is constantly directed at abolishing “imitation.” “Established Xndom” rlly dates from the moment the festival of Christmas was declared to be the supreme festival (in the 4th cent.). The Savior of the world was now a child. And why did people want so very much to be saved by a child? Because they thought that here there can be no talk of imitation. To be saved by a child is something like “learning” from the lily and the bird, which people also prefer to an actual “teacher.” So it alternates between two extremes: either insisting only upon Xt’s death (for then one avoids imitation) or upon the Christ child. What must be asserted once again is “imitation.” Now, of course, not in the almost comically erroneous way this was done in the Middle Ages. No: imitation in the sense of witnessing to the truth and of suffering for doing so. Here, incidentally, medieval asceticism and so forth will have their significance. For in fact, in order to able to be a witness to the truth it is necessary to be disciplined to be able to do without things, etc. The error of the Middle Ages was to make asceticism and the like into an absolute τελος so that the Middle Ages copied Christ rather than imitated him. To copy is simply to grasp the external form. Xt did not teach poverty in and for itself, but poverty in order to be able to witness to the truth. But still, the Middle Ages were much farther along than the modern error which entirely omits imitation and positions Xnty as a mere doctrine to be lectured on or as an artistic production in the manner of eloquence and such.

151

5

10

15

20

25

30

Theme for a Sermon. “Not that I have grasped it―but that I am grasped.[”]

22 τελος] Greek, end, goal.

152

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 153–155

•

1851

187

153

5

154 10

15

20

155

25

30

God. Take a poet, even the most creative―and see how almost all his characters in fact resemble one another, and he creates at most a few original personalities. And then think of God, who creates these millions upon millions―and not a single one of them is like another.

Situation An Admirer of Xt on Judgment Day. Imagine someone. And I will neither consign him to insignificance nor accuse him of being a hypocrite. No, he is quite extraordinarily gifted―but he has in fact missed the point of Xnty. He develops these extraordinary abilities, educates himself into becoming what is, humanly speaking, a really complete figure, accomplishing extraordinary artistic feats, becoming a world-historical figure possessed of everything that, humanly speaking, is capable of impressing and attracting―and imagine when he is to be compared with the Exemplar! And yet, he has also been, humanly speaking, a pious man―but he has once and for all missed the point.

Chrysostom―Mynster. M. has made being a religious speaker into an artistic performance, so he keeps a very close watch on his personal life in the outside world. This is where the error is lodged. Chrysostom is truly also very eloquent―but he gesticulates with the whole of his existence. Now he takes action in public life―and the next Sunday he preaches about it. Now he uses his pulpit for action; his talk is not an aesthetic work of art that is to be kept at a theatrical distance, apart from the actuality of life― no, it is an action that is simply intended to intervene right in the middle of the actuality of life.

185

186

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 156

•

1851 188

“The Highly Entrusted.” That a hum. being vis-à-vis other hum. beings has dared appeal to a special relation to God: well, I do not understand it; furthermore, neither do I understand it in this way. Suppose a hum. being dared know, deep down, that he had a special relation to God: it seems to me that he would have to say to God: [“]In infinite, unspeakable gratitude for this grace, I am willing to suffer everything―oh, but is it not true that you do not want me to speak about this to anyone[?] Is it not true that you would be angry, as over the greatest presumptuousness and ingratitude, if I dared to speak to anyone about my relationship with you―and at the same time, then, I will ask you, most of all, that you not require anything like that of me: To me it would be as though I were to die of shame and as if it would grieve my spirit unto death.[”] I will now pursue this further, thinking and speaking in entirely hum. fashion. To this God might answer: [“]Humanly speaking, what you say can be quite true and beautiful, but for one thing, I have chosen you precisely in order for it to be spoken in the world or because I want to have it said; and for another, what you are saying is, after all, rlly human egotism: You want to enjoy the relationship to me. No, exactly the opposite: Precisely what I require―and this is precisely why I have involved myself with you―is for you to say it in the world. If you fear that it will be taken in vain, that you will be honored and esteemed by peop., which you certainly think will grieve your spirit: Be at peace, that is eternally impossible―such a thing could only happen to those whom it surely will not grieve, those who in truth do not have any relation to me. No, when you say it, you will―from a hum. point of view―have pronounced your own downfall. People will hate, abominate, curse you. Furthermore, you must endure the fact that―from a hum. point of view―it will continually look as if I, too, have left you in the lurch. For inasmuch as I am spirit, as long as you live in the world, you can only have a relationship of spirit with me, have only the testimony of the spirit in faith. But in this, too, there will be sufficient blessedness for you―and then, you have eternity before you.[”]

156

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 157–158

•

1851

189

157

5

Mynster’s Sermon Today. Mynster preached today about the beauty of the Christian life―and very beautifully. But to go on the attack, to impart impetus to action, etc.―no, that is alien to Mynster’s character as he is at present. Instead of Christian unrest, always artistic rest. For a moment I had expected something else today, because he had chosen hymn no. 588, but it did not happen.

10

158

15

20

25

30

35

That from a Christian Point of View, the Rank Order Is Inverted i.e., the higher the rank, the greater the suffering; this is in fact also said expressly in the N.T., where Xt says to his disciples, who wanted to sit at his left and right side: You do not know what you are asking for―are you able to drink the cup I am to drink[?] You do not know what you are asking for―No, the apostles did not take account of the inverted rank order, but understood it in straightforward fashion. In the straightforward rank order, everyone very much wants to gain admission and ascend higher and higher. In the inverted rank order―well, if they know what they are asking for, scarcely anyone asks for entry or for rapid advancement to a higher level. But as soon as it is forgotten that from a Christian point of view, the rank order is inverted, Xnty is abolished. A straightforward rank order, a straightforward ascent in honor and esteem, are from a Christian point of view just like the reckoning of time before Xt, a negative reckoning, a debit that is imputed to a person. Ah, how far God’s thoughts are from those of hum. beings! People struggle to ascend higher and higher in rank, in honor and esteem, and do not notice that they are getting deeper and deeper in debt. For this positive (honor, esteem, rank, etc.) is precisely the negative; and that negative (to be scorned, ridiculed, persecuted―in short, to suffer for the truth) is precisely the posi-

187

188

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 158–159

•

1851

tive. Likewise, the earnestness of the world is jest and, in a Christian sense, to become a fool in the world is precisely earnestness. 190

Grace Stiffening the Demands of the Law. This can also be viewed as follows: precisely the fact that grace is shown me, precisely the fact that I am pardoned―indeed, precisely here is the requirement that I must therefore make all the more effort. This is also how Luther presents the matter in the sermon on the epistle for the 7th Sunday after Trinity Sunday. But what is important here―if I am not to make a poor hum. being go absolutely mad―is of course that this must in turn be understood as the inward appropriation of faith, as an ever more profound and inward understanding of how deeply I need grace. In addition, it can easily be seen that―as I have so often said―the easiest situation in which to become a Xn or to receive grace is the moment of death, for here the difficulty of renewed effort disappears. If I am to live, then a new effort must begin. And precisely in view of the fact that I received grace for what had been done in the past, this effort must now be all the purer. But look, soon―or immediately thereafter―it turns out that grace, and then more grace, is needed, because, having already received grace, the effort is so imperfect. And thus the situation intensifies. What does this mean? It means that one can turn in two directions: either that one nonetheless believes that one can attain perfection through effort, or that one comes to understand more and more deeply how much one has need of grace. If I were to define Christian perfection, I would not say that it is a perfection of striving, but that it is precisely the profound acknowledgment of the imperfection of one’s striving, and therefore precisely a deeper and deeper consciousness of the need for grace, not in relation to one thing or another, but of the infinite need for infinite grace. But how easily this can, in turn, be taken in vain! Yes, it is entirely true, but I could almost be tempted to say that precisely this possibility indicates that it is true Christianity. It is not nearly as easy to take Judaism in vain―in the O.T. it is not nearly so easy to cheat God. But when he revealed himself in Xt―yes, that was the ultimate thing he could do, and for precisely this reason

159

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 159

191

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

it became easy, in a certain sense, to take it in vain, but then, of course, the frightful earnestness of eternity is waiting behind it. The genuine Christian thesis: a hum. being is capable of absolutely nothing―hasn’t this more or less become Christendom’s watchword, permitting indulgence from all striving! And that is how it is with everything Christian! Christianity rlly begins at the point where the most enthusiastic person, almost in despair over his sin, stands ready, in the most intense sort of ardor, to sacrifice everything―and then, so that this ardor does not develop into presumptuousness or actual despair (presumptuousness: as though a hum. being were himself capable of anything; despair: as though he were in fact capable of nothing)―then Xnty wants to humble this ardor and also to bring about peace, saying: A hum. being is capable of absolutely nothing―but it is sheer grace. And then the whole of worldliness seized control of precisely this thesis and said: [“]A hum. being is capable of absolutely nothing―one is saved by sheer grace―so let us not waste a second in worrying about the salvation of our souls, since of course it cannot help, because a hum. being is himself capable of absolutely nothing; and it is not needed anyway, because of course we are saved by grace.[”] And then they rewrote that gospel passage. Because in the gospel passage, those who were actually excluded were of course those who had refused to come, because the one had married, the other had bought a yoke of oxen (noted en passant: the fact that the gospel simply draws a parallel between getting married and buying a yoke of oxen does not correspond very well to the grandiloquent phrases we use in speaking of marriage, more or less as Diogenes of Laertius, in Greek naïveté, draws a parallel in describing the purity of Pythagoras, saying that no one ever saw him in the act of love or on the toilet). They rewrote the gospel, so that the ending was that all those who were invited and who stayed away were included after all. And to my way of thinking this is what is so frightful about Christianity: that in a certain sense it can be deceived so easily. It has no external markings as does the Law, it says almost the exact same words as those uttered by the indolent spirit of worldliness, which continually speaks of how a hum. being is capable of absolutely nothing, of how it is sheer grace―in a certain sense making it infinitely easy to deceive God, oneself, and others― frightful earnestness! Precisely because, in Xt, God became the God of grace, he also became, if I dare put it this way, more dignified than ever.

189

190

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 159–160

•

1851

In the O.T., after all, it is more as if he sat and kept watch―indeed, if I dare put it this way, he quarrels with hum. beings over what is his, insists upon his rights, etc. Then he decided to do everything―and now he becomes infinitely more dignified; he almost invites hum. beings to deceive him: frightful earnestness. God’s relation to a hum. being is like the relation of a father to a prodigal son. For some time he does something for him. During all that time he does not keep himself at a dignified distance: he gets angry, he looks after his rights, etc. Then he decides to do everything, and now he becomes infinitely dignified. By doing everything he in a certain sense makes it possible for the son to deceive him entirely: frightful earnestness. The father no longer bickers with his son, no longer quarrels―no, he has done everything, and from that moment something like an infinite silence begins. When the father had simply done something, it had not been nearly as easy to take this something in vain, for the father kept an eye on things. Now he has done everything, has made it infinitely easy for the son to take everything in vain: frightful earnestness! To do everything is therefore the most critical discrimen, a frightful either-or. So when God sent Xt to the world, he did infinitely all: then he saved the human race, every single one―yes, or he gave them up forever, every single one. In Xt God is brought to his extreme: the infinite, infinite love and mercy―yes, or by the same token, rigor: he is so frightfully rigorous that he does not even let you notice it at the time, as when his wrath falls silent precisely when it is at its maximum. The extreme is always what is frightful: even extreme leniency always has this element of frightfulness: there is nothing more extreme.

Clara Raphael is not so much―as people have remarked―neutrius generis, as much more a disheveled communis generis.

20 discrimen] Latin, turning point, outcome, decisive difficulty. 34 neutrius generis] Latin, neuter gender. 35 communis generis] Latin, common gender.

5

10

192 15

20

25

30

160

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 161–164

162

1851

The System

161

5

•

“progresses by necessity,” it is said. And look, it can never, for one single instant, get as much as half an inch further than existence, which progresses by freedom. This was the swindle. It was just as if an actor wanted to say: [“]It is I who am speaking, these are my words[”]―and then, the second the prompter falls silent, he does not have one single word to say.

Eve was created to provide company for the man; the Holy Spirit is called the Comforter.

193

Poetice.

163

15

20

25

164

30

In one of the older journals (probably from the beginning of ’49), there is, poetice, a line about how I, though certainly not bloodthirsty, could have journalists shot continuation poetice: Yes, just go ahead and rage, just raise an outcry against me so that, if possible, I might be put to death. What do I care about that[?] But this is what concerns me infinitely: that I fall before journalists. Yes, even though I accept what Xnty teaches, that we are to be resurrected with transfigured bodies―yes, I think that I will pray to God that I might nonetheless preserve a little scar on my transfigured body in memory of the fact that I had been killed by journalists.

The Poetic, and Myself. Here it is again. The battle of ideas that I represent―albeit to some extent bringing it into actuality, and thus, indeed, accompanied by no small amount of troubles―if I were to transform it into poetic works, even putting it directly on the stage as drama: Well, not one, not one of my contemporaries could do it as successfully and become the hero of the moment. 15 poetice] Latin, poetically.

191

192

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 164

•

1851

But because I hold back and at least to some extent actualize it, I create for myself nothing but opposition and cause many spiritual trials for myself. These, however, are the border skirmishes of my nature. I am a poet. But I was long ago destined for religious individuality, long before I became a poet. And the event through which I became a poet was indeed an ethical breach or a teleological suspension of the ethical. And both of these aspects destine me to want to reach something beyond “the poet,” while I also learn, more and more anxiously, to be watchful that there is nothing presumptuous in this―something God will surely watch over as well. And then, every time an episode of this internal border skirmish is put behind me, the refrain―which had also been present during the struggle―comes back with even greater force: That I can never sufficiently thank God, who in infinite love has done and continues to do for me so infinitely much more than I ever had expected, could, or dared expect. O blessedness! And what strengthens me and gives me the courage to attain such heterogeneity with the universally human sphere as I have attained is simply that my strength is my weakness. Almost from childhood, unusual sufferings caused me to be placed outside the universally human sphere. I am not someone who undertakes arbitrary experiments, nor perhaps merely a foolish, daring sort―no, I am a sufferer, forced into suffering. Without these sufferings I would naturally have been married long since and probably also have become a government official. Nonetheless, these sufferings of mine also have a dialectical quality, so it was quite possible that they could be taken away. Perhaps this will indeed happen, and, I hope, it will happen by the time I no longer have the means to maintain an authorial existence at my own expense. If this does not happen, well, I will certainly receive my orders. In the meanwhile, I am biding my time so that I do not, out of untimely anxiety for my worldly well-being, take hasty action that would disturb whatever intentions Governance might possibly have for me.

5

10

15

194

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 165–166 165

5

10

166

195 20

25

30

•

1851

An Extreme Consolation. For Those Undergoing Great Spiritual Trial. So, does only the person who has a gracious God and Father have a God and Father? What about someone who, alas, has a wrathful God and Father―does not he have a God and Father? Oh, my friend, if this is how things are with you, or if this is how things are with you when you are undergoing spiritual trial, then cling, nonetheless, to this extreme consolation, only do not let go of God, and you will see that it helps. The sole danger is to let go of God. Even if his wrath were to remain upon you for your entire life, it is not nearly so dangerous. But surely, it happens very rarely that any hum. being is as spiritually tried as sorely as this.

Hum. Self-Contradiction. Someone becomes a poet, a virtuoso (as, e.g., is said about Paganini) through a crime and so forth―he takes no notice whatever that, ethically, that this is not a possibility. Through innocent suffering a person can become one [a poet, a virtuoso] without objection from the ethical, but not through a crime. And yet, perhaps he is precisely the one who takes note of the ethical, perhaps it is precisely the punitive or judgmental unrest of the ethical that makes him into a poet, a virtuoso, and the like. But in any case, ethically it is an impossibility. The ethical must deliver him up, repentant, to the religious for further treatment. Ethically it is an impossibility. It is as if the aesthetic sphere said to a pers.: [“]You are a poor devil. There is a pers. at such and such a place―have the courage to murder him and you will be the richest of all. And no one will know of it.[”] The ethical must say: [“]No, stop. At the instant you kill him, you must go to the police, pay everything back, and then let yourself be condemned as a murderer.[”]

193

194

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 167–169

•

1851

God as Father―A Hum. Father God is not Father in entirely the same sense as an earthly father. An earthly father is bound in a natural relationship: he is father whether he wants to be or not; in making himself a father, he has made himself into something that entraps him. It is otherwise with God, for he is solely spirit. If you do not want to be such that God can be your Father, then God is not your Father―he cannot be your father, nor does he want to be. But there is still another difference. For it has surely been seen that an earthly father, when his prodigal son returned repentant, hardened his heart and would not forgive or be a father. But this never happens with God: as soon as you honestly want it, God is indeed your Father.

Existential Proportions. N. N. delivers a masterful, uplifting, and charming lecture on self-denial―and as a reward is made a Knight of the Dannebrog. M. M. practices self-denial―and as a reward is mocked and ridiculed. Fundamentally this is highly ridiculous: a man delivers a splendid lecture on poverty―and meanwhile the priest’s collection plate is being passed around. Or he delivers a charming lecture on poverty, which is so charming that people find it to be worth 100 rix-dollars, which are sent to him and which he accepts.

167

5

10

15

168

20

25

196

30

Priests. If one were to count very carefully, one could not say that the country has 1000 priests, but 1000 priests’ gowns. People do not really immerse themselves into being priests, not at all. No, inside a priest’s gown

169

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 169–171

5

10

170

15

20

there is a man who is entirely different from a priest, even though he is wearing a priest’s gown. Despite the fact that, generally speaking, I hate machines, I could really wish that someone would invent a kind of machine that could be wound up to deliver these charming and uplifting sermons. Then every congregation could acquire a machine of this sort. Then at least people would at least not be confronted with the offensive situation in which a priest does not do what he himself says―there would be nothing offensive about it.

Abbot Isidorus replies to complaints about the decreasing respect paid to clergy, saying that it is the fault of the worldliness of the clergy, and says: thus in the old days (because the clergy was not worldly) the congregation feared the priest; now the priest fears the congregation. see Neander’s Chrysostomus, 2nd part, in the note on p. 99.

197

171 25

30

35

Youth―Experience. A young pers. would reason more or less as follows: If I could prove that, e.g., Prof. Martensen’s existence is devoid of ideas, and on the contrary consists of a worldly striving for earthly goods: then many people would abandon him and he would lose all respect. No, young friend. You are wrong. Precisely because you were able to prove it, even more would follow him, for that is in fact what people rlly want: earthly advantages. And your proof that this is the way things are with Martensen would make the

•

1851

195

a

and in order that the gesticulations not be missed, one could have the deacon blow his nose, mop the sweat from his brow, and in brief, behave as he had surely seen the priest behave

1

5

[a]

a sort of music box, which could be set up in the pulpit, something I think might well be entrusted to a sexton;a if people found it necessary for a priest to set up the music box and to gesticulate, I would not be at all opposed to it. It would be amusing to hear a music box say, “Even if everyone else fell by the wayside, I would be faithful to Christianity, the gentle doctrine, the consolation and cure for all sorrow, that gives joys their true savor. It is my innermost conviction that, etc.” And perhaps it would be more than amusing, because it is possible that in this way people could be brought to pay attention to what preaching is by hearing that preaching―in the manner deemed acceptable nowadays―could also be done by a music box.

10

15

20

25

196

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 171–173

•

1851

masses take note that danger was afoot, that the idea was about to carry out an audit of existences― and then they would adhere to Martensen all the more emphatically. They would say: [“]It is enormously important that we support him―it is our own cause,[”] and they would love him all the more passionately and support him all the more warmly. But if you could prove that Prof. Martensen’s existence was in the service of the idea, dedicated to sacrifice, and that there was no profit to be made that way: then you shall see, then the masses would abandon him.

An Established Order can compel a person to form a party, even if he originally had had no intention whatever of doing so. This was the case with Audius (the Audians of the 4th cent.). He attacked the worldliness of the clergy. But then the established order sought to expel him and succeeded in doing so: he founded a party. From this I see something I myself have experienced a great deal: how difficult it is to be adroit when bringing forth a corrective. I read the remark about Audius in Neander’s Chrysostomus, in one of the notes to the first 96 pages of the second volume. The place is p. 100, right at the conclusion of note 1.

5

10

172 15

20

25

198

30

1

5

[a]

Our times imagine that they are times of reform. But upon closer inspection one will see that those who want to reform the Church are absolutely not religious individuals, but politicians. If this is the way things are, then there is more

The Times―and My Task. 1) This is not an age that has need of a reformer, but it is a conceited, puffed-up, confused age in which anyone and everyone wants to dabble at being a reformer, and that therefore needs precisely the opposite of a reformer: an officer who can con-

173

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 173

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

199

40

sume, eat up, all these reformers as Socrates ate up the Sophists. These are not times when government misrule makes a reformation necessary, but times that are to learn the need for government, or learn to be governed. 2) As I have said so often: what is highest and what is lowest share a certain likeness with one another. I shall explain a bit more about this. What is highest is not the straightforward hum. norm. On the contrary, what is highest is the abnormal. Thus all the religious paradigms are recognizable by the offense they cause the ethical. Or, to take an example: to awaken offense―indeed, nothing is easier, any scamp or lout can do that. And yet, yet, precisely what is highest can in fact also awaken offense. Now, the rank order is as follows: A) First comes what is highest, which is the abnormal. B) Then comes the upright, honest human position, which is a certain relativity. C) Then come the louts, the false reformers, etc. Of course, B obviously possesses more truth than C, but if it wants to ignore A completely, B is in fact untruth. Now take our situation. Mynster represents B. He has abominated C and has fought against it to the best of his ability. To that extent, I agree with him. But he has forgotten to emphasize or even to allude to A, and I disagree with him about that. Mynster’s position works in fair weather. But when unrest begins, it does not suffice: position A must be brought to bear simply in order to be able to govern. Because, you see, the error of the times is precisely this dabbling at reform. This is C. How is it that this C can attain a certain legitimacy, even though it has done so mendaciously? Precisely by taking credit for A, and unfortunately Mynster’s position does not mention A. Under such circumstances, if one is to gain power over C, what is one to do? One cuts off C’s communication with A or makes impossible any confusion of C with A.

•

1851

197

religiousness in the established order. If these reformers gain a foothold, then there will supposedly be a Reformation that, making use of less religiousness―indeed, using minus religiousness―reforms something that, after all, does have some religiousness. Therefore Governance says, [“]No, stop[!], nothing will come of this. You are not to have a reformation, but you reformers are to be rejected, rebuffed, shown for what you are.[”] Imagine if Luther were alive at this moment―he would say: [“]Everything must be done to smother such an ungodly and presumptuous rebellion, which, on top of everything, impudently wants to call itself a reformation.[”] How different it is. When Luther stepped forward, a Reformation was needed. And Luther also possessed essentially more religiousness than did the established order. It became the Reformation. Nowadays, the evil, the sickness is precisely the conceitedness that a totally worldly generation wants to―reform―the Church. Religiously understood, the task consists precisely in suppressing this odious business, this odious business that is the most profane imitation of Luther’s Reformation, that takes it in vain; so far is it from being a Reformation that it is the downfall of all religiousness―by means of― most horrid nonsense!―a reformation[.]

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

198

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 173

•

1851

This certainly does not happen with Mynster’s position, which remains silent with respect to A, for precisely because A has not been spoken of, precisely for this reason, C has been able to take advantage of A and put forth the proposition that, in the highest sense, is the truth: that what is highest is abnormal. What does one do then? Well, here is my tactic. I bring A forward poetically, implying: This is too high for us hum. beings, it is only for those who are chosen, those to whom much has been entrusted. So I support B. And then I have the strength to ram and sink C. If the cleverest statesmen, the most experienced rulers of the Church, were to judge, they would say, [“]He has it exactly right.[”] And then I must put up with living here in Copenhagen as a ridiculous exaggeration, must publish the entire business at my own expense―and meanwhile Mynster sits in splendor and governs―in absurdum; and the government officials regard me as suspect. Yet to a certain extent Mynster does understand me. Privately, I have done more than a little to explain my position. But the fact is that he also understands that this includes an indirect condemnation of his entire position. As in fact it does. And what makes my position more difficult is that what I want is not something I can communicate as such, perhaps informing the public of it in print. No, thank you―what I want is just that there be governing. But this, again, is the confusion of the times: that everything is to be communicated to the public, including the fact that there is to be governing―but then that of course becomes impossible when it is communicated to the public. Thus I must put up with men of the government who do not actlly govern; and I strongly maintain that there must be governing―and am rewarded with the anger of men of the government.

16 in absurdum] Latin, in absurdity.

5

10

15

20

25

30

JOURNAL NB23

JOURNAL NB23 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Text source Journal NB23 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 1

203

1

•

1851

NB23. January 22nd 1851.

201

202

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 2

•

1851 204

My Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Relationship to the Established Order and. the Intrigue . . . . . . . . . . Xt’s Passion Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Variants for a Passage in the Preface to the Friday Discourses (Note no. 3 in “Three Notes”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 3. p. 13. p. 226. pp. 234, 35, 36.

2

5

p. 242.

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 3 1851 •

205

3

Concerning texts for Friday sermons see the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17 p. 30.

203

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 4–5

•

1851

207

4

5

10

Immured Monks. As I see (in Neander’s Chrysostomus, volume 2, p. 230) there were even monks who were so zealous that they had themselves immured so that there was only a little hole through which they received food. The exiled Chrysostom met one such monachus monachorum (μοναχος εγϰλειςμενος immured monk) in Nicaea and convinced him that it was more pleasing to God to do something beneficial, and he became a missionary. One cannot keep from smiling at the thought of an immured monk ad modum a baked apple. And yet, would that we had this strength!

5

The Existential―The Art of Oratory, Eloquence.

15

The more a pers. strives in daily existence himself, the less he is inclined to give speeches. Take Socrates. Someone like him understands only all too well that these splendid speeches and masterpieces of eloquence do not lead peop. into, but away from, the existential, which always merely poses small tasks in the course of the day, but does not have glorious situations and transports of delight. Therefore a person of that sort will say, [“]Oh, good Lord, what does an hour’s oratory once a week or once a year amount to[?”] No, therefore a person of that sort becomes an ironist, a tease. And what does that mean? It means that he constantly connects the insignificant things of life to what is highest, pointing out that whereas in one sense it involves what is highest, the difficulty is precisely the fact that it also involves the most everyday sorts of things―in short, he does not place the tasks at a distance aesthetically. On the other hand, the less a pers. himself exists, the greater the need for effusions of eloquence. One thinks now of the situation in Xndom.

20

25

30

6 monachus monachorum] Latin, the monk of monks, i.e., the leading monk. 7 μοναχος εγϰλειςμενος] Greek, immured monk. 11 ad modum] Latin, in the manner of.

205

206

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 6

•

1851

My Task.

1

5

[a]

and it could perhaps have nagged at me my entire life, since it was of course possible that I would never have been able to decide to publish these writings.

Precisely so that I can fall repressively with a hundredweight on all this political, profane reforming of the religious―precisely for this reason, I must be led so far out that I can outbid every representative of movement. And then the turn, such as what took place in the preface to Practice in Xnty, a sort of symbolic act in which I was the only person judged to be a mediocre Xn. The misfortune of the times, especially now after ’48, is precisely that of misunderstood movement, of wanting to reform en masse. But had I not published Practice in Xnty, had I withheld it until later in order not to bring upon myself the troubles of possibly being misunderstood by the established order, I would continually have been nagged about whether I had not spared myself. Furthermore, had I published, one after the other, each of these 3 writings that are included in Practice in Xnty, I would have done so with the thought that my task was to incite movement―rather than that it is my task to wear down the reformers. When everything in Copenhagen became ironical, I, the master of irony, reversed the situation and became the object of irony. When chaos conquered in ’48, it became very clear that I―I, who had been a stimulus in the direction of movement―had the task of taking aim at the reformers. I have always understood this, but I simply had to understand it even more. And in this way everything is directed toward what is best. This is the blessed consolation in which I have always found repose: that I either take hold of things in the right way, and I thank God―or I take hold of them in the wrong way, and then his infinite love nonetheless makes it not only into the right thing, but into something much better than it would have been otherwise. Infinite love!

208

6

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 7–9 209

7

5

10

15

20

8

A Dialectical Definition by Luther. In the sermon on the epistle for the 11th Sunday after Trinity Sunday, Luther, as usual, defines faith very accurately. He says that it is diametrically opposed to feeling (the category of immediacy). E.g., you feel sin―and then you are to believe that it is entirely forgiven, and thus you are pure joy, despite the fact that you feel the exact opposite. Then L. has someone raise the objection: But if this is the way things are, why do you continually say that one is to experience faith, when one of course experiences the exact opposite[?] Then, quite properly, L. must make the distinction: that there is in fact an experience of faith. That is exactly how it is. But constant care must be taken that experience A and experience B are not confused, that faith’s definition as the absurd continually intervenes. But the careless treatment of Xnty permits these two sorts of experience to merge into one another and thus does not notice that the entire sphere of faith then disappears and, with it, Xnty.

The Old―The New. Yes, indeed, what I am saying is rather antiquated, but keep an eye out: with the help of the year ’48 it will soon be the newest of the new.

9

210

My More Recent Conversations with Bishop Mynster after the One about Practice in Xnty The various times I spoke with him I have also had an opportunity to touch upon these points. That the error from above was that there was not rlly any

•

1851

207

208

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 9–10

•

1851

governing. That above all what mattered was grasping the reins firmly. That a little admission ought to be made to God concerning the past―in order then to take proper hold of the reins. That this was one of the most excellent situations I could imagine for eloquence: When, from below, the cry was for freedom, freedom, and more freedom―and then the governing power stepped forward, summoned up all its dignity, and said: [“]We, too, have felt called to self-examination by the upheavals of these times, and we have acknowledged before God that in the past we have perhaps been unduly lax―now we intend to govern.[”] I said to him: [“]You have the gifts―eloquence, presence, dignity, age, tradition―you are the only one here on the hill who is capable of it.[”] So Mynster listens to me. He generally replies that wanting to tyrannize really cannot do any good.

Freedom of Religion. Our times’ notions concerning freedom of religion are indeed so far from being an expression of Xnty’s victory that, on the contrary, they express that Xnty has abandoned hope of victory over the world, is willing to be satisfied with being permitted to look after itself. Truly, if that had been Xnty’s original view, Xnty would never have come into the world. It came into the world through its need to suffer unto death for the faith; that was precisely why it conquered the world. This need for martyrdom was its “suffering” intolerance. Now it has lost the desire and the need to suffer, lost the intolerance of martyrdom, and is well satisfied with being a religion like other religions, on an equal footing with Judaism, paganism, and irreligion. Wanting to kill others because of their faith is the intolerance that is repugnant to Xnty. But for oneself to be willing to be put to death for the sake of one’s faith―yes, let us not overlook it― this is also intolerance, it is the suffering intolerance. Modernity is indifferentism inasmuch as it does not so much express that Xnty has abandoned the world as that Xnty has abandoned itself―or more correctly, that Xndom has abandoned Xnty.

5

10

15

10

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 11–13 211

11

5

10

12

15

20

13 25

30

35

•

1851

The Call from Above―The Call from Below Every call from God is always addressed to one person, the single individual; the rigor and the examination consist precisely in this, that the person called is to stand alone, go his way alone, alone with God. Everything that takes numerical form is not from above; if people believe that they have heard this as a call, they can be certain that it is from below. Because this desire to be a group is deceit that wants to escape the rigor, the spiritual rigor of being spirit, and wants to act in worldly fashion, assisted by Numerus.

The Brilliance of the Law―The Brilliance of the Gospel. When Moses came down from the mountain with the Law, no one could bear to look upon his face―because of the brilliance. When Xt was transfigured on the mountain, the disciples could not only bear that brilliance but indeed found it infinitely beneficial. The brilliance of the Law is fatal, that of the Gospel infinitely beneficial. This observation is made more or less in this fashion by Luther in the sermon on the epistle for the 12th Sunday after Trinity Sunday.

Freedom. The true Xn does not concern himself much with forms, because in himself and before God he knows that should it become necessary: I will break them, and no earthly power shall be able to be bind me. He is (albeit in an infinitely purer sense) like someone who walks about with a loaded pistol―he knows the way out; he is (albeit in an infinitely purer sense) like the Stoic who walked about with the idea of suicide―he knows the way out. Therefore he does not make a big fuss; this is precisely why he can bear so much, simply because in himself and before God he knows that if it comes to a certain point, the way out of martyrdom beckons to him. 10 Numerus] Latin, number, amount, very many, the mass.

209

210

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 13–16

•

1851

The more cowardly peop. are, the less they have this openhearted courage―or the more they have a well-grounded fear that when it comes to a crisis, things will misfire, the more eager they are to guarantee external forms for themselves. It is basically the same anxiety, the same worldly spirit, that reveals itself in its zeal for the forms of freedom, as though these were everything―the same worldly spirit that expresses itself in heaping up money because it believes neither in Providence nor in itself. The more faith in God, the less does a pers. feel the desire to hoard―the more faith in God, the more indifference toward all this fighting for mere forms.

212

Grundtvig

14

In his younger days he represented old, old-fashioned, ancient, primal-primeval Christianity; now, in his old age, he is decked out as a truly fashionable fellow.

15

My Task.

15

is always to indicate the existential corrective by poetically positioning the ideals to incite people concerning the established order, with which I am in league, hindering all false reformers and the opposition, who are evil itself―and whom only ideals can stop.

5

10

20

25

Linguistically, or the Language Betrays Them. Despite the fact that when they are to act, they all come to an agreement with “the others” etc.―nonetheless, they all deprecatingly say of someone: Well, he had come to a prior agreement with “the others.” So they themselves betray the fact that they know that authentic intensive actions emanate from an individual and from silence.

16

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 17–18

•

1851

213

17

5

Paul Dying. The legend says that when Paul was beheaded, his head three times cried out Xt’s name. This signified that his preaching rlly began with his death. In other cases it is said that when someone is dead the image of the beloved is found in the lover’s heart―but Paul’s activity was of course the proclamation of the Word. I have read this historical remark in Scriver.

10

18

15

20

25

30

Constraint of Conscience. In its earnest sense, no word is as insidious as this word because none is so enormously obligating. It is so easy―and so solemn―to invoke conscience and to complain about oppression of conscience. But watch out: complaint about oppression of conscience can so easily be self-revelation. I can complain, e.g., that my boots pinch―without revealing myself to be the guilty one, for the guilty person is surely the shoemaker. But when a person is supposedly feeling oppression of conscience and does nothing more than complain, then there may be some external pressure, it is true. But on the other hand, neither has the freedom within me reacted powerfully enough for me to be willing to venture to the utmost. For had I done that, had I ventured absolutely everything, then I would once again be on good terms with my conscience. Still, the fact is: If a person feels one or another sort of pressure but is not willing to venture everything―and he then complains: in so doing he is giving himself away, for it is not rlly a matter of conscience after all.

211

212

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 19–21

•

1851

Matters of Conscience Cannot Be Represented by Starting a Discussion because the person who starts the discussion senses in advance that it will not succeed. The person who has a matter of conscience must express that it must succeed or he falls―otherwise he is not rlly permitted to say that he has a matter of conscience.

Dr. Rudelbach and Me. We will never come to understand one another. For him it has long since been settled that he is a Xn. And now he busies himself with the history and the external forms of the Church. He has never felt the unrest of the idea, every single day, about whether he is in fact a Christian. “Never,” no, because the person who has felt it one time, one day, one hour will not let go of it for his whole life, or it will never let go of him. The idea has involved me in personal self-concern, and therefore I can never find the time for projects, because every day I must begin with the concern: Are you in fact a Xn―for of course today an existential collision could perhaps arise in which it became clear that you are no Xn.

19

5

214

20 10

15

20

25

My Battle against Illusions.

1

5

[a]

And as for making use of external means to get rid of it: For one thing, because of inwardness, I have not a single moment for that; for another, it is also wrong, for it is the outward direction, is in the direction of externality.

It has never occurred to me to want to get rid of illusions and to do so by using external means. No, no, no! E.g., Xndom is an illusion. Do I want to get rid of it? No, I only want the single individual not to get deceived by it. So I even want it to continue its existence, for this is precisely the best proof of how victorious a

21

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 21–22

•

1851

213

person’s own inwardness is: that one can preserve it―and quite calmly let the illusion continue, but it does not disturb a person, does not bewitch him.

215

22

10

15

20

25

30

35

The Emancipation of the Church. If the Church is free from the state, very well: I will immediately come to terms with the given situation. But if the Church is to be emancipated, I must ask: In what manner, by what means[?] A religious movement must be served in a religious way―otherwise it is a deception. Therefore this emancipation must come about through martyrdoms, whether bloody or unbloody. But voting in worldly fashion with the world (and voting is worldliness) concerning the emancipation of the Church: that is in fact worldliness―indeed, wretched worldliness. It is merely worldliness in a new pattern, which is why people do not immediately recognize it. And whereas someone howls piously against this frightful worldliness of perhaps being a member of a knightly order and an Excellency―a worldliness that, after all, is perhaps not so dangerous, and in any case can be put completely right by a little concession, a concession made in pious fashion by the person concerned, which is why a figure of this sort can indeed be quite true―he forgets that this voting on the emancipation of the Church is much more dangerous. From the Christian point of view, the first sort of worldliness, if in this single individual it is in fact culpable worldliness, results only in the perdition of the individual. The other sort results in the loss of Xnty, if this were possible. “Freedom of the Church from everything worldly!” Yes, this is a lofty Christian idea―quite truly. But it is so lofty that for this very reason it cannot possibly follow that something so lofty can be attained through such shabby means as voting.

[a]

himself a k.

1

[b]

This is a lofty idea, Luther’s idea―and then think what L. would say if he heard that this was to happen by means of voting.

5

214

1

c

if he does not dare strike so high a note

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 22–23

•

1851

In spiritual matters, the price is the purchase. But those who want to attain the emancipation of the Church in this way―sparing themselves from martyrdom―have introduced a concept of tolerance that is in complete conformity with worldliness (namely, tolerance = indifferentism), and this is the most frightful insult to Xnty. “But only when the Church is finally free, can things be better.” Perhaps, but who taught you that it was permissible to employ such profane means to attain that end, and that this was supposed to be Xnty[?] And even if you win, Xnty loses, for at that moment Xnty has rlly lost its cause―has abandoned its sovereignty, has been degraded into wanting to live on an equal footing with Judaism, paganism, and every other religion. Good Lord, but in that case, Xt is of course no longer the Savior of the world, if his adherents could live so alarmingly peacefully with this assurance, a peace that would send a shudder through the host of witnesses who did not want to live peacefully in this way. It is certainly true that Xnty does not want to be forced upon anyone. No, but it is the will of Xnty that its adherents, through suffering, are to force the world to become Xn. If an adherent is not capable of thisc, he can pray for himself. That is quite another matter. But such an adherent will also feel too humble to dare to want to occupy himself with reshaping― indeed, reforming―“the Church”; giving thanks for grace, he will live in quiet inwardness. But it was precisely the “only true Xns in Denmark,” it was precisely those to whom it became clear that this great good could be attained―by voting.

5

216 10

15

20

25

30

My Psychological Tactic. I never directly deny what a man says of himself. This is what usually happens. Assume someone says something grand about himself. Then someone replies: That is a lie, conceitedness―and then they begin to quarrel. That is not my way. No, when a man says something of that sort I reply: If you yourself say so, I believe it. Then I take the statement and think through all the existential consequences of such a statement, which I compel him to accept. One of two things happens: either he lives up to them at least to

23

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 23–25

•

1851

a certain extent, and in that case there was indeed truth in him. Or he does not live up to them―and in that case he has passed judgment on himself. I pass judgment on no one, but this makes things manifest. 5

217

24

10

15

A Matter of Conscience. Someone says: This or that is really a matter of conscience for me, and I would indeed sacrifice quite a bit for it. Nonsense! How can it be a matter of conscience―only that for which one would venture everything is a matter of conscience. Here again one sees that the existential element is what rlly speaks. Let a person remain silent, but let his life express that he has ventured everything for the religious: that would be a matter of conscience. But we, as we are, we are much too frail and fragile to have matters of conscience, to be able to bear having a matter of conscience. Look, this is something we must say concerning ourselves, confessing it to ourselves and to God, and humble ourselves.

20

25

25

30

35

Luther’s Marriage. Its significance, of course, is that it is one of those exceptional actions that have an awakening character, one of those exceptional actions in which the absolute―which has to bear all these relativities upon relativities that constitute actuality, and, tired of bearing them, exhales for an instant and establishes something qualitatively new. The absolute is the fundament of all the relativizing that is actuality. And these exceptional actions, which are recognizable by the absolute’s breach of something ethical, are, as it were, the sigh of the absolute. But what do hum. beings do? Now they base a learned science on an exceptional action of this sort. Now in these times, for example, Luther’s marriage has attracted attention. Now there will be research and more research. If, for example, someone discovers that Luther, by chance, was unshaven on his wedding day,

215

216

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 25–28

•

1851

they will believe that this is a part of true Lutheran evangelical marriage.

Change of Quality with Respect to the Direction Outward or Inward in Xnty. If the direction is to be outward, it must be because the established order is pure and simple ungodliness (or as if the surrounding world were sheer paganism.). And then it is a matter of conscience. If this is not the case, then to want to dabble in or concern oneself essentially with making changes in externals, is so far from being meritorious that the quality transforms itself and Xnty becomes inwardness. But not hidden inwardness. No, the ethical side of Christianity will still surely provide a person with collisions with the surrounding world, perhaps giving rise to martyrs. But on the other hand, Xnty is indifferent with respect to planning changes in the external forms of the Church, for this then becomes mere politics or an ordinary desire for change, which is precisely what Xnty is not.

26 5

218

15

20

God’s Thoughts Are not the thoughts of hum. beings. Thus, at one time it was God’s thought that a reformation was needed: at that time no one wanted to be a reformer. Now everyone wants to be one―so we can be sure that a reformation is no thought of God’s.

Existential Proportions. If someone is brought to Xnty through very severe sufferings and spiritual trials, it nonetheless does not follow unconditionally that he must in turn make it just as rigorous for others. For in that way, of course, Governance’s intention to use individuals to influence others, the whole, is not rlly fulfilled. No, the blow

27

25

28 30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 28–31

5

•

1851

217

is passed on and becomes weaker in others, and there is thus an infinite difference of relativity between one hum. being and another. In this respect there is actually a misunderstood zeal for the idea, which could be so zealous that it simply prevented the idea from coming into the world, preserving it in a merely tangential relation to the world.

219

29

That Christianity Does Not Exist

15

can be proven from the fact that existences, lives as actually lived, demonstrate that no one believes in “the single individual” and in intensive actions―existences everywhere demonstrate: [“]Let us form a group.[”] But Xnty is diametrically opposed to this. And the existential always expresses truly what a pers. believes. So what good does it do that they give assurances upon assurances that they believe in Xnty[?]

20

30

25

What Lies Ahead. It is not “doctrine” that is to be inspected critically, and not “the Church” that is to be reformed, etc. etc. No, it is existences that are to be inspected critically. The fact that our entire existential realm is certainly nonsense,a item that we will all surely come to make a frightful admission to Xnty. But we all wince at this existential realm, and hence these many quibbles and caprices to the effect that it is “doctrine” that must be inspected and Church reformed and the State, etc.

30

31

The Highest Is the Abnormal. It can indeed be counterfeited by what is lowest. But the abnormal, which is the highest, is what it is because of the enormous pressure from the ethical, which lies in between. 25 item] Latin, Latin, as well as, furthermore.

a

and lack of character

1

218

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 31–33

•

1851

What is lowest now wants to remove this―and be the highest―without all the dangers. To this end people have also come up with this: Let us form a group. 5

220

The Exceptional. The ordinary (Mynster, etc.) absolutely does not want to know that the exceptional (the highest as the abnormal) exists. Or, insofar as it is something in the past, people explain it with the assistance of the result, so that, after all, it becomes something other than what it was. Or, precisely because something exceptional of this sort has transformed our concepts, people make use of our present concepts so as not to find exceptional that which indeed was exceptional in its time. People dare not include the exceptional―lest everything be confused. Nor do people know my method for keeping track of this through the existential. But the progress in relation to the exceptional is this―and progress toward the ideal is always regress―that whereas in earlier times there were such men of God, we must be satisfied with a poet who says it is a possibility, who holds open the possibility, but is in turn the most rigorous critic and inspector of everyone who says he is someone of this sort.

32

10

15

20

25

30

The Significance of My Life in These Times. The Church is not to be reformed, nor the doctrine. If anything is to be done―then it is penance for all of us. My life expresses this. In human terms, I am the most precocious person we have. And what have I learned? That I scarcely dare call myself a Christian―so how should I dare

33

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 33

5

221

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

want to reform the Church or occupy myself with such things[?] As other youths travel abroad―and then bring back accounts of the habits and customs of foreign lands―I have for many years lived as though in a foreign land, associating with ideals, where it is so blessed to be, all gentleness and mildness, provided only that one is humble and modest. Then I was parted from them. And in farewell they said to me, as it were, Go now with God.a And that you may remember us, take the ideals with you poetically. Make the best use of them you can, but remember: You are responsible for them. What did I learn? I learned that to be a Xn is something so infinitely lofty that I scarcely dare call myself one. But I was granted permission to employ the ideal poetically. The doctrines of the established order, its organization, are very good. Ah, but the lives, our lives― believe me, they are mediocre. This can be forgiven, however, simply provided that it is acknowledged. But do not incur additional guilt by wanting to reform the Church when Xnty no longer exists. As Luther stepped forth at the Diet, alone with the Bible, I would like to step forth with only the N.T., take the simplest maxim for Christian life, and ask every individual: Have you even approximately fulfilled it―and if not, do you still want to reform the Church? They just laugh! But no, this, too, I have surely taken care of in advance. They were permitted, back then, to get their fill of ridiculing me―something I myself demanded. Now they are surely tired of it. Stop, oh, stop. At least be satisfied for now with what I have to offer. And what can I offer? I am a poet―alas, only a poet. But I can present Xnty in the splendor of ideality, and I have done so. Listen to me―at least before you begin reforming and voting. First, at least, see properly how ideal Xnty isd―before you reform. I am only a poet, alas, only a poet. Do not look at my life―and yet, simply look at my life in order to see what a mediocre Xn I am, which you will see

•

1851

219

a

tell others what you have learned.

1

[b]

The proclamation of the doctrine is kept at too great a distance; Xnty is not a power in actuality; our lives are only slightly touched by the doctrine.

5

[c]

And no one says, [“]I am just as good as the others,[”] for the person who says that is the most unworthy.

d

and then look for a moment at yourselves

10

220

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 33

•

1851

best when you listen to what I say about the ideal. Listen to that and forget about my insignificant self. I am only a poet. I love this earthly life altogether too much, would be happy to have what are, humanly speaking, good times, to amuse myself, enjoy life, etc. Alas, and I understand that, strictly understood, Xnty requires something entirely different. But precisely because I confess my inferiority in profound humility, I have understood that Xnty permits me to live like this, at least for now (for I am of course obligated to make inquiries, as a child does with his father or his teacher). And this is what I offer―on these terms I dare offer Xnty―ah, listen to me, at least before you reform it. I am only a poet. And what, then, is my task (if I could discharge it, for I cannot even know with certainty today whether I can do so tomorrow―always, I dare only know that yesterday I could more or less do it [)]. Wherever there is a movement which in my view is dangerous for Xnty―there, so to speak, I go. I am not saying a word to those present―no, God forbid. Not a word concerning myself―that would be disrespectful. So what do I do? I take up a position in the middle of the gathering, as it were, in a corner, according to the circumstances. Then I begin to talk aloud to myself, like an absent-minded person, aloud to myself―about ideals. So just talk, you strident ones, whose speeches―in addition to many brilliant passages along the way, all end with the brilliant finale: [“]Now let us take a vote.[”] But something else will happen. First one and then another will go off to one side, saying to himself, [“]That was certainly strange talk, that business about the ideal[”]―believe me, he will not vote. And so it goes. For no more than, ideally viewed, any woman can resist the poet’s Don Juan, can any man or woman, ideally viewed, in the long run resist this talk of the ideal―alas for the pers. who could do so. But he cannot do it. It steals into a person through who knows what pores and openings, steals into the heart. A long time may pass; one day he becomes rather strange. He withdraws,

5

222 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 33–34

5

223

10

15

20

25

30

or he goes out to take a solitary walk.e And then, when he opens the door again or comes home, he is changed―believe me, he will not vote on Xnty. We hum. beings always have it in our power, in a certain external, godforsaken sense, to vote on Xnty. We could indeed say, [“]This is how we want things, and we call this Xnty.[”] Oh, let us beware! Listen to me!f You cannot and will not hear any gentler words than these, spoken by a poor poet. But just look at Xnty. Just look at my portrayal of a witness to the truth, to say nothing of an “apostle[”] (and one must be at least a witness to the truth in order to dare want to “reform”). Look at my portrayal; then look, for example, at me and see what a wretch I am by comparison―ah, ah, and, humanly speaking, I am nonetheless quite in the forefront here on the hill. I am only a poet.g If you want to understand me, if you want to repay me by embellishing my earthly life for me―I will gratefully accept it. And I dare do this, dare it precisely because I only call myself a poet, daring as well to take childlike joy in these earthly things. Ah, if the matter is to go to the next higher court, if a witness to the truth is required in order to stop it―no, he will not accept such things. Frightfully tough, like someone dead, unmoved and immovable, he pegs the price of being a Xn― for you and me, for all of us―as high as “spirit” is high; he abolishes all boundaries; hastens with longing toward his own martyrdom, and therefore he cannot spare us others. Thus many frail people fall who could have come along under a little more lenient terms, had there been concessions, and many waverers harden their hearts, etc.

35

34

Psychological Indicator of Having a Matter of Conscience.

40

The indicator is: the person who has a matter of conscience not only does not seek earthly help, nor does he seek to avoid dangers, nor does he seek “the easiest way,” no, he seeks dangers, creates diffi-

•

1851

221

e

he says to himself, That was certainly a strange talk, that business about the ideal, I want to think it over.

f

Ah, my friends, I have never begged for such a thing―now I am begging for it in the name of Xnty! Listen to me. Ah, and you, you women, you always tend to be receptive to a poet’s words―ah, be receptive and stop the men!

1

5

10

g

precisely for this reason I only wish to be, humanly speaking, well understood by you, for a poet is always weak in this way.

15

222

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 34–35

•

1851

culties for himself, discovers the most difficult way. Ah, because only one thing concerns him: that he has not erred, that it was not a matter of conscience, and the dangers help make this clear. Where this indicator is absent, there is no matter of conscience in the strict sense. As calmly as a functionary in a bank looks at a bank note and says, [“]There is a dot missing over the ‘i,’ the bank note is a forgery.[”] One dot―it seems insignificant to everyone else, yet it suffices to show that it is a counterfeit bank note. As calmly as a broker inspects currency and says, [“]A flourish is missing here―this bill is counterfeit.[”] As calmly as a physician says, “It is not that sickness, because the symptom is absent[”]―that is how calmly I say, [“]Where this symptom is absent, there is no matter of conscience.[”] But I do not say, [“]Where this symptom is present, there is a matter of conscience, this is absolutely certain[”]―no, I am not saying that.

224

10

15

20

Balloting The more insignificant a matter is, the more it is suited for decision by voting; the more significant, the less it is. And truth and everything connected with it cannot be decided by ballot. A person who believes that there is a God cannot participate in any voting about whether there is a God. The result―which furthermore cannot of course be known in advance―has no effect on the matter. For even if our Lord gained an absolute majority in the voting―indeed, unanimity―it is blasphemy to vote, and even if the voting only lasted 5 minutes, during that time God’s name is being taken in vain, just as it is when it is granted the sort of approval produced by voting.

35

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 36–37 36

5

225

10

15

20

25

35

1851

223

The Old Orthodox, who of course claimed that they were the only true Xns in Denmark. I have nothing against their separating themselves from us―but that they should achieve this by balloting and without giving up their claim to being the true Church is indefensible. But that is supposed to be the tactic―and then judgment will be passed upon Mynster and his ilk. And what would the worthy Spandet’s frame of mind have been when he submitted his proposal[?] Did he view it as something similar to a suggestion concerning gas streetlights or things of that nature― well, in that case it can certainly be voted upon―but it would of course have been improper to submit it in such frame of mind. Or if he claims to view this as a matter of conscience, then how in all the world can he be satisfied with serving a matter of conscience― which, since it is in “His Majesty’s Service,” must not only be passed quickly and must prevail, but it must prevail or the person charged with this must fall―by putting forth a proposal to be voted upon and then seeing how many votes it will get. Even if it passed, the matter would nonetheless be poorly served, providing an indirect proof that this is not a matter of conscience for him, that he has overreached himself. And if the motion is defeated, then he will perhaps step forth as a person of character!

30

37

•

A Reformation―Without “a Reformer.” So that was what was new: a reformation without “a reformer.” Indeed, since everything has become impersonal, why not this too[?] Or perhaps it is not the case that this reformation is without a reformer: for of course, they have all become reformers―indeed, it is one and the same

[a]

The old orthodox wanted to pull out of the entire arrangement, though still reserving for themselves the claim of being the true Church, perhaps also (which Rudelbach appears to indicate in his book on the constitution of the Church, etc.) retaining for themselves all the property of the Church, which indeed is no small amount per capita, inasmuch as the Church has rather much property and, in R.’s view, there are very few true Xns.

1

5

10

224

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 37–39

•

1851

thing. The concept “reformer” corresponds qualitatively to: one. If there are two, the quality is lost. If there are ten, the minus increases, and if everyone is one, then no one is. Thus, a reformation without a reformer. Indeed, a reformer is in fact a difficult figure for the contemporary age, almost as much for those who agree with him as for those whom he opposes. So people get rid of him, he is antiquated. Instead of “the reformer” they substitute something much more pliable, and despite its apparent unsociability, something much more sociable: a voting machine―unless they prefer something also very serviceable as a social amusement: a wheel of fortune. Whereupon the reformation begins. People sit in tightly knit little groups―and vote. Nonetheless I hope that there will not be any reformation. As Napoleon cleared the hall with his grenadiers, a poet will come who clears the hall with the help of―ideals. By the way, basically the business about a poet who makes use of ideals to devour those who are confused―basically this is the Socratic.

1

5

[a]

But that the crowd is to be stopped by the ideal with the help of a “poet” is also an advance because it means that everyone is to be an individual and relate as an individual to the ideal, equality before the ideal. Human equality and humanity.

5

226

10

15

20

As one speaks of having been shot by the arrows of elves, I would say: to be wounded by ideas.

38

The Supremacy of the Crowd.

39

It is easily seen that there has been a qualitative change in the form of the world. There is no longer any possibility of one person ruling over the others. If there is to be rule, it must be indirect or inverse, i.e., through suffering. An example of indirectness is a poet, who by summoning forth the ideals forces people back within their boundaries.

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 39

•

1851

The marginal addition, entry NB23:39.a, has been assigned a reference mark by H. P. Barfod.

225

226 1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 39–42

An individual is not to be the ruler who is recognizable as such. That is a lower form of hum. existence, and the imperiousness of the crowd can no longer tolerate it. No, when he says, [“]I am a poet, only a poet,[”] he is saying: [“]Look at me and see that I am not something great, not the ideal―but look at the ideal.[”] But it is precisely the person who is further along who may be made use of as “the poet” in order to provide indirect pressure with the help of the ideal; if it is quite literally true that in hum. terms he is a wretch, he does not provide pressure, nor does he help the ideal to press. Thus, instead of wanting to enjoy his advanced position in a straightforwardly recognizable way (which is to be a straightforward ruler who has himself admired and obeyed), the person who is further along must have the resignation to conceal that fact in unrecognizability (incognito) with the assistance of the ideal, which in fact also annihilates his hum. scrap of superiority. This is also what I have already suggested in the conclusion of the review of Two Ages.―Oh, my God, how clear everything becomes to me! I can never sufficiently give thanks for what has been done for me, so infinitely much more than I had ever expected, could have expected, or dared expect!

•

1851

For “Thinkers.” If someone believes that there is a God before it has been decided in the affirmative by a vote, after it has been decided by ballot does he believe on a rather different basis than before[?] And for someone who did not believe before, is there now any reason for him to believe because it has been decided by a vote in the affirmative that there is a God[?]

Balloting. Everything finite is commensurable with balloting. Nothing infinite can be decided by ballot. For decision by ballot merely means that now the matter is over, not that, in the infinite sense, it is now decided. Nothing infinite results from a decision by ballot. It is simply over now.

Second Time. When Frederick VI said: [“]We, we alone know how to govern,[”] people laughed. If two years later Frederick VI had simply said: [“]As we once said, [‘]We, we alone,[’ ”] things would have looked entirely different. For if mockery was really to have meant anything, people ought really to have revolted. If they had not done so, they lost, and the repetition of those words now makes that point. That is how it is with certain pronouncements: For a longer or shorter period they are sub poena præclusi et perpetui silentii. If the party addressed does not watch out, the speaker retains the advantage of being able to repeat his words.

29 sub . . . silentii] Latin, under penalty of exclusion and subjection to perpetual silence.

228

40

5

41

15

42

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 44–45 229

43

5

10

44 15

20

Ludicrousness. If one is oneself a Knight of the Dannebrog, then to want to make a Christian objection that someone else is a Commander of the Dannebrog or a Knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog―or if one has an office with a salary of 2,000 rix-dollars, to want to make it into a Christian objection that someone has 3 or 4,000: this is after all ludicrous. If objections of this sort are to make sense, they would have to be raised by someone who lives in poverty or indeed, in voluntary poverty, and is a nobody.

Dr. Rudelbach is rlly devoid of ideas. Obviously he has not at all read the passage in Practice in Xnty―that Xnty simply does not exist―in such a way that it occurred to him to measure himself against the ideal and ask himself: But are you a Christian, then[?] No, he has an absolute and unalterably firm conviction that he and his party are Xns. And thus he is very pleased with the passage and thinks it applies to Mynster. And I, on the other hand, quite simply think it applies to me.

25

30

Dare a person, on the basis of merely formal agreement, vote with those with whom he otherwise disagrees without pointing out that this agreement is a misunderstanding―is this not a concealment?

35

Strictly speaking one indeed dare not do it. But inasmuch as I always argue with people by disputing e concessis I will say: Yes, if someone confesses to being nothing but an out-and-out politician, I will make no objection. For politics is mere externality,

45

33 e concessis] Latin, properly “ex concessis,” on the basis of concession; here, on the basis of points conceded by one’s opponent.

•

1851

227

228

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 45–48

•

1851

and the fundamental differences between one externality and another cannot be so qualitative that it is absolutely necessary to sound the alarm. And furthermore, politics is in so many respects a lack of conscience. But if a person wants to be counted as a Christian in the stricter sense, then he dare not conceal the fact that his agreement is a misunderstanding―i.e., when viewed in accordance with Xnty’s notions of remaining unsullied by intrigue, this is a concealment. And therefore he must either point it out―or give up his insistence on being counted as a Xn in the stricter sense.

The Old Orthodox would rlly like to be separated from us and live by themselves, though maintaining their claim that they are the only true Xns. They are so tolerant! They are so tolerant that they would like to abandon us! I am not as tolerant as that. I do not want to separate myself from the others, because the good I possess in Xnty, even in merely being related to Xnty, is something I want to continue to call to the attention of others, even though it would expose me to misunderstanding. The old orthodox have rlly become old and lazy.

Chrysostom says it splendidly: The house did not fall down because the storms came―but because it was built on sand.

The Storm Arises―Christ Sleeps. Thus what is highest resembles what is most lowly. Only a child, and in fact a very small child or an animal, can lie quite peacefully and sleep during a storm. We others cannot do it. But then again, the God-Man can do it. And what, then, ought we others do? Yes, we should do as the disciples did: they called upon Xt.

5

230

10

46

15

20

47

25

48

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 49–50

49

5

231

•

1851

Remark …. well, if the matter is of the sort that is suitable for decision by ballot, I could gladly cast a ballot―despite the fact that otherwise I neither dance nor vote. I once spoke at a general meeting, and then I requested that a vote be taken. It was at the Student Association and it was a question of forbidding badminton, to which I was opposed.

10

50

15

20

25

30

Christian VIII. In my first conversation with him (which incidentally is noted somewhere else), when he hinted at drawing me into a closer relationship to himself, I said (and I do not remember whether this has been noted down): No, Your Majesty, the point of my life is precisely that I am a private person―a private person who in our times is able and willing to defend absolute monarchy. If I am drawn into a closer relationship to you, I am instantly weakened. Everything is weakened when it is explained by impure motives. The only one not weakened is a private figure. whom people have nonetheless attempted to weaken by calling him an eccentric. I could have added that people then weaken the private figure by calling him an eccentric. Ah, but my reply was truthful. Thus, everything has disintegrated to such an extent that a monarch himself must admit it―and he did. A private figure is a power, and he must have sufficient resignation to avoid wanting to be the recipient of the least bit of favor―otherwise he is weakened. At one time, the king’s favor was power―how changed, when the king must refrain from showing his favor simply in order not―to weaken. How impotent!

229

230

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51

•

1851

My Relationship to the Movement.

1

a

arise

b

(Anti-Cl.)

In one sense, no one, no one, no one here on the hill is as close to the movement as I am―indeed, I am its extreme point. But at the very instant that one of our men of the party of movement would say: [“]Excellent, let us then stick together and get this or some other change in external arrangements[”]―then there is no one, no one, no one here on the hill who is as distant from the movement as I am: different from it and separated from it by a world of difference. Even he, the old man, the Right Reverend Bishop of Zealand, whom I admired from the first and still do―even he can get involved with it. He is capable of saying, [“]Well, if it really must be this way, if you will be reasonable, I can cooperate with you on many points.[”] But I cannot. It is the same as when a venerable matron is present at a dance. Naturally, she did not come there to dance; no, she had come with her children and grandchildren. She sits in an inner room where the older people have gathered, likewise in a festive mood, but not to dance. Then the young people get the idea, [“]We must have old Mrs. H―whose mature beauty puts us all in the shade―we must have her take a turn on the dance floor.[”] She objects, saying, [“]No, no, little children.[”] But at last she gives in and says: [“]But on one condition―there will be absolutely no waltz, I truly will not waltz. But if it will make you happy, I will dance a polonaise around the room.[”] At the ballet that same evening a debate may,a and later on at social gatherings, there is a continuing debate about whether it could be said that old Mrs. H. had danced that evening. I am not going to get involved in a debate such as this between those who dance and those who converse. My opinion is simply that it can be said: She agreed to do so, which was something she could certainly do and still preserve her dignity. It is different with me. Even if both youth and madness united in inviting me to dance, I do not dance―literally, any more than an invalid dances, if you will. If people want to explain it that way, I have no objection― but it is literally true: I do not dance.

One of my pseudonymsb has said: Xnty simply does not exist. It almost sounds as if an apostle were speaking and that therefore everything would have to be affected accordingly. For just as when a large fish moves―practically when it merely breathes― the depths of the sea are churned up: so, when he is to move―

51

5

10

232

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51

5

10

233 15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

practically when he merely breathes―an apostle must move everything.―Not one, not one, not one of the men of the party of movement dare issue a challenge in this way. Even the person who issued the greatest challenge and dared the utmost would reduce the price and say, [“]One could almost, almost be tempted to say that it seems as if Xnty does not exist.[”] Therefore it is the pseudonym who says this. But before these words are uttered this book has a preface in which it says: [“]I understand this as having been said to me, to me alone (not to any other pers.), so that I might learn to take refuge in grace.[”]― Not one, not one, not one of our men of movement would describe the turn in this way. He would say: I and a few people, we are Xns, or, at any rate, at least I am―i.e., onc first point he will not make such a great flourish, and on the second point he would assert that beyond all doubt he, personally, is a Xn. But precisely because I poetically gave it the impetus of the infinite (through a pseudonym)―and then, in addition, in Christian fashion, with the help of a preface, I let it all apply to me, to me alone―precisely for this reason the movement is exactly the opposite of how it might appear to inexperienced and ordinary seamen, not to mention passengers. The sailor speaks of tacking. When it is to be done, he is not satisfied with having a couple of sails set. No, every bit of canvas is set in order to catch every puff of air and impart the greatest possible impetus. So the ship is making headway―say, and this is certainly impossible―at the rate of 75 miles every 4-hour watch. The order is given: all men to the sails―the captain himself is at the helm. The passengers say, That is where we are headed, and with the great speed at which we are traveling, we will be there in an instant. Now is the moment. The signal is sounded. He has the ship come about―and that was not where we went, nor was it anything in the vicinity: no, it was in the exact opposite direction. Then he turns the helm over to the mate. He takes a cigar case out of his pocket, though his thoughts seem to be elsewhere, for the expression on his face expresses the solemn joy that is seen in experienced sailors when with God’s help―and that is something an experienced sailor never forgets!―a difficult maneuver has been successfully executed. Then he takes a cigar from the case while his mouth has a sly smile such as is seen in experienced sailors. Then, without saying a word, he goes to his cabin and composes his report to the admiralty.―Let me just add a novelistic feature to this event. There was a passenger on board, the most eminent of the pas-

231

c

that

1

232

1

d

a common soldier,

e

(―oh, forget all emancipation!― you)

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51

•

1851

sengers: he held a telescope in his hand; then he put it to his eye; then he made a gesture with his hand. Clearly the passengers practically regarded him as the captain, and clearly this did not displease him. He explained: That is where we are headed, and with the great speed at which we are traveling, we will be there in an instant. By nature he had a long nose (see Claudius): when the tack was made, I have never seen so long a nose. Then for a moment he stood as though turned to stone. But then he became furious. He threw the telescope to the deck and wanted the passengers to revolt against the captain. This was not echoed by the passengers, however, and things went so quietly that the captain never heard the least about it in his cabin, where he sat fully occupied with composing his report to the admiralty. To the admiralty. Yes, because the admiralty and the general staff are the two great powers. Yet there is one that is greater: God in Heaven. But to have to steer on the condition that one is to submit a report there and thus with eternal responsibility: that is sheer fear and trembling. I would rather cut peat every day for 70 years than have to steer on those terms for just one hour. Good Lord, one is, after all, only a poor hum. being, and even the greatest hum. being could so easily fall short of the mark, even if only by 1/999th―but when it is a matter of eternal responsibility it does no good to have come that close to the mark. And yet in another sense it is so blessed to steer on the condition that all the splendors of the world, offered for 70,000 years: yes, well-advised―but no, not even here is there anything worth considering!―I will trade it for just one hour of this blessedness. Now, this is granted to every hum. being; indeed, he must do it. A serving maid, a professor,d Councillor of Chancery Deichman (oh, excuse me!), a bishop, a postal worker, you,e my dear girl, and I: Everyone must be the single individual who steers his ship subject to eternal responsibility. In one sense this is frightful. But if it is properly understood in fear and trembling and not spiritlessly forgotten

5

10

15

234 20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51

•

1851

The marginal addition, entry NB23:51.j, continues in the main text column with entry NB23:51.j.b, which Kierkegaard indicates with a reference mark.

233

234 1

f

―in Christ’s name and for His sake―

g

―here I put it humorously―

h

5

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51–53

―here comes the serious part!―

•

1851

again: thenf it is gentler than merely being under the orders of the admiralty, for if the admiralty cannotg be as terrifying as God in Heaven, trulyh even less can it bei love and mercy as God in Heaven is!j

i

―for that matter, it cannot even dare be, for the admiralty has no divine, royal prerogative―

j

10

And this is Xnty;a is there any part of it you want to get rid of―and by balloting!b a

and God’s invention

Or does it seem to you that now is the moment to consider making external changes and not, instead, to consider how blessed this Christianity really is, alas, and how little all of us, surely―or at least I―have appreciated this good. Period! j.b

5

10

Armor.

236

52

At the beginning of his sermon on the epistle for the 21st Sunday after Trinity Sunday (Eph 6) Luther says that there are two kinds of armor: one makes us unconquerable, another makes us conquerors.

15

Poetic

53

Humor Tending toward Higher Madness. . . . In my opinion, Christianity simply does not exist. Furthermore, I absolutely support Bishop Mynster who I hope is of the same opinion.―It would be Hamletesque; then the pathos explodes and the individual is exploded.

20

25

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 54–56 54

5

10

15

Grundtvig―and Me. Grundtvig strode into the world with his probationary sermon: “Why Has God’s Word Departed from His House?” I could never say anything like that. I would have had to say: Why Has Power Departed from the Preaching of God’s Word[?] Because in my view God’s Word is in fact heard round about in the country―the trouble is simply that we do not act in accordance with it. I can be satisfied with little: a little passage from the Bible is enough―I immediately ask myself: Have you done it? This is also why I can listen to any priest, any university student, [theology] graduate. Almost from the start Grundtvig has been reduced to being able to listen only to himself. And always this insistence upon Xnty as doctrine, as dogmas―and then the world-historical.

20

55

Grundtvig―and Me.

30

In no way do we differ more than in our tactics. An unknown theology graduate wants to attack everything with a 14-page piece―to top it off, a probationary sermon, which was thus a sort of trial piece for which he was in fact to receive a grade. And I have worked on an enormous scale for 7 years in a row. Captivated peop. as an aesthetic author, reached a high point―and then I have a pseudonym say: Xnty does not exist.

56

The Grundtvigians―The Friends of the Peasant Party.

35

Dare the Grundtvigians deny that they know that the Friends of the Peasant Party want freedom

237 25

•

1851

235

236

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 56–58

•

1851

for purely worldly reasons and in a purely worldly way (thus in opposition to Xnty), while the Grundtvigians want freedom for hyper-Christian reasons? And how, then, dare they vote together with them? I do not ask the Friends of the Peasant: they do not claim to be anything other than politicians. But I ask the Grundtvigians, who have even pretended that they are the only true Xns in the country. Is this sort of Jesuit concealment Xnty?

A Procession.

5

57

In a beautiful way Scriver takes this saying quite literally: “Their deeds follow them”―as if, perhaps for want of any other cortege, they walked behind in a procession. It can be continued further: for when the rest of the “following” returns home from the gravesite, this procession continues to follow. It can be continued still further, for with this procession and with its continuation, it is eternally the case that the continuation follows. Except this continuation is not to be called a voluntary continuation: here one can say, with the philosophers, that it follows of necessity. It is both a continuation and a consequence.

Death. Scriver writes: “It is good to do business with death. We have the advantage (“to die is gain”). This is a grander way of fooling death than that of Epicurus: that death cannot take hold of me because when I am, it is not, and when it is, I am not.

15

20

238

58 25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 59–61 59

5

•

1851

On Examples. Salvianus Mass. de avaritia 3, 10: Possim quidem dicere majora exemplis omnibus Dei esse mandata clamantia quotidie in omni mundo. Because demands for examples also very easily become evasions, very easily direct attention to this: whether I am capable of doing it―instead of giving impetus with this: You shall. Nonetheless he does cite examples, but as an accommodation―and not the reverse, as people otherwise do.

10

60

The Existential Springs

15

are tired out; where the springs used to be, there is now nonsense (reasons, considerations, deliberations, looking to “the others,” etc.)[.] Therefore all movement is feigned movement, movement in place, as if a cow were trying to fly. People prepare themselves for action as improperly as if someone who is to run a race were to prepare himself by putting on 3 coats and two cloaks, galoshes, etc., etc.

61

Religious Upbringing.

239 25

30

With respect to all externality (which I myself as an “individual” cannot eliminate, and neither do I feel that my conscience obligates me to become a martyr in order to eliminate it) the law is this: the task consists precisely of turning inward to become indifferent to this transformation, to draw the mind away from occupying itself with it. Forming a group and things of that sort are falsifications, and are also, from a purely disciplinary point of view, like a student’s inattentiveness in class―or rather, they are like his failure to sit in class quietly. Everywhere, there is and there must be an existential either/or. And the demoralization of our times is precisely that quantification is continually substituted for this.

3 Possim . . . mundo] Latin, I could certainly state that God’s commandments, which resound daily all over the world, are greater than all examples.

237

238

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 62–63

•

1851 On Myself

I am a sort of existential master of ceremonies. That is: with respect to what anyone claims to be in the area of religion, I immediately become that person’s existential consequences, which either compel him to be in character or to become revealed as a deceiver or as self-deceived. Ideally viewed, this is my task, though empirically I do not necessarily occupy myself with every individual. But that we must move back is something I constantly express by continually saying of myself: I am only a poet, which is the truth, but which nonetheless can very much annoy muddleheads who would rather that they themselves were the ideal or at any rate something close to it, or at least something somewhat close to it.

Handbook for Voters Under this title one could write a satire on this entire bothersome business. In general it is indeed sad how little thinking there is in the world. People change the form of government, everything, everything―and the only thing that is not subjected to doubt, the only fixed point, is faith in the sort of decision that is arrived at by voting. There are extremely interesting and important problems here with respect to showing the limitations of voting, where the use of voting is nonsense, as it would be nonsense to use a steelyard in weighing gold. And the fact that the human race now subscribes to voting as the sole method of decision making shows how deeply the race has sunk, has become sheer worldliness.

62

5

10

15

63

25

30

240

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 64–66 64

5

10

15

20

65 25

Grundtvig takes no notice whatever of the fact that the concept of tolerance that is now flourishing is: indifferentism, the most profound falling away from Xnty―and he will vote on the same side as this. In Franklin’s little essay “On the Passion for Persecution in Earlier Times, on Dissenters, etc.[”] (his Life and Writings by Binzer, pt. 2, pp. 165ff.), he speaks of how people gradually came to acknowledge toleration. (i.e., people became more and more indifferent.) Then this toleration is lauded. Thus in a naive note to the text (p. 167) it says: As obvious as this toleration is to the sound hum. understanding, it was nonetheless not the fruit of reason but―of trade. The Portuguese had already realized how much toleration was in the interest of business.― Congratulations. I really think that this is the explanation: business and shipping and railroads, all worldly sociability and friendliness―toleration is in the interest of all this―long may it live!

Franklin’s work from the year 1759, The History of the Province of Pennsylvania, has the motto: [“]He who gives up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserves neither liberty nor safety.” Franklin’s Life and Writings by Binzer, pt. 1, p. 154.

241

35

1851

239

Prosit!

30

66

•

Worldly Wisdom or the Wisdom of the World Abolishes Character. In his Life, referring to a project for the general welfare that he had set forth anonymously in his early days, Franklin says, “Here I learned what I lat-

[a]

The sort of worldliness in which the cleric is an Excellency, etc. is not nearly as dangerous as this worldliness: to drink a toast with the executioner.

1

5

[a]

And this is something any shopkeeper will be able to understand: that toleration is in the interest of trade. And when the world had sunk so low that we had no higher concept than that of being a shopkeeper, toleration arose―and this was the improved Xnty.

10

240

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 66–67

•

1851

er came to experience, that when one wants to advance a cause, one ought not place oneself at the head of it but have it be ‘someone who takes a lively interest in our situation, and so forth,’ ” i.e., let it be an abstraction, an X.―Yes, this is surely what is most prudent; it is rooted in the fact that hum. ambition cannot tolerate that there is someone at the head. And this has thus abolished the ethical, which is precisely what insists upon the person and which would condemn this prudence as impermissible cowardice. In similar fashion he says that one of his friends had pointed out to him that he must work at being humble. Franklin says: [“]And that was just what I did, though I did not rlly become any humbler by doing so. But my manner of speaking changed; I rarely spoke in clear opposition to things; I tended to use expressions such as, I think one could be of the opinion that, etc.[”]― and he adds, [“]Since then, I have had much better success in pushing through what I wanted pushed through.” Of course, because this humility is a compliment to the hum. ambition that will not tolerate character.

Grundtvig.

1

a

solely and only

If the State Church is indeed a fact, one can only fight one’s way out of this fact religiously―not by voting or political rape. And of course the old orthodox bear the guilt (if it is as great as they claim it is) along with the rest of us; for of course they have lived within the State Church. So they should not be allowed to run away from the whole business with the claim that they are the only true Xns. At the most recent meeting of parliament Grundtvig said that for 40 years he has considered leaving the State Church―this is a la Trop’s reading for his examinations. Neither is it true, because for the most part what he has done is entered it―and then gone out of it―and then in―and then… He says he would have done it except for his concern for the thousands who had listened to his voice. Is the business about “the thousands” historical truth and not merely something said poetice et eleganter; is it historical truth and not, on the contrary, a poetic attempt à la Falstaff’s deeds in battle, perhaps an optical illusion because Grundtvig does not have eyes like us others, buta a matchless world-historical gaze in which one and a half hum. beings are transformed into “the thousands”―therefore, if 36 poetice et eleganter] Latin, poetically and tastefully.

5

10

15

67

25

242 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 67–68

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1851

this is the historical truth, then the matter is quite peculiar. For if Grundtvig had walked out, “the thousands” would certainly have followed him. But Denmark is a small country―if Grundtvig takes “the thousands” out of the State Church with him―then there will not be very many left to form the State Church. But in that case it would of course have been terribly easy to put everything in order in the State Church. Grundtvig leaves―“theb thousands” follow him―and the whole thing is decided as easily as flipping a pancake. If he goes back into it again, then we have the State Church; if he leaves, then we have no State Church; for as Poul Møller pointed out in his day, history and Grundtvig and Grundtvig and history are one and the same, so Denmark and G. and G. and D. must also be one and the same―if it is indeed the historical truth aboutc “the listening thousands.” But of course a seer can also see things wrong―perhaps that is precisely why he ϰατεξοχην is called a seer, because he does not see as we others do―but sees wrongly. Finally, he says: that (in 40 whole years, he has not walked out) because he expected that the people would surely arrive at this insight themselves. This is rather a long time to wait, unless G. has prospects of becoming 150 years old. And next, where did he say that he expected this―that is, where, before the upheaval of ’48, did he predict this―for to say now that he expected it is rather tardy. On the contrary, in the last years before ’48, when a bit of stir in popular life began to raise questions about a people’s school “in Scandinavia, in Sorø, on Skamlingsbank,” Grundtvig testified that―when he had prophesied at the beginning of the century―he had not expected that he himself would experience it. I think G. is nonsense.

243

68

35

Defection from Xnty. Owing to the rigor with which Xnty was originally insisted upon, the unyieldingness of blood witnesses, Xnty prevailed and was victorious, reshaped the world, tempered morals, etc. Now there exists a Xn tradition (volatilized Xnty, which, however, is a fruit of Xnty) and it is that which (albeit essentially qua indifferentism) now, under the name of tolerance, wants to 16 ϰατεξοχην] Greek, to an extraordinary degree, par excellence.

241

b

c

listening

the seer Grundtvig’s

1

242

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 68–71

•

1851

have religious freedom and freedom from Xnty―this is how Xnty is rewarded. And the old orthodox walk into the trap and think that this is splendid.

Acting in Character never finds success at the moment; on the contrary it offends peop. But for example, when 20 years have passed and this person is still living―and if by that time he has become a muddlehead, he is recognized for that action. But only in cases in which he has by then become a muddlehead, for otherwise he would once again be engaged in acting in character, and in that case there will be no recognition.

69

10

15

Theories of the State. Instead of all these hypotheses about the origin of the state, etc., people ought to occupy themselves more with the question: given that there is an established order, how can new points of departure be established religiously[?]

Franklin (in his Leben und Schriften by Binzer, part 2) speaks of a sect, the Dunkers, who would not draw up any written confession of faith―in order not to hamper their free development. Franklin finds this very admirable, because sectarians otherwise are characterized by the exact opposite. Now, this latter point of view may be true enough, but after all, these sectarians were also altogether too expediti. What is more inexplicable is rlly how they succeeded in forming a sect on that basis.

70

20

71

25

244

30

28 expediti] Latin, unbound, free.

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 72–74 72

5

10

73

15

20

74

30

245

35

•

1851

Fichte the younger (in his Ethics § 249, his critique of the Englishman Bentham, who defends the use of capital punishment for murderers and for the leaders of an insurrection) remarks with respect to the latter that it is quite proper and that it has been short-sighted soft-heartedness on the part of our present legislators to abolish the death sentence for political crimes on the ground that they are merely the products of erroneous convictions, “quite as if it were only the subjective element, the opinion, that was punishable, and not, to a much greater extent, the enormous arrogance of being willing to employ every sort of violent means to force one’s opinion upon others.”

Reduplication. With respect to finite and worldly goods (which precisely because of their inferiority are not essentially related to any reduplication), the mode in which I obtain them (provided it is not impermissible) is pretty much a matter of indifference, and it can easily become prudishness to be too strict in this connection. But in relation to the goods of the spirit, the mode in which they are acquired is itself the good, the expression of my notion of the good. The mode could be of the sort of which I would have to say, No, I will not have it on those terms, that would be making a fool of myself.

To Have a Cause. A) Lower Forms. 1) Because people have a good opinion of it, see it is a sign of seriousness and so forth, a person speaks unceasingly of having a cause, of wanting to work for a cause, of solely willing the cause―and he has no cause other than wanting to please everyone with this talk about having a cause. Such people have no cause―rather, they decorate something or other, a papier-mâché head, which they coddle as if it were a child. 2) A person has a sort of a cause―but the cause is equally much the desire to further his own advantage by having the cause. 3) A person has a cause―but supports it in every way through group action, etc.; he is happy when someone supports him, even

243

244

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 74–76

•

1851

if it is owing to a misunderstanding; for even though he has a cause, he wants to spare himself as much as possible, i.e., he wants to have a cause as little as possible. B) Higher Forms. 1) Ethical irony and intellectual, unselfish interest, which have a cause to the degree that it is concealed in order to prevent being helped as a result of a misunderstanding. 2) The martyrs who suffer for a cause. They do not actually need to fear that people will support them, because people flee the presence of suffering. But in any case they indeed remain on guard so they can deflect misunderstood help if it should be offered, because for them the cause is unconditionally the absolute, the I is unconditionally nothing. And this is having a cause to the highest degree.

5

10

15

Franklin (Leben und Schriften by Binzer, vol. 4, p. 4. Der Rummeltopf no. 1.) :…. und obgleich Reformation eigentlich jedes Menschen Sache ist (ich) meine, daß jeder Andern bessern sollte) so ist es doch in diesem Falle nur zu wahr, daß, was Jedermanns Sache ist, im Grunde keines Menschen Sache ist―und dem gemäß wird auch die Sache betrieben. Nach reiflicher Überlegung halte ich’s daher für gut die «keines Menschen Sache» ganz zu der meinigen zu machen etc.: That is good. Except I understand it a bit differently, because at the present moment everyone is dabbling at being a reformer, so the task must be the task that no one wants to take on: to reform the reformers.

Science and Politics

75

20

25

76

are the two wrong paths for Xnty; the latter is the more dangerous because it can become so popular. 246

18 und obgleich . . . zu machen] German, And tho’ Reformation is properly the concern of every Man; that is, Every one ought to mend One; yet ’tis too true in this Case, that what is every Body’s Business is no Body’s Business, and the Business is done accordingly. I, therefore, upon mature Deliberation, think fit to take no Body’s Business wholly into my own Hands.

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 77–79 77

5

10

78

20

79

25

30

247

35

•

1851

That Christianity Always Has a Double Danger is demonstrated even by my life’s fragment of approximation of a Christian existence. The step now taken against Rudelbach produces a double danger, for those whom it rlly helps leave me in the lurch―indeed, in the end they will probably even use it against me. But peop. are genrlly careful never to venture forth except in situations where there is only one danger. Thus it is with Grundtvig right now, for if he were to set forth the Christian concept of freedom in a Christian way he would be opposed in equal measure by the worldly and the clerical establishments. But he removes one of the dangers in an unchristian way by forming a coalition with the Friends of the Peasant Party.

The Pressure That Must Be Brought to Bear. The ideals must be used to bring pressure to bear. But an ideal witness to the truth, for example, is essentially higher than any actual witness to the truth whatever. To that extent the pressure, coming from that height, becomes even stronger. The mitigating factor, in turn, is that the whole thing is done by a “poet” who says: I am not that.

Sense of Justice. Columbus requested that he be buried with the chains that were so unjustly placed upon him in life. Franklin lived in London as an agent for Pennsylvania and a number of other colonies. A message from Governor Hutchinson and the lieutenant governor in Boston arrived in England, depicting the colony’s governmental affairs in an unfavorable light. Fr. came into possession of these letters and sent them to Boston. This led to a legal case in which Fr. was accused of having gained possession of the letters illegally; the prosecutor called him a thief and so forth. Fr. remained silent during the proceedings. But his biographer says (in a note in Leben und S. by Binzer, pt. 1, p. 179) that this treatment made quite a profound impression

245

246

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 79–81

•

1851

on Fr., which can be seen from the fact that later, at the signing ceremony of the treaty between America and France, he wore the same velveteen suit he had worn then, which he never used otherwise. 5

Franklin. An article by Fr. (der arme Richard oder der Weg zum Wohlstand Leben u. Sch. by Binzer, vol. 4, p. 95). contains many good items of practical sense and ends as follows: “Thus the old Gentleman ended his Harangue. The People heard it and approved the Doctrine, and immediately practiced the contrary, just as if it had been a common Sermon.”

Fichte Ethics Part 1, p. 780. On the occasion of the French motto: liberty, equality, fraternity. This fraternity becomes that before which property, marriage, family, even differences between talents and abilities are to disappear. “Die Brüderliebe wird plötzlich als gleichmachende, revolutionaire Gewalt proclamirt: en seltsamer Selbstwiederspruch.” And then he shows that it is law, not love, that equalizes in that sense. This is something he could have demonstrated more forcefully: that love is precisely what preserves differences because love seeks not its own, but what is the neighbor’s; not only does it not covet what is the neighbor’s, but on the contrary rejoices that he has one or another thing that I do not have or that I am not. But this is the most frightful hoax of recent times: that egotism pretends to be love, so that love becomes something that demands instead of something that gives. It is love when a person says: Even if everyone else had one or another advantage, and if I were the only one who did not have it, I would rejoice that the others have it. It is egotism to say: If I do not possess this advantage, then not one single other person is to have it. And here again is seen what I have always said, that the whole of the modern age is that wretched caricature of religiousness―it is politics. 8 der arme Richard . . . Wohlstand] German, Poor Richard, or the Way to Wealth. 20 Die Brüderliebe . . . Selbstwiederspruch] German, Fraternity is suddenly proclaimed as an equalizing, revolutionary force: a strange self-contradiction.

80

10

81

20

25

248

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 81–83

5

10

15

20

•

1851

Hum. equality―indeed, that is what Xnty wants! In two ways: Either that if you are the one who has drawn the shortest straw, you patiently come to terms with that, or―for in this way the difference is[a] removed―or that those who have been favored with advantages themselves decide to give up something or everything. But in these cases Xnty always wants to act by means of the good―why indeed should the differences of earthly life be so important to Xnty that there would be strife and discord on their account[?] But politics is egotism disguised as love, the most frightful egotism; it is Satan himself in the form of an angel of light. Yes, indeed, the person who has been favored might well say: Let them take everything from me―but let them at least be honest enough not to do it in the name of love. Often enough, we have shuddered at the skillful and calculated cruelty with which, for example, the clergy in its day would hand over a heretic to the worldly authorities―in order that they not involve themselves with capital punishment (as if they were not really involved with it anyway!) and then they even added that it was their wish that bloodshed might be avoided―which meant that the condemned person was to be burned! Ah, but it is just as cunning when the most frightful egotism, this liberated demon, pretends to be love and demands that while it is levelling everything we should worship and idolize it―as love!

25

82

30

249

Francke People accused him of wanting to found a new religion and so forth. He replied: [“]Ich verlange keine neue Religion sondern neue Herzen.” In his “Abgenöthigte Fürstellung[”] § 41. See Guericke, Franckes Leben, p. 52 note.

83

On a Passage in “The Accounting.” Something That Is Not to Be Added, However.

35

Inasmuch as, before God, I regard the whole of my work as an author as my own upbringing, I could say: But I have remained 28 Ich verlange . . . neue Herzen] German, I do not demand a new religion, but rather new hearts.

247

[a]

essentially

1

248

1

a

, in relation to what I myself understand before God as my own upbringing.

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 83–84

•

1851

so silent for so long lest, by speakinga too soon, I become guilty of telling tales out of school. This could then be added to the passage in the final version of “The Accounting”: Before God, I call it my upbringing, etc. I would also have liked to use precisely that expression; lyrically, it would have satisfied me to use precisely that expression. But something else holds me back. As happens so often, when regarded from another vantage point, the humblest expression is precisely the one that easily comes to say too much―that is how it is in this case. Precisely this humble expression would accentuate the fact that it was my upbringing, almost in the sense of being an authority. The way it is put in “The Accounting”―with the addition that I will continue to have need of upbringing―is simpler, and the tone is entirely such as could be said of any hum. being.

Christianity Always Has Lowliness in the First Place―and Then, in the Second, a Paradoxical Expression of Loftiness.

5

a

because he is a disciple

Xt was born in a manger: how lowly―but then the star shines over it, and kings come to worship, yet the lowliness is not abolished. It is a curious expression of the impotence of these kings: they bring these costly gifts, they themselves worship the child― but the manger and the poverty are not changed. This is precisely what is divine. Xt has no place to lay his head―how lowly! And yet a woman anoints his feet―she is rewarded by being immortalized in history―what a more than royally royal distinction! Yet the lowliness remains unchanged in first place; he continues to be the lowly, poor pers. Look, this is an incognito! And on the other hand, the second there is a glint of the glory that is concealed in this incognito, it is enough to make a person blind―so powerful is the effect of the light. The disciples were sent forth: poor, without owning the least thing, how lowly! And yet “whoever gives one of these lowly even a cup of cold watera, he shall not lose his reward.” (Mt 10:42) how noble, what rank, above all kings and emperors! Yet the lowliness literally remains in first place. The two spheres are kept absolutely separate from one another; their loftiness does not

5

10

15

84

20

25

30

35

250

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 84–86

5

10

85

20

•

1851

find expression in the removal of the lowliness―no, it remains. An apostle is able to do what is extraordinary, even able to perform miracles! What consummate power. But look, he is then bound by one or another perhaps random suffering that makes him more wretched and impotent than the most wretched and impotent pers. And that is how he must continue living; his power as an apostle does not find expression in his now being able to remove the suffering. Therefore Christian loftiness is truly something that could drive a person mad. It is almost enough to drive a person mad: to be lofty to that degree―and yet also to be lowly to the same degree. And there are protections against taking this loftiness in vain. The divine certainly knows how to protect itself.

Copenhagen and Denmark Are a Provincial Market Town so much so that the circumstance that I have been given the poor and unfortunate name “Søren” has presumably prevented me from being regarded as being somebody. No, if Cph. is to believe that I am a thinker, I would really have to have had―a nicer name. Perhaps people will deny that this is so. But it is true nonetheless. And it is one thing for people to be so provincial, and something else that they deny it when it is said.

25

86

30

35

Dishonesty. All I have to do is say to someone that Denmark is an ungrate ful country for which to labor―instantly I receive the answer: [“]Well, could you ask for any better reward[?] You have of course the reward of your consciousness.[”] Oh, good Lord! Look, people speak in such lofty tones―and in the meantime I am in the process of becoming an almost ridiculous figure in Copenhagen because people believe that I have indeed actually arranged my life to be like this. And that is how we live―in addition, we are all Christians and must now take up reforming the Church.

249

250

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 87–88

•

1851 251

Deceit In every situation, the currency for being a hum. being has been debased. In the old days people regarded wanting to be alone as egotism and self-love. But look, the race has now become so wretched that being alone has gone completely out of style; the race is too wretched to produce egotisms even of that sort. Nowadays, in order to be an egotist one must be part of a group. Egotism is represented by coteries and parties. Meanwhile people continue using the old language that says that wanting to stand alone is egotism―but to be part of a group is cordiality and love. People are not aware that all the circumstances of our existence have been reversed. The world has become so worldly that no individual can endure being an egotist; he cannot prevail qua individual. Egotism has understood this and the price has thus been reduced, so that egotism has now become somewhat social―coteries, factions―profiting from the hypocritical appearance of being love. Thus egotism has become what is social―and thus wanting to stand alone has become precisely what is religious; under such circumstances, it is something only the religious person can endure. But truly, egotism did not become social because it had ceased to be egotism.

87

5

10

15

20

25

30

Theater Review

88

Imagined Piece.

35

Yesterday Dean X. X., Knight of D. and DM, made a guest appearance at the vespers service in the Church of Our Lady.

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 88–89

30

It was completely sold out, the house was overfilled, but certainly no one who was there will regret it―on the other hand, perhaps many will regret that they had not been there had it been possible to get in. For the sake of these many people, we hope that Dean X. X. will speak again sometime. Dean X. X. is a true artist. His demeanor is impressive, his bearing noble, his appearance dignified, his gestures genuine, his facial expressions unforgettable. Without exaggeration, I daresay that neither Director Nielsen nor even the late Dr. Ryge could match this performance. His lecture was the well-known set piece about faith, and he left nothing, nothing whatever wanting in the performance. He has great powers at his disposal. He can be terrifying when necessary; he can be ingratiating when necessary; shed tears when necessary: in short, he has everything. Director Nielsen may have a finer voice, but on the other hand Dean X. X. has matchless virtuosity in using his voice, bringing out every nuance. I was enchanted. But as I was sitting there it suddenly occurred to me―but where is the prompter? There is indeed no prompter!! There is no prompter, so this is in earnest, this must be in earnest! I became so anxious at that thought that I almost fainted. Strange! In the theater, if one notices the prompter, the illusion is disturbed. In church, the illusion would be perfect only if the prompter were present.

89

Godly Wiliness.

5

252

10

15

20

25

35

Inasmuch as worldly wisdom (that is, reflection) is precisely what is evil, all tactics must become indirect. In the old days, awakening tactics were straightforward. A person who was conscious of being more advanced in Xnty came forth in character, directly recognizable as someone more advanced.

•

1851

251

[a]

This sketch is inverted and therefore does not fit in here. And if someone were to say, Yes, but Dean X. X. weeps, he really sobs―that is something Director Nielsen can also do.

1

5

252

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 89–92

•

1851

Nowadays the operation becomes indirect. He must guarantee that he is existentially more advanced than the established order. Then he turns aside and confesses, I feel that I am not a Xn, that Xnty is something so infinitely lofty that I am no Xn. At first, the established order may find this to be splendid. But it had better look around. It has been fooled, for with its assertion that it is Xn, the established order lags behind him, and with his assurance that he is not a Xn, he is ahead. So people will perhaps say: He is a fool. But the established order had better look around. Because in the game of gnav it is the case that when the fool moves, he takes only one player with him―here he takes all with him.

5

253

10

Parody.

90

With respect to fashions in clothing and the like, [“]Let us form a group[”] can be adequate as the form of coming-into-being. But with respect to truth, with respect to the idea, imagine what a terrible parody it would be if here the method became, [“]Let us form a group.[”]

20

The Old Orthodox

91

are now entirely devoid of qualities. They have no eye for what was made obvious enough in ’48, that the crowd, the mass is evil. They are still living in the long since outdated notion: Fight the established order with the help of the people.

25

Francke.

92

Fr. notes correctly (in connection with dancing, which, incidentally, he says he opposes) that one should not speak first of such things, but speak first of improving the heart. But the world

30

254

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 92–93

5

10

15

20

•

1851

would rather speak first of such things in order to conclude that Xnty is an exaggeration. But Fr. himself does not rlly use this tactic. He deals with the question of whether dancing is permissible and cites reasons why it is not. No, what is really the more profound tactic is to reply: I am so far behind in Xnty that I do not have time to involve myself with the question of whether dancing is permissible, or even to dance. That is a genuine religious tactic. But the fact is that people so much want to show that they are right and to present reasons, and in so doing they lose the Christian position. It is the same with something more significant: science and scholarship. The person who gives reasons to prove why there is no Christian scientific scholarship is fooled. No: take one or another Christian rule for the conduct of life and then say: Inasmuch as I must, alas, confess that I have not yet lived up to it, how could I find time for the question of scientific scholarship[?] That is the truly Socratic approach. The passage on dancing is found in Guericke’s Franckes Leben, p. 178. Among the arguments Franck cites against dancing there is one so lofty as almost to make one laugh: dancing conflicts with “imitating Christ.” It certainly cannot be denied that a dancing parishioner rlly does not look like someone imitating Christ, but here what happens to Fr.’s argument is like what we say about a voice that breaks into a falsetto: it is too high.

25

93

30

35

Tactic against Spiritual Trial. James 4:7: [“]Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.[”] This, then, is the tactic, not the reverse: flee the devil―no this can be the tactic only in dealing with temptation. From this it can also be seen that spiritual trial is located a whole quality higher than temptation. In hum. terms it is always a consolation that there is a possibility of fleeing the danger and that there is deliverance in doing so. This is not the case with respect to spiritual trial. But this is precisely what gives rise to a new spiritual trial, because to the person struggling spiritually it will seem for quite a while as if he had tried to do too much, as if he perhaps ought to have fled. This is yet another spiritual trial. Only the foolhardiness of faith, which charges head on, can

253

254

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 93–96

•

1851

struggle against spiritual trial. But in every weak moment the believer becomes anxious and afraid that this foolhardiness of faith was perhaps even a way of tempting God―which is yet another spiritual trial.

255

5

Linguistic:

94

All man―not to mention all men, or: if not all men, then at any rate all man. 10

No Reformation. The procedure is quite simple and in the true Christian spirit. Making use of the tax collectors or sextons, one asks every single pers. in the kingdom, each one separately, without exception, the poorest and the most wretched as well as the most distinguished person and the professor: Is he the reformer? Then, if one receives nothing but No―the matter is then decided, and then in the true Christian spirit one simply directs oneself polemically against gathering together a group that wants to reform.

What Injustice! When one merely considers what sufferings of mind and body a poor person, a martyr, must have undergone before coming so far that he had visions and the like―and this is something we speak of as if it were quite simply a delight, even more delightful than going to the theater―instead of confessing that we are anxious and afraid of such things, that we would rather say No, thank you. And furthermore we overlook the fact that the judgment in the situation of contemporaneity is something quite different than it became many years or centuries later.

95

15

20

96

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 97–100 256

97

•

1851

Epigram. In our times everything must be free; even if a person absolutely does not want to, he must be free or they will probably kill him―that is how free everything must be.

5

98

10

“The Apostle.” It is quite true that many people adhered to the apostle. But the apostle did not first confer with these people, seeing how many there were, come to some sort of agreement, and so forth. No, he took action, period; and then the many adherents came, profiting from the fact that the apostle had taken action. When Rudelbach (in the article in Fædrelandet) speaks of the apostle surrounded by a cloud of witnesses, R. sees incorrectly: he sees the cloud―and not the apostle.

15

99

20

100 25

30

My Tactic of always debating only e concessis (when a man says something grand about himself, to take him at his word and then press the existential consequences upon him) could seem to be “infamous malice and envy.” By no means―it is admiration. But it is the admiration of reflection, which is circumspect, and ethically it is irony, which our times’ lack of character needs.

…. cannot be formed in accordance with the paradigm (voting, voting with discussion, voting without discussion―oh, voting― from, in, with, upon, by voting) or follow the melody of the ballad: Let Us Become a Group, Hurrah, Hurrah, Hurrah. One can reform street-lighting and how people dress and, with all due respect, pumping out sewage, in this way―but let us be hum. beings. Xnty is not suited to being reformed in this way.

255

256

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 101–103

•

1851

Commissioning the Disciples. When the disciples were sent out to fetch the donkey and the colt, Xt says: Go into the village that lies before you. This is like a motto for the commissioning of the disciples and for the universality of Xnty, because with those orders one can of course go all over the world. It is a specification of location like the specification of time: Printed this year.

One Hum. Being―Many Hum. Beings. God is an almighty man who can get help for himself, even if it were only from one single hum. being. But then that single hum. being must unconditionally, unconditionally sacrifice everything. You see, we certainly do not want to be that single hum. being. So we grasp at sensate, physical help: Let us form a group. We spare ourselves. We should confess, then, that this is how things are, but we lie and want the social aspect to be that which is more earnest. I do not do this. I make the confession that I am not a solitary hum. being of that sort―I am only a poet. The law is quite simple, by the way: The more quickly a hum. being resorts to the social aspect―that “Let us form a group”― the more sensate a hum. being he is, and the less he communicates with God. The person who must instantly form a group in every situation is rlly bereft of God and of ideas―that is, it is his own fault, for God abandons no one.

…. appealing politically to being a mass, a crowd, or at any rate a flock, a bunch, or at any rate a portion, a splash of human beings, forgetting that, in religion, one is enough.

257

101

5

102

15

20

25

103 30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 104–106 258

104

5

105

15

20

25

106 30

259

40

•

1851

Man―Woman. For woman, the temptation to misuse cunning (e.g., to deceive), corresponds to the temptation for man, which is the misuse of power. And basically, the fact that the woman’s guilt is always emphasized more strongly than the man’s is an indirect compliment to woman, an acknowledgment of the degree to which she is the stronger sex with respect to cunning.

Character. A person who believes that being in the majority is truth has the task, when he is in fact in the minority, of continuing to speak and conducting himself as though he were in the majority; at that very moment it becomes clear whether his view about being in the majority is a sign of character and not a shabby accident. Conversely, with respect to the person who believes that he belongs in the minority: if for a moment he is in fact in the majority, he must continue to express, without change, that he is in the minority―otherwise precisely this makes it clear that he is lacking in character, that he would rlly rather be in the majority. The temptation for the former (to become dispirited and admit that he is in the minority) is essentially the same―i.e., equally great―as the temptation for the latter (to become untrue, deceived by the numerical, and admit that he is in the majority). Perhaps more people are capable of resisting the former temptation than the latter, just as there are surely fewer people who really have the character to be in the minority.

How Xnty Is Slackened. First there is Xt. It is the existential impetus of the eternal itself who came―in order to suffer and die. Next come the apostles, who were unconditionally willing to die. longed for martyrdom. Next come the martyrs. But already here arises the dialectical issue of whether it is unconditionally required that a Xn suffer

257

258 1

5

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 106–108

And even as early as Cyprian (who, however, did not approve of this) being a Xn in the stricter sense became a representation: blood witnesses issued receipts that exempted others from having to risk their lives and permitted them to make an offering and in this way to avoid persecution.

•

1851

martyrdom―or whether it is not equally true Xnty to want to live, the extensive as the intensive. Then Xnty is slackened by an entire qualitative level: now there are only the apologists. Next Xnty has essentially come to a stop. Next scientific scholarship and the theory of the Church begin.

Clement of Alexandria says that we must substitute what is merely human―reflection, scholarship, and the like―for what the apostles had immediately through the spirit. Here is the confusion, for indeed, it looks as if what the apostles had through the spirit was profundity, speculative intuition―rather than authority. And thus it is forgotten that Xnty is the existential. Precisely because he has to make room for scholarship, Clement of Alex., without noticing it, indirectly comes to poetize “the apostle,” so that however lofty a place it is assigned, “the apostle” becomes a category of the sort that includes genius.

“The Rich Young Man.” I imagine the situation as follows. Humanly speaking, he had a certain amount of ability, and, assisted by the greater elasticity wealth gives a person, he aspired to something higher. But Xt scored a direct hit: Give everything to the poor―and follow me. Most likely, the rich young man even thought that wealth was precisely what would help him venture forth more daringly. Incidentally, when he lists the individual commandments for the young man, Xt finally mentions this one: [“]You shall love your neighbor as yourself.[”] But he cannot rlly be said to have kept this

5

107 10

15

20

108

25

30

260 35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 108–111 commandment, and Xt could have stopped him at this point.

109 5

10

15

The Objective. It is this frightful hypocrisy that has been promoted: that the objective, the doctrine, the fact of the matter, is everything―the subject is a matter of indifference. This is what has helped to place Xnty in entirely false categories. Imagine two teachers equal in abilities and gifts, teaching the same doctrine―but one builds a brilliant career with this message, the other lives in poverty, persecuted. Let us assume that it really is the same doctrine (which the first of the two will surely insist is the case): if this doctrine is Xnty, the difference is infinite, because through his existence the one preaches Xnty into an illusion―the other makes it existentially clear what Xnty is.

20

110

25

111

30

…. they have sacrificed―for all of us, priests as well as lay people, can preachify, sing, chatter, bluster about “sacrificing”―but sacrificed: consider it well; sacrificed: oh, it is so lofty: They have sacrificed, sacrificed time and effort, etc.

Faith―Existence. It is usually put like this: first one must have faith, and then existing may follow. And this has contributed enormously to the confusion, as if it were possible to have faith without existing. And then people have put this into their heads and have abolished existence―because of course faith is much more important.

•

1851

259

260

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 111–113

•

1851

The matter is quite plain. In order to have faith, there must first be an existence, an existential category. This is something I can never emphasize too much: that in order to have faith, in order for there even to be a question of having faith, there must be the situation. And this situation must be established through an existential step by the individual. People have utterly abolished this propaedeutic. They let the individual go along in his usual mediocre rut―and then gradually acquire faith, more or less as a person can learn rote lessons without needing the situation. But take the example of the rich young man. What did Xt require first of all? He required an action that would have totally propelled the rich young man out into infinity. You see, that is what is required: You must go out, out upon the 70,000 fathoms of water. That is the situation. There can be a question now of gaining faith or of despairing. Still, there will be nothing meritorious about it, because you will be so shaken, through and through, that you will certainly learn to let go of meritoriousness. Then there is once again a second existing that follows after faith. But this first must never be forgotten―or Xnty is entirely displaced.

One Thesis. Luther nailed 95 on the church door; it was indeed a conflict about doctrine. Nowadays one could place a single, solitary thesis in Adresseavisen: Christianity simply does not exist―and offer to debate it with all the priests and professors.

Divine―Hum. I believe that I have understood something that it is important to maintain and represent for as long as possible. So I use my modest fortune in doing this―alas, this is merely human. What

261

10

15

20

112 25

30

113

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 113–116

5

•

1851

261

would be godly would be if I were able to live in poverty. But I am holding out more or less as long as I can. And of course, there is the man whose entire wisdom with respect to me rlly consists of the shabbiness of taking advantage of what I said to him a number of years ago: that it was expensive for me to maintain an authorial existence of this sort, that I really could not afford it. And therefore he merely procrastinates.

262

114 10

115 15

20

25

116 30

….You have 1000 priests: If you had only one who had at any rate a little crumb to sacrifice for the sake of Xnty, you would be better served. You want to reform the Church: But first get one single Xn―and then let him reform the Church.

My Aim always tends in this direction: Xnty simply does not exist―that is, existentially, which of course is also why I call myself a poet. Therefore, for the sake of this aim it is of course important to me to shunt aside everything that can be misleading in this connection. At one time, people believed that what was needed was a speculative system―this was misleading, for then it was tacitly conceded that we are Xns, that this fact was quite certain and everything was in order, inasmuch as the only thing that was needed was a system. Now people want to reform the Church― this is equally misleading; it is as if everything is in order with our being Xns. You see, here is my difference from Rudelbach, who speaks only of a little faction that he calls the Church―and they are true Xns. I do not share this latter opinion.

The Teachers of the Early Church one does note so clearly, that they still bore in mind, that it was a matter of concern for them, thata the matter of sacrificing everything be taken literally.

a

there was a time when

1

262 1

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 116–117

b

that such things were taken literally, [c]

5

10

15

So far are we from sacrificing, and even from merely admitting honestly that this is what is required, that in order to be completely secure we have established it as a sort of dogma that to sacrifice is to “tempt God.” But of course the ancients did have the relief that if a person were to sacrifice something or himself for Xnty, it was understood―not as nowadays, when such a person would be ridiculed―by Christians―as ridiculous exaggeration.

•

1851

It is now so long agob the fact that such things were done has become a fable to us. We are even afraid of sacrificing anything―for fear of tempting God. Hell and the devil and everything related to them have been explained as metaphorical expressions― and sacrificing everything, as well as everything related to that, has also been explained as a metaphorical expression, as hyperbole.

5

263

10

117

Origen warns against priests’ accepting earthly pay and becoming, as he says, pharaoh’s priests instead of God’s. Pharaoh, the earthly king, wants his priests to have earthly goods, to look after earthly things, not souls. But what does Xt command his priests to do? He who does not renounce everything he possesses cannot be my disciple. I tremble in speaking these words; I must accuse myself first of all; I must pronounce my own condemnation first of all. How can we dare preach such truths to the people, indeed, even read them, we, who not only do not give up everything we possess but even strive to acquire more? But when our consciences condemn us, should we therefore conceal what is written? No, I will not make myself guilty of a double crime. I will confess, confess before the entire people, what the gospel says and what I still have not fulfilled. cf. Böhringer, Die Kirche un ihre Zeugen Origin, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 109.

15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 118–119 118

5

264 10

15

119 20

25

30

35

Our Way of Reading the N.T. Imagine one of the teachers of the early Church― and let him witness the way in which we read the N.T.! We leave out everything existential, acting literally as if it simply was not there; we do this literally; the ancients took absolutely literally what was written there. But still, I am closer enough to the ancients than is the average person of today that I admit that this is written in the N.T., and I make a confession. I cannot really get the momentum to do more, because I, too, am in fact paralyzed by the illusion that we are all Xns. But nonetheless I am like a shout of alarm, a cry of conscience indicating where we are. To do more, a person would have to possess authority, for a person would rlly come to define from the ground up what it means to be a Xn.

Xnty’s and also Luther’s view is, after all, obviously that the distinctive mark of being a Xn is not that I give assurances, assuring that I believe. No, one’s existence is to be marked by the Christian quality of existence, and then the faith is present, the faith that I nevertheless am saved by grace. Thus faith is not a surrogate for existing, but faith is to ensure that the individual does not regard the qualitatively Christian existence (renunciation, self-denial, etc.) as something meritorious. Give up everything―then the moment comes when you give assurances that you believe, that you believe that you are saved by grace, that faith is what saves. For when you have in fact given up everything, this expresses in another sense that you believe; then the only remaining danger is that you could think that your self-denial was something meritorious.

•

1851

263

264

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 120–122

•

1851

The Dislocation of Xnty. People have brought Xnty so far down that its significance is supposed to be solely and exclusively as a consolation. So everyone makes himself as comfortable as possible―and then Xnty is taken along as a consolation. But if Xnty were to be proclaimed truthfully, it would easily look as if it wanted to hinder people in going about their business in life. And what would they probably think if they heard that one must suffer for Xnty.

The Extraordinary―The Ordinary. The extraordinary person must sacrifice and must certainly find his satisfaction in doing so, just as he must also be certain that this is his task. The ordinary-hum. must in hum. fashion admit to having his earthly wishes, be a hum. being pure and simple, strive to fulfill those wishes, and then let God rule and decide whether he will deny any of them. But the place for the extraordinary person must be held open.

Amazing! At one time, the objection against Xnty (and that was precisely the time when it was clearest what Xnty is) was that it was unpatriotic, dangerous to the state, revolutionary―and now Xnty has become patriotism and State Church. At one time, the objection against Xnty (and that was precisely the time when it was clearest what Xnty is, and the objection was raised by truly perspicacious pagans) was that it is misanthropic―and now Xnty has become: humanity. At one time, Xnty was an offense to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, and now it is―cultivation. For Bishop Mynster, the mark of true Xnty is cultivation. Look, if Dr. Rudelbach would now resign his office, come forth as a solitary man, protect himself against all misunderstood support in the form of political alliances, and testify that he is not

120

5

10

265

121

15

20

122

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 122–124

•

1851

a Xn and that Xnty simply does not exist: Look, that would make sense. But this messing about by voting with every Tom, Dick, and Harry, granting a legion of illusions―no, this is nonsense.

123

10

266

15

20

124

30

35

The Suffering Struggle. Force may never be used, that is Xnty’s view. Rather, one is to suffer, enduring the injustice while also witnessing to the truth, until the other party can no longer endure committing injustice and renounces it of his own accord. This suffering struggle also has a paralyzing effect, as it were. Just as a hypnotist induces the hypnotized person to sleep, with one limb after another losing its vitality, so does this suffering endurance paralyze injustice: no evil can hold out against it. But the fact is that this way is so slow―there seems to be an extreme shortcut that has great appeal to the impatient, worldly mind, which itself is only all too closely related to injustice: the use of force. For the use of force―and the hasty impatience to use force in protecting oneself against injustice―are essentially the same worldliness and essentially the same injustice; at the most, there is the altogether accidental difference, that the suffering party is in fact deprived of the opportunity to commit injustice.

Private Conversation. This, too, is a part of what demoralizes: that in private conversation people more or less betray the fact that they know very well how crazy everything is. But officially―no, people are not so crazy as to say so officially. Here once again it is a serious self-accusation to have understood something correctly without acting accordingly. A person thus passes judgment on himself with such talk―if he does not also make a humbling admission. And that is surely something people are not inclined to do. People are so eager to have “understood” something―that they forget that one’s understanding is the criterion by which one’s actions are to be judged.

265

266

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 125–126

•

1851

To “Sacrifice” As in all cases, in order to determine whether one or another thing is a “sacrifice,” one must always look at the beginning. Many a man in fact intends to make a profit on one or another enterprise―and look, it did not work out, and he suffered a loss. And then (retrospectively), helped by the result, he wants to reinterpret the situation―that he made a sacrifice―in order to get at least some profit, namely honor and respect for having made a sacrifice. Incidentally, the reverse can indeed also be the case: a person begins something with the notion that it will be his downfall (thus that he is making a sacrifice), and Governance prevents it or perhaps he was insufficiently familiar with the circumstances.

125

5

10

267

15

On Myself.

1

a

in which I can move.

b

, as confining as tight boots,

I believe I could have the courage to give up my life in order to make room for the extraordinary―but to be regarded as the extraordinary myself: No, that I cannot do. To me it seems as if in so doing I would defile what had been entrusted to me. If worse comes to worst, I would rather try to get hold of a pers. who perhaps was not even as far along as I am, and then get him proclaimed as the extraordinary and perhaps risk everything in promoting him. But I myself must continually be able to say: It is not I who am the extraordinary, I only bow to it. Only then am I happy, with a zest for life and battle. Incognito is my element and in it is also the enlivening incommensurability.a This not being more than one appears and is assumed to be is also frightfully cripplingb for me, as if it were fatal. For most people it is perhaps an exhilarating enticement to be regarded as something more than one is, so that they will at least strive after something. For me it is the reverse, to be regarded as less than I am is working capital (that which drives me forward). But then, too, I am a fundamentally polemical nature.

126

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 127–128 127

5

10

268

15

20

25

128

30

35

•

1851

Christ in Glory. … Then he died―and then was taken up in glory. Now one could come to an overhasty conclusion (as was pointed out in Practice in Xnty), and as it were shout hurrah for him―forgetting the part about imitation that applies to us. But there is another way in which one can come to an overhasty conclusion. Origen puts it beautifully…[“]Even (in glory) he weeps over our sins, cannot rejoice as long as we continue in our wrongdoing. How can he―who went to the altar to atone for our sins―how can he be joyful when the lamentation over our sins ascends to him! He does not want to drink the wine of rejoicing in God’s kingdom alone, he is waiting for us. But, you ask, when will his joy, his work, be perfected? When he has made me, the last and most wretched of all sinners, perfect and complete.” This latter bit is an excellent turn of phrase, especially when it is also regarded as a blank to which each can sign his name. But the excellent thing about it is that after such an enormous, more than world-historical turn―to lead the matter back to: me. (see Böhringer, Die Kirche und ihre Zeugen, pt. 1, sec. 1, Origen, pp. 189, 190.) One can in fact also regard Xt too much as an exemplar, as if he were like someone who has already taken his examinations and now does not think of the others―instead of regarding his life, his suffering, and death (which certainly were his examination in obedience) as after all essentially the deliverance and atonement, that is, for others.

Misunderstanding. When a person sees what he calls God’s cause suffer, it is so natural for him to want to rush to offer help―and then also to hope that in other respects God will, as it were, be a bit more lenient with him. Alas, no! Who rlly grasps the exaltedness and loftiness of the divine[?] Suppose that, humanly speaking, God’s cause was almost lost. Then someone comes who humanly, though honestly, wants to help. And God, who has been sitting quite calmly in heaven, answers: [“]Well, now, so you want to be examined[,”]― because this will be an examination.

267

268

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 128–130

•

1851

Imagine something that, humanly speaking, is surely unimaginable: a hum. being who is sure of his cause to this degree! Humanly speaking, everything looks as if his cause was lost. Then someone comes who, quite honestly, wants to help him―and he answers: [“]Yes, but it will be an examination, it will be most rigorous for you.[”] I am speaking of someone who, humanly speaking, honestly wanted to help, because it is an entirely different matter if he is a deceiver, for then exaltedness of this sort is not required in order to put him at a distance. But this divine exaltedness! Oh, a poor hum. being can so easily err, as if God or God’s cause had need of anything. The situation is always―even in what is, humanly speaking, the most desperate moment for God’s cause―it is always the same: the closer you come to God, the more rigorous he becomes. He does not make the mistake of rejoicing over this help―no, it is your examination. But no coterie with God, no companionship.

5

10

15

269

Irenæus says that it is certainly true that death is the punishment of sin (thus part of God’s righteousness), but that it is also an expression of God’s grace and mercy. This was precisely how God dealt the devil a setback, as it were―that he thrust death in between and thereby put an end to sin. Had hum. beings continued to be eternal, or had they become eternal, the devil would have won. But now, death, the punishment of sin, sets a boundary for sin in another sense (grace and mercy). see Böhringer, Die Kirche und ihre Zeugen, pt. 1, sec. 1, Irenæus, pp. 237, 238.

129 20

25

30

Ireneus.

130

The reciprocal relationship between Law and Gospel. They are in agreement: 1) with respect to their origin: they both spring from God. 2) with respect to their intention: the upbringing of hum. beings.

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 130–131

•

1851

3) with respect to their essential content: to obey God, follow his word, love him above all, one’s neighbor as oneself, refrain from all evil.

5

10

15

270

They are different: 1) with respect to the range of their content: the Law gave laws for ceremonies, the Gospel abrogated them, but in so doing broadened the Law. 2) with respect to who proclaims them: the prophets―Xt. 3) with respect to their differing points of view about who should be brought up: the Law is for slaves in order to break their obstinacy―the Gospel is for free people. 4) with respect to their methods of upbringing: the Law brought up from the outside in, the Gospel from the inside out. 5) with respect to the ethical requirement: both require obedience, but greater obedience is required by the Gospel. 6) with respect to their extent: the Law was meant for a single people, the Gospel for all. see Böhringer, Die Kirche und ihre Zeugen, pt. 1, sec. 1, pp. 239, 240.

20

131

25

30

35

The Suffering Struggle. That this and this alone is what is Christian is of course expressed by its being Xnty itself. God does not use force to wrest hum. beings from the power of the devil. No, Xt lets himself be born, suffer, die―in order to rescue hum. beings from the power of the devil. Injustice also has its rights, and in considering injustice it is injustice to want to commit injustice against it: it is simply unchristian. What is Christian is: in suffering, to permit injustice to have all its rights, down to the least detail―and in that way to win, to conquer it. Christianity is always deceptive at first glance. This suffering combat looks so weak. At first glance, many an unjust ruler has perhaps thought: “This man, he is not dangerous, he will not use force, indeed he is even madder than that, he helps us against everyone who wants to use force against us, even if that force offered to help him. So this sort of combat is thus the most innocent sort of private amusement.” Oh, you shortsighted

269

270

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 131–132

•

1851

person, precisely such a person is the most dangerous. Yes, if you could seduce him into using force, he would be less dangerous. True enough, for the moment the danger would perhaps become greater, but the downfall occasioned by the assistance of such a suffering combatant is also quite different fundamentally and in its essence. For what does it mean that he struggles while suffering? It means that he rlly transforms himself into something that causes you to pass judgment upon yourself. No injustice, not the least bit of injustice, is committed against you―no, but all your injustice is made manifest, down to the least detail. Yet the world and Xndom have long since sunk so deep in worldliness that such tactics are entirely forgotten and now must of course look like sheer madness. And indeed, is it not madness to believe that there is meaning in existence, to believe that there is justice at every single point, item that God exists, item that one single person, who is in the truth, and as long as he is in the truth, is stronger than millions[?]

5

10

15

271

Bishop Mynster From a Christian point of view, what profound misunderstanding is to be found in a single word―without him thinking about it. At the beginning of the observation that deals with sin (in the Observations), it says: this word [sin] is almost never heard in the world nowadays, but is found to be almost laughable―and yet, it must be heard by every earnest hum. being in his quiet hours. So, this word is no longer heard in the world―and the world being spoken of is: Xndom, where everyone is a Xn! Enormous confusion. But it must be heard―yes, indeed, that was spoken in true Christian fashion, aber, aber: it must be heard in every earnest hum. being’s quiet hours. Enormous confusion. First of all, what does it mean that it must be heard in every earnest hum. being’s…, the fact that he is hearing it of course makes him an earnest hum. being, so this is merely a tautology. But now his: quiet hours. How quiet! Yes, what a quiet abyss of Christian nonsense! This was the word that conquered the world: The apostle imprisoned all things under the power of sin. That is Xnty’s principal power. And that is precisely what must be heard―in the world: the stronger, the more ungodly it is, the more ridiculous peo31 aber, aber] German, but, but.

132 20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 132–133

5

10

15

272 20

133 25

30

35

40

•

1851

ple find this. And now it is confined to an earnest hum. being’s quiet hours―and on top of this, people have allowed the world to regard itself as Xn. So Xnty’s cause has suffered defeat to the extent that in the midst of a profane world that (and this is even crazier) calls itself Xn, there lives höchstens one single earnest man, but he dares not say how things truly are; he is afraid of being laughed at by this Christian world, so he talks to himself about sin in a quiet hour. Take the attacks on Xndom leveled by any of my polemical pseudonyms―none of them are so dreadfully severe as this one by Bishop Mynster―without his noticing it. It is also a frightful satire upon him―as bishop standing at the head of 1000 priests in a Xn world in which people find talk of sin to be laughable, but nonetheless it is presumably earnest about being Xn, a Xn world in which an earnest man then steals away in a quiet hour and talks with himself―very softly, very softly (indeed, he has reason to do so, because under such circumstances this talking softly is rlly yet another sin) about sin. What an earnest man and a Xn this is! And in many respects this is what Mynster’s sermons are like as soon as he begins to describe what he supposes our situation to be. He is more of an artist and poet; what is dangerous is simply that he himself does not recognize this fact.

Christianity―Tertullian. I have often pointed out that Xnty can be presented in two ways: either in the interest of hum. beings (a mitigating accommodation) or in God’s interest (true Xnty). Then I have pointed out that if I am not able to present Xnty in the latter mode, or dare not do so, then I must make an admission and keep the space open. Scarcely any Church Father has presented Xnty in God’s interest as pithily as Tertullian has. Here, Xnty is not a bit of morality and a few points of doctrine; rather, here Xnty is contention between God―and the world. Therefore Tertullian decisively focuses his attention on its opposite: idolatry. And inasmuch as Xnty has long since triumphed, as they say, and has left its stamp on culture, Xnty and the world are so entangled that the matter must once again, and with renewed intensity, focus on this: Is Xnty God’s or is it man’s[?] 5 höchstens] German, at most.

271

272

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 133–134

•

1851

You see, this was what excited people in the early days of the Church: that they quite literally felt that what was at stake was God’s cause―not about some doctrinal points and so forth, but about whether God is to be God. My very subordinate achievement is always: to direct attention. I make the admission: I dare not venture higher―but I am at least like a shout of alarm.

I Cannot Do Otherwise,

5

134

is a saying that goes back to Tertullian. It reads: [“]The person who has perceived the truth cannot do otherwise; he must cling fast to it.” see Böhringer, Die Kirche und ihre Zeugen, pt. 1, sec. 1, pp. 285, 286.

10

Here, once again, one must grant old father Socrates a bit of his due, for of course in a similar sense he emphasizes what it means to “understand,” namely, that the person who has truly understood something also does it, and doing it is the criterion for having understood it. This is also acknowledged in all finite situations. If someone were to praise a medicine as the only sure preventative and not use it himself, one concludes that that this is not his conviction. And thus in every case. It is only in this one curious case that people have come up with the notion that in spiritual matters, if someone gives assurances that he has faith―while his life expresses the opposite―this assurance must nevertheless suffice. No one behaves like this in any finite situation; people are not satisfied with assurances but are careful to find out how the other person acts. A financier is uncertain about which bonds to invest in, so he consults another financier. Let us assume that the other financier makes an enthusiastic speech about how 3 percent bonds are the only safe investment. So perhaps the first financier believes him, but he says, I would still prefer to know what bonds he invests in himself. If he then learns that at the very same moment the other financier bought 4 percent bonds, he thinks as follows: To hell with his assurances, I am going to stick to his actions, for his conviction is what he himself does.

273

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 135–137

135

5

•

1851

Tertullian in his teaching on the means of grace he proposes that the mark of the divine is,a externally, a lowly appearance (die Einfachheit der Erscheinung) and, internally, a divine power. Whereas paganism is internal emptiness replaced by external pomp. see Böhringer, Die Kirche und ihre Zeugen, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 343. This is what I emphasize with the distinction between direct recognizability and indirect recognizability.

10

274

136

15

20

25

30

137

35

273

Tertullian emphasizes the difference between faith and non-Christian wisdom. Among other things, he says that the difference has to do with extent. “Christianity is the completed revelation and has a definite endpoint. We no longer need to ruminate, now that we have found Xt, no longer need to seek, now that we have found the Gospel. Because we believe, we need do nothing more than believe, because what we believe, above all, is that there is nothing more that we must believe.” This is the boundary; otherwise we would of course have to continue seeking in the infinite. Philosophy, on the other hand, has no boundary and therefore continues into the infinite. And why so? Because philosophy gives unconditional freedom of inquiry. “Because one must be everywhere in order to seek and find, he can be nowhere ….. Certainly it is only because one does not find that he is constantly seeking, for he is seeking where there is nothing to be found. A person knocks constantly only because no door is ever opened, for he is knocking where no one is inside. A person prays constantly only because he is not heard, for he is praying to one who does not hear.” Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 313.

Tertullian “What God has commanded is always good and always the best. What are you hesitating for? God has commanded it.” Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 295. 4 die Einfachheit der Erscheinung] German, the simplicity of the appearance.

a

the unity of

1

274

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 138–140

•

1851

Tertullian in his work of consolation for martyrs actlly elevates Christian freedom so high that he postulates the paradox that it is only through being imprisoned for Xnty’s sake that a person becomes truly free. “Prison gives the Christian what the desert gave the prophets. The Lord himself often sought solitude, in order that he might pray more freely. Let us remove the name prison and put solitude in its place.” A bit earlier he says: The world itself is a prison; therefore, by being imprisoned you have exited from prison rather than entered it. Regard prison as an asylum. Certainly it is dark in prison, but you have the light; and there are fetters in prison, but you are free. Even outside prison, the Xn has forsaken the world, and in prison has forsaken prison as well. No matter where you are in the world, you are nonetheless outside the world.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 294.

Tertullian says in a passage in his book on the Lord’s Prayer: “Formerly, prayer called down plagues upon the land, defeated armies, withheld fructifying rain. But Christ has given prayer the power solely to do the good. Evangelical prayer heals the sick, drives out demons, opens prisons, loosens the bonds of the innocent, wipes away sins, drives away temptations, halts persecutions, consoles the dispirited…raises up the fallen, strengthens those who falter…[”] see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 348.

138

5

10

275

15

139 20

25

30

Tertullian says somewhere that since the birth of Xt, astronomy has acquired new content: Xt―his star, which the wise men saw in the East, is now the only star.

140

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 140–142

•

1851

I have read this quoted in Böhringer.

5

10

I think it is also Tertullian who somewhere says: A person who himself does not want to suffer cannot love the person who has suffered. I have read this in Böhringer. But here it must be remembered that with respect to Xt this principle could be insisted upon so recklessly that a person could come to the opposite extreme: an almost unseemly fraternization with the God-Man, forgetting that there is after all a human truth in the fact that Xt did not suffer in order that I should also suffer, but in order that I should be saved and give thanks to him―except, however, this must not be misunderstood as though it proclaimed a new, purely worldly existence that merely seeks what belongs to the world.

276

141

20

142

25

30

Tertullian I think it is, says that the Xn may not go to war: indeed, one cannot go to war without drawing a sword, the sword that Xt ordered put in its scabbard. I think I have read this somewhere in Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, and it is surely Tertullian.

The Book of Job. Then, when the three friends (who were older men) have as it were grown tired of answering Job or have lost their composure in confronting him, and surely are not far from granting that he is right, the young man, Elihu, begins. This can be understood as follows. In one sense, the ideality of faith is represented most truly―that is, most ideally―by the young man because he has not yet had any experience. The older person, the experienced person―alas, for him it happens only too easily that faith has suffered some slight damage; he therefore tends toward compromise, toward reducing the price a bit, etc. But the youth still possesses only pure ideality.

275

276

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 143–144

•

1851

Basil. Already at that time he expresses the situation of Xndom when he says: [“]Our difficulties are oppressive, and yet martyrdom is an impossibility―because our persecutors bear the same name as ourselves.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 190, bottom of page.

Christ as Exemplar. Take a human relativity. Imagine an existential ethicist. With respect to him, it is always in the interest of his times to see that he gets surreptitiously pushed aside as an object of admiration―and thus to get rid of him as someone whom we ought to resemble. In aesthetic fashion, he is made into someone extraordinary; people admire and admire him―in order to be rid of him ethically. This is how the hum. race has continually behaved in relation to Xt. It is remarkable to see how quickly Xnty is slackened with respect to the existential. As early as the 3rd century, people began to make fundamental reductions in what being Xn requires of a person: one can very well be a Xn and nonetheless evade the dangers of confessing it: indeed, be a Xn―and sacrifice. As a result of this Xndom experiences an enormous numerical expansion―and a reduction in intensity. Then there is this growing crowd of so-called Xns and suchlike. Now begins the tactic of pushing Xt out entirely. In the 4th cent. people intensify brooding upon the admiration and adoration of the God-Man―aha!, but imitation? no such careful attention is paid to that. From that time on, Xnty becomes disoriented. And from then on it moves steadily forward in this erroneous direction―yes, for it does go forward! Just ask the 19th cent. whether Xnty is going forward! Then Xt becomes a myth, a clever poem―and finally, he comes to be like that serpent with 8 heads that Linnaeus proved never to have existed. The more the admiration increases, the lighter Xt becomes― and at the time he exerted the greatest existential pressure, there was no time at all for admiration.

143

5

144 10

277 15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 144 –147

•

1851

Ethically, admiration must in fact immediately be converted into action tending toward imitation; to the degree that admiration is allowed to take the time to be admiration, to that degree a person is on the wrong path ethically.

5

145

10

278

146

15

20

25

147

Basil. We can flee evil, either out of fear of punishment―like slaves, or in the hope of reward―like hirelings, or out of love of God―like children. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 258.

Asceticism. What our times would rlly be most inclined to regard as a parallel to Don Quixote is: an ascetic in the old-fashioned sense, an ascetic who fasts and prays, who accuses himself for having even the slightest sinful thought and imposes punishment upon himself―and then, we are all Xns! For someone to live in poverty and straitened circumstances―if he cannot afford better―is something we understand (even though the time will surely soon come when we do not understand it, for of course he could see to it to become a communist), but this is not at all the concept of asceticism. That asceticism is a spiritual dietetic rule, that it has religious significance for the person himself: this is what people would find enormously ridiculous―and yet we are all Xns! We are all Xns, and so if someone was serious about expressing Christianity existentially, everyone would laugh, would find it to be a ridiculous exaggeration, and the man would be regarded as mad.

Distance. Once everything was inner struggle and spiritual trial: whether it was God’s will, that was the question, and all preparations

277

278

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 147–149

•

1851

were directed accordingly: A person withdrew into solitude, fasted, prayed, and the like. Now everything is extroverted: intrigues flourish and what matters is to form a group, etc. If one put two such individuals together, they would simply not understand each other; the one would simply not understand what the other was doing.

The Mynsterian Sermon. It is, after all, so obvious that so far from bringing Xnty into the world this is a continuing effort to smuggle Xnty out of the world―if in fact there was any Xnty. Everything has been transposed into aesthetic categories: art―quiet hours. And existentially, the preacher leads the most worldly of lives, rich in pleasures. It could still work out―if he then made admissions and confessions regarding himself, about his inability to convince himself to take Xnty to a higher level. Ah, but it is precisely here that things are worst of all. In practice he has established the principle that actlly to be in earnest about the religious is―lack of cultivation! This latter is what is frightful. Ah, but in this way there is consistency in the debauchery: he has been unable to convince himself to make a concession―so he must have the assistance of this final untruth.

Contrasts. Think of one of those suffering figures: During what was perhaps a long life, he had to endure all the mistreatment of his contemporaries―and no one, no one was concerned about his misery―unless it was to increase it! No one expressed concern― except in the form of ridicule and mockery―about his sufferings for the sake of the truth. Then he dies. Then there lives a man who is sensual in every way, ambitious, avaricious, pleasure-mad, and in addition eager to don the appearance of holiness: he makes a brilliant career by preaching

5

148

15

279

20

25

149

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 149–151

5

10

15

20

•

1851

about how the first man suffered! He has numbered every one of the first man’s tears―and he has, I think, turned every one of those tears into gold! He has heard every one of the man’s sighs―and I do believe that it is in fact with the help of the first man’s sighs that the second man wallows in pleasure! Ah, how lofty is the divine―how dignified, as it were! Because a hum. being, even an apostle, could of course lose his equilibrium at the thought of such things and grasp at worldly help! But God sits calmly in heaven, valuing himself infinitely, saying: But the first man had a relationship to me; that is enough, even if he had suffered 10,000 times more than he did suffer. Ah, yes, this is so true! If a hum. being who is suffering like that demands help in outward things, it is indeed because he does not value God highly enough; he wants so much to have the relationship to God on more lenient terms. Now of course this is only human, but on the other hand, God is, after all, absolutely right: the relationship to him is such a blessing that it absolutely and infinitely outweighs all suffering. And look, this is also why an apostle, for example, has dignity on God’s behalf, if I dare put it that way. They flog him; the apostle replies: I have the honor of being flogged, etc.

280

150 25

30

151

35

Nonna The mother of Gregory of Nazianzus. He had a brother, Caesarius, who was a physician. He died. When he was buried, his mother was there, not in mourning clothes, but clothed in white: “She vanquished her tears with philosophy, her sorrow with hymns.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 386.

Ambrose. They demanded that he turn over a church to the Arians. The emissaries of the emperor come to Ambrose in the cathedral and demand that he do so, pointing out that this is the emperor’s prerogative. Ambrose replied: [“]If the emperor requires of me what

279

280

1

a

my property, my fortune

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 151–153

•

1851

is minea, I shall not oppose it―despite the fact that it all belongs to the poor. But the emperor has no right to what belongs to God. If you want my property, take it! My life: I am prepared to follow you! If you want to put me in chains and lead me to death: certainly, with pleasure! I shall not surround myself with people as a bulwark―I will not embrace the altars in order to preserve my life, but rather I will sacrifice myself in order to save the altars.” Böhringer, pt.1, sec. 3, p. 29.

Ambrose [“]The wounds we get for Christ’s sake are not wounds by which life is lost, but by which it is propagated…I beg you, just let this battle take place, and just be spectators! Consider that when a city has an athlete, it wants to see him compete. Why in greater things do you shrink from doing what you usually do in lesser things[?]” (See Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 35.) This is very well said. Indeed, a Xn is like a strong man, and should we not want to see him exercise his strength through persecution or under persecution[?] You see, this is strong talk, and inasmuch as Ambrose himself is the one who must take on the task, it is true strength.

John the Baptist. Somewhere in the Gospel it is written that John said of Xt: I did not recognize him―but when he saw the spirit hover over him in the form of a dove, then he recognized him. And yet, when Xt comes to him to be baptized, John indeed says: I need to be baptized by you, and you come to me. These can certainly be reconciled, however, because John could very well have known Xt as someone, or as the one, who stood far above him without therefore having recognized him to be God’s only begotten son.

5

152

15

281 20

153

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 154–155 154

5

10

15

20

282

155

25

30

•

1851

Can This Really Be How It Is? Augustine, for example, says somewhere, [“]If you still think you have no affliction, then you have not yet begun to be a Xn. This brief life is an affliction; if there is no affliction, then there is no state of exile; but if it is a state of exile, then either you do not love your home very much or, beyond all doubt, you have an affliction” (see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 188[)]. You see, that is plain talk. And the higher we go in the definition of being a Xn (up to being God’s chosen one in the strictest sense, an apostle), the more and more definitely it is said that it is sheer suffering―and the Exemplar himself!! On the other hand, it continues quite calmly and without disturbance from generation to generation: these 1000s upon 1000s who become priests―they take their examinations and believe that they have come through that unpleasant struggle, and then they yearn for a more comfortable situation so that they can at least enjoy life a bit. So they marry―and then they go forth to proclaim the gentle teaching, Xnty, this gentle teaching, which “sweetly relieves life’s sorrows and for the first time gives the joys their proper savor”―and this is Xnty.

Something Typical. A Donatist former bishop, Emeritus, met with Augustine in Caesarea in Mauretania (Algeria). Augustine led him into the church―for a conversation. But of course the Donatists, you see, were persecuted, persecuted by the world, so they did not dare speak. A stenographer was present in order to write down the conversation. Then Emeritus merely said this word to the stenographer: Write. And then he remained mute. It is excellent, an excellent expression of the fact that he was forbidden to speak, and that all the business about a colloquium was fundamentally a sham. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 172

281

282

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 156–158

•

1851

Augustine speaks in a later work of his former delight in theater. He shows what a self-contradiction aesthetic sorrow is, because a person involuntarily breaks off right at the point where it should lead one to action. He says that tragedy is supposed to awaken compassion, “but what sort of compassion is it in which the spectator is not called upon to rush to provide assistance, but is only invited to enjoy the pain. … I, wretched person that I am, I loved this enjoyment of pain! But what sort of love is this love of pain! For I did not wish to undergo what I might see presented, but only to let it move me superficially, as it were, and, as when one scratches oneself with one’s nails, this led to an inflammation. What a life a life of that sort was, oh my God!” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 110

156

5

10

15

Augustine. “There is a truth that abides, even if the world were to pass away…This truth is not subordinate to the hum. spirit (if that were the case, the hum. spirit could not of course pass judgment in accordance with it, but would have to pass judgment upon it), not coordinate with it (then it would of course be as changeable as the hum. spirit); but the hum. spirit is subordinate to it―and this is to be truly free, when a hum. being is subordinate to it.[”]

157

20

283

25

Augustine. As a proof of the truth of Xnty, Augustine also cites (in addition to the usual proofs based on prophecies and historical consequences) the unity of Xns as opposed to the variety and contentiousness of philosophies. But this argument does not in fact mean very much, because it is implicit in the difference between religion and philosophy, and for that matter every religion possesses this unity rather than the divisiveness of the philosophical.

158

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 159–161

159

5

160

•

1851

Simon Peter “could you not watch with me one hour?” Here, for a moment, Christ is the suffering human being who, for his own sake, desires the support of another hum. being. But at that very instant he is once again the teacher: “Watch and pray, that you do not fall into temptation”―thus, not for my sake, but for your own.

R. Nielsen―and Me. I am so convinced of the correctness of my ideas that it has never occurred to me in the faintest way to initiate a debate. Prof. N. seems not at all convinced―he wants to debate and convince Prof. Martensen.

15

284

161

20

25

30

Humor (Pathological) Situation. A religious speaker talks on the gospel concerning the lilies and the birds, that even the lowliest lily is lovelier than Solomon, and he applies this to being a hum. being, for the blessed consolation for even the most wretched. In his pathos he reached the culmination. Then he recalls the interpreter who, in order to explain the gospel text, said that the imperial crown lily grows wild in that region. The speaker exclaims (the pathos practically leaping forth): [“]He must be an ass, that interpreter.[”] And the speaker bursts into tears, so that for a moment he is unable to continue. He turns aside for a moment. Then he again begins to speak and says: [“]Forgive me, my feelings overwhelmed me. But, indeed, it is so frightful! We hum. beings have Holy Scripture. We say that it is God’s Word, which indeed it is, these blessed words. Then we hum. beings come up with the idea that an interpreter is needed―and then there comes an interpreter such as this one! He must be an ass![”] The speaker comes to laugh involuntarily. He

283

284

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 161–164

•

1851

continues: Yes, one could really just as easily laugh as weep over it. This is pathologically correct.

5

1

5

10

15

20

[a]

Now that Bishop M. has restored his honor, the label GoodyGoody will gain a new point. It could be introduced as follows. The epithet I once thought of using for G.―the tool of literary contemptibleness―is so lengthy that it would certainly be better if I use a new word: the Goody-Goody. It expresses precisely the same thing. It contains an allusion to a passage in The Happy Capsize. There is a whore who is to be married; she goes to Rosiflengius―not in order to be married by him, because of course R. was not a priest―but in order to get a wedding verse, which she gets, bearing the words: The Lily Entwined with the Rose, or Thoughts of the Goody-Goody Virgin Bride. June 1852

To be added to a passage in an older journal, where it says that I could be willing to take upon my conscience having journalists shot: but no, no! I would rather fight in such a way that I myself take over command at the execution at which I am to fall before the journalists.

162

Goldschmidt

163

once the tool of contemptibleness, now the virtuous one, the goody-goody! Once the grinning mountebank―now the ethicist! Once hiding behind knaves, the darling of the mob―now the aristocrat, the fine, fine aristocrat who hobnobs at the dinner table with barons and counts―and yet despite all the transformations, essentially the same―the only remarkable thing in these transformations!

The Donatist Principle: The Church that persecutes is eo ipso the false Church; the Church that is persecuted and counts martyrs is eo ipso the true one. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 353.

27 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

10

15

285

20

164 25

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 165–167 165

•

1851

285

Augustine says that to refrain from using force to coerce someone into the truth “is a false and cruel tolerance.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 366, top of page.

5

166

10

The Donatists said in opposition to worldly might being employed against them: “Xt has given the Xns the example not of killing, but of dying.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 384.

286

167

15

20

25

30

Augustine defends authoritative faith, saying somewhere that even if a person came to believe something wrong because of authority, it was better than not believing in authority at all.a Altogether, he of course emphasizes the ethical aspect of authority: obedience, subjection as something intrinsically beneficial. [He] also insists that asceticism is part of being a thinker. The entire section about this in Böhringer could be given another close reading. Against the Donatists, he insists that his view is not that force be used to compel people to faith (because it cannot be evoked by compulsion), but that might must be used in order to remove hindrances in the individual (passions and the like) so that faith might emerge. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3. The entire portion on Augustine’s relation to the Donatists, especially pp. 357ff. and pp. 367, bottom of page, and 368 contains the passage to which I particularly refer.

a

see Böhringer, pt.1, sec. 3, p. 253. “to refuse to let oneself to be led by any authority is even more lamentable than being deceived by an authority.”

1

5

286

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 168–170

•

1851

Augustine.

1

a

sin is not to be explained as a consequence of

What has so often been put forward as an excuse for hum. beings with respect to sin―weakness, ignorance, the superior power of the senses, etc.―is given a masterful turn by Augustine, who says that so far from defending or explaining sin, this obscuration of the understanding is far more the punishment of sina―no, it is to be explained as a consequence of sin, the punishment of sin. “We call sin not only that which is called sin in the strictest and narrowest sense, namely a voluntary and conscious offense, but we call sin everything that is a necessary consequence of such an offense and is thus its punishment.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 408. Böhringer is right in saying that Augustine views the situation in such a way that a person’s own will is not external to, but is included within the state in which the pers. is situated. See ibid., p. 409, top of page.

Augustine says that the meaning of the words, [“]Adam, where are you,[”] is that God is punitively reminding him that now he is no longer in God, but outside of God. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 498, top of page.

Freedom. That abstract freedom of choice (liberum arbitrium)―is a fantasy―as if at every moment of his life a pers. is confronted with this abstract possibility, so that he never rlly gets going, as if freedom were not also a historical condition: this has been pointed out by Augustine and subsequently by many moderns. It seems to me that this can be illustrated simply as follows. Imagine a balance, even the finest balance for weighing gold― 26 liberum arbitrium] Latin, free choice, free will, arbitrary freedom.

168

5

10

287 15

169 20

170

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 170–171

5

10

•

1851

even when it has only been in use for a week, it already has a history. The owner knows this history―for example, whether it has a bias in the one direction or the other, and so forth. This history continues as the balance continues in use. So it is with the will. It has a history, a constant, continuing history. Thus it could get to the point that a pers. finally even loses the capacity of being able to choose. The history does not conclude with this, however, for, as Augustine so rightly says, this condition is the punishment of sin―and is itself sin. The concept of sin is in every way fitting. It is not an external thing, with the punishment being something else―no, despite the fact that it is punishment, the punishment is indeed also sin.

288

171 15

20

25

30

35

Rumford It is modern and lacks character: the inventor of Rumford’s soup was rewarded by being elevated to the nobility, presumably also a rich man. This kind of thing would have offended people in antiquity and the Middle Ages. But our times or modern times find this lack of reduplication completely in order. Eugene Sue raises his voice against the plight of the poor―and earns a half million by doing so. Yes, of course, people say, otherwise he would have been mad to do it. People would not have behaved like this in antiquity or the Middle Ages. There was a much greater feeling and ethical respect for existential transparency. It is this modern hypocrisy about objectivity, about doctrine, about the cause, etc., that has utterly abolished Xnty. This protesting the plight of the poor in so massive a tome looks as if it amounted to something―and if this then makes the auctor rich, it makes no difference one way or the other. Alas, no, my friend. This lack of reduplication makes it all into an illusory movement―essentially nothing is done about poverty, but a new path to riches has been discovered. At first glance, ethical reduplication makes it look as if the individual has failed to have major, broad-reaching influence―but he works at the foundation, and there is a Providence above that keeps its eye on every such honest person. At the moment, all the activity of the other person looks as if it was something―but it is a mirage, like those in the desert. 29 auctor] Latin, source, origin, author.

287

288

1

5

10

a

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 171–173

Instead of history and character, we now have a miasma of everything that is impersonal and lacking in character. Fundamentally, history is over, and no one believes in eternity―and the hum. race is like a school where report cards have disappeared. People console themselves with the notion that nowadays everything may be written in the book of forgetfulness.

•

1851

And so it is with all of modernity: nothing but confusing mirages, because ethical reduplication is lacking.

Freedom of Choice. Genrlly speaking, the freedom to choose is depicted as an extraordinary good. Well, that is indeed the case, but it nevertheless depends on how long it is to last. For people genrlly make the error of imagining that this freedom of choice lasts one’s entire life and that this itself is the good. Ah, what Augustine says about true freedom (as opposed to freedom of choice) is so true and is based on experience: a hum. being has the strongest sense of freedom when with a firm, decisive resolve he impresses upon his action that inner necessity that excludes the thought of any other possibility. Then the “torment” of choice or freedom of choice comes to an end. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 550.

The Contemporary Age―Posterity. A contemporary age persecutes, puts to death a witness to the truth. Then comes posterity, which makes a big fuss about him. And now it would like to make it look as if it is much better than that contemporary age. But you see, the guilt of this very hypocrisy is just as great as that of the contemporary age of putting him to death. These are Xt’s words when he talks to the Pharisees, both in Mt and in Lk 11:48.

172

289

15

20

173

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 174–176 174

5

175

10

290 15

20

176

25

30

Proverb of Solomon Augustine cites one such: [“]The fool offends against the way of the Lord, but in his heart he blames God for it.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 571.

Christianity Slackens―The Doctrine of Predestination. That the doctrine of predestination emerges is also an unmistakable sign of how the existential velocity has decreased. By slackening, Xnty has gotten the mass of hum. beings to be Xns―and now the Xn sits and wonders how it is possible that a hum. being can be saved. And then comes the dogma of sedentary piety: predestination. In general one could draw a distinction between existential Xnty―and sedentary Xnty. The latter makes Xnty into doctrine, then gets into disputes about doctrine, orthodoxy, and degenerates into fantasy.

The Temptation of Xt It is not merely an ordinary hum. temptation― but what an intensification: When one is hungry, to have it in one’s power to perform a miracle and obtain bread in that way. This is something quite different from mere hunger; it is a superhuman torment to have the power of miracle at that very moment, and not dare to use it.

•

1851

289

290

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 177–179

•

1851

The Highest as the Abnormal. This form (that the abnormal is what is highest, often even the abnormal with the teleological suspension of the ethical, the absolute) is, ethically, what the miracle is in nature.

Joy in Affliction. People certainly say that it is merely the worldly outlook that wants to get rid of affliction in order to regain joy―that what is religious is to take joy in affliction, despite the fact that the affliction and the suffering continue. However true this may be, let us nonetheless not exaggerate, for a hum. being is after all a hum. being, and if joy in affliction could be or should be entirely the same as joy without affliction, then eternity would of course be almost superfluous.

177

5

178

10

15

291

That I Am Supposed to Be Such an Odd Eccentric. It is after all rlly an enormous satire upon the present age. In a small way, I express a little bit of ethical selflessness in relation to an idea. God knows, measured against the ideal it is sheer wretchedness. But humanly speaking it is at least a little―and, be it noted, we all should express the ethical.―And then the average is so low that people shunt me aside as an odd eccentric, and even Bishop Mynster himself does this. An odd eccentricity: Yes, thanks a lot―if a genuine existential ethicist comes along, what an odd eccentricity that would have to be! The ethical is always the requirement―and thus it is the greatest possible backwardness and distance

179

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 179–181

•

1851

291

from the ethical to view this as odd and as an eccentricity, i.e., as something that is quite specific to this particular individual.

180

10

15

So now I have obtained Der Sozialismus in seinem Principe betrachtet v. Vinet, übersetzt v. Hofmeister. I have only read the preface to the little piece and have seen enough. He is not the man. He is a brilliant author―who writes something about the single individual; he is not in character, not acting in character, not existentially elevated above all the debate; no, no, he writes something that he then submits to the judgment of the public; he speechifies and negotiates with the public in the manner of an ordinary author. But all the same, there is spirit.

20

25

30

35

Vinet.

1

Vinet.

292

181

[a]

March 9th

5

Collision of Conscience―The Established Order. They say (and, from a Christian point of view, rightly) that simply to permit the individual to be subsumed in the state is paganism and the end of all truth―that in conscience, the individual is above the state. They emphasize that the heroes of the hum. race are precisely those who are individuals who have collided with an established order for the sake of conscience. True, true! But now you want to make a turn! Ergo you say that all laws that could compel conscience ought to be abolished. No, no! Frightful error, and corrupting, demagogical pandering and sentimentality! No, why did those men become heroes? Precisely because there was an established order that could exert great

[b]

It was Vinet about whom Rudelbach shouted in his book on civil marriage, saying that Vinet and I were in agreement. Curiously enough, I then ordered a book by him from the university library. It was on loan. A while later it was sent to me. Several days afterward, the librarian told me that the person who had had the book wanted it back again. I sent it back immediately. And look, it was Martensen who had had it. It was a lengthy work by Vinet, in French, which is why I did not read any of it. But today I myself have obtained the little book that I had ordered.

[a]

This is also how Vinet presents it.

5

10

15

20

292

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 181–183

•

1851

pressure and, by exerting this pressure on such an individual, cause him to realize that it was in truth a matter of conscience, so that he did not make an error and go off half-cocked. You see, that is why―precisely for the sake of conscience―I require compulsion. I love what is great―ah, with an indescribable, envious admiration!―but I hate nonsense, and in this situation the attempt is made to interpret everything nonsensically.

5

10

Vinet

1

[a]

denn ein Christ glaubt an den Sündenfall der Gattung und die Wiederherstellung des Individuums.

He said it masterfully: Xt’s teaching is the fall of the race and the resurrection of the individual. see Der Sozialismus übersetzt v. Hofmeister. p. 23.

182

15

293

The Sufferings of “the Extraordinary Person.” This alone: what an entire alphabet of torment. The extraordinary person is not vain about what has been granted him―for in that case he would of course not be the extraordinary; furthermore, he is altogether too exhausted by what has been granted him to be vain. But on the other hand, it is indeed the case that he is the extraordinary one. And then―yes, if he would just speak with one single person about what has been granted him― then, to see the suspicious look that judges him to be a conceited fool, etc. And then, yes, perhaps the extraordinary person would most prefer that people were confirmed in the view that he is a fool, an insignificant personage―but then, the responsibility before God―whether he dares it: is it not deceiving God, inasmuch as God has in fact made him the extraordinary one. 1 denn ein Christ . . . des Individuums] German, because a Christian believes in the fall of the race into sin and the restoration of the individual.

183

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 183 –184

5

10

184

20

25

294

30

35

40

Ah, the hallmark of the genuine relationship to God will indeed always be the tendency toward madness―that is how strenuous it is. To be the extraordinary person, to share with God the knowledge that this is what one is, to dare to know that this will be made increasingly manifest in the future (albeit in this case perhaps the future means not until after one’s death)―and yet in this life, in the present age, for the most insignificant person to be more than the extraordinary person, because the most insignificant person is within the relativity of what has been given hitherto―the extraordinary person is the new that as yet is nowhere at home.

Vinet. As noted, he is not in character; he is without― merely an author. He speaks of individuality, of the I, the single individual―but he is infinitely distant from the final reduplication, from saying: I, Vinet―i.e., existentially tying a knot at the end of the thread. But some of this is certainly attributable to the enormous stage and the enormous means of communication. Making use of the press in French―i.e., for God knows how many millions―it would of course have to be a god who dared this final reduplication. Here, once again, can be seen the fundamental failing of our times. In antiquity things were divided into smaller parts, so they were manageable: Socrates, for example, took personal responsibility for Athens―and then it was: I, Socrates. What is Vinet’s presentation like, then? Rhetorically, to a certain extent it is rlly socialist. One immediately notices from his style how far he is from the final existential reduplication: that under any circumstances, he himself is an individual. There is nothing in his style of the goading, gadflylike, teasing that is unsocial in teaching unsociability―no, Vinet writes just like anyone else who wants to win people over― to win them over straightforwardly―to his views.

•

1851

293

294

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 184–186

•

1851

Unless I am very much mistaken, Vinet is sufficiently uncertain of his theory that if a crowd shouted their approval, it could induce him to take them seriously and completely forget reduplication of what he has written about the single individual. Incidentally, from looking at Vinet I feel quite definitely that what has in fact helped me venture somewhat farther out is the circumstance that my stage has been so small.

“Grace” Humanly speaking, there is something paralyzing about “grace,” because if merit is attributed to striving, to denying oneself, etc., it provides a different sort of satisfaction for what is merely human. But, understood from a merely human point of view, if a person is to strive, deny himself, sacrifice everything―and that this nonetheless is “grace”: this is indeed paralyzing.

On Myself. Is there anything ridiculous after all about the fact that I have had unusual abilities? Or about the fact that I have been unusually diligent? Or in the fact that I have been unselfish? Of course not. But, you see, had there been any truth in this provincial market town where I live, it would by now have expressed the fact that these very things were good. Instead, it inverted the situation: it deified its own mediocrity―and I became a ridiculous exaggeration. And, why so ridiculous, why such an exaggeration? Well, because I was not like the others. Is it so ridiculous to write a large book that is a good piece of work? Of course not. But look at Prof. Heiberg, who is supposedly no. 1: he would never have had the strength for a work like this―he writes bagatelles―ergo things must be inverted, and I must put up with the fact that writing a large book that is a good piece of work is ridiculous. And that is how it is in every situation. Is it ridiculous―especially when understood from a Christian point of view―that I have worked free of charge? Scarcely. But Prof. M et al. want to make a profit from life, and they did―ergo the situation must be

5

185 10

15

186

20

25

295 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 186–189

5

10

•

1851

inverted, and it became ridiculous, an odd exaggeration to work free of charge. Etc. Or was it perhaps a ridiculous exaggeration when vulgarity had gained such disproportionate superiority that everyone found it intolerable―and I was the only person who could do anything to oppose it― ―was it so ridiculous that I did it, that I showed by my actions that it was intolerable[?] But because the others limited themselves to chattering about how intolerable it was (but since they did nothing, they nonetheless showed that it must in fact be tolerable: how ridiculous!), the situation had to be inverted, and an ethical action became―a ridiculous exaggeration.

15

187

20

188 25

Christ Curses the Fig Tree. In his homily on this passage in Matth., Chrysostom says that Xt had never cursed any hum. being, but that this was done in order to show what hum. beings deserved and what Xt had a right to do. I read it in Scriver, the first part, the section: [“]Der Seelen Würdigkeit wegen ihrer Erlösung”], § 20, (p. 30 in my edition).

Ψ 25:6–7. “Be mindful of your mercies, O Lord―for they have been from eternity” “Remember not the sins and transgressions of my youth” Ah, for indeed they are of course temporal, but mercy is from eternity; it was before they were and remains after them.

30

296

189

Personal. Today I did my customary lectionary reading in the O.T. And the reading for the day was David’s psalms 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.

295

296

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 189–192

•

1851

I was very much struck by it, precisely because yesterday evening I got the little book by Bishop M., in which he blurs the impression Goldschmidt makes by bringing the two of us together where we ought to be kept separate. I was particularly struck by Ψ 26:4 and Ψ 27:10.

On Having the World or the World’s Cultivation. Joh[.] V. Andreä talks somewhere about the fact that nowadays parents set much store by their children acquiring this cultivation, and they do not consider the high price the world exacts for its instruction. His words are: [“]Denn die Welt lehrt nicht umsonnst, und nichts ist in der Welt theurer als der Unterricht der Welt[”] From the work: Libertas veri Christianismi solidæque Philosophiæ. in Hossbach’s Leben Andreä, p. 269.

5

190

10

15

20

Ψ 10:14

1

5

[a]

The following words could be appended to this as a commentary: God has chosen those who are poor and despised―chose them, but no, there was no choice, there was nothing else for him to choose, for the world had chosen all those who were powerful and respected.

the Vulgate translates this Tibi derelictus pauper. Scriver explains this (vol. 1, p. 35) as follows: the world chose all those who were distinguished, powerful, etc.―so there was nothing left for God except the poor and the forsaken. Our translation translates it differently: the poor person trusts in thee.

191

25

297

Scriver in a passage (pt. 1, p. 40) translates Job 13:15 as follows: [“]Even if he (God) slays me, nevertheless I hope in him.[”] 14 Denn die Welt . . . Unterricht der Welt] German, Because the world does not teach in vain, and nothing in the world is more expensive than the world’s instruction. 22 Tibi] Latin, to you. 22 derelictus pauper] Latin, the poor are committed.

192

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 192–195

•

1851

297

It is beautiful, but probably incorrectly translated.

5

193 10

194

20

25

vol. 1, p. 42, Scriver says that the soul, the human soul, is God’s repose, or that God reposes in it―that what here is granted to a hum. being is as extraordinarily splendid as it would be for a subject if a mighty prince were to rest his head on the subject’s lap.

The Disciple. There was a time when one could almost be afraid to call oneself a disciple of Xt.a Nowadays one can do so quite unproblematically, because nowadays it means nothing at all.

My “Character.” There is some truth in the idea that I am a kind of incognito. A person is precisely in character by being incognito; I do not enter into character by exiting the incognito. Of course, this is also how it is with a secret police agent: he is precisely in character by being disguised and by taking care that no one learns that he is with the police. One cannot (except meaninglessly) say to him: Enter into character by casting off your disguise and revealing yourself as a police officer―no, that is precisely exiting from one’s character.

298

195

30

Anselm writes in a letter to Bishop Fulk of Beauvais: “… For there are many prelates of our order who, so concerned as it were that God’s property not be lost while in their hands that they let God’s Law perish in their hearts. Because they make such efforts at be-

a

because it meant so much.

1

298

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 195–197

•

1851

ing shrewd, at not being deceived by others, that they themselves become cunning at deceiving others.[”] Böhringer, vol. 2, part 1, p. 270, top of page.

Anselm. The day he was ordained archbishop of Canterbury, the gospel reading for the day on which the sermon was based was precisely this: that no one can serve two masters. That was certainly quite remarkable. I read this somewhere in Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, on Anselm’s life.

My Relationship to the Established Order and the Intrigue against Me. 1) My position has never concerned “doctrine”; I think the doctrine is quite in order. Note From this alone one can see that it cannot be in my interest to form a faction, a sect, and the like, for there is no talk of any doctrinal difference. 2) My position (which, however, I never put forward directly or with authority) tends toward the existential: that it can be seen from peoples’ existences that there rlly is no Xnty, or very little of it. The proclamation, as far it goes, is equivocal (which can be seen very well in Mynster): in “quiet hours” people are infatuated with lofty notions―then they go home and say to themselves: Of course, it cannot be like that in practical life―instead of saying, Xnty is precisely this: it must be done in actuality. Note One can see why I make so much use of a poetic approach. If I did not make use of it, then, either I myself would have to be the absolute, the ideal (which I am very far from being), and thus make use of absolute authority, or I would have to make my own existence the maximum, neglecting to strive myself, and then pass judgment on others. That is fanaticism and arrogance; instead, I bring the ideals to bear poetically. But I bring them to bear, and they are heard. Mynster, on the other hand, does not want them spoken of, wants a conscious separation between the quiet hours and daily life, whereas I want the religious to be heard in the midst

196

10

197

15

20

25

30

299

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 197

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

•

1851

of daily life, heard in its ideality, which passes judgment on me, judging that I am imperfect and mediocre. 3.) In order to do everything within my power to avoid causing a collision with the established order or causing the least harm― but only benefit―I have always preserved myself as an individual, have rebuffed those who approached me, thereby embittering many people―alas, this was done out of zeal for the established order, for which an effort such as mine can become dangerous as soon as it becomes a party. 4) The danger that threatens the established order in these times is: the crowd, the numerical, parties, sects. In order to protect itself, all these numerical phenomena must be split up. That is how the religious establishment should make use of its officials. But it is a thankless job―a person exposes himself to being disliked, regarded as haughty, etc. No one wants to do it―the established order itself courts popular approval and numbers as much as any party does. That means, there is rlly no governing, and Mynster is an example of this. So, once again serving the established order in self-denial, I have taken the entire matter upon myself, exposing myself doubly to be being disliked, for of course it cannot even be said that I am doing this in my capacity as the holder of an official position―and at the same time, without enjoying the support and security of having an official position. The Intrigue. It can now easily be seen how this can be arranged. I have no support from the established order, just as I have neither the profit nor the renown of holding an official position. On the other hand, in serving the established order I have put myself at odds with the crowd. Now the established order rebuffs me, and I am more or less abandoned. I merely want to point this out; for with God’s help I will surely get through. But by looking at how Mynster, in his most recent book, plays up Goldschmidt at my expense, one may conjecture that this might be intrigue.

299

300

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 198–200

•

1851

Anselm 1

[a]

Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 295.

as archbishop decides to oppose the king, and in this connection calls upon the other bishops to lend support; they reply: [“]We know you to be a pious and holy man, whose business is in heaven, but we have to take things into account, we have relatives, are engaged in worldly activities. We confess that we are not able to lift ourselves up to your height. If you will condescend to us and walk our path, we will support you. But if you will adhere to God alone, then you must also stand alone, as you have hitherto: we cannot support you.” You see, this says something after all: at least they are not cheeky enough to want to make their earthly realm into something higher, into the truth―and Anselm’s into fantasy.

198

5

300

10

15

Anselm. Pope Paschal II writes in a letter to Anselm (which was delivered by the emissaries of the king and of Anselm, in which the pope was well aware that in A’s view, he had not been strict enough with the king, which the pope now explains as leniency and wisdom) [“]… for the person who stands up and extends a hand to someone who is lying down in order to raise him up, will be unable to do it without bending down himself. But even though he bends down and appears to come closer to the person lying down, he must not lose his equilibrium.”

The Existential―Observation. There is a question whether a single day’s fast is a much more earnest exercise than reading or listening to a sermon an hour a day every day for 14 days without changing one’s way of life.

199

20

25

200

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 201–202 201

301

10

202

15

20

25

30

•

1851

Christ’s Passion Story. This can be said to be the most moving (on Xt’s part) and the most shameful (on the part of his surroundings) event that has ever happened or is thinkable, because Xt’s story always is ideality, not as is otherwise the case with historical events, which are not sheer ideality and to which the poet therefore can add some ideality―but here the ideality is the historical event, which is the greatest possible contradiction and is again an expression of the fact that in its pure ideality Xnty breaks open the whole of existence, just as the graves burst open, and the veil.

The Passion Story. At most, people feared that Xt could constitute a danger to the emperor, but when Xt stood there, flogged, Pilate was no longer afraid― ―and then he became dangerous, not only to the emperor, but to the emperor’s gods.

From a religious point of view, the greatest powerlessness is the greatest power. Therefore Xt holds no scepter in his hand, but only a reed, the symbol of powerlessness―and yet, at that very moment he is the greatest power. With respect to power, commanding the entire world with a scepter is nothing compared to commanding with a reed, i.e., through one’s powerlessness, i.e., religiously. A ruler clad in purple robes is not nearly as great as a ruler in rags, which of course is also why we sometimes see that precisely the sort of ruler who truly feels powerful, even though he can actually clothe himself in purple, prefers to command wearing an old coat and the like. This is a very weak analogy to the divine: the greatest powerlessness―the greatest power; for the analogy is after all merely a game of removing the insignia; from a religious point of view, if it is to be in earnest, truly in earnest, it must, in sensate terms, be the greatest powerlessness.

301

302

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 203–204

•

1851

Anselm―Modernity. Nowadays, in modern times, A’s ontological proof has played a major role, and is especially used by―freethinkers. Amazing! As he himself reports, Anselm acquired this proof (in Proslogium) through prayer and supplication―which, by the way, is a peculiar way to prove something. A. says, [“]I want to prove the existence of God. To this end, I pray that God will strengthen and help me[”]―but this, of course, is a much better proof of God’s existence: the fact that it is so certain that one must have God’s help in order to prove it. If one could prove God’s existence without his help, it would as it were be less certain that he exists. The circle in which Anselm moves also becomes clear in his reply to Gaunilo. G. had objected that “That than which nothing greater can be thought etc.” is merely a mental object. A. answers that this is not true; it is not merely a thought that can be thought, and is thought, and that resides in the hum. mind―otherwise God would of course not exist. But good Lord, that was precisely what was to be proven. See Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 350. But what interests me in connection with Anselm is also that he emphasizes the ascetic element in being a thinker. This is also cited somewhere earlier in Böhringer’s account of Anselm’s life. And now, think of modern speculation, which runs off with this Anselmian argument―modern speculation, for which, sadly, it is only all too true that God does not exist―and that this admits of being proven; and [then] Anselm, who prays to God for the proof.

Anselm. He demonstrates the necessity of expiation, not only from God’s side, in order to satisfy God’s honor, but also from humanity’s side. Assuming that a hum. being could gain salvation through an act of mercy on God’s part, but without satisfaction, the hum. being would be incapable of bliss. The fact that satisfaction had not been made would constantly torment him and disturb his bliss. Alternatively, one could imagine that he no longer cared about whether satisfaction had been made, but that would indeed be turpitude. See Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 406.

203

5

10

302

15

20

25

204

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 205

205

5

303 10

15

20

25

30

35

•

1851

Anselm. Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 429 reproaches Anselm because the matter of hum. salvation appears at the end of his theory of satisfaction, almost as an aside, and is principally viewed as involving the restitution of God’s honor. Here is a point I have frequently emphasized in the journals. We hum. beings have now ventured almost egotistically to take control of Xnty; we do not consider (as Anselm and the ancients considered) that Xnty is God’s invention and, in a good sense, God’s interest. People forget that egotism is one thing and ego is another, and that because God is infinitely removed from being an egotist, he is in fact the infinite ego (and cannot be otherwise). What I have often emphasized as the difficulty with Xnty for us hum. beings is precisely this: that on a grand scale it is in God’s interest. We hum. beings have a difficult time understanding that sin should be something so frightful, that God’s righteousness is so stern, etc. But out of love God wants to be reconciled. Yet if he is to be reconciled, his criterion must be employed; nonetheless, it is out of love for us hum. beings―but the criterion is so enormous that it is almost as though this help were our greatest calamity, because it is so enormous. Take hum. analogies. When a superior intellect must keep company with those who are far less endowed, he perhaps will do everything (let us suppose) out of love, but he employs his criterion (he cannot do otherwise without killing himself), and it is so great, so much too great for the others, that his help, his love, almost becomes like a plague to them. In Xnty, this is where the possibility of offense is to be found. Alas, but Xnty is not at all presented anymore, so much has it become a habit and a bagatelle. Xnty has become the divine passion’s battle of God with himself, so that in one sense we hum. beings disappear like ants (while it is nonetheless infinite love for us)―this has been forgotten; God has been transformed into a sort of lenient something who is neither God nor hum. being.

303

304

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 206–207

•

1851

Variants for a Passage in a Preface to the Friday Discourses (Note no. 3 in the Three Notes) Having put it like this, I have nothing further to add, unless (unbelievably!) it might occur to someone (which I would profoundly have to regret, almost as derangement!) to ask me (with no prompting whatsoever on my part!) whether I thought I had a more intimate relationship with God. To such a person I would reply, etc. or Having put it like this, I have nothing further to add, except just this, which, by the way, is entirely unnecessary, and which for that matter I beg might be forgiven as coming from an all-too-anxious conscientiousness. There is no human being alive―who is not indeed just as close to God as I am, etc.

The Interesting―and Crime: A Reduplication in Being a Criminal.

1

5

Note As is well known, there are as a rule few who are more charitable and generous than prostitutes, and no one is more easily moved to tears than a criminal―it is a mood that signifies nothing. a

People do not take sufficient notice of the fact that crime, like everything else, has taken a step forward in reflection. A reduplicated criminal of this sort would have a pattern like this, for example: he is a young man, cultivated, with a scholarly education, musical, readily susceptible to a variety of feelings,a also writes verse, moves in select circles; he is interesting; women find something melancholic about him, and if for a moment it is rumored that there is something wrong with him, they are of the opinion that it is something far in his past that is the source of his melancholia, but now that he is honorable, lovable, “and so melancholic.” That is what he is like. But a person must live― live well and on a grand scale. So he has arranged a way of life for himself, e.g., he is secretly the leader

206

5

10

304

15

207 20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 207

5

10

305 15

20

25

30

35

40

of a small band of thieves, to which he devotes a certain amount of time, secretly directing its activities, from which he reserves for himself 30 to 50 percent of the profit. Now, it could scarcely be otherwise than this: as a civil servant works certain hours every day, as a businessman works in his fashion, so also is it his business to make money in this way― and he must have money, a great deal of money. But we’re not actually concerned with that. With demonic callousness he is absolutely resolved upon this point: A certain amount of crime must be committed every year so that he can live in style― on this point there must be no wavering. In other respects you can make every effort to be charming and pleasant and to enjoy life in select society. The reduplication consists in the fact that he is leading a double life. Think of “a wasted talent” or “a lost young pers.” or “a criminal, pure and simple,” etc.: none of them leads a double life. No: while the talent is being wasted, it is wasted in its every expression, etc. Reduplication, on the other hand, is demonic consciousness: the ability to be criminal in accordance with a specific, definite criterion, to a certain extent each year―and at the same time to be charming, cultivated, etc., etc. A reduplicated criminal of this sort is of course the most dangerous type. But he will dupe women, the average run of men, even the less experienced police agents. Whoever fails to catch him red-handed will always think: [“]Well, maybe he was like that once, but now he is better,[”]―“Ah, he is so soulful, so easily moved, cultivated, interesting, and melancholic.” This, however, is how things go, even if such criminals get involved in the sort of crimes that involve the police, because, for one thing, there are in fact only a few police agents who understand things of this sort and understand that it is precisely this deceptive aspect that makes such criminals the most skillful, and, for another, there is after all still some notion that these are actual crimes. But now, a reduplicated criminal of this sort― though one who lives not by theft or robbery, but,

•

1851

305

306

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 207–208

•

1851

e.g., by slander. He makes use of the press in doing this. He takes the greatest precautions in protecting himself, calculating as follows: You need so and so much in order to live in grand style. You will earn it through slander―and no wavering: this is your business, your way of making a living. In other respects you do everything to make yourself charming, pleasant, seeking entry into the select circles where you find support. Here there are no police to trap the criminal and no criminal courts to pass judgment. What there is here is rlly public opinion, and public opinion consists of these thousands upon thousands of people, including all these decent but simple people and all these women, etc. None of these people have any understanding of reduplication. They cannot get it into their heads that anything of this sort exists, “that he―no, he is interesting and charming and merry, and emotional, melancholic, etc., etc.” Then, in the end, the situation could take a turn like this: if a quiet observer with a perspicacious eye recognizes the criminal in him and treats him accordingly―this observer is regarded as a slanderer who wants to harm this charming man. 1

5

10

15

[a]

And if it should so happen that circumstances come to be such that a demonic person of this sort can achieve the same worldly goods he desires through honorable means, people rejoice as if it were a conversion. Highly dubious! As soon as he can no longer acquire the money and influence he desires through honorable means, he will revert, perhaps quite calmly, to his former ways. For this is precisely what is demonic: this calmness of his conviction: so and so much per year to live on, and so and so much influence is to be acquired a tout prix.

16 a tout prix] French, at any cost.

b

Ah, how many are there who understand the demonic―and the reduplication is precisely the demonic; it is so far from being an excuse that it is in truth a dreadful characteristic. But the demonic is tempting. And even those who have suspicions about such a person are tempted to assume that this is after all a good pers., that after all there is something good in him.

Messiah. The Jew Trypho says (in the work by Justin Martyr, dialogus com T. judæo): The Messiah―whether he has indeed been born and exists somewhere or other is unknown, and I myself do not know. Nor

5

10

15

307

20

25

30

208

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 207

•

1851

Kierkegaard used a reference mark indicating that the marginal addition, entry NB23:207.b, was to be inserted between two paragraphs.

307

308

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 208–209

•

1851

has he any power until Elias comes and anoints him and reveals everything to him. I have found this cited in Corrodi, Kritische Geschichte des Chiliasmus, pt. 1, p. 385. 5

Mynster―and Me. My abilities, my diligence, my accomplishments―Mynster knows their worth very well. The fact that I have worked without remuneration is, after all, neither a crime nor a disparagement. But this is precisely where the problem lies. Mynster is ossified in the sort of earnestness that says that life’s earnestness consists in being a civil servant and all the trappings. He is narrow-minded. M. says exactly what Peer Degn says: One begins with a subordinate position and then works one’s way up. It is extremely dangerous for someone who is a nobody to have importance, even if his importance was that he defended the established order better than we ourselves can do. I have seen this very clearly, but out of love for someone deceased, and out of admiration for M’s great attributes, I have never directed attention to things of this sort―rather, with no regard to myself, I have placed Mynster in an advantageous light. But everything has its time. Bishop M. and I are not in fundamental disagreement: he wants to defend the established order― for that same purpose I come forth with much more powerful weapons than those he has. But he does not want me to accompany him―because I am a private individual. As far as that goes, I have also spoken with him about appointment to a position at the pastoral seminary―his view is that this is impossible. He wants me to be a priest out in the country (which, in one sense, I would very much like) and in that way get rid of me. But in the end this gives rise to confusion. Bishop M.’s stubbornness finally results in my being regarded by many people as the opposition, despite the fact that I am precisely the defender of the established order―and in that connection I find it consoling to ascertain that compared with my position, all of M’s tactics consist of nothing but halfway measures. But I am nothing, I work without pay―and, you see, in M’s view this constitutes my guilt. I cannot let things continue in this manner. Therefore, at some point I must ask those who want to stay with the established

209

10

308 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 209–211

5

210 10

15

309

20

211

25

30

35

•

1851

order to read my writings, because I cannot believe that those people are in fact so prejudiced that they will not acknowledge an appropriate tactic because I am―nobody―which from a religious point of view is a plus for me: namely, I am not a loafer but certainly among the most diligent of people, and at my own expense.

The Extensive―The Intensive. When the Talmudic scholars describe the millennium and its perfection, they say, for example, that one grape is so large that it contains God knows how many thousand barrels of juice (I read this in Corrodi, Geschichte des Chiliasmus, pt. 2, I think). But it would appeal more to me to use the form of intensity: Despite the fact that the grape was no larger than an ordinary grape, the juice was so refreshing that one grape would be enough for a long time. In general, a fitting description of peop. could certainly be done by dividing them into those who have a sense for the extensive and those who have a sense for the intensive.

Religion Transposed into the Interesting. An example of this is to be found in the interest with which short stories, tales, and the like, depicting old orthodox Jewish domestic scenes, are being read nowadays, for example, in Germany, Erzählungen aus Ghetto (I read them in the Athenæum; if I remember correctly, the author is named Kompart[)], and a new collection has appeared, called Bohemian or Polish Jews, or something like that; and here in Denmark: A Jew. It is so deceptive, as if this sort of approach was the expression of religious interest, as if this was what moved the author to present this type of material. On the contrary, producing this sort of material (by someone who is himself a Jew) is precisely the opposite of this, and an orthodox Jew would have to regard it as utterly profane. But the author makes himself interesting. And we read this sort of material with a certain wistfulness, as when

309

310

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 211–213

•

1851

one reads of one’s childhood and the like―there is something pious in it, people think―but we are no longer children. Soon similar stories will appear in connection with Christianity. They portray the quiet piety, which perhaps is still to be heard here and there in family settings. And then we read them and become wistful―but we have grown out of such things. In connection with religion, the rule is that literary work of this type means that its time is past; it has become a curiosity.

Mynster’s Lenten Sermon. In it he portrayed Xt’s degradation―but then he says: But I do not see degradation here, I see loftiness, for a pers. can only truly be degraded by what comes from within―all the world’s injustice, etc., is incapable of degrading him. Well, this is true enough and has often been said. However, the question remains of whether giving the matter this rhetorical flourish does not easily give the matter such a turn as to direct attention away from the frightful truth, which indeed is that he was actually degraded―and from the truth that “the imitator” could come to suffer as he did. It is a matter of actually suffering degradation: when a smiling man, possessed of every worldly advantage, speaks of how such a degraded person is nonetheless exalted―this easily gets too lofty; perhaps this very same orator would shrink from even the least bit of degradation and become very bitter if someone wanted to console him by saying that, of course, he could equally well be the exalted one.

5

10

212

15

20

310 25

30

35

Passion in Connection with Having a Conviction. When, for example, someone is in love, he is not satisfied with saying, [“]I love,[”] with declaiming

213

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 213–214

5

10

15

•

1851

311

it in every key, with tears in his eyes, etc. It is not even enough for him to say it to his beloved―he suddenly undergoes a passionate μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος demanding to kiss his beloved and whatever else such love can come up with. This is exactly how it is when one has a conviction. A person who does not rlly have a conviction, but plays at having something of the sort, loves to lecture oratorically on this conviction of his in quiet hours―he practices great artistry in his facial expressions, his gestures, his voice, also getting tears in his eyes aesthetically―in short, the game possesses a certain aesthetic truth. But the person who actually has a conviction truly undergoes a passionate μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος; he actively puts this conviction of his into the midst of actuality, and, as a lover desires to kiss the beloved, so he feels a need to suffer for his conviction, and this gives him truly passionate satisfaction.

20

311

214

25

30

35

Rousseau. His Confessions, vol. 4 (The Walking Tours) are excellent; e.g., the 5th walking tour is aesthetically incomparable. Incidentally, here we have an example of what it means not to have been well taught in Xnty. R’s life contains analogies to the genuine Christian collisions (to do the good and suffer for it; to do the good and in so doing to make oneself and others unhappy). This is what he cannot bear; he complains that it cripples him so indescribably. How much this would have strengthened him if it had been quite clear to him that this is the genuine Christian collision. But because he is ignorant of everything concerning Xnty, on the one hand he is crippled, and on the other he falls into the conceit that he is the only pers. who has suffered like this.

3 μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] Greek, transition to another (conceptual) sphere.

a

He lacks the ideal, the Christian ideal, which could humble him and teach him how little he in fact suffers in comparison with the holy one, the ideal that could keep him striving and prevent him from sinking into poetic dreaming and inactivity. He is an example of how difficult a hum. being finds it to die away.

1

5

10

312

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 215–216

•

1851

Public. Here are some of the abuses perpetrated by and with this concept. 1) Authors use the most profoundly respectful expressions when speaking of the public, ask for its generous consideration, etc. But the public is an abstraction that simply does not exist. So every individual reads this and flatters himself that he is the person to whom all this is addressed. It is demoralizing. If authors wrote for the single individual, it would not occur to him [the single individual] to flatter himself. 2) The industrial producers of literature, the party-liners, etc. write for the public, in the name of the public, etc., in order to create the appearance that they are numerous, a palpable force. 3) Most peop. are not nearly as afraid of holding a wrong opinion as they are of being alone in their opinion. They protect themselves by writing for the public; then they know that they are not the only ones who hold this view. This is also demoralizing; everyone should learn to stand alone with his opinion, even when this opinion is shared by many.

The Church―Sociality. In his Anfänge der Kirche, Richard Rothe straightforwardly deduces the idea of the Church from human nature. It is supposedly inherent in sociality, which is a part of hum. nature. Without now denying the reality of the Church or the fact that Xnty argues for it, I would, on the other hand, object to this sort of deduction. The fact is that Xnty is related to spirit―and sociality relates essentially to the mind-body synthesis. Aristotle rightly says that “the crowd” is an animal category. Xnty also teaches that eternal life is simply not social. Society cannot be deduced from “spirit”; and the Church rlly exists precisely because we are not truly or purely spirit. “Congregation” is an accommodation, an indulgence that takes into account how little we are―or could endure being―spirit. But this is something entirely different from that hasty deduction.

215

5

10

15

312 20

216

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 217–218

217

5

10

15

313

20

25

218

30

35

•

1851

The Proclamation of Christianity. The proclamation of Xnty includes the word, the discourse― and then an existing that supports this discourse, which witnesses. If one assumes that speaking suffices for the proclamation of Xnty, then we have transformed the Church into theater and can have an actor learn a sermon and deliver it in superb, masterful fashion with facial expressions, gestures, oratory, tears, and everything the theater-going public might desire. But people say: “After all, the religious speaker declares that what he says is his faith, his conviction―the actor does not do that.” Fine. But how am I to know that this is true, that this actually is the speaker’s faith and conviction? Must I here again be satisfied with this: [“]He delivers it so superbly, he weeps, he sobs[”]―but good Lord, an actor can do this, too. And thus the matter simply goes back to the primal element in Xndom: The guarantee that what is proclaimed is the faith and conviction of the speaker is his life, his personal existing. So both parts―the words and the existence―are included. If one of the parts is to be absent, then, of course, preferably the former. If the latter is missing, the proclamation of Xnty is transformed into theatrical amusement or delight. It makes no difference how urgently His Right Reverence orates, how grippingly he presents things, how much he weeps―for, of course, Mrs. Heiberg can also do all that.

The Established Order―and Me. If I collide with the established order, it is simply and solely possible through an error on Mynster’s part. My entire work is a defense of the established order, the only defense that can be mounted truthfully. Everything has been done to make things as lenient as possible for Mynster. But if, finally, he wants to harden himself in the position that the whole of his suspect proclamation of Xnty―which has made Xnty into a theatrical delight―is wisdom, is Xnty, well, then he is the one who makes my task into something different. But neither will he be able to prevail in that case. Then his time will have come, and whatever happens to me, Mynster, in

313

314

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 218–221

•

1851

his own lifetime, will be subjected to an accounting, if not by me, then by others―and it will be quite costly for him. When, in addition, Mynster asserts that precisely this is Christianity and that a presentation of Xnty such as mine is fantasy, his entire traffic in worldly wisdom is transformed into something even worse.

5

Father in Heaven! That we might consider that whatever happens to us comes from you, and that nothing that comes from you can harm us―no, no, it can only benefit us.

219

Law―Gospel.

220

Xnty is the Gospel― ―but, but Xt nonetheless says that he has not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it, to make the Law more rigorous, as in the Sermon on the Mount. If care is not taken in this respect, the Gospel, grace, is taken in vain. Later, the Reformation. It has been said that it emphasized “grace” at the expense of the Law. (Thus Ullmann, Reformation v. der Reformation, B 1, Vorr. XIII: [“]die Reformation … ist Reaction des Christentums als Evangeliium gegen das Christentum als Gesetz,” cited in Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche, vol. 3, p. 345 n. Fine. But perhaps Luther was not sufficiently careful here. The norm is: For every additional degree of grace, the Law must also be made more rigorous in its inwardness―otherwise the whole of worldliness comes crashing in and takes “grace” in vain. And this is precisely what happened as a result of the Reformation.

Ridiculous! I am reading Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche. Such as it is, it is a very well-written book. But I can only laugh when reading such stuff. So there sits a theologian and blusters about the future task of the entire Church, making himself important through his views on Luther and the Reformation, for which he takes credit, almost as if it were his own property and personal accomplishment.―And Mr. 19 die Reformation . . . als Gesetz] German, the Reformation . . . is the reaction of Christianity as Gospel against Christianity as Law.

10

314 15

20

25

221

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 221–223

5

222 10

15

315 20

25

•

1851

Petersen, he is indeed a man whose life more or less follows the tune: What Office Should I Now Seek, Is the Scenery Beautiful[?], etc. item: it was really wonderful that the University of Erlangen sent me a doctoral diploma. And so it is with almost everything in our times: sheer debauchery in doctrine, fantasy, observations, insight, etc.―but not the least bit of thought, not a scintilla of action.

Das christliche Bewußtseyn. This is Schleiermacher’s expression, and Neander, praising the expression, explains that the Reformation was an act of this Christian consciousness (see Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche, vol. 3, p. 346 n.). Well that is right enough, but the matter has something very dubious about it. Namely, that Xnty ideally relates itself to the single individual. On the other hand, when the price of being a Xn is sharply reduced, when all manner of illusions are tolerated in order to uphold the appearance that all are Xns―entire countries and states―then a Xn vapor is emitted, a common consciousness: but if this is supposed to be Xnty, no thanks. Thus, now the world will probably also emit a new cultural consciousness, a Christian vapor―also a Christian consciousness, and presumably it will make natural science its religion. You see, this Christian consciousness means so much that in the end falling away from Xnty will become Christian consciousness, and there will be a Christian consciousness over the entire world at the same time―at precisely the same time―that Xnty does not exist at all.

30

223

“The Church” Exists Only for the Sake of Our Imperfection. This is Calvin’s teaching. See Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche, vol. 3, p. 405 note. Naturally, Petersen has a different view of the matter.

35

9 Das christliche Bewußtseyn] German, Christian consciousness.

315

316

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 224–226

•

1851

The Religious―Doubt Official preaching has untruthfully presented the religious, Xnty, as sheer consolation, happiness, etc. Because of this, doubt has gained the advantage of being able to say, in dignified fashion: I do not wish to be made happy by an illusion. If Christianity were presented truthfully as suffering that becomes greater, the higher up one goes, doubt would be disarmed, and in any case there would be no occasion to be superior―because one wished to be exempted―from suffering.

The Merely Human. It is unbelievable with what effrontery people nowadays appeal to the merely human in contrast to Xnty. But what is it that we nowadays call the “human”? It is a volatilized Xnty, a cultural consciousness that Xnty has emitted. Thus, it is attributable to Xnty―and then people emphasize it in contrast to Xnty. One must say to the humanists: So just produce the merely human―for the human we have now is rlly Xnty’s, even if it does not want it that way―but you cannot lawfully take it as your own in contrast to Xnty.

The Existential. Then every time someone existentially advances the cause 1 inch further―there comes an entire generation of docents and talkers, who convert this advance into doctrine, i.e., the cause goes backward.

224

5

10

225

15

20

316

25

226

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 227–228 227

5

228

10

15

•

1851

317

Luther says: if I am to be deceived, I would rather be deceived by God than by hum. beings; for if God deceives me, he can certainly defend having done so. see Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche, vol. 3, p. 420 Note

Xnty as Consolation that is the only way it is presented nowadays. Originally it was entirely different: It was not said, [“]Let yourself, after all, be convinced, it is sheer consolation.[”] No: [“]Have you the courage and the mind to want to be of the truth―then become a Xn, it is sheer suffering.[”]

[a] In one sense, from a Christian standpoint, the situation is in fact as is written in the letter to the Hebrews: They would not accept consolation, they wanted to advance farther in venturing for the truth.

1

5

JOURNAL NB24

JOURNAL NB24 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Journal NB24 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Anne Mette Hansen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 1

319

1

•

1851

NB24. April 20th, 1851

321

322

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 2

•

1851 320

My Reckoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How Things Went with the Publishing of the Last Pseudonym: Anti-Climacus The Sickness unto Death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hidden Inwardness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On My Work as an Author The Significance of This Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 54.

2

p. p. p. p. p.

5

63. 92. 100. 118. 204.

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 3 1851 •

321

3

Concerning Texts for the Friday Sermons See the blank sheet at the front of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17 p. 30.

323

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 4–6

•

1851

325

323

4 13

“Do Not Worry about Tomorrow,” no, do what it says in the hymn:

5

Say to sorrow, Yes, yes, tomorrow. that is, today I will not worry about tomorrow.

5

10

15

…. you sufferer, perhaps you sigh, [“]Now I have suffered so long; now at least a little encouragement must come if I am to be able to hold out―and new sufferings come.[”] Oh, hold out, then, simply believe that even sufferings, new sufferings, precisely at the most painful moment, can help you onward, as when the coachman uses the whip at the moment things are most difficult for the horse, who thinks that the only thing that could help would be to have permission to catch his breath.

6

Necessity Transformed into Freedom. 20

25

30

In the hymn, “When I Think of That Hour, etc.” it says: [“]close the door,[”] though this is something the dead person of course does not need to do himself; the survivors take care of closing it quite firmly. But what gives cheer and is poetic is that it is as if the deceased himself transformed this into his free act, that he closes the door in order that things be as they ought to be in his sleeping chamber.

[a]

One could say, in a humorous way, that this is an expression for how hilariously happy the deceased is in his coffin, how happy he is that they close the cover of his coffin so firmly, that is, at being able to close his door.

1

5

326

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 7–8

•

1851

“The Church.” In the definition of “Church” in the Augsburg Confession― that it is the communion of saints, where the Word is properly taught and the sacraments are properly administered―people have quite rightly (that is, wrongly) grasped only the two elements, about doctrine and the sacraments, and have overlooked the first, the communion of saints, in which the definition tends in the direction of the existential. In so doing they have turned the Church into a communion of indifferent existences (or in which what is existential is a matter of indifference)―but “the doctrine” is correct and the sacraments are properly administered. This is rlly paganism.

324

7

5

10

Knowledge of the Truth

8

All this straightforward talk of wanting so very much to know the truth, etc., is nonsense, illusion, or hypocrisy. Every hum. being always knows the truth a good bit farther out than he expresses it existentially. Why, then, does he not go farther out? You see, there’s the rub! I feel I am too weak (too weak ethically) to go as far out as my knowledge. It is eternally certain that “the truth,” placed into the world existentially, is certain downfall, and it is also Xnty. Everyone experiences something like this on a lesser scale. He sees something truer―but he does not dare venture so far out existentially. Thus everyone acquires guilt before God―and must make the admission. You see, this is something different from that talk about wanting so very much to know the truth, plus, if only one understood the truth one would surely act in accordance with it, plus the imagined notion that if only one were the truth, one would surely prevail. Oh, dear friend, one could almost be tempted to say, Thank you, God, that you are not the truth, for in that case your downfall in this world would be certain. I have understood this, and therefore I call myself merely a poet; and therefore I find it explicable that I indeed get through quite well, and perhaps can even prevail, which would be impossible if I were more than a poet.

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 9–11

•

1851

325

9

5

“I am already being sacrificed,” Paul says. “The priest” preaches on this, moved and movingly. If someone in our time were to arrange his life, just a little, in the direction of being “sacrificed,” we would all laugh. At the start of it, wanting to be sacrificed is laughable, madness, or perhaps treason against being human― but when it is past, yes, then it is splendid.

10

Politics.

10

In modern states, statecraft is not about how one should go about being a minister, but about how one should go about becoming a minister. People know no more than this, so they rlly use up their wisdom in a sort introductory science of becoming a minister. This must result in the dissolution of states, for there is rlly neither governance nor rule. In earlier times, when there was more peace in existence, only a few people could have a hope of becoming ministers, so they had time to train themselves for it. Nowadays the possibility has been opened for everyone; the crush of people wanting to become ministers is so great that a special art is required in order to push one’s way through, if possible, and become one. So they train themselves in this art, spending their time and diligence on it―so a person becomes a minister, but knows nothing else. He could remark, naively, I have not trained myself to be a minister, but to become one―and indeed, in this respect I have shown that I was clever.

15

20

25

11

30

Plato’s Republic Book 6. Here someone raises an objection to Socrates’ praise of philosophers: the common opinion is that some of the adherents of philosophy are incompetent and that others, the greater part, are utterly contemptible people. Socrates replies that this is because so many incompetent people have usurped the name of philosopher.

327

328

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 11–12

•

1851

But here, of course, Socrates does not reduplicate his polemical view of life: that the common opinion (the crowd’s opinion) regards as bad precisely those who are truly good. Here, of course, Socrates approaches common opinion straightforwardly as that which is correct, whereas the error lies in the circumstance that so many incompetents have forced their way into becoming philosophers and want to be regarded as such. Consequently Socrates must assume that the true philosopher would also be regarded as such by common opinion; but this is indeed directly contrary to Socrates’ polemical view of life and contrary to the testimony of his own life.

326

10

15

Christianity Is Needed First and Foremost in order to become aware of―in order to learn― how I need it. Genrlly Xnty is presented like this: they say, for example, that Xnty teaches an atonement, and so they think that then we hum. beings will surely take hold of it. No, no. I must first learn from Xnty how I need Xnty. Xnty is God’s notion of sin and righteousness, etc. If I go off and repose lazily in my merely hum. notion of what sin is and of God’s righteousness, how in all the world would it occur to me that sin was something so frightful that Xt’s suffering and death were needed to atone for it[?] This is the infinitely deep torment of misunderstanding in Xt’s suffering. We hum. beings live in our own thoughts, thinking that things are going very well for us, that sin, after all, is not so terrifying, etc. Then Xt comes and wants to save us; he does everything out of love. Yes, but he always brings to bear God’s notion of what sin is. In so doing, he first makes us hum. beings, humanly speaking, unhappy―but then, when we

12

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 12–14

5

327 10

15

13 20

30

35

1851

329

have permitted him to teach us the terror that sin is, and about God’s righteousness―yes, then he is our Savior. My Lord and Savior, I must first look upon your sufferings and learn what a terror sin is. When I have learned that, then comes what follows: how I need Xnty. But thus I must first learn from Xnty itself how I need Xnty. Yet even in lesser, human relationships between one pers. and another there is indeed a somewhat similar situation. A lover needs the beloved not only in order to love him or her, but first of all in order to become aware of what it is to be in love, and this will be the case especially when one of the parties is rather inert.

A Mediator is what I need, among other reasons, simply in order to become aware of the fact that it is God with whom I, so to speak, have the honor of speaking; otherwise a hum. being can easily go on living in the indolent delusion that he is talking with God whereas he is in fact only talking with himself.

25

14

•

The Most Blessed Consolation, the Eternal Proof That I Am Loved by God. Here is the syllogism. Love (i.e., true love, not the self-love that only loves what is exceptional, excellent, etc., and thus actlly loves itself) relates inversely to the greatness and excellence of the object. So if I am infinitely, infinitely nothing; if in my misery I feel myself more wretched than the most wretched person: Yes, then it is eternally, eternally certain that God loves me. Xt says: Not a sparrow falls to the ground without his will. Ah, I will bid lower: Before God I am less than a sparrow―the more certain it is that God loves me, the more certain is the conclusion of the syllogism.

[a]

Viewed from this perspective, the mediator signifies in a certain sense a remove: he is like a court official who teaches us that we cannot address His Majesty directly, lest we foolishly and thoughtlessly go and speak to His Majesty as if we were equals. How consistent the divine always is! Always reduplication: when he reduces the price, he also adds something on. He reduces the price, condescends to us hum. beings, sends a mediator―yes, but in another sense the mediator expresses the remove, that the situation is no longer as naive as when God involved himself directly with a hum. being as one friend with another―no, now there is a mediator. Yet we have come closer to God; but, as in relation to the ideal, where every step forward is a step backward, so in relation to God: Approach, remove, and yet actual approach.

1

5

10

15

20

25

330

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 14–16

•

1851

Yes, the emperor of Russia, one can surely imagine that God could overlook him, God has so much to attend to, and the emperor of Russia is so great. But a sparrow―no, no―because God is love and love relates inversely to the greatness and excellence of the object. You feel forsaken in the world, you sufferer―no one cares for you. Alas, you conclude, then neither does God care for me. You fool! Or, fie on you, you slanderer, to speak thus of God. No―if there were one person of whom it was literally true that he was the most forsaken of all: he, precisely he, is the one whom God loves. Or if he were not absolutely the most forsaken, if he still had a little scrap of human consolation―and then this, too, were taken from him: at that very instant it would become even more certain that God loves him.

5

328

10

15

Sickness―The Sickness of Reflection In the 3rd book of the Republic (in Heise’s translation, pt. 1, pp. 178 ff.) Socrates fulminates against the misuse of the art of medicine, as a result of which rich people lie sick their entire lives, and shows that the art of medicine is only properly employed when it is used on poor people, where there comes an end, either health or death, and he tells that Asclepius was struck by lightning as punishment for having taken money for healing a rich person who lay dying. Thus, too, with religion. There is an improper use of religion that results in a person living an entire life in deliberations, observations, moods, etc. Here, too, the proper use is that things come to an end: either resolute and powerful acceptance―or rejection.

15

20

25

30

Strain. Suffering is intensified frightfully when it is voluntary. For example, when a person has it within his power to make things easier for himself, but voluntarily keeps up the strain for the sake of an idea or for the sake of the truth, and then, really suffering pain, feeling the strain, still has it within his power to spare himself.

16

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 16–18

•

1851

This is intensification. Take a horse that is worn out and tired―it is painful enough when it is required that it should nonetheless continue pulling―but suppose it were also required to frolic about while pulling. 5

329

17

10

18 15

20

25

30

35

Independence. How is it that in our times only someone who is well-to-do is thought of as an independent man? I wonder if it isn’t because it has been completely forgotten, or has become a fable, that being able to live on roots, on bread and water, is a more certain form of independence.

The Human―The Christian “What is human and what is Christian are one and the same,” has now become the watchword. This is quite truly the expression of the fact that Xnty is abolished. Voltaire is supposed to have said somewhere that he would not believe in hereditary nobility until it was historically verified that a child had been born with spurs on. Similarly, I would say: Until further notice, I intend to stick with the old notion that the Christian and the human, the humane, are qualitative opposites; I intend to continue with this until informed that a child is born who is by nature self-denying, or who thus has innate self-denial. And what Voltaire says about being born with spurs, is indeed not as impossible as that―at least it does not contain any self-contradiction―but for self-denial to be a natural category is total nonsense. And yet this sort of thing is being written everywhere nowadays. Someone writes a book about this unity of the human and the Christian, and someone else cites it and modifies it a little, etc., etc. All of it sheer inhumanity. It occurs to no one that he himself should make this innocent experiment: to close his door, speak only to himself, and say to himself: Is this in fact true[?]

331

332

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 19–21

•

1851

John of Salisbury said to Pope Adrian IV in a conversation concerning the Church of Rome: today, everything can be had for money; tomorrow, one will be able to obtain nothing except money. see Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 8.

19

5

330

The Divine―The Human.

20

Perhaps you say, “But of course it was God himself who made this world with all its delights and joys, so it is of course a self-contradiction on his part for Xnty then to come and change everything into sin and lay down the requirement of dying away.” In a certain sense, I have nothing to reply to this. Such things do not concern me. As long as it is certain that this is what Xnty teaches, I have nothing to do with such objections. By the way, is it not a self-contradiction on your part for you to accept Holy Scripture as the word of God, to accept Xnty as divine teaching―and when you run into something you cannot square with your ideas or your feelings, then you say that it is a self-contradiction on God’s part rather than a self-contradiction on your part, for you must either entirely reject this divine teaching or entirely accept it as it is.

10

15

20

25

You Are to Be Hated by All for My Name’s Sake No wonder! Indeed, is death such a welcome figure to hum. beings. And an apostle: his life quite literally expresses dying, to have died away―from what? Yes, from all from which one can die. And precisely this, this from which one can die away―precisely this is what the natural hum. being by nature and naturally loves most highly as his life.

21

30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 22–24 22

5

•

1851

An Eternal Damnation. To say to others: [“]…. or you are eternally damned”―no, I am not capable of that. For me, the situation is always that all the others will surely be saved, that is certain―only with me can there be anything dubious. Now, is this merit on my part? No! No! It is simply because I am not sufficiently focused on the absolute and do not possess anything that is more than what is merely human.

331

23

Finite Goals.

30

Yes, if you live in a flock, together with hum. beings, if you have a fortune, how entirely fitting it is that you should enjoy life with its assistance, and if you have no fortune, how entirely fitting it is that you must look to getting something to live on, using most of your time to make a good living and enjoy your life as much as possible. But now be alone with God, and see whether things go so naturally, whether he does not confiscate your fortune and either require that you give it up entirely, or take your life into his service in such a way that you become a worker pure and simple. And if you have no fortune, will he not ask you whether you could not limit your needs, use less in order to have more time to work in his service. Or is it not like deceiving God when you move too quickly and decisively to arrange your life to serve finite goals, and in so doing to serve your convenience, your enjoyment of life. Look, this was the meaning of “poverty,” which was also to be found in paganism. But it is so easy to push this entire matter aside by summoning up a caricature from the Middle Ages.

24

Savonarola

15

20

25

35

says in a Lenten sermon (Feb. 17, 1495) …. I will therefore talk with my God ….. Forgive me if I speak in too familiar a tone and too indiscreetly. You, O Lord, you who have created all that is good, have stolen my heart and have

333

334

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 24–25

•

1851

deceived as no hum. being ever has been deceived. For because I have long beseeched you, that you might show me the mercy of never being obligated to keep an eye on others, you have done precisely the opposite, without my being aware of it, and have gradually drawn me into the position I now occupy. In short, I longed after a quiet life, and you have lured me out with your bait as a bird is lured onto a lime-twig; had I seen this, perhaps I would not be standing where I now stand. My situation has been like that of a fly who reaches out toward the light and flies toward a burning light that it sees―not knowing that it burns― and singes off its wings. You have shown me your light, in which I have delighted; and when it was said to me that it is a good thing to spread this light for the salvation of souls, I have come to the light and singed my wings. Indeed, I have come upon a deep sea and have longed to return to harbor, and I look all around but see no possibility. With Jeremiah, I will to say to you: Lord, you have deceived, and I have let myself be deceived; you were too strong for me and have prevailed, but for this I have been mocked every day, everyone laughs at me[.] Jeremiah 20:7.. See Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 154.

5

10

332

15

20

Yet such is God’s upbringing: he deceives a pers. into the truth. He grasps the truth in his imagination―it looks so inviting, he cannot let go of it, he goes along with it―and now he stands in the midst of actuality, and it is an entirely different matter. 25

Goldschmidt. What makes it possible for him to get on so well with people is of course the almost boyish or childish posture he assumes with respect to the public. He presents himself as someone who has suffered as a Jew from childhood on―he wants to be the object of sympathy, and this is something the public very much likes. But no genuine author could bring himself to live with such an Achweimir. Furthermore, if he is subjected to any sort of injustice―he immediately brings the matter to the attention of the public. This is something the public very much likes. It is this wretchedness that brings him whatever success his industrious talent is capable of.

33 Achweimir] German-Yiddish, Ah, woe is me.

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 26–28 26

5

333

27

•

1851

The Voluntary―To Die Away. People think that the voluntary is an exaggeration―but is not Xnty’s requirement that each person die away[?] If there were nothing voluntary, then the Xn would be tried only in those trials of self-denial that are unavoidable. But in that case it could of course be imagined that someone could come to live in such favorable circumstances that he had no occasion to die away, and he would then be able to say: It is not my fault, but my life presented no opportunity. No, if it is the requirement that each person die away, then it must not be circumstances or chance events that decide the extent to which a person comes to die away―but then we are of course confronted by the voluntary.

Chrysostom says: the lives of the apostles, not their miracles, converted the world. This is cited by Savonarola. See Rudelbach, Savonarola, p. 189 bottom of page, p. 190 top of page.

20

28

25

30

35

My Position. Indeed, in almost every case I have read about, one of two situations tends to prevail: either a polemicist makes “the people” into the fixed point, the truth, and the government into what is attacked, or, belonging to the government, he fulminates against “the people.” It can easily be seen that both forms are worldly struggle―there is no double danger. Now, what is my position? Do I attack “the government”? No, no. But I do say: You are not governing―it is indefensible to let the reins be taken from you like this, and you, especially you, you clergy, you deceive Xnty by making it agreeable to the crowd in this political, pandering fashion instead of teaching with authority. Thus my polemical aim is rlly at “the crowd.” But I am not protected by being a civil servant.

335

336

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 28–29

•

1851

So how shall I rlly get anyone to listen to what I have to say? Those who govern―they do not want to listen to it. And “the people”! Of course, I cannot complain to the people that those who govern do not govern sufficiently. If one is to talk to the people about “government,” it would of course have to be a situation in which I maintained that the government was tyrannical or that it abused its power in some other way―whereas my complaint is that the government simply does not use its power as it should. You see, how could I dare hope to get anyone to want to do battle under conditions in which every reward or advantage is impossible, but in which the displeasure of both parties is almost unavoidable[?] All those who want to help me immediately distort my cause by making it partisan either in the one direction or the other, and therefore I cannot make use of them. But what I express is religious struggle, and I can see how strenuous it is from the mere fact that I cannot indeed get anyone even to have sufficient self-denial to understand how thankless this struggle is.

5

10

15

20

334

25

Savonarola

1

[a]

see Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 208 bottom of page.

says somewhere that he must remind them of what he has said so often: a great act of charity can only be repaid with great ingratitude. Excellent. For an act of charity for which I receive another sort of charity, a straightforward reward, is eo ipso not such a great act of charity. Suppose there were a great act of charity―but it is rewarded with much gratitude: then it becomes lesser, as it were. No, when it is rewarded with ingratitude, only then is it wholly an act of charity, and if it is rewarded with much ingratitude, then it is quite truly a great act of charity. I do, however, have a reward, for from the great ingratitude of the recipient I have the reward that my great act of charity truly becomes a great act of charity. 32 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

29

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30

30

5

10

15

335 20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

337

Conversation with Bishop Mynster May 2nd. As I came in, I said that it was close to the time when he usually set out upon his episcopal visitations and that I usually liked to call upon him a bit before this time. Then we spoke together about the minister and the ministry, which I am not noting down because it does not concern my cause. After that, the conversation was drawn to more recent events. I again said a few words about the tactics involved with my latest pseudonym, showing how I could not have opposed Rudelbach without it, which he [Mynster] granted. I then repeated that even if―as was possible―he had something against this book of mine, it was nonetheless a defense of the established order. Then I suddenly turned to his book and said outright that I had not thanked him for my copy because there was something in it of which I could not approve―therefore I had postponed a visit. Then we talked about it, though for a moment he was taken aback when I led the conversation in this direction. So we talked about it. His words were basically to the effect that, as I could very well understand, he had merely said that G. was talented. Then I showed that this could be regarded as concealing something. I reminded him that he, too, had enemies and of how an enemy might view his behavior. I repeated again and again that what concerned me was whether his reputation might not have suffered too much by presenting G. in this way. Pointed out to him that he ought to have required a retraction on G.’s part, saying that with his permission I would show him how he should have done it, namely, demanded a retraction―that the whole problem was to be found in the fact that M. should remember that he has a reputation he must represent, and that it was impossible for me to

[a]

He said that G. was a useful pers. and that one must make use of such people. I replied that there is an impatience that only takes note of what appears advantageous at the moment but which is dangerous, and that there was a question of whether his reputation had not paid too high a price.

1

5

338

1

b

“I want my conscience to be clear”.

[c]

5

And I spoke with him a little about himself, about the joys of his old age and how thankful he must be. And then once again that he absolutely must look out for his reputation.

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30

•

1851

defend this conduct of his. Pointed out to him that he now had G. in his power; that he could give a turn to the affair; that by doing good one tended to draw forth the good in a pers.; that M. presented G. in such a manner that G. himself ought to have noticed that a retraction was required; that inasmuch as it was not forthcoming, what had been done was thus something else. But M. was of the opinion that at any rate G. had remained silent. I again explained how practiced in stealth G. is, and that the matter could certainly come up at some point. Then I said to him, [“]It might seem strange to you that a younger person speaks in such a manner to someone older, but all the same, you will surely permit me to do so and will let me give you some advice: If there is anything about me of which you disapprove, if you would like to give me a slap, do it, do it. I can certainly take it, and I will surely take care to see that you do not suffer for it. But above all, do not do it in such a manner that your own reputation comes to suffer because of it. It is your reputation that concerns me.[”] Then I repeated again and again, “I want to have it said, and quite clearly,”b “it must be noted that I have said that I cannot approve of it” (and in saying this I leaned across the table and wrote it with my hand, as it were). To this he answered: Well, it is taken under advisement. Every time I said this, I saw to it that he replied and indicated that he had heard it. In other respects my conversation expressed all the devotion for him that I have from my father. I spoke at much greater length than usual. Incidentally, he was more friendly and attentive than usual. And today I did something I rarely tend to do otherwise: I spoke with him a little about his family, which he himself brought up by relating that his daughter was to be married.[c] Usually he tends to make himself hard to get when I speak to him about wanting to call upon him, and generally he tends to say that it would be better if I might come another time, without saying when. He did not do this today. On the contrary,

5

10

15

20

336

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30–31

5

10

15

20

he said that I would be welcome. And when I then said, [“]Would another time perhaps be more convenient for you[“?”] he replied, [“]Just come then[.”] To this I replied, [“]Of course I, too, would prefer to come at this time. It is most convenient for me. After all, I am accustomed to it, ‘and tradition is of course a great power.’[”]: (This was an allusion to something in the conversation.[)] So it went, Thank you, good friend, etc. I parted from him on the most amicable terms possible. Incidentally, as we were speaking to one another about G., he made an attempt to show that he had spoken of G. as “talented” and of me as “gifted,” and that the latter was something much greater. To this I replied, [“]Ah, no, it is a matter of indifference―here it is only a question of your reputation.[”] Then he also turned aside from this attempt. In general I am happy that I have spoken with him. After all, my devotion to him belongs to him, and of course it would not do much good for me to tell in print how devoted I am to him, nor would it ever be understood.

25

337

31

30

35

Christianity. All prototypes show that the more a human being involves himself with God, the more unhappy and wretched, humanly speaking, he becomes―and people have trivialized this teaching into something that one preaches to make a living! All preaching to make a living must of course be grounded in the principle that the more you involve yourself with God, the better will things go for you. Consider “the Exemplar”! Now think what is already difficult enough to think: that he, the Righteous One, must suffer all this. But you believe that nevertheless one thing remains firm throughout all

•

1851

339

[d]

What was dubious (with respect to the extent to which Mynster had not wanted to affront me by situating me together with Goldschmidt) was something I have not wanted to write until now, though I stored it in my memory. When I said that he ought at least have had G. first issue a retraction of what he had done in the past, M. replied, [“]Then I would first have to have read through all his many books. [”] So, can M. really be supposed to be ignorant of the fact that there existed a journal called The Corsair, that G. had edited it for 6 years, and can M. be supposed not to understand that this was what I was referring to!

1

5

10

15

20

[a]

This is the most rigorous form of being a Xn. This does not apply to the more lenient form― which makes Xnty into inwardness, which lives quietly in a monastery or quietly in the world but does not witness for Xnty in the more rigorous sense―in which increasing inwardness is not linked to inversion, and especially not to the double danger of inversion.

25

30

340

1

5

Note This is the case, e.g., with Savonarola, when he is in prison, and in general this suffering is a part of the suffering that is specific to witnesses to the truth. b

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 31–33

•

1851

this: that God does not forsake him. But this, too, happens: God forsakes him. And we see something similar in the exemplars who are derived from him: that in the most agonizing part of their lives there comes a moment when they also feel themselves forsaken by God, when they, too, must drink the gall that the world indeed proves its point against them even in this way: that indeed, they themselves lament that God has forsaken them.b This, then, is Christianity: the more you truly involve yourself with God, the greater is the misery, humanly speaking, even if, in an infinitely sublime sense, it is blessedness―and then, that God forsakes you. True enough, it is only for a moment, but it is indeed something frightful, frightful that God is frightful like this (and yet infinite love), that this is what it is like to involve oneself with God.

1. Savonarola.

5

10

15

32 20

“The power of faith is secure in dangers, but in danger when a person is secure.” Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 350.

2. Savonarola says somewhere that the person who is truly converted does not care what people say about him, takes heart and says: This is how I want people to live in my house. This reminds me of my father’s words, with which he cut off all objections by others concerning the way he lived: This is the custom in my house. see Rudelbach, Savonarola, p. 372 bottom of page.

338

33

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 34–37 34

5

35

10

15

36

20

3 Savonarola Bernard says: Ingratitude dries up the springs of mercy, but, Savonarola adds, gratitude opens them. see Rudelbach, S., pp. 372 bottom of page and 373 top of page.

Savonarola. Apologetics. Look, this is indeed an apology for Xnty. He proves the truth and divinity of Xnty from the transformation that takes place in those who become Xns: the proud become humble, the lustful become chaste, etc. It is in Thriumphus Crucis 2nd book. See Rudelbach, S., pp. 386 and 387. In our time such an apology would be a satire on us Xns.

Apology―Apologetics. Everything is distancing itself from the existential. In the old days people wrote apologies; this was against the pagans in the situation of actuality. Nowadays we have a science called apologetics, a science about writing apologies.

339 25

37

Savonarola. “The father of prayer is silence; its mother, solitude.” see Rudelbach, S., p. 428.

30

•

1851

341

342

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 38–39

•

1851 Being Christian.

The ideality of it has been completely lost. The result is that being a Xn is regarded as something that can surely be done by everyone. Then, by contrast, it becomes a mark of distinction to go further, to become a philosopher, poet, or God knows what. To bring things to a halt at this point, I have brought ideality to bear. People must at least have respect for what it means to be a Xn; then each person can try it or choose whether or not he wants to be one. People scoff at prayer (as now in the little piece, “The Dispute between Ørsted and Mynster” by H-t). If I were to get involved here, what would I do? I would idealize prayer in all its infinitude, so that it becomes clear that there is perhaps not one single hum. being who is capable of praying. Look, that is how it is to be done. One must have enough resignation to put oneself aside in order to bring ideality to bear in an infinitely lofty fashion; then the matter will surely take a different turn.

1

a

which examine the mirror, the frame, the mounting, etc.

38

5

10

15

20

The Letter of James: The Word Is a Mirror. To See Oneself Truly Blessedly in the Mirror.

39

1) So one must not observe the mirror, the frame, for example (this is emphasized by the blood witness Savonarola)―but see oneself in the mirror. And yet this is exactly what people have done in relation to God’s word as the mirror. Thus all the auxiliary sciences in connection with God’s word,a instead of seeing oneself in the mirror. 2) One must know oneself to a certain extent in order to be able to see oneself in a mirror or in order to recognize one’s mirror image. It is well known that if a person chances to see himself and does not know that there is a mirror (which he does not see), he does not recognize himself. 3). One must be very careful to say to oneself: It is you, remember, it is you.

25

30

35

340

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 39–40

35

The most powerful emperor in the Orient had a slave to remind him to take revenge on that little nation―of course it was not worth remembering that sort of thing. No, David was better served―even though it was not the sort of service one prefers to choose for oneself―he had Nathan, who said: You are the man. And yet David himself of course knew very well what he had done, and in genrl terms how abhorrent it was, but it does not follow from this that the transformation had truly taken place: You are the man. This is the difficult understanding of God’s word―the learned, the colossally learned understanding is not nearly as difficult as this: You are the man. 4.) To look at oneself in a mirror is a feminine art. But a woman looks at herself in a mirror in order to see her beauty. True, she also gets to see her unbeautiful features, but it was not exactly in order to see them that she looked at herself in the mirror― rather, it was in order to conceal them with a more beautiful appearance. But what is earnest, what is manly, is to look at oneself―in God’s word―in order to see what one truly looks like. Most people are afraid to see themselves. It is indeed a dangerous sight; once one has seen it, one does not easily get rid of it again. 5) One must remember how one looked in the mirror. 6) Though however repugnant one looked, one must not despair, nor may one let matters rest with merely remembering how one looked―but begin with what is important, what is decisive: to transform oneself before the mirror, as the mirror requires.

40

Mynster―and Me.

40

Imagine a knot that has been tied. Then there are several people who want to have it untied. That is something Mynster does not want at all costs. Then

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1851

343

[b]

The prophet Nathan told him a story. But as things go when it is merely something historical, or a lesson and the like, David listened to the story quite calmly. Who knows, he himself, as the chosen poet, was perhaps capable of pointing out, from an artistic point of view, that Nathan’s story had one or another flaw, that one or another feature ought to have been different. But then the prophet gave the story a different turn and said: You are the man. That was personal.

1

5

10

15

344

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 40–42

•

1851

I come along and say, Just let me tie it a little tighter. No, he is also afraid of that. No one may touch it, and this despite the fact that it is so loose that it cannot hold without being tied tighter. 341

The story from Abraham of St. Clara, which I have also noted down in an earlier journal, is perhaps best told so that it concludes as follows: Then the woman led him to a place outside of the town, to a cave, and said: [“]Here no one, no one, can see us―it would have to be someone omnipresent.[”] Then he replied: [“]How can the Omnipresent One see us here; and he was very last one I wished to see us.[”] And then he preached on the omnipresence of God so emphatically that the woman converted.

41

10

The New, the Turn.

42

All around in the various countries there are a great many churches. In each of them there is an elevated place called a pulpit. A person ascends to it in order to proclaim Xnty―that is what it is for. Good! Indeed, if the person who mounts it is so advanced in being a Xn that he dare call himself a Christian in the strict sense. But I have not come so far as that―I do not know whether others have―and so the pulpit rlly becomes a place for accusing oneself. Nowadays is there anyone who envies daring to speak to the people from a pulpit! There was a time when people believed that by mounting the pulpit a person came closer to God in such a manner that he acquired the power to command others. It is not quite so. By mounting the pulpit one does indeed come closer to God, as it were―precisely for that reason one does not escape self-accusation, from which the person standing in the midst of the congregation perhaps does escape. To preach from a pulpit is to accuse oneself, must be to have the courage to let it apply to oneself. Then there is some truth in this sort of preaching, but nonetheless it still true that in the stricter sense the real sermon or proclaiming is preaching on the street and taking action.

15

20

25

30

342 35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 43–44

43

5

10

15

•

1851

Psychological. The pleasure that is especially taken by women―and especially by those who are less educated―in terrifying children with all sorts of fantastic notions about a man who will come and take them away, etc. (thus, today, the 5th of May, in the area out near Hirschholm, I heard a girl tell a little child not to go too close to the water, that there was a man in the water who would take the child, that even to look down into the water―and this was fundamentally a profound remark―would be enough for him to take the child) is connected (apart from being a way to get children to keep quiet) with the selfishness that finds delight or titillation in seeing a child have anxiety about something one is not oneself anxious about, something whose nothingness one knows oneself. When a man does something of this sort, one also wants to see whether he likes to give the whole thing a comic touch. But woman has a secret rapport with anxiety, and it titillates her to see the child’s actual anxiety.

20

44

25

30

35

343

The Corporeal―The Spiritual. Compare education as it was in earlier times to what it is like now. Holberg says somewhere that to be a doctor one need do nothing more than buy a black suit and write “John Doe, Practicing Physician” on one’s door. Similarly, people also thought that to be a teacher and an educator one needed only to buy a cane and start beating.―Peer Degn says that by the time Erasmus got a beating (to put it politely) on his rump, Peer had already been caned three times by the schoolmaster. Usually, people probably misunderstand this remark to mean that Peer wanted to present himself as a tough fellow who had been punished so frequently. No, no: Peer Degn’s thought leads elsewhere. He is involved in the syllogism that he, as a teacher, is now putting into practice: to educate is to flog, to be educated is to be flogged; ergo he has been splendidly educated and can be proud of it. He speaks with pride of his education (just as when a magister speaks of the many universities at which he has studied), and it is almost

345

346

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 44–45

•

1851

modesty that he speaks of only 3 times, because 7 times would be an even greater distinction and the guarantee of an education beyond compare. That was what education was like in earlier times. Now everything is admonition, everything tending merely in the direction of understanding, so that the child understands that one means well by him, etc.―but existence is not rlly touched upon. Now look at loftier things. In religious matters as well, attention has been directed toward observing, understanding. Now of course this can be strenuous, but what is strenuous, after all, is rlly the transformation of existence, and it is an enormous deception that things have been made to look as though, provided one merely understands what is the highest thing, doing it is something that comes of itself. Ah, but the distance from understanding to doing is infinitely, infinitely greater than from not-understanding to understanding; the former contains an entire, qualitative μεταβαςις εις αλλο γενος. But people are very reluctant to venture forth existentially, and between understanding and understanding an entire life can pass by, and existence remains entirely unchanged. We all laugh at the person who says in connection with taking his university entrance examination, [“]I’ll take it next time,” but do we not all do the same thing? We work toward understanding and say, [“]Once we have understood, we will surely do it, it will surely come, etc.[”]―and then we die. But if we were not hindered by death, we would surely do it, that is, as soon as we have understood it properly. Ah, the human cunning about understanding. A daylong fast, an action directed at witnessing to the truth: everything of this sort touches existence in an entirely different way than 10 years’ or 100 years’ study. By working toward understanding a person takes a wrong turn, and indeed, there was more truth in the old notion of beginning immediately by turning to action.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

To Devote Oneself Entirely to Xt One can belong to him only by devoting oneself entirely. The person who has not devoted himself entirely has not actually devoted himself to Xt, because the one corresponds to the other. 17 μεταβαςις εις αλλο γενος] Greek, transition to another (conceptual) sphere. (See also explanatory note.)

45

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 45–46

344 5

10

•

1851

But nonetheless, devoting oneself entirely does not necessarily mean that you therefore become a martyr and the like. No, the only thing that follows from this is that you are no longer the master of your own life, that you do not know how it will end. As when a child who is to go into the water puts his arms around the neck of an adult―and from that moment is completely commended to the care of that adult, regardless of whether they shall merely wade or go out upon 70,000 fathoms of water: this is how it is with devoting oneself to Xt. Worldliness is the callousness with which a person hardens himself in advance by an act of will, saying: [“]I will venture out only so far. I dare not, I cannot go farther. The moment a gesture is made in that direction, I prudently protect myself against venturing forth into a decision.[”]

15

46

20

25

30

35

40

Mood. What an enormous burden the Christian idea places upon a hum. being! It is so natural for a hum. being to have an immediate hope, a belief, that if he simply tries hard, he will surely be victorious. And then Xnty comes along and says: [“]You fool, or you shameless fellow, do you not see what is expressed by ‘the exemplars’? Do you perhaps imagine that you are better than they[?”] And what do “the exemplars” express[?] That defeat is victory. Know this: that even if you succeed in becoming only somewhat more perfect, your downfall is certain, and the more you succeed, the more certain is your downfall. Ah, it is enough to despair over! Spending just a single hour with thoughts of this sort is more exhausting than great efforts expended in the immediate hope of victory. The fact that one works in opposition to oneself: that one could easily have victory simply by stopping work, by slacking off, by becoming self-serving like all the others, by using shabby methods like all the others―but that if I was able to use absolutely honorable methods, and only such methods, then my downfall would be absolutely certain! It is as if Xnty wanted to kill all courage, all joy, every hope in a hum. being. Indeed, all immediate courage and joy and hope: it is called dying away. But, then, does Xnty therefore want you to cease striving? No, you shall.

347

348

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 46

•

1851

Or is Xnty without courage? Oh, no―but it is so infinitely lofty that it is almost as if it were not intended for hum. beings but for heroes. Christian courage begins at the point at which merely hum. hope and courage expire in hopelessness and discouragement. Only one thing is certain: downfall―and it is toward this that he strives, making enormous efforts and every sacrifice. Marvelous courage! O, you thousands upon thousands who bustle about among one another in busyness and more busyness―and in addition are Xns: Have you also understood this, or even an inkling of it[?] That I have been initiated into what one would call these melancholic thoughts, almost from childhood on, has had an enormous influence on me. From a merely hum. standpoint it is absolutely certain that this defeat is precisely what one must not aim at, that this is precisely what one is to avoid. For me, on the other hand, the Christian idea that to be victorious is to be defeated has been the earliest thought, though at the beginning I did not understand it as personally as I did later. If I had not had Xnty along, I would have taken a different direction. I would turn aside, spare myself, saying: Now you cannot venture out any farther, it will be your defeat. But then Christianity comes and explains: Defeat is precisely what is required―winning is worldliness. And this is the doctrine that has now become the religion of an entire country and a people, and there are thousands of teachers who teach it for a living―and yet nothing is more certain than that the person who even made a partial effort to “seek first God’s kingdom” would not be granted a living. If our Lord―if I dare put it this way―is high and mighty about it and says, [“]You shall first seek my kingdom,[”] then the paid livings are high and mighty about it and say, [“]You shall first seek me, or you will get nothing[”], which is also what is expressed by all the exemplars, for while it is certainly true that they did not die of starvation, their circumstances were so scanty they could not exactly be called a living. Look, this is quite terrifying. And then there is yet another difficulty. Because let us assume―let me consider this possibility―that I succeeded in attaining something of this loftiness: It seems to me that I must then become alien to all hum. beings, that they must hate me (alas, and this is indeed what Xnty predicts), it must seem to them as if I wanted to annihilate everything they hold dear. And this teaching, which fills me with fear and trembling, has now been embraced by all these millions upon millions, among

345

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 46–48

•

1851

whom there are millions who perhaps have scarcely an extra half-hour a year in which to think about their inner lives―but they are all Xns.

346 5

47

10

15

20

48

30

35

Mynster and Me. It is certainly not unthinkable that in a certain sense M. would prefer a direct attack rather than my entire position. Then he would count on getting me forced into a position that was so far out that even if I was right 10 times over, I would never get justice in this world. In a certain sense, he might perhaps also prefer enormous seriousness―as people call it―to the light figure I present, for in that case I would not have peop. on my side. But the lighter form in which I present it is precisely what is dangerous. Thus, in one sense, my weakness is my strength. That is: Were I stronger, were I, for example, a witness to the truth, then my downfall would be certain. This is something worldly prudence can understand in its way. But I am only a poet, and therefore people cannot get rid of me so easily. And if M. wanted to see aright, he would also have to see that it is a defense of the established order―helped by making admissions.

Christian Piety―Jewish Piety. I have in fact never seen a Xn in the strict sense. Among socalled Xns I have seen some beautiful examples of Jewish piety. Jewish piety rests in the thought: Hold on to God and things will go well for you―the more you hold on to God, the better, and in any case you always have God to hold on to. Xnty expresses something entirely different: The more you hold on to God and involve yourself with him, the worse it will be for you. It is almost as if God said to a person: It would be better if you went to Tivoli and amused yourself with the others―but whatever you do, don’t get involved with me; humanly speaking, it will be misery.

349

350

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 48–50

•

1851

And not only that, but then, in the end, God also forsakes the Xn; this can be seen from the Exemplar. For to be a Xn in the strict sense is to die (to die away)―and then to be sacrificed: first, a sword pierces his heart (this is dying away), and then to be hated, cursed by peop., to be forsaken by God (i.e., to be sacrificed). Thus, Christianity is superhuman. And yet the N.T. requires “imitation” of the Xn. I am not capable of it. I can only come so far out as to use “the Exemplar” as a humiliation, not for imitation, and yet again as a humiliation because I cannot use the Exemplar in any other way.

The Prudence to Stop. This is much spoken of nowadays, and rlly it was of course my pseudonyms who raised the idea in their day. Stopping can be prudence, egotism to do it at the most advantageous moment and guarantee oneself the most spectacular exit: but is it really Xnty? Xnty is to hold out, in fear and trembling, as long as possible, not sparing oneself, but if possible also remaining on guard that one does not become so weak that one comes to damage one’s own cause by holding out too long. But it is a question of the cause, not of the person―of what benefits the cause, not of what is convenient for the person.

1

[a]

Vinet.

The Whole Business with Vinet about the necessity of a space being provided in order that a person can come to confess his conviction is a sophism. It all depends on what one understands by confessing one’s conviction. This is to be understood as meaning: to step existentially into the character of one’s conviction, not to write or say something about it in oratorical fashion. V. does not rlly pay attention to this. But this is utterly indefensible. It is only altogether too easy to get something apostolic into one’s head, to write something about it, and then to want to have permission to do it. No, no: You must either be in character―or the task is to remain silent.

347 5

10

49

15

20

50

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 50–51

•

1851

351

Everything you communicate that is existentially higher than your own existence you must dare communicate only in such a manner that you use it in humiliation, so that no meritorious light falls upon the saying of it. 348 5

51

10

15

20

25

30

35

My Reckoning. Scarcely anyone here is as familiar as I am with all the objections that can be raised from a Christian point of view against a State Church, a People’s Church, an established Christian Church, etc., item that in the strict Christian sense the requirement is separation―that is the requirement of ideality at its maximum. But I say that to undertake this separation is such a qualitatively religious act that only someone of qualitatively distinguished religious character can do it; strictly speaking, it would require an apostle, at the least a witness to the truth. And it must be done in character; there must be no characterless driveling about it. Getting a characterless scatterbrain to venture such a thing is infinitely more insane than putting a butcher in command of an army brigade,[a] Now, I have not discovered one single person on our stage who could even bear a resemblance to such a distinguished religious character. On the contrary, there are a number of people who confusedly dabble at wanting to undertake this operation in a manner devoid of character and impermissible in form. This is absolute corruption.[b] A muddled established order― well, indeed, this is certainly not something praiseworthy, but it is nonetheless infinitely preferable to a reformation that is devoid of character. So this is where I get involved. If I were to put myself forward as being a witness to the truth or something like that, I would be a nonentity. But I do not do that. For that very reason I have enough truth in me to be capable of handling the reformers who are without character or morals. In this way I safeguard the established order. But in order to do this, I in turn require what I require of myself: admissions. Just as when a regiment has disgraced itself and the entire regiment is reduced in rank, so, I believe, that if we will not and dare not venture out any farther than to the People’s Church and that sort of thing, then we must all tolerate being 10 item] Latin, as well as, furthermore.

[a]

or a common barber in charge of a complex surgical operation.

1

[b]

5

in accordance with the saying: corruptio optimi pessima.

6 corruptio optimi

pessima] Latin, the corruption of the best is the worst.

352

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 51–52

•

1851

reduced in rank, we must acknowledge that we are not Xns in the stricter sense. And so, what do I do in this respect? Do I step forward as the person who, so to speak, has orders from God to reduce Xndom in rank? Oh, no. I am without authority. Moved by the ideal as I am myself, I take joy in being reduced in rank myself, and “without authority” I strive to move others to the same. The error in Mynster’s position is: 1) that he has put in abeyance the question of whether there is truth and significance in all of us thousands and millions being Xns; 2) and next, that he has hardened himself against me. Thus the entire established order can continue to exist. For a Xn in the strict sense is such a rarity that scarcely one is to be found in a generation. A Xn in a volatilized sense, a Xn such as we are, is someone who embraces the teaching, rests in grace, but does not in the stricter sense get involved in “imitation.” For such a Xn, Xt is the Savior, the Redeemer, but not in the stricter sense “the Exemplar,” except in the sense of humiliation tending toward inward appropriation. And look, “imitation” in its more rigorous sense is precisely what Mynster has abolished, omitted completely. It is precisely here that the error is lodged: that he has acted as if it were nothing at all―for it must said, there must be truth about where we are, otherwise everything has been made worldly.

God’s Faithfulness. This was rlly written as a conclusion to the sermon on the unchangingness of God, but it is better suited to the theme of God’s faithfulness. . . . . But, then, have you yourself indeed experienced the unchangingness of God, or does it perhaps seem to you that you have rather experienced the opposite? Thus, when you were a child, did you not have a different notion of God than you now have as an adult[?] Hasn’t your experience with God been like that with a hum. being, in which after closer association you find him to be different than you had imagined, and you find him changed over the course of years? Let us simply speak of this in quite human terms. Sometimes, God’s unchangingness is spoken of as being so reliable that pre-

5

349 10

15

20

25

52

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 52

5

10

350 15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

cisely this reliability is like a deception. For in every situation it is true that the words of someone inexperienced are often characterized by a suspect reliability and certainty, while at first glance the words of someone experienced appear less reliable, but they last longer. So God’s unchangingness and faithfulness are spoken of. To utter one single word to the effect that he could be capable of change or even that at times he might indeed almost want to deceive a hum. being: ah, a person would shudder to say such a thing. But then take Luther: he was certainly a man of experience! He says: If I am to be deceived, I would rather be deceived by God than by hum. beings. There is a pious man―and not merely a pious man, but a blood witness―who says in a sermon: You deceived me, o God, etc. (it is Savonarola, the cited passage is found on p. 18 of this journal). And so it is with every hum. being who truly engages with God―there come moments when he must say, [“]You deceived me, o God[”]―and he is not immediately able to say, “but it was for my own good that you deceived me, o God―but into the truth.[”] That God must use a deception is not because he is not faithful or because he has changed―no, he is eternally unchanging and educating love. But it is inherent in us to be so reluctant to venture forth. We very much want to fob God off with the assurance that we so very much want to know the truth, as well as assuring him that if only we understood what is right, we would surely do it. This is deceit. Therefore God, like every educator, must use cunning. And in this way you deceived me as well, o God! You showed me those lovely pictures. You did not say to me, [“]Just be careful, be clever, use the understanding with which I have so liberally endowed you, never get involved with things of this sort.[”] No, you beckoned to me, as it were. I cannot say that I followed in reckless fashion, for early on there was fear and trembling in my being. So I followed. At times it was as if you frightened me back; then I gave it all up. But there was beckoning once again, and I followed. Oh, it is dreadful to be deceived; to be deceived by God―terrifying! As a person who faints grasps at something to hold on to, and, when he fails to find it, collapses, so it is with someone who has been deceived. For what looked so inviting as a possibility is so monstrously frightening as an actuality. And yet, even though a person has been deceived, there would still be nothing to regret: to be deceived through having ventured forth to seek the eternal is, after all, always preferable to being pru-

353

354

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 52–54

•

1851

dent in a worldly way. Ah, but you only deceive a person into the truth. This pain, too―that it is as if a person has been deceived―is a part of things until the eternal is reached. Alas, but soon it will again be necessary for you to deceive me, for otherwise I will slumber into worldly security. But who is it who praises you most truthfully, and thus best: the person who shouts out your faithfulness―and perhaps says nothing at all, or the person who says, [“]You faithful one, you deceived me―into the truth; you were too loving and faithful not to deceive me; then I would have continued to live in the imagined notion of your faithfulness, but would never have involved myself with you.[”]

5

10

15

Tertullian “The pagans, too, know repentance. They repent of their confidence, their love, their patience when it has been ill used. They preserve a profound impression of this sort of repentance, preserving the memory of it and are very wary not to be too quick to do anything good that could injure them. Thus, their repentance makes them worse, not better.” see Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter, Leipzig, 1777, 3rd vol. p. 73, Tertullian’s writing de poenitentia. At the same point (p. 77) Tertullian says that one must not in turn repent of one’s repentance or repent of having repented, for this is to please the devil, whereas repentance pleases God.

351

53

20

25

30

How Things Went with the Publication of the Latest Pseudonym: Anti-Climacus The Sickness unto Death.

54

(This is surely noted down in the journals from that time, but I never reread that sort of thing and always keep a general overview of it in my head.)

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

5

10

15

20

352 25

30

35

40

It was in the summer of 1849. I was very fatigued from the previous year. The financial crisis had made a strong impression on me and made it very clear to me that in the future I would have to think about earning a living. All the business with R. Nielsen had distressed me. Strube had caused me concern. I had long struggled with the question of whether I should publish these writings. If that were to happen, it was my intention then to travel recreationally for a while and in the future to be obliged to work for a living. I also understood that if they were to be published, there was not much time to lose, both because in relation to the whole maieutic foreground of the structure of my work, it was important that they appear as quickly as possible, and also because of an external consideration: there was a threat of an income tax at any moment. But throughout all this I continually prayed that God would give me every sort of encouragement if I was supposed to go ahead and publish them, but warn me off in every way if there was anything presumptuous about it. Then the decision not to publish them won out. It seemed to me that a happier life might await me if I could succeed in removing the difficulty in my personality that had made it impossible for me to take on any official appointment. And it seemed to me that having a Savior was precisely what might help me to come to that point, whereas I had earlier understood this suffering as my limitation, which I could not transcend, but with which, through God’s help, I could come to terms, because in another sense so much had been granted to me. So I prayed to God that I might succeed in getting a position at the pastoral seminarya―and also that I might be reconciled with her, something she, the married one, would have to request herself. To be sure, I had had misgivings earlier, and I immediately got them again: What should I then do with all the writings that had been completed[?] They could scarcely be published after I had been appointed to a position―and I risked making a bungle of myself. Then I thought that I would

•

1851

355

Note My idea was to act in the direction of the extensive, whereas my earlier effort was in the direction of the intensive. Then I would have to regard myself as having prevailed in such a way that the established order had gladly embraced my position. So I wished to have an appointment at the seminary.

a

1

5

10

356 1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

Had this happened, the strenuousness of my life would have abated. Thus, this also corresponded to bringing her to the fore, which was something I wanted very much to do for various reasons (see the journals from that period), also because it would satisfy my pride to make the greatest possible amends to her; because it would give me joy to express my faithfulness; it would benefit my religious cause; my life would be moving.―But she herself would have to demand it. Yet I had to give up the idea of the seminary, first of all, because Mynster would clearly oppose it. Then there were also other influences on me: I sent a message to the printer, received the reply: Could they receive the manuscript the next day. Then the same evening I learn that Councillor of State Olsen is dead. It moved me in rather disturbing fashion: Whether I ought not wait a little, that perhaps something might happen from her side― and these two thoughts then were now united: the seminary―her. However, action had in fact been taken. I dared not reverse it. Moreover, if anything happened from her side, I could of course (and this was in fact my thought) let the book be printed and then put it in storage. But if there could be no victorious return to the established order, then I would have to keep her out of it, or the step in her favor would come to signify something completely different. But this death came in a such a strangely fateful manner that it indeed had to have a powerful effect upon me.

•

1851

simply use them at the seminary as a sort of esoteric communication. But this, however, involved a difficulty: it seemed to me that this was an all too unserious a way to set forth such serious ideas, and that it was indeed a difficult business to have had such thoughts communicated to me, and for me to evade the responsibility of setting them forth.―In connection with her I also worried whether it was at all possible to be reconciled with her, whether I would not be taking an enormous responsibility upon myself by now suddenly disturbing her entire marriage, inasmuch as I would either have to explain the whole truth of the matter (and then perhaps everything would be disturbed) or I would have to deceive in a new way. Meanwhile I went to Madvig. I did not see him. I went to Mynster, did not see him. I went to Mynster yet again and was rebuffed as formally as possible with the remark that he did not have time today. During this same period I had read Fenelon and Terstegen. Both had made a strong impression on me. I had been especially struck by a line by Fenelon: that it must be horrible for a pers. if God expected something more of him. Strong misgivings began to awaken concerning whether such a transformation of my entire personal existence was at all possible. On the other hand, I was good at being an author, and I did in fact still have enough money. It seemed to me as if I had permitted myself to be warned off prematurely, and because I wished for it, I had permitted myself to be moved to hope for something that perhaps could not be attained, and in that case I would perhaps make a bungle of things. So I wrote to the printer. Received the message that they were at my service, and could they please have the manuscript the next day―matters seldom tend to be decided so quickly. Then, in the evening―when, according to our agreement, the printer was to have the manuscript the next morning―I learned that Councillor of State Olsen is dead. It made a powerful impression on me. What is strange is that he had died a day or two before,

5

10

15

20

353

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

5

10

15

20

25

355 30

35

40

and I had not heard about it; and only after I had made an agreement with the printer did I come to hear it. I said to myself: Had you known this before you wrote to the printer, you would perhaps have paused to see if it might be a sign of something―regardless of how firmly I continued to believe that it was enormously risky to speak with her, precisely because I had deceived her by having pretended to be a deceiver. As I have said, this made a disquieting impression on me. I did not sleep peacefully at night. Also, it seemed to me as if someone else was speaking with me or that I was talking to myself. As things now stand for me, I can well remember the words, but I cannot say definitely which words were mine and which were mine in the other person. I remember these words: [“]Look, now he wills his own destruction.[”] But I cannot say with certainty whether this was because I was the one who wanted to refrain from sending the manuscript to the printer and make an overture to her―or the reverse, that I was the one who insisted on sending the manuscript to the printer. I can also remember the words: [“]It is of course of no concern to[”]―but I can’t remem ber with certainty whether the next word was [“]you[”] or [“]me[”]―“that Councillor Olsen is dead.[”] I can remember the words, but not the particular pronoun: [“]You[”] or [“]I[”]―[“]could certainly wait a week or so.[”] I can remember the reply: [“]Who does he think he is[?”] NBcd In the morning I was utterly confused about it. The agreement with Luno had been made. It seemed to me that I would have to be an utter fool if, after having wrestled with the question of publication for so long and worn myself out, and after having come so close to doing it, I were now to reverse myself―something I have never done―and I was afraid of completely losing control of myself. And on the other hand, I had nothing concerning her to go on: of course, even though the Councillor was dead, the responsibility for involving myself with her was just as great. I was utterly perplexed. But yet it seemed to me as if something that wanted to warn me off had tak-

•

1851

357

[b]

In this connection it must be noted that the impression I had the next morning was essentially of an undefined dread. It was really only much later that I came to remember any detail; and that was mainly after I had come to live in that unfortunate apartment on Nørregade that Strube had rented for me; there are few outward things that have depressed me as much as that apartment, where, moreover, I sat for a long time and was able to accomplish as good as nothing because of the reflected sunlight that bothered my eyes.

1

5

10

15

c

NB In the course of the last week or two, the meaning of that night’s conversation with myself has suddenly dawned on me: that it is surely my common sense that wanted to restrain me from publishing the manuscripts. A line I have always remembered, but whose meaning would not become clear to me, has now in fact become clear to me. The line was: “Is this what is required of me,” to which, as noted, I replied: [“]Who does he think he is[?”] Thus, this is what is required of me. Up until

20

25

30

358

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

•

1851

Part of the main text of NB24:54, with marginal additions NB24:54.c and d, which were added in August 1852.

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

5

10

en place, even though I was also aware that it was of course possible that it was I myself who wished to be free from publishing it, and all the while I also understood that it was quite in order for a terror to be summoned up within me in connection with publishing such books. I remember clearly that I came to think that the fact that God frightens a pers. does not always mean that this is something he should refrain from doing, but that it is the very thing he should do; but he must be terrified in order that he learn to do it in fear and trembling.

•

1851

359

now, I could not figure out what I meant or intended by this. Until now, I have understood it to mean that I was I willing to sacrifice life and blood, etc.―which, by the way, was something I could not comprehend, for how could this occur to me, for I have never resorted to speaking in such lofty tones. However, until now I had wanted to understand it more or less in that way, and thus I understood [“]Who does he think he is[?”] as a reprimand for an almost blasphemous remark.―Now, on the other hand, it has become clear to me. Deep down, before that night I had often enough said to myself before God, that regardless of the fact that it seems to me that she herself must be the one who asked for an understanding with me―that I, if it were required of me, was willing to be the one who took the first step, that my misgivings should thus not be lodged in my pride. And look, here is the line: Is this what is required of me[?] Aug. 5, 1852

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

d

NB see journal NB26. p. 92.

356

15

20

So I sent the manuscript to the printer. I prayed to God that he himself would educate me so that in the tension of actuality I might now learn how far I should go.e So the work became pseudonymous. To that extent, I backed off. As for the other writings by Anti-Climacus (Practice in Xnty), the original title page already had the word: poetic. And it was only in order to emphasize this even more that I made use of the pseudonym,

e

And a decision I have so desperately needed to make; it had been so frightfully fatiguing for me to have those manuscripts lying there, and every blessed day to think about publishing them, correcting a word here, then a word there.

35

360

1

5

10

f

In these writings the passages that spoke of myself and of the actual circumstances of my activity as an author―which a poetic personage (a pseudonym) of course, cannot speak―were of course deleted, and only a few lines―of the sort that were suited to a poetic personality―remained, and if they were not entirely suited, they were changed.

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

•

1851

and then, making use of the preface in my own name, I put even greater pressure on myself.f Then, when the pseudonym was applied to The Sickness unto Death and it was decided that the other works should also be pseudonymous, I had the idea of traveling, for it now seemed to me that there did not need to be any great haste in publishing the other works, and there was the constant threat of an income tax. So I took a step in her direction by writing to Schlegel. He was extremely affronted etc. Everything connected with this is in her cabinet. Then I moved from the tanner’s. I had been considering traveling, so I had not viewed the rooms myself, but had let Strube do it, and when things must go wrong, they always do so with a vengeance: He was afraid of offending me by saying that the apartment rlly was not any good (for he thought that I indeed very much wanted to live there, despite the fact that I had told him that I had not seen the apartment at all)―and the apartment was as might be expected. I was so overwhelmed that I could not think of anything but traveling. I suffered greatly. Then it became clear to me that there was no time to waste, that I ought to publish the other manuscripts by Anti-Climacus. That was what I did, and on that occasion my spirit was quite unusually calm. I certainly remember that I had been afraid that I would now come to be reminded of that unrest and tension of ’49, but no. This is how things are. In a certain sense I have suffered greatly―also in a purely outward way, because of that apartment and pecuniary worries. What made that publication (the one in ’49) rather stressful was that I had come to consider another possibility. When things weigh on me a bit, I come so easily to think: Of course you could have done it differently. But suppose I had refrained from sending the manuscript to the printer; then suppose either that I myself had done nothing with respect to “her”

5

10

15

20

25

30

357 35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54–56

5

10

15

20

55 25

but had waited to see if she would do something herself, or that I had taken a step and it had come to nothing (not the worst outcome) or had saddled me with an enormous responsibility, had disturbed her marriage―and all the while, I had left all the manuscripts lying there and had tormented myself about that the fact I had been so close to a decision! It is quite natural that such a final publication, which involves a change in direction, is a bit stressful. Yet things have rlly gone as I had prayed God they would: I was both warned off and urged on. Urged on, among other things, by that line from Fenelon that had made so strong an impression on me;h warned off by the circumstance of that death. And the unity of these became that preface of mine: It is all spoken to me, that I might learn to take refuge in grace. The publication of those works has indeed been my upbringing in Xnty; I have come to include myself personally, so that I did not occupy myself with presenting Xnty merely intellectually and poetically.

That the More One Involves Oneself with God, the More Difficult It Becomes. Ah, it is so entirely proper that this is the case, for otherwise the relationship with God would of course be taken in vain, and it would be precisely the earthly mind that involved itself with God.

30

358

56

New Themes for Sermons on the Unchangingness of God. Everything moves him―nothing changes him.

35

Your sigh, your prayer, etc. is heard: Ah, in grace, it has touched him, moved him deeply, he who

•

1851

361 [g]

That is also why I rlly have always thought that she herself would have to require it. Without mentioning a great many other considerations (see the journals from that period), merely this, that it was of course possible that she had given me up entirely, changed completely: I could not have the heart to learn that about her.

h , urged on by the circumstance that I went in vain both to Madvig and Mynster, and to Mynster a second time

1

5

10

362

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 56–58

•

1851

is infinite love. But it does not follow from this that your wish is fulfilled. He has so infinitely much to take care of, and one thought is to be maintained throughout the whole: and you see, for this reason it may well be the case that he must deny you this. But they touch and move him, both your prayer and that he must deny you it―for nothing changes him.

5

* * God is unchanging―could you wish it otherwise[?]

The Quiet Hours in church are truly not the maximum of religiousness. On the contrary, they are school exercises―in order that you shall put religion into actuality, and to that extent the true significance of the church or the quiet hours in church, their significance, is to render the church superfluous, even if we never get that far, and even if we nonetheless want to benefit from paying a visit there. Imagine a violinist, for example. Would he, without having learned the least bit of the music, immediately seat himself down with the orchestra and play along with them[?]―of course he would himself be disturbed and would disturb the others. No, for a long time, he makes use of quiet hours to practice. There, as far as is possible, there is nothing that disturbs him; there, he sits and beats time, etc. But of course he is supposed to play as a part of the orchestra, he must be able to tolerate the blare of the various instruments, this interweaving of sounds, and still play his violin and play with them, just as calm and certain as if he were home alone in his room. Ah, this means that he must have the assistance of many quiet hours in order to learn how to do this―but the final goal (τελος) is always to be able to play as part of the orchestra. It is the same with the religious.

Cyprian in his work de opera et eleemosynis says: My brethren, it is just as unchristian to refrain from charity because you have many 29 τελος] Greek, goal, purpose.

57

15

20

25

30

359

58

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 58–61

5

59

10

•

1851

children. On the contrary, one ought to give all the more. “Hoc ipso operari amplius debes. Plures sunt, pro quibus Dominum depreceris: multorum delicta redimenda sunt, multorum purgandæ conscientiæ, multorum animæ liberandæ.[“] see Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter, part 3, p. 216.

….. Thus it is with us hum. beings; it is the truth. If you cannot submit to having it said to you, then do me the favor of listening when I say it to myself―for it shall be said and it shall be heard. Believe me, it would never occur to me to say it to you without also saying it to myself, but if you do not want to hear it, now I am yielding. But if you think that I am insulting you by saying it to you―ask yourself whether I would be insulting you less by regarding you as someone to whom one dared not say the truth.

15

359

60

20

25

61

30

360

God Terrifies―but out of Love. Imagine a lover―but a deeply earnest pers. Do you think that in talking to the girl he will praise himself, will lure, will persuade―no, on the contrary, he will speak in opposition to himself. Does this then mean that he does not want the girl? Well, of course he does, but he is earnest. And this is also how it is with God. He, though he himself does not terrify, he indeed permits a hum. being to be terrified of the path he in fact wants a hum. being to follow, even though he will forgive him for not having ventured to try it. That is how earnest God is in his infinite love.

Blessed the Person Who Does Not See―and Nonetheless Believes; but if a person sees, then of course he is not believing, so why this [“]nonetheless[?”] It must be remembered, however, that Thomas certainly did see, but what did he see? Yes, he saw something that is in conflict with the understanding: that a dead person has risen. To this extent, this rlly does not help him to believe.

1 Hoc . . . liberandæ] Latin, You ought to work at this all the more. There are many for whom you shall intercede before the Lord. Many shall be delivered from their trespasses; the consciences of many shall be purified; the souls of many shall be set free. (See also explanatory note.)

363

364

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 61–63

•

1851

When it concerns the certainty that relates to seeing in a straightforward way, then seeing and believing are mutually exclusive. But what Thomas sees is a phenomenon of an entirely different sort; it contains a contradiction that makes immediate sensation (seeing) an impossibility. To this extent one could understand this “nonetheless” as a sort of amicable irony toward Thomas: that he himself thinks he sees, and that nonetheless he actlly believes: Despite the fact that you see―you nonetheless believe. You think that you see, but such things cannot be seen straightforwardly, and therefore what you are doing is believing. In connection with such phenomena (those that are contradictions), seeing can perhaps be just as much a hindrance as not seeing―for the person who merely sees (senses), does not see after all, because it does not admit of being seen.

God’s Unchangingness. It is incredible how frivolously we hum. beings speak of the consolation that God is unchanging. Yes, indeed, God is unchanging, but what good does it do me―am I rlly capable of having anything to do with an Unchanging Being[?] For a poor, inconstant hum. being this is the greatest strain; the pain I must undergo here is far greater than everything I could suffer from another hum. being’s changeableness. You see, this is how serious the matter is. But then it must be said that we nevertheless must go through with it and that then the blessedness is there as well. But this sentimental pandering, this shamelessness with which we usually speak of the consolation of God’s unchangingness, is an illusion.

A Church Father Warns against the Superstition of an Established Church That Is Accessible to the Senses. Hilarius contra Auxentium: For one thing, I warn you, beware of the Anti-Christ. An insane love of walls deceives you. You

5

10

15

62

20

25

30

63

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 63–65

361

5

64

15

20

•

1851

insanely honor God’s Church with beautiful architecture. Ridiculously, you seek God’s peace there. Can anyone doubt that one day the Anti-Christ will be enthroned there[?] Mountains, forests, lakes, prisons, and deserts are safer places . . . For what does the world admire these mighty bishops nowadays, other than honoring them as holy teachers of religion―because they rule over great places. See, Henry, Calvins Leben, 1st pt., pp. 91 and 92.

That God’s Word Is Written in Poor Language. Calvin very rightly emphasizes this. “It is precisely through diligence or deliberation that the greatest secrets of God’s kingdom are given to us in quite contemptible dress. Read Demosthenes, Cicero, Plato―they will captivate you, enthrall you―… the Holy Scripture will pierce your heart …. Ut promptum sit perspicere, divinum quiddam spirare sacras scripturas.” Institutiones, Lib 1. cap. 8 cited from Henry, Calvins Leben 1st pt., p. 295. Incidentally, I also think I can point out another aspect here: that it is divine dignity, so to speak, that writes in poor language. His Majesty writes with bad handwriting, writes on a scrap of paper, and the like―the more subordinate one is, the more one must adhere to straightforward dignity or worthiness; the other is the reverse.

25

65

30

35

Socrates would not make use of the speech that had been offered to him. He found it inappropriate, beneath his dignity, to use this artfully crafted, elegant lecture―he wanted to speak ex tempore. And the person to whom a point of view is a life, is something existential, is something present―will at every moment, with a mere turn of the spigot, as it were, also have something sufficient and well-considered to say; he will also harbor a suspicion concerning elaborate speech[,] which both distracts him personally and leads his audience to think of something other than what is important. 15 Ut . . . scripturas] Latin, In order that one might clearly realize that the Holy Scriptures are inspired by something divine. 29 ex tempore] Latin, extemporaneously, without preparation.

365

366

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 65–66

•

1851

For this reason as well, religious speech ought to take place essentially extempore. In this way a person cannot have at his disposal all these cunning and cautious expressions and turns of phrase with which one protects oneself; but what is best is for him simply to come out with it. Furthermore, it is beneficially humbling for a pers. to speak extempore. It so easily becomes sheer amusement to sit and elaborate, and then it is still another amusement to know privately that one is not saying one single word that has not been very carefully, very artfully chosen. And finally, if a person is actually capable of elaboration, such speech ends up squandered, for not one of 1000 listeners is sufficiently developed to be capable of listening at that level. Then the listener will forget one part in favor of another, and will fail to hear most of it. And the speaker will also come to squander far too much: first of all, the time he took to elaborate, and secondly, the enormous amount of time it took him to memorize it.

Contrast. God’s word was spoken (communicated merely orally) by a single pers. and then was later written down― ―nowadays any muddlehead can get his drivel printed in tens upon tens of thousands of copies. According to our way of thinking today, one would think that God should at least have waited to be born until the invention of book printing, that before then it was not the fullness of time, and that then he would have secured himself two or three rapid printing presses. Ah, what a satire on the hum. race for God’s word to have been put into the world in that way; and what a satire on the hum. race that as the message communicated gets worse and worse with the help of more and more new inventions, its dissemination gets greater and greater.

5

362

10

15

66

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 67–69 67

5

363 10

15

68

20

25

30

69 35

•

1851

The Double Danger. Here it can be seen immediately. Calvin actually lived in poverty―and yet he had in fact been offered plenty of opportunities to earn money and become a grandee. Thus this is self-denial to the first power. If things in fact were as the priest preaches them to be, Calvin would have been honored and respected for this. Well, thanks, but no thanks―no, it was precisely the opposite. This is the double danger. He was subjected to all sorts of slander because he wanted to live in poverty. See Henry, Calvins Leben 1st part, pp. 429 and 430; he himself says (p. 430, bottom of page), [“]If I took it upon myself to write an apologia, I would never stop; although this says a great deal, so vast, though only the hundredth part of what I am afflicted with every day.[”]

On Myself. I concern myself with inward appropriation, not with dissemination. This voice with its subdued inwardness has convinced me; that which is said in this subdued tone is so true to me that it becomes untruth for me the instant I raise my voice to say the same thing. Oh, what is the point of yelling and screaming. From the Christian point of view there should not be great churches but small houses of prayer, and there should be preaching every day. But this is what is bestial: an enormous room, a mass of peop., a well-rehearsed orator, and then yelling. Indeed, if it were market prices he was proclaiming, it would be something worth hearing. The raised voice of a missionary, not to mention that of an apostle, where it is a matter of disseminating the teaching, is naturally something completely different.

… I have certainly heard that people could not hear me when I preached last Sunday. Undoubtedly there are plenty of people who were not even in church who would tell me this. And,

367

368

1

a

or shouter,

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 69–72

•

1851

perhaps with the aid of the daily press, it will finally be heard all over the country: that no one could hear me:―and that’s something, at least. Fortunately―and as I had in fact expected―the attendance was not particularly great. So I was not put in the position that I have imagined could happen to an oratora who was the talk of the town: that when he preached in the morning, the attendance was so great that even in the afternoon many citizens and their families went out and listened at the church, to find out if there was something to be heard; and the next day the attendance was so great that there were pastry ladies outside with tables.

5

10

364

Socrates. How normal. First he concerns himself with nature (research into nature, astronomy and the like) and then he goes over to concerning himself with hum. beings as an ethicist and remains with that. In our times, in modern times, things are the reverse. People begin by concerning themselves with hum. beings, and then they tire of it and turn to nature. Rousseau, for example.

70

15

20

Productivity.

71

An ethicist like Socrates, those who in the stricter sense are entrusted with religion, they do not demonstrate any real productivity―they don’t have time for it; they are entirely dedicated to the energetic, are entirely τελεολο gically defined, and they are constantly invoking the existential.

25

Mood.

72

And then, when a pers.―after lifelong daily sufferings and torments of the soul―true enough, bloodless, but nonetheless bloodily sacrificed for peop.: when he dies, oh, it seems to me that he ought at any rate have the consolation of at least having accomplished something with his life. Alas, far from it. No: then, 26 τελεολο gically] Greek-Danish, teleologically, in a goal-oriented manner.

30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 72–73

5

10

15

365

20

25

30

73

35

40

•

1851

when he is dead (to some extent, they may already have been preparing this while he was alive, just waiting for his death), then they arise―the speakers, the orators, the mendacious disciples― who now praise his noble selflessness, etc. in lofty tones―and they themselves earn money, honor, esteem for doing so. What an abomination! Consider what is the highest! Was the vileness before Christ even half of what it was after him[?] No, no! The fact that not even his innocent suffering and death could move people―this is a greater vileness. Indeed, not only did it not move people to imitate him―no, people gained money, honor, and respect. Profit lay in wait; this they found to be what was most profitable of all: to orate grandly about how Xt suffered. You see, what he did pointed in the direction of imitation. True enough, there were those whom he did move to suffer as he had suffered―but in their cases as well, what happened was that each one was vilely exploited for the sake of making money and profiting from their reputations. Alas, and if there is a person whom the exemplars do not in fact move strongly enough so that he comes in the stricter sense to suffer in like manner, but in whom there is, after all, a little bit of truth, so that at least he does not want to convert the sufferings of the exemplars into money and other forms of profit―this is enough: He, too, will come to suffer at least to some extent, for even this is too much for the world. And while he suffers, vileness is already lying in wait: “If only he were dead,” and then his life also will be cashed in and turned into profit. And then, when the deceased is highly praised by the vileness that turns his suffering into profit―then, when it looks as if the world had now become better―alas, it is worse. This profiteering vileness is worse than all the opposition to him.

Notice Concerning My Own Practice. If preaching―in particular, preaching ex tempore―had worked out, I had considered doing it a couple of times, and then the following Sunday, instead of preaching myself, to take one of Mynster’s sermons and read it aloud in order to demonstrate that edification is something quite different from a possible interest motivated by curiosity. In the introduction I would have said a couple of words about the useful English custom that requires

369

370

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 73–74

•

1851

that sermons be read from a prepared text (because the living words of a speaker can easily have an intoxicating effect and intoxicate the preacher himself), and about the beneficial effect of reading someone else’s sermon aloud, which reminds the speaker that he, too, is being addressed. I would also have said a couple of edifying words about the significance of Mynster’s sermons for me, something I inherited from my father.

1

[a]

see p. 118 in this journal.

5

On Myself.

74

On Sunday, May 18th, I preached at the Citadel. It was my first, my beloved, text, James 1. Also―I confess it―with the thought of “her,” item if it might please her to hear me. Beforehand I suffered greatly from every sort of strain, as is always the case when I have to use my physical person. I delivered it. It in fact went fairly well, but I spoke in such a weak voice that people complained about being unable to hear. When I went home, however, I felt well, animated. I had had the idea of giving several such sermons in the course of the summer, of course after working them through. In the meanwhile, however, it became clear to me that it takes an altogether abnormal amount of time and that it is, after all, too wearing on me. So I had the idea: Of course, you can preach ex tempore. That struck me. Then I would have been daring to the utmost. But what happened? On Monday I was so weak and exhausted that it was frightful. Then several days passed. I certainly did not give up the idea of preaching ex tempore and of thus emphasizing Christianity to the maximum. Yet I felt that it went against the whole of my being. I became weaker and weaker. Yet I did not give up the idea entirely. I had to give it up for the next time, however. Then I became really sick. The lamentable, tormenting pain that constitutes the limit of my person began to rear up in fearsome fashion, something that had not happened to me in a long, long time. For a moment, I understood this as a punishment for having failed to act quickly enough. I became more miserable.

10

366

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 74–75

5

10

15

367 20

25

•

1851

On Sunday following May 18th, I read a sermon by Mynster as usual, and look: the text for the day was about the thorn in the flesh: [“]My grace is sufficient for you.[”] That struck me. Yet I would not give up that idea; I even considered forcing myself further along. Now the torment intensified. Then I came to a different understanding of it: that I had once again wanted to venture beyond my limits. And now, I repose in this: [“]My grace is sufficient for you.[”] My task is that of inward appropriation, and there is a great deal of the poet in me. On the morning of Sunday the 18th, I had prayed to God that something new might be born in me (I myself don’t know how that occurred to me); furthermore, the thought forced itself upon me that just as parents bring up their children and finally lead them to confirmation, so was this now my own confirmation to which God had led me. In a way, this is indeed what happened. Something new has been born within me, for I understand my task as an author differently; it is now dedicated in a quite different way to straightforwardly advancing religion. And I have also been confirmed in this: this is how it is with me. Oh, what has made me especially hesitant about venturing out so far is that I have been tormented by a quite different concern: making a living―and I was so anxious that this might be a serious delusion that instead of doing anything about it, I ventured forth farther in the ideal sense. God will surely continue to do everything good for me, he whom I can never thank sufficiently for what is being done for me.

30

75

35

40

Luther―Catherine von Bora. Luther rlly could not in fact have been what we call [“]in love[”]. I could imagine that he said to Catherine, [“]My dear girl, as I have told you, my marriage was aimed at defying Satan, the pope, and the whole world. As far as that goes, you are surely also capable of understanding that I could certainly have married your kitchen maid―for the important thing is that the fact that I am married becomes notorious. I could certainly also marry a doorpost, if it were possible for it to be regarded as my wife, as a real marriage, for I am not so eager to get into the bridal bed, but to defy Satan, the pope, and the whole world.[”]

371

372

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 75–77

•

1851

Conversely one could say, [“]My dear girl, that I do not marry you must not grieve you―for in my eyes you are and remain the sole beloved, but it is to spite Satan, the public, the newspapers, the entire 19th century that I cannot marry.[”] 5

Luther.

1

[a]

see Henry, Calvins Leben, pt. 3, p. 582, note.

somewhere in the 3rd volume of Henry, Calvins Leben I read a note concerning Luther, that when he was to die and wanted to make a will, and people wanted witnesses to be present, Luther said: [“]There is no need of that, for I am very well known, on earth, in heaven, and in hell, so my name is sufficient.” Here Luther is so naively humorous that it is almost naughty.

76

10

368

Hum. Error. The worldly mind is never entirely satisfied until it has made what is wrong into a dogma, a duty. The N.T. obviously has a preference for the unmarried state. This gives a bad taste. Now, of course, people could understand the matter like this: One could say that Xnty tends mostly in this direction, but it also permits marrying as an indulgence. Or one could say that marrying can be regarded as an αδιαϕορον, you may do what you want. But no, the worldly mind is not at peace until it has made it into a dogma that there is an unconditional duty for every hum. being to marry. Xnty clearly has a preference for what is voluntary, for the voluntary renunciation of worldly things. Now, one could say, I am not that strong, I would in fact prefer to hold on to what is worldly, speaking like the man who said, [“]My dear brandy, if you do not abandon me, I will never abandon you.[”]―One could say that, holding on to what is worldly but confessing that this is a weakness. No, the worldly mind is never at peace until the opposite position has been made a duty; people say, The voluntary, voluntarily sacrificing something, is tempting God―nonsense, how could I be so ungodly as to tempt God. 22 αδιαϕορον] Greek, adiaphoron, a matter of moral indifference. (See also explanatory note.)

77

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 77–78

5

78

10

15

369

20

25

30

35

•

1851

In the Middle Ages, people did not know Greek. Now, people could simply have admitted this, and confessed that they did not want to expend the effort to learn it. But, no. The easygoing, worldly mind was only satisfied when it was established as a dogma that knowing Greek was heresy. (See Erasmus Rotterdams Leben by Adolph Müller, Hamburg, 1828, p. 115 top).

Hidden Inwardness This profoundly untruthful, hypocritical, and fantasy-laden confusion concerning hidden inwardness―this is what must be rejected. There is scarcely one person in each generation who is deep enough truly to possess―or unfortunate enough to be obliged to possess―hidden inwardness. But nothing is more dangerous than to turn people loose in this way and give up all oversight, permitting everyone to give assurances concerning what he possesses in hidden inwardness. And nothing is more contrary to Xnty― Xnty which wants precisely to have everything made manifest. No, wait! In my case it is to some extent true that I have been unlucky enough to have to go and conceal a hidden inwardness. For this very reason, because there was at any rate some truth in me―for this very reason I was the one who had the task of sorting things out in this matter. And now look. Precisely because there was at least some truth in me in connection with hidden inwardness―for this reason I have truly been the only one who has said: I do not have faith. This is indeed the rule: If there is truly to be hidden inwardness, then you damn well must not say that you conceal such an inwardness―no, you must express it negatively. You must not go around and straightforwardly give assurances that you conceal faith in hidden inwardness. No, if it is in hidden inwardness you must of course say [“]I do not have faith,[”] and put up with all the consequences. Oh, this hidden inwardness―how frightful that it has been made so easy for the average run of peop. to become fools who imagine things about themselves―or hypocrites.

373

374

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 79–81

•

1851

Christianity in Its Early Days―and Nowadays. As is well known, Tiberius was willing to include Xt among the gods. This was of course the most favorable treatment possible. The Xns could indeed have said: [“]We are so few, how in all the world are we supposed to be able to convert an entire world―no, let us live quietly with our religion, a tolerated religion―after all, Xt is included among the other gods.[”] And nowadays! Nowadays Xnty’s is such a lost cause that those who claim to be the only Xns are ecstatic if they are simply permitted to live their own lives, if their religion is tolerated or recognized like other religions―while the entire world is nonetheless permitted to call itself Xn―this very world that they themselves deny is Xn. Who recognizes, amid this whimpering, that frightful (in the sense of suffering), domineering, divinely domineering religion: Xnty[?]

79

5

10

15

370

The Holy Spirit. …. And with the lives such as we live―so insignificant, having been made so finite, so worldly―we lead each other to believe that we are praying to a Holy Spirit to help us, that it [the Holy Spirit] is what guides us. No, let us instead at least be honest and honor the Holy Spirit and say: We are afraid to ask for the help of the Holy Spirit; the matter could become too serious for us if the Holy Spirit were actually to come―and help us. Look, this is 50% more earnest than priestly rubbish.

Pentecost Sunday. Paulli preached. He preached about joy in the Holy Spirit. Then he showed how the apostolic Church was the great prototype, that we must look back to “the first Church, when the apostles were the preachers.” What is that? Gibberish. He himself is evidently snared in an illusion and he ensnares the congregation. Indeed, it has the appearance of being something

80

20

25

81

30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 81–82

•

1851

15

we truly wished for: to have the apostles as preachers once again. Oh, madness. No, this is how we must speak: Beware, beware of wishing for that glory again, when the apostles were preachers― you, with your lives that have been made worldly, you are better served by fat preachers with clerical livings, who are Knights of the Dannebrog. Pray to God that he will hold his hand over you lest you have apostles again, for then the game would be up. Then he continued: “The believers were united in harmony … and there were no poor among them, everything was held in common.” How moving, or, rather, what revolting nonsense! If it is so splendid that there are no poor―owing to the fact that everything is held in common―then surely it is within our power to arrange that. But I wonder whether His Reverence is rlly well served by that, or wishes for it, or dreams of what he says―or I wonder whether the congregation does!

82

Priestly Mistake.

5

10

20

25

30

35

In the otherwise excellent sermon by Mynster [“]On Purity of Spirit and Morals[”] (1 Thes) he follows the apostle, speaking first against lust and then against dishonesty. Then, when the transition is to be made from the first section to the second, there comes a passage in which Mynster ingeniously demonstrates that there is a “close connection between the apostle’s first admonition and the second.” Look, here the apostle has been diminished. The apostle is sheer activity. So he takes a scrap of paper and in the greatest haste jots down a number of admonitions for the congregation― the only important thing is that they be heeded. But then Mynster makes the apostle into an author, a profound author―there is a [“]close connection[”]: Well, no thanks. I wonder what Paul would say to this―I think he would say: “Ah, spare me your profundity upon profundity―just get people to heed the admonitions, and then it will truly be a matter of no consequence whether or not there is a connection between the various admonitions in my epistle.”

375

376

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 83–84

•

1851

Erasmus of Rotterd. says somewhere in Εγϰωμιον μωριας “The princes leave piety to the common man; the common man leaves it to the clergy; the worldly (seculares) clergy leave it to the clergy in ecclesiastical orders; these shove it over onto the monks; the more lenient of these shove it over onto the more rigorous; the more rigorous shove it over onto the mendicant monks, and these shove it over onto the Carthusians, among whom alone true piety is to be sought, and in such a way that it is not easy to find any of it.” see Erasmus Leben by Adolf Müller, Hamburg 1828, p. 235.

Socrates’ Way of Life. It is said of him that he never left Athens (that is, after he started philosophizing ethically), and he himself says somewhere in the introduction to one of Plato’s dialogues that one does not learn anything from trees, but from peop. in the city. Now, I will not ask: But did he in fact learn anything from peop.? But I am thinking about something else. That is, he constantly walked about in the throng of peop. Now, this could express his strength: that he could hold on to his thoughts in the midst of the throng. But it could also be an expression of his weakness, his limitation: that in one sense he needed p eop. The fact of the matter is that Socrates is a skeptic, but a skeptic who is ethically in character. But still, he is a skeptic. His life is a hypothetical experiment, and what is heroic in this is holding out to the end, becoming a martyr for it―but, once again, in character, without pathos and the like, so that one gets the impression: It could after all be an interesting business to be condemned to death. He is a skeptic. His reflection has indeed reached the point at which it stops. Now, if Socrates had lived as an ascetic in rural isolation, there is a question as to whether he would have held out. Precisely because he is stopped at the infinite negative―he must be in the throng, he needs peop., ever more new peop., as the fisherman needs fish, in order to experiment with them.

2 Εγϰωμιον μωριας] Greek (book title), In Praise of Folly. 4 seculares] Latin, the secular, i.e., non-monastic clergy.

83

5

10

84

15

372

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 84–86

•

1851

It is quite true that this fills his life, but one could also ask whether he himself did not need it in order to fill his life.

85 5

10

86 15

373

20

25

30

35

Ignorance―Faith. Socrates believed that he had a divine mission to show that everyone was ignorant―quite rightly, for of course at that time Divinity had not yet let itself be heard from. But after the revelation had been imparted to hum. beings, what matters―ad modum the Socratic principle: Do you know something or do you not know something―is: Do you believe or do you not believe.

Lessing (Wolfembüttel fragment) Conception of Xt. The basis of this view is clearly a psychological remark. What Lessing cannot get into his head is that a hum. being could begin by being religious―rather, by being in fact, first of all, originally, religious―but that this is a later stage. That this is how it goes: a hum. being seeks what is earthly, wants to be a king―this fails; then he reinterprets his entire life and pretends that his original intention was to want to suffer, so at any rate he has that gain. If we omit Xt, there is naturally a certain truth in this position of Lessing’s. First of all, there is the truth that in one sense the religious cannot be what is primary in hum. being, for the religious is a dying-away―thus there must of course be something to die away from. Secondly, it is also certainly true that it often happens in life that a failed striving for something worldly will subsequently reformulate itself and be an original religious striving. At the same time, there are in fact also purely hum. lives in which the religious is actlly the primary position. They are sufferers such as those whose special suffering, right from the very beginning, has situated them outside the universal, who have been denied the enjoyment of life, and who therefore must either become purely demonic (in the evil sense) or become essentially religious existences. 9 ad modum] Latin, in the manner of.

377

378

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 87–88

•

1851

“You will be placed before kings and princes, but have no fear about what you are to say; it will be given to you at that time.” Now, this is explained on the basis of the assistance by the [Holy] Spirit, and quite rightly. But of course the matter also has a purely hum. explanation. The fact is that our speech contains an element that is somewhat artificial and untrue; we have our lives in completely different categories, and we sit there tormenting ourselves to find the right expression and are embarrassed in the presence of kings. But imagine a hum. being who has made up his mind and understood this: [“]My life is sacrificed, I can expect nothing, nothing but suffering.[”] Ah, this makes him so earnest that he is not easily at a loss concerning what he is to say, although perhaps this―which does not in fact concern him, and this is precisely the secret of it―does not become eloquent or the least bit oratorical. He is too earnest to have the least bit of concern for the world: Nor, if someone has this truth within him, is one easily at a loss for what one is to say. The difficulty is simply caused by the fact that we love ourselves and the world; the person who hates himself and the world quickly makes up his mind about what he wants to say.

87

The New Proverb.

88

“‘I really do believe that lying is a science,’ said the devil; he had attended lectures at Kiel.” That amused Bishop Mynster so much when I spoke with him yesterday. I was on the point of saying that lying is a science, and truth is a paradox―which of course I have always said―I was on the point of saying it but did not, because then Mynster will scarcely put that proverb into circulation, which is something I very much want.

5

10

15

374

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 89 89

•

1851

379

Fear and Trembling Abraham.

5

10

15

20

375

25

30

35

40

…. And he split the firewood; and he bound Isaac; and he lit the fire; and he drew the knife―and he thrust it into Isaac! At that very instant Jehovah stands in corporeal form at Abraham’s side and says: Indeed, what have you done―oh, poor old man! And this was absolutely not at all what had been required. You were of course my friend―I only wanted to test your faith! And indeed I shouted to you at the last instant, indeed, I shouted: Abraham, Abraham, stop! Then Abraham replied in a voice that was partly thea faintness of adoration, partly theb faintness of madness: [“]O Lord, I did not hear it. Although now that you say it, it does in fact seem to me that I heard such a voice. And when it is you, my God, who commands, and it is you who commands a father to murder his own child: then at such a moment a person is under some strain. Therefore I did not hear the voice. And if I had heard it, how could I have dared believe it was yours? When you command me to sacrifice my child―and then, at the decisive moment, a voice is heard that says ‘Stop,’ I would of course have to believe that it is the voice of the Tempter, who wants to deter me from fulfilling your will. One thing or the other: Either I would have had to assume that the voice that told me to sacrifice Isaac was that of the Tempter, and in that case I would not have set forth―but inasmuch as I was certain that it was your voice, then I of course had to conclude that the other voice was that of the Tempter.” Then Abraham went home. And the Lord gave him a new Isaac. But Abraham did not look upon him with joy. When he looked upon him, he shook his head and said, [“]This is not that Isaac.[”] But to Sarah he said: [“]It was truly strange! It is certain, eternally certain, that it was God’s requirement that I sacrifice Isaac― God himself cannot deny it―and when I actually did it, it was an error on my part, it was not God’s will!” But that was not how it was with the father of faith, Abraham! Obedience consists precisely in this, in immediate and unconditional obedience at the very last instant. Ah, when a person has come so far as to say A, then, humanly speaking, a person is most prone to say B and act. What is even more difficult than journeying out to Moriah in order to sacrifice Isaac is, when one has already drawn the knife, to be able willingly to understand in

a

broken confused

b

1

380

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 89–90

•

1851

unconditional obedience: It is not required. With respect to decisions such as that of sacrificing one’s own child and sparing it, in preserving right up to the last instant, preserving the same obedient―if I dare say so, adroit―willingness, like that of a servant who, having already almost reached the goal, is to run back again and thus has run in vain: Oh, that is great: “But no one was as great as Abraham―who can comprehend him[?]”

1

[a]

see p. 92 et al. in this journal

On Myself. The matter is quite simple. I can truthfully say of myself that when it comes to abilities, intellectual gifts, I have been entrusted with what is extraordinary. But now the next thing: the extraordinary in the sense of character, of being able to live in poverty, etc.―look, that is something I do not have. I have always acknowledged that I have had an advantage: a fortune. This changes everything. Now, very possibly my imagination depicts the difficulties and dangers as altogether too enormous, but in any case I do not feel that I have the strength―and furthermore, I am afraid that even if I were capable of living in poverty, completely in character, I would perhaps become proud, arrogant. And furthermore, there is within me a sympathy for what is purely human that makes me reluctant to venture out so far, even if I were capable of doing so. Indeed, even in relation to “her,” it would almost cause me pain―it seems to me that (if I were capable of venturing out so far) I would become utterly foreign to her. So I surely ought to remain within my boundaries and take care to look after myself a bit in finite respects. Infinite love, which continues, always lovingly, to put up with me. Ah, while I sleep, you are awake; and when I am awake and err, you make the error itself into something even better than the right thing would have been―and I, I can only marvel over you, infinite love!

5

90

15

20

376

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 91 91

5

10

15

20

377

30

35

40

•

1851

The Apostle, the Disciple―Christendom. For 1,500 years, at the very least, people have put it like this: “The apostle, the disciple, that is the extraordinary; God preserve me from being so immodest to require or desire such status―no, I am modestly and humbly satisfied with something lesser.” Oh, the profound cunning of the hum. race, which has used this to get Xnty turned in the entirely wrong direction. The fact is that people would damned well rather be free of the glory of having to die away in accordance with the criterion of the disciple―and in addition people then want to have the extra reward that being free of all these sufferings and torments is modesty and humility, God preserve us. Yes, God preserve us, what rogues we hum. beings are!―to get the ethical norm and the definition of the relationship to that norm transformed into the aesthetically extraordinary and the relationship to that. It is now time, as the watchman says, for the matter to be reversed entirely, for this to be insisted upon: the requirement is that each and every one of us should be the apostle or “the disciple.” This is a different interpretation. Furthermore, we are to be judged in accordance with this criterion. Everyone who does not become a martyr has in one way or another exempted himself from it by means of a roguish trick and is guilty before God for having done so. Look, this changes the matter. All this fuss about being too modest and humble to desire such a thing―we can spare ourselves this―and then at least we can see to it that we are honest enough to admit how things are with us. From an ethical point of view it is in fact the case that, in ethics, there is no extraordinary; viewed ethically, the extraordinary is the norm, is what all of us must do; it is the requirement that each person must come to terms with, assisted by making admissions. But we have displaced the spheres. We have transposed the ethical into the aesthetic; the apostle has become the aesthetically extraordinary person―and we have built churches for them, made every manner of fuss about them. Sure, thanks, but no thanks: we prefer to be freed from imitation. From the ethical point of view, the extraordinary is the norm. “The disciple” is the criterion, the requirement. We are judged in accordance with this, and at all costs we should be on guard against increasing our guilt with the hypocrisy that it is out of modesty and humility that we do not become disciples. Fright-

381

382

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 91–93

•

1851

ful! Imagine that one day it will perhaps become the custom to make being an honest man into the extraordinary and that then a thief would say: I am not so immodest to require to be extraordinary―I would prefer (rather than being an honest man, who has to renounce an impermissible advantage) to retain the impermissible advantage and then in addition be honored and respected as modest and humble. This is how we have behaved in relation to what from a Christian point of view is ethically normative: the disciple. There is continual retreat. First we abolished the God-Man as “Exemplar”: it was too lofty. But we did retain the apostle, the disciple: he became the extraordinary, which we smuggled away. But we did retain the witness to the truth. Then we also abolished him, scaling things down more and more, and finally, the exemplar is a businessman. From this we see that the fundamental error of Xndom rlly is the selling of indulgences. We abolish imitation and sell Xnty off at various prices. This is the history of the Church, or rather the history of Xndom. Indulgences were being sold long before they reached the high point against which Luther protested. And right away, when Luther was scarcely dead―indeed, even while he was still alive―indulgence was being practiced using him.

The Witness to the Truth Is Put to Death. That this can happen is in a certain sense also because he is so great that he has absolutely no need of peop. If he did, he would have given an explanation that would have helped him―peop. would have had sympathy for him and with him.

5

10

15

20

378

92 25

30

The Truth Is a Power,

93

though this is rarely seen, for as long as it is truth, it suffers and must be the weaker in any encounter. Then, when it has won, everyone supports it. Why? Because it is the truth? No, for in that case they would also have supported it when it was suffering.

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 93–95

•

1851

They support it because the others do; thus they do not support it because it is a power in and of itself, but because it is a power owing to its support by the others.

94

10

15

20

379

95

25

30

35

The Unhappy Misfit. Then, when he finally dies, God receives him in eternity, and caresses him, and says, [“]Poor child, that you had to suffer like that throughout your whole life. Ah, I would so much have preferred to have done well by you, but in fact it was a part of the infinite plan of the world that you and so many others have had to suffer like this. Ah, but I have suffered with you―truly, every one of your undeserved sufferings has moved me deeply, even though I have been unable to change them.” This is how God talks, because God in Heaven―indeed, how shall I say it!―God in Heaven, he is the most loving pers. And just imagine a loving hum. being who in the service of a great plan has had to let another hum. being suffer; ah, how he suffers along with him, how he remembers this exactly, until the moment when he can say to him: It could not have been otherwise, but oh, I have perhaps suffered more because of this than you.

Why Are the Ideals Presented So Infrequently? Quite simply, this is because of human egotism. If someone were to present them, he would at the very least want to profit from doing so by being himself the ideal, by being admired as such, etc. Now, for one thing, this would be a mediocre presentation of the ideal (and is fanaticism), and for another, such an aspiration is rather foreign to our sensible times. Thus, the ideals should be presented by someone who does not himself claim to exemplify them. But the shrewd understanding says: [“]Indeed, I am not so crazy as to let on that I know how great the requirements are (something most of my contemporaries surely do not know)―that would of course deprive my life of all profit from my efforts. So I am not crazy and will not let on that I know how great the requirements are―inasmuch as I myself cannot live up to them: that would of course merely

383

384

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 95–97

•

1851

lead to my own humiliation. And furthermore, as soon as I came forward with such a presentation, perhaps ‘the others’ would get the idea of forcing me to live up to it, badgering me about it. No thank you: I am not crazy, neither do I hate myself. I want to profit from the fact that I am capable of a bit more than most of the others. Therefore I will let the criterion be the old one, and I will not come forward with all this business about the ideal.” Look, this is why the ideals are not presented.

Our Times and the Time of the Reformation or the Time before the Reformation.

People say that these two periods resemble each other very much. Well, thanks anyway. No, the evil in our times is precisely the rash, profane conceit that we are capable of reforming the Church; the evil in our times is precisely that of wanting to take the concept of “reformation” in vain. You see, I base my calculations on this: I defend the established order insofar as I understand it as my proper task to carry on a polemic against the reformers of our times, all of whom are deceivers or are confused. In other respects, I see very clearly the shortcomings of the established order. But my idea: that the true task of our times is not to want to begin reforming but to take stock of where we are.

5

96

15

20

380 25

Christianity Is Precisely Not the Objective―It Is the Exact Opposite: It Is Precisely the Subjective. This can also be seen in how Xnty must be served. Wherever there is something objective (a country’s government, for example, a doctrine, an enterprise, and so forth), this objective can very well be well served by a person who, in exchange for one or another benefit (be it money, or rank, or status, and so forth) will also serve that objective. There is absolutely no self-contradiction in this. Otherwise with Xnty, which is sheer reduplication. If, for example, someone demands to be made a baron―but thereafter is

97

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 97–99

5

98 10

•

1851

also willing to do everything for Xnty―this is precisely something by which Xnty cannot be well served; indeed, Xnty must regard all his activity as working against Xnty. As spirit, Xnty is sheer transparency, infinite inspection; but we hum. beings prefer to deal with something objective, for objectivity is opaque, and all sorts of nonsense and madness can go on behind its back.

Deceit. Someone gives assurances that he presents Xnty in such a lenient form in order to spare other people―but is he in fact more severe with himself? No! Aha! Look, here, once again, is what is dubious: He spares himself―and then he also wants to profit, to be loved and treasured by peop. because he is so loving.

15

99

20

381 25

30

35

Governing. This is what is rlly at issue, and in one sense my claim is that the problem is precisely that there is no governing. I had believed, after all, that Mynster was a man of government. But the last 3 years have truly taught me that he is an enormous coward who seeks public approval more than any journalist. And then, my situation! It is not good to govern in these times. Those whose duty it was to govern become fearful, and owing to their fear of peop., they sit there garnering approval. And then along comes a private individual who, if he is to level an attack, must direct it at the fact that they do not govern. Fine situation! After all, when a person has an official position and a lifelong appointment, one at least always has some support when one opposes something. But a private individual: that such a person is willing to expose himself to the odium of putting forth the position that there must be governing―and that those who govern then gain the upper hand against him by hoping for the approval of the public in saying, as it were, “Here you can see how lovable we, the government are―we do not govern at all.” The wretchedness of our times is a lack of character, from top to bottom.

385

386

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 99–100

•

1851

And my tasks are always so singular that ordinary people, even if their lives depended on it, could not figure out what I am fighting for. To a certain extent, Mynster understands this. [“]It is too lofty[”] is what he has so often said to me. But truly, he is not too lofty to make use of it in his shabby way. How different things would be if Mynster himself were loftier, for then he would not betray what is lofty, which indeed becomes “too lofty” precisely because his life has become so utterly worldly. The whole of his wisdom is like that of the journalist and the politician and Goldschmidt, etc.: One must howl with the dogs among whom one finds oneself, the majority is the deciding factor―except that Mynster is marked by the peculiarity of having, throughout an entire generation, wept movingly in a quiet hour on Sundays when he presents Xnty.

Historical View. “Imitation” “Imitation” (suffering for the teaching and for what is related to it) is what must be brought forth once again; this is how the task is related dialectically to the point at which Luther eased up. And why is “imitation” to be brought forth? Is it perhaps in order to place a burden on consciences, or perhaps in the sense of an ascetic self-torment―in which case, we will have learned nothing from what has gone before? No, imitation is to be brought forth in order, if possible, to bring a bit of discipline to Xndom; and, if possible, to restore once again a bit of meaning to Xnty; and with the assistance of the ideals, to humble us and teach us to seek refuge in grace; and to stop the mouth of doubt. People have entirely displaced the point of view for Xnty. In the N.T., the matter is utterly simple. Christ says, [“]Do what I say―and you will learn.[”] Thus, first of all, a decisive action. Aided by that, your life will then collide with the whole of existence, and you will get something other than doubt to think about; and you will have need of Xnty in both senses, both as an exemplar and as grace. Nowadays people give the matter a different turn. Xnty is an objective doctrine―it must justify itself to me before I get

5

10

15

100

20

25

382 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 100–101

5

10

15

20

101 25

383

•

1851

involved with it. Good night to all Xnty. Now doubt has conquered. This doubt, then, can never be halted with reasons, which simply feed the doubt. No, but doubt can be halted by “imitation.” That is: Turn around, my friend, you are not to be objective, but subjective―if you dare doubt, does your life then express imitation in the least way? You see, this is a different kind of talk. We have utterly abolished imitation and at the most we cling to the mediocrity called civic righteousness. Therefore peop. cannot become humbled in such a way that they truly feel a need for “grace,” for of course the requirement is no more than “civic righteousness,” and they fulfill it, more or less. And next, when imitation is not required, there is ample opportunity for becoming objective and transforming both Xnty and Xt into their exact opposites: Xt thus becomes the sort of teacher who is to be judged by the public and who must therefore make sure to justify himself and his teachings. Things were otherwise with Luther’s relation to his times. At that time, “imitation” was in full swing and was misguided. Nowadays, on the other hand, imitation has been completely abolished. It must therefore once again be brought forth, dialectically, having learned well from all the old errors.

The Unconditioned―“Reasons” The unconditioned cannot be helped by means of reasons―for that for which reasons are given is eo ipso not the unconditioned. It is not a matter of there being, if you will, no reasons―no, but it is that, at all costs, the one who proclaims dares not give reasons: he must say, That is to betray the unconditioned. Reasons―the fact that there are reasons―is not a plus in relation to the unconditioned. No, no, it is a minus; it subtracts from it; it makes the unconditioned into the conditioned.

387

388

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 102–103

•

1851

On Myself. Now they are being printed. Oh, I feel so inexplicably, unspeakably happy and relieved and confident and overwhelmed. Infinite love! I have suffered much during these days, terribly much. Ah, but still it comes back―an understanding of my task once again confronts me, but in an intensified form. And even if I have got it wrong seventeen times, in its grace, an infinite love has nonetheless made everything turn out for the best. Infinite love! Ah, but it is blessed to give thanks, but perhaps never does one feel one’s wretchedness and sin more profoundly than when one is overwhelmed like this. As Peter said, [“]Depart from me, for I am a sinful man[”]―precisely on the occasion of the great draft of fishes.

Xnty My most profound doubt, which has now been removed. Oh, when I have heard these millions upon millions speak of the leniency of Xnty: to me it was inconceivable. This is how it has been with me. Deep down (however much I have in fact been humbled before my Lord and Savior) I have believed that I would have come out of it better if only I had to deal solely with God the Father―that it was precisely “the Mediator” who makes the situation so difficult. For if I have only to deal with God the Father, then no “imitation” is required. And so the situation was like this: If I, a sufferer and as wretched as the most wretched, turn to Xt―and he helps me: What then? Then he says: But then you must imitate me, die away, suffer for the teaching, be hated by all peop.―in short, agony on a scale such as has never been suffered by any hum. being other than a Xn. But good Lord, to be helped in that way! Now I understand that imitation is not in fact to be brought to bear in that way, that it is there to keep order, to teach humility and the need for grace, to put a stop to doubt. Then there is reassurance and blessedness―and then it would not be impossible that a hum. being could be so moved at all this love and feel himself so blessed that for him dying away would become love’s joy. If that moment does not come for a hum. being: well, then there is grace, and as Luther says so excellently, “imitation” must

102

5

10

103

20

25

30

384

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 103–105

•

1851

hurl him neither into despair nor into presumptuousness. If the moment does come, then despite all its pain, imitation is a matter of love, and thus is indeed blessed.

104

10

15

20

105

30

385 35

Mynster has never had the notion that there is an unconditioned. For him, everything is the conditioned. His proclamation of Xnty therefore consists essentially of “reasons.” Furthermore, when Xnty had the support of the government (the State Church), he ruled with the help of physical force― perhaps I let myself be duped into believing that he really was someone who governed. Now this arrangement has been shattered―and (as in his latest book) Mynster is trying to become a democrat and is embracing the journalists who give lip service to the public, and now even Goldschmidt. In ’48 Mynster should have done one of two things: Either have resigned from his position and said, [“]That which I have represented is overthrown,[”] or have continued to stand there, but have fought and suffered for the unconditioned. He chooses a third alternative: Taking care to keep on good terms, if possible, with those who now possess power: the public and the like.

“Imitation.” There is after all more significance in Catholicism, precisely because it has not entirely let go of imitation. “Imitation” (properly understood―that is, not to the point of self-torment, of hypocrisy and works-righteousness, etc.) rlly provides the guarantee that Xnty does not become poetry, mythology, an abstract idea―which is almost what it has become in Protestantism. “Imitation” situates “the single individual,” each individual, in relation to the ideal. You see, this sets a stopper for Xnty being mythology or poetry.

389

390

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 105

•

1851

But (by getting rid of imitation and by means of hidden inwardness) Protestantism has more or less reached the point at which Xt is no longer the ideal, the Exemplar (to which every individual must relate himself, honestly admitting how things are with him), but an idea. And individuals in the race, single individuals, are specimens, mere specimens; each of them makes merry in his own way―there can be no notion of getting involved with the ideal. There is no ideal at all, there is an idea: Xt―and the hum. race. Hurrah for me and you, I say. Indeed, the matter is distorted in an even crazier fashion. When Xt is the exemplar, when every individual is to strive―it is suffering to have to strive in this way. This is of course why it is necessary that it be commanded―[“]You shall[”]―otherwise it will never happen. Nowadays people have reversed the relation: wanting to strive toward the ideal is arrogance, shameless pride―that is how we talk (that is how Prof. Heiberg, for example, talks in the preface to Clara Raphael). You see, here once again we have hypocrisy: not only do people exempt themselves from the strain―no, people make strain into pride, so that being exempted from it is praiseworthy humility. So, if someone were to venture forth in striving toward the ideal―what would happen[?] There is no mention of “You shall,” which is the very thing that was supposed to help him when the sufferings begin: “You shall”―there is no nonsense about it―you shall and every pers. shall. Instead, people now say, [“]Disgusting pride, but the sufferings are thus well-deserved: punishment for pride.[”] God and Xnty are very precise in their reckoning: Every single hum. being shall relate himself to the ideal, regardless of how far from it he is. This is so that Xnty can keep an eye on these millions of people. The Protestant consciousness, which is free and lavish with hum. beings, calculating in very large, round numbers, exempts all of us from striving toward the ideal, and makes the human race that which relates itself―well, not exactly to the ideal, for that is something the “race” cannot do (one cannot relate oneself to “the ideal” en masse)―thus making the ideal into an idea, an abstract idea. And how far is it from this to Xnty becoming mythology, to talk about Xnty becoming poetic effusions and moods? Oh, Luther, Luther: alas, this is why the Reformation came off so easily because “worldliness” understood that this was something for us! Oh, you honest man, why did you not suspect how

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 105–106

5

386

10

15

20

106

25

30

35

•

1851

crafty we hum. beings are! Why did you not have eyes in the back of your head so that you could have prevented what happened behind your back! You see, this is why things were so easy for Luther, because “worldliness” early saw in this an easy way to be quit of the strain of Xnty. And this is why it will now be so difficult to get this situation righted again (without, however, losing hold of the truth in Luther’s position): because “worldliness” understands only all too well that what is at stake here is making the matter more rigorous once again. If “imitation” is not brought to bear minimally and in the mildest dialectical fashion for the sake of order and putting things right―that Xnty concerns itself with the single individual, every individual, who must relate himself to the ideal, even if it were only to confess humbly how infinitely far behind he is― then “the race” is imperious and Xnty is mythology, poetry; then the preaching of Xnty is theatrical, because the guarantor of the distinction between the theater and the church is “imitation,” its earnestness, the sobriety that inheres in the fact that hum. beings are made into single individuals, in order that every individual relate, and shall relate, himself to the ideal.

The Lenient Preaching of Xnty has rlly betrayed Xnty, and it is certainly out of fear of hum. beings that it has become so lenient. Now, this surely counts on the matter becoming very difficult for the opposing party, for it must of course make Xnty rigorous―and one cannot get peop. to embrace that. Perhaps, however, this wretched, cowardly shrewdness miscalculates. For in times when superstition prompted peop. to want to be Xns, if only for safety’s sake, made them fearful of not being Xns, it was natural that they sought it as cheaply as possible. But nowadays the times are less inhibited and to some extent possess the courage of freethinking―and it could well be that one might indeed get them to be willing to listen to a truthful presentation of Xnty in its true rigor. That is one of the good features of our times: they take a dim view of things that have been tarted up.

391

392

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 107–108

•

1851 Faith―“Reasons.”

As the principle must read: [“]Faith cannot be comprehended; at the most, it can be comprehended that it cannot be comprehended,[”] so also: [“]Reasons cannot be given for something unconditioned; at the most, reasons can be given for the fact that reasons cannot be given.[”]

107

5

387

Fear and Trembling. … Abraham sacrificed the ram and went home with Isaac, whom he spared. [“]But,[”] said A. to himself, [“]through these events I have indeed been made forever heterogeneous to being human. Despite the fact that I was a hum. being, had it pleased you, O Lord, to have changed me into the form of a horse, I would not be more heterogeneous to being human than I have become through this event. The difference of not sharing the same form is not as great as the difference of not sharing the same concepts, but rather, at the most decisive point, to have concepts that are infinitely opposed.―I cannot talk with Sarah; she would have to regard this journey to Moriah as the most terrible crime against her, against her beloved child, against you, O Lord. Then the time will surely come when her wrath has abated and she will forgive me. And then I must thank her for her loving forgiveness. The same with Isaac; there will come a time when he will recall this story―and then he will hate me until the moment comes when he will forgive me, for which I must thank him. O Lord, the sufferings of my heart when I conquered myself in order to sacrifice Isaac―these are recompensed by the fact that people lovingly forgive me for this crime, and I humbly give thanks for this loving forgiveness. And even if―which, however, I would not do in order to avoid defiling my relationship to you by initiating others into it―even if I were to say to someone that this was your test: Oh, in having such

108 10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 108–109

5

10

•

1851

393

a relationship to you, O Lord, I have nonetheless been made heterogeneous to being human, more heterogeneous than if I had been changed into the form of a horse.” But not so with Abraham, the father of faith. Because to begin with thoughts like these is to approach the boundaries of faith, even if one believed that this was making use of reflection in order to remain within the boundaries of faith: Ah, reflections only help one to go beyond the boundary. But Abraham, the father of faith, he remained in the faith, far from the boundary, from the boundary at which faith disappears in reflection.

388 15

109

20

25

30

35

The Established Order―and Me. It is as far as possible from being the case that I am attacking the established order―I am in fact defending it against the party of movement, against the age’s evil lust for reform. But I do believe that Bishop M, for example, who of course is also defending the established order, does not defend if properly. Admissions must be made to Xnty; we must confess that we are rlly only approximations of being Xns―this is the consequence of bringing the ideals to bear, and if the ideals are not brought to bear, one cannot control the movement. But I am almost never understood, for I lack the finite and I lack the illusions. People simply cannot grasp that it could occur to a private individual to defend the established order―and people explain that those who hold official positions do so because it is their living and their career. That is how it is everywhere. It is all mediocrity, utterly devoid of ideality.

[a]

Mynster’s problem is rlly that deep down he thinks like this: Well, it will certainly hold for the few years I have to live.

1

394

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 110–111

•

1851 Proclaiming Xnty.

The law is: If the proclamation is to be true, then the proclamation must produce what it proclaims. For example: if what is proclaimed is that the Xn suffers in this world, then the one who proclaims it must also suffer. Otherwise, Xnty is transformed into mere doctrine, objective doctrine, and that is not what Xnty is. The order of precedence for the proclamation is inverse: the more the one who proclaims it comes to suffer, the more perfect is his proclamation; the more he has success and a brilliant career, the worse is his proclamation.

110

5

10

389 15

Mynster’s Guilt. The law is quite simply this: If, through preaching Xnty, a person cuts an increasingly brilliant career path in the world, year after year, and a person comes to possess all manner of worldly goods, etc.―then in one or another way there is something dubious in his preaching, perhaps, in fact, even with respect to the teaching (that he has omitted a portion of it or has not presented it correctly), and in any event with respect to imitation, in the fact that his life has not been an imitation of Xt. And what then? Is one permitted simply to condemn him and what he stands for? Yes, a witness to the truth, an apostle is permitted to do that―not me. I say: I, too, have spared myself, but one thing must be required: that the person in question then confess that this preaching of his is not Xnty in the strictest sense, which is something that I―I, who indeed have always ventured somewhat farther than Mynster and cannot exactly be said to have cut any brilliant career path―which is something I have expressed by saying: I am not a Xn; or I take refuge in grace, and mark well, in such a manner that I

111

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 111–112

5

10

15

indicated the greater requirement by which I let myself be judged. This is something Mynster has not done. Not only has he spared himself and shrewdly garnered all the advantages, but he has reversed the relation and has made this shrewdness, this brilliant career, into wisdom and earnestness and has made sacrifice and suffering into fantasies of the imagination. Look, this is impermissible[a]―that is something that I, too, am permitted to say. And Mynster has had occasion to take note―for my life is precisely what must make him take note. And I have not irritated him; on the contrary, I have bowed with profound reverence and have put up with just about everything.

390

112

20

25

30

35

The Ethical’s Order of Precedence. The ethical begins straightway with this requirement of every hum. being: You shall be perfect; if you are not, then it is immediately reckoned against you as guilt. This puts an end to all the nonsense to the effect that one so very much wants to and wants to. No, in relation to the ethical you can speak only in self-accusation. If you are not perfect, you must not dare babble about how very much you want to; rather, you must immediately make the humble confession: It is my own fault; if I am not perfect, it is my own fault. Viewed ethically, I myself am in fact the only one who stands in the way of my being perfect―I myself, who fail to will rightly. To say that I so very much want to but that there is something other that stands in the way is a libel against God and Governance; it is lèse-majesté against the ethical; it is perfidious hypocrisy.

•

1851

[a]

395

it is wanting to have it both ways, it is making the preaching of Xnty into the most refined delight instead of suffering.

1

396

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 113

•

1851

The Established Order―and Me. The defense of the established order by taking polemical aim at the numerical, the crowd, the public, the inorganic, the mass, the evil in society: this was my task. When government officials defend the established order, an ambiguity can easily arise here because it is their living and their career. Furthermore, they often defend it quite poorly, namely by enlisting the help of the numerical on their side, or in a slightly earlier day, through the use of physical force. On the other hand, I express the swordplay of ideality. As I said at the time to Christian VIII when he wanted to draw me closer to himself: If you succeeded in this, I would become essentially powerless, for the point is precisely that I am a private individual, a person who is a nobody, who relates himself ideally and most distinctly to the ideal―that is why I have been understood, at least in one sense. But because, as an extraordinary person, I have obligated myself to an established order, it does not follow that I am simply and without further ado in agreement with the established order, that is, with the factual, given officials and government men and their tactics. Because I have principally led an offensive against the numerical (that was where the decisive battle was to take place), I have not straightforwardly and without further ado allied myself with the actual representatives of the established order―that is, I have not identified myself unambiguously with them. On the contrary, there has even been a hint at the possibility of a disagreement with them, though nothing more than that. That is, I have had to operate in such a way that when I took up the established order’s cause and took to the field in opposition to the evil in the state, to the numerical principle, I also had to make clear indirectly the errors in the tactics employed by the established order. The representatives of that order were forced to lose their self-control and to judge me in a way that in their loss of self-control it became clear that

113

5

10

391 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 113

5

10

15

392

25

30

they had not rlly grasped the idea of “an established order,” but that fundamentally they were fighting in merely temporal and worldly fashion for their own advantage, for the established order. I have indeed succeeded in this, thus unmasking these representatives, right up to the latest one: Mynster per Goldschmidt. But to my way of thinking attention should not be directed at this squabble at all, for this is not where the decisive battle should take place. Only when the whole of my strategy is clear can there be talk of letting them pay off these debts a little, but mostly in connection with my private squabble with them. This is the strategy. Prof. Nielsen is now supposedly going to improve upon it. He has absolutely failed to grasp my principal idea: to defend an established ordera against the numerical. Then (in the belief that he understood me, that I was attacking the established order or at any rate its representatives) he thought it was strange of me, for example, that I did not launch a head-on attack against Martensen, etc. Thus he was supposed to be the earnest one, who did it in earnest. Yes, thanks, but no thanks―if he had been in charge he might have helped my cause as well as a general does when he leads his troops into battle a couple of hours too early or several miles further away; his help would have caused the battle to take place at a completely different point. Look, this is why I have continually told him that from my point of view I disapproved of his attack on Martensen.

6 per] Latin, by means of.

•

1851

397

a

(that is to say ideally, not with the help of a position as a high official or by police power, and thus to defend it ideally is in turn identical with being an agent of awakening).

1

5

[b]

Also, apart from all this, the whole of Nielsen’s behavior is nonetheless incorrect. He wants to shape himself in accordance with the paradigm I have marked out, but his form is utterly irregular. I represent inwardness, which is not an objective doctrine, nor do I undertake to influence other people directly. The consequence of this might have been for Nielsen to step forward and say: [“]This entire literary output has convinced me; it is neither more nor less than myself[”] (just as I say that the whole business is my own development), but instead Nielsen remained silent about it and said: [“]I am damn well going to teach Prof. Martensen a lesson[”]―this is externality.

10

15

20

25

398

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 114

•

1851

The Established Order―and Me. When the seas are running as high as they are now, it is impossible for the established order, especially one that has become as worldly as ours, simply to push ahead. Often enough I have said to Mynster something like the following (which he himself is also to some extent quite capable of seeing): that the danger is the numerical, that everything is disintegrating into parties and sects. Furthermore, what is dangerous is the coalition between political and religious movements. The danger is so great that in the end there is the risk that Xnty will be subject to balloting. So my suggestion was this: At all costs let us position Xnty out of range, so that the gunfire falls not on Xnty, but on us. So, step lively: Let us humble ourselves and admit that an established order of this sort is not Xnty in the stricter sense―thereafter we bring forth the ideal and can cope with the movement, and we have brought Xnty to a place of safety. Therefore, higher prices. A shabby sovereign can be served by reducing prices in the face of danger. The absolute sovereign, Xnty, can only be served by raising prices in the face of danger. But the whole of Mynster’s wisdom consists of maintaining appearances, and therefore he believes that taking a step of this sort is the maddest thing to do, especially at this moment, and that now more than ever what matters is maintaining appearances. Mynster has no more faith in the power of truth than do my boots; in self-satisfied fashion he believes in his own shrewdness―and, after that, in appearances. I have also repeatedly said this to him, and these were my first words to Paulli (at the time he told me what Mynster had said about Practice in Christianity), and I have said this to Martensen, not to mention to Nielsen: In two years the established order will thank me for the book. And that will indeed happen. That is, not that people will thank me―no, people will surely forget it, but the book will nonetheless be what turned the established order in the right direction. On the other hand, it will of course be forgotten that it was I who had to do it at my own risk, that I had to put up with the fact that these officials―who are all decked out in their high positions and who are paid dear sums for making a mess of Xnty―that they became angry and said that I was the one who caused the problem and railed against me in the strongest terms. Look, this is always my lot, and Mynster has always been honest enough about looking after his own interests.

114

5

10

15

20

393

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 114–115

•

1851

I have never wanted to make a fuss in this connection because I believed that it was a part of self-denial not to insist upon one’s rights and because I had so much piety toward Mynster.

115

10

15

394 20

25

30

35

Christ Did Not Come to Abolish the Law―Imitation―We Human Beings.

No, truly Xt did not come in order to abolish the Law―he himself is of course the fulfillment of the Law, and thus he presented himself as the Exemplar. This, the fact that there is an Exemplar who is the fulfillment of the Law and whom we ought to imitate: this is a major qualitative intensification. Even 1,718 lawgivers who wrote laws all day long could not exhaust all of the Law as does a life that at every instant is the fulfillment of the Law―and that we are then supposed to imitate this! But “imitation” is what we hum. beings must do our best to get rid of in every way. In the interest of hum. beings, Xnty must get rid of “imitation”―it may well be that there are very few who embrace it. Hum. beings have only been willing to embrace “imitation” on one condition―that it was then made into something meritorious. Otherwise, if Xnty is to be pleasing to hum. beings, imitation must go. So people attribute great importance to what is objective―the sacrament and the like―but, please note, in an entirely different sense from how this is done in the gospels and from what Xt himself did. Imitation! I do not believe that this is to be understood as forms of imitation such as fasting, whipping oneself, and the like. No, “imitation” is following the Exemplar in willing to witness for the truth and against untruth, but without seeking any assistance whatever from any physical force, thus neither allying oneself with any existing power nor forming one’s own party―but if one adheres to this, one is eo ipso sacrificed. What wonder, then, that we hum. beings cannot involve ourselves with this imitation. Nonetheless, imitation must be brought forth once again, at least dialectically, in order to teach the need for grace; what must be brought forth is that imitation is required of every person― then let him seek refuge in grace.

399

400

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 116–118

•

1851

Mynster’s―Mine. In the main, however, M. must after all agree with me that the entire established order is not Xnty in the strict sense. Thus, as far as it concerns himself, he may perhaps have made this confession to God, but he believes that this sort of thing must be kept quiet at all costs in order to get hum. beings to accept Xnty.―This is shrewdness and is extremely dubious; especially when it is continued generation after generation, it becomes utterly corrupting. And I wonder whether Mynster himself has also forgotten something of what he had understood earlier, and that in later times, counting on the fruits of his shrewdness, he got a number of people to accept Xnty, believing that this is rlly Xnty, after all, and that the more rigorous Xnty is an exaggeration. My suggestion is: Let us instead be honest and admit that this whole business is not Xnty in the strict sense. This is at least being truthful and is the precondition for going further.

Priest―The Congregations. If it really were so that a person could purchase eternal salvation at the bargain price at which the priests generally offer it, then anyone who did not accept it would have to be mad. But the fact is that, deep down, every pers. in Christendom has a far more earnest notion of Xnty and has enough sense to understand that people are not very well served by the priests’ willingness to sell it off. Hum. beings are afraid that Xnty will get its hands on them and that they would then be unable to break free of it.

“Imitation.” The two principal approaches people have used to get rid of imitation, indeed, even the idea of imitation, are a/ People focus their entire attention on something objective, e.g., the doctrine or the sacraments, and then in lofty tones they

116

5

10

15

395

117

20

25

118 30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 118–119

5

10

15

20

396

119

25

30

•

1851

speak disdainfully about the subjective―well, thanks, but no thanks, scoundrels that we are! b/ People focus their entire attention on the race, on the congregation, on the Church―in short, on something collective―so that the category of “the single individual” disappears. Christ relates to this collectivity, but does not relate in that way to “the single individual,” which disappears. And with the disappearance of “the individual,” “imitation” also disappears, because imitation relates categorically to the single individual―and then in lofty tones people say disdainfully that wanting to be the single individual is either foolishness or something sickly and vain― scoundrels that we are. What was it that the greatest thinker of the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas, used to defend “indulgence”? It was with the help of the doctrine of the Church as a mystical body in which we all come to participate in the Church’s Fideicomiss as if it were a party game. On the whole, every conception of Xnty that does not employ “imitation” at least dialectically―namely, in order to ingrain the need for grace, in order to prevent Xnty becoming mythology, and in order to maintain order ethically: every such conception is “indulgence.”

The Single Individual―Conscience. One could say that “conscience” is one of life’s greatest inconveniences. Therefore let us form a group―for with a group it is good-bye to conscience: when it comes to conscience, one cannot be 2 or 3, or Møller Brothers and Company. And let us safeguard all this convenience of having abolished conscience by saying that wanting to be a single individual is egotism, sickly vanity, etc. If you have a conscience―then life is pretty much barred for you, for the law of the world is: consciencelessness, happy-golucky, hanc veniam damus, petimusque vicissim.

15 Fideicomiss] Latin, properly “fideicommis,” entrusted property. (See also explanatory note.) 32 hanc veniam . . . vicissim] Latin, I both insist upon this freedom for myself and gladly grant it to others. (See also explanatory note.)

401

402

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 120–121

•

1851

Indulgence―Popularity

1

5

10

15

20

25

[a]

At that time many innkeepers certainly had reservations about the Lutheran position, whether it could actually be true that a person “really” obtained eternal salvation at so low a price, namely gratis. For the notion of being obliged to pay with “spirit,” through spiritual struggle, is something that can never become popular. Assume, for example, the pope’s fee had been 10,000 rix-dollars―10,000 rix-dollars! That was expensive. And yet, for something to be gratis in Luther’s sense is infinitely more expensive, because it becomes spirit and spiritual struggle. On the other hand, for the person who has no notion of spirit, the bill is 10,000 rix-dollars―and gratis, absolutely gratis. True, Luther did away with it costing money―but he was in earnest about it becoming spirit, which is far and away more expensive.

Xnty has rlly never been more popular than when the pope straightforwardly said: [“]If you want to be saved it costs 4 marks and 8 shillings, plus a gratuity for the priest. If you want to be completely saved, then 5 marks. But that you will be saved is absolutely certain―you will get a receipt.[”] Fundamentally, this is and continues to be popular. It is a complete misunderstanding for people to think of Luther as popular. No, no! How did Luther become so popular! Well, look a bit more closely and you will see the whole picture. People decided that the pope had become too expensive―and then they took Luther in vain, so that, helped by the way he approached the matter, they thought they could obtain eternal salvation much more cheaply, absolutely free of charge. Were a person to embrace Luther’s position in earnest, it would never become popular. No: the target of popular anger was that the pope was too expensive, especially when they learned that there could be a possibility of obtaining the same thing absolutely gratis, without any cost whatever. Fundamentally, the pope was a man who understood the popular position, just as surely as Peer Degn understands the popular position, and just as surely as all social classes are at root the same. Accurately understood, the truth of the Lutheran position is infinitely too lofty, far, far too much addressed to “spirit,” ever to become rlly popular.

Conversation with Mynster 9 Aug. 1851 As I entered I said, [“]Welcome home from your visitation journey. Your Reverence has of course already visited me as well: the two small books I sent you.[”] He had read only one of them (and, to tell the truth, for a moment I expected the odd coincidence that it would be precisely the Two Dis-

120

5

10

15

20

397 25

30

121

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 121

5

10

15

20

25

398

30

35

40

courses―but no, it was in fact My Work as an Author that he had read). “Yes, there is a thread that runs through the whole of it,” he said, “but it was spun after the fact―though, of course, you yourself say as much.” I replied that what rlly ought to be noticed was the devotion to one single thing over so many years and in so many works, that my pen had never deviated, not once. To this he said that the little Literary Review had been an exception. I made no further reply to that, for of course this is clarified in the little piece about my work as an author, but I did say that this Review was an essential part of my work and that this was the case precisely because there were certain things I wanted to get said― which, at the time, I did not think I myself could say―and I therefore ascribed them to another.―The sense I had of M. on that occasion was that, all in all, he had been impressed by the little book and that he was therefore at a loss for words. Then we spoke of other things. He agreed with me concerning what I had said about the government, which was entirely his view. Then we spoke a bit about that. I said that it was not so pleasant to have to say such things, and that was why there was no one who wanted to do it, but it nonetheless had to be said, and so I have done it. He was pleased and satisfied and in agreement with me. Then I said that I had really been pleased to speak with him today because today was the anniversary of my father’s death and that I wanted everything to be as it ought to be on this day. Then there were a few words about the pastoral seminary, but he tried to evade this and was of the opinion that the best thing would be, without further ado, for me to start by founding a pastoral seminary myself. The conversation was extremely friendly and not without animation. So I again said a few words to the effect that I was not pleased by what he said about Goldschmidt in his latest book―this was something I especially felt I needed to say, inasmuch as I express such loyalty to him.

•

1851

403

404

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 121–124

•

1851

Then we parted, and as usual he said, “Farewell, dear friend.”

Ruysbroek depicts the depravity of the monks and he says: [“]All this (this entire worldly way of living)―is this the Rule of Benedict or of Augustine? There would have to be a great many glosses and commentaries in order to be able to present it as such.” I also say the same thing: The way we live our lives, is this Xnty? There would have to be a great many glosses and commentaries, entire sciences, in order to derive this from the N.T. The passage by Ruysbroek is cited from Ullmann, Reformatoren vor der Reformation, 2nd. vol., 1842, p. 58, bottom of page and p. 59, top of page.

122 5

10

15

399

In our times the priests have become so worldly that we have now reached something even apostolic times did not reach: We are all priests!

123

On Myself.

124

Oh, the lack of understanding that is always my lot! I always must be restructured into something straightforward! Supposedly I am a person who very much wanted to succeed, but who only managed to make headway very slowly. Truly, no! I have employed half of my powers to work counter to myself. But who would believe such things! And yet it cannot be denied―it is a fact.

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 125 125

5

10

15

400

25

30

35

40

•

1851

405

My Relationship with Mynster Now―Practice in Christianity―The Business with Goldschmidt. My category is the single individual. My task has been to make use of this category―in dialectical unity with the established order―for awakening and for defending the established order ideally against the numerical principle, against parties, etc. Thus, I am defending an established order. Then I kept on serving my idea in purely ideal fashion. Then for a number of reasons the question occurred to me of whether or not I could directly support the established order in straightforward fashion. But because I am defending an established order in ideal fashion it does not follow that I am simply in complete agreement with the established order. This had to be examined, and as earnestly as possible. A talk with Mynster or anything of that sort would be childish. What do I do, then? I develop, ideally and unconditionally, the entire dialectic of the Christian movement―this message overturns an established order. I communicate this message pseudonymously and arrange a thrice-repeated preface, which I understand as being said solely to myself so that I might learn to take refuge in “grace.” This is the formula for a Christian established order: that it is an indulgence, that “grace” must be brought to bear here. If the established order does not understand itself in this way, if it does not bring grace to bear here, then we are in disagreement. But the message was an ideal one, no one was attacked. This is what I set forth. Truly, if anything was destined to disturb Mynster, it was this.[a] I must now look at the consequences of this. Either M. must rear up in all his power―perhaps crushing me: well, then the truth of the matter will have been made manifest. Or there will be no complete victor: well, for my part I have done everything in order that nothing dubious be covered up. Or possibly M. will have sufficient freedom of spirit

[a]

But that is it precisely how it should be in order that the truth come out, and in order that I not spare myself―I really suffered very much, both in my own behalf and also in my devotion to Mynster.

1

5

406

1

b

and I had to assume it came from Mynster, who was thus concealing something.

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 125

•

1851

to say that this is the truth: I rejoiced at the thought of that. Or he will do nothing whatever: well, in that case my intention had been to conclude with an encomium to Mynster, for I would be satisfied if he remained silent. Then I learned that he was furious. So I spoke with him. All this is found in the journal from that period. After speaking with him I was well satisfied and considered publishing the encomium. Then I came to speak with Nielsen. In my joy I related that I had spoken with Mynster, and I praised his freedom of spirit. I forgot that this would necessarily incite Nielsen, who hates Mynster. At the same instant I realized that if I now published the encomium to M., N. would dare the uttermost. And the matter was additionally dubious because I did not in fact know what Mynster might have been concealing. If I published the encomium too soon, I risked his using it against me. So some time had to pass. Then I heard from a number of quarters that M. was ill-disposed toward me after all. Madvig behaved quite strangely with me.b Thus some time had to be allowed to pass. All the while I was simply longing to be able to do this for Mynster. But as noted, it was impossible to know what he was concealing, and whether he might not think of using the encomium against me as soon as it appeared, taking advantage of this opportunity to make an official break. Then came the article against Rudelbach. Mynster was pleased, and I was happy. Now, just one word from Mynster―then the encomium will appear. The word came―but it brought up Goldschmidt, and in such a way! Now the encomium is impossible. Even though I so very much want to publish it, it is impossible because it will incite Nielsen, etc., so that things will end up worse than they started. There can be no encomium; I will have to be satisfied with my earlier tradition of reverence and devotion with respect to

5

10

15

20

25

401 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 125–126

5

10

15

20

25

402

126

30

35

Mynster. The encomium cannot be published; the whole of my writings cannot be transformed into a triumph for Mynster: that would be making a laughingstock of myself, because M. has positioned Goldschmidt in that way and, as noted, it is impossible because Nielsen, etc., would be incited to the uttermost and would rush at him and cause incalculable damage. In a way, Mynster has gotten his due, because he has never behaved decently toward me. Fundamentally, he has wanted to exploit me to satisfy his egotism, and in any case he ought long ago have recommended me for a position at the seminary, not to mention helping me if I had wished it. But it pains me, for I had wished to do more―infinitely more―than right by Mynster. But he himself has made it impossible. But my relationship to the established order has been secured. For Mynster has essentially remained silent. The business with Goldschmidt is more a personal affront to me. For of course Mynster wanted to bring Goldschmidt to the fore precisely because he defends the established order. What is dubious is Goldschmidt’s vita ante acta and, for me personally, his history with me; I require only that G. recant his past 6 years.

Human Justice! The judgment was: I find no guilt in this person―and thereafter he was―in accordance with law and judgment―crucified! Even though it is historical actuality, how poetic everything in Christianity is―no poet could invent something like this. The entire event would, as it were, have lacked an element of terror and madness if the judgment had instead been [“]He is guilty.[”]

24 vita ante acta] Latin, life before the events; previous life.

•

1851

407

408

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 127

•

1851

Objectivity―Hypocrisy. People make Xnty into an objective doctrine. The objective element is the main thing: thereby people avoid all existential effort (the direction: becoming subjective) and all scrutiny. Or a person makes an official position and the like into something objective and again protects himself by positioning his own personality outside of it. Prior to this a person is an entirely unknown entity; he has taken care to pass his examinations and perhaps to study, but in other respects he has been wary of any sort of achievement, because of course one’s personality is made manifest in such things. Then one seeks an official position, adheres to the established order, secures his career―and then everything is fine, because now a person can constantly conceal himself under “Yes, it is in my capacity as an official, by virtue of my office, etc.” Perhaps I can illuminate the sort of confusions that can arise in this way by referring to another world: the world of criminals. A criminal regards his relationship to an interrogator as objective: lies of every sort are permissible―if necessary, a false oath. In a way, this is done by virtue of his office. Now assume (and Archdeacon Tryde recounted a precise example of this in connection with a criminal out in the countryside) that a criminal has stood there speaking nothing but lies; assume that the interrogator sees clearly that these are lies and says to him, [“]Now speak the truth.[”] He replies, [“]I have spoken the truth.[”] “Will you shake hands with me on that, on your having spoken the truth?” “No, I will not.” Strange. The criminal clearly makes a distinction between what is personal and what is impersonal, objective, which, if you will, is done in virtue of his office. If the interrogator were to say to him, “Do you dare swear on it?” he would answer, [“]Yes.[”] Were the inquisitor to say to him, “Dare you shake hands with me on it?” he would say, “No, I will not.” Because to the criminal this is a personal act. Ah, is it not the case for many a priest that he does not have a moment’s hesitation in giving voice

127

5

10

15

20

25

403 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 127–128

5

10

128 15

20

25

404 30

35

40

•

1851

409

to the strongest sort of expressions and assurances when speaking of Xnty and his faith from the pulpit―and if one were to say to him in private, “Will you shake hands with me on that?” he would perhaps say, [“]No, I will not.[”] Because the former statements were in his official capacity, something impersonal. One sees how dangerous it is when Xnty is only to be represented by those with official positions―what a dangerous ambiguity this is, how this sort of preaching can silently undermine and enervate Xnty in a country, if there was any of it there in the first place.

The Review of My Two Most Recent Books. Aug. 13th In Flyveposten there is one in which it is stated, “It appears from this that the author now regards his work as an author as essentially concluded.” This is quite odd. Let us imagine that an author states expressly that he now intends to lay down his pen, and let us assume that this author is still a young man. Under ordinary circumstances, what will “the journal,” the critical intermediate authority, do? It will say, Yes, this must certainly not be taken quite literally; it will probably be so for a while, or perhaps he will begin again in another style, etc., etc.―in brief, the journal will editorialize on the remark in such a way as to get the author to continue. Here, on the other hand, this is the case: I have not said in any way that I want to stop as an author, which indeed clearly follows from the fact that the journal has to limit itself to saying: [“]It appears.[”] And what does the journal do, then? It takes it upon itself to put into circulation the statement that now I want to stop; it takes upon itself the task of getting me to stop. It is very amusing! I must have a friend, a benefactor, who has an interest―who perhaps has had this interest for quite a long time―in seeing that I stop being a writer damned soon.

[a]

Perhaps he would even be happy to see me leave the country―but that would be ungrateful of me; with Peer Degn I must say: Should I leave a congregation that loves and respects me and which in turn I love and respect[?]

1

5

410

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 128–129

•

1851

And curiously enough, quite by chance I saw the same article today in Fyens Avis without it being noted that it was taken from Flyve-Posten, but in other respects the same article word for word, except for the omission of the words “highly gifted.” Thus it seems that my friend and benefactor must have sent it to Fyens Avis himself. Perhaps he has sent it to a number of newspapers in the provinces―all in order that I might stop being a writer. That is how it could be interpreted. Perhaps the whole thing is only a bit of journalistic clumsiness, which immediately sees to putting into circulation something that can be talked about, as in this case, whether I really want to stop, and so forth―for the contents of the books are then a matter of no significance.

5

10

15

The Sacrificed. … And then, when a witness to the truth of this sort has endured all the mistreatment of his times throughout an entire life and now has finally witnessed with his death―then the admiration arises, and then it is that the orators make a business of presenting it again and again and enjoy the profit thereof, both in money and in esteem, almost as if they were the person who had died. Look, here is the untruth. Properly, people ought to speak of the person who died in such a way that it is made vividly present how he had suffered, how he suffered, how he would actually come to suffer in the same way if he were living now. But woe to the person who dared be true even merely by saying this: he would come to suffer as the one who died suffered. For what the generation wants to do is to flatter itself with this admiration of―a person who has died, as if this generation were much better than the one that put him to death. And the orators flatter this generation’s self-regard. It is generally true that all historical knowledge is demoralizing if one does not understand how to make the past ethically present in such a way that the past judges the present as it judges the past. The one generation should actlly know as little as possible about the other, for with this knowledge come evasions and excuses, on the one hand, and illusions on the other.

129

20

25

405

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 130–131

130

5

10

15

406

25

•

1851

Mynster―and Me. Mynster really does bear a great responsibility toward me. The fact that the numerical, the public, and all that are rlly what are demoralizing and will possibly destroy Xnty: this is something he can see, and is something he ought to be able to see. Thus, as a Christian bishop, this was what he must hurl himself against with the whole power of the established order. Instead, however―indeed, for as long as he could hide behind a Danish chancery―he ignored it in refined fashion, which truly was not a Christian tactic. But now, now he flirts with the public, with Goldschmidt. So I, a private individual, must take on the tasks for which 1000 priests are paid and that all of them refuse to perform. This then comes to look like a ridiculous exaggeration on my part. And Mynster: Yes, he yields to the public’s judgment of me because M. is both cowardly and envious of me. And then there is me, me with my melancholia, which clinging tightly to someone who has died, clings tightly to Mynster. Perhaps M. is counting on my being too weak to attack the entire established order by myself. But he had better be on guard, because this will never be how things will be if, as is possible, it comes to a battle. And I am not so weak that I cannot attack Mynster’s ecclesial governance from a Christian point of view. And I should be able to do it in such a way that I can get both Martensen and Paulli to lean toward my side. Oh, wise old man, why are you absolutely unwilling to believe it[?] After all, there is only one person who selflessly supports you.

30

131

35

On My Work as an Author The Significance of This Little Work. The state of affairs in “Christendom” is that people have utterly displaced the point of view for what Xnty is, transposing it into something objective, something scientific and scholarly, making differences such as genius and talent into what is decisive.

411

412

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 131

•

1851

This little work turns the whole thing around. It says (precisely because it is preceded by that enormous literary production): To hell with genius and talent and scholarship and so on―Xnty is the existential, it is a task for character. And that is how the matter is situated now. That is why this little book is not a literary work, a new literary work, but an act, and that is also why it is important that it be as short as possible, so that it does not demarcate a new literary productivity that people can chat about. The little book is μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος, and it elucidates the extent to which something of this sort was already present in the whole of my work as an author. Even if I had known or had had an overview of the whole of my work as an author, down to the least detail, this piece about my work as an author ought nonetheless never have been expressed at the beginning, for in that case the point of view would have been displaced and the reading public would have become interested out of curiosity about whether I in fact actually adhered to and made good on what I had predicted. No, it must come at the conclusion so that with a single blow it can carry out what a sailor calls coming about: the turn. This little book is not authorship but action. It is an intensive action that will not be understood immediately any more than was the action against The Corsair at that time. Perhaps people will even conclude that I have made too little of myself―I, who after all could lay claim to being a genius and a person of talent―and instead say that it is “my own development and upbringing.” But this is precisely the turn in the direction of Xnty and in the direction of “personality.” Here, then, is a single individual who relates himself to Xnty, and not in such a way that he is now going to try his hand at being a genius and a person of talent and accomplish something―no, the opposite. Here, then, the price of Xnty is pegged so low, so leniently, that it is frightful. But at least it is a real

5

10

15

20

407

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 131–132

5

10

132

20

408

25

30

35

relation to Xnty. There are no tricks and illusions. The Mynsterian way is in toto an illusion.a In my view, however, Xnty is positioned as the unconditioned, and the entire point of view is quite different: that we come to admit that we are not Xns in the stricter sense. In short, the entire design is as different as possible from the official version, and nonetheless it is even more lenient. But what there is has truth in it; it is not appearance and illusion. Without this little book the whole authorship would indeed have been transformed into a new doctrine.

Christian Affectation. This has also done a great deal of damage, this business of always having to go straight to making a big fuss about proclaiming Christianity as joy upon joy―and God knows how joyous we actually are. The consequence of this is either that we radically transform Xnty and omit what does not conform to merely hum. notions of joy or it becomes slobbering drivel and, to some extent, hypocritical. The plain and simple thing is to say that Xnty is the unconditioned, that I am to accept it, and that it then promises me that one day it will become sheer joy―without it following from this that this is necessarily something that will in fact happen in this life or that I am so advanced in Xnty that I am already capable of finding sheer joy in it. Furthermore, I think there is something deceptive here. Despite the fact that we are all Xns, the world has already in fact cowed Xnty bit by bit into a mouse hole. Then we come up with the idea of proclaiming that Xnty is sheer joy―namely in order to make it comprehensible that a person wants to be a Xn. Well, thanks, but no thanks: we would be embarrassed to confess that we do not dare refuse to accept Xnty, that we very well grasp the suffering― 2 in toto] Latin, as a whole.

•

1851

a

413

and from a Christian point of view is only tenable by means of what I might suggest, admissions: I take refuge in grace; this is not Xnty in the stricter sense―about which Mynster is silent and which he wants to suppress.

1

5

414

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 132–134

•

1851

but that we must be Xns. You see, here again is the wretchedness that rlly betrays Xnty.

Christianity is always this quid nimis. The apostles were flogged, thrown into prison―and then there was a great earthquake in order to free them. The purely hum. point of view would say: [“]This is both too little and too much. I truly do not require that there be miracles for my sake, but at the same time I would also certainly prefer to be free of flogging. Could we not mediate the proclaiming Xnty so that it became a nice, inoffensive, secure position for a man with a family[?”] And, ah, how the extraordinary person must suffer! It always seems to be bordering on madness. A person is an apostle and scarcely has his daily bread―at the next instant he performs miracles, but no mediation. And mediation, mediation is the merely human element in the absence of which a hum. being is never happy. And so we have wanted to mediate Xnty! Truly, this is to abolish it. But again, I am not battling against the fact that we mediate, no, but against the shamelessness of our wanting to make mediation into something higher. Let us humbly admit that mediation is the grace for which we must pray. But mediation is a mob uprising against the sovereignty of Xnty. We boast that mediation is the only thing that is compatible with us hum. beings; thus we boast that therefore mediation absolutely has “the crowd” on its side: and thus we dethrone Xnty.

133 5

10

15

20

25

409

It All Depends on the Conception. Saul is thrown to the ground, becomes blind―this signifies: You are an apostle. Simon Magus is stricken with blindness―this signifies: Punishment. And of Paul it is written: [“]I (Xt) shall show him what he will come to suffer for my name’s sake―he, my chosen instrument.” At this point, must not a poor, wretched hum. being sigh, [“]Oh, my God, is this what it is like to involve oneself with you―if this is the consequence, ah, who would dare involve himself with you.[”] Take a merely hum. situation: Assume that a man says of 4 quid nimis] Latin, too much. (See also explanatory note.)

134

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 134–135

5

135

15

20

25

410 30

35

•

1851

a woman, [“]She is my heart’s chosen one―I will show her what she will come to suffer for my sake[”]―must not the girl rather decline this love with thanks[?] Yet between one hum. being and another such a relationship is untruth, perhaps frightful arrogance. But between God and a hum. being the relationship cannot be otherwise: To be the chosen individual is to be initiated into the most frightful sufferings―God cannot love a hum. being in any other way.

The Apostle. Monstrous scoundrels that we are, the hum. race has utterly displaced the point of view. We have made “the apostle” into the extraordinary in the sense of accidental differences (thus, aesthetic), and being an apostle has been made into the extraordinary almost in the sense of enjoying life―instead of “the apostle” being in the extraordinary sense, ethical, i.e., what every hum. being ought to be, and extraordinary in the sense of suffering, i.e., what everyone would rather avoid. This is how we have displaced the point of view. Thus, once in a while there has been an arrogant windbag who, under the impression that an “apostle” is the extraordinary in this misunderstood sense, has presumptuously wanted to be the extraordinary. I reverse the entire situation. I assume everyone can―indeed, shall―be this. Indeed, Xt himself says that if we had faith as a mountain we could move mountains. Thus I assume this to be so for everyone, with only one exception, myself. And why? Because I am a coward, a wretch, a shrewd fellow who does not rlly have faith, etc. You see, this is a quite different way of talking than the hypocrisy that I am too humble and too modest to want to be the―ethically extraordinary one. In general I believe that one cannot speak truly about Xnty except as sheer self-accusation. Thus, I am not the [ethically extraordinary] one. Oh, but God in Heaven, how poor things are that there are so few who are willing to suffer, who actually want to involve themselves with you, which is to suffer!

415

416

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 136

•

1851

Socrates―“The Apostle” Well, it is merely jovial nonsense that raises this objection against Socrates: that it was self-love always to work in this manner, indirectly, maieutically, in ironic isolation. No, according to Socrates’ way of thinking, this was precisely to be loving. If it is true that every hum. being simply must help himself, if the ideal is to stand alone, then what is important is of course to keep the person being helped from becoming dependent upon the helper―for in that case he is not helped. This was Socrates’ idea, and in addition, Socrates is the judge. But he loved hum. beings on a scale of which all these jovial drivelheads have not the faintest notion; he loved them according to the idea, after first having himself been disciplined by the idea so that he was able to stand absolutely alone, to do without absolutely every other hum. being―something of which the jovial fellows have not the faintest notion. Otherwise with “the apostle.” He has a different conception of what it is to love, and he has grace to proclaim. But note well, the apostle himself was first disciplined to be absolutely capable of doing without any other hum. being. Between this Socratic position and that of apostle lie half-measures and, finally, nonsense. That is, wanting to win peop. over―this so-called joviality in contrast to Socrates’ so-called heartlessness―can least of all be what is apostolic: it can be a cunning way for the person involved to have a need for peop. because he cannot stand alone (which he will not say, but says―either hypocritically or stupidly―that it is out of love for others), or because he wants to profit from peop., or because he does not have the courage to turn his sword against the hum. imperiousness that surrounds him and that wants him to express a relation of dependence upon them. I began with the Socratic, but I nonetheless profoundly acknowledged my inferiority, for I had a fortune, which was a great help in being independent of peop. Insofar as I am now striving to make a closer approach to myself or to the idea, in one

136

5

10

15

20

25

30

411

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 136–137

5

137

15

20

25

30

412 35

40

sense I regard this as a reduction of the price, as an accommodation, but also as a movement in the direction of Xnty. I do not, however, spout nonsense and say that my position is superior to the Socratic. No, no―nor is it even in the Socratic direction, but in the direction of proclaiming grace, though of course in a manner that is infinitely inferior to the apostolic.

Mundus vult decipi―Illusion. Without “persons” the hum. race is immoral nonsense. And that is in fact what it is. Everything is calculated to make persons impossible―the daily press, in particular, has done everything in this regard. My best times were when I lived on the streets, because things were directed most powerfully against illusions. Now I have retreated somewhat: it is something lower, it is an accommodation. People want to interpret this to mean that I am now on a higher level. Yes, mundus vult decipi. No, without wealth I could have continued to endure living on the streets: indeed, in that case I would have gone mad, i.e., have been declared mad, perhaps put to death; but that is precisely what would have been great. Nonetheless, when I accommodate myself a bit in this way, acknowledging the limits of my powers, I do in fact accomplish two things: 1) I do not let myself be deceived into believing that I am now something higher, inasmuch as my being seen less frequently helps me―by means of an illusion―gain greater esteem. 2) Nor do I forget what must be borne in mind and what we will have to repeat someday―and then light will surely be shed on what took place earlier. But while I accommodate myself a little like this and scale things down a bit, in another respect I have made some progress. For the fact is that I was 10 Mundus vult decipi] Latin, The world wants to be deceived. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1851

417

418

1

5

10

15

a

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 137–139

Furthermore, in the beginning I was not so mature, so that all my comings and goings on the streets and my conversations with anybody and everybody were of course in large measure a diversion, an enjoyment, which I needed; thus my more withdrawn life is, in a different sense, a task for character and progress in that direction. In order for living on the streets to be, in the strictest sense, in the character of doing it solely for the sake of the idea, a person must first have arrived at the certainty that he could endure living in the solitude of a desert.

•

1851

wealthy, which means that I myself cannot even say with certainty whether there was not a certain degree of pride involved in what had been my previous situation. I am more heavily burdened by also having pecuniary difficulties, and to this extent perhaps there has been some progress in enduring what I now endure.a

The Negative Indication of a Genuine Communication of the Truth. Xnty stands topmost with its thesis: The world lieth in wickedness. Next comes the more accomplished sort of paganism with its thesis: The world wants to be deceived. Then comes nonsense with its thesis: It is a wonderful world; the crowd is truth. And most deeply sunk in nonsense is the daily press, which has transformed the hum. race into “a cloud” of nonsense.

5

138

15

20

The Divine and the Merely Human Conceptions of Xnty These two conceptions are diametrically opposed to one another. The divine conception is in the direction of intensity: Xnty is intensively concentrated in one single pers. who makes himself and everyone unhappy, humanly speaking, for the sake of Xnty. He calls this (and this is what is divine) loving God and hum. beings; he does all this out of sheer love. The merely hum. conception revolves around this: Let us love one another, yield to one another, indulge one another, each of us slacking off a little, etc. This means: Good-bye to the idea! With the assistance of this conception, Xnty spreads itself: the extensive.

139

25

413

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 139 –141

5

10

140

15

20

25

30

414

141

35

The uttermost consequence of the divine conception of Xnty would be: Xnty is intensively present in one single pers. who is put to death for his Xnty, cursed by the entire hum. race. This was the way in which Xnty was present in Xt when he hung on the cross. At that instant, Xnty (according to the divine conception) was unconditionally true as it never will be again.―The uttermost consequence of the merely hum. conception would be: All hum. beings have become Xns―and Xnty simply does not exist.

“Reasons” The priest says that one must give reasons in order to get people to accept Xnty; it is an accommodation, but it is necessary. Now, I am not going to say that this is nonsense, that if in fact one gives reasons to get people to accept Xnty, what they are accepting is not Xnty. But I will say something else: Take a closer look and you will see that “the priest” has even more reasons than those he cites, that he has reasons why he gives reasons, reasons about which he remains silent. He has, in fact, the reason that he wants to get along well with peop. who might perhaps become angry if he represented Xnty more truthfully. He has the reason that it is his living and that he must take care to speak in such a way that the congregation does not stint in its offerings. In short, he has the reason that he himself is mired in the same worldliness as the congregation.

Luther’s Turn away from the Monastery. Away! Luther shouts, away with all these imagined godly acts of fasting, etc. Everyone is to remain in his calling: that is the true worship of God.

•

1851

419

420

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 141–142

•

1851

But wait just a minute, dear Luther. So, everyone is to remain in his occupation. But, then, is every civil occupation compatible with Xnty―for example, that of being an actor in the theater? Great conflicts lurk here. Next, in what manner is he to live in his civil occupation: is civil propriety sufficient for a Xn? If not, is he to express Christian ethics in his civil occupation[?] In that case he will be reduced to poverty and persecution as quickly as ein, zwei, drei. Seen from this point of view: In opposition to the error of the monastery, this turn looks so simple, but on closer inspection what enormous conflicts lurk here, precisely because true Xnty is characterized by not fitting into this world. But then Luther was no dialectician; he always saw only one side of the matter.

5

10

15

On Myself. Bringing forth the ideals in this way and acting as though I personally remained outside of it (indirect communication) gave rise to the dubious view that the situation could of course also be understood as though I were actually keeping myself personally outside of it, as though I did not feel my life and myself to be obligated by the ideality, thereby avoiding the humiliating circumstances in which it actually was the case that I myself, in my striving, indeed felt my imperfection. Now, it is certainly true that this was not how it was in my innermost self, before God: there I myself indeed understood my imperfection. But for this reason it could indeed of course have been my own deceitful heart that prompted me to avoid this humiliation vis-à-vis people. Furthermore, in relation to Xnty the indirect method is only transitory, because Xnty of course has grace to proclaim. And again, Xnty tends toward making things manifest. If someone were to say that of course Xt was incognito, the reply must be both that it was impossible for him to be otherwise, for the GodMan, this synthesis, is only possible in an incognito, while he himself does of course say quite directly that he is God, and that this is something the Xn is not to imitate; he is, of course, not supposed to be the God-Man, but is to proclaim the God-Man and proclaim grace. 7 ein, zwei, drei] German, one, two, three.

142

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 142–144 415

5

143

15

20

144 25

30

•

1851

Finally, as I have often emphasized, in connection with the proclamation of Xnty the indirect method also has the dubious property that it could of course be an attempt to avoid suffering for the teaching. The indirect method of proclaiming Xnty is maieutic. With this method a beginning can be made in order to shake off the illusions, and sometimes it can also be used in connection with the problem of taking “grace” in vain.

The Book of Job. The significance of this book is rlly to show the cruelty that we hum. beings commit by regarding being unhappy as guilt, as a crime. This is indeed hum. selfishness, which wishes to free itself of the impression, the serious and upsetting impression, of suffering, of what can happen to a hum. being in this life. In order to protect themselves against it, people explain suffering as guilt: It is his own fault. Oh, hum. cruelty! What concerns Job is obtaining justice―in a certain sense, also in relation to God, but above all in relation to his friends, who instead of comforting him torment him with the thesis that he is suffering because he is guilty.

A True Christian rlly can only involve himself with worldly things in order to deceive, i.e., in order to create a situation in which to set forth Xnty. If, for example, a true Xn has a decided talent with which he can be a brilliant success, he can do this for a couple of years, gaining all possible honor and esteem and fame―in order then suddenly to throw it all aside, but having assured himself the attention that will make it possible to create a situation in which Xnty can make an impression.

421

422

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 145–146

•

1851

Those Who Only Half-Way Became Witnesses to the Truth. I have often considered the notion that if anyone deserves a eulogy, it is precisely the sort of men who became martyrs in a way, insofar as they failed to obtain the joys of life, and yet they did not garner the imperishable laurels of martyrdom because at the decisive moment they became a little fearful, perhaps recanting or retreating a bit, as, e.g., Wessel, who was one of the forerunners of the Reformation. I find it so disgusting when I read a professor or someone of that sort who speaks condescendingly of such a person, or, when (as I have read in a biography of Calvin) the author, entirely as if he were a master of ceremonies, passes judgment on poor Servetus and does not consider that in the end Servetus nonetheless went bravely to his death and that, even at the final moment, he was true to his principles. Oh, this disgusting mob of assistant professors who have never risked a penny and then pass judgment on such a man. I am not pleased when a pers. ventures out farther than what he can accomplish, but, for God’s sake, he is already punished sternly enough by having to live with that blow. But in any case, a pers. of this sort, an unfortunate apprentice, is naturally far more valuable than millions of assistant professors and entire herring shoals of peop. who turn the sufferings of others into their living and their passion, who become professors of the subject, and who in addition pass judgment on them as if they themselves were fellows of a completely different sort―which they certainly are, in a way: namely wretches.

Christianity’s Proportions with Respect to Its Diffusion. When a nonsensical fellow proclaims Christianity, everyone (Numerus) accepts it―it stops there (naturally, the worst sort of proclamation of Xnty has the greatest diffusion). Then the inversion begins again: the deeper the impression one has of Xnty, the more he comes to a polemical decision: not to be a Xn, because being a Xn has become nonsense. And in turn, the more faithfully one represents this polemical position (of not being a Xn), the fewer people associate themselves with him, but the law is always the law of inversion. Then, when this polemical position of not being a Xn has been used up, when it has become some30 Numerus] Latin, Number, Amount, Mass.

416

145

5

10

15

20

25

146

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 146–149

417 5

147

10

148

20

•

1851

thing trivial, it is represented by a nonsensical fellow―and then everyone accepts it. Then the person who is more truly Xn will again bring forth the straightforward, simple position: to be a Xn. The more ably he represents this, the fewer will involve themselves with him. Always inversion.

Bernard says: “major erit confusio voluisse celare, cum celari nequeat.” in epistle 42, ad Henricum archiep. Senonensem. cited from Wessenberg, Die großen Kirchenversamlungen des 15 und 16 Jahrhunderts. Constance, 1840. Part 1, preface, p. xxii.

Wessenberg (loc. cit. p. 46) says: Here a striking difference between paganism and Christianity was revealed. The former viewed the world as eternal and the individual human beings as perishable. Xnty regarded the world as perishable but the individual human beings as imperishable. This is very good. But this is of course precisely the modern consciousness: the world, the human race, etc., are eternal―the individuals disappear. That is, the modern consciousness is paganism.

25

149

Tertullian de præscript. n. 23: dum verisimilia mentiuntur, veritatem frustrantur. see Wessenberg, loc. cit., p. 65. Note.

9 major . . . nequeat.] Latin, it would cause great confusion to conceal it because it cannot be concealed. 27 de præscript. n. 23] Latin (book title), On the Principal [Objections against Heretics], no. 23. 27 dum verisimilia . . . frustrantur.] Latin, when things that appear to be true deceive, the truth is deceived.

423

424

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 150–152

•

1851

Qualitative Dialectic The more important a piece of writing, people say, the more it must be made the object of investigative exegesis. Then people make this into a straightforward scale: more important, still more important, absolutely most important―it is God’s word, ergo. Nonsense: At this point there is a qualitative reversal: As soon as it is God’s word, you have only to obey. If you want permission to do research, then never say that Holy Scripture is God’s word: in that case you entrap yourself.

418

150

5

10

Everything Depends on “How.” I commit myself to writing a witty novel that develops the idea that Xnty rlly does not exist at all. Then there will certainly be no hue and cry against it―no, I will be a brilliant success, and the priests will read it. Indeed, perhaps next Sunday they will preach on the interesting fact that Xnty rlly does not exist at all. But if I do this in the interest of religion, people will become furious―then the matter becomes too earnest. And, what is even more frightful: If I did it in such a manner that it disturbed the barrel organ of the established order, with its 1,000 livings.―Well, bloody murder, look at the priests, the bishops, the sextons’ assistants: All of them will do battle for Xnty with religious zeal!

151

15

20

25

The Single Individual―The Public. The thesis “the public, the crowd, is untruth” can only be consistently asserted and fought for by one person. Even if there are merely two people who want to unite in order to fight for this principle, that would not be fighting for it unconditionally, because two is a number tending toward the crowd, the public, whereas one is not a number but a qualitative category.―And this thesis, that “the public, the crowd, is untruth” is Xnty’s thesis. In every generation in which this thesis is not fought for―in every such generation Xnty does not rlly exist.

152

30

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 152–153 419

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1851

But on the one hand, naturally, the surrounding world in which the thesis is to be asserted finds it to be madness, laughable madness, for a single person to want to do it: “Indeed, even if there were a number of people”―perhaps “many” or perhaps (risum teneatis!) “the public.” That is, the surrounding world tends toward the dialectic that the public is truth, so the thesis that the “the public is untruth” can only (how excellent!) be accepted as true if it―has the public on its side. On the other hand, some individuals will certainly take note of this entire message, this battle tending toward the thesis that the public is untruth. So they will―and yes, here we have it again― associate themselves with the single one in order (how splendid!) to help him! Either they were unable to understand that the cause loses ground in this way, or they did not want to understand it, but find it more comfortable to associate themselves with the single one after he advanced the cause so far that―with a deft, nimble phrase!―it can profit by winning the support of the public. Ah, to endure that solitary combat, year after year, to have it within one’s power to make it easy for oneself and win everything simply by reducing the stakes: this is asceticism. It is a solitary struggle in which one also fights to stand alone. The surrounding world finds this to be laughable madness―the surrounding world that is only all too familiar with how one is supposed to behave: One must begin by acting is if one were many, for in that way one becomes many―that is how it is with fools: when one sheep runs to the water, they all do. But how sad, when one has become exhausted in this solitary battle and yet hopes and hopes that there could be just one honest person who also takes hold in solitary fashion. But no! They all want to profit―they are utterly indifferent to truth and Xnty. And then, when they realize that they can no longer hold out against this solitary warrior by finding it laughable, then they begin to shout that it is arrogance, dreadful arrogance―and we are all Xns.

35

153

40

420

The Transformation of the World: Xnty’s Transformation, to Witness for Truth, to Witness against Untruth.

One could say that to witness for the truth is sufficient, that a person could limit himself to that, that witnessing against untruth could be too much, could be tempting God, plunging oneself into 5 risum teneatis!] Latin, take care not to laugh! (See also explanatory note.)

425

426

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 153

•

1851

danger. Thus, a person ought to wait until untruth arrives and wants to force me into untruth―then I shall resist, witnessing for the truth. There is something to this, but the question is whether the form of the world has not undergone an alarming change. There was a time when untruth was aware that it was a power, much the stronger power, and it sat there, ruling despotically―in such times one can be quite certain that untruth keeps a watchful eye on everyone who is of the truth and attacks him― thus he can come to witness for the truth. But in our times everything has been transformed into shrewdness. For its own sake, untruth prefers that nothing whatever happens, that everything remains peaceful, that decisions of every sort are avoided, wishing only that everything might remain as it is, shrewdly guarding against disturbing anyone or anything. In this way untruth believes it can shrewdly keep everything at bay. In times such as these, if one aims merely at wanting to witness for the truth (not against untruth), only putting up resistance if someone wants to force me into untruth: Then there is a major question as to whether a person has not actlly let himself be fooled. In Luther’s time the situation was quite different (and he did, incidentally, witness against untruth). The pope was a power, a tyrannical power―so the rest would surely follow of itself. But when power is served by shrewd and crafty means: there must be witness against untruth. In such times an entire preliminary fight must be fought in order to compel untruth to do battle, because it shrewdly prefers to have peace. But when that is the situation, the usual nonsense is then to rant about what was appropriate for quite different times. For example, suppose a person in Luther’s time had stepped forward and said, [“]Xnty simply does not exist[”]―he could rest easy in the assurance that this had been heard by the reigning authorities and that force would be employed against him. But in our times things are different. The government would say: [“]Let us merely act as though we have not heard it; dealing with it would be the most dangerous thing for us.[”] Thus in order to rouse them up one must first do battle to force them to be so good as to please to be a government. This is the transformation of the times. Whereas in a previous era the government protected itself by using force against the truth, now it wants to protect itself by refraining from going on the attack and by giving this evasion the appearance of the spirit of peace.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 154

421

154

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1851

“Narrow Is the Way” is this a historical account (that at the time of Xnty’s arrival in the world the way was narrow―in which case we must change the way we read the text) or is it an eternal truth―in which case a person makes a fool of himself by taking the easy way proclaiming that “the way” is narrow, for at most the summa summarum of his preaching and his life is that historice the way was narrow. But then people wanted to make this and passages like “narrow is the way” into an objective doctrine―so objective that it does not apply to one single pers., not even the one who proclaims it: no, it is purely objective. Infinite nonsense! “God has chosen what is despised in the world.” Is this historice―or is it, understood in the Christian manner, an eternal thesis, that at every moment and until the end of the world it is the case that God has chosen what is despised in the world[?] Thus it is of course nonsense when someone decked out in worldly glory preaches―objectively!―about God having chosen what is despised in the world. One simply cannot preach objectively at all, for to preach is neither to chatter with one’s mouth or with one’s a― ―, but is essentially a person’s existing: what my existing expresses is my sermon. But my existing is my subjectivity. Luther insisted, quite rightly, that the true Church is a despised little flock―the pope and all that business is not the true Church. Now Luther was victorious a long time ago, and so people forget the reduplication: that it will now once again be the case that the true Church is a despised little flock. Either all the existential theses in the Holy Scriptures become something historical, so that all the verb tenses in the N.T. must be changed to the perfect or pluperfect, or they are eternal theses and are existentially just as valid as when Xnty entered the world. The nonsense about objective doctrine is hypocrisy. For what is an objective doctrine of existence supposed to be? Is it supposed to be a doctrine of existence that―objectively!―is indifferent to personal existing? But surely, a doctrine of existence is of course the exact opposite, perhaps indifferent to everything else, only not indifferent with respect to―existences: otherwise it is of course not a doctrine of existence. 7 summa summarum] Latin, sum total. 8 historice] Latin, viewed historically.

427

428

1

5

a

―generally, one can recognize them by their passionate disorientedness― b

, and especially for the purpose of orientation, c

(and how easily!)

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 155–156

•

1851

4651. In Flyveposten for September 16 or 17 there is someone who― certainly in order to impress―has signed himself 4651, and has taken it upon himselfa to orient my readers, or indeed to warn them against letting themselves be disturbed by my little piece On My Work as an Author. The only thing I find worthy of noteb is the signature: 4651. It is impressive and convincing and overwhelming. Should the frightful thing happen,c that someone now comes along who signs himself 789,691, I will be crushed.

Learned Reading.

a

10

who was beating him on the leg

Here is an example of how a learned person can occupy himself with something without it exercising the least sort of influence upon him. There is a German translation of Epictetus’s 4 volumes of discourses by a Schultz, 1801, Altona. In the preface to the first volume he relates that he has been quite occupied with this author― and of course he also had the task of translating him. One would then expect that something of Epictetus had had an influence on the man’s own self―Epictetus, that iron man who, as a slave, said to his master:a [“]If you strike harder, you will break the leg.[”] And he struck and broke it, and E. said: [“]Didn’t I tell you so?[”] Epictetus, whose principal thesis is: To know the difference between the things that are in our power and those that are not (nowadays, e.g., public opinion), and one should not trouble oneself at all concerning the latter. In the preface to the second volume of the translation Mr. Schultz writes: [“]Die gütige Nachsicht……[”] Then he makes an excuse for having rushed a bit with the latest volume because he had moved, etc., and says (preface, p. v) [“]… ―und von Richtern, die noch ein Herz im Busen haben, darf ich noch dieser treuen Darstellung … Schonung erwarten.[”] Is one to believe that this was someone who had occupied himself for many years with Epictetus―but this is learned reading.

29 Die gütige Nachsicht] German, Kind forbearance. 32 und von Richtern . . . erwarten.] German, and after this faithful depiction I dare to expect clemency from judges who still have a heart in their bosoms.

422

155

5

10

156

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 157 423

157

•

1851

No One Can Serve Two Masters

429

[a]

No one can serve two masters.

Introduction

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

The gospel says: No one can. The whole world says the exact opposite: indeed, it can be very easily done, for there has never lived a hum. being of whom it was not true that to some extent he served two masters.―Nonetheless, the gospel does not scale down its view or mediate or say that “to a certain degree” can be sufficient. There is only one who has actually realized serving only one master, he who says the words “No one can serve two masters”: Jesus Christ, the Exemplar. But how did he have to live, then? First in poverty and lowliness, thereafter in sheer sacrifice. And so, how did things go for him (what did he have to endure―in order not to serve two masters)? He had to suffer on account of it, for everyone else wanted to serve two masters, and that was what they wanted to force him to do, too. And this was what he had to suffer in order not to come to serve two masters: he was persecuted (by those who wanted to serve two masters), betrayed (by those who wanted to serve two masters), condemned, crucified. Ah, is this how it is to serve only one master? Yes, this is how it is. But Xt does not want to worry the life out of us by presenting himself as the only one who has served only one master (even though it is the truth) and then, with the stringency of the Law, require the same of us. No, he mitigates the entire situation; he refers us to some other teachers (who, like himself, have indeed no will of their own―and this is precisely what counts if one is to serve only one master): the lily and the bird. “Consider them,” he says. Yes, consider them. Ah, do not forget that now it is autumn: Soon the lily will wither, ah, do not forget to consider it before that happens; soon the bird will fly away―ah, do not forget to consider it one more time before it departs. Then winter will come, a long, long time, and you will not be able to see or hear these delightful teachers. Consider them! It is autumn―but see whether that disturbs or upsets them. No, as it says in the hymn, “Say to sorrow, Yes, Yes, tomorrow.” That is what they do, unconcerned about tomorrow, etc. But this is not to be understood as meaning that persecution is to be transformed into a poetic jest by employing the lily and

[b]

The theme is to be: Christ as Exemplar.

1

430

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 157–158

•

1851

bird as exemplars. No, the Exemplar, Christ as the Exemplar, and “imitation” are precisely what must be emphasized in our time, at least dialectically, in order to bring meaning and a little discipline to “Christendom,” in order to stop up the mouth of “doubt” and teach “scientific scholarship” proper comportment and respect in Christian matters.

Spiritual Trial. Most people probably live essentially without any religiousness, or at the most they possess religiousness in the same sense that they occasionally go to the theater, which is zero religiousness. Therefore, there can be absolutely no talk of spiritual trial with respect to them. Then there are some individuals who do in fact possess some religiousness, who lead daily lives within religious notions. So these people live like this: God is the one on whose assistance they depend so that everything might go well for them, provided they themselves are circumspect, shrewd, avoid all dangers, etc. Here there can be absolutely no talk of spiritual trial. Then comes genuine Christian religiousness―I do not know if there are religious persons of this sort; I have not seen any. This religiousness follows the N.T. view: that truly keeping oneself close to God means precisely that one comes to suffer in this world; that religiousness means willingness to witness to the truth, to suffer, to make sacrifices―all, of course, without the conceitedness of meritoriousness. But inasmuch as they venture forth in this way, the mark or the sign of the relation to God is the opposition of the world, persecution, suffering. This is spirit, and the testimony of the spirit is what sustains them. But at every moment of dullness they shrink from this intensification―and then things change, so that it seems to them that the opposition of the world is perhaps proof of their being wrong, that it is presumptuous of them to have ventured out so far, so that they are not so far from coming to regret as guilt what had been their most honest enthusiasm. Look, this is spiritual trial. The natural hum. being tends in this direction: the circumstance that things go well for a person is a sign of his relationship with God. “Spirit” recognizes the relationship with God in opposition, in suffering: it has the courage and the faith for an unending

421

5

158

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 158–159

5

425

10

15

20

159

30

35

40

•

1851

431

polemic, as when Luther rightly demonstrates that his is the true Church from the circumstance that it is a despised little flock; that the true Church is always recognizable by suffering; that, on the other hand, as he says at one point, those who are afraid to suffer are the ones who become the victorious false Church, which, instead of suffering, persecutes the true Church. (The passage is taken from Geist aus Luthers Schriften: Kirche, 5780). But in every moment of dullness the spiritual person sinks down into being the natural hum. being, and then spiritual trial comes. The person who egotistically wants only to have happy days and have God help him profit can never undergo spiritual trial. For if things go well for him, he will become so enchanted that he will notice nothing of the true situation. And if things do not go well for him, that will perhaps help him to become aware of his true situation, and he will then repent of his former life: this, however, is not spiritual trial because it makes good, straightforward sense to repent of something bad. Spiritual trial consists of, as it were, being in a situation in which one must repent of one’s best intentions. And it is, as it were, enough to make one lose one’s reason. For through his word God, as it were, lures a person out or commands him to venture forth―and then, when for an instant he lets the person go, everything is turned upside down for him.

What Is Required in Order, with True Blessing, to Observe Oneself in the Mirror of the Word. 1) To a certain extent, one must know oneself already. For the person who does not know himself cannot recognize himself either, and a person can always recognize himself only to the extent that he knows himself. Thus a sort of preparation is required. Indeed, with respect to the senses, it is also the case that the person who chances to see himself in a mirror―or if one positions a mirror so that he does not know that the image he sees is a mirror image, and this image is himself―cannot recognize himself. Paganism demanded: Know yourself. Xnty says: No, this is something preliminary: Know yourself―and see yourself in the mirror of the Word in order to know yourself properly. No true self-knowledge without God-knowledge, or before God. Here, to stand before the mirror is to stand before God.

[a]

What Is Required in Order, with True Blessing, to Observe Oneself in the Mirror of the Word. New.

1

432

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 159–160

•

1851

2) You must not be afraid to see yourself. It is well known that a hum. being is afraid to see himself physically―that superstition has held that seeing oneself was an omen of death. And this is also the case with spiritual matters: to see oneself is to die, to die away from all illusions and from hypocrisy―great courage is required to dare see oneself, which of course can only take place in the mirror of the Word, for otherwise it easily becomes a deception and a person’s self-knowledge becomes like the thrashing Sancho administers to himself. One must want only the truth, neither vainly wanting to be flattered nor bedeviling oneself in self-torment. 3) One must conceive an implacable hatred of the self that showed itself in the mirror as that from which one must die away, the old self.

Sterile Orthodoxy. In his postil (III, p. 118) Melanchthon says: “Es ist nicht nöthig zu disputiren, ob die Zerknirschung aus Liebe zur Gerechtigkeit oder aus Furcht vor der Strafe entspringe, weil dieß gemischt ist. .... Ich erinnere mich, daß gerade jene Leute welche darüber disputierten (there was a dispute about this in 1538), hier eine gantze Nacht hindurch tranken und sangen: ‘Da trunken sie die liebe lange Nacht, biß daß der helle Tag anbrach: Sie sungen, sprungen und waren voll.’” See Galle, Melanchthon als Theolog, Halle, 1840, p. 243, middle of page.

21 Es ist nicht . . . waren voll.] German, It is not necessary to dispute about whether remorse has its source in love of justice or fear of punishment, because it is mixed . . . I remember that precisely those people who disputed about that (there was a dispute about this in 1538), drank and sang here throughout an entire night: “They drank the whole blessed night until day broke: They sang, leapt about, and were drunk.”

5

10

426 15

160

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 161–162 161

5

10

20

25

30

35

1851

433

Historical Progress or Progress in Xndom Höchstens what happens is thata there comes a What that is truer, but not a Why that is truer. For example, now a truer doctrine emerges, or a particular point of doctrine receives a truer exposition―whereupon the man who does this becomes a success, profits from it, etc. Then there is a time when it is said that fruitless speculation has corrupted everything, that life, that existence, must be emphasized―and this is accepted, and the person who says it becomes a success. Aha! Lives remain the same―there is an absence of reduplication.

427

162

•

Why Does “Tragedy” No Longer Appeal?

Quite simply because the faith in personality has been lost. The heroic―that one single hum. being can stand there and gesticulate as if he were capable of everything―has rlly become ridiculous to the mindset of our times. No, no, it is ridiculous: one must be a group, a party, have anonymous supporters, etc., etc. Luther is rlly ridiculous to the mindset of our times: a single, solitary pers., who takes a coach to the Imperial Diet at Worms and wants to destroy the entire power of the pope. Naturally, the fact that he appeals to God is again ridiculous to the mindset of our times, because for this mindset God cannot be supposed to relate to an individual hum. being but at most to “a group,” a party, a people, etc. And how dreadful is the speed with which everyone in our times takes care immediately to become “a group” when he has the least thing to communicate or wish for. Damned, ungodly shortcut that people think they can take. And then it is said that we are all Xns. God in Heaven! The formula for existence, the paradigm of 2 Höchstens.] German, At most.

a

(with respect to the most recent past, which is less true―because with respect to original Xnty, no progress is possible, and on the contrary, all subsequent developments are continued regression)

1

5

434

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 162–164

•

1851

Xnty, has become ridiculous to the entire race―and so we are all Christians.

Sensibleness―The Changed Form of the World. An enthusiast needs decisiveness. Perhaps he also believes that decisiveness will give him strength. Perhaps he also has illusions concerning his strength. But wherever there is enthusiasm there is also a tendency toward decisiveness, toward catastrophe. “Sensibleness” has discovered something else. It has realized once and for all that no hum. being can endure being with the idea, that indeed, finally, if a person does not let go of the idea and save himself, there must come a decision, a catastrophe, which makes it clear that he is a wretch. In addition, sensibleness appeals to experience: How often we see what happens to the enthusiast when the real point of decision is reached. The difference between one pers. and another thus consists not so much in strength, for no one can endure the idea, but in not arriving at decisions. Sensibleness therefore believes that all wisdom consists in preventing decisions. Then a person can solemnly assure that if it were required of him, he would surely be the man―in the meanwhile making every effort, with the best of his abilities, to assure that, if possible, it never comes to any decision. This prevention of decision by sensibleness has given rise to an existential obstruction, so to speak, and a frightful demoralization, which then culminated in a frightful catastrophe such as the one in ’48.

Christianity. Yes, to be sure, Xnty is joy, a joyous message―only it presupposes one thing: that in order for it truly to be joy for us hum. beings, you and I are to be heroes, spirit. Take, for example, the following situation. A message such as the following is proclaimed to a hum. being: [“]First and foremost, there is something you do not know, but which has to be said to you, and which you are to believe: That you have been

163 5

428

15

20

25

164 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 164–165

5

10

15

429

20

25

165

30

35

40

•

1851

conceived in sin, born in iniquity; that you are a sinner from birth, in the power of the devil; that if you remain in this state, you are certain of going to hell. Therefore, in his infinite love, God has arranged for your salvation, has caused his Son be born, to suffer, and to die. If you believe this, you will be saved eternally. This is proclaimed to you, this joyous message. And you must realize that the joy is even greater: that in service to this cause you shall be granted permission, for the entire remainder of your life, 40 years, to endure living in poverty, being mocked, flogged, abused, finally executed―think what an honor, what an indescribably joyous message.” This is Xnty. We Danes live more or less as if Holberg were our guide to life. Now imagine what Henrich or Pernille would say to this joyous message. Think of Chilian, to whom this joyous message is proclaimed: that in accordance with God’s will he is to be sacrificed for the salvation of the entire country. And indeed, what is Mynster other than a velvet-bound, giltedged edition of this life wisdom of Henrich and Pernille―naturally with a refined supplement that Henrich and Pernille did not have the cultivation to devise. And so we have had the entire world Christianized, i.e., we have accepted the Word, “a joyous message.” We have said that Xnty calls itself a joyous message. So let us take steps to discover what we hum. beings could find to be a joyous message―and that is Xnty.

“The Apostle.” The precondition, the sine qua non, for all enjoyment of life is a certain steadiness. Even the poorest destiny can nonetheless yield a certain enjoyment if it is simply characterized by a daily steadiness. But nothing, no situation in life makes enjoyment so impossible as that of being an apostle―that dreadful heavenward blanket-toss. At one instant to be situated in the direst necessity, perhaps veritably starving, then to be willing, if God wills it, to die of hunger―but it was not God’s will, and so one gets a reprimand: You of little faith. Or, in order that one not actually go hungry, to be willing to work for one’s living―and then, just as he is beginning, a miracle happens and he gets a reprimand: You of little faith! Ah, these are terrible sufferings: the suffering

435

436

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 166 –167

•

1851

of a sort of conscious madness in all his blessedness, for it is like madness. Ah, however pampered and wretched I am, this much will nonetheless be granted me: to have at least ventured far enough out that I can be honest with respect to the extraordinary person, that I do not take him in vain, that I possess at least a reasonably truthful notion of how infinitely the extraordinary has suffered.

The Most Frightful Error of Judgment, if a person had long disciplined himself in every form of asceticism and then finally came to the point of performing what might be called a truly good deed―and then misjudged it, wanting to have merit for it in the eyes of God: Alas, the greatest of all transgressors, all of them, is so much closer with his simple: God be merciful to me, a sinner. What Luther emphasizes is so true, that the more a person endeavors to perform good deeds with the idea of gaining salvation, the more anxious he merely becomes; his life becomes sheer self-torment, and the genuine sinner is far, far happier in sighing, briefly and to the point: God be merciful to me, a sinner. But one must also bear in mind that this can easily lead a person to want to live in worldliness out of fear of getting caught in the snares of meritoriousness or self-torment if he started doing something that was not to his worldly advantage, etc.

5

166 10

15

430

20

25

“The Disciple Is Not above His Master” is said by Christ in this way: I have suffered, ergo you, too, are to suffer. Ah, humanly speaking, one could perhaps be tempted to give the matter a different turn and say: [“]What is excellent is precisely the capacity to endure suffering in that way, to be spirit in that way. Therefore the disciple is incapable of it because he is not spirit in that way. As the weaker one, he must be permitted more lenient conditions, be loved, honored, respected, etc.[”] Now, in any case the matter must be given a turn in order to be tolerable, for indeed, from a Christian point of view it is truly intolerable for the disciple to be regarded by the world as excel-

167

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 167–168

•

1851

lent, as a straightforward example of earnestness, rather than as the opposite: as a weakness, a frailty, an imperfection that can be tolerated, provided the true situation is acknowledged.

168

10

15

431

20

25

30

35

40

Extensity―Intensity. Intensive existence is related to being the single individual and thereby is in turn related to the ideal. Of course, this can become more and more intense, thus continually becoming more and more strenuous. Nonetheless, the ideal is of course never attained. But a quite eminent subjectivity is entailed in enduring in this way, because it is rlly neither more nor less than being sacrificed. Then the stakes can be lowered. That is, one can work extensively. I believe that this is permissible, but it is something hypocritical if one decks out this extensive activity as being something higher, as love of others, while the intensive is supposedly egotism. You are lying in your teeth. The intensive is exactly love―namely, it is loving God. But it is quite overwhelmingly strenuous. What am I, then? I do not present myself as a witness to the truth, but I am honesty that wants to impede people―not in making their lives somewhat easier, no―but in propagating the lie that this easier way is supposed to be something higher, that it is earnestness, that what is truly higher is either a ridiculous fantasy and an exaggeration, or it is egotism. I am honesty. And this is how things are: every simple hum. being can of course be an honest person―but it does not follow from this that his words find a hearing. To be able to deceive the world―ah, that is so seductive. Precisely because now the world lieth in reflection what is needed is an honesty that has it within its power to deceive, but that wants to be honest. Therefore I make no greater existential demands than what are usual. But, just as a person can purchase something shoddy or something valuable for the same sum, on the same existential terms I can offer a more truthful conception of Xnty. Someone possessing authority might go a step further, might require an existential transformation, greater effort. I do not go that far, but this is not something I am proud of. I myself am far enough out existentially that I can truly be honest with respect to those glorious ones: the witnesses to the truth, the true Xns.

437

438

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 169

•

1851

Illumination of the Whole of Xnty. The greatest emphasis a hum. being could place upon himself―upon his I, upon the fact that I am the one with whom you are dealing―is to require faith. And a hum. being who understood this would then constantly order his entire life or arrange his life in such a way that it could only become an object of faith. It is not he who needs to be believed by the others―no, it is the assertion of his sovereignty that wills only to be an object of faith. I am not deciding whether a hum. being has the right to relate to others in this way―or I am denying it. But God is the I, the subject, who in relation to hum. beings must accentuate his I in such a way that it is only the object of faith. Thus in this connection God will also arrange everything in such a way that he can only become the object of faith, always arranging things such that they conflict with the understanding. This is not arrogance on God’s part; he cannot do otherwise. So take all the difficulties with Xnty seized upon by the freethinkers and defended against by the apologists, and look: the whole business is much ado about nothing. These very difficulties have been put there by God―though they are also inherent in the necessary properties of his essence and in the misrelation between the two qualities God and hum. being―in order to ensure that he can only be the object of faith. This is why Xnty is the paradox, this is why there are contradictions in Holy Scripture, etc., etc. But in its way of viewing things the understanding wants to present everything in straightforward fashion―that is, it wants to abolish having faith. It wants direct recognizability. It wants to have the most absolute harmony among everything in the scriptures. Then it will believe Xnty, believe that the Bible is God’s Word, i.e., it will not believe. It has no inkling of God’s sovereignty and of what it means to require faith. The apologists are just as stupid as the freethinkers, and they are continually shifting the point of view of Xnty. In order to understand or to become aware of Xnty, of God’s relation to hum. beings, one could make a study of the most cunning hum. arrogance―because it will be recognizable precisely by the fact that it requires faith. Here one would notice quite a few

169

5

10

15

432

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 170

•

1851

439

NB24:170. The entry was written on a loose sheet of paper that was placed at the front of the journal.

440

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 169–170

•

1851

things. Then again, one must of course not forget that this sort of hum. arrogance is presumptuousness and ungodliness, whereas in relation to God it cannot be otherwise: he must require faith, otherwise he is not God. But, of course, what sort of notion do all these speculative theologians together have about what it is to require faith!

1

5

Early April 1851.

a

That nothing could be done on the occasion of Mynster’s most recent work: Further Contribution, etc.

To the Journal. the volume.

5

434

170

The page is indicated at the beginning of 10

That Nothing Can Be Done on the Occasion of Mynster’s Most Recent Book (Further Contribution, etc.) 1) The words he cites are used quite properly, so that no objection can be made. 2) I would absolutely accept recognition by Bishop Mynster. But the way in which he has positioned Goldschmidt makes the whole thing an insult (formally, for of course the fact of the matter is that the material is cited correctly). But my practice is never to take insults into account. To defend oneself against insults is not fighting in godly fashion―in godly fashion one only defends oneself against being recognized as excellent, etc., especially when it is misunderstood. 3) My existential category is: “without authority.” But in this case what rlly must be made use of is authority, and an attack on Mynster would tend in that direction. But I continually confine myself solely to the poetic approach. 4) It goes without saying that Mynster was the person for whom, above all others, I would have risked almost everything. But he has weakened himself here. As far as that goes, given my profound veneration, he has also put me in a position of almost ridiculous embarrassment, for this is really not a category for a man who behaves in this way. As far as that goes, for my part I could be satisfied if I were also the person who dealt him a blow. But for the reasons cited I cannot decide to do it―and furthermore, many people will also view Practice in Xnty as aimed in Mynster’s direction, despite my having in fact kept the whole thing poetic and my continuing wish to be able to continue unchanged with my “in profound veneration.”

15

20

25

30

35

JOURNAL NB25

JOURNAL NB25 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Journal NB25 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Anne Mette Hansen, Finn Gredal Jensen, Steen Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 1

437

1

•

1851

NB25. Novbr. 29th 1851.

443

444

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 2

•

1851

Abraham. (New Fear and Trembling) (in Journal NB24 or NB23 one of them from the summer of 1851 or the spring there is a draft related to this) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Mynsterian Preaching of Christianity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Possible Collision with Mynster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Story of the Passion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

438

2

p. 40. pp. 122 and following. pp. 169 and following. pp. 175, bottom of page, and following.

5

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 3 1851 •

439

3

Concerning Texts for Friday Sermons See the blank sheet at the front of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17 p. 30.

445

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 4–5

•

1851

441

4

5

10

15

20

25

30

5

The Relation to God. Strictly speaking, a person’s relating to God must needs be recognizable precisely in that everything goes awry. If this were not the case, it would of course be possible that a person would cleave to God―in order that everything go well. This is an expression of God’s self-assertion: he says, as it were, If you really want to have anything to do with me, you must endure the fact that I keep watch, ensuring that misfortune and opposition and suffering result from the relation. Look, faith and love of this magnitude must be present in the person who wants to be called God’s friend. A more childlike standpoint is seen when a person fundamentally loves himself and, hoping in the bargain to obtain God’s help so that everything goes well for him, gives thanks to God and attributes everything to him. But if you earnestly want to remain faithful to God, and simply strive to do what can please God, then eo ipso opposition and suffering must follow. Naturally, God must keep watch; naturally, he cannot wish to let himself be deceived or to permit you to remain in an illusion. Ah, what a frightful effort it is for a hum. being to bear the fact that suffering indeed has its source in God. The fact that, in an infinitely lofty sense, God is nonetheless― no, precisely for this reason―infinite love, is an entirely different matter. He wills a hum. being’s eternal well-being―and, alas, a hum. being is primarily concerned about his earthly well-being. It is this conception of the relation to God that finds diabolical expression in what we hear in our time: God is evil. That is: the unconditioned, the relation to the unconditioned, to the ideal, etc., makes a hum. being unhappy in this world. Yes, of course, says Xnty, but the unconditioned saves a person eternally. But when hum. beings have abandoned the eternal, then, quite logically, God is evil―frightful!

The Single Individual. What produces such enormous confusion is that everyone must immediately formulate a theory and obligate everyone else to it. 18 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

447

448

1

[a]

he himself does not even get to put his own theory into practice, but he came to set forth a theory that was the source of controversy.

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 5–7

•

1851

Now someone has formed an impression of Xnty―presto! then it has to be a theory, and everyone else must follow suit. So he busies himself with elaborating his theory (this of course tends away from the religious). Then his theory is attacked by others, he defends himself, etc.―continually tending away from true religiousness,[a] No, what must be insisted upon is this: There is a book called the N.T. I feel myself obligated by it in the following ways―but I do not formulate theories, I do not obligate others. I say only: I feel myself obligated in this way and I express it in action. Truth is not my helping to gather a bunch of people who feel themselves obligated by me or by my views. Truth is that it be known that there is a book called the N.T. and that everyone, by himself, and before God, is to understand himself as obligated by it.

442

5

10

15

The N.T.

6

Luther somewhere says expressly that what had confused the Church was the perpetual emphasis on the doctors of the Church and their writings. He believed, as he also says, that when the N.T. has been brought forth and translated into the local language, thus making it accessible to everyone, absolutely no further scholarly analysis should take place. Yes, that’s it. No, just as the pope protected himself by forbidding the reading of the N.T., so did Protestantism protect itself with the assistance of―learned exegesis. Everything depends upon our being prevented from gaining access to, or our defending ourselves from grasping the import of, God’s Word.

20

25

30

35

Hegel. What was more honest about the furious attack directed against Xnty in an earlier age was that it

7

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 7–8

443 5

10

8 15

20

25

30

35

40

was at least allowed to remain reasonably certain about what Xnty is. What is dangerous about Hegel is that he changed Xnty―and in so doing made it agree with his philosophy. Generally speaking, this is what characterizes an age of understanding. Not to permit the task to remain what it is and say No, but to change the task and say Yes, by God, we are in agreement. The hypocrisy of the understanding is infinitely cunning. That is why it so difficult to catch sight of it here.

An Earlier Time―Our Time. Psychologically. I have wondered why it is that in earlier times, authors, poets, etc. produced their most important works at an older age, whereas in our time it is characteristic to begin by culminating, item a lack of confidence in life, so that almost everyone contemplates stopping writing at an early age, to become a prof. for a few years, a poet for a few years, an actor, etc.―in short, as if the tasks were insufficient to last an entire life. I think this can be explained as follows: instead of being tasks for character, all tasks have become tasks of virtuosity. That is why they do not suffice. To be capable of saying what is highest, to be capable of understanding what is highest, to present it, etc., this can be done up to a person’s 30th year. To do it: this changes everything and would give a person task enough for the longest life. You see, this is what people do not want to do. They want to scintillate with virtuosity―and slink away from character. That is why people turn aside. This is also the source of didacticism, that villainy: Right at the point where a person stakes his life, suffers everything―at that very point some wretch comes along and appropriates the doctrine, the objective doctrine (the subjective aspect, suffer19 item] Latin, as well as, also.

•

1851

449

450

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 8–11

•

1851

ing, is a matter of no importance, something lower) and becomes a success. 444

Psychological.

9

We are brought up in Xnty so leniently that the question of whether one ought not make an effort to attain the sort of righteousness that Xnty requires―without wanting to employ the usual sleazy methods, without wanting to profit from doing so, without wanting to sing with the birds among whom one finds oneself, etc.―can actually appear to a person as a spiritual trial. Might it not be something opposed to God, might it not be arrogance, pride for me to want to be better than the others, so that far from being pleased, God would be displeased with these strivings of mine[?] You see, what God wills―and what we absolutely must do―is no longer absolutely clear to us, but “grace” has been brought to bear improperly and altogether prematurely.

5

10

15

Christianity.

10

In order unconditionally to provide consolation to all sufferers, Christianity must reach far down―far enough to encompass a wretchedness that terrifies us merely by our being made aware of it (even though Xnty only brings it to awareness in order to console). At the same time Xnty must make the tone and the requirement so lofty that it can force demons to their knees. This makes the situation difficult for us, who are average hum. beings. Therefore we have the N.T. to guide us, and therefore everyone, before God, must defend the way in which he lets himself be obligated by Xnty. But intermediate authorities established by hum. beings serve only to confuse.

20

The Primitive―The Traditional.

11

In our times, scholarly doubts arise more and more strongly, taking away scripture after scripture. The orthodox are in despair. How strange! People accept that the N.T. is God’s Word―

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 11–12

445 5

10

15

20

25

•

1851

but people seem to have forgotten entirely that God, after all, continues to exist. But the fact is that people do not believe, but are mimicking history. Suppose doubt hit upon the idea that Paul’s letters were not by Paul or that Paul had simply never existed, and that this idea came to be viewed as rather probable: what then? Well, scholarly orthodoxy would have to despair. The believer would quite simply have to turn to God in prayer and say: [“]How can this make sense? I cannot compete with this learned scholarship, but I cling to the doctrines of Paul―and you, my God, whatever the critics prove about the existence of Paul, you will not permit me to live in error. I accept what I read here[a] and I refer it to you, o God, and then you will keep me from being led into error by what I read.[”] I could really be tempted to believe that Governance is permitting learned, exegetical, and critical skepticism to gain the upper hand because Governance is tired of the hypocrisy and the mimicry occasioned by preoccupation with “the historical” and historical certainty, and wants to compel hum. beings back into primitivity again. For primitivity, that one must be primitive, alone with God, without having been preceded by others whom one imitates and to whom one appeals: this is something peop. are quite unwilling to do. And with every century, history’s millions upon millions became more and more numerous, and hum. beings also became more and more spiritless. Then God has arranged things so that corrosive criticism has also become more and more powerful over the centuries. All spiritlessness is connected with this historical appeal to the countless millions who lived before us.

451

[a]

in Paul

30

12

Stephen. When He Had Said This, He Fell Asleep.

35

1) He fell asleep. How quiet. For a person can certainly sleep fitfully, but then he cannot be said to have fallen asleep. But sleeping quietly symbolizes quietness. How quiet. How quiet― doubly so in the light of its opposite: a raging crowd, fuming with violence and murder―and he, he sleeps. His Lord and Master slept[a] while the storm raged―and the disciples imitated him, sleeping at that moment.

[a]

in the boat

1

452

1

b

on the other hand

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 12

•

1851

2) He slept. How powerful―yes, or ratherb how powerless, how powerless you are, ungodly world, how powerless in all your rage and noise: what do you accomplish―look here and see what you accomplish: he is asleep! You yourselves become sleepless with embitterment, manage to disturb everything―but not him, not a person who sleeps! How powerful to be able to sleep at that moment, and not merely to be able to sleep at that moment, but to lay down to sleep at that moment. Under other circumstances, how little it takes to disturb a person’s sleep―but to be able to sleep like that. Ah, world, you are almost laughable in your impotence: He is asleep, he sleeps away from it all, he does not struggle against it, no, far from it: he is asleep. He does not answer you, no, far from it: he is asleep― he is distant, faraway, absent: he is asleep. 3) When he had said this, he fell asleep. What was it he said? He said: Father, do not hold this sin against them. This, then, is the formula: then one falls asleep. As one tells a child to recite a prayer aloud and then sleep―that is how he slept or that is what he said. He prayed for them. He prayed for himself again and again; his entire life, right to the end, his sufferings, were praying for himself. Now there is only an instant left, a minute: He prays for his enemies. Yet it must be admitted that the shorter the time allotted, perhaps the easier it is to decide to pray for his enemies. Were he to have lived longer among them, perhaps it would not have been so easy to pray for them. But we learn from him: to pray for oneself and to pray for one’s enemies―then to fall asleep.

5

446 10

15

20

25

30

* * [c]

They saw your face as the face of an angel―thus in death.

5

[d] he has been famous and praised for 1800 years, but he cares so little about that―he sleeps.

So sleep, then, sleep sweetly (to be completed).

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 12

•

1851

Part of entry NB25:12.d was written in the margin.

453

454

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 13–16

[a]

1

5

10

Stephen.

Theme: when the world is closed to a person, heaven opens up for him. Intro. The animal does not see heaven at all. The pagan (those who walk erect) did, however, see heaven;a but only the Xn sees heaven open, especially the martyr―for him the world is closed on the greatest possible scale. a

15

20

But in another sense, in speaking of paganism one must simply say that heaven is closed to paganism―though the world is all the more open to it. Indeed, the one corresponds to the other―either/ or: The world is open to those to whom heaven is closed, and the world is closed to those for whom the heavens open. Now you can choose.

[a]

25

30

But if someone says, “Angels, no one has ever seen an angel― that is something for children,” answer,[“]Rubbish, nonsense, hold your tongue―just see to it that you become like Stephen, that your face is like the face of an angel: then the rest of us will indeed get to see an angel.[”]

•

1851

Stephen. Theme: What is required in order to be able to pray for one’s enemies? Praying for one’s enemies is the greatest of all― therefore it causes so much bitterness in the situation of contemporaneity.

13

5

448

God’s Word. If one is truly to depend upon a hum. being, one requires that he give his word on it: in this way, God has of course given us his word, his word on it that―Xt is the Word.

St. Stephen’s Day.

14

10

15

That the feast of Christmas begins and ends with angels: Yesterday the angels proclaimed that a savior is born―today Stephen attests to that, and they saw his face as that of an angel. 20

The Celebration of Christmas. Why did the savior of the world become a child? The most emphatic expression for the fact that we are saved by grace alone, that we are incapable of achieving anything, is that the Savior is a child. There can be absolutely no question of imitation here. But we must be extremely careful not to make Xnty into mythology in this way. Indeed, Christmas first arose in the 4th cent.

16

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 17–18

17

Immortality

20

Cicero says (in de natura deorum toward the conclusion of the 2nd book) that the gods have no advantage over hum. beings other than immortality, but that this is not necessary in order to lead a happy life. Certainly great confusion results from the way in which Xndom foists immortality upon people and gets them to imagine that they have a profound need for immortality. Generally speaking, immortality first made its appearance with Xnty―and why is that? Because it requires that a person die away. In order for a person to be able and willing to die away, the eternal and immortality must be unshakable. Immortality and dying away correspond to one another. The hope of immortality is born in the suffering of dying away. But in Xndom people want to cheat their way into everything, and thus also into immortality.

18

“Only One Receives the Prize.”

5

449 10

15

25

30

35

Can be used as theme for a discourse (for self-examination) that reveals the hypocrisy perpetrated by invoking “the congregation,” just as the first discourse revealed the hypocrisy perpetrated by invoking “scientific scholarship.” To be―to have an obligation to be―the single individual is what is most strenuous, and it means renouncing the world: this is something hum. beings know very well, but they simply will not admit it. “The single individual” is the category of spirit. The collectivity is the animal category that makes life easier, provides a criterion of comparison, serves up worldly goods, conceals one in the crowd, etc. “But we are clever, we have discovered―think how clever, how inscrutable―we have discovered

•

1851

455

456

1

a

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 18–19

(but this remains unter uns; I can of course confide this to you in the parlor, but one must avoid saying it officially)

•

1851

that being a single individual (who clings only to God) is self-love, disgusting and heartless self-love. Am I to be such an egotist, then―fie on it―especially because, were I to will such a thing, I would be deprived of everything that is worldly, whereas by being―heartily!―heartily in solidarity with the others, I gain worldly things and am also beloved as the loving, the hearty person.” …. “But we are clever, we have―imagine how cunning, but by all means, let us keep this cunning to ourselves―we have discovered that the collectivity, the association, the congregation: these are ‘earnestness’―that wanting to be the single individual is fantasy, immaturity, exaggeration, and thus is not true earnestness. Am I to be a fantast, then[?]― no, I am the earnest one who heartily sticks together with the others, and in so doing I gain all earthly advantages and am also regarded and honored as the earnest one. Just looka at those in history who have actually stood alone, look how things went for them, how they were abandoned by everyone, then persecuted, compelled to live in poverty and, finally, were not even permitted to live but were condemned to death―fantasts as they were, they lacked earnestness, and this was why it was their fate to be punished, even if they were perhaps punished too severely, and the more appropriate punishment, the one our times has assigned to such people, is to be ridiculed by us earnest and reasonable people.”

5

450

15

20

25

30

Paganism. Right at the end of the second book of de natura deorum Cicero gives voice to the essence of paganism: there exists a Providence that concerns itself with the whole of things and also with individual hum. beings―but, note well, with those who are remarkable. And he says the gods concern themselves with important matters and not with things that are insignificant. Oh, frightful hopelessness, or frightful lèse majesté against God: how in all the world would I dare 1 unter uns] German, between us.

19

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 19–21

5

10

•

1851

457

believe that God concerned himself about me if he only concerned himself with what is important[?] How frightful that it could occur to a hum. being to believe that it was for this reason that God concerned himself with him―that consequently he was important to God. No, Xnty approaches the matter differently: the more wretched, the more abandoned, the more insignificant, the unhappier you are―you may be sure of this―the more God concerns himself with you. Paganism is camaraderie with God: God is merely the superlative of being a hum. being.

451

20

Solidarity.

15

The basis of all solidarity is the need for one another. That is why one cannot be in solidarity with God in this sense―for God has need of nothing and no one. To be in solidarity with God is to be under continual examination. In love, God is most severe with the person who comes closest to him. Ah, how many people have deceived themselves in this respect, believing deep down, however silently, that God needs them. It is as if God’s majesty has been forgotten, and instead of the usual expositions of God’s attributes one sees nowadays, I could be tempted to take up just one―on God’s majesty―so that people could properly appreciate: love.

20

25

21

35

Cicero says (in de natura deorum, conclusion of book III that both amount to the same thing: that no one is wise and that no one can be wise. Thank you. Then the following conclusion also presents itself: that both amount to the same thing: that no one is pure, free of guilt, and that no one can be. That is how people want to abolish the eth-

[a]

Paganism―and Judaism, too, although less so―rlly has no concept of God’s majesty. This also is why paganism (e.g., Cicero in de natura deorum, conclusion of book III) used the fact that evil people fared well in the world as an argument against the existence of a God. This was what Diogenes did in connection with the thief Harpalus, who was regarded as happy, saying, “Your existence disproves the existence of gods.[”] You see, this is the debased concept of hum. gods, who are believed to act immediately, presumably because they are unsure of themselves. On the contrary: Xnty!―this infinite majesty, that the God of love

1

5

10

15

458 1

5

10

15

20

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 21–22

simply permits the worst things to happen to his loved ones in the world and for the time being permits evil people to triumph: infinite majesty. Take, for example, a weak hum. analogy: the merely hum. stance is to be hard on one’s enemies and opponents but to pamper one’s adherents. Push this to a somewhat higher level, and you will find someone who is extremely lenient to his enemies and opponents but strict with those who want to be his friends! Perhaps this is culpable arrogance, but in the relation between God and hum. beings it cannot be otherwise if God is truly to be God, God with majesty. And yet, in this enormous majesty he is love.

•

1851

ical in our times as well. People say: None of us are ―ergo none of us can be it [ethical], or people say that these two sentences are one and the same.

God’s Majesty―“Grace” in the First Place. The more a pers. clings to God, the closer he comes to him, the more he wills what God wills, the more rigorous does everything become for him, the more he suffers in this world―that this is true, that it is certain, that it is Xnty, that it is spirit, is inherent in God’s majesty, which cannot be otherwise. That nonetheless―or rather, that for precisely this reason―God is love, infinite love, is equally certain. Oh, those blessed glorious ones who could endure involving themselves with God on these terms. It is equally certain that their salvation is nonetheless by “grace,” for this is once again an expression of majesty: No one can be saved except by grace. But these glorious ones did not have grace right at the start: their lives express spiritual struggle in the strict sense, and even though they themselves acknowledge before God that they are saved by grace, we others should bow deeply before them. Then comes the next stage. A hum. being acknowledges this, acknowledges how frightful it is to come quite close to God (which, after all, is what God requires), but confesses his weakness, confesses the fact that he does not dare do this―at least not yet―then “grace” shifts into the first place, so that grace permits a slackening-off of the greatest strain. In his infinite love God can and does enter into this sort of thing, too―but then he wills that there be honesty and truth, that a person must confess this. I must, in humble and straightforward fashion, confess that the error lies in me, that I am afraid of being spirit in the strict sense, and that I am therefore to some extent evading the situation. The error contained in sermons is the nonsense to the effect that [“]I would so very much like to.[”] Rubbish: No, I am the one who would not so very much like

22

10

452 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 22–23

5

10

15

to―and God will forgive me for this in “grace.” Infinite love that he is―he is nonetheless willing to be involved with a hum. being, even on those conditions. My God, my God―this is not my cry, [“]My God, my God, why have you forsaken[”]―no, it was only the highest one, the only one, your beloved, who stood closest to you, and next after him were the chosen ones―no, I cry: [“]My God, my God, that you hold on to me in this way, that you want to hold on to me, that you want to have anything to do with me despite the fact that I am so weak and do not dare venture out so far.[”] But as they are now, modern sermons are wrong, rlly wrong; all true preaching is rlly self-accusation. To say: [“]I would so very much like to[”] is an affront to God. Either I am to do it entirely, or I must confess that I am like a poor child, so weak.

453

23

25

30

35

The Event in France. The decisive line is rlly (and this is something the Russian tsar will understand) that the soldiers said, [“]We are soldiers.[”] That they are addressed as [“]Citizens,[”] and that they therefore dare not shoot: this is, for the time being, held in abeyance. Napoleon is no hero. This does not require proof. But there is proof in the fact that the night preceding the coup, between 2 and 4 o’clock in the morning, he ran about restlessly, asking the adjutants and the sentries whether they had heard anything, that is, the signal he was expecting. The old Napoleon was able to sleep before a battle. A hero bears his task intensely, with equanimity, without other people noticing its weight. The new Napoleon lacks this intensive self-repose―he is like a gambler, is tense like a gambler, and does not repose in himself as a hero does.

•

1851

459

460

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 24–27

•

1851–1852 Paganism

(see de natura deorum conclusion of book III, also Horace, æquam mentum mihi ipsi præstabo) said: one should thank God for good luck―wisdom is one’s own doing. Xnty teaches that the Pharisee sinned most profoundly when he thanked God for his righteousness. Nonetheless, it goes without saying (as Luther also insists in the sermon about the Pharisee and the publican) that one is not to mendaciously attribute to oneself more sins than one’s own, but must simply avoid confusing the merely human criterion with God’s criterion.

January 1852. “The Professor” In early antiquity philosophy was a power, an ethical power, character. The empire protected itself by―paying them, by making them “professors.” So also with Christianity. The professor is a castrato, but he has not gelded himself for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, but the reverse, in order properly to fit into this characterless world.

24

5

10

454

25

26

15

20

Luther. After all, everyone will admit that it is extremely different if a person at the pinnacle of scholarly cultivation suddenly stops and says, [“]No, what matters is not scientific scholarship[”]―and if some bricklayer’s apprentice jumps up and says it. But why, then, do people not want to understand that it is different for someone (e.g., Luther)―who has fasted and mortified his flesh for 20 years, and who is therefore aware that he is capable of doing this at any time―for him to say, [“]No, that is not what matters[”], and for us, who have never attempted anything at all, to say the same thing. Are there not grounds to suspect oneself if one has never attempted anything at all[?] 2 æquam . . . præstabo] Latin, personally, I shall prefer a calm (or fair) attitude.

27

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 25

•

1852

NB25:25. Kierkegaard begins the new year with the heading “January 1852.”

461

462

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 28–30

•

1852

Div. Compassion. Imagine a lenient lord. Yes, his subjects say, it is true, he does everything for us―but he cannot entirely put himself in our place, and he has never been in our place. He cannot fully help us. This is where Xnty is situated: God decided to become a hum. being so that he could truly have mercy upon hum. beings.

28

5

10

456

The Gospel for the Poor

1

5

a

Ah, but the poor are perhaps just as worldly and concern themselves just as little with the gospel; but this is how we hum. beings are: we demand a joyous message about earthly goods.

What has rlly made the matter difficult is that people want to make Xnty into a joyous message― for the fortunate and the rich and the mighty, etc.

The Annunciation. Theme: that the angel made the right choice―because Mary made the right choice. It is certainly true that she was the chosen one, and thus the matter was decided― it was she. But nonetheless there is also a moment of freedom, of appropriation, in which it becomes clear that a person is the right one. Had the angel not found her as she was when he found her, she would not have been the right one. She said, Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord―let it be with me as you will. We are so accustomed to hearing this that we easily overlook its significance and probably go so far as to imagine that had we been in the same situation we would have replied the same way.

29

15

30

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 30–31

25

Let us consider what she―alas, much more naturally!―could have replied. It is helpful for us to consider this situation in a manner quite different from the way in which it has been decoratively presented―not without beauty―by the pious attitudes that, for example, have dwelt on the idea that when the angel had spoken to Mary, it was as if the whole of creation had called out to Mary: [“]Indeed! say Yes. Oh, be quick to say Yes, etc.[”] Thus she could have―yes, she could have done just as Sarah did; she could have laughed―indeed, in this case there were equally good reasons for doing so. And had she not been able to laugh at it, she might have felt that it was shameful to be addressed in this way and have dismissed it. Or she could have said, [“]This is too lofty for me, I cannot do it, spare me, it is beyond my powers.[”] The angel clearly shared the view that it was beyond her powers, and that is why the power of the Holy Spirit had to overshadow her. Well, this is true enough, but precisely when one has faith of this sort, becoming nothing, a mere instrument―precisely this is surely farther beyond a hum. being’s powers than the utmost, utmost efforts at the limits of one’s strength.

31

Knock, and It Shall Be Opened unto You.

5

10

15

457 20

30

35

40

So it is eternally certain that when someone knocks, the door will be opened. Ah, but suppose that the difficulty for us hum. beings consists precisely in the fact that we are so afraid to step forth―and knock. Have faith―and if you command it, this mountain will lift itself up and hurl itself into the sea. It is eternally certain that this is so. Ah, but suppose that the difficulty for us hum. beings consists precisely in the fact that we must be anxious and afraid of possessing such enormous power, so that to us it is as if it might well happen that the mountain lifted itself up―but then fell on me.

•

1852

463

464

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 32

•

1852

To Suffer for the Teaching―The Relation to Absolute Majesty―The Positive Recognizable by the Negative. One realizes that Xnty is conscious of being the absolute, the divine, from the circumstance that it strikes such a lofty tone, that it decrees that any relation to it will involve suffering―and that this is nonetheless the greatest grace and the highest sort of blessedness. Nothing, nothing strikes such a lofty tone. (It would not occur to the arts or sciences that commerce with them would come to entail suffering.) This is the first point. And then what follows: that despite this it [Christianity] is sheer blessedness and sheer grace. Suffering for the teaching thus does not mean that one earns and deserves blessedness. If that were the case, then the infinite, the absolute, is made finite, for deserving a thing makes it finite. No, the suffering is neither more nor less than the identifying mark, the criterion, which shows that I am actually involved with the absolute, that I am relating myself to it. The absolute, the highest good, is thus heterogeneous with all other goods, not their superlative― no, the reverse: it is recognizable by the fact that relating to it is suffering. Here, as everywhere, the formula for Christianity is that Christianity is always the positive that is recognizable by the negative―and relating oneself to the highest blessedness is recognizable by the fact that one comes to suffer in this world. Herein lies the possibility of offense. But the apostle always speaks on the basis of this dialectic of reversal: not only does he refuse to allow himself to be disturbed by suffering and opposition―no, no, on their basis he proves that his cause is the right one, that it is God’s cause. Ah, peerless majesty.

32

5

10

15

458

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 33–34

33

5

•

1852

465

The Wedding at Cana. Xnty changes water into wine: it denies a hum. being what is earthly, but it gives him the eternal. He must die away, but then he becomes spirit: is not this transformation of an animal creature into “spirit” the same as the transformation of water into wine[?]

10

34

Abraham. New Fear and Trembling.

15

Here the mood should touch more definitely upon madness. The point should be that A. had been unable to keep himself in suspenso at the apex of faith until the end―and therefore had sacrificed Isaac.

459

Mood.

20

25

30

Once there was a man who as a child had learned the story of Abraham, and he knew his lessons, as always, both by heart and in his heart. Then years passed, and as with so much one learns in childhood, so also with this, he had no use for it―and he forgot it. In the meantime, his life changed. He had many trials and tribulations, and a strange collision suddenly, at one blow, put his life in abeyance; he became preoccupied with this and only this. It preoccupied him from morning to night, awake and in dreams, and he became old before his time. 15 years passed in this fashion. Then, as he awoke one morning, this suddenly occurred to him: But what you are going through is of course similar to the story of Abraham. 15 in suspenso] Latin, in suspense.

[a] In Journal NB24 or NB23 (one of those from the summer of 51 or the spring) there is a draft related to this.

1

466

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 34–36

•

1852

And then he began to read. He read and read; he read aloud, he sketched the whole thing out; he cut it out in paper silhouettes; he did nothing else―but he did not understand Abraham and he did not understand himself. 5

Christianity. To be sure, when a pers. has become truly unhappy―then he has a taste for Xnty. Therefore most people resort to Xnty at death. But―as one might actlly pose the hum. objection to Xnty―if I am among the fortunate, am I permitted voluntarily to make myself unhappy like this so that I might get a proper taste for Xnty? This is the question of the voluntary, of the imitation of Xt―not so much as the result of faith as of placing myself in the situation in which I can become a Xn. The person who has involuntarily become unhappy, humanly speaking, is in a less difficult position, for spiritual trial really only arrives with the “voluntary.” Luther rightly puts it as follows: Xt is a gift―to which faith corresponds. Furthermore, he is the Exemplar―to which imitation corresponds. But with greater accuracy it might be said: 1) imitation, tending toward decisive action, through which the situation for becoming a Xn comes into existence; 2) Xt as gift―faith; 3) imitation as the fruit of faith.

The Son of the Widow of Nain or The Encounter of Death and Life. From one side comes the funeral cortège; from the other side comes Xt. From the other side, i.e., the opposite side. This is how it is with the whole of Xnty: from the other side comes the opposition to what is merely human.

35

10

15

460

25

36 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 36–37

5

•

1852

Xnty transforms death into life (awakening―immortality), but first it also transforms life into death (dying-away), always the opposite, always from the other side. The greatest possible distortion of Xnty is to put it on the same plane as what is merely human, perhaps as the superlative; or as something that keeps pace with the merely human, or perhaps represents an intensification of it.

37

Can I Understand?―Do I Want to Understand?

10

The entire realm of intellectuality and everything belonging to it can be recognized by the formula that in relation to it I must ask: Can I understand it? The task here is to understand. Here there are differences between one hum. being and another, inasmuch as one person is capable of understanding more than another can understand, of understanding more easily, more quickly, etc.―genius and talent―and if I do not possess this distinction, there is nothing more to be said about the matter. The ethical and the ethical-religious can be recognized by the formula: Do I want to understand it? Thus here there are no differences. Above all, the ethical and the ethical-religious must not include anything about which I might ask: Can I understand it? At that very instant the ethical is changed for the worse; it has lost authority; procrastination has intruded. Therefore, neither can the ethical be served, as intellectuality can, by someone saying: Work at it, and you will surely come to understand―give yourself a little time, and it will surely come, etc. No, no, with respect to everything about which there is truly a question of my ability to understand it, it is also true that it is not the ethical―this sort of thing is not a part of the ethical. Therefore the ethical can only be served by what the police do when they say: [“]You scoundrel, not wanting to understand― you hypocrite, etc.[”] or by irony, which operates cunningly, saying, [“]You can very well understand, but you do not want to understand.[”] What profound cunning it is, therefore, to establish a science of the ethical or the ethical-religious! What profound cunning when it is said that a sermon must have comprehended the latest philosophy in order to satisfy the requirement of the times. Yes, certainly, because the requirement of the times consists precisely

15

20

461 25

30

35

40

467

468

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 37–38

•

1852

in becoming free of the ethical requirement―so the best thing is to bring in scientific scholarship which operates politely in the direction of the intellect: to be able to understand.

Amor and Psyche. Just today I am again reading the story in Apuleius. The 4th test Venus sets for P[syche] is to retrieve the box from Proserpine―and the dangers along the way consist in large measure of sights and objects that will move her to sympathy and thus delay her and hold her back. This is something I have also noted in other legends: that in relation to the extraordinary, in relation to what in Greek might be called divine daring, something takes shape that holds a person back or that tempts a person toward something that will hold him back, something tending toward sympathy. And quite rightly. Because dangers and everything related to them cause an ordinary hum. being to shrink back in fear. Then there are the brave ones. Dangers and the like do not scare them. So spiritual trial takes the form of sympathy. And look, it is precisely the brave person who most tends to show sympathy to others. Ordinary hum. beings, perhaps, might not let themselves be held back by sympathy as long as they themselves simply have the courage to go up against the dangers, but the brave person is precisely the one who is weakest in the sense of showing sympathy. Take an example: advancing an idea. Indeed, the ordinary hum. being is restrained from venturing like this by the fear of dangers; he shrinks back and would rather be satisfied with being a copy. But then there is the brave one. Quite right, he does not shrink back from the dangers. But look, this is where sympathy comes in: things of this sort cannot be done without making a whole lot of peop. unhappy―this is spiritual trial.

38

10

15

20

25

462

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 39–42

•

1852

To Die Away

39

was of course the Socratic.

5

Theaet[etus]: διο ϰαι πειρασϑαι χρη ενϑενδε εϰεισε ϕυγειν οτι ταχιστα. ϕυγη δε ομοιωσις ϑεω ϰατα το δυνατον. cited from Meiners’s Ethik, Göttingen, 1800, pt. 1, p. 211.

Stoic Suicide.

40

: ηνοιϰτα[ι] ἠ ϑυρα, το αναϰλητιϰον σημαινει Arrian III, 10 and 13, cited from Meiners’s Ethik, pt. 1, p. 164. 10

41

Lucretius II, 1.

15

Svave, mari magno turbantibus æqvora ventis, e terra magnum alterius spectare laborem; non qvia vexari quemquam’st jucunda voluptas, sed, quibus ipse malis careas, quia cernere suave’st cited from Meiners’s Ethik, pt. 2, p. 300.

463

42

The Proclamation of Xnty by Official Christendom Is Sophistry.

20

In order to illustrate this, a few words about the ancient Sophists. If one wants to understand them, one must certainly bear in mind that they were not as they were presented in Plato. In Plato, of course, they are simply turned inside out: their essence and their interior are made visible, whereas their reality was cunning, illusion, hypocrisy. This would indeed have been a foolish, a stupid self-contradiction on their part―and the Sophists were not stupid; that the challenge is to appear to be just and good, but not to be those things―this was their secret―for being those

25

3 διο ... δυνατον] Greek, Wherefore we ought to fly away from earth to heaven as quickly as we can; and to fly away is to become like God, as far as this is possible. 8 ηνοιϰτα[ι] ... σημαινει] Greek, The door, after it is opened, signifies an invitation. 12 Svave . . . suave’st] Latin, It is delicious, when the wind raises the waves of the great sea in a rage, to observe another’s difficulties from the mainland. The source of our joy is not the distress of others, but rather to gain an insight into the trials of others that we do not share.

469

470

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 42

•

1852

things is certain misery:1 it would be a strange self-contradiction, then, if they themselves presented this; the illusion would be rendered impossible and they would be rendered harmless. No, in reality they fight precisely to preserve the illusion: they praise the good, etc. (thereby they attained the appearance of being that―but they were not that, and thereby they attained all earthly advantages). In Geschichte des Wissenschaften, Lemgo, 1782, 2nd part, p. 208, Meiners, following Philostratus, tells us about their lives. Thus we have that fine moral tale about Hercules at the crossroads, which is ascribed to Prodicus, a Sophist. Gorgias encouraged unity among the Greeks at the Pythian and Olympic games. Hippias depicted the families and the deeds of the heroes, the famous men, the wise counsel that Nestor gave Neoptolemus after the conquest of Troy. The Sophists also changed in accordance with their circumstances: In Thebes and in Sparta, they orated about virtue, praising it and praising virtuous men―because that was what was pleasing there. In Athens they waxed eloquent about the benefits of poverty and exile, because oratory of that sort was pleasing there (see Meiners, loc. cit., p. 209). In the note to the passage on Athens he cites Isocrates in Helen. Encom.―In short, they were declaimers. Just like the priests nowadays. The point is to seem to be devout, but not to be it―for to be it, yes, that is misery, persecution, etc. They orate so movingly in quiet hours―they move people, they acquire the appearance of being [devout]―but in reality, in character, they deny it―and they acquire earthly goods. But take care, take care that no one discover it―appearances are what matter. And people do it for money―something that both Socrates and Aristotle cite as the distinguishing characteristic of Sophistry. And by thus attaining the appearance of being a pious, good, and just person, they contribute to the situation in which the truly just person, conversely, comes to suffer as if he were an impious and unjust person. This is also how Socrates presents it, that this is the ultimate spiritual trial for the person who truly wants to be good: that he is, conversely, treated and regarded as an evil person and must suffer as such. “He is persecuted, or crucified, or burned until he then learns―when it is too late―that what matters is not to be a good person, but to seem to be one.” Note It was not without being deeply moved that I again read the passage in Plato’s Republic where the Sophist puts forth this formulation. Socrates saw the truly ethical so clearly―and alas, think, then, of Xndom, which is so much farther along than Socrates!

5

10

15

20

25

464

30

35

1

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 42–44

•

1852

The appearance of being a good person is theatrical comedy, and theatrical comedy is the maximum the world can tolerate. You see, this is why these orators succeed. Ah, Socrates, Socrates, Socrates! 5

43

10

15

20

Socrates. He is, after all, the only one of his kind, a true hero of intellectuality. In his pathos he reposes in himself to such an extent that he never has his pathos in common with others, but always hinders this communication by means of irony―so little does he need others. He is condemned to death. One gets a sense of Socrates from reading Xenophon’s Apology. What concerns him is the thought that he is now an old man, 70 years old, so that death could never come at a more opportune time. Furthermore, drinking poison is a pleasant way to die. As when a man says, [“]I have had an upset stomach for several days, I really think I will take some pills for indigestion,[”] so does Socrates drink the poison. Ah, the great master of irony. Cicero (Tusculan Disputations) puts it splendidly: He (Socrates) drinks the poison as if he were thirsty. I would add (this appears in the Phaedo): He drinks festively, as though for pleasure.

465

44

Dimensions. A.

30

When a person wants to get peop. to support a cause or has a cause that he wishes them to support, what does he do? He gives them reasons upon reasons, points out to them the advantages, etc.―because he himself is not (as people say) crazy: he is not unconditionally convinced of the unconditional rightness of his cause, and he (as it is said, neither does he regard peop. as being crazy), he knows very well that this is the sort of thing that is required if peop. are to support something. He needs peop. That is

471

472

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 44

•

1852

why he strives―sweetly!―to win them over, and does win them over (ja, mit Speck fangt man Maüse) with reasons and with prospects of victory, etc. etc. B. The highest merely hum. dimension is Socrates. He reposes so unconditionally in his unconditional relation to what he has to communicate that―quite consistently!―he places irony between himself and those whom he wants to gain for his cause. He rebuffs with irony. He has a cause for which he sacrifices everything, his life. He wants to get peop. to support it. But precisely because he relates himself to it unconditionally, he rebuffs with irony, more or less saying: [“]I do not know whether I am doing anyone a favor by getting him to support my cause.[”] And quite rightly, for to be willing to support something unconditional is to be willing to suffer, and that is not something for everyone. But precisely the fact that he manages to rebuff people―despite the fact that he wants to gain the support of peop.―precisely this fact proves that he has within himself a relation to something unconditional. The widespread eagerness to gain the support of peop. is merely an expression of the fact that one neither possesses something unconditional nor does one relate oneself unconditionally to something unconditional.

5

10

15

20

C. The God-Man. He says: I am God. Follow me, believe in me―then you will be persecuted, abominated, excluded from the synagogues, executed. This is divine. From these words alone I prove that the GodMan is the God-Man―no hum. being has ever spoken thus. There were many people, both before and after, who were presumptuous enough to present themselves as something divine. Such a person also sought to win peop. over,―but ad modum A, that is, in the finite manner: what does this mean? It means that he himself is not unconditionally convinced that he is the divine. He wants so very much to have people, a good many people, support it―because, you see, then he could in fact acquire the assistance of tangible power (because they are numerous) to assist him in coercing others to support it, and in any case, then he 2 ja, mit Speck . . . Maüse] German-Danish, yes, one catches mice with bacon. 32 ad modum] Latin, in the manner of.

25

466 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 44–46

5

10

15

20

45 25

30

•

1852

himself would be secure. Thus he presents himself as the divine. Indeed, he himself says so, he gives assurances upon assurances. Indeed, but he does not dare say it, for he does not dare say: As a result of this, you will be flogged, persecuted, etc. He does not dare say this. Why should he? Then he would of course run the risk that no one would support it―aha! that means that he himself does not believe that he is the divine. In saying this of himself, he himself does not dare let go of himself and establish the criterion―no, he clings fast to peop. and foists upon them the notion that he is―the divine: how excellent! But Xt says: Come hither, all of you―the consequence of following me will be that you will be flogged, lose everything, etc.: that is, everyone flees. This is divine in a double sense and is to speak as no hum. being has ever spoken, saying: Come hither, all of you (because, as God knows, he is concerned for everyone, and here there can be no talk of an esoteric relation to some few individuals)―and then to say what comes next. A hum. being who had the strength to say the latter, would not have the divinity to nonetheless say the former: Come hither, all of you. You see, this is the unconditional; this is spirit; this is the proof that Xt is the God-Man, because in wanting to win everyone over unconditionally, he frightens them all away.

The Sophists. In the second part of Meiners’s Geschichte der Wissenschaften, right at the conclusion of the section on the Sophists, I see that later (after Socrates’ death) the Sophists had lost so much esteem that they were not even permitted to serve as witnesses in court. Splendid! Splendid! Just as it is with the French police in our own day! And with God’s help this is also what will happen to the journalists!

467

46

35

Christianity―Christendom Only when a hum. being has become so wretched that it is true of him in the strictest sense that his only wish and only consolation is to die: only then does Xnty begin. When this is indeed how it is with a pers., then eo ipso in connection with this, his sole consolation, awakens his sole concern:

473

474

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 46–47

•

1852

Dare I hope to be saved? And what could be capable of preventing this? Sin and sins. And, quite rightly, it is here that Xnty begins. For what does Xnty want? It wants to help a hum. being die as someone saved. In cases when such a pers. does not die, but continues living, his life will tend toward suffering, suffering for the teaching, etc., but not toward enjoying life. But in Xndom Xnty has been arranged as an incitement to enjoy life, a new, more powerful stimulant aimed at the enjoyment of life. Xndom is thus a refined way of enjoying life, frightfully refined, for in paganism’s enjoyment there was always a bad conscience. But in Xndom people have sought to banish that by bringing the atonement to bear in the following manner: You have a God who has atoned―now you are truly to enjoy life. This is the greatest possible reversal.

Christianity. Christianity is so opposed to immediate hum. nature (that which is immediately natural) that I must say (this is something I can experience in my own person): Something of this this sort would never have occurred to me (never have arisen in my heart[)]. Indeed, Christianity is so opposed to what is natural that, if anything other than Xnty were to counsel me to embark on something of this sort (or more correctly, not merely counsel me, but command me to do it), I would absolutely not dare begin upon it because it would seem to me to be not only self-torment, but also presumption against God. What is natural is to wish for what is pleasant, to be happy to be alive, to enjoy life―and then to offer thanks to God. If I am to begin with Xnty and I forsake myself or I venture forth in such a way that I endure the world’s opposition and I suffer: then in an instant everything is transformed for me―so quickly that it seems as if this suffering were an expression of God’s displeasure with me, that is, a sign that I should not proceed down this path―because (and this is the conclusion drawn by the natural person) the sign of the God-relation is that my undertakings succeed, that I come to enjoy life, etc. What is the problem? The problem is that it (the idea of Xnty)―the idea that I am related [to God]―simply does not naturally occur to me. I desire (as someone heterogeneous, not

5

10

15

47

20

25

468 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 47–48

5

10

15

20

48

30

469

35

40

•

1852

related) to enjoy life―and then to thank God. Take a sparrow, for example, let it truly have everything it wishes―and then let us imagine that it thanked God: this does not make it related to God. But Xnty wills precisely that the fact that hum. beings must stand in relation to God be taken absolutely in earnest. God is spirit―thus only in dying away, in self-denial, in suffering (not in enjoyment) is relationship with God possible (for a sensate being). Ah, divine sublimity that, unlike the pagan gods, does not in petty fashion lie in wait, persecuting or punishing its foes―while making everything fine for its worshipers. No, in divine sublimity you let the punishment of the ungodly consist precisely in letting everything go well for them―but alas, without you, and precisely there lies the punishment! But those who worship you are recognizable by the fact that they must suffer: they have involved themselves with you, and therefore they must suffer. From this it can be seen that Xt had to suffer only because of this: to be related to God is to suffer. Nonetheless there is reconciliation―if not quite what hum. cruelty has invented à la Phalaris’s ox: that Xt must suffer and be tormented in order that I might enjoy life in luxury and pomp and glory. No, no: “imitation” is also a part of it. And only by suffering can a sensate being be related to God.

Modern Sophistry. When I emphasize the existential element in Xnty (albeit, alas, not nearly as strongly as does the N.T.!) people shout, [“]This is an exaggeration, it is the Law, not the Gospel.[”] They shout, [“]You have forgotten to speak of the Holy Spirit and its assistance, for that makes a heavy burden light.[”] Fine. So the others have the assistance of the Holy Spirit which makes everything light and helps them to―to what? What do their lives express? Do their lives express self-denial, renunciation―so that the difference between them and me, then, is that we agree that the business about self-denial and renunciation must be a part of it, but that this seems so difficult to me, whereas, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, it is easy for them? No: their lives express sheer worldliness. Aha! So that is what the assistance of the Holy Spirit is doing for them. Double nonsense: that worldliness is supposed to be Xnty―and that they then have

475

476

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 48–49

•

1852

the assistance of the Holy Spirit in order to be worldly, which is not Xnty and which in any case is something best attained without the assistance of the Holy Spirit. But the whole thing is nonsense. The business about the Holy Spirit, which people summon up in order to escape from the task, is shirking―whereas I have sufficient respect for the Holy Spirit that I have not dared speak of it because I understand that as soon as I begin to do so I will have to pose the existential element even more rigorously.

5

10

God―God’s Cause. People talk about God’s cause, about God having a cause, about wanting to serve God’s cause, etc. Now, that is all very well, but the question is how to understand this in greater detail. Most often, it is fundamentally as if God had a cause in the hum. sense of the term, to which he was a party, that he had an interest in the victory of the cause and thus was willing to help those who wanted to serve his cause, etc. Verily, in this way God is made into a rather subordinate entity who in the end even gets into the embarrassing situation of needing hum. beings, needing those who honestly want to serve him. No, no. God does not have a cause in that sense; he is not party to anything. For him everything is infinitely nothing: any instant he wills it, everything, everything, is nothing―which thus includes all, all resistance to his cause. But ergo he has no cause in this sense; he has no finite interest in its victory, etc. Infinite sublimity. From this it follows that to want to serve God’s cause does not mean that one, as it were, comes to his assistance―but that one is subjected to an examination. If a person turns to God and says, [“]I want to serve your cause,[”] it is not God who, so to speak (because he has his hands full with a cause), is delighted that now someone is going to help him: infinite nonsense and blasphemy. No: God is infinitely victorious, at every instant he is infinitely victorious. When someone wants to serve his cause, it is not God (infinite nonsense and blasphemy!) who loses his

49

15

20

25

30

470 35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 49

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

471

•

1852

equilibrium and his sublimity―no, he focuses his attention on the person who is willing to do this examinando, and sees how he conducts himself, whether he is honest, etc. Precisely because God has no finite interest in causes, but is the infinite victor―precisely for this reason he can, blessedly, look solely at this. From this it follows that the more you involve yourself with God, the more rigorous everything becomes for you―it is God’s infinite sublimity, yet from his infinite love, that he is willing to involve himself with a hum. being. God’s infinite sublimity consists precisely in his willingness to allow evil people to succeed in this world. Ah, you do not understand this, but God understands it: the fact that God overlooks them is a frightful punishment!― But he is stricter and more rigorous with those who are good. Ah, we do not understand, how blessed it ought to be for a hum. being when God wants to involve himself with him, but God understands it. Gnrlly speaking, when someone, as they say, honestly wants to serve God’s cause, he probably thinks: Then God should help as well. Yes, in what way? In a sensate way? With fortunate outcomes, success, earthly advantages, etc.? But in that case, of course, the whole business goes downhill and it becomes no longer God’s cause but a finite cause like other causes―and perhaps I was at root a sneaky fellow who did not rlly want to serve God’s cause but instead wanted politely to deceive God into serving my advantage―because (yes, it must be because God has his hands full by having a cause in a finite sense) he would become so happy that I wanted to serve his cause that he would promptly accept my offer. Infinite nonsense and blasphemy. No, God is spirit―and the task for a hum. being is to be transformed into spirit. But spirit consists precisely in relating oneself to God despite the testimony of the senses. Thus this is God’s sublimity. It seems to a poor hum. being as if he must expire in this sublimity―and yet it is nonetheless God’s infinite love! Yes, infinite love, infinite, that you should be willing to involve yourself with a hum. being: weak, foolish, fleshly hearts, that― because he himself has of course said that he is love―are always speculating about remodeling God as if he were love in the finite sense: such a wonderful uncle, a really good grandfather whom we hum. beings can put to very good use. And especially, the more sensate we are, the less we are―or are willing to be―spirit. Yet God is of course also infinite love in that he does not suddenly and all at once assault a hum. being, as it were, and require that he be spirit―in that case a hum. being must perish. 2 examinando] Latin, examining [him].

477

478

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 49–50

•

1852

No, he proceeds very gently. It is a gradual process, an upbringing. There are many moments when one gets a bit out of breath, when God strengthens the patient in a finite way―but then onward. And there is one thing that God requires absolutely at every moment: honesty, so that a person does not reverse the relationship and prove his relation to God and the truth of his cause by pointing to happiness, good fortune, and the like, but conversely confesses that these are owing to his weakness, that they are an accommodation on God’s part, something that, later on, he will perhaps have to dispense with―in order to move onward. Furthermore, what is required of the patient at every moment is honesty, so that every time he makes use of his cleverness to gain a bit of solace, of relief, for himself, he immediately chalks this up as a debit in his relationship with God―so that for the sake of God in Heaven his cleverness does not make him conceited, for in that case the relationship to God would be utterly extinguished, and he would perhaps become one of those unfortunate beings for whom everything in the world succeeds― because they are subjected to God’s punishment: that he will have nothing whatsoever to do with them.

Bishop Mynster―Christianity.

1

a

it is in order to live pleasantly, because a person cannot live pleasantly otherwise.

Quite apart from the other things that are concealed in Mynster’s preaching of Christianity: M. has also failed Xnty, dislocating Christianity or its point of view. Xnty is the unconditioned; it is being-in-and-for-itself, and M. has at most a finite teleology. (I could be tempted to remind him of that old distinction between Stoicism and Epicureanism: Epicurus also praises [virtue], but he gives a “Why?”―i.e., for him virtue is not something that is inand-for-itself.)a As is also clear from one of his Spjellerup sermons on John the Baptist, in which Mynster speaks of the kingdom of God, M’s understanding of Xnty is obviously the following: Now, there has been suffering upon suffering in order that Xnty might prevail; sacrifices upon sacrifices have been made―but indeed, it will not always have to be like this: there must of course come an age, a generation, which will reap the benefits of all these sacrifices, i.e., enjoy them and thereby enjoy life. Aha! You see, this would be a splendid form of Xnty. That age and that generation are presumably precisely the ones that are contemporary with Bishop M. A

5

10

15

20

50

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 50–51

472 5

10

15

20

25

30

51

40

•

1852

complete dislocation of Xnty, as if it were something historical in the finite sense, instead of being the unconditioned in the infinite sense. It always comes back to the confusion that, in the finite historical sense, God has a cause, has something that must be fought through to the end―and that therefore the conditions are changed and therefore God (entirely like an earthly monarch) cannot be altogether too particular about the person who wants to serve his cause, as long he is useful. No, Xnty is the unconditioned, not something that once was suffered for and that a subsequent generation is to profit from and enjoy. No, Xnty is the unconditioned that must be suffered for in this world as long as this world exists, whereas the suffering becomes blessedness in another world. (Mynster, on the other hand, actlly abolishes eternity and situates Xnty, lock, stock, and barrel, in the historical sphere as something commensurable with the historical.) And God is the infinite examiner who does not have his hands full with a cause but has conquered infinitely―and therefore looks solely at the ethical. On the contrary, we hum. beings, each and every one of us, have great cunning in slipping the traces and have a great desire to do so: [“]It is my task to proclaim Xnty objectively― ―naturally, of course, there are millions of people who are to act in accordance with it.[”] No, thank you, says God, I am examining you. Every understanding of Xnty that makes it into something historical is confusion, not to mention every view that holds that Xnty is perfectible. Exactly the reverse: Only once has it ever truly existed unconditionally: when Xt lived, suffered, and died. The history of Xnty is unfortunately one of constant retreat. With a historical phenomenon this is not the case (but for precisely this reason, Xnty is not a historical phenomenon): things go forward. This is what Mynster, in utter confusion, has transferred onto Xnty.

The Worship of God. In our time, when action, re-formation of character, and the like have been abolished as means of worshiping God, the worship of God has become a way of paying compliments, a sort of courtly duty in which priests compete with one another to see who can say the most courteous things, the most flattering words, to our Lord.

479

480

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 51–53

•

1852

Is this not idol worship―to worship (the true God) in this manner?

473

The Sophist in Oneself. If a hum. being were to have his own way, he would never be in earnest; his sophistry would always sneak in with illusions, evasions, etc. We read, or we hear, or by chance we come to think about the unconditional obedience and devotion that God may require: not only are we patiently to bear the adversities he sends us, but we are to receive them as good gifts, as presents that are even more splendid than earthly happiness, etc. A person finds this moving until―Presto!―sophistry sneaks in, explaining that this person’s state of mind has now supposedly become so pleasing to God that God would surely send him what are―in a different sense― good gifts, happiness, good fortune, etc. Oh sophistry, sophistry! Is this not like the man who went past a bar without having a whiskey, and as a reward went into the next bar and drank one, so that he not only got the whiskey anyway, but also got it as a reward―which is so masterful that he rlly ought to have yet another whiskey as a reward (for his cleverness!)[?]

Superstition―Superstition. We cross ourselves when we read, for example, that the Finns pray to God or sacrifice to him―so that he will provide them with a good catch. But what of us: Everyone who clings to God for the sake of a successful outcome is of course equally superstitious.

52 5

10

15

20

53

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 54–55 54

5

474

15

30

35

1852

But from Him Who Has Not, Even What He Has Will Be Taken Away. This appears to be a contradiction, directly contradicting the proverb, [“]Where there is nothing, neither is there anything to take.[”] How can anything be taken from the person who has nothing? It is quite simple: [“]Not to have[”] means not actually having something―it means having a delusion that one has it. From him, then, something is taken, i.e., the tiny Anflug he has about possessing it is taken away, so that he becomes more and more stupid in the delusion of having something. The delusion is not taken from him―that would be his good fortune―no, what is taken from him is the little fragment that could nonetheless have made it clear to him that he was in a delusion. That is how it is with the whole of Xndom and established Xnty: it is to have Xnty in the manner of a delusion: it is not to have it. And from them is taken [the chance to discover this]―i.e., they sink deeper and deeper into the delusion.

Sophistry.

55

25

•

In Wieland’s Agathon it is presented superbly: Hippias does not of course deny that the good is beautiful, that virtue is splendid, etc., but he says (and this is precisely where the sophistry is to be found) that it is something that the imagination is delighted to present, to observe―but it is not something in accordance with which one orders one’s life; it is not a norm, not regulative. Then take the “quiet hours” and that sort of proclamation of Xnty! If the above-mentioned description does not fit that situation, then I don’t know what does. Enormously dangerous sophistry! All that artistry in those quiet hours, all that mastery in presenting, observing, depicting―and then the secret: that naturally this sort of thing does not work in practical life; a person does not order his life in accordance with it. The secret―indeed, they are careful enough not to say this during the quiet hours, for then the true situation would become apparent. But the more artistry that is used in presenting and observing―the less this induces the listeners to act in accordance with 9 Anflug] German, hint, trace.

481

482

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 55–57

•

1852

it. No, the more it merely enchants and bewitches them into fantasy-laden illusion.

“I Am Who I Am” This is an analogy to metaphysics, in which the highest principles of all thought cannot be proven but only paraphrased tautologically: an introverted infinity. As everywhere else, so also here a likeness exists between what is highest and what is lowest, for tautology is the lowest form of communication, is rubbish―and tautology is also infinitely the highest, so that in these situations anything other than tautology would be rubbish.

56 5

10

475

Suffering

57

The merely hum. understanding of suffering can never extend farther than either to understand suffering in a finite, teleological way (one suffers for a certain period, so and so many years, etc., in order to achieve something or to become something or other, etc.) or, if suffering continues, then to bear it patiently, albeit as an evil. Xnty clearly believes that suffering is the characteristic mark of the relationship to God: If you do not suffer, you have nothing to do with God. God is spirit, and therefore a hum. being (qua sensate being) can have something to do with him only if he suffers. And not only that, but Xnty believes that it is out of love that God lets a hum. being suffer―he despises the ungodly: they have nothing to do with him; therefore they are free of suffering. You see, these are certainly hard words for a poor hum. being to bear. And what makes them doubly hard in “Christendom” is that from childhood on, people are brought up with all this mawkishness about God as a loving grandpa and uncle, understood in sensate fashion. Furthermore, we live in a Christian world that takes great pains to stigmatize involving oneself with God in this manner as blasphemy, arrogance, and pride. To be involved with God is to stand defenseless in the sensate world; not to be so is cowardice and sensuality―were we honest enough to admit this, we would risk being hurled out even further: but

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 57–58

•

1852

now we defend ourselves with the notion that involving oneself with God like this is arrogance, blasphemy.

58

10

476

20

25

30

35

“In Addition” Christianity’s view is that it is the greatest possible lèse majesté to want to love God in addition: to enjoy life, to cling to this world, and in addition: to love God. Even a mere hum. being would of course not be satisfied with being in addition loved, with being loved in addition. Frightful presumptuousness for a wretched nobody like a hum. being to dare, in addition, to love God. But of course it could also be said in a different way: that I certainly acknowledge that I am to love God entirely―but that in addition, owing to my weakness, I cannot entirely let go of the world, something I therefore believe God will forgive. Nevertheless, this―which undeniably is more forgivable than the shameless impertinence of mediation―is something that Xnty cannot countenance, but must say: My little friend, how can you be so childish, though perhaps you will become better. “But,” I hear someone say, “is this God I am to love, is it not the God, the same God, who has created the whole of this splendid world? How, then, could he be opposed to my loving it, rejoicing in it, in his gifts? Do not the sparrow and the lily and all of nature take joy in it in the same way?” To this Xnty must reply: Rubbish. First of all, do you really know that the lily and the sparrow rejoice? Next, if you are able to rejoice in the same way as the sparrow and the lily, go right ahead. But you cannot. For the sparrow and the lily and all of the life of nature are simple; the sparrow is no double-essence, no synthesis―no either/or exists for it, thus neither is any presumptuous “in addition” possible for it. Only the hum. being is a double-essence. And furthermore, this whole world of which you speak: there is in fact really a question as to whether God can be said to have created it, this entire cultural world, which is the work of the human race. “But then are hum. beings indeed the most miserable of all creatures, destined from God’s hand to be unhappy or to make themselves unhappy?” To this I must reply: Not at all, not at all. We are only talking about this: What is Xnty’s view? And next: Xnty certainly does, in fact, hold the view that hating the world

483

484

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 58–60

•

1852

and oneself in this way in order to love God―that precisely this is blessedness, entirely different from enjoying life au niveau of the sparrow and the lily. But paganism knew at any rate that there is a crossroads (Hercules), and Xnty teaches that the road is narrow, that only few find it: but Xndom has invented the notion that God and world are one and the same.

5

God.

59

Not a sparrow falls to the ground without his will―yes, in the quiet hours, when you dress in velvet or silk and play Xnty with us, declaiming, lecturing on it splendidly in a sonorous voice― and we others enjoy it: then of course it can be quite easy. But just take an example from the actual world of nature: a storm in which a hurricane rages and rips up trees by the roots and the birds crash to the ground in mortal anxiety; or imagine the wind blowing away the pollen of millions upon millions of flowers, or that the earth opens up and swallows entire cities―then say that not a sparrow falls to the ground without your heavenly Father’s will, that indeed, even the hairs on your head are numbered. Truly, we need to live closer to nature, if for no other reason than to receive a greater impression of God’s majesty. Clustered together in the great cities of cultural life, we have done all that we can to rid ourselves of every impression that could unsettle us―a lamentable demoralization.

10

Sophistry.

60

In the realm of the ethical and the ethical-religious everyone who does not himself express existentially what he teaches, or at least draw attention to it, accuse himself, and explain how he understands himself in relation to this matter: every such person is a Sophist, and everything he communicates is sophistry. The person who expresses existentially what he teaches is a “teacher.” The group beneath this could be called teachers’ assistants: they at least help by testifying to the truth, by pointing out what it means to be a teacher, but confessing that they themselves are not teachers. 2 au niveau] French, on the level.

15

477 20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 60–62

•

1852

Alas, the situation with us is that there is not one single “teacher,” and that I am in fact the only one who could be called a teacher’s assistant. You see, that is what they call Xnty.

61

10

15

20

478 25

30

62 35

David’s Psalm: “This Is Too High for Me” In the psalm in which David praises God’s omnipresence so splendidly and says: [“]If I took the wings of the morning and flew to the uttermost limits of the sea, you would be there, etc.,[”] David says: [“]This is too high for me.[”] Yes, quite right, that is exactly how it is. All this unspeakable bliss―when it is heard in a quiet hour (that is, at the distance of imagination), oh, how soothing, how soothing, that God is so close to me, so close, at every second―just thinking this is so blessed for a hum. being. But if this is supposed to be actuality, that is, not just a representation of it: How frightfully strenuous that God is close to me like this. I scarcely dare walk across my floor, scarcely dare move, scarcely say a word, lest it displease God―and before God (but he is omnipresent, so I am indeed before God)―the most insignificant thing is commensurable with the most important decision, just as a sparrow is present for him―indeed, as he numbers the hairs on my head. Therefore, see the truth in David: This is too high for me. For David was a man of experience. But on the other hand, in seeing this, see also the confusion that affects the whole of Xndom―for everything is held at a distance by the imagination, and people simply do not see where the sphere of the religious begins―indeed, from the sermons themselves, from the character of the sermons, I could prove indirectly that the average run of priests does not even live within the religious at all.

From him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. First of all, [“]to have[”] must be understood in the sense of [“]to have acquired[”]: From him who has acquired nothing (this is connected to the parable of the entrusted talents), even what he has will be taken away―namely, what he has as given. Thus,

485

486

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 62–63

•

1852

the one talent was of course given, and because he had acquired nothing, what had been given to him was taken away as well. And indeed this is the law of the spirit for all possession: only in acquisition is there possession; if nothing has been acquired, then what has been given is also taken from a person.

The Relationship to God. If a person dares to invoke God, to speak in God’s name: Then―yes, this is the way human beings think―then one would think that everyone has to go along with this person and yield to him, that he must be capable of everything―ergo that it is splendid to be such a person. Yes, this is the human way of thinking, which always wants to turn the divine into, at most, a superlative of the human. No, to speak in God’s name means that a person comes to suffer, to encounter all possible resistance, people’s hatred, their curses. If the situation were in fact as it is imagined from the merely hum. point of view, then surely everyone would call upon God and speak in God’s name, and on the other hand God would have no control over whether someone drew close to God in order to obtain earthly advantage or drew close to God in and for himself. Thus, to speak in God’s name (even if it is the truth and the speaker is therefore a person who has received a call) means to encounter all possible resistance, to become the most wretched of people, hated, persecuted, etc. And not only that, but it also means that the person thus called must submit to this: that in the phenomenal world God acts as though he were testifying against him with all his might. Frightful! But it cannot be otherwise, for God is spirit, and if God helped in straightforward fashion, if he testified straightforwardly on behalf of the person called, then that person would in fact be prevented from becoming spirit, and thus from becoming or being the person truly called. But in spirit, God witnesses on behalf of the person called― this is faith’s secret. When such a called person goes forth to do God’s work― when they, God and he, go their separate ways, as it were, I

5

63

10

15

20

25

479

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 63–64

5

10

15

•

1852

487

imagine that God says to him, one last time: [“]Remember, above all, what this means―that you will come to suffer. Above all, you must not forget that in the phenomenal world I also must testify against you, my child, my little friend. It cannot be otherwise or else I will not be God and you will not become spirit. But simply believe, do not be offended in me because I must let it appear as if I, the faithful God, were the faithless one who left you in the lurch. It cannot be otherwise. If you want to have it otherwise, it means that you no longer have a relationship with me.[”] It is clear that much of what Luther explained (with the help of an explanation that itself needs an explanation) as the work of the devil―as if the devil were in a position to set actual limits for God―can be explained by the misrelation between God’s infinite majesty and hum. beings. If a hum. being is actually going to have anything to do with God, suffering is inevitable―the misrelation between these two qualitative parts of the relation must lead to suffering, but, but all the same the relationship is indeed blessedness.

20

64

25

480

35

Suffering. As has been stated, what is merely human can never extend farther than defining suffering teleologically and within this life: a hum. being suffers for a number of years, after which he thereby has or he thereby attains some determinate thing. Of course, sometimes the suffering in fact lasts the whole of a hum. being’s life―so we hum. beings have hit upon an explanation that is the most egotistical cruelty of a generation toward an individual. We define this individual (whose suffering has thus lasted his entire life)―we define his suffering teleologically for us others, us subsequent people: He suffered―in order that we might have things better. Excellent invention of Phalaris. The good people, precisely the good people, (consequently, those who ought to be―if anyone ought to be―better off in this life), they must suffer in order that we (scoundrels) might be better off― truly, an additional proof that we are scoundrels. But this is how we nonetheless find it to be in order: We heap honor and praise upon such a martyr; we make his name day into a feast day. For example, nowadays, in memory of what

[a]

Suffering.

1

488

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 64

•

1852

Luther suffered we eat goose on St. Martin’s Day. The only thing lacking is for Luther actually to have become a martyr and for his martyrdom to have been the frightful one of being roasted to death on a grill―how considerate for us who come after, for us to honor and commemorate him by grilling and eating a goose! Ah, hum. brutality and bestiality. And now, what have been the consequences of this for Xnty? Yes, quite simply this: those first Xns―they have suffered; now we should enjoy ourselves. They suffered―we honor and praise them, we “build their tombs,” eat a special sort of pastry on their day, go on picnics in their honor―ah, hum. brutality and bestiality! To be able to rejoice in this way and in so doing to cut off all relation with these glorious representatives of humanity. What, then, is Xnty’s view (Xnty, which is suffering, which, if it becomes enjoyment, is abolished, as is now the case in “Xndom”)―Xnty’s view is that suffering has an entirely different context, infinitely higher than every teleology. To suffer in this world for the truth, for the good, for Xnty―is blessedness. Suffering is thus not an evil that teleology only later makes into something else (which, in the relation between the generation and the individual, would of course be perpetrating the most atrocious injustice against the person sacrificed)―no, it is blessedness to suffer. To suffer is the expression of the highest inward passion in relation to God, to suffer is to share a secret with God! Ah, how blessed! Behind this entire world of actuality, of phenomena (in which it of course looks as if God, too, were opposed to the sufferer, inasmuch as he does not help extricate him from suffering, but lets him suffer) lies another world, a world of the spirit, and here the sufferer knows, in common with God―blessed secret, how blessed to share a secret with God!―that in truth this phenomenal appearance means exactly the opposite: that it is precisely an expression of God’s love that he lets the sufferer suffer. It is God who must be a bit hard on the pers. who must suffer like this; nonetheless, in order to force him out in this way, God will at times make use of the good and at other times employ strictness. It is Xnty that, by requiring “imitation” of the Xn, wants to lead him so far out―alas, and at first this is frightful for a hum. being. And yet there comes a moment when the hum. being himself understands that this, precisely this, is in fact the only thing that a hum. being who earnestly thinks about life could wish for. Or would it be possible for me―if I am nonetheless to remain a human being―to wish to have lived in such

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

481

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 64

•

1852

35

a way that my life expressed that I was in no way related to the glorious members of the human race, with the consequence that either they would have to have been gods (if I am supposed to be a hum. being), or if they are to be human beings, I would have to be a beast[?] Oh, my God, my God: My childhood was unhappy, excruciating; my youth full of torment―I have groaned, sighed, and cried out. Thank you, nonetheless―not you, the all-wise one―no, no, thank you, you infinitely loving one―precisely the infinitely loving one―for having done things this way! A hum. being has 30, 40, perhaps 70 years before him. You have (lovingly) prevented me from using that sum to purchase cakes and sweets―for then I would either have nothing to remember in eternity, or to my everlasting torment I would have to remember that I purchased something paltry. You compelled me―there were also many moments when you spoke to me in a way I can only call kindly, but on this same subject, not about my escaping the suffering, but that it was precisely because of your love for me that you kept me out there―you compelled me to purchase suffering: blessedly. For every such suffering is suffering in community with you, and every such suffering is an eternal acquisition for eternity. For only sufferings can be remembered. A pagan (Cicerob) relates that the greatest voluptuary of the Orient (Sardanapalus) had written on his tombstone: [“]I took all the world’s pleasures into the grave with me[”]―to which another pagan (Aristotle) supposedly replied: [“]How? You could not even hold fast to a single one of them while you were alive.[”] No, no, pleasures cannot be remembered―least of all in eternity. Therefore, if a pers. escaped all suffering in this world―how frightful―perhaps clad in purple and velvet, a pasha of the 17 horsetails, with a ring in his nose, which he alone dared wear, and before whom everyone fell to his knees: frightful thus not to be related to those glorious members of the human race, but to be a carnivorous beast in comparison to them. How frightful to have nothing whatever to remember in eternity!

40

But if it is blessed to suffer in this way, is not suffering actlly a pleasure? Let us be cautious here, here where many different people are in agreement in this false assertion.

5

10

15

20

25

30

489

b

in de finibus

1

490

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 64

•

1852

There exists a wretched sort of shrewdness that wants only to be free of suffering; it reasons as follows: Doing the good has its reward in itself, ergo the good contains within itself its own satisfaction, just like the satisfaction I feel when I enjoy what is sensual―ergo there is no essential difference between us! This is hypocrisy aimed at escaping from suffering. Next, there are, e.g., paganism’s Stoics, who in a demonic intensification want to have doing the good provide so much satisfaction―that it is pleasure. Yet the Stoic believed that suicide was expedient―but why employ suicide to put an end to pleasure? Consequently it is untruth. Then there are muddled thinkers like Rosseau, who says in the strongest terms that suffering is nothing, that it is pleasure―that is how it is theoretice, for in practice he was extremely thinskinned. Consequently it is a self-contradiction. No, I side with Xnty, which, precisely because it is in earnest about a person actually coming to suffer (while the others actlly evaded suffering and plumed themselves with rhetoric, which can of course tend toward pleasure) expresses it like this: it is suffering―but it is blessed. Here it is indeed not a question of simply suffering for the sake of the good, but of the sufferings that are a part of a person’s being able to be an instrument for God. This, then, is what is blessed: that while the suffering causes pain, he dares to know, together with God, that this is precisely in order that God might all the better be able to make use of him. This is what is blessed: that while the phenomenal world testifies against him through misfortune and adversity and opposition, he dares know, together with God, that this is precisely because he relates himself to God.

482

5

10

15

20

25

30

Nonetheless, suffering is not introduced as something blessed in and for itself. In that case, Xnty would be nonsense, it would not exist at all, as it more or less does not exist in our time, when people have wanted (as unchristianly as possible) to define the sufferings of past ages teleologically―that is, that we are supposed to derive pleasure from them.

This is the end of all sophistry: Let them all share one head, let Satan himself be included―no sophistry can take that. 14 theoretice] Latin, in theory.

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 65–67

•

1852

483

65

5

10

66

15

20

25

To Believe is actlly to go forward along the road where all hum. road signs point: Back, Back, Back. Thus the way is narrow and (though this is precisely something important to faith) dark. Indeed, not only is it dark, pitch dark, but it is like a dark road on which confusing lamplight makes the darkness even darker―the confusing lamplight is of course the fact that the hum. road signs point in the opposite direction.

Inversion. is something with which Socrates was already familiar, though naturally an entire qualitative step lower than in Xnty, and by the same token, he thought inversely, though again an entire quality lower. Aelianus (in variæ historiæ) tells of a painter from whom someone had commissioned a work that was supposed to depict a horse rolling on its back. The artist painted a horse in full jump. When the owner complained and said that that was not what he had ordered, the painter replied: Turn the piece upside down, and then you will have what you requested.―This, Aelianus says, is the way Socrates speaks: It must be understood inversely. This is indeed excellent. When I defended my dissertation on irony I had not read Aelianus, but why did no one bring him to my attention!

67

Imitation―Atonement.

30

But despite the fact that now it is doubtlessly the case that “imitation” is what must be brought forth―even if (having learned from the errors of the Middle Ages) in a different sense― by no means is the matter to be turned around as though Xt were

491

492

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 67

•

1852

to be solely the Exemplar and not the Atoner, as though atonement were not needed, at any rate not for those who are farther along. No, no, no―and as for that, the farther along one is, the more one will discover that he needs atonement and grace. No, atonement and grace are and remain what is definitive. When the moment arrives, when death puts an end to it, all striving in the direction of imitation is after all paltry in God’s view: ergo there is a need for grace and atonement. Furthermore, at every moment that striving continues there is a need for atonement in order that this striving not be transformed into excruciating anxiety in which a person burns up, as it were, and then comes to strive less than ever. Finally, at every moment of striving, there will be errors made, things left undone, sins committed: ergo the atonement is unconditionally necessary. If imitation―even in its most extreme efforts―in earnest (i.e., before God) is to claim significance as something in the sense of being meritorious, it must be as a sort of a jest, something childish: what is in earnest is the atonement. But what is loathsome is for a hum. being―“since, after all, there is grace”―to want to make use of that grace and omit all striving. It is like the situation with a child when, as they say, he is cossetted, treated like a prince, and a positive construction is put on his every deed: the spoiled child will be recognized by the way he takes advantage of the fact that the parents are so loving by becoming careless and acting in the very way the parents do not want. The other unfortunate outcome of putting the most positive construction on his behavior would be if it led a child, who did indeed strive diligently, to want to have merit for doing so. No, there is nothing so calculated to prevent meritoriousness and merit as putting the most positive construction on one’s deeds. For an instant it looks deceptively as if the opposite were the case, for if a positive construction is simply placed on what I do, then nothing is required in the sense of rigor, but everything is grace. Then of course every

5

484 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 67–68

5

10

little bit of striving looks as if it were meritorious. Oh, my friend, precisely this―the fact that nothing is required in the direction of rigor, the fact that you are simply granted positive constructions―precisely this makes it impossible that even your greatest striving could become meritorious. Yes, where something rigorous is required, that is where there can be talk of meritoriousness; but when everything is grace, meritoriousness is impossible―it is impossible to have merit in the face of grace.a But, as has been stated, it is scurvy, shabby for someone to take advantage of this and cease striving.

485

The Mynsterian Preaching of Christianity.

15

1

20

25

)

68

If Xnty were something that had arisen in a hum. being’s heart or in the hum. heart, if it were what earnest, capable, honest humanity, in its most beautiful moments, contrives or wishes for in order to ennoble the enjoyment of this earthly life―including the prospect of eternal life: then I am in complete, total agreement with the many, many people who admire the Mynsterian approach. Understood in this way, the Mynsterian approach is masterful, perfect. (Lyric: M. is also regarded as an artist, an orator, a cultivated personality, an asset for the government, etc.) )

2

30

35

But, but, but, it is a different matter. Xnty is not what has arisen in a hum. being’s heart. It is precisely what did not arise in any hum. being’s heart. And Xnty is what is contained in the N.T. And M. has obligated himself in most solemn fashion to teach this. Declaring himself to be a believer in this sense, through the laying-on of hands, he has as a priest received the assistance of the Holy Spirit―in order to proclaim this. Subsequently he was

•

1852

493

Note For only in the face of what is on the same level as oneself can there be talk of meritoriousness―similarly when one is face to face with “the requirement.” But “grace” has positioned itself infinitely higher than you, and therefore merit has been made impossible. “Grace” is thus at once both the expression of God’s infinite love, but also the highest expression of his majesty, manifesting God’s infinite sublimity. At the remove of “grace” you are in one sense infinitely farther from God (even if, in another sense, infinitely closer, namely by taking refuge in his love, concealed beneath “grace”) than at the remove of the Law and the requirement. For in the face of the Law and the requirement it is as if God condescended to bicker with you, and on the other hand, it is as if you might perhaps be capable of fulfilling the Law after all. But at the remove of “grace” God has once and for all placed you at an infinite remove― in order then to show mercy. At the same time that God in Xt came infinitely close to hum. beings in “grace,” he also guaranteed himself an infinitely higher, majestic expression of that distance: “grace.”

a

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

494

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 68

•

1852

consecrated as a bishop, and as such has repeatedly transmitted to others the assistance of the Holy Spirit to proclaim this Xnty in accordance with the N.T. If this is the case, his preaching of Xnty is confusion, which is easily proven.

5

)

3

That this step gives me pain, that I have shrunk from taking it, that I wince at doing it, how I suffer in doing it―I will not describe, for I would not be understood. Just two words about my veneration of him (also for the sake of a person who is deceased, my father) and also about the fact that as an author I have always placed the greatest emphasis on M., who, as stated, from a merely hum. point of view is the object of my highest admiration. But this, which is so painful to me, can nonetheless be of benefit to the cause in two ways. 1) That everyone can thus see that what motivates me is not personal hostility toward M. 2) That what I am aiming at becomes quite clear. Because if M. were an insignificant, untalented, half-cultivated man, then many people would perhaps agree with me that this was not Xnty, but they would search for the problem in a lack of talent, of cultivation, etc. No, no! What concerns me is that the Christian and the human sphere are not one and the same (see the N.T.), and for this very reason it is a good thing that the representative of the merely human sphere is in possession of these things [talent and cultivation] in splendid fashion. But then, when it is compared to the N.T., it becomes clear that it is not Xnty.

10

486

15

20

25

30

)

4

1

5

Note Therefore they also called themselves, and their principles were called: paradoxes―short, laconic, taut in quality, with the intent that people should act in accordance with them. But antiquity a

Let me take an analogous case. It is well known that the most rigorous ethics in the pagan world were those of Stoicism.a Those ethics assert the ideal, and, qualitatively interested in the idea, they assert the ideal, the ideal of the wise man―concerning whom Stoicism itself, quite consistently, says, [“]Such a person has never lived.[”]

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 68

5

10

15

More or less all the rest of the pagan world protests against this ethic, citing the following: [“]This is an exaggerated ideal that exists nowhere, that is incompatible with the world, that is not for us hum. beings―we must take hum. beings as they are, etc.[”] This is something I understand. I can very well support it. But someone who has given solemn assurances that he will proclaim―and through ordination has received the assistance of the Holy Spirit so that he will be able to proclaim―that an ideal even higher than that of Stoicism has existed, item that we should strive for it (and this is in accordance with N.T. Xnty): he cannot conduct himself like this. The fact that he in silence has undertaken such a transformation, omitting what is strenuous, does not make matters better, but worse.

487

)

5

20

25

30

35

40

If this is right about Mynster’s preaching―this excellence, which I cannot tire of praising (additional lyricism)―then Bishop Mynster must first of all renounce his dignified position as a Christian bishop; next he must give up being a priest, insofar as this is contingent upon ordination and the N.T. He must say: “What I preach and what my life expresses is actlly not Xnty. It is a religious doctrine in service of the state.” And it truly is: If he himself is too modest to say it, I will say it as loudly and as enthusiastically as possible: It is what serves the state. Nor is this a sufficient evaluation of M.―a man of his significance is not found once in a generation. “But,” M. must say in addition, “but it is not really Xnty―it is a watering down of Christianity, an approximation of it, or a cultural-, a world-consciousness, on which Xnty has left its imprint.” This is what he must do, or his preaching must at least repeatedly, repeatedly echo this reminder: This is not actlly Xnty. But he has not done this―and if his preaching of Xnty is supposed to be the Xnty of the N.T. (and that is the only true Xnty), it is extremely confusing.

•

1852

495

also displays a confusion that calls to mind the continuing confusion of Xndom, where the same thing has happened to the Xn paradox. The great, world-famous rhetorician Cicero also wrote Paradoxes, a brief work in which he presents several Stoic principles but, as he thinks, he goes beyond the Stoics, for he decks them out in rhetorical decorations and flatters himself at having managed―to make them less repellent. Perhaps! But perhaps the Stoics are precisely the ones who would find them repellent.

1

5

10

15

496

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 69

•

1852

Preaching. It is, after all, easy to see that when the preacher of Christianity is not in character as a Christian, the preaching elicits precisely the opposite actuality. Imagine two preachers who both deliver one and the same discourse, e.g., about dying away, about renunciation. The one is masterful and thus makes a profound impression, an almost overwhelming impression, on the audience. When the members of the audience leave, they feel moved, and also moved with gratitude toward this speaker. How can we thank him, these simple, honest people think. Then one person decides to thank him by sending him 50 rix-dollars; another with a pair of silver candlesticks; a third, in accordance with his lesser means, with a goose, etc. Now imagine that one of these two preachers was, e.g., as an ascetic, in the character of Christianity: what then? Yes, when these good-natured souls come with their gifts, earnestness indeed comes to light: He cannot accept them, he has no use for them. “If you want to thank me,” he says, “then act in accordance with what I have preached to you. For example, give this―and a little more― to the poor.” Look, this is Xnty. The earnestness is indeed greatest and truest at the second point: what is earnest is not the talk, but what comes after.― The other preacher is a rhetorician, a priest―he is absolutely delighted with the gifts. Several days later he goes around and thanks each person, one by one. Then he gives a big 10-course dinner on the occasion of all these great presents: this is playing at Xnty. This preaching elicits precisely the opposite actuality as Christian actuality. The rhetorician himself does not die away―anything but. And these good-natured peop. are led to believe that now they have done enough, now that they have scraped something together for His Reverence. Or take two preachers. They both preach one and the same discourse about how the truth must suffer

69

5

10

488 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 69–70

35

in this world. And it is a masterful lecture that indeed produces an enormous effect, the listeners are enraptured in audible admiration―but the one preacher, who is in the character of Xnty, says, [“]Did I say something foolish?[”] and then criticizes the members of the audience themselves, which gets him booed, etc. This is Xnty: what is earnest is not the discourse, but what comes next.―The other preacher is a rhetorician, a priest. He is delighted with the audience’s approval; he bows and scrapes like a popular virtuoso. He is the focus of more and more attention because of his excellent discourse about how the truth is mocked in this world. He draws the attention of the government, is made a knight, gets the rank of a councillor of chancery, is permitted to wear velvet on his left arm, etc.―is this Xnty? No, it is playing at Xnty. The effect that is elicited, or the actuality, is exactly the opposite. Look, this is playing at Xnty. And the existence of 600 trillion, quadrillion billion, million such rhetoricians by no means proves that Xnty exists. But people let it go on like this from generation to generation: It looks as though Xnty existed on the grandest scale―and it is a deception or a delusion. Where is a youth supposed to get the confidence to dare live his life according to Xnty, when what he gets to see is this frightfully untrustworthy business[?] If there is any truth in this: that the relation to God is, after all, the only blessedness, that poverty and persecution are, after all, blessed in the relationship to God―well, these millions of rhetoricians prove nothing with all their proofs; they prove only that it can be quite pleasant to gain money, honor, and esteem.

70

Socrates―The Others.

40

Socrates always talked only of food and drink―at root, however, he was always talking and always thinking about the infinite.

5

10

15

489 20

25

30

•

1852

[a]

497

In any case, what I have always said is true: that if the preaching of Xnty is not in character, then one must at least establish a relation to the truth by confessing that this preaching is not Christianity.

1

5

498

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 70–71

•

1852

The others always talk about the infinite, and in the most pompous tones, and at root are always talking and always thinking of food and drink, of money and profit.

Bold Confidence in Suffering for Truth. The thought that is the lifeblood of Xnty is that relating oneself to God means that one will come to suffer; that the more fervently one relates oneself to God, the more suffering; that suffering is the consequence of relating oneself to God; that suffering is the outward sign of the relationship to God―this thought is so offensive to the merely hum. standpoint and is in such radical opposition to it, that one might just as well order a hum. being to spend his entire life standing on his head.―I cannot endure the thought either, but what I sense here is the solemnity that is always present when one approaches the divine―and wherever the paradox is, there is the divine. And, as Jacob said, [“]This is God’s house, this is the gate of heaven,[”] I say, Here is the divine (something different from what the priests call Xnty). And as Pythagoras listened to the harmony of the spheres, so am I lifted up wherever I encounter the paradox, for it is the divine.― And how paradoxical that it is precisely the religion that solely and from the beginning has taught that God is love―that it then teaches, or shows through examples, that to relate oneself to this loving God is to come to suffer―the more fervently one relates to God, the more suffering! Now, what helped the apostles and the first Xns gain the bold confidence needed in order to suffer for truth was that they were, so to speak, swept along by Xt’s life. Xt was of course the holy one―this was eternally certain to them―and his suffering was such a presence in their lives that the notion that suffering is the characteristic mark of the relationship to God was also a presence in their lives. You see, this is the source of bold confidence. Two additional points should be noted here: 1) That a person can prove that Xt was God simply from the circumstance that Xt unconditionally expresses that the maximum fervency of the God-relationship is maximal suffering. At its maximum, this thought, or this suffering―that with God contra is to signify pro―cannot be endured without a consciousness that is God’s consciousness. If these two consciousnesses diverge even the least bit from one another, the maximal point of this relationship―this 37 pro] Latin, for. 38 contra] Latin, against.

71

10

490 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 71–72

5

10

15

20

491

25

•

1852

suffering, which must signify fervency―cannot be endured. The suffering’s contra will repel straightforwardly and will not be echoed by a corresponding pro. 2) That Xnty can never attain the speed it had in the first generation. Because the speed it is to have depends on the degree of bold confidence to suffer for truth. But, as has been stated, what helped the apostles and the first Xns was Xt’s life, suffering, and death. He, the holy one, he could maintain unconditionally that suffering means absolutely nothing other than the fervency of the God-relationship, ergo it does not deter, it attracts. As soon as the person who suffers is a mere hum. being, even if he is a witness to the truth (thus, as we say, for truth), he is of course not in fact the holy one, and thus this suffering―that he encounters opposition, that the world is against him―can perhaps signify something different, can signify that he has taken the wrong path, can even signify God’s punishment. And if it is me―where am I to get the bold confidence to forget my guilt―well, of course then suffering can signify something else, it can signify that I must turn back, even signify God’s punishment. Then the bold confidence disappears, then there is no question of suffering for truth―then Xnty is exhausted. In my case there is a special context. For precisely because I am conscious of having offended more than others, I believed that I ought to endure somewhat more, venture somewhat further out than others―in keeping with the principle that the guilty person must suffer. And look, then I discover that Xnty is precisely the opposite of this: that the innocent person must suffer. What infinite sublimity there is in Xnty! But in other respects this is my situation: that in this way I come to discover yet again that Xnty is paradoxical.

30

72

35

40

Xnty in God’s Interest―In a Hum. Being’s Interest. Xt’s life is Xnty in God’s interest. At the moment he dies, Xnty is transferred into the interest of hum. beings. “The apostle” transforms the Exemplar essentially into the Redeemer. This also means that “the apostle” posits heterogeneity between the God-Man and every other hum. being. The atonement, or the fact that Xt’s life and death are the atonement, is the expression of the heterogeneity between him and every hum. being. “Imitation” tends toward likeness. “The apostle” imitates

499

500

1

a

or we cheat our way entirely out of imitation.

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 72–73

•

1852

him and is crucified―but he places the atonement in the essential position, for otherwise the apostle would of course become a sort of Xt. And quite properly, it was precisely the apostle who had not been a witness to Xt’s life, who had not lived with him, the later apostle, Paul, who most strongly emphasizes the atonement and almost overlooks imitation. Then, in the Church, generation after generation, Xnty is egotistically transferred more and more into the interest of hum. beings: the atonement makes imitation into nothing.a Then Xndom gets a worse and worse conscience, and the thought that relating to God should signify suffering becomes utterly foreign to it; the precise opposite―happiness and success―become the characteristic mark of relating oneself to God―and then Xnty is actlly abolished.

5

10

15

492

“Imitation” That it just won’t do, as in Catholicism, to believe in Xt’s atonement and then to live the whole of one’s bandit life undisturbed: this is of course well known. But the question is always: What ethics are to be adopted in order that one may dare call oneself a Xn? In Protestantism, instead of having that crazy business of continuing to be a bandit “confident in grace,” we have civil propriety. Civil propriety, that is more or less what is required existentially of a Xn―and then faith in the atonement. Be very careful. Xnty is infinitely lenient, sheer mercy. If a person lies dying―even if he has 70,000 murders on his conscience, etc., the atonement provides satisfaction. But, but he indeed also dies, and he is thus not in any position to lead a new life. And the question is, What is the existential state in which Xnty will permit a pers. to live his everyday life, year after year[?] Is civil propriety such an existential state? Indeed, look around: what is it? It is, in actual life―worldliness, and again, worldliness, that shabbily betrays everything higher. Then we want to add the atonement to this or tack it on―and this is Xnty. Once a week in a quiet hour we talk of striving― naturally, we have guaranteed that our lives are nailed fast to an illusion, so that it would be sheer fantasy to think that this sort of thing could have the least bit of meaning. This is Xnty!

73

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 74–75

74

5

10

•

1852

Not to Venture. In the gospel this is portrayed by the servant who buried his pound―he was prudent, cautious, but the master rejects him. Imagine another incident in that gospel story, imagine that someone came along who said, [“]Master, I wanted so very much to acquire something by making use of the pound entrusted to me―so I ventured, apparently too boldly, for I gained nothing and even lost that one pound entrusted to me.[”] I wonder whether that man would not find forgiveness more readily than the cautious man[?]

493

75

Lack of Character.

15

How often do we not hear―indeed, it is in fact something everybody is willing to talk about―that priests ought to be more in the character of Christianity. Do you believe that people actually want this? Truly, no, no! What people want is precisely for the priest to be lacking in character―precisely this lack of character is what is loved and cherished. Because for one thing, with his help we obtain an indulgence from the existential―and for another, we profit by feeling that we are better than the priest, or at least that we have the right to pass judgment on him. But woe to him who would dare be earnest about this and take on character. Ah, what depths of cunning and hypocrisy! Thus, at its best, being a person of character may very well benefit a person’s reputation―one step further (and this step is decisive: it decides whether this is actual character; the other is the invention of hypocrisy) and you are in disgrace in the world.

20

25

30

501

502

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 76–77

•

1852

“The Sacrificial Victims” It is frightful, we must surely say, frightful that the situation must be like this, that hum. beings must be slaughtered in order that other hum. beings might advance. And yet this hum. slaughter is not even what is most frightful. No, even more abominable than this hum. slaughter is the fact that every such victim is butchered and cut up, thus yielding― professors by the score or by the thousand, all according to the importance of “the victim.”

76

5

10

“Only to the Extent That One Can Do It Joyfully―Only to That Extent Is a Person to Renounce What Is Earthly. Otherwise It Is Not Even Pleasing to God.” Excellent: What deceit and hypocritical cunning to talk so much like Xnty and yet be so unlike it! For if this is to be taken at face value, it would more or less mean that none of us are to give up what is worldly, at least not to any decisive degree―for truly, this cannot be done “joyfully,” i.e., not if it is understood to be a renunciation of a quantum satis that can intensify pleasure. Xnty speaks of dying away―this is rather more earnest. Take the example of subjecting oneself to very painful surgery. Now, if it were agreed that a person would only subject himself to it if he could do so with pleasure―what then? Well, then “the physician” would say, [“]This means that no one would ever subject himself to it, for it is stuff and nonsense, unthinkable, that a person could undergo it without terrible suffering from the agonizing pain, to say nothing of his being able to take pleasure in it.[”] No, a person can only submit to this operation if he has decided calmly, and in quiet agreement with himself, to subject himself to this pain, and then sticks to that decision. If the surgeon, moved by the patient’s pain, stopped in the middle of the operation and asked him if he would not rather stop, then the patient’s quiet agreement with himself to endure it is, again, what is crucial―but it is nonsense and hypocrisy to stipulate that a person should submit to this operation only to the extent that he can do so with pleasure. Christ says to the apostles: “You will weep and mourn, but the world will rejoice.” Here the joy is placed somewhere else―the 20 quantum satis] Latin, sufficient amount.

494

77

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 77–79

•

1852

world will rejoice, which is the intensification of the apostles’ suffering.

78 5

10

495

15

Generational Xnty; the Historical. Xnty relates to the single individual. Only where it is primitive does it exist. And then we have completely reversed the situation: Xnty is supposed to relate to the entire race, and this falsification―to believe because, or by virtue of the fact that, others have believed―continues generation after generation. Well, the first generation acted rightly. It handed this down to the next generation: [“]We have believed.[”] But from that moment on we come to the generation that handed down to the next generation not “We have believed,” but “We are handing down what the previous generation believed, which is ‘We have believed that the next-previous generation believed!’ ” Just imagine, this has continued generation after generation: Ah, abyss of confusion―ah, what a sure way of abolishing Xnty! From this can also be seen to what degree the Grundtvigian position misses the point of Xnty.

20

79

25

30

35

Christ’s Crucifixion. Never has there been bitterness against a pers. as against Xt. The one thing corresponds to the other: Precisely because he said the highest things about himself, said them specifically about himself―precisely this [elevation] returns in the form of impassioned bitterness against him. Let us think for a moment of someone in whom I would not otherwise discern any sort of analogy: Socrates. By ironically keeping everything at a distance, by saying nothing decisive about himself, Socrates is, at the outset, unable to provoke the passionate admiration of his contemporaries; but this in turn works to his advantage, because then the passion of bitterness cannot be so powerful, either. In order properly to incite bitterness against oneself, a pers. must have said the highest about himself and have said it quite unconditionally. Compared with saying unconditionally and without the least reservation that one is God, talking about something divine is truly insufficient to in-

503

504

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 79–81

•

1852

cite passionate bitterness (when the admiration is replaced by the bitterness). From this it can be proven that hum. bitterness has never raged against anyone as it did against Xt.

5

Joseph of Arimathea―Xndom This man is a symbol of Xndom: he went to Pilate and asked if he might have Xt’s corpse―and buried it. That is how Xndom honors Xt, by burying him. Thus, it is as important to them as it was to the high priests to know with certainty that he is dead―but then they bury him with great pomp and glory: the final honor.

80

10

496

Christianity.

81

… And then, when a person has become so unhappy and wretched in this life that there is a possibility of his becoming a Xn in earnest, one of two things will happen. Either he will not in fact succeed in pressing through to gain the triumphant joy of the spirit, but he will nonetheless continue to relate to Xnty―and the world will mock him as someone who makes himself unhappy. Or he will succeed in pressing through to gain the triumphant joy of the spirit. And then what happens to him will fulfill Xt’s predictions concerning his disciples: “You will be hated by all because of my name. Indeed, the time is coming when those who kill you will think that by doing so they are offering worship to God.” He will be put to death―in Xt’s name, in order to serve Xt!―He will be hated, accursed, and will be called “Egotist” from start to finish. Now, in a certain sense I can well understand that the world must talk like this. For what an egoity the divine has, according to Xnty: to want to be loved as God wants to be loved―to the point of hating one’s father and mother! And what egoity there is in the true Xn, to love oneself so highly that in order to save oneself and in order to remain with God, one is― egotistical!―enough to hate the world, oneself, the human race, one’s friends!

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 81–82

5

82

10

497 15

20

25

30

35

•

1852

No, the world hates nothing, nothing so much as it hates the person who expresses what spirit is. Nor are 100,000 thieves and robbers as dangerous to the sensate world in which the senses have their life, as is one single true Xn, who explodes the whole of worldliness by expressing what spirit is.

“Prudence” Has Abolished Xnty, What It Means to Be “Sacrificed,” and Its Difficulty. From generation to generation, the law for every individual’s efforts has long been this: That a person ought only will the possible. If a person should venture to the point that he is defeated, he has erred, he has not awaited the opportune moment, etc. “To triumph in such a way that one is defeated” (the Christian way) is madness, and neither is it pleasing to God, the Loving One. Wait just a minute! The idea is that each person should venture just a little, then the next generation a little, etc.―and then at the end it will come. Can the unconditioned, Xnty, come into the world in this way[?] This is simply a quantitative deception. An effort that continues for 70,000 generations, in which people continually venture out only far enough to gain a prudent victory―this does not bring the unconditioned into the world. The efforts of these 70,000 generations do not express a drawing near to the unconditioned, but express that the unconditioned does not exist. Or can it be supposed to be possible to get “forsaking everything” into the world by having 70,000 generations in which each person only ventured to the point that he himself forsook nothing, but merely profited from it[?] In that case, what is the point of all the nonsense about history and the historical process? Indeed, it is hypocrisy, a ruse. Prudence reverses the situation, and the individual selfishly makes the τελος “I am of course supposed to enjoy life,” ergo I am the one who is the unconditioned, and the unconditioned is not what matters. No, the unconditioned can only be served in such a way that the person who serves it defines it as the τελος and himself as sacrificed. He must endure defeat, triumph in being defeated. This is what it is to be “sacrificed,” and this is how Xnty was originally served. 32 τελος] Greek, goal, end, purpose.

505

506

1

5

a

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 82–83

so that he does not recognize God’s love in God’s shielding him from suffering, but―oh blessed sublimity!―in the fact that God sends suffering, keeps him suffering, permits him to suffer

•

1852

The difficulty, then, is that the person who serves in this way not only endures and suffers, not only suffers patiently―no, the difficulty is that he remains in solidarity with God in such a way that he preserves the loftiness to assert that it is God’s love, God’s infinite love, that has helped him to suffer like thisa―something that is diametrically opposed to the merely hum. point of view. The next difficulty to arise is a spiritual trial, one that torments him about the fact that people’s judgment of him is that this is arrogance and that his suffering is punishment for his arrogance. The final difficulty is that of refraining from becoming self-important before God (meritoriousness). For if a person is aware that he relates to God on a purely egotistical basis, in order to profit from him, a person can indeed protect himself against presumptuously wanting to have merit in relation to God. This is how people prevent meritoriousness nowadays. This is why “the sermon” has become sheer flattery of God. “You are the infinite. I am nothing, nothing, less than a sparrow.” Well, this humility may certainly be in order, but it can also be a cunning ploy, designed to free a person from the “imitation” that is implied when one is a bit more than a sparrow before God. A cunning child could perhaps think of wanting to be so lowly, so lowly, in relation to his father just like a little bird―as a way of escaping the earnestness of discipline.

5

10

498 15

20

25

30

When One Is a Cleric, Wanting to Make a Point of Being Completely a Man of the World and of Participating in Worldliness as Much as Anyone, Can Be the Most Refined Hedonism.

83

1) Now, for example, there is a turtle soup banquet at Privy Councillor H.’s;―the Bishop is there, too. And the verdict concerning him is: He is a peerless man, he is capable of everything. At a turtle

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 83

5

10

15

499

20

25

30

35

40

soup banquet he can keep up with anyone―and did you hear him last Sunday? He portrayed those lofty virtues so peerlessly. The Portuguese ambassador is also tout a fait a fellow for a turtle soup banquet―but in his case there was no refinement. The cleric has the advantage―that he can also depict things so peerlessly.a 2) Julie and Fanny are the Privy Councillor’s daughters. They are discussing the feast,b and Julie says: [“]Believe me, it is very burdensome and inconvenient for the Bishop to participate in feasts like this. He would much rather live in poverty. Did you hear him last Sunday―he cried, when he depicted, etc.[”] And thus Julie and Fanny worship him―and this is the verdict of the women. It is also refinement: the Portuguese ambassador is not admired, because he eats the turtle with genuine gusto.c 3) The rest of us do not thank any of the other guests at that turtle soup banquet―we thank only the Bishop for making the sacrifice of participating in this sort of thing, for doing it so completely that no gourmet could have enjoyed turtle soup better― on Sundays he is a man of God―and thus would prefer to live in poverty, but adapts himself to us, for which we must thank him,d for not suddenly becoming so grave (as he is in his innermost selfe) as to disturb us at our turtle soup banquets, and so forth, which he can surely do without (did you hear him last Sunday?). Everywhere, a cleric of this sort cloaks himself in a sort of refined superiority. If the Foreign Minister is a Knight of the Order of the Elephant―well, then, that is his life’s earnestness. But this cleric, who also becomes a K of E―ah, you had better believe that for him that is just something childish―did you not hear him last Sunday[?] Thus he is different from other Knights of the Elephant in being infinitely elevated over “this childishness”―yet in such a way that he is (for safety’s sake) a K of E. This can be the most frightful sort of refinement, so that an artful hedonist might say, [“]Indeed, all the world’s delights and glories would not satisfy 4 tout a fait] French, properly “tout à fait,” entirely.

•

1852

507

a

This is having turtle in a uniquely sauce piquante―no wonder it has such exceptional flavor.

1

b

(where they were not present, because ladies do not like to be)

5

c

And the women’s worship, indeed, in specie their religious worship, is yet another sauce piquant with which the turtle is prepared solely for this peerless cleric.

d

, for deigning to be with us―and with the turtle,

e

, did you hear him last Sunday!

2 sauce piquante] French, piquant sauce. 7 in specie] Latin, specifically.

10

508

1

5

f

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 83–84

so that a Greek hedonist might say: [‘]I confess that the help of Xnty has made possible a refinement that I had not suspected, for what, after all, was all my enjoyment of life compared with what it would have been had I in addition been a Christian cleric![’]

•

1852

me if I were not also a cleric: it is an intensification that I know how to savor.f[”] It can be refinement. He could also have begun his involvement in this by having at first been more innocent―alas, and then he was no longer able to resist. It could perhaps also be an overly daring venture in the direction of inwardness―which he, alas, completely forgot to subject to occasional control.

The Possible Collision with Mynster. Right from the beginning, what M. has fought for―often rather crudely―in opposition to me has been to uphold the interpretation: My view, the Mynsterian view, is earnestness and wisdom; K’s view is odd, perhaps remarkable, but an odd exaggeration. My position is that I represent a truer conception of Xnty than M. does. Nonetheless, attacking Mynster, weakening him, is the farthest thing from my mind. No, exactly the opposite is the case. A little admission on his part and everything will be as advantageous as possible to him. No one will see the way things actlly are, something I have always concealed by bowing so deeply to him. I have actlly been an alien figure for M. from the very beginning (indeed, I myself said to him the first day: We are in complete disagreement―which he surely understood instinctively even better than I). I have within me a sort of passion for the truth and for ideas that is utterly foreign to him. Thus, I am opposed to him.―When Concluding Postscript appeared, things were still all right, both because I personally emphasized his importance so strongly toward the conclusion of the book and because Joh. Cl. is a humorist, and this made it easier for M. to assert: [“]This is only a poetic exaggeration, humor―whereas my own position is true earnestness and wisdom.[”]―The first part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits made a less pleasant impression on

5

84

500 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 84

5

10

15

20

501

25

30

35

40

him, but, perhaps out of gratitude for my postscript to the Concl. Postsc., the verdict was: [“]This is an excellent book[”]―especially the two last parts.― Works of Love offended him.―Xn Discourses even more so.―And thus it continues, more and more. Practice in Xnty affected him extremely painfully. Do I have it in for M., then? No, no, I am devoted to him with a hypochondriacal passion and on a scale he has never suspected. But here my hand is being forced by something else. I can no longer afford to continue the fight for the idea that I have represented. Therefore I must make haste. If my future were economically secure, so that I knew that I could devote myself entirely to the idea, I would surely grant some time and let M. live out his life―ah, it pains me so profoundly to have to draw my sword against him. But economic considerations are forcing me to make haste. If only I could get an official appointment, it would be easier for M. to get his interpretation to prevail. And he knows that I have financial worries. He has known it for several years. I myself have told him so. Now he is watching to see if this will force me to back down, perhaps even to throw myself into his arms, so that he can profit at my expense and get additional proof that his position is one of wisdom and earnestness. That line about Goldschmidt was fateful. (1) It provided a sad insight into Mynster’s evil side. (2) It gives me precisely the hard evidence against Mynster that I would have to have if I were to attack. I have long been aware that his entire person was rather close to worldliness. I have long seen this and have thus discounted him by half, accepting his “sermon[s].” But this fact betrays the whole thing. And here, as elsewhere, I first induce a person to give me the evidence I need. 3) It demonstrates that M. regards himself as impotent with respect to the idea. But he has been in an emotional state. For me, the possibility of this collision means that I must adopt an even higher conception of Xnty in order to maintain my position. This is a very serious matter―there is so much for me to learn and to

•

1852

[a]

509

In addition, I remember that the following observations also became clear to me: 1) When I had no economic concerns whatever, I was certain, I knew for certain, that it was not in order to spare myself that I held back and avoided a collision with M. But when I [now] have concerns about finite things― and in this respect M. could indeed have been of great service to me―then I must be suspicious of myself concerning whether I may be avoiding collisions in order to spare myself. 2) Actually, however, I would shudder at the prospect if, finally, M. did want to help me, because in my view he possesses altogether too much worldliness, which finds it quite proper for a person to secure his earthly advantage. 3) If I had let things go and had not published the last works while M. was still living, later on there would scarcely be anyone who had the strength to oppose me―but would I not then have avoided the scrutiny to which I now am subjected, having published them while M. lives[?]

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

510

1

5

10

15

[b]

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 84–85

It is also strange. At first, for a long time I resisted publishing the last works and was very reluctant to do so. Finally it happened―and it was pseudonymous. (It was The Sickness unto Death.) Then I said to myself: Now, there is no reason to hurry with the rest of the literature, since of course it is to be pseudonymous. When I moved out of the tanner’s place, my idea was to travel. Therefore I did not inspect the rooms myself. Then I got that unfortunate apartment. I suffered very much there, oh, very much. Then the rest of the Anti-Cl. material was published. Look, it is as if Governance wanted M. to experience it.

•

1852

suffer.―But on the other hand, for me the possibility of this collision means that there is a power that is working against M. For if it occurs, the collision will be against my will. Economic considerations are compelling me to make haste, and M. has had it within his power to buy, at a most advantageous price, what could be most dangerous to him if it comes to a collision. He was an old man. The truer view is offered by someone who “in profound veneration” was willing to arrange things so that it looked as though it were Mynster’s view. He would not do it. After having enjoyed life as he indeed has, it can certainly be bitter in his final years to have illuminated what sort of Xnty this actlly is.

The Story of the Passion The divine can be recognized from these things as well: 1) that everything that happens, that is said, that comes to pass, etc., is full of portent. What is matter-of-fact continually transforms itself into meaning something infinitely higher, so that everything is elevated an entire quality above the human level. The high priest says: It is better that one person suffer, etc.―and he is prophesying. It is a remark made from worldly prudence, and look, it is a prophetic voice.―The high priests require that Pilate set a watch by the grave so that it might be certain that Xt is not risen―and the presence of the watchman is precisely what becomes the testimony that he has risen.―Pilate writes: [“]The King of the Jews[”] and says, [“]What I have written, I have written[”]―indeed, and he was right, but he had no idea how right he was. 2) Almost everything that is said resounds in reverse, becomes true when heard in reverse. The crowd stands near the cross, mocking, everyone is mocking―and speaking from a merely hum. viewpoint, they demand―as a condition of their believing that he is Xt―that Xt do the things, precisely

5

10

15

85

20

502 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 85–86

5

those things, that, if he did them, would from God’s point of view prove precisely that he is not God’s Son. “Climb down from the cross; help yourself; let us see if God will help him, etc., etc.”―for had he climbed down from the cross, had helped himself, had saved his life, had called for 12,000 legions of angels, etc., he would in fact not have been God’s Son.

10

86

15

20

25

30

503 35

Christendom. Inventory. Actually it is after all a grandiose attempt that has been made to trick God out of Xnty. And just like Morten Fredriksen, who ran away and left a straw man in his bed, so have we hum. beings (continuing generation after generation) figured out how to substitute a counterfeit―the race, the hum. race―and thus we live carefree existences in worldly enjoyment of life, cavorting ad libitum as copies. Xt involves himself with―the hum. race. We have entrusted the hum. race to God―he cannot get hold of us: we are copies. This is how we live: as copies. In so doing we have of course attained the most perfectly carefree state. But, then, what is all the business about immortality, about being related to God―what has become of Xnty[?] God has intended something much higher for us (see the N.T.): actually being related to God. But, but―and things cannot in fact be otherwise― for safety’s sake this cannot be done in a simple, straightforward manner (ad modum of becoming an excellency, a king, etc.). No, it is connected with surgery that is so frightfully painful―that we hum. beings quite properly think, Well, to be honest, this sublimity is too high for us. All this is something I can understand altogether too well. On the other hand, I cannot have anything to do with the fact that people have tacitly turned 19 ad libitum] Latin, at will, however we like.

•

1852

511

512

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 86

•

1852

Xnty into something that has an immediate appeal for us―and that they then call this Xnty: they play Xnty―in earnest. No, my view is that every honest pers. is very capable of understanding God’s actual intent. Now, if he cannot bring himself to desire this sublimity that God has intended for him, this sublimity that, mark well, has the recognizable characteristic of straightforwardly being so terribly painful to us hum. beings that if he were at least honest with God, he would admit this straightforwardly, saying, [“]Forgive me for not daring truly to involve myself with you,[”] or [“]Have patience with me, perhaps it will come.[”] Ah, in that way at least one still has a relationship with God; one has not entirely given up on him―by wanting to deceive him. Imagine a father and a son. The father owns all manner of worldly goods, which are what the son so very much wants to have. The father takes a different view of the matter. Imagine that the father yielded and said, [“]Well, you will get what you want, but remember that what is being realized here is not my idea― remember that it would be the worst sort of delusion if you let the fact of your having received all these worldly goods from me serve as proof that you have my love. No, as you know, my wish and my idea is something quite different. But I will yield to you a bit―perhaps it will come.[”] This is how a hum. being might relate to God, a hum. being who did not truly want to involve himself with the divine, with what is truly Xn, but who on the other hand did not want to break with God or deceive him. There have lived peop. who so strongly sensed the blessedness that Xnty would grant them in requiring that they die away― who sensed its presence so strongly that they reckoned the suffering as nothing, so that they truly found sheer blessedness and joy in this Xn sublimity. Or, if it was not like this for them right away at the beginning, they came to experience it this way in the course of time. This is what people have taken in vain, and here they have substituted the notion that Christianity is to be sheer joy and blessedness for us hum. beings in a more or less straightforward sense. Those glorious ones thus found blessedness, sheer blessedness in relating themselves to that which, humanly speaking, makes a hum. being unhappy. This is what is highest. What is much lower is this: to sense the suffering, but nevertheless to be unwilling entirely to let go of the relation to that

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

504

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 86–87

5

10

15

•

1852

higher state―that is, to feel that the relationship is suffering but nevertheless to be unwilling entirely to let go, whether this is because a person hopes that one day it might well go better for him, or because, in any case, a person trembles at the thought of abandoning the relationship. “Apostasy” is to have perverted the meaning of Xnty and then to act as if nothing has happened―and to be a Xn! Those heroes of Xnty, their lives, have been taken in vain. They felt sheer blessedness. They did not speak of the suffering―despite the fact that it was there: this is the expression of the strength of their faith. But people have taken this in vain; they have acted as though this blessedness were something quite straightforward. If a pers. hardened himself to endure the most painful surgery quite calmly―well, this shows how tough he is. But there could be a blockhead nearby who concluded: ergo it does not hurt. This is how it is with Xndom. What the heroes understood by blessedness (with suffering as the middle term) we have translated into: hurrah, hurrah, hurrah. And then we are all Xns, earnest Xns, who are considering―reforming the Church.

20

87

25

30

35

The Endless Chatter and Conversation of “the Awakened” about Their Xnty and Xnty. No sooner do the awakened gather than they chatter about nothing other than Xnty. It is disgusting, foolish flirtation. But did not the first Xns do this, too? Yes, they did. So why was that not foolish flirtation? Because the sword of persecution hung over their heads at every hour, because it was constantly a matter of life and death, so it was impossible to do anything other than talk about it, just as it is impossible to talk about anything other than a huge conflagration―as long as it lasts. But nowadays the awakened suffer nothing, do nothing―and therefore this endless chatter is foolish flirtation.

513

514

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 88–89

•

1852

“Renunciation”―Demoralization. The demoralization of our age (which quite simply has been occasioned by “the understanding” having duped the entire generation, all of us) is this: renunciation, which Xnty requires, has been abolished―people take what is worldly. But not only that, no (this is the intensification), people make renunciation (which they evade) into an aufgehobnes element and a refinement in the enjoyment and possession of earthly things. People take, people covet, earthly things―but they are dignified, above such things― despite the fact that they do indeed take them. People take credit for the lofty idea of renunciation―for the idea of giving up earthly things as childish―even while possessing earthly things. People want the title of Knight, Councillor of Justice, etc., etc.―they get it―and then, in addition, they are so dignified that they are above such things as childishness―and yet they are those things. “The understanding” must necessarily engender the most disgusting hypocrisy of all. The incision must be made, the surgical incision―the disjunction either/or must be brought to bear. If you want earthly things: truly, I will not prevent you from having them. But nothing beyond this―no hypocritical appearance of your being far above them. Because if you truly are far above earthly things, this can only be expressed by your not taking them. But this hypocrisy of “the understanding” is perhaps far more dangerous to Xnty than the raw, bestial passions with which Xnty had to contend in the beginning. Incidentally, here it can easily be seen what I mean when I that say I am “without authority.” For I say, You may certainly have earthly things―but the hypocritical illusion must go. The person with authority must say: Renounce earthly things.

The Extraordinary One Is: The One Sacrificed. This is how things are in the sphere of the religious and the ethical-religious: the two terms are inseparable because the extraord. relates to things inversely. Very close attention must be paid to this, and by doing so one will gain a new occasion for observing the mischief and hypocrisy of Xn preaching as currently practiced. Oh, we hum. beings, 7 aufgehobnes] German-Danish (from Hegelian philosophy), properly, “aufgehobenes,” suspended, but preserved.

88

505 5

10

15

20

25

30

89

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 89

5

506 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1852

every hum. being, hum. nature―are truly born hypocrites, and so cunning! This is the scale: the sphere of the religious―the extraordinary one. This is the truly extraordinary one, and, as everywhere in this sphere, the positive is recognizable by its opposite, the negative: to be the extraordinary one is―to be sacrificed, to become the one sacrificed. But we hum. beings, we understand [“]the extraordinary[”] aesthetically as the superlative of what is direct and straightforward―so that being the extraordinary becomes the highest sort of enjoyment. Aha! Now the priest (one of these 1000’s upon 1000’s who are paid to confuse Xnty, a situation just as backward as if the state were to come up with the idea of employing 1000 civil servants who were paid to defend the circle―by proving that it is a square) he preaches: “To be something so exalted as a witness to the truth, an apostle, the Virgin Mary, etc.―I am altogether too modest and humble to ask for anything of that sort.” You scoundrel! What you are doing here is sneaking in a false concept of the extraordinary. By sparing ourselves, by loving flesh and blood, we guarantee ourselves pleasant days in this world―and then, aided by the priest, we aspire to the hypocritical illusion that our not asking to be the extraordinary is an expression of our humility and modesty! No, no. If there is to be even a little bit of meaning in the preaching of Xnty, the extraordinary must be spoken of in entirely different fashion. If it is true that these extraordinary ones have created the conditions on which we may simply have an easier time of it in life (if this is indeed the case), well, these extraordinary ones, the ones sacrificed, must at least weigh on our consciences. Thus, we are not to be permitted to cheat the extraordinary ones by pretending their lot is something enviable, nor are we to cheat our way into humility and modesty by virtue of the fact that we are content to admire them without asking to share their lot. No, no, if it actually is true that the sufferings of those who have been sacrificed can permit us to make our lives easier, well, then, in any case their sacrifice must be reckoned against us as a debt. So if we are to speak of the extraordinary one, we must do so like this: Before God and his holy angels, I confess that if an angel were to have come to me to proclaim such―joyous!―tidings, I would have prayed, begged that I might be free of it. Or if Xt had called upon me and said to me, “You shall be my chosen

515

516

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 89

•

1852

instrument. I shall―joyous news!―show you what you will come to suffer for my name’s sake,” I would have begged to be free of it, etc. O, you who have been sacrificed in such agony―that you should not even have thanks for it. No, no, because in order for us to be able to shirk “imitation,” the situation must be mendaciously reversed, and your circumstances must become enviable. Disgusting! But for us hum. beings, everything, everything is concerned with getting away from whatever might remind us, however faintly, of “imitation.” So if I were to thank them for all their sufferings, the situation could of course easily come to turn against me: You, why do you not suffer, why are you shirking[?] Look, this is what people are afraid of. So people protect themselves. Because if the situation of those [who have been sacrificed] was indeed enviable―then I escape from “imitation,” indeed, so much so that I gain humility and modesty in addition to the money, honor, esteem, and all the worldly enjoyments in which I have my life. You see, the priests are clearly responsible for this. For the mass of humanity is not so hardened that if this were laid upon their hearts they would refuse to grant it access. But the priests are afraid to permit even a small portion of the truth to shine forth. Incidentally, there is a question of whether one is permitted to teach simply that some have suffered―in order that we might enjoy life. This is the genuine Mynsterian position, this suspect egotism. The question is whether this view does not reduce Christianity to a simple historical event, a simple historical doctrine for which there once had to be suffering―instead of that Xnty is an examination by eternity. For why, indeed, did those people come to suffer? Because they renounced everything. But, then, has Xnty abolished this requirement? Or can there be indulgence for me because others have renounced everything? But everywhere one runs into this falsification that makes Xnty into a historical doctrine, a sort of scholarly knowledge―instead of it being eternity’s requirement and its promise―to those first ones as to us, and to every age, so that Xnty has nothing whatever to do with all that historical nonsense, but as it says in the N.T., begins anew with every generation.

5

10

507

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 90–91 90

5

10

•

1852

Deceit. Even with its best will, a child cannot do other than understand Xnty as mythology: the eater transforms what is eaten. You see, that is why we in Xndom busy ourselves so much with childlike faith, with what is childlike―for then we turn a sentimental mythology into Xnty―and “imitation!” Basically, Xndom has tried to let “the child” decide what Xnty is―and then we exploit the fact that this (which, in the child, was innocent) turns Xnty into mythology: we exploit this in order to shirk that which does not please us and to drool in sentimentality.

508

91

15

20

25

30

35

“From Henceforth All Generations Shall Call Me Blessed” Lk 1:48 yes, quite true, all generations henceforth―though not the contemporaneous generation, which saw in her the most unfortunate of all women. But we skip over this―and then pretend that Mary was extraordinary in the sense of enjoyment and happiness. We skip this and in so doing miss the point of Mary’s faith, or the greatness of her faith: that she humbly and joyously found the situation to be sheer blessedness. And we deceive ourselves, as if it were modesty and humility on our part not to desire something like the extraordinary thing that befell Mary. And we deceive the exemplary ones by not even at least remembering their sufferings with gratitude. For us hum. beings, for average people, what is surely of greatest importance is surely the question of how things will go for us during the time we live here on earth. A person must already be “spirit” to be able to concern himself with references to the praise of later generations. But the more I consider it, the clearer it becomes to me how mendaciously we associate with the holy. This I will not and cannot do. After all, I will only live on earth a maximum of 70 years―but in eternity I shall live with those glorious ones, and how, indeed, will they receive me, with what eyes will they look upon me, if I were to deceive them like that and lie my way out of the true relationship to them!

517

518

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 92–93

•

1852

Catholicism―Protestantism. To get rid of “imitation,” to get it removed: that is what occupies us hum. beings. So we have behaved as follows. We take Xt only as “Redeemer” and entirely omit the category [“]Exemplar[.”] But that is not all: before long the Virgin Mary becomes a sort of redeemer to whom one prays, asking that she pray to “the Redeemer” in our behalf; and then “the apostle” becomes a sort of redeemer to whom one prays, asking that he pray to “the Redeemer” in our behalf; and then the martyr to pray to the apostle and so on up; and then the priest, to the witness to the truth and so on up. Naturally, this long string is calculated to put “imitation” at a distance. This is a frightful error. At the same time, there is something hum. in it. For indeed, if I want to have my life be one of enjoyment, and I am conscious of this, and I nonetheless want to relate to the exemplars who express the exact opposite (suffering), it is (humanly speaking) touching for me to want to transform the exemplars into redeemers of a sort, to want to express how different my life is from theirs―it is a sort of honesty toward these exemplars. Protestantism is more cunning. We live in sensual and worldly enjoyment (and we call it Xnty)―and then we repay the exemplars, the intermediate levels of authority, with the hypocritical words: [“]I am too humble and modest to desire the extraordinary[”]―Which extraordinary? To live in poverty and wretchedness, hated, accursed, and finally put to death? The more I look at it, the more it seems to me that Protestantism (however true the Lutheran position might be)―that Protestantism’s hypocrisy is the rlly aggravated and calculated hypocrisy.

“When the Fullness of Time Had Come.” What does this mean? It means that the hum. race had reached the point that from then on “spirit” could be made the criterion: thus did Xnty arrive. That was supposed to have decided matters. But in order to get rid of Xnty, people have come up with the notion of making it into a doctrine in the historical sense and believing that what

92

5

10

15

509

20

25

30

93

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 93–95

5

10

•

1852

is important is the history of this doctrine (as with the history of Platonic philosophy)―indeed, people have even believed that this doctrine was perfectible. Splendid! Let us just go right into the business of perfectibility―then we will easily come to the point of entirely abolishing Xnty. Actually, this is what hum. beings want, but it is done hypocritically, in the name of Xnty’s perfectibility. If people want to kill Xnty, it is always best done (which has in fact happened) in the name of protecting it, defending it, perfecting it. Incidentally, herein lies an indirect proof of Xnty’s enormous power―the fact that the dangerous attacks are always made under the pretense of defending, protecting, perfecting it. And in so doing the entire situation is reversed: it looks as though it were the true Xns who betrayed, attacked, corrupted it.

510

94

20

25

95

30

35

Theme for a Sermon for Easter Monday The words in the gospel of Lk 24:24: “Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but they did not see him[.”] This: but they did not see him. Of course, exactly the same thing happened with the disciples walking to Emmaus, while Xt walked with them―but they did not see him. So also with us. Here: a little fencing about historical knowledge, which also comes and looks and finds things as they were related―but does not see him.

When the Doors Were Locked, Xt Came to the Disciples. Thus the doors must be locked, locked to the world―then Xt comes in through locked doors[;] of course, he also comes from within. When Xnty struggled, the doors were always locked―the heterogeneity of Xnty. In Xndom we have let the doors stand wide open (homogeneity with the world) but then Xt does not come, either.

519

520

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 96

•

1852

Reflection. The fact that the entire generation, the hum. race, has entered into reflection has changed everything. In immediacy one was related to an unconditioned and was related unconditionally. What wonder, then, that a person risked life and death.― The secret of reflection is: there is no unconditioned―nothing is so untrue that there is not, after all, some truth in it, and nothing so true that there is not, after all, some untruth in it. Where is there any place for risking life and death here[?] The passion is gone. Xnty emphasized one sort of suffering unconditionally, that of sin. Immediacy was seized by it―so we had unconditional passion tending toward renunciation. In reflection, the suffering of sin differs only in degree from all other suffering―so the individual does not get any impetus toward venturing unconditionally.― The unconditioned, the eternal, etc., are actlly abolished―though Xnty continues to exist―in fact, we are all Xns. Yes, and something that perhaps was not even achieved in early Xndom―that all are priests―has now been attained. For if, indeed, being a priest is to be the way priests are nowadays, well, then we are all truly priests. We are all Xns. Xnty goes on existing. Strange! Here is a mere analogy from antiquity. In antiquity, the most essential education was training as a rhetorician, an orator, training in eloquence. This was connected with the whole of public life in the republic―this eloquence would subsequently be put to active use in actual life. Then came the empire, and actual life was totally transformed―there was no more action. But the education and training of youth remained the same. In the schools of rhetoric they went through their exercises, orating on the same themes concerning freedom―aber in life no one had any use for this. Thus Xnty has been abolished in Xndom, but the priests are orators and the 39 aber] German, but.

96

5

10

15

511

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 96–97

•

1852

521

worship services on Sundays are like the exercises in the schools of rhetoric. It is an illusion, as though everything were in order, but actuality itself has been abandoned by Xnty. 5 [a]

Introduction

97

10

512 15

20

The Gospel Story of the Good Shepherd. Theme: that the difference between the hireling and the shepherd only becomes clear―when the wolves come. This is aimed at “Xndom.” In calm weather, when everything is secure, when there are no dangers for Xnty―when, in fact, every advantage is connected with it―the shepherd and the hireling can easily be confused: then it indeed entirely suits the hireling to be the shepherd. But when the wolves come.[b]

Incidentally, it is worth noting that the epistle of Peter, which deals with imitating Xt, is accompanied by the gospel story of the good shepherd, though those who have chosen this epistle have most likely let their choice be determined by the closing words: [“]You were like sheep without a shepherd.[”]

“The hireling” and “the shepherd” are of course not as different from one another as, e.g., red and black, so that one immediately sees the difference with one’s eyes half open. One must remember that the secret and the art of the hireling consist precisely in doing everything to resemble the shepherd as deceptively as possible. The hireling, of course, does not write [“]Hireling[”] on his hat―Lord, no, at all costs, do not let anyone know anything other than that I am the shepherd.

1

5

10

15

[b]

―That is why it was actlly the hirelings who invented the sort of security that is “Xndom”: they know very well that when the wolves come it will be obvious that they are not shepherds. To this extent they have an interest in preventing the wolves from coming. This could give them a fleeting likeness to shepherds.a For―when the wolves come, when it can no longer be prevented, then it becomes obvious that the hirelings are―hirelings.

20

25

30

a

yet the difference is easy to see: the hireling does not fear the coming of the wolves for the sake of the flock, but for his own sake because he might lose the profits and because, in addition, it would also become obvious that he is a hireling.

35

522

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 98–99

•

1852 The Law of Existence.

1

5

10

15

20

25

[a]

That is why it is easiest to write a grammar in a dead language―because it has been concluded. The anatomist must have a dead body, for even if he might otherwise be able to use one that was alive, it changes at every moment, it is im Fluße. The guarantee that a theory can be created is always that its object is in the realm of being or in the realm of having-been, not in becoming. It may appear as though one has even more in theory than in life. In a certain sense this is indeed true. In theory one does in fact have the whole, its every detail, and all at once―whereas life, impoverished, is successive. But the theory does not in fact have―life. It is this enchantment that finally entraps the theory in the empty conceit that it is capable of creating life on a scale not even possessed by the life that preceded the theory.

First comes life. Then, after a longer or shorter interval (but afterward) comes theory. Not the reverse: first theory, then life. First art, the work of art, then theory, and that is how it is in all cases. Thus, first life, then theory. Then there usually comes a third thing: an attempt to create life with the help of the theory, or the fantasy of having the same life with the help of the theory that preceded it―indeed, of having that life even more intensely. This is the final stage, the parody (as everything ends in parody), and then the process has concluded. Then there must be new life again. Now, take Xnty. It came in as life, sheer heroism that risked everything for the faith. The change takes place fundamentally from the moment Xnty adopted the point of view that it is a doctrine. This is the theory, it was about what had been lived. But there was still some vitality in it, and therefore there were occasional life-and-death disputes about “doctrine” and doctrinal principles. Nonetheless, doctrine became more and more the adequate definition of human lives. Everything became objective. This is the theory of Xnty. Then followed a period when it was believed that life could be brought forth with the help of theory. This is the period of the System, the parody. And now the process has been concluded. Xnty must begin anew as life. The catastrophe of ’48 tends entirely in this direction as well.

Socrates. How sublime! He is accused, among other things, of not fearing the gods of the state. He is condemned to death. His friends want to help him escape from prison. No, S. answers, If I fled like that, I would of course make true the accusation that I do not fear the gods of the state! 8 im Fluße] German, in flux.

98

5

10

15

20

25

513

30

99

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 100

100

5

10

15

20

25

514 30

35

40

“The Monastery” The error in the monastic movement of the Middle Ages was this: asceticism, renunciation, etc. were after all an expression of infinite passion and for Xnty’s heterogeneity with the world. It ought to have been done quite simply: the candidate for the monastery should have declared that this was simplement what was required. But something else happened instead. The candidate for the monastery declared himself nonetheless to be homogeneous with the world, because he accepted permitting himself and his position to be regarded as the extraordinary, which was straightforwardly saluted by the admiration of contemporaries. That is, the candidate for the monastery participated in the general reduction of the Christian requirement. He did not make asceticism, etc. into what was required, but made the way of life of the others into what was required―and thus he gained admiration for doing what was extraordinary. But one who is extraordinary in this way is indeed homogeneous with all other worldliness. Likewise, in so doing the candidate for the monastery avoided persecution, suffering for the teachings, and the like. It is easy to see that were asceticism and the like simply presented existentially as what is required, as what is required of everyone, then peop. would become embittered. But if the ascetic is willing to accept the admiration of others and to permit the others to repay him by admiring him: then a person can indeed go in for asceticism. The sign that Christianity was scaled down is precisely the arrival of the position [“]extraordinary Xn[.”] That was a great help! Instead of there being, in the Christian sense, only one requirement for all of us, there were now ranks: there came to be extraordinary Xns who were compensated straightforwardly with admiration, and plain worldliness became the ordinary Xn position. 9 simplement] French, simply.

•

1852

523

524

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 100–101

•

1852

The first blow Xnty received was when the emperor became Xn. The next, and far more dangerous blow was when the category [“]straightforwardly recognizable extraordinary Xn[”] arose. The error lay, as noted, not in entering the monastery, but in the title of extraordinary Xn, who is compensated straightforwardly with the admiration of contemporaries.

Contemporaneity with Xt.―The Poetic.―Imitation. If I had lived at the same time as Xt, could it possibly have occurred to me to want to be a professor of that situation, objectively presenting it―instead of sharing in the suffering[?] But now that was 1,800 years ago. Yes, sure enough. To put the matter to rest we must have the help of “the poet.” What does the poet do? His eye has perspective vision, so that he sees what is farthest away as something close at hand. So he succeeded in this, and now he wants to produce his masterwork[,] which has its value precisely in depicting the past exactly as if it were present. He wants to “represent” it―and thus be admired by peop., be a success, etc. But here things come to a halt. For if it is actually the case that the past has become entirely present―how can it occur to you to want to poetize―then you must of course become involved, act, suffer. Or, if a house is on fire, is it not an outrageous atrocity (if such were possible) if a person (instead of helping with putting out the fire and with rescuing) wanted to be there in order to “depict” the fire―and then be admired for his art, make money, etc., while the victim of the fire, alas, lost everything[?] Above all, Xnty will no longer tolerate this shameless objectivity with which a person wants to play the part of a third party, becoming a professor of―the fact that other people were crucified―depicting (in order to earn money) how others have given everything to the poor. Ah, continually inhaling dust-contaminated air is not as frightful as what I encounter wherever I look: this objectivity that sucks blood in such mean fashion, or converts the sufferings of the glorious ones into money, honor, prestige. And always ambiguity, ambiguity, ambiguity! There is always the appearance that it is for the sake of scholarly knowledge, for truth, for Xnty―that one first of all guarantees oneself a profit. Good Lord, can Xnty be served in that way? Or I wonder whether someone

5

101

10

15

20

25

515 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 101–102

5

10

102 15

20

25

30

516

35

•

1852

who has never read a single learned work, but who has acted in self-denial, I wonder whether he has not contributed more to illuminate what Xnty is than 170,000 of the most super-learned professors who start by guaranteeing themselves earthly goods― in order then to write about Xnty or profit from Xnty in other ways. Such a person has indeed done more for it. And if there were no 170,000 professors of this sort, it would possible―even if only weakly or imperfectly―to recognize what Xnty is. But “the professors” obscure Xnty totally―under the guise of illuminating Xnty. They obscure it totally, helped by the most disgusting amalgam: learning, learned opinions up one side and down the other, memorized by heart and without heart.

Optical Illusion. Councillor of State David has told me that the warden of one of the silent prisons in North America had iron bars and the like painted on the wall, but made sure that the prisoners could never get close enough to see that the whole thing was an optical illusion, and he maintained that these painted iron bars were just as effective as the real thing. That is how it is with the preaching of Xnty! During “quiet hours” a person abandons himself fervently, in imaginative passion, to spiritual debauchery, claiming that he is willing, if it were required, to sacrifice everything―depicting the sublime, the noble, with the passion of a theatrical actor (and, indeed, who but an actor ordinarily has this excited passion!).― ―And in his everyday life a person protects himself with all possible cowardly shrewdness, so that his life never comes to the point of making any decision that might make it apparent what sort of fellow he is.―What more does the congregation want? This sort of thing is of course just as beneficial as any actual witness to the truth. Yes, perhaps even better, people think. Because this pure, abstract possibility―no, it would never get that perfect, even if the most honest witness to the truth became a martyr. The abstract possibility is the epitome of all perfections. The most perfect work of the greatest author―is after all not as perfect as the work that Mr. X could write if he wanted to. And this abstract possibility is offered to the congregation every Sunday by these noble “good shepherds,” who with the help of abstract possibility gain respect

525

526

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 102–104

•

1852

and dignity as instruments of earnestness and truth―and in addition get all the earthly gain.

Theme. When a pers. is sick or feels ill, the first thing he does is immediately send for the physician, and medicine is what he wants. Spiritually understood, exactly the opposite is the case: when someone has sinned, the last thing he wants is the physician and the medicine.

103 5

10

The Frightful Situation When the Criterion by Which We Are to Be Judged Is the Universally Human. Ah, after all, everyone, everyone, tends to reassure himself with a relativity. A person who is a bit better than his family and relations, or than others in the provincial town where he lives, or among his age group, and so forth, is immediately reassured and feels better. Bear in mind, then, that the judgment will be in eternity, where, merely of those who are in the strictest sense blood witnesses, there will be millions upon millions. People live by comparing themselves with a couple of other people, or a couple of hundred, or a couple of thousand, or a couple of hundred thousand―or, go further!―to a couple of million (it is already dizzying), and the judgment will be in accordance with the criterion of those blood witnesses who have been tested against the most dreadful criterion―of them alone there will be millions. Ah, a hum. being finds this so tempting, this wretched notion that God cannot, after all, be so severe, for he would be put in an awkward situation if he had to condemn us all. My friend, even when that line (which you think God cannot cross without undue severity) has long, long ago been crossed, he still has millions who have lived up to the task. What is bourgeois philistinism? It is comparison with a specific number. But Xnty does away with bourgeois philistinism: the

104

15

20

25

30

517

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 104–105

•

1852

criterion is all, all, all hum. beings. Even in Copenhagen it causes much ado when one person is, after all, willing to suffer a little for Xnty―and on Judgment Day there will be billions who have suffered much, much more. 5

105

10

15

20

25

30

35

518

The Dangerous “in Addition.” I imagine a hum. being who is well equipped in every respect. He has essentially understood Xnty and has understood that it can only be proclaimed truthfully when it is served in self-denial and renunciation. Alas, but he cannot gain mastery over himself like that. [“]I cannot,[”] he says to himself, [“]I cannot let go of earthly goods like that. And furthermore, I will be unable to get anyone at all to embrace Xnty. And finally, compared with the preaching of Xnty that people otherwise get around here, mine is, after all, quite a bit truer.[”] So he gives in and in addition takes earthly goods―but of course, in saying this, he does not also say out loud the truth about how things really are, for in that case he perhaps might indeed fail to get earthly goods, and in any case, under those conditions earthly goods would surely lose their appeal for him. He acts as if everything is in order with his preaching of Xnty, that it is true Xnty. But with a feeling of thankfulness toward God, he says to himself: [“]Because I get earthly goods like this, I shall also work all the more zealously and untiringly, striving to win more and more people for Xnty.[”] And he keeps this pledge. With uncommon zeal and skill and endurance, he preaches Xnty for a generation or more, and he wins many, many people for Xnty. And this moves him: he very much wants―and this is sincerely intended―to show God his gratitude by working more and more zealously, by winning over more and more people. Let us now draw up his balance sheet. Has the man benefited Xnty? No, no, no. He has done incalculable damage. Specifically, he has made things doubly difficult for true preaching to gain a hearing when it arrives―it will come to appear as a ridiculous exaggeration. His untruthful preaching has given peop. a taste for a Xnty without renunciation and for the notion that this is

527

528

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 105–106

•

1852

just as true a Xnty as the old one―so of course a person would have to be mad to involve himself with the old Xnty. And the more zealous his preaching, the more thousands he won over, the more dangerous it was. For with the truth it is not the case that the falsification that in a certain sense lies closest to it (closest in the sense that it possesses within itself the most truth), that it is an approximation of the truth, that it is what is closest to the truth. No, precisely the opposite: precisely this one is the most dangerous, and in a way the farthest from the truth, blocking the passage, making the truth unrecognizable. The utterly corrupted person lies closer to the truth―that is, it is easier to make the truth recognizable in the aftermath of a simple scoundrel or hypocrite than after a person like this, who used all his energy and zeal to get as many people as possible to accept his message, believing that in so doing he was showing his gratitude toward God. Ah, in one sense this is so enormously human, in another sense so frightful. It is so human to want to knock down the price a little, but then also to be all the more eager to broaden one’s reach―and in doing so one does the most damage. A person who preaches Xnty in this way goes to his grave bearing responsibility for himself and responsibility for the thousands whom he needed, if you will, in order to demonstrate his energy and zeal, whom he won for Xnty and induced to believe that they were Xns and that this was Xnty―finally, responsibility to the witness to the truth who one day will establish true Xnty, whose life will now become doubly painful.

Pascal. In modern times, who has been more utilized by priests and professors than Pascal! They appropriate his thoughts―but they omit the fact that Pascal was an ascetic, that he wore a hair shirt and all that sort of thing. Or they explain it as something characteristic of those times, which is without significance for us. Splendid! Pascal was original in every other respect―except in this. But was asceticism in fact the general rule in Pascal’s time, or had it not been long since abolished by then, and Pascal was precisely the one who had to assert it in opposition to his times[?]

5

10

15

20

25

106

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 106–107

519

5

107

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1852

But that is how it is everywhere―everywhere there is this infamous, disgusting cannibalism in which (as Heliogabalus ate ostrich brains) they eat the ideas, the opinions, the sayings, the dispositions of the dead―but their lives, their character: no, thank you, they do not want any of that.

Christian Venturing. The sum of all prudence, then, consists in never venturing any farther out than what, by virtue of my understanding, I see that I can manage, or farther than any suffering that, by virtue of my understanding, I calculate that I can endure. Seneca put it correctly as follows: I am not to dare that which, were I to succeed, would leave me astonished at my success―it is too lofty. But, now, to forsake the world and everything that is of the world (which is Xnty’s requirement): How in all the world am I to forsake such things if prudence and the understanding are to decide whether or not I will do it or am able to do it! Take Xt’s prophecy of what would happen to himself and his followers, and then say how in all the world it could occur to any hum. being, by virtue of the understanding and prudence, to get involved with something of that sort? But the point is that Xnty is the unconditioned. Period. If something is the unconditioned and is God’s will and command―that puts an end to all responsibility for the second party to make use of prudence: he has only to obey. This is nonsense: that something is God’s will for a hum. being, that it is the unconditioned―and then that the person concerned is supposed to consider prudently whether he dare involve himself with this sort of thing, which does not even need to be considered because the understanding, prudence, everything shouts at top volume that it is madness to involve oneself with this sort of thing. Look, this is why Xt promised his apostles a Spirit. Now everything will be in order: the disciples are simply to obey, venture―for the rest, God shall surely see to it that he is capable of doing it, of doing it victoriously, or―if he fainted under venturing like that―that he is able to bear it. But inasmuch as we have been brought up in Xnty, and inasmuch as we hum. beings have gotten Xnty down among us: It makes no impression whatever upon us of being the unconditioned, of being “God’s will for us.” We relate to it and its

529

530

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 107–108

•

1852

requirements as to every other undertaking in life: we believe that we may prudently calculate how far we dare venture―rather than that we must venture. Look, this is why dying away and renunciation have been entirely abolished, for by virtue of the understanding and prudence it is truly impossible to will to die away―prudence and the understanding are diametrically opposed to that.

That We Are Brought Up in Xnty from Childhood has its good side, after all: that if we actually become Xns we come to experience a situation analogous to those who were Xt’s contemporaries. At first they entertained earthly expectations― and then everything turned upside down: then becoming a Xn in spirit and truth became a matter of earnestness. This is what it is like when someone who has been brought up in Xnty from childhood appropriates Xnty as an earthly gospel―and then, at a later age, if he is to have a spiritual impression of Xnty, comes what is frightful for a hum. being.

520 5

108 10

15

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 109

•

1852

521

109

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

About “Her.”

May 1852

During the latter part of 1851 she encountered me every day. It was during the period when I would walk home by way of Langelinie at ten o’clock in the morning. The timing was exact and the place merely shifted farther and farther up the road to the lime kiln. She came walking as if from the lime kiln. I have never gone one step out of my way and have always turned off on the Citadel Road, even when one day she happened to be a few steps farther along on the Lime-Kiln Road, and I would therefore have encountered her if I had not turned off. That was how it went, day after day. The problem is that I am so frightfully well-known and that a lady so rarely walks that route alone at that time of day. Furthermore, I did not fail to notice that this attracted the attention of a couple of the habitual strollers―both of whom were acquainted with both us―who met more or less regularly at the same time each day. So I had to make a change. Furthermore, I also believed that this would be best for her, for if she does in fact have in mind a reconciliation with me―for which I would of course have to require her husband’s consent―this steady daily routine is tiresome. So the decision was made that Dec. 31st would be the last time I walked that route at that hour. This resolution was kept. On January 1, 1852, my route was changed; I went home by way of Nørreport. Some time passed in this fashion, and we did not see one another. One morning she encountered me on the path by the lake, where I now was in the habit of walking. The next day I also took this path, which was my usual one. She was not there. As a precaution, however, I nonetheless changed my future route and went down Farimags-Veien, and finally I varied my homeward route. After this I did not encounter her at those hours on those paths, which would in fact have been made difficult because my route home was varied, and she normally took the path by the lake. But what happened? Some time had passed, then she meets me one morning at 8 o’clock on the avenue outside Østerport, the route I walk to Cph. every morning.

531

532

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 109

•

1852

The next day she was not there, however. I continued walking to town by this same route, which I cannot very well alter. So she met me here quite often, sometimes also on the ramparts, the path I take to town. Perhaps it was coincidence, perhaps. I could not understand what she was doing on that route at that hour, but as I notice everything, I noticed that she came that way especially if there was an east wind. So indeed, it could be because she could not bear the east wind on Langelinie. But―she did also come when there was a west wind. Time passed in this manner. She saw me now and then, precisely at the same time of the morning, and then in church on Sundays. Then came my birthday. As a rule, I am always away on my birthday, but I was not feeling quite well. So I stayed at home; as usual, I walked into town to talk with the doctor because I had considered celebrating my birthday with something new, something I had never tasted before, castor oil. Right outside my door, on the sidewalk in front of the avenue, she meets me. As so often happens of late, I cannot keep from smiling when I see her―ah, how much she has come to mean to me!―she smiled in return and nodded. I took a step past her, then raised my hat and walked on. The next Sunday I was in church and heard Paulli; she was there as well. She sat near the place where I stand. What happens? Paulli does not preach on the gospel, but on the epistle, and it is: Every good gift and every perfect gift, etc. On hearing these words, concealed by the person next to her, she turns her head to the side and looks at me, very fervently. I looked straight ahead, at nothing in particular. The first religious impression she has of me is linked to this passage, and it is the text I have emphasized strongly. I actually would not have thought that she would remember it, despite the fact that I know (from Sibbern) that she read the Two Discourses from 1843, where this text is used. So she nodded me a greeting last Wednesday―and today this text―and she notices it. I confess that I, too, was somewhat shaken. Paulli finished reading the text aloud. She sank rather than sat down, so that I actually was a bit worried, as I was once before, for her emotion was so vehement. To continue. Then Paulli begins. I think I know Paulli rather well, and how such an introduction would occur to him is inexplicable. But perhaps it was directed at her. He begins: [“]These words, all good gifts, etc., are ‘implanted in our hearts’―yes, my

522 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 109 523

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1852

listener, if these words should be torn from your heart, would not life have lost all its value for you, etc.[”] It was as if I were standing on glowing coals. It must have been very overwhelming for her. I have never exchanged a word with her, have gone my way, not hers―but here it was as though a higher power said to her what I have been unable to say. God only knows how gladly and promptly I would make a place for her: just as with God’s help a place shall be made for her memory, so would a place be made for her among her contemporaries. Ah, that would satisfy my pride so very much. All the admiration I have gained―to transfer this to her, to let her become the one who is admired: Yes, this would truly suit me. But there are 17 reasons why this cannot be done. I do believe, however, that this impression was so heartening that now she will surely be able to keep herself together. Several mornings later she met me again, but there was nothing worthy of note. Alas, if she had thought that now I was supposed to be the one who greeted her―that is something I cannot do. I am willing to do everything, but if anything is to be done, I must have her husband in the middle. Either―Or! If I am to involve myself with her, then it will be on the grandest scale, then I want it to be known to everyone, to have her transformed into a triumphant figure who will get the most complete restitution for the stigma of my having broken with her―while I nonetheless reserve the right to give her a good scolding for her vehemence at that time.

533

534

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 110

•

1852 524

The Extensive [and] the Intensive in the Preaching of Xnty. It is clear that there has been a complete change, a worldchange in Xnty, starting at the point when attention was directed away from the inward appropriation and the development of character, and toward changing the external world, removing life’s pressure, etc. Continued movement in the direction of this change has had the effect that nowadays Xnty more or less no longer exists. Paul writes: [“]Were you called to be a slave? Do not let it worry you. If you can become free, choose that instead.” This is div. loftiness, genuinely Christian. But what justified the apostle in this infinite indifference to all external things? Quite simply, the fact that his life was even more wretched than the slave’s, the fact that he lived in poverty and, in addition, was persecuted in accordance with Xt’s example. Then a person is entitled to talk like that―such talk is truly lofty, far from being outrageous, which it truly is when someone who himself has all the goods of life wants to talk like that to one who is suffering. That was Xnty. That is how Xnty must actlly be served in order to be Xnty. Then people reduced the price of being a Xn: now the rich and the mighty, who wanted to enjoy life―they also became Xns. Therefore―for the sake of appearances!― a little must be done for the slaves and the poor etc. Look, this is the corruption of Xnty. And this is where people vacillate, as it were. The rich and mighty Xns sometimes want to invoke Paul against poverty. How shameless! Yes, if someone himself lives in voluntary poverty as Paul did, he can talk loftily about poverty. So, one thing or the other: either the Xn is to live under the same conditions as the poor and the wretched, and then there can be spiritual loftiness―or, if being a Xn can be reconciled with enjoying this life, then more, much more, must be done for the poor and for those who suffer. If Xnty had been continually held to the intensive, if no one had been permitted to call himself a Xn unless his life expressed likeness with the wretched (instead of making this into the mark of “extraordinary” Xns, as they did in the Middle Ages): yes, then Xnty would have continued to be the salt of the earth, instead of

110

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 110–112

•

1852

525

having become terribly diluted, as it now is, among these millions upon millions of Xns, made unrecognizable in a politicizing evanescence.

111

The Mynsterian.

10

15

20

25

30

112 35

M. would certainly not be unwilling to say, “Before God I readily admit that the preaching of Xnty I represent is in no way served in the way the N.T. requires, but in this fallen world one cannot do more than that, and at any rate this is always something, and after all, to a certain extent one must howl with the wolves among whom one finds oneself.” Very good―but why, then, has Xnty come into the world? Has it not come precisely in order to make the world better[?] But if that which is to make the world better is served in the same way as everything else in the world―what then? Yes, then this is nonsense. Xnty served in that way is not Xnty. And not only that, but what is even more corrupting is that the illusion that Xnty is a part of this is conjured up. Perhaps it is also wrong for a merchant to say, [“]I have to be guilty of a little dishonesty, or it is impossible to be a merchant in this world,[”] but at least a merchant does not in fact think he represents something that has the precise goal of making the world better. But it is nonsense, nonsense, when something that is supposed to make the world better is served by the same shabby means as everything else. But perhaps M. says: “Well, if I were to do things differently, the situation would recoil upon my head.” Quite right―to be a Xn is of course precisely to suffer in this world. Woe, woe, woe to the pers. who first said, [“]Xt died for me―ergo I am supposed to enjoy life.[”] Woe to him. Here is the wrong turn, because the turn should be from the atonement to “imitation.” This wrong turn, repeated by millions upon millions (there are even millions upon millions of priests) is what has confused the whole of Xnty.

My Situation. When I hurled myself against the literature of the mob, Gjødvad was there, impatiently waiting for the article, which was the greatest service that could be done at that time for Fædrelandet,

535

536

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 112

•

1852

which had itself proclaimed that the spread of mob literature was so disproportionate that it could not be ignored.―So I took action.―And indeed, in its way it was effective― ―but I made myself vulnerable to “the public,” and from that moment on, the newspaper Fædrelandet, presumably out of fear of the public, never acknowledged my existence. And yet Gjødvad is my friend. I have seen him year after year, every blessed day―nowadays a little less frequently―and I actually like him very much. And so, if I―I do not need to say it, he has spoken of it quite often: how Bishop M. treats me, that he has complimented me in private and has betrayed me in his official capacity. But the editor of Fædrelandet―does he not do the same thing? And yet I like Gjødvad so much. But it is so strange that after what happened with mob literature―and Gjødvad, after all, certainly knows that I see Fædrelandet’s conduct toward me for what it is―then, later on, G. egged me on a little, to get me, if possible, to take a similar step against Flyveposten. And had I done that and had come into any sort of danger, Fædrelandet would have betrayed me yet again. However I can very well continue to like G. personally. But it is still a sorry business. And now, Prof. Nielsen! How acute he is, indeed, in discovering the ambivalence in Bishop Mynster’s conduct, etc. toward me! But Nielsen himself does exactly the same thing, only with even more ambivalence. In what he writes it looks as if he were fighting for my cause. But actlly it was circumstances that compelled him to admit that he has taken his position from my writings. And despite the fact that he was forced to make this confession, his situation is essentially as follows: in private he celebrates me―and in his official capacity he betrays me so that he can pretend to be independent.

526

5

10

15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 113

•

1852

527

113

5

10

15

20

About “Her.” And then, if it were possible that I dared situate her in the place she is guaranteed in the future: then it would be entirely misunderstood by contemporaries as a retraction, pure and simple. Truly, she would not get it on that condition, even if I were willing to submit to being misunderstood by the others. No, no! She has suffered innocently. Her tears have moved me. I want to do everything to make her happy! But there must also be truth and earnestness in it, so if I were to get involved with her, I would require that she would first and foremost submit to a sharp reprimand for the manner in which she behaved during that time, inasmuch as a year or 1-1/2 years later, the whole thing ended in a new engagement. Of course, I could not wish to have other people view the matter like this, but she must know that, despite all my devotion to her, I nonetheless do indeed view the matter like this.

537

538

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 113

•

1852

The last portion of entry NB25:113, “About Her.”

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 114

•

1852

529

114

5

10

15

20

25

The Course of My Life. I became an author amid frightful inner suffering. Then year after year I was an author, suffering for the sake of the idea in addition to what I endured in inner sufferings. Then came ’48. That helped. Then came a moment when, blessedly overwhelmed, I dared say to myself: I have understood the highest. Truly, this is not granted to many in each generation. But almost at the same instant something new struck me: Of course, what is highest is not to understand the highest but to do it. This was something of which I had certainly been aware, right from the beginning; therefore I am also somewhat different from an author in the ordinary sense. But what I had not seen so clearly was that by having private means and being independent, it was easier for me to express existentially what I had understood. Then when I understood this, I was willing to declare myself a poet, namely because I have had private means, which made action easier for me than for others. But here it is again: what is highest is not to understand the highest but to do it, and, note well, with all the burdens attached. Only then did I properly understand that “grace” must be brought to bear, otherwise a pers. suffocates at the moment he is to begin. But, but, “grace” is not to be brought to bear in order to hamper the effort―no, here it is again: what is highest is not to understand the highest but to do it.

539

Notes for JOURNAL NB21 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB21 543

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB21 551

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB21

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, and Steen Tullberg Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by David D. Possen

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by David D. Possen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

543

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB21 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB21.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB21 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. A scallop-edged label marked “NB21.” and bearing the date “11th September 1850.” has been pasted to the front cover (see illustration 1). Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand, with some insertions and most headings in his latin hand. Eight entries (NB21:2, 14, 16, 39, 47, 77, 122, 141) are written in a latin hand (see, e.g., illustration on pp. 72-73). Additionally, a latin hand is used for Latin and French words and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. A table of contents for the volume is written across almost the entire width of the inner front cover of the volume (NB21:2). Marginal additions NB21:121.a and NB21:125.b are continued across the width of two pages, and marginal addition NB21:16.a is written is written across an entire page (see illustration on pp. 14-15). Additional text, running out into the margin of the page, has been added to entries NB21:12, 31, 48, 88, 110, and 157. Journal entries are separated from one another with a hash mark (#). When an entry began on a new page of Kierkegaard’s journal, he generally placed an extra hash mark at the top of the new page. Two asterisks (**) were used to mark an internal division of entry NB21:83. A diagonal line in ink was made across entry NB21:35 by EP editor H. P. Barfod, who wrote the word Anvendt (Danish, “used”) in the margin (see illustration on pp. 26-27).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB21 was begun on September 11, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than November 13, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB22. Of the journal’s 164 entries, only one, NB21:1 is dated, though two other entries contain references that make it possible to assign dates to them. Entry NB21:121 bears the heading “My Conversation with Bishop Mynster, 22 October

544

J O U R N A L NB 21 1850, after He Had Read Practice in Christianity.” And in NB21:139, Kierkegaard writes, “It is often pointed out (and also today by Pastor Visby in the sermon on the unforgiving fellow servant whom he used as an occasion to preach about enmity) that what most arouses passion is just a little trifle,” which makes it clear the Kierkegaard had been to high mass in the Church of Our Savior on the twenty-second Sunday after Trinity Sunday, that is, October 27, 1850, and that the entry had been written down the same day.

III. Contents Well into the journal, Kierkegaard imagines that a “very superior person” could take it upon himself, in relation to a child or a young girl, to do everything such a person was not capable of doing, but on one condition, that the youngster is to be “happy and contented in his or her innocent way.” If the young person begins to interfere to express gratitude, he or she is breaking the agreement, because—the superior person would say—“That is not what I want—I only want to make you happy.” Kierkegaard explains that this little tale illustrates “how it is in the mild Xnty,” and explains it further as follows: The individual allows Xt to have done everything, which indeed is true unconditionally for all true Xnty, but the individual occupies himself in such a childlike way with the rest of life’s content, relying on Xt to take care of this matter of salvation and confident that all he himself has to do is be happy. The individual becomes not even reflective enough to be disturbed by the thought that this security and unconcern might be an ungodly flippancy. (NB21:110) In contrast with this mild Christianity, Kierkegaard puts forward the rigorous form, characterized by “the imitation of Xt.” Here, the individual human being is no more capable of achieving anything in relation to Christ than he was in the former situation, “but regardless of that, or for that very reason, it is as though Xt says to the single individual: If you want to thank me, then become my imitator. Being born again then becomes something in earnest. Then come also all the collisions with the environing world, all the suffering” (NB21:110).

) See Adresseavisen, no. 252, October 26, 1850.

1

Critical Account of the Text

1. Outside front cover of Journal NB21.

545

546

J O U R N A L NB 21 That this mild Christianity is not identical with the true Christianity is a recurrent theme in Journal NB21, which for this very reason is profoundly skeptical of every rapprochement between Christianity and worldliness. In this connection, Kierkegaard is most often critical of those in power for their selfish permissiveness, but he is also capable of broadening his critique to apply to something as elusive and diffuse as national character: Finding a Place for the Idea in Denmark is the hardest work one can imagine; for Denmark is just about as far from the idea as possible. The country’s misfortune is not even that it is small, but rather that everything is a certain ordinary well-being, to some extent a deification of this. But no greater distance from the idea is possible. (NB21:22) The restoration of true Christianity in a culture that calls itself Christian but that has long since lost the impression of Christianity’s radicality (NB21:63) requires a resolute and dramatic countermove in the form of imitation, the significance of which has been repressed by Christendom. As a consequence of the general subjection of the religious life to the humanistic worldview, the age of true martyrs is over, so what is needed now are “long-term martyrs” (NB21:69): “Let the imitation return—and the persecution will soon follow” (NB21:58). Kierkegaard is very much aware that a demand of this sort would not only be regarded as an anachronism, but would also elicit theological criticism, inasmuch as a person’s attempt to imitate Christ would almost be viewed as a blasphemous exaggeration (NB21:9). Thus Kierkegaard regards Mynster’s preaching of the gospel as merely a sort of ritualized respectability (NB21:30) with which he preaches “Xnty into an illusion, fixedly into an illusion” (NB21:15; see NB21:12). A similar illusion lies at the root of Mynster’s “Art of Governing,” which consists of a concealed lust for power and is thus “the diametrical opposite of Christianity” (NB21:10; see NB21:15). Allegedly, Mynster had lost all sense for the ideals Kierkegaard depicted with poetic fervor in work after work (NB21:127), and he instead personified a culture of cultivation that was inconsistent with Christianity: The Middle Ages thought that Christianity was renunciation, dying to the world, asceticism. Mynster thinks just about the opposite (and this is the modern view generally), that Christianity is cultivation.

Critical Account of the Text But this concept of cultivation, accepted without further ado, is highly dubious, and when it in fact becomes enjoyment, refinement, purely human cultivation, it is dead set against Xnty. If cultivation is supposed to be what is Christian, then it would have to be the cultivation of character, or the cultivation to be a person of character. (NB21:143) The contrast between the Middle Ages and modernity not only involves very different eras, but even more, very different principles, the one authentic and uncompromising, the other ready to compromise and inauthentic. The tension that develops between these two principles finds expression in Kierkegaard’s critique of the corrupted servants of Christianity, the ecclesiastical civil servants and the industrious priests who tirelessly do their bit to “canonize bourgeois philistinism” (NB21:23). In a number of journal entries, Kierkegaard employs grand gestures in ironizing about the modern priest who, driven by concerns that are markedly this-worldly, runs “from Herod to Pilate” (NB21:26), only to end up as “an ecclesiastical-secular hermaphrodite” (NB21:72; see NB21:27 and NB21:60). In similar fashion, Kierkegaard indicts “the Priestly Sermon’s Betrayal” (NB21:24) and the increasing affectedness of churchgoers (NB21:73), suggesting that someone “see to it that the whole N.T. (with the possible exception of Revelation) is read aloud during every Church year,” supplemented with “readings aloud of sermons by the orthodox teachers of the Church from the different ages” (NB21:92). In addition, he suggests the introduction of “an annual Day of Penitence and Prayer” on which we can honestly confess that we have made Christianity more lenient and thus avoid making “a fool out of God” (NB21:105; see NB21:65). There is the possibility of more stringent arrangements, however: Let Mynster, one Sunday, instead of holding a sermon himself, take one of Luther’s, particularly one that is characteristic of Luther, and read it aloud—and the whole thing will sound like a satire on Mynster, unless he is quick to make a small admission concerning himself. (NB21:91)

Kierkegaard’s own reading of Luther’s sermons can be followed in the journal. Sometimes he points out an “inconsistency” (NB21:74) or takes exception to a thought that Luther does not bring “properly together” or “combine properly” (NB21:135, 159),

547

548

J O U R N A L NB 21 but Luther’s theological honesty and personal courage are repeatedly emphasized nonetheless. The journal also shows evidence of wider reading. In the German priest and hymnodist Christian Scriver, Kierkegaard comes across a remark that he believes fits his own life (NB21:6; see NB21:89). A number of pithy, sage sayings by Seneca are cited (NB21:14, 39, 155); Aristotle is also cited, namely, for a remark concerning friendship (NB21:66) that Kierkegaard found in Montaigne, who is himself the subject of continual reading and who generally meets with Kierkegaard’s agreement (NB21:19, 38, 61, 71). Nonetheless, Kierkegaard takes exception to Montaigne’s remarks concerning the injustice of coupling shame with sexuality: “Bashfulness” is not simply “prudish,” because in the “act of procreation . . . a creative moment is also present that must be referred to God” (NB21:59). A more recent acquaintance is John Wesley, who wins Kierkegaard’s approval with his suggestion that priests ought to be able to give an account of the reasons for which they believe themselves to have been called by God (NB21:75). Kierkegaard also finds that “Wesley puts it well” when he maintained, in speaking of the Methodists’ hymns, that they were “not that miserable doggerel, but songs more likely to make a Christian out of a critic than a critic out of a Christian” (NB21:76). When he learned that Wesley, who had long been unmarried and who had written a book on the unmarried state, took counsel with friends in order to come up with a motive for marrying, Kierkegaard’s sympathy cooled markedly: “That, you see, is why we have friends. It is what I have always said” (NB21:81). French theologians and authors also figure rather prominently in this journal. Kierkegaard reads about Bernard of Clairvaux, who is alternately praised (NB21:144), belittled (NB21:147), and is often simply cited without comment (NB21:154). We also encounter Peter Abelard (NB21:149) and Blaise Pascal (NB21:100– 102, 104), whose subsequent impact also interested Kierkegaard (NB21:163). Kierkegaard cites in French Rousseau’s words concerning white lies, but he had discovered them in his reading of Richard Rothe (NB21:117). Rothe also enjoys the dubious honor of being singled out for his sincere, but theologically rather naive explanation of why Jesus remained unmarried: It was because he was unable to find a partner who was his equal. “Excellent!” Kierkegaard exclaims, ironically (NB21:112). Entries of a more autobiographical character are also generously represented in this journal, in which Kierkegaard reinterprets some of his more traumatic experiences, both public and private. The collision with Corsaren [The Corsair] and the subsequent “mob violence” (NB21:12) remain markedly unchanged as a fo-

Critical Account of the Text cus of pain, but Kierkegaard also touches on the lack of “recognition” accorded him (NB21:4), which stands in glaring contrast to the recognition in which M. A. Goldschmidt, the onetime editor of Corsaren, can take delight (NB21:152). Making a sad prophecy, Kierkegaard explains how mediocre imitators will one day be able to carry his work further and profit from it (NB21:158; see NB21:32). He flatly confesses how “in a single moment of despondency” he could be tempted to believe that Governance had been all too hard toward him: “My suffering is that, in a certain lower sense, I am not properly a hum. being, and am all too much spirit. I have no resort to others. Never have I said a single word to any pers. at all about what I rlly suffer—I cannot. God is my only resort. That, you see, is why he has me so fearfully in his power” (NB21:46). Several entries later, Kierkegaard sketches how the story of his life might have turned out under more normal circumstances, but his “natural development” had been halted and everything had changed when he had asked himself the question: “Are you a Xn?” (NB21:52). Personal retrospection is often accompanied by Kierkegaard’s approaching “operation” (NB21:41), his “polemic” (NB21:136), and his general reflections on tactics (NB21:25). Under the programmatic heading “What I Have Wanted and Want,” Kierkegaard pleads that he has never attempted “to extend the cause in the pietistic direction” (NB21:77; see NB21:114), but on the contrary, in the name of honesty, he has insisted on an existential congruence between what is proclaimed and the one who proclaims, insisting that each must be marked by the uncompromising criterion characteristic of New Testament texts: “The method in use nowadays is to leave out the passages in the N.T. that put a strain on existence. They are suppressed—and we then arrange easier and more reasonable conditions for ourselves. Perhaps we think that if we do not mention these passages, then neither does God know that they are in the N.T.” (NB21:99). This practice is “a conspiracy against Holy Scripture” (NB21:108), which is why Kierkegaard regards himself as obligated to come forward as a “corrective,” a task he would really prefer to have been spared (NB21:85). In this journal, Kierkegaard comments on and clarifies matters concerning both his overall intention and various portions of his writings. There is Kierkegaard’s well-known remark on the passage in his magister dissertation, On the Concept of Irony, in which he criticized Socrates because he lacked a sense for “the totality” and only “paid attention, numerically, to the individuals”: “Oh, what a Hegelian fool I was; precisely that is the great proof of how great an ethicist Socrates was” (NB21:35). He also comments

549

550

J O U R N A L NB 21 on the significance of true self-concern as presented by Climacus (NB21:64), whose connection to Anti-Climacus is also touched on (NB21:113). Most of all, Kierkegaard focuses on the reception accorded Practice in Christianity, which appeared on September 25, 1850, and which had supposedly disturbed a number of its readers. Kierkegaard’s good friend, J. F. Giødwad, declared that the work, with its requirements concerning the ideal, was liable to scare off “one or two theology graduates” from becoming priests (NB21:83; see NB21:86), whereas Archdeacon E. C. Tryde was of the opinion that Kierkegaard had overstated his case when criticizing the sermon for being an “observation” (NB21:88). Sibbern, on the other hand, reacted in more conciliatory fashion, telling Kierkegaard that some people had viewed Practice in Christianity as “purely comic,” and as a consequence had insisted “that the clergy ought to intervene, so grave was the matter”—whereupon Sibbern himself had difficulty in keeping from laughing (NB21:133). On the other hand, there was not much amusement to be found when Kierkegaard spoke with Mynster about Practice in Christianity on October 22, 1850, a conversation on which he reports in the journal’s longest entry (NB21:121). Having already spoken with Mynster’s son-in-law, Just Paulli, who told Kierkegaard that the aged bishop was embittered and had referred to Practice in Christianity as making “profane sport of the holy,” Kierkegaard had prepared himself for a brusque dressing-down. Mynster, however, was amicable and merely reacted with affable phrases, saying that each bird of course sings its own song, thus parrying Kierkegaard’s critique and once more letting a mild, untruthful Christianity celebrate its victory. A while later, Kierkegaard made a laconic comment concerning himself and Mynster: “Basically, everyone knows I am right—including Bishop Mynster. That I am not acknowledged to be right we all know—myself included” (NB21:134).

Explanatory Notes 4

1 2 3 4

5

1

2 3

7

5

What Is Christianity . . . p. 22] See NB21:16. How Does a Person Become Christian? . . . p. 36] See NB21:29. What I Have Wanted and Want . . . p. 118] See NB21:77. Mynster’s Meaning for My Entire Work as an Author . . . p. 194] See NB21:122. texts for sermons on Fridays] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held every Friday at 9 a.m. in Vor Frue Kirke [The Church of Our Lady] in Copenhagen. In addition to a discourse in connection with confession, a short sermon was delivered between confession and communion. Kierkegaard had preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady―on June 18, 1847, on the text Mt 11:28; on August 27, 1847, on the text Jn 10:27; and on September 1, 1848, on the text Jn 12:32―and went on to publish all three sermons as discourses. Two of the sermons appear as the second and third discourses in the fourth part of Christian Discourses under the title “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: Christian Discourses” (CD, 262–274; SKS 10, 277– 292); the remaining sermon appears as the first exposition in Practice in Christianity, No. III (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160) (→ 31,15). see the blank page at the front of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Theme for a Friday discourse Journal NB17 p. 30] See NB17:24 in KJN 7, 183. ― Friday discourse: → 5,1. I have no livelihood] Presumably, a reference to the fact that, as early as in the period following the publication of Either/Or (1843), again after the publication of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), and quite frequently thereafter, Kierkegaard considered stopping writing and seeking a position as a country priest instead.

On this see, e.g., JJ:415, from February 1846, in KJN 2, 257; NB:7, from March 1846, NB:57, from November 1846, NB2:136, from August 1847, in KJN 4, 16–17, 50, 193; NB10:16, from February 1849, in KJN 5, 274; and NB12:110, from August 1849, NB13:35, from October 1849, NB14:137, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 204–206, 298, 428– 429. See also chap. 3, “The Role of Governance in My Works,” in the second part of The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 71–90; SKS 16, 50–69): “promptly to take to the country as a rural pastor” (PV, 86; SKS 16, 65). At one point, Kierkegaard had also considered applying for a position as instructor at the Royal Pastoral Seminary in Copenhagen; see, e.g., NB10:89, from ca. March 1849, in KJN 5, 313, and the accompanying note. See also a draft of a never-used polemical article, “En Yttring af Biskop Mynster” [A Comment by Bishop Mynster], from 1851, where Kierkegaard writes in retrospect: “I have had another thought for the past 4 or 5 years, however. Recognizant of my unique abilities, and because I believe it would be in agreement with the establishment and Bishop M. [Mynster], and for my own sake, I have desired a position at the pastoral seminary. Throughout the years I have insistently mentioned this to the bishop. But no!” (Pap. X 6 B 173, p. 274). 1000 salaried teachers of Xnty] According to the lists in Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Clerical Calendar for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848, concluded January 18, 1848; ASKB 378), there were about 890 principal parishes in Denmark (i.e., without the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg), and about 1,050 priests (including bishops and archdeacons) were employed; in addition to the above, there were about 120 stipendiary curates. whom they now abuse] → 11,32 and → 11,33. to make peop. attentive] → 12,42. says to the child it was the cat that did it] A ref-

12

29 3 8

8

552

26

7m

1

6

8

37

9

4

9

13

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 4–6

erence to Danish phrases such as det har katten gjort (“the cat did it”) and det har katten taget (“the cat took it”), used as excuses when something has broken or disappeared. See N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Proverbs and Sayings] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 11, no. 279. nod to me your support] Danish, tilvinke mig Bifald, “applaud me by waving.” Only one came forward] Presumably, a reference to Rasmus Nielsen, who “came forward” as a defender of Kierkegaard against H. L. Martensen in Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 56,17). first performance] Presumably refers to Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed. Forelæsninger over Jesu Liv [The Faith of the Gospels and Modern Consciousness: Lectures on the Life of Jesus] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 700), the first book Rasmus Nielsen published after he and Kierkegaard entered into close friendly relations. ― performance: The Danish word is Optræden, which means both “coming forward” and “playing a role.” the plain man] A typological designation used frequently by Kierkegaard for those of the working class. the 1000 priests] → 7,12. read in Scriver . . . a man whose motto was: Aliis inserviendo consumor] A Latin citation from § 67 of M. Christian Scrivers, Fürstl. Sächs. Ober-HofPredigers und Consistorial-Raths zu Qvedlinburg,; Seelen-Schatz,; Darinnen; Von der menschlichen Seelen hohen Würde, tieffen und kläglichen SündenFall, Busse und Erneuerung durch Christum, göttlichen heiligen Leben, vielfältigen Creutz und Trost im Creutz, seligen Abschied aus dem Leibe, triumphirlichen und frölichen Einzug in den Himmel, und ewiger Freude und Seligkeit, erbaulich und tröstlich gehandelt wird;; Vormahls; In denen ordentlichen WochenPredigten seiner anvertrauten Christlichen Gemeinde fürgezeiget, und auf Anhalten vieler gottseligen Seelen weiter ausgeführet [M. Christian Scriver, Chief Court Chaplin and Consistorial Councillor to the Prince of Saxony at Quedlinburg; Soul-

•

1850

Treasure; In Which The Great Value of the Human Soul; the Deep and Lamentable Fall of Sin; Repentance and Renewal in Christ; Divine Holy Life; the Manifold Cross and Comfort in the Cross; The Blessed Parting from the Body; and the Triumphant and Joyful Entrance into Heaven and Eternal Joy and Blessedness Are Treated Edifyingly and Consolingly; Formerly Presented during the Regular Weekly Sermons to His Entrusted Christian Congregation, and Expanded to Apprehend Many Religious Souls], 5 vols., 8th ed., with a new introduction by Johann Georg Pritius (Magdeburg, 1723 [1675–1692]; ASKB 261– 263; abbreviated hereafter as Seelen-Schatz), vol. 4, p. 479, col. 1: “From this we can easily deduce why it is that the gracious and loving God would decree and allow that even his most zealous and most faithful servants, and his dearest and most pious children, at times be harrowed fiercely by Satan with high spiritual trials―namely, that he wants to present them as prototypes and for consolation, healing, and warning to other Christians, who are untested, erring, and weak. He arrays them like candles that bear the flame, and which are gradually consumed by it, particularly when it is moved and buffeted by the wind, but which nonetheless light up the entire house with its radiance and glow and banish the darkness so that one can fittingly apply to them the tale of the prince who had coins minted showing a candle on a candlestick, with the words Aliis inserviendo consumor: ‘In serving others, I consume myself.’ ” ― Scriver: Christian Scriver (1629–1693), German Lutheran theologian, pastor, devotional writer, and composer of hymns. He became archdeacon in Stendal in 1653, and pastor in Magdeburg in 1667; in 1690 he was appointed chief court chaplain of the diocese of Quedlinburg. An important precursor to the pietists, Scriver simultaneously emphasized the Lutheran doctrine of justification and the inner appropriation of faith. Seelen-Schatz, cited above, is his best-known devotional work; it became widely known not only in Germany, but throughout Scandinavia as well. sacrificed for others. Aliis inserviendo consumor] Variant: Changed from “sacrificed.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

15

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 7–10

20

25

30

31

34

pension] Under the absolute monarchy (1660– 1848), pensions were paid to officials appointed by the king and, upon their deaths, to their widows or other kin. As a rule, these payments were paid out of the royal pension fund, which was funded mainly from the profits of the postal service; on this see § 3 in the royal decree of February 9, 1816. According to § 22 of Danmarks Riges Grundlov [The Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark], signed June 5, 1849, all royally appointed officials were entitled to a pension, whose amount was fixed in accordance with the law on pensions adopted on January 5, 1851. like that widow . . . gave the last penny to the poor] See Mk 12:41–44, where it is related that a poor widow came and deposited into the temple treasury “two small copper coins, which are worth a penny.” one single farthing] An expression meaning “next to nothing.” In the Middle Ages, a Hviid (lit., “white,” here “farthing”) was a silver coin of little value; the same word is used for “penny” in the 1819 Danish translation of Mk 12:42. For more on Danish money, → 9,34. left anything with which to pay the priest . . . any funeral oration] Despite the fact that―in accordance with chap. 9, “Om Liig og Begravelse” [On Corpses and Burial] in Dannemarks og Norges Kirke-Ritual [Ecclesiastical Rites for Denmark and Norway] (Copenhagen, 1762 [1685]; abbreviated hereafter as Kirke-Ritual)―no oration was to be delivered at the gravesite, in Kierkegaard’s time it was customary that such eulogies were in fact given at the cemetery. According to a government decree of March 31, 1829, “there can be no objection to an oration either in the mortuary or at the cemetery.” According to bk. 2, chap. 10, art. 1 of Chr. V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683), pastors were permitted to receive payment for delivering a eulogy from the pulpit; later on, as mortuary and graveside eulogies became more common, this permission came to apply to these as well. Not uncommonly, such eulogies would be longer and more elaborate in proportion to the amount paid. 50 rix-dollars] The rix-dollar, properly “Rigsbank dollar” (rigsbankdaler), was a Danish currency de-

•

1850

553

nomination in use from 1713 to 1875, when it was replaced by the krone (crown), at the rate of two crowns to one rix-dollar. According to a law of July 31, 1818, passed in the wake of the Danish state bankruptcy of 1813, the rix-dollar became the basis of the Danish monetary system and was divided into six marks, each of which was further divided into sixteen shillings; thus there were ninety-six shillings in a rix-dollar. A pair of shoes cost three rix-dollars, and a one-pound loaf of rye bread (the staple of the day) cost between two and four shillings. A judge earned about 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a mid-level civil servant earned about 400–500 rix-dollars a year; a qualified artisan would receive 200 rix-dollars a year, plus free food and lodgings from his master; a maidservant received at most 30 rix-dollars in addition to room and board. accuse me of pride, that I want to stand alone] In his journals, Kierkegaard frequently complains that his great efforts as an author are being explained as pride; see, e.g., NB9:57, presumably from January 1849, in KJN 5, 243, and NB16:59, from February 1850, in KJN 7, 137. It has not been possible, however, to identify an actual instance of Kierkegaard being called proud and aristocratic.

2

10

Mynster’s] Jakob Peter Mynster (1775–1854), Danish pastor, writer, and politician. From 1811, Mynster was permanent curate at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. From 1826, he was court preacher, and from 1828, royal confessor as well as court chaplain at Christiansborg Palace Chapel. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand and as such was the primate of the Danish Church and the king’s personal counselor; during the period 1835–1846, he was a member of the Advisory Assembly of Estates in Roskilde, where he was very influential; and in 1848–1849 he was a member of the Constitutional Assembly. Mynster had a seat in a great many governing organs and was the prime mover behind various key ecclesiastical publications, including the authorized Danish translation of the New Testament that appeared in 1819, the Udkast til en Alterbog og et Kirke-Ritual for Danmark

22

10

554

34

11

10

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 10–12

[Draft for a Service Book and Church Ritual for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1839), and the authorized Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845). In accordance with the Danish system of rank and precedence, in 1847, Mynster, as bishop of Zealand, was ranked number thirteen in the first class and accordingly was to be addressed as “Your Eminence.” a position] Danish, Levebrød (lit., “bread for living”), a position providing an income (→ 21,21). quiet hours] An expression often used by J. P. Mynster (→ 10,22) with respect both to private devotions and church services. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on the Doctrines of the Christian Faith], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1833]; ASKB 254–255), vol. 1, p. 240; vol. 2, pp. 298, 299, 301, 306; Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons on Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230 and 2191), vol. 1, pp. 8 and 38; Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Given in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), p. 63; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Given in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 10, 11, 14; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Given in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 204 and 216.

11

16

Mynster] → 10,22.

11

27

Mundus vult decipi] Variant: added. This Latin phrase, which is usually followed by the phrase decipiatur ergo (“so let it be deceived”), has been widely used. In his stories of heroes (1739), Holberg relates that Cardinal G. P. Caraffa (subsequently Pope Paul IV) “when in a procession, distributed blessings with his hand, but at the same time continually mumbled these words with his mouth: Mundus vult decipi, decipiatur!” in Adskillige store Heltes og berømmelige Mænds, sær Orientalske og Indianske sammenlignede Historier og Bedrifter efter Plutarchi Maade [Comparative Stories and Deeds of a Number of Great Heroes and Famous Men, Especially Those of the Orient

•

1850

and India, in the Manner of Plutarch], in Ludvig Holbergs Udvalgte Skrifter [Selected Works of Ludvig Holberg], ed. K. L. Rahbek, 21 vols. (Copenhagen, 1804–1814), vol. 9 (1806), p. 86. reduplicating] → 60,13. See also “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (Copenhagen, 1851): “This again is the dialectical movement . . . or it is the dialectical method: in working also to work against oneself, which is the reduplication and the heterogeneity of all true godly endeavor to worldly endeavor. To endeavor or work directly is to work or to endeavor directly in the immediate context of an actual given situation. The dialectical method is the reverse: in working also to work against oneself, a redoubling, which is ‘the earnestness,’ like the pressure on the plow that determines the depth of the furrow, whereas the direct endeavor is a glossing-over, which is finished more rapidly and also is much, much more rewarding―that is, it is worldliness and homogeneity” (PV, 9n; SKS 13, 15n). threw myself at the rabble] Refers to the socalled Corsaren [The Corsair] affair and its consequences for Kierkegaard. In response to P. L. Møller’s critique of Stages on Life’s Way (1845) in the article “Et Besøg i Sorø” [“A Visit to Sorø”] published in the annual Gæa for 1846, Kierkegaard wrote a newspaper article―“The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner,” which appeared under the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], on December 27, 1845, no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38– 46; SKS 14, 77–84)―in which he identified P. L. Møller with the satirical weekly Corsaren and asked “to appear in Corsaren,” inasmuch as he could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused by the paper, but only praised. Corsaren responded by carrying a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and caricatures of Kierkegaard (see SKS K20, 41–44). The first of these appeared on January 2, 1846, no. 276, and others appeared at regular intervals until July 17, 1846, no. 304. The teasing went on sporadically after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor, continuing through February 16, 1849, no. 439. Following the second article (no.

30

32

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 12–13

33

12

5 31

35 42

277, dated January 9, 1846), Kierkegaard responded with an article attributed to his pseudonym Frater Taciturnus, on January 10, 1846, “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action,” in Fædrelandet no. 9, cols. 65–68; see COR, 47–50; SKS 14, 85–89). In this article Kierkegaard wrote, with respect to his “application to be abused,” that he had taken “the step for the sake of others” (COR, 47; SKS 14, 87). Corsaren’s attacks resulted in Kierkegaard’s being abused on the street. On his altercation with Corsaren, see On My Work as an Author: “The press of literary contemptibility had achieved a frightfully disproportionate coverage. To be honest, I believed that what I did was a public benefaction; it was rewarded by several of those for whose sake I had exposed myself in that way―rewarded, yes, as an act of love is usually rewarded in the world―and by means of this reward it became a truly Christian work of love” (PV, 10n; SKS 13, 16n). nearly had to fear mob violence against me in the streets] Starting in 1847, Kierkegaard ruminated repeatedly in his journals on the possibility of being abused or even murdered at the hands of the mob. This intensified in 1848, after the publication of Christian Discourses (1848), and especially on account of the book’s third part, “Thoughts That Wound from Behind―For Upbuilding: Christian Addresses.” See, for example, NB:137 and 154, both likely from March 1847, along with NB4:118, dated March 27, 1848, and NB4:131, dated March or April 1848, in KJN 4, 94–95, 102–103, 346, 350; NB8:104, from December 1848, NB10:177, from April 1849, and NB10:199 and NB10:200, both from April 1849, in KJN 5, 195–196, 357–358, 375–377, 378–379; and finally NB11:20, from May 1849, and NB11:125, from June 1849, in KJN 6, 14, 69. Mynster’s] → 10,22. the power of the divine to dissolve the illusions.] Variant: first written “the power of the divine to hold the illusions.” for us,] Variant: added. calling attention, that I can] See “The Accounting,” in On My Work as an Author, where Kierkegaard writes: “This in turn is the category of my whole authorship: to make aware

•

1850

555

of the religious, the essentially Christian―but ‘without authority’ ” (PV, 6n; SKS 13, 12n). See also the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” where Kierkegaard writes: “ ‘Without authority’ to make aware of the religious, the Christian, is the category for my whole work as an author regarded as a totality” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). The System] Refers to Kierkegaard’s earlier polemic, not only against the particular philosophical system developed by G.W.F. Hegel in his Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, but also more generally against Hegelianism, including the attempts by J. L. Heiberg and Rasmus Nielsen (→ 66,11) to construct an all-encompassing philosophical system; see, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 51; SKS 4, 356) and Prefaces (P, 14, 65; SKS 4, 478, 525, with accompanying explanatory notes). By the term “system” or “the System” Kierkegaard thus seems to refer generally to a philosophical attempt to understand and explain the world as a whole with the help of abstract logical categories or discursive thinking; at times the term seems to be used as a synonym for objective knowledge. Kierkegaard sets forth his most comprehensive polemic against “the System” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (see, e.g., CUP 1, 13–17, 106–125; SKS 7, 22–26, 103–120). “The System” has practically vanished . . . two students . . . to smile] The Danish reception of Hegel’s philosophy reached its apex in the late 1830s and early 1840s. By 1850, it had entirely lost its former centrality to Danish philosophical and theological debate; and so “the System” as a paradigm for philosophical investigation (→ 13,2) can justifiably be said to have “vanished” by this point. For this same reason, the university students of the day seem to have regarded every mention of “the System” or of Hegelian concepts as old-fashioned, comical, or ideological. “hidden inwardness”] See, for example, NB12:162, from September 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “What Luther says in the preface to the Postil about the difference betw. Xt as exemplar and gift [see En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), vol. 1, pp. xii–xiv] is quite correct. I am also well aware that

2

3

6

13

556

12

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 13–15

I have tended in the direction of Xt as exemplar. But in this connection something must be borne in mind. Luther was confronted by the exaggerated misuse of Xt as exemplar, and he therefore emphasizes the opposite. But nowadays Luther has long since triumphed in Protestantism and has caused Xt to be entirely forgotten as an exemplar, and the whole business has rlly become a pretense about hidden inwardness” (KJN 6, 243). See also NB20:74, likely from August 1850, where Kierkegaard writes: “Hidden inwardness arose when concern and enthusiasm for actually being Xn gradually faded away even though, at the same time, no one wanted to break completely with Xnty. Hidden inwardness excuses one from actual renunciation, excuses one from all the inconvenience of suffering for Xnty’s cause. This became the agreement and on this condition everyone continued to be Xn―it was convenient” (KJN 7, 443). And: “The notion that one could be a Xn, with an inwardness so hidden that Satan himself would never discover it, was glorified and admired as a matter of refinement” (KJN 7, 443). And further: “As for that, I confess that I have been a lover of hidden inwardness both as an ironist and melancholic, and it is certainly true that I have cultivated inwardness and made great efforts to conceal it. There is also something true in the shyness that conceals its inwardness. But as for me, I have tried to order my actions as a striving for what is Xn. I have never maintained that I was Xn in hidden inwardness and then otherwise, with all life’s energy, organized my life secularly. To the contrary, I have kept my inwardness secret, appeared as an egotistical, frivolous person, etc.―and yet I have acted in such a way so as to experience the Xn collisions” (KJN 7, 443–444). Kierkegaard ends the entry as follows: “[H]idden inwardness was the very thing to be prodded, which can only be done indirectly” (KJN 7, 444). the ballot] Lit., Ballotation, referring to a method of voting with the aid of (black and white) balls (instead of voting slips). This, incidentally, is the origin of the term “ballot,” which was once used to refer to these small balls. Later the term “ballotation” came to refer more broadly to organizing or holding a vote in general,

•

1850

or simply to voting. See § 39 in, respectively, “Folketingets Forretningsorden vedtagen den 8de, 9de og 11te Februar 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Lower House of Parliament, Adopted on February 8, 9, and 11, 1850], p. 128; and “Forretningsorden for Landsthinget vedtagen af Landsthinget den 13de Febr. 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Upper House of Parliament, Adopted by the Upper House on February 13, 1850] in Danmarks Riges Grundlov. Valgloven. Bestemmelser angaaende Forretningsordenen i begge Thingene [The Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark, Electoral Law: Resolutions Regarding Rules of Procedure in Both Houses of Parliament] (Copenhagen, 1850), p. 146: “Voting by means of balls takes place when requested by 25 members.” Plus dolet, quam necesse est . . . quam necesse est. Seneca ep. 98] An aphorism of Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 b.c.–a.d. 65), Roman politician, author, and Stoic philosopher; the passage is in Seneca, Ad Lucilium epistolae morales [Moral Letters to Lucilius], trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 3, p. 123 (Letter 98, § 8). Presumably cited from Montaigne in his essay “De la phisionomie” [On Physiognomy] (bk. 3, chap. 12), which appears as “Von der Physiognomie” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 6 (1795), pp. 152–223; 192–193. English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 513.

15

13

Mynster] → 10,22. Louis Phillip] The French king Louis Philippe (1773–1850, reigned 1830–1848). When revolution broke out in Paris in June 1830, he fled to await the outcome; but in July he was invited to return, and he was elected king in August. As ruler, Louis Philippe took bribes and sought to enrich himself while maintaining good relations with the other European Great Powers. By February 1848, the people’s dissatisfaction with him had risen to the point of open rebellion; at first he tried to mollify them by displays of generosity, but when that failed, he fled to England and watched from exile as the French monarchy was replaced by a republican constitution. Kierkegaard refers to the

19

13

23

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 15–17

24 26 27

16

1

latter revolution in NB4:121, from March 1848, in KJN 4, 347–348; see the accompanying explanatory note. See also an undated and unused draft of “The Tone of My Contemporaneity with Bishop Mynster, in Three Images” from 1855, where Kierkegaard comments as follows on his agreement and disagreement with Mynster: “My agreement with the late bishop was in one sense total; in another sense, however, the disagreement could be equally great. The agreement consisted in wanting to defend the established order and combat the Opposition. The disagreement concerned how the established order should be defended. He wanted to defend it in a shrewd worldly manner, diplomatically, by veiling it, concealing it, by employing optical illusions (of which he was a master), by the shrewd use of small incentives à la Louis Philippe, by yielding gradually, and by accommodating and bargaining, if necessary. I wanted, religiously, to defend it with the greatest possible honesty, hiding nothing, but acknowledging the true situation” (Pap. XI 3 B 111, pp. 182–183). See also the section titled “The Bourgeoisie and the People” in the article “From Abroad,” pt. 1, in Nord og Syd. Et Maanedskrift [North and South: A Monthly Journal], ed. and pub. by M. Goldschmidt (→ 89,26), vol. 4 [April–June 1848] (Copenhagen, 1850), p. 299: “Louis Philippe is named as the one who particularly gave the French a taste for trade and speculation, infecting every class with stock fever and the mercantile spirit.” boost from the idea] i.e., rousing oneself to follow a higher idea. making a living] → 10,34. has livings in his gift] Applications for ecclesiastical positions in the diocese of Zealand were to be sent to Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 10,22), who then forwarded them to the cultus minister (i.e., the cabinet minister responsible for Church and educational affairs) with his recommendation. Mynster thus had influence on who was appointed to a vacant position, and in this sense can be said to have had a share of “livelihoods” or “livings” (→ 21,21) “in his gift.” Or Rather, What Christianity Is] Variant: added.

•

1850

557

Christianity is no doctrine] The same view is expressed repeatedly in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). See, e.g., CUP 1, 325–327 and 379–381; SKS 7, 296–298 and 345–347. “Anyone who resolves to do the will of God . . . or whether I am speaking on my own.”] Cited freely from Jn 7:17. a pasha with three horsetails] “Pasha” was the honorary title borne by the highest civilian and military officers of the Ottoman Empire. Their rank was displayed by the number of horsetails (from one to three) hung on a stake outside the owner’s tent. the Socratic “If there should be an immortality.”] A reference to pt. 2, chap. 2 of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Socrates is described as follows: “He poses the question [of the certainty of immortality] objectively, problematically: if there is an immortality. So, compared with one of the modern thinkers with the three demonstrations, was he a doubter? Not at all. He stakes his whole life on this ‘if’; he dares to die, and with the passion of the infinite he has so ordered his whole life that it might be acceptable― if there is an immortality” (CUP, 201; SKS 7, 184– 185). See NB5:30, dated May 1848, in KJN 4, 382, and NB15:75, dated January 1850, in KJN 7, 48–50. This in turn presumably refers to Plato’s Apology (40c–42a), where Socrates, after having been sentenced to death, makes some hypothetical observations about life after death (see CI, 79–96; SKS 1, 138–150).

2

Voluntary] Here connoting suffering and self-denial. Χt’s words about taking up one’s cross daily] Reference to Lk 9:23. Governance] See, e.g., chap. 2, “Om Guds Gjerninger” [On God’s Works] sec. 2, “Hvad Skrivten lærer om Guds Forsyn og de skabte Tings Opholdelse” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Providence and the Sustaining of Creation], § 3: “God, who is the world’s Lord and Ruler, governs with wisdom and goodness, no matter what happens in the world, so that both good and evil obtain the result that he finds most beneficial,” and § 5: “What we encounter in life, whether it be

2

4

16m

29

30

17

12 6

17m

558

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 17–23

sorrowful or joyful, is apportioned to us by God with the best of aims, so that we always have cause to be pleased with his governance and rule,” in N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangelisk-christelige Religion indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [A Primer for the EvangelicalChristian Religion, Prepared for Use in Danish Schools] (Copenhagen, 1791; ASKB 183 is an edition from 1824; abbreviated hereafter as Balle and Bastholm, Lærebog), pp. 23, 24–25. 17

27 36

37

18

8

dying to the worldly] → 17,36. dying away from the world] One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ we have died to sin. See, e.g., Rom 6:2; see also 1 Pet 2:24 and Col 2:20. In certain strands of mysticism and pietism these ideas were intensified, so that human life was regarded as a daily dying-away, in self-denial, from sin, from temporality, from finitude, and from the world, and thus the burden was shifted from a person dying to sin through Christ to include a person dying to sin through faith. demanded an unconditional break with everything in order to follow him] See, e.g., Lk 14:26; see also Mt 19:21, 19:29; Lk 5:11, 5:28. Montaigne says . . . When they do not stand high above us, they stand far beneath us] An abbreviated version of the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “De l’art de conferer” [Of the Art of Discussion] (bk. 3, chap. 8), which appears as “Von der Kunst der Unterredung” in Michael Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen über allerley Gegenstände. Ins Deutsche übersetzt [Michel de Montaigne’s Thoughts and Opinions on Various Subjects. Translated into German], 7 vols. (Berlin 1793–1799; ASKB 681–687, hereafter abbreviated as Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 347–407; 376: “Neither is it enough for those who govern and command us, and have all the world in their hand, to have a common understanding, and to be able to do what we can; they are very much below us if they are not infinitely above us; as they promise more, so they are to perform more.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne, Comprising His Essays, Letters, and Journey through Germany and Italy, with Notes from All the Commentators, Biographical

•

1850

and Bibliographical Notices, &c, &c, 4th ed., trans. William Hazlitt (Philadelphia: J. W. Moore, 1856, abbreviated hereafter as The Works of Michael de Montaigne), p. 457. ― Montaigne: Michel Eyquem de Montaigne (1533–1592), French philosopher; Montaigne had served as a jurist at the court of Bordeaux, but in 1570 he retired to his estate, where he spent much of the rest of his life writing his famous essays. Ea non media . . . quo fortunæ suæ consilia applicent. Livy 32, 21] A quotation from the Roman historian Livy (Titus Livius of Patavium, 59 b.c.– a.d. 17), Libri historiarum [Books of History], bk. 32, chap. 21, as cited in Montaigne’s essay “De l’utile et de l’honneste” [Of Profit and Honesty] (bk. 3, chap. 1), in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 3–42, p. 11. English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 391. Montaigne’s citation of the line, however, is abbreviated and edited. For the original, see T. Livii Patavini historiarum libri qui supersunt omnes et deperditorum fragmenta [Livy’s Extant Books of History and Lost Fragments], ed. J. T. Kreyssig, 5 vols. (Leipzig, 1829; ASKB 1251–1255), vol. 4, pp. 77–78.

13

18

Wanting to See the Outcome before Passing Judgment] Refers to the citation from Livy in the previous explanatory note (→ 18,13).

18

18

Juliet, who make away with themselves in sorrow] Refers to act 5, sc. 3 of Shakespeare’s tragedy Romeo and Juliet (1597), in which Juliet is driven to suicide from grief at being unable to have her beloved Romeo. See William Shakspeare’s Tragiske Værker [William Shakespeare’s Tragedies], trans. P. Foersom and P. F. Wulff, 9 vols. (vols. 8 and 9 bear the title Dramatiske Værker [Dramatic Works]) (Copenhagen, 1807–1825; ASKB 1889–1896), vol. 2 (1811), pp. 227–418; 408–409. Karen, Maren, Mette] Ordinary Danish girls’ names, often invoked in a comical or satirical manner. the livings brethren] Compare NB20:74, from July 1850, where Kierkegaard ironically writes: “and besides, thought the world, this hate residing in the hidden inwardness could also be a lie because

7

19

16

27

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 23–28 one hears of it only in preacher prattle, which again is not the preacher’s own conviction but something he declaims in an official capacity in order to make a living as a worthy member of the newest religious order: the bread and butter brothers” (KJN 7, 443). On the “livings” or “livelihoods” of contemporary Danish priests, see → 21,21. 19

34

20

13

16

20m

5 7

differential] Differing capabilities as a function of differences in ability, talent, genius, etc. the differentially extraordinary] Differing degrees of the extraordinary as a function of differences in ability, talent, genius, etc. a minus . . . a plus] A reference to the grading system of the day, in which the grade “mg” (Danish, meget godt, “very good”), for example, could be modified to become “mg minus” or “mg plus.” give one’s fortune to the poor] An allusion to the pericope of the rich young man in Mt 19:16–22. whipped] e.g., in the manner of the apostles (Acts 5:40–41), Paul and Silas (Acts 16:37), the Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 22:19), or Jesus (Mt 27:26); see also Mt 10:17.

20

23

My Tactic of Throwing Light on Χnty] See “My Position as a Religious Author in ‘Christendom’ and My Tactics,” a supplement to “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (PV, 15; SKS 13, 23).

21

2

Paul’s introduction . . . “not to confer . . . blood” (Galatians)] Reference to Gal 1:15–16. ― flesh and blood: An idiomatic designation of human beings as mortals; occurs six times in the NT. Other references include 1 Cor 15:50, Mt 16:17, and Eph 6:12. scampers from Herod to Pilate] An expression for running from one place to another to no avail. The expression has its background in Lk 23, where it is related how Jesus was first brought to Pilate, then transferred to Herod, and then returned to Pilate, inasmuch as neither regarded himself as fit to judge him. Recorded in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 665. errands] Refers to theological graduates’ attempts to secure a pastoral appointment (→ 21,16).

5

5

•

1850

559

a priest must be married . . . or else he is not a proper priest] Presumably, a reference to Titus 1:5–6. This verse was among the texts that the bishop read aloud (and on occasion discussed) at the ordination of priests in a ritual still practiced in Kierkegaard’s day; on this see chap. 10, art. 2 of Kirke-Ritual (→ 9,31), pp. 367–368. See NB19:81, from July 1850, where Kierkegaard writes: “We are here: when a man is not married, then it is improper, indeed scandalous, for him to want to be a priest. Yes, basically we have come even further, for we have come so far that one proves from the N.T. that this is how it should be” (KJN 7, 390). running after an official appointment] When an ecclesiastical post was declared vacant in Departementstidenden [The Departmental Times], applications for that position had to be sent within six weeks to the bishop of the diocese; he then sent the applications, together with his own remarks, to the cultus minister (i.e., the minister for Church and educational affairs), who then recommended to the king who ought to be appointed to the post. There were about 1,050 clerical positions in the kingdom of Denmark (→ 7,12), but because the number of theology graduates far exceeded the number of available positions, it was not uncommon for candidates to turn to archdeacons or bishops, such as J. P. Mynster (→ 13,27), or to others with influence on the appointment of new priests. On pastoral appointments as “livelihoods” providing income, see → 21,21.

12

the one thing needful] An allusion to Lk 10:38– 42, esp. vv. 41–42. a future priest . . . the least trifle regarding the appointment] Presumably refers above all to the income-generating activities associated with a pastorate. See, e.g., NB20:97, from August 1850, where Kierkegaard writes: “A man seeks a clerical living. Unbelievably much is investigated, and nothing concerning income, the parsonage, etc., is presupposed without further ado” (KJN 7, 453). In provincial towns, citizens were required to pay the priest a given amount of money called “priest money,” while in rural areas farmers were required to donate a “tithe,” a certain percentage of their goods, often grain. The amount was deter-

20

21

16

21

21

560

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 28–35

mined by the Ministry of Church and Education. On holy days, members of the congregation could also pay their priest a voluntary sum of money called an “offering.” Priests had a certain amount of additional income called “perquisites,” i.e., fees for performing clerical acts such as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In addition to this, priests in provincial towns were granted a rent subsidy, while priests in rural areas had income from the lands and farms attached to their call. In general, priests in Copenhagen had greater income than those in the provinces, but there was much variation from parish to parish. A complete account is found in Bloch Suhr, Kaldslexicon, omfattende en Beskrivelse over alle danske geistlige Embeder i alphabetisk Orden [Encyclopedia of Calls, Including a Description of All Danish Ecclesiastical Offices in Alphabetical Order] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 379). ― future: Variant: added. 22

17 25 36

23

10

23

23 26

Χt says . . . he will know from experience whether I am speaking on my own] Refers to Jn 7:17. give all your wealth to the poor] An allusion to Mt 19:16–22. would weigh you down.] Variant: first written “raises you up.” break with everything in order to join with me] → 17,37. Mynster’s] → 10,22. dying to the world] → 17,36.

23

33

Lucky in a certain sense is that person] Variant: “in a certain sense” added.

24

30

lie in your teeth] Løgn i Jer Hals, a variation on the expression Det er Løgn i Jer Hals (lit., “It’s a lie in your throat,” i.e., you’re lying), which is used (among other places) in Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Henrich og Pernille [Henry and Pernilla] (1731), act 3, sc. 7; see Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen 1758 or 1788 [1731– 1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 4. The volumes have no date of publication and are unpaginated.

25

35 37

flesh and blood] → 21,2. commend ourselves to God] Allusion to a line from the song sung by Copenhagen watch-

•

1850

men at midnight, “Vægternes Natte-Sang udi Kjøbenhavn” [The Night Watchmen’s Chants in Copenhagen]: “ ’Twas upon the midnight-tide / Our Savior he was born, / To comfort all the world so wide, / That then lay all forlorn. / The bell has chimed the midnight hour― / With mouth and lip / And heart so deep / Commend yourself into His power” in Instruction for NatteVægterne i Kiøbenhavn [Instruction for Night Watchmen in Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 1784), p. 21. I am spirit] Allusion to Jn 4:7–26; see also 2 Cor 3:17–18.

11

28

Socrates . . . before the people’s assembly, his eye saw . . . only individuals] The Greek philosopher Socrates (ca. 470–399 b.c.) offered a defense speech or Apology to the 501 members of the Athenian jury, when he stood accused of promoting gods other than those recognized by the Athenian state and of corrupting the youth of Athens. According to the account in Plato’s Apology, Socrates addressed himself to his accusers by name, i.e., as individuals.

30

28

My Dissertation] Refers to On the Concept of Irony, with Continual Reference to Socrates, which Kierkegaard defended for the degree of magister in philosophy on September 29, 1841. Influenced as I was by Hegel] See the appendix on “Hegel’s View of Socrates” in pt. 1 of On the Concept of Irony (CI, 219–237; SKS 1, 263–278). ― Hegel: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770– 1831), German philosopher and theologian, professor at Berlin from 1818 until his death. In his library, Kierkegaard had a number of volumes of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Works: Complete Edition], 18 vols. (Berlin, 1832– 1845; ASKB 549–565; abbreviated hereafter as Hegel’s Werke); see also ASKB 1384–1386. in my dissertation . . . Socrates . . . only paid attention, numerically, to the individuals] A reference to the appendix on “Hegel’s View of Socrates” in pt. 1 of On the Concept of Irony (CI, 219–237; SKS 1, 263–278), where Kierkegaard― with reference to Hegel’s Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie [Lectures on the History

1

29

2

4

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 35–41 of Philosophy], 3 vols., included in Hegel’s Werke (→ 29,2) as vols. 13–15, ed. K. L. Michelet (Berlin, 1833–1836; ASKB 557–559), vol. 2 (1833) (vol. 14 of Hegel’s Werke), p. 92―writes: “It is possible for this curtailment of the universal to remain fast and not be occasional, for the universal to be acknowledged in its determinateness, only in a total system of actuality. But this Socrates lacks. He negated the state, but he did not come back again to the state in a higher form in which the infinite he negatively required is affirmed” (CI, 234; SKS 1, 275). 29

10

22

29

30

26

1

Greatness.] Variant: first written “Greatness,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. those glorious ones] An idiomatic reference to the martyrs persecuted and executed during the first centuries of Christian history on account of their Christian beliefs. what Quintilian says somewhere . . . seen theatrical actors . . . someone who had succumbed to the pain] Here Kierkegaard repeats the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “De la diversion” [Of Diversion] (bk. 3, chap. 4), which appears as “Ueber zerstreuende Vorspiegelungen” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 113–139; p. 135: “Quintilian reports to have seen players so deeply engaged in a mourning part, that they could not give over weeping when they came home; and of himself, that having undertaken to stir up that passion in another, he himself espoused it to that degree as to find himself surprised not only to tears, but even with paleness, and the deportment of a man really overwhelmed with grief.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 413. This passage is derived from the Institutio oratoria [Institutes of Oratory] of the Roman rhetorician Marcus Fabius Quintilian(us) (ca. a.d. 35– 95), bk. 6, chap. 2, lines 35–36. what Hamlet says about the actor who speaks of Hecuba] See Hamlet’s soliloquy in Hamlet, act 2, sc. 2. ― Hecuba: In Homer’s Iliad, Hecuba is the wife of Priam, king of Troy, and daughter of the Phrygian king Dymas.

•

1850

561

Montaigne: Everyone takes care . . . the boldness with which one confesses one’s mistakes] Here Kierkegaard repeats the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “Sur des vers de Virgile” [Upon Some Verses of Virgil] (bk. 3, chap. 5), which appears as “Ueber Verse des Vergil” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 139–287; p. 150: “Everyone is wary and discreet in confession, but men ought to be so in action; boldness in doing ill is in some sort modified and restrained by boldness in confessing it.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 416.

9

30

Seneca: quare vitia sua nemo confitetur? . . . Somnium narrare vigilantis est. (Ep. 55.)] This citation from Seneca is likely derived from Montaigne’s essay “Sur des vers de Virgile” [Upon Some Verses of Virgil] (bk. 3, chap. 5), which appears as “Ueber Verse des Vergil” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 139–287, p. 151, where the source is incorrectly marked as “Senec. ep. 55.” The correct reference is to Seneca (→ 13,15), Ad Lucilium epistulae morales, 53:8. English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 416.

15

30

a long way from] Variant: first written “a long way behind”. the price is quoted somewhat higher] See, e.g., NB12:7, from July 1849, where Kierkegaard remarks that the pseudonym Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6) has “jack[ed] up the price properly” (KJN 6, 147). On this, see the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, No. I, where Kierkegaard writes, “In this work, which is from the year 1848, the requirement for being a Christian is forced up by the pseudonymous author [Anti-Climacus]” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). This preface is referred to again in Nos. 2 and 3 of the book (PC, 73 and 149; SKS 12, 85 and 153). Practice in Christianity by Anti-Climacus, edited by S. Kierkegaard, was advertised in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 225, September 25, 1850, as having appeared.

9

31

15

562 26

27

31

35

36

32

2 7

32

24

26

32

30

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 41–47

•

1850

“It is too lofty for us, we take comfort in grace;”] Presumably refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, No. I, where Kierkegaard writes: “Yet the requirement must be stated, presented, heard; from a Christian point of view there must be no reduction of the requirement, nor ought it be suppressed―instead of making an admission and confession concerning oneself. The requirement ought to be heard, and I understand what is said as spoken to me alone, so that I might learn not only to take refuge in ‘grace,’ but to take refuge in it with respect to the use of ‘grace’ ” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). in the sense of not being Xnty,] Variant: changed from “as if it were not Xnty”.

a municipal decree of June 26, 1818: whereas the poor received a free but modest burial, all others were required to hire an undertaker from this list. In Kierkegaard’s day, the authorized undertakers were sharply criticized for taking advantage of their monopoly by charging outrageous prices. without that of the others] Variant: before “that” the words “first hearing” have been deleted. livelihood] Danish, Levebrød, i.e., a position providing an income (→ 10,34 and → 21,21). as the author himself in fact admits with respect to himself] Presumably refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, No. I (→ 31,26 and → 31,15).

4

33

major premise] In classical logic, a categorical syllogism is an argument consisting of two premises and a conclusion. The one premise, which is to contain the subject concept of the conclusion, is called the minor premise; the other premise, called the major premise, contains the predicate concept of the conclusion. minor premise] See the previous explanatory note. Here there is, in addition, a pun on the word used, Undersætning, whose etymology (“understatement”) evokes the notion of support. Governance] → 17m,6. he gives everything to the poor] An allusion to Mt 19:16–22.

I can never thank Governance enough . . . that has been done for me] See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” where Kierkegaard writes: “And truly, that which is, after all, more important to me than all the writings, and which concerns me more profoundly, is to express as honestly and as emphatically as possible something for which I can never give sufficient thanks, something which when I someday have forgotten all the writings, I will remember eternally and unchanged: How Governance has done infinitely much more for me than I had ever expected, could have expected, or dared to expect” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 349; see the two pages in “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19), of which this manuscript is a draft). See also The Point of View for My Work as an Author: “And now, when I am to speak of my relationship to God, of what is repeated every day in my prayers which give thanks for the indescribable things he has done for me, so infinitely much more than I could ever have expected” (PV, 72; SKS 16, 52). ― Governance: → 17m,6.

30

33

Nullæ sunt inimicitiæ nisi amoris acerbæ. Properts.] This citation from the Elegiae [Elegies] or Carmina [Poems] of the Roman poet Sextus Propertius (ca. 49–15 b.c.), bk. 2, no. 8, v. 3, is likely derived from Montaigne’s essay “Sur des vers de Virgile” [Upon Some Verses of Virgil] (bk.

9

34

re-brand] Danish, stemple om (lit., to endow with a new “stamp” or character; to alter in an essential way). lèse-majesté] Technically, a crime committed against the king. According to Chr. V’s Danske Lov (1683), such crimes were to be punished with the severest penalty (see bk. 6, chap. 4, § 1). sextons] Lower-ranking church officers responsible for grave digging, assisting the bell-ringer, and above all, serving as ushers during church services, where they were to ensure that congregants were seated in accordance with their social status and rank. undertakers] i.e., the five city undertakers authorized by the city of Copenhagen according to

32 33

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 47–52 3, chap. 5), which appears as “Ueber Verse des Vergil” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 139–287, p. 202. English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 425. If that is the origin of the quotation, then Kierkegaard neglected to reproduce the reference: “Propert. L. II, Eleg. 8., v. 3,” where L. stands for liber (“book”). 34

27

35

3

quiet hours] → 11,10. any joyful days . . . in one of the morning and evening prayers in the hymnal] Refers to the “Morgen-Bøn om Tirsdagen” [Morning Prayer for Tuesdays] in “Daglige Morgen- og AftenBønner” [Daily Morning and Evening Prayers] in Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog til Brug ved Kirkeog Huus-Andagt [Evangelical Christian Hymnal, for Use in Devotions in Church and at Home] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 197; abbreviated hereafter as Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog), pp. 622– 623: “Almighty God, Lord of heaven and earth! We are unworthy of all the forbearance and steadfastness that you have shown us . . . You make us live; and from your lenient hand we receive everything to maintain us in this life. You preserve our health, and fill our hearts with happiness. All the good that we have is from your hand―and you give us joyful days, even upon the earth.”

35

20

sense what is of the spirit?] A play on Mt 16:23.

35

25

I studied theology] In the fall of 1830, Kierkegaard left the Borgerdydsskolen [School of Civic Virtue] and matriculated as a student at the University of Copenhagen with a view to studying theology. He took the examen artium (entrance examination) and received his admission letter on October 30, and officially entered the Faculty of Theology as a student of theology on November 1, the first day of the winter semester. See LD, 7–8; B&A, vol. 1, pp. 6–7. became a theology graduate] Kierkegaard took his final theological examinations on July 3, 1840, earning the degree candidatus theologiae, i.e., a qualified candidate for a theological position, typically as a priest. See LD, 10–13; B&A, vol. 1, pp. 9–12.

26

•

1850

563

could then have sought a clerical office] While Kierkegaard had passed his final examinations in theology at the University of Copenhagen in July 1840, this was not a sufficient qualification in his day for ordination or employment as a priest in the Danish State Church. A candidate was required to have attended the pastoral seminary for at least one semester, and to have passed the examinations both in homiletics, which included a public sermon, and in catechetics. Kierkegaard attended the pastoral seminary from November 1840 to September 1841―that is, for two semesters―but did not pass his homiletics examination until he gave his public sermon in Trinity Church on Købmagergade (see map 2, C1) on February 24, 1844. He appears never to have completed his catechetics examination. Knight of Dannebrog] The order of the Dannebrog was established by King Christian V on October 12, 1671. On June 28, 1808, shortly after he ascended to the throne, King Frederik VI issued a decree democratizing the order, which would no longer be limited to the nobility.

26

school] Probably refers to the fact that all parish priests, whether in town or the country, were expected to serve as chairmen of their parishes’ educational councils, and so take full responsibility for management of the local school system. This included the duty to deliver an annual report to a regional educational council controlled by the local bishop. parish statistics] A reference to Statistisk Tabelværk [Statistical Tables], published by a governmental commission from 1835 until 1848, and thereafter by the state bureau of statistics. Kierkegaard here presumably refers to the significant burden imposed on parish priests and archdeacons, who were charged with supplying data on the local schools and the poor relief system. On this see, e.g., Axel Holck, Dansk statistiks Historie 1800– 1850 [History of Danish Statistics] (Copenhagen, 1901), particularly pp. 274–280. cultivation of flax] Presumably refers to the fact that country priests ran parsonage farms, many of which grew flax for linen production.

9

29

9

10

36

564 36

16

19

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 53–56

Luther . . . “for God neither heeds . . . except solely for his Xns’ sake.”] A reference to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on Mt 22:15– 22, the gospel for the twenty-third Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller [A Christian Book of Homilies, Collected from Dr. Martin Luther’s Church and House Postils], trans. Jørgen Thisted, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828; ASKB 283; abbreviated hereafter as En christelig Postille), vol. 1, pp. 600–601: “[It is] the Christians alone who by their prayers sustain these two kingdoms on the earth, that of God and that of Caesar. If they did not exist and pray for these two worlds, it would be impossible for them to exist even for an hour. In short, it is for the sake of the Christians that God preserves the whole world. For he thinks as follows: ‘My Christians give me what is mine, and Caesar what is Caesar’s. So may they also have peace, that I must make and give them.’ Now when God gives the Christians peace, the same peace extends also to the ungrateful ones―they enjoy this good because of the faithful.” what Anti-Climacus expresses . . . the examination for becoming and being a true Xn can be administered] A reference to the following passage in Practice in Christianity (→ 31,15), No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” V: “It is, however, untruth, this talk whereby people flatter the human race and themselves that the world is advancing. The world is going neither forward nor backward; it remains essentially the same, like the sea, and like the air, in short, like an element. It is, namely, and must be the element that can provide the test of being a Christian, who in this world is always a member of the Church militant. This is the truth” (PC, 232; SKS 12, 226). See also PC, 225; SKS 12, 219, where Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6) addresses his fictive interlocutor as follows: “I thought that the very beginning of the test to become and to be a Christian is to become so turned inward that it seems as if all the others do not exist for a person, so turned inward that one is quite literally alone in the whole world, alone before God, alone with Holy Scripture as a guide, alone with the prototype before one’s eyes.”

•

1850

learned examinations] → 35,26. flesh and blood] → 21,2. “Give everything to the poor”] An allusion to Mt 19:16–22. there are variants . . . the readings are not quite certain . . . textual criticism] A reference to New Testament textual criticism, a branch of scholarly Bible research (→ 58,27) concerned with the effort to establish, and at times reconstruct, the most likely and reliable basic text of the New Testament on the basis of the numerous manuscript traditions. In the resulting scholarly editions, variants were marked in the margins; and where variants proliferated, it was commonly remarked that the reading was “uncertain.” See, e.g., Novum Testamentum graece [The New Testament in Greek], ed. J.A.H. Tittmann, stereotype ed. by A. Hahn (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 19).

31

Contributed to Abolishing] Variant: Changed from “Abolished”. a father . . . concerned even with the slightest thing in a person’s life] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 10:29–31. cordiality] Danish, Hjertelighed (lit., “heartiness”), a word employed frequently by N.F.S. Grundtvig; see, e.g., NB15:29, from January 1850, in KJN 7, 22, and the associated explanatory note. In addition to “heartiness,” Kierkegaard often also used the terms “hearty,” “lovable,” and “dear” ironically in referring to Grundtvig and his followers, including P. C. Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB15:82, also from January 1850, in KJN 7, 55. to confer in commodious jargon (heartily!) with others] Presumably refers to the strongly Grundtvigian Roskilde Ecclesiastical Conventicle, at which P. C. Kierkegaard was an active participant, giving lectures and taking part in ecclesiastical and theological debates. In earlier journals, Kierkegaard had used the word “heartily” in connection with him in this context: see, e.g., NB17:16.a, from March 1850, and NB17:106, from May 1850, in KJN 7, 177, 250–251. given another stamp] → 32,24.

21

“But Surely We Cannot All Be Martyrs?”] See the imagined objection that Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6) introduces in Practice in Christianity (→

12

5

37

6 10

37

23

39

3

38

7

38

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 56–60 31,15), No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” V: “ ‘How unreasonable,’ I hear someone say: ‘How unreasonable!’ It is, of course, impossible that we all can become martyrs; if we are all to become martyrs and be killed, who, then, is going to kill us; if we are all to become martyrs and be persecuted, mocked, and insulted, who, then, is going to persecute and mock us?” (PC, 221; SKS 12, 216). The same objection is repeated at PC, 225; SKS 12, 220. 38

39

17

1

3

39

10

Nullum . . . magnum ingenium sine aliqua dementia] A paraphrased citation from Seneca (→ 13,15), De tranquillitate animi [On Peace of Mind] 17:10: nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit. See L. Annaei Senecae philosophi opera omnia [The Complete Works of the Philosopher L. Annaeus Seneca], 5 vols. (Leipzig: stereotype edition, 1832; ASKB 1275–1279), vol. 1, p. 216, where this line is identified as a citation from Aristotle. Kierkegaard cites this line in Fear and Trembling (1843) (FT, 106; SKS 4, 195), and also―without “unquam”―in JJ:151, from the summer or late summer of 1843, in KJN 2, 175. as tolerant as the piety of the Romans: what difference does one god more or less make?] Roman religion had a syncretistic tendency, leaving room for the worship of such exotic deities as Isis, Bona Dea, and Mithra. livelihood] i.e., a position providing an income (→ 21,21). Montaigne says . . . something so detestable about that to which we all of course owe our existence] Here Kierkegaard repeats the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “Sur des vers de Virgile” [Upon Some Verses of Virgil] (bk. 3, chap. 5), which appears as “Ueber Verse des Vergil” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 5 (1794), pp. 139–287; 157–158: “What has rendered the act of generation, an act so natural, so necessary, and so just, a thing not to be spoken of without blushing, and to be excluded from all serious and regular discourses? We boldly pronounce kill, rob, betray, but the other we dare only to mutter between the teeth. Is it to say, that the less we say in words, we may

•

1850

565

pay it so much the more with thinking? For it is certain that the words least in use, most seldom written, and best kept in, are the best and most generally known; no age, no manners, are ignorant of them, any more than of the word bread. They imprint themselves in everyone, without being expressed, without voice, and without figure; and the sex that most practices it is bound to say least of it. ’Tis an act that we have placed in the free franchise of silence, whence to take it is a crime, even though it be to accuse and judge it; neither dare we reprehend it, but in periphrasis and circuitry.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 417. by choosing himself, as it is said in Either/ Or] A reference to “The Balance between the Esthetic and the Ethical in the Development of the Personality” in the second part of Either/Or (1843), in EO 2, 155–334; SKS 3, 153–314, esp. EO 2, 211–224; SKS 3, 203–215. the farthest extremity of the synthesis from spirit] See the following passage in chap. 2, § 2, A, “The Consequence of the Relationship of Generation,” in The Concept of Anxiety (1844) (CA, 62–73; SKS 4, 367–377): “In modesty there is an anxiety, because spirit is found at the extreme point of the difference of the synthesis in such a way that spirit is not merely qualified as body but as body with a generic difference. Nevertheless, modesty is a knowledge of the generic difference, but not as a relation to a generic difference, which is to say, the sexual urge as such is not present. The real significance of modesty is that spirit, so to speak, cannot acknowledge itself at the extreme point of the synthesis. Therefore the anxiety found in modesty is prodigiously ambiguous” (CA, 68; SKS 4, 372). And further: “In the moment of conception, spirit is furthest away, and therefore the anxiety is the greatest” (CA, 72; SKS 4, 376). to a larger living] → 21,21. that a priest absolutely should be married] → 21,12. 1000 married priests] → 7,12. To castrate a man is called to unman him] For “unman” Kierkegaard uses the Danish word afmande, which does not appear in C. Molbech,

20

26

5 11 21 31

40

566

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 60–66

Dansk ordbog [Danish Dictionary], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 1032); it was likely derived from the German entmannen, found in Th. Heinsius, Volksthümliches Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache [Popular Dictionary of the German Language], 4 vols. (Hanover, 1818–1822; ASKB U 64), vol. 1, p. 1021, col. 1, where the word is defined as “robbing of one’s manhood, castration.” 40

36 37

41

13 15

Montaigne] → 18,8. put (Book 1, chap. 28, on solitude) . . . cannot be worth much] Here Kierkegaard provides a Danish rendering of the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “De la solitude” [Of Solitude] (bk. 1, chap. 39), which appears as “Ueber die Einsamkeit” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 2 (1793), pp. 172–198; p. 172: “And as for the fine saying in which ambition and avarice cloak themselves, ‘That we are not born for ourselves, but for the public,’ let us boldly appeal to those who are in the thick of public affairs, and let them lay their hands on their hearts and then say whether, on the contrary, they do not rather aspire to titles and offices, and the tumult of the world, to make their private advantage at the public expense. But we need not ask them the question; for the corrupt ways by which men push on, toward the height at which their ambitions aspire, do manifestly enough declare that their ends cannot be very good.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 128. there are 1000 priests] → 7,12. what the fidget says . . . take on a couple more] A reference to act 1, sc. 6, of the comedy Den Stundesløse [The Busy Trifler] (1731) by Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754), Danish-Norwegian writer and scientist. The fussy Mr. Vielgeschrey refuses to allow his daughter Leonora to marry Leander, because Leander has not studied bookkeeping and so cannot relieve him in his great business enterprises. This leads Leander to remark: “I do not know what business a man can be in, if he does not occupy any position!” Vielgeschrey responds: “I am so busy with business that I have no time to eat or drink. Pernille! He says that I have no business. You can testify in my behalf!”

•

1850

Maidservant Pernille: “Master has enough work for ten men. It is only his enemies who say that he has no business. After all, apart from me Master keeps four scribblers on staff, which is proof enough that he has plenty of business.” To which Vielgeschrey adds: “And I’m about to hire another pair!” Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 24,30), vol. 5. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. See also act 3, sc. 1. Joh. Climacus shows . . . becoming and being Xn . . . break all ties] Refers to various passages in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 2, chap. 3, § 2 and § 4. ― Joh. Climacus: Johannes Climacus, the pseudonymous author of Philosophical Fragments (1844) and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). The name Climacus is presumably a reference to the Greek theologian and monk Johannes Klimax (Latin, “Climacus”) (ca. 525–616), who lived as a hermit on Mount Sinai for forty years and was the author of the work Klímax toû paradeísou (in Latin, Scala paradisi [Ladder of Paradise]), which was thus the source of his surname. See also the more detailed note in SKS K4, 197. and the part about even hating mother and father, and so on] Refers to Lk 14:26.

3

and a Curiosity Associated with This.] Variant: added. end could be tied fast] An expression from needlework, meaning that one has fastened the thread tightly after using it for sewing.

29 9

43

Aristotle’s . . . Proverb . . . no longer any friend to be found. (Montaigne, book 1, chapter 27)] Here Kierkegaard renders in Danish the conclusion of the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “De l’amitié” [Of Friendship] (bk. 1, chap. 28), which appears as “Ueber die Freundschaft” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 2 (1793), pp. 3–34; p. 22: “ ‘Love [your friend],’ said Chilo, ‘so as if you were one day to hate him; and hate him so as you were one day to love him.’ A precept that, though abominable in the sovereign and perfect friendship which I speak of is, nevertheless, very sound as to ordinary cases,

15

43

42

20

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 66–74 and to which the saying that Aristotle had so frequently in his mouth, ‘O my friends, there is no friend,’ applies.” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 107. 44

45

7

5 13 20 22

45

35

“imitation, the imitation of Xt” . . . a fanciful misunderstanding] Kierkegaard refers to the widespread emphasis on Christ as Exemplar and the related notion of the “imitation of Christ” in the Middle Ages, especially in monasticism and mysticism. St. Bernard of Clairvaux (→ 85,28), for example, put great emphasis on imitating Christ in poverty, humility, and suffering. Passion mysticism regarded the suffering Christ as the way to perfection, whereas quietistic mysticism asserted both that the soul should imitate Christ’s death on the cross and that the individual should resemble Christ in striving for virtue, especially for the pure love of God. flesh and blood] → 21,2. special daily suffering] Variant: “daily” added. Governance] → 17m,6. the clipped-wing bird, the decoy] In bird-hunting, a captive bird used as a lure to attract other birds. Montaigne says . . . a dog by the collar around its neck] A summary of the following passage in Montaigne’s essay “De l’inequalité qui est entre nous” [Of the Inequality among Us] (bk. 1, chap. 42), which appears as “Ueber die Ungleichheit unter den Menschen” in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 18,8), vol. 2 (1793), pp. 266–287; pp. 267–269: “But touching the estimate of men, ’tis strange that, ourselves excepted, no other creature is esteemed beyond its proper qualities. We commend a horse for his strength and sureness of foot . . . and not for his rich caparisons; a greyhound for his speed, not for his fine collar; a hawk for her wing, not for her jesses and bells. Why, in like manner, do we not value a man for what is properly his own? He has a great train, a beautiful palace, so much credit, so many thousand pounds a year: all these are about him, not in him . . . Why, in giving your estimate of a man, do you value him wrapped and muffled up in clothes? He then

•

1850

567

discovers nothing to you but such parts as are not in the least his own; and conceals those by which alone one may rightly judge of his worth. ’Tis the price of the blade that you enquire into, and not of the scabbard. You would not, peradventure, bid a farthing for him if you saw him stripped. You are to judge him by himself, and not by what he wears. And as one of the ancients very pleasantly said: ‘Do you know why you repute him tall? You reckon withal the height of his clogs,’ whereas the pedestal is no part of the statue. Measure him without his stilts, let him lay aside his revenues and his titles, let him present himself in his shirt!” English translation: The Works of Michael de Montaigne (→ 18,8), p. 147. occasional addresses] Broad designation for speeches given by priests at confirmations, weddings, funerals (eulogies), and confession, as well as for the speeches given by archdeacons at the installation of priests, or those by bishops at clerical ordinations and the dedication of churches. It was not uncommon for priests and bishops to publish collections of their “occasional discourses”; examples in Kierkegaard’s library include For huuslig Andagt. Et Ugeskrivt [For Domestic Devotions: A Weekly], vols. 2 and 3 (Copenhagen, 1839–1840; ASKB 370–371), which includes a series of confessional, wedding, and graveside discourses; P. J. Spang, Prædikener og Leilighedstaler [Sermons and Occasional Discourses] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 243); and J. P. Mynster, Taler ved Præste-Vielse [Discourses at Ordinations], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1840–1851; ASKB 235–236). undertaker] → 32,30. man, neutrius . . . hermaphrodite] Variant: changed from “man.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

8

In his sermon . . . Luther . . . proclaim first faith and then works . . . a proper gospel] A reference to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on the gospel reading for the first Sunday in Advent, Mt 21:1–9, in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), vol. 1, pp. 15–30; p. 15: “We have two things to consider and notice in the gospels. First, the works of Christ, given to us for our good and benefit, to which

33

46

9 16

46

568

47

47

3

11

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 74–76

faith must cling and put into practice; second, the selfsame works, now made into a pattern and prototype for us to follow and imitate―so that all gospels that teach first faith and then works are true gospels.” scripture as the only norm] Refers to Luther’s insistence that Christian doctrine can only be based on Holy Scripture, the Bible; this principle of sola scriptura (Latin, “scripture alone”) means that scripture is the final and decisive authority for all matters of dogma. Luther directed this principle in particular against the Roman Catholic Church, whose pope and councils regarded ecclesiastical tradition as a norm for faith and knowledge, alongside scripture. Wesley . . . called for a threefold test . . . called by God to preach] A paraphrase of the following passage in Robert Southey, The Life of Wesley, and the Rise and Progress of Methodism, 2 vols. (New York: Wm. B. Gilley, 1820; abbreviated hereafter as The Life of Wesley), vol. 2, p. 147, which Kierkegaard read in German in John Wesley’s Leben, die Entstehung und Verbreitung des Methodismus. Nach dem Englischen des Robert Southey, ed. F. A. Krummacher, 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1841 [1828]; ASKB 785–786; abbreviated hereafter as John Wesley’s Leben), vol. 2, p. 203: “The helpers [i.e., the Methodist equivalent of priests] were not admitted indiscriminately: gifts, as well as grace for the work, were required. An aspirant was first examined concerning his theological knowledge, that it might be seen whether his opinions were sound; he was then to exhibit his gift of utterance, by preaching before Mr. Wesley; and afterward to give, either orally or in writing, his reasons for thinking that he was called of God to the ministry.” ― Wesley: John Wesley (1703–1791), English theologian, priest, writer of hymns, and founder of Methodism; in 1725, ordained minister and deacon of the Anglican Church; in 1726, elected fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford; in 1735, began a threeyear venture as minister and missionary to the parish of Savannah, Georgia (where he tried, and largely failed, to convert local Native Americans); on his return, became deeply involved with the Moravian Fellowship; following a 1738 visit to

•

1850

Herrnhut, returned to England, where he broke with the Moravians, founded Methodism, and became an open-air preacher in 1739, partly itinerant but largely based in the Bristol area. Wesley was influenced by Thomas à Kempis, Johann Tauler, Luther (particularly the doctrine of justification by faith), Calvin, pietism, and mysticism; he placed great emphasis on personal conversion, piety, and holiness. ― Krumacher: Friedrich Adolf Krummacher (1767–1845), German Reformed theologian and pastor. ― called for: Variant: This reading is suggested by Pap. and is included in brackets by the editors of SKS. a question of a living] → 21,21. 3 examinations] The final theological examination, together with those in homiletics and catechetics (→ 35,26). Regarding No. 3 . . . If the applicant passed . . . 4-year probation] A paraphrase of the following passage in The Life of Wesley, vol. 2, pp. 147–148; John Wesley’s Leben, vol. 2, p. 203 (a continuation of the passage cited above → 47,11): “The best proof of this was that some persons should have been convinced of [their] sin and converted by his preaching. If a right belief and a ready utterance were found, and these fruits had followed, the concurrence of the three marks was deemed sufficient evidence of a divine call; he was admitted on probation; with a caution, that he was not to ramble up and down, but to go where the assistant should direct, and there only; and, at the ensuing conference, he might be received into full connexion. And after a while the time of probation was found too short, and was extended to four years.” Wesley puts it well . . . make a Christian out of a critic than a critic out of a Christian] A paraphrase of the following utterance by John Wesley (→ 47,11), as cited in The Life of Wesley, vol. 2, p. 162; John Wesley’s Leben, vol. 2, p. 220: “Nor are their solemn addresses to God interrupted either by the formal drawl of a parish-clerk, the screaming of boys, who bawl out what they neither feel nor understand, or the unreasonable and unmeaning impertinence of a voluntary on the organ. When it is seasonable to sing praise

16 17

18

24

47

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 76–80 to God, they do it with the spirit, and with the understanding also: not in the miserable, scandalous doggerel of Hopkins and Sternhold, but in psalms and hymns which are both sense and poetry; and as would sooner provoke a critic to turn Christian, than a Christian to turn critic.” 48

11 18

48

23

sacrificed to Denmark? . . . because the rabble was able to do it by itself?] → 11,32 and → 11,33. make a little admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, No. I (→ 31,26). A Methodist, Walsh . . . said of himself: [“]The sword is too sharp for the sheath.[”]] Refers to the following description of Thomas Walsh in The Life of Wesley (→ 47,11), vol. 2, pp. 207–208; John Wesley’s Leben, vol. 2, pp. 281–282: “With all this, the zeal of this extraordinary man was such that, as he truly said of himself, the sword was too sharp for the scabbard. At five-and-twenty he might have been taken for forty years of age; and he literally wore himself out before he attained the age of thirty, by the most unremitting and unmerciful labor, both of body and of mind. His sermons were seldom less than an hour long, and they were loud as well as long. Mr. Wesley always warned his preachers against both these errors, and considered Walsh as, in some degree, guilty of his own death, by the excessive exertion which he made at such times, notwithstanding frequent advice, and frequent resolutions, to restrain the vehemence of his spirit. He was not less intemperate in study. Wesley acknowledged him to be the best biblical scholar whom he had ever known. If he were questioned concerning any Hebrew word in the Old, or any Greek one in the New Testament, he would tell, after a pause, how often it occurred in the Bible, and what it meant in every place. Hebrew was his favorite study: he regarded it as a language of divine origin, and therefore perfect.” ― Walsh: Thomas Walsh (1730–1759), among the first lay Methodist preachers from Ireland; in 1749 converted from Catholicism to Anglicanism; had a second conversion later that year after hearing Methodist openair preachers, and applied to John Wesley (→ 47,11) to become a preacher himself; in 1750 was

•

1850

569

sent by Wesley to County Tipperary in Ireland, where he became an itinerant open-air preacher, preaching in both Irish Gaelic and English; in 1758, fell ill of tuberculosis, from which he died in 1759. A section of The Life of Wesley, vol. 2, pp. 199–210; John Wesley’s Leben vol. 2, pp. 270–286, is devoted to Walsh’s brief but extraordinary career. high rank] In the Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) there were nine classes, each further subdivided into numerical subclasses. The nation’s bishops were assigned to the first class and were addressed by the title “Your Excellency.” In 1847, Bishop of Zealand J. P. Mynster (→ 10,22) was given extraordinary advancement to thirteenth place in the first class, and was thenceforth to be addressed as “Your Eminence.”

32

48

people meet him with jubilation] Reference to Lk 19:28–40, esp. vv. 36–38. the profane view, which sees in Xt a fanatic and fantast] See, e.g., J. L. Heiberg, Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid. Et IndbydelsesSkrift til en Række af philosophiske Forelæsninger [On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age: An Invitation to a Series of Philosophical Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 568), pp. 19– 20: “If Christ were to come back to Christians of the present day, he would hardly be much better treated by them than formerly by the Jews. Since torture has been abolished, I do not suppose that they would crucify him, but our doctors would claim he was a quack, our jurists would claim he was a disrupter of the civil order; and the theologians, his born defenders, how would they receive him? The orthodox would call him a false teacher, and the rationalists, a fanatic.” English translation from J. L. Heiberg, On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age and Other Texts, ed. and trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2005), p. 97. This passage was cited by F.L.B. Zeuthen in his review of Heiberg’s book in Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post], nos. 76 and 77 (April 18 and 19, 1833), pp. 301–302 and 305–306.

5

49

6

570 49

50

26

19 30

30

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 81–85

Wesley . . . As an older man he wanted to get married . . . his inclination.” (See Wesleys Leben . . . pt. II, p. 295)] Refers to The Life of Wesley (→ 47,11), vol. 2, p. 215; John Wesley’s Leben, vol. 2, p. 295, where it is related that “John [Wesley] also began to think of marriage, after his brother’s example [i.e., Charles Wesley, who had married at age forty-one], though he had published ‘Thoughts on a Single Life,’ wherein he advised all unmarried persons, who were able to receive it, to follow the counsel of our Lord and of St. Paul, and ‘remain single for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.’ . . . [This] treatise . . . placed him in an unfortunate situation; and, for the sake of appearances, he consulted certain religious friends, that they might advise him to follow his own inclination.” Ultimately, Wesley married “a widow, by name of Vizelle, with four children”; see The Life of Wesley, vol. 2, p. 217; John Wesley’s Leben, vol. 2, p. 296. fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. Giødvad] Jens Finsteen Giødwad (1811–1891), Danish jurist and journalist; editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten 1837–1839, and from 1839, coeditor and publisher of Fædrelandet. He assisted Kierkegaard with proofreading, and during the publication of the pseudonymous writings of 1843–1845, Kierkegaard often made use of him to carry out business errands with his printer, Bianco Luno, and with his publisher and bookseller, C. A. Reitzel. Kierkegaard repeated this in 1849, when he sent the manuscript of the pseudonymous Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays to Giødwad for delivery to the printer Louis Klein; see NB11:8 in KJN 6, 8, dated May 4, 1849. On Kierkegaard’s friendship with Giødwad, see NB9:28, from January 1849, where Kierkegaard writes, “Giødvad is my personal friend” (KJN 5, 222), and NB18:44, from the summer of 1850, where Kierkegaard again calls Giødwad his personal friend and relates that “over the last three to 4 years I have spoken with him every single evening” (KJN 7, 283). told me yesterday . . . I answered . . . happy again over existing] This conversation has not been verified.

•

1850

Anti-Climacus (Practice in Christianity, No. 2)] Refers to Practice in Christianity, No. II, “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” by AntiClimacus, edited by S. Kierkegaard (→ 31,15) (PC, 69–144; SKS 12, 81–148). ― Anti-Climacus: The pseudonymous author of The Sickness unto Death (1849) and Practice in Christianity (1850). The prefix “Anti-” was formed as a counterpart to the pseudonym Johannes Climacus (→ 42,3). On Anti-Climacus as the new, higher pseudonymity, see → 56,35. the Angels’ Hymn of Praise at Xt’s Birth] See Lk 2:1–20, esp. v. 14. Anti-Cl. says that when Xt decides . . . make us all unhappy] Refers to the following passage in Kierkegaard’s Practice in Christianity, No. II, “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” the section titled “The Categories of ‘Offense,’ That Is, the Essential Categories of Offense,” § 4: “Therefore, by the step he takes out of love he at the same time plunges that person, mankind, into the most horrible decision. Indeed, it is as if one heard a cry from human compassion: ‘Oh, why are you doing this!’ ” (PC, 138; SKS 12, 141). at Xt’s birth the angels’ songs of exultation were heard] See Lk 2:1–20, esp. vv. 9–14. Luther rightly says . . . about Xt . . . “a great joy” . . . “for utterly crushed consciences”] A reference to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on Lk 2:1–14, the gospel for Christmas Day, in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, p. 66, col. 1: “This is the proper definition and explanation. If you would define Christ rightly, and properly describe who and what he is, then attend to how the angel defines and describes him, namely, that he is and is called a great joy. But . . . this preaching is fit only for the wretched, miserable consciences.” Luther elaborates further on “crushed” spirits, hearts, and consciences elsewhere on pp. 65–66.

6

the Pseudonyms] Presumably refers first and foremost to Johannes Climacus (→ 42,3) and AntiClimacus (→ 51,6).

8

51

7 8

16 27

52

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 85–88 13

23

53

1 1

1 3

54

2

priests publish their sermons in print] In Kierkegaard’s day, there were numerous priests who published their sermons. See, e.g., the Danish sermon collections in Kierkegaard’s library: N.F.S. Grundtvig, Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224); J. P. Mynster (→ 10,22), Prædikener [Sermons], 3 vols., 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1826 [1810]; vol. 2, 2nd ed. [Copenhagen, 1832 (1815)]; ASKB 228 and 2192); Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons for Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1823 [3rd ed., Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 229–230 and 2191]); Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Held in the Church Year 1846–1847] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231); and Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Held in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232); H. L. Martensen (→ 56,17), Prædikener [Sermons], first and second collections (Copenhagen, 1847 and 1849; ASKB 227); and P. J. Spang, Prædikener og Leilighedstaler (→ 46,8). the corrective] Meaning both a corrective alternative and a test of the truth. Anti-Climacus] → 51,6. in Practice in Xnty, No. 3] Practice in Christianity (→ 31,15), No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions” (PC, 135–262; SKS 12, 149–253). My Preface to the Book] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). He says: If I should sink under the weight of the criterion, etc.] Refers to the following passage in Practice in Christianity, No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” V, where Anti-Climacus writes: “And even if I myself should sink under the weight of the criterion I develop, and even if I should be the first who incurs judgment, and even if I should be the only one―I cannot do otherwise” (PC, 228; SKS 12, 222). Anti-Climacus (Practice in Xnty)] Practice in Christianity (→ 31,15) by the pseudonym Anti-

•

1850

571

Climacus (→ 51,6), the publication of which was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 225 (September 25, 1850). Tryde] Eggert Christopher Tryde (1781–1860), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1804; after having served as parish priest in a number of different parishes on Zealand from 1807, in 1838 he was named archdeacon at the Church of Our Lady, and from 1841, he was also codirector and teacher at the pastoral seminary in Copenhagen. Tryde had served as Kierkegaard’s confessor in the period 1839–1842. that Xnty had been abolished through “observation.”] Refers to the opening paragraphs of Practice in Christianity, No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” VI, namely, PC 233–237; SKS 12, 227–230, particularly the following passage: “In this manner, by means of its favorite way of observing what is the essentially Christian, which is just by ‘observation’ and ‘observations,’ the sermon presentation has abolished what Christianly is decisive in the sermon presentation―the personal: this You and I, the speaker and the one being spoken to; this, that the one who is speaking is himself personally in motion, a striver, and likewise the one spoken to, whom he therefore stirs up, encourages, admonishes, and warns, but all with respect to a striving, a life; this, that the speaker will continually not go away from himself but come back to himself and will help the listener, not to go away from himself but to come back to himself. In our day, the sermon presentation has itself first totally disregarded, and subsequently has contributed to its being totally forgotten, that the Christian truth cannot really be the object of ‘observations’ ” (PC, 234; SKS 12, 228). This attack on sermonizing as making “observations” culminates in the claim that “this fundamental change in the sermon presentation” was the means “whereby Christianity was abolished” (PC, 237; SKS 12, 230). In using the term “observations” here, Kierkegaard refers not least to J. P. Mynster (→ 10,22), who frequently used the term in his sermons (→ 69,11). of preaching,] Variant: added.

3

4

10

572 12 18

25 28

29

31

33 33

54

37

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 88–92

A public official] Priests were public officials. the office] Presumably refers to the fact that the income of priests was dependent on “priest money” and voluntary contributions (→ 21,21). the whole passage about the sermon having become observations] → 54,4. my discourses] Presumably refers especially to the “discourses” Kierkegaard held at the Friday communion services at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen (→ 5,1). The Right Reverend gentleman] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence established by decree on October 14, 1746 (with amendments on August 12, 1808), this title was reserved for the higher members of the clergy, who ranked in the highest six classes. This included the bishops and Copenhagen’s parish priests, court preachers, archdeacons, and doctors of theology, among others; see C. Bartholin, Almindelig Brev- og Formularbog [Universal Book of Letters and Formulae], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB 933), vol. 1, pp. 49–56. a very large living] Namely, as an archdeacon. After the bishops, archdeacons were the highest-paid officials in the Danish People’s Church. exposed myself to persecution] → 11,32 and → 11,33. lived on the street] Presumably refers to the fact that Kierkegaard himself frequently walked the streets of Copenhagen. See NB3:50, from December 1847: “All my walking in the street was once considered vanity, and it made people angry. They had no idea that I did it to weaken the impression they had of me. (the maieutic). Now they note that much walking in the street robs one of all esteem, and so now people become angry with me because I don’t keep more to myself, because I am not exclusive!” (KJN 4, 271). excellent saying . . . in Scriver . . . the daughter must support the mother] A reference to the following passage in Scriver, Seelen-Schatz (→ 9,13), vol. 4, p. 551, col. 1: “Without prayer, faith cannot stand in the face of the devil’s temptation. It is as a famous man once said: Prayer is the daughter of faith, but the daughter must feed the mother.” ― but the daughter must support the mother.:

•

1850

Variant: first written “but the mother must support the daughter.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. That Christ makes little into much, as with the feeding of the 5000] See Mt 14:13–21 and Jn 6:1–13.

5

55

Mynster] → 10,22. make a small admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity.

18

55

the gospel or the epistle for the day . . . morning service or vespers] The scriptural texts prescribed for every Sunday and holiday of the year, both from the gospels and the epistles, were collected and printed in in Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog). For the rules governing the assignment of epistle and gospel texts to matins at 7 a.m., to high mass at 10 a.m., and to vespers at 2 p.m., see Kirke-Ritual (→ 9,31), chap. 1, art. 1, p. 21: “For matins and high mass, the Sunday text is the usual gospel; for vespers it is the epistle.” By Kierkegaard’s day, it had become common to alternate annually between the gospel and epistle texts, which meant that in some years the epistle text was used in the morning, and the gospel in the afternoon, and in other years the reverse took place. On this see chap. 4, art. 25, in “Forslag til et: Kirke-Ritual for Danmark” [A Proposed Church Ritual for Denmark] in J. P. Mynster, Udkast til en Alterbog og et Kirke-Ritual (→ 10,22), p. 18. Martensen] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884), Danish theologian and pastor; theology graduate, 1832; after a journey abroad in 1834–1836, Martensen became a privatdocent and university tutor whose students included Kierkegaard; he acquired the degree of licentiate in theology in 1837; lecturer at the University of Copenhagen, 1838; extraordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen, 1840; honorary doctorate from the University of Kiel, 1840; member of the Royal Scientific Society, 1841; ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen, starting September 1, 1850; appointed court preacher on

9

20

17

56

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 92–96

18

56

29

29 35

39

57

6

May 16, 1845; knight of the Dannebrog, 1847. On July 19, 1849, Martensen had published his major work, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), which had appeared in a new edition on May 22, 1850. This work positioned Martensen in direct opposition to Kierkegaard, inasmuch as it provoked a larger dispute about the relation between faith and knowledge. speculation] A reference to speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology. Anti-Climacus’s] Here as the pseudonymous author of Practice in Christianity (→ 31,15 and → 51,6). My Preface to the Book] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). let him take the matter to such a height that the judgment falls upon me as well] A reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity― and particularly to the end, where Kierkegaard writes: “I understand what is said as spoken to me alone―so that I might learn not only to resort to grace but to resort to it in relation to the use of grace” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). See also “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (→ 33,30), where Kierkegaard writes the following in a note: “Later [i.e., later than “Discourses for the Communion on Fridays,” the fourth part of Christian Discourses (1848)], however, a new pseudonym, Anti-Climacus, appeared. But the very fact that it is a pseudonym means what the name (Anti-Cl.) also implies: that he is inversely coming to a halt. All the earlier pseudonymity is lower than ‘the edifying author’; the new pseudonym is a higher pseudonymity. But that is how one is ‘halted,’ of course: something higher is manifested that simply forces me back within my limits, judging me, judging that my life does not measure up to so lofty a requirement and that therefore the communication is something poetic” (PV, 6; SKS 13, 12). Bishop Mynster] → 10,22. what Anti-Cl. says . . . not read or heard a sermon . . . in the strictest sense Christian] See, for example, the following passage from exposition V in Practice in Christianity, No. III, “From On

•

1850

573

High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” where Anti-Climacus writes about how “I in fear and trembling, pursued by spiritual trials, have suffered” by pursuing the thought of Christianity’s “rigorousness”: “[S]olitary, even though I have lived in Christendom where all are Christians, but where I still have never heard any discourse or sermon about which I, if the question were put to me before God, unconditionally would dare to say that it was Christian―because even the most Christian sermon I heard nevertheless always had a dubious admixture of ‘reasons,’ a tinge of whimpering and pity, a discord of ingratiation” (PC, 228; SKS 12, 222). The Gospel about the Paralytic] See Mt 9:1–8, the gospel text for the nineteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, which in 1850 fell on October 6. Stand up and walk] See Mk 2:1–12, esp. vv. 8–11. Take up your bed] See the preceding explanatory note.

17

when . . . I threw myself against the rabble] Refers to Kierkegaard’s attack on the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 11,32). Goethe] Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749– 1832), German poet, playwright, essayist, jurist, politician, and scientist. they are also friends of revolutions . . . e.g., Xt’s coming, Luther] Refers to the following passage in Goethe’s conversation with his secretary, the German author and librarian Johann Peter Eckermann, on January 4, 1824: “It is true I could be no friend to the French Revolution; for its horrors were too near me, and shocked me daily and hourly, while its beneficial results were not then to be discovered. Neither could I be indifferent to the fact that the Germans were endeavoring, artificially, to bring about such scenes here as were, in France, the consequences of a great necessity . . . Because I hated the Revolution, the name of the ‘Friend of the powers that be’ was bestowed upon me. That is, however, a very ambiguous title, which I would beg to decline. If the ‘powers that be’ were all that is excellent, good, and just, I should have no objection to the title; but since with much that is good there is also much

2

57

22 24

19

19

58

574

24 27

58

32 32

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 96–100

that is bad, unjust, and imperfect, a friend of the ‘powers that be’ often means little less than the friend of the obsolete and bad . . . If, however, there exists an actual necessity for a great reform among a people, God is with it, and it prospers. He was visibly with Christ and his first adherents; for the appearance of the new doctrine of love was a necessity to the people. He was also visibly with Luther; for the purification of the doctrine corrupted by the priests was no less a necessity. Neither of the great powers whom I have named was, however, a friend of the permanent; much more were both of them convinced that the old leaven must be gotten rid of, and that it would be impossible to go on and remain in the untrue, unjust, and defective way.” J. P. Eckermann, Gespräche mit Goethe in den letzten Jahren seines Lebens [Conversations with Goethe in the Last Years of His Life], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1836 [vols. 1–2] and Magdeburg, 1848 [vol. 3]), vol. 3, pp. 44–46; English translation: Conversations of Goethe with Eckermann and Soret, trans. John Oxenford, 2 vols. (London: Smith, Elder & Co., 1850), pp. 122–123. the words I cite are Goethe’s own] → 58,19. Erasmus Rotterdam] Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466/1469–1536), Dutch Roman Catholic theologian and philologist; famed for his learning and scholarliness; a leading figure in the Northern European humanist movement. His edition of the Greek NT with philological explanations, published in 1516 along with a Latin translation and commentaries, was of fundamental importance for the Reformation and for textual criticism (→ 37,10). At first, Erasmus was favorably disposed toward Luther’s reformist ideas, but later increasingly distanced himself from them, not least as a result of their dispute about freedom of the will; see Erasmus’s 1524 treatise, De libero arbitrio [On the Free Choice of the Will], and Luther’s response in the same year, De servo arbitrio [On the Bondage of the Will]. with all my might―and with all my fortune] A wry reference to Dt 6:5. it has not made me rich] An assertion often made by Kierkegaard in his journals, which may reasonably be understood by considering the to-

•

1850

tal expenses associated with producing his books in the light of his rapidly diminishing fortune. See Frithiof Brandt and Else Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 23–64; see also NB16:59, from February 1850, in KJN 7, 136–138, and the associated explanatory note, as well as NB17:13, from March 1850, and NB20:36, from July 1850, in KJN 7, 174 and 420. By 1850, the fortune Kierkegaard had inherited from his father, which had originally amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars, in real estate, stocks, and bonds, was virtually depleted; on this see NB11:122, from May or June 1849, in KJN 6, 64, along with the associated explanatory note, and NB18:7, from May 1850, in KJN 7, 262, along with the associated explanatory note. When Christ drove out those who were bargaining . . . a whip out of rope] See Jn 2:13–16 and Mt 21:12–13. This whip he swung with authority] A possible reference to Mt 7:29.

35

and more reasonable] Variant: added.

5

59

Pascal says . . . “that it is ridiculous to be scandalized by Xt’s abasement . . . the elevation he shows.”] A reference to the following passage in Pascal’s Pensées: “It is most absurd to take offense at the lowliness of Jesus Christ, as if his lowliness were in the same order as the greatness he came to manifest.” See Gedanken Pascals [Pascal’s Pensées], ed., trans., and annotated by J. F. Kleuker (Bremen, 1777; ASKB 711), p. 120. English translation: Pascal, Pensées, trans. W. F. Trotter, in Pascal, The Provincial Letters; Pensées; Scientific Treatises, vol. 33 of Great Books of the Western World, ed. Robert Maynard Hutchins (Chicago: Penguin, 1952), 327, § 793. ― Pascal: Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), French mathematician, philosopher, and theologian. Following the death of his father in 1651, fell under the influence of Jansenism’s Augustinian account of Christianity (→ 94,34), in large part owing to the influence of his younger sister Jacqueline Pascal, who became a nun at the strongly Jansenist Cistercian

13

59

58

37

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 100–102

24

59

60

31

9

13

18

convent Port-Royal de Paris. Following a mystical-religious awakening in November 1654, he retreated to the convent Port-Royal de Champs (→ 94,34), in Magny-les-Hameux; during the next four years, he was a regular presence there, living an austere life dedicated to the study of scripture. During this period he wrote a series of eighteen Provincial Letters (1656–1657), a robust defense of Jansenism against Jesuit attacks; these were condemned by Pope Alexander VII in 1657 and banned and burned by King Louis XIV in 1660. His most famous work, the Pensées (Thoughts on Religion), consisted of fragments discovered upon his death and was first published in 1669 (Paris: Guillaume Desprez); the “Edition de Port-Royal” (→ 94,34) appeared in 1670. true] Variant: added. Pascal says . . . dangerous to know God and not . . . own wretchedness] A reference to the following passage in Pascal’s Pensées (→ 59,13), p. 264, § 527; Gedanken Paskals, p. 171: “The knowledge of God without that of man’s misery causes pride. The knowledge of man’s misery without that of God causes despair. The knowledge of Jesus Christ constitutes the middle course, because in Him we find both God and our misery.” Pascal says . . . only a few peop. speak humbly about humility . . . in us there are only lies, duplicity, contradiction] A reference to the following passage in Pascal’s Pensées (→ 59,13), p. 237– 238, § 377; Gedanken Paskals, p. 307: “Few men speak humbly of humility, chastely of chastity, few doubtingly of skepticism. We are only falsehood, duplicity, contradiction; we both conceal and disguise ourselves from ourselves.” reduplication] A term Kierkegaard often uses in connection with a relationship of reflection in which something abstract is repeated (actualized) in concrete practice or existence (→ 11,30). when doubt was taught] A reference to the fact that H. L. Martensen (→ 56,17) frequently emphasized the importance of doubt as modern philosophy’s methodological principle, as opposed to faith, which was the principle of medieval philosophy. To this end, he frequently appealed

•

1850

575

to Descartes’s aphorism de omnibus dubitandum est (“everything must be doubted”); on this, see the next explanatory note. See also Martensen’s review of J. L. Heiberg’s Indlednings-Foredrag til det i November 1834 begyndte logiske Cursus paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole [Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course Begun in November 1834 at the Royal Military College] (Copenhagen, 1835), which appeared in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], vol. 16 (Copenhagen, 1836), where Martensen writes on p. 518: “Nowadays the slogan is: Doubt is the beginning of wisdom,” and on p. 519: “The requirement ‘de omnibus dubitandum est’ is not fulfilled so easily, for what is required is no finite doubt, not the popular doubt about one or another thing whereby one always reserves for oneself something that is not included in the doubt . . . Science thus requires absolute, infinite doubt.” An English translation of Heiberg’s lecture is available in Heiberg’s Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course and Other Texts, ed. and trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2007), pp. 39–72. Martensen . . . lectured on de omnibus dubitandum . . . lectured on a dogma] This refers especially to H. L. Martensen’s lectures on Prolegomena ad dogmaticam speculativam [Introduction to Speculative Dogmatics], which consisted of two one-hour lectures weekly during the winter semester of 1837–1838 (a winter semester ran from November 1 to March 31 of the following year). Judging from the summaries in Kierkegaard’s notebooks (see Not4:3–12 in KJN 3, 125–142), Kierkegaard attended the first ten of these lectures. Here Martensen attempted to unite Right-Hegelian philosophy with Christian dogmatics. In the fifth lecture, he took up Descartes as the starting point of modern philosophy and cited the Cartesian line de omnibus dubitandum est directly as the guiding motto of modern (Protestant) philosophy. During the summer semester of 1838 and the winter semester of 1838–1839, Martensen gave lectures in Dogmatica speculativa [Speculative Dogmatics], the first twenty-three sections of which Kierkegaard summarized in KK:11 (KJN 2, 342–352). ― de omnibus dubitandum: Refers to a famous saying in the

18

576

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 102–107

history of philosophy: De omnibus dubitandum est (“One is to doubt everything”), which was coined by the French philosopher, mathematician, and natural scientist René Descartes (1596–1650). In his chief systematic work, Principia philosophiae [Principles of Philosophy] (1644), the saying forms part of the title of the first section of the first part: “Veritatem inquirenti, semel in vita de omnibus, quantum fieri potest, esse dubitandum” [He Who Seeks the Truth Ought for Once in His Life Doubt Everything to the Extent Possible], in Renati Des-Cartes opera philosophica [Philosophical Works of René Descartes], 4 vols., 6th Elzevier ed. (Amsterdam, 1677–1678, vol. 1, 1678; vols. 2–4, 1677; ASKB 473), vol. 2, p. 1. The saying expresses Descartes’s attempt to reach a firm foundation for scientific cognition and a starting point for his philosophical system by going through methodical doubt. 60

23

24 25

31 32

61

10

Anti-Climacus’s Practice in Christianity No. 3] Refers to Practice in Christianity, No. III (→ 31,15), by the pseudonym Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6), titled “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions” (PC, 135–262; SKS 12, 149– 253). He says that Xnty cannot be an object for “observations.”] → 54,4. also in the old days “meditations” was a more common title] See, for example, Joannis Gerhardi, Meditationes sacrae ad veram pietatem excitandam et interioris hominis profectum promovendum accommodatae [Johann Gerhard, Holy Meditations for the Evocation of True Piety and the Promotion of the Human Being’s Inner Development], ed. S. Guenther (Glogau, 1842 [1606]; ASKB 518); Danish translation: J.M.H.F. Stilling, Dr. Johann Gerhard’s Opbyggelige Betragtninger (Copenhagen, 1848; ASKB 275). ― days: Variant: Tid (Danish, lit., “time”) is the reading suggested by Pap. and is included in brackets by the editors of SKS. The editors of EP suggest “theology” instead. a public official] i.e., a priest qua public official. in a secular way, an official position] i.e., a paid position in the clerical establishment. Pascal] → 59,13.

•

1850

He says . . . the literal agreement of many . . . wager on this assertion] A reference to the following passage in Pascal’s Pensées (→ 59,13), p. 240, § 392; Gedanken Paskals, p. 351: “We assume that all conceive of [these objects] in the same way; but we assume it quite gratuitously, for we have no proof of it. I see, in truth, that the same words are applied on the same occasions, and that every time two men see a body change its place, they both express their view of the same fact by the same word, both saying it has moved; and from this conformity of application we derive a strong conviction of a conformity of ideas. But this is not absolutely or finally convincing though there is enough to support a bet on the affirmative, since we know that we often draw the same conclusions from different premises.”

11

admitting] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). to force the requirement so high] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). Day of Penitence and Prayer] Until the late 17th century a number of “penitence” and “prayer” days were observed each year. Although the 1685 edition of Kirke-Ritual did not establish a fixed day of prayer, in 1686 the fourth Friday after Easter was named “the General Day of Fasting, Penitence, and Prayer.” Observance of this day continued through the nineteenth century, when it was simply called “the General Day of Prayer.” See Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 56,9), pp. 84–86, which specifies the texts to be read during the day’s three services: high mass, the “noon sermon” (i.e., the noon service), and vespers. human whimpering] → 57,6.

21

6

61m

drawing attention to where we are] → 12,42. they take it upon themselves to attack me] It is not known to whom this refers.

3

62

judgment is coming] A reference to Judgment Day, when all human beings must give an accounting before God, and God closes the accounts; see Mt 12:36, 25:31–46; Rom 9:28; 1 Pet 4:5. See also Mt 25:31–46 on the judgment of the world.

17

61

22

27

4

62

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 108–109 62

24

I will include the requirement and then make an admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26).

62

27

Sins of Omission] Sins one becomes guilty of by failing to do what God has commanded. See, for example, § 87, “Eintheilungen der Sünde” [Classifications of Sin], in K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Hutterus Redivivus or the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1829]; ASKB 581), pp. 208–211, which summarizes “the old Church dogmatists’ ” distinction between “sins of commission” in various forms, and what is placed under another category, as related to “the Law,” as peccatum omissionis (“sin of omission”), which are defined as adversus legem jubentem (“against what the Law commands”), p. 209. In the book by F. W. Newmann, Die Seele ihr Leiden und ihr Sehnen . . . at which the devout wince most] A reference to Francis William Newman, The Soul, Its Sorrows and Its Aspirations: An Essay Towards the Natural History of the Soul as the True Basis of Theology (London: Trübner and Co., 1868 [1849]), pp. 56–57, which Kierkegaard read in German as Die Seele, ihr Leiden und ihr Sehnen. Ein Versuch zur Naturgeschichte der Seele, als der wahren Grundlage für die Theologie, trans. A. Heimann (Leipzig 1850; ASKB 695), pp. 98–100: “But what then is that of which so many devout persons speak―daily repentance and daily forgiveness? Can it be all emptiness and morbid feeling? I am far from saying so. It has been laid down above, that we must distinguish between our failures through want of power in the spiritual affections, and failures from a double mind and traitorous will; and must lament indeed, but on no account scourge ourselves, on account of the former. But there is also a third class, in a manner intermediate to these two, which is not to be overlooked; namely, when we fall short of our own discerned standard through a weakness of spiritual affection which may possibly be imputed to our own negligences or indolence. As our experience grows, our strength ought to grow, and to plead weakness is not always an adequate excul-

28

•

1850

577

pation. Hence sometimes the deepest confessions come from those who feel themselves competent for higher duty: a thought which was at the bottom of Paul’s utterance―‘Woe is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel.’ It is not therefore always a mark of something extravagant, when eminently holy men appear to be carried beyond bounds in their self-displeasure. In fact, in proportion as our sphere of knowledge enlarges, so does our responsibility; and in the farther advance of spiritual life, it may seem that the affections themselves become virtually to a great extent at our call. Not that we are able at will to bid them exist and act, and that, in any intensity which we choose; yet experience shows us ways of courting pure and holy feeling; and if we apprehend that we have neglected these, we necessarily blame ourselves. In short, omission is probably the form of guilt which is most apt to overcloud the heart, when all the better-defined sins are subdued; especially because it is often extremely difficult to ascertain whether we are or are not to blame. And here probably there will be no hazard in affirming, that the most spiritual men have concurred in regarding the posture of self-justification and palliation as so hurtful, that they prefer to admit their own guilt whenever there is room to suspect it. Sins of omission may be unobserved and unknown. Waste of time and of other talents, selfishness, indolence, cowardice, negligence, self-pleasing, nay, want of sympathy, of tenderness, of meekness, may be sins of the will in this sense―that if at the time of temptation our will had been in its normal vigor, it was in our power to avoid them; but because the mind was occupied by something else, we did not exert ourselves; and in the retrospect we now cannot tell what we might have done, if a holier will had been active.” According to a receipt from bookseller Otto Schwartz dated October 2, 1850, Kierkegaard bought the Heimann edition of Newman’s essay on that day; and a receipt from bookbinder N. C. Møller dated December 31, 1850, reveals that Møller had billed Kierkegaard for binding the book on October 6, 1850. ― F. W. Newmann: Francis William Newman (1805–1897), English classicist, historian, linguist, mathematician, and eclectic theologian,

578

63

1

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 109–114

as well as the younger brother of John Henry (Cardinal) Newman; in 1826, elected fellow of Balliol College, Oxford; in 1830, resigned his fellowship out of sympathy for Baptism, and traveled to Baghdad to join Anthony Norris Groves’s evangelical mission there; in 1833, returned to England, where he became a tutor in classics at Bristol; in 1840, accepted a professorate at the Unitarian seminary Manchester New College; and in 1846, moved to University College, London, where he remained until his retirement in 1869. Anti-Climacus’s Sickness unto Death] Presumably refers to the following passage in pt. 2, A, chap. 1 of The Sickness unto Death (1849), where the pseudonymous author Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6) asks rhetorically whether the definition in question is not “too spiritual”: “Why is it assumed to be too spiritual? Because it does not mention murder, stealing, fornication, etc.? But does it not speak of these things? Are not they also self-willfulness against God, a disobedience that defies his commandments? On the other hand, if in considering sin we mention only such sins, we so easily forget that, humanly speaking, all such things may be quite in order up to a point, and yet one’s whole life may be sin, the familiar kind of sin: the glittering vices, the self-willfulness that either in spiritlessness or with effrontery goes on being or wants to be ignorant of the human self’s far, far deeper obligation in obedience to God with regard to its every clandestine desire and thought, with regard to its readiness to hear and understand and its willingness to follow every least hint from God as to his will for this self. The sins of the flesh are the self-willfulness of the lower self, but how often is not one devil driven out with the devil’s help and the last condition becomes worse than the first. For this is how things go in the world: first a man sins out of frailty and weakness, and then―well, then he may learn to flee to God and be helped to faith, which saves from all sin, but this will not be discussed here― then he despairs over his weakness and becomes either a pharisee who in despair manages a sort of legal righteousness, or in despair he plunges into sin again” (SUD 81–82; SKS 11, 195–196). See also the explanatory notes on this passage in SKS K11.

•

1850

as the moralists now pontificate] See, e.g., R. Rothe, Theologische Ethik (→ 64,30), vol. 3, pp. 605– 616, esp. p. 605: “It is not up to the individual to decide whether to contract marriage, but a definite call of duty. Marriage is the fundamental ethical relation for all, the living root from which the ethical world in its totality grows and continually regenerates itself; and it is precisely for this reason that all should take part in it.”― moralists: i.e., moral philosophers. forbid the woman to propose to the man] See, e.g., R. Rothe, Theologische Ethik (→ 64,30), vol. 3, p. 608: “The woman must wait until she is called to marriage by the man.” major premise] → 31,35. minor premise] → 31,36. traditional] Variant: first written “Herkömliche” (German, “conventional”).

12

In Richard Rothe’s Ethics . . . Χt’s not being married . . . could find “keine ebenbürtige Person.”] This refers to the following passage in Richard Rothe, Theologische Ethik [Theological Ethics], 3 vols. (Wittenberg, 1845–1848), vol. 3, p. 613 n. 1: “And also for this reason marriage was an impossibility for [the Savior], because no spiritually coequal spouse could be sought, let alone found, for him.” ― Richard Rothe: Richard Rothe (1799–1867), German Lutheran theologian and priest; from 1823, priest at the Prussian embassy in Rome; from 1828, professor of New Testament and practical theology at the pastoral seminary in Wittenberg; from 1837, at Heidelberg; from 1849, at Bonn; and from 1854, at Heidelberg again. Influenced by Schleiermacher, Hegel (→ 29,2), and theosophical thinkers, he formulated a speculative theology―an ethics, rather than a dogmatics―and his Theologische Ethik is regarded as his principal work and a classical work of German academic cultural Protestantism.

30

64

Joh. Climacus] → 42,3. Anti-Climacus] → 51,6.

1

65

indifferent things] Presumably, a reference to the notion of morally indifferent actions, often called “adiaphora” (→ 71,4). In the eighteenth

14

64

13

19 19 27

1

65

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 114–116 century, pietists claimed that sanctification should encompass the entire life of the one reborn, and that no action was so insignificant that it fell outside the revealed laws of morality; therefore they condemned, for example, dancing, card playing, drinking of alcohol, luxurious living, smoking, theater, facetiousness, and untimely laughter. The orthodox Lutherans, by contrast, viewed such actions as indifferent, innocent, or neutral, which fall within the freedom and personal choice of Christians, with which no one has the right to interfere. See DD:180, dated December 18, 1838, in KJN 1, 262, and the associated explanatory notes. 66

10

11

held back from publishing books] Presumably refers to the fact that Practice in Christianity was first published only on September 25, 1850 (→ 31,15), even though Practice in Christianity, No. I, “ ‘Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest’: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,” and no. 2, “ ‘Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me’: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” were written during the second half of 1848, while it is likely that no. 3, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” was completed in early 1849. Kierkegaard also seems to have postponed publication of The Sickness unto Death, which he appears to have written between February and May 1848, but first published on July 30, 1849 (on this, see SKS K11, 166 and 121). let Nielsen and Stilling do so] Refers to the polemics of Rasmus Nielsen and Peter Michael Stilling against Hans Lassen Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 56,17), which was published on July 19, 1850. In his preface, Martensen had dismissed Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings as mere “random thoughts and aphorisms, sudden discoveries and hints” (p. iii). Rasmus Nielsen’s review Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse [Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics: An Investigative Review] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 701) appeared on October 15. At the end of December 1849,

•

1850

579

Stilling published Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden, med særligt Hensyn til Prof. Martensens “christelige Dogmatik.” Kritisk-polemisk Afhandling [On the Imagined Reconciliation of Faith and― Knowledge, with Particular Reference to Prof. Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics: Critical and Polemical Essay] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 802; abbreviated hereafter as Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden), which was strongly influenced by Kierkegaard; it was noted in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 303, December 22, 1849, as having appeared. This led to a major debate about the relation of faith to knowledge. Nielsen’s next major work was Evangelietroen og Theologien. Tolv Forelæsninger holdte ved Universitetet i Kjøbenhavn i Vinteren 1849–50 [The Faith of the Gospels and Theology: Twelve Lectures Held at the University of Copenhagen in the Winter of 1849–1850] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 702); the book was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 80, April 6, 1850, as having been published. In this work, Nielsen presents a more systematic argument, based on insights from Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings, that we must comprehend that faith cannot be comprehended. This was followed by Et par Ord i Anledning af Prof. Scharlings Apologie for Dr. Martensens Dogmatik [A Few Words on the Occasion of Prof. Scharling’s Defense of Dr. Martensen’s Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850), the publication of which was announced in Adresseavisen, no. 109, on May 11, 1850. Stilling subsequently published the piece Et Par Spørgsmaal til Professor C. E. Scharling i Anledning af hans saakaldte Anmeldelse af Dr. Martensens christelige Dogmatik [A Couple of Questions for Professor C. E. Scharling on the Occasion of His So-Called Review of Dr. Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850), which was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 113, May 16, 1850, as having appeared. With these two works, Stilling and Rasmus Nielsen had formed a common front against Martensen and his followers. The polemics between Martensen and Nielsen continued with Martensen’s publication on June 13 of Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 71,1), in which he defended himself against criticisms of his dogmatics. ― Nielsen: Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish

580

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 116–119

theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, 1840–1841; from 1841, Poul Martin Møller’s successor as extraordinary professor in moral philosophy, and from 1850, ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen. He taught speculative and Hegelian philosophy in particular, but in the mid-1840s, he came under Kierkegaard’s influence, and they became friends in 1848 (concerning this, see NB7:6 and NB10:32 in KJN 5, 80–81 and 283). In the summer of 1848, Kierkegaard believed that he would soon die and therefore wanted someone to publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74 in KJN 5, 56–57 and NB14:90 in KJN 6, 402–405). He decided on Rasmus Nielsen, whom he had once met on the street and with whom he subsequently discussed his views on walks they took every Thursday. Kierkegaard decided to wait until after Nielsen had published his next book before deciding how useful Nielsen might be. On May 19, 1849, Nielsen’s big book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 7m,6) was published; it profoundly disappointed Kierkegaard. The book, which scarcely makes mention of Kierkegaard, was nonetheless so very much influenced by Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works that reviewers declared that Nielsen was a disciple of Kierkegaard; Kierkegaard himself, on the other hand, was full of worry and annoyance (see, e.g., NB11:46 in KJN 6, 28). Kierkegaard’s relation to Nielsen is illuminated in a number of journal entries and in a series of letters (published in LD) concerning, among other things, their break in April 1850. ― Stilling: Peter Michael Stilling (1812–1869), philosopher, abandoned his studies of theology shortly before his examinations but was later granted a dispensation and earned the magister degree with the dissertation Den moderne Atheisme eller den saakaldte Neohegelianismes Conseqvenser af den hegelske Philosophie [Modern Atheism, or So-called Neo-Hegelianism as a Consequence of Hegelian Philosophy] (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB 801). In the early 1840s, Stilling was a spokesman for a conservative version of Hegelianism; at the end of the decade he fully rejected this position. After a study tour, he worked as a privatdocent in the

•

1850

period 1846–1850. On Kierkegaard’s relation to and discussions with Stilling, see, e.g., NB14:112, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 416–417, along with NB15:56, from January 1850, NB16:56, from February 1850, NB17:76.b, from April 1850, and NB20:56, from July 1850, in KJN 7, 35–36, 229, 430–431. let the others rake the chestnuts out of the fire] An expression for enjoying the fruits of others’ unpleasant work; it is derived from a fable about a monkey that lured a cat to pull the roasted chestnuts out of the fire, and then ate them himself. Concerning Rasmus Nielsen and Peter Michael Stilling’s attack, strongly inspired by Kierkegaard, on Hans Lassen Martensen’s speculative theology, see → 66,11. Kierkegaard did not participate directly in this conflict, which continued for another year. hurling myself against the rabble] Refers to Kierkegaard’s attack on the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 11,32). by publishing Practice in Xnty] Practice in Christianity was published on September 25, 1850 (→ 31,15).

14

16

18

Rousseau has an excellent observation on white lies (. . . Richard Rothe, Ethik . . .): Cette question . . . impossible a pratiquer] A reference to R. Rothe, Theologische Ethik (→ 64,30), vol. 3, p. 569 n. 1, where Rothe cites the line from Rousseau freely. ― Rousseau: Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712– 1778), French philosopher and author; his unfinished Rêveries d’un promeneur solitaire [Reveries of a Solitary Walker] was published posthumously in 1782 and is divided into ten parts or chapters called “Walks.” ― on white lies: Variant: added.

24

66

Richard Rothe (Anfänge . . .) lets the Church merge into the state . . . the stage . . . divine service] A reference to Richard Rothe (→ 64,30), Die Anfänge der Christlichen Kirche und ihrer Verfassung. Ein geschichtlicher Versuch [The Beginnings of the Christian Church and Its Constitution: A Historical Essay] (Wittenberg, 1837), pp. 25–47, especially pp. 45–46: “Here, too, the relation between the religious and the for-itself human or the natural―an opposition that it is the great task

19

67

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 119–121 of salvation in history to sublate [aufheben]―forms the hinge on which everything pivots. As long as these two remain separated, so too will the theatrical stage and the church service remain not only separated, but opposed to one another. But if the for-itself human and the religious merge into one another, then the theatrical stage and religion will also become one. The community of artistic life in its completed structure is, in itself, the collective church service; or the other way around: the collective church service is, in itself, the total organism formed by the shared artistic life . . . And because in its perfection it is identical with art as such, religion too, in its perfection, belongs with the state in its perfection, for the state celebrates the triumph of its perfection precisely in the perfected religion.” ― as in paganism: See p. 43, where Rothe writes: “In paganism, therefore, the worship of nature and the worship of God, profane art and holy art, and accordingly also artistic life and religion themselves (work of art and idol, artistic spectacle and feast of the gods) are immediately one.” 68

2 3

5

Bishop Mynster] → 10,22. after He Had read Practice in Christianity] Practice in Christianity appeared on September 25, 1850 (→ 31,15). Kierkegaard had sent Mynster a copy with a personal dedication “To His Excellency, the Right Reverend Bishop Dr. Mynster.” That book is now in possession of the Kierkegaard Archive at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. Pauli] Just Henrik Voltelen Paulli (1809–1865), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1833; from 1835, catechist at Church of the Holy Ghost; from 1837, palace priest at Christiansborg Castle Church, and from 1840, also court priest; close associate of Bishop J. P. Mynster (whose eldest daughter Paulli married in 1843) and a close friend of H. L. Martensen (→ 56,17); member of the hymnal committee of the Copenhagen Clerical Conventicle, 1841–1844. Kierkegaard owned Paulli’s Christelige Bønner [Christian Prayers], 2nd enlarged ed. (Copenhagen, 1848 [1845]; ASKB 279), but not his 1844 Prædikener om Kirken og Sakramenterne [Sermons on the Church and the Sacraments].

•

1850

581

his virtuosity in adopting superior airs] Compare NB11:193, dated June 1849, in KJN 6, 113–114. the scene . . . Have you any special business? and so forth] The date of this encounter has not been determined. It is as I have said to you before . . . each bird singing its own song.”] It is not known when Mynster first said this to Kierkegaard. pleased with this answer;] Variant: first written “pleased with this answer.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. He pointed out that . . . there had to be observations] An allusion to Bishop Mynster, whose sermons frequently used the term betragtning (“observation,” “meditation,” “contemplation,” “reflection,” or “investigation”) when speaking of personal devotion, and whose principal edifying work was called Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme (→ 11,10); see, e.g., Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 (→ 11,10), pp. 41, 129; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 (→ 11,10), pp. 16, 44, 56, 72, 140, 153; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 11,10), the first section, “Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1849” [Sermons Held in the Year 1849], pp. 1–132, esp. pp. 6, 110, 124. See also NB11:217 in KJN 6, 130–131. half of the book is an attack on Martensen] Here Mynster presumably was referring to Practice in Christianity, No. I, “ ‘Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest’: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,” and no. 2, “ ‘Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me’: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition” (PC, 5–68 and 69–144; SKS 12, 13–80 and 81–148). the other half on me] Here Mynster was presumably referring to Practice in Christianity, No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions” (PC, 145–262; SKS 12, 149– 253). the passage on “observations”] → 54,4. I was a young man] May 5, 1850, was Kierkegaard’s thirty-seventh birthday. the book had already been out for something close to 3 weeks] The conversation with Paulli evidently took place on October 21, 1850; Practice in Christianity had been published on September 25 (→ 31,15).

24 25

40

9

69

11

18

19

20 25 3

68m

582 7

10

11

14

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 121–124

action by the government] It has not been possible to determine which government action Kierkegaard was thinking of. The government at the time was the ministry formed on November 16, 1848 (the so-called November Ministry), which, led by Count A. W. Moltke, oversaw the adoption of the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849, making the country a parliamentary monarchy; the ministry remained in office until July 13, 1851. government disapproval] Refers most likely to Prof. Johan Nicolai Madvig (1804–1886), the government’s cultus minister (i.e., minister for Church and educational affairs). Another possibility is Prof. Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793–1877), Kierkegaard’s former theology teacher, who served in the so-called November Ministry as minister without portfolio. A third possible reference is to the bishops as leaders of the church. Mynster . . . a Sunday sermon after the book had come out] According to the published lists of preachers, Bishop Mynster preached only once between September 25 and October 22, 1850, namely, at the 10:00 a.m. high mass on Sunday, October 6 at Christiansborg Palace Church; see Adresseavisen, no. 234 (October 5, 1850). polemicized strongly against naturalism . . . “that unfortunately . . . today think about miracles.”] Here Kierkegaard cites from memory Mynster’s sermon of October 6, 1850 (see the preceding explanatory note), the nineteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, on Mt 9:1–8 (the healing of the paralytic), which was later printed as no. 20, “The Power Jesus Revealed in His Works,” in Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 11,10), pp. 260–273, p. 264: “The works [of Christ] have remained the same, the witness has remained the same, but human beings’ sense has changed, so that when we now speak of miracles, of works, that proceed beyond the boundaries of nature and that are not conducted in accordance with this same nature’s laws, we know well that we often will meet unwilling ears, that today’s human beings are liable to set nature on the highest throne.” ― naturalism: A philosophical approach that confines itself to causally determined nature and recognizes no other power or principle higher than nature itself.

•

1850

Mynster’s] → 10,22.

20

a corrective] → 52,23.

5

70

The Woman Who Was a Sinner] Reference to Lk 7:36–50. The woman who was a sinner is present almost only as in effigy, and yet . . . the one who is present] See the following comment on Lk 7:47 in Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: The High Priest―The Tax Collector―The Woman Who Was a Sinner (1849), no. 3: “It is almost as if the Savior himself momentarily looked at her and the situation that way, as if she were not an actual person but a picture. Presumably in order to make the application more impressive to those present, he does not speak to her; he does not say, ‘Your many sins are forgiven you, because you loved much.’ He speaks about her; he says: Her many sins are forgiven her, because she loved much. Although she is present, it is almost as if she were absent; it is almost as if he changed her into a picture, a parable . . . It is almost like a story, a sacred story, a parable―and yet at the same moment the same thing was actually taking place on the spot” (WA, 141–142; SKS 11, 277).

29

70

Information on Dogmatics by Martensen] i.e., Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift [Information on Dogmatics: An Occasional Piece] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), by Hans Lassen Martensen (→ 56,17). Here Martensen tells us . . . introspection . . . something sickly that discovers every little speck] Refers to the following passage in Martensen’s Dogmatiske Oplysninger, p. 37: “Let us not forget that in the religious life we also find a sickness of reflection―an egoistic concern for salvation― in which the I ruminates upon itself, and, owing to sheer self-contemplation and self-examination, never comes to gaze rightly at God or Christ, because it itself is so interested in its consciousness of sin, this ethical transparency of itself to itself, in which, as it were, it can observe every flea of sinfulness as under a microscope, in which it is so interesting to itself in this unceasing, paradoxical passion for an eternal happiness.”

1

30

2

71

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 124–126 4

15

71

25

and in his Moral Philosophy Martensen lectures profoundly (. . . Rothe . . . in his Ethik) . . . there are no αδιαφoρα . . . everything, even the least significant thing, is duty] A reference to § 31 of Martensen’s Grundrids til Moralphilosophiens System. Udgivet til Brug ved academiske Forelæsninger [Outlines of the System of Moral Philosophy: Published for Use in Conjunction with Academic Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 650)], § 31, p. 35: “If in the arena of the free will there is nothing too trifling to be determined by duty, so too there is nothing too great or distinguished to be expressed under the form of duty. Duty is morality’s absolute measure, and this leaves no more room for adiaphora (→ 65,14) than it does for opera supererogatoria [works of supererogation, i.e., beyond the call of duty]. A morality which in its practitioner wants to outbid the demands of duty is not freedom but arbitrariness, and will easily be able to be shown as dereliction of duty or as neglect of the necessary.” English translation from Martensen, Outline to a System of Moral Philosophy, trans. Curtis Thompson, in Curtis Thompson and David Kangas, Between Hegel and Kierkegaard: Hans L. Martensen’s Philosophy of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 245–313, p. 273. This paragraph is cited by Richard Rothe in his Theologische Ethik (→ 64,30), vol. 3, p. 91; in note 1, a reference is provided to the German edition of Martensen’s Outline to a System of Moral Philosophy, namely, Grundriß des Systems der Moralphilosophie. Zum Gebrauch für akademische Vorlesungen. Aus dem Dänischen (Kiel, 1845), pp. 33–34. ― αδιαφoρα: Greek, adiaphora (→ 65,14). in Information on Dogmatics . . . there must after all be a limit] A reference to the following passage in Dogmatiske Oplysninger, p. 38: “I ask: where is the limit [for the passion of faith]? For if passion is established as normative, then it is sorely difficult to determine how far one may go in that direction.” See also p. 21. the Inserted Lines in Practice in Christianity No. 1] See Practice in Christianity, no. 1, “ ‘Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest’: For Awakening and

•

1850

583

Inward Deepening,” “The Halt,” § 2, A (“The First Period of His Life”) (PC, 40–53; SKS 12, 53– 65), which includes responses by “the sagacious and sensible person,” “the clergyman,” “the philosopher,” “the sagacious statesman,” “the solid citizen,” and “the scoffer.” Pauli] → 68,5. such things,] Variant: first written “such things.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Peter thought . . . have been enough to point to them] It has not been possible to identify where or when Peter Christian Kierkegaard might have expressed this opinion. ― Peter: Kierkegaard’s elder brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805– 1888); defended his licentiate degree in theology in 1836; served as tutor for theological students until 1842, when he accepted a call as priest for the parish of Pedersborg and Kindertofte by Sorø in south-central Zealand; he was a faithful adherent of Grundtvig, and from July 1844 he was a respected member of the Roskilde Ecclesiastical Conventicle. On December 29, 1849, he was elected to the Landsting, the upper house of the newly established Danish parliament, as a representative for the Society of Friends of the Peasant, i.e., the Venstre (“Left”) Party, but soon thereafter― February 11, 1850―he joined the group of Center Party members in the upper house; see NB15:82 (KJN 7, 55) and the relevant explanatory notes. Works of Love, where I did it] Presumably refers to sections 2.B, “You shall love the neighbor,” and 2.C., “You shall love the neighbor,” in Works of Love (1847), first series of discourses (WL, 44–60 and 61–90; SKS 9, 51–67 and 68–95), where the poet’s notion of love as erotic love and friendship, as opposed to Christianity’s conception of neighbor-love, is brought in indirectly and not in the form of direct statements. a pittance] Literally, 4 shillings (→ 9,34), i.e., a very small amount. Christian Order of Precedence] A playful reference to the worldly or civic order of rank in Denmark (→ 48,32), comprising nine classes subdivided by number. sufferings “for the sake of the Word.”] A reference to Mt 13:21.

29 32

5

71m

10

23

74m

33

74

4

75

584 75

23

76

11

76

18 19

19 20

76

24

25 34

77

2

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 127–131

Mynster] → 10,22. lower than the poet] Variant: preceding this, the word “far” has been deleted. I know then, can be secure enough; it] Variant: added. Atlas] In Greek mythology, a giant who holds up the heavens. According to Hesiod, he is the son of the Titan Iapetus and Clymene, daughter of Oceanus; as punishment for his participation in the Titans’ war against the gods, he was exiled far to the west, where he carried the heavens, often depicted as a ball, on his neck and shoulders. Prof. Martensen] → 56,17. atlas] A reference to Martensen’s doctoral gown, which was of a satinlike fabric known as “atlas.” This expression is not merely one of implied moral disapprobation; see the ordinance of March 13, 1683, chap. 1, § 5, concerning dress of the clergy (and still in force in Kierkegaard’s time): “The bishop of Zealand and the chaplain to the king are to wear a black high-collared velvet gown, velvet cap and bonnet, while other bishops are to wear black silk gowns with velvet collars and also black velvet caps and bonnets. Doctors of theology are to wear velvet bonnets and collars with velvet gowns, together with silk cloaks.” satisfaction made for sin] Refers to the dogma that Christ made vicarious satisfaction for our sins; that as God’s own son, his voluntary suffering and death satisfied God’s judgmental wrath over human sin, thus vicariously substituting his own suffering for the punishment that the guilty would otherwise have suffered for their sins, thereby atoning for the insult to God’s justice. On this see Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 56,9), p. 254. Christ . . . forgive sins while he is alive?] See the following explanatory notes. In the story of the paralytic . . . Stand up . . . and walk] Refers to Mt 9:6, in the story of Jesus healing the paralytic at Mt 9:1–8 (→ 57,17); see also Mk 2:5, in the parallel version at Mk 2:1–12. ― the Son of Man: See Mt 9:6. This is the designation Jesus most frequently uses of himself in the Gospels. To the woman who sins . . . Her many sins are forgiven] A paraphrase of the first part of Lk

•

1850

7:47, from Lk 7:36–50 on the woman who was a sinner. In verse 48, Jesus says directly to the woman: “Your sins have been forgiven.” he even gives a reason . . . because she loved much] A paraphrase of the second part of Lk 7:47. To the woman taken in open adultery . . . Go and sin no more.] See Jn 8:11.

4

5

flesh and blood] → 21,2.

17

77

a popinjay ribbon at the popinjay shooting] Bird shooting, dating from the Middle Ages, was a common leisure activity for citizens of Copenhagen in the nineteenth century, the equivalent of the European sport of “popinjay.” A contest was held every summer, in which the goal was to shoot a wooden bird from its mount on a pole, and the victor was crowned “reigning bird king” until the following year’s contest. Communism cries out that ownership is theft] A notion memorably expressed as “la propriété c’est le vol” (French, “property is theft”) by the French publicist P. J. Proudhon in Qu’est-ce que la propriété? Ou recherches sur le principe du droit et du gourvernement [What Is Property, or Investigations of the Principle of Law and Government] (Paris, 1840). In the 1840s, people in Denmark knew of communism only from newspaper reports of political discussions in France and England; see, e.g., Ludvig Meyer, Fremmedord-Bog [Dictionary of Foreign Words], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1844 [1837]), p. 113: “Communist: an adherent of a political party in France or England of recent years, which preaches communal ownership of property.” In Denmark, the adjective “communistic” was generally used in a derogatory sense with respect to attempts to limits the rights of estate owners to the land that had been cultivated by copyholders. See, e.g., Fædrelandet, no. 1849, March 29, 1845, col. 14818, where it is stated, with respect to the question of whether copyholders ought to have ownership of the lands they cultivated, that “communism is the principle of equality carried to the point of absurdity, which develops in opposition to the principle of property carried to the point of absurdity.” See also the article “Hvad er Communisme?” [What Is Communism?] in

8

78

11

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 131–135 Almuevennen [The Friend of the Common People], nos. 41–42, May 28, 1845, pp. 165–168. 78

20

24 27

Luther’s definition] Allusion to Luther’s distinction between Christ as Exemplar and Christ as gift, in which greater importance is attributed to the latter. See “Dr. Morten Luther’s Fortale” [Dr. Martin Luther’s Prologue] in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16) , vol. 1, pp. xii–xiv: “For this is the foundation and the main part of the Gospel: that before you take hold of Christ as a pattern, you accept and confess him as a present and a gift, whom God has given you as your property . . . If in this way you have Christ as the foundation and the principal good of your salvation, then comes the second part: namely, that you also accept him as a pattern and sacrifice yourself in service to your neighbor, just as you see that he has sacrificed himself for you. Therefore, simply look at this! Christ, as a gift, nourishes your faith and makes you a Christian, but Christ, as Exemplar, performs your works. These [works] do not make you into a Christian, but they are done by you as soon as you have become a Christian. The difference between gift and Exemplar is the same as the difference between faith and works . . . This double good―gift and Exemplar―we have in Christ.” See NB15:32, from January 1850: “It is of course quite clear that it is Xt as Exemplar that must now be brought forward dialectically, precisely because the dialectical (Xt as gift) that Luther brought forward has been taken utterly in vain, so that ‘the imitator’ resembles the Exemplar in no way whatever but is absolutely heterogeneous and then simply slips in grace” (KJN 7, 23; see also NB20:148, from August 1850, in KJN 7, 477–478). All progress . . . a regress (which I have pointed out elsewhere)] See, e.g., NB21:67. Christ-lovers] See NB17:66, from April 1850, in KJN 7, 215 (and the associated explanatory notes), where Kierkegaard writes about the “distinction that I have thought ought to be made, the expression of reflection in Christianity, that (just as the wise were are at first called σοϕοι and thereafter ϕιλοσοϕοι) instead of using the name or the term Christian, we must concede that the task of being a Christian is now so great, and we are so

•

1850

585

imperfect, that we must be satisfied with the term lovers of Christ or something like that.” See also NB19:44, from June or July 1850, in KJN 7, 357– 368, and accompanying notes. Sibbern] Frederik Christian Sibbern (1785–1872), professor of philosophy at the University of Copenhagen 1813–1870; one of Kierkegaard’s teachers in the 1830s. the inserted lines in No. 1 of Practice in Christianity] → 71,25.

14

Bishop Mynster] → 10,22.

25

79

In his sermon on . . . “the good shepherd,” Luther] Refers to Luther’s gospel sermon for the second Sunday after Easter, on Jn 10:11–16 (where Jesus speaks of himself as “the good shepherd,” Jn 10:11), in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, pp. 294–302. He speaks . . . Χt taking to himself the contrite etc.] A reference to En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, p. 6, where Luther remarks of the prophet Ezekiel: “He speaks of the evil shepherds who are against Christ, saying (chap. 34): ‘Woe to Israel’s shepherds, who feed themselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fatlings; you do not feed the sheep. You have not strengthened the weak, you have not healed the sick, you have not bound up the injured, you have not brought back the strayed, you have not sought the lost, but you have ruled them with force and harshness. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd; and scattered, they became food for all the wild animals. My sheep were scattered, they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill; my sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth,’ etc. Thus does God punish the faithless shepherds. It is his earnest intention that the weak, the sick, the injured, the persecuted, and the lost be strengthened, healed, bound up, and dispersed no more. ‘You should have done this yourselves!’ he says to the shepherds, ‘but you did not, and so I will do it myself. I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak!’ Here you see how Christ in his Kingdom treats the weak, the sick, and the injured: he takes

29

79

79

15

31

586

80

1

7

17 19 29 33

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 135–139

them to himself, he helps them. This is surely an encouraging sermon.” in the same sermon . . . immediately on becoming Xn there is straightaway persecution . . . and inner anxiety] A reference to the following passage in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, pp. 300–301: “Not only does the world take offense at Christ’s kingdom―because it does not accord with the world’s wisdom, and its ways are not as ordered and regulated as the world opines that it should be if it is to deserve to be called the work and realm of God. On the contrary! Because it defies all reason and understanding, the world regards Christ’s gospel as pure folly or illusion, and so condemns and persecutes all those who adhere to it and who do not follow this judgment. Meanwhile, Christ hides himself from his Church, acting as though he had forgotten it, yes, abandoned and rejected it; for he allows it to sigh under the cross, under all the world’s cruelty, and lets its enemies mock it, rejoice and triumph . . . And what is more, his Christians are afflicted in their hearts with fear of their sin and of God’s wrath. They must suffer every misery, they must taste the bitterness of hell . . . Who, then, knows the sheep? . . . They are buried so deep in suffering, mockery, disgrace, death, offense, etc., that they are even hidden from one another! No one, no one, except for Christ.” that the suffering is so great and frightful . . . not being offended by Xt] A reference to the following passage in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, p. 301: “Behold, this is the true manner in which Christ knows us and is known by us. This is a high and glorious wisdom, but it is buried, buried deep from the world’s reason and senses, and only faith comprehends it, faith in Christ, which here must withstand struggle and conflict in order to preserve this knowledge and grow in it, lest it be led away from Christ by such powerful offense. It is for this reason that Christ himself says, at Mt 11:6: ‘Blessed is he, who is not offended in me!’” satisfaction has been given] → 76,24. flesh and blood] → 21,2. 1000 priests] → 7,12. no living to give away] → 13,27.

•

1850

make the admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26).

3

81

No. 339 of the evangelical hymnbook . . . God, to call you father . . . Of child’s rights has none] A citation from the first verse of the hymn “God, to Call You Father,” no. 339 in Evangeliskchristelig Psalmebog (→ 35,3). According to Den Danske Psalmedigtning [Danish Hymnody], ed. C. J. Brandt and L. Helweg, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1846–1847; ASKB 191–192), vol. 2, p. 226, where this hymn appears as no. 895, the author was Henrik Kampmann (1750–1828), Danish priest and hymnodist, a 1773 theology graduate who served from 1779 until his death as priest in Farum and Værløse on the island of Zealand. Kampmann published a collection of Psalmer [Hymns] in 1823, but by then had already had fifty-three hymns included in the Evangeliskchristelig Psalmebog. On this see Den Danske Psalmedigtning, vol. 2, pp. 224–228, 382–383. he is father only in the sense of the father of all] Presumably, an allusion to Eph 4:6.

18

81

This is found in the gospel . . . God will be just as severe with us as we are with others] Refers to the last verse in Jesus’ parable about the indebted servant, Mt 18:23–35, which is the gospel for the twenty-second Sunday after Trinity Sunday, which in 1850 fell on October 27. toward others] Variant: first written “toward him”.

33

81

5

82

today by Pastor Visby . . . on the unforgiving fellow servant . . . preach about enmity] According to Adresseavisen, no. 252 (October 26, 1850), Pastor Visby preached at high mass at 10 a.m. in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn on October 27, the twenty-second Sunday after Trinity Sunday. ― Carl Holger Visby: Danish theologian and priest (1801–1871); cand. theol. 1823; from 1826, priest at the city court house, the prison at the House of Punishment, Rasping, and Betterment in the Christianshavn district of Copenhagen, and at the military prisons in the Citadel of Copenhagen, to which in 1830 he added the post of curate at the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn until he became parish priest of

10

82

25

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 139–143

19

83

14 14

83

30 34

84

17 18

that church from 1844 to 1854. ― the unforgiving fellow servant: → 81,33. ― preach about enmity: Visby did not publish this sermon, though see his Homiletisk Tankemagazin som Vejledning til frugtbar Eftertanke over Kirkeaarets Evangelier og Hjælpemiddel ved Udarbeidelse af Prædikener over samme [Storehouse of Homiletic Ideas: A Guide to Fruitful Consideration of the Gospel Texts for the Church Year and for Assistance in Formulating Sermons on Those Texts] (Copenhagen, 1866; abbreviated hereafter as Homiletisk Tankemagazin), pp. 832–845, esp. pp. 841, 843, 844–845 on enmity. ― enmity: Variant: first written “friendship”. adduces . . . a trifle brings about the strongest passion . . . divides them] Visby does not mention this example in Homiletisk Tankemagazin (→ 82,10). God is spirit] An allusion to Jn 4:7–26, esp. vv. 23–24; see also 2 Cor 3:17–18. he takes no special pleasure . . . hymns . . . in the smell of sacrifice; but . . . has real need of him] Presumably, a mixture of references to Amos 5:21–24 and to Ps 51:16–17; see also 1 Sam 15:22, Prov 21:3, and Rom 12:1. Practice in Christianity] → 31,15. its author] The pseudonym Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6). fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. I who after all have so much of the poet . . . not . . . an extraordinarius . . . have always emphasized] See, e.g., the following passage from The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 7,5), pt. 2, chap. 3, “Governance’s Part in My Authorship”: “And now I, the author, in my judgment what relation do I have to the age? Am I perhaps ‘the apostle’? Abominable! I have never given occasion for that idea; I am a poor, lowly human being. Am I then the teacher, the one who does the upbringing? No, not that either. I am the one who has himself been brought up, or the one whose authorship describes what it means to be brought up to become a Christian; just as the upbringing and accordingly as the upbringing puts pressure on me, I in turn put pressure on the age, but teacher I am not―only a fellow-pupil” (PV, 78–79; SKS 16, 57–58). See also the follow-

•

1850

587

ing passage in the “Supplement” to The Point of View, no. 2, “A Word on the Relation of My Work as an Author to ‘the Single Individual’: “This is why the author does not call himself a ‘truth-witness’―no, oh no, far from it . . . But in addition he has also had too much imagination and much too much of the poet to dare to be called a truth-witness in the stricter sense” (PV, 119–120; SKS 16, 99–100). See also the unpublished essay “The Dialectical Relations: The Universal, the Single Individual, the Special Individual” (→ 94,6), where Kierkegaard defines “the true extraordinary” as one who “through his Godrelationship” collides with the established order; and see also his related remark in NB10:14, from February 1849: “No, I am certainly not ‘that kind of extraordinary.’ In part, because I have not collided with the established order, but [only] with the universally hum. (a hardship that often befalls a genius) and in part because I am a penitent; and finally, what is extraordinary about me could not be further from bringing about something new; so far from it, that it is just the opposite[:] I intend rather to maintain the established order” (KJN 5, 272). Kierkegaard expresses similar sentiments in NB10:34 and NB10:37, from the same time period, in KJN 5, 284 and 285–286. make people aware] → 12,42. Mynster] → 10,22. dying to the world] → 17,36. scourged themselves in the monastery] Refers to the ascetic practice of whipping oneself practiced during the Middle Ages by Christian monks, hermits, and especially by the so-called flagellants (13th and 14th centuries). Self-flagellation was regarded as a special form of penance, more effective than the Church’s ceremonies and sacraments. acosmism] The view that the world is mere appearance, that reality lies behind the world rather than in it. cosmism] A construction that suggests the opposite of acosmism, but presumably means mere worldliness. to have the world] i.e., to know one’s way about the world, to have experience of the world.

21 5 7 18

22

23

26

85

588 85

28

29

86

19

24

87

22

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 144–152

Bernard] St. Bernard (1090 or 1091–1153), French Cistercian monk, theologian, and mystic; from 1115, abbot of the monastery in Clairvaux; canonized in 1174. He left an extensive body of writings in addition to a great many letters and sermons. He said it beautifully: “Let us not forget that Martha and Mary . . . sisters” . . . in Neander’s Bernhard . . . p. 68] A citation from August Neander (→ 87,30), Der heilige Bernhard und sein Zeitalter. Ein historisches Gemälde [St. Bernard and His Times: A Historical Tableau] 2nd ed. (Hamburg and Gotha, 1848 [1813]; abbreviated hereafter as Der heilige Bernhard), p. 68. Bernard . . . to yearn for Xt . . . no need of his material presence] A reference to a passage in August Neander (→ 87,30), Der heilige Bernhard (→ 85,29), p. 56, excerpted below, in which Neander comments as follows on a prayerful remark by Bernard (→ 85,28): “ ‘How fair . . . you appear to me, my Lord Jesus, even in human form! Not only because of the divine miracle through which you appear, but also because of [your] truth, meekness, and righteousness. Blessed is the one who watches closely how you walk as a human being among human beings, and strives with all his might to imitate you!’―Bernard regards love of Christ that is based on his purely human element as a phase that the soul must rise beyond.” Quantæ tenebræ] This expression is used in Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg [Erasmus Montanus, or Erasmus Berg] (1731), act 3, sc. 5; see Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 24,30), vol. 5; the volumes are undated and unpaginated. Abelard] Pierre Abélard (1079–1142), French theologian, scholastic philosopher, monk, and abbot; in 1121, founded the Oratory of the Paraclete, a Benedictine monastery, in Champagne; in 1140– 1141, was accused of heresy by, among others, Bernard of Clairvaux (→ 85,28), and excommunicated by Pope Innocent II, but he was saved from the effects of this sentence by Peter the Venerable (1092–1156), who offered him sanctuary at the abbey of Cluny. Abelard was an accomplished dialectician and logician as well as theologian, but is best known today for his affair with Héloïse

•

1850

d’Argenteuil, to which Kierkegaard refers in “ ‘Guilty?’―‘Not Guilty?’ ” in Stages on Life’s Way (1845) (SLW, 407; SKS 6, 378, with the accompanying explanatory notes in SKS K6; see also JJ:180 in KJN 2, 183). In Neander’s biography of Bernard (. . . pp. 246 and 247 top of page) Abelard’s view of miracles . . . what prevails is a dead faith] Refers to August Neander (→ 87,30), Der heilige Bernhard (→ 85,29), pp. 246–247. Here Neander cannot help remarking . . . a dead faith clings most readily to miracles] Refers to the following passage in August Neander, Der heilige Bernhard (→ 85,29), p. 247: “We see here that Abelard is simply hunting for reasons to support his claims and undermine his opponents. Yet it is easily seen that the very miracles whose immediate function is to draw attention to a divine fact, and provoke to faith, are least of all fit to transform a dead faith into a living one; indeed, it is dead faith that clings most readily to a miracle.” ― Neander: Johann Wilhelm August Neander, born David Mendel Neander (1789–1850), German Protestant theologian; in 1806, converted from Judaism to Christianity; from 1812, professor of Church and dogma history at Heidelberg; from 1813, at Berlin. Neander understood Church history as a history of piety and sought to reveal Christian piety in its various historical forms.

23

30

it is your wisdom that governs] → 17m,6.

15

88

the rabble raged at that time . . . exposed myself to everything] Refers to Kierkegaard’s attack on the satirical weekly Corsaren, which led to his being mocked and abused in the street (→ 11,32). Goldschmidt] Meïr Aron Goldschmidt (1819– 1887), Danish Jewish journalist and publicist, author of works including En Jøde. Novelle [A Jew: Novella] (by the pseudonym Adolph Meyer, edited and published by M. Goldschmidt) (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1547). Goldschmidt founded Corsaren (→ 11,32) in October 1840 and was the journal’s actual editor until October 1846, when he sold it and embarked on a yearlong journey abroad; starting in December 1847, he was publisher and principal contributor to the monthly journal Nord og Syd [North and South].

24

89

26

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 152–160 30 35

90

1

90

7 12

13

28

91

1 3

I then publish a book] Refers to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,15). the public officials] That is, the clerics employed by the state. Martensen] → 56,17. Practice in Christianity] → 31,15. “The opposition” want to do away with government] The “government” in question was the socalled November Ministry (→ 68m,7). The opposition to the November Ministry consisted chiefly of the Venstre (“Left”) or Bondevennerne (“Friends of the Peasant”); the November Ministry was dissolved on July 13, 1851. Anti-Climacus] Refers to Anti-Climacus (→ 51,6) as the pseudonymous author of Practice in Christianity. concessions have to be made] “Concessions” [Indrømmelser] is the same word as is used for “admissions”; see the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). in fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. I did not understand things in the beginning as clearly as I do now] See On My Work as an Author (→ 33,30), where Kierkegaard writes, “This is how I understand it all now; in the beginning I could not foresee what indeed has also been my own development” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18).

7

91

14

Seneca says: It is not rlly courageous if courage does not grow with the danger] See NB17:100, from May 1850, KJN 7, 244, and the accompanying explanatory notes.

91

25

Give to God What Is God’s . . . even what belongs to Caesar] See Mt 22:21. God’s, . . . I obey Caesar.] Variant: changed from “God’s.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

92

11

1850

589

reading for the seventeenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), vol. 1, pp. 534–540, esp. pp. 538–540; in 1850, the seventeenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday fell on September 22. where he speaks of being a true Xn . . . poverty and persecution and the like] See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on Jn 10:11–16 (where Jesus describes himself as the good shepherd), the gospel for the second Sunday after Easter, in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, pp. 294–302, pp. 300–301 (→ 80,1); and see also Luther’s sermon on Jn 16:16–23, the gospel for the third Sunday after Easter, in En christelig Postille (→ 36,16), pt. 1, pp. 302–309, p. 305: “A Christian must suffer spiritual trial, anxiety, want, opposition, and affliction . . . the Christians must suffer many sorts of torment. Some suffer loss of their property, others damage to their reputation, some are drowned, others are burned, others decapitated. One perishes in one way, another in another, and whoever is a Christian must have misfortune and persecution, want and difficulties constantly upon his neck. It is the whip with which they are scourged, and they must not expect their lot to be better as long as they are here: this is the livery by which one recognizes Christ’s servants. Whoever wants to be among their number must not be ashamed to bear it.”

19

Bernard] → 85,28.

91

26

•

Where he wants to encourage children to obey . . . God makes a famous doctor out of a poor wretch . . . poor manservant, and the like] Presumably, a reference to Luther’s sermon on Lk 14:1–11 (Jesus’s healing of the man with dropsy and the parable of the great dinner), the gospel

the number of theology students has dropped off markedly] When Kierkegaard matriculated at the University of Copenhagen in 1830, there were 59 theology students signed up for the official examination; in 1840, the year he himself took the exam, there were 102 examinees. In 1845, the number had fallen back to 68, and in 1848 it fell further to 41. The number rose slightly in 1849, to 50, but fell back to 46 in 1850. In 1851, it fell again, to 33, and again in 1852, to 18; in 1853, the number was nearly unchanged, at 21. This indicates that the number of theology students did indeed drop off “markedly” over the course of the 1840s and 1850s. See Kjøbenhavns Universitets Aarbog for 1837 [University of Copenhagen Yearbook, 1837], ed. H. P. Selmer (Copenhagen, n.d.), p. 10; Kjøbenhavns Universitets Aarbog for 1845 [University of Copenhagen Yearbook, 1845],

2

93

590

4

8

93

18 19 33

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 160–162

ed. H. P. Selmer (Copenhagen, n.d.), p. 114; Supplement til Kjøbenhavns Universitets Aarbøger [Supplement to the University of Copenhagen Yearbooks], ed. H. P. Selmer, “No. 1, for 1848” (Copenhagen, 1848), p. 13; and Meddelelser angaaende Kjøbenhavns Universitet . . . for Aarene 1849– 1856 [Communications Regarding the University of Copenhagen . . . for the Years 1849–1856], ed. A.C.P. Linde (Copenhagen, 1860), p. 493. the old saying that studying theology is the surest way to bread] No such saying has been identified. For another reference, see NB15:35, from January 1850: “nowadays the word in Xndom is that if a man has a son who is not fit for anything else, let him become a theological graduate: after all, it is the safest way to a living, the real breadstudy” (KJN 7, 25). On priestly appointments as careers for theologians, see → 21,21. I see (in Theobald Thamer . . . p. 5) . . . “In den vorigen Zeiten . . . mit diesem Studium sich beschäftigen will ....”] An abbreviated quotation from Theobald Thamer, cited in August Neander (→ 87,30) Theobald Thamer, der Repräsentant und Vorgänger moderner Geistesrichtung in dem Reformationszeitalter. Eine historische Monographie [Theobald Thamer, Representative and Precursor of Modern Spiritual Developments in the Age of the Reformation: A Historical Monograph] (Berlin, 1842), p. 5. ― Theobald Thamer: German theologian and priest (1502–1569); studied theology at Wittenberg and became an eager pupil of Luther and Melanchthon; in 1540, became professor of Greek at Frankfurt an der Oder; in 1543, became professor of theology and priest in Marburg, where he first strongly defended, and then even more strongly opposed Lutheran teachings; priest in Frankfurt am Main from 1549 until his dismissal in 1553; converted to Catholicism during a visit to Rome, and served from 1555 to 1566 as a Catholic priest in Minden and Mainz; from 1566, professor of theology in Freiburg im Breisgau. Stilling] → 66,11. It has not been possible to confirm Stilling’s claim. Practice in Christianity] → 31,15. societal haggling.] Variant: first written “societal haggling and”, with the sentence apparently to continue.

•

1850

four-seater Holstein carriage] An open, upholstered horse-drawn carriage with four seats.

37

The Movement] This presumably refers to the reform and liberation movement that originated ca. 1830 with N.F.S. Grundtvig’s demand for freedom of religion within the Church and was further fueled in 1848 by the movement for political freedom and democratic government, culminating in the adoption of Danmarks Riges Grundlov [The Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark] on June 5, 1849. written in one of the three minor ethical-religious treatises by F. F. (which are in the tin box) . . . clears out all these false reformers] A reference to the following passage: “If Governance had meant to give the generation an extraordinary, it must accordingly be expected that perhaps first a forerunner, an officer, will be sent to clear the air in order to throw out all these false prophets to bring a little meaning and pith into the enervated and meaningless situation again” (BA, 151; Pap. VII 2 B 235, p. 42), in the unpublished essay “The Dialectical Relations: The Universal, the Single Individual, the Special Individual,” which Kierkegaard at one point intended to publish as no. 2 in A Cycle of Ethical-Religious Essays. This collection, which remained unpublished, was edited and arranged in the summer of 1848 but consisted of material that had been written in 1846–1847, namely, the following six essays: no. 1, “Something on What Could Be Called Premise Authors,” from the introduction to The Book on Adler (see Pap. VII 2 B 235, pp. 5–16, slightly reworked, and see also Pap. IX B 1, p. 297); the aforementioned no. 2, from chap. 1 of The Book on Adler (see Pap. VII 2 B 235, pp. 33–53, slightly reworked, and see also Pap. VIII 2 B 9,13–15, pp. 50–51, as well as IX B 2, pp. 298–299, and IX B 7–8, pp. 305–307); no. 3, “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” from 1847 (see Pap. VIII 2 B 136, p. 236, and VIII 2 B 138–139, pp. 238–239); no. 4, “A Revelation in the Situation of the Present Age,” from chap. 2 of The Book on Adler (see Pap. VII 2 B 235, pp. 74– 90, and for a slightly reworked version, see Pap. IX B 4, p. 300); no. 5, “A Psychological View of

2

6

94

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 162–163

18

23

94

30 31

Mag. Adler as a Phenomenon and as a Satire on Hegelian Philosophy and the Present Age,” from chap. 4 of The Book on Adler (see Pap. VII 2 B 235, pp. 176–230, and for a slightly reworked version, see Pap. VIII 2 B 7,12–18, pp. 32–43, VIII 2 B 8,1, p. 44, and VIII 2 B 9,12, p. 49, as well as IX B 5, pp. 301–305); and no. 6, “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle,” from chap. 3, § 2 of The Book on Adler (see Pap. VII 2 B 235, pp. 136–150, and for a slightly reworked and expanded version, see Pap. VIII 2 B 7,8–9, pp. 28–29, and VIII 2 B 9,16–18, pp. 51–53, as well as IX B 6, p. 305). Essays nos. 3 and 6 were published together on May 19, 1849, as Two EthicalReligious Discourses under the pseudonym H. H.; Kierkegaard had earlier decided to omit essay no. 5. On this, see NB10:38, from February or March 1849, in KJN 5, 286–287, and NB 11:8, dated May 4–5, 1849, in KJN 6, 8. ― in the tin box: Shortly after Kierkegaard’s death, his nephew Henrik Lund drew up an overview, “The Order of the Papers,” which explains where he found Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers, i.e., in which cabinet, in which drawer, etc., the various documents lay. From Lund’s document it is clear that the manuscript of “Three Ethical-Religious Essays” was found in a package in “the box in the desk,” and was registered as no. 140 (see Pap. X 6 B 57–62, pp. 61–64). ― reformers: → 94,2. establishment ought to have made the admission . . . before anyone on the outside reminded them of it] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 31,26). the leader of the Church] Evidently a reference to J. P. Mynster, who, qua bishop of Zealand, was primate of the Danish Church, i.e., primus unter pares (“first among equals”) with respect to the other Danish bishops, and thus could be regarded as the Church’s effective leader. Pascal] → 59,13. little treatise by Neander: über die . . . Bedeutung der pensees Pascals. Berlin, 1847] August Neander (→ 87,30), Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s für die Religionsphilosophie insbesondere. Ein zur Feier des Geburtstages Seiner Majestät des Königs in der öffent-

•

1850

591

lichen Sitzung der Akademie am 16. Oktober 1846 gehaltener Vortrag [On the Historical Significance of Pascal’s Pensées, Particularly for the Philosophy of Religion: A Lecture Presented to the Open Session of the Academy on October 16, 1846, in Celebration of the Birthday of His Majesty the King], 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1847 [1846]; abbreviated hereafter as Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s); the book has twenty-nine pages. it is in Athenaeum] The Athenaeum, a private library, was founded in 1824; in 1849, it was located at Østergade 68 (present-day Østergade 24), where members could read on weekdays between noon and 3:00 p.m. and between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Books could also be borrowed for reading at home; see “Bestemmelser angaaende Udlaanet fra Athenæums Bibliothek” [Rules Concerning Borrowing from the Athenæum Society’s Library], in Fortegnelse over Selskabet Athenæums Bogsamling, den 31. December 1846 [Catalogue of the Athenaeum Society’s Library, December 31, 1846] (Copenhagen, 1847), pp. iii–iv. Kierkegaard had been a member of the Athenaeum since at least 1845 (see LD, 176; B&A 1, 139) and owned the library’s catalogues for the years 1847–1851 (ASKB 985–986). The work by Neander is listed in Første Tillæg til Athenæums Hovedkatalog, den 31te December 1850 [First Supplement to the Athenaeum’s Main Catalogue, December 31, 1850] (Copenhagen, 1849), p. 479. not until just recently has Pascal’s Pensées . . . by Prosper Faugère, 1844 . . . la necessité de faire des apologies] On this, see August Neander (→ 87,30), Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s (→ 94,31), pp. 4–5. ― Prosper Faugère: Armand Prosper Faugère (1810–1887), French author and Pascal scholar, who published the two-volume edition Pensées, fragments et lettres de Blaise Pascal in 1844. ― Anton Arnold: Antoine Arnauld, ‘le Grand Arnauld’ (1612–1694), French Catholic theologian and priest; installed as priest in 1641; became a doctor of the Sorbonne in Paris in 1643, and thereafter a leading figure in Jansenism and opposition to Jesuitism. When Jansenism was declared heretical by the pope in 1655, he retreated to the monastery of Port-Royal des Champs (see below), where he met Pascal; fled in 1679 to Belgium and Holland, where he

32

34

592

95

5

8

J O U R N A L NB 21 : 163–164

continued his work as an author. Neander here refers to the second edition of Pascal’s Pensées, known as the “Edition de Port-Royal,” which appeared in 1670. (The first edition, now extremely rare, was published in 1669.) ― Port Royal: Originally a Cistercian nunnery founded in 1204 in Magny-les-Hameux, south of Versailles, PortRoyal was moved to Paris in 1625. The old cloister remained in use, however, leading to the use of two names: “Port-Royal de Paris” for the “city” cloister in Paris, and “Port-Royal des Champs” for the “country” cloister, i.e., the one in Magnyles-Hameux. Under the influence of Duvergier de Hauranne, abbot of Saint-Cyran, Port-Royal became the center of French Jansenism, a strongly Augustinian movement within the Catholic Church. Soon a circle of Jansenists, including both Blaise Pascal and Antoine Arnauld, gathered there to live quiet lives of asceticism in fellowship. In 1660, as persecution of Jansenists reached fever pitch across France, the school at Port-Royal was closed; and when both the nuns in the Paris cloister and the members of the community in the country cloister refused to endorse Pope Alexander VII’s condemnation of Jansenism, both cloisters were placed under interdict in 1664, and ultimately razed in 1710. Neander rightly shows that Pascal . . . established the practical as the highest] On this, see August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, pp. 15 and 23–24. Cousin regards Pascal as . . . “unbounded skepticism with convulsive piety.”] On this, see August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, p. 6. ― Cousin: Victor Cousin (1792–1867), French philosopher and pedagogue; from 1815–1820, and again from 1828, instructor at the École Normale in Paris; following the July Revolution of 1830, became professor of philosophy at the Sorbonne, where he lectured primarily on the history of philosophy and especially the works of the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel (→ 29,2) and F.W.J. Schelling; retreated from public life after the February Revolution in 1848 and devoted himself to wide-ranging philosophical and literary-historical research and writing. Kierkegaard owned a copy of Cousin’s

•

1850

Über französische und deutsche Philosophie [On French and German Philosophy] (Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1834; ASKB 471). N. rightly shows . . . a misunderstanding, that P. . . . “finds it equally ridiculous . . . in order to accept them.”] On this, see August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, pp. 20–21. Pascal says . . . [“]One must have . . . Pyrrhonist . . . and a Xn who has subjected himself to faith . . . it is merely weak.”] A citation from August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, p. 14. ― Pyrrhonist: A doubter or skeptic; the name is derived from the Greek philosopher Pyrrho of Elis (360–271 b.c.), who is regarded as the first skeptic. Pascal says that . . . the divine one must first love, then know] A paraphrase of August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, p. 26. What Pascal means is this . . . a transformation of personality; in order to know the div. one must become another pers.] See August Neander, Über die geschichtliche Bedeutung der Pensées Pascal’s, p. 26, where Neander writes: “The spirit that has become worldly must become unworldly through love in order to be able to see divine things with a connate sense.” in our time . . . bellowing about knowing and more knowing] Presumably, a reference to the speculative philosophers and theologians of Kierkegaard’s day, such as Ph. K. Marheineke and Hans Lassen Martensen (→ 56,17), who argued that a conceptual grasp of the divine was the key to a true understanding of Christianity― as opposed to sense of God based on feeling or historical testimony. speculator] A practitioner of speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology. Practice in Christianity] → 31,15. a living] → 21,21. those who appoint him just like that] Presumably, a reference to the bishops (→ 13,27).

11

17

25

28

31

41

2 11 13

96

Notes for JOURNAL NB22 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB22 595

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB22 605

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB22

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, and Finn Gredal Jensen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

595

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB22 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB22.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB22 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. An oval label marked “NB22.” and bearing the date “Novbr. 13th 1850.,” has been pasted to the front cover (see illustration 2). The journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand with occasional instances of his latin hand. Entry NB22:122 is written in a distinct latin hand. In a few entries, the main part of the text consists of Latin citations in a latin hand (NB22:9, 95, and 126). Kierkegaard also used his latin hand for French and Latin words and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. A table of contents has been written across nearly the entire width of the inner front cover of the journal. Two entries have headings that continue out into the marginal column (NB22:33, “An Either/Or concerning an Established Order” and NB22:56, “The Official Proclamation of Christianity.” This is also the case with the citations from foreign (i.e., non-Danish) languages in NB22:9, 68, and 134 as well as with text that has been added to NB22:98, and also with a heading in NB22:90. The lengthy marginal addition NB22:63.a runs across two pages. A portion of marginal addition NB22:91.a was written over the main text column (see illustration on p. 153). The last two lines of marginal addition NB22:138.a were written partially under the main text column. The concluding portion of marginal addition NB22:146.b continues under the main text column and extends across the entire page (see illustration on p. 180). Marginal addition NB22:146.c was begun in the main text column (see illustration on p. 181). Entry NB22:146.d.a, which is an addition to marginal addition NB22:146.d, was written in the margin above that entry (see illustration on p. 182). Marginal addition NB22:169.a also has a marginal addition, NB22:169.a.a. Most of the entry headings in the journal are completely or partially underlined. In the heading to NB22:7 the expression “The Voluntary” is double underlined, as is the word “shall” in NB22:115. Journal entries are usually separated from one another with a hash mark (#). When an entry began on a new page of Kierkegaard’s journal, he generally placed an extra hash mark at

596

J O U R N A L NB 22 the top of the new page. Entry NB22:8 is divided internally with two asterisks, which replace a hash mark that had been written first. At three points NB22:63 is divided internally by horizontal lines.

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB22 was begun on November 13, 1850, and it must have been concluded no later than January 22, 1851, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB23. Only three of the journal’s 173 entries bear indications of their date. Entry NB22:79 is dated “Today (the day after Christmas).” In NB22:83, Kierkegaard sets forth a sketch of a theme for a sermon “Suddenly, some Sunday, act as if today were New Year’s Day—which in a certain sense is of course true—in order to get a proper impression of the disappearance of time.” This entry presumably stems from the turn of the year 1850–1851. In NB22:157, Kierkegaard notes: “Mynster preached today about the beauty of the Christian life—and very beautifully.” The sermon in question was delivered on the second Sunday after Epiphany, which in 1851 fell on January 19.1 Some entries in the journal contain references that make possible an approximate dating. Entry NB22:63 contains Kierkegaard’s lengthy review of Mathilde Fibiger’s epistolary novel Clara Raphael. Tolv Breve [Clara Raphael: Twelve Letters]. The book was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 297, December 18, 1850, as having been published, but according to a receipt dated December 31, 1850, from the bookseller C. A. Reitzel, Kierkegaard had already acquired it on December 15, 1850, which, however, was a Sunday.2 Entry NB22:64 begins: “Guizot says: The only policy for the state is indifference toward all religion.” This is a reference

) See Adresseavisen, no. 15, January 18, 1851.

1

) See receipt for books, dated December 31, 1850 (KA, D, packet 7, layer 6) reproduced in H. P. Rohde, “Søren Kierkegaard som Bogsamler. Studier i hans efterladte papirer og bøger paa Det kongelige Bibliotek” [Søren Kierkegaard as a Collector of Books: Studies in His Posthumous Papers and Books at the Royal Library], Fund og Forsking [Discovery and Research], vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), pp. 79–127, p. 122.

2

Critical Account of the Text

2. Outside front cover of Journal NB22.

597

598

J O U R N A L NB 22 to the French historian and politician François Guizot (1787–1874), whose pointed remarks were reported in Berlingske Tidende, no. 294, December 16, 1850. Entry NB22:85 contains Kierkegaard’s critical remarks concerning Rasmus Nielsen’s Dr. H. Martensens Dogmatiske Oplysninger belyste [Dr. H. Martensen’s Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated], which was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 305, December 28, 1850, as having been published. According to a receipt dated December 31, 1850, from book dealer C. A. Reitzel, Kierkegaard had already acquired the volume on December 25, 1850, and he subsequently received a dedicated copy from the author.1 Entry NB22:145 bears the heading “An Ecclesiastical Theater Review in Berlingske Tidende, January 17, 1851” and contains Kierkegaard’s reaction to the article in question, presumably written immediately after its publication.2

III. Contents A recurrent them in Journal NB22 is the eloquence with which the priest not only impresses his congregation, but also distances himself from the existential requirements posed by Christianity. Under the heading “The Medium of Imagination—Actuality,” Kierkegaard illustrates his point by referring to a well-known optical illusion: Pick up a stick. When you hold it in your hand it is straight. Throw it in the water and it looks broken. Then you can pick it up again and say, “My God, it is really straight”—indeed, but if you throw it into water again, it looks broken. This is how rhetoricians, etc., present Christianity. They remove it from the medium of actuality (they do not express it existentially), and therefore Christianity looks completely different from what it is in truth—but put it existentially into actuality and you will see that it looks completely different, that exaltation becomes abasement, etc. (NB22:6)

)

1

See receipt for books, dated December 31, 1850 (KA, D, packet 7, layer 6) and H. P. Rohde, “Søren Kierkegaard som Bogsamler. Studier i hans efterladte papirer og bøger paa Det kongelige Bibliotek,” pp. 86 and 122.

) Berlingske Tidende, no. 14, January 17, 1851.

2

Critical Account of the Text

Kierkegaard gives a number of examples of such “fraudulent oratory,” which is marked by its capacity to carry away the speaker so that he forgets to include himself in what he is preaching about and is thus able to induce his listeners to believe that “the believer finds joy in suffering contempt, takes pleasure in poverty, and the like” (NB22:62). Kierkegaard shifts focus deftly from the situation in early Christianity to the modern era, “Christendom,” in order to point out how genuine pathos and radical existence have been replaced by bourgeois, self-indulgent hypocrisy: “In original Xnty the rule was that your life must serve as the guarantee of what you say. The modern version is that by expressing the exact opposite of what you depict so delightfully and grippingly, your life must serve as the guarantee that the whole business is silliness, theatrical enjoyment—then the congregation says: By God, that was a lovely sermon” (NB22:98; see NB22:169). When he considers present-day preachers, the true Sophists of modern times, Kierkegaard puts forward the psychological observation that the reason they prefer a church that is “packed absolutely full” is that, were they to preach to “an empty house” they would be able to sense that their message also concerned themselves, personally, which would make them “anxious and afraid for themselves” (NB22:76). According to Kierkegaard, a similar timorousness underlies the abolition of the rite of confession, which disappeared from religious life as a result of a conspiracy between congregation and priest: The congregation became afraid to go to confession: the confessional box brought the matter too close to a person. The priests became afraid to hear confessions: the matter became too earnest. And the whole of the proclamation of Xnty became oratory, eloquence, which, it is very true, omitted what was decisively Christian: the application, the individual. (NB22:81) Kierkegaard involves himself in the tension between the merely poetic rendering of actuality and the existential actualization of the Christian requirements. He admits that he, too, is a poet, that he, as much as anyone, is a master of religious rhetoric, but he is a poet of a special sort: “I am a poet. But I was long ago destined for religious individuality, long before I became a poet. And the event through which I became a poet was indeed an ethical breach or a teleological suspension of the ethical” (NB22:164). Kierkegaard was also compelled to carry out another sort of sus-

599

600

J O U R N A L NB 22 pension in order to keep in check the leniency of his own nature. Thus, we can read the following under the heading “Leniency”: I believe I daresay of myself that I certainly have at my disposal a passion for proclaiming the leniency of Xnty such as is possessed by none of those who proclaim it among us— though of course this gift can be taken from me at any time. This is something that might be noticed by a psychologist of the more profound sort, for it is precisely the anxiety with which I present what is frightful that shows that I am fearful of the opposite sort of powers that have been entrusted to me, fearing that I might truly come to beguile people. Leniency is so characteristic of me that it is almost as though I cannot express it. To me, it seems as though if it were truly to break forth, I would expire in it, preaching peop. into a security that could almost become giddiness or sheer unconcern.” (NB22:94) And in fact one does not find many traces of leniency in Kierkegaard’s journal. In the name of honesty he brings to bear a hermeneutics of suspicion that lays bare the sophistical self-deceptions and illusions with which people try to maintain the notion of a deeper meaning behind the bourgeois worldview. Kierkegaard focuses his critique especially on the naïveté that philosophers and theologians reveal when they continually presuppose that human beings have a deep-felt desire to know the truth: “No, every hum. being is more or less afraid of the truth; and this is human because the truth has to do with being ‘spirit’—and that is especially difficult for flesh and blood and carnal desires. Dying away lies between hum. beings and the truth—look, this is why all of us are more or less scared” (NB22:4). The representatives of the Church should therefore replace their conjuring tricks and theatrical gestures with a much more matter-of-fact admission of the degree to which they fall short of the ideal. In the absence of an honesty of this sort, hypocrisy is in fact granted the best possible terms: “The universal requirement is simply to admit before God that you are a hum. being with various desires and wishes, who is working in a permissible way to achieve those things, leaving it up to Governance to decide whether or not one is to attain them, because fulfillment is of course at all times in the power of Governance” (NB22:7). Kierkegaard’s critique of Christianity’s self-satisfied administrators is not founded only on theological or psychological considerations—it also has its source in those who are on the fringes and at the bottom of society, who are less gifted in the

Critical Account of the Text pecuniary or intellectual sense, whom the institutions of learning have not yet succeeded in corrupting: “Therefore I have always insisted that Xnty is properly for poor people, who perhaps work and slave all day and can scarcely earn their daily subsistence. The better off one is, the more difficult it is to become a Xn, for reflection can so easily take the wrong direction” (NB22:92). In more than a few of the journal’s entries, Kierkegaard documents that theology, too, can take a wrong turn: he makes “the Law,” “the Exemplar,” and “imitation” subjects of theological-historical retrospection in order to emphasize imitation and to draw a line between imitation and “meritoriousness” (NB22:25): As Exemplar, Christ is still part of the proclamation of the Law; Xt’s own life as Exemplar was indeed the very fulfillment of the Law. And precisely by fulfilling the Law he ransomed us from the Law unto grace. But then imitation shows up again, not as Law, but by grace and through grace. (NB22:5; see NB22:51–53, 99, 115) If this is not insisted on, “we have returned to being under the Law” and thus under the unfreedom and the endless self-accusations that Luther fought against with all his might. All “forcibly extracted imitation” is merely “distorted mimicry,” and is therefore “something that Xt opposed” (NB22:144). In considering a sermon by Luther, Kierkegaard concludes, “Grace is what is serious—my works are merely a jest—and then I go to it, the more vigorously, the better—but to me it is nonetheless a jest, and it must not mean anything more to me than that” (NB22:57). Even though all imitation emerges from thankfulness, imitation is in itself a decisive corrective of the evangelical irresponsibility with which people make themselves comfortable in Christendom: “The entire art of Xndom is constantly directed at abolishing ‘imitation’ ” (NB22:151). Inasmuch as the modern “proclamation of Christianity” only “comes to Xnty,” but never earnestly pushes “into Xnty” (NB22:56), the unavoidable consequence is that Christianity ends in “total conformity with ordinary worldly comings and goings” (NB22:82). And the consequence of such “conformity” becomes “ ‘Xndom,’ where all are Xns” (NB22:48), which, viewed from another perspective means that “Christianity Simply Does Not Exist” (NB22:42). Or, to put it briefly, in absolute and parodic form: “. . . One became a Xn—without Xnty” (NB22:111). In this journal, Kierkegaard reads, comments on, and quotes from Herman Reuchlin’s Geschichte von Port-Royal [History of

601

602

J O U R N A L NB 22 Port-Royal] (NB22:9–12, 14, 32) and from Pascals Leben [Life of Pascal] (NB22:18–22, 26–29, 31, 35). Kierkegaard also reads the German priest and poet Christian Scriver (NB22:58), who inspires him to sketch the structure of “4 Sermons” (NB22:90). A. F. Thiele’s Die jüdischen Gauner in Deutschland [The Jewish Tricksters in Germany] (NB22:102) is also a part of Kierkegaard’s reading, as is Eugène François Vidocq’s Wahre Pariser Geheimnisse [True Secrets of Paris] (NB22:105–106). A leading place is also occupied by Johan Wilhelm August Neander’s Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche, besonders des Orients, in dessen Zeitalter [St. John Chrysostom and the Church, Particularly the Eastern Church, of His Day], from which Kierkegaard cites frequently toward the end of the journal, often nodding in agreement (NB22:123, 127, 129–130, 133, 136–139, 142, 170, 172). But Kierkegaard also finds time for his own works. Thus he comments on the nature of indirect communication as represented by Anti-Climacus (NB22:13; see NB22:14), on the relation of indirect communication to Kierkegaard’s own person (NB22:16), as well as the Concluding Unscientific Postscript’s account of the character of the pseudonymous authorship (NB22:17). The supposed inconsistency in the first of the Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays pointed out by Kierkegaard’s brother Peter Christian Kierkegaard is also subjected to analysis—and dismissed (NB22:24). Finally, Kierkegaard reflects on the publication of Practice in Christianity, a work that could be accused of placing burdens on a clergy that was already under some pressure (NB22:46), while Kierkegaard himself was unable to live up to the book’s demands—a circumstance that could perhaps provide the occasion for additional criticism (NB22:88). The achievements of others—and especially the absence of same—receive comment in the journal. Thus there are some hard blows directed at Peter Christian Kierkegaard, who is capable only of “[m]essing about with matters of no significance” and of producing “sloppy work,” doing so “in the name of heartiness and conviviality” (NB22:36; see NB22:107). And Kierkegaard provides a psychologically controversial portrait of Grundtvig and his disciples: Every nature has a need for its opposite, produces it itself, and thus often imagines that it is itself this opposite. With G., then, a powerful nature, strength, toughness, perseverance, and the like, are characteristic of him. That is precisely why he loves to talk so much about heartiness and the like: it is a necessary emanation.

Critical Account of the Text Now this is the aspect imitated by the Grundtvigians, who become real slobberers. (NB22:37) Kierkegaard’s journal includes some acerbic, half-sarcastic remarks concerning the feminist writer Mathilde Fibiger, whose novel Clara Raphael. Tolv Breve is made the subject of a lengthy “review.” Among the things at which Kierkegaard pokes fun is her unbecoming pursuit of “originality,” and he also aims a blow at J. L. Heiberg, who had taken upon himself the project of publishing the book and of providing it with a preface. Brimming over with disapproval, Kierkegaard concludes: “If no one else is willing to take it upon himself to defend against this intrusion of aesthetic pandering into the religious sphere, at least I will not have remained silent” (NB22:63; see NB22:160). In Journal NB22, Kierkegaard’s ongoing personal saga concerning Rasmus Nielsen is provided with a couple of new episodes. Nielsen has demonstrated, more than sufficiently, “how little concept he has of truth and of service to the idea”; Nielsen has regarded Kierkegaard as “a sort of professor” with new ideas he wanted to appropriate, and “he simply did not see that what was characteristic of me was precisely the life with which I have served these ideas, the sacrifices I have made, etc.” (NB22:66). Not the least among these problems was Nielsen’s latest book, Dr. H. Martensens Dogmatiske Oplysninger belyste [Dr. H. Martensen’s Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated], which Kierkegaard found to be depressing reading because he could see clearly that the private conversations he had had with Nielsen were now in print. Nielsen, “[b]y virtue of his conversations with me . . . has been enriched with a literary production that will support him for a long time . . . Now he is in fact obligated to acknowledge what he uses from my published writings because the outside world has its eye on him . . . but of course no one other than myself can monitor his use of the other material—and to do that would be far beneath my dignity” (NB22:85). Toward the end of the journal there is a longer entry, “On ‘Her.’,” in which Kierkegaard takes a retrospective look at the epistolary rapprochement he attempted in connection with Regine after her father’s death. Because his letter was returned unopened, Kierkegaard speculated that perhaps “Schlegel has not told her about it,” but at the same time he is happy that the onetime engaged couple can continue to encounter one another. “We see each other more frequently,” Kierkegaard notes. He would very much like to talk with Regine, explain himself, but he does not dare do so: “Perhaps, however, she has more or less put me out of

603

604

J O U R N A L NB 22 her thoughts—and by speaking with her I could perhaps disturb everything. Perhaps even the entire marriage is a mask, and she is attached to me even more passionately than before. In that case, everything would be lost. I know very well what she can do once she gets hold of me” (NB22:146).

Explanatory Notes 99

1

NB22. . . . 1850.] Variant: Label on the outside front cover of the book.

100

1

Anti-Climacus is not . . . p. 266.] Variant: Label on the inside front cover of the book. ― AntiClimacus is not indirect communication . . . p. 21: See NB22:13. ― On Indirect Communication and Myself . . . p. 25: See NB22:16. ― On a Statement in the Postscript to “The Accounting” concerning My Direct Communication . . . p. 26: See NB22:17. ― About the 1st Essay in H. H.’s Two Essays . . . p. 35: See NB22:24. ― An Either/Or in Relation to an Established Order . . . p. 45: See NB22:33. ― Contemporaneity with Xt and Being a Disciple . . . p. 54: See NB22:39. ― On Myself . . . p. 83: See NB22:54. ― Practice in Christianity―and Me . . . p. 143: See NB22:88. ― The Times and My Task . . . p. 266: See NB22:173.

101

1

2

texts for Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion, services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held at 9:00 a.m. on Fridays in Vor Frue Kirke [The Church of Our Lady] in Copenhagen; in addition to a discourse in connection with confession → 142,25, a short sermon was also delivered between confession and communion. Kierkegaard had preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady, on June 18, 1847, on the text Mt 11:28; on August 27, 1847, on the text Jn 10:27; and on September 1, 1848, on the text Jn 12:32. Two of the sermons were published as the second and third discourses in the fourth part of Christian Discourses under the title “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: Christian Discourses” (CD, 262–274; SKS 10, 277–292), and another in the first exposition in part III of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). see the blank page at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347.

Theme for a Friday discourse Journal NB17 p. 30] See NB17:24 in KJN 7, 183. ― Friday discourse: → 101,1.

3

the youth who wanted to tear off the veil concealing the divine] Presumably, an allusion to the ballad “Das verschleierte Bild zu Sais” [The Veiled Image of Sais] (1795), by the German poet Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805), concerning a youth who, driven by a thirst for wisdom, visited a priest in Sais in Egypt. When he saw a gigantic, veiled image of a god, the youth asked what the veil concealed and received the reply: the truth. But the priest also told him that the oracle from the gods stated that no mortal was to tear off the veil before the god itself removed it, and that anyone who lifted the veil with uninitiated, unclean hands would see the truth. Driven by his desire for truth, the youth entered the temple at midnight and allowed himself to be tempted to tear off the veil. The youth never told anyone what he had seen and experienced, but he had lost all joy in life. And if anyone asked him, he answered with an admonition that the person who comes to the truth by way of guilt will never again take joy in the truth. See Schillers sämmtliche Werke [Complete Works of Schiller], 12 vols. (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 1804–1815), vol. 1, pp. 335–338. flesh and blood] An idiomatic designation of human beings as mortals; occurs six times in the NT: see, e.g., Mt 16:17, Gal 1:16, and Eph 6:12. See also 1 Cor 15:50, where Paul writes, “What I am saying, brothers and sisters, is this: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” Dying away] One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ we have died to sin. See, e.g., Rom 6:2; see also 1 Pet 2:24 and Col 2:20. In certain strands of mysticism and pietism these ideas were intensified, so that human life was regarded as a daily dying-away, in self-denial, from sin, from temporality, from finitude, and from the

2

8

9

103

606

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 4–8

world; thus the burden was shifted from a person dying to sin through Christ to include a person dying to sin through faith. 103

14

15 16

16 18

When Christ finally sends out his apostles, he says: [“]Go forth and teach all nations, baptizing them . . .[”]] See Mt 28:18–20. ― finally: Variant: added. and he who believes] Refers to Mk 16:15–18. imitates me;] Variant: first written “imitates me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. here the great emphasis is on grace.] Variant: added. As Exemplar, Christ is still part of the proclamation of the Law . . . ransomed us from the Law unto grace] Cf. NB15:114, from February 1850: “As Exemplar, Xt remains a form of the Law, indeed of the intensified Law, which is why Xt’s sufferings are also the sternest judgment upon the world and the human race, for there was not one single one who would persevere with him . . . To be contemporary with Xt is absolutely the most rigorous possible examination; if this remained the standard, then the Jews were under a more lenient judgment when they were under the Law. But then Xt dies―and his death is the atonement: here is grace” (KJN 7, 78). See also later in the same entry: “As long as Xt is visibly present as the Exemplar he cannot prevent this becoming a judgment. His life thus has a double aspect: he is the Exemplar―then he dies; and now he transforms himself, he becomes ‘grace’ eternally, also in relation to our imperfect efforts to resemble ‘the Exemplar,’ ” (KJN 7, 79). See also NB14:7 from November 1849: “What is written in Galatians 2―through the Law I have died to the Law―corresponds precisely to the way in which I usually present the relationship to ‘the Exemplar’: ‘the Exemplar’ is to be presented as the requirement, and then it crushes you. Then ‘the Exemplar,’ who is of course Xt, transforms himself into something else, into grace and mercy, and he is precisely the one who reaches out for you in order to support you. But in this way you have of course died to the Exemplar through the Exemplar” (KJN 6, 350). ― fulfillment of the

•

1850

Law: See Rom 10:4; see also Rom 8:1–4. ― ransomed us from the Law: See Gal 3:13–14. exaltation becomes abasement] Allusion to Mt 23:12; see also Lk 18:14, which constitutes the conclusion of Jesus’ parable concerning the tax collector and the sinner, vv. 9–14.

2

104

those who wanted to be disciples . . . the one who wanted to bury his father first, etc.] Refers to Mt 19:16–22 and Lk 9:59–60; see also Lk 14:25– 27. When Xt says: [“]Everyone who has abandoned his father . . . will receive tenfold] Refers to Mt 19:29. Governance] See, e.g., chap. 2, “Om Guds Gjerninger” [On God’s Works] sec. 2, “Hvad Skriften lærer om Guds Forsyn og de skabte Tings Opholdelse” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Providence and the Sustaining of Creation], § 3: “God, who is the world’s Lord and Ruler, governs with wisdom and goodness, no matter what happens in the world, so that both good and evil obtain the result that he finds most beneficial”; and § 5: “What we encounter in life, whether it be sorrowful or joyful, is apportioned to us by God with the best of aims, so that we always have cause to be pleased with his governance and rule,” in N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangeliskchristelige Religion indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [A Primer for the Evangelical Christian Religion, Prepared for Use in Danish Schools] (Copenhagen, 1791; ASKB 183 is an edition from 1824; abbreviated hereafter as Balle’s Lærebog), pp. 23, 24–25.

20

104

Freedom of Conscience, Freedom of Belief, and the Like] → 107,9. parties and the like.] Variant: Changed from “parties.” a great outcry for freedom of conscience, freedom of religion] → 107,9. ― freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, etc.: Variant: “etc.” added. That is not how] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. when a berserker felt a power . . . bring shields and, if possible, immobilize him] No source for

7

26 35

105

34 33

41 41

106

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 8–9

107

2

this has been identified, but see J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte indtil Frode 7 Tider [The Superstitions, Gods, Fables and Heroes of the Nordic Peoples up to the Times of Frode VII] (Copenhagen, 1800; ASKB 1947), pp. 53–54: “Berserker: Nordic name for a type of warrior who was clad in animal skins and performed deeds of violence . . . Their most prominent feature was a furious bravery. They feared neither death nor dangers. When their courage was aroused and no enemy was at hand, they became as if mad, pounded on their shields, screamed, hacked the earth, and, on some occasions certainly attacked innocent people. Kings, especially those who were mighty, usually kept a number of them at court for personal protection and to have them available for battle. In only a few cases are they known to have violated their loyalty.” heroes of faith . . . yearned for imprisonment, chains, the stake] Refers to those during the first centuries a.d. who were persecuted because of their Christian faith. Many were imprisoned; others suffered martyrdom by being burned at the stake, decapitation, or being thrown to wild animals. See, e.g., the account in Kirkens Historie gjennem de tre første Aarhundreder af Eusebius [Eusebius’ History of the Church during the First Three Centuries], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB U 37), pp. 204–223, 248–273, 329–340, 383–397, 434–436, 492–516, 541–542, 565. Eusebius relates that Bishop Ignatius (Theophorus) of Antioch, who was devoured by lions in the Roman Colosseum, “wrote to the Roman community, beseeching them not to request mercy for him and thereby rob him of the hope of the crown of martyrdom, which he sought with longing” (p. 169). Chapter 3 of “Den Smyrnensiske Menigheds Beretning om Biskop Polykarps Martyrdød” [The Report of the Smyrna Congregation on the Martyrdom of Bishop Polycarp], tells of Germanicus, who was martyred by being thrown to wild animals: “He teased the bloodthirsty animals and initiated the attack himself out of a longing to escape the company of these spineless people, the sooner the better.” According to chapter 14, Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who was burned alive in the stadium there, uttered the

•

1850

607

following prayer to God directly from the pyre: “May I be received among [the company of your martyrs] today and reach you as a pleasing and well-appointed sacrifice!” See Aposteldiscipelen den Smyrnensiske Biskop Polykarps Brev til Philippenserne samt Beretningen om hans Martyrdød [The Letter of Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna and Disciple of the Apostle, to the Philippians, Together with the Report of His Martyrdom], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen 1836; ASKB 141), pp. 21, 28. Nowadays, people want the state . . . to grant . . . freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and the like] Refers to the circumstance that in October 1850, Judge N. M. Spandet, a member of the Rigsdag, the newly established Danish parliament, and a supporter of the Venstre (“Left”) or Friends of the Peasant group in the parliament, put forth a proposal for a law concerning freedom of religion that would introduce civil marriage and abolish compulsory baptism and confirmation. The proposed law, which ignited furious debate, was initially discussed in the Folketing, the lower house of parliament, on October 28 and had its first reading before parliament on November 14–16 (→ 142,4). * *] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. From Anton Arnauld’s speech . . . O utinam arguerem sic . . . bona causa mea est? Reuchlin, Geschichte Port-Royal, 1st vol., p. 94] Cited from bk. 2, chap. 2, “Geschichte des Ordens in Frankreich, seine Bedrückung durch den Gallicanismus. Philippica Anton Arnaulds des älteren” [History of the Order in France, Its Oppression by Gallicanism, Philippica Anton Arnauld, the elder], in H. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal. Der Kampf des reformirten und des jesuitischen Katholicismus unter Louis XIII und XIV [History of Port-Royal: The Battle between Reformed and Jesuit Catholicism under Louis XIII and Louis XIV], vol. 1 (Up to the Death of Angelica Arnauld, 1661) and vol. 2 (From the Death of the Reformer Maria Angelica Arnauld in 1661 to the Destruction of the Monastery in 1713) (Hamburg, 1839–1844; abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte von Port-Royal); vol. 1, p. 94. ― Anton Arnauld: Antoine Arnauld, “le Grand Arnauld” (1612–

9

20

2

108

608

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 9–10

1694), French Catholic theologian and priest; installed as priest in 1641; became a doctor of the Sorbonne in Paris in 1643, and thereafter a leading figure in Jansenism (see below) and a sworn opponent of Jesuitism. Because he had attacked the Jesuits’ moral views and their conception of the eucharist, and Jansenism had been declared heretical by the pope, in 1655 he retreated to the monastery of Port-Royal des Champs (see below), where he met Blaise Pascal (→ 109,18); fled in 1679 to Belgium and Holland, where he continued his work as an author. ― the Jesuits: Member of the Roman Catholic order of monks founded in 1534 by the Spanish Basque Ignatius Loyola and approved by Pope Paul III in 1540. The Jesuit order was founded in reaction to the Reformation and sought both to win believers back to the Roman Catholic Church and generally to preserve the pope’s authority over the Church. Jesuits often used heavy-handed methods, such as force, intrigue, or slander to compel Christians to submit to the Church. ― O utinam arguerem . . . quare tam bona causa mea est?: Cited from the Roman poet Ovid’s Amores [Love Poems], bk. 2, poem 5, lines 7–8; see Ovid, Heroides and Amores, trans. Grant Showerman, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1914), p. 395. ― Reuchlin: Hermann Reuchlin (1810– 1873), German theologian and historian; studied the history of Jansenism during a stay in Paris in 1835–1836; from 1842 to 1857, priest in Pfrondorf near Tübingen. ― Port-Royal: Originally a Cistercian cloister founded in 1204 in Magnyles-Hameux, south of Versailles. In 1625, Abbess Angélique Arnauld (→ 108,8) moved Port-Royal to Paris. The old cloister remained in use, however, leading to the use of two names: “PortRoyal de Paris” for the “city” cloister in Paris, and “Port-Royal des Champs” for the “country” cloister, i.e., the one in Magny-les-Hameux. In 1637, under the influence of the Jesuit-educated theologians Duvergier de Hauranne, abbot of Saint-Cyran, and Cornelius Jansen, the rural cloister, whose residents were highly educated laymen living in fellowship in quiet asceticism, established a school as a counterweight to the pedagogical methods of the Jesuits. In time, this

•

1850

evolved into the principal center of Jansenism, a movement within the Catholic Church based on a strongly Augustinian theology and a radical version of the doctrine of grace. The movement favored a thoroughgoing democratization of the ecclesiastical hierarchy and was subjected to severe attack by the Jesuits. This was the fellowship that attracted both Blaise Pascal and Antoine Arnauld. In 1653, Jansenism was condemned as heresy by Pope Innocent X, which led to increasing persecutions that also affected Port-Royal. In 1660, as persecution of Jansenists reached fever pitch across France, the school at Port-Royal was closed; and when both the nuns in the Paris cloister and the members of the community in the country cloister refused to endorse Pope Alexander VII’s condemnation of Jansenism, both cloisters were placed under interdict in 1664, and ultimately razed in 1710. A line by Franz v. Sales . . . um vollkommen zu sein . . . besonders gut thun. Reuchlin . . . 1st vol., p. 270] Cited from bk. 4, chap. 4 of H. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal (→ 108,2), vol. 1, p. 270. ― Franz v. Sales: St. Francis of Sales (1567–1622), Roman Catholic theologian and bishop; educated at the Jesuit college in Paris; ordained a priest in 1591; attached to the cathedral chapter of Geneva, then in exile in Annecy, and assigned the task of winning the Calvinist population of Chablais back to the Church of Rome; from 1602, bishop. In 1604, he came under the influence of the ascetic and mystic Jane Frances de Chantal with whom in 1610 he founded the order of nuns called the Congregation of the Visitation (also known as the Salesians), a nursing and teaching order. Starting in 1619, he was connected to Port-Royal (→ 108,2). His mystical and ascetic writings were very widely read by Catholic Christians. He was declared a saint in 1665 and a teacher of the church in 1877. ― Angelica Arnauld: Jacqueline-Marie-Angélique Arnauld (1591–1661), sister of Antoine Arnauld (→ 108,2), Cistercian nun, abbess; resident in the Cistercian cloister of Port-Royal from 1599; after her confirmation as a nun in 1600, she changed her name to Angélique (or Angelica), and in 1602

8

108

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 10–14 became abbess of Port-Royal, where she lived a strictly ascetic life. In 1619, she became closely connected to Francis of Sales, whom she chose as her spiritual adviser, and came under the influence of the mysticism of Jane Frances de Chantal. In 1635, she chose as her confessor Duvergier de Hauranne, abbot of Saint-Cyran, and through him she became an adherent of Jansenism (→ 108,2). 108

109

23

1

2

109

7

When Dr. A. Arnauld wrote against frequent partaking of communion . . . people cried . . . leading people away from religion] Refers to bk. 7, chap. 1, “Dr. Arnauld gegen das häufige Communiciren. Wesen und Wirksamkeit des Einsiedlervereins von Port-Royal” [Dr. Arnauld against Frequent Communion: The Character and the Activities of the Society of Hermits of Port-Royal], in H. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal (→ 108,2), vol. 1, pp. 521–589; esp. pp. 524–539. On p. 524, Reuchlin introduces Antoine Arnauld’s (→ 108,2) work, De la fréquente communion, où les sentiments des pères, des papes et des conciles, touchant l’usage des sacremens de pénitence et d’eucharistie sont fidellement exposés, pour servir d’adresse aux personnes qui pensent serieusement à se convertir à Dieu et aux pasteurs et confesseurs zéléz pour le bien des ames [On Frequent Communion, or the Views of the Fathers, the Popes, and the Councils Concerning the Use of the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, Faithfully Presented for the Assistance of Those Seriously Thinking of Converting to God and of Pastors and Confessors Zealous in Behalf of the Well-Being of Souls]. my pseudonym] i.e., Anti-Climacus as the pseudonymous author of Practice in Christianity; see the next note. what the bishops . . . praise . . . “he encourages great things without disparaging the lesser.”] Reference to bk. 7, chap. 1, in H. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal (→ 108,2), vol. 1, p. 531. ― A. Arnauld’s book on frequent communion: Antoine Arnauld’s (→ 108,2) work criticizing frequent communion (→ 108,23). Anti Climacus] The pseudonymous author of The Sickness unto Death (1849) and Practice in

•

1850

609

Christianity. The prefix “Anti-” positions AntiClimacus in opposition to the pseudonym Johannes Climacus (→ 109,35). The reference here is to Practice in Christianity by Anti-Climacus, edited by S. Kierkegaard. The book was advertised in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 225, September 25, 1850. there is a preface by me] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to the first part of Practice in Christianity: “In this work, stemming from the year 1848, the pseudonym forces the requirement for being a Christian up to the highest level of the ideal. Yet the requirement must be stated, presented, heard; from a Christian point of view there must be no reduction of the requirement, nor ought it be suppressed―instead of making an admission and confession concerning oneself. The requirement ought to be heard, and I understand what is said as spoken to me alone, so that I might learn not only to take refuge in ‘grace,’ but to take refuge in it with respect to the use of ‘grace’ ” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). This preface is referred to again in nos. II and III of the book (PC, 73 and 149; SKS 12, 85 and 153). make an admission before God] → 109,9. Pascal writes . . . Only rarely and for few does God step forth . . . hides himself from others (see Reuchlin, Geschichte Port Royal, vol. 1, bottom p. 680 and top p. 681.)] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in bk. 7, chap. 4, in H. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal (→ 108,2), vol. 1, pp. 680–681. ― Pascal: Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), French mathematician (→ 115,30), physicist, philosopher, and theologian. Following the death of his father in 1651, Pascal fell under the influence of Jansenism’s Augustinian account of Christianity, in large part owing to the influence of his younger sister Jacqueline Pascal (→ 111,15), who became a nun at the strongly Jansenist Cistercian convent Port-Royal de Paris (→ 108,2). Following a mystical-religious awakening in November 1654, he retreated to the convent Port-Royal de Champs, in Magny-les-

9

17

109m

18

109

610

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 14–16

Hameux; during the next four years he was a regular presence there, living an austere life dedicated to the study of scripture. When Jansenism (→ 108,2) came under attack by the Jesuits, Pascal wrote a series of eighteen Provincial Letters (1656–1657), a robust defense of Jansenism, which immediately appeared in many editions; the work was condemned by Pope Alexander VII in September 1657 and was banned and burned by King Louis XIV in 1660. At his death, Pascal left a large collection of handwritten fragments as the draft of an apology for Christianity against atheism. These were later collected and published as Pascal’s Pensées [Thoughts] or Pensées sur la religion [Thoughts on Religion], his most famous work, first published in 1669 (Paris: Guillaume Desprez); the so-called Edition de Port-Royal appeared in 1670. ― Mademoiselle Roannes: Or Mademoiselle de Roanez, sister of Artus Gouffier, duke of Roanez, who was a close friend of Pascal. Owing to an eye disease, in 1656 she undertook nine days of devotion before the Holy Thorn (see below); on the last day she felt herself so transported that she decided to withdraw from the world. Subsequently, under the name Charlotte de la Passion, she became a novice in the cloister of Port-Royal in Paris. When her mother failed to convince her to leave the cloister, her mother obtained a secret arrest warrant (lettre de cachet), after which Mademoiselle Roannes lived in great seclusion in her parents’ house until 1663; despite her repeated written renewals of her vows as a nun, in 1664 she obtained a release from her vows and married in 1667. She died in 1683. See appendix 3 in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 263–264; Pascal’s nine extant letters to her are reproduced on pp. 264–270, where it can be seen that the letter to which Kierkegaard refers is the second of Pascal’s letters, written a month after the above-mentioned miracle, presumably in early April 1656. ― the miraculous healing of little Perrier in Port Royal: See pp. 678–679, where it is related that, upon request, Port-Royal in Paris had borrowed a thorn from Christ’s crown of thorns from a pious cleric. The thorn arrived on a Friday in Lent when mass was held and there was a procession in the cloister church. When the

•

1850

reliquary was exhibited, a ten- or eleven-year-old girl, a niece of Pascal and the daughter of a man named Perrier, who was an employee of the tax court at Clermont in the Auvergne, asked that she be permitted to touch the holy thorn to her diseased left eye. She did so, and her eye was miraculously healed; see appendix 3 in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben, p. 265, where her name is given as Margarethe. the dialectic Joh. Climacus argues for: A revelation . . . is a mystery] Refers to the passages on the relation between revelation and mystery―the fact that a revelation in the strict sense can only be recognized by the fact that it is a mystery―in chap. 2 of the second section of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 213 and 245; SKS 7, 195 and 223). ― Joh. Climacus: Johannes Climacus, the pseudonymous author of Philosophical Fragments (1844) and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). The name “Climacus” (a Latinized spelling of the Greek word for “ladder”) is presumably a reference to the Greek theologian and monk Johannes Klimax (ca. 525–616), who lived as a hermit on Mount Sinai for forty years and was the author of the work Klímax toû paradeísou (in Latin, Scala paradisi [Ladder of Paradise]), which was thus the source of his surname. See also the more detailed note in SKS K4, 197. I am indeed not a teacher . . . someone who has developed during the process of productivity . . . I myself was not clear about it from the beginning] Cf. the original manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (→ 110,28), presumably written in 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “Perhaps, indeed, some people will be surprised when they have read these writings [on Kierkegaard’s work as an author], but no one can be more surprised than I, who now (after having been an author for about 7 years, and truly as if in a single breath), when I turn around and observe in astonishment what has been traversed, seeing, almost with a shudder, that the whole of it actually is indeed only a single thought, as I now quite clearly understand it, although at the beginning I indeed had

35

17

110

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 16–17 neither contemplated that I would continue to be an author for so many years, nor had I had such grand intentions. Viewed philosophically, this is a development of reflection which is described retrospectively; it can only be seen gradually, as it is traversed, and understood only when it has been traversed . . . ‘Upbringing in Christianity’ is what is needed everywhere; it is in this respect, I believe, that the work of an author has significance. In no way, however, do I call myself, the author, ‘the teacher’; I myself am the one who has been brought up” (Pap. X 5 B 148, pp. 348–350). See also the following passage from the final version of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting”: “This is how I understand it all now; at the beginning I was not able to have an overview of what of course has also been my own development” (OMWA, 12; SKS 13, 18). 110

28

a Statement in the Postscript to “The Accounting” concerning My Direct Communication] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in “The Accounting”: “But just as that which has been communicated (the idea of the religious) has been cast completely into reflection and in turn has been taken back out of reflection, so also the communication has been decisively marked by reflection, or the form of communication used is that of reflection. ‘Direct communication’ is: to communicate the truth directly; ‘communication in reflection’ is: to deceive into the truth. But since the movement is to arrive at the simple, the communication in turn must sooner or later end in direct communication” (OMWA, 7; SKS 13, 13). ― “The Accounting”: In 1849, Kierkegaard considered publishing The Point of View for My Work as an Author, “Three ‘Notes’ concerning My Work as an Author,” “One Note concerning My Work as an Author” (the title of which he proposed to change to “The Accounting”), with the accompanying appendix “Armed Neutrality, or My Position as a Christian Author in Christendom,” and “Everything in One Word,” in one volume under the title On the Work as an Author or On My Work as an Author, Written in 1848. Later, “The Accounting” came to constitute the bulk of On My Work as an Author

•

1850

611

(Copenhagen, 1851) (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19); there “The Accounting” was dated “Cph., March 1849” (PV, 5; SKS 13, 11). all the edifying writing has been direct communication] → 111,4. an authorship . . . indirect communication . . . pseudonyms . . . direct communication in the edifying works] See “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author, where the passage cited above continues as follows: “It began maieutically with aesthetic production, and all the pseudonymous writings are maieutic in nature. Therefore this writing was also pseudonymous, whereas the directly religious―which from the beginning was present in a glimmer of suggestion―carried my name. The directly religious was present from the start, for the Two Edifying Discourses of 1843 were of course concurrent with Either/Or. And in order to safeguard this concurrence of the directly religious, every pseudonymous work was accompanied concurrently with a little collection of “edifying discourses,” until the publication of Concluding Postscript, which posed the problem . . . of the entire authorship: ‘becoming a Christian.’* From that moment the glimmer of the directly religious came to an end, for now the purely religious writings begin: Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits, Works of Love, Christian Discourses” (OMWA, 7–8; SKS 13, 13–14). The footnote indicated in the text reads: “*The situation (in ‘Christendom,’ where consequently, everyone is a Christian)―the situation which, as every dialectician can see, places everything in reflection― also makes an indirect method necessary, because here the task must be to work with an illusion: calling oneself a Christian, perhaps imagining oneself to be one, without being it. Therefore the person who posed the problem does not directly define himself as a Christian and the others as not being that. No, it is the reverse: He denies that he is that and concedes that the others are. This is what Johannes Climacus does.―In connection with simple receptivity, as with an empty vessel that is to be filled, direct communication is in order; but where there is an illusion, that is, something that must be dispelled, direct communication is inappropriate” (OMWA, 8n; SKS 13, 14n).

1 4

111

612 7 10

111

111

15

22

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 17–20

direct statements about the authorship] → 110,28. something maieutic] i.e., concerning maieutics, the art of midwifery, from a Greek word that means to release or deliver someone who is giving birth. This refers to Socrates’ maieutic art, which consisted in talking to another person in order to help him deliver the knowledge with which he was already pregnant but had simply forgotten. See, e.g., Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus 148e–151d, in Plato: The Collected Dialogues Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961; abbreviated hereafter as Plato: The Collected Dialogues), pp. 853–856. in Reuchlin, Pascals Leben . . . p. 30 . . . in order to contemplate this step in solitude (seul à seul)] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated summary of a lengthy passage in a letter dated June 19, 1648, from Jacqueline Pascal to her father, who was staying at a health spa in the Auvergne; published in bk. 1 of Pascals Leben bis zum Jahre 1656 [The Life of Pascal to the Year 1656], the passage dealing with the father’s opposition to his daughter Jacqueline’s wish to become a nun in the Cistercian cloister of Port-Royal de Paris (→ 108,2), in Hermann Reuchlin (→ 108,2) Pascal’s Leben und der Geist seiner Schriften zum Theil nach neu aufgefundenen Handschriften mit Untersuchungen über die Moral der Jesuiten [The Life of Pascal and the Spirit of His Writings, in Part Based on Newly Discovered Manuscripts Dealing with the Morals of the Jesuits] (Stuttgart, 1840; abbreviated hereafter as Pascal’s Leben), pp. 29–30), where Jacqueline Pascal asks to be permitted to make her decision “entirely alone (seul à seul),” p. 30. ― Jacqueline’s: Jacqueline Pascal (1625–1661), Blaise Pascal’s (→ 109,18) youngest sister. After her father’s death in 1651, she finally entered the cloister of Port-Royal de Paris, and despite opposition from her older sister Gilberte, she took the veil in 1653. Ein Wahn, der mich beglückt . . . mich zu Boden drückt. Quoted in . . . Pascals Leben . . . p. 72] The motto of bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten” [The Provincial Letters

•

1850

and the Casuistry of the Jesuits], in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 72. ― Provincial Letters: → 109,18. The Jesuits] → 108,2. What Reuchlin says about the Jesuits in Pascals Leben, book two . . . lax morality for others] Reference to a passage in bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 91– 92, where Reuchlin describes what he calls the lax disciplinary principles of the majority of the Jesuits. ― the Pharisees: The Pharisees were one of the most influential movements in Judaism during the Hellenistic-Roman period from ca. 100 b.c. until the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, emphasizing legalistic adherence to Mosaic law, e.g., complex rules of ritual cleanliness for the priesthood. They believed themselves to be in possession of a comprehensive oral tradition regarding the application of the Mosaic legal framework, and held other beliefs, such as the existence and importance of angels and the resurrection of the dead. There were about six thousand Pharisees in Jesus’ time. ― who imposed heavy burdens . . . did not themselves lift a finger: Reference to Mt 23:4. What Reuchlin notes (loc. cit., p. 98) . . . Eskobar calls the father-confessor “the confessing person’s advocate,” . . . earlier he had been the judge] Reference to bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben, p. 98. ― Eskobar: Antonio de Escobar y Mendoza (ca. 1589–1669), Spanish Roman Catholic moral theologian and author; in 1605, he joined the Jesuit order (→ 108,2); active as priest and confessor in Valladolid, Burgos, and Salamanca in Spain; in addition to poetry and religious dramas, he wrote a great many exegetical works and pieces on moral theology, which were widely read, including Liber theologiae moralis [Book on Moral Theology], which appeared in 1642 and was reprinted forty times in the next decade. This voluminous work was what motivated Pascal to attack Escobar’s doctrines in his Provincial Letters (→ 109,18), where he said they were an expression of the Jesuits’ lax notion of morals.

28

111

29

7

112

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 21–24 112

14 15

16

23

30

113

5

113

12 13

21

114

2

113m

5

Pascal] → 109,18. see Reuchlin, Leben Pascals, pp. 135 and 136] See H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 135 and 136. In the 10th letter . . . P. rants . . . love God in our deeds, but that now this is no longer the case] Kierkegaard’s summary of a passage in bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben, p. 135. ― Provincial Letters: → 109,18. In den zerstreuten Gedanken Pascals . . . Die Liebe ist kein bildliches Gebot . . . ist abscheulich] Quoted from bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben, pp. 135–136. Der Messias soll . . . ein großer, weltlicher Fürst seyn . . . als jenes die jüdische] Quoted from bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben, p. 136. ― Messias: i.e., Messiah. The Jews interpreted the OT prophecies of the coming Messiah (a Hebrew word, meaning “the anointed one”) as referring to an earthly king who was to free them from the Roman occupiers; see, e.g., Jn 6:15 and 18:33ff. the Jesuits’] → 108,2. Pascal] → 109,18. P. is right to note . . . they would not take it ill . . . lack of love] Reference to bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 136– 137. ― Provincial Letters: → 109,18. In the same letter . . . shown them the wound that could be inflicted, but has not yet inflicted it] Reference to bk. 2, “Die Provinzialbriefe und die Kasuistik der Jesuiten,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 137. ― In the same: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. ― the Jesuits: → 108,2. works-righteousness] The desire to be reckoned as righteous by God because of one’s good works, which is in conflict with the Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith. somewhere in Neander’s Bernhard of Clairvaux . . . Arnold of Brescia . . . does not dispute

•

1850

613

about it] Perhaps an allusion to a passage in pt. 2, C, “Bernhards Kampf mit Peter Abälard und Arnold von Brescia” [Bernard’s Dispute with Peter Abelard and Arnold of Brescia], in August Neander, Der heilige Bernhard und sein Zeitalter. Ein historisches Gemälde [St. Bernard and His Times: A Historical Tableau], 2nd rev. ed. (Hamburg and Gotha, 1848 [1813]; abbreviated hereafter as Der heilige Bernhard), pp. 298–299. The pages following this passage (pp. 298–318) deal especially with Arnold of Brescia’s struggle to reform the worldliness of the Church and the clergy. Abelard, mentioned in this connection, is Peter Abelard (1079–1142), French scholastic philosopher, theologian, monk, and abbot. ― Neander’s: Johann Wilhelm August Neander, born David Mendel Neander (1789–1850); German Protestant theologian; in 1806, converted from Judaism to Christianity; from 1812, professor of Church and dogma history at Heidelberg; from 1813, at Berlin. Neander understood Church history as a history of piety and sought to reveal Christian piety in its various historical forms. ― Bernhard of Clairvaux: Bernard of Clairvaux or St. Bernard (1090/91–1153), French Cistercian monk, theologian, and mystic; from 1115, abbot of the monastery of Clairvaux; canonized 1174; elevated to Father of the Church in 1830; author of many works and a great many letters and sermons. ― Arnold of Brescia: (ca. 1100–1155), Italian monk and priest, presumably a student of Abelard in Paris, 1115–1120. Leader in movements to reform the worldliness of the Church and the clergy and spokesman for the ascetic life of apostolic poverty. Condemned in 1139 by the Lateran Council in Rome and fled to Paris, where he supported Abelard in his dispute with Bernard of Clairvaux. When he himself came under serious attack by Bernard, he fled to Zurich. In 1145, he returned to Rome, where he continued his agitation for reform. He was excommunicated in 1148 and in 1155 was executed by hanging, after which his body was burned. the 1st Essay in H. H.’s Two Essays] “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” in Two Minor Ethical-

11

114

614

12

15

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 24

Religious Essays by the pseudonym H. H. (1849) (WA, 51–89; SKS 11, 57–93). It is stated there that a person has power to act only as long as he remains silent . . . he must not say it] Reference to the following passage in the “Introduction” to the first essay: “Silence and the capacity to act correspond precisely to one another. Silence is the measure of the capacity to act; a person never has more capacity to act than he has silence. Everyone understands very well that taking action is something much greater than talking about doing so; therefore if he himself is sure that he can do it, and he has decided that he will do it, he does not talk about it” (WA, 56; SKS 11, 62). In the recollected version of his talk at the Conventicle, Peter observed . . . an inconsistency here: here something was of course said] A reference to the printed version of the lecture Kierkegaard’s elder brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard, had delivered at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle in Ringsted on October 30, 1849, where he spoke of Søren Kierkegaard as the representative of the ecstatic and of Hans L. Martensen (→ 135,19) as the representative of sober-mindedness. P. C. Kierkegaard names the Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays as an imitation of Søren Kierkegaard’s “series of works” and faults them for lacking “the stamp of genuine passion,” after which he says: “Indeed, if I remember rightly, when the first of them repeats the not ungrounded assertion concerning the energy of silence, the person who speaks it is not practicing it, and vice versa―so I find it quite proper that within ecstatic literature this principle be placed á cheval [French, properly à cheval, “on horseback”] at the point of the paradox’s razor edge; but then I do not understand what relation this entire essay is supposed to have to the question of the extent to which a person dare saddle other people with the responsibility they assume by making him a martyr. For, at least to me, it appears that a person who was vividly aware of such a situation would necessarily remain silent, and that the person who debated about it (and, indeed, probably even consciously avoids the obvious way out) has―in the midst of the protest

•

1850

about life [i.e., as opposed to theory]―gone over to the side of theory.” Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], ed. R. Th. Fenger and C. J. Brandt (8 vols., 1845–1853; ASKB 321–325), December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, col. 191. ― the recollected version of his talk at the Conventicle: Reference to the fact that P. C. Kierkegaard wrote out his lecture from memory. In the introductory note preceding the printed version of his lecture, he noted: “It has not been possible for me to write up the contents of what I presented orally any more exactly than I have done here. And inasmuch as there was no debate about it at the time, I will not go into it any further here. The train of thought and the contents and many of the specific details are here, as best I could remember them” (col. 171). ― Peter: Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805–1888), Danish theologian and priest; cand. theol. from the University of Copenhagen, 1826; dr. phil. from Göttingen, 1829; lic. theol. from the University of Copenhagen, 1836; tutored theology students until 1842, when he accepted a call to be parish priest in Pedersborg and Kindertofte by Sorø. He was a close ally of Grundtvig and a respected member of Grundtvig’s circle, which included his membership in the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle. He was elected to the upper house of parliament on December 29, 1849, as a representative of the Friends of the Peasant (or Venstre [“Left”]), but on February 11, 1850, he joined the Centrum group; see Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828–50” [Diary for 1828–1850] (NKS 2656, 4o, I), p. 158. still open the possibility of martyrdom . . . they put him to death for that reason] Compare to point no. 3 at the conclusion of part D of the first of the Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays: “In other respects, it is certainly remarkable, in a philosophical-dialectical sense, to consider that it was not at all unthinkable that a human being could be put to death simply because he defended the notion that a human being does not have the right to let himself be put to death for the truth. If, for example, he were contemporary with a tyrant (be it an individual human being or the crowd), the tyrant would perhaps misunderstand him and view it as a satire on himself and become so furious that he

23

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 24–29

27

put to death precisely the person who defended the view that a human being does not have the right to let himself be put to death for the truth” (WA, 85; SKS 11, 89). this is surely recorded in the journals from that period] Refers both to NB11:64, from May 1849, in KJN 6, 37, and to NB14:107, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 413–414; see the accompanying explanatory notes.

114

33

Meritoriousness] In Lutheran doctrine this term designated the erroneous view that by one’s own actions and deeds (e.g., voluntary poverty, asceticism, fasting, etc.) one can make oneself deserving of God’s justice and salvation; see, e.g., articles 4, 6, and 20 in the Augsburg Confession (1530).

115

14

Pascal] → 109,18. In short, if we want to say . . . we would have to be very great in order to be able to judge about such matters . . . quoted in . . . Pascals Leben, p. 238] Refers to a passage in bk. 4, “Die Gedanken Pascals über die Religion” [Pascal’s Thoughts on Religion] in Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 238. ― Pensees: i.e., Pascal’s Pensées [Thoughts] or Pensées sur la religion (→ 109,18).

15

115

20 21

115

30

Pascal] → 109,18. To know God only speculatively is not to know him at all . . . Pascals Leben, p. 243] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in bk. 4, “Die Gedanken Pascals über die Religion,” in Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 243. Pascal was a famous mathematician] As a sixteen-year-old, Pascal had written an essay on conic sections that attracted much attention. In 1642, he invented a calculating machine to facilitate difficult calculations for his father, Étienne Pascal, also a famous mathematician, and he continued to develop and improve the machine until it took on its final form in 1652. Parallel with these developments, he undertook a series of experiments in physics and published his results. In 1653 and 1654, he formulated his most important mathematical ideas, e.g., the preparatory work for integral calculus and the development of the arith-

•

1850

615

metic triangle, now known as “Pascal’s Triangle,” which he described in a work that was published posthumously in 1665. In 1658, he also wrote an influential work on the cycloid. On the influence that Pascal’s work on mathematics, geometry, and physics had on the reception of his thoughts on religion and Christianity, see H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 251–252. Mynster] Jakob Peter Mynster (1775–1854), Danish pastor, author, and politician. From 1802, Mynster was parish priest in Spjellerup in southern Zealand. From 1811, he was permanent curate at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. From 1826, he was court preacher, and from 1828, royal confessor as well as court priest and priest at Christiansborg Palace Church. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand and as such was the primate of the Danish Church and the king’s personal counselor; during the period 1835–1846, he was a member of the Advisory Assembly of Estates in Roskilde, where he was very influential; and in 1848–1849, he was a member of the constitutional assembly. Mynster had a seat in a great many governing organs and was the prime mover behind various key ecclesiastical publications, including the authorized Danish translation of the New Testament that appeared in 1819, the Udkast til en Alterbog og et KirkeRitual for Danmark [Draft for a Service Book and Church Ritual for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1839), and the authorized Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845). In accordance with the Danish system of rank and precedence, in 1847 Mynster, as bishop of Zealand, was ranked number thirteen in the first class and accordingly was to be addressed as “Your Eminence.” a passage from Pascal’s Pensees . . . appealing in their eyes . . . Pascals Leben, p. 223] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in bk. 4, “Die Gedanken Pascals über die Religion,” in Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 223. ― Pascal’s Pensees: Pascal’s Pensées or Pensées sur la religion (→ 109,18).

1

4

116

616 116

18

20

23

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 30–31

Epictetus] Greek philosopher (ca. 55–135), born a slave but later emancipated; active first in Rome, subsequently founded a school in the Greek city of Nicopolis. In 1st- and 2nd-century Rome, Epictetus, together with Seneca and Marcus Aurelius, was one of the most important spokesmen for Stoicism, a philosophical school that had been founded by Zeno in Greece ca. 300 b.c. In a.d. 94, Epictetus was banished from Rome to Nicopolis in Epirus in northwestern Greece. Epictetus’s lectures on moral questions were written down by his pupil, the historian Arrian (Lucius Flavius Arrianus, ca. 86–160) as the Discourses, four of which survive, along with an Enchiridion (i.e., a manual or handbook) that summarizes Epictetus’s most important teachings. Kierkegaard possessed several editions of Epictetus; see Epiktets Haandbog. Af det Græske oversat og med Anmærkninger oplyst af E. Boye [The Handbook of Epictetus, translated from the Greek and with Annotations by E. Boye] (Copenhagen, 1781; ASKB 1114; abbreviated hereafter as Epiktets Haandbog); see also ASKB 1113 and 1205. he is a slave] E. Boye, in his unpaginated “Epiktets Levnet” [The Life of Epictetus], included in his translation of Epiktets Haandbog, writes: “We know that he had been a slave, but the manner in which he had become one is not reported. We also know that his master had been Epaphroditus, who was a freed slave and a secretary to Emperor Nero. Epictetus was given his freedom by him [Epaphroditus] and thereafter traveled to Rome, where he devoted himself to Stoic philosophy. He not only studied it and taught it, but also applied it in his manner of living. Thus, free of pride and the desire for riches, he lived an upright and frugal life, well satisfied with his poverty.” the pride of Stoicism] See Boye’s preface to Epiktets Haandbog, “No philosophical sect other than the Stoics has on such unprepossessing a ground―on the principle of the power of a human being over his opinions―erected so splendid a building, so excellent a moral doctrine, the compliance with which makes a human being into a god on earth, into the autocratic creator of his own fortune.”

•

1850

the first words of Epictetus: Some things are . . . others are not in our power] Cited freely from chap. 1, § 1 of Epiktets Haandbog, pp. 3–4: “Some things are in our power; others are not. In our power are our opinions, inclinations, desires, aversions―in a word, those things that are own deeds. But what is not in our power is our body, our property, what others think of us, acts of state―in a word, those things that are not our own deeds.” hears the slave sighing . . . as a slave must learn it] See Boye’s note to the cited text in Epiktets Haandbog, pp. 3–4: “My leg you will fetter, but my moral purpose not even Zeus himself has power to overcome.” English translation from Epictetus, The Discourses as Reported by Arrian, the Manual and Fragments, trans. W. A. Oldham, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1926), p. 13. too high a price . . . cost of character] Variant: first written “too high a price.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence, and followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

32

12

117

Jacqueline Pascal] → 111,15. She puts it superbly . . . Nothing is as dangerous . . . her superior enlightenment (Erleuchtung) see . . . Pascals Leben, p. 258. (Appendix I)] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in appendix 1, “Briefwechsel von Agnes Arnauld und Jacqueline Pascal” [Correspondence between Agnes Arnauld and Jacqueline Pascal], in Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 257–258. ― St. Theresa: or Theresa of Avila or Theresa of Jesus (1515–1582), Spanish Carmelite nun and mystic who founded the order of Discalced Carmelites or Theresians at the convent of St. Joseph at Avila in 1562. In the course of mystic contemplation she fell into ecstasy and received “great revelations.” She wrote many works of the mystical and ascetic sort, including poetry. She was canonized in 1622, was declared the patron saint of Spain in 1814, and a Doctor of the Church in 1970. She also says: fear death . . . one ought to be a man. see loc. cit., p. 259] Kierkegaard’s Danish ren-

15

117

36

16

1

117m

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 31–34 dering of a passage in appendix 1, “Briefwechsel von Agnes Arnauld und Jacqueline Pascal,” in Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), p. 259. 118

3

Reuchlin . . . the Jesuits . . . understood the Virg. Mary . . . the world’s pain . . . pierced her heart] Refers to Hermann Reuchlin’s (→ 108,2) account of the Jesuits’ cultivation of the Virgin Mary in bk. 2, chap. 1, “Des [Jesuiten] Ordens Entstehung und Principien; deren Entfaltung und Modificirung” [The Rise of the [Jesuit] Order and Its Principles: Their Development and Modification] in his Geschichte von Port-Royal, vol. 1, pp. 55–60. See p. 58, where it is stated that in the cult of Mary it was claimed that she suffered more than all the martyrs put together; see also pp. 60–61, where Reuchlin alleges that there is a connection between the Jesuits’ emphasis on the cult of Mary and their soft-hearted approach to penance; and see p. 61, where Reuchlin implies a connection between the Jesuits’ cultivation of Mary, their “lax moral doctrine,” and Pelagianism. ― Pascals Leben: Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15). ― the Jesuits: → 108,2. ― the pain . . . which pierced her heart: Reference to Lk 2:35 and Jn 19:25.

118

9

An Either/Or . . . Established Order.] Variant: changed from “Either/Or.”

118

19

In his Genius of Xnty Chateaubriand says that Christian eloquence . . . Tzschirner (in his Letters to Ch., Leipzig, 1828) agrees] Refers to a passage in Tzschirner’s first letter to Chateaubriand, “Ueber die gegenwärtige religiöse Stimmung der Welt und Herrn Chauteaubriand’s Bemühungen auf dieselbe einzuwirken” [On the World’s Current Religious Atmosphere and Mr. Chateaubriand’s Endeavors to Influence It], in Briefe eines Deutschen an die Herren Chateaubriand, de la Mennais und Montlosier über Gegenstände der Religion und Politik. Verfasst von Tzschirner [Letters of a German to Herrs Chateaubriand, Lamennais, and Montlosier, on the Topics of Religion and Politics. Written by von Tzschirner], ed. [W. T.] Krug (Leipzig, 1828), pp. 21–22, where Tzschirner notes that “holy eloquence is a production of Christianity; the priests of Greece and Rome

•

1850

617

were merely priests, not proclaimers of the Word of God.” ― his Genius of Xnty: See the beginning of Tzschirner’s first letter, where he declares that of Chateaubriand’s works, “the one on The Genius of Christianity occupies the first place for him” (p. 3); in note 1, the editor tells us that the work is Génie du Christianisme, ou beautés de la religion chrétienne [The Genius of Christianity, or the Beauty of the Christian Religion], 4 vols. (Paris, 1802). ― Chateaubriand: François René Vicomte de Chateaubriand (1768–1848), French author, politician, and diplomat. In 1802, Chateaubriand, one of the founders of French Romanticism, published his great work Le génie du Christianisme [The Genius of Christianity], a poetic defense of Christianity as a religion of feeling and a gospel of fantasy and as a source of inspiration for martyrdom, self-sacrifice, and the hope of eternal salvation. Chateaubriand hoped that the work would contribute to the revival of the Catholic faith and thereby to a new social order. ― Tzschirner: Heinrich Gottlieb Tzschirner (1778– 1828), German Lutheran theologian and priest; from 1805, professor of theology at Wittenberg; from 1809, at Leipzig; and from 1815, also priest and superintendent (a senior ecclesiastical official). His theological position combined a faith in revelation with ethical-critical rationalism, simultaneously viewing the content of Christianity as rational and the form of its biblical revelation as supernatural. the eloquence of the Sophists] Reference to the Sophists (a Greek term that originally meant an insightful and capable man), the general term for a number of Greeks of the 4th century b.c., who― for a considerable fee―offered their services as teachers, not only of rhetoric and politics, but also in the areas of philosophy, natural science, anthropology, and pedagogy. The Sophists were known for their eloquence. Starting with Plato (3rd century b.c.), who fought against them both politically and philosophically (e.g., in the dialogues Sophist, Protagoras, Gorgias, and Theaetetus), the term “Sophist” usually came to be used in a pejorative sense.

32

618 119

4

6 11

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 35–36

The Sophists simply teach this distinction . . . the great requirements are not for all of us] Refers to appendix 10, “Le-Moine’s Schrift: Die bequeme Frömmigkeit” [Le Moyne’s Work, “Comfortable Piety”], in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 296–304. In this appendix, Reuchlin examines a work by Pierre Le-Moine (i.e., Le Moyne), La dévotion aisée (→ 119,11). Reuchlin explains that the second chapter of Le Moyne’s book states, “piety is not inaccessible to anyone―it has its higher and lower levels: this variation is part of the beauty of the Church . . . Certainly, there are exceptional souls, whom God has elevated to the highest level of piety . . . There are also souls called to a lesser height, which of course are lower, but which also have their level in heaven” (p. 298). Reuchlin explains that in chapter 3, Le Moyne states, “Every estate has its virtues, has the corresponding assistance of nature and grace; . . . Each has only to strive toward the virtue and piety corresponding to its estate” (p. 298). And further, on the same page: “God grants different forms of grace and support in relation to the differing obligations. Of course, there are loftier souls who do not remain at obligations of their estate, but this also requires extraordinary grace, which does not fall from heaven upon every possible head every day. Therefore, extraordinary piety of this sort is also not a universally obligatory law.” measured] Variant: added by Pap. and adopted by the editors of SKS. Le Moine’s book, la devotion aisèe . . . (There are excerpts in Pascals Leben . . . pp. 296 et al., appendix X)] Reference to appendix 10, “Le-Moine’s Schrift: Die bequeme Frömmigkeit,” in H. Reuchlin, Pascal’s Leben (→ 111,15), pp. 296–304. The appendix begins with bibliographical information concerning the volume, noting that it was published in Paris in 1652, having received royal permission, and that Father Pierre Le-Moine was a member of the Society of Jesus. Reuchlin also notes that the book was approved by the Jesuit provincial authorities in France after having been revised by three priests of the Society. Appendix 10 then provides a summary of the book. ― Le Moine: Pierre Le-Moine (or Lemoine or Le Moyne) (1602–1671), French theo-

•

1850

logian, poet, and Jesuit; joined the Jesuit order (→ 108,2) in 1619, received his theology degree in 1637, and from 1638 was attached to the Collège de Clermont. Here it is made into a system, and mediocrity completely legitimized] → 119,4. See also Reuchlin’s summary of bk. 1, chap. 6 of La dévotion aisée, p. 299: “Thus we have every reason to play up mediocre piety, which of course also has its value and merit―indeed, one is obligated only to that, and it is the only thing necessary for salvation.” what Peter is doing in the name of heartiness and conviviality] Kierkegaard often also used the terms “hearty,” “lovable,” and “dear” ironically in referring to Grundtvig and his followers, including P. C. Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB15:82, from January 1850, in KJN 7, 55. See also NB17:16.a, from March 1850, and NB17:106, from May 1850, in KJN 7, 177 and 250–251, as well as NB21:55 in the present volume, where Kierkegaard uses “heartiness” in connection with P. C. Kierkegaard’s talk at the meeting of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle (→ 114,15). See the summary of the meeting of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle on October 12, 1848, in Dansk Kirketidende (→ 114,15), December 17, 1848, vol. 4, no. 12, col. 212, in which P. C. Kierkegaard speaks of the “hearty unity” among Christians; see also Dansk Kirketidende, December 31, 1848, vol. 4, no. 14, col. 243, where he speaks of having to tolerate those in the congregation who have not yet “awakened to a truly living consciousness of sin and a truly hearty faith, while they also lack the heart to make a conscious and deliberate break from the Christianity that has been communicated to them.” the age of envy and leveling] See the section “The Present Age” in A Literary Review (1846) in TA, 68–112; SKS 8, 66–106; see esp. TA, 81–84; SKS 8, 78–80, where Kierkegaard develops the notion that “as, in a passionate age, enthusiasm is the unifying principle, so in a passionless and very reflected age does envy become the negatively unifying principle.” See also TA, 84; SKS 8, 80: “Envy that is establishing itself is leveling, [and] whereas a

13

22

24

119

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 36–37

120

120

10

18

passionate age accelerates, raises up and topples, elevates and debases, a reflected, passionless age does the opposite: it smothers and impedes―it levels.” conspiracy against property] Owing to the great cost of the first Schleswig war or “three years’ war” that had broken out in April 1848 and lasted until February 1851, a war tax was imposed on May 15, 1850. There was continuing discussion of a new form of taxation, as can be seen from the article “Om en Formues- og Indkomstskats Indførelse i Danmark” [On the Introduction of a Tax on Wealth and an Income Tax in Denmark], published under the mark “49.” [Viggo Rothe] in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], nos. 231 and 232, October 4 and 5, 1850, pp. 921–922 and 925–926. In November 1850, during the parliamentary debate of a proposal by the finance minister to introduce a new form of taxation, Prof. A. Steen of the Friends of the Peasant (or “Left”) group proposed progressive taxation on inherited wealth; see the article “Om Forslaget til en Indkomstskat” [On the Proposal for an Income Tax] in Nord og Syd. Et Ugeskrift [North and South, a Weekly], ed. and pub. M. Goldschmidt, vol. 5 (September– December 1850), p. 754. An even more radical proposal for transforming all taxation into a tax on wealth was put forward in 1850 by the journalist A. Girardin, a member of the National Assembly in France who was then an adherent of the extreme Left; see the article “Fra Udlandet” [From Abroad], no. VI, in “Silhouetter” [Silhouettes], no. 7, in Nord og Syd, vol. 4 (April–June 1850), p. 426. Denmark first imposed a tax on wealth in 1903. Grundtvig] Nicolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish theologian, pastor, author of hymns, historian, politician; ordained 1811; thereafter served as priest in various places on Zealand and in Copenhagen; from 1839 until his death, priest at Vartov Hospital Church in Copenhagen (see map 2, A2), where he gathered a growing congregation of like-minded believers and adherents; he had great influence among the priests of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle (→ 114,15), which, like the Dansk Kirketidende, was with some justification regarded as a mouthpiece for his views. In 1848–1849, he served as a member of the

•

1850

619

Danish constitutional convention, and from 1849 was a member of the first Danish parliament (for Præstø, in southeastern Zealand), where he attached himself primarily to the Venstre (“Left”) or Bondevennerne (“Friends of the Peasant”) parties; see the article “Danske Rigsdags-Breve” [Danish Parliament Letters], no. III, in Danskeren, et Ugeblad [The Dane: A Weekly], edited by Grundtvig (and quite likely authored by him as well), April 6, 1850, vol. 3, no. 13, pp. 193–202, p. 196 . Grundtvigians] A general term for the followers of N.F.S. Grundtvig. Despite the fact that he had many adherents in the 1830s and 1840s, Grundtvig denied that they constituted a sect separate from the established Church; see, e.g., Dansk Kirketidende, October 17, 1847, vol. 3, no. 3, cols. 33–34. he loves to talk so much about heartiness] Presumably, a reference to the concept of “heartiness” employed by N.F.S. Grundtvig. See, e.g., Bededags-Tale for Rigsdagen i Danmark [Prayer Day Address for the Parliament in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1848); by “parliament” Grundtvig means the constitutional convention. Grundtvig delivered this address against the background of the ongoing civil war in Schleswig and Holstein (→ 120,10). His point of departure is “that in no part of the known countries of the world has ‘heartiness’ made its home as it has in little Denmark, where no one is capable of counting all the sacrifices the people have voluntarily made, both in war and peace, for king and fatherland” (pp. 7–8); that “this, the matchless heartiness of the Danish people, [is] known to all of us” (p. 8); and that it is “the Danish heartiness in which our love for the fatherland has its source and our happiness its basis” (p. 9). “But,” Grundtvig continues, “it is of course crystal clear, especially to Christians, that heartiness now stands in the greatest danger, surrounded as it is on all sides by obstinacy and selfishness, ever more impudently mocked and ridiculed as it is by the reigning, unbelieving conceitedness” (p. 9). Therefore “all the prayers of Danish men and Danish women” to God must be “that things might be different with the Danish parliament so that the heart comes to

18

22

620

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 37–41

occupy its proper position as the best adviser to the head” (p. 11). Yet, “if it is simply true that heartiness has in Denmark its earthly home, it is also indubitably true that Denmark’s salvation is beyond doubt if only the Danish heart continues to beat, sensible of its mortal danger, and calls out to the heavenly Father for His help and blessing!” (p. 13). For God is “the creator of the heart and is the almighty, trusty friend of heartiness” (p. 14). See also Grundtvig’s article “Om Hjertet som Danmarks Perle” [On the Heart as Denmark’s Pearl] in Danskeren, et Ugeblad, September 20, 1848, vol. 1, no. 27, pp. 424–431, in which he does not want to speak of the physical heart but to keep to “the heart of metaphor, which is the source of everything hearty,” and thus to “use the word ‘heart’ as the source of all our fellow-feeling, which, in Danish all of us call heartiness,” and is connected with the Scandinavian and especially Danish priority given to “bonds of blood,” taking “an especially hearty view of women and children” (pp. 425–426). The Danish, “hearty view of human life,” of which Grundtvig makes himself spokesman, “encompasses both the spirit and the heart, both human nature and human history,” and can “succeed only where it has been prepared for since time immemorial, which is the case only in our Scandinavia” (pp. 426–431). Therefore Grundtvig presupposes, “daringly, that popular, national feeling in Denmark . . . will be strong enough to assert the rights of the heart and gain for itself enlightenment in the Danish mother tongue, in which it finds pleasing expressions and liberates the Danish head from its slavery to the German and from being confused by all foreign fads” (p. 431). The same notions about the interdependence of “heartiness” and “Danishness” are developed further in the article “Danmarks Beskaffenhed” [Denmark’s Character], in Danskeren, August 4, 1849, vol. 2, no. 30, pp. 465–473, where Grundtvig writes of “the deep Danish heartiness that breathes life into everything in which Denmark and Danishness is reflected” (p. 466). In the article “Menneskehed og Folkelighed betragtede med nordiske Øine” [Humanity and National Popular Culture, Viewed with Nordic Eyes], in Danskeren, October 20, 1849, vol. 2, no.

•

1850

41, pp. 641–654, Grundtvig makes the additional point that “the learned establishment is at odds with the mother tongue, with national popular culture, and with all that is hearty” (p. 648). In his article “Dannekvinden og den kvindelige Dannelse” [The Danish Woman and Female Cultivation], which appeared in Danskeren, February 2, 1850, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 49–64, “heartiness” is linked to “the Danish woman” and to “female cultivation,” and is associated with “the laws of Mother Nature or heartiness” (p. 63). In the poem “Nu eller aldrig” [Now or Never], which appeared in Danskeren, July 13, 1850, vol. 3, no. 27, pp. 417– 419, Grundtvig again says, with respect to Danes, that “heartiness is our pearl” (p. 419). nonsense by having] Variant: changed from “nonsense, but has”. as we say . . . a person who travels for the sake of his health . . . always one station behind] It has not been possible to verify this idiom, but see this passage in “The First Love” in Either/ Or (1843): “the journey one takes for the sake of one’s health, which, as we say, is always one station ahead” (EO 1, 259; SKS 2, 251).

35

120

2

121

a person who wanted to be a disciple]→ 104,20. he required nothing more of them than . . . and gratitude] In a number of healing miracles Jesus says to the person healed, “Your faith has saved you”; see Mk 5:34, 10:52; Lk 17:19. Concerning faith, see also Mt 8:10, 9:2, 15:28. Concerning gratitude, see Lk 17:15–18. Anti-Climacus] → 109,7. In this connection, see the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 109,9).

8

121

you have paid a high price] Allusion to 1 Cor 6:20 and 7:23; see also Mt 20:28; Gal 3:13; 1 Pet 1:18–19; Rev 9:5.

34

121

interrogator] Originally, a judge in matters of faith and heresy; the leader of a legal investigation in the Commission of Inquisition, an authority established in Copenhagen in 1686 with the task of investigating (though not serving as a judicial instance) in particular cases of theft and

16

122

13

24

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 41–46 the sale of stolen property in the capital. In § 9 of the ordinance of December 30, 1771, in which it is ordered that the Copenhagen Commission of Inquisition be merged with the Royal and City Court, the judge on the investigative commission is termed the “inquisitor.” 122

27

27

36

123

17

37

124

11

This thesis, which Anti-Climacus posits] See, e.g., section I of “The Halt” in “Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest,” which is exposition no. I in Practice in Christianity (→ 109,7): “Christendom has abolished Christianity without really knowing it itself; the consequence is that if something is to be done, one must attempt again to introduce Christianity into Christendom,” (PC, 36; SKS 12, 49). ― Anti-Climacus: → 109,7. has awakened some anger, as though it were a terrible exaggeration] It has not been possible to identify to whom this refers. at Christmastime, when people are sentenced to go out [“]and look at the stars[”]] Refers to the sentence to “look at the stars” in a game of forfeits, when the person sentenced is to choose an escort, after which they place their arms around each other’s waists, go outside, kiss one another, and come back inside. See Anna Erslev, Stuelege [Parlor Games], 3rd. ed. (Copenhagen, 1904), p. 55 (sentence no. 50). children who are alike play together best] Proverb listed as no. 1586 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Sayings and Adages] (Copenhgen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 60. unum noris omnes] The expression stems from the Roman author Terence’s comedy Phormio, act 2, sc. 3, v. 35; see P. Terentii afri comoediae sex [Six Comedies by Publius Terentius Afer] ed. B. F. and F. Schmieder, 2nd ed. (Halle, 1819 [1794]; ASKB 1291), p. 431; and Terentses Skuespil [The Plays of Terence], trans. Fr. Høegh Guldberg, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1805; ASKB 1293–1294), vol. 2, p. 264. 300 [rix-dollars]] The rix-dollar, properly rigsbank dollar (rigsbankdaler), was divided into six marks, each of which was further divided into sixteen shillings; thus there were ninety-six

•

1850

621

shillings in a rix-dollar. A judge earned about 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a middle-level civil servant earned about 400–500 rix-dollars a year. A housemaid earned at most thirty rix-dollars a year, plus meals and lodging. A pair of shoes cost three rix-dollars, and a pound of rye bread cost between two and four shillings. I say (with the help of the preface) . . . I dare not call myself a Xn in the strictest sense] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 109,9).

10

123m

His will is made known to me . . . and in my conscience] See, e.g., chap. 1, I, § 6, “Hvorledes vi komme til Kundskab om Gud” [How We Come to Knowledge of God], in Balles Lærebog (→ 104,35), p. 7: “It is certain that God’s will with respect to human beings, is contained in the Bible, which therefore is also called God’s Word, for it teaches us fully and clearly what a sinful human being needs to know for his improvement and consolation, and also for his genuine blessedness, both in this life and in the life to come.” See also chap. 5, § 5.c, pp. 53–54, “Om Synderes Deelagtiggiørelse i den af Christo forhvervede Naade og Salighed” [On the Participation of Sinners in the Grace and Salvation Earned by Christ]: “Through the proper use of God’s Word we come to genuine knowledge of God’s will and gain the strength to act in accordance with it, provided that we do not ourselves oppose the grace of the Holy Spirit, which acts with the Word and awakens admonitions in our conscience, which we ought not stifle.” See also Rom 2:14–15.

3

126

Practice in Xnty.] → 109,7. the clergy are under such pressure] Presumably, a reference to N. M. Spandet’s proposed law concerning freedom of religion, which would introduce civil marriage and abolish compulsory baptism and oath taking (→ 107,9). As early as the provisional reading of the bill, on October 28, 1850, R. M. Sørensen, a teacher who was connected to the Friends of the Peasant (or Left) group, stated “that those who are most likely to oppose the proposal must be the priests, whose incomes would be reduced (powerful hissing from the as-

31

126

33

622

127

3

127

16

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 46–48

sembly),” Fædrelandet, October 29, 1850, no. 252, p. 1004. During the first reading of the proposed law in the Folketing, on November 14–16, 1850, the cultus minister (i.e., the minister for Church and educational affairs), Prof. J. N. Madvig, said, “that the priests are required to carry out a great many civic tasks and have complained bitterly against this increase. For my part I shall try to make it possible to reduce these tasks, just as in the past I have at least tried to prevent them from being increased, so that the priests are not burdened with one public and civic task after another . . . but all this civil work will not simply by transferred to the authorities with the requirement that they be carried out without payment . . . One must not employ compulsion or even enticements, to lead anyone to the People’s Church [→ 165,16] or to any other religious society, but neither should one situate the church that the constitution has designated as the People’s Church in a decidedly unfavorable relation to a person who does not want to belong to it or to any other church. It does not help to say that we favor it with money and property because it is not about clerical officials, it is about the church and the congregation. One must not entice anyone out of the congregation, for doing so one does wrong, great wrong, to the church” (Dansk Kirketidende [→ 114,15)] November 24, 1850, vol. 5, no. 60, col. 989). According to the summary in Fædrelandet, November 18, 1850, no. 269, col. 1071, the cultus minister also said, “One must bear in mind that the voluntary offerings placed in the collection plate and the perquisites [i.e., fees for performing clerical acts such as weddings, baptisms, and funerals] [→ 156,30] were payment for the many civic tasks they are required to carry out.” struggle for official positions and livings] Presumably, a reference to the fact that the introduction of civil marriage and the abolition of compulsory baptism would lead to a reduction in the perquisites collected by the priests. the Christians made use of apologetics even in the beginning] See § 84, “De christelige Apologeter” [The Christian Apologists] and § 85, “Apologetikens Methode” [The Method of Apologetics], in K.

•

1850

Hase, Kirkehistorie. Lærebog nærmest for akademiske Forelæsninger [Church History: Textbook Primarily for Academic Lectures], trans. C. Winther and T. Schorn (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 160–166; abbreviated hereafter as Kirkehistorie), pp. 60–62 and 62–63. See p. 61: “Apologetics flourished in the age of the Antonines [i.e., the Roman emperors Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, who ruled in the latter half of the 2nd century a.d.], when the Church, owing to external circumstances, was moved equally by fear and hope, and all opinions were permitted to express themselves freely and publicly. The apologists, who all were men of scholarly Greek culture, wanted to rebut rumors and opposition writings, to win over public opinion, and to gain protection from the government.” Among the first of these early apologists can be mentioned Justin Martyr and his two apologetic works; see Justinus Martyrs Apologier eller Forsvarsskrifter for Christendommen [Justin Martyr’s Apologies, or Writings in Defense of Christianity], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1836; ASKB 141); Bishop Theophilus of Antioch, and Brevet til Diognetus om Christendommens Fortrin skrevet kort efter Aposteltiden [The Epistle to Diognetus concerning the Excellence of Christianity, Written Shortly after the Age of the Apostles], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1836; ASKB 141). Among the later apologies from the 3rd century can be mentioned the Church Father Tertullian’s Apologeticus adversus gentes pro christianis [Defense of Christianity against the Pagans] in Qu. Sept. Flor. Tertulliani opera [Tertullian’s Works], ed. E. F. Leopold, 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1839–1841; ASKB 147–150, in Bibliotheca patrum ecclesiasticorum latinorum selecta [Library of Selected Latin Church Fathers], ed. E. G. Gersdorf, vols. 4–7), and the dogmatic work against Celsus by Origin, a Church Father of the School of Alexandria. See also § 29, “Christliche Apologeten” [Christian Apologists], in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of Church History], 3rd ed., 2 vols., with continuous pagination (Halle, 1838 [1833]; ASKB 158–159), vol. 1, pp. 96–99. this is a lie,] Variant: first written “this is a lie.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

23

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 49–57 127

29

31

128

129

7

3

The Quakers made it a matter of conscience . . . not go to war] See, e.g., K. Hase, Kirkehistorie (→ 127,16), p. 536, where it is related that “the Quakers’ refusal to go to war, to swear oaths, and to pay tithes, as well as their contempt for worldly pleasures, luxuries, and every sort of rank and precedence stemmed from early Christianity and was conditioned by the situation in which they lived.” balloting] Refers to a method of voting with the aid of black and white balls (instead of voting slips). This, incidentally, is the origin of the term “ballot,” which was once used to refer to these small balls. Later the term “balloting” came to refer more broadly to organizing or holding a vote in general, or simply to voting. See § 39 in, respectively, “Folketingets Forretningsorden vedtagen den 8de, 9de og 11te Februar 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Lower House of Parliament, Adopted on February 8, 9, and 11, 1850], p. 128; and “Forretningsorden for Landsthinget vedtagen af Landsthinget den 13de Febr. 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Upper House of Parliament, Adopted by the Upper House on February 13, 1850] in Danmarks Riges Grundlov. Valgloven. Bestemmelser angaaende Forretningsordenen i begge Thingene [The Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark, Electoral Law: Resolutions Regarding Rules of Procedure in Both Houses of Parliament] (Copenhagen, 1850), p. 146: “Voting by means of balls takes place when requested by 25 members.” Xt . . . assumed the form of a humble servant] See Phil 2:6–11, esp. v. 7. Paulli . . . the gospel for the 26th Sunday after Trinity Sunday . . . followed after Xt . . . in the year that has passed] On November 24, 1850, the twenty-sixth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, Court Priest Paulli preached at the high mass at Christiansborg Palace Church (→ 177m,2); see Adresseavisen, November 23, 1850, no. 276. The gospel text for that Sunday was Mt 11:25–30. The twenty-sixth Sunday after Trinity Sunday is the last Sunday in the church year, hence Paulli’s reported reference to “the year that has passed.”

•

1850

623

Inasmuch as Paulli’s sermon was not published, it has not been possible to verify the remarks to which Kierkegaard refers. ― Paulli: Just Henrik Voltelen Paulli (1809–1865), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1833; from 1835, catechist at Church of the Holy Spirit; from 1837, palace priest at Christiansborg Palace Church, and from 1840, also court priest; close associate of Bishop J. P. Mynster (whose eldest daughter Paulli married in 1843) and a close friend of H. L. Martensen (→ 135,19); member of the hymnal committee of the Copenhagen Clerical Conventicle, 1841–1844. Kierkegaard owned Paulli’s Christelige Bønner [Christian Prayers], 2nd enl. ed. (Copenhagen, 1848 [1845]; ASKB 279), but not his 1844 Prædikener om Kirken og Sakramenterne [Sermons on the Church and the Sacraments]. the requirements of ideality] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 109,9). a humble admission] Reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity. An apostle . . . hates the world] See, e.g., Lk 14:26; see also Mt 19:21, 19:29; Lk 5:11, 5:28; Jn 12:25.

20

jacks up the price of the ideal] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 109,9). authority like that of an apostle] On apostolic authority, see “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle,” the second of the Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (1849), in WA, 91– 108, esp. 96–105; SKS 11, 95–111, esp. 100–109.

5

In the sermon . . . Luther says that a hum. being is saved by faith . . . “exercise works.”] Refers to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on the epistle Gal 3:23–29 (on the Law as the disciplinarian, which drives us to Christ), for New Year’s Day, in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller. Efter Benjamin Lindners tydske Samling, overs. af J. Thisted [A Christian Book of Homilies, Collected from Dr. Martin Luther’s Church and House Postils: From Benjamin Lindner’s German Collection], trans. Jørgen Thisted, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828; ASKB 283; abbreviated hereafter as En christelig Postille),

31

129

26 29

130

12

130

624

131

131

13

18

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 57–60

vol. 2, p. 91, col. 2: “For the person who is an heir does not work for the sake of inheritance―he of course already possesses it, and in his works he is merely performing exercises. Thus in this case, too. He who believes is already pious and righteous―indeed, saved―by grace alone, apart from all works. Whatever he does after this are only exercise works.” Luther’s doctrine about faith] Refers to Luther’s doctrine of sola fide (Latin, “faith alone”), which he found expressed in Rom 3:28 in particular. In his translation of that verse Luther tightened Paul’s expression “a person is justified by faith” by adding the word “alone”: “a person is justified without the works of the Law, by faith alone.” Die Bibel, oder die ganze Heilige Schrift des alten und neuen Testaments, nach der deutschen Uebersetzung D. Martin Luthers. Mit einer Vorrede vom Prälaten Dr. Hüffell [The Bible, or All the Sacred Writings of the Old and New Testaments, according to the German Translation of Dr. Martin Luther: With a Preface by the Prelate Dr. Hüffell] (Karlsruhe, 1836; ASKB 3; abbreviated hereafter as Die Bibel nach der deutschen Uebersetzung D. Martin Luthers). Luther’s doctrine of faith also included the view, based on his reading of Rom 1:17, that a person who has been justified lives by faith alone― though in his translation of this verse, Luther did not add the word “alone.” Der Geitz ist sein selbst Stieffmutter. Scriver] Freely rendered from § 64 in “Von der zukünfftigen himmlischen Seligkeit der gläubigen Seelen, / Die III. Predigt, / Welche, wie sie die Welt und deren Eitelkeit betrachtet, / Fürstellet aus Pred. Salom. I, 2” [On the Future Heavenly Blessedness of Believing Souls, / Sermon III, in Which We Observe the World and Its Vanity / Based on Eccl 1:2], in M. Christian Scrivers, Fürstl. Sächs. OberHof-Predigers und Consistorial-Raths zu Qvedlinburg, / Seelen-Schatz, / Darinnen / Von der menschlichen Seelen hohen Würde, tieffen und kläglichen SündenFall, Busse und Erneuerung durch Christum, göttlichen heiligen Leben, vielfältigen Creutz und Trost im Creutz, seligen Abschied aus dem Leibe, triumphirlichen und frölichen Einzug in den Himmel, und ewiger Freude und Seligkeit, erbaulich und tröstlich

•

1850

gehandelt wird; / Vormahls / In denen ordentlichen Wochen-Predigten seiner anvertrauten Christlichen Gemeinde fürgezeiget, und auf Anhalten vieler gottseligen Seelen weiter ausgeführet [M. Christian Scriver, Chief Court Chaplin and Consistorial Councillor to the Prince of Saxony at Quedlinburg, / SoulTreasure, / In Which / The Great Value of the Human Soul; the Deep and Lamentable Fall of Sin; Repentance and Renewal in Christ; Divine Holy Life; the Manifold Cross and Comfort in the Cross; the Blessed Parting from the Body; and the Triumphant and Joyful Entrance into Heaven and Eternal Joy and Blessedness Are Treated Edifyingly and Consolingly. / Formerly / Presented during the Regular Weekly Sermons to His Entrusted Christian Congregation, and Expanded to Apprehend Many Religious Souls], 5 vols., 8th ed., with a new introduction by Johann Georg Pritius (Magdeburg and Leipzig, 1723 [1675–1692]; ASKB 261–263; abbreviated hereafter as M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz, vol. 5, p. 824, col. 1: “Thus says the German proverb: Miserliness is its own stepmother.” ― Scriver: Christian Scriver (1629 –1693), German Lutheran theologian, pastor, devotional writer, and composer of hymns. For additional information, see the explanatory note to NB21:6. John the Baptist . . . to Xt . . . Are you the one who is to come?] Refers to Mt 11:2–6. He has attacked Herod, and therefore he is now imprisoned] Refers to Mt 14:3–4. ― Herod,: Variant: first written “Herod.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. does not want him to be . . . a judge, but merely to prepare the way for Xt] Alludes to Mt 11:7–19, esp. vv. 7–11. See also Mt 3:3. ― a judge: Alludes to John the Baptist’s proclamation of judgment; see Mt 3:7–12. “Blessed is he who is not offended”] Freely cited from Mt 11:6.

21

Xt lived to be 34 years old] In Kierkegaard’s time, it was widely held that Jesus was thirty years old when he was baptized by John the Baptist and that his public ministry lasted three years. See G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch

2

131

25

27

32

132

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 60–63

2 4

5

132

132m

15

1

zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Specialized Biblical Dictionary for Use as a Handbook for Students, Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71; abbreviated hereafter as Biblisches Realwörterbuch), vol. 1, pp. 654–667, where it is explained that according to the three synoptic gospels, Jesus’ public activity lasted one year, while according to the gospel of John, it lasted three years. the duration of a generation] The traditional view was that a generation was thirty-three years. the Temple was destroyed in the year 70] The Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by the occupying Roman forces under Emperor Titus in the year a.d. 70; see Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch, vol. 2, p. 683. the normal duration of a hum. life] The traditional specification of a human life as lasting seventy years can be found, e.g., in Ps 90:10 and in Robin Waterfield, trans., Herodotus: The Histories (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), bk. 1, chap. 32. idea of the papacy . . . is related to the entire human race] That is, the idea that as the apostle Peter’s successor or vicar (vicarius Petri) and as the possessor of the “chair of Peter” (cathedra Petri), the pope is not only bishop of Rome but also the head, both with respect to doctrine and to jurisdiction, of the entire Church and the guarantor of its unity. This is based on Mt 16:18–19, 28:20; Lk 22:31–32; Jn 21:15–19. Kierkegaard could also be referring to the fact that in the course of the 11th century the pope was increasingly presented as the bishop of the Church Universal (episcopus universalis) and that since the 12th century he had borne the titles “vicar of God” (vicarius Dei) and “vicar of Christ” (vicarius Christi). See §§ 32, 71, 103, and 132 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 127,16), vol. 1, pp. 106–109, 234–237, 372–378, and 497–503. See also DD:162, dated October 30, 1838, in KJN 1, 257–258. An individual man, seized by Xnty, becomes a missionary] Refers to Paul.

•

1850

625

that there is joy in being subjected to mockery] See “But It Is Blessed―to Suffer Mockery for a Good Cause,” the sixth of the “Thoughts That Wound from Behind―for Upbuilding,” which constitute the third section of Christian Discourses (1848), in CD, 222–233; SKS 10, 230-240.

34

132

Clara Raphael] Refers to Clara Raphael. Tolv Breve [Clara Raphael: Twelve Letters], ed. J. L. Heiberg (Copenhagen, 1851: ASKB 1531), advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 297, December 18, 1850, as having been published, but according to a receipt dated December 31, 1850, from the bookseller C. A. Reitzel (KA, D packet, 7 layer 6), Kierkegaard had already acquired it on December 15, 1850, which, however, was a Sunday. The anonymous author of the work was Mathilde Fibiger (1830–1872), a campaigner for women’s rights; from 1849, teacher at Maltrupgård, the residence of a forest steward, near Sakskøbing on the island of Lolland in southern Denmark. In the following notes reference is made, first, to the first edition, and thereafter to Lise Busk-Jensen’s critical edition of Mathilde Fibiger, Clara Raphael / Minona, in the series Danske Klassikere [Danish Classics] (Copenhagen: Det danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab, 1994; abbreviated hereafter as DSL). A young girl] In a passage from correspondence between the author and Heiberg, included in the preface titled “The Editor to the Readers,” the author calls Clara Raphael “a young girl” (Clara Raphael, p. vii [DSL, p. 10]). See also the eighth letter, p. 74 (DSL, p. 63), where Clara Raphael describes herself as “a young girl”; and p. 33 (DSL, p. 36), where, in an account of a conversation, Clara Raphael is called “a young, cheerful girl.” Full name: Clara Raphael] The letters are signed by Clara Raphael, except for the eleventh letter, which is signed by “Anna K,” i.e., the young baroness, “Miss Anna,” Clara Raphael’s new friend. Age: 20 years] See the preface, “The Editor to the Readers,” in which Heiberg provides information about the author: “The work was written by a quite young girl, around twenty years old” (Clara Raphael, p. iv [DSL, p. 9]). Mathilde Fibiger had been born on December 13, 1830, and was thus twenty years old in December 1850.

14

133

17

17

17

626 18

18

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

Appearance: pretty] See p. 34 (DSL, p. 36), where Clara Raphael hears Miss Carlsen say to Madam Star, the priest’s wife: “Miss Raphael is of course a lovely girl!” See also p. 25 (DSL, p. 30), where Clara Raphael speaks of herself as “young, happy, and pretty,” when she was at her first ball following her confirmation. Religion: freethinker] Refers to Clara Raphael’s reference to what she calls “my religion,” i.e., ideas not subject to Christian dogma; see e.g., pp. 58–59 (DSL, pp. 52–53), where, in a conversation with Pastor Star, she says: “My religion is no secret . . . I believe in God and love him above everything in the world, but precisely for that reason I cannot understand all the talk about God’s wrath, the curse of original sin, etc., which are the foundations of the Christian religion. I have never had the feeling that a mediator between myself and God is necessary . . . I know nothing whatever of all the regret and fear and conversion that is spoken of from the pulpit. Undaunted, I walk the path that seems right to me, and for me turning around would be precisely what constitutes the fall into sin.” After Star voices emphatic objections, she continues: “What I believe is simply that the person who fights against sin has not fallen to sin. It has never cowed me in such a way that I have felt my soul bereft of freedom and strength.” On a subsequent Sunday, Pastor Star has the conversation serve as the occasion of preaching a sermon in opposition to her views, and afterward she holds an improvised lecture on religion at the parsonage, beginning as follows: “I can derive my faith from the myth of the Fall in the Bible; it is only the serpent for which I have no use” (p. 63 [DSL, p. 56]). And further, on pp. 64–65 (DSL, p. 57): “God truly loved the world, so he had a glimmer of his own being be born as a human being in order to save those who were lost. But it was a ray of the sun of truth, which is God, not his son, and this ray has again reunited itself with the light from which it came forth. There is one God, the Father of all; I cannot imagine him divided into three. I believe in the Holy Unity, not in the Holy Trinity.” See also p. 71 (DSL, pp. 60–61), where, following a summary of her lecture, Clara Raphael writes: “I do

•

1850

not understand Christianity, I thought. Why should I, by myself, attempt to force my way in where only an angel of annunciation can lead us? Indeed, God speaks to me through everything I see and hear that is beautiful and lovable, and in a language I understand! So why should I listen to what I find incomprehensible[?] ‘If you do not love your brother, whom you see, how can love God, whom you do not see?’ If I do not love God in art, in nature, in all human beings―who are created in his image―how, then can I love him in Christ, whom I do not understand[?] Thus I will not brood about, but console myself with the notion that if Christ is the only way to God, he cannot be the way to the tomb of freedom and personality.” What drives Clara Raphael onward in the battle for “the well-being of humankind” is “the power of the divine idea” (pp. 74–75 [DSL, p. 63]). Employment: governess in the household of a steward] See p. 7 (DSL, p. 19), where Clara Raphael writes: “In the position I held [in the household of an aunt] I could not find any appropriate sphere of activity, and I had to do something. Therefore I came here. I am to bring up these sweet children! I have been entrusted with teaching them to treasure the greatest joys of life, to cultivate their natural tendencies toward what is good and beautiful.” This position as a governess was, however not with the steward but with “tenant Bech,” whom she describes as “that little, fine man” (p. 8 [DSL, pp. 19–20]): “He in fact does not have anything other than the title in common with a tenant, because the steward (who, fortunately, only shows himself rarely) runs the entire estate.” Character: original] See the next note. is attested to by herself] Clara Raphael continually presents herself as someone who stands out as different and better than those with whom she is surrounded; see, e.g., pp. 10–15 (DSL, pp. 21–25) and esp. p. 16 (DSL, p. 25): “What is affectation? ‘Something one puts on,’ will be the reply, and it is true. Now, it would therefore be affected if I, who am rather different, took upon myself an ordinary nature in order to please people.” See also pp. 23, 24, 28–29, 68, 75–76, and esp. pp.

18

20 20

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

21

21

24

47–48 (DSL, pp. 29–30, 30, 33–34, 59, 63–64, and esp. 45–46), where Clara Raphael, in a conversation with Camilla Riis, says: “Freedom is the only happiness I am searching for . . . I must be myself and fight for my existence. It is no shame to fall in an honest war, but to flee as soon as one comes under fire: there, you see, is shame. It is better to die with honor than to live with shame―that was the motto of our forefathers, and I have inherited it from them. Indeed, I am not challenging the world, but I am only defending myself against its attack upon my independence . . . I surrender the present reality for the ideal that beckons to me from above. No one can serve two masters, and I have chosen.” her friend Mathilde] Clara Raphael’s friend Mathilde is the recipient of the twelve letters, but although there are repeated references to letters from Mathilde to Clara, they are not reproduced in the book. Perhaps Kierkegaard is confusing her with Camilla Riis, another friend; see the next note. a number of respectable women and men from the district] See p. 15 (DSL, p. 25), where Clara Raphael writes about her friend Camilla Riis: “Camilla, who faithfully reports to me everything that people say about me, has lately been much concerned with the circumstance that I am found to be affected. When I ask whether she shares this opinion, she replies, ‘Yes, you are not at all like other people―you would be perfect if you were a bit more down-to-earth.’ ” See also p. 47 (DSL, p. 45), where it is related that Camilla says something similar. See also p. 34 (DSL, p. 36), where, after her first conversation with Miss Carlsen, Clara Raphael writes: “Later, I heard her say to Madame Star, ‘Miss Raphael is certainly a lovely girl! I cannot conceive how you can find her to be conceited and affected.’ ‘Yes,’ replied Madame Star, ‘right now she is behaving in childlike and modest fashion because she wants to win you over. She is certainly aware that she has let herself be carried away by her peculiarities and that she is in ill odor here.’ ” See also p. 78 (DSL, p. 65). conceives the not-so-original idea: I will indeed be original] Perhaps a reference to p. 33 (DSL, p.

•

1850

627

36), where Clara Raphael says to Miss Carlsen: “I would rather be the least among the great than the greatest among the least!” The general opinion of Miss Carlsen, who has arranged language lessons and who also teaches music, is “that she is very original, but otherwise truly an excellent girl. Around here, being original is generally the worst thing that can be said about someone, so I cannot conceive how she is nonetheless capable of winning people’s approval” (pp. 31–32 [DSL, p. 35]). she searches for an idea . . . she does not want to marry] See pp. 73–74 (DSL, p. 62), where Clara Raphael writes: “It seems to me that there is a profound truth underlying the Catholic idea of the cloister―that whoever wants to live and fight for what is of heaven must totally forsake the world . . . When the idea appears to a person’s soul, then, like the merchant who found the costly pearl, he must give everything he owns in order to acquire it . . . if one wants the eternal, one must give up the temporal . . . The same idea also underlay the beautiful term for a nun: the bride of God. Whoever wants to live for heaven here on earth must marry his innermost being to the idea, and battle against the worldly with all his strength. But to retreat to the cloister resembles more a flight from the battle than an attack― it would be taking the idea literally instead of spiritually.” This apparently prompts her friend Mathilde to pose the following question, which Clara reproduces on p. 84 (DSL, p. 70): “Is the spiritual life of the cloister to be understood to mean that you will never marry? What will you do, then, if you come to love a man?” To which Clara replies on pp. 84–85 (DSL, p. 70): “You will surely laugh when I say that I could sooner fall in love with a lovely young girl than with a man. Gentlemen have so many unpleasant traits that annoy me. Beyond this, all I can say is that I will not marry today or tomorrow―or probably ever.” the idea: the emancipation of women] See p. 84 (DSL, p. 69), where Clara Raphael relates the following question, which her friend Mathilde has presumably posed in a letter: “First of all, you must finally tell me what it really is you want to

27

30

628

31

134

1 3 4

6

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

fight for, and then―how do you want to fight for it?” And Clara replies: “I will struggle, I will live for, what I understand as the emancipation of women. You ask: In what way? Just remember that Rome was not built in a day! Is it not something great simply to know what one wants? The way in which it is to be done does not become clear to a person in a day or in two days. The plan is gradually taking form in my mind, but so far is it from being complete that there can be no question of communicating it. Nonetheless, I have already given you a hint concerning it in the verse cited from Tegnér: ‘And fight for the well-being of humanity with the pen, with the voice!’ ” From her letters one learns nothing more concrete about this idea of hers] But see pp. 25, 43– 44., 51–55, 65–66 (DSL, pp. 31, 42–43, 48–50, 57). One day she takes communion] → 134,8. a religious education that is certainly unusual in a young girl] → 133,18. with the editor of the book, one cannot admire enough] See the preface, “The Editor to the Readers” (p. vii [DSL, p. 12]), where Heiberg writes that it must sooner “awaken amazement that such a young girl has come so far in her thinking, than that she has not yet come to its conclusion.” read . . . in Magnus Eirikson’s book on . . . the Trinity] Refers to a work by the Icelandic theologian and author Magnús Eiríksson (1806–1881), Om Baptister og Barnedaab, samt flere Momenter af Den kirkelige og speculative Christendom [On Baptists and Infant Baptism and Several Aspects of Ecclesiastical and Speculative Christianity] (Copenhagen, 1844). Eiríksson received his theology degree from the University of Copenhagen in 1837 and thereafter worked in Copenhagen as a private tutor; Kierkegaard was a source of inspiration for his writings. After having attended a lengthy worship service that included the baptism of several infants, Clara Raphael gets involved in a discussion with Pastor Star, in which she argues against infant baptism and in favor of “the Anabaptists,” i.e., in favor of adult baptism (pp. 56–57 [DSL, pp. 51–52]). Concerning her rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity → 133,18.

•

1850

She takes communion and promises God that she will live for her idea] See p. 88 (DSL, p. 72), where, in her ninth letter, Clara Raphael relates: “Today I took communion. I went to church this morning, entirely alone . . . Everything in the natural surroundings was so indescribably peaceful; within myself there was also a peace: the lofty calm granted us by a firm decision, a complete dedication to a holy cause. When I knelt before the altar I gave my entire soul to God in the promise to fight until my death for truth and enlightenment, for the happiness of humanity and the honor of God. I promised that no consideration of earthly success would ever divert my soul from the eternity to which I dedicated myself.” Clara subsequently remembers this vow (p. 98 [DSL, pp. 78–79]). Then she goes home―and falls in love] In her tenth letter, Clara Raphael tells of her love for the young baron Axel and his love for her (pp. 93–97 [DSL, pp. 75–78]). virtuous as Charles was] Refers, in Scribe’s play Den første Kjærlighed, to the relationship of Charles to the seamstress Pamela, while he and his cousin Emmeline were in love with one another. In sc. 16, Charles relates this eight years later, though now disguised as Rinville, in a conversation with Emmeline: “To see Charles was to love him instantaneously. Charles was virtuous, but he could not deny his feelings. In her despair, Pamela wanted to put an end to her life. She had already raised the fatal dagger to her breast―well, it was not really a dagger, but a pair of sewing scissors. Charles must either marry her or see her die right before his eyes” (A. E. Scribe, Den første Kjærlighed. Lystspil i een Act [First Love: A Comedy in One Act], trans. J. L. Heiberg [Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB U 98], in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater], no. 45, p. 13). See “The First Love” in the first part of Either/Or (1843) in EO 1, 231–279, esp. 251; SKS 2, 225–270, esp. 244. From its premiere at the Royal Theater on June 10, 1831 through May 29, 1849, the play was performed seventy-four times and was revived in May 1854. she will not marry] See pp. 98–100 (DSL, pp. 78–80), where Clara Raphael describes how it

8

13

15

16

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

17

18

24

suddenly became clear to her that by marrying she would both be violating the promise she had made to God at the altar (→ 134,8) and be deceiving Axel if he were to lead her as his bride to that same altar. She therefore decided to write to him: “Oh, God! I wrote that I had made a promise to another, (these cruel words were the only ones that were clear to me); I asked him to forget me, for I was not worthy of him” (p. 100 [DSL, p. 79]). How much she suffers from this decision . . . to her sickbed] In the eleventh letter to Mathilde, written by baroness Anna at Clara Raphael’s request, Anna relates how, after her decision, Clara had sat up wakeful for two days, become weak, had wept, had become dizzy, had a high fever and febrile hallucinations, and was therefore compelled to remain in bed (pp. 101–107 [DSL, pp. 81–85]). no one knows how much she suffers, says her closest [female] friend] Perhaps a reference to the following passage in the eleventh letter, where baroness Anna relates: “But suddenly she [Clara Raphael] turned her head away, wrested herself away from me, and said: ‘Do not like me, Anna! Do not speak to me like that! You think― you don’t know―read it!’ She handed me the beginning of a letter to you. ‘Yes, I know everything,’ I said, ‘but do you think that I like you less because of that? Are we not friends, sister?’ . . . The letter confirmed what I was already certain about, that she loved my brother. The rest of it I did not really understand, but she must of course have previously made a decision to live for one or another idea” (pp. 102–103 [DSL, pp. 81–82]). she marries the beloved―but as brother and sister] Refers to the twelfth letter, in which Clara Raphael relates that she has received a letter from her beloved Axel in which he writes, “I am convinced that your feelings have already been purified into the clear flames of sisterly love, and I promise you that by your own name―which is to me the holiest of names―all my efforts will be toward ennobling my passion for you, to purge from them every taint of self-love. But you must help me in this, Clara! Grant me not only a brother’s place in your heart, but also a brother’s pre-

•

1850

629

cious right to live for you and with you. This can happen only if, before the world, you become my spouse; before God and one another we will live together as loving siblings. No passion on my part will disturb your peace, for you shall not see me again before my feelings for you have become those of a brother, only stronger and even more unselfish” (p. 109 [DSL, pp. 86–87]). In this connection, Clara Raphael writes, at the conclusion of her letter: “Is he not noble, great? He corresponds to the ideal of a man that I sometimes imagined in my dreams, but never expected to encounter in life. And he wants to be my brother!” (p. 110 [DSL, p. 87]). from novels . . . respect for him, but I cannot love him] See “The First Love” in the first part of Either/Or, where Emmeline is thought of as “standing before Aunt Judith, if she were alive, daring to say to her: ‘I do not love Rinville. I have never loved him. I love only Charles, and I say again: one loves only once, and the first love is the true love. But I have respect for Rinville, and therefore I have married him and obeyed my father’ ” (EO 1, 257; SKS 2, 250. Also sc. 14 in Scribe, Den første Kjærlighed, p. 11). I can only love him as can a sister] No source for this has been identified. a couple of men want to be married, . . . as respectable as a brother and a sister marrying.] Variant: changed from “a couple of men want to be married.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. A long-winded preface by . . . Theater Director, Councillor of State, R. Heiberg] Refers to the preface, “The Editor to the Readers,” by J. L. Heiberg in Clara Raphael, pp. iii–x (DSL, pp. 9–13). ― Councillor of State: J. L. Heiberg was awarded the title of actual councillor of state on May 4, 1850. ― R.: Knight (Danish, Ridder) of the Dannebrog, a title Heiberg had held since June 28, 1840. ― Heiberg: Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), Danish author, translator, editor, critic of drama and literature, Hegelian philosopher, and popularizer of Hegelian philosophy. After having served as a lecturer in Danish literature at the University of Kiel in the period 1822–1825, Heiberg was appointed titular professor in 1829,

29

31 37

1

135

630

3

6

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

and in the period 1830–1836, he taught logic, aesthetics, and Danish literature at the Royal Military Academy. From 1828 to 1839 he was a playwright and permanent translator at the Royal Theater, where he was appointed director in 1849. In the 1840s, Heiberg was Denmark’s premier tastemaker, even though he had all but stopped writing criticism. he does his best to demonstrate that this book is an extraord. production] See the preface, “The Editor to the Readers” (p. iii [DSL, p. 9]), where Heiberg writes: “The more I appreciate the fact that I am the person whose lot it has become to introduce these pages to the world, the more I wish to do so in such a way as truly to contribute to gaining them the recognition that it seems to me they deserve, but that―this is my hope―they both can and will find without assistance.” A few lines later, Heiberg informs the reader that “the work was written by a quite young girl, around twenty years old, and that the reader here receives it exactly as it came from her hand, without my having changed the least thing in it,” and in his introduction he tells the reader that he has provided these details “in order that this work― with its highly distinctive character, its great extroverted energy, and its equally great introverted resignation, as well as the unusual maturity in its presentation and style―both in the total impression it makes and in its details, not mislead the reader into thinking that the author of the book is an elderly woman who can draw upon the experiences and observations of a long life.” He shows . . . the idea of the Protestant monastery . . . as sister and brother] Refers to the preface, “The Editor to the Readers” (p. v [DSL, p. 10]), where Heiberg writes: “Her [Clara Raphael’s] resignation is in fact not cloistered, not Catholic, but Protestant. Her flight from the world to God is not a negation of the world but a purifying bath in the divine springs from which she will return to the world, to its struggles and toil, and will purify herself through participation in them. In the whole of this view there is something that recalls the Maid of Orleans, a figure that is thus not without influence upon Clara. But just as that sublime figure has an essentially Catholic, nunlike

•

1850

aspect, so, nonetheless, is there in the genuinely Protestant and by no means cloistered Clara a sort of reflection of this, which emerges particularly at the end of the book.” The idea of living in the married state as brother and sister (→ 134,24) is put forth at the end of the book. the editor unconditionally concedes the merit . . . to his female client Raphael] Refers to the preface, “The Editor to the Readers” (pp. v–vi [DSL, pp. 10–11]), “In the correspondence between the author and myself, we have repeatedly debated―in addition to other details of the piece―this in particular, though without coming to agreement. I put forth the view that the womanly ideal could not generally be defined as the Maid of Orleans, who had a special mission, and therefore corresponded only to an individual aspect of the ideal. I pointed out that to be sure, the highest womanly ideal known to Christendom is presented as a virgin, but in unity with being a mother, a unity that, independent of all dogmatic explanations, expresses that the ideal includes both a heavenly and an earthly element. To this I received the reply: ‘I believe that every noble woman shares the lot of Mary. At one time, the angel of annunciation said to her―at one time she heard these solemn words: Hail, thou blessed among women!―But the heavenly messenger shows itself in different forms for everyone, and the tasks he assigns them differ. For one, the duties of a wife and mother constitute a sphere of activities that is rich in blessings. Another person feels called to take a more daring stance in life in a more manifest battle for what is heavenly. The angel of annunciation appeared to me in the form of a Valkyrie, and I believe it did for Clara as well.’ ” Heiberg continues on p. vii (DSL, p. 11): “Perhaps yet another remark by the author will shed light on Clara’s character, both in this respect and generally: ‘It was not my intention to present an ideal, but an idealist. She is not supposed to be free of failings. If poets want to present the ideal in pure and unfalsified form, then let it be presented in the form of an angel of light, not as a young girl. To do the latter would be a bitter irony upon the innate imperfection and weakness of our nature.’ ”

13

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

16

19

reserving for himself . . . objections . . . doctrine of the Trinity] Refers to the preface, “The Editor to the Readers” (p. vii [DSL, p. 11]), where Heiberg writes: “The limit I thought I found in the author’s thinking was at the disputed point that she makes ideality altogether too abstract so that it almost coincides with the Idea. And, for her, even this remains in an altogether undefined universality. It seems to me that this is the case at least with respect to the Idea that is supposed to be the guiding star for Clara’s life. Undoubtedly, the difficulties she finds in the doctrine of the Trinity are also occasioned by the lack of sufficient separation between Idea and ideal.” contribution concerning . . . the Trinity . . . prompt Prof. Martensen to deal further with the matter] The dogma of the Trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is fundamental to H. L. Martensen’s dogmatics and is reflected in his work, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), which in addition to its introductory chapters consists of “Læren om Faderen” [The Doctrine of the Father], pp. 137–279; “Læren om Sønnen” [The Doctrine of the Son]; pp. 281–392; and “Læren om Aanden” [The Doctrine of the Spirit], pp. 393–582. Clara Raphael refers to Martensen at one point in Clara Raphael, p. 52 (DSL, p. 48): “What is it to live[?] In one of his discourses Martensen has answered it as follows: It is to increase in wisdom and grace before God and human beings.” ― Prof. Martensen: Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884), Danish theologian and priest; earned the cand. theol. degree in 1832; served as a tutor for theological students at the university, including Søren Kierkegaard; traveled abroad (visiting, in particular, Berlin, Heidelberg, Munich, Vienna, and Paris) in 1834–1836; received the lic. theol. degree in 1837; in 1838, appointed lecturer in theology at the University of Copenhagen; in 1840, received an honorary doctorate from Kiel and was appointed extraordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen; in 1845, appointed preacher at the royal court; Knight of the Dannebrog in 1847; in 1850, appointed ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen. On July 19, 1849, Martensen’s major work, Den christelige Dogmatik

•

1850

631

[Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), was published; a second edition appeared on May 22, 1850. This work placed Martensen in direct opposition to Kierkegaard, occasioning a wider conflict about the relation between faith and reason. Prof. M. transfers the monastery to the other world . . . refrain from marriage] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in § 276 in the section “Mellemtilstanden i de Dødes Rige” [The Intermediate State in the Kingdom of the Dead], in Den christelige Dogmatik, p. 547: “The kingdom of the dead is the kingdom of inwardness, of quiet self-reflection, a kingdom of recollection in the full sense of the word, in the sense that the soul here journeys into its own interior, returns to the basis of life, to the true interior of all that exists. And the purgative significance of this condition consists precisely in this.” In an additional note on § 276, pp. 549–550, Martensen writes that “within the kingdom of inwardness there must also be assumed a certain outwardness. In the world of the spirit, the soul cannot be thought of as being totally without a nature. For one thing, it is necessary to assume that the coming corporeality, or the resurrection of the body, is prepared for through a concealed natural development, and for another, the apostle Paul teaches expressly that even though we do not possess the full integrity of our being, for we have become unclothed in death and will only become clothed again at the return of the Lord, yet in the intermediate state we are not to be totally naked, but are to be clothed [2 Cor 5:2–4]. A certain clothing of the soul in the kingdom of the dead―in that (here we are speaking in human fashion) cloistered world―must thus be assumed. But inasmuch as we are compelled in this way to assume this certainly obscure notion of an intermediate state in the kingdom of the dead, this does not negate the fact that the fundamental determinant of this sphere is that of inwardness and spirituality.” Concerning marriage, Martensen writes in a note to § 290 in the section “Herrens sidste Tilkommelse og alle Tings Fuldendelse” [The Final Coming of the Lord and the Fulfillment of All Things], p. 580: “Is . . . the difference between

24

632

27 28

134m

25

30

135m

1

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63

man and woman to persist in that kingdom [of blessedness]? This we cannot doubt, as it has such comprehensive significance for the whole of psychic individuality. Yet we also know with certainty that it is something that, after it has once fallen away, is no longer worthy of being resurrected from the dead: ‘those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. Indeed they cannot die anymore, because they are like angels and the children of God, being children of the resurrection.’ ” See Lk 20:35–36. than Adam did before Eve had been created] See Gen 2:7, 2:18–23. created. _________ ] Variant: The long horizontal dividing line was changed from a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. an extremely original turn,] Variant: first written “an extremely original turn.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Herr Zierlich . . . that men’s and women’s clothing should hang together in the same closet] Presumably, a reference to a scene in J. L. Heiberg’s vaudeville Aprilsnarrene, eller Intriguen i Skolen [The April Fools, or Intrigue at School] (1826), in which Miss Trumfmeier related that she had been locked in a closet, and when it became clear that Herr Zierlich’s Sunday suit was hanging in it, Madame Rar exclaimed, “It is very unpleasant for you to find yourself closeted with a man’s suit.” See J. L. Heibergs Samlede Skrifter. Skuespil [The Collected Writings of J. L. Heiberg: Plays], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833–1841; ASKB 1553–1559), vol. 4 (1835), pp. 111–112. From its premiere on April 22, 1826, through December 18, 1844, the play was performed sixty-five times at the Royal Theater; it was revived in March 1856. formerly the gehorsamer Diener of the System] Refers to the fact that J. L. Heiberg had declared himself a Hegelian philosopher in 1824, and in 1830s and 1840s he had introduced Hegel’s philosophy into Denmark and served as its defender. See, e.g., Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie eller den speculative Logik. Som Ledetraad ved Forelæsningerne paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole [Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy, or

•

1850

Speculative Logic, as a Guide to the Lectures at the Royal Military Academy] (Copenhagen, 1832); Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid. Et Indbydelses-Skrift til en Række af philosophiske Forelæsninger [On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age: An Invitation to a Series of Philosophical Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 568); Indlednings-Foredrag til det i November 1834 begyndte logiske Cursus paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole [Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course Begun in November 1834 at the Royal Military Academy] (Copenhagen, 1835); and “Det logiske System. Første Afhandling, indeholdende: Paragrapherne 1–23” [The System of Logic: First Essay, Containing §§ 1–23], in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus, Journal for the Speculative Idea], ed. J. L. Heiberg, nos. 1 and 2 (Copenhagen, 1837–1838; ASKB 569; abbreviated hereafter as Perseus), no. 2, pp. 1–45. ― the System: Refers to Kierkegaard’s earlier polemic, not only specifically against the philosophical system Hegel himself developed, e.g., in his Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences], but also against Hegelianism, particularly the attempts by J. L. Heiberg and Rasmus Nielsen (→ 136,34) to build up an all-encompassing logical system; see, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 51; SKS 4, 356) and Prefaces (P, 14, 65; SKS 4, 478, 525, with accompanying notes). By the words “the system” Kierkegaard thus seems to allude more generally to the philosophical attempt to understand and explain the world as a unity with the help of abstract logical categories or discursive thinking; at times the term seems almost to serve as a synonym for objective knowledge. Kierkegaard’s most comprehensive polemic against “the system” appears in Concluding Unscientific Postscript; see, e.g., CUP, 13–17, 106–125; SKS 7, 22–26, 103– 120. the unforgettable author of promises] Refers to the circumstance that in his preface to “The System of Logic. First Essay, Containing §§ 1–23,” J. L. Heiberg had written: “The author hereby permits himself to communicate the first contribution toward the execution of a long-entertained plan, namely to present a system of logic

2

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 63–66

4

6

135

36

. . . Further, with the present contribution and its continuation, he has the intention of paving the way for an aesthetics he has long wanted to produce” (Perseus, no. 2, p. 3). However, nothing else saw the light of day after this preliminary contribution to “the system,” which thus remained unfinished and Heiberg’s promises unfulfilled. See the conclusion to the first preface in Prefaces (1844) (P, 14; SKS 4, 478). the astronomically ascended professor] Refers to J. L. Heiberg’s great interest in astronomy, which first found expression in his annual Urania, 1844–1846. See, e.g., “Det astronomiske Aar” [The Astronomical Year] in Urania. Aarbog for 1844 [Urania: Annual for 1844] (Copenhagen, 1843; ASKB U 57), pp. 75–160, where Heiberg inserts critical remarks concerning Kierkegaard’s Repetition (1843). the defender and vendor of the convent―the Clara Convent] → 135,6. Guizot says: The only policy for the state is indifference toward all religion] Refers to the public debate in France after C. F. Montalembert, a right-wing politician and defender of Church’s rights and independence vis-à-vis the state, had presented the National Assembly on December 10, 1850, with a detailed committee report concerning a proposed law on the introduction of Sabbath laws on Sundays. Following an account of the committee report, the account of the debate as it appeared in French newspapers was summarized under the heading “Udenlandske Efterretninger” [Foreign Bulletins] in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 294, December 16, 1850, where it was noted “La Presse [a French newspaper] believes that only one policy toward the Church is possible on the part of the state, and that is the one stated by Guizot: absolute indifference.” ― Guizot: François Pierre Guillaume Guizot (1787–1874), French historian and politician; from 1840 until the Revolution of February 1848, served as foreign minister and subsequently also as prime minister of the July Monarchy, but in February 1848 he was removed by King Louis Philippe, after which his political career ended.

•

1850

633

Prof. Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, 1840–1841; from 1841, extraordinary professor in moral philosophy, and from 1850, ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen; Knight of the Dannebrog, 1847. In the early 1840s, he was a marked Hegelian, but in the mid-1840s, he came under Kierkegaard’s influence, and they became friends in 1848 (concerning this, see, e.g., NB7:6, from August 1848; NB7:114, from November 1848; and NB10:32, from February 1849, in KJN 5, 80–81, 145, 283; and Pap. X 6 B 124, p. 164). At that time, Kierkegaard believed that he would soon die, and he therefore wanted someone to publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74, from August 1848, in KJN 5, 56–57; NB14:90, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 402–405; and the draft of a never-published article from ca. 1849–1850, “Something concerning My Relationship to Prof. Nielsen,” in Pap. X 6 B 99, pp. 110–112). In this connection, Kierkegaard considered acquainting someone else with his ideas concerning his writings (see Pap. X 6 B 124, p. 164, a draft of another never-published article, “Concerning My Relationship to Herr Prof. Nielsen”). He chose Rasmus Nielsen, whom he had once met on the street and with whom he subsequently discussed his views on walks they took every Thursday. But Kierkegaard decided to wait until after Nielsen had published his next book before deciding how useful Nielsen might be. On May 19, 1849, Nielsen’s big book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed. Forelæsninger over Jesu Liv [The Faith of the Gospels and Modern Consciousness: Lectures on the Life of Jesus] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 700; abbreviated hereafter as Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed), was published; it profoundly disappointed Kierkegaard. The book, which scarcely makes mention of Kierkegaard, was nonetheless so very much influenced by Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works that reviewers declared that Nielsen was a disciple of Kierkegaard; Kierkegaard himself, on the other hand, was full of worry and annoyance (see, e.g., NB11:46 in KJN 6, 28). Soon afterward, when H. L. Martensen

34

136

634

137m

7

9

137

10

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 66–67

published Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 135,19), where Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings were ridiculed in the preface, Rasmus Nielsen attacked Martensen with the polemical piece, Mag. S. Kierkegaards ‘Johannes Climacus’ og Dr. H. Martensens ‘Christelige Dogmatik.’ En undersøgende Anmeldelse [Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s Dogmatics: An Investigative Review] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 701), which appeared on October 15, 1849. This led to a wide-ranging debate about the relation between faith and knowledge. Nielsen’s next major work was Evangelietroen og Theologien. Tolv Forelæsninger holdte ved Universitetet i Kjøbenhavn i Vinteren 1849–50 [The Faith of the Gospels and Theology: Twelve Lectures Held at the University of Copenhagen in the Winter of 1849–1850] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 702); the book was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 80, April 6, 1850, as having been published. In this work, Nielsen presents a more systematic argument, based on insights from Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings, that we must comprehend that faith cannot be comprehended. This was followed by Et par Ord i Anledning af Prof. Scharlings Apologie for Dr. Martensens Dogmatik [A Few Words on the Occasion of Prof. Scharling’s Defense of Dr. Martensen’s Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850), the publication of which was announced in Adresseavisen, no. 109, on May 11, 1850. Kierkegaard’s relation to Nielsen is illuminated in a number of journal entries and in a series of letters (published in LD and SKS 28) concerning, among other things, their break in April 1850. to destroy Martensen] i.e., with the attack on H. L. Martensen in the polemical piece Mag. S. Kierkegaards ‘Johannes Climacus’ og Dr. H. Martensens ‘Christelige Dogmatik.’ En undersøgende Anmeldelse (see the preceding note). admission . . . as . . . grudgingly as made necessary] See the preceding note. When Spener made his appearance . . . Nowadays, pietism constitutes the only fragment of support . . . the established order is lukewarm] See the next two notes. ― Spener: Philipp Jakob Spener (1635–1705), German Lutheran theo-

•

1850

logian and priest; magister in philosophy, 1653; doctor of theology, 1664; from 1666, senior priest in Frankfurt; from 1686, senior court preacher in Electoral Saxony; from 1691, dean of St. Nikolai in Berlin. In 1670, he arranged his first “divine assemblies,” i.e., domestic religious gatherings known as “collegia pietatis” (Latin, circles of piety). In all his ecclesiastical posts, Spener was deeply engaged in catechizing youth in working for religious awakening and an inner life of piety. From ca. 1690, he was embroiled in a bitter theological battle between pietism and Lutheran orthodoxy, with the orthodox accusing the pietists of holding heterodox views. He published a series of important works and carried on an extensive correspondence with all the factions within the pietist movement; he is often viewed as the father of German pietism. Kierkegaard owned Philipp Jakob Spener’s deutsche und lateinische theologische Bedenken. In einer zeitgemäßen Auswahl [Philipp Jakob Spener’s Theological Considerations in German and Latin: A Selection for the Times], ed. F.A.E. Hennicke (Halle 1838; ASKB 268). in Märklin: Darstellung . . . des modernen Pietismus, 1839] Reference to Christian Märklin, Darstellung und Kritik des modernen Pietismus [Presentation and Critique of Modern Pietism] (Stuttgart, 1839), pp. 15–16, where the author outlines the opposition between the insistence of Spener’s pietism on “living, inward appropriation of Christianity” and the “dead, fixed orthodoxy of the time,” which leveled unfounded charges of heterodoxy against the pietists, who took the position that “what is literal and given do not have absolute worth, but are valuable only as the expression and testimony of religious consciousness, which is what is primary and original.” Märklin, the author, viewing pietism in his contemporary context, finds it very relevant, inasmuch as it consists of “the tendency to lead the Christian faith out of its objectivity and into the sphere of consciousness, of the inner life.” ― Märklin: Christian Märklin (1807–1849), German Lutheran theologian, priest, and author. in Hosbach, Leben Speners, just at the end of the second part] Refers to the following passage in W. Hoßbach, Philipp Jakob Spener und seine

17

18

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 67–77

137

137

21

27 28

Zeit. Eine kirchenhistorische Darstellung [Philipp Jakob Spener and His Times: A Church-Historical View], 2 vols. (Berlin, 1828), vol. 2, p. 385: “It is very remarkable how much the changing spirit of the times has totally reversed their relationship to the dominant party in the Church. Spener and his adherents were accused by their opponents of indifferentism and heterodoxy; now the pietists are the preservers of orthodoxy.” ― Hosbach: Peter Wilhelm Heinrich Hoßbach (1784–1846), German Lutheran theologian, priest, and author. Les desirs innocens . . . ne meurent jamais . . . in Fernow, Petrarcas Leben] Quoted from Francesco Petrarca dargestellt von C. L. Fernow. Nebst dem Leben des Dichters und ausführlichen Ausgabenverzeichnissen [Francesco Petrarca, by C. L. Fernow, Together with the Poet’s Life and Detailed Notes on Editions], ed. Ludwig Hain (Altenburg, 1818), p. 52. The quoted material itself has not been identified. ― Fernow: Carl Ludwig Fernow (1763–1808), German pharmacist, aesthetician, and art historian. ― Petrarca: Francesco Petrarca (anglicized as Petrarch) (1304– 1374), Italian poet, philologist, and philosopher. Kierkegaard owned Francesco Petrarca’s sämmtliche italienische Gedichte [Complete Italian Poetry of Francesco Petrarca], trans. F. W. Bruckbräu, 6 vols. (Munich, 1827; ASKB 1932–1933). I do not box as one beating the air] Cited freely after 1 Cor 9:26. brings one’s own flesh into subjection] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 9:27.

138

1

They all run the race] Cited freely after 1 Cor 9:24.

138

14

go to hell] This expression occurs in Mk 9:43. someday, when God and Eternity pass judgment] This idea occurs a number of times in the NT, e.g., in Mt 12:36; Rom 9:28; 1 Pet 4:5. See also Mt 25:31–46.

15

138

20

Which Sin Cries Out to Heaven] The notion of an especially dreadful sin as “a sin that cries out to heaven” has its origin in Genesis 4, where God asks Cain what he had done, because Abel’s blood is crying out to God.

•

1850

635

to resist and] Variant: first written “to resist!”, with the exclamation point apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

29

138

Does he not . . . tell his disciples . . . how things will be for them if they remain faithful] See, e.g., Jn 16:1–4; see also Mt 10:17–18, 10:22, 24:9; Jn 15:20–21. He draws them to himself] Allusion to Jn 12:32. he . . . says that the person who wants to build a tower . . . how high a tower he can build] Refers to Lk 14:28–30.

27

139

the Sophists] → 118,32. sowing the seed] Allusion to Mt 13:3–23. His Reverence] Title commonly used in referring to a member of the clergy. In the Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) there were nine classes, each further subdivided into numerical subclasses. Titles and forms of address were assigned to persons in various official positions; “Your Reverence” was used in referring to clerics of the lowest rank or to those who were not included in the system of rank and precedence at all.

12

the syllogism of the main character in The Busy Trifler . . . 4 clerks and soon must take on another] A reference to act 1, sc. 6, of the comedy Den Stundesløse [The Busy Trifler] (1731) by Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754), Danish-Norwegian writer and scientist. The fussy Mr. Vielgeschrey refuses to allow his daughter Leonora to marry Leander, because Leander has not studied bookkeeping and so cannot assist him in his great business enterprises. This leads Leander to remark: “I do not know what business a man who does not occupy any position can be in!” Vielgeschrey responds: “I am so busy with business that I have no time to eat or drink. Pernille! He says that I have no business. You can testify in my behalf!” Maidservant Pernille: “Master has enough work for ten men. It is only his enemies who say that he has no business. After all, apart from me Master keeps 4 scribblers on staff, which is proof enough that he has plenty of business.” To which Vielgeschrey adds: “And I’m about to hire another pair!” Den

25

31 34

140

21 22

140

636

28

140

33

141

9

141

14

15

18 19

141

25

35

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 77–80

Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 5. The volumes have no date of publication and are unpaginated. 1,000 priests, not counting deans, bishops, etc.] According to the lists in the Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Ecclesiastical Yearbook for 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848 [went to press January 18, 1848]; ASKB 378), there were about 890 principal parishes in the kingdom of Denmark (i.e., without the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg), which employed about 1,050 priests, including bishops and deans; in addition to this there were about 120 personal chaplains. hate father and mother, etc. for Xnty’s sake] Refers, e.g., to Lk 14:26. we cannot speak of society with God] Variant: added. Pastor Paulli. Today . . . he preached on Stephen] Court priest J.H.V. Paulli (→ 129,3) preached on the day after Christmas, December 26, 1850, at high mass at Christiansborg Palace (→ 177m,2); see Adresseavisen, no. 303 (noon edition), December 24, 1850. The epistle text for the day after Christmas is Acts 6:8–15 (on Stephen before the council) and 7:54–60 (on the stoning of Stephen). December 26 is known as St. Stephen’s Day in the Western Church. he pointed out that this was not something one should “admire.”] Inasmuch as Paulli’s sermon was not published, it has not been possible to verify the remarks to which Kierkegaard refers. we should not admire it, but “give God the glory.”] See the preceding note. Pharisees . . . Xt had healed the person born blind] See the report of Jesus healing the man born blind in John 9; see esp. v. 24. reduplication] Kierkegaard often uses this term with reference to relations of reflection in which something abstract, or the content of something, is repeated (actualized) in concrete practice or existence. he accepted the help of the princes] On the role of German princes in advancing the Reformation,

•

1850

see, e.g., §§ 152–156 in Dr. Wilhelm Münschers Lærebog i den christelige Kirkehistorie til Brug ved Forelæsninger [Dr. Wilhelm Münscher’s Textbook of the History of the Christian Church, for Use in Conjunction with Lectures], trans. F. Münter, new rev. ed. by J. Møller (Copenhagen, 1831; ASKB 168), pp. 210–214. See also § 181 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 127,16), vol. 2, pp. 831–848. the Spandet-Grundtvig proposal now before Parliament] Refers to the reading in the Folketing of N. M. Spandet’s proposed law concerning freedom of religion, which would introduce civil marriage and abolish compulsory baptism and oath taking (→ 107,9). During the first reading of the bill, on November 14–16, 1850, N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 120,18) delivered a lengthy speech, which was printed in Dansk Kirketidende (→ 114,15), November 24, 1850, vol. 5, no. 60, cols. 990–996, and December 1, 1850, vol. 5, no. 61, cols. 1001–1003. Referring to “the need for freedom of religion as it is set forth in the constitution,” Grundtvig stated that he was wholly convinced that it “must be present in everyone who has any living faith―and on the other hand, that for the most part, those who do not feel this need constitute the mob who do not care about any sort of religious freedom other than being able, undisturbed, not only to avoid all faith, but [also] to ridicule and mock all faith with the greatest derision, even if on certain occasions they do submit to certain religious rituals” (col. 991). Grundtvig could support the principle of freedom with the introduction of civil marriage as long as it did not involve the abolition of marriage in church and conflict with popular tradition; therefore, it should take place in the presence of a priest in a form that recalled the “betrothal” of earlier times, “but in that case this civil marriage ought to be entered into by all married people, if they wish, whether they say that they belong to the People’s Church or whatever else they want” (col. 995). Although marriage is a purely human and civil arrangement to which Christianity has of course given a certain stamp, and “which with the introduction of compulsory participation in the Church has been given the disgusting ap-

4

142

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 80–81 pearance of Christendom,” Grundtvig states that the situation is quite different with respect to confirmation, “which is a Christian arrangement that people have wanted to exploit for civil purposes, and the consequence of this has been . . . that they simply piled one more untruth upon citizens when it was required that all those who were born into what was called the bosom of the People’s Church were to believe and confess [Christianity], even if they were not really able to believe in it” (col. 1001). A clear division must be made between what is civic and what is Christian. Thus one cannot introduce a freedom outside the People’s Church that does not also hold inside of it as well; if this were to happen, “then the People’s Church would necessarily be in a situation in which all serious and genuine religious people would leave it . . . we leave it because we do have at least a little we can sacrifice for the sake of freedom” (col. 1002). Grundtvig concludes by “asking that the assembly consider the matter carefully and thoroughly before it completely rejects as unusable a proposal before it has had the discussion that it would otherwise certainly have been granted” (col. 1003). A full account of the debate surrounding the first reading of the bill was carried in Fædrelandet, no. 269, November 18, 1850, pp. 1071–1072. In his article “Om Troesfrihed” [On Freedom of Religion] in Berlingske Tidende, no. 282, December 2, 1850, Spandet explains his views concerning the proposed legislation. From a lengthy editorial piece in Fædrelandet, no. 298, December 21, 1850, pp. 1189–1190, which recounts the negative reaction to the proposed legislation, it emerges that a clear majority of the committee selected to consider the matter (→ 142,8) was in favor of an entirely new proposal for a “Law concerning the Contraction of Marriage outside the Recognized Religious Societies or between Members of Different Religious Societies,” that was based on a draft from the cultus minister. ― Spandet: Niels Møller Spandet (1788–1858), jurist and politician; from 1819 until his death, jurist in the Provincial Superior Court of Copenhagen; starting in 1849, a member of the Folketing (lower house of parliament), where he was affiliated with the Venstre

•

1850

637

(“Left”) and Friends of the Peasant parties; closely tied to Grundtvig from as early as 1810. calling upon help from Xnty’s worst enemies in order to win] It has not been possible to determine what Kierkegaard is referring to. by balloting.] → 127,31. The result of the balloting following the first reading of Spandet’s proposed legislation was fifty-four in favor and twenty-eight against, which meant that the proposal would receive a second reading; see Fædrelandet, no. 269, November 18, 1850, p. 1072. A few days later, Grundtvig proposed that a seven-member committee be established to work further on the matter; see Dansk Kirketidende, December 8, 1850, vol. 5, no. 62, col. 1019; although Grundtvig himself stood for election to that committee, he was not elected; see Fædrelandet, no. 272, November 21, 1850, col. 1083. ― by balloting.: Variant: first written “by balloting,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. Vespasian spoke the truth: One should not sniff money . . . smells just as good as all other money] Free rendering of an anecdote about the Roman Emperor Titus Flavius Vespasianus (ruled a.d. 69–79), from Suetonius’s biography of Vespasian, chap. 23 in bk. 8 of De vita Caesarum [The Lives of the Caesars], where it is stated, “When Titus found fault with him for contriving a tax upon public conveniences, he held a purse of money from the first payment to his son’s nose, asking whether its odour was offensive to him. When Titus said, ‘No,’ he replied, ‘Yet it comes from urine.’ ” English translation from Suetonius, The Lives of the Caesars and the Lives of Illustrious Men, trans. J. C. Rolfe, Loeb Classical Library, 2 vols. (London: William Heinemann, 1914), vol. 2, p. 319. Kierkegaard’s likely source was Caji Svetonii Tranqvilli Tolv første Romerske Keiseres Levnetsbeskrivelse [Caius Suetonius the Tranquil’s Account of the Lives of the First Twelve Roman Caesars], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1802–1803; ASKB 1281), vol. 2, p. 213. Here there is] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. The Abolition of Confession] Both the Danish Church’s understanding and its practice of the

7

8

10

13

25

142

638

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 81–85

rite of confession underwent great changes between the era of the Reformation and the middle of the 19th century. After the Reformation was introduced to Denmark in 1536, the confessional booths were retained so that a person could still seek out a priest individually, confess his sins, and ask for absolution, i.e., the forgiveness of sins through the laying-on of hands. At that time, confession was a voluntary rite offered to anguished consciences, but with the adoption of Danmarks og Norges Kirke-Ritual [Church Ritual for Denmark and Norway] (Copenhagen, 1685), confession was made a necessary precondition for participation in the eucharist (see chap. 4, art. 1, p. 143). But over the course of the 18th century, as the number of those participating in the eucharist―and thus attending confession―increased and was concentrated during certain seasons, it became impossible for priests to shrive individually, in the confessional booth, the many people wanting to participate in the eucharist. At the same time, a forbidden custom was spreading: not only married couples, but entire families, and people who did not even know one another would go into the confessional booth at the same time. The confessional booth was therefore altered from an actual booth to a special, closed room, located either in the church itself or in the sacristy, where confession took place. In larger churches such as the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen, where Kierkegaard himself went to confession, there were two confessional booths, each with room for thirty to fifty people. As private confession disappeared, the liturgical character of the rite of confession changed; the conversation between the priest and the parishioner making confession was abandoned, and the individual confession of sins was replaced by a common confessional prayer or by a confession of sins said on behalf of all. Both the confessional prayer and the confession of sins gradually disappeared, however, and at the end of the 18th century, they were replaced by a confessional sermon (→ 101,1), delivered by the father confessor, i.e., the priest who was in charge of the confessional rite as the preparation for participating in the eucharist later that day or on the next day. At the same time, there was an

•

1850–1851

increasing tendency for priests to omit absolution and replace it with a blessing, though this practice was ended when the government sent out a directive on August 12, 1828, requiring bishops to impress upon priests that they follow precisely the “prescribed formulas” in church ritual, with no omissions or additions. In Kierkegaard’s day, the rite of confession at the Church of Our Lady took place as follows: those who wished to make confession gathered in the nave of the church, where the rite began with a hymn and a confessional prayer read by the cantor from the chancel doorway. Then the sexton admitted them to the confessional booth, where they took their places in pews. The priest sat in his chair and gave a short confessional sermon, about ten minutes in length. Thereafter, the priest went through the pews and with laying-on of hands pronounced the forgiveness of sins to each individual, two at a time. Then they returned to the church, and if there were more than could be accommodated in the confessional booth at one time, a new group went into the confessional booth. When the entire ceremony was concluded, a hymn was sung in the nave of the church. “Bless the Lord, O My Soul, and Forget Not All His Benefits”] See Ps 103:2.

1

144

R. Nielsen’s . . . Dogmatics, Illuminated] Rasmus Nielsen, Dr. H. Martensens Dogmatiske Oplysninger belyste [Dr. H. Martensen’s Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 703), was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 305 (December 28, 1850) as having been published. According to a receipt dated December 31, 1850, from book dealer C. A. Reitzel (KA, D packet 7, layer 6) Kierkegaard had already acquired the volume on December 25, 1850. The book was Nielsen’s rejoinder to H. L. Martensen’s (→ 135,19), Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift [Information on Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), which was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 136, June 13, 1850; in that work (pp. 8–76), Martensen had mounted a pointed attack on Nielsen’s polemical Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige

6

144

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 85

7

Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 136,34), which had appeared in October 1849. In the conclusion . . . his relationship to the pseudonyms and to me . . . a farce] Refers to pp. 66–75, esp. pp. 74–75, where Nielsen writes: “I certainly do not need to give further assurances that, for my part, I not only have a personal affection for Mag. Kierkegaard, but also great respect for the man from whose writings I can very clearly (if not ‘straightforwardly’) see that his inner life must be far more strenuous than mine. But it would indeed be profoundly saddening to me if (which I must regard as unthinkable) Mag. Kierkegaard were to misunderstand these statements of mine, as if in uttering them I wanted to position myself in any sort of relationship of dependence upon his personal individuality. My relationship to that authorial individuality is and must essentially be same as it would be if, instead of living here in Copenhagen, he lived, e.g., in Rome or in Philadelphia, or if, instead of being our “highly honored contemporary,” he had lived either with Tertullian or with Augustine or with― Anselm. I regard coming into an untrue relation to the Kierkegaardian writings as extremely dangerous because I always regard coming into an untruthful relation to the truth as extremely dangerous. On the other hand, I do not regard entering into a literary polemic with Mag. Kierkegaard as so dangerous in that sense. Let him have great cleverness and equally brilliant weapons― good Lord, we cannot all be geniuses: when one fights for a cause, one does not fight in order to demonstrate one’s talent. Mag. Kierkegaard is furthermore, as far as I know, precisely the only author who has summoned up―indeed, I could say, has sacrificed and squandered―the whole of his talent in order to prove that talent is a matter of indifference in relation to knowledge of the highest truth. Let Mag. Kierkegaard demonstrate that the use I have made of his writings is ambivalent, unclear, or dubious in some other way: if he can convince me, well, then I will confess my error and thank him for his guidance. If he cannot convince me, well, then I will stand by my position, and I should think that in this respect I have the same rights as everyone else. Thus

•

1851

639

my cause is not Mag. Kierkegaard’s cause. Mag. Kierkegaard’s cause is beyond all debate, ideally anchored in the central point of inwardness around which religiousness moves. My cause is within the debate, oriented externally toward the boundary where theology and philosophy battle over knowing and not-knowing.” the attack on Martensen] i.e., in the polemical piece Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse. his conversations with me] The conversations Kierkegaard had had with Rasmus Nielsen in the course of their weekly walks (→ 136,34). Prof. M.] Martensen. all of his works] → 145,10. So I spoke with Nielsen concerning these things] → 136,34. as something he has grasped through reading . . . the writings] → 144,7. But the reason] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. have treated the whole matter with him religiously] See NB10:32, from February 1849: “I have drawn R. Nielsen toward me because I considered it to be my religious duty, so it couldn’t be said of me that I had completely ignored that initial level of responsibility with regard to another pers.” (KJN 5, 283). This is repeated in NB14:90, from December 1849: “Certainly, I have patiently put up with a great deal from him, and have done so precisely because I have had him in my relationship to God. But it has also developed me further in a religious direction” (KJN 6, 403–404). See also NB 18:82, from May 1850: “For I was always bound by my God-relationship: that I had resolved before God to make the attempt with him, that therefore I had to put up with absolutely everything” (KJN 7, 314). Kierkegaard frequently discusses this situation in other entries; see, e.g., NB6:76 and 78, both from August 1848, and NB7:7 and 10, also from August 1848 (KJN 5, 57–59, 60, 81, 83); NB17:71, from April 1850, NB19:39, from June 1850, NB20:36, from July or August 1850 (KJN 7, 219–222, 365, 420). It was . . . foreboding of death . . . acquaint another person with the cause] → 136,34.

10

18

22 28 35 36 39 40

1

145

640 4 7 10

30 37

146

2

146

25

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 85–88

I chose N. . . . sought to approach me earlier] → 136,34. Governance] (→ 104,35). the things he was writing at the time] Especially Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed and Mag. S. Kierkegaards ‘Johannes Climacus’ og Dr. H. Martensens ‘Christelige Dogmatik.’ En undersøgende Anmeldelse, as well as Et par Ord i Anledning af Prof. Scharlings Apologie for Dr. Martensens Dogmatik (→ 136,34), and most recently Dr. H. Martensens Dogmatiske Oplysninger belyste (→ 144,6). colliding egotisms] A reference to Rasmus Nielsen and H. L. Martensen (→ 144,6). In other words,] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. his first big book is a sad testimony] Refers to Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 136,34), in which Rasmus Nielsen is so clearly influenced by Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings that reviewers declared him a disciple of Kierkegaard; see NB15:77, from January 1850 (KJN 7, 50–51), with its accompanying explanatory notes. The only works by Kierkegaard to which Nielsen refers directly in his book are “Anna’s Patience in Expectation” from Two Edifying Discourses (1844) and Works of Love (1847). If there is to be Holy Scripture . . . internal agreement . . . to the least trifle] Presumably, a reference to the consequences of the doctrine that the Bible has come into being through divine inspiration; see, e.g., H. L. Clausen, Det Nye Testaments Hermeneutik [New Testament Hermeneutics] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 468), p. 300, where Clausen cites the German Lutheran professor of theology J. Gerhard’s Latin work on hermeneutics from 1610: “There are no genuine contradictions anywhere in Holy Scripture. Where there appears to be such, it is annulled as soon as the true meaning of each passage is discovered; then it will be seen that the contradiction did not involve the thing, but the name, or that the referent was not the same, or that it was not referred to in the same manner or at the same time.” Lastly, see a passage cited from a Latin hermeneutical work published in 1642 by the German Lutheran professor of theology J. K. Dannhauer: “All of

•

1851

Scripture is perfect; consequently it must necessarily consist of inspired vowels, for how could a work be perfect if it consisted only of the body, but lacked the soul of the vowels?” See NB20:70 from August 1850, which has the heading “A New Proof of the Bible’s Divinity,” in KJN 7, 440. The doctrine concerning divine inspiration of the Bible, which in orthodox Lutheran theology was often broadened to mean literal, verbal inspiration, is based on 2 Tim 3:16. God-Man] i.e., Christ, who as the human being in whom God revealed himself, united in himself the divine and human natures. If one is to be the God-Man . . . absolutely certain in straightforward fashion, says scholarship] Presumably, a reference to the neorationalistic and speculative understanding of the God-Man, as represented, e.g., by the German Lutheran theologian D. F. Strauß and criticized, e.g., by J. P. Mynster in the article “Rationalisme. Supranaturalisme” [Rationalism, Supernaturalism] in Tidsskrift for Litteratur og Kritik [Journal for Literature and Criticism], no. 1 (Copenhagen, 1839), pp. 249–268, esp. pp. 261– 262: “If Christ, the absolutely sinless, holy, and blessed, could appear in accordance with the natural course of things, by humanity’s natural process of development, then human nature is not corrupt, then it is still what it originally was―a pure emanation or manifestation of the Godhead . . . But if not, then our Salvation is not through any act of humanity, . . . and, just as the first creation could not be a part of any preexisting series and could not be part of what we call natural continuity―though certainly in continuity with the divine nature―in this way, the new creation in Christ, though prepared by divine provisions, is the first step in a new series, a new, unmediated infusion of divine life into the human.”

39

1

147

There are actually people . . . not flattering kings and princes] It has not been possible to identify what is being referred to.

9

147

Practice in Christianity]→ 109,7. Mynster’s position] i.e., the manner in which J. P. Mynster (→ 116,1), in his understanding and

16

147

14

148

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 88–90 preaching of Christianity and in his conduct as bishop, related to the ideal. 148

20

23

149

150

23

14

19

149m

1

3 4

They say . . . worldly goods . . . enjoy them] If there is a source for this, it has not been identified. observation] See NB21:88, with its accompanying explanatory note, in the present volume. 4 lines . . . in Scriver . . . a verse . . . written above the door, or something like that] Refers to a passage in § 15 in “Von der zukünfftigen Herrlichkeit und Seligkeit der gläubigen Seelen, / Die V. Predigt, / Welche ihre gottselige Vorbereitung zum Sterben fürstellet, / Aus den Worten des heiligen Apostels, / I. Corinth. XV, 31” [On the Future Glory and Blessedness of Believing Souls, Fifth Sermon, Presented on the Basis of the Words of the Holy Apostles, 1 Cor 15:31], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 131,18), vol. 5, p. 886. life imprisonment] When a convicted criminal was sentenced to life imprisonment, the judgment said the condemned person was to be imprisoned in a specific penal institution “for life.” In accordance with a decree of April 11, 1840, if a criminal had been convicted of aggravated theft for a third time or of simple theft for a fifth time, he could be sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor, working on fortifications or in the workhouse. in the course of time a pardon is possible] According to § 31 in the Constitution of June 5, 1849, the king was empowered to grant pardons; see Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 127,31), p. 14. confessional discourses] Here, presumably, in the sense of discourses on the occasion of confession; see “On the Occasion of a Confession,” the first of the Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) in TDIO, 7–40; SKS 5, 391–418; and “An Occasional Discourse,” the first part of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) in UDVS, 3–154; SKS 8, 107–250. On the confessional sermon as part of the rite of confession, → 142,25. the confessional]→ 142,25. before God as an individual] See “An Occasional Discourse”: “Those who confess are not together in company; each one is alone as an individual

•

1851

641

before God; husband and wife, even though they go to confession together, nevertheless do not confess in union, for the one who is confessing is not in company: he is alone as an individual before God. And when, as an individual, he admits to himself that the questions he addresses to himself―with the help of a whisper by someone insignificant―are accusations, then he is confessing” (UDVS, 151; SKS 8, 247). the old Socratic saying: when someone . . . does not do it, he has not in fact understood it] Presumably, a reference to Plato’s dialogue Protagoras (351e–357e); see Udvalgte Dialoger af Platon [Selected Dialogues of Plato], trans. C. J. Heise, 3 vols. (Copenhagen 1830–1838; ASKB 1164–1166), vol. 2 (1831), pp. 195–209. See Plato: The Collected Dialogues (→ 111,10), 343–348. to say: [“]Lord, Lord[”]―faith is known by its fruits] Reference to Mt 7:15–23. The situation of the confession . . . before God.] Variant: added. who puts some money in a burial society] In the 1840s, as the cost of funerals and burials rose so much that many people could not afford the fees, a good number of “burial societies” were established in Copenhagen. These were private associations into which members could regularly pay a sum of money, thus assuring that they would have a proper burial. having it proven] Soon after Hegel’s death, a long and bitter dispute developed, both among his disciples and his opponents, concerning the extent to which his ideas left open the possibility of individual immortality. The debate was regularly summarized in Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur [Journal for Foreign Theological Literature], ed. H. N. Clausen and M. H. Hohlenberg, to which Kierkegaard subscribed beginning in 1833 (according to the subscription lists provided by the editors, which cover the period up to 1840). See also Poul Martin Møller, “Tanker over Mueligheden af Beviser for Menneskets Udødelighed, med Hensyn til den nyeste derhen hørende Literatur” [Thoughts on the Possibility of Proofs for Human Immortality, with Regard to the Latest Literature on the Subject], in Efterladte Skrifter af Poul M. Møller [Posthumous Writings of

5

9 12 22

29

150m

642

30

31

37

151

2

7

15

20

151m

6

11

152

5 23

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 90–96

Poul Martin Møller], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839– 1843; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 2 (1842), pp. 158–272. You are immortal] Refers to the notion of individual immortality; K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Hutterus Redivivus, or a Dogmatics for the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1829]; ASKB 581), § 129, p. 330: “The Christian concept of death already contains the idea of immortality as a self-conscious, eternal continuation of individual life.” eternity is not the land of shadows] Presumably, an allusion to the notion of the kingdom of the dead as a land of shadows, a notion stemming from sources including Ps 23:4 and Mt 4:16. God . . . lives in a light . . . a light that penetrates everything] Allusion both to 1 Tim 6:16 and 1 Jn 1:5. fulfill the Law to its fullest extent] Presumably, a reference to Gal 3:13 and 4:4–5. See also Rom 8:3–4, 10:4; Eph 2:15–16. dying . . . reduced the requirement in relation to the thief;] Reference to Lk 23:39–43. ― the thief;] Variant: changed from “the thief.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. he departs from the world with the words: Believe in me] Presumably, a reference to Jn 14– 16; see esp. 14:1–3 and 14:11. the Exemplar] Variant: preceding this, the words “Xt qua” have been deleted. only in connection with those whom he himself wanted to have as―or who themselves wanted to be―disciples did he have to be so rigorous] → 104,20 and → 129,29. for here . . . his imitation.] Variant: this note was begun in the main text column. to set forth love: “Let us love one another.”] Refers to 1 Jn 4:7–8. the vulgar press did everything to present me as mad] A reference to attacks on Kierkegaard published in the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair], which was edited by M. A. Goldschmidt; the attacks, which started on January 2, 1846, no. 276, and continued regularly until July 17, 1846, no. 304, included satirical articles and caricature drawings (see

•

1851

KJN 4, 453–456). Corsaren’s teasing of Kierkegaard continued after Goldschmidt’s departure as editor and did not cease until February 16, 1849, no. 439. Kierkegaard was convinced that, as a result of Corsaren’s attacks, he was abused on the street. the common man] Kierkegaard’s preferred term for people of the lower social classes.

24

for God everything is possible] Reference to Mt 19:26.

1

154

Salvianus Massiliensis . . . Opera p. 218 . . . crescens simul et decrescens . . . see Statsleben . . . Sugenheim . . . pt. 1, pp. 11 and 12 n] Cited from S. Sugenheim, Staatsleben des Klerus im Mittelalter [The Political Life of the Clergy in the Middle Ages], vol. 1 [the only volume that appeared] (Berlin, 1839), pp. 11–12 n. 17. ― Salvianus Massiliensis: Or Salvian of Marseille (Latin, Massilia), where he spent the last part of his life. Born ca. 400–405, probably near Cologne or Trier; became a member of a Cistercian order in Lérins in the south of France. Many of his writings have been lost, but among those extant is his uncompleted principal work De gubernatione Dei [On God’s Government], in eight books, which contains a powerful social critique in portraying the difficulties associated with mass migrations of people as the judgment and punishment of God upon the sinful people of Rome; and the ascetic Adversus avaritiam [Against Avarice], in four books―also known as Timothei ecclesiam libri quatuor [Timothy’s Four Books to the Church] or merely as Ad ecclesiam [To the Church]―which point out the monastic life of poverty as the ideal. ― Opera p. 218: According to p. 11 n. 16, the edition is “Opera. Ed. Baluze,” which appears to be the edition Kierkegaard had in his library: Sanctorum presbyterorum Salviani Massiliensis et Vincentii Lirinensis Opera [The Works of the Holy Presbyter Salvian of Marseille and of Vincent of Lérins], ed. Stephanus Baluze, 4th ed. (Pedeponti, 1743 [1663]; ASKB 757), chap. 1, p. 207. ― Sugenheim: Samuel Sugenheim (1811–1877), German Jewish historian and author.

29

154

It was Eve who seduced the man] See Gen 3:6.

14

155

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 98 156

4

11

18

19

30

or Maren’s Secrets] Variant: added. Refers to “Marens Hemmeligheder, eller SteenpæreSkallen” [Maren’s Secrets, or the Stone Pear Peel], part 3 of the polemical poem “Asenutidens Abracadabra. Eller Skialdbørnelærdommens, hiin ‘lurvedes’ ‘betydningsfulde’ Kiærne i tre Skaller. Efter venlig Begiering kedsommeligen uddraget og morsommeligen fremsat af Disciplernes afsatte Mester” [The Modern Ases’ Abracadabra, or That “Shabby,” “Meaningful” Core, in Three Peels: Upon Amicable Request, Boringly Extracted and Amusingly Presented by the Cashiered Master of the Disciples] (1816), which consists of a conversation between “the dean” and “the boy,” in Jens Baggesens danske Værker [The Danish Works of Jens Baggesen], ed. by the author’s sons and C. J. Boye, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1832; ASKB 1509–1520), vol. 7 (1831), pp. 185–210. Christianity does in fact prefer the unmarried state] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 7; see esp. 7:7. See also Mt 19:10–12. contentment, and enjoyment] The expression, a pleonasm, stems from Danish writer Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Barselstuen [The Lying-In Room] (1724), act 2, sc. 7, where it forms part of long-winded, stilted remarks made by a schoolmaster. See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 140,25), vol. 2. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. to the extent that Xnty involves itself with marriage . . . marry only once] On the prohibition of marriage following divorce, see Mt 19:9; see also Mt 5:32 and 1 Cor 7:10–11. On monogamy, see, e.g., § 83 in H. L. Martensen’s (→ 135,19) Grundrids til Moralphilosophiens System. Udgivet til Brug ved academiske Forelæsninger [Outlines of the System of Moral Philosophy: Published for Use in Conjunction with Academic Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 650), p. 85, where it is stated that Christianity developed “the monadic love in which devotion requires unconditional fidelity. By introducing monogamous marriage Christianity carried out the emancipation of woman. Love’s liberty of choice became the point of departure for marriage”; see also NB12:76, from the summer of 1849, in KJN 6, 185. a good position . . . a very lucrative position] In provincial towns, citizens were required to pay

•

1851

643

the priest a given amount of money called “priest money,” while in rural areas farmers were required to donate a “tithe,” a certain percentage of their goods, often grain. The amount was determined by the Ministry of Church and Education. On holy days, members of the congregation could also pay their priest a voluntary sum of money called an “offering.” Priests had a certain amount of additional income called “perquisites,” i.e., fees for performing clerical acts such as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In addition to this, priests in provincial towns were granted a rent subsidy, while priests in rural areas had income from the lands and farms attached to their call. In general, priests in Copenhagen had greater income than those in the provinces, but there was much variation from parish to parish. A complete account is found in Bloch Suhr, Kaldslexicon, omfattende en Beskrivelse over alle danske geistlige Embeder i alphabetisk Orden [Encyclopedia of Calls, Including a Description of All Danish Ecclesiastical Offices in Alphabetical Order] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 379). ribbons and titles] i.e., clergy decorated with the cross insignia associated with various ranks in the knightly order of the Dannebrog, including the Great Cross of the Dannebrog, plus the various sashes and ribbons for these and other orders; a knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog (e.g., Bishop J. P. Mynster [→ 116,1]) was to bear a gold cross on a ribbon around his neck and on his left breast a large cross decorated with silver rays forming a star. an Excellency] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 140,22) established by decree on October 14, 1746 (with amendments on August 12, 1808), persons with a first-class rank were to be addressed as “Your Excellency.” Within the Church hierarchy, this applied to all bishops with the exception of J. P. Mynster, bishop of Zealand, who from 1847 onward was to be addressed, uniquely, as “Your Eminence” (→ 116,1). as the philosophers say, it is a necessary development] Refers to Hegel’s dialectical method, according to which concepts develop from one another by necessity with the help of their oppo-

36

1

2

157

644

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 98–106

sites, e.g., the concept “being” necessarily produces the concept “nothing,” and together they necessarily produce the concept “coming into being.” The same logic of concepts is also employed in Hegel’s philosophy of history in order to explain the “necessary development” of historical forces. 157

17 18

158

2

12

158

25

31

159

1 2

those who must suffer for Xt’s sake] See, e.g., 2 Cor 1:3–11; see also Heb 10:32–39 and Acts 9:16. the Xn suffers for the teachings] → 139,27. In Thiele’s Die Jüdischen Gauner . . . Löwenthal . . . became a swindler] Refers to the report of someone named “Moses Leven Löwenthal, now calling himself Moses Lebrecht Carl,” in A. F. Thiele, Die jüdischen Gauner in Deutschland, ihre Taktik, ihre Eigenthümlichkeiten und ihre Sprache . . . Nach Kriminalakten und sonstigen zuverlässigen Quellen bearbeitet und zunächst praktischen Criminalund Polizeibeamten gewidmet [The Jewish Tricksters of Germany, Their Tactics, Their Peculiarities, and Their Language . . . Based on Criminal Records and Other Reliable Sources and Especially the Actual Practice of Criminal and Police Officials], 2 vols. (Berlin, 1842–1843), vol. 2, pp. 346–358. Kierkegaard follows Thiele’s account quite closely. ― Thiele: A. F. Thiele, German court clerk at the Prussian criminal court in Berlin; no further information concerning him has been found. Thiele also relates that . . . He would buy nickel silver items and sell them as real silver . . . sell them so cheaply] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of Thiele’s narrative on pp. 350–351. They castrate . . . make him a singer . . . higher than any that can be reached by any natural hum. being] That is, a castrato, someone who was castrated as a boy and who has therefore retained the high-pitched voice of a boy. no true Xn can.] Variant: changed from “no actual hum. being can. Bishop Mynster] → 116,1. the words . . . the Christian . . . a stranger and a pilgrim in this world] Refers to 1 Pet 2:11; see also Heb 11:13.

•

1851

which Vidocq has pointed out in part 2 of his Wahre Pariser-Geheimniße] Refers to the following passage in chap. 3 of Vidocq’s Wahre Pariser Geheimnisse. Deutsch herausgegeben vom Verfasser [Vidocq’s True Secrets of Paris: Published in German by the Author], 6 vols. (Berlin and Paris, 1844 [French ed., 1844]; abbreviated hereafter as Vidocq’s Wahre Pariser Geheimnisse), vol. 2, p. 79: “Those who are criminals, thieves, or murderers by profession are unbelievably superstitious. They believe in dreams, fortune-telling, the influence of specific days. Many will not steal on Fridays, or if they encounter a priest walking past the place they live, or when they have knocked over a salt cellar. But if they find a piece of iron, they become bold and audacious.” Vidocq’s Wahre Pariser Geheimnisse is listed in Fortegnelse over Selskabet Athenæums Bogsamling, den 31. December 1846 [Catalogue of the Athenaeum Society’s Book Collection, December 31, 1846] (Copenhagen, 1847, ASKB 985), p. 322. ―Vidocq: Eugène François Vidocq (1775–1857), French police chief, private detective, and author; previous to these professions he had been a soldier and a criminal; from 1809, police spy in Paris; from 1811 to 1827, head of the security police. After financial collapse in connection with a paper and printing business, in 1833 he established the earliest known private detective agency. His Mémoires [Memoirs], published in 1828, and his crime novels were great successes. impressa vestigia] An expression used several times by Cicero, e.g., in Orator, bk. 3, sec. 12; see Kierkegaard’s edition, M. Tullii Ciceronis opera omnia [Complete Works of Marcus Tullius Cicero], ed. J. A. Ernesti, 2nd ed., 4 vols. (Halle 1756–1757 [1737–1739] in 5 tomes plus an index volume; ASKB 1224–1229), vol. 1 (1757), p. 656.

7

Vidocq (Wahre Pariser-Geheimniße, vol. 3) . . . made use of convicted criminals . . . always found them trustworthy] Refers to a passage in chap. 5, “Betrachtungen” [Observations], in Vidocq’s Wahre Pariser Geheimnisse (→ 159,7), vol. 3, pp. 155–156. ― exclusively: Variant: preceding this, the word “almost” has been deleted.

21

159

10

159

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 106–120

160

32

having been a criminal] Variant: changed from “being a criminal”.

27

Brorson’s hymn no. 209 . . . Commend yourself therein, Then you are free] Cited from the sixth stanza of a hymn by the Danish bishop and composer of pietistic hymns, Hans Adolph Brorson (1694–1764), “Min Christen, er dit Kors saa svart” [My Christian, Your Cross Is So Heavy], hymn no. 209 in the section, “Om Korsets Hemmelighed i Almindelighed” [On the Secret of the Cross Generally], in Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson [Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Hans Adolph Brorson], collected and edited by J.A.L. Holm, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1838 [1830]; ASKB 200), p. 623: “If you can become quit of yourself, / Forsaking everything great and small, / Then you have found the way. / Commend yourself therein, / Then you are free, / Then you have won.” The hymn was initially published in part 5, “Troens Kamp og Seyer” [Faith’s Struggle and Victory] of Brorson’s hymnal, Troens rare Klenodie, i nogle aandelige Sange fremstillet af Hans Adolph Brorson [Faith’s Rare Treasure: Some Spiritual Songs Presented by Hans Adolf Brorson], ed. L. C. Hagen (Copenhagen, 1834 [1739]; ASKB 199).

161

1

Mockery and Misfortune Always Go Together] A similar version of this saying is collected as no. 3059 in C. Molbech, Danske Ordsprog, Tankesprog og Riimsprog [Danish Proverbs, Maxims, and Rhymed Apothegms] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 1573), p. 194.

161

19

like to explain] Variant: the editors of SKS, following the editors of EP, have added the word “explain”. The editors of Pap do not add it.

162

23

speculative] e.g., in speculative (Hegelian) theology.

163

10

“He who sees his brother ‘suffer need and closes his heart,’[”]] Cited freely from 1 Jn 3:17.

163

18

God’s Governance] → 104,35.

164

1

Distance.] Variant: added.

•

1851

645

St. John . . . our duty to lay down our lives for our brethren] Refers to 1 Jn 3:16. The appellation “St.” indicates the belief that the author of the epistle was the apostle John who had been called by Jesus and who was “the disciple Jesus loved” (see Jn 13:23–25 and 21:20). In Kierkegaard’s day, it was widely believed that the apostle John was the author of the gospel of John and the Johannine epistles.

2

Mynster] → 116,1. out of a sense of filial piety to someone deceased . . . obligated . . . to please him] In NB2:267, from April 1847, Kierkegaard writes: “I was brought up on Mynster’s sermons ―by my father” (KJN 4, 240). And in NB5:81, from June 1848, he writes: “And yet I love B. M. [Bishop Mynster]; my only wish is to do everything that might strengthen his reputation; for I have admired him and hmnly speaking I do admire him, and whenever I can do something for his benefit, I think of my father, whom, I believe, it pleases” (KJN 4, 407). See also NB11:154, from May or June 1849, in KJN 6, 87–88 and NB18:77, from May or June 1850, in KJN 7, 310–311. ― someone deceased: Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838); he retired at age forty in possession of a considerable fortune; as the years passed, he added to his fortune through interest and investment income. After the death of his first wife, he married Ane Lund in 1797; they had seven children together, of whom Søren was the youngest. In 1808, M. P. Kierkegaard bought the house at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B1–2), where he lived until his death. As first resident curate at the Church of Our Lady, J. P. Mynster was Kierkegaard’s father’s confessor, though only from 1820 until 1828, when Mynster became palace priest. to direct attention in poetic fashion] See “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (→ 110,28): “This, in turn, is the category of all my literary production: to direct attention to the religious, to Christianity―but ‘without authority’ ” (PV, 6n; SKS 13, 12n). See also the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” where Kierkegaard writes: “ ‘Without authority’ to make aware of the religious, the Christian, is the

6 10

15

164

646

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 120–124

category for my whole work as an author regarded as a totality” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). 164

20

The Fear of God Is Profitable unto All Things] Reference to 1 Tim 4:8.

164

27

Salvianus . . . adversus avaritium Lib. 1 cap. 8: Dura fortasse . . . exstinguit peccatum] Cited from bk. 1, chap. 8 of Salvianus Massiliensis’s work Adversus avaritiam; see Salviani Massiliensis et Vincentii Lirinensis Opera (→ 154,29), p. 218. The parenthetical portion is Kierkegaard’s insertion of an abbreviated passage from the Latin Vulgate version of Jas 5:3. The “well-known biblical words” Salvianus cites are from the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach, Sir 3:30 (Sir 3:29 in the Latin Vulgate). ― Apostolus enim: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

165

2

3

Chrysostom] John Chrysostom (344/354–407), theologian and Church Father, originally a lawyer; baptized ca. 370 and subsequently studied at the theological school in Antioch; after a period as an ascetic monk and hermit, was made deacon in 381 and presbyter at Antioch in 386; in 397 inaugurated as a bishop and nominated for an archbishopric; removed in 403 and exiled in 404, first to Cucusus on the Armenian border (today Göksun, Turkey), and later to the Taurus Mountains. He was known as a charismatic preacher; hence his nickname Chrysostom, Greek for “golden mouth.” St. Chrysostom’s works consist of exegetical, monastic, and catechistic treatises; collections of homilies; and his letters. very well put in a letter . . . “If the Christian . . . is invulnerable.” See . . . Neander, pt. 1, p. 15] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in one of Chrysostom’s two letters to the younger Theodore, cited in the first section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” [Life of St. Chrysostom] in A. Neander (→ 113m,5), Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche, besonders des Orients, in dessen Zeitalter [St. John Chrysostom and the Church, Particularly the Eastern Church, of His Day], 2 vols. (Berlin 1821–1822; abbreviated here-

•

1851

after as Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche), vol. 1, p. 15: “If the Christian does not harm himself, nothing is capable of hurting him― he is invincible.” ― Theodore of Mopsuetia: i.e., Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 352–428), theologian and bishop; from 383, presbyter in Antioch; from 392, bishop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia (in southeastern Asia Minor). When a society is dissolved in the way it happened in ’48] Refers to the fact that at the beginning of 1848, Europe was marked by a series of revolutions and political upheavals, including the constitutional changes that took place in Denmark when the death of King Christian VIII led to the fall of absolutism and the de facto introduction of a constitutional monarchy, a change that was codified in the Danish Constitution of June 5, 1849. State Church] A State Church is a church established as the official religion of the state and is granted a special (often monopolistic) position; in return, the state exercises a degree of control over that church. In Denmark, the evangelical Lutheran Church was the State Church, with the king as its head and with bishops, deans, and priests as royally appointed civil servants. The Danish Constitution of June 5, 1849, states that “the evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish People’s Church and as such is supported by the state,” a statement that can be read both descriptively and prescriptively. Under the new constitution, the clergy continued to be paid by the state and appointed by the king, who was himself required to be a member of the evangelical Lutheran Church. See Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 127,31), pp. 6 and 26. it teaches subservience to all authority] Reference to Rom 13:1. by participating . . . the manner of Tryde . . . foolish prattle against politics] i.e., Eggert Christopher Tryde (1781–1860), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1804; after having served as parish priest in a number of different parishes on Zealand from 1807, in 1838 he was named archdeacon at the Church of Our Lady, and from 1841, he was also codirector and

10

16

21 29

165

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 124–128

33

166

3

teacher at the pastoral seminary in Copenhagen. Tryde had served as Kierkegaard’s confessor in the period 1839–1842. Kierkegaard is probably alluding to Tryde’s participation in the discussion concerning whether the Danish People’s Church should have a synodal arrangement (→ 165,16) governing the relation between church and state. At its summer meeting in 1849, the Grundtvigiantinged Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle convened a committee consisting of Tryde (as secretary), P. C. Kierkegaard, and parish priests H. J. Giessing, E. V. Kolthoff, and C. Pram Gad. The committee was to consider the clergy’s position in relation to the synodal arrangement that it was expected the government would propose, and present its own proposal. At the conventicle’s summer meeting in 1850, Tryde presented his report in which, on behalf of the majority on the committee, he supported convening a synod and proposed establishing parish councils and ecclesiastical meetings in the form of conventicles at the diocesan level in order to guarantee a broad representation from within the Church; see Dansk Kirketidende (→ 114,15), August 4, 1850, vol. 5., nos. 45 and 46, cols. 740– 747. the clergy itself is the first to rush to Parliament] In the elections to the Folketing, which were held on December 4, 1849, fifteen of the one hundred seats were won by priests, including N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 120,18), and in the elections for the upper house, held on December 29, 1849, three of the fifty-one seats were won by priests, including P. C. Kierkegaard (→ 114,15). directed an attack at the clergy] Refers to Practice in Christianity (→ 109,7), where Anti-Climacus charges the Danish clergy and its preaching with having abolished Christianity.

166

31

If one has said A, so must one also say B] A saying noted as no. 1 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld (→ 123,17), p. 1.

167

17

In “adversus avaritium[”] Salvianus says . . . si indevotus, redde quasi non tuum. (Lib I, VI.)] Reference to Mt 19:16–22, esp. v. 21, which Salvianus cites in bk. 2, chap. 9, p. 239; in bk. 3, chap. 19, p. 279; bk. 4, chap. 8, p. 293.

•

1851

647

Chrysostom: “Perhaps . . . previously had seemed obscure.” Neander, Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 49] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from one of Chrysostom’s (→ 165,3) two works on grief cited in the first portion of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 154,3), vol. 1, p. 49.

28

167

First, Xt was the Exemplar. Then they abolished . . . took only his death] Refers to Paul; see NB20:148, from September 1850: “When J. Xt lived he was the exemplar; the task of faith was to avoid becoming offended at this particular hum. being, who was God, but to believe [in him]―and then to imitate Xt, become a disciple. Then Xt dies. The essential change then occurs with the apostle Paul. He places infinite emphasis on the death of Xt as the atonement; the object of faith becomes the atoning death of Xt. In this way the exemplar qua exemplar is put at a greater distance. As long as Xt was living and the exemplar walked and stood here on earth, existence was as though shattered―the absolute always shatters existence. Then comes the change: the exemplar is altered in such a way that particular emphasis is placed precisely on his death, his atoning death. As the apostle delivers this doctrine, his own life expresses imitation. But in order that no blasphemy should appear―as though the apostle thought that he could reach Xt through imitation―he draws attention away from imitation and thus fixes it decisively on the exemplar’s atoning death” (KJN 7, 477–478). Instead . . . they were transformed into intercessors] → 168m,1. Anti-Climacus . . . in Practice in Xnty, pt. III] Refers to no. VI, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” in part III of Practice in Christianity by Anti-Climacus (→ 109,7) (PC, 232–257, esp. pp. 237–240; SKS 12, 227– 249, esp. pp. 231–233). Here Anti-Climacus writes: “The Exemplar must be unconditionally in the background, behind everyone, and it must be behind in order to push forward those who are to be formed in accordance with it” (PC, 239; SKS 12, 232). This comment . . . Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 51. . . statt Vorbilder der Sittlichkeit sucht] Refers

3

168

6 14

1

168m

648

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 128–134

to the first section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 51. 168

18

32

169

169

13

26

26

Chrysostom vigorously opposes . . . priests merely as rhetoricians . . . “In attending sermons . . . attitudes toward the priest.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 62] Refers to a passage from Chrysostom’s (→ 165,2) work on the priesthood, which is related and cited in the first section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 62. Further: [“]What are we to say about the internal squabbling . . . speculate on them.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 63] ― Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Refers to a passage from Chrysostom’s (→ 165,2) work on the priesthood, which is related and cited in the first section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 63. In opposition to the objection that if we all were monks . . . [“]In truth . . . destroyed everything.” Neander, Chr., pt. 1, p. 22] Refers to a passage from Chrysostom’s (→ 165,2) work on monks, which is related and cited in the first section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 22. psalms of David] There is a long Jewish and Christian tradition that holds that the Israelite King David (ca. 1000–960 b.c.) is the author of the 150 psalms in the OT book of Psalms, even though his name only appears in the heading of 73 of them. In his German translation of the Bible, Luther introduced the designation “Psalms of David” for the book of Psalms, and this was subsequently adopted by the Danish Bible translations of the Reformation era and later, thus gaining popular and clerical acceptance. David consoles his heart despite all sufferings] See, e.g., Ps 6, 13, 22, 28, 31, 55, 56, 57, 59, 69, 102, 140.

•

1851

Chrysostom] → 165,2. When lay people objected . . . you need to read the Bible . . . monks and hermits] Refers to a passage in Chrysostom’s discourse on regular Bible reading, related and cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, pp. 192–193.

6

The Objective Doctrine, the Objective . . . they make light of subjectivity] Reference to the objective view of Christianity, which Kierkegaard, under the pseudonym Johannes Climacus, attacked in various places, including the first section of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), “The Objective Problem of the Truth of Christianity,” in CUP, 21–57; SKS 7, 29–61. Kierkegaard’s attack concerns, first of all, H. L. Martensen (→ 135,19), the leading representative of speculative theology, who presented the doctrines of Christianity in his work on dogmatics. Second, it concerned N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 120,18) and his adherents, who in ecclesiastical debate invoked the Apostles’ Creed and the Augsburg Confession as the norms of Christian doctrine. Now the doctrine] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Schiller’s words about money are now fitting: ein Wort . . . giebt nicht davon Kunde] Reference to the first stanza of the German poet Friedrich Schiller’s poem, “Die Worte des Glaubens” [The Words of Faith] (1797). An English translation of the stanza reads: “Three words I name you, of inmost force; / From mouth to mouth they are spoken; / Their being they draw from no outward source; / The Heart gives their only token: / And man of all worth is dispossess’d, / When these words find not belief in his breast.” Translation from Friedrich Schiller, The Minor Poems of Schiller of the Second and Third Periods, with a Few of Those of Earlier Date, trans. John Herman Merivale (London: William Pickering, 1844), p. 268. In the rest of the poem it emerges that the “three words” are “free,” “virtue,” and “God.” See Schillers sämmtliche Werke (→ 103,2), vol. 1, p. 403.

16

170

7

31

33

170

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 135–142 171

19

words of the gospel about refraining from passing judgment] Reference to Mt 7:1–2.

171

24

Chrysostom: “The awakening of someone dead . . . Christian wisdom.” Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, p. 219] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Chrysostom’s (→ 165,2) homily on Matthew, cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 219.

171

31

Chrysostom: The heavens do not tell . . . of a pure life. Neander: Chrys., pt. 1, p. 220] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Chrysostom’s → 165,2) homily on Romans 18, cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 220.

172

7 8

24

Chrysostom] → 165,2. Once he heard a Christian debate . . . but God’s cause. Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, pp. 227 and 228] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Chrysostom’s → 165,2) homily on 1 Corinthians, cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, pp. 227–228. much deeper, more profound, loftier, etc.] Kierkegaard often ascribes terms such as these to N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 120,18); see, e.g., NB15:59, from January 1850, and NB16:64, from February 1850, in KJN 7, 36–37, 140. See also an unused draft of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where a caricatured depiction of Grundtvig is presented as follows: “Wherever dialectical and genuine development through thought are lacking, a convenient shortcut is taken to the most desperate opposite: the profundity of profound thought is displayed by furrowing the brow, yodeling with the voice, raising the forehead, staring straight ahead, intoning a profound F-note in the bass scale” (Pap. VI B 29, p. 110). See also “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (1849) in WA, 104; SKS 11, 107–108.

•

1851

649

Xnty is foolishness to reason] Allusion to 1 Cor 1:23. modern apologetics] The beginning of the 19th century saw the development of Christian “apologetics,” which unlike so-called polemics methodically laid out the relevant materials for a defense of the specific characteristics of the Christian religion; see, e.g., Friedrich Schleiermacher’s work, Kurze Darstellung des theologischen Studiums [Brief Presentation of Theological Study] (Berlin, 1811; 2nd ed., 1830); and K. H. Sacks, Christliche Apologetik [Christian Apologetics] (Hamburg, 1829; ASKB 755).

26 2

172m

Chrysostom says that the apostles . . . acceptance for a teaching like Xnty] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 228. “The teaching was of a type . . . no one other than the apostles . . . ascended to heaven.” Neander, Chrys., pt. 1, p. 231] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 231.

29

172

To Become Sober] Allusion to 1 Pet 4:7.

8

173

meritoriousness] → 114,33. Peter had failed the cause of Xnty by denying Xt] Refers to Mt 26:69–75. Thus with Paul] Presumably, a reference to the circumstance that prior to his own conversion and baptism, Paul had been a zealous participant in the persecution of Christians by Jews in Jerusalem; see Acts 8:1–3, 9:1–2; Gal 1:13–14.

4

174

Peter became afraid of a girl―and denied Xt] Refers to the account in Mt 26:69–75 of Peter’s denial (→ 174,13); see esp. vv. 69–72. with faith one moves mountains] Allusion to Mt 17:20. The remark about Peter being afraid of a girl and denying is from Chrysostom] Refers to a passage in an apologetic sermon by Chrysostom

17

33

13 14

18 19

174

650

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 142–145

(→ 165,2), in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, p. 235. 175

4 6

testimony of the spirit] Perhaps an allusion to Rom 8:16; see also 1 Jn 5:6. minor premise] In classical logic, a syllogism is an argument consisting of two premises and a conclusion. The one premise, which is to contain the subject concept of the conclusion, is called the minor premise; the other premise, called the major premise, contains the predicate concept of the conclusion. Here there is, in addition, a pun on the word used for “minor premise,” namely, Undersætning, whose etymology evokes the notion of support.

175

29

the Law] Presumably refers to that which concerns the question of the use or function of the Law in the life of a Christian believer, a usage that in Lutheran tradition is called “the Law’s third use”; see, e.g., § 120 “Lex et Evangelium” [Law and Gospel], in K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus (→ 150m,30), pp. 294–297; p. 296: “The Law has three uses: a) the political or civil use, because it maintains external discipline through an external fear of people; b) the persuasive or pedagogical use, because, through an internal fear of God, it leads the sinner to acknowledge his wretchedness and come to faith; c) the instructive, normative, or third use, because by teaching, it rules in the life of the reborn.”

176

3

An Ecclesiastical Theater Review in Berlingske Tidende, January 17, 1851] Refers to “Vor Aftengudstjeneste vedkommende” [Concerning Our Vesper Services], an article signed “– i –” in Berlingske Tidende, no. 14, January 17, 1851. describes the almost sensual enjoyment characteristic of a Catholic vesper service . . . . so tasteless to have 8 candles in the vestibule, etc.] Refers to the following passage in the above-mentioned article, which is written in the form of a letter in which the writer gives an account of a visit to Rome: “That evening, too, we took the path to ‘il Jesu,’ that church of the Jesuit Order; the deep-

6

•

1851

toned bells resounded toward us with their earnest voices; countless people streamed there to hear eloquence flow from the mouth of the Jesuit preacher. Can you recall, as we entered, how surprised we were by the beauty and splendor, the grace and the comfortable atmosphere, that saturated the entire interior of the church[?] From the altars, hundreds of candles, behind which monstrances shone with diamonds, shone on us; the splendid paintings seemed to emerge from their frames and become living figures; the dome and the arches, everything, was decorated with a multitude of colors that cast a strange, magical spell upon the eye; maroon draperies hung in front of the church’s windows; the cold marble floor was covered with warm carpets. The congregation sang the Ave Maria while incense wafted from the shining silver censers. Indeed, there the eye felt attracted and refreshed; the sense for beauty and comfort felt satisfied; the mind was uplifted and edified. On January 12 of this year, I visited the principal church of our capital city [the Church of Our Lady]. How pleased I was that we had at least come so far that we no longer hesitated with respect to having a worship service in the evening, for there can be no doubt that an evening worship service is much more beautiful and appropriate than church at seven o’clock on a winter morning. What, then, could one expect other than that the church would be outfitted as beautifully and ceremoniously as one could imagine, so that one forgot the cold climate and felt oneself enlivened, both bodily and spiritually[?] I went there with memories of my church attendance in Rome, but I felt only all too deeply how often a beautiful memory can be bitter. The first thing the eye encountered upon entering the narthex of the principal church was 6 or 8 tasteless candles, which were supposed to serve for illumination . . . [A]fter I had overcome this unpleasant impression, I went into the church, but there I received only a more unpleasant impression, because the large congregation gathered there was standing in what was as good as semidarkness: the candles at the pews, one ring of candles over the choir, and 4 candles on the altar were all the illumination in that large room; one certainly did

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 145–146

13

not have to fear suffering from too much candle smoke; when, in addition, hymns were designated to be sung in the church, it would seem indeed to be a very important obligation to assure that people could read the hymns, but this was impossible for many of the churchgoers. Here I will not mention the unpleasant, repulsive winter cold that one encounters as soon as one enters, but that could, after all, be reduced with heating, or at least with carpets on the entire floor, to which the congregation would surely contribute if there were the least encouragement to do so. It is saddening to see how Protestantism is often devoid of every sense of beauty and comfort in churches, and because of this the congregation is not drawn toward it, but rather distances itself from it.” ― the recently introduced vesper service: See Adresseavisen, no. 1, January 2, 1851, where the reader is informed that “vesper services at the Church of Our Lady will begin at 6 p.m. on the first Sunday of the New Year, January 5th.” a time when they coated Xns with pitch . . . as torches along the road] When large areas in Rome were consumed by fire in the year 64, Emperor Nero (37–68; emperor, 54–68) was accused of having set the fires himself, “but since he covertly feared the vengeance of the populace, he did not want to be regarded as the person who started that frightful fire. A group of bribed accusers were to cast the blame upon the poor Christian congregations that had long been established in Rome and were universally hated by the Romans because they were regarded as a sect of rebellious Jews . . . [A]ll Christians were imprisoned and executed in the most frightful fashion. The unfortunate individuals were put into woolen sacks that were stuffed with tow (tunicæ molestæ), sewed shut, and then smeared with pitch. Then these living mummies were half buried in the earth in long rows, like pilings, and ignited as torches along the racetrack at night.” Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie [Karl Friedrich Becker’s World History], rev. J. G. Woltmann, trans. and aug. J. Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983), vol. 3 (1823), p. 716. See also Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44; Kierkegaard owned Caius Cornelius Tacitus, af det Latinske med

•

1851

651

de fornødenste Anmærkninger, især for Ustuderede [Caius Cornelius Tacitus, from the Latin, with the Most Necessary Notes, Especially for Those Who Have Not Studied Latin], trans. Jacob Baden, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1773–1797; ASKB 1286–1288), vol. 2 (1775), pp. 281–282. Mynster] → 116,1. State Church] → 165,16. paid civil servants] The priests were civil servants appointed and paid by the state. “Her.”] Refers to Regine Schlegel (née Olsen) (1822–1904), youngest daughter of Regina Frederikke Olsen (née Malling) and Terkild Olsen. Here Kierkegaard refers to the fact that he had been engaged to her for over a year, from September 10, 1840, until October 12, 1841. She subsequently became engaged to J. F. Schlegel on August 28, 1843, and married him on November 3, 1847, in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn. Kierkegaard wrote a retrospective account of his relationship with Regine Olsen in “My Relationship to ‘Her.’ Aug. 24th 49. Somewhat Poetical” (Not15:1–15 in KJN 3, 429–445). her father’s death] Regine Olsen’s father, Terkild or Terkel Olsen (1784–1849), head of the office of accounting in the government finance department, died on June 26, 1849. The obituary for him in Adresseavisen, no. 150, June 29, 1849, reads: “On the night between 25th and 26th of this month, the Lord called away my beloved husband after 40 years of marriage, the father of my 6 children, Terkild Olsen, Councillor of State and Knight of the Dannebrog. [signed] Regine Olsen, née Malling.” I wrote to Schlegel] In volume 28 of Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter, the extant letter, written in the autumn of 1849, from Kierkegaard to Regine and J. F. Schlegel, along with various drafts, sketches, copies, and an annotation, is printed in SKS 28, 245–263 as letter number 159, which is accompanied by “udkast” (sketches) numbers 159.1 and 159.2; “kladder” (drafts) numbers 159.3–159.7; “kopi” (copy) number 159.8; and “notat” (annotation) number 159.9. The English language edition of Kierkegaard’s correspondence, included

20 27 1

176m

2

177

3

3

652

4

21

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146

in Kierkegaard’s Writings as Letters and Documents (LD), is based on the older Danish edition, Breve og Akstykker (B&A), which used different editorial procedures than those used in SKS. In those editions, some of the materials in question are printed as letter numbers 235–239 (LD, 322–337; B&A, 253–264). A portion of the “copy” of letter 159 (letter 239 in LD, 335; letter 159.8, copy of letter 159, in SKS 28, 262) reads as follows: “This step was occasioned by the impression Councillor of State Olsen’s death had made on me. The letter was from Nov. 19, ’49. / The letter to Schlegel read as follows: / Dear Sir. / The enclosed letter is from me (S. Kierkegaard) to―your wife. / You yourself must now decide whether or not to give it to her. I cannot, after all, very well defend approaching her, least of all now when she is yours, and for that reason I have never availed myself of the opportunity that has presented itself or perhaps has been presented for a number of years. / It is my belief that a small item of information about her relationship to me might now be of use to her. If you disagree, may I ask you to return the letter to me unopened. / [in the draft:] I have wanted to take this step, to which I felt myself religiously obligated, and in writing, because I fear that my pronounced personality, which probably had too strong an effect at one time, might once again have too strong an effect and thus in either one way or another be disturbing. / I have the honor to remain, etc. / S. K. / I then received a moralizing and indignant epistle from the esteemed gentleman and the letter to her unopened.” ― Schlegel: Johan Frederik Schlegel (1817–1896), Danish jurist and civil servant; university student, 1833; law degree, 1838; worked for a time as a private tutor in the Olsen household and developed tender feelings for Regine Olsen. In 1842, he started as an intern in the government’s Office of Customs and Commerce, becoming a head clerk there in 1847; the following year, he became Chief of the Colonial Office. He . . . would not in any way “tolerate any interference . . . between himself and his wife.”] The letter from Schlegel has not been preserved; see the preceding note. Cordelia] Slip of the pen for Cornelia, i.e., Cornelia Olsen (1818–1901), Regine’s older sis-

•

1851

ter; married merchant Fr. Emil Winning on November 6, 1849. According the 1850 census and the Veiviser [Gazetteer] for 1851, they lived at 28 Vestergade (see map 2, A-B1). goes back the same way, alone] According to the Veiviser for 1851, J. F. Schlegel (and thus also his wife, Regine Schlegel) lived at 20 Norgesgade, also known as Bredgade (see map 2, E2). a scoundrel] Presumably, a reference to the circumstance that Kierkegaard appeared to be a scoundrel when he broke his engagement to Regine Olsen; see Not 15:4.l, where Kierkegaard writes: “To exit from the relationship as a scoundrel, if possible as a first-class scoundrel, was the only thing that could be done in order to get her afloat, to speed her to a marriage; but it was also exquisite gallantry” (KJN 3, 434–435). See also Not 15:9, where Kierkegaard relates that he has heard that Regine was angry with him about the way in which he had broken off the engagement, and adds: “She forgets that she herself said that if I could convince her that I was a scoundrel she could easily come to terms with the entire business. And now she complains about the manner, presumably ‘the scoundrelly manner.’ And incidentally, if that manner had not been employed, we would still probably still be in the process of breaking up. To this extent it is right to complain about ‘the manner,’ since in no other manner could I have succeeded” (KJN 3, 439). See also Not15:11.a: “In order to help her, I have put up with being seen as a scoundrel in the eyes of everyone else” (KJN 3, 440). stopping as an author] Earlier, in the summer of 1849, Kierkegaard had considered stopping as an author and seeking a position either as a priest or as a teacher at the Royal Pastoral Seminary in Copenhagen; see, e.g., NB14:12 and marginal entry NB14:44.d, both for November 1849, in KJN 6, 354–355 and 374. the last pseudonym] Anti-Climacus (→ 109,7). the Palace Church] Christiansborg Palace Church, situated on Slotsholmen opposite Højbro Plads (see map 2, B2). Even though the Palace Church served as the church for the royal court, it was open to the public for high mass and vespers. three weeks ago] i.e., at Christmastime (→ 141,14).

22

7

178

23

24 2

10

177m

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 146–151

10

22

178m

1

31

183

8 10

14

She sat right in front of me;] Variant: first written “She sat right in front of me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the arcade] Refers to the arcade that encircles the riding ring behind Christiansborg Palace in Copenhagen (see map 2, B2). And I am not . . . devoted to her.] Variant: this note was begun in the main text column. ― the period that followed the end of our engagement] → 177,2. ― the period of her engagement to Schlegel] → 177,2. for only if it has his consent does it interest me] See the following passage in one of the drafts of the letter to J. F. Schlegel, where Kierkegaard writes: “If it is your opinion that it might please her, if it is your opinion that it may be of service [deleted: if it is your opinion that it might enhance your marital life] to her to have a milder―that is, in another sense, a harsher―explanation of her relationship with me, then I am not unwilling now to do that which I can all too easily do. / If your reply to this should be ‘no,’ then the matter is thereby settled. / If your reply is ‘yes,’ then I must stipulate a few conditions in advance, should you yourself not feel prompted to do so. If the exchange between us is to take place in writing, then my condition is that no letter from me is to reach her without having been read by you; likewise I shall not read any letter from her unless it bears your written approval and has been read by you. If the exchange is to be a verbal one, then my condition is that you be present during every conversation” (letter 236 in LD, 330; letter 159.2, a draft of letter 159, in SKS 28, 254). Chrysostom] → 165,2. He says . . . when a man’s wife’s child dies . . . she was indeed willing] Kierkegaard’s summary of the passage he cites from Neander’s book on Chrysostom; see the next note. His words are as follows: Whoever endures . . . a martyr’s crown― . . . joyously prepared to do so, etc. Neander, Chrysostomus, pt. 1, p. 249. Hom. 8 in Coloss. IV, 133] Kierkegaard’s Danish summary of a homily (→ 165,2) by Chrysostom, cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus,” in A. Neander, Der heilige

•

1851

653

Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 1, pp. 249–250. ― a martyr’s crown―: Variant: first written “a martyr’s crown.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. both in lesser matters and in great ones] Variant: added.

30

183

Christmas was declared to be the supreme festival (in the 4th cent.)] See NB:50, from ca. November 1, 1846, where Kierkegaard writes: “the festival of Christmas was first introduced in the 4th century a.d.,” in KJN 4, 47, citing as his source F. G. Lisco, Das christliche Kirchenjahr. Ein homiletisches Hülfsbuch beim Gebrauche der epistolischen und evangelischen Pericopen [The Christian Ecclesiastical Year: A Homiletic Manual for Use in Connection with the Epistolary and Gospel Texts], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Berlin, 1843 [1834]; ASKB 629–630; abbreviated hereafter as Das christliche Kirchenjahr), vol. 1, p. 9, § 17: “Up to the year 325 there are only very obscure and uncertain traces extant pertaining to this festival, but after the middle of the fourth century, under the reign of the Roman bishop Liberius, it makes its appearance, and it was in fact in the Roman Church, i.e., in the West, that it was first a universally acknowledged and highly celebrated festival.” See also the following passage from one of Chrysostom’s Christmas sermons from the year 387, cited in the second section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus,” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3),vol. 1, p. 260: “The festival that is the most venerable and holy of all festivals, which we not incorrectly can name as the central point of all other festivals, the festival of the corporeal birth of Christ.” The Savior of the world was now a child] See § 20 in Lisco, Das christliche Kirchenjahr, vol. 1, p. 12: “Christmas was viewed as the real children’s festival because through Jesus Christ, the Son of God, we should all enter into the blissful condition of being God’s children, becoming God’s beloved children.” “learning” from the lily and the bird] Reference to Mt 6:24–34, where Jesus tells his followers to let go of earthly concerns by considering the lil-

5

184

6

9

654

11 15

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 151–157

ies of the field and looking at the birds of the air. Kierkegaard published a number of pieces based on this text; see the second part of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits, which Kierkegaard had published in March 1847, consisting of three discourses collectively titled “What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air” (UDVS, 155–212; SKS 8, 251–307) and The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air: Three Godly Discourses from April 1849 (WA, 1–45; SKS 11, 5–48). either insisting only upon Xt’s death (for then one avoids imitation)] → 168,3. the almost comically erroneous way this was done in the Middle Ages] Refers to the widespread emphasis on Christ as exemplar, and thus to the practice of “imitating Christ,” in the Middle Ages, especially in monastic movements and in mysticism. For example, St. Bernard of Clairvaux placed great emphasis on the imitation of Christ in poverty, humility, and suffering. The mysticism that emphasizes the passion of Christ regarded imitation of Christ’s sufferings as the path to perfection, whereas quietist mysticism said both that the soul ought to imitate Christ’s death on the cross and also that the individual ought to imitate Christ in striving for virtue, especially for the pure love of God.

184

32

Not that I have grasped it―but that I am grasped] Adapted freely from Phil 3:12.

185

10

Judgment Day] → 138,15. See esp. Mt 25:31–46.

185

23

Chrysostom] → 165,2. Mynster] → 116,1. Chrysostom is truly also very eloquent] → 165,2. Now he takes . . . right in the middle of the actuality of life] See, e.g., the third section of “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 154,3), vol. 2, pp. 1–96, where there is a long series of examples of how Chrysostom’s Sunday sermons related to and involved themselves with events of the prior week. grieve my spirit unto death] Allusion to Mt 26:38.

23 27 28

16

•

1851

I am spirit] Allusion to Jn 4:24. See § 1 in Balles Lærebog (→ 104,35), p. 12: “God is a spirit or an invisible being who possesses reason and free will, but no body, and does not consist of parts. Therefore he cannot be seen with eyes of flesh, nor can he be depicted by any image.” the testimony of the spirit] → 175,4.

36

Mynster preached today about the beauty of the Christian life] According to Adresseavisen, no. 15, January 18, 1851, Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 116,1), was to preach at the 10 a.m. high mass at Christiansborg Palace Church (→ 177m,2) on January 19, 1851, the second Sunday after Epiphany. The sermon is published as no. 1, “Et christeligt Livs Skiønhed” [The Beauty of a Christian Life] in “Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1851” [Sermons Held in the Year 1851], in Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1851 og 1852 [Sermons Held in the Years 1851 and 1852] (Copenhagen, 1853; ASKB 234), pp. 3–16. From this text it can be seen that Mynster preached on the epistle text of Rom 12:6–16 (on the gifts of grace in the congregation and on living in accordance with God’s will). The theme of the sermon is introduced as follows: “In this connection we are to be encouraged in our hours of devotion, and we could take every one of the apostle’s [i.e., Paul’s] admonitions to us, for every one of them is rich enough to take up the whole of our observation, but on this occasion we will make an effort to summarize the whole, because in accordance with the recommendation in our text, we will attempt to sketch the beauty of a Christian life.” hymn no. 588] Hymn no. 588 in Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845), included at the end of Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog til Brug ved Kirke- og Huus-Andagt [Evangelical Christian Hymnal, for Use in Devotions in Church and at Home] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 197), pp. 29–30: “1. My soul, if you will for a while / Your God in truth to praise, / Then, with all your might and main, / You should your Lord obey. / 2. In vain you go into the church / The Lord’s Word there to hear / If home again you go, forgetful, / And fail what you

3

186

38

8

187

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 157–159 heard there. / 3. It does no good that you know God / And from him what to say, / If from his Word and pure command / You, evil, go astray. / 4. Stay with God’s Word and let your faith / In loving deeds show forth. / Then, in God’s peace and calm, / Attain a blessed death. / 5. Avoid all sin, worship your God, / And keep your tongue in check, / Who judges strict―you know the words― / The Lord will judge in turn. / 6. Think of your neighbor’s peace and needs / Console with help and trust, / And do not ever let the world / Your loving to impede. / 7. O, Lord Jesus, let your Spirit / My heart sanctify, / And with your own almighty hand / To me your help supply! / 8. Then shall my deeds be praised / By thee and thee alone, / And by your grace you’ll surely give / To me a heavenly home.” The hymn is by the Danish bishop and hymnodist Thomas Kingo and was included in Dend Forordnede Ny Kirke-Psalme-Bog [The New Authorized Church Hymnal] from 1699. 187

14

19

188

9

Xt says to his disciples . . . are you able to drink the cup I am to drink] Cited from Mt 20:20–23. rank order] Allusion to the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 140,22). This is also how Luther presents . . . epistle for the 7th Sunday after Trinity] Reference to Luther’s sermon on Rom 6:19–23 (on freedom from sin), the epistle for the seventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday in En christelig Postille (→ 130,31), pt. 2, pp. 370–377. See esp. pp. 370–371, where Luther, referring to the above-mentioned verse, says: “What? he [Paul] says: Are we to sin, then, because we are not under the Law, but under grace?―It is indeed the world’s depravity when people preach of the forgiveness of sins, granted out of sheer grace, without merit on our part, that the world then says either, we forbid good deeds, or it wants to deduce and conclude from it that we can now live in sin and do what we want, even though by any reasonable understanding, the opposite ought to take place, namely that from this doctrine people would feel themselves encouraged to do good, in praise, gratitude, and

•

1851

655

eternal honor to God. For indeed, this doctrine, when it is understood properly, does not make people proud and spineless, but humble and obedient.” Then Luther gives examples from worldly, domestic, and civic life, including the example of a thief whom the judge lets go free out of grace, even though he had deserved punishment, and who then thinks he is entitled to do whatever he wants. And Luther continues: “In brief: When the Law is suspended and grace is given, no one is permitted thereby to do wrong in such a way; the sinner, because of the grace that has been shown him, is all the more obligated to live henceforth in such a manner that the court will not indict him a second time. Everyone can very well see and act upon such distinctions in worldly matters, and no one is so crazy as to agree with the assertion that ‘Grace is a right that gives a person the freedom to do wrong’ . . . From the fact that our lives are now sheer grace it surely does not follow that we should now have the freedom once again to live as we lived before, when, in disgrace and wrath, we forfeited our lives. On the contrary, we, as those who know how to appreciate the ineffable grace―that he has saved us from eternal death and made us alive―we should now venture to keep watch on ourselves in the future, so that we do not waste these acts of charity, falling out of grace and into the punishment of eternal death. St. Paul speaks of it like this: Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? [Rom 6:16]―which means that if you now possess the forgiveness of sins under grace, and if you are now justified, then you also owe God obedience in living in accordance with his will. For, after all, you must owe someone service and obedience, either that of sin, which brings upon you the wrath of God and death if you remain in it, or that of God, in which case you serve him in a new life. Therefore you must no longer obey sin, from whose might and power you are now liberated.” the easiest situation in which to become a Xn . . . is the moment of death] See, e.g., NB14:49, from November 1849, in KJN 6, 379; NB15:114.a, from

16

656

189

3 14 22 28

190

4

21

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 159–164

February 1850, in KJN 7, 78–79; and NB18:4, from May 1850, in KJN 7, 260–261. a hum. being is capable of absolutely nothing] Perhaps an allusion to Jn 3:27. it is sheer grace] A Christian expression stemming from 2 Cor 12:9. in the gospel passage . . . actually excluded . . . bought a yoke of oxen] See Lk 14:16–24. Diogenes of Laertius . . . describing the purity of Pythagoras . . . no one ever saw him in the act of love or on the toilet] Reference to the Greek author Diogenes Laertius (3rd century b.c.), who writes of the Greek philosopher and mathematician Pythagoras (580–ca. 500 b.c.) in bk. 8, chap. 1, sec. 19 of Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s Philosophical History, or the Lives, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Eminent Philosophers], trans. Børge Riisbrigh, ed. Børge Thorlacius, 2 vols. [Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111]), which in Kierkegaard’s Danish edition read, “No one saw him in the latrine, or in the business of love, or drunk” (vol. 1, p. 372). The English translation in the Loeb Classical Library differs from this, however: “He was never known to over-eat, to behave loosely, or to be drunk” (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols. (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 2, p. 337. infinitely more dignified;] Variant: first written: “infinitely more dignified.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. So when God sent Xt to the world . . . he saved the human race] Presumably, an allusion to Jn 3:16–17. Clara Raphael] → 133,14.

190

33

191

1

The System “progresses by necessity,” it is said] → 135m,1 and → 157,2.

191

10

Eve was created to provide company for the man] Reference to Gen 2:18–23. the Holy Spirit is called the Comforter] See Jn 13–16. The term used for the Holy Spirit in the Authorized Version (“King James Version”)

10

•

1851

is “Comforter”; the NRSV uses the terms “Advocate” or “Helper.” In one of the older journals . . . could have journalists shot] Refers to NB10:53 from February or March 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “God in Heaven knows that blood-thirst is foreign to my soul, and to a frightening degree, I also think I have a concept of a responsibility to God. And yet I would, in the name of God, take responsibility for giving the order to fire if I, first of all, with the precaution of a most anxious conscience, had convinced myself that there was not one single other man facing the rifles―yes, not one single living creature other than―journalists. This is said of the whole class” (KJN 5, 294). I fall before journalists] → 152,23. resurrected with transfigured bodies] Presumably, a reference to Phil 3:20–21. a little scar] Variant: “little” has been added.

14

The Poetic, and Myself.] Variant: changed from “Poetic.” And the event through which I became a poet was indeed an ethical breach] See NB3:20.d, from November 1847: “When I began writing Either/Or, because of an unhappy relationship to another pers. [i.e., Kierkegaard’s break with Regine Olsen (→ 177,2)], my basic defect and anguish were brought back to me once more and intensified, and from this I understood that humly speaking my existence had run aground for the whole of my life. It was in this way I became an author” (KJN 4, 256). See also the passage in “Governance’s Part in My Authorship,” chap. 3 of The Point of View for My Work as an Author: A Direct Communication, Report to History, published posthumously by P. C. Kierkegaard (Copenhagen, 1859), where Kierkegaard writes of the “fact” that subsisted “prior to the real beginning of my work as an author,” i.e., prior to Either/Or, which made him a “poet” (PV, 84; SKS 16, 63). teleological suspension of the ethical] See Problema 1, “Is There a Teleological Suspension of the Ethical?” in Fear and Trembling (FT, 54–67; SKS 4, 148–159).

27

191

20 22 23

191 6

192

7

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 164–169

14

26 29

That I can never sufficiently thank God . . . than I ever had expected] See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (→ 110,28), where Kierkegaard writes: “And truly, that which is, after all, more important to me than all the writings, and which concerns me more profoundly, is to express as honestly and as emphatically as possible something for which I can never give sufficient thanks, something which when I someday have forgotten all the writings, I will remember eternally and unchanged: How Governance has done infinitely much more for me than I had ever expected, could have expected, or dared expect” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 349). See also the two pages in “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19). a government official] → 178,23. I no longer have the means to maintain an authorial existence] Despite the fact that Kierkegaard had received payment for his writings since 1847―with the exception of Two Ethical-Religious Essays, which he financed himself (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Tvende ethisk-religieuse Smaa-Afhandlinger in SKS 11, 96–97)―his fortune had been greatly diminished. Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (→ 164,10), died in 1838, leaving an estate―inherited by Søren Kierkegaard and his brother Peter Christian (→ 114,15)―that in March 1839 was reckoned at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 124,11). Søren Kierkegaard’s share amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars, in real estate, stocks, and bonds; see F. Brandt and E. Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 67–69. Kierkegaard’s financial situation in the period 1846–1850 can only be estimated, but he had sold the last of his inherited stock in March 1847, and his last royal bond was sold in December 1847 (see Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 69–71). At Christmastime that same year, Kierkegaard sold his childhood home at 2 Nytorv. The house fetched 22,000 rix-dollars: Peter Christian Kierkegaard held a first mortgage for 7,000 rix-dollars, while Søren received a second mortgage for 5,000 rix-dollars at 4 percent

•

1851

657

interest, a bank draft for 753 rix-dollars (which he sold for 757 rix-dollars in December 1849), and in January 1848, a cash payment of 10,000 rix-dollars. Kierkegaard invested some of the proceeds in stock and in royal bonds. See NB7:114 in KJN 5, 144–145, in which Kierkegaard expresses the belief that he lost 700 rix-dollars on the bonds; see also Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 83–90. Governance] → 104,35.

34

as, e.g., is said about Paganini] Nicolò Paganini (1782–1840), Italian violin virtuoso; his phenomenal technical abilities, Romantic artistic attitude, and an almost demonic persona made him one of the most legendary and idolized figures of modern music, but these same characteristics fed rather strange rumors that grew up around him, e.g., concerning mystical erotic adventures involving murder, subsequent imprisonment in dungeons, and consorting with the devil. Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified. punitive or judgmental] Variant: added.

16

God, for he is solely spirit] → 186,36. forgive or be a father.] Variant: first written “forgive or be a father,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. But this never happens with God . . . God is indeed your Father] Presumably, allusion to Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son in Lk 15:11–32.

7

that the country has 1000 priests] → 140,28. and to gesticulate] Variant: added. Even if everyone else fell by the wayside, I would be faithful to Christianity] Presumably, a reference to Mynster’s (→ 116,1) sermon “Om Menneskenes Ustadighed” [On the Inconstancy of Human Beings] on Jas 1:17–21, the epistle for the fourth Sunday after Easter, in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons for Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 2 vols., 3rd. ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230 and 2191; abbreviated hereafter as Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage), vol. 1, pp. 395–408. Here Mynster writes, among other things: “I will promise you, my God, that I will presume nothing, as I certainly once did, according to what others say,

33

194

12

195m

193

22

194

14

14

15

658

17

20

195

13

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 169–173

but will first submit it to my conscience, where the steadfast judgment dwells, for it has never yet led me astray; but what I have confessed there fully and deeply I have never since needed to repent. And how could this light, which comes from you, possibly deceive? Everything that comes from you is a good and perfect gift. So I will stand by what I have thus confessed; and even if all those around me were to change their minds, my own shall not waver, and even if I were to walk alone, I would remain on the path that you have shown me. But what perhaps still remains behind in thought, what I have not yet tested in my heart . . . that I will gladly abandon, if you would grant me to know it better” (p. 406). the gentle doctrine . . . that gives joys their true savor] Presumably, a reference to Bishop J. P. Mynster’s sermon on Jn 10:11–17 for the second Sunday after Easter (which in 1851 fell on May 4), no. 29, “At vi alle, eenfoldigen og oprigtigen, skulle holde os til den samme christelige Tro” [That All of Us Are to Cling Simply and Honestly to the Same Christian Faith], in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage, vol. 1, pp. 358–369, pp. 362– 363: “It is . . . true that most people have many adversities in the world, but it is also true that greatest among these are dissatisfaction, doubt, fear, and worry, and that the good they actually lack is one that could sweetly relieve life’s sorrows and give the joys their proper savor.” Concerning this “good,” Mynster says, “we [have] no other name for that great good than faith, the true, living Christian faith; in it is the foundation for all our relief, the source of everything that can fill the heart and make it happy and blessed.” It is my innermost conviction] No source for this has been identified. Abbot Isidorus . . . now the priest fears the congregation. see Neander’s Chrysostomus, 2nd part, in the note on p. 99] Refers to a passage in “Anmerkungen” [Notes], no. 1, in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 2, pp. 98–99. ― Isidorus: Isidore of Pelusium (ca. 360–433), priest and abbot in the eastern portion of the Nile delta. He was an admirer of Chrysostom, praised the ascetic and in-

•

1851

dustrious life of the monk and criticized the local bishop and priests for their desire for pomp and worldliness. Approximately two thousand of his letters survive. Prof. Martensen’s] → 135,19.

26

195

Audius . . . founded a party . . . remark . . . in Neander’s Chrysostomus . . . second volume . . . p. 100 . . . note 1] Refers to a passage in “Anmerkungen” [Notes], no. 1, in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 165,3), vol. 2, p. 100: “So then Audius, an uneducated but pious layman in Mesopotamia, formed a sect because as a preacher of repentance who opposed worldly passions of the clergy, he had called down persecution upon himself.” ― Audius: (d. ca. 370); because of his attack on the worldliness of the clergy he was expelled from the Church and formed a monklike, ascetic sect, the Audians, which chose him as bishop. Audius and his adherents seem to have been exiled to Scythia, north of the Black and Caspian Seas, where he missionized among the Goths. Concerning the Audians, who continued to exist until the early 5th century, see, e.g., § 94.1, “Antikirchliche Secten” [Anti-ecclesial Sects] in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 127,16), vol. 1, p. 341.

18

196

age in which anyone and everyone wants to dabble at being a reformer] See NB21:162 with its accompanying explanatory notes. an officer who can consume, eat up, all these reformers] According to NB21:162, this concerns the following passage: “If Governance had meant to give the generation an extraordinary, it must accordingly be expected that perhaps first a forerunner, an officer, will be sent to clear the air in order to throw out all these false prophets to bring a little meaning and pith into the enervated and meaningless situation again” (BA, 151; Pap. VII 2 B 235, p. 42), in essay no. 2, “The Dialectical Relations: The Universal, the Single Individual, the Special Individual,” in the unpublished Three Ethical-Religious Essays by the pseudonym F.F. See the note to NB21:162 in the present volume.

33

196

36

J O U R N A L NB 22 : 173 197

1

16

25

198

11 16

197m

9 36

as Socrates ate up the Sophists] i.e., as Socrates, in his conversations (in Plato’s dialogues), obliterated the leading wisdom of his day, namely, the relativistic life-views of the Sophists. See the conclusion of Kierkegaard’s account of Socrates’ relation to the Sophists in The Concept of Irony (1841) in CI, 217–218; SKS 1, 262. rank order] Allusion to the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 140,22). See the note to NB22:158 in the present volume. Mynster] → 116,1. rulers of the Church] Primarily the bishops. the government officials] i.e., the priests (→ 176m,1). Governance] → 104,35. Luther’s Reformation,] Variant: first written “Luther’s Reformation.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1851

659

Notes for JOURNAL NB23 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB23 663

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB23 673

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB23

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff and Finn Gredal Jensen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by David D. Possen

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by David D. Possen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

663

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB23 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB23.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB23 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. A scalloped, rectangular label marked “NB23.” and bearing the date “January 22nd 1851.,” has been pasted to the front cover (see illustration 3). The journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand with occasional instances of his latin hand. Entry NB23:197 is written in a distinct latin hand. Kierkegaard also used his latin hand for French and Latin words and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. Marginal addition NB23:39.a continues onto the margin of the next page in the journal. Marginal addition NB23:51.j continues into the main text column, with a symbol indicating the addition NB23:51.j.b (see illustration on p. 233). Most of the entry headings in the journal are completely or partially underlined, as are occasional words in the text. Journal entries are usually separated from one another with a hash mark (#). When an entry began on a new page of Kierkegaard’s journal, he generally placed an extra hash mark at the top of the new page. Entry NB23:51 is divided internally with a horizontal line.

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB23 was begun on January 22, 1851, and must have been concluded no later than April 20, 1851, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB24. Of the journal’s 228 entries, only NB23:180 bears a date (“March 9th”). Five entries contain references to contemporary events that make possible the assignment of an approximate date. In NB23:20, which bears the heading “Dr. Rudelbach and Me,” it can be assumed that the words “now he busies himself with the history and the external forms of the Church” refer to Rudelbach’s book Om det borgerlige Ægteskab. Bidrag til en alsidig, upartisk Bedømmelse af denne Institution, nærmest fra Kirkens Standpunkt [On Civil Mar-

664

J O U R N A L NB 23 riage: Contribution to a Comprehensive, Unbiased Evaluation of That Institution, Principally from the Church’s Point of View], the publication of which was advertised in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 19, on January 23, 1851. In NB23:77, when Kierkegaard remarks that the “the step now taken against Rudelbach produces a double danger,” he is referring to his article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” which appeared in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 26, January 31, 1851. In NB23:98, one reads the following: “When Rudelbach (in the article in Fædrelandet) speaks of the apostle surrounded by a cloud of witnesses, R. sees incorrectly: he sees the cloud—and not the apostle.” This is a reference to A. G. Rudelbach’s article in Fædrelandet, no. 38, February 14, 1851. In NB23:189, Kierkegaard informs us that “yesterday evening I got the little book by Bishop M., in which he blurs the impression Goldschmidt makes by bringing the two of us together where we ought to be kept separate.” The book Kierkegaard had received was Mynster’s Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [Further Contribution to Negotiations concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark], the publication of which was advertised in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 61, March 13, 1851. Entry NB23:212 discusses the contents of “Mynster’s Lenten Sermon,” which according to Adresseavisen, no. 75, March 29, 1851, was to be delivered on March 31. Generally, the marginal additions in the journal were probably added somewhat later than the principal entries to which they were appended. Entry NB23:163.a, which is dated “June 1852,” was thus written more than a year after the journal was concluded.

III. Contents Journal NB23 bears the mark of the political tumult and the general tendencies in the direction of liberalization and democratization that characterized the period after the fall of absolutism. The entries that touch on social and political developments express equal measures of displeasure and amazement, but they also contain diagnoses of modernity unparalleled in the literature of the period. Unsurprisingly, the new situation provides Kierkegaard with the opportunity to discuss the oppositional relation between “the majority” and “the minority” (NB23:105), which his writings described in such detail, but his marked sense for the character and

Critical Account of the Text

3. Outside front cover of Journal NB23.

665

666

J O U R N A L NB 23 the consequences of the social-psychological avalanche that was taking place compelled him to revise some of his earlier notions about the religious individual’s placement in the world and the obligations incumbent on such an individual. In his diagnoses of modernity, it is typical of Kierkegaard that he is not satisfied merely with defending Christianity’s legitimacy; he is also, and even more so, engaged with insisting on Christianity as the only alternative to the anonymization that exudes from modernity in every direction. In a typical expression of his view of the irreconcilable opposition between the centrifugal forces of society, on the one hand, and religious intensity, on the other, Kierkegaard writes: The law is quite simple, by the way: The more quickly a hum. being resorts to the social aspect—that “Let us form a group”— the more sensate a hum. being he is, and the less he communicates with God. The person who must instantly form a group in every situation is rlly bereft of God and of ideas—that is, it is his own fault, for God abandons no one. (NB23:102; see also NB23:103) Kierkegaard is also a critical observer of modern tolerance, not only the social egalitarianism but also the broad-mindedness in matters of religion, which helps place Christian martyrdom in relief: “Wanting to kill others because of their faith is the intolerance that is repugnant to Xnty. But for oneself to be willing to be put to death for the sake of one’s faith—yes, let us not overlook it—this is also intolerance, it is the suffering intolerance” (NB23:10). Above all, however, the age’s countless demands for reform offered Kierkegaard perfect opportunities to ironize over this pronounced but diffuse desire for reform in every possible (and impossible) direction, worldly and religious, even though all the while, the “character” that is supposed to be behind reform is being undermined by the general forces of leveling. Thus the society finds itself in the peculiar situation of witnessing “A Reformation—Without ‘a Reformer,’ ” which at first serves as an occasion for a comical shrug of Kierkegaard’s shoulders: “Indeed, since everything has become impersonal, why not this too[?]” (NB23:37; see also NB23:95). But before long the urge for farce finds expression in the form of a suggestion that “the reformer” could be replaced with “a voting machine,” which could perhaps on special occasions be in turn replaced by “a wheel of fortune” (NB23:37; see also NB23:41 and 45).

Critical Account of the Text Under the heading “Prosit!” Kierkegaard comments on the naïveté Grundtvig exhibits when he hails equality and freedom as Christian ideals. “Grundtvig takes no notice whatever of the fact that the concept of toleration that is now flourishing is: indifferentism, the most profound falling away from Xnty—and he will vote on the same side as this” (NB23:64). Grundtvig revealed a similar lack of forethought and reflection when, with great drama, he “strode into the world with his probationary sermon: Why Has God’s Word Departed from His House?,” a question Kierkegaard would never ask, inasmuch as God’s word has indeed never departed from the Church. Instead, Kierkegaard would ask the much more intrusive question: “Why Has Power Departed from the Preaching of God’s Word[?]” (NB23:54). The most detailed of the entries concerning Grundtvig discusses his relationship to the “State Church,” which Grundtvig, according to his own reports, had been considering leaving for forty years, which in Kierkegaard’s view was not only a long time, but was also factually incorrect, “because for the most part what he has done is entered it—and then gone out of it—and then in—and then…” (NB23:67). This entry also finds amusement both in the sheer quantitative significance that Grundtvig’s followers have for the State Church and in Grundtvig’s significance for the nation, “for as Poul Møller pointed out in his day, history and Grundtvig and Grundtvig and history are one and the same, so Denmark and G. and G. and D. must also be one and the same.” Kierkegaard concludes the entry laconically with words that have since almost become proverbial: “I think G. is nonsense” (NB23:67; see also NB23:15). In Journal NB23, as in many of his earlier journals, Kierkegaard defines both the category and the extent of his task, which, among other things is “always to indicate the existential corrective by poetically positioning the ideals to incite people concerning the established order” (NB23:15). For the same reasons, the task involves neither “ ‘doctrine’ that is to be inspected critically,” nor “ ‘the Church’ that is to be reformed,” but rather “existences that are to be inspected critically” (NB23:30). In one of the longest entries in the journal, Kierkegaard, who was not noticeably burdened by modesty, makes clear “The Significance of My Life in These Times”: “In human terms, I am the most precocious person we have. And what have I learned? That I scarcely dare call myself a Christian—so how should I dare want to reform the Church or occupy myself with such things[?]” (NB23:33). In a similar vein, Kierkegaard describes himself as “a sort of existential master of ceremonies” who confronts everyone who thinks he is “in the area of religion,” compelling him to embody the attendant

667

668

J O U R N A L NB 23 “existential consequences,” so that the person involved is either compelled “to be in character” or becomes “revealed as a deceiver or as self-deceived” (NB23:62; see also NB23:194). As a “master of ceremonies” of this sort, Kierkegaard also knows his place: “I believe I could have the courage to give up my life in order to make room for the extraordinary—but to be regarded as the extraordinary myself: No, that I cannot do. To me it seems as if in so doing I would defile what had been entrusted to me” (NB23:126). Kierkegaard states the limits of his own existential capacities by describing himself as a “poet” who is capable of presenting the Christian ideals but cannot live up to them, and with this he becomes a visible indicator of Christianity’s radical character and its real homelessness in the modern world: And what can I offer? I am a poet—alas, only a poet. But I can present Xnty in the splendor of ideality . . . I am only a poet, alas, only a poet. Do not look at my life— and yet, simply look at my life in order to see what a mediocre Xn I am, which you will see best when you listen to what I say about the ideal. Listen to that and forget about my insignificant self. I am only a poet. I love this earthly life altogether too much, would be happy to have what are, humanly speaking, good times, to amuse myself, enjoy life, etc. Alas, and I understand that, strictly understood, Xnty requires something entirely different. (NB23:33; see also NB23:39, 102, 115) In other journal entries this animated self-presentation is replaced by a quite prosaic sense of injury over the absence of recognition, over the lack of appreciation of his diligence and exceptional abilities (see NB23:186), over the cramped pettiness that prevails in Copenhagen, and indeed, over the fact (as Kierkegaard saw it) that some of his misfortune was attributable to his unimposing first name: Copenhagen and Denmark are a Provincial Market Town so much so that the circumstance that I have been given the poor and unfortunate name “Søren” has presumably prevented me from being regarded as being somebody. No, if Cph. is to believe that I am a thinker, I would really have to have had—a nicer name. (NB23:85; see also NB23:86)

Critical Account of the Text Bishop Mynster was ostensibly among the relative few who understood Kierkegaard’s worth: “My abilities, my diligence, my accomplishments—Mynster knows their worth very well”; however, it was these very qualities that also had a negative effect on Mynster’s overall assessment of Kierkegaard, inasmuch as “Mynster is ossified in the sort of earnestness that says that life’s earnestness consists in being a civil servant and all the trappings. He is narrow-minded” (NB23:209). This same narrow-mindedness characterizes Mynster’s partiality for institutional arrangements and his humanistic tendencies in general. Thus Kierkegaard noted the following under the heading “Amazing!”: At one time, the objection against Xnty (and that was precisely the time when it was clearest what Xnty is) was that it was unpatriotic, dangerous to the state, revolutionary—and now Xnty has become patriotism and State Church. At one time, the objection against Xnty . . . was that it is misanthropic—and now Xnty has become: humanity. At one time, Xnty was an offense to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks, and now it is—cultivation. For Bishop Mynster, the mark of true Xnty is cultivation. (NB23:122) At other points in the journal Kierkegaard depicts history as an irreversible story of decline, in which for centuries upon centuries we have “slackened with respect to the existential,” so that as early as the 3rd century we began “pushing Xt out entirely,” and in the 19th century have reformulated Christ into “a myth, a clever poem” (NB23:144; see NB23:106). What is shameful is not merely Mynster’s approval of the world-historical process, but that he additionally reveals himself as a veritable cultural philistine when he intimates to Kierkegaard that, in putting forth his ideas about the obligation to live up to the Christian requirements, Kierkegaard borders on making himself a bit laughable and in any case reveals a profound lack of culture: “Ah, but it is precisely here that things are worst of all. In practice he [Mynster] has established the principle that actlly to be in earnest about the religious is—lack of cultivation! This latter is what is frightful” (NB23:148). Kierkegaard’s indignation over Mynster’s position stems not only from wounded vanity, but also from a historical and philosophical reflection on the relation between, on the one hand, the notion of humanity cherished by cultivated society, and, on the other hand, the fact that Christianity is the original presupposition of that same cultivated society. Kierkegaard clarifies the true or-

669

670

J O U R N A L NB 23 der of precedence in an entry that bears the heading “The Merely Human”: It is unbelievable with what effrontery people nowadays appeal to the merely human in contrast to Xnty. But what is it that we nowadays call the “human”? It is a volatilized Xnty, a cultural consciousness that Xnty has emitted. Thus, it is attributable to Xnty—and then people emphasize it in contrast to Xnty. (NB23:225; see also NB23:133, 222) The journal includes a great many reactions to Mynster’s stealthy and opportunistic approach both to political and to religious matters, but it also includes psychological insights and disclosures: “He is more of an artist and poet; what is dangerous is simply that he himself does not recognize this fact” (NB23:132; see also NB23:148, 179, 197, 212). Nor is Kierkegaard able to communicate meaningfully with Andreas Rudelbach, who appears in the journal fairly frequently (NB23:36.a, 77, 98, 115, 180.b). “We will never come to understand one another,” Kierkegaard writes of Rudelbach, who to Kierkegaard’s amazement never doubts for a second that “he is in fact a Christian” and now merely “busies himself with the history and the external forms of the Church” (NB23:20). In Kierkegaard’s view, Rudelbach, who was known as one of the most learned men in the country, is “rlly devoid of ideas,” a fact attested to by Rudelbach’s opinion of Practice in Christianity (NB23:44). Reading was special source of solace. Of particular interest was Alexander Vinet’s Der Sozialismus in seinem Princip betrachtet [Socialism, Viewed in Accordance with Its Principle], to which, incidentally, Kierkegaard had been alerted by Rudelbach (NB23:180.b). Kierkegaard is willing to note that Vinet says something “masterfully” (NB23:182), but his final judgment is restrained. Vinet is in fact “not in character; he is without—merely an author. He speaks of individuality, of the I, the single individual—but he is infinitely distant from the final reduplication, from saying: I, Vinet—i.e., existentially tying a knot at the end of the thread.” Furthermore, in Vinet Kierkegaard misses “goading, gadflylike teasing” (NB23:184). But in this journal Kierkegaard also reads the German theologian and hymnodist Christian Scriver (NB23:17, 57–58, 187, 191–192) without reservations, and in general he reveals a predilection for classical writers and for authors from the early Church and Reformation. Kierkegaard devotes many lines to Friedrich Böhringer’s Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen oder die Kirchenge-

Critical Account of the Text schichte in Biographieen [The Church of Christ and Its Witnesses, or the History of the Church in Biographies], from which he cites, among others, Tertullian (NB23:133–141), Basil (NB23:143), Ambrose (NB23:151–152), Augustine (NB23:154–158, 165–170, 172, 174), and Anselm (NB23:195–196, 198–199, 203–205). There is also time for Rousseau, whom Kierkegaard very much values: “His Confessions, vol. 4 (The Walking Tours) are excellent; e.g., the 5th walking tour is aesthetically incomparable. Incidentally, here we have an example of what it means not to have been well taught in Xnty. R’s life contains analogies to the genuine Christian collisions” (NB23:214). In the margin Kierkegaard noted that Rousseau “is an example of how difficult a hum. being finds it to die away” (NB23:214.a). There were others who apparently had an easier time doing so: in the first real entry in the journal, Kierkegaard relates that he had read of some monks “who were so zealous that they had themselves immured so that there was only a little hole through which they received food.” Kierkegaard was fascinated with the idea, but was nonetheless unable to take the immured monks entirely seriously: “One cannot keep from smiling at the thought of an immured monk ad modum [in the manner of] a baked apple. And yet, would that we had this strength!” (NB23:4).

671

Explanatory Notes 201

1

NB23. January 22nd 1851.] Variant: label on the outside front cover of the book.

202

1

My Task . . . p. 242] Variant: written on the inside front cover of the book. ― My Task . . . p. 3: See NB23:6. ― My Task . . . p. 13: See NB23:15. ― My Relationship to the Established Order and the Intrigue . . . p. 226: See NB23:197. ― Xt’s Passion Story . . . pp. 234, 35, 36: See NB23:201 and 202. ― Variants for a Passage in the Preface of the Friday Discourses . . . p. 242: See NB23:206.

203

1

texts for Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held every Friday at 9 a.m. in Vor Frue Kirke [The Church of Our Lady] in Copenhagen. In addition to a discourse in connection with confession, a short sermon was delivered between confession and communion. Kierkegaard had preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady―on June 18, 1847, on the text Mt 11:28; on August 27, 1847, on the text Jn 10:27; and on September 1, 1848, on the text Jn 12:32―and went on to publish all three sermons as discourses. Two of the sermons appear as the second and third discourses in the fourth part of Christian Discourses under the title “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: Christian Discourses” (CD, 262–274; SKS 10, 277– 292); the remaining sermon appears as the first exposition in Practice in Christianity, No. III (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160. see the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17, p. 30] See NB17:24 in KJN 7, 183.

2 3

205

3

see (in Neander’s Chrysostomus, volume 2, p. 230) . . . monks . . . had themselves immured . . . became a missionary] Summarizes the following account in the fifth section of “Leben des heili-

gen Chrysostomus” [Life of St. Chrysostom] in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche, besonders des Orients, in dessen Zeitalter [St. John Chrysostom and the Church, Particularly the Eastern Church, of His Day], 2 vols. (Berlin 1821–1822; abbreviated hereafter as Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche), vol. 2, pp. 230–231: “When he [Chrysostom] found a pious anchorite (μoναχoς εγχεχλειςμενoς, the term for monks who had immured themselves somewhere for a certain period of time, or for the rest of their lives, and only let themselves be reached by food delivered through holes in their walledoff cells, or at certain times for conversation with those who wished to visit them), he persuaded him that labor in the vineyards of the Lord was more pleasing to God than such idle asceticism, and moved him to travel to Antioch and put himself at the disposal of the missionary office in Phoenicia.” ― Neander: Johann Wilhelm August Neander, born David Mendel Neander (1789–1850), German Protestant theologian; in 1806, converted from Judaism to Christianity; from 1812, professor of Church and dogma history at Heidelberg; from 1813, at Berlin. A pioneer of scholarship on Church history, Neander understood the history of the Church as a history of piety and sought to reveal Christian piety in its various historical forms. ― Chrysostom: John Chrysostom (344/354–407), theologian and Church Father, originally a lawyer; baptized ca. 370, and subsequently studied at the theological school in Antioch; after a period as an ascetic monk and hermit was made deacon in 381 and presbyter at Antioch in 386; in 397 inaugurated as a bishop and nominated for an archbishopric; removed in 403 and exiled in 404, first to Cucusus on the Armenian border (today Göksun, Turkey), and later to the Taurus Mountains. He was known as a charismatic preacher; hence his nickname Chrysostomos, Greek for “golden mouth.” St.

674

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 4–6

Chrysostom’s works consist of exegetical, monastic, and catechistic treatises; collections of homilies; and his letters. ― Nicaea: an ancient and medieval city in Bithynia, an area in northwest Asia Minor; today Ýznik, Turkey. 205

14

22

25

206

3

3

Oratory, Eloquence.] Variant: changed from “Oratory.”, with the period apparently marking the end of the title, as in the final version. an hour’s oratory once] Variant: first written “an hour’s oratory.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. to what is highest,] Variant: first written “to what is highest.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. hundredweight] a great weight. The Danish hundredweight [centner] was equivalent to one hundred Danish pounds, i.e., fifty kilograms. this political, profane reforming] A reference to various attempts at ecclesiastical reform, starting with the proposal for a new synodal constitution of the People’s Church designed to fulfill § 80, “Folkekirkens Forfatning ordnes ved Lov” [The Constitution of the People’s Church Is to Be Ordered by Law], of the Danish constitution adopted on June 5, 1849, i.e., Danmarks Riges Grundlov. Valgloven. Bestemmelser angaaende Forretningsordenen i begge Thingene [Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark, Electoral Law, Procedural Rules concerning Both Houses of Parliament], abbreviated hereafter as Danmarks Riges Grundlov (Copenhagen, 1850), p. 26. On January 10, 1851, the Danish lower house [Folketing] unanimously allocated five thousand rix-dollars (→ 227,6) to Cultus Minister J. N. Madvig for organizing a Church assembly for the purpose of “preparing future legislation on the constitution of the People’s Church”; see Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 9, January 11, 1851, p. 35. Debate on the subject was further sparked by proposed legislation on freedom of religion, which had already been introduced in October 1850 (→ 208,18) by Folketing member N. M. Spandet (→ 223,10), and still more by a proposed “Lov om Ægteskabs Indgaaelse udenfor de anerkjendte Troessamfund eller imellem

•

1851

Medlemmer af forskjellige Troessamfund” [Law concerning the Contracting of Marriage outside the Recognized Religious Communities, or between Members of Different Religious Communities], which had been formulated by a majority of the committee organized by the Folketing to consider Spandet’s proposed legislation; on this see NB21:162 and NB22:80, and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. Still another possible referent may be the manifesto by A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), “Votum for virkelig Religionsfrihed” [A Vote for Real Freedom of Religion], in the book Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip, dens Udartning og dens mulige Gjenreisning fornemmelig i Danmark. Et udførligt kirkeretligt og kirkehistorisk Votum for virkelig Religionsfrihed [The Evangelical Church’s Constitution: Its Origin and Principle, Its Decline, and Its Possible Restoration, Principally in Denmark. A Detailed Vote, Based on Canon Law and Church History, for Real Religious Freedom] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 171; abbreviated hereafter as Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip), and his call for the introduction of civil marriage in the book Om det borgerlige Ægteskab. Bidrag til en alsidig, upartisk Bedømmelse af denne Institution, nærmest fra Kirkens Standpunkt [On Civil Marriage: Contribution to a Comprehensive, Unbiased Evaluation of That Institution, Principally from the Church’s Point of View] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 752; abbreviated hereafter Om det borgerlige Ægteskab). the religious] Danish, det Gudelige, “the Godly”, i.e., what concerns the relation to God. preface to Practice in Xnty . . . mediocre Xn] See the “Editor’s Preface” to “ ‘Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest’: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,” No. I of Practice in Christianity (→ 206,14), where Kierkegaard writes: “In this work, stemming from the year 1848, the pseudonym forces the requirement for being a Christian up to the highest level of the ideal. Yet the requirement must be stated, presented, heard; from a Christian point of view there must be no reduction of the requirement, nor ought it be suppressed―instead of making an admission and confession concern-

4 8

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 6–7

11

14

20

23

25

ing oneself. The requirement should be heard― and I understand what is said as spoken to me alone―so that I might learn not only to resort to grace but to resort to it in relation to the use of grace” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). This preface is referred to again in Nos. II and III of the book (PC, 73 and 149; SKS 12, 85 and 153). after ’48] Shortly after the beginning of 1848, Europe was torn by a series of revolutionary and political upheavals. In Denmark, the death of King Christian VIII gave occasion for the fall of absolutism (on March 21) and the de facto introduction of a constitutional monarchy, which was codified with the adoption of Danmarks Riges Grundlov on June 5, 1849. published Practice in Xnty] The publication of Practice in Christianity by Anti-Climacus, edited by S. Kierkegaard, was advertised in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 225, on September 25, 1850. these 3 writings . . . in Practice in Xnty] The three “numbers” of Practice in Christianity––No. I, “Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest: For Awakening and Inward Deepening”; No. II, “Blessed Is He Who Is not Offended at Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition”; and No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions”―the first two of which were written in 1848, and the third presumably early in 1849―were originally conceived as three independent texts. On June 4, 1849, however, Kierkegaard started to consider publishing them together, pseudonymously, as a one-volume collection with the common title Practice in Christianity. On this see NB11:123, written on June 4, 1849, in KJN 6, 65; see also NB12:7, from July 1849, in KJN 6, 147, where Kierkegaard indicates that he has now decided to proceed as above. wear down the reformers] See NB22:173 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. the master of irony] A reference to the fact that Kierkegaard earned the title of magister [master]

•

1851

675

on September 29, 1841, by successfully defending his dissertation on irony, On the Concept of Irony. became the object of irony] A reference to attacks on Kierkegaard published in the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair], which was edited by M. A. Goldschmidt; these attacks included satirical articles and caricature drawings (see KJN 4, 453–456), starting on January 2, 1846, no. 276, and continuing regularly until July 17, 1846, no. 304. Corsaren’s teasing of Kierkegaard continued after Goldschmidt’s departure as editor and did not cease until February 16, 1849, no. 439. Kierkegaard was convinced that, as a result of Corsaren’s attacks, he was abused on the street. In the sermon . . . Luther, as usual, defines faith . . . joy, despite the fact that you feel the exact opposite] A reference to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on the epistle for the eleventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday (which in 1851 fell on August 31), 1 Cor 15:1–10 (on Christ’s resurrection), in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller [A Christian Book of Sermons Drawn from Dr. Martin Luther’s Church and House Sermons], trans. J. Thisted, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828; ASKB 283; abbreviated hereafter as En christelig Postille), vol. 2, pp. 405–412; pp. 406–407: “And here we come to what I have always said, namely, that faith must possess nothing at all other than the Word. It tolerates no cleverness, no rumination, if it is to remain and persist. For human wisdom and reason can reach no higher or farther than they can judge and infer, than a man can see and feel and conceive by means of the senses. Faith, by contrast, must hoist itself up above the external feeling, above the senses’ conception; indeed, it must contradict those, and must cling to what is set forth in the Word. This no one can do by reason or human faculties; it is the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart. If one could grasp this by reason . . . then one would need neither faith [nor] the Holy Spirit . . . Therefore here, too, you must judge only according to the Word, and without regard to all that one sees or feels. I also feel my sin, I feel the Law, I feel the Devil on my neck . . . but what shall I do? If I were to reason

26

3

207

676

10

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 7–9

in accordance with my feelings and faculties, then I and all humanity would necessarily despair and wither. If, on the contrary, I wish to be helped, then I must surely repent, follow the Word, say in accordance with the Word: ‘I do indeed feel God’s wrath, the Devil, death and hell, but God’s Word speaks the opposite. It tells me that I have a gracious God in Christ, who is the Lord of the Devil and all creatures. I do indeed feel and see that I and all human beings must rot in the grave; but the Word tells me that I shall be resurrected with great glory, and live eternally. This, then, is the art and wisdom of faith, which makes the wisdom of the world into foolishness.” Then L. has someone raise the objection: . . . Then, quite properly, L. . . . that there is in fact an experience of faith] A reference to the following passage (a continuation of the passage cited above) in En christelig Postille, vol. 2, p. 407: “Perhaps you object: ‘Preacher, what is this that you believe? If you yourself declare that we do not feel it, then your preaching must be an empty dream, a nothing. For if there is something, then surely experience must also attest to it?’ / Answer: What I say is precisely that it must be believed above and prior to all experience. What cannot be believed humanly is what must be believed, and what cannot be felt must be in the heart nonetheless . . . / ‘How then? If this is true, then must there not be experience of it? Must it not be felt?’ / True enough! But the feeling must come afterward. Faith must be there first, outside and above feeling. And so my conscience, inasmuch as it feels sin and is accordingly in terror, must become a master and victor over sin―not in feeling or in thought, but in faith in the Word, by which it comforts itself against sin and raises itself over it, until sin must flee completely and can no longer be felt.”

207

27

the year ’48] → 206,11.

207

30

Bishop Mynster] Jakob Peter Mynster (1775– 1854), Danish pastor, writer, and politician. From 1811, Mynster was permanent curate at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. From 1826, he was court preacher and from 1828, roy-

•

1851

al confessor as well as court priest and priest at Christiansborg Palace Chapel. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand and as such was the primate of the Danish Church and the king’s personal counselor; during the period 1835–1846, he was a member of the Advisory Assembly of Estates in Roskilde, where he was very influential; and in 1848–1849, he was a member of the Constitutional Assembly. Mynster had a seat in a great many governing organs and was the prime mover behind various key ecclesiastical publications, including the authorized Danish translation of the New Testament that appeared in 1819, the Udkast til en Alterbog og et KirkeRitual for Danmark [Draft for a Service Book and Church Ritual for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1839; abbreviated hereafter as Udkast til en Alterbog og et Kirke-Ritual), and the authorized Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845). In accordance with the Danish system of rank and precedence, in 1847, Mynster, as bishop of Zealand, was ranked number thirteen in the first class and accordingly was to be addressed as “Your Eminence.” the One about Practice in Xnty] See NB21:121 in the present volume, which is titled “My Conversation with Bishop Mynster, 22 October 1850, after He Had Read Practice in Christianity.” The various times I spoke with him] Kierkegaard’s conversations with Mynster after October 22, 1850, are not mentioned in the journals; nor have they been otherwise identified. a little admission ought to be made to God] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). the cry was for freedom . . . and more freedom] See NB21:162 and NB22:80, with the associated explanatory notes, in the present volume. summoned up] Variant: first written “and”. on the hill] i.e., “here in the neighborhood.” The expression is taken from Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg [Erasmus Montanus, or Rasmus Hill] (printed 1731), in which the principal figure attempts in vain to convince the people of his native district that the world is not flat, but round. See, e.g., act 3, sc. 2: “Here on the hill no one will believe it; for how

31

32

2 5

7 12

208

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 9–13 can it be, seeing as the world of course appears to be quite flat?” Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 5, undated and unpaginated. 208

18

20

25

Our times’ notions concerning freedom of religion] In the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849, §§ 81–84, freedom of religion was codified. See especially § 81: “Citizens have the right to form societies for the worship of God in a manner consistent with their convictions, provided, however, that nothing be taught or done that is inconsistent with morality or public order.” See also § 84: “No one may, on account of his religion, be denied access to the full enjoyment of civic or political rights, or exempt himself from fulfilling any general civic duty”; see Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 206,3), pp. 26–27. As logical consequences of the above freedom, in October 1850, N. M. Spandet (→ 223,10), a member of the Folketing (the lower house of parliament), introduced draft legislation to provide for civil marriage and to abolish compulsory baptism and confirmation. Spandet’s proposed legislation, which was also described as a proposal for freedom of conscience, roused fierce debate and received partial backing from N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14). See NB22:80 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume; see also the manifesto by A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), “Votum for virkelig Religionsfrihed” [A Vote for Real Freedom of Religion], in the book Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), and his book Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 206,3), which also calls for freedom of religion. victory over the world,] Variant: first written “victory over the world.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. conquered the world] Variant: first written “conquered death”.

209

1

The Call from Above] Variant: changed from “The Call from Below”.

209

13

When Moses came down from the mountain . . . his face―because of the brilliance] A reference to Ex 34:29–30.

•

1851

677

When Xt was transfigured on the mountain . . . found it infinitely beneficial] A reference to Mt 17:1–4. ― infinitely] Variant: “infinitely” has been added. This observation . . . Luther . . . 12th Sunday after Trinity] A reference to the following passage in Luther’s sermon on 2 Cor 3:4–11, the epistle for the twelfth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (which in 1851 fell on September 7), in En christelig Postille (→ 207,3), vol. 2, pp. 412–421; pp. 420–421, where Luther refers to Paul’s speech about the glory of the law: “It certainly was a glory, he said; but what did it achieve, except to chase men away from God and into death and hell? But we, on the other hand, have a different glorious accomplishment to praise. This glory is described where the Gospel recounts how Christ permitted his disciples to see it, when ‘his face shone like the sun.’ Moses and Elijah were also witnesses. And the disciples did not flee, but gazed upon it with wonder and joy, saying: ‘It is good for us to be here; we will make dwellings for you and Moses etc.’ Compare these two images, and you will fully understand what he wishes to see; for this is, as stated above, the sum of the matter: the Law produces nothing but terror and death, when it cuts right into the heart with its brilliance. The Gospel, by contrast, gives comfort and joy.”

15

the Stoic who walked about with the idea of suicide] The Stoic philosophical school, founded by the Greek thinker Zeno of Citium (ca. 335–263 b.c.), further developed in the 1st century a.d. by Roman thinkers, including Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius, was characterized in part by moral approbation of suicide; see W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826, vol. 5 (1805), pp. 140–182, esp. pp.157, 169–176, 181. See also Not13:29 in KJN 3, 395–396, and the associated explanatory notes. Providence] God’s providence. See chap. 2, sec. 2, “Hvad Skrivten lærer om Guds Forsyn og de skabte Tings Opholdelse” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Providence and the Sustaining of Creation], § 2a: “God takes care of all his creatures, the least as well as the greatest, and

30

209

8

210

20

678

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 13–17

obtains for them everything that is necessary for their sustenance, and guards and protects them”; § 3: “God, who is Lord and Regent of the world, governs with wisdom and goodness whatever happens in the world so that both good and evil achieve an outcome that he considers most suitable”; and § 5: “Whatever we encounter in life, whether distressing or pleasing, gets allotted to us by God for the best purposes, so that we always have reason to be gratified with his reign and governance,” in N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangelisk-christelige Religion indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [A Primer for the Evangelical Christian Religion, Prepared for Use in Danish Schools], abbreviated hereafter as Balles Lærebog [Balle’s Primer] (Copenhagen, 1791; ASKB 183 is an edition from 1824), pp. 23 and 24–25. 210

14

15

Grundtvig] Nicolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish theologian, pastor, author of hymns, historian, politician, et al.; ordained 1811; thereafter served as priest in various places on Zealand and in Copenhagen; from 1839 until his death, priest at Vartov Hospital Church in Copenhagen (see map 2, A2), where he gathered a growing congregation of like-minded believers and adherents; he had great influence among the priests of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle, which, like the Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times] was with some justification regarded as a mouthpiece for his views. In 1848–1849, he served as a member of the Danish constitutional convention, and from 1849 was a member of the first Danish parliament (for Præstø, in southeastern Zealand), where he attached himself primarily to the Venstre (“Left”) or Bondevennerne (“Friends of the Peasant”) parties; see the article “Danske Rigsdags-Breve” [Danish Parliament Letters], letter III, in Danskeren, et Ugeblad [The Dane: A Weekly], edited by Grundtvig (and quite likely authored by him as well), April 6, 1850, vol. 3, no. 13, pp. 193–202, p. 196 (→ 235,35). In his younger days he represented . . . primal-primeval Christianity] A reference to Grundtvig and his followers, who often referred to themselves as “old-time Christians,” the “old believers,” or simply “the orthodox.” See, e.g.,

•

1851

Grundtvig’s polemical writings Om Daabs-Pagten [On the Baptismal Covenant] (Copenhagen, 1832), pp. 15–19, and Om Sogne-Baandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Relaxing of Parochial Restrictions and Mr. Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 19ff. These terms were also invoked several times when the Advisory Assemblies of Estates took up Jacob Christian Lindberg’s appeal for freedom of conscience for clergy and for relaxing parochial restrictions on the laity. See, e.g., Tidende for Forhandlinger ved Provindsialstænderne for Sjællands, Fyens og Lollands-Falsters Stifter samt for Færøerne, 1838 [The Journal of the Proceedings of the Provincial Estates for Zealand, Funen, Lolland-Falster, and the Faroe Islands, 1838], 2nd ser. (Copenhagen and Roskilde, 1839), cols. 1167, 1170, 1178 (→ 234,19). the existential corrective] i.e., partly as the remedial alternative; partly as the test of the truth. false reformers] → 206,3. evil itself] Variant: first written “evil itself.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

20

The legend says that when Paul was beheaded . . . Xt’s name . . . historical remark in Scriver] A reference to the following passage in § 24 of “Von der zukünfftigen Herrlichkeit und Seligkeit der gläubigen Seelen, / Die VI. Predigt, / Darinn ihr frölicher und seliger Abschied aus dem Leibe und aus der Welt beschrieben wird. Offenbah. Joh. XIV, v. 13” [On the Future Glory and Blessedness of Faithful Souls / Sixth Sermon / in Which Their Happy and Blessed Departure from Body and World Is Described. Rev. 14:13] in M. Christian Scrivers, Fürstl. Sächs. Ober-Hof-Predigers und Consistorial-Raths zu Qvedlinburg, / SeelenSchatz, / Darinn / Von der menschlichen Seelen hohen Würde, tieffen und kläglichen Sünden-Fall, Busse und Erneuerung durch Christum, göttlichen heiligen Leben, vielfältigen Creutz und Trost im Creutz, seligen Abschied aus dem Leibe, triumphirlichen und frölichen Einzug in den Himmel, und ewiger Freude und Seligkeit, erbaulich und tröstlich gehandelt wird; / Vormahls / In denen ordentlichen Wochen-Predigten

3

210

22 23

211

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 17–22

7

212

9

seiner anvertrauten Christlichen Gemeinde fürgezeiget, und auff Anhalten vieler gottseligen Seelen weiter ausgeführet [M. Christian Scriver, Chief Court Chaplain and Consistorial Councillor to the Prince of Saxony at Quedlinburg / SoulTreasure / in Which / the Great Value of the Human Soul; the Deep and Lamentable Fall of Sin; Repentance and Renewal in Christ; Divine Holy Life; the Manifold Cross and Comfort in the Cross; the Blessed Parting from the Body; and the Triumphant and Joyful Entrance into Heaven and Eternal Joy and Blessedness Are Treated Edifyingly and Consolingly / Formerly / Presented during the Regular Weekly Sermons to His Entrusted Christian Congregation, and Expanded to Apprehend Many Religious Souls], 5 vols., 8th ed., with a new introduction by Johann Georg Pritius (Magdeburg and Leipzig, 1723 [1675–1692]; ASKB 261–263; abbreviated hereafter as M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz), vol. 5, p. 980, col. 1, where Scriver writes about Paul’s death: “And it is strange what Church history tells of [Paul], namely, that his decapitated head spoke the name Jesus three times; without a doubt this is an indication of how, during his life, he had had a passionate desire to spread the honor of the name Jesus, which also became known in death, and so too his soul, as soon as it had exited his body, began to praise the name of Jesus.” ―Scriver: Christian Scriver (1629 –1693), German Lutheran theologian, pastor, devotional writer, and composer of hymns; for more information, see the explanatory notes to NB21:6 in the present volume. Paul’s activity was of course the proclamation of the Word] See, e.g., Rom 1:1, where Paul introduces his epistle with the words: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God.” Dr. Rudelbach] Andreas Gottlob Rudelbach (1792–1862), Danish theologian, pastor, and author; theology graduate, 1820; dr. phil., 1822; pastor in Glauchau in the principality of Saxony, 1829–1845; lectured as a privatdocent at the University of Copenhagen, 1847–1848; from 1848, parish priest in Slagelse on Zealand. In his early

•

1851

679

years, while still a biblical theologian, Rudelbach was a strong adherent of N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and was his comrade-in-arms against rationalism, but he subsequently broke openly with him, coming ever closer to J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30) and H. L. Martensen (→ 283,13). For him it has long since been settled that he is a Xn.] See Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (see the next note), p. 72, where Rudelbach writes: “As long as the Church lasts (and it will last until the coming of the Lord), every upright servant of the Lord― it is my fixed, immutable belief―will not come to answer the One who hears our prayers in any way other than how the disciples answered the Lord when he asked them: ‘When I sent you out without a purse, bag, or sandals, did you lack anything?’―They could only answer: ‘No, Lord, not a thing’ (Lk 22:35).” now he busies himself with . . . the external forms of the Church] Probably a reference to Om det borgerlige Ægteskab, which was advertised as published in Adresseavisen, no. 19, January 23, 1851. According to p. 1 of its introduction, the book was written as a response to N. M. Spandet’s legislative bill proposing the introduction of civil marriage (→ 206,3 and → 208,18). The book contains lengthy historical investigations and ends by recommending the introduction of civil marriage. On p. 70 n. 121, Rudelbach refers to Kierkegaard; this provoked Kierkegaard’s response in the form of an article in Fædrelandet titled “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach” (→ 245,4). The present entry may also be a reference to Rudelbach’s earlier book Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3). The Emancipation of the Church] i.e., the separation―and freeing―of the Danish Church from the Danish state. During the negotiations that led up to the drafting of the Danish constitution, a proposal for separating church from state was considered; if adopted, this would have given the Danish Church a synodal constitution, viz., its affairs would have been administered by an elected synod. The proposal did not, however, find majority approval. Instead, the consti-

11

12

5

213

680

6 15

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 22

tution of June 5, 1849, affirmed the following in § 3: “The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish People’s Church, and as such is supported by the state,” which was supplemented by the “promissory paragraph” § 80, “Folkekirkens Forfatning ordnes ved Lov” [the constitution of the People’s Church is to be ordered by law]; see Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 206,3), pp. 6 and 26. At the same time, §§ 82–84 of the constitution introduced freedom of religion (→ 208,18). This led to a continuous, and at times ferocious, debate about the relation between state and church; see NB21:162 in the present volume. In Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9) came out against the establishment of a state church, and advocated the separation of church and state. In §§ 203–204, pp. 367–370, Rudelbach argues for a synodal organization, albeit insisting that such a synod should stand “not over, but under, all that constitutes the church’s objective and authoritative content, in the Word and in the sacraments, in its confession and in its cultus,” and such that the synod would not operate by majority vote: “All synodal deliberations must be conducted and concluded by what can be called the spiritual principle of the Church, which is based on what the Apostle called ‘the revelation of the truth’ (2 Cor 4:2), and does not replace conviction with the torpid, dead principle of the majority. Church meetings are not political-worldly assemblies; if they cannot depend on the Lord’s liberating and enlivening spirit, then they do not deserve to exist―indeed, then they do not exist. Synods that operate in accordance with the majority principle and the corresponding modern form of representation do not build the Church, but dissolve it” (p. 369). Debate about the relation between church and state returned to prominence in connection with the Folketing’s consideration of the bill proposed by N. M. Spandet (→ 208,18). If the Church is free from the state] See the preceding note. voting] Danish, Ballotation, referring to a method of voting with the aid of black and white balls instead of voting slips. This, incidentally, is the origin of the term “ballot,” which was once

•

1851

used to refer to these small balls. Later the term “ballotation” came to refer more broadly to organizing or holding a vote in general, or simply to voting. See § 39 in, respectively, “Folketingets Forretningsorden vedtagen den 8de, 9de og 11te Februar 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Lower House of Parliament, Adopted on February 8, 9, and 11, 1850], p. 128, and “Forretningsorden for Landsthinget vedtagen af Landsthinget den 13de Febr. 1850” [Rules of Procedure for the Upper House of Parliament, Adopted by the Upper House on February 13, 1850] in Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 206,3), p. 146: “Voting takes place by means of balls when requested by 25 members.” pattern] Here Kierkegaard uses the word Mynster, a highly unusual spelling of Mønster, i.e., “pattern”; of course, this was also the name of the primate of the Danish Church. piously] Danish, gudeligt, “in a godly manner,” i.e., religiously, concerned with the relation to God. a member of a knightly order] i.e., the Great Cross of the Dannebrog. In 1836, J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30) had become a Knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog. an Excellency] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence established by decree on October 14, 1746 (with amendments on August 12, 1808), persons with a first-class rank were to be addressed as “Your Excellency.” Within the Church hierarchy, this applied to all bishops with the exception of J. P. Mynster, bishop of Zealand, who from 1847 onward was to be addressed, uniquely, as “Your Eminence.” “Freedom of the Church from everything worldly!”] → 213m,2. See Rudelbach, Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), p. 371: “When the Church is emancipated, torn away from the groundless, leaden regency of the worldly, the State too is emancipated, liberated from the confusions that combined state/church legislation had so often imposed upon it; in this unnatural coalition, both parts were bound in unbefitting chains.” something so lofty] Variant: changed from “so lofty a good”. concept of tolerance . . . toleration = indifferentism] See Rudelbach’s Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings

19

21 22

23

35

38 4

214

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 22–24

7

Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), p. 329: “But it is equally clear that the concept of tolerance cannot possibly remain in the purely negative sphere, but must acquire a definite content; for the freedom of religion is itself the reality of tolerance and its actual content. And so it is protected from sinking down to the level of indifference, from which it often struck back, in a paranoid reaction, at everything positive. But freedom of religion is itself active to the highest degree; wherever it goes, it develops a fullness of power and activity, and generates organs that are filled with life by the spirit of faith.” See NB22:64 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. Kierkegaard’s remark probably also contains a reference to the fact that N. M. Spandet’s proposed legislation on the freedom of religion (→ 208,18) was an expression for tolerance toward believers of other faiths as well as of nonbelievers. See Spandet’s article “Om Troesfrihed” [On Freedom of Religion] in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 282, December 2, 1850, where he writes: “The basis of my proposal is that no one can incur any civic disadvantage by failing to confess with his mouth a faith that he lacks in his heart . . . As stated, it is only civic disadvantages that [my] proposal will avert for those who, for one or another reason, do not wish to be married in Church ceremony, or be confirmed, take sacraments, or have their children baptized . . . My proposal aims mainly to abolish what I regard as an injustice that is currently being practiced. But precisely for this reason, I am convinced that if the religious coercion now practiced is abolished, then the fear of God in general, and Christianity in particular, will in no way decline. On the contrary, they will gain significantly because of it.” “But only when the Church is finally free, can things be better.”] The source of this statement has not been identified. Nevertheless, see Rudelbach, Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), pp. 370–371: “Earlier, in the period of the State Church just as much as in the age of the church state [i.e., theocracy], the actual situation was that Church and State, for all their pretended unity, were in fact wholly divergent; and this was the cause of many

•

1851

681

of the worst collisions between them, which have often plagued both entities in the same way. It is precisely with the introduction of freedom religion, and by means of the acknowledgment of the difference in character between Church and State, that unity between them can be grounded and strengthened.” “only true Xns in Denmark”] → 223,1. k.] Knight. Luther’s idea] A reference to Luther’s doctrine of the two kingdoms, the heavenly (spiritual) and the worldly, which must be distinguished carefully so that they are not mixed together. On this, see Luther’s 1523 treatise, Von weltlicher Obrigkeit, wie weit man ihr Gehorsam schuldig sei [Secular Authority: To What Extent It Should Be Obeyed]; see Luthers Werke: Vollständige Auswahl seiner Hauptschriften. Mit historischen Einleitungen, Anmerkungen und Registern [Luther’s Works: A Complete Selection of His Principal Writings, with a Historical Introduction and an Index], ed. Otto von Gerlach, 24 vols. (Berlin 1848; abbreviated hereafter as Luthers Werke [vols. 1–10 are a stereotype of the 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1840–1841)]; ASKB 312–316), vol. 6, pp. 20–69, esp. pp. 27–31, esp. the following passage on pp. 30–31: “For this reason these kingdoms must be sharply distinguished, and both be permitted to remain; the one to produce piety, the other to bring about external peace and prevent evil deeds; neither is sufficient in the world without the other. For no one can become pious before God by means of the secular government, without Christ’s spiritual rule.” English translation: Luther, “Secular Authority: To What Extent It Should Be Obeyed,” trans. J. J. Schindel, reprinted in Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings, ed. John Dillinger (New York: Anchor Books, 1962), pp. 363–402, p. 371. See also A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), pp. 42–46, and Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 206,3), p. 71. to have matters of conscience,] Variant: first written “to have matters of conscience.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

27 1

213m

2

15

215

682 215

22

34

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 25–32

Luther’s Marriage] In 1505, Luther had entered an Augustinian monastery in Erfurt, but in 1521 he put aside his monastic garments, and in December 1524 he left the monastery definitively. The following year he married the nun Katharina von Bora, who had left the cloister in Nimbschen with eight other nuns and fled to Wittenberg, where they were granted refuge with Luther’s approval. See the note in Kierkegaard’s addendum to his Fædrelandet article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach” (→ 245,4), in COR, 58; SKS 14, 115. Now in these times, for example, Luther’s marriage . . . attention] See Grundtvig’s article, “Folket, Folke-Kirke og Folke-Troen i Danmark” [The People, the People’s Church, and the People’s Faith in Denmark] in Danskeren (→ 210,14), January 4, 1851, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–16; p. 14, where the following provocative questions are posed to opponents of the introduction of civil marriage: “Shall we continue to force all members of the People’s Church to undergo church wedding ceremonies, of which the Gospels know nothing, and which Martin Luther openly disdained when he himself entered into a civil marriage that was not merely unchurchly, but which― as a marriage between a monk and a nun―broke with all the notions of churchly marriage in his day?” See also A. G. Rudelbach’s (→ 212,9) piece Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 206,3), p. 39, note 75: “Nor, perhaps, should one neglect to note that Luther’s own marriage to Katharina von Bora was plainly a civil marriage (concluded in the presence of friends alone), and that he sanctified it later with a solemn Church procession, but that in his letters he continually speaks of this relation as his Copulation [wedding].” In a short, untitled piece in Berlingske Tidende, no. 23, January 28, 1851, Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30) wrote, “It has surely been noteworthy to many that recently, indeed from two quarters, it has been claimed that Luther’s marriage to Katharina von Bora was ‘a civil marriage,’ ” after which Mynster proceeded to try to demonstrate the opposite. In the next day’s newspaper, Prof. C. T. Engelstoft introduced his article “Var Luthers Ægteskab et borgerligt Ægteskab” [Was Luther’s Marriage a Civil Marriage],

•

1851

Berlingske Tidende, no. 24, January 29, 1841, as follows: “It has roused something of a sensation that Pastor Grundtvig and Dr. Rudelbach have publicly claimed that Luther himself, by his own example, justified the practice of civil marriage.” He then refutes Rudelbach’s account. On the following day, Luther’s marriage to Katharina von Bora was mentioned in a review of Rudelbach’s Om det borgerlige Ægteskab signed by “B.” in Fædrelandet, no. 23, January 30, 1851. Rudelbach responded to Mynster in his article “Om Luthers Ægteskab” [On Luther’s Marriage] in Berlingske Tidende, no. 30, February 5, 1851, and to Engeltoft in “Endnu et Par Ord om Luthers Ægteskab og hans Yttringer om Ægteskabets Væsen” [Another Few Words on Luther’s Marriage and His Utterances on the Matter of Marriage] in Berlingske Tidende, no. 35, February 11, 1851. In a short retort to Rudelbach, “Luthers Ægteskab,” in Berlingske Tidende, no. 31, February 6, 1851, Mynster defended his own view of the matter. planning changes in the external forms of the Church] → 206,3.

17

216

unconditionally] Variant: added. For in that way] Variant: added. Governance’s] i.e., of God’s governance (→ 210,8).

31

216

to make a frightful admission to Xnty] See The “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). it is “doctrine” . . . Church reformed and the State] → 206,3.

26

Mynster] → 207,30. progress . . . is always regress] See NB21:67 and 132 in the present volume. men of God] The term “men of God” appears in 2 Pet 1:21. In the Old Testament, “man of God” is frequently used to denote a man to whom God has granted a special power, a particular message, or a special task, e.g., a prophet (see, e.g., 1 Sam 2:27–36; 1 Kings 12:22–24), such as Elijah (1 Kings 17:18–24 and 2 Kgs 1:9–13) and Elisha (2 Kings 4), but it is also used as an honorific for Moses (Deut 33:1), David (Neh 12:24–36), and Samuel (1 Sam 9:6–10).

8

32 33

217

28

21 24

218

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 33–36

35

219

1

10 20 24

31

32

39

the most precocious] i.e., the one who has made the most progress, who is the most developed, who occupies the most advanced standpoint. to reform the Church or] Variant: first written “to reform the Church.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Go now with God] A farewell wish: May you be in God’s care, under God’s protection. they are mediocre] Variant: first written “it” instead of “they”. Luther stepped forth . . . alone with the Bible] While no source for this scene has been identified, it is depicted, for example, in the Danish historical painter Adam A. Müller’s painting Luther paa Rigsdagen i Worms [Luther at the Diet of Worms], in which Luther stands with a large book under one arm and speaks before Emperor Charles V on the first day of the Diet of Worms in April 1521. This painting, which was commissioned on the occasion of the three hundredth anniversary of the Reformation in 1836, was completed in 1838 and was displayed in the Church of the Holy Spirit in Copenhagen. back then, to get their fill of ridiculing me] A reference to attacks on Kierkegaard in the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 206,26). something I myself demanded] An allusion to the article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner,” which Kierkegaard published under the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus in Fædrelandet, no. 2078, December 27, 1845, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). Here Kierkegaard asked that he might himself soon appear in Corsaren, as he could not accept being the only Danish author who had thus far not been abused, but only praised by the journal (COR, 46; SKS 14, 84). This is also an allusion to the attack that Kierkegaard directed at Corsaren, once again under the alias of Frater Taciturnus, in Fædrelandet, no. 9, January 10, 1846, cols. 65–68, with “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” (COR, 47–50; SKS 14, 85–89), in which he writes that he is taking “the step for the sake of others,” namely, the step of “requesting that I myself be abused” (COR, 47; SKS 14, 87). voting] → 213,15.

•

1851

683

I dare] Variant: changed from “I can”. not saying a word to those] Variant: “those” was changed from “the one”. the poet’s Don Juan] i.e., the ideal Don Juan, as he is conceived by the aesthetician “A” on the basis of W. A. Mozart’s opera of the same name in the essay “The Immediate Stages of the Erotic, or the Musical Erotic” in the first part of Either/Or (1843), in EO 1, 47–135; SKS 2, 53–136. the ideal―] Variant: first written “the ideal.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. We hum beings.] Variant: “hum. beings” has been added. here on the hill] → 208,12. pegs the price . . . high] See, e.g., NB12:7, from July 1849, in which Kierkegaard writes as follows about the pseudonym Anti-Climacus (→ 230m,2): “The pseudonym [had] jack[ed] up the price properly” (KJN 6, 147). See also the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, No. I (→ 206,8). boundaries] Danish, Confinier, from the Latin confinia: borders, border-zones. concessions, and] Variant: changed from “concessions.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

13

Balloting] → 213,15. God’s name is being taken in vain] See the Second Commandment, Ex 20:7.

21

The Old Orthodox . . . the only true Xns in Denmark] A reference to Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and his followers, who often referred to themselves as “the orthodox,” i.e., as the people who represented true and proper Christian faith and doctrine. Thus, in Om den Clausenske Injurie-Sag [On the Clausen Libel Case] (Copenhagen, 1831), p. 15, Grundtvig described himself and his adherents as “the hyperorthodox and the old-fashioned believers,” and in Tale til Folkeraadet om Dansk Kirkefrihed savnet [Speech to the People’s Council on the Lack of Danish Ecclesiastical Freedom] (Copenhagen, 1839), p. 13, he used the term “we so-called excessively true believers (ultra-orthodox).” See also the next note and → 223m,1.

1

220

22 37

39

4

221

17 27

29 33

222

34

223

684 4

6 8

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 36

their separating . . . from us] In his article “Tale for Troes-Frihed i Folkethinget (Et Udkast)” [Speech in Favor of Freedom of Religion in the Folketing (a Draft)] in Danskeren (→ 210,14), February 1, 1851, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 69–80, Grundtvig writes on pp. 75–76: “For my own part, I myself, I who dare to believe I that belong to those in Denmark who attach the highest value to the faith of our fathers and all of our inherited Church customs, I would find myself forced to resign from the so-called People’s Church and to advise all of my friends to do the same, if what for so long has been a dead letter were to be revived, namely, that in the Church all those who wish to marry, would be required to do so at the altar, where the priests would be required to declare openly un-Christian marriages Christian; and if, as I believe, it must soon come to pass that all those who voluntarily confessed the Church’s faith and followed its rites were to resign from it, what benefit or joy would then accrue to either God or man from a Church whose members found it necessary to force one another to confess a certain faith and follow certain church customs?” During the Folketing’s second debate on N. M. Spandet’s proposed legislation on freedom of religion (→ 208,18), which also became a debate on the new bill proposed by the majority of the elected committee (→ 206,3), Grundtvig declared, according to a report in Fædrelandet, no. 23, January 28, 1851, p. 92, that “He himself had the greatest respect for the customs inherited from our fathers, but he would not for a moment hesitate to resign from the People’s Church, if there was a revival of the dreadful message that no one could become man or wife without first having participated in the sacrament of the altar.” With this Grundtvig referred to § 5 in the committee’s bill, which specified that “no proof shall be required that those who do not belong to a recognized faith community have partaken of the sacrament of the altar,” i.e., have taken communion; see Fædrelandet, no. 298, December 21, 1850, p. 1190. balloting] → 213,15. and then judgment will be passed upon Mynster and his ilk] As a sworn adherent of the

•

1851

State Church, J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30) had opposed Grundtvig’s long-running campaign, starting in the early 1830s, for the freedom to choose one’s church irrespective of one’s home parish, as well as for dogmatic and liturgical freedom for priests → 223m,1). This conflict was expressed openly as early as 1839, in Grundtvig’s polemic against Mynster’s proposal for a new service book and church ritual (→ 207,30), Frisprog imod H. H. Hr. Biskop Mynsters Forslag til en ny Forordnet Alterbog [Frank Words in Opposition to His Reverence Bishop Mynster’s Proposal for a New Official Service Book] (Copenhagen, 1839). Mynster also opposed Spandet’s proposed legislation on religious freedom (see the next note) in his short piece, Grundlovens Bestemmelse, med Hensyn til de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [The Provisions of the Constitution Regarding the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1850), which was advertised as published in Adresseavisen, no. 287, December 6, 1850. In an article titled “Erklæring i Anledning af Biskop Mynsters lille Bog om en Lov, som af mig er foreslaaet” [Statement on the Occasion of Bishop Mynster’s Little Book concerning a Law Proposed by Myself] in Berlingske Tidende, no. 297, December 19, 1850, Spandet sharply rebuts Mynster’s critique. Given Mynster’s defense of the existing wedding ceremony, Spandet argues that Mynster is the one working to defend the desacralization of what is holy. the worthy Spandet’s frame of mind . . . his proposal] In his article “Om Troefrihed” [On Freedom of Religion] in Berlingske Tidende, no. 282, December 2, 1850, Spandet describes the anticipated and intended ramifications of his proposed bill on freedom of religion, namely, the introduction of civil marriage and the abolition of enforced baptism and confirmation. ― Spandet: Niels Møller Spandet (1788–1858), jurist and politician; from 1819 until his death, jurist in the Provincial Superior Court of Copenhagen; starting in 1849, a member of the Folketing (lower house of parliament), where he was affiliated with the Venstre [Left] and Friends of the Peasant parties (→ 235,35); closely tied to Grundtvig from as early as 1810.

10

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 36

19

21 29

223m

1

“His Majesty’s Service”] A legal designation for undertaking one’s duty as a royally appointed official; applicable to Spandet qua judge. the person charged with this] i.e., by God. step forth as a person of character] Kierkegaard uses the expression “to step into character” in the sense of choosing to be something fully and totally, to stand behind one’s personal views and act in conformity with them. In coining the expression, Kierkegaard may have had in mind the Danish expression at træde i gevær, literally, “to step into arms,” i.e., to ready oneself for combat. The old orthodox wanted to pull out . . . being the true Church] As early as 1826, after he had resigned his position as a priest, Grundtvig (→ 210,14) advocated full freedom of religion within the State Church; see Vigtige Spørgsmaal til Danmarks Lovkyndige [Important Questions for Denmark’s Jurists] (Copenhagen, 1826). In the years that followed, Grundtvig broadened his position to include freedom that would allow those who, like himself, wished to assert a Christianity that was based on “the symbolic books” (especially the Apostles’ Creed and the Augsburg Confession), to leave the State Church and form free congregations outside the State Church; see “Om Religions-Frihed” [On Freedom of Religion] in Theologisk Maanedsskrift [Theological Monthly], ed. N.F.S Grundtvig and A. G. Rudelbach, 13 vols. (Copenhagen, 1825–1828; ASKB 346–351), vol. 8 (1827), pp. 28–59 and 136–171; see also Om den Clausenske Injurie-Sag (→ 223,1), esp. pp. 8 and 15. In 1832 and 1834, the focus of his argument shifted to “freedom of conscience” within the State Church, and he proposed allowing the laity to have their ecclesiastical life in a parish other that the one in which they resided, particularly with respect to baptism, communion, and confirmation; see Om Daabs-Pagten [On the Baptismal Pact] (Copenhagen, 1832) and Om Sogne-Baandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Loosening of Parish Bonds and Mr. Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834). Later in 1834, he entirely gave up the idea of forming free congregations and instead linked the universal dissolution of parish bonds to a demand for freedom of conscience in matters of dogma

•

1851

685

and liturgy for all priests in the Danish State Church; see Den Danske Stats-Kirke upartisk betragtet [The Danish State Church, Viewed without Partisanship] (Copenhagen, 1834). But in 1838, Grundtvig again threatened that he and “the old-fashioned Christians” would secede from the State Church unless the dissolution of parish bonds and the introduction of freedom of conscience for priests made it possible for them to remain; see Grundtvig’s article “Om SamvittighedsFrihed i Danmark” [On Freedom of Conscience in Denmark] in Nordisk Kirke-Tidende [Scandinavian Church Times], vol. 6 (1838), no. 40, cols. 623– 631. Grundtvig subsequently asserted both that it would be wrong to secede from the State Church to form “divine assemblies,” and that if the requisite freedoms were not granted, it could become necessary, as a last resort, for “earnest Christians” to leave the church. See, e.g., his article “De Helliges Samfund” [Society of the Holy Ones] in Dansk Kirketidende, November 7, 1847, vol. 3, no. 6, cols. 81–96, especially cols. 95–96, collected in Dansk Kirketidende, ed. R. Th. Fenger and C. J. Brandt (8 vols., 1845–1853; ASKB 321– 325). This same view―namely, full confessional freedom, coupled with the absolute right to secede from the State Church―was voiced by the Grundtvigians, especially the Grundtvigian pastor F. E. Boisen, who was a member of the Folketing, at the meeting of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle on October 12, 1848; see Dansk Kirketidende, December 24, 1848, vol. 4, no. 13, cols. 222–223 and 226–227, and December 31, 1848, vol. 4, no. 14, cols. 239 and 241–243, where it is reported that Kierkegaard’s older brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard, said: “The abolition of all external hindrances for free entry and exit, into the Church and out of the Church, is now one of the great priorities and pressing consequences and cannot be avoided.” (F. E. Boisen was Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s brother-in-law, inasmuch the latter had been married to Boisen’s sister, Elise Marie Boisen, from October 1836 until her death less than a year later.) which Rudelbach . . . in his book on the constitution of the Church] Refers to A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse

5

686

8

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 36–37

og Princip (→ 206,3), pp. 348–351, particularly p. 348: “The difficulties on the following point―the calculation of church assets and the remuneration of clerics―are so obvious that unless we accede completely to the view of our esteemed friend, Dr. P. C. Kierkegaard, that the time has now come for ‘a deeply serious fight for the church’s temporal possessions,’2 we may only speak about it with a certain reserve and with the reservation that the matter must be investigated further in detail by those who are called to do so.” Footnote 2 in the above passage sends the reader to “Dansk Kirketidende, 1849, No. 170.” On this, see the next note (“no. 170” is the serial number; no. 14 is the issue number). retaining for themselves all the property of the Church] This refers in part to the real estate belonging to the Church, including parsonage farms and the lands belonging to them, and in part to the tithes that made up a significant portion of priestly incomes, as well as items designated for use in Church services. The constitutional convention’s debates about the relation between state and Church, including the transition from a State Church to a People’s Church gave rise to a wide-ranging debate about what should be done with church property, namely, whether it should revert to the state or be transferred to the new People’s Church. This debate was also joined by the Grundtvigians at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle; see the minutes of their October 12, 1848, meeting in Dansk Kirketidende, December 24, 1848, vol. 4, no. 13, cols. 226–228, where it is clear that the Grundtvigian pastor F. E. Boisen held that “those who have left the Lutheran Church should retain their share of church property and apply it freely for their own churchly uses”; December 31, 1848, vol. 4, no. 14, cols. 243–245, which includes a piece by Søren Kierkegaard’s older brother P. C. Kierkegaard, who declared that with regard to “the Church’s temporal possessions, and the tithe in particular,” he was “of a mind to fight for them quite seriously.” See also L. Helweg’s article “Om det saakaldte Kirkegods (med særligt Hensyn til Rigsdagens Forhandlinger)” [On the SoCalled Church Property (with Special Reference to the Deliberations of Parliament)] in Dansk

•

1851

Kirketidende, July 8, 1849, vol. 4, no. 41, cols. 673– 687. While § 66 of the draft of the Danish constitution stated, “All property or funds reserved or donated to the Church, to schools, or charitable foundations [may] not be applied to any other purpose,” this section was excised during deliberations, and the final constitution of June 5, 1849, contained no references to church property―so the matter remained unresolved. See cols. 677–679 in Helweg’s article. in R.’s view, there are very few true Xns] While no source for this statement has been identified, Kierkegaard may be referring to Den evangeliske Kirkeforfatnings Oprindelse og Princip (→ 206,3), p. 15, where Rudelbach writes: “It is certain―and the serious [Christians] can hardly deny―that . . . the willingness to suffer for the sake of Christ and the congregation . . . has hardly been taken up, as it should be, in the Christian praxis of the majority.” what was new: a reformation] → 206,3 and Kierkegaard’s article (→ 245,4), “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” in Fædrelandet, no. 26, January 31, 1851, pp. 101–102 (COR, 51–59; 53; SKS 14, 109– 116; 112): “There is nothing about which I have greater misgivings than about all that even slightly tastes of this disastrous confusion of politics and Christianity, a confusion that can so easily bring about and make fashionable a new kind of reformation of the Church, a reverse reformation that in reforming puts something new and worse in place of something old and better, although it is still supposed to be an honest-to-goodness reformation, which is then celebrated by illuminating the entire city.” a voting machine] → 213,15. Napoleon cleared the hall with his grenadiers] A reference to an event that took place during November 9–10, 1799, coup d’état by General Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821), known today as the Coup of the Eighteenth Brumaire (though the event in question in fact took place on the following day, the Nineteenth Brumaire, i.e., November 10). See Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie, omarbeidet af Johan Gottfried Woltmann [Karl

13

33

223

12

224

18

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 37–43

21

shot by the arrows of elves] i.e., obsessed, under enchantment, and (deathly) ill.

224m

3

an advance] Variant: first written “an advance.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Human equality and humanity] Kierkegaard plays on the Danish words for “human equality” (Menneske-Lighed) and “humanity,” for which he here uses Humanitet, but elsewhere often uses Menneskelighed. suggested in the conclusion of the review of Two Ages] See TA, 109; SKS 8, 103: “Only through a suffering act will the unrecognizable one dare to contribute to leveling and by the same suffering act will pass judgment on the instrument. He does not dare to defeat leveling outright―he would be dismissed for that, since it would be acting with authority―but in suffering he will defeat it and thereby experience in turn the law of his existence, which is not to rule, to guide, to lead, but in suffering to serve, to help indirectly.” I can never sufficiently give thanks for . . . dared expect] See the manuscript of the two separate

32

35

687

pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (→ 247,33), where Kierkegaard writes: “And truly, that which is, after all, more important to me than all the writings, and which concerns me more profoundly, is to express as honestly and as emphatically as possible something for which I can never give sufficient thanks, something which when I someday have forgotten all the writings, I will remember eternally and unchanged: How Governance has done infinitely much more for me than I had ever expected, could have expected, or dared to expect” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 349). See also the two pages in “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19).

25

226m

1851

Friedrich Becker’s World History, Reworked by Johan Gottfried Woltmann], trans. J. Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983; abbreviated hereafter as Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie), vol. 12, pp. 173–200. See especially p. 182, which describes how on the morning of the Nineteenth Brumaire, Napoleon, accompanied by his elite soldiers, known as “grenadiers,” broke up the Council of Five Hundred, which was meeting at St. Cloud Palace on the outskirts of Paris, and seized power. In December of the same year, a new constitution placed the government in the hands of a First Consul, elected for ten years, and two additional consuls, serving as advisers. Napoleon himself was elected First Consul and subsequently ruled as Emperor Napoleon I from 1804 to 1814 and for a period in 1815. a poet, who makes use of ideals to devour those who are confused . . . the Socratic] See NB22:173 and the associated explanatory note in the present volume.

224

7

•

by ballot] → 213,15.

4

226

Balloting] → 213,15. the matter is over,] Variant: first written “the matter is over.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

10

226

When Frederick VI said . . . We, we alone know how to govern] A reference to a rescript issued by King Frederick VI (1768–1839, reigned 1808– 1839) on February 20, 1835, upon receiving a letter written by Prof. H. N. Clausen, and signed by 572 citizens, protesting possible restrictions on freedom of the press. The rescript included the following line: “None but we alone can judge what is in the true interests . . . of the state and the people.” See Collegial-Tidende [Collegial Times], no. 9, February 20, 1835, p. 137. See also H. N. Clausen, Optegnelser om mit Levneds og min Tids Historie [Notes on the Story of My Life and Times] (Copenhagen, 1877), pp. 181–182. they lost,] Variant: first written “they lost.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

19

Knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog] → 213,22. 2000 rix-dollars] The rix-dollar, properly “Rigsbank dollar” (rigsbankdaler), was a Danish currency denomination in use from 1713 to 1875, when it was replaced by the krone (crown), at the rate of two crowns to one rix-dollar. According to a

4

13

226

25

6

227

688

7

227

14 16

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 43–48

law of July 31, 1818, passed in the wake of the Danish state bankruptcy of 1813, the rix-dollar was divided into six marks, each of which was further divided into sixteen shillings; thus there were ninety-six shillings in a rix-dollar. A pair of shoes cost about three rix-dollars, and a onepound loaf of rye bread (the staple of the day) cost between two and four shillings. A judge earned 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a mid-level civil servant earned 400–500 rix-dollars a year; a qualified artisan would receive 200 rix-dollars a year, plus free food and lodgings from his master; a maidservant received at most 30 rix-dollars in addition to room and board. According to the Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Clerical Calendar for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, n.d. [late 1847 or early 1848]; ASKB 378), cols. 5–41. Kierkegaard’s confessor, A.N.C. Smith, the perpetual curate of the Church of Our Lady, had a living worth 534 rix-dollars per year, while that of the archdeacon of Zealand diocese, E. C. Tryde, was worth 1,334 rix-dollars and was the highest clerical position for which details are given; no details were provided for the incomes of Bishop Mynster or other bishops. 3 or 4000] According to Fortegnelse over de Embedsmænd, der have en aarlig Gage af 600 Rbdlr. eller derover [List of Officials with an Annual Emolument of 600 Rix-Dollars or More] (Copenhagen, 1851), the departmental director for the Ministry of the Interior had an annual income of 3,000 rix-dollars, while the corresponding director of the Cultus Ministry (the ministry of education and the Church) earned 3,400 rix-dollars yearly; the chief administrator of the District of Copenhagen earned 3,900 rix-dollars, a judge on the Supreme Court 4,200, and Prof. H. N. Clausen earned 4,306 rix-dollars when all of his privileges, including his state housing, were included. Dr. Rudelbach] → 212,9. the passage in Practice in Xnty―that Xnty simply does not exist] See, e.g., “The Halt,” sec. 4, “Christianity as the Absolute: Contemporaneity with Christ,” in “Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,”

•

1851

No. I in Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8) (PC, 62– 66; SKS 12, 74–78); see also the following, which articulates a thesis that runs throughout the book: “Christianity has abolished Christendom without really knowing it itself. As a result, if something is to be done, one must attempt again to introduce Christianity into Christendom” (PC, 36; SKS 12, 49). conviction that he and his party are Xns] → 212,11. thus he is very pleased with the passage and thinks it applies to Mynster] → 223,8. ― Mynster: → 207,30. think it applies to me] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8).

20 21

23

vote] → 213,15.

27

227

The Old Orthodox . . . separated from us . . . the only true Xns] → 223,1, → 223m,1, and → 223,4.

12

228

Chrysostom says . . . because it was built on sand] A reference to the following passage in the fifth section of the “Leben des heiligen Chrysostomus” [Life of St. Chrysostom] in A. Neander, Der heilige Johannes Chrysostomus und die Kirche (→ 205,3), vol. 2, p. 274, where Chrysostom is cited as having commented on the parable in Mt 7:24–27 about the house built on rock and the house built on sand, that the house built on sand “was easily swept away, not because of the force of the attempts―for then the other house would have experienced the same―but because of its own weakness . . . it did not fall because the wind blew on it, but because it was built on sand, i.e., its indolence and wickedness were at fault, because even before the wind blew on it, it was weak and positioned to fall down.”

23

228

The Storm Arises―Christ Sleeps] A reference to Mt 8:23–27, which was the gospel text for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany; see Forordnet AlterBog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog). In 1851, this Sunday fell on February 2. the God-Man] i.e., Jesus Christ, believed by Christians to be both truly God and truly human,

27

228

31

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 48–51

32

229

3 5 6

229

11 12

13

the man in whom God incarnated and revealed himself. as the disciples did: they called upon Xt] Refers to Mt 8:25. decision by ballot] → 213,15. neither dance] → 230,33. once spoke at a general meeting . . . forbidding badminton . . . I was opposed] This account has not been verified. ― Student Association: The Student Association was founded in 1820 at Regensen College in Copenhagen and rented facilities in which it carried on various activities, including a library from which university students could borrow books. Kierkegaard was a member from November 1833 until January 1839; the extent to which he participated in the association’s meetings is not known. Christian VIII] → 229,12. my first conversation with him (. . . noted somewhere else)] Refers to Kierkegaard’s first audience with King Christian VIII (1786–1848, king from December 1839), which took place at Amalienborg Palace on Saturday, March 13, 1847; see the “Allerunderdanigst Rapport fra Adjudant du jour den 13de Marts 1847” [Most Humble Report from the Adjutant of the Day for March 13, 1847], in “Audiens-Rapporter, 1846–1848” [Audience Reports, 1846–1848], in the National Archives, in which “Magister Kirkegaard” is listed as number twenty-one of thirty-one audiences. The conversation is recorded in NB9:41, from January 1849, in KJN 5, 228–229; see also NB16:65, from February 1850, in KJN 7, 141–142. when he hinted at drawing me . . . to himself . . . I am a private person . . . calling him an eccentric] See NB9:41: “He said many flattering things to me and asked that I visit him, to which I replied: [‘]Your M., I do not visit anyone.[’] Then he said: [‘]Yes, but I of course know that you will have no objection to my sending for you.[’] To which I replied: [‘]I am your subject, your Majesty has but to command―but like for like, I lay down one condition.” “Oh, and what is that?” “That I be permitted to speak with you privately.” . . . In the course of the conversation, at the very beginning,

•

1851

689

he also said something to me about my having so many ideas and whether I couldn’t spare a few for him. To that I answered him that I believed that all my work was, among other things, beneficial to every government, but that the point in it was precisely that I was and remained a private citizen, for otherwise people would insinuate some mean-spirited interpretation. And moreover I added this: [‘]I have the honor of serving a higher power, on which I have staked my life,[’]” (KJN 5, 228). ― absolute monarchy: The Royal Law of November 14, 1665, introduced absolute monarchy to Denmark, assigning all legislative, executive, and judicial powers to the king alone. ― a private figure.: Variant: changed from “a private figure,”, with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. ― whom people . . . calling him an eccentric: Variant: this passage was deleted by Kierkegaard and restored by the editors of SKS. ― calling him an eccentric: See Kierkegaard’s marginal note NB12:138.c, from September 1849, where he writes that “the vulgarity of the mob and the envy of the elite [may] have already succeeded in making me into a halfmad eccentric” (KJN 5, 230). “Vulgarity” refers to the satirical attacks on Kierkegaard in Corsaren (→ 206,26), which resulted in his being met on the street with shouts and ridicule. the Movement] A reference to the Church reform movement that sought various freedoms, including the introduction of a possible new synodal constitution for the Danish Church, which would have loosened the ties between state and church or broken them completely (→ 213,5), the enactment of full-fledged freedom of religion (→ 206,3), and the provision of the freedom to choose one’s church irrespective of one’s home parish, as well as dogmatic and liturgical freedom for priests (→ 223m,1). here on the hill] → 208,12. our men of the party of movement] The men who represented the reform movement, e.g., N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14), N. M. Spandet (→ 223,10), A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), and F. E. Boisen (→ 223m,1), as well as, to an extent, Cultus Minister J. N. Madvig, insofar as he supported a synodal restructuring of the Danish Church (→ 206,3).

1

2 4

230

690 10

12 27

33

33

37

39

231

2 8

16

232

8

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 51–52

the old man, the Right Reverend Bishop of Zealand] J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30), who had turned seventy-five on November 8, 1850. Well, if it really must be this way,] Variant: added. had danced that evening.] Variant: first written “had danced that evening,”, with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. I do not dance] A play on the last lines of the Preface to Practice in Christianity (1844), where Johannes Climacus writes: “The thought of death is a good dancing partner, my dancing partner. Every human being is too heavy for me, and therefore I plead, per deos obsecro [I swear by the gods]: Let no one invite me, for I do not dance” (PC, 8; SKS 4, 217). literally,] Variant: first written “literally.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. One of my pseudonyms has said: Xnty simply does not exist] → 227,16. The pseudonym is AntiClimacus (→ 230m,2). affected] Variant: changed from “toppled”. everything.] Variant: changed from “everything, tear all” by the editors of SKS. this book has a preface . . . I might learn to take refuge in grace] A reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). poetically gave it] Variant: changed from “poetically to give it”, which was previously changed from “by poetically giving it”. see Claudius] Perhaps a reference to the poem “Die Mutter bey der Wiege” [The Mother at the Cradle] by the German author Matthias Claudius (1740–1815), in Matthias Claudius Werke [Works of Matthias Claudius], 5th ed., 4 vols. in 8 tomes (Hamburg, 1838 [1774–1812]; ASKB 1631–1632), vol. 1, parts 1–2, p. 42: “Sleep, sweet boy, sleep sweet and mild: / His spit and image, your father’s child! / Indeed you are, although he knows / You do not have your father’s nose. // Now he was just here in this place / Gazing intently at your face / And said: ‘He does take after me / though not my nose.’ // To me, while it does seem too small / It must be his nose after all / For if it were a different one / Where ever did he get

•

1851

it from? // Sleep, sweet boy: your father’s words / Are just a little jesting dart / Don’t give his nose another thought / Just have his heart!” fear and trembling] An allusion to Phil 2:12. 70 years] The traditional notion that seventy years is the duration of a human life goes back to Ps 90:10. Councillor of Chancery Deichman] According to the 1851 Vejviser eller Anviisning til Kiøbenhavns, Christianshavns, Forstædernes og Frederiksbergs Beboere [City Directory, or Information on the Residents of Copenhagen, Christianshavn, the Suburbs, and Frederiksberg], a Councillor of Chancery J. Deichmann lived in Klareboderne (see map 2, C2). Councillors of chancery were secondary-level civil servants in the chancery, which was the governing body through which the absolute monarch administered the internal affairs of the Danish kingdom until the adoption of the Danish constitution on June 5, 1849. as God in Heaven is!] Variant: Immediately following this, the word “Period.”, followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry, has been deleted. Anti-Cl.] The pseudonymous author of The Sickness unto Death (1849) and Practice in Christianity (1850). The prefix “Anti-” was formed as a counterpart to the pseudonym Johannes Climacus, the pseudonymous author of Philosophical Fragments (1844) and the Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). forget all emancipation] This would include, in particular, women’s emancipation, which had recently become a hotly debated subject owing to the appearance of Clara Raphael. Tolv Breve [Clara Raphael: Twelve Letters], ed. J. L. Heiberg (Copenhagen, 1851: ASKB 1531), advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 297, December 18, 1850, as having been published. The anonymous author was Mathilde Fibiger, a campaigner for women’s rights. See NB22:63, with its accompanying explanatory notes in the present volume. balloting] → 213,15. At the beginning of his sermon . . . Luther says that there are two kinds of armor . . . another makes us conquerors] A reference to Luther’s

23 24

37

4

234

2

230m

2

232m

10

234m

12

234

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 52–54 sermon on Eph 6:10–17 (on taking up “the whole armor of God”), the epistle for the twenty-first Sunday after Trinity Sunday (which in 1851 fell on November 9), in En christelig Postille (→ 207,3), pt. 2, pp. 484–499; p. 486, cols. 1–2: “He [Paul] names . . . two kinds of power that we must have. One is expressed by our becoming fixed and immovable in everything we should believe and do. The other by the fact that we cannot merely defend and preserve what we have, but can counterattack against those who would deprive us of it . . . The first power makes me invincible; the second makes me a victor. The former is a defensive power, the latter the power of victory. And the latter requires a more complete armor than the former.” 234

19

20 21 22

235

1 2

15

Higher Madness] See EE:195, presumably from early 1839: “Discursive Raisonnements and Incomprehensible Apropos concerning the Category of Higher Madness” in KJN 2, 64. Kierkegaard writes: “Under this category I will treat the ridiculous combinations of the two conflicting parties’ separate (specific) stupidities in a higher unity. Orthodox and politicians, e.g., in the matter of parochial freedom. Philosophers and theologians, etc.” (KJN 2, 65). “Orthodox” refers to the Grundtvigians, and “parochial freedom” refers to the Grundtvigian demands for the freedom to choose one’s church irrespective of one’s home parish, as well as for dogmatic and liturgical freedom for priests (→ 223m,1). See also → 210,15. In my opinion, Christianity simply does not exist] → 227,16. Bishop Mynster] → 207,30. It would be Hamletesque . . . the individual is exploded.] Variant: added. Grundtvig] → 210,14. Grundtvig strode into . . . Why Has God’s Word Departed from His House] A reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s trial sermon, “Hvi er Herrens Ord forsvundet af hans Hus?” [Why Has the Lord’s Word Disappeared from His House?] (Copenhagen, 1810). university student, [theology] graduate] An ordinance of February 13, 1801, confirmed a long tradition of permitting both theology graduates

•

1851

691

and theology students to preach. According to § 1 of the ordinance, only those students who could prove that they had passed their preliminary examinations and had attended theology lectures at the university were allowed to preach, subject to the supervision of the local parish priest, to whom they were responsible. this insistence on Xnty as doctrine, as dogmas] Presumably refers to the fact that N.F.S. Grundtvig, in many of his writings, repeatedly insists on the truth of the doctrines contained in the Apostles’ Creed and the 1530 Augsburg Confession. the world-historical] A reference to the fact that N.F.S. Grundtvig frequently adopted a world-historical and universal-historical point of view. During the period 1812–1817, Grundtvig published three works in which he interprets world history from a decidedly Christian and biblical point of view, according to which Christ is the central point of history, with the fortunes of nations dependent on their faith in God. In Udsigt over Verdens-Krøniken fornemmelig i det Lutherske Tidsrum [Survey of World History, Primarily in the Lutheran Period] (Copenhagen, 1817; ASKB 1970), Grundtvig writes that the weak and shadowy way of viewing history that is available to memory, which only loosely weaves together the events of the past, “has in the Church attained a wonderful clarity in which it is transformed into a contemplative vision, and with this newly created, poetic eye, we view the shadows of the human race in its mysterious development, and with our eye can follow it from the splendor of the Golden Age to the gloom of our own Iron Age” (p. 601). Further on in the book, Grundtvig again writes of the manner in which history is viewed, when world history, art, and philosophy are considered as part of a single context, inspired by God’s word (p. 662). Grundtvig continues: “The living view of history―which we can call the gaze of recollection―consists of our viewing the entire race as one person, whose life we are called upon to continue and whose strength we lovingly make our own; the view becomes alive and actual only to the degree that we heartily believe in its truth, but the shadow of it can appear without

17

19

692

235

21 23

24

24 26

27

28

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 54–56

•

1851

any particular faith, when reason becomes spiritually conscious of itself and thus vouches for the truth of the notion” (p. 664). See also the first selection, “Universal-Historisk Vidskab” [Universal Historical Knowledge], of Nordens Mythologi eller Sindbilled-Sprog [Scandinavian Mythology or Symbolic Language] (Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB 1949), pp. 1–46.

1859, the aesthetic writings consist of the following books: “Either/Or, Fear and Trembling, Repetition, The Concept of Anxiety, Prefaces, Philosophical Fragments, Stages on Life’s Way,” together with “a little aesthetic article: The Crisis and a Crisis in the Life of an Actress” (PV, 29n; SKS 16, 15). and then I have a pseudonym say: Xnty does not exist] → 227,16.

Grundtvig] → 210,14. An unknown theology graduate] Grundtvig took his theological examination in October 1803 and made his literary debut with Maskeradeballet i Dannemark [The Masquerade Ball in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1808); followed by Nordens Mythologi eller Udsigt over Eddalæren for dannede Mænd, der ei selv er Mythologer [Scandinavian Mythology, or a Survey of the Eddas for Educated Men Who Are Not Themselves Mythologists] (Copenhagen, 1808); Indbydelse til Gamle Nordens Venner [Invitation to Friends of Ancient Scandinavia] (Copenhagen, 1808); the first volume of Optrin af Kæmpelivets Undergang i Nord [Scenes from the Decline of the Age of Mighty Heroes in Scandinavia] (Copenhagen, 1809); and Sørgekvæd ved Prinds Kristians Død [Elegiac Verses at the Death of Prince Christian] (Copenhagen, 1810). a 14-page piece] Grundtvig’s trial sermon, “Hvi er Herrens Ord forsvundet af hans Hus?” (→ 235,2) is twenty-four pages long, the first eight pages of which comprise a title page, a poem dedicated to his father, pastor Johan Grundtvig, and a foreword; the sermon itself is thus sixteen pages long. a probationary sermon] → 235,2. to receive a grade] Trial sermons were graded jointly by a professor of theology and an appointed priest. I have worked . . . 7 years in a row] Refers presumably to the period from 1842, when Kierkegaard began work on Either/Or (1843), to 1848 or early 1849, when he completed work on Practice in Christianity (→ 206,20). aesthetic author] According to The Point of View for My Work as an Author, written over the course of the summer and autumn of 1848, and published posthumously by P. C. Kierkegaard in

Grundtvigians] A general term for the followers of N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14). Despite the fact that he had many adherents in the 1830s and 1840s, Grundtvig denied that they constituted a sect separate from the established Church; see, e.g., Dansk Kirketidende (→ 223m,1), October 17, 1847, vol. 3, no. 3, cols. 33–34. Friends of the Peasant Party] Or “Venstre” [the Left], a society―which later took the form of a political party―founded to represent poor rural laborers, which had fought for democracy and subsequently, in parliament, worked for reforms in Danish agriculture and the Church. For information on the formation of Danish political parties in this period, see N. Neergaard, Under Junigrundloven. En Fremstilling af det danske Folks politiske Historie fra 1848 til 1866 [Under the June Constitution: An Account of the Political History of the Danish People from 1848 to 1866], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1892; reprographic ed., Copenhagen, 1973), p. 590: “The formation of parties in the parliament proceeded more quickly and with greater focus than it had at the constitutional convention. Even before parliament convened for the first time, Venstre, a designation that included the Friends of the Peasant and those members, numerous at first, who supported them on matters of rural affairs and as well on general political issues, had already rented a ‘club room’ where its members could meet and make all necessary decisions, and Centrum followed their example immediately thereafter.” On Grundtvig’s close relationship to Friends of the Peasant, see his article “Danske RigsdagsBreve” [Letters from the Danish Parliament], no. III, in Danskeren (→ 210,14), April 6, 1850, vol. 3, no. 13, pp. 193–202, p. 196, where he divides the lower house into two halves, “Friends of

29

33

35

235

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 56–59

236

3 3 5 7

236

11

the Peasant” and “Non-Friends of the Peasant,” (Grundtvig’s term for the Centrum) and declares that he “plainly” belongs to the former. The well-known Grundtvigian pastor F. E. Boisen (→ 223m,1) also voted with the Friends of the Peasant. Kierkegaard’s Grundtvigian brother P. C. Kierkegaard was elected to the upper house of parliament on December 29, 1849, as a representative of the Friends of the Peasant (or “Venstre”), but on February 11, 1850, he joined the Centrum group; see Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828–50” [Diary for 1828–1850] (NKS 2656, 4o, I), p. 158. See also NB15:82 in KJN 6, 55 and the relevant explanatory notes. hyper-Christian] → 223,1. vote] → 213,15. Grundtvigians . . . the only true Xns in the country] → 223,1. Jesuit concealment] Refers to reservatio mentalis (Latin, “mental reservation”), a concept that was particularly connected with the Jesuits of the 17th century, who enunciated various degrees of legitimate reservation; this was attacked by Blaise Pascal in his Provincial Letters; see NB22:14 and associated explanatory notes in the present volume. Scriver takes . . . “Their deeds follow them”―as if . . . they walked behind in a procession] A reference to the following passage in § 7 of “Von der zukünfftigen Herrlichkeit und Seligkeit der gläubigen Seelen, / Die VII. Predigt, / Darinn der Zustand derselben nach ihrem Abschied aus dem Leibe und aus der Welt nochmahln betrachtet wird, Aus obigem Text [Offenbah. Joh. XIV, v. 13]” [On the Future Glory and Blessedness of the Faithful Soul / Seventh Sermon / in Which the State of Said Soul, Following Its Parting from the Body and the World, Is Again Considered in Connection with the Above Text [i.e., Rev 14:13]], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 5, p. 986, col. 1: “The holy apostle Paul [in 1 Tim 6:17–19] asks the wealthy of this world to do good, to be rich in good works, generous, and ready to share; if they follow this command and then, when they die, are famed by the poor on account of this, then their works do follow them . . . ”

•

1851

693

one can say, with the philosophers, that it follows of necessity] A reference to the dialectical method of G.W.F. Hegel, according to whom concepts develop of necessity from and by means of their opposites, e.g., the concept of “being” necessarily gives rise to that of “nothingness,” which together necessarily give rise to the concept of “becoming.” In Hegel’s philosophy of history, the same conceptual logic is used to explain the “necessary development” of historical forces.

21

Scriver writes: “It is good to do business with death . . . (“to die is to gain”)] The following passage appears in § 21 of “Von der zukünfftigen Herrlichkeit und Seligkeit der gläubigen Seelen,” (→ 236,11) in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 5, p. 993, col. 1: “It is good to do business with death; the gain is ours, as the Apostle says [Phil 1:21]: Christ is my life; death is my gain.” Epicurus: that death . . . when it is, I am not] In bk. 10, chap. 125 of Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s Philosophical History, or the Lives, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Eminent Philosophers, in Ten Books], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111; abbreviated hereafter as Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie), vol. 1, p. 502, Diogenes Laertius (third century b.c.) reports that the aesthete and philosopher Epicurus (341–270 b.c.) said: “Death, therefore, the most awful of evils, is nothing to us, seeing that, when we are, death is not come, and, when death is come, we are not.” English translation: Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. A. Hicks, 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1970–1972 [1923]), vol. 2, p. 651.

25

Salvianus Mass. de avaritia 3, 10: Possim quidem . . . in omni mundo] Latin citation from bk. 3, chap. 10, of Salvian’s ascetic treatise Adversus avaritiam [Against Avarice]; see Sanctorum presbyterorum Salviani Massiliensis et Vincentii Lirinensis Opera [Works of the Holy Priests Salvian of Massilia and Vincent of Lérins], ed. Stephanus Baluzius [Étienne Baluze], 4th ed. (Stadt am Hoff,

2

236

27

237

694

8

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 59–64

1743 [1663]; ASKB 757), p. 262. ― Salvianus Mass.: Salvianus Massiliensis, or Salvian of Massilia, i.e., Marseille in southeastern France (ca. 400–480), Roman Catholic priest and author; born near Trier or Cologne; joined the monastic community in Lérins, Provence, in 425, and became a priest in Marseille in ca. 435. Many of his writings have been lost; those preserved include his incomplete main work De gubernatione Dei [On God’s Governance] in eight books, which interprets the barbarian invasions of Rome as marks of God’s verdict against and punishment of the Roman Empire’s sinful citizens; his four-volume ascetic treatise Adversus avaritiam, also known as Timothei ecclesiam libri quatuor [Timotheus’s Four Books to the Church], or simply Ad ecclesiam [To the Church], which sets forth the monastic life’s ideal of poverty. he does cite examples] That is, examples of the first Christians giving away what they owned: Acts 2:44, 4:32, and 4:33–35.

237

11

The Existential Springs] “Springs” in the sense of mattress springs, rather than sources of water.

238

2

existential master of ceremonies] Variant: “existential” added. in the area of religion,] Variant: added.

3 20 24

239

1

2 3 5

7

Voters] → 213,15. change the form of government] as, in Denmark, from an absolute monarchy (→ 229,13) to a constitutional monarchy with an elected parliament. Prosit!] From Latin, “May it be to your benefit,” used to convey congratulations, to offer welcome, or (in contemporary Danish) as an equivalent to “Bless you!” Grundtvig] → 210,14. the concept of tolerance . . . indifferentism] → 214,4. he will vote on the same side of this] → 235,35. Grundtvig voted for N. M. Spandet’s proposed bill on religious freedom (→ 208,18). In Franklin’s little essay . . . pt. 2, pp. 165ff. . . . in the interest of business] A reference to Benjamin Franklin’s essay “On Persecution in Former

•

1851

Ages―of Dissenters―State of Toleration, etc.,” which Kierkegaard presumably read in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften nach der von seinem Enkel, William Temple Franklin, veranstalteten neuen Londoner Original-Ausgabe; mit Benutzung des bei derselben bekannt gemachten Nachlasses und früherer Quellen zeitgemäß bearbeitet af A. Binzer, [Benjamin Franklin’s Life and Works, according to the New Original London Edition by His Grandson, William Temple Franklin, Using the Posthumous Material Made Known by That Edition and Earlier Sources Interpreted in Accordance with Their Time, by A. Binzer], 4 vols. (Kiel, 1829; ASKB 1871–1872; abbreviated hereafter as Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften), vol. 2, pp. 165–176. For the original, see Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin, LL.D., F.R.S., &c., Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States of America at the Court of France, and for the Treaty of Peace and Independence with Great Britain, &c., &c., Written by Himself to a Late Period, and Continued to the Time of His Death by His Grandson, William Temple Franklin, 6 vols. (London: A. J. Valpy, 1818; abbreviated hereafter as Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin), vol. 3, pp. 194–198. The particular reference is to a passage on p. 167 in the German edition, and p. 195 in the English: “The general opinion was only, that those who are in error ought not to persecute the truth; but the possessors of truth were in the right to persecute error, in order to destroy it. Thus every sect believing itself possessed of all truth, and that every tenet differing from theirs was error, conceived that when the power was in their hands, persecution was a duty required of them by that God whom they supposed to be offended with heresy. By degrees more moderate, and more modest sentiments have taken place in the Christian world; and among Protestants particularly all disclaim persecution, none vindicate it, and few practice it. We should then cease to reproach each other with what was done by our ancestors, but judge of the present character of sects or churches by their present conduct only.” To this is appended the following footnote: “‘Toleration in religion, though obvious to common understanding, was not however the production of reason, but of com-

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 64–65

20

merce. The advantage of toleration for promoting commerce was discovered long before by the Portuguese. They were too zealous Catholics to venture so bold a measure in Portugal; but it was permitted in Goa, and the Inquisition in that town was confined to Roman Catholics.’ Lord Kaimes’s Sketches of the History of Man, vol. II, p. 474.” ― Franklin: Benjamin Franklin (1706–1790), North American scientist, statesman, and philosopher; a strong defender of the rights of the British colonies in America before the king and parliament in London; in 1776, participated in drafting the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America; in 1787, joined the Constitutional Convention responsible for drafting the United States Constitution. In his Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion (1728), Franklin formulated the partly deistic position that underlay his defense of religious tolerance. Franklin praised deism’s focus on virtue, and while he doubted the divinity of Christ, he regarded both Socrates and Jesus as ethical paradigms. ― Binzer: August Daniel Freiherr von Binzer (1793–1868), German journalist, poet, and author. railroads] Railroads were the great construction projects of the era. The first were established in England ca. 1830 and thereafter spread to the Continent. The first fragmentary railroads in Germany were built in the mid-1830s, and in 1838 the first Prussian railroad (from Berlin to the suburb of Potsdam) opened. During the 1840s, German railroads developed further, with Berlin at the center of the rail net. One of these rail lines ran from Berlin through Angermünde to Stettin (Kierkegaard traveled on this train in May 1843, though only as far as Angermünde, and again in May 1845). The first Danish railroad was from Altona to Kiel in the duchy of Holstein, opening in September 1844. The next Danish railroad was the line from Copenhagen to Roskilde, which opened in June 1847. As early as the mid-1840s, there were plans to build a railroad line through northern Zealand, but this did not actually happen until the 1860s, when the first rail line in Jutland also opened. The first Danish railroads were joint stock companies, and there was a great deal of speculation in railroad shares. In mid-

•

1851

695

1847, railroad construction was linked to a political scandal in France, and a number of ministers were accused of corruption (see the reference to “Guizot” in NB9:42, from 1849, in KJN 5, 231). worldly sociability and friendliness] Presumably, a reference to the Copenhagen club called “The Friendship Club” [Danish, Det Venskabelige Selskab], established in 1783, whose main purpose was entertainment. In the winter months it held concerts and balls; members could also read newspapers and magazines on the society’s premises and amuse themselves with games of various types, especially billiards. See Love for Det Venskabelige Selskab, antagne i Generalforsamlingen den 14 April 1819 [Articles of Association for The Friendship Club, adopted by the General Assembly, April 14, 1819] (Copenhagen, 1819). See also the following passage in Kierkegaard’s article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” in Fædrelandet (→ 245,4): “Christianity will not be helped from the outside by institutions and constitutions, and least of all if these are not won through suffering by martyrs in the old-fashioned Christian way, but are won in a social and amicable [selskabeligt-venskabeligt] political way . . . On the contrary, to be aided in this way is the downfall of Christianity” (COR, 54; SKS 14, 113, emphasis added). Excellency] → 213,23. to drink a toast with the executioner] An allusion to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Mester Gert Westphaler [Master Gert Westphaler], act 2, sc. 4 in the five-act version (1723), or sc. 8 in the oneact version (1724). See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 208,12), vol. 1 (the one-act version), undated and unpaginated. Franklin’s . . . The History of the Province of Pennsylvania . . . neither liberty nor safety.” . . . pt. 1, p. 154] A reference to the following passage in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 154–155; Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 1, p. 142: “This appeared at the beginning of 1759, with the title of ‘A Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania from its origin, so far as regards the several points of controversy

21

2

239m

4

24

239

696

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 65–67

which have from time to time arisen between the several Governors of Pennsylvania and their several Assemblies, Founded on authentic documents.’ To which was prefaced the motto: ‘Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’ ” 239

240

35

5

9

Franklin says . . . “Here I learned . . . ‘someone who . . . our situation, and so forth’ ”] A partly free, partly altered version of the account of the founding of the Philadelphia public library in Benjamin Franklin’s “Selbstbiographie. Fortgeführt bis ins ein und funfzigste Lebensjahr” [Autobiography, Continued until the Fifty-First Year of Life], in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 92–94. Here are excerpts from the English original, Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin, vol. 1, pp. 63–65: “I proposed to render the benefit from the books more common, by commencing a public subscription library . . . So few were the readers at that time in Philadelphia, and the majority of us so poor, that I was not able with great industry to find more than fifty persons (mostly young tradesmen) willing to pay down for this purpose forty shillings each . . . The objections and reluctances that I met with in soliciting the subscriptions made me soon feel the impropriety of presenting myself as the proposer of any useful project that might be supposed to raise one’s reputation to the smallest degree above that of one’s neighbors, when one has need of their assistance to accomplish that project. I therefore put myself as much as I could out of sight, and stated it as a scheme of a number of friends, who had requested me to go about and propose it to such as they thought lovers of reading. In this way my affair went on more smoothly, and I ever after practiced it on such occasions; and from my frequent successes can heartily recommend it. The present little sacrifice of your vanity will afterwards be amply repaid.” hum. ambition cannot tolerate that there is someone at the head] See NB22:36 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. In similar fashion he says . . . work at being humble. Franklin says . . . pushed through.”] An abbreviated version of a passage in Benjamin

•

1851

Franklin’s “Selbstbiographie. Fortgeführt bis ins ein und funfzigste Lebensjahr” [Autobiography, Continued until the Fifty-First Year of Life], in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 102–103. Here is the English original, from Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin, vol. 1, pp. 74–75: “My list of virtues contained at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend having kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud, that my pride showed itself frequently in conversation, that I was not content with being in the right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent (of which he convinced me by mentioning several instances), I determined to endeavor to cure myself if I could of this vice or folly among the rest; and I added Humility to my list, giving an extensive meaning to the word. I cannot boast of much success to acquiring the reality of this virtue, but I had a good deal with regard to the appearance of it. I made it a rule to forbear all direct contradiction to the sentiments of others, and all positive assertion of mine own. I even forbid myself . . . the use of every word or expression in the language that imported a fixed opinion; such as certainly, undoubtedly, etc., and I adopted instead of them, I conceive, I apprehend, or I imagine a thing to be so or so; or it so appears to me at the present. When another asserted something that I thought an error, I denied myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, and of showing immediately some absurdity in his proposition; and in answering I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances, his opinion would be right, but in the present case there appeared or seemed to me some difference, etc. I soon found the advantage of this change in my manners; the conversations I engaged in went on more pleasantly.” Grundtvig] → 210,14. the State Church] A state church is a church established as the official religion of the state and is granted a special (often monopolistic) position; in return, the state exercises a degree of control over that church. In Denmark, the evangelical Lutheran Church was the State Church, with the king as its head and with bishops, deans, and

20 21

240

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 67

22

22 23 23 24 26 28

priests as royally appointed civil servants. The Danish constitution of June 5, 1849, states that “the evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish People’s Church and as such is supported by the state,” a statement that can be read both descriptively and prescriptively. The clergy continued to be paid by the state and appointed by the king, who was himself required to be a member of the evangelical Lutheran Church. out of this fact religiously] Variant: first written “out of this fact religiously.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. voting] → 213,15. the old orthodox] Grundtvig (→ 210,15 and → 223,1). the guilt (if it is as great as they claim it is)] → 240,28. they have lived within the State Church] → 223m,1. the claim that they are the only true Xns] → 223,1. At the most recent meeting of parliament Grundtvig said that for 40 years . . . leaving the State Church] A reference to a speech to the Folketing (the Danish parliament’s lower house) given by Grundtvig on February 6, 1851, during the second day of deliberations on the “Lov om Ægteskabs Indgaaelse udenfor de anerkjendte Troessamfund eller imellem Medlemmer af forskjellige Troessamfund” [Law concerning the Contracting of Marriage outside the Recognized Religious Communities, or between Members of Different Religious Communities], under the heading “84de Møde. Torsdagen den 6te Februar (Fortsat)” [84th Meeting. Thursday, February 6 (continued)], reproduced in Rigsdagstidende: Forhandlingerne paa Folkethinget [Parliamentary Times: Proceedings of the Folketing], no. 322 (1851), in Rigsdagstidende. Forhandlingerne paa Folkethinget 2den Session 1850 [Parliamentary Times: Proceedings of the Folketing, Second Session, 1850], vol. 3, nos. 317–445 (Copenhagen, [1851]), cols. 5119–5125; cols. 5120–5121: “Thus it is quite clear that this is a people that feels a great yearning for ecclesiastical freedom, that is, a civic freedom from ecclesiastical coercion. To be specific, what you see before you is a Danish

•

1851

697

citizen, and also one of the old priests of the old State Church, a real old-fashioned priest, as the saying goes, who fought hard to shore up the State Church internally, but who in his forty years of service as a priest has both felt and professed a general right to civic freedom of religion, yes, he has―and he himself has felt the yearning for [freedom] so deeply, that he has continually sought permission from the secular authorities to withdraw from the State Church, to withdraw from what was, in his eyes, a terribly confused, half-ossified, half-dissolved State Church.” This portion of the speech is paraphrased in Fædrelandet, no. 31, February 6, 1851, p. 124, and repeated in essence in Grundtvig, “Folke-Thinget og Troes-Friheden i Danmark” [The Folketing and Religious Freedom in Denmark] in Danskeren (→ 210,14), February 15, 1851, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 99–112, p. 104. a la Trop’s reading for his examinations] A reference to the third scene of Recensenten og Dyret [The Reviewer and the Beast] (1826), a vaudeville by J. L. Heiberg (→ 294,29), in which the lifelong student Trop, who at the age of sixty is about to complete his law school education, says: “At any moment, I can produce proof that I have been close to taking the Latin bar exam. That is something, at least,” J. L. Heibergs Samlede Skrifter: Skuespil [J. L. Heiberg’s Collected Writings: Plays], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833–1841; ASKB, 1553– 1559), vol. 3 (1834), p. 202. During the period between 1826 and 1850, this play was performed at the Royal Theatre one hundred times, and again on February 11, 1851. for the most part what he has done is entered it―and then gone out of it . . . and then] → 223m,1. He says . . . the thousands who had listened to his voice] In a continuation of the cited passage from Grundtvig’s address to the Folketing (→ 240,28), Grundtvig clarifies that he had “sought in vain” to withdraw from the State Church, and that “even the strict prohibition, even the old Danish Chancery’s ‘nothing can be done about it,’ would not have hindered his doing so at his own risk, if had not felt himself moved by the thought of the not inconsiderable group, indeed the thou-

29

31

33

698

37

39

241

3 11

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 67

sands, who had listened to his churchly cry”; see Rigsdagstidende. Forhandlingerne paa Folkethinget 2den Session 1850 (→ 240,28), vol. 3, col. 5021. This portion of the speech is paraphrased in Fædrelandet, no. 31, February 6, 1851, p. 124, which includes the phrase “the thousands who had listened to his voice.” Danskeren, February 15, 1851, vol. 4, no. 7, p. 104, also includes the phrase about “the thousands who had listened to his churchly voice.” à la Falstaff’s deeds in battle] Shakespeare’s comic figure Sir John Falstaff appears in Henry IV Part I and Henry IV Part II and The Merry Wives of Windsor; see esp. Henry IV Part I, act 5, sc. 4. See Kierkegaard’s Danish edition, William Shakspeare’s Tragiske Værker [William Shakespeare’s Tragedies], trans. P. Foersom and P. F. Wulff, 9 vols. (vols. 8 and 9 bear the title Dramatiske Værker [Dramatic Works]) (Copenhagen, 1807–1825; ASKB 1889– 1896), vol. 3 (1815), pp. 171–176. a matchless world-historical gaze] → 235,19 and → 241,16. See also Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Grundtvig is described as a “seer, bard, skald, prophet with an almost matchless insight into world history and with one eye for the profound,” CUP, 46; SKS 7, 52 and the accompanying explanatory note. See also JJ:285, presumably from late 1844, in KJN 2, 211. ― matchless: A word used so frequently by Grundtvig that it practically became a Grundtvigian emblem; see, e.g., NB2:173, NB3:34.a, NB4:49 in KJN 4, 209, 263, 310, with their accompanying explanatory notes. if Grundtvig takes “the thousands” out of the State Church with him] → 240,33. Poul Møller . . . Grundtvig and history are one and the same] An allusion to Poul Martin Møller’s satire “Forsøg til et Himmelbrev i Grundtvigs nye, historiske Smag, fundet af Poul Møller” [Draft of a Letter from Heaven, in Accordance with Grundtvig’s New Historical Taste, Found by Poul Møller], in Efterladte Skrifter af Poul M. Møller [Posthumous Writings of Poul Martin Møller], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839–1843; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 1, pp. 195–200, particularly the end, where the following words are attributed to Grundtvig: “I will conclude by crying ‘Woe,’ indeed thrice ‘Woe,’ for the whelps who have dared to oppose

•

1851

the chronicles and myself, and myself and the chronicles and the chronicles and myself. Amen.” called a seer] See, e.g., Dansk Pantheon, et Portraitgallerie for Samtiden [Danish Pantheon, a Portrait Gallery for Our Times] (Copenhagen, 1844), which portrayed Grundtvig as “an absolutely unique and matchless example of a prophet at New Year’s,” with “a gaze that has seen deeply into the world of history and of spirit” (unpaginated). See also JJ:285, likely from the end of 1844, in KJN 2, 211, and the associated explanatory notes. he says . . . expected that the people would surely arrive at this insight themselves] In Grundtvig’s 1851 speech to the Folketing, cited previously (→ 240,33), he remarks about the “thousands” who had listened to him, and would have followed him, that “he nourished the hope that among the mild, sensible, and peaceful Danish people, a mild, clear enlightenment about the necessity and justice of civic religious freedom would prevail, also in legislation (Bravo!). Nor has my hope disappointed me, for this hope has made itself felt in clear, noticeable fashion in the Danish constitution, where it is expressly declared that civic life is to be freed of all ecclesiastical concerns, which indeed has happened” (Rigsdagstidende: Forhandlingerne paa Folkethinget 2den Session 1850, vol. 3, col. 5021). This portion of the speech is not paraphrased in Fædrelandet but is reproduced quite faithfully in Danskeren, February 15, 1851, vol. 4, no. 7, p. 105. the upheaval of ’48] → 206,11. in the last few years before ’48 . . . a people’s school “in Scandinavia, in Sorø, on Skamlingsbank,” . . . experience it] A reference to the fact that Grundtvig had for years been advocating the establishment of folk high schools in order that there might be “popular enlightenment” in the “mother tongue” throughout Denmark. See, e.g., Grundtvig’s Bøn og Begreb om en Dansk Høiskole i Soer [Petition for and the Idea of a Danish High School in Sorø] (Copenhagen, 1840), in which he suggests the establishment of a Danish, “popular” (i.e., national) secondary school in Sorø in central Zealand, “for the sake of Danishness and the mother tongue” (p. 29),

16

18

22 24

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 67–71

241m

2

241

39

242

1 2

242

16

where the instruction will not be in Latin, but in Danish and will concern the fatherland and its history, so that “it will be especially history and poetry, including the history and the lays of the fatherland, that will play the leading role at our popular high school” (p. 25). If this project is carried through successfully, Grundtvig argues, then “both the spirit of Scandinavia and the heart of Denmark” will be victorious (p. 33). In the meantime, in 1844, another folk high school had been founded in Rødding, in southern Jutland, not far from Skamlingsbanken, a hill that was the site of meetings held by Danish nationalists, including Grundtvig, in the 1840s. On one such occasion Grundtvig had delivered a grandiloquent address, “Skov-Hornets Klang mellem SkamlingsBankerne” [The Sound of the Waldhorn amid the Skamling Hills] (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB U 45). Finally, in March 1847, King Christian VIII granted permission to establish a high school in Sorø, prompting Grundtvig to publish Lykønskning til Danmark med Det Danske Dummerhoved og Den Danske Høiskole [Congratulations to Denmark, with the Danish Blockhead and the Danish High School] (Copenhagen, 1847), where he remarks that he was “most deeply moved [by] the little Danish people’s rousing and enlightenment.” See also Grundtvig’s article “Om Dansk Oplysning og den Danske Høiskole i Sorø” [On Danish Enlightenment and the Danish High School in Sorø] in Danskeren (→ 210,14), August 2, 1848, vol. 1, no. 20, pp. 305–314, where he writes that his lone voice had long seemed like a lonely “cry in the wilderness,” but had later turned out to be a forecast of broader, popular forces that were preparing to arise. the seer Grundtvig’s] → 241,16. indifferentism] → 214,4. religious freedom] → 206,3 and → 208,18. the old orthodox] Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and his followers, the Grundtvigians (→ 210,15 and → 223,1). Theories of the State . . . all these hypotheses about the origin of the state] See, e.g., I. H. Fichte, Die philosophischen Lehren von Recht, Staat und Sitte (→ 243,1).

•

1851

699

Franklin (in his Leben und Schriften . . . part 2) . . . a sect, the Dunkers . . . by the exact opposite] A reference to no. 11, “Ueber die Sekte der Dunkers” [On the Sect of the Dunkers], in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 2, pp. 187–189, in which Franklin reports on a conversation he had with a certain Michael Weffare, who was supposedly one of the sect’s founders. For the English original, see The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 1, p. 93: “He complained to me that [the Dunkers] were grievously calumniated by the zealots of other persuasions, and charged with abominable principles and practices, to which they were utter strangers. I told him this had always been the case with new sects, and that to put a stop to such abuse, I imagined it might be well to publish the articles of their belief, and the rules of their discipline. He said that it had been proposed among them, but not agreed to for this reason: ‘When we were first drawn together as a society (said he), it had pleased God to enlighten our minds so far as to see that some doctrines, which were esteemed truths, were errors; and that others, which we had esteemed errors, were real truths. From time to time He has been pleased to afford us farther light, and our principles have been improving, and our errors diminishing . . . and we fear that if we should once print our confession of faith, we should feel ourselves as if bound and confined by it, and perhaps be unwilling to receive further improvement; and our successors still more so, as conceiving what their elders and founders had done, to be something sacred, never to be departed from.’ This modesty in a sect is perhaps a singular instance in the history of mankind, every other sect supposing itself in possession of all truth, and that those who differ are so far in the wrong, like a man traveling in foggy weather; those at some distance before him on the road he sees wrapped up in the fog, as well as those behind him, and also the people in the fields on each side; but near him all appear clear; though in truth he is as much in the fog as any of them.” ― Dunkers: or Tunkers, or First Day German Baptists: a Baptist community originally founded in 1708 in Schwarzenau, Germany;

22

242

700

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 71–77

its adherents were quickly forced to emigrate, however, and in 1719 the first twenty such families settled in Pennsylvania. The movement quickly grew on American soil, buoyed both by emigrants and local interest, and soon spread to other states. Meanwhile, a faction of the original emigrants split off from the main movement and formed an independent community in the vicinity of Philadelphia. There are certain similarities between the Dunkers and the Quakers. 243

1

Fichte the younger (in his Ethics § 249 . . . Bentham . . . remarks . . . force one’s opinion upon others.”] A reference to the following passage in § 249 of I. H. Fichte’s System der Ethik [System of Ethics], vol. 1, Die philosophischen Lehren von Recht, Staat und Sitte in Deutschland, Frankreich und England, von der Mitte des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts bis zur Gegenwart [Philosophical Doctrines of Law, the State, and Morality in Germany, France, and England, from the Middle of the Eighteenth Century to the Present] (Leipzig, 1850; ASKB 510; abbreviated hereafter as Die philosophischen Lehren von Recht, Staat und Sitte), p. 608, where Fichte writes: “Bentham carefully weighs the benefits and disadvantages of capital punishment against one another. Among the benefits he considers is that its actual evils are not as great as its apparent ones . . . Ultimately, however, he concludes that its disadvantages are greater. Nevertheless, he does not wish to abolish it entirely, but rather to restrict it to the rarest of uses―namely, as punishment for murderers and, where there has been an insurrection, for its leader. To us, this view seems quite right and practical; whereas the short-sighted soft-heartedness on the part of our present state legislators has made the mistake of unconditionally abolishing the death penalty for the very crimes that are most dangerous to public safety, namely, political crimes, on the grounds that they are merely the products of erroneous convictions―quite as if it were only the subjective element, the opinion, that was punishable in political crimes, and not, to a much greater extent, the enormous arrogance of being willing to employ every sort of violent means to force one’s opinion upon others!” ― Fichte the younger:

•

1851

Immanuel Hermann Fichte (1796–1879), German philosopher, son of the philosopher J. G. Fichte and therefore commonly referred to as “Fichte the younger”; from 1836, extraordinary professor and from 1840, ordinary professor of philosophy at Bonn; from 1842 to 1863, professor at Tübingen. Kierkegaard owned a number of his works (see ASKB 501–511 and 877–911). ― Bentham: Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), English jurist and philosopher, whose declared ambition was to introduce radical reforms to the constitution and criminal code of Great Britain and abroad; as a moral philosopher, set as his ideal what has since come to be known as the main principle of Utilitarianism: “the greatest good for the greatest number.” Reduplication] Kierkegaard often uses this term with reference to relations of reflection in which something abstract, or the content of something, is repeated (actualized) in concrete practice or existence.

13

243

Franklin (Leben und Schriften . . . vol. 4, p. 4. Der Rummeltopf no. 1.) . . . zu der meinigen zu machen] The English original is from Benjamin Franklin, “The Busy-Body, No. 1,” in American Weekly Mercury, February 4, 1729. Kierkegaard’s German citation is from Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 4, pp. 3–8, p. 4, where this text is mistakenly dated January 28, 1728. ― Rummeltopf: German, a traditional earthenware pot with a pig’s bladder fastened tightly over it, used in parts of northern Germany as a children’s noisemaker. See the note to Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 4, p. 3. at the present moment everyone is dabbling at being a reformer] → 206,3 and → 223,33.

16

244

Science and] Variant: added.

30

244

The step now taken against Rudelbach] Refers to Kierkegaard’s article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” in Fædrelandet, no. 26, January 31, 1851, pp. 101ff. (COR, 51–59; SKS 14, 111–116), prompted by A. G. Rudelbach’s (→ 212,9) reference to Kierkegaard in note 121, p. 70, in Om det borgerlige Ægteskab

4

245

26

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 77–80

8

12

245

24

(→ 206,3 and → 291m,2). See also Rudelbach’s response to Kierkegaard in “Afnødt Erklæring om et personligt Punkt og tillige om Betydningen af ‘Kirkens frie Institutioner’ ” [A Forced Declaration about a Personal Matter, with a Clarification of the Meaning of “The Free Institutions of the Church”], published in two parts in Fædrelandet, in no. 37, February 13, 1851, p. 145, and no. 38, February 14, 1851, pp. 149–50, respectively. In the first part Rudelbach rebuts Kierkegaard’s critique, asserting that it rests on a misunderstanding, and he defends his own view of―and his campaign for―freedom of conscience, of religion, and of the Church. In the second part, Rudelbach summarizes the most important points on which he and Kierkegaard disagree: (1) the organization of the Church, including the Christian congregation; (2) the means employed to introduce “the Church’s free institutions”; and (3) their understanding of history. In connection with this latter point Rudelbach writes: “When [Kierkegaard] in one of his most recent writings (Practice in Christianity) expresses himself in such a manner that it seems that history conceals and covers up the abasement of Christ and the offense of the cross, we must claim, on the contrary, that history reflects both the one and the other.” Grundtvig] → 210,14. The reference here is to the fact that Grundtvig supported N. M. Spandet’s bill on freedom of religion (→ 208,18) as a civic right (→ 214,4). a coalition with the Friends of the Peasant Party] → 235,35. Columbus . . . be buried with the chains . . . placed upon him in life] A reference to the injustice meted out to Christopher Columbus (1451– 1506), when his many enemies succeeded, by means of false accusations, in displacing him as governor of the Hispaniola colony (today Haiti), and having him returned to Spain in chains. King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella immediately freed him and supported him financially at the royal court; but despite the king’s sympathy and promises of aid, nothing was done to rectify the injustice done to Columbus. This, at any rate, is the account provided in chapter 2, § 13, “Columbus i

•

1851

701

Lænker / (1500)” [Columbus in Chains / (1500)] in Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie (→ 224,18), vol. 6 (1824), pp. 35–37, which ends as follows: “Full of regret, the so disgracefully neglected Columbus left the court, carrying his chains with him everywhere, and he demanded that they be laid with him in his grave.” In § 15, “Columbus’s Død. (Den 20de Mai 1506.)” [Columbus’s Death (May 20, 1506)], p. 41, it is related that Columbus’s brother “brought his body to St. Domingo, buried it in the cathedral there, and did not forget the chains.” Franklin lived in London as an agent for Pennsylvania . . . remained silent during the proceedings] A summary of the events described in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 161–182; for the English original, see The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 343–361. Franklin was elected agent to the British crown from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1764, and later as agent from New Jersey, Georgia, and Massachusetts as well. The “messages” described here were letters sent from Boston in 1773 by its Governor Thomas Hutchinson and Lieutenant Governor Andrew Oliver to “persons of power and office in England” (p. 354); the public suit against Franklin took place in London in 1774. his biographer says (in a note . . . p. 179) that this treatment . . . never used otherwise] See The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 1, pp. 358–359n. Franklin] → 239,7. An article by Fr. (der arme Richard . . . vol. 4, p. 95) . . . good items of practical sense] Refers to no. 7, “Der arme Richard, oder der Weg zum Wohlstand” [Poor Richard, or the Way to Wealth], in Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 4, pp. 95–114; “Poor Richard’s Almanac: The Way to Wealth, as clearly shown in the Preface of an old Pennsylvania Almanac, intitled, Poor Richard Improved,” in The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 4, pp. 235–243. “Thus the old Gentleman ended . . . just as if it had been a common Sermon.”] See Benjamin Franklin’s Leben und Schriften (→ 239,7), vol. 4, p.

26

34

7 8

10

246

702

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 80–82

113; The Life and Writings of Benjamin Franklin (→ 239,7), vol. 4, p. 243. 246

15

22

25 26

26

247

11 15

Fichte Ethics Part 1, p. 780. On the occasion of . . . ein seltsamer Selbstwiederspruch”] See § 314 of I. H. Fichte’s Die philosophischen Lehren von Recht, Staat und Sitte (→ 243,1), pp. 779–780. Fichte explains that during the French Revolution a third principle, “general well-being,” was added to the first two, “liberty and equality,” but “later, the third concept, ‘fraternity,’ was introduced, which the German communists put on their banner as ‘absolute humanism.’ Everything should be sacrificed―so now it is to absolute concepts of ‘fraternity’ or ‘humanism,’ before which property, honor, family, even differences in talent and abilities, are to be sacrificed. Fraternity is suddenly proclaimed as an equalizing, revolutionary force: a strange self-contradiction” (p. 780). he shows that it is law, not love, that equalizes] A reference to the following passage in § 314 of I. H. Fichte’s Die philosophischen Lehren von Recht, Staat und Sitte (→ 243,1), p. 780: “But love is never what equalizes―only law is that; love is what distinguishes, what prefers . . . Compared to it, the abstract, universally leveling, and indeed atheistic ‘brotherly love’ is an unsustainable thought. If anyone can be my brother, without distinction, then no one can!” love seeks not its own] See 1 Cor 13:5. what is the neighbor’s;] See 1 Cor 10:24. ― neighbor’s;: Variant: first written “neighbor’s.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. not covet what is the neighbor’s] See Ex 20:17. Satan himself in the form of an angel of light] See 2 Cor 11:14. the skillful . . . cruelty . . . the condemned person was to be burned!] See, e.g., § 150, “AlbigenserKreuzzug und Inquisition” [The Albigensian Crusade and Inquisition], in Heinrich Ernst Ferdinand Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of Church History], 3rd ed., 2 vols. with continuous pagination (Halle, 1838 [1833]; ASKB 158–159), vol. 1, pp. 591–595, which describes the Inquisition tribunal established by Pope Gregory IX in 1232 and granted the au-

•

1851

thority to persecute all heretics, to imprison them without due process, torture them in order to extract confessions, and subsequently to mete out harsh punishments to them, including life imprisonment, all while, however, “those declared incorrigible were turned over to the secular authorities for the execution of capital punishment at the pyre (since ecclesia non sitit sanguinem [Latin, ‘the Church does not thirst for blood’])” (p. 594). Francke] August Hermann Francke (1663–1727), German Lutheran theologian and priest; received the magister degree in 1685 for a dissertation on Hebrew grammar; in 1686, established the Collegium Philobiblicum, a philological-exegetical working group inspired by the pietist Philip Jakob Spener and dedicated to the edifying interpretation of the Bible; in 1690, appointed deacon of the main city church in Erfurt, but expelled after fifteen months because of his pietist convictions; from 1691, after intercession by Spener, pastor in Glaucha and professor of Hebrew and oriental languages (and, from 1698, of Greek and theology as well) at the newly founded University of Halle; from 1715, pastor in Halle in addition to his other duties. Francke established several schools (the Franckesche Stiftungen) in the Halle area, including a school for the poor and an orphanage; these served as models for pietist charitable and educational ventures throughout Lutheran Europe―including Scandinavia―in subsequent generations, leading to the establishment of Bible societies and publishing houses for religious literature. People accused him . . . He replied: [“]Ich verlange . . . neue Herzen.” . . . See Guericke, Franckes Leben, p. 52 note.] A reference to H.E.F. Guerike, August Hermann Francke: Eine Denkschrift zur Säcularfeier seines Todes [August Hermann Francke: A Memoir on the 100th Anniversary of His Death] (Halle, 1827; abbreviated hereafter as August Hermann Francke), p. 52, where Guerike cites at length from § 41 of Francke’s Abgenöthigte Fürstellung der ungegründeten und unerweißlichen Beschuldigungen und Unwarheiten welche in dem jüngst zu Leipzig publicirten Pfingst-Patent enthalten sind [A Necessitated Clarification of the

26

27

247

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 82–84 Unfounded and Unprovable Accusations and Untruths Contained in the Whitsun-Broadside Recently Published in Leipzig] (1691); the citation ends as follows: “The blindness of the great mass in the midst of Christendom is so dire that true repentance and earnest conversion to God are regarded as nothing less than starting a new religion, taking on a new faith, joining a new sect. I do not demand a new religion, but rather new hearts.”― Guericke: Heinrich Ernst Ferdinand Guerike (1803–1878), German Lutheran theologian of a highly conservative bent; from 1829, professor at Halle; Kierkegaard owned his Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 247,15). 247

33

35

248

2

On a Passage . . . However.] Variant: changed from “On Myself.”. ― “The Accounting”: In 1849, when Kierkegaard considered publishing The Point of View for My Work as an Author, “Three ‘Notes’ concerning My Work as an Author,” “One Note concerning My Work as an Author,” with the accompanying appendix “Armed Neutrality, or My Position as a Christian Author in Christendom,” and “Everything in One Word,” in one volume under the title On the Work as an Author or On My Work as an Author, Written in 1848, he changed the title of “One Note concerning My Work as an Author” to “The Accounting.” Later, “The Accounting” came to constitute the bulk of On My Work as an Author (Copenhagen, 1851) (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19); there “The Accounting” was dated “Cph., March 1849” (PV, 5; SKS 13, 11). before God,] Variant: added. the passage in the final version of “The Accounting”: Before God, I call it my upbringing, etc.] In “The Accounting” (→ 247,33), Kierkegaard writes: “When I speak with myself ‘before God,’ I religiously call all my work as an author my own upbringing and development, though not in the sense as if I had now become perfect or am perfectly finished with respect to needing upbringing and development” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). ― final version: On My Work As An Author was advertised as published in Adresseavisen, no. 184, August 7, 1851. Presumably, in late 1850 or in 1851, Kierkegaard

•

1851

703

had written two folio pages bearing the title “A Final Version of ‘The Accounting’: Draft” (Pap. X 5 B 265–269, pp. 431–433; see especially Pap. X 5 B 268, p. 433, which contains Kierkegaard’s note on this passage). ― call: Variant: first written “regard”. it is put in “The Accounting” . . . will continue to have need of upbringing] → 248,2. Xt was born in a manger] Refers to Lk 2:7. the star shines over it, and kings came to worship] See Mt 2:1–2: In Danish Church tradition, these wise men are known as de hellige tre konger, “the three holy kings.” they bring these costly gifts, they themselves worship the child] See Mt 2:11. Xt has no place to lay his head] See Mt 8:20. a woman anoints his feet . . . immortalized in history] See Lk 7:36–50 and the parallel account in Mt 26:6–13, esp. v. 13. The disciples were sent forth . . . the least thing . . . “whoever gives . . . shall not lose his reward.” (Mt 10:42)] See Mt 10:5–42, esp. vv. 9–10 and 42. An apostle is able to do what is extraordinary . . . to perform miracles!] A reference to Paul. Acts 14:3 reports that when Paul and Barnabas stayed in Iconium, “the Lord . . . testified to the word of his grace by granting signs and wonders to be done through them”; for further examples, see Acts 15:12, 19:11–12, and 20:7–12; see also Rom 15:19 and 2 Cor 12:12. bound by . . . random suffering . . . the most wretched and impotent pers.] Refers to 2 Cor 12:7–9; see also Eph 3:8 and 1 Cor 15:9. ― random suffering: A reference to the speculation by Bible scholars throughout the centuries about the meaning of Paul’s “thorn in the flesh,” viz., whether it refers to some chronic physical or psychological illness. See, e.g., G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Dictionary of the Bible, for the Use of Students, University Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71), vol. 2, p. 262.

12

20

248

20

23 26 26

34

2

4

249

704 249

15 16

249 250

must now take up reforming the Church] → 206,3.

7

the race] i.e., the human race. cordiality and love] “Cordiality” (Danish, Hjertelighed, lit. “heartiness”) was a word employed frequently by N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14); see, e.g., NB15:29, from January 1850, in KJN 7, 22, and the associated explanatory note. In addition to “heartiness,” Kierkegaard often also used the terms “hearty,” “lovable,” and “dear” ironically in referring to Grundtvig and his followers, the Grundtvigians (→ 235,33), including P. C. Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB15:82, also from January 1850, in KJN 7, 55, and the associated explanatory notes.

36 36 37

38

251

Market Town] i.e., a small town in the provinces; used derisively of Copenhagen and Denmark. the poor and unfortunate name “Søren”] See, e.g., NB14:85, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 399, and the associated explanatory notes.

36

16

250

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 85–91

11

11

13 14

20

Knight of D.] Knight of the Dannebrog. DM] Man of the Dannebrog. vespers] A reference to the 2 p.m. church service (“evensong”), the time of which was changed to 6 p.m. in 1851 at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. See NB22:145 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. the Church of Our Lady] See map 2, B1. Director Nielsen] Nicolai Peter Nielsen (1795– 1860), actor at the Royal Theater; received the title of director in 1829. the late Dr. Ryge] The actor Johan Christian Ryge (1780–1842); passed the medical-surgical examinations at the University of Kiel in 1805 and received a doctorate in medicine one year later; in 1813, debuted as an actor at the Royal Theater, and in 1832 became a director as well. His lecture was the well-known set piece] Variant: changed from “He spoke”. nothing, nothing whatever wanting in the performance] Variant: changed from “nothing wanting in communicating the faith”. in using his voice,] Variant: first written “in using his voice.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1851

came forth in character,] → 223,29. ― character,: Variant: first written “character.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. in the game of gnav . . . when the fool moves, he takes only one player with him] A reference to a popular party game, gnav (literally, “gnaw”; also known as vekselspil, “pass-me-by”), in which the value of a player’s piece is determined by a figurine (cuckoo, dragon, cat, horse, house, pot, or owl) or a number (from 12 to 1). There are also two “fools,” who function as jokers. A player draws a piece from a hat containing twenty-one pieces in all; he can then trade his piece with another player. The goal is to avoid ending up with the piece of lowest value. If a player has the piece with the house, he can refuse the trade by saying “pass” (Danish, hus forbi, “pass by this house”); the price for doing so, however, is to accept a “stroke” (streg). Once a player has received three (in some versions, five) strokes, he is out of the game. A player who has drawn the fool may also “stand firm,” i.e., refuse to trade, if offered the other fool. Possession of the fool brings with it a modicum of protection against losing: if both fools are in play, each of the two players who has one can receive an extra stroke without losing. On the other hand, if only one fool is in play, then not only does its “owner” lose his extra stroke, but so does the player who holds the lowest-valued piece in play. When only two players remain, the one with the fool may stand firm in the event that (assuming the game is played with a three-stroke limit) he has two strokes and his opponent only one, for “the fool always takes one with it,” as the saying went―though this privilege was cancelled if the opponent held the piece with the cuckoo. For more details, see S. A. Jørgensen, Nyeste dansk Spillebog [Newest Danish Book of Games], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1802), pp. 360–364.

38

251

10

252

The Old Orthodox] Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and his followers, the Grundtvigians (→ 210,15 and → 223,1). ’48] → 206,11. Fight the established order with the help of the people] Refers presumably to Grundtvig’s frequently repeated references to “the people,” “the Danish people,” their position, their rights, their

22

252

24 26

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 91–92 views, etc. See, e.g., “Folket, Folke-Kirken og Folke-Troen i Danmark” [The People, the People’s Church, and the People’s Faith in Denmark], no. 1, in Danskeren (→ 210,14), January 4, 1851, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–16, particularly where he writes, on p. 2: “that the Church exists for the sake of the people, and not the people for the sake of the Church, and that what calls itself a People’s Church cannot, without clear self-contradiction, assert the slightest civil right either over or against the people,” and no. 2, in Danskeren, no. 3, January 18, 1851, pp. 35–48, particularly where he writes, on p. 38: “If we view the people’s faith in Denmark as it is . . . then we naturally see a half-dead babble of the most mythical and often most unreasonable fancies, partly of pagan, partly of Papist, and partly of so-called scientific origin. A People’s Church that is to be capable of absorbing and breathing life into it all would have to consist of very dissimilar and conflicting parts; while on the other hand, the name ‘People’s Church’ would be the emptiest of all titles if the Church did not in everything speak to and satisfy the People’s Heart.” See also Grundtvig’s address to the Folketing on the occasion of its deliberations on the bill concerning religious freedom, “Lov om Ægteskabs Indgaaelse udenfor de anerkjendte Troessamfund eller imellem Medlemmer af forskjellige Troessamfund” (→ 240,28). 29 30

Francke] → 247,26. Fr. notes correctly . . . that Xnty is an exaggeration . . . passage on dancing . . . Leben, p. 178] A reference to H.E.F. Guerike, August Hermann Francke (→ 247,27), p. 178: “ ‘One of course should not speak first of such things,’ said Francke, ‘but first speak as a Christian teacher does, cultivating the people according to their hearts; for when the heart is rightly changed and improved, what is external will fall away on its own . . . But the world has a habit of speaking of such things, in order to justify itself.’ ” ― He deals with the question of whether dancing is permissible and cites reasons why it is not: A reference to H.E.F. Guerike, August Hermann Francke (→ 247,27), pp. 178–185, in continuation of the passage just cited: “We will now reproduce Francke’s own argumentation

•

1851

705

in excerpts. ‘As far as whether the dancing customary today is sin, I cannot answer in any way other than affirmatively. If I were asked whether the movements and positions of the body themselves are sinful, then I could answer negatively, for no one could or would lead anyone to sin without an evil constitution of the mind . . . My reasons, viz., to refrain from dancing, are as follows: (1) The fundamental rule of all our deeds is: When you eat or drink, or whatever you do―do it for the glory of God. Dancing conflicts with this . . . (2) The second fundamental rule of Christian actions is that one should deny worldly desires, i.e., no longer hear or know anything of them. Now it is obvious to every sapient human being, that what gives dancing its value is nothing other than worldly desire . . . (3) It also conflicts with imitating Christ, which one does not measure solely by external measures . . . but also, and indeed primarily, by internal measures, namely, by the sense of Christ that must live within us . . . (4) It conflicts with what Paul says (Col. 3:16): ‘Whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.’ . . . (5) The Christian must disavow love of the world not halfway, but with a full heart, as John writes (1 Jn 2:15). But what else, other than love of the world, would lead a person to dancing? . . . (6) What Christ does and undertakes for one must be truth, i.e., something upright, certain, enduring, whose fruits do not decay but last forever . . . (7) He who is truly serious about pursuing his Christianity must not only avoid sin but also protect himself from occasions for sin; the person who avoids the occasion avoids the sin itself, but the person who places himself in the occasion to sin has thereby already sinned against God . . . (8) If one claims that dancing is permissible then one must explain for whom it is permissible and not a sin. Is it so for the coarse worldlings? For them, everything is sin . . .’ ” ― the truly Socratic approach: Presumably, an allusion to Plato’s dialogue Phaedrus, in which young Phaedrus discusses explanations of mythological beings, to which Socrates replies (229e–330a): “I myself have certainly no time for the business, and I’ll

706

253

20

23

254

13

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 92–102

tell you why, my friend. I can’t as yet ‘know myself,’ as the inscription at Delphi enjoins, and so long as that ignorance remains it seems to me ridiculous to inquire into extraneous matters. Consequently I don’t bother about such things, but accept the current beliefs about them and direct my inquiries, as I have just said, rather to myself, to discover whether I really am a more complex creature and more puffed up with pride than Typhon, or a simpler, gentler being whom heaven has blessed with a quiet, un-Typhonic nature.” Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961; abbreviated hereafter as Plato: The Collected Dialogues), p. 478. dancing conflicts with “imitating Christ.”] A reference to Francke’s third reason to prohibit dancing, p. 179. Fr.’s] Francke’s. sextons] Lower-ranking church officers responsible for gravedigging, assisting the sacristan, and above all for serving as ushers during church services, where they were to ensure that congregants were seated in accordance with their social status and rank.

255

2

In our times everything must be free] → 230,1.

255

7

many people adhered to the apostle] See the next note. When Rudelbach (in the article in Fædrelandet) . . . a cloud of witnesses] A reference to the following passage in the article by A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9) titled “Afnødt Erklæring om et personligt Punkt og tillige om Betydningen af ‘Kirkens frie Institutioner’ ” (→ 245,4), in Fædrelandet, no. 38, February 14, 1851, p. 149, col. 1: “The individual will never be alone when he bears witness, acts, or suffers for the sake of God; he will always be surrounded by a cloud of witnesses (Heb 12:1), even when outwardly he seems to be most forsaken.” ― When: Variant: first written as a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

12

•

1851

debating only e concessis] Variant: “only” added. “infamous malice and envy.”] The source of this quotation has not been identified.

17

voting] → 213,15. from, in, with, upon, by] Presumably alludes to grammatical mnemonic rhymes with prepositions. See DD:113, dated May 19, 1838, in KJN 1, 246. the ballad: Let Us Become a Group . . . Hurrah] A fictive ballad. let us be hum. beings] A phrase used frequently by the character Poppedrengen in “The Galoshes of Good Fortune,” a fairy tale by Hans Christian Andersen (1805–1875), published in Tre Digtninger [Three Poetic Pieces] (Copenhagen, 1838), pp. 1–52, pp. 42–44.

24

When the disciples were sent out . . . Xt says: Go into the village that lies before you] A reference to Mt 21:1–11; see esp. vv. 1–2. Printed this year] A phrase sometimes found on the title pages of broadsides and other (antique) books, instead of specifying the year of publication; in any given year, the buyer was led to believe that the book was new.

2

God is an almighty man] Stock designation of God in the dogmatic list of his attributes. See, e.g., chap. 1, “Om Gud og hans Egenskaber” [On God and His Attributes], sec. 3, “Hvad Skrivten lærer om Guds Væsen og Egenskaber” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Being and His Attributes], § 3: “God is almighty and can do anything he wills without difficulty. But he does only that which is wise and good, because he wills nothing other than this and this alone,” in Balle’s Lærebog (→ 210,8). See also the first article of the Apostles’ Creed: “I believe in God the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth.” I make the confession] A reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). hum. being of that sort―I am only a poet] Variant: changed from “a solitary hum. being of that sort.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. bereft of God and of ideas―that is . . . abandons no one.] Variant: changed from “bereft of God and

11

255

20

255

26

26 29

256

7

20 21

26

256

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 102–107 of ideas.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― God abandons no one: An allusion to Heb 13:5, which cites from Deut 31:6 and Josh 1:5. 257

26

than the latter,] Variant: first written “than the latter.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence, and followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

257

30

impetus of the eternal . . . and die] Variant: changed from “impetus.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the apostles, . . . willing to die. longed for martyrdom] Variant: first written “the apostles.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― the apostles . . . willing to die: Possibly a reference to Jn 16:1–4; see also Mt 24:9. See also Kirkens Historie gjennem de tre første Aarhundreder af Eusebius [Eusebius’s History of the Church during the First Three Centuries], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB U 37; abbreviated hereafter as Kirkens Historie af Eusebius), particularly bk. 2, chap. 9, pp. 70–71, about the execution of the apostle James, and bk. 2, chap. 25, pp. 104–105, about the Emperor Nero’s killing of the apostles Peter and Paul. ― longed for martyrdom: While no reports of the apostles themselves “longing” for martyrdom have been identified, there are numerous such accounts of other Church martyrs. Examples include Bishop Ignatius (Theophorus) of Antioch, who was devoured by lions in the Roman Colosseum; his story is told in Kirkens Historie af Eusebius, bk. 3, chap. 36, where it is reported on p. 169 that he “wrote to the Roman community, beseeching them not to request mercy for him and thereby rob him of the hope of the crown of martyrdom, which he sought with longing.” Another example is Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who was burned alive in the stadium there; according to chap. 14, he uttered the following prayer to God directly from the pyre: “May I be received among [the company of your martyrs] today and reach you as a pleasing and well-appointed sacrifice!” See also Aposteldiscipelen den Smyrnensiske Biskop Polykarps Brev til Philippenserne samt Beretningen om hans

32

•

1851

707

Martyrdød [The Letter of Polycarp, Disciple of the Apostle and Bishop of Smyrna, to the Philippians, Together with the Report of His Martyrdom], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen 1836; ASKB 141), pp. 21 and 28. the apologists] See, e.g., K. Hase, Kirchengeschichte. Lehrbuch zunächst für academische Vorlesungen [Church History: Primary Handbook for Academic Lectures], 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1836 [1834]; ASKB U 52), translated into Danish by C. Winther and T. Schorn as Kirkehistorie. Lærebog nærmest for akademiske Forelæsninger [Church History: Textbook Primarily for Academic Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 160–166; abbreviated hereafter as Kirkehistorie), pp. 60–63; and see also NB22:48 and the associated explanatory notes in the present volume. theory of the Church] See, e.g., the section on “Kirchenverfassung” [Church constitution] in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 247,15), vol. 1, pp. 99–114. as early as Cyprian . . . to avoid persecution] See Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1, pt. 1, pp. 387–388, where it is related that when official persecution of the Carthaginian Christian community suddenly intensified during the reign of Emperor Decius (a.d. 249–250), “many were conquered [i.e., abandoned Christianity] before the battle and without a fight and did not even care to give others the impression that they were worshiping the idols against their will . . . ” Evidently some of this group asked “the martyrs for ‘letters of reconciliation’ ” that would allow them to be readmitted to Church society without further ado; this practice was staunchly opposed by Cyprian. ― Cyprian: Thascius Caecilius Cyprian(us) (ca. 200–258), served as bishop of Carthage from 248 or 249 until his martyrdom by decapitation just outside of Carthage on September 14, 258; author of a wide variety of apologetic, ecclesiological, dogmatic, ethical, and psychological writings, with a particular focus on the phenomenon, plight, and fate of lapsed Christians. Clement of Alexandria says . . . what is merely human . . . scholarship, and the like] A reference

4

258

6

1

258m

9

258

708

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 107–113

to the following passage in Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1, part 1, p. 82: “This began the heyday of Clement’s activity as a teacher and writer. For him, scholarship became the form that corresponded to the revealed faith as content . . . ‘The apostles and prophets, he says, were surely enlightened by the Holy Spirit; but we cannot rely on similar inspiration to understand the meaning of their words; we must rely, in its place, on scholarly spiritual education.’ ” ― Clement of Alexandria: Titus Flavius Clemens, known as Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–ca. 215), Church Father born in Athens and originally trained in Greek philosophy; converted to Christianity and moved to Alexandria, where he joined the Stoic philosopher Pantainos, another Christian convert; established a theological-philosophical school in approximately 180, while serving simultaneously as a teacher at Pantainos’s Christian academy, which he took over on Pantainos’s death around the year 200; two years later was forced to flee persecution to Caesarea in Cappadocia, where he continued his work as a teacher. The extant writings of Clement of Alexandria are extensive and include apologetic, theological, ethical, hermeneutical, logical, and philosophical works, all in support of his effort to preach Christianity as the only true philosophy. 258

23 25

260

14

19

“The Rich Young Man.”] A reference to Mt 19:16–22. a certain amount of ability,] Variant: first written “a certain amount of ability.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. upon the 70,000 fathoms of water] Recurrent expression in Kierkegaard’s writings, first used in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), where the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus writes: “A spiritual existence, especially a religious one, is not easy; the believer constantly lies upon the deep, has 70,000 fathoms of water beneath him” (SLW, 444; SKS 6, 411). meritoriousness] In Lutheran doctrine this term designated the erroneous view that by one’s own actions and deeds one can make oneself deserv-

•

1851

ing of God’s justice and salvation; see, e.g., articles 4, 6, and 20 in the Augsburg Confession (1530). Luther nailed 95 on the church door] See the account of Luther’s ninety-five theses in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 247,15), vol. 2, pp. 740–751. The theses themselves are reproduced in Luthers Werke (→ 213m,2), vol. 1, Martin Luthers reformatorische Schriften, pp. 27–41. Adresseavisen] Adresseavisen was established in 1759 and published until 1909 (the spelling of the name underwent minor changes in the course of the newspaper’s history), and it was the most important organ in Copenhagen for advertising because, with the exception of Berlingske Tidende, it was the only newspaper in the city that had the right to accept paid advertising. Starting in 1800, Adresseavisen was published six days a week; in the 1840s, the average press run was seven thousand copies. Christianity simply does not exist] → 227,16. Variant: first written “Christianity simply does not exist.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

25

I use my modest fortune in doing this] An assertion often made by Kierkegaard in his journals, and which may reasonably be understood by considering the total expenses associated with producing his books in the light of his rapidly diminishing fortune. See Frithiof Brandt and Else Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 23–64; see also NB16:59, from February 1850, in KJN 7, 136–138, and the associated explanatory note, as well as NB17:13, from March 1850, and NB20:36, from July 1850, in KJN 7, 174 and 420. By 1850, the fortune Kierkegaard had inherited from his father, which had originally amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars, in real estate, stocks, and bonds, was virtually depleted; on this see NB11:122, from May or June 1849, in KJN 6, 64, along with the associated explanatory note; see also NB16:59, from February 1850, NB17:13, from March 1850, NB18:7, from May 1850, and NB20:36, from July 1850, in KJN 7, 136–138, 174,

34

260

28

29

260

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 113–117

261

3

261

9

11

261

15 19

262, 420, all with their associated explanatory notes. the man whose entire wisdom . . . I really could not afford it] Presumably, a reference to Kierkegaard’s conversation with Bishop Mynster (→ 207,30) in February or March 1849. See NB10:89, from ca. March 1849, in KJN 5, 313, where Kierkegaard writes: “The other day I went to Mynster and casually mentioned an appointment at the seminary”; a marginal note indicates that this refers to the Royal Pastoral Seminary in Copenhagen (→ 308,27). 1000 priests] According to the lists in the Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Ecclesiastical Yearbook for 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848 [went to press January 18, 1848]; ASKB 378), there were about 890 principal parishes in the kingdom of Denmark (i.e., without the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg), which employed about 1,050 priests, including bishops and deans; in addition to this there were about 120 personal chaplains. You want to reform the Church] → 206,3 and → 223,33. Xnty simply does not exist] → 227,16. At one time, people believed that what was needed was a speculative system] A reference to the fact that speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology was dominant in Denmark in the 1830s and 1840s―and it was this Hegelian philosophy that was viewed by J. L. Heiberg (→ 294,29) as “what was needed,” or, to use his own favorite expression, as “what the times demand”; see his Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid [On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age] (Copenhagen, 1833), esp. pp. 52–53. See also H. L. Martensen (→ 283,13), Af mit Levnet [From My Life], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1882–1883), vol. 1, p. 62, where he relates that Prof. F. C. Sibbern acknowledged that it was “a demand of the time that, for no small number, Christianity also needed to be preached speculatively, and in this demand he was supported by powerful movements at the time.” “System” refers to Kierkegaard’s earlier polemic, not only against the particular philosophical system developed by G.W.F. Hegel in his Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences but also

•

1851

709

more generally against Hegelianism, including the attempts by J. L. Heiberg and Rasmus Nielsen to construct an all-encompassing philosophical system; see, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 51; SKS 4, 356) and Prefaces (P, 14, 65; SKS 4, 478, 525, with accompanying explanatory notes). By the term “system” or “the System” Kierkegaard thus seems to refer generally to a philosophical attempt to understand and explain the world as a whole with the help of abstract logical categories or discursive thinking; at times the term seems to be used as something like a synonym for objective knowledge. Kierkegaard sets forth his most comprehensive polemic against “the System” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (see, e.g., CUP 1, 13–17, 106–125; SKS 7, 22–26, 103–120). Now people want to reform the Church] → 206,3 and → 223,33. Rudelbach . . . a little faction that he calls the Church . . . true Xns] → 223m,13.

23 25

The Teachers of the Early Church] Presumably, such figures as John Chrysostom (→ 205,3), Origen (→ 262,12), Irenaeus (→ 268,19), Tertullian (→ 271,24), Cyprian (→ 258m,1), Basil (→ 276,1), Ambrosius (→ 279,32), and Augustine (→ 281,2). Hell and the devil . . . explained as metaphorical expressions] It is unknown to whom this refers. admitting honestly that this is what is required] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). established it as a sort of dogma that to sacrifice is to “tempt God.”] It is unknown to whom this refers.

29

261

5

262

4

262m

Origen warns . . . still have not fulfilled. cf. Böhringer . . . pt. 1 . . . p. 109] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen oder die Kirchengeschichte in Biographieen [The Church of Christ and Its Witnesses, or the History of the Church in Biographies], 7 vols., numbered 1.1–1.4 and 2.1–2.3 (Zurich 1842–1855; ASKB 173– 177; abbreviated hereafter as Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen) (not including two additional volumes published after Kierkegaard’s death, namely, vols. 2.4 and 2.5, Zurich, 1856–1858), vol.

12

7

262

710

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 117–122

1.1, p. 109, which Kierkegaard paraphrases here. ― Origen: The priest and Church Father Origen (ca. 185–255) became the leader of the School of Alexandria in 202, but was removed in 231 after being accused of heresy; he then moved to Caesarea in Palestine, where, under the influence of the Platonic philosophy of the times, Origen produced the first real Christian dogmatics and biblical commentaries and became the first to engage in textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible. ― Böhringer: Georg Friedrich Böhringer (1812– 1879), German-Swiss theologian and Church historian; from 1842, pastor in Glattfelden, in the canton of Zurich.

10

the teachers of the early Church] → 261,29. make a confession] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8).

263

29

meritorious] → 260,19.

264

18

let God rule] Presumably, a conscious allusion to Thomas Kingo’s hymn “Nu rinder Solen op” [The Sun Arises Now] (1674), verse 9: “You, O Lord, know best / My needs and my demands / The path to happiness / Is resting in Your hands; / And what is best for me / You long ago did see / What more would you have, my soul? / Just let God rule,” Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Thomas Kingo [Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Thomas Kingo], ed. P. A. Fenger (Copenhagen, 1827; ASKB 203), no. 187, pp. 397–401, p. 399. But the place . . . must be held open.] Variant: added.

263

2

19

264

23

At one time, the objection against Xnty . . . revolutionary] Presumably, a reference to the prevailing view of Christianity in the Roman Empire in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. See, e.g., § 78, “Regjeringens Indgriben” [Government Intervention], in K. Hase, Kirkehistorie (→ 258,4), and § 21, “Ursachen der Verfolgungen gegen die christliche Kirche im römischen Reiche” [Causes of the Persecutions against the Christian Churches in the Roman Empire] in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 247,15), vol. 1, pp. 77–78, where he cites Rome’s view of

•

1851

Christianity as a “non-permissible religion” and Rome’s belief that Christians’ refusal to participate in state religious ceremonies and military service was “inflexible obstinacy,” which meant that the state must regard Christians as “enemies of the emperor and the Roman people.” ― revolutionary: Variant: added. now Xnty has become patriotism] Presumably, a reference to Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and the Grundtvigians (→ 235,33), who frequently linked Christianity to Danishness. For this same reason, Grundtvig was attacked by his erstwhile ally A. G. Rudelbach in the work Christendom og Nationalitet. En Bibelsk-historisk Betragtning og Beviisførelse, tilegnet Danmarks hæderlige Geistlighed [Christianity and Nationality: A Biblical-Historical Consideration and Argument, Dedicated to Denmark’s Honorable Clergy] (Copenhagen, 1847). Grundtvig replied in January 1848 in “Om Folkeligheden og Dr. Rudelbach” [On National Popular Identity and Dr. Rudelbach], in Dansk Kirketidende, January 30, 1848, vol. 3, no. 20, cols. 313–323. After claiming that Rudelbach, who “hovered between German and Danish,” was incapable of grasping “the proper relationship of national popular identity to Christianity” (col. 321), Grundtvig repeats his position that even if “every nationality . . . can turn away from the truth and harden itself against it,” nonetheless it must be present in living fashion and aware of itself before it can enter into a living relation with the revealed truth” (col. 322). The issue of nationality was debated further at the gatherings of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle in 1848. On July 7, 1848, for example, Pastor F. E. Boisen gave a lecture “on the relation between Danish national popular identity and Christianity, and on the activity of priests in this connection,” which was published in Dansk Kirketidende, October 8, 1848, vol. 4, no. 2, cols. 25–39. Boisen asserted that it was important to “summon up and nurture the people’s love of their fatherland, their history, and their language, so that the people realize that whatever we think of foreigners, Danishness is at any rate what is best for the Danish people, and their efforts must therefore strive not to incorporate what is foreign, but to be a genuinely

25

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 122–126

26 27

31 32 34

Danish people in the manner in which they think, act, and express themselves,” and therefore the priests’ “work in furthering Danish national popular identity in our congregations must consist of getting the people to know and to love what really belongs to the people as a Danish people,” (col. 27). See also Grundtvig’s articles in Danskeren (→ 210,14) and his 1851 article “Folket, FolkeKirken og Folke-Troen i Danmark” (→ 252,26) and NB15:27 in KJN 7, 22, with its accompanying explanatory note. State Church] → 240,21. At one time, the objection against Xnty . . . misanthropic] A reference to the fact that, during the first centuries of Christianity’s history, pagans accused it of being odium totius generis humani (Latin, “hatred toward the entire human race”), which Kierkegaard discusses frequently in his journals. See, e.g., NB20:135 in KJN 7, 472. The source for this expression is possibly the Church Father Tertullian (→ 271,24), Apologeticus adversus gentes pro christianis [Apology for Christians against the Pagans], 37, 8: “Sed hostes maluistis vocare generis humani” (“People have preferred to call them [the Christians] enemies of the human race”), Qu. Sept. Flor. Tertulliani opera [Tertullian’s Works], ed. E. F. Leopold, 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1839–1841; ASKB 147–150), in Bibliotheca patrum ecclesiasticorum latinorum selecta [Library of Selected Latin Church Fathers], ed. E. G. Gersdorf, vols. 4–7, vol. 1, p. 109. See also Tacitus, Annales [Annals], bk. 15., chap. 44, 4, in C. Cornelii Taciti opera ex recensione Ernestiana [Tacitus’s Works from the Ernesti Edition], ed. I. Bekker (Berlin, 1825; ASKB 1282), p. 347, where it is related that Christians who were suspected of having burned Rome during the reign of Nero were not so much condemned for arson as for odio humani generis. In the Danish translation of Tacitus that Kierkegaard owned, J. Bader renders the expression as “hatred of humankind.” Cajus Cornelius Tacitus [Tacitus], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1773–1797; ASKB 1286–1288), vol. 2 (1775), p. 282. At one time . . . foolishness to the Greeks] See 1 Cor 1:23. Bishop Mynster] → 207,30. Dr. Rudelbach] → 212,9.

•

1851

711

protect himself against all misunderstood support . . . political alliances] A reference to Rudelbach’s article “Afnødt Erklæring om et personligt Punkt og tillige om Betydningen af ‘Kirkens frie Institutioner,’ ” no. 1 (→ 245,4), in Fædrelandet, no. 37, February 13, 1851, p. 145, col. 1, where he emphatically defends himself against criticisms leveled in Kierkegaard’s article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach” (→ 245,4), writing that “He [Kierkegaard] presents the matter as if his own task―which he has tried to accomplish in all his pseudonymous and nonpseudonymous writings―was to present Christianity as ‘victorious inwardness’ and to awaken concern in the individual about his salvation, whereas Dr. Rudelbach, with his battle for the emancipation of the Church, has expressed himself as if Christianity (the Church) was to be ‘saved by free institutions,’ as if the blessed and helpful power lay in ‘external forms’; he [Rudelbach] was even supposed to have wanted to attain his goal through politics and to have made himself guilty of the ‘disastrous confusion of politics and Christianity’; he has supposedly strayed from the apostolic path . . . and has sought to win an ambiguous, evil majority by uniting with the sort of people to whom he would otherwise, as a spokesman for Christianity, have turned his back.” Rudelbach goes on to say that in all his writings he has disapproved of “such principles as my honored friend attributes to me,” and that indeed, he has “condemned this way of planting Christianity and raising up the Church” (Fædrelandet, no. 37, February 13, 1851, p. 145, col. 1). voting] → 213,15.

35

2

265

make a humbling admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8).

33

265

Governance] God’s governance (→ 210,8).

13

266

not even as far along as I am] Variant: “even” has been added. zest for life and battle.] Variant: changed from “zest for life and battle, and can move me.”

23

266

27

712

267

27

Incognito] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

2

was taken up in glory] Reference to the ascension; see Lk 24:51, Acts 1:9, Jn 12:32. as was pointed out in Practice in Xnty] See, e.g., the section of Practice in Christianity (→ 206,14) about the difference between the admirer and the imitator (PC, 233–257; SKS 12, 227–249). Origen puts it beautifully . . . [“]Even (in glory) he weeps . . . and complete.” . . . see Böhringer . . . pp. 189, 190] Kierkegaard’s source for this citation from Origen is G. F. Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 189–190. his examination in obedience] An allusion to Phil 2:8.

3

7

24

268

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 126–132

19

Irenæus says . . . death is the punishment of sin . . . (grace and mercy). see Böhringer . . . pp. 237, 238] A paraphrase of the following passage on Irenaeus’s catechism in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 237–238: “Much as Origen regarded punishments as means of disciplining and healing, Irenaeus too interprets the punishment for sin at the merciful hand of God as the first stage of salvation. For Irenaeus, death, the heaviest consequence of sin, is already the first sign of God’s mercy. ‘When God―for such is his surprising way of expressing himself―banished man from Paradise and sent him far away from the Tree of Life, this was not, as some have dared to say, because he begrudged it to him, but because he had mercy on him, and did not want him to remain a sinner forever, or for his sin to become immortal, the evil endless and irreparable. And precisely thereby, he dealt the Tempter a setback, as it were―that he let death thrust in and put an end to sin.’ ” ― Irenæus: Irenaeus of Lyon (ca. 135–200), bishop, Church Father, and martyr; originally from Asia Minor, became priest and, in 177, bishop in Lyon; according to tradition, was martyred during the persecutions of the Christians by the Roman emperor Septimus Severus. His main work was Adversus haereses [Against the Heretics], a five-book attack on the

•

1851

many Gnostic sects of the day. In the history of theology, Irenaeus is viewed as a mediator between Eastern and Western traditions. ― how God . . . as it were: Variant: first written “how God,”; “as it were” has been added.

22

Ireneus] → 268,19. The reciprocal relationship . . . the Gospel for all. see Böhringer . . . pp. 239, 240] A faithful précis of the summary of Irenaeus’s catechism (→ 268,19) given in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 239–240.

31

to wrest hum. beings] Variant: “hum. beings” added. and as long as he is in the truth] Variant: added.

25

269

16

270

Bishop Mynster] → 207,30. At the beginning of the observation that deals with sin (in the Observations) . . . by every earnest hum. being in his quiet hours] A reference to the introductory passage in no. 20, “Sin,” in J. P. Mynster, Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on the Doctrines of the Christian Faith], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1833]; ASKB 254–255), vol. 1, p. 240: “Sin― this word is now heard only rarely in the world, at least rarely in its right meaning; people seem to think that so harsh a word could rarely describe our actions; they seem to think it unreasonable toward ourselves and others if we characterize human error, weakness, imperfection―for that is what we call it―with so harsh a name; and we therefore prefer to abandon the word as a capricious joke. But you serious word! You shall be heard in every honest human being’s quiet hours, in all your rigorous significance, so that you may tell him what it is that destroys the peace in his innermost being, what the sickness is of which the many pains are only as isolated outbreaks.” ― quiet hours: → 278,15. The apostle imprisoned all things under the power of sin] Presumably, a reference to Gal 3:22, see also Rom 3:9–20, 5:12, 11:32. the attacks on Xndom . . . my polemical pseudonyms] See especially Philosophical Fragments

19

270

268

32

23

37

9

271

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 132–134

12

12

271

24

26

29 35

272

5

(1844) and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), attributed to the pseudonym Johannes Climacus, and The Sickness unto Death (1849) and Practice in Christianity (1850), attributed to the pseudonym Anti-Climacus. as bishop standing at the head] A reference to J. P. Mynster, who qua bishop of Zealand was primate of the Danish Church, i.e., primus unter pares (“first among equals”) with respect to the other Danish bishops, and thus could be regarded as the Church’s “head.” 1000 priests] → 261,9. Tertullian] Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus (ca. 155–240), born in Carthage in North Africa, one of the Roman Catholic Church Fathers. A lawyer by training, Tertullian converted to Christianity between 195 and 197, and became an accomplished theologian and apologist; in 207 he presumably embraced Montanism, an ascetic Christian movement dating from the mid-second century, which resisted the worldliness of the orthodox Church. While Tertullian’s works include catechistic, dogmatic, and antiheretical writings, his main legacy is the body of apologetics with which he responded to the persecutions of Christians in 197/198 and which protest the unjust nature of these persecutions; generally speaking, his anti-pagan polemics are of an ethical cast. accommodation] The expression “accommodation” alludes to the notion in Enlightenment theology that divine revelation is adapted to the limitations, prejudices, and errors of human beings. make an admission] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). Tertullian decisively focuses his attention on its opposite: idolatry] See Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 287–293: “Tertullian regarded idolatry as the force that ruled all of paganism. . .”; see also Tertullian, De idololatria [Of Idolatry], written 210–212. My very subordinate achievement . . . to direct attention] See “The Accounting,” in On My Work as an Author (→ 247,33), where Kierkegaard writes: “This in turn is the category of my whole

•

1851

713

authorship: to make aware of the religious, the essentially Christian―but ‘without authority’ ” (PV, 6n; SKS 13, 12n). See also the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” where Kierkegaard writes: “ ‘Without authority’ to make aware of the religious, the Christian, is the category for my whole work as an author regarded as a totality” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). I Cannot Do Otherwise] An allusion to the reply generally attributed to Luther at the Diet of Worms in 1521, when he was asked to state in clear language whether he would retract his teachings, which had been condemned by the Church: “Because . . . my conscience is captive to the Word of God, I therefore neither can nor will recant, as it is neither safe nor advisable to act against conscience. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me! Amen!” C.F.G. Stang, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), p. 123. See also the following passage in Practice in Christianity, No. III, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” V, where Anti-Climacus writes: “And even if I myself should sink under the weight of the criterion I develop, and even if I should be the first who incurs judgment, and even if I should be the only one―I cannot do otherwise” (PC, 228; SKS 12, 222). Tertullian. It reads . . . cling fast to it.” see Böhringer . . . pt. 1, sec. 1, pp. 285, 286] The reference is to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 285–286. the person who has truly understood . . . the criterion for having understood it] Presumably, a reference to Plato’s Protagoras (351e–357e). Here Socrates asserts that the person who has true knowledge cannot let it be displaced by the passions and the like, and that the person who chooses the wrong course of action merely expresses his ignorance. See Udvalgte Dialoger af Platon [Selected Dialogues of Plato], trans. C. J. Heise, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1830–1838; ASKB 1164–1166), vol. 2 (1831), pp. 195–209.

9

10

17

272

714 273

2

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 135–140

Tertullian . . . on the means of grace . . . replaced by external pomp. see Böhringer . . . pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 343] A reference to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 343: “Tertullian introduces the doctrine of the means of grace―with special attention to baptism―with an observation that is both true and deep. He asserts that the mark of the truly divine is the union of the simplicity of the [external] appearance with [internal] divine power; conversely, paganism sought to replace its internal emptiness with external pomp.”

273

11

Tertullian emphasizes the difference . . . praying to one who does not hear.” Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 313] A reference to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 311–313. The passage cited is introduced as follows: “Let us now consider both Christian faith and non-Christian wisdom . . . According to its extent―Christianity is the completed revelation and has a definite end point.” ― we need do nothing more than believe: Variant: “more” has been added.

273

32

Tertullian “What God has commanded . . . God has commanded it.” Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 295] A reference to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 295: “How wondrous is the ambiguity of men [who] mix and confuse good and evil. Yet what God has commanded is always good and always the best. What are you hesitating for? God has commanded it. God’s will is our salvation; for he wills that his image can also be our likeness, so that we will be holy because he is holy.”

274

2

6

Tertullian in his work of consolation for martyrs . . . Christian freedom] A reference to the discussion of Tertullian’s Ad martyras [To Martyrs], written either in 197 or in 202–203, in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 293. “Prison gives the Christian . . . put solitude in its place.”] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated rendering of a passage from Tertullian, Ad martyras, as cit-

•

1851

ed in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 294. A bit earlier . . . The world itself is a prison . . . outside the world.” See Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 294] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated version of the following citation from Ad martyras in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 294: “When we consider, he says, that the very world itself is a prison, then we must see that matter more as that you have exited the prison than that you have entered it. The world carries a greater darkness, in which the hearts of men go blind; it puts on heavier chains, which keep the souls themselves captive; a greater crowd of the guilty surrounds the world, namely, the entire human race; it will not be tried by the court of a proconsul, but by the court of God. And you, you blessed ones, shall you not regard yourself as those who have been brought out of the prison and into an asylum[?] To be sure, there is darkness in the prison, but you yourselves have the light; there are chains in the prison, but you are free before God. What is more: Outside the prison, Christ has abjured the world―and inside the prison, he has abjured the prison itself. No matter where in the world you may be, you are outside the world. And if you have also lost some of the joys of life, it is a happy transaction: losing in order to win what is great.”

10

Tertullian . . . on the Lord’s Prayer . . . “Formerly . . . raises up the fallen . . . see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1, p. 348] An truncated excerpt from a passage in Tertullian’s little book on the Lord’s Prayer, cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 348–349. Following “consoles the dispirited,” the last sentence cited continues as follows “. . . accompanies the wanderer, calms the waves, feeds the poor, guides the rich, raises up the fallen, strengthens those who falter, preserves those who see. Such prayer is the wall of faith, our dam, our weapon against the men who waylay us from all sides.”

19

274

Tertullian says . . . astronomy has acquired . . . is now the only star . . . in Böhringer] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich

31

274

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 140–145

275

2 2

8

Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 288: “Still others occupied themselves with magic, with astrology. One invoked the wise men from the East, the star of the Messiah [see Mt 2:1–12]. How grandly the profound Tertullian opposed this! ‘Such arts,’ he explained, ‘were only permitted until the appearance of the gospel, so that after the birth of Christ the stars were to give no further tidings . . . Today astrology is concerned with Christ. It is the star of Christ, not that of Saturn or Mars, nor of some other order of the dead, that will be observed and proclaimed.’ ” I think it is also] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Tertullian . . . A person who himself does not want to suffer . . . in Böhringer] A reference to the following citation from Tertullian in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, p. 298: “He who fears suffering can never belong to one who has suffered.” the God-Man] → 228,31.

275

15

Tertullian . . . the Xn may not go to war . . . put in its scabbard . . . somewhere in Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 1] A reference to the following passage from Tertullian in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.1, pp. 289–290: “The divine and human oaths of office, the cross of Christ and the banner of the Devil, the camp of light and the camp of darkness: these cannot be joined together. A life can never belong to both of the two, to Caesar and to God. For how can one perform deeds of war without the sword that the Lord has taken away?”

275

23

Then, when the three friends . . . the young man, Elihu, begins] A reference to Job 32:1–5. Elihu’s subsequent speech is at Job 32:6–37:24. On Job’s three friends, Elifaz, Bildad, and Sofar, see Job 2:11–13.

276

1

Basil] Basil of Caesarea, or Basil the Great, ca. 330–379, bishop of Caesarea in Cappodocia in Asia Minor, one of the most famous fathers of the Greek Church; laid the dogmatic groundwork for the doctrine of the Trinity.

•

1851

715

he says . . . our persecutors . . . see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 190, bottom of page] A passage from a letter by Basil, cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.2, p. 190n.

3

and sacrifice] i.e., sacrifice to the gods of the state in order to avoid persecution. the God-Man] → 228,31. Then Xt becomes a myth] An allusion to the mythological interpretation of the NT inaugurated with the work of the German Protestant theologian D. F. Strauss, Das Leben Jesu, kritisch bearbeitet [The Life of Jesus, a Critical Treatment], 2 vols. (Tübingen, 1835–1836), which argued that the accounts of Jesus’ life are based on myths. This line of argument had a powerful influence on Danish scholars, e.g., Frederik Beck (in his dissertation Begrebet Mythus eller den religiøse Aands Form [The Concept of Myth, or the Form of the Religious Spirit] [Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 424]). that serpent . . . Linnaeus proved never to have existed] In the twelfth edition of his Systema Naturae [System of Nature] (Stockholm 1766), vol. 1.1, p. 358, the Swedish scientist Carl Linnaeus or Carl von Linné (1707–1778) mentions that many of the so-called dragons of literature never existed in reality, including the famous seven-headed Hydra of Hamburg, which was thus labeled as “an excellent work, not of nature but of art.” Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified; but see the mention of “snakes with seven heads” in Stages on Life’s Way (SLW, 401; SKS 6, 372).

22

Basil] → 276,1. We can flee evil . . . out of love of God―like children. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 258] A reference to the following passage from Basil’s ascetic ethics, cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.2, p. 258: “I see three ways of reaching obedience. Either we can avoid evil out of fear of punishment, and think menially; or we can seek the fruits of reward and fulfill the commandments for our own benefit, and think like a hireling; or we can do it for the sake of virtue itself and out

6

276

28 33

34

7

277

716

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 145–151

of love for our lawgiver, greatly pleased to be dignified by serving such a noble and kind God, and so are disposed like children.” 277

14

17

Don Quixote] The comic hero in the Spanish author Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra’s (1547–1616) picaresque novel Don Quixote, (1605–1615); see Den sindrige Herremands Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og Bedrifter [The Life and Works of the Ingenious Lord Don Quixote de la Mancha], trans. C. D. Biehl, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1776– 1777; ASKB 1937–1940). We are all Xns] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

278

1

A person withdrew into solitude, fasted, prayed, and the like] A reference to the anchorites, ascetic Christian hermit-monks; see, for example, § 73 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 247,15), vol. 1, pp. 244–248.

278

10

Mynsterian] → 207,30. quiet hours] An expression often used by J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30) in referring both to private devotions and to church services. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme (→ 270,23), vol. 1, p. 240; vol. 2, pp. 298, 299, 301, 306; Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons on Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230 and 2191), vol. 1, pp. 8 and 38; Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Given in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), p. 63; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Given in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 10, 11, 14; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Given in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 204 and 216. made admissions and confessions] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8).

15

17

279

6

Ah, how lofty is the divine―] Variant: first written “Ah, how lofty is the divine!”, with the exclamation point apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1851

absolutely right:] Variant: first written “absolutely right.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. They flog him; the apostle replies: I have the honor of being flogged, etc.] Presumably, an allusion to Acts 5:40–41; see also Rom 5:3, Phil 1:29, and 1 Pet 4:13.

16

Nonna . . . mother of Gregory of Nazianzus . . . her sorry with hymns.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 2, p. 386] An abbreviated version of the account provided in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.2, pp. 385–386. ― Gregory of Nazianzus: Gregory of Nazianzus, or simply Gregory the Elder (ca. 330– 390), bishop of Nazianzus in Cappadocia in Asia Minor and one of the fathers of the Greek Church; converted to Christianity, was baptized in 358, and withdrew into asceticism; became a priest in 361, and in 380–381 was a bishop in Constantinople.

24

279

Ambrose] of Milan (ca. 339/340–397), Roman Catholic teacher and saint; from 374 bishop of Milan; left many letters, discourses, and hymns, as well as a number of writings dealing with ethics, dogmatics, and biblical exegesis, especially of the Old Testament. They demanded . . . a church to the Arians . . . I will sacrifice myself in order to save the altars.” Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 29] An abbreviated version of the extended account provided in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 27–32. ― Arians: Followers of Arius (d. 336), who had been chosen as priest of one of the main churches in Alexandria. In the theological debate about the relations among Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Arius claimed that only the Father is eternal, and that before the beginning of time he had created the Son out of nothing; hence the Son has no part in the Father’s being (hypostasis), but is of a similar essence (homooiousios). Arianism was condemned at the Council of Nicaea, in 325 and again at the First Council of Constantinople (i.e., the Second Ecumenical Council) in 381. This led Arians to establish their own churches or to attempt to take over existing ones.

32

279

20

33

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 152–155 280

280

10

24

27 31

281

2

Ambrose [“]The wounds we get . . . in lesser things[?]” (See Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 35)] An excerpt from a longer passage by Ambrose (→ 279,32), cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 35. The cited passage is part of a speech given by Ambrose to his congregants while their church was surrounded by armed soldiers. it is written that John said of Xt: I did not recognize him . . . then he recognized him] A reference to Jn 1:31–34. John indeed says: I need to be baptized by you, and you come to me] A reference to Mt 3:13–34. God’s only begotten Son] An allusion to Jn 1:18; see Jn 3:16. Augustine, for example . . . love your home . . . you have an affliction” (see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 188] The reference is to a passage by Augustine cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 188. The line “you do not love your home very much” may refer to Heb 11:16: “But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one.” ― Augustine: Aurelius Augustinus, or St. Augustine (354–430), theologian, philosopher, and rhetorician; born to a pagan father in North Africa and educated as an orator in Carthage; active in Italy from 383; converted to Christianity and was baptized by Ambrose of Milan (→ 279,32); priest from 391, and bishop of Hippo from 395; one of the four Roman Catholic Church Fathers. Augustine’s principal works include his Confessions, with which he founded the genre of autobiography; On the Trinity (399–419); and The City of God (412–426); he also wrote a great many apologetic, exegetical, dogmatic, and ethical works, as well as sermons and letters. Kierkegaard owned Augustine’s works in Sancti Aurelii Augustini opera [The Works of Saint Aurelius Augustinus], 3rd ed., 18 vols. (Bassano, 1797–1807; ASKB 117–134). ― a state of exile: See 1 Pet 2:11, where Paul’s addressees are dubbed “aliens and exiles”; see also Heb 11:13. ― home: Variant: first written “Fædrela”, the beginning of the Danish word Fædrelandet, which means “fatherland.”

•

1851

717

these 1000s upon 1000s who become priests] → 261,9. take their examinations] A reference to the theological examination at the University of Copenhagen. which “sweetly relieves . . . gives the joys their proper savor”] Presumably, a reference to Bishop J. P. Mynster’s (→ 207,30) sermon on Jn 10:11–17 (on the good shepherd) for the second Sunday after Easter (which in 1851 fell on May 4), no. 29 in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage (→ 278,15), vol. 1, pp. 358–369, pp. 362–363: “It is . . . true that most people have many adversities in the world, but it is also true that greatest among these are dissatisfaction, doubt, fear, and worry, and that the good they actually lack is one that could sweetly relieve life’s sorrows and give the joys their proper savor.” This “good,” Mynster explains, is “faith, the true, living Christian faith; in it is the foundation for all our relief, the source of everything that can fill the heart and make it happy and blessed.”

13

A Donatist former bishop, Emeritus, . . . Write. And then he remained mute. . . . see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 172] A paraphrase of the encounter in the year 418 between Augustine and Emeritus, a former Donatist bishop, as described by Georg Friedrich Böhringer in Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12) vol. 1.3, pp. 171–172: “In the year 418 Augustine arrived at Caesarea Mauretania (Algiers). There he met Emeritus, the former Donatist bishop of that place, who had been one of the seven spokesmen for the Donatists at the colloquium in Carthage. He had kept himself hidden until that point. Augustine brought him into the Church for a conversation. Many people were assembled there. But when Augustine finished his own speech, Emeritus uttered these bitter words: ‘I cannot will otherwise than as you will; but I can will what I will.’ How could he utter any other view than the Catholic one, since the state had prohibited his own? And yet, he could not utter the Catholic view on account of his individual conviction, which did not permit him to join the Catholic church community. A stenographer was there to take down the

23

14

18

281

718

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 155–160

conversation. ‘Write,’ Emeritus said to him and― then he remained mute.” ― bishop, Emeritus: d. 418. ― the Donatists: A schismatic movement among North African Christians―named for Donatus Magnus (d. ca. 355), a bishop of Carthage―which Augustine successfully worked to root out in the early fifth century. 282

282

2

17 18

282

26 27

283

3

Augustine. speaks . . . lead one to action. He says . . . oh my God!” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 110] The reference is to a passage by Augustine cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 110. Augustine] → 281,2. “There is a truth . . . free, when a hum. being is subordinate to it.[”]] This entry is a composed of a series of short excerpts from a much longer citation from Augustine in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 234–235. Böhringer’s citation begins as follows: “There is a truth ‘which abides, even if the world were to pass away,’ something fixed, certain, general, eternal; that is Augustine’s premise, in opposition to skepticism . . . This highest general truth is . . . ‘an inalterable truth, that encompasses everything that is inalterably true and is neither your truth nor my truth nor a third’s truth, but the truth of all.’ ” Augustine] → 281,2. As a proof of the truth of Xnty . . . the unity of Xns as opposed to the variety and contentiousness of philosophies] A paraphrase of an extended passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 241–244; the crucial line, on p. 243, refers to “the unity of Christians in faith as opposed to the fracturedness [Zerrissenheit] of philosophies.” Böhringer sums up his position as follows: “In a word, Augustine points to the Church’s miraculous emergence, spread, its history, its struggles, growth, life, its doctrine as the authentication of Christianity” (pp. 243–244). Simon Peter] His actual name was Simon. Peter was his nickname, from the Greek word for stone

•

1851

(petros), a translation of the Aramaic Cephas; see Jn 1:42. “could you not watch with me one hour?”] See Mt 26:36–46. “Watch and pray, that you do not fall into temptation”―] See Mt 26:41. ― temptation”―: Variant: first written “temptation.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. R. Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, 1840–1841; from 1841, Poul Martin Møller’s successor as extraordinary professor in moral philosophy, and from 1850, ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen. He taught speculative and Hegelian philosophy in particular, but in the mid-1840s he came under Kierkegaard’s influence, and they became friends in 1848 (concerning this, see NB7:6 and NB10:32 in KJN 5, 80–81 and 283). In the summer of 1848, Kierkegaard believed that he would soon die and therefore wanted someone to publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74 in KJN 5, 56–57 and NB14:90 in KJN 6, 402–405). He decided on Rasmus Nielsen, whom he had once met on the street and with whom he subsequently discussed his views on walks they took every Thursday. Kierkegaard decided to wait until after Nielsen had published his next book before determining how useful Nielsen might be. On May 19, 1849, Nielsen’s big book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed. Forelæsninger over Jesu Liv [The Faith of the Gospels and Modern Consciousness: Lectures on the Life of Jesus] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 700), was published; it profoundly disappointed Kierkegaard. The book, which scarcely makes mention of Kierkegaard, was nonetheless so very much influenced by Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works that reviewers declared that Nielsen was a disciple of Kierkegaard; Kierkegaard himself, on the other hand, was full of worry and annoyance (see, e.g., NB11:46 in KJN 6, 28). When, shortly thereafter, H. L. Martensen published Den christelige Dogmatik (see the next note), which included a preface in which he heaped scorn on Kierkegaard’s writings, Rasmus Nielsen at-

4 7

10

283

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 160–161

13

tacked Martensen in the polemical piece Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse [Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s Dogmatics: An Investigative Review] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 701), which appeared on October 15, 1849. This led to a major debate about the relation of faith to knowledge. Nielsen’s next major work was Evangelietroen og Theologien. Tolv Forelæsninger holdte ved Universitetet i Kjøbenhavn i Vinteren 1849–50 [The Faith of the Gospels and Theology: Twelve Lectures Held at the University of Copenhagen in the Winter of 1849–1850] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 702); the book was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 80, April 6, 1850, as having been published. In this work Nielsen presents a more systematic argument, based on insights from Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings, that we must comprehend that faith cannot be comprehended. This was followed by Et par Ord i Anledning af Prof. Scharlings Apologie for Dr. Martensens Dogmatik [A Few Words on the Occasion of Prof. Scharling’s Defense of Dr. Martensen’s Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850), the publication of which was announced in Adresseavisen, no. 109, on May 11, 1850. Kierkegaard’s relation to Nielsen is illuminated in a number of journal entries and in a series of letters (published in LD) concerning, among other things, their break in April 1850; many of these are listed in the explanatory note to NB22:66 in the present volume. he wants to debate and convince Prof. Martensen] In his counterpolemic, Dogmatiske Oplysninger [Information on Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), pp. 8–76, Martensen sharply attacked Nielsen’s polemic Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (see the preceding note). Nielsen responded in turn in Dr. H. Martensens Dogmatiske Oplysninger belyste [Dr. H. Martensen’s Information on Dogmatics, Illuminated] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 703), which was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 305 (December 18, 1850) as having been published. ― Martensen: Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884); earned the cand.

•

1851

719

theol. degree in 1832; served as a tutor for theological students at the university, including Søren Kierkegaard; traveled abroad (visiting, in particular, Berlin, Heidelberg, Munich, Vienna, and Paris) in 1834–1836; received the lic. theol. degree in 1837; in 1838 appointed lecturer in theology at the University of Copenhagen; in 1840, received an honorary doctorate from Kiel and was appointed extraordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen; in 1845 appointed preacher at the royal court; Knight of the Dannebrog in 1847; in 1850, appointed ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen. On July 19, 1849, Martensen’s major work, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), was published; a second edition appeared on May 22, 1850. This work brought Martensen into direct conflict with Kierkegaard, occasioning a wider conflict about the relation between faith and reason. Pathological] Here in the literal sense of “pathos-filled.” the gospel concerning the lilies and the birds . . . the lowliest lily is lovelier than Solomon] Refers to Mt 6:24–34, the gospel reading for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, which in 1851 fell on September 28. ― birds,: Variant: first written “birds.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― Solomon: Solomon (ca. 965–926 b.c.), second son of King David, ruled the united kingdom of Israel for forty years (see 1 Kings 11:42), and was known for his wealth and wisdom (see 1 Kings 10:4–7, 14–29). the interpreter . . . explain the gospel . . . the imperial crown lily . . . in that region] See, for example, Klaus Gratz, Kritisch-historischer Kommentar über das Evangelium des Matthäus [Critical-Historical Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew], 2 vols. (Tübingen, 1821–1823), vol. 1, p. 384, where the commentary on Mt 6:28 reads as follows: “Lily. Many authorities understand this to mean, in particular, the deep red imperial crown lily, one of the most beautiful flowers that grows in the fields of the East.” ― imperial crown lily: The three-foot-tall Fritillaria imperialis (known as the Imperial Crown) is native to a broad area ex-

16 17

21

283

720

30

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 161–163

tending from modern-day Turkey and Iraq, through Iran and Afghanistan, to Pakistan and the Kashmir valley. these blessed words] An allusion to Lk 4:22.

284

6

a passage in an older journal . . . having journalists shot] A reference to NB10:53, from February or March 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “God in Heaven knows that blood-thirst is foreign to my soul, and to a frightening degree, I also think I have a concept of a responsibility to God. And yet I would, in the name of God, take responsibility for the order to fire if I, first of all, with the precaution of a most anxious conscience, had convinced myself that there was not one single other man facing the rifles―yes, not one single living creature other than―journalists. This is said of the whole class” (KJN 5, 294).

284

13

Goldschmidt] Meïr Aron Goldschmidt (1819– 1887), Danish Jewish journalist and publicist, author of En Jøde. Novelle [A Jew: Novella] (by the pseudonym Adolph Meyer, edited and published by M. Goldschmidt) (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1547). Goldschmidt founded Corsaren in October 1840 and was the journal’s actual editor until October 1846, when he sold it and embarked on a yearlong journey abroad; starting in December 1847, he was the editor (and principal contributor) of the monthly journal Nord og Syd [North and South], which became a weekly newspaper in September 1849. once the tool of contemptibleness . . . the goodygoody . . . hobnobs . . . with barons and counts―] A reference first to the period when Goldschmidt was editor of Corsaren, and then to the period where he was publisher of Nord og Syd (see the preceding note). ― once the tool of contemptibleness . . . the goody-goody: Variant: added. ― knaves: Refers presumably to the anonymous writers for Corsaren, or to the straw-men who were listed as Corsaren’s legally responsible editors; the term was used in Corsaren itself in this context in no. 27 (May 7, 1841): “People accuse us of retaining workmen and knaves as [our] responsible editors.” ― the fine . . . aristocrat who hobnobs . . . with barons and counts: Perhaps

14

•

1851

a reference to Goldschmidt’s “Diary” in Nord og Syd, February 28, 1851, which describes the reception of Austrian officers in Mecklenburg: “What is more, many of the Austrian officers are not noble enough for the highborn ladies, who complain bitterly about the fact that they must eat at the same table as the bourgeois―which had been unheard of until then. Because so many Hungarians and Italians had defected in 1848 and 1849, there has been a great advancement of ranks in the Austrian army, with corporals becoming officers, especially in the infantry and artillery, and the Mecklenburgers find it extremely odd that such people dare address their comrades, who are counts and barons, as ‘Du.’ An authentic Prussian army officer, ideally of the first regiment, who does not tolerate any bourgeois―that is the Mecklenburg ideal of a German warrior.” Nord og Syd. Et Ugeskrift, vol. 6 (Copenhagen, January– March 1851), pp. 225–226. ― counts―: Variant: first written “counts.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence, and followed by a hash-mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. despite all the transformations] Variant: added. Now that Bishop M. has restored his honor] A reference to J. P. Mynster (→ 207,30), Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [Further Contribution to Negotiations concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1851), which was advertised as having been published in Berlingske Tidende, March 13, 1851, no. 16. The principal portion of the pamphlet bears the date February 27, 1851, and discusses questions related to the new constitution for the Danish Church, i.e., questions of freedom of religion and the introduction of civil marriage. See p. 5, where Mynster writes: “for, as an excellent French writer, whom we thank the publisher of Nord og Syd [i.e., Goldschmidt] for acquainting us with, says―there is nothing more worthy of respect than ‘a people that defends its morals.’ ” See also p. 44, where Mynster writes: “Among the gratifying [‘]emergent phenomena[’]―we adopt this term from one of our most talented authors―that have appeared in the course of these discussions, is the echo found in

19 1

284m

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 163–167

8 11

a voice that has recently (see Fædrelandet, no. 26) inveighed against ‘the faith that the error is to be found in external things, that what is needed is a change in external things, which supposedly is to help us’ oppose the ‘disastrous confusion of politics and Christianity, a confusion that can so easily bring about and make fashionable a new kind of reformation of the Church, a reverse reformation that in reforming puts something new and worse in place of something old and better.’ The gifted author will permit me, in conclusion, to borrow his words, ‘that Christianity, which has its life in itself, is supposed to be saved by free institutions, is in my view a complete misunderstanding of Christianity, which, when it is true in true inwardness, is infinitely higher and infinitely freer than all institutions, constitutions, etc.’ ” In his use of the term “emergent phenomena” Mynster is alluding to Goldschmidt, who a couple of years earlier had suggested this term (Danish, Fremtoning) as a translation of the German term Erscheinung (see Nord og Syd, 1849, vol. 5, pp. 143–144); Goldschmidt’s term gradually gained acceptance in the Danish language. The reference to a “gifted author” is to Kierkegaard, and the quoted passages are from Kierkegaard’s article “An Open Letter Prompted by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach” (→ 245,4), which had appeared in Fædrelandet on January 31, 1851, no. 26; see COR, 55–56; SKS 14, 113. See NB24:30 with its accompanying note in the present volume; see also Pap. X 6 B 171, titled “A Remark by Bishop Mynster.” certainly] Variant: added. a passage in The Happy Capsize . . . the GoodyGoody Virgin Bride] A reference to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Det lykkelige Skibbrud [The Happy Capsize] (published 1731), in which a prostitute who is to be married has paid Magister Rosiflengius (a name that means “praising everything”), the town’s professional writer of occasional verse, to produce a poem for the wedding. In act 3, sc. 2, Rosiflengius presents the poem to her with the words: “Little girl[!] The poem costs 2 rix-dollars, because I have not only restored your virginity, but have also portrayed you as one of the most virtuous and correct maidens in

•

1851

721

town, and you yourself know that this not a title that you deserve.” The poem’s title is then read out in act 3, sc. 3: “The Lily Entwined with the Rose,” and in the dedication the bride is referred to as “the noble, goody-goody maiden.” See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 208,12), vol. 4. The play was performed eight times during the 1840s, with the last performance on May 25, 1847. The Donatist Principle: The Church that persecutes . . . counts martyrs . . . the true one. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 353] This articulation of the Donatist (→ 281,23) position is found in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 353.

24

284

Augustine says . . . “is a false and cruel tolerance.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 366, top of page] This citation from Augustine is found in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 366.

1

285

The Donatists . . . “Xt has given . . . the example . . . of dying.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 384] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 384: “The Donatists were correct when, not wanting to mix state and church, they said: ‘Persecution and force in matters of religion are against the word and spirit of Christ’; and when they said, so beautifully: ‘Lord Christ did not give the Christians the example (prototype) of killing, but of dying; had he loved those who opposed him in the manner of the Catholics, then he would not have died for us.’ ”

6

285

Augustine defends authoritative faith . . . not believing in authority] → 285m,1; on Augustine → 281,2. he . . . emphasizes the ethical aspect of authority: obedience . . . beneficial] See, e.g., Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 251: “Humility is nothing other than voluntary submission to a higher authority”; or p. 257: “Faith in authority relates to wisdom as its preceding stage, as its propaedeutic in a double sense: ethical and intellectual. Faith is

13

285

18

722

20

22

24

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 167–168

authority . . . not simply milk, but discipline, and contains within itself a submission of the whole person to holy power and to divine authority, and this has as its consequence a life in accordance with this authority.” insists that asceticism is part of being a thinker] Perhaps a reference to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 255: “Let us consider this religious knowledge more closely. Its elements are: from the multiplicity of the world in which we are situated―from the illusory appearances of the sensory―to withdraw to the One, to collect oneself, through the mediation of Christ, to God and into God, to ascend above all created, sensate, mental, and spiritual things to the original ground, to the original intelligence, to God . . . This withdrawal, however, this―to use a medieval expression― this ‘simplification,’ must take place just as much through contemplation and speculation on the side of intuition, as through love, asceticism, and purification on the side of the will and of life.” The entire section about this in Böhringer] Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 248–260. Against the Donatists . . . faith might emerge. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3 . . . especially pp. 357ff. and pp. 367, bottom of page, and 368] A reference to the section titled “Augustine and the Donatists” in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 310–385. Pages 357–358 discuss Augustine’s understanding of the relation between the Christian state and the church. From the bottom of p. 367 to the middle of p. 368, Böhringer explains Augustine’s view that the purpose of punishment is “not to force into faith, but to punish unbelief; not to drive [others] to right thinking, but to prevent bad action. ‘Fear of punishment, even if one as yet has no love of the good, still locks up the evil will in the seal of thought.’ . . . [It is] not that force should create faith―that is impossible―but that fear of punishment should clear away only the hindrances―passions, prejudices, indolence, fear of fellow-sinners, etc. When the hindrances have been removed in this way . . . [then] the inner consent [to Christianity] must come on its own.”― Donatists: → 281,23.

•

1851

see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 253. “to refuse . . . even more lamentable . . . by an authority.”] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 253: “Incidentally, Augustine does not deny the possibility that one may be deceived by a false authority, ‘and it certainly is sad when, at a time when one is not capable of knowledge of the full truth, one is betrayed by any authority; but,’ he adds, ‘it is much sadder to refuse to let oneself be led by any authority.’ ”

1

285m

What has so often been put forward . . . sin― weakness, ignorance, the superior power of the senses, etc.] See The Sickness unto Death (1849), pt. 2A, chap. 2, “The Socratic Definition of Sin,” which begins as follows: “Sin is ignorance. This, as is well known, is the Socratic definition, which, like everything Socratic, is an authority meriting attention” (see SUD, 87–96; SKS 11, 201–208). See also pt. 2A, chap. 3, “Sin Is Not a Negation but a Position,” which begins as follows: “That this is the case is something that orthodox dogmatics and orthodoxy on the whole have always contended, and they have rejected as pantheistic any definition that made it out to be something merely negative―weakness, sensuousness, finitude, ignorance, etc.” (see SUD, 96–100; SKS 11, 209–212). is given a masterful turn by Augustine . . . “We call sin . . . is thus its punishment.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 408] A reference to the following passage, including citations from Augustine, in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 407–408: “A far more weighty objection to free will as the sole and exclusive root of evil is the appeal to ignorance, incapacity, as that through which recognizably blameworthy actions arise. But this very state, Augustine says, is never that of original [human] nature, but that of already-fallen [human] nature, and thus presupposes an earlier deviation from God, and must be regarded as a natural and thoroughly justified punishment for earlier sins . . . The most justified punishment for sin is precisely that everyone loses what he did not wish to use well, to the extent that he could have

3

286

5

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 168–171

13

used it well without effort. Accordingly, whoever knowingly does wrong should lose the knowledge of what is right, and whoever does not will to act rightly where he can do so should lose the power to act rightly where he wills to do so. ‘Therefore the punishments for every sinful soul are ignorance and incapacity.’ It is clear: when he speaks of the will as the root of sin, Augustine does so in the broadest sense. ‘We call sin not only that which is called sin in the strictest and narrowest sense, namely a voluntary and conscious offense, but we call sin everything that is a necessary consequence of such an offense and is thus its punishment.’ ” ― far more the punishment of sin―: Variant: first written “far more the punishment of sin.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― and is thus: Variant: first written “and in addition is”. Böhringer is right . . . a person’s own will . . . the state in which the pers. is situated. See ibid., p. 409, top of page] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 409: “The person’s own will is thus not locked out of, but locked into, the state in which he finds himself.”

286

19

Augustine says . . . [“]Adam, where are you,[”] . . . outside of God. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 498, top of page] A reference to the following citation from Augustine in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 498 top of page: “And the meaning of the words that the Lord spoke to the human being who shuddered with fear and hid from him―Adam, where are you?―was to remind him reproachfully of where he―Adam― now was, for God no longer was [there].”

286

30

Augustine] → 281,2 and → 286,5. many moderns] See chap. 1, § 6, “Anxiety as the Presupposition of Hereditary Sin and as Explaining Hereditary Sin Retrospectively in Terms of Its Origin,” in The Concept of Anxiety (1844), where Kierkegaard’s pseudonym Vigilius Haufniensis states: “Nor can there be any anxiety if sin came into the world by an act of an

30

•

1851

723

abstract liberum arbitrium (which no more existed in the world in the beginning than in a late period, because it is a nuisance for thought [Danish, en Tanke-Uting, lit. ‘a non-thing for thought’])” (CA, 49; SKS 4, 355). See also Not13:23, from 1842–1843, where Kierkegaard writes: “A completely indifferent will (aequilibrium) is a nonthing [Uting], a chimera; Leib[niz] shows this splendidly in several places; Bayle also concedes it (against Epicurus)” (KJN 3, 391). On this, see Herrn Gottfried Wilhelms, Freyherrn von Leibnitz, Theodicee, das ist, Versuch von der Güte Gottes, Freyheit des Menschen, und vom Ursprunge des Bösen [Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz’s Theodicy, That Is, Essay concerning the Goodness of God, the Liberty of Man, and the Origin of Evil], ed. J. C. Gottsched, 5th ed. (Hanover, 1763 [1720]; ASKB 619), pt. 3, §§ 311ff., pp. 511ff., especially § 320, pp. 521–522, where Leibniz (→ 302,2) writes, with reference to the atomic theory of Epicurus, that “he resorted to that only to justify this alleged freedom of complete indifference, a chimerical notion which appears to be of very ancient origin; and one may with good reason say: Chimaera Chimaeram parit [one chimera begets another].” English translation: Leibniz, Essays on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man and the Origin of Evil, trans. E. M. Huggard (London: Routledge, 1951), p. 320. See also § 324, pp. 527–528 in the German edition, and p. 321 in the English translation: “M. Bayle himself remarks aptly that freedom of indifference (such as must be admitted) does not exclude inclinations and does not demand equipoise.” The German philosopher Schelling, in his essay “Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen des Menschlichen Freyheit” [Philosophical Investigations of the Essence of Human Freedom], in Philosophische Schriften [Philosophical Writings], vol. 1 (the only volume that seems to have appeared) (Landshut, 1809; ASKB 763), p. 408, speaks of “aequilibrium arbitrii” (indifference of the will), as “the plague of all morality.” as Augustine . . . says, this condition . . . punishment is indeed also sin] → 286,5. Rumford . . . the inventor of Rumford’s soup . . . to the nobility] Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count

8

287

14

287

724

20 20

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 171–173

Rumford (1753–1814), statesman and physicist; born in Woburn, Massachusetts; acquired property in nearby Rumford (now part of Concord) upon his marriage to a local heiress; after serving as a major in the New Hampshire Militia in the 1770s, developed Loyalist sympathies, and ultimately abandoned his wife and home to join the British army. Here he founded a unit called the King’s American Dragoons, in 1781, and rose to become its colonel; in 1784 he was knighted by King George III. In 1785, he moved to Munich, where he became secretary to the Duke of Bavaria; in this capacity he reorganized the army and undertook major social reforms, including the introduction of potato farming to the region and the establishment of workhouses for the unemployed. He was perhaps most famous for his invention of “Rumford’s Soup,” a potato- and barley-based soup for the poor that promised an optimal balance of cost and nutrition. In 1791, he was rewarded for these contributions with the title “Count Rumford,” after the estate he had lost during the Revolutionary War. In 1799, Rumford returned to England and later turned his attention to physics―in particular, the study of heat― and made numerous discoveries and inventions that paved the way for modern heating, refrigeration, and the theory of thermodynamics. See F. A. Brockhaus, Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände. (Conversations-Lexikon.) [Universal German Encyclopedia for the Educated Classes], 8th ed., 12 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1837; ASKB 1299–1310), vol. 9 (1836), pp. 469–470. reduplication] → 243,13. Eugene Sue raises his voice against the plight of the poor―and earns a half million by doing so] Joseph Marie Eugène Sue (1804–1857), French novelist, particularly known for his prolific production of popular fiction in various genres, including maritime, historical, and social themes. His novels were distributed quite widely, owing in part to serialization in newspapers; elected to the Legislative Assembly on April 28, 1850. Although more than a dozen of his novels were translated into Danish, Kierkegaard does not appear to have owned any of them. ― the plight of the poor: Presumably, a reference to Les mystères

•

1851

du peuple, ou Histoire d’une famille de prolétaires à travers les Ages [The Mysteries of the People, or History of a Proletarian Family through the Ages] (Paris, 1849–1850). The novel’s serial installments were translated into Danish by Edvard Meyer and appeared in Flyveposten [The Flying Post] from mid-1849 through 1850. about objectivity, about doctrine] A reference to the objective view of Christianity variously promulgated by H. L. Martensen (→ 283,13), the leading representative of speculative theology, who presented the teachings of Christianity in his work on dogmatics, and N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 210,14) and his followers, who invoked the Apostles’ Creed and the Augsburg Confession as the norms of Christianity. Kierkegaard’s pseudonym Johannes Climacus attacks the notion of objective doctrine in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), particularly in part 1, “The Objective Issue of the Truth of Christianity” (CUP, 19–57; SKS 7, 29–61). a Providence above] → 210,8.

26

36

what Augustine says about true freedom . . . the “torment” of choice . . . comes to an end. see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 550] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3 (1845), pp. 549–550: “To be sure, the human being is not truly free when he is wavering between two opposed impulses of the will . . . [O]n the contrary: [he] has the strongest sense of freedom when, full of resolve, he wills the good, and impresses upon his action that inner necessity that excludes the thought of any other possibility, when he practices the good with such certainty as though no other mode of decision were possible. Then the human being does the good not as though he were doing something special, but as though it were self-explanatory for him. Then the ‘torment’ of choice has an end; the good has become second nature to the person.” ― excludes: Variant: first written “makes”.

12

288

Xt’s words when he talks to the Pharisees . . . in Lk 11:48] See Mt 23:29–33 and Lk 11:48. ― Pharisees: The Pharisees were one of the most influential movements in Judaism during the

31

288

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 173–180 Hellenistic-Roman period from ca. 100 b.c. until the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, emphasizing legalistic adherence to Mosaic law, e.g., complex rules of ritual cleanliness for the priesthood. They believed themselves to be in possession of a comprehensive oral tradition regarding the application of the Mosaic legal framework, and held other beliefs, such as the existence and importance of angels and the resurrection of the dead. There were about six thousand Pharisees in Jesus’ time. 289

1

2

289

7

Proverb of Solomon] According to both biblical and Church tradition, the book of Proverbs was written by King Solomon (→ 283,17). See Prov 1:1: “The proverbs of Solomon son of David, king of Israel.” Augustine cites . . . [“]The fool offends . . . blames God for it.” see Böhringer, pt. 1, sec. 3, p. 571] A reference to the following passage from Augustine, quoted in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, p. 571: “Insofar as you read such things in holy scripture as that God incites human beings to evil, by blunting or hardening their hearts― then believe with certitude that it was their earlier and indeed greater guilt that called this upon them as their justified punishment, so that you do not fall into the error that Solomon described with these words: The fool offends against the ways of the Lord, but in his heart he blames God for it.” See Prov 19:3. ― in his heart: Variant: “his” added by the editors of SKS, following the text by Böhringer. The Doctrine of Predestination] The dogma of predestination, which has assumed various forms in the Church’s history and maintains that God (either from all eternity or since the Fall) has predestined every individual human being either for eternal salvation or eternal damnation. Scriptural sources for the doctrine include Rom 8:28–30 and Eph 1:5 (“He destined [proorisas] us for adoption as his children through Jesus Christ. . .”) The Greek verb proorisas (infinitive proorizein), is translated in the Latin Vulgate (→ 296,21) as praedestinare, “predestine.”

•

1851

725

the doctrine of predestination emerges] The doctrine that the fate of each individual is predetermined by God as creator can be traced back to Origen (→ 262,12), but was given dogmatic form by Augustine (→ 281,2); see Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 1.3, pp. 560–585.

8

The Temptation of Xt] A reference to the account of Jesus’ temptation in the desert in Mt 4:1–11, which is the gospel for the first Sunday in Lent; see Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), pp. 49–50. In 1851, this Sunday fell on March 9. Of special interest here is Mt 4:3–4.

22

289

teleological suspension of the ethical] See “Problema I. Is There a Teleological Suspension of the Ethical,” in Fear and Trembling (1843), in FT, 54–67; SKS 4, 148–159.

3

290

in relation to an idea.] Variant: first written “in relation to the idea.”

23

290

Vinet] Alexandre Rodolphe Vinet (1797–1847), Swiss theologian and author; from 1817, a teacher of language and literature at several places, including the University of Basel; from 1837, professor of practical theology (and, from 1846, French literature) at the Academy of Lausanne. Vinet’s writings and teachings cover a variety of areas, ranging from literary criticism, morality, pedagogy, and ethics to ecclesiology, practical theology, and social issues, but his greatest passion was reserved for political and ecclesiastical reforms, including the separation of church and state, as he argued in his prize-winning essay Ueber die Darlegung der religiösen Ueberzeugungen und über die Trennung der Kirche und des Staates als die nothwendige Folge sowie Garantie derselben [On the Presentation of Religious Conviction and on the Separation of Church and State as the Necessary Consequence and the Guarantee of This], trans. F. H. Spengler (Heidelberg, 1845 [French edition, 1842]; ASKB 873). Kierkegaard’s concern with Vinet was in large measure attributable to A. G. Rudelbach’s juxtaposition of Kierkegaard and Vinet in Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 206,3),

6

291

726

7

9 9 11

14

291m

2

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 180–181

p. 70n, to which Kierkegaard had objected in a newspaper article in Fædrelandet (→ 245,4). Der Sozialismus . . . betrachtet v. Vinet, übersetzt v. Hofmeister] Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet [Socialism, Viewed in Accordance with Its Principle], trans. D. Hofmeister, with a preface by A. Neander (→ 205,3) (Berlin, 1849 [French 1846]; ASKB 874). the preface] Vinet’s “Preface by the Author,” pp. xiii–xv. the little piece] The book is seventy-nine pages long. writes something about the single individual] See Vinet’s “Preface by the Author,” pp. xiv–xv, which promises to discuss “the revival of individuality through the double influence of the gospel and the migration of peoples,” as well as how this “is threatened by the suppression of the principle of individuality.” writes something that he then . . . negotiates with the public] See, e.g., the following passage in Vinet’s “Preface by the Author,” p. xv: “Thus I have set forth the content and plan of the present writing, and if I remain obscure, then through this presentation I myself render that verdict; for it certainly is not the fault of the subject matter; on the contrary, it exposed me to the danger of being abstract and dry. But if my essay encompasses all of these flaws at once, and I nonetheless have undertaken the defense of such an important truth [as that defended here], then what more can I wish than that a lucid thinker with a torch should light up the underground region into which I have plunged?” Another possibility is that Kierkegaard is referring to Vinet’s frequent appeals to his readers as, e.g., on p. 18, where he writes: “In this connection I have all readers on my side, if I have any at all . . .”; on p. 19: “I ask who among my readers―or even outside this narrow circle, what human being would dare claim . . .” etc. It was Vinet about whom Rudelbach shouted . . . Vinet and I were in agreement] A reference to p. 70 n. 121, in A. G. Rudelbach (→ 212,9), Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 206,3): “It is the same thing that one of our most excellent recent writers, Søren Kierkegaard, attempts to elucidate, to

•

1851

impress, and as Luther puts it, to drive home to all that would hear. It is the same thing that lives and breathes in the theory of individuality of the admirable Alex. Vinet, which for its completion needs only to demonstrate and actualize that this individuality contains the condition for the greatest gathering in the spirit of Christ, who said both, ‘Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.’ (Mt 12:30) and ‘Whoever is not against us is for us’ (Lk 9:50).” Martensen] → 283,13. They say . . . to permit the individual to be subsumed in the state is paganism] Refers to the point of view that Vinet (→ 291,6) advocates in Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), in such repeated, formulaic statements as “human being and society are two different beings” (p. 7); see also the next note. that in conscience, the individual is higher than the state] See, e.g., Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), p. 11, where Vinet writes: “But there is also another conflict in which the distinction of human being and society becomes manifest. It is not interest but conscience that brings this to light.” See also p. 12: “There is a truth, and the state is not its proprietor. To whom is each of us directed in order to learn it? Undoubtedly: to himself . . . The conscience of the individual has recognized the truth, and his will accepts the law of conscience.” They emphasize . . . heroes . . . for the sake of conscience] A reference to Vinet, Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), p. 16: “We claim this with certainty, because all peoples include in the ranks of their great men, and commend as their past benefactors, those who dared for reasons of conscience to enter into open conflict with society, whether with society itself or with its leaders.” you say that all laws that could compel conscience ought to be abolished] Presumably, a reference to the many reformers who fought for full religious freedom and for guarantees of freedom of conscience (→ 208,18 and → 223m,1). See also A. G. Rudelbach’s (→ 212,9) article “Afnødt

14 22

25

27

32

291

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 181–186 Erklæring om et personligt Punkt og tillige om Betydningen af ‘Kirkens frie Institutioner’ ” (→ 245,4), no. 1, where he defends his campaign for “Freedom of Conscience, Religion, and Church,” in Fædrelandet, no. 37 (February 13, 1851), p. 145. 292

12 13

292m

293

1

15 18

20 30 37

Vinet] → 291,6. said it masterfully: Xt’s teaching is the fall of the race and the resurrection of the individual. see Der Sozialismus . . . p. 23] A reference to the following passage in Vinet (→ 291,6), Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), p. 23: “The gospel, we say, teaches him the fall or annihilation of the race and the reestablishment of the individual.” denn ein Christ glaubt . . . und die Wiederherstellung des Individuums] A direct citation from Vinet, Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), p. 23. Vinet] → 291,6. He speaks of individuality, of the I, the single individual] See Vinet, Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet (→ 291,7), p. 34, where he writes as follows with respect to Jesus Christ: “In one of the tribes of a people hated by all peoples, and which alone had not renounced its nationality, one who was both royal offspring and a man of the people raised his pure voice, spoke with power―and simultaneously inaugurated a future in heaven for the human soul and a future on earth for humanity. This earthly future, with which alone we are here occupied, is the development of a new principle with the help of which humanity could open itself up again, namely, the principle of individuality. Jesus Christ taught it by creating it or, if one prefers, by setting it free.” Vinet then expands on this principle up to p. 57, where he notes “We have developed the principle of individuality and have shown its necessity, its value, and its holiness.” On the “I,” see especially pp. 43, 47, 52. reduplication] → 243,13. Socrates, for example, took personal responsibility for Athens] See the next note. goading, gadflylike] See Plato, Apology, 30e–31a, where Socrates (ca. 470–399 b.c.) warns his judges

•

1851

727

against condemning him to death: “If you put me to death, you will not easily find anyone to take my place. It is literally true, even if it sounds rather comical, that God has specially appointed me to this city, as though it were a large thoroughbred horse which because of its great size is inclined to be lazy and needs the attention of some stinging fly. It seems to me that God has attached me to this city to perform the office of such a fly, and all day long I never cease to settle here, there, and everywhere, rousing, persuading, reproving every one of you” (English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, pp. 16–17). take them seriously] Variant: first written “take them seriously.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. market town] → 249,15. Prof. Heiberg] Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791– 1860), Danish poet, editor, critic of drama and literature, Hegelian philosopher, and popularizer of Hegelian philosophy. After having served as a lecturer in Danish literature at the University of Kiel in the period 1822–1825, Heiberg was appointed titular professor in 1829, and in the period 1830–1836 he taught logic, aesthetics, and Danish literature at the Royal Military Academy; on his Hegelianism, see → 261,19. From 1829, Heiberg was a playwright and permanent translator at the Royal Theater, where he was appointed director in 1849. Heiberg was Denmark’s leading tastemaker in the 1840s, even though he had essentially stopped writing criticism. I have worked free of charge] → 260,34. Prof. M] Prof. Hans Lassen Martensen (→ 283,13). His annual income was 1,803 rix-dollars, of which 400 rix-dollars were paid to him “as court preacher out of the court treasury.” Fortegnelse over de Embedsmænd, der have en aarlig Gage af 600 Rbdlr. eller derover (→ 227,7), p. 33. Or was it perhaps] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. vulgarity . . . such disproportionate superiority] A reference to the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 206,26). I was the only person who could do anything to oppose it] → 219,32.

3

294

23

294

29

35 36

4 4

6

295

728 295

16 17

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 187–190

Christ Curses the Fig Tree] See Mt 21:19. In his homily . . . Chrysostom says . . . what Xt had a right to do . . . in Scriver, the first part, the section . . . § 20, (p. 30 in my edition)] A reference to the following passage in § 20 of “Die III. Predigt, / Von der Seelen Hoheit und Würdigkeit, in Betrachtung ihrer Erlösung. / Aus vorigem Text” [The Third Sermon, / On the Highness and Worthiness of the Soul, in Consideration of Its Salvation. / From the Preceding Text [i.e., Mt 16:26]], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 1, p. 30, col. 1: “And to this belongs Chrysostom’s remark that one does not read that Lord Jesus ever truly punished or destroyed a man; for although the world must have known that he certainly had the power [to do so], and that he had cursed the fig tree that he found without fruits, so that it immediately withered down to the root, and he also displayed his righteousness and power with the pigs of the Gadarenes [Mt 8:28–34].” A marginal note by Scriver reads: “Matt. XXI, 19,” and “c. IIX,32” (i.e., Mt 21:19, Mt 8:32). ― homily: a sermon that follows a scriptural text verse by verse. ― Chrysostom: → 205,3. ― deserved and what Xt had a right to do: Variant: first written “deserved.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

295

24

Ψ 25:6–7. “Be mindful of your mercies . . . transgressions of my youth.”] An abbreviated citation of Ps 25:6–7. Kierkegaard’s cites freely from the Møller translation of the book of Psalms in Det Gamle Testamentes poetiske og profetiske Skrifter, efter Grundtexten paa ny oversatte [The Poetic and Prophetic Books of the Old Testament, a New Translation Based on the Original Texts], trans. Jens Møller and Rasmus Møller, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828–1830; ASKB 86–88 and 89–91), vol. 1, p. 132. ― Ψ: The Greek letter psi or ps, a common abbreviation for the book of Psalms.

295

33

David’s psalms 24, 25, 26, 27, 28] i.e. Ps 24–28, presumably, in the Møller translation; see the preceding note. ― David’s psalms: There is a long Jewish and Christian tradition that holds that the Israelite King David (ca. 1000–960 b.c.) is the author of the 150 psalms in the OT book of Psalms,

•

1851

even though his name only appears in the heading of 73 of them. In his German translation of the Bible (see ASKB 3–5), Luther introduced the designation “Psalms of David” for the book of Psalms, and this was subsequently adopted by the Danish Bible translations of the Reformation era and later, thus gaining popular and clerical acceptance. yesterday evening I got the little book by Bishop M.] Namely, J. P. Mynster’s (→ 207,30), Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 284m,1). blurs the impression Goldschmidt makes by bringing the two of us together] → 284m,1. ― the impression: Variant: preceding this, the words “thus entirely” have been deleted. ― Goldschmidt: → 284,13. Ψ 26:4] Reference to Ps 26:4. ― Ψ: → 295,24. Ψ 27:10] Reference to Ps 27:10. Joh[.] V. Andreä talks somewhere . . . der Unterricht der Welt . . . Hossbach’s Leben Andreä, p. 269] A reference to the following passage in Wilhelm Hossbach, Johann Valentin Andreä und sein Zeitalter [Johann Valentin Andreä and His Age] (Berlin, 1819), p. 269, where Hossbach cites from Andreä’s book Libertas veri Christianismi solidaeque Philosophiae [Freedom according to True Christianity and Authentic Philosophy]: “O parents! When you send your sons away, you shiver that something might meet and hurt them on the road, whether it be thieves or highway robbers. But there are other thieves and robbers you have to fear, those who prey on the soul by filling it up with bad habits, desires, passions, pride, lies, and unchastity, and afterward bandage the wounds they have inflicted with outward delicacy and respectability. And when you receive [your sons] again, so well-acquainted with this world and with our customs, eloquent and polite in the company of young women, practiced in the games of men, perhaps just as you yourselves have wished, you do not know how costly this will be for you, and with what incalculable expenses it has been purchased. You think it is something innocent, and it delights your eyes. But very few find the path in this labyrinth; the rest must clamber over many barriers of evil in order to reach this virtue.

2

3

6 6 9

296

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 190–192 For the world does not teach in vain, and nothing in the world is more expensive than the world’s instruction.” ― Joh[.] V. Andreä: or Johann Valentin Andreae (1586–1654), German Lutheran theologian, priest, and author; from 1620, priest in Calw; from 1639, court priest and consistorial councillor in Stuttgart; from 1650, general superintendent in Bebenhausen; in 1654, abbot in Adelberg. He was an eager reformer of both Church and society and reflected a drive for piety that stretched beyond confessional Lutheran theology and had a certain amount of influence on the leading German pietists. His writings range from ecclesiastical and pedagogical works, to polemics on contemporary issues, and to poetry. ― Hossbach’s: Peter Wilhelm Heinrich Hossbach, who published as Wilhelm Hossbach (1784–1846), German Lutheran theologian, priest, and author. 296

21

Ψ 10:14 the Vulgate . . . Scriver explains this (vol. 1, p. 35) . . . nothing left for God except . . . the forsaken] A reference to § 36 of “Die III. Predigt, / Von der Seelen Hoheit und Würdigkeit, in Betrachtung ihrer Erlösung. / Aus vorigem Text” [The Third Sermon, / On the Highness and Worthiness of the Soul, in Consideration of Its Salvation / from the Preceding Text [i.e., Mt 16:26]], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 1, p. 35, col. 2: “What Luther translated as Die Armen befehlens dir [the poor commit themselves to you], the old Latin interpreter rendered Tibi derelictus est pauper, the poor one is left to you, or left over to you. The world anticipates God in choosing, and selects the richest, the powerful, the grand, the high, and the noble, loves them and respects them as lofty and worthy; and so the miserable, the poor, the bereft, the inconsolable, the contemptible, the mean, and the low are left to our God. He then takes them up with fatherly love, and joy in his ministration and care.” ― Vulgate: The “ordinary” (Latin, vulgata) standard Latin translation, which has been the Roman Catholic Church’s official Latin Bible since the Council of Trent in 1545–1547. As Ps 9 and Ps 10 are merged in the Vulgate, Scriver’s reference to Ps 10:14 is in fact to Ps 9:35 in that edition.

•

1851

729

Our translation . . . the poor person trusts in thee] In the 1740 Danish translation of the Bible, which was the authorized version in Kierkegaard’s day, the relevant phrase from Ps 10:14 reads, “den Svage forlader sig paa dig” (“The poor person entrusts himself to you”); in the Møller translation (→ 295,24), vol. 1, p. 111, it reads, “paa dig forlader sig den Svage” (“Upon you does the poor person entrust himself”). God has chosen those who are poor and despised] Refers to 1 Cor 1:28; see also Jas 2:5.

27

3

296m

Scriver in a passage (pt. 1, p. 40) translates Job 13:15 . . . I hope in him] A reference to the following passage in § 11 of “Die IV. Predigt, / Von der menschlichen Seelen Hoheit und Würdigkeit, in Betrachtung deren Heiligung, und etlicher andern Umstände, handelnd. / Aus demselben Text” [The Fourth Sermon, / On the Highness and Worthiness of the Human Soul, in Consideration of Its Sanctification / and Several Other Circumstances / from the Same Text [i.e., Mt 16:26]], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 1, p. 40, col. 2: “When Job interrupts and sweetens all of his unhappy laments and the bitternesses that afflict him with these words: If the Lord wished to slay me now, I will nevertheless hope in him; I know that my redeemer lives!” In the margin, Scriver added: “Job 13:15)”; see Job 19:25. vol. 1, p. 42, Scriver says that the soul . . . rest his head on the subject’s lap] A reference to § 15 of “Die IV. Predigt, / Von der menschlichen Seelen Hoheit und Würdigkeit, in Betrachtung deren Heiligung, und etlicher andern Umstände, handelnd. / Aus demselben Text” [The Fourth Sermon, / On the Highness and Worthiness of the Human Soul, in Consideration of Its Sanctification / and Several Other Circumstances / from the Same Text [i.e., Mt 16:26]], in M. Christian Scrivers Seelen-Schatz (→ 211,3), vol. 1, p. 42, col. 1: “But how holy and noble is the soul in which God finds peace! As when a powerful potentate were to lay his head in the lap of one of his subjects, and sweetly fall asleep, it would undoubtedly be a singular love and grace.”

30

296

2

297

730 297 297

18 28

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 194–198

enter into character] → 223,29. Anselm writes . . . become cunning at deceiving others. Böhringer, vol. 2, part 1, p. 270, top of page] The reference is to a passage in a letter of congratulations sent by Anselm to Paul, “a monk of Caën,” on the occasion of the latter’s appointment as Abbot of St. Albans in 1077. The letter is cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1 (1849), pp. 269–270: “Try, therefore, more to be loved by all for mercy and gentleness than feared for too austere and unsparing justice . . . Let your neighbors be glad that an adviser and helper has come to them from God, not deplore that an invader has arrived of other men’s property, or a persecutor on evil pretexts. For there are many prelates of our order, who, as if afraid lest God’s portion should be ruined in their hands, bring about the destruction of God’s law in their hearts. For they try to be so much on their guard not to be taken in by others, that they become crafty to take in others. They are so careful not to be prodigal, and not senselessly to waste what they have, that they become misers, and what they keep rots away without profit to any one . . . These things let your prudence carefully guard against.” English translation: R. W. Church, Saint Anselm (London: Macmillan, 1905), p. 121. ― Anselm: Anselm of Canterbury (ca. 1033–1109), English scholastic theologian; from 1078 abbot of the Bec monastery in Normandy; appointed archbishop of Canterbury in 1093, against his will; left an extensive theological authorship, as well as numerous prayers and meditations for private use, and a prodigious correspondence; is perhaps best known for his book Cur Deus homo [Why Did God Become Man?] (1094–1098), where he presents his satisfaction theory of atonement (→ 302,31). ― Bishop Fulk of Beauvais: According to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 268–269, Anselm wrote twice to Fulk (who had formerly been a monk under Anselm’s supervision at Bec), both before Fulk became bishop and after Fulk had been offered the bishopric of Beauvais and sought Anselm’s counsel.

•

1851

Anselm] → 297,28. The day he was ordained . . . no one can serve two masters. . . . in Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, on Anselm’s life] A reference to the account in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 284–285, of how, eight days following his ordination, Anselm attempted to present King William II (Rufus) with a gift of £500 in silver in an effort to improve relations between crown and Church. The king was initially willing to accept the gift, but influenced by mean-spirited advisers, he refused the gift as too meager and demanded double the amount. Anselm refused to do so and insisted on the gift he had initially offered. The king told him angrily that he could keep his money, and Anselm responded by retiring to Canterbury and donating the money to the poor. Böhringer writes: “A[nselm] departed with painful experience of how hard it is to serve two masters. That was the gospel that had been the day’s reading on Nov. 25, the day of his ordination; henceforth it would be the heading for his future life.”

5

which, however, I never put forward directly or with authority] → 272,5. Mynster] → 207,30. “quiet hours”] → 278,15. I want the religious to be heard . . . in its ideality, which passes judgment on me] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 206,8). looking at] Variant: Kierkegaard’s “setting” (Danish, sætte) has been changed by the editors of SKS to “looking at” (Danish, see). Mynster . . . plays up Goldschmidt at my expense] i.e., in Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 284m,1 and → 296,2). ― Goldschmidt: → 284,13.

20

Anselm. as archbishop decides . . . we cannot support you.”] A reference to the account in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 293–297, of the renewed feud in 1097 between Anselm (→ 297,28) and the English King William II (Rufus). In that year, the king had raised an army to quell a re-

1

298

6

298

24 24 37

34

299

34

300

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 198–203 bellion in Wales and accused Anselm of sending him knights that were too few in number, poorly outfitted, and insufficiently trained. At first William Rufus tried to sue Anselm; later, he withdrew the suit but demanded that Anselm either pay him a large fine or fall upon his mercy and thus be permanently humbled; Anselm refused and chose exile instead. The king stated that if Anselm left, he would lose the archdiocese and no longer be recognized by the crown as archbishop. As the conflict deepened, Anselm hoped in vain to receive support of the English bishops, but they refused, making the statement cited by Kierkegaard (Böhringer, p. 295). ― as archbishop: Variant: added. 300

16 17

301

1

9 10

Anselm] → 297,28. Pope Paschal II writes in a letter to Anselm . . . the person who stands up . . . must not lose his equilibrium.”] A reference to a letter from Pope Paschal II to Anselm dated March 23, 1106, and cited in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, p. 323. This concerns a later conflict between Anselm and King Henry I, successor to William Rufus. ― Pope Paschal II: In office 1099–1118. ― well aware: Variant: instead of “well”, first written “not”. ― extends a hand: Variant: changed from “bows down”. Christ’s Passion Story] Presumably, a reference to the compilation of the four gospels’ various accounts of Christ’s passion; see “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), pp. 263–288. During Lent, accounts of the passion were used as gospel texts for weekday services. Xnty] Variant: first written “Xn”. the graves burst open, and the veil] See “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), p. 285: “And behold, the curtain of the temple was split in two from top to bottom, and the earth shook, and many of the corpses of the saints rose up, and walked out of their graves following [Christ’s] resurrection.”

•

1851

731

The Passion Story] → 301,1. people feared that Xt could constitute a danger to the emperor] See “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), p. 279: “Then Pilate sought to release him. But the Jews cried out: ‘If you let him go, then you are no friend to the emperor. For everyone who proclaims himself king rebels against the emperor.’ ” when Xt stood there, flogged, Pilate was no longer afraid] See “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), p. 278: “Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged . . . Then Pilate came out again, and said to [the Jews]: See, I present him to you, so you [will] see that I find no fault in him. Then Jesus emerged, wearing the crown of thrones and the purple cloak. And [Pilate] said to them: See what a man!” ― Pilate: Pontius Pilate, Roman prefect of Judaea and Samaria (a.d. 26–36); for the biblical view of Pilate’s role in Christ’s trial and execution, see Mt 27:11–26 and Jn 18:28–19:22, 38. the greatest powerlessness is the greatest power] A reference to 2 Cor 12:9 (→ 249,4). Xt holds no scepter in his hand, but only a reed] See “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 228,27), p. 278, where it is related that Pilate’s soldiers “removed his clothing, threw a purple robe upon him, plaited a crown of thorns and placed it on his head, placed a reed in his right hand, and fell upon their knees before him, and mocked him, and began to hail him, saying: ‘Hail to the King of the Jews!’ And they struck his mouth, and spat upon him, and took the reed, and struck his head, and fell upon their knees, and worshiped him.”

12

Anselm] → 297,28. in modern times . . . has played a major role] Anselm’s ontological argument was reprised by the French philosopher, mathematician, and naturalist René Descartes in pt. 4 of his Discourse on Method (1637), in the fifth part of his Meditations on First Philosophy (1641/1647), and in § 14 of

1

301

13

14

18 20

2

302

732

3

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 203

his Principles of Philosophy (1644). It is also used by the Dutch philosopher Baruch (or Benedict) Spinoza in his Ethics, pt. 1, proposition 11; by the German philosopher and polymath Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in §§ 43–45 of his Monadology (1714); and by the German mathematician, philosopher, and theologian Christian Wolff in pt. 2, § 13 of his Natural Theology (1737). Kant offered a refutation of the ontological proof of God’s existence in the section “Von der Unmöglichkeit eines ontologischen Beweises vom Daseyn Gottes” [On the Impossibility of an Ontological Proof of God’s Existence], in Critik der reinen Vernunft [Critique of Pure Reason], 4th ed. (Riga, 1794 [1781]; ASKB 595), pp. 620–630; see also the corresponding section of the work Der einzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseyns Gottes [The Only Possible Ground of Proof for a Demonstration of God’s Existence] (1763), published in Imanuel [sic] Kant’s vermischte Schriften [Immanuel Kant’s Miscellaneous Writings], ed. J. H. Tieftrunk, 3 vols. (Halle, 1799 [a 4th vol. appeared in Königsberg, 1807]; ASKB 1731–1733), vol. 2, pp. 67–107, esp. pp. 69–78; here Kant argues that existence is not a property. See also Not4:10, Kierkegaard’s notes to H. L. Martensen’s (→ 283,13) eighth introductory lecture on speculative dogmatics during the winter semester 1837–1838, where, after attributing “the ontological proof of the existence of God” to Anselm, Martensen remarks that “it was later set forth by Leibnitz and Wolff: the highest essence must possess all qualities; it must possess blessedness, but to this belongs being, ens, cujus essentia existentia [‘an entity whose being (contains) existence’]” (KJN 3, 138; see also the associated explanatory note). ― A’s ontological proof: The expression “the ontological proof” is Immanuel Kant’s term for the proof of the existence of God originally presented by Anselm in his Proslogion (→ 302,4), which centers on the definition of God as that greater than which nothing can be thought, and the claim that a God who exists must be more perfect than a God who does not exist. and is especially used by―freethinkers] In the summer of 1829, G.W.F. Hegel gave a series of lectures under the title “Über die Beweise vom

•

1851

Daseyn Gottes” [On the Proofs of the Existence of God], in which he discussed the ontological proof. These lectures were published as an “Appendix” to Hegel’s Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion. Nebst einer Schrift über die Beweise vom Daseyn Gottes [Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion: Together with a Writing on the Proofs of the Existence of God], ed. P. Marheineke, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Berlin, 1840 [1832]; ASKB 564–565), vol. 2 (vol. 12 in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [G.W.F. Hegel’s Works: Complete Edition], 18 vols. [Berlin, 1832–1845]), pp. 289–483. While Right Hegelians such as C. H. Weiße and K. F. Göschel cited Hegel’s positive view of Anselm’s proof as evidence that his thought was in line with orthodox Christianity, the Left Hegelian philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach―to whom Kierkegaard may have been referring with the expression “freethinkers”―offered a critical and anthropological interpretation in § 62 and § 86 of his Geschichte der neuern Philosophie von Bacon von Verulam bis Benedict Spinoza [History of Modern Philosophy from Bacon of Verulam to Benedict Spinoza] (1833), in the appendix to his Geschichte der neuern Philosophie. Darstellung, Entwicklung und Kritik der Leibnitz’schen Philosophie [History of Modern Philosophy: Presentation, Development, and Critique of the Leibnizian Philosophy] (Ansbach, 1837; ASKB 487), and in chap. 20 of his Das Wesen des Christenthums [The Essence of Christianity], 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1843 [1841]; ASKB 488). Anselm acquired this proof (in Proslogium) through prayer] Presumably, a reference to Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 347–348, which recounts Anselm’s outburst of thanks to God for revealing the proof to him. ― Proslogium: or Proslogion [Address], written in 1077–1078. A. says, [“]I want to prove the existence of God . . . God will strengthen and help me[”]] See Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 345–346, were Böhringer cites the prayer in Anselm’s Proslogion as follows: “Lord . . . you who give the faith of understanding, grant as far as it avails me, that I understand (see) that you are as we believe

4

6

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 203–204

11 13

21

and that you are what we believe. And we believe that you are that than which nothing higher can be thought.” as it were] Variant: added. The circle in which Anselm moves . . . reply to Gaunilo . . . otherwise God would of course not exist. . . . See Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 350] A paraphrase of Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, p. 350: “What [Gaunilo] said applied to the thought ‘[that than which] nothing greater,’ a thought that certainly can and will be thought and dwell in the mind; otherwise God would not be this ‘that than which nothing greater,’ or would not be recognized as such; but that he is so, and how wrong it would be to deny this, [Anselm] appealed to his, Gaunilo’s, own conscience. A. himself had presumed this concept as an article or statement of faith.” Böhringer states that Anselm’s argument alludes to Rom 1:19–20. ― Gaunilo: 11th-century monk at the monastery of Marmoutiers near Tours. In his work Liber pro insipiente [The Book on Behalf of the Fool], Gaunilo attempted to prove that Anselm’s “ontological argument” is flawed. Anselm responded in his Liber apologeticus contra Gaunilonem [Apologetic Book against Gaunilo]. ― G. had objected . . . merely a mental object: For a summary of Gaunilo’s objections, see Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 348–350. ― can be thought, and is thought: Variant: “be thought” has been added. Anselm . . . emphasizes the ascetic element in being a thinker . . . in Böhringer’s account of Anselm’s life] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, pp. 253–254: “In his monastery A[nselm] dedicated himself most eagerly to religious exercises . . . Such bodily asceticism was, however, only the sheath of the spiritual . . . With the same power with which he devoted himself to religious exercises, he dedicated himself simultaneously to investigating knowledge of the Christian truth.” Böhringer goes on to state that even though many in Anselm’s time were his equal in asceticism, “he was ahead of them all in speculation . . . [I]n

•

1851

733

his time he stood like a lofty peak above the surrounding mountains.” modern speculation, which runs off with this Anselmian argument] See → 302,3; on modern speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology, see → 261,19. Anselm] → 297,28. He demonstrates the necessity of expiation . . . also from humanity’s side. Assuming . . . turpitude. See Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 406] See the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, p. 406: “In proving that God cannot forgive sin without expiation by satisfaction, A[nselm] primarily proceeded from the standpoint of God, from his glory, from the harmony of all of his attributes; but he also considered―albeit more sparingly, as his whole development had more of a theological than an anthropological cast―the standpoint of the human being, for whom such loving kindness would be so deeply undue . . . ‘As long as the human being does not attain [full blessedness], he will either will to attain it, or not want to; if he does will it, then he cannot have it, and so he will feel a lack; if he does not will it, then he will be in the wrong; in either case he will not feel blessedness; accordingly, as long as the human being does not expiate his sin, he cannot be happy.’ ” ― expiation: According to Anselm’s rationally argued and objective philosophical and legalistic satisfaction theory of atonement, presented in his Cur Deus homo (→ 297,28), human sin has cheated God of the honor due to him. While God, in his mercy, wishes to forgive this insult, his justice does not permit him to overlook it, but requires expiation by one of two means: either by direct punishment of the sinner, or by satisfaction―and ín fact only by means of satisfaction, because at the creation God destined human beings for blessedness (salvation). And inasmuch as human beings, owing to the enormous burden of their sins, cannot produce the necessary satisfaction―only God can do so―satisfaction must be brought about by a “God-Man.” Therefore God himself becomes man. And because this “God-Man,” Christ, owing to his sin-

24

30 31

302

734

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 204–207

free life, is not himself obligated to die, with his death―taking the place of human beings―he can earn merit with God, and God must reward this merit. And inasmuch as the reward far surpasses the loss that human sin has cost God, and inasmuch as God himself has no use for the merit, he transfers it to human beings, thereby combining his justice with his mercy. 303

2 3

7

13

15

27 33

Anselm] → 297,28. Böhringer, pt. 2, sec. 1, p. 429 reproaches Anselm . . . viewed as . . . the restitution of God’s honor] A reference to the following passage in Georg Friedrich Böhringer, Die Kirche Christi und ihre Zeugen (→ 262,12), vol. 2.1, p. 429: “Here, ultimately, all of the theory’s flaws come together. Inasmuch as God’s honor is regarded one-sidedly from the outset, and inasmuch as, moreover, the necessity of forgiveness is primarily explained in terms of the damage done to God’s honor, rather than by the sinfulness of human beings . . . [it follows that] this forgiveness devolves entirely into a restitution of God’s honor by God himself; and instead of an equalization of the disharmony in the human being’s ethical nature in his relation to God and in God’s relation to him, [satisfaction] becomes a mediation of God with himself, which only incidentally―as if coming from outside―is ascribed to the human being, is transferred from God to him. That is the result of this one-sided, otherworldly perspective!” ― theory of satisfaction: See → 302,31. ― viewed: Variant: added. a point I have frequently emphasized in the journals] See, e.g., NB:79, from November or December 1846 (KJN 4, 67–68), and NB18:68, from May or June 1850 (KJN 7, 302–303). God is . . . the infinite ego] See Ex 3:14, “I am who I am,” which is rendered in the Vulgate (→ 296,21) as ego sum qui sum. What I have often emphasized . . . on a grand scale it is in God’s interest] See, e.g., NB22:43 in the present volume, see also NB23:133. killing] Variant: first written “helping”. battle of God with himself] Presumably, a reference to Anselm’s satisfaction theory of atonement, or Böhringer’s critique of it (→ 302,31).

•

1851

Variants for . . . Preface to the Friday Discourses (Note no. 3 in the Three Notes)] Refers to the following passage in the “Preface to the ‘Friday Discourses,’ ” which is no. 3 of the “Three ‘Notes’ concerning My Activity as an Author” from 1848: “Put this way, I have nothing further to add, unless someone―which I regret―were to get the notion of asking me about whether I think I have any sort of special relation to God. I would answer him, No, oh no, oh no, far from it! In Christendom there has never lived a person, there is no one alive―absolutely no person―who is not absolutely as close to God, loved by him” (Pap. IX B 15, p. 376). The “Preface to the ‘Friday Discourses,’ ” which was originally dated “in Oct. 47” (see Pap. IX B 14, p. 377) and was thought of as a preface to “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays,” which is the fourth section of Christian Discourses (1848) (CD, 247–300; SKS 10, 255–325), was not used there but was instead included in the “Three ‘Notes’ concerning My Activity as an Author,” consisting of: no. 1, “To the Dedication: ‘That Single Individual,’ ” originally written in 1846 (see Pap. IX B 63,4–5, pp. 350–357); no. 2, “A Word on the Relationship of My Work as an Author to ‘That Single Individual,’ ” originally written in 1847 (see Pap. IX B 63,6–13, pp. 357–374); and no. 3, “Preface to the ‘Friday Discourses.’ ” In 1848, when Kierkegaard decided to append the three notes to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 235,28) as a supplement, he gave them the title “Three Friendly ‘Notes’ concerning My Work as an Author,” but subsequently deleted the word “Friendly” (see Pap. IX B 58); later, note no. 3 was instead used as the preface to Two Discourses at the Communion Service on Fridays (1851), while no. 1 and no. 2 were published posthumously under the title “ ‘The Single Individual’: Two ‘Notes’ concerning My Work as an Author,” in The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 101–124; SKS 16, 79–104).

1

304

The Interesting] The “interesting” is a category originating in German aesthetic theory (first with Friedrich Schlegel); it became a fashionable word in the early 1840s, serving as a common term for stimulating artistic effects that were re-

19

304

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 207–209

19

306

36

garded not as beautiful, but as fascinating. The “interesting” could thus designate tension, disharmony, something piquant or sensational, etc., but could also designate a refined or reflective style and a stimulating novelty of materials or of their arrangement. In the Danish context, the “interesting” was made topical by J. L. Heiberg, who, in his review of Oehlenschläger’s play Dina [Dina], in Intelligensblade [Intelligencer], vol. 2, nos. 16–17, November 15, 1842, wrote that ancient tragedy did not recognize “the interesting, which is a modern concept for which ancient languages did not even have a corresponding expression. This circumstance signifies both the greatness and monumentality of ancient tragedy, but also its limitation; for it follows from this that as much as that genre demands character portrayals, as little, basically, has it room for character developments; here there is, so to speak, nothing to develop, as little as in a marble statue. The boundaries of everything are plastically determined from the start, indeed even predetermined” (p. 80). See the preface to Either/Or (EO 1, 9; SKS 2, 17) and “Problema III” in Fear and Trembling (FT, 83; SKS 4, 173), with accompanying explanatory notes. Reduplication] → 243,13. The Jew Trypho says . . . The Messiah . . . until Elias . . . reveals everything to him. . . . in Corrodi . . . pt. 1, p. 385] See H. Corrodi, Kritische Geschichte des Chiliasmus [Critical History of the Chiliasm], 3 vols. (Frankfurt, 1781–1783), vol. 1, p. 385, paraphrasing Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho: “Trypho derides Justin for believing that the Messiah has already been revealed and has arrived, and says to him: ‘The Messiah―whether he has indeed been born and exists somewhere or other is unknown, and I [Trypho] myself do not know. Nor has he [the Messiah] any power until Elijah comes and anoints him and reveals everything to him.’ ” ― The Jew Trypho: or Tryphon, a character in Justin’s dialogue; conceivably connected to the Talmudic rabbi Tarphon, who was a contemporary of Justin. ― Justin Martyr: (ca. a.d. 100–165), Greek Christian philosopher; born in Palestine, in Flavia Neapolis (near modern Nablus), the site of ancient Shechem in Samaria;

•

1851

735

converted to Christianity by the 130s and founded a Christian school where he served as a missionary in Rome; died a martyr’s death in Rome in 165. ― dialogus cum T. judæo: The Dialogue with Trypho, written between a.d. 150 and 155. ― Elias: The Old Testament prophet Elijah (d. 9th century b.c.); see 1 Kings 17–19. In Mal 3:23–24, it is foretold that Elijah will return before “the day of the Lord” to restore Israel’s relation to God; in the New Testament, Elijah plays a role as forerunner to Christ in the account of the transfiguration, Mt 17:1–13; while at Mk 9:11–13, Jesus identifies John the Baptist with Elijah. ― Corrodi: Heinrich Corrodi (1752–1793), Swiss Reformed theologian, polymath, and author; ordained in 1773, and from 1786, professor of natural law and ethics in Zürich. ― Chiliasmus: Chiliasm, better known today as “millenarianism,” is the belief in a thousand-year reign of Christ on earth; the principal scriptural sources for this are Rev 20:1–6 and 1 Cor 15:20–28. The notion of a thousand-year reign with a charismatic leader is known both from antiquity and in modern times. Mynster] → 207,30. I have worked without remuneration] → 260,34. M. says . . . with a subordinate position and then works one’s way up] Presumably, a reference to Mynster’s rise from parish pastor in Spjellerup in southern Zealand (from 1802 to 1811) to resident curate at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen (from 1811), to court chaplain (from 1826), to royal confessor (from 1828), and finally to bishop of the diocese of Zealand and thus primate of the Danish State Church (from 1834) (→ 207,30). ― what Peer Degn says: Refers to act 1, sc. 2, of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg (1731), where when Jeppe expresses the wish that his son Erasmus become a priest, Peer Degn says: “But a deacon [Degn] first.” Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 208,12), vol. 5. In 1850, Erasmus Montanus was performed four times by the Royal Theater, with the last performance on December 9, 1850; it was not performed in 1851. someone deceased] A reference to Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838), who retired at the age of forty in possession of a

6 8 13

18

308

736

27

28

28

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 209–211

considerable fortune; as the years passed, he added to his wealth through interest and investment income. After the death of his first wife, he married Ane Lund on April 26, 1797; they had seven children together, of whom Søren was the youngest. In 1808, M. P. Kierkegaard bought the house at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B2), where he lived until his death. As first resident curate at the Church of Our Lady, Mynster was M. P. Kierkegaard’s confessor, though only from 1820 to 1828, when he became palace priest. For more on Kierkegaard’s veneration of his deceased father, see the notes to NB22:120 in the present volume. spoken . . . about appointment to a position at the pastoral seminary] → 261,3. ― the pastoral seminary: The Royal Pastoral Seminary was established in 1809 and provided instruction in pastoral theology (i.e., the preparation of sermons), catechetical instruction, liturgy, canon law, and cure of souls. Kierkegaard had himself attended the pastoral seminary from November 1840 to September 1841. his view is that this is impossible] See, for example, a draft of a never-used polemical article “En Yttring af Biskop Mynster” [A Comment by Bishop Mynster] from 1851 where Kierkegaard writes in retrospect: “I have had another thought for the past 4 or 5 years, however. Recognizant of my unique abilities, and because I believe it would be in agreement with the establishment and Bishop M. [Mynster], and for my own sake, I have desired a position at the pastoral seminary. Throughout the years I have insistently mentioned this to the bishop. But no!” (Pap. X 6 B 173, p. 274). He wants me to be a priest out in the country . . . and in that way get rid of me] See NB:107, dated January 20, 1847, in KJN 4, 81, where Kierkegaard writes: “Even though Mynster has a certain benevolence toward me―in his heart of hearts even more than he admits―it is evident that he regards me as a suspect and even dangerous person. That is why he wants me out in the country.” See also NB:57, dated November 5, 1846, in KJN 4, 50–51. ― which, in one sense, I would very much like: Presumably, a reference to the fact that as early as the period following the publication of Either/Or

•

1851

(1843), again after the publication of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), and quite frequently thereafter, Kierkegaard considered stopping writing and seeking a position as a country priest. See, e.g., JJ:415, from February 1846 (in KJN 2, 257); NB:7, from March 1846, NB:57, from November 1846, NB2:136, from August 1847 (in KJN 4, 16–17, 50, 193); NB10:16, from February 1849 (in KJN 5, 274); NB12:110, from August 1849, NB13:35, from October 1849, and NB14:137, from December 1849 (in KJN 6, 204–206, 298, 428–429). See also chap. 3, “The Role of Governance in My Writings,” in The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 86; SKS 16, 65). at my own expense] → 260,34.

5

309

When the Talmudic scholars describe the millennium and its perfection . . . thousand barrels of juice . . . in Corrodi . . . pt. 2] A reference to H. Corrodi, Kritische Geschichte des Chiliasmus (→ 306,36), vol. 2, pp. 496–497: “One must confess that that Talmudist spoke meanly who promised that in the age of the Messiah, one grapevine would require an entire city, that is, as many winepresses as there are houses in a city, to press all of its grapes. For if every grapevine were to yield 2.5 sextillion buckets (Metretas) of wine, then even a province would not suffice to press its grapes. For assume that 2.5 billion buckets can be produced in one winepress. Then one would need a million cities, each containing a million winepresses, to process the fruit of merely one single vine.” ― Talmudic scholars: Scholars of the Talmud, the most comprehensive body of traditional Jewish teachings, which includes texts dating from ca. 150 b.c. to a.d. 900, though its earliest major component―the Mishnah, which consists of systematic collections of oral traditions―was first canonized in the late 2nd or early 3rd century a.d. The Talmud contains accounts of a future Messianic Age, when the dead will rise, the final judgment will take place, and a new era of peace will begin. ― millennium: See → 306,36.

10

309

the Interesting] → 304,19. Erzählungen aus Ghetto . . . Kompart] Leopold Kompert, Geschichten aus dem Ghetto [Stories from

22

309

26

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 211–212

28

29

310

12

the Ghetto] (Leipzig, 1848). ― if I remember correctly: Variant: first written instead of “if”, “certainly”. ― Athenæum: The Athenaeum, a private library, was founded in 1824; in 1849, it was located at 68 Østergade (present-day 24 Østergade), where members could read on weekdays between noon and 3:00 p.m. and between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Books could also be borrowed for reading at home; see “Bestemmelser angaaende Udlaanet fra Athenæums Bibliothek” [Rules concerning Borrowing from the Athenæum Society’s Library], in Fortegnelse over Selskabet Athenæums Bogsamling, den 31. December 1846 [Catalogue of the Athenaeum Society’s Library, December 31, 1846] (Copenhagen, 1847), pp. iii–iv. Kierkegaard had been a member of the Athenaeum since at least 1845 (see LD, 176; B&A 1, 139) and owned the library’s catalogues for the years 1847–1851 (ASKB 985–986). The two works by Leopold Kompert, the first of which in its second (1850) edition, were registered as nos. 2743 and 2744, respectively, in Tredie Tillæg til Athenæums Hovedkatalog, den 31te December 1852 [Third Appendix to the Athenaeum’s Main Catalogue, December 31, 1852] (Copenhagen, 1853), p. 701. ― Kompart: Leopold Kompert (1822–1886), German-Jewish novelist and publicist. Bohemian or Polish Jews] Leopold Kompert, Böhmische Juden. Geschichten [Bohemian Jews: Stories] (Vienna, 1851). A Jew] A reference to En Jøde: Novelle af Adolph Meyer. Udgiven og forlagt af Meïr Goldschmidt [A Jew: A Novel by Adolph Meyer, Edited and Published by Meïr Goldschmidt] (→ 284,13) (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1547). Mynster’s Lenten sermon. In it he portrayed Xt’s degradation . . . incapable of degrading him] In Adresseavisen, no. 75 (March 29, 1851), it was announced that “The Lenten sermon on Monday”―i.e., the fourth Monday of Lent, March 31―would be given by Bishop Mynster (→ 207,30) at 9 a.m.; see no. 3, “See dette Menneske! / Paa fierde Mandag i Fasten” [Behold the Man! / On the Fourth Monday of Lent] in Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1851 og 1852 [Sermons Given in the Years 1851 and 1852] (Copenhagen, 1853; ASKB

•

1851

737

234), pp. 32–44. After introducing the sermon’s theme, “Behold the man!” Mynster writes, on pp. 33–36: “Yes, behold him, the man full of pain! . . . They have bound him like a criminal, they have led him from one judge to another; false witnesses have testified against him, but he has no defender . . . He has suffered the most painful blows, has been weakened so that he soon afterward will not be able to carry his cross. In their cruelty, soldiers, who had heard that the mob had formerly wanted to proclaim him king, cast a purple cloth on him, plait him a crown, but one of thorns; they put a scepter in his hand, but it is a reed, and in this way they greet him as King of the Jews. These are the circumstances in which the judge presents him to the people . . . Now they cry out around him: Crucify! Crucify! and his enemies hear, and are glad; now the victory is theirs. Behold the man! Is it possible to imagine a human being more deeply abased? . . . And yet, when I see my Savior in this state, and hear all calling it abasement, then I remember his words: ‘There is nothing outside a person that can defile by going in, but the things that come out are what defile a person’ [Mk 7:15]; thus nothing that befalls a person from without, no external power, however strong, however hostile, however oppressive it may be, can really degrade a person, but what comes from within him, from his heart, that is what is degrading . . . Therefore I see the crown of thorns upon my Savior’s brow―no, not like the crowns of gold and gemstones that the world and so-called good fortune extend to their favorites, but rather as a crown of stars that sparkles with imperishable radiance; I see the staff in his hand as a sign of dignity―it is not borrowed finery, which can be taken away just as it was given, but an imperishable possession of the person who won it; as he walks upon the path that the world calls the most profound degradation, I hear my Savior say: You daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me [Lk 23:48]!―for throughout all this his glory stood firm like the green tree that the storm could not bend, and whose beauty increased from year to year, whereas all that was high among men was like the dry wood that was soon to be chopped down and cast into the fire.”

738

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 213–216

311

9

in quiet hours] → 278,15. See also J. P. Mynster’s Lenten sermon in Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1851 og 1852 (→ 310,12), p. 44.

311

21

Rousseau] Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), philosopher and author, born in Geneva, died in Paris. In addition to the work mentioned in the next note, Kierkegaard owned Rousseau, Émil ou de l’éducation [Émile, or On Education], 4 vols. (n.p., [1762] 1792; ASKB 939–940) and a Danish translation, Emil eller om Opdragelsen, 6 vols. (Copenhagen, 1796–1799; ASKB 941–943). His Confessions, vol. 4 . . . the 5th walking tour] J.-J. Rousseaus Bekjendelser eller hans Levnet, skrevet af ham selv paa Fransk [The Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, or His Life, Written by Himself in French], trans. M. Hagerup, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1798; ASKB 1922–1925; abbreviated hereafter as J.-J. Rousseaus Bekjendelser), vol. 4, “Indeholdende hans Drømmerier” [Containing His Dreams], i.e., a Danish translation of Rêveries du promeneur solitaire [Reveries of a Solitary Walker], which consists of ten “walking tours”; the fifth of these, the “Fifth Walk” or “5th walking tour,” is found on pp. 102–123. R’s life . . . analogies to the genuine Christian collisions . . . cripples him so indescribably] A reference to Rousseau’s “Sixth Walk” or “6th Walking Tour,” which Kierkegaard would have read in J.-J. Rousseaus Bekjendelser (→ 311,22), vol. 4, pp. 123–145. See especially pp. 134–135, where Rousseau writes: “Convinced by twenty years’ experience that all the happy dispositions that nature had put in my heart had been turned, both by my destiny and by those who control it, into something harmful to myself or others, now I can only see a good deed I am asked to do as a trap laid for me, underneath which lurks something bad. I know that, whatever the effect of a good deed may be, I will still be able to take credit for my good intention. Yes, that credit is no doubt still there, but the inner charm is not, and as soon as I do not have this spur, I feel only indifference and coldness within me, and since I am sure that, instead of doing something really useful, I am simply acting the dupe, the combination of my indignant self-love and my reason’s denial inspires

22

27

•

1851

only opposition and resistance in me, where once, in my natural state, I would have been full of ardor and zeal.” English translation: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Reveries of the Solitary Walker, trans. Russell Goulbourne (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 64. falls into the conceit that he is the only pers. who has suffered like this] Refers presumably to the following passage in the “Sixth Walk” or “6th Walking Tour,” in J.-J. Rousseaus Bekjendelser (→ 311,22), vol. 4, p. 135: “There are some types of adversity which uplift and strengthen the soul, but there are others which weaken and kill it; it is to this latter type that I am prey. If there had been some trace of sin in my soul, this adversity would have made it ferment to excess and driven me delirious; but instead it simply rendered me of no significance.” English translation: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Reveries of the Solitary Walker, trans. Russell Goulbourne (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), p. 64. the holy one] i.e., Jesus Christ. to die away] One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ we have died to sin. See, e.g., Rom 6:2; see also 1 Pet 2:24 and Col 2:20. In certain strands of mysticism and pietism these ideas were intensified, so that human life was regarded as a daily dying-away, in self-denial, from sin, from temporality, from finitude, and from the world, and thus the burden was shifted from a person dying to sin through Christ to include a person dying to sin through faith. In his Anfänge der Kirche, Richard Rothe . . . the idea of the Church . . . a part of hum. nature] A reference to Richard Rothe, Die Anfänge der Christlichen Kirche und ihrer Verfassung. Ein geschichtlicher Versuch [The Beginnings of the Christian Church and Its Constitution: A Historical Essay] (Wittenberg, 1837), vol. 1, pp. 12–24; see esp. pp. 18–19: “If we recognize the state as the specific form of human community as such, i.e., the ethical [community], as the realization of the immanent, i.e., the ethical, ends of human nature as such, then there remains another category of ends, and [another] related community, namely the religious community, which is

37

4

311m

9

23

312

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 216–220

30

30

31 33

35

313

23

no less justified, and which is grounded in the conscious relation of human nature to God . . . The Church is thus the religious community, just as the state is the ethical community, i.e., the in-itself human (the universally human).” ― Richard Rothe: German Lutheran theologian and priest (1799–1867); for more details, see the explanatory notes to NB21:112 in the present volume. the mind-body synthesis] See, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (1844): “Man is a synthesis of the psychical and the physical; however, a synthesis is unthinkable if the two are not united in a third. This third is spirit” (CA, 43; SKS 4, 349). Aristotle rightly says that the “crowd” is an animal category] In bk. 1, chap. 5 of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (1095b, 19–22), Aristotle states that “the mass of mankind are evidently quite slavish in their tastes, preferring a life suitable for beasts”; see also bk. 3, chap. 11 of Aristotle’s Politics, where in discussing the numerical superiority of the crowd, he compares the crowd with animals (1281b, 15–20). See Aristoteles graece [Aristotle in Greek], ed. I. Bekker, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1831; ASKB 1074–1075), vol. 2, p. 1095, col. 2, and p. 1281, col. 2; for a standard English translation, see Jonathan Barnes, ed., The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), vol. 2, pp. 1731 and 2034. ― Aristotle: Aristotle of Stagira (384–322 b.c.), Greek philosopher, logician, and naturalist, pupil of Plato; in 335 b.c. founded the peripatetic school at the Lyceum. Xnty also teaches that eternal life is simply not social] Presumably, a reference to Mt 22:30. deduced] Variant: first written “deduced.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence, and followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. accommodation] → 271,26. His Right Reverence] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 213,23), the title højærværdig (“Right Reverence”) was used for those holding positions of authority in the Church, who were classed in ranks 1 through 6―e.g., bishops, court preachers, and doctors of theology, as well as Copenhagen’s parish priests and others.

•

1851

739

Mrs. Heiberg] Johanne Luise Heiberg, née Pätges (1812–1890), celebrated actress at the Royal Theater, where she first appeared in 1823 and was a regular part of the theater’s acting company from 1829 to 1864. She starred in many heroine roles that were often written for her by various playwrights, including her husband, Johan Ludvig Heiberg, whom she married in 1831, and with whom she served as a principal tastemaker of the age.

24

Mynster] → 207,30. he is the one] Variant: preceding this, the words “to be sure, certainly” have been deleted.

32

Law―Gospel] Kierkegaard has in mind the Pauline and Lutheran doctrine of the relation between Law and Gospel, in which the Law judges human beings and is the chastiser that drives people to Christ, whereas the Gospel is the joyous message that “Christ is the end of the Law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes” (Rom 10:4). In this sense, the Law and the Gospel can be said to represent rigorousness and leniency, respectively. Xt nonetheless says . . . to abolish the Law . . . to make the Law more rigorous, as in the Sermon on the Mount] See Mt 5:17–22; see also Mt 5:27– 28 and 31–48. ― the Sermon on the Mount: Designation for Mt 5–7. It has been said that it emphasized “grace” at the expense of the Law. (Thus Ullmann . . . Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche, vol. 3, p. 345 n.] See August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche: Zur wissenschaftlichen Beantwortung der Lebensfrage unserer Zeit ein theologischer Versuch [The Idea of the Christian Church: A Theological Attempt at a Scholarly Answer to the Life-Question of Our Age], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1839–1846; ASKB 717–719; abbreviated hereafter as Die Idee der christlichen Kirche), vol. 3 (1846), p. 345, where Petersen cites Carl Ullmann’s Reformation vor der Reformation (see the next note) as follows: “In its most general nature, the Reformation is a reaction by Christianity as Gospel against Christianity as Law.” ― Ullmann: Carl or Karl Ullmann (1796–1865), German Reformed theologian; from 1821, professor in

12

313

35

13

17

314

740

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 220–222

Heidelberg; from 1829, in Halle; and from 1836, in Heidelberg again; from 1853, priest in Karlsruhe. Petersen’s citation is from Ullmann’s Reformatoren vor der Reformation, vornehmlich in Deutschland und den Niederlanden [Reformers before the Reformation, Primarily in Germany and the Low Countries], 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1841–1842). The passage cited above by Petersen is in vol. 1, preface, p. xiii. ― Petersen: Johann Christoph August Petersen (1808–1875), German Lutheran theologian and priest, influenced by Friedrich Schleiermacher (→ 315,9) and August Neander (→ 205,3); from 1834, deacon in Erfurt, and from 1835, priest in Buttelstedt near Weimar; in 1843, received an honorary doctorate in theology from the University of Erlangen (→ 315,3); from 1850, superintendent in Gotha; and from 1852, supreme consistorial councillor. ― Petersen, Die Idee der Kirche: August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche. 314

32

33

the future task of the entire Church] Presumably, a reference to Petersen’s preface to Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (→ 314,17), vol. 3, pp. i–xxii, where Petersen summarizes the goal of his work as follows (p. xii): “to offer a theological doctrine of the Church that would help to stimulate the newly revived life of our Church in accordance with the demands of both evangelical faith and Christian scholarship. But this is a goal that evangelical theology must aim for above all else if it is to prove itself as a life-force in our time. It may not abrogate the task of elaborating the doctrine of the Church into a complete system, using rigorous scholarship, precisely because the matter of the Church has now been drawn into the middle of the struggle of life.” See also the next note. his views on Luther and the Reformation, for which he takes credit] See, e.g., Petersen’s preface to Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (→ 314,17), vol. 3, pp. xviii–xix, where Petersen describes the second half of his book as follows: “In this second half, the age of the Reformation takes center stage . . . [It is] precisely in the Reformation age that I found the factual proof of my entire doctrine of the Church. But what primarily led me to treat this epoch so distinctively, was [my desire to]

•

1851

settle the great ecclesiastical question of the present day, the question of union. This is a historical question in the deepest sense of the word, and the correct answer can only be given by history as viewed in the light of the divine Word.” the University of Erlangen sent me a doctoral diploma] A reference to the first unpaginated page in August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (314,17), vol. 3, where Petersen effusively thanks the “renowned theological faculty of Erlangen” for awarding him an honorary doctorate “for my book about the Christian Church”; he then dedicates his current book to “you, most excellent men” of the faculty of the University of Erlangen on the occasion of the three hundredth anniversary of the death of Martin Luther (in 1546). observations] See NB21:88 and the associated explanatory note in the present volume. Das christliche Bewußtseyn . . . this Christian consciousness (see Petersen . . . vol. 3, p. 346 n.)] A reference to August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (→ 314,17), vol. 3, p. 346n, where Petersen cites August Neander (→ 205,3) as follows: “This power which permeated men’s minds has generated among the people a common consciousness of the Christian truth, which―independent of all human authority―as independent evidence of the Christian truth, has rebelled against any imposition of authority in matters of faith. It is this power of Christian consciousness that had opposed any mixture of Jewish and Christian standpoints ever since the latter arose in the Church, reacting against it in a variety of ways, until finally, through the Reformation, this sort of reaction by the Christian consciousness gained victory and prevailed, thereby attaining proper freedom. The term ‘Christian consciousness’ that we use here is a new one, but what it refers to is as old as Christianity itself. To have found and brought into general use a word that is the fitting expression for a powerful truth . . . that is often a great merit of world-historical importance . . . and that is here by no means the least accomplishment of the man whom Germany honors as one of its greatest teachers,” namely, Schleiermacher (see below). ― Schleiermacher:

3

315

6

9

315

J O U R N A L NB 23 : 222–228

20

315

31

33

Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768– 1834), German Reformed theologian, philosopher of religion, and classical philologist, became a priest in Berlin in 1796; from 1804, extraordinary professor at Halle; from 1810, professor of theology at Berlin. Kierkegaard owned a number of his works; see ASKB 238–242, 271, 769, 1158–1163. a common consciousness] Refers to the term Gemeinbewußtsein (“common consciousness”) in Petersen and the concept of ein gemeinsames Bewußtsein (“a shared consciousness”) in Neander (→ 315,9). “The Church” Exists Only for the Sake of Our Imperfection . . . This is Calvin’s teaching. See Petersen . . . vol. 3, p. 405 note] A reference to the following note in August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (→ 314,17), vol. 3, pp. 405–406, where Petersen writes: “In this doctrine [of the Church] Calvin does not go beyond the analogue and symbolism of actuality. To him, the Church is like a ‘mother’ installed by God to raise his children; but why?―Simply ‘as our ignorance and sloth (I may add, the vanity of our mind) stand in need of external aids, by which faith may be begotten in us, and increase and make progress until its consummation.’ ” For this last phrase, cited by Petersen in Calvin’s Latin, see John Calvin (1509–1564), Institutio christianae religionis [Institutes of the Christian Religion] 1539 [1536] (see ASKB 455–456), bk. 4. chap. 1, § 1; English translation: John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1846), vol. 3, p. 9. Petersen has a different view of the matter] A reference to the continuation of the note cited in the preceding note, where Petersen writes: “The weakness in Calvin’s theory [is] that he does not comprehend the necessity of the Church as essential to the idea, but only as befitting her, as corresponding, for the sake of human frailty . . . That the actuality of the Church is plainly essential to its idea was not clear to Calvin . . . From his standpoint, Calvin knew a theoretical universality in which the ideal appears merely as such―thus always in a certain abstraction from actuality― the true actuality does not come into being com-

•

1851

741

pletely . . . is not sufficiently acknowledged as the real embodiment of the idea.” The Merely Human] Corresponding to “the natural human,” and in contradistinction to the (strictly) Christian. nowadays . . . the merely human in contrast to Xnty] See NB23:216. the “human”? . . . a cultural consciousness that Xnty has emitted] See NB23:222.

13

Luther says: if I am to be deceived . . . defend having done so. see Petersen . . . vol. 3, p. 420 Note] Cited from the beginning of Luther’s 1528 Bekenntniß vom Abendmal Christi [Confession from Christ’s Supper, or the “Great Confession”] presented in August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche (→ 314,17), vol. 3, p. 420n. Petersen’s source was Dr. Martin Luther’s sowol in Deutscher als Lateinischer Sprache verfertigte und aus der letztern in die erstere übersetzte Sämtliche Schriften [Dr. Martin Luther’s Complete Writings, Collated in Both German and Latin, and Translated into the Former from the Latter], ed. J. G. Walch, 24 vols. (Halle, 1740–1753), vol. 20 (1747), p. 1300.

1

317

to be of the truth] An allusion to Jn 18:37; see also 1 Jn 3:19. as is written in the letter to the Hebrews: They would not accept consolation . . . venturing for the truth] See Heb 12:5: “And you have forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as children: ‘My child, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, or lose heart when you are punished by him.’ ” In Luther’s German translation, the Greek word paraklesis―here rendered in English as “exhortation,” is rendered as “Trost,” which means “consolation,” and Danish words follow suit, rendering the word as “Trøst,” which similarly means “consolation.”

13

317

3

317m

316

15 17

Notes for JOURNAL NB24 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB24 745

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB24 755

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB24

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, and Anne Mette Hansen Translated by Joel D. S. Rasmussen Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Explanatory Notes by Tonny Aagaard Olesen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

745

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB24 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB24.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB24 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. An oval label marked “NB24.” and bearing the date “April 20th 1851.” has been pasted to the front cover (see illustration 4). Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand. Headings are written in Kierkegaard’s latin hand. Except for its final paragraph, which begins on a new page, the entirety of NB24:159 is written in a latin hand. Additionally, a latin hand is used for Latin and French words, for some quoted material, and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. A table of contents for the volume is written across almost the entire width of the inner front cover of the volume. Entries NB24:30 and 136 have had additional text added, which continues out in the margin of the page. Marginal additions NB24:54.a and 120.a are continued in the margins of two and three successive pages, respectively. Marginal addition NB24:54.c is written lengthwise (i.e., vertically) in the marginal column (see illustration on p. 358). Journal entries are separated from one another with a hash mark (#). When an entry began on a new page of Kierkegaard’s journal, he generally placed two hash marks (# #) at the top of the page. The journal also includes one loose quarto-size sheet containing the text of entry NB24:170 (see illustration on p. 439). According to B-cat., this sheet, which bears the date “Early April 1851” and the notations “To the Journal” and “The page is indicated at the beginning of the volume,” was found folded and placed at the beginning of the journal.

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB24 was begun on April 20, 1851, and must have been concluded no later than November 29, 1851, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB25. In addition to the label on the cover of the volume, four of the journal’s 170 entries contain dates. In NB24:30,

746

J O U R N A L NB 24 which bears the heading “Conversation with Bishop Mynster May 2nd,” Kierkegaard remarks, “today I did something I rarely tend to do otherwise: I spoke with him a little about his family,” and that Mynster “did not do this today”; thus this entry was written on the day the conversation had taken place. Entry NB24:43 contains the date reference “today, the 5th of May,” and NB24:81 has the heading “Pentecost Sunday,” that is, June 8, 1851. In NB24:128, which is dated “Aug. 13th,” Kierkegaard touches on the reviews of his two most recent books and refers to Flyveposten, August 7, 1851, no. 181, and Fyens Avis, August 9, 1851, no. 187. Some entries contain references that make approximate dating possible. In NB24:69, Kierkegaard writes, “I have certainly heard that people could not hear me when I preached last Sunday.” He is referring to the sermon he gave at the Citadel Church on May 18, 1851; that date is mentioned in NB24:74: “On Sunday, May 18th, I preached at the Citadel.”1 In NB24:102, the words “Now they are being printed” refer to the printing of On My Work as an Author and Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays, which lay finished at the printer’s on August 4 and were announced as having been published in Adresseavisen, August 7, 1851, no. 184. Entry NB24:121 contains Kierkegaard’s summary of a conversation with Mynster that took place on “9 Aug. 1851.” Entry NB24:155 contains Kierkegaard’s reaction to an article that appeared in Flyveposten, September 16, 1851, no. 215. Entry NB24:159 touches on For Self-Examination, which appeared September 12, 1851. Generally speaking, marginal additions were made somewhat later than the main journal entries to which they are attached. Marginal entry NB24:54.c, for example, is dated August 5, 1852, and NB24:54.d, “NB see journal NB26. p. 92,” refers to an entry that bears the date “Aug. 7th [1852]” (see NB26:39 in KJN 9; SKS 25, 44–46). The loose sheet constituting entry NB24:170, which according to B-cat. had been placed at the beginning of the journal, is dated “Early April 1851,” and this should be understood as meaning that it was written before Kierkegaard started writing in the volume containing Journal NB24.

) See Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], May 17, 1851, no. 11.

1

Critical Account of the Text

4. Outside front cover of Journal NB24.

747

748

J O U R N A L NB 24

III. Contents Taking his inspiration from James 1:23–24 (“For if any are hearers of the word and not doers, they are like those who look at themselves in a mirror; for they look at themselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they were like,” Kierkegaard reflects on how one ought properly to use a mirror. First and foremost, a mirror is to be used to observe oneself and not become itself an object of observation. One is not to “examine the mirror, the frame, the mounting, etc.” (NB24:39.a). Nonetheless, “this is exactly what people have done in relation to God’s word as the mirror,” something amply testified to by “all the auxiliary sciences in connection with God’s word.” In order to be capable of using a mirror in a meaningful way, a person must have at least a certain minimum amount of self-knowledge—one must “know oneself to certain extent”—or one will be unable “to recognize one’s mirror image” (NB24:39). Kierkegaard makes a number of points in his reflections on this mirror, but he is particularly occupied with the relation between the mirror’s capacity both to reproduce and to conceal what it reflects and with the possibility of self-recognition for the person reflected. Toward the conclusion of Journal NB24, in order to formulate his position more precisely, he returns to the mirror metaphor in the letter of James: “To a certain extent, one must know oneself already. For the person who does not know himself cannot recognize himself either, and a person can always recognize himself only to the extent that he knows himself” (NB24:159). What is of crucial importance is the extent of this “to a certain extent,” because this will be decisive for the relation of the human sphere to Christianity, which is arguably the fundamental theme running throughout Journal NB24. Mirrored reflections are encounters of the familiar with the unknown, something that becomes clear when Kierkegaard adds: “Paganism demanded: Know yourself. Xnty says: No, this is something preliminary: Know yourself—and see yourself in the mirror of the Word in order to know yourself properly. No true self-knowledge without God-knowledge, or before God. Here, to stand before the mirror is to stand before God” (NB24:159). With this, Kierkegaard includes in his journal a group of themes that are both classic (for Kierkegaard) and complicated. His reading reflects both his intense preoccupation with the early history of Christianity and with the new forces that emerged with the Reformation. Typical in this respect are the references to C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter (NB24:58); I. H. von Wessenberg,

Critical Account of the Text Die großen Kirchenversammlungen des 15ten und 16ten Jahrhunderts (NB24:147–149); Paul Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins des großen Reformators (NB24:63–64, 67, 76, 145); and to Adolf Müller, Leben des Erasmus von Rotterdam (NB24:83). A. G. Rudelbach, Heironymous Savonarola und seine Zeit casts its shadow over almost the entire first third of the journal, where Kierkegaard cites the work and comments on it (NB24:19, 24, 27, 29, 32–35, 37, 39, 52). Savonarola not only fascinates Kierkegaard as a “blood witness,” but also because he unambiguously declared that, in a paradoxical manifestation of his unfathomable love, God had deceived him “as no hum. being ever has been deceived.” Savonarola depicts the details and the extent of this divine deception in a powerful and image-laden Lenten sermon from which Kierkegaard cites a portion, accompanying it with the following comment: “Yet such is God’s upbringing: he deceives a pers. into the truth. He grasps the truth in his imagination—it looks so inviting, he cannot let go of it, he goes along with it—and now he stands in the midst of actuality, and it is an entirely different matter” (NB24:24). Kierkegaard’s comment is one of a number that touch upon God’s capacity to entice, seduce, and deceive the individuals through whom he realizes his will in the world. In a longer passage that was originally written as “as a conclusion to the sermon on the unchangingness of God,” Kierkegaard again touches on Savonarola’s remarks on God’s manipulations, and he then goes on to pursue this idea in a dizzying theological perspective: That God must use a deception is not because he is not faithful or because he has changed—no, he is eternally unchanging and educating love . . . And in this way you deceived me as well, o God! You showed me those lovely pictures. You did not say to me, [“]Just be careful, be clever, use the understanding with which I have so liberally endowed you, never get involved with things of this sort.[”] . . . Oh, it is dreadful to be deceived; to be deceived by God—terrifying! (NB24:52) In addition to God’s unchangingness is God’s absolute unpredictability, which for human beings is expressed in the circumstance that God never deceives anyone out of the truth but always deceives a person into the truth (see NB24:52). A Christian is compelled to use similar tactics when he is to bring Christianity to the secular modern age: “A True Christian rlly can only involve himself with worldly things in order to deceive, i.e., in order to create a situation in which to set forth Xnty” (NB24:144). The dialectic of deception presupposes the proposition that deep down, human

749

750

J O U R N A L NB 24 beings do not want to be confronted with the truth, that in their innermost selves people sense the fateful nature of an encounter with the God of Christianity: “Hum. beings are afraid that Xnty will get its hands on them and that they would then be unable to break free of it” (NB24:117). Thus, in a journal entry that juxtaposes Christian and Jewish piety, Kierkegaard asserts that whereas the Jew believes that if only he clings to God, things will go well for him in the world, the Christian believes “The more you hold on to God and involve yourself with him, the worse it will be for you. It is almost as if God said to a person: It would be better if you went to Tivoli and amused yourself with the others—but whatever you do, don’t get involved with me; humanly speaking, it will be misery” (NB24:48; see NB24:55). Thus God also has no patience for anyone who would attempt to promote the cause of Christianity without understanding its intolerant character: “All this straightforward talk of wanting so very much to know the truth, etc., is nonsense, illusion, or hypocrisy” (NB24:8) that comes nowhere near the “divinely domineering religion: Xnty” (NB24:79). Kierkegaard does not deny that Christianity is supposed to be good news to fallen humanity—“only it presupposes one thing: that in order for it truly to be joy for us hum. beings, you and I are to be heroes, spirit” (NB24:164). Neither can Christian joy ever be identical with straightforward happiness or be combined with a distracted, bourgeois lifestyle—it can only be caught sight of on the far side of “imitation” (NB24:115, 118). Kierkegaard sketches the consequences of the age’s simpleminded and slack fraternization with Christian joy under the heading “Christian Affectation”: This has also done a great deal of damage, this business of always having to go straight to making a big fuss about proclaiming Christianity as joy upon joy—and God knows how joyous we actually are. The consequence of this is either that we radically transform Xnty and omit what does not conform to merely hum. notions of joy or it becomes slobbering drivel and, to some extent, hypocritical. (NB24:132) A good number of the journal’s entries show that the supposed either/or is actually a both/and. This radical reversal can be seen most clearly in the form of the humanism that emerged from Christianity, to which it thus owes its existence but which in the modern world has succeeded in repressing Christianity and establishing itself as Christianity’s replacement. “ ‘What is human and what is Christian are one and the same,’ has now become the

Critical Account of the Text watchword,” Kierkegaard notes in an entry that bears the heading “The Human—The Christian.” Building on Voltaire’s remark that he would only believe in “hereditary nobility” when he saw a child born with spurs on, Kierkegaard declares that he, too, would have to be presented with something as contrary to nature as a child born with self-denial as a “natural category” before he would agree to abandon his view “that the Christian and the human, the humane, are qualitative opposites” (NB24:18). Shortly after this, in an entry with the heading “The Divine—The Human,” Kierkegaard imagines someone who asks how the God “who made this world with all its delights and joys” can be guilty of the “self-contradiction” of permitting Christianity to transform “everything into sin” and “lay down the requirement of dying away” from his Creation: “In a certain sense, I have nothing to reply to this. Such things do not concern me. As long as it is certain that this is what Xnty teaches, I have nothing to do with such objections” (NB24:20). At a number of points in his journal, Kierkegaard returns to the notion of world history as a continuing history of decay, in which generation after generation have watered down true passion and in so doing have phased out every emphatic sort of life: There is continual retreat. First we abolished the God-Man as “Exemplar”: it was too lofty. But we did retain the apostle, the disciple: he became the extraordinary, which we smuggled away. But we did retain the witness to the truth. Then we also abolished him, scaling things down more and more, and finally, the exemplar is a businessman. (NB24:91) Kierkegaard’s critique of the age’s notion of the continuing progress of the human race is rooted in his profound skepticism concerning the honesty underlying the human race’s stated desire to be honest. Thus it is once again deception that undergirds the dynamic of Kierkegaard’s presentation when, later in the journal, he divides history into phases: Xnty stands topmost with its thesis: The world lieth in wickedness. Next comes the more accomplished sort of paganism with its thesis: The world wants to be deceived. Then comes nonsense with its thesis: It is a wonderful world; the crowd is truth. And most deeply sunk in nonsense is the daily press, which has transformed the hum. race into “a cloud” of nonsense. (NB24:138)

751

752

J O U R N A L NB 24 Kierkegaard’s quarrel with enlightened humanism’s concept of truth provides him with many opportunities to criticize its representatives, especially Bishop Mynster, whose poor sense for the way things actually were in “the established order” is the subject of the following indictment: “I had believed, after all, that Mynster was a man of government. But the last 3 years have truly taught me that he is an enormous coward who seeks public approval more than any journalist” (NB24:99). Kierkegaard asserts that Mynster “has never had the notion that there is an unconditioned” (NB24:104). Mynster defends “the established order” (NB24:109) and has no sense, or at most a very marginal sense, of the danger lying in wait in the form of “the numerical,” of the fact “that everything is disintegrating into parties and sects”; nor has he paid sufficient attention to “the coalition between political and religious movements,” even though the “danger is so great that in the end there is the risk that Xnty will be subject to balloting” (NB24:114). In a number of entries Kierkegaard expresses his typical animosity to Mynster’s aimless drift, and he makes it clear that he has had conversations with Mynster in which he has made it clear to the bishop that it was time for Mynster to acknowledge officially the distance from the Christian ideals: “My suggestion is: Let us instead be honest and admit that this whole business is not Xnty in the strict sense. This is at least being truthful and is the precondition for going further” (NB24:116; see NB24:40, 47). But Kierkegaard does not have much confidence in Mynster in this connection: “Mynster has no more faith in the power of truth than do my boots; in self-satisfied fashion he believes in his own shrewdness—and, after that, in appearances” (NB24:114). Kierkegaard depicts in very lively fashion his various conversations with Bishop Mynster, whom he had continued to venerate greatly. “After all, my devotion to him belongs to him, and of course it would not do much good for me to tell in print how devoted I am to him, nor would it ever be understood” (NB24:30; see NB24:111). This remark concludes a lengthy entry concerning a visit with Mynster on May 2, 1851, in the course of which Kierkegaard had complained about the extremely unfortunate manner in which Mynster had juxtaposed Kierkegaard and M. A. Goldschmidt in his most recent publication, Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [Further Contribution to Negotiations Concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark]. In this piece, the bishop had called Goldschmidt “one of our most talented authors,” whereas Kierkegaard himself was described, perhaps a bit more modestly, as “the gifted author.”

Critical Account of the Text Kierkegaard interprets Mynster’s description of Goldschmidt as an offensive approval of Goldschmidt’s past as editor of Corsaren [The Corsair], and in the course of the conversation he points out to Mynster that there are enemies who could perhaps take advantage of the bishop’s lack of caution and do harm to his “reputation” (NB24:30). During his next visit to Mynster, August 9, 1851, Kierkegaard again told the bishop that he “was not pleased by what he said about Goldschmidt in his latest book” (NB24:121; see NB24:125, 130, 170). Kierkegaard had sent Mynster Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays and On My Work as an Author, both of which had appeared on August 7, 1851. “Yes, there is a thread that runs through the whole of it,” Mynster remarked with respect to On My Work as an Author, “but it was spun after the fact—though, of course, you yourself say as much.” When Kierkegaard replied that his “pen had never deviated, not once,” Mynster objected that A Literary Review had perhaps been one such deviation, but Kierkegaard did not want to comment on that: “The sense I had of M. on that occasion was that, all in all, he had been impressed by the little book and that he was therefore at a loss for words” (NB24:121). A longer entry with a number of marginal additions provides an insight into the unusual circumstances in which The Sickness unto Death became pseudonymous (NB24:54) at the last minute, but the journal also contains a couple of giddy comments on the review of Kierkegaard’s little piece On My Work as an Author (NB24:128, 155; see NB24:131). Kierkegaard’s plan to turn “the whole of my writings” into “a triumph for Mynster” was definitively shelved after Mynster’s remarks about Goldschmidt—“that would be making a laughingstock of myself” (NB24:125; see NB24:130, 170)—and his respect for the aging bishop is also in marked decline, which Kierkegaard himself reveals by alluding to two famous characters from Holberg: “And indeed, what is Mynster other than a velvet-bound, gilt-edged edition of this life wisdom of Henrich and Pernille—naturally with a refined supplement that Henrich and Pernille did not have the cultivation to devise” (NB24:164). Kierkegaard’s increasingly frequent demands for “honesty” in matters of ethics and religion correspond to his praise of aesthetic simplicity and unpretentiousness: “From the Christian point of view there should not be great churches but small houses of prayer, and there should be preaching every day. But this is what is bestial: an enormous room, a mass of peop., a well-rehearsed orator, and then yelling. Indeed, if it were market prices he was

753

754

J O U R N A L NB 24 proclaiming, it would be something worth hearing” (NB24:68). Kierkegaard himself was far less audible when he preached at the Citadel Church on Sunday, May 18, 1851: “I have certainly heard that people could not hear me when I preached last Sunday. Undoubtedly there are plenty of people who were not even in church who would tell me this. And, perhaps with the aid of the daily press, it will finally be heard all over the country: that no one could hear me:—and that’s something, at least” (NB24:69). Somewhat later Kierkegaard returned to his sermon, which he had based on “my first, my beloved, text, James 1” (NB24:74). And he acknowledges “—I confess it—” that when he chose that particular verse from the letter of James, which had had special significance during the period of his engagement, it was “with the thought of ‘her,’ ” that is, in the hope that Regine might come to church that day “if it might please her to hear me.” The thought of Regine’s presence did not make it any easier to write the sermon: “Beforehand I suffered greatly from every sort of strain, as is always the case when I have to use my physical person.” Kierkegaard judged that the sermon “went fairly well.” When he went home he felt well, even “animated,” but the day after he “was so weak and exhausted that it was frightful.” In the days that followed, the malaise increased: I became more miserable. On Sunday following May 18th, I read a sermon by Mynster as usual, and look: the text for the day was about the thorn in the flesh: [“]My grace is sufficient for you.[”] That struck me. (NB24:74)

Explanatory Notes 321

1

NB24. April 20th 1851] Variant: label on the outside front cover of the book. April 20, 1851, was Easter Sunday. Four days later, Kierkegaard moved to Østerbro, which was just outside of Copenhagen.

322

1

My Reckoning . . . p. 204] Variant: written on the inside front cover of the book. ― My Reckoning . . . p. 54: See NB24:51. ― How Things Went . . . p. 63: See NB24:54. ― On Myself . . . p. 92: See NB24:74. ― Hidden Inwardness . . . p. 100: See NB24:78. ― On Myself . . . p. 118: See NB24:90. ― On My Work as an Author . . . p. 204: See NB24:131.

323

1

2 3

325

4

Texts for the Friday Sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that were held at 9 a.m. every Friday at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. In addition to a discourse in connection with confession, a short sermon was also delivered between confession and communion. Kierkegaard had himself preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady, on June 18, 1847, on the text Mt 11:28; on August 27, 1847, on the text Jn 10:27; and on September 1, 1848, on the text Jn 12:32. Two of these sermons were published as the second and third discourses in the fourth part of Christian Discourses under the title “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: Christian Discourses” (CD, 262–274; SKS 10, 277–292), and another in the first exposition in part 3 of Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18) (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). the blank sheet at the front of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17 p. 30] See NB17:24 in KJN 7, 183. knb24/11 “Do Not Worry about Tomorrow,”: See Mt 6:34. Say to sorrow, Yes, yes, tomorrow] The opening lines of the second verse of H. A. Brorson’s

hymn “Klag dig ei for Trang paa Drikke” [Do Not Complain about What You Are to Drink], which originally appeared in Doct. Hans Adolph Brorsons fordum Biskop over Riber Stift Svanesang [The Swan Song of Dr. Hans Adolph Brorson, former Bishop of the Diocese of Ribe] (Copenhagen, 1765), here cited from Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson [Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Hans Adolph Brorson], ed. J.A.L. Holm, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1838 [1830]; ASKB 200), p. 862. In the hymn, “When I Think of That Hour, etc.” . . . close the door] Cited freely from the hymn “Naar jeg betænker ret den Stund” [When I Truly Think of the Hour], written ca. 1600 by the Norwegian priest Peder Nielsen. The hymn was included in Thomas Kingo, ed., Kirke-Psalmebog [Church Hymnal], originally authorized in 1699 (see ASKB 204), but not included in Evangeliskchristelig Psalmebog til Brug ved Kirke- og HuusAndagt [Evangelical Christian Hymnal, for Use in Devotions in Church and at Home] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 197; abbreviated hereafter as Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog); authorized in 1798, see ASKB 195 and 196). Presumably, Kierkegaard knew the hymn from J. P. Mynster, Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 197), though it is possible he had come upon the hymn in Psalmebog. Samlet og udgivet af Roskilde-Konvents Psalmekomite. (Fremlagt for Konventet) [Hymnal: Collected and Published by the Roskilde Conventicle Hymn Committee (Presented to the Conventicle)] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 198), pp. 373–375.

20

325

In the definition of “Church” . . . sacraments are properly administered] Refers to article 7 of the Augsburg Confession. See Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession], introduced, translat-

2

326

756

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 7–20

ed, and with commentary by A. G. Rudelbach (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386), p. 50. The Augsburg Confession (1530) is the oldest of the Lutheran confessional documents. 326

16 36

the truth, etc.,] Variant: first written “the truth,”. I call myself merely a poet] Kierkegaard often described himself as a poet, most recently in the article “Occasioned by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” published in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], January 31, 1851, no. 26 (COR, 51–59; SKS 14, 109–114), where he refers to all his literary works as “poetical” (COR, 56; SKS 14, 114).

327

2

“I am already being sacrificed,” Paul says] See 2 Tim 4:6–8.

327

28

Plato’s Republic . . . name of philosopher] See the beginning of bk. 6 (487a ff.) of Plato’s Republic.

329m

10

reduplication] Kierkegaard often uses this term to describe a condition of reflection in which something abstract is made actual in concrete praxis or existence.

329

35

330

1

Xt says: Not a sparrow falls to the ground without his will] Reference to Mt 10:29. the emperor of Russia] Tsar Nicholas I (r. 1825– 1855). It was largely owing to Russian pressure on Prussia that the outcome of the First Schleswig War (or Three Years’ War), 1848–1850, was favorable for Denmark. God is love] Refers to 1 Jn 4:8 and 16.

3

330

17

3rd book of the Republic . . . struck by lightning] Paraphrase of Plato’s Republic, bk. 3 (405c–408b). The version of Plato that Kierkegaard paraphrases is C. J. Heise’s Danish translation, Platons Stat [Plato’s Republic], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1851; identical with Udvalgte Dialoger af Platon [Selected Dialogues by Plato, pts. 4–6]; ASKB 1167). Heise’s translation was advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), February 15, 1851, no. 39.

•

1851

Voltaire is supposed to have said . . . born with spurs on] It has not been possible to locate a statement of this sort by Voltaire, but Heinrich Heine attributed something similar to Voltaire in his Reisebilder [Travel Pictures], part 3, which appeared in 1830.

18

331

John of Salisbury said to Pope Adrian IV . . . Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 8] Kierkegaard’s translation of a passage from part 1, chap. 1 of A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit. Aus den Quellen dargestellt [Girolamo Savonarola and His Times: Based on the Sources] (Hamburg, 1835; abbreviated hereafter as Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit), p. 8. Rudelbach cites as his source John of Salisbury (1115–1180), Johannes Sarisberiensis Policraticus sive de nugis curialium [John of Salisbury, Policraticus or, Concerning the Foolishness of Courtiers], bk. 6, p. 24. ― Adrian IV: Nicholas Breakspear (ca. 1100–1159), pope from 1154 until his death. ― Rudelbach: Andreas Gottlob Rudelbach (1792–1862), Danish theologian, pastor, and author; theology graduate, 1820; dr. phil., 1822; pastor in Glauchau in the principality of Saxony, 1829–1845; lectured as a privatdocent at the University of Copenhagen, 1847–1848; from 1848, parish priest in Slagelse on Zealand. In January 1851, Rudelbach published Om det borgerlige Ægteskab [On Civil Marriage], which gave rise to much debate (→ 337,19), and Kierkegaard wrote an article in this connection (→ 337,14). ― Savonarola: Journal NB24 testifies to Kierkegaard’s reading of Rudelbach’s book on the Italian Dominican monk Girolamo Savonarola (1452–1498), a charismatic preacher of repentance who had great religious and political influence in Florence and was sentenced to death by the pope. Kierkegaard jotted down various passages from the book, particularly from the chapter that presents Savonarola’s dogmatics; see NB24:24, 27, 29, 31–35, 37, 39, 52.

1

332

dying away] One of the Apostle Paul’s fundamental ideas is that in Christ a human being has died away from sin. See, e.g., Rom 6:2 and Col 2:20. Mysticism and pietism accentuated this notion, making a person’s daily life one of dying

13

332

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 20–30 away from sin and the pleasures of the world in self-denial and in complete separation from everything temporal, finite, and worldly. Thus the point changed from human beings having died away from sin through Christ to an insistence that human beings must also die away from sin through faith. 332

26 28

333

334

32

26

29

You Are to Be Hated by All for My Name’s Sake] See Mt 10:22. to have died away] → 332,13. Savonarola says in a Lenten sermon . . . See Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 154] Kierkegaard translates from Savonarola’s Lenten sermon of February 17, 1495, which appears (in German) in part 2, chap. 4 of A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 152–156. Lord, you have deceived . . . Jeremiah 20:7: Kierkegaard translates from Rudelbach, though Rudelbach writes, “Lord, you have deceived me.” Goldschmidt] Meïr Aron Goldschmidt (1819– 1887), Danish Jewish journalist and publicist, author of works including En Jøde. Novelle [A Jew: Novella] (by the pseudonym Adolph Meyer, edited and published by M. Goldschmidt) (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1547). Goldschmidt founded the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair] in October 1840 and was the journal’s actual editor (owing to censorship rules, there were a number of “straw editors”) until October 1846, when he sold it and embarked on a yearlong journey abroad; starting in December 1847, he published the monthly journal Nord og Syd [North and South] (which became a weekly starting in September 1849) to which he was the principal contributor. Nord og Syd ceased publication on March 28, 1851, though from November 1, 1851, it appeared occasionally as a “voluntary pamphlet,” and in 1855 it resumed regular publication. He presents himself as someone who has suffered as a Jew from childhood on] Refers to Goldschmidt’s partially autobiographical description of the principal character in En Jøde (→ 334,26).

•

1851

757

Achweimir] In En Jøde (→ 334,26) Goldschmidt relates how “the whole class swarmed around him [Jacob, the principal figure] laughing, and crying ‘Jew’ or ‘Ach wai mir!’ or ‘Hep! hep!’ ” (p. 123). “Hep” was an invective with which Jews were taunted; borrowed from the German, its origin is uncertain but may come from Hierosolyma est perdita (Latin, “Jerusalem is lost”). See NB10:127 in KJN 6, 332.

33

To Die Away] → 332,13.

1

335

Chrysostom says . . . Rudelbach, Savonarola, p. 189 bottom of page, p. 190 top of page] Kierkegaard’s translation from part 2, chap. 4 of A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 189–190. Rudelbach gives his source as Savonarola, Apologeticum fratrum congregationis S. Marci. 1497 [Defense of the Brothers of the Monastery of St. Mark, 1497].

15

335

Savonarola says somewhere . . . repaid with great ingratitude] Kierkegaard’s translation from part 2, chap. 4 of A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), p. 208. see Rudelbach, Savonarola p. 208 bottom of page] → 336,26.

26

336

1

336m

Conversation with Bishop Mynster May 2nd] In later years, Kierkegaard regularly called on Bishop Mynster at the bishop’s palace opposite the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. ― Bishop Mynster: Jakob Peter Mynster (1775– 1854), Danish pastor, writer, and politician; from 1802, parish priest in Spjellerup in southern Zealand; from 1811, permanent curate at The Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. From 1826, he was court chaplain, and from 1828, royal confessor as well as court chaplain and chaplain at Christiansborg Palace Chapel. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand. As bishop of Zealand, Mynster was the primate of the Danish Church and the king’s personal counselor. During the period 1835–1846, he was a member of the Advisory Assembly of Estates in Roskilde, where he was very influential, and in 1848–1849, he was a member of the

3

337

758

4

8

8

12

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30

Constitutional Assembly. In accordance with the Danish system of rank and precedence, from 1847, Mynster was ranked number thirteen in the first class and was the only person to be referred to as “His Eminence.” On July 2, 1851, the fiftieth anniversary of Mynster’s ordination was celebrated in Roskilde Cathedral; see the accounts in Flyve-Posten [The Flying Post], July 4, 1851, no. 152; in Fædrelandet, July 7, 1851, no. 154; and in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], July 7, 1851, no. 154, as well as Mynster’s greeting in the same newspaper, September 6, 1851, no. 207; see also Kierkegaard’s reaction in Pap. X 6 B 207. ― May 2nd: i.e., Friday, May 2, 1851. it was close to the time . . . a bit before this time] Mynster’s annual visitation journeys took place in the summer and almost always in two tours: one in May and the first part of June, which Mynster called the “asparagus visitation,” and the other in late June and July, which he called the “strawberry visitation”; see J. P. Mynsters Visitatsdagbøger 1835–1853 [J. P. Mynster’s Visitation Journals, 1835–1853], ed. B. Kornerup, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1937), vol. 2, p. xxxi. Thus Mynster was to begin his visitation journey three weeks after this conversation with Kierkegaard. That Kierkegaard visited Mynster every year before the latter began his visitation journeys cannot be documented. Then we spoke together] Variant: first written “together.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. about the minister and the ministry] The first cultus minister (i.e., minister for ecclesiastical, educational, and cultural affairs) was D. G. Monrad. In November 1848, after the fall of the ministry that had come to power during the unrest of March 1848, Monrad was replaced by J. N. Madvig, who remained at the post until December 1851. The cultus minister, who is presumably the minister referred to here, was Mynster’s superior and was responsible for clerical appointments. Madvig had published the new marriage law in Berlingske Tidende on May 2, 1851, no. 101. I again said a few words about the tactics involved with my latest pseudonym] Under the pseudonym Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard had published The Sickness unto Death on July 30, 1849,

•

1851

and Practice in Christianity on September 25, 1850. He had discussed the latter work with Mynster during a visit on October 22, 1850; see NB21:121 in the present volume. opposed Rudelbach] Refers to Kierkegaard’s newspaper article against A. G. Rudelbach (→ 332,1) “Occasioned by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach” (→ 326,36). Rudelbach had replied to Kierkegaard’s objections in the lengthy article “Afnødt Erklæring om et personligt Punkt og tillige om Betydningen af ‘Kirkens frie Institutioner’ ” [Necessitated Declaration Concerning a Personal Matter and also on the Significance of “the Church’s Free Institutions”] in Fædrelandet, February 13, 1851, no. 37, and February 14, 1851, no. 38. this book of mine] Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18). his book] Variant: first written “his book.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― book: Mynster’s piece, Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [Further Contribution to Negotiations Concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1851), was advertised as having been published in Berlingske Tidende, March 13, 1851, no. 16. The principal portion of the pamphlet bears the date February 27, 1851, and discusses questions related to the new constitution for the Danish Church, i.e., questions of freedom of religion and the introduction of civil marriage. In his discussion of this latter issue, Mynster makes frequent reference to A. G. Rudelbach’s piece Om det borgerlige Ægteskab. Bidrag til en alsidig, upartisk Bedømmelse af denne Institution, nærmest fra Kirkens Standpunkt [On Civil Marriage: Contribution to a Comprehensive, Nonpartisan Judgment of That Institution, Principally from the Church’s Point of View] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 752; abbreviated hereafter as Om det borgerlige Ægteskab), advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen, January 23, 1851, no. 19. Kierkegaard had also written a newspaper article in opposition to Rudelbach’s piece (→ 337,14). In his pamphlet, Mynster reiterates the views he had expressed in a piece he had published a year earlier, Grundlovens Bestemmelser

14

17 19

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30

20

med Hensyn til de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [The Constitution’s Provisions with Respect to the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1850), advertised as having been published in Berlingske Tidende, March 13, 1850, no. 287, as well as in a number of articles concerning Luther’s marriage, published in Berlingske Tidende, January 28, 1851, no. 23, and February 6, 1851, no. 31. Rudelbach had replied to Mynster’s most recent piece with Antegnelser ved høiærværdige Biskop Dr. J.P. Mynsters ‘yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark.’ Med et Anhang: Om Motiverne til det borgerlige Ægteskabs Indførelse i Frankrig [Notes Concerning the Right Reverend Bishop Dr. J. P. Mynster’s “Further Contribution to Negotiations Concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark,” with an Appendix: On the Motives Underlying the Introduction of Civil Marriage in France] (Copenhagen, 1851); see Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], June 1, 1851, vol. 6, no. 24, cols. 388–391. I had not thanked him . . . I could not approve] Kierkegaard received the work shortly after its publication (see NB23:189 in the present volume), but could not reconcile himself with Mynster’s friendly mention of Goldschmidt (→ 334,26). As early as p. 5 of the work (→ 337,19) Mynster cites a catchword by a French author, “with which the publisher of Nord og Syd [i.e., Goldschmidt] has acquainted us, for which we thank him.” But the passage Kierkegaard found most offensive was on page 44, where Mynster writes “Among the gratifying [‘]emergent phenomena[’]―we adopt this term from one of our most talented authors―that have appeared in the course of these discussions, is the echo found in a voice that has recently (see Fædrelandet, no. 26) inveighed against ‘the faith that the error is to be found in external things, that what is needed is a change in external things, which supposedly is to help us’ oppose the ‘disastrous confusion of politics and Christianity, a confusion that can so easily give rise to and make fashionable the matter of a new reformation of the Church―a backward reformation which in reforming posits something new and worse instead of what is older and better.’ The gifted author will permit me, in conclusion,

•

1851

759

to borrow his words, ‘that Christianity, which has its life in itself, is supposed to be saved by free institutions, is in my view a complete misunderstanding of Christianity, which, when it is true in true inwardness, is infinitely higher and infinitely freer than all institutions, constitutions, etc.” (p. 44). In his use of the term “emergent phenomena” Mynster is alluding to Goldschmidt, who a couple of years earlier had suggested this term (Danish, Fremtoning) as a translation of the German term Erscheinung (see Nord og Syd, 1849, vol. 5, pp. 143–144); Goldschmidt’s term gradually gained acceptance in the Danish language. The passage by Kierkegaard that Mynster cites is from Kierkegaard’s above-mentioned article (→ 337,14) that had appeared in Fædrelandet on January 31, 1851, no. 26; see COR, 55–56; SKS 14, 113. In the course of 1851, Kierkegaard wrote innumerable drafts of a polemical piece against Mynster because of these remarks, which implicitly linked Goldschmidt and himself; see Pap. X 6 B 171–208. we talked about it,] Variant: first written “we talked about it.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. he had merely said that G. was talented] → 337,20. he, too, had enemies] e.g., philosophy professor Rasmus Nielsen (→ 355,5). retraction on G.’s part] i.e., a public statement in which Goldschmidt (→ 334,26) would distance himself from his satirical and offensive activities in connection with Corsaren in the period 1840– 1846. Goldschmidt had in fact ceased publication of Nord og Syd on March 28, 1851, with a valedictory editorial stating: “I have now published Nord og Syd for close to 3-1/2 years and have written ca. 4,000 pages. To write so much and such varied material―which nevertheless is all related and ought to be brought together under a common heading―is not a good thing; it does not really benefit a person’s intellectual existence because one gradually begins to send forth thoughts and feelings in haste, before they have been enriched by all the facts required by the matter at hand. I will not retract anything I have written, for at least I have said them out of good will and zeal for the truth. But often I have been unable to

23

27 29 35

760

338

32

36

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30

say all that presumably could be said, and even more frequently I have had to put aside work of the sort that I would have preferred to finish. The consequence of this has been that I have recently become dissatisfied with editing Nord og Syd. Perhaps this journal has not yet ceased to satisfy its public―at any rate I must acknowledge, with profound gratitude, that I have seen no signs of that, though this could be because, generally speaking, the public discovers literary faults later than do critics. But in my view, when an author comes to an insight such as that mentioned here, it is his duty to stop in good time, if it is possible, in order that he not betray the confidence shown him by his readers and become an invalid to his ideas before it is his time . . . To those who believe that up to this point I have spoken well, and who therefore are well disposed toward Nord og Syd, I would like to direct some words of hearty thanks―were it not for my fear of mixing the least bit of sentimentality into this matter” (Nord og Syd, 1851, vol. 6, pp. 343–344). my father] Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838), retired at the age of forty in possession of a considerable fortune; as the years passed, he added to his wealth through interest and investment income. After the death of his first wife, he married Ane Lund on April 26, 1797; they had seven children together, of whom Søren was the youngest. In 1808, he bought the house at Nytorv 2 (today Frederiksberggade 1; see map 2, B1–2), where he lived until his death. As perpetual curate of the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen, J. P. Mynster was M. P. Kierkegaard’s confessor, though only from 1820 until 1828, when Mynster became palace chaplain. his family . . . his daughter was to be married] Mynster (→ 337,3) had been married since 1815 to Maria Frederica Franzisca (1796–1871), called Fanny, the daughter of Bishop Friederich Münter (1761–1830). They had four children: Frederik Joachim (1816–1857); Christian Ludvig Nicolai (1820–1883); Maria Elisabeth (1822–1909), who was married to court chaplain J. H. Paulli in 1843; and Olivia Lorentze (1826–1882). This youngest daughter, Olivia, had been engaged for half a

•

1851

year to Captain Carl Elias Viggo Arnholtz (1815– 1887); see a letter of December 4, 1850, from Mynster to Bishop G. P. Brammer: “As for private matters, Your Reverence has perhaps heard that our youngest daughter has joined a military element to our clerical family. Namely, she has become engaged to a captain of the Engineer Corps, Arnholtz.―He is a worthy and capable man, and there is every reason to have the best hopes” (Nogle Blade af J. P. Mynster’s Liv og Tid [Some Pages from J. P. Mynster’s Life and Times], ed. C.L.N. Mynster [Copenhagen, 1875], p. 456). Carl and Olivia were married by Bishop Mynster in Christiansborg Palace Church on Saturday May 10, 1851 (see the church records for the Garrison Church). that he had spoken of G. as “talented” and of me as “gifted,”] → 337,20. In general] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. belongs to him,] Variant: first written “belongs to him.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. for me to tell in print how devoted I am to him] Kierkegaard considered including in one of his later writings an encomium to Mynster, either in the form of a dedication or in something lengthier (→ 406,3). G.] Goldschmidt (→ 334,26). And I spoke with him . . . his reputation] Variant: begun in main text column, continued in the margin. situating me together with Goldschmidt] → 337,20. retraction of what he had done in the past] → 337,35. his many books] Goldschmidt had only published two works of fiction (under the pseudonym Adolph Meyer), namely En Jøde (1845) and Fortællinger [Tales] (1846). In addition to these he had published Corsaren for six years (1840–1846) and had published a number of volumes of Nord og Syd from December 1847 until March 28, 1851. So, can M. really be supposed to be ignorant . . . that G. had edited it for 6 years] Mynster’s son C.L.N. Mynster subsequently alleged in the posthumous work, edited by J. Paulli, Har

13

339

20 21

22

1

337m

3

338m

4

339m

10 13

14

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 30–35 S. Kierkegaard fremstillet de christelige Idealer―er dette Sandhed? [Has S. Kierkegaard Presented the Christian Ideals―Is This the Truth?], ed. J. Paulli (Copenhagen, 1884), that his father did not in fact know of the satire Goldschmidt directed at Kierkegaard in Corsaren. Referring to the present journal entry (to which C.L.N. Mynster had access because the publication of Barfod and Gottsched’s edition of Søren Kierkegaard’s efterladte Papirer had been completed in 1881), he writes: “We could here add the personal information that Mynster was actually almost entirely ignorant of what took place in Corsaren; he neither saw it nor read it and only heard of it infrequently. Doubtless he never saw Kierkegaard’s martyrdom in it: the pictures with the short trousers. It was Nord og Syd and En Jøde that kindled his interest in Goldschmidt” (p. 22). ― The Corsair: A satirical and political weekly journal, Corsaren, founded in 1840 by M. A. Goldschmidt (→ 334,26), who was editor and contributor until October 1846 when, in the aftermath of the dispute with Kierkegaard, he sold the paper to the xylographer A.C.F. Flinch, under whose direction the journal survived until 1855. The journal’s satirical articles were accompanied by drawings by Peter Klæstrup, which helped it gain broad readership; in the mid-1840s it had a press run of about three thousand copies. 340

2

340m

2

340

20

God forsakes him] A reference to Mt 27:46. This is the case, e.g., with Savonarola, when he is in prison,] Kierkegaard is referring to part 2, chap. 5 (“Savonarolas Gefangennehmung, Process und Märtyrertod” [Savonarola’s Imprisonment, Trial, and Martyr’s Death]) in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 236–278, which depicts the last two months of Savonarola’s life in prison. Despite various forms of torture, Savonarola did not abjure his faith, not even when he was finally burned at the stake. At one point he does, however, hint that he has been weak in his faith; see p. 261. ― in prison,: Variant: first written “in prison.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Savonarola. “The power of faith . . . a person is secure.”] Kierkegaard translates from part 3,

•

1851

761

chap. 3 (“Savonarolas dogmatischer Standpunct” [Savonarola’s Dogmatic Standpoint]) in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 172–173. Savonarola says somewhere] Kierkegaard translates from part 3, chap. 3 (“Savonarolas dogmatischer Standpunct”) in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), p. 372. Rudelbach cites as his source Prediche sopra il Salmo: Quam bonus, Israel, Deus [Sermon on the Hymn, “How Good, O Israel, God Is!”], pp. 180–182. my father’s] → 338,32. see Rudelbach, Savonarola, p. 372 bottom of page] → 340,26.

26

Savonarola Bernard says . . . Rudelbach, S., pp. 372 bottom of page and 373 top of page] Kierkegaard translates from part 3, chap. 3 (“Savonarolas dogmatischer Standpunct”) in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 372–373. ― Bernard: Bernard of Clairvaux or St. Bernard (1090/91–1153), French Cistercian monk, theologian, and mystic; from 1115, abbot of the monastery of Clairvaux; canonized 1174; elevated to Father of the Church in 1830; author of many works and a great many letters and sermons.

2

341

Savonarola. Apologetics] Part 3, chap. 4 of A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1) bears the title “Analyse der apologetischen Schriften Savonarolas” [Analysis of Savonarola’s Apologetic Writings], pp. 375–401. He proves the truth and divinity of Xnty . . . Rudelbach, S., pp. 386 and 387] Kierkegaard is referring to part 3, chap. 4, “Analyse der apologetischen Schriften Savonarolas” (→ 341,8) of Rudelbach’s book, pp. 386–387, which reads in part: “The tree is known by its fruits; from effects one knows of causes; from the healing power, the author of salvation! How the philosopher, with all his efforts, has determined how difficult it is for a mere individual to follow a purely natural sort of justice! Just as soon as anyone truly converts to the Crucified One, even if he be the

8

341

340

31 34

9

762

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 35–39

greatest sinner―what an astounding effect we see produced without effort! The proud and the envious become humble and beneficent; the avaricious become generous and bountiful; the lustful become chaste and pure―in short, the sinner becomes a child of God: he puts on the new person. Truly, if faith does this, then Christ, in whom the Christian believes, is true God.” Rudelbach cites as his source Savonarola’s apologetic piece from 1497, Triumphus Crucis [The Triumph of the Cross], bk. 2, chap. 7. 341

18

20

22

341

26

Apology―Apologetics] This entry was most likely occasioned by Kierkegaard’s reading of part 3, chap. 4, “Analyse der apologetischen Schriften Savonarolas,” in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), pp. 375–401, where Rudelbach places particular emphasis on Savonarola’s Triumphus Crucis (→ 341,9). In the old days people wrote apologies] A reference to the so-called apologists, i.e., the 2nd-century theologians who defended Christianity, typically with apologies directed at unbelievers. The most famous of these were Justin Martyr (100– 165) and his follower Tatian (latter half of the 2nd century), Tertullian (→ 354,16), Athenagoras (latter half of the 2nd century), and Theophilos of Antioch (latter half of the 2nd century). See also NB22:48 in the present volume with its accompanying explanatory note. Nowadays we have a science called apologetics] The beginning of the 19th century saw the development of Christian “apologetics,” which unlike so-called polemics methodically laid out the relevant materials for a defense of the specific characteristics of the Christian religion; see, e.g., Friedrich Schleiermacher’s work, Kurze Darstellung des theologischen Studiums [Brief Presentation of Theological Study] (Berlin, 1811); and K. H. Sacks, Christliche Apologetik [Christian Apologetics] (Hamburg, 1829; ASKB 755). Savonarola . . . Rudelbach, S. p. 428] Kierkegaard translates from part 3, chap. 5 “Moral und Ascetik Savonarolas” [Savonarola’s Morality and Asceticism], in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), where

•

1851

Rudelbach quotes Savonarola: “The father of prayer is silence, its mother is solitude” (p. 428). People scoff at prayer] Kierkegaard is referring to a pseudonymous polemical piece, Striden mellem Ørsted og Mynster eller Videnskaben og den officielle Theologi. Af H――t [The Conflict between Ørsted and Mynster, or Science and Official Theology, by H–―t] (Copenhagen, 1851), which was advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen, April 19, 1851, no. 93. The author was the atheistic Young Hegelian, Rudolph Varberg (1828–1869), who handily sketched the positions in the intellectual debate of the day. On the one side was science (Hans Christian Ørsted, born in 1777, died March 9, 1851). On the other side were the knights of faith (i.e., adherents of Kierkegaard). And in between is the halfway position, i.e., official theology. Whereas the so-called conflict between faith and knowledge (1849–1851) had taken its beginning in H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (1849), i.e., the official theology, which in its day was sharply criticized by the knights of faith, now Mynster (in the piece Bemærkninger ved Skrivtet ‘Aanden i Naturen’ [Remarks on the Work The Spirit in Nature], 1850) represents official theology, whose halfway status is contrasted with science, represented by H. C. Ørsted’s Aanden i Naturen (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 945). Varberg’s point is that when “official theology” succumbs after attack from the two opposite flanks―“science” and “knights of faith”― the real battle, between science and the knights faith, will begin. In his piece Varberg provides a number of examples of how prayer is a ridiculous practice that belongs to an antiquated (Christian) worldview; see pp. 30–35, esp. p. 28.

12

342

The Letter of James: The Word Is a Mirror] Refers to Jas 1:23–24. this is emphasized by the blood witness Savonarola] Kierkegaard is presumably referring to part 3, chap. 2 (“Savonarolas Gedanken von der Heil. Schrift” [Savonarola’s Thoughts Concerning the Holy Scriptures]), in A. G. Rudelbach, Hieronymus Savonarola und seine Zeit (→ 332,1), p. 341. Rudelbach cites as his source

23

342

26

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 39–43

343

1

4

343m

1

343

37

344

5

Savonarola, Trattato della sana e spirituale lettione (Epistolae spirituales et asceticae) [Treatise on Healthful and Spiritual Reading (Spiritual and Ascetic Letters)], translated from Tuscan to Latin by J. Quétif (Paris, 1674), pp. 234–240. The most powerful emperor . . . on that little nation] Kierkegaard is referring to the Persian king Darius (ca. 549–485 b.c.), who went to war against the Greeks many times and suffered a major defeat by the Athenians at Marathon in 490 b.c. Book 5, chap. 105 of Herodotus’s The Histories relates that Darius “ordered one of his attendants to repeat to him three times, every time a meal was served, ‘Master, remember the Athenians.’ ” Kierkegaard owned Die Geschichten des Herodotos [The Histories of Herodotus], trans. F. Lange, 2 vols. (Breslau, 1824; ASKB 1117), see vol. 2, p. 58. Cited here from Herodotus: The Histories, trans. Robin Waterfield (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 346. Kierkegaard cites the anecdote on a number of occasions, e.g., in Stages on Life’s Way (1845) (SLW, 295; SKS 6, 274) and Works of Love (1847) (WL, 37; SKS 9, 44). David was better served . . . he had Nathan, who said: You are the man] Refers to 2 Sam 12:1–7. Nathan told him a story] → 343,4. Mynster] → 337,3. The story from Abraham of St. Clara . . . the woman converted.] See the second lesson, “Von der Buße” [On Repentance], part 3, in Grammatica Religiosa oder geistliche Tugend-Schule, in welcher ein Jeder sowohl Geist- als Weltlicher durch fünf und fünfzig Lectionen unterwiesen wird, wie das Böse zu meiden, das Gute zu wirken sey [Religious Rules, or the Spiritual School of Virtue, in Which Everyone, Clergy as Well as Secular, Is Taught in Fifty-Five Lessons How to Avoid Evil and Do the Good], 2 vols. (Latin, 1691; German, 1699); abbreviated hereafter as Grammatica Religiosa. Vol. 1 of the above-mentioned Grammatica Religiosa is part of P. Abraham’s a St. Clara Sämmtliche Werke [The Complete Works of P. Abraham of St. Clara], 22 vols. (Passau, 1835–1854; ASKB 294–311), vols. 15–16 (with continuous pagination) (Lindau, 1845); here see vol. 15, pp. 54–55: “In one city

•

1851

763

there lived a certain sinful woman, and in order to approach her, the holy Abbot Paphnutius put on worldly clothes. When he reached the woman, the holy Abbot pretended that he had been struck with love by her beauty, and had come to her because he wished to enjoy her beauty and gratify his desires. He had also brought with him a considerable sum of money, and asked her to lead him to a secret place, so that he would be seen by no one, and thus could commit that sin without shame. The woman led the holy Abbot to various secret places, but again and again he objected, saying that he feared to be seen. Finally she led him to a very dark place, and said that no one could see him there but God alone and the Devil. And in this surety that she gave, the pious servant of God saw an opportunity to lead the woman to the desired healing. For much as she had reminded him, with great seriousness, that one who sins before the face of God will always end by enduring a nasty shock, just so did he begin to prepare the unchaste woman for repentance.” A year earlier Kierkegaard had written a similar journal entry (see NB20:163 in KJN 7, 488–489 [1850]), in which he refers to a still earlier entry, NB2:91, dated June 1847 (KJN 4, 177). ― Abraham of St. Clara: A reference to Abraham a Sancta Clara, the monastic name of Johann Ulrich Megerle (1644–1709) from Swabia, Augustinian friar, priest in Taxa near Augsburg from 1668, and in Vienna and elsewhere in Austria from 1672 until his death; he wrote about sixty works, which appeared in about 350 editions as late as 1785, and he was thus one of the most successful religious writers of the baroque period. In addition to sermons and edifying writings, the edition cited here contains biographies of saints, fairy tales, and satire. someone omnipresent] Variant: changed from “someone omniscient or someone omnipresent”. Omnipresent One] Variant: changed from “Omniscient One”. today, the 5th of May] Monday, May 5, 1851, when Kierkegaard had his thirty-eighth birthday. Hirschholm] Today Hørsholm, about seventeen miles north of Copenhagen.

9 10

6 7

345

764 345

23

27

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 44–46

Holberg says somewhere . . . “John Doe, Practicing Physician”] Reference to act 3, sc. 3 of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Hexerie eller Blind Allarm [Witchcraft or False Alarm] (1731), in which the character Leander, in disguise, takes four rix-dollars (→ 402m,12) for providing a shoemaker’s apprentice with the following advice about how to become a physician: “You must purchase 7 yards of black cloth from the dry goods merchant across the way, for he is the only one who has the black cloth woven in Wittenberg. Have a long gown made for yourself from this cloth. When you have done that, you must rent some nice rooms and over the door have written in large letters―what’s your name? [Boy:] I’m named Jan. [Leander:] Then you should write, here lives the very famous Doctor Jansenius, who cures every sort of illness”; see Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 5. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. ― Holberg: Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754), Danish-Norwegian writer, philosopher, and historian; from 1717, professor at the University of Copenhagen, where he served as rector and treasurer in the period 1737–1751; often called the founder of modern Danish literature. His thirty-three comedies made him the most read and most performed writer in Denmark; his comic tales of Peder Paars (1719) and Niels Klim (1741) were also extremely popular. Peer Degn says . . . caned three times by the schoolmaster] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus (1731), in which Peer Degn has the following monologue in act 1, sc. 3: “To tell the truth, I’m not looking forward to Rasmus Berg returning home. Not because I’m afraid of his learning, for I was already a seasoned university student when he was still in grammar school and, pardon the term, was being caned on his rear end.” A bit later in the same act, sc. 5, he says to Rasmus’s parents: “Ah, nonsense, why should I harbor enmity toward him? Before he was even born I had already been caned by the schoolmaster 3 times, and by the time he was in the 4th grade, I had been a teacher for 8 years” (Den Danske Skue-Plads [→ 345,23], vol. 5).

•

1851

as when a magister speaks of the many universities at which he has studied] Reference to the learned fool, Magister Stygotius, who recites his academic accomplishments in act 3, sc. 5 of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Jacob von Tyboe (printed 1724); see Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 345,23) vol. 3. Kierkegaard uses the same reference in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846); see CUP, 621–622; SKS 7, 564. transformation of existence,] Variant: first written “transformation of existence.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. μεταβασις εισ αλλo γεvoς] This commonly used expression appears in similar form in Aristotle, who in bk. 1, chap.7 of the Posterior Analytics (75a 38) writes that proofs in one science cannot immediately be transferred to another, e.g., that truths in geometry cannot be proven arithmetically. venture forth existentially,] Variant: first written “venture forth existentially.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

36

actually devoted himself] Variant: “actually” has been added. out upon 70,000 fathoms of water] Recurrent formulation in Kierkegaard’s writings, introduced in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), where, in his “Epistle to the Reader,” the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus writes: “Spiritual existence, especially the religious, is not easy; the believer is always out upon the depths, has 70,000 fathoms of water beneath him” (SLW, 444; SKS 6, 411).

38

346

8

347

immediate hope] Variant: “immediate” has been added. the earliest thought,] Variant: first written “the earliest thought.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. thousands of teachers who teach it for a living] Kierkegaard often mentions the one thousand clerical livings, i.e., the parish priests. According to the tables in Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Ecclesiastical Yearbook for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848; ASKB 378), there were ca. 890 principal parishes in the kingdom of Denmark (i.e., without the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein,

19

347

17

348

11

346

17

18

25

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 46–51

27

42

349

6

349

33

350

2 3 4 5 5

350

15

18

350

25

or Lauenburg), and ca. 1,050 priests in service, including bishops and deans; in addition to this must be reckoned ca. 120 personal chaplains. “seek first God’s kingdom”] Cited from Mt 6:33. Kierkegaard makes similar use of this theme in NB20:136 in KJN 7, 472–473. with fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12– 13. Mynster] → 337,3. It would be better if you went to Tivoli] The amusement park Tivoli had been founded in 1843 by G.J.B. Carstensen on a portion of the ramparts outside of Vesterport (see map 3, C3). this can be seen from the Exemplar] → 340,2. to die (to die away)] → 332,13. first, a sword pierces his heart] Presumably, an allusion to Lk 2:34–35. to be hated, cursed by peop.] Reference to Mt 24:9; see also Mt 5:11. to be forsaken by God] → 340,2. my pseudonyms who raised the idea in their day] See “In vino veritas” in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), SLW, 80–81; SKS 6, 79; see also SLW, 105, 434; SKS 6, 100, 402. The theme is also touched on in “The Rotation of Crops” in Either/Or (1843), EO 1, 298; SKS 2, 286; in Repetition (1843) R, 184, 195; SKS 4, 55, 64; and in Fear and Trembling (1843), FT, 115; SKS 4, 202. in fear and trembling] → 348,42. The Whole Business with Vinet . . . confess his conviction] Kierkegaard is referring to the Christian individualism that the influential Swiss theologian Alexandre Vinet (1797–1847), who had recently died, had presented in his works, including Der Sozialismus in seinem Prinzip betrachtet [Socialism, Viewed in Accordance with Its Principles], trans. D. Hofmeister, preface by A. Neander (Berlin, 1849 [French edition, 1846]; ASKB 874). See NB23:180–182 and 184 in the present volume, where Kierkegaard comments on this work and presents objections similar to those he presents in the present entry. Kierkegaard probably is also referring to Vinet’s

•

1851

765

prize-winning essay Ueber die Darlegung der religiösen Ueberzeugungen und über die Trennung der Kirche und des Staates als die nothwendige Folge sowie Garantie derselben [On the Presentation of Religious Conviction and on the Separation of Church and State as the Necessary Consequence and the Guarantee of This], trans. F. H. Spengler (Heidelberg, 1845 [French edition, 1842]; ASKB 873). Kierkegaard’s concern with Vinet was in large measure attributable to A. G. Rudelbach’s juxtaposition of Kierkegaard and Vinet in Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 337,19), p. 70n, to which Kierkegaard had in fact objected in a newspaper article in Fædrelandet (→ 337,14). knb24/187 V.] Vinet (→ 350,25). meritorious] i.e., having merit in God’s eyes because of one’s good works, which conflicts with the Lutheran doctrine as set forth in articles 4, 6, and 20 of the Augsburg Confession. State Church] A church that the state legislates as its church, with its faith and doctrine affirmed by the state as the official religion. Until the end of absolutism in 1848, the Danish Church was very much a State Church. With the arrival of popular sovereignty, the evangelical Lutheran State Church became the Danish People’s Church. People’s Church] The term “People’s Church” was adopted by the Constitution of June 5, 1849; see § 3: “The evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish People’s Church and as such is supported by the state,” and § 80: “The constitution of the People’s Church will be ordered by law.” Danmarks Riges Grundlov. Valgloven. Bestemmelser angaaende Forretningsordenen i begge Thingene [Constitution of the Danish State. Electoral Law. Provisions Regarding the Order of Business in Both Houses of Parliament] (Copenhagen, 1850), pp. 6, 26. strict Christian sense] Variant: “Christian” has been added. separation―] Variant: first written “separation.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. I am without authority] In the prefaces to his edifying writings, Kierkegaard usually points out that he is speaking “without authority.” In “The

32 3

351

9

351

9

10 10

5

352

766

8

24

351m

352

353

1

28

11

12 33

354

12

354

16

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 51–54

Accounting” in On My Work as an Author he notes: “This in turn is the category of all my writings: to direct attention to the religious, to Christianity― but ‘without authority’ ” (OMWA, 6; SKS 13, 12). See also the two special pages toward the end of On My Work as an Author: “ ‘Without Authority’ to direct attention to the religious, to Christianity, is the category of my entire work as an author, viewed as a totality” (OMWA, 12; SKS 13, 19). The error in Mynster’s position] i.e., in the way in which J. P. Mynster (→ 337,3) related to the ideal in his understanding and preaching of Christianity and in the manner in which he discharged his episcopal office. truth about where we are,] Variant: first written “truth about where we are.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. a common barber in charge of a complex surgical operation] In Kierkegaard’s day, barbers who had passed the surgical examination at the Academy of Surgery still functioned as surgeons with the right to treat injuries and illnesses that presented externally, but the barbers’ rights were gradually reassigned to university-trained physicians, so that the activity of barbers in the health sector was in fact very limited, consisting principally of bleeding and the application of leeches. the sermon on the unchangingness of God] Reference to the sermon Kierkegaard had recently delivered in the Citadel Church (→ 370,10). If I am to be deceived . . . by God than by hum. beings] Kierkegaard found this pronouncement by Luther in August Petersen, Die Idee der christlichen Kirche [The Idea of the Christian Church], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1839–1846; ASKB 717–719), vol. 3 (1846), p. 420. See NB23:227 in the present volume. There is a pious man . . . p. 18 of this journal: See NB24:24. fear and trembling] → 348,42. then I would have continued] Variant: first written “but I would have continued”. Tertullian] Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus (ca. 155–240), born in Carthage in North

•

1851

Africa, theologian, apologist, one of the Roman Catholic Church Fathers. “The pagans, too, know repentance . . . repentance makes them worse, not better.”] An abbreviated rendering of a passage in C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter [Library of the Church Fathers] (→ 354,24), vol. 3 (1777), p. 73. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter, Leipzig, 1777, 3rd vol. p. 73] i.e., the large series of works collected and translated into German by the German theologian Christian Friederich Rössler (1736–1821), Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter in Uebersetzungen und Auszügen aus ihren führnehmsten, besonders dogmatischen Schriften, sammt dem Original der Hauptstellen und nöthigen Anmerkungen [Library of the Church Fathers in Translation and Extracted from Their Most Important Writings, Especially Concerning Dogmatics, together with the Original Principal Loci and Necessary Notes], 10 vols. (Leipzig, 1776–1786), vol. 3 (1777), p. 73, with the heading “Tertullians Schrift über die Buße / Auszug” [Tertullian’s Work on Repentance, Selections]. Tertullian’s writing de poenitentia] See C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter (→ 354,24), vol. 3, chap. 2: “Quintus Septimius Florens Tertillianus,” which begins with an “Einleitung” [Introduction], pp. 32–40, containing an overview of Tertullian’s writings that mentions De poenitentia [On Repentance], p. 38. At the same point] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. (p. 77) Tertullian says . . . repentance pleases God] Abbreviated rendering of a passage in C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter (→ 354,24), vol. 3 (1777), p. 77. How Things Went with the Publication of . . . The Sickness unto Death] On a number of occasions, Kierkegaard described the circumstances surrounding the publication of The Sickness unto Death, which appeared on July 30, 1849. At the last moment, Kierkegaard decided to employ the pseudonym Anti-Climacus instead of his own name. Subsequently, he published Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18) under the same pseud-

17

24

26

27

27

32

354

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

35

355

1

2

5

onym. See NB20:12 (“How the New Pseudonym Anti-Climacus Came About,” 1850) in KJN 7, 405. This is surely noted down in the journals from that time] See NB11:192, from June 1849; NB12:7 and 28–30, from July 1849; NB12:143 (“This Past Summer”), from September/October 1849; and NB13:78, from October 1849; as well as NB14:12, from November 1849, in KJN 6, 112–113, 147, 159– 160, 233–235, 324. I was very fatigued from the previous year] Kierkegaard noted a number of times how the year 1848 had been particularly wearing for him, both because of political upheavals and because it was the year of his greatest literary productivity. See the unused draft, from October 1849, of “The Accounting” portion of On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2), where he writes: “The year 1848, that year which was so important for me, when I worked more, much, much more than ever in any year, when I was also supported―dialectically understood―by that frightful political catastrophe, I had the opportunity truly to understand myself as an author and the opportunity . . . to turn inward in order to study and delve into the religious . . . ―the most reliable and truest study of the religious I possess” (Pap. X 5 B 219). The Sickness unto Death (→ 354,32), Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), and The Point of View for My Work as an Author (published posthumously by P. C. Kierkegaard in 1859) were all written in 1848. the financial crisis] A reference to the drop in financial markets because of the First Schleswig War (or Three Years’ War) that broke out in the spring of 1848. In December 1847, Kierkegaard had sold his childhood home at Nytorv 2, and he invested some of the proceeds in royal bonds. In 1848, he believed he had lost ca. 700 rix-dollars (→ 402m,12) because of falling bond prices. Kierkegaard used the rest of the money from the sale of the house to purchase stock, and he believed that he suffered no loss in this connection (see NB7:114 in KJN 5, 144, and F. Brandt and E. Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 86–90). All the business with R. Nielsen had distressed me] A reference to Kierkegaard’s relationship

•

1851

767

with professor of philosophy Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), with whom he had established a friendship in the summer of 1848 (see, e.g., NB7:114 in KJN 5, 145, and Pap. X 6 B 124). At that point Kierkegaard believed that he would soon die, and he therefore wished to have someone who would publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74 and NB14:90 in KJN 5, 56–57 and KJN 6, 402–405, respectively). He counted on Rasmus Nielsen, with whom he then discussed his views in the course of strolls they took every Thursday. Nonetheless, Kierkegaard wanted to defer judgment on how useful Nielsen might be until after Nielsen published his next book. On May 19, 1849, Nielsen’s book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed. Forelæsninger over Jesu Liv [The Faith of the Gospels and Modern Consciousness: Lectures on the Life of Jesus] (Copenhagen 1849; ASKB 700), appeared, and it profoundly disappointed Kierkegaard. The book makes it clear that Nielsen had been so influenced by Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works that reviewers declared he was a disciple of Kierkegaard. The whole affair filled Kierkegaard with worry and anger (see, e.g., NB11:46 in KJN 6, 28). Soon thereafter, H. L. Martensen published Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), dismissing Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works in the preface, and Rasmus Nielsen attacked Martensen in the polemical piece, Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens Christelige Dogmatik. En undersøgende Anmeldelse [Magister S. Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics: An Investigative Review] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 701), which was published on October 15, 1849. This then led to a greater debate about the relationship between faith and knowledge. Kierkegaard broke with Nielsen in April 1850 (see NB17:7 in KJN 7, 171– 172). Strube had caused me concern] Frederik Christian Strube (1811–1867), an Icelandic journeyman carpenter, and his wife and two daughters, lodged with Kierkegaard in the period 1848–1852. Strube became mentally ill, and from December 1 to December 9, 1848, he was a pa-

6

768

10

17

35

35

40

356

16

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

tient at Frederick’s Hospital in Copenhagen. See NB11:194.a (1849) in KJN 6, 116, and its accompanying explanatory note. my intention then to travel . . . work for a living] See, e.g., NB7:114 from November 1848, in which Kierkegaard recalls that after he had sold the house at the end of 1847, he had had a “plan of traveling abroad for 2 years” (KJN 5, 144). a threat of an income tax at any moment] Presumably, a reference to the political debate about how the First Schleswig War, which had broken out in April 1848, was to be financed. A war tax was introduced on May 15, 1850, but there was no tax on incomes or on wealth in Kierkegaard’s lifetime. See NB18:51 (1850): “what now seems imminent is a tax on wealth, which will embarrass me financially” (KJN 7, 290). pastoral seminary] The Royal Pastoral Seminary was established in 1809 and provided instruction in pastoral theology (i.e., the preparation of sermons), catechetical instruction, liturgy, canon law, and cure of souls. Kierkegaard had himself attended the pastoral seminary from November 1840 to September 1841, and had subsequently considered teaching there (→ 355m,8). that I might be reconciled with her . . . would have to request herself] Refers to Regine Schlegel, née Olsen (1822–1904), engaged to Kierkegaard from September 10, 1840, until October 12, 1841, and subsequently married to J. F. Schlegel (→ 360,10) on November 3, 1847. ― her . . . would have to request herself: Variant: changed from “her”. all the writings that had been completed] i.e., the writings subsequently published as The Sickness unto Death (→ 354,32), Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), as well as A Cycle of Ethical-Religious Essays, of which only Two Ethical-Religious Essays by H. H. were published (on May 19, 1849). Lastly, Kierkegaard had written on the intentions underlying his writings; see in particular The Point of View for My Work as an Author (published posthumously by P. C. Kierkegaard in 1859). I went to Madvig] Johan Nicolai Madvig (1804–1886), Danish philologist; professor at the University of Copenhagen; member of the constitutional convention, 1848–1849; from November

•

1851

16, 1848 until December 7, 1851, Madvig was cultus minister and as such had decisive influence over ecclesiastical appointments. See, e.g., NB11:193 in KJN 6, 113. I went to Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 337,3), to whom requests for clerical appointments were to be sent. See, e.g., NB11:192 in KJN 6, 112–113. In NB10:89 (1849), Kierkegaard notes: “The other day I went to Mynster and casually mentioned an appointment at the seminary” (KJN 5, 313). I went to Mynster yet again . . . he did not have time today] Reference to a visit on Monday, June 25, 1849, which Kierkegaard had described in NB11:193: “I was with him today, Monday. Sure enough: [‘]Good day, dear friend, dear friend[’]―and then he said that he didn’t have time to speak with me[:] ‘I’m saying it frankly.’ I understood him. Meanwhile I knew that I should restrain myself and thanked him for it because it showed his confidence in me. And then he repeated this [‘]dear friend[’] 6 or 7 times, slapped my back and patted me―i.e., he’s frightened to speak with me because he’s frightened of getting too involved with me. He did indeed say, [‘]Come another time[’] but he fully realized it wouldn’t be this week, and then he’s off to do his visitations, so it was easy to understand the message” (KJN 6, 113). During this same period . . . God expected something more of him] See, e.g., NB11:192: “I am pained by what I read in Fenelon somewhere about the idea that it must be horrible for the person ‘from whom God expected more, or on whom God had relied to make a crucial decision.’ On the other hand, I was struck by what I read in Fenelon today, 2nd Part, p. 26 (in Claudius’s translation). And especially what I read yesterday in Tersteegen’s Epiphany sermon, p. 141: ‘the wise men went another way,’ for we should always be ready to follow God’s lead,” (KJN 6, 112; see also the accompanying explanatory note). ― Fenelon: François de Salignac de la Mothe-Fénelon (1651– 1715), French archbishop and author, particularly noted as tutor for the grandson of Louis XIV, the duke of Burgundy. The passage Kierkegaard here copies is from Fenelon’s Werke religiösen Inhalts [Fenelon’s Religious Works], trans. Mathias

16

17

20

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

34

40

357

11

32

359

11 12

Claudius, 3 vols. (Hamburg, 1823 [1800–1811]; ASKB 1914), vol. 1, p. 223. ― Terstegen: Gerhard Tersteegen (1697–1769), German Reformed mystic, hymn writer, and revivalist lay preacher (especially in the period 1750–1760). So I wrote to the printer . . . have the manuscript the next day] The correspondence between Kierkegaard and the printer has not survived. Kierkegaard delivered the manuscript of The Sickness unto Death to the printer on June 29, 1849, and the printing of the book was completed on July 27, 1849. ― the printer: Bianco Luno’s Printing House, owned by Christian Peter Bianco Luno (1795–1852), printer to the royal Danish court, where all of Kierkegaard’s books, with the exception of Two Ethical-Religious Essays (1849), were printed. See NB12:28 in KJN 6, 159, and NB20:12 in KJN 7, 405. Councillor of State Olsen is dead] Terkild or Terkel Olsen (1784–1849), head of the office of accounting in the government finance department, father of Kierkegaard’s onetime fiancée, Regine (→ 355,35), died on the night between June 25 and 26, 1849. He was awarded the title of “actual counselor of state” on June 28, 1840. According to the Danish system of rank and preferment, adopted in 1746 and revised in 1808, an “actual” (as opposed to “titular”) councillor of state was in the third subclass of the third class. See “Titulaturer til Rangspersoner i alfabetisk Orden” [Titles of Persons of Rank, Listed in Alphabetical Order], in C. Bartholin, Almindelig Brev- og Formularbog [Universal Book of Letters and Formulae], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB 933), vol. 1, pp. 49–56. I did not sleep peacefully at night] See, e.g., NB14:12 (1849): “I was under great strain and slept rather fitfully, and strangely enough, words occurred to me to the effect that I was about to leap to my downfall” (KJN 6, 355). Luno] → 356,34. in fear and trembling] → 348,42. So I sent the manuscript to the printer] See the account in NB14:12: “In the morning I reconsidered the matter. Action had to be taken, that was how I understood it. Then I decided to refer the matter entirely to God: to send the first manuscript (The Sickness unto Death) to the printer

•

1851

769

without saying anything whatever about whether anything else was to be printed. I would now let actuality test me: it was possible that everything could be printed, and it was possible that I could turn aside” (KJN 6, 355). So the work became pseudonymous] See the account in NB14:12 of how the pseudonym AntiClimacus arrived at the last moment: “During typesetting there was some nonsense with Reitzel, which made me extremely impatient. Once again, it occurred to me to take back the entire manuscript, to put it aside and wait yet again and see whether I shouldn’t let everything be printed at the same time and without pseudonymity, for the pseudonymity had not yet been established because the title page had not been printed (in a breach with my customary practice, I had originally given orders that it was to be printed last). I went to the printer. It was too late. The typesetting of most of it was as good as finished. So the pseudonym was put on it. That is how one must be helped, and helps oneself, when it is so difficult to act” (KJN 6, 355). As for the other writings by Anti-Climacus . . . title page . . . poetic] The book Practice in Christianity. By Anti-Climacus. Nos. I, II, III. Published by S. Kierkegaard (Copenhagen, 1850), which came out on September 25, 1850, is a collection of three pieces: “Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,” “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” of which the first two were written in 1848 and the third was probably written in 1849. In NB14:12 (1849), Kierkegaard writes: “When the work “Come unto Me All You Who Labor etc.” was written, [“]Poetic Venture― Without Authority; For Inward Deepening in Christianity[”] was immediately put on the title page. And then my name was put there. And that was also how it was with the others” (KJN 6, 354). No title page with this wording has been found. However, in November 1848, when Kierkegaard considered publishing The Sickness unto Death (→ 354,32), another piece titled “Armed Neutrality,”

16

18

770

360

1

5 8 10

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54

plus the three pieces that were subsequently collected as Practice in Christianity, in one volume to be called Fulfillment’s Complete Works, he added in the margin: “The three―[‘]Come unto Me[’]; [‘]Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended[’]; [‘]From On High[’]―would then get a separate title page: Attempt to Introduce Xnty in Xndom; but at the foot of the title page [‘]Poetic Attempt―Without Authority,[’]”; see NB8:15, NB9:56, NB10:19 in KJN 5, 158, 242–243, 275–276. the preface in my own name] The first of the three pieces constituting Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18) is preceded by an “Editor’s Preface,” signed by Kierkegaard, in which he states: “In this work, stemming from the year 1848, the pseudonym forces the requirement for being a Christian up to the highest level of the ideal. Yet the requirement must be stated, presented, heard; from a Christian point of view there must be no reduction of the requirement, nor ought it be suppressed―instead of making an admission and confession concerning oneself. The requirement ought to be heard, and I understand what is said as spoken to me alone, so that I might learn not only to take refuge in ‘grace,’ but to take refuge in it with respect to the use of ‘grace’ ” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). Parts 2 and 3 of the book refer back to this preface (PC, 73 and 149; SKS 12, 85 and 153). I had the idea of traveling] → 355,10. there was the constant threat of an income tax] → 355,17. So I took a step . . . in her cabinet] See NB14:44 (“A Further Step in Relation to ‘Her.’ ”), in which Kierkegaard summarizes the sequence of events. It begins: “I have written a letter to Schlegel with a letter to her enclosed, and have received his reply and the other letter unopened. Everything is found in a packet in her cabinet” (KJN 6, 273). ― Schlegel: Johan Frederik Schlegel (1817–1896), Danish jurist and civil servant; university student, 1833; bachelor of law, 1838; served for a time as a private tutor in the Olsen household and developed tender feelings for Regine. In 1842, he started as an intern in the government’s Office of Customs and Commerce, becoming a head

•

1851

clerk there in 1847. He married Regine Olsen on November 3, 1847 (→ 355,35). ― her cabinet: See Not15:6: “I had a cabinet made of Brazilian rosewood. It was made according to my own design, and this in turn was occasioned by words from her, the lovable, in her agony. She said that she would thank me her whole life long if she were permitted to remain with me, even if she had to live in a little cabinet. Taking this into account, it was built without shelves.―In it, carefully preserved, is found everything that reminds me of her and that might remind her of me. There are also copies for her of [the writings by] the pseudonyms; there were always only two vellum copies printed, one for her and one for me” (KJN 3, 438). Then I moved from the tanner’s] Kierkegaard lived on Rosenborggade from April 28, 1848, to April 16, 1850, first at number 9, thereafter at number 7, where he had rented rooms from Johan Julius Gram, a tanner. Kierkegaard decided it was too expensive to live in Gram’s apartments, and the stench from the tanning works was insufferable; see NB18:92 in KJN 7, 324. so I had not viewed the rooms myself . . . the apartment was as might be expected] In NB18:92 (“My Home”) in KJN 7, 324, Kierkegaard explains in more detail the circumstances of his move to Nørregade, including the unfortunate part played by Strube (→ 355,6). Kierkegaard moved from Nørregade to Østerbro on April 24, 1851, i.e., after having begun the present journal. the other manuscripts by Anti-Climacus] i.e., the three pieces that subsequently were published together as Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18). That was what I did] Kierkegaard delivered the manuscript of Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18) to Bianco Luno’s Printing House (→ 356,34) on August 20, 1850, and on September 25, 1850, the book was advertised as having been published. that apartment] Probably both the place on Rosenborggade (→ 360,13) and the subsequent place on Nørregade (→ 360,14). pecuniary worries] Kierkegaard is presumably referring to his general financial situation, namely, the fact that he could no longer continue to consume his capital, which was absolutely out of the

13

14

26

28

35

35

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 54–57

36

361

13 16

355m

356m

4

20

24 41

357m

7 11

18

question if he was losing money (→ 355,2) or if there was the prospect of new taxation (→ 355,17). the one in ’49] Variant: added. Kierkegaard is referring to the publication of The Sickness unto Death, which is the subject of the present entry. that line from Fenelon] → 356,20. that preface of mine . . . take refuge in grace] → 360,1. ― refuge in grace: Variant: first written “refuge in Xnty”. Then I would have to regard myself . . . influences on me.] Variant: added. ― the idea of the seminary . . . Mynster would clearly oppose it] Kierkegaard’s idea of getting an appointment to the pastoral seminary, which he raised with Mynster, ended with Mynster suggesting that Kierkegaard himself could found a seminary, i.e., offer to hold lectures; see NB24:121. See also the unused draft of a polemical article, “A Remark by Bishop Mynster,” from 1851, in which Kierkegaard retrospectively writes: “I have had another thought for the past 4 or 5 years, however. Recognizant of my unique abilities, and because I believe it would be in agreement with the establishment and Bishop M. [Mynster], and for my own sake, I have desired a position at the pastoral seminary. Throughout the years I have insistently mentioned this to the bishop. But no!” (Pap. X 6 B 173, p. 274). I sent a message to the printer . . . the manuscript the next day] See the account in NB14:12: “I wrote to the printer and gave orders for typesetters and that ‘things were to done quickly.’ I received word from the printer that everything was ready and could they have the manuscript” (KJN 6, 354). Then the same evening I learn that Councillor of State Olsen is dead] → 356,40. keep her out of it,] Variant: first written “keep her out of it.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. after I had come to live in that unfortunate apartment on Nørregade] → 360,13. depressed me as much as that apartment,] Variant: first written “as much as that apartment.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. that night’s conversation with myself] → 357,11.

•

1851

771

see journal NB26. p. 92] See NB26:39 (“On Myself”), dated August 7, 1852, in KJN 9 (SKS 25, 44–46). those manuscripts] → 355,40. the journals from that period] In NB7:20 (1848), Kierkegaard remarks: “it is only now, after 7 years’ time, that I dare confide to paper my thoughts concerning her” (KJN 5, 90). Subsequently, one finds the relationship to Regine discussed in NB10:199 (1849) (KJN 5, 375–377). Kierkegaard began writing in Journal NB11 on May 2, 1849; see entries NB11:183 and 192 in KJN 6, 107–108 and 112–113. He began writing in journal NB12 on July 19, 1849; see entries NB12:29, 105, 116, 118, 120, 122–123, 138, 150, 198 in KJN 6, 159–160, 201–202, 210–211, 212–214, 214–216, 217–219, 227–231, 238–239, 268–270. He began writing in Journal NB13 on September 28, 1849; see NB13:4 and 16 (“My Relationship to Her: The Final Word, for Now”) in KJN 6, 276, 284–285. See also the whole of Notebook 15, which bears the title “My Relationship to ‘her.’ Aug. 24th 49. somewhat poetical,” in KJN 3, 427–445, where Kierkegaard provides a retrospective account of his relationship with Regine Olsen. I went in vain both to Madvig and Mynster, and to Mynster a second time] Madvig (→ 356,16) and Mynster (→ 356,16) were not at home when Kierkegaard called on them, and when he called on Mynster again, the bishop did not have time to talk with him (→ 356,17).

31

New Themes for Sermons on the Unchangingness of God] Kierkegaard, who had very recently preached at the Citadel Church on “God’s Unchangingness” (→ 370,10), had treated the same topic earlier in Two Edifying Discourses (1843) and in the second and third discourses in Four Edifying Discourses, in EUD, 31–48 and 125– 158; SKS 5, 41–56 and 129–158. * *] Variant: first written two hash marks (# #), apparently indicating the end of the entry and the beginning of a new page.

31

the quiet hours] An expression frequently used by Mynster with respect to devotions, both in private and in church. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on

14

359m

35 5

361m

12

7

361

772

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 57–65

the Doctrines of the Christian Faith], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1833]; ASKB 254–255), vol. 1, p. 240; vol. 2, pp. 298, 299, 301, 306; and Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons for Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230 and 2191), vol. 1, pp. 8, 38, 215, 384; vol. 2, p. 127; Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Held in the Church Year 1846– 1847] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), pp. 52, 63; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Held in the Church Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 10, 11, 14; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Held in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 204, 216. 362

33

363

1

363

28

31

364

7

364

18

Cyprian in his work . . . give all the more] Reference to chap. 3 (“Thascius Cäcilius Cyprianus”) in C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter (→ 354,24), vol. 3, where one section (pp. 212–217) bears the title “Cyprian Von der Gutthätigkeit (51) und Allmosen. Auszug” [Cyprian on Beneficence51 and Alms, Selections]; see p. 216: “It is just as unchristian, my brothers, if you want to refrain from charity toward the poor because of the number of your children. One ought to give all the more.” ― Cyprian: Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus (ca. 200–258), bishop of Carthage in North Africa, one of the Roman Catholic Church Fathers; died as a martyr on September 14, 258. Hoc ipso operari . . . animæ liberandæ] From C. F. Rössler, Bibliothek der Kirchen-Väter (→ 354,24), vol. 3, p. 216, where the passage is found in note 57. Blessed the Person Who Does Not See―and Nonetheless Believes] From Jn 20:29; see also 1 Pet 1:8. Thomas certainly did see . . . a dead person has risen] Reference to Jn 20:24–29. amicable irony] Variant: changed from “amicable concession”. God’s Unchangingness] Kierkegaard had been preoccupied with this theme for years (→ 361,31).

•

1851

Hilarius contra Auxentium . . . over great places] Kierkegaard translates from Paul Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 1, pp. 91–92, which includes a passage from a writing by the Church Father Hilarius of Poitiers (Hilarius Pictaviensis, ca. 315–367), Contra Auxentium [Against Auxentius]; Auxentius, the bishop of Milan, was an Arian. Henry, Calvins Leben 1st pt., pp. 91 and 92] i.e., Paul Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins des großen Reformators [The Life of the Great Reformer John Calvin], 3 vols. (Hamburg, 1835–1844), vol. 1, pp. 91–92.

35

364

8

365

“It is precisely through diligence . . . sacras scripturas.”] Kierkegaard translates and cites from Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 1, p. 295, where Henry cites a portion of Calvin’s Institutes. Kierkegaard owned an edition of Calvin’s Institutio religionis Christianae [Institutes of the Christian Religion], originally published in 1536 and in a second, augmented edition in 1539; see Calvin, Joannis Calvinis Institutio christianæ religionis [John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion], ed. A. Tholuck, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1834– 1835; ASKB 455–456). Institutiones, Lib 1. cap. 8 cited from Henry, Calvins Leben 1st pt., p. 295] See bk. 1, chap. 14 of Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), where he refers to Calvin’s Institutio (→ 365,11), bk. 1, chap. 8.

11

365

Socrates would not make use of the speech that had been offered to him] See bk. 2, chap. 5, “Socrates,” pp. 40–41, in Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s Philosophical History, or the Lives, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Eminent Philosophers, in Ten Books], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111; abbreviated hereafter as Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie), vol. 1, p. 74: “The philosopher then, after Lysias had written a defense for him, read it through and said: ‘A fine speech, Lysias; it is not, however, suitable to me.’ For it was plainly more forensic than philosoph-

26

17

365

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 65–74 ical. Lysias said, ‘If it is a fine speech, how can it fail to suit you?’ ‘Well,’ he replied, ‘would not fine raiment and fine shoes be just as unsuitable to me?’ ” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 1, p. 171. See also Plato’s Apology, 34c, where Socrates says that he has not thought of having his family and children attend in order to request his acquittal: “I do not think that it is right for me to use any of these methods at my age and with my reputation.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), p. 20. 366

27

367

2

11

11

fullness of time] Reference to Gal 4:4–5. Calvin actually lived in poverty . . . become a grandee] Kierkegaard here reproduces the depiction of Calvin in the section “Das arme Leben Calvins” [Calvin’s Life of Poverty] in bk. 1, chap. 20 (“Charakteristik Calvins” [Description of Calvin]) in Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 1, pp. 423–433. See Henry, Calvins Leben 1st part, pp. 429 and 430] Refers to a passage in Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 1, pp. 429–430, of which Kierkegaard translates the conclusion. he himself says (p. 430, bottom of page) . . . I am afflicted with every day] Kierkegaard’s translation of the last lines of the passage referred to in the previous note.

367

34

I have certainly heard . . . that no one could hear me] See NB24:74.

368

14

First he concerns himself with nature . . . as an ethicist] See the Greek author Diogenes Laertius (3rd century a.d.), who reports in his history of philosophy (→ 365,26), bk. 2, chap. 5, sec. 21: “He [Socrates] discussed moral questions in the workshops and the market-place, being convinced that the study of nature is no concern of ours”; English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers (→ 365,26), vol. 1, p. 151.

•

1851

773

Socrates . . . not demonstrate any real productivity] Socrates did not write any books.

23

368

one of Mynster’s sermons] Kierkegaard owned the following volumes of sermons published by J. P. Mynster (→ 337,3): Prædikener [Sermons], 3rd ed., vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1826 [1810]; ASKB 228), 2nd, ed., vol. 2 (Copenhagen, 1832 [1815]; ASKB 2192); Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 362,14); Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 (→ 362,14); Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 (→ 362,14); and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 362,14). the useful English custom . . . of reading someone else’s sermon aloud] What Kierkegaard is referring to could not be determined. ― living words: Allusion to N.F.S. Grundtvig and his followers. the significance of Mynster’s sermons for me, something I inherited from my father] In NB2:269, from April 1847, Kierkegaard writes: “I was brought up on Mynster’s sermons―by my father. There’s the rub, because naturally it would never have occurred to my father to have taken these sermons any other way than literally. Brought up on Mynster’s sermons―by Mynster: yes, that’s a question” (KJN 4, 240). See also Pap. X 6 B 212, p. 334: “In a way, I was brought up on Bishop M’s sermons. Later, starting in my 25th year, I read M’s sermons year after year.” And in NB5:81, from June 1848, he writes: “And yet I love B. M.; my only wish is to do everything that might strengthen his reputation; for I have admired him and hmnly speaking I do admire him, and whenever I can do something for his benefit, I think of my father, whom, I believe, it pleases” (KJN 4, 407). See also NB11:154, from May or June 1849 (KJN 6, 87–88); NB18:77, from May or June 1850 (KJN 7, 310–311); and NB22:120 in the present volume. Kierkegaard later remarked in NB28:56 (KJN 9; SKS 25, 262–264) that he was invariably present whenever Mynster preached in Copenhagen. ― my father: → 338,32.

36

369

6

370

On Sunday, May 18th, I preached at the Citadel] Kierkegaard preached at the Citadel Church (also known as the Castle Church) on Sunday, May 18,

10

370

40

774

10

11

371

1

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 74–76

1851, the fourth Sunday after Easter, on the epistle Jas 1:17–21. See the list of preachers published in Fædrelandet, May 17, 1851, no. 11, p. 452: “The Citadel, Mag. S. Kierkegaard, 9½ o’clock.” On May 21, Kierkegaard received two letters from women who had been present. The one letter writer, who called herself “e – e,” wrote, “You were listed as the preacher at the Citadel last Sunday. I could not refrain from going out there, and I was not disappointed. It was not one of the sermons I have heard so often and have forgotten before it was finished. No, the discourse streamed forth from a rich, warm heart, terrifying, but also edifying and reassuring, penetrating to the heart, never to be forgotten, but to bear eternal fruits, rich in blessings” (LD, 379–380; SKS 28, 476). The second letter writer, who called herself “S.F.,” expressed her profound thanks for Kierkegaard’s sermon at the Citadel Church: “For me, the day was a festival day of edification, and I think it was for many others as well” (LD, 384; SKS 28, 480). Kierkegaard did not publish the sermon until September 3, 1855, when it appeared under the title The Changelessness of God: A Discourse by S. Kierkegaard (M, 263–281; SKS 13, 319–339). my first, my beloved, text, James 1] In the preface to his sermon, The Unchangingness of God, Kierkegaard writes: “This discourse was delivered in the Citadel Church on May 18, 1851. The text is the first one I used; subsequently it has been brought forth frequently; now I return to it again,” (M, 267; SKS 13, 325). Kierkegaard had frequently made use of Jas 1:17–21 (→ 361,31). with the thought of “her,”] i.e., with the thought of Regine (→ 355,35). See the lengthy NB25:109 in the present volume. On Sunday following May 18th . . . My grace is sufficient for you.] The Sunday to which Kierkegaard refers was Sunday, May 25, 1851, the fifth Sunday after Easter, for which the gospel text was Jn 16:23–28, and the epistle text was Jas 1:22–27. Kierkegaard did not in fact read Mynster’s Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 362,14) in the sequence dictated by the church calendar. He speaks of the epistle text for Sexagesima Sunday, i.e., 2 Cor 12:7–9, where Paul writes: “Therefore, to keep me from being

•

1851

too elated, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I appealed to the Lord about this, that it would leave me, but he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.’ So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.” Mynster’s sermon, no. 14, “Vor Pligt at nøies med Guds Naade” [Our Duty to Be Satisfied with God’s Grace], is found in the above-mentioned collection, vol. 1 (1837), pp. 191–203. be born in me (I myself] Variant: first written “be born in me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. see p. 118 in this journal] See NB24:90.

12

1

370m

Luther―Catherine von Bora] Martin Luther definitively left the Augustinian monastery in 1524 and the following year married the nun Catharine von Bora (1499–1552), who had left the cloister in Nimbschen with eight other nuns and fled to Wittenberg, where, with Luther’s approval, they had been granted refuge. The couple lived together in Wittenberg, where they had six children. In 1850 and 1851, in the wake of proposed laws providing for freedom of religion and the introduction of civil marriage, there was a debate concerning the theological basis of marriage. The debate took place in newspapers and in a series of pieces such as A. G. Rudelbach’s Om det borgerlige Ægteskab (→ 337,19), in which Luther’s marriage is discussed in detail; in Kierkegaard’s article against Rudelbach (→ 337,14), which includes a note about Luther’s marriage to Catherine von Bora; and in Mynster’s response to Rudelbach, which included an appendix, “Om Luthers Ægteskab” [On Luther’s Marriage], in Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 337,19), pp. 45–56; and Rudelbach’s reply to Mynster’s remarks (→ 337,19). See NB23:25 in the present volume. in my eyes] Variant: added.

31

371

2

372

of Henry, Calvins Leben . . . my name is sufficient] A reference to and translation of a passage from the last chapter of Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 3 (1844), pp. 581–582.

8

372

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 76–79 372m

1

Henry, Calvins Leben, pt. 3, p. 582, note] The note contains Luther’s will in Latin (→ 372,8).

372

18

The N.T. obviously has a preference for the unmarried state] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 7:1–2. it also permits marrying as an indulgence] Reference to 1 Cor 7:9. αδιαφoρov] Kierkegaard discusses this in a number of places; see, e.g., NB21:124 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. like the man who said . . . I will never abandon you] Refers to the dead drunk man in Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Det lykkelige Skibbrud [The Happy Capsize] (1731), who exclaims in act 3, sc. 6: “The more one is in your company, dear brandy, the more one wants you. I will never abandon you until the day I die―nor will you leave me” (Den Danske Skue-Plads [→ 345,23], vol. 4). In the Middle Ages, people did not know Greek] → 373,3. The easygoing, worldly mind . . . Erasmus Rotterdams Leben . . . Hamburg, 1828, p. 115 top] See part 1, sec. 1 (“Die Jugendgeschichte des Erasmus, und was er als Mensch gewesen” [The History of Erasmus as a Young Man and the Person He Was), from Adolf Müller’s book about Erasmus of Rotterdam (→ 376,1), Leben des Erasmus von Rotterdam. Mit einleitenden Betrachtungen über die analoge Entwickelung der Menschheit und des einzelnen Menschen. Eine gekrönte Preisschrift [The Life of Erasmus of Rotterdam, with Introductory Observations on the Analogous Development of Humanity and of the Individual Human Being. A Prize-Winning Essay] (Hamburg, 1828), in which Müller explains how the ignorance of Greek that prevailed in the Middle Ages made it very difficult for Erasmus to acquire the language, leading Erasmus to remark subsequently, “In my youth, a darkness lay so heavily upon our Germany that a person was in fact accounted a heretic if he could understand the Greek language” (p. 115).

21 22

29

373

1 3

373

10

be rejected] The Danish term that Kierkegaard uses is mynstres ud, which was a highly anomalous spelling of mønstres ud and perhaps an allusion to Bishop J. P. Mynster.

•

1851

775

for this reason I have truly been the only one who has said: I do not have faith] Kierkegaard had not yet said this in his own name, but in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) he had the pseudonym Johannes Climacus declare: “The undersigned, Johannes Climacus, who has written this book, does not put himself forward as a Christian” (CUP, 617; SKS 7, 560). See NB17:28 in KJN 7, 185. In Practice in Christianity, the pseudonymous author Anti-Climacus does not present himself as a Christian, either (→ 394,37). In the appendix to On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2), which is dated November 1850, Kierkegaard does, however, explain his position, saying that he has never accused anyone of not being a Christian, that he has never called himself a Christian, but on the contrary has said that he was “without authority” (see OMWA, 15; SKS 13, 23).

26

Tiberius was willing to include Xt among the gods] See bk. 2, chap. 2 (“Tiberius ved Efterretningen om Christus” [Tiberius Had Information Concerning Christ]) in Kirkens Historie gjennem de tre første Aarhundreder af Eusebius [Eusebius’s History of the Church in the First Three Centuries], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB U37). Here it is related how Tiberius Claudius Nero (42 b.c.–a.d. 37), Roman emperor, a.d. 14–37, reacted to Pilate’s communication concerning Jesus: “When the miraculous resurrection and ascension of Our Savior had already been heard of by many people, Pilate―in keeping with the customary practice of reporting all news―provided emperor Tiberius [i.e., Nero] with a report concerning Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, about which all of Palestine was talking; similarly, he also reported on Christ’s other miracles and on the fact that many regarded him as a God. Tiberius supposedly presented this news to the council, which, however, rejected the matter, apparently offended at having been bypassed in this matter because according to an old law, no one could be included among the gods without the council’s decision and consent. But at root events took this course because God’s saving word has no

2

374

776

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 79–82

need of human approval and assistance. Tiberius, however, remained fully behind the view he had already formed and did not institute any harsh measures against Christianity . . . The Providence of Heaven gave him this notion in order that the Gospel might strike root without resistance and spread over the entire world” (pp. 62–63). 374

28

29

375

5 8

13

Pentecost Sunday] i.e., Sunday, June 8, 1851. The gospel text for the day was Jn 14:23ff., and the epistle was Acts 2:1–11. Paulli preached. He preached . . . the apostles were the preachers] Paulli preached at the principal service at 10 a.m. at the Palace Church; see Adresseavisen, June, 7, 1851, no. 133. As a rule, Paulli destroyed his manuscripts, and he never published this sermon; see J. H. Paulli, Taler i Kirken og ved særegne Leiligheder [Discourses in Church and on Special Occasions], ed. C.L.N. Mynster (Copenhagen, 1866), p. iii. ― Paulli: Just Henrik Voltelen Paulli (1809–1865), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1833; from 1835, catechist at Church of the Holy Spirit; from 1837, palace priest at Christiansborg Castle Church, and from 1840, also court priest; close associate of Bishop J. P. Mynster (whose eldest daughter Paulli married in 1843) and a close friend of H. L. Martensen (→ 397,21). In 1840, he was made a Knight of the Dannebrog. Kierkegaard’s library included Paulli’s contribution to the history of practical theology, Dr. Niels Hemmingsens Pastoraltheologie [The Pastoral Theology of Dr. Niels Hemmingsen] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 715); the volume was advertised in Adresseavisen, July 1, 1851, no. 152, as having appeared. Paulli defended his doctor of theology dissertation on June 30, 1851. fat preachers with clerical livings, who are Knights of the Dannebrog] e.g., Paulli (→ 374,29). Then he continued: “The believers were united . . . everything was held in common.”] Paulli must have touched upon Acts 4:32–35. His Reverence] In the Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) there were nine classes, each further subdivided into numerical subclasses. Specific titles and forms of

•

1851

address were assigned to persons in various official positions. See C. Bartholin, Almindelig Brevog Formularbog (→ 356,40), vol. 1, pp. 49–56. Those holding positions of authority in the church, e.g., bishops, court preachers, doctors of theology, were to be addressed as “the right Reverend” and were ranked first in the sixth class (of nine classes in all). In Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 337,19) Mynster had complained―perhaps thinking of Kierkegaard― about the misuse of clerical titles: “Certainly many theologians cannot be acquitted of the fact that, in keeping with ancient custom, they bear the title of “Your Reverence,” and this increasingly seems to be held against them. It is wretched―even though there is scarcely any trace of this remaining among us nowadays―if someone wants to place his rank or title on the scales in the belief that by so doing he adds weight to his opinion. On the other hand it now seems to have become customary to use a man’s title as a reason for rejecting his opinion, and in the course of ecclesiastical disputes we regularly hear from those who think that they have said something witty or incisive when they have called their opponents ‘Reverences.’―‘A thrown stone is a bad argument,’ said Fichte when the youth of Berlin broke his windows; and whether one calls those whom one wants to mock ‘Reverences’ or ‘bag peekers,’ the argument is equally mean and crude” (pp. 8–9). In the otherwise excellent sermon by Mynster . . . and the second] Refers to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 337,3) sermon for the second Sunday in Lent on 1Thes 4:1–7, on holiness, which bears the title “XIX. On Purity of Heart and of Life,” in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 362,14), vol. 1 (1837), pp. 230–242. The apostle to whom Mynster refers is Paul, and Mynster does use the term “lust,” but not “dishonesty.” The sermon’s transition, to which Kierkegaard refers, reads as follows: “Let us recall our text. Its admonition is this: God’s will is our sanctification; he called us not to impurity, but to holiness. But does this mean that the apostle goes no further than the admonition we have discussed thus far?

18

375

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 82–85

31

Is life pure because it is respectable in this respect? Is the heart pure because these passions have been extinguished? Oh you, who trumpet your strength, your early wisdom because you remained standing when the others fell, who praise yourself that you are not like those who are infected, whom you despise: Are your hands clean, then, when ill-gotten advantage clings to them? Is your heart pure if it is filled with base self-seeking? This, indeed, in whichever of its thousands of forms it appears, is what infects and corrupts both thought and life; and whether what you seek is gold or pleasure, sacrificing what is great and good for what is low and wicked, what is eternal for what is temporal, sacrificing God and his will and approval for the world and for yourself―then your are nonetheless, in your fashion, entangled in the impurity that you condemn when it manifests itself in a different way than your own, and you cannot raise clean hands and a confident heart to Him who sees in secret . . . Therefore there is a close connection in the apostle’s discourse, when to the first admonition he adds this one: Do not oppress anyone or exploit your brother in any business, for the Lord is the avenger of all such―as we always have said and testified to before you―when he reminds us that avarice infects lives and hearts just as much as does lust” (pp. 236–237). spare me your. . . profundity] Variant: first written “Kiss my ass”.

376

1

Erasmus of Rotterd. says somewhere . . . Hamburg 1828, p. 235] See A. Müller, Leben des Erasmus von Rotterdam (→ 373,3), p. 235.

376

13

It is said of him . . . philosophizing ethically] In bk. 2, chap. 5, sec. 21 of his history of philosophy, Diogenes Laertius relates how Socrates abandoned natural science for ethics (→ 368,14), saying of Socrates (chap. 5, sec. 22): “Unlike most philosophers, he had no need to travel, except when required to go on an [army] expedition. The rest of his life he stayed at home” (Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie [→ 365,26], vol. 1, p. 66). English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2

•

1851

777

vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 1, p. 153. he himself says somewhere in the introduction . . . but from peop. in the city] Refers to Plato’s dialogue Phaedrus (230d), where Socrates sits down together with Phaedrus under a tree outside the city walls: [Phaedrus] “Anyone would take you, as you say, for a stranger being shown the country by a guide instead of a native―never leaving town to cross the frontier nor even, I believe, so much as setting foot outside the walls.” [Socrates] “You must forgive me, dear friend; I’m a lover of learning, and trees and open country won’t teach me anything, whereas men in the town do.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues Including the Letters (→ 365,26), p. 479. the throng.] Variant: first written “the throng,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. he is stopped at the infinite negative] In his magister dissertation, On the Concept of Irony (1841), Kierkegaard defines Socrates’ standpoint as “absolute infinite negativity”; see CI, 215–216, 261; SKS 1, 260, 299. Socrates believed . . . everyone was ignorant] See Socrates’ Apology (20c–23b) by Plato, where Socrates tells of his divine call. Socrates’ friend Chaerephon had asked the oracle at Delphi if there was anyone who was wiser than Socrates, and the oracle had answered, No. Socrates then turned his attention to understanding what this pronouncement meant, interrogating everyone who was reputed to be wise and investigating the type of wisdom they possessed. Eventually he had to accept that the god was right, inasmuch as Socrates’ wisdom consisted of his knowledge that human wisdom is really worthless: “That is why I still go about seeking and searching in obedience to the divine command, if I think anyone is wise, whether citizen or stranger, and when I think that any person is not wise, I try to help the cause of the God by proving that he is not” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues Including the Letters (→ 365,26), p. 9). the Socratic principle: Do you know something or do you not know something] Refers to

14

21

35

5

9

377

778

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 85–89

Socrates as an intellectualist who raised questions concerning (imagined) knowledge. Socrates differentiated between knowing and not knowing, something frequently emphasized by Kierkegaard as, e.g., in the motto that accompanies The Concept of Anxiety (1844) (CA, 3; SKS 4, 310) and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 327, 558; SKS 7, 298, 507, with the accompanying explanatory notes). 377

14

27 37

378

3 5

378

26

Lessing (Wolfembüttel fragment) Conception of Xt] In his capacity as a librarian of the town of Wolfenbüttel in Braunschweig, the German scholar Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729–1781) anonymously published portions of a manuscript by the late German rationalist theologian Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694–1768). Kierkegaard refers here to Von dem Zwecke Jesu und seiner Jünger. Noch ein Fragment des Wolfenbüttelschen Ungenannten [On the Goals of Jesus and His Disciples: Another Fragment from the Unnamed Person of Wolfenbüttel] (Braunschweig, 1778), pp. 112–127 (equivalent to part 1, §§ 30–33) and pp. 129ff. (equivalent to part 2, § 2ff.), where it is shown that Jesus’ disciples at first regarded him as an earthly king who was supposed to defeat the occupying Roman forces and reestablish the independence of the Jewish state, but that when, with Jesus’ death, this failed to occur, his disciples reinterpreted his life in religious fashion. See NB11:118 (1849) in KJN 6, 62–63, with the accompanying explanatory note. to die away from] → 332,13. demonic (in the evil sense)] i.e., demonic in the Christian or New Testament sense, as opposed to the Greek philosophical sense. In The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 118–154; SKS 4, 420–453) Kierkegaard defines the demonic as an unfree relation to the good. “You will be placed before kings . . . at that time.”] Freely quoted from Mt 10: 18–20. this is explained on the basis of the assistance by the [Holy] Spirit] See the preceding note. “ ‘I really do believe that lying is a science,’ said the devil; he had attended lectures at Kiel.”] A proverb

•

1851

noted as no. 6156 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 673. Bishop Mynster] → 337,3. yesterday] It is not known when this conversation took place. The last time Kierkegaard had spoken with Mynster was May 2, 1851 (see NB24:30), and the next time would be August 9, 1851 (see NB24:121). From mid-June until mid-July 1851 Mynster was at home during the interval between his two periods of visitation travel (→ 337,4). lying is a science, and truth is a paradox] This is the content of part 2, sec. 2, chap. 2 (“Subjective Truth, Inwardness; Truth Is Subjectivity”) of Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous work, Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 189–251; SKS 7, 173–228). See Kierkegaard’s draft of an article (Pap. X 6 B 207, p. 322), where he uses this same proverb, directed against Mynster, though without mentioning Mynster’s name. Fear and Trembling] In this entry and in the later NB24:108, Kierkegaard builds on his earlier pseudonymous work Fear and Trembling (1843) and produces draft material for a new “Fear and Trembling”; see NB25:2 and NB25:34 in the present volume, and NB28:41 from 1853 (“New ‘Fear and Trembling’ ”) (KJN 9; SKS 25, 248–249). Abraham . . . thrust it into Isaac] Kierkegaard’s point of departure for his presentation of Abraham here is the account of Abraham’s sacrifice of his son Isaac in Gen 22:1–19. This biblical passage also constitutes the point of departure for his published work Fear and Trembling (1843) (FT, esp. 9–23; SKS 4, 105–119). Sarah] Abraham’s wife, mother of Isaac. But that was not] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. the father of faith] Title assigned to Abraham in Fear and Trembling; owing in particular to Rom 4 and Gal 3:9, Abraham has acquired this title in Church tradition. But no one was as great as Abraham―who can comprehend him] These are the words of the fictive admirer of Abraham in Fear and Trembling

28 29

29

1

379

2

31 35

35

6

380

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 89–99 (1843): “No one was as great as Abraham. Who is able to understand him?” (FT, 14; SKS 4, 111). 380

26 32

380m 381

1 9 16

382

10 15

20

383

19

“her,”] i.e., Regine (→ 355,35). See also NB25:109 in the present volume. Ah, while I sleep, you are awake] See NB12:90 in KJN 6, 191 and NB18:39 in KJN 7, 279, which contain references to a prayer in Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog (→ 325,20), pp. 622–623: “Almighty God . . . you watch over us when we sleep, and when we awaken it is your power that preserves us and your eye that gives us counsel.” see p. 92 et al. in this journal] See NB24:74. die away] → 332,13. It is now time, as the watchman says] In Kierkegaard’s day watchmen patrolled the streets of Copenhagen with the task of lighting street lamps, maintaining peace and order, and helping in case of fire. As they walked the streets, they were required to cry out the prescribed watchman’s verses every hour. The verse for 10 p.m. was: “If you wish to know the time, master, girl and boy, then it is time one went to bed; commend yourself freely to the Lord; be bright and clever; be careful with flame and fire; our clock has struck ten,” Vægtervers, som synges om Natten af Vægterne i Kjøbenhavn [Watchmen’s Verses That Are Sung at Night by the Watchmen of Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 1850), p. 1. God-Man] i.e., Christ. a businessman] i.e., a priest. As civil servants, the priests were salaried by the state and had additional income from “perquisites,” i.e., fees for performing such clerical acts as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. which Luther protested] Luther protested against the thriving business of selling indulgences in his famous ninety-five theses, which he posted on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg on October 31, 1517, the date that is generally given as the start of the Protestant Reformation. It could not have been otherwise] An allusion to Luther’s celebrated (but possibly apocryphal) statement to the Diet of Worms in 1521, when he refused to retract the teachings that had been con-

•

1851

779

demned by the Church: “ich kann nicht anders, Gott helfe mir! Amen!” [I can do no other. God help me! Amen!]. See C.F.G. Stang, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), p. 123. status, and so forth)] Variant: first written “status)”. reduplication] An expression often used by Kierkegaard to designate a relationship of reflection in which something abstract is repeated (actualized) in concrete practice or existence.

32

that Mynster was a man of government . . . more than any journalist] Until 1848, as the king’s personal counselor and the leader of the Church, Mynster (→ 337,3) had power and understood how to use it (→ 389,9). With the advent of popular sovereignty in 1848 and the appointment of a cultus minister whose responsibilities included the Church (→ 389,17), Mynster had to negotiate for the political results he wanted and enjoyed only modest success. In a draft from 1852 (Pap. X 6 B 212, pp. 334–335) concerning his relationship with Mynster, Kierkegaard clarifies the matter: prior to 1848, Mynster had been able to conceal his weakness behind “the Royal Danish Chancery,” but after 1848, he could “not be a Christian bishop and stand firm, looking only to God and eternity and the responsibility and judgment―but preferred to act with worldly shrewdness, almost like a journalist.” Kierkegaard goes on to cite a number of examples of Mynster’s failure: “I refer, among other things, to the sort of agitation there was in connection with Spandet [who in 1850 and 1851 was a leader in the introduction of civil marriage and freedom of religion] . . . I refer, among other things, to the fact that he ordained Monrad [a National Liberal politician who had opposed the absolute monarchy], bent with the wind, went with the current . . . I refer, among other things, to the manner in which he, the be-all and end-all of the State Church, now almost democratically seeks to insinuate himself into the ‘People’s Church’ . . . I refer, among other things, to his telegraphic communications with the professors and with scientific scholarship, with Martensen, from beginning to end.”

19

384

35

385

780

386

4

11 11

14

386

24

33

388

1 2

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 99–103

Kierkegaard then faults Mynster for his involvement with “G.,” i.e., Goldschmidt, (→ 337,20); in this connection see also NB11:154 (1849) in KJN 6, 87–88. See also H. L. Martensen’s letter to his friend, Pastor Gude, dated December 21, 1850: “In the past, the bishop was at least heard in connection with every important matter and nothing was undertaken without his advice. Now we have only the parliament and a random cultus minister, who have absolutely no need to take the bishop into account, nor do they do so” (Biskop H. Martensens Breve [The Letters of Bishop H. Martensen], ed B. Kornerup, vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1955), p. 22). [“]It is too lofty[”] . . . so often said to me] Kierkegaard had not previously related this remark from his conversations with J. P. Mynster (→ 337,3), but later, in 1854, he adverted to it frequently. See also NB10:14 (1849): “What Nielsen told me is also true: that, in a way, Bishop Mynster considered me to be an exaggeration―in a time of peace. But now he thinks I’m a better fit” (KJN 5, 272). ― often: Variant, added. Goldschmidt] → 334,26. One must howl with the dogs among whom one finds oneself] A variant of the proverb “One must howl with the wolves among whom one finds oneself,” a maxim noted as no. 10,873 in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 378,26), vol. 2, p. 492. a quiet hour] → 362,14. we will have learned nothing from what has gone before?] See NB22:144 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. Christ says, [“]Do what I say―and you will learn.[”]] Kierkegaard’s paraphrase of Jn 7:17. See also NB14:106 in KJN 6, 412–413, and NB21:16.a and NB21:29 in the present volume. On Myself.] Variant: added. Now they are being printed] Two of Kierkegaard’s works, which appeared under his own name, On My Work as an Author and Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays, had presumably been sent to the printer in mid-July, and the printing was finished on August 4, 1851. The

•

1851

works were advertised in Adresseavisen, August 7, 1851, no. 184, as having appeared, and in Berlingske Tidende, August 6, 1851, no. 180. As Peter said, [“]Depart from me, for I am a sinful man[”]] From Lk 5:8. die away] → 332,13. “imitation” must . . . nor into presumptuousness] This is perhaps a reference to Luther’s sermon on Mt 21:1–9, the gospel text for the first Sunday of Advent, in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller. Efter Benjamin Lindners tydske Samling, overs. af J. Thisted [A Christian Book of Homilies, Collected from Dr. Martin Luther’s Church and House Postils: From Benjamin Lindner’s German Collection], trans. Jørgen Thisted, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828; ASKB 283; abbreviated hereafter as En christelig Postille), vol. 1, pp. 15–30. See, e.g., p. 17, where Luther says: “If you want to be a Christian, then you must take heed of the words, ‘For you, For you,’ and cling to them, and believe without doubting that what they say will befall you. Nor may you view it as presumptuousness that in so doing you compare yourself with the holy ones, but as an absolutely necessary humiliation and mistrust, not at all of God’s grace, but of yourself. At the risk of losing eternal salvation, we must couple such spirited consolation with the grace that is offered us by God. If you do not want to become one of the holy ones, just as holy as they, how will things go for you? But, that you boldly believe that you are holy in Christ―this is God’s true honor and promise, whereby you confess, love, and praise his grace and work, and by the same token condemn yourself and your works and cast away all faith in yourself―yes that is what I call being a Christian.” See also Luther’s sermon on Mt 11:2–10, the gospel text for the third Sunday of Advent, in En christelig Postille, vol. 1, pp. 39–51, e.g., p. 42: “From all this you must now follow one of the two: presumptuousness or despair. Presumptuousness ensues when a person attempts to fulfill the Law through works and involves himself in acting in accordance with the command of the words . . . Despair, on the other hand, appears when a person notices how

11

27 39

388

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 103 –105 weak the ground is upon which he has built and acknowledges that it is impossible for him to love God’s Law, for he finds nothing good within himself, finds nothing but hatred of the good and desire for what is evil. Then he realizes that he cannot fulfill the Law with works, so he despairs of his works and does not respect them.” And further, on p. 43: “The Gospel signifies a joyous message because in it is proclaimed life’s blessed teaching about God’s promise, as well as the offer of grace and the forgiveness of sins. Therefore, deeds are not a part of the Gospel, for it is not the Law, but faith alone.” See NB20:65 in KJN 7, 436. 389

5

9

Mynster has never had . . . essentially of “reasons.”] Under the pseudonym Anti-Climacus, Kierkegaard gives an account of the criterion against which he measures Mynster (→ 337,3) in the fifth discourse in “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” in Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), No. III, where Anti-Climacus writes how, in solitary, suffering fashion, and beset with spiritual trials, he has occupied himself with Christianity’s rigor: “Christianity is the unconditioned, it has only one being, unconditioned being; if it is not unconditioned, it is abolished; in relation to Christianity there is an unconditional either/or . . . even the most Christian sermon I have heard nonetheless always had a suspect admixture of ‘reasons,’ an aftertaste of human whimpering and pity, an offnote of ingratiation” (PC, 227–228; SKS 12, 221– 222). when Xnty had the support . . . of physical force] Refers to the ecclesiastical situation prior to 1848, when the State Church (→ 351,9) was replaced by the People’s Church (→ 351,9). Mynster was known for governing with a firm hand, e.g., in the case involving the forced baptism of the children of Baptists in the early 1840s, about which H. L. Martensen (→ 397,21) subsequently related: “Mynster insisted that because the Baptists would not have their children baptized, the state was justified in incorporating them in our society and taking care that baptism be carried out, even if it was against the parents’ will. The consequence of this was that on occasion it was necessary to

•

1851

781

use the police to get children baptized.” H. L. Martensen, Af mit Levnet [From My Life], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1882–1883, vol. 2 (1883), p. 71. Mynster is trying . . . now even Goldschmidt] A reference to Mynster’s Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 337,19), where he inveighs against (among other things) an exclusive, aristocratic notion of the Church (pp. 40–41), and where he speaks of M. A. Goldschmidt in positive terms (→ 337,20). In ’48] The fall of absolute monarchy on March 21, 1848, also meant a weakening of Mynster’s position, inasmuch as the new, so-called March Ministry included a cultus minister (→ 337,8) who bore political responsibility for the Church. The circumstance that the first cultus minister was the leading National Liberal figure, D. G. Monrad, who had only served a couple of years as a priest, was a source of indignation for some in ecclesiastical circles, including Kierkegaard. works-righteousness] The desire to be reckoned as righteous by God because of one’s good works, which is in conflict with the Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith; see the Augsburg Confession (→ 351,3). Xnty does not become poetry, mythology] Presumably, an allusion to Left Hegelian critics of religion, such as David Friedrich Strauß (1808–1874), Ludwig Feuerbach (1804–1872), and Bruno Bauer (1809–1882), who were important figures through the 1840s, and who asserted that Christianity was poetry and mythology. Protestantism] Variant: first written “Xnty”. Hurrah for me and you, I say] Loosely cited from the comic ballad “Manden og Konen satte dem ned” [The Man and Wife Sat Themselves Down], in which the chorus reads, “Hurrah for me and you, I say, this time will never be forgotten[”]; the first known printing of the song was in south Jutland ca. 1815, and it was also published in Copenhagen in the late 1820s. The ballad was included in H. Grüner Nielsen, ed., Danske Skæmteviser [Danish Ballads] (Copenhagen, 1927–1928); see also Anton Caen, Folke-Visebog [Folksong Book], 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1847– 1851), vol. 2 (1849), pp. 18–19.

14

17

29

389

30

32 9

390

782 13

16

41

391

16

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 105–113

[“]You shall[”]―] Variant: first written “[“]You shall.[”], with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. that is how Prof. Heiberg, for example, talks in the preface to Clara Raphael] See J. L. Heiberg’s preface to Mathilde Fibiger’s (1830–1872) pseudonymous novel, Clara Raphael. Tolv Breve [Clara Raphael: Twelve Letters] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 1531), ed. J. L. Heiberg, pp. iii–x (see also Lise Busk-Jensen’s edition in Danske Klassikere [Danish Classics] (Copenhagen: Det danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab, 1994; abbreviated hereafter as DSL), pp. 9–13. The book was advertised in Adresseavisen, December 18, 1850, no. 297, as having appeared. Here Kierkegaard is referring to Heiberg’s superior position with respect to religion, e.g., as expressed in the following passage: “Her [Clara Raphael’s] resignation is indeed not cloistered, not Catholic, but Protestant. Her flight from the world to God is not a negation of the world, but a purifying bath in the divine sources from which she will return to the world, to its struggles and toils, and purify herself through participation in them. There is something in this entire viewpoint that reminds one of the maid of Orleans, a figure who has in fact not been without influence upon Clara. But just as that sublime figure has a Catholic, nun-like side, in the genuine, Protestant, and by no means cloistered figure of Clara, there is nonetheless a sort of reflection of this, especially in the book’s conclusion” (p. v [DSL, p. 10]). See also NB22:63 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note, where Kierkegaard discusses the book in more detail. ― Prof. Heiberg: Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), author, editor, and critic; titular professor 1829; 1828–1839, playwright and translator at the Royal Theater, thereafter its dramatic adviser until he became director of the theater in 1849. Heiberg had been the leading tastemaker for twenty-five years even though he had essentially stopped his work as a critic. alas] Variant: preceding this “You honest man” has been deleted. Xnty is mythology,] Variant: first written “Xnty is mythology.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1851

Fear and Trembling] See NB24:89 (→ 379,1). Abraham sacrificed the ram and went home with Isaac, whom he spared] → 379,2. Sarah] → 379,31. this journey to Moriah] i.e., Abraham’s journey to Moriah in order to sacrifice Isaac (→ 379,2). the father of faith] → 379,35.

9

5

393

Bishop M, for example, who of course is also defending the established order] i.e., J. P. Mynster (→ 337,19). Mynster’s] → 337,3.

21

393

1

393m

something I have expressed . . . I take refuge in grace,] See Kierkegaard’s preface to Practice in Christianity (→ 360,1). See also NB24:78 (→ 373,26). ― refuge in grace,: Variant: first written “refuge in grace.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. bowed with profound reverence] → 440,38.

37

394

14

395

lèse-majesté] Chr. V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683), which was still in force at the time, reserved the supreme punishment for lèse-majesté; see bk. 6, chap. 4, § 1.

35

395

As I said at the time to Christian VIII . . . I am a private individual] In 1847, Kierkegaard had had three audiences with King Christian VIII (1786–1848, r. 1839–1848); the first on March 13 at Amalienborg Palace, the latter two at Sorgenfri Palace on July 18 and October 3. Kierkegaard described his audience in NB9:41–43 (1849) in KJN 5, 228–236. In NB9:41, Kierkegaard wrote: “In the course of the conversation, at the beginning, he also said something to me about my having so many ideas and whether I couldn’t spare a few for him. To this I answered him that I believed that all my work was, among other things, beneficial to every government, but that the point in it was precisely that I was and remained a private citizen, for otherwise people would insinuate some mean-spirited interpretation” (KJN 5, 228). See also NB23:50 in the present volume. Mynster per Goldschmidt] Refers to J. P. Mynster’s approving mention of Goldschmidt (→ 337,20).

13

396

6

397

392

10 22 23

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 113–118

15

21

31

397m

6

398

5

28

Prof. Nielsen is now supposedly going to improve upon it] Refers to Rasmus Nielsen, who, very much under the influence of Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings, launched an attack on H. L. Martensen’s work on dogmatics (→ 355,5). it was strange . . . Martensen, etc.] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884), Danish theologian and pastor; cand. theol. in 1832; after a journey abroad in 1834–1836, Martensen became a privatdocent and university tutor whose students included Kierkegaard; he acquired the degree of lic. theol. in 1837; lecturer at the University of Copenhagen, 1838; honorary doctorate from the University of Kiel, 1840; extraordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen, 1840; ordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen, 1850; appointed court preacher on May 16, 1845; knight of the Dannebrog in 1847. In the summer of 1849, he had published one of his major works, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), which had appeared in a new printing on May 22, 1850. Martensen’s work led to a general debate about the relation between faith and knowledge and thus placed him in direct opposition to Kierkegaard. Although Kierkegaard had produced a good deal of indirect polemics in opposition to Martensen, especially in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), he had never publicly attacked Martensen, which Rasmus Nielsen thus did, more or less on Kierkegaard’s behalf (→ 397,15). from my point of view I disapproved of his attack on Martensen] Kierkegaard noted this fact a number of times in his journals; see, e.g., NB17:7, NB17:71, NB19:29, and NB19:39c in KJN 7, 172, 222, 358, 365), but there are no indications of this in the surviving correspondence between Kierkegaard and Nielsen. the whole of Nielsen’s behavior] → 355,5. Often enough I have said to Mynster] Kierkegaard regularly called on Mynster and conversed with him (→ 337,3). I have also repeatedly said this to him . . . about Practice in Christianity] See NB21:121 in the present volume, where Kierkegaard relates that on October 21, 1850, he had met court and

•

1851

783

palace priest Just Paulli (→ 374,29) on the street and that Paulli had told him that in connection with Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18) Mynster (→ 337,3) had said, “The book has provoked me intensely; it makes profane sport of the holy.” Kierkegaard went to Mynster the day after he had heard this in order to receive his supposed reprimand, and he subsequently spoke with Mynster about the book on a number of occasions; see, e.g., NB23:9 in the present volume. I have said this to Martensen . . . will thank me for the book] These conversations with H. L. Martensen (→ 397,21) and Rasmus Nielsen (→ 355,5) are not recorded in Kierkegaard’s journals, but subsequently he does refer to a conversation with Nielsen; see NB24:125.

30

he himself is of course the fulfillment of the Law] See Rom 10:4; see also Rom 8:1–4. 1,718 lawgivers] The number 1,718, which Kierkegaard later used in Judge for Yourself! (written 1851–1852, published posthumously in 1876) (SKS 16, 168; JFY, 112, where, however, the number is erroneously given as “seventeen, eighteen”) is an allusion to “117,” a conventional usage that signified a large number. something meritorious] → 351,3. people attribute great importance to what is objective―the sacrament and the like] → 400,32. forms of imitation such as fasting, whipping oneself, and the like] A reference to the asceticism of the Middle Ages, in particular as practiced by Christian hermits and monks in monasteries. Self-flagellation and abstinence from eating meat, for example, were regarded as effective forms of penance that could atone for sin. seek refuge in grace] → 360,1.

7

Mynster’s] i.e., the way in which J. P. Mynster (→ 337,3) related to the ideal in his understanding and preaching of Christianity and in the manner in which he discharged his episcopal office.

1

400

People focus their entire attention . . . or the sacraments] Kierkegaard is referring to the objective view of Christianity that he had attacked under the pseudonym Johannes Climacus in Concluding

32

400

399

11

19 21 26

36

784

33

401

3

9

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 118

Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 21–57; SKS 7, 29–61). Kierkegaard’s remarks are directed both at H. L. Martensen (→ 397,21), the leading representative of speculative theology, who presented his version of Christian doctrines in his Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 397,21), and at N.F.S. Grundtvig and his adherents, for whom the central focus was “the living word”―i.e., the Lord’s Prayer, the Apostles’ Creed, and the words of institution of the Eucharist―which had been spoken in the Church over the centuries. in lofty tones they speak disdainfully about the subjective] → 401,9. People focus their entire attention . . . on something collective] This applies equally to H. L. Martensen and to N.F.S. Grundtvig. then in lofty tones . . . and vain] As, e.g., H. L. Martensen in his preface to Den christelige Dogmatik, where he writes: “And those who do not feel the tendency toward coherent thought but are able to satisfy themselves by thinking in random thoughts and aphorisms, sudden discoveries and hints, can also be within their rights in viewing coherent knowledge as unnecessary for themselves. But when, as in recent times, it begins to be put forth as a sort of dogma that the believer can have absolutely no interest in seeking coherent knowledge of that which is of greatest importance for him; that the believer cannot wish to engage in any speculation concerning the Christian truths, because all speculation is merely cosmic, i.e., worldly and pagan; that the believer must view the concept of systematic knowledge about faith as a self-contradiction that abolishes true Christianity, etc.―then I confess that such statements, even when I have heard them and seen them set forth with ingenious paradoxicality, are not capable of convincing me. Indeed, I can see them only as containing a great misunderstanding and a new―or rather, an old―error . . . As far as I am capable of judging, there is only one person who corresponds perfectly to the concept of the believer, namely the entire Universal Church. As individuals, each of us possesses the faith only to a certain limited degree, and we must certainly guard against making our own individual, perhaps rather one-sided, per-

•

1851

haps even rather sickly life of faith into a rule for all believers” (p. iii). See also § 234 in the same work: “The individual can develop his charisma in love’s reciprocity with the many different charismas that are all present and belong to the same kingdom. He cannot fulfill his sanctification by living in egoistic and sickly fashion as an ‘individual,’ but only by joining his life to the life of the community. If Christ is actually to live in the individual, then Christ’s Church, with its sufferings and triumphs, must lead an actual life in the individual” (p. 475). See NB12:76 from the summer of 1849, where Kierkegaard writes that he understands this passage to be directed at him. Martensen escalated his attack in the piece Den danske Folkekirkes Forfatningsspørgsmaal betragtet af Dr. H. Martensen [Dr. H. Martensen’s Views Concerning the Question of the Constitution of the Danish People’s Church] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 655), pp. 28ff.; the volume was advertised in Adresseavisen, September 25, 1851, no. 226, as having appeared. What was it that the greatest thinker . . . a mystical body] Based on Paul’s epistles, e.g., 1 Cor 12:27–31, the Catholic doctrine of the Church as a mystical body (Latin, corpus Christi mysticum) regards the Church as a living entity, whose limbs are the congregation and whose head is Christ. The expression “mystical” indicates that this is something other and more than a merely physical or ideal (moral) body. The Catholic Church’s doctrine concerning indulgences assigns to the Church a treasure of supererogatory good works, which are attributable to the merits of Christ and the saints. With this treasure (Latin, thesaurus ecclesia), which the pope administers, the Church can dispense indulgence for temporal punishments that human beings have brought upon themselves through their sins. The medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas developed the doctrine in his major work Summa Theologiae [Theological Encyclopedia]. ― Thomas Aquinas: (ca. 1225–1274), Italian theologian and philosopher; Dominican monk; canonized as a saint in 1323; declared a teacher of the Church in 1567. Fideicomiss] Originally this designated a legacy that was legally restricted to the perpetual sup-

12

15

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 118–121 port of a family or foundation. Only the interest or the current income could be used, not the capital, which thereby was also protected against creditors. The Danish constitution of 1849 forbade the establishment of more such legacies restricted to families; in 1919, legislation abolishing manors dissolved surviving legacies that were based on agricultural land; and in 1954, the remaining family legacies based on capital were also dissolved. 401

29 32

402

2

25

wanting to be a single individual is egotism, sickly vanity, etc.] → 401,9. hanc veniam damus, petimusque vicissim] The Danish edition current in Kierkegaard’s time as Q. Horatius Flaccus’ samtlige Værker [The Collected Works of Horace], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1792–1793); see vol. 2, p. 451. The passage cited comes from Horace, Ars poetica [On the Art of Poetry], II, 3, 11; see Q. Horatii Flacci opera [The Works of Horace], stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1248), p. 274. The Loeb edition translation reads: “This licence we poets claim and in our turn we grant the like.” Horace, Satires, Epistles, Ars Poetica, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1926), p. 451. when the pope straightforwardly said . . . completely saved, then 5 marks] Satire on the Roman Catholic Church’s system of indulgences. ― 4 marks and 8 shillings: → 402m,12. just as surely as Peer Degn understands the popular position] Refers to act 1, sc. 3 of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus (→ 345,27) (1731), where Peer Degn recounts his talents in a monologue: “People think that one takes nothing into consideration before becoming a parish clerk [Danish, Degn], indeed, indeed! By my faith, the office of parish clerk is a difficult one if it is to feed a man. Before my time people here in town believed that all funeral hymns were equally good, but I have managed things so that I can say to a peasant: Which hymn do you want―this one costs so and so much, this other so and so much. And the same thing when there is to be casting on of earth: Do you want fine sand or just plain dirt?” See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 345,23), vol. 5.

•

1851

785

10,000 rix-dollars] The rix-dollar, properly rigsbank dollar (rigsbanksdaler), was the basic monetary unit in Denmark in Kierkegaard’s time. A rix-dollar was divided into six marks, each of which was further divided into sixteen shillings; thus there were ninety-six shillings in a rix-dollar. A judge earned about 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a middle-level civil servant earned about 400–500 rix-dollars a year; a qualified artisan would receive 200 rix-dollars a year, plus free board and lodging from his master; a maidservant received at most 30 rix-dollars plus board and lodging. Four hundred rix-dollars were considered sufficient to maintain a family for a year. A pair of shoes cost three rix-dollars, and a onepound loaf of rye bread (the staple of the day) cost between two and four shillings. gratis, absolutely gratis] Alludes to the classical theological expression gratia gratis data (Latin, “grace that is given gratis”); based on Rom 3:24.

12

Conversation with Mynster] See also Kierkegaard’s conversations with Mynster in May 1851 (→ 337,3) and later in the summer of that year (→ 378,29). 9 Aug. 1851] The day was a Saturday. Welcome home from your visitation journey] Mynster had concluded his last visitation journey on August 3, 1851 (→ 337,4). On July 7, 1851, he had celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of his ordination (→ 337,3); his nephew, C.L.N. Mynster, also a priest, presided over the ceremony; see C.L.N. Mynster, ed., Nogle Blade af J. P. Mynster’s Liv og Tid (→ 338,36), pp. 478–483. Your Reverence] (→ 375,13). the two small books I sent you] i.e., On My Work as an Author and Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (→ 388,2). it was spun after the fact―though, of course, you yourself say as much] In On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2) Kierkegaard writes: “This is how I understand it all now; at the beginning I was not able to have an overview of what of course has also been my own development” (OMWA, 12; SKS 13, 18). the little Literary Review] i.e., Kierkegaard’s review of Thomasine Gyllembourg’s anonymously

32

402m

20

402

33 34

35 36

3

8

403

786

10

21

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 121–122

published novel To Tidsaldre [Two Ages] (1845) in A Literary Review (1846), in TA, 3–112; SKS 8, 7–106. of course this is clarified in the little piece about my work as an author] Refers to “The Accounting” in On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2), where Kierkegaard adds the following note to his statement that Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) was the next important work to appear after Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846): “The little literary review of the novella Two Ages, which followed so immediately after Concluding Postscript as to be almost simultaneous, is of course also one of my productions qua critic, not qua author, but in the last portion it does contain a sketch of the future from the point of view of ‘the single individual’―a sketch that was not proven false by the year ’48” (OMWA, 10n; SKS 13, 16n). what I had said about the government] Refers to Kierkegaard’s explanation of his tactics in the appendix to On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2), where he writes: “The thread of intelligence broke in the year ’48; the whine that heralds chaos was heard! ‘That was the year ’48, that was progress,’―yes, if in fact ‘government’ is established for which not one single new civil servant is needed, nor any of the older ones dismissed, but perhaps an inner transformation in the direction of becoming firm through the fear of God. The error from above was surely that, generally speaking, the government viewed worldly wisdom as strength, which essentially is just a lack of strength. The error from below was the desire to dispense with all government. The punishment is that what will come to be most bitterly missed will be precisely government. In our century, as never before, the human race and the individuals in it (those who command and those who are commanded; superiors and subordinates; teachers and those taught, etc.) have been liberated from all the nuisances (if you wish to call them that) that stem from the fact that something stands, and must stand, unconditionally firm; surely, never had ‘opinions’ (the most various, from the most various spheres) felt themselves to be so unhampered and delighted in ‘liberty, equality, and

•

1851

fraternity,’ as they do under the frolicsome license of ‘to a certain degree’: As never before, the truth in the fact that what the race and every individual in it needs is for something to stand―and for something to have to stand―unconditionally firm; they need what divinity, the Loving One, invented in love: the unconditional, for which humanity, which is clever unto its own corruption, has substituted the much-admired notion of ‘to a certain degree’ ” (OMWA, 19; SKS 13, 26). entirely] Variant: added. the anniversary of my father’s death] Kierkegaard’s father (→ 338,32) died on August 9, 1838; see NB20:130 in KJN 7, 470. Then there were a few words about the pastoral seminary] → 356m,16. So I again said a few words . . . about Goldschmidt] → 337,20. as usual he said, “Farewell, dear friend.”] See NB11:193 in KJN 6, 113, where Kierkegaard discusses Mynster’s use of “dear friend.” Ruysbroek depicts the depravity of the monks . . . present it as such.] See Ullmann, Reformatoren vor der Reformation, vol. 2 (→ 404,14), which summarizes the criticism directed at the growing worldliness of monastic orders voiced by the Flemish mystic Jan van Ruysbroek (1293–1381), pp. 58–59. The passage by Ruysbroek . . . p. 58, bottom of page and p. 59, top of page] C. Ullmann Reformatoren vor der Reformation, vornehmlich in Deutschland und den Niederlanden [Reformers before the Reformation, Primarily in Germany and the Low Countries], 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1841– 1842); vol. 2 with the double title, Die positiven Grundlagen der Reformation auf dem populären und wissenschaftlichen Gebiete [The Positive Basis of the Reformation in the Popular and Scholarly Areas] and Johann Wessel, der Hauptrepräsentant reformatorischer Theologie im 15ten Jahrhundert; nebst den Brüdern vom gemeinsamen Leben, namentlich: Gerhard Groot, Florentius Radewins, Gerhard Zerbolt und Thomas von Kempen; und den deutschen Mystikern: Ruysbroek, Suso, Tauler, dem Verfasser der deutschen Theologie und Staupitz in ihrer Beziehung zur Reformation [Johann Wessel, the Principal Representative of Reformation

22 30

33 39 1

401

4

404

14

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 122–125 Theology in the 15th Century along with the Brethren of the Common Life, Namely, Gerhard Groote, Florens Radewyns, Gerard Zerbolt, and Thomas à Kempis; and the German Mystics: Ruysbroek, Suso, Tauler, the Authors of the German Theology and Staupitz in Their Relation to the Reformation], pp. 58–59. 404

20

21

404

23

405

1 1

2

18

apostolic times] The period following Jesus’ resurrection and ascension depicted in Acts and the epistles of the New Testament; see especially the “pastoral letters,” e.g., the letters of Timothy and the letter of Titus. We are all priests!] A reference to the Lutheran notion of the universal priesthood of all baptized believers; see, e.g., Martin Luther, Schrift an den christlichen Adel deutscher Nation von des christlichen Standes Besserung [Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation] (July 1520), in which he supports his argument by referring to 1 Pet 2:9 and Acts 5:9–10, in Otto von Gerlach, ed., Luthers Werke. Vollständige Auswahl seiner Hauptschriften. Mit historischen Einleitungen, Anmerkungen und Registern [The Works of Luther: A Comprehensive Selection of His Principal Writings, with a Historical Introduction, Notes, and Index], 10 vols. (Berlin 1840–1841; ASKB 312–316), vol. 3 (1840), pp. 167–168. Kierkegaard also alludes to the proverb, “We are all human beings,” no. 6422 in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 378,26), vol. 2, p. 21. Myself.] Variant: changed from “Myself!”. Mynster] → 337,3. Practice in Christianity] Kierkegaard’s last pseudonymous work (→ 359,18) contained a critique of Mynster, and the bishop was not pleased (→ 398,28). The Business with Goldschmidt] i.e., the fact that Mynster had emphasized Goldschmidt (→ 334,26) and placed him together with Kierkegaard in the piece Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 337,19). A talk with Mynster] Kierkegaard had called on Mynster three times in the course of the spring and summer of 1851: May 2 (see NB24:30), later

•

1851

787

in the summer (see NB24:88), and August 9 (see NB24:121). I develop, ideally . . . take refuge in “grace.”] Reference to Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), attributed to the pseudonym Anti-Climacus but published with a preface by Kierkegaard (→ 360,1). ― ideally] Variant: added. the message was an ideal one, no one was attacked] See the first conversation with Mynster after the publication of Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), when Mynster, referring to the book, supposedly said, “Yes, half of the book is an attack on Martensen, the other half on me” (NB21:121 in the present volume). conclude with an encomium to Mynster] Kierkegaard had long considered honoring Mynster by dedicating one of his writings to him. He had planned to do this with “Three Ethical-Religious Essays” (written in 1846 and/or 1847 and put in final form in 1848), which Kierkegaard wanted to publish under the pseudonym F.F., but the plan was never realized. See NB11:227 in KJN 6, 135, where Kierkegaard discusses this; in the course of 1850 Kierkegaard formulated a number of drafts of a dedication; see Pap. X 6 B 162–170. Then I learned that he was furious . . . from that period] → 398,28. Then I came to speak with Nielsen] Presumably, the same conversation with Nielsen (→ 355,5) that Kierkegaard mentioned previously; see NB24:114. Then I heard from a number of quarters that M. was ill-disposed toward me] See H. L. Martensen’s letter to his friend Pastor Gude, dated November 26, 1850, in which he discusses Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18): “Furthermore, this book has now caused the bishop to give up totally on K’s work; naturally, the shameless pronouncements concerning the Church’s sermons have made him indignant” (Biskop H. Martensens Breve (→ 385,19), vol. 1, p. 14. Madvig] → 356,16. concealing,] Variant: first written “concealing.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. appeared,] Variant: first written “appeared.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

20

32

3

6 11

22

23 28

29

406

788 32 36

407

13 25

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 125–128

Then came the article against Rudelbach] → 337,14. The word came . . . and in such a way!] → 337,20. a position at the seminary] i.e., a teaching post at the pastoral seminary → 356m,4. his history with me; . . . his past 6 years] According to Goldschmidt, the two had met for the first time in 1837, though this is probably an error for 1838, inasmuch as they spoke about Kierkegaard’s debut book From the Papers of One Still Living (1838). They had next met one another in 1841, when Corsaren reviewed Kierkegaard’s dissertation, On the Concept of Irony (1841), and various times thereafter up to 1846, when Kierkegaard attacked Corsaren and Goldschmidt responded with a campaign against Kierkegaard. See, e.g., M. A. Goldschmidt, Livs Erindringer og Resultater [Memories and Results of My Life], ed. Morten Borup, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1965 [1877]), vol. 1, passim. Goldschmidt was one of Kierkegaard’s admirers, and Kierkegaard had seen a great talent in Goldschmidt. Kierkegaard had advised Goldschmidt to give up Corsaren and called upon him to write fiction; see NB10:45 in KJN 5, 291. ―with me; . . . his past 6 years: Variant: changed from “with me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― his past 6 years: i.e., Goldschmidt’s years as editor of Corsaren (→ 339m,13).

407

29

The judgment was: I find no guilt . . . crucified] See Jn 19:4–6 and 18:38.

408

2

People make Xnty into an objective doctrine] Kierkegaard is referring primarily to H. L. Martensen, N.F.S. Grundtvig, and their adherents (→ 400,32). Archdeacon Tryde] Eggert Christopher Tryde (1781–1860), Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1804; after having served as parish priest in a number of different parishes on Zealand from 1807, in 1838 he was named archdeacon at the Church of Our Lady, and from 1841, he was also co-director and teacher at the pastoral seminary in Copenhagen. Tryde had served as Kierkegaard’s confessor in the period 1839–1842.

24

•

1851

My Two Most Recent Books] i.e., On My Work as an Author and Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (→ 388,2). Aug. 13th] Wednesday, August 13, 1851. In Flyveposten there is one . . . essentially concluded] A reference to an anonymous column “Literatur” [Literature] in Flyve-Posten, August 7, 1851, no. 181, which stated: “University book dealer Reitzel has published On My Activity as an Author by S. Kierkegaard. The contents of this little work are to some extent made clear by its title. It is a survey of this highly gifted man’s work as an author, from his publication of Either/Or to the present; in his singular fashion he presents it as the development of his own religious faith, of which he has also sought to provide an account. In doing this, he seems to have concluded his actual activity as an author, which is implied not only by various statements in the above-mentioned work, but also by the preface to Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays, which was simultaneously published by the same publisher and which could serve as a model of clerical eloquence.” getting me to stop.] Variant: changed from “getting me to stop!”. I saw the same article . . . the omission of the words “highly gifted.”] See Fyens Avis, August 9, 1851, no. 187, in which the article from Flyve-Posten (→ 409,16) was reprinted, as Kierkegaard notes, without the words “highly gifted.” ― Fyens Avis: The daily newspaper Fyens Avis, en politisk og Avertissements-Tidende [Funen’s Newspaper: A Journal for Politics and Advertisements] (published October 10, 1847– March 31, 1868)―not to be confused with Fyens Stifts Avis [Funen’s District Newspaper], i.e., Fyens Stiftstidende [Funen’s District Times]―was published in Odense and edited from 1849 to 1853 by theology graduate Nis Hansen, who is probably the author of the remarks Kierkegaard cites. with Peer Degn . . . love and respect] A reference to act 1, sc. 4 of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus (1731), in which Peer Degn recounts his merits to Nille and Jeppe: “Ten years ago I was offered the position of cantor in the School of Our Lady, but I did not want it, for

14

409

15 16

35 1

410

4

409m

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 128–133 why should I do it, Jeppe? Why should I leave my congregation that loves and honors me and which in turn I love and honor[?] I live in a place where I have my daily bread and where I am respected by everyone, for the district governor never comes here: I am immediately sent for to pass the time with him and sing for him” (see Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 345,23), vol. 5). 410

35

make the past ethically present] Variant: “ethically” has been added.

411

2

Mynster] → 337,3. as long as he could hide behind a Danish chancery] Until March 1848, the absolute monarchs of Denmark administered all domestic matters, including those affecting the clergy, through a governmental body called the Royal Chancery, an organ in which Mynster functioned as the king’s adviser (→ 385,19). now he flirts with the public, with Goldschmidt] → 337,20. 1000 priests are paid] → 348,25. clinging tightly to someone who has died, clings tightly to Mynster] → 370,6. Mynster’s ecclesial governance] → 385,19. Martensen] → 397,21. Paulli] → 374,29. supports you.] Variant: first written “supports you,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue.

9

11 14 18 24 26 26 28

411

32

412

29

On My Work as an Author] → 388,2. the action against The Corsair at that time] When one of Corsaren’s contributors, P. L. Møller, published a harsh critique of Kierkegaard’s works in his aesthetic annual, Gæa for 1846, Kierkegaard mounted an ironic counterattack, identifying P. L. Møller with Corsaren and asking “to appear in The Corsair,” because he could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused but only praised by the paper. See the article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner,” which appeared under the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus in Fædrelandet, on December 27, 1845 (no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 [COR, 38–46; SKS

•

1851

789

14, 77–84]). Thus, Kierkegaard had stepped forth and challenged Corsaren as a gutter newspaper, and Corsaren responded by carrying a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and caricatures of Kierkegaard. The first of these appeared on January 2, 1846 (no. 276), and others appeared at regular intervals until July 17, 1846 (no. 304). After M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor, the teasing nonetheless continued until February 16, 1849 (no. 439). After the second Corsaren article, which appeared on January 9, 1846 (no. 277), Kierkegaard responded, once again under the alias of Frater Taciturnus, in Fædrelandet, January 10, 1846 (no. 9, cols. 65–68), with “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” (COR, 47–50; SKS 14, 85–89). “my own development and upbringing.”] Freely quoted from On My Work as an Author (→ 388,2): “When I speak with myself ‘before God,’ religiously, I call the whole of my work as an author my own upbringing and development, but not in the sense that I have now become complete or completely finished with respect to needing upbringing and development” (OMWA, 12; SKS 13, 19). Xnty and . . . of “personality.”] Variant: changed from “Xnty.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. The Mynsterian way] (→ 400,1). and from a Christian point of view is only tenable] Variant: changed from “and is only tenable”. what I might suggest, admissions . . . this is not Xnty in the stricter sense] → 360,1. quid nimis] Alludes to ne quid nimis (“nothing too much”), which is the Latin translation of a Greek inscription on the temple at Delphi and is known from the Roman poet Terence’s comedy Andria, act 1, v. 61, where the emancipated slave Sosia says: “nam id arbitror apprime in vita esse utile, ut ne quid nimis” (“I believe the best principle in life is nothing in excess”). See P. Terentii Afri comoediae sex [Six Comedies by Terence], ed. B.F.F. Schmieder, 2nd ed. (Halle, 1819 [1794]; ASKB 1291), p. 11. English translation from Terence, The Woman of Andros, The Self-Tormentor, The Eunuch, trans. John Barsby, Loeb Classical

33

35

2

413

1

413m

2

4

414

790

5

10

414

29 30 32

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 133–137

Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), p. 55. The apostles were flogged, thrown into prison] After Jesus died, the disciples (the apostles) went forth and preached the gospel, for which they were often persecuted, mocked, imprisoned, and whipped; a number of them suffered martyr’s deaths. mediate] i.e., sublate opposites into a higher unity; here used more in the sense of “smooth over.” The expression “mediation” corresponds to the German terms Vermittlung (“mediation”) and Versöhnung (“reconciliation”) in Hegelian logic. Kierkegaard is referring to speculative theology and particularly to H. L. Martensen (→ 397,21). Saul is thrown to the ground, becomes blind] See Acts 9:1–9. Simon Magus is stricken with blindness] See Acts 8:9–24. of Paul it is written: [“]I (Xt) . . . my chosen instrument.”] Refers to Acts 9:15–16.

415

24

Xt himself says . . . we could move mountains] Refers to Mt 17:20.

416

2

jovial] Here, as elsewhere, Kierkegaard typically directs such terms as “jovial,” and “hearty” against N.F.S. Grundtvig and his adherents. maieutically] i.e., concerning maieutics, the art of midwifery, from a Greek word that means to release or deliver someone giving birth. This refers to Socrates’ maieutic art, which consisted in talking to another person in order to help him deliver the knowledge with which he was already pregnant but had simply forgotten. See, e.g., Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus 148e–151d, in Plato: The Collected Dialogues Including the Letters (→ 365,26), pp. 853–856. I began with the Socratic] Kierkegaard notes in a number of places that he had been preoccupied with Socrates since his early youth; see, e.g., NB20:118 (1850) in KJN 7, 463. In 1841, he had defended his dissertation for the magister degree, On the Concept of Irony, in which Socrates was the principal figure.

4

38

•

1851

I had a fortune] Kierkegaard’s father, M. P. Kierkegaard, died in 1838 (→ 338,32), leaving an estate that was reckoned in 1839 at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 402m,12), most of which was in real estate, stocks, and bonds. During the period 1839–1847 Kierkegaard gradually sold the stocks and bonds; see Brandt and Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene (→ 355,2), pp. 67–71. In 1847, after the sale of the last of the stocks and bonds he had inherited, Kierkegaard sold the house at Nytorv 2. The house fetched 22,000 rix-dollars: Peter Christian Kierkegaard held a first mortgage for 7,000 rix-dollars, while Søren received a second mortgage for 5,000 rix-dollars at 4 percent interest, a bank draft for 753 rix-dollars (which he sold for 757 rix-dollars in December 1849), and in January 1848, a cash payment of 10,000 rix-dollars. Kierkegaard invested some of the proceeds in stock and in royal bonds at 4 percent interest. The bonds were presumably sold prior to March 1852; the stocks were sold between March and December 1852; the mortgage was sold on August 25, 1854. In addition to this, starting in 1847, Kierkegaard also had income from royalties related to the sale of his books, which in 1849 amounted to 693 rix-dollars. See Brandt and Thorkelin, pp. 83–92. no―nor . . . the apostolic.] Variant: changed from “no.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

39

5

417

Mundus vult decipi] The expression is generally followed by “decipiatur ergo” (so let it be deceived), and is often attributed to Nero’s courtier, the writer Petronius (1st century), but the expression was subsequently used by many authors. In Denmark the expression was known from a number of sources, including A. E. Scribe’s comedy of manners, Puf eller Verden vil bedrages [Poof, or the World Wants to Be Deceived], which was performed seven times in 1849 and which ends with a lie triumphing over the truth. when I lived on the streets] i.e., the period when Kierkegaard often strolled about on the streets of Copenhagen, generally engaged in conversation with someone. This changed after Corsaren’s campaign against him began early in 1846 (→ 412,29).

10

417

16

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 137–145

19

35

418

5

418m

7

418

12 15 19

Now I have retreated somewhat] On April 24, 1851, Kierkegaard had moved to Østerbro, an area that was then outside Copenhagen proper. what we will have to repeat someday] i.e., on judgment day. having pecuniary difficulties] The great fortune Kierkegaard had inherited from his father was being gradually used up; see, e.g., NB11:122, from May or June 1849, in KJN 6, 64, with its accompanying note, and NB18:7, from May 1850, in KJN 7, 362, with its accompanying note. an enjoyment, which I needed;] Variant: first written “an enjoyment, that I needed.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. The world lieth in wickedness] Refers to 1 Jn 5:19. The world wants to be deceived] → 417,10. “a cloud” of nonsense] Allusion to the second part of A. G. Rudelbach’s article, “Afnødt Erklæring om et personligt Punkt” (→ 337,14), where he writes: “The single individual will never be alone where he witnesses, takes action, or suffers for God’s cause, but will always be surrounded by a cloud of witnesses (Heb. 12:1), even when he feels that he is most alone; he will never go forth in service of the spirit and the Word without having with him the net for catching men with which the Lord first blessed St. Peter” (Fædrelandet, February 14, 1851, no. 38, p. 149, col. 1).

•

1851

791

Away! Luther shouts . . . true worship of God] A reference to Luther’s so-called ethic of vocation, which rejected the notion of there being anything meritorious (→ 351,3) associated with markedly pious actions such as entering a monastery. On the contrary, everyone was to regard his or her work as a call from God and carry out that work conscientiously, fulfilling one’s obligations to one’s neighbor.

33

God-Man] (→ 382,10). he himself does of course say quite directly that he is God] See Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), No. II.B (“The Possibility of Essential Offense in Relation to Loftiness: That an Individual Speaks or Acts as if He Were God, Says of Himself That He Is God―That Is, in Relation to the Category God in the Composite God-Man”) (PC, 94; SKS 12, 103), where Kierkegaard treats this matter. Finally . . . suffering for the teaching] See Kierkegaard’s presentation of the dialectic of communication in Practice in Christianity (→ 359,18), No. II (PC, 123–144; SKS 12, 128–147).

34

1

421

18

421

5

422

419

13

The priest says] Kierkegaard often ascribes this apologetic and rationalistic view of preaching to Bishop Mynster (→ 389,5).

What concerns Job is obtaining justice . . . he is suffering because he is guilty] Three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, come to comfort Job, a righteous man who has met with great misfortune. Each of these three friends gives a speech in which he presents the view that God is just and that therefore Job’s misfortune can only be explained as being his own fault. Each time his friends speak, the righteous Job complains that they view him as guilty (chaps. 1–31). Then the young Elihu steps forth and reproaches Job for being self-righteous (chaps. 32–37). Finally, the Lord speaks to Job and emphasizes his omnipotence. Job acknowledges his nothingness, lets himself be humbled, and repents his words, and the Lord chastises Job’s friends because they had not spoken truthfully about his omnipotence (chaps. 38–42).

419

32

Luther’s Turn away from the Monastery] i.e., Luther’s turn away from the idea of the monastery as the true place for Christianity; Luther himself also left the monastery.

the imperishable laurels of martyrdom] Allusion to 1 Pet 5:4. Wessel, who was one of the forerunners of the Reformation] See the account of the heresy trial

418

23

31

opposed to one another.] Variant: first written “opposed to one another,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. Let us love one another] Reference to 1 Jn 4:7–8.

420

35

7

792

10

423

8 9

11

423

423

15

26

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 145–154

of the German theologian and Protestant reformer, Johann Wessel (ca. 1420–1489), in Ullmann, Reformatoren vor der Reformation (→ 404,14), vol. 1, pp. 367–405, esp. p. 386. as I have read . . . at the final moment] Refers to the section “Betrachtungen an dem Scheiterhaufen Servets” [Observations at Servetus’s Funeral Pyre] in chap. 4 of Henry, Das Leben Johann Calvins (→ 365,8), vol. 3 (1844), pp. 201–215, esp. pp. 209ff. ― Servetus: Michael Servetus (ca. 1511–1553), Spanish physician and theologian, condemned as a heretic and burned at the stake, owing in part to the judgment Calvin passed against him. Bernard] → 341,2. in epistle 42, ad Henricum archiep. Senonensem] i.e., Bernard’s Epistula de moribus et officio episcoporum [On the Conduct and Duties of a Bishop], letter 42 (chap. 7, sec. 29). cited from Wessenberg, . . . Part 1, preface, p. xxii] Reference to Ignaz H. von Wessenberg, Die großen Kirchenversammlungen des 15ten und 16ten Jahrhunderts in Beziehung auf Kirchenverbesserung geschichtlich und kritisch dargestellt mit einleitender Übersicht der frühern Kirchengeschichte [The Great Synods of the 15th and 16th Centuries Concerned with Improving the Church: A Historical and Critical Presentation with an Introductory Overview of Earlier Church History], 4 vols. (Constance, 1840), vol. 1, p. xxii. Wessenberg (loc. cit. p. 46) says . . . as imperishable] Kierkegaard translates from the chapter “Anstalten zur Bethätigung christlicher Liebe” [Institutions for the Manifestation of Christian Love] in Wessenberg, Die großen Kirchenversammlungen des 15ten und 16ten Jahrhunderts (→ 423,11), vol. 1: “Here the striking contrast between Christianity and paganism manifests itself. The latter saw the structure of the world as something eternal and the individual human being as something perishable. In contrast to this, the Christian regards the world as perishable, but the individual human being as imperishable” (p. 46). Tertullian de præscript. n. 23] Tertullian’s (→ 354,16) De praescriptione haereticorum [On the

•

1851

Principal Objections against Heretics] does not include the passage Wessenberg cites. It is found in a work by Cyprian (→ 362,33) De ecclesiae catholicae unitate [On the Unity of the Catholic Church], chap. 3, line 55. see Wessenberg, loc. cit., p. 65. Note.] Kierkegaard cites a note in the chapter “Spaltungen im Glauben” [Schisms in the Faith] in Wessenberg, Die großen Kirchenversammlungen des 15ten und 16ten Jahrhunderts (→ 423,11), vol. 1, p. 65.

28

become furious―] Variant: first written “become furious.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. 1,000 livings] → 348,25. bloody murder] The actual Danish expression is a mild oath, Død og Pine (“death and pain”).

17

risum teneatis!] Cited from Horace, De arte poetica [On the Art of Poetry], 5; see Q. Horatii Flacci opera [The Works of Horace], stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1248), p. 274. In the Danish translation available in Kierkegaard’s time, Q. Horatius Flaccus’ samtlige Værker [The Complete Works of Horace], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1792–1793), vol. 2, p. 451, the expression is rendered, “My friends, can you keep from laughing?” when one sheep runs to the water, they all do] Proverb listed as no. 472 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Proverbs and Sayings] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 18; see also no. 1699 in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 378,26), vol. 1, p. 169.

5

compel untruth to do battle,] Variant: first written “compel untruth to do battle.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

27

426

“Narrow Is the Way”] Reference to Mt 7:14. change the way we read the text] i.e., to the past tense. God has chosen what is despised in the world] See, e.g., 1 Cor 1:28; see also Jas 2:5. a--] ass, arse, buttocks. Luther insisted . . . not the true Church] → 431,1. reduplication] → 329m,10.

2

427

424

21 21

425

26

4 13 21 24 28

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 155–156 428

2

3

8

428

16

4651] Variant: added. The number is Kierkegaard’s error for 4951, which is how the unknown reviewer signed the review (→ 428,3); perhaps it is a code for the date on which the article may have been written: 4 September 1851. In Flyveposten for September 16 or 17 . . . On My Work as an Author] In Flyve-Posten, Tuesday, September 16, 1851, no. 215, where Kierkegaard’s For Self-Examination was also reviewed (→ 431,25) under the heading “Et Par Ord om et Punkt i Mag. S. Kierkegaards Pjece: Om min ForfatterVirksomhed” [A Couple of Words on a Point in Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s Piece On My Work as an Author], a critical discussion of Kierkegaard’s work of the same name (→ 388,2). It concludes: “Readers of Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s writings would do best if they did not allow themselves to be disturbed by how the author himself wishes his writings to be ordered and interpreted. In general, writings exist independently of whatever opinion their author has concerning them: they stand or fall by their own contents. Mag. Kierkegaard may want to dwell on the accidental circumstances that accompany his writings, but that is his business and a private matter.―Once someone has become an author―which no one can make a person into―one must also conduct oneself as an author. If an author does not do so, the reader must not let himself be disturbed by it.” It is] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. a German translation of Epictetus’s 4 volumes . . . he has been quite occupied with] Refers to the preface to the first volume of Arrians Unterredungen Epiktets mit seinen Schülern. Übersetzt und mit historisch-philosophischen Anmerkungen und einer kurzen Darstellung der Epiktetischen Philosophie begleitet von J. M. Schultz [Arrian’s Discussions of Epictetus with His Pupils: Translated with Historical and Philosophical Notes and Accompanied with a Brief Presentation of Epictetus’s Philosophy by J. M. Schultz], 2 vols. (Altona, 1801–1803; ASKB 1045). In this preface, which consists of six unnumbered pages, Johan Matthias Schultz (1771–1849), a professor of phi-

•

1851

793

losophy and philology from Schleswig, tells of his special interest in late Stoicism and his extensive work in that field. He had gained much recognition for his editions of Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations (published 1799 and 1802), which led him to the study of Epictetus’s philosophy. ― Epictetus: Greek philosopher (ca. 55–135), born a slave but later emancipated; active first in Rome, subsequently founded a school in the Greek city Nicopolis. He left no writings but addressed himself to laymen and pupils in lectures (Discourses), which were written down by the historian Arrian (Lucius Flavius Arrianus, ca. 86–160). Kierkegaard possessed several editions of Epictetus; see ASKB 1113, 1114, and 1205. Epictetus, that iron man . . . Didn’t I tell you so?] This well-known anecdote is not found in Arrians Unterredungen Epiktets mit seinen Schülern (→ 428,16) but is included in Epiktets Haandbog [Epictetus’s Handbook], trans. Engelbert Boye (Copenhagen, 1781; ASKB 1114), p. ix. Epictetus, whose principal thesis is . . . those that are not] This is one of Epictetus’s fundamental ideas, which is developed in Arrians Unterredungen Epiktets mit seinen Schülern (→ 428,16), and in the introduction to Epiktets Haandbog (→ 428,21), chap. 1, § 1: “Some things are in our power; others are not” (p. 3). Epictetus teaches that one must determine what is in one’s power and what is not; the latter things are not our concern and therefore ought not disturb our equilibrium. In the preface to the second volume . . . Schonung erwarten] Refers to Schultz’s short preface to Arrians Unterredungen Epiktets mit seinen Schülern (→ 428,16), vol. 2, which is followed by a lengthy introduction, “Versuch, Epiktets philosophische Grundsätze im Zusammenhange darzustellen” [Attempt at Placing Epictetus’s Fundamental Philosophical Principles in Context] (pp. vii–xliv). In the preface, he begs the indulgence of his readers for delays in the appearance of the volume and cites an almost comical litany of obstacles, including the fact that he had moved from his former domicile, had endured many domestic difficulties, plus travel, illness, administrative duties, and his mental and physical state (pp. iv–v).

21

24

28

794 429

1 29

30

36 39

430

12

26 30

431

1

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 157–159

No One Can Serve Two Masters] See Mt 6:24. the lily and the bird] Refers to Jesus’ parable of the lily and the bird, Mt 6:24–34. Kierkegaard treated this theme a number of times. See, “What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air: Three Discourses,” the second part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 155–212; SKS 8, 253–307); “The Cares of the Pagans: Christian Discourses,” which is the first part of Christian Discourses (1848) (CD, 3–91; SKS 10, 13–98), and The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air: Three Godly Discourses (1849) (WA, 1–45; SKS 11, 7–48). “Consider them,” he says] Refers to the parable of the lily and the bird, Mt 6:24–34; see esp. vv. 26 and 28. as it says in the hymn, “Say to sorrow, Yes, Yes, tomorrow.”] → 325,4. But this] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Therefore, there can be absolutely] Variant: first written, with a new paragraph “Then there are some individuals”. meritoriousness] → 351,3. moment of dullness] See EE:117 (1839) in KJN 2, 39–40, where “moments of dullness” appears as a term from mysticism, corresponding to the “spleen” of Romanticism and the medieval term “acedia”; see also Either/Or (1843), in EO 2, 242; SKS 3, 231. when Luther rightly . . . Geist aus Luthers Schriften: Kirche, 5780] Refers to text no. 5780 under the rubric “Kirche” [Church] and sub-rubric “Kampf in der Kirche” [Disputes in the Church] in Geist aus Luther’s Schriften oder Concordanz der Ansichten und Urtheile des großen Reformators über die wichtigsten Gegenstände des Glaubens, der Wissenschaft und des Lebens [The Spirit of Luther’s Writings, or Concordance of the Views and Judgments of the Great Reformer on the Most Important Matters of Faith, Knowledge, and Life] ed. F. W. Lomler, G. F. Lucius, J. Rust, L. Sackreuter, and E. Zimmermann, 4 vols. (Darmstadt, 1828–1831; ASKB 317–320), vol. 3 (1830), pp. 94–95.

•

1851

What Is Required in Order, with True Blessing, to Observe Oneself in the Mirror of the Word] The theme and title of the first part of For SelfExamination (FSE, 25; SKS 13, 53), of which the preface is dated “August 1851”; the volume was advertised in Adresseavisen, September 12, 1851, no. 215, as having appeared (→ 428,3). See NB24:39 in the present volume. ― What Is Required in Order, with True Blessing, to: Variant: changed from “How, with True Blessing, One Is to”. Paganism demanded: Know yourself] The inscription “Know Yourself” was found on the most important temple in Greece, the temple of Apollo (the temple of the oracle) in Delphi. The saying has been attributed to the Ionic philosopher Thales of Miletus and the Spartan lawgiver Chilon, but it was primarily through Socrates that it became widely known. superstition has held that seeing oneself was an omen of death] A widespread popular superstition that appears, e.g., in Goethe’s Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre [Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship] (1795–1796), bk. 5, chap. 16, where the count thought he had seen himself in a mirror and from that moment believed he would soon die. See Goethe’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe letzter Hand [Goethe’s Works: Complete Edition, with the Author’s Final Changes], 55 vols. (Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1828–1833; ASKB 1641–1668), vol. 19 (1828), p. 249. to dare see oneself,] Variant: first written “to dare see oneself.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the thrashing Sancho administers to himself] Sancho Panza is Don Quixote’s squire in the Spanish author Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra’s (1547–1616) picaresque novel Don Quixote, (1605– 1615); see Den sindrige Herremands Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og Bedrifter [The Life and Works of the Ingenious Lord Don Quixote de la Mancha], trans. C. D. Biehl, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1776– 1777; ASKB 1937–1940). What is presumably being referred to here is bk. 8, chap. 71, in which Sancho Panza bares the upper half of his body, but instead of whipping himself, he flogs several nearby beech trees (vol. 4, p. 341). This is re-

25

431

36

3

7

11

432

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 159–162

18

431

433

21

1 1 12

433

15

peated in chap. 72, when Sancho Panza does his whipping, “as on the previous night, at the expense of the bark on the beech tree, and not of his shoulders, for he kept his eye on them so carefully that the whip could not have chased away a fly if it had sat on them” (vol. 4, p. 349). In this way Sancho Panza deceived Don Quixote, who carefully counted every blow, and paid for each of them as he had promised. die away, the old self] Reference to the notion that because of sin a person must die away (→ 332,13), put off the old self and put on the new self. See, e.g., Rom 6:6 and Col 3:9–10. In his postil (III, p. 118) Melanchthon says . . . 1840, p. 243, middle of page] A reference to part 1, chap. 7 (“Melanchton als Dogmatiker” [Melanchthon as Dogmatist]) in Friedrich Galle, Versuch einer Charakteristik Melanchtons als Theologen und einer Entwickelung seines Lehrbegriffs [Essay toward a Sketch of Melanchthon as a Theologian and of the Development of His Doctrinal Concepts] (Halle, 1840). The work deals with the dispute over the use of the Law that arose with Agricola in 1537 and culminated in 1540 with the publication of Luther’s six essays on the so-called antinomies. In addition to what Kierkegaard excerpts, Melanchthon also states: “Where true remorse exists, there is a greater pain present than fear of punishment and hatred of sin” (p. 243). Historical] Variant: changed from “Christendom’s” changed from “the World’s”. or Progress in Xndom] Variant: added. reduplication] → 329m,10. Why Does “Tragedy” No Longer Appeal?] As early as 1828, J. L. Heiberg had argued that the time of tragedy was past in his series of articles, “Svar paa Hr. Prof. Oehlenschlägers Skrift: ‘Om Kritiken i Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, over Væringerne i Miklagard’ ” [Reply to Hr. Prof. Oehlenschläger’s Piece, “On the Critique of The Vikings in Constantinople in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post [Copenhagen’s Flying Post]”], in which Heiberg argued that all modern drama rested on

•

1851

795

the basis of comedy; see Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, January 25 and 28, 1828, nos. 7–8, and February 4, 8, 11, 15, 18, 22, and 25, 1828, nos. 10–16; reprinted in J. L. Heiberg, Prosaiske Skrifter [Prose Writings], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1841–1843; see ASKB 1560), vol. 1. Heiberg subsequently repeated his argument in a review of Carsten Hauch’s drama, Svend Grathe, in Intelligensblade [Intelligence Papers] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB U 56), no. 5, in which Heiberg discusses the specific characteristics of tragedy: “But it follows from what is real and valid in the common effort that the time of historical drama, and thus the time of tragedy, is past. This poetic category culminated long ago, and will not return except as a reminiscence” (p. 128). H. L. Martensen advances the view that just as the immediate has been sublated by reflection, so, too, has the tragic been sublated by the comic; see Martensen’s review of Heiberg’s, Nye Digte [New Poems] in Fædrelandet, esp. January 10, 1841, no. 398. The present entry by Kierkegaard may have been occasioned by revival of Oehlenschläger’s Væringerne i Miklagard (1827)―the work that had touched off the entire debate about tragedy―at the Royal Theater on November, 1, 1851. Luther is rlly ridiculous . . . a single, solitary pers. . . . the entire power of the pope] After Luther published a series of polemical works against the Roman Catholic Church, the pope tried to have Emperor Charles V condemn Luther without a hearing, but the emperor instead summoned Luther to appear before the Imperial Diet in the city of Worms in 1521. Luther traveled from Wittenberg to Worms with his friend Armdorf, and the journey “resembled a victory parade, with all people thronging from everywhere in order to get a look at him.” Luther appeared before the assembly and was asked whether he would recant his attacks, and after a day’s time to consider the matter, he replied that if he was not convinced by Holy Scripture that he was in error, he would stand by his words, which he did. See the section “Rigsdagen i Worms” [The Diet of Worms] in Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie [Karl Friedrich Becker’s History of the World], revised by Johan Gottfried Woltmann], trans. J.

23

796

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 162–170

Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983), vol. 6 (1824), pp. 275–279. 434

19

25

434

30

36

435

9

12 13

14

17

435

37

436

6

Then a person can solemnly assure that . . . he would surely be the man] See NB14:63 (“Protest against Bishop Mynster,” 1849), where Kierkegaard says of Mynster, “How often has His Right Reverence not movingly given assurances that if it were required of him, he would willingly sacrifice his life, his blood, everything[?]” (KJN 6, 386). a frightful catastrophe such as the one in ’48] → 403,21. a joyous message] Allusion to the Latin evangelium, i.e, joyous message, rendered in English as “gospel.” you have been conceived in sin, born in iniquity] Free rendering of Ps 51:5. living in poverty, being mocked, flogged, abused, finally executed] See Jn 16:1–4. See also Mt 10:17–18, 22; 24:9 and Jn 15:20–21. Holberg] → 345,23. Henrich or Pernille] The clever and courageous servants who appear in a number of Ludvig Holberg’s comedies, in which one or both of them employ various intrigues to turn the tables on the master or the mistress of the house and everyone else. Chilian, to whom this joyous message . . . salvation of the entire country] Reference to act 3, sc. 2 of Holberg’s comedy Ulysses Von Ithacia [Ulysses of Ithacia] (1725), in which an augur tells the hero Ulysses and his faithful servant Chilian that victory will be assured if Chilian is sacrificed. Ulysses receives this as good news, but of course Chilian does not, and he manages to escape by convincing Ulysses to consult another augur (Chilian in disguise) who foresees something more advantageous to Chilian. See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 345,23), vol. 3. Mynster] → 337,3. You of little faith] See Mt 8:26. take him in vain . . . has suffered.] Variant: changed from “take him in vain.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1851

have merit for it in the eyes of God] → 351,3. What Luther emphasizes . . . God be merciful to me, a sinner] Presumably, a reference to Martin Luther’s sermon on Lk 18:9–14, the gospel text for the eleventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 388,39), vol. 1, pp. 467–482; see esp. pp. 471–472. ― God be merciful to me, a sinner: Reference to Lk 18:10–13. something . . . his worldly advantage, etc.] Variant: changed from “something.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

13

“The Disciple Is Not above His Master”] From Mt 10:24.

26

436

the world lieth in reflection] A parallel to the expression “the world lieth in wickedness” (→ 418,12). those glorious ones] Idiomatic expression for the Christian martyrs of the first centuries after Christ who were persecuted and put to death for their faith.

29

437

he cannot do otherwise] → 383,19. much ado about nothing] Idiomatic expression. The Danish term is blind Allarm (literally “false alarm”), which appears in the title of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Hexerie eller Blind Allarm (→ 345,23).

18

Early April 1851] Variant: This entire entry was added on a loose sheet inserted at the beginning of the journal; see the “Critical Account of the Text” for this journal in the present volume. Early April 1851: Variant: the date was added to the loose sheet. The date referred to is presumably prior to April 20, 1851, when Journal NB24 was begun. To the Journal] i.e., presumably to the present journal, NB24, which was the latest in the series of journals that Kierkegaard had been keeping since 1846. See the “Critical Account of the Text” for this journal in the present volume, where this loose page is assigned to Journal NB24 on the basis of H. P. Barfod’s catalogue. The page is indicated at the beginning of the volume] See NB24:2. Starting with Journal NB11, begun on May 2, 1849, Kierkegaard had included

8

436

16

20 24

39

438

21

9

9

440

J O U R N A L NB 24 : 170

11

13

16 23 29 35 38

in each of his journals a table of contents indicating passages he found especially important. That Nothing Can Be Done . . . Mynster’s . . . Further Contribution, etc.)] Variant: written diagonally in the upper left-hand corner of the page. ― Mynster’s . . . Further Contribution, etc.): The first evidence of Kierkegaard’s reading of J. P. Mynster’s (→ 337,3) most recent piece, Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark (→ 337,19), is found in NB23:189 in the present volume. The words he cites] i.e., the words Mynster cites from Kierkegaard’s article in Fædrelandet (→ 337,14). the way in which he has positioned Goldschmidt] → 337,20. My existential category is: “without authority.”] → 352,5. my profound veneration] → 440,38. Practice in Xnty] → 359,18. “in profound veneration.”] Kierkegaard’s formula when addressing Mynster, both in letters (see LD, 275, 339–340; SKS 28, 360–361) and in dedications (see LD, 431, 432, 436; SKS 28, 498, 501, 503, 506, 509, 511, 513, 518, 521). See also “A First and Last Explanation” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Kierkegaard writes: “I cordially thank everyone who has kept silent and, with profound veneration, the firm Kts― for having spoken” (CUP, 629; SKS 7, 572). In a journal entry from 1852, Kierkegaard discussed the special formulation he used in connection with Mynster, inasmuch as a possible break with him would result in Mynster’s degradation in Kierkegaard’s terminology: instead of being addressed with “profound veneration,” Mynster would be addressed with “most profound respect” (Pap. X 6 B 212, pp. 335–336).

•

1851

797

Notes for JOURNAL NB25 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB25 801

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB25 809

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB25

Critical Account of the Text by Joakim Garff, Anne Mette Hansen, and Steen Tullberg Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Explanatory Notes by Richard Purkarthofer Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

801

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB25 is a bound journal in quarto format. A scalloped label marked “NB25.” and bearing the date “Novbr. 29th 1851,” both in Kierkegaard’s hand, has been pasted to the front cover (see illustration 5).The manuscript of Journal NB25 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand, with occasional instances of his latin hand. Headings are written in Kierkegaard’s latin hand, which is also used for Latin and French words, for some quoted material, and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. A table of contents for the volume is written across almost the entire width of the inner front cover of the volume. Entries NB25:5 and NB25:97 have been supplemented with additional text that continues out into the margin of the page. Part of marginal addition NB25:12.d is written in the main text column (see illustration on p. 453). Marginal additions NB25:20.a, 67.a, 84.a and b, 97.a, and 98.a are continued in the margins of two successive pages. Footnote NB25:42.1 also runs across two pages, separated from the main text by a line. A line is also used to separate text in connection with marginal entry NB25:97.b. Journal entries are separated from one another with a hash mark (#). When an entry began on a new page of Kierkegaard’s journal, he generally placed two hash marks (# #) at the top of the page. Two asterisks (**) were used to mark an internal division in entry NB25:12, whereas internal divisions in entries NB25:64 and NB25:97 use a horizontal line for this purpose. The two entries “About ‘Her.’ ” (NB25:109 and 113) both begin on new pages and are concluded with two hash marks and with two large “X’s” (see illustration on p. 538).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB25 was begun on November 29, 1851, and must have been conclud-

802

J O U R N A L NB 25 ed no later than June 4, 1852, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB26. Only three of the journal’s 114 entries bear dates: NB25:1 (which is the above-mentioned label bearing the date “Novbr. 29th 1851”), NB25:25 (“January 1852”) (see illustration on p. 461), and NB25:109 (“May 1852”). This latter entry contains a description of Kierkegaard’s various encounters with Regine Schlegel from late 1851 through May 1852, including mention of chance meetings they had on the street on Kierkegaard’s birthday, May 5, 1852, and again at high mass at the Palace Church the following Sunday, May 9, 1852.1 In addition, at the conclusion of the entry, Kierkegaard writes that he had also met Regine several mornings following this. Thus the entry was written at some point after May 9. Finally, NB25:15 was presumably written on December 26, 1851; it bears the title “St. Stephen’s Day,” i.e., December 26, and in the entry Kierkegaard writes that Stephen attests “today” that a Savior has been born.2

III. Contents “Pilate writes: [‘]The King of the Jews[’] and says, [‘]What I have written, I have written[’]—indeed, and he was right, but he had no idea how right he was.” Kierkegaard cites this incident as an example of the linguistic reversal that often comes into play when the divine is present in a concealed fashion and “what is matter-of-fact . . . transforms itself into meaning something infinitely higher” and is thus “elevated an entire quality above the human level.” Statements of this sort are to be interpreted completely differently from other statements, Kierkegaard believed, all the more so because a statement of this type “resounds in reverse, becomes true when heard in reverse” (NB25:85). Large portions of Journal NB25 bear the stamp of this notion concerning the significance of reversedness, making use of the hermeneutics of reversal, the formula of which is the dialectical notion that “the positive is recognizable by its opposite, the negative” (NB25:89). For example, in a corrective commentary on Cicero’s concept of God, Kierkegaard writes: “No, Xnty approaches the matter differently: the more wretched, the more abandoned, the more insignificant, the unhappier you are—you may be sure of this—the more God concerns himself with you” (NB25:19). The

) See the explanatory note to NB25:109. ) NB25:12 and 13 also concern St. Stephen.

1 2

Critical Account of the Text

5. Outside front cover of Journal NB25.

803

804

J O U R N A L NB 25 notion that the reverse side is the decisive side of Christianity also finds expression in an entry that bears the title “The Son of the Widow of Nain or The Encounter of Death and Life”: From one side comes the funeral cortège; from the other side comes Xt. From the other side, i.e., the opposite side. This is how it is with the whole of Xnty: from the other side comes the opposition to what is merely human. Xnty transforms death into life (awakening—immortality), but first it also transforms life into death (dying-away), always the opposite, always from the other side. (NB25:36) Entry after entry in Journal NB25 discusses the manner in which a Christian may practice and acquire this dialectic of reversedness so that he becomes capable of interpreting his life in categories and perspectives that are entirely different from those of the non-Christian (e.g., NB25:49, 63–64, 89). That suffering is in itself one of the distinguishing marks by which the divine makes itself known to human beings is expressed in the first real entry in the journal, which bears the title “The Relation to God”: Strictly speaking, a person’s relating to God must needs be recognizable precisely in that everything goes awry. If this were not the case, it would of course be possible that a person would cleave to God—in order that everything go well. This is an expression of God’s self-assertion: he says, as it were, If you really want to have anything to do with me, you must endure the fact that I keep watch, ensuring that misfortune and opposition and suffering result from the relation. (NB25:4) The notion of God as the “infinite examiner” (NB25:50) seems more pronounced in Journal NB25 than in earlier journals and is accompanied by a suspicion that human sinfulness centers on a desire to cheat and deceive God and that God must therefore take precautions: “Naturally, God must keep watch; naturally, he cannot wish to let himself be deceived or to permit you to remain in an illusion” (N25:4). In his depiction of the pressure that God, in his invisible might, exerts upon the Christian, Kierkegaard frequently permits the abstract to take on quite concrete forms and circumstances: “I scarcely dare walk across my floor, scarcely dare move, scarcely say a word, lest it displease God—and before God (but he is omnipresent, so I am indeed before God)—the most insignificant thing is commensurable with the most important deci-

Critical Account of the Text sion” (NB25:61). Kierkegaard makes no effort to conceal the fact that entries of this sort concern matters far back in his own life story and are thus of an autobiographical character: Oh, my God, my God: My childhood was unhappy, excruciating; my youth full of torment—I have groaned, sighed, and cried out. Thank you, nonetheless—not you, the all-wise one—no, no, thank you, you infinitely loving one—precisely the infinitely loving one—for having done things this way! A hum. being has 30, 40, perhaps 70 years before him. You have (lovingly) prevented me from using that sum to purchase cakes and sweets—for then I would either have nothing to remember in eternity, or to my everlasting torment I would have to remember that I purchased something paltry. (NB25:64) Kierkegaard ironizes more than a little over human beings’ reasons, as hypocritical as they are complex, for wanting to go about “remodeling God,” so that God’s love becomes soppy and sentimental and God takes on the character of “such a wonderful uncle, a really good grandfather whom we hum. beings can put to very good use” (NB25:49, see also NB25:57). Kierkegaard presents a number of brief and pessimistic surveys of this history of the dismantling of God’s sovereignty, a process that has accelerated thanks to the modern institutionalization and professionalization of religion. Among the costs have been a marked weakening of the passions of the individual human being, the development of a false consciousness, and the continually increasing cultivation of merely human values, of comfortable civic virtues, which come to be identified with true Christianity. Kierkegaard’s protest is categorical: “Governance is tired of the hypocrisy and the mimicry occasioned by preoccupation with ‘the historical’ and historical certainty, and wants to compel hum. beings back into primitivity” (NB25:11). This sort of “primitivity” means uncompromising opposition to what is well-known and familiar, and it constitutes Kierkegaard’s radical alternative to civilization’s domestication of the world, something that finds particular expression, not least, in the unnaturalness of the modern city. Kierkegaard joins the modern critique of civilization, announcing: “Truly, we need to live closer to nature, if for no other reason than to receive a greater impression of God’s majesty. Clustered together in the great cities of cultural life, we have done all that we can to rid ourselves of every impression that could unsettle us—a lamentable demoralization” (NB25:59).

805

806

J O U R N A L NB 25 One of the most effective contributions to the process of ridding ourselves of “every impression that could unsettle us” has come from the teachers and professors of theology who, in the name of science, have transformed the subjective, divine teacher into an objective, dogmatic teaching. What ought to have been understood as “tasks for character” have been transformed into “tasks of virtuosity” (NB25:8). Just as Kierkegaard does not mince words in his critique of professors of theology—“The professor is a castrato, though he has not gelded himself for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, but the reverse, in order properly to fit into this characterless world”(NB25:26)—neither does he spare the Danish clergy: the priests are the “Sophists” of modern times (NB25:42; see also NB25:96) who, with their empty rhetoric and smarmy phrases, have drained the last bit of meaning out of Christianity: “It is, after all, easy to see that when the preacher of Christianity is not in character as a Christian, the preaching elicits precisely the opposite actuality” (NB25:69; see also NB25:75). At root, this sort of undertaking is “just as backward as if the state were to come up with the idea of employing 1,000 civil servants who were paid to defend the circle—by proving that it is a square” (NB25:89; see also NB25:51 and 61). Kierkegaard’s indignation at the thoughtless manner in which the modern age treats the genuine Christian heroes of earlier times—the “heroes of Xnty” (NB25:86)—culminates in his consideration of the fate to which Pascal was subjected: In modern times, who has been more utilized by priests and professors than Pascal! They appropriate his thoughts— but they omit the fact that Pascal was an ascetic, that he wore a hair shirt and all that sort of thing . . . But that is how it is everywhere—everywhere there is this infamous, disgusting cannibalism in which (as Heliogabalus ate ostrich brains) they eat the ideas, the opinions, the sayings, the dispositions of the dead—but their lives, their character: no, thank you, they do not want any of that. (NB25:106) This hermeneutics of reversal practiced by Kierkegaard is directed in particular at the relation between the Law and grace, because “ ‘grace’ has been brought to bear improperly and altogether prematurely” (NB25:9). This premature turn to grace has the consequence that people in Christendom understand Christianity as “as an incitement to enjoy life, a new, more powerful stimulant aimed at the enjoyment of life,” which, as a consequence, produces a blasphemously refined notion of the meaning of the atonement: “You have a God who has atoned—now you are truly to enjoy

Critical Account of the Text life. This is the greatest possible reversal” (NB25:46). The attempt to turn this “reversal” around requires a more precise presentation of the way in which the Reformation understood the situation: Luther rightly puts it as follows: Xt is a gift—to which faith corresponds. Furthermore, he is the Exemplar—to which imitation corresponds. But with greater accuracy it might be said: 1) imitation, tending toward decisive action, through which the situation for becoming a Xn comes into existence; 2) Xt as gift—faith; 3) imitation as the fruit of faith. (NB25:35; see also NB25:48, 67, 92). In his reflections, Kierkegaard often includes Bishop Mynster, whose person and whose conduct as bishop are the objects of a great deal of attention in this journal. Kierkegaard has no doubts that Mynster has “failed Xnty, dislocating Christianity” (NB25:50), an accusation he documents point by point in a lengthy entry titled “The Mynsterian Preaching of Christianity.” The entry seems to be a preliminary sketch for a larger encomium to Mynster, an impression that is strengthened by a couple of instructive parentheses containing the words “Lyric” and “additional lyricism” (NB25:68). A later entry makes it clear that Mynster could be acquitted if he would officially acknowledge that he had watered down Christianity: “A little admission on his part and everything will be as advantageous as possible to him. No one will see the way things actlly are, something I have always concealed by bowing so deeply to him” (NB25:84). The preparations for a “Collision with Mynster” (NB25:84) can be found at many points in the journal, not only in theological themes but also in the polemical tone that marks the majority of the entries. Not a few of these have an aphoristic quality, resembling theological diapsalmata (see NB25:14, 53, 65, 66, 70, 80), and thus anticipate the form of communication that Kierkegaard will employ so masterfully when the “collision” eventually becomes a reality. The sketch of the “turtle soup banquet,” attended by a highly decorated and profoundly hypocritical cleric (NB25:83) seems almost like an excerpt from The Moment. Several of the last entries in the journal touch on Kierkegaard’s relationship with J. F. Giødwad, whom Kierkegaard cannot help liking “very much” (NB25:112), despite the fact that Giødwad’s statements during Corsaren’s attack on Kierkegaard were anything other than unequivocal. No less equivocal and lingering are

807

808

J O U R N A L NB 25 Kierkegaard’s feelings for Regine, whom (according to a lengthy entry “On ‘Her.’ ”) he had met every day during the latter part of 1851. Kierkegaard would like to explain himself to her, but his trepidations concerning the consequences of such an approach were not diminished by the fact that he also reserved for himself the right to give her “a sharp reprimand for the manner in which she behaved during that time” (NB25:113, see also NB25:109).

Explanatory Notes 443

1

NB25. . . . 1851.] Label affixed to the front cover of the journal.

444

1

Abraham . . . pp. 175, bottom of page, and following] Written on the inside of the front cover of the journal. ― Abraham . . . p. 40: See NB25:34 with marginal entry NB25:34.a. ― The Mynsterian . . . pp. 122: See NB25:68. ― Mynster: Jakob Peter Mynster (1775–1854), Danish pastor, writer, and politician; parish pastor in Spjellerup in southern Zealand from 1802 to 1811; from 1811, resident chaplain at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. From 1826, he was court chaplain and from 1828, royal confessor as well as court chaplain and chaplain at Christiansborg Palace Church. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand and thus became primate of the Danish State Church. He preached frequently in Copenhagen churches, especially at Vor Frue Kirke (the Church of Our Lady) and the Palace Church. ― The Possible Collision . . . pp. 169: See NB25:84. ― The Story of the Passion . . . pp. 175: See NB25:85.

445

1

Texts for Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held on Fridays in the Church of Our Lady. Kierkegaard had preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady, on June 18, 1847, on the text Mt 11:28; on August 27, 1847, on the text Jn 10:27; and on September 1, 1848, on the text Jn 12:32. Two of the sermons were published as the second and third discourses in the fourth part of Christian Discourses under the title “Discourses at the Communion on Fridays: Christian Discourses” (CD, 262–274; SKS 10, 277–292), and another in the first exposition in No. III of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160).

See the blank sheet at the front of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Theme for a Friday sermon Journal NB17 p. 30] See NB17:24 in KJN 7, 183.

2

be called God’s friend] Allusion to Jas 2:23; see also 2 Chr 20:7, Isa 41:8. what we hear in our time: God is evil] Kierkegaard explains this in more detail in a draft of the preface to the fifth essay in A Cycle of Ethical-Religious Essays, from early 1849: “But truly, what is needed is eternity―is any stronger proof of this required than the fact that socialism believes that God is evil; indeed, it says so itself, for the demonic always contains the truth in reverse” (Pap. X 6 B 40, p. 149).

12

he himself does not even . . . source of controversy] Variant: Entry begun in the main text column.

1

448m

Luther somewhere says expressly . . . their writings] Refers to a sermon by Martin Luther on 1 Cor 12:1–11, the epistle for the tenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller [A Christian Book of Homilies, Collected from Dr. Martin Luther’s Church and House Postils], trans. Jørgen Thisted, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1828; ASKB 283; abbreviated hereafter as En christelig Postille), vol. 2, pp. 395–396: “He [Paul] begins to preach about spiritual gifts and admonishes them [teachers and leaders in the Church] about how they should conduct themselves in this respect, for the greater and the more beautiful such gifts are, the greater the tendency of flesh and blood toward sectarianism and inventing things. If a person has a good understanding of scripture and can explain it, or can work wonders, he immediately has grandiose notions regarding himself; he requires that everyone submit to him; he wants to

20

448

3

447

28

810

23

29

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 6–12

bring the whole of the mob over to his side; and he cannot tolerate having anyone standing on the same level as himself. In doing this he introduces a divorce and an inequality in the teaching . . . This is how things were in those days, and this is how things still go with our gospel. No sooner was the message about God’s grace brought to light once again, instructing souls, binding them all together with the bonds of unity, than the devil had his hands full, awakened his gang of sectarians, and called forth willful people who also wanted to be praised for their excellence, for being great intellects, for being better preachers, writers, and explainers of scripture than others . . . but precisely by claiming that they teach something that is higher and better, they hinder and distort true teaching, so that they can never be said to have continued building the structure, but rather to have abolished and disturbed the ground, and to have led people back to their earlier error and blindness.” as he also says . . . no further scholarly analysis should take place] No source for this has been found. forbidding the reading of the N.T.] Refers to the strong reservations that the Roman Catholic Church had regarding widespread reading of the Bible by people in their own languages. See, e.g., Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Hutterus Redivivus, or a Dogmatics for the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1828]; ASKB 581; abbreviated hereafter as Hutterus redivivus), § 49, p. 114, where he writes that within the Protestant Church “the H[oly] S[criptures] were commended for edifying use and approved as a help for everyone; on the other hand, the Rom[an] curia, especially after Innocent III, has made reading of translations dependent upon the judgment of eccles[iastical] authorities.” See also K. Hase, Kirkehistorie. Lærebog nærmest for akademiske Forelæsninger [Church History: Textbook for Use with Academic Lectures], trans. C. Winther and T. Schorn (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 160–166), § 273, p. 271: “Gregory VII (1080) was the first to oppose the Slavic peoples’ attempt to cling to the use of their mother tongue in wor-

•

1851

ship services, and he appealed to the mysteries of the ancient Church in order to disapprove of the use of the H[oly] Scriptures in the peoples’ own language.” sing with the birds among whom one finds oneself] A variant of the proverb “One must howl with the wolves among whom one finds oneself,” noted as no. 10873 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 2, p. 492.

9

450

In our times . . . taking away scripture after scripture] A reference to the historical-critical exegesis of the Bible or “biblical criticism” that arose in the 19th century in response to the insistence by the Enlightenment that biblical research investigate received texts critically with respect to their authenticity. Biblical criticism wants to understand biblical texts as historically conditioned expressions of the faith and the worldview of a specific historical period. People accept that the N.T. is God’s Word] See N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangelisk-christelige Religion, indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [Textbook on the Evangelical Christian Religion for Use in Danish Schools] (Copenhagen, 1824 [1791]; ASKB 183; abbreviated hereafter as Balles Lærebog), p. 7, § 6: “It is certain that God’s will with respect to human beings is contained in the Bible, which therefore is also called the word of God.” the critics] i.e., practitioners of historical-critical exegesis of the Bible (→ 450,33).

33

450

Stephen] See the reading for December 26, St. Stephen’s Day, Acts 6:8–15 and 7:54–60. His Lord and Master slept while the storm raged] Allusion to Mt 8:23–27. Father, do not hold this sin against them] See Acts 7:60 (→ 451,31). He prayed for them] See Acts 7:60 (→ 451,31). He prayed . . . right to the end] Refers to Acts 7:59 (→ 451,31). in the boat] → 451,37. They saw your face as the face of an angel] Cited freely from Acts 6:15 (→ 451,31).

31

35

10

451

37 19

452

23 23 2

451m

2

452m

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 12–17

454m

4

he has been famous . . . he sleeps] Variant: A portion of this entry was written in the main text column; see illustration on p. 453.

6

The pagan (those who walk erect) did, however, see heaven] Reference to the customary ancient etymological explanation of the Greek word for human being, “anthropos,” as “the one that looks upward.” This explanation is attributed to Plato; see P. Arnesen Græsk-Dansk Ordbog [GreekDanish Dictionary] (Copenhagen, 1830; ASKB 993), p. 101. Kierkegaard here refers to Cicero, De natura deorum [On the Nature of the Gods], bk. 2, chap. 56, 140, where it is said, with respect to the gifts that the gods have given to human beings, “She [Nature] has raised them from the ground to stand tall and upright, so that they might be able to behold the sky and so gain a knowledge of the gods. For men are sprung from the earth not as its inhabitants and denizens, but to be as it were the spectators of things supernal and heavenly, whereof no other species of animals participates” (Cicero, De natura deorum [and] Academica, trans. H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library [London: Heinemann, 1933; abbreviated hereafter as De natura deorum (Loeb)], pp. 257, 259). only the Xn sees heaven open, especially the martyr] Reference to Jn 1:51.

8

454

11 12

454

15 17

18

God has of course given us] Variant: “us” has been added. Xt is the Word] Refers to the identification of God with his Word, and God’s Word with Christ, in the prologue to the gospel of John. See Jn 1:2– 2:14; see also Rev 9:13 and 1 Jn 5:7. St. Stephen’s Day] December 26 (→ 451,31). Yesterday the angels proclaimed that a savior is born] Refers to the gospel text for Christmas Day, Lk 2:1–14; see Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog). today Stephen . . . face as that of an angel] See the reading for December 26 (→ 451,31), esp. Acts 6:15.

•

1851

811

Indeed, Christmas first arose in the 4th cent.] Variant: added. Debate about the date for the celebration of Christ’s birth arose in the 3rd century, and in the course of the 4th century the date was fixed as December 25. See NB:50, from ca. the beginning of November 1846, where Kierkegaard writes that “the festival of Christmas was first introduced in the 4th century” (KJN 4, 47). Kierkegaard gives as his source F. G. Lisco, Das christliche Kirchenjahr. Ein homiletisches Hülfsbuch beim Gebrauche der epistolischen und evangelischen Pericopen [The Christian Ecclesiastical Year: A Homiletic Manual for Use in Connection with the Epistolary and Gospel Texts], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Berlin, 1843 [1834]; ASKB 629–630): “Up to the year 325 there are only very obscure and uncertain traces extant pertaining to this festival, but after the middle of the fourth century, under the reign of the Roman bishop Liberius, it makes its appearance, and it was in fact in the Roman Church, i.e., in the West, that it was first a universally acknowledged and highly celebrated festival” (vol. 1, p. 9, § 17). See NB3:66 in KJN 4, 177, and NB8:85 in KJN 5, 188, with its accompanying explanatory note.

29

454

Cicero] Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 b.c.), Roman politician, jurist, philosopher. in de natura deorum . . . 2nd book] Refers to Cicero, De natura deorum (→ 454m,6), bk. 2, chap. 61. the gods . . . in order to lead a happy life] Kierkegaard’s rendering of Cicero’s De natura deorum, bk. 2, chap. 61, based on his German translation, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter in drey Büchern. Aus dem Lateinischen des Marcus Tullius Cicero übersetzt [Conversations on the Nature of the Gods, in Three Books: Translated from the Latin of Marcus Tullius Cicero], trans. C. V. Kindervater (Zurich, 1787; ASKB 1238; abbreviated hereafter as Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter), pp. 193–194. See also Kierkegaard’s Latin edition, M. Tullii Ciceronis opera omnia [Complete Works of Cicero], ed. J. A. Ernesti, 6 vols. (Halle, 1757; ASKB 1224–1229; abbreviated hereafter as Ciceronis opera omnia), vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 569.

4

455

4

5

812 13

455

23

456

6

20

456m

3

456

32 34

37

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 17–20

it requires that a person die away] i.e., die away from the world. One of the apostle Paul’s fundamental ideas is that in Christ a human being has died away from sin. See, e.g., Rom 6:2 and Col 2:20. See also 1 Pet 2:24. Mysticism and pietism accentuated this notion, making a person’s daily life one of dying away from sin and the pleasures of the world in self-denial and in complete separation from everything temporal, finite, and worldly. Thus the point changed from human beings having died away from sin through Christ to an insistence that human beings must also die away from sin through faith. “Only One Receives the Prize.”] Cited freely from 1 Cor 9:24. heartily] Kierkegaard links expressions such as “heartily” to N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 503,18) and Grundvigians, including his brother P. C. Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB15:29 and NB17:106 in KJN 7, 22, 250–251, with their accompanying explanatory notes. how things went for them,] Variant: first written “how things went for them.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. one must avoid saying it officially] Variant: first written “I” instead of “one”. the second book of de natura deorum] Refers to Cicero (→ 455,4) De natura deorum, bk. 2, chap. 66. there exists a Providence . . . those who are remarkable] Refers to bk. 2, chap. 66 of De natura deorum: “Nor is the care and providence of the immortal gods bestowed only upon the human race in its entirety, but it is also wont to be extended to individuals. We may narrow down the entirety of the human race and bring it gradually down to smaller and smaller groups, and finally to single individuals.” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), p. 181. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, pp. 193–194, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 572. the gods concern themselves . . . not with things that are insignificant] Refers to bk. 2, chap. 66 of De natura deorum: “The gods attend to great matters; they neglect small ones. Now great men al-

•

1851

ways prosper in all their affairs, assuming that the teachers of our school and Socrates, the prince of philosophy, have satisfactorily discoursed upon the bounteous abundance of wealth that virtue bestows.” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), p. 283. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, p. 204, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 573. lèse-majesté] Chr. V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683), which was in force until the adoption of the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849, reserved the supreme punishment for lèse-majesté; see bk. 6, chap. 4, § 1. God has need of nothing and no one] See Works of Love (1847), WL, 120; SKS 9, 123, where Kierkegaard uses a similar formulation. To be in solidarity with God] Allusion to Jas 4:8. the usual expositions of God’s attributes one sees nowadays] Presumably, a reference to Balles Lærebog (→ 450,35), chap. 1, “Om Gud og hans Egenskaber” [On God and His Attributes] and to S. B. Hersleb, Lærebog i Bibelhistorien. Udarbeidet især med Hensyn paa de høiere Religionsklasser i de lærde Skoler [Textbook in Biblical History: Prepared for Use in Advanced Religion Courses at Institutes of Higher Education], 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1826 [1812]; ASKB 186–187). majesty― . . . :love.] Variant: changed from “majesty.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Cicero in de natura deorum . . . the existence of a God] Refers to Cicero (→ 455,4) De natura deorum, bk. 3, chaps. 32–33: “Telamo dispatches the whole topic of proving that the gods pay no heed to man in a single verse: [‘]For if they cared for man, good men would prosper / And bad men come to grief; but this is not so.[’]” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), p. 365. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, pp. 262–264, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, pp. 603–605. ― the fact that evil people: Variant: changed from “the fact that evil”. what Diogenes . . . the existence of gods] Refers to Cicero (→ 455,4) De natura deorum, bk. 3,

39

17

457

18 25

27

4

9

457m

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 20–24

458m

19

457

30 31

458

458

2

5 5 6 14

459

5 7 7

•

1851

813

But as they are now] Variant: first written a hash mark (#) apparently indicating the end of the entry. wrong,] Variant: first written “wrong.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

14

20

Cicero] → 455,4. in de natura deorum . . . and that no one can be wise] Refers to De natura deorum, bk. 3, chap. 32: “For if by the general consent of all philosophers folly is a greater evil than all the ills of fortune and of the body when placed in the scale against it, and if wisdom on the other hand is attained by nobody, we, for whose welfare you say the gods have cared most fully, are really in the depth of misfortune. For just as it makes no difference whether no one is in good health or no one can be in good health, so do I not understand what difference it makes whether no one is wise or no one can be wise.” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), p. 365. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, pp. 261–262, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 603. none of us can be it,] Variant: first written “none of us can be it.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

The Event in France] Allusion to Napoleon III’s coup d’état of December 2, 1851 (→ 459,26). the Russian tsar] Tsar Nicholas I (r. 1825–1855). It was largely owing to Russian pressure on Prussia that the outcome of the First Schleswig War (or Three Years’ War), 1848–1851, was favorable for Denmark. the soldiers said, [“]We are soldiers.[”]] No source has been identified for this. Napoleon is no hero] Napoleon III, Charles Louis Napoleon Bonaparte (1808–1873), was the nephew of Napoleon I. He attempted to seize power through a coup several times, first in 1836 and then in 1840. After the revolution of February 1848, he tried to gain power democratically and was elected president in December 1848. On December 2, 1851, he seized imperial power through a coup d’état and reigned as Emperor Napoleon III from 1852 to 1870. ― no: Variant: before “no”, “rlly” has been deleted. The old Napoleon was able to sleep before a battle] Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821), who seized power in France through a coup in 1799, ruled as Emperor Napoleon I from 1804 to 1814 and for a time in 1815. A number of anecdotes about him relate that he was able to sleep at will. The new Napoleon] i.e., Napoleon III (→ 459,26).

God’s Majesty] Variant: “God’s” has been added. in the First Place.] Variant: added. clings to God] Allusion to Jas 4:8. those blessed glorious ones] In Kierkegaard and in the sermon literature of his day, the expression “the [or those] glorious ones” was used in referring to witnesses to the truth or to martyrs. My God, my God, why have you forsaken] Cited freely from Mt 27:46. the only one] i.e., Christ; see, e.g., Jn 3:16. your beloved] i.e., Christ; allusion to Mt 3:17; see also Mt 17:5, 2 Pet 1:17, Col 1:13.

de natura deorum conclusion of book III] Reference to Cicero’s (→ 455,4) De natura deorum, bk. 3, chap. 36 (→ 460,3). Horace, æquam mentum mihi ipsi præstabo)] Reference to the Roman poet Horace 65–8 b.c.), Odes, bk. 2, poem 3, vv. 1–4, where he writes: “Remember to keep a level head when life’s path is steep; likewise, when the going is good, to restrain it from excessive joy, Dellius, for you are sure to die.” English translation from Horace, Odes and Epodes, trans. Niall Rudd, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard

2

chap. 34: “Diogenes the Cynic used to say that Harpalus, a brigand of the day who passed as fortunate, was a standing witness against the gods, because he lived and prospered as he did for so long.” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), p. 369. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, p. 264, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 605. And yet . . . he is love] Allusion to 1 Jn 4:16; see also 1 Jn 4:8.

14

459

21

22 26

31

34

2

460

814

3

5 7

460

14 15

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 24–30

University Press, 2004), pp. 101 and 103. See also Kierkegaard’s Danish edition, Q. Horatius Flaccus’ samtlige Værker [The Complete Works of Horace], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1792–1793), vol. 1, p. 146. for good luck―wisdom is one’s own doing] Reference to Cicero, De natura deorum, bk. 3, chap. 36: “. . . our virtue is a just ground for others’ praise and a right reason for our own pride, and this would not be so if the gift of virtue came to us from a god and not from ourselves. On the other hand when we achieve some honour or some accession to our estate, or obtain any other of the goods or avoid any of the evils of fortune, it is then that we render thanks to the gods, and do not think that our own credit has been enhanced. Did anyone ever render thanks to the gods because he was a good man? No, but because he was rich, honoured, secure . . . However, to return to my point, it is the considered belief of all mankind that they must pray to god for fortune but obtain wisdom for themselves.” English translation from Cicero, De natura deorum (Loeb), pp. 373 and 375. See also Kierkegaard’s German edition of Cicero, Gespräche über das Wesen der Götter, pp. 267–268, and his Latin edition, Ciceronis opera omnia, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 606. Pharisee . . . thanked God for his righteousness] Allusion to Lk 18:11–14. as Luther also . . . one is not to mendaciously attribute to oneself more sins than one’s own] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Lk18:9–14 (the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector), the gospel text for the eleventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 448,20), vol. 1, pp. 467–482. Luther writes: “For no one ought to make his heart into a den of thieves: One must not accuse oneself of the sins of which one is not conscious. One must speak the truth, whatever it is, and not deprive oneself of the praise of a good conscience” (pp. 473–474). early antiquity] Variant: changed from “antiquity”. The empire protected itself . . . by making them “professors.”] Reference to the founding of four schools of philosophy―the Platonic Academy, the Aristotelian Peripatetic School, the Stoa, and

•

1851–1852

the Epicurean Kepos (i.e., “Garden”)―founded under the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius (121– 180, emperor from 161) in Rome in the year 176. but he has not gelded himself for the sake of the kingdom of heaven] Reference to Mt 19:12.

17

has fasted and mortified his flesh for 20 years] Reference to Luther’s time as an Augustinian monk, 1505–1524.

27

460

entirely put himself in our place] See the first discourse in “The High Priest”―“The Tax Collector”―“The Woman Who Was a Sinner,” Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1849), WA, 113–124; SKS 11, 251–259, and the first draft of this discourse in NB7:14, dated September 1, 1848, in KJN 5, 86–87; SKS 21, 83.

6

462

The Gospel for the Poor] Allusion to Mt 11:4–6. the fortunate and] Variant: added. joyous message] i.e., “gospel.”

12

462

5

462m

The Annunciation] Refers to the gospel text for the annunciation. According to Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17) the gospel text for that day, which in 1852 fell on March 25, is Lk 1:26–38. Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord . . . as you will] Lk 1:38. to consider this situation in a manner quite different from . . . the pious attitudes . . . Indeed! say Yes. Oh, be quick to say Yes, etc.] Reference to Alfonso Maria di Liguori (1696– 1787), Vollständiges Betrachtungs- und Gebetbuch von dem heiligen Alphons von Liguori. Neu aus dem Italienischen übersetzt von einem Priester aus der Versammlung des allerheiligsten Erlösers [Complete Book of Prayers and Meditations by Saint Alphonsus Maria de’ Liguori, Newly Translated from the Italian by a Priest of the Order of the Most Holy Redeemer] (Aachen, 1840; ASKB 264), p. 577: “ ‘Make haste, o holy virgin,’ cried Saint Bernard to Mary, ‘Why do you delay in giving your consent? The eternal Word awaits your consent before it takes on flesh and becomes your Son; all of us, who are unhappily damned to eternal death―we all await this, o Mary. If you consent to become the mother of Jesus, then we

18

462

15

28 3

463

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 30–37

11

19

463

27 33

464

4

33

35

will all be delivered. So make haste, o my Queen, say Yes―do not be the reason for the salvation of the world, which depends upon your consent, to be put off further.’” In Kierkegaard’s copy of the book, which is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive of the Royal Library in Copenhagen, this passage is marked with a vertical line of ink in the margin (see Pap. X 6 C 2,20, pp. 460–461). just as Sarah did; she could have laughed―] Reference to Gen 18:1–15, esp. vv. 12–13. ― laughed―: Variant: first written “laughed.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the power of the Holy Spirit had to overshadow her] Reference to Lk 1:26–38, esp. v. 35. Knock, and It Shall Be Opened unto You] Quoted from Mt 7:7. Have faith―and if you command it . . . hurl itself into the sea] See Mt 21:21–22. The Positive Recognizable by the Negative] See Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 2, chap. 4, division 2, A, § 2: “Now, to act might seem the very opposite of to suffer, and thus it might seem strange to say that the essential expression of existential pathos (which is acting) is suffering. But this is only apparently the case, and again the sign of the religious sphere is manifest here―that the positive is distinguished by the negative (in contrast to the directness of immediacy and the relative directness of reflection)―that to act religiously is marked by suffering” (CUP, 432; SKS 7, 393; see also CUP, 524; SKS 7, 476). possibility of offense] See Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 2, chap. 4, division 2, appendix to B, sec. b, on “The Possibility of Offense” (CUP, 585; SKS 7, 532). dialectic of reversal] See NB:194, from the spring of 1847, where Kierkegaard uses this term in opposition to the “dialectic of immediacy” (KJN 4, 116). See also the first essay in Two Minor EthicalReligious Essays (1849), chap. B: “Just as there is a plus scale and a minus scale on a thermometer, so in the dialectical there is also a direct scale and a reverse scale. But one rarely or never sees the dialectical used in reversed fashion in people’s think-

•

1852

815

ing about acting in life; one does not come to the real problem. For the most part, people know only the directly dialectical” (WA, 67–68; SKS 11, 72–73). The Wedding at Cana] Reference to Jn 2:1–11. According to Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17) this was the gospel text for the second Sunday after Epiphany, which in 1852 fell on January 18. die away] → 455,13.

2

New Fear and Trembling] Fear and Trembling: Dialectical Lyric was presumably written in May and June 1843 and was published on October 16, 1843, under the pseudonym Johannes de silentio; see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Frygt og Bæven in SKS K4, 83–97. The book takes its point of departure from Gen 22:1–19. Once there was a man] The introductory section of Fear and Trembling (1843) begins with this traditional formula: “Once there was a man who as a child had heard that beautiful story of how God tempted Abraham and how he withstood the temptation, kept the faith, and, against expectation, got a son a second time” (FT, 9; SKS 4, 105). Journal NB24] NB24:89 and NB24:108 have a draft of a treatment of Gen 22:1–19. NB23] No draft of this sort is found in Journal NB23.

12

Luther rightly puts it] The source has not been identified. he is the Exemplar] Variant: SKS has “he”; ms. has “his”.

20

The Son of the Widow of Nain] Reference to Lk 7:11–17, which, according to Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17), is the gospel text for the sixteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday. (dying-away)] Variant: first written “(dyingaway).”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. (→ 455,13). opposite,] Variant: first written “opposite.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. What profound cunning when it is said . . . the latest philosophy . . . the requirement of the times] Presumably, a reference to a review of Either/

29

466

2

467

465

5

465

19

1

465m

1

466

21

3

36

816

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 37–38

Or (1843) by “K-H,” in For Literatur og Kritik. Et Fjerdingaarsskrift [For Literature and Criticism: A Quarterly], vol. 1, no. 4, published by the Literary Society of Funen (Odense, 1843), pp. 377–405. In a digression, the reviewer (whose actual name was Hans Peter Kofoed-Hansen) asserted “that the Church still does not know how to take hold of the more cultivated classes . . . In any case, one cannot expect that any aesthetician or that any of the many people who have familiarized themselves with the terrain of reflection and irony, should feel themselves edified or converted in the Church or obtain a drop of consolation for a torn spirit as long as what is heard from the pulpit is still the old shoemaker’s moralisms and everyday trivialities which one could just as easily say to oneself at home on one’s sofa, or the oft-repeated assurances in which the weary soul―having endured hope, fear, trembling, and despair―has had to abandon confidence. Thus the so-called holy and awakened may say what they will, but the cultivated people of recent times are no longer satisfied with old-fashioned Christianity or the old faith, but require that it be presented in a new, fresh form, which can only be imparted by a philosophical bath” (pp. 384–385). Kofoed-Hansen’s remarks were criticized by Bishop J. P. Mynster (under the pseudonym “Kts”) in the article “Kirkelig Polemik” [Ecclesiastical Polemics] in J. L. Heiberg’s Intelligensblade [Intelligenser], nos. 41–42, January 1, 1844 (vol. 4, pp. 97–114). See also Preface V in Prefaces: Light Reading for People in Various Estates, According to Time and Opportunity (1844), P, 31–34; SKS 4, 493–496. ― in order to satisfy the requirement of the times: In Kierkegaard’s day, this was a frequently used expression, often occurring in connection with demands for political changes (e.g., the liberals), changes in ecclesiastical arrangements (e.g., the Grundtvigians), or more general changes in intellectual life. In this latter sense J. L. Heiberg often spoke of “the requirement of the times,” e.g., in his philosophical prospectus Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid [On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 568), where he writes: “And just as this undertaking has

•

1852

heretofore been lacking in accounts of philosophy . . . so also is it now precisely this undertaking to which our activity in particular must be referred since the demands of the age assert themselves more and more” (pp. 52–53). English translation from Heiberg’s “On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2005), pp. 117–118. Amor and Psyche] Reference to the classical myth of Amor and Psyche, retold by the Roman author Lucius Apuleius (born ca. 125) in his novel Metamorphoses (also known as “The Golden Ass”). Kierkegaard owned Latin and German editions of the work: Apuleii fabula de Psyche et Cupidine [Apuleius’s Tale of Psyche and Cupid (i.e., Amor)], ed. J. C. Orellius (Turici, 1833; ASKB 1217), and Amor und Psyche, freie metrische Bearbeitung nach dem Lateinischen des Apuleius [Amor and Psyche: A Free Verse Adaptation from the Latin of Apuleius], trans. J. Kehrein (Giessen, 1834; ASKB 1216). Just today I am again reading the story] While he was writing Either/Or (1843), Kierkegaard made use of Amor und Psyche in the German translation by J. Kehrein (see the preceding note); see EO 1, 31; SKS 2, 40,24; see also Pap. III B 179,42. Kierkegaard again mentions the tale in JJ:39, from the end of 1842; see KJN 2, 143. Apuleius] → 468,5. The 4th test . . . hold her back] In the tale of Amor and Psyche (→ 468,5) Venus assigns Psyche a number of mortally dangerous tasks, the last of which is for Psyche to retrieve from the goddess Proserpina a box containing a beauty ointment. Among the hindrances, for example, is a lame muleteer, who asks Psyche to pick up some sticks that have fallen off his mule. what in Greek might be called divine daring] Presumably, a reference to the Greek notion of hubris, i.e., presumption (especially vis-à-vis the gods) that dares beyond human limits. The idea of hubris is present at many points in Greek culture, especially in tragedy, and it was incorporated in ethical works of classical and Hellenistic philosophy.

5

6

6 6

12

468

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 39–42 469

1 3

469

7

8

To Die Away] → 455,13. Theaet[etus] . . . cited from Meiners’s Ethik, Göttingen, 1800, pt. 1, p. 211.] Refers to Socrates’ reply to Theodorus in the Platonic dialogue Theaetetus, 176a–b, which Kierkegaard cites word for word (omitting diacritical markings) from Christoph Meiners, Geschichte der ältern und neuern Ethik oder Lebenswissenschaft [History of Ancient and Modern Ethics, or the Science of Living], 2 vols. (Göttingen, 1800–1801; ASKB 675–676, abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte der Ethik), vol. 1, p. 211 n. 24. The translation in Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961; abbreviated hereafter as Plato: The Collected Dialogues), p. 881, reads: “That is why we should make all speed to take flight from this world to the other, and that means becoming like the divine so far as we can.” ― Meiners: Christoph Meiners (1747–1810), German philosopher, historian of culture, and polyhistor; from 1772, extraordinary professor, and from 1775, ordinary professor, of philosophy at Göttingen. Kierkegaard owned a number of his books; see ASKB 657–676, 1406–1406a, and 1951–1951b. Stoic Suicide] Refers to the passage on the Stoics’ view of suicide in Christoph Meiners, Geschichte der Ethik (→ 469,3), vol. 1, p. 164: “Even stranger than the teaching just cited was the insistence by the Stoics that it is an obligation sometimes to live, sometimes to die, that the times and the circumstances determine when Providence itself opens the door of life, as it were, and gives the sign to retreat from the stage of life.” : ηνοιϰτα[ι] ἠ ϑυρα . . . Arrian III, 10 and 13, . . . cited from Meiners’s Ethik, pt. 1, p. 164] Cited word for word from Christoph Meiners’s footnote to the above-mentioned passage on p. 164., bk. 3, chap. 13. A standard English translation reads: “Now whenever he does not provide the necessities for existence, He sounds the recall; He has thrown open the door and says to you, ‘Go.’ ” English translation from Epictetus, The Discourses as Reported by Arrian, the Manual, and Fragments, trans. W. A. Oldfather, Loeb

•

1852

817

Classical Library, 2 vols. (London: Heinemann, 1926–1928), vol. 2, p. 93. Kierkegaard could also have read the passage in the German translation he owned, Arrians Unterredungen Epiktets mit seinen Schülern. Übersetzt und mit historisch-philosophischen Anmerkungen und einer kurzen Darstellung der Epiktetischen Philosophie begleitet von J. M. Schultz [Arrian’s Conversations of Epictetus with His Disciples: Translated and Accompanied with Historical and Philosophical Notes and a Brief Presentation of the Philosophy of Epictetus, by J. M. Schultz], 2 vols. (Altona, 1801–1803; ASKB 1045), vol. 2, p. 49. ― Arrian: Lucius Flavius Arrianus (ca. 95–ca. 175), Greek author, historian, officer in the Roman army. He was a student of the Stoic philosopher Epictetus and preserved his teachings in four books of Discourses, from which the quoted passage is taken. In bk. 3, chap. 10, however, there is no mention of either suicide or death. Lucretius II, 1] Refers to the Roman Epicurean poet Titus Lucretius Carus’s (ca. 94–55 or 51 b.c.) work De rerum natura (→ 469,12), bk. 2, vv. 1–5. Svave, mari magno . . . Meiners’s Ethik, pt. 2, p. 300] “Pleasant it is, when over a great sea the winds trouble the waters, to gaze from shore upon another’s great tribulation: not because any man’s troubles are a delectable joy, but because to perceive what ills you are free from yourself is pleasant.” English translation from Lucretius, De rerum natura [On the Nature of Things], trans. W.H.D. Rouse, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1924), p. 85. Kierkegaard cites this passage from a footnote in Meiners, Geschichte der Ethik (→ 469,3), vol. 2, pp. 300–301.

11

the ancient Sophists] Historical designation for a group of professional teachers of philosophy and rhetoric in the 5th century b.c. Among the leading figures were Protagoras of Abdera, Gorgias of Leontini, Prodicus of Ceos, Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, Critias, and Hippias of Elis (→ 473,26). to appear to be just . . . certain misery] Refers to Glaucon’s reply in his conversation with Socrates in Republic, bk. 2 (360d): “For if anyone who had got such a license within his grasp should refuse

20

469

12

28

469

818

470

7

8

9

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 42

to do any wrong or lay his hands on others’ possessions, he would be regarded as most pitiable and a great fool by all who took note of it, though they would praise him to one another’s faces, deceiving one another because of their fear of suffering injustice.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 608. Geschichte des Wissenschaften, Lemgo, 1782, 2nd part, p. 208] Christoph Meiners Geschichte des Ursprungs, Fortgangs und Verfalls der Wissenschaften in Griechenland und Rom [History of the Origin, Rise, and Fall of the Sciences in Greek and Rome], 2 vols. (Lemgo, 1781–1782; ASKB 1406–1406a; abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte des Ursprungs). following Philostratus, tells us about their lives] In his Geschichte des Ursprungs, vol. 2, pp. 202–207, Meiners reproduces the tale of Hercules at the crossroads (→ 470,9) from Xenophon’s Memorabilia. Meiners then contrasts the moral value of the tale with details about the life of its putative author, Prodicus (→ 470,9), referring in his footnotes to Flavius Philostratus, De vitae sophistarum [The Lives of the Sophists], after which Meiners provides details concerning Gorgias (→ 470,10). ― Philostratus: Flavius Philostratus “The Athenian” (ca. a.d. 170–244/249), Greek rhetorician and Sophist from Lemnos. His works include Βίοι σοϕιστῶν (Latin, De vitae Sophistarum [On the Lives of the Sophists]), presumably from before a.d. 238, which treats the Sophists in chronological order, primarily from a.d. 100 to Philostratus’s own time. Hercules at the crossroads, which is ascribed to Prodicus] Refers to a story of a decisive choice that is attributed to the Greek Sophist Prodicus of Ceos, a contemporary of Socrates. The story has been lost, but is rendered freely by Xenophon in his recollections of Socrates, Memorabilia, bk. 2, chap. 1; see Xenophons Sokratiske Merkværdigheder [Xenophon’s Socratic Memorabilia], trans. J. Bloch (Copenhagen, 1792), pp. 115–129. When the demigod Hercules (Greek, Heracles), son of the royal daughter Alcmene and Zeus, had become a young man and did not yet know whether he should follow the path of virtue or that of vice, he sat down, worried and doubting, at a lonely crossroads. There he met two women, “virtue”

•

1852

and “vice,” each of whom sought to win him over. Hercules chose the path of virtue. Gorgias encouraged unity among the Greeks . . . Olympic games] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of Meiners, Geschichte des Ursprungs, vol. 2, p. 208. Hippias depicted . . . that was what was pleasing there] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of Meiners, Geschichte des Ursprungs, vol. 2, pp. 208– 209. ― Hippias: The Greek Sophist Hippias of Elis; the reference here is to the depiction of him in the Platonic dialogue Greater Hippias. In the note . . . in Helen. Encom.] Refers to Meiners’s footnote to the passage referred to in the previous note. The note reads: “Isocr. in Helen. Encom. II. 116. 117. Αλλα γαρ οὐδενος αυτοις αλλου μελει πλην του χρηματιζεσϑαι παρα των νεωτερων. – Επι γαρ ἁπαντων των πραγματων προς τας περιττοτητας ϰαι ϑαυματοπιοίας ὁυτω διαϰειμενοι διατελουσι. [Isocrates Praise of Helena, 6–7]: “But the truth is that these men care for naught save enriching themselves at the expense of the youth . . . These young men, to be sure, may well be pardoned for holding such views; for in all matters they are and always have been inclined toward what is extraordinary and astounding.” English translation from Isocrates, trans. Larue van Hook, Loeb Classical Library, 3 vols. (London and Cambridge, MA: Heinemann and Harvard University Press, 1928–1945), vol. 3, p. 63. quiet hours] An expression often used by J. P. Mynster (→ 444,1) with respect both to private devotions and church services. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on the Doctrines of the Christian Faith], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1833]; ASKB 254–255), vol. 1, p. 240; vol. 2, pp. 298, 299, 301, 306; Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons on Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230 and 2191), vol. 1, pp. 8, 38, 215, 384; Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Given in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), p. 63; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Given in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 10, 11, 14; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850

10

12

19

24

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 42–43

28

33

36

39

471

4

[Sermons Given in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 204 and 216. something that both Socrates and Aristotle . . . characteristic of Sophistry] At many points in Plato’s dialogues Socrates describes the Sophists as earning money from their teaching. In Apology (19d–e), for example, Socrates rejects accusations that he, like the Sophists, had received money for his so-called teaching; see Gorgias (511d–e), Republic (493a), and the conversation between Theaetetus and the stranger in Sophist (222–223). Aristotle, too, appears to regard pecuniary interest as characteristic of Sophistry; see Nicomachean Ethics, bk. 9, chap. 1 (1064a30) and especially Sophistical Refutations (171b25). This is also how Socrates presents it] Reference to Plato’s Republic, bk. 2 (361e–362a), where Socrates recounts his conversation with Plato’s brother Glaucon (→ 470,36). “He is persecuted . . . but to seem to be one.”] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of Meiners’s translation of Glaucon’s reply in Plato’s Republic, bk. 2 (361e–362a). I again read the passage in Plato’s Republic] → 469,28. Kierkegaard also refers to this passage in the Republic, bk. 2 (360c–d) in NB17:36, from 1850, in KJN 7, 190–191. Ah, Socrates, Socrates, Socrates!] Presumably, a reference to a tale about Croesus, the wealthy king of Lydia, related in Herodotus, The Histories, bk. 1, chaps. 32 and 86. Once, when Croesus had invited the wise Solon from Athens and had shown him all his wealth, he wanted to know what Solon thought about his happiness. In his reply, Solon said: “Now, I can see that you are extremely rich and that you rule over large numbers of people, but I won’t be in a position to say what you’re asking me to say about you until I find out that you died well.” Later, in 456 b.c., Croesus suffered defeat by the Persian king Cyrus, who took him prisoner and decided to burn him. While the unhappy Croesus was atop the pyre, he remembered the words Solon had spoken to him, that “no one who is still alive is happy,” and he cried out the name “Solon” three times. When Cyrus heard this, he had his translator ask whom Croesus was calling upon, and when he found

•

1852

819

out, he commanded that the fire be extinguished and Croesus be spared. See Die Geschichten des Herodotos [The Histories of Herodotus], trans. F. Lange, 2 vols. (Berlin 1811; ASKB 1117), vol. 1, pp. 18–19 and 49–50. English translation from Robin Waterfield, trans., Herodotus: The Histories (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 15– 16 and 39–40. Socrates] The Greek philosopher Socrates (ca. 470–399 b.c.) developed his thoughts in dialogue with his contemporaries and left no writings, but the main outlines of his character, activity, and teachings were depicted by three of his contemporaries: Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds; Xenophon, in his four “Socratic” writings, including the Memorabilia; and Plato, in his dialogues. Socrates was condemned to death by a court of the Athenian people for refusing to acknowledge the gods of the state and for corrupting the youth; the sentence was carried out when he drank hemlock and died. hero of intellectuality] Perhaps a reference to G.W.F. Hegel’s presentation of Socrates, whom he several times refers to as a “hero” in matters of the mind, e.g., “Socrates was still the hero who possessed for himself the absolute right of the mind, certain of itself and of inwardly deciding consciousness, and thus expressed the higher principle of mind with consciousness.” Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie [Lectures on the History of Philosophy], ed. C. L. Michelet, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1836; ASKB 557–559); vols. 13–15 in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [The Works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Complete Edition], 18 vols. ( Berlin 1832–1845); vol. 2 (= vol. 13 of the complete edition) (1836), pp. 100–101; see also p. 91. English translation from E. S. Haldane, trans., Lectures on the History of Philosophy by Georg Friedrich Wilhelm Hegel, 3 vols. (London, 1892– 1896), vol. 1, p. 444. always hinders this communication by means of irony] See Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 2, sec. 2, chap. 4, division 2, A, “Pathos”: “It is told of Socrates that a man came to him and complained that people were slandering him in his

6

7

9

471

820

12 13

20

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 43–44

absence. Socrates replied: ‘Is that anything to care about? It makes so little difference to me what people do with me in my absence that they are even quite welcome to beat me in my absence.’ This remark is proper irony; it is devoid of the sympathy with which Socrates could create a mutual situation with another (and the law for teasing irony is quite simply this: the ironist’s cunning prevents the conversation from being a conversation, although in every way it looks like a conversation, perhaps even a sincere conversation). It is ironically teasing, even if it is oriented toward the ethical in order to arouse the man to gain self-assertiveness” (CUP, 552n; SKS 7, 501–502n). He is condemned to death] → 471,6. Xenophon’s Apology] Reference to Socrates’s Apology, a brief, perhaps very early work by the Greek soldier, historian, and author Xenophon (ca. 430–355 b.c.). Kierkegaard owned editions of the work in Greek and Latin; see Xenophontis opera graece et latine [Xenophon’s Works in Greek and Latin], ed. C. A. Thieme, 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1801–1804; ASKB 1207–1210), vol. 4, pp. 409– 424. Kierkegaard also owned a German translation, Xenophons sämmtliche Schriften [Xenophon’s Complete Works], 6 vols., trans. A. C. Borheck (Lemgo, 1778–1808; ASKB 1212–1213); according to a bill from bookbinder N. C. Møller, Kierkegaard had the work bound in March 1850; see H. P. Rohde, “Søren Kierkegaard som Bogsamler” [Søren Kierkegaard as a Collector of Books], in Fund og Forskning [Discovery and Research], vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), p. 115. Cicero (Tusculan Disputations) puts it . . . if he were thirsty] Reference to Cicero (→ 455,4), Tusculanae disputationes [Tusculan Disputations], bk. 1, chap. 40: “How charmed I am with Theramenes! How lofty a spirit is his! For though we shed tears as we read, nevertheless a notable man dies a death that is not pitiable: he was flung into prison by order of the thirty tyrants, and when he had swallowed the poison like a thirsty man he tossed the remainder out of the cup to make a splash . . . Who would applaud this calmness of a great spirit in the hour of death, did he judge death to be an evil? Theramenes passed to the same prison and the same bowl

•

1852

as Socrates a few years later, condemned by a sentence of judges as criminal as that of the tyrants on Theramenes.” English translation from Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, trans. J. E. King, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1927), pp. 115 and 117. Kierkegaard owned a German translation of the text, Marcus Tullius Cicero’s Tusculanische Untersuchungen [Marcus Tullius Cicero’s Tusculan Investigations], trans. and notes by J. D. Büchling (Halle, 1799; ASKB 1236); according to a bill from book dealer J. H. Schubothe, Kierkegaard purchased the work on January 13, 1852; see Fund og Forskning, vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), p. 126. in the Phaedo): He drinks festively, as though for pleasure] Reference to Plato’s dialogue Phaedo, 117b, where it is related that Socrates, surrounded by his friends, asked the man who handed him the cup of poison “ ‘What do you say about pouring a libation from this drink? Is it permitted, or not?’ [He was not permitted to do so.] ‘I see, said Socrates. But I suppose I am allowed, or rather bound, to pray to the gods that my removal from this world to the other may be prosperous. This is my prayer, then, and I hope that it may be granted.’ With these words, quite calmly and with no sign of distaste, he drained the cup in one breath.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 97. (as people say] Variant: added. ja, mit Speck fangt man Maüse] German proverb; see “Speck” [Bacon], no. 37, in Deutsches Sprichwörter-Lexikon. Ein Hausschatz für das deutsche Volk [Dictionary of German Proverbs: A Domestic Treasury for the German People], ed. K.F.W. Wander, 5 vols. (Leipzig, 1867–1880), vol. 4 (1876), p. 674. See also Schiller’s play Die Räuber [The Robbers], act 2, sc. 3, where Spiegelberg says these words, in Schillers sämmtliche Werke [Schiller’s Complete Works], 12 vols. (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 1804–1815) vol. 2, pp. 1–176, p. 73. The God-Man] i.e., Jesus, who as the human being in whom God revealed himself, united in himself concretely the divine and human natures; see Practice in Christianity (1850) (PC, 81–82; SKS 12, 92).

22

30 2

24

472

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 44–50

25

26

473

11 13

25

26

29

474

21

475

3 6 6 19

He says: I am God] See Practice in Christianity (1850), No. II, B, “The possibility of essential offense in relation to loftiness, that an individual human being speaks or acts as if he were God, declares himself to be God, thus in relation to the qualification ‘God’ in the composition God-Man” (PC, 94–102; SKS 12, 105–110), where Kierkegaard treats this theme. be persecuted . . . excluded from the synagogues, executed] Allusion to Jn 16:2. Come hither, all of you] Refers to Mt 11:28. everyone flees] See Practice in Christianity (1850), in which Mt 11:28 is used as section title for No. I, “ ‘ Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest’: For Awakening and Inward Deepening,” to which Kierkegaard appends the motto “Procul o procul este profani’ [Away, away, O unhallowed ones] (PC, 5; SKS 12, 13). Meiners’s Geschichte der Wissenschaften] Christoph Meiners’s Geschichte des Ursprungs (→ 470,7). the section on the Sophists . . . witnesses in court] Kierkegaard here summarizes Meiners’s Geschichte des Ursprungs (→ 470,7), vol. 2, bk. 6, chap. 2, “Geschichte der alten Sophisten” [History of the Early Sophists] pp. 169–227, esp. p. 221. the French police in our own day] No source for this has been identified. never have arisen in my heart] Allusion to 1 Cor 2:9. related to God] Allusion to Acts 17:28–29. God is spirit] See Jn 4:24. dying away] → 455,13. à la Phalaris’s ox] See the discussion of “the unfortunate people who were tortured over a slow fire in the ox of Phalaris” in the “Diapsalmata,” in the first part of Either/Or (EO 1, 19; SKS 2, 27). The ox of Phalaris was an instrument of torture in the form of a brazen bull, in which the tyrant Phalaris of Agrigentum in Sicily (570/565–554/549 b.c.) roasted his prisoners. The bronze bull had flutes in its nostrils, so that the cries of the prisoners sounded like music. See the Greek author Lucian’s work, Phalaris, 1, 11–12, in Luciani

•

1852

821

Samosatensis opera [The Works of Lucian of Samostata], stereotype ed., 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1829; ASKB 1131–1134), vol. 2, pp. 256–257, and Lucians Schriften [The Writings of Lucian], 4 vols. (Zurich, 1769–1773; ASKB 1135–1138), vol. 4, pp. 234–239. focuses his] Variant: following this, the word “entire” has been deleted. his willingness to allow evil people to succeed in this world] Perhaps an allusion to Mt 5:43–46; see also Eccl 8:14. God is spirit] → 475,6. Yet God] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

1

Bishop Mynster] → 444,1. Mynster’s preaching of Christianity:] Variant: first written “Mynster’s Christianity:”. a finite teleology] A doctrine of the worldly end or purpose of things. that old distinction between Stoicism and Epicureanism: Epicurus] Reference to Christoph Meiners, Geschichte der Ethik (→ 469,3), vol. 1, p. 81, where he emphasizes the difference between the Greek philosopher Epicurus’s (341–270 b.c.) understanding of virtue being the highest good and the view of the matter held by the Stoics. See the next note. Epicurus also praises [virtue], but he gives a “Why?”] Reference to Christoph Meiners, Geschichte der Ethik, vol. 1, p. 70, where he points out that unlike the Stoics, Epicurus’s view is that friendship, like all virtues, is not of value in itself, but is to be sought the sake of its utility and the pleasure it affords. In this connection, Meiners refers to bk. 10, chap. 120 of Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers (→ 490,9) and alludes to bk. 10, chap. 132 (→ 478m,1) of the same work. his Spjellerup sermons . . . speaks of the kingdom of God] Kierkegaard is referring to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 444,1) sermon “Om Johannes den Døber. Første Prædiken. Paa tredie Søndag i Advent” [On John the Baptist: First Sermon. For the Third Sunday in Advent], on the gospel text Mt 11:2–10, in Prædikener af J. P. Mynster [Sermons by J. P. Mynster], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1810–1815;

22

477

10

29 41

23 26 27

28

31

478

822

479

478m

25

1

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 50–55

ASKB 228 [vol. 1, 3rd ed., 1826; vol. 2, 2nd ed., 1832]); vol. 1, pp. 1–27. These sermons were also known as the Spjellerup sermons because Mynster had written them during his time as a parish priest in the town of Spjellerup in southern Zealand. Here Mynster writes: “John was in prison because he had testified to the truth, but even in prison he did not lose the hope in which he had lived. For his constant message had been: [‘] God’s Kingdom is at hand, but I am not the one who is to bring it. It shall be brought by one who comes after me, who is greater than I,’ ” (p. 7). Kierkegaard appears to be alluding to the latter portion of the sermon, where Mynster speaks of John the Baptist’s death as a martyr: “And where would it be better for our blood to flow other than upon the way of the Lord? Where better, than when we give it for the sake of righteousness? Let us instead regard it as a sign of God’s approval that he permitted him―before age had weakened the power of manhood―to die as he had lived, to fall unblemished, as did the many witnesses to the truth, in order to rise again into their reward. For, nourished by their blood, the tree of life grows upon the earth, spreading its refreshing boughs, but its crown reaches up into heaven and is greening and blossoming with imperishable beauty” (p. 27). something historical is confusion,] Variant: first written “something historical is confusion.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. it is in order to live pleasantly . . . a person cannot live pleasantly otherwise] Refers to Epicurus’s views as presented in bk. 10, chap. 132 of Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers (→ 490,9): “Wherefore prudence is a more precious thing even than philosophy; from it spring all the other virtues, for it teaches that we cannot lead a life of pleasure which is not also a life of prudence, honour, and justice; nor lead a life of prudence, honour, and justice, which is not also a life of pleasure. For the virtues have grown into one with a pleasant life, and a pleasant life is inseparable from them.” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb

•

1852

Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1925), vol. 2, p. 665. See also bk. 10, chap. 140. in this manner?] Variant: changed from “in this manner!”

1

480

the man who . . . went into the next bar and drank one] If there is a source for this, it has not been identified. (for his cleverness!)] Variant: changed from “for his cleverness”.

17

480

the Finns pray to God or sacrifice to him . . . a good catch] Alludes to the views held in Kierkegaard’s day concerning various elements of the religion of Lapland; see, e.g., W. Vollmer, Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie aller Nationen [Complete Dictionary of the Mythology of All Nations] (Stuttgart, 1836; ASKB 1942–1943), where this custom is discussed on p. 1125. clings to God] → 457,18.

26

from Him Who Has Not, Even What He Has Will Be Taken Away] Freely cited from Mt 13:12; see also Mt 25:29. Where there is nothing, neither is there anything to take] Proverb listed as no. 4391 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 450,9), vol. 1, p. 486.

1

In Wieland’s Agathon . . . it is not a norm, not regulative] Refers to the bildungsroman Geschichte des Agathon (1766–1767) by the German author, translator, and editor Christoph Martin Wieland. The novel is set in ancient Greece, where the hero Agathon is kidnapped by pirates and sold as a slave to the early Sophist Hippias, who gives him the name Callias and conducts himself more as his teacher and mentor than as his owner. Hippias is a convinced materialist and hedonist and tries to convert the idealistic Agathon to his philosophy. Here Kierkegaard is probably alluding to pt. 1, bk. 3 of the novel, “Darstellung der Filosofie des Hippias” [Presentation of the Philosophy of Hippias], where Hippias says: “Thy misfortune, my dear Callias, arises from an imagination, which presents her objects to thee in such transcendent brightness, that she deceives thy heart

21

21

480

29

481

4

481

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 55–58

27 31

39

482

4 5

and spreads a false light over every object which really exists: a poetical imagination which employs itself in discovering more perfect beauties, more enlivening pleasures, than are to be found in nature. An imagination to which we are indebted for a Homer an Alcamenes and a Polygnotus; and which was designed to improve and refine our joys and not to be the director of our lives.” English translation from C. M. Wieland, The History of Agathon in Four Volumes (no translator listed), 4 vols. (London, 1778), vol. 1, pp. 116–117. “quiet hours”] → 470,24. observing] Mynster had used the expression “observation” (Danish, Betragtning) in the title of his devotional work, Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme (→ 470,24). He also used the verb “observe” frequently in his sermons, often in introducing the theme of the sermon; see, e.g., Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage (→ 470,24), vol. 1, p. 68 (“properly observe the story [i.e. Acts 6:8–15 and 7:54–60] we have read aloud”), p. 105 (“observe the remarkable tales of Jesus’ childhood”); Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 470,24), p. 175 (“The quiet week calls us to quiet observation”). See NB21:121, with its accompanying explanatory note, in the present volume. induces the listeners to act in accordance with it] Presumably, an allusion to Jas 1:22. “I Am Who I Am”] Reference to Ex 3:14. the highest principles of all thought cannot be proven] Presumably, a reference to the three fundamental laws of logic, specifically, the law of contradiction (nothing can be both X and not-X). In bk. 4 of his Metaphysics (1005b 17–25), Aristotle asserts that the law of contradiction is the most secure basis of all, inasmuch as it will always be presupposed in every proof, and that therefore one cannot prove it, but merely refute every attempt to deny its validity; see Aristotle, Posterior Analytics, bk. 1, chap. 3 (72b 18). See also JJ:266, probably from late 1844, where Kierkegaard writes: “The highest principles can be demonstrated only indirectly (negatively). This idea is frequently found and developed in Trendelenburg, Logische Untersuchungen. For me it is important for the leap, and to show that the highest

•

1852

823

can be reached only as a limit” (KJN 2, 206); see the accompanying explanatory notes and F.A. Trendelenburg, Logische Untersuchungen [Logical Investigations], 2 vols. (Berlin, 1840; ASKB 843), vol. 2, pp. 320–331. See also J. P. Mynster (→ 444,4), “Bemærkninger om den Konst at prædike” [Remarks on the Art of Preaching], originally delivered in oral form in 1810 and reprinted several times; see J. P. Mynster, Blandede Skrivter [Miscellaneous Writings], 6 vols. (Copenhagen, 1852–1857; ASKB 358–363 [vols. 1–3]), vol. 1, pp. 81–129: “this much is certain, that although everything else can be proven, in accordance with the concept we connect with this word―the primal truth, the highest principle from which all truth emanates―cannot be” (p. 95; see also p. 101). God is spirit] → 475,6. they have nothing to do with him] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 8:28–29. hard words] Allusion to Jn 6:60. defenseless] Presumably, an allusion to Jer 16:19.

23

lèse majesté] → 456,39. I am to love God entirely] See Lk 10:25–28. mediation] The term “mediation” was used by Danish Hegelians to express the Hegelian concept of Vermittlung (German, “mediation”) or Versöhnung (German, “reconciliation”). In Hegel’s philosophy, the term is linked to his critique of the principle of the excluded middle (the principle of contradiction). It was also a topic of discussion in speculative philosophy and theology, with Danish writers including J. L. Heiberg, H. L. Martensen, and A. P. Adler maintaining that mutually opposed positions could be sublated into a higher unity, while others, including J. P. Mynster, denied this. “But,” I hear someone say] Frequently occurring stylistic element in the diatribes of the Cynics and Stoics and in some of the NT epistles, serving to introduce a fictive interlocutor whose objection is then refuted. Do not the sparrow and the lily and all of nature take joy in it in the same way] Allusion to Mt 2:24–34; see also The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air (1849), esp. no. III, “Joy,” in which

6

482

26 28 35

13 17

20

23

483

824

29

29

39

484

4 5

484

10 11 11

20

485

5 7 11 11

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 58–63

Kierkegaard treats this topic (WA, 36–45; SKS 11, 40–48). synthesis] See, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (1844): “Man is a synthesis of the psychical and the physical; however, a synthesis is unthinkable if the two are not united in a third. This third is spirit” (CA, 43; SKS 4, 349). no either/or exists for it] See The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air (1849), no. II, where Kierkegaard interprets Mt 6:24 with respect to the lily and the bird (WA, 21–24; SKS 11, 26– 29). Reference is also being made to the debate, during the latter part of the 1830s, concerning the validity of logical principles (→ 483,17). hating the world and oneself in this way in order to love God] Allusion to Jas 4:4; see also Lk 14:26 and Jn 12:25. a crossroads (Hercules)] → 470,9. the road is narrow . . . few find it] Reference to Mt 7:13–14. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without his will] Reference to Mt 10:29. quiet hours] → 470,24. dress in velvet or silk] An ordinance of March 13, 1683, chap. 1, § 5, concerning clerical dress (and still in force in Kierkegaard’s time) stipulated: “The bishop of Zealand and the chaplain to the king are to wear a black, high-collared velvet gown, velvet cap and bonnet, while other bishops are to wear black silk gowns with velvet collars and also black velvet caps and bonnets. Doctors of theology are to wear velvet bonnets and collars with velvet gowns, together with silk cloaks.” Kierkegaard may also be referring to the fact that although priests’ gowns were trimmed with silk, professorial gowns were made of silk. indeed, even the hairs on your head are numbered] Allusion to Lk 12:6–7. David’s Psalm: “This Is Too High for Me”] Allusion to Ps 139:6. If I took the wings of the morning . . . you would be there] Reference to Ps 139:7–11. a quiet hour] → 470,24. at the distance of imagination] Compare “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A

•

1852

Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” No. II in Practice in Christianity (1850): “Well, if one goes and lives intoxicated in fantasies, if one allows the fantasy to create a fantastic figure of Christ, to which one then relates at the distance of imagination―well, then one perhaps does not notice the offense” (PC, 100; SKS 12, 108–109). a sparrow is present for him] See Lk 12:6–7 and Mt 6:26, 10:29–31. he numbers the hairs on my head] Allusion to Lk 12:6–7. the sphere of the religious begins―] Variant: first written “the sphere of the religious begins.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

21 21 27

From him who has not, even what he has will be taken away] → 481,1. the parable of the entrusted talents] See Mt 25:14–30. only in acquisition is there possession] See the fourth discourse, “To Gain One’s Soul in Patience,” in Four Edifying Discourses (1843), in EUD, 159–175, esp. 162–164; SKS 5, 159–174, esp. 162–163.

33

3

486

drew close to God] → 457,18. God is spirit] → 475,6. the faithful God] God is called faithful in both the OT and the NT, e.g., Deut 32:4, 1 Cor 1:19, 1 Thes 5:24. explained . . . as the work of the devil] Allusion to passages in which Luther ascribes to the devil major influence in connection with human misfortune and adversity. See, e.g., the sermon on Mt 8:23–27 (in which Jesus stills the storm on the Sea of Galilee), the gospel text for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany, in En christelig Postille (→ 448,20), vol. 1, pp. 168–175, where the following remark is attributed to “evil and useless tongues of mockery”: “Before this teaching [i.e., Christianity] arose, it was so wonderfully still, and we were as well off as we could desire; now, on the other hand, there arise more troubles than anyone can count: sects, war, rebellion, high prices, and all sorts of misery.” Luther continues: “Now, whoever wants to stop these mocking mouths should

21

486

485

36

31 7

10

487

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 63–64 say to them: ‘Dear fellows, have you never read in the gospel that as soon as Christ comes aboard the boat and puts out to sea, a storm arises?’ The gospel is without guilt in all this―all the guilt must be ascribed to the devil and our ingratitude” (p. 169, col. 2). 487

22 32 39

488

3

10 10

13 37

489

1 8

As has been stated] See NB25:57. invention of Phalaris] → 475,19. in memory of what Luther suffered we eat goose on St. Martin’s Day] In memory of St. Martin (336–ca. 397), bishop of Tours, who was martyred and buried on November 11, since the 14th century it has been the custom to eat Martin’s goose on that day. This alludes to the legend of St. Martin, who hid in a goose pen when people wanted to appoint him bishop, but his presence was betrayed by the honking of the geese. In Protestant countries, the eating of Martin’s goose was connected to Martin Luther’s birthday, November 10, 1483. the frightful one of being roasted to death on a grill] Reference to St. Lawrence, who according to legend was martyred in Rome in 258 by being grilled alive; the grill is his attribute when he is depicted or described. build their tombs] Reference to Mt 23:29–30. eat a special sort of pastry . . . go on picnics in their honor] Presumably, a reference to the St. Martin’s Day custom in which children carry lanterns in a procession and are given cakes. The custom is known from Germany and Flanders, where there are baked goods variously known as “Martinshorn,” “Martinslaible,” and “gateaux de St. Martin.” these glorious representatives of humanity] → 458,14. by requiring “imitation” of the Xn] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 16:24–25; see also Mt 10:38–39. the glorious members of the human race] → 458,14. you, the all-wise one] See Balles Lærebog (→ 450,35), chap. 1, “On God and His Attributes,” sec. 3, “What Scripture Teaches Concerning God’s Essence and Attributes,” § 5: “God is all-wise and his decisions always have the best intentions; and he always chooses the best means to carry them

•

1852

825

out.” In a note it is remarked, “We can surely believe that the all-wise God does not cause anything useless to be done and that everything we encounter in accordance with his will is intended for our benefit” (p. 14). See also Rom 11:33. perhaps 70 years] The traditional specification of a human life as lasting seventy years, e.g., in Ps 90:10 and in Herodotus: The Histories (→ 471,4), bk. 1, chap. 32. many moments when you spoke to me . . . on this same subject] Allusion to a line attributed to Socrates in Plato’s dialogue Gorgias 490e, where Socrates replies to Callicles’ objection that he always says the same thing: “Not only that, Callicles, but about the same matters.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 273. In Xenophon’s Memorabilia, IV.4.6, the Sophist Hippias mockingly says: “ ‘How now? . . . still the same old sentiments, Socrates, that I heard from you so long ago?’ ‘Yes, Hippias,’ he replied, ‘always the same, and―what is more astonishing―on the same topics too! You are so learned that I daresay you never say the same thing on the same subjects.’ ” English translation from Xenophon, Memorabilia and Oeconomicus, trans. E. C. Marchant, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1923), p. 325. A pagan . . . Cicero . . . relates . . . while you were alive] Refers to Cicero (→ 455,4), De finibus bonorum et malorum [On the Ends of Good and Bad Things], bk. 2, chap. 32: “Yet if bodily pleasure even when past can give delight, I do not see why Aristotle should be so contemptuous of the epitaph of Sardanapalus. The famous Syrian monarch boasts that he has taken with him all the sensual pleasures that he has enjoyed. How, asks Aristotle, could a dead man continue to experience a feeling which even while alive he could only be conscious of so long as he was actually enjoying it?” English translation from Cicero, De finibus bonorum et malorum, trans. H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1914), p. 199. Kierkegaard cites in Danish from his German translation, Über das höchste Gut und Uebel [On the Highest Good and Evil], trans. C. V. Hauff (Tübingen, 1822; ASKB 1237); according to a bill from book dealer J. H. Schubothe,

11

15

23

826

30

34

490

7

9

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 64

Kierkegaard purchased the work on January 13, 1852; see Fund og Forskning, vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), p. 126. ― Sardanapalus: Legendary king of the Assyrian Empire whom Aristotle several times labeled an effeminate voluptuary, e.g., in Politics, bk. 5, chap. 10 (1312a1); Nicomachean Ethics, bk.1, chap. 3 (1095b22), and Eudemian Ethics, bk. 1, chap. 5 (1216a16). The passage mentioned by Cicero was long thought to have been written by Aristotle but is now regarded as pseudo-Aristotelian. pasha of the 17 horsetails] “Pasha” was the honorary title borne by the highest civilian and military officers of the Ottoman Empire. Their rank was displayed by the number of horsetails (from one to three) hung on a stake outside the owner’s tent. to have nothing whatever to remember in eternity] See Christian Discourses (1848): “Enjoyment is pleasant at the moment but, just like the momentary in its emptiness, does not make a good showing for recollection and does not exist at all for eternal recollecting. On the other hand, there is no recollecting more blessed, and nothing more blessed to recollect, than sufferings over and done with in company with God; this is the secret of sufferings. So, then: either seventy years in all possible enjoyment, and nothing, nothing for eternity (of all, the most dreadful lack, and also indeed the longest lasting!), or seventy years in suffering and then an eternity for blessed recollecting” (CD, 104; SKS 10, 116). e.g., paganism’s Stoics] Presumably, the early Stoics (300–100 b.c.), a Greek school of philosophy, founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium. Yet the Stoic believed that suicide was expedient] A typical trait of philosophical Stoicism was its acceptance of suicide, as expressed in bk. 7, chap. 1, sec. 130 of Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers: “They tell us that the wise man will for reasonable cause make his own exit from life, on his country’s behalf or for the sake of his friends, or if he suffer intolerable pain, mutilation, or incurable disease.” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, Loeb Classical Library, 2 vols. (London: Heinemann, 1925), vol.

•

1852

2, p. 235. Kierkegaard owned Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [The Philosophical History of Diogenes Laertius, or the Life, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Famous Philosophers, in Ten Books], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111); see vol. 1, p. 332; see also W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826), vol. 4 (1803), pp. 145–146. Rosseau . . . it is pleasure] Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), philosopher and author, born in Geneva, died in Paris. Here the reference is to J.-J. Rousseaus Bekjendelser eller hans Levnet, skrevet af ham selv paa Fransk [The Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, or His Life, Written by Himself in French], trans. M. Hagerup, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1798; ASKB 1922–1925), vol. 4, “Indeholdende hans Drømmerier” [Containing His Dreams], i.e., a Danish translation of Rêveries du promeneur solitaire [Reveries of a Solitary Walker], the “Første Spaseretur” [First Walk], in which he writes of the adversities and persecution to which he had been subjected by his opponents: “I had long and violently contended― without address, without dissimulation, without prudence, frank, open, impatient, choleric . . . Finding, at last, all my efforts vain, and torturing myself to no purpose, I took the only method which remained to be taken, that of submitting to my destiny, without any longer wrestling with necessity. I found in this resignation a reward for all my misfortunes in the tranquility it procured me, and which could not be united to the continual labour of a resistance as painful as unprofitable” (p. 4). Writing of the sufferings he had been compelled to endure, Rousseau continues: “I then find them much less than I had imagined, and even amidst my sufferings I feel myself eased . . . This is the service my persecutors have rendered me, by exhausting without end every weapon of their animosity. They have deprived themselves of all power over me, and I may in future laugh at them” (pp. 6–7). English translation from The Confessions of J. J. Rousseau, with the Reveries of the Solitary Walker: Translated from the French, (no

12

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 64–67

489m

1

translator listed), 2 vols. [London: 1783], pp. 146– 147 and 148. an instrument for God] Allusion to Acts 9:15–16. not exist at all,] Variant: first written “not exist at all.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Let them all share one head] Refers to a remark by the Roman emperor Gaius Julius Cæsar Germanicus, known as Caligula (12–41, emperor from 37): “I wish the Roman people had but a single neck.” Chap. 30 in Caji Svetonii Tranqvilli Tolv første Romerske Keiseres Levnetsbeskrivelse [Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus’s Description of the Lives of the First Twelve Roman Emperors], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen,1802–1803; ASKB 1281), vol. 1, p. 312. English translation from Suetonius, trans. C. Rolfe, Loeb Classical Library, 2 vols. (London: Heinemann, 1914), vol. 1, p. 453. de finibus] → 489,23.

491

6

Thus the way is narrow] → 484,5.

491

18

22 33

38

Aelianus (in variæ historiæ) tells . . . what you requested] Kierkegaard summarizes a tale by the Roman author Claudius Aelianus (ca. 170–235) as related in a contemporary German translation, Vermischte Nachrichten [Various Stories], 3 vols., trans. Superintendent Dr. Wunderlich, in Claudius Aelianus Werke [The Works of Claudius Aelianus], 9 vols., in Griechische Prosaiker in neuen Uebersetzungen [Greek Prose Authors in New Translations], ed. G.L.F. Tafel, C. N. von Osiander, and G. Schwab (Stuttgart, 1839–1842; ASKB 1042), vol. 3 (1839), p. 318. An English translation of the tale reads: “A tradition was current according to which Socrates’ statements were like Pauson’s paintings. The story is that Pauson the painter received a commission to paint a horse rolling on the ground, and he portrayed it as running. The man who commissioned the picture was annoyed at the breach of contract, but the artist replied: ‘Turn the panel upside-down and the running horse will be rolling on the ground.’ Similarly Socrates was not clear in his conversations, but if one turned them on their head they would be perfect.” Aelian, Historical Miscellany, trans. N. G.

•

1852

827

Wilson, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997), p. 463. This, Aelianus says, is the way Socrates speaks: It must be understood inversely] Kierkegaard continues summarizing the above-mentioned translation of Aelianus, pp. 318–319. When I defended my dissertation on irony] Kierkegaard defended his dissertation On the Concept of Irony (1841) for the magister degree on September 29, 1841. He had started writing it as early as 1838–1839, but most of it was written in the period beginning ca. September 1840 until shortly before it was submitted on June 3, 1841; see SKS K1, 125–145. the errors of the Middle Ages] See NB14:16: “The error of the Middle Ages was that poverty, the unmarried state, etc., were regarded as things that in and of themselves could please God. This has never been Xnty’s view. Xnty has commended poverty, the unmarried state, etc. in order that hum. beings, by having as little as possible to do with finite things, could all the better serve the truth” (KJN 6, 356); see also For Self-Examination, published on September 12, 1851, where Kierkegaard writes, “The error of the Middle Ages, meritoriousness, was abhorred” (FSE, 17; SKS 12, 46). Exemplar] Refers to the widespread emphasis on Christ as exemplar, and thus the practice of “imitating Christ,” in the Middle Ages, especially in monastic movements and in mysticism. For example, St. Bernard of Clairvaux placed great emphasis on the imitation of Christ in poverty, humility, and suffering. The mysticism that emphasizes the passion of Christ regarded imitation of Christ’s sufferings as the path to perfection, whereas quietist mysticism said both that the soul ought to imitate Christ’s death on the cross and also that the individual ought to imitate Christ in striving for virtue, especially for pure love of God. Thomas à Kempis’s De imitatione Christi [The Imitation of Christ, see ASKB 273] contributed greatly to spreading the idea of imitating Christ in late medieval Europe. Atoner] Refers to the dogma that Christ made vicarious satisfaction for our sins, that as God’s

23

25

32

491

1

492

1

828

22

493

9

493m

3

493

14 25

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 67–68

own son, his voluntary suffering and death satisfied God’s judgmental wrath over human sin, thus vicariously accepting the punishment that the guilty would otherwise have suffered for their sins, thereby atoning for the insult to God’s justice: as a result, human beings can live and are saved. meritorious] In Lutheran doctrine, this term designated the erroneous view that by one’s own actions and deeds one can make oneself deserving of God’s justice and salvation; see, e.g., articles 4 and 6 of the Augsburg Confession. meritoriousness is impossible―] Variant: first written “meritoriousness is impossible.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. meritoriousness] → 492,22. Mynsterian] → 444,1. M. is also regarded as an artist . . . an asset for the government, etc.] Perhaps a reference to the depiction of J. P. Mynster in pt. 15 of Dansk Pantheon, et Portraitgallerie for Samtiden [Danish Pantheon: A Portrait Gallery for the Present Day] (Copenhagen, 1844), where the anonymous author (actually, P. L. Møller) begins his description of Mynster by remarking: “In our day, a cleric cannot raise himself to an elevated position in society merely by virtue of his status as a cleric, cannot make his name echo in circles greater than among the particular congregation into whose midst he has been led by chance―or, at most, among his most immediate descendants. If, within his spirit, he senses justification for working on a larger scale, for greater recognition than what is usual for an orator and a ‘shepherd of souls,’ it will be difficult to attain this goal, even if an unusually gifted talent were to gather into his congregation the most elite of his fellow citizens, unless, by virtue of his work as a scholar and a writer, he has also gained for himself a respected position in the universal realm of intellect; unless he has been capable of leading his words out of the Church’s spiritual, vanishing formlessness and into the world of literature which by virtue of its organic forms has a longer-lasting existence― unless, indeed, he has understood, as a practical

•

1852

man of business, how to arouse the interest of the state. Because a Protestant cleric is also a worldly official, and it is often the case that being orderly about one’s business is not the worst sort of recommendation for a priest . . . And where do we find these [above-mentioned qualities] in a more beautiful union with the true clerical spirit than in the man portrayed in this illustration [i.e., Mynster]?” (p. 1). As bishop of Zealand, Mynster was primate of the Danish Church and personal adviser to the king. In the period 1835– 1846, he was a member of Assembly of Estates in Roskilde; in 1848–1849 he was a member of the Constitutional Convention; in addition he was a member of a great many governing organs. But, but, but,] Variant: first written “But, but, but.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. what did not arise in any hum. being’s heart] → 474,21. obligated himself . . . to teach this] i.e., by having been ordained. See the ritual for the ordination of priests, chap. 10, art. 2 in Dannemarks og Norges Kirke-Ritual [Church Ritual for Denmark and Norway] (Copenhagen, 1762 [1685]), which was in force in Kierkegaard’s day. The law provided that the ordinands were to kneel before the altar and that the bishop was to entrust them with “the holy office, through prayer and the laying on of hands, saying: ‘Thus, in accordance with apostolic custom, do I confer upon you the holy office of priest and preacher, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and accordingly give you, as proper servants of God and Jesus Christ, the power and authority to preach God’s word privately and publicly in the church, to distribute the highly revered sacraments in accordance with Christ’s own establishment, to bind sins upon the obdurate and release them from the penitent, and everything else pertaining to God’s holy call, in accordance with the Word of God and our Christian customs.’ ” through the laying-on of hands . . . received the assistance of the Holy Spirit] The matter of whether any special spiritual gifts were conferred through the laying-on of hands was a subject of debate. See H. L. Martensen’s treatment of or-

29

31 33

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 68

37

494

2

10

dination in Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849, ASKB 653 ), § 272: “So, in the Lutheran Church, when priests are ordained in apostolic fashion with the laying-on of hands by the brethren―a symbol of the transfer of a spiritual gift―we certainly cannot place priestly ordination on the same level as the actual sacraments, nor dare we assume that extraordinary gifts are associated with this as in apostolic times; but just as little can we assume that it is merely a ceremony in which nothing is communicated . . . Despite the fact that, owing to a certain distaste for the hierarchical principle, the Lutheran Church has not come to enunciate any dogma concerning the ordination of priests, there is nonetheless in the Lutheran Church in fact a faith that ordination is something more than a mere ceremony, just as it is the unanimous testimony of all believing priests that as a result of their ordination they continually draw new power and strength for the carrying out of their duties” (pp. 533–534). Subsequently he was consecrated as a bishop] Mynster became bishop of Zealand in 1834. transmitted to others the assistance of the Holy Spirit] As the senior official in the Church, a bishop was responsible for the ordination of priests; ordination was performed one time only: after a priest had been called to his first post and before his installation. my veneration of him (also for the sake of a person who is deceased, my father)] See, e.g., NB6:55: “my reverence for Mynster was something I was granted, something I was to display” (KJN 5, 38). Kierkegaard repeatedly links this veneration to his father, to whom Mynster had served as confessor from 1820 until 1828, when Mynster became palace priest. In 1847, Kierkegaard wrote in his journal that he had been “brought up on Mynster’s sermons―by my father” (NB2:267, KJN 4, 240). ― my father: At the age of forty, Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838) retired from his business in possession of a considerable fortune, which he augmented over time. In 1797, he married Ane Lund, with whom he had seven children of whom Søren was the youngest.

•

1852

829

In 1808, he bought the house at Nytorv 2 (today Frederiksberggade 1) (see map 2, B2), where after a brief illness he died in 1838, at the age of eighty-one. Stoicism] → 490,7. the ideal of the wise man . . . Such a person has never lived] No source for this has been identified. as they are, etc.] Variant: first written “as they are,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. ordination] → 493,33. also wrote Paradoxes . . . make them less repellent] Refers to Cicero’s work Paradoxa Stoicorum, in which he collected and commented on the paradoxically formulated philosophical principles of the Stoics. According to a bill from J. H. Schubothe’s bookshop, dated January 13, 1852, Kierkegaard purchased a German translation of the work, Paradoxieen [Paradoxes], trans. C.A.G. Schreiber (Halle, 1799?; ASKB 1237); see Fund og Forskning, vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), p. 126. In §§ 3–4, Cicero writes: “But nothing is so difficult to believe that oratory cannot make it acceptable, nothing so rough and uncultured as not to gain brilliance and refinement from eloquence. And holding this opinion I have acted even more boldly than the person I am speaking of himself. For Cato at all events follows the Stoic practice of employing the embellishments of eloquence when he is discoursing on grandeur of mind, or self-control, or death, or the glory of virtue in general, or the immortal gods, or love of country; but I for my part have amused myself by throwing into the common form, for your benefit, even those doctrines which the Stoics scarcely succeed in proving in the retirement of schools of philosophy. The doctrines are surprising, and they run counter to universal opinion―the Stoics themselves actually term them paradoxa; so I wanted to try whether it is possible for them to be brought out into the light of common daily life and expounded in a form to win acceptance, or whether learning has one style of discourse and ordinary life another; and I write with the greater pleasure because the doctrines styled paradoxa by the Stoics appear to me to be in the highest degree Socratic,

35 37

5

495

9 6

495m

830

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 68–71

and far and away the truest.” English translation from Cicero, De oratore III, de fato, paradoxa stoicorum, de partitione oratoria [On the Orator, On Fate, Paradoxes of the Stoics, On the Divisions of Oratory], trans. H. Rackham, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1948), pp. 255 and 257. 496

7 14 14

497

14

15

dying away] → 455,13. one person decides] Variant: first written “one person thinks of”. 50 rix-dollars] A statutory regulation of July 31, 1818, established the rix-dollar (abbreviated “rd.”), i.e., the rigsbank dollar (rigsbankdaler), as the fundamental monetary unit of the Danish realm. There were sixteen shillings in a mark, and six marks in a rix-dollar, and there were thus ninety-six shillings in a rix-dollar. A pair of shoes cost about three rix-dollars, and a pound of rye bread cost between two and four shillings. A judge earned 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a middle-level civil servant earned about 400–500 rix-dollars a year. A journeyman in a trade earned five rix-dollars a week, and a housemaid earned at most thirty rix-dollars a year, plus meals and lodging. is made a knight] i.e., becomes a member of the Order of the Dannebrog (the Danish flag), founded in 1671 by King Christian V. In 1808, soon after he ascended the throne, King Frederick VI instituted a democratization of the order, which would no longer be reserved exclusively for the nobility. The decoration borne by members of the order was to be an “external sign of acknowledged civic worth,” without regard to class or age. This opened the order to clerics and professors. gets the rank of a councillor of chancery] i.e., comes into the same class as a councillor of chancery, a secondary-level civil servant in the chancery, which was the governing body through which the absolute monarch administered the internal affairs of the Danish kingdom. In accordance with the decree of 1746 concerning rank and precedence, actual councillors of chancery occupied the first rank in the sixth of nine classes, while titular councillors of chancery were in the first rank of the seventh class.

•

1852

permitted to wear velvet on his left arm] Kierkegaard’s caricature of the rules governing clerical gowns (→ 484,11). what I have always said] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (1850): “Yet the requirement must be stated, presented, heard; from a Christian point of view there must be no reduction of the requirement, nor ought it be suppressed―instead of making an admission and confession concerning oneself. The requirement ought to be heard, and I understand what is said as spoken to me alone, so that I might learn not only to take refuge in ‘grace,’ but to take refuge in it with respect to the use of ‘grace’ ” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15).

16

1

497m

Socrates always talked only of food and drink] Refers to Plato’s dialogue Gorgias, in which Socrates, in a conversation with Gorgias and Gorgias’s admirers, repeatedly asks questions that reveal the ignorance of his interlocutor. Callicles, one of Gorgias’s disciples, impatiently breaks into the conversation and says: “You keep talking about food and drink and doctors and nonsense. I am not speaking of these things” (Gorgias 490c– d). English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 272.

38

497

Jacob said, . . . this is the gate of heaven,] Reference to Gen 28:12–17. Pythagoras listened to the harmony of the spheres] Refers to the belief attributed to Pythagoras (late 6th century b.c.) that heavenly bodies produce sounds in accordance with the Pythagorean notion of harmony. The generally held Pythagorean view was that we cannot hear the sounds because we have become accustomed to them. However, the neo-Pythagorean Iamblichus (4th century a.d.) maintained that Pythagoras himself had been able to hear and to understand this universal harmony and the music of the spheres; see e.g., Theophilus Kiessling, ed., De vita Pythagorica liber [Book on the Pythagorean Way of Life], 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1815–1816), vol. 1, pp. 135–136. God is love] Refers to 1 Jn 4:8 and 4:16. swept along] See “existential impetus” in NB23:106 in the present volume.

16

498

19

22 28

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 71–83

38

499

15

499

35

37 40

cannot be endured without] Variant: “cannot be endured” has been added by SKS as also by EP and as suggested by Pap. can even signify] Variant: “even” has been added. “The apostle” transforms the Exemplar essentially into the Redeemer] Reference to Paul’s teachings, e.g., in Rom 3:23–26, see also 5:8–11, 6:10–11; 1 Cor 15:3–4; 2 Cor 5:14–21; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14–20; 1 Thes 5:9–10. See also NB20:148 in KJN 7, 477–478. God-Man] → 472,24. “The apostle” imitates him and is crucified] Reference to Paul, who was presumably executed. a quiet hour] → 470,24.

500

37

501

3

the servant who buried his pound] Reference to Mt 25:14–30; see also Lk 19:11–27.

502

21

dying away] → 455,13. You will weep and mourn, but the world will rejoice] Cited from Jn 16:20.

38

503

18

Grundtvigian] Refers to the view held by the Danish theologian, priest, poet, historian, and politician Nikolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872) as to what should be regarded as the source and norm for the faith and teachings of the Christian Church. In his work Kirkens Gienmæle [The Church’s Rejoinder] (Copenhagen, 1826), Grundtvig maintains that it is not the Bible, but “the living Word,” i.e., the Apostles’ Creed, the words of institution of the eucharist and baptism, and the Lord’s Prayer, which have been transmitted orally through the centuries by the Christian congregation, that make the Church into a “Christian” Church and thus constitute its source and its norm. This Grundtvigian view is criticized in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 1, chap. 1, § 2; see CUP, 34–46, esp. 43–44, SKS 7, 41–52, esp. 49.

503

36

saying unconditionally . . . that one is God] → 472,25.

504

6

Joseph of Arimathea] See Mt 27:57–60. he went to Pilate . . . and buried it] See Mt 27:57–61.

7

•

1852

831

the high priests to know with certainty that he is dead] See, e.g., Mt 27:62–66.

10

“You will be hated by all . . . they are offering worship to God.”] A combination of sayings from Mt 10:22 and Jn 16:2. hating one’s father and mother] Reference to Lk 14:26. to hate the world, oneself, the human race, one’s friends] Presumably, a reference to Jn 12:25 as well as to Jas 4:4 and Lk 14:26. the sensate world] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 2:14, where Paul writes, “But the [ἄνϑρωπος ψυχιϰὸς lit., ‘the psychical human being’]―here Kierkegaard’s Danish Bible translation from 1819 has det sandselige Menneske [‘the sensate human being’], whereas the King James Version has ‘the natural man,’ and the NRSV has ‘those who are unspiritual’―does not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he is unable to understand them because they are spiritually [πνευματιϰῶς (here the Danish version and both of the English versions cited above agree on ‘spiritually’)] discerned.”

24

3

505

“forsaking everything”] Presumably, an allusion to Lk 14:33. generations] Variant: first written “years”. history and the historical process] Presumably, a reference to the Hegelian philosophy of history, which seeks to demonstrate how the world spirit has become conscious of itself through historical and speculative development. remains in solidarity with God] Allusion to Jas 4:8. meritoriousness] → 492,22. You are the infinite. I am . . . less than a sparrow] → 485,21. so lowly, so lowly,] Variant: added.

25

505

Privy Councillor] Originally this meant an adviser who was familiar with state secrets, one of the king’s privy advisers, but later it became purely honorary. According to the decree of 1746 concerning rank and precedence, this title, together with the title “Excellency,” entailed membership in the first of nine social ranks. The title Privy

36

504

32 35

26 29

3

506

14 21 27

506

832

507

33

508

8

508m

1

508

10 27

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 83–84

Councillor was in use in Denmark from the time of Christian IV in the early 17th century; in 1808 the title was abolished and replaced by Privy Conference Councillor (a first-rank title) and Privy State Councillor (a second-rank title). a Knight of the Order of the Elephant] A member of Denmark’s highest order, ostensibly founded in the mid-15th century by King Christian I. According to new statutes promulgated by King Christian V in 1693, the Order of the Elephant was reserved exclusively for “foreign potentates and gentlemen of the evangelical religion, those of most privy of councils, the highest ministers, generals, and Knights of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog.” occasional control.] Variant: first written “occasional control;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. a Greek hedonist] Variant: at some point this was changed from “an adherent”, which previously had been changed from “Aristippus”. Mynster] → 444,1. I myself said to him . . . We are in complete disagreement] See NB2:210, from 1847, where Kierkegaard also discusses what he said to Mynster: “As soon as I spoke with him for the first time, and many times thereafter, I told Bishop Mynster as solemnly as possible that I expressed the opposite of what he expressed, and that (in addition to my respect for him) it was precisely for this reason that he was important to me. He solemnly conceded this in the conversation and, fully attentive, he replied that he understood me. At one point he said that we were one another’s complements; I, however, did not agree with this because it was more polite than what I could require, but merely repeated my difference categorically” (KJN 4, 222). See also NB18:26 in KJN 7, 271. Presumably, this conversation took place when Kierkegaard brought Bishop Mynster a copy of Concluding Unscientific Postscript, which was published on February 27, 1846 (see Paper 571, dated June 29, 1855, in KJN 11; SKS 27, 568–569). It is not known when Kierkegaard spoke with Mynster for the first time after M. P. Kierkegaard’s death in 1838 (→ 494,10), but ac-

•

1852

cording to NB:57, dated November 5, 1846 (KJN 4, 50–51), Kierkegaard had already spoken with Mynster at that point. Concluding Postscript] i.e., Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments: A MimicalPathetical-Dialectical Compilation, an Existential Contribution, by Johannes Climacus. Edited by S. Kierkegaard (1846), which appeared on February 27, 1846. I personally emphasized his importance so strongly toward the conclusion of the book] Refers to “A First and Last Explanation” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript, where Kierkegaard writes: “With this I take leave of the pseudonymous authors with doubtful good wishes for their future fate, that this, if it is propitious for them, will be just as they might wish. Of course, I know them from intimate association: I know they could not expect or desire many readers―would that they might happily find the few desirable readers. Of my reader, if I dare to speak of such a one, I would in passing request for myself a forgetful remembrance, a sign that it is of me that he is reminded, because he remembers me as irrelevant to the books, as the relationship requires, just as the appreciation for it is sincerely offered here in the moment of farewell, when I also cordially thank everyone who has kept silent and with profound veneration thank the firm Kts―that it has spoken” (CUP, 629; SKS 7, 572). The “firm Kts” is a reference to Jakob Peter Mynster―formed from the middle letters of his three names―who had praised a number of Kierkegaard’s works in his article “Kirkelig Polemik” [Ecclesiastical Polemics], which had appeared in J. L. Heiberg’s Intelligensblade [Intelligencer], 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1842–1844), vol. 4, nos. 41–42, January 1, 1844, pp. 97–114. Joh. Cl. is a humorist] See “Appendix: An Understanding with the Reader” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846): “The undersigned, Johannes Climacus, who has written this book, does not make out that he is a Christian; for he is, to be sure, completely preoccupied with how difficult it must be to become one; but even less is he one who, after having been a Christian, ceases to be that by going further. He is a humorist;

32

33

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 84

39

509

1 3

4

satisfied with his circumstances at the moment, hoping that something better will befall his lot, he feels especially happy, if worse comes to worst, to be born in this speculative theocentric century” (CUP, 617; SKS 7, 560). ― humorist: Variant: first written “pseud”. The first part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits made a less pleasant impression on him] A notice in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 61, March 13, 1847, informed the public of the publication of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits. The first part of that work bears the title “An Occasional Discourse.” my postscript to the Concl. Postsc.] → 508,33. especially the two last parts.] Reference to the second part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), “What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air: Three Discourses,” and the third part of the same work, “The Gospel of Sufferings: Christian Discourses.” ― parts.: Variant: first written “parts,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. Works of Love offended him] A notice in Adresseavisen, no. 229, September 29, 1847, informed the public of the publication of Works of Love: Some Christian Deliberations in the Form of Discourses. Kierkegaard sent Bishop Mynster a copy with the following dedication: “To His Excellency the Right Reverend Bishop Mynster, Knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog and Man of the Dannebrog, et al., in profound veneration, from the author” (LD, 431; SKS 28, 503). Kierkegaard wrote about Mynster’s reaction to the book on a loose page bearing the title “Some Historical Data concerning My Relationship to Bishop Mynster,” dated June 29, 1855: “To my knowledge, only once did he attempt to use his rank against me. It was the first time I saw him after Works of Love: ‘Was there something you wanted?’ ‘No, I see that you are busy today.’ ‘Yes, but I am not really that busy.’ ‘No, your Reverence, let me instead have it on credit for another time’ ” (Paper 571; KJN 11; SKS 27, 667).

•

1852

833

Xn Discourses even more so] A notice in Adresseavisen, no. 100, April 25, 1848, informed the public of the publication of Christian Discourses. Practice in Xnty affected him extremely painfully] A notice in Adresseavisen, no. 225, September 25, 1850, informed the public of the publication of Practice in Christianity, by Anti-Climacus, edited by S. Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard sent Bishop Mynster a gilt-edged copy printed on vellum bound in glossy black paper with the following dedication: “To His Excellency the Right Reverend Bishop Dr. Mynster, Knight of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog, et al., in profound veneration, from the editor” (SKS 28, 518). The volume is in the Kierkegaard Archive of the Royal Library in Copenhagen; see Kierkegaardiana 9 (Copenhagen, 1974) p. 249. On Mynster’s reaction to the book, see NB21:121 in the present volume for Kierkegaard’s account of a conversation with him that took place on October 22, 1850. I can no longer afford to continue the fight for the idea] Presumably refers to the circumstance that Kierkegaard could no longer live securely on his wealth and that he found the earnings from his writings to be insufficient (→ 539,15). If only I could get an official appointment] Presumably, a reference to the fact that as early as the period following the publication of Either/Or (1843), again after the publication of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), and quite frequently thereafter, Kierkegaard considered stopping writing and seeking a position as a country priest. See, e.g., JJ:415, from February 1846, in KJN 2, 257; NB:7, from March 1846, NB:57, from November 1846, NB2:136, from August 1847, in KJN 4, 16–17, 50, 193; NB10:16, from February 1849, in KJN 5, 274; NB12:110, from August 1849, NB13:35, from October 1849, and NB14:137, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 204–206, 298, and 428–429. For a time, Kierkegaard also had plans for seeking appointment as an instructor at the Royal Pastoral Seminary. See, e.g., NB10:89, from ca. March 1849, in KJN 5, 313; see also its accompanying note. See in addition a draft of a never-used polemical article “En Yttring af Biskop Mynster” [A Comment by Bishop Mynster] from 1851, where Kierkegaard writes in retrospect: “I have had an-

4

6

10

18

834

21

28

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 84

other thought for the past 4 or 5 years, however. Recognizant of my unique abilities, and because I believe it would be in agreement with the establishment and Bishop M. [Mynster], and for my own sake, I have desired a position at the pastoral seminary. Throughout the years I have insistently mentioned this to the bishop. But no!” (Pap. X 6 B 173, p. 274). I have financial worries . . . I myself have told him so] Kierkegaard’s apparent assumption that Bishop Mynster was familiar with his economic situation is presumably based on the circumstance that he had called on the bishop in March 1849 and had “casually mentioned an appointment at the seminary” (NB10:89 in KJN 5, 313; see also NB18:7 in KJN 7, 262). That line about Goldschmidt was fateful] Refers to Mynster’s piece, Yderligere Bidrag til Forhandlingerne om de kirkelige Forhold i Danmark [Further Contribution to Negotiations concerning the Ecclesiastical Situation in Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1851), which was advertised as having been published in Berlingske Tidende, no. 16, March 13, 1851. Kierkegaard received the work shortly after its publication (see NB23:189 in the present volume) but was offended by Mynster’s friendly mention of Goldschmidt. As early as p. 5 of the work, Mynster cites a catchword by a French author, “with which the publisher of Nord og Syd [North and South] has acquainted us, for which we thank him.” But the passage Kierkegaard found most offensive was on p. 44, where Mynster writes, “Among the gratifying [‘]emergent phenomena[’]―we adopt this term from one of our most talented authors―that have appeared in the course of these discussions, is the echo found in a voice that has recently (see Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 26) inveighed against ‘the faith that the error is to be found in external things, that what is needed is a change in external things, which supposedly is to help us’ oppose the ‘disastrous confusion of politics and Christianity, a confusion that can so easily give rise to and make fashionable a new sort of reformation of the Church―a backward reformation that in reforming posits something new and worse instead of what is older and better.’

•

1852

The gifted author will permit me, in conclusion, to borrow his words, ‘that Christianity, which has its life in itself, is supposed to be saved by free institutions, is in my view a complete misunderstanding of Christianity, which, when it is true in true inwardness, is infinitely higher and infinitely freer than all institutions, constitutions, etc.’ ” (p. 44). In his use of the term “emergent phenomena,” Mynster is alluding to Goldschmidt, who a couple of years earlier had suggested this term (Danish, Fremtoning) as a translation of the German term Erscheinung (see Nord og Syd, 1849, vol. 5, pp. 143–144); Goldschmidt’s term gradually gained acceptance in the Danish language. The reference to a “gifted author” is to Kierkegaard, and the quoted passages are from Kierkegaard’s article “Occasioned by a Reference to Me by Dr. Rudelbach,” which had appeared in Fædrelandet on January 31, 1851, no. 26; see COR, 55–56; SKS 14, 113. See NB24:30 and its accompanying note in the present volume; see also Pap. X 6 B 171, titled “A Remark by Bishop Mynster.” ― Goldschmidt: Meïr Aron Goldschmidt (1819–1887), Danish Jewish journalist and publicist, author of works including En Jøde. Novelle [A Jew: Novella] (by the pseudonym Adolph Meyer, edited and published by M. Goldschmidt) (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1547). Goldschmidt founded the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair] in October 1840 and was the journal’s actual editor (owing to censorship rules, there were a number of “straw editors”) until October 1846, when he sold it and embarked on a yearlong journey abroad; starting in December 1847, he published the monthly journal Nord og Syd [North and South] (which became a weekly starting in September 1849) to which he was the principal contributor. Nord og Syd ceased publication on March 28, 1851, though from November 1, 1851, it appeared occasionally as a “voluntary pamphlet,” and in 1855 it resumed regular publication. Economic considerations are compelling me to make haste] → 537,15. “in profound veneration” was willing . . . as though it were Mynster’s view] Presumably, a reference to Kierkegaard’s deliberations about dedicating “Two Discourses at the Communion

4 10

510

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 84

509m

10

23

510m

5

7

10

on Fridays,” the fourth section of Christian Discourses (1848), to Mynster “in profound veneration,” (Pap. VIII 2 B 118), and to a dedication to Mynster from 1850 he had considered publishing. The various dedications end stereotypically with the phrase “in profound veneration” (Pap. X 6 B 163–170). in this respect M. could indeed have been of great service to me] As bishop, Mynster had influence on a possible appointment to the pastoral seminary (→ 509,18). Appointments to clerical positions were decided by the cultus minister, who was Mynster’s superior; during the period January–June 1852 the position was held by Peter Georg Bang. had not published the last works] → 510m,5. it was pseudonymous. (It was The Sickness unto Death.)] The Sickness unto Death: A Christian Psychological Exposition for Upbuilding and Awakening. By Anti-Climacus. Edited by S. Kierkegaard was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 176, July 30, 1849, as having been published. Publishing the book under the pseudonym AntiClimacus had been considered in early June 1849, and the final decision to do so was made as the type was being set; see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Sygdommen til Døden in SKS K11, 167. Now, there is no reason to hurry with the rest of the literature] Presumably, a reference to the three manuscripts––“Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest: For Awakening and Inward Appropriation,” “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” the first two of which were written in 1848, and the third presumably early in 1849––which were published on September 25, 1850, as Practice in Christianity. By Anti-Climacus. Nos. I, II, III. Edited by S. Kierkegaard. See NB8:15, NB9:56, NB10:19 in KJN 5, 158, 242–243, 275–276. When I moved out of the tanner’s place] From October 18, 1848, until April 15, 1850, Kierkegaard had lived in two different apartments owned by the tanner Johan Julius Gram on Rosenborggade. On the spring moving day, April 16, 1850,

•

1852

835

Kierkegaard moved to 43 Nørregade (see map 2, B1). The rental contract with master mason Frantz Ludvig Wahl was dated February 27, 1850, and reads: “The undersigned rents to Magister art. S. A. Kierkegaard from next moving day in April 1850 the second-floor apartment on the street side of the building at no. 43 on Nørregade, consisting of 5 rooms, kitchen, maid’s room and hallway, a storeroom in 2 sections, and a fuel cellar, common laundry-drying attic, and wash house, all for the semi-annual rent of 140 rix-dollars, written one hundred forty rix-dollars, in ready silver, inclusive of all taxes currently levied” (KA, D packet 8, layer 22). my idea was to travel] See, e.g., NB7:114, from November 1848, where Kierkegaard recalls that after having sold the family house at 2 Nytorv at the end of 1847, he had considered “traveling abroad for 2 years, and then coming home and becoming a priest” (KJN 5, 144). Therefore I did not inspect the rooms myself] See NB24:54 in the present volume: “Then I moved from the tanner’s. I had been considering traveling, so I had not viewed the rooms myself, but had let Strube do it, and when things must go wrong, they always do so with a vengeance: He was afraid of offending me by saying that the apartment rlly was not any good (for he thought that I indeed very much wanted to live there, despite the fact that I had told him that I had not seen the apartment at all)―and the apartment was as might be expected.” It was thus the Icelandic carpenter Frederik Christian Strube (1811–1867), who, with his wife and two daughters, lodged with Kierkegaard in the period 1848– 1852, who had found the new apartment. that unfortunate apartment. I suffered very much there] In entries NB18:48 and NB18:92 (“My Home”) in KJN 7, 287 and 324–325, Kierkegaard gives a more detailed description of the situation in the apartment on Nørregade (→ 510m,10). He emphasizes the problems of noise and reflected sunlight: “in the afternoons I suffer so much from reflected sunlight that I feared at first that I might go blind” (KJN 7, 324). Then the rest of the Anti-Cl. material was published] → 510m,7.

11

12

14

16

836 510

17

24 27 31 36

511

6

511

14

29 33

512

30 39

513

6

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 85–88

The Story of the Passion] Presumably, a reference to the compilation of the four gospels’ various accounts of Christ’s passion; see “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17), pp. 263–288. It is better that one person suffer, etc.] Refers to Jn 11:47–53. The high priests require . . . that it might be certain that Xt is not risen] See, e.g., Mt 27:62–66. Pilate writes . . . What I have written, I have written] See Jn 19:21–22. The crowd stands near the cross . . . let us see if God will help him, etc., etc.] See, e.g., Mt 27:39– 43. 12,000 legions of angels] Allusion to Mt 26:53. ― legions: A legion was a unit in the Roman army consisting of between three thousand and six thousand soldiers; a large number. Morten Fredriksen, who . . . left a straw man in his bed] Morten Johan Frederiksen was a notorious criminal known as “The Master Thief.” In 1812, after a number of successful escapes from prison, he was incarcerated in the Roskilde jail with heavy chains on his arms and his neck and with one leg chained to the floor. Nonetheless, he escaped on November 23, 1812, after having made a false leg of hay and rags, covered it with a stocking, and fooled a guard into binding it with a chain. See Den berygtede Mestertyv og Rasphuusfange Morten Frederiksens sandfærdige Levnetshistorie [The True Life Story of the Notorious Master Thief and Rasping House Prisoner Morton Frederiksen] (Copenhagen, n.d. [ca. 1820]), pp. 14–15. See Prefaces (P, 8; SKS 4, 482) and Paper 97:1 (KJN 11; SKS 27, 118–119). being related to God] Allusion to Acts 17:28–29. excellency] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) in which there were nine classes, the title “excellency” was reserved for those in the first class. die away] → 455,13. Those glorious ones] → 458,14. “Apostasy”] Perhaps an allusion to 1 Tim 4:1.

•

1852

“the Awakened”] Presumably, a reference to the religious or “godly” awakenings, i.e., pietists, old-fashioned Lutherans, and followers of various lay preachers and revivalists, including Grundtvigians, and in particular the followers of J. C. Lindberg, who for a time served as a focal point for popular awakenings, some of which he attached to the Grundtvigian movement. the sword of persecution hung over their heads] An allusion to the legend of the sword of Damocles. The tyrant Dionysius the Elder of Syracuse had an unctuous servant, Damocles, who praised him as the happiest man in the world. Dionysius then offered to let him taste his happiness and installed him in splendid surroundings. Damocles was immediately in seventh heaven, but when Dionysius also had a sword suspended over his neck, supported by a single horse hair, he lost the desire to be happy. See Cicero, Tusculanae disputationes, 5, 20, 61–62, available in a standard English translation as Tusculan Disputations, trans. J. E. King, Loeb Classical Library (London: Heinemann, 1927), pp. 487 and 489.

22

an aufgehobnes element] Alludes to the Hegelian concept of an aufgehobenes Moment. In German idealism, the concept das Moment (German, “the element”) designates a constitutive element of a larger organic whole. According to Hegel’s dialectical logic, a category or a “moment” is necessarily negated by its opposite; thus, e.g., being is negated by nothing; together, the two opposite categories therefore constitute a conceptual unity, as, e.g., being and nothing are united in becoming. In this way, the individual categories that have been traversed can be said to be “sublated elements” in the dialectically progressing movement, i.e., the opposition between them has been suspended or sublated, but they themselves are preserved and incorporated in a higher unity; see Hegel, The Science of Logic. Knight] i.e., a Knight of the Dannebrog (→ 497,14). Councillor of Justice] A title used for persons holding various posts that were placed in the fifth rank class (titular councillors of justice) or in the fourth rank class (“actual” councillors of justice) in the

7

513

28

13 13

514

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 88–90

29

515

5 12

Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) in which there were nine classes, each further subdivided into numerical subclasses. Specific titles and forms of address were assigned to persons in various official positions. See “Titulaturer til Rangspersoner i alfabetisk Orden” [Titles of Persons of Rank, Listed in Alphabetical Order], in C. Bartholin, Almindelig Brev- og Formularbog [Universal Book of Letters and Formulae], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB 933), vol. 1, pp. 49–56. The order of rank and precedence was published annually in the Kongelig Dansk Hof- og Stats- Calender [Royal Danish Court and Government Almanac] and the Veiviser eller Anviisning til Kiøbenhavns, Christianshavns, Forstædernes og Frederiksbergs Beboere [City Directory, or Information on the Residents of Copenhagen, Christianshavn, the Suburbs, and Frederiksberg] (Copenhagen, 1849), in which all persons of rank were listed with the proper forms of address. I am “without authority.”] In the prefaces to his edifying writings, Kierkegaard often points out that he speaks “without authority.” In “The Accounting,” included in On My Work as an Author, he states, in a note: “ ‘Without authority’ to make aware of the religious, of Christianity, is the category of all my work as an author, viewed as a whole. That I was ‘without authority’ is something I have from the very first moment emphasized and repeated stereotypically; I prefer to regard myself as a reader of the books, not as their author” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). the positive is recognizable by its opposite] → 464,4. these 1000’s upon 1000’s who are paid] According to the tables in Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Ecclesiastical Yearbook for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848 [concluded January 18, 1848]; ASKB 378), there were about 890 principal parishes in the kingdom of Denmark (i.e., without the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, or Lauenburg), and about 1,050 priests in service, including bishops and deans; in addition to this must be reckoned about 120 personal chaplains. Specific sorts of revenue were attached to each pasto-

•

1852

837

ral call; a complete account can found in Bloch Suhr, Kaldslexicon, omfattende en Beskrivelse over alle danske geistlige Embeder i alphabetisk Orden [Encyclopedia of Calls, Including a Description of All Danish Ecclesiastical Offices in Alphabetical Order] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 379). were paid to defend] Variant: changed from “defended”. a witness to the truth] Variant: first written “an apostle,”. flesh and blood] An idiomatic designation of human beings as mortals; occurs six times in the NT. Other references include 1 Cor 15:50, Mt 16:17, and Eph 6:12. pleasant days in this world] Perhaps an allusion to 1 Pet 3:10. modesty] Variant: first written “greed” (Danish, Begjerlighed) instead of “modesty” (Danish, Beskedenhed). You shall be my chosen instrument . . . you will come to suffer for my name’s sake] See Acts 9:15–16. imitation] → 492,1. the genuine Mynsterian position] See NB25:68. busy ourselves so much with childlike faith] Presumably, a reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 503,18), whose hymns often accentuate childlike joy in Christianity or Christ as a child. See Sang-Værk til den Danske Kirke [Songs for the Danish Church], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 201), e.g., hymn nos. 193 (“Det kimer nu til Julefest” [The Chimes Announce the Christmas Feast] and 196 “Jeg som et Barn mig glæde vil” [I Will Be Happy as a Child]); see also hymn nos. 153, 154, 160, 162, and 164. See also Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), pt. 2, sec. 2, chap. 5 (“Conclusion”) (CUP, 587–616, SKS 7, 533–559), e.g., “The Christianity that is recited to a child or, rather, the Christianity the child himself puts together if no pressure is used to drive it existentially into decisive Christian categories, is actually not Christianity but idyllic mythology” (CUP, 591; SKS 7, 537); and with reference to Grundtvig or his followers: “Therefore, when an orthodox continually talks about childhood faith, what is learned as a child, a womanly heart, etc., he

15 16 20

21 23

43

6

516

26 4

517

838

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 90–96

may only be a somewhat humorous character . . . who has managed to mix up Christianity with the childlike (literally understood) and who now longs for childhood, and whose longing is therefore especially for the loving tenderness of the pious mother” (CUP, 598; SKS 7, 543). 517

13 33

518

4

518

33

519

6

519

15

16

519

28 32

“from Henceforth . . . Blessed”] Variant: added. 70 years] → 489,11. take Xt only] Variant: “only” has been added. “When the Fullness of Time Had Come.”] See Gal 4:4–5. Xnty’s perfectibility] This expression was used in early Lutheran dogmatics in connection with Christianity’s capacity for development and perfection. In the latter part of the 18th century, the idea was adopted by rationalist theology, which regarded the history of Christianity as a progressive development toward ever greater perfection. In the 19th century, the idea of perfectibility was refashioned in connection with notions concerning the history of philosophy and of culture, e.g., in Hegel. In his Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Geschichte [Lectures on the Philosophy of History] (first published by E. Gans, 1837), Hegel speaks of “a drive toward perfectibility” (“ein Trieb der Perfectibilität”) that reveals itself in world history; see also Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus (→ 448,29), § 49, p. 113. Theme for a Sermon for Easter Monday] The Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17) prescribes Lk 24:13– 35 as the gospel text for Easter Monday, which in 1852 fell on April 12. Some of those who were with us . . . but they did not see him] See Lk 24:24. When the Doors Were Locked, Xt Came to the Disciples] See Jn 20:19–26. When Xnty struggled] Allusion to the Latin dogmatic expression ecclesia militans, which in early Christian theology designated the opposition from the surrounding world to which the Church was to be subjected until Christ’s return; only then would the Church triumph and become

•

1852

the ecclesia triumphans or Church triumphant. See, e.g., Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus, § 124, pp. 312– 313: “The living congreg[ation] through which Christ always accepts humank[ind] into reconciliation and preserves it in grace is the Church, as it was founded by Xt, embattled with the world (Ecc. militans, Eph 6:12), someday the victorious (triumphans, Heb 12:23) kingdom of God on earth.” that all are priests] Reference to the Lutheran Protestant doctrine of universal priesthood, according to which all those who are baptized are priests. See, e.g., Luther, An den christlichen Adel deutscher Nation von des christlichen Standes Besserung [To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation] from July 1520: “Thus, through baptism we are all consecrated as priests, as St. Peter (1 Peter 2 [1 Pet 2:9]) says, ‘You are all a royal priesthood and a priestly kingdom,’ And Rev. [Rev 5:9–10], ‘Through your blood you have made us into priests and kings.’ ” Luthers Werke. Vollständige Auswahl seiner Hauptschriften. Mit historischen Einleitungen, Anmerkungen und Registern [Luther’s Works: Complete Selection of His Major Writings, with a Historical Introduction, Notes, and Index], ed. Otto von Gerlach, 10 vols. (Berlin, 1840–1841; ASKB 312–316), vol. 3 (1840), Martin Luthers reformatorische Skriften [Martin Luther’s Reformation Writings], p. 167. In antiquity, the most essential education was training as a rhetorician] Rhetoric, which arose as a specific genre in Sicily in the 5th century b.c., was an essential requirement for the Sophists and played an important role in the political affairs of ancient city states. Isocrates (436–338 b.c.) was the first to make rhetoric a subject of study, which served as the conclusion of a well-rounded general education. Aristotle (384–322 b.c.) produced a systematic presentation of rhetoric, which he regarded as the part of dialectics closest to politics (Rhetoric 1356a 25). Practical oratory reached its high point in Greece in the second half of the 5th century and the 4th century b.c. and became the most important part of an education. Then came the empire . . . the same themes concerning freedom] Although rhetoric was a deci-

24

29

34

520

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 96–98 sive factor in the political and juridical affairs of antique city-states, it lost much of its importance as a consequence of the political upheavals in the wake of the battle of Chaeronea (338 b.c.) in which King Philip II of Macedonia (ca. 382–336 b.c., king from 359 b.c.) gained mastery over the city-states. The rhetorical literature of the imperial period (“the Second Sophistic”) often consisted of purely formal oratorical techniques or had the purpose of communicating an edifying message. 521

6 17

22

521m

17

522

2

11

27

The Gospel Story of the Good Shepherd] Refers to Jn 10:11–16. the epistle of Peter] According to Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17), the epistle for the second Sunday after Easter, which in 1852 fell on April 25, is 1 Pet 2:21–25. You were like sheep without a shepherd] Allusion to 1 Pet 2:25. That is why it was actlly . . . hirelings are―hirelings] Variant: entry begun in main text column. First comes life. Then . . . comes theory] Perhaps an allusion to the Latin aphorism primum vivere, deinde philosophari (“first, live―then philosophize”). everything ends in parody] See an entry on a loose paper, dated November 20, 1836, where Kierkegaard writes that “in my view, every development is only completed with its parody” (Paper 43 in KJN 11; SKS 27, 87–88; see also DD:168 in KJN 1, 260). This is the period of the System, the parody . . . process has been concluded] Beginning with René Descartes (1596–1650), modern philosophy has been characterized by an effort to find a systematic basis for all knowledge. This effort was taken up in earnest by German idealism, culminating in the philosophy of G.W.F. Hegel, whose system represented an attempt to provide a coherent and exhaustive description and explanation of actuality in its entirety and its unity. The basis for this description and explanation, which employs a dialectical method, is assumed to be the Absolute Spirit. It is assumed that the dialectical method is capable not only of describing and explaining actuality, but is also able to

•

1852

839

indicate the laws of its creation. This, however, is only possible if the identity of thought and being is presupposed. When Kierkegaard began his career as a writer, Danish philosophy was dominated by such thinkers as Johan Ludvig Heiberg, Hans Lassen Martensen, and Rasmus Nielsen (→ 536,21), who shared Hegel’s view that philosophy could only be presented in a scientific, scholarly system. In his early writings, Martensen in particular sought to cultivate systematic and speculative philosophy in the area of theology. As early as 1846, however, J. P. Mynster could note in his memoirs that “in recent years Hegelian philosophy has had to move aside completely.” Meddelelser om mit Levnet. Af Dr. J. P. Mynster [From My Life: By Dr. J. P. Mynster], ed. F. J. Mynster (Copenhagen, 1854), pp. 236–237. The catastrophe of ’48] Refers to a decisive turning point, the Revolution of 1848. In 1848, Europe experienced revolutions and political upheaval. In Denmark, the death of King Christian VIII on January 20, 1848, and news of the February Revolution in Paris, plus rumors of rebellion in the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein (which were under the Danish crown) led to the fall of absolutism in March and, immediately thereafter, to the beginning of the Three Years’ War (or the First Schleswig War), which lasted from April 1848 until February 1851. The Constitutional Convention assembled in October 1848 with the task of writing a free constitution and produced Danmarks Riges Grundlov [The Constitution of the Danish Kingdom], which was ratified on June 5, 1849. Kierkegaard had his most productive year during this political unrest. He wrote, among other things, The Point of View for My Work as an Author (published posthumously in 1859 by Peter Christian Kierkegaard), in which 1848 is depicted as a time of dissolution, in which everything has been transformed into politics; see PV, 68–69; SKS 16, 48–49. In a draft related to The Point of View, Kierkegaard wrote: “Even now in ’48 it really looks as though everything is politics, as it was before. But it will certainly become clear that the catastrophe is in reverse correspondence to the Reformation: Then, everything looked like a religious movement and became politics; now,

30

840

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 98–102

everything looks like politics, but will become a religious movement” (Pap. IX B 63,7, p. 363). See also NB20:86, which bears the title “The Turn in the Understanding of Xnty Also Occasioned by the Year ’48”: “The conflict concerning Xnty will no longer be a conflict about doctrine. (This is the conflict between orthodoxy and heterodoxy.) The dispute (occasioned also by the socialist and communist movements) will be about Christianity as a form of existence” (KJN 7, 449–450). 522

34

36

37

523

14

524

1

525

15

He is accused . . . of not fearing the gods of the state] Reference to Plato’s Apology (24b), where the accusations are summed up as follows: “Socrates is guilty of corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in deities of his own invention instead of the gods recognized by the state. Such is the charge.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 10. His friends want to help him escape from prison] As Socrates awaited his execution, his friends offered to help him escape. He refused, out of respect for the laws of Athens. See Plato’s dialogue Crito (43–54). No, S. answers . . . that I do not fear the gods of the state!] Reference to Plato’s dialogue Crito (43–54), in which Socrates refuses to accept his friends’ suggestion that he escape before being executed. straightforwardly] Variant: added. when the emperor became Xn] Refers to the Roman emperor Constantine the Great (ca. 272–337, emperor 306–337), who openly favored Christianity from 312. In 313, he recognized it as a religion on an equal footing with others and subsequently paved the way to its becoming the state religion. Constantine had himself baptized on his deathbed in 337 by Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia. Councillor of State David] Christian Georg Nathan David (1793–1874) Danish economist and politician; in 1830, extraordinary professor of economics at the University of Copenhagen; in 1834, founded the liberal daily newspaper Fædrelandet, serving as its sole editor in the pe-

•

1852

riod 1835–1837. In 1840, David was elected both to the Citizens Representative Assembly of Copenhagen and as a delegate to the Advisory Assembly of Estates that met in Roskilde and represented the Danish islands (there were parallel advisory assemblies for Jutland; for southern Jutland, including Schleswig; and for Holstein). In December 1849, at the first parliamentary elections to the Rigsdag, David was elected by a large majority as a candidate for the conservative party in his district of Copenhagen. David was a member of the commission charged with investigating prison conditions and in 1845 became a member of the governing board of the House of Punishment, Rasping, and Betterment in Christianshavn (see map 2, C4), in the period 1848–1858 serving as that institution’s principal overseer. ― Councillor of State: In accordance with the decrees of 1746 and 1808 concerning rank and precedence, this title was ranked in the third of nine classes. one of the silent prisons in North America] In 1841 and 1843, C.G.N. David, together with the architect J. Friis, traveled to several countries, including the United States, in order to investigate prison arrangements. David wrote up his findings in a number of essays, including “Om de nyere Fængselssystemer”[On Modern Prison Systems] and “Beretning om en i 1841 og 1842 paa Kgl. Befalning foretagen Reise til Undersøgelse af Fængselsvæsenet” [Report on a Journey to Investigate Prison Systems, Commissioned by the Crown and Taken in 1841 and 1842], published in Nyt Statsoeconomisk Archiv [New Archives of National Economy], vol. 1, ed. C. N. David (Copenhagen, 1843), pp. 1–118 and 171–252. In connection with the United States, David describes two forms of solitary confinement: the Philadelphia system “in which the prisoners are entirely isolated from one another, each in his own cell, day and night” (p. 31), and the Auburn (New York) system, concerning which David writes: “In an Auburn penal institution, the prisoners’ obligations could be summed up in few words: they are to work diligently, invariably obey every order, and observe an unbreakable silence” (p. 49).

15

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 102–107

21

38

526

20

527

1

527

7 17

528

30

“quiet hours”] → 470,24. ― hours: Variant: SKS and Pap. have “hours” (Danish, Timer); ms. has “fanatics” (Danish, Sværmer). good shepherds] Refers to the gospel story of the good shepherd (Jn 10:11–16), but also to the term “shepherd” as the designation of a spiritual guide, especially a priest. blood witnesses] Martyrs. criterion is all,] Variant: first written “criterion is all.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. in Addition] See NB25:58. and in addition takes earthly goods] Variant: changed from “mediates”. Pascal] Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), French mathematician, physicist, philosopher, and theologian. Following the death of his father in 1651, Pascal fell under the influence of Jansenism’s Augustinian account of Christianity, in large part owing to the influence of his younger sister Jacqueline Pascal, who became a nun at the strongly Jansenist Cistercian convent Port-Royal de Paris. Following a mystical-religious awakening in November 1654, he retreated to the convent Port-Royal de Champs, in Magny-les-Hameux; during the next four years he was a regular presence there, living an austere life dedicated to the study of scripture. When Jansenism came under attack by the Jesuits, Pascal wrote a series of eighteen Provincial Letters (1656–1657), a robust defense of Jansenism, which immediately appeared in many editions; the work was condemned by Pope Alexander VII in September 1657 and was banned and burned by King Louis XIV in 1660. At his death, Pascal left a large collection of handwritten fragments as the draft of an apology for Christianity against atheism. These were later collected and published as Pascal’s Pensées [Thoughts] or Pensées sur la religion [Thoughts on Religion], his most famous work, first published in 1669 (Paris: Guillaume Desprez); the “Edition de Port-Royal” appeared in 1670. Kierkegaard owned three German translations of the work; see ASKB 712–713 and 714; according to a bill

•

1852

841

from book dealer C. A. Reitzel dated December 29, 1850, Kierkegaard bought Pascal’s Gedanken [Thoughts] on November 25, 1850, and on December 25 purchased two other volumes by Pascal, perhaps ASKB 714; see Fund og Forskning, vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1961), p. 122. Pascal was an ascetic . . . wore a hair shirt] Concerning Pascal’s asceticism, Pascal’s sister, Mme. Périers, wrote: “Here I touch upon a situation that, whatever one says about it, is nonetheless the most powerful proof of his faithfulness to God and himself. When he was in certain company he used an iron belt with barbs, which he wrapped around his bare body.” “Leben Paskals” [The Life of Pascal] in Gedanken Paskals [Pascal’s Pensées], ed. “with notes and thoughts” by J. F. Kleuker (Bremen, 1777; ASKB 711), pp. xxix–lvii, esp. pp. xliii–xliv. Heliogabalus ate ostrich brains] The Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius Heliogabalus or Elagabalus (ca. 203–222; emperor 218–222) was notorious for his cruelty and debauchery. In his Scriptores Historiae Augustae [Authors of the History of the Augustan Emperors], Aelius Lampridius relates that Heliogabalus would sometimes eat nothing but ostrich for an entire day (chap. 32,4), and that he also had more than six hundred ostrich heads served at a banquet so that the guests could eat the brains (chap. 30,2). Seneca . . . I am not to dare] Refers to the Roman philosopher and author Lucius Annaeus Seneca (ca. 4 b.c.–a.d. 65). This is perhaps an allusion to Ad Lucilium epistolae morales [Moral Letters to Lucilius], bk. 28, 5: “I disagree with those who strike out into the midst of the billows and, welcoming a stormy existence, wrestle daily in hardihood of soul with life’s problems. The wise man will endure all that, but will not choose it; he will prefer to be at peace rather than at war.” English translation from Ad Lucilium epistolae morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, Loeb Classical Library, 3 vols. (London: Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 3, p. 123. Kierkegaard could have read this in the edition he owned, L. Annaei Senecae philosophi opera omnia [The Complete Works of the Philosopher L. Annaeus Seneca], 5 vols. (Leipzig:

33

2

529

11

529

842

17 32 40

530

5

530

13

531

2

5

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 107–109

stereotype edition, 1832; ASKB 1275–1279), vol. 3, p. 72. Xt’s prophecy of what would happen to himself and his followers] Refers to Mt 10:16–25. Xt promised his apostles a Spirit] Refers to Mt 10:20 and to Jn 16:7–14. God’s will for us] Perhaps a reference to 1 Thes 5:16–18. to die away] → 455,13. in spirit and truth] Allusion to Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman in Jn 4:7–26, esp. vv. 23–24. About “Her.”] Refers to Regine Olsen (1822–1904), daughter of Regina Frederikke and Terkild Olsen. Kierkegaard was engaged to her for a bit over a year, from September 10, 1840, until their final break on October 12, 1841. On August 28, 1843, she became engaged to Johan Frederik Schlegel, and she married him on November 3, 1847, in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn. Kierkegaard wrote a retrospective account of his relationship with Regine Olsen in a piece titled “My Relationship to ‘her.’ Aug. 24th 49. somewhat poetical,” in Notebook 15; see Not15:1–15 in KJN 3, 429–445. In NB8:33, Kierkegaard writes, with respect to his break with Regine, “I nonetheless had the strength to mitigate matters for her by saying that I was a scoundrel, a deceiver” (KJN 5, 165–166). when I would walk home] i.e., home from town. On April 24, 1851, the spring moving day, Kierkegaard moved from his apartment in Nørregade (→ 510m,10) to 108A Østerbro, which at the time was outside of Copenhagen proper. The avenue was situated in the location of present-day Dag Hammarskjölds Allé and its continuation as Østerbrogade to Trianglen. In a letter to Kierkegaard’s brother, Peter Christian, Kierkegaard’s nephew Carl Lund describes the place as follows: “Uncle Søren has also half-moved out into the country. He has left the city and now lives out in Østerbro, on the right-hand side as you leave the city, at the end of the lake . . . He has taken lodgings there on the second floor of a large new building, with an entrance and a view facing

•

1852

a pretty garden and the lake.” Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard: A Life as Seen by His Contemporaries (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 145. According to a survey of the property in September 1856, Kierkegaard’s floor of the building included an entryway, a kitchen, and six rooms. Peter Tudvad, Kierkegaards København [Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 2004), p. 54. In October 1852, Kierkegaard moved to 5–6 Klædeboderne, which corresponds to present-day 38 Skindergade. Langelinie] The long outer rampart of the Copenhagen citadel, running from southwest to northeast (see map 2, H2). the road to the lime kiln] i.e., the road from the most northerly part of the citadel, which in Kierkegaard’s time ran along the beach, toward the lime kiln. The road corresponds to present-day Strandboulevard (see map 4, D2). Citadel Road] i.e., present-day Kastelsvej, which then started at the beach to the east and turned toward Classensgade (see map 4, D3–C2). her husband’s] → 531,2. Johan Frederik Schlegel (1817–1896), Danish jurist and civil servant; university student, 1833; law degree, 1838; worked for a time as a private tutor in the Olsen household and developed tender feelings for Regine. In 1842, he started as an intern in the government’s Office of Customs and Commerce, becoming a head clerk there in 1847; the following year he became Chief of the Colonial Office; and in 1854, he was appointed governor of the Danish West Indies (today’s U.S. Virgin Islands), where his duties included dealing with matters that had arisen in the wake of the abolition of slavery in 1848. January 1, 1852] In 1852, New Year’s Day fell on a Thursday. Nørreport] See map 2, C1. the path by the lake] i.e., that part of the socalled Lovers’ Lanes that ran alongside Sortedam Lake on the city side, which also was commonly known as “Marriage Lane” or “Divorce Lane” (see map 3, C2–D1). down Farimags-Veien] Farimagsvej was a long road (see map 3, D2–C4) that went around the margin of Østerbro, Nørrebro, and Vesterbro. the avenue outside Østerport] → 531,5.

6

7

10

22

26 27 29

33

39

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 109 532

3

11

13

15

18

23

on the ramparts] The ramparts that formed part of the defensive fortifications surrounding Copenhagen, namely the Øster, Vester, Nørre, and Christianshavn ramparts. Here Kierkegaard is primarily writing of the Øster Rampart (see map 2, E1–G1). in church on Sundays] Probably a reference to Christiansborg Palace Church (see map 2, B2), which served as the church for the court, but which was open to the public for high mass and vespers. As early as January 1851, Kierkegaard wrote the following in his journal: “In church, usually the Palace Church, we have in fact regularly seen one another for quite a number of years, and recently more often than usual. I have my regular place, where I invariably sit. She often sits quite nearby” (NB22:146.b in the present volume). Then came my birthday] Kierkegaard turned thirty-nine on May 5, 1852. The word he uses for “birthday” is the German word Geburtstag, which in Kierkegaard’s day was a generally used Danish term for birthday. the doctor] It is not clear whether Kierkegaard here is referring to Oluf Lundt Bang (1788–1877) or to Ditlev Andersen von Nutzhorn (1800–1865). O. L. Bang was professor of medicine and since 1841 had been director of the Royal Lying-In and Nursing Establishment in Amaliegade, where he also had offices for his private practice. In 1824, D. A. von Nutzhorn passed his examinations at the Surgical Academy and the same year became a general practitioner in Copenhagen; in 1843, he became physician at the House of Punishment, Rasping, and Betterment in Christianshavn in addition to his private practice elsewhere in the city. Nutzhorn was the Kierkegaard family physician as early as the 1830s; he attended Kierkegaard’s mother when she died in July 1834 and Kierkegaard’s father when he died in August 1838. on the sidewalk in front of the avenue] i.e., on the sidewalk outside Kierkegaard’s apartment (→ 531,5). The next Sunday I was in church and heard Paulli] i.e., Sunday May 9, 1852. According to Adresseavisen, no. 107, May 8, 1852, the ser-

•

1852

843

mon at high mass at 10:00 A.M. the next day at Christiansborg Palace Church (see map 2, B2) was to be delivered by Just Henrik Voltelen Paulli (1809–1865). Paulli was a Danish theologian and priest; theology graduate, 1833; from 1835, catechist at the Church of the Holy Spirit; from 1837, palace priest at Christiansborg Palace Church, and from 1840, also court priest; close associate of Bishop J. P. Mynster (whose eldest daughter Paulli married in 1843), and a close friend of H. L. Martensen. Paulli does not preach on the gospel, but on the epistle] According to Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 454,17) the gospel text for the fourth Sunday after Easter was Jn 16:5–15, whereas the epistle text for that day was Jas 1:17–22. it is the text I have emphasized strongly] Kierkegaard had made use of Jas 1:17–22 as a point of departure for the second discourse in Two Edifying Discourses (1843) and for the second and third discourses in Four Edifying Discourses (1843). In addition to this, there are many allusions and references to this text throughout Kierkegaard’s writings. despite the fact that I know (from Sibbern) . . . where this text is used] The second discourse in Two Edifying Discourses (1843), bearing the title “Every Good and Perfect Gift Is from Above,” is written on the text of Jas 1:17–22. In Not15:4, Kierkegaard writes, “The preface to the Two Edifying Discourses was intended for her [Regine Olsen] . . . And there are faint hints in the book itself. She has read it, I know this from Sibbern” (KJN 3, 436). ― Sibbern: Frederik Christian Sibbern (1785–1872), professor of philosophy at the University of Copenhagen, 1813–1870; one of Kierkegaard’s teachers. From a letter written by Sibbern to Augusta Sibbern Møller, dated October 2, 1863, it is clear that for a time Sibbern was also a confidant of Regine Olsen; see Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard (→ 531,5), pp. 213–216. last Wednesday] i.e., Wednesday, May 5, 1852, Kierkegaard’s birthday. These words, all good gifts . . . lost all its value for you] Paulli’s sermon, that here builds on Jas 1:17 and 21, was not published.

25

31

32

35 42

844 533

15 25

26

534

10

18 40

535

535

3

6 10

535

35

35

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 109–112

heartening that now] Variant: “now” has been added. the stigma of my having broken with her] i.e., the damage to Regine Olsen’s reputation occasioned by Kierkegaard breaking the engagement (→ 531,2) on October 12, 1841. her . . . her vehemence at the time.] Variant: changed from “her.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Were you called to be a slave? . . . If you can become free, choose that instead] Cited freely from 1 Cor 7:21. all the goods of life] Variant: “all” has been added. to be the salt of the earth] Reference to Mt 5:13. evanescence.] Variant: first written “evanescence,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. M.] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 444,1). one must howl with the wolves among whom one finds oneself] A proverb listed as no. 10873 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 450,9), vol. 2, p. 492. When I hurled myself against the literature of the mob] As a reply to P. L. Møller’s critique of Stages on Life’s Way (1845) in his article “A Visit in Sorø,” published in the annual Gæa for 1846, Kierkegaard wrote a newspaper article in which he identified Møller with the satirical weekly Corsaren and then asked “to come in Corsaren,” because he could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused but only praised by the paper; see the article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner,” which appeared under the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus in Fædrelandet on December 27, 1845, no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). Gjødvad was there, impatiently waiting for the article] Jens Finsteen Giødwad (1811– 1891), Danish jurist and journalist; editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post], 1837– 1839, and from 1839, coeditor and publisher of Fædrelandet. Giødwad was Kierkegaard’s close

•

1852

friend and helped him with proofreading and as a middleman in dealings with his printer and his publisher. The article referred to here is “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner” (see the preceding note). Giødwad’s role in the genesis of the article is also mentioned in an article on a loose paper from 1854 or 1855 with the title “The Relation of Fædrelandet to My Work as an Author”: “When I hurled myself against Corsaren, the situation was more or less as follows: the conventional wisdom for everyone―also for myself―was that papers like Corsaren are to be ignored. Fine. But, but―everything must be understood cum grano salis [Latin, “with a grain of salt”]. Corsaren had achieved such an enormous circulation, disproportionate to the country’s size, that everyone suffered under its tyranny. And in the office of Fædrelandet the judgment had long been that something must be done. Not as though there was any agreement between Fædrelandet and myself, far from it.―Then I took action; it was the greatest service that could have been done for Fædrelandet at that moment. Giødwad came hurrying over to me in order to get hold of the article, standing there while I wrote the final portion” (Pap. XI 3 B 12, p. 27). See NB18:44 in KJN 7, 282–283, with its accompanying explanatory note. Fædrelandet] Founded as a weekly in 1834 and became a daily from December 1839. The newspaper was especially important up to the fall of absolutism in March 1848 as the most important organ for the liberal opposition. Until 1864, it was the most influential paper in the country. I have seen him year after year, every blessed day] Concerning Kierkegaard’s friendship with Giødwad, see NB9:28, from January 1849: “Giødvad is my personal friend” (KJN 5, 222) and NB18:44, from May 1850, where Kierkegaard again writes: “I call Giødwad my personal friend, and over the past three to 4 years I have spoken with him every single evening” (KJN 7, 283). how Bishop M. treats me . . . has betrayed me in his official capacity] See Pap. XI 3 B 12, from 1854–1855, with the title “The Relation of Fædrelandet to My Activity as an Author”: “And

37

6

9

536

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 112

16

21

25

during all this I have endured for a long time, year after year, speaking with Giødvad as friend to friend, every blessed evening, and he could tell me how indefensibly Heiberg, and later Mynster and many others had behaved toward me by acknowledging my significance in private and, in their official capacities, either denying this or remaining silent.” to take a similar step against Flyveposten] Refers to the beginning of Kierkegaard’s polemic against Corsaren (→ 535,35). Flyveposten [The Flying Post] was a conservative daily newspaper founded in 1845 and until 1852 edited by Eduard Meyer. It was a popular organ for news and entertainment and had a large readership, with about seven thousand subscribers in 1848–1852. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 [Danish Newspapers: 1634–1989 ], 3 vols. (Odense, 1988–1991), vol. 2 (1989), pp. 114–115. Prof. Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; cand. theol., 1837; lic. theol., 1840; privatdocent at the University of Copenhagen during the winter term, 1840–1841; from 1841, extraordinary professor of moral philosophy at the University of Copenhagen and from 1850, ordinary professor. Nielsen’s special subject was speculative, Hegelian philosophy, but starting in the mid-1840s, he came under Kierkegaard’s influence; the two men became friends in 1848 (see NB7:6 and NB10:32 in KJN 5, 80–81, 283). Kierkegaard considered bringing Nielsen into his confidence concerning the ideas behind his writings; see the draft of an article “Concerning My Relationship to Hr. Prof. R. Nielsen,” from ca. 1849–1850: “In mid-1848 I considered a number of things, all of which clearly led to the same conclusion, that I ought―that it was my duty―to make an attempt to acquaint another person with my views by establishing a personal relationship, all the more so because I intended to stop being an author. I chose Prof. Nielsen, who had already sought to approach me. Since then I have as a rule spoken with him once a week” (Pap. X 6 B 124, pp. 164–165). But actlly it was circumstances . . . taken his position from my writings] Refers to the reactions

•

1852

845

to Rasmus Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed. Forelæsninger over Jesu Liv [The Faith of the Gospels and Modern Consciousness: Lectures on the Life of Jesus], pt. 1 (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 700). Nielsen made very little mention of Kierkegaard in the book, and he was subjected to much criticism for having assumed Kierkegaard’s ideas and his style. See the review, probably by H. F. Helweg, under “Bog–Nyt. (April–Juni)” [Book News: April–June], in Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], July 22, 1849, vol. 4, no. 43, cols. 714–718. The reviewer starts by writing: “Prof. Nielsen, who had been known earlier as a talented spokesman for the speculative theology of Hegel’s school, though always in such a way that one always sensed in him―both as philosopher and theologian―a deeper religious seriousness and warmth, has now broken entirely with modern scientism, and in this work, in which he for the first time clearly articulates this break, has essayed composition in the manner of Mag. Kierkegaard, though without any particular success . . . If it is no longer possible to have mediation, which allows all the opposing standpoints to have their due so that they might combine into a speculative unity―well, then one gives it up, allows the opposites to confront one another unreconciled! But how so? after all, doesn’t one become a simple human being once again when one enters into the unruly confusion of opposites? Ah, no! It is Mag Kierkegaard’s undying merit to have shown the way that Prof. Nielsen has followed, namely to make oneself into the dialectical” (col. 714). In his lecture at the meeting of the Roskilde Conventicle on October 30, 1849, P. C. Kierkegaard criticized Nielsen for his frequent borrowing from Søren Kierkegaard’s works and also criticized him for his manner of expression and his close adherence to Kierkegaard’s style without attaining the true, passionate character of the latter’s works. P. C. Kierkegaard’s lecture was printed in Dansk Kirketidende, vol. 5, no 12, December 16, 1849, cols. 171–193; see esp. col. 191. Nielsen seems to have changed his approach after this. Although Nielsen scarcely mentioned Kierkegaard in Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed, in Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes

846

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 112–114

Climacus”og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik.” En undersøgende Anmeldelse [Mag. S. Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s Dogmatics: An Investigative Review] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 701), Nielsen acknowledges his debt to Kierkegaard. Pages 11–42 of Nielsen’s review consist almost exclusively of material cited from Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), and, referring to Kierkegaard, Nielsen concedes, “nor, in the important matter we consider here [i.e., the principles of dogmatics] have I invented anything (if there is someone who has seen or discovered anything, it is certainly someone else, and not myself)” (p. 130). Nielsen continues by saying, “indeed, here I am not making use of anything that originates with me, but am merely appropriating what I believe I have learned from someone else” (p. 131). 537

2 3

14

“Her.”] i.e., Regine Olsen (→ 531,2). situate her in the place she is guaranteed in the future] Presumably, a reference to Regine’s posthumous reputation, her historical significance. This, however, did not exclude the idea of a specific bequest in Kierkegaard’s will, and following Kierkegaard’s death in 1855, it emerged that he had made Regine his sole heir. In a will, presumably written in 1849, Kierkegaard wrote: “What I wish to express is that for me an engagement was and is just as binding as a marriage, and that therefore my estate is to revert to her in exactly the same manner as if I had been married to her” (LD, 33; B&A 1, 25). In another message, dated August 1851, Kierkegaard wrote: “The unnamed person―whose name will someday be named― to whom the entire authorship is dedicated, is my former fiancée, Mrs. Regine Schlegel. [on the paper wrapper] To be opened after my death” (SKS 28, 43). a year or 1-1/2 years later, the whole thing ended in a new engagement] Kierkegaard had been engaged to Regine Olsen for just over a year, from September 10, 1840, to October 12, 1841. On August 28, 1843, Regine became engaged to Johan Frederik Schlegel (→ 531,22) and subsequently married him on November 3, 1847.

•

1852

I was an author,] Variant: first written “I was an author.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Then came ’48] i.e., the year 1848 (→ 522,30). by having private means and being independent] Kierkegaard’s father (→ 494,10) died in 1838, leaving an estate―inherited by Søren Kierkegaard and his brother Peter Christian― that in 1839 was reckoned at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 496,14); Søren Kierkegaard’s share amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars, in real estate, stocks, and bonds. Kierkegaard sold the stocks and bonds during the period 1839–1847. See F. Brandt and E. Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 67–71. After the sale of his last inherited stock in March 1847 and his last bond in December of that year, Kierkegaard sold his childhood home at Nytorv 2 on December 24, 1847. The house fetched 22,000 rix-dollars. Peter Christian Kierkegaard held a first mortgage of 7,000 rix-dollars, while Søren received a second mortgage of 5,000 rix-dollars at 4 percent interest, a bank draft for 753 rix-dollars (which he sold for 757 rix-dollars in December 1849), and in January 1848, a cash payment of 10,000 rix-dollars. Kierkegaard invested at least some of the proceeds in stocks, but also in royal bonds at 4 percent. The bonds were probably sold prior to March 1852; the shares were sold between March and December 1852; the second mortgage was sold on August 25, 1854. In addition to these assets, Kierkegaard had royalty income from the sale of his books, which in 1849 had amounted to 693 rix-dollars; see Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 86–92 and 35. I was willing to declare myself a poet] See NB:10:200, dated April 25, 1849: “There is only one humiliation that qua auth. I am to take, like everything from God’s hand―and, personally, I have always been deeply humbled―namely, that I may never presume that I could express, in reality, what I portray, to the scale on which I portray it, as if I myself were the ideal. In this regard, I must make a concession in the direction of being a poet and a thinker . . . Normally the hero comes

4

6 15

17

539

J O U R N A L NB 25 : 114 first, the ethical personality, and then the poet. I wanted to be both, at the same time, as I needed ‘the poet’s’ calm and distance from life and the thinker’s calm, at the same time as I wanted to be in the midst of real life and to be what I poetically conceived and thought about” (KJN 5, 378).

•

1852

847

MAPS Map 1, Copenhagen, 1839, by Severin Sterm 850

Map 2, Copenhagen Locator Map 852 Map 3, Copenhagen with Suburbs 854 Map 4, Copenhagen with outer Suburbs 856

Map 1

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 2

C

|

D

E

|

F

|

G

|

H

1

| 2

| 3

| 4

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 3

C

|

D

E

|

F

|

G

|

H

1

| 2

| 3

| 4

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 4

C

|

D

CALENDAR For January 1, 1850, through December 31, 1850 858 For January 1, 1851, through December 31, 1851 860 For January 1, 1852, through December 31, 1852 862

Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2nd S. in Lent

St. Peter’s Chair

Ember Day

1st S. in Lent

Shrove Tuesday Ash Wednesday

Quinquagesima

Candlemas Sexagesima

F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 M Tu 3rd S. in Lent W Th F Sa Su M 40 Martyrs Tu 4th S. in Lent W Th F Sa Su M Tu W 5th S. in Lent Th F Sa Su M Tu Palm Sunday W The Annuciation Th F Sa Maundy Thursday Su Good Friday M Tu Easter Day

March 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 4th S. a. Easter

Great Prayer Day

3rd S. a. Easter

Moving Day

2nd S. a. Easter

1st S. a. Easter

Easter Monday

April W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Sa Su M Tu 5th S. a. Easter W Th F Sa Ascension Day Su M Tu 6th S. a. Easter W Th F Sa Su M Tu Pentecost W Pentecost Monday Th F Ember Day Sa Su M Tu Trinity Sunday W Th F Sa Corpus Christi Su

May 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 5th S. a. Trinity

7 Sleepers

4th S. a. Trinity Birth of John Bapt.

3rd S. a. Trinity

2nd S. a. Trinity

1st S. a. Trinity

June

AND

Septuagesima

F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th

February

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

2nd S. a. Epiphany

1st S. a. Epiphany

Epiphany

New Year’s Day

January

858 N OTEBOOKS

1850

M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

9th S. a. Trinity

8th S. a. Trinity

7th S. a. Trinity

6th S. a. Trinity

The Visitation

July Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 13th S. a. Trinity

12th S. a. Trinity

11th S. a. Trinity

10th S. a. Trinity

August

M

Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su

14th S. a. Trinity

Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu 15th S. a. Trinity W Th F Sa Su M Tu 16th S. a. Trinity W Th Ember Day F Sa Su M Tu 17th S. a. Trinity W Th F Sa Su M 18th S. a. Trin. / St. Tu Michael and all W 30 Th Angels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

September 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 22nd S. a. Trinity

21st S. a. Trinity

Moving Day

20th S. a. Trinity

19th S. a. Trinity

October F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 26th S. a. Trinity

25th S. a. Trinity

24th S. a. Trinity St. Martin

23rd S. a. Trinity

All Saint’s Day

November Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

1st S. a. Christmas

Christmas Day St. Stephen

4th S. in Advent

Ember Day

3rd S. in Advent

2nd S. in Advent

1st S. in Advent

December

C A L E N D A R 1850 859

1850

W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Sa 3rd S. a. Epiphany / Su Candlemas M Tu W Th F Sa 5th S. a. Epiphany Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su Septuageisma M Tu W Th F St. Peter’s Chair Sa Su Sexagesima M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Tu W Th F Shrove Tuesday Ash Wednesday Sa Su M Tu W 1st S. in Lent / 40 Martyrs Th F Sa Ember Day Su M Tu W 2nd S. in Lent Th F Sa Su M Tu W 3rd S. in Lent Th The Annuciation F Sa Su M Tu 4th S. in Lent W Quinquagesima

March 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Th F Sa Su M Tu 5th S. in Lent W Th F Sa Su M Tu Palm Sunday W Th F Maundy Thursday Sa Good Friday Su M Easter Day Tu Easter Monday W Th F Moving Day Sa Su M 1st S. a. Easter Tu W Th F Sa

April 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Ascension Day

5th S. a. Easter

4th S. a. Easter

Great Prayer Day

3rd S. a. Easter

2nd S. a. Easter

May Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2nd S. a. Trinity

7 Sleepers

Birth of John Bapt.

1st S. a. Trinity

Corpus Christi

Trinity Sunday

Ember Day

Pentecost Pentecost Monday

6th S. a. Easter

June

AND

3rd S. a. Epiphany

Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F

February

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

2nd S. a. Epiphany

1st S. a. Epiphany

1st S. a. Christmas

New Year’s Day

January

860 N OTEBOOKS

1851

Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

6th S. a. Trinity

5th S. a. Trinity

4th S. a. Trinity

3rd S. a. Trinity

The Visitation

July F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 11th S. a. Trinity

10th S. a. Trinity

9th S. a. Trinity

8th S. a. Trinity

7th S. a. Trinity

August 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

W Th F Sa Su M 12th S. a. Trinity Tu W Th F Sa Su M 13th S. a. Trinity Tu W Th Ember Day F Sa Su M 14th S. a. Trinity Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu 15th S. a. Trin. St. Michael and all W Angels Th F Tu 30 M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

September 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 19th S. a. Trinity

Moving Day

18th S. a. Trinity

17th S. a. Trinity

16th S. a. Trinity

October Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1st S. in Advent

23rd S. a. Trinity

22nd S. a. Trinity

St. Martin

21st S. a. Trinity

All Saint’s Day 20th S. a. Trinity

November M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

1st S. a. Christmas

Christmas Day St. Stephen

4th S. in Advent

Ember Day

3rd S. in Advent

2nd S. in Advent

December

C A L E N D A R 1851 861

1851

Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th Fr Sa

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 M Tu W Th F Sa Su Septuagesima M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Sexagesima Tu W Th F Sa Su Quinquagesima / M St. Peter’s Chair Tu Shrove Tuesday W Ash Wednesday Th F Sa Su M 1st S. in Lent Tu W

4th S. a. Epiphany Candlemas 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 5th S. in Lent

The Annuciation

4th S. in Lent

3rd S. in Lent

40 Martyrs

2nd S. in Lent

Ember Day

March Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Sa Su M Palm Sunday Tu W Th F Maundy Thursday Sa Good Friday Su M Easter Day Tu Easter Monday W Th F Sa Su M st 1 S. a. Easter Tu W Moving Day Th F Sa Su M Tu 2nd S. a. Easter W Th F Sa Su M

April 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Pentecost Pentecost Monday

6th S. a. Easter

Ascension Day

5th S. a. Easter

4th S. a. Easter

Great Prayer Day

3rd S. a. Easter

May Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

3rd S. a. Trinity / 7 Sleepers

Birth of John Bapt.

2nd S. a. Trinity

1st S. a. Trinity

Corpus Christi

Trinity Sunday

Ember Day

June

AND

3rd S. a. Epiphany

Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th Fr Sa Su

February

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

2nd S. a. Epiphany

1st S. a. Epiphany

Epiphany

S. after New Year

New Year’s Day

January

862 N OTEBOOKS

1852

Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

7th S. a. Trinity

6th S. a. Trinity

5th S. a. Trinity

4th S. a. Trinity

The Visitation

July Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 12th S. a. Trinity

11th S. a. Trinity

10th S. a. Trinity

9th S. a. Trinity

8th S. a. Trinity

August 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Th 30

W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W St. Michael and all Angels

16th S. a. Trinity

15th S. a. Trinity

Ember Day

14th S. a. Trinity

13th S. a. Trinity

September F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 21st S. a. Trinity

20th S. a. Trinity

Moving Day

19th S. a. Trinity

18th S. a. Trin.

17th S. a. Trinity

October M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1st S. in Advent

24th S. a. Trinity

23rd S. a. Trinity

St. Martin

22nd S. a. Trinity

All Saint’s Day

November W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Christmas Day St. Stephen

4th S. in Advent

Ember Day

3rd S. in Advent

2nd S. in Advent

December

C A L E N D A R 1852 863

1852

CONCORDANCE From Søren Kierkegaards Papirer to Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks 867

867

Concordance Pap.

KJN

Pap.

KJN

Pap.

KJN

X 3 A 438 X 3 A 439 X 3 A 440 X 3 A 441 X 3 A 442 X 3 A 443 X 3 A 444 X 3 A 445 X 3 A 446 X 3 A 447 X 3 A 448 X 3 A 449 X 3 A 450

NB21:1 NB21:3 NB21:2 NB21:4 NB21:4.a NB21:5 NB21:6 NB21:7 NB21:8 NB21:9 NB21:10 NB21:11 NB21:12 NB21:12.a NB21:13 NB21:14 NB21:15 NB21:15.a NB21:16 NB21:16.a NB21:17 NB21:17.a NB21:18 NB21:19 NB21:20 NB21:21 NB21:22 NB21:23 NB21:24 NB21:24.a NB21:25 NB21:26 NB21:27 NB21:28 NB21:29 NB21:29.a NB21:30 NB21:31 NB21:32 NB21:33 NB21:34

X 3 A 477 X 3 A 478 X 3 A 479 X 3 A 480 X 3 A 481 X 3 A 482 X 3 A 483 X 3 A 484 X 3 A 485 X 3 A 486 X 3 A 487 X 3 A 488 X 3 A 489 X 3 A 490 X 3 A 491 X 3 A 492 X 3 A 493 X 3 A 494 X 3 A 495 X 3 A 496 X 3 A 497

NB21:35 NB21:36 NB21:37 NB21:38 NB21:39 NB21:40 NB21:41 NB21:42 NB21:43 NB21:44 NB21:45 NB21:46 NB21:47 NB21:48 NB21:49 NB21:50 NB21:51 NB21:52 NB21:53 NB21:54 NB21:55 NB21:55.a NB21:56 NB21:57 NB21:58 NB21:59 NB21:60 NB21:60.a NB21:61 NB21:62 NB21:63 NB21:64 NB21:65 NB21:66 NB21:67 NB21:68 NB21:69 NB21:70 NB21:71 NB21:72 NB21:73

X 3 A 516 X 3 A 517 X 3 A 518 X 3 A 519

NB21:74 NB21:75 NB21:76 NB21:77 NB21:77.a NB21:78 NB21:79 NB21:80 NB21:80.a NB21:81 NB21:82 NB21:83 NB21:84 NB21:84.a NB21:85 NB21:86 NB21:86.a NB21:87 NB21:88 NB21:88.a NB21:89 NB21:90 NB21:91 NB21:91.a NB21:92 NB21:92.a NB21:93 NB21:93.a NB21:94 NB21:95 NB21:96 NB21:97 NB21:98 NB21:99 NB21:100 NB21:101 NB21:102 NB21:103 NB21:103.a NB21:104 NB21:105

X 3 A 451 X 3 A 452 X 3 A 453 X 3 A 454 X 3 A 455 X 3 A 456 X 3 A 457 X 3 A 458 X 3 A 459 X 3 A 460 X 3 A 461 X 3 A 462 X 3 A 463 X 3 A 464 X 3 A 465 X 3 A 466 X 3 A 467 X 3 A 468 X 3 A 469 X 3 A 470 X 3 A 471 X 3 A 472 X 3 A 473 X 3 A 474 X 3 A 475 X 3 A 476

X 3 A 498 X 3 A 499 X 3 A 500 X 3 A 501 X 3 A 502 X 3 A 503 X 3 A 504 X 3 A 505 X 3 A 506 X 3 A 507 X 3 A 508 X 3 A 509 X 3 A 510 X 3 A 511 X 3 A 512 X 3 A 513 X 3 A 514 X 3 A 515

X 3 A 520 X 3 A 521 X 3 A 522 X 3 A 523 X 3 A 524 X 3 A 525 X 3 A 526 X 3 A 527 X 3 A 528 X 3 A 529 X 3 A 530 X 3 A 531 X 3 A 532 X 3 A 533 X 3 A 534 X 3 A 535 X 3 A 536 X 3 A 537 X 3 A 538 X 3 A 539 X 3 A 540 X 3 A 541 X 3 A 542 X 3 A 543 X 3 A 544 X 3 A 545 X 3 A 546 X 3 A 547

Pap.

X 3 A 548 X 3 A 549 X 3 A 550 X 3 A 551 X 3 A 552 X 3 A 553 X 3 A 554 X 3 A 555 X 3 A 556 X 3 A 557 X 3 A 558 X 3 A 559 X 3 A 560 X 3 A 561 X 3 A 562 X 3 A 563 X 3 A 564 X 3 A 565 X 3 A 566 X 3 A 567 X 3 A 568 X 3 A 569 X 3 A 570 X 3 A 571 X 3 A 572 X 3 A 573 X 3 A 574 X 3 A 575 X 3 A 576

KJN NB21:105.a NB21:105.b NB21:106 NB21:107 NB21:108 NB21:109 NB21:110 NB21:110.a NB21:110.b NB21:111 NB21:112 NB21:113 NB21:113.a NB21:114 NB21:114.a NB21:115 NB21:116 NB21:117 NB21:118 NB21:118.a NB21:119 NB21:120 NB21:121 NB21:121.b NB21:121.a NB21:122 NB21:123 NB21:124 NB21:124.a NB21:125 NB21:125.a NB21:125.b NB21:126 NB21:127 NB21:128 NB21:129 NB21:130 NB21:130.a NB21:131 NB21:132 NB21:132.a

868 X 3 A 577 X 3 A 578 X 3 A 579 X 3 A 580 X 3 A 581 X 3 A 582 X 3 A 583 X 3 A 584 X 3 A 585 X 3 A 586 X 3 A 587 X 3 A 588 X 3 A 589 X 3 A 590 X 3 A 591 X 3 A 592 X 3 A 593 X 3 A 594 X 3 A 595 X 3 A 596 X 3 A 597 X 3 A 598 X 3 A 599 X 3 A 600 X 3 A 601 X 3 A 602 X 3 A 603 X 3 A 604 X 3 A 605 X 3 A 606 X 3 A 607 X 3 A 608 X 3 A 609 X 3 A 610 X 3 A 611 X 3 A 612 X 3 A 613 X 3 A 614 X 3 A 615 X 3 A 616 X 3 A 617 X 3 A 618

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NB21:133 NB21:134 NB21:135 NB21:136 NB21:137 NB21:138 NB21:139 NB21:139.a NB21:139.b NB21:140 NB21:141 NB21:141.a NB21:142 NB21:143 NB21:144 NB21:145 NB21:146 NB21:147 NB21:148 NB21:149 NB21:150 NB21:151 NB21:151.a NB21:152 NB21:153 NB21:153.a NB21:154 NB21:155 NB21:156 NB21:157 NB21:158 NB21:159 NB21:160 NB21:161 NB21:162 NB21:163 NB21:164 NB22:1 NB22:3 NB22:2 NB22:4 NB22:5 NB22:6 NB22:7 NB22:7.a NB22:8 NB22:8.a NB22:8.b NB22:8.c NB22:8.d

X 3 A 619 X 3 A 620 X 3 A 621 X 3 A 622 X 3 A 623 X 3 A 624 X 3 A 625 X 3 A 626 X 3 A 627 X 3 A 628 X 3 A 629 X 3 A 630 X 3 A 631 X 3 A 632 X 3 A 633 X 3 A 634 X 3 A 635 X 3 A 636 X 3 A 637 X 3 A 638 X 3 A 639 X 3 A 640 X 3 A 641 X 3 A 642 X 3 A 643 X 3 A 644 X 3 A 645 X 3 A 646 X 3 A 647 X 3 A 648 X 3 A 649 X 3 A 650 X 3 A 651 X 3 A 652 X 3 A 653 X 3 A 654 X 3 A 655 X 3 A 656 X 3 A 657 X 3 A 658 X 3 A 659 X 3 A 660 X 3 A 661 X 3 A 662 X 3 A 663

NB22:8.e NB22:9 NB22:10 NB22:11 NB22:11.a NB22:12 NB22:13 NB22:13.a NB22:13.b NB22:14 NB22:15 NB22:16 NB22:17 NB22:18 NB22:19 NB22:20 NB22:21 NB22:22 NB22:22.a NB22:23 NB22:23.a NB22:23.b NB22:24 NB22:25 NB22:26 NB22:27 NB22:28 NB22:29 NB22:30 NB22:31 NB22:31.a NB22:32 NB22:33 NB22:34 NB22:35 NB22:36 NB22:37 NB22:38 NB22:39 NB22:40 NB22:41 NB22:42 NB22:42.a NB22:43 NB22:44 NB22:45 NB22:46 NB22:46.a NB22:47 NB22:48

AND

X 3 A 664 X 3 A 665 X 3 A 666 X 3 A 667 X 3 A 668 X 3 A 669 X 3 A 670 X 3 A 671 X 3 A 672 X 3 A 673 X 3 A 674 X 3 A 675 X 3 A 676 X 3 A 677 X 3 A 678

X 3 A 679 X 3 A 680 X 3 A 681 X 3 A 682 X 3 A 683 X 3 A 684 X 3 A 685 X 3 A 686 X 3 A 687 X 3 A 688 X 3 A 689 X 3 A 690 X 3 A 691 X 3 A 692 X 3 A 693 X 3 A 694 X 3 A 695 X 3 A 696 X 3 A 697 X 3 A 698 X 3 A 699 X 3 A 700 X 3 A 701 X 3 A 702

N OTEBOOKS NB22:49 NB22:50 NB22:51 NB22:52 NB22:53 NB22:54 NB22:54.a NB22:55 NB22:56 NB22:57 NB22:58 NB22:59 NB22:60 NB22:61 NB22:61.a NB22:62 NB22:63 NB22:63.a NB22:63.b NB22:63.c NB22:63.d NB22:63.e NB22:64 NB22:65 NB22:65.a NB22:66 NB22:66.a NB22:66.b NB22:67 NB22:68 NB22:69 NB22:70 NB22:70.a NB22:71 NB22:72 NB22:73 NB22:74 NB22:75 NB22:76 NB22:77 NB22:78 NB22:79 NB22:80 NB22:81 NB22:82 NB22:83 NB22:84 NB22:85 NB22:85.a NB22:86

X 3 A 703 NB22:87 X 3 A 704 NB22:88 NB22:88.a X 3 A 705 NB22:89 X 3 A 706 NB22:90 X 3 A 707 NB22:90.b X 3 A 708 NB22:90.a X 3 A 709 NB22:90.c X 3 A 710 NB22:90.d X 3 A 711 NB22:90.e X 3 A 712 NB22:91 NB22:91.b X 3 A 713 NB22:91.a X 3 A 714 NB22:92 X 3 A 715 NB22:93 X 3 A 716 NB22:94 X 3 A 717 NB22:95 X 3 A 718 NB22:96 X 3 A 719 NB22:97 X 3 A 720 NB22:98 X 3 A 721 NB22:99 X 3 A 722 NB22:100 X 3 A 723 NB22:101 X 3 A 724 NB22:102 X 3 A 725 NB22:103 X 3 A 726 NB22:104 X 3 A 727 NB22:105 X 3 A 728 NB22:106 NB22:106.a X 3 A 729 NB22:107 X 3 A 730 NB22:108 X 3 A 731 NB22:109 X 3 A 732 NB22:110 X 3 A 733 NB22:111 X 3 A 734 NB22:112 X 3 A 735 NB22:113 X 3 A 736 NB22:114 X 3 A 737 NB22:115 X 3 A 738 NB22:116 X 3 A 739 NB22:117 X 3 A 740 NB22:118 X 3 A 741 NB22:119 X 3 A 742 NB22:120 X 3 A 743 NB22:121 X 3 A 744 NB22:122 X 3 A 745 NB22:123 X 3 A 746 NB22:124 X 3 A 747 NB22:125 X 3 A 748 NB22:126 X 3 A 749 NB22:127

CONCORDANCE X 3 A 750 NB22:128 NB22:128.a X 3 A 751 NB22:129 X 3 A 752 NB22:130 X 3 A 753 NB22:131 X 3 A 754 NB22:132 X 3 A 755 NB22:133 X 3 A 756 NB22:134 X 3 A 757 NB22:135 X 3 A 758 NB22:136 X 3 A 759 NB22:137 X 3 A 760 NB22:138 X 3 A 761 NB22:138.a X 3 A 762 NB22:139 X 3 A 763 NB22:140 X 3 A 764 NB22:141 X 3 A 765 NB22:142 X 3 A 766 NB22:143 X 3 A 767 NB22:144 X 3 A 768 NB22:145 NB22:145.a X 3 A 769 NB22:146 NB22:146.a NB22:146.c NB22:146.e X 3 A 770 NB22:146.b X 3 A 771 NB22:146.d NB22:146.d.a X 3 A 772 NB22:147 X 3 A 773 NB22:148 X 3 A 774 NB22:149 X 3 A 775 NB22:150 X 3 A 776 NB22:151 X 3 A 777 NB22:152 X 3 A 778 NB22:153 X 3 A 779 NB22:154 X 3 A 780 NB22:155 X 3 A 781 NB22:156 X 3 A 782 NB22:157 X 3 A 783 NB22:158 X 3 A 784 NB22:159 X 3 A 785 NB22:160 X 3 A 786 NB22:161 X 3 A 787 NB22:162 X 3 A 788 NB22:163 X 3 A 789 NB22:164 X 3 A 790 NB22:165 X 3 A 791 NB22:166 X 3 A 792 NB22:167 X 3 A 793 NB22:168

X 3 A 794 NB22:169 X 3 A 795 NB22:169.a NB22:169.a.a X 3 A 796 NB22:170 X 3 A 797 NB22:171 X 3 A 798 NB22:172 X 3 A 799 NB22:173 X 3 A 800 NB22:173.a X4A1 NB23:1 X4A2 NB23:3 X4A3 NB23:2 X4A4 NB23:4 X4A5 NB23:5 X4A6 NB23:6 NB23:6.a X4A7 NB23:7 X4A8 NB23:8 X4A9 NB23:9 X 4 A 10 NB23:10 X 4 A 11 NB23:11 X 4 A 12 NB23:12 X 4 A 13 NB23:13 X 4 A 14 NB23:14 X 4 A 15 NB23:15 X 4 A 16 NB23:16 X 4 A 17 NB23:17 X 4 A 18 NB23:18 X 4 A 19 NB23:19 X 4 A 20 NB23:20 X 4 A 21 NB23:21 NB23:21.a X 4 A 22 NB23:22 NB23:22.a NB23:22.b NB23:22.c X 4 A 23 NB23:23 X 4 A 24 NB23:24 X 4 A 25 NB23:25 X 4 A 26 NB23:26 X 4 A 27 NB23:27 X 4 A 28 NB23:28 X 4 A 29 NB23:29 X 4 A 30 NB23:30 NB23:30.a X 4 A 31 NB23:31 X 4 A 32 NB23:32 X 4 A 33 NB23:33 NB23:33.a NB23:33.b NB23:33.c

X 4 A 34 X 4 A 35 X 4 A 36 X 4 A 37 X 4 A 38 X 4 A 39 X 4 A 40 X 4 A 41 X 4 A 42 X 4 A 43 X 4 A 44 X 4 A 45 X 4 A 46 X 4 A 47 X 4 A 48 X 4 A 49 X 4 A 50 X 4 A 51 X 4 A 52 X 4 A 53

X 4 A 54 X 4 A 55 X 4 A 56 X 4 A 57 X 4 A 58 X 4 A 59 X 4 A 60 X 4 A 61 X 4 A 62 X 4 A 63 X 4 A 64 X 4 A 65 X 4 A 66

869 NB23:33.d NB23:33.e NB23:33.f NB23:33.g NB23:34 NB23:35 NB23:36 NB23:36.a NB23:37 NB23:38 NB23:39 NB23:39.a NB23:40 NB23:41 NB23:42 NB23:43 NB23:44 NB23:45 NB23:46 NB23:47 NB23:48 NB23:49 NB23:50 NB23:51 NB23:51.a NB23:51.b NB23:51.c NB23:51.d NB23:51.e NB23:51.f NB23:51.g NB23:51.h NB23:51.i NB23:51.j NB23:51.j.a NB23:51.j.b NB23:52 NB23:53 NB23:54 NB23:55 NB23:56 NB23:57 NB23:58 NB23:59 NB23:60 NB23:61 NB23:62 NB23:63 NB23:64 NB23:64.a

X 4 A 67 X 4 A 68 X 4 A 69

X 4 A 70 X 4 A 71 X 4 A 72 X 4 A 73 X 4 A 74 X 4 A 75 X 4 A 76 X 4 A 77 X 4 A 78 X 4 A 79 X 4 A 80 X 4 A 81 X 4 A 82 X 4 A 83 X 4 A 84 X 4 A 85 X 4 A 86 X 4 A 87 X 4 A 88 X 4 A 89 X 4 A 90 X 4 A 91 X 4 A 92 X 4 A 93 X 4 A 94 X 4 A 95 X 4 A 96 X 4 A 97 X 4 A 98 X 4 A 99 X 4 A 100 X 4 A 101 X 4 A 102 X 4 A 103 X 4 A 104 X 4 A 105 X 4 A 106 X 4 A 107 X 4 A 108

NB23:64.b NB23:65 NB23:66 NB23:67 NB23:67.a NB23:67.b NB23:67.c NB23:68 NB23:69 NB23:70 NB23:71 NB23:72 NB23:73 NB23:74 NB23:75 NB23:76 NB23:77 NB23:78 NB23:79 NB23:80 NB23:81 NB23:81.a NB23:82 NB23:83 NB23:83.a NB23:84 NB23:84.a NB23:85 NB23:86 NB23:87 NB23:88 NB23:88.a NB23:89 NB23:90 NB23:91 NB23:92 NB23:93 NB23:94 NB23:95 NB23:96 NB23:97 NB23:98 NB23:99 NB23:100 NB23:101 NB23:102 NB23:103 NB23:104 NB23:105 NB23:106

870 X 4 A 109 X 4 A 110 X 4 A 111 X 4 A 112 X 4 A 113 X 4 A 114 X 4 A 115 X 4 A 116 X 4 A 117 X 4 A 118 X 4 A 119 X 4 A 120 X 4 A 121 X 4 A 122 X 4 A 123 X 4 A 124 X 4 A 125 X 4 A 126 X 4 A 127 X 4 A 128 X 4 A 129 X 4 A 130 X 4 A 131 X 4 A 132 X 4 A 133 X 4 A 134 X 4 A 135 X 4 A 136 X 4 A 137 X 4 A 138 X 4 A 139 X 4 A 140 X 4 A 141 X 4 A 142 X 4 A 143 X 4 A 144 X 4 A 145 X 4 A 146 X 4 A 147 X 4 A 148 X 4 A 149 X 4 A 150 X 4 A 151 X 4 A 152 X 4 A 153

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NB23:106.a NB23:107 NB23:108 NB23:109 NB23:110 NB23:111 NB23:112 NB23:113 NB23:114 NB23:115 NB23:116 NB23:116.a NB23:116.b NB23:116.c NB23:117 NB23:118 NB23:119 NB23:120 NB23:121 NB23:122 NB23:123 NB23:124 NB23:125 NB23:126 NB23:126.a NB23:126.b NB23:127 NB23:128 NB23:129 NB23:130 NB23:131 NB23:132 NB23:133 NB23:134 NB23:135 NB23:135.a NB23:136 NB23:137 NB23:138 NB23:139 NB23:140 NB23:141 NB23:142 NB23:143 NB23:144 NB23:145 NB23:146 NB23:147 NB23:148 NB23:149

X 4 A 154 NB23:150 X 4 A 155 NB23:151 NB23:151.a X 4 A 156 NB23:152 X 4 A 157 NB23:153 X 4 A 158 NB23:154 X 4 A 159 NB23:155 X 4 A 160 NB23:156 X 4 A 161 NB23:157 X 4 A 162 NB23:158 X 4 A 163 NB23:159 X 4 A 164 NB23:160 X 4 A 165 NB23:161 X 4 A 166 NB23:162 X 4 A 167 NB23:163 X 4 A 168 NB23:163.a X 4 A 169 NB23:164 X 4 A 170 NB23:165 X 4 A 171 NB23:166 X 4 A 172 NB23:167 NB23:167.a X 4 A 173 NB23:168 NB23:168.a X 4 A 174 NB23:169 X 4 A 175 NB23:170 X 4 A 176 NB23:171 NB23:171.a X 4 A 177 NB23:172 X 4 A 178 NB23:173 X 4 A 179 NB23:174 X 4 A 180 NB23:175 X 4 A 181 NB23:176 X 4 A 182 NB23:177 X 4 A 183 NB23:178 X 4 A 184 NB23:179 NB23:180.a X 4 A 185 NB23:180 X 4 A 186 NB23:180.b X 4 A 187 NB23:181 NB23:181.a X 4 A 188 NB23:182 NB23:182.a X 4 A 189 NB23:183 X 4 A 190 NB23:184 X 4 A 191 NB23:185 X 4 A 192 NB23:186 X 4 A 193 NB23:187 X 4 A 194 NB23:188 X 4 A 195 NB23:189 X 4 A 196 NB23:190

AND

X 4 A 197 X 4 A 198 X 4 A 199 X 4 A 200 X 4 A 201 X 4 A 202 X 4 A 203 X 4 A 204 X 4 A 205 X 4 A 206 X 4 A 207 X 4 A 208 X 4 A 209 X 4 A 210 X 4 A 211 X 4 A 212 X 4 A 213 X 4 A 214 X 4 A 215 X 4 A 216 X 4 A 217 X 4 A 218 X 4 A 219 X 4 A 220 X 4 A 221 X 4 A 222 X 4 A 223 X 4 A 224 X 4 A 225 X 4 A 226 X 4 A 227 X 4 A 228 X 4 A 229 X 4 A 230 X 4 A 231 X 4 A 232 X 4 A 233 X 4 A 234 X 4 A 235 X 4 A 236 X 4 A 237 X 4 A 238 X 4 A 239 X 4 A 240 X 4 A 241 X 4 A 242 X 4 A 243 X 4 A 244

N OTEBOOKS NB23:191 NB23:191.a NB23:192 NB23:193 NB23:193.a NB23:194 NB23:195 NB23:196 NB23:197 NB23:198 NB23:198.a NB23:199 NB23:200 NB23:201 NB23:202 NB23:203 NB23:204 NB23:205 NB23:206 NB23:207 NB23:207.a NB23:207.b NB23:208 NB23:209 NB23:210 NB23:211 NB23:212 NB23:213 NB23:214 NB23:214.a NB23:215 NB23:216 NB23:217 NB23:218 NB23:219 NB23:220 NB23:221 NB23:222 NB23:223 NB23:224 NB23:225 NB23:226 NB23:227 NB23:228 NB23:229.a NB24:1 NB24:3 NB24:2 NB24:4 NB24:5

X 4 A 245 NB24:6 NB24:6.a X 4 A 246 NB24:7 X 4 A 247 NB24:8 X 4 A 248 NB24:9 X 4 A 249 NB24:10 X 4 A 250 NB24:11 X 4 A 251 NB24:12 X 4 A 252 NB24:13 X 4 A 253 NB24:13.a X 4 A 254 NB24:14 X 4 A 255 NB24:15 X 4 A 256 NB24:16 X 4 A 257 NB24:17 X 4 A 258 NB24:18 X 4 A 259 NB24:19 X 4 A 260 NB24:20 X 4 A 261 NB24:21 X 4 A 262 NB24:22 X 4 A 263 NB24:23 X 4 A 264 NB24:24 X 4 A 265 NB24:25 X 4 A 266 NB24:26 X 4 A 267 NB24:27 X 4 A 268 NB24:28 X 4 A 269 NB24:29 NB24:29.a X 4 A 270 NB24:30 NB24:30.b NB24:30.c X 4 A 271 NB24:30.a X 4 A 272 NB24:30.d X 4 A 273 NB24:31 X 4 A 274 NB24:31.a X 4 A 275 NB24:31.b X 4 A 276 NB24:32 X 4 A 277 NB24:33 X 4 A 278 NB24:34 X 4 A 279 NB24:35 X 4 A 280 NB24:36 X 4 A 281 NB24:37 X 4 A 282 NB24:38 X 4 A 283 NB24:39 NB24:39.a X 4 A 284 NB24:39.b X 4 A 285 NB24:40 X 4 A 286 NB24:41 X 4 A 287 NB24:42 X 4 A 288 NB24:43 X 4 A 289 NB24:44

CONCORDANCE X 4 A 290 X 4 A 291 X 4 A 292 X 4 A 293 X 4 A 294 X 4 A 296 X 4 A 297 X 4 A 298 X 4 A 299

X 4 A 300 X 4 A 301 X 4 A 302 X 4 A 303 X 4 A 304 X 4 A 305 X 4 A 306 X 4 A 307 X 4 A 308 X 4 A 309 X 4 A 310 X 4 A 311 X 4 A 312 X 4 A 313 X 4 A 314 X 4 A 315 X 4 A 316 X 4 A 317 X 4 A 318 X 4 A 319 X 4 A 320 X 4 A 321 X 4 A 322 X 4 A 323 X 4 A 324 X 4 A 325 X 4 A 326 X 4 A 327 X 4 A 328 X 4 A 329 X 4 A 330

NB24:45 NB24:46 NB24:47 NB24:48 NB24:49 NB24:50.a NB24:51 NB24:51.a NB24:51.b NB24:52 NB24:53 NB24:54 NB24:54.d NB24:54.e NB24:54.f NB24:54.h NB24:54.a NB24:54.b NB24:54.c NB24:54.g NB24:55 NB24:56 NB24:57 NB24:58 NB24:59 NB24:60 NB24:61 NB24:62 NB24:63 NB24:64 NB24:65 NB24:66 NB24:67 NB24:68 NB24:69 NB24:69.a NB24:70 NB24:71 NB24:72 NB24:73 NB24:74 NB24:74.a NB24:75 NB24:76 NB24:76.a NB24:77 NB24:78 NB24:79 NB24:80 NB24:81

X 4 A 331 X 4 A 332 X 4 A 333 X 4 A 334 X 4 A 335 X 4 A 336 X 4 A 337 X 4 A 338 X 4 A 339 X 4 A 340 X 4 A 341 X 4 A 342 X 4 A 343 X 4 A 344 X 4 A 345 X 4 A 346 X 4 A 347 X 4 A 348 X 4 A 349 X 4 A 350 X 4 A 351 X 4 A 352 X 4 A 353 X 4 A 354 X 4 A 355 X 4 A 356 X 4 A 357 X 4 A 358 X 4 A 359 X 4 A 360 X 4 A 361 X 4 A 362 X 4 A 363 X 4 A 364 X 4 A 365 X 4 A 366 X 4 A 367 X 4 A 368 X 4 A 369 X 4 A 370 X 4 A 371 X 4 A 372 X 4 A 373 X 4 A 374 X 4 A 375

NB24:82 NB24:83 NB24:84 NB24:85 NB24:86 NB24:87 NB24:88 NB24:89 NB24:89.a NB24:89.b NB24:90 NB24:90.a NB24:91 NB24:92 NB24:93 NB24:94 NB24:95 NB24:96 NB24:97 NB24:98 NB24:99 NB24:100 NB24:101 NB24:102 NB24:103 NB24:104 NB24:105 NB24:106 NB24:107 NB24:108 NB24:109 NB24:109.a NB24:110 NB24:111 NB24:111.a NB24:112 NB24:113 NB24:113.a NB24:113.b NB24:114 NB24:115 NB24:116 NB24:117 NB24:118 NB24:119 NB24:120 NB24:120.a NB24:121 NB24:122 NB24:123

X 4 A 376 NB24:124 X 4 A 377 NB24:125 NB24:125.a NB24:125.b X 4 A 378 NB24:126 X 4 A 379 NB24:127 X 4 A 380 NB24:128 NB24:128.a X 4 A 381 NB24:129 X 4 A 382 NB24:130 X 4 A 383 NB24:131 NB24:131.a X 4 A 384 NB24:132 X 4 A 385 NB24:133 X 4 A 386 NB24:134 X 4 A 387 NB24:135 X 4 A 388 NB24:136 X 4 A 389 NB24:137 X 4 A 390 NB24:137.a X 4 A 391 NB24:138 X 4 A 392 NB24:139 X 4 A 393 NB24:140 X 4 A 394 NB24:141 X 4 A 395 NB24:142 X 4 A 396 NB24:143 X 4 A 397 NB24:144 X 4 A 398 NB24:145 X 4 A 399 NB24:146 X 4 A 400 NB24:147 X 4 A 401 NB24:148 X 4 A 402 NB24:149 X 4 A 403 NB24:150 X 4 A 404 NB24:151 X 4 A 405 NB24:152 X 4 A 406 NB24:153 X 4 A 407 NB24:154 X 4 A 408 NB24:155 NB24:155.a NB24:155.b NB24:155.c X 4 A 409 NB24:156 NB24:156.a X 4 A 410 NB24:157 NB24:157.a NB24:157.b X 4 A 411 NB24:158 X 4 A 412 NB24:159 NB24:159.a X 4 A 413 NB24:160 X 4 A 414 NB24:161

871

X 4 A 415 X 4 A 416 X 4 A 417 X 4 A 418 X 4 A 419 X 4 A 420 X 4 A 421 X 4 A 422 X 4 A 423 X 4 A 424 X 4 A 425 X 4 A 426 X 4 A 427 X 4 A 428 X 4 A 429 X 4 A 430 X 4 A 431 X 4 A 432 X 4 A 433 X 4 A 434

X 4 A 435 X 4 A 436 X 4 A 437 X 4 A 438 X 4 A 439 X 4 A 440 X 4 A 441 X 4 A 442 X 4 A 443 X 4 A 444 X 4 A 445 X 4 A 446 X 4 A 447 X 4 A 448 X 4 A 449 X 4 A 450 X 4 A 451 X 4 A 452 X 4 A 453

NB24:161.a NB24:162 NB24:163 NB24:164 NB24:165 NB24:166 NB24:167 NB24:168 NB24:169 NB25:1 NB25:3 NB25:2 NB25:4 NB25:5 NB25:5.a NB25:6 NB25:7 NB25:8 NB25:9 NB25:10 NB25:11 NB25:11.a NB25:12 NB25:12.a NB25:12.b NB25:12.c NB25:12.d NB25:13 NB25:13.a NB25:13.a.a NB25:14 NB25:15 NB25:15.a NB25:16 NB25:17 NB25:18 NB25:18.a NB25:19 NB25:20 NB25:20.a NB25:21 NB25:22 NB25:23 NB25:24 NB25:25 NB25:26 NB25:27 NB25:28 NB25:29 NB25:29.a

872 X 4 A 454 X 4 A 455 X 4 A 456 X 4 A 457 X 4 A 458 X 4 A 459 X 4 A 460 X 4 A 461 X 4 A 462 X 4 A 463 X 4 A 464 X 4 A 465 X 4 A 466 X 4 A 467 X 4 A 468 X 4 A 469 X 4 A 470 X 4 A 471 X 4 A 472 X 4 A 473 X 4 A 474 X 4 A 475 X 4 A 476 X 4 A 477 X 4 A 478 X 4 A 479 X 4 A 480 X 4 A 481 X 4 A 482 X 4 A 483 X 4 A 484 X 4 A 485 X 4 A 486 X 4 A 487

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NB25:30 NB25:31 NB25:32 NB25:33 NB25:34 NB25:34.a NB25:35 NB25:36 NB25:37 NB25:38 NB25:39 NB25:40 NB25:41 NB25:42 NB25:43 NB25:44 NB25:45 NB25:46 NB25:47 NB25:48 NB25:49 NB25:50 NB25:50.a NB25:51 NB25:52 NB25:53 NB25:54 NB25:55 NB25:56 NB25:57 NB25:58 NB25:59 NB25:60 NB25:61 NB25:62 NB25:63

X 4 A 488 NB25:64 NB25:64.a NB25:64.b X 4 A 489 NB25:65 X 4 A 490 NB25:66 X 4 A 491 NB25:67 X 4 A 492 NB25:67.a X 4 A 493 NB25:68 X 4 A 494 NB25:68.a X 4 A 495 NB25:69 X 4 A 496 NB25:69.a X 4 A 497 NB25:70 X 4 A 498 NB25:71 X 4 A 499 NB25:72 NB25:72.a X 4 A 500 NB25:73 X 4 A 501 NB25:74 X 4 A 502 NB25:75 X 4 A 503 NB25:76 X 4 A 504 NB25:77 X 4 A 505 NB25:78 X 4 A 506 NB25:79 X 4 A 507 NB25:80 X 4 A 508 NB25:81 X 4 A 509 NB25:82 NB25:82.a X 4 A 510 NB25:83 NB25:83.a NB25:83.b NB25:83.c NB25:83.d NB25:83.e NB25:83.f X 4 A 511 NB25:84 X 4 A 512 NB25:84.a X 4 A 513 NB25:84.b

AND

X 4 A 514 X 4 A 515 X 4 A 516 X 4 A 517 X 4 A 518 X 4 A 519 X 4 A 520 X 4 A 521 X 4 A 522 X 4 A 523 X 4 A 524 X 4 A 525 X 4 A 526 X 4 A 527 X 4 A 528 X 4 A 529 X 4 A 530 X 4 A 531 X 4 A 532 X 4 A 533 X 4 A 534 X 4 A 535 X 4 A 536 X 4 A 537 X 4 A 538 X 4 A 539 X 4 A 540 X 4 A 541 X 4 A 542 X 4 A 543 X 4 A 544 X 4 A 545 X 5 A 166

N OTEBOOKS NB25:85 NB25:86 NB25:87 NB25:88 NB25:89 NB25:90 NB25:91 NB25:92 NB25:93 NB25:94 NB25:95 NB25:96 NB25:97 NB25:97.b NB25:97.b.a NB25:97.a NB25:98 NB25:98.a NB25:99 NB25:100 NB25:101 NB25:102 NB25:103 NB25:104 NB25:105 NB25:106 NB25:107 NB25:108 NB25:109 NB25:110 NB25:111 NB25:112 NB25:113 NB25:114 NB24:170 NB24:170.a