Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks, Volume 7: Journals NB15-NB20 [Course Book ed.] 9781400848218

Citation preview

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS

B RUCE H. KIRMMSE GE NERAL EDITOR

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS VOLUME 7 Journals NB15–20

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

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, Joel D. S. Rasmussen, Vanessa Rumble, and K. Brian Söderquist in cooperation with the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, Copenhagen Volume 7, Journals NB15–NB20 Originally published under the titles Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: 23 Journalerne NB15–NB20 and Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: K23 Kommentarer til Journalerne NB15–NB20 © 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 © 2014 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: 978-0-691-16029-0 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 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Journal NB 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii 1 95

Journal NB 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Journal NB 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

165

Journal NB 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Journal NB 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

333

Notes for Journal NB 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

499

Notes for Journal NB 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

571

Notes for Journal NB 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

613

Notes for Journal NB 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

653

Notes for Journal NB 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

701

Notes for Journal NB 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

741

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

789

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

797

Maps

Calendar

255 395

801

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 [Let- ters and Documents Concerning Søren Kierkegaard], 2 vols., ed. Niels Thulstrup (Copenhagen: Munks- gaard, 1953–1954)

H. P. Barfod, “Fortegnelse over de efter Søren Aabye B-cat. Kierkegaard forefundne Papirer” [Catalogue of the Papers Found after the Death of Søren Aabye Kierke- gaard] 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, Pub- lished 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. Ras- mussen, 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: “Armed Neutrality” in KW 22 AN BA The Book on Adler in KW 24 C The Crisis and a Crisis in the Life of an Actress in KW 17 CA The Concept of Anxiety in KW 8 CD Christian Discourses in KW 17 CI The Concept of Irony in KW 2 COR The “Corsair” Affair; Articles Related to the Writings in KW 13 CUP Concluding Unscientific Postscript in KW 12

I NTRODUCTION



TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

EO 1 Either/Or, part 1 in KW 3 EO 2 Either/Or, part 2 in KW 4 Early Polemical Writings: From the Papers of EPW 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 Fear and Trembling in KW 6 FT JC “Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubi- tandum est” in KW 7 Judge for Yourself! in KW 21 JFY LD Letters and Documents in KW 25 “The Moment” and Late Writings: Articles M 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 “Newspaper Articles, 1854–1855” in KW 23 NA 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 Philosophical Fragments in KW 7 PF PV The Point of View for My Work as an Author in KW 22 R Repetition in KW 6 Stages on Life’s Way in KW 11 SLW 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 Ethical Religious Essays; Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays; An Upbuilding Discourse; Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays in KW 18 WL Works of Love in KW 16 WS “Writing Sampler” in KW 9

xvii

xviii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NKS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

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)

Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter [Søren Kierkegaard’s WriSKS tings], 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 com mentary 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 Søren Kierkegaards Samlede Værker [Søren Kierke- gaard’s Collected Works], 1st ed., 14 vols., ed. A. B. Drachmann, J. L. Heiberg, and H. O. Lange (Copen- hagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag, 1901–1906) SV2 Søren Kierkegaards Samlede Værker [Søren Kierke- gaard’s Collected Works], 2nd ed., 15 vols., ed. A. B. Drachmann, J. L. Heiberg, and H. O. Lange (Copen hagen: 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 Genesis Ex Exodus Lev Leviticus Num Numbers Deut Deuteronomy Josh Joshua Judg Judges Ruth Ruth 1 Samuel 1 Sam 2 Sam 2 Samuel 1 Kings 1 Kings 2 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chr 1 Chronicles 2 Chr 2 Chronicles Ezra Ezra Neh Nehemiah Esth Esther Job Job Ps Psalms Prov Proverbs

Eccl Ecclesiastes Song Song of Solomon Isa Isaiah Jer Jeremiah Lam Lamentations Ezek Ezekiel Dan Daniel Hos Hosea Joel Joel Am Amos Ob Obadiah Jon Jonah Mic Micah Nah Nahum Hab Habakkuk Zeph Zephaniah Hag Haggai Zech Zechariah Mal Malachi

xix

xx

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Apocryphal Books Tob Tobit Jdt Judith Add Esth Additions to Esther Wis Wisdom Sir Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) Bar Baruch 1 Esd 1 Esdras 2 Esd 2 Esdras Let Jer Letter of Jeremiah Song 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 Matthew Mk Mark Lk Luke Jn John Acts Acts of the Apostles Rom Romans 1 Cor 1 Corinthians 2 Cor 2 Corinthians Gal Galatians Eph Ephesians Phil Philippians Col Colossians 1 Thes 1 Thessalonians 2 Thes 2 Thessalonians

1 Tim 1 Timothy 2 Tim 2 Timothy Titus Titus Philem Philemon Heb Hebrews Jas James 1 Pet 1 Peter 2 Peter 2 Pet 1 Jn 1 John 2 Jn 2 John 3 Jn 3 John Jude Jude Rev 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

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

first written: 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 NB15

JOURNAL NB15 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Text source Journal NB15 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Finn Gredal Jensen, Kim Ravn, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 1

7

1

•

1850

NB15. January 6th, 1850

3

4

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 2

•

1850

8

Concerning the Title: A Contribution to the Introduction of Christianity into Christendom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning the Article against P. L. Møller by Frater Taciturnus . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning a Remark by Anti-Climacus Somewhere in Practice in Christianity, no. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On My “Heterogeneity” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the Two Pages That Are to Be Printed on a Half Page Preceding “The Accounting” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning the Publication of a Couple of the Writings about Myself or My Work as an Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two Slips of Paper That Are Together with “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Significance of My Work as an Author to Me as My Upbringing in Christianity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Misfortune in These Times, Why I Am Not Understood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the Publication of “The Accounting” and “Three Notes” Now . . . . . . . . .

2

p. 15. p. 39. p. 45. p. 53.

5

p. 62. p. 64.

10

p. 84. p. 94. p. 167. p. 179.

15

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 3–4

•

1850

5

9

3

Concerning Texts for Friday Sermons, see the new page at the beginning of Journal NB14.

4

The Possibility of Offense and “the Single Individual” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Difference between “Crowd,” “Public”—[and] “Community” . . . . . . . . . . . . Dialectic Oriented toward Becoming a Xn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Faith—and the Proof . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “Christendom” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rom 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5

p. p. p. p. p. p.

75. 77. 106. 175. 184. 219.

Journal NB15 inside of the front cover and the first page, containing entries NB15:2, 3, and 4. With the first of these entries, NB15:2, Kierkegaard inserted a symbol indicating emphasis of the final line.

8

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 5–7

•

1850 12

Theme for a Sermon:

5

The Proclamation of the Word here based on that hymn verse in the old hymn (O great God, we praise thee)

5

The prophets announced him, The apostles proclaimed him, And the host of martyrs praised you Solemnly in the hour of death. a

in our time it is certainly just as ridiculous to sing something of this sort, as it is for the watchman to cry at 8 p.m. on a winter evening that now darkness blinds the earth and the day diminishes.

1

5

a

10

certainly also noting that the host of martyrs exists in the present tense and is something not yet concluded so that something new can come, while on the other handa

a

it is in the sermon on Stephen

This is the true preaching; this is what it means to witness; Sunday chatter does not mean much. Incidentally, the fact that this verse says [“]announced him[”] and [“]proclaimed him[”] is prob. accidental, but it is something that could be made use of: It is only with respect to the host of martyrs that Xt himself is present, so that it says: it [“]praised you[“].a

10

15



Proportions.

6

Luther rightly says that there rlly ought not be preaching in churches;a it is an accommodation to the sort of worship that exists for the sake of our weakness―alas, and we are so far behind that scarcely very many go to church―and nonetheless this is Christendom.

20

Orthodox people, like the Grundtvigians, who are fatuous enough to believe that they are the only true Xns―when they take action in life, their actions are

7

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 7–8

13 5

10

in complete conformity with worldliness. They are also worshipers of voting and the majority, etc. And inasmuch as the modern political movement per abusum contains elements of religiosity, they find it to be splendid, almost making common cause with worldliness―rather, under such circumstances, they ought to be exceedingly zealous to ensure [their] difference. But these orthodox Christians―if you will―are as far as possible from being dedicated to the Christian principle: that to serve the truth is to suffer. They are imperious and seek power fully as much as any other political party.

15

8

20

25

30

35

40

As has happened in the course of history―in which there have been entire eras when by means of sheer imagination people have become lost in Christian objectivity and have entirely forgotten themselves, while they cleverly elaborated the doctrine, produced artistic depictions of Xt and the like―this is still the case with most of those who have at least some relationship to Xnty. They do not notice that the real difficulties only begin when all this objectivity is to be transposed existentially into the life of the single individual. For safety’s sake they continue to shout that the objective is what is highest, that the subjective is something imperfect. And yet, the whole of Xnty is subjectivity. Xnty is no doctrine, it is a doctrine existentially transposed into one single hum. being, into the God-Man. But when will we gain control over this confusion from which hum. beings are not eager to remove themselves, for they are not eager to turn to existential tasks, to genuine self-denial, to acting in Christian fashion, to having God and the Exemplar so close to their lives that it literally has solely and only to do with me, the single individual[?] And people have decked out these cowardly, worldly, effeminate evasions as the highest of 4 per abusum] Latin, improperly.

•

1850

9

10

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 8–9

•

1850

things―being subjective is nothing, indeed, it is an error. What profound cunning of evil is indeed always present in worldliness! To be objective is supposedly to be modest, humble―at least it is what is easiest. 14 5

The Grundtvigians fought like this: they maintained that the others were not Christians, and therefore they wanted them removed from their official positions. The entire concept of a State Church and the secure official positions that correspond to it is based on the illusion that we are all Christians. So the orthodox probably even wanted to make a sort of profit from the circumstance that there were so few Christians. Everything the Church owned was of course supposed to become the property of the few truly Christian priests. What worldliness in the midst of the holiness! But Grundtvig ought to be kept out of this. Incidentally, I am not aware that the party has been willing to make any sort of sacrifice. Grundtvig’s error was that he did not immediately understand the matter sufficiently deeply: that Xndom was the concept he should attack. The way he put the matter gave it the appearance that if Clausen were removed from his position, everything would be fine, then we would all be Xns, and the State Church would be a society of Christians. Only when this tactic foundered did he decide to resign his position. From the point of view of the principle, it was fortunate that the matter turned out as it did, for otherwise an absurd situation might easily have arisen in which Clausen’s removal would guarantee that the whole business was Xndom. Before long, incidentally, the question of Xnty can turn into a question of money. The syllogism will be: of course, everything the Church owns belongs only to the true Xns; we are the halfscore of people who are true Xns; ergo we take possession of the estate. The best thing to do would be to retain an attorney to plead the case―and then give oratorical assurances that this is a return to the apostolic Church. To a certain extent, this tactic would even get popular support; the popular aspect of it, of course, is that it is as unchristian as possible and as worldly as possible.

9

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 10–11 10

5

15 10

11 15

20

25

30

35

•

1850

Strictly speaking, the manner in which Peter defended himself when they wanted to remove him from his position is not Christian but legalistic. His unspoken assertion, like that of all Grundtvigians, is that they are the only true Xns―ergo they have to protest against the entire concept of Xndom and the State Church. Then the State Church says: [“]You must either do it or resign your position.[”] He replies: [“]Neither the one nor the other―if you want to dismiss me, that is your business.[”] But in doing this he indirectly recognizes the concept of the State Church and Xndom: that we are all more or less Xns. That is, he clings just as firmly to the concept of the State Church as do any of its defenders who happen to disagree with it on a particular point.

I cannot, alas, get anyone to understand me. For to understand what I say―well, that is something than can certainly be managed. But then, when all is said and done and it is to be actualized, things get confused. They are not constrained at every second, as I am, by a higher power who with inflexible rigor compels one to obey what has been understood down to the least detail and in connection with the least of things. Imagine a horse who admired a horse called “The Dancer” and who also wanted to dance―but this horse had no riding master who would use a whip and spurs and a sharp bit at every instant to force it to dance: Do you think that such a horse would learn on its own to dance that way, which seems to the horse to be cruelty? And in comparison with the other horse, the situation for this horse (which incidentally, was perhaps just as well-formed and had all the prerequisites) would be just like the situation of another person in comparison to myself: he begins to move and makes a sort of hop―and then a lot of clumsiness, and then another hop. At one instant a start is made at wanting to act in an ethical-religious manner, and almost at the same instant, he flops down into the use of impatient, finite, shabby means.―What is missing is the riding master and the whip and the spurs and the sharp bit.

11

12

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 12–13

•

1850

The system begins with “nothing”; mysticism always ends with “nothing.” The latter is the divine nothing, just as Socrates’ ignorance was fear of God―his ignorance, with which, again, he did not begin but ended, or at which he continually arrived.

12

5

16

The passage in the scriptures is spoken of so often: [“]All is revealed in the mystery,[”] and a certain speculation has maintained that it was not profane speculation, but within the mystery. In connection with Xnty I would stress another aspect of the concept of mystery: the ethical-religious. Xnty entered as a mystery; the greatest possible hum. guarantee was sought before anyone was admitted―how profane they have now made Xnty with the slipshod manner in which they simply make everyone straightway into a Xn, and allow everyone to be one! Xnty understood very well that with respect to serving the truth, what matters especially is the transformation of the individual, so that one becomes a suitable instrument of the truth. But no one gives a thought to such things in our objective and busy times. Hence this unfortunate―and, objectively quite correct―preaching of Xnty by hum. beings who rlly have no notion whatever of Xnty. And nothing, nothing has confused―indeed abolished―Xnty so much as has precisely this unchristian way in which it is preached. Certainly, Xnty has never been―indeed, it has abhorred being―a mystery in the sense of existing only for a few brilliant minds who have become its initiates. No: God has chosen the lowly and the despised―but still there was no lack of initiation. It is not an intellectual but an ethical initiation, personality’s enormous respect for inclusion in the Christian community, and this respect is not expressed in assurances and by making a fuss, but existentially, in action. Do not I, a poor wretched hum. being, experience something like this in my petty circumstances[?] Change me into some doctrinal formulas and then let every faker teach them, and let his life be a satire of what he says: Is this not meaningless[?] And in what way am I different from this? Is it not the fact that―even though I am only striving―I have transformed my individuality to serve these ideas of mine existentially[?] That is, I have had an initiation. Therefore, what little there is within me has been

13

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 13–15

5

•

1850

a power―when it is taught as a doctrine it is only a little more nonsense in addition to all the other nonsense. Therefore I never forget that with respect to Xnty, a shoemaker, a tailor, a workman is just as much a possibility as the most learned person and the most brilliant intellect. Indeed, generally, the Church must always expect its salvation from a layman, precisely because he is closer to the ethical initiation.

17

14 10

15

Prayer Father in Heaven! O, you who concern yourself with the sparrow―and not in such a way that you cruelly require that the sparrow be like yourself: No, you who lovingly concern yourself with the sparrow so that with fatherly concern you put yourself in its place―you indeed also concern yourself with a human being. And even though you require that he strive to be like you, which you cannot require of the sparrow, you do not require it of him cruelly. No, with fatherly concern you put yourself in his place, and you yourself are the one who provides the strength to strive.

20

15

25

30

35

Prayer Lord Jesus Christ! Throughout your entire life you endured suffering in order to save me also: Alas, and the time of your suffering is not yet past; for will you not also, saving and redeeming, endure this suffering―this patient suffering of concerning yourself with me―I who so often wander from the right path or who, even if I remain on the right path, stumble on it, or rather move forward so slowly, creeping. Infinite patience, the suffering of infinite patience! How many times have I not become impatient, wanting to forsake everything, give everything up, take the frightfully easy shortcut, the shortcut of despair: but you did not lose patience. Alas, what your chosen servant says―that he completed your sufferings―does not apply to me. No, what applies to me is only that I have increased your sufferings, added new sufferings to those you once suffered in order to save me also.

13

14

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 16–18

•

1850 Prayer

We hum. beings bear what is holy merely in a fragile vessel of clay. But you, O Holy Spirit, when you dwell in a hum. being, you dwell in something that is infinitely inferior: You, Spirit of Holiness, dwell with uncleanness and infection; you, Spirit of Wisdom, with foolishness; you, Spirit of Truth, with self-deception! Oh, continue to dwell [here]; and you, who do not conveniently search for the desirable dwelling that you would surely seek in vain; you, who yourself, in creating and giving rebirth, make your own dwelling place―o, continue to dwell [here], that one day you might be pleased with the dwelling place you yourself have prepared for yourself in my infected and foolish and deceitful heart.

1

[a]

This remark was found on an old slip of paper with the folder of writings.

[b]

5

But this title was not used; were it to be used, it would of course be merely poetic, and it is too much. The original title was retained. Practice in Christianity, An Attempt.

16

5

10

18

15

The title:

17

A Contribution to the Introduction of Christianity into Christendom

20

is correct with respect to categories; nothing is said of Denmark, or Germany, or Sweden, etc., nor of whether it is something present or past; no, it is the purely dialectical definition of the concepts: the relation between the two concepts: Xnty―and Xndom, with the qualification of introducing Xnty. It is spiritual fencing.

Lk 24:28 “… and it seemed as if he wanted to go further. And they constrained him and said, Stay with us, for it is almost evening and the day is almost over. And he went in to stay with them.” This is a metaphorical characterization of Xt’s relationship to the believer qua Exemplar. With one

25

18

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 18–19

5

10

single step, the Exemplar is so far ahead that the believer is annihilated. But of course the believer must still strive. Therefore the Exemplar must patiently yield a little; then despite the infinite imperfection, there is still a slight bit of progress. But then it often happens that for a moment it looks as if the Exemplar wanted to “go further,” and further in such a way that the imitator is lost―then he prays for himself: Stay with me. This is the lingering, that, for a hum. being, is a need, even though for the Exemplar it is the suffering of patience.

19

19 15

20

25

30

35

40

To become sober! From a Christian point of view, this idea is so gigantic in its simplicity that a person could almost become completely confused by it. How many people have in fact existed who―if they themselves were equipped with extraordinary abilities―have understood existentially, in their own lives, that the least bit of actual self-denial, even it were something of the greatest insignificance to daily life, is worth more than the greatest world-historical accomplishment even if, in an external sense, this [latter] reshapes an entire country or a world! How many people have in fact existed who existentially, in their own lives―if they themselves were millionaires―have understood that the widow gave more than they did when they gave 900,000 rd.! Fundamentally, it is alarming for a hum. being to consider the infinite unchangingness of spirit with which God makes this distinction―God, for whom the ethical and the ethical-religious are the only currency. One difficulty has always occurred to me in connection with the simple person. I imagine a young pers., a university student, for example; he becomes ill, cannot accomplish anything―his spirit is suffering. Then, if I were to offer consolation―and how gladly would I not do so!―then I would say: Consider that in God’s eyes your life is nonetheless absolutely as important and significant as that of someone who astonishes the world and transforms

•

1850

15

16

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 19

•

1850

it with his ideas. But look, are not a powerful brain and significant intellectual strengths required in order truly to find rest in this exaltation? So of course we are back at the same point. But I cannot let go of the idea that every hum. being, absolutely every hum. being, however simple he is, or however much he suffers, is nonetheless capable of grasping what is highest, namely, the religious. If this is not so, then Xnty is rlly nonsense. For me, it is frightful to see the recklessness with which philosophers and the like apply categories of differentiation, such as genius, talent, etc. to the religious. They have no notion that the religious is thereby abolished. I have had only one consolation, this blessed one, that I know something that can provide consolation, blessed consolation, to every hum. being, absolutely every hum. being. Take away this consolation and I do not care to live―then I have spleen. Think of what is highest, think of Xt―imagine that he had come to world in order to save some brilliant intellects, for others could not understand him. Disgusting, revolting! He would have been disgusted not by any hum. suffering, nor by anyone’s limitations―but by the company of brilliant intellects: Yes, that would have disgusted him. There has been a sympathy in my soul for the hum. being, pure and simple, especially for the suffering, the unhappy, those of limited abilities, and the like. I have learned to thank God for this sympathy as a gift of grace. God knows, I have become a victim because of this very sympathy of mine, for without it I would never have involved myself so much with the common man and would never have exposed myself to the vulgarity of the mob, which I did in sympathy for the many, many who suffered innocently in the vilest fashion.―Nonetheless, it is my continuing prayer that God will preserve in me this sympathy and increase it more and more. Here one immediately sees an example of what nonsense it is [to say] that to expose oneself to danger voluntarily is to tempt God and that one ought not ask God that one be tried in life. Am I also not permitted to pray to God that he will grant that in the truly Christian sense, in the truly Christian sense, I might love hum. beings, love my neighbor[?] I would certainly think so. But then it is eternally certain that if I am merely somewhat successful in loving my neighbor in the truly Christian sense, suffering is unavoidable (this is Xnty’s own teaching, and I have had occasion to be assured, with eternal certitude, of its truth); but in that case my prayer will of course entail that I am put in danger.

5

10

15

20

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 20–21

20

5

10

15

21 20

25

21 30

35

•

1850

The frightful thing one discovers when one stands outside of Xnty (the crucifixion of the understanding and the consequent suffering, the unavoidable consequences in relation to the surrounding world)―this frightful thing, which could have an effect so powerful that one abandoned the hope and the resolution to become a Xn― this frightful thing is something else, however, when viewed from within. In the first place, for a person in love, suffering is different from suffering for the person who stands on the outside and sees the same suffering; but a believer is more than a person in love. In addition, it becomes quite obvious to the believer that all these sufferings in relation to the world are in no way the fault of Xnty, as if it were too strict or cruel―no, they are the fault of the world because it is evil. But this is an enormous difference. If a girl were to suffer much with a man because he was severe―well, she would likely put up with it if he were the beloved. But if it is infinitely clear to her that He is Love itself, that the sufferings are not his fault, but the fault of others, of evil ppl. who hate him precisely because He is Love: then the situation is different. This is correct. What is wrong is that people have made Xnty so mild that suffering has been completely eliminated. No: Xnty is not the teaching that there is no suffering; it is the teaching that there is enormous suffering, but that this enormous suffering is nonetheless light―not so light as to mean that there is no suffering, no, light despite the fact that it is equally true that the suffering is enormous―thus enormous suffering―yet light.

Hugo of St. Victore’s commentary on the passage [“]Many are called, but few are chosen[”] is excellent. (See Helfferich, Mystik, part 2, p. 319.) The story of Ahasuerus, who disowns Queen Vashti because of her pride. Then he gives orders that young, beautiful girls are to be brought together from the whole of his kingdom. They are to be brought to the person in charge of his female personnel. Then they are to be decked out in splendid garments; next they are to be anointed with balm and myrrh for 6 months, then with other spices for 6 months. Then they are to be brought before the king

17

18

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 21–24

•

1850

so that he could choose one. “Thus were many selected in order that one might be chosen. … The king’s servants select many in order to adorn them; the king chooses only one for his chambers. In accordance with the king’s command, the first choice fell upon many; the second choice fell only upon one, in accordance with the king’s will.” The story is found in the book of Esther, chap. II.

True religiousness cannot form any party or coterie, for it is an association of people who do not desire anything, either individually or together; rather, each is willing to sacrifice and then they unite simply for that purpose, so that each animates the other to sacrifice more and more. As soon as someone wants to have something he is eo ipso out of the association.

5

22 10

15

What a sorry sight this is for me! I saw R. Nielsen’s ideal possibility―but I do not dare to tell him directly, nor would that do any good, for then it would of course become something quite different and not ideality in the strictest sense. He did not see it. I see Stilling’s possibilities; it is the same thing here. And so it is with many. I look forward with longing toward the moment when an existential ideality will appear in our relationship. Ah, and if it were something reserved only for those with superior gifts―but this sort of thing is a possibility for everyone: and that it should nevertheless be such a rarity!

Hugo of St. Victore. The little essay by him is also excellent: [“]The Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit[”] (see Helfferich, vol. 2, pp. 332ff.) The man has real value. His individual sentences are so pithy that they are almost themes. For example, “If you pray for your spirit, then you are praying for the Spirit (namely the Holy Spirit).[”] The sketch of how the Holy Spirit as a medicine saves from sickness is excellent. “Do not be afraid to use the medicine 14 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

22

23

20

25

24

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 24

5

10

15

20

23 25

30

35

40

•

1850

against the sickness. The sickness does not taint the medicine, but the medicine breaks the sickness.” If you are using the medicine, the suffering rlly stems from your not wanting to use the medicine properly and fully. “Two opposites are fighting against one another: the medicine and the sickness. The medicine for you, the sickness against you. Without resistance to the sickness, no healing; if there is no resistance to the medicine, there is no distress. The battle of the opposites is the distress under which you are suffering”―but why, then, do you also want to resist the medicine[?] “But nevertheless, accuse not the medicine but the sickness. The medicine will help, the sickness will harm. Therefore, by itself the sickness may well have peace, but not well-being; only the medicine has well-being and no distress. But when the two come together, the battle of the opposites is the distress from which the one wishes to emerge in order to help and which the other refuses to leave in order to do harm. But in this difficulty, the sickness, not the medicine is to blame.” [“]With the arrival of the Spirit you are enlightened and quickened, you who were blind and dead; quickened, so that you might perceive. One thing you see, another thing you see ahead; one thing you perceive, another thing you perceive ahead. You see the evil and you see it ahead; you see what is present at hand, what is to come you see ahead. You perceive the guilt, and you perceive the chastisement ahead. Before the arrival of the Spirit, like a blind person, you did not see, and like someone dead, you did not perceive. You did not see, because you did not look back; and you did not perceive, because you did not pay attention.―This is the source of the chastisement that heals: when, having been made empfindlich of the evil you suffer, you perceive the pain in order to amend it. If you felt no pain, you would not amend it; if you felt no fear, you would not pay attention. Therefore you are, one might say, enlightened about the guilt, so that you might see it; next, about the chastisement, so that you might fear it; so that finally, having been made empfindlich by the guilt, you might feel the pain and better yourself. If a person did not see the chastisement, which one fears, no one would feel the pain about the guilt that gives a person pleasure. Therefore, through the chastisement that follows upon guilt you are shown that the guilt in which you actually take pleasure will come to pinch and displease, so that you finally notice that even that which appears pleasant about it is evil, because the bitterness one tastes on account of it or in consequence of it is such a great evil. In this way you become enlightened and concerned, because you see what terrifies, what 28 empfindlich] German, sensitive.

19

20

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 24–25

•

1850

possesses, what gives pain.” “Every chastisement is indeed an evil, but not every chastisement is evil, for what helps and assists unto something else is a good. Through the chastisement we are freed from the chastisement, namely eternal [chastisement].” 5

Hugo of St. Victore has a correct thesis (Helfferich, Mystik, vol. 1, p. 368). “With respect to the things that surpass reason, faith is in fact not really supported by any reason, because reason does not comprehend what faith believes; but nevertheless here there is also a something through which reason becomes determined or is determined as honoring the faith that it nonetheless is incapable of grasping fully.” This is what I have explained (e.g., in Concluding Postscript): that not every absurdity is the absurd or the paradox. The activity of reason is precisely to know the paradox negatively―but no more than that. In an older journal or on a loose sheet of paper from an earlier period (when I was reading Aristotle’s Rhetoric) I have put forth the view that a Christian rhetoric ought to be introduced in place of dogmatics. It would relate to πιστις; in classical Greek πιστις is a conviction that relates to what is probable (more than δοξη, opinion). But Xnty, which always turns the concepts of natural man upside down, producing the opposite, lets πιστις relate to the improbable. Thus this concept, the improbable, the absurd, ought to be developed, for it is sheer superficiality to hold that the absurd is not a concept, that every sort of absurda is equally at home in the absurd. No, the concept of the absurd is precisely to grasp that it cannot and must not be grasped. This is a negative conceptual definition but is just as dialectical as any positive one. The absurd, the paradox, is constructed such that reason, on its own terms, is in no way capable of dissolving it into nonsense and showing that it is nonsense. No, it is a sign, a riddle, a compound riddle, of which reason must say: [“]I cannot solve it, it is not to be comprehended, but it does not at all follow from this that it is nonsense.[”] Yet it is obvious that if one utterly abolishes “faith” and lets the entire sphere disappear, then reason becomes conceited and perhaps concludes that ergo the paradox is nonsense. But how concerned people would be if, in another situation, the class of those who were knowledgeable had died out and those who 21 πιστις] Greek, belief, trust, confidence, faith, proof, evidence, production of evidence in court, persuasion. 22 δοξη] Greek, opinion, assumption. 28 absurda] Latin, absurdity.

25

10

15

20

24 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 25–26

5

10

15

•

1850

were not knowledgeable had then decided that one or another thing was nonsense―but faith is what is knowledgeable with respect to the paradox. It believes the paradox, and so―to recall those words of Hugo of St. Victore―reason can certainly be defined as honoring faith, namely insofar as reason immerses itself in the negative conceptual determinants of the paradox. In any case, it is a fundamental error to hold that there are no negative concepts. The highest principles of all thinking or the proofs of those principles are of course negative. Hum. reason has boundaries; that is where negative concepts lie. Boundary skirmishes are negative, constraining. But people have a twaddling and conceited concept of human reason, especially in our times, when one never thinks of a thinker, a reasonable hum. being, but of pure reason and the like, which do not exist at all, inasmuch as there is no one, be he a professor or whatever, who is pure reason. Pure reason is a fantasy, and this is also the seat of the fantastic boundlessness in which there are no negative concepts, but where everything is grasped, like the witch who ended by eating her own stomach.

20

26 25 25

30

35

But fundamentally all understanding depends on one’s internal attitude. If at one point a person truly has faith and confidence― regardless of whether the most unfortunate thing befalls him― well, if he truly has faith and confidence, even if it was the most disastrous of things―he is immediately capable of explaining it in various ways as a happy event: that God has let something befall a person right now, because right now he has the strength to bear it; that he ought to make use of the opportunity to get to know himself in overcoming it, etc.―If a person is despondent, depressed, melancholic, merely the most insignificant thing is enough for a person to glimpse the rule of bad luck, of fatality, in what is happening. From this one sees that a person’s entire view of life is rlly a confession of how things are within him.

21

22

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 27–29

•

1850

An obvious factor in Xt’s death was his rejection of nationality, his wanting to have nothing to do with it. Now the orthodox are the true nationalists; they produce theories about Christian states and Christian peoples. If any people qua people could claim that they had an avenue to relate themselves as such to Xnty, it would surely be God’s chosen people―and they perished and have remained as an eternal reminder that Xnty is not related to nationality. But how convenient: precisely when nationality is on the agenda, it is difficult to bring up religion―and then the orthodox become recognizable precisely by their being genuinely nationalist fanatics. Grundtvig, who has always been a hater of discipline and rigor, has also formulated a theory of how the true Xn partakes of everything―he has surely forgotten the parable about those who run the race and exercise self-control in all things. It is unbelievable for what nonsense they have exploited the story of the wedding at Cana. To be consistent, the Grundtvigians must also be offended that Xt was not married, or, indeed, that he did not marry several times. This “partaking of everything” is fundamentally conceitedness: they will not admit what others admit, that it is beyond the powers of a hum. being to be everything equally.

27

Always the same. A few years ago, the priests were busy “getting their robes turned, so that they almost looked like professorial gowns”―this was scholarly. Now they are taking off and are to sit in the parliament―a priest, that is not something to be. And this is prettied up under the highfalutin title of working for the whole―that is, lying about in Cph. and amusing oneself, consuming one’s per diem allowances, participating in voting and the like.―And this is earnestness! If someone, on his own account, renounced the income from his call and worked night and day for an idea―that would be fanaticism.

28

Never is evil, mediocrity, more dangerous than when it is decked out as “heartiness.”

29

5

10

15

20

25

26

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 30–33 30

5

•

1850

Concerning the Article by Frater Taciturnus against P. L. Møller. Probably almost no one has thought about what I myself understood very well at the time. Usually, a pseudonym is simply an author. But my pseudonym was a poetical person in character. Therefore the entire article was held in his character. This was a very unusual task for a polemic. And naturally I had to put up with the fact that not one single person noticed it.

10

31

The gospel says: Seek first the kingdom of God. Experience teaches that when ppl. have sought their peace and joy in every other place, then last of all they finally seek God.

15

If a person is to succeed in coming to seek God’s kingdom first, he must begin with repentance.

32

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. With respect to contemporaneity with Christ as a criterion, something that also has been noted in other journals must indeed be borne in mind: that Xt’s death is indeed the atonement, and in one sense it is from this event that grace can be dated. As long as Xt was alive, grace was not present in this sense―his own life was of course a trial for him, he himself was tested.―In another sense, his entire life was grace, as scripture says that grace and truth were made manifest in Xt.

20

27

30

33

What “the race” is tending toward is apparently the establishment of natural science instead of religion.

23

24

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 34–35

•

1850

Since Visby lost the election, the people of Xnshavn seem to be entirely unwilling to listen to him. But for it [Visby’s church] to be as empty as it was today is really too bad. Naturally, the fools do not understand things in a particularly Christian manner. If someone is a court preacher and has an enormous number of listeners, everyone runs there. From a Christian point of view, the likelihood is that a person will perhaps get some worldly art, but not Xnty. From a Christian point of view, if a man is persecuted, the likelihood is that a person will perhaps get a bit of Xnty. Today he preached (Xt age 12 in the temple) on the theme: “seek and you shall find” 1) what is one to seek 2) how should one seek 3) where should one seek. This sermon was cut a bit short; otherwise if could have been excellent. He himself also understood how to make illuminating use of the gospel reading for the day. He did it quite nicely, but it could have been done better. Mary sought something that was not her own, something that was entrusted to her―and by God―something she had had: in this way we should seek lost innocence, to come into God’s kingdom as children. She sought it tirelessly. She sought it in the temple.

34 5

10

15

20

25

28

At the beginning of his sermon for the 3rd Sunday after Easter, Luther correctly points out that it is Jewish to cling to this life in order that things might go well for a person and he might live long in the land; it is Christian to view oneself as a pilgrim here in this world, despite the fact that, in view of the excesses of the Middle Ages, Luther finds it necessary to warn against hastening to a monastery and the like. The consequence of the Jewish view is an intensified nationalist zeal―and now (yes, as Xnty has been inverted in every respect), now it has become precisely true orthodoxy to be as nationalistically zealous as any politician. This is the parallel of what I have shown elsewhere: Xnty praises the unmarried state―nowadays the married state is life’s

35

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 35–39

5

36 10

37

•

1850

earnestness, the unmarried state is fanaticism. Xnty was preached by men who asked for no pay―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 bread-study.

Moses and Elijah were present at the transfiguration―that is how it is with respect to every ecstasy and the like: the Law and the Prophets are present so that it does not become fantastical. Something like this is said by Richard of St. Victore.

Concerning a Remark by Anti-Climacus Somewhere in Practice in Christianity, no. 3.

15

When he establishes that in the Church militant there are only individuals, it is an intensification of “awakening”; thus he does not recognize the congregation.

38

Christ thus remained an indirect communication to the end; for (as Anti-Cl. correctly notes somewhere in Practice in Christianity, no. 2) the fact that he was incognito in the form of a servant makes all his direct communication nonetheless indirect. But then his life does have a phase that is otherwise denied: the resurrection, the ascension―this is rlly the first direct communication.

29

25

39

30

It is very well put by Richard of St. Victore: Eve ought to have been satisfied to be Adam’s companion, ought not have taken it upon herself to lead.

25

26

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 40–41

•

1850

The Dialectical Element in My Polemical Position. Others, at the head of the crowd, attack the single individual; qua individual, I attack the crowd, and I have never found it defensible or worth the trouble to attack an individual. But to attack an individual in the name of the crowd, of the public, is cowardly worldliness. No battle has ever been as cowardly as that of the daily press. When, in long bygone times, the government was the mighty power, it required courage to attack it; but now everyone knows very well that the crowd holds power in the state, and yet people continue to play the game that it is courageous to attack the government or, even better, an individual member of the government. What a lie. Every time the press is attacked―thus when one says Grüne, Ploug, etc.―they become angry and explain that they are a principle and insist that they be designated by abstract names. By contrast, as soon as they attack, they always pick only one individual officeholder, and they then aim at him the enormously disproportionate firepower that is the daily press. What profound cowardice it would be for someone to call it a duel when one party turned up qua individual with a pistol, and the other sat behind a battery or behind a regiment. It can easily be seen that my polemic is in the service of the truth, for it is eo ipso suffering. Therefore it is not understood― that is, most people actually do not understand it, and some few do not want to understand it.

This, too, is a form of taking what is holy in vain, e.g., when, after having tried to get power and advantage by every possible means, politicians are defeated, they deck it out as martyrdom. From this one can see that it is never the end, but the beginning, that is decisive for what a thing is. The voluntary element is decisive for what rlly constitutes martyrdom in the strictest sense: after having had the opponent in one’s power, then to have surrendered that power in order freely to choose humiliation. Thus understood, I may perhaps even have done damage with my efforts to glorify martyrdom and regain for it a bit of

40

5

10

15

20

25

30

41 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 41–42

•

1850

its respect; for now worldly shrewdness gets one thing more: a person sallies forth to conquer in worldly fashion―but he says to himself, If it fails, we will deck it out as martyrdom.

5

42

10

15

20

25

30

35

The condition for a hum. being’s salvation is the faith that everywhere and at every moment there is an absolute beginning. If the person who has served himself egotistically in the service of illusions is to begin a purer striving, what matters is that he believe absolutely in the new beginning, for otherwise he will muddle the transition into the old ways.―This is also how it is with conversion in the stricter sense: faith in the possibility of a new, absolute beginning; otherwise things essentially remain the way they were. This is the infinitely intensive element in faith’s anticipation, which has the cheerful courage to dare to believe in it―to transform the old situation into something absolutely forgotten―and then to believe absolutely in the beginning. In other respects, however, the criterion of the truth of this faith will be the cheerful courage that, in the opposite direction, has the courage to grasp truly profoundly one’s previous wretchedness. Thus the one corresponds to the other: if a person does not truly profoundly feel this and have the courage for it, neither will he truly have a new beginning, because the reason he does not feel it so profoundly is simply that he covertly harbors the notion that if he truly looked at it, it would be so awful that there would be no new beginning for him. Therefore he makes it a bit milder and does not look at it too carefully, intending thereby to come more certainly to a new beginning―and for this very reason he does not come to it. A beginning always has a double impetus: in the direction of what has gone before and in the direction of the new. The new begins to the same degree that it pushes against the direction of the old.

27

28

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 43–45

•

1850

Could be used for a discourse.

31

43

The last two lines of each stanza in no. 45 in Brorson’s Svanesang, for a discourse on “faith” or on “patience.”

1

5

[a]

I have rearranged the stanzas; Brorson’s verse 3 is used as no. 2, and verse 2 as no. 3.

1) the greater the need, the more fixedly it looks toward the end. Thus it is not disturbed by the fact that the road is narrow and steep 3) Nor is it disturbed by the condition of the road, whether it “is roses or swamps” everything is the the same when our bent is toward heaven. 2) Nor by the length of the road The closer to its home The more briskly it advances.

5

10

15

It is very well put by Richard of St. Victore. He points out that one must not be busy like Martha, but “idle” like Mary. Then he adds that there are nonetheless many whom this does not help either, for they certainly are free of the busyness of work, are not employed, “but all the same do not understand how to make a Sabbath of the Sabbath.”

44

There is a remarkable wordplay present in fruit and fear; people say that where there is no fear, there is no fruit.

45

20

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 46

•

1850

32

46

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

On My “Heterogeneity” Surely I have had a heterogeneity with respect to what is ordinary and general; this was essentially rooted in a primal suffering and subsequently was intensified even more through dialectical suffering that made me even more heterogeneous in my silence. But for one thing, I have never understood my heterogeneity as my perfection, but rather as my imperfection; for another, I have never understood myself absolutely with respect to it [heterogeneity], but only relatively. As a consequence, I can use direct communication to indicate to my contemporaries the indirect communication that is used. Understood in this way, every human being of at least some depth possesses a certain degree of heterogeneity. Because, for example, as long as he goes about pondering something, making only indirect remarks, he is heterogeneous. In my case this has taken place on a larger scale, inasmuch as I have the entire printed communication. Though I also understand the whole of my work as an author as my upbringing. Absolute heterogeneity remains indirect communication to the very end because it absolutely refuses to be in the context of the universal. But this heterogeneity is also superhuman―demonic or divine. All heterogeneity lies within the point of departure of particularity, but it then seeks to return to the universal. In this way a forward push is achieved. Absolute heterogeneity remains to the end in the heterogeneity of the point of departure. The effect is then qualitatively greater. Consequently, this is the category I employ: I have to make aware. I have never assumed the character of heterogeneity simply because I have understood it as my imperfection (therefore, no “authority,” either) and because the published writings constitute my own development. But making aware is a category that is still in the context of the universal. Absolute heterogeneity has nothing to do with making aware; it is in character and denies the context. The difference is easily discerned. The fact that I communicate the latter poetically and pseudonymously is a concession. If an individual communicated it in his own name and claimed that his life expressed it, the situation would be different.

29

30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 46

•

1850

Absolute heterogeneity must begin approximately at the point where I now break off, that is, with the developed consciousness that I have attained through what has been traversed. But precisely because I have attained it through what has been traversed, I have also understood that I cannot assume its character, but have a poetic relation to it. Had I not understood this, and had I not been helped to understand it, I would presumably have taken a wrong turn in the direction of becoming a fanatic. Now, someone could say, [“]Yes, but the very fact that there are pseudonyms is itself indirect communication.” The reply to this must be: [“]You have not really taken a careful look; the Editor’s Preface always employs the category [‘]I am striving[’]; and I acknowledge that this is the more ideal Christian requirement. The maximum indirectness would be to produce a communication of this sort and allow the question of whether it was an attack on Christianity or a defense of it to remain utterly, absolutely ambiguous. Absolute heterogeneity would be to make it into an entirely direct communication, but then to oneself step into its character. Were this to happen, the established order would be absolutely exploded by this heterogeneous individual.[”] By contrast, the category of making aware, explained in more detail in my prefaces and safeguarded by my existence, is intended to do precisely the opposite, to allow the established order to exist right down to the least detail―and merely attempt to breathe inwardness into it, leaving it to each person to decide individually the extent to which he will make use of it. Anything more is absolutely impossible for me, for in that case I would have to have authority, which I have denied having from the very beginning―and why? Because I dare not appeal to God in such a way that I might dare say that he has chosen me for something special. What I can say again and again, and―compared to the need within me―never sufficiently, is merely how I have felt myself helped by him in connection with what I myself, to the best of my modest abilities, had begun. I did not begin with that infinite certainty that is inherent in having been chosen by God and that grants authority. On the contrary, I began by being the unhappy person, the suffering person―and thus I began. Then, bit by bit, it became larger, and I myself am the one who looks with greatest surprise upon what has been granted me. But it is impossible that this situation could confer authority. Indirect communication, therefore, is what has been appropriate for

5

33

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 46–48

5

10

•

1850

me. The only difference is that because the literary productivity is also my upbringing and development, it ends with a pseudonymity that poses the Christian requirement ideally and in relation to which I define myself as a someone who strives. Had I been merely a poet, I would surely have gotten into the nonsense of simply poetizing Christianity without noting that this cannot be done, that one must include oneself and either express the ideal existentially oneself (which cannot in fact be done) or define oneself as a someone who strives. Had I not been a poet, I would surely have gone and confused myself with the ideal and become a fanatic. What, then―in addition to the main thing, that I have been helped by Governance―has helped me? The fact that I am a dialectician.

34

47

20

Concerning the Two Pages That Are to Be Printed on a Half Page Preceding “The Accounting” To many people, it will probably seem altogether too submissive. They do not consider (and they probably have no notion of) what it means to speak “before God.” But indeed, this was also included in [“]The Accounting[”], where I noted my relationship with God and where I understand the whole as my upbringing. Therefore it was printed on a half page in a different typeface in order to indicate that this is a matter before God.

25

48

30

Look, this is a situation in “Christendom.” It is told of Bernard of Clairvaux that parents restrained their children, wives their husbands―lest Bernard convince them to become Xns in such a way that they actually abandoned everything. And this is how it always is with the essentially Xn person: he is like the πεισιϑανατος of antiquity, so much does he call a person away from the pleasures and the life and the joy of the sensual person―and yet we are all Xns in Xndom. And now in our times, when there lives not even so much as one πεισιϑανατος.

35

31 πεισιϑανατος] Greek, a person who convinces others to die. (See also explanatory note.)

31

32

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 49

•

1850 35

Concerning the Publication of a Couple of Writings about Myself. I again brought up the matter I had considered: The Accounting, the Three Notes, and the first part of The Point of View. I made a couple of modifications. All my old doubts arose again, however, essentially concentrating on this point: It is inconsistent and impatient for me to include myself like this during my lifetime―and especially right now, when I want to stop―and, in so doing, risk taking on new impetus, even though in an earlier version from 1849 I had done everything to put forward the two postulates: that for me the entire work as an author has been my upbringing, and that its purpose is to make aware.

49

5

10

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 50–51

•

1850

36

50

5

51

15

20

25

30

35

This, too, seems to me an inexplicable form of spiritlessness― how, at a certain day and hour, a hum. being can have a particular impression of the religious: can be Christmas-merry at Christmastime and not at all think of Good Friday; can be profoundly sorrowful on Good Friday and then have no other impression whatever. This is the best proof that the religious is something entirely external to a person.

In defending the reality of art, also in relation to the spirit of religion, it is argued that spirit saturates a hum. being such that it can be seen what sort of man he is; e.g., when Luther said, [“]God help me, Amen,[”] he said this in order that people looking at him could look into his character and see what manner of man he was. To a certain extent, this must in fact be granted, though one must remember not to insist upon it too much, for if this transformed a pers. in that way, then of course his enemies might also immediately see the same thing. And next it must be borne in mind that this does not hold in relation to the object of “faith”―because precisely in order to test faith, and in order that faith can be faith, immediate straightforwardness is denied. That is, there may certainly have been a human transfiguration (even though it should always be remembered that the enemies did not see it―for to take a lesser example, those who stoned Stephen did not in fact see his face as the face of an angel), but indeed there is no straightforward immediacy that is knowable as being God. And thus the object of faith does not admit of artistic representation. And even in the relations betw. one hum. being and another, to the extent that a hum. being in relation to something else may be the object of a sort of faith, to that extent he cannot be painted or depicted in that relationship, for the fact that it must be faith means precisely there is no straightforward immediacy, for otherwise everyone would of course have to see the same thing, also his enemies, who draw the exact opposite conclusion. But in the midst of Xndom people are scarcely even aware of the Socratic notion: that the teacher of morals (the pure one, the noble one) was the ugliest man, with an apparent tendency toward everything evil―and this is in Xndom, which of course

33

34

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 51–54

•

1850

relates itself to the God-Man, the object of “faith.” And yet people believe that every inwardness can be painted, i.e., is straightforwardly recognizable. What, then, is “faith”? Well, it is obvious: nowadays “faith” is of course this and that, opinion, and the like―and art is a higher sphere; and in addition, we are all Xns.

Not only do people not understand my ideas, but what is far more grievous to me, they do not understand, they have no notion of the degree of conviction with which I hold my idea. That a pers. can fall into doubt about whether he is permitted to communicate directly, about whether God has something against it because He requires greater endurance from him in order that he might prevail: Yes, who thinks of such things[?] If one merely has a half-digested scrap of a half-idea, one immediately blesses everyone with it in straightforward fashion, one profits from it oneself, etc.―but to be capable of teaching it, and then to suffer by enduring with such rigor! Now, incidentally, it looks as if I have retreated a bit―alas and alack, what an accommodation I have had to make. Now I am seen less often, associate mostly with refined people: my reputation is rising. Alas, mundus vult decipi and only Xnty knows what truth is.

37

52

15

20

25

30

It never occurs to a pastor on a Sunday to read aloud a sermon by Luther, for example, instead of preaching himself! But there is this nonsense about the living word; and there is also anxiety about being regarded as a parish clerk!

53

The idol, the tyrant of our times is “the crowd,” the numerical. As in earlier times, the religious per-

54

28 mundus vult decipi] Latin, the world wants to be deceived. (See also explanatory note.)

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 54–56

5

10

38

15

55 20

56

25

30

35

40

•

1850

35

son had to regard sorrowfully and with the thought “he is lost” everyone who adhered, e.g., to the ungodly “emperor,” the “ungodly pope,” the “ungodly bureaucracy,” and groveled before them―or as pious parents regarded their child going to court, so must one grieve deeply over everyone who participates in voting. However capable he might be in other respects―indeed, even if he were supremely gifted, it only makes matters all the worse―he is formally strengthening the evil: voting. And, spiritually understood, this idolatry cultivates voting rather like that disgusting worship of the lingam, for voting is of course the productive force in connection with the deification of the numerical. Alas, but how long, how long, will it be before individuals appear in opposition to it[?]

“Anxiety” is indeed rlly nothing other than impatience.

Stilling is situated at a critical turning point. What rlly occupies him is pride in realizing the ideal in relation to his late wife, in being true to her, not marrying. Alas, and even this pride has not made him quiet or truly determined: he experiments with decking himself out in this ideal, he anticipates. He has religious possibilities, but things may also go in a different direction. He could marry again― and then become a despairing assailant of the “inhuman rigor” of religion. And if that happens, whose fault is it but his own[?] He did not approach religion in a religious way―therefore it merely became inhuman rigor. But he remains a possibility. And if only he knows his limits―namely, that as an author he has the task of expressing passionately that he needs religion, and that the scientific-scholarly religion that is on offer cannot hold him―he cannot inflict injury on the terrain of religion.

[a]

Stilling.

1

[b]

Even though it must always be borne in mind that to communicate doubt (sickness) when one does not oneself possess the remedy is something for which one bears responsibility. According to my theory, one must never begin to communicate doubt before one has the remedy, and never more doubt than one can check.

5

10

36

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 57–59

•

1850

It is indeed rather analogous to the prophetic (and this is something every more or less intelligent nature has experienced) for a person to say something that he himself understands in his own way―and eventually he understands that something much more profound lay within it. This contains an analogue to the prophetic: that the prophet spoke of something that perhaps was present or of something shrouded from him, in a more obscure future―and only when Xt appears does it become clear that it was he of whom they spoke. Thus the fulfillment is not merely a part of making the prophecy a prophecy, but actlly the prophecy is only completed in the fulfillment―even though it predicted it in advance.

57

Lavater puts it very well in speaking of the question of the Magi concerning the whereabouts of the king of the Jews: “The first question concerning him refers to him as the king of the Jews; and the final words concerning him were [‘]the king of the Jews[’]―both times spoken by pagans: the king of the Jews was sought by pagans as a king and was crucified by pagans as the king of the Jews.”

58

The Possibility of Offense―the Single Individual.

5

39 10

20

59 25

What people genrlly call Xndom (these thousands and millions) has in fact made Xnty into sheer nonsense. But actlly, the orthodoxy of established Xndom has also transformed Xnty into paganism. Xt is the paradox. Everything Xn is marked accordingly―or through the synthesis is such that it is marked―by the dialectical possibility of offense. This is now being removed by orthodoxy (especially the moving and emotional Grundtvigianism, for there is nonetheless strength in Grundtvig), which has everywhere put in its place the miraculous-delightful, the delightful, the match-

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 59–60

40

10

15

60 20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

lessly delightful and profound, etc., in short, straightforward categories. Thus Xt gains straightforward recognizability, but with straightforward recognizability Xt is not “the sign”; with straightforward recognizability Xnty is paganism. Then they spout a bit of nonsense about the sign and the offense en passant, albeit very infrequently―it does not help, for the possibility of offense is what is dialectically decisive, is “the boundary” between paganism, Judaism―Xnty. It is clear to me that this fundamental confusion is linked to the fact that people are educated in Xnty from childhood. In this way a straightforward impetus is imparted to everything; the repulsion of opposition is not imparted. Furthermore, through the possibility of offense one sees that, as the dialectical, Xnty is only concerneda with individuals, because the possibility of offense cuts off and isolates everyone as the transition to becoming a Xn.

37

a

in any case

The Difference between “Crowd,” “Public”―and “Community.” In “the public” and the like, the single individual is nothing; there is no individual; the numerical is what is constitutive and is the law for coming into being, a generatio æqvivoca; apart from “the public” the single individual is nothing, and in a deeper sense, he is also nothing within the public. In the community, the single individual is; the single individual is dialectically decisive as the Prius for forming a community, and in the community the single individual is qualitatively something essential and at any moment can also become higher than “the community,” namely, as soon as “the others” fall away from the idea. What binds the community together is that each is an individual, and then the idea. What binds the public together, or itsa looseness, is that the numerical is everything. Every individual guarantees the community; the public is a chimera. In the community, the single individual is the microcosm who qualitatively repeats the macrocosm; here unum noris omnes holds true in a good sense. In the public there is no single individual; the whole is nothing; here it is impossible to say unum noris omnes, for here there is no One. “The community” is certainly more than a sum, but it is nonetheless a sum of ones. The public is nonsense: a sum 24 generatio æqvivoca] Latin, spontaneous generation. 28 Prius] Latin, precondition, presupposition. 37 unum noris omnes] Latin, if one knows one, one knows them all. (See also explanatory note.)

a

in the community

1

38

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 60–62

•

1850

of negative ones, of ones who are not ones, who become ones by means of the sum instead of the sum having to become the sum by means of the ones.

People understand everything politically (without “people” for that reason understanding much about politics), with the consequence that the religious person is hated as a proud person, an aristocrat and the like. The religious person expresses that there is a God; the life of the religious person expresses, first of all, [“]Please make room[”]―it is an expression of respect. Naturally, it is not exactly an expression of respect for “the public” and concepts of that sort―just the opposite. But it is nonetheless an expression of respect―namely, for God. But people do not have time to see what comes next, that the religious person is as far removed as possible from being a proud person, an aristocrat and the like―that in true humility and worship he bows 70 times deeper than any politician. But as noted, people do not see what comes next, do not understand it; and so people shout at the religious person: A proud man, an aristocrat!

61

41 10

15

20

That Victor Hugo! Pampered, of course, for many years as one practiced in the sort of debauchery engaged in by novelists who pander poetically to emotions that are the opposite of those expressed in their own lives, he has now supposedly delivered a “brilliant address” attacking the clerical party. One can imagine him taking pleasure in advance, as he thought of the situation: to play “witness to the truth” like this, and to be esteemed and honored and admired. All praise to the clerical party―its cause is in the minority, and the natural sciences are celebrated. And now he dishes it out. Who denies that the natural sciences have also had their martyrs, but Victor Hugo appears to have completely forgotten that the names of these [martyrs] are all but absent from recent times when, on the contrary, it is precisely these sciences that are triumphant. And what tyrant, what idol is it that he serves with this speech of his? It is “the crowd,” “voting,” and the like. And has it

62

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 62–63

5

10

43 15

20

63 25

•

1850

perhaps claimed no victims? It claimed Xt and Socrates and “the host of martyrs.” And so, what are the examples of Christian religiousness? What a fool to want to speak of things of which he has absolutely no understanding. The examples he cites are of ordinary great and good deeds, in no way specifically religious, let along specifically Christian-religious deeds. Paganism has all sorts of examples of this sort. Great and noble deeds such as these are honored in the world―but Xt and his followers were surely just as practiced in magnanimity and the like, but they were persecuted and put to death for it. If it were up to me, V. Hugo would be jailed for half a year to take instruction in Xnty! But as noted, what a find for “the poet”! One can imagine that the other poets have become envious of him, for they have not become members of the Assembly. One thinks of Eugene Süe, who has written his way into being a millionaire―by depicting the poverty and wretchedness of actual life. Yes, thank you very much―he was able to give 50 rd. to the poor in exchange for his having been the fortunate one to whom this enviable opportunity was offered: that of playing the hero, the witness to the truth, with applause and laurels!

Two Slips of Paper That Were Together with “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself.” This work cannot be made pseudonymous because it rails against the sermon having been turned into observations, i.e., into something impersonal―and of course a pseudonym is also something impersonal.

30

35

NB This objection is responded to on an accompanying piece of paper, and the book was made pseudonymous Oct. 9, 49. That piece of paper has the following contents: In a way there is a dialectical heresy at one point in this book, namely, at the point where it is shown that the sermon has become impersonal, this is done by someone who is no one. The inconsistency is that this is done by a pseudonym, who himself is of course no one. But here is my boundary: I can make aware― nothing more. And on the other hand, I am still included as

39

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 63

•

1850

Entry NB15:63, which begins on the middle of the page, is a copy from two older slips of paper. Kierkegaard has added the words: “That piece of paper has the following contents:”

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 63–65

5

•

1850

editor and will of course bear the responsibility, and everything will be understood as though I myself had said it. Thus there is indeed a very essential forward step: both in getting it said and in the circumstance that people will in fact attribute it to me. The added factor here is actlly this: that even though the speaker is of course no one, a pseudonym, the editor is an actual person who acknowledges that he will be judged for this discourse written by a pseudonym.

10

64

44 15

20

25

30

65

With Christianity, everything has been ushered into the realm of the spirit; now the scene is always set in the realm of the spirit. But now Xnty has actlly been transformed into a universalized tradition, has become an atmosphere. An analogue to antiquity now emerges. The negative principle was fate, a principle of nature. Fate was envious of the individual, especially of the eminent individual―the insignificant individual was not pursued by fate. In tragedy fate crushes the hero, but the chorus is oblivious to the blows of fate. The analogue will now emerge in the realm of the spirit. The concept of the universal, an abstraction, the public and the like, is fate, something negative in relation to the individual, but only in relation to the eminent individual. In a certain sense, the chorus no longer exists, for the chorus is actlly the public. The insignificant individual lives happily in the public while the eminent individual is leveled by the abstraction. This is the battle of the future, except that it will not be the single individual in the sense of a tyrant, but the religious individual whose intention is precisely to free individuals, though this is something the public does not understand. But there is also an ambiguity in “the public,” for although it is itself the power that levels, it is in a way itself also the spectator, the chorus. This stems from irresponsibility.

It is dangerous to live in times when the world’s tides are turning. It usually takes a generation or two before people become aware of where the evil now lies and that the attack must be changed. Those who represent a somewhat nobler form of suf-

41

42

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 65–66

•

1850

fering profit from this because now they are in fact victorious and yet also enjoy honor as martyrs. Thus in the states the opposition parties once stood at the head of what was then the weaker force, “the crowd,” which suffered in fighting against the more powerful “government.” Nowadays, “the crowd” has long been the dominant force in the state. Those who stand at the head of the crowd are by far the stronger force, and yet they profit from the honor and esteem owed to martyrs.―Similarly with the natural sciences, which still like to play the game of enjoying the honor and esteem owed to martyrs, though in fact the natural sciences are the dominant force, and theology has long since been dethroned.

5

10

45

Real self-duplication without a third element that stands outside and constrains is an impossibility and makes all such existing into an illusion or experimentation. Kant held that the hum. being was his own law (autonomy), i.e., bound himself under the law he gave himself. In the deeper sense, what this really postulates is lawlessness or experimentation. Its earnestness will be no more rigorous than were the blows that Sancho Panza inflicted on his own backside. It is impossible for me actually to be stricter in A than I am or wish to be in B. There must be constraint if it is going to be in earnest. If I am to bind myself and there is no binding force higher than myself, then where, as the A, who binds, can I find the rigor I do not possess as B, the one who is to be bound, when, after all, A and B are the same self[?] This is especially clear in all religious realms. The transformation that is actlly from immediacy to spirit―this dying-away becomes unserious, becomes an illusion, experimentation, if there is no third factor, the constraining factor, which is not the individual himself. This is also why all eminent individuals have been constrained: they are actlly “instruments.” Not only is there no law that I myself give myself as the ultimate, but there is a law that is given to me by something higher. And not only that, but this lawgiver also takes the liberty of participating, in the capacity of educator, and makes use of compulsion. But if a hum. being is never in his life willing to act decisively enough for this educator to get hold of him, well, then it can

66 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 66–68

5

10

15

46

20

•

1850

certainly happen that a hum. being is permitted to live in selfsatisfied illusions and fancies and experimentation―but this also signifies supreme disfavor. A hum. being can be rigorous enough with himself to understand that [“]My rigor amounts to nothing; I must have another to help so that there can be rigor, even if he is also leniency.[”] But engaging with this other does not mean giving assurances upon assurances; it means acting. When a person acts decisively and enters into actuality, existence can take hold of him and Governance can bring him up. It may certainly happen that a person can spare himself ever so much, and it could still occur to Governance to take him to task. But this does not please Governance, it is almost wrath. Governance wills that a hum. being is to believe and have faith in Governance. Governance is no friend of the sissified cowardice of wanting to play autodidact when at the same time there lives so excellent an educator and teacher as Our Lord, to whom he can turn. But in ordinary hum. situations, to be sent to school or to try to get into school means that I go wherever it is the teacher dwells. Spiritually, the teacher immediately comes to dwell wherever I finally act decisively. For what do I want: I want to be brought up to be spirit―and yet do not want to act decisively? Nonsense.

25

67

The more things a hum. being becomes accustomed to participating in―to the point of taking part in everything―the more the spirit within him is stunted―and the more successful he will be in the world.

30

68

35

Ah, to receive the impression from a contemporary is indeed a frightful qualitative decision. One has historical knowledge that hundreds and hundreds were granted something extraordinary― and this one can easily understand and find acceptable. But, that this contemporary person―that it has been granted to him―no, this is something one cannot get into one’s head; it must be the other person’s fantasy. Yes, this is how it is with every situation of contemporaneity.

43

44

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 68–69

•

1850

The contemporary person who is himself absolutely capable of acquiring the impression that an embattled contemporary is someone extraordinary: he is himself rather extraordinary.

The Significance of My Work as an Author to Me as My Upbringing in Christianity. In The Point of View for My Work as an Author I have explained that I understood my task to be that of serving the cause of Xnty, to present what Xnty is, but that―in order that the situation not be reversed, so that it was Xnty that needed me, instead of me needing Xnty―Governance has also helped me in this respect by letting me understand that it was I who needed Xnty. The matter is quite simple. Religiously and with absolute piety in connection with Xnty, I had dedicated myself to come to clarity about what Xnty is―this for my own sake, and I understood as well that this was what the times needed. It was planned on this scale and with the risk, right from the beginning, that if it turned out that I could not accept Xnty, this was a blow I would accept. That is, Xnty was not to be accommodated to me, but what Xnty is was to be viewed absolutely fearlessly. But what if Xnty turned out to be something I myself could not accept? Well, then perhaps―out of piety for Xnty, with the intention of serving it―I would have publicly acknowledged this, but in other respects would have continued unchanged, occupying myself with Xnty and concerning myself with it. Had that happened, it was not my intention to forget the matter: no, Xnty and becoming a Xn were my life’s task because I understood, in deep piety, that even the longest life would not be too long for this task. I know of only one analogue to this situation, namely the plans I made, back then, about taking my theological examination. I decided to do so out of piety for my late father. Well, it was certainly possible that at the designated time, despite having read diligently, I could have decided for hypochondriacal reasons that I was not yet ready to sit for the examination―but what then? Well, then I would have continued to read for the theological examination. Even if I had never passed the examination, one thing would absolutely have happened: I would have continued to read for the theological examination.

69

10

47

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 69–70

5

10

15

48

25

70 30

35

40

•

1850

That is how it is with my relation to Xnty. It is not as if one makes a calculation, and then chooses either/or: no, I had chosen: Xnty. The fact that I did not dare call myself a Xn would only have been a concern in relation to the ideal. Fundamentally, all the anxiety is more an expression of my ideality, even though this is something that has made itself quite scarce in our times, when there is one thing everyone knows himself to be without further ado: a Xn. Most of all, what Xnty lacks are passion-filled circumstances in which to express that one wants to be a Xn. Confirmation accomplishes very little. But Governance has been especially helpful to me in connection with getting a proper impression of Xnty. 1) All of my original, internal suffering. 2) My relationship to “her.” 3) What I have suffered from persecution by mob vulgarity and hum. ingratitude. Truly, without this I would indeed have completely missed one aspect of Xnty. To live through a magnanimous action, undertaken out of love for others, and to see it rewarded like that; to experience being declared an egotist precisely because I was unselfish; to see all this egotism that is the fundamental driving force of society―to see it united in declaring me an egotist at the very moment that I was most compassionate: yes, that was rlly something to drive a person mad. Fortunately, I had been well-trained in Xnty from childhood on. That helped. But truly, I learned Xnty from the ground up.

Ah, how infinitely profound it is―and is not this rlly the reason for my and everyone’s misfortune: that we have no proper notion of what sin is in God’s eyes! Arndt (and likewise the old edifying writings) says in connection with Xt’s suffering and death that one must look upon it in order to get a notion of what sin means to God. I go and trifle with it and have no truly passionate notion of how abominable sin is in God’s eyes―this is something I must see in Xt’s sufferings for sin. Here, once again, is the dialectical: his sufferings are not, first of all, to console, but are first of all to terrify, to terrify me. Thus, first of all, Xst teaches desolation―precisely in order thereafter to console. But with his sufferings he makes me take notice in order that I might feel the terrors of sin truly deeply.

45

46

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 70–71

•

1850

The truth of the religious can be illuminated with the help of a not inappropriate analogy: by considering the idea of a distinguished person, a courtier, and then forgetting what ought to be forgotten. Imagine having insulted the king: who would despair more at having done this, a peasant or a courtier? Would it not be the courtier, far and away? And thus with the religious. The holy person understands what sin means―I, a sinner, go and trifle with it; it is precisely this trifling with it that is a part of my sin.

5

10

49

1

5

[a]

With respect to J. Müller, it must be steadfastly maintained that he has a much more profound view, even if he does not possess its qualitative consequences and really formulate a μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος.

6 μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] Greek, transition to another conceptual sphere. (See also explanatory note.)

See, here, too, I am not understood at all. All the more profound thinkers (Hegel, Daub―and to name someone less famous but very worthy of respect: Julius Müller, etc.), are agreed in situating evil in isolated subjectivity―objectivity is what saves. This has long since become a slogan, and of course every university student knows that I am an isolated individuality―ergo I am practically evil: “pure negativity, without seriousness, etc.” Oh profound confusion. No, the entire concept of objectivity, which has been made into our salvation, merely feeds the sickness, and the fact that it is praised as the remedy simply shows how fundamentally irreligious the times are; for this salvation is rlly a return to paganism. No, precisely in order to put an end to subjectivity in its untruth we must go all the way through to “the single individual”―directly before God. But people have absolutely no notion of what religiosity is. People have no notion that in one sense Xt and all the heroes of the faith were isolated individualities―aber they belonged entirely to God. Take Socrates! In those days, of course, one Sophist after another came forth and showed that the problem was lack of sufficient knowledge, that there had to be more and more research, that ignorance was the evil.―and then old father Socrates comes and says: No, ignorance is precisely the cure.

34 aber] German, but.

71 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 71–73

5

10

50

Yet Another Example of Dialectic.

20

Xnty makes sin the most frightful thing―and then wants to get rid of it. A more lenient view (e.g., Leibnitz, etc.) wants to make sin milder, defends it―and then, sure enough, then we remain stuck in it; it becomes an imperfection that is inseparable from a hum. being for all eternity. This takes sin off our hands.

73 30

35

1850

47

I wonder if things did not go with Socrates, in his day, exactly as they have with me. He was regarded as representing evil, for in the view of the times, ignorance was evil―and yet Socrates was truly the physician. In areas like these it takes a fortunate genius (or an infinite profundity and an infinitely good ear, so that all the daimonic phenomena, inversely understood, can themselves proclaim what they need) in order to grasp things properly. I am not boasting of anything. It is quite true: according to the view of the times, isolated subjectivity is indeed evil; but the cure by “objectivity” is not one whit better. Salvation must come through subjectivity, i.e., through God, as the infinitely compelling subjectivity.

72

25

•

Julius Müller has an excellent rejoinder to the explanation of sin as weakness: Has not evil been seen to impart intensified energy[?] And to this end he appeals to Plato, who characterizes η αδιϰια as τον εχοντα (την αδιϰιαν) μαλα ζωτιϰον παρεχουσα, ϰαι προς γ’ ετι ζωτιϰῳ αγρυπνον. (see Julius Müller, 1st part of The Doctrine of Sin p. 119 note). I myself have shown this in earlier journals, that the good certainly imparts strength, but also the sensitivity of eternity, which is why the good, the innocent suffer so deeply. Evil (precisely through 31 η αδιϰια] Greek, injustice. (See also explanatory note.) 31 τον εχοντα … αγρυπνον] Greek, that which renders its possessor very lively indeed, and not only lively but wakeful (See also explanatory note.)

[a]

in de republica Lib. X.

1

48

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 73–75

•

1850

despair) imparts a desperate lust for life and strength. (while the good longs to be quit of life). I have shown why baptized Jews in particular are good representatives of this sort of energy because most often they have no religion whatever and despairingly understand that they have been allotted only this life. This imparts impetus.

1

[a]

Stages on Life’s Way.

Ah, but this book ends with remarkable words, the last part of Frater Taciturnus’s concluding words regarding himself: do not incite him, for then he could become dangerous.

5

74 10

51

Dialectic Tending toward Becoming a Xn. Socrates did not first try to gather some proofs for the immortality of the soul in order that he might then proceed to live, having faith on the basis of these proofs. The situation was just the reverse―he said: The matter of immortality, of whether it exists, concerns me so much that I unconditionally venture to stake the whole of my life on it, as though it were the most certain thing of all. That is how he lived―and his life is a proof of the immortality of the soul. He did not first have faith on the basis of proofs and then live―no, his life is the proof, and only with his death as a martyr was the proof complete.―Look, this is spirit; it is a bit embarrassing for copycats and for all those who live at second- or at tenth-hand, for those who chase after results, and for cowardly and squeamish types. Used cautiously, this can be applied to the situation of becoming a Xn. First, quite rightly, comes Lessing’s doubt that one cannot base an eternal blessedness on something historical. Thus something historical exists here, the story of Jesus Xt.

75

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 75

5

10

15

20

52

25

30

35

40

But, then, is this absolutely certain historically? To this it must be replied that even if it were the most certain thing in all, all of history, it would not help: no direct transition can be made from something historical to the basis for an eternal blessedness. This is something qualitatively new. What then? This―a hum. being says to himself, a la Socrates: [“]Here there exists something historical that teaches me that I must turn to Jesus Xt concerning my eternal blessedness. Now, I must be quite careful to guard against taking a wrong turn into scholarly dabbling and research about whether it is indeed quite certain historically; for it is sure enough historical―that is, even if it were 10 times more certain down to its least detail, it would not help me anyway, because I cannot be helped directly.[”] Then I say to myself: [“]I am choosing. This historical event is enough for me to decide to stake my whole life on this [‘]if.[’][”] Then he lives, he lives filled with this thought alone, venturing his life for it, and his life is proof that he believed. He did not have some proofs, then believe, and then begin to live. No, just the reverse. This is called venturing, and without venturing, faith is an impossibility. To relate oneself to spirit is to take an examination. To believe, to will to believe, is to transform one’s life into taking an examination. The daily examination is the tension of faith.―But one could preach about this to all the cowardly, squeamish, spiritless types until the end of the world, they will not grasp it, they rlly do not want to grasp it. To them it rlly seems that it is very well that someone else ventures, and that they then adhere to him―and give assurances. But to venture―no thanks. Still, with respect to becoming a Xn there is a dialectical difference from Socrates that must be kept in mind. Namely this: that with respect to immortality, a hum. being relates to himself and to the idea, nothing more. But when a hum. being chooses to believe in Xt on the basis of an [“]if,[”] that is, chooses to stake his life on it, then he is of course

•

1850

49

[a]

This is also inherent in Xt’s words: If anyone wants to follow my teaching―that is, live in accordance with it; that is, take action in accordance with it―he will experience, etc. This means that here no proofs are provided in advance― and neither is he satisfied that the acceptance of his teachings means: I give assurances.

1

5

10

[b]

This comes from the fact that the hum. being is a synthesis of bodymind and spirit. But “spirit” causes dissension―whereas in every situation the squeamish hum. being wants to bring along the baser elements and have their consent. This is the source of this anxiety about “venturing.” The spiritless hum. being always wants “probability.” But “spirit” will never grant this; “spirit” is the examination: Will you let go of probability, will you deny yourself, forsake the world, etc.

15

20

25

50

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 75–77

•

1850

permitted to turn directly to Xt in prayer. Thus, the historical is the occasion and yet is also the object of faith. But all spiritless types turn the situation around. They say: [“T]o stake everything on an [‘]if[’] is a sort of skepticism, it is fantasy, not positivity.[”] This is because they do not want to “venture.” And Xnty has dragged along this swarm of spiritless people who have finally abolished Xnty.

1

[a]

R. Nielsen.

5

That “the single individual” is the truth is rlly also expressed in the word: a demagogue―for he is always someone who operates with the help of the crowd.

76

Indeed, it is certain that R. N. actlly began with egotistical and shrewd intent. Recently, he has often had to admit that slipping past me was what he viewed as the real difficulty. If that had succeeded, his idea was thus that with my support, clandestinely and half-understanding my efforts, he would gesticulate in the world a la myself. Ah, lamentable shrewdness! To tell the truth, at one point I thought he would succeed, however indignant it might make me. Yet something quite different has happened. I have remained silent―but the surrounding world has taken it upon itself to force him back upon me. This was a fateful counterweight to [his] worldly shrewdness. The fact is that I believed I was the object of envy, which indeed I am; therefore, also for a moment, I really believed that R. Nielsen might succeed in his deception. But I also knew that fundamentally people deep down had an enormous impression of me. Then what happened was that precisely because R. N. also wanted to be a sort of Mag. K―even though people had no suspicion of how treasonous that tactic was to me―precisely this caused a bit of the truth about me to emerge together with the envy. But in no way have I given up on R. N. It is not so easy to make the transition from the finite understanding to the service of the idea.

77 15

53

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 77–79

5

10

15

•

1850

51

He can still bring some truth to his position. He can live up to his beginnings, confess that he had rlly intended to profit from this new standpoint as he previously had profited from other scholarly standpoints, but that the more he involved himself with the cause, the more he realized that it took hold of him, indeed judged him―for in fact having rlly begun by taking the cause in vain. But he is rather tense, and what is the reason? Obviously because earthly and worldly shrewdness has quite a hold on him, and he has involved himself with something that could almost drive him mad, because his shrewdness cannot master it. It is possible that he has now mended his ways, for at least now I occasionally notice that it has become clearer to him that he has erred, item that I noticed this long ago. In the beginning it pained me deeply to look upon a deception of this sort right under my nose, while―slow to pass judgment and with God-fearing restraint―I remained silent and was delayed on my way.

54

78 20

25

30

79

Yet it was indeed good fortune, an indescribable benefit to me, that I was as melancholic as I was. Had I been a happy type― and then experienced what I have experienced as an author―I believe a person would have gone mad. But I knew more frightful torments―inside, where I rlly suffer. And what happened then? Ah, something amazing―even if it has not yet entirely happened, although it has done so to a certain degree and will do still further, I believe―this amazing thing: that it is precisely this outward tumult that has lured my melancholia out of its hiding place and to some extent has already rescued me from it, and will do so even more fully! Oh, the depth of riches, how unsearchable are your ways, O God, yet all fatherliness and grace!

Petrarch puts is nicely: Anger is a brief rage, and if one does not constrain it―a lengthy rage.

14 item] Latin, as well as, also.

[a]

On myself.

1

52

1

a

hastily

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 80

•

1850

It is indeed a foolish objection against me and my life (and for many of those concerned, to the degree that they themselves understand that it is untrue, a culpable objection): that I stand apart from life and that this is exactly what religiousness is not, because true religiousness grasps life actively. Oh, you fools, or you hypocrites: How do I stand apart from life? In such a way that, singled out as I am, there is literally not a single person here in this country who stands so foremost on the stage. No, living apart from life is precisely running along with the flock, being in “the crowd,” by which one gains inconspicuousness yet also influence and power. How do I stand apart? By having built a literary canon the likes of which would be hard to find! By being the only person who ventured to take action when “the rabble” raged and triumphed. This is how I stand apart from life: by being recognized by every child, a stock figure in your plays, my name a byword, my life a daily sacrifice in order, if at all possible, to make fast the end of the thread, to bring the religious to bear once more. But then, what is the source of this talk that I stand apart from life? Well, I will tell you―it comes from this: that with all my work I gain no earthly reward, that I am not applauded at assemblies, which I do not attend, but am mocked on the streets, where I do my work; it comes from this: that I have not made my life compatible with an appointment as cabinet minister; it comes from the fact that people have noted that I am a fool, a fool―who fears God! Oh, you hypocrites, with your love that does not stand apart from life―that is surely something your self-love would forbid you to do! Oh, you hypocrites, with your practicality that grasps life actively―yes, ora grasps―after advantages! Oh, you hypocrites, with your earnestness that makes no overwrought retreat from life into fantasy―truly, your cowardice would soon chase you back into the flock again, the flock of animals, away from the place where earnestness dwells: being the single individual. Oh, you hypocrites, with your patriotism

80

5

10

15

55

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 80

5

10

15

20

56

25

30

35

40

that forbids you to lack sympathy for the nation’s woes and welfare; yes, thank you very much, you have saved Denmark, saved it from being a country into being a market town, the promised land of narrow-mindedness and mediocrity, saved it from belonging to history in the future. For if you really believe that your 4 shillings’ worth of accomplishments, your foolish remarks at assemblies, your names, will go down in history―for that to happen, first of all, everything, everything in existence, from the ground up, would have to be turned upside down so that “history” would take over the role always formerly assigned to “oblivion.” But perhaps this is what you are working for, that everything might be turned upside down, so that “history” becomes “oblivion” and those who are excellent are forgotten; that “oblivion” becomes “history” and “oblivion” historically takes along with itself everything, all of you, your speeches, and your 17th amendment to the 16th amendment, concerning nothing. There is something frightful in seeing individuals plunge down into these mutual assurances,b a commune naufragium. How many, many are there already living for whom no concepts exist, for whom all that matters is that there is a majority for something―to such an extent that they feel utterly unrepentant when this is the case! If there is a majority in favor of making whoredom into virtue and murder into justice, then it is so. And the “strict Xns,” as they are called, come running to this rallying ground and cast their ballots. Yes, sometimes they actually have a little amendment,c worshiping―Christianly!―the majority! But they see through the entire odious business― of course, thank you very much. In private conversation they babble tirelessly about how wretched and debased it all is. But there, at the point where, by energetic action―that is, by standing absolutely apart, not in order to remain silent, no, in order to stand as a bothersome and of course mistreated reminder that there is a God―there they cast their ballots, worshiping―Christianly!―the majority! 24 commune naufragium] Latin, common shipwreck. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1850

53

b

in which people do not insure, as they otherwise do, against shipwreck, but in which the insurances are themselves the shipwreck

1

c

5

a little amendment in order to― improve!―the monstrous evil that has triumphed totally: even more insane than if someone wanted to extinguish a fire with water from an eyedropper! And when this is done, when they have “saved their conscience” in this way by improving and correcting the evil a little bit―that is, by making it worsea―then they cast their votes along with everyone else a

, if they accomplish anything at all,

10

15

54

1

[a]

the concept “complicity.”

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 81–82

•

1850

It is indeed a curious misunderstanding, a consequence of this deification of scholarship and science, for people also to want to use science in presenting the existential sphere. The existential as such is something far more concrete than the “scientific” (and to use learned science in presenting the existential is thus pure nonsense); its presentation is essentially either realization in life or poetic presentation loquere ut videam.

81

In a time of moral dissolution such as ours, the concept of “complicity” must be sharpened quite significantly. It is so easy to say that one is participating out of zeal and earnestness and is also making an effort to do one’s little part to counteract what is wrong; that is, one permits all the corruption to remain in force and at most proposes a little amendment. And a person profits from doing so: by being in good standing with the corruption because, when one views the whole affair, he is a participant―and also by flattering himself in imagining that he is better than his times. The truth is quite different. The whole in which I participate is naturally far more important than my tiny little amendment from within. Therefore the participant is responsible for the whole. But this would be acting decisively; it would be exposing oneself to danger, acquainting oneself with the patient sufferings of seeming to accomplish nothing whatever (for at first the pure service of the idea is like standing completely aside, while the least little amendment immediately “accomplishes” a great deal), as if one were drowning in the crowd. In all critical periods a great deal of villainy is done by individuals almost all of whom are aware of the seat of the whole calamity, and then, instead

82

11 loquere ut videam] Latin, speak, that I may see [you]. (See also explanatory note.)

5

10

15

57 20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 82–83

•

1850

55

of taking decisive action and suffering, or refraining altogether from action, they convert it into an amendment, and as noted, through a culpable nefas they profit, in the worldly sense, in two ways. 5

10

15

20

58 25

30

83 35

Unfortunately one must almost fear that Peter has now become a figure of this sort. He has always been something of a fuddy-duddy. Recently he has been rather devoid of ideas. But now it seems almost as if he has seen the light―he will find success as a cheerleader for mediocrity, triviality, and heartiness. It is true that he has needed diversion. I can understand that he is tired of living out there in the country with a sick wife―but what a diversion! Now he is running around to every assembly, speaking everywhere―naturally, with heartiness and earnestness, “in order to counteract.” At the Society of Friends of the Peasant to give assurances: I am not a member of the Friends of the Peasant― instead of acting by staying away.―He is intelligent and very knowledgeable, but he is disintegrating into a vapid gadabout, taking part in everything. It is a bad sign that he is living at Christian Lund’s, for he will surely become Christian’s ideal! The reduplication of form that is consistency of character is beyond his existential energy. He cannot actively remove himself from a situation and thereby express qualitative opposition and heterogeneity; he remains within the situation, giving assurances that he is not in agreement, more or less as when he was at the conventicle and served up a critique in which he gave assurances that it was not a critique.

[b]

is rlly that for him religiousness is always a condition: it is―he presents everything in the sphere of being, Spinozistically. How it becomes, in the sense of coming into being and in the sense of being preserved, does not rlly concern him. Therefore he can only deal with a small portion of dogmatics. Every

[a]

3 nefas] Latin, crime, sin, ungodliness.

Peter.

The error in Schleiermacher’s dogmatics

1

56

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

[b]

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 83–84

This also explains why S. defines the feeling of absolute dependence as the principle of all religion. For this, too, is a condition, or is religiosity in being. As soon as the question becomes an ethical one, that is, one concerning the becoming of this condition, how it comes into being, what I must do in order that it can come into being, and how it can be preserved or how I can be preserved in it―which also is becoming―then the depiction of religiosity is changed. I believe it could be said that it is precisely in this way that S. has failed Christianity, because he understands it aesthetically-metaphysically merely as a condition, while Christianity, ethically, wants to be understood essentially as a striving. S. understands religiosity as wholly analogous to romantic love, for example. But this is a misunderstanding. With romantic love there cannot rlly be any talk of a striving. But Christianity is in the sphere of becoming. When this is understood, every Christian category is depicted differently than in S. And not only this, but it is only then that the most decisive Christian categories emerge―these are lacking in S., or at any rate what is decisive is lacking

•

1850

Christian category is marked by the ethical in the direction of striving. Hence the fear and trembling and that [“]thou shalt[”]; hence also the possibility of offense etc. All such things are of little concern to S[ch]leiermacher. He treats religiosity in being. This actlly is also the source of his principle that feeling is always true. On closer inspection its truth is rlly that it is. The whole battle arises only with becoming. Seen in “becoming,” the question emerges: But then, is that which is––the truth[?] Within being, the truth is that it is.

Ah, what an infinite difference: shielded by the illusion that it is one’s office and one’s living (within the illusion of a Sunday worship service for those who want to come and listen) to declaim some Christian truths―and in one’s daily life to be attractive in the eyes of the world, living one’s daily life existentially in sheer worldly categories, off on a political career, voting and dancing along as a participant in everything―what an infinite difference, then, to be obligated to set forth the Christian ideas in the midst of actuality, breaking through the illusions, accentuating personal existence by virtue of these ideas. Then the conflict will manifest itself―how far “actuality” is from Christianity must manifest itself. As long as the priests remain satisfied with having guaranteed themselves a living and with being permitted, once a week and at funerals to speak a peculiar jargon (like barristers or actors)―with no demands whatever as soon as the shop is closed: well, naturally, this is tolerated. This is precisely what is attractive in the eyes of the world. No one, perhaps no one, is as attractive as a priest who is a politician. For the world understands very well that a priest ought to be a witness for the religious in the midst of “actuality,” but now it [“actuality”] triumphs. Most of his time, his thoughts, are directed toward balloting and the like, so of course he expresses that being a priest is merely his way of making a living. And then there

5

10

84 15

20

59 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 84–85

5

10

15

20

is this hypocrisy of a priest of this sort explaining his participation in politics as earnestness and religiosity. Oh, you blind person: If you want to be more than a priest, then become one of Christianity’s witnesses in the midst of actuality, but do not become a politician. Precisely this is the requirement of Christianity: It wants what is said in church to be expressed in “actuality,” saturating existences; in this, Christianity is different from the theater and the like. Thus the priest must go out among them in order to have a look, in order to make them aware. But does the priest go there[?] He certainly avoids doing that. As soon as he has removed his gown on Sunday he says: [“]For the sake of God in Heaven, let us not talk about that―I am just like you, a member of the club, a voting member of everything worldly, a pleasant dinner-party fellow, shrewdly aware of my own interests, just like you. How unseemly, how uncultivated it would be of me to want to remind you―or even to remind you existentially―about Xnty when outside of church; it would indeed be like an actor continuing to play a comedy out in society and in daily life.[”]

25

85 60 30

35

40

With this unending voting, ethical concepts, too, will finally vanish from the race. The strength of ethical concepts is in the relation of conscience, but voting externalizes everything. Many people surely still live with the comforting notion that the world will never go so awry that, for example, theft becomes a virtue. Who knows that? Look at France! And in that case, how many would dare maintain that theft is sin[?] In that case it would in fact be a Christian collision. While everyone was stealing, one would oneself suffer being a victim of theft without daring to steal in return, and then suffer a second time by proclaiming one’s conviction that theft is sin. Indeed, at this moment, how many people dare to witness against voting! Höchstens one might 41 Höchstens] German, at most.

•

1850

57

58

1

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 85–86

a

after first having given a brilliant lecturea depicting the danger voting poses to morality and religion, a

, “grippingly and movingly,”

•

1850

perhaps have “a profound seer” propose at an assemblya that a vote ought to be taken on whether to refrain from voting. And it is clear that having viewed things so deeply would be admired as the most profound wisdom and the purest sort of morality. Refined lack of character is the glittering sin of our time, the path to “fortune and power.”

An Objection to Xnty. Poetic. This objection could be thought of in connection with a particular individual in such a way that it had nothing whatever of the impudence that objections otherwise have. It might go like this:

5

10

[a] In this way, too, original sin as guilt expresses that God is employing his criterion, for God sees everything in uno; and therefore it seems so burdensome to the merely hum. understanding.

8 in uno] Latin, as one.

Why, O God, did you want to do so much for hum. beings as to give them Xnty, which actlly makes them unhappy[?] Surely, you did it out of love, but you do not seem to have considered that a very subordinate and lowly person can come to suffer very much simply by becoming the object of the love of someone highly elevated. The highly elevated being immediately applies his criterion―he does what he does out of love, but indeed his application of his criterion cannot be avoided, for of course he is who he is. And so, what does he do? He actlly makes the other unhappy. This is also how it is with Xnty! It is your criterion, O God, that is Xnty. In Xnty you actlly relate yourself to yourself. Indeed, you say that it is out of love, that it is for our sake, that you do it, but the criterion in nonetheless yours. How in all the world could it occur to a hum. being that sin was something so frightful that your own Son, the Holy One, must suffer a gruesome death in order that your wrath be appeased[?] This is too lofty for a hum.

5

86

15

20

25

61

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 86–88

5

10

15

87 20

88

62 30

35

being. It is you who have been appeased, but what sets you at rest is too lofty for a hum. being, and is distressing for precisely that reason. Suppose a girl is loved by a man who is absolutely her superior; the more sincerely he loves her, the unhappier he will make her―and out of love. He is applying his criterion, he cannot do otherwise. He loves her sincerely, and what happens: the very thing he sees as the most powerful expression of his love―this very thing will be too lofty for her and will distress her. This objection is quite unusual, but it takes quite a different view of the matter than do the ordinary objections against Xnty. Here, among other things, one sees the necessity of the absolute [“]Thou shalt[”] in order to get through.

Even the chosen apostle―and thus absolutely everyone―is qualitatively different from the God-Man in this: the apostle must be constrained. The GodMan is the only one who possesses pure ideality and therefore voluntarily does what is highest.

I remember one of Mynster’s ordination sermons in which Mynster, in one of his usual oratorical flights, says: If the truth were as frightful as it is sometimes described, why would I seek it out, etc. [?] In other words, M. does not in fact have any absolute notion about absolutely having to seek out the truth, whether it is something frightful, which crushes me, or not. But perhaps it is honest of him to say it so directly.

•

1850

59

60

1

[a]

on myself.

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 89–90

•

1850

Fundamentally, most people live in the same duplicity with regard to spirit as they do with regard to natural phenomena. Science explains that the sun stands still and the earth orbits around it: in everyday speech we continue to say that the sun comes up and goes down. Thus, science basically presents a view that is toto coelo different from what we in fact use in our daily lives, from what the priest preaches, etc.―and the most peculiar sort of affectation emerges in particular with respect to the latter, inasmuch as almost everyone says that this sort of thing can of course be used in popular presentations, though almost everyone is informed about what is “scientific.” Then, to whom is the popular presentation directed?

89

If someone were to say, “Yes, of course you can be so altruistic, serving the truth so wholly, if you will―you, who are wealthy,” I would reply, [“]Well, there is some truth in that.[”] I do, however, have an unusual view of existence. For indeed, as soon as I no longer have the means to do things this way, I will modestly take up some activity in which I work for a living. If my needs in this connection are so great that I must work all day long, well, then I will confess that I regard it as my task to work for a living. If my needs are not that great, then I will see to it that I have a little time left over and a little spare money set aside so that I can serve the truth, even if it is on a much smaller scale. But there is one thing, one thing that I definitely do not want: I do not want there to be any confusion about whether I am working for my own advantage or for the truth. To my way of thinking, the world’s misfortune is simply that hum. shortsightedness, often with the best of intentions, has thought as follows: If in general you want the truth, then if you occasionally take account of your own interests―even if a less noble method sometimes intervenes―it is a matter of no importance, and furthermore, that is how the world really is, every practical hum. being knows that, and after all, I cannot remake the world. Ah, you who are impatient and shortsighted. No, you surely cannot remake the world. Well, then, just do what you can, live in quiet obscurity, working for your living. Truly, at least a person of this sort does no harm. But if you want to work for the

90

6 toto coelo] Latin, as wide as the heavens.

5

10

20

25

30

63

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 90–92

5

91 10

15

20

25

30

•

1850

truth, then, before God, consider carefully on what scale you can do it. The scale may be modest, but in God’s name, promise and keep your promise to God and yourself that in accordance with this scale you will use the purest of means. The alternative is nothing but impatience and shortsightedness[,] which have done irreparable damage.

1st part, pp. 350 et al. No, no, it is not so much that Hegel is wrong in this way. J. M. [writes] that inasmuch as Hegel indeed also defines evil as abstract subjectivity, arbitrariness, the single individual’s usurpation of the universal―that is, also as egotism―then J. Müller would of course have to agree with him and would indeed be in agreement with him were it not clear that Hegel traces this presence of evil back to a higher necessity. No, the error lies principally in that fact that the universal, which Hegelianism makes into the truth (and the single individual participates in the truth by being subsumed into it), is an abstraction: the state, etc. He does not come to God, to subjectivity in the absolute sense, and to the truth: that in the final analysis the single individual is actually higher than the universal, namely the single individual in his relation to God. How often I have I not argued that Hegel basically makes hum. beings pagans, makes them into an animal race endowed with reason. For in an animal race “the single individual” is always lower than the “race.” The hum. race has the peculiarity that, precisely because every individual is created in the image of God, “the single individual” is higher than the “race.” That this can be taken in vain and dreadfully misused: concedo. But that is Xnty. And it is there that the battle must rlly be fought.

64 35

92

61

The Shrewd―the Good and the True. Take a certain fraction of the good or of the true―this is the shrewdness with which you will succeed in the world. Take the 30 concedo] Latin, precondition, I concede.

[a]

Julius Müller on “Sin.”

1

62

1

[a]

see the enclosed.

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 92–93

•

1850

good or the true entirely, and the exact opposite will happen― you will come into total conflict with the world. I have an example of this. I had at first thought of an enigmatic dedication to the writings concerning my work as an author, inserting “her.” For other reasons, this cannot in fact be done, for however enigmatic it would be, it would nonetheless be easily understood, and furthermore, not only do I not have any guarantee that a newspaper will show respect and not take it upon itself to mention her name, but on the contrary, there is the greatest likelihood that this will happen, and then everything would be disturbed and I would perhaps have caused incalculable harm. But I would very much like to do it, because I would like to have the matter properly dealt with before my death, if this is possible. But I want to illuminate a different matter here. So, assuming I did do this―what then? Well, then I would have been wanting in shrewdness. Why? Because it is too lofty. By now, this story has been forgotten: I was a scoundrel, but now it has been forgotten and everything is all right again with respect to this matter―now it must not be touched upon. Yes, but in fact I was not quite entirely a scoundrel; the whole matter has a far deeper meaning. It does not make matters any better―this is precisely the problem, and it is also what would make such a step unwise. It would be so lofty that it would look as if I wanted to wrest people out of their pleasant routine for a moment by being able to explain everything and by having explained it―and then they would become annoyed, and so one comes into conflict.

Is it not a curious yet profound turn of phrase that one can say, [“]Here there is absolutely no talk of any choice―I am choosing such and such.[”] (A similar remark is found in J. Müller, but not put so precisely.) Furthermore, Xnty can say to a pers.: [“]You shall choose the one thing needful, but in such a way that there is no talk of any choice―that is, if you spend a long time talking nonsense, you are not actlly choosing the one thing needful; it must be chosen first, as with the kingdom of God.[”] So therefore there is something with respect to which there may not be―and in principle cannot be―any choice, and yet it is a choice. Thus, precisely the fact that there is no choice is the expression of the

5

10

15

20

25

93

35

65 40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 93

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

66

•

1850

enormous passion or intensity with which one chooses. Can any more accurate expression be given for the fact that freedom of choice is only a formal category of freedom, and that emphasizing freedom of choice as such is simply the loss of freedom? The content of freedom is so decisive for freedom that the truth of freedom of choice is precisely that there must be no choice, even though it is indeed a choice. This is “spirit.” But precisely because hum. beings are far from being spirit, precisely for this reason, freedom causes them so many difficulties because they continually remain suspended in freedom of choice. Reflection, which in turn is linked to inertia and what is base, comes to stare fixedly at freedom of choice instead of remembering that there must be no choice―and then choose. Strange as it seems, one must thus say that only fear and trembling, only constraint, can help a pers. into freedom. For fear and trembling and constraint can gain mastery over one in such a way that there is no talk of any choice―and then one surely chooses the right thing. At the moment of death most people choose the right thing. But how is scientific scholarship supposed to help? In no way, no way. It releases all the tension in calm, objective observation― and then freedom becomes some inexplicable something. From a scientific and scholarly point of view, Spinoza is and becomes the only consistent thinker. Here it is just as with believing and speculating, and as Joh. Climacus has said, just like sawing wood: It is one thing to make oneself objectively light and something else to make oneself subjectively heavy: and then people want to do both at once. Freedom actually is only when―at the same instant, the same second that it is (freedom of choice)―it goes with infinite speed to bind itself unconditionally through the choice of submission, the choice whose truth is that there cannot be talk of any choice. It is inconceivable: the miracle of almighty love that God can actually grant a hum. being so much that, with respect to Himself, He could wish to say, almost like a suitor (here there is a fine play on words: to make free, to propose): [“]Will you have me, or will you not[”]―and then wait one single second for the answer. Alas, but the hum. being is not entirely spirit. He thinks: Because the choice has been left to me, I will take my time and first I will consider the matter truly earnestly. What a sorry anticlimax! “Earnestness” is precisely choosing God immediately and “first.” So a person lies there, contending with a phantom, freedom of

63

64

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 93–94

•

1850

choice: does he possess it or does he not, etc.?―even doing so from a scientific-scholarly point of view. He does not notice that he has missed freedom. Then he perhaps amuses himself for a while with the idea of freedom of choice until things change yet again and he comes to doubt whether he has freedom of choice. And now he has indeed lost freedom of choice. By grasping (in the military sense) the matter utterly erroneously, he has confused everything. By staring fixedly at “freedom of choice” instead of choosing, one loses both freedom and freedom of choice. It can never be regained through reflection; if it is to be regained it must be through intensified fear and trembling evoked by the thought of having wasted it. The enormous thing granted a hum. being is choice, freedom. If you want to save it and preserve it, there is only one way to do so: At that very second unconditionally and in utter submission to give it back to God, and yourself along with it. If this sight of what has been granted to you tempts you, if you yield to the temptation and gaze with selfish desire upon freedom of choice― you lose freedom. And then your punishment is to walk about in a sort of confusion, swaggering over having freedom of choice. [“]Woe to you, this is the sentence pronounced upon you: You have freedom of choice, you say, and you have not yet chosen God.[”] Then you become sick; freedom of choice becomes your obsession; finally you become like the rich person who melancholically imagines that he is impoverished and will die of want. You sigh that you have lost freedom of choice―and the error is simply that you are not sorrowing deeply enough, for then you would certainly regain it.

With respect to many mental sufferings, it may be said that the very offense of which the sufferer accuses himself is perhaps only really committed at that moment, but in a very different way. There was someone (it was a Catholic who became a Lutheran; Kofoed-Hansen told me this) who maintained that he had sinned against the Holy Spirit by having been disloyal to his convictions at a moment of difficulty, and that there was no grace for him. Perhaps the sin against the H. S. was rather the pride with which he would not forgive himself. There is also a stringency in condemning oneself, in not wanting to hear of grace―which is simply sin. As I pointed out to Kofoed-Hansen, this is something Anti-Climacus has already shown.

5

10

15

20

25

94

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 94

•

1850

As he approached the bottom of the page, Kierkegaard gradually lengthened the lines in order to have room for the conclusion of entry NB15:94

65

66

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 95–96

•

1850

68

So now Lic. Lind wants to give lectures at the Society for Workmen’s Culture, lectures on proofs of the truth of Xnty! This is certainly well-intentioned, but really, he does not know what he is doing. This social class has already become pampered so that as soon as it gathers at a meeting, it feels that it is an authority entitled to pass judgment. The person who speaks is not a “teacher” but is someone who defers to the crowd, to this esteemed gathering. And now “proofs”! Well, thank you very much, then everything will be in order: “Let us now hear what Xnty has to say in its defense,” etc. That will be the impression― and this is the abolition of Xnty. Priests are what are needed, priests with courage and authority. The confessional is what should be used. Alas, such efforts, well-intentioned in every way―which confuse more and more.

95

For a long, long time the human race exhausted itself with the question of God’s personhood. If only we could comprehend that, people thought, we could put aside the matter of the Trinity. What happened? Then came Hegel and the Hegelians. They had a better understanding of the matter: They proved that God was personal simply from the fact that he is triune. Well, thank you very much, this is a real help. The whole business with the Trinity was a sham, it was the old trilogy of logic (thesis―antithesis―synthesis), and the “personhood” that resulted from it was more or less the X with which people began in those days, when they thought that if only they could comprehend God’s personhood, they could put aside the matter of the Trinity. On the whole, this is Hegelianism’s most profound confusion with respect to Xnty: that it has no time and no understanding for posing the Christian problem first, before one comprehends. Hegel’s results (which are proclaimed with the accompaniment of trumpets and drums as the explanation of everything) are an approximation of the form of the problem as that which one must now comprehend or comprehend that it cannot be comprehended.

96

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 96–98

5

69 10

15

•

1850

The point at which Hegel ends is more or less that at which Xnty begins: the misunderstanding is simply that Hegel thinks that there he is finished with Christianity―indeed that he has gone much farther. It is simply impossible for me to refrain from laughing whenever I think of Hegel’s comprehending Xnty, which defies comprehension. And what I have always said is and remains true: Hegel was a professor of philosophy, not a thinker, and he must also have been a rather insignificant personality without an impression of life―but a quite extraordinary professor, I do not deny that. But surely someday the time will come when this concept― professor―gains acceptance as a comical character. Think of Xnty! Alas how changed it is since the time when it hada confessors b ―and the time when it drew professors who can be inflected in all casibus.

97

Speculation―Faith.

20

Speculation can present the problems, can know that every single problem is a problem that exists for faith, is characterized and compounded in such a way that it exists [as a problem] for faith―and then ask: Will you believe or not[?] Furthermore, speculation can audit faith―i.e., that which at a given moment is believed or is the content of faith―in order to see whether faith contains an admixture of nonsensical categories that are not the objects of faith but, e.g., of speculation. All this is a very complicated task. Speculation sees―but only to the extent that it says: [“]Here it is.[”] Then it is blind. Then comes the faith that believes; it is the one who sees. in relation to the object of faith

25

30

98

A Special Difficulty with My Life.

35

If people had a notion of what I have suffered, of what I still suffer, of what sufferings are connected to such an existence, they would be much more accommodating. 16 casibus] Latin, grammatical cases.

67

a

inflexible

b

who could only be declined in one casus.

4 casus] Latin, grammatical case.

1

68

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 98–100

•

1850

Now it cannot be denied that in “the writings” I have presented this often enough and in frightening fashion―but personally, in my contact with others, I have been the easygoing fellow with a zest for life. People do not notice that this is a form of melancholia and is precisely a sign of how deeply I am suffering―just as I, in turn, also shudder at becoming the object of other people’s pity. Perhaps this is pride, though I understand it as God’s grace that he does not free me from the sufferings but grants me the consolation of being personally able to conceal them. There is, however, also the problem that one or another person is tempted by this and wants to copy me because he imagines that what is contained in the writings is an exaggeration, that I myself manage things so easily. I surely have no guilt in connection with this, for after all, he himself lacks earnestness, but I am painfully moved by it.

5

10

70

15

20

Which is worse, then: to be executed or that slow death of being trampled to death by geese.

99

There is something very telling in the story about Sibylla and Tarquinius Superbus. Lying and deceit always begin at a mendacious high point but then are willing to come down if the buyer does not want to pay so high a price. Truth always begins with the lowest possible though true price: then if the buyer does not want it, the price is a little higher the next time, and thus it goes up. Mendaciously obtained superiority always begins in the highest key―if this is not accepted, well, then it comes down. True superiority always begins as low as is truly possible; then, if it is disdained, it of course goes up.

100 25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 101 101

5

10

71 15

20

25

30

35

40

There is an excellent little section on evil, on sin as the incomprehensibleb, the world’s secret, precisely because it is the groundless.c I am also delighted to see that he cites Daub, who also takes this position in Judas Ischariot and is not without a tendency to assign evil to a particular category of the miraculous, though he later abandoned this view and was of the opinion that he could conceptualize evil as the negative, e.g., in his work Hypotheses on Hum. Freedom. J. M. is entirely right when he says that sin’s “incomprehensibility” is not caused by limited knowledge―as if the proper course would be for us to continue speculating and then we would certainly arrive at it. No, its incomprehensibility is precisely its nature. Quite simply, one could also view it as follows: If one took a hum. being who had once submitted to a sin and who has now been delivered, and one were to ask him whether he can now comprehend that he could sin in that manner, he would answer, No, not in the least. The purer a pers. becomes the more incomprehensible evil becomes to him. I can also demonstrate this inconceivability of sin in another fashion. Anti-Cl. has correctly shown that with respect to evil, possibility and actuality relate to one another in a manner that is the reverse of what they do otherwise. In other cases, actuality is higher than possibility, but in relation to evil, actuality is lower than possibility; the good as possibility is the imperfect, as actuality it is the perfect; but evil as possibility is better than [evil] as actuality. But of course to comprehend it [evil] is to dissolve actuality into possibility (see Joh. Climacus); but if in casu actuality is lower than possibility, it is of course impossible to comprehend, for of course sin only rlly is when it is actuality. But to comprehend is to dissolve into possibility; thus it is impossible to comprehend it because it is not evil when it is dissolved in possibility. The good can be comprehended because there is a direct relationship betw. possibility and actuality, while of course it must be borne in mind that the good in possibility 35 in casu] Latin, in this case.

•

1850

69

[a]

Julius Müller. Doctrine of Sin 1st part pp. 457ff. b

1

the impenetrable

c

the arbitrary discontinuity.

[d]

Therefore we will also find that upon reflection, when a pers. considers sinning or having sinned, he is likely to describe his condition as that of a drunk person. He sank, or his consciousness sank into darkness, as it were. Here lies the category of the groundless. Yet we must not forget that evil can possess a frightful energy in a pers., so that he wants to cast himself into this darkness, and that this is something for which a person is responsible and which essentially inheres in the will. But just as the drunkard is guilty of having become drunk by having overindulged in strong drink, whereas the drunkenness itself is simply a sinking beneath consciousness, so it is with sin.

5

10

15

20

25

70

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 101–103

•

1850

is something lower, that comprehending the good is qualitatively removed from realizing it.

What J. Müller points out earlier is also correct, that freedom cannot be said to be equally the capacity for good and for evil, for then evil is actlly also a good. Nor can one say that misuse of the will is the ground of evil, for the very misuse of the will is of course evil itself.

102 5

10

72

“Science”―The Existential. “Actuality” cannot be conceptualized. Joh. Climacus has already demonstrated this correctly and quite simply. To conceptualize is to dissolve actuality into possibility―but then it is of course impossible to conceptualize it, for to conceptualize it is to transform it to possibility and is thus not to hold fast to it as actuality. As far as actuality is concerned, conceptualizing is a regression, a step backward, not a step forward. It is not as if “actuality” were devoid of concepts―not at all, no, the concept that is found by conceptually dissolving it into possibility is also present in actuality, but of course there is something more: that it is actuality. From possibility to actuality is a step forward (except in connection with evil); from actuality to possibility is a step backward. But there is this ill-fated confusion in modern times, when people have incorporated “actuality” into logic, and then in their distraction they forget that in logic “actuality” is really only a “thought actuality,” i.e., a possibility. Art, science, poetry, etc., only concern themselves with possibility―that is, possibility not in the sense of an idle hypothesis, but possibility in the sense of ideal actuality. But is not history actuality? Yes, of course. But what history? The world’s 6000 years of history are certainly actuality, but an actuality that has been traversed and put behind; for me, it exists and can exist only as a thought actuality, i.e., as possibility. Whether or not the dead actually realized existentially the tasks posed for them in actuality has now been decided, has been

103

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 103

5

10

73

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

concluded; there is no more existential actuality for them except in what has been put behind, which for me, in turn, exists only as ideal actuality, as thought actuality, as possibility. But it is as if people have gone mad with this pantheistic scientism. [“]Don’t mind me,[”] this sort of professor thinks, [“]the couple of years I live, the little bit I could accomplish―is it worth wasting a single moment on that[?] No, ‘science, science.’[”] But this is irreligious, a lack of religious discipline, a lack of “sobriety,” drunkenness, drunkenness in dreams. That “science” is lower than the existential is seen quite simply in the God-Man. Imagine yourself as a contemporary: “science” is impossible here because the God-Man is himself the existential. But then, when the pace has slackened―a couple of hundred years or so afterward―then, well, then there is less religiousness, and then “science” emerges. And 1800 [years] later the situation has been entirely reversed, then “science” is higher than the existential. Imagine yourself contemporary with Socrates. There is no science here; that is precisely what he wants to get rid of; he is “a gadfly,” himself the existential. But then he dies. In Plato, the existential slackens―then comes “science.” Well, then, is Plato greater than Socrates? Yes, perhaps when he is judged by docents; but then they must be consistent and judge that a professor of theology is greater than Xt. No―precisely when “science” has become what is unconditionally the highest, precisely at this point religion has as good as totally disappeared. There are two poles, and one could certainly cast a generation’s ethical-religious horoscope by learning what it judges concerning “science” in the area of religion. “The owl of Minerva takes wing only at dusk,” and “science” always comes afterward. What Joh. Climacus says is true: to transform Xnty into “science” is the greatest possible error, and if it succeeds absolutely (oh, how “the times” will cheer!)––then Xnty is absolutely abolished. But what the judge in Either/Or says is also true, that the finer, the more refined, the fluid to which one becomes addicted, the more difficult the healing. And now this addiction to “science.” Merciful God, what a world cataclysm would be required to wrest a person out of this drunkenness. When being drunk means being sober not only in one’s own eyes, but in the eyes of everyone―but what am I saying: [“]sober[”?]―yes, being more than sober, sober as a god who, in blessed levelheadedness, reposes in equilibrium, possessing that self-esteem and

71

72

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 103–105

•

1850

being respected as such by everyone―what hope then is there for salvation[?] A person who wants to speak of this sort of drunkenness will of course be regarded by the entire world, in scientific fashion, as a contemptible drunkard. 5

My Misfortune in These Times, Why I Am Not Understood.

1

a

that I was a “serious” man, worthy of respect

My misfortune is that I have removed the illusions. Instead of having spent thousands and thousands supporting my existence as a writer like this, and instead of having strained myself so enormously, I should have secured myself a professorial position with a good salary (then I would have been understood by all the tradesmen––i.e., by just about everyone―I would have been understood, certainly not my philosophical positions, but I would have been understooda) and thus would have accomplished little but promised much (then I would have been understood by other professors and scholars). Then I would also have guaranteed that I would be understood by university students inasmuch as I would be examining them―which definitely helps and helps them to speak well of one, because one is, after all, the authorized teacher. (Instead of this I have lived in almost comradely fashion as though I were nobody.) I should have lived in “the circles,” in professorial seclusion; then I would have had a great reputation, and furthermore I would have been safeguarded by belonging to the great corps of civil servants who stick together in accordance with the law that when one is injured, all are injured (instead I have lived as the single individual in whose fate not one single person participates).

It is easy enough to defend the use of shrewdness in accomplishing something by appealing to Paul, who of course also made use of shrewdness. Well, let us see. An existence that has so qualitatively and totally guaranteed its heterogeneity as

104

10

74

15

20

25

30

105 35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 105–108

5

10

•

1850

madnessa can make use of shrewdness without danger. The danger is when a person who is not remarkable in this way acts shrewdly―for then shrewdness takes advantage of him in toto. Such a man has not secured any heterogeneity for himself (which―understood in relation to Paul―can only be attained by at some point acting decisively in opposition to the understanding). The religious do not consider this. Unremarkable religious existences of this sort want to defend their shrewd conduct religiously by appealing to Paul, without noticing or wanting to notice that the “total madness” of Paul’s life―i.e., its incompatibility with shrewdness―was a sufficient guarantee, whereas their little fragment of religiosity drowns in the total shrewdness that belongs to the world and worldliness.

15

106 75 20

107

30

108 35

That I continually go backward is an expression, a qualitative expression, of fear and trembling. I am not oriented in a way that permits me to speak grandly of what is to come and of what I want. No, oriented as I am, I understand that I am capable of nothing whatever. So I turn backward: I strive with all my talents to do the best I can today. And then month follows month, year follows year―and only then to I see what has been achieved.

Yes, it is true: how satirical when one suddenly thinks of the Old Testament command, “You shall not make for yourself any image of your God,” in our times, when God has become abstract. How the world has become reversed: Is it a step forward or backward[?] Fichte the younger has pointed this out in his Vorschule der Theologie § 108.

What inveterate effeminacy: for oneself, to want to proclaim Christianity in such a way that it procures for one all earthly advantages―and then, if pressed, to put up with someone pro-

73 a

which of course was accomplished precisely by acting in opposition to shrewdness

1

5

74

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 108–109

•

1850

claiming it by making every sort of sacrifice―provided, please note, that he is willing to let himself be regarded as though this were a sort of idiosyncratic hobby (with the former alternative being true, earnest Christianity) and if, in addition, he personally adheres to a light, witty way of talking. And one is sufficiently stupid or inveterate to fail utterly to understand that he has been seen through, that such a person is actlly and seriously playing a cunning trick on him. Because for someone to want to have the advantages―well, after all, if he confesses it, no one else can really object to it―but to distort the relationship to such a degree that unselfishness is seen to be an exaggeration to the point of being ludicrous; and then for selfishness to profit still further by having something to amuse it―this is indeed to have sunk too low. It is true that the more refined sort of people do not actually do this so openly and brazenly; on the contrary, they occasionally give compliments, but shrewd in the ways of the world as they are, they do make an effort to advance the view that this sort of thing―which of course is something amiable, truly praiseworthy, and more than forgivable―is nonetheless an exaggeration, a hobby.

5

10

15

20

25

76

In relation to Xnty the question is always to what extent must a pers. be reshaped toward becoming spirit before he dare appropriate grace. As the situation now is, things are just too crazy; it is rlly nothing but refined paganism. A person remains within all the categories of sensuousness and worldliness, lives his life within them; then he willingly acknowledges that he is far behind (this is called repentance) but remains in the same place; then he brings “grace” to bear―as a new patch on an old garment. On the other hand, if in order to dare appropriate “grace” a hum. being must be decisively developed into being “spirit,” then God knows how many there will be in each generation who would actually

109

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 109–110

5

10

15

20

25

•

1850

75

feel a need for Xnty or have any use for it. If I actually must die away from my most cherished wishes, forsake everything that delights an earthly hum. being, then humanly speaking, I indeed become as unhappy as possible―and so the question is if I then am “spirit” enough to actually have use for Xnty. There is a shameful abuse fostered by the division: the Law is frightening―the Gospel is reassuring. No, at first the Gospel itself is and must be frightening. Had this not been the case, how in all the world could things have happened as they did with Xt: when he said, [“]Come unto me[”]―everyone stayed away, they fled from him. But it is increasingly clear to me that only an apostle can proclaim Xnty in the stricter sense, for only he has the authority to be rigorous in that way. Thus a hum. being does not have authority of that sort and must lower the price. Only the person who has himself been transformed to “spirit” in the stricter sense, only he can no longer understand, will not understand, the confounded nonsense, the feebleness, in which we others are ensnared, which causes us to spare ourselves altogether too much and repose in grace all too early, reposing in it, away from the struggle, instead of reposing in it to become renewed for renewed struggle.

77

110

30

35

Faith―The Proof Someone who is condemned to death as a criminal, a blasphemer; abandoned by everyone, he is flogged, mocked, spat upon, and finally nailed to the cross―and he says: Have faith in me. Indeed, this is truly the place for faith, for all immediacy testifies against it―crying out to heaven, if you will―saying, Do not have faith in him. 1800 years later there lives a speaker who proves on the basis of the consequences of that person’s life that he was the one he said he was. Well, if it can be proven, then he is no longer the object of faith.

[a]

It must, however, be remembered that precisely because in “contemporaneity” the paradox, as the object of faith, is beyond human

1

76 1

5

10

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 110–112

powers, the apostles were therefore equipped with superhuman powers in order to be able to endure having faith. We others have it somewhat easier, and then in addition we have “grace” as the fruit of Xt’s death. But it must never be forgotten that if it can be fully proven from the consequences that Xt is the one he said he was, then he is not the object of faith.

•

1850

If Xt had in any way been of this opinion, he would have said to his disciples, [“]Wait a while, and you will certainly come to see that I was right.[”] But he did not do that; he did not refer to the historical consequences of his life; he wanted to be the object of faith. If this does not help a person to see the confusion in which the whole of Xndom lies, it cannot do any good to talk to him.

5

10

Luther was indeed no dialectician. In the sermon on the epistle for the 6th Sunday after Easter he argues, as he also argues elsewhere, that in relation to faith one must not take into account persons, but only the Word: Even if it were an apostle who taught something other than the Holy Scripture, one ought not follow him. That is right enough. But Luther ought nonetheless be a bit careful. Indeed, Xnty obviously came into the world in reversed fashion, so that the person is higher than the teaching. How am I to know whether something is God’s word or teaching? If Luther replies, [“]By testing the teaching[”], then all is lost, then Xnty is a hum. invention. Exactly the opposite takes place: I yield to someone’s authority, but then the person is higher than the teaching. Luther ought also have pointed this out, though in other respects he can be right in what he says about a hum. being’s presumptuousness with respect to God’s word.

111

Socrates is rlly the martyr to the numerical, the sacrifice demanded by balloting.

112

15

20

25

78 30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 113

•

1850

77

79

113

5

10

15

Concerning the Publication of “The Accounting” and the “Three Notes” Now. Perhaps “The Accounting” can be published, and in its latest version. As for “Three Notes,” I have returned to the original understanding: because I cannot after all present myself in accordance with my wretchedness, nor ought there be any attempt to present myself in accordance with my possible superiority. For me personally, both elements correspond precisely to one another; if one is taken away, the other becomes untrue. So “Three Notes” can either be left lying or the important categories of thought they contain can be used quite simply as theses without mentioning myself with a single word― the thesis “the crowd” is “untruth” and the thesis about “the single individual.” In its present version, “The Accounting” contains essentially nothing about me; if any objection were to be raised, it would more likely be that I am made too insignificant. But in fact my significance cannot be presented truthfully without including, as a counterweight, the fact that I myself am a penitent, and I cannot go that far in presenting my person as long as I am alive, not even for the sake of “her”―who would suddenly be thrust into a reinterpretation of the past, which perhaps would disturb her profoundly.

78

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 114

•

1850 80

The Holy Spirit.

1

Note It was thus a profound view of the matter in antiquity, when people would only let themselves be baptized on their deathbed;

a

The H. S. is called the “the Comforter.” That name could lead one to think that it was supposed to comfort the disciples, and then also the Xns as well, because Xt went away and was no longer visible among them. This is not how it is at all. 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. (One sees from this how infinitely backward is the priestly prattle that at emotional moments―moved and movingly and thoughtlessly―or if it has a thought, it is only to the extent that flesh can be said to have a thought―expresses a wish to be contemporary with Xt.) 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. The Holy Spirit, which Xt will send, is now rlly the dispenser of grace, the grace that Xt earned. Hence the name, “the Comforter.” A hum. being, of course, will not have need of grace only with respect to what is past. That is how people generally think of it. It is said: All your sins have been forgiven you―restitution has been made. Fine, but if I do not die tomorrow, then it will soon become clear that despite the fact that I was granted “grace,” since then I have been far from pure and perfect. So in this respect the matter has in fact become worse. Because before I received grace I of course always had the consolation that grace was available, but now I have indeed misused grace.a Ergo I again need “grace” in connection with the poor use I make of grace, and so on endlessly. Grace is the everlasting fountain―and the H. S. is the dispenser,

114

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 114–115 81

5

the comforter. The comforter also in the sense that Xt as Exemplar is of course a demand to which no hum. being is in fact equal. 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.”

10

115

15

20

25

30

“Christendom” This is the enormous illusion that has actlly abolished Xnty. One can become quite dizzy when one gazes upon the dreadful conceptual confusion that has arisen in connection with Christianity. In brief, the confusion is this, but it has continued from generation to generation of these millions and millions: One enters into Xnty in the wrong way. Instead of entering as an individual, one enters with the others; the others are Xns―ergo I am one, too, and in the same sense that the others are. In this connection I come to think of old Socrates. Being a hum. being was something that gave him pause, for in his day the matter of being a hum. being was the way things are now with respect to being a Xn. The individual was not a hum. being qua individual, but inasmuch as the others are hum. beings, then I am one as well. But still, that confusion was nothing compared to the one in Xndom, because being a Xn should be the most mature and self-conscious decision.

•

1850

79

people understood that, humanly speaking, Xnty is the life view for which only one situation is favorable: that of death. The difficulty emerges when one must struggle. One postpones the acceptance of grace until it [the struggle] is past―then one accepts it; now restitution has been made for everything; then one dies blessed. But this is either melancholia or indeed worldly shrewdness that takes Xnty in vain.

1

5

10

80

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 116–117

•

1850 82

The Most Dangerous Situation for a Child with Respect to the Religious What is most dangerous is not for the father or the person bringing up the child to be a freethinker or even for him to be a hypocrite. No, what is dangerous is for him to be a pious and God-fearing man, for the child to be deeply and profoundly certain of this and yet nonetheless to notice a profound disquiet concealed in his father’s soul, for which not even the fear of God and piety can gain peace. The danger lies precisely in the circumstance that in this situation the child is prompted to draw a conclusion concerning God, almost to the effect that God is not, indeed, the infinitely loving being.

How suspect it is to bring up a child in Xnty can also be seen from this: Xnty has as its precondition the actuality of the consciousness of sin. It is the joyous news that God in Xt takes sinners upon himself; Xt is the friend of sinners―blessed news for every sinner, all the more blessed, the more profoundly he has sensed the power of sin and the pain of repentance. But now take the child: it has no actual consciousness of sin. What then? Well, the child must actlly have his own thoughts concerning all that is said about how good God and Xt are―that is, that the child notices that it is accompanied by an aber: if one has sinned. Take an analogy. Describe the family physician to a child as a particularly kind and loving man, etc.―what then? The child actlly thinks as follows: [“]Yes, it is indeed very possible that he is such a nice man; I would gladly believe it, but I would nonetheless prefer to be free of him, because for me to be the object of his special love means that I am sick, and being sick is not nice; therefore I am far from being happy at the thought that he is to be sent for.[”] Assume that there is a sickly person in the family who is inexhaustible in praising the physician’s love: the child thinks, Well, that is right enough―if one is sick. If one is actually sick, and the sickness is of a serious character, then one is happy that there is a physician; but when one is not sick, when one has absolutely no notion of being sick―then “the physician” is rlly an unpleasant thought.

116

5

10

117 15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 117–119

83 5

10

118 15

20

25

119 30

35

•

1850

So in relating a child to Xnty, one must either omit what Xnty rlly is―and what sort of way is that to bring up a child in Xnty!―or one must say it, and this causes the child to be more afraid of Xnty than happy about it. Millions of people would have to have been aware of this were not the entire business with the many Xns and the upbringing of their children in Xnty a sham. Science wants to turn Xnty into mythology―and so there is an outcry. People do not notice that as it is currently and generally practiced, Xn upbringing is rlly mythology.

The difference between a pagan and a Xn is not that the latter is without sin. The difference is in how he regards his sin, and how he is kept striving. When a pagan sins―and precisely the more profound and noble he is―there is a frightful pause in striving: he descends into melancholia, broods ruminatively on his guilt, and sin perhaps gains more and more power over him, so that in desperation he sinks ever more deeply. The Xn has a savior; he takes refuge in “grace”; as if he were a child, his sin is transformed for him into fatherly chastisement that has the purpose of helping him forward―and now he perhaps takes a forward step that is more certain. Truly, cheerful courage is not rash irresponsibility, but is confidence in grace. It can be rash irresponsibility for a pers. hastily to leave behind the thought of a sin of weakness, but it can also be cheerful courage because he has such a profound and confident notion of “grace.”

Instead of all this priestly prattle and all these scholarly tomes that make the matter so serious, so infinitely serious and important, by showing how Xnty satisfies the deepest needs of the entire race, so that there is no mention―how frivolous or narrow!― of my little I, but―how grand and profoundly serious!―of the whole world. Instead, I could be tempted to reverse the discourse for once, saying, I feel a need for Xnty, and I can easily imagine that you others do not feel this, that you are better and stronger than I. There is a confounded hypocrisy concerning seriousness:

81

82

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 119–122

•

1850

that seriousness is supposedly to conceal oneself behind “the others,” these millions, instead of being “the single individual.”

84

Actlly, the Formula of Concord and so forth indeed made the religious into legalisms; it is like an unending legal case in which one piously encounters narrow-minded hum. hairsplitting in favor of God. But, good Lord, does God need such pious Procuratores in order to win the case[?]

120

My need for Xnty is so great (both because of my sufferings and my sins and because of my frightful introversion): therefore I am not understood. Therefore, as well, I have frequently even been afraid of making life altogether too serious for others as well; that is why I am so cautious.

121

5

15

The use people make of “the Church” is indeed also an indulgence from making genuine decisions with respect to becoming a Xn. What a difference: the days when there was no Xnty but a beginning had to be made, and the weight of the world fell with an almost crushing impact upon “the single individual’s” decision whether to become a Xn―and now, when the gigantic, accumulated illusions of eighteen centuries transform it almost into foolishness, something one becomes without really knowing how. So far is it from being the case that the 1800 years are a proof of the truth of Xnty, that (in a way, religiously, even though to the extent that it is disobedient, it is irreligious) one could more easily transform the fact that Governance has permitted Xnty to sink into an illusion like this into an argument against Xnty. But it must not be forgotten that this is of course the Xns’ fault, so that Xnty almost comes to transform itself into the most terrifying accusation against the hum. race: that after Xnty was implanted in it, the race permitted it to degenerate to such a degree that it became meaningless, unrecognizable, an enormous illusion. If this fight is to be fought through, it will become more terrible than when Xnty came into the world. It will be said with intensified passion that true Xnty is odium totius generis humani.

7 Procuratores] Latin, administrators, lawyers. 36 odium totius generis humani] Latin, hatred of the entire human race. (See also explanatory note.)

122

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122

5

85 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

After the world has made its arrangements with Xnty, taken possession of it―then, to want to take Xnty from it (that is, make Xnty into what it was), then the world will certainly let go of it. The martyrs―this is almost crazy―will not bleed the way they did in the past, because they were Xns: no, they will be put to death because they are not Xns. The most frightful of dramas! And how solitary the martyr will stand! Because when Xnty came into the world―precisely because the contrast was truly striking, qualitative, crying out to the heavens―precisely for that reason it was easier to choose decisively: either/or. But now the illusion has enervated the contrast. When someone ventures forth, as soon as he encounters any resistance, at that very instant, the illusion is at his service with a new little refinement and he retreats again. In the beginning, the world forced the Xn into character; nowadays, illusion, inexhaustibly inventive, continually tears him out of character. When Xnty strove against paganism, there was no difficulty in finding a foothold, for the qualitative resistance of the antitheses to one another provided the foothold. Nowadays, almost superhuman powers are required simply to get a foothold, for the illusion continually wants to insinuate itself, day in and day out. If a man is condemned to life in prison for his convictions, that is certainly a test; but still, if the matter is settled with this, it is nonetheless something that can be managed. But if the punishment is made more stringent by interrogating him again and again every week, and he is presented with a form, and if he signs it, he will be set free: this is a terrible intensification. And yet, if it is the same form word for word, it can be managed. But if he is interrogated again and again every two hours and is continually presented with a new form, and if he signs it, he will be set free: this is beyond human strength. And this is how it is to battle an illusion. The illusion is improved at every instant, imitating the position of the witness to the truth, but as an illusion, saying, [“]Good Lord, then we are of course in agreement―why do you want to make yourself miserable and alarm us others.[”] You see, this is torture. Paganism truly did not insist that it possessed Xnty. But the illusion will not for any price part with the illusion that it possesses Xnty. Therefore the illusion is continually willing to offer something different, all according to the capacities of the witness to the truth. But it does not want any decision. The illusion is willing to make concessions on a grand scale (as in bidding at an auction)―but one thing must be made certain: that fundamentally the old arrangement remains in place.

83

84

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122

•

1850

In order to fight his way forward in this situation, the witness to the truth must not only have an almost superhuman cunning, but an almost superhuman cunning in being cruel to himself. One weak moment―that is enough, then the illusion swallows him up; he himself does not know one thing from another, and this makes the task 50 percent harder for the next witness to the truth. The most dreadful battle is not when one opinion confronts another opinion; no the most dreadful battle is when two hum. beings say one and the same thing and the battle is over the interpretation, and this interpretation is nonetheless a qualitative difference. It is in the interest of the deceiver to let the original formulation intrude meaninglessly: “Of course, we are saying one and the same thing”―instead of letting the fight be over the interpretation. Everything has reversed itself: there was a time when the world wanted to do battle―then Xnty fought. Now the world is in mendacious possession of Xnty, so its strategy is to do its utmost to avoid doing battle at all costs. It is as if a confidence man has the suspicion that if a matter comes to trial, he would lose, and therefore the whole of his strategy consists of preventing it from coming to trial. In matters of the spirit this is much easier than in everyday civil life, for the strategy consists of continually imitating the position taken by the other party, so that to a certain extent one says the same thing―but Good Lord, then we are of course in agreement. So let people claim that the world has made progress since the days when Xns were persecuted with fire and the sword―and nowadays, when it fights with the power of lies for the appearance of being Xn. But what are they fighting about, then? Being a Xn of course includes a requirement of self-denial such as cannot be particularly inviting to the world. True, but the world regards Xnty differently. It has gotten it into its head that this teaching, after all, constitutes an insurance policy for eternity―and

5

10

86

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122

5

10

15

20

88 25

30

35

40

thus it would be unwise to abandon it. Naturally, to abandon this fantasy in order actually to become a Xn is equally unwise, for then the insurance policy is too expensive. It would of course be madness for a person to spend his entire fortune on insurance― for indeed, what would be left to insure. No, one pays a certain percentage; thus buying insurance is something no prudent man omits. And this is how the world wants to have Xnty. It is impossible to make it clear than one cannot have Xnty in this way because the world does not want to understand this, and the world does not want to take the matter so seriously. But that someone should compel it to give up the name of Xn and thus leave the insurance company[?]―no, never. The person who wants to work in that direction is not only the enemy of hum. beings, he is an enemy of God. Influenced as the world has been by a volatilized Christian tradition, the world’s impression is this: It is, after all, a question concerning eternal life―a wise man does something, after all, for safety’s sake: he takes out an insurance policy, paying a certain percentage each year. One takes out insurance―only now is one at peace; now one can enjoy life; only now―as “the priest” so nicely puts it―do the joys of life take on their true flavor. What joys? Well, let us not talk about that.a One takes out insurance; now―as “the priest” so nicely puts it―one possesses that which can alleviate one’s worries and sufferings―ah, yes! supposing that one is “earnest” enough to be capable of freeing himself entirely from the worry that the whole business about insurance might be a dubious matter, that it might be a chimera, so that what is needed is more likely to be an insurance company to guarantee the insurance policy. But of course, this is something we have; we of course have the clergy. Just look at them, and from their security you will easily see the security with which you can insure yourself with them―on very favorable and reasonable terms. Just listen to their arguments, their proofs―indeed, no insurance agent has known how to recommend his firmb like

•

1850

a

nor about their “true” taste.

85

1

86

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122

•

1850

At two points in entry NB15:122, Kierkegaard changed the word “Mynster” to “the priest.” In the marginal column two additions can be seen, one of which is a change to the text in the main column.

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122–123

5

10

15

20

25

this. They take care of everything for you, without the least difficulty: you just give them your name, then the sexton enters it in “The Book of Life,” and then you are enrolled. And in order that you not be bothered in any way by anything in the external world, the clergy―who of course are solely concerned with the serious business of insurance for eternity, and thus might easily come to appear overly serious―have done everything in order to be exactly the way you are with respect to external matters and so forth. And then if anyonec says to “the priest”: “But is it quite certain, then, that there is an immortality[?],”d he replies, “Nothing is more certain; if―to make an unreasonable assumption for a moment―it turns out that there is no immortality, just make sure to get hold of me in the next life, and you will get your money back―and you will be entitled to call me a deceiver―indeed, if you wish, even to kill me. But one thing you will not reasonably be able to accuse me of, neither here nor in the hereaftere: that we are too expensive―for charts and tables show with complete accuracy that the Lutheran Church in Denmark offers something close to the lowest price, while its insurance policies are nonetheless in every respect entirely as safe, indeed, perhaps even more reassuring than those of Catholicism and other confessions, which, however, make much greater demands upon their participants.[”]

30

89

123

35

40

This is how Xnty came into the world: it presupposed hardship, agony, the anguished conscience that suffered under the Law, the hunger that simply cries out for food―and then Xnty was the food. And nowadays, nowadays people think that an appetizer is needed in order to get people to go along with Xnty. What appetizers? The preaching of the Law? No, no, Xnty must be served with the spices that whet the appetite―proofs, reasons, probability, and the like. And most recently the sermon has essentially focused solely and exclusively on

•

1850

87

b

, it is as obvious as 2 and 2 make 4 that taking out insurance here is not to “venture” anything in the least way, that on the contrary, it is the shrewdest of all calculations, to pay a bargain price in purchasing the most invaluable of all goods, the true good, “which is the only thing that gives joys their true taste and gently alleviates the cares.”

1

5

10

c

(who is registered with and known to the sexton, and thus― what amounts to the same thing― is certain of heaven)

d

(for he is certain of immortality and blessedness, there can be no doubt about that; his doubt is whether it is also certain that immortality and blessedness exist)

15

e

20

(and least of all in this final phase, where to your blessed surprise you will find that you have received indescribable blessedness beyond all measure, as Paul says)

88

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 123–125

•

1850

appetizers. In other words, they are betraying Xnty; they rlly deny that it is unconditionally the food, that the fault lies in hum. beings, that they should be properly starved―then they would surely learn to need Xnty. But nowadays it is Xnty that needs appetizers in order to have a bit of taste―otherwise it presumably tastes of nothing. And what does it taste like with the help of an appetizer? We have transformed Xnty from a radical cure (and that is what it is; therefore it presupposes in those concerned the resolve―resolvere, to open up―that is always required in connection with a radical cure) into a minor precaution, as that which is taken to avoid catching cold, getting a toothache, and the like. And curiously enough, whereas every inventor of drops, extracts, etc., “which neither harm nor help,” trumpets his medicine as a miraculous balm―Xnty is proclaimed in very subdued tones; a gang of reasons and proofs immediately marches up in order to make it at least somewhat probable that there is something to Xnty. And this is called preaching, for which a person is rewarded as a “servant of the Word.” Truly, if worse comes to worst, I believe Xnty would be better served by a charlatan than by a legion of such preachers.

5

10

15

20

90

Proportions. These days most people (these thousands upon thousands) are Christians simply by virtue of being hum. beings. At the greatest possible remove from this would be a demon who managed with the assistance of Xnty to become a hum. being. He would be capable of carrying out a thorough audit of the illusions in established Christendom.

Poetic Lines by an Individual. “Instead of voting by ballot―where, after all, it is so easy for additional questions to arise, putting the outcome in doubt―I propose that in addition to the president, the secretary, etc. yet another official should be elected: the teller. He ought to be

124 25

30

125

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 125–127

5

10

126 15

20

•

1850

analogous to a Notarius publicus, i.e., a person specifically chosen for this function, who could be brought to wherever the assembly met or could be booked a day in advance. His task would be to count the buttons. As soon debate concerning an issue was completed, the president says to the teller, [‘]Would you now please count the buttons.[’] Then the position that wins is the truth; the entire assembly falls down in adoration and says, [‘]It is God’s will.[’] The teller ought also be a holy person, inasmuch as the state sees in him its principle; thus he is a sort of deity, or at any rate a mythological person who could be worshiped in the oriental manner, and an annual festival could be held in his honor.”

The error in much of what the Middle Ages practiced in order to express the heterogeneity of the Christian life and worldliness was that by doing it a person became self-important―indeed, even important before God. Christianity’s view is that the Christian should be so spiritual that he could do such things easily, as if they were nothing. If he can do it that way, Xnty is happy to see it. If he cannot, then it is preferable to make an honest confession and admission, to refrain from bungling things―and then Christianity is also satisfied.

91

127 25

30

35

Goethe always presents his feminine characters solely in the light of male egotism. Take Clärchen! A man like Egmont, who bestrides the stage as he does, even when he is in mortal danger―that he can be so entirely certain that Clärchen will not allude with a single word or expression to all that she of course knows and in which she is infinitely interested―that she can simply love a pers. to that degree: yes, this little, insignificant girl is simply femininely great, an unusual girl in an entirely different sense from the silly way in which people speak of an unusual girl (with a bit of culture, etc.), a figure whom I, in complete agreement with Goethe, value very little. Take Margaret! To preserve that feminine insignificance when confronted by so marked a personality as Faust: yes, this is feminine greatness. But Goethe was such an egotist that he rlly did not even have honesty enough to have a sympathetic eye for evaluating what had been squandered on him. Even the diminutive form “Clärchen” is in one sense unfair if nothing further is said, for her insignificance is simply 1 Notarius publicus] Latin, notary public.

89

90

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 127–128

•

1850

greatness, even it is completely proper for Egmont to call her “Clärchen”; but perhaps it could be emphasized that it was only Egmont who called her that.

What and―How. The difference in life is not what is said, but how. With respect to [“]what,[”] the same thing has been said before, perhaps many times before―so that the old saying, [“]There is nothing new under the sun,[”] holds true, this old saying that nonetheless always remains new. But how it is said: this is what is new. And thus understood, it is true that everything is new, because just for safety’s sake, I ought to include the following: Even when an imitator repeats one or another old thing, down to the last little insignificant detail, there is still something new―that the old has now become nonsense, triviality. The eye for this [“]how[”] is actlly spirit, whereas there is (among other things) such a thing as spiritless learning of which the secret is: This new thing is the same as such and such from the 17th century and is also the same as such and such from the Middle Ages, etc. This is the intellectual difference: what and how. Again, the ethical-religious difference: what is said and how it is said. The words [“]I know nothing except Christ, and him crucified,” spoken by an apostle, cost him his life; by a witness to the truth, it becomes persecution; by someone lesser, by me, for example, it does become a sort of suffering; by a poet, it leads to success; by a declaiming priest, it not only brings him success, but he is really honored almost as someone holy. “The single individual”: this idea, enunciated by someone who is in the strict sense a witness to the truth, is death. Spoken by someone more imperfect, by me, for example, it still constitutes a decisive break with the world and what belongs to the world, thus at least some sacrifice; by a declaiming orator: he is a success. Here, [“]how[”] does not mean the aesthetic, the declamatory, whether in flowery language or in a simple style, whether with a sonorous organ or a scratchy voice, whether dryly and without emotion or with tears in one’s eye, etc. No, the difference is

128

10

15

20

25

92

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 128–129

5

10

15

20

25

•

1850

whether one speaks or acts by speaking: whether one uses one’s voice, facial expressions, arm movements, treble or perhaps tenfold emphasis of a single word, etc., whether one uses such things for emphasis in order to make an impression―or one uses his life, his existence, every hour of his day, sacrifices, etc., in order to exert pressure. This pressure is the high pressure that transforms what is said into something completely different than when an orator says the same thing, word for word. And, as I said today to His Excellency Ørsted, when a pers. puts his thought into the world it makes an infinite difference whether he understands that he is to be issued as a rix-dollar note or as a 10-rix-dollar note or as a 100-rix-dollar note. They all say the same thing, perhaps word for word, but it depends on who is saying it: it is not quite the same―no, there is an infinite difference. Abominable guilt, incurred so often in our times: when a shrewd thinker notices someone else whose life bears the marks of having been sacrificed for speaking some [truth] or the truth: when this shrewd thinker shrewdly says the same thing―and is a success. He says the same thing; indeed, perhaps he will even defend himself against the other by saying, “I am saying the same thing, word for word.” You hypocrite―yes, of course you are saying the same thing, but you do not act by speaking, you merely talk, and in doing so you do something completely different, so that you are a success―by saying the same thing, word for word. Truly, eternity will take this sort of guilt very seriously. There are not many crimes as aggravated as this one, and not many who have harmed the truth as have these shrewd thinkers.

93

129

35

Rom. 7. The most severe judgment upon sin, and it is precisely there that the Redemption begins by saying the same thing but in another way. Rom. 7. Obviously, then, the most terrifying form of sin is when it has utterly taken away a hum. being’s power so that it has him in its power against his will. Seen from this perspective, all voluntary sin is far less terrifying, precisely because a person also sees that he had it within his power to have acted differ-

91

92

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 129

•

1850

ently. Thus, too, with the individual’s own condition, for indeed, it inherently contains much hope about the possibility of being saved by one’s own powers―that he could have acted differently. But when he can only say, Sin has such power over me that it is against my will―then despair is right at the door. And yet here, here is where the atonement and the redemption begin. So it says, Take courage, it is not you who wills the evil, it is the power of sin in you; console yourself in Christ. Remarkable, that the most frightful accusation from the one side is mercy’s exculpation from the other. It can easily be seen that this doctrine can be taken in vain. But the danger is not so great if we bear one thing in mind: that this shall happen, that a pers. is to emerge from sin. The frightful abuse of it is when the fact that it is against one’s will becomes the defense for―remaining in sin.

5

10

15

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 130

•

1850

94

130

To a Contemporary, whose name must still not be mentioned, but whom history will name―be it for a short time or long―as long as it names mine, is dedicated with this little work the whole of my work as an author, as it was from the beginning.

5



93

JOURNAL NB16

JOURNAL NB16 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Text source Journal NB16 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Finn Gredal Jensen, Kim Ravn and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 1

97

1

•

1850

NB16. Febr. 14 1850.

97

98

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 2

•

1850

98

“Without Authority” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the Publication of Writings about Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning Writings about Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On the “Three Notes” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 5. pp. 68 et al. pp. 82 et al. p. 118.

2

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 3–4

1850

99

3

Concerning texts for the Friday sermons see the blank page at the beginning of Journal NB14.

4

“Original Sin” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Christian “Congregation” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “The Single Individual”―“Race” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Text for a Lenten Sermon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Misfortune of Christendom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Point in Christendom’s Confusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reduplication p. 160.

pp. 2, 11, 13 bottom of page p. 7. p. 23. p. 81. p. 97. p. 130.

•

99

5

100

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 5–6

•

1850 100

Julius Müller formulates very well the problem of whether original sin (peccatum originale) is guilt. He shows that guilt and sin are correlates―ergo where there is sin, there is also guilt; if one concedes A, one must also concede B. And the formulation of the principle that original sin is guilt, or that original sin exists, is similarly correct. Thus the condition from which actual sins necessarily emerge is also sin. It is quite simply in the categories of cause and effect. In addition, he correctly shows how the syllogism about guilt and sin can also be reversed, in Pelagian fashion, to its precise opposite. Guilt and sin are correlates; now, it is impossible for me to think of my guilt in relation to something I have not committed―ergo there is no original sin, so that by denying the concept of guilt I come to deny original sin simply by virtue of the thesis that guilt and sin are correlates.

5

Original Sin.

6

Incidentally, in my view, “original sin” is yet another expression of the fact that Xnty uses God’s standard of measure. God sees everything in uno. This is the deepest reason why offense is possible in relation to every category of Christianity and is inseparable from it: that Xnty has been invented by God; that at no point does it ever forget that God is included, and as a participant, which is something he has condescended to be―but of course, from this it follows that we (humnly speaking, if you will, we poor hum. beings) must put up with the fact that God’s standard of measure is used. The first consequence of this is that it recoils upon us to a degree that no hum. being would dream of or contemplate on his own[.] (Here is what is so masterful in the Augsburg Confession, etc.: that on his own, no hum. being has a true notion of how deep the corruption of sin is, that he must be enlightened about this through a revelation. And quite rightly, because having an inadequate notion of sin is precisely a part of what sin is; and furthermore because only God, the Holy One, has the true divine notion.) But the second consequence is that there is a restoration: 3 peccatum originale] Latin, original sin. (See also explanatory note.) 21 in uno] Latin, as one.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 7–8

•

1850

for then it is also promised that the hum. being will become a child of God. 101

7

10

15

20

Everything that neither occupies a specific sphere of activity assigned to it within the state and is thus subordinate to it nor directly acknowledges that it works for finite ends, makes the claim that it is in the service of ideas and as such must be kept chaste and pure, untouched by association with finite advantages. Working for an idea is also recognizable by the fact that it addresses itself ϰατα δυναμιν to everyone, to the people. A civil servant and the like has his specific sphere of activity, but an author, for example, an artist, etc., relates himself to the people. A merchant, for example, can also in a way be said to relate himself to the people, insofar as they want to buy from him, but he also acknowledges directly that he is working for a finite end. So think of what madness and immorality it is that something which by the form of its existence lays claim to serving the infinite, to being higher than a particular, specific, limited activity within the state―that journalism, for example, is in fact in the hands of tradesmen. The significance of being above relative things ought at least be purchased with cash sacrifices.

8

30

35

“Without Authority” The reason I have continually said that I am without authority is that I myself have felt that there was too much of the poet in me, also that I feel that I have been helped by something higher; furthermore, that I am constructed in a backward fashion, but also that I understand that both the profound suffering of my life as well as my guilt make me need Xnty on so great a scale, while I am constantly afraid of making it too burdensome for anyone, for perhaps he does not need so great a standard of measure. Of course, neither the God-Man nor an apostle can have worries of this sort―but then, I am only a poor hum. being.

11 ϰατα δυναμιν] Greek, potentially.

101

102

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 9–11

•

1850 102

1

5

10

[a]

Or let me take another illustration. The individuals in a population who are so noteworthy and prominent that they must bear the burden that even the most trivial details of their lives are of interest, so that they can appear in print and become the subject of gossip―in brief, the individuals whose renown is the stuff of conversation

Someone purer than I, who had just as deep an impression of Xnty as I have: yes, I would count that straightforwardly in his faveur. With me it is another matter, because (everything else regarding intellectual gifts and other qualifications notwithstanding) the fact that I have so profound an impression of Xnty is, after all, “not owing to my virtue.” If someone―if we may put it like this―had the best understanding of Plato, even though he had been the greatest of sinners, the latter circumstance makes no difference whatever, is entirely a matter of indifference. This is not how it is in relation to Xnty. Such a person ought humbly bear in mind that he has a qualification that might indeed have helped him grasp Xnty more profoundly―but it is a qualification that is not a straightforward plus, but a straightforward minus.

9

If a person wants to sit brooding and staring at his sin and is unwilling to have faith that it is forgiven, he is indeed also guilty of thinking poorly of Xt’s merits.

10

Christian “Congregation.”

11

I know nothing more illuminating to designate where it is located than an analogy, which, by the way, is sans comparaison. The world of criminals constitutes a little society of its own, situated outside hum. society, a little society that, by the way, also possesses an intense solidarity that is not very common in the world, perhaps because each person individually feels himself expelled from hum. society. This is how it is with the society of Christians. By accepting Xnty, thus by becoming a believer―that is, by accepting the absurd, indeed by staking his life on it―each person individually has said farewell to the world, has broken with the world. Precisely

25

3 faveur] French, favor. 27 sans comparaison] French, beyond compare.

5

10

15

20

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 11–13

103

10

15

20

for this reason, the society of these people who have voluntarily placed themselves outside society in the usual sense of the word is all the more intense because each individually feels how isolated he is in “the world.” But just as in that society of criminals great care must be taken to see to it that no one comes into that society unless he is marked as they are, so, too, in the society of Xns: they must take care that no one comes into this society except precisely the person whose distinguishing characteristic is that he is polemical in the extreme toward society in the ordinary sense―that is, the Christian congregation is a society consisting of those who are qualitatively individuals; the intensity of the society is also conditioned by this polemical stance toward the greater hum. society. But when in the course of time and with the steady advance of nonsense being a Xn has become identical with being a hum. being: then the Christian congregation became the hum. race―good night! Now the Christian congregation is the public, and in the eyes of every cultivated cleric, to say nothing of the eyes of the laity, it is offensive to speak of “the single individual.”

25

12

30

It is splendidly put by Julius Müller (2nd part p. 430): that if one says that this doctrine of the personality, which does not speak of the race but makes the individual person into something atomistic― what, then, does the word [“]individual[”] mean? Is not an individual an ατομον that will not in any way permit itself to be viewed as the appearance or impression of another[?]

35

13

That “Original Sin” Is “Guilt[”] is the real paradox. How paradoxical it is can best be seen as follows. It is formed from a composite 31 ατομον] Greek, atom, literally “uncuttable.”]

•

1850

103

for their bestial times―perhaps such individuals constitute a little society; perhaps the pressure of enduring this, plus disgust at general hum. bestiality, makes the association more intense. But this little society is situated outside of “society.” Among other things, the association consists of the shared consciousness of how each of the individuals has in a certain sense been deprived of universal hum. rights, of the right to be left alone, etc.

1

5

10

104

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 13–15

•

1850

of qualitatively unlike categories. To “inherit” is a category of nature; “guilt” is an ethical category of spirit. The understanding says, How could it ever occur to a person to put them together, to say that something can be inherited that according to its concept cannot possibly be inherited[?] It must be believed. The paradox in the Christian truth is always linked to the fact that it is the truth as it is for God. A superhuman measure and criterion is employed, and in relation to this only one relation is possible, that of faith.

5

104

10

Here there is an error in Julius Müller. In connection with sin, as in connection with every expression of freedom, he rightly asserts (this is something the younger Fichte has already repeatedly enjoined) that it cannot be known with necessity (no, neither beforehand nor afterward, see Philosophical Fragments), but must be experienced. Fine. Then he should have turned decisively toward the ethical-religious, toward the existential, toward you and I. Earnestness is that I become conscious of myself as a sinner and in this respect apply everything to myself. But instead he gets involved with the ordinary difficulties concerning the universality of sin, etc. But if this is to be experienced, then either I must know everything―and in that case, since the world keeps going on, the whole thing becomes a hypothesis, which perhaps has held up until now, but (as I see Prof. Levy writes in a treatise on the lying-in hospital) is in no way tenable on that account. Or I must understand what Joh. Climacus has explained in Concluding Postscript, that in relation to actuality, every individual is rlly referred only to himself―all other individuals he can understand only in possibility.

14

On closer inspection it will emerge that, properly understood, original sin, which is an article of faith, is actlly not an increase in strictness but a mitigation, signaled by the fact that there is an Atoner who has made satisfaction for the whole race. But it must be insisted that the universality of sin cannot be known; it can only be believed; it is a revealed communication. In

15

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 15–17

•

1850

105

addition to this I have one and only one thing on which to focus all my earnestness: that I am a sinner.

105

16 5

10

15

20

25

Clutter―and Category. It makes an infinite difference if one first makes a move in the direction of wanting to comprehend, to grasp speculatively and conceptualize―and then finally grants that there is, after all, something incomprehensible in faith―or from the very beginning one categorically grasps that faith cannot and shall not be comprehended. All speculative comprehension in the domain of Xnty (if it has not in fact emancipated itself totally and is open paganism) always ends with: So there is truly something incomprehensible remaining. But what confusion, and what is the point of all this yielding to speculative curiosity instead of dutifully and in Christian fashion immediately pointing out and energetically emphasizing that it is impossible and impermissible to comprehend a paradox, for then it is not a paradox. It is difficult to crack a peach pit; let us assume that it is impossible to do it. So what would one judge of a gathering in which each person put one in his mouth, making gestures: [“]Now, now, now―yes, sure enough, here it comes,[”] and then finally says, “To a certain degree, I cannot, however, crack it.” Yes, my friend, if to a certain degree you cannot crack it, this obviously means that you cannot crack it. What would one think of this? Would it not be better, after all, to refrain from the attempt, to begin by saying: I cannot―and thena perhaps show why it is an impossibility for human teeth. But people like the salivating. It is lack of character.

30

17

35

Would it not be a rarity for there to be someone who could literally speak to a gathering of people exactly as one speaks with an individual because he had toughened his thinking and his mind against surrendering to the illusion of numbers, to the dizziness of animal categories. And in how many ways it is seen that as soon as hum. beings are in a crowd, they feel that they are cloaked with the impudence of animality. When two men

a

at most

1

106

1

a

the belly, or more precisely

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 17–18

•

1850

converse it would of course never occur to one of them to say [“]bravo[”] or [“]Shut up[”]. But in a gathering this is done almost instinctively. In what capacity does the individual do this, then―because, damn it, qua talis the gathering certainly does not have a mouth. He does not do it as an individual, because the person who is properly conscious of himself as the single individual does not do it. And yet it is an individual who does it, or several individuals, but in such a way that each individual one of them does it. What, then, is the state of such an individual? A sort of confused state, such as when a schoolteacher cannot properly take charge and see the individuals―then the boys take advantage of the situation and have a lark, because there is no one there. Or it is a bestial state. Or a fatuous state, so that he confuses himself with an abstraction. Experience will also teach that it is precisely the most insignificant, the worst, least developed, least conscious people who go in for being an organ in this sense―and an organ in this sense can only be compared with what farting is for an organism. Then the newspaper provides an exact account of every Shut up! and Bravo!―and great importance is ascribed to this. Thus the crazy court of judgment is ventriloquism: the decisive voice in public life is not that of the mouth―buta the ass.

The existence of every state requires means of diversion. Thus in monarchies people were satisfied with the theater, Tivoli, and the like. But then the world became so frightfully serious―that is, utterly worldly. Now there had to be an entirely different means of diversion: on the one hand, the blissful illusion for each one individually: I am part of governing the state, perhaps my vote will decide the fate of the state (though when it comes down to it, it will be argued that―as now in the upper house of parliament with respect to the president’s participation in voting―that it is indefensible to require that a man vote on the condition that his vote decides the outcome―something my brother has exploited in an oafish manner, so that his entire attack was hot air and merely won him praise and approval); on the other hand, there is the tension of actuality: that here―unlike the theater―actual hum. beings are playing, that their fate will be decided by balloting, etc. 5 qua talis] Latin, as such, in itself.

5

106

15

20

18

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 19–21

19 5

107 10

15

20

20 25

•

1850

I find Peter inexplicable. He knows what is involved in getting elected; indeed, he knows the whole mirage rather well―and then he declaims that every member of parliament is a man of honor, that it is an honor to be a member, to have the confidence of the people, etc., etc., etc. And I am sure than when he orates on things of this sort he is moved almost to tears―risum teneatis amici. For the sake of a cause one can decide to go to a dance hall: eh bien! But we know the context of such phrasemongering only all too well: with all due respect, we are here, here where coteries and intrigue and chance are the powers that decide who is and who is not included and more or less what is to win and what is not. But this cozy-hearty pageantry: it certainly smacks a bit of country priest. Naturally, at the same time it flatters the assembly. Of course, the whole pack of intriguers cannot have anything against suddenly being cloaked with such splendid draperies and in such a ceremonious and touching manner. In this respect his speech reminds me of Michel Perrin who―in the company of police officers and as one of their initiates―still continues to be a country priest.

Just this alone―what sufferings of introversion there are in my life! Born for intrigue, gifted as few are in this respect―and then to be placed in the sole service of the idea. What a diversion, if I had been extroverted―whereas now all my intrigue is consumed in consuming the intrigues of others, but with an almost hairsplitting cruelty I prevent myself from making use of the least bit of shrewdness.

30

21

35

“The Single Individual”―“The Race” There is something correct in the observation by Göschel: that the concept of the hum. race is actually one of self-sufficient personality that is prior to and independent of its temporal realization or development in personal individuals (cited by Julius Müller in the second part of The Doctrine of Sin p. 467). 8 risum teneatis amici] Latin, contain your laughter, friends. (See also explanatory note.) 10 eh bien] French, oh well.

107

108

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 21

•

1850

This is what I have frequently expounded, that what is characteristic of the hum. race in comparison with an animal race is that the single individual is higher than the race. Whereas, with respect to animal specimens, the primary factor is the race, here the single individual, that is, every individual if he truly is the single individual, is primary. The race is a lower commonality. This has been entirely forgotten in our time, when people have also forgotten entirely that the hum. being is in kinship with God. But God cannot be in kinship with an animal race; God is spirit, and it would be bestial for him to be in kinship with a “race.” He can be in kinship only with “the single individual,” and only “the single individual” can be in kinship with God. “Specimen” is less than “race”; the single individual is more than race, because he is the whole race and also the individuation. Therefore, as well, in eternity “race” will come to an end. This will be of great importance with respect to the entire doctrine concerning original sin. In pagan fashion, hum. beings rejoice at being in the race (it is an animal category); it is the greatest misfortune and the most profound pain to be outside “the race.” This also reproduces itself in the lives of young people, when a hum. being has not yet become spirit―which most never become, even though it is the criterion according to which eternity will judge them. From a Christian standpoint, a hum. being sighs under “the race.” As a synthesis, he is compelled to be a part of the race; the concretion thus given is something he must appropriate as his task, participating as an accomplice in the guilt of the race, augmenting the guilt of the race with his own guilt―but he longs to be in God. To think of “race” as the middle term in eternal life, as the middle term for being in God: is bestiality. Here is a simple psychological observation. Take someone in love whose beloved dies. Then let Xnty offer him immortality: if he thinks about it a bit, there might be many who would say: Immortality does not suit me, it is much too spiritual. And in like manner Xnty’s eternal life is much too spiritual for the entire mass of hum. beings. An eternal life in which there are no general assemblies, no running in herds, no animal odors, etc.: that would of course be worse than death.

5

108

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 22–24 22

5

109 10

15

23

25

24 30

35

•

1850

In contrast to the discourse of the Middle Ages and other such periods about possession and about individual hum. beings who made pacts with evil, I would like to write a book: On Possession and Being Possessed in Modern Times, and show how people submit to it en masse, how it is practiced en masse right now. That is why people run together in flocks: so that one can be seized by natural and animal frenzy, so that a person can feel himself stimulated and fired up, ausser sich. Scenes on the Brocken are perfect parallels to this demonic lust in which the lust is to lose oneself, to evaporate into a potentiation in which one is outside of oneself, not really knowing what one is doing or saying or who or what it is that is speaking through one, while one’s blood nonetheless courses more powerfully, one’s eyes sparkle and stare, the passions boil, the lusts seethe. Oh, what depths of confusion and corruption, when, furthermore, this is praised as life’s seriousness, as heartiness, love, yes―as Xnty.

Julius Müller put it well: “In creating the hum. being, God theomorphizes―precisely for this reason a hum. being does not anthropomorphize when he thinks of God as a being who resembles hum. beings. If one were subjectively compelled to regard everything that hum. beings say about God in terms of their own nature as mere anthropomorphism, then God could not have made hum. beings more incapable of knowing him than by creating him in his image.” (On Sin 2nd part p. 491.[)]

How bitter! These incomparable riches contained in my writings, served with such selflessness as mine, and, existentially in melancholy sympathy for every single pers., especially the lowly, and the poor, and those who suffer―and then to live in a provincial market town and to be totally subjected to crudity from one side and to envy from the other, totally subjected because totally deprived of the criterion. That when Goldschmidt says, [“]Mag. K himself gave me permission to abuse him[”]―that then everyone finds this retort fine and exhaustive, a full and sufficient explana-

8 ausser sich] German, outside himself.

109

110

1

a

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 24–25

and that my suffering was simply that there is no stage larger than this in Denmark

•

1850

tion, without suspecting that it is a judgment upon him: that he is and was a boy:a God in Heaven! And then, then―then what comes next: yes, then I turn to the other side, where it is good to be: I thank you, God, beyond words, yes, beyond words, for you have done so infinitely much more for me than I ever could have expected, had expected, or dared expect.

5

10

110

That God tests, indeed tempts (“lead us not into temptation”) a pers.―this thought must not horrify a person. What makes the difference is simply how one looks at it. Unbelief, melancholia, etc. immediately become anxious and afraid and actlly impute to God that he does this in order that a pers. shall succumb; for however far it may be from occurring to the melancholy anxiety in a person to think such things of God, in the deepest sense it does in fact do so, though without knowing it or being itself aware of it, as with an impassioned person of whom it is said, he does not know what he is doing. The believer, on the other hand, immediately approaches the matter from the opposite side: he believes that God does it in order that he pass the test. Alas, and in a certain sense this is exactly why unbelief, melancholia, anxiety, etc. most often succumb during the test, because they wear themselves out ahead of time and as a punishment for thinking so ill of God, whereas faith usually triumphs. But this upbringing from innate anxiety to faith is a rigorous upbringing. Anxiety is the most frightful sort of spiritual trial―until the point is reached at which this same pers. is practiced in faith―that is, in viewing everything inversely, becoming hopeful and confident when something happens that previously would almost have caused him to expire and swoon in anxiety―going courageously into that from which he previously had only had one avenue of rescue: flight, and so on.

25

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 25–27

5

10

111

26

25

30

27

Therefore the person whose soul contains an innate anxiety can easily have an indeed fanatical notion of God’s love. But he cannot make his relation to God concrete. If this notion of his about God’s love is rooted more deeply in him, and if he is piously concerned to nourish and preserve it at all costs, then in many ways and for a long, long time his life may continue in this agonizing suffering in which he gets no impression in concreto that God is love,a while he nonetheless clings all the more firmly to the thought: Yes, but God is love just the same. This is a sign that he is being brought up to faith. Clinging fast in this way to the thought that God is love just the same―this is the abstract form of faith, and faith in abstracto. Then it will certainly come to pass―he will succeed in making his relation to God concrete.

•

1850

a

(for the anxiety continues to be too powerful for him, and it prevents him from seeing the danger, the test, the temptation, etc. from the right perspective: that they are there in order for him to pass the test)

How many people have even the slightest idea of how strenuous a life becomes through an actual relation to God. Merely to have totally removed the customary security in which most people live after they have reached a certain age, believing that now their development is essentially completed, that from now on it will simply be repetition, almost habitual repetition―merely to have this totally removed. And on the other hand, this daily fear and trembling, every day, the possibility of being thrust into making decisions of the highest order every moment of the day―or rather, that one is situated thus because every spiritual existence is in fact out upon “70,000 fathoms of water.”

M. began his activity as a docent at the peak of the speculative philosophy that spoke almost scornfully of the old principle that something is true in theology that is not true in philosophy and 9 in concreto] Latin, concretely. 15 in abstracto] Latin, abstractly.

111

[a]

Martensen

1

5

112

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 27–30

•

1850

conversely. He ends his Dogmatics by proposing that there is even something that is true in popular presentations of Xnty that is not true in dogmatics, that αποϰατασταςις is untenable in scholarship, but it can be used in popular presentations―and so he has remained true to his first love, see the preface to his Dogmatics. He is a tissue of untruth and triviality who can only cause harm, because he has done a bit of reading and―has made sorry use of a rigorous religious upbringing.

5

10

Something Arndt writes somewhere (one of the twelve chapters by Weigel) is beautiful and childlike: “It is quite true that God knows very well what you need, and thus you do not need to tell him it in prayer. But God has arranged matters such that he pretends he does not know it unless you yourself tell it to him in prayer.” This of course is also what parents sometimes do with a child; they say, they will be happy to give it to him, but he must ask for it himself.

112

28

15

The railroad mania is altogether an attempt a la Babel. It is also connected with the end of a cultural era, it is the final dash. Unfortunately, something new began at almost the same moment: 1848. Railroads are related to the intensification of the idea of centralization. And this new development is related to splitting up into disjecta Membra. Centralization will probably also be Europe’s financial ruin.

29

Denmark’s Fate.

30

In governing the state and in almost all situations, older, sometimes much older, men were at the top. They governed with the thought: [“]It will surely hold as long as we live.[”] Oh, when no one takes hold of the reins with the strength and the will to make decisions, there are terribly propitious circumstances for a growing demoralization. 3 αποϰατασταςις] Greek, return to the previous situation. (See also explanatory note.) 25 disjecta Membra] Latin, unconnected members. (See also explanatory note.)

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 30–31

5

10

113

15

20

25

31

30

35

40

•

1850

In the other branches of public life as well, it was the older generation who, not knowing what to do, fought to maintain the appearance of being what they once were: e.g., Heiberg et al. Once again, propitious circumstances for the growth of demoralization. Fædrelandet as well has long been in this situation. It feels that it may stop publication any moment―therefore it will not take decisive action. The situation was already like this at the end of Christian VIII’s reign and is the same once again following the unnatural upturn of 1848. Everywhere, propitious circumstances for the rise of wretchedness and triviality. Denmark’s downfall is easy to recognize, i.e., to prognosticate. A physician can have no more certain symptoms of the presence of putrefaction in the body than a psychologist has here of the disintegration of the spirit. For a moment, the war and the blossoming of nationalism conceal or concealed the true situation. It is not the Germans who would devour us, oh, no. We ourselves are internally disintegrating. Public life culminates in the vacillation between envy and pity, but there is no passion, no enthusiasm for what is great, no gratitude, etc. Flyveposten is thus a completely normal phenomenon. It maintains itself by keeping pace with this oscillation. It tolerates anything tending toward envy―then the “good-natured” Dane says, [“]Dammit we should in turn do something for him, we will subscribe.[”]

This, too, is a part of the delight that triviality and nullity take in the fact that in Denmark renown is a veritable punishment. If for a single second the renowned person were to wince at the crazy criterion under which he must live in Denmark, the entire public shouts, [“]It is really nothing, everyone feels quite strongly, he really ought to put up with this sort of thing[”]―well, thanks anyway, he [the member of the public] does not realize that what helps him is the immediate certainty with which he knows that his obscurity protects him from the sufferings of fame. And furthermore he has no inkling of the significance of this daily situation, nor any inkling of what it means to be painfully aware that people do not occupy themselves in the least with ideas, truth, and the like, but only with nonsense. But as mentioned, this is a part of the delight: that the public, one by

113

114

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 31–32

•

1850

one, is given to believe that it is stronger than―the nation’s very few extremely gifted and developed personalities. 114

1

[a]

Julius Müller. Richard Rothe. Dorner. 2nd part of J. Müller’s Doctrine of Sin pp. 557 ff.

Look, here we have the confusion as it is usually expressed. In his Ethics R. Rothe attacks Julius Müller and then shows that the problem is that J. M. places too much emphasis on the consciousness of guilt; next he says [“]The proper abhorrence of evil of course depends on its objective qualities, not on a person’s subjective relationship to it. The only proper hatred of evil is that which hates and condemns it because it is evil, that is, because it is opposed to God and our nature, and only for that reason, and not because it deserves [to be hated] by us.” Can a more immoral pronouncement be imagined! And this is scholarship! Look, this is the consequence of all this objectivity even in relation to the doctrine of sin, where “earnestness” consists precisely in the subjective fact that I am a sinner. J. M. properly rejects this assertion, showing that in this way sin rlly becomes Uebel, suffering, and the like. But J. Müller does not make it qualitatively ethical enough. The other typical expression of confusion is Dorner. He rejects J. M. on the ground that he places too much emphasis on the individual personality and overlooks the concept of the race. Well, thanks anyway―this is exactly what constitutes the demoralization of the times. J. Müller is an able man, but he is not a great ethicist; he lacks Socratic powers and that sort of education. He inhabits an antiquated position. He has not established the μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος to the existential thinker. Still, in this same place I see a more correct observation by Dorner: [“]Only when confronted with Xt does a hum. being make the most profound decision; all prior sins are something provisional and fundamentally do not decide a person’s total worth.” There is truth in this; it is quite correct that the situation of choice before Xt is qualitatively 22 Uebel] German, evil. 33 μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] Greek, transition to another conceptual sphere. (See also explanatory note.)

32

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 32

5

115

15

20

25

30

35

40

calculated to make a hum. being into the single individual. It is the real conversion of the mass into individuals; it is the decision of eternity, and eternity will come to the aid of memory in this respect. (Incidentally, Anti-Climacusb also illuminates this matter.) But Dorner is wrong in not regarding the hum. being as having been originally established to be the single individual, so that he has become the mass as a result of a qualitative decision. The situation is: first, the design to be the single individual―and through guilt to become spiritless, that is, the mass, part of the mass. But then comes “salvation,” that is, the second time, the choice of Xt. But in the atonement and the salvation Dorner rlly sees the first beginning instead of the second, which is implicit in the concept of salvation. I cannot in the strict sense “be saved” by an “Atoner” from a situation (however unfortunate it might be) into which I have not thrust myself through any guilt. According to Dorner, Xt is not “the second time,” but “the first time,” so all prior events fall away rather like a dust jacket that is not bound into the book, or like a rough draft on poor-quality paper in comparison with the document itself, which is on watermarked paper. With this the matter becomes all too easy. The intensification of the decisive choice with respect to Xt consists precisely in the fact that it is “the second time.” If one adopts Dorner’s position, one could be also be tempted to assume that Xt came yet another time in this life―as a Savior in the stricter sense. What is untenable in Dorner’s thinking also emerges in another way. For if it were the case that all sins were only provisional in the sense of being something insignificant, something that cannot be the object of God’s wrath―that prior to Xt the individual is actlly concealed in the mass and participates only in the general guilt, which after all is not properly guilt inasmuch as the individuals are not properly guilty (and one thus ends up with a negative sum instead of a positive one: that every individual in the race is also guilty)―if this were the case, why in all the world did Xt come into the

•

1850

b

115

The Sickness unto Death

1

116

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 32–33

•

1850

world? If the guilt were no greater than that, then he was of course not needed. In that case, Xt comes to the world as the proclaimer of the law and as a demand. This is certainly connected to something else in Dorner, that he probably assumes that Xt rlly came into the world to save the race, to make satisfaction for the race. But this in turn is something very unclear: a race that has guilt―a race in which each individual has no guilt. As I have previously shown, the truth is that the hum. being was established to be the single individual; through guilt he became the mass. Now comes salvation, but salvation―that is, the fact that it is “the second time”―also clarifies the situation, and therefore the decisive choice when confronted with Xt is the even more intensified decision, and if the decision is to reject Xt, then it is even more intensified sin and guilt.

5

10

116

15

20 1

[a]

Julius Müller―Joh. Climacus

J. M. has invented the theory of tracing original sin (peccatum originale) back to a timeless fall prior to all hum. beings’ lives in time. This is actlly a dislocation of Xnty. Joh. Cl. immediately comes with his problem: that an eternal blessedness or unblessedness is decided in time in relation to something historical. J. Müller believes he has extricated himself from the first difficulty―that of getting sin and guilt into the world and into every hum. being. But now the next problem: the decision of salvation, because it is an eternal decision, becomes just as incommensurable for a decision in a moment of time as the former one. Then J. M. was surely compelled to situate this decision, too, outside of time, in a timeless decision in each individual prior to the lives of all hum. beings in time. The consequence of this is that a hum. being has actlly lived out his entire life in a sort of timeless ideality before he lives it out in time.

33

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 33

5

10

15

117

20

25

30

35

40

Of course, this sort of thing certainly admits of being thought―but then what is Xnty? The whole business is simply an indirect proof of the correctness of my view: posit the paradox. It is precisely through Müller’s position that the suspect nature of speculation emerges. The paradox is that an eternal decision is made in time. I say this cannot be comprehended, it must be believed: that is, it is a paradox. Now comes speculation; it says yes, indeed, I can surely comprehend it. I manage it by imagining myself in a timeless decision prior to all time―do we see that[?] Yes, by all means. But my dear friend, the problem was an eternal decision―in time, not an eternal decision outside of all time in a timeless manner. Fundamentally Kant was more honest with his radical evil, for he never pretended that this theory was supposed to be a speculative comprehending of the Christian problem. But the misfortune in all the speculation of our times is that it cannot define and stick to the problem―but comprehend it, yes, it can certainly do that. It is just as ridiculous as if someone wanted to occupy himself with drawing and had a man sit for him for a long time―finally the drawing was finished, the portrait: it depicted, e.g., a tree.b Someone sets up the problem; then the speculation begins; a long time passes during which the problem, so to speak, must endure sitting for speculation; finally it is finished―here it is―and then it is simply a different problem. The difficulty or the objection has become the problem. How, indeed, can it be comprehended that an eternal decision is decided in time[?] The speculative answer is that it can be decided in a timeless manner, i.e., not in time. The secret of speculation actlly is that it takes so long before the answer comes; if it came immediatelyc people would see that it was nonsense. But if it came immediately, how could it be a speculative answer! Ah, God help us, then it would of course be a popular answer. The speculative takes many years; a folio is written and many learned dissertations are cited―then the

•

1850

b

117

, which is an entirely excellent likeness to the tree that stands outside the man’s window―but it was the man who was to be drawn, not the tree; and why, then, have the man sit for him for such a long time!

1

5

c

(in an almost timeless fashion, instead of taking an inhumanly long time)

10

118 1

5

10

15

[d]

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 33–34

The difference between the popular and the speculative is in how much time is taken. If you ask a man, Do you know thus and such, or do you not―and he immediately answers Yes or No, that is a popular answer: he is a student. If it takes 10 years before the answer comes, and it comes in the form of a system and in such a way that it is not quite clear whether he knows it or not, then it is a speculative answer: he is a professor of philosophy, at least he ought to be one.

•

1850

answer is speculative and is the solution. It is speculative; at least it has been very cunningly devised, it reveals knowledge of the world and of hum. beings.



118 5

To Be Nothing. To be nothing: oh, the happiest, most enviable lot in life! But to be nothing on the other side of being something, higher than the very, very most of being something―to be nothing on the far side of being something: oh, this is an eternally certain consignment to the most intense, daily mental sufferings. This is actually where the God-Man is situated. And why is mental suffering so inevitable here? It is easy to see. What corresponds to being nothing is no attention, and being nothing is what corresponds to no attention; so the relation is correct. Attracting attention to oneself corresponds to being something, and the more one is, the more attention one can thus attract to oneself and bear without disturbing the correct relation or proportions. But to attract infinitely more attention to oneself than the person who is the altogether the greatest of the greatest of those who are something―and then to be nothing: yes, this is as madness. And so on. For the person who is simply nothing and who thus attracts no attention to himself―no questions are asked concerning his life, nor does it need to be explained. To the degree that a person is something and thus attracts attention to himself, to that degree the issue of an explanation of his life arises; and indeed, this can be done: a person explains or understands his life in terms of the something that he is: this very something is the

34

10

15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 34–35

5

10

15

119 20

25

30

35

40

explanation. But an infinitely great amount of attention, and therefore the greatest possible question concerning the explanation―and then for him to be nothing: yes, it is as madness. Actually, this is the manner of the conflict: either we are all clever and he is mad, or we are all mad and he is clever. Oh, people think it is so easy to be nothing. Yes, in the straightforward sense in which it means a quiet, unnoticed, nondescript life. But to be nothing while at the pinnacle of the attention of one’s contemporaries: truly, there is usually only one word for this: it is madness, even though it must be noted that in such a case one’s contemporaries declare themselves to be just as mad or more so―for if this man is mad, what does it mean to focus attention on him uninterruptedly[?] Ah, I know―but of course I am only a poor lowly hum. being―I know a great deal concerning this. And if people want some elucidation, I will provide an illustration: my servant Anders, who is very devoted to me and very intelligent, has in his way suffered not a little in this connection. Of course he is subjected to this continual nonsense about me―and he cannot protect himself with my being something. For, particularly with respect to the social class to which he more or less belongs, for that very class, being something is pretty much the meaning of life. His class can understand a situation in which a man of means lives an unremarkable existence; but to work so hard and to be the object of attention as I am―and then to be nothing: that offends people.

Press Legislation. Because what rlly aggravates the offenses of the press is the degree of distribution (something that until now has been completely overlooked by the law, which has simply made this offense identical with all others); all fines and other sorts of punish-

•

1850

119

120

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 35–37

•

1850

ment ought to be stiffened in relation, for example, to the number of subscribers. (I always have in view, in particular, the daily press, the government’s filth machine.) In similar fashion, fines and punishments ought to be stiffened in proportion to how often the mendacious, offensive things have been repeated and said, for in this way they become more widely distributed. If people do not want to consider prohibiting the daily press to some extent, they ought at least consider establishing a punishment for the crime of attempting to drive society mad by printing nonsense.

5

10

It is an old story. A discovery is made―the human race is triumphant. Everything, everything is enthusiastically set in motion in order to make the discovery more and more perfect. The hum. race celebrates and worships itself. Finally there is a pause―people pause: [“]But is this discovery―in particular, its extraordinary perfection―a good thing![”] And then the most eminent minds are again needed in order to speculate, almost to the point of madness, inventing safety valves, dampers, brakes, etc., in order, if possible to slow things down so that this peerless and peerlessly perfected discovery, the pride of the hum. race, does not end by running over the entire world and destroying it. Think of the invention of the art of printing, perfected right down to the high-speed press, which can guarantee that no filth and sediment goes unnoticed. Think of railroads. Think of free constitutions, these peerlessly perfected discoveries―the pride of the hum. race―which awaken a longing for oriental despotism as a happier way of life.

36

It can be frightful to see a single individual so feverishly buffeted about, but think of the life of the state as a whole! People debate § 14―in doing so, the question of the entire constitution arises en passant, and then they debate it as a part of § 14. They are sitting there and have just completed § 15―then news arrives that the sitting government that came to power the day before yesterday was overthrown by a popular uprising. So a new government arrives. It gets about as far as § 9. This is the rational state, the pride of the hum. race, the fruit of enlightenment, the result of the daily press (this inestimable good).

37

15

20

120 25

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 38–39

38

5

10

•

1850

What a frightful existential strain it is, and not only that: quite literally, one can only be a private person when one is alone; and on the other hand, to have the character of a public person visà-vis one’s servant, one’s barber, one’s closest family members. No―things can only go this wrong in a little, cooped-up place or an outhouse, the homeland of nonsense, the provincial market town Copenhagen. And then the Danish vanity about history and about intellectuality! Yes, it is obvious that quite a fuss will be made over me, God knows, and I am also quite certain to go down in history―but my times should not rlly look forward to that history.

39

Indirect Attack.

15

The extent to which there is absolutely no religious existence is often best seen indirectly. “The priest” preaches that “a pers. must sacrifice everything in order to save his soul.” Fine. Then, inasmuch as nothing more specific is said concerning this, one sees that it has never occurred to His Reverence to want to do it, for the collision will take quite a different form than what he imagines. If sacrificing everything in order to save one’s soul were to happen without further ado, then every hum. being would have to live in the most absolute isolation, so that he could make this move without intervening in disturbing fashion in the life of someone else. But no one does this―and if he did, sacrificing everything would mean very little, because that [“]everything[”] indeed contains relationships to others. He lives in a context. In sacrificing everything to save his soul he intervenes in the lives of others in an absolutely disturbing fashion, sets a standard of measure that is much too great, and becomes a real affliction for them; he will come to suffer for it. Here one sees how much closer the collision (to hate father and mother, etc.) lies than one imagines. For if a person was truly in earnest about actually sacrificing everything in order to save his soul, and was spiritual enough to actually do it, it is eternally certain that the judgment passed against him―even by those

121 20

25

30

35

121

122

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 39–40

•

1850

nearest to him, and perhaps especially by them―would be: He is a heartless egotist who is concerned only with himself, and he blithely makes us others miserable―he, who could make things so nice for us. There would also be very little mention of friendship, for it is hard to imagine a friendship based on sacrificing everything in order to save one’s soul; for a person who acts decisively to that degree must also in like measure find repose in God so decisively that friendship rlly cannot have very much meaning. And friendship, after all, is rlly based on relativities: to profit in this world, to help one another in various earthly adversities, etc. But when a person’s only concern is to save his soul―which is what it must be if he sacrifices everything for this―and if friendship certainly does not help him in this connection, how much, then, does friendship rlly mean[?] But the sermon is nonsense―and an indirect indictment.

Thus, it can easily be seen that if the question concerning what sort of self-denial and renunciation of worldly things is required in order to proclaim Xnty―that if this is to be decided by a forum, as it is called, composed of―Xns or the cultivated public― of Xns, etc.―then the matter is decided. This is something the clergy themselves seem to understand, and this is why on such occasions they are usually so ready and willing to put the matter before the great public. To cast ballots on whether and to what extent there is to be self-denial―yes, nothing will come of it. The deception is that the clergy should of course participate in educating this great public and therefore that it should express self-denial existentially, so that everyone, as soon as he looked at a cleric, would immediately see what Xnty requires. But instead the clergy has made common cause with the public; they have fallen completely out of their character as teachers, as God’s servants―and now they are delighted to be so well understood by their contemporaries.

5

10

15

40 20

122

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 41 41

5

10

15

20

•

1850

The dreadful disorder in which we live has been produced because people[a] have wanted to combine working for infinite and for finite ends. This can only give rise to confusion. Let it simply become clear which is which. Working for a finite end is indeed something honorable; what is dishonest only arises when a person wants to decorate such work with the illusion that it is also for an infinite end. No, no! All work for infinite ends must be viewed as a luxury, in the noble sense of the term. Make the attempt yourself, then: how far, how much, how long can you work like this;b but just keep it pure, then you will do some good. If you find absolutely no time or opportunity to work in this manner, well, at least you do no harm if you honestly confess that you are working solely and only for a finite end. Not only do you do no harm, no, you do good, for then, when someone comes who can and will work for an infinite end, he is more readily understood instead of continually being exposed to martyrdom because of the dishonest and ignoble mishmash of those who rlly work for finite ends and have mendaciously maintained that they also work for infinite ends.

123

[a]

from generation to generation

b

, without any trepidation whatever.

1

124

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 42

•

1850

123

On the Publication of Writings about Myself. “The Accounting” cannot be published now either. As I have always understood, there is a poetic element in me which precludes me from including myself in the account; and on the other hand, if it is to be done, it should be done on so decisive a scale that I would dare say absolutely everything about myself. There is an either/or here. One single word concerning myself, then a μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος has been made and I will be unable to stop. Let the times demand an explanation of me, and then we will see. And there is truth in this: it is not I who must provide the explanation, it is the times that must be good enough to respect a phenomenon of this significance and demand an explanation. There is one more point in addition to this. The reason I have to stop being an author at this point is that I can no longer afford to be an author. Thus understood, I both acknowledge with unspeakable gratitude how infinitely much more Governance has done for me than I could ever have expected, and in addition I understand that precisely this point (here, again, o the wonderful assistance of Governance!)―precisely this point is the right viewpoint, and the decisive stopping point right here. But I cannot officially communicate the former part in that way, and therefore there would also be something untrue in communicating the latter. Finally―however happily I repose in my gratitude toward Governance for what has been done for me―worries about my finances have pained me, and I have also reduced the stakes a bit too much. The Point of View for My Work as an Author, in its original version is the truest understanding. I understand myself extremely well, and this includes understanding what this activity as an author has cost me. From the start I had no intention of remaining an author all my life; I have known that the moment might come when I would have to work for a living, and that at that point I would have to give up being an author in order that I not mix together working for infinite and finite ends. So let them call it fanaticism (at any rate, it will be a fanaticism of the understanding, and Socrates also a fanatic): I myself understand extremely well that I have squandered money in order to reach the goal that, with the assistance of Governance, has been reached: directing attention to Christianity. My efforts have put a stop to the fatal confusion of the striving toward infinite and toward finite ends. It has cost me a great deal, but humanly speaking I believe that this has clarified the Christian cause. I do not put myself forth as someone extraordinary. I am essentially a poet―and then a penitent. If I did not live as the target of popular persecution, I could―as I had originally intended― tell my times straightforwardly and with a dash of humor that I can no longer afford to be an author. Now this cannot be done. Let the times themselves demand the explanation. This is an interpretation about which there is controversy, but it is an interpretation that is decisive for the whole of Xnty. I do not and never have put myself forward as an apostle or even merely as a witness to the truth (I have done my utmost to prevent this), but I want it to become clear that working for life’s finite ends is not life’s greatest seriousness―nor are things to be mixed together, but which is which must be kept clear and unsullied.

42

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 42 124

5

10

15

•

1850

125

In order to direct attention to this, I have kept 7 whole years’ work as an author absolutely free of any finite considerations, making use of the advantage that I had a bit of wealth. This is enough to awaken attention; in any case, I cannot hold out any longer. Without extravagance I would never have been able to work on the scale that I did; for my extravagance has always been calculated solely to keep me productive on this prodigious scale. In any case, it is a pious extravagance (connected to the fact that I am a penitent). If my having had too much imagination and having therefore been so active as a poet is nonetheless something that makes me guilty in the eyes of God, well, then I am very willing to confess this before God―before him I am of course always in the wrong. But I am eternally certain that, however much this may indeed be a fault, I am forgiven. And I really believe that it in fact only becomes a fault if I in any way assumed any importance before God, as though there were something meritorious in what I have done―though he will certainly prevent that, he, the loving father, whose paternal love it is my happy occupation to remember every day, remembering it again and again, and will remember eternally.

126

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 43–44

•

1850 125

1

a

, I would not be believed.

I best realize how infinitely much has been entrusted to me and how much I have succeeded when, on rare occasions, I talk about it a little with a single pers. In subdued fashion, knocking off 50 percent (for it is impossible for me to speak of myself in very grand terms when I am face to face with a pers.), I hint at things a little: and I see an almost suspicious expression, as though I were nonetheless revealing too much about myself. Oh, how sad it is, in a certain sense, to have so infinitely much entrusted to me! Now, under ordinary circumstances modesty would prevent me from speaking of it, but even if it did not and I spoke of it, it would do no good.a I really think that God has arranged matters such that the person to whom he entrusts infinitely much can only talk about it to God, for no one else would believe it or understand it. And it is also for the best this way. Alas, if a person could really talk to others about it, one could also easily come to take it in vain and become proud of it. Before God that is not possible―he can exert infinite pressure.

43

5

10

15

20

“Bless those who persecute you.” Is this really possible? Think of it like this. Have you any notion of how blessed it is, the more intense your fellowship with God is[?] Oh, but when―precisely at the moment that this blessedness passes all understanding―when you honestly consider that it is indeed precisely the persecution by your enemies that has helped you to feel this blessedness: at such a moment, is it not possible, then, to bless them[?] To bless them! Yes, this is, if I dare say so, a festive expression of how indescribable is the blessedness that you sense. Just think of Socrates: when they handed him the cup of poison, and he said, Is it permissible to offer a libation?―how festive! And now the Xn: at the moment he most blissfully senses his fellowship with God―and he must admit that to a great extent he owes this to his persecutors―for him then to say, I will forgive them and I am not angry with them―how unfestive―no, I bless them. Ah, it is like the fairy tale. A cruel stepmother throws a little child down a well. The child is rescued by elves who take it to

44

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 44–45

126 5

10

15

45

•

1850

the happy land of enchantment. And here she sees her stepmother, and with the most blissful expression of a child’s innocent joy, she kisses her stepmother’s fingers―as if she were the dearest of mothers. Ah, my friend, what difference does it really make if in dastardly fashion you did everything you could in order to injure and embitter my life if this indeed was a help to me―if it was precisely by means of this help that I became blessed like this: what difference does it make? Yes, it indeed makes this difference: that I must bless you. But pay careful attention to this: forget about those who persecute you, but instead pay all the more attention to becoming blissful like this in fellowship with God. Alas, but we hum. beings think most about those who persecute us―less about using the persecution to further the relation with God. Alas, and many ended not only by cursing their persecutors, but cursing God as well.

Text for a Lenten Sermon. I will use the words from the passion narrative for it: the betrayer also knew the place.

25

30

And then show that precisely this is the betrayal by the whole of “Xndom”: that it knows Xnty, is clear about it―but it goes no further. That every individual hum. being also has a constant tendency toward this betrayal: being satisfied with knowing the place―the betrayer also knew the place.

127

128

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 46

•

1850

Concerning Writings about Myself. This is something to which I often return, the original thought: that I was to die and that the whole latter portion of my literary production would be published after my death. At that time I felt so physically weak but so inexplicably rich. I had also succeeded in attaining complete transparency. Had I died at that time, it would have had the greatest possible effect, humanly speaking. As long as I live I will not be understood. Death must mitigate things in order to help the times out of their difficulty. I rlly have much too much ideality to be alive. As long as I am around, alive, it will be almost impossible for anyone to understand the degree to which I felt that I was right, that the truth was on my side, the degree to which I had been granted superior strength, how much I have had in my power, how―gradually, as I came to understand Governance’s plan―I systematically came to work counter to myself in order to inflict the wound that much deeper. Oh, there is something indescribably sad, and also painful, in this isolated knowledge of oneself, from which, incidentally, my attempts to escape were made in vain, because no one would believe me. I, who have felt infinitely deeply that I was scarcely a hum. being, lower than the lowest―and yet in another sense favored to the same degree. However, I did not die. This, then, became my upbringing: to have almost attained a transfiguration and then to have to understand that while I am alive, or at least for the time being, I am not permitted to publish it. That was certainly severe. At that moment I was in fact almost about to decide to publish it: then came the frightful spiritual trial. Then, when I gave up publishing it, having to deny myself like this became an exercise in patience. Then the spiritual trial returned in a new form, about whether the whole business was not fretful anxiety―and that I had to return to the point of being almost about to publish it―that I had to go back. The upbringing has been this: Having received myself in my ideality on such a grand scale, then, in addition, to rehearse the distinction―which, however, I have always done―between the ideality and myself as an actual person. Having the thought of death as much a presence as it was then was surely a contributing factor―along with the accelerated speed imparted by 1848―in reaching the overview I attained, a

46

5

127

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 46–47

•

1850

35

comprehensive view of history, of Xnty, of my work as an author. Well―this is how I imagine Governance thought of it―well, it will be granted to him. But then he may not die now, because this would be too likely to give rise to a confusion in which he becomes an almost superhuman ideality. What he has to put into the world, he is to put into the world, but he must be good enough to walk openly at its side, insisting: I myself am not this, I am a poor individual hum. being, my life is not so lofty as to correspond adequately to what I have been permitted to present. And this, indeed, is how I have understood my task from the beginning; now I understand it the same way, but much more clearly, now that I have undergone a temptation of this sort, which I had not done in the beginning, for in the beginning I had not understood myself fully, and therefore I could not quite explain myself, even if I had wanted to do so. It is now quite certain that in presenting myself I have again done everything I could to prevent this confusion of myself with the ideality. But the most consistent expression of this is: to remain silent. It is not dialectical to make a pronouncement in which one does everything to impose limitations and proclaim objections: what is consistent is to remain silent, however severe this may be for impatience. Let the times themselves demand the explanation, then we will see; but then at any rate I will know that I did not myself precipitate it through impatience. And truly, this matter can become extremely serious. For it could of course be possible that society would make so great a demand on me for an explanation that I would be compelled to make use of the ultimate explanation I possess, and that would surely be a great strain on me―but truly, in that case I would also push frightfully hard, for then the seriousness would become almost terrifying, especially because of the contrast of such seriousness to the incognito I have found myself induced and also obligated to maintain, an incognito that the world has more or less taken for my true nature.

47

Dramatic Motif.

5

10

128 15

20

25

30

I imagine a figure such as Giordano Bruno or the like, in short, someone who became a martyr for an idea. In a weak moment,

129

130

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 47–48

•

1850

he gave way; he hid himself in order to escape danger. His hiding place has been discovered through treachery; he is seized― and now he is happy to have been forced to remain in danger. Then I imagine him brought before a judge (and I will fashion a couple of Socratic lines). He demands to know who it was who has revealed his hiding place and betrayed him. It turns out that it was his servant. He is confronted with the servant, who is very downcast because he now senses his guilt. Then he says to the servant: [“]Do not be distressed, I entirely forgive you; there certainly are not many servants who would have acted differently from you, for I well know that you have been suborned―how much was I worth, by the way[?”] The servant: [“]I received 250 rd.[”] The lord: [“]Well, that is indeed a handsome sum; by the way, you know, that it is actlly quite fortunate for you that I am not angry with you. For in my will you are to receive 500; if I had become angry with you, you would have been cheated: you have received 250 to betray me, 250―a crime; and otherwise you would have received 500 in the absence of anything dubious― thus, you would have lost more than half. Now, on the other hand, you will receive 500 after my death, from the will, and 250 extra as something you have earned on the side. My friend, those who paid you the 250 rd. have probably not admonished you to use the money well, so now accept my admonition and use the money well; do not despair because you were weak enough to betray me, be strong enough to believe both that God will forgive you completely and that I have entirely forgiven you.[”] One could also have the collision be such that there had been an earlier crime that had no connection to this man’s later life, a crime of which the servant was aware―and that the servant had now informed against him. What I want to portray is the sort of loftiness that the mass of humanity usually confuses with something close to madness.

Distance. In Kant’s little essay, “An Answer to the Question ‘What Is Enlightenment,’” he suggests the greatest possible expansion of the public use of reason and the limitation of its private use. By private he understands, e.g., that a civil servant qua civil servant must not quibble but do what is required―qua writer, on the other hand, this same man, addressing himself to the public,

5

10

129

20

25

30

48 35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 48–50

5

10

130

49

25

50

35

•

1850

is permitted to use his reason publicly as freely as possible in order to illuminate all sorts of problems. Qua priest a priest is to proclaim what is commanded―qua writer he can present his own doubts about the faith. Now, I will not speak of the problem present here (which, however, K. himself parries to a certain extent), that in this way a civil servant becomes a double being, which is madness, especially in the domain of religion (which, by the way, has now been more or less attained). No, what I want to keep in mind is an exclamation by Kant. After having put all his hope in “the public, served by writers,” he exclaims: [“]that the people’s guardians in spiritual matters (that is, not private civil servants, but the writers and the people constitute the public) should themselves be without authority is an absurdity that ends up perpetuating absurdities.” Undeniably! But it is only a prophecy that has long since been fulfilled. But expired?―alas, no, “it indeed ends up perpetuating absurdities.”

The Greeks say that a man himself creates his situation and circumstances. The proverb puts it: Everyone forges his own fate. This same thought is expressed beautifully by Julius Müller: A person’s choice becomes his fate. At first glance this does not seem to be well put, for if he chooses it himself, there of course cannot be any talk of its becoming his fate―then it is of course his choice. But the fact is, it becomes clear that there was much more in what he chose than he perhaps knew; it has quite different consequences―and thus it becomes his fate.

Oh, what an illusion Kant has! There (on one of the pages just prior to the passage in the previously cited essay) he says that a king is to say: Argue as much as you want―but obey. I do not know what I should be most amazed at: either this philosopher’s indirectly indicated contempt for argumentation as being so impotent―or this unfamiliarity with human life. A little earlier in the same essay K. said that there is only one master in the world who can say, Argue as much as you want― only obey. I assume that here K. means God, and I find the thought beautiful, that is, that God Almighty could do this―be-

131

132

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 50–54

•

1850

cause he can compel. But look, however, and see whether God does it! And then to transfer this to an earthly king, and to pretend that arguing and obeying were not the most dangerous of neighbors one could imagine, as if arguing and obeying were separate in such a way that they had almost nothing to do with each other!

5

Basically, it is easy enough: from generation to generation, in proclaiming Christianity, each person reduces the price, thereby gaining worldly advantage and winning love and respect for his heartiness, etc.―and then, finally, when someone gets serious about restoring elasticity to Christianity’s drive spring, people shout that he is the one who awakens offense.

51

Frightful collision: those who killed the apostles believed that in doing so they were serving God.

52

To avoid scandal people remain silent, indulging contemptibleness, wretchedness, lies; people do not notice that the scandal engendered by this is infinitely more corrupting. This is now the world’s thieves’ argot: when someone indicts actual villainy, he responds, [“]He is the one who awakens scandal.[”] For the actual villainy is not a scandal; presumably it is nothing at all.

53

Christianity’s Misfortune

54

It can perhaps be most accurately expressed like this: Through the world-historical, through the illusions, speculation, apologetics, etc., etc., Christianity has become deadlocked. This is why it takes such an artful operation to set it right again.

131 15

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 55–56

55

5

10

132 15

20

56 25

30

35

•

1850

133

Mynster’s error is not, after all, his initial failing: that he did not insist strongly enough on Xnty from the beginning and avoid the illusion―that his cultivated personality guaranteed a bit of esteem from the distinguished people. No, when one considers the situation of the times, Mynster’s significance was precisely that he at least did something; and they were difficult times that would have required a quite remarkable sacrifice if a higher standard were to be established; and finally, Mynster’s personality had its limitations (as every personality has its limitations), and I believe he understood himself―indeed, that he understood himself piously. No, his error, his fault, is the subsequent one: that he became so infatuated with himself and his method, that he converted it simply into “earnestness” instead of remaining on watch concerning its dubiousness from a Christian point of view; he made himself into a paradigm, while from a Christian point of view he is probably an unparadigmatic inflection; he enriched the country with nothing but priests of this type, who in the end installed on the throne of religion the worldly shrewdness under which I have been compelled to suffer―for people no longer know actual religion and regard it as something close to madness.

[a]

Stilling can easily cause a very fatal confusion concerning Xnty. What preoccupies him is actlly somewhat erotic, perhaps only to a lesser degree; principally it is pride that par tout wants to realize the idea of remaining unmarried, loyal to his wife. This is what he is suffering under now, as under a frightful self-torment, he says. But for the sake of God in heaven, what does this have to do with Xnty! Is it Christianity that forbids him to marry? It permits him to do it 7 times if he wants to. There is something confusing here. Now he talks ceaselessly about how Xnty appears to him to be the most dreadful self-torment, etc. But this talk is rlly deceptive. He is not involved with Xnty in any deep sense; he is tormenting himself with an obsession: I want to, and I do not want to. Now this is something he will not admit―and thus Xnty is supposedly causing him all this

[a]

26 par tout] French, properly “partout,” everywhere.

Mynster

Mag. Stilling

1

134

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 56

•

1850

suffering, Xnty, which of course says, You are entirely, entirely free―get married! Inasmuch as he cannot, at any rate openly, explain the way things actually are―that it is his relationship to his late wife, his desire to marry, and his wavering resolve not to do so after all, that are the source of the torment―there is a risk that in venting his feelings he will transfer this to Xnty, as if that were what preoccupies him and as if that were the most dreadful self-torment. I have said this to him with the utmost seriousness, shown him that he is turning everything topsy-turvy, told him that he should get married, that this entire collision as such has nothing to do with Xnty. Oh, I speak with him extremely seldom. But it can become a disaster. For a part of such sufferings is the feeling of a need to express oneself, indeed, very actively; and then, inherent in the deviousness of such sufferings is the tendency to seize upon something utterly different and exhaust oneself in speaking of it, as if that were the source of his suffering. This would be extremely unfair conduct in relation to Xnty. His life is very confused in other respects. He does concern himself somewhat with Xnty, but then this is also supposed to be research, yielding scholarly results, historical observations. Imagine oneself in such a situation―instead of adhering to the strictest diet, focusing solely on himself, he busies himself with freethinkers in order to describe them. Alas, first of all: silence! The only remedy in such a situation is to say to all reflection: Keep still. But he does not have any real personal concern for himself. It always has to be, in addition, a reflective dividend for thought. And thus he never actlly gets to live, at least not in the deeper, personal sense. But we will hope. If a person really wills, what possibilities he has! But he demonstrates precisely what it means that no one is given a Xn upbringing any more, and he shows precisely how necessary it is to have, if not the monastery, then something resembling it. A spiritual institute could help him. In my presentation, rigor is a dialectical element in Xnty, but leniency is represented just as strongly. The former is represented poetically by pseudonyms; the latter is represented personally by myself. This is what is needed by the times, which have taken Xnty in vain. But it becomes something entirely different when there is a despairing pers. who has nothing to say about Xnty other than that it is the cruelest self-torment. In order to put an end to this frivolousness I have had to posit rigor, and have posited it simply in order to provide impetus toward Xnty’s

5

10

15

133

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 56–57

5

10

•

1850

leniency. This is how I have understood Xnty and my task. Had I understood only its frightful rigor―I would have remained silent. This has already been pointed out by Johannes de silentio: that under such circumstances one should remain silent and at least show that one loves other people―by remaining silent: for merely negative outcomes, moreover, such a frightfully negative outcome, one must not communicate. That sort of thing is not communication, no, it is assault, treachery, weakness of character, which wants at least to have the satisfaction of having the sorry pleasure of making others just as unhappy and confused as one is oneself.

134

57 15

20

25

30

35

40

How little Denmark is can be seen in the fact that a person who does not share my views might be entirely right in recommending in the strongest terms that actual writers use the strictest sort of anonymity. Everyone (provided he does not simply want to plunge into martyrdom at the hands of the mob) may demand a bit of distance. In a large country, this is of course easily managed and therefore one can of course use one’s name. But for a long time Denmark has not been a country, but a provincial market town. Literature does not rlly exist; that is, there are no barriers or anything of that sort. On the other hand, the daily press is all the more frightful, and muddies everything. To publish a book― there is no criterion for this in Denmark, not even so much as a little journal. So what happens? Well, something quite unusual happens. In becoming an author a man becomes a little better known than others (despite the fact that soon we will all know each other). Then the daily press takes the opportunity to write about him. They write about him―the hell with his book. The daily press writes for that class of society to whom it would never occur to read a book. Instead of writing a book, by riding behind a team of 4 horses, or having one’s house painted in a curious style, and the like, one could for example, attract equally much attention― and the daily press would also write about him. This is how being an author is a way of focusing upon oneself the attention of the curious.

135

136

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 57–59

•

1850

An author publishes a book in Denmark. He thinks it is “readers” to whom he addresses himself―you are wrong. If individual readers do exist here or there, they live as refugees in the provincial market town. No: with the help of newspapers, shop clerks, idlers, etc., etc. pay attention―no, not to the book, but to the man. So write something about him―you see, this is something for the public. As one might, for example, warn a person against attracting attention by going about dressed like a Turk, so in Denmark must one warn a person against becoming an author. In a way, there is only one thing remaining: strictest anonymity.

5

10

135

15 1

[a]

The few excellent men we have are all older and the younger work en masse to debase the currency.

Denmark’s character is the most characterless nonsense. No nation, no nation whatever, is so on guard against authors who, for example, write in a foreign tongue―patriotism demands that one not do so. Then if he refrains from doing so, he is continually mistreated―that is his reward. If, in the other hand, someone does what he wants to do and has to do, and writes in a foreign language―and then gains renown: only then does Denmark take notice; now it dares believe in his talent, now that “people abroad” have passed favorable judgment on him. This is how Denmark continually vacillates between self-deification and self-contempt.

58

My torment as an author is that the country has no standard by which to judge me, and this daily suffering is painful and furthermore intensifies over time. My literary productivity rescues me from a melancholia that is profoundly rooted in my nature; religiously obligated, I concentrate everything on making a great effort: and what do I achieve? First, to endure it all, to spend money on it―and then, because this sets the criterion much too high, the

59

20

25

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 59

5

10

136 15

20

25

30

35

40

judgment is that I am a hack writer. Why? Because I can work so quickly, whereas every trivial thing on which more time is expended is something valuable. And not just this. People in fact notice that this judgment, that I am a hack, is not sufficient to keep me down. So then the judgment becomes that it is pride, an aristocratic temperament: [“]Why should he have such extraordinary abilities―what a bother, let us conspire against him and employ bestial crudity and envy to embitter him because he has been granted the extraordinary.[”] And not one single honest pers. among all of his contemporaries has endeavored to include a word of mitigation here. No, envy sits in its concealment and is delighted at crudity’s uprising against me. Yes, if I could split myself up and become ten people―now that would be something in Denmark. Then there would be the requisite variety, one author today, another tomorrow, none of them amounting to very much. Merely the brief pieces I toss off would be sufficient to establish a brilliant career in Denmark―and a career that would make me a great deal of money. But now I have to put things of that sort aside in order that they not become overly important and because they are too insignificant to measure up to my standards. Then come the books―and my fate is sealed. One word in print about the clothes I wear, and thousands upon thousands lap it up; it is remembered for ages; the gaze of a passerby reminds me of it―a work I have written vanishes without a trace; up to this point, the only trace it leaves is in my assets. Then I think of the words of Paul, that miraculous syllogism: The injustice I suffer proves that there must be justice―in the hereafter. Oh, excellent syllogism, even if in one sense, it must be tortured out of a pers.―but then it is all the more powerful. And incidentally, viewed from the other side― yes, from the other side, from that other side, as when a portrait painter choses to portray the side of a one-eyed person on which the subject has an eye―that is, seen from the other side, seen from the

•

1850

137

138

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 59–60

•

1850

relation to God, do I have anything to complain about? Complain[?]―God forbid. Complain[?]―oh, no, I indeed can never thank God sufficiently for the indescribable goodness he has shown me, so much more than I had expected. Truly, a grain of wheat must die in order to sprout; in order to advance the development of historical progress, there must be suffering of this sort; though from a hum. point of view, one of course feels pain as a woman feels when she is to give birth―but, when the child is born!

5

10

It is quite true that faith is “the point outside the world,” which therefore also moves the whole world. What emerges through the negation of all points in the world is the point outside the world―this is easy to see. That syllogism: that because there is no justice in the world― rather, sheer injustice―justice exists and, yes, must of course exist outside the world: here is the point outside. This is the syllogism of faith. Take the absurd. Negating all conceptualizing forces one outside the world, into the absurd―and here is faith. Alas, but faith has not been found in the world for a long, long time―therefore, neither does it move the world. Faith has permitted itself be duped and has become a point within the world, and therefore at best it moves as does any other point within the world: it gives rise to a few transactions based on probability; it occasions some minor incidents―but it does not move as the point outside. That was how Xnty moved when it entered the world, but the world―whose interests truly are not served by there being such a point outside that in fact wanted to keep the world in continual fear and trembling―the world duped itself or Xnty, and got Xnty inside. From being the point outside the world, Xnty―so they think―became the established order. Everything came to a halt. Then in more recent times people have been busy proving that Xnty has its beginnings in myth― yes, why not, as long as one does not notice that it is the most recent developments that are closer to being myth or fable. It depends on what one takes as one’s fixed point of departure. But it seems obvious to me that in its present form Xnty is the most fable-like thing one could imagine.

60

15

137 20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 60–61

5

10

15

20

25

138

•

1850

If a former king is now living as a bartender on Knabrostræde, one is easily tempted (especially if one finds him to be a jolly fellow who is satisfied with everything, including himself) to view as a myth the story that he originally was a king. And one can be right about that, for in this case a person’s identity is verified. But one should be very cautious about simply transferring this to Xnty. Xnty, after all, is something quite specific; just because millions of people come up with the idea of calling something Xnty that does not at all resemble Xnty any more than a bartender resembles a king does not of course make it Xnty. Now the case becomes something different. In its original form Xnty is in its proper medium, its form is the reduplication of its content. There is nothing mythical in this. Now people have taken away the reduplication―and so Xndom is simply myth. There are two sorts of incognito: in the form of a servant Xt was God―in the form of the God-Man Xndom is paganism. The former contains no self-contradiction; in the latter hodgepodge there is a self-contradiction and thus in turn something mythical―unless one wants to say straightforwardly: This is a lie. So first sweep clean your own doorstep; see to it that you get rid of the lie; then we will surely be finished with the business about myth―that is, at the moment that it can properly be seen that Xndom is a lie, a deception: at that very moment it is seen that original Xnty is anything but myth. Here, again, the tactic is the opposite of what is customary. There are not to be counterarguments showing that Xnty is not a myth; there is not to be any defending, etc.―no, there should be an attack; it should be proven that Xndom is fable, then we will surely get rid of the business about myth.

30

61

On the “Three Notes” They could perhaps be transformed quite simply into theses, so that there was not a word concerning myself, but only Theses on “Crowd” and “the Single Individual.”

35

Most of the passages are already cast in the form of theses, so the only passages that need to be omitted are the ones that deal with me.

139

140

1

[a]

R. Nielsen

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 62–64

•

1850

In the first lap of a hum. being’s life the greatest danger is that of not venturing. Then, when one has ventured profoundly, the greatest danger in the second lap is to venture too much. In the first case, by not venturing one veers off into the service of triviality; in the second, by venturing too much one veers off into fantasy, perhaps into presumption.

62

By insisting on one single point, R. Nielsen has damaged the whole of my work as an author by making it appear as if the whole of my work as an author was solely concerned with that point. He makes no room whatever for me or for a vüe of my work as an author, but egotistically makes use of one single detail. In the multifarious details of my work as an author I have various different magical charms with which I captivate and conquer―he occasions the misunderstanding that I have just this one point which is supposed to conquer by means of his efforts.

63

Basil the Great, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia in † 379, says it very well. In opposition to the allegorists he says, [“]As for myself, when I hear the word grass mentioned, I understand grass. I take plants, fish, and animals and cattle, everything exactly as it is said; for I am not ashamed of the gospel. Others have sought through certain παραγωγαι or τροπολογιαι to procure through their own ingenuity a certain venerableness for scripture.[”] (see Clausen’s hermeneutics, p. 165). This is what H. H. has done: that all the business about the lofty and the profound and the miraculous-delightful etc. is affectation that does not like to obey what is simple, or actlly does not like to obey, and therefore it leads everything into other categories, just as the Romans, when they felt they could not shake off the yoke of Augustus, poetized that he was a god―a substitution of different categories.

64

12 vüe] French, properly “vue,” view. 26 παραγωγαι] Greek, false or incorrect derivations. 26 τροπολογιαι] Greek, metaphorical or unreal, allegorical interpretations.

5

10

15

139 25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 65

65

5

10

15

20

25

30

140 35

40

•

1850

My “sad fate” is rlly that my nature is one of sheer intellectual elegance and that to some extent I presuppose this in others. For a time, I actlly did not notice this; I buried myself in my task, practiced and developed the dance steps without noticing that in so doing I became much too intellectual for this world in which everything depends on animal health and impudent directness and shabbiness. In this way I cannot but miss out on all advantages. Take a situation with Christian VIII―him, “the King”―and he the king who had such grand pretensions of intellect and elegance. Fine. The first time I spoke with him I said to him, [“]Things here are on much too small a scale; in other circumstances one generally says to an author, [‘]If you want to earn more, work more.[’] I have long been reduced to the situation: [‘]You must see to it that you work a bit less, because you can no longer afford to work so hard.[’][”] His Majesty beamed with delight and graciousness. Well, thanks a lot. Had I been king, I would never have permitted something like that to be said to me and then immediately joined in the laughter. I would first have come back with a serious rejoinder: [“]But, my God, is it really like that[?] Do you not at least want your expenses to be covered out of public funds[?]” Only then would I, qua king, have the advantage when I join in the laughter. Otherwise it is indeed actlly a satire on the king. It is a clearly satirical situation when one is king of a country that is so small that an author (that is, not a man who does it as a hobby), a real author, can truthfully talk like this. Now, it is certain that Christian VIII was unusually cultivated, but in pecuniary matters he was demoralized both by his own financial embarrassments and by foreign creditors. Incidentally, the rejoinder I imagined for myself had I been king would not have changed things one way or the other, because I would have responded, [“]No.[”] But interjecting this royal flourish makes a devil of a difference. On the other hand, that rejoinder would have pleased me for other reasons, because it would thereby have signaled that the king was at any rate aware of such things, so that at least some more serious emphasis fell on the sacrifices I have made and continue to make.

141

142

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 65–67

•

1850

But here once again is my elegance―which becomes my ruin. The mob rages against me; bourgeois philistinism and dailybread careerism quietly smile at my impracticality―I myself, religiously introverted, see the shabbiness with a keener eye than anyone, inwardly treating the matter with a seriousness that is far over a priest’s understanding―but the moment I speak of it, I transform it into a clever witticism―and everyone joins in the laughter. Nonetheless, the situation is of course as I have always said it was: the relationship to spirit is an examination. And here, once again, is the examination: I get a terrifying insight into the selfishness and worldliness of others, which I would not get if I were straightforwardly serious or even if I complained––whereas at the same time I secure for myself knowledge of how they themselves judge an existence that―if they themselves possessed spirit and earnestness in any deeper sense―contains infinitely more than enough to make them pay attention. The facts of my existence are clear enough. It is said that when one looks at a dancer one must not be able to see that he is breathing heavily. I have followed this rule with respect to spirit. And since I indeed do not breathe heavily, do not appear to be extremely earnest, do not lament―well, then the whole thing is fun and games. This conclusion is just as stupid as: [“]The dancer does not breathe heavily―ergo he did not leap at all; he has remained standing on the ground.[”] The difference is simply that as sense data, the one can verified by any bartender; the other―well, if someone does not himself have spirit and earnestness, he will not see it either. Therein lies the examination. “Spirit” always negates immediacy―therefore only “spirit” can become aware of spirit.

Everything gets reversed in this erroneous world: “the innermost” will soon become the extreme outermost (they are of course the extreme Left).

5

10

15

20

25

30

66

35

141

A psychological observation on the love of boys in antiquity. The reason pederasty was so widespread in antiquity and was not rlly condemned was certainly because of paganism’s corruption, but psychologically something else must be borne in mind.

67

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 67–68

5

10

15

•

1850

In the relation between man and woman, in sexuality, there was no room whatever for intellectuality. The woman was situated in an altogether too inferior position for that, especially in man’s opinion, as is the case in the entire Orient. Here the relation is solely sexual. So intellectuality was situated in relation to the love of young peop., as Socrates says, that is, still in an innocent sense; and then it degenerated into that vice. But intellectuality had nothing whatever to do with loving the opposite sex. In Christendom intellectuality has been more or less related to loving the woman. The great question is and remains whether this entire admixture of intellectuality and an instinct such as this is not, from a moral point of view, a very dubious affair, whether what is being developed here is not a refinement in which little good comes of loving one person and being faithful to that one person, when one per abusum combines it with intellectuality in this manner.

68

The Point in the Confusion of “Christendom.”

20

The most deeply embedded confusion is the utterly wrong and unchristian notion of what it means to make use of personality in such a way as to take the liberty of resorting to personality in order to get personal. The bank rightly says that there can be no absolute guarantee that its bills cannot be copied, because it is the case that what has been made can also be imitated. This is also how things are in the domain of the spirit. A deception that is in fact taking place, a method by which to deceive, is pointed out in every detail. Now (a person thinks) people have been helped. Then the deception, in turn, copies the pointing-out of the deception, but in such a way that the very pointing-out of the deception becomes a new deception. It can go on like this to infinity. What then? Then we say, Stop, and add: There is only one solution left, a μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος: all assurances and guarantees lead to nothing―show me your existence, that is the guarantee. The deception has also realized this. And here it has erected a huge wall: to talk like this is to take the liberty of resorting to personalities, and it is uncultured to resort to personalities.

25

30

35

142

40

15 per abusum] Latin, improperly. (See also explanatory note.)

143

144

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 68–69

•

1850

You see, here the deception has triumphed eternally. So they also apply this to Xnty. Thus Xnty presumably came into the world without taking the liberty of resorting to personalities―Xt was crucified, the martyrs’ blood was shed, etc.. All of it took place without personalities. You see, this is where the secret of evil is situated. With the help of convention and public opinion, existences have been smuggled away―and then people are willing to struggle about the other things. Yes, it is obvious, for in this sort of situation it is absolutely true that the deception can copy everything. What should stop the deception is simply existence, the question of existence.

1

a

so that “the physician” might say: For God’s sake, work

b

5

, whereas it is usually said, If you want to earn more, then work more

To need to work in order to keep a profound melancholia in check;a not to dare to work because one no longer can afford it;b to suffer bestial abuse every day in this situation: well, then, this is difficult! And yet―yes, like someone who has worked his way through a primeval forest and managed to cut his way through―that is how I celebrate in delight: It has been reached, it has been cut through, through all the illusions to a vüe of Xnty such as has not been attained for many, many ages. And so, let me suffer, then―it has been reached. Truly, I have not worked in vain, have not been beating the air. There has been squandering, everything has been squandered, strained, strained―support has been provided by Governance: now it has been reached. In other respects―with indescribable gratitude―my situation may now become whatever it will, it has been appointed by God. It is certain that this was the only way to attain what has been attained; had it taken just one or two years’ less time, it would not have been attained. And the times have been harpooned―now they are merely still running with the line.

5

10

15

69 20

13 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 70–73

•

1850

145

143

70

5

71

From his standpoint Kant puts it pertly (in one of his essays): So, as far as I am concerned people may certainly call philosophy the handmaiden of theology, whether she walks behind, carrying the train―or walks ahead, carrying the torch.

Litera gesta docet, quid credas Allegoria Moralis quid agas, quo tendas Anagogia.

10

72

15

20

73 25

30

35

God’s creative word creates omnipotently from nothing. A speaker, a rhetorician, produces an opposite effect: he speaks of how the truth is mocked―and he himself becomes honored and esteemed. An existential thinker produces what he says. When he says that the truth is persecuted―he strikes so emphatically that he is struck in return, and, pointing at himself, he can say: This is of course something you can observe in me.

When a teacher must accentuate worldly objectives or when he accomplishes them (which God has absolutely nothing against, so long as he honestly admits it), he must renounce the purely ideal sort of dignity and a certain sort of authority and admit it himself. Nevertheless, he must be treated properly and with respect. Otherwise one gets the idea of insulting a merchant because he is an honest merchant. And a teacher who conscientiously fulfills his obligations, though confessing that he does so in fact because he needs his pay: he is like the honest merchant. 8 Litera … Anagogia.] Latin, The literal meaning teaches what has taken place; the allegory, what one is to believe; the moral meaning, what one is to do; the anagoge, what one should aspire to. (See also explanatory note.)

[a]

1 Cor 9:14, Paul says [“]that the Lord Himself has ordained that the proclaimer of the gospel is to live off the gospel.[”] And for a long time that was how things did go, splendidly and properly, sped along by the initial proclamation of the gospel without pay; people had so much reverence for the gospel and for what they received through its proclamation that they gladly and gratefully gave money, in addition thanking God and the teacher. But alas, since those times

1

5

10

146 1

5

10

15

20

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 73–74

there has been a frightful advance of worldliness from both sides: “living off the gospel” became the greatest opulence and luxuriousness; and the congregation lost the idea of the gospel and gained all the more a sense for money. Just think: Now, when people say on the basis of long experience: [“]If a father has a son who is not good at any other sort of study, let him study theology―this is the safest way to a living.” Here there is error on both sides, both on the part of the clergy and on the part of the congregation―however, I think that this matter is to be kept as I in fact have had Anti-Climacus keep it: that the attack is to be directed at the congregation that, having become worldly, has no notion of the gospel, but only of money.

•

1850

The error is that people have also wanted to have the ideal dignity, and thus they actlly demanded more of the students than of themselves: they demanded that their students pay in so spiritual a way that they would not think of it as a payment. No, if things are to be so spiritual, then let the teacher renounce the payment.

144 5

[b]

25

30

Of course, it follows of itself that whatever talent, etc. he might have helps him wield a certain power and superiority, but he himself must not confuse this with ideal dignity.

[a]

On myself.

Proportions Associated with Directing Attention.

74

Had I had a fortune sufficient to enable me to continue being an author for the whole of my life, I would probably have become too sarcastic and light-headed and would have acted unjustly. Had I been able to force myself into a purely ascetic existence, meritoriousness would surely have emerged and spoiled it. Now the situation is as lenient as possible, and all the business of founding schools and the like has been prevented. Attention has been directed―and so I step back into more ordinary categories.

10

15

20

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 74–75 145

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

75

40

And to my way of thinking this is also what is beautiful, but in addition is what safeguards the truth in the entire situation. It was certainly not I who went forth into the world with a ready-made theory about Xnty’s collision with the world. On the contrary, having a rather complete notion of the collision of inwardness with becoming and being a Xn, it was my idea to present this, to show that just as in earlier times the collision with the world was unavoidable, nowadays, by contrast, the task of inwardness in becoming and being a Xn must be assumed to be a more intense one, so that there would after all be equal conditions. I was absolutely unaware of the collision of Xnty with the surrounding world. What happens―the surrounding world helps me to discover it; yes, it compels me to discover it. Whatever rigor I exercise is rlly only the reduplication of what the times have done to me; the times punish themselves through me. Not to praise myself, but it would have been difficult to have presented Christianity more leniently than I have done. Denmark has scarcely had a more selfless author than myself―and then this treatment; and then that we all are Xns: 1000 Christian priests who all remain silent while vulgarity and nonsensical chatter were literally the only thing that flourished in Denmark. This is what is level-headed, what is reassuring, in it all: that there is no exaggeration―indeed, compared with the way I have been treated in a Christian country, for my part I have nonetheless truly kept the situation very lenient. I am rlly not partisan, but I express the ratio between the times and a Xn striving. As the rigor becomes greater in proportion to the way this latter [i.e., Xn striving] is treated, it is the times that pass judgment on themselves.

The Number Carried. It is what I have repeated and repeated, but can never repeat often enough, just as it actually was

•

1850

147

148

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 75–76

•

1850

also what made me aware of the Xnty’s collision with the world: the calamity, the knot―the difficulty is located in an entirely different spot than people think. The difficulty is that if someone wants to do what the priest says, he is not permitted to do it; he is laughed at (because he more or less expresses loving one’s neighbor), ridiculed (because he is selfless), persecuted, etc. Oh, what a shortsighted person am I, whom life itself had to take hold of in order to make me aware of this; otherwise I would have entirely overlooked Xnty’s outward collisions. Christ, after all, was certainly the man who could fulfill his own teaching; he was himself was the existential expression of the teaching―and he is precisely the one who collides, and so terribly. And after him, all the martyrs, etc. But here, once more, see proof that Xnty has been essentially abolished. One can see it in the proportions. We of course have the clergy; they proclaim the teaching. The clergy’s objection to the times is essentially that no one does what we say. Thus (for it is indeed indirectly present in it) nothing more is required than to do what we say. Alas, and this is where Xnty begins in earnest, it begins with the difficulties, sufferings, etc. that are connected with following the teaching: the fact that one is not permitted to do it but must suffer for it.

Measure of Distance. In an earlier age the notion of distance from the ideal included the notion of the enormous effort and self-denial, etc. Nowadays the distance has much more than doubled, for now, in between (between the ideal and striving for it) there lies an extremely distinguished and refined reflection of the understanding that finds the whole attempt laughable, extremely laughable, a childish immaturity, and in addition the surest way (apart from all the exertions and all the self-denial, etc.) of exposing oneself to what is feared most of all: to make oneself laughable. Oh, the distance between the rich man and Lazarus was not as frightful as that which now exists betw. the ideal and the striving for it. No one is to be seen―truly, I have not seen anyone―not one single person, who sets sail for ideality; they all set sail with

146

5

10

15

20

76

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 76–77

147 5

10

15

•

1850

the reckoning: relative goals, either goals that are merely relative, pure and simple, or goals that are, at least for safety’s sake, relative goals like interpretation―perhaps (and a striving of this height is probably found only extremely rarely) in order to avoid the laughter. The relative goals are clothing; the ideal striving is like walking about stark naked: offensively striking, laughable. To be an individual hum. being―with sheer striving and with one’s sights on the ideal: No, you would die of shame (it is selfevident that shame is rather misplaced here―for it is rather the relative goals about which one is to be ashamed) or die from the terror of being laughed at. The currency of being an individual hum. being has been terribly debased. Therefore everyone tries to cover himself with one or another abstraction: we, our times, the public. And for the sake of “seriousness,” in order not to become laughable, one sticks to relative goals.

77

The Corsair―and Me.

20

This newspaper has really devoted itself to me. One could say that, after all, so many other people have been attacked and you are placing too much weight on yourself. Not at all. The situations are entirely different. 1) The attack on me is of a unique proportion. For a moment, this little country paused, seeing an entire issue of the paper containing nothing but insults directed at me. 2) In other cases this was the situation: for some time the public, public opinion (which Goldschmidt watched carefully) had spoken nonsense about one or another person―then The Corsair printed its attack in an appropriate little dosage. Everything was thus prepared in advance. Here was an author who was at his apex and enjoyed great respect. There were no spots or wrinkles―no agreement with the public concerning the attack. It came so suddenly, ordered by myself, and indeed it rlly was Goldschmidt who quite personally dared do it, putting himself in contradiction to his earlier encomium.―There was a lingering notion of my actual greatness, and the public was put in the difficult situation of having participated in something it would not have done by itself.

25

30

35

149

150

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 77–78

•

1850

3) In other cases, the person attacked usually regards it as a calamity, pure and simple, sees to it to get away from there as quickly as possible, to take a bow and utter thanks for the gracious punishment― and then the public is gracious. Here it can easily be seen that I regard the situation rather differently, have remained standing as a fixed point that takes up the fight with the whole business.

5

148 10

Bible Interpretation.

1

5

10

15

[a]

In the 17th century, which is where the understanding of Holy Scripture as doctrine rlly began, there appeared an equally imaginative notion of inspiration that corresponded to what allegory had been in its time, when every word, every letter had been allegorical. But as always is the case, here as well: precisely this imagining is an indirect attack on Xnty. People do not want to let Xnty be the paradox and be satisfied with that, so they think of substituting imagination which, be it noted, is not the

Previously, the Holy Scriptures reflected themselves imaginatively in the imagination: that is where the entire allegorical interpretation is situated. It is rlly an expression of the fact that people cannot get it into their heads how the infinite has taken place simply, historically. Allegory as the primary mode of interpretation is rlly an indirect attack on Xnty: that Xt was an individual hum. being, the apostle an individual hum. being, who in a prodigious effort dashed off a few words on a scrap of paper for a congregation. Then came the Reformation and asserted what had to some extent been previously asserted in principle (though not in decisive opposition to the established order―but rather “in agreement with the Catholic Church,” regardless of the fact that it was in the least possible agreement, but those involved (e.g., an Erasmus) dared not act decisively; they were interested only in getting it said) and introduced a sounder philological interpretation. But now we are once again absolutely drowning in sound scholarly interpretation. It is quickly forgotten that the Bible is Holy Scripture, whereas in the beginning, to the imaginative view, it meant everything that the Bible was Holy Scripture. Above all, it is quite naturally overlooked that the apostle is an existing person who with peerless agility dashes off a few words to keep a congregation going.

78

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 78–81

5

10

First they imaginatively transformed the apostle’s “hasty letters” into God knows what. Now they are distorting them into teachings, doctrine. They are incitements. Where everything is at stake, where what counts every day is to gain more believers and to hold on to those who have already been gained, there is time neither for imaginings nor for learned dissertations. They forget Paul entirely in favor of the scrap of paper he produced, which they treat in the most un-Pauline way.

149

79

15

20

25

80

A Satirical Collision. Sometimes, in an egotistical outburst of “spirituality,” the world shouts that if the teachers of religion were as they were in the days of the apostles, forsaking worldly advantage, doing it for nothing, etc., the congregation would do likewise―and then, if someone stands in their midst and does this, even sacrificing money, the world shouts: “He is mad” ―so much does worldliness have superior power, that in “actuality” the world is not even capable of recognizing what it demands and finds it to be quite simply madness for someone to do something without deriving an advantage from it― ― ―aber this was of course what it had itself demanded. Look, these are genuine Christian collisions for the person who sacrifices himself in this way.

An excellent saying: qui timide rogat, docet negare.

30

81

Measure of Distance. Once it was the case that people frivolously, defiantly attempted to escape the idea of eternal punish24 aber] German, but. 29 qui timide … negare] Latin, he who requests fearfully prompts refusal. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1850

151

Xnty that always is situated in inverse dialectic―whereas imagination is the most superlative form of superlatively straightforward dialectic. This is a fundamental confusion that continually recurs. People refuse to be satisfied with simply positing the absurd, so they substitute the deepest depth of what is deepest and the most sublime sublimity of the sublime― well, thanks anyway, then Xnty is indeed paganism; and people nonetheless think that with this new approach they have elevated Xnty to something much higher. Look, this is a lack of respect for qualitative dialectic. The most superlative superlative of the superlative within straightforward dialectic is still qualitatively different from inverse dialectic.

1

5

10

15

20

152

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 81–82

•

1850

ment―nowadays even the ridiculous has inserted itself; the entire cultivated world assures a person that it is nonsense and that one makes oneself ludicrous by having such thoughts. 5

Oh, the world is so clever and everything is supposed to be so lofty, and the orthodox are not much better. It is supposed to be so lofty and so objective that something is of course equally true whether or not a man acts accordingly―oh, but let us be a little stupid and understand that this is a lie in your teeth, an invention of evil. It is supposed to be so lofty: I work on behalf of the truth―as for the fact that I do indeed also have every possible earthly benefit from doing this: who could be so prosaic as to think me so base, that this is why I do it! Oh, let us indeed be a little stupid and prosaic and at least look upon this with a bit of suspicion. But in the state the police are watchful, making sure that “poisons” are not delivered without great precautions―in matters of the spirit everyone handles poisons in the most reckless and carefree fashion. Truly, what the world needs is a truly stupid Socrates, who is so enormously stupid that he does not dare peg things so high. That which the noblest nature, who daily lived in fear and trembling, would perhaps dare to risk in an emergency: this of course becomes something else when it is the prevalent condition in a world of shrewd and suspect persons. If a man known for his honesty finds something on the street and says, [“]I shall certainly advertise it in the lost and found column,[”] it is perfectly in order. But when one of the suspect persons finds something and says, [“]I shall certainly have it advertised,[”] the police do think it would be better if he turned it over immediately. Alas, and who indeed is so good that he need not associate with himself as with a suspect per-

82

10

150 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 82–84

•

1850

153

son―and the person who does not do so, well, he is precisely one of the most suspect of all.

83

10

15

151 20

84

25

30

35

It is easy enough for the orthodox in this country to object to me, saying that I exaggerate, am altogether too rigorous, etc. (which, by the way, is not true, because I myself have still not exceeded 50 percent of the standard set by the gospel), and then they conveniently forget that if that were the case, they themselves would of course be complicit. For I did not begin like this; it has been a continual ascent. If, either immediately or in a timely manner, the orthodox had been supportive, as was their obligation, I would scarcely have become so rigorous (which, incidentally, would possibly have been an error, albeit an excusable one, because the greater truth was hidden from me). But their silence and narrow-minded opposition is, among other things, also simply a part of why I have had to peg the price higher.

Principal Rule. Above all, read the N.T. without a commentary. Would it ever occur to a lover to read a letter from his beloved with a commentary! A commentator is an extremely dangerous interference in connection with everything that makes a qualitative claim of having purely personal significance for me. If the letter from the beloved were in a language I did not understand―well, then I learn the language―but I do not read the letter with commentaries by others. I read it, and because the thought of the beloved is truly present to me, and there is the intention, in everything, to will as the beloved wills and wishes: then I will surely understand it. It is the same with the Holy Scriptures. With God’s help

[a]

That is, during the reading you are concerned with yourself and with your relationship with the beloved, but you do not concern yourself objectively with the

1

5

154

1

5

10

15

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 84–86

letter from the beloved: that this passage, for example, can be understood in 10 ways―oh, no, what is important for you is that you come to act as soon as possible. And furthermore, should it not mean something to be a lover, should it not give you what the commentators do not have[?] Everyone is the best interpreter of his own words, they say. And next after that comes the lover and, in relation to God, the person who truly believes. Pereat the commentators!

•

1850

I will surely understand them. Every commentator detracts. The person who can sit with 10 open commentaries and read the Holy Scriptures―well, perhaps he will write the 11th, but he is associating with the Holy Scriptures contra naturam.

This is how it should be; this is how it was at one time: Xnty’s proclaimer (not “the teacher,” which is why he is not called that, but “the witness”) was a sonorous image of what was said. The sound pattern produced by vibrations of the air is the sonorous image, that is, the visible image of what has been heard―thus “the witness” was the sonorous image, the visible existential image of what he proclaimed.

The Deceptive Use of Luther. This is what is deceptive: what Luther did in opposition to and as if in defiance of a self-important, misunderstood, fantasy-laden asceticism―has been made into something true in and of itself, and although now everything has become worldliness (so that the opposition has totally disappeared), people nonetheless appeal to Luther. It was precisely in opposition to the overwrought and fantasy-laden meritoriousness of asceticism, that Luther, in godly fashion, emphasized simple worldliness in a good sense. But the opposition is the point in this. Nowadays Christianity has become utterly identical with sheer worldliness―and still people continue to appeal to Luther.

15 Pereat] Latin, Let them die.

5 contra naturam] Latin, against nature.

5

85 10

15

152

86

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 87 87

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

153

40

Luther. When I look at Luther it often occurs to me that there is something very dubious about him: a reformer who wants to cast off a yoke―is a suspect matter. This is precisely why he was immediately taken in vain politically, for he himself has a common boundary with politics, as does his entire position: not attacking “the crowd,” but a particular high official. This is also why the battle was altogether too easy for Luther. What is difficult is to have to suffer simply because one must make things more difficult for others. When one fights to cast off burdens, one is naturally understood immediately by a great crowd of people whose interest it is to cast off burdens. Here, then, the true Christian mark of the double danger is absent. In a certain sense, Luther came to take the matter too lightly. He ought to have made it obvious that the freedom for which he was fighting (and in that fight he was right) leads to making life, the life of the spirit, infinitely more strenuous than it had been before. Had he kept strictly to that, then indeed no one would have supported him, and he would have had the double danger―for no one supports someone in order to make his life made more rigorous. But then he turned aside too quickly. With jubilation, political jubilation, his times took over his cause, formed a party. What Luther wanted: to overthrow the pope―bravo. Well, thanks anyway, this is of course sheer political fun and games. The only thing important to me is to get this matter dialectically clarified―Luther, by the way, is the object of my entire respect―but a Socrates, no, no, Luther was far from being that. When I speak of a hum. being, pure and simple, I say: O, greatest of all hum. beings, old Socrates, hero and martyr of intellectuality, you alone understood what it is to be a reformer, and understood yourself in being one, and were one.

•

1850

155

156

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 88

•

1850

Reduplication. Every striving that does not make use of ¼, ⅓, ⅔, etc. of its power to work against itself systematically in doing its work is essentially a worldly striving; at any rate it is absolutely not reformative. Reduplication is to work against oneself when one works; it is like the pressure on the plow that determines the depth of the furrow, whereas a striving that does not also work against itself in doing its work is merely a smoothing over. What in fact does it mean to work against oneself? Quite simply this. If the established order, the traditional arrangement, etc., that one takes as the starting point is sound, thoroughly sound, one asserts what one asserts directly―in this case there can be no talk of anything reformative because if the established order is sound there is of course nothing to reform. To the degree that the established order―that is, there where one’s striving begins―is corrupted, the dialectic of working against oneself becomes increasingly necessary, so that what is new does not get corrupted and become an immediate success and the like by being stated directly instead of being asserted in its heterogeneity. Here again is the difference between what is direct and what is inverted, the dialectical. To work or strive directly is to work and strive. The inverse is: in working also to work against oneself. Ah, but who dreams that such a scale of measure exists and that I use it on such a grand scale! Understood I will never be. I am viewed as someone who strives directly―and now people think that I have made a sort of breakthrough! Oh, ignorance! After I published Either/Or, I had of course already had the brilliant success; it was within my power to continue. After all, what is the source of all the difficulties against which I strive if not in myself? It is well known that there has not been one single person who has actlly dared to oppose me. But I myself have done so. What a wrong turn on my part―if my striving had been direct, what a wrong turn on my part it was to publish Two Edifying Discourses after Either/Or, which could only confuse people, instead of letting Either/Or stand as a brilliant success and to continue in that direction, which was what the times required, merely in somewhat smaller portions. What an effort to counter

88

5

10

15

20

25

30

154 35

40

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 88–90

5

89

•

1850

myself―for me, the darling of the public, to bring up the subject of the single individual and finally to hurl myself into all the dangers of mockery! But matters of this sort can only be understood by someone who himself has dared to do something similar. Someone else could never think of it or believe in it. This is also how R. Nielsen causes confusion, for he depicts my striving as direct striving.

Gregory of Nyssa put it splendidly in connection with pilgrimages: “One does not come closer to God by changing one’s place.” Alas, no, it is only all too certain that it can only be done by changing oneself.

15

90

20

25

30

155

The Socratic anecdote―“that when he would deprive them of one or another stupidity, people could get so angry that they really wanted to bite him”―is something one can experience for oneself. Every hum. being generally has a good helping of superstitions, habits, and the like. Perhaps he is willing to admit that these are weaknesses, but he does everything to preserve them, to make sure that no one touches him in this connection because it would upset him too much. If it happens anyway, it immediately seems to him as if he were in the grip of a hostile power that is pestering him―instead of humbly understanding that perhaps this is happening to him just in order to help him attain mastery over things of this sort. But this true “good behavior” of faith is extremely rare. But for the person who truly takes notice of this sort of thing it is no surprise that in many a weak moment he is almost afraid truly to involve himself with God, because it could come to involve a complete reformation of even the smallest aspects of an individual, even more powerfully than when a girl is loved by an absolutely superior intellect, so that she must leave her mental universe completely behind in order to love not merely as she understands it, but as he understands it.

157

158

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 91–92

•

1850

God creates out of nothing. If, as is said, one wants to say that a genius creates, one would have to say that to be able to create he must make sure that there is nothing. Everyone who begins with a something never gets to create. Let us take an example: the genius of being able to deceive in the Socratic sense. If, when he is to begin, a person thinks that there are 6 or 100 specific ways of doing it, he is not a genius. Genius has nothing, nothing whatever ready, has absolutely nothing―but merely the power and what power produces is indeed an ingenious production or creation, if one wants to use this word in connection with a human production.

91

Augustine draws attention to the fact that even Christ himself did not fulfill the commandment, “when someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the left one toward him.” For when one of the servants of the high priest struck him on the cheek he said, [“]If I have spoken wrongly, prove it; but if I have spoken the truth, why do you strike me[?]” And Augustine explains that with this conduct he prevented an additional injustice from happening. Here is something I have often considered in connection with meekness: that when carried through unconditionally, in its very gentleness―which indeed lessens the guilt (see my discourses “The Gospel of Sufferings”)―there is the double danger: first, that it can almost reinforce the guilty person in thinking that his guilt is nothing, and, second, that the meekness itself can be too severe because of its gentleness, for if someone made him aware of his guilt, he might perhaps stop doing it. For that matter, the leniency of absolute meekness could in fact almost be cruelty, an almost ironical deception. All conditions of the spirit are so wonderfully dialectical that, depending on one’s point of departure, if one sets out to carry something through to its absolute limits, one can end up with an exact opposite outcome. As in this case: when it is carried through absolutely without regard to the consequences, meekness itself can very well be the most frightful severity.

92

5

10

15

13

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 93–96

•

1850

156

93

5

94

15

20

25

95 30

96 35

Augustine has a superb response to the question of whether a Christian dares be a soldier; he believes there is nothing standing in the way of this and says non benefacere prohibet militia, sed malitia. In addition he appeals to the fact that [John] the Baptist, did not say to soldiers, [“]Throw your weapons away,[”] but rather, [“]Do no violence or injustice to anyone, and be content with your wages.[”] But of course he was also a forerunner of Xnty.

In demonstrating that it is permissible for a Christian to serve the state (which at one time was a major issue of concern), it is rather dubious to argue, as Ambrose does at one point, that the scriptures say that a person who holds an office must be faithful to that office―for it is one thing have it [an office] and another thing to seek it. This is like demonstrating that Xnty praises marriage from the fact that it is written that hum. beings must not put asunder what God has joined together―for it is one thing to assert the sanctity of a pact that has been entered into and another thing to praise entering into the pact. Take another example: with respect to a rashly signed promissory note―because it is a promise, I ought to keep it. So when moral doctrine insists on this, does this mean it is praising the making of rash promises[?] This is only in order to shed light on the matter; I am very far from thinking that Xnty has anything against marriage―but Xnty always has a great deal against this sort of argumentation, which is in fact dishonest.

Something I read somewhere holds true with respect to certain things: [“]No pers. is to believe another in connection with this matter, and if he requires that one believe him, one must do so even less.”

This is yet another of the world’s hypocrisies: the maintaining of an illusion by saying that as long as a person’s character is not attacked, the rest is nothing. Oh, hypocrisy! The danger the world holds for a person is by no means that of being viewed as a bit corrupt in one’s inner being―no, no, just as long as he is not so stupid, so clumsy as to 3 non benefacere … malitia] Latin, it is not military service, but malice that prevents one from doing something good. (See also explanatory note.)

159

160

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 96–98

•

1850

be such a bungler in committing evil that he gets convicted under the law. And in that case what the world detests is the stupidity and the clumsiness. The world’s judgment is not the least bit moral (naturally, otherwise the world would not be the world), but aesthetic: it admires everything that possesses power, stealth, selfishness, etc.―successfully―that is, so as to win money, honor, respect. Therefore the world has actlly substituted ridicule, being made a laughingstock, for that which is most feared; this is most certainly an aesthetic judgment. This is why there is no fear whatever of having an erroneous opinion about something, as long as one is in the majority; rather, even if they have the truth itself, what people fear is to stand alone.

157 5

10

15 1

5

[a]

It is mentioned in Neander’s Denkwürdigkeiten 2nd volume, somewhere in the notes.

There is a type of religiousness―yes, actlly the most common type―to which analogous forms still appear. In earlier times, in the first centuries [a.d.], many people believed that one related oneself to God only in connection with one’s eternal salvation; concerning earthly and temporal matters, one must stick with the old gods. This is the form: to live in completely different categories existentially, but in addition to have secured one’s eternal salvation with a sort of insurance policy.

97

20

25

There continues to be this nonsense about how The Corsair was a joke, foolishness, etc.―presumably as opposed to the profound seriousness of other papers. No, The Corsair was a crime, a crime pure and simple, commensurate with the surreptitious demoralization of the public. This sort of thing cannot yet be heard, because of course the present generation is of course very much complicit. Incidentally, this phenomenon has caused irreparable damage all by itself. Comedy is an extremely important power―particularly in Denmark―principally in dealing with a stupid sort of seriousness. But now we are so inundated with depraved comedy that real wit must refrain from being comical because people immediately shout, “Corsair article.” And so this phenomenon of

98

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 98–99

5

158

99

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

ridicule has promoted its precise opposite, a more prudish and stupid type of seriousness. Naturally, Goldschmidt always comes off in a good light when people disapprovingly call The Corsair a joke, foolery, and the like. Truly, I ought then be the first person to praise it. But it was a crime.

“Actuality” as It Actually Is. It is the masses who actually rule the state, and with the assistance of the daily press, chatter is the absolute power. God preserve us, we certainly do maintain an appearance of earnestness, but it is a lie, and it is an accident that “chatter” is not the only thing that is heard at every moment. Take whomever you like: an artist, a poet, a scholar, a priest, a civil servant, a journalist, etc., direct an attack at one or another of his activities, demonstrate that it is―and let us assume that this is the case― wretched, etc. An attack like this amounts to nothing; it remains essentially within that circle of society that occupies itself with this sort of thing and is soon forgotten―and in any event there is an enormous portion of society to which it would never occur to take an interest in this sort of thing. No, let the “chatter” begin. Write whatever nonsense you want concerning him; write the sort of rubbish that schoolchildren call fun and games: that yesterday he spilled food on himself at the dinner table; then depict him with his napkin; do it regularly, every other day for 14 days: then that frightful monster, the mob, rises up―this is something for them. These thousands upon thousands shout with joy or howl with delight like a beast of prey over its booty. You see, this attack is dangerous―and the people shout in nervous anxiety: It is nothing. Moses was a tormented man. Why? Was he persecuted by tyrants? No, no―that is almost mere child’s play compared with his sufferings, this most plagued of men. Why? Because it was his mission to bring a slavish-minded people to freedom. Every day he had to endure the bestiality, etc. of this slavish-minded people in order to bring them to freedom.―This has really struck me today, but also the sort of being scripture makes him out to be: that Holy Scripture calls him the most tormented of men. But back to “actuality,” the rational, Christian state, which still possesses many high-flown epithets, all of which are the most insulting sarcasms.

161

162

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 99–100

•

1850

Thus “chatter” is the power; as in mythology, where night is the mother of everything, so is chatter the womb, in particular of modern states, with their complete freedom, the freedom that allows all chatter to emerge, and the freedom for others to chatter along with them. That this is true is as certain as that the earth exists. But the fact is that one cannot even get it said. How should one say it so that it can be heard? In the daily press? Yes, hah! it is certainly very vigilant against letting this sort of news slip through. And that is how we live. “Earnestness,” “the truth,” “honest opinion,” lead a hidden, private existence―for almost everyone knows quite a bit better. Talk with them, with each one individually, the member of parliament, the journalist, the deputy, etc.―talk with each one privately, then you will get to hear his indignation about the intrigues in the parliament―but then, in parliament, that is, officially: there he is careful to guard against speaking of such matters; there he will speak emotionally of the advantages of this free constitution in promoting truth, etc. You will get to hear someone else’s indignation about the daily press, about the villainy practiced by the daily press―but in the daily press (for he himself makes use of the daily press), that is, officially: there he does not speak of such things―insignificant things like that are certainly not worth speaking about in public. Excellent: officially, people strengthen evil with major means of communication[;] privately, confidentially, people grant a bit of justice to the good and the true. And thus society is as if bewitched, as if possessed. Certainly most people rlly do not notice or discover anything in a deeper sense, for inasmuch as they never act or speak officially from the standpoint of the good, but of evil, they naturally meet with great success in the world. And at the same time, they flatter themselves about being privately aware of the lies and deceptions. This is truly a frightful flattery, frightful because in eternity their judgment will be precisely that they knew better privately; had they not had this consciousness, they would have been less guilty.

All of the modern entertainment involving popular assemblies in which a couple of speakers battle one another, and the

5

159

10

15

20

25

30

35

100

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 100–101

•

1850

163

Entries NB16:100 and NB16:101, the latter of which Kierkegaard concluded in the marginal column because of lack of space in the main column.

164

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 100–101

•

1850

assembly, casting ballots, shouts [“]Shut up[”] and [“]bravo[”]―is rlly nothing other than a revival of the pleasures of bullfighting, but with the difference that now it is the assembly, the public, the crowd, that takes it upon itself to be the beasts (the wild, ferocious animals whose [“]Shut up[”] and clamor constitute the danger), and this is a very small difference.

5

161

Measure of Distance.

1

a

that we should live according to what we have heard), people would find it either ridiculous and abgesmackt or presumptuous.

4 abgesmackt] German, properly “abgeschmackt,” tasteless.

How far from Christianity one is personally and existentially can be seen in this way: the same expressions, ideas, etc. that are used in the sermon (e.g., that all of life is an upbringing, that we should take everything to God, etc.) and that are accepted there―if a person in actuality were to say such things about himself and his life, (and the priest does indeed saya

101

15

JOURNAL NB17

JOURNAL NB17 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Journal NB17 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Anne Mette Hansen, and Kim Ravn

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 2

165

1

•

1850

NB17 March 6th 1850.

167

168

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 2

•

1850

166

About Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Curious Situation with Respect to Prof. Martensen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Misunderstanding in My Situation as an Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The World’s Turning Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . My Situation in Relation to the Times, to the Extent That It Has Itself Given Rise to the Dubious Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lines Concerning Myself . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. p. p. p.

10 26 70 71.

2

5

p. 72. p. 79.

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 3–4

•

1850

169

167

3

4 5

Concerning Texts for Friday Sermons See the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 30.

The Absurd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . God’s Chosen Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Daily Press . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Confusion in Christendom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . On Prof. Nielsen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. p. p. p. p. p.

17 38. 90. 191. 148. 194.

170

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 5–6

•

1850 168

It is a special sort of difficulty. In order to prove properly that a man is God’s chosen instrument, people attribute to him visions and revelations, dreams, etc. Now, I am not speaking of the apostles, for whom I always keep a separate account. But the difficulty is that a man of this sort is put forth as an example regardless of the fact that his situation is heterogeneous; he is supposed to be an example for those to whom nothing of this sort happens. Now here comes the question: did this happen to him because of an advance in piety, or did the fact that this happened to him help him acquire the courage, the faith, the fearlessness that made his godliness so great[?] If the former is the case, of course, then revelations and the like are of course straightforward superlatives in a straightforward, continuing striving; in the other case, the paradigm is heterogeneous and imitation is not possible. People have not noticed that here in the domain of religion a difference that is similar to that between people of genius and talent and ordinary hum. beings can easily arise. This is easily brought about when the ethical is not strongly enough present in the religious.

5

About Myself.

6

Look, people call it wit, joking―and nothing: I call it quite simply, in the deepest sense, crime. This was what the vulgarity of the mob wanted, it wanted to present me to the mob as someone mad so that the mob could then decide how to treat me. The intention was thus either that I would have to leave town―so that people would see that the

5

10

15

20

25

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 6–7

169

5

10

15

20

7

30

35

40

•

1850

171

mob practices ostracism―or that I would actually be weakened. And during all this (in such petty circumstances and broadcast so grossly disproportionately) the cultivated world transformed itself into spectators―not one word slipped out concerning this villainy. Things went so far that I could even be exposed to personal attacks on the street. Had that happened, my entire circle of friends and acquaintances would have been afraid, and I would have been broken. But, as always, Governance has held its hand over me in fatherly, indescribably fatherly, fashion. The cleverness and personal virtuosity that I have been granted have of course also helped me to navigate under such difficult circumstances, in which everything depends on me, as the person attacked (instead of my finding support from one single person), having the lightness to make the matter so insignificant that friends (if I may call them such) do not after all betray me utterly. And how much has been gained in illuminating Xnty; and how many mortgages I hold on the state of affairs in Denmark! Truly, its time will come.

R.N.’s misfortune, after all, is rlly the fact that he has been warped by scholarliness and has not yet acquired any notion of what it is to be a personality that calmly reposes in its certainty of the rightness of a cause while also taking action as a personality. How simple and beautiful the whole matter would have been―instead of all the things he has brought up. He would have begun with a quite plain and simple declaration in which he―not without a certain decorous self-respect concerning the studies of philosophy he knows he has made―would have declared that these writings have changed his views. Then, with the composure of a complete personality, he would quite calmly have set to work illuminating the writings.

[a]

R. Nielsen.

1

[b]

And I had indeed arranged the matter dialectically in such a way that the very plainspokenness and certainty with which one declared, [“]Yes, call me a disciple or what you will, I support this cause, which has changed my views[”]― precisely this certainty would show that the man was truly anything but a Schüler.

11 Schüler] German, disciple.

5

10

172

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 7–8

•

1850

Then, however much he might have been offended by the preface to Martensen’s Dogmatics: well, then―a quite simple rejoinder with the self-respect and dignity of a personality. And now―this whole pack of semi-scholarliness with which he begins, and then the diversion against Martensen. This does not please me particularly with respect to the cause. I have never done battle with anyone in a situation in which victory would bring honor (for the battle with Heiberg was self-defense); fighting like this is worldliness. I have aimed at the true evil, the mob, the crowd, where no honor is to be won. That was also the way I wanted my cause stated. With all these halfway measures and erroneous tactics, almost 2 years have now passed. And how much has been lost! How beautiful it all would have been, how pure and transparent the situation would have been, so entirely free, without disciples or anything of that sort―no, a respectable personality who, at one with himself in having found something decisive in these writings, had decided to take action on behalf of the cause. But perhaps it is too much to require a transformation of this sort by a former speculative professor, at any rate on his first run. And how clear this would have made the heterogeneity with Martensen, whereas now the homogeneity is so obvious. I have learned awfully much from this test of patience.

170

5

10

15

20

25

Generally speaking, sermons nowadays are utterly confusing. “The priest” has at his disposal, in the form of platitudes, the thoughts and words of those men whose lives expressed existentially what corresponds to those same words and thoughts―but none of us expresses this. So it becomes sheer self-contradiction. The priest says “that it is good to be in the house of the Lord―but a person’s work does not permit one to remain there, etc.”―what work? How much does a pers. really need in order to live? Yes, ask those ascetics. But we, we need so much more―and yet we talk like those ascetics, and the whole business becomes a satire on ourselves. The fact is that admissions must be made: we must admit that we are not so simply spiritual, that we are both more sensual and more intellectually developed―and then, for the rest, we take refuge in grace.

8

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 9–12

•

1850

171

9

5

10

10

20

11 25

12 30

This is how Xnty wants to rule. It does not require any particular thing―precisely when a pers., almost in impatient zeal, is most keen on wanting to do this particular thing, Xnty says: It is not needed, it is not required. In other words, Xnty wants a disposition of unconditional obedience. The notion of pleasing God by doing one or another thing was a childish misunderstanding that did not properly comprehend God as the infinite ruler whose loftiness cannot permit the sort of situation in which one could do him a service instead of having to ask for permission to dare venture forth into danger, ask for permission to have the honor to serve the truth, etc.

Just think of these things at the same time: the enormous criterion you establish for a person’s life, an eternal judgment―so that one would think that it was absolutely guaranteed that he would live for at least 30 years―and then, for example, that today a teeming capital city perishes in an earthquake: think of these things at the same time and you will understand how necessary grace is for a hum. being to be able to endure living for a single instant.

The person who really grasps his immortality or that an eternal life awaits him will quickly learn to take refuge in grace.

. . . . Simply to worship another, an individual human being, in a situation of contemporaneity: oh, how many are there, indeed, in each generation who have the courage and faith and humility for this. For of course what counts here and what is always the criterion for the personality is to be able to pack all the many thoughts into an action; what is required here is not oratory or argumentation or superlative upon superlative―no, to be quiet,

173

174

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 12–13

•

1850

taciturn, and to fall down in worship before an individual hum. being whose sensuous existence seems to do everything within its power to argue against this.

172

About Myself. When I think back on it now, how remarkable was that stroke of the pen with which I hurled myself against the vulgarity of the mob! And this was the mood in my soul when I took the step: I thought of stopping as an author with Concl. Postscript, the entire manuscript of which had been delivered to Luno. Grateful, unspeakably grateful for what had been granted me, I decided― when the occasion was provided by that article in Gæa―to take a magnanimous step for the sake of “the others.” I was the only person who had the prerequisites for doing it emphatically―the prerequisites: 1) Goldschmidt had immortalized me and saw in me the object of his admiration, 2) I am a witty writer, 3) I have not taken the side of the elite or of any party whatever, 4) I possess a personal virtuosity in being able to associate with everyone, 5) I had up to that point a shining reputation that literally did not have a single spot of criticism or the like, 6) I have unselfishly used my own money to be an author, 7) I was unmarried, independent, etc. So, religiously determined, I did it. And look, precisely this step was decisive for my continuing to be an author! Ah, and what significance it has had, how I have learned to understand myself, learned to know “the world,” and learned to understand Xnty―yes, otherwise an entire aspect of Xnty, and a crucial aspect, would probably not have occurred to me at all, and perhaps I would not have been granted the situation in which I myself would come into the proper relation to Xnty. But on such a scale: a consummate and earned reputation as an author, then suddenly almost to begin all over again!

13

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 14–15 14

173 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

15

•

1850

About Myself. This is precisely what is reassuring, the guarantee of the correctness of my position in the religious sphere. My decision not to marry or shape my life in conformity with a striving for finite goals was not taken arbitrarily or by virtue of a theory. No, I have suffered as an αϕοριςμενος from my earliest days. There is a higher power that compels me. If, humanly speaking, I were free and unrestrained and in conformity with the universal, I would scarcely have become involved with all this sort of thing. But nonetheless let us assume that this was what had happened, that I myself had arranged my life like this theoretically or arbitrarily: then I would all too quickly have deceived myself into meritoriousness, and at the first opportunity I would have run wild in establishing schools. No, I am a reminder, as far as can be from requiring that others live like this, as far as can be from finding anything meritorious in my life. But I am a reminder to the times, reminding them that they ought to be very grateful in appreciating that it is both possible and permissible for them to have this palliative of occupying themselves with finite goals―and also of the fact that they will disgrace themselves if they impudently reverse the situation and make this lenient position into the greatest seriousness and the highest thing. This has become increasingly forgotten since the time of Luther, who has been taken in vain―and this is where I am situated. But the reassurance consists precisely in the fact that―especially in the beginning―I have been existentially compelled, in accordance with a criterion that is only altogether too frightful, to become aware (and in so doing, to make people aware) of a more rigorous religious existence, namely by my having been placed― in suffering and under compulsion―outside the universal. The pain and the suffering has been frightful, especially in the beginning―but precisely because of them I have also had quite other things to think about than becoming self-important through “meritoriousness” or busying myself with training imitators.

Fundamentally, there is something very comical in Goldschmidt lately. Now he is a respectable man, almost an aristocrat, 6 αϕοριςμενος] Greek, someone or something cut off; here, an exile, someone expelled.

175

176

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 15–16

•

1850

who speaks with dignity, saying, on the occasion of Schak’s article: “Without further ado, he reckons us among the ravens who live off the names of the famous,[”] etc.―and it is G. who is speaking. I imagine a situation. A hubbub in the street, a person has been seized by someone and held as a thief; the person is very well dressed, speaks for himself fluently and cleverly, saying: “Just seizing a man on the street and calling him a thief,” etc.; the public is surprised and indignant on his behalf―at that instant a police officer comes by; he goes over to see what is going on; he eyes the respectable man and instantly says, “Ah, is it you Svend Andreas Olsen[?”] That is how it is with G. What is more comical, however, is that of course those who were there did not know Svend Andreas Olsen―but of course we all know G.―

About Myself. Remarkable collision contained in my public life. I knew well the degree to which I was superior to everything celebrated in the literature of the time. I also knew the degree to which I was secretly envied by the literary bigwigs―but they dared not utter a single word.―Thus I had come to a point of rest, the position that had been triumphantly conquered by Either/Or and occupied thereafter. Then came that little article by P. L. Møller. Now, had I thought only of myself, I would have remained silent, because for my own sake there was truly nothing worth the trouble of dealing with, which I indeed told Gjødvad. But (something I also told Gjødvad and that is also included in my article itself) it seemed to me that I ought to do something about the situation in order, if possible, to stop the uprising of the rabble, which had subjected the literary elite to base injustice. So I hurled myself against the rabble. To tell the truth, among the things I had in mind was

5

10

174

15

16

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 16

5

10

175

15

20

25

30

35

40

that however bitterly the elite might have envied me, this step would procure justice for them, and indeed, might perhaps get them to soften their position and make them willing to understand all my efforts. But no, it was precisely this envy by the elite that became my collision. It disseminated the view that I was mad for wanting to do―what everyone had said 100 times ought to be done. And now I am holding out for the 4th year. I am known by every servant, every scoundrel, every child, whose passing glances remind me of the mockery; my name is used as an invective that is shouted after me―as good as nothing is said in print concerning me and my work as an author; my price is not quoted on the exchange, while every day the abuse continues. Then the elite envy reasons as follows: So look, now we dare permit ourselves to do to him what we so much wanted to do at the time. Owing to the vulgar mob’s abuse, the elite envy thinks that I have been so weakened in people’s eyes that now, e.g., Martensen dares to swagger in a preface. And look, now my brother Peter―he, too, makes use of the fortunate moment for a frivolous acknowledgment that naturally contains the middle term to the effect that inasmuch as I have now been abused in this way, one might dare offer a pinch of me―and perhaps manage to have oneself regarded as noble and magnanimous,[a] But we will see. In any event, Xnty has been illuminated in accordance with a real criterion. Bishop Mynster, as always, is the only figure here on the hill, as he was, from the start, the only one I took into account. He has, however, taken some slight notice of the turn of affairs. At one point a couple of years ago he said to me: “But those who actlly come to bear the brunt will be other than those at whom you are taking direct aim.” Yes, quite true―but what about those who are accomplices through their traitorous silence[?] Mynster’s position does grasp one point well, however. The extent to which he, too, in ordinary Christian envy,

•

1850

[a]

177

while on the other hand his effusions were also, after all, certainly occasioned by a loving and “hearty” concern that the latest turn in theological literature would grant me too lofty a position.

1

5

178

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 16–19

•

1850

might have wanted to see me a bit broken―is something I will not decide. When I hurled myself at the mob he might in fact have thought that it could do me some good. Then in addition he thought that it would go no further than my getting a little blow. But what happens―now come my consequences: that I must present Xnty in accordance with its more rigorous criterion. You see, this is fatal for all those who had comfortably accommodated themselves to a low-price and advantageous edition of Xnty. And that was rlly what Bishop Mynster meant.

5

176 10

1

[a]

The Absurd.

Spiritual Trial. As can happen with a woman precisely in connection with her truly beloved: that because she is preoccupied altogether too intensely with this single thought, there suddenly arises something almost like a disgust for the beloved, who nonetheless is truly the beloved―so, too, is there a religious spiritual trial (which indeed we also find described in ancient sources) in which there arises a loathing of the religious even though it nonetheless is the highest reality for the suffering person, but he has been too preoccupied with it. Here nothing can be done except to have patience and remain quiet, then the blessedness returns all the more strongly.

17

In David we have an example (which Arndt also cites in the preface to the 3rd book p. 667) of sacrificing one’s will. 2 Sam 23:15: When he mightily desired to drink water from the well at Bethlehem and the three heroes forced their way past the enemy and brought water to the king, he poured it out for the Lord. Incidentally, this is a religious parallel to the story of Alexander who did it not for God, but out of hum. magnanimity and heroism.

18

15

20

25

30

The Absurd.

19

The immediate believer cannot maintain that for the understanding and for every third party who is not a believer, the con-

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 19–20

5

177

15

20

25

•

1850

tent of faith is the absurd, and that in order to become a believer every person must be alone with the absurd. The immediate believer, as someone immediate, is not composite, cannot have a doubleness within himself, cannot contain it. When he speaks to another person he construes the absurd, with the best of intentions and enthusiastically, in the most superlative of superlatives―and then hopes that this will succeed in straightforwardly convincing the other person. What is lacking here is the elasticity of the dialectical: to understand that this is absurd for the understanding, to speak of this quite calmly to a third party, granting that it is the absurd, enduring the pressure that the other person has to regard it as the absurd―and then nonetheless to believe it. Whereas it naturally follows that it is not absurd for him as a believer. But the immediate person cannot remove himself from being in straightforward continuity with others; he cannot maintain that what is for him the most certain thing of all―blessedness―is and must be the absurd for others. This is the source of the unholy confusion in talk about faith. The believer is not dialectically consolidated as “the single individual”; he cannot tolerate this double vision, that the content of faith, seen from the other side, is the absurd. This is the tension, the tension of the life of faith, in which one must keep oneself. But everywhere there is a tendency to construe faith straightforwardly. The scholarly science that wants to comprehend faith is an attempt in this direction.

20

The Misfortune of Christianity in Christendom.

30

Not one single objection against Xnty has arisen, not even from the most rabid rationalist and the most scandalized person, to which the “actual Xn” cannot reply quite calmly: Yes, that is the way it is. But the fact is that those in Xndom who want to be Xns are coddled; they are pampered by having and getting Christianity on terms that are altogether too cheap: that is why they were unable to resist.

35

179 1

180

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 21

•

1850

A Comment Concerning Something in Fear and Trembling Joh. de s. rightly says that passionate concentration is required in order to show the various psychological standpoints. That is how it is with respect to the decision about whether I am to assume that, humanly speaking, one thing or another is impossible for me. Here I am not yet thinking of the highest sorts of collisions in which what is expected is utterly at odds with the order of nature (e.g., that Sarah gets a child even though she is long past the natural age of childbearing). This is indeed why Joh. d. s. continually repeats that he is unable to understand Abraham, because in addition the collision here is so high that the ethical constitutes a spiritual trial. No, in lesser situations. There are many peop.―and probably by far the majority―who could live without consciousness rlly penetrating their lives. For them it is certainly possible that they never come to a passionately concentrated decision about whether they should relate themselves expectantly to this possibility or abandon it―thus they live this in unclarity. Not so with individuals whose nature is consciousness. They could very well give up one thing or another, even though it is their most cherished wish; but they must have clarity about whether or not they are to expect. Things of this sort can never in all eternity be made comprehensible to immed. or half-reflective natures. Therefore they never come to the distinction between resignation and faith. This of course is what Joh. d. s. has insisted upon again and again. Everything, he says, depends on passionate concentration. So when someone comes and wants to correct him by leading the matter back into ordinary intellectual unclarity (which undeniably is the way things generally are with peop.)―then, yes, then of course he manages to get understood by many. This is how it always goes when something a real thinker has pushed to its logical extreme is corrected with the help of what “he rejected before he began.”

21

5

178

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 22 22

5

10

15

179

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

An Example of Faith in Which the Important Thing Is Turning Aside from Reflection. When the task is not to endure one thing or another, to work for, to will one thing or another, etc., in which, praying to God for help, I also think directly of one thing or another, which is the task. No, let the task be: to forget one thing or another. Inner experience will teach that there are many situations, especially those involving spiritual trial, in which the greatest danger is to continue to think about that which is to be put aside, that it does absolutely no good to employ all the efforts of the will in order to put it aside, that then one only gets stuck more and more fast in it, that it is a question of getting away from it, a question of the quiet humility that attends to forgetting. Thus the task is: to forget. And thus the embattled individual is a religious person who prays to God for help and assistance in order to―forget. And here again, if the prayer becomes prolix, wordy; if the prayer, as it were, becomes anxious about not having presented its plea with sufficient intensity: well, then precisely the opposite results―then I am continually reminded more and more of the thing against which I am supposed to protect myself by forgetting. Here what matters is a trusting sigh that takes only a second to make itself understood by God―and then away, to forgetting. Incidentally, it is likely that the prolix, wordy prayer often also conceals within itself unbelief. Thus, from such situations a pers. can learn very quickly to acquire the most intensive sort of trust in God. Here there is no time to add even a single word to the prayer, for then I am reminded of the thing I am to forget. Here prayer is the silent, trusting accord with God. Therefore this is rlly an education in prayer, because garrulousness is dangerous. And even if inwardness is present in a lengthy effusion to God, the question nonetheless is and remains whether this sort of prayer is not lingering instead of taking action. Certainly prayer has and must have its blessedness, but one can dwell too much upon this blessedness. Thus collisions of this sort can teach a pers. another aspect of prayer.

181

182

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 23

•

1850

My Curious Situation with Respect to Martensen. Of course there are some people who see a bit more deeply into the matter, but the tradition that goes from mouth to mouth concerning the difference betw. Prof. M. and myself is that he wants to vindicate thinking with respect to faith, wants to think about faith, and that I do not want to do so. Curious! Just look at my work as an author. At the time I started, I had about the same level of scholarly education as the prof. (perhaps a bit less German erudition, but on the other hand a bit more Greek). An entire pseudonymous literature makes use of many methods and a number of pseudonyms principally in order to illuminate the problem of faith, to discover the proper sphere of faith, to define its heterogeneity from other spheres of the intellect or spirit, etc., etc. And how is all this accomplished? With dialectic, with thinking. I daresay scarcely any other author has concerned himself with thinking about faith on such a scale―though admittedly not with speculating on and on about various dogmas, for I “thought,” yes, I thought (it was, after all, thinking) that one must first come to terms with the entire question of faith; I venture to assert that dialectical definitions of individual points have been set forth more precisely in my works than in any previously known. So this is what it is not to want to think about faith. Now, take Prof. M. He has written a dogmatics. Very well. In it he treats all the points and questions usually treated in dogmatics (concerning scripture, the Trinity, the creation and preservation of the world, redemption, atonement, angels, devils, hum. beings, immortality, etc.)[.] But there is one point he slides over rather lightly, this is the point concerning the relation of faith to thinking. You see, this is what people call thinking about faith―as opposed to my efforts. But the fact is: I have worked and accomplished something on this point―this is the sort of stuff no one has the time to read. Martensen has given as-

23

5

10

15

20

180

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 23–25

5

24

10

surances upon assurances―that is something for everyone to run along with. My detailed books―yes, they frighten people off, they run away from them. Prof. Martensen’s winged assurances―people run along with them, es gehet vom Munde zu Munde.

Theme for a Friday Discourse.

•

1850

183

[a] I do not want to speak of other means of propulsion that favor Prof. M.: He is a prof.; he has an important position; a velvet sash or paunch; is a knight―whereas I am a nobody, have spent money in order to be an author. Would that someone or other might think seriously about this, just for half an hour; then perhaps he might come to have a different opinion of my efforts.

1

5

10

At the altar there is: 1) forgetting (of your sins, of what is past and gone), 2) remembering (of Xt’s love, of the eternal that is yet to come).

181

25

15

20

25

30

Socrates. Indeed, it is clear that Socrates’ defense was precisely what embittered the judges so that they condemned him to death. Socrates had been viewed as an eccentric and as such was more or less left alone. Then he was accused. In itself the accusation was of no great significance. But then the situation of the accusation became the occasion that revealed what was rlly present in Socrates. The elevated self-esteem with which he related ironically to the summa summarum of the entire popular assembly, refusing to defend himself but jesting with them: this became what was rlly decisive. His behavior as the accused embittered the people so much that he was actually condemned for that behavior, and the accusation became the occasion. This has also been correctly grasped by Wieland in his Aristipp und seine Zeit 2nd part pp. 12 and 13.[b]

5 es gehet ... zu Munde] German, literally, it goes from mouth to mouth, i.e., everyone is talking about it. 23 summa summarum] Latin, sum of sums, sum total.

[a]

Socrates

[b]

good observations are also to be found on pp. 38, 39, 40, but from another angle; here, though in very abbreviated form, the question emerges whether Socrates ought to have fled out of concern for the Athenians. (here H. H.’s two essays come to mind); see in addition pp. 55 et al.

15

20

184

1

[a]

the daily press

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 26–27

•

1850

The Daily Press The daily press is what has destroyed the states. As long as it exists, much less grows and advances, Xnty is an impossibility in the states (apart from quiet, secluded life that is able to conceal itself here and there), and rlly the state itself is an impossibility. Here is where the martyrs should fall; they should be marked by the persecution and abuse of the daily press. There will be unbloody martyrs (for of course the press does not kill anyone―as is said hypocritically, even though God knows how many people the press has already killed)―but of the most complex and difficult sort, because every day a sufferer does in a way have it in his power to withdraw. The martyr must thus be noticed by his times in such a way that people deep down have an understanding of him and of the truth of his cause, but no one dares speak out of fear of the daily press. Then, when he is dead, he moves. But this martyrdom also has this difficulty: it must lift up the same thing―an entire life―every single day, so that in his death he can exert pressure with his entire life. If he permits any interval of time to pass, the impression is weakened and the degree to which his death was a martyrdom does not become clear. Here the category of “the single individual” is rlly the right one for the martyr.

26

5

10

182 15

20

25

Poetic Lines. The most disgusting of all tyrannies: the tyranny of the daily press, of distribution. With another tyranny, one can travel to someplace else―but here, here one of the persecutors travels along with one; he usurps one’s reputation in the foreign locale, first relates that the famous Mr. X is living here in town, then gushes with praise in order to garner attention―and in order that one can taste the abuse that follows. You see, with the help of the press this can be achieved very quickly. Suppose there were no press, suppose one of those who hated the well-known person wanted to follow him by traveling to the foreign place and there to make an impression by slandering him verbally―no, it would not succeed. But it could be done with the help of the press, with the enormous mouthfuls that the press can take at a time.

27

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 27–29

•

1850

185

Ah, as a plant must feel when it cannot get rid of the wretched vermin that is both consuming and disfiguring it: so must a well-known person feel when he sees how this wretched vermin, which lives off “renown,” cannot be shaken off or avoided. 5

28

About Theophilus Nicolaus.

25

You see, this is what happens when clumsiness intervenes in opposition to an artistic design. Joh. Climacus himself declares that he does not have faith. Theophilus Nicolaus presents the believer. He takes absolutely no note of the fact that to be consistent he must present the matter in such a way that inasmuch as Joh. Climacus himself says that he does not have faith, is not a Xn, everything he says cannot, of course, prove anything. But Theophilus Nicolaus suspects nothing of this. He involves himself bona fide. Alas, how sad to live in such petty circumstances that as good as no one rlly has an eye for a profoundly executed artistic design. What has cost me days of diligence, enormous effort, an almost sleepless dialectical persistence in keeping the threads properly arranged in this delicate construction―this simply does not exist for others. I am simply identified with my pseudonyms, and then some nonsense gets patched together that―of course―is understood by many more: yes, of course!

29

God’s Chosen Instruments.

183

15

20

30

35

How does God go about securing himself an instrument among hum. beings? Quite simply as follows: He isolates such a person so that even if that person wanted to, it would be impossible for him to make himself understood by others. As soon as there is understanding by others, then comes bargaining, discounts, etc.―but he must hold out in this frightful isolation, constantly alone with God―then there will certainly be success in pegging the price of religion sufficiently high.

[a]

About Theophilus Nicolaus.

1

186

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 29–30

•

1850

God can isolate “the instrument” through sufferings, sufferings in which he cannot make himself understood by anyone else, sufferings to the point of madness. On the other hand, “the instrument” can be isolated like this by the extraordinary itself, e.g., through visions, revelations, and the like. But, is this in fact so isolating? Have we not indeed had millions who have lived very well by dint of Paul’s having been called by a revelation? Undeniably! At a distance (especially at a distance of 1800 years), a revelation is an extremely comfortable matter―but to be oneself the one who has had a revelation in a situation of contemporaneity, among one’s contemporaries: this is fundamentally the most absolute sort of isolation. Such a man constantly oscillates between what is highest―and madness: he cannot rlly be understood, understood to have had a revelation, by any third party.

5

10

184 15

Is a Christian Permitted to Make Use of Shrewdness, except in an Inverse Sense: Not to Make Life Easier for Himself, but to Make It Burdensome, Not to Avoid Danger, but to Enter into It? Granted (as is said objectively) that Xnty is a doctrine, that is, a sum of doctrinal propositions. It is of course obvious that the same thing can be said in many different ways and yet remain the same qua doctrine. For example, the difference could be that one person (helped by the [“]how[”] with which he says it) is a brilliant success, and another (helped by the [“]how[”] with which he says the same thing) is persecuted: Is it the same thing, then, the same Xnty―is a Christian permitted to make use of his shrewdness in the manner of the former [“]how[”]? Note Here, incidentally, one sees how foolish it is to call Xnty a doctrine, for then the difference―that one person is a success in proclaiming the same thing for which another person must suffer―then the difference would be utterly unimportant, inasmuch as what they say was really the same thing. Thus, e.g., in relation to Plato’s philosophy: if two people present it equally truthfully, then the fact that the one employs his shrewdness to become a success and the other disdains this shrewdness and is persecuted: this difference is essentially trivial. But Xnty is no doctrine, it is an existential communication.

30

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 31–32

31

5

10

185 15

20

25

32 30

35

•

1850

187

Is There Not a Necessary Relation between What a Pers. Says and Teaches and What Follows from It, so That He Necessarily Brings Consequences upon Himself, and so That, if the Consequences Do Not Ensue, One Is Justified in Concluding: Well, Then He Has Not Truly Proclaimed This? Take an example: to proclaim Christian self-denial. If someone truly proclaims it, does it not follow with necessity that what he says will happen to him, so that the only true proof of the truth of the proclamation is that it produces what has been proclaimed―perhaps not in such a way that anyone does what he says, but at any rate that what happens to him takes place in accordance with what he says: that Christian self-denial happens to him. If, on the contrary, someone became a brilliant success by proclaiming Christian self-denial―is this not a direct proof of the fact that he is not proclaiming it truly[?] The Sophists are so reluctant to stop here; they keep it ambiguous, saying: Sometimes the truth must suffer in this world, but sometimes things go well for it. But when Christian self-denial is proclaimed in such a way that the person who proclaims it becomes a success, then he is not actlly proclaiming it; perhaps he is declaiminga, but he is not expressing it existentially, and this is why the consequences do not ensue. One sees here, once again, how foolish it is to call Xnty a doctrine instead of an existential communication.

Goldschmidt. Apart from the fact that 1) it is rlly nothing but impudence (though perhaps he himself does not understand this) and 2) nonsense that imitates what he has heard about metamorphoses and stages in the development of a life―what he has hit upon, that The Corsair is a first stage―apart from this, there remains the psychological oddity that he evinces the Merkwürdighed that the comic is the first stage. In other cases, after all, the comic is usually the last stage―comedy certainly concludes Hegel’s Aesthetics, 35 Merkwürdighed] German/Danish, peculiarity.

a

at a poet’s distance from actuality.

[a]

Goldschmidt.

1

188

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 32–33

•

1850

and an Aristophanes would have found it strange if someone had suggested to him that he make his existence as a comic poet into a first stage―in order thereafter to become “earnest.” In general, the nonsense G. puts into the world with his personal existence is not without interest in relation to the investigation that has been assigned to me: Copenhagen in moral dissolution. As an author, I myself have never made use of the comic; it has been used in service of pseudonyms, who of course would quite consistently find it ridiculous if they were permitted to attain a new stage, because the comic is the designation for the highest sphere. I myself was an edifying author from the very first. In the pseudonyms, the comic is, if anything, too high a stage, because it is something demonic.

5

10

15

186

Socrates―Xnty.

1

5

a

and that is why it is learned so slowly, not as quickly and easily as one learns one more language or one more system by rote. No, in connection with virtue, there is always special emphasis on the inward, inward-turned, “the single individual.”

This Socratic thesis is also of the greatest importance for Christianity: virtue cannot be taught―that is, it is not a doctrine, it is an ability, a practice, an existing, an existential reformationa Here, in turn, is where I place myself with my thesis: Xnty is not a doctrine, but an existential communication. It is of such decisive importance to define the concept “teacher” in relation to Xnty. It is rlly the entire unholy pack of “priests and professors” that has, bona fide, confused “the faith.”

33

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 34–35 34

5

10

A Curiously Ironic Honor. When a fire breaks out somewhere and the alarm is to be sounded, the drummer gets there first and beats the drum outside the place that is on fire. That is the last place he needs to beat the drum. It is if it were being shown honeur. An analogous case, would be, for example, if it was the custom, when a man was to be executed, for the guilty person to mount the scaffold, accompanied by an officer of the law and a priest, and for the executioner first to bow three times to the delinquent and then once to the authorities.

187

35

Plato.

15

Is it not strange that in the Republic Plato wants to have “the poets” exiled from the state, attacks “the poets” frequently―and yet was in fact himself a poet or a thinker of a predominantly poetic character. Again, what is remarkable here is that this is not an earlier stage and the decisively ethical a later stage. Alas, no, it is the reverse. It is a reversed μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος. This is reminiscent of Socrates, who himself actually was an ethicist and was right in wanting to get rid of “the poet.” With the second generation (Plato) we have come so far that Plato is the poet who wants to get rid of “the poet”―he poetizes wanting to get rid of the poet, that is how far things have gone backward. I have been struck by some words of Aristippus (in Wieland’s Aristipp und seine Zeit 4th vol. p. 34), where he speaks of Plato’s Republic: “You require,[”] he writes, [“]my views on this new poem by our declared enemy of poets.” This point about Plato has also been important to me personally. I have always recognized that there is something of the poet in me. Nonetheless I am struggling forward. I do not follow immediately after a Socrates and then let matters go backward.

20

25

30

35

6 honeur] French, honor. 23 μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] Greek, transition to another conceptual sphere. (See also explanatory note.)

•

1850

189

190

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 35–36

•

1850

No, in the limitless confusion of religion, I am one step forward. I point out the turn that is to be made, but, almost fainting under that enormous intellectual task of clearing the ground, I myself point out the purely ethical existence as that which is higher.

1

5

10

[a]

And thus even a pagan―he who was not in possession of the highest, the true Ideal―regarded the world in this way: how frightfully must it be regarded by Xnty, for the distance is proportional to the loftiness of the ideal, and therefore the world is completely good only for those who are wicked or who know no ideal. [b]

15

20

25

30

35

What excellent praise of this world has been attributed to the eulogist of injustice: “The just person is whipped, stretched on the rack, put in chains; people want to burn out his eyes, and after he has suffered all imaginable abuse, he is nailed to the cross and now, too late, is compelled to realize that in this world one must strive to appear just, but not be mad by being just. How splendid, on the contrary, is the lot of the unjust in this world if he has the shrewdness to get public opinion on his side, and he is regarded as an honorable man while, under the guise of virtue, he allows himself to do everything. The highest posts of honor in the state await him; he can marry whomever he wishes and give his own children to whomever he wishes; everyone counts it an honor to associate and have connections with him; and because

Inversion. The Christian view that here in the world everything is reversed, that the more I try to practice virtue, the worse things go for me, etc.―all this is of course already to be found in the entire excellent presentation of the ethical in the first books of Plato’s Republic. The Sophists teach that committing injustice is advantageous, and that everyone knows this, though for safety’s sake they maintain the appearance of willing the good―Socrates wants a person to do the good and avoid the appearance of doing so, lest he be tempted by the reward. Here, incidentally, there is a little difficulty that can be easily removed. When, indeed, the Sophists teach that committing injustice is what is most advantageous and that, deep down, everyone views it in this way―why, then, the appearance of being regarded as just[?] If this is supposed to be an advantage, then of course the world must actually regard justice as the good, and thus the world cannot be so evil that the relationship is one of inversion. But this is precisely where the secret is lodged: it is only the appearance of being a virtuous person, a just person, etc.―it is in this superficial form that the world gives its approval, indeed almost as an expression of the cunning that cunningly knows how to preserve this appearance. As soon as one is actually in earnest about willing what is just, the world cannot bear it, and things do not go well for the just person; but this appearance, this interesting mystification in which the world itself half believes

5

36

10

188

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 36–37 and does not believe, this is profitable―precisely this hypocrisy is part of being a true success, while the world is willing to approve of the mystification and honor this man as a just person. 5

37

10

15

189 20

25

30

35

Without exactly flattering myself I dare believe that I am perhaps the person who enjoys the greatest respect in our situation. And how do I know this? I know it from the fact that people make it look as if I am eccentric, a bit mad, etc. Hum. beings understand one another mutually in their egotistical striving for the finite goals that constitute life’s earnestness for them; they pay honor to one another, etc. Whatever goes beyond this (and the world keeps a sharp eye out for whether something actually does) is certainly the object of their respect―but for the sake of God in heaven, it must be kept an appropriate distance from eccentricity and madness, forgivable, but nonetheless eccentricity―for otherwise it would of course also turn everything upside down, disturb the entire game. If, for his own reasons, someone of the more ideal sort is willing to be satisfied with conditions that make him an oddity (and to be quietly respected), then it is tolerated. If he is not willing, if he wants to attack the world, pass judgment on it, etc., then it becomes a matter of life and death, then the world will not be a peaceful place until this man is dead. Deep down, a refined prostitute has a great deal of respect for a moral girl, but this must not be expressed―she must be permitted to mock her morality a bit, as if it were an eccentricity, something odd. Now, if the young girl does not pay any further consideration to this matter, but simply reposes in herself―then things continue on; if she wants to reverse the relationship and pass judgment to the effect that the prostitute’s life is a bit more than an eccentricity, a lamentable eccentricity, perdition―then

•

1850

191

no means is too wicked for him in attaining his end, everything succeeds for him; he emerges successful from every situation; in brief, he becomes a rich and mighty man, able to help his friends and harm his enemies, indeed, even to win over the gods themselves with frequent sacrifices and expensive gifts, so that he will be dearer to them than the just person, who has nothing to give.”

1

5

10

192

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 37–38

•

1850

this girl’s fate is decided, then the prostitute will not rest until she is annihilated.

On the Abuse I Have Suffered. What interests me purely psychologically is to see which were the most dangerous of all the attacks― one learns to know the world from this. All the abuse was shabby; I was showered with mockery and brutality―it was all quickly forgotten. They took my first name and made it into a nickname, used it in comedies―in the street I was called by that name again and again: this was something dangerous. They made me into a caricature, known by every child―this was something dangerous. But the most dangerous thing was that they wrote that my trousers were too short, or even that one leg was ½ inch shorter than the other. Absolutely nothing could be done about all the other things. This was where the difficulty arose, about the fact that there was something striking―striking, be it noted, after the press had been used to direct everyone’s attention to it. This was what was dangerous. It was linked to my character, it was supposedly pride. The more respectable people felt that, after all, I could yield a bit―they simply did not consider the fact that actlly there has never been anything striking about the way I dress, and, on the other hand, if I made any sort of change whatever, that of course would also in turn be subject to public discussion―and (even though I kept everything unchanged) this happened in Flyveposten with P. L. Møller, where it was related that my trousers had now become too long. Look, this was dangerous, precisely because it was linked to my character. Indeed, what madness public life is! But truly, I would like to see how many could endure it: day in and day out to have these thousands

38

10

15

20

190

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 38–39

5

10

15

39

25

191

30

35

40

of people―maidservants, children, scoundrels, etc.―reminded of one and the same thing. Never to be able to be private because even the humblest middle-class family was aware of the same thing, and if one called upon them, in their embarrassment they betrayed the fact that they knew it, betrayed it with a glance. And then the bitterness at being rewarded in this way for having worked as no author has, unselfishly as have no others, and finally for having wanted to benefit society.―What was dangerous was that it was linked to my character, and it looked as if something could be done about it and that it was my obligation to do it―instead, the entire society expressed madness on this occasion. The tragicomic situation of seeing the embarrassment of my tailor because he had come to participate in public life, etc., etc.; my servant’s shared knowledge of this, etc.―

Ordinarily, death, or at least a lifelong martyrdom, is the punishment for being in the right with respect to one’s times: God knows whether I will succeed in getting justice from the same times that have treated me unjustly and with respect to which I am in the right. My situation is quite unique. I have not attacked the times but have hurled myself against a sort of tyranny―indeed, soon it must become clear to the times how right I am, how unjustly they have treated me; and indeed, the confession will surely come when the ill-temperedness has properly subsided. My situation is also unique simply because I do not claim to be an ethical figure in any grand sense, have never made use of authority, thus have not placed great emphasis on a decisive turning point. If it happens, it will be of the greatest importance for the illumination of Xnty. I know nothing; I know only to marvel at Governance.

•

1850

[a]

193

And then every day, year after year, to be continually exposed to the possibility that a spiteful pers., a half-drunk student some evening, someone desperate to earn 10 rd., will again begin using the press to write about my clothing.

1

5

194

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 40–42

•

1850

Psyche would not be satisfied with having faith; it was of course possible that the invisible being that visited her was a monster―then she looked, and saw what she lost. This is also how it is with the relationship of reflection with respect to God. You are perhaps able to see that what has been traversed is something extraordinary, so this was granted to you: if you will not be satisfied with this, satisfied with living backward―if you want certainty in advance in order to be entirely certain that the way you are going is not a wrong way―this is indeed possible (just as it was possible that the invisible being that visited Psyche was a monster who, precisely in order to conceal that fact, was only willing to be seen in the dark, i.e., not to be seen, but believed): then everything is lost, you do not gain certainty after all, but only the certainty that now everything is lost.

40

As I have said it here: where the real danger is, it is always said, “it is nothing.” This is the fundamental lie. Of course people very much want to be the earnest, the courageous man, the defender of virtue, etc.; now, if people conceded that there was real danger, then of course they would have to go into it―and they do not want to, ergo they are lying.

41

Reply to Contemporaries I do think I ought to be shown a little reasonableness. In consideration of the fact that he was licensed contemptibleness, Goldschmidt was permitted to make use of all the weapons that no respectable author ought even dare touch. With the help of these weapons, favored by being licensed―he played the role of an invincible victor. I find this to be in order, or to put it more properly, I certainly do not find it in order, but I do find that it makes some sense if it is clear that it is as licensed contemptibleness that he triumphs in this way. But it is indeed entirely wrong for him to become en passant and without further ado a respectable author, and for him to have been allowed this without making a very official apology, for it is of course the most outrageous injustice against all of

5

10

15

20

192

42 25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 42–44

5

43 10

15

20

25

193

•

1850

those who had to put up with his abuse―because at the time he was licensed contemptibleness. And indeed, it is even crazier than the craziest of things to turn the situation around so that it even becomes sort of meritorious that he is so good―that he wants to be respectable, almost as when parents who lack the strength to punish a naughty child want to thank the child when it becomes well-behaved.

Xnty Wants to Make Eternity Easy, but Makes This Life Burdensome. Xnty’s presupposition is rlly that the matter of eternity engages a hum. being absolutely. Xnty knows the remedy for this concern. But as we genrlly live, it simply does not occur to us that the matter of eternity is of any significance―we will all be saved, that is certain enough. So Xnty is therefore to be situated within this life, as though it were able to provide help for this life. But this is precisely what it cannot do at all; it can only make this life as strenuous as possible. Xnty’s presupposition is that the concern that things might go well for a person in eternity is so great that, in order to find peace in this respect, one gladly endures―indeed, one thanks God for―having this life made somewhat more, yes, infinitely more strenuous than it is if one does not involve oneself with Xnty. Merely having real concern about one’s eternal blessedness (as Xnty requires), this alone is of course an enormous burden compared with living in a way that leaves the eternal in abeyance.

30

44

My Relationship with My Contemporaries.

35

But am I not being unjust, at least to many contemporaries? I use all my strength to take the injustice and abuse I suffer and transform it into nothing―and then they believe it is nothing and continue it.

195

196

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 44–45

•

1850

This criterion requires “spirit” of them, requires that they consider this matter on their own, without anything having been said to them directly. Ought I not say something directly, or travel abroad a bit, as I have indeed continually thought of doing for other reasons[?] This latter, traveling a bit, would be to give them sufficient time to take stock of themselves, and they would take notice―whereas now my personal, daily presence, the fact that my appearance makes it look as though it were nothing: this strengthens the established view of the matter. Yet I also in fact owe it to my cause and to the truth to hold out long enough so that I can have something to hold onto, something to which I can appeal. With my public existence I have rlly purchased a mortgage note on the public life of this country; it can be used in presenting Christianity. They say, “Your presentation is too lofty[.]” I answer, “That is impossible, it has of course taken place right in front of your noses; and it cannot be too lofty, because it corresponds precisely to the treatment I have endured qua author―so, therefore you yourselves have required it because I have had to stick to Christianity in order to endure your treatment.[”] Though, of course, now the situation will become clearer, because after all I am in the process of stopping as an author.

About Myself Personally. Humanly speaking, one could say that my misfortune is that I have been brought up so strictly in Xnty. From the earliest age I have been in the grip of a primal melancholia. Now, had I been brought up in a more ordinary way―yes, it is clear that I would scarcely have become so melancholic―then I would have been confronted earlier with the task of doing everything to force my way out of this melancholia, which almost kept me from being a hum. being―doing everything either to break it or be broken myself. But familiar as I was from my earliest age with this Christian notion of the thorn in the flesh, that such things are simply part of being a Xn―I found that nothing could be done about it, and in any case my melancholia found support in this entire outlook.

5

10

15

20

45

194 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 45–46

5

10

15

20

25

•

1850

So I reconciled myself to it religiously―it has made me, humanly speaking, as unhappy as possible, but then on the basis of this pain developed an extraordinary intellectual existence qua author. I came to terms with myself in this life. The torment was frightful―but the satisfaction was all the greater: I can never thank God sufficiently for what has been granted me. But then―then it was my fate to be an author―in Denmark. In any other country an author’s existence such as mine would have been the way to riches―in Denmark it cost me money. Insults were heaped upon me; almost everything was done to make my life intolerable: It makes no difference―this existence as an author, as it was and is my possibility, was a satisfaction, so that I can never thank Governance sufficiently; for the more opposition, the richer the literary productivity simply became. But―it costs money (yes, it is an almost crazy situation, to the jubilation of the provincial market town in which I live, surrounded by insults, pursued by envy)―and I can no longer afford it. I would gladly accept an official position―but here comes my melancholia and makes difficulties. No one has any notion of how I suffer, of the degree to which I have been placed outside what is universally human. And of course this would have to be removed if I were to be able to live together with peop. in an official position. Though one thing remains: that I can never sufficiently thank God for the indescribable good he has done to me, so much more than I had expected.

30

195

46

35

40

Concerning Goldschmidt. It is likely that scarcely anyone in this country has paid as much attention to G. as I have; scarcely anyone has had such good intentions with respect to him: but 6 years of crime as editor of The Corsair must not and ought not disappear as nothing. In taking the step I did at that time, my thought was let the account be settled and then to do everything for him in as reasonable a fashion as possible―I wanted to be his defender―he made me into his accuser: in so doing, the situation has not exactly become easier for him.

197

198

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 46–48

•

1850

But had I not raised an objection at the time, he would have been able either to avoid any indictment for those activities or simply to escape them when he felt like behaving himself.

5

The Misunderstanding in My Situation as an Author. The times have only worldly categories; thus they expected and continue to expect that I would either evade the abuse by traveling abroad, for example, or that I would defend myself. But I am immersed in religious prototypes whose distinguishing characteristic is suffering. I do not know if I am permitted to make my situation easier, because it is clear that the more I suffer, the more deeply I will wound the times, and the effect of my life will become all the greater. In this way (by not doing what people expect) I myself am a part of making the situation more difficult. But people do not really know me.

The World’s Turning Point. As I have demonstrated in the last section of the review of Two Ages, the punishment will fit the crime, and therefore it will simply be to have no government, so that the strenuousness, but also the step forward, will be that everyone must learn in earnest to be his own master, to govern himself without being helped by the dispensation of having governors and leaders (which had made matters easier, but which the generation disdained): thus the religious advance and the strenuousness will be that everyone must bear within himself the duplicity of knowing that Christianity conflicts with the understanding―and nonetheless believe it. This is the signal that the time of immediacy is past. Just as Quidam in the “Psychological Experiment” is no immediate unhappy lover (he himself sees that the matter is comical and yet clings to it tragically by virtue of something else, but therefore with constant discord, which is the sign that immediacy is over), so, also, with the religious.

47

10

15

48

196

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 49

49

•

1850

My Situation with Respect to the Times, to the Extent That They Themselves Are to Blame for the Problem.

5

10

15

20

25

30

197

35

40

I feel that history will bear witness on my behalf, attesting to the significance I have had as an author, that it is a turning point for the world; moreover, that something extraordinary has been achieved: this is something I know, truly without conceit, I, who profoundly, ah, so indescribably profoundly, feel my own wretchedness as a poor miserable human being and a great sinner. But my times refused to accept the achievement. My writings were not read―on the contrary, the provincial market town amused itself by caricaturing me and making fun of me. With this, matters came to a deadlock. If people had immediately engaged with the matter, showing decent respect for what had been achieved, appreciating the great sacrifices I had made as an author, things would have gone easier. Now it will be difficult to avoid the confusion of disintegration―and they have put me aside. Now it will become increasingly costly to address what I have achieved, because now people will first have to make a little confession concerning the way in which I was treated. Ah, there might seem to be some pride in this thought: truly, to anyone who had even a hint of the torments by which I am bound to God, it would certainly not occur that I could be proud of it. Wretched, as I felt myself, a penitent, as I profoundly knew myself to be: God knows it was no great merit on my part, but it is true that I subjected myself to the humblest possible circumstances (willing to live together with the common man, always putting myself in a certain comical light, in order not to seem too severe). People then rejected me: yes, that aroused my pride, but nonetheless God always exerts such strong pressure on me that every second I am, if not actually, then potentially, out on the 70,000 fathoms of water. Usually, this is how I have lived: every single day of my life I have perhaps suffered more intensely than others do in an entire year. But it is clear that in this suffering there has also been a blessedness that others may never have sensed. Because, to put it briefly, I always have only one and the same thing to say: that I can never sufficiently thank God for the indescribable good he has done to me, so much more than I could ever have expected or dared expect.

199

200

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 50

•

1850

The Conflict between “Understanding” and “Faith,” Purely Psychologically. “The understanding” never comes to the absolute. Take an example. I am of course also responsible for my understanding. Fine. Now take a pers. who wants to break some deeply ingrained habit. First he says: [“]Now, you have gone around long enough, saying, [‘]Tomorrow,[’]―now begin today.[”] So he begins, and the first attack is quite violent. Then the understanding says, [“]This is wrong, you must proceed a bit more gently―there are of course also examples of a pers. destroying himself in this way. So back off a bit and postpone it until tomorrow.[”] In the highest ethical sense, the question here is this: Does a hum. being have no responsibility for what happens to him when he struggles against evil, daring to risk everything, placing the responsibility on God―that is, believing―and permitting himself to say that this danger of destroying himself is a spiritual trial, a new trick played on him by the bad habit[?] Nonetheless, it is undeniably true that one can indeed go astray by overstraining oneself in doing battle against evil. I know this from my own experience. But then one backs off and makes an admission to God and a promise to begin honestly once again where one left off. Such a humiliation (to the effect that one is not immediately able to do it) can also do its part in saving a person from stoical conceitedness. I also know from my own experience that (precisely because I am afraid of arbitrary caprices) I have the custom of giving due notice regarding the renunciation of one or another thing, one or another habit whose turn it now is. Suddenly to say, [“]Today[”] can be very dangerous, can be a false impatience. But it is the same with the understanding in this case as it is with the understanding in relation to believing Xnty. Faith has an interest in coming to a conclusion, an absolute decision; the understanding has an interest in keeping “deliberations” alive. Just as the police would find it awkward it there were no crimes, so would the understanding if deliberations were finished. “Faith” wants to posit the absolute; “the understanding” wants to continue deliberating.

50

5

10

15

20

25

30

198 35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 50–52

5

10

51

15

20

25

•

1850

How difficult it is to have faith now, now in the 19th cent., now when everything has become a chaos of reflections and deliberations. Truly, therefore, it is always a great help to a person when it becomes quite clear to him that the object of faith is the absurd―it shortens things mightily. Yes, one could say among other things that it was out of concern for hum. beings―in order that they might, after all, come to have faith―that this was why God determined that the object of faith was to be the absurd and that he let it be said in advance that it was, and is, and shall be the absurd.

Lines Concerning Myself. True enough, I had not thought that the power of villainy was so great. When I hurled myself against it, I did, after all, count on the fact that, given the notion people had of me at that time, I would succeed in getting the literary world onto the right path, that it would be an honor to be mocked by contemptibleness― thus I was counting on the world being rather better than it is; I certainly did not think it was good, but I did expect that a step taken with such honesty and enthusiasm would help advance our situation somewhat. Alas, the problem was simply that the step was not understood―and thus things became worse, even more so because of my constancy. And what is the upshot? If at that time, without having taken this step, I had had the full-fledged notion I now have concerning the scale on which villainy rules by means of wretchedness and envy: would I not have prayed to God for the strength to take the step I have taken?

30

52

35

199

I was willing to associate with everyone as an equal―now, good God, I was, after all, not the least among them. But to associate with them as their equal when, in their capacity as the public, these same peop. are then willing to participate in the mockery without the least embarrassment: that I will not do.

201

202

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 53–57

•

1850

Perhaps I have also been wrong, when associating with others, by constantly transforming the abuse I have suffered into witty conversation; after all, duping them like this (which could also conceal a profound contempt for peop.) also leads them astray.

53

5

Inward Lines.

54

Yesterday I was miserable―but I could not, indeed, really put my hope in God; today I became even more miserable―it helped; now I can hope again. Oh, the danger, the danger―in spiritual situations it is what corporal punishment is in lesser situations.

10

This is one of the reasons peop. so much prefer to be addressed in assemblies, not individually. The single individual― who is perhaps so very much superior to them that scarcely dare look at him when they are to speak with him individually―is physically overwhelmed by the impact of “the crowd,” and each individual in the assembly attributes this tension to himself, thinking that he himself is the one of whom the other is almost fearful in this way.

55

Oh, it is indeed so difficult to do something “immediately.” A person so much wants to have a postponement of just half an hour, as if it would then become easier for a person, instead of merely becoming more difficult, or more likely not getting it done at all, or getting it only half done.

56

. . . . . So a person thinks that at one or another time, yesterday, or the day before yesterday, he was so close to success in winning one or another inner struggle, of holding out faithfully―if only he had not made one or another little error: but now he is

57

15

20

25

30

200

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 57–59

5

10

58

•

1850

203

unable to do it―instead of “immediately” having faith, faith that with God’s help the error itself will serve a person well. A person was so close to having convinced himself that when he believes, a misfortune, a danger, is transformed into an advance and a gain―but then came a little error and he did not succeed: So now immediately put to use what has been learned (that when you believe, everything serves you well), and believe that this error serves you well. Ah, but an enormous school is needed in order to become present to oneself in this way instead of constantly becoming distant from oneself.

Teach me, o God, not to stifle and torment myself in smothering reflection, but to breathe healthily in faith.

15

59

20

25

30

35

Lines. Oh, dreadful depths of confusion, oh, dreadful because of errors hardened by custom. Generation after generation, these hundreds upon hundreds of professors―in Christendom―thus surely, after all, Xns indeed, all the more so because they were professors of theology. They wrote books, and more books about books, and books to provide an overview―and in turn journals existed solely to write about them, and book printers flourished, and many, many thousands had jobs ― ― ― and not one of these hirelings’ lives bore the most remote resemblance to a truly Christian existence―yes, it did not occur to a single one of them to take the N.T., read it straightforwardly and simply, and before God to present himself with the question: [“]Does my life bear any resemblance, even the most remote, to that of Christ, so that I might dare call myself an imitator: I, a prof. of theology, a Knight of the Dannebrog, honored and esteemed, with a regular salary and free professorial housing, and the author of many learned writings on the four journeys of Paul[?”] There are passages in the N.T. from which one can prove the propriety of having bishops, priests, deacons (however little those of the present day resemble the original design), but find a passage in the N.T. where there is mention of: professors of theology. Why does one come to laugh involuntarily if, to the

[a] “The professor” of theology.

1

204

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 59

•

1850

passage in which God appoints some to be prophets, others to be apostles, others to be leaders of congregations―why does one come to laugh involuntarily if to this were added: [“]some to be professors of theology[?”] Why could not there just about as well have been written: [“]God appointed some to be councillors of Chancery.[”] “The professor” is a later Christian invention―yes, later Christian, because it was invented at about the time that Xnty began its retreat, and the culminating point of “the professor” came precisely in our times―when Xnty has been entirely abolished. What is expressed by “the professor”? “The professor” expresses that religion is a matter for the learned; the professor is the greatest satire on “the apostle.” To be―a professor of what? Of something put into the world by a couple of fishermen: oh, what a splendid epigram. That Xnty should be capable of triumphing over the world: Yes, that was something prophesied by the founder himself, and the “fishermen” believed it. But this monument to victory: that Xnty would become so triumphant that there would be professors of theology―this was not prophesied by the founder, unless it was where there is mention of there being a “falling away” from the faith.

Eureka! I have it! “The professor” will rlly be the analogue to Don Quixote. Perhaps he will be an even more profoundly comical figure. Someone who has within himself absolutely no conception or anything human tending toward enthusiasm for personally taking action and living like the Exemplar, but who believes that this is a matter for the learned. “The truth” is crucified as a thief―before that, it is mocked, spat upon―in dying it cries out, Follow me. Only “the professor” (the unhuman) does not understand a word of this; he regards it as a matter for the learned. In “the pseudonyms” I have only made use of “the privatdocent,” but “the professor” is indeed a more genuine type, precisely because of the earnestness of his life, the His Eminence the Knight.

201

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 60

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1850

The Daily Press.

60

202

•

With every other crime, the qualitative aspect is and remains unchanged, and thus a crime cannot come into being as a result of a quantitative aspect (except in connection with slander and the like), but in that case it is not possible for an individual to promote the circulation of it on his own. If someone steals 10 rd. and someone else steals 10,000 rd., the qualitative aspect is the same, but the quantitative aspect is different; the qualitative aspect is the same: both are thefts. When a man, who is in the bedroom in the evening and is about to go bed, says to his wife, with whom he had been out that evening, [“]I really do think Miss Hansen wears a lot of makeup. Did you notice, etc.[”]―this is the most insignificant thing in the world. On the other hand, when a newspaper with 10,000 subscribers says the same thing, then poor Miss Hansen is annihilated (for a private person, especially a young woman, cannot bear publicity on that scale), thus, indeed, a crime has surely been committed. Here, I believe, is the special characteristic of crimes by the press, in which distribution qua talis (that is, not the distribution of something that is criminal in itself) is a crime. The daily press is capable at every moment of shaking up existence and making it insane. One could say that the same thing could be done by means of oral communication, for example, if that man did everything he could to tell the whole town that Miss H. wears a lot of makeup. No, this is not at all the case. Because it takes much more time for an oral communication to emerge and make an impression, and it takes many more middlemen to get the gossip going. And how many people really want to gossip about this sort of thing[?] But in print it can be done by one single person, and then it is established that the interesting thing about it―which is what makes people want to gossip about it―is precisely the fact that it has appeared in print. Superb! A person can use the press to distribute something that people do not even want to gossip about, and then people gossip about it because it has appeared in the papers. And how does this come about? Quite simply: when two people talk to one another, modesty prevents them from gossiping about such things, they are ashamed to gossip about such things. But the press―it is “no one,” and of course no one cannot be ashamed. And if it has been said in the press, then one of course has it to gossip about, because now there is something to gossip about, now there is 20 qua talis] Latin, as such.

205 [a]

the daily press.

1

206

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 60

•

1850

something that has appeared in print, and the fact that something has appeared in print is of course something to gossip about.

As long as the daily press exists, Xnty is an impossibility. If Xnty is actually to be actualized (that is, not declaimed oratorically by a tradesman and officeholder in a church, with the shared understanding that he of course is not so uncultivated and personal as to have in mind those who are present here, or anyone now living, as if he wanted to place any obligation or pass any judgment upon them), then it is eo ipso unavoidable that the person who is proclaiming must direct a great deal of attention to himself. He must direct attention to his person without the use of any illusions (and this is precisely what is necessary to proclaim Xnty truthfully). The daily press will seize hold of him that very instant. It does not need to say a single mean-spirited word, no, only nonsense, everything that, in a conversation between a man and his wife in the bedroom, is utterly insignificant―and in a very short period of time he will be consumed, as it were. Let a newspaper appear twice a day every day, with 5,000 subscribers, depicting him and writing the most insignificant things concerning his person twice a day for 14 days: he is weakened. Heroism will be required to endure this treatment. Inasmuch as he has not yet been weakened, he is assumed to possess this heroism. But something additional will also be required, something close to heroism will be required of his contemporaries in order for them to be able to maintain their view of him. By reading all the nonsense about him that appears in print, by hearing the town echo day and night with the all this nonsense, it takes hold absolutely, and under such circumstances there will be very, very few people in each generation who will be able to maintain their view of him―the incessant nonsense will wield its absolute power over them as well―and then he is weakened. 13 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

5

203 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 60

5

10

15

20

204 25

30

35

40

But Xnty cannot truly be actualized in any other way than by a personality of that sort, who ventures to identify himself so markedly: ergo Xnty is an impossibility as long as the daily press exists, for it would be a self-contradiction for someone proclaiming Xnty to make use of the daily press. This is how the state, the Christian state, exists. There are 1,000 priests―serious men, in addition to many other serious men. They all know more or less clearly that the entire business is based on nonsense; they all know more or less clearly that there is a power, known as the daily press, that at any moment can perform a miracle like the one involving the vermin in Egypt: it can fall to earth and nonsense can rise up, swallowing its prey. [“]For the sake of God in Heaven, let us not have any contact with that,[”] think these 1,000 serious Christian priests―nonetheless, we will certainly preach Xnty. Oh, you fools, or rather: You, too, are, if not vermin, then an irritation, not much better than what you fear. I will give an example of the fate of someone abused like this. Of course, a man cannot himself be everything; he cannot be his own shoemaker, his own hatter, his own tailor, etc. Then let us assume that this man is unable to shave himself. Then let us write about him, set the whole town in motion, focus everyone’s attention on his beard (and this can be done, because he is a striking personality and the press is capable of everything in the line of nonsense). Criticize his beard, the way it sits.b What then? Then eo ipso the barber takes an interest in the persecution. The barber despairs. This man, whom I will call “the Apostle,” understands very well that nothing can be done about this, that the only thing to do is to leave everything unchanged (because the craziness consists in the fact that such things would be material for a story in the press), while it is also his Christian duty to remain at his post. But the barber! Well, he cannot get this into his head (for the barber is not a hero). Thus―and what heroism is involved in enduring being riveted fast to the barber like this, and it would do no good to

•

1850

b

207

And the less there is something striking about it, the better; the crowd’s gaze is only directed to it all the more crazily, because, Damn it, there must be something strange about it, inasmuch as the press is talking about it.

1

5

208

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 60–61

•

1850

choose another, because, owing to the efforts of the daily press, “the Apostle” is known by every barber―the barber cannot get it into his head that this is society, which is in the process of going crazy. He concludes that there must be something to it (inasmuch as it appears in print), that he must be trimming the man’s beard the wrong way. He decides to alter the beard a little. Because “the Apostle” indeed understands it to be his Christian duty to remain at his post, and thus does not dare conceal himself, it is easy enough to catch sight of him. Then the newspaper’s spies (who perhaps have already seen him at the barber’s, or who have taken control of the barber) immediately discover the change. New articles. The whole town’s interest once again focuses on the beard with renewed interest, and people also find it to be weakness of character, a sure sign that the Apostle is not an apostle, if he yields on matters like this―even though it was rlly the barber who yielded. This style is also wrong, however, and the barber grows desperate. He says right out: [“]I no longer dare to be this man’s barber; the little bit I earn from one customer is really too little in comparison to being made so ridiculous that I lose all my customers.[”] So then “the Apostle” goes to another barber (because he simply cannot shave himself), the same thing happens there. No barber dares take up the task of shaving him. So he has to let his beard grow and limit himself to trimming it once in a while. New articles. Meanwhile, undaunted, “the Apostle” proclaims God’s Word―well, no one is interested in that―but the business about the beard, and almost nothing else, is spoken of all day long, and people continually say, [“]It is nothing.[”] There are, however, a few people who take note of his teaching, his peerless gifts, etc. But these few dare not risk anything. They take quiet delight in his extraordinariness―but as for bringing any notice upon themselves: No, they say, we are not heroes; we could not endure being made ridiculous. Indeed, they almost become angry with “the Apostle” for remaining at his post. This is Dichtung und Wahrheit. I am no apostle―but in other respects this is close to my own life.

What is Xnty? Xnty is the suffering truth, or the teaching that the truth must suffer in this world. The idea is that, concerned solely for the salvation of your soul, you turn to Xt. He then says: [“]Be assured of your salvation. I am your Savior and Redeemer. But now, in this life 34 Dichtung und Wahrheit] German, poetry (i.e., fiction) and truth. (See also explanatory note.)

5

10

15

205

25

30

35

61

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 61–62

5

10

208 15

20

25

30

•

1850

(because I vouch for the other life), you must also become my imitator in being willing to suffer for the truth.[”] You see, this is Xnty. Now, suppose I am a proclaimer of Xnty―but also that I am a priest. Then I receive a message from a man, or he comes to speak with me. What does he want? If it is an anguished conscience―well, then, that is a task for me. But no, it is a happy-golucky, amusing man who has become engaged to an enormously rich and beautiful girl with whom he intends to travel around Europe immediately following their wedding―and I am to marry them. But, you see, as a proclaimer of Xnty, I have one and only reply: [“]So I declare unto you the gracious forgiveness of your sins in the name of the Father, etc.[”] Now, if I say that―and then: [“]Inasmuch as your sins are forgiven you and your eternal salvation is thus assured, your Savior and Redeemer obligates you in turn to live this life in imitation of him, suffering for the truth. And this ought not be any sacrifice to you, because if it is true that you are truly concerned for the salvation of your soul (and in the absence of this, you of course receive the forgiveness of sins in vain, a sin which in turn would be sufficient to plunge you into the deepest torment of an anguished conscience), then all earthly things are nothing to you, indeed, your sole wish must be to suffer for the truth in order at least to express some gratitude for what Xt is for you.[”] You see, this is Xnty. And a man is supposed to give me money for saying this to him. One thing or the other: Either this pers. understands what I am saying, and then he is an altogether different person, who has other things to think about than the girl’s enormous fortune, her beauty, and foreign travel―or he does not understand it, and in that case it is, after all, unreasonable that he must give me money to say such unpleasant and fatal things to him; indeed it is a crime on the part of the state to bring him into contact with the priest, either tempting the priest to adopt a different tone or tempting him to take in vain what is holy.

35

62

40

There are cases in which long-drawn-out reflection about whether or not to take a very decisive step cannot simply be explained as lack of character. On the contrary, this continuing reflection can be a necessary exhaustion that is precisely the precondition for truly taking decisive action.

209

The concluding portion of entry NB17:61 and the beginning of entry NB17:62, exhibiting considerable variation in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand.

212

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 62–63

•

1850

But this is true only with respect to religious decisions. With aesthetic and aesthetic-ethical decisions what matters is precisely to make use of the passion of the first moment. But in religious matters, blood loss and exhaustion are necessary in order to become so annihilated that the action then becomes truly religious. In this respect, significant strength of character is also needed in order to keep oneself constantly at the pinnacle of the same discrimen, because to forget the whole business or become indifferent to it is something else again. But in keeping oneself at the pinnacle of decision day after day, one exhausts what is sensory, the attachment of the senses to worldly things―and so it succeeds. Thus we also frequently have examples of very great religious individuals who have continued for many years in keeping themselves at the pinnacle of deciding whether or not to enter a monastery, and this was precisely what helped them do it. Otherwise the step might have been the exaggeration of a momentary mood, which was later to be regretted, whereas now, through the loss of blood and the exhaustion, they were already in a condition approximating that of being in the monastery, so empty and indifferent had everything earthly and worldly become to them. If the audacious decision of a momentary mood had induced them to enter the monastery, the battle would only have begun there. In this case, on the contrary, they had kept their lives at the pinnacle of decision, obligating themselves every day not to let go of the thought about whether or not they should enter a monastery. Precisely this is an asceticism that is very capable of serving as a transition. For indeed: it is one thing to let it remain in abeyance as a whim: [“]Should you not enter a monastery[?”]―it is something else to summon forth the idea with the same intensity every blessed day, obligating oneself not to allow one’s life meanwhile to slip into any sort of distraction, but to occupy oneself solely with this decision. To endure this is fundamentally to be in a monastery already.

5

10

209

15

20

25

30

35

And people still think they can use a new book to combat this boundlessly bloated, theological-scholarly confusion of Xnty. No, no, little child, the matter is very simple. Get hold of one single actual confessor―and then obligate the professor of theology to encounter God in the confessional, and ein, zwei, drei, I will get the entire theology confessed out of him, because it is all embed8 discrimen] Latin, turning point, outcome, decisive difficulty. 40 ein, zwei, drei] German, literally, “one, two, three,” i.e., without further ado. (See also explanatory note.)

63

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 63–64

5

10

•

1850

ded in the worldliness and worldly ease of talking about Xnty. What is lacking is the relationship of conscience to Xnty. The “professor of theology” is to learn what the N.T. quite simply obligates him, as every Xn, to do: then he will certainly learn to speak another language, then he will learn what indulgence he needs in order to dare continue being a professor, civil servant, knight, etc. (instead of being a missionary and martyr). You see, this is what he is to learn―then he will not reverse the situation and make his position into what is important. But in scholarly fashion―yes, it is true: the confusion cannot be cleared up in scholarly fashion.

210

64

15

20

25

30

35

40

About Myself. Strangely enough. Melancholic as I was, when I began as an author, in a certain sense 100 years older than the eldest among us: a penitent; an unspeakably unhappy person; sadly sympathetic to the common man, in particular; aware of myself as an intellectual and aware of my superiority―it was as far as possible from being the case that my unfortunate exterior (my thin legs, etc.) bothered me; on the contrary, I was ironically satisfied with this incognito. I understood that fundamentally my intellectual task and my situation involved those people who had some sort of claim to being intellectuals. Living with the common man was something I found satisfying, both as relaxation and as a work of reconciliation. But look: then the bourgeoisie and the common man, etc. were supposed to follow the newspaper’s orders to judge me, and in particular my clothing. And for the common man, for all of those who are pretty much nothing, especially those who live in the capital, clothing is the most serious of matters. The common man is better able to tolerate an attack on his character than on his clothing. The common man understands very well that he is of course nothing special, and that therefore he will be judged more or less on how he looks; that is why clothing is the most important thing to him―and that is why an attack that would have been of minimal significance in any other circle was here the most dangerous. But what is strange here are the concepts. According to aesthetics, what is properly comical is when a person who, for example, has thin legs, wants to conceal this fact by wearing stuffed

213

214

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 64–65

•

1850

leggings and the like. But when the vulgarity of the mob comes to judge, what is comical becomes the fact that a person will not go to the trouble of concealing it. This is called irony―and I thought I knew what irony was. But the problem is that the entire country had lost the notion of what irony is; the vulgarity of the mob had turned things completely around. Therefore, action had to be taken. And it is true that Goldschmidt was an enormous power atop The Corsair―now he is nothing. And it is certain that it was cowardice for everyone to remain silent. And it is no less certain that in remaining silent and leaving me standing there, the respectable class committed shabby treason against me. Privately, both Heiberg and Ploug and Hage (then the editor of Folkebladet) thanked me. Yes, that is typical of the top literary figure and the editors of the newspapers, the ones who rlly ought to act, to thank me privately.

What I have said so many times is both certain and true: that a dead man is what Denmark needs in order to reveal all the interconnected villainy and envy and cowardice. As long as I remain alive and use 2/3 of my strength in transforming the whole business into nothing, as long as it remains in the interest of villainy and envy and cowardice to support the notion that the abuse I suffer is nothing―of course, they themselves are the guilty ones, and if a thief was supposed to decide whether theft is a crime, the result is easy to predict. And so of course it is nothing―that which is indisputably the most painful of sufferings: the daily suffering that, as it is daily, cannot possibly arouse pathos. To be thrown to wild animals―that at least comes to an end. But to live like this, thrown to hum. brutality and yet to be a respected person (for otherwise the abuse would quickly come to an end)―this is torture. Far from being a consolation, the freedom one has to remove oneself from this whenever one wants is on the contrary an intensification, inasmuch as one therefore must every day, freely and voluntarily, continue suffering, renewing one’s religious duty―unlike other cases, where at least it is up to a decision made by a force external to oneself. Had I been victorious in such a way that I stood in triumph, then what was supposed to have been illuminated would not have been illuminated, for in that case my superiority would

5

10

211 15

65 20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 65–68

•

1850

215

have concealed the guilt of the others, which would have looked much smaller. No, a dead man―they cannot get rid of him in that way.

66

10

212

67

25

68

35

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 imperfect, that we must be satisfied with the term lovers of Christ or something like that―this distinction is indeed the basis for the earlier distinction, when a difference was drawn between fides humana and fides divina, and it was nonetheless conceded that a person who possessed only fides humana was also a Xn, despite the fact that his faith was actlly only that of a proselyte with respect to being a Xn, having been convinced by all sorts of historical reasons, etc.

... Oh, even this suffering: that even to the few who take a real interest in a person, the sight of that person is not a happy one. They feel very well that this life includes an exertion that places a demand upon them; they feel that they must either disapprove of this exertion (and in that case the contact is indeed not such a happy one), or they must praise it as something lofty, but, be it noted, lofty in such a way that one would prefer it to be at the remove of death, of history, from oneself. Alas, I actlly bother even those who mean well by me.

An eternal image of the relation of the God-fearing to God (namely, that it is an upbringing) is expressed in a peculiar feature of the language of God’s chosen people: it must be read backward. Existing backward is rlly the strictest sort of religiosity, the strongest expression of how God exerts pressure. The person who is oriented forward, who speaks exaltedly about what he will do in the future, etc.―he is by no means rigorously religious. 7 σοϕοι] Greek, wise men. 7 ϕιλοσοϕοι] Greek, lovers of wisdom. (See also explanatory note.) 12 fides humana] Latin, human certainty. 13 fides divina] Latin, divine certainty.

[a]

Fides humana and fides divina.

1

216

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 68–69

•

1850

No, backward―so that at every moment there perhaps is scarcely one more day, scarcely one more hour, for a person to live―to live like this is religiosity. But this also can only be read backward. Moses saw the back of God, not his face, i.e., there is no agreement in advance, the religious person is simply the unconditionally obedient instrument―and then afterward he sees how God has made use of him. To know that God is using one: this would be a dangerous thought for a hum. being; therefore he only came to know it afterward.

This is the measure of what a hum. being is: for how large a portion of his contemporaries does he dare exist and allow his life to be judged by them. In this connection one could go through an entire scale of relativities, from those who only exist for a very few (as, for example, women; then to those who exist for larger and larger, more and more numerous circles―but still for circles) to the highest category, the God-Man, who establishes the quality [“]hum. being[”] and therefore must be judged and wants to be judged by absolutely every hum. being, eternally, and divinely certain that he is precisely the one who expresses the quality of being a hum. being, whereas all other hum. beings do not express the quality except with the addition of accidental ingredients. Courage is daring to exist for the whole range of one’s times. Of course, a sensate being finds it comfortable to exist only for a particular circle of people who express exactly the same as himself, so existing for them designates the “solidarity,” that provides life with earthly security. For how many are there, really, in each generation who know what is what―for them the important thing is that all their views be shared by others, some others, many others. But the heterogeneous person who dares exist for others must of course be certain within himself (and, of course, certain most of all because he is helped by the fact that God shares in this knowledge) that he is a hum. being, for otherwise the judgment would soon be that this heterogeneity is madness and the like. But the courage of daring to exist for the whole range of one’s times is also punished―or, rather, distinguished―by the fact that

5

10

69 213

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 69

5

10

15

20

214 25

30

35

40

•

1850

the courageous person must come to grief because of it. This is difficult to avoid, simply because such a pers. can be labeled with a particular judgment that then becomes widely circulated with respect to him; but because the majority of people are supposed to be included in passing judgment, the verdict can become so tangled that this in itself is enough to create confusion in the entire affair. The situation is different for those who only exist for a smaller circle of people. That circle is in agreement with him about what it means to be a hum. being. This is in solidarity with the judgment of him that is in circulation. For the others he essentially does not exist; therefore they are satisfied with seconding the judgment passed by that group. Let me take an example. A learned man who is very careful about not existing for anyone except other learned people, who lives a very withdrawn life, etc.: learned people come to a judgment concerning him. As time goes by, many people other than the learned come to know something about him, but inasmuch as he has not given these others, these many others, occasion to judge him, the others limit themselves to putting that judgment into circulation: relata referre. Arranging one’s life in this way is the only prudent thing to do. (This is where Bishop Mynster is to be found.) I doubt whether a pers. is religiously permitted to do this; in any case he must make an admission. From a Christian standpoint, on the other hand, it is precisely the task for every generation to pose the question [“]What does it mean to be a hum. being[?”] ever more clearly, ever more specifically, for the more this is done, the more profoundly will the question of the relation between God and a hum. being emerge. Everyone who has his life merely within a particular circle contributes nothing toward clarifying and bringing to the fore the question of what it means to be a hum. being―he merely helps himself get through life as best he can, investigating nothing profound, but seizing hold of one or another set of external appearances more or less related to being a hum. being, wagering everything on that. He is utterly devoid of primitivity. Because the God-Man alone expresses qualitatively what it is to be a hum. being, it is of utmost importance to him to exist for every hum. being, unconditionally every hum. being. Insofar as this is the case, it could seem that the God-Man must become an enormously abstract hum. being. And that is indeed the case: he is literally Nothing. One could now have a detailed examination of all sorts of hum. relativities in order to establish the extent to which each of 19 relata referre] Latin, “to relate something one has [merely] heard” (i.e., without vouching for its truth).

217

218

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 69–70

•

1850

them could be commensurable with the God-Man, so that he could have been the God-Man in that relativity. Because he is, qualitatively, essentially equidistant from every relativity of custom connected with hum. beings, which relativity he chose could seem a matter of indifference. And one could of course say he chose a specific differentiation when he chose to be a poor and lowly hum. being as opposed to being someone of high birth. But this is not true, because he was not a poor and lowly hum. being in contrast to high birth and wealth―if that had been the case, he would have been a part of the solidarity of the poor and the lowly. He was purely and simply a hum. being who felt no pressure from the fact that he owned nothing (thus he was indeed not poor) and who found bliss in being nothing (thus he was indeed not lowly). He could also very well have been wealthy and wellborn were it not for the fact that solidarity would immediately have turned up there, and were it not for the fact that wealth and high birth are suspect qualities with respect to being a hum. being.

5

10

15

20

215

To involve oneself with God, to be genuinely religious without bearing the mark that one has been wounded: well, I do not understand how such a thing should be possible. To be capable of saying, in relation to God: [“]I will involve myself with you to a certain extent; I will allow you a place among my feelings, but no more than that. I do not want to be a spectacle in the world as a religious person must be because his relationship with you has caused him to become heterogeneous with this life. In this earthly life I want to live healthy and strong, becoming a complete hum. being in the worldly sense―and then, in my innermost self, have a feeling. Because the person who has truly involved himself with God is instantly recognizable by the fact that he limps, as it is said, or at any rate that he has a suffering heterogeneity in this life.[”]

70 25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 70–71

5

10

•

1850

219

But it is indeed impossible to involve oneself with God in any way other than one in which one will be wounded, for God himself is indeed this: how one involves oneself with him. In relation to sensory and external objects, the object, the matter, is something other than the mode, the manner; there are many modes―perhaps one stumbles upon a lucky mode, etc. In relation to God, [“]How[”] is [“]What.[”] A person who does not involve himself with God in the mode of absolute devotion does not in fact involve himself with God. In relation to God one cannot involve oneself to a certain degree, for God is precisely the antithesis of everything that is to a certain degree.

15

71

20

25

216

30

35

Concerning R. Nielsen Last Thursday I took a walk with him and finally managed to say a bit about how I viewed his entire diversion―both the big book and the 12 lectures― as an attempt by a shrewd person (perhaps the shrewdest with respect to some matter) who wanted to further the matter instead of simply serving the cause; moreover, that the entire business with Martensen was a mistake that had nothing to do with my cause but was personal animosity; moreover, that he transformed it into a doctrine; lastly, that he plagiarized altogether too much, even including my conversations.[d] Given my reticence in saying such things, this was said in gentle tones, even if a little bitterness perhaps entered into it as a reflection of his vehemence; I also said to him that in this case I was judging in accordance with the criterion I apply to myself.f He became somewhat angry or, rather, testy. But I changed course and spoke of other things and we strolled home in bona caritate. 38 in bona caritate] Latin, in good charity.

[a]

see p. 139.

1

[b]

the 18th and 19th of April 50.

[c]

My words were that, viewed as a whole, the diversion over which he had command (his 3 books) were not in the service of religion.

5

[d]

And yet, from many subsequent utterances I had reason to conclude that he more or less thought that he had now done what he could do and would withdraw.

10

[e]

And later in the course of conversation, when he said that I had wronged him, I replied, certainly not in an offensive manner, that if that was the case, I was indeed a pers. against whom it was certainly worth being in the right.

15

f

and―with my view of the matter, the context of which only he and I are completely familiar with―that

20

220

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 71

•

1850

The beginning portion of entry NB17:71; the entry has quite a number of marginal additions, including the date and a reference to a later entry, NB17:76.

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 71

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

218

40

Then I thought that this Thursday I would raise the same subject again and that if he was willing to listen to reason and agree to the truth, it might perhaps have the fortunate result that he would feel himself obligated quite simply to do something in behalf of the cause as a reviewer and that sort of thing. But no, today I received a letter in which he renounces walking with me on Thursdays. It is better that it has happened. He has very much abused his relationship to me. Presumably this letter is yet another bit of coyness intended to make me give in―for in addition to having simply sought work after work of mine, he has indeed also taken advantage of my hypochondria. It is a good thing that it has happened. I bear no grudge against him, not in the least way, and I would be very willing to involve myself with him again, though it would scarcely be of any service to me, because his physical robustness is a poor match for my scrupulosity. He has grown, but there is still something of the docent about him. Incidentally, there is a continuing series of remarks on my relationship with him in the various journals and on various loose papers. I have suffered indescribably by the free and easy manner in which, privately, he understands and understands, and then, publicly, makes use of what has been written and said, both as his own and as misunderstood―which, in a way, is indeed truly his own. I thought that I would die; therefore I wished to make an attempt to familiarize someone with the cause. Prof. Nielsen has understood only all too clearly that he is alive.h Altogether overly hypochondriacal as I am, and in fear and trembling before God, I have been continually afraid of wronging him, hoping and hoping―and in this way I have been put off, expecting that now, “the next time,” I should just see. And when all is said and done, he has written a big book in which he ignored me completely (and an entire year and my copious communications with

•

1850

221

when I spoke of him to others, I emphasized the good aspects, including financial sacrifices he may have made and his exposing himself to unpleasantness. I also said to him that I had kept calm for so long because I had been continually considering how I should judge him. He must be aware that I am not in the habit of taking attacks into account, but that I paid closer attention where it was a matter of someone wanting to acknowledge me, that what was important to me was what judgment I should make concerning him.

1

5

10

15

[g]

At first I thought of writing a few words to him, but now I think it best to let the matter remain as is until I hear from him.

20

h

He thinks he is indispensable to me, that he is the only person I can get to support the cause properly, or at least to awaken attention. There is some truth in that view―all the same, he misuses this against me at times in order to make himself hard to get―but he does not consider that everything depends on whether my idea is one of wanting to triumph in a worldly way, or one of wanting to go down to defeat in a godly way, for in the latter case he is very dispensable if he does not share the same understanding―and in any case it will depend on his grasping the cause better and more wisely than in his writings thus far, item on the extent to which the cause itself does not gain new friends, and finally, what I emphasize here is after all essentially based on the fact that I was religiously motivated when I drew him to me or that 40 item] Latin, as well as, furthermore.

25

30

35

40

45

222 1

5

10

15

20

25

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 71–72

I responded with alacrity when he asked me to dance, a turn of events that certainly surprised him and went far beyond his expectations because it was an action from the core of my being, an intensive action, the significance of which only became clear later on, in stages. Most likely he had thought only that he would sort of knock on my door and that I would then sort of open it a crack or not even that much; instead the double doors were flung open and he was invited to come in. That was more than a person could ask. True, but precisely this beginning may perhaps have changed the whole business, captured him for the cause in a quite different way, so that he may perhaps really come to serve it, which possibly he had not thought of doing; and in any case, were it to be possible to bind him to the cause, the beginning would have to have been made in this way, with this curious surprising quality and this qualitative intensity.

•

1850

him were expended on this). Next, he took several theses of one of the pseudonyms in order to attack Martensen; and finally he has made an attempt to transform it into doctrine―and not the least thing was done for the cause. Perhaps the problem was that he had come into too close a relationship with me. I need my freedom. Under freer terms, so that I do not feel obligated to place such strong emphasis on him, he can be of benefit to the cause, even if there is a deviation, because he does, after all, direct attention to it. But if he is to be a highly trusted interpreter I cannot remain indifferent concerning such a misunderstanding. In other respects, I think my personal presence disturbs him; if I were dead, I think he would present the cause better.

5

10

15



219

[a]

R. Nielsen.

With the thought that death was imminent, with the feeling that it was my duty at least to make an attempt to inform another pers., if possible, about the cause I have the honor of representing, so that he could represent it in the same character, I drew him to me after he had himself sought to make an approach. I did not permit myself the least bit of direct influence on his work as an author; I regarded it as my duty that, if it were to happen, it would have to emerge in him independently―but I placed a great wealth of communication at his disposal. This hope of mine has been disappointed―I say no more than this, I add no adverb to express the degree, no adverb would satisfy me.

72 20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 72–73

5

10

15

20

25

220

30

Let someone capable of understanding me imagine what it means to me to keep myself inactive in this way, focused only on him in tense expectation―with a life as intense as mine, to endure this for 1½ or 2 years, but seeing gradually, as his works appeared, that I had been disappointed―and yet feeling myself obligated to hope, inasmuch as I had approached the matter religiously. Imagine what I have suffered! Though perhaps this is not at all his fault, but mine, for having had such hope―ah, perhaps it was my fault for having taken upon myself the responsibility of letting thoughts destined only to pass through my personality, with its pressures, find another path. Perhaps the criterion employed has been infinitely too high. In private conversation he has been very well able to understand and understand, understanding that what he had done was wrong, that the right thing would have been this―and then he nonetheless did the wrong thing again, or indeed even made use of the comment as an ingredient in his work. As noted, perhaps the criterion has been infinitely much, much too high. This is the source of the misfortune. As soon as I judge in accordance with that criterion, it is as if I am doing him an enormous injustice. If I take the criterion away, I will have no more difficulty with him than with Stilling, who certainly has never complained of injustice. But the fact is that I have never invested in Stilling in this way. Though Nielsen himself ought also understand this to some extent. But in this respect, perhaps I also was unjust to him with what I said last time.

35

73

40

. . . . I have believed that it was a part of self-denial to remain silent with respect to what good, humanly speaking, I have done, and God has helped me to be able to do so. But my life will cry out after my death. And for a living person who makes use of these few moments

•

1850

223

224

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 73–75

•

1850

to speak―what good does it do, compared with a dead person who continues to cry out[?] With respect to every living person, one at least has certainty that his talk must come to an end―but once a dead person (instead of behaving expressly in accordance with what is usual and customary by remaining silent) has begun with this strange business of crying out, how can one stop up his mouth[?]

1

[a]

Christendom.

5

Christendom.

74

See, this is yet another consequence of the fundamental confusion: that Xnty is not proclaimed by witnesses, but by teachers. What is a witness? A witness is someone who directly demonstrates the truth of the teaching he proclaims―directly, yes, both by there being truth and blessedness in him, and by instantly offering his person and saying, [“]Now, see if you can force me to deny this teaching.[”] By means of this struggle, in which the witness perhaps succumbs in the physical sense―may die―the teaching triumphs. The opponents have no such view for which they risked dying. This is the ongoing, practical proof of the truth of the teaching. But a teacher! He has proofs and arguments―but he himself remains on the outside and the whole thing becomes ridiculous― all the objections triumph.

10

15

20

25

It is very well put in the 4th book of Rousseau’s Emile, where the vicar speaks. And says: [“]Now, my young friend, I have given you my confession of faith ... You are the first person to whom I have confessed it, perhaps you will remain the only person to whom I will ever confess it.” Here comes the good part: “As long as any good faith is still to be found among peop., one must not disturb peaceful souls or trouble the faith of simple people by heaping up difficulties that they cannot resolve and that can only disturb them without enlightening them. But when everything has in fact been shaken, one must preserve the trunk by sacrificing the branches. Troubled, doubting, and almost dying consciences that are in the condition I have seen yours to be, are what need to be strengthened and awakened, and in order to

221

75

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 75–76

•

1850

225

fortify them once again on the foundation of eternal truths, it is necessary to complete the work by tearing away the shaky pillars by which they believe they are still being supported.

5

76

10

15

20

224

30

35

Concerning Prof. Nielsen Melancholic and in much fear and trembling, as I always am, I had considered, after all, that I might write him a few words that would make it possible to restore the relationship. But no, it is the wrong thing. I ought to be happy to have received the letter of divorce. I find his physical robustness as well as a certain coarseness and a frightful vehemence to be simply a plague in a personal relationship. Just this: simply because he knows that I am melancholic and have a religious desire for a decision, were I to write a few words to him now, he could then get the notion (and of course I have had examples of this) to hold on to the note, perhaps for quite a while, without letting me know that he had received it. That by itself is enough to demonstrate a fundamental difference. In other respects, I like him and would be happy to see him and speak with him, acknowledge his talents―but no personal relationship. It was truly not my idea for things to turn out like this. I had indeed looked forward with pleasure to next Thursday, hoping that now that he had absorbed the shock, I could attain a more truthful relationship with him. He himself broke it off. I, who understand only all too easily that I am destined to suffer, I certainly did not have sufficient self-esteem to break it off, however much I had to put up with, for as a penitent who hates himself, I immediately realized that I did not dare evade it. Frightfully vehement person that he is, it is not at all impossible that he will now leap to the opposite extreme, wanting to injure me and my cause―now we will see. Presumably I will also be labeled a deceiver, a cunning person: “no one knows better than he, he who had trusted me.” Alas, yes. Had he been able to take that jolt and had he trusted me a little more than he trusted his own vehemence, it would have possible (and it would have pleased me very much) for us to have made progress to the point where I could have withdrawn

[a]

see p. 127.

1

A portion of a long entry, NB17:76; the deleted hash marks (#) indicate that Kierkegaard twice intended to end the entry, but then continued it.

228

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 76

•

1850

entirely and left the work to him. I have suffered terribly much with him, but precisely because of his vehemence at that time (in breaking off the entire relationship without further ado), I understood clearly how far from being realized were my earlier hopes that concessions would gradually mollify him, and it became clear to me how close had been the danger that he would gradually succeed in making me worldly, so that I would come to do the wrong thing and triumph in worldly fashion.

Perhaps the way in which Prof. N. has injured me most has been this unholy waiting while he procrastinates and the fact that my very being has been affected by this dawdling that is his forte. I have reined in my enormous speed for 1½ years―and waited―and in vain: frightful. I cannot defend telling him straightforwardly, directly what he should do, where his talent lies―it would upset me. It is accomplished indirectly often enough―but then, when he acts, the things I have communicated to him privately become a little comma in the argument―even in those things that should stand absolutely alone, in lapidary style, as something decisive―and thus he could have spared himself writing the two books. Oh, if he had been a man of character! That simple word could have expressed and illuminated the whole business, including the subtle conspiracy against me in this country. He has a notion of the value of my cause, but it is as if he thought that in view of unfavorable market conditions a person could perhaps make a little better buy on the public exchange if he were also willing to pay court to me in private, almost worshipfully―and he is not without talent in this respect. His worldliness seems to say to him, [“]What does he want―After all, I am, as he himself says, the cleverest fellow here on the hill, so he will surely have to accept the offer. If he is not satisfied, it is of course possible that what he wants to say is true in a certain infinitely lofty sense, but it is so very

5

10

15

20

25

225

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 76

5

10

15

20

25

226

30

35

40

lofty that no one here on the hill can embrace it, especially if it is to go further than myself, I who of course am the only person who can serve as a sort of middleman. And thus I am safe.” This is surely the source of the worldly tactics he always uses, the only thing he knows how to use, because personally, face-to-face with me, he does not say anything, but when he is offended―he immediately says that he is withdrawing. Look, this is religiosity! But it hurts me, for I had hoped, after all, to make a religious impression upon him. Given my previous judgment of N. and given my knowledge of how others had judged him, it was of course a rather daring venture to choose precisely him. But that (in addition to many other qualifications present in him) was precisely what delighted me. Even now I have hopes for him. Were I to die today, I am certain that my death would take hold of him and pacify him so that he would be of use. But the worldliness in him is very powerful, this worldly notion that he is supposedly indispensable to me, etc. etc. And now, in addition to this, he may hear from others that he is mad to sacrifice himself for me in this way. Most likely he now explains this as cunning on my part, that only now (after he has done most of what he has done thus far, however flawed it might be) do I reproach him, for had I done it earlier, he would immediately have abandoned me and done nothing whatever. This is not cunning, however, it has been painful enough for me to endure, to have such expectations, for so long. If, however, he had had patience enough to want to understand that what was said was well-meant (even if it became a little bitter because of his vehemence, so that it might better have been said in my rooms, where the conditions are somewhat different), he would have come next Thursday: then there would have been some progress.b But true enough, he leapt aside, and that is where we now stand. For myself, however, I do believe that all this suffering is beneficial: it predisposes one to act religiously and is a tonic against the poetic capricious-

•

1850

b

229

(What I had imagined was: either daring to take upon myself the responsibility and tell him directly what he should do in various specific situations, or to make my relationship to him as free as that with Stilling, for example, so that we would see one another every once in a while, talk en passant about my work, and no more than that. I did not want to part from him in anger, because it is of course possible that my criterion is too great and in a way this could be unjust to him, even though he himself has had a part in applying this criterion.)

1

5

10

15

230

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 76–78

•

1850

ness by which I have always been somewhat affected, although the good effects of that capriciousness have of course also been what was unusual about me.

Oh, it is so true, so true: what Denmark needs is a dead man. At that very instant, I will have triumphed as any hum. being rarely triumphs. At that very instant, all the business about my thin legs and my trousers, and the nickname “Søren” will be forgotten―no, not forgotten, it will be understood differently, and it will impart enormous impetus to the cause. At that very instant envy will be stilled. At that very instant, those who are to witness for me will speak a different language from the one they speak now, for then no self-denial will be necessary. Then, even my least utterance will acquire meaning and acceptance―whereas now, gigantic achievements are rebuffed so that mockery and envy can take hold of me. Only the voice of a dead man can penetrate a moral dissolution such Denmark’s, a dead man whose whole life was a study in preparing for this situation: to be able to speak as a dead man.

77

10

15

20

227

About Nielsen. I have always said that N. was and is the only possibility here. He has worked with great zeal, has the proper constitution for being truly capable of serving a cause―nor has he retreated. Given my criterion and my knowledge of his understanding of the cause, I could now be justified in requiring a great deal more; using my criterion I could also show that in terms of the idea, the cause has retreated. Oh, I have struggled much with myself over this point. Because, if I were now to do it, would it not be simply the impatience of the idea? Must this not happen with every cause: When it starts to gain broader following, it retreats in terms of the idea―and has not everyone who has put something ideal into the world had to endure this sorrow[?] Take that which is the highest: If Xt had suddenly turned to attack the apostles, saying, [“]The cause becomes something different when you present

78

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 78–79

5

10

15

•

1850

it―it is diminished, and it is precisely for this reason that more people embrace it[”]―what then? Yes, then Xt would rlly have to have refrained from coming to the world. In my case, however, such thoughts are connected with my notion that I would die before the cause had rlly taken hold. Given the thought that I was to die, I wanted to initiate N. into the cause―but I kept on living. Yet, as in every case, I am learning infinitely much. But now N. must either be drawn to me much more powerfully, so that he is directly made use of, so that I tell him directly what I think he is to do in various specific situations (for 1-3/4 years I have now endured knowing what he should do but have never told him directly, and thus it has pained me to see that it did not happen), or he and I must be made so much freer from one another that I will never have occasion to apply my criterion, by which, after all, I could be doing him an injustice and probably have done him an injustice. For the time being, this latter course is surely the best.

228

79

25

30

35

40

There is psychological profundity in some lines in Emile (in the story called, “Emile and Sophia, or the Solitaries”): [“]I talk incessantly about forgiving (Sophie had been unfaithful to him) without considering that the person offended often forgives, but the person who offends never does.” And why is it so difficult for the person who offends to forgive? Because it is so difficult to humble oneself under one’s own guilt. This is the source of the hatred whereby the world never forgives its having wronged those who are good.―Rousseau has not understood this, however, because the explanation added by Emile makes the sentence meaningless: “undoubtedly, it was her intention to inflict on me all the evil she inflicted on me. Hah, how she must hate me.” But this is not at all the seat of the problem, which is that the guilty person indeed loves himself too much to be able to be properly penitent in hating himself. In order to be able to forgive entirely, the guilty person must feel his guilt infinitely―otherwise he prefers to be angry at the person he has wronged, or at any rate to flee from him, to avoid his forgiveness. Receiving the forgiveness of the person he has wronged is the humiliation he cannot tolerate―and therefore the offending party never forgives.

231

232

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 80–81

•

1850

The Religious. O, would that you, Lord J[esus] Xt, might fill my thoughts in such a way that people would indeed be able to see by looking at me that I was thinking of you. And how should a person see that?―From my gaze, turned toward heaven? Of course that could also signify that I was looking at the stars or at visions and hallucinations. No: would that your image might convince me so that I―lowly, despised, ridiculed―proclaimed your teachings; then people would see by looking at me (not at my gaze, but at my daily presence ) that I am thinking of you.

80

5

10

* * You heavenly powers, you who support the good, you heavenly hosts, o help me to raise my voice so that, if possible, it could be heard over the whole world―I have only one single word to say, but if I am granted the power to say one single word or one single sentence so that it might take hold and never be forgotten―my choice is made, I have it, I would say: Our Lord Jesus Xt was a nobody, ah, remember that, Xndom!

15

229

20

R. Nielsen. I wrote a note to N. (so that at any rate I would not be the one who has wronged him, not even in the least way). Then we spoke with each other on Wednesday April 30th. I told him I wanted a freer relationship. Hope is my element, especially when it contains a dash of hoping against hope. For his sake, I hope that it will at least be possible for him to end up properly, even though he began in the wrong way. Would that he had never written the big book. That behavior―after what happened between us―the behavior that in fact continued for a year: ah, it made me fix my policeman’s gaze on him―something so alien to my nature, something I had never wanted to do, even though I always have that gaze but never use it. Yes, if it were a matter of doing something very clever, and if perhaps he was not artful enough―oh, that sort of thing would not give me occasion to use that gaze. But the difficulty is

81

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 81–82

5

10

15

20

230

25

30

35

82

40

•

1850

precisely that he was supposed to do something uncomplicated and simple (something he himself has often enough admitted he understood) and that he nonetheless continues to do something clever instead. The difficulty, the danger, for him (he has admitted often enough that he understood this very well and that he understood it at the start) was to slip past me while he was steering―wanting to move ahead, while also making use of my views and attacking Martensen as well as winning a victory―in such a way as to avoid my mounting a flank attack against him, a fight he did not want to risk in any way. This is why he made his personal overtures. Now he probably thinks he has achieved this, and I have not stopped him. So he tried to sneak away with a sort of independence, without even signaling to me, whom he privately put off by saying that it was “the next one” on which things especially depended. Now he probably believes that he has succeeded in this, indeed, that now I cannot even stop him, whereas he had originally wanted to play the independent figure who not only had all of my works to draw upon, but also my conversations, a wealth completely unknown to others, and, finally the incalculable capital of having a contemporary life standing behind the teachings―but other contemporaries have not taken note of this, while on the other hand he has had private communication. But little by little he began wanting to come a bit closer to the truth and to take me along. Though it is always as if he is so reluctant to do what he very well understands as something uncomplicated and simple and true, but which he puts off as something he will do in an emergency, while he does something else, even though this something else gradually does become a little bit truer. But this is precisely what is wrong. Air was what was needed―what was needed in that connection was a primal, uncomplicated, and simple step; and instead he shut everything up even more with his big book, with his artfulness. Yet I do not want to be unjust to him; perhaps he means well, but it is so difficult to do the simple thing. And therefore I hope.

Stoicism―and My Life. Here, indeed, I can properly see my essential relation to Xnty: when I read a Stoic. What he says can be quite true, and it is of-

233

234

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 82–83

•

1850

ten expressed with energy and skill―but he does not understand me. With the Stoic everything is pride―there is no place for sadness. He has contempt for all these people, the ignorant rabble, he treats them like children, they do not exist for him, everything they do means nothing to the wise man, they are incapable of offending him, he does not merely forgive them for their offenses, but proudly thinks: Little children, you are utterly incapable of offending me. Oh, but this is not my life at all. Yes, I could be tempted to use this tactic against the elite and the respectable class, to arm myself in this way. That is why their behavior toward me has never rlly grieved me, I take a bit of stoical revenge. But the common man whom I loved! My greatest joy was to express at least some portion of love for my neighbor. When I saw that disgusting condescension toward the lower classes, it was my consolation to dare say to myself, “At least I do not live like that”―I took pleasure in alleviating the situation a little in this respect, if possible; it was my blessed pastime. My life was meant for this. And that is why it grieves me so indescribably when I have to bear the derision of the common man. Truly, there was scarcely anyone among us who loved the common man in this way―and now, to see him turned against me in hostility. A journalist who cheats the common man out of his money in exchange for confused concepts is regarded as a benefactor. And the person who sacrificed every advantage of belonging to the elite: he is presented as the enemy of the common man, as the one they should mock. You see, life is never like this for a Stoic.

5

10

15

20

231

25

Stoicism.

83

This, moreover, is a curious self-contradiction in Stoicism: it teaches that he [the Stoic] takes earthly sufferings, adversities, and the like so lightly that they simply do not exist for him―and then suicide is still recommended as the ultimate escape route. But, one thing or the other: either suicide is something ridiculous, because it is ridiculous to do something because of a nothing―or suicide is a reasonable step, i.e., a step that makes some sense, but in that case it has been proven that sufferings do exist for the Stoic and that they are not a nothing to him.

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 83–84

5

10

15

20

•

1850

Here, incidentally, we see the union of pride and cowardice. One keeps oneself at the pinnacle of pride as long as possible by continually keeping open the escape route of cowardice. This pride is thus like the profligacy of a bankrupt when he knows he will go broke anyway. It is not a case of pride transforming itself into cowardice when suicide enters the scene―no, during the entire period that pride was sustained by the thought of suicide, pride was cowardice. Incidentally, having suicide up one’s sleeve of course imparts a certain power to live life intensely. The thought of death focuses and concentrates life. If one did not already know how intensely Napoleon lived, one could draw that conclusion from the fact that he always carried a dose of poison on his person. Here again, Stoicism can be seen to be a false edition of Xnty. For it is quite true that Xnty also intensifies life through the thought of death, of impending death, perhaps tomorrow, perhaps today. If this does not lead a person to say “let us eat and drink,” it leads to making enormously intense use of this very day, today. But then Xnty takes on yet another weight: it is of course possible that death will fail to show up for a long time. This is what is so frightfully strenuous, this alternation.

232

84 25

15

35

40

The person who is to indicate the criterion, as long as he functions in that capacity, has the task of keeping as close to peop. as possible, of being known and continually seen by them qua gadfly. This then gives rise to an almost insane confusion: in general, they know or are of the opinion that he is supposed to be rather extraordinary, but they have neither the time nor the opportunity to study or occupy themselves with his ideas and thoughts―so they fasten upon his accidental characteristics. Every hum. being has many of these, but his quickly become eccentricities. How does this happen? It happens because instead of focusing their attention on his teachings, his mission―in which case the situation would be as it ought to be―people focus their attention on his accidental characteristics, as though they were what was extraordinary. The attention is in inverse relation to what has become its object―and in their language this means: he is eccentric. Yes, no wonder―when it is something close to madness to focus attention in this manner.

235

236

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 84–87

•

1850

Thus there is a sort of fencing betw. peop. and the extraordinary person: they defend themselves against him. And why do they do that? Actlly, they do it because they want him to withdraw. They feel very much that his life is a challenge, but they do not want to be reminded of that, so they want him to withdraw, live in seclusion, so that they do not get to see him and feel the reminder―and then they will honor him.

5

If I present, as a possibility, that the extraordinary person must always suffer―it will move everyone. In the situation of contemporaneity, if they are together with an extraordinary person, everyone will in fact say: [“]Well, with him it is another matter, his pride is altogether intolerable, it is not our fault that he is as eccentric as he is, etc.[”] This means: it is admitted in possibility―it is denied in actuality.

85

The cunning of the world is great. If a famous man actually expresses the view that he is indifferent to its attentions; if, e.g., when he travels, he actually wishes to be incognito and actually takes action to that effect, the world becomes angry. It wants him to be willing to be stared at, etc.―and it also wants to be permitted to say that, after all, he is vain. The world always wants to take double advantage.

86

10

15

20

233

25

I divide my life into two parts. On an everyday basis, I dutifully walk about and am recognized―once in a while, I take a little walk and wish to have the greatest possible incognito. This rlly demonstrates the seriousness with which I view my task. The world would rlly rather have the situation reversed: Once in a while, I ought to promenade triumphantly―on an everyday basis, I ought not be seen at all. Oh, yes, that would also be what was most comfortable for me.

87

30

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 88–89 88

5

10

15

89

234 25

30

35

•

1850

Offense Simply take this: that as a child Xt “was submissive to his parents”; thus, as Luther rightly puts it, he took part in their work, gathered up wood shavings, etc. The offense is immediately to be found in the circumstance that his divinity does not find a specific physical expression. Thus, even in lesser circumstances, the world is always offended simply by someone who is, in human terms, extraordinary, if this extraordinariness does not find physical expression but fits in perfectly with people in general. If he is someone extraordinary, they say, then he must have the mark of distinction and live among distinguished people―but he must not live among us, that is eccentricity, affectation. It is so difficult to love one’s neighbor. Ah, if God had not commanded it, one would rather put up with falling among thieves than express love for one’s neighbor in this world―but preachifying about it, well, that is profitable.

The Fate of the Extraordinary Person. There is a certain little knack to doing it; it depends on how the mid-level authorities react. To the crowd, the extraordinary person (that is, when he is not supported by illusions―and in that case is not rlly extraordinary) is a species of madness. But the crowd does not rlly believe that it has a right to an opinion. The crowd looks inquiringly to the mid-level authorities. If they absent themselves, the crowd concludes: ergo the man is rlly mad. If the mid-level authorities are envious of the extraordinary person and collude with the crowd’s confusion, it is even more certain that this will be the conclusion. Then the most various sorts of people unite for the downfall of the extraordinary person. The respectable people act as if they acknowledge and appreciate the extraordinary person, but they elevate him so high, so extraordinarily high, that it rlly becomes a sort of madness. They do not say this, however; in general they officially observe the most profound silence―but then they let the crowd execute the judgment. And when all who ought to be mid-level authorities keep silent, the crowd is permitted to judge entirely without constraints, and then it judges: it is madness, eccentricity, pride, etc.

237

238

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 90

•

1850

The Public. From one end to the other, every situation in public life is actlly lack of conscience. There exists a hungry monster―I will not decide whether it is still bloodthirsty, but recent times attest to how easily bloodthirstiness can awaken―a hungry monster: the public. It hungers with a desperate passion “to get something to chatter about.” And journalists are the animal-keepers who provide the public with something to chatter about. In the old days people were thrown to wild beasts―now the public consumes someone who has been tastily prepared by journalists as the dish the public finds most delicious: nonsense. A public personality is eo ipso sacrificed; “the journalist” knows how to determine exactly how long (depending on the degree of his celebrity) he can be served up and how many times a week he can be delectable to the public as nonsense. If the public personality is an egotist who endures all this because it is, after all, unavoidable if he wishes to obtain other worldly goods, then he suffers less, is not a martyr, is devoid of sadness, is better understood―but he is prepared as nonsense and the public consumes him all the same: the benefit that the “public” actlly has from celebrities is that it gets something to chatter about, a meal of nonsense. No one knows how this comes about; those without knowledge of public life are sometimes of the opinion that a public personality ought to defend himself at one point, illuminate some issue at another, etc., that not to do so is pride on his part―o, you ignoramuses and you ignorant wretches, no, this is least of all what the public demands, it only demands nonsense: “something to chatter about.” There is only one way out, that of shrewdness: to take care that one’s personal life is as secluded as possible and to show oneself in the role of public personality only in appropriately solemn situations―but Xnty does not rlly permit a person to live in that way. It is said that differences in social standing must make impossible a happy love-relationship between a man and a woman. Maybe, maybe not! But this difference: between being a private person, in a civil position, in a subordinate office―in brief, being situated such that one is not subject to the interest of the public and the journalist―and being a public person: these two can never come to an understanding; there is a qualitative difference

90

5

10

15

20

25

235

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 90–91

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1850

between them every instant of their lives, all the more so when the public person is actually a servant of the truth, when it is not for the sake of his enjoyment or for earthly purposes that he endures being sustenance for the public so that it can get something to chatter about. Something to chatter about! God created hum. beings in his image; he also gave them the gift of the word and wanted hum. beings to talk, a man with his neighbor, the lover with the beloved, friend with friend, and also a number of men with each other―and about what? O, you Almighty One, you who have moved heaven and earth in order to create a world at which eternity eternally marvels, at its wisdom and its greatness―and at your love: but hum. beings found that this was not something worth talking about. O, you infinitely sublime being, whose sublimity the heavenly hosts are still struggling to express―you persuaded yourself to condescend to hum. beings, as the adult does to the child when, in order to delight the child, he promises to play with him―you performed something that, owing to your participation, became more than play: that wonderful interplay called history―and those serving spirits who stand closest to you, who assist you in arranging it all and who see most deeply into the matter, they have not yet fathomed it, much less grown tired of marveling: but hum. beings found that this was not something worth talking about. Hum. beings―that is, the public: they only demand something to chatter about, and by this they understand that we get something to chatter about concerning one another, concerning our insignificant lives and especially concerning our lives’ insignificant details. Everything else disgusts the public, which knows only one pleasure: that of masturbation in the form of talking, a pleasure in which it indulges with the help of “the journalist.”

236

91 35

40

I do not understand it: to be able to be objective like that in relation to the religious. On Saturday a person takes out the religious (more or less as the jurist takes out law books) and “acquaints himself with it,” then puts together a sermon which he delivers on Sunday―but otherwise has nothing to do with the religious: it never overwhelms him, never seizes hold of him suddenly―no, it is a business like that of a merchant, a lawyer, a messenger in the Chancery!

239

240

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 92

•

1850 Category.

In relation to everything hum., the more one thinks about something, the better one understands it. In relation to the divine, the more one thinks about something, the less one understands it. This is the qualitative difference, which makes it impossible for this situation to be otherwise; the qualitative heterogeneity between God and hum. beings must display precisely this relationship. So should not a person simply refrain from thinking about the div[ine]? No, you fool. If possible, you are to spend every moment doing that, and with every moment spent properly in this way, you will learn to be all the more astonished. But if someone were to say to you that the situation is different from this, that the more you think about the div[ine], the better you understand it, you must say: You are lying in your teeth. Take a purely human relationship. Take an excellence actually demonstrated by someone, and you will see that at first it seems to you that you are quite close to understanding it―and the more you involve yourself with it seriously, the more you will confess, in astonishment, that you do not understand. Lies, and untruths, and deceptions always start coyly, by making themselves appear valuable. The truth always starts at an apparently reasonable price, but the more you involve yourself with it, the more will things happen. Then the astonishing thing happens: you now see that what you originally purchased inexpensively is worth a higher price, and it continues to rise like that. Except this: in hum. relationships, between one pers. and another, there is, after all, a limit―in the relationship between a hum. being and God there is never any limit, least of all in eternity. No, when the astonishment has forced its way through the constrictions of temporality, then, in eternity, then it finally becomes truly limitless. And this is why the believer longs for eternity, so that in limitlessness he can find room for his limitless astonishment, which in temporality had put him in an awkward position, like that of living in rooms that are so small one cannot move.

92

5

10

15

20

25

30

237

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 93 93

5

15

10

15

20

25

30

35

•

1850

About Myself. In many ways, this, too, contributes to increasing the difficulties and sufferings (but obviously, the effects will be correspondingly greater): the circumstance that I am as young as I am. Were I an older man, first of all, all the business about my thin legs and my short trousers would be of no significance, for, after all, it is really only at a certain youthful age that having a fine physique is regarded as desirable, particularly in relation to the opposite sex. Next, were I an older man, people would assume that by now I would surely have already enjoyed life, perhaps to the point of surfeit, and people could explain my present views on that basis. But (given my qualifications in the area of intellectual cultivation, which favor me in every way with respect to being able to enjoy myself and take pleasure, etc.) the fact that I am wasting my best years in occupying myself like this with the religious―it is a scandal. As everywhere, so also here, the curious thing (but also that which makes my life truly instructive and one of discovery) is that I continually discover that one is not permitted to occupy oneself with the religious, with Christianity, that the world will use the force and the might of the devil to drive a person in the opposite direction. To the best of my modest abilities I did at least strive to express a bit of loving my neighbor―what happens? The world wants to compel me with all its might to become and to remain a person of distinction―indeed, I even have to take some action along these lines so as not to make myself too vulnerable. I occupy myself with the religious, lead this very strenuous life―the world absolutely insists that I enjoy life, etc.―always the opposite. From this it can be seen that the only thing that really has an effect on the world is the purer sort of intellectual relationship as well as what the world may regard as something voluntary (even though this voluntary has within itself an inner necessity). Wherever this sort of intellectual relationship is absent, the world explains everything on the basis of finite reasons and thus receives no awakening impression.

241

242

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 94–95

•

1850

238

The Truth. The truth is always suffering and always defenseless in this world. It is not so difficult to find helpers and secure power, but in choosing helpers, the truth must exercise the infinite caution of truth, and therefore gets few helpers, perhaps none at all; so it is obliged to demonstrate the truth of the words that I read yesterday or the day before in one of Seneca’s letters (and that strangely reminded me of Frater Taciturnus’s lines in the first article in Fædrelandet, which, however, I find more felicitous, because in addition to the polemical element they also contain an element of sadness in expressing an inner satisfaction: “I am contented with being the author[”]): [“]I am contented with few, with one, with none.[”] (I have only just now begun to read Seneca.) The truth is constantly vulnerable to being deceived, especially by those closest to it. Because the outcome is never decided by [“] what,[”] but [“]how,[”] it is clear that false editions of the same truth are possible at every instant. So, take a person whom the teacher has most assiduously acquainted with the truth: he is precisely the person who has it in his power to state what appears to be the same truth, but with a different How―and become a success in the world, whereas the teacher must suffer. And he can be quite certain that this deception will not be discovered, for precisely because he is the one who is closest of all, he is the person who is closest to having understood the teacher. So if the teacher could not find anyone who came closer than this to understanding him, how could he find anyone capable of understanding the nature of this deception, the understanding of which would require an even better understanding of the teacher than the deceiver (who was the person closest to the teacher) had[?]

Coterie―and Unity in the Idea. The law of coteries is: the closer, the more intimate, the two are to one another, the more favorable, the more lenient, are their judgments of one another, the more likely they are to explain everything as perfection. In relation to the idea the law is: the closer you come, the more rigorous becomes the judgment; if you want to have a more lenient judgment that makes what is relative into something of importance or that overlooks imperfections―then

94

5

10

15

20

25

30

95

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 95–99 239

96

10

15

97

•

1850

move a little farther away: rigorous judgment is precisely making distinctions; the closer you come, the more this increases. Thus coteries are an impossibility.

The Common Run of Peop.―The Heterogeneous Person. The common run of people are rlly just examples, duplicates of what has been put into the world. One can say of them: they have the benefit of being alive, whereas the world derives no benefit from their having lived. As for the other class (the heterogeneous), it is most often the case that they derive no benefit from being alive (humanly speaking, one is tempted to say this when one sees how full of torment and suffering their lives are, in genrl consoled only by the thought of death), but the world derives a benefit from their having lived, for they are the ones who introduce what is new.

Either qualitative reduplication, which in working also works counter to itself, or qualitative simplicity of character. Tertium non datur.

20

98

25

99 30

I am now reading Seneca’s letters, which I find excellent; the short sentences by Epicurus that have been inserted are also splendid. In the 22nd letter a passage by Epicurus is quoted, including the following: “a happy way out of even the most difficult situations is also to be hoped for if one neither rushes ahead of time nor hesitates when the time has come.”

The other Sunday I heard a theology graduate, Clemmensen, at vespers in the Church of Our Savior (it was my birthday). It was a simple sermon, but the kind I like. He inserted a bit of highly poetic beauty in this sermon, probably without knowing it. He had preached about life as a going-forth from the Father and a coming-home to the Father, as 18 tertium non datur] Latin, There is no third. (See also explanatory note.)

243

244

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 99–101

•

1850

in the gospel text. Then came the usual stuff about life as a path. Then there was a metaphor about a father who sends his son out into the world, very pretty. Then this metaphor was abandoned and became actuality, our relation to God. And then he said: And when the hour of death finally comes and the pilgrim’s cloak is cast off and the staff is laid down―and the child goes in to the father. Superb! I would bet that Clemmensen came to say it quite unwittingly; indeed, if he had thought about it, he might perhaps have preferred to say [“]the soul[”] or [“]the transfigured person[”] or something of that sort. But no, “the child” is masterly.

1

5

[a]

Incidentally, it becomes increasingly clear that the “voluntary” is actlly what is specifically characteristic of Christianity and is likewise what causes difficulties―but we have utterly abolished it.

5

240

10

Seneca’s 22nd letter quotes a saying by a Stoic: He is not a man of courage whose courage does not increase under difficulties.

100

The Confusion in “Christendom.”

101

Here is a new insight, or the same insight from a new angle. In Christendom teachers promise that they will teach in accordance with the N.T. Excellent. Subsequently a protracted conflict has arisen here concerning whether and to what extent they are also obligated by the symbolic books, etc., etc., something that has lasted a long, long time and about which entire libraries have been written. But good Lord, Christianity is no “doctrine,” so why this oath? If an oath is to be sworn, it must say that they promise to act according to the N.T., to live in conformity with the N.T. Or is the intention perhaps that “the teacher” must simply teach in accordance with the N.T., but that he is then supposed to obligate his listeners to act in conformity with it[?] Excellent, then we have the strange sight of having a teacher present a doctrine that convinces his listeners, inspires them to do what

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 101–102

5

241 10

does not inspire him, convincing them of something of which he is not convinced. Or should we perhaps say: Well, of course, naturally, if one simply takes care that the doctrine is presented in pure fashion, of course people will act in conformity with what is taught. Sure, thanks a lot. If that were the case, then the whole of Xnty is rlly a fundamental error, for Xnty rlly consists of the fact that it by no means necessarily follows that a person simply does what he learns. Christianity’s claim is that there is actlly an infinite distance between these two things. But the tactic of the world is always to divert attention away from doing, acting, and toward matters of doctrine.

15

102

20

25

30

35

40

The Issue. The matter is quite simple. The N.T. is extremely easy to understand. But we human beings, we are really rather cunning rogues, and we pretend that we cannot understand it because we understand very well that if it could be understood immediately, we would immediately have to act in conformity with it. But in order to mend relations a bit with the N.T., so that it does not become angry with us and find us to be completely in the wrong, we flatter it, we tell it that it is so enormously profound, so wonderfully delightful, so unfathomably sublime, etc., more or less as when a little child pretends that he cannot understand what is being commanded and is clever enough to want to flatter Papa. Thus, we human beings pretend that we cannot understand the N.T.; we do not want to understand it. You see, this is where Christian scholarship comes in. Christian scholarship is the human race’s enormous invention in order to protect itself against the N.T., in order to ensure that a person can continue to be a Christian without the N.T. getting altogether too close to him. It has invented Christian scholarship in order to interpret, clarify, more closely illuminate, etc., etc.,

•

1850

245

246

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 102

•

1850

The conclusion of entry NB17:101 and the beginning of entry NB17:102, both written in Kierkegaard’s Latin hand.

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 102

5

243

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

the N.T. Sure, thanks a lot! Yes, we human beings are scheming rogues―and our Lord is the Simple One, but true enough, the Simple One who cannot be fooled. Take any words whatever in the N.T., forget everything but that, obligate yourself to act accordingly―[“]O, God help me,[”] people would say, “at that very instant my entire life, in the temporal and earthly sense, runs aground.[”] So what is to be done? Priceless scholarship, what would we human beings be if you did not exist? It is frightful to fall into the hands of the living God―but it is even frightful to be alone with the N.T. I do not make myself out to be any better than I am; I confess that I (and I daresay it is possible that I am in fact one of the more courageous people around here) do not yet dare unconditionally to be alone with the N.T. Alone with it, that is, to be together with it as if I were alone in the whole world and as if God sat beside me and said, [“]Please take note of what is written there, and to the fact that you are to act in conformity with it.[”] Alone with it, that is, as if I were alone in the whole world, and as if Christ stood next to me, so that there would be no doubts concerning the fact that when it is written that one is to do something, then one is in fact supposed to do it―as Christ’s example demonstrates. Oh, how many have there really been in 1800 years of Christendom who have had the courage to dare be alone with the N.T. To what frightful consequences might it drive me―this defiant and domineering book―if I were alone with it like that! How different it is when I take a concordance to help me, a dictionary, a couple of commentaries, three translations―all in order to truly be able to understand this profound and wonderfully delightful and unfathomably sublime work―“because”―I say frankly―“if only I understand the N.T., I will surely be able to manage the part about living in conformity with it.” Truly, what good fortune, what a rare consolation, it is that the N.T. is so difficult to understand. I am speaking in behalf of the cause of the human race when I say: Let us stick together; by all that is holy, let us promise―and hold each other to it―unstintingly to spare no effort, no sleepless nights, in making the N.T. more and more difficult to understand; if what has been invented thus far does not suffice, let us invent more scholarly sciences―in order to explain and interpret Holy Scripture. I open up the N.T. and I read, “If you wish to be perfect, then sell all your goods and give to the poor and come and follow me.” Good Lord, all the capitalists, the big government officials, and

247

248

1

a

face to face with a royal majesty

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 102

•

1850

those living on pensions, too―just about the entire race excepting the beggars―we would be done for, were it not for scholarship. Scholarship! The word has a splendid sound; honor be to everyone who consecrates his efforts to serving scholarship; praise be to everyone who works to establish people’s respect for scholarship― scholarship, which helps to restrain the N.T., that―as scholarship says―“inspired” book: that is, that confounded book that would bowl us all over ein, zwei, drei, if it got loose, that is, if scholarship did not restrain it. In vain does the N.T. raise its voice higher than did Abel’s blood, which cries out to heaven; in vain does it command with authority; in vain does it exhort and beseech: we do not hear it―that is, we hear this voice only through scholarship. As when a foreigner,a protests his rights in a foreign language, when he passionately ventures to say daring words―but look, the interpreter who is to translate it to the king does not dare translate it and puts something else in its place: this is how the N.T. sounds through scholarship. As those screams of people tortured in Phalaris’s ox sounded like music to the tyrant’s ear, so, through scholarship, does the div. authority of the N.T. sound like a tinkling cymbal or like nothing at all. Through scholarship―yes, because we hum. beings are cunning. Just as we lock up an insane person so that he does not disturb the world, just as a tyrant gets rid of an outspoken person so that his voice will not be heard, so, with the help of scholarship, have we imprisoned the N.T. In vain does it shout and scream, rage and gesticulate―it does not help: we perceive it only through scholarship. And in order to make ourselves completely safe, we say that scholarship exists precisely in order to help us understand the N.T. so that we might better hear its voice. Ah, no insane person, no prisoner of the state, was ever locked up like this, for of course we do not deny that they are locked up. But even greater precautions are taken in relation to the N.T.: we lock it up, but we say that we are doing precisely the opposite: we are busy at work, doing nothing other than helping it gain power and dominion. But it is obvious that no insane person, no prisoner of the state, would ever be as dangerous to us hum. beings as would the N.T. if it were set free. True enough, we Protestants indeed go to great lengths so that, if possible, every pers. can own a copy of the N.T.: ah, but to what lengths we go to in order to impress upon everyone that the N.T. can be understood only through scholarship. To want to open up the N.T., to understand what one reads in it as a direct order, to want immediately to act accordingly―what an error[!]

5

10

244

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 102–105

5

10

103 15

245

20

104

25

105 30

35

•

1850

No, the N.T. is a doctrine, and one must have the help of scholarship in order to understand it. You see, this is the issue. And the little bit I have intended to do is easily expressed: I have wanted to direct a bit of attention and to make the admission that I find it extremely easy to understand the N.T., but that up to now I have found extremely great difficulties within myself when it is a matter of literally acting in accordance with what is not difficult to understand. I could perhaps have taken a different turn, have seen to inventing a new scholarly discipline, but I am satisfied more with what I have done―with having made this admission concerning myself.

In the 26th letter of Seneca. Cited from Epicurus: [“]Prepare yourself for death, whether it is better that it comes to you or you come to it.[”] So says Seneca: that it is a splendid thing to learn to die. Do you perhaps think it superfluous to learn something one only has use for once? That is exactly why we must prepare ourselves. One must constantly learn what one cannot experience in advance, if we are indeed to understand it. In general, Seneca’s letters contain nuggets of nourishment.

53rd letter of Seneca: “Why does no one confess his errors? Because he is still ensnared in them. The person who is awake or who is waking up tells his dreams―to confess one’s errors is a sign of recovery. So let us awaken in order to be able to convince ourselves of our errors.”

About Myself. My guilt with respect to my times is too great, too aggravated, for it to be forgiven before death: I am right. Appalling guilt. The extent to which I am superior to them [my times], the extent to which Governance has favored me by making me capable of achieving extraordinary things, the extent to which the illusions and the egotism of my contemporaries are illuminated: people are

249

250

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 105–106

•

1850

beginning to notice these things increasingly. If I am used as the criterion, the others are downgraded altogether too much―ergo. I do not know of one single point (and from the standpoint of the idea, this is entirely correct) at which I have not collided with hum. egotism. The fact that I write large books―this is suspect to those who write pamphlets and newspaper articles, and inasmuch as I am more or less the only person who writes large books: then―ergo one is a fantast if one writes large books.―The fact that I am nothing―indeed, it is important to all those belonging to the brotherhood of officeholders that this does not become the criterion of seriousness: ergo it is fantasy.―The fact that I make no money―indeed, it is important to all the tradesmen that this does not become the criterion of seriousness: ergo it is fantasy. At no point can egotism judge truthfully concerning me without judging itself―ergo. The fact that an offense has been committed against me―yes, this must not be confessed in all eternity, for then they themselves would be the guilty ones: ergo I am the guilty one. Not only those who write for The Corsair, but all its 1000 subscribers have an interest in my remaining the guilty one. It is rlly no use to talk to anyone. They would listen to me, in a way it would amuse them to play with listening to me speak about what I must endure―but the egotism would remain essentially unchanged.

5

10

15

246

25 1

[a]

Peter.

Peter. With the notion that he is, after all, capable of having about what I have sacrificed, about how strenuous my life is, item with the notion that he is, after all, capable of having about what I have achieved: then, to write a little article like that about me, covering himself in cowardly fashion with every possible illusion―this is rlly a crime. But indeed he was honored for it, he benefited by making himself attractive in the eyes of “the crowd,” by ingratiating himself with the numerical: he who, on top of all this, “heartily” (which surely means that he is heartily tired of life out there in the parsonage and, as he himself said to me quite privately, is “very much in need of diversion[”]) decides to serve the state, an earnest friend of the fatherland, who enthusiastically hurries to vote. He can truly be happy that he has me: all he needs to do is to come to the assistance of the envy that is

106

30

12 35

40

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 106–108

5

10

15

•

1850

directed against me, and he is the most beloved person. Here in this country, the strictest vigilance is exercised lest anyone dare say what people have concluded concerning me―people know very well that I have been granted the extraordinary. In this connection, it might of course seem dangerous that I have a brother, a brother who indeed could suddenly feel himself obligated to bear witness for his brother. What a meritorious deed it is, then, when he demonstrates that he is happy to extend a hand to envy; how kind, what love and heartiness. This brother, the numbers say, is not at all strange and eccentric like that other brother; he is not proud and haughty, but is lovable and hearty, a serious man who accomplishes little things of this sort, who is not a fantast, but who seriously takes note of worldly advantages and who, in addition to all this, has the merit of having sided against his brother, and indeed, not with some great achievement, but with such a tiny little, half-hour article.

247

107 20

25

30

108

You see, this is what a person wants: he wants to come up to you, sit down and chat, becoming self-important by joining in―and if one then wants to remind such a person that what rlly matters is taking action: then he becomes angry. And when the same person reads about someone who has died, a man of character who treated people in this manner, he admires the deceased. And the very people who never ventured the least thing for an idea, who never had the remotest idea of suffering in that respect: they are precisely the ones who drool to the point of disgustingness when they say that sufferings of that sort are nothing―that the inward satisfaction is such an enormous benefit that the suffering is nothing. Reply: if the inner satisfaction is actually such an enormous benefit, why―I almost said it―why the devil is not everyone a hero[?]

Priests are an intolerable tribe to talk with. They have become quite absurdly spoiled by declaiming about what is highest. And there is always this evasion about the quiet virtues that are practiced in secret.

251

252

1

[a]

About Myself.

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 109–110

•

1850

About Myself. How much I could do to make my position easier! So is it pride that prevents me? Certainly. There is also something else that is holding me back. I understand that the longer I can endure the torment, the more deeply I will wound. So it seems to me as if God wanted to test me. And if I had then taken steps and obtained or sought relief―and help came as I needed it, and I had to understand that if I had held out a little longer, I would not have needed to seek relief and would have benefited the cause more. It seems to me as if God would then say: You of little faith, why did you not hold out a little longer[?] Ah, it is frightful mental suffering to keep oneself in this tension; and suppose it is self-torment, or pride―but then suppose on the other hand that the task is precisely to endure in absolute silence.

The Proclamation of Christianity. What divine authority is indeed required in order to proclaim Xnty! To dare proclaim a teaching whose first result is to make hum. beings unhappy, humanly speaking. Here lies one my life’s difficulties. From childhood on I was unhappy, suffering unspeakable torments―and then a penitent: for my part, I find Xnty to be quite in order; I feel that Xnty must be what can help me, and furthermore in my childhood it was impressed upon me that I was to be bound by it. But then, to proclaim this teaching to others: that is something for which I almost do not have the courage. One must be more than hum. to have the courage, under the appearance of wanting to provide consolation―to begin by making the sufferer much, much unhappier. I do not dare do it. When I see someone suffering, I immediately provide consolation, and the sort of consolation that is hum., but this is not Xnty. I take delight in the happy lives of others; I would so very much like to provide support in this respect―ah, at one time I, too, wished to be happy like that. It was denied me and I was assigned to Xnty. But now, when I am supposed to proclaim Xnty truthfully, I am then supposed to disturb the whole of that

109

5

10

15

248

110

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 110

5

10

15

20

249 25

30

35

40

•

1850

happier existence that can be present when one has not come into contact with spirit. And I―right there, when I see the joy of a young girl, when I see the happiness of lovers, see the peaceful tranquillity of domestic life―then I am supposed to disturb this by proclaiming Xnty to them. Sometimes it seems to me that with this knowledge of mine about Xnty, it is as if I went about concealing a crime; it seems so natural to me that peop. must flee from me as an enemy of humanity: I see the young girl’s tears, her wrath: would that she might, after all, free herself from me in some way or other; I hear the prayers of the housewife, she prays to God that he will arrange things in such a way that I will go past her door, that my talk will not disturb the peace and joy of her beloved nest that she has built and where she dwells. Ah, to declaim once a year that the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world―yes, indeed, what does that do[?] But actualize this: a hum. being whose life expresses [“]the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.[”] Invite him to a wedding―ah, and if he comes, it must be as if cruelty on his part―and yet proclaiming Xnty is indeed supposed to be the truly good deed. Do not say that Xt himself went to a wedding. That was at the beginning of his life―before it became clear how evil the world was. And when his disciple had seen that, he said: I know nothing except Xt and him crucified―and he did not go to the wedding. You see, I do not have the strength for this. I, an unhappy person, have needed Xnty; my joy withered long ago, and only thorns bloom for me: I learned to have need of Xnty. I was the wretched person―but I do not have the strength to make others unhappy in order to help them gain an understanding of Xnty. I have understood this from the beginning, and therefore I had the idea of keeping hidden within myself an innermost compartment of Xnty. Something else happened. The world took me in vain. Against my will, its abuse forced the more rigorous proclamation of Xnty across my lips. Alas, I understand it well: I am, indeed, too much of a poet; I am, indeed, not spirit in the strict Christian sense of the term. But I well understand what frightful sufferings are required in learning to become spirit, and thus I am sure that all the poet’s objections―which are like the sigh of the hum. heart in opposition to Xnty―are totally without meaning for a person. And then, then I live in Xndom, where we are all Xns!

253

254

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 111

•

1850

The Voluntary.

1

5

10

a

and of course Xt had it in his power to obtain bread. The voluntary is suffering in faith’s struggle with God. I have it in my power to escape this, but there is something in me that says to me that God would prefer that I endure―but of course this can also be pride, can also be tempting God. Crafty as it is, by emphasizing this concept of tempting God, the world has abolished Xnty.

This is a curious unclarity in Luther’s sermon on Xt’s temptations. Luther uses the gospel as an occasion to warn against self-chosen sufferings. He says that one should not choose sufferings oneself if the spirit does not drive one to do so. But when it is done because the spirit is driving a person, then it is nonetheless the voluntary. With respect to suffering, what is the difference between the voluntary and the involuntary? Suffering is involuntary if it is in fact present without any assistance of any sort on my part. If I cannot make a living despite all my efforts, then it is involuntary. If I am assaulted while walking down the street, this is involuntary. But if I step forth as Luther himself did, witnessing against the pope, this is the voluntary; he could of course have refrained from doing so. To say that he could not do otherwise is quite correct, but it is humbug if in this way he wants to make the prompting of the spirit identical with external necessity. Thus, what remains is the voluntary. Nor can it be otherwise: if the voluntary leaves, Xnty is abolished―which indeed it has been. With the disappearance of the voluntary, “spiritual trial” disappears, and with the disappearance of spiritual trial, Xnty disappears―as it has disappeared in Xndom. Xt’s entire life is voluntary suffering, as his coming in order to suffer is voluntary. Indeed, even in the story of the temptations, and precisely in the first incident (on the occasion of which Luther makes his remark), the voluntary appears. If I am hungry and have no bread, it is involuntary; but if I have bread or have the power to obtain bread and do not want to exercise that power: then it is voluntary―a

111

5

10

15

20

250 25

30

35

JOURNAL NB18

JOURNAL NB18 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Alastair Hannay

Text source Journal NB18 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 1

253

1

•

1850

NB18. May 15th 1850.

257



J O U R N A L NB 18 : 2–3 1850 •

259

255

2

3 5

Concerning Texts for Friday Sermons See the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14. Theme for a Friday Discourse Journal NB17 p. 30.

The Requirement―The Indulgence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Gospel the Great Supper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 33. p. 86 et al.

260

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 4

•

1850

“Stopping” as Necessary in Order to Be Attentive to Xnty and to Become a Xn. Most people live from cradle to grave ceaselessly and unstopped in the medium of ceaselessness (temporality, the merely quantified, etc.). Then finally death comes along and stops them―and now they take notice of Xnty, repent of not having made it their own earlier; with the assistance of this repentance they attain a relationship to Xnty, and then die. In actual life, the natural hum. being fears death no more than he fears stopping. Now, death and stopping in fact have a great deal in common. Coming to a stop is as when a fish is taken out of water and has to breathe in the air. The natural hum. being shudders at this other element, at the prodigious power inherent in “the stopping” and concerning which he understands very well that as soon as it gets the least power over a person, it is incalculable to what limitless extent it gains power. And in turn, the natural hum. being fears this limitlessness as he fears death. To the person whose element is “to a certain degree,” the limitlessness, the infinite, the stationary character of the eternal in the stopping is just like dying. Transformed into doctrine, Xnty can very well merge with the busyness and quantification of temporality and ceaselessness: it does not lead a person to Xnty. On the other hand, “the stopping” can also become a § in Xnty’s doctrine: this helps just as little. In the story of the thief on the cross there is something typical of an aspect that is not emphasized. All, all have fallen away, even the apostle has denied Xt―the only Xn contemporary with Xt was the thief on the cross; Xnty, if I dare say it, is so infinitely much too lofty for hum. beings that (when the situation is most strenuous, specifically in contemporaneity with Xt) in real life not even the apostle can hold out with Xt. Only a thief―a dying thief―only he, through consciousness of sin and the situation of death, is helped in holding fast to Xt. What is it that makes death “the situation” for becoming a Xn? It is the conclusive and concluding fact that now it is over; it helps a person bid absolutely on the absolute. If one does not dare say to a dying person that this is death, but puts him off by saying that he will surely recover, then death is not “the situation” either.

256

4

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

257 40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 4–5

5

10

5

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

I believe that even in relation to the most sincere and earnest Xn who ever lived, it would nevertheless be the case that only at his death would it be absolutely true that he is a Xn. We all relate ourselves to Xnty in this way; we have bid on it, so to speak. But the higher one has bid on it while one was alive, the truer will be his final bid in death, the nearer will he be to reaching the moment in which he bids entirely absolutely. In actual life, only one person has bid on it absolutely and held out (even though he continued living) at every moment, expressing and standing behind one and the same absolute bid: he who himself was the absolute. We hum. beings need support; and at the moment of death a hum. being is helped by the situation to become the truest he can become.

The Proclamation of Christianity. I understand only one thing, that if Xnty is not kept at least more or less at its qualitative pinnacle (that it presupposes such suffering and wretchedness, as well as repentance, that this life is lost), then Xnty is rlly an impossibility. That was how Xnty came into the world. But what then? Then the hum. race’s affectation (since the days of the martyrs were long past) arrived at the assumption that Xnty was supposedly something extraordinary, and thus that it was supposed to play at Xnty―and this is Xndom. Try proclaiming Xnty in Xndom. Be yourself wretched like one of those whom hum. compassion, for safety’s sake, keeps far away from society, lest we become anxious and afraid by knowing that such sufferings exist: be yourself one such person, and then dare proclaim consolation for such suffering, thus reminding society that such sufferings exist―and you will see what commotion follows. And then we are all Xns. But the lepers, the insane, those possessed by demons, the publicans, and flagrant sinners: we take extreme precautions to keep them far removed from hum. society―and yet it was precisely for these people that Xnty was proclaimed. O hum. compassion―or, what is the same thing, o Christian compassion in Xndom, unchanged and just as cruel as ever it was in pagan times. Seneca tells of a man upon whom a king avenged himself by having his nose and ears cut off and, in brief, mistreated, after which he was locked in a cage in which he could

261

262

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 5–7

•

1850

not stand up. And what else does Seneca relate[?] He relates that when he was forced to remain in there with his own filth, finally even compassion turned its back on him because he was disgusting. Excellent compassion! But Xnty begins consolation at the point where hum. society wishes to be ignorant that such sufferings exist. And this is entirely unchanged in Xndom. True Xnty would outrage everyone, as it did in the past, because in proclaiming consolation for these dreadful sufferings it bothers society by exposing to the light of day these dreadful sufferings from which we otherwise cruelly shield ourselves, so that we do not become aware of them―we Xns!

The Sigh of Someone Praying. You loving Father, I fail at everything―and nonetheless you are love. Ah, this, too―insisting that you are love―I fail at―and nonetheless you are love. Whichever way I turn, this is the only thing I cannot be without or dispense with―that you are love. And therefore I believe that when I fail to insist that you are love, then it is nonetheless out of love that you allow this to happen. Oh infinite love!

258

5

10

6

20

The Tactic against Me.

7

People have a notion of the enormous scale on which I have worked and that it might very well exhaust a person; people reckon that daily derision (especially under the crazy terms that stipulate that I am not compensated for it in any way) must indeed be exhausting and contribute to the circumstance that I am increasingly regarded by the public as an eccentric or a madman; people know (and Mynster at any rate knows) that the financial sacrifices become more and more burdensome for me, that, especially in financial respects, I am prevented from holding out for very long: ergo people then decree: just draw out the time. In the meanwhile, people concern themselves with making life profitable for themselves in every way (whereby one in turn gains

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 7–10

259

5

8

•

1850

popularity and is understood, respected, and esteemed by all the tradesmen, i.e., by everyone), and in the meanwhile the only thing that matters in connection with me is to draw out the time. Almost everyone knows privately of the treason committed against me―but it must not be spoken of. It is what I have said so often: a provincial market town conspiracy, and, each in his own way, the most various sorts of people are active in keeping it going.

. . . . I am watched with Argus-eyes by all those who are nothing, by all those who achieve nothing, who will nothing. And it is splendidly put by Hamann (3rd volume letter no. 67): “that Argus was a pers. who had nothing to do, which is indicated by his name.”

15

9

20

25

Just as a rich man, who owns a valuable collection of works of art or a splendid palace or the like, delights in having everyone come to see it and then express his opinion about it: so is God’s delight with the world that everyone is to be an individual who relates, with primal originality, what it is that most astonished him. If in the rich man’s house there were a book in which previous visitors had written their feelings and opinions, he would not want a subsequent visitor to read this book before he went to see things. Ah, we hum. beings turn everything around. We read our way to everything. This has finally come to consume what is noble and essential about being a hum. being.

30

10

Hamann puts it splendidly (3rd volume p. 68): [“]das höchste Decorum besteht öfters in Beleidigung des subordinirten, und Convenance bricht öfters die feyerlichsten Convention.”

31 das höchste Decorum ... Convention] German, often, the highest decorum consists of slandering subordinates, and propriety often breaks the most solemn conventions.

263

264

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 11–12

•

1850

Solomon’s judgment can be applied to the Church. It became evident that it was the true mother who would rather give up the child than have half of it. So, too, with the Church, the true mother: it would rather let go of the single individual, let him at least live, than have half of him―and it is just as impossible to have half of a person spiritually as it is bodily. It is beautifully put by Hamann (3rd bk. p. 72): mit einem getheilten Kinde ist einer wahren Mutter nicht gedient.

11

“Christendom”

12

What is villainous is that everywhere people cloak talk of the infinite in a personal existence that is wholly commensurable with finite goals, so that people have an ongoing understanding that this business about infinite striving is just something we say―we all know that there is of course another explanation that is the real explanation. What absolutely always offends peop. is any expression to the effect that there is something in and for itself: what offends them is not that this is said, but that it is expressed existentially. Take Prof. Martensen. Now, let us suppose that it has become clear to him that he ought to preach, or that there ought to be preaching. Next, suppose that he said to himself: [“]You are a prof. of theol., with an appropriate position and salary―so do it in your free time and gratis[”]: That would have offended people; they would have found it odd; and Bishop Mynster, among others, would not have appreciated it, and why? Because what is expressed here is that it was about Martensen in and for himself. But Martensen, the profound and earnest genius―yes, for sure, thanks a lot! What did he do? He became court preacher, took a salary for it, and then preached―every 6th Sunday. You see,

15

10 mit einem … nicht gedient] German, a divided child is of no use to a true mother.

5

260

10

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 12–14

5

261 10

13 15

20

14

30

35

•

1850

265

this was understood. People declaimed about the profound religiosity in Martensen, who felt the need to proclaim Xnty from the pulpit as well. But this could easily become too lofty―then, of course, we all know how things really are. Is this how peop. want to have things? They want to have the infinite go up like a kite―but so as not to have it fly away, they have attached a little string to it. And so, too, it is with Christianity as well: it is declaimed: but that it is a declaimer speaking is of course something people know from the explanation they have of his life.

Today, the first day of Pentecost, Mynster preached against monasteries and hermits―oh, good Lord, to want to harp on that tune now, in the 19th cent., in order to be rewarded with applause. He did not polemicize against a single one of the forms of evil that are specifically characteristic of our times―ah, God preserve us, then it could easily have become too serious for him: No, he polemicized against―the monastery.

Virg. Mary. . . . . This is probably how it is with everyone, albeit to different degrees, whose life is singled out to have historical significance: they are not happy― but adoringly they praise God for what has been granted them, or for what it pleased God to allow to happen through them. Mary says: All generations will call me blessed. Mary felt herself to be sacrificed; she was not happy; and of course it was also prophesied that a sword would pierce her heart. Here again, incidentally, is an example of what sermons accomplish. Now the priest declaims on the humble faith shown in Mary’s words. Take the

[a]

True religious existence is to be as if destroyed for this life―but nonetheless to call oneself blessed: mediation is an invention of worldliness.

1

5

266

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 14–16

•

1850

situation of contemporaneity: yes, for sure, thanks a lot! It would have been absolutely outrageous for a despised virgin to make so much of herself and proclaim that all generations would call her blessed. Her contemporaries would have said: [“]One might after all have a little sympathy for the poor girl, if she were not so insanely conceited.” Ah, this preaching, this preaching, it has entirely deranged Xnty. In possibility, we flirt with what is holy, and thereby become all the more proficient at persecuting it in actuality.

5

262 10

There is indeed something very striking in the observation Luther makes in the sermon on the gospel text for the annunciation: Hum. beings have little hope that God will provide them with their bodily needs, and then they believe that God will surely give them eternal blessedness. Alas, the truth is that we let the matter of eternal blessedness remain more or less in abeyance; physical necessities we make use of immediately. The contexts are different, however. For, precisely because eternal blessedness is so great a good, we do indeed feel so a great need for it that this is why the need helps us. It is sometimes more difficult for one properly to think truly of God together with earthly necessities: He easily becomes too spiritual for one.

15

15

20

25

The Sermon. There is disagreement about which sort of discourse is the proper one. The truth is that what people now call a sermon (i.e., discourse, rhetoric) is a wholly inappropriate form of communication in relation to Xnty. Xnty can only be communicated by witnesses, i.e., those who existentially express what is said, actualize it. Precisely at the point at which Mynster is most admired, at the most brilliant moments―precisely there, from a Christian point of view, he is most untrue. Ah, it is frightful to consider that this same crowd, which is hushed in admiration at precisely that point, would rage against a poor, abused apostle―who did what Mynster declaims about.

16

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 17–20

17

5

•

1850

If it is so easy for a person to fear that he is tempting God by daring to do genuinely Christian deeds, the reason is that he is not truly certain that the Bible is the word of God and that this is written about in the word of God.

263

18

10

There is a certain sort of superiority that in the situation of contemporaneity can hardly escape becoming the object of a certain sort of sympathy, even from those who acknowledge this superiority. They sense his superiority, but they also see that it is so infinitely unlike everything temporal and worldly that it is indeed as if his superiority were impotence. Therefore, they dare not confess his superiority audibly (that would put them at odds with life), but are uplifted by it in a quiet hour.

15

19

20

25

20 30

35

A Priest―A Police Officer. A police officer is not permitted to be a private person. If he passes by a place where there is a disturbance or a crime is being committed―and it would perhaps be most convenient for him to slip past without identifying himself as a police officer―if a bystander recognizes him, he is permitted to say to the police officer: Please be so kind as to do your job. Similarly, neither is a priest permitted to be a private person and arrange his affairs so that he only declaims one hour a week and is otherwise a private person. If he is contemporary with something demoralizing, he must bear witness.

Today I was struck by an observation by Kofoed-Hansen in a sermon for the 2nd day of Pentecost. “One could ask why God, who disrupted Babel (that is, he willed dispersal), why he then wanted ‘the Church’ (that is, unity).” This struck me in connection with all my modicum of religious activities: that I, in fact, want to keep the public away, and nonetheless want, if possible, to have everyone be the single individual, and thus, in fact, a unity.

267

268

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 20–22

•

1850

The mark of the religious is always a primary negative definition. The first stage is always the invention of humanity, of worldliness (Babel, the public, etc.); the religious negates this and then brings forth, in its true form, what hum. beings wanted to do in a false form.

5

264

To the piece:

21

Come unto Me, All You Who Labor, etc.

1

5

10

15

20

[a]

The whole difficulty can be avoided by not using the word “entry” (which could include an allusion to that specific event) but the word “procession,” so that it is understood as applying to his behavior in general. Incidentally, here what has happened to me is certainly what happens so often in connection with my hypochondriacal worries―to be sure, the original manuscript already has [“]procession[”].―Alas, indeed, the entire difficulty was avoided long ago, because everything is as it should be in the original manuscript, whereas this same worry has no doubt disturbed me at an earlier point (see Journal NB10 p. 116) and was only noted down because I am so reluctant to reopen my manuscripts. 24 June 1850.

It is perhaps best that the passage where there is an allusion to Christ’s entry be omitted. True enough, it does not say that this is a direct reference to the entry on Palm Sunday; true enough, in any case the entry cannot have been an absolutely triumphal procession, because all the forces capable of doing anything were against him, so that it is only the crowd that is cheering, while the disciples only understood the whole business afterward (Jn XII:16). But all the same it must have been triumphal for Xt, inasmuch as the Pharisees themselves say (Jn XII:19), [“]You are doing nothing. Look, all the world is following him![”], and because it is immediately preceded by the awakening of Lazarus. It is the last glimmering, the run-up to the downfall, in order truly to have momentum for the fall. Therefore it is perhaps best to omit it.

10

Meritoriousness.

22

To avoid meritoriousness in the following way: by not involving oneself at all with Xnty’s real requirements, living as best one can in accordance with worldly interests, and then bringing “grace” to bear, believing that God is surely merciful: this is not indeed the view of Xnty either: it is rlly to abolish Xnty.

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 23–24 23

5

265 10

15

20

24

30

35

Rigorousness―R. Nielsen. My task was to bring rigorousness to bear. I have done this and formulated it consistently. Then came N.; he was supposed to improve things. He goes and changes it into a debate. Nothing could be more foolish, and there is no more certain way of losing. If hum. beings themselves are to debate whether they want to have what is lenient or what is rigorous, the choice is easily made. No, rigorousness is brought to bear either with authority or without it, but mir nichts und Dir nichts above and beyond all debate. This is precisely the misfortune: we have brought Xnty down to our level to the point that we imagine that we are supposed to debate whether or not we want it to be so rigorous, while we believe that if we do not want to have it so rigorous, what we have is Xnty all the same. But then of course I would be mad to want to have the rigorous version. Eulenspiegel never did find the tree from which he wanted to be hanged (he had made it a condition that he would choose the tree himself)―and that is how it will go with rigorousness.

Perfect Love. Perfect love is to love the one by whom you were made unhappy. No hum. being has the right to demand to be loved like this. God can demand it; it is infinite majesty. For the person who is religious in the strictest sense, it is surely the case that in loving God, he loves the person by whom he was made unhappy in this life, humanly speaking―even though blessed. I do not have the strength to understand things in this way. Furthermore, I am very afraid of becoming tangled in the most dangerous of all snares, that of regarding myself as meritorious. The person who is religious in the strictest sense has also conquered this danger, however. 11 mir nichts und Dir nichts] German, without further ado.

•

1850

269

270

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 25–26

•

1850

Erasmus concludes a letter to Zwingli with these words (quoted in Hamann 3rd vol. p. 145): [“]videor mihi fere omnia docuisse, quæ docet Lutherus, nisi quod non tam atrociter, quodque abstinui a quibusdam ænigmatibus et paradoxis.” I think of my own situation, which is on a smaller scale. Scharling, too, thinks that Martensen has emphasized Christianity as an existential relationship and its ethical side just as strongly as I have, presumably with the exception of some paradoxes, and that it is not tam atrociter.

25

About Myself.

26

Verily, verily, I was not the one who made the matter too rigorous or was too overbearing. I saw―and only all too clearly―that Xnty was not being proclaimed at all. And how did I communicate this? I did not rush forward in judgment; no, I transformed myself into a jokester, and I said this dreadfully serious thing in the gentler form of a joke―so that they might at least take ad notam and also so that I would not be too quick to adopt too elevated a tone. And what did they do? They found it to be fun and games or they ignored me, utterly excluded me, then let me walk about as a curiosity for the mob, whereas they were serious men who proclaimed Xnty and gained all worldly benefits. Oh, why did you yourselves [serious men] take the matter so seriously[?] Truly, I take no joy in this. In many ways I am a poetic soul, and thus even a pampered soul, I would gladly have the most reasonable terms―only it must be said. But you yourselves wanted something frightful. You thought it would be so easy to evade things in that way―and it is precisely this evasion that makes the matter more serious. And then, when we perhaps come to stand in the midst of that frightful situation, Mynster will then surely reproach me, saying that I am guilty. Me, guilty! No, truly, even if you [Mynster] are not the only one who is guilty, you, too, bear the guilt because you wanted to be clever and shrewd with respect to that which, 3 videor ... paradoxis] Latin, It seems to me that the doctrines I have presented are approximately the same as those Luther is setting forth, except that I have not done it in such a ferocious manner and that I have refrained from certain enigmas and paradoxes. 10 tam atrociter] Latin, in such a ferocious manner. 20 ad notam] Latin, notice.

5

266 10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 26–27

5

10

267

15

20

27

25

30

35

40

•

1850

also out of respect for you, had been made as gentle as possible. Privately, you would say to me (and it was the first time I spoke with you, that is, after the publication of Concluding Postscript, which is now to be labeled an error) that we were “complements of one another”; privately, you would say (when R. N.’s Faith of the Gospels was published) “of course, Mag. K., we all acknowledge that we have been influenced by you”―but publicly, no, not one word; publicly Martensen was to be put on display, even after his impudent preface. And meanwhile I was to make all the sacrifices and the rabble permitted to eat away at my reputation. You see, this is the source of the confusion. The bourgeoisie, and rlly the entire population, is right to regard me as a sort of madman; for when all you who ought to witness in my behalf remain silent, and only the mob’s vulgar press is permitted to speak, then of course they will be mistaken. How in all the world is that class of society supposed to understand that deep, deep down, in the innermost regions of the heart, I am reckoned as extraordinary―deep, deep down, in the innermost regions of the heart, where people, who regard me as proud and will not defend me, expect that I will fall because they even know that financially I can so little afford it.

Leniency―Rigorousness. Ah, a person can certainly proclaim leniency. One spares oneself, one is loved by peop., receives their gratitude, their devotion; one can look out with self-satisfaction, or at any rate with tranquillity, upon the many, the many happy and smiling people who, presumably (and who themselves say so) find repose in what one proclaims. But proclaiming rigorousness! Sheer spiritual trial: whether you can endure it yourself; whether you ought not spare yourself; whether it might not end with corrupting instead of benefiting, tearing down instead of building up. Sheer unrest and worry and fear and trembling for the sake of others about whether you are not demanding too much of them. And then this dismal sight, to see their anger and bitterness―to have no one’s gratitude, but to have everyone eager to get away from you, not to mention those who directly accuse you of making them unhappy. On my own infinitely small scale, befitting a poor, lowly hum. being, I, too, have experienced this. Oh, but you, my Lord and

271

272

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 27–28

•

1850

Savior, you who were love, you who came to the world out of love, who suffered and died―sheer love: humanly speaking, you did, in fact, make your contemporaries unhappy. You could not reassure a single one of them with the joy of a secure life. No, they were rent asunder in terror and fear: you became a sword through the heart of your mother, a scandal to your disciples; all of existence appeared to be an accusation directed at you, for having presumably come into the world in order to make all peop. unhappy―you who were “love” and who came in love to save everyone. Oh, why did you not cut the price: then it would never have occurred to me that the problem is anything other than continually to cut the price. But now―yes, when I have doubts about myself, and it seems to me as if I must first and foremost cut the price for my own sake, and when it seems to me as if I owe it to others to cut the price―now it can cause me anxiety to think of you, as if you would become angry, you, who never cut the price yet nonetheless were love. You, who never cut the price. Ah, what is a poor hum. being’s little bit of forcing up the level of the task compared with the scale you employed, which was that of divinity. That, you see, is certainly how it should be. There is to be no reduction in the price―but the person who forced the task up highest must acknowledge, in boundless humility, that he, too, is saved by grace. That is how it should be. Ah, would that I were such a person. Ah, and that peop. then do nothing other than hinder me, intimidating me from doing the little I do toward forcing up the level of the task.

The Requirement―The Indulgence. The requirement is the universal, that which applies to all, the criterion against which everyone is to be measured. Therefore the requirement is what is to be proclaimed; the teacher is to proclaim the requirement and in this way stir up unrest; he dares not reduce the requirement. Indulgence is not to be proclaimed, nor can it be proclaimed, because it differs entirely for different people and constitutes their innermost, private understanding with God. Proclaiming of the requirement is to drive hum. beings to God and Xt in order to determine what indulgence they need, what

5

10

268 15

20

25

28

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 28

5

10

15

269 20

25

30

35

•

1850

indulgence they dare ask for before God, while the proclaiming of the requirement continually holds them to God. But people have reversed the relationship. The teacher (the priest) does not proclaim the requirement, but indulgence. Instead of indulgence having to be the deepest secret of the individual’s conscience before God, directly confronted with the requirement, people have reversed the relationship and, to mutual contentment and edification, proclaim indulgence simply and solely. People entirely omit the requirement, or indeed they even say that it applied only to the apostles, and so one hum. being enthusiastically proclaims indulgence to the others―indulgence, which, after all, is one of the prerogatives of God’s majesty, so that it can only be bestowed by him upon the single individual, i.e., to every individual, but to each quite separately. Am I permitted to say to another hum. being (if there are no quite special circumstances in which he has anxiety or is sick or the like, though still would rlly have to say to him that he must turn to God, and that then he will surely find peace): God does not require this of you (although it is indeed the requirement in the N.T.), let alone whether I am permitted to take it upon myself to be a teacher, to be paid for it, and then to proclaim to an entire assembly: God does not require this (when it is indeed the requirement in the N.T.), God is gracious, etc.[?] No, I am not permitted to do this. I must proclaim the requirement and then I have to add: If this is too burdensome for you, then turn to God (as I myself do, I who also need indulgence), and then, through him and before him, you will certainly come to understand what can be conceded to you. But people have taken indulgence in vain. It has become a sort of fable we tell one another (this is more or less what “the sermon” is), that God is not so strict, etc. And yet the intention is entirely different. God is the sole dispenser of grace. He wills that every individual hum. being―disciplined to this point through the proclamation of the requirement―is to turn to him separately, as an individual, and then separately receive the indulgence that can be granted to him. But we hum. beings have reversed the relationship, have robbed or deceived God out of the royal prerogative of grace, and then falsely distribute grace.

273

274

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 29–30

•

1850

About Myself. Oh, if only there had been truth in the situation: then I would have had my place. I had come in order to have my say―I who am surely one of those who has the most to say. But now I was to be elbowed aside, ignored, treated as though I were mad: this made me more and more introverted, and in turn I developed more and more, and then, alas, more and more out of proportion to these petty circumstances; and I sank under this disproportion. I have given offence to no one, no one. But unfortunately it is the case that Denmark is so small and such a provincial market town that The Corsair actlly constituted public opinion. You see, this is the root of my misfortune. I did an absolutely good deed―but it was understood to be a crime because people saw it as putting myself above public opinion. To whom shall I speak? There is no one. The crowd has long since sworn enmity to me; a very few individuals probably understand me to some extent, but find the conditions attached to bearing witness to be too burdensome. The literary elite are delighted at the misunderstanding.

29

5

10

15

20

Hypocrisy. 1

[a]

the preface to the second printing of Martensen’s Dogmatics.

This is the formula for all hypocrisy: to cloak purely worldly actions in the appearance of religion. There is something of hypocrisy in Prof. Martensen’s preface to the 2nd printing of Dogmatics. Recently, his entire tactics have in fact consisted of simple worldly shrewdness, which, however, may end in failure. It has been almost 9 months since the appearance of Nielsen’s review and Stilling and Paludan-Müller. But Martensen has had so much to attend to, etc. Now the word is that he hopes to finish a little piece by summer.―Oh, good Lord! But the hypocrisy really lies in the fact that he adds [“]if time and circumstance permit[”] (be it noted in parenthesi that I wager that Mynster dictated that to him, word for word, without himself considering that there is a difference between Mynster and Martensen, between Martensen vis-à-vis Nielsen and Mynster vis-à-vis Lindberg, a difference in their relationships, etc.) if time and circumstance permit. You see, this is hypocrisy. Privately, he himself knows very well that what he has lacked has been neither time nor circumstances, but it is rather sly to remain silent 32 in parenthesi] Latin, parenthetically.

270

30

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 30–32

•

1850

10

and delay (which he has in fact certainly done for all too long). That the new preface once again contains an attempt at worldly shrewdness in a dilatory direction―and then this godly stamp, “if time and circumstances permit.” The only thing missing was “God willing.” Thus a thief could say, God willing, on Monday I intend to commit a burglary on Amagertorv. What is godly does not rlly consist in adding “God willing” to an ungodly act, but in refraining from committing the ungodly act.

31

If―In the Event of.

5

15

20

271

25

32 30

And thus, if someone were to say to a believer: [“]But after all, suppose that it ended with God having deceived you,[”] he would reply, with Luther: [“]Hold your tongue, dear fellow, God does not do that.[”] And if the person were not satisfied with that answer he would say, [“]Well, then, if you want it that way, in any event I of course did not lose anything by having wagered everything on the one thing that occupies me. For even if I now renounced much in this life because I believed it to be God’s will, and it nonetheless ended, as you say, with God having deceived me, I would not have occupied myself with possessing these goods anyway, inasmuch as I would either also have known that God could deceive a person, thus, that God is a deceiver―that is, that everything is nothing―or, I would have shrunk back because of staking everything on involving myself with God.[”]

Just as Xt said at the dinner (when the woman anointed him): [“]She did this for my burial,[”] immediately after the entry [into Jerusalem] he says: [“]My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.[”]―Always the thought of death.

275

276

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 33

•

1850 Xnty.

Yes, of course there is strife between God and hum. beings. And if Xnty is to be implemented in accordance with its entire truth (something only its founder managed to do) or is to be implemented by an apostle, then the enmity becomes a matter of life and death. Oh, it makes one shudder merely to think of how dead from the world, from being a hum. being in the ordinary sense, a person must be in order truly to present Xnty. For my part, I feel how infinitely far I am from it. I love being a hum. being; I do not have the courage entirely to be spirit in that way. And nonetheless, in our circumstances, I am probably one of those farthest along. Therefore my life displays at least something of Christianity. To be sure, originally, it was not out of personal preference that I came to be sitting here like this, occupying myself with religious matters. No, from my earliest years I was miserable; I understood that for me no help, no recourse was to be found among hum. beings; I was placed outside human society, assigned to myself, reminded of my wretchedness every day―alas, in the days of youth, when the blood was warm and I wanted so very much to be like the others―alas, in the days of love, when the heart beat soundly and I wanted so very much to be like the others―I learned to cling to the religious as my only consolation. But nevertheless, I have always presented it in a lenient form, even when presenting it simply as I understood it; I have presented it in a lenient form in order to spare both myself and others. [“]Without authority,[”] that was my category; on the other hand, I have never presented matters as does Xnty: that love of God is hatred of the world and vice versa. I am not a happy person who, as a result of a spiritual impression, has freely chosen to involve myself with Xnty (and indeed, God knows if this can actlly be done if it is not preceded by suffering); from my earliest beginnings I have been an unhappy person, placed outside of what is universally human. You see, this is not a particularly happy situation―and therefore I never dare make a direct assault on others, because it seems to me that I would have to start by making them unhappy, and that I cannot do, I who―[“]unfortunately,[”] a strict Xn would surely say―still so much love to see the purely hum. delight that others take in life―something for which I have a better than ordinary eye, because I have a poet’s eye for it. Moreover, I am a penitent―and

33

5

10

15

20

25

272 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 33–35

•

1850

10

here again is something I cannot take upon myself to force others to be, but it is certain that this is what I am. In brief, I have met the preconditions Xnty sets (suffering in a greater than ordinary sense and guilt in a special sense) and I have found my stronghold in Christianity. But I cannot invoke authority or really proclaim this directly to others, because I cannot of course create the preconditions. I could very well accept appointment as a priest, because in no way is that, strictly speaking, the concept of proclaiming Xnty―there, I would least of all be serving as a missionary.

34

A Trait of Father’s That Deserves to Be Preserved.

5

15

20

273

35

35

One day I tipped over a saltcellar at the dinner table. Passionate as he was, and vehement as he could easily become, he began to scold so severely that he even said that I was a prodigal son and things of that sort. Then I objected and reminded him of an old family story of how my sister Nicoline had once broken a very valuable tureen and Father had not said a word, but acted as if it were nothing at all. He replied: [“]Well, you see, it was such a valuable piece that one did not need to scold―she herself certainly felt that it was wrong, but when it is a trifle, that is precisely when one must scold.[”] There is something of the greatness of antiquity in this little story. The objectivity that refrains from scolding on the basis of how one is oneself affected, but purely objectively, according to whether scolding is needed.

Christianity―Modern Methods of Cure. It is indeed fortunate that we have the old edifying writings that we can look to. Where in all the world could we find those psychological states in our times[?] The things that come to light when treating hum. beings as spirit―all those conditions of the soul, introversion―are cured nowadays by traveling to a spa, by leeches, bloodletting, etc.: but we are all Xns.

277

278

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 36–38

•

1850

My Misfortune. My misfortune is that I have served the idea, proclaimed Xnty, gratis, and also that I have done it better than any of the tradesmen. Gratis and better: both parts are required. Had I done it gratis, but worse than the tradesmen, they would not have had anything against it, but on the contrary would have made use of me as an deplorable example and said, Look at that, this is what things come to when they are gratis. Had I done it better than any of the other tradesmen but had myself been the tradesman who earned most, eh bien in that case the tradesmen (poets, priests, professors, etc.) would have tolerated it, because they would at any rate have found that my life confirms the principle of their trade.

36

5

10

15

Judaism―Xnty. “In this world, it sometimes happens that the same thing befalls the just as befalls the unjust”―this “sometimes” is Judaism. From the Christian point of view this happens always, for Xnty is the suffering truth. But the priests are very careful not to proclaim Xnty.

37

20

274

About Myself. Was I so proud, then? Has it to do with my wanting to make others feel the advantages I had as a person of means? God knows, no. But this is how things are. I had worked without pay and achieved what I wished. Then there was a villainous phenomenon in this country; I knew that it was a plague to all respectable people; I knew that it was a source of indignation that in a little country, which can scarcely afford to support a poet, there are means to support a scandal-monger; I knew that none of those who suffered under this villainy had the courage or the qualifications enabling them to do it; I knew that people looked to me as the only one: I did it. 11 eh bien] French, well then.

38

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 38–40

5

•

1850

You see, here comes the guilt. Now, instead of expressing appreciation for the step I took, of supporting me simply by a little written notice, in order, if possible, to elevate the times above this meanness and make it an honor to be mocked by these criminals―they betrayed me. This is why so much of my life now judges them so strictly―many things that I had never wished to emphasize except, at most, in the form of a joke.

10

39

15

Edifying. In an old edifying work (Arndt) it says that God only sleeps lightly with a suffering person, as does a mother with a sick child―she awakens as soon as the child moves. Marvelous masterpiece of the emotive, which almost borders on lunacy. * *

20

275

In one of the morning or evening prayers in the Evangelical Hymnal it says: “While we sleep, you keep watch, o God”―alas, as if we could help ourselves if only we were awake. No, this ought to be added: And when we awaken, we have no more understanding of our own welfare than when we lay in a deep sleep―so you, o God, must keep watch nevertheless. This observation is surely in an earlier journal, because I recall that it occurred to me earlier.

25

40

30

Catachesis about My Life. The person who places himself entirely outside human judgment makes himself more than a hum. being. This is true. Have I done this in the least way[?] Was The Corsair Danish public opinion, was it the expression of the truth at that time? If you maintain that, then yes, then I am surely guilty.

279

280

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 40–41

•

1850

But look, fundamentally all of you admitted that it was a crime, even those who supported it most fervently admitted that it was fundamentally a crime. This untruth of yours was only rlly revealed by my action. So if that was a crime, then my action was a good deed in the strictest sense of the term―and yet The Corsair still perpetuates the untruth to the effect that my guilt and my crime were that I wanted to make myself more than a hum. being―and how do they prove that? From the fact that I hurled myself against what you yourselves acknowledge to be a crime. Ah, but there was an infinitely profound untruth in public life. People wanted to support crime, villainy―and yet to justify themselves by saying that it was villainous. It was egotism that took delight in the fact that there were wretches who were willing to commit criminal acts: then you wanted to support them financially and spread the slander, but you also wanted to be righteous, because you said: Of course, it is villainous. So how much guilt has been incurred at my expense? Especially by those who had a clear view of the situation―and did not bear witness for me, but remained silent.

Odd Testimonial to the Truth. Even though the priests have done everything to make Xnty into nothing but hum. compassion, have completely omitted its requirements or, if they are mentioned, they have in any case made use of “grace” to make them not the least bit disturbing or have made them into nothing: despite this, they still cannot get peop. to embrace Xnty. And why? Because there is after all some truth in peop.: they have a suspicion that this is not Xnty at all and that it is a dangerous power with which to come into contact.

5

10

15

20

25

276

41 30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 41–43

•

1850

281

Here it is once again clear that if one is to get peop. to embrace it, it must be by presenting it in its rigorousness.

42

10

15

20

About Myself. Never have I made even the slightest attempt or have I acted as though I wanted to obligate or compel another person to serve Xnty on the terms I do, nor have I judged anyone for not having done so. On the contrary, I have supported those who have proclaimed Xnty on very different terms, supported respectable people when I saw the confused revolt from below that characterizes the times. This must definitely be insisted upon, for otherwise I would indeed have some guilt with respect to them in this matter. But now their guilt has been completely exposed: not only were they themselves unwilling to proclaim Xnty on those terms, but they would not even permit me to do so; on the contrary, they judged me as a fantast, an eccentric, who was rightly a victim of the mob.

43

My Public Situation.

25

What villainy! There is not a single one of my contemporaries, not a single one, whom I could not devastate with my comic abilities. People were well aware of it at the time, and that was why they all remained silent. I was honest enough with respect to the situation, wanting to throw off the tyranny of vulgarity that was despotic toward everyone―with myself as the deified exception―also exhibiting a vis comica, though of the more base sort. Then they betrayed me. And now people know that I cannota very well make use of my comic abilities. I can scarcely write a newspaper article, especially anything polemical, because I live constantly

30

277 35

32 vis comica] Latin, comic force.

even if I wanted to, which, owing to higher considerations, is something that I would scarcely want to do nowadays,

a

1

282

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 43–44

•

1850

surrounded by the mob and the risk of violence is real. Now came the time when Prof. Martensen thought he could make use of the moment. But no, my good man. As honest as my work as an author has been, it is also watched over, with an inexplicable solicitude, by Governance. Furthermore, another point has now been reached: I can now use pathos as triumphantly as I once used the comic. But sometimes I could almost be tempted to recall earlier times with just half a score of those devastating comic lines.

Fædrelandet

1

5

10

15

20

25

[a]

This was the situation prior to my taking action: Officially, people tried as best they could to maintain the view that such vulgarity was nothing, something to be ignored. Privately, people had long since admitted to one another that the entire situation was intolerable. The Corsair’s subscription numbers increased, the other newspapers’ decreased; it was read by the upper and the lower classes and with great curiosity; it was a power and sheer tyranny. People looked to one another; something had to be done; people looked to me. So I acted. That is, I changed the method. They knew very well that I alone possessed 10 times the polemical powers needed. The difficulty was simply to get it understood that the right course of action was to change the method. This was what Fædrelandet should have taken steps to do, should have published a few words―otherwise, why did

Everyone who was somewhat familiar with the situation knew how Fædrelandet winced under the vulgar press that had completely taken the wind out of its sails. I acted; Gjødvad stood impatiently at my side, waiting for the article in which I demanded to be abused. One thing or the other: either they must insist that that press be ignored―and then not even carry my article, even though I had asked them to do so; or (and this was the truth) they realized that their position was so desperate and the public sphere so distorted that action had to be taken―and then they would have to support my action, which would only have required a few words of acknowledgment. They did not do it, they betrayed me. After a long while, they finally dropped their subscription to The Corsair, as if that were doing something. In the course of conversation, when it seemed as if I were being asked whether they ought to do anything (without asking that question directly), I always said: Just do nothing. Truly, if people have no more feeling than that for a just cause, I am not the one who is to beg. Fædrelandet perhaps bears more guilt with respect to me than Goldschmidt does. And in any case there

5

10

44

15

12

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 44–46

280 5

10

15

20

is always the guilt of not having sought to provide a bit of guidance with one single word. To tell me privately that my achievements are so extraordinary that no one can take it upon himself to review them is of course only a joke. They could say it openly, after all―and not remain silent while the mob alone does the talking. I am writing this down for the following reason in particular. My time will surely come. Then it will be convenient for Fædrelandet to cast blame on Heibergb and especially on Mynster for not having witnessed in my faveur―and then Fædrelandet will surely portray itself as so innocent. But I do not intend to tolerate that. I call Gjødvad my personal friend, and over the past three to 4 years I have spoken with him every single evening and found him to be an amiable hum. being―as I knew I would. If he had not been a journalist I would have found in him the person with whom I could come closest to having a real friendship. But it is a completely different matter with the journal Fædrelandet. I concede that they acted under very difficult circumstances at that time, but then, that was precisely the test.

25

45

46

35

It really applies to me, Hamann 3rd vol. p. 400: Die Furcht des größten Kunstrichters, der Herzen und Nieren prüft, ist die wahre Muse.

About Myself. I will never be understood; this is something that happens again and again in every aspect of my life. If I were now to become sick―then everyone would think it was because I had worked too hard, and in fact the reason is precisely that in recent times I have had to stop my literary productivity― 12 faveur] French, favor. 30 Die Furcht ... die wahre Muse.] German, Fear of the greatest art critics, who search one’s hearts and reins, is the true muse.

•

1850

283

it run the article[?] But no. They thought it most prudent to flee back to the old tactic: that a paper like that is nothing, something to be ignored―and left me standing there like a semi-lunatic―and I was the country’s greatest younger luminary, without a single blemish until then. There was some truth (which I acknowledged at the time, but had other grounds for doing so) in what Goldschmidt said to me immediately after the first article was published (that is, before he had begun the attack): that he could not conceive that I would do so much for Fædrelandet; Ploug was after all not much better than he was. He said the same thing about Gjødvad, but I rebuffed it with the words, Gjødvad is my friend. But what an indirect concession it was when, after the first article had appeared, Goldschmidt came to me privately yet again and said: “Have you read that article―it utterly annihilates P. L. Møller.” Presumably he wanted me privately to prevent The Corsair’s attack, which naturally I would not do. And furthermore, there is the fact that Fædrelandet had after all rlly entrusted me with the task of dealing with the whole mob singlehandedly. And none of this is spoken of, while a class of people is incited against me, a class that has no notion of who I am and no inkling of the true situation. Note Privately, he also thanked me most emphatically for the article against P. L. Møller and added that I should have done it long ago. So he spoke like this privately, but publicly he remained silent.

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

b

45

Owing to lack of space in the marginal column, the addition to entry NB18:44.b (on the recto page reproduced here) was written across the entire width of the page.

286

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 46–47

•

1850

the only thing that has kept me alive and well and happy―because of financial considerations. But this is something no one understands, and in order at least to have a common language with other people, here, as always, I must put forward the explanation that it is because I have worked too hard. The reason that “they” only can and only want to understand this explanation is that they in fact will not accept the notion that there are peop. upon whom it has pleased Governance to bestow the extraordinary. So people explain it to themselves like this: I have become different from other people by having overexerted myself―and people are relieved. And I have to put up with this explanation, for otherwise there would be raging envy. This is how it is with every detail of my life; the provincial market town always has one or another squalid explanation, and in order merely to be tolerated sufficiently to be permitted to live among them, I have to act as though this is true. Now, occasionally this situation amuses me, but it does also have its tragic side.

An Actor―A Priest. An actor portrays, e.g., a nobleman, a hero, a witness to the truth, and the like; thus, he gives voice to all these noble, lofty, heroic feelings and thoughts. Now, would anyone deny that it would be offensive if the actor did this in his own name[?] But then, why should a priest be permitted to do this? The actor can be a believer, just like all the rest of us and the priest; in Xndom we are of course all Xns, and yet we conform to what is worldly. So why should a priest be permitted to declaim all these splendid virtues in his own person, continually giving occasion for the confusion that he himself is the one who puts them into practice[?] A very logical thinker could be tempted to make the following proposal: that we entirely abolish the pulpit, clerical vestments, ordination, and the like. A little stage would be set up in the church, with a proper curtain. There would be no objections if people wanted to use an organ. Then there would be a prelude. Next, the curtain would go up and “the priest” would step forward, or, if they wanted to have a variety show, several “priests”

281

10

15

47

25

30

35

282

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 47–49

5

10

48 15

20

49

30

283

35

•

1850

would step forward in historical dress. Then one of them would portray Luther, for example. The theater director (and, incidentally, one could very well use the fellow from the theater, because the Cultus Minister is of course also the Theater Minister) would make sure that the costumes were historically accurate―and then he would declaim one or another of Luther’s sermons. Naturally, people would weep, just as they indeed weep in the theater when a tragedy is presented―though genrlly speaking people do indeed believe that weeping in church is different from weeping in the theater, which sometimes can be true, but as a rule is not true.

A Lodger. In the place where I am now living on Nørregade, the lodger upstairs could certainly be called a quiet, peaceable lodger: He is out of the house all day long. Unfortunately he has a dog that is at home all day long. It lies by an open window and takes an interest in everything. If a man walks past and sneezes unusually loudly, the dog instantly barks and can go on barking for a long time. If a coachman drives past and cracks his whip, it barks; if another dog barks, it also barks. Thus there is not the least little incident in the street that I do not receive in a second edition, thanks to this dog.

One Aspect of My Public Position.

I know that this is how Bishop Mynster has understood my position, and with his conservative temperament, it was the only way he could support this sort of thing, as if I was the only person to whom he could make this concession. I represented movement, but, mind you, the movement of inwardness, so that the established order was not disturbed. Moreover, I exerted such pressure on the younger generation that none of the younger people were permitted to slip past me. Then I had the pleasure of transforming my existence into a sort of celebration in honor of Mynster. I spent everything, received no pay of any kind, drew

287

288 1

5

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 49–50

It is easy to prove that this is the case, and the proof consists simply of the way things actually were with R. Nielsen: the only thing he was worried about was getting past me, and that was why he sought to approach me privately.

•

1850

upon myself the displeasure of the younger people who wanted to advance and from whom I ought naturally to have sought support. My project is so lofty that it is infinitely easy to mount a deceptive attack against me, as if I were doing something else. And now Martensen writes a preface that is supposed to make my work something trivial, and Mynster remains silent. In a certain sense, however, I am happy with Prof. Martensen’s preface, for I know well that with the help of public opinion certain people have done their utmost to oppose me. But if I were to prevail, inasmuch as this is the sort of thing that cannot be controlled, these same people naturally intend to say, [“]Yes, of course, as we have always said, Mag. K. is someone extraordinary.[”] But now I have a little fact: the two lines in that preface were a dietetic indiscretion, a dud.

5

10

15

20

An Illusion

50

The supposed humility and modesty in confessing that one does not call oneself an apostle. It is, after all, yet another confusion that has arisen with the help of “Christendom,” which has once again turned all Christian concepts topsy-turvy, i.e., has prevented them from being what they originally were: reversed. It is called humility and modesty when someone says: I do not indeed call myself an apostle. Thus, what is proud, what is haughty, is to call oneself an apostle. I do not deny that this can be pride and haughtiness, but I wish only to illuminate the situation in a little more detail. When one speaks like this, one proceeds from the assumption that being an apostle is a distinction; humility, modesty consist of not claiming distinction. Fine. But, like everything Christian, being an apostle is not a straightforward distinction, but an

25

30

35

284

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 50

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

inverse one. You see, here comes a little N.B. With all straightforward distinctiveness or distinction, the matter is quite simple: If I truly do not make any claim to it, then this is modesty, because a straightforward distinction, without further qualifications or definitions, is straightforwardly an earthly good. But being an apostle is sheer earthly suffering. Indeed, if the apostle were permitted to live a second time, when his teachings had triumphed, well, then it would perhaps be a straightforward earthly good to be an apostle. But while he was alive, his calling himself an apostle surely did not help him gain honor and respect and earthly goods; precisely the fact that he called himself an apostle was the signal that he must suffer more than the other adherents, suffer unto death. This is what it is to be an apostle―something different from that retrospective view that, with the help of an illusion, takes the apostle in vain. But if this is the way things are, then this demand―that one summarily be regarded as modest because one does not call oneself an apostle―becomes suspect, because this could also be worldly shrewdness and cowardice. Here is the issue: instead of using the confusing term “apostle” (which has subsequently been made worldly and has been identified with other worldly distinctions) let us say this: an entire lifetime of being scorned, ridiculed, persecuted, impoverished, imprisoned, and put to death. When someone then says, [“]I am not so immodest as to demand to become an Excellency,[”] well, this is quite straightforward. But suppose someone says, [“]I am not so immodest as to demand to become poor, impoverished, the rubbish of the world, ridiculed, put to death―well, this is not quite so straightforward, for there are probably not ten people in every generation who have the courage for it. Thus it could be worldly shrewdness and cowardice that hold a person back but that also want to profit by being regarded as humility. You see, it is suspect. Ah, if only we could remain clear about what Xnty is! That it is not a doctrine, but an existence;

•

1850

[a]

289

And it must be borne in mind that there is nothing that all of us are so equidistant to as to being an apostle, precisely because this is not a matter of the aesthetic difference of being a genius, of being talented and the like. And surely, with respect to poverty, suffering for the truth, etc., every pers. is permitted to arrange his life exactly like that of an apostle, except he is not permitted to appeal to divine authority. But with respect to the former [being an apostle], he must not feel embarrassed, and least of all ought he do it out of modesty, for if there is to be any talk of true modesty here, it must be the admission that one is too weak and sensate, that is, one must accuse oneself―not as when I am too modest to demand to become a cabinet minister, a heroic artist, a knight of all the European orders and the like.

1

5

10

15

20

25

290

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 50–51

•

1850

that what is needed is not professors, but witnesses―then we would be free of all this self-important scholarliness, these fine men who are scholars―whom Xnty now needs. No, Xt did not need scholars, but could be satisfied with fishermen, so what is really needed now is many more fishermen. For, precisely because Xt was present, the danger would not have been so great if Xnty had fallen into the hands of students. The error is not the studying; rather, the error is that the emphasis continually falls on the wrong thing: on fathoming and presenting―so that it becomes ridiculous, a triviality, to do any of it. On the other hand, a simple man has no distractions. In this case one immediately focuses on his life: if he is without significance in this respect, he is without any significance whatever. But this simplification is extremely important with respect to drawing up the account: then the emphasis always falls on the right place, on existence.

About Myself, Personally. If I had had no fortune whatever, fundamentally I would have been better off, I think, because then I would have had to devote all my powers to earning a living and would have had no qualms of conscience to the effect that I was not allowed to do so. But now, when I can understand how extraordinarily much has been entrusted to me, how much good I am doing―it seems to me that inasmuch as I still do have money, I ought to remain at my post. In this conflict I face the difficult situation in which I fear “grieving the Spirit,” on the one hand, and “tempting God,” on the other. The financial crises of 1848 suddenly plunged me into this situation. And what now seems imminent is a tax on wealth, which will embarrass me financially. For I will not be understood at all. Even if I have been prodigal, it nevertheless has also had a purely ideal significance for me, precisely because I understood how much had been entrusted to me. Had I let myself be governed by worldly common sense, I would never have achieved what I have achieved; I would have become an entirely different pers. Before God, I will gladly confess that I have been prodigal, that here, as everywhere, I am in the wrong before him. He has it in his power to say to me, “You ought to have been frugal.” And yet he indeed knows how the matter can be understood differently from a different angle. But there is no other way in which

285 5

10

15

51

20

25

30

35

286

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 51–52

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

1850

one can involve oneself with God: He is always in the right. A person who actually ventures something―of course, it is not decided in advance whether he can bear it every moment (this is precisely what it means to venture)―so, if the person venturing something becomes afraid, God can say: Yes, you yourself are of course to blame in this matter. But, on the other hand, the person who lives trusting in God does indeed rest in the faith that God will surely help him. But one is always in the wrong before God. For if things succeed―it is nevertheless not owing to any merit of mine, but to help from God, who could have let go of me at every moment. If it fails, I am to blame for having ventured. Thus it is truly frightful to involve oneself with God, who cannot and will not provide any straightforward certainty or contractual relationship―and yet it is blessed, blessed to be as nothing in his hand, he who nonetheless eternally is and remains love, whatever happens. This alone is certain for me, this blessed fact: God is love. Even if I have erred on one or another point, God is nonetheless love―this I believe, and a person who believes this has indeed not erred. If I have erred, this will surely become clear to me, and I will repent―and God is love. He is it: not He was it, nor is it something he will be: Oh, no, even this future tense would be too slow for me―he is it. Ah, how wonderful. Sometimes, perhaps, my repentance must be waited for, so there is a future tense, but God never has to be waited for, he is love. As the water of a spring is equally cool, unchanged, in summer and winter―so, too, with God’s love. But as it occasionally happens that a spring runs dry―no, no―yes, whom shall I praise: I have indeed no exclamation other than that concerning precisely the one of whom I am speaking here: “God be praised!”―therefore, no, God be praised, God is not love in that way. His love is a spring, but it never runs dry.

287

52 35

40

About Myself. In Denmark I have been offered an enormous fee to write in the newspapers (I was once offered 100 rd. per sheet by Carstensen, when he had Figaro or Portfeuillen, for an article against Heiberg)―I have spent very significant sums in publishing one or another large work, the fruit of a year’s or a year and a half’s untiring industry.

291

292

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 53–56

•

1850

The Essential Relationship of Reduplication to Xnty. It would have to be a very peculiar idea, thought, observation, and the like if, when one was excited about it and then wanted to use one’s powers straightforwardly to win peop. over to it―one was unable win some over. But this straightforward relationship is not rlly Xnty. Xnty consists precisely of the rigor of reduplication in which the teacher, in serving the idea, is even cruel to himself and is vigilant lest peop. be won over to it in illusory fashion, lest it become something they say, etc.―item lest the cause gradually weaken, become less urgent than it was originally, as often happens when more people join in.

1

any more than it would ever occur to the priest to start wanting to do it―otherwise he would have to speak differently. [a]

53

5

10

15

Christianity Is Dialectical.

54

It can be seen in a number of ways, including this formula for “the apostle”: He begins by persecuting it [Christianity].

20

The Distance from the Prototypes in Christendom.

55

This is best seen indirectly, in the sermon, which in quite theatrical fashion does not give living presence to the difficulties bound up with putting it into practice, but lets everything remain one of those solemn, uplifting experiences in a quiet hour, based on the tacit agreement that it would not occur to any of us to do it,[a]

25

288

30

At one point in the sermon “The Life of the Apostle Paul,” Mynster exclaims, [“]Who would not love the man who writes, [‘]Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it; being defamed, we 13 item] Latin, as well as, furthermore.

56

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 56–57 entreat,[’]” though here it is probable that Paul must be dead. That Mynster’s imagination can deceive him in this way is inexplicable.

57

10

15

20

25

30

289

40

Hum. Deceit. This form of deceit occurs frequently in the business of everyday life: when you emphasize ethical tasks and prod someone a little in this direction, he replies, [“]I do not have the ability to do it.[”] The deceit consists in transforming an ethical task into a task involving differences. This is not at all a matter of abilities, but of will; the simplest person has the ability, if he wants to. But this is how people parry and then profit as well by seeming to be modest. Well, thank you very much. Let us take the most rigorous ethics, the Commandments. If, when you said to a thief, [“]You ought to refrain from stealing,[”] he were then to reply, [“]Yes, that is right enough for the person who has the ability for it; I do not have the ability for it,[”] would that not be a peculiar way of talking[?] But this is how it always is with the ethical. The ethical requirement that a man witness to the truth does not have to do with the intellect, but with the will. The requirement is not that he become a genius―oh, no, it is quite simple, but it is hard on flesh and blood, and therefore a person tries to get out of it by acting as if it were a matter of aesthetic difference, and says―modestly―I do not have such abilities. In so doing, incidentally, he lies in yet another way, for he weakens the impression of the truly ethical person, as if he were easily able to do so because he has such abilities― but it is not at all a question of abilities. But people fear the truly ethical person and would very much prefer to protect themselves against him by making him into someone with special gifts, so that his life in fact loses its power to serve as a demand―for if it is a question of abilities, it is of course nonsense to require of a pers. something he has not been given.

•

1850

293

294

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 58

•

1850

A Reply that I could be tempted to make: Inasmuch as “the established order” is so strong that Prof. Martensen thinks that he can dismiss the entirety of my writings with two lines in a preface, it surely becomes my duty to take away the damping capacity of jest and the diverting capacity of indirection, which―in order to spare myself and others―I have employed until now in connection with my communications: to take these away and proceed in a direct manner. The established order is certainly strong enough; after all, it has Prof. Martensen, who, as can be seen from his preface, is considerably the stronger. Thus, directly: the entire proclamation of Xnty as it is now heard rlly omits what is essential in Xnty. And, to make it entirely direct: Prof. Martensen’s work, in all its foolishness, is actlly the betrayal and abolition of Xnty. Granted, this has helped him in his career and in the acquisition of worldly goods, but it is of course not identical with Xnty, which contains no § about providing worldly goods for Prof. M. by transposing Xnty’s message into unchristian forms of communication. Neither “the professor” nor “the court preacher” are mentioned in the N.T., which speaks only of “witnesses,” which does not mean people whose lives express precisely the opposite of the teachings while they provide assurances upon assurances that in their innermost being, etc. No, “witnesses” are those whose existences (personal existences) are the transparency of the teachings, so that they could indeed shut their mouths and proclaim the doctrine nonetheless, because their lives are “bearing witness.” By contrast, it would be a great embarrassment if Prof. Martensen remained silent, for then people would say, Of course, it is indeed a purely worldly existence. But then he speaks―and provides assurances―and Berlingske Tidende provides assurances that this is Martensen’s conviction, concerning which Miss Bremer and Flyveposten also provide assurances, and

58

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 58–60 292

5

59

15

20

60

295

The God-Relationship. If possible, practice self-denial for 70 years, more passionately and truly than 1000 Xns; if possible, work harder than 1000 martyrs: nonetheless, that you are saved is grace, exactly as it is grace when the greatest sinner is saved. In a way, it could seem that whatever one does makes no difference―oh, yes, if you are a monster. But if God were not infinitely elevated in this way, he would not be God―then he would be more or less needy instead of being what he is, grace. The confusion consists simply in the fact that you compare yourself with others―alone before God, the matter is infinitely simple.

The Gospel: The Great Supper.

Theme:

35

1850

many believers who believe Martensen’s assurances assure us that one can quite safely believe them. Should not this be certain, seeing as there are so many assurances[?] And yet, it is suspect. For a life does not need one single assurance―it is of course something one can grasp. Where this is absent, the matter simply becomes more and more suspect the more assurances there are.

Life’s Earnestness.

30

•

That this [life’s earnestness] is not finite goals, especially not when they stand in the way of the eternal, but that mediation, too, is a hallucination, for if seeking the eternal “first” is to be done in earnest, then for the most part finite goals go by the board.

When we now read the gospel aloud here, each of us understands what is in fact easily understood,

[a]

I had thought I would preach on this gospel and therefore have studied it a bit.

1

[b]

see p. 177.

[c] Prayer. Father in heaven, you, who received our earliest promise, to whom we promised to be faithful when we were baptized, that in our lives we might not forget this our promise, forget that we are betrothed, forget to come to your wedding―whatever excuse we could come up with is a matter of

5

10

In the marginal entry NB18:60.c Kierkegaard used a pencil to put parentheses around a portion of the text that can be seen at the bottom of the verso page and the top of the recto page reproduced here.

298 1

5

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 60–61

indifference; what is decisive is that we did not come to the wedding (we who did not even excuse ourselves from accepting the invitation, as they did in today’s gospel, but who have indeed accepted it, have solemnly promised to come, so if we do not come after all, our guilt becomes all the greater).

•

1850

and he confesses that these were excuses, poor excuses, that ought not hold a pers. back. But now we are here, in God’s house, in a quiet hour, as it is called. Out there, where it is anything but quiet, the excuses that have been discussed here are reckoned as more or less life’s earnestness―and the only excuse for that is surely that out there the highest invitation is not heard―it has, as it were, retreated from actual life and resounds only in various quiet hours.

293

5

10

10 [d]

15

20

25

30

35

One could say that this is a strange sort of invitation. An invitation, of course, leaves one free as to whether or not one will come. And then, when those who have been invited politely excuse themselves, the inviter has them put to death.―But that is God’s royal prerogative. This latter is not strange; rather, what is strange is the former, the fact that he would condescend to invite us.

[e]

It must, however, be noted that in the gospel about the great supper it is not said that the invitation was to a wedding. And in the gospel about the king who prepared his son’s wedding, no one makes the excuse that he had taken a wife; it only says that the one went to his fields, the other to his business. But it makes no real difference.

But is it not rlly the gospel’s invitation that is in the wrong, coming at such an inopportune moment, precisely when one is standing there about to get married, when one is most busy with his earthly doings, etc.[?] After all, the invitation could come at a moment when one had nothing else to do, in an idle moment, perhaps in a quiet hour―the gospel demands too much.―Yes, the gospel poses an either/or and does it deliberately in order to provide the proper tension for the choice. However mild the gospel is, however lovingly it extends the invitation, it has nonetheless not lost its sense of itself.

The curious fact is that it was a wedding to which they had been invited, and yet they excused themselves by saying that they had to go to a wedding―thus, two weddings. And God is gracious enough to describe his relationship to hum. beings as a relationship of love.

The Gospel of the Great Supper.

15

20

25

30

61

Theme. Which is the greater guilt: to be like those in the gospel who excused themselves from accepting the invitation―or like us, who have solemnly answered:

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 61–62 Yes (in baptism) and promised to come, and then do not come after all, because of the same hindrances as those in the day’s gospel. 294

5

62

10

15

20

25

30

35

From My Life. Only once in my life have I been present at a general meeting (on very rare occasions I have been present at general meetings of the Student Association or the insurance company, but that is of course something else), and then I was the presiding officer. It was at the second general meeting of university students immediately following the accession of Christian VIII. After a couple of words of introduction from me about how profoundly flattered I felt at having been elected, we proceeded to business. This began with, and more or less consisted of, a Levin (not Israel, but another) who asked for the floor and was granted it. He said, Gentlemen, what is a petition? At this point he was interrupted. The uproar lasted a long time; finally, I managed to get the floor and then said, Hr. Levin has the floor. The scene was repeated, and the same thing happened once again. Gradually, Hr. Levin worked his way all the way up to the podium and wanted to explain to me privately what he rlly meant, apparently thinking that it was because I had a personal interest in what he had to say that I had made so many efforts to gain the floor for him. Then, French Bierring asked for the floor and began like an orator, saying, Is there anyone who dares oppose me in this matter[?] Here he was stopped when the gathering began to shout: Yes, yes. The noisy scene lasted a long time. Then my brother came over to me and asked for the return of the petition, which was what actlly was supposed to have been debated at the general

•

1850

299

300

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 62–65

•

1850

meeting. In addition, he asked me to say―or he himself said― that the petition would be available for signature at his rooms. This of course was in conflict with all the rules. And to make matters complete, I finally took the floor and said: The general meeting is hereby adjourned. They approved this rather than depose the presiding officer. Oddly enough, by the way, even though it was a long time afterward, when I spoke with Christian VIII for the second time, he knew what had happened at that general meeting and that I had presided.

5

10

295

Among the reasons that marriage is found unbearable by those who wish to separate is precisely this: that divorce is possible. Things might go better if divorce were impossible. Someone who raises doves knows that if he takes the two most quarrelsome doves (but a male and a female) and cages them together, they will eventually mate. How dependable is everything God does! With two males it surely would not work―they would kill each other. But a male and a female must be suited to one another, and if only it is made impossible for them to separate, things work out.

63

Abraham is an eternal prototype of the religious person. As he had to leave the land of his forefathers for a foreign land, so indeed must the religious person leave, i.e., forsake, an entire generation of his contemporaries―even though he remains among them, albeit isolated, alien to them. Being an alien, being in exile―this is precisely the characteristic suffering of the religious person.

64

15

20

25

30

About Myself. What I have achieved will be admired for a long time: I have had extraordinary abilities (alas, how I recognize myself in this past tense that I always use; even when I feel strongest, I say: I

65

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 65–66

5

296

15

20

25

30

35

66 40

•

1850

have had―this is a unity of melancholia, reflection, and piety, and this unity is my nature): what I lack is the animal side of being a human being. People use this against me. People feel more strongly anchored in the sensate world and are able to participate in everything― which I cannot, so they find it odd, affected, ridiculous, haughty, and God knows what else, that I am not just the same: People take a bestial delight in demanding of me what has been denied me, and they make fun of what has been granted me. And this can be very easily done, because in our petty circumstances I am so unusual that I am surely the only one of my kind―to whom, therefore, no one feels any connection. Even those who have some spirit enviously make use of this advantage. They, too, find it affected and odd and ridiculous of me, although it is in no way ridiculous, whether one looks at the suffering or at the fruits of the suffering. Often I suffer to the point of the weakness of death, undergoing frightful torment― then my spirit is strong and I am in the world of ideas, where I forget everything. But then I am reproached because I want only to be a thinker, not a hum. being like the others; people grant me every possible sort of suffering and abuse as the punishment I deserve. Oh, how false or foolish you are! Give me a body―or, had you given me one when I was 20 years old, I would not have become as I am. But you are envious, and this is the suffering that the very intellectually gifted person must suffer in his times. Oh, how easy it is to say in connection with something in the past: [“]That which is to be immortalized in song must die[”]―but in real life people themselves much prefer to be free of this, indeed, they are angry at the person whose life bears all the marks of being one of that sort. Incidentally, it is surely true that those sufferings that are immediately recognizable have at least the consolation of not being linked to a person’s character. If someone is a cripple, at least people do not say that this is odd, affected, ridiculous of him. But of course, all sufferings that are immediately recognizable are also exposed to that torment known as sympathy.

The Human―The Christian. The hum. is that we are the innumerable beings, the race, and I am one with the flock―therein is indulgence, distraction. The Christian is that what is needed is always only one―therein is

301

302

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 66–68

•

1850

the almost superhuman exertion for everyone who is able to grasp this. Humanly, all of us together must, if possible, make sure that we all stay together in order to pull the load along― therein is relief and freedom from cares, for how infinitely small becomes the share each one must bear. Xnly, one is enough―one who is, nonetheless, infinitely incapable of doing anything―but God is with you. Frightful burden: with the consciousness of being infinitely incapable of doing anything, to bear God, who is capable of doing everything. Humanly, for the understanding to be involved, if possible, in 17 plans at once is plenty to do; there is solace and levity in this. Xnly, there is nothing to do, only to be infinitely still so that God can approach―frightful exertion.

5

10

297

Comic. In a very difficult affair, and in a hurry, where every second was valuable, a strategic position had to be taken up; there was one volunteer―the signal was given. Then he came at a run, his body bent over the horse, his left arm outstretched, giving the horse the reins; the spurs pressed in on its sides, his gaze daring, almost foolhardy: thus did he come dashing ahead at a full gallop―on a wooden horse. Ah, there are peop. who are capable of imitating perfectly the movements of someone in motion, and when one looks more closely, they do not move from the spot, the whole thing is a false alarm.

Just This One Collision in Christ’s Life―What Suffering! He who is himself an individual hum. being, stands in need of a hum. being! He is God; as far as that goes, he has indeed no need of any hum. being, not of all the millions who have lived, not of the hosts of angels. But he does not will to be God, he wills to be a hum. being. Ergo he needs a hum. being; he needs someone he can use as an apostle. This other hum. being is of infinite importance to him―naturally, if he wills to be God, then

67

20

25

68 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 68–69

5

10

298 15

69

25

30

35

•

1850

this hum. being is less than nothing to him; but he does not will to be God―thus this hum. being is infinitely important to him, for the sake of the cause, that the apostle truly remains faithful to the cause. Christ was capable of tears in pleading with him to be faithful―that is how much he needs him for the sake of the cause―and also because he does not will to be God. Xt did not will to be God; in an almighty decision he has compelled himself to be an individual hum. being―now, bearing humanity’s cause upon his heart, he must actually suffer all the impotent misery of being a poor, individual hum. being―and at every moment it is his voluntary decision that compels him; he of course has it within his power to break through and be God. This observation is surely true, but a hum. being ought to be cautious even in connection with observations of this sort, because what rlly is relevant to him is that it is also for his sake that Xt suffers, and that Xt’s suffering and death are atonement also for him. And now, think of the way in which speculation talks about the God-Man!

My Difficult Position in Presenting Xnty, in Which Everyone Is Placed, if Xnty Is to Be Presented Truthfully. It was undeniably a forgivable illusion for a pers. to be in. He lives in Xndom where all are Xns; there are a myriad of paid preachers of Xnty: well, then, what could be more natural than for him to hit upon the idea of truly illuminating Xnty―that would be a project for which everyone would thank you. My friend, this will soon be seen to be an illusion. Year after year, the egotism of the hum. race has cheated God out of Xnty to such an extent, has itself taken possession of it, reedited it―and almost nothing is more important to hum. egotism than to prevent a person from gaining enlightenment about what Xnty is. On this question, the congregation will be in agreement with more or less the entire paid staff. To the paid staff it is indeed of utmost importance that Xnty not emerge in its true form, but it will also be in the interest of the congregation to oppose this, because it believes it is better served by retaining Xnty at the bargain price at which it in fact has it, and to join with the hired servants in the illusion that this [truthful presentation of Christianity] is not Xnty.

303

304

1

a

in this nobler occupation

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 69

•

1850

The more I consider my presentation of Xnty, the clearer it becomes to me that it is true, but the more do I also notice that Xnty of course becomes the point of conflict at which two opposed interests collide. Either Xnty is to be presented in God’s interest, if I dare put it this way: this is its truth. But this presentation is not at all in the interest of hum. beings. The interest of hum. beings consists precisely in cheating God out of it for the lowest possible price. It can never be in the interest of hum. beings for Xnty to be presented in its rigorousness, so that it becomes something truly in earnest―but of course, if I dare put it this way, this is in God’s interest or it is the truth. Therefore, the person who proclaims Xnty truthfully must himself understand that this is certainly not something for which peop. will thank him―precisely the opposite. The more truthfully he does it, the more will he be abandoned by peop., the more will they see in him their worst traitor and enemy. For a pers. to view the matter differently, the most profound sort of transformation must first have taken place within him, so that he has learned to love and fear God to the point of hating himself, i.e., he must be a true Xn. Now, such Xns will support the truthful preaching of Xnty to the utmost of their abilities― yes, this goes without saying. And now, imagine yourself in Xndom, where people have simply made arrangements for these 1000 clerical livings. Yes, I certainly believe that the priests do not preach Xnty. The sort of Xnty preached by the priests is indeed something the natural hum. being can even very profitably give money for. But take Xnty as it truly is. Have a man preach that you are to make sacrifices for the sake of this teaching, that you are to expose yourself to dangers, do without all worldly goods―[“]And I am supposed to give money for that![”] the natural hum. being will say. And he is really right about that. Try it! Have a man go to someone else and say: [“]You are to give a portion of your wealth to the poor. You shall have much more to think about than making money, and your diligencea is to be rewarded with mockery―I charge 100 rd. as the preacher of this teaching.[”] I think the natural hum. being would reply: [“]Is he mad? Does he want me to give 100 rd. in order to be informed that I am supposed to fork out 10,000 rd.?[”] How different it is when it is a man who uses his great gifts as a priest to lead a life full of enjoyment, is honored and esteemed, and who then preaches this lenient teaching: Yes, it is easy to understand that it is something one is to give money for. But it is not rlly Xnty.

5

10

15

299 20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 69–70

5

10

•

1850

But there is another question: Has a hum. being the right to proclaim Xnty, if I dare put it this way, in God’s interest? Is not this presuming too much? The answer to this must be: Xnty cannot truthfully be proclaimed any other way. But the consequence is that those who have proclaimed Xnty truthfully have rarely done so, in the natural sense, willingly. They have been compelled to do so by inner and outward suffering, so that they dared not do otherwise, but, in the natural sense, would rather have been free of it. Nonetheless, the difference from an “apostle” is still the fact that he [the apostle] has div. authority.

300

70

20

25

30

35

Ordination is clung to tenaciously in Xndom. So a new teacher is ordained. This takes place with fearsome solemnity in the “quiet, serious hours.” Now he is ordained. Thereupon he arranges his life in utterly worldly fashion like other secular or ordained people. This sort of religiosity is really a parallel to that noted at an earlier point in this journal: a thief says God willing, on Sunday I intend to commit a burglary on Amagertorv. Moreover, ordination is very rigorously defended by the zealous clergy, that is, at every opportunity that it does not inconvenience them, but can used in clerical fashion to harass others. If a lay person wants to preach―God preserve us, then the clergy make a great fuss about ordination, about the gifts of grace that are communicated to them through ordination. At the same time, however, a learned theological battle is being fought concerning the nature and significance of ordination from a speculative point of view―and from our profound thinker, genius, and ecclesiastical bartender, senior court preacher X we expect a work that will shed new light on this mystery. Fortunate Xndom! Everyone who is a lover of fun and nonsense is invited to stoop to Xndom. Everything means 17 different things in Xndom, and at root the basis of all these many meanings is that they mean nothing. Now, the fun consists in the

305

306

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 70–72

•

1850

fact that people completely turn things around, and invert them, and reverse them ad libitum according to their desire and the occasion. This nonsensical mush of all concepts is established Xndom. 5

Poetic.

71

A Man Has the Following Advertisement Printed in the Newspaper. Invitation.

1

a

ordinary. extraordinary

a

If there should be five or 6 like-minded people who together with me and without a lot of solemn ceremonies are willing to commit themselves simply to try to understand the N.T. and simply to strive to express its demands in deeds, I propose to begin holding religious gatherings at which I will interpret the N.T. Admission will be open to all with the exception of the clergy. For clergy, admission will require the payment of 10 rd. each time, which will be distributed to the poor. It seems to me that those who, turning their backs on imitation, have made money on Xt, must pay something extra if they want to hear a real sermon once in a while. In the event that any professor of theology should wish to be present at these gatherings, the payment for him will be 20 rd. each time. This seems to me not unreasonable, when one considers what it means to become aa professor of Xt’s having been crucified, or ab professor of Peter and Paul’s having been flogged.

10

301 15

20

25

30

“The Professor.”

72

Let us take mathematics. It is very possible that a famous mathematician, for example, became a martyr for his science―this would not prevent my be-

35

2 ad libitum] Latin, however it pleases.

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 72

5

10

15

20

25

30

302

35

40

coming a professor of the subject he has presented. Because what is essential here is the doctrine, the science; the personal life of the teacher is something accidental. But from an ethical-religious point of view, and especially from a Christian point of view, there is no doctrine in the sense in which it is the essential and the person involved is something accidental: here, imitation is what is essential. What nonsense it is, then, when, instead of imitating Xt or the apostles and suffering as they suffered, a person becomes a professor―of what subject? Well, of the fact that Xt was crucified and the apostles were flogged. The only thing lacking was for a professor to have been present on Golgatha, who had then immediately established himself as a professor―of theology? Yes, we see that theology had not yet arisen at that time―at that time it would therefore have been quite clear that if he was to become a professor of anything, it would have to be of the fact that Xt was crucified. Thus, a professor of the fact that someone else was put to death. It could be quite curious to have such a professor accompany the entire campaign. Thus, he would first become a professor of the fact that Xt was crucified. Then the apostles began. Then Peter and James were brought before the council, after which they were flogged―there would immediately be a new § and that very day the professor would become a professor of the fact that Peter and James were flogged. Then the council forbade the apostles to preach Xt. But what do the apostles do? They remain imperturbable and continue to preach because one ought to fear God more than hum. beings―and the professor is also imperturbable: he becomes a professor of the fact that Peter and James, despite having been flogged, did not refrain from preaching the truth―for a professor ought to love new §§ more than God and the truth. “The professor” continually follows along―of course, a professor’s slogan is to follow along, to follow along with the times.a Assuming that there was a professor of theology at that time,b it would

•

1850

307

a

though not following after, imitating Xt.

b

(at that time, when theology had not yet arisen)

1

308

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 72–73

•

1850

be possible for a person to study the acts of the apostles and keep oriented about what it was that he was now professor of. Then it ended with the apostle being crucified― and the professor became a professor of the fact that the apostle was crucified. Later, the professor finally died with a peaceful death. This, you see, is the way one can put an end to all this scholarliness when it becomes altogether too pompous and pretentious: one seizes hold of the professor and excludes him until admissions are forthcoming on this point―and then the entire established order can very well continue to exist. Incidentally, “the professor of theology” is a point de vüe in Xndom: to the same degree that “the professor” is regarded as what is highest, to that same degree people are most disoriented with respect to Xnty; from the way in which “the professor” is judged, one can see the state of Xndom and how it judges Xnty.

The Proclamation of Xnty.

5

10

15

20

73

Rich―Poor Unfortunate―Fortunate, etc. rlly, the gospel says, surely, that the poor, the unfortunate, etc. are closer to the gospel, more susceptible to the gospel than are the fortunate, etc. I lack the courage to say this quite without reservations, but to me the matter seems simple put this way. Also as presented in the N.T., Xnty is proclaimed equally to all. But then when Xnty is proclaimed truthfully, as in the N.T., it appears that this teaching strikes the fortunate the wrong way, whereas sufferers, the wretched―especially those whose misfortune consists of having been denied hum. consolation―are more disposed to seize hold of this sole consolation. Consequently, the fortunate are not excluded at the outset, far from it. But Xnty is proclaimed truth14 point de vüe] French, properly “point de vue,” point of view, criterion.

25

30

303

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 73–75

5

10

74

15

20

75

35

1850

309

fully, and then in fact it turns out that the fortunate, the robustly sensate of this world, drift away. But people have substantially reduced the price of Xnty, and this has led to the illusion that nowadays things are no longer as they were at the outset, when the wretched, the poor, etc. were more disposed to accept Xnty. Unfortunately, there is a worldly shrewdness that for safety’s sake wishes to include Xnty among all earthly goods and worldly pleasures. This way of proclaiming Xnty is what has confused Xnty’s situation.

The Rigorousness of Reduplication. When I indeed have conviction for a cause, when I then speak enthusiastically in its behalf and see how the whole crowd accepts it: is it not asking too much of me that, instead of simply being encouraged by this, I must first take a careful look, become uneasy, indeed must even suspect that I am on the wrong path, that this is a misunderstanding because I am being understood so quickly and the truth is being received with open arms like this? But this is how rigorous the truth is.

About Myself. Worldliness―Religiousness.

304

•

Xndom, where we are all Xns, is so deeply embedded in worldliness that to dare draw attention to oneself is understood and explained simply and solely as vanity, pride, in short, as worldliness; it is entirely forgotten that in its higher forms religiousness can do this same thing, that all the exemplars have done it. But so far are people from having a notion of Xnty, that the view (which is fundamentally no less worldly shrewd) that believes the most correct thing, the shrewdest thing, is to live unno-

[a]

Nonetheless, one must also bear in mind that an element of self-torment can also emerge here. It could after all also be true that some people actually do appropriate what has been spoken of. Luther says that Christian life includes: faith―works of love―and then persecution because of the faith and love (the passage is noted in my copy of his sermon). At another point (which also is noted in my copy) he also says that where persecution is absent, there is something wrong with the preaching. In my view, however, here again one must be wary of self-torment, for otherwise the task of bringing the teaching into the world could of course involve taking constant care that it not be accepted but rejected. Here we must commend ourselves into God’s hands and ask him to watch over us.

1

5

10

15

20

310

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 75–77

•

1850

ticed―that this is tarted up so into “making it a point of honor to live quietly” (Thessalonians)―and that this is the maximum sort of religiousness. Yes, in a sermon (e.g., the one titled What Have Christ’s Witnesses Accomplished?) Mynster does indeed declaim about the glorious fact that these witnesses of Christ did not retreat, did not prefer to live in concealment, but dared draw attention to themselves―but if someone were to do this nowadays, in our times: ah, God preserve us, Mynster would say. Now, as for myself, I think that in this respect I have done everything humanly possible to keep the cause unsullied. First I acquired renown as an author―and then, when I had acquired it, I broke entirely with worldliness and began in earnest as a religious author: it seems to me that any child could see that had worldly glory and honor been what I wanted, I would of course have attained them. I do not think it is possible, in venturing to draw attention to oneself for the sake of religion, to do more to prevent being confused with these servants of vanity who desire renown and the like.

5

10

15

20

Luther as a Point de Vue. I could be tempted to take Luther’s collection of sermons and excerpt from it a great many propositions and ideas, all of which are noted in my copy, and then publish them in order to show how far present-day sermons are from being Xnty, so that people do not say that it is I who have taken it into my head to exaggerate.

Mynster’s Sermons―and Me. I was brought up on Mynster’s sermons―aber by my father, a simple and unassuming and earnest and strict man to whom it would never in all the world have occurred not to act in accordance with what he read. Had I been brought up by Mynster, I would of course have found out on Mondays, Tuesdays, etc.―on weekdays―that a person is not after all a fantast who simply acts accordingly. 31 aber] German, but.

76

25

305

77

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 77–78

•

1850

10

What a difference! And alas, what a satire on Mynster have I not become. This is not seen: The reverence I have inherited for him is something I have preserved, and this has surely benefited me and prevented me from becoming guilty of exaggeration, something that, incidentally, is utterly foreign to the whole of my being, for what is characteristic of me is precisely the circumspection with which I serve, whereas another person could become giddy as easily as ein, zwei, drei. Incidentally, this also stems from my having understood very early on and very profoundly that I was the exception.

78

The Untruthfully Lenient Proclamation of Xnty.

5

15

20

25

30

306

35

40

Now, it is not merely untrue, but as such it also incurs a heavy responsibility. When, that is, Xnty is proclaimed as lenient, it also lacks the degree of consolation needed by someone who is truly wretched. The fact is that peop. wish to exclude the truly wretched person entirely, to remain ignorant of the fact that he exists―and there, you see, is where Xnty rlly begins. Take whatever sermon you like from our times―and then take, e.g., someone who is truly suffering, someone who has melancholia bordering on madness, someone possessed, or take someone who is suffering for the sake of the truth: offer it to him―it sounds like mockery of him; it dare not offer consolation because it dare not even think about his suffering. That sorrows and adversities and difficulties and the like exist―well, even the most fortunate person must surely be aware of this. The sermon also takes note of these, but, be it noted, it does so in so weak a fashion that the total impression in no way disturbs the impression of a pleasant life, full of delights. And that is what the fortunate want to hear, if they have the merest crumb of hum. common sense.―And this is supposed to be Xnty. The mere fact that Xnty drags these wretched people onto the stage, brings them into society’s consciousness, so to speak, is offensive to the natural hum. being. Drags them onto the stage: why? In order to console them. Yes, thanks anyway, says the natural hum. being, we would prefer to be completely ignorant of such sufferings; that, after all, is why we have out-of-the-way places, far from society, where we chase them. And as soon as we notice that a pers. is in this state, that he is wretched in this way, 8 ein, zwei, drei] German, literally, “one, two, three,” i.e., without further ado. (See also explanatory note.)

311

312

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 78–79

•

1850

we offer―presumably out of compassion!―to remove him far, far away from ourselves. And it is precisely these people who are among those whom Xt seeks. Oh, you handsome preachers, you who are admired and who surely admire yourselves for your kinship with the classicism of a Goethe, who knew how to distance himself: ah, what do you in fact rlly understand of Xnty! Originally I had had a rather better understanding of Xnty: ah, but what, after all, was that until the world itself really taught me to pay attention. What first helped me was my original inner suffering, which had the appropriate degree of torment―and yet I was entirely unaware of the most decisive strenuousness associated with Christianity.

The Various Gradations of Christianity. One can regard Xnty as a fluid that can then be graded. The law is: the greater the rigorousness―the greater the consolation. The rigorousness is the spiritual aspect, but the spiritual aspect is in turn the consolation. Assuming the N.T. registers 14 degrees, the ordinary sermon registers scarcely one degree. The consequence of this is also that the usual sermon can console only those who have no real need of consolation―whereas the N.T. can console the most wretched person of all, even someone whom the most deviant fantasy could imagine to be more wretched than the most wretched person who has ever existed. One would think that consolation was something every pers. would like to hear, the more consolation the better. No, no, this must be understood cum grano salis. The degree of consolation is of course a constant reminder of the degree of wretchedness; but there is a kind of wretchedness of whose existence the natural hum. being wants at all costs to remain ignorant; look, this kind of consolation he truly does not want to hear about. When wretchedness is depicted, what is called to mind is something that has happened to many, something that can happen to a pers.―but so, too, sounds the enthusiastic discourse of consolation. Yes, thanks anyway, says the natural hum. being, I would in fact rather remain ignorant for as long as possible that such wretchedness exists. 30 cum grano salis] Latin, with a grain of salt.

5

10

79

20

25

30

307

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 79–82

5

80

15

81

25

30

308

82 35

•

1850

Dare proclaim consolation of this sort, and you will see―you will be expelled from good society, treated as a malicious pest against whom people must protect themselves―but Xnty, that lenient doctrine, that is something that a cultivated society of lifeloving people of the world will certainly want to keep. Therefore it is also required that when proclaiming Xnty in our times, a priest must “have world” enough to be able―to omit Xnty.

Consolation. In one sense, it is certainly easier to console others when one is happy oneself than to have to console others when one is oneself a sufferer. Ah, but in the former case the consolation will perhaps be that much the weaker, and a person will scarcely dare involve himself with the truly suffering person.―Therefore the proper relationship involves a suffering person for whom it is a consolation to console other sufferers. (see the discourse, “The High Priest” in the Friday discourses.)

To Ignore the Rabble. True enough, the shrewdest thing may be to ignore the rabble (that is, daily, every blessed day of one’s life, while on an occasional Sunday one declaims oratorically about loving one’s neighbor), existentially expressing that only a tiny portion of society exists. But a Christian priest is truly not permitted to do this. God in Heaven, how dare a priest say: It is beneath my dignity to involve myself with the rabble. Miserable fellow, do you know what you are saying, that it is blasphemy, that you are mocking Xt who introduced a new concept of dignity, the Christian concept, which consists precisely of existing for the rabble, of suffering its misunderstanding, perhaps its persecution, but all in order to help it forward.

R. Nielsen―and Me. Never have I suffered, qua author, as I have suffered with him. In isolation with my own criterion, things go well; I do not

313

314

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 82

•

1850

think at all of other people’s criteria, or I imagine that deep down they live in accordance with a criterion that is the same as mine. But now, to have to endure using my criterion alongside his. There were moments when I was close to becoming anxious and afraid for myself. And then, on the one hand, to want to compel him, and on the other hand to be concerned about whether I might not be doing him an injustice―and then the equanimity with which he composes himself: that this is just the way most people are; that he is in fact probably quite a lot further along than most people, which indeed he doubtless is, even if I have occasionally found his contentment and composure appalling. And then having to lie still during all this and wait, feeling obligated to wait. 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. And what have I learned? Well, if from the beginning I had the feeling that I was the exception, I have certainly had that feeling confirmed. But finally, it will in fact end with him, just like that girl, regarding me as the most cunning deceiver―and this precisely because I have not employed cunning against him, whereas he perhaps wanted to employ cunning against me, though he certainly also had honest intentions. The impression his big book made on me was that his cunning had deceived him and that in this way he had arrived at a desire to deceive me. This grieved me profoundly. But because of the God-relationship I felt obligated to put up with everything, obligated to refrain from breaking with him, but to hope. And then something different happens, then the situation is reversed in such a strange manner that he has rlly come to deceive himself. For basically the public took my side and now will presumably continue doing so, increasingly forcing him to acknowledge that he is rlly just a reviewer, and that the fact that his starting point was untrue means that it has this power over him. This is extremely simple, and yet to him it could perhaps come to look as if I had a head full of intrigue that had planned an enormous stratagem. Strange! Ah, but it is nonetheless true that one cannot deceive a simple person.

5

10

15

20

25

30

309

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 83–84 83

5

10

84 15

20

25

30

310 35

40

•

1850

Christianity―The Human. How far Xnty is from relating straightforwardly to being a hum. being in such a way that only a little eloquence would be needed to get people to accept it, can best be seen from the fact that the real proclaimers of Xnty have had to be forced against their will and, simply qua hum. beings, would much rather have been exempted from it. But we are pampered by being brought up in Xnty from childhood. This is how we rlly live: We make our lives as rich in pleasure as possible and then we have the consolation of having Xnty in reserve, but it this not rlly Xnty.

Mynster’s sermon, “Observation on the Fate of Those to Whom the Usual Abilities Are Denied,” is not rlly intended as consolation for people who suffer in this way, but as pleasant reassurance for fortunate people so that they might go home from church armed against the impression of people who suffer in this way. There is some cunning in this. M. believes he cannot entirely ignore those who suffer in this way, about whom the gospel speaks so frequently. So he deals with the issue in a manner that in the final analysis denies that such sufferings are rlly an affliction. He does not speak words of consolation to those who suffer, but to the fortunate he says: Cheer up―the situation is not in fact so terrible, it also has its gentler side: there are cases in which the blind have had a spiritual eye that is all the more perceptive (e.g., Homer comes to mind), and in which the deaf have been profound thinkers. Look, that is preaching! Actually, it is mocking those who suffer. But fortunate people―well, they are happy to have sermons of this sort, which give them complete reassurance so that they can take undisturbed pleasure in enjoying life on the grandest scale―undisturbed by the wretchedness of life: “it is not so awful, it also has its gentler side.” In all, what we have here is a whole field for psychological observation: the artfulness with which human egotism, disguised as compassion, seeks to protect itself against the impression made by life’s wretchedness, in order to keep it from disturbing the gluttony of the lust for life.

315

316

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 84

•

1850

It is a la Goethe. And Mynster has indeed modeled himself on him. But is it in fact Xnty! Is it in fact a sermon about Him, compassion, who sought out sufferers of this sort, putting himself entirely in their place[?] And how often we preachify, speaking of the poor as being so much happier than the rich―and this is done in the guise of compassion. It is presented so movingly: How happily the poor are able to live, free of all the burdens of wealth. Now, is this a discourse designed to provide consolation to the poor? No, it is a turn of phrase that is exceedingly welcome to the rich, because then they do not need to give anything, or anything in particular, to the poor―fundamentally, the poor are happier; poverty has its beautiful side. The rich man goes home from church to his treasure, to which he now clings all the more firmly, edified by the beautiful lecture that spoke the language of compassion. But is it in fact Xnty! Is it in fact a sermon about Him, compassion, who in order to console poverty subjected himself to the same circumstances[?] But just as “the Christian state” rlly recognizes only one type of crime: theft―a frightful, indirect piece of evidence against “the Christian state”―so, too, do the privileged classes also have their priests, who are like coconspirators. They know, you see, how to talk in such a way as not in any way to disturb the enjoyment of life. Such priests thus practice the art of coming as close as possible to the gospel, though in such a way as not to disturb the possession and enjoyment of all earthly goods or the life that occupies itself with their acquisition and possession. If someone were to proclaim the gospel to them free of charge, they would not put up with it. It is important to them that “their priest” possesses more or less the same goods as they themselves possess. His income must correspond more or less to theirs; his rank and position in society must correspond more or less to theirs; his house must correspond more or less to theirs; he must be a knight of more or less the same orders of knighthood: then people think that they have a guarantee that he will take all due consideration in proclaiming the gospel, a guarantee that he is duly discomfited, so that the gospel will be not be discomfiting. The same applies, for that matter, to all classes of society: everyone wants the external circumstances of his priest to correspond more or less to his own external circumstances. One is then assured that he will not go too far. The priest of the bour-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

311 40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 84–85

5

10

•

1850

geoisie may very well fulminate against the luxuries of the elite, etc.―this is even very popular with the bourgeoisie, who lack the means―but each must canonize the living standard of his respective social class. I have heard a priest rant against major ecclesiastical posts; in his view, a priest ought to be paid enough to enable him to live respectably, but not a bit more. And how much money was required for that? Well, it was more or less his own salary, right down to the mark and shilling―and he occupied a post from which he did not expect to be transferred. I have heard a priest rant against clergy being decorated with stars and sashes of various orders―but he believed that he could be a Knight of the Dannebrog without causing offense―naturally, he was himself a knight.

15

85

20

25

30

35

312

40

Lines. (poetic) The present-day proclamation of Xnty. Even if it is not intended to do so, the present-day proclamation of Xnty nonetheless definitively tends not toward bringing Xnty in but, in the very course of its talk, to spirit Xnty away. I do not claim that this means that absolutely no one benefits from proclamation of this sort, by no means. Of course there are 1000 clergy, every one of whom derives a benefit: a living, for some of them a very handsome income. But I do not understand what benefit Xnty has from it or what interest it could have in it. Even if we went further down the beaten path and established 10,000 such livings, I still do not see how it could rlly be of interest to Xnty or what benefit Xnty could derive from it―assuming that it is in fact the case that it is Xnty that is supposed to benefit from having priests and not priests who are supposed to benefit from Xnty. As occasionally happens in everyday life, when an actual author is shouldered aside into poverty, treated as a sort of superfluity, while a group of middlemen, consisting of fiddlers and woodwinds―I mean journalists―establish a little business through writing about this author: it seems to me that Xnty has been shouldered aside in similar fashion while a group of middlemen, fiddlers and woodwinds, establish a business at its expense. Like a river that, higher than any other, plunges down from a cliff, so too, but from oh so much infinitely higher, Xnty

317

318

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 85 1850 •

plunged down in order eternally to save the hum. race: now Xnty has to provide benefits in another way, like the river that drives the greatest number of mill wheels, it drives even more of them, 1000 wheels―every such wheel is a clerical living, the dwelling place of “the priest” who benefits from Xnty. But I hear a scream, a frightful scream, the scream of all the priests in unison, and it is easy to understand how frightful this scream must be, because screaming is of course the priest’s profession, and now 1000 in unison, and it is finally about clerical livings. A frightful scream: [“]So, do you want there to be no instruction in Xnty at all[?”] Reply: Well, the schoolteacher of course instructs children in Xnty. Furthermore. If there is to be truth here, how do the schoolteacher and the priest really differ? The matter is quite simple. Everyone who knows anything about hum. life also knows very well that as children we all have an impression of the sublime―but that it is our misfortune that by the time we have reached the age of 25 we have already learned to laugh at this childhood impression as a piece of fantasy, as something out of place in this world, something a practical man―and what more splendid title is there than [“]a practical man[”?]― merely laughs at. Now, if there is to be any truth in “the priest,” this is where his task lies: to stand as a witness, through his personal existence and through proclamation of the Word, testifying that talk of this sort is the ungodliness of worldliness and that Xnty consists precisely in remaining true to this childhood impression throughout one’s entire life. But then the priest must take care that he himself does not become homogeneous with the whole of worldliness. In Xndom, most peop. live as follows: Naturally, they are Xns as a matter of course―so there is nothing to dwell upon―and then they get busy living. Priests are theology graduates. Naturally, they are Xns as a matter of course; if all of us are Xns, then a theological graduate must undoubtedly be a Xn.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 85 313

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Then a number of years pass, years of expectation during which the graduate waits until it is his turn to begin to seek a position. Then he begins to look. Naturally, he is a Xn as a matter of course; if all of us are Xns, then could it be that an older theological graduate, indeed, someone who is seeking an ecclesiastical call, was not a Xn! Of course not; the only question is whether he should seek a call in a provincial town or in the country, and if so, whether in Jutland or in Zealand, how important a call dare he expect, etc. A laborer is worthy of his hire―certainly. So if someone wants to take it upon himself truly to proclaim Xnty―and there are some people to whom Xnty either was already a matter of infinite importance or to whom it became such precisely by means of his preaching, and these people then say: [“]A man cannot live on air, it is absolutely nothing more than our duty, beyond thanking him, to pay him for his work.[”]―yes, this is proper. But this also differs infinitely from the enormously complex but utterly worldly traffic in the 1000 clerical livings. Whether the theological graduate rlly cares about Xnty and whether the congregation to which he comes rlly cares about Xnty―no questions at all are raised concerning this. After all, the state has made arrangements for these 1000 clerical livings―and now indeed a living has just become vacant for which the theologian can have hopes. When it is a matter of physical necessities that simply announce their presence in straightforward fashion, it may perhaps be proper that the city, e.g., arranges for 50 bakeries, but Xnty has absolutely no interest in having 1000 clerical livings arranged―its interest is that Xnty be proclaimed truthfully. The God in Heaven who concerns himself with sparrows, the God in Heaven who has expressed in no uncertain terms that he takes an interest in Xnty, a cause that indeed is his cause: he will certainly see to it that true proclamation finds wages enough to live. Let Xnty become very valuable to you, then venture to believe in this God in Heaven―and then proclaim Xnty: do not be ashamed, if need be, to say

•

1850

319

[a]

Oh, do not believe that what Xt and the apostles and all the witnesses to the truth have sanctified and made into the highest dignity is beneath your dignity, but strive to understand that what is confusing things is the ungodly, worldly dignity that has been brought into the world by a worldly clergy.

1

5

320

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 85–87

•

1850

straightforwardly that you cannot live on nothing―it is a human need concerning which you need not be ashamed. But shame on you for being in kinship with all this worldly traffic that has seized hold of Xnty with its coarse, worldly hands and transformed it into 1000 livings; shame on you for accepting the hand that worldliness wants to extend to you.

Judaism―Christianity. Even for Luther, how Jewish religiosity and Christian religiosity differ remains unsettled. Jewish religiosity relates to this life, has promise for this life―Christian religiosity is essentially a promise for the next life, because Christianity is rlly suffering truth. In one and the same sermon (the sermon on the gospel for the first day of Pentecost)― indeed, separated by only a couple of sentences―Luther presents the Xn “as a man of God, a pers. for whose sake God spares the country and the people” and that the world must regard the Christian as [“]a bird of ill omen who brings corruption and damnation upon the country and the people.” And indeed Luther also speaks this way in other passages, where he says that a storm immediately arises wherever there is a true Xn and true Xn confession: “when Xt goes on board the boat, a storm will immediately arise”―so the Xn cannot exactly be welcome in the world “which lived in peace and quiet until that pers. came along and disturbed everything,” as it also says in one of Luther’s sermons.

Jewish Religiosity―Christian Religiosity. Of all religiosity, Jewish religiosity comes closest to simply being a hum. being. Its formula: Stay close to God, then things will go well for one here in the world. Christian religiosity is much, much too high for us. So it is certainly true that Xnty has proclaimed grace as the essential thing, but this, again, has been taken entirely in vain.

314

5

86

10

15

20

25

87

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 88

•

1850

315

88

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

About Myself. If only I could really impress this upon my contemporaries. I am not a hum. being who, possessing all the ordinary hum. prerequisites for leading a humanly happy life, then, through having read Holy Scripture, chose to suffer for the truth. Oh, far from it. I certainly believe that this can be done, indeed, that it is actlly required in the N.T. But nevertheless it was much too high for me. And in any case, I have rlly been brought up in a rather toned-down Xnty. If that [voluntarily choosing to suffer for the truth] had been the case with me, I would not have dared venture in that way; I would have feared coming too close to Xt. Then, with a joyful spirit and with gratitude to God, I would have seized the happy, smiling life offered to me, and for the rest I would have relied upon grace, which of course is something we all must do. But my situation is as different from that as can be. Ah, how my soul was filled with a yearning, especially in the days of my youth, to be a hum. being like others so that I could enjoy life. But frightful sufferings placed me outside the universal hum. sphere. I am not one of those profoundly religious types, in that sense [of having voluntarily chosen to suffer]. From my earliest days I have been a man under compulsion. Through all these torments occasioned by what was denied me, my task became clear to me for the first time and thus it bestowed upon me an indescribable satisfaction, for which I can never sufficiently thank God. I have often thought of my life in terms of a metaphor. Assume that somewhere or other there lived a mighty prince―and somewhere else there lived an artist who was capable of producing works of very great interest to this prince. Then I imagine that he had this artist taken captive and imprisoned. Then he said to him: [“]You are to have the best of everything here with me, but every day you are to work for a certain period of time until you are finished.[”] Thus, it has seemed to me as if Governance had caught hold of me and said to me: [“]You are to direct attention to Xnty; you have the prerequisites for doing this, and you are to have whatever else you need in addition. For the rest, you will be permitted to take whatever joy you can in life, you may have a certain number of hours of leisure every day and also make jokes and amuse yourself. But you are to work diligently every day. You shall also find an indescribable bliss through your

321

322

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 88–89

•

1850

work―but you are nonetheless a captive, and in many a weak moment it will in fact seem to you that you would rather be free. This will not help you, however: You shall. Be careful to do it with a good will, make sure you are grateful for the grace that is shown you, then in your bliss you will forget all your suffering, which is the bond with which I hold you. But if you will not, then you will be compelled.[”] I have not been able to understand my life in any other way. Had I been a happy person who had freely chosen Xnty, my situation would have been entirely different. One of the consequences of this is that I constantly say that I am without authority. Xnty has disappeared from the world to such an extent that what must be done first and foremost is to secure a reliable understanding of what it is. So this has been my task.

Prudence―The Good. Prudence also prevents a pers. from doing the good in this way. We all know that the good pays very poorly in this world, so that wanting to do it looks like stupidity. This is something I have often pointed out. But here is a new form. If it is true that the good pays very poorly in this world (something of which we all are highly aware), why, then, do I do it? It must certainly be because I ought to do it. But of course it is very “stupid” to express so emphatically that there is something one ought to do. A person is an adult, a man, a father, an intelligent man―and then is he supposed to have a relationship with Our Lord that is more or less like the relationship of a little boy to his parents: he simply shall and that is that. That would of course be ridiculous. The priest can declaim something about this on Sunday―but it does not actually admit of being realized. If someone wanted to proclaim Xnty because he ought, it would of course be enormously stupid and ridiculous for him to betray the fact that he was so afraid of God that he did it simply and solely because he should do it. But if it is someone’s living, perhaps a good and lucrative living―well, then, proclaiming Xnty is something serious, there is nothing stupid or ridiculous about it.

316 5

10

15

89

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 89–90

5

317

10

•

1850

Oh, infinite depth, oh, appalling bounty of fraud and cunning and deceit, conscious or unconscious, continued from generation to generation, practiced by these thousands upon thousands, established through practice―and then one poor, individual hum. being, a sickly person whose life hangs by a thread and who almost dies every day, sometimes every hour, an anxious and troubled conscience―and he is, as it were, ordered to take command against all this. It is indeed like a fairy tale; indeed, it is almost like a fairy tale in which the cruel stepmother thinks up one or another entirely impossible task in order to torment the stepchild―except that here it is the God of love, and it is out of love that he grants me all this.

90

About Myself.

15

Confounded consequence of the fact that thousands upon thousands, who understand nothing, are supposed to pass judgment, guided by individuals who do not understand anything either―for, after all, I am truly the only person who rlly possesses the categories that are relevant to my cause. They continually turn my situation around: they explain that I broke with the vulgarity of the mob because I was an aristocrat who haughtily wanted to demonstrate his disdain for peop. What nonsense. It could never occur to an aristocrat to take such a step; such an action is simply unaristocratic. I acted precisely because I was aware that I was anything but an aristocrat, aware that my life had expressed this fact, aware that in my melancholia and religiosity I had at least been aware of what it is to love “the neighbor.” But now, because people assumed that I acted as an aristocrat, they also expected that I would continue to act like an aristocrat: travel abroad or withdraw completely in elite arrogance. Here it comes again: what occupies me is Xnty; and the common man has scarcely anyone who loves him more sincerely than I do. But this, which is so simply Christian―it has become something utterly alien in Xndom!―where all of us are Xns.

20

25

30

35

323

324

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 91–92

•

1850

Lines by the “Prudent Person.” The first time is always the most expensive. The first time one buys spinach even its weight in gold is hardly enough; later in the summer one can buy almost all too much for 2 shillings. It is the same with Xnty. Thus a prudent person is not so crazy as to bid on Xnty at its first appearance. No, but around 1800 years later it will have properly fallen in price to the point that prudence even advises bidding on it. This even holds true in connection with a genius. The first time, prudence refrains―as early as the second and third times, there may be talk of bidding, depending on how important a genius it is, for if it is a very important genius, one must wait until the 6th or 7th time. You see, this is prudence. And, precisely the way in which one proves the truth of Xnty nowadays― by the fact that it is accepted by reasonable and prudent people―precisely this is proof that Xnty no longer exists.

My Home. When one lives alone, as I do, one is all the more thrown back on one’s home, for there, at any rate, I can be comfortable. And the way things are in my home, nowadays! Last summer, when I was at the tanner’s place, I suffered indescribably from the stench. I did not dare risk spending another summer there, and furthermore the whole thing was too expensive for me. Where I now live, in the afternoons I suffer so much from reflected sunlight that I feared at first that I might go blind. And now the worries about Strube. That this pers. upon whom I depended as on no one else, the man I inherited from my father, have known for twenty years, whom I have regarded as one of those healthy, strong, powerful workers―that he should then, precisely during the time he was at my

91

5

318 10

15

20

92

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 92–93

5

10

15

319

20

25

30

93

35

40

place, become unbalanced, that he should have to be admitted to the hospital, that he wants to reform the whole world, and the like. If a person works on intellectual matters on the scale that I do, one wants one’s associates to be as I had imagined Strube to be. And now all these provisions to be made for him, the sight of him suffering despite some success in calming him down; the concern that it might recur and come to stay, and then, because it is in my house, become a sensational event upon which the newspapers would seize.a And now from another quarter. Not long ago (when I was still living at the tanner’s) I happened to come home one day, and someone must have been in my desk and in one of my chests, the mahogany one. It is possible, though it is almost unthinkable, that I myself forgot to close it when I went out, but all the same it is extremely unpleasant. This sort of thing can make a home unpleasant, even if one has the most reliable household, as I have. It was extremely unpleasant for me for Anders’s sake, Anders, with whom I have been especially pleased because And when one comes home to all this and is tired, often also unpleasantly agitated by the coarseness to which I am exposed every day: oh, to proclaim Xnty in this way is something other than being a priest. And then, that I can no longer afford to produce literary work―because when I produce I forget everything.

About Myself, Personally. I see only all too clearly how each one of the people to whom I relate qua author rlly deceives me. But I cannot say it to him; in such matters I am always restrained by a modesty that enjoins silence; it seems to me that it is as if I wanted to make myself better than him, alas, I, a penitent. Furthermore, it also seems to me that it is as if I sometimes do

•

1850

a

325

, while on the other hand I have to fear that if I now let him go, it would have too strong an effect on him, and God knows, he remains, unchanged, the most good-natured pers. I have known, or one of the most good-natured, and solicitude itself with respect to me; but at that time I did see how heated he could be and how obstinate.

1

5

10

326

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 93–95

•

1850

them an injustice by using too great a criterion. But good Lord, is there not one criterion for everyone; or are there some people of the sort who are obligated to live up to a criterion that is so great that it is eo ipso given that they will be deceived by everyone with whom they come into contact, because according to the greater criterion, even when these others act honestly, they are in fact deceiving[?] When I speak with each one of them individually about one of the others, about how there could be deception there, he understands me―but he surely believes that I do not see that he himself is also deceiving me.

R. Nielsen―and Me. I am certainly no Socrates, Nielsen no Plato, but the relationship might nonetheless be analogous. Now, take Plato! No doubt, the great preponderance of ideas is of course from Plato himself, but in order to keep the point of departure unsullied, he did not hesitate to attribute everything to Socrates; he did not become weary at the possibility that people might get tired of it always being Socrates, Socrates. Ah, but Nielsen took the ideas and concealed their source; finally, he revealed his source, but concealed the scale on which he had taken things from it, item that I had privately gone to great lengths to familiarize him with my cause. I have done nothing, but have left everything in the hands of Governance.

About Myself. If, next to one of the booths on Deer Park Hill, where the shouts of the barkers and blasts from trumpets resound incessantly, there lived a nymph who had only a spirit voice: that is how I live. Nonetheless, it shall be heard long after silence has fallen upon all these robustly sensate fellows in clerical gowns who provide sensory satisfaction to the congregation by marrying 7 times and are busily engaged in worldly activities, while in addition shouting or declaiming Xnty once a week. 4 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

5

10

94

320

20

25

95

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 96–97

96

5

10

15

321

20

25

30

97 35

•

1850

The Exertion. Ah, when everyone is a Xn and everyone, everyone who proclaims Xnty proclaims that it consists of making life as easy and as rich in pleasures as possible, and then in addition to assume that God is gracious, that God wants you to be happy and satisfied―indeed, that wanting to make life somewhat more strenuous is tempting God: how burdensome it is, then, to make life more difficult for oneself, almost as if one were getting involved with being meritorious. But, you, my God and Father, what then is Xnty[?] I am supposed to make my life easy for myself, be happy and contented. Thus, where there is danger, there truly I am not to go, God will surely not have it―where truth suffers, from there truly I am to stay away, for God wants me to have an easy life―so, if a nation is undergoing moral disintegration, if the existence of Xnty becomes an illusion, a hallucination, I am truly supposed to remain silent, this is God’s will. Ah, ungodly worldliness, which has taken Xnty in vain. No. I am supposed to suffer for the truth―when I see it suffer along my way, to suffer, even if it were unto death, but feel with infinite profundity, all the same, that I am saved by grace. And I am supposed to rejoice, always rejoice―“in God”―that is something a suffering witness to the truth knows best how to interpret. But woe to you who have taken Xnty in vain, for having done injury in this way, for causing a person so much trouble that he could have been spared had you not taken it upon yourselves to explain what Xnty is―and now his flesh and blood approve of your explanation.

How much Peter endured during the 3 days Xt was dead! To be separated from Xt like that, after having denied him. Dreadful. And yet Peter was not repudiated, but was forgiven and became the apostle he was. You see, this is indescribably lenient compared with Jehovah’s relation to Moses, who did not enter the Promised Land simply because he doubted.

327

328

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 97–99

•

1850

Ah, infinite leniency, of which I am almost fearful lest it enchant me into taking it in vain. This is almost what worries me most about Xnty: its leniency― I become so anxious that I might take it in vain. 5

The Judgment upon Xndom. If it were possible to defend the claim that nowadays Xnty was no longer embattled, that inasmuch as we are all Xns, we could no longer persecute one another, etc., but take life in straightforward fashion, not inversely―if this were so, a sign of this would be that if Xt came again, he would not be put to death. And yet in Xndom it is in fact commonly remarked that this is what would happen to him. If Xnty were a doctrine, this might also be possible. It could not happen to Plato, for example, if he were to come a second time and had been put to death the first time. But Xnty is no doctrine; it is an existence, an existing. Christianity is not the doctrine about denying oneself, about this being the right thing to do for 3 reasons, but is: to deny oneself. And because Christ would again instantly express self-denial absolutely, death would be certain.

Imagine the lovely church―the festive gathering―the young women with almost childlike piety―etc. etc.―now the organ stops playing, the speaker steps forward. He speaks enthusiastically of self-denial; he is moved, actually moved (this sort of thing also happens to “the poet,” the true poet); he moves everyone; he says it and he believes it (as the true poet also does; this is precisely the condition for the poem’s truth): that even if everything were required of him, he would be willing (perhaps prior to this we have sung hymn 595 in the Evangelical Hymnal) to sacrifice everything―and everyone is blessedly moved. Ah, my friend, my friend, do it, do it in reality―and everything is changed: you no longer enchant anyone, but everyone flees from you; you only make the girls anxious, and the men loathe you;

98

10

322 15

20

99 25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 99–101

•

1850

you inspire no one; you are scarcely permitted to climb into the pulpit―in Xndom, where all are Xns and that speech is admired, that poet’s speech.

100

10

15

About Myself. Christianity is rlly as good as abolished, as it were. But first a poet’s heart must break, or a poet must stand in the way in such a manner as to block the way for all illusions. This is the stopping; and in our petty circumstances, it is my task. This poet loves the ideal; he differs from a poet in the usual sense in that he is ethically attentive to the fact that the task is not to poetize the ideal but to resemble it. But this is precisely what he despairs over, as well as over the pain he must bring to people when this gets situated in actuality. But, he is scrupulous and exacting as no one else is―and as only unhappy love is (and thus his life is of course an unhappy love affair in relation to the ideal)―with respect to all the illusions, which he discovers and destroys on the grandest scale.

323 20

101

25

30

35

Luther. This is where we really go to begin again: Luther. Coupling worldliness and religiousness together was done a little too quickly. Luther may have been right concerning himself: he certainly possessed the inner truth to dare to venture doing opposite things and yet be quite free in doing them: married and yet as if not married, within worldliness and yet as if alien to it despite partaking of everything, etc. Ah, but it was dangerous simply to teach this in straightforward fashion, because it made things altogether too easy for the whole of worldliness, which is satisfied with providing mere assurances and thus remains worldliness pure and simple. Truly, how many are there in each generation of whom it is truly the case that despite owning all earthly goods, they own them in such a way that they nonetheless do not possess them, are will-

329

330

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 101–103

•

1850

ing to surrender them, are not at all attached to them, would gladly let go of them[?] Oh, dangerous spirituality. It is so much simpler to say, I am afraid of myself, afraid that it could all be my own self-deception, so I would rather renounce them. Luther himself, incidentally, was greatly tried in external struggles, was not entirely in conformity with worldliness, and was kept in check by the enormous offense that was awakened by the step he took in marrying. Ah, but now all checks have disappeared! Luther’s true successor would come to precisely the opposite result of Luther, because L. came after fantastical exaggerations in the direction of asceticism, whereas he would come after the frightful deception to which Lutheranism gave birth.

5

10

15

The Good Books. A priest sits and studies the writings of these devout, noble souls, and he learns them by heart―and declaims. If I were in charge, it is precisely books of this sort that would be burned, for they may certainly plunder the bad ones. But this wretched thievery: that something that another person learned in enormous torment, in mortal danger, in affliction and anxiety―is now declaimed by such a scoundrel, who does not bear the slightest resemblance to that sort of person.

102

20

324 25 1

[a]

see pp. 86, 87

The Great Supper. One could ask, by what right does the inviter have those who were invited put to death because they did not come; this is indeed a rather peculiar sort of invitation. As far as we ourselves are concerned, we must say that we honestly deserve it because we of course promised to come when we were baptized. If one does not wish to emphasize this point, then the answer is that the inviter is God, who in fact has proprietary rights over us human beings.

103

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 104–105 104

5

10

15

20

25

•

1850

Spirituality―And Spirituality. People accuse the Middle Ages of overwrought spirituality for having taken seriously the idea of giving up the world―perhaps. But is it not a much greater sort of spirituality to come into possession of spirituality, to expend a great deal of time acquiring and preserving it, and then to believe oneself to be so spiritual that deep down one is infinitely elevated above all this[?] The Middle Ages had anxiety and said, [”]I dare not trust myself―therefore I do not want to have posts of honor and dignity.[”] Nowadays we are more spiritual; we aspire to such things, we arrange our entire lives around them―but deep down we are so spiritual that we are elevated above all such things as though above mere child’s play―whether we go about clothed in rags or in velvet with stars and sashes, it is all the same to us―though we do in fact prefer to go about in velvet with stars and sashes. But then this bespangled person says: I can assure you that deep down I, etc., and if it were required of me―and he gets to be 70 years old in a world he himself calls wretched and corrupt―but he encountered no summons, it was not required of him. Yes, truly, it was not required of him, for no one came to compel him, because he used all his cunning to avoid every danger, he used all his cunning to ally himself with whomever held power at the moment― but if it were required, etc. This is more or less making a fool of God; it is like when a child plays the game of hide and seek so that no one shall find him. Aloud a person says, If it were required of me, etc.―and then quite softly he says, Just see if Satan himself can get hold of me, that is how cleverly I shall conceal myself.

325

105 30

35

Judaism―Xnty It makes an infinite difference, after all, whether I assume that the mark that I am the pious person whom God loves is that everything goes well for me, that I am in possession of worldly goods, and the like (this is Judaism), or that the mark is precisely the fact that I am a sufferer, that I always face adversities and difficulties (God’s fatherly solicitude in order that I remain vigilant), and finally suffer the opposition of the world because I remain with God and confess Xt (this is Xnty).

331

JOURNAL NB19

JOURNAL NB19 Translated by Joel D. S. Rasmussen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse and K. Brian Söderquist

Text source Journal NB19 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Anne Mette Hansen, and Finn Gredal Jensen

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 1

329

1

NB19. June 9, 1850.

•

1850

335

336

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 2

•

1850

330

My concern with respect to the publication of the writings that are complete My boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

p. 52. p. 54.

2

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 3

•

1850

331

3

Concerning texts for Friday Sermons see the blank sheet preceding Journal NB14 Theme for a Friday Discourse Journal NB17 p. 30.

337

338

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 4–5

•

1850

332

Light―To Lighten.

1

a

rocking,

Rigor lightens decision (as one says: I will lighten your load); from rigor the decision is lightest, light as the bird that takes off from the swinging branch which,a assists. (This thought was doubtless expressed in an initial draft of the three discourses on “The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air” in the opening of the first. Or it may be found recorded some other place, I don’t know where, for which reason I record it again.)

The Difference between Prof. Martensen and Me. Prof. M.’s entire life and also his work as an author indirectly show signs that right from the beginning he has labored under this notion: that it is naturally self-evident that he is Xn. He was raised (and strictly even) in Xnty, baptized early, and later confirmed: it is self-evident, then, that he is Christian. Then he became a student; chose to study theology―naturally it is self-evident that he was Xn. It was not that he chose to become Xn―no, that was obviously given―he chose between alternative courses of study and chose theology. Became a graduate. He has perhaps considered whether he should pursue the practical or theoretical path, become priest or professor. He became professor―naturally, that he is Xn is self-evident. Then he studied, and fixed his gaze upon all kinds of magnificent scholarly problems―a most serious man such as he was, he talks incessantly about seriousness and more seriousness. It’s otherwise with me. I was very strictly raised in Xnty; but its effects upon me were such that I at one point in my life understood that this being Xn was something imaginary, but the decision to be-

4

5

10

5 15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 5–7

333

5

10

15

20

6

25

30

7 35

•

1850

339

come Xn was for me so weighty that I then invested my personal existence in Xnty, something which was already intimated by the fact that at an earlier time I had rlly been offended by it. I then occupied myself purely personally with this question. In everything I considered, I also thought: if this is Xnty, can you then seriously decide for yourself to become Xn[?] Or, if this is Xnty, does it not disturb you too much to be Xn[?] But on the basis of this imagined notion, I would with natural readiness to be Xn either actually become Xn, or straightforwardly break with it. That is why I have been so very much occupied with getting it firmly established what Xnty is, not for the sake of the doctrine, but for my sake, so I could get it decided whether I would be Xn. This is my life and my work as an author. I am not a serious man, at least not in the sense that I write systems, organize the doctrine of Xnty―while naturally it is self-evident that I am Xn.

What infinite confidence Martensen has! He talks incessantly about great matters: about the entire Church, the apostolic age, the dogmatics of the first three centuries, medieval dogmatics, the dogmatics of the Reformation period, the entire succession of famous doctors of the Church―and Christ says: I wonder whether faith will be found on earth upon my return. Such matters do not occupy Martensen―he is objective.

[a]

In Information on Dogmatics M. complains that Stilling addresses the issue with “unwashed hands,” which is why one cannot become involved with him. From the Christian point of view such matters should not be disturbing, since obviously Xt himself (who, in parenthesi noted, was no elegant court

[a]

39 in parenthesi] Latin, parenthetically.

Martensen

Martensen’s Information on Dogmatics.

1

340

1

5

[b]

for to crucify the truth is presumably of no significance, the important thing is whether one does it with washed hands or―O horror!―with unwashed hands.

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 7–8

•

1850

preacher who in stately fashion brings Xnty back to external elegance) says: whether or not one eats with unwashed hands is of no significance. And how natural it is, then, that Xt judged thusly, he who was more strongly concerned with the very opposite, that, e.g., a Lady Macbeth can wash her hands from morning until night, use an ocean to wash them― and yet they do not become clean, or that Pilate of course also washed his hands, presumably so as not to crucify the truth―with “unwashed hands.”

The Parable of the Lost Sheep. This parable surely expresses in the strongest terms that the hum. being has nothing at all to contribute toward his own salvation: the shepherd takes the sheep, lays it across his shoulders, carries it, etc.―the sheep has only to lie perfectly still. Oh, but this is of course only one moment. If the sheep does not die in the same instant then it shall indeed have to strive again. And is it not then infinitely difficult to be able to lie so perfectly still that no new guilt arises, or that anxiety over the old guilt does not once again get the upper hand, etc. Xnty is mildness in severity. Yet since severity is thus the dialectical moment, hum. beings have completely abolished it and pretended that Xnty is mildness. It is the monstrous danger in everything that has a dialectical moment that surely ought to be sublated, transformed into its opposite (severity into mildness), that we make the matter all too easy by turning the dialectical into something about which we at most give assurances, that in our innermost we, etc. The greatest deception and cunning in the realm of the spirit is related to devious practices concerning such a dialectical element that, because it ought to be sublated, is then done all too easily, whereby the second thesis (mildness here) becomes untruth.

334 5

10

8

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 9–11

335

9

5

10

15

20

10

30

11

35

Christianity’s Consolation―To Die Away from the World. Christianity is consolation and mildness, so it is said. Good. But one demand Xnty nevertheless makes is that a hum. being shall die away from the world. See, here we have it again. How many are there in each generation who would retain a suffering for which they sought consolation, if they first endured all the sufferings lying within the compass of dying away from the world. For here lie rlly almost all hum. anxieties. There is only one sorrow more―that over one’s sin―and how many have that, especially in the specific sense of the term. If then one wishes to say that it is a consolation that Xnty wants to help an individual to die away from the world―but, how many are there indeed who really desire it, such that they in truth find it consoling to be helped to it. No, Xnty rlly exists no more. The coiled spring― and which coiled spring? the absolute itself―has long since been slackened, and the whole thing has become nonsense.

Sadness. Oh, final consolation, to have only the consolation of consoling others. Oh sadness, when that which one calls consolation and by which one is oneself consoled, appears to others so terrible that they above all decline that sort of consolation, which seems to them the worst of all plagues.

My Category. What I rlly represent is: the obstruction, which puts an end to the reflections continuing from

•

1850

341

342

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 11–12

•

1850

generation to generation and asserts Christian qualities.―I am supported in being able to do this, for I was myself “halted” very early in life, placed outside the universally hum. in unspeakable agonies, assigned solely to the relationship to God. Although standing in the middle of actuality on a scale unmatched by anyone else here at home (for I have in some measure reached “actuality”), in yet another sense I have lived as though I were in a world of my own. I have never doubted the rightness of my cause and its significance―doubted, no, I am as far as possible from that; I have had but one expression: that I am never able to thank God enough for what has been granted to me, so infinitely much more than I had expected or could have dared expect, and I have longed for eternity in order to thank God unceasingly. A lovely girl, my beloved―her name will go down in history with me―was to some degree squandered on me, so that through new sufferings (alas, it was a religious collision of a special sort) I might become what I became. In a certain sense I, again, was squandered for the cause of Christianity; in a certain sense, for humanly speaking, I have truly not been happy―Oh, but still I can never thank God enough for the indescribable good he has done for me, so infinitely much more than I had expected. Would anyone ask whether there was something I think could have happened differently, and that would then have been better? Oh, foolish question: no. There were a few things I think could have happened differently so that I then could have been happier, humanly speaking―Oh, but that it therefore would have been better, no, no. And in indescribably blissful wonder I also understand in retrospect more and more how that which happened was the only thing, the only right thing.

How the N.T. Wants Only to Be Read Captivatingly. The fundamental confusion in Christianity, as I have said often enough, is that it has been converted into doctrine. In relation to a doctrine one must first and foremost see synoptically in order to become familiar with the whole thing. With the N.T. it is just the opposite. It relates solely to the ethical, and therefore wants you to begin quite simply by taking a single point―but then see to it that you do it.

336 5

10

15

20

25

30

12

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 12

5

337

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

Therefore, when an individual becomes conceited by wanting to understand the whole thing first etc., and pretends that this is love of the truth and not some cunning that wants to be free from actually doing it, then one can take these steps (and in case it is oneself who is the party concerned, then one should also behave in the following way toward oneself): take one or another of the passages in the N.T. that contain a demand for self-denial and renunciation―words that are always as simple as possible to understand but so difficult to execute―and now say to him: why do you not act according to these words which, after all, are so easy to understand―then one sees the cunning. Ethically the matter is never about all this understanding and comprehending, but rather about doing what one understands― and that which a hum. being rlly ought to do is always easy to understand. But this is also precisely what hum. cunning always pushes aside―in order to go into the profundity of the matter, while adding that obviously one cannot act upon something one has not understood. Yes, indeed, and that is also why God has always arranged things such that whatever ought to be done is so easy to understand that the stupidest person can understand it right away. What is easier to understand than: give your fortune to the poor―but there are other difficulties here. What is easier to understand than all the demands tending toward self-denial and renunciation[?] But we do not at all wish to hear such things mentioned. On the contrary, it has gotten turned around, as though we were to act according to the profundity. Were that the case then God would truly be a mediocre partner of a lawgiver who―presumably in order to experience the joy of not having his laws obeyed―made his laws so deep and profound that hum. beings had to devote their lifetimes to interpreting them―and thus they were legally justified because they did not have to comply with them, nor even indeed to make a start―for even at the final moment it would not have become clear to them what was required. “But, then, is it not of absolute importance first of all to understand?” No, ethically the important thing is that you do what is so infinitely easy to understand that you understand it right away, but which your flesh and blood want to prevent you from doing.

343

344

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 13–14

•

1850

The Pharisee―And the Tax Collector.

1

a

by contrast

In his sermon on this, Luther rightly points out that the Pharisee’s guilt was also that he, since he felt himself superior to the tax collector, gave no thought at all to helping him toward salvation, but was contented with feeling superior, and thus used the tax collector, if I may say so, to illustratea his own virtue and piety.

It is also remarkable that the gospel puts a purely Christian prayer in the mouth of the tax collector, and thereby of course rlly introduces Christianity prior to Christianity. For this reason Luther also holds the opinion, in the same sermon, that one must suppose that the tax collector has heard Xnty’s proclamation. Thus, the parable is not showing differences within Judaism, but is showing this difference: Judaism―Xnty.

Contemporaneity with Xt―Dying Away. Let us suppose someone said: What impels me to Christ and binds me to him is not even so much the consciousness of sin as it is what Peter also says: To whom shall we go; I assume that the relationship to God, the salvation hereafter, is conditional on Xt, which is why I hold fast to him. Fine. But think now of contemporaneity. What does Xt express? Xt expresses dying away from the world, living in poverty, in contempt, in persecution. Should you now in the situation of contemporaneity wish to hold fast to him, then you must conform to his existence. For Xt has not lectured on a doctrine about dying away from the world, but is himself existentially the dying away from the world. Now, is eternal salvation really so great a good to you that you consider it the absolute good at this price? It is clear that at this price a good can indeed only be the absolute good. How pedagogically careful Xnty is! It does not speak immediately of all the difficulty, neither of course did Xt in relationship to the disciples. It says: would you like to become eternally blessed? If you answer “Yes,” then Xnty says: well, then embrace Xt, embrace him through and through―but he expresses exactly what is meant by being dead to the world.

13

5

338

10

15

14

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 15–17

15

5

339

10

15

16

20

•

1850

345

My Conception of Xnty. When it is introduced, an immense cry will be raised that it is an exaggeration, that I indeed actually want to abolish Xnty or frighten people away from it etc., etc. To that, this may be answered. When, generation after generation, these thousands and millions have been permitted unchallenged to knock down the price again and again: yes, then the reversal must indeed appear to be a frightful exaggeration, especially since―precisely because the error has persisted for such a long time―it must be taken if possible to a qualitative extreme, so that ultimately the reversal does not also become conformed to the error. But in such a case the mistake truly lies not in the reversal but in the earlier error.

My Opinion is that it is entirely in order that a teacher of Xnty be paid by the learners; but at the same time I also think that in all eternity it is unacceptable to alter Xnty in order to make people the more willing to pay the teacher―for what is then not rlly Xnty. If they would rather have that, fine, but then just let them quit calling it Xnty.

17

The Difference between My Struggle and Earlier Ones.

30

Previously, they contended over one or another doctrine, because one party would not accept the doctrine etc.a My struggle, much more inward, concerns: the how of the doctrine. I say that a person can accept the entire doctrine, but destroy it as he recites it. Here the contention is not, therefore, that about the others not wanting to accept Xnty, but about their wanting to have it in the wrong way. They want, e.g., to have the whole of Xnty―but by virtue of reasons: then it is not Xnty. They want to have the whole of Xnty, but by virtue of speculation:

a

This is the struggle between orthodoxy and heterodoxy.

1

346

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 17–19

•

1850

then it is not Xnty. They want to have the whole of Xnty, but as a doctrine: then it is not Xnty. This struggle is much more inward, and is unlikely to become popular. 5

The Middle Ages―The Modern Age.

1

5

[a]

and then note well that it is nonetheless simply and solely unconditionally by grace that one is saved, quite the same as it is grace that saves someone who only converts on his deathbed.

Herein lay the error and also the vanity of the Middle Ages: running to a monastery, flagellating oneself―and then being admired for it. No, remain where you are―but witness for truth and against untruth, do not busy yourself with all manner of earthly and finite objectives, but work for the truth and the kingdom of God: and you will see, you will soon become unhappy in the world, hum. speaking, scourged in either one or another way―[a] But when one busily fills his time with all kinds of finite pursuits and then in ultimate matters gives an assurance concerning his inwardness etc.: yes, then he immediately conforms with worldliness and does not collide with it. Xnty must make a hum. unhappy, humanly speaking, if this hum. being is earnest about Xnty. It instantly directs his whole mind and effort toward the eternal; he thereby become heterogeneous with all worldliness and must collide. And then, without further ado, dozens are appointed as priests of this doctrine―this doctrine that, hum. speaking, is like a plague to the natural hum. being. Then again, the natural hum. being probably no longer exists―we are of course all Xns.

The Whole of Xnty Has Become a Figure of Speech. How many priests are there, indeed, who dare personally admit that they pray, they personally, that they personally consign their lives to God, praying to God in that connection. No, the priest personally arranges his life like other menfolk, i.e.:

18

10

340

15

20

25

30

19

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 19–20

5

10

341 15

20

25

30

35

according to prudence and probability, and in a deeper sense it never occurs to him that God would intervene directly in his life etc.―but on Sundays he preachifies about how the Xn (in abstracto) prays, about how the one who prays (in abstracto) assigns everything to God. The whole thing has become figures of speech, which people find entirely in order for “the priest” to use on Sundays (just as lawyers and doctors of course also have their own language) but which they would permit neither the priest nor the layman to make personal use of on Mondays―that would of course be laughable. The sensibleness of the age has presumably long, long ago outgrown this childishness―nowadays it is a mannerism used when sermonizing, like the mortician’s manner, etc.

Judgment upon Myself. God knows I have been prodigal―I willingly recognize that and admit my guilt. However, I cannot in fact judge myself entirely as I now understand myself; for I did not originally understand myself in this way. What I state here is not intended to defend myself before God or myself, but is merely historical information. Indescribably unhappy as I felt at having to add, to all my inner torments, a new torment for having made “her” unhappy, I was, as it were, lost in this life―then awoke the enormous productivity, which I embraced with an equally enormous passion. My prodigality therefore has an essential relation to my productivity, which I understood as my only chance and on the other hand as an indescribable mercy from God to give my life such significance. Thus everything was squandered on me in order to keep me in a productive condition. I now un4 in abstracto] Latin, in the abstract.

•

1850

347

348

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20

•

1850

derstand that it would have been more pleasing to God or more truly Christian if on the contrary I had been thrifty as well. But I neither understood it at the time, nor do I even believe that this would have been possible for me. On the other hand, I certainly have related myself to God, prayed to him, every time I needed to resort to a costly diversion, and when I youthfully came to the self-understanding that it was permitted. I prayed to God that I might justifiably amuse myself with such a tour, and I assigned it to him. Thus the years passed by. I continually came to a clearer understanding of how much was granted to me with respect to achievement―and I understood myself such that I dared be extravagant in order to maintain myself in a productive state, hastened in addition by the thought that I would not live long. Besides that, I then had the reassuring thought that I was of course qualified to become a country priest, and that I in many ways desired that. In the year 1848 I received the decisive push in the direction of Xnty. The writings of that period still remain unpublished. It affected me (even despite a misunderstanding with Prof. Nielsen, whom I in the meantime had drawn close, and who has been a humiliation to me, without him quite knowing it) so powerfully that I wanted to move out into the country and express the Christian heterogeneity entirely. At almost the same moment, however, I recognized it as a deception by my imagination, something that overwhelmed my powers, and which I would perhaps come to regret throughout a long life. I remained standing. That first misunderstanding with Nielsen was also smoothed over the very same day, so the idea of such a decisive step was with me scarcely more than a day. I began to be aware, however, that the most recent productivity was so decisive, that it would perhaps place me entirely outside the universal, and that people could possibly also use it to deny me outright an appointment to a clerical living.

5

10

342 15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20

5

10

15

343

20

25

30

35

40

I now had to look on this collision very anxiously, simply because now more than ever I had to think about my livelihood, and since I had now become older than 34 years (which I had always expected would be the age of my death), it could of course be possible that I would grow old. Thus engrossed in myself and cut off from the world, as it were, I had grasped what Xnty rlly is, and now I had to use good sense to determine the extent to which I had strength to carry it out―not understood in the sense that I was to get some advantage from it, no, because it was in fact to God that I had submitted the results of my reflections, in order to avoid possibly being deluded by imagination, and ending up bursting myself open and confusing everything by having willed to do too much. Neither do I deny that there was some hypochondria in this. Still, at the same time, I had set Nielsen to work, and I waited for him. He continually put me off, and said: I would see next time, etc. Nevertheless, I thought I ought to hold off publishing mine, in order to see first what could be counted on from him. This was a lamentable time. I suppose I felt that he rlly did nothing but delay me, not to say betray me (which, although possible, is incorrect, and is simply a consequence of applying my criterion)― and meanwhile precious time passed. Then I had troubles at home (Strube―I also suffered from the stench of the tanner in the warm weather). To keep going I needed to spend considerable money on carriage rides. And while nothing rlly happened, Nielsen went and became sycophantic toward me in private conversation, which did me no good whatever. Then I also thought I should seek an official appointment first, before I published anything―but here again were quite peculiar difficulties, of course, which are bound up with the inner anguish of my life. Yet I believe (and this is my consolation and joy) that all this serves to help me die away from the world, that I might become better suited to serve the

•

1850

[a]

349

My many thoughts on this subject are found in the journals from the time, together with what preoccupied me so much concerning the publication during my life of the writings about myself: concerning whether or not it was contrary to self-denial to speak about myself, since there is an entire side I cannot bring out in this way, whereas viewed from the other side it also seemed it could be a duty both to God (in order to attribute everything to him) and toward my contemporaries for me to say something about myself.

1

5

10

15

350

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20–23

•

1850

religious in a proper religious fashion, and to die away from my poet-impatience and so much else.

The Consolation of Christianity . . . . . Oh, but if you are really one of those who suffer so immeasurably that human sympathy and compassion only know how to defend themselves against you, to ostracize you from society, in brief, if you are one of those in relation to whom hum. compassion transforms into cruelty: yes, then there is Xnty’s consolation. Take heart―oh, praise God in heaven―there was one who sought out just such wretches, healed some of them, but in any case called them all to himself, indeed transformed his entire situation in life to be wholly in likeness to them: oh, God be praised for Xnty. The difficulty in Xnty is rlly to become so miserable that one really needs it―but if you are such a one, then truly it is also a consolation.

21 5

10

344

20

The Consciousness of Sin Binds to Xt. 1

5

10

15

[a]

But what faith indeed! to believe that the one who was under the same sentence, mocked, ridiculed, spat upon, cursed, nailed to a cross: to believe that his words have some significance, that he could be God who gives one a place in paradise, to maintain this faith even when it comes to the point that this crucified one himself cries: my God, My God, why have you forsaken me. (Tersteegen has called attention to this). Oh, they preachify so often that Xnty is direct communication. In

They all abandoned Xt, even the apostle denied him―only the thief on the cross remained faithful to him until the end and at the final moment; but he was of course bound by the consciousness of sin and the situation of death.

God’s Special Upbringing. For a hum. being who is the object of this, it perhaps goes something like this: From his earliest age he is bound to a suffering that is a thorn in the flesh to him, placing him outside the universally

22

25

23 30

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 23–24

5

10

15

20

345

25

30

24

35

human. This prevents him from being able to enjoy life―and forces him into the God-relationship as the only consolation and salvation. It would be futile for him to pray and implore God to take this thorn from him. Perhaps when this hum. being has at long last died away from the world in such a way that the worldly and selfish enjoyment of life has lost its value to him as a godly individual, then perhaps the thorn will also be removed. Human beings are often quite cunning in relation to God; they will gladly pray and beseech him, and then perhaps also thank him―that they got their own way. Incidentally, this situation can also illuminate the forgiveness of sin. That which it continually depends upon is the kind of life to which one wants to return after having received the forgiveness of sins―what the integrum is to which there is a restitutio. Many a person essentially lives a life solely determined by the desire to enjoy life. At the same time there is a guilt that oppresses him. So he will readily pray and plead for the forgiveness of sin― so that when his load is lightened, he can properly enjoy life. But here God may restrain him again. The hum. being cannot truly find rest in the thought that his sin is actually forgiven. The thought continues to pursue him. Then perhaps years go by during which he dies away from the world―and then, then he also perceives that he now has the full forgiveness of sins.

Xt’s Garment I have read in something by an edifying author (Scriver) that there is a legend that says the Vrgn. Mary had knit this garment for him when he was a child, and that it then grew with him as he grew.

18 integrum … restitutio] Latin, allusion to restitutio in integrum: “restored to its original condition,” a term used in Roman law.

•

1850

351

truth, that a man, enduring the insults and curses of everyone, condemned as a criminal, nailed to a cross―when he then says: Believe in me, I am God―God in heaven, is this direct communication!

1

5

352

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 25–26

•

1850

The Difficulty of Christianity.

1

5

a

especially the food for whose preparation heaven and earth were set in motion, so that the fare might be blissful and delicious― when one is famished to that degree.

Truly, the difficulty is not, when absolutely feeling one’s wretchedness, to grasp the consolation of Xnty, that (if I dare say) incomparable exaggeration that God let himself be crucified for my sake in order to save me, and in order to show how he loves me. No, the difficulty is to become so miserable as to want to risk discovering one’s own wretchedness. To be made healthy by the aid of Xnty is not the difficulty; the difficulty is to become truly and thoroughly sick. If you are sick in this way, then Xnty comes to you with incomparable ease, just as it comes with incomparable ease to the starving person to help himself to food.a Even if the entire world were to laugh you down―what does the starving person care about that in comparison with getting something to eat. So, too, with Christianity. If the world bothers you, then you are not absolutely sick. Just imagine that there was a hungry person at whom everyone would laugh in ridicule if he ate the food that was in front of him. Now, perhaps a few hours would still elapse during which he would prefer being hungry to being mocked. But if it ultimately became a matter of death, then he sure enough would choose to eat.

Tersteegen (Auswahl seiner Schriften v. Georg Rapp. Essen 1841.) p. 379, quotes from Psalm 77:3: [“]meine Seele soll sich weigern sich trösten zu laßen.” This is in contrast to being consoled solely by God. Here one could indeed say that this is tempting God, just as in those words in the Letter to the Hebrews where it speaks of those who “would not accept consolation,” that is, human consolation, again in contrast to being consoled solely by God.

31 meine Seele ... zu laßen] German, my soul refuses to be comforted.

25

5

10

15

20

346

26 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 27 27

5

10

15

20

25

30

347

40

Is Hum. Nature, Christianly Understood, a Unity or a Duality? There is currently so much talk about this; and the philosophers naturally know that hum. nature is a unity―and my brother Peter also read a little article on this at the convention; in brief, it is indubitable, something one can appeal to as an axiom, that hum. nature is and must be a unity. When I last spoke with Bishop Mynster he brought the same matter up in connection with R Nielsen, about whom he said, in contrast to Stilling who was criticized only for his tone, “Nielsen I simply cannot understand; he seems to want to make a hum. being into a dual-entity.” To which I responded: Well surely, if it is so, Right Reverend Sir, it is in fact also the doctrine of Xnty, the conflict in every hum. being between the natural pers. and the new pers., a conflict that must in fact continue throughout an entire life. I then developed my conception approximately as follows. The category for the relationship betw. a hum. being and humanness is: the more I think about it, the better I understand it. In the relationship between the hum. being and God the category is: the more I think about the divine, the less I understand it. Two heterogeneous qualities could never become homogenous through continuous relating of themselves to each other―on the contrary the difference, the qualitative difference, the heterogeneity becomes more obvious. All true religiousness is therefore in a sense retrogression, i.e., not straightforward progress. As a child I think I am nearest to God; the older I become, the more I discover that we are infinitely different, the more deeply I feel the distance―and in casu: the less I understand God, i.e.: the more clear it becomes to me how infinitely exalted he is. Therefore: the more I develop in the direction of thinking and understanding and comprehending, the more natural it also becomes for me to then want to comprehend and comprehend. But see, I comprehend the divine all the less (on account of 35 in casu] Latin, in this case.

•

1850

353

354

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 27

•

1850

the relationship betw. the qualities). And every time this happens, it is as though Xnty comes to me and says: Do you then wish to abandon me? To which the believer then responds: Oh, no, certainly not, I want to believe. This is the potentiation of faith: The less I can comprehend, if I nonetheless believe, then the more intensive the faith. But Xndom is vain, it wants to avoid the cross, the humiliation of simply and straightforwardly confessing that one has his life in something one cannot understand. Of course, this is foolish for an adult hum. being, not least in our speculative age, and all the more depending on how speculative one is. So one substitutes profundity and speculation―in order to avoid the cross. And Xndom is indolent, hence its tendency toward unity. The Xn categories that are valid for all of life are made into something transitory, a phase. It begins by being incomprehensible, but then gradually, etc.―that is to say: the natural hum. desire to comprehend is smuggled in, then gets unity into its essence―and complacency. For with the arrival of this unity, the restlessness and the striving and the fear and trembling, which should characterize all of life, go out. Moreover, that duality belongs to hum. nature is already inherent in the fact that God must be an absolute ruler. Consider a domineering hum. being who truly has a notion of the pleasure of ruling. Do you believe he is satisfied with ruling directly? No, for in order to enjoy the pleasure of domination, he establishes a duality in the other hum. being: he transforms himself into someone incomprehensible, and precisely by this repulsion he torments the devotion of adoration out of the other. In the relationship betw. hum. being and hum. being, this is ungodliness. But God cannot do it otherwise. God cannot be the highest superlative of the hum.; he is qualitatively different. Hence, first comes the incomprehensibility, which increases with the development of hum. understanding―and thereby faith, which believes against the understanding, is again potentiated. Finally, there must be Christian unity in the Church, which God wills for the sake of clarity. It ought not be such that the priest says one thing and the professor another; no, the professor ought to say that same thing but more intensively. When the priest proclaims in simple fashion that faith cannot be comprehended, it should not be assumed that this situation is somehow deficient, and that, by contrast, the professor comprehends it, presumably in order that conceited and cheeky noggins, bold souls, should disdain the priest and look to the professor. No, the rela-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

348

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 27–28

5

10

15

20

•

1850

tionship must be this: if you will not be satisfied with the priest, then by going to the professor you shall come to something even more rigorous; for he can comprehend that faith cannot be comprehended; he cannot comprehend anything other than this, but this he can comprehend with such God-fearing power that he can bring to their knees all the insubordinate souls, who want to comprehend, who pretentiously want to negotiate with God on terms other than those of faith, which believes against understanding. See, this makes life strenuous, it is true; but that it is also Xnty, is also true. To make hum. nature into a unity in this life is a tendency toward indolence, even if one indicates an initial stage where the duality, the split, was present. Xnty has never taught that a hum. being in this life could become so perfect that he could rest in such a unity. With this it is as with suffering. Xnly understood, there is no initial stage where there was suffering, and then its cessation already in this life, and now a present state of sheer bliss. No, Christianly, suffering is the perpetual constituent in this life; if suffering disappears entirely, then it is not perfection but apostasy from Christianity, corresponding to the kind of security that is found in the purely worldly hum. being, except that the one who is also an apostate is even more corrupted.

28

Plain Honesty.

25

It is my conviction (and I have never understood Xnty differently) that as rigorous as it is, it is also lenient. It is not given to everyone, and therefore neither is it unconditionally required of everyone, that he in the most rigorous sense must live in poverty and humiliation. But he must be honest, he must frankly confess that such a thing is too high for him, and then rejoice as a child under the more lenient conditions, since ultimately grace is nonetheless the same for everyone. But one must not reverse the relationship, become conceited, and say: to include worldliness is even more perfect. I am as far from considering myself capable of living as an ascetic in the strict sense of the term as I am from ever having seen one single hum. being whom I could believe was capable of doing so. Oh, this alone, that in such a life the most insignificant thing becomes something of infinite importance, that everything, everything, even the least significant, becomes relevant in rela-

30

35

40

355

356

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 28

•

1850

tion to the question of my eternal salvation: oh, this surpasses the understanding. Quite possibly many an ascetic was spiritually conceited; but that is not for me to judge, since I have to confess that his first stage is something I can by no means achieve. Oh, but worldliness has conquered to a such a degree that the classification “the ascetic” is used as a refinement for flattering oneself in one’s sensate enjoyment of life, feeling that from a Christian point of view one is better than the ascetic. So let the nation’s 1000 clergy give us assurances that to live as an ascetic is not the highest, although were it required, they would be willing enough: I confess that whether the ascetic is the highest or not the highest, he nonetheless stands an entire stage higher than where I have my life, and furthermore I certainly do not have the right casually to ascribe spiritual pride to every ascetic―on the contrary, he simply has this additional great danger of feeling his own proximity to this temptation, something that alone would be enough for me not to dare venture such upon such a life, even if I otherwise―which is by no means the case―supposed myself to be so indifferent to flesh and blood that I did dare venture upon such a life. And furthermore, I confess that if I said: If it is required, then I am indeed immediately ready and willing―I confess that if I said this I would be lying in my teeth. Just as my own life hardly resembles an ascetic’s, so have I not in the slightest way demanded such a life of any other hum. being or passed judgment upon a single hum. being for not having done it―I, who only minimally, in accordance with my abilities, have sought to commit myself to a small portion of it, and who in any case have admitted to what I have been mindful of from the start: that I am without authority. I make no proposal in relation to the established order, not a single one. I think that for the sake of the cause it can continue as it stands, except that each individual should make a confession before God and compel oneself to remember it.

349

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 28

5

10

15

350

20

25

30

35

40

But in my opinion, what has demoralized Xndom, especially Protestantism is this: that a clergy that has conformed with worldliness at every point, instead of admitting that from a Christian point of view this is an indulgence, has reversed the relationship, has made this worldliness into something Christianly far higher and truer than actual renunciation, than actually living in poverty and humiliation. The world has seen through this, and therefore the clergy is without influence. And in this I quite agree with the world. I find unbearable this endless nonsense and these assurances that if, and if, then they would gladly give up everything, live unmarried in poverty etc., etc. With me, at any rate, this is now how things are: I admit it, I have neither the strength nor the bravery for such a life. This I say directly, and then additionally I praise Xnty with all the ability granted to me. And yet I have held out as an author proclaiming Xnty at my own expense; but I have had wealth. Among the clergy, as is well known, it is not customary to do anything gratis. The custom is: one seeks first a living (yes, this certainly is not seeking first the kingdom of God)―and then one gives assurances that if, etc. I have not the slightest objection to the first part, I find it entirely in order (entirely in the same sense as I have fared well by having a little wealth) that a man secures himself a living. But I think nobody has the right to say the next part unless he does it himself. Otherwise it so easily becomes braggadocio, which weakens the impression of Xnty. It is not at all dangerous that we should come to know that a clergyman is like the rest of us, a hum. being, no hero; the danger is that he in such an easy way secures for himself a reserved place a la suite, an actual station among heroes, and is also a hero―if it were required. A person can be one thing―and perhaps also a lieutenant in the military reserve if the country were to get into war. But to live out life as a plain and ordinary hum. being, perhaps almost a bourgeois philistine, and also to be a hero [“]if[”]: that will not do. It is meaningless to will also to be the highest; for one must say to such 35 a la suite] French, that properly “à la suite” (military expression), belonging to the army and, despite not seeing active service, claiming that one will serve when needed and is thus entitled to a salary in the meanwhile.

•

1850

357

[a]

One can, being superior in this or that, offer assurances that if it is required he is also willing to be inferior in this or that; this is meaningful, precisely because the fact that one is superior furnishes the guarantee that one can easily be inferior. But when one who is inferior then gives assurances that if required he is also willing to be superior, this is nonsense, since being inferior is no guarantee, and the other is precisely that, quod erat demonstrandum. 13 quod erat demonstrandum] Latin (mathematical expression), that which was to be demonstrated.

1

5

10

358

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 28–29

•

1850

an individual: If it comes so easily to you, then you really ought to do it in earnest.

The Injustice of the Situation toward Me. Humanly speaking, I have correctly and clearly understood my task and what I was capable of doing. The poet in me predominates, but all the same I have depicted and illuminated Christianity. I have never permitted myself to use authority. Now, if those contemporaries with just a moderate love of the truth had been receptive of what I was doing, then everything would have been fine, then everything would have been as pleasant and peaceful as possible. Instead, from beginning to end I have been subjected to treachery that has forced me, or has wanted to force me, beyond my boundary. Initially, I was disproportionally gifted in relation to such a small-scale setting. The treatment I have suffered has developed me even more, such that I just become more and more disproportionate. As Asaph in relation to worldly goods prays that God will give him neither wealth nor poverty but moderation, so am I nearly brought to the point where in despondent moments I could be tempted to say: O God, do not grant me such all-too-extraordinary abilities when I have to live in such a small-scale setting―I could be tempted to say this in sadness, although on the other hand I recognize with deep gratitude that I can never thank God sufficiently for what has been done for me, so infinitely much more than I could or would have dared expect. As it happens, the entire Nielsen-ian diversion against Martensen has been uncomfortable to me, because it so easily contributes again to making me even more disproportionate.

29 5

10

351 15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 30 30

5

10

352 15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

Actual Renunciation―The Important.

From a Christian point of view, it is more important that I deny myself in one respect or another, renounce one pleasure or another, than that I, indulging it, produce the most perfect masterwork of true thought, art, etc., or that I accomplish the most amazing thing, even if this is beneficial. See, this is authent. Xnty. But my life is not so lofty. I have taken childlike delight in many, many a pleasure, and have then been delighted once more when that has helped me find the strength to achieve again something I could understand was true and right, for which I have then thanked God. Oh, but this infinite sobriety, which is rigorous Christianity, is too lofty for me, I can only praise and extol it. This sobriety! For I and those like me, we are all more or less intoxicated in imagination, and involuntarily fashion God somewhat in likeness to that―whereas instead he, the sole blessed one, looks with blessed sobriety, if I dare say so, purely and simply at the ethical, and all this about achievement, about accomplishment, etc., means nothing whatsoever to him, does not move him at all. How many a hum. being is there, really, who could calmly maintain this, so it convinced him to act accordingly: if he, e.g., by living in abundance was actually able to produce a masterwork on a scale that, generation after generation, convinced thousands of the truth, and if he would be unable to do so were he not permitted to live in abundance―how many an individual would there be who was so sober that he understood that the latter is the important thing, that it was more important that he lived frugally and let all masterworks go. And yet so it is before God. But, on the other hand, for me, and surely for most hum. beings, this is how it is: it is as though I should perish if I were only to breathe in this pure air of the ethical. I do not say more; I merely continue to draw attention to it, and locate myself infinitely lower. If only people did not force me into being perfect, which I in no way am. In quiet thought I can sustain this infinite sobriety of the ethical; but acting in my own life I cannot compel myself in this way. Then I become anxious and fearful of it as of the most dreadful pedantry that would suffocate me inhumanly; yes, it seems to me as though God opposes my laboring under the delusion of attempting something so lofty. But I extol it anyway. And it is true

359

360

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 30–32

•

1850

that I, at peace with God as I always strive to be, can be happy in a serene and childlike manner living the way I live. I can say to God in altogether childlike fashion, as I would say to my father (and this comes to me so naturally): May I now have a little free time so I can enjoy myself[?]―and then I do enjoy myself. At other times it can occur to me that since this sobriety is the ethical, it is obviously my obligation, and thus I must be able to be like that. So sometimes I make a strenuous attempt―but I am nearly brought to despair, and must then retreat to my lower ways. Except I continually maintain that the other is the higher, and I define my life in relation to it by making confession about myself.

My Concern with Respect to Publishing the Writings That Are Ready. Although I know that with an almost exaggerated caution it is continually turned in the direction of a movement of inwardness, and never in the direction of a pietistic or ascetic awakening that wants to actualize it externally: nonetheless I constantly fear that such a communication would involve some obligation on my part immediately to express it existentially, which is beyond my powers, nor is it my intention, which is that it shall be used to intensify the need for grace―whereas I, even if I were more spiritual than I am, have an indescribable anxiety about venturing so far out or so high up. But so long as I lead the life I now lead, it could still so easily be misinterpreted, as if I intended to realize such a life. It is for that reason that I was thinking that I should first secure an official appointment or something similar, in order to convey that I do not consider myself better than others. But, again, that has its own specific difficulties, and so the time has passed, and I have suffered indescribably.

My Boundary. 1) There is in me a predominantly poetic element, which I am not spiritual enough to be able to slay, nor even rightly under-

5

10

353

31

15

20

25

30

32

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 32–34

5

10

354 15

20

33 25

•

1850

stand (precisely because this poetic element is present) that it should be God’s will with me; nor am I spiritual enough to live as an ascetic. 2) Then, on the other hand, I know to an exceptional degree what Xnty is, know how to present it, have uncommon abilities in that respect. 3) So with God’s assistance I use these gifts in order to present it, to win hum. beings for it, so that they at least get an impression, become aware. 4) Thus I believe there is one thing more that I will be granted the strength to do, to impress upon people a continuing reminder: just at that point when I have gotten people to accept it, then to remind them gently and kindly, but in truth-loving fashion, veraciously that the reason they now accept it is simply that I am not on any great scale a truly religious person, but something of a poet who has used gentler―though consequently in the highest sense less authentic means―whereas the truly religious person would be disliked and persecuted because he used the absolutely authentic means,[a] ethically actualized everything, instead of confessing to himself and others that, after all, he has a somewhat poetic relation to it.

A Misgiving. So and so many children are baptized every year, so many confirmed, so many become theol. graduates; there are 1000 priests; there are professors of theology, bishops, deans, there are sacristans, sextons, sub-sextons: everything is as it should be―if only Xnty also existed.

30

34

35

The Absoluteness of Christianity. See, this alone is a proof of the divinity of Xnty, quite different from the proof based on the 18 centuries. A hum. being comes to Xt and wants to be his disciple, only he asks that Xt wait a few days while he buries his dead father, and then he will forsake everything and follow him. Xt answers: let the dead bury their dead; you come and follow me. God in

361

[a]

was in truth earnest,

1

362

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 34–35

•

1850

Heaven, to require breaking with everything on this scale―see, this is a proof that one has an absolute conception of one’s cause as the absolute. Truly, no hum. being has ever spoken this way. True enough, the better one’s cause is, the more rigorous he is also in choosing disciples―but next to the absolute break, can anything more beautiful than this be imagined: simply to make the condition of a few days in order to bury a dead father! Never has any hum. being had a cause of the sort that could cause him to think of rejecting such a disciple, when, on the contrary, the filial piety he showed toward the dead father surely must recommend him. But only Xt had the absolute cause. And what sublimity, which again can only be divine: calmly resting in the idea of the absoluteness of one’s cause, to reject such a disciple. Never has any hum. being who has had a cause had such absolute independence with respect to needing another hum. being: this, again, is the absoluteness of the divine. Obviously, however, the cause Xt had has its own specific inner coherence. It was not a cause like any other, needing support to prevail, if possible. No, his cause was precisely to be careful that he did not come to prevail―he could easily prevail. Obviously, then, there is indeed a reason for being rigorous, for otherwise, you see, one could get disciples who help him to prevail. And Xt’s cause was: to make all the arrangements so he could be put to death. Strange cause! Yet here again is the expression for the absolute, which is divine; no hum. being has ever had a cause in this sense. Many a hum. being has lost a cause; but never has a hum. being had a cause whose purpose was that it should be lost, such that the effort was essentially in that direction. Again, it is the superhuman that, entirely heterogeneous with everything hum., relates itself only to itself, does not come to the world in order to get its destiny decided but, eternally resolved within itself regarding what it wills, comes to the world―to be put to death.

5

10

355 15

20

25

30

The Deceit of the Human Heart.

35

Oh, how cunning this heart of a hum. being really is, mine as well as others. A speaker steps forward, and―as we are used to hearing, and I also speak the same way, of course―prays: Lord Jesus Xt, draw me to you completely.

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 35–36

5

10

356 15

20

25

30

36 35

•

1850

God in heaven! That the one who throughout an entire life willed to suffer every agony, and finally an ignominious death, in order to save every hum. being: that there should be, on his part, anything preventing him from willing with the greatest joy to draw me entirely to himself―that would of course be charging him with an almost insane kind of self-contradiction. But then am I talking backward? Oh yes, indeed, and right there is the deceit. It is I whose conception of dying away from the world is so painful that I shrink from it. Instead of confessing in self-accusation: Lord Jesus Xt, forgive me for still being so far behind―instead of that, I speak backward, and pretend as though I were indeed willing enough, but that the problem is something else, presumably that Xt in his blessed sublimity does not have the time or the occasion to help me. “Tear me away from everything that holds me back.” But, my Lord and God, what then is it that holds me back? It is after all only myself; if I had not cunningly and surreptitiously colluded with that which holds me back, then it would be eo ipso certain that Xt would draw me entirely to himself, for of course he does nothing other than will to draw every hum. being to himself. Consequently, I speak backward again. Instead of accusingly judging myself and praying for forgiveness for being so far behind, for allowing so many things to hold me back; I pretend as though I were willing enough, but that there is something else that is holding me back. In this way my prayer becomes almost a reproach to Xt; for truly, if I am in truth unconditionally willing, but there is something else that holds me back, totally against my will―then it appears that Xt does not in fact will to be the Savior after all. Oh, but such is the deceitful human heart: desiring is rlly the maximum we achieve; and thus when this desiring is expressed really ardently, then we think we are extraordinarily advanced.

Nielsen―And Me. The difference is between a cause being served religiously or in any case in the interest of ideality, and being served in a worldly sense, with earthly impatience. And because it was my cause, I suffered greatly in looking at it, because I felt obliged to hope. 18 eo ipso], Latin, by that very fact.

363

364

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 36–37

•

1850

As in a worldly sense one would think that it is lacking in earnestness to serve a cause in such a way that one becomes nothing (even while, ideally, it is precisely earnestness), so too with serving a cause in such a way that one works solely to develop the idea, unconcerned with attacking anyone, fully assured of the correctness of one’s cause. The worldly mind will think that this is not proper earnestness, that earnestness consists in attacking others straightaway, which in the ideal sense is precisely not earnestness (and least of all when additionally there is personal animosity involved), since it is proof of a lack of faith both in the idea and in God. No cause that truly belongs to the idea passes away; its time will come. Were I now to go into the Nielsenesque, then I must really say that even if the direct attack had been appropriate, then it should have been far more energetic and resolute. His conduct does not bear the stamp of a character resting in a faith in the truth of the cause, but rather of one feeling his way forward. Still, the whole matter has turned in such a way that I suppose N. will be developed after all.

5

10

15

357 20

25 1

[a]

Martensen

Martensen. M. has had the opportunity, disputing e concessis, with N. and Stilling, to use the pseudonyms against them, without therefore granting the pseudonyms any particular concessions, but merely showing that there was irregularity in their relationship to the pseudonyms. He did not do this in his Dogmatiske Oplysninger. He preferred to pretend he was superior to the pseudonyms. That was foolish of him. For deep down, people greatly respect the pseudonyms, but envy prevents this from being said. However, just let someone who lays claim to being respected speak contemptuously about them, and then the envy becomes inclined to be honest.

27 e concessis] Latin, properly “ex concessis,” from what has been conceded.

37

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 38–40

38

5

39

15

358 20

25

35

1850

365

The current proclamation of Christianity in Christendom makes roughly the same impression as, e.g., when one reads on a painted board out on the inclined glacis, placed right where a much-visited path over the glacis begins: No One May Walk on the Glacis― Violators Will Be Arrested.

R. Nielsen’s Offense. (His Big Book). Certainly with an idea of the degree to which I have suffered; with an idea of the exceeding significance that the cause I have the honor to serve had: then as a matter of coursea to want to turn everythingb to his own account, to ignore me and attempt to deploy the cause for his own advantage―and that after I had personally coached him for an entire year, and during the time that I was coaching him! The extent of his guilt depends upon what conception he had. For me it was the most painful impression, approaching sorrow, I have had. Such a betrayal right in the heart, and then that it is the man who steps up and pronounces judgment on “mediocrity.”c However, with my idea that for God all things are possible; with such ideals in view, ideals that have always intimated themselves to me―and then, once I had taken him into my God-relationship, I understood it to be my task to remain calm.

30

40

•

Something Dubious Concerning the More Competent Proclamation of Xnty. Almost every one of the eminent personalities in the Church is also, as a rule, a case of someone who has previously been a sinner in the stricter sense.

a

, almost with concealment of his source,

b

1

, all literary accomplishments,

c

while later he himself has often enough confessed to me that he originally understood that the decisive danger for him, the danger of the prima quality, was by no means that of attacking Scharling, Engelstoft, Martensen, etc. (he desired to do this precisely because he felt his superiority and the victorious nature of my standpoint), but that of failing to hold my attention, and therefore he attempted, where possible, to protect himself by making a personal approach to me, even though he certainly has never received any direct promise from me, or anything that could resemble such a thing. But see, again, this entire tactic of his is thus, of course, mediocrity; he evades the decisive danger, selects the danger that rlly is not one―and then plays the hero who judges “mediocrity.”

8 prima] Latin, first.

5

10

15

20

25

366

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 40–42

•

1850

This is precisely what has contributed to giving them the impression of Xnty―in the strictest sense of the term, they needed Xnty. But they have now suppressed this, and instead emphasize the concept of universal human sinfulness. The conditions that Xnty made manifest, when Xt himself proclaimed it, must of course still be typical. But at that time it was in fact tax collectors and sinners (consequently, those whom we call sinners in the stricter sense) who kept company with Xt.

The Category, “Xt, a Friend We Have in Heaven,” Is Sentimental. For his peace and rest and bliss a hum. being requires a God in heaven whom he―O inexpressible bliss!―dares call his father, regarding himself as the child.―Then he needs a savior and reconciler, so that despite his sin he dares believe God wants to be his father.―Then he needs a holy spirit, who strengthens him in the endeavor and witnesses with his spirit. But a friend! Just a friend, pure and simple! Has the Christian, then, grown so old that he is no longer a child, and therefore God is presumably no longer his father? If yes, then it is high time to have a look around for a friend. But if he is a child―a child does not usually have what one properly calls friends. All this about a friend in heaven is a sentimentality that has entirely warped Xnty. Yes, one may call Xt the friend of sinners, for this is the same as savior and reconciler. But just purely and simply to call Xt a friend in heaven is to do away with God the Father and make Xt into something entirely wrong. When we have grown so old that we persuade ourselves that we must be our own Providence, then we must look about for a friend, a friend who cannot rlly help us, but sympathizes with us. And this is how we have finally made Xt into a friend, a friend “on whose breast I can lean my tired head” (as it says in one of Mynster’s sermons).

Wonderful. Jehovah is revealed to Solomon in a dream and permits him to request something from him (1 Kings 3). Solomon requests

5

41

15

359

20

25

30

42

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 42–44

5

43

10

360

15

20

25

30

44

•

1850

367

wisdom. And this pleases God so much that he says, because you did not choose riches, or a long life, or victory over your enemies, but wisdom, thus you shall also receive wisdom such as no other has ever had. Wonderful; for in a certain sense one must of course say that Solomon’s choice showed that he had wisdom.

It is put excellently by Tersteegen (in a sermon am Erscheinungsfeste p. 131 in Rapp’s selections from his writings): the scribes knew enough to say where the Messiah would be born― but they remained quite complacently in Jerusalem, and did not go along to look for him. Alas, similarly in this same way a person can know all about Xnty, but it does not move him. This power that moved heaven and earth―it does not move him at all. On the whole, Tersteegen is incomparable. In him I find true and noble piety and simple wisdom. Alas, and what a difference: the three kings had only a rumor to go on―but it moved them to travel that great long distance. The scribes knew the message a different way entirely; they sat and studied the scripture as professors―but it did not move them. Where, then, was there greater truth―in the three kings who chased after a rumor, or in the scribes who, with all their knowledge, remained sitting[?] Tersteegen did not use the situation in this way. He uses it―and superbly―as the spiritual trial it must have been for the kings that the scribes, who told them the message, themselves remained passively in Jerusalem. “Surely we have been fooled, the kings must have thought”; for it is obviously a suspect self-contradiction that the scribes should really know this and nonetheless remain passive. It is just as suspect as when someone knows the message of Xnty―and his own life expresses the opposite. One is tempted to assume he wants to make a fool of a person― unless one assumes that he is just making a fool of himself.

The Potentiation of Being a Christian. What in our day is called humanity is not what one might call pure and simple humanity, but an enfeebled form of Christianity. 7 am Erscheinungsfeste] German, on the Feast of the Epiphany.

[a]

As it happens, however, in reading an earlier passage in the same sermon I now see that Tersteegen was aware of what I particularly wanted to emphasize.

1

5

368

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 44–47

•

1850

Originally, the situation was this: to accept Christianity from the starting point of “general human consciousness.” Now the situation is: to become a Xn from a starting point which is a Xnty that has already been volatilized. Ergo becoming a Christian is potentiated. Here again one sees what I have developed in Armed Neutrality: the relationship becomes one of casting the entire process of reflection more inwardly, just as when the change happened whereby instead of σοϕοι one got ϕιλοσοϕοι simply because the task had become so enormously much greater.

Tersteegen says somewhere: Jesus arises from the love feast and goes out to―Gethsemane. It is always this way: Gethsemane lies closest to the highest bliss.

5

361

10

45

15

When the situation is: “someone else makes me unhappy and afflicted―and now Christianity is the consolation”―this is not a situation of rigor. No, when it is Xnty itself that makes you unhappy, humanly speaking, for having a relationship with it―and that it then is nonetheless the consolation: then the situation is at its highest.

46

A More Lenient Way to Enter into Xnty.

47

The assurance of an eternal life is bound up with Xt. If, then, the matter of an eternal life becomes absolutely important to a person, he embraces Xnty. No essential change has yet taken place in this hum. being. He continues living in his own categories, except that through his relationship to the eternal he is bound to Xt. But if he subsequently becomes aware that wanting to be involved with Xt in this way means being involved with him completely, then he will be driven by constant dilemmas into actual imitation. Then, surely, little by little the divine sublimity of suffering will stir and move and coax him.

25

9 σοϕοι] Greek, wise ones. ϕιλοσοϕοι] Greek, lovers of wisdom, philosophers.

20

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 47–50

362

5

48

•

1850

Meanwhile, it will always remain a question whether such a relationship to Xnty can stand the test when a crisis that is decisive in the strictest sense sets in, when it becomes clear that religion is not immediately and primarily consolation, but rather that it first and foremost plunges me into sufferings and adversities.

The Sigh of a Struggling One.

20

“Oh, my God, my God; this is beyond my strength; even in relation to the most insignificant matters it seems to me as though you pressed upon me with your entire weight; and constantly so―I barely stir, and immediately it seems to be an enormous guilt, a scandalous sin, certain to have the most dreadful consequences, and I sink under the weight of you. No, I no longer have the strength to bear you.” Answer: Though let me tell you―you are of course making the same mistake made by the man who believed he had gone blind when he had covered up the burning candle.―Or is it you, then, who is supposed to bear God? I thought it was God who, in infinite love, wants to bear you, and bear you just as lightly, yes, just as lightly as he certainly is heavy, if you were to bear him.

49

My Operation in Relation to Christianity.

10

15

25

It is to nail down the Christian categories in such a way that no doubt, no reflection, shall be able to get hold of them. It is like when someone locks a door and throws away the key: thus are the Christian categories made inaccessible to reflection. Only the choice remains: will you believe or will you not believe, but the prattle of reflection cannot get hold of it.

30

363

50

Generally, a pers. begins by first seeing how far he dares― more or less―have dealings with Xnty. If he discovers something that does not require altogether too much from him, he calls that Xnty, and now proclaims Xnty.

369

370

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 50–52

•

1850

I have concerned myself first and foremost with the question of ideality: What is Xnty. Whether I myself might possibly sink under it has not occupied me. This interest in pure ideality is the more that I have; and as a consequence it has been natural and necessary for me to use pseudonyms.

5

Oh, Even Luther

51

does not really pull his thoughts together, but speaks of one thing enthusiastically in one place, and then forgets that in another place he says something else, so it is difficult to act on such instructions. In the gospel about the hemorrhaging woman he says right at the end that even if it were the greatest thing of all, if a pers. has faith that it will happen, then it will happen. We see this, he says, in the gospel’s two miracles. But see, in other places Luther asserts that to expect miracles is to tempt God.

10

The Hemorrhaging Woman.

52

The words: if only I touch the hem of his garment, I will be made well. The words surely cannot be used immediately as a proof of a sort of extraordinary faith, which did not even insist upon speaking with Xt. One must of course remember that according to the Law of Moses the hemorrhaging woman was unclean, so she therefore preferred that the whole matter go unnoticed. So one could also understand the words in the following way: she has not had the courage to step forward, but she has believed that Xt was one who could help her, and if he is as she believed him to be, then he can surely also do it if I only touch his garment.

15

20

25

30

364

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 52–53

5

10

15

20

Her words, then, should not be regarded as an expression of a faith that is intensified in comparison with those who openly turned to Xt, but she remains a prototype for those who have the faith but for certain reasons desire to approach Xt as secretly as possible. Bashfulness is that which holds her back.[a] As for the attitude of Xt, it may perhaps be interpreted in a somewhat different way than is usually done. He will not permit this secretive communication with him. He therefore draws her forward. This is understood as somewhat judgmental. But perhaps it is done precisely out of compassion, divine compassion, in order to show her that he is not apprehensive about a hemorrhaging woman touching him and making him unclean. In Xt’s place, a merely hum. being, even if he could work miracles and had done so, would have shared the woman’s interest in her remaining hidden; it was too much to ask of him that, in addition to everything else, he should expose himself to the people’s judgment.

53

“The Missing Coin”― “The Lost Sheep”― “The Prodigal Son.”

25

3 Christian Discourses.

30

35

1) The missing coin. Here there can be no talk about straying; a coin can only be lost―it cannot go astray. Neither has a coin itself any guilt in being lost; if it is lost then it is the bearer’s fault, or the fault of the person who was supposed to take care of it. Finally, a coin can do nothing at all to help itself be found again. Therefore, we could say there is no wonder that the owner is so happy upon finding it; for since it is his own fault that he has lost it, by no means does he rejoice in the coin’s behalf, but entirely for his own sake―also in such a way that the guilt, the confusion involved in his losing it are now made good again.

•

1850

[a]

371

Therefore, neither does she have the same grandiosity in her appearance as does “the woman who was a sinner,” who openly goes in to Xt at the banquet.

1

5

372

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 53

•

1850

2) The lost sheep. There is no discussion of how it came about; its loss has no such history. The story begins with the fact that it is the lost sheep. Yet it is clear that a sheep can in a sense share some blame for its own loss by leaving the shepherd, even if the shepherd is perhaps guilty for not having watched carefully. The sheep itself, therefore, is capable of doing something to cause its loss. It can do nothing about its rescue. The shepherd must go out and seek it. He finally finds it, and in such a miserable state that he has to carry it home. The shepherd’s joy is great; but perhaps not entirely in the sheep’s behalf, insofar as the shepherd possibly has something to reproach himself for in connection with not having taken better care of the sheep. 3) The prodigal son. Here it begins with a story of how it happened that he became lost; and he has entirely and solely himself to blame for it. Next, he must nonetheless do something toward helping himself be rescued: turn home to the father and repent. Finally, the father’s joy is entirely in the son’s behalf. The father has nothing to reproach himself for; he has done everything for the son, and the son is at the age when the father could not justify treating him like a child but must let him try his hand in life by himself. There is, therefore, progression from the joy of the woman who lights the lamp, sweeps the house, finds the coin and calls together neighbors and friends, to the joy of the shepherd who goes out and seeks the lost sheep and finds it, to the joy of the father in regaining the prodigal son. Such is the joy in heaven over one sinner who repents. Just like this; for just as someone possesses all these many, many shillings and knows precisely how many he has and immediately misses the lost one, in the same way God possesses all of us human beings. And as the shepherd guarding his sheep knows them all and discovers immediately when one has gone astray, so is God like a shepherd in relation to all of us millions of hum. beings. And as a father loves his child, so does God love every hum. being, knows exactly how many children he has, and immediately misses the lost child. Oh, if someone possesses millions and millions of coins (as God possesses hum. beings) then he is perhaps tempted to think that the relationship here might be different than with the woman who possessed only ten coins and thus would indeed have to take notice when she lost one. Or if someone possesses millions and millions of sheep (as God possesses human beings) then he is perhaps tempted to assume that the relationship must be different than with the shepherd

365

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

366

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 53–55

•

1850

10

who does not have so many sheep and therefore may very well miss one. But when it is children! Is it conceivable that a father could have so many children that he would not know how many he had and would not immediately miss the one who is lost! It is quite possible that a man could possess so much money that he finally did not himself know what he possessed and became indifferent to it, although he nonetheless must be said to possess the money. But if a father had so many children that he became indifferent to them and did not himself know how many he had: then he would not be a father.

54

The Prodigal Son―The Only Begotten Son.

5

15

20

55

25

30

367

35

In this gospel the prodigal son has an older brother; but he will do nothing to save the prodigal. But Xnty itself is, indeed, ϰατεξοχην the gospel. And in this gospel the prodigal son (the hum. race) has an older brother (the only begotten Son) and he does everything, loses his life in order to save the prodigal, in agreement with the father on this from the beginning.

Mynster―Myself. I read in the N.T. that proclaiming Xnty is the way to get scorned, persecuted, killed. My life expresses, at least, that proclaiming Xnty is the way to become nothing. M. expresses that it is the way to have the most brilliant career, the way to the life of richest enjoyment. In truth, I would have to be an odd hum. being not to understand why all shun me and follow M. I read in the N.T. that proclaiming Xnty leads a hum. being to the point where, if there is no eternal life, he is the most wretched of all. My life is basically such that everyone will understand that, if there is no eternal life, then I have indeed been duped―I, for whom the world has opened up in a way it rarely does for anyone, but I have refused. M. expresses that whether or not there is an eternal life, he is not duped―he has enjoyed this life thoroughly. 16 ϰατεξοχην] properly ϰατ’ ἐξοχήν, Greek, to an extraordinary degree, “par excellence.”

373

374

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 55–57

•

1850

It will be M’s business to defend his. For let us forget about voluntary poverty and lowliness: if I am born a millionaire, born a count, Xnty assumes that I will remain in that state and nonetheless that I can very well be a Xn. But to become a millionaire by preaching Xnty, to become a count, an Excellency, by preaching Xnty―where is the place in scripture that speaks of that!

The Fraud. Yes, had Cato Uticensis refrained from committing suicide because it was greater not to do so: there would be meaning in that. But that every huckster who does not do away with himself is immediately greater than Cato: that is nonsense. So it is with Christianity in our time in relation to the ascetic and the candidate for the monastery.

5

56

15

Luther.

57

When Luther said: voluntary poverty, the unmarried state, spending the greater part of the day in prayer and supplication, fasting, etc., it does not depend on all such things―it is faith (in which connection it surely must be remembered that faith could of course be compatible with monasticism and was undoubtedly originally united with it, and the degeneration was not so much the monastic life as the meritoriousness it was imagined to have), this is certainly also true of Luther. Furthermore―to be on the safe side―he was also the man who had shown that he could, and could every moment, do the former. Oh, but Luther was not a dialectician―he did not see the tremendous danger involved in putting some other thing in the highest position, some other thing that relates to and presupposes a first thing concerning which there is no test whatsoever. He did

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 57–58

5

368

10

15

20

25

30

35

58

40

not understand that he had provided the corrective, that the spigot ought to be turned off with utmost caution, so that people did not simply go and make him into a paradigm. This is just what happened. It was not long before worldliness understood: Why, of course, this is really the right man for us, this Luther! With the help of his theory we get permission to retain worldliness in its entirety, to arrange ourselves in as secular a manner as pleases us, and then also to say, “Giving everything to the poor, living in the monastery is not the highest good, that is what Luther said,” not even one of the most cunning among us had courage enough to devise that. And it is true; for it takes great courage, great faith and bravado in ordera to venture such things―and on the other hand it requires only a very ordinary scoundrel to take it in vain. Poor Luther! Just think how every Tom, Dick, and Harry appeals to you, how all these bread-andbutter fellows, “husbands, fathers, and reigning champions of the shooting club,” members of the Friendship [Club], etc., and how clergymen, too, call upon your name. For my part, among all the people I have known I have not found a single one whom I would dare believe was capable of voluntarily giving up everything in order to live in a monastic cell, any more than I dare claim this with respect to myself. And it is really hard when one is 37 years old, for many years a theol. graduate, has long since been a wellknown author, and then to discover that one is not in a position to do these things that, thanks to one’s upbringing, one already knew at age 16 have been left far behind.b

Luther―Mynster. Imagine M. as contemporaneous with L. Now let everything be said about M. that can be said truthfully, and a bit more. But if anyone wants to

•

1850

375

a

in godly fashion

1

b

What wonder, then, that Luther very quickly got such great support? Worldliness understood immediately that here was an indulgence. That it was true of Luther did not matter to them; they understood immediately how through a little untruth this could be turned to greatest profit. They invented the assurance, they gave

5

10

376 1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 58–59

•

1850

assurances that in their innermost spirit they were willing to give everything to the poor, etc., but because that was not the highest good they did not do it, kept every penny and grinned under their beards at our Lord, the N.T., Luther, especially at Luther, that chosen instrument of God, who had so marvelously helped hum. beings make a fool of God. Strangely enough, therefore, after the gospel was given its rightful place, and all that about voluntary poverty etc. was abolished, Luther himself had to confront the fact that he could barely get a bit of money for priests and schoolteachers. Presumably people answered: giving one’s possessions to the poor or churches is not the highest good―so says Luther―therefore we do not do it. If it were the highest, we would certainly do it. Thus, in the sermon on the gospel for the 26th Sunday after Trinity Sunday, among other places, L. complains that it was much better before than it is now, even though the gospel has been brought forth into the light of day. On the whole, Luther struck too hard. He should have done everything to remove the idea of meritoriousness from such works and, apart from that, let them stand―then regarded his marriage as an act of awakening. But then he went too far, the result being: getting married and not giving anything to the poor came to be seen as the great step forward in religiosity. Also in Tishreden (published by Benjamin Lindner, Salfeld 1745) (in a piece with the heading “von einem Fürsten, der in seinem

deny that what I now say about M. is true, then I will say he is a liar: M. is a clever, prudent man, who shrinks from nothing, nothing, as much as he shrinks from scandal, in relation to which he has an idiosyncratic aversion like one can have in relation to sharpening a saw, etc. And now, what is Christianity! Christianity is from first to last scandal, the divine scandal (σϰανδαλον) Every time someone dares raise the scandal to the highest order there is joy in heaven, for only the divinely chosen instrument is capable of raising the scandal to the highest order. And what is Luther’s greatness? His writings will perhaps be forgotten, even his conduct toward the pope (although that was certainly scandal enough) will perhaps fade away: but at the peak of the medieval mentality to dare to marry, himself a monk, and with a nun! Oh, God’s chosen instrument! For you it was reserved to raise the greatest scandal ever raised in Xndom by this act. First comes the entry of Christianity into the world, when Xt and the apostles preached it: this in itself was the divine scandal. But next, and in Christendom, Luther takes the prize for having occasioned the greatest scandal. And now Mynster with his―Christian―anxiety about even the most trifling scandal! And he inspires himself and others with Luther’s help. All is vanity, says the preacher.

44 Tishreden] German, properly, “Tischreden,” Table Talks. 46 von einem ... ausliehe] German, on a prince who in his last days lent money usuriously

9 σϰανδαλον] Greek, snare, stumbling block.

Qvantum satis of Xnty for the Merely Hum. Being. One perfects oneself in one’s ability to present the right, the good, one’s ability to sketch the wrong turns, truly and fittingly. It seems that this can be required of a hum. being; in any case, it is cultivation. But to want to begin carrying it out in daily life itself―that would of course be silly, almost affected, practically fussy, overly scrupulous, and thereby embarrassing to oneself and annoying to others. Besides, it is thought, there is no point to starting

5

369 10

15

20

25

59

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 59–61

370 5

in on such things. If you begin it, then Christianity is something dangerous that takes the entire hand when you give it the little finger―and then you have to quit anyway; and so it is silly to have begun. Therefore, principiis obsta. The appropriate qvantum satis is that you know how to depict things tastefully and beautifully and fittingly, that you are enough of a psychologist to point out people’s wrong turns―but no more than that.

•

1850

377

letzten Ende Geld auf Wucher ausliehe,” found in the 2nd part, p. 229) Luther says: also ist es jetzt (namely, since the gospel has come to light) leider dahin kommen, daß man sagt: oh, gute werck, meine frömmigkeit macht mich nicht selig, darum wil ich geitzen, wuchern, und thun, was mir gefällt und wohl thut etc.

10

60

15

20

61

30

35

In his sermon on the gospel for the 26th Sunday after Trinity Sunday Luther wants to show as a matter of course that in Mt 25:31, etc. there can be no talk of acts of compassion by heathens, because it says they are shown toward Xns, “and surely a heathen would hardly show compassion toward a Xn.” This is a somewhat mistaken and hasty conclusion. In an even more bitter relationship than that between heathen and Xn, in the relationship betw. Jew and Samaritan, the Samaritan after all showed compassion toward the Jew.

To God. Even if it were the case that, to the extent I could understand how good you were to me, then I was also, hum. speaking, grateful for your every benefaction―oh, this is nevertheless not rlly a relationship betw. you, O God, and a hum. being, that he has to be able to understand that you are good. Help me to thank you also when I do not understand that you are good, but almost childishly want to understand that it is as though you now were less loving. Abominable thought, by means of which I could make myself eternally unhappy.

5 principiis obsta] Latin, resist beginnings, i.e., nip it in the bud. (See also explanatory note.) 6 Qvantum satis] Latin, the amount needed.

3 also ist es jetzt ... thut] German, So it has now unfortunately come to the point that one says: Oh, good works, my piety does not save me, so I will be covetous, usurious, and do what pleases and benefits me.

1

5

10

378

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 61–62

•

1850

So often, however, it seems to me as though my relationship to you resembled that to an examiner: I must use my intelligence, my strength, and then it depended on whether I got it right; if I got it wrong, then you just said: well, you got it wrong, you made a mistake there―it is your own fault. Oh, my God, is this a relationship between God and hum. being! No, God be praised, we do not confront one another in such dignified fashion as equals, you and I. Oh, no, even when I made a mistake it was still with your Governance, your Governance, which permitted it to happen, and straightaway lovingly took it up into your fatherly purpose for me, lovingly disposing over these millions of possibilities so that even this mistake would become beneficial for me.

You let me succeed in everything: then there came a time when it seemed to me that you let me fail in everything. I then understood this to mean that it was now over, that now you would no longer have anything to do with me in that way. Then I believed, however, that one blessing still remained for me: to thank you unceasingly for the indescribable good you had done for me, so infinitely much more than I could have expected, or dared to have expected.―Oh, my petty heart, which despite everything thinks so ungenerously of you. No, your intention was that I should make progress, that from the indescribable good you have done for me in such a way that I could understand it, I should learn the blessedness of praising and thanking you even when I understand nothing other than that everything goes wrong for me.

The Discourse of a Religious Individual. There was a time, O God, when you showered me with good gifts, and in connection with each benefaction I thought of you: that was blessed.

371 5

10

15

20

25

30

62

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 62–65

5

372

63

15

20

64

25

30

65

Then everything was changed; it seemed as though everything went wrong; and therefore every time a new misfortune came I thought of you, that you are love: that was even more blessed. For your love is not like that of a hum. being, who proves his love by what he does for me. Oh, no, your love is above all proof: whatsoever you do with me―it is infinite love.[a]

Christianity―Humanness. As soon as a hum. being shows that he believes God really helps him, he is immediately disliked by hum. beings. They take pleasure in injuring him, etc., in seeing whether God will help him, as they say. Since he is so distinguished as to live in such a relationship with God, as they say, then surely we have nothing in common with him. God in heaven, and every Sunday “the priest” preaches that every hum. being shall live in this way, believing in God’s assistance―and we are all Xns.

•

1850

379

[a]

And when, after all, is it most true of me that I perceive that you are infinite love? Surely not when I am helped by the proof, oh, no, when I perceive it without proof, when it is not a doctrine that always requires proof, but has become for me the axiom that never requires proof. Oh, but when my soul grows weary, then you will not let the proof fail to appear.

The Scandal. Act just one time in such a way that your action expresses that you fear God alone, and fear hum. beings not at all: then you will also immediately stir up a certain degree of scandal. That which avoids scandal is solely that which from fear of hum. beings and regard for hum. opinion is entirely conformed to worldliness.

Martensen Information on Dogmatics. He himself indicates in one place that the significance of the pseudonyms is probably mostly in the

[a]

Martensen Information on Dogmatics.

1

5

10

380

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 65–66

•

1850

direction of awakening personal life―and yet earlier he deprecatingly says: all these phrases about happy and unhappy lovers, the risk of faith, etc. But good Lord, having conceded the former point as he has, where then can an author who wishes to awaken personal life get other or better categories[?] But M. cannot remember from one moment to the next what he himself says.

To God

1

a

impressed upon me the same thing a second time

b

and therefore that it was a punishment that it happened to me

Deep in my soul you planted the blessed assurance that you are love. Then you treated me as a father does a childa, and proved to me over and again that you were love. Then you fell silent for a moment, wanting me now to try my hand a little without proof, to discover whether I could do the same without proof. Then everything became confused for me, I became so anxious and afraid, such that I even thought this was infinitely too lofty for me, and I was afraid that I had gone too far, had become too presumptuous, had held to you for too longb. Just relieve me of one concern, I said: that it is not my own fault. Ungrateful scoundrel that I am, as though it were my earlier goodness that was the cause of your demonstrating your love up until now. Spare me from one concern, I said, that it should be my many errors that have made you tired of me: ungrateful scoundrel that I am, as though it were due to wisdom and merits that you previously had loved me. Oh, foolish, vain heart, which still wants to dissemble somewhat in relation to the past: not only to have perceived the blessedness that God is love and that he shows it to a person, but that one after all in some small way should have been worthy of it, even if only in comparison with his present unworthiness. Oh, no, no, God be praised that it has never been because of my worthiness that God has loved me. It is precisely this that gives me courage, for otherwise a hum. being would of course die of

5

373

66

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 66–69

•

1850

381

anxiety at the very same moment, lest at the next moment he was no longer worthy.

67

Humor.

374

If it were not in another sense madness, it would be an example of humor were a hum. being to say to God: despite having been raised strictly in Xnty, I was nonetheless, as you know, born in the 19th century, and therefore also have my share of the general superstitious belief in reason, etc. The humorous element would lie in this “as you know.”

10

68 15

20

69

25

30

35

Tersteegen says it beautifully someplace in a Christmas sermon: (p. 108 in Rapp’s selections) Ja, Seelen, raümet eure Herzen aus von euren Sünden, von der Welt, und von allen ihren Eitelkeiten; denn Christus vil kommen und in uns geboren werden. O, daß es nicht auch heiße: Er fand keinen Raum in der Herberge!”

The Jews It is also remarkable, as Helveg observes in the introduction to the translation of the Book of Ezra (in Kalkar’s Bible), that whereas other peoples became increasingly removed from the faith of their fathers[a] the older they grew, it is the opposite with the Jews: whereas in their younger days they chased after false gods, the religion they rejected in the time of their youth became the consolation of their old age. But then it happened again that they became fixated so one-sidedly upon the old that for that very reason Xnty had to be an offense to them. The old culminates in such a way that it has to alienate itself from its own development. 15 Ja, Seelen … der Herberge] German, “Yes, souls, cleanse your hearts of all your sins, of the world, and all your vanities; for Christ wants to come and be born in us. Oh, let it not be said: He found no room in the inn!

[a]

which nearly became a mockery to them,

1

382

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 70–71

•

1850

The Proclamation of Xnty―The Daily Press.

1

[a]

supreme

The current proclamation of Xnty is nonsense. But if Xnty really is to be proclaimed, it will also become apparent that it is the daily press which will, if possible, make it impossible. Never has there been any power so diametrically opposed to Xnty as the daily press. Day out and day in the daily press does nothing other than delude hum. beings with this[a] axiom of lying, that numbers are decisive. And Xnty rests on the idea that the truth is the single individual.

Another Instance of Cunning. If then someone in serving the religious goes just a little bit beyond the purely worldly practice of treating it merely as a livelihood and means to all manner of earthly advantages, then the cry is heard at once: “Such things can only be required of an apostle, to attempt such things is to want to make oneself into an apostle.” Aha, in this way they win in two directions: they not only find a brilliant excuse for eschewing such things―no, it is laudable, it is indeed humility―but they also find a charge against the one who carries out such things: after all, it is presumptuous to make himself into an apostle in this way. Yes, the world is shrewd. But let us nonetheless look a little more closely. I do not know whether in any way it should be displeasing to God for a hum. being to be willing to make sacrifices in order to serve the truth, consequently to suffer, yes, even to be put to death. But this I know well, that God does not take pleasure in a hum. being going ahead and wanting to make himself into an apostle. See, here is the difficulty. Apostolicity is not defined by suffering, but by divine authority. All the witnesses to the truth have of course also suffered, suffered unto death, without it having occurred to them to make themselves into apostles. But the shrewdness consists in immediately pitching the matter so high that one is freed from doing it, wins honor and esteem

70

5

10

375

71

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 71–73

5

72

•

1850

for humility by not doing it, and gets an opportunity to charge the one who, without in the remotest way laying claim to authority, not even to mention div. authority, makes sacrifices, then into the bargain gets the added burden of being judged severely because he makes sacrifices.

The Priests’ Use of the Bible.

20

How often have I heard the priests explain that the requirements found in the Sermon on the Mount were for the apostles alone and not for us (yet it must be recalled, however, that it reads, “he turned to the disciples,” and he had 70 disciples, after all, and we also see how absolute the requirement is in the cases where someone comes to him and wants to be a disciple; but between “the apostle” and the disciple lies the difference that the apostle has divine authority, whereas the requirement to give up everything is identical). On the other hand, the priests always as a matter of course make use of the words: “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see,” as though they were simply said to everyone, and yet it expressly reads, “he turned to the disciples in particular and said: Blessed are the eyes, etc.[”]

73

Luther’s Transformations.

10

15

377

25

30

35

Those who were contemporary with Luther, especially those who were close to him, got the powerful impression that he was a hero of faith, at first melancholic beyond all measure and then awfully tested in the most frightful spiritual trials, that he was the pious, God-fearing man, who as such was essentially a stranger in the world. Soon, however, the impression of Luther changed―he rlly came to be regarded as a political hero, and the catchphrase by which he is remembered, became: Hear me, o pope, etc. Once again the impression changed, since now the pope’s hold was broken, and Luther was regarded as a cheery man of the world and good company, the catchphrase by which he was remembered both by clergy and lay folk became: wer nicht liebt Weiber, Wein, Gesang etc. Nowadays, one could quite colloquial35 wer nicht liebt Weiber, Wein, Gesang] German, who does not love women, wine, and song.

383

384

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 73

•

1850

At the beginning of entry NB19:73 Kierkegaard has added some words in the main text column.

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 73–74

5

10

15

ly say that the perception is: the significance of the Reformation is that Luther set girls and wine and card games in their rightful place in the Christian Church as an essential feature, yes, as the true perfection in contrast to the imperfect: poverty, prayer, and fasting. In view of this, his memory is best celebrated in the following way. Chorus of clergy and lay folk: [“]Let us now toast Martin Luther― Hurrah! And shame on anyone who will not drink a toast to Martin Luther, Hurrah, Hurrah, the toast was fine, Hurrah; still one more time―Hurrah, Hurrah![”] Having his portrait done as the jack of clubs could also preserve his memory. It is not enough to erect memorial columns to him; not enough to name one day of the year after him; no, make him into the jack of clubs: and there will scarcely be a clergyman who does not again and again have occasion to remember Martin Luther and the Reformation.

378

74

25

30

35

40

Nonsense. On Good Friday they preach: the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. Now do a thought-experiment. Think to yourself how the man whose life-view is contained in this phrase must appear. And then deny that we would not all really desire that such a hum. being hide himself in a monastery so we did not have to see him, so that he then would not completely disturb our joy in life. Deny that if he himself did not think of entering the monastery, then we would request it of him or force him to go there, just as they asked Xt to leave the place where they had become afraid of him. And then contemplate his plump, smiling, hypocritical Reverence who, cribbing a bit from one of Mynster’s sermons, gives this magnificent discourse. And then consider his Excellency himself, this fine man of the world, who has sucked enjoyment out of life as rarely, rarely, anyone has―and whose lifeview is: the world has been crucified to me, and I to

•

1850

385

386 1

5

10

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 74–76

It is just as if one (as was the case with my father’s brother when he was over here one summer) were to have three coats on in the summer and then said: my view is that one should dress as lightly as possible. Here we may likewise say: had you not said it yourself, one would have found it difficult to discover that this was your view.

•

1850

the world. Yes, if he did not say it himself, then you certainly would have found it difficult to discover that this was his life’s motto. But this is for a change! Priceless nonsense. For a change, perhaps, one has the view of delighting in life―and then for a change: the world has been crucified to me; or perhaps one has the first one for daily use, and for a change (for, after all, one does grow tired of everything), for a change one takes the view: the world has been crucified to me. Now, of course this is entirely in order, quite like in the theater: it will not do for every blessed evening to have tragedy, no, the usual must be comedy, ballet, and the like.―and once in a while, for a change, a tragedy, then one feels like weeping, has the pleasure of blubbering through several handkerchiefs―yes, just like in church when for a change it is preached: the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.

The Test of Christendom. a

on Sundays

Command the preachers to keep quieta. What, then, remains? Well, then the essential thing remains: the lives, the daily existence with which the priest preaches. Would you, then, by seeing their lives, get the impression that it is Xnty they proclaim?

5

10

15

379

75

25

Seeking First the Kingdom of God.

76

One can truly say of anyone whose striving right from the start and later in all things is commensurate with one or another finite τελος that he does not seek first the Kingdom of God. From this it does not follow, however, that anyone whose striving has the heterogeneity of infinitude can be said to be seeking first the Kingdom of God, but he nonetheless has ideality.

30

32 τελος] Greek, end, goal.

35

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 76–77

5

10

15

20

25

An example of making one’s striving commensurate with a finite τελος right from the start. When someone wants to be active by preaching Xnty, and then, right from the start, this striving becomes for him commensurate with finitude, e.g., which pastoral call he should now seek, whether preferably in a market town or out in the country, and in that case whether it should be in Jutland or Zealand, in order (once he first has obtained such a living) to preach undauntedly that a hum. being shall first seek the Kingdom of God. However, if the desire to be effective in this way is determined by the infinite, then he first scrutinizes whether he has qualifications enabling him to be effective in this way, and if not he immediately begins to acquire them, and if he has them then he begins straightaway, wastes not a moment―if it cannot be done any other way, he goes right out on the street and begins. Perhaps it then happens that he comes into conflict with the established order, gets arrested, etc., etc., never gets appointed to any official post, any living: see, this is the consequence of seeking first the Kingdom of God. Homogeneity with the world, on the other hand, means first seeking worldly advantage―then one does not collide either.

380

77

30

35

Wilhelm Lund. It occurred to me today what a similarity my life has with his. Just as he lives over in Brazil, lost to the world, absorbed in excavating antediluvian fossils, so also do I live as if outside the world, absorbed in excavating the Christian concepts―alas, and yet it is in Christendom that I live, where Xnty is in full bloom, stands in luxuriant growth with 1000 clergy, and where we all are Xns.

•

1850

387

388

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 78–79

•

1850

Tersteegen correctly says somewhere: if a sick person were to say, I believe there is a physician who lives in such and such a place, and who is perfectly able to cure me―how, then, does he demonstrate that he has this faith? By seeing to it that he gets in contact with this physician. So, too, with any faith: if it does not move a hum. being to act according to it, then having this faith is imaginary, just as anyone would realize the faith of the sick person was imaginary if he carried on without making the least attempt to get in contact with the physician whom he assured us he fully and firmly believed was entirely able to heal him.

78

In the external world it surely does not happen that the farmer makes a mistake and believes the tares are the wheat, makes a great fuss over the tares, harvests them, carries them in, and lets the wheat lie and rot in the field. In relation to the spirit it usually happens that in this world the mistake is made of regarding the tares as wheat. Now obviously this is not so strange, since certainly, spiritually understood, more tare blossoms are always found even in the best wheat fields than wheat stalks are found in the tare fields of the world. And a parte potiori or majori fit denominatio: since the great, great majority are tares, then tares are wheat and wheat is tares; if not absolutely all, then at least the great, great majority are satisfied with this―and the majority are, of course, the truth. Since in the world of the spirit the concepts do not have an external actuality but are the notion, people therefore simply take advantage of the opportunity and relabel the concepts in a manner pleasing to the majority.

79

5

10

20

381

30

35

25 a parte potiori … denominatio] Latin, according to the portion that is largest [or] most important.

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 80 80

5

10

15

20

25

30

382

35

40

•

1850

389

Clerical-Worldly Nonsense. Look, such things appear again and again in diverse forms owing to this complete conformity of the clerical and the worldly. There is a priest. He is an extremely mediocre priest, as everyone knows. But in addition he is supposed to be an excellent farmer or horse and cattle breeder. The governmenta becomes aware of his merits―and he is made a Knight of the D. Instead of seeking to remove him from the clerical position and getting a position for him where he belongs―he remains in clerical office―and gets decorated, too. That he is decorated should really, it is true, signify that he was an even better than average clergyman, but here it signifies a minus, it is in his capacity as something else entirely that he is a knight. Priceless nonsense! In any case it really seems to me it ought to be forbidden for him to wear the decoration on his clerical gown. It can be bad enough for a priest to wear a decoration, even when this signifies that he is an unusually capable priest; but for him to wear a decoration in order to remind the congregation that he is something entirely different than a priest is after all utterly mad. This stems from the complete lack of respect for what it means to be a clergyman, which in turn is a consequence of the perfect conformity betw. the clerical and the worldly. Suppose a clergyman had the good fortune to become champion of the shooting club, then everyone really would find it improper were he to wear his mark of distinction in the pulpit. And yet that is basically not as ridiculous as for a clergyman constantly to wear a decoration that reminds the congregation that he is an excellent veterinarian or the like. After all, it is rlly not in his capacity as veterinarian that he wears the clerical gown―and yet it is in his capacity as veterinarian that he wears the cross of the knighthood on his clerical gown.

a

(I leave it undecided whether it is the ecclesiastical or the secular branch [of the government], for the only thing lacking was for it to have been a member of the clergy, the bishop―who perhaps was himself an excellent veterinarian― to be the one who had nominated him and drawn the attention of the government to him)

1

5

10

[b]

Recently I saw that a lieutenant and Knight of D. has become a clergyman (presumably he was in the war as a volunteer and distinguished himself). Just as they now permit him to wear his knight’s cross on his clerical gown, so too could they permit him in addition to wear epaulets on his clerical gown.

15

20

390

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 80–83

•

1850

But the government has an eye for merits―and on the other hand no eye for what it ought to mean to be a cleric.

Where Are We? 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. We are here: experience teaches that it is most appropriate for a father to permit his son to study theology, “for it is the surest way to secure a living.”

Why Do We See No Persecution at All? Because there is no Xnty. Let Xnty come, then persecution comes as well. And then passion comes again. Someone who has seen a hum. being he considered devout, God-fearing, and humanly speaking, righteous suffer abuse and persecution and finally death will surely develop ample passion, hatred of this world, if not on the monstrous scale as the apostles, who had seen the Holy One crucified, such that from that moment the world was crucified to them and they to the world.

81 5

10

82

15

20

The Proclamation of Xnty. Xnty essentially cannot be proclaimed through speech,―but through action. Nothing is more dangerous than that all these lofty feelings and exalted resolutions etc. merely get an oratorical flourish. It then becomes an intoxication that is extremely dangerous, and the deceptive element is just that the entire thing becomes an ardent mood, and that it is, as they say, “so sincere of him”―alas, yes, in the sense of the mood of the moment. Proclamation by means of action is abstemious; it does not amass listeners seeking intoxication; it is almost boring, and what is boring is that it immediately becomes a matter of doing something about it, and one sees that the teacher does it.

83

25

384

30

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 82

•

1850

391

At the bottom of the page, entry NB19:82 was written across the entire width of the page and continued vertically in the marginal column.

392

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 84–87

•

1850

Before God. Well, now, granted there are two ways, and yet the latter of these should rlly be the more blessed: either that in an outward way everything is supported more and more by good fortune, and you thank God; or you learn to be able to bear more and more, to be able to do without more and more, learn it through fellowship with God.

Ethical Ideality. It is an entirely confused use of language to say, with respect to the higher thing one still has not accomplished: [“]I cannot[”]―as though there were talk of talent and the like. To use “can” here, it must be remembered, is so far from being an excuse that it is self-accusation. Paul does not say: [“]I cannot be perfect.[”] He says: [“]I press on.[”] When someone says: [“I cannot[”]―as a rule it means that he wants to turn aside and reassure himself.

Mynster―Luther. Luther says somewhere in his sermons that three things belong to a proper Christian life: 1) faith; 2) works of love; 3) persecution for this faith and these works of love. Now take Mynster. He has downgraded faith’s tension and inwardness. In place of works of love he has set legality. And persecution he has entirely abolished.

84

5

85

15

86

25

385

Point de vue for Xndom. The usual thing now is to desire a speedy death―and in the still-authorized litany is the prayer that God will save us from, among other evils, a sudden death. * * 28 Point de vue] French, point of view, perspective.

87

30

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 87–89

5

88

15

•

1850

It is judged as a fault, as unchristian, for a hum. being to find consolation in death, to long to be out of this life. Well, I thank you ever so much, this is Xnty! Xnty means precisely that death is one’s essential consolation, that one’s day of death is one’s day of birth, and the longing for eternity grows greater and greater. But in fact, people deify the sensuous clinging to life, and longing for death is viewed as the condition of one who barely even assumes immortality. And this is in Xndom, where we all are Xns.

Introspection. People who warn against introspection might just as well warn against Xnty. Aided by grace they seek to block up the way leading inward and direct one away from it out into the worldly. But in fact, they are anxious about the real, strenuous life of the spirit that only emerges with introspection, while they now live in worldliness and then prattle on about the highest.

89

My Inwardness.

20

It is in my nature to hide my inwardness―this, precisely, is inwardness. But inasmuch as Christianity really is such that distinctly expressing Christianitya will incur the world’s disfavor and ridicule, then it is in fact a question whether I dare maintain this hidden inwardness. True, my way of living as a spy can have and has had its significance; but it is still a question whether I have not many times also made things too easy for hum. beings with my cunning, and in that case this really ought to be redeemed someday through a direct declaration.

25

386

30

393

a

not only in writing but also in daily existence

1

394

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 90

•

1850

“Socrates―The Ideal” Socrates did not have the true ideal, nor the conception of sin, nor that hum. salvation required a crucified God: his life’s motto could therefore never be: the world is crucified to me and I to the world. He therefore maintained irony, which simply expresses his elevation over the folly of the world. But for a Xn irony is not enough, it can never respond to the frightful fact that salvation entails that God be crucified, although irony can surely be used for some time in Xndom for awakening.

90

5

JOURNAL NB20

JOURNAL NB20 Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Journal NB20 in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Niels W. Bruun, Anne Mette Hansen, and Steen Tullberg

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 1

389

1

•

1850

NB20 July 11th 1850.

397

398

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 2

•

1850

Concerning a remark in the Postscript to “Concl. Postscript” respecting publication of the writings about my activity as an author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How the new pseudonym Anti-Climacus came about . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning publication of the later writings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning publication of the finished writings that has now begun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The established Church―my position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concerning publication of the writing about my activity as an author . . . . . . . . . . . . .

390

p. p. p. p. p. p.

1. 11. 47. 189. 242. 250.

2

5

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 3

391

3

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

•

1850

399

400

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 4–5

•

1850

392

It is often said that were Christ to come again now, he would once again be put to death. That is quite true, but more to the point, it should be added that he will be sentenced and then put to death―because what he preached was not Xnty, but an insane, ungodly, blasphemous, misanthropic exaggeration and caricature of the gentle doctrine of Christianity, the true Christianity that is to be found in Christendom and whose founder was Jesus Christ.

Concerning a Remark in the Postscript to “Concl. Postscript” Respecting Publication of the Writings about My Activity as an Author. The remark is: [“]Thus in the pseudonymous books there is not a single word by myself. I have no opinion about them except as third party, no knowledge of their meaning except as reader, not the remotest private relation to them, that being impossible in a doubly reflected communication. One single word by me personally, in my own name, would be a case of presumptuous self-forgetfulness that, in this one word, from a dialectical point of view, would essentially incur the annihilation of the pseudonyms.” Now, one could say that in, e.g., “The Accounting” the pseudonyms are spoken of directly, these being the guiding thought throughout. On this one must observe: both, that what I wrote then can be quite true and the later just as true, because at the time, you see, I had not come further in my development, had not yet clearly come to terms with the definitive thought for the whole productivity, still not even dared to say definitely that it might not end with me finding something repellent in Christianity, while in religious enthusiasm I nevertheless kept on trying to the utmost of my ability to

4

5

10

5 15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 5–7 393

5

10

6 15

7

•

1850

401

solve the task of accounting for what Christianity is: and that neither in the writings on my activity as an author do I talk directly about the pseudonyms or identify myself with the pseudonyms, but simply point to their significance as maieutic. Finally, that I do in fact add: This is how I understand the whole thing now, that I have in no way grasped it all in this way from the beginning, just as little as I dare to say that I have grasped straightaway that the τελος of the pseudonyms was maieutic, since it was also a moment in my own life’s development in the form of a poetic outpouring.

From Tersteegen: Wer glaubet, der ist gross und reich, Er hat Gott das Himmelreich. Wer glaubet, der ist klein und arm, Er schreiet nur: Herr Dich erbarm.

The Impossibility of Christianity Here at Present. )

1

25

30

35

Even if there were no other obstacle―and God knows there is just about everything else in addition―this alone would be enough: there are 1000 people who have an extreme interest in making sure others do not discover what Xnty is. If people were to discover it, it is not that livelihoods would go down the drain, that is not what I mean; but there would be need for interpretation; and if someone were hot-headed and eager, he would not leave himself time to discover that it is just a question of interpretation and he would believe that it is a matter of livelihoods being abolished; and then all hell would be cut loose. It is not improbable that it would happena. The same glowing ardor and burning enthusiasm with 10 τελος] Greek, goal, purpose. 15 Wer glaubet ... Herr Dich erbarm] German, “Whoever believes they are great and rich, / They have God and the Kingdom of Heaven, / Whoever believes they are small and poor, / They cry only: Lord have mercy.”

a

that these 1000 would not give themselves time to hear that it is just a matter of interpretation.

1

402

1

b

it is self-evident that we appeal with good conscience to the lives we have so far led

c

and eagerness of faith

5

d

when we include those in the aspiring passion of possibility

e

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 7

•

1850

which a believing clergy kept hold of “faith” in former times, refusing to hear a word on this point, that same ardor and enthusiasm is still there― thanks to the clergy―except that it has taken another direction, not that of “faith” but of livelihoods and the protection of livelihoods. The same clergy that, with inconceivable calm (yes, inconceivable for a person who has no concept of clergy), has witnessed Xnty lose position after position in the 19th century, the same clergy that has looked on with inconceivable calm while the community (Xndom, where we are all Xns) has become afflicted with a moral corruption even more frightful than antiquity’s corruption, the same clergy that has lived undisturbedly because we are all Christians: yes, that same clergy is instantly prepared to take up arms when its livelihood is disturbed. Not a word, they say; with the whole passion of orthodoxy we cling to―the livelihood; if everything stays the way it is, we are of course willing to preach about the glory of giving everything away in order to belong wholly to Christ and we are willing to preach that one must first seek the kingdom of God, etc.b; but we are too serious to engage in witticisms and tomfoolery on Monday about seriously removing our livelihoods. Look at these 1000 men―and if we include the superiors, whose passionc must surely be even greater in proportion to their larger livelihoods, dwho stand as though in reserve, thoughe they are still interested in the livelihood, then there will surely be as many as 1100, a holy number that brings the 1100 martyrs to mind―look at these 1100, ready to become martyrs for the livelihood: they will rlly make Xnty impossible.

394

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

)

2

And should this not be the case, if Xnty were to be placed in actuality, then the daily press, which fights for the sovereignty of the public over both God and Xt, would put everything in motion to make Xnty impossible.

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 8–9

•

1850

403

395

8

5

10

15

20

25

30

9 35

Martensen―and Me. That it should be a dispute about terms has never occurred to me; I know better where the difficulty lies. That I consider him to be far, far, far stronger than me at the moment is something of which I make absolutely no secret. That there should be another fool like myself―who could get it into his head to go in for the kind of proclamation of Xnty that I represent, the more or less true proclamation―does not to occur to me. Martensen’s path suggests that proclaiming Xnty is the way to a brilliant career, the way to all worldly benefitsa―and that Xnty is what he proclaims, that is something Martensen assures us is so. And that it must be so is something the majority are only all too readily willing to believe. Then no wonder that they side with him in such numbers. That my proclaiming of Xnty should be the true proclamation of Christianity, and what I proclaim is Xnty, is something that on the contrary any pers. would so much prefer not to believe. And I have no enticements, since what is enticing is precisely what one misses with my proclamation. Nor have I any means of compulsion, for I am without authority. Then no wonder that I stand alone. This, you see, is the difference between Prof. M. and myself. That there should be a scholarly conflict has never occurred to me; daily suffering and sacrifice prevent me from forgetting what the conflict is really about.

Christianity’s Collision. If Christianity is again to find its place in actuality in its truth, something notable will happen: congregations and the priests will band together to

a

the way that, sure enough further and further from the truth, leadsa deeper and deeper into delusion’s flower-strewn and smiling gibberish. a

more and more enchantingly

1

5

404

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 9–11

•

1850

protect themselves against Xnty. For to give up Xnty entirely is something the congregation will not do, it having once occurred to them that it can be quite convenient to be a Christian at a somewhat cheap and reasonable price―and Xnty in its truth is something the congregation will not agree to in all eternity. Let it pass, they then say; we can afford what it costs to support priests as we always have done; they strive inexpensively and with real engagement to secure a highly respected and cultivated public’s satisfaction by serving and waiting on them with Xnty.

The Strict Christian should be equitable and humane enough to elegantly put up with, yes, even apologize to his neighbor and others for being as he is, for not taking part in what they devote so much of their lives to, which, humanly speaking, can be so beautiful and worthy of love; he should apologize that they cannot find enjoyment with him in that way.

The Highest Form of Piety―and the Highest Egotism

The awful thing is that exactly the highest form of piety, quite letting go of everything earthly, can be the highest egotism. It can be an awful egotism so to express through one’s form of life that the others rlly in a deeper sense have no religiousness. And yet, this is of course the absolute form of devotion required by scripture.

396

10

10 15

20

11

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 12–14 12

5

397

10

15

20

25

13

1850

405

How the New Pseudonym Anti-Climacus Came About. This is recorded in the journals from that time. My thought was to lay aside the finished production and see if I could get a place at a seminary, in order to be active extensively and cut down a little in the intensive direction. I found repose in this. But then the opposite thought awoke so strongly (which is all related in the journals) that I thought I had to act. So I wrote to Luno about starting the printing. But the thought of an appointment at a seminary was accompanied by a thought of a possible reconciliation with “her.”[a] Then the odd thing happened that the same day or the day after I had written to Luno, and had been told that he expected the manuscript as soon as possible, I learned that councillor of state Olsen had died. If I had known this before I wrote to Luno, I would have waited a little while. But now I thought the whole thing had become a sort of nonsense that would choke me if I were to take it back again and write once more to Luno. So the printing began, and in the tension of real life (which I had wanted in order to learn more about myself) it became clear to me that I ought to introduce a new pseudonym.

Transforming Little into Much.

30

Learn to make do with little―will you deny that it is much[?]

14

The Necessity of a Clergy (but with Tighter Christian Reins) as Middle Term in Xndom.

35

•

[a]

for if there is to be any reduction in the direction of strictness for me, the same is to apply to her, if she so pleases.

1

406

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 14

•

1850

The more I think of it, the more I come back to the thought that such a clergy in the older (medieval) style is an essential ingredient as a middle term in Xndom. Far, far the majority of peop. feel no need of Xnty in the strictest sense; on the contrary, it would make them unhappy and perplexed. True enough, from the idea’s perspective one must say that all of them should feel this need, and this is my blessed consolation, that no one, not one is excluded. But in real life it is not so. Xnty’s consolation rlly begins on the other side of all the usual hum. worries, its consolation is rlly the forgiveness of sins, and so far as that goes, far from being a relief, it requires one to suffer for the teaching. This, you see, is something most people cannot go along with, it would destroy their lives completely. They have an essential need of a relationship to Xnty. So life is for them as though a source of joy, and a pious joy. And we should all bear in mind that in the end, i.e., in eternity, we shall all be equally blessed. The mistake in Catholicism was that the clergy, egotistically and greedy for power, made itself into an intermediate authority in order to rule―rather than the direct opposite, that it exists and must exist in order to practice leniency such that the passage to stricter Xnty is open to anyone who wants it. Accordingly, Catholicism’s mistake was that the clergy, that is, a strict and more monastic holy order, egotistically desired to be the intermediate authority. Then, in the name of ordinary Xns, Luther rose up in order to shake off this intolerable yoke and to secure for everyone the immediate relationship to God. Excellent, all praise to him. But Luther was no dialectician. He failed to see that he was the extraordinary one, that perhaps in the final analysis the only one able to support this immediate relationship to God. Yet he set himself up as the benchmark. Protestantism’s watchword became: we are all priests, the consequence of which had to be either distressing extravagance or that one sank down into total worldliness. Look now at the situation in Protestantism. Yes, it is obvious, a given fact, it is established that the priests we now have are priests―yes, so we are all priests, that is to say, these priests are altogether indistinguishable from other innkeepers, shopkeepers, or for that matter from other worldly officials; in short they are just like us others: ergo we are all priests. The elevated spirituality assumed by Luther (for no one will dissuade me that when the gospels say give everything to the poor, the naive way of taking this is quite simply to do it, and

398

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 14–15

5

399

10

15

20

25

•

1850

the spiritually elevated way on the contrary is to say: I do not do it, but in my innermost being I am like the person who has done it and is every instant willing to do so), ah, nothing in the world is easier to falsify than just that. Luther was in his full right in crushing the egotistical element in the clergy’s power-hungry wish to be the intermediate authority; ah, but he has had only a poor knowledge of humanity in thinking that we can all be priests, that the only way this could be done in this earthly world was, as has happened, through the priests becoming innkeepers―and all of us priests. There ought to be a clergy as middle term. This clergy should have tight Christian reins, give expression at least in an approximate way to the strictest requirements of Xnty, for otherwise these die out and everything becomes sheer, out-and-out worldliness, as is the fact. Draconian laws lead to nothing, and this monstrous elevation with our all being priests leads to the distressing gibberish we see before us. This clergy would have to be recruited from such as whom were, either through great sins or very grievous misfortunes and the like, brought to the point of having to break completely with this world. But instead of gloomily and misanthropically making others unhappy by requiring the same of them, they should, from love of being a human being, and so far as truth allows, be lenient toward the weaker, or toward those who could not break so completely. Truly, this is indeed not to be greedy for power: to be oneself bound by stricter conditions―and naturally, willingly granting everyone who wishes it to submit to the more rigorous.

15

The Middle Term between Ideality’s Demand and Where We Are.

30

It is easy to see that the N.T., particularly the gospels, contain only ideality’s demands, and do so absolutely. We have now grown accustomed to saying, without further ado, that it was solely for the apostles, it does not apply to us. You, my God, what a strange God, to grant a holy scripture that concerns only the few people who heard it word of mouth― and not the whole hum. race. No, each person must experience the demands of ideality, and as has been said in another place, it is apostolic to relate not to the demands of ideality, but to div. authority.

35

407

408

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 15–18

•

1850

Each person must measure him- or herself before God against the demand of ideality―and then, before God, but responsibly, have recourse to grace.

400

“Grace.”

To be allowed to live one’s life in such a way that one protects oneself and pampers oneself so as to have good days―and then to believe that one will be blessed by grace. Yes, that is hum. wisdom. But it is not Xnty. Xnty means one must live to see that it is precisely Xnty that, humanly speaking, makes one unhappy, that is, when one is tempted to think it a merit to endure: to then humble oneself infinitely before God in one’s sin, and understand that it is by grace that one is saved, by that and that alone: that is Xnty.

16

10

15

Grace―Xndom Just as the most degenerate countries are those in which a rich and fertile nature produces everything without anyone being compelled to work, so too is Xndom, with the help of a “grace” that is taken in vain, demoralized in a way that was not even true of paganism.

A Penitent Is Best Able to Proclaim Truth. It can be seen also in this way: the fact that Peter denied [Christ] gave him headway, for in repenting he had infinitely much to make up for. The fact that Paul had persecuted the congregation, that gave him headway, for he had infinitely much to make good. Incidentally, there are some remarks from another angle about this idea that were placed in the Bible case on the desk last year, but which now lie in a bundle by itself placed in the middlemost broad drawer in the desk.

17

20

18

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 19–21

19

5

401

10

15

20 20

25

30

21

35

•

1850

It is easy to see that a pers. has to be brought to great extremes in order to take refuge in one who is crucified. True enough, one says: he suffered and died precisely to save me. Good, but it is just as true that his whole life was a kind of suffering in order to leave me a footprint. It does not really do to move from the crucified one to a dance hall, to let him be crucified so that I live according to this melody: Rejoice at life―and rejoice once again, quite unconcerned, because there is a person who has let himself be crucified for you. Even if it were possible that the crucified one could have gone in for such a thing, it would nevertheless be objectionable to any better pers. The fault of the Middle Ages was this monastic asceticism. What Xnty demands of Xns, on the contrary, is to be witnesses to the truth―and then suffering will surely come.

I wonder whether Bishop Mynster dares maintain that the world has now become better? He has not made such a claim, either; on the contrary he portrays it in sufficiently dark hues. But how then does he explain that Xnty is not persecuted these days? Alas, he does not involve himself in such questions, so circumspect is he, to be sure. The explanation is otherwise obvious enough: because Xnty has come to nothing. Satirically enough, for that matter: the world is becoming worse but Xnty is no longer persecuted―one should think this was proof that the world had become better. Xnty is no longer persecuted―yes, I can believe it, in a certain sense people will have a hard time persecuting it, inasmuch as it is nowhere to be found.

Martensen―and Me. Martensen’s bastion is essentially the clergy. It is obvious that the clergy hold me in suspicion because I have no livelihood.

409

410

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 21–22

•

1850

They have a certain suspicion that it could be risky to have Xnty proclaimed by a person who does it free of charge. Martensen’s “sound teaching” on the other hand finds the clergy’s support. They think like this: Xnty was originally an illness at the time it was proclaimed by those who offered their own lives. Thus Xnty came into the world as an invalid. But regardless of how well it went, or how badly it went, it gradually gained strength―and became “sound teaching”; the proclaimers did not become sacrificial offerings themselves but rather took offerings and grew fat through offerings and fees.

5

10

402

The Daily Press. This dreadful evil has been produced, among other things, by the following: What rules the world is not exactly the fear of God but fear of man. Hence this anxiety about being a single individual, and this tendency to hide beneath one abstraction or another; hence the anonymity, hence calling oneself the editorship, etc., etc. On the other hand: what envy absolutely targets is the single individual; envy will not tolerate that a single individual is meaningful, let alone eminent. This is why envy nurtures pure abstractions: the editorship, anonymity etc., etc. It is in envy’s interest to uphold the idea that even the most eminent single individual is a trifle in the face of an abstraction, even if this notoriously arises through an individual man calling himself “the editorship.” Envy cannot bear the sight of superiority, it therefore protects the abstractions because they are invisible. Ultimately, an abstraction relates to hum. fantasy, and the imaginary exercises enormous power. Even the most remarkable individual is still just one actual being―but “the editorship”―yes indeed, no one, no one knows what huge capacity lurks behind it. Summa summarum: The hum. race ceased to fear God. Then came the punishment: the race became afraid of itself, and nurtures the imaginary before which it then trembles. * * Debate about the press laws in France interests me: at last it has come to the point where people are compelled to speak up. 33 Summa summarum] Latin, In summary.

22

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 22

5

403 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

It is beyond compare to hear the journalists’ squeal that the daily press is an impossibility without anonymity. Truly an excellent admission of what weak characters they are; and from another angle, if everything depends on anonymity, then all the more important that, if possible, it is made impossible. But still the press defends itself: it is impractical, it is impossible to implement―and the journalists cheer. Imagine that the world of thieves had discovered a way of making it impossible to discover the perpetrator; what joy among the thieves! And what joy among the journalists that presumably it cannot be done. Whether it is true that anonymity is one of the greatest moral evils is not something the journalist troubles himself about at all; he says simply: thank heavens it is impossible to eradicate anonymity. Oh, of all the corrupters of the human race, the most abominable, you journalists! Oh, of all tyrants most detestable, you journalists, you who tyrannize through craven fear of man. The journalists could, however, be mistaken; perhaps it is feasible. But the fact is that no one dares speak out; many still live in the brutish bliss of the belief that the daily press is the greatest and most priceless good; others no doubt understand that it is not, but tremble before the power of the journalists. It was still the case not so long ago that anyone who dared to doubt that the daily press was an invaluable good, the pride of the human race, was considered a dolt who could not rise to such elevated thoughts. From what has been essayed so far, no one has reached a conclusion about whether or not it is impossible to legally put an end to anonymity. Let us imagine a state (it would be a self-contradiction, but we can imagine it) where theft was considered humankind’s greatest discovery, an invaluable good etc.―yes, legislation on theft under these conditions would surely be an impossibility. But when, in governments, people have peace and quiet to look on theft as a crime, and it is considered valuable to come up with sharper and sharper definitions: then we have really good theft laws. Likewise with anonymity. Let the gloss be removed from it, let the opinion be that anonymity is base. Not only is much gained by this alone, but then legal provisions against it will follow. It is one thing to write laws on condition that writing them is a martyrdom, another to dare in peace and quiet to employ one’s mental acuity working them out and to be rewarded with thanks for it as for a good deed.

411

412

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 23

•

1850

Mixture of Judaism and Xnty.

1

5

10

[a]

And suffering will surely come. For the moment an imitator places an essentially Christian action in the world, with its qualitatively proper mark, he will also collide with the world, with Xndom. Every essentially Christian action has the mark of the quid nimis that offends. If you possess a million, give 100,000 rd to the poor,

8 quid nimis] Latin, excess.

The crumb of religiousness one sees in Christendom (and it is not much) is rlly Judaism with a confusing admixture of something Xn, as I have remarked elsewhere. Here is how one lives: One believes (God only knows how many do, but eh bien, I take it they do) there is a God, a Father in Heaven. This God controls everything; it is up to him whether things go well or ill in the world, whether I am to have success or adversity and the like. That is to say, nothing here is decided about the lot of the pious in the world; at times a pious person lives at ease and fortune smiles on him, while another pious person faces only misfortune, and yet both are pious―it is impossible to prove from their lives’ fates whether or not they are pious.―This God has written his law on the hum. heart and has also revealed it to him in other ways. But this God has never presented himself as an exemplar. This is the kind of religiousness peop. hold to now, and they then introduce Xt merely as the alleviating factor, as grace. But Xt is also the exemplar. In relating to Xt, and every instant that I relate to Xt, I commit myself to imitation. This has been totally abolished. Or is this what it means to imitate Xt, to let him, so to speak, go his own way in suffering―thus he brings about grace―which I then take and go my own way[?] Once there is an exemplar, imitation is obligatory. What does imitation imply? It means a striving for my life’s conformity with the exemplar. But the fact that there is an exemplar again posits a necessary relation between being the pious person and what befalls the pious person. This pious person who is not marked in a quite definite way is eo ipso not the pious person. Try it now. I can pray to God for a life of ease because God has posited no necessary relation 8 eh bien] French, very well. x eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

23

5

404

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 23–24

5

405

10

15

20

25

between piety and suffering in this world. But what the exemplar expresses is, to the contrary, that piety is a matter of suffering in this world. Can I now beg Xt for a life of ease[?] That is impossible because it is Xt I am asking, and I am indirectly saying that I am asking him to exempt me from the imitation that is precisely what he demands. And yet in Xndom one invokes Xt’s name bluntly to secure a life of ease with the help of grace. The frightening thing about Xnty is not the suffering that comes, but the understanding that by involving myself with Xt, suffering must follow. So I can very well pray to him to help me endure, but not to be exempted, because that mocks him. Xnty could not present itself to the contemporary disciples as frighteningly as that, for they saw no necessary connection between suffering and Xnty; on the contrary, until the suffering arrived, they hoped for just the opposite. Nor did his contemporaries have the exemplar in quite the same sense (for contemporaneity with him was the time during which the exemplar developed, a development that accordingly ends with his death), nor did they have “grace,” which is earned through the suffering and death of the exemplar. But grace is not to be understood in the sense that I am exempted from suffering, but that I am treated gently, and that I am freed from the anxiety of merit as though, through suffering, I should obtain blessedness on my own.

•

1850

413

then you will make a hit; give everything then you will collide. Take a large livelihood, an honorable position in order to proclaim Xnty, then perhaps you will be a big hit; renounce everything, every advantage you might gain by proclaiming Xnty, then you will collide.

1

“Grace”―The Christian Reduplication

10

5

30

40

Christianity always has reduplication within it. If “grace” stands in relation to living a life of pleasure and unconcern, then grace is taken in vain. Grace relates to my dying away, which is what the exemplar gave expression to at the time, while the exemplar’s suffering and death were the acquisition of grace. I too shall die away―but then be saved by grace. The hum. concept of grace is this: now we should be completely free, which is why there is grace.

ax

)

35

x a

)

24

414

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 24–25

•

1850

The Christian concept is: no, you shall suffer and suffer―and then be saved by grace. It is easy to see the mark of offense. For the natural man it can be offensive merely to hear talk of grace, insofar as he wants to make himself righteous. But, eh bien, he says, fine, I will humbly accept grace, but then I also want to be free. Alas, not so, says Xnty, you are going to suffer and suffer―and then you will have to humble yourself anyway and accept the fact that it is through grace that you are saved. Alas, only Xnty has a conception of the divine in which God is infinitely elevated; we hum. beings make God fairly insignificant.

5

406

10

15

The Daily Press. I am not of the opinion that effective [anti-press] laws are an impossibility. But I do think that what will save humanity from this evil (over which Satan himself has proudly exulted and said: at last I have invented a depravation that is secured in such a way that any precautionary measure against it is practically unrealizable) is something quite different: true Xnty. A small flock of true Xns, spread out as single individuals, would be able to take the matter up. True Xns are to be understood as those who believe and whose lives express their dedication to suffering for the truth; there is no wavering in their action, as though they gradually figured out that one could also serve the truth―and enjoy success in this world. Look at such people, they are dead to the world, it is only they who manage to get the message across. The constant cry that it should be impossible to get the upper hand over the daily press is simply an expression of how little those now living have a conception of what it means to want to suffer

25

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 25–28

5

•

1850

415

for the truth, to stake a whole life; it is simply an expression of how effeminately peop. now live. And I do not deny that for peop. like those now living, it would indeed be an impossibility to take it up with the press, peop. who have no eternity to hope for and no life to sacrifice.

407

26

10

The Jesuits―the Daily Press. The Jesuits, in their degeneration, represented the most disgraceful attempt to take control over conscience. The daily press is the meanest attempt to establish the lack of conscience as a principle of the state and humankind.

15

27

20

25

Xnty―Infant Baptism. If Xnty were quite straightforwardly a good, like an earthly good, e.g., money, then it would be understandable if the child were put in possession of it as early as possible. But because Xnty is a good whose first principle is an obligation to be willing to suffer for truth, there is something not quite right about being in such a hurry. And on the other hand, there is also a question of what interest Xnty can have in being overloaded to such a degree with millions of―baptized Xns who otherwise have nothing to do with Xnty.

30

28

35

Christianity―Suffering. With everything else in the world, it is true that if I start on something, it is possible that it might go well for me but also that it might go badly―but not with Xnty. Here, if no suffering follows, then neither has my life expressed true Xnty.

[a]

cf. p. 43. But such disingenuous talk is constant in Xndom. People say that Xnty is the highest and greatest good, but they keep silent about how this ought to be more deeply understood, namely that Xnty is the highest good in the sense of eternity, whereas in precisely the earthly sense it makes a pers. unhappy.―The Xn is blessed, people say, but then they fail to say in what sense, namely that in Xnty’s opinion this is in the sense of eternity, though the Xn is tormented in the earthly sense.―People say: Xnty is the healing power for sufferings, but they do not say what these sufferings are, namely that Xnty is thinking of the anxiety of conscience, fear of judgment, etc., whereas, in compensation for saving a pers. from these sufferings, it precisely imposes earthly sufferings on him, the sufferings of temporality.

1

5

10

15

20

25

416

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 28

•

1850

If this is not so, then the exemplar is, in one way or another, an untruth. Either because the exemplar has expressed something only accidental (that he, living at that time, experienced a particular kind of opposition, and so on) and thus is not essentially the exemplar, or because there ought to be several exemplars (one expressing that it is truth to suffer, another that it is truth to stay out of trouble, and so on), in which case the “exemplar” is untrue because it is only one among others. But, you say: [“]When a pers. professes to be Xn and in other respects lives like others, then he must leave to God the way things turn out for him in the world.” I will not speak now about the fact that there is something suspicious about the fact that professing Xnty is understood no differently than it is now understood in Xndom: to be baptized as a child, etc., or to seek a post as a theol. graduate; for if this is what it is to profess Xt, then it is unlikely that one will collide with the world, whereas from a Xn point of view one assumes a great responsibility by taking part in such an illusion. However I will not talk about that now. But beyond professing Xt (saying I am a Xn and believing what a Xn is supposed to believe), it is also required that I act in a Xn way (which corresponds especially to the fact that there is an “exemplar” and that true Xnty is imitation). So try it. Put in motion one of the actions marked as Christian and you shall indeed see collision. This world lies in sheer relativity―and the quality of being Xn is the absolute: such an action must collide quite decisively with actuality. Sure enough, no one, when putting the absolute into effect, not even an apostle, can sustain it to such a degree that sustaining it is identical with being the absolute―which is why, when it happened, everything split apart, the curtain of the temple, the graves, the whole of existence, all this relativity―but the collision will be perilous nonetheless. But the fact is, there may not be a single case of an action essentially marked as Christian seen in any generation; it only happens to a certain degree, and so too, correspondingly, with the collision.

408 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 29–32 29

•

1850

417

Unhappy―Guilty. Hum. sympathy protects itself against the misfortunate pers. by explaining his misfortune as guilt: then one is rid of him. And meanwhile we are all Xns.

409 5

30

Debating with Peop. about What Christianity Is

10

is a mistake, for with very, very few exceptions, their tactic is precisely to ward off understanding or discovering what Xnty is because they already sense that it is fairly easy to understand but that it would interfere with their lives.

31

15

20

25

32

30

The Disparity between Christianity and Christianity in Christendom

is that Xnty speaks incessantly of eternity, it thinks constantly of the eternal―and then Xndom comes along and says the same thing and thinks of the earthly life. The apostle says: rejoice always―that is, with the thought of eternity, for here in the world you shall have misery enough. Xndom too says: a Xn always rejoices, but understanding that to mean earthly joy, that he is sound and in good health, has zest for life, etc.―Xnty says that everything is bestowed on us by grace, happiness, health, blessedness―it thinks constantly of eternity, of which it has such an immense conception. Xndom repeats what is said and understands it as being about this life. And so it is everywhere.

One gets a beautiful result if one eliminates the first two lines and last two lines of a hymn for Ascension Day, and then alters the punctuation a little so it reads: Lehr’ mich nur im Geiste leben, Als vor Deinen Augen da: Fremd der Welt, der Zeit, den Sinnen, Bei Dir abgeschieden drinnen. 30 Lehr’ mich … abgeschieden drinnen] German, Teach me to live in spirit alone /As there before your eyes / Stranger to the world, to time, the senses / In thee, isolated within.

[a]

cf. p. 38 in the margin

1

418

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 32–34

•

1850

Instead, Tersteegen has a period, and then two more lines, whereby the beauty is lost.

410

The Proclamation Now Current in Christendom is lèse-majesté against Xnty. Instead of 1) bearing witness, 2) using authority 3) tendering a life that is willing to put up with the consequences of doing so―in brief, instead of staying close to God and leaving the rest to him―one wants, partly in a paltry mediocrity that has never had a notion of anything more elevated, partly from fear of man, and finally also for the sake of worldly gain, to be on good terms with peop., and therefore transform them endlessly into the authority that judges truth. Of course Xnty, too, would come off badly in our time. That a hum. being should be subject to a master so that every day and every hour was committed to serving God, that he should actually deny himself in this way, that loving God should be such a serious a matter that it meant hating the world―it is indeed seditious, one will say. Yes, quite right. Xnty is also “insurrection,” that is, as soon as Xnty is presented in its truth, peop. will rise up against it. But where in our time are those who have even suspected such a thing[?] For even that much requires being removed from one’s relationship to others so that coming passably near God is a possibility. But of course most peop. are, from birth to the grave, so babbled into a relation with “the others” so that it never occurs to them that absolute thoughts exist.

Concerning Publication of the Later Writings. I think I can see quite clearly that if I were to die now, the effect of my life would be extraordinary. Yet on the other hand, if I am to stay alive, I would of course have to publish them. The thought then arises again, is this not a little impatient― and suppose you died the day after you had published them! The fact of the matter is this. These writings would throw light on how much has been entrusted to me. But then it is so much a part of my nature to think less of myself than I am. Ah, it has

33 5

10

15

20

25

34

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 34–35 411

5

10

15

35

20

25

30

35

•

1850

done my spirit so much good to appear as a joker, frivolous, an egotist, etc., while I have been working day and night. And it will be as though to sadden my spirit were I myself to speak directly of the extraordinary things that have been granted me. And yet I understand that in another way it might be my duty, and that this hanging back is a kind of selfishness. While my situation is not what one otherwise finds―that it vexes a man to say more of himself than he is­―my collision is the opposite: I would so much rather say less of myself than I am. Yes, I confess it, there was an anger, an indignation in my soul, which meant that it did me much good when Martensen, e.g., was proclaimed the great genius, the earnest Xn who regenerated both science and Xnty in the Nordic countries―while I was a fugitive bird, a diffuse mind, etc. And so on, in so many ways.

Possibility―Actuality. Now Mynster pontificates and says: and he (Xt) did not hold it back but said the great words: I am a king―and then Mynster weeps, I, Miss Jespersen, student Møller, councillor Nissen, wholesaler Grønberg, etc., etc., and while weeping, we admire Mynster; many are no doubt unclear whether they weep at the thought of Xt or whether these are tears of admiration for Mynster. When he said these words―believe me, the Jews grinned, and Pilate shrugged his shoulders―and we others, what have we done[?] This, it seems to me, is something of which I could convince a stone. And yet, not even this may be said―or you will see how actuality judges it. You will touch no one (alas, like his excellency, his touching excellency) they would laugh you out of the place, then accuse you of conceit and pride, and impracticality. And one is not supposed to let oneself be consoled by the thought of death!

419

420

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 36

•

1850 412

1

[a]

[b]

5

10

R. Nielsen.

R. Nielsen

a

He is, I would say, an egotist who has seen the significance of my cause, and then strictly egotistically thought: if only I could make it my own. Really, he would rather I were dead. If that were the case he would also give me what is mine with all stops out. But alive, I am an embarrassment. He began by trying to elbow me out almost completely so as to push himself forward with his independent

With regard to my primary aim, the accent should have fallen on the fact that it was a striving with no finite goal but, in service to the idea, undertaken with sheer self-sacrifice: I lost money while others earned it, I was derided while others received the highest honor, etc. And then attention should have been drawn to the way this sacrifice qualifies someone to pass indirect judgment on the Xndom of this age by examining how the age judged such striving. A notion of the activity of the clergy is also provided when they take someone to task for having no living or position even though he works as much as everyone else does. Nielsen’s self-denial should have consisted of the fact that he, Prof. and Knight of the Dannebrog and so on, was nonetheless honest enough to be willing to attest to it all. Instead he takes a couple of propositions (more or less as though I, too, were someone who had sought a professorship and then put some writings together), formulates some principles from these, and submits the matter for debate with another professor. And not only that, he makes an attempt (with the big book) to obscure the identity of the source from which these thoughts have come into the world, and has the audacity to assume independent originality. God in Heaven. And all this after having been privately tutored by me. Still, I do not pass judgment, for I have only my own benchmark and lack a conception of what it is like to be a pers. who has always been wrapped up in worldly concerns like that. The matter has been especially difficult for me because I had taken him into my God-relationship― but this has also had its significance for me.

36

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 37–39 413

37

5

10

Christianity―Judaism. This is the only way one can one see how heterogeneous they are: Judaism postulates family life as the form that devoutness takes. Xnty shatters all this with the absoluteness of the God-relationship, which can lead to hatred of father and mother. Judaism is a fear of God that has its home in this world; Xnty is alienation from this world. In Judaism the reward for fearing God is blessedness in this world; Xnty is hatred of this world. The collisions related to piety, which Xnty itself establishes, must be regarded by Judaism as ungodly, that is, as distant as possible from being an expression of devoutness.

•

1850

421

magnum opus. But circumstances stood in his way and forced him to some extent into the truth.

1

a

also somewhat annoyed at his subordinate position in relation to Martensen

5

15

38

20

25

30

39

Christianity―To Die Away. [T]hat this is the case is seen alone from the fact that it is said: you shall love Xt. But to love is to be transformed in likeness with the beloved; otherwise it is simply a desire to profit from him. And if one wants to do so, to love Xt, then all Xndom cries out: it is presumptuousness―then on Sunday the priest preaches that this is exactly what one ought to do. The difference is that the priestly chatter on Sunday is a diversion; it is something else to take it seriously―and it is something people will not do. They stand there and conjure up what is the greatest for a pers. and say that this is what he must do―and then if he does it in earnest, they say it is presumptuousness.

Teacher―Disciple. Generally, it is the teacher, the master, who gathers everyone around himself. Then a disciple

[a]

But if it is presumptuous to want to do so, then it is also presumptuous to advocate it in a sermon. So “it is presumptuousness.” Yes, if wanting to love Xt to the point of striving to imitate him, if this were quite plainly something great (like, e.g., wanting to love a princess and so on), then it would be quite in order, to avoid doing this so as not to be presumptuous. But because loving Xt is, from the start, just what flesh and blood most of all shrink from, it is quite another matter that someone who desists has the right to say that one does so to avoid being presumptuous. But we are left here again with all the official hypocrisy that is the preserve of Protestantism: it is possible that it is

10

15

20

25

422

1

5

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 39–40

piety which out of God-fearingness does not risk it (though here it is always another matter), and it can be the most ungodly wretchedness that exploits the opportunity to be free of it, and, in addition, takes advantage of the claim that it is to avoid presumptuousness.

•

1850

comes and captures the attention of only a few. He explains that this is because he lacks the master’s abilities and gifts. Take Xt. Xt says: come hither―and everyone takes flight. The Right Reverend gentleman says: come hither all of you, etc.―and peop. rush to him. Isn’t this because the Right Reverend gentleman does it badly, since here again Xnty has inverse proportions[?] The invitation is not straightforwardly inviting (like the Right Reverend gentleman’s roaring, to which everyone flocks) but is just as much repulsive.

414

5

10

The Struggler’s Sigh.

40

Oh, were everyone to oppose me, and were misfortune to follow upon misfortune (which is often more painful than the opposition of men, which one knows must come), one thing remains, O God, the testimony of spirit. When you, who indeed dispose over everything, who at each instant have millions of possibilities, when you, infinite love, let all of this oppose me or, insofar as through some error of judgment I myself am responsible for some of it, when you, infinite love, thus let me make such a mistake, when, alas, it seems as if you have withdrawn: there is still a fellowship between us, the testimony of the spirit. If there were no testimony of the spirit, if, with its help, you did not, after all, hold on to the one you put to the hardest test, then I would not know whether I was coming or going, it would be impossible for me to know where I was, whether opposition and misfortune were your fatherly discipline to frighten me to turn back, or opposition and misfortune were signs that that I was on the right road, the narrow road, where the spirit’s testimony is the only sign.

15



20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 41–43 41

5

415

10

15

20

42

25

•

1850

423

“The Monastery” was nevertheless a point de vüe to help a person determine where he was, whether he had climbed higher in perfection than the monastery or had sunk into rank worldliness. Then they let “the monastery” fall away, and for a long time now we have fooled around in utter darkness about where we are, and everything profane flourishes as never before. “Faith” has now to a great extent become hidden inwardness, not even remotely detectable in peoples’ lives, though they still protest that deep within, etc.―faith has become hidden inwardness to such an extent that ultimately a new kind of faith will be called for in relation to “faith,” having faith that I have faith. What once inspired a person to witness not only in word but to witness in deed, has now become something so imperceptibly recondite that not only a third party, but also the person himself needs faith to believe that he has faith,[a]

Today (in the sermon on the gospel about the false prophets) Visby correctly observed that sometimes one judges wrongly, believing a person’s fine words and manner of speech while his life shows the opposite. But one can sometimes also judge wrongly by concluding from a person’s speech that his life is depraved; for sometimes a person’s life is better than his speech.

30

43

About Myself.

35

There is another reason I am uneasy about speaking to anyone about the economic concerns I might run into; for I have no doubt that everyone will say to me: You are not crazy enough to want to squander more; first secure the earthly, etc. 2 point de vüe] French, properly “point de vue,” point of view.

[a]

yes, ironically enough, it most often takes an extraordinary faith to have faith that a person has faith, ora to have faith that he [himself] has faith. a

he himself needs an extraordinary faith

1

5

424

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 43–45

•

1850

That is just what frightens me, that my lower instincts will receive some disturbing approval that may end up destroying me. If there were someone whose life clearly bore the mark of being under a much greater strain than mine, much further along―yes, I could speak to him without danger. But in this worldliness into which the religious has sunk, where do I find such a person[?]

Christianity―Human Being. “But if Xnty, taken in its strictest form, will make a pers. unhappy, hmnly speaking, for the whole of this life, it is almost too much to demand that a pers. get involved.” To this Xnty would have to reply: the fact that you can speak like that reveals that you lack a divine understanding of how dreadful sin is, as well as a divine understanding of what eternal blessedness is; if you had this counterweight, you would discover that even on this account, Xnty is an absolute infinite gain. By the way, it is usually the case that those who have served Xnty on the strictest terms (provided that this has been the truth within them) have been forced to do so. Via unique circumstances, they have been brought to such extremities that they must proceed onward.

416 5

44

15

20

25

In the sermon on the epistle for the 4th Sunday after Epiphany Luther touches on an interpretation of Xnty as though it were, in a way, God’s wrath. He explains that to love God is to love one’s neighbor. For two reasons. The first is because God does not need our love. The other is that God has made foolishness of the world and wants to be loved during affliction and lamentation. 1 Cor 1:21 (“For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through sheer wisdom, etc.”). Therefore, says Luther, he has also sacrificed himself in lamentation and death on the cross, and let his believers suffer in the same way so that anyone who had not wanted to

45

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 45–47

417

10

•

1850

love God earlier when he gave them food and drink, honor and wealth, should now love him in hunger and sorrow, in misfortune and ignominy. So the category here is this: the God-relationship is not straightforward (as in Judaism) but is inversely identifiable. Here too is the mark of offense, to love God―not only when things go against one (for that is not enough to establish the possibility of offense categorically, since opposition and whatever comes with it can have a source other than God), no, when opposition comes precisely from the God-relationship, arises from abiding by God. As it says in the gospel: when persecution arises on account of the Word.

46

Martyrdom.

15

Even the martyrs will differ in the present age. Dying from spiritual exertion, mental suffering, and the like could not occur in the past, when it was a matter of life and death from the start. Nor were there at that time the huge quantities of reflection to take care of, the purely intellectual tasks, those reflections complicated with all the counterfeit versions of Christianity, the millions of titular Xns. The fewer thoughts there are, the less reflection there is, the closer the decision is to life and death. It is the same everywhere. Just one example from another context: that is why in earlier times there was quick recourse to the corporeal when raising children. A bloodless martyrdom, then. Yet it is perhaps even more tormenting because the more extensive the reflection is, the more the mentally racking the vilification. Moreover, the bloodless martyrdom, unlike the catastrophe of life and death, lacks the support that otherwise gives strength and that defines one’s position and keeps one on the spot.

20

25

30

47

Grundtvig himself has verbosely transformed Grundtvigian talk about the dead letter into a deadening conceit.

425

426

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 48–50

•

1850

In one sense Bürger’s Lenore is right: O, Mutter, Mutter, was mir brennt Das lindert mir kein Sacrament. Xnty knows but one suffering: that of sin. If Lenore wants to transform her suffering and, e.g., sorrow less over Wilhelm than over having rebelled against God in her despair, then Xnty can help. Her mother’s remark, by the way, is characteristic of Xndom: prescribing the sacrament without further ado for unhappy love―so why not also for fever and the like? (which has also been done).

Poverty, It is one thing to quite arbitrarily make poverty into piousness, as though poverty were something in and of itself. This basically transforms God into a kind of great pasha who sits there idly, and to whom the pious person says: look at me now; you shall see that I can live on bread and water. It is another thing when poverty relates to the idea that a person’s life serves. Assume, e.g., that conditions are such that if the idea is to be truly served, then there is scarcely time left over to dedicate to one’s livelihood, and then it is indeed a duty to choose scarcity of time and a meager livelihood rather than acquiring more at the expense of the idea. Or suppose that poverty relates to the idea itself. Take a theol. graduate who is practically offered a clerical post as the way to make a living, but has doubts about taking it because he fears contact with all this worldliness in the forecourt lest his life might express that this is how it ought to be. You see, here poverty is borne by the idea and bears the idea. And so on, in many ways.

48

418

10

49

20

25

30

It Is Existence That Preaches

50

not the mouth. Take 3 clerics who live in different circumstances: a prelate, a well-to-do parish priest, a genuinely ascetic mendi-

35

3 O, Mutter … kein Sacrament] German, Oh mother, mother, what is burning me / is something no sacrament relieves.

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 50–52

419

•

1850

cant friar. All three preach about the “daily bread” for which we pray; they may say the same thing―but here the speaker, his character, his daily existence, surely provides the interpretation. And so it is everywhere. This the shrewd world, too, knows how to exploit shrewdly, just as well as Xnty knows how to insist that it is with existence that preaching is to be done, lest the whole thing be a sham.

51

Progress in My Life.

10

However much I was under a Socratic influence, however much I was disposed with all my being toward the category of “the single individual” when I first introduced it in the foreword to the two ed. discourses [of] 1843, it nonetheless had purely personal significance for me as well. The idea was not clear enough to me that I could have introduced it right then without that personal significance. When I used it a second time, i.e., intensified, in the dedication to the ed. discourses in various spirits, I understood that I was acting in a purely ideal way. When I broke off my engagement, it was a purely personal act before God. Only later did I grasp the significance of this step for the idea supporting my cause. If I now give up plans to become a priest, it might be because I immediately understand the ideal meaning of this negative step for the idea supporting my cause, such that it no longer begins with an essentially personal understanding of my actions one way or another, which I understand afterward as an expression of my cause’s idea. My God, my God, in this way―no, you are not forsaking me, but helping me.

15

20

25

30

52

35

About Myself. Previously I took pride in being able to see everything, to see that nothing escaped me. Now I take pride in seeing nothing, in calmly not seeing all the bestiality and sneering, and so on, that surrounds me.

427

428

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 53–55

•

1850

About Myself. And this is how I have been used. The category that was to come forth was “the single individual”―and then [my] existence more or less reached the mark. It has succeeded. But then who am I? Am I some devil of a pers. who understood it from the start, and who had the personal strength to hold on to it in daily existence? Oh, far from it. I have been helped. By what? By a fearful melancholia, a thorn in the flesh. I am a dreadful melancholic who has had the good luck and virtuosity to be able to hide it, and that is why I have fought. But Governance keeps me melancholic. However, I have understood the idea more and more and have had indescribable satisfaction and nothing but joy―but always helped by the torment that keeps me within bounds. What Governance would perhaps scarcely dare assign to any other pers., to approach the categorical expression of what it means to be the single individual without either straying into arrogance or being caught up in associations―here I have been somewhat successful. But Governance has made sure of quite another explanation―but the goal of making the category of the single individual visible has been achieved.

Strict Xnty. Mynster is an expression of the fact that proclaiming Xnty is one among many ways of finding a livelihood and becoming something in this world.―The ideal proclamation of Xnty seems to be proclaiming that Xnty is like (alas, remarkable company) gambling, drink, women, and so on. The way to waste money and become nothing. The fault I find in Mynster surely is not that he is not the idea itself, for wanting to be such a thing is insanity in a hum. being, but that he is able so purely sensuously and so narrow-mindedly to idolize this finite traffic.

That the life of Xt expresses the idea is self-evident. And these are the idea’s dialectical movements. When the absolutely extraordinary person leaves port and sets a course, his contemporaries are amazed that he is capable of absolutely everything. They follow him rejoicing, worried, and

53

420

10

15

20

54

25

30

55

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 55

•

1850

429

The concluding portion of entry NB20:55. To each of the two final paragraphs has been added text which continues out in the marginal column.

430

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 55–56

•

1850

curious only as to what he wants of finitude, whether he wants to be king or merely secretary of state, etc. Here he is he at his peak. It is now that he and his contemporaries must come to an understanding, when they see what he wants of the earthly. But what happens? He stays on this summit and rejects every finite τελος, will not possess anything earthly, not so much as to secure the very least. Then comes the transformation. To his contemporaries he is without predicates. His extraordinariness is transformed into nothing, to have become nothing, to the most pitiful of all. And the accusation against him is this: it is his own fault that he let the opportunity go. And yet ideally he stands at the same point, at the same zenith. And his eulogy is: he let the opportunity go.

The Turning Point in the World of Spirit. It is less a matter of what is said than of the ministering existence in relation to what is said. This is responsible for those feigned movements, when what is said is true but the ministering existence comes to express the opposite, e.g., makes a brilliant career by proclaiming that the truth must suffer in this world. Ah, how close I have come to that! And if in daily torment I had not been aware of the leash with which a higher power holds me, as it were, so that I do not give it the slip, I would have made a wrong turn 17 times. Having drawn Nielsen to me, how close I was at that point, allied with him and Stilling, to exploiting the polemical upper hand granted me, to making a direct attack on Mynster and Martensen, competing directly about who should have power and esteem, indicating one or another earthly advantage that I was after. And, humanly speaking, it was possible, my side is the stronger. But on the other hand, that very move would have given the cause a quite different support among the crowd as it became clear to them that there was something earthly I fought for, that perhaps I sought a high civil office to use to the advantage of my

5

422

10

15

56

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 56

423 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

•

1850

allies or, if they had no need of it, in any case to gain for them a feeling of power. But now I am bound with the thorn in the flesh and have also discovered new burdens on top of it. If that were not the case, I would very probably have acted on the strength of this common thought: I can enjoy earthly advantages just as much as anyone else, seeing that what I proclaim is much truer than what the others proclaim. One of the most powerful attempts to show that the truth must suffer would then have been transformed into a brilliant career for the preacher. I would have been a success and, in the success, presumably forgotten what I was after. On the other hand, the thorn in the flesh is now teaching me something else. It punishes me, mockingly, and says: do not trouble yourself, you lack the condition for seizing the opportunity. Alas, yes, I who am born for suffering. But then another voice too is heard, which says to me: Oh, my little friend, it is so infinitely well-intentioned on your behalf; there is an infinite love that has bound you like this. Now many a time you feel only pain, especially when faith is weak; in the hereafter you will understand it differently. I have also been subject to this illusion: that just as I understood how much of the extraordinary has been entrusted to me and how this could be put into the world in such a way that it would be understood, so also must I be the one who was meant to succeed, the victor in an external sense. Something of the kind has no doubt also come to Nielsen’s mind, no doubt also Stilling’s. Privately they may have reproached me for not seizing the opportunity. Alas, if it were the case that without the thorn in the flesh I would have possessed the maturity and earnestness to understand how to hold back, entirely on my own, yes, then I would have been great. But I have help: the thorn in the flesh―here it is as if someone is swimming with the help of a belt of cork, only in reverse, as with everything in the religious. Plainly, help is what supports, suffering helps in the opposite way. Religiously it is not the external that is to triumph, it triumphs by succumbing. That is why inner torment is the help that keeps one on the proper path.

431

432

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 57

•

1850

Through a Miracle of Christ to Be Saved from One Evil or Another―and Dying Away. One usually appeals to the fact that Christ performed miracles, healed the sick, etc., to show how plainly intelligible it is that everyone plainly wants to be his contemporary in order to seek his assistance. Let us look at this matter a little more closely. The question will always be what kind of existence the individual returns to after being helped. Xt’s meaning is evident: the person assisted in this way should now side with him, be an imitator, forsake this world. And he can see what this implies by observing Xt; he will also easily discover the consequence of taking his side. But if that is so, then it will be the case that most hum. ills are easier to put up with than this operation that is so painful for flesh and blood―actually to die from the world. Let me give an example. A pers. living at the time of Christ, on whom fortune has smiled in all other respects―there is only one torment under which he suffers: this life, which otherwise was far, far happier than most people’s lives―this life rlly disturbs him. If this cross could be removed, how he would enjoy life, how much he would thank the one who assisted him. Imagine him living at the same time as Xt. I will not dwell on the fact that it would hardly occur to such a pers. to turn to Xt, that he would no doubt be afraid that the matter would become too serious. But let us assume this is the case. So he turns to him. Let us suppose that Xt wants to help him―but Xt adds: then you must become my disciple by imitation. What then? I imagine this man will say: this is a difficult situation. I wanted to be rid of this cross so that I could properly enjoy life, and you are willing to help me on condition that I then die completely to this world. But in that case I am better off staying as I am, enjoying life as best I can, in spite of this torment of mine, rather than being assisted in this way; on the other hand, if I were actually to die to the world as you require, this torment does not matter all that much, not so as to make any particular difference. Take a lame person. Yes, someone who wants to enjoy life on a grand scale (e.g., a Lord Byron) could certainly wish to be healed― but not on condition of having to die to the world altogether. On the other hand, if I should really die to the world, it makes no great difference one way or the other whether I am lame or not.

57

5

424 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 57–59

•

1850

20

But here again one is dallying with Xt. It makes him into a wonder healer who helps out with a miracle―it is forgotten that he is a teacher. And even if Xt did not bind the one helped in this way to imitation, every better pers. would feel bound to it―if he has been helped by him through a miracle. And the matter is therefore the same. If someone wanted to enjoy life if Christ helped him, [but] said not a word about imitation: ah, simply being guilty of such ingratitude would be enough to ruin one’s enjoyment of life, even if unable to decide on being an imitator. Of the 10 lepers only one turned back―but I wonder if the 9 rlly felt the great joy of being healed, which reminded them constantly of having taken Xt in vain. To perform miracles Christ presupposes faith. This rlly implies that anyone who wants to be helped must be at the point of being willing to die to the world. Then he receives assistance, though he is also obligated in imitation to die to this world altogether. This is the situation―so all this about the miracle loses its seductive power.

58

A Socrates in Xndom.

425 5

10

15

25

30

59

Socrates could not prove the immortality of the soul; he simply said: this matter occupies me so much that I will order my life as though immortality were a fact―should there be none, eh bien, I still do not regret my choice, for this is the only matter that concerns me. What a great help it would already be in Xndom if there were someone who spoke and acted like that: I do not know whether Xnty is true, but I will order my whole life as though it were, stake my life on it―then if it proves not to be true, eh bien, I still do not regret my choice, for it is the only matter that concerns me.

The Wedding in Cana. Christendom has been making a terrible fuss about this wedding, but I do not know what they have proved from it.

433

434

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 59–60

•

1850

In the first place, the fact that Christ was present at a wedding proves nothing about marriage. As teacher it was his task to be present anywhere, always on the lookout for an opportunity to instruct. For he was not a professor who lectures at certain hours ex cathedra. Thus it proves nothing. Otherwise it could also be proven that Xt was an advocate of banquets and of Pharisees from the fact that Xt was frequently present at banquets and with Pharisees. But he changed the water into wine in order to gladden the party. True. But his mother had to prompt him to do it and he initially responded with a reprimand, so he was not especially inclined to do it. If we are to arrive at any conclusion from the story about Xnty’s judgment on marriage, we would have to say: marriage is related to Xnty in the same way as Mary here to the miracle; Xnty rlly does not want to have anything to do with it, is indifferent about whether one marries or not. But the woman pleads for it―and then Xnty gives in and, for an instant, enters into her conception of marriage.

426

10

15

20

To Pray in Xt’s Name. This is how Xndom presents it. I have a God in Heaven from whom I may expect all that is good (for he is infinite love)―alas, if only I were not a sinner. But now, through his suffering and death, Xt has made up for it and reconciled me with God―ergo, I may expect all that is good, and I may ask God for it. Here again we break off too quickly. We forget that Xt is the exemplar. We transform the relationship as though God were a powerful prince, Xt the powerful courtier next to him, his influence so great that when I pray in his name, my prayer is heard.― But this courtier does not pass himself off as the exemplar―I merely take advantage of his influence. If then I pray to God in Xt’s name for one or another benefit, or exemption from one or another ill, there is an “aber” inasmuch as Xt’s name, by binding me to imitation, puts me under an obligation to far greater suffering and privation by actually dying to the world.

5 ex cathedra] Latin (literally), from the chair.

60

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 61–63

•

1850

427

61

5

62

10

15

20

25

When I had published Concl. Postscript, my intention was to withdraw and concentrate more on my own relationship to Xnty. But in the meantime the external circumstances of my public life were so arranged that I discovered the Christian collisions existentially. This is an essential element in my own upbringing.

The Forgiveness of Sin. Hamann quotes a passage (volume 1 of his collected works in letter no. 40): [“]Wie es von drey Männern Gottes in der Schrift heißt: daß Gott ihnen vergab und ihr Thun strafte Ψ 99.” These are, as Hamann adds in a parenthesis, “two opposing concepts that seem to rescind each other.” But it is also a fitting expression of the Christian concept of the forgiveness of sins. In one of my earliest journals (from before I started as an author), I have noted that the forgiveness of sin consists not so much in the removal of the punishment as in the altered view that it is not punishment, that God is showing me mercy. Perhaps the painful suffering of punishment is not removed and takes its time, but my conception of it has changed. Now, I no longer bear this suffering burdened with the thought that it is the expression of God’s wrath; I bear it with God as I bear any other suffering. Conceptually, this is quite properly what forgiveness of sin amounts to, as does, if you will, the remission of punishment. For what is punishment? Punishment is not pain in and of itself; the same pain or suffering can indeed happen to another sheerly by accident. Punishment is the idea that this particular suffering is punishment. When this idea is removed, so too, rlly, is the punishment.

30

63

35

428

The Merely Human―The Christian. Mere human thought thinks like this: if I only succeed in getting through time―eternity is something I can surely get along with. The essentially Xn is: if only eternal happiness is a certainty for me, I shall no doubt manage time even if life should become difficult and burdensome for me. 10 Wie es … Thun strafte] German, Of three men of God, the scriptures say that God forgave them their sins but punished their actions.

435

436

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 63–65

•

1850

But the certainty of eternal happiness has been made too easy or wohlfeil for us, that is to say, we have transformed it into something imaginary.

In his sermon on “Christian prudence,” Mynster has an excellent passage on how worldly prudence busily occupies itself in immediately declaring anyone a fool who rlly risks something for truth, etc. Mynster then shows how this has always been the case, how this has happened not only to Xt and the apostles, but to all of truth’s zealous servants, how it is still true that worldly prudence calls them fools― alas, it does not occur to Mynster that worldly prudence, to be sure, has never called him a fool.

64

10

15

Faith―A Striving

1

5

10

15

[a]

Luther himself therefore insists that there should be fasting and the like,a though salvation must not to be made dependent upon it. Here is the dialectical aspect: salvation is not dependent on it ergo, one thinks, one can let go of striving completely. But this was never Luther’s view; if it was, he would have been a champion of dead faith. What he means is: if salvation is made dependent on it, then it is Law, and then it is through evil that a person is driven to strive. When it is faith that saves, a striving then follows,

What Luther says is quite true: if a pers. were to acquire his salvation through his own striving, it would have to end either in presumption or in despair, and that is why faith saves― Yet not in such a way that striving ceases completely. Faith ought to make striving possible, for the fact that I am saved by faith, that as far as that goes, nothing at all is demanded from me, ought to make it possible for me to strive, so that I do not collapse under impossibility but am encouraged and refreshed by the fact that my salvation has been decided, that I am a child of God on the strength of faith. This is how faith must relate to striving, both in its beginning and during its progress; but it cannot be the intention that striving should cease altogether.

a

thus, e.g., in the sermon on the epistle for the 1st Sunday in Lent and many other places.

2 wohlfeil] German, cheap.

65

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 66 429

66

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Is There a Private Relationship with Xt? It is quite possible that in the case of my own life I often see Xt too much as the examiner, as if I was supposed to strive on my own and he was simply to look to see how far I was able to come. I realize this, and I know that as a penitent I have confessed many a time before God that these were rlly impious thoughts because it is impious to entertain such thoughts in relationship to a savior. For this is not in the least a savior’s love. But on the other hand, things have rlly gone too far in the other direction. People imagine they have a private relationship to Xt. They join up with Xt, as they say, they want to work for his cause, as they say; but then they also believe that Xt is not as strict with the people who join the cause in that way. They forget that with Xt no such private relationship is possible; he looks, unchanged, upon the person who joins with him to see whether he strives honestly and earnestly. But people have wanted to form a regular coterie with Xt. A coterie survives because of a mutual understanding that members are not strict with each other about honesty, honor, upright behavior―while outwardly, with regard to others, they are. We have almost forgotten in what sense Xt has a cause. Someone with a cause in the temporal, earthly sense must form a coterie and become dependent on those he is in league with. Xt’s only cause is truth, in the eternal sense. He will have absolutely nothing else. That is why he must be just as strict with the one who joins with him as with anyone else. Someone who wants something earthly could be well served by an adherent who successfully carries his cause forward against all others while making an exception of himself―Xt cannot in all eternity use such an adherent; it is blasphemy.

•

1850

437

nurtured with the help of the good. But if no striving at all follows faith, indeed even the opposite, then is such a one lost, and why? Is it because the striving was not forthcoming? If so, the salvation would still have depended on striving. No, it is because striving’s failure to appear makes it apparent that he does not have faith, and therefore he is lost, because he does not have faith.

1

5

10

438

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 67–68

•

1850 430

Can a Theol. Graduate Demand to Be Ordained without Wanting to Have Any Clerical Appointment? As things are at present, I do not see that a theol. graduate could be denied ordination, if he so demanded, even if he had no desire for an appointment. It was the State Church that linked ordination to an appointment and a livelihood, but the State Church is now essentially dissolved.

67 5

10

Anonymity. 68

Anonymity has also demoralized the times this way: it has helped make the times characterless by abolishing character. Anyone who is discontent with the establishment, who in any way wants to play the reformer, wants to protest against it, wants to speak the language of truth extra ordinem, i.e., outside the media recognized by the state―he must also stand up and take full responsibility. He must not be afraid of risk, for that very risk shapes him, or is in any case the examination that decides whether he is good at such things or not. But you see, a way out was discovered with the help of anonymity. Let us assume that an abuse, an injustice occurs in one way or another. Everyone suffers under it. Well and good. But just because one person suffers an injustice, it does not follow that he is rlly the man called to protest. Now the rule should be that if I lack the power to raise my voice against injustice earnestly and with integrity, if I lack the courage to witness for the truth like that, then my task is to hold my tongue and suffer. No impatience. The person who keeps quiet and suffers because he recognizes that he is unfit to be a reformer, he too, is a moral character. It is only after the situation has been intensified by a long period of suffering and silence that true character emerges. But with the help of anonymity a shortcut has appeared. Every impatient coward who has not dared to use his own name―it might cost him his position or cause him disgrace or some other problem―now becomes, anonymously, a witness to the truth. 17 extra ordinem] Latin, outside the ordinary.

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 68 431

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

1850

Yes, no doubt it is convenient. Someone came up with the idea that anonymity was something meritorious, that it implied “concentrating on the issue itself.” Yes, thank you very much, and it was for the sake of “concentrating on the issue itself” that someone anonymously attacks another by name. The anonymous one was afraid to use his own name but not afraid to attack the other by name. Truly, this kind of courage marks a brilliant advance for wretched cowardice. Then the door was opened. Every kind of impatience and irritation came running with every triviality from the school of suffering―and became an anonymous reformer. Sometimes even schoolboys became reformers of the school board or an individually named teacher―anonymously. And though we have a police notice prohibiting ale-house keepers from serving alcohol to schoolboys, we have no order forbidding schoolboys from working at newspapers―I almost wrote forbidding journalists from serving schoolboys. Indeed it cannot be prevented because they can remain anonymous. Anyone who knows something about hum. nature knows that mediocrity, triviality, and petty passions are tempted to play the reformer, to talk the bold language of truth. And now this is spoken from morning to evening―by all these cowards who, just for the sake of the issue itself, conceal their name. At the newspaper office, this quite ordinary scene takes place: A man bluntly admits that, for this or that reason, he cannot very well sign his name, and remains anonymous. The editor and the author understand each other; and neither of the parties blush. The article is published―one would think it was by one of the heroes of truth. What follows from this, again, is that the desire to be a person of actual character, who under his own name exposes himself to real risk, becomes ridiculous, unwise, because it is possible to do the same thing in a far more comfortable way and speak only to the issue itself. Oh, you wretches, yes, certainly one can accomplish the same thing in a more comfortable way―[a]demoralize the entire society by speaking the noble language of truth―if it were in fact the same thing for a moral character to do some good with his particular protest and to do an infinite good by being a person of character. A sight the world was privy to in former timesb―a coxcomb of an agitator jumps forward as a reformer and then stands there, a target of derision―this we no longer see. No, now things are

439

[a]

one can

b

and this sight has its beneficial side

1

440

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 68–70

•

1850

more favorable for the strutting agitators―they remain anonymous and are thus never compromised. Meanwhile the anonymous ones thundered on― and they had to be heeded, for public opinion was being expressed, and anonymously “simply to serve the cause.”

The Religious State of Our Time is a fearful self-contradiction. In private one can get almost anyone to admit that he is a long way from Xnty, but officially the same people keep up appearances by claiming that we are all Xns.

432 5

69

10

A New Proof of the Bible’s Divinity.

70

Until now people have done as follows. They have said: all scripture is div. revelation, inspired, etc., ergo there must be the most perfect harmony among the reports down to the most trivial detail; it must be the most perfect Greek, etc., etc. Let us look at the matter in another way. God surely knows what is it to “believe,” what it means to require faith, namely that implies a rejection of direct communication and posits an ambiguity. See, now we are getting somewhere. Precisely because God wants Holy Scripture to be the object of faith and an offense to any other way of looking at it, it is precisely for that reason that these discrepancies have been carefully contrived (which will in any case be resolved into agreements in eternity): that is why it is in bad Greek, etc., etc. Take another situation. As ruler of the world, God also wants to be the object of a faith; he wants you and me to believe that he is the loving father, etc. A theory corresponding to harmony-theory would then have to require that the world, too, be so devoid of ambiguity that it was possible directly to sense and feel that God is love. But the world

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 70–71 433

5

10

is a long way from being like that. And why is it? Because God wants to be believed in faith. Similarly with Holy Scripture. But “faith” went out of fashion; the tension of passion, which is faith, seemed to peop. to be an exaggeration―and so if one wanted to concern oneself at all with the premise that there is a revealed word of God, it had to be of the kind that afforded a direct sense that it was God’s word, which must show perfect harmony throughout, etc. Scholarly efforts were not spared―yes, but even the most scholarly of efforts are still always as indolence compared with the kind of strenuousness belonging to faith.

•

1850

441

[a] In the Middle Ages, too, it was taught that the visible signs of the sacraments were there to “tempt” faith, i.e., to create an opposition, through the possibility of offense, from which faith could proceed so that the individual could choose faith, though there is no direct relationship.―Clement of Alex. taught that Holy Scripture employs allegories―so that the heretics would not be able to understand it, i.e., so that scripture would exist only for the faithful.

1

5

10

15 [b]

71

20

25

30

35

40

The Need of Our Time, Religiously Speaking, is not a new masterly work of eloquence and profundity, not a hitherto matchless acuity in determining the conceptual content of faith, etc., etc. The unwholesomeness of the age can consume something like that in half a year and the matter will have come no further. No, more good is done by someone who, for the sake of Xt, denied himself something, however insignificant. Action is what the time needs. It was no doubt occasionally presumptuous in former times when in all too comradely a fashion people approached the thought that they might try to emulate the exemplar. It was no doubt a misunderstanding when they, all too childishly, kept company with God and thought that he sat and watched me denying myself, giving up this or that trifle. Ah, but those times had one great good―a childlikeness that made it possible to seize hold of the assigned duties. Now, on the contrary, the ideal has been placed at such a terrible distance from the single individual that the ideal has become merely the idea of the human race; the ideal has been placed at such a distance from the single individual that it never in

And in scientific distraction people made God into a rather stupid God, who―because they had themselves forgotten what it means to have faith, or perhaps never knew―had forgotten or perhaps never knew what arrangements were required for something to be an object of “faith.”

15

20

442

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 71–73

•

1850

the remotest manner occurs to an individual to want to strive for likeness, as if this were just as unprofitable and foolish as barking at the moon. So distant is the ideal from the single individual that a whole world of prosaic wisdom, which would find it ridiculous if he started on such things, lies between him and the ideal; yes, he would find himself ridiculous. This, you see, is also presumption.

434

About Myself. If there were otherwise any similarity between my crumb of a duty in the world and that of a man like Moses, I would say the difference is this: he was afraid to take it on because he was not a gifted speaker―and a man who could speak was required. Alas, if that was the problem, I would be quite confident. But now an ascetic is required who can live on bread and water, and I am not that person. I have perhaps some robustness inasmuch as I am able to stand people’s judgment―but ascetic robustness is something I lack; it is foreign to my nature and entire upbringing, yes, I am even apprehensive about starting on such things because I am afraid of entering the field of the meritorious.

72

To Give Offense―To Take Offense.

73

Xt cries woe to those who give offense, to those by whom offense comes―and yet the possibility of offense is inseparable from any definition of what is Xn, and Xt repeats often enough “blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.” The difference is[:] The div. truth is “the truth,” but in such a way that the world takes offense at it. It cannot be otherwise. But one cannot say for that reason that it gives offense. Giving offense is something quite different, it is, e.g., a desire to intentionally wrench faith from the believer. For when one points to the possibility of offense in order to strengthen faith, that is the authentic Christian proclamation of Xnty.

5

10

15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 74

•

1850

435

74

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

436

An Agreement between Xndom and the World for Mutual Swindle. 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. This was also convenient from another perspective, that of “the world.” If Xnty becomes nothing but this kind of extraord[inary], extraord[inary] hidden inwardness, which is about so viel wie nichts, then the world pledges to put up with Xnty. That was a fine world. Naturally, it saw with half an eye that, with hidden inwardness’s help, it had conquered Xnty. That enormous power, Xnty, declared that its friendship was a hatred of the world―no, the world could not calmly stand by, nor was it allowed to. But a Xndom that, in total and complete hidden inwardness, hated the world, but that otherwise in every utterance expressed an intimate friendship with the world, that was in complete conformity to the world: [“]Yes, by all means,[”] the world said and thought―this kind of hatred can be conceded with pleasure as something quite harmless―and besides, thought the world, this hate residing in the hidden inwardness could also be a lie because 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. 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. It was refinement―ah, indeed; instead of refinement we sometimes use another expression, to be men of the world. Therefore Mynster, e.g., will say: Yes, but by being a teacher in the Church I am still confessing Xt. To that the answer must be: This is a roguish trick because the livelihood and the official position disguise what is characteristic of confession. 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 11 so viel wie nichts] German, as much as nothing.

443

444

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 74–75

•

1850

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. However, the degree to which one is allowed to do this is another matter because it is characteristic of Xnty to immediately draw ridicule, persecution, etc., if I properly confess it. True enough, by acting according to the Xn standard I incur similar treatment, but it might be the case that the resentment would be even greater if everyone knew that it was in order to confess Xt. For if worse came to worst, the world would rather come to terms with the eccentricity of genius, or treat it more gently, than put up with Xnty. Besides, in my own case it must be remembered that in my past I have already marked my relationship to Christianity according to quite another standard of measure than that of the functionaries and the bread and butter brothers; but the question is whether I ought to do more, which, after all, reminds me that I have understood that it was my duty to operate as a spy. Had I not had this peculiar thought, I would have had to act differently from the outset. But then neither would the achieved results have been accomplished: the indirect evidence against the Xndom we find ourselves in―the fact that a person believes he is Xn and yet cannot recognize Xn action or what conforms to it, and sings out that it is eccentricity, exaggeration, and the like. This would never have been achieved by a direct attack, by declaring oneself to be a Xn and judging others not to be; for then they would appeal, without blinking, to their hidden inwardness. And hidden inwardness was the very thing to be prodded, which can only be done indirectly.

5

10

15

20

25

30

Joke in Earnest.

75

In one of his Table Talks, Luther talks of what he does when the devil tempts him at night. He says to him: My good Satan, now you must really leave me in peace because you know that it is God’s will that peop. should work during the day and sleep at night.

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 76–77

•

1850

437

76

5

10

15

20

25

30

77

Luther―and the Situation in Protestantism. Luther complains (in the sermon on the epistle for the fourth Sunday in Lent) that there are far more people who prefer to hear a proclamation of the Law rather than a proclamation of the Gospel. In our time, it is just the opposite; we would prefer to hear nothing but the Gospel, the Gospel. But then again, our time has of course made such extraordinary progress in Xnty. Alas, no, the situation is quite different. When someone has a genuine interest in religion, the most immediate thing is for him to become enthusiastic and want to actualize it, to make himself worthy, and so forth. Certainly this can easily degenerate and become a dangerous fallacy, but it always proves a desire and interest in the matter. Then comes Luther, who, opposed to this juvenile approach, made faith the important thing. This was evidently too elevated for peop.; they were better able to understand, and preferred to hear, that they were to fast, to go on pilgrimages, etc.; but at least the desire to hear it and put it into action proves there is a desire for and interest in religion. Then, after Luther, came Protestantism. It found Luther’s approach to be excellent; that is, it did not have enough desire or interest to even try striving, fasting, giving alms, etc. It had something quite different to take care of―and just wanted to hear the gospel, the gospel. Oh Luther, Luther! Did you not know that draconian laws simply lead to an end to executions[?]―and so, too, when taken exponentially. However true it was for Luther, and however true it is for Christianity―it must be watched over with the greatest severity; otherwise worldliness takes it in vain, and it not only remains secularity through and through, but even boasts that it is the highest spirituality.

Human Drivel. Today I was speaking with a Right Reverend. He explained to me enthusiastically that what we rlly need are mendicant friars

445

446

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 77–80

•

1850

and the like. But why does the Right Reverend not become a mendicant friar himself? On this point it is not possible to say “I cannot,” for it is only a question of will. In other words, the Right Reverend prefers to occupy one of the big official positions. But next Sunday he will preach emotionally about that fact mendicant monks are what we rlly need. And we can go further: suppose such a mendicant friar actually arose and appeared among us, what would the Right Reverend do? He would immediately seize the opportunity to exclaim: This is what I have always said―and then he would all but imagine himself being that man, rather than imagining that his guilt becomes greater the longer and more loudly he preaches that mendicant friars are what is needed without acting accordingly. And even further: after the mendicant friar had been around for a year, the Right Reverend would be among those who cried: This is too much, this is too much―for now the matter will have become serious. Look at this Right Reverend, he sits calmly with his large salary, carefully watching out for a bigger post to become vacant so he can apply for that one. Amazing human drivel! Just give in to the drivel and that is where you find advancement and betterment. As for the truth, in this world there is no advancement, only regression.

438

5

10

15

20

The Moravian Brothers do not accentuate imitation―they compensate with a lyrical blood-theory, all that staring at Xt’s suffering.

78

In a Christian sense, it is altogether incorrect to accentuate that all humankind needs Xnty, and then to prove it again and again. This is the issue in Christianity: I have need of Xnty.

79

To die away is to see everything as one will see it at the moment of death, thus to bring death as close as possible. Will not even the most dazzling and enchanting pleasure, whether you

80 35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 80–82

439

5

15

82 20

25

30

35

1850

savored it or not, seem altogether without consequence at the moment of death[?] And inversely, will not every good deed that you did not fail to carry out―yes, for the sake of God in Heaven do not fail to carry it out―seem of the utmost importance at the moment of death[?]―Alas, who has managed to do that?

That Which Ties Us to Xt

81

10

•

There is a power called sin. If you want to be saved from it, then seek Xt. He is redemption―even though, humanly speaking, redemption is bitter; but if sin is truly more bitter to you, then there is no reason to hesitate. The final hour approaches, the hour of death. Xt promises you an infinite good right then. Heavenly bliss. Would you refuse it for anything else? So choose him. But in that case he makes it a condition to dispose over your life here in the world; he makes it somewhat more difficult for you―but he also helps you to bear it.

God is not worshiped in mood but in action; but here is the difficulty: it can so easily become narrow-mindedness and temptation toward thinking in terms of merit. Only the childlike disposition―or a love that loves God entirely―can do it properly. Here I am thinking of something like an ascetic action (for action in the way of testifying for the truth and against untruth is something one should quite plainly do). Take an example. Someone wants to devote certain days to holy thoughts; he knows there is a place, an environment which is particularly suited to preserving this earnest mood. But this place is some distance away so travel and lodging will cost quite a bit. Perhaps true worship in this case means saving the money, especially if he cannot afford it; in any case, maybe it is his duty to save. Yet even Xt approves a certain kind of pious squandering as, e.g., lavishing that expensive ointment on him. And here the point is that prudence is depravation.

447

448

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 83–84

•

1850 440

About Myself From early on I have had a thorn in the flesh, dreadful agonies, including isolation, which was by no means my own wish. If I had not been wealthy but had been forced to work for a living, I would have had to stake everything on getting rid of this evil, or I would have perished. But I had wealth―and I accepted that the suffering, through God’s infinite love, was again exactly the pressure that raised me above the commonplace. But it was my hope then that I would not be tested by economic difficulties. If, with all my advantages, I had been freed from the thorn in the flesh, it is not inconceivable that I would have made some attempt at asceticism; for I readily saw that in order properly to exercise power, one must also have complete control over oneself, or as much control as possible, also with regard to one’s body. I do not commend this motive, I simply say that I believe it would have been the case. As it happened, I have had clipped wings in the deepest sense―and I have been used to much enjoyment and comfort, always in order to be able to work all the more productively. Touching on this point is not such a good thing for me, because my whole existence is an artificial existence. The hard part is that someone with my working capacity and abilities is born in this little country; for in a large country I would have been assisted, there would have been enough to earn as an auth. However, in another way I am fond of this little country precisely because it is so well suited to my religious development and significance.

83

5

10

15

20

25

30

Do not use your intellectual abilities to protect yourself. If you are weak, just dare act; confess your weakness before God, however anxious you are; he will then surely arrange everything so that you can bear it, and then by having dared, you still save your conscience.

84

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 85–86

•

1850

449

441

85

5

10

15

20

25

30

About Myself. Owing to the abuse and boorishness I have been exposed to, I felt a need to surround myself with a certain extravagance, which cost me much in spite of being little able to afford it. Yet as I, before God, understood it, I had the money and deemed that I should use it with thanks. Gladly giving thanks for the extraordinary things that were entrusted to me, living only for this cause, I understood, before God, that I could live extravagantly, as well. Racked by inner torments and placed in painful isolation outside the universal[,] which made it so very hard for me to work for a living, I understood, before God, that I had wealth and that it would last me as long as I lived. I was ready to expose myself to risk for the sake of the cause; but then I saw it as a mitigation granted to me that I should live without worries concerning subsistence. And it is also true that in another sense I have a very sharp intellect and once had great desire to earn money; had I been in an ordinary person’s situationa, I would have most willingly secured my future with an official appointment. Yet, as my whole life has been a constant upbringing, I will no doubt now too be led further. Without all my inner torment, without this bold imagination of mine, and without God’s help, none of the accomplishments would ever have been achieved. I cannot do two things at once, do something more “in addition.” I have always imagined that when I had run out of money, I would have to stop serving the idea and work solely for a living. It almost seems as though the next move could be completely different, that I should become an ascetic, something that has otherwise always been alien to my nature and that I have been uneasy about, especially because I fear I could become overwrought and that it would expose me to the temptation of meritoriousness, that it would make me cold, severe, and indifferent toward others and what is beautiful about hum. existence.

35

86

The Turn in the Understanding of Xnty Occasioned also by the Year ’48. The conflict concerning Xnty will no longer be a conflict about doctrine. (This is the conflict between orthodoxy and heterodoxy.)

a

and had I not had this thorn in the flesh

1

450

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 86–88

•

1850

The dispute (occasioned also by the socialist and communist movements) will be about Christianity as a form of existence. The problem will be about loving one’s “neighbor,” attention will be directed toward Xt’s life, and Xnty will essentially accentuate conformity with his life. The world has gradually consumed those myriad illusions and partition walls by which people have ensured that the question was merely about Xnty as a doctrine. The rebellion in the world shouts: We want to see action!

442

5

10

Christian Order of Precedence. 1) If you have wealth and want to be perfect, then give everything to the poor. 2) If you have wealth and want to use it for one or another beneficial undertaking, that too is fine. 3) If you have wealth and want to use it to enjoy life, though, please note, in a permissible manner, Xnty no doubt tolerates it.―4) If you must earn a living―then Xnty prefers that you limit your needs in order to have more time for the religious rather than that you use more time working in order to have more money to spend. Xnty is suspicious of earning money. At the same time Xnty is lenient if you understand that the right to spend so much time earning money is an indulgence. But if you turn earning money into what is serious about life, then you have fallen from Xnty.

The Bible―for “The Single Individual.” Imagine a loving couple. The lover has written a letter to the loved one. Could it ever occur to the recipient to worry about how others would understand the letter, or will he read all by himself[?] Suppose now that this letter from the lover had the odd feature that every single pers. was the loved one, what then? Is the intention now that they should get together and confer with one another, even drag along a learned apparatus from countless generations? No, the intention is that each individual is to read this letter before God, wholly as an individual, as the single individual who has received this letter of God’s, this letter from God.

87

15

20

88

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 88–91 443

•

1850

But it is soon forgotten that this letter is from God and entirely forgotten that it is to the single individual. The human race has been put there instead. And for that reason, we have completely lost the impact of the Bible.

5

89

10

15

20

90 25

30

91 35

“That Single Individual” What has puzzled me most about my production is how I ended up beginning with “that single individual,” with willing the single individual, this so altogether true principle. For imagine someone who has enthusiastically wanted something; he goes enthusiastically out into the world, has gathered followers; the years have passed, he is an old man; he himself is just about the only one who has been true to the ideal; in other respects he considers the cause a fiasco―and now he says, no, it rests on the single individual alone, sociality is essentially regression. This is how it goes for the old man at the end of his life―but how does a pers. of twenty-something years begin in this way[?] How did he figure this out[?] And how inverted, upside down must he have been to believe that it is the truth[?]―Alas, in general, nothing is more natural for a young man than to believe in fellowship.

There have been many of the opinion―indeed it has even become modern to be of the opinion―that they personally have no need of Xnty but they have accepted it anyway because there were many others who did, or they understood that others needed it and, so far as that goes, that others accepted it, but they do not personally accept it. With me, it is the other way around: I can well understand that I need Xnty―but I simply cannot understand what these millions of others want with it.

Christ opens his arms and says: come to me. The priest hurries to say: just dare throw yourself into his arms―this is life. Fine, but watch out, for this embrace of his comes only with death.

451

452

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 91–95

•

1850

He calls himself life, he says come to me―and were you to give yourself over completely, you would also be dead, you would have died away; for he is not simply life, he is life through death.

1

a

and then nothing is gained through Xnty.

444

Xt dies to save you―but on condition that you die away; but then nothing is gained, one will say. How? Is nothing gained[?] Even if you had fully died away, it does not follow that at death you enter into the eternal bliss that Xt has earned for you. But, you say, when someone has completely died away, he is also pure spirit and has essentially found the rest that Xnty offers.a Answer: let us suppose that this was so; it is still true that without Xt’s help, you are incapable of dying completely away, yes, incapable without his help, of beginning the assignment.

92

Xnty demands everything, and if you have done everything, it requires that you understand that you are nevertheless saved solely and completely by grace. It is divine grace, different from the human concept of grace.

93

10

20

In a sermon today, Pastor Smith said something that struck me: Xt has not spoken to us just with his life, he has also spoken for us with his death.

94

Ah, if I were to wish something for myself, I would wish that I had Xnty’s conception of what infinite good eternal blessedness is, and that I had this conception with me every moment. What would I not be capable of, and how much would I not love Xt[?]―Alas, instead of being anxious all the time about involving myself with him and nonetheless being so often mistrustful because, to me, it seems that his salvation almost comes close to making me unhappy. And why does it seem so to me? Because I cling to the earthly―and have such a poor conception of eternal blessedness.

95

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 96–98

•

1850

445

96

5

Every other concern finds its expression in human life. The concern for accumulating money finds its expression and takes a long, long time; likewise the concern for honor and glory, and similarly with even the most trivial concern. Only the concern for one’s eternal blessedness finds no expression whatsoever―but we all have it, we are all Xns.

97

Strange.

10

20

In the world, in everyday dealings, only the highest good is presupposed without further ado. Suppose someone seeks the lowest kind of a position―his qualifications are by no means presupposed without further ado; they are first investigated―but the notion that one is Xn, that is presupposed without further ado. A man seeks a clerical living. Unbelievably much is investigated, and nothing concerning income, the parsonage, etc., is presupposed without further ado―but that he is Xn, this is naturally granted without further ado, that in hidden inwardness he loves God above all and is prepared to renounce everything at any moment it is demanded―this is presupposed without further ado.

98

Bishop Mynster’s

15

25

30

misfortune is rlly that he has begun at too advanced a stage; he has not begun in his youth by asking himself: will you be a Christian; he has begun by presupposing that naturally he was a Christian; and he has then asked himself: Do you want to be a priest, a professor, or perhaps a lawyer, etc. So he chose to be a priest, and then carefully made sure that he did not completely thoughtlessly discover what Xnty is. He has made, if you will, quite an acceptable deal; he has taken with him as much as he possibly could given the fact that he wanted to secure an earthly life replete with enjoyment.

453

454

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 99

•

1850 446

Absolute Devotion to God. The relationship to God is like a relationship to superiority, especially to absolute superiority: a moment comes when it seems as though God’s love were a delusion with which he deceives the pious. This is the moment when it really becomes clear that the God-fearing person is to be torn from his entire range of ideas and world of concepts and initiated into God’s ideas and concepts in order to learn from him what love is. A pers. initially lives in relation to God with the tempo of childhood and the religious impressions from that time, thinking he loves God, understands that God is love, is grateful for all the many good gifts, etc. But you see, God then sends constant adversity; Xnty, which is proclaimed as a consolation, metamorphoses into a monstrous burden laid on the believer, so that instead of being consoled, he must even suffer for Xnty, etc.; then no doubt it seems to him as though God were in a sense a deceiver who entices a pers. further and further out, and instead of adapting to him, orders everything in order to trap him in the service of his interests. It begins with God, who loves man, and then it appears that God is the one who wants to be loved; he has not the slightest intention of altering his conception of what love is, and his conception of what love is makes you, humanly speaking, unhappy in this life. This is spiritual trial. But this is quite as it should be; even the apostles experienced this in relation to Xt. And yet God is infinite love; but he has only a spirit’s concept of your happiness and blessedness―alas, and you are flesh and blood. So if you are to be blessed in your relationship to him, your concept must be transformed, and this transformation, this rebirth, is an immensely painful operation, and there comes a moment in the process when it looks to you as though God resembled a superior kind of seducer. God is no egotist, to be sure, but he is the infinite Ego who cannot possibly be altered so as to please you, but you must be absolutely transformed in order to please him. Forget everything, forget yourself absolutely, in the thought of God, in the thought that he is love: yes, then you are blessed in your relationship to him―but then you have also become spirit.

99

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 100–102

•

1850

447

100

5

10

The Testimony of the Spirit is present, strictly speaking, only when immediate testimonies witness against it. When everything goes your way and is in accord with your own understanding, you still cannot be sure that the joy you feel is the testimony of the spirit even if you refer everything to God; for it might also simply be an intensification of your own life through good fortune and prosperity. But when everything goes against you, and you nevertheless perceive a testimony within you that you are on the right path and are to continue along that path, where everything will likely go against you more and more; this, you see, is the testimony of the spirit.

101 15

20

25

30

102

35

. . . . and even if you were eternally happy in the end, despite never having rlly found occasion to concern yourself with the matter, it seems to me that one day it would nevertheless be apparent to you that it was a sad and deplorable ingratitude that the good―which Christ suffered and died to attain―had not absolutely concerned you, no, had not concerned you at all. So you who suffer, you must rather count yourself lucky that God prevented you from frittering your life away and taught you to become attentive to that infinite good through difficult suffering. And this is what dying away rlly means: eternal blessedness appears unconditionally as the only good, and all else as nothing. But, alas, the way we live is such that we have time to think about and concern ourselves with everything else. But we either leave the question of eternal blessedness in abeyance or bring in “grace” in such a way that we have hope of becoming eternally blessed by grace, as we say―which is like saying that we are not concerned with it at all.

The Notion That Xnty Does Not Fit in with the World proves Xt’s own life altogether satisfactorily. The fact that it has now spread everywhere, as they say―yes, it goes unnoticed that one first ought to prove that it is Xnty that has spread everywhere, whereas there is no need to prove that what Xt proclaimed was Xnty.

455

456

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 102–105

•

1850

One boasts that everyone is Xn and fails to notice how satirical it is that when Xt proclaimed Xnty, everyone fled―so the fact that it is so widespread has doubtless to do with the fact that what is proclaimed is not Xnty.

448

5

Delusion and Again Delusion. A whole mass of considerations are set in motion by means of which, and in which, it is proved that God is love: this is the Sunday discourse―Monday’s footnote is that you ought to be careful about getting too involved with God. And the religious person who talks piously about belonging wholly to God is even proud of his wisdom, of the fact that he has not been some fool who got too involved with God―and so God is love, and one is so sincerely convinced of it, etc.; at the same time one consorts with him as though he were a scheming despot.

103

10

15

There is a sort of sermon that corresponds roughly to what a certain sort of popular novel is to the aesthetic. Thisted delivered a lot of them.

104

Gibberish.

105

One asks God to provide testimony of the spirit―and forgets that “testimony of the spirit” is really present, and decisively present, only when all immediate testimonies have been negated. How many rlly have the strength to bear the testimony of the spirit[?] But they do not know what they are talking about. In religious respects, far too many (priests and lay people) are like the Jew who signed a petition supporting the Norwegian constitution without knowing that it expelled Jews from the country. This is the way they consort with what is Christian, and if they knew themselves at all, they would thank God that, at the present,

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 105–106 449

•

1850

he did not grant their prayer, for one must be in a critical state before testimony of the spirit rlly helps; one must essentially be on the path to becoming spirit―and how many are in that critical state[?]

5

106

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Endless Sorrowfulness. that no pers. can grasp: out of love, Christ lets himself be born, suffers for an entire lifetime, finally dies to save us so we acquire the eternal good: deliverance from our sin and heavenly bliss― alas, and he is not understood; it seems to us hum. beings that he makes us unhappy, as though getting completely involved with him would make us unhappy; for we only have a sense of the earthly, and only want the earthly, are alone concerned with the earthly, and only want comfort in that respect; and in that respect he rlly offers no comfort, even wants to make life strenuous for us. But it is nonetheless just as certain that he did everything and suffered everything out of love―suffered also because we hum. beings did not want to understand him. Just consider this situation in a pers.’s life: consider how hard it is when one is honestly aware of doing a good deed, and must one suffer in order to do it; and consider how hard it is when the recipient thinks it has made him unhappy. Yet this is how it is with Xt: the merely hum. understanding of Xt is this: he makes us all unhappy; no one has made us hum. beings as unhappy as he has―in a divine sense, he is our savior. No one, no one has done, or could do it, what he has done for us. But in order to understand it, our whole disposition must be reshaped. This is the rebirth. But strict care must be taken that these two understandings are kept meticulously apart, that they are not jabbered together as if the natural hum. being, the sheerly human, could see a savior in Xt. This is where Xndom’s deepest confusion lies. This is why the possibility of offense must be raised again. The natural hum. being must first be reborn, learn from Xt what infinite good eternal blessedness is, what terror sin is, learn that without Xt we would be damned―then Xt is the one who obtains the highest good for us.

457

458

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 106–108

•

1850

Ah, but it is really a matter of keeping watch with all one’s might on the border conflicts between the hum. and the divine; otherwise all Xnty is nonsense, as it now is in Xndom.

The Old Approach―and Mine.

1

a

everyone, if possible

The old approach was this: to be so eager and busy getting peop. en massea to agree to Xnty that they either forgot, or were not particularly concerned about, whether or not what was agreed to was Xnty. This is my approach: to make absolutely sure that it is clear what Xnty is―even if no one at all, not even myself, could agree to it.

Fraudulent Sermons. I remember having read in a sermon―indeed, by what they call a very orthodox man (and of course you can get anyone to say that)―something about the words of Peter. He wrote [“]it was presumptuous to say: ‘Look we have left everything, what then will we have?’ ” I wish all these priests were at Brocken. They do nothing but demoralize peop. with their Sunday rubbish. Yes, it is certainly presumptuous, if you will; but my own thought is that if it were really true that he sacrificed everything for the sake of Xt, our Lord Jesus Xt is not someone who would fail to show lenience or forgive if, in a moment of weakness, a man said “what will we have?” To truly sacrifice everything in earnest is no tomfoolery like the priest’s gabbling. But it is demoralizing that both the priest and the listeners naturally feel themselves better than an apostle who is “presumptuous”―these wretched milksops who have never in their lives once thought of offering a cent for the sake of Xt, yes, the priest least of all. Look, it is clear that when that is the case, one is not easily tempted to ask Xt “what will we have?”

450

107

10

108 15

20

25

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 109–112

•

1850

451

109

5

110

15

20

Possibility―Actuality. Mynster now pontificates about those far off times when God made his will known through extraordinary arrangements, with visions and dreams―imagine that it pleased our Lord to send Mynster a vision with orders to go out and preach it: Mynster would take cover, he would do everything, absolutely everything, would put up with every humiliation so as to be excused, because simply being afraid of ridicule would be enough for him.

When Xnty came into the world, a grandly passionate conception of visions and dreams and God’s revelations prevailed among the contemporaries, the Jews. Now on the contrary, all such concepts are abolished, almost laughable―but Xnty flourishes, we are all Xns. Mynster knows it but is careful not to say anything. He knows it. In a sermon (in the two volumes of sermons; either the one about earnestness in our Xnty or the one about how God wants us wholly to belong to him) he himself says: do not let the expression “to will the salvation of your soul” frighten you; do not be put off by it, [“]even if it is old and seems ridiculous to most peop.” Thus, to be concerned about the salvation of one’s soul seems ridiculous―and yet we are Xns, this is a Christian people, etc.―yes, otherwise the high and great office of bishop of the Zealand diocese would be unthinkable.

25

111

30

112

In Montaigne, 2nd book, chapter 16 (on honor, renown) there are these splendid words by a sailor: My God, you can save me if you will; if you will, you can also let me sink; but I keep my helm constantly straight. That was a good motto.

Ah, just as, owing to faintness and indisposition, someone seasick is totally indifferent to everything, lifts not a finger even if one stood there and would make an end of him: so too, because

459

460

1

5

10

15

20

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 112–113

But in relation to God, we hum. beings seldom get beyond being enamored, and few get even that far. But enamorment is self-love; amorous love is self-love. In amorous love I remain within my own idea of what is loveable and discover that the object of love thus corresponds to my head and my heart; this is why I love the beloved oh so ardently, i.e., why I so ardently love myself. So also with the relation to God. One pers. endures longer than another regarding what love can do to a beloved and still be love; but when it comes to the total overthrow of one’s conception, the moment must come when it seems as though God were a deceiver; this is the crisis― until faith more than conquers.

•

1850

of blessedness, one can become so indifferent as to be infinitely indifferent about what the world will do with one, not lift a hand in prevention, not move a foot in avoidance, because the blessedness is so indescribable.

452

The Apostles’ Situation

113

How dreadful it must have been for the apostles when, for a time, it must have looked as though Xt had deceived them―tricking them with inviting prospects―and then turning the matter around so dreadfully. But it cannot be otherwise for a hum. being. in relation to God. There must come a moment (that is to say when all his purely hum. conceptual world has to be overthrown and he is to be translated into God’s concepts), when it seems to him that God is a deceiver. He will have many weak moments when he will long for the old days, and it will seem to him that he could love God better if the relationship were as it was earlier, when God enticed him by adjusting to his own ideas. This is the truth. But the difference between my way of talking and the customary way is that the latter jabber some vapid phrases about God is love, and about love, and Xt likewise (presumably because those concerned involve themselves neither with God nor Xt)―whereas I speak of what it is like when the matter is taken in earnest. Truly, anyone with the remotest idea of what it rlly means to die away also knows that a thing like that does not occur without fearful pain. No wonder, then, that he cries out, sometimes also rebels against God because it seems to him as though God deceived him, he who, from the beginning, became involved with God under the conception that God would love him according to a hum. conception of love, and now discovers that it is God who wants to be loved, and according to God’s conception of what love is. But the fact that God is infinite all the same, is infinite love, still remains. The mistake made by a

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 113–115

453

5

10

114

15

20

25

115

30

35

hum. being is that in moments of weakness he lacks the courage, confidence, and faith to rejoice that God condescends to involve himself with a hum. being. Just keep hold of this: it is because of infinite love that God must perform this monstrously painful operation. This will surely help. But painful it certainly is, that is certain. And then comes spiritual trial. One is alarmed at the thought that it might mean that God is angry, that is why he causes a person all this pain―instead of its being precisely out of infinite love.

To Die Away. A hum. being can be brought to the point of understanding that he should now begin to die away. But then, see, nothing comes of it! Then it is as if God said: Let me have a go at it, for when you are the one administering blows to yourself, there is no force in them. Still, to some extent, an agreement exists beforehand such that a pers. understands that it is beneficial that this should happen to him. But in the first instant of pain he will be so perplexed that, in shock, he forgets everything, any understanding. Yet it is sure to return.

The central issue―concerning which one can never pray enough to God―is that an infinite conception of the odiousness of sin be present in one’s mind at all times, as also an infinite conception of what infinite good an eternal salvation is. Without this, one is overwhelmed by the sufferings, he is enervated, thinks the price for eternal salvation on these conditions is too high. So he glances to the side and listens―and then he can hear from a million people that salvation can be bought much cheaper. Oh, the most dangerous place for a true Xn to live is―Xndom.

•

1850

461

462

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 116–117

•

1850 454

Come to Me, All of You. If the point of saying these words is aesthetic, then the art would be to say them in such a way that, if possible, literally everybody comes. Christ said them in such a way that the effect was that everyone ran away from him. Here again is the reduplication that is in everything Xn. Xt says: Come to me, all of you; but on the other hand he uses such means to repel that the effect is that everyone flees. Purely humanly, the point would be to say: Come, and then use every possible means to entice. Christianly, the point is to say: Come, and then use nearly every means to repel. Oh, the unfathomable depth of sadness and pain in Xt: to say Come to me, all of you, and know in advance what the effect would be. Is any more proof of Xt’s divinity needed than this: he can bring these words to his lips: Come to me, all of you. A hum. being, Socrates, understood that if he had invited everyone, just about everyone would have fled from him; a hum. being, Socrates, therefore changes the invitation and talks about “the single individual.” For a hum. being, prior knowledge of the effect changes the invitation; but God changes nothing. Unchanged, he declares: Come to me, all of you. That everyone could benefit from his teaching is something Socrates, too, knew; but he foresaw what the effect would be, and he changed the invitation. Xt knows eternally, divinely, that everyone needs him; he knows in advance what the effect will be―but he does not alter the invitation. Divine!

God―Xt When a pers. relates only to God, the relationship is as that of a child to a father. When Xt comes along, the hum. being is treated as an adult. Imitation and voluntariness show that the requirement here is higher than for a child. Yet it must also be remembered that Xt is, in addition, grace, and that he is the very one who will help a person to strive.

116

5

10

15

20

25

117

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 118

•

1850

455

About Myself.

118

5

10

15

20

25

. . . This is like a motto for how my whole life is misunderstood. It should surely be assumed of a pers. who, in his 25th year, understood Socrates as well as I did, as I demonstrated in my dissertation, that he was aware that anyone who wanted to enjoy honor and esteem in the world would have to use illusion as support, would have to live in hiding, rarely be seen, etc. Then I began my activity. Melancholic as I was, suffering in my innermost being, a penitent, I gave myself the assignment of destroying illusions, of living in just such a way that, in spite of all my achievements, I went without honor and esteem―because when a person is seen every day, is regarded as nothing at all, etc., it weakens the impression to the point that he lacks esteem. My contemporaries are then to pass judgment on me. They take for granted the presupposition that it is obvious that I, like everyone else, wanted and aspired to honor and esteem―but I have not conducted myself appropriately, and I convinced myself that living in my way was the path to esteem. So I was an inexperienced youth, etc.―for God’s sake. This is the way the world always rids itself of the impression of something better, of something awakening. It is precisely because everything depended on this point that I have done so much to make sure that I was considered highly intelligent. So they solved the problem with the explanation that I am odd. For God’s sake.



30

* *

What have I not done to make things as lenient as possible for my contemporaries! There are certain things that produce indignation when a man says them in strict seriousness, in judgment― if a child chances on the same thing, one takes it ad notam. Thus, in order not to disturb, I have put up with being regarded as peculiar, a flighty bird. Ah, but that too has been taken in vain.

35

32 ad notam] Latin, under advisement.

463

464

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 119

•

1850 456

Christian Chattiness. Ah, it is so easy to let the mouth run on and say in prayer: “if only I might succeed in loving you Lord Jesus Xt”―but, for heaven’s sake, there is nothing to hinder that from his side; to love him is rlly to hate oneself, so there you see is where the difficulty lies; the prayer should really go: Oh, that I might properly hate myself.

119

5

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 120

•

1850

465

457

120

5

10

Regarding the Publication of the Writing That Is Lying Ready. For a long time I believed that I had not long to live; I was convinced, according to what I could understand, that if I died now the influence of my life would be great, because what Denmark needed was a dead man. I have now waited, also allowing R. Nielsen the space to make his entrée. But if I am to go on living, there is not a moment to waste―and I have therefore now sent a manuscript to press. That it will presumably be apparent this time, as always, that Governance’s thoughts are far above mine and that it was right for me not to publish the writings previously―this I do not doubt for an instant. Infinite love, which I can never sufficiently thank for what it has done for me!

466

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 121–123

•

1850 458

The life of an apostle, what an epitome of suffering. First they thought that Xt wanted to found an earthly kingdom. They attached themselves to him exultantly, doubtless thinking they could never thank him enough for choosing just them, feeling all the power that “even the spirits submitted to them.” Then the order is altered. It speaks of suffering. It must almost have seemed to them that Xt had lured them on with a trick. However, they offer once again―they would risk their lives with him. It turned out, however, that when all was said and done, they were afraid. Then the pain of having denied him―and during all the time he was dead. Then the resurrection, the ascension―and then begins this life full of trials and tribulations.

121

Obedience―Power to Command

122

As long as a pers. is obedient to something higher, he can also stand in command. But as soon as he begins to doubt whether he must obey any longer―then he can no longer command, and then he begins to give reasons. To give reasons is an indirect sign that faith’s obedience is lacking. Thus we see that the fact that all preaching and proclamation of Xnty has been transposed into the reasons for it is an indirect proof that faith has disappeared.

5

10

15

20

25

30

Leniency and more leniency is what people clamor for in the preaching of Xnty. Yet the better among the clergy are almost ashamed at how low they must bid in order to get peop. to accept Xnty in any way. They shudder at the thought of it being necessary to cut the price even more. Ah, but is it not inexplicable that they find themselves in the middle of it and quite forget

123

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 123–125

459 5

124

10

15

•

1850

what plain experience otherwise teaches: the more one gives way, the worse things become, and the only thing that helps is rigorousness. But using rigorousness requires faith, and to have faith presupposes obedience to something higher―and this the preachers lack―hence all the confusion.

Sorrowfulness. Here I am with these inner torments and struggles, outwardly soon impoverished, and, in addition, treated as a kind of half lunatic, ridiculed by the rabble, laughed to scorn every day―and it is Xnty I have the honor of serving, and even my enemies are not far from admitting to themselves that there is no one who can represent it, no one who can present it, as I can―and it is in Xndom that I live, where everyone is Xn, where there are 1000 livings and public officials who proclaim Xnty! Yet I understand that a knot must be tied, i.e., a personality must succumb, otherwise the matter will not be sufficiently visible.

20

125

25

30

Xnty Does Not Rlly Exist. This also is a part of true Xnty: one must make sacrifices for the doctrine, suffer for it. Now take all these officials who make public service a means of livelihood, why in all the world should it occur to them to hint at such a thing! Or what face would the congregation put on if such things were spoken of[?] And yet it is eternally certain that true Xnty, and the proclamation of true Xnty, means making sacrifices for the doctrine, suffering for it, and proclaiming that this is how it shall be. Ah, but Xnty has been haggled down to being tolerated höchstens as a crumb of comfort that you take with you.



31 höchstens] German, at most.

467

468

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 126–128

•

1850

What does it mean to be a true Xn? It means being cursed, hated, abominated by peop. as a nuisance so that it becomes a meritorious deed to persecute and abuse you―and then to live in fear and trembling in relation to God, unless you also protect yourself―yes, and then, in the end, it is to become eternally blessed. This, you see, I understand. What wonder, then, that I shudder.

126

5

460

10

About Myself. 127

This is what I have always maintained. I have never said that I was the true Xn and condemned the others for not being that. I have wanted peop. at least to hear what Xnty is; I have been willing to let the same judgment be passed on me as on others. Can a more reasonable proposal be imagined? Ah, but not even that may happen―could a better proof be imagined for the nonexistence of Xnty!

About Myself. Presenting the story of Xt’s suffering was a task I once thought of undertaking; I already have quite a lot of suitable material. I do not doubt that in terms of inwardness, imagination, and heart-rending and gripping eloquence it would have become a masterpiece, yes, would have been as enthralling as those paintings that depict Xt. And doing so, I would surely have differed from those artists by still having enough Xnty in me to give God thanks in childlike fashion for being allowed, as an indulgence, to sit and enjoy this life and then work on such things.

15

20

128

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 128–129

461

10

15

129

20

25

30

35

•

1850

469

Ah, but even so I would have become a Sophist, though with the redemptive factor that I humbly understood that I was a Sophist. In truth, if God does not compel a person, if God does not sit and watch over him, even the most honest person is a Sophist. At the same time, an honest Sophist should not be scorned. My message never goes beyond asserting that a person should at least confess that it is an indulgence to be exempt from genuine imitation. I have never demanded more of anyone; and I have not even demanded that much but, without authority, have merely called attention to the fact that this is how it ought to be. And thus, if God did not compel me, neither would I myself come further.

“No One Can Serve Two Masters,” but just look at the peop. in this world, and do not forget to include yourself―you might not find a single one of whom it is even moderately true that he serves only one master. Inasmuch as everyone does it, it seems clear that serving two masters is possible. And yet the gospel says: No one can serve two masters. What the gospel means is this: to do so will be a person’s downfall. The temporal and the eternal stand opposed in this way. Temporally, you want to become something great, to be a success, etc., in this world. So you must simply see to it that you serve two masters, for willing one thing will not get you very far in this world; it is precisely the road to ruin in this world. But in eternity, willing to serve two masters is the road to perdition.

[a]

But even if there were not a single hum. being alive who wanted to serve only one master― the gospel does not allow itself be impressed by these millions of people, does not reduce the price, but repeats: No one can serve two masters.

1

5

470

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 130–132

•

1850

Short Notes. This year, August 9th (the date of my father’s death) happened to fall on a Friday. I also went to communion that day. And, oddly, that day the sermon I read in Luther, according to the lectionary, was the verse “All good and perfect gifts, etc.[”] from the Epistle of James. The day I sent the manuscript to the press, the daily sermon I read in Luther, according to the lectionary, was Paul’s verse on the tribulations of the age, etc. It was a curious turn of events. I myself am strangely affected by it because I do not remember beforehand which sermon is to be read according to the lectionary. Sept. 8 (which I consider my engagement day) falls on a Sunday this year, and the gospel is: No man can serve two masters.

Speculation.

130

462 5

10

15

131

One speculates oneself into Xnty; i.e., one speculates Xnty out of the world. 20

Unconditional Surrender. You must surrender unconditionally to Xt; there must be nothing, nothing at all as a condition between you and him, neither that which you consider the most important thing, nor the most insignificant thing, nothing that would mean that you cannot surrender. No, surrender must be unconditional. Then―and this is something else―you can pray that the treatment will not be too severe. The mistake with the man spoken of in the gospel who wanted to be a disciple but bury his father first, is that he wanted to do it first, that he thus made it a condition so that he would not surrender unless the condition were granted; i.e., he would only surrender conditionally. He should have surrendered unconditionally, should have said: even if I am required to give up what I wish so much to do, bury my father, very well, I will give it up. I will surrender unconditionally; burying my father is not a

132

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 133–134

463

10

133

15

20

134

25

30

35

•

1850

requisite condition. No, after having surrendered unconditionally, I will ask you if this might not be permitted.― True enough, by surrendering unconditionally to Xt, who is absolute spirit and who demands a dying away from the world, you run the risk that he will make things so complicated for you that might be driven to despair. This is what is so horrible for flesh and blood, and what is meant to be so horrible for flesh and blood, in unconditional surrender. That is how it must be, but remember too that he is grace, and that it is to grace that you surrender.

What Does It Mean to Be Christian? It means walking hand in hand with one’s savior under the eye of a heavenly Father, that is, under the eye of a truly loving father, strengthened by the testimony of the spirit. Oh blessed company! If this is not the case, then the blame lies with us―for this is God’s intention. The blame lies with us―ah, comforting thought, for then it can be changed.

Siding with the Established Order. To recommend going with the established order without further ado, as though it were the “serious” thing to do, and modest and humble as well, can be a great untruth. To side with the established order without further ado in this way can imply an evasion of doing any work for the idea, or even inquiring into the idea as such. You say: I will take the world as it is, waste no time, and begin immediately arranging things in order to find as much enjoyment in it as possible. To be serious is precisely to take an interest in the idea, the ideality with which a pers. first searches for the idea, for the time being paying no attention to the others, unconcerned about their possibly quite erroneous concepts. In essence, the genius is constantly submitting an existential accounting. What others do not find time to think about―because

471

472

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 134–136

•

1850

they immediately get to work on relativities―is exactly what preoccupies him. He thinks about the reality of getting married―others thoughtlessly assume that everyone should get married because everyone else does it; they simply ask which woman they should take, etc. So it is in all situations. And this is why geniuses usually amount to nothing.

1

5

a

and inwardly assures himself that he is willing to sacrifice everything (ah yes, there is no embarrassment when it is inward―and outwardly one does not end up sacrificing anything)

464

In the sermon on the epistle for the 10th Sunday after Trinity, Luther says somewhere that one must either curse Xt or acknowledge him as Lord. That is absolutely right. The passion opposite to worship is to curse.―And this again is inherent in the fact that Xnty, understood in a purely human way, is an affliction (Odium totius generis humani).

135

The Cunning in the Assault I Delivered on “Christendom.”

136

The real root of the confusion in Christendom is that Xnty has been made into a doctrine and has entirely abolished imitation. On the appointed Sunday, “seeking first God’s kingdom” is preached throughout the country. But how does that work in reality? It is implicit that this is how everyone behaves as a matter of course; no other thought arises. First, someone says, I insist on getting married, supporting a wife and children, and then receiving a somewhat respectable appointment, etc.―and he settles in and studies Xnty as though it were a doctrine; and if he becomes a priest, he touches everyone with elevated talk of “seeking first God’s kingdom.”a―If there should be a crumb of meaning in any of this, one ought first arrive at an understanding that God might require someone to remain unmarried, to live in poverty, etc., in order better to serve Xnty―and then, after attaining that 16 Odium totius generis humani] Latin, hatred of humankind.

15

20

25

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 136–137

465 5

10

15

20

137 25

understanding, he ought to take it to be an indulgence that his life is arranged in some other way. Such are the circumstances. Now if I had dashed forward with thunder and lightning and said, None of you are Xn, I am, etc., in my opinion I would have revealed immaturity, but I would no doubt have been understood and admired by quite a few who were in despair. But I acted differently. I threw myself adroitly (that I dare to say), adroitly (in the form of being an egotist, the most irresponsible of all) into an existence that, by being an essential approximation to a spirit-existence, had a conformity with Christian life―and then gave peop. an opportunity to judge. And the judgment upon me was that such an existence is an oddity, he is a fantast, an exaggeration, he lacks of seriousness, etc. Thanks, now I have the proof I was looking for. I have not judged others, the others have judged themselves and shown that, for them, this notion of first seeking God’s kingdom is rlly just a manner of speech.

Lunatic Comedy. Scene on Judgment Day. Our Lord A theol. Professor.

30

35

Our Lord: “Have you sought first the kingdom of God?” Prof.: “No, I cannot say that I have, but I know how to say ‘seek first the kingdom of God’ in seven languages, 1) in Danish it goes like this, 2) in German like this, 3) in French like this, 4) in Greek like this, 5) in Hebrew like this, 6) in Latin like this, 7) in Arabic like this, 8) in Syrian like this, 9) in Phoenician like this―look at that! I even know it in 9 languages, that is 2 more than I promised.” Our Lord

•

1850

[b]

473

I judged no one, I attacked no one, I even gave support to the established order, and venerated Bishop Mynster, the most dangerous of them all.

1

5

474

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 137–139

•

1850

turns aside while the professor continues: “To the best of my ability, I have devoted day and night to searching out and researching like this.”―Here he is interrupted by the trumpeting angel who, with the words [“]you bungler,[”] strikes him such a blow that he speeds several million miles away.

. . . If I saw a slightly built young girl, who on seeing a woodcutter swinging an enormous tree stump over his head on an axe, said: “What a shame my parents will not let me chop wood; if only I were allowed, I could do it,” I would smile. Likewise when I hear a refined Goethe-type person who, in a romantic moment, tearfully assures us from the pulpit that he has often longed to have been contemporary with Xt. Of course, one does not express it quite so precisely: he says he wishes he had seen Xt―aha!, perhaps a private diversion in an out-of-the-way place during a “quiet hour.” I find little that offends me more than this rubbish about quiet hours―as if Xnty had the remotest connection with that kind of preaching. The most fearful episode in all world history, and it is supposed to be presented in its truth “in a quiet hour.” This is in the most obvious way possible to turn the whole thing into a comedy or a game, as when children in the living room imagine they are on Napoleon’s journey over the Alps or that sort of thing.

466

5

138

10

15

20

25

Concerning Imitation. Perhaps you have heard there is something called “imitation”? Maybe it consists in repeating the same words that Xt spoke, or maybe it has to do with existence? Or is it perhaps a doctrine, so that we say “pass me by” once again―we give a lecture on the teaching―though naturally we have no more to do, roughly like the gate clerk whose writing no one could read and, in response to a rebuke from his superior, said that his function was to write, it was the business of the superior to read.

139

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 140–142 467

140

5

10

15

141

25

142

468

•

1850

“How is one to express at all what it is be a Christian?” [T]hat is what I would like to ask established Christendom. The expression [of Christianity] that the Middle Ages stood by― entering the monastery, fasting, praying, asceticism, and the like, all that has been abandoned. The Xn must remain in the world, they say. But then he must express that he is Christian in his work, etc. Take a merchant. He is a Christian. He surely ought to express the fact that he is a Christian by avoiding the semi-dishonest transactions that are common practice in business dealings and make an effort to exercise the kind of conscientiousness that is truly Christian. Good, but he will then soon have to close his shop and he will be called a traitor by the other merchants. It is exaggeration on his part, they will say, he should be like the others―aha, the expression for what it is be a Christian disappeared. If Bishop Mynster had expressed the kind of conscientiousness that is specifically Christian, he would never have become bishop. By remaining among peop. the Christian would instead get himself persecuted.

Bishop Mynster. This is no doubt the turn he once made in his life. He said to himself―and in this he was absolutely right, and still remains so―I have the most competence. If I do not take the no. 1 place someone perhaps less competent, less honest shall. Ergo, I will take it. Here he turns aside from the ideal. The ideal would have beckoned him on, saying: Never mind that you are the most competent, comparatively speaking, follow me further―to be sure, you will then become nothing in this world.

My Relationship to My Contemporaries―One of Misunderstanding. The fault is not mine, the matter is quite plain. As long as it is to be the case that my life lacks seriousness while everyone else’s is serious, only confusion can come of it. So my life is said to lack seriousness, and has always lacked it. If only he would concentrate on something serious, etc. And when on closer inspection one hears the real reason, we find out that it

475

476

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 142–144

•

1850

is because I have no job, no official position, have amounted to nothing, have even allowed myself to become prey to laughter―I myself would say for the sake of the idea, but in the eyes of the world, this is nonsense. So, without a livelihood, without a position, i.e., without any earthly pay, ridiculed, thus paid with derision, working, dare I say, more than any civil servant and career official, that is why my life lacks seriousness. Yes, in this way, confusion is the only conclusion to be drawn from me and my life. In worldly worldliness, what earnestness rlly is has been entirely forgotten, and I―who nevertheless bring a crumb of this to mind, even if weakly―I am the only one who altogether lacks seriousness.

1

[a] The new form of sermon

The New Form of Sermon must, in the first place, be a monologue. For one thing, because peop. still cannot stand it for one hum. being to speak to another in this way, saying “you shall,” and for another, because the extent to which one hum. being is permitted to do this is a difficult business―and the relevance of ordination in this connection―are not clear to me. So monologue is used―I do not address you, but listen to how Xnty speaks to me. And then I can use this [“]you shall[”] to advantage.

5

10

143

20

25

5

[a] Wishing to have been contemporary with Xt.

Wishing to Have Been Contemporary with Xt. As opposed to the sermon’s wishful longing to be contemporary with Xt, I have always put the matter the other way around: I regard it as lenience that I do not have to become a Xn with that fearful suspense. I have said quite plainly in one of the Friday discourses (in Christian Discourses), no. 1 in fact, that it has been the same for me as for everyone else; I have turned the situation around rhetorically, and in order to avoid pronouncing judgment upon anyone else―which, as it says in the discourse, one hum. being is not permitted to do to another―I have taken myself and judged myself.

144

30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 145–148

•

1850

469

145

5

A Passage in Luther. It struck me today; I took Luther out in order to read his Wider die himmlischen Propheten―and there you have it; it begins as follows: . . . Ich hatte mich schier zur Ruhe gestellt, und meinete, es wäre ausgestritten, so hebt sichs allererst, und gehet mir, wie der weise Mann spricht: Wenn der Mensch aufhöret, so muß er anheben.

10

146

15

147 20

148

30

Christianity Is in Proportion to the Person Who Proclaims It. When Xt preaches it, no hum. being can stand being Xn; they all betray him. When an apostle preaches it, we hum. beings begin to go along with it. And then it goes downhill―and when a Mr. Muddlehead preaches Xnty, all of us are Xns, millions of us.

There is an excellent story by Scriver I read today about a monk who could put up with 2 or 3 days of fasting in his cell (i.e., when he was together with others) but who was unable to fast for one day in the desert (where there was no one to look at him).

The Exemplar 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. 6 Ich hatte mich schier … muß er anheben], German, I had almost let myself relax, and thought the matter was taken care of. But then it suddenly arises afresh, and I experience what the wise man says: “When a person finishes, he must begin again.”

477

478

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 148–149

•

1850

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. This is Xnty for us hum. beings. Xt’s life on earth is Xnty, which no hum. being can endure. Then, in the course of time, emphasis was put on imitation, again misconceived. Luther later turned the relationship in the right direction again. But then they misused Luther by completely leaving out imitation and by taking “grace” in vain. Imitation must be present, but not in such a way that the person becomes self-important or wants to earn salvation thereby. No, grace is the decisive factor. But if the relationship is to be true, then “grace,” grace in particular, must be proclaimed by someone whose life nonetheless expresses imitation in the strictest sense. If the person preaching grace is someone whose life expresses the opposite of imitation, grace is taken in vain. No, but if grace is proclaimed by someone whose life rigorously expresses imitation, then the relationship is true; grace retains its true price. The closer such a person comes, humanly speaking, to looking as if he is advocating meritoriousness, the truer is his preaching that hum. beings are saved by sheer grace. Here again we see that Xnty is in proportion to the person who proclaims it―and consequently that it is as far as possible from being a “doctrine.”

Sigh. Sometimes this is how it is: what’s worse, the anxiety that arises when the Law is preached―or, alas, the anxiety that arises lest

470

10

15

20

25

30

35

149

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 149–152

•

1850

I still take “grace” in vain[?] Yet this is exactly why there is grace, to eradicate this anxiety, too. 471

150 5

10

15

20

151 25

The Judgment of My Contemporaries on Me. Now there will surely be yet another howl that I preach only the Law, that I insist too strongly on imitation, etc., etc. (even though I point to grace in the preface to my new book Practice in Xnty). And it will go: we cannot stop here, we must go further― to grace, in which there is stillness and rest. Yes, you are preaching nonsense. For the average hum. being, Xnty has shrunk into a sheer trifle, a parodic edition of the doctrine of grace in which Xns simply let care go to the winds and count on God’s grace. But because everything Christian has shrunk into triviality like this, they are unable to recognize it again when one presents Christianity’s passionate elements. They have it all in an infinitely empty conceptual summary―and they think they have advanced beyond the successive development of pathos-filled elements. But nothing can be taken in vain as easily as grace, and as soon as imitation is omitted entirely, grace is taken in vain. But that is the kind of preaching peop. appreciate so much.

Nothing fixes a thing more deeply in our memories than our desire to forget it. Montaigne, somewhere in the 2nd book, chapter 12. In the German translation I read, it is on p. 395.

Indirect Communication 152 30

It is not the case that direct communication is superior to indirect communication. No, not at all. But the fact is, there has never been a hum. being who could use indirect communication even passably, let alone throughout an entire lifetime. For we hum. beings need each other and in that there is already directness.

479

480

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 152

•

1850

Only the God-Man is sheer indirect communication from first to last. He had no need of hum. beings, but they infinitely needed him; he loves hum. beings, but with his own conception of what love is. Therefore he does not change by moving toward their conception, not even slightly; to eliminate the possibility of offense, which is what his existence in the guise of a servant is, he also does not speak directly. When a pers. uses indirect communication, it is in one way or another something demonic, though not necessarily in the bad sense, but as with, e.g., Socrates. But truly, direct communication, by contrast, makes life much easier. It is another matter if someone who has perhaps used indirect communication in a selfish way (i.e., demonically in the bad sense), found it humiliating to use direct communication. I have frequently felt a need to use indirect communication (though of course, it must be remembered that when I did in fact use it, it was far from fully implemented, and I did so only for short periods), but it seemed to me as though I had wanted to spare myself, as though I could achieve more by holding out. Whether there be pride in this too, God knows best; before God I dare neither affirm nor deny it. For is there anyone who knows himself so well? I say, when I look back on the stretch of my life that has passed, it is not impossible, it seems to me, that there has been something higher hidden behind me. It is not impossible. I will say no more. What have I done, then? I have said: For the time being, I will use no means that would disturb this possibility, as, for example, by the premature used of direct communication. It is like what happens when a fisherman sees the bobber move―it might be a bite, it might be the movement of the lake. But the fisherman says: I will not reel in the line because by doing that I show that I have given up that possibility; perhaps it will happen again and prove to be a bite. Indirect communication has been something like an instinct for me, because by becoming an author

472

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 152–153

473

5

10

15

20

153

30

35

40

•

1850

481

I have also developed myself, and consequently the whole movement is backward, which is why, from the very outset, I could not say directly what my plan was, though I was certainly aware that a lot was fermenting within me. And furthermore, consideration for “her” also meant that I had to be careful. I could well have said at the outset: I am a religious author. But how could I then have created the illusion that I was a scoundrel in order, if possible, to help her[?] Rlly it was she, i.e., my relationship to her, that taught me indirect communication. She could only be assisted by an untruth about me; otherwise I believe she would have gone out of her mind. That the collision was religious would have utterly deranged her, and that is why I have had to be so infinitely careful. And only when I had her engaged again and married have I considered myself free in this respect. Through something purely personal, I have thus again been helped toward something on a far greater scale, something I have gradually come to understand more and more deeply.

Mynster. So Mynster preaches about Christianity providing zest for life, dauntlessness―he points to Luther and says: there you see it―and in the meantime one sees from Mynster’s own life that what he understands by zest for life is rlly a purely worldly attachment to this life in almost luxuriant enjoyment―while Luther, on the contrary, was plagued by temptations of suicidea so that his zest for life was purely divine. So too when Mynster presents the outward appearance of being a teacher with authority. On closer inspection one sees that his authority consists essentially in having secured for himself a great and influential office and then the power to give out livings.

(cf. somewhere in Tischreden)

a

1

482

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 154–155

•

1850 474

1

[a]

The established Church―my position

[b]

5

10

15

Even an established Church made up of earnest Xns in the more rigorous sense would need to be reminded of this Xn point: that in the highest Xn sense, there is no established Church, only a militant Church. But this may only be said at the distance of ideality from the established. If an established Church cannot put up with this being said, even on this condition, it is thus a sign that such a Church is in error and a direct attack must be made.

The Established Church―My Position In the highest Christian sense there is no established Church, only a militant Church. This is the first point. The second is that there nonetheless is an established Church. It is in no way to be overthrown, no, but a higher ideality must hover above it as a resuscitating possibility: In the strictest Christian sense, there is rlly no established Church. This has now taken place through me, with the aid of a pseudonym, so that everything might become a purely spiritual movement. There is not a shred of a proposal pertaining to the external. And while the pseudonym raises his hand for this enormous blow, I stand in between, parrying: the whole thing will recoil on me for being such a poor Xn―I, who nevertheless remain in the established Church. In this way the whole thing is a spiritual movement. Oh, my God, at times I am almost tempted to admire myself for what I have been able to do―but God be praised, you help me attribute everything to you in adoration, I, who never can thank you sufficiently for the good that has been done for me, so much more than I have ever expected, could have expected, dared to expect.

In anc. times asceticism consisted in abstaining from food and drink; now the only analogy to asceticism is the time graduates spend seeking livings, and in that connection running from Herod to Pilate, so close and yet so far, etc., until, entirely demoralized by this drill, they become servants of the state and Church.



154

5

10

15

20

25

155 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 156–157 475

156

5

157

10

In Denmark, no spiritual danger is possible, Mynster might perhaps say; for if someone is to be dangerous, he must not start off by first seeking a living. But in Denmark, it is impossible for someone to begin without seeking a living.

The priests rant against celibacy―and at the same time secularity adopts it: journalists, etc., in short those who should really draw in the reins, are quite naturally unmarried. But the priests certainly do not think that anything needs to be done to carry Xnty through―it was victorious long ago.

•

1850

483

484

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 158

•

1850

476

Christendom has abolished the other side of Christianity, the rlly decisive side. Christianity has become a doctrine; but conversion, rebirth, imitation, dying away from this world, renunciation, self-denial, etc., are as if blown away.

158

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 158

•

1850



Entry NB20:158 was written in a latin hand diagonally across the page.

485

486

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 159–160

•

1850 478

You who have loved us first, O God―alas we speak of it as if it were historically just once, and yet you do it constantly, many times every single day, throughout the whole of life, you always love us first. When we awake in the morning and turn our thoughts to you―you are the first, you have loved us first. If I were to rise at daybreak and instantly turn my thoughts to you in prayer, you are already there ahead of me. You have loved me first. When out of my distraction, I collect my thoughts and think of you, you are there first. And so always―and yet we talk ungratefully as if it were only once that you loved us first in that way!

The 8th of September! The gospel: No one can serve two masters (my beloved gospel)! My favorite hymn: “Commit Thy Way,” which Kofoed-Hansen chose today! How festive, and how relevant to me, who have been occupied these days publishing On My Work as an Author and its accompanying dedication.

159

5

10

160 15

20

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 161

•

1850

487

479

161

5

10

15

20

Publication of the Work: On My Work as an Author.

On My Work as an Author must still be kept back. It seems to me it would come too disturbingly close to Practice in Christianity, to the impairment of both, even if in another sense I understand that it might create a greater impression. But the primary issue here is that the spirit has not come over me in such a way that I feel with full repose and peace of mind that this is the moment, which I felt about the timing of the publication of Practice in Christianity. I know immediately the difference―whether the spirit is over me or not, whether I am wholly at one with myself or not―because in the latter case I have not been able to stop thinking about particular details, of changing something, first one detail, then another. In the other case, this does not occur to me at all because my mind’s attention is fastened fully and solely on this and is in agreement with itself about the matter having now been commended to God’s hand; I have let go of it. God knows that in one sense I would gladly publish On My Work as an Author right now in order to be absolutely free, but because I cannot find that unqualified consent within myself, I dare not―regardless of whether it is my mistake that I cannot find that consent, that I want to spare myself, perhaps, without being completely aware of it, or whether it is exactly the right course not to give in to the impatience that in another sense is present in me, pushing me to publish it now. I do not know. But I commend myself to God. He will no doubt see to it that when the moment comes, I will find myself in full agreement with myself about publishing it.

488

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 162–163

•

1850 480

Christian Simplemindedness is no doubt not straightforwardly simplicity of mind or straightforward simplicity, a paradox (that an individual hum. being is God is anything but straightforwardly simpleminded), but the simplicity is precisely in order to keep the turn from going toward speculating, reasoning, and so forth, but toward existing, toward expressing Christianity existentially. To exist is precisely simplicity. That is why everything Christian is marked by the paradox, so that one does not make the mistake of supposing that he is to speculate. To exist, to act according to command, that is simplicity. To speculate, to reason, that is the opposite of simplicity. And therefore what is expressed here with the help of the paradox is nothing to speculate about―do as it says, i.e., be simpleminded; here there is nothing to speculate about―believe it; and then do not go off and speculate about faith, for then you will again move away from simplicity; no, believe―act in accordance with it, then you will remain in simplicity.

Even Socratic simplicity was not straightforwardly simpleminded: ignorance in this sense is a very complex affair. But it was simplicity to remove all this speculating (the sophistry) in order to act, to exist, which is simplicity. But with regard to existing, speculation is the constantly recurring sophistry.

An Excellent Remark by Stilpo, which reminds me of what I have always said, that one has to take peop. aside―if possible into the confessional―before there is any use in talking with them about Xnty. Someone asked Stilpo if the gods found any satisfaction in our worship and our sacrifices. Stilpo replied: “You speak quite frankly; let us draw aside if you want to talk of such things.”

162

5

10

15

20

25

163

30

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 163–164 481

5

10

15

20

25

164

482

40

•

1850

I recall giving the matter a similar turn myself. It was up at Giødwad’s. There were a number of us present, among them Martin Hammerich, who spoke in this careless way about some Christian matter. I replied: What you say sounds quite right here, in the company of several people; were there more, it would sound even better―but if you go with me into the adjoining room, where we can be alone, you will see that it sounds quite mediocre. By the way, Stilpo meant something else; what he rlly wants to say is that if you want to speak boldly about the gods, you ought to find an out-of-the-way place where you can be sure the gods will not hear you―but of course there is no such place. I am reminded of that incomparable story that I have saved somewhere. A disguised clergyman (who wore a disguise precisely in order to more effectively convert peop.) arranges a rendezvous with a wanton woman. But, he says, there is one thing you must guarantee: that it will be a place where no one, no one at all, can see us, because, I must tell you, I am a clergyman, so you can well imagine the risk I take if we are discovered. She promises. He arrives at the appointed time. She takes him into several rooms that she takes to be safe, but he thinks not. Finally she takes him outside the city to a remote grotto and says: here no hum. being can see us, only for God could it be possible. How is it, replied the clergyman, that you believe God can see us, and he is precisely the last one I would want to see me―and he then begins preaching so vehemently about God’s omnipresence that the woman gave up her former profession. (I have this story from Abraham a Sancta Clara.)

Concern for an Eternal Blessedness. Indeed, this was how I went forth into this life: As far back as I can remember, nothing has been more certain than an eternal blessedness: I had only to die and mention Xt’s name, then it was the most certain thing of all.―And no doubt this was also true for everyone brought up from childhood in Xnty. Does this certainty make a pers. stronger in this life’s sufferings? No, rlly it makes him more spoiled. The greater danger is precisely what helps one to take lesser risks. Here you can see the monstrous illusion in Xndom, even where it is true that a child has actlly been brought up in Xnty.

489

490

1

5

[a]

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 164–168

Mynster could not imagine him without a certain refined distance from actuality―and Martensen could not imagine him except as someone holding forth, etc.

•

1850

Concern for eternal blessedness must be freed from the illusion. The same has happened in Xndom as with the person who inherits wealth and has never had to earn a living: this illusory security also comes from being coddled from childhood.

482

As a hum. being is, so is his image of Christ.

165

5

10

The Gospel of Peace This is what Xnty is called and calls itself―and yet it is what agitated existence as never before. Here again we see the extent to which all direct categories suffice in characterizing Christianity, which is always inversion.

Superiority’s Suffering. Indeed, when the superior person wants to make use of his superiority in order to get away with something, or even to profit from the less clear concepts of others by deceiving them, then there is no suffering. That is natural. But there is suffering when the superior person remains faithful to the idea and then has to put up with their misunderstanding, which he could so easily have avoided by deceiving them.

To Be Nothing. The infinite in the guise of being nothing, a pure and simple “human being” (somewhat like the lily and the bird, who indeed are not anything), is that point in the world outside the world that can move

166

15

167

20

25

168 30

483

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 168–170

5

169

15

170

20

25

30

all existence. If the infinite is something, it can move only relatively. On the other hand, everything that fundamentally wants to be something in this world is not a moving power, but remains the untrue established order of things, the worldly sluggishness that is the established order, which smugly stretches itself out in earthly security.

My Thesis. My thesis is not that what is preached in Xndom as Xnty is not Xnty. No, my thesis is that the preaching is not Xnty. It is a “how,” a reduplication, that I am fighting about―but of course: without it Xnty is not Xnty.

Always Illusion, the world always wants to be deceived, yes, so passionately that the martyrs are always put to death because they will not deceive in the way the world everywhere wants them to. Take this example of illusion. Someone who wants the world to regard him as earnest must withdraw, be seldom seen, etc.―but the earnestness of truth is precisely to take this illusion (which so many have exploited so dishonorably, so that they become celebrities merely because people see them so rarely) and to live in the streets until he is regarded as a loafer, so that peop. become bored with him, so that absolutely no astonishment results from seeing him, etc.

•

1850

491

492

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 171–172

•

1850 484

Illusion. The very clergyman whose life is worldly wisdom from morning to evening, precisely he will also feel the greatest need once in a while, or once a week, to weep over these exalted virtues that he portrays in a quiet hour. Perhaps qua mood it will be true of him at the moment, but it is poetic, or the poet relation, it is as when the exuberant person feels a need to write idylls, or as when a lost soul feels a need to dissolve in tears at the thought of a paragon of virtue. The listeners prize the emotion of such a speaker highly and forget that this kind of emotion is just the opposite, an indirect refutation. Someone who actually struggles every day to carry out the religious in his life will hardly be so glowing and enrapturing, since there is no oppositional poet-need in him. And when such a tearful speaker, through, e.g., illness, has been prevented from preaching for some time, his family will tell touchingly that he longs for his pulpit. Yes, thank you very much, so too in a similar case does the stage actor long for the stage, and an old playgoer for the theater. With a little crumb of imagination, a small gift―and one’s daily life in quite other categories, no doubt then there can be a need, like a rapturous desire, to step forward, to portray this loftiness, to be carried away and to carry away, to give rise to the mistaken identification of oneself as such a one, to feel the congregation’s excitement, to receive the tears of young women, etc.―ah, yes indeed, it is quite exquisite.

My Work is said to be an exaggeration. Well then, show me where the N.T. cuts prices and haggles―and we have nothing other than the N.T. to go by. But Xndom has invented the following nonsense: there is a revealed word of God―but then there is a tradition among us hum. beings according to which it is agreed that it stands to reason that we ought not take it so scrupulously. God’s word is rlly not for us.

171

5

10

15

20

25

172 30

35

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 172–174 485

5

10

15

173

174 25

30

•

1850

Or show me where the Church Fathers cut the price. Or is Luther also an exaggeration! On Sunday the priest stirs up his own imagination as well as that of the congregation―in a quiet hour; and on Monday the priest is the first to shout [“]crucify him[”] about anyone who dares to act accordingly. And even if he does not shout “crucify him,” he nevertheless finds it to be just as ridiculous as if a person were to act according to what he sees or hears in the theater. These quiet hours―abominable invention! That which was taught in the marketplace, on the street, and which became actuality’s catastrophe ϰατεξοχην, can now only be taught in a quiet hour―to do otherwise would be profane. So J. Xt was profane. And then people find fault with the monastery because it was a flight from life―but to have the entirety of one’s religiousness contained in one quiet hour once a week and otherwise to conform with worldliness is an even greater flight from actuality― that is, compared to the religious, for no one denies, by the way, that we are all too deeply enmeshed in actuality.

Mynster originally had impressions; they have surely slackened off somewhat in worldly self-satisfaction. And so that is where Martensen will begin. Yes, it gets better and better.

The State Church. How lucky for poetry that the state has not come up with the idea that poetry is a necessity, that a poet must be appointed for every thousand peop.―then poetry would have been destroyed. We would have had specially trained civil servant poets, and peop. would have been so pampered by this continual poetic nonsense that they would not even have bothered to listen to the one with a calling. Likewise with Xnty. The state paternally appoints 1000 specially trained civil servants―and Xnty perishes in nonsense.

11 ϰατεξοχην] Greek, to an extraordinary degree.

493

494

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 175

•

1850 486

Pietism.

1

5

10

a

to suffer in this world, and that a worldly wise conformity with this world is un-Christian), yes, of course. And the mildest proposal, it seems to me, is that we at least put up with it being said, without anyone being judged thereby, but that every individual, including myself, is directed to grace and indulgence.

Yes, of course pietism is the one and only consequence of Xnty (pietism properly understood, not in the sense of abstaining from dance, and similar outward things, no, but in the sense of witnessing to the truth and suffering for it, together with the understanding that it is part of being a Xna

175

5

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 176 487

176

5

If the time for aesthetic production had not long since passed, or if this kind of recreation were some day to be allowed, I would like to write a book that would be titled: Conversations between My Wife and Me.

10

15

In the preface, the author tells us that his wife was 19 years old on their wedding day, that, as will be seen, the conversations stem from the first six months of their marriage. They should be dialogues. I would portray the humor that emerges in a relationship when the man is a superior intellect, yet genuinely in love, and the feminine figure is charming in her naïveté―the humor that emerges when they talk together about their relationship. I would risk a certain directness, and yet it should be so upright and decent that our Lord himself, if you will, could listen to it.

•

1850

495

Entry NB20:176 was written on last verso page of the journal and was written upside down in relation to the other entries.

Notes for JOURNAL NB15 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB15 501

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB15 511

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB15

Critical Account of the Text by Joakim Garff and Finn Gredal Jensen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn and Peter Tudvad Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

501

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB15 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB15.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB15 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. According to H. P. Barfod’s catalogue of Kierkegaard’s papers, “a loose slip of paper” was included with p. 142 of Kierkegaard’s journal (NB15:130).1 Because the slip of paper has been lost, it is here reproduced according to the text of EP.2 Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand, with some passages in his latin hand. Seven entries (NB15:1, 2, 17, 46, 47, 49, and 128) are written in a distinct latin hand, and a latin hand is also used for Latin, French, and Italian words and occasionally as a form of calligraphy for headings and titles. The entries written on the inside front cover and the first page of the journal consist of a listing of contents and were written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format; see illustration on pp. 6-7). In writing entry NB15:94, as he neared the bottom of the page, Kierkegaard gradually lengthened his lines in order to fit the entire entry on the page (see illustration on p. 65). Entries NB15:49 and 113 were written lengthwise, i.e., vertically, along the margin.3 On two occasions in entry NB15:122, Kierkegaard deleted “Mynster” and replaced it with “the priest” (see illustration on p. 86).

) B-cat., 363. After the introduction to p. 142 of Kierkegaard’s journal, on which begins entry NB15:92, “The Shrewd―the Good and the True,” Barfod wrote: “Included on a loose slip of paper, To a Contemporary.” Kierkegaard refers to this in a marginal addition, entry NB15:92.a: “see the enclosed.”

1

) EP I–II, p. 200 (Pap. X 5 B 264).

2

) Entries that Kierkegaard wrote lengthwise along the margin are reproduced in KJN by using the entire width of the page.

3

502

J O U R N A L NB 15

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB15 was begun on January 6, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than February 14, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB16. Except for this label, the journal contains no specific dates. In a number of entries Kierkegaard reflects on texts for specific holy days, though this does not necessarily mean that the days on which the entries were written coincide with the relevant days on the Church calendar. Nonetheless, it can be inferred that entry NB15:34 was written on January 13, 1850, because it refers to Pastor Visby at the Church of Our Savior: “Today he preached (Xt age 12 in the temple) on the theme: ‘seek and you shall find,’” which is the gospel text for the first Sunday after Epiphany, which in 1850 fell on January 13. Various entries can be dated approximately. Entry NB15:62 mentions a “‘brilliant address’” that Victor Hugo had given before the French National Assembly on January 15, 1850. Kierkegaard’s journal entry must therefore have been written after that date.1 In the latter part of entry NB15:82, Kierkegaard makes sarcastic remarks concerning his older brother Peter Christian’s recent activities in the capital, where he supposedly wanted to “find success as a cheerleader for mediocrity, triviality, and heartiness”: It is true that he has needed diversion. I can understand that he is tired of living out there in the country with a sick wife― but what a diversion! Now he is running around to every assembly, speaking everywhere―naturally, with heartiness and earnestness, “in order to counteract.” At the Society of Friends of the Peasant to give assurances: I am not a member of the Friends of the Peasant―instead of acting by staying away.― He is intelligent and very knowledgeable, but he is disinte-

) The expression “a brilliant address” appears in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 20, January 24, 1850; Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 21, January 25, 1850, notes that “Victor Hugo’s address was brilliant.” The address itself was published in Fædrelandet, no. 24, January 29, 1850, and the same day a detailed account of it was published in Berlingske Tidende. Kierkegaard presumably had his information about the contents of the address from one of these accounts.

1

Critical Account of the Text

1. Outside front cover of Journal NB15.

503

504

J O U R N A L NB 15 grating into a vapid gadabout, taking part in everything. It is a bad sign that he is living at Christian Lund’s, for he will surely become Christian’s ideal! P. C. Kierkegaard was elected to the upper house of the newly established Danish parliament on December 29, 1849. In order to participate in parliamentary deliberations, he traveled to Copenhagen from his parish in Pedersborg in central Zealand and lived for a time with his brother-in-law Johan Christian Lund.1 Kierkegaard’s mention of the meeting of “the Society of Friends of the Peasant” presumably refers to January 27, 1850, when P. C. Kierkegaard appeared for the first time as an invited speaker of the Venstre Party at Møntergade in Copenhagen.2 Thus, the latter part of entry NB15:82 cannot have been written any earlier than January 27, 1850. In entry NB15:95, Kierkegaard comments on P. E. Lind’s lecture series at the the Society for Workmen’s Culture, titled “The Difference between Christianity and Paganism and Proofs of the Truth of Christianity.” The phrase “now Lic. Lind wants to give lectures” must refer to something in the immediate future. According to a notice in Berlingske Tidende, February 5, 1850, supplement to no. 29, Lind’s first lecture was given “Tuesday evening, February 5th, at 8:30.”3 Thus, entry NB15:95 cannot have been written any earlier than February 5, 1850. As with the marginal additions in other journals, the marginal additions in the present journal may have been made somewhat after the original entries they accompany. It cannot be determined whether the appended lists of contents of the journal (NB15:2 and 4) were written while the journal was still in use or subsequently.

) P. C. Kierkegaard’s diary indicates that he arrived in Copenhagen on January 27, 1850: “The morning of the 27th I arrived in Cph, where it was announced on that very day that the meeting of parliament had been postponed until several days after the 28th. I took up lodgings in Henrik’s rooms (he is with the army hospital in Odense) at the home of businessman Lund. The king opened parliament on the 30th…” (P. C. Kierkegaard’s diaries for 1828– 1850, NKS 2656, 4o, I, p. 156).

1

) See NKS 2656, 4o, p. 156. P. C. Kierkegaard spoke at the Society of Friends of the Peasant on February 1 and 9, 1850.

2

) See the relevant explanatory note for this entry.

3

Critical Account of the Text Two entries, NB15:17 and 63, consist of Kierkegaard’s copies of older slips of paper. Entry NB15:17 concerns an unused subtitle for Practice in Christianity, “A Contribution to the Introduction of Christianity into Christendom.”1 In the margin Kierkegaard wrote: “This remark was found on an old slip of paper with the folder of writings” (NB15:17.a). The slip of paper is now lost and its placement among the papers containing various drafts of the book cannot be determined. Entry NB15:63 contains a copy of “Two Slips of Paper That Were Together with ‘From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,’” that is, the third part of Practice in Christianity. Both slips of paper are from October 1849.2 The dedication to Regine (“To a Contemporary”), entry NB15:130, was on a loose slip of paper that, according to Barfod’s catalogue, was in the journal at p. 142, where it is referred to by marginal entry NB15:92.a. The date of this draft is uncertain, but presumably it comes from late 1849.3

III. Contents “It is told of Bernard of Clairvaux that parents restrained their children, wives their husbands―lest Bernard convince them to become Xns in such a way that they actually abandoned everything” (NB15:48). Kierkegaard relates this story about one-third of the way into Journal NB15, but in principle he could have placed it anywhere in the journal because it indicates a theme that recurs in many entries from this period, namely, a critique of Christendom’s falsification of Christianity, whose original passion and radicality have diminished in tempo with its spread (NB15:13).

) The first occurrence of this subtitle, though in a slightly different form, has been published as Pap. IX B 29 from 1848; the subtitle later appears in the following drafts from 1848–1849: Pap. IX B 45,1; IX B 46; X 5 B 31,1; X 5 B 56 and 64, p. 275.

1

) See the relevant explanatory notes for this entry. The beginning of the entry can be seen in illustration on p. 40 in the present volume.

2

) See the explanatory notes for NB15:49 and 130 in the present volume. In EP Barfod suggests that the slip of paper is “from 1846?,” but the editors of Pap. suggest 1849–1850; see EP 1–II, p. 200 and Pap. X 5 B 264.

3

505

506

J O U R N A L NB 15 The object of his polemical assault is thus nothing less than “the gigantic, accumulated illusions of eighteen centuries” (NB15:122; see also NB15:124). Kierkegaard points to the mocked and degraded Savior as the “Exemplar” who is the irreconcilable opponent of this illusion, and by the same token he stresses “martyrdom” as the true hallmark of Christianity. The wish to render probable the historicity of Christ’s divinity is a misunderstanding attributable to theological indolence, for what the times need is neither historical proof nor intellectual strength, but existential daring (NB15:95 and 109). No matter how shocking it might be to brilliant professors and shrill priests, Christianity does not exist in order to satisfy “the deepest needs of the entire race,” but is to address itself to the single individual, to whose “little I” (NB15:119) it directs its eternal concern. Indeed, the truth of Christianity cannot be proven by anyone, but everyone who wishes to do so can witness to its rigor and its heterogeneity with the world: “This is called venturing, and without venturing, faith is an impossibility. To relate oneself to spirit is to take an examination. To believe, to will to believe, is to transform one’s life into taking an examination. The daily examination is the tension of faith” (NB15:75). Kierkegaard’s emphasis on Christianity’s demands leads him to undertake a series of clarifications of the relation between sin and grace (NB15:70 and 72), Law and Gospel (entry NB15:109), and the paradox and the atonement (NB15:114). Originally, Christianity was a “radical cure” (NB15:123) that visibly and dramatically highlighted the Christian’s radical departure from norms and values of the surrounding society; in modern times Christianity has taken on something approaching a culinary character and thus has had to make itself attractive to the bourgeoisie as an “appetizer.” In his assaults on “Christian states and Christian peoples” (NB15:27; see also NB15:35), Kierkegaard frequently mentions Grundtvigians and other fellow-travelers of Grundtvig who view themselves as the only true Christians, but whose everyday behavior in the world is banal and conformist (NB15:7). In a number of entries Kierkegaard expressly exempts Grundtvig himself from his critique of the Grundtvigians―“there is nonetheless strength in Grundtvig” (NB15:59; see also NB15:9). On the other hand, Kierkegaard is merciless when it comes to criticizing his own brother, P. C. Kierkegaard, and maliciously singles out his brother’s need for “diversion” as the real motive behind his going on the lecture circuit, where according to Søren Kierkegaard, his Grundtvigian older brother has developed into “a cheerleader for mediocrity, triviality, and heartiness” (NB15:82).

Critical Account of the Text Kierkegaard’s personal differences with his contemporaries are linked to his more general disagreements with his times, the epoch, the modern age. In a number of entries, when referring to the arbitrariness and thoughtless haste that often turns up, even in connection with major decisions, Kierkegaard uses the term “balloting,” which actually means a decision reached with the use of black and white balls (NB15:84; see also NB15:28). The menace of balloting and voting is particularly visible in the daily press, and Kierkegaard includes pointed and bitter remarks in referring to the press’s encroachment on the individual in the name of the anonymous masses. Paradoxically enough, inasmuch as no one dares any longer to put up resistance against “the crowd,” the “tyrant” of the democratic age has become “the crowd” (NB15:54). Thus the disparity in strength between the single individual and the press is also alarmingly asymmetrical, and the outcome of the contest is always known in advance: “What profound cowardice it would be for someone to call it a duel when one party turned up qua individual with a pistol, and the other sat behind a battery or behind a regiment” (NB15:40). Hidden within the power that the press has usurped, Kierkegaard sees an intellectual-historical “analogue to antiquity” when there was a notion of anonymous fate that could become “envious of the individual, especially of the eminent individual” and that seems to be making a renewed appearance in the press’s persecution of eminent figures and its deification of those who are ordinary. The power of envy continues unchanged―it is merely distributed differently: “the public and the like, is fate, something negative in relation to the individual, but only in relation to the eminent individual. In a certain sense, the chorus no longer exists, for the chorus is actlly the public” (NB15:64). A number of entries about Kierkegaard himself give Journal NB15 the character of a more private diary. Several entries depicting how he had become an “object of envy” (NB15:77) make it clear that the remarks concerning modern forms of envy are linked to Kierkegaard’s own painful experiences. Among the envious was Rasmus Nielsen, who “also wanted to be a sort of Mag. K,” but possessed none of the necessary prerequisites and therefore had unwittingly allowed his admiration to evolve into ressentiment (NB15:77). Kierkegaard confesses openly that understanding his concerns is no simple matter (NB15:52). When a religious person expresses his relation to God, he is absolutely misunderstood and “is hated as a proud person, an aristocrat and the like” (NB15:61) or viewed as “pure negativity, without seriousness, etc.” (NB15:71). Regarding himself from this angle, Kierkegaard

507

508

J O U R N A L NB 15 can straightforwardly congratulate himself on his melancholia, calling it “an indescribable benefit,” because without it he would probably have gone “mad” under the enormous burden of opposition and mockery to which he had been exposed over the years (NB15:78). Here and there Journal NB15 also displays traces of Kierkegaard’s reading. The Parisian mystic Hugh of St. Victor is read with undivided enthusiasm―“The man has real value” (NB15:24)―and is praised for his discerning and admirable observations (NB15:21). Kierkegaard is similarly taken with Richard of Saint Victor (NB15:39 and 44) and the Swiss priest and author J. C. Lavater (NB15:58). He also expresses approval of the German theologian Julius Müller’s observations concerning the character of evil and the incomprehensibility of sin (NB15:73 and 101). The entries also include some beautiful words by Petrarch (NB15:79) and a sketch for an edifying discourse based on a passage from Hans Adolph Brorson’s Svanesang [Swan Song] (NB15:43). Sermons by Martin Luther are also touched on―generally with much praise and with remarks concerning their exemplary character (NB15:35 and 53), although occasionally the praise is more reserved because Luther had not carried out the necessary degree of reflection: “Luther was indeed no dialectician” (NB15:111). Kierkegaard also had his reservations about Schleiermacher, who erroneously regarded religion as a “condition” (NB15:83), while Victor Hugo was supposedly utterly incapable of understanding religion at all and is thus called an ignorant “fool,” who, if Kierkegaard had his way, would be compelled to take a basic course in Christianity: “If it were up to me, V. Hugo would be jailed for half a year to take instruction in Xnty!” (NB15:62). At the beginning of the journal, Kierkegaard includes references to a series of entries that he apparently regarded as particularly important. These entries are scattered throughout the journal, but most of them concern his own writings, both those he had completed and those that were still in progress. In one entry, Kierkegaard refers to another entry concerning the original title of Practice in Christianity, which would have been called “A Contribution to the Introduction of Christianity into Christendom” (NB15:17). In another entry referred to in his list of contents, Kierkegaard recounts the curious fact that Practice in Christianity criticizes the impersonal approach that nowadays is characteristic of “the sermon,” but the book itself presents this critique impersonally inasmuch as it “is done by someone who is no one”: Practice in Christianity had of course been “made pseudonymous” (NB15:63). One

Critical Account of the Text entry in the list of contents is especially personal: Kierkegaard writes of his misgivings about publishing the “Three Notes” that are linked to “The Accounting,” for the result of their publication could be that Regine Schlegel would be “thrust into a reinterpretation of the past, which perhaps would disturb her profoundly” (NB15:113). The last entry in the journal, which Kierkegaard had written on a loose slip of paper that is now lost, takes the form of a dedication to Regine Schlegel, to whom all of Kierkegaard’s writings are consecrated (NB15:130). Journal NB15 contains Kierkegaard’s recurrent reflections on the reciprocal relationship between life and writing that has characterized his work as an author. In a couple of these entries, to which Kierkegaard refers in his list of contents, he discusses his “heterogeneity with respect to what is ordinary and general,” and he emphatically declares that he understands the entirety of his “work as an author” to be his own “upbringing and development” (NB15:46; see also NB15:47, 49, 66, and 69). As a history of a development or upbringing that, strangely enough, had shaped its author, the writings play a significant role in limiting their own author’s self-determination and competence, and Kierkegaard dialectically associates this with his use of pseudonyms and indirect communication. What remains is an enormous sense of wonder and gratitude that the writings came into being at all: “I did not begin with that infinite certainty that is inherent in having been chosen by God and that grants authority. On the contrary, I began by being the unhappy person, the suffering person―and thus I began. Then, bit by bit, it became larger, and I myself am the one who looks with greatest surprise upon what has been granted me” (NB15:46).

509

Explanatory Notes 3

1

NB15. … 1850.] Label affixed to the front cover of the journal.

4

1

Concerning the Title … p. 179] This table of contents was written on the inside of the front cover of the journal. Concerning the Title: A Contribution … p. 15] See NB15:17 in the present volume. Concerning the Article against P. L. Møller by Frater Taciturnus … p. 39] See NB15:30 in the present volume. Concerning a Remark by Anti-Climacus … p. 45] See NB15:37 in the present volume. On My “Heterogeneity” … p. 53] See NB15:46 in the present volume. On the Two Pages … Preceding “The Accounting” … p. 62] See NB15:47 in the present volume. Concerning the Publication of a Couple of the Writings about Myself or My Work as an Author … p. 64] See NB15:49 in the present volume. Two Slips of Paper That Are Together with “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself” … p. 84] See NB15:63. The Significance of My Work as an Author to Me … p. 94] See NB15:69. My Misfortune in These Times … p. 167] See NB15:104. On the Publication of “The Accounting” and “Three Notes” now … p. 179] See NB15:113. Texts for Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held on Fridays in Vor Frue Kirke [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

1 3

4 6 7

9

11

13 15 16

5

1

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, (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). see the new page at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347.

1

The Possibility of Offense and “the Single Individual” … p. 75] See NB15:59 in the present volume. The Difference between “Crowd,” “Public”― [and] “Community” … p. 77] See NB15:60 in the present volume. Dialectic Oriented toward Becoming a Xn … p. 106] See NB15:75 in the present volume. Faith―and the Proof … p. 175] See NB15:110 in the present volume. “Christendom” … p. 184] See NB15:115 in the present volume. Rom 7 … p. 219] See NB15:129 in the present volume.

3

hymn verse … prophets announced him … Solemnly in the hour of death] Cited from the sixth verse of the hymn “O store Gud! vi love dig” [O great God, we praise thee!], hymn number 5 in 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. 12–14; p. 13. ridiculous … for the watchman to cry at 8 p.m. on a winter evening … the day diminishes] In Copenhagen and the Danish provincial towns, there was a corps of night watchmen (established 1683, abolished 1862) who were to light the street lamps, maintain law and order, prevent nuisances on the streets, and give the alarm in case of fire. In

4

8

2

8m

5

4

5 6 7 8

512

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 5–7

addition to this, on their rounds they were to call out the time and sing out the appropriate watchman’s verse, taken from various hymns, at every hour, from November through February, starting at 8 p.m. and ending at 5 a.m. See Instruction for Natte-Vægterne i Kiøbenhavn [Instructions for Night Watchmen in Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 1784). The watchman’s verse on p. 19 of these instructions reads: “When darkness blinds the earth and the day diminishes, the hour reminds us of the death’s dark grave. Shine for us, sweet Jesus, for our every step to the grave, and grant us a blessed death.” On January 9, 1850, the sun set at 3:47 p.m. and dusk was reported as lasting fifty-one minutes; see Almanak for det Aar efter Christi Fødsel 1850 [Almanac for a.d. 1850] (Copenhagen, 1850), unpaginated. 8

20

23

8m

12

8

28

Luther rightly says … rlly ought not be preaching in churches … for the sake of our weakness] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on Acts 6:8–14 and 7:54–59, the epistle for the day after Christmas, 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), vol. 2, pp. 4–70; pp. 65–66. we are so far behind that scarcely very many go to church] According to Frederik Hammerich, Kirkehistoriske Foredrag til Belysning af vore Kirkespørgsmaal [Lectures on Church History for the Illumination of Questions Concerning Our Church] (Copenhagen, 1856), p. 188, in 1855 there were “8,000 regular churchgoers” in Copenhagen, and “there are no more than that from an adult population of 70 to 80,000.” it is in the sermon on Stephen] → 8,20. –– Stephen: See Acts 6 and 7. Orthodox people, like the Grundtvigians] Grundtvig (→ 10,16) and his adherents were often referred to as “Grundtvigians.” As early as 1826, after he had resigned his position as a priest (→ 10,20), Grundtvig wrote that he was not capable of “founding parties” and had neither the desire nor the ability to be a “party chief” (Vigtige

•

1850

Spørgsmaal til Danmarks Lovkyndige [Important Questions for Denmark’s Jurists] [Copenhagen, 1826], pp. 51–52). And even after he had acquired many followers in the course of the 1830s and 1840s, he denied that such a sect or party existed; see, e.g., Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], ed. R. Th. Fenger and C. J. Brandt (vols. 1–8, 1845–1853; ASKB 321–325), October 17, 1847, vol. 3, no. 3, cols. 33–34. Grundtvigians commonly 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 (ultraorthodox).” are fatuous enough … the only true Xns] See the preceding note. worldliness] Variant: changed from “actuality”. They are also worshipers of voting and the majority] Presumably a reference to the fact that in December 1849 a number of Grundtvigians had won seats in the two houses of the legislature in the first round of parliamentary elections. Grundtvig himself had been elected to the lower house, as had the well-known Grundtvigian pastor F. E. Boisen, and Kierkegaard’s older brother, the Grundtvigian pastor Peter Christian Kierkegaard (→ 11,1), had been elected to the upper house. The Danish parliament assembled for the first time on January 30, 1850 (→ 55,5). the modern political movement] A reference to the political upheavals that began in early 1848, when King Christian VIII’s death led to the fall of absolutism and the de facto instituting of a constitutional monarchy, which became codified in the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849 → 9,13). worldliness] Variant: first written “worldliness.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. political party] In 1849 and early 1850, political organizations and parties in the modern sense did

29 1 1

3

6

13

9

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 7–9 not yet exist, but with the constitutional convention that was convened on October 23, 1848, and concluded work on May 25, 1849, by adopting the Danish constitution that was signed by the king on June 5, 1849 (the so-called June Constitution), the waters had parted between democrats (the Venstre [Left] or Friends of the Peasants), classical liberals (the Centrum [Center]), and conservatives (Højre [Right]). These political tendencies or movements asserted themselves subsequently in the elections to the two houses of the Danish parliament (→ 9,1). 9

31

10

1

God-Man] i.e., Jesus Christ. being subjective is … an error] Presumably a reference to H. L. Martensen’s defense of theological speculation―which included an indirect critique of Kierkegaard―in the preface to Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), p.iii: “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 put 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 can see, 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 to only a certain limited degree, and we must certainly guard against making our own individual, perhaps rath-

•

1850

513

er one-sided, perhaps even rather sickly life of faith into a rule for all believers.” To be objective … easiest.] Variant: added. Grundtvigians] → 8,28. they maintained that the others were not Christians, and therefore they wanted them removed from their official positions] Although Grundtvig was somewhat subdued after he had been convicted of libeling Prof. H. N. Clausen (→ 10,20), his steadfast adherent, the theologian J. C. Lindberg, kept up violent attacks on those whose beliefs differed from his own. See, e.g., Lindberg’s Om Christendommens Forsvar i Danmark mod falske Lærere og falske Lærdomme [On the Defense of Christianity in Denmark against False Teachers and False Doctrine] (Copenhagen, 1828), in which he emphasizes Grundtvig’s battle against false teachings and differentiates between those who have “our faith” and those who do not have it, ending with the following demand: “The people’s teachers, the priests, the schoolteachers, and those who teach priests, who have taken upon themselves the office of proclaiming, defending, and spreading Christianity―we demand that … they shall carry out the work of their office and that they shall resign their office if they work against its requirements” (p. 54). Lindberg then directed his attacks against Prof. Clausen; see Er Dr. Prof. Theol. H. N. Clausen en ærlig Lærer i den christne Kirke? [Is Prof. Dr. Theol. H. N. Clausen an Honest Teacher in the Christian Church?] (Copenhagen, 1830), in which Lindberg maintains that Clausen’s teachings are lies and that he therefore ought to resign his office. Lindberg directed an even more violent assault against Pastor C. H. Visby (→ 24,3), as yet another “Clausenian,” in his article “Falsk Lærdom i vor Frelsers Kirke paa Christianshavn, oplyst af Præsten Visbyes Paaske-Prædiken” [False Teachings in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn, Illuminated by the Priest Visby’s Easter Sermon], in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie [Monthly Journal of Christianity and History], vol. 2 (1831), pp. 262–275. Here Lindberg accuses Visby of being an enemy of true Christianity, of teaching false doctrine in opposition to the Augsburg Confession, of preach-

3 6 6

10

514

9

11 16

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 9

ing paganism, and of loving lies, concluding: “Therefore, let the false teachers continue to speak of their great love, but let them first demonstrate enough love of the truth as to drive them out of the State Church in which they merely remain as liars!” (p. 274). The next year Lindberg directed his fire at Clausen’s father, H. G. Clausen, archdeacon at the Church of Our Lady, in the piece Stiftsprovst H. G. Clausens vilkaarlige og uforsvarlige Forandringer ved den christne Daab [Archdeacon H. G. Clausen’s Arbitrary and Indefensible Changes with Respect to Christian Baptism] (Copenhagen, 1832). As time passed, Lindberg changed his strategy and followed Grundtvig in the battle to free the laity from being bound to specific parishes and to grant clergy freedom in matters concerning liturgy and dogma. State Church and the secure official positions] A state church is a church established as the official religion of the state and 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, established the evangelical Lutheran Church as “the Danish People’s Church,” which as such was supported by the state. 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. the orthodox] i.e., the Grundtvigians (→ 8,28). But Grundtvig ought to be kept out of this] Presumably a reference to the fact that Grundtvig was more cautious than Lindberg. After he had resigned his post and had been convicted and censured for his violent attack on Prof. H. N. Clausen (→ 10,20), Grundtvig no longer demanded the resignation of priests and theologians who refused to embrace wholeheartedly official Lutheran doctrines as enunciated in “the symbolic books” (especially the Apostles’ Creed and the Augsburg Confession), but instead pleaded for religious freedom within the State Church; see Vigtige Spørgsmaal til Danmarks Lovkyndige. In the years that followed, Grundtvig broadened his po-

•

1850

sition to include freedom that would allow those who, like himself, wished to assert a Christianity that was based on “the symbolic books,” to leave the State Church and form free congregations outside of it; 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, 136–171; see also Om den Clausenske Injurie-Sag (→ 8,28), 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 DaabsPagten [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 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. In the years that followed, Grundtvig 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. ― But Grundtvig: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. ― Grundtvig: Nicolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 9–10

17 20

(1783–1872), Danish theologian, pastor, author of hymns, historian, and politician; ordained 1811; thereafter served as priest in various places in 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 (→ 55,29), which, like the Dansk Kirketidende (→ 8,28) was with some justification regarded as a mouthpiece for his views. In 1848–1849, he served as a member of the Danish constitutional convention (→ 9,13) and from 1849 was a member of the first Danish parliament (for Præstø, in southeastern Zealand). the party] i.e., the Grundtvigians, as an ecclesiastical party or tendency. The way he put the matter … if Clausen were removed … everything would be fine] In his polemical work Kirkens Gienmæle mod Professor Theologiæ Dr. H. N. Clausen [The Church’s Rejoinder to Professor of Theology, Dr. H. N. Clausen], a reply to Clausen’s book Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus [The Church Constitutions, Doctrines, and Rites of Catholicism and Protestantism] (Copenhagen, 1825), N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 10,16) directed a violent attack at H. N. Clausen for having “placed himself at the head of all the enemies of the Christian Church and despisers of God’s Word in this country” (p. iii). Grundtvig further insisted “that as an honest man, he [Clausen] must either offer a solemn apology to the Christian Church for his unchristian and offensive teachings, or he must lay down his post and renounce his name as a Christian” (p. iv). Clausen sued Grundtvig for libel. Grundtvig lost the case, and on October 30, 1826, he was sentenced to lifelong prior censorship of his writings. Even before the sentence was handed down, Grundtvig resigned from his position at the Church of Our Savior, where he had been permanent curate since the autumn of 1822. ― Clausen: Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793– 1877), Danish theologian; dr.theol., 1826; from 1821, a lecturer at the University of Copenhagen, where he became extraordinary professor in 1822

•

1850

515

and ordinary professor in 1830. In the period 1840–1846, Clausen served as a representative in the Roskilde Advisory Assembly of Estates; from 1848 to 1851, he served in the so-called November Ministry (→ 26,11) as minister without portfolio, and from 1849 to 1853, he served as a member of parliament (→ 9,1). ― would be fine: Variant: first written “would be fine.” with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. it was fortunate that the matter turned out … the whole business was Xndom] On the view of Christendom and the State Church at which Grundtvig arrived after having resigned his position, see especially the introduction to the first part, “Den herskende Kirke” [The Reigning Church], in Den Danske Stats-Kirke upartisk betragtet: “Christianity, or, if you prefer, the faith of the fathers of Christendom, and the society it creates are an obvious fact from the past that can never become anything other than what it has been, so whoever changes it merely pushes it away from himself or makes himself ridiculous by wanting to besmirch its name with the deeds of his own hands. The state church, on the other hand, is not a church state but is simply an arrangement of the state (establishment) which the government is permitted to alter in accordance with its own wishes, and no bishop, priest, or professor has the right to push back, inasmuch as no breach has been made in the freedom of conscience that is both the supreme basis of all religion and every innocent citizen’s inalienable right (p. 1).” this is a return to the apostolic Church] Presumably, a reference to Acts 2:44–47 and 4:32– 37. Peter defended himself when they wanted to remove him from his position] Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805–1888), Søren Kierkegaard’s elder brother; Danish theologian and priest; cand. theol., 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 (→ 10,16) and a respected member of Grundtvig’s circle, which included his mem-

25

34

1

11

516

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 10 –12

bership in the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle (→ 55,29). Concerning his election to the upper house of the Danish parliament, (→ 55,5). P. C. Kierkegaard had formally accepted the call to the parish of Pedersborg and Kindertofte in central Zealand on November 27, 1842. The parish included two families of Baptists, one of which had a child who had not been baptized into the established Church within the time required by law. (Only Jews were exempt from the law concerning compulsory baptism.) For reasons of conscience, P. C. Kierkegaard was not willing to carry out a forced baptism as the law required, nor were the child’s parents willing to be persuaded. The matter was reported to the ecclesiastical authorities, and on February 8, 1843, an appointed guardian arrived in order to arrange for the compulsory baptism of the child. In February 1843, P. C. Kierkegaard pleaded his case before the chancery and Bishop Mynster (→ 59,25), but the child was nonetheless forcibly baptized in Pedersborg Church, though without Peter Christian’s involvement. A similar situation arose in September 1843 with the second Baptist family, and their child was likewise forcibly baptized. The first family had another child in August 1844; they again refused to have their child baptized, and P. C. Kierkegaard once again refused to force them to do so. Mynster reported the matter to the chancery, which followed his advice and on February 11, 1845, wrote to P. C. Kierkegaard, informing him that he had fourteen days either to consent to baptize the children of Baptists or to tender his resignation. If he refused both, the chancery would recommend his dismissal. On February 27, 1845, he informed the chancery that he refused either to baptize the child or to resign, and the chancery continued to consider the case, finally making an equivocal recommendation to the king on May 27, 1846, the upshot of which was that he was able to remain in his post. Meanwhile, in the summer of 1844, he had joined the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle, where he was highly esteemed. On October 15, 1845, P. C. Kierkegaard gave an account of his case at the conventicle, which unanimously adopted a resolution stating that no priest should be forced to

•

1850

baptize a child against the wishes of the family. (See Dansk Kirketidende (→ 8,28), December 14, 1845, vol. 1, nos. 12–13, cols. 193–196. See also P. C. Kierkegaard’s theological arguments in “Om baptistfødte Børns Tvangs-Daab” [On Forced Baptism of the Children of Baptists], in Dansk Kirketidende, December 28, 1845, vol. 1, nos. 15–16, cols. 226–263. His unspoken assertion, like that of all Grundtvigians … the only true Xns] → 8,28. State Church] → 10,9. Then the State Church … either do it or resign your position] → 11,1. He replies …if you want to dismiss me, that is your business → 11,1.

3 5 6 7

What is missing … bit] Variant: added.

34

11

The system begins with “nothing”; mysticism always ends with “nothing.”] See the introduction to A. Helfferich, Die christliche Mystik [Christian Mysticism] (→ 17,29), vol. 1, p. 106, “When, for mysticism, real thinking ceases, it has been sublated into the notion of the absolute idea … and when the human spirit has sunk into the timeless and nonspatial abyss―the nothing or the not-I, so often spoken of in German mysticism––then the category with which the philosophy of concepts opens its objective logic comes to stand, so to speak, at the conclusion of subjective logic or at the end of the system.” ― The system begins with “nothing”: Refers to the principle that philosophy must begin with nothing. As early as From the Papers of One Still Living (1838), Kierkegaard refers to “Hegel’s great attempt to begin with nothing” (FPOSL, 61; SKS 1, 17), and in the first part of Either/Or (1843), he writes “that it is not at all difficult for philosophy to begin. Far from it, for of course it begins with nothing and thus can always begin” (EO 1, 39; SKS 2, 48). And in an entry that bears the title “The Dialectic of Beginning: Scene in the Underworld,” on two loose slips of paper from 1845, he has Socrates ask Hegel on what presuppositions he bases his philosophy, and Hegel answers: “On nothing whatever,” and shortly thereafter he has Hegel add: “I presuppose noth-

1

12

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 12–16

2

2

ing” (Pap. VI A 145). In the introduction to his Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], G.W.F. Hegel poses the requirement that logic begin with “pure being,” which, however, is identical with “nothing”; see Wissenschaft der Logik, ed. L. von Henning, 2 vols. [vol. 1 is in 2 parts] (Berlin, 1833–1834 [1812–1816]; ASKB 552–554), vol. 1.1 of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [The Complete Works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel], 18 vols. (Berlin, 1832–1845; abbreviated hereafter as Hegel’s Werke), vol. 3, pp. 59–74. The Danish Hegelian J. L. Heiberg made the idea that philosophy must “begin with nothing” into a sort of slogan, e.g., in §§ 1–8 of his article “Det logiske System” [The Logical System], published in his journal Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus: Journal of the Speculative Idea], no. 2, August 1838, pp. 1–45, and §§ 26–27 of his Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie eller den speculative Logik. Som Ledetraad ved Forelæsninger paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole (Copenhagen, 1832; abbreviated hereafter as Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie), p. 11; available in English translation as Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy or Speculative Logic, as a Guide to Lectures at the Royal Military College, trans. Jon Stewart, in Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2006), pp. 55–56. The latter is the divine nothing] See the introduction to A. Helfferich, Die christliche Mystik, vol. 1, pp. 106–107. Socrates’ ignorance was fear of God] In the conversations recounted in Plato’s dialogues, Socrates often alludes to his ignorance; see, e.g., Apology (21a–23b), where he explains that the oracle at Delphi had indeed denied that anyone was wiser than he, for Socrates knew that he knew nothing, unlike the many who imagine that they know something. See Platonis opera quae extant [Surviving Works of Plato], ed. Fr. Ast, 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1819–1832; ASKB 1144–1154), vol. 8 (1825), pp. 108–113; see also Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), pp. 7–9. See also The Sickness unto Death (1849), section 2, part A, chap. 3, titled “That Sin Is Not a Negation but

•

1850

517

a Position”: “Let us never forget―though how many really ever have known it or thought of it?―let us never forget that Socrates’ ignorance was a sort of fear and worship of God, that his ignorance was the Greek version of the Jewish adage that the fear of Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (SUD, 99; SKS 11, 211). All is revealed in the mystery] Presumably a reference to 1 Cor 2: 7–10; see also Eph 3:9, Col 1:26, and esp. Col 2:2–3, which seems to form the basis for “The mystery by whom everything was revealed, but in the mystery” in Practice in Christianity (1850) (PC, 135; SKS 12, 139. a certain speculation has maintained that it was not profane speculation, but within the mystery] Kierkegaard may be referring to H. L. Martensen, Mester Eckart. Et Bidrag til at oplyse Middelalderens Mystik [Meister Eckhart: A Contribution to the Illumination of the Mysticism of the Middle Ages (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 649; abbreviated hereafter as Mester Eckart), esp. pp. 56ff. and 71. ― speculation: Hegelian speculative philosophy and theology. God has chosen the lowly and the despised] Reference to 1 Cor 1:26–29; see also Jas 2:5. community,] Variant: first written “community.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

6

you who concern yourself with the sparrow … also concern yourself with a human being] Presumably a reference to Mt 10:29–31. require that he strive to be like you] Perhaps a reference to Mt 5:48. to strive.] Variant: first written “to strive,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to be continued.

10

what your chosen servant says―that he completed your sufferings] Reference to Col 1:24. –– your chosen servant: See Rom 1:1.

32

13

We hum. beings bear what is holy merely in a fragile vessel of clay] Reference to 2 Cor 4:7. Holy Spirit, when you dwell in a hum. being] Presumably an allusion to 2 Tim 1:14 and to Rom 8:9–11; see also 1 Cor 3:16–17.

2

14

12

7

27 30

13

15 18

3

518 5 6 7 11

14

19

14m

1

8

14

30

15

8

15

13

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 16–19

Spirit of Holiness] See Rom 1:4. Spirit of Wisdom] See Eph 1:17. Spirit of Truth] See Jn 14:17, 15:26, and 16:13; see also 1 Jn 4:6. giving rebirth] See Titus 3:5. A Contribution to the Introduction of Christianity into Christendom] A subtitle that Kierkegaard at first considered adding to the title of each of the three parts of Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8); see Pap. IX B 29 and 45,1; IX B 46; X 5 B 31,1. He later considered adding it to the main title of the book; see Pap. X 5 B 56 and 64, p. 275. an old slip of paper with the folder of writings] It cannot be determined where this slip of paper had been kept. “Writings” refers to the three parts of Practice in Christianity; see the next note. Practice in Christianity, An Attempt] 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––were published on September 25, 1850, as Practice in Christianity. ― An Attempt: The subtitle “An Attempt” was retained as late as the printer’s proofs, on which it was deleted with ink; see Pap. X 5 B 33a,1. The manuscripts of parts 1 and 2 also were subtitled “An Attempt” when they were submitted to the printer, where the subtitle was deleted with ink; see Pap. IX B 45,1 and 51,1. Lk 24:28 “… he wanted … he went in to stay with them.”] Cited from Lk 24:28–29; Kierkegaard’s emphasis. lost―] Variant: first written “lost.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. To become sober!] Reference to 1 Pet 4:7; see also 1 Pet 5:8. The King James version, like the authorized Danish translation of Kierkegaard’s day, has “sober.” In his own copy of the Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book

•

1850

for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog), which is preserved in KA at the Royal Library, Kierkegaard underlined the words “therefore sober” and “unto prayer”; 1 Pet 4:7–11 is the epistle for the sixth Sunday after Easter. the widow gave more than they did when they gave 900,000 rd.] Refers to Mk 12:41–44. ― 900,000 rd.: i.e., 900,000 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 96 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. Kierkegaard’s father left an estate of about 125,000 rix-dollars, and in December 1847, Kierkegaard sold the family house on Nytorv in Copenhagen for 22,000 rix-dollars. philosophers and the like apply categories of differentiation … to the religious] Cf. the draft of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Kierkegaard writes: “Let it be true 10 times over that unlike Hegelian philosophy, Christianity is not based on differences, that the holy humanness of Christianity is that it can be appropriated by all” (Pap. VI B 54,30). Cf. also “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays by the pseudonym H. H. (1849): “So if the paradoxical-religious sphere is abolished or explained by reference back to the aesthetic, then an apostle becomes neither more nor less than a genius, and then good-bye to Christianity. Cleverness and spirit, revelation and originality, being called by God and being a genius, an apostle and a genius: they all end up amounting to more or less the same thing. In this way Christianity has been confused by scholarship gone astray.” (WA, 93; SKS 11, 97). See also: “The person who has been called in this way [by God] does not relate to other human beings qua human being; he does not relate to other human beings through a quantitative difference (as a genius, someone remarkably gifted, etc.). No, he relates paradoxically by having a specific quality that no immanence can revoke in a simulacrum of eternity, because it is essentially paradoxical and

26

8

16

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 19–21

28

17

3

24

is after thought―not before, prior to, thought― against thought” (WA, 100; SKS 11, 104). exposed myself to the vulgarity of the mob, which I did in sympathy for the many, many who suffered innocently] Kierkegaard identified P. L. Møller with the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair] 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 [The Fatherland] on December 27, 1845, no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). 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. The teasing continued sporadically after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor and 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 on January 10, 1846, no. 9, cols. 65–68, with “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” (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. the crucifixion of the understanding] On the idea that having faith in opposition to the understanding is a form of martyrdom, see chap. 2 in the second part of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (CUP, 232–233; SKS 7, 212–213). On the relation of reason to the absurd and to the paradox, see NB15:25 in the present volume. that this enormous suffering is nonetheless light] Perhaps an allusion to Mt 11:30. See the second discourse, “The Gospel of Sufferings,” in the third part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), where the theme, based on Mt

•

1850

519

11:30, is “Though how can the burden be light when the suffering is heavy?” Hugo of St. Victore’s commentary on the passage … (See Helfferich, Mystik, part 2, p. 319.)] Refers to a piece in “Das Unterpfand der Seele” [The Mortgage of the Soul], by Hugh of St. Victor, translated by Adolph Helfferich in his Die christliche Mystik in ihrer Entwickelung und in ihren Denkmalen [Christian Mysticism: Its Development and Its Monuments]; vol. 1 is subtitled Entwickelungsgeschichte der christlichen Mystik [History of the Development of Christian Mysticism], and vol. 2 is subtitled Denkmale altchristlicher Mystik [Monuments of Ancient Christian Mysticism] (Gotha, 1842; ASKB 571–572; abbreviated hereafter as Die christliche Mystik); vol. 2, pp. 273–369; p. 319. ― Hugo of St. Victore: Hugues de Saint-Victor or Hugh of St. Victor (ca. 1096–1141), French monk, philosopher, theologian, mystic; originally perhaps from Saxony or Flanders, he came to the monastery school of the Augustinian abby of St. Victor in Paris when very young, and from 1133 he served as director of the school; both as a mystic and through his work on the theory of knowledge, hermeneutics, and biblical exegesis he had great influence on medieval scholasticism. ― Many are called, but few are chosen: See Mt 22:14. ― Helfferich: Adolph Helfferich (1813–1894) German philosopher and author, from 1842 privatdocent and subsequently extraordinary professor of philosophy at Berlin. The story of Ahasuerus … Queen Vashti … so that he could choose one] Kierkegaard’s rendering of Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 319. ― Ahasuerus: Usually identified as the great Persian king Xerxes (518–465 b.c., king from 486 b.c.), at whose court the dramatic events of the book of Esther are set; in ancient Persian the name means “the righteous king.” ― disowns Queen Vashti because of her pride: See Est 1:10–22. “Thus were many selected … in accordance with the king’s will.”] Kierkegaard’s translation from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 319. ― the king chooses only one for his chambers: Namely, the Jewish woman Esther; see Esth 2:17.

29

17

32

1

18

520

18

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 21–24

7

The story is found in the book of Esther, chap. II] Reference is made to “Esther 2” in Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 319.

17

R. Nielsen’s] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, winter semester 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). Kierkegaard appears to have brought Nielsen into his confidence concerning the ideas behind his writings; see the draft of an unpublished article “Concerning My Relationship with 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). See also the draft of an unpublished article from the summer of 1850, “Concerning Hr. Prof. Nielsen’s Relationship to My Work as an Author” (Pap. X 6 B 93, pp. 102–104). Stilling’s] Peter Michael Stilling (1812–1869), philosopher, abandoned his studies of theology shortly before his examinations but later was granted a dispensation and earned the magister degree in philosophy with the dissertation Den moderne Atheisme eller den saakaldte Neohegelianismes Conseqvenser af den hegelske Philosophie [Modern Atheism, or So-called NeoHegelianism 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

21

•

1850

period 1846–1850. At the end of December 1849, he 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: Polemical Essay] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 802) and sent Kierkegaard a copy with a dedication. In NB14:112 (KJN 6, 416) Kierkegaard recorded the concluding portion of the thank-you note he sent to Stilling (see the draft of the note in LD, 338– 339; B&A 1, p. 265), where Kierkegaard writes: “Thus, it is a pleasure for me to regard you, not as an adherent of myself, but as a declared adherent of a transfigured person, your spouse (→ 35,24). And―permit me to tell you this―this is a possible way for you to understand the situation. This is something I know how to treasure: no connoisseur of gemstones has a keener eye for refractions than I have for the noble treasure of existential possibility.” In this same entry, after recording the conclusion of his note to Stilling, Kierkegaard writes: “His life is constituted such that he could become a religious existence of a more unusual sort (KJN 6, 417).” Hugo of St. Victore] → 17,29. [“]The Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit[”] (see Helfferich, vol. 2, pp. 332 et al.)] Reference to “Die sieben Gaben des heiligen Geistes” [The Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit] by Hugh of St. Victor, translated by A. Helfferich in his Die christliche Mystik (→ 17,29), vol. 2, pp. 332–337. If you pray for your spirit, then you are praying for the Spirit] Kierkegaard’s free translation from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 333. “Do not be afraid to use the medicine … breaks the sickness.”] Kierkegaard’s translation of a passage from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 333. If you are using the medicine … not wanting to use the medicine properly and fully] A sentence added by Kierkegaard, linking the previously cited passage, from p. 333, to the next passage he cites, from p. 334. “Two opposites are fighting … the distress under which you are suffering”] Kierkegaard’s

28

18

29

32

35

2

4

19

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 24–25

9 10

17

27

20

1

20

6

14

translation of a passage from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 334. but why, then, do you also want to resist the medicine] Kierkegaard’s addition. “But nevertheless, accuse not the medicine … the sickness, not the medicine is to blame.”] Kierkegaard’s free translation from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, pp. 334–335. With the arrival of the Spirit … you did not perceive, because you did not pay attention] Kierkegaard’s free translation from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 335. This is the source of chastisement that heals … what possesses, what gives pain] Kierkegaard’s translation of an abridged passage from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, pp. 335–336. Every chastisement is indeed an evil … we are freed from the chastisement, namely eternal [chastisement]] Kierkegaard’s translation of an abridged passage from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, pp. 336–337. Hugo of St. Victore … incapable of grasping fully”] Kierkegaard’s translation of a passage from Die christliche Mystik, vol. 2, p. 336, where the author cites from and refers to De sacramentis christianæ fidei [On the Sacraments of the Christian Faith], 1.3, chap. 30) by Hugh of St. Victor (→ 17,29). ― by any reason: Variant: added. This … explained (e.g., in Concluding Postscript) … know the paradox negatively―but no more than that] Presumably a reference to the second part, chap. 4, sec. 2.B of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846): “Thus, the believing Christian both has and makes use of his understanding, respects what is universally human, does not explain it as a lack of understanding if someone does not become a Christian, but in relation to Christianity, he believes against the undersanding and here, too, he makes use of the understanding―in order to take care that he believes against the understanding. Therefore, he cannot, as someone might fear, believe nonsense against the understanding, because the understanding would of course perceive that it is nonsense and hinder him in believing it, but he makes so much use of the understanding that through it he takes

•

1850

521

note of that which cannot be understood, and then he relates himself to it, believing against the understanding” (CUP, 568; SKS 7, 516). See also the footnote on the same page: “Therefore it was stated above that it is always a tricky business to present as the absurd, the incomprehensible, something that someone else can explain as easy to understand.” In an older journal … (when I was reading Aristotle’s Rhetoric) … in place of dogmatics] Presumably a reference to JJ:305, probably from early 1845: “A new science must be introduced, Christian rhetoric. It is to be constructed ad modum [in the style of] Aristotle’s Rhetoric. The whole of dogmatics, especially what it has now been developed into, is a misunderstanding” (KJN 2, 217). On a loose quarto-sized page from the same period, Kierkegaard set forth the following idea: “Something on Godly Rhetoric, with Special Attention to Aristotle’s Rhetoric. By Johannes de silentio” (Pap. VI A 146, p. 59). This was developed further on other loose pages from the same period (see Pap. VI A 147–156, pp. 60– 67, and VI B 128–137, pp. 217–228). ― Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Kierkegaard owned two different editions of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, namely, De arte rhetorica [The Art of Rhetoric], stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1831; ASKB 1080), and Rhetorik [Rhetoric], trans. K. L. Roth, 2 vols. with continuous pagination, in Schriften zur Rhetorik und Poetik [Writings on Rhetoric and Poetics], 3 vols., part of Aristoteles Werke [Aristotle’s Works] (Stuttgart, 1833–1840; ASKB 1092–1093), which were included as vols. 132–133 and 201 in Griechische Prosaiker in neuen Uebersetzungen [Greek Prose Authors in New Translations], ed. Tafel, Osiander, and Schwab. Aristotle’s Rhetoric was also included in the various editions of Aristotle’s collected works in Kierkegaard’s library (ASKB 1056–1076). It would relate to πιστις … lets πιστις relate to the improbable] See marginal note JJ:305.c: “Aristotle situates rhetoric and the means of arousing belief (πιστεις) in relation to probability so that (as opposed to knowledge) it concerns itself with states of affairs that can also be otherwise. Christian rhetoric will differ from Greek rhetoric in that it only concerns itself with improb-

18

21

522

21

8

9

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 25–27

ability, with showing that something is improbable, in order that one can believe it. In this case, probability is just as much to be shunned as was improbability in the other case, but the difference from knowledge is the same in both cases” (KJN 2, 217; see also accompanying explanatory notes). ― πιστις: Aristotle uses this term in the sense of the production of evidence in court in bk. 1, chap. 1 of his Rhetoric. –– δοξη: Kierkegaard’s erroneous transcription of δόξα. In his Phaedrus (259e), Plato demands that the speaker speak the truth, as opposed to δόξα, which is merely acceptance of the matter under discussion; Aristotle makes the same distinction in bk. 1, chap. 1 of his Rhetoric (1355a 17), where he uses the synonym τὰ ἔνοδοξα for δόξα. The highest principles of all thinking … are of course negative] Presumably a reference to the three fundamental laws of logic, described in classical logic as the law of identity (if something is X, it is X), the law of the excluded middle (everything must either be X or not-X), and the law of contradiction (nothing can be both X and not-X). Traditional logical systems build on these three laws or principles. Thus, in bk. 4 of his Metaphysics (1005b 17–20), 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 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 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). Hum. reason has boundaries] Presumably a reference to Kant’s attempt in Critik der reinen Vernunft [Critique of Pure Reason] (Riga, 1794 [1781]; see ASKB 595), to make use of transcendental philosophy in order to carry out a critical investigation and definition of the boundaries of human reason.

•

1850

negative concepts] e.g., the concepts of “the improbable,” “the absurd,” and “the paradox.” pure reason] Presumably, a reference to Kant’s analysis of “pure reason” in Critik der reinen Vernunft (→ 21,9). exist at all,] Variant: first written “exist at all.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the witch who ended by eating her own stomach] No source for this has been identified.

10

An obvious factor in Xt’s death was his rejection of nationality] Contrast this position with the view advanced by Grundtvig (→ 10,16) in his article “Om Folkeligheden og Dr. Rudelbach” [On National Popular Identity and Dr. Rudelbach] in Dansk Kirketidende, January 30, 1848, vol. 3, no. 20, cols. 314–315.: “just as God undoubtedly had his good reasons not to send his Son, of woman born, in the days of Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, but first formed a people from the descendants of Abraham and let that people live through all its natural epochs before he sent them his Son, in the fullness of time, so is the life of the people of Israel the necessary presupposition of Christ’s coming.” the orthodox] → 8,28. the true nationalists … being genuinely nationalist fanatics] In his article “Folkelighed og Christendom” [National Popular Identity and Christianity] in Dansk Kirketidende, October 17, 1847, vol. 3, no. 3, cols. 33–44, Grundtvig defended himself against a country priest who in an article in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times] accused him of mixing together national popular identity, the nationalist cause, and Christianity. Grundtvig insisted that he had always believed, and continued to believe, that Danish “national popular identity” had to be resurrected before one could speak to the Danish people about a living Christianity: “I have definitely not mixed Danishness and Christianity together in any other way than this for many years,” Grundtvig wrote (col. 43). Two months later, 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

1

14

14

18

2 3

22

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 27 [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 relationshiop 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). When Rudelbach was permitted to express his views in Dansk Kirketidende, Grundtvig’s fury burst forth in “Den Danske og den Tydske Theologi” [Danish and German Theology] in Danskeren, et Ugeblad [The Dane: A Weekly], no. 8, May 10, 1848, vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1848), pp. 124–125: “Even in these heroic days of the Danish awakening, a German doctor [i.e., Rudelbach] among us dares to raise German arms against our Danish theology, and the so-called ‘Danish’ Church Times has let him use it as a battleground. Even though I have nothing but disdain for the whole of German theology … I am nonetheless compelled to declare that if the so-called ‘Danish’ Church Times wants to consort with the enemy, however much it pains me to do so, I must declare it to be un-Danish and break off all amicable relations with it” (p. 125). The issue of nationality was debated further at the gatherings of the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle (→ 55,29) in 1848. On July 7, 1848, for example, Pastor F. E. Bojsen 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; Bojsen 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,

•

1850

523

and their efforts must therefore strive not to incorporate what is foreign, but to be a genuinely 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 congregatons must consist of getting the people to know and to love what really belongs to the people as a Danish people” (col. 27). The issue came up again on October 12, 1848, when P. C. Kierkegaard (→ 11,1) spoke up and warned against “the currently rampant deification of nationality” as an extremely dangerous error, adding “Wherever the Holy Spirit is present, we confess ourselves to be unworthy and incompetent, to be chosen in Christ―and precisely for that reason we neither disdain nor hate any other nationality”; see Dansk Kirketidende, December 17, 1848, vol. 4, no. 12, cols. 213–214. In March 1848, Grundtvig had published the first issue of his weekly, Danskeren, which had the express purpose of winning Denmark over to “Danishness” and of contributing “to the rescue of Danishness from the great shipwreck that has never been more unmistakably threatening than now”; see the preface to the first issue, March 22, 1848, vol. 1, p. 2. In subsequent issues of Danskeren, the nationalist sentiments expressed there developed increasingly in the direction of “fanatical” nationalism, with a hostile attitude toward everything German; see, e.g., “Ingen Dansk Frihed under Tydsk Trældom” [No Danish Freedom under the German Yoke] in no. 7, May 3, 1848, vol. 1, pp. 110–222; “Danmarks og Danskhedens Dødskamp for Livsfrist” [The Mortal Struggle of Denmark and Danishness for a Lease on Life] in no. 15, April 21, 1849, vol. 2, pp. 225–238, which expresses hope of “winning in the dangerous struggle” with “Germany and Germanness, which is death and the grave for us” (p. 227); “Folkeligheden og den fremmede Dannelse” [National Popular Culture and Foreign Culture] in no. 47, December 1, 1849, vol. 2, pp. 747–752; and “Dansk Nytaars-Ønske” [Danish New Year’s Wish] in no. 1, January 12, 1850, vol. 3, pp. 1–16, where Grundtvig’s wish for old Denmark is that “the weighty, lovely, three-colored gemstone” that is “the Danish fatherland, mother tongue,

524

12

13

14 15

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 27

and group of friends” might be saved, retained, and preserved―and “let all Germanness go to blazes!”; see also “Folke-Aanden og de fremmede Guder” [The Spirit of the People and the Foreign Gods] in no. 2, January 19, 1850, vol. 3, pp. 17–32. ― they produce theories about Christian states and Christian peoples: It has not been possible to determine to whom this refers. Grundtvig argued against the idea of a “Christian state”; see, e.g., Den Danske Stats-Kirke upartisk betragtet (→ 10,16), p. 57, where he writes “that the state has never had any religion and will not get any either, for the state is only a personification and not a ‘real person,’ which indeed, is what one must be first of all in order to believe in something, much less to be believed in by the people. State religion is thus an artificial term.” ― God’s chosen people―and they perished: A reference to the Jewish people. ― convenient: Variant: following this has been deleted “and how Christian”. Grundtvig, who has always been a hater of discipline and rigor] Presumably a reference to the fact that Grundtvig’s views on freedom increasingly made him an opponent of using church discipline in order to exclude nonconformists from the Church (→ 10,16). also formulated a theory of how the true Xn partakes of everything] It has not been possible to identify any such theory advanced by Grundtvig, but Grundtvigians generally emphasized the Christian’s participation in the life of God’s creation. the parable about those who … exercise self-control in all things] See 1 Cor 9:24–25. It is unbelievable for what nonsense … the wedding at Cana] It is not clear what Kierkegaard is referring to, but it could be Grundtvig’s sermon on the account in Jn 2:1–11 of Jesus at the wedding in Cana, which is the gospel text for the second Sunday after Epiphany, which in 1850 fell on January 20. Grundtvig preached at Vartov Church that Sunday; see Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 16, January 19, 1850, which is reprinted in Holger Begtrup, ed., N.F.S. Grundtvigs

•

1850

Vartovs-Prædikener 1839–1860 [N.F.S. Grundtvig’s Sermons at Vartov, 1839–1860] (Copenhagen, 1924), pp. 244–248. In the introduction to the sermon, Grundtvig says, “When we hear that our Lord Jesus Christ himself, along with his mother and his disciples, was right there, in the house where the wedding took place, just like the other guests, this is not only one of the most remarkable but also one of the most joyous things we can imagine, especially because we know that the Lord and his mother, far from imposing the least sort of restraint on the joys of the wedding, much to the contrary, did everything they could to sustain and increase them―the Lord’s mother, by complaining about the lack of wine, which makes the human heart merry, and the Lord by remedying this lack in a manner so wondrous that in doing so he made manifest his divine splendor, so that his disciples believed in him” (pp. 244–245). Furthermore, Grundtvig says, “He [God] not only let His only begotten Son be a guest at an earthly wedding―and, with an act of creation, to augment and glorify the joys of the wedding in order that we might know that He, who created human beings in His image and likeness, loves all our human joys and does not wish to disturb them in any way, but rather to purify, consecrate, and transfigure them―but finally, he also made the joys of the wedding, the highest joys we know and can identify in our everyday lives, into a parable of the complete, eternal joys He has prepared in His house for all those who believe in His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and love in return Him who first loved us, and love one another as He loves us … Yes, my friends, just as the highest, noblest, and purest joys of weddings on earth―as Abraham and Sarah’s or Joseph and Mary’s―are and can only be parables of the joys of heaven that await us all, so in truth can we say that the sign given by the Lord at the wedding in Cana in Galilee is also only a parable of the sign He makes through the spirit of His Father when Sunday’s light and everyday life hold their wedding in His own spiritual house––His Church and congregation––on earth” (pp. 247–248).

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 28–29 22

23

25

31

22

35

A few years ago, the priests were busy “getting their robes turned … like professorial gowns” … scholarly] See the following passage in part 2, section 2, chap. 1, “Becoming Subjective,” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript by the pseudonym Johannes Climacus (→ 63,25): “But when people are everywhere making great claims, world-historically and systematically wanting to hoodwink God, when priests themselves are in a hurry to turn their clerical gowns inside out so that they almost resemble professorial gowns, when people everywhere say that the immediate has been sublated―it does not incite the god’s anger if one asks these very wise people what they know concerning this simple matter [i.e., falling in love]” (CUP, 181; SKS 7, 167). ― scholarly: A reference to speculative theology as a scholarly “science,” e.g., as presented in the preface to H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 10,1). Now they are taking off and are to sit in the parliament] In keeping with the Danish constitution ratified on June 5, 1849, the king summoned the two houses of parliament to assemble for the first time on January 28, 1850, later postponed until January 30, 1850 (→ 55,5). In the elections to the lower house, which were held on December 4, 1849, fifteen of the one hundred seats were won by priests, including N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 10,16), 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 (→ 11,1). renounced the income from his call] Presumably an allusion to the circumstance that clerical members of the parliament continued to receive the income from their calls when parliament was in session, despite the fact that they were hindered from performing the usual tasks of their office. “heartiness.”] Presumably a reference to the concept of “heartiness” employed by N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 10,16). 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 (→ 9,13). Grundtvig delivered this address against the background of the ongoing

•

1850

525

civil war in Schleswig and Holstein between the German and Danish portions of the monarchy; the war lasted from April 1848 until February 1851. Grundtvig’s 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 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, no. 8, May 10, 1848, vol. 1, pp. 424–431, in which Grundtvig does not want to speak of the physicial 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

526

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 29–32

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, no. 30, August 4, 1849, vol. 2, 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, no. 41, October 20, 1849, vol. 2, 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). 23

1

the Article by Frater Taciturnus against P. L. Møller] Reference to 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 28, 1845 (no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658) (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). The article consists of Frater Taciturnus’s rejoinder to the critique of Stages on Life’s Way (1845), and in particular of “‘Guilty?’/ ‘Not Guilty?,’” which Møller had included in his essay “Et Besøg i Sorø” [A Visit in Sorø], published in Gæa, æsthetisk Aarbog 1846 [Gaea, Aesthetic Annual for 1846], ed. P. L. Møller (Copenhagen, 1846), pp. 144–187, esp. pp. 172–180. In the article, Frater Taciturnus identifies Møller with Corsaren (→ 45,16). ― Frater Taciturnus: Latin, “the taciturn brother,” the pseudonymous author of “‘Guilty?’/ ‘Not Guilty?’ A Story of Suffering. Psychological

•

1850

Experiment,” the third part of Stages on Life’s Way (1845) (SLW, 185–397; SKS 6, 173–454) and of the above-mentioned article plus the article “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action,” which appeared in Fædrelandet, no. 9, January 10, 1846, cols. 65–68 (COR, 47–50; SKS 14, 85–89). For a more detailed explanation of the name, see the explanatory notes in SKS K6, 213 and the explanatory note to JJ:326 in KJN 2, 542–543. ― P. L. Møller: Peder Ludvig Møller (1814–1865), Danish aesthetician, author, and critic, served as editor of the polemical journal Arena in 1843, and in the years 1845–1847 he published the aesthetic annual Gæa. Møller also contributed articles to various journals, including “a number of satirical critiques and poems in Corsaren,” as he himself described his work in T. H. Erslew’s Almindeligt ForfatterLexicon [Universal Encyclopedia of Authors], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1843–1853; ASKB 954–969), vol. 2 (1847), p. 406. He published some of his literary pieces in Kritiske Skizzer fra Aarene 1840– 47 [Critical Sketches from the Years 1840–1847], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1847). In addition to the critique published in Gæa for 1846, he also published a negative review of Concluding Unscientific Postscript in Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post], nos. 73 and 74, March 27 and 28, 1846, under the name “Prosper naturalis de molinasky.” At the end of 1847, he traveled abroad and never returned to Denmark. The gospel says: Seek first the kingdom of God] See Mt 6:33.

11

23

Xt as Exemplar … (Xt as gift) that Luther brought forward] See, e.g., “Dr. Morten Luther’s Fortale” [Dr. Martin Luther’s Prologue] in En christelig Postille (→ 8,20), vol. 1, pp. xii–xiv: “In order that you … not make Christ into a Moses, as if He were nothing more than a teacher and a pattern, which other saints also are, or as if the gospel were a book of instruction and laws, you ought to understand Christ, His words, His deeds and sufferings, in double fashion: of course, indeed, as an Exemplar, which is held up to you for imitation … [T]his is the foundation and the main part of the Gospel: that before you take hold of

18

23

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 32–35

21

25

28 30

24

3

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 an 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.” in vain,] Variant: first written “in vain.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. something that also has been noted in other journals … Xt’s death is indeed the atonement] See, e.g., NB10:54 in KJN 5, 295, and NB14:78, in KJN 6, 395. his own life … he himself was tested] Presumably a reference to Heb 4:15. scripture … grace and truth were made manifest in Xt] See Jn 1:17. Visby lost the election] Carl Holger Visby (1801– 1871), Danish theologian and priest, cand. theol. 1823; from 1826 priest at the city courthouse, 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 that church in 1844, a post he retained until 1854. In the first elections to the Danish parliament, which were held on December 4, 1849, Visby stood as a candidate for the lower house and was defeated by Prof. C. E. Fenger, who received 255 votes, while Pastor Visby received 147 votes, and a journeyman tailor named Klamer received 63 votes; see Berlingske Tidende, no. 287, December 4, 1849, and Statistisk Tabelværk [Statistical Tables], new series, vol. 2 (Copenhagen, 1851), p. 123.

•

1850

527

today] January 13, 1850 (→ 24,13). If someone is a court preacher and has an enormous number of listeners] The term “court preacher” signifies a court priest, i.e., a priest who has been appointed by the king to preach to the court at Christiansborg Castle Church (see map 2, B2). J. P. Mynster (→ 59,25) was a court priest in the period 1828–1835, but after being appointed royal confessor in 1828, and bishop in 1834, he also continued to preach to the court at the Castle Church; Pastor J. H. Paulli (who was Mynster’s son-in-law) had been a court priest since 1840, and Prof. H. L. Martensen had been one since 1845. With respect to the enormous number of listeners, see, e.g., H. L. Martensen, Af mit Levnet [From My Life], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1882–1883), vol. 2 (1883), p. 86: “The church was always full as, thank God, it has remained to this day, and among the listeners were both men and women who were among the noblest and most cultured people in the capital. Thus among my listeners were Mynster and A. S. Ørsted. The opinions I heard [regarding my preaching] were very favorable.” Today he preached (Xt age 12 in the temple)] According to Adresseavisen, no. 10, January 12, 1850, Pastor Visby preached at the principal service at the Church of Our Savior on Sunday, January 13, 1850, the first Sunday after Epiphany, for which the gospel text is Lk 2:42–52, the account of twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple (→ 24,20). “seek and you shall find”] Allusion to Mt 7:7; see also Lk 2:48–49. the gospel reading for the day] Lk 2:48–49. come into God’s kingdom as children] Probably a reference to Mk 10:15; see also Mt 18:4.

5

At the beginning of his sermon … Luther … it is Jewish to cling to this life] A reference to Luther’s sermon on 1 Pet 2:11–20, the epistle for the third Sunday after Easter in En christelig Postille (→ 8,20), vol. 2, pp. 240–248. Luther writes, “But pay careful attention to the apostle’s [Peter’s] words and observe what a completely different understanding this fisherman from Bethsaida now has, compared to his previous views when he had walked about with the Lord prior to his

27

7

13

14 20 24

24

528

29 30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 35

resurrection. For then, like the other apostles and the entire Jewish people, he had had no other understanding of God’s or Christ’s kingdom than as an earthly kingdom in which they would be rich and happy peasants, citizens, nobles, counts, and lords; that all the glorious things in the world would belong to them; all the pagans would be their servants and slaves; no enemies, war, hunger, or misfortune would bother them any more: a kingdom in which they would have nothing but peace, good days, pleasure, and happiness under their supreme king, the Messiah. That was their hope and expectation; they were quite intoxicated with these sweet thoughts, just as they are drowned in this dream to this day” (pp. 241–242). that things might go well … live long in the land] See Deut 5:16. it is Christian to view oneself as a pilgrim here in this world] See Luther, En christelig Postille, vol. 2, p. 242, where Luther has Peter say to the Christians: “For you must also know this: In the eyes of the world you are not lords and knights of that sort, any more than Christ is a king in the eyes of the world. The kingdom of the world does not coincide with His kingdom; in the kingdom of the world you must therefore regard yourselves as alien and foreigners. Therefore I also beseech you, that inasmuch as you have become Christians and brothers in the heavenly kingdom, you comport yourselves properly in it and that from now on you wander as those who are no longer attached to this worldly kingdom, but regard this life on earth as a pilgrim regards the land through which he makes his journey and the inn at which he spends the night; for he does not think of remaining here; here he expects neither to become a citizen or a mayor, but to eat his meal and direct his walking staff further on, out the door, toward heaven. This―he says―is how you must also regard your lives, for you have not become Christians in order that you might rule and remain here on earth, as the Jews dream.― No, the Christians have another home, another citizenship and principality than in this world. Therefore, as pilgrims on the earth, search for another country in which you will be lords and have a place to stay without having to suffer what you have so often had to suffer in this inn.”

•

1850

Luther … against hastening to a monastery and the like] See En christelig Postille, vol. 2, pp. 243, 245, and esp. 246, where Luther writes: “Therefore it is the great, unreasonable fool who runs out of the world into a desert or a wild forest … No, you must be in whatever station and arrangments you are in―for after all, you must be in one place the entire time you live on the earth―so God has not cast you away from people, but among them … Nor is the idea that you are to shroud yourself in a cowl and creep into a corner or hide yourself in a desert. For in so doing you do not avoid the devil and sin― they will find you as well in the desert in a gray cowl as they would in the marketplace in a red coat.” now it has … true orthodoxy … as any politician] → 22,3. what I have shown elsewhere: Xnty praises the unmarried state … fanaticism] See, e.g., NB6:83 in KJN 5, 64, NB12:191 in KJN 6, 263–265, and the draft, presumably from the end of 1849 or the beginning of 1850, titled “On Prof. Martensen, Prof. R. Nielsen; Joh. Climacus,” where Kierkegaard writes: “From the Christian point the view, the unmarried state is what is Christian in the strictest sense. Does Christianity therefore have anything against marriage? No, but from a Christian point of view marriage must understand that it is an indulgence. If marriage becomes puffed up in a worldly way, if it becomes impudent, claiming that it is life’s earnestness and that the unmarried state is fanaticism: there will have to be a legal case” (Pap. X 6 B 116, pp. 150–151). ― Xnty praises the unmarried state: Presumably a reference to 1 Cor 7, esp. v. 7. See also Mt 19:10–12. ― nowadays the married state is life’s earnestness: At that time, all the priests and curates in Copenhagen were either married or widowers; see also NB11:140 in KJN 6, 78–79. become a theological graduate … the safest way to a living,] In provincial towns citizens had the duty of paying the priest an assessed sum called “priest money,” while peasants in rural parishes were to pay the priest a certain percentage of their agricultural yield, especially grain, known as a tithe. The size of these payments was established by the Ministry for Church and

32

36 38

4

25

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 35–37 Educational Affairs. 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 such clerical acts as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In provincial towns, there was also an additional sum for a housing allowance, while rural priests had income from the fields and farms attached to their call. In general, priests in Copenhagen were better off than those in the provinces; see an anonymous article, “Bemærkning om de kjøbenhavnske Præsters Forhold til Menigheden” [Observation on the Relation of Copenhagen Priests to the Congregation], in Politivennen [The Friend of the Police], no. 1313, February 27, 1841, p. 130: “Compared with the rest of the country’s priests, a large portion of the priests of Copenhagen have generous incomes and live extremely well.” At the same time, however, many theological graduates had to wait quite a number of years after completing their studies before they received an appointment and had to make a living by working at various temporary jobs, e.g., as private tutors. ― a living,] Variant: first written “a living.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. 25

8 8

Moses and Elijah were present at the transfiguration] See Mt 17:1–8, esp. vv. 3–4. that is how … every ecstasy … said by Richard of St. Victore] Refers to chap. 3, of the third section, “Richard von St. Victor, oder die wissenschaftliche Mystik des traditionellen Kirchenglaubens” [Richard of St. Victor, or the Scholarly Mysticism of the Traditional Church Faith], § 3, “Die wissenschaftliche Form der Mystik” [The Scholarly Form of Mysticism], in A. Helfferich, Die christliche Mystik (→ 17,29) vol. 1, p. 497. ― Richard of St. Victore: Richard de SaintVictor or Richard of St. Victor (d. 1173), French monk, philosopher, theologian, mystic; perhaps originally from Scotland, but at an unknown date entered the Augustinian monastery of St. Victor in Paris, where he became prior in 1162; like his teacher Hugh of St. Victor, his work concerned theories of knowledge, hermeneutics, and bib-

•

1850

529

lical theology. He is known in particular for his De trinitate [On the Trinity]; his mystical writings deal with the contemplative path of spiritual ascent to God. a Remark by Anti-Climacus … he does not recognize the congregation] Refers to the fifth exposition in the third part “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” in Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8), (PC, 222–223; SKS 12, 218): “If, on the contrary, instead of muddling Christianity into world history in human, frivolous fashion, we take Christianity as it presents itself and believe that this life is the time of testing, believe that Governance surely knew what it was doing, believe that it was and is the will of Christianity that it be proclaimed to all, but that it is by no means Christianity’s view that all will accept it: then everything remains in order; then this life remains the time for testing for each individual, and here in this world the Christian Church is always a Church militant. When applied to this life, a concept such as ‘congregation,’ with which people have been so preoccupied in these times, is really an impatient anticipation of the eternal. Struggling corresponds to ‘the single individual,’ that is, when struggling is understood in a spiritual and Christian sense, not in the physical sense of military battle, where things depend not so much on the single individual as on how many thousands there are, how many cannon they have, and the like. From the Christian point of view, it is always individuals who struggle, for spirit is precisely this: that before God everyone is an individual, that ‘fellowship’ is a lower category than ‘the single individual,’ which everyone can and ought to be. And even if there were thousands of individuals and they thus strove in union, understood from the Christian point of view, each individual, apart from striving in union with the others, is nevertheless also striving in himself, and must deliver an accounting on judgment day, when his life as an individual is to be tested. Therefore, the congregation really belongs only to eternity; ‘the congregation’ is, at rest, what ‘the single individual’ is in unrest. But of course this life is precise-

13

25

530

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 37–40

ly the time of testing, of unrest―therefore, ‘the congregation’ has no place in time, but only in eternity, where it is, at rest, the gathering of all the single individuals who survived the struggle and the test.” ― 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 (→ 63,25). ― Church militant: Corresponds to the Latin expression ecclesia militans, which early Christian theology used to designate the opposition from the surrounding world to which the Church was to subjected until Christ’s return; only then would the Church triumph and become the ecclesia triumphans or Church triumphant. 25

21

22

25

27

as Anti-Cl. … in Practice in Christianity, no. 2] Refers to the section on “The Impossibility of Direct Communication” in the second part of Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8) (PC, 134; SKS 12, 138), “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition”: “When someone says directly, [‘]I am God, the Father and I are one,[’] that is direct communication. But if the person who says this, the communicator, is this individual human being, an individual human being exactly like others, then this communication is not exactly quite direct, because it is not exactly quite direct for an individual human being to be supposed to be God―whereas what he is saying is quite direct. By virtue of its communicator, the communication contains a contradiction: it becomes indirect communication, it confronts you with a choice of whether or not to believe him.” in the form of a servant] See Phil 2:6–11, esp. v. 7. Richard of St. Victore: Eve ought … not have taken it upon herself to lead] Kierkegaard’s rendering of a portion of chap. 17 in bk. 2 of Von der Gnade der Betrachtung [On the Grace of the Observation] by Richard of St. Victor (→ 25,8), translated into German by A. Helfferich in his Die christliche Mystik (→ 17,29), vol. 2, pp. 454–457; p. 455.

•

1850

When … the government was the mighty power … courage to attack it] Reference to the situation prior to the fall of absolutism on March 21, 1848, and the general amnesty issued on January 24, 1848, for cases involving the press (see the next note). play the game that it is courageous to attack the government … member of the government] A government proclamation issued on January 24, 1848, suspended all pending cases involving violations of the “law concerning freedom of the press” from 1799, and on March 24, 1848, the 1799 press law was finally abolished, though every writer was still legally accountable. ― the government: i.e., 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, which made the country a parliamentary monarchy; the ministry continued in office until July 1851. Grüne] Johan Peter Martin Grüne (1805–1878), Danish journalist and politician. Kierkegaard is here referring to Grüne’s role as editor (from April 1839) and publisher (from July 1845) of Kjøbenhavnsposten, a position he held until 1856. The daily newspaper Kjøbenhavnsposten, founded in 1827, was the older of the two leading liberal papers (the other was Fædrelandet; see the next note); in 1848 it had about one hundred out-oftown postal subscribers. In its early years the paper was primarily interested in the arts and culture, but in the course of the 1830s it became markedly political and was for a time the most important organ for the liberal political opposition. Grüne continued the liberal line, but in the course of the 1840s, as it took an increasingly radical democratic stand, the journal lost ground; in the period 1848–1850 the paper took a conservative position and became increasingly reactionary and royalist. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 [Danish Newspapers, 1634–1989], 3 vols. (Odense, 1988– 1991), vol. 2 (1989), p. 108. Ploug] Parmo Carl Ploug (1813–1894), Danish journalist, politician, and author, known for various writings, including university student com-

8

11

15

15

26

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 40–44

23

26

31

38

edies written under the pseudonym Poul Rytter. Kierkegaard is here referring to Ploug’s role as publisher and editor of Fædrelandet, which was founded as a weekly in 1834 and became a daily in 1839. The paper was especially important as the most important voice for the liberal opposition until the fall of absolutism in March 1848, after which it remained the organ for liberal polemics against the authorities and people in power. In 1848, the paper had about one thousand out-of-town postal subscribers; the total number of subscribers was probably a bit under two thousand. See Søllinge and Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989, vol. 2, p. 109. It can] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. politicians] e.g., Orla Lehmann, a leader of the liberal opposition to absolutism who played a decisive role in the transition to constitutional government in March 1848 and was made minister without portfolio in the ministry formed on March 22, 1848 (the “March Ministry”), under the leadership of Count A. W. Moltke. Lehmann had considerable influence in writing a draft of a proposed constitution, but because of his unpopular views regarding the settlement of the civil war in Schleswig and Holstein (→ 22,35), he had to leave the government with the formation of the “November Ministry” (→ 25,11); he failed to win a seat in the elections for the constitutional convention (→ 9,13) and thus had no direct influence on the final drafting of the constitution of June 5, 1849. In December 1848, Lehmann was named prefect of the Vejle district of Jutland; in 1849 he traveled to the war zone near Kolding, where he was taken prisoner by the Schleswig-Holstein forces and was not released until 1850. my efforts to glorify martyrdom] Presumably, this is primarily a reference to the first essay, “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays by the pseudonym H. H., esp. section C (WA, 79–82; SKS 11, 83– 86), and to the fifth exposition in the third part, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” of Practice in Christianity

•

1850

531

(→ 14m,8) (PC, 201–232, esp. 225–227; SKS 12, 198–226, esp. 220–222). See also The Point of View for My Work as an Author (published posthumously by P. C. Kierkegaard, 1859) (PV, 50–51, 109– 110; SKS 16, 32–33, 89–90). absolutely in the new] Variant: “the new” added. absolute] Variant: added.

10

no. 45 in Brorson’s Svanesang] Refers to H. A. Brorson’s hymn “Skal vi ustridig hist Guds Himle-Bryllup gjæste” [Shall We Be Guests, Unchallenged, at God’s Heavenly Wedding], no. 45 in the section titled “Svanesang” [Swan Song] in Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson [Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Hans Adolf Brorson], ed. J.A.L. Holm, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1838 [1830]; ASKB 200), pp. 863– 864: “Shall we be guests, unchallenged, at God’s heavenly wedding. Patience must fix its gaze on the goal … The greater the need, the more fixedly it sees the end. Then the wanderer counts each day’s completed miles―the memory of his country is always the rest that lies ahead. The more he has endured, and the farther he has traveled, the nearer he is to his home and the more briskly he advances. Well, then, we know where the short road leads. We expect Him home again, He who prepares a place for us. Now we pass through swamps, now through gardens of roses. It is all the same to us, when our direction is toward heaven.” ― Brorson: Hans Adolf Brorson (1694– 1764), Danish bishop, hymnodist, and pietist.

2

28

Richard of St. Victore … “idle” like Mary] Refers to a passage in bk. 1, chap. 1 of “Von der Gnade der Betrachtung” (→ 25,27) by Richard of St. Victor (→ 25,8) in A. Helfferich, Die christliche Mystik (→ 17,29), vol. 2, pp. 426–427, where Mary is specifically referred to as “idle.” Then he adds … “but … do not understand how to make a Sabbath of the Sabbath.”] Kierkegaard’s rendering of a passage from bk. 1, chap. 2 of “Von der Gnade der Betrachtung” (→ 25,27) by Richard of St. Victor (→ 25,8) in A. Helfferich, Die christliche Mystik (→ 17,29), vol. 2, pp. 427–429, esp. p. 428.

18

28

27

13

19

532 28

29

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 45–46

26

people say that where there is no fear, there is no fruit] The play on words in Danish is frugtløs (“fruitless”) and frygtløs (“fearless”); this is not known to be a common Danish wordplay and was presumably coined by Kierkegaard himself.

3

primal] Variant: added. I can use direct communication to indicate … the indirect communication that is used] Refers both to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 26,38), which had been written in the course of the summer and autumn of 1848, and to the little piece, On My Work as an Author, which Kierkegaard himself published in 1851, but the main portion of this latter work, “The Accounting,” is dated “Copenhagen March 1849” (PV, 5; SKS 13, 11), and the supplement to it, “My Position as a Religious Author in ‘Christendom’ and My Tactics,” is dated “Copenhagen, Nov. 1850” (PV, 15; SKS 13, 23). I also understand … my work as an author as my upbringing] See On My Work as an Author: “‘Before God,’ religiously, when I converse with myself, I call all my work as an author my own upbringing and development, though not in the sense as if I were now complete or completely finished with respect to needing upbringing and development” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). this is the category I employ: I have to make aware] See On My Work as an Author: “‘Without authority’ to make aware of the religious, of Christianity, is the category for the whole of my work as an author, viewed as a totality” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). no “authority,”] → 29,28. The passage from On My Work as an Author continues as follows: “That I was ‘without authority’ is something I have insisted upon from the very beginning and have repeated stereotypically” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). In the preface to his first collection of edifying discourses, Two Edifying Discourses (1843), Kierkegaard notes that he “does not have authority to preach” (EUD, 5; SKS 5, 13). This is repeated unchanged in the prefaces to the subsequent collections of edifying discourses (1843–1844; see EUD, 53, 107, 179, 231, 295; SKS 5, 63, 113, 183, 231, 289), and in variant forms in the prefaces to Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) (TDIO, 5; SKS 5, 389)

10

17

28

30

•

1850

and to the two first parts of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 5, 157; SKS 8, 121, 257). In Works of Love (1847) Kierkegaard writes that “we [i.e., Kierkegaard] are well-taught and trained in Christianity from childhood on, and in our more mature years we have dedicated our days and our best powers to this service, even though we always repeat that our discourse is ‘without authority’” (WL, 47; SKS 9, 54). the published writings constitute my own development] → 29,17; see also On My Work as an Author, 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). The fact that I communicate … pseudonymously is a concession] Presumably, a reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8) by the pseudonym Anti-Climacus, with Kierkegaard as editor (→ 30,12). break off,] Variant: first written “break off.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the Editor’s Preface always … the more ideal Christian requirement] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to 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.’ S. K.” (PC, 7; SKS 12, 15). ― [‘]I am striving[’];: Variant: first written “[‘]I am striving.[’]”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. exploded by] Variant: first written “exploded.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. my prefaces] → 29,30 and → 30,12. What I can say again and again … felt myself helped by him … had begun] Cf. “A First and Final Declaration” in Concluding Unscientific

31

36

2

12

21

23 32

30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 46–47

31

11

31

15

Postscript, where Kierkegaard acknowledges his pseudonymous works and thanks God’s governance for having “granted me much more than I ever had expected” (CUP, 628; SKS 7, 572). Similar gratitude is expressed frequently in Journals NB2– NB14 and in the manuscripts of The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 72; SKS 16, 52) and On My Work as an Author (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18). I have been helped by Governance] Cf. chap. 3, “The Part Governance Has Played in My Writing,” in The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 71–90; SKS 16, 50–69). the Two Pages That Are to Be Printed on a Half Page Preceding “The Accounting”] A reference to the following four-page manuscript, presumably from 1849: “For the typesetter. This is to be printed immediately following the title page ‘The Accounting,’ in a different font and on a half page, as with dedications and the like. / 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 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. Viewed religiously, this same development signifies to me personally the extent to which I am in an infinite debt of gratitude to Governance, which has held its hand over me in paternal fashion, showing me favor, and has supported me in such a multitude of ways. [What follows was written at the bottom of the last page of the manuscript, with a reference mark indicating that it was to be inserted here]. In addition, this same development signifies to me personally my own own development and up-

•

1850

533

bringing; for however true it may be that when I began, I understood, deep down, that I essentially belonged to the religious, this relationship was nonetheless in need of development and upbringing in various ways, which is something I still need. / Nonetheless, inasmuch as the ‘understanding’ of my work as an author that I here shall communicate does not add anything, but is purely and simply a demonstration and an explanation of what has in fact been accomplished, and whereas, from the beginning, I understood some portion of the whole development, and as time went by came to understand more and more of it: I have therefore structured the presentation as if the whole development had been a conscious thought from the beginning―in one sense, I myself am, after all, the author who has done everything that has been done. [What follows was written at the bottom of the second and third pages, with a reference mark indicating that it was to be inserted here.]; humanly speaking, before a human tribunal, I must primarily call the writings my own production, even though I was in many ways helped and supported by something higher: understood in a godly way, before God I call it my own development and upbringing, though not in the sense as if I were now complete or completely finished with respect to needing upbringing and development. / But in order not in any way―alas, with ingratitude―to cheat, as it were, Governance out of even the least little thing, or mendaciously to attribute something to myself, I am making the present statement at the outset. 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. This feeling is indescribably blessed; at times it has overwhelmed me in such a way that it has taught me to approximate an understanding of the words of the apostle [Peter]: ‘Go away from me, for I am

534

19 21

31

26

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 47–49

a sinful man’ [Lk 5:8]; that is: it is precisely this extraordinariness that causes me to feel my own wretched unworthiness all the more deeply. / ‘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. I have never made use of ‘authority’; on the contrary, from the very beginning (the preface to the Two Edif. Discourses 1843) I have stereotypically repeated and insisted that ‘I am without authority.’ ‘To direct attention’ to the religious, more precisely, to Christianity, is really the category for my work as an author; the three aforementioned categories also correspond categorically correctly to this category” (Pap. X 5 B 148–150, pp. 348–350; cf. X 5 B 151–152, which is a draft of the above). ― “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” (→ 32,2), “One Note Concerning My Work as an Author” with its appended supplement “Armed Neutrality, or My Position as a Christian Author in Christendom,” and “Everything in One Word” in one book, 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 (→ 29,10) (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19); the last two pages (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19), which in the original edition are printed in larger type and on two pages of their own, are an abridged and reworked version of the manuscript cited above. “before God.”] → 31,15 and → 29,17. upbringing] Variant: first written “personal”. It is told of Bernard of Clairvaux … that they actually abandoned everything] Refers to chap. 3, the introduction to the first part, “Der h. Bernhard, oder die contemplative Mystik des traditionellen Kirchenglaubens” [St. Bernard, or the Contemplative Mysticism of the Traditional Faith of the Church], in A. Helfferich, Die christliche

•

1850

Mystik (→ 17,29), vol. 1, pp. 263–281, esp. p. 264, where the incident to which Kierkegaard refers is recounted. ― Bernard of Clairvaux: 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. πεισιϑανατος] It is said that the Cyrenian philosopher Hegesias (ca. 300 b.c.) spoke so convincingly of death that some of his students committed suicide. See, e.g., Cicero, Tusculanae disputationes [Tusculan Disputations], bk. 1, chap. 34; Kierkegaard owned Marcus Tullius Cicero’s Tusculanische Untersuchungen [Marcus Tullius Cicero’s Tusculan Investigations], trans. and notes by J. D. Büchling (Halle, 1799; ASKB 1236); see p. 98. I had considered: The Accounting, the Three Notes, and the first part of The Point of View] Probably toward the end of 1848 or the beginning of 1849, Kierkegaard considered publishing three volumes under the title Fulfillment’s Complete Works: The Fruits of the Year 1848, of which vol. 1 would contain The Sickness unto Death (→ 25,13), vol. 2 would contain Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8), and vol. 3 would contain On My Work as an Author, consisting of no. 1, “The Point of View”; no. 2, “3 Notes” (see below); no. 3, “1 Note” (subsequently titled “The Accounting” (→ 31,15)); and no. 4, “Everything in One Word.” Later, probably in October 1849, he added the following to “The Point of View”: “NB. Perhaps this could scarcely be done, however. But the 1st section could possibly be used, though in such a way that it was not no. 1, but would be preceded by the Three Notes and the One Note” (Pap. X B 5 143, pp. 344–345). ― the Three Notes: i.e., “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work 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); no. 3, “Preface to the ‘Friday Discourses,’” originally written in

31

2

32

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 49–52

5

6 7

33

4

1847 (see Pap. IX B 63,14, pp. 375–377). In 1848, when Kierkegaard decided to append the three notes as a supplement to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 26,38), 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). ― the first part of The Point of View: i.e., The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 29–32; SKS 16, 15–22). to include myself like this during my lifetime] i.e., to publish the writings on his work as an author under his own name and while he was still alive rather than posthumously. now, when I want to stop] i.e., with the publication of Practice in Christianity by Anti-Climacus. in an earlier version from 1849 … to make aware] → 31,15. ― for me: Variant: added. Christmas-merry at Christmastime … profoundly sorrowful on Good Friday] Perhaps a reference to Wilhelm Rothe, Det danske Kirkeaar og dets Pericoper, en Haandbog for Prædikanter og Kirkegjængere [The Danish Church Year and Its Pericopes: A Handbook for Preachers and Churchgoers], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1843 [1836]; ASKB 747), in which the concluding portion of the section on the third and fourth Sundays in Advent includes the following: “Indeed, as the time of preparation begins, Christmas joy is already beginning to be born in our hearts, and the day [Christmas day] when we are reminded of the Lord’s arrival in the flesh is approaching” (p. 92); and the beginning of the section on Good Friday: “This day, indeed, on which the Lord was crucified and buried, is a day of sorrow for the entire Church which, so to speak, celebrates Jesus’ burial ceremony” (p. 143). Cf. NB11:207 in KJN 6, 126–127.

•

1850

535

In defending the reality of art … what sort of man he is] No specific source for such views has been identified. ― the reality of art: Variant: changed from “art”. Luther said, [“]God help me, Amen,[”]] An allusion to the reply generally attributed to Luther at the Diet of Worms in 1521, when, referring to God’s word and his conscience, he refused to retract his teachings, which had been condemned by the Church: “Here I stand, I can do no other. God help me! Amen!” in C.F.G. Stang, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), p. 123. those who stoned Stephen … the face of an angel] See Acts 6:8–15 and 7:54–60. the Socratic notion … the ugliest man … tendency toward everything evil] Presumably, a reference to Alciabiades’s speech in Plato’s Symposium, 215a–222a. Alcibiades begins by describing Socrates’ external appearance, which reminds him of a satyr. But he adds that Socrates contains within himself a divine beauty and that with his words that seek wisdom, Socrates seizes hold of all those who hear him. For these reasons, Alcibiades himself has come to love Socrates unreservedly and unhappily. 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. 87–100 (Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters (→ 12,2), pp. 566–573).

10

Now I am seen less often] Presumably, this means that he is seen less often on the street, which is where Kierkegaard was supposedly harassed as a result of Corsaren’s attack on him (→ 45,16). mundus vult decipi] 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 con-

26

33

12

24 37

28

34

536

34

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 52–56

tinually mumbled these words with his mouth: Mundus vult decipi, decipiatur!” (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 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. the living word] The expression “the living word,” which stems from Acts 7:38, where it means God’s word (NRSV and King James version use “oracles” rather than “word”), is associated with N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 10,16) and his “ecclesiastical view” according to which it is not the Bible, but “the living word,” i.e., the Apostles’ Creed that is recited at baptism and the words of institution that are spoken at the eucharist, which for centuries have been transmitted orally and spoken by the Christian congregation, that makes a church a “Christian” Church and constitutes the source and norm of its faith and doctrine. Grundtvig set forth these views as early as Kirkens Gienmæle (→ 10,20), where he used this expression primarily with respect to the Apostles’ Creed, which Grundtvig said had “emanated from Christ’s mouth”; in this same work Grundtvig also placed the spoken word in opposition to the written word. The idea that the Apostles’ Creed originated with Christ himself is expressed more emphatically in Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224), vol. 3, no. 20, “Klippen er Christus” [Christ Is the Rock], pp. 463–464, where Grundtvig writes that Christ’s “word is not a random rumor or a dead letter, but an actual, audible, living word,” and that “first and foremost, it is the word by which he has ordered those who want to be baptized into his society to confess their faith, and we believe that that word is the same as our present creed.” The theory that the “living” word is the orally transmitted and “spoken” word as opposed to the “literalist,” “feeble,” or “dead” word

•

1850

of scripture was developed further by Grundtvig in many other works. being regarded as a parish clerk] In accordance with an official government pronouncement from 1809, if a priest was absent or did not perform the church service, the parish clerk was required to read a religious work or a printed sermon, either from the pulpit or―if he was not permitted to use the pulpit―from the clerk’s bench. The choice of the religious work or sermon was reserved for the priest unless the parish clerk, in accordance with a decree of 1801, had the right to preach.

34

everyone who participates in voting] Here Kierkegaard is presumably referring to the priests who had been elected to the parliament, where they voted (→ 22,25). that disgusting worship of the lingam] Refers to the worship of the lingam, a stylized phallic symbol installed in Hindu temples dediated to the god Shiva. See, e.g., L. Moréri, Le grand dictionnaire historique, ou le mélange curieux de l’histoire sacrée et profane [Great Historical Dictionary, or the Curious Mixture of Sacred and Profane History], 6 vols. (Basel, 1731–1732; ASKB 1965– 1969), vol. 4 (1732), p. 984, where “lingam,” which represents the principle of fertility, is described as a “monstrous idol,” and where it is stated that the Brahmans often carry it to their many rituals. See also W. Vollmer, Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie aller Nationen [Comprehensive Dictionary of the Mythology of All Nations] (Stuttgart, 1836; ASKB 1942–1943) p. 1144.

6

Stilling] → 18,21. his late wife] Frederikke Marie Larsine Jacobine Stilling, née Larsen, married Stilling on December 1, 1846, and died at age thirty-three on December 22, 1847; see the obituary in Adresseavisen, no. 305, December 28, 1847, where Stilling writes: “She died at the beginning of the second year of her marriage, a few days after she had presented me with a son.” not marrying] Cf. NB16:56 in the present volume, where less than two months later Kierkegaard refers to Stilling’s “urge to get married.”

22

35

12

24

24

35

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 56–62

30

38

36

7

10

36

15

“inhuman rigor”] Cf. NB16:56 in the present volume, where Kierkegaard notes that Stilling had called Christianity “the most appalling self-torment.” the scientific-scholarly religion] Possibly a reference to Stilling’s scholarly writings (→ 18,21). the prophet spoke of something that perhaps was present … Xt … clear that it was he of whom they spoke] Reference to OT prophecies of the coming Messiah, which are understood in the NT as pertaining to the coming of Christ; see, e.g., Isa 7:14. the fulfillment―] Variant: first written “the fulfillment.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Lavater puts it very well … crucified by pagans as the king of the Jews] Kierkegaard’s free translation of Lavater’s interpretation of the question posed by the Magi in Mt 2:2: “Where is the child who has been born king of the Jews?” in J. C. Lavater, Betrachtungen über die wichtigsten Stellen der Evangelien. Ein Erbauungsbuch für ungelehrte nachdenkende Christen. Nach den Bedürfnissen der jetzigen Zeit [Observations on the Most Important Passages in the Gospels: An Edifying Book for Untaught, Thoughtful Christians. For the Needs of the Present Age], 2 vols., vol. 1 (with the subtitle Matthäus und Markus [Matthew and Mark]) (Dessau, 1783); vol. 2 (with the subtitle Lukas und Johannes [Luke and John]) (Winterthur, 1790); see vol. 1, p. 12. ― Lavater: Johann Caspar Lavater (1741–1801), Swiss priest and author. Lavater was widely respected as a priest, preacher, and poet, but was especially known for his work on physiognomy, i.e., the theory that the external appearance of a person, and especially the face, expresses one’s moral and spiritual disposition. His principal work on the subject was Physiognomische Fragmente zur Beförderung der Menschenkenntnisz und Menschenliebe [Physiognomic Fragments for the Promotion of the Knowledge and Love of Humanity], 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1775–1778; ASKB 613–616).

•

1850

537

the synthesis] i.e., the synthesis of the divine and human natures in Christ as the God-Man. orthodoxy … Grundtvigianism] → 8,28. the miraculous-delightful … the matchlessly delightful and profound, etc.] These and similar expressions were often used by Grundtvig in his writings and sermons, but it has not been possible to find written evidence of their also having been used by Grundtvig’s followers. Xt … “the sign”] See the NT, esp. Lk 2:34–35, where Simeon proclaims: “This child is destined for the falling and the rising of many in Israel, to be a sign that will be opposed so that the inner thoughts of many will be revealed.” In this connection, see, in Kierkegaard’s Practice in Christianity, the second part, “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,” § 1, “The God-Man Is a ‘Sign’” (PC, 124–127; SKS 12, 129–132).

31

4

37

unum noris omnes] The expression stems from the Roman author Terence’s comedy Phormio, act 3, 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.

37

37

Victor Hugo] Victor Marie Hugo (1802–1885), French poet, playwright, and author of short stories and novels, a leading figure in the French Romantic movement. In 1848, Hugo became a member of the French constitutional convention, and in 1849 he was elected to the French parliament, where he became a member of the republican opposition; he was a dogged campaigner for development and progress. Many of his short stories and novels appeared in Danish. a “brilliant address” attacking the clerical party] Refers to Victor Hugo’s speech in the French parliament during the debates, which began on

22

38

32 35

26

538

30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 62

January 14, 1850, about the government’s proposal for a law reorganizing the educational system. The first mention of the debate, in Berlingske Tidende, no. 20, January 24, 1850, describes Hugo’s speech as “a brilliant address”; Fædrelandet, no. 21, January 25, 1850, p. 79, carried a brief account of the debate on January 15 and 16, 1850, in which it is related that “Victor Hugo’s speech was brilliant and all the newspapers are filled with praise or attacks, all according to their party colors. The opposition newspapers … declare that both in form and content it is one of the greatest addresses ever delivered before a French political assembly. The conservative papers, and even more the legitimist and Catholic papers, competed with one another in belittling it, while the Bonapartist journals praise it.” In Berlingske Tidende, no. 24, January 29, 1850, there was a more detailed account of Victor Hugo’s speech against “the clerical party” and in favor of educational freedom under the secular supervision of the state―and thus against the government’s proposed law. On the same day, Fædrelandet, no. 24, pp. 91–92, carried an even more detailed account of the speech, including passages from Victor Hugo’s violent attack on “the clerical party,” e.g.: “I do not confuse you with the Church any more than I would confuse a parasitic plant with an oak tree. You are the Church’s parasitic plants, you are a canker on the Church! … You are not the faithful, but sectarians in a religion you do not understand!”― the clerical party: The Catholic ecclesiastical party, mentioned in Berlingske Tidende, no. 24, both as “the Church party” and as “the ultra-Catholic party”; in Fædrelandet, no. 24, it is first labeled the “the ecclesiastical party” and thereafter called “the clerical party” and “the Catholic party.” the clerical party―its cause is in the minority] See Berlingske Tidende, no. 20, January 24, 1850, where it is reported that “if there is no change of opinion―which, of course, is not impossible― there will be a majority opposed to this proposed law.” The views of two spokesmen for “the clerical party” are recounted: Bishop Parisi had dealt the proposed law “a hard blow, even though the prelate did declare that he would vote in favor of the law,” and the famous Catholic orator and pol-

•

1850

itician Count Charles Forbes Montalembert “produced the same effect, though he, too, declared himself in favor of the law.” See also Fædrelandet, no. 21, January 25, 1850, p. 79, where the brief report concludes with the remark: “In the meeting on the 17th, Montalembert spoke for the proposed law, but his speech was untypically muted, and a majority in opposition to the law appears to be forming.” the natural sciences … their martyrs, but Victor Hugo … from recent times] According to Fædrelandet, no. 24, January 29, 1850, p. 91, Victor Hugo said: “We know the clerical party! It is an old party that has already gathered its laurels. It is the party that keeps watch at the gate of orthodoxy; it is the party that has hidden the truth under ignorance and lies. It is the party that has forbidden science and genius to go farther than the prayer book, and which wants to nail thinking fast to the cross of dogma. Every forward step reason has taken in Europe has been made despite it. Its history is written in the history of the development of the human race, but backwards. It is the party that had Prinelli whipped because he said that the stars would not fall down from the heavens; it is the party that put Campanella on the rack seven times because he maintained that the number of worlds was infinite and because he suspected the secret of creation. It is the party that persecuted Harvey because he proved the circulation of the blood. In Joshua it found grounds for imprisoning Galileo; in Paul it found reason to imprison Columbus. Discovering the laws of the heavens was ungodliness; discovering a world was heresy. It is the party that banished Pascal in the name of religion, Montaigne in the name of morality, Molière in the name of morality and religion.” It claimed Xt] See, e.g., Mk 15:6–15. the examples of Christian religiousness] According to Fædrelandet, no. 24, January 29, 1850, p. 91, in his speech against “the clerical party” Victor Hugo said: “You talk about religious instruction! Do you really know what is the true religious instruction before which one must bow, which one may not disturb? It is the merciful nun at the bedside of the dying! It is the monks who purchase

32

1 3

39

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 62–63

6

13

14 16

16

the freedom of slaves! It is Vincent de Paul who saves the foundling! It is the bishop of Marseille among the plague-stricken! It is the archbishop of Paris who smilingly walks through the frightful faubourg St. Antoine, elevating his crucifix over the civil war and disregarding the possibility of death if only he can bring peace! This is the true, profound, active, and popular religious instruction that, fortunately for religion and for the human race, still makes more people into Christians than you make into unbelievers.” great and good deeds] Reference to Ove Malling, Store og gode Handlinger af Danske, Norske og Holstenere [Great and Good Deeds of Danes, Norwegians, and Holsteiners] (Copenhagen, 1777); it was reprinted many times, for the last time in 1834, and was commonly used in Danish language instruction in Latin schools. Xnty!] Variant: first written “Xnty,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to be continued. But as] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. the Assembly] The popularly elected lower chamber of the French parliament, which exercised legislative and fiscal authority until Louis Napoleon’s coup in 1851. Eugene Süe, who has written his way into being a millionaire … poverty and wretchedness of actual life] Marie Joseph Eugène Sue (1804–1857), French author, especially known for his countless maritime, historical, and socially themed novels, which had an enormous audience (in part because they were serialized as supplements in newspapers) and were very profitable. Sue was an unsuccessful candidate in the election for the constitutional convention in 1848, but was elected to the lower house of the French parliament in April 1850. Many of his novels were translated into Danish. ― millionaire―: Variant: first written “millionaire.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― depicting the poverty and wretchedness of actual life: Presumably, a reference to Sue’s novel that was translated into Danish as Paris’s Mysterier [The Mysteries of Paris], which appeared in serialized form in 1843 and thereafter in book form, or perhaps to Folkets

•

1850

539

Mysterier, eller En Proletarie-Families Historie i Løbet af Aarhundreder [The Mysteries of the People, or The Story of a Proletarian Family over the Course of Centuries], trans. E. Meyer (Copenhagen, 1850 [original French ed., 1849–1850]), which also appeared first in serialized form, starting in mid1849. 50 rd.] Fifty rix-dollars (→ 15,26). Two Slips of Paper … “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself.”] Refers to two slips of paper (see Pap. X 5 B 97–98 and 99) that Kierkegaard had placed in a packet together with “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” the third part of Practice in Christianity (→ 14m,8), and that he had copied, in slightly altered form, both into the present entry here in Journal NB15 and onto a torn-off piece of paper; see Pap. X 5 B 101, which reads: “Copy of the two slips of paper, which are together with ‘From On High He Will Draw All,’ and which are also to be found in Journal NB15 p. 84.” This work cannot be made pseudonymous … the book was made pseudonymous Oct. 9, 49] Slightly altered copy from one of the two above-mentioned slips of paper (Pap. X 5 B 97; see the previous note). It is not known when the text on this slip of paper was written, but the additional remark―“NB This objection is answered on an accompanying piece of gray paper and the book has now been made pseudonymous”―is dated “Oct. 9, 49” (Pap. X 5 B 98). ― made pseudonymous: i.e., published as written by the pseudonym Anti-Climacus (→ 25,13). ― it rails against the sermon having been turned into observations: Refers to the sixth section of “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” in Practice in Christianity (PC, 233– 257, esp. 233–237; SKS 12, 227–249, esp. 227–230). The term “observation” is a critical allusion to J. P. Mynster (→ 59,25), who often used the words “observation” or “observations” and the expression “let us observe” in introducing the themes of his sermons; see, e.g., Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Held in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), pp. 41, 129; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Held in

19 24

26

39

540

33 34

41

16

24

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 63–66

the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 16, 44, 56, 72, 140, 153; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Held in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), the first section, “Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1849” [Sermons Held in the Year 1849], pp. 1–132, esp. 6, 110, 124. That piece of paper … contents] Variant: added. In a way there is a dialectical heresy … this discourse written by a pseudonym] A slightly altered copy of the second slip of paper, which is dated “in Oct. 49” (Pap. X 5 B 99 (→ 39,24)). ― in this book: i.e., in “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions.” ― where it is shown that the sermon … someone who is no one: See the previous note on the sermon as “observation.” ― by a pseudonym: i.e., by Anti-Climacus (→ 25,13); variant: first written “by a pseudonym.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― I can make aware: → 29,28 and → 31,15. ― I am still included as editor: On the title page of Practice in Christianity, Kierkegaard is named as editor. ― acknowledges that he will be judged for this discourse: Reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to the first part of Practice in Christianity, where Kierkegaard writes in conclusion: “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 in the second and third parts of the book. Fate was envious … especially of the eminent individual] Presumably, a reference to the ancient Greek idea of nemesis, which was an expression for the gods’ envy of any great human success and which functioned as a sort of punitive or equalizing justice in punishing every excess of happiness or daring. the chorus] In Greek tragedy, as the drama unfolded, the chorus was the group of people who sang commentaries on and interpretations of the various developments, and who engaged in dialogue with the actors. Whereas the hero of the tragedy was an eminent individual, the chorus

•

1850

represented ordinary citizens. Typically, it was through the chorus that the observer sensed the fate that befell the hero. times when world’s tides are turning] Presumably, a reference to the fact that in the beginning of 1848, Europe was marked by a series of revolutions and political upheavals; in Denmark this culminated in the fall of absolutism on March 21. Those who stand at the head … the honor and esteem owed to martyrs] A reference to the renown that leaders of the republican and, in particular, the liberal opposition had achieved by having made themselves vulnerable to the sanctions imposed by the authorities for their breach of the “press freedom ordinance,” which prohibited criticism of the constitution and the government; such political leaders were frequently subjected to fines and prison sentences. Similarly with the natural sciences … honor and esteem owed to martyrs] → 38,32.

35

41

6

42

Kant held that the hum. being was his own law … he gave himself] Refers to Immanuel Kant’s theory of morals, which posits autonomy (imposing a law upon oneself) as the highest principle; see Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason, bk. 1, chap. 1, § 8, theorem 4: “Autonomy of the will is the sole principle of all moral laws and of the duties conforming to them; any heteronomy of the power of choice, on the other hand, not only is no basis for any obligation at all but is, rather, opposed to the principle of obligation and to the morality of the will. For the sole principle of morality consists in the independence from all matter of the law (i.e., from a desired object) and yet, at the same time, the determination of the power of choice by the mere universal legislative form which a maxim must be capable of [having]. That independence, however, is freedom in the negative meaning, whereas this legislation―pure and, as such, practical reason’s own legislation―is freedom in the positive meaning. Therefore the moral law expresses nothing other than the autonomy of pure practical reason, i.e., freedom; and this [autonomy] is itself the formal condition of all maxims,

17

8

42

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 66–69

20

22 29

under which alone they can harmonize with the supreme practical law. If, therefore, the matter of volition, which can be nothing other than the object of a desire that is being linked with the law, enters into the practical law as the condition of its possibility, then there results heteronomy of the power of choice, namely dependence on the natural law of following some impulse or inclination, and the will gives to itself not the law but only the precept for rational compliance with pathological laws. But the maxim, which in this way can never contain the universally legislative form within itself, not only brings about no obligation in this way, but is itself opposed to the principle of a pure practical reason and therefore also to the moral attitude, even if the action arising from it were to be lawful” (Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason, trans. Werner Pluhar [Indianapolis: Hackett, 2002], pp. 48–49). the blows that Sancho Panza inflicted on his own backside] Sancho Panza is Don Quixote’s squire in 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 repeated 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. actually] Variant: added. this dying-away] i.e., turning away and releasing oneself entirely from everything connected with immediacy, temporality, and finitude. Similar expressions are often used in mysticism and in pietist theology and literature. One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ we have died to sin;

•

1850

541

see, e.g., Rom 6:2. In pietism this idea was made more stringent, so that human life is 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. See, e.g., bk. 1, observation 12, “A Christian must die to his heart’s desires and to the world and live in Christ,” and observation 13, “Out of love for Christ and for the sake of the eternal glory for which we are created and redeemed, we must die away from ourselves and the world,” in Johann Arndt, Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom [Four Books on True Christianity] (→ 45,31). situation of contemporaneity.] Variant: changed from “contemporary person.”

38

43

The Significance of My Work as an Author to Me as My Upbringing in Christianity] → 29,17 and → 31,15. In The Point of View … I have explained that … it was I who needed Xnty] Copy of a footnote in The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 26,38) (PV, 93n; SKS 16, 72n): “The dedication, inasmuch as it goes even farther back in time, was: Even if I never got so far as to become a Christian, I would, before God, use all my time and all my diligence on at least making it clear what Christianity is and where the confusion in Christendom is lodged, a task for which I had fundamentally prepared myself from my earliest youth. From a human point of view, this was certainly a magnanimous decision. But Christianity is too great a power to want simply to make use of a human being’s magnanimous decision (which, in fact was also most likely an expression of my relationship to my father); therefore it or Governance took the liberty of arranging the rest of my life in such a way that there could be no misunderstanding―which, from the very beginning, there surely was not―about whether it was I who needed Christianity or Christianity that needed me.” the plans I made … taking my theological examination … my late father] Kierkegaard began reading for his examinations in the autumn of

5

44

7

31

542

34

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 69

1838, after his father’s death on August 9 of that year, and took his final examination for the theology degree on July 3, 1840. In his petition to be admitted to the examination (written, as required, in Latin), which Kierkegaard submitted on June 2, 1840, he stated at the outset: “My father was the former merchant, the late M. P. Kierkegaard, whose memory I venerate.” Next, after reporting how he had gradually drifted farther and farther away from theology into the study of philosophy, so that it had become clear to him that he could neither satisfy the demands of theology nor theology his own, Kierkegaard writes: “Under circumstances such as these, I frankly admit that I would never have been able to bring myself to continue in the direction I had long since abandoned and resume the studies I had already consigned to oblivion, were it not that for the fact that my father’s death causes me to feel in a certain way bound by a promise” (LD, 9–10; B&A 2, 6–7 [a Danish translation of the Latin text in B&A 1, 8]). See also JJ:81: “When I am not reus voti [Latin, “bound by an oath”], nothing works for me. That was how I got my theology degree” (KJN 2, 153). See also JJ:297: “When Father died, Sibbern said to me, ‘Now you will never get your theology degree,’ and then that was exactly what I got. Had Father lived on, I would never have got it” (KJN 2, 214). ― my late father: Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838). In 1780 he received a license as a hosier, and eight years later he was granted a license as an importer and wholesaler of colonial goods (sugar, coffee, molasses, etc.). 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. having read diligently] In his recollections of his friend Søren Kierkegaard, Hans Brøchner reports that Kierkegaard had read for his examinations “with great energy,” that he had hired a tutor and had “worked his way through the

•

1850

driest of the disciplines, made notes on ecclesiastical history, learned the list of popes by heart, and so on. His tutor was very pleased with him” (Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard: A Life as Seen by His Contemporaries [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996], p. 228). The entries from August 1838 to January 1839 in Journal DD in KJN 1, 248–269, from February to September 1839 in Journal EE in KJN 2, 8–58, and from September to December 1839 in Journal KK in KJN 2, 309–352 attest to intensive reading for the examinations. In Not5:19, presumably from the late summer of 1840, Kierkegaard refers to this period: “Reading for my examination is the longest parenthesis I have experienced” (KJN 3, 181). hypochondriacal] In Kierkegaard’s time, “hypochondria,” in addition to its present-day meaning―i.e., a continual fear of illness and an excessive concern for one’s health―still had the older meanings of obsession with minor details and melancholia (see Ludvig Meyer, Fremmedordbog [Dictionary of Foreign Words], 3rd ed. [Copenhagen, 1853]; ASKB 1035), and Kierkegaard not infrequently used the word in these senses, both in his journals and notebooks and, e.g., in The Concept of Anxiety (BA, 162n; SKS 4, 460). All of my original, internal suffering] Cf., e.g., Kierkegaard’s description of how he became an author in chap. 3, “The Part Governance Has Played in My Writing” in the second part of The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 79–84; SKS 16, 58–62). Here Kierkegaard reports that as a child he was “in the grip of an enormous melancholia” from which he could not wrest himself and “from which I have scarcely been entirely free for a single day” (PV, 79, 81; SKS 16, 58, 60). My relationship to “her.”] i.e., 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 more than 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

35

14

15

45

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 69–70

16

18

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). What I have suffered from persecution by mob vulgarity] Refers to the fact that Corsaren’s attacks apparently resulted in Kierkegaard’s being abused on the street. After Kierkegaard, alias Frater Taciturnus, identified P. L. Møller with Corsaren in the article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner” (→ 23,1), he asked that he “might 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 COR, 46; SKS 14, 84). Corsaren responded by carrying a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and caricatures of Kierkegaard (see KJN 4, 453–456). 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 persisted after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor (see below), continuing 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); see the next note. The satirical and political weekly journal Corsaren was founded in October 1840 by M. A. Goldschmidt, who was the journal’s real editor until October 1846. The journal claimed that it stood apart from party politics, but in view of its attacks on the absolute monarch and his government and on the liberal opposition, it could be called republican, though this tendency was weakened after the fall of absolutism in 1848. The journal’s satirical articles were accompanied by drawings by Peter Klæstrup, which helped it gain broad readership. In addition to mocking the government and the opposition, the paper also made fun of the leading lights of the literary establishment of the day. a magnanimous action, undertaken out of love for others] Refers both to the article “The

•

1850

543

Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner” (see the previous note) and in part to the attack that Kierkegaard, alias Frater Taciturnus, directed against Corsaren in the article “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” in which he writes that he has taken “this step for the sake of others,” that is, the step of “demanding to be abused myself” (COR, 47–50; SKS 14, 87). being declared an egotist] → 46,19. yes, that was] Variant: first written “yes, that is”. Arndt … what sin means to God] The German Lutheran theologian and priest Johann Arndt’s (1555–1621) edifying work Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Four Books on True Christianity] was published for the first time in Magdeburg, ca. 1605–1610 and appeared in Danish translation for the first time in 1690. Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum, often supplemented with excerpts from other of Arndt’s writings, so that it bore the title Sechs Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Six Books on True Christianity], was very widely read. It contains not only Arndt’s own edifying meditations and “observations” but also a great many excerpts from other edifying Christian literature, e.g., Thomas à Kempis and Johann Tauler. Arndt was a forerunner of pietism, linking orthodox Protestant penitential piety with medieval mysticism. Kierkegaard owned the work in a later German edition, Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum, Welche handeln Von heilsamer Buße herzlicher Reue und Leid über die Sünde wahrem Glauben auch heiligem Leben und Wandel der rechten wahren Christen [All Insightful Books on True Christianity, Which Treat of Healthy Repentance, Heartfelt Regret, and Remorse over Sin, True Faith, as well as the Holy Life and Doings of the Genuinely True Christian], 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1737 [1733]; ASKB 276; abbreviated hereafter as Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum), and in an abridged DanishNorwegian translation, Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom. Paa ny oversatte efter den ved Sintenis foranstaltede tydske Udgave [Four Books on True Christianity: Newly Translated from Sintenis’s German Edition] (Kristiania [Oslo], 1829; ASKB

20 24 31

45

544

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 70–71

277; abbreviated hereafter as Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom). Kierkegaard is here referring to a passage in bk. 2, chap. 19: “Therefore the crucified Christ first shows us our sins, which are great and many. He reveals to us the secret, hidden sins of our hearts that he has atoned for through his cries of agony and the anguish of his soul. He shows us his wounded, bloody, pitiable body, full of pain and sickness, that we might read in it, as in a book, and understand our sins, which we have perpetrated with all our members” (Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum, pp. 383–384; see also Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom, p. 251). ― the old edifying writings: The edifying works that dominated the religious literature of the late 17th century and well into the 18th century were still widely read in Kierkegaard’s time, when in 1842, Foreningen til christelige Opbyggelsesskrifters Udbredelse i Folket [The Association for the Dissemination of Edifying Writings to the People] began publication of older as well as new edifying writings. 46

14

(Hegel, Daub … Julius Müller, etc.) … objectivity is what saves] Refers to the critique, in Kierkegaard’s day, of Romanticism’s individualism, relativism, and nihilism, which Kierkegaard terms “isolated subjectivity,” an expression he presumably borrowed from A. P. Adler’s Den isolerede Subjectivitet i dens vigtigste Skikkelser [Isolated Subjectivity in Its Most Important Forms] (Copenhagen, 1840), pt. 1. This critique took its point of departure in Hegel, and as time went by, it developed in various directions with later philosophers and theologians, such as Carl Daub and Julius Müller. This critique sought to rebut the relativistic view by establishing that the truth is not to be found in the chance notions of an individual, but on the contrary in “a higher authority,” e.g., according to Hegel, in “Sittlichkeit” [morals]―which Kierkegaard understood as “the universal”―and, according to other philosophers and theologians, in God. Kierkegaard refers to these various forms of “higher authorities” as the “objectivity” that can “save” an individual by making him capable of escaping the dangers of relativism―in which he regards his own person

•

1850

as the “higher authority”―and able to enter into a higher sphere of truth outside himself. ― Hegel: In his library Kierkegaard had a number of volumes of Hegel’s Werke (→ 12,1), see ASKB 549–565 and 1384–1386. In the present connection, see Phänomenologie des Geistes [The Phenomenology of Spirit], ed. J. Schulze (Berlin, 1832 [1807]; ASKB 550), in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 2, pp. 263–314, 451–508, and §§ 105–141 in Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts [Outlines of the Philosophy of Right], ed. E. Gans (Berlin, 1833 [1821]; ASKB 551), in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 8, pp. 148–207. ― Daub: Carl Daub (1765–1836), German philosopher and theologian, from 1795 professor of theology at Heidelberg; in his later years, he became a Right Hegelian and a leading representative of speculative theology. Kierkegaard owned D. Carl Daub’s philosophische und theologische Vorlesungen [Dr. Carl Daub’s Lectures on Philosophy and Theology], ed. C. L. Michelet and T. W. Dittenberger, 7 vols. (Berlin, 1838–1844; ASKB 472–472g). In the present connection, see Die dogmatische Theologie jetziger Zeit oder die Selbstsucht in der Wissenschaft des Glaubens und seiner Artikel [The Dogmatic Theology of the Present Time, or Egotism in the Science of the Faith and Its Articles] (Heidelberg, 1833). ― Julius Müller: (1801–1878), German Lutheran theologian, extraordinary professor at Göttingen (1834), ordinary professor at Marburg (1835), and ordinary professor at Halle (1839). Best known for his two-volume work Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde [The Christian Doctrine of Sin] (1839–1844); vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde. Eine theologische Untersuchungen [On the Nature and Basis of Sin: A Theological Investigation] (Breslau, 1839; abbreviated hereafter Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde). Kierkegaard purchased the 3rd expanded and improved ed., 2 vols., with no subtitle on vol. 1 (Breslau, 1849; ASKB 689–690) on February 11, 1850; see the receipt from C. A. Reitzel dated December 31, 1850 (KA, D packet 8, layer 1). In the section of vol. 1 titled “Das Realprincip der Sünde” [The Real Principle of Sin], pp. 62–109, Müller writes: “Thus, what makes sin into sin, evil into evil, is the selfish isolation of the creature active within it … Internally, ‘the I, the dark des-

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 71–72

19

26 35

40

pot,’ rules; he stands alone in the middle of the world, sunken into himself and in a chaos of selfish striving, of inclinations and disinclinations, without any true participation in the sorrows and joys of the human race and the individual, alienated from God” (p. 67). See also p. 227, where Müller explains that the root of evil is to be found in the fact “that the individual wants to exist for himself, that is, in asserting absolutely his individual interest, his particular will, he above all stands in opposition to other individuals and thereby to the universal as the rule of equality for all.” every university student knows that I am an isolated individuality] In NB12:76, from July or August 1849, in KJN 6, 184, Kierkegaard writes: “M. appears to be directing sarcasm at me with this talk of a sickly, egotistic life as an individual” and in connection with this refers to H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 10,1), p. 475: “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 egotistic 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.” See also P. C. Kierkegaard’s (→ 11,1) address to the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle of October 30, 1849 (→ 55,29), in which he says that “Søren Kierkegaard’s own life is perhaps in many ways like that of a hermit in the midst of a bustling crowd,” describing his sibling as “an ecstatic monastery brother” (Dansk Kirketidende (→ 8,28), December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, cols. 190, 193. this salvation is rlly a return to paganism] → 61,24. In those days … Sophist … ignorance was the evil] Refers to the Sophists, who constituted a reigning tendency in Greek philosophy in the fifth century b.c. The Sophists traveled about the country and offered professional instruction in their knowledge. Their most systematically cultivated field was rhetoric, and their instruction was meant to prepare students for political life. ignorance is precisely the cure] On Socrates’ ignorance, (→ 12,2).

•

1850

545

μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] See Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 368, where, in discussing the significance of the Christian doctrine of atonement in Hegel’s speculative philosophy, Julius Müller writes: “But if this is the concept of the atonement, then it is an arrant μετάβασις εἰς ἄλλο γένος to make the subject’s participation in this atonement primarily and essentially dependent upon the subject undergoing a moral transformation and rebirth.”

6

46m

Leibnitz … wants to make sin milder, defends it] Refers to bk. 2, “Prüfung der vornehmsten Theorien zur Erklärung der Sünde” [Examination of the Leading Theory Concerning the Explanation of Sin], sec. 1, chap. 1, “Ableitung der Sünde aus metaphysischen Unvollkommenheit des Geschöpfes” [Derivation of Sin from the Imperfection of Creation], in Julius Müller’s Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde, pp. 113–141, where, on the basis of Leibniz’s Theodicy, he discusses his theory that “the original source of sin lies in the metaphysical imperfection of creation,” and that what is real in sin, “like everything real in the creature, is produced through the continuing activity of God, which is to be thought of as continua creatio [Latin, “continuing and sustaining creation”], whereas sin, formally seen, “is a mere privation―that the will remains standing at subordinate objects and has not gone further to those that are higher―and precisely because of this has no causa efficiens [Latin, “efficient cause”], but on the contrary only a causa deficiens [Latin, deficient cause” (pp. 114–115). ― Leibnitz: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), German philosopher, mathematician, natural scientist, jurist, and historian. Kierkegaard owned both Herrn Gottfried Wilhelms, Freyherrn von Leibnitz, Theodicee, das ist, Versuch von der Güte Gottes, Freyheit des Menschen, und vom Ursprunge des Bösen [Herr Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz’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) and God. Guil. Leibnitii opera philosophica, quae exstant [The Extant Philosophical Works of Gottfried

22

47

546

24

47

28

31

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 72–75

Wilhelm Leibniz], ed. J. E. Erdmann, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1839–1840; ASKB 620), which includes Essais de théodicée sur la bonté de dieu, la liberté de l’homme et l’origine du mal [Essays in Theodicy, Concerning the Goodness of God, the Liberty of Man, and the Origin of Evil]. it becomes an imperfection that is inseparable from a hum. being for all eternity] See the chapter discussed in the previous note (in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde), p. 123, where Julius Müller writes: “These views of Leibniz cannot be logically developed any further without making sin eternal for every personal creature. If sin springs from natural imperfection, as essentially belongs to the concept of creature, then it cannot in all the ages of the future ever actually be annulled― rather, there is only something of an infinite approximation of annulment.” Julius Müller has an excellent rejoinder to the explanation of sin as weakness: Has not evil been seen to impart intensified energy] Refers to the chapter discussed in the previous notes (in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), pp. 117– 119, where Julius Müller discusses the explanation of sin as privation (→ 47,22) or as “sins of weakness.” Here he maintains that the fact that the sinful tendencies, which have their origin in “the mere imperfection, the weakness of the will,” are capable of escalating “to malignity and energetic perversity” must be because “a worse principle was at work than is acknowledged by this privation theory … A human being can collect himself not only in the good, but indeed also in evil. Does not experience show us often enough that a decisive tendency toward evil is capable of electrifying a person, placing his spiritual powers in a mighty tension, casting him into restless activity*?” pp. 117–119. The footnote indicated by the superscript asterisk at the conclusion of the cited passage includes a reference by Müller to Plato; see the next two notes. Plato, who characterizes η αδιϰια as τον εχοντα … αγρυπνον (see Julius Müller … p. 119 note)] Kierkegaard is citing word for word

•

1850

(translating the German into Danish and with minor orthographic changes in the Greek) from Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 119n. According to Müller, the Greek quotation is from “De Republica lib. X” [Republic, bk. 10], 610e, where the remark is attributed to Glaucon, who is in conversation with Socrates. Because ´ἡ ἀδιϰία´ means “injustice,” Müller’s note can be rendered as follows: “Plato characterizes injustice as that which makes the person who commits it, who possesses (injustice), as in fact very lively and, in addition to being lively, is also wakeful” (see Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters (→ 12,2), p. 835: “injustice [is] … something that kills others when it can, renders its possessor very lively indeed, and not only lively but wakeful”). I myself have shown this in earlier journals … they have been allotted only this life] Refers to NB8:44, from December 1848, in KJN 5, 172. de republica Lib. X] → 47,31.

35

1

47m

remarkable words … do not incite him, for then he could become dangerous] Cited, with minor omissions, from “Epistle to the Reader from Frater Taciturnus” in Stages on Life’s Way (SLW, 493; SKS 6, 454). ― Frater Taciturnus: → 23,1. Stages on Life’s Way] Stages on Life’s Way: Studies by Various Persons. Compiled, Forwarded to the Press, and Published by Hilarius Bookbinder, was published on April 30, 1845 (see SLW; SKS 6).

9

48

1

48m

proofs for the immortality of the soul] Refers to the notion of the individual immortality of a human being. See See 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.” Shortly after Hegel’s death there was extensive and bitter debate, among both his adherents and his opponents, concerning the extent to which his

16

48

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 75

19

34

thought allowed for individual immortality. The debate was regularly summarized in reports carried in the Danish Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur [Periodical for Foreign Theological Literature], edited by H. N. Clausen and M. H. Hohlenberg, to which Kierkegaard subscribed starting in 1833. See also “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 Poul Martin Møller], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839– 1843; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 2 (1842), pp. 158–272. he said: The matter of immortality … I unconditionally venture to stake the whole of my life on it] Presumably, a reference to Plato’s dialogue Apology (esp. 40c–e), where, according to the interpretation presented in Kierkegaard’s magister dissertation, Socrates relates himself hypothetically to life after death; see On the Concept of Irony (CI, 79–90; SKS 1, 138–146). See also Concluding Unscientific Postscript (CUP, 200–202; SKS 7, 184– 185). Lessing’s doubt … an eternal blessedness on something historical] Refers to the essay by the German librarian, poet, and philosopher Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729–1781), Über den Beweis des Geistes und der Kraft. An den Herrn Director Schumann zu Hannover [On the Proof of the Spirit and the Power: To Hr. Director Schumann of Hanover] (1777), published in Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s sämmtliche Schriften [Complete Writings of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing], 32 vols. (Berlin, 1825–1838); ASKB 1747–1762); see vol. 5 (1825), pp. 75–85, esp. p. 80, where Lessing writes: “If no historical truth can be demonstrated, then nothing can be demonstrated by means of historical truths. That is: accidental truths of history can never become the proof of necessary truths of reason” (translation from Lessing’s Theological Writings: A Selection in Translation, ed. Henry Chadwick [Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957], p. 53). See pt. 2, sec. 1, chap. 2, “Possible and Actual Theses by Lessing,” in Concluding Unscientific

•

1850

547

Postscript (CUP, 93; SKS 7, 92): “Lessing has said (S. W., 5th vol. p. 80) that contingent historical truths can never become a demonstration of eternal truths of reason, and also (p. 83) that the transition whereby a person wants to build an eternal truth on a historical report is a leap.” ― Lessing’s: Variant: added. Thus something historical exists here … the basis for an eternal blessedness] According to Concluding Unscientific Postscript (CUP, 93; SKS 7, 92), this is a reference to the above-mentioned essay by Lessing, pp. 82–83: “It is said: ‘The Christ of whom on historical grounds you must allow that he raised the dead, that he himself rose from the dead, said himself that God had a Son of the same essence as himself and that he is this Son.’ This would be quite excellent! if only it were not the case that it is not more than historically certain that Christ said this. If you press me still further and say: ‘Oh yes! this is more than historically certain. For it is asserted by inspired historians who cannot make a mistake.’ That, then, is the ugly broad ditch which I cannot get across, however often and however earnestly I have tried to make the leap. If anyone can help me over it, let him do it, I beg him, I adjure him. He will deserve a divine reward from me” (translation from Lessing’s Theological Writings (→ 48,34), pp. 54–55). something qualitatively new.] Variant: changed from “something uncertain.” scholarly dabbling … for it is sure enough historical] During the Enlightenment of the 18th century, theological work with biblical texts was confronted with demands from historians that biblical research, like other historical research, employ a historical-critical method, i.e., that in studying texts, historical influences were to be investigated and the reliability of sources was to be verified in order to prove the authenticity of a text. At various times this method was attacked for undermining the authority of the Bible. Xt’s words: If anyone wants to follow my teaching … he will experience, etc.] It is unclear what Kierkegaard is referring to, but see, e.g., Mt 7:24, Lk 6:47, Jn 8:31–32.

37

6

49

12

1

49m

548 50

14 23 27 30

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 77–79

R. N.] Rasmus Nielsen (→ 18,17). but the surrounding world has taken it upon itself to force him back upon me] → 50,30. also for a moment] Variant: changed from “also”. precisely because R. N. also wanted to be a sort of Mag. K … the truth about me] Presumably, a reference to Rasmus Nielsen, 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 Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed), pt. 1. The book was announced as having “appeared” in Adresseavisen, no. 116, May 19, 1849. See the review, probably by H. F. Helweg, under “Bog–Nyt. (April–Juni)” [Book News: April–June], in Dansk Kirketidende, July 22, 1849, vol. 4, no. 43, cols. 714–718. The reviewer starts by writing: “Prof. R. Nielsen’s voluminous work Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed … [is] a remarkable book in a number of respects, not so much because it opens the reader’s eyes to new insights, as because of the freshness and poetic intuition with which the ideas are advanced and, indeed, the book makes an interesting contribution to a portrait of its author. 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. Yes, when it becomes dubious to remain at one absolute standpoint, it is of course fine that the way has been paved to another, for then one at least avoids sinking into the infinite chaos of relativity. If one has previously been the Idea’s authoritative spokesman, who never condescended to speak his subjective thoughts, but always demonstrated the absolute self-movement of the Idea, it is indeed altogether too humiliating to become an ordinary human being who has a bit of an opinion about one thing or another about which he would occasionally like to speak for the

•

1850

benefit and enjoyment of his good friends. 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 come forward unreconciled to one another! 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. If previously one had the entirely correct view, because it contained within itself all the subordinate views, now one has absolutely no view at all … But the author does not want to limit himself to presenting dialectical fencing of this sort―through what he is doing, he also wants to express his own personal conviction. But when he does this, he once again comes to recognize the full strength of objections to that conviction, and then the conviction falls silent and is carried away into the dialectical maelstrom” (cols. 714– 715). See also P. C. Kierkegaard’s critical mention of Rasmus Nielsen’s book in his lecture at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle on October 30, 1849 (→ 52,1). drive him mad,] Variant: first written “drive him mad.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. slow to pass judgment] Perhaps an allusion to Wis 12:10; see also Jas 1:19.

11

51

16

tumult] Variant: changed from “torment”. Oh, the depth of riches, how unsearchable are your ways] Kierkegaard’s free citation from Rom 11:33.

27

Petrarch puts is nicely: Anger is a brief rage … a lengthy rage] Kierkegaard’s rendering of a portion of the Italian poet and scholar Franceso Petrarca’s (1304–1374) sonnet, “Vincitore Alexandro l’ira vinse” [Anger Conquered Alexander the Conqueror], from a German prose translation in Francesco Petrarca’s sämmtliche italienische Gedichte [The Complete Italian Poetry of Francesco Petrarca], trans. Fr. W. Bruckbräu, 6 vols. (Munich, 1827;

33

51

30

51

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 79–80 ASKB 1932–1933), vol. 4, p. 21: “Anger is a brief rage, and for the person who does not rein it in, it is a lengthy rage that often leads its victim to shame and sometimes to death.” The sonnet is included as no. 32 in Petrarca’s collection of poetry Il canzoniere [The Songbook]. Kierkegaard translated the final line of the cited passage as “it ends with downfall,” but he then obscured this phrase under the word “rage,” with which he decided to end his excerpt. 52

1

objection … that I stand apart from life … true religiousness grasps life actively] Perhaps a reference to P. C. Kierkegaard’s (→ 11,1) lecture at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle of October 30, 1849 (→ 55,29), in which he presented his brother as a representative of “ecstasy”: “Ecstasy tends … to cultivate a tendency to overrate life utterances that are, so to speak, tangible, thereby cultivating a sectarian tendency among those who feel themselves addressed by ecstasy’s way of understanding and expressing Christianity. As the most immediate expression of the Christian life, ecstasy lies so close to that life that it is customarily confused with it by its most zealous admirers, which has the immediate consequence that they are prevented from having any real confidence in or respect for the more quiet stirrings of this same life [i.e., the Christian life] in the congregation, and that they positively feel themselves repelled by every attempt to express oneself about this subject in the form of scholarship and concepts. But even if Søren Kierkegaard’s own life is perhaps in many ways like that of a hermit in the midst of a bustling crowd, even if he himself indeed always seeks ‘the single individual,’ he seems to be finding something quite different. He indeed seems to be at the point of finding adherents who admire his advice to stick to life and not to theory, and who out of sheer admiration―indeed, do not do likewise, but write about it. And thus even now we are able to detect harbingers of the strange spectacle of people who make the protest of life against theory into a new theory―the spectacle of this: that the essential difference between them and their opponents becomes this: that the one group regards knowledge as privileged and is

•

1850

549

therefore tempted to forget life; the other group, on the other hand, regards knowledge as not privileged, and then, with respect to knowledge and the development of knowledge, becomes equally theoretical; instead of being practical, it protests and refutes by means of a press in a publishing house―instead of deeds, of the ordeal by fire in which a person’s life is at stake. In my judgment, this is in fact the tendency of Professor Rasmus Nielsen’s lecture on the relation between faith and modern consciousness (→ 50,30). And if they listen to his voice, perhaps it will seem to more people than me that it is as though they were seeing a brand new, third truth spring forth, the contents of which is the theory that there are two truths, each of which is equally correct, equally consistent, within its own sphere: that of faith, and that of unbelieving speculation. But of course, if such a discovery were actually to develop into a conscious and definite message, I would scarcely ever agree with it” (Dansk Kirketidende, December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, cols. 189–190). Shortly after these remarks, P. C. Kierkegaard notes that “it seems to me that H. H.’s ethical essays [i.e., Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays, by Kierkegaard’s pseudonym H. H. (1849)] are moving in this same direction” (col. 191). It is at the conclusion of the lecture that P. C. Kierkegaard refers to his brother as “an ecstatic monastery brother” (col. 193) (→ 46,19). the only person who ventured to take action when “the rabble” raged and triumphed] Refers to Kierkegaard’s attack on P. L. Møller and Corsaren (→ 45,16 and → 45,18). recognized by every child] Presumably, a reference to the consequences of Corsaren’s attack on Kierkegaard―specifically, that Kierkegaard was abused on the street; see, e.g., Georg Brandes’s recollections “that when, as a child, I failed to pull my trousers down carefully and evenly over my boots, which in those days were serviceably long, the nurse would admonish me, saying: ‘Søren Kierkegaard!’” (Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard, p. 97). a stock figure in your plays] In Hans Christian Andersen’s vaudeville En Comedie i det Grønne [A Comedy in the Open Air] (performed at the

16

18

19

550

27

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 80

Royal Theater three times in the period May 13, 1840–February 12, 1847), Dalby is a theater director disguised as a “barber,” and his lines are full of Hegelian gibberish taken from Kierkegaard’s review of Andersen’s novel Kun en Spillemand [Only a Fiddler] (1837; ASKB 1503) in From the Papers of One Still Living, Published against His Will (1838); see En Comedie i det Grønne, Vaudeville i een Akt efter det gamle Lystspil: “Skuespilleren imod sin Villie” [Comedy in the Open Air: Vaudeville in One Act, from the Old Comedy “Actor against His Will”] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB U 14). J. C. Hostrup’s university comedies Gjenboerne [The Neighbors across the Way] (first performed at the Student Union in 1844, then in the provinces in 1845–1846, and finally in thirteen performances at the Royal Theater in Copenhagen during the period June 27, 1846, through May 9, 1849) and En Spurv i Tranedands [A Sparrow among Hawks] (first performed at the Student Union in 1846, then at the Odense Theater the same year, and finally in eleven performances at the Royal Theater from August 17, 1848, through March 20, 1849) feature a theology student named “Søren Torp,” who was originally named “Søren Kirk”; see Gjenboerne. Vaudeville-Komedie af C. Hostrup [The Neighbors across the Way: Vaudeville Comedy by C. Hostrup] (Copenhagen, 1847), and En Spurv i Tranedands. Folkekomedie [A Sparrow among Hawks: Popular Comedy] (Copenhagen, 1849). In Johanne Luise Heiberg’s anonymously published vaudeville En Søndag paa Amager [A Sunday on Amager] (performed thirty-seven times at the Royal Theater, from March 5, 1848, through January 13, 1850) there is a peasant from Amager named Søren; see En Søndag paa Amager, Vaudeville i een Act [A Sunday on Amager, Vaudeville in One Act], ed. J. L. Heiberg (Copenhagen, 1848; ASKB U 61). And in the comedy Tonne gaaer i Krigen. Comedie med Sang [Tony Goes to War: A Musical Comedy] by Carit Etlar (pseudonym for Johan Carl Christian Brosbøll), one of the peasants is named Søren; the play was performed at the Royal Theater six times from February 16 through March 15, 1849; see Tonne gaaer i Krigen. Comedie med Sang (Copenhagen, 1849). mocked on the streets] → 45,16.

•

1850

where I do my work] Contemporary sources confirm that Kierkegaard spent much time every day strolling the streets of Copenhagen, where he conversed with many different people. the flock of animals] In “What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air,” the second part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), Kierkegaard states that he has his notion of “the crowd” as an “animal category” from “the most famous pagan thinker” (UDVS, 190; SKS 8, 287), i.e., Aristotle; see 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. 1281; For an 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, p. 2034. See also section 2, B, B., in The Sickness unto Death (1849): “If order is to be maintained in existence― and that is something God indeed wants, for he is not a God of confusion―then first and foremost, care must be taken that every human being is an individual human being and becomes conscious of being an individual human being. When people are permitted to rush together into what Aristotle calls the animal category, the crowd, this abstraction (instead of being less than nothing, less than the least individual human being) comes to be viewed as being something: then it does not take long before this abstraction becomes God” (SUD, 117–118; SKS 11, 229). patriotism] Reference to the bombastic nationalist mood that emerged as a consequence of the civil war in Schleswig and Holstein between the Danish and German populations of the monarchy (→ 22,35). market town] A provincial town, as opposed to a capital city and a seat of royal residence. shillings’ worth] Idiomatic expression meaning a very small amount; for “shilling” (→ 15,26). amendment] Variant: following this has been deleted “―but they participate in voting”. nothing.] Variant: first written “nothing;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to be continued.

28

41

43

4 7 20 21

53

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 80–82

24

27

31

53m

5 11

54

7

commune naufragium] Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536) includes the saying “a common shipwreck is a comfort to all” in his early 16th-century collection of Greek and Latin proverbs, Adagia. something―] Variant: first written “something.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. “strict Xns,” as they are called] Presumably, a reference to the followers of Grundtvig (→ 8,28);―come running to this rallying ground and cast their ballots: Presumably, a reference to the priests who were elected to parliament (→ 22,25). in order to―improve!] Variant: changed from “concerning”. “saved their conscience”] A “saved conscience” was an idiomatic expression meaning a “good conscience”; see E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 2, p. 217. the “scientific”] Refers to the ongoing debates in Kierkegaard’s day concerning methodology, speculative philosophy, the formation of systems, science, and scholarliness; see, e.g., F. C. Sibbern, Logik som Tænkelære fra en intelligent Iagttagelses Standpunct og i analytisk–genetisk Fremstilling [Logic as a Doctrine of Thinking, from the Point of View of an Intelligent Observer and in an Analytic-Genetic Presentation] (Copenhagen, 1835; ASKB 777), esp. chap. 5 (§ 167–179), “Om videnskabelig Fremstilling i Almindelighed og Beskrivelse, Definition, Inddeling og Læresætning i Særdeleshed” [On Scholarly Presentations Generally and on Description, Definition, Subdivision, and Doctrine in Particular], pp. 353– 371; and F. C. Sibbern Om Philosophiens Begreb, Natur og Væsen. En Fremstilling af Philosophiens Propædeutik [On the Concept, Nature, and Essence of Philosophy: A Presentation of the Propaedeutic of Philosophy] (Copenhagen, 1843; ASKB 779), esp. § 7, “Philosophy is c) scholarly-scientific knowledge. On scientific knowledge and scholarliness in general,” pp. 22–24, and § 19, “Philosophy’s emergence in c) a philosophical system,” pp. 71–80. See also NB12:14, from the summer of 1849, where Kierkegaard accuses H. L.

•

1850

551

Martensen of having “indulged,” i.e., yielded to, “science” in his Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 10,1); see KJN 6, 151, and its accompanying explanatory notes. loquere ut videam] This expression was attributed to Socrates by Erasmus (→ 53,24) in his Apophthegmata [Apothegms], 3, 70. and then, instead] Variant: first written “either”. Peter] i.e., Kierkegaard’s older brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard (→ 11,1). Here the reference is to the circumstance that he had been elected to the upper house of the Danish parliament on December 29, 1849, which, together with the lower house, was convened for the first time on January 30, 1850. P. C. Kierkegaard writes of this under the entry for January 1850 in his “Dagbog for 1828–50” [Diary for 1828–1850] (NKS 2656, 4o, I): “The morning of the 27th I arrived in Cph., where it had just been announced that day that parliament had been postponed for a few days from Jan. 28 … The king opened parliament (in the lower chamber) on the 30th” (p. 156). living out there in the country] P. C. Kierkegaard lived in a rural parsonage in the village of Pedersborg in central Zealand. When the two lesser villages that were part of the parish are included, the parish of Pedersborg had at least one thousand inhabitants. An annex parish, Kinderstoft, which consisted of three or four small hamlets, had about 480 inhabitants. with a sick wife] Sophie Henriette (known as “Jette”) Kierkegaard, née Glahn (1809–1881), married P. C. Kierkegaard on June 12, 1841. According to a letter from Søren Kierkegaard to P. C. Kierkegaard, dated March 20, 1846, she had been sickly since the beginning of the marriage; see LD, 191; B&A 1, 150. This is in agreement with what P. C. Kierkegaard notes in his diary, that in January 1841, during the early period of his engagement, he had to go to a social gathering alone, because “J.’s indisposition had not quite disappeared,” whereas in May of that year, during the preparations for their wedding, he was happy that “Jette was now … thank God, truly healthy and cheerful” (“Dagbog for 1828– 50” (→ 55,5), pp. 115–116). After she had given

11

54

39

54

5

55

12

13

552

14

16

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 82

birth to their first and only child on March 27, 1842, Henriette became ill and was in much pain, but in the course of May she became “pretty well, even though it was only in the latter half of the month that she began to take some carriage rides” (“Dagbog for 1828–50,” p. 121). In a letter to his brother, dated February 18, 1843, Kierkegaard describes her as having “weak nerves” (LD, 148; B&A 1, 115–116). See also Kierkegaard’s letter, presumably from 1847, to his sister-in-law Henriette, in which he warns her against sitting still too much and encourages her to take walks in the country (LD, 214–216; B&A 1, 168–170). See in addition another letter from Kierkegaard to his sister-in-law, likewise presumably from 1847, from which it appears that this is not a case of any visible illness, but a psychic, depressive suffering (LD, 226–228; B&A 1, 179–181). See as well the letter Kierkegaard wrote to her in December 1847, in which he mentions a “tendency to melancholia” (LD, 235–237; B&A 1, 186–187). It can be seen from Kierkegaard’s two last letters to her (LD, 227, 235; B&A 1, 180, 186) and from P. C. Kierkegaard’s diary, where he writes in January 1848 that “Jette has been bedridden since my absence in Aug.–Sept. of last year” (“Dagbog for 1828–50,” p. 150), that Henriette Kierkegaard was bedridden for long periods of time. Now he is running … to every assembly … “in order to counteract.”] It can be seen from P. C. Kierkegaard’s diary that on January 27, 1850, he was invited to speak at the meeting of the Venstre [Left] or Friends of the Peasants club (“Dagbog for 1828–50,” pp. 156–158; see the next note), that on February 1 he debated with C. E. Rottwitt at the Left club, that on February 2 he apparently participated in the founding of the Centrum party, and that on February 9 he participated in a debate about the press law at the Venstre club, where he opposed the formation of a joint committee of members of the upper and lower houses of parliament with respect to this and future matters. ― heartiness: (→ 22,35). At the Society of Friends of the Peasant … I am not a member of the Friends of the Peasant] See P.C. Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828–50,” p. 156, where he writes: “As for the clubs, having re-

•

1850

ceived a written invitation, I was at the Venstre’s (Friends of the Peasants) in Møntergaden on the 27th [of January 1850], but reserved the right to appear at other places.” P. C. Kierkegaard had been elected to the upper house as a representative of the Friends of the Peasant, but on February 11, 1850, he joined the Centrum group in the upper house; see “Dagbog for 1828–50,” p. 158. 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; facsimile 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. he is living at Christian Lund’s] See P. C. Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828–50,” p. 156: “I arrived in Cph. the morning of the 27th [of January 1850] … I took up residence in Henrik’s rooms (he is at the army hospital in Odense) at Agent Lund’s.” Johan Christian Lund (1799–1875), who had been married to Søren and P. C. Kierkegaard’s sister Nicoline Christine from 1824 until her death in 1832, was a silk and textile merchant, a wholesaler, also called an “agent,” and lived in the house he owned at the corner of Købmagergade and Klareboderne. reduplication of form] Kierkegaard often uses this term about a reflective relation in which something abstract, or the content of something, is repeated (actualized) in concrete practice or in existence. when he was at the conventicle and served up a critique … was not a critique] Refers to the lecture P. C. Kierkegaard gave at the Roskilde

22

24

29

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 82–83 Pastoral Conventicle that met in Ringsted on October 30, 1849. The lecture appeared in print in Dansk Kirketidende (→ 8,28), December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, cols. 171–193, and an introductory note explains that it is a reconstruction of what he actually said. After making use of 2 Cor 15:13 to develop the concepts of ecstasy and sober-mindedness in Paul, and then presenting a lengthy, somewhat critical overview of “Magister S. Kierkegaard’s well-known works and Prof. Martensen’s Dogmatics and his work in dogmatics generally” (cols. 178–187), P. C. Kierkegaard continues: “And after these expositions, you probably expect that I will now proceed to criticize both the authors I have discussed, and in particular point out the degree to which the temptations lying closest to their opposed standpoints have been too much for them. But that is not my intention at all. I have never yet criticized anyone, and I will not do so now, either. So, do I perhaps want to mediate between the two of them, doing so―en passant―to my own glory, so that I can quickly sketch a new system while standing on their shoulders? That is even less my intention … On the other hand, what I do want to do can thus be expressed in a few words: I want to express my outspoken wonder about a phenomenon with respect to the effect that seems to be emanating from Søren Kierkegaard’s efforts. And then I will confide in you here, sub rosa, concerning the manner in which I, for my part, enjoy and employ the two famous authors―especially the one of whom I first spoke [i.e., Søren Kierkegaard]” (cols. 187– 189). For other discussions of P. C. Kierkegaard’s lecture, see NB14:81, 95, 97, 102, 107, 108, 117 in KJN 6, 396–397, 407, 408–409, 411, 413–414, 414– 415 with their respective explanatory notes. ― conventicle: The Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle (founded in 1842), was a professional gathering where priests and theologians, often of the Grundtvigian persuasion, met twice a year (July and October) to discuss theological and ecclesiastical matters. P. C. Kierkegaard became a member of the group in July 1844 and was an active participant in its meetings, which were summarized in Dansk Kirketidende.

•

1850

553

religiousness is always a condition … presents everything in the sphere of being] See § 3 in Friedrich Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube [The Christian Faith] (→ 55m,2), vol. 1, pp. 13– 14, where Schleiermacher begins by asserting “that piety is a condition in which feeling and doing are combined,” and he goes on to say (p. 14) that “in its various manifestations piety is essentially a condition of feeling.” See Not4:45, where Kierkegaard cites with approval the following passage from the German theologian and Right Hegelian philosopher J. E. Erdmann’s Vorlesungen über Glauben und Wissen als Einleitung in die Dogmatik und Religionsphilosophie [Lectures on Faith and Knowledge as an Introduction to Dogmatics and the Philosophy of Religion] (Berlin, 1837; ASKB 479), pp. 266–267: “From the standpoint at which everything is grasped as being, Schleiermacher could also grasp the difference only as something existing; hence, for him the religions are not distinguished from one another merely as stages, but also as types. By contrast, from a standpoint where the truth is known as something self-developing, the different religions become the different developmental stages necessary for religion in general” (KJN 3, 166). Spinozistically] Spinoza’s metaphysical system is a monism, i.e., a systematic unity or whole that is based on the concept of unity, Deus sive natura (Latin, “God or Nature”), which Spinoza develops in greater detail by employing a scientific, geometrical method. Kierkegaard is opposed to this, for inasmuch as God is eternal, this fundamental principle becomes synonymous with a static, as opposed to a dynamic, relation. See JJ:443, from March 1846, where Kierkegaard finds it odd that Spinoza constructs his ethics on “what is such an indeterminate, though no doubt correct, principle as this: suum esse conservare [Latin, “the preservation of one’s own being”]” (KJN 2, 266–267). See also Not13:39, also from March 1846, where Kierkegaard writes: “Spinoza might well be quite right about the entire introspective method―that finis [Latin, “purpose, goal”], τελος [Greek, “purpose, goal”], is nothing other than appetitus [Latin, “desire”]; that beatitudo [Latin, “happiness’] is

34

36

55

554

56

2 5

6

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 83

not virtutis præmium [Latin, “the reward of virtue”], but ipsa virtus [Latin, “virtue itself”]―The question is only whether his Ethics as a whole doesn’t give rise to an ambiguity inasmuch as he contemplates everything at rest (in order to eliminate teleology) and, at the same time, (by virtue of the definition suum esse conservare[)] manages also to bring finitude into becoming. That is, the concept of movement is missing here” (KJN 3, 401). Kierkegaard owned Benedicti de Spinoza opera philosophica Omnia [The Complete Philosophical Works of Benedict de Spinoza], ed. A. F. Gfrörer (Stuttgart, 1830; ASKB 788); Spinoza’s Ethica [Ethics] is on pp. 285–430. fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. S[ch]leiermacher] i.e., Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834), German theologian, philosopher of religion, and classical philologist; became a priest in Berlin, 1796; from 1804 extraordinary professor at Halle and from 1810 professor of theology at Berlin. his principle that feeling is always true] In Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est. A Tale (Pap. IV B 1), Kierkegaaard writes: “Therefore, immediately, everything is true*, but at the next instant this truth is untruth, for immediately everything is untrue,” and in the footnote attached to the asterisk above: “S[ch]leiermacher’s teaching about feeling―that everything is true (see the introduction to his Dogmatics; some rejoinders by Erdmann in Bruno Baur’s journal, vol. 3, pt. 1, p. 11)” (Pap. IV B 1, p. 145). Kierkegaard’s reference to the introduction in Schleiermacher’s dogmatics is presumably to the sentence at the beginning of § 3 in Der christliche Glaube, vol. 1, p. 6: “Viewed by itself, the piety which constitutes the basis for all ecclesiastical congregations is neither a knowing nor a doing, but is rather a category of feeling or of immediate self-consciousness.” This is supported by a reference to J. E. Erdmann’s treatise “Ueber Widersprüche unter den christlichen Glaubenslehren” [On Contradictions in Christian Doctrines], in Zeitschrift für spekulative Theologie in Gemeinschaft mit einem Verein von Gelehrten [Journal for Speculative Theology, in Association with a Group of Learned People], ed. Bruno Bauer, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1836–1838; ASKB 354–357),

•

1850

vol. 3, pt. 1 (1837), pp. 1– 48; on p. 7, Erdmann gives an account of this statement, and on p. 11, he sets forth his “rejoinder”: “Feeling comes to an end as soon as it says anything, because when it is said it becomes simply something objective; so when Schleiermacher says that feeling cannot err, it is really a joke, because saying that feeling cannot err is just as correct (and for the same reason) as saying that a mute makes no errors in speaking.” See in addition Schleiermacher, Ueber die Religion. Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern [On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers], 5th ed. (Berlin 1843 [1799]; ASKB 271), p. 64: “All is immediately true in religion, for except immediately how could anything else arise? But that only is immediate which has not yet passed through the state of idea [German, Begriff] but has grown up purely in feeling.” English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers, trans. John Oman (London, 1893), p. 54. Schleiermacher’s dogmatics] Friedrich Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith, Presented in Context, in Accord with the Fundamental Tenets of the Evangelical Church], 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Berlin, 1835– 1836 [1821–1822]; 2nd rev. ed., 1830; ASKB 258; abbreviated hereafter as Der christliche Glaube). S. defines the feeling of absolute dependence as the principle of all religion] See Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 340, where he writes with respect to “the feeling of absolute dependence” that “according to Schleiermacher it is the universal principle of religion.” See § 4: “The common element in all howsoever diverse expressions of piety, by which these are conjointly distinguished from all other feelings, or, in other words, the self-identical essence of piety, is this: the consciousness of our absolute dependence, or, which is the same thing, of our relation with God” (Der christliche Glaube, vol. 1, pp. 15–22). English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith in Outline, trans. D. M. Baillie (Edinburgh, 1922).

2

55m

1

56m

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 84–88 56

14 19 35

57

7 16

57

32

34

58

1

6

58m

1

one’s office and one’s living] → 25,4. on a political career, voting] → 53,31. a priest who is a politician] → 22,25. Precisely] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. member of the club] It was not unusual for members of the clergy to be members of clubs, societies, and associations; in the period 1840–1847, J. P. Mynster(→ 59,25), bishop of Zealand, was a member of eight or nine societies, and E. C. Tryde, an archdeacon, was a member of six or seven such groups; see F. Jørgensen, “Copenhagen Societies from 1820 to 1848,” Historiske Meddelelser om København [Historical Reports about Copenhagen], 4th ser., vol. 5 (Copenhagen, 1957–1958), pp. 94– 95. theft becomes a virtue … Look at France] Presumably, a reference to the revolution of February 1848 in France, which was marked by “wild attacks on property by the masses”; see Flyve-posten [The Flying Post], no. 77, March 31, 1849. theft is sin] See the eighth of the Ten Commandments, Ex 20:15; see also Mt 15:19, 19:18; Rom 13:9; Eph 4:28. “a profound seer”] Presumably, a reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 10,16), who is described in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) 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 accompanying explanatory note. See also JJ:285, presumably from late 1844, in KJN 2, 211. glittering sin] Presumably, an allusion to the view that the Christians regarded the pagans’ “virtues as glittering vices,” as Kierkegaard renders it in AA:18 in KJN 1, 29. The expression is usually, though incorrectly, attributed to Augustine; see the explanatory note in KJN 1, 334. a brilliant lecturea depicting the danger voting poses to morality and religion] Presumably, a reference to the circumstance that despite the fact that he had himself stood for election to the parliament and been elected (→ 9,1), Grundtvig spoke critically about decisions taken by majority vote, which he described as, among other things, “the super-

•

1850

555

stitious belief in majorities,” in his article “Den Danske Rigsdags Historie” [The History of the Danish Parliament], in Danskeren, et Ugeblad, no. 36, September 15, 1849, vol. 2, p. 571. your own Son … must suffer a gruesome death in order that your wrath be appeased … It is you who have been appeased] 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 accepting the punishment that the guilty would otherwise have suffered for their sins, thereby atoning for the insult to God’s justice. original sin] The dogmatic doctrine of original sin (the Danish term is Arvesynd, which translates literally as “inherited sin,” and the German term is similar) as the original and fundamental sin― which entered the world through Adam’s fall and subsequently is propagated through the sexual act, and is thus inherited―is primarily founded on the account of the Fall in Genesis 3, as well as Ps 51:5 and Rom 5:12–14.

36

58

5

58m

one of Mynster’s ordination sermons … seek it out … whether it … crushes me, or not] Refers to sermon no. 25, “Over Tit. 1, 1–5. ‘Erkiendelse af Sandheden til Gudfrygtighed’” [On Titus 1:1–5, “Knowledge of the truth that is in accordance with godliness”], delivered on March 17, 1843, and printed in J. P. Mynster’s Taler ved PræsteVielse [Discourses at Ordinations], 2nd collection (Copenhagen, 1846), pp. 85–96; pp. 88–89: “On the other hand, we hear others who with the appearance of being right maintain that the truth is to be sought for its own sake, without any preconceptions or preconceived notion of where it will lead us; that we are to entrust ourselves to its leadership, unconcerned about whether in doing so we will be conveyed to smiling shores or to barren heaths; that our search must be unselfish; and that we are to take delight in having found the truth, even if it dissipates our most beautiful dreams as chaff, crushes our most cherished wishes like a reed broken by the storm. And surely, we are capable of nothing against the truth;

25

59

556

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 88–91

we must grant it power; but if the truth actually were a monster before whose poisonous exhalations all flowers withered, under whose foot all life’s seedlings are crushed: then I do not know why we should seek it out in its den or be joyful at its approach; then I do not know why we do not dare become as indifferent to the truth itself as this would make us toward everything else, or how there could be any talk of a duty toward the truth if the truth itself dissolved all the reasons for being obligated―and then, indeed, perfect wisdom would be this: Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die [1 Cor 5:32].” See Mynster’s Taler ved Præste-Vielse [Discourses at Ordinations], collections 1–3 (Copenhagen, 1840–1851; ASKB 235–236). ― 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 and 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 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). 60

7

8

preaches, etc., ― ] Variant: first written “preaches, etc.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. This was followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. affectation] See JJ:497 from 1846, where Kierkegaard defines the term as “acquiring something by lying” (KJN 2, 281).

•

1850

are wealthy] Kierkegaard’s father died in 1838, leaving an estate (→ 44,31)―inherited by Søren Kierkegaard and his brother Peter Christian― that in 1839 was reckoned at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 15,26); 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 Nytorv 2. 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 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.

16

60

1st part, pp. 350 et al.] In bk. 2, pt. 2 of Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), pp. 350–370, there is a lengthy polemic against “the Hegelian theory of evil.” that Hegel] Variant: “Hegel” has been added. J. M. [writes] that inasmuch as Hegel indeed … evil back to a higher necessity] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Julius Müller’s Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde, pp. 350–351. the universal, which Hegelianism … an abstraction: the state] Refers to the fact that in his philosophy of right, Hegel completes his analysis of the increasingly complex spheres of the individual’s varous relations in a lengthy concluding chapter that bears the title “Morality.” This chapter culminates in the third and final section,

9

61

10 10

17

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 91–93

24

28

62

4

17

18

which deals with “The State”; see §§ 257–360 in Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 8, pp. 312–440. Kierkegaard objects to the fact that at this point in Hegel’s analysis the individual entirely disappears and is viewed by Hegel as something extraordinarily abstract, “an abstraction.” that Hegel … makes hum. beings … into an animal race … “the single individual” … lower than the “race.”] Cf., e.g., chap. 3, “The Part Governance Has Played in My Writing,” in The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 26,38), where Kierkegaard writes, “I have not with the least little bit of the abilities granted me striven to express … that the human race is the truth, or indeed even, that it is God, and that therefore the task (in Goethean-Hegelian fashion) is to satisfy the times … I have striven to express that the category ‘race,’ when applied to being a human being, especially as an expression for what is highest, is a misunderstanding and is paganism because the human race is not superior to an animal race merely owing to the advantages of the [human] race, but through this humanness: that every individual in the race (not merely a single remarkable one, but every individual) is greater than the race, which is inherent in the Godrelationship, … for relating oneself to God is far superior to relating oneself to the race or through the race to God (PV, 88n; SKS 16, 66–67n). every individual is created in the image of God] See Gen 1:26–27. an enigmatic dedication … inserting “her.”] See NB15:130 and its accompanying explanatory notes in the present volume. this story] Reference to Kierkegaard’s engagement to Regine Olsen and the breaking of that engagement (→ 45,15). I was a scoundrel] When he broke the engagement, Kierkegaard himself ostensibly wanted people―and, especially, Regine―to regard him as a scoundrel so that she could become engaged to someone else without having to consider him. See Not15:4.l (→ 45,15), where Kierkegaard writes: “To exit from the relationship as a scoundrel, if possible as a first-class scoundrel, was the only

•

1850

557

thing that could be done in order to get her afloat, to speed her to a marriage” (KJN 3, 434–435n). see the enclosed] Reproduced in the present volume as NB15:130. A similar remark is found in J. Müller, but not put so precisely] Presumably, a reference to bk. 3, pt. 1, chap. 1, “Unterschiede im Begriff der Willensfreiheit” [Differences in the Concept of Freedom of the Will], in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 395 (on formal freedom, choice, and freedom of choice). You shall choose the one thing needful] See Lk 10:38–42, esp. vv. 41–42. must be chosen first, as with the kingdom of God] → 23,11. Thus] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. be no choice,] Variant: first written “be no choice.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12; see also Eph 6:5. From a scientific and scholarly … Spinoza is and becomes the only consistent thinker] → 55,36. Joh. Climacus … sawing wood … make oneself subjectively heavy] Refers to the conclusion of chap. 2 in the first part of Concluding Unscientific Postscript: “I will permit myself to use a metaphor to illustrate the contradiction between the impassioned, infinitely interested subject and speculative thought, if it is supposed to help him: If someone wants to saw wood, it is important not to bear down too much on the saw; the lighter the hand of the sawyer, the better the sawing goes. If someone presses on the saw with all his might, he will not do any sawing at all. Similarly, here, too, it is important for the person who speculates to make himself objectively light, but the person who is impassioned, infinitely interested in his eternal blessedness, makes himself as subjectively heavy as possible. Precisely by doing so he makes speculating impossible for himself. Now, if Christianity requires this infinite interest in the individual subject … it can easily be seen that it will be impossible for him to find in speculative

1

62m

32

62

33 37 39 6

14 22 25

63

558

29

31

64

1

6

12 24

64

33

40

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 93–95

thought what he is seeking” (CUP, 57; SKS 7, 60– 61). ― Joh. Climacus: Johannes Climacus is 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 (Greek, “ladder”) (ca. 525–616), who lived for forty years as a hermit at Mount Sinai and was the author of the work Κλῖμαξ τοῦ παραδείσου, also known in Latin as Scala paradisi [Ladder of Paradise], hence his name. See also the more detailed note in SKS K4, 197. Freedom] Variant: immediately preceding this, a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry, has been deleted. choice of submission,] Variant: first written “choice of submission.” with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. does he not,] Variant: first written “does he not?”, with the question mark apparently indicating the end of the sentence. grasping (in the military sense) the matter utterly erroneously] The Danish expression used by Kierkegaard means to grasp a sword or rifle incorrectly, so that one misses one’s target. wasted] Variant: first written “lost”. rich person] Variant: first written “sick person”. a Catholic who became a Lutheran … there was no grace for him] No source for this anecdote has been identified. ― Kofoed-Hansen: Hans Peter Kofoed-Hansen (1813–1893), Danish theologian, teacher, and priest; theology graduate, 1837, following which he became a teacher at the Odense Cathedral School; from June 1849 to November 1850, he was perpetual curate at the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn; starting in 1840, he authored novels under the pseudonym “Jean Pierre.” ― sinned against the Holy Spirit: Refers to the doctrine that the sin against the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin; see Mk 3:28–29; see also Mt 12:31–32. this is something Anti-Climacus has already shown] Refers to section 2, B, A., “The Sin of Despairing over One’s Sin,” in the second part of The Sickness unto Death (1849), by Anti-Climacus (→ 25,13), pp. 113–115: “If a person, who has been

•

1850

addicted to one or another sin, but who has for a long time put up resistance against the temptation and has been victorious―if he has a relapse and succumbs to the temptation: then the dejection that follows is by no means always sorrow over the sin … Such a person may perhaps give assurances more and more emphatically of how this relapse pains and torments him, how it brings him despair: ‘I will never forgive myself,’ he says … He never forgives it himself―but well, if God would forgive him for it, then he might, after all, have the decency to forgive himself. No, his despair over the sin is very far from being a category of the good: it is a more intensive category of sin, the intensity of which is immersion in sin― and indeed this is more so, the more passionate the expressions with which he … denounces himself when he ‘will never forgive himself’ for sinning like this (for such talk is something close to the opposite of the grief of the penitent who prays God to forgive him). The fact of the matter is that during the time he put up victorious resistance to the temptation, he became, in his own eyes, better than he actually is―he became proud of himself. This pride is interested in making sure that what has gone before is something that has been left completely behind. But with the relapse, what has gone before suddenly is entirely present once again. His pride cannot tolerate this reminder, and this is the source of his profound grief, etc.” (SUD, 111–112; SKS 11, 222–223). So now Lic. Lind … proofs of the truth of Xnty] See the advertisement in the supplement to Berlingske Tidende, no. 29, February 5, 1850 (the morning edition): “The Society for Workmen’s Culture. On Tuesday, February 5th, at 8:30 p.m. Hr. Pastor Lic. Theol. Lind will begin a series of lectures on the difference between Christianity and paganism and proofs of the truth of Christianity.” ― Lic. Lind: Peter Engel Lind (1814–1903), Danish theologian and priest. In 1843–1844, he journeyed abroad on a government stipend in order to study prison systems. After he returned home, he was appointed pastor at the Copenhagen City Jail in June 1844, and from November 1844, he also held the post

3

66

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 95–96 of pastor at the House of Punishment, Rasping, and Betterment in the Christianshavn district of the city as well as at the military prison at the Citadel of Copenhagen, a position he held until 1855. ― The Society for Workmen’s Culture: The first association of workmen in Copenhagen was founded by masters of the various trades in November 1840, and as a political response to this, The Society for Workmen’s Culture was founded in October 1847. This association, which also included journeymen, was democratically inclined and in March 1848 fought for universal suffrage in the elections for the constitutional convention; see Peter Tudvad, Kierkegaards København [Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 2004), pp. 335–336. 66

19

22

For a long, long time … the question of God’s personhood] See Julius Schaller, Die Philosophie unserer Zeit. Zur Apologie und Erläuterung des Hegelschen Systems [The Philosophy of Our Times: Toward a Defense and Elucidation of the Hegelian System] (Leipzig, 1837; ASKB 758), pp. 268–328; K. Conradi, Christus in der Gegenwart, Vergangenheit und Zukunft: Drei Abhandlungen als Beiträge zur richtigen Auffassung des Begriffs der Persönlichkeit [Christ in the Present, Past, and Future: Three Essays Contributing to the Correct Interpretation of the Concept of Personality] (Mainz, 1839); and F. A. Staudenmaier, Darstellung und Kritik des Hegelschen Systems [Presentation and Critique of the Hegelian System] (Mainz, 1844; ASKB 789), pp. 25ff. Hegel and the Hegelians … put aside the matter of the Trinity] Refers to G.W.F. Hegel’s controversial understanding of the Christian dogma concerning the Trinity. Hegel’s idealistic philosophy holds that the basis of all actuality is “the concept” (der Begriff, alternatively translated as “the Notion”), which consists of the abstract conceptual unity of “the universal” (Allgemeinheit), “the particular” (Besonderheit), and “the individual” (Einzelnheit). In § 163 of Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences], Hegel explains these three different aspects as follows: “The Notion as Notion contains the three following

•

1850

559

‘moments’ or functional parts. (1) The first is Universality―meaning that it is in free equality with itself in its specific character. (2) The second is Particularity―that is, the specific character, in which the universal continues serenely equal to itself. (3) The third is Individuality―meaning the reflection-into-self of the specific characters of universality and particularity; which negative self-unity has complete and original determinateness, without any loss to its self-identity or universality. Individual and actual are the same thing: only the former has issued from the notion, and is thus, as a universal, stated expressly as a negative identity with itself” (Hegel’s Werke [→ 12,1], vol. 6, p. 320; translation from Hegel, Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, trans. William Wallace [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971], p. 226). For Hegel, Christianity, which he refers to as “the revealed religion,” is the highest form of religious thought, because its understanding of divinity corresponds with the tripartite nature of the “concept”: the Father represents “the universal” (see § 567 in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 7,2, p. 449); the Son represents “the particular” (see § 568 in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 7,2, pp. 449–450); and the Holy Spirit represents “the individual” (see § 569 in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 7,2, p. 450). See also Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion [Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion], ed. Ph. Marheineke, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1840 [1832]; ASKB 564–565), vol. 2; in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 12, pp. 223– 247 (on the Father), pp. 247–308 (on the Son), and pp. 308–356 (on the Holy Spirit). Presumably, it is Hegel’s association of “the concept” with the Trinity to which Kierkegaard is referring in using the expression “sham.” ― thank you very much,: Variant: first written “thank you very much.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― of logic: Variant: added. ― thesis― antithesis―synthesis: From Greek terms meaning, respectively, standpoint, contradiction or objection, and unity. Hegel himself does not use the terms “thesis,” “antithesis,” and “synthesis,” but his method was often described with these terms in more popular and erroneous presentations of his dialectical method. Kierkegaard owned one of the earliest of these presentations, namely, H.

560

67

2

7

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 96–100

M. Chalybäus, Historische Entwickelung der speculativen Philosophie von Kant bis Hegel [Historical Development of Speculative Philosophy from Kant to Hegel] (Dresden, 1837; ASKB 461), from which he possibly had his understanding of Hegel’s dialectical method; see the Danish translation of the Chalybäus’s work, which Kierkegaard also owned, Historisk Udvikling af den speculative Philosophie fra Kant til Hegel [Historical Development of Speculative Philosophy from Kant to Hegel], trans. S. Kattrup (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 462), pp. 285–286: “The first cycle is the symbol of the subsequent cycles, or actually: being, non-being, and existence or becoming―in itself returns in all subsequent theses, antitheses, and syntheses, except that it takes place in more definite forms and expressions” (p. 300 in the German ed.). Hegel thinks … Christianity … he has gone much farther] According to Hegel, religion is situated on the second-highest step of the system of speculative knowledge, whereas philosophy represents the highest level. Religion is thus lower than philosophy; religion, after all, still contains an empirical element because it understands the truth of the divine in the form of “representations”; philosophy, on the other hand, understands the truth only in the form of “the concept” (i.e., without any empirical dimension). Religion is thus to be seen as an imperfect stage on the way to the absolute knowing of philosophy, and one must “go farther than Christianity” in order to attain this philosophical knowing. what I have always said … Hegel was … not a thinker] See, e.g., the introduction to The Concept of Anxiety (1844): “People long since abandoned him [Schleiermacher] when they chose Hegel, and yet Schleiermacher was a thinker in the fine, Greek sense: he only spoke of what he knew; but despite all his excellent abilities and enormous learning, Hegel’s work repeatedly reminds us that he was, on a grand scale, a professor of philosophy in the German sense, inasmuch as he must explain all things à tout prix [French, “at all costs”]” (CA, 20; SKS 4, 327–328). See also § 1 in chap. 3, “Actual Subjectivity, Ethical Subjectivity: The Subjective Thinker,” in the second section

•

1850

of the second part of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 301–318; SKS 7, 274–289). time when it hada confessors[b]] See Dr. Wilhelm Münschers Lærebog i den christelige Kirkehistorie til Brug ved Forelæsninger [Dr. Wilhelm Münscher’s Textbook on Christian Church History, for Use in Conjunction with Lectures], trans. F. Münter, new rev. ed. by J. Møller (Copenhagen, 1831; ASKB 168), p. 46: “The Christians who suffered death for the sake of their faith are called martyrs, from whom one really ought to separate the confessors who, having lost their fortune, staunchly confessed Christianity in mortal danger.” See also DD:121 in KJN 1, 247, where Kierkegaard cites part of this passage. professors] Variant: first written “professors.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

14

15

Speculation] → 12,7. sees. in relation to the object of faith] Variant: first written “sees,”.

19

“the writings”] Presumably, a reference to Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), esp. the third part, “The Gospel of Sufferings: Christian Discourses” (see UDVS, 212–341; SKS 8, 313–431), and to Christian Discourses (1848), esp. “States of Mind in the Struggle of Sufferings: Christian Discourses” (see CD, 93–159; SKS 10, 103–166).

1

68

that slow death of being trampled to death by geese] Allusion to the proverb, “It is a slow death to let geese trample one to death,” recorded as no. 1560 in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 53m,11), vol. 1, p. 151. See also NB:209 in KJN 4, 122, where Kierkegaard alludes to this proverb in connection with the mockery to which he had been subjected during Corsaren’s attack on him (→ 45,16 and → 52,18).

21

68

the story about Sibylla and Tarquinius Superbus … Truth always begins … thus it goes up] Refers to the widely recorded tale of the sibyl of the city Cumae, who sold a collection of oracles known as The Sybilline Books to King Tarquinius, to whom

24

68

67

31

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 100–101 some sources assign the surname Priscus, whose period of rule is traditionally said to have been 616–579 b.c., and to whom other sources assign the surname Superbus, i.e., Rome’s last king, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, whose period of rule is said to have been 534–510 b.c. Kierkegaard relates the story in “The Equilibrium between the Aesthetic and the Ethical in the Composition of the Personality” in the second part of Either/ Or (1843) as follows: “So despair, then, with all your soul and all your mind: the longer you put it off, the more difficult will be the terms, and the requirement will be the same. I am shouting this out to you just as did that woman, who offered a collection of books to Tarquinius, and when he would not pay the sum she demanded, she burned a third of them and demanded the same sum, and when he again would not pay the sum demanded, she burned the second third and demanded the same sum, until he finally gave the original sum for the last third” (EO 2, 209; SKS 3, 201). See, e.g., Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [New Dictionary of Mythology], ed. Fr. G. Klopfer, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945), vol. 1, p. 608. 69

1

4

an excellent little section on evil … it is the groundless] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a passage from Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 457. he cites Daub … Judas Ischariot … Hypotheses on Hum. Freedom] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of the first half of a footnote in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), p. 460, which refers to Judas Ischarioth [Judas Iscariot] by Karl Daub and to K. Rosenkranz, Erinnerungen an Karl Daub [Recollections of Karl Daub]. ― Daub: → 46,14. ― Judas Ischariot: Carl Daub, Judas Ischariot oder das Böse im Verhältniß zum Guten [Judas Ischariot or Evil in Relation to Good], 3 vols. (Heidelberg, 1816–1818). ― miraculous,: Variant: first written “miraculous.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― negative,: Variant: first written “neg-

•

1850

561

ative.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― Hypotheses on Hum. Freedom: Des Herrn Geheimen Kirchenraths und Professors, Dr. C. Daub Darstellung und Beurtheilung der Hypothesen in Betreff der Willensfreiheit. Mit Zustimmung des Verfassers aus dessen Vorlesungen herausgegeben [Hr. Privy Councillor for Ecclesiastical Affairs and Professor Dr. C. Daub’s Presentation and Judgments of Hypotheses Concerning Freedom of the Will, Published with the Consent of the Author of These Lectures], ed. J. C. Kröger (Altona, 1834). J. M. … says that sin’s “incomprehensibility” … is precisely its nature] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a passage from Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), pp. 457– 458. Anti-Cl. has correctly shown … evil as possibility … as actuality] Presumably, a reference to the introductory definition given in part A,B, “The Possibility and the Actuality of Despair,” in the first section of The Sickness unto Death (1849) by Anti-Climacus (→ 25,13) (SUD, 14–15; SKS 11, 130–131). possibility (see] Variant: first written “possibility.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. see Joh. Climacus] See § 2, “Possibility Superior to Actuality. Actuality Superior to Possibility. Poetic and Intellectual Ideality. Ethical Ideality,” in chap. 3, sec. 2 of the second part of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) by Johannes Climacus (→ 63,25) (CUP, 324; SKS 7, 295–296). Julius Müller. Doctrine of Sin 1st part pp. 457ff.] Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), pp. 457–458, in bk. 3, sec. 1, chap. 3, “Die Willensfreiheit des Menschen als Möglichkeitsgrund der Sünde” [Human Freedom of the Will as the Ground of Possibility of Sin], pp. 450–474. the arbitrary discontinuity] See Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde, pp. 456–457: “Evil is in its essence capricious, but capriciousness is a discontinuity of the rational coherence and the higher

11

25

34

34

1

4

69m

562

14

70

4

6

70

12 22 25

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 101–103

intentionality in which alone every individual action can find its true basis.” evil … frightful energy … into this darkness] → 47,28, → 47,31 and → 47,35. What J. Müller points out … that freedom cannot … equally the capacity for good and for evil] Presumably, a reference to Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde (→ 46,14), who writes, with respect to Pelagius and Julian, that their “concept of moral freedom is so abstract and so thoroughly unsatisfactory to every more profound Christian consciousness; that this freedom, although it is always in the same equilibrium between good and evil, is a never-ending oscillation, a true perpetuum mobile, in a person and yet is by no means capable of moving from its own location to the goal of being fulfilled with true, eternal content; that, while everything revolves around it, it remains unchanged through all the ages as this empty, indifferent and yet all-decisive possibilitas boni et mali [possibility or capacity for good and evil]” (p. 401). See also the discussion of Schelling’s definition of the concept of freedom as “a capacity for good and evil” (p. 455). Nor can one say that misuse of the will is the ground of evil … evil itself] Refers to pp. 461– 462 in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde, where with respect to all those “who since Origen and Augustine have placed the origin of evil in the misuse of free will,” Müller writes, “They properly have scruples about letting it stem from a capacity communicated by God to human beings, and owing to these difficulties they must draw a definite boundary against these and all analogous notions, coming to the point of deriving evil from itself, for the misuse of free will is already something evil. In other respects, however, the expression is untenable.” Joh. Climacus has already demonstrated this correctly] → 69,34. except in connection with evil] → 69,25. in modern times, when people have incorporated “actuality” into logic] Critical reference

•

1850

to G.W.F. Hegel’s attempt to analyze “actuality” as a category in logic or metaphysics; see Hegel’s Wissenschaft der Logik (→ 12,1), 2 vols., in Hegel’s Werke, vols. 3–5; vol. 4, pp. 199–218; and §§ 142–159 in Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften (→ 66,22), in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 281–314. The matter was treated in similar fashion by Danish Hegelians; see §§ 105–107 in Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie (→ 12,1), pp. 59–63; §§ 28–30 in A. P. Adler, Populaire Foredrag over Hegels objective Logik [Popular Lectures on Hegel’s Objective Logic] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 383), pp. 152–173; and § 15 in Rasmus Nielsen’s (→ 18,17) Den propædeutiske Logik [Propaedeutic Logic] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 699), pp. 159–178. See also the introduction to The Concept of Anxiety (1844) (CA, 9–10; SKS 4, 317–318, with accompanying explanatory notes). The world’s 6000 years of history] Since Christian antiquity, it was believed on the basis of various passages in the OT that the world was created ca. 4000 b.c. This was maintained by, e.g., the Irish Anglican archbishop James Ussher, who in his Annales veteris testamenti [Annals of the Old Testament] (1659), concluded that the world had been created in 4004 b.c. These and similar calculations were accepted as authoritative well into the 19th century, so that in Kierkegaard’s day the world was estimated to be about 6,000 years old. See, e.g., the official Almanak for det Aar efter Christi Fødsel, 1850 [Almanac for a.d. 1850] (Copenhagen, 1850), unpaginated, p. 3: “The current year is calculated to be 1859 years after Christ’s birth. / 5817 after the creation of the world.” pantheistic scientism] Presumably, a reference to Hegel’s philosophy; in Kierkegaard’s journals the term “scientism” frequently designates Hegelian speculative philosophy (→ 54,7). When Hegel linked the divine to the historical development of the world spirit, it seemed to many people that he was guilty of pantheism and of doing away with a personal God. Hegel was increasingly attentive to this criticism and attempted to reply to the accusation in the 3rd ed. of his Encyklopädie from 1830, § 573; see Encyklopädie der philosophischen

33

4

71

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 103

18

Wissenschaften (→ 66,22), vol. 3, in Hegel’s Werke (→ 12,1), vol. 7,2, pp. 452–468. In the German context, among the works that discussed Hegel’s alleged pantheism were: F. C. Baur, Die christliche Gnosis oder die christliche Religions-Philosophie in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwiklung [Christian Gnosis, or Christian Philosophy of Religion in Its Historical Development] (Tübingen, 1835; ASKB 421); Julius Schaller, Die Philosophie unserer Zeit. Zur Apologie und Erläuterung des Hegelschen Systems [The Philosophy of Our Times: Toward a Defense and Elucidation of the Hegelian System] (Leipzig, 1837; ASKB 758), pp. 268–323; and C. L. Michelet, Geschichte der letzten Systeme der Philosophie in Deutschland von Kant bis Hegel [History of the Most Recent Philosophical Systems in Germany, from Kant to Hegel], 2 vols. (Berlin, 1837–1838; ASKB 678–679), vol. 2, pp. 645–648. In Denmark, the topic was treated in Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie (→ 12,1), § 129n; and in H. L. Martensen, De autonomia conscientiæ sui humanæ, in theologiam dogmaticam nostri temporis introducta [The Autonomy of Human Self-Consciousness in the Dogmatic Theology of Our Time] (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 648), §§ 11 and 20 (Kierkegaard also owned the Danish translation of this work, trans. L. V. Petersen, Den menneskelige Selvbevidstheds Autonomie i vor Tids dogmatiske Theologie [Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 651]); and in H. L. Martensen, Mester Eckart (→ 12,7), pp. 39ff., 57, 82ff. There is no science here; that is precisely what he wants to get rid of] Presumably, an allusion to bk. 2, chap. 5, sec. 21 in Diogenes Laertius’s history of philosophy: “He [Socrates] discussed moral questions in the workshops and the market-place, being convinced that the study of nature is no concern of ours” (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), vol. 1, p. 66). English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London:

•

1850

563

William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1925), vol. 1, p. 151. See also NB:81–82 in KJN 4, 69; SKS 20, 70. he is “a gadfly,”] See Plato’s dialogue Apology, 30e–31a, where Socrates warns his judges 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 stimulation 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” (Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters [→ 12,2], pp. 16–17). In Plato] Kierkegaard often concerned himself with the relation between Socrates, as someone who had no doctrine, and Plato, as someone who presented doctrines; see, e.g., NB14:55: “Yes, compared to Socrates, Plato himself was already a misunderstanding. Only Socrates managed to keep himself on the pinnacle of continually expressing the existential, constantly remaining as a presence, so that he had no doctrine, no system, and the like, but had practice. Plato took his time―with the assistance of this enormous illusion, it became a doctrine. Gradually the existential element disappeared more and more from view, and then the doctrine became dogmatically broader and broader” (KJN 6, 381; see also the accompanying explanatory notes). “The owl of Minerva takes wing only at dusk,”] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Hegel’s Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts (→ 46,14), in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 8, p. 21. In ancient mythology, Minerva (Greek, “Pallas Athena”) was the goddess of wisdom, as well as of war, art, and scholarship; among her many symbolic associates was the owl. What Joh. Climacus says is true … Xnty into “science” … error] Presumably, a reference to a portion of chap. 2, in pt. 2, sec. 2 of Concluding

19

20

29

31

564

35

72

12

14

15 27

72

34

73

10 11

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 103–110

Unscientific Postscript (1846) by Johannes Climacus (→ 63,25) (see CUP, 213–234; SKS 7, 195–213). what the judge … says is also true, that the finer … the more difficult the healing] Loosely cited from “The Equilibrium between the Aesthetic and the Ethical in the Composition of the Personality” in the second part of Either/Or (1843): “I have often noticed in life that the more costly the fluid with which a person intoxicates himself, the more difficult his healing becomes” (EO 2, 194; SKS 3, 188). ― the judge: William, a judge in the Copenhagen court system and the putative author of B’s papers in the second part of Either/Or. a professorial position with a good salary] As civil servants of the Danish state, professors received an annual salary between 1,200 and 1,800 rix-dollars (→ 15,26). the tradesmen] In the narrow sense, this meant residents of a market town who had licenses to run a business there, i.e., trade, manufacturing, transportation, hospitality, and the like. As civil servants, professors were paid by the state, and in that sense could be said to be engaged in a trade, because they were paid to carry on scholarship. certainly] Variant: changed from “perhaps”. the law that when one is injured, all are injured] Presumably, an allusion to 1 Cor 12:26; it was also included as a proverb in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 53m,11), vol. 1, p. 613. Paul, who of course also made use of shrewdness] See, e.g., 1 Cor 12:8 and 14:1–24. the “total madness” of Paul’s life] See, e.g., 2 Cor 11:16–12:12. sufficient guarantee … worldliness.] Variant: changed from “sufficient guarantee.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

73

17

fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12.

73

25

the Old Testament command, “You shall not make for yourself any image of your God,”] Refers to the third of the Ten Commandments; see Ex 20:4–5. Fichte the younger … his Vorschule der Theologie § 108] In § 108 of his Sätze zur

30

•

1850

Vorschule der Theologie [Elementary Principles of Theology] (Stuttgart, 1826; ASKB 501), pp. 212– 214, I. H. Fichte writes: “To us, of course, from our present-day standpoint, this can appear less penetrating, because that command of the faith concerning the oneness and the absence of images of God has triumphed so thoroughly that on the contrary, through the increasing development of the understanding, for us God has already sunk into the abstract unity of an empty absolute, into a universal necessitas [Latin, “necessity”], so that we ourselves have actually become too bad for the powerful plenitude of any visible symbolizing of faith, which, however, God Himself proclaimed as something living” (p. 214). ― Fichte the younger: 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). and seriously] Variant: added.

9

74

a new patch on an old garment] Allusion to Mt 9:16. die away] → 42,29. he said, [“]Come unto me[”]] Reference to Mt 11:28. away, they fled from him.] Variant: changed from “away.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. only an apostle can proclaim Xnty in the stricter sense] See “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle,” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays by H. H. (1849) (WA, 91–108; SKS 11, 95– 111).

36

74

2

75

condemned to death as a criminal] See, e.g., Lk 23:32–33. a blasphemer] See esp. Mt 26:57–68. abandoned by everyone] See Mt 26:69–75. flogged] See Mt 27:26. mocked, spat upon] See Lk 18:32, Mk 14:65, Mt 27:27–31.

29

12 13

14

30 30 31 31

75

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 110–114

76

32

Have faith in me] Allusion to Jn 14:1.

11

In the sermon … 6th Sunday after Easter … one ought not follow him] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on 1 Pet 4:7–11, the epistle for the sixth Sunday after Easter, in En christelig Postille (→ 8,20), vol. 2, pp. 278–291; pp. 289–290: “Therefore preachers as well as listeners must most of all take care that the infallible testimony, the teaching that is taught, is actually the true word of God, revealed by heaven, given to the holy first fathers, the prophets, and apostles, confirmed by Christ himself, who entrusted it to be proclaimed. For it never ought to be tolerated that people keep company with doctrine that pleases everyone or that best comports with human understanding and reason; it ought never be tolerated that people sport and juggle with the scripture and the word of God, interpret it, stretch it, twist it, flatter it as they please, for the sake of people or of unity, for in that case people have no sure or steady basis on which consciences could depend. Just as little ought it be tolerated if someone who possesses much respect, holiness, spirit, and understanding―as far as I am concerned, he could be an apostle―comes forward, appealing to his gifts and to the office entrusted to him, and has the authority to teach whatever he finds pleasing―the listeners ought not accept or believe what such a man teaches.” If Luther replies, [“]By testing the teaching[”]] See the continuation of the passage from Luther’s sermon cited in the previous note, p. 290: “In opposition to this and in agreement with all the rest of scripture, St. Peter teaches that with respect to matters pertaining to faith, at the risk of losing one’s eternal salvation, one must not regard or respect persons or gifts, but must test and judge all teachings in accordance with God’s clear and unfailing word which has been given to us from heaven and from time immemorial has also had the sure, unanimous testimony of the apostles as well as that of the Church.” the sacrifice demanded by balloting] See Plato’s dialogue Apology, 36a, where after the verdict has been read, Socrates says to the jury: “There are a great many reasons, gentlemen,why I am not dis-

22

32

•

1850

565

tressed by this result―I mean your condemnation of me―but the chief reason is that the result was not unexpected. What does surprise me is the number of votes cast by the two sides. I should never have believed that it would be such a close thing, but now it seems that if a mere thirty votes had gone the other way, I should have been acquitted, and not only that, but anyone can see that if Anytus and Lycon had not come forward to accuse me, Meletus would actually have forfeited his one thousand drachmas for not having obtained one fifth of the votes” (Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, p. 21). See also bk. 2, chap. 5, sec. 41–42 in Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie (→ 71,18), vol. 1, p. 74. “The Accounting”] → 31,15. the “Three Notes”] i.e., “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author” (→ 32,2). its latest version] → 31,15. a single word―] Variant: first written “a single word.”, the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the thesis “the crowd” is “untruth”] The principal theme of “No. 1. To the Dedication: ‘That Single Individual’”; see The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 26,38) (PV, 105–112; SKS 16, 85–92). the thesis about “the single individual.”] Cf. the last portion of “No. 2. A Word on the Relationship of My Work as an Author to ‘That Single Individual’”; see The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 113–124; SKS 16, 98–104). ― “her”: Refers to Kierkegaard’s former fiancée, Regine Olsen, subsequently Regine Schlegel (→ 45,15).

1

The H. S. is called the “the Comforter.”] In the texts from the gospel of John to which reference is made in the next explanatory note, the Greek word for “the Holy Spirit” is ὁ παράκλητος, which is often translated as “the spokesman,” but also as “the comforter.” The authorized Danish version in Kierkegaard’s day translated the word as “the spokesman,” but Luther’s German translation of the NT used the word “comforter.”

3

77

1 2 8

9

9

78

566 4

25 30

78m

2

79

23

80

17 23

81

7

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 114–122

that it was supposed to comfort the disciples … Xt … was no longer visible among them] Reference to Jn 13–17. The Holy Spirit, which Xt will send] → 78,4. It is said: All your sins … restitution has been made] Refers to the words spoken during confession, when the priest, laying on hands, pronounces the forgiveness of sins of each invididual. in antiquity … baptized on their deathbed] Refers to the practice in the ancient Church, when baptism was deferred until one was on one’s deathbed; the most famous example of this is that of Emperor Constantine, who only had himself baptized by Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia in 337, shortly before his death. Socrates … gave him pause] 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 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” (Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters [→ 12,2], p. 478). Xt is the friend of sinners] Reference to Mt 11:19. it is accompanied by an aber] From the German expression es ist ein Aber dabei (lit., “it is accompanied by a ‘but’”), meaning that the situation contains something suspect, unexpected, or hidden. Science wants to turn Xnty into mythology] 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

•

1850

on myths. This line of argument was extended and radicalized by other German theologians and philosophers, e.g., Bruno Bauer in his Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker [Critique of the Synoptic Gospel Histories], 3 vols. (Leipzig 1841–1842). Strauß had a powerful influence on Danish scholars, e.g., Fr. Beck in the dissertation Begrebet Mythus eller den religiøse Aands Form [The Concept of Myth, or the Form of the Religious Spirit] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 424) and Hans Brøchner (see his translation, David Friedrich Strauß: Fremstilling af den christelige Troeslære i dens historiske Udvikling og i dens Kamp med den moderne Videnskab [David Friedrich Strauß: A Presentation of the Doctrines of the Christian Faith in Their Historical Development and Their Battle with Modern Scholarship], 2 vols. [Copenhagen, 1842– 43; ASKB 803–804]). that you are] Variant: first written “not”.

36

81

the Formula of Concord] The Formula of Concord, the last of the classical Lutheran formulae of faith, was written by a number of leading Reformation theologians to hinder the threat of schism following the death of Luther in 1546. Originally written in German in 1577–1578, it was subscribed to by a great many Lutheran princes, cities, and theologians, although never adopted by the Lutheran Church in Denmark. It was published in Latin translation in 1598. See Libri symbolici ecclesiae evangelicae sive Concordia [The Symbolic Books of the Evangelical Church or Concordia], ed. K. A. Hase, 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1837 [1827]; ASKB 624), pp. 570–830.

4

82

Xns’ fault] Variant: first written “Xns’ fault.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. odium totius generis humani] The source for this saying is possibly the Church Father Tertullian, 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.

29

82

36

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 122–123

84

33

85

17 22

25

30

87

2

3

(Leipzig, 1839–1841; ASKB 147–150, vols. 4–7 in Bibliotheca patrum ecclesiasticorum latinorum selecta [Library of Selected Latin Church Fathers], ed. E. G. Gersdorf, 13 vols. [Leipzig, 1838–1847]), 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 set fire to 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 “hatred of humankind,” Cajus Cornelius Tacitus [Tacitus], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1773–1797; ASKB 1286–1288), vol. 2 (1775), p. 282. Xns were persecuted with fire and the sword] See the accounts in 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), pp. 204–223, 248–273, 329–340, 383–397, 434– 436, 492–513, 541–542, 565. See also the translator’s introduction, where the historical context of Eusebius’s work is described as “a very strange age, when Christianity had struggled through its first three centuries, and the world, which saw that fire and the sword made no inroads against it, flattered it and gave it the kiss of Judas” (p. i). an enemy of God] Allusion to Jas 4:4. insurance policy,] Variant: first written “insurance policy.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. “the priest”] See illustration on p. 86 in the present volume for Kierkegaard’s deletion of “Mynster” (→ 59,25) and substitution of “the priest.” The wording “the priest” appears two additional times in the present entry, and both times as Kierkegaard’s substitution for “Mynster.” one is “earnest” … worry that] Variant: added. your name … the sexton enters it] In Kierkegaard’s day, if one intended to participate in confession and communion, one informed the sexton, who then entered one’s name in the communion book. in “The Book of Life,”] See Rev 17:8 and 20:15.

•

1850

567

immortality] → 48,16. charts and tables show] Reference to statistical calculations of the sort available in Statistisk Tabelværk, published by the Danish government’s Bureau of Statistics almost every year since 1835, which provided detailed tables related to demographic and economic developments in Denmark. the true good, “which … gives joys their true taste … alleviates the cares.”] Presumably, Kierkegaard’s free rendering of a passage from J. P. Mynster’s sermon on Jn 10:11–17, the gospel text for the second Sunday after Easter, “That We Must All Simply and Honestly Adhere to the Same Christian Faith,” in Prædikener paa alle Sønog Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons on Every Sunday and Holy Day of the Year], 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823], ASKB 229–230 and 2191), vol. 1, pp. 358–369; p. 362: “It is … true that most people have many problems in the world, but it is also true that the greatest among these are dissatisfaction and doubt and fear and worry that the good they actually lack is of the sort that could reduce the bitterness of the sorrows and give the joys their true taste.” Concerning this “good,” Mynster says “but we [have] no other name for this great good than faith, the true, living, Christian faith; it contains the foundation of all our reassurance, the source of everything that can fulfill and delight the heart” (p. 363). and blessedness] Variant: added. indescribable blessedness beyond all measure, as Paul says] See 2 Cor 4:17.

13

anguished conscience] In NB:79 in KJN 4, 68, the expression “anguished conscience” is attributed to Luther; see, e.g., his sermon on the the gospel for the first Sunday in Advent in En christelig Postille (→ 8,20), vol. 1, pp. 15–30, esp. pp. 18, 20–21, 27– 28. See also the article “Gewissen” [Conscience], in Geist aus Luther’s Schriften oder Concordanz [The Spirit of Luther’s Writings, or Concordance], ed. F. W. Lomler, G. F. Lucius, J. Rust, L. Sackreuter, and E. Zimmermann, 4 vols. (Darmstadt, 1828– 1831; ASKB 317–320), vol. 2 (1829), pp. 327–346.

32

87

“servant of the Word.”] Idiomatic expression, meaning a priest; see Lk 1:2 and Acts 6:4.

19

88

22

8

87m

16 23

568 89

23

24

33

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 123–129

Goethe] Kierkegaard owned a number of Goethe’s works in various editions, including Goethe’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe letzter Hand [Goethe’s Works: Complete Edition with the Author’s Final Changes], 60 vols. (Stuttgart, 1828– 1842; ASKB 1641–1668 [vols. 1–55, 1828–1833]; abbreviated hereafter as Goethe’s Werke). Clärchen! … can simply love a pers. to that degree] Reference to act 1, sc. 3 and act 2, sc. 2 in Goethe’s five-act tragedy Egmont (1788), in Goethe’s Werke, vol. 8 (1828), pp. 167–298. Count Egmont, Prince of Gaure, the leader of aristocratic opposition to Spanish rule in the Netherlands, is in mortal danger after the Duke of Alba has arrived with his army in order to establish order in the wake of an iconoclastic riot. Egmont, in a difficult situation as mediator between the interests of the common people, the aristocracy, and the monarchy, finds respite with the middle-class Clärchen, who in act 1, sc. 3, says to her mother: “There is not a drop of false blood in his veins. And then, Mother, he is indeed the great Egmont; yet, when he comes to me, how tender he is, how kind! How he tries to conceal from me his rank, his bravery! How anxious he is about me! so entirely the man, the friend, the lover” (pp. 193–194); see also pp. 237–238; English translation from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Egmont, trans. Anna Swanwick, in Goethe, Marlowe, vol. 19 of Harvard Classics, ed. Charles W. Eliot (New York: Collier, 1909), p. 268. Egmont was played at the Royal Theater in its entirety for the last time in 1834. Margaret … Faust] Reference to the principal female character, Margarete or Gretchen, and her relationship to Faust in pt. 1 of Goethe’s tragedy Faust (1808), in Goethe’s Werke, vol. 12 (1828), pp. 1–247. Kierkegaard treats this relationship in the third part of “Silhouettes” in Either/Or (1843), pt. 1 (EO 1, 204–215; SKS 2, 200–209), where it is argued that what Faust requires of a girl who is to arouse his desire is not cultivation or intellectual development, but immediacy: “Goethe has seen all this perfectly, and therefore Margaret is a little middle-class girl, a girl one could almost be tempted to call insignificant” (EO 1, 207–208; SKS 2, 203); see also EO 1, 204–205; SKS 2, 200.

•

1850

for Egmont to call her “Clärchen”] Egmont’s beloved, Clara, is called “Clärchen” not only by him but by the other characters in the tragedy.

1

90

There is nothing new under the sun] See Eccl 1:9. (among other things)] Variant: added. I know nothing except Christ, and him crucified] See 1 Cor 2:2. spoken by an apostle, cost him his life] According to tradition, Paul was decapitated in Rome during the reign of Emperor Nero, who died in June a.d. 68; see bk. 2, chaps. 22 and 25 in Kirkens Historie … af Eusebius (→ 84,33), pp. 95–96, 104. high pressure] In Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen, water from nearby sources was referred to as “pump water” because it had to be pumped up, but water piped from elevated sources farther away came out of the pipe under pressure and was referred to as “high pressure water.” His Excellency Ørsted] Anders Sandøe Ørsted (1778–1860), Danish jurist, prime minister; from 1801, judge in the royal and city court; from 1809, also co-director and instructor in canon law at the pastoral seminary; from 1810, supreme court justice, a post he left in 1813 in order to become a member of the Chancery; from 1825, also attorney general. In 1842, he became a member of the Privy Council and prime minister but lost all his offices in 1848. In 1848–1849, he was a member of the constitutional convention. Ørsted’s status as a privy councillor entitled him to be addressed as “Excellency,” which according to the Danish system of rank and precedence (established by decrees of 1746 and 1808, plus later amendments) was reserved for persons of the highest rank. 100-rix-dollar note] → 15,26. [truth]] Variant: This reading is suggested by Pap. and is included in brackets by the editors of SKS.

8

90

Rom. 7] Variant: added. See esp. Rom 7:14–25.

30

91

To a Contemporary … from the beginning] According to EP I–II, p. 200, this entry was written on a loose slip of paper that was inserted next to p. 142 of the journal; see NB15:92.a in the present

1

93

18 25 26

6

91

9

12 17

J O U R N A L NB 15 : 130 volume. ― whose name must still not be mentioned: Reference to Kierkegaard’s onetime fiancée, Regine Olsen, subsequently Regine Schlegel (→ 45,15). ―whom history will name―be it for a short time or long―as long as it names mine: See Not15:14 (→ 45,15), where Kierkegaard writes: “My existence was to accentuate her life absolutely, my activity as an author could also be viewed as a monument to her praise and honor. I am taking her with me into history. And I who, melancholy, had only one wish, to enchant her: there it is not denied me; there I walk by her side; as a master of ceremonies I escort her in triumph, saying: please make a bit of room for her, for ‘our own dear little Regine’” (KJN 3, 443–444). ― this little work: Presumably, a reference to a work he contemplated publishing in October 1849, consisting of “The Accounting,” “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author,” and the first part of The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 32,2).

•

1850

569

Notes for JOURNAL NB16 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB16 573

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB16 581

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB16

Critical Account of the Text by Joakim Garff, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

573

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB16 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB16.” by Kierkegaard (see illustration 2 in the present volume). The manuscript of Journal NB16 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 some passages in his latin hand. Four entries (NB16:1, 2, 42, and 71) are written in a distinct latin hand, and a latin hand is also used for Latin, French, and Italian words and occasionally as a form of calligraphy for headings and titles. The entries written on the inside front cover and the first page of the journal consist of a listing of contents and were written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format); NB16:42 was written lengthwise, that is, vertically, along the margin.1 Owing to lack of space, the latter portion of the journal’s final entry, NB16:101, was written in the margin (see illustration on p. 163).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB16 was begun on February 14, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than March 6, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB17. Except for this label, the journal contains no specific dates. As with the marginal additions in other journals, those in the present journal may have been made somewhat after the original entries they accompany. It cannot be determined whether the appended lists of contents of the journal (NB16:2 and 4) were written while the journal was still in use or subsequently.

) Entries that Kierkegaard wrote lengthwise along the margin are reproduced in KJN by using the entire width of the page.

1

574

J O U R N A L NB 16

III. Contents “It is difficult to crack a peach pit; let us assume that it is impossible to do it. So what would one judge of a gathering in which each person put one in his mouth, making gestures: [‘]Now, now, now―yes, sure enough, here it comes… [’]” (NB16:16). Kierkegaard’s depiction of a gathering that takes turns trying to crack a resistant peach pit is included in an entry labeled “Clutter―and Category,” and it is intended to illustrate the relationship between the speculative attempt to grasp faith’s essence and its actual incomprehensibility. “Would it not be better, after all,” Kierkegaard asks, “to refrain from the attempt,” and instead to say, “I cannot.” Journal NB16 contains a considerable number of theological and philosophical “peach pits,” but it also employs engagement, criticism, and satire in pointing out that there is an outside world to which thought must relate itself if it is not to end in meaningless abstraction. Thus, large portions of Journal NB16 consist of essays in the art of becoming concrete, employing a discourse that makes use of tangible things in order to investigate the cracks and crevices between thought and deed, will and actuality, the priest’s sermon and his practice. According to Kierkegaard, an important clarification of the religious confusion of the times must be sought in the growing insistence on interpreting instead of taking action. The manner in which people place themselves in bondage to hermeneutics at the expense of actuality is attested to in a number ways, including the extensive commentaries to the New Testament, which supposedly have the purpose of providing guidance to the reader but that in reality merely give rise to confusing ambiguities and thus postpone the existential action that ought to be the true result of impassioned reading: “Above all, read the N.T. without a commentary. Would it ever occur to a lover to read a letter from his beloved with a commentary! A commentator is an extremely dangerous interference in connection with everything that makes a qualitative claim of having purely personal significance for me” (NB16:84). A similar danger of existential distraction can be found in the “allegorical interpretation” and in a purely “philological interpretation,” both of which weaken the imperative nature of New Testament texts and in general divert attention from the aggressively personal address of those texts: “Allegory as the primary mode of interpretation is rlly an indirect attack on Xnty … ” (NB16:78). Above all, however, modern interpreters tend to place insufficient emphasis on the fact that behind the New Testament texts there were people who took action in actual, dra-

Critical Account of the Text

2. Outside front cover of Journal NB16.

575

576

J O U R N A L NB 16 matic circumstances, when the truth and the future of Christianity were at stake: “They forget Paul entirely in favor of the scrap of paper he produced, which they treat in the most un-Pauline way” (NB16:78). In brief: “Pereat the commentators!” (NB16:84.a). In Kierkegaard’s own case, his lived life and the genesis of his texts were inseparably linked. Journal NB16 contains quite a number of reflections on the sufferings, misunderstandings, and personal flaws that became productive factors in his literary activity (NB16:8, 9, 20). At many points, Kierkegaard touches on the powerful forces that contributed to shaping his work as an author but that cannot be described because they stem from something beyond himself (NB16:43, 46). With his conviction that his works were not merely his own accomplishments but were in the profoundest sense dependent on the unfathomable assistance of Governance, Kierkegaard is able to assume a certain distance in describing the enormous significance and “incomparable riches” (NB16:24) of those works. He is also capable of depicting his own genius in tones attributable to his experiences with a creative force for which he himself cannot take credit. Occasionally, it may be difficult to draw sharp boundaries between human and divine creation (NB16:91); by contrast, the fate assigned to genius, both publicly and privately, can be stated with painful precision: My “sad fate” is rlly that my nature is one of sheer intellectual elegance and that to some extent I presuppose this in others. For a time, I actlly did not notice this; I buried myself in my task, practiced and developed the dance steps without noticing that in so doing I became much too intellectual for this world in which everything depends on animal health and impudent directness and shabbiness. In this way I cannot but miss out on all advantages. (NB16:65) Among the advantages that Kierkegaard did not secure were academic advancement and a literary career that could have taken a quite different direction if he had thought tactically and had taken different steps early in his literary career: “What a wrong turn on my part―if my striving had been direct, what a wrong turn on my part it was to publish Two Edifying Discourses after Either/Or, which could only confuse people, instead of letting Either/Or stand as a brilliant success and to continue in that direction, which was what the times required, merely in somewhat smaller portions” (NB16:88). Kierkegaard quite consciously “work[ed] counter” to himself (NB16:46), which not only exacted a psychic toll, but had significant economic costs as well: “There has been squandering,

Critical Account of the Text everything has been squandered, strained, strained … ” (NB16:69). In view of his originality, his fate as an author seems to him absurd, which is also why he counsels others against entering the same line of work: “As one might, for example, warn a person against attracting attention by going about dressed like a Turk, so in Denmark must one warn a person against becoming an author” (NB16:57; see also NB16:31). The ideal situation would be to find concealment in great obscurity, but Kierkegaard must content himself merely with singing mournful praises of such a possibility: “To be nothing: oh, the happiest, most enviable lot in life!” (NB16:34). Kierkegaard’s notoriety on the streets of Copenhagen owed less to his work as an author than to the public smears to which he believed he had been subjected by the satirical journal Corsaren [The Corsair], the aftereffects of which he diagnosed, clearly sensing that the better sort of people had given their tacit approval to such bestial treatment: “No, envy sits in its concealment and is delighted at crudity’s uprising against me” (NB16:59). The success of the “phenomenon of ridicule” in spreading depraved humor (thus making it more difficult for true wit to combat stupid Danish seriousness) was to a great extent produced by the collapse of the concept of authority, which in turn was the consequence of a new sort of public (NB16:98). As ever, power continued to reside in society; it was merely in other and less sensitive hands than previously: “It is the masses who actually rule the state, and with the assistance of the daily press, chatter is the absolute power” (NB16:99). This permanent, nonsensical chatter had become Denmark’s second nature and revealed a profound duality in the nation’s self-understanding: “Denmark’s character is the most characterless nonsense … This is how Denmark continually vacillates between self-deification and self-contempt” (NB16:58). In the course of his reflections on the democratization of power, Kierkegaard touches on the possibility of a more restrictive press law that could assure that an individual citizen would be treated with respect and that would hold journalists responsible. The entry is titled “Press Legislation”: “If people do not want to consider prohibiting the daily press to some extent, they ought at least consider establishing a punishment for the crime of attempting to drive society mad by printing nonsense” (NB16:35). Earlier in the journal, Kierkegaard noted that he “would like” to write a book with the title “On Possession and Being Possessed in Modern Times,” in which he would show that even so-called enlightened citizens are just as possessed as certain sorts of people were

577

578

J O U R N A L NB 16 thought to be in the Middle Ages. The modern era is the epoch of mass psychoses, the confused age of ecstasy, of the triumph of the crowd: “That is why people run together in flocks: so that one can be seized by natural and animal frenzy, so that a person can feel himself stimulated and fired up, ausser sich. Scenes on the Brocken are perfect parallels to this demonic lust in which the lust is to lose oneself, to evaporate into a potentiation in which one is outside of oneself, not really knowing what one is doing or saying” (NB16:22). To become oneself in the Christian sense involves “a complete reformation of even the smallest aspects of an individual” (NB16:90), but a reformation of this sort also has social consequences. True Christians constitute a marginalized group in society, and in this respect they can easily call to mind the world of criminals, which also “constitutes a little society of its own” (NB16:11). Kierkegaard leaves no doubt that this “analogy” must be understood with necessary reservations, but he finds the similarities striking. Just as “in that society of criminals great care must be taken to see to it that no one comes into that society unless he is marked as they are,” so, too, must Christians always be careful that no one is admitted to their society “except precisely the person whose distinguishing characteristic is that he is polemical to the extreme toward society in the ordinary sense …” (entry NB16:11). Christian society, “consisting of those who are qualitatively individuals” (NB16:11), must actualize the requirements of Christianity in such a way that the condition of Christians in the world is revealed to everyone and the difference between the Christian and the non-Christian becomes clear. The modern clergy has deceitfully striven to conceal or entirely to abolish such a difference: “The deception is that the clergy should of course participate in educating this great public and therefore that it should express self-denial existentially, so that everyone, as soon as he looked at a cleric, would immediately see what Xnty requires. But instead the clergy has made common cause with the public; they have fallen completely out of their character” (NB16:40). Kierkegaard responds on behalf of an imaginary congregation, and as an exception to his usual practice, he couches his words as though he were speaking for the majority: “What then? Then we say, Stop, and add: There is only one solution left … show me your existence, that is the guarantee” (NB16:68). A number of entries are marked by fiery rhetoric that is expressed in outbursts like “[it] makes a devil of a difference” (NB16:65), “this is a lie in your teeth” (NB16:82), and in the fairly frequent occurrence of “thanks anyway” (NB16:31; see also

Critical Account of the Text NB16:32, 78.a, 87). Various body parts and orifices are used metaphorically in depicting the collapse of authority: “Thus the crazy court of judgment is ventriloquism: the decisive voice in public life is not that of the mouth―but the ass” (NB16:17). In similar fashion, Kierkegaard is capable of speaking of the city of his birth as “a little, cooped-up place or an outhouse, the homeland of nonsense, the provincial market town Copenhagen” (NB16:38). Nor does Kierkegaard wear velvet gloves in characterizing his contemporaries. He calls his brother, Peter Christian, an “oafish” fellow (NB16:18), whose activities as a member of parliament have been facilitated by “phrasemongering” and, properly viewed, are merely a “mirage” (NB16:19). H. L. Martensen is criticized for the inconsistency of his dogmatics and is called “a tissue of untruth and triviality who can only cause harm, because he has done a bit of reading” (NB16:27). Among J. P. Mynster’s failings, Kierkegaard emphasizes the “error” that “he became so infatuated with himself and his method” (NB16:55), whereas Rasmus Nielsen is upbraided for his failure to understand Kierkegaard’s writings (entries NB16:63, 88). A number of considerations that arose from Kierkegaard’s current reading also left their traces in this journal. A reading of Kant’s essay “An Answer to the Question ‘What Is Enlightenment’” gives rise to critical comments (NB16:48, 50; see also NB16:70). Kierkegaard’s reading of A. Neander’s Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christentums und des christlichen Lebens (Berlin, 1823–1824; ASKB 179–180) led to a couple of entries on Augustine, whose views on whether a Christian is permitted to undergo military service Kierkegaard endorses completely: “Augustine has a superb response” (NB16:93; see also NB16:92). Elsewhere in Neander, Kierkegaard was struck by an observation by the Cappadocian Church Father Gregory of Nyssa to the effect that one does not come closer to God by changing one’s place, but only by changing oneself, which Kierkegaard finds “splendidly” put (NB16:89). He also continues from his previous journal his remarks on the German theologian Julius Müller, who is singled out for his excellent observations, though Kierkegaard’s admiration has its limits: “J. Müller is an able man, but he is not a great ethicist; he lacks Socratic powers and that sort of education” (NB16:32). In this failing, Müller shares the fate of Luther, concerning whom Kierkegaard, after a couple of polemical outbursts, remarks: “…Luther, by the way, is the object of my entire respect―but a Socrates, no, no, Luther was far from being that” (NB16:87). At a number of points Kierkegaard gives detailed reasons why he himself is no Socrates either, but it seems indisputable to him

579

580

J O U R N A L NB 16 that his work has had a Socratic character. No one, indeed, has managed to inflict such deep and mortal wounds upon the sophistical age as he has: “the times have been harpooned―now they are merely still running with the line” (NB16:69).

Explanatory Notes 97

1

NB16. … 1850.] Label on front cover of the volume.

98

1

“Without Authority” … p. 5] See NB16:8 in the present volume, written on the inside front cover of the volume. On the Publication of Writings about Myself … pp. 68 et al.] See NB16:42 in the present volume. Concerning Writings about Myself … pp. 82 et al.] See NB16:46 in the present volume. On the “Three Notes” … p. 118] See NB16:61 in the present volume.

2 3 4

99

1

2

99

3

4 5 6

texts for the Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held on Fridays in Vor Frue Kirke [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 the other appeared in the first exposition in part 3 of Practice in Christianity, written by Anti-Climacus and published in 1850 by Kierkegaard (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). see the blank page at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. “Original Sin” … pp. 2, 11, 13 bottom of page] See NB16:5, NB16:13, NB16:15 in the present volume. ― 11, 13 bottom of page: Variant: added. Christian “Congregation” … p. 7] See NB16:11 and 16:11.a in the present volume. “The Single Individual”―“Race” … p. 23] See NB16:21 in the present volume. Text for a Lenten Sermon … p. 81] See NB16:45 in the present volume.

The Misfortune of Christendom … p. 97] See NB16:54 in the present volume. The Point in Christendom’s Confusion … p. 130] See NB16:68 in the present volume. Reduplication … p. 160] See NB16:88 in the present volume.

7

Julius Müller formulates … original sin (peccatum originale) is guilt] Refers to bk. 4, chap. 3, “Die kirchliche Lehre von der Erbsünde” [The Church’s Doctrine of Original Sin], in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde [The Christian Doctrine of Sin], 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Breslau, 1849 [1839]; ASKB 689–690), vol. 2, pp. 417–494; pp. 418–419: “Original sin is to be regarded as … genuine sin, which thus makes every human being guilty before God and deserving of eternal punishment from the beginning of his or her existence. Original sin is also essentially original guilt.”―Julius Müller: German evangelical theologian (1801–1878); from 1834, extraordinary professor at Göttingen; from 1835, ordinary professor at Marburg, and from 1839, at Halle. He is most known for his work Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 1, Vom Wesen und Grunde der Sünde. Eine theologische Untersuchungen [On the Nature and Causes of Sin: A Theological Investigation] (Breslau, 1839). Only one vol. was published in the 1st ed.; the 2nd expanded ed. (Breslau, 1844) appeared in two vols., but with no title on the 1st vol. The 3rd expanded and improved ed. (Breslau, 1849) also appeared in two vols. and with no title on vol. 1. Kierkegaard purchased this 3rd ed. on February 11, 1850; see the receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers (KA, D packet 8, layer 1)). ― original sin: → 100,14. ― peccatum originale: In Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, p. 417, Julius Müller discusses “peccatum originale” as the Church’s term for human “sinfulness,” which he proceeds to analyze under the title “peccatum haereditarium,” i.e., “inherited

2

8 9

100

582

3 6

10

14

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 5–8

sin.” The German word for original sin, Erbsünde, like its Danish cognate Arvesynd, translates literally as “inherited sin.” He shows that guilt and sin are correlates] See the next note. And … the principle that original sin is guilt … similarly correct … cause and effect] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, p. 419. ― And: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. In addition, he correctly shows … that guilt and sin are correlates] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, pp. 419–421. ― In addition, he correctly: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. ― Pelagian: Reference to Pelagius, British preacher active in Rome ca. 400; he went to Africa ca. 410 and soon thereafter was in Palestine, where there is no record of him after 418. He denied the doctrine of original sin and asserted the capacity of the human will to obey God’s will and to live free of sin; every human being was born as good and as uncorrupted as was Adam when God created him. Even though Pelagius believed that human beings could effect their own salvation, he did not deny the idea of God’s grace, which reaches human beings primarily through Christ, whose shining example inspires human beings to break the habit-forming power of sin and imitate him. At the urging of Augustine, Pelagius’s doctrines were condemned at two African synods in 416 and 418 and by an edict issued by the Western Roman emperor in 419, though the Greek Church’s bishops did not join in the condemnation. original sin] The dogma of original (or inherited) sin as the first and basic sin, which is passed on through the sexual act and is thus inherited after having entered the world through Adam’s fall, is based on a tradition anchored primarily in the account of Adam’s fall in Gen 3, as well as Ps 51:7 and Rom 5:12–14. It was only with Augustine, however, that the notion of original sin was made a dogma, i.e., an obligatory doctrine, which asserts that sin is active in the sexual act (and thus

•

1850

in the genesis of every human being) and that every human being, because he or she is born in and with sin, has lost the capacity to do the good. This dogma was embraced by the entire Church at the Council of Carthage in 412, 416, and 418 and at the Council of Ephesus in 431. The dogma of original sin was also embraced by the Lutheran reformers and found expression in article 2 (“On Original Sin”) of the Augsburg Confession (→ 100,31). what is so masterful in the Augsburg Confession, etc. … must be enlightened about this through a revelation] Reference to article 2 (“On Original Sin”) of the Augsburg Confession, the first Lutheran confessional document, from 1530, which is one of the confessional writings of the Danish People’s Church; see Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchton forfattede, Apologie [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession together with the Apology for the Same by Ph. Melanchthon], trans. A. G. Rudelbach (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386), pp. 46–47. By “etc.” Kierkegaard could be referring to pt. 3, art. 1,3 in the Schmalkaldic Articles (a confessional work published by Martin Luther under the title Artikel christlicher Lehre [Articles of Christian Doctrine] in 1536 and published in 1541 in Latin translation as Articuli christianae doctrinae); see K. A. Hase, Libri symbolici [Symbolic Books], 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1837 [1827]; ASKB 624), p. 317. Kierkegaard cites this passage in The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 26; SKS 4, 333). ― etc.: Variant: added. also promised that the hum. being will become a child of God] See, e.g., Mt 5:9; Jn 1:12–13; Rom 8:14–17; Gal 3:26; Phil 2:15; 1 Jn 3:1.

31

100

1

101

“Without Authority”] Variant: added. I have continually said that I am without authority] Cf. the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” presumably written in 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “I have never made use of ‘authority’; on the contrary, from the very beginning (the preface to the Two Edif. Discourses 1843) I have stereotypically repeated and insisted that ‘I am without author-

25

101

26

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 8–14 ity’” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 350; see the two pages of “The Accounting,” which constitutes the bulk of On My Work as an Author [→ 124,2] (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). In the preface to his first collection of edifying discourses, Two Edifying Discourses (1843), Kierkegaard notes that he “does not have authority to preach,” (EUD, 5; SKS 5, 13). This is repeated unchanged in the prefaces to the subsequent collections of edifying discourses (1843–1844; see EUD, 53, 107, 179, 231, 295; SKS 5, 63, 113, 183, 231, 289), and in variant forms in the prefaces to Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) (TDIO, 5; SKS 5, 389) and to the first two parts of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 5, 157; SKS 8, 121, 257). See also sec. 2.B in Works of Love (1847) (WL, 47; SKS 9, 54). 102

7

“not owing to my virtue.”] Cited from “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” written in 1848 and included as no. 2 in Practice in Christianity (→ 99,1): “In an odd way, and not exactly owing to my virtue―rather, owing to my sins―I have become purely formally aware of secrets of existence and the secretiveness of existence” (PC, 139; SKS 12, 142). Practice in Christianity was advertised as having appeared 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.

103

3

more intense] Danish inderligere, literally “more inward.” Forms of this Danish term, which often occurs in pietistic literature, have also been rendered in English as “inward,” “inwardness,” and as “fervent,” “fervency,” “more fervent,” etc. individuals;] Variant: first written: “individuals.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. of interest,] Variant: first written: “of interest.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. universal hum. rights] Presumably, a reference to the political developments that followed the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen

14

102m

6

103m

12

•

1850

583

promulgated by the French National Assembly in 1789, and particularly to the continuing demands for freedom and equality that emerged in European countries after 1830 and 1848. It is splendidly put by Julius Müller … the appearance or impression of another] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a section in bk. 4, chap. 3, “Die kirchliche Lehre von der Erbsünde,” in Julius Müller Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, pp. 429–430. of another] Variant: added.

26

That “Original Sin” Is “Guilt[”]] → 100,10.

36

103

Here there is an error in Julius Müller … must be experienced … the universality of sin] An allusion to a passage in bk. 3, sec. 1, chap. 4, “Die Freiheit als Möglichkeit der Sünde” [Freedom as the Possibility of Sin], in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, pp. 219–220. ― something the younger Fichte has already repeatedly enjoined: Presumably a reference to § 46 in I. H. Fichte, Sätze zur Vorschule der Theologie [Elementary Principles of Theology] (Stuttgart, 1826; ASKB 501), pp. 117–119. ― the younger Fichte: Immanuel Hermann Fichte (1796–1879), German philosopher, son of J. G. Fichte and thus usually referred to as “Fichte the younger”; from 1836, extraordinary professor and from 1840, ordinary professor at Bonn; from 1842 to 1863, professor at Tübingen. Kierkegaard owned a number of his works (see ASKB 501–511 and 877–911). ― known: Variant: this word has been added by the editors of SKS; Pap. suggests “concluded”. ― see Philosophical Fragments: See the following passage in § 1 in the “Interlude” in Philosophical Fragments (1844): “The transformation of coming-into-existence is actuality; the transition takes place in freedom. No coming-into-existence is necessary, not before it comes into existence, for then it cannot come into existence; not after it has come into existence, for then it has not come into existence” (PF, 75; SKS 4, 275). Prof. Levy writes in a treatise on the lying-in hospital … tenable on that account] Presumably, a reference to C.E.M. Levy’s treatise “Om

12

104

103

33

26

584

28

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 14–17

Navlevenebetændelsen og den derved fremkaldte Pyæmie hos spæde Børn” [On Inflammation of the Umbilical Vein and the Pyemia it Causes in Infants] in Hospitals-Meddelelser. Tidsskrift for praktisk Lægevidenskab [Hospital Communications: Journal of Practical Medical Science], ed. by the head physicians of Copenhagen’s hospitals, vol. 2 (Copenhagen, 1849), pp. 317–379. After describing fourteen cases, all fatal, of this sort of infection in infants at the lying-in hospital in Copenhagen between 1838 and 1849, and after providing a statistical overview and a table of the symptoms, in a tentative conclusion, Levy writes: “Thus far we have seen how little tenable are the symptoms attributed to inflammation of the umbilical vein, as such; in support of the view previously adumbrated by us, what is important now is to emphasize the frequent occurrence of deuteropathic local infections, the origins of which in a purulent infection are quite unmistakable,” p. 363. –– Prof. Levy: Carl Edvard Marius Levy (1808–1865), Danish physician, M.D. 1833; from 1841, extraordinary professor of obstetrics at the University of Copenhagen and senior obstetrician at the lying-in hospital; from 1842, head obstetrician for the city of Copenhagen; from 1850, ordinary professor. ― the lying-in hospital: The Royal Maternity and Nursing Foundation in Copenhagen, founded in 1785. what Joh. Climacus … all other individuals … understand only in possibility] Presumably, a reference to chap. 1 in the second section of pt. 2 of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Johannes Climacus writes: “In studying the ethical, every person is referred to himself. In this connection, he himself is more than sufficient for himself; indeed he is the only place in which he can study it with certainty. Even another person with whom he lives can only be known to him by means of external things, and insofar as this is the case, the knowledge is already somewhat suspect” (CUP, 141–142; SKS 7, 132). Presumably this is also a reference to chap. 3, § 1, in the second section of pt. 2 of Concluding Unscientific Postscript, where Climacus writes: “The only actuality there is for an existing person is his own ethical actuality; in connection with all other ac-

•

1850

tuality he only has knowledge, but true knowledge is transposing something into possibility” (CUP, 316; SKS 7, 288). And in addition, presumably, this is also a reference to chap. 3, § 1, in the second section of pt. 2 of Concluding Unscientific Postscript, where Climacus writes: “ethically, there is no direct relation between subject and subject. When I have understood another subject, its actuality is for me a possibility, and this thought actuality is related to me qua possibility, just as my own thought of something that I have not yet done is related to doing it” (CUP, 321; SKS 7, 293; see also CUP, 323; SKS 7, 294–295). ― Joh. Climacus: Johannes Climacus is 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 (Greek, “ladder”) (ca. 525–616), who lived for forty years as a hermit at Mount Sinai and was the author of the work Κλῖμαξ τοῦ παραδείσου, also known in Latin as Scala paradisi [Ladder of Paradise], hence his name. See also the more detailed note in SKS K4, 197. original sin … an article of faith] → 100,14 and → 100,31. an Atoner who has made satisfaction for the whole race] 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 accepting the punishment that the guilty would otherwise have suffered for their sins, thereby atoning for the insult to God’s justice.

34

animal categories] See the second section, chap. 3, B, pt. B in The Sickness unto Death (1849): “If order is to be maintained in existence―and that is something God indeed wants, for he is not a God of confusion―then first and foremost, care must be taken that every human being is an individual human being and becomes conscious of being an individual human being. When people are permitted to rush together into what Aristotle calls the animal category, the crowd, this abstrac-

35

104

35

105

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 17–19 tion (instead of being less than nothing, less than the least individual human being) comes to be viewed as being something: then it does not take long before this abstraction becomes God” (SUD, 117–118; SKS 11, 229). In “What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air,” the second part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), Kierkegaard states that he has his notion of “the crowd” as an “animal category” from “the most famous pagan thinker” (UDVS, 190; SKS 8, 287), i.e., Aristotle; see 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. 1281. For an 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, p. 2034. 106

27

31

33

Tivoli] A popular summertime amusement park on the Copenhagen ramparts immediately outside Vesterport (see map 3, C3), founded in 1843 by J.B.G. Carstensen. part of governing the state] In accordance with § 34 of Danmarks Riges Grundlov [The Constitution of the Danish Kingdom] of June 5, 1849, the Danish people were represented in a parliament consisting of an upper and a lower house. The election to the lower and upper houses took place on December 4 and 29, 1849, respectively. The parliament met for the first time on January 30, 1850; see the explanatory notes to NB15:28 and 82 in the present volume. as now in the upper house … the president’s participation in voting … won him praise and approval] On February 6, 1850, not long after the upper house of the parliament assembled for the first time, the members debated the question of whether the president of the house ought to cast the tie-breaking vote when the house was deadlocked. Kierkegaard’s brother Peter Christian Kierkegaard spoke in favor of having the president break such ties, and when the question was put to a vote, the position favored by P. C. Kierkegaard won with thirty-one votes in favor to fourteen against. See the account of the meeting

•

1850

585

in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 31, February 6, 1850, p. 124; see also the account of the second reading of the bill on February 12, 1850, in Fædrelandet, no. 36, February 12, 1850, p. 144. ― the president’s: The first president of the upper house was Supreme Court Justice P. D. Bruun; on February 13, 1850, after the procedural issue mentioned above had been settled, there was a new election for president of the chamber, in which P. C. Kierkegaard stood as a candidate; according to Fædrelandet, no. 37, February 13, 1850, p. 148, Justice Bruun was reelected with forty votes, while P. C. Kierkegaard and another candidate received one vote each. ― my brother: Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805–1888), Søren Kierkegaard’s elder brother; 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. P. C. Kierkegaard was elected to the upper house of parliament on December 29, 1849, as a representative of the Friends of the Peasant, but on February 11, 1850, he joined the Centrum group; see P. C. Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828– 50” [Diary for 1828–1850] (NKS 2656, 4o, I), p. 158. Peter] Peter Christian Kierkegaard (→ 106,33). and then he declaims … every member of parliament is a man of honor … the confidence of the people … etc.] According to the account in Fædrelandet, no. 31, February 6, 1850 (→ 106,33), of the debate in the upper house concerning the role of the president in breaking ties, P. C. Kierkegaard motivated his position in favor of allowing the president to vote in such situations by asserting that “just as all members of the upper house are men of honor, so, too, is the president, who is chosen by men of honor as their representative, and he who is the man of all parties is the man of no party.” risum teneatis amici] Cited from Horace, De arte poetica [On the Art of Poetry], 5; see Q. Horatii Flacci opera [The Works of Horace], stereotype ed.

3 4

8

107

586

15

19

107

31 32

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 19–22

(Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1248), p. 274. In 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?” country priest] A reference to the fact that P. C. Kierkegaard was a country priest in the parish of Pedersborg and Kindertofte (→ 106,33). Michel Perrin … continues to be a country priest] In a two-act vaudeville by Mélesville (pseudonym for Anne H. Joseph Duveyrier and Charles Duveyrier) titled Michel Perrin, eller: Politiespionen, uden at vide det [Michel Perrin, or, The Police Spy without Knowing It], adapted by Thomas Overskou, in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire, nr. 75, [The Repertoire of the Royal Theater, no. 75] (Copenhagen, 1835 [original French version, 1834]), the principal character, a former country priest named Michel Perrin, unwittingly becomes an agent for his old friend and schoolmate Joseph Fouché, head of Napoleon’s secret police; at the end of the drama Fouché gets Perrin reinstated in his old rural parish. The piece premiered at the Royal Theater on June 9, 1835, and was performed twenty-seven times between then and September 17, 1843; it was revived in the 1849–1850 theater season, when it was performed on October 15 and 28, November 17, and December 7, 1849, as well as on February 5, 1850. “The Single Individual”―“The Race”] Variant: added. the observation by Göschel … cited by Julius Müller … p. 467] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a section in bk. 4, chap. 3, “Die kirchliche Lehre von der Erbsünde,” in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, p. 467. The note is a reference to Göschel, Beiträge zur spekulativen Philosophie von Gott und dem Menschen und von dem Gottmenschen. Mit Rücksicht auf Dr. D. F. Strauss Christologie [Contributions to the Speculative Philosophy of God and of Man and of the God-Man, with Regard to Dr. D. F. Strauss’s Christology] (Berlin, 1838), pp. 58–59. –– Göschel; Karl (or Carl) Friedrich Göschel (1784–1861), German jurist, author, and church-

•

1850

man; published a great many works dealing with law, history, theology, and philosophy, all from a Right Hegelian point of view. This is what I have frequently expounded … a lower commonality] See chap. 3, “The Part Governance Has Played in My Writing,” in The Point of View for My Work as an Author, where Kierkegaard writes, “I have striven to express that the category ‘race,’ when applied to being a human being, especially as an expression for what is highest, is a misunderstanding and is paganism, because the human race is not superior to an animal race merely owing to the advantages of the [human] race, but through this humanness: that every individual in the race (not merely a single remarkable one, but every individual) is greater than the race, which is inherent in the God-relationship … because relating oneself to God is far superior to relating oneself to the race or through the race to God (PV, 88n; SKS 16, 66– 67n). –– animal race: → 105,35. the hum. being is in kinship with God] Allusion to Acts 17:28–29. God is spirit] Refers to Jn 4:7–26, esp. vv. 23–24; see also 2 Cor 3:17–18. race,] Variant: first written: “race.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. doctrine concerning original sin]→ 100,14. animal category] → 105,35. animal frenzy] → 105,35. Scenes on the Brocken] According to popular superstition, Brocken or Blocksberg, the highest point in the Harz Mountains of northern Germany, was the place where witches and evil spirits gathered to celebrate Walpurgisnacht (the night of April 30). Kierkegaard is presumably referring to the scenes on Brocken in the first part of Goethe’s Faust (vv. 3835–4398), where Mephistopheles acquaints Faust with wanton sensuality. In an early journal entry, BB:11, dated October 22, 1836 (KJN 1, 84), Kierkegaard noted how these scenes in Faust call to mind the folk legend of the Venusberg, where young men are seduced through sensuality and their souls are taken from them. The name “Blocksberg” has also been applied to other eminences in Germany, Hungary, and Sweden.

1

108

8 9 14 16 19 7 9

109

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 23–26 109

20

Julius Müller put it well: “In creating the hum. being … in his image.” … p. 491] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a section in bk. 4, chap. 3, “Die kirchliche Lehre von der Erbsünde,” in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, pp. 490–491. ― creating him in his image: Reference to Gen 1:26–27.

109

33

market town] A provincial town, as opposed to a capital city and a seat of royal residence; here a derogatory reference to Copenhagen. subjected to crudity] See the next note. Goldschmidt says, [“]Mag. K himself gave me permission to abuse him[”]] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard himself 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). Corsaren [The Corsair] 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. The teasing continued sporadically after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor, and 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 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); in this article Kierkegaard wrote that his “application to be abused,” was a “step [taken] for the sake of others” (COR 47; SKS 14, 87). Corsaren’s attacks resulted in Kierkegaard’s being abused on the street. ― 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

33 35

•

1850

587

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 published the monthly journal Nord og Syd [North and South]. –– Mag. K.: Magister Kierkegaard, who defended his magister dissertation, On the Concept of Irony, on September 29, 1841. he is and was a boy] See esp. NB11:199, from June or July 1849 (KJN 6, 119–120); see also NB6:7, from July 1848 (KJN 5, 10). I thank you, God … dared expect] See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (→ 101,26), where Kierkegaard writes: “And truly, that which is, after all, more important to me than all the writings, and that concerns me more profoundly, is to express as honestly and as emphatically as possible something for which I can never give sufficient thanks, something that 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 [→ 124,2]) (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19). See also The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 108,1): “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).

2

110

4

“lead us not into temptation”] See Mt 6:13. flight, and so on.] Variant: first written: “flight.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. God is love] Allusion both to 1 Jn 4:8 and 4:16.

11

9

111

fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. “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).

28

111

110

40

33

588 111

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 27

M. began … at the peak of the speculative philosophy] Presumably refers to the fact that as a privatdocent H. L. Martensen held a series of lectures titled “Prolegomena ad dogmaticam speculativam” [Introduction to Speculative Dogmatics], delivering 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. After he was appointed lecturer on the theology faculty of the University of Copenhagen on April 21, 1838, Martensen repeated this lecture series under the title “Den nyere Philosophies Historie fra Kant til Hegel i dens Forhold til Theologien” [The History of Modern Philosophy from Kant to Hegel, in Relation to Theology] in the summer semester of 1838 (a summer semester ran from May 1 to September 30) and again in the winter semester of 1838–1839. Martensen writes of this in his memoirs, Af mit Levnet [From My Life], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1882–1883), vol. 2 (1883), pp. 3–4: “Even before my appointment to the university, in the winter of 1837–1838, I had held these lectures before a varied audience who had especially asked me to do so, and every time they were repeated they were attended by a most numerous audience from the various faculties, indeed, even by men who held civil service positions. It was a world of new ideas with which people here became acquainted … Without exaggeration, the effect of my lectures can be described as great and extraordinary. A new life and movement was present among theology students. Philosophical studies exercised their captivating power, and the students continually spoke of the loftiest problems” (pp. 5–6). Of his relationship to Hegel, Hegelianism, and speculative philosophy at that time, Martensen wrote: “When I then lectured on dogmatics as someone who could presuppose knowledge of modern philosophy and its effects on theology, I was in a peculiar relation to Hegel, who was the great and famous philosopher of the age, introduced among us by J. L. Heiberg, and who was in many respects an object of my ad-

•

1850

miration and affection. I had to lead my auditors through Hegel; we could not remain fixated on him, but had to go beyond him, as it was said” (p. 4). “When it is often said that during my first period at the university I was the representative of Hegelianism, this is indeed a very uncritical assertion that ignores the express and motivated statements in my dissertation and that has been refuted by every one of my writings” (p. 5). “Hegel was of course the man of the hour, and if one bore his seal, one stood at the pinnacle of the age. Others became seriously engaged with Hegel and profoundly familiar with him. Among these there were some who could not accept that I was not a Hegelian” (p. 6). See also the critical accounts of the texts of Notebook 4 (KJN 3, 527– 531) and of Journal KK (KJN 2, 592–596). ― M.: 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, 1850; appointed court preacher on May 16, 1845; knight of the Dannebrog, 1847. His major work, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), was advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen, no. 167, July 19, 1849 (according to a receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers, Kierkegaard had already acquired the book on July 18). M. began … almost scornfully … not true in philosophy and conversely] Presumably, a reference to § 1 in Martensen’s licentiate dissertation, De autonomia conscientiæ sui humanæ, in theologiam dogmaticam nostri temporis introducta [On the Autonomy of Human Self-Consciousness in the Dogmatic Theology of Our Times] (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 648), Danish trans. by L.V. Petersen, Den menneskelige Selvbevidstheds Autonomie i vor Tids dogmatiske Theologie (Copenhagen, 1841;

35

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 27–28

112

1

ASKB 651), where Martensen writes about “the view that holds that there are supposedly two truths about the same object,” and notes that “this smacks very much of a shoddy scholasticism that pretends to itself that there are two truths, one theological and one philosophical, which not infrequently contradict one another” (p. 3, both in the original Latin version and in the Danish translation). In this work, Kierkegaard sees a reference to “the old principle that a thing is true in theology that is not true in philosophy and conversely.” Regarding this principle, see W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826), vol. 8,2 (1811), pp. 456–457, where an account is given of a dispute between the theology and philosophy faculties of the University of Paris concerning the relation of theology to Aristotelian philosophy and of the compromise that was arrived at: “that many things can be true in philosophy and false in theology, and that thus there is a double truth” (p. 460). The theory of the double truth was rejected in the prologue to a heresy condemnation of radical Aristotelianism issued by the bishop of Paris in 1277, but it nonetheless enjoyed great success in later scholasticism; see Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 9 (1814), p. 298. Kierkegaard might also have known of the notion of the double truth from A. Günther, Der letzte Symboliker [The Last Symbolists] (Vienna, 1834; ASKB 521), p. 315, where mention is made of “the scholastic assertion of a double truth,” according to which “something can be philosophically true and at the same time theologically false, and vice versa, theologically true and philosophically false.” He ends his Dogmatics … αποϰατασταςις is untenable in scholarship … in popular presentations] refers to §§ 283–289 in the concluding section of “The Lord’s Second Coming and the Fulfillment of All Things” in Den christelige Dogmatik, pp. 555–582; 565–577. In § 283, Martensen writes: “that the more Christian thought probes into this question [of how the doctrine of eternal damnation is related to the doctrine of universal apocatastasis], the more it is led into an antinomy that, it seems, is not to be brought to a fully conclusive and satisfacto-

•

1850

589

ry solution at the present level of knowledge” (p. 566). And he introduces § 288 as follows: “Therefore, we let the antinomy remain there as a cross for thought that, at the standpoint of the Church militant, must not and dare not be taken away” (p. 575). ― αποϰατασταςις: The doctrine of universal apocatastasis expresses the dogmatic view that there is a definitive reestablishment, a restitution, of all human beings, so that God becomes all in all and everyone is saved; the opposite of this is the doctrine of a double result, which expresses the dogmatic view that there is both eternal salvation and eternal damnation. he has remained true to his first love, see the preface to his Dogmatics] See the preface to Den christelige Dogmatik, where Martensen refers to the licentiate dissertation he wrote in his youth: “I must only be permitted to say that, given the turn that philosophical movements have taken in the period we have recently been through, I have not found any occasion to abandon the thought that formed the basis of my first theological writing, On the Autonomy of Human Self-Consciousness in the Dogmatic Theology of Our Times, the thought ‘that in no way is it religion that must borrow its gravity and its significance from speculative thinking, but that it is speculative thinking that needs religion, God’s revelation, as its principle’” (p. i). rigorous religious upbringing] It has not been possible to verify this assertion. Something Arndt writes … “It is quite true … you yourself tell it to him in prayer.”] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of the beginning of subchapter 12 in bk. 2, chap. 34 in Johann Arndt, Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum, Welche handeln Von heilsamer Buße herzlicher Reue und Leid über die Sünde wahrem Glauben auch heiligem Leben und Wandel der rechten wahren Christen [All Insightful Books on True Christianity, Which Treat of Healthy Repentance, Heartfelt Regret, and Remorse over Sin, True Faith, as well as the Holy Life and Doings of the Genuinely True Christian], 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1737 [1733]; ASKB 276; abbreviated hereafter as Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom

4

8

11

112

590

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 28–29

Wahren Christenthum), pp. 479–480. See also subchapter. 2 in bk. 2, chap. 34, p. 464. Chapter 34 in bk. 2 consists of twelve subchapters that, according to a note (p. 636) included by the German theologian and priest J. G. Dorsch (or Dorsche) (1597–1659), were originally written by Valentin Weigel (see below) and subsequently included by Arndt in his book. See also Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom. Paa ny oversatte efter den ved Sintenis foranstaltede tydske Udgave [Four Books on True Christianity: Newly Translated from Sintenis’s German Edition] (Kristiania [Oslo], 1829; ASKB 277; abbreviated hereafter as Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom), pp. 304 and 296– 297. ― Arndt: The German Lutheran theologian and priest Johann Arndt’s (1555–1621) edifying work Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Four Books on True Christianity] was published for the first time in Magdeburg, ca. 1605–1610 and appeared in Danish translation for the first time in 1690. Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum was often supplemented with excerpts of Arndt’s other writings, so that it bore the title Sechs Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Six Books on True Christianity]; it was very widely read. It contains not only Arndt’s own edifying meditations and “observations” but also a great many excerpts from other edifying Christian literature, e.g., Thomas à Kempis, Johann Tauler, and Valentin Weigel. Arndt was a forerunner of pietism, linking orthodox Protestant penitential piety with medieval mysticism. Kierkegaard owned the work in a later German edition, Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum (see above); and in an abridged Danish-Norwegian translation, Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom (see above). ― Weigel: Valentin Weigel (1533–1588), Lutheran mystical writer; from 1567 until his death, pastor at Zschopau, near Chemnitz. He produced a great many philosophical and theological writings that he did not publish in print form, but circulated in handwritten copies; they first appeared in print ca. 1609 and 1619. He combined Reformation theology with Neoplatonism, German mysticism, and the natural philosophy of Paracelsus, influencing later thinkers, including Arndt (who took over portions of his Gebetbuch [Prayer Book] from

•

1850

1572–1575), as well as Jacob Böhme, G.W. Leibniz, and pietism. railroad mania] 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 1840’s, 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 mid1847, railroad construction was linked to a political scandal in France, and a number of ministers were accused of corruption (see NB9:42 in KJN 5, 229–235). a la Babel] Reference to Gen 11:1–9. something new … 1848] Shortly after the beginning of 1848, Europe was marked by a series of revolutionary and political upheavals, which in Denmark culminated in the fall of absolutism on March 21. On October 23, 1848, the Danish constitutional convention assembled; it completed its work on May 25, 1849, with the adoption of Danmarks Riges Grundlov, which was ratified by the king on June 5, 1849. disjecta Membra] from the Roman philosopher and author Seneca, Phaedra, v. 1256: “disiecta … membra laceri corporis” (“torn body’s scattered parts”). English translation from Seneca, Tragedies, ed. and trans. John G. Fitch, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002–2004), vol. 1, p. 551.

20

20 22

25

112

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 30 112

29

113

3

6

In governing the state … older … men were at the top] Presumably refers to the members of the Royal Privy Council of State (the absolute monarch’s councillors): P. C. Stemann (born 1764), minister of justice and president of the Royal Danish Chancery (the absolute monarch’s advisers for domestic affairs); A. W. Moltke (born 1785), minister of finance; A. S. Ørsted (born 1778), attorney general (the king’s highest legal adviser); J. C. Reventlow-Criminil (born 1797), head of the foreign office and president of the Chancery for Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg. All were dismissed on March 21, 1848, when the Privy Council was dissolved; see Ny CollegialTidende [New Collegial Times], no. 14, March 31, 1848, 8th year, 1st quarter, p. 229. 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, 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. Fædrelandet … feels that it may stop publication any moment] Fædrelandet, founded 1834, was the younger of the two leading liberal newspapers (the other was Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post]; from December 1839, Fædrelandet changed from a weekly to a daily paper; from mid-1841, its editors were Kierkegaard’s friend J. F. Giødwad and Carl P. Ploug. In the 1840s, the paper was the most important organ for the liberal opposition; it fought for freedom and popular participation in governing the state and against absolutism; in addition, it sought to advance the nationalist cause by asserting the Danishness of Schleswig and calling for Scandinavian unity. During this period, when it had about 1,500 subscribers, the government

•

1850

591

moved against it several times, imposing fines and confiscating issues. With the outbreak of the Three Years’ War (→ 113,16) in March 1848 and the subsequent political upheavals, including the fall of absolutism and the convening of the constitutional convention in October 1848 (→ 112,22), the newspaper experienced a considerable rise in popularity and larger circulation. It now had about one thousand mail subscribers (i.e., out-oftown readers) and a total of scarcely fewer than two thousand subscribers. Thereafter, the paper lost its importance and functioned more or less as the mouthpiece for National Liberal ministers; it published lengthy, often academic and polemical articles reflecting its continuing zeal for the principles of liberalism and Scandinavianism and for the Danish cause in Schleswig. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 [Danish Newspapers, 1634–1989], 3 vols. (Odense, 1988–1991), vol. 1, pp. 156–158, and vol. 2 (1989), p. 109. the end of Christian VIII’s reign] Christian VIII (1786–1848) was king from 1839 until his death on January 20, 1848. the same once again … upturn of 1848] → 113,6. recognize,] Variant: first written: “recognize.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the war] Refers to the Schleswig-Holstein civil war between the German and Danish portions of the Danish monarchy; the Three Years’ War or the First Schleswig War lasted from April 1848 until February 1851, with the pro-German population in Schleswig and Holstein receiving support from Prussia for the incorporation of the duchies in a united Germany. the blossoming of nationalism] Refers to the rise of shrill nationalist sentiment in the wake of the war; see the previous note. Flyveposten] Conservative daily newspaper, founded in 1845 and until 1852 edited by Eduard Meyer; a widely circulated popular source of news and entertainment, and in the period 1848– 1850, it had about seven thousand subscribers; see Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989, vol. 2, pp. 114–115.

8

9 13

16

16

21

592 114

6

20

25

31

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 32–33

R. Rothe attacks Julius Müller … deserves [to be hated] by us.”] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in an appendix to bk. 4, chap. 4, “Der Ursprung der angebornen Sünde” [The Origin of Inborn Sin] in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, pp. 553– 561 (Rothe’s attack is on pp. 554–558), esp. p. 557. –– R. 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, and theosophical thinkers, he formulated a speculative theology―an ethics, rather than a dogmatics―and his Theologische Ethik [Theological Ethics] is regarded as his principal work and a classical work of German academic cultural Protestantism. J. M. properly rejects this … does not make it qualitatively ethical enough] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a passage in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, pp. 557–558. Dorner. He rejects J. M. … overlooks the concept of the race] Kierkegaard’s brief Danish summary of a passage in an appendix to bk. 4, chap. 4, “Der Ursprung der angebornen Sünde,” in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, pp. 553–561. Pages 558–561 concern Dorner’s review of Müller, concerning which Müller writes, “In a detailed evaluation of this work, another dear friend, Dr. Dorner … finds that the fundamental shortcoming of my view is that I proceed from an atomistically fixed personal consciousness and encroach on consciousness of the race” (p. 558). ― Dorner: Isaak August Dorner (1809–1884), German Lutheran theologian; from 1862 to 1883, professor of theology at Kiel, Königsberg, Bonn, Göttingen, and Berlin. Under the influence of Schleiermacher, Hegel, and Kant, he developed a theology that is based on faith but is itself a speculative science capable of grasping the foundation of faith as an objective truth. ethicist;] Variant: first written: “ethicist.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence; prior to that was written the adjective “ethical”.

•

1850

observation by Dorner … do not decide a person’s total worth] Kierkegaard’s abridged Danish rendering of a passage in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, p. 559. Anti-Climacus also illuminates this matter] Refers to the second part, chap. 3, B., B of The Sickness unto Death (1849): “A self directly before Christ is a self intensified by an enormous concession from God, intensified by the enormous emphasis that falls upon it when, for the sake of this self, God allowed himself to be born, became a human being, suffered, died. As in the preceding passage, where it was said: the greater the notion of God, the more self, so here, as well: the greater the notion of Christ, the more self. A self is, qualitatively, what its criterion is. That Christ is the criterion is an open expression, confirmed by God, of the enormous reality a self has, for only in Christ is it true that God is a human being’s goal and criterion, or criterion and goal.––But the more self, the more intense is sin” (SUD, 113–114; SKS 11, 225). ― Anti-Climacus: The pseudonymous author of The Sickness unto Death and, subsequently, of Practice in Christianity (1850 [→ 99,1]). The prefix “anti” is intended to establish Anti-Climacus as a counterpart to the pseudonym Johannes Climacus (→ 104,28). Dorner is wrong … become the mass as a result of a qualitative decision] See the following passage in Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, p. 559, where Müller writes, with respect to Dorner’s view, “that Dorner finds the entire guilt of the individual to be enclosed within the common sin of the race.” See also the subsequent passage in vol. 2, p. 560, where Müller states that by attributing all sins to the race, Dorner finds that individuals are guilty only of “‘provisional’ sins.” What is untenable] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. that all sins were only provisional … the individuals or not properly guilty] → 115,6. make satisfaction for the race] → 104,35.

36

7

116

J. M. has invented the theory … timeless fall … lives in time] Refers to the introduction to an appendix to bk. 4, chap. 4, “Der Ursprung der an-

21

116

5

115

6

32

34

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 33–34

24

28

117

6 16

gebornen Sünde” in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, pp. 553–561, p. 553, where Müller discusses some of the objections that have been raised against his view, by R. Rothe and I. A. Dorner, among others (see previous journal entries with their accompanying explanatory notes): “Tracing peccatum originale back to a fall that timelessly preceded the lifetime of all human beings has led to such powerful objections by the most noteworthy voices, that I feel myself forced to append some remarks here.” –– original sin: → 100,14. ― peccatum originale: → 100,2. Joh. Cl. … his problem … in relation to something historical] Refers to the motto on the title page of Philosophical Fragments (1844): “Can a historical point of departure be given for an eternal consciousness; how can such a point of departure be of more than historical interest; can one build an eternal blessedness on historical knowledge?” (PF, 1; SKS 4, 213; see also PF, 109; SKS 4, 305). These two passages are cited and discussed in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (CUP, 15, 93–106, 361–586; SKS 7, 24; 92–103; 329–533). ― Joh. Cl.: Johannes Climacus (→ 104,28). ― immediately: Variant: added. J. Müller believes … sin and guilt … every hum. being] Refers to the following passage in an appendix to bk. 4, chap. 4, “Der Ursprung der angebornen Sünde” in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 2, p. 553: “The question here is, on the one hand, the universality of sin in the human race, its rootedness in the nature of the race, and on the other hand, personal guilt and responsibility, the origin of sin in the voluntary self-perversion of the creature, not in a necessity that is ordained by the divine intellect or given by God himself.” Müller goes to protest that he has explained the reasons for his view “as simply and as clearly as possible; they are found principally in the aforementioned mutually conflicting sets of facts concerning our moral being and our consciousness” (p. 554). speculation] → 111,35. Kant was more honest with his radical evil … the Christian problem] Kant develops his doctrine of radical evil―i.e., that human beings have a natural, inborn, but nonetheless self-deserved

•

1850

593

tendency to act in accordance with bad maxims (subjective rules)―in his work Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der bloßen Vernunft [Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone] (Königsberg, 1838 [1793]), pp. 19–45. Kant discusses the radical evil in human nature: “Hence we can call this a natural propensity to evil, and as we must, after all, ever hold man himself responsible for it, we can further call it a radical innate evil in human nature (yet none the less brought upon us by ourselves)” (p. 25). English translation from Immanuel Kant, Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone, trans. Theodore M. Green and Hoyt H. Hudson (Chicago: Open Court Publishing, 1934), p. 28. Inasmuch as the human propensity for evil actions is self-deserved, this propensity is rooted in human freedom, and its origin may not be known theoretically; it “remains inexplicable” (p. 43). speculative] → 111,35. a system] Refers to Kierkegaard’s earlier polemics, not only those directed specifically against Hegel’s philosophical system, but also against Hegelianism in general, including in particular the attempts by J. L. Heiberg (→ 113,3) and Rasmus Nielsen (→ 140,9) to build an all-encompassing logical system; see, e.g., The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 51; SKS 4, 356) and Prefaces (P, 14 and 65; SKS 4, 478 and 525, with accompanying explanatory notes). By “a system” or “the system” Kierkegaard thus appears to refer in a general sense to philosophical attempts to understand and explain the world with the help of logical categories or by discursive thinking; at times, “the system” seems to be synonymous with objective knowledge. Kierkegaard presents his most comprehensive polemic against “the system” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (see, e.g., CUP, 12–17 and 106–125; SKS 7, 22–26 and 103–120). my servant Anders] Anders Christensen Westergaard (1818–1867), Kierkegaard’s servant since May 1844. this continual nonsense about me] Presumably, a reference to the consequences of the attack on Kierkegaard by the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 109,35), specifically the fact that he was abused on the street and that people gossiped about him.

18 10

118m

21

119

24

594 120

23

24

25 25

120

32

121

7

121

16 19

33

34

124

1 2

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 36–42

the invention of the art of printing] The invention of printing with movable type took place ca. 1450 and is generally attributed to Johannes Gutenberg (ca. 1368–1468). high-speed press] The high-speed, cylindrical-drum press was introduced to Denmark in 1825 and was used in printing Adresseavisen; in 1841, Fædrelandet followed suit. As early as 1835, typographers sought (in vain) to preserve their jobs by limiting the use of the high-speed press. railroads] → 112,20. free constitutions] e.g., the French constitution of November 4, 1848, which created a legislative assembly, and the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849 (→ 112,22), which created a bicameral parliament. the entire constitution] → 120,25. market town] → 109,33. is often best seen] Variant: first written: “and how little there”. 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. affliction for them,] Variant: first written: “affliction for them.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the collision (to hate father and mother, etc.)] Reference to Lk 14:26. Writings about Myself] See the next note. “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” (→ 139,31); “One Note Concerning My Work as an Author,” with the accompanying appendix “Armed Neutrality, or My

•

1850

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 (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19) and was accompanied with an appendix titled “My Position as a Religious Author in ‘Christendom’ and My Tactics” (PV, 13–20; SKS 13, 21–27). “The Accounting” is dated “Copenhagen, March 1849” (PV, 5; SKS 13, 11), whereas the appendix is dated “Copenhagen, Nov. 1850” (PV, 15; SKS 13, 23). I can no longer afford to be an author] → 125,2. unspeakable gratitude … than I could ever have expected] → 110,4. my finances] → 125,2. The Point of View for My Work as an Author, in its original version] The Point of View for My Work as an Author was originally written in the summer and autumn of 1848 (→ 124,2). It was published posthumously in 1859 (→ 108,1). From the start I … have to work for a living] 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). 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, 86; SKS 16, 65). fanaticism of the understanding] Variant: first written: “fanaticism”. directing attention to Christianity] See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” presumably written in 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “‘To direct attention’ with respect to the religious―specifi-

11 12 18 19

22

25 28

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 42–45

32

125

1

2

4

cally, Christianity―is really the category for my work as an author” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 350; cf. two pages of “The Accounting,” in On My Work as an Author (→ 124,2) (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19)). the target of popular persecution] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard was supposedly abused on the street as a consequence of attacks on him by the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 109,35). 7 whole years’ work] Kierkegaard generally viewed the date on which Either/Or was published, February 20, 1843, as the beginning of his work as an author, but he had worked on that book from October 1841 until January 1843; see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten ― Eller in SKS K2–3, 58. a bit of wealth] Kierkegaard’s father died in 1838, leaving an estate―inherited by Søren Kierkegaard and his brother Peter Christian (→ 106,33)―that in 1839 was reckoned at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 130,12). 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 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; see NB7:114 (KJN 5, 144), in which Kierkegaard expresses the belief that he lost 700 rix-dollars on the bonds; see also Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 83–90. extravagance] According to a very approximate calculation in Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 154–155, from the death of his father in 1838 until his own death in 1855, Kierkegaard spent a total

•

1850

595

of about 45,000 rix-dollars, an average of about 2,600 rix-dollars per year. active] Variant: EP has “daring” (dristig); Pap. has “active” (driftig). before him I am of course always in the wrong] Cf. “The Edification in the Thought That before God We Are Always in the Wrong,” the theme of the “Ultimatum” that concludes the second part of Either/Or (EO 2, 339, 346; SKS 3, 320 and 326). meritorious] → 146,15.

8 10

13

talk about it to God,] Variant: first written: “talk about it to God.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

14

126

“Bless those who persecute you.”] Loosely cited from Mt 5:44. this blessedness passes all understanding] Allusion to Phil 4:7. Socrates: … said, Is it permissible to offer a libation] See Plato’s dialogue Phaedo, 117b, where it is related that Socrates asked the man who handed him the cup of poison “num licet de hac potione alicui libare, necne?” (Platonis opera quae exstant [The Extant Works of Plato], published in Greek and translated into Latin by Fr. Ast, 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1819–1832; ASKB 1144–1154), vol. 1, p. 617. A standard English translation reads, “What do you say about pouring a libation from this drink? Is it permitted, or not?” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961], p. 97). the fairy tale … the dearest of mothers] No such fairy tale has been identified.

21

126

Text for a Lenten Sermon] Bk. 2, chap. 4, art. 5 of Danske Lov [Danish Law] (1683) required that priests hold worship services on all Wednesdays or Thursdays in Lent; in Kierkegaard’s day this requirement was still in force in Copenhagen’s churches. the betrayer also knew the place] Loosely cited from “Vor Herres Jesu Christi Lidelses Historie” [The Story of the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ] in Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark]

20

24 31

38

22

127

596

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 45–47

(Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381), p. 264: “But also Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place.” In his own copy, which is in the KA at the Royal Library, Kierkegaard underlined the following words in pencil: “who betrayed him, knew the place,” and at the foot of the page he wrote, “As always, the betrayer also knew the place, otherwise, of course, he could not betray; he is a disciple who knows―and then a traitor.” 128

1 3

Writings about Myself] → 124,2 and → 124,19. that I was to die … the whole latter portion of my literary production … after my death] See journal entry NB10:200, dated April 25, 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “It is now so clear to me; everything I came to understand last year about God’s guidance has led me precisely toward this aim: to throw light on Christianity and to portray the ideal of being a Christian. At the time, I certainly didn’t imagine it. I thought that I should die. That didn’t happen, I didn’t die; I was therefore momentarily at risk of not understanding myself. I seemed to understand that the world, or Denmark, needed a martyr. I had everything ready in writing and really thought about whether it was possible to back up my writing in the most decisive manner, by laying down my life. The misunderstanding was this, or rather, this was part of a misunderstanding that would wound me: I was unable to do it” (KJN 5, 378; see also the relevant explanatory notes). –– the whole latter portion of my literary production: Presumably, a reference to The Sickness unto Death (1849); the three pieces, “Come unto Me, All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest,” “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me,” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,” the first two of which were written in the period ca. April–November 1848, and the third written early in 1849 (all three were combined as Practice in Christianity, published in 1850 [→ 99,1]); and A Cycle of Ethical-Religious Essays, prepared in the summer of 1848, but written in 1846–1847 and consisting of five essays from The Book on Adler and a later essay, “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” (see

•

1850

NB10:3, from February 1849, and its accompanying explanatory notes), of which the third essay (“Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?”) and the sixth (“On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle”) were published pseudonymously on May 19, 1849, as Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (→ 140,29). Presumably, Kierkegaard is also referring to the following pieces concerning his work as an author (→ 124,2): The Point of View for My Work as an Author, “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author” (→ 139,31), “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” (see Pap. X 5 B 144). Finally, Kierkegaard also appears to be referring to “Mr. Phister as Captain Scipio (in the Comic Opera Ludovic), a Recollection and for Recollection” (see Pap. IX B 67–73, pp. 383– 407), from the end of 1848 (concerning this, see NB12:133, from ca. September 1, 1849, in KJN 6, 224, and its accompanying explanatory note). scarcely a hum. being, lower than the lowest] Presumably, a reference to Eph 3:8; see also 1 Cor 15:9. I was in fact almost] Variant: “almost” added. the accelerated speed imparted by 1848] On Kierkegaard’s productivity in 1848 (→ 128,3). much more clearly,] Variant: first written: “much more clearly.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence and followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. of this sort,] Variant: first written: “of this sort.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. It is now quite certain] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. terrifying,] Variant: first written: “terrifying.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Giordano Bruno … became a martyr for an idea] Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), Italian philosopher and priest. Like the Polish astronomer Copernicus,

21

28 40 11

129

12

16

32

37

129

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 47–50

130

12

130

35

36

131

10

131

20

Bruno opposed the notion that the earth is the center of the universe, which he claimed was infinite. He was officially accused of heresy as early as 1576; in 1592, he was summoned to the Inquisition in Venice and was subsequently condemned to death in Rome, where he was burned on February 17, 1600. 250 rd.] 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 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. Kant’s little essay, “An Answer to the Question ‘What Is Enlightenment,’” ] Refers to Kant’s essay “Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?” [An Answer to the Question “What Is Enlightenment?”] (1784) in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften [Miscellaneous Writings of Immanuel Kant], ed. J. H. Tieftrunk, 3 vols. (Halle, 1799; a 4th vol. was published in Königsberg in 1807; ASKB 1731–1733), vol. 2, pp. 687–700. he suggests … qua writer he can present his own doubts about the faith] Kierkegaard’s Danish summary of a passage in Kant’s “Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?” in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften, vol. 2, pp. 692–694. an exclamation by Kant … perpetuating absurdities] Kierkegaard’s Danish summary of a passage in Kant’s “Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?” in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften, vol. 2, p. 695. ― the public,: Variant: first written: “‘the public,’ he exclaims:”. The Greeks say that a man himself creates his situation and circumstances] See Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde (→ 100,2), vol. 1, pp. 296–298n, esp. the conclusion, p. 298: “Greek philosophy … expressly combats pushing the guilt back onto the gods―in particular Plato, as noted above.” Near the beginning of the note,

•

1850

597

Müller refers to Plato’s Republic, bk. 2, 380. At this point Socrates says, “But as to saying that God, who is good, becomes the cause of evil to anyone, we must contend in every way that neither should anyone assert this in his own city if it is to be well governed, nor anyone hear it, neither younger nor older, neither telling a story in meter or without meter, for neither would the saying of such things, if they are said, be holy, nor would they be profitable to us or concordant with themselves.” Socrates goes on to say: “This, then, said I, will be one of the laws and patterns concerning the gods to which speakers and poets will be required to conform, that God is not the cause of all things, but only of the good.” (English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961], p. 627.) The proverb puts it: Everyone forges his own fate] A similar German proverb is collected as no. 7 under the heading “Schicksal” [Fate] 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. 159. See also the similar Danish proverb collected as no. 5794 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 639. expressed … by Julius Müller: A person’s choice becomes his fate] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a passage in bk. 5, “Die Steigerung der Sünde in der Entwickelung des Individuums” [The Increase of Sin in the Development of the Individual], in Julius Müller, Die christliche Lehre von der Sünde, vol. 2, p. 571: “Not only his own interior, but also the external world holds a person fast in his error; the product of his freedom becomes the chains of his freedom; his choice becomes his fate.” At first] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Kant … a king is to say: Argue … but obey] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a passage in Kant’s essay “Beantwortung der Frage:

21

22

23

30

131

598

36

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 50–55

Was ist Aufklärung?” in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften (→ 130,35), vol. 2, p. 700, where the monarch to whom he refers is evidently Frederick the Great. A little earlier … K. said …there is only one master … who can say, Argue … only obey] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a passage in Kant’s essay “Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?” in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften (→ 130,35), vol. 2, p. 692. compel.] Variant: first written: “compel,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue.

132

1

132

13

heartiness] Perhaps a reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s concept of “heartiness”; see the note accompanying NB15:29 in the present volume.

132

17

those who killed the apostles … were serving God] Reference to Jn 16:2.

132

23

when someone indicts actual villainy] Presumably, a reference to the fact that in the article “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” (→ 109,35), Kierkegaard, using the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus, indicts Corsaren’s “contemptible trade” and writes that the paper’s “fallen cleverness” and its helpers “ought to be ignored in the literary world, just as prostitutes are ignored in the civic world” (COR, 49, 47; SKS 1, 88 and 87).

132

30

the world-historical] Presumably, a reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig, who published three histories of the world in the period 1812–1817 in which he interpreted history from a decidedly Christian and biblical point of view, according to which Christ was the central point of history, with the fortunes of nations dependent on their faith in God. In his work, 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 trans-

•

1850

formed 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 viewed 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 any particular faith, when reason becomes spiritually conscious of itself and thus vouches for the truth of the notion” (p. 664). speculation] → 111,35. apologetics] A reference to Christian “apologetics,” a field that experienced a renewal in the early 19th century and that, unlike Christian “polemics,” includes a methodically arranged presentation of the materials relevant to a defense of the specific nature of the Christian faith; see Friedrich Schleiermacher’s presentation in Kurze Darstellung des theologischen Studiums [Brief Presentation of the Discipline of Theology] (Berlin, 1811; 2nd ed. Berlin, 1830) and K. H. Sacks, Christliche Apologetik [Christian Apologetics] (Hamburg, 1829; ASKB 755). 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 and 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; in 1848–1849, he was a member

30 30

2

133

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 55–56

18

133

24

26

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). unparadigmatic inflection] Irregular inflection, a grammatical term. 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; abbreviated hereafter as Den moderne Atheisme). 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 period 1846–1850. At the end of December 1849, he 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, to whom he sent a copy with a dedication; this polemical work was noted as having appeared in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 303, December 22, 1849. wants to realize the idea of remaining unmarried, loyal to his wife] See 15:56 in the present volume. ― his wife: Frederikke Marie Larsine Jacobine Stilling, née Larsen, married Stilling on December 1, 1846, and died at age thirty-three on

•

1850

599

December 22, 1847; see the obituary in Adresseavisen, no. 305, December 28, 1847, where Stilling writes: “She died at the beginning of the second year of her marriage, a few days after she had presented me with a son.” This is what he is suffering under now … a frightful self-torment, he says] It has not been possible to verify this statement or the subsequent statements concerning Stilling. a part of such sufferings] Variant: changed from: “a part of the grace of such sufferings”. He does concern himself somewhat with Xnty … historical observations] Refers to Stilling’s polemical work Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden (→ 133,24). he busies himself with freethinkers in order to describe them] Refers to Stilling’s magister dissertation Den moderne Atheisme (→ 133,24), in which he “describes” C. L. Michelet, D. F. Strauß, and L. Feuerbach. gets to live,] Variant: first written: “gets to live.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. But] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. If a person really wills, what possibilities he has!] See NB14:112, from December 1849, in which Kierkegaard copied the original conclusion of the thank-you note he sent to Stilling for the gift of Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden (see the draft of this note in LD, 338–339; B&A 1, p. 265); in the conclusion of the thank-you note Kierkegaard writes: “Thus, it is a pleasure for me to regard you, not as an adherent of myself, but as a declared adherent of a transfigured person, your spouse. And―permit me to tell you this― this is a possible way for you to understand the situation. This is something I know how to treasure: no connoisseur of gemstones has a keener eye for refractions than I have for the noble treasure of existential possibility,” KJN 6, 416. In this same journal entry, after copying down the conclusion of his note, Kierkegaard writes, with respect to Stilling, “His life is constituted such that it could become a religious existence of a more unusual sort.”―If: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

28

13 19

23

28

30 30

134

600 34 36

37

135

3

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 56–59

A spiritual institute] It has not been possible to identify what Kierkegaard is referring to. The former is represented poetically by pseudonyms] Refers primarily to Anti-Climacus (→ 115,5) as the pseudonymous author of Practice in Christianity (1850) (→ 99,1), in which Kierkegaard, as editor, writes the following in the preface: “In this work … the pseudonym forces the requirement for being a Christian up to the highest level of the ideal … 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.’ S. K.” (PC, 7; SKS 12,15). the latter is represented personally by myself] Refers in particular to the edifying portion of Kierkegaard’s writings, but see also the editor’s preface to Practice in Christianity in the previous note and in NB14:34, from January 1849, in KJN 6, 367–368. This has … Johannes de silentio … one should remain silent … not communicate] Refers to “Problema III. Was It Ethically Defensible for Abraham to Conceal His Purpose from Sarah, from Eliezer, from Isaac?” in Fear and Trembling (1843) (FT, 82–120; SKS 4, 172–207; esp. the passage concerning Faust, FT, 107–112; SKS 4, 195– 200). Here the book’s pseudonymous author, Johannes de silentio, writes a note concerning an ironist: “Let us imagine such an Aristophanes, such a Voltaire, slightly altered, for he is also of a sympathetic nature: he loves existence, he loves people, and he knows that even if the chastening of laughter will perhaps raise up a young generation to salvation, a great mass of people of the present generation will perish. So he remains silent and as far as possible forgets to laugh himself” (FT, 108n; SKS 4, 196–197n). And the pseudonymous author writes that Faust knows that with his doubt he is capable “of terrifying people, of causing existence to totter under their feet, of scattering people in every direction, of causing the scream of anxiety to resound everywhere… But Faust is of a sympathetic nature, he loves existence, his soul is unacquainted with envy, he realizes that he cannot put a stop to the fury which

•

1850

he is indeed capable of awakening, he desires no Herostratic honor―he remains silent … he seeks to keep in step with other people as much as possible” (FT, 109; SKS 4, 197). (“Herostratic” means pertaining to Herostratus, who sought fame by burning the temple of Artemis in 356 b.c.) plunge into martyrdom at the hands of the mob] → 109,35 and → 132,23. market town] → 109,33. not rlly exist;] Variant: first written: “not rlly exist.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. not even so much as a little journal] Kierkegaard is presumably referring to literary journals; see NB10:96, from ca. March 1849, where in a similar context he mentions “a country so small that it doesn’t even have a literary journal” [KJN 5, 315]; see also the second of the “notes” in “‘The Single Individual’: Two ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author” (→ 139,31), an appendix to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 108,1): “‘Denmark is a little country’ … the literary world is so small that there are no literary journals, nor have there been any for a long time”; (PV, 116; SKS 16, 96). In 1849 and 1850 there was no Danish literary journal. The last volume of For Litteratur og Kritik [For Literature and Criticism], a literary journal published in Funen beginning in 1843, appeared in January 1848, and Nordisk Literatur-Tidende [Scandinavian Literary Times], ed. J. F. Giødwad and P. C. Ploug (as a supplement to Fædrelandet on Sundays, when the newspaper itself did not appear), started publication in 1846 and lasted only a year. The other major literary journals, Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], Tidsskrift for Litteratur og Kritik [Journal for Literature and Criticism], and Journal for Litteratur og Kunst [Journal for Literature and Art], ceased publication in 1838, 1842, and 1844, respectively.

18

patriotism] → 113,16.

19

136

to spend money on it] Until 1847, Kierkegaard had functioned as his own publisher; that is, he had himself taken charge of the production and

38

136

135

23 24

27

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 59 financing of his books, which had been sold on commission. But following the publication of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits, which appeared on March 13, 1847, Kierkegaard entered into a business arrangement with the publisher and bookseller C. A. Reitzel, who both assumed the expenses associated with the printing of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits, paying Kierkegaard a one-time royalty of 225 rix-dollars (→ 130,12) for the book, and purchased for 1,200 rix-dollars the remaining copies of Repetition, Fear and Trembling, Philosophical Fragments, The Concept of Anxiety, Prefaces, Stages on Life’s Way, Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions, Concluding Unscientific Postscript, and A Literary Review, all of which Reitzel already had on a commission basis. At that point, Either/Or was sold out. See Reitzel’s journal, Forhandlinger med Forfattere, Redacteurer &c: 1835–[1858]) [Negotiations with Authors, Editors, etc., 1835–[1858]], p. 28 (in the archives of C. A. Reitzel’s Booksellers). Kierkegaard received one-time royalties for the books published by Reitzel in 1847, 1848, and 1849: 270 rix-dollars for Works of Love (1847) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Kjerlighedens Gjerninger, SKS K9, 95); 220 rix-dollars for Christian Discourses (1848) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Christelige Taler, SKS K10, 75–76); 550 rix-dollars for the second edition of Either/Or (1849) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten ― Eller, SKS K2–3, 64); 31 rix-dollars, 5 marks, 4 shillings for The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air (1849) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Lilien paa Marken og Fuglen under Himlen, SKS K11, 29); 85 rix-dollars for The Sickness unto Death (1849) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Sygdommen til Døden, SKS K11, 178); 26 rix-dollars for Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1849) (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of “Ypperstepræsten,”―“Tolderen,”― “Synderinden” in SKS K11, 274). Kierkegaard received no royalty for Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays, because the book was published on commission by Gyldendal (1849), with Kierkegaard financing production, which came to 53 rix-dollars and 1 shilling (see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Tvende ethisk-religieuse Smaa-Afhandlinger in SKS K11, 97).

•

1850

601

the judgment is that I am a hack writer] Kierkegaard mentions this same criticism in NB:14 and NB:194, from March and May 1846, respectively; see KJN 4, 23–24, 116–117. It has not been possible to identify an actual instance of Kierkegaard being called a hack writer. So then the judgment becomes that it is pride, an aristocratic temperament] In his journals, Kierkegaard frequently complains that his great efforts as an author are explained as pride; see, e.g., NB9:57, presumably from January 1849, in KJN 5, 243, but it has not been possible to identify an actual instance of Kierkegaard’s being called proud and aristocratic. crudity’s uprising against me] → 124,32. the brief pieces I toss off] See, e.g., the many drafts of articles concerning the theological disputes occasioned by H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik from 1849 (→ 111,35), including Rasmus Nielsens’s (→ 140,9) work 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) (Pap. X 6 B 103–143, pp. 129–193). But now I have to put things of that sort aside] See, e.g., “Polemika[:] ‘R. Nielsen’ by Joh. Climacus, Writing Exercises in Character―not to be used” (Pap. X 6 B 83–96, pp. 91–106). One word in print about the clothes I wear] Refers in particular to Peter Klæstrup’s drawings of Kierkegaard in Corsaren (→ 109,35), where on January 9, 1846 (no. 277, col. 4 [COR, 116]), January 23, 1846 (no. 279, cols. 1 and 2 [COR, 126–127]), March 6, 1846 (no. 285, col. 9 [COR, 132]), and January 8, 1848 (no. 381-a, col. 8), one could see Kierkegaard’s trousers with legs of differing lengths; and on January 16, 1846 (no. 278, col. 5 [COR, 120]), his thin legs were depicted in a pair of boots that were much too large for him. See also “Den nye Planet” [The New Planet] in Corsaren, January 9, 1846 (no. 277, cols. 1–4 [COR, 112–117]), which consists of a fictional discussion involving J. L. Heiberg, the astronomer C.F.R. Olufsen, and Kierkegaard, in which Olufsen, referring to his tailor, assures Kierkegaard that

39

6

15 21

24

28

137

602

34

138

2 5 8

138

11

15

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 59–61

“dammit, the one trouser leg is always just as long as the other one unless I expressly request it otherwise in order to look like a genius” (cols. 2–3). See illustrations 2–15 in KJN 4, 453–456. Klæstrup depicted Kierkegaard with trouser legs of unequal length in the drawing “Søren Kierkegaard og ‘Aftenbladet’ i en theologisk Tarantella med Castagnetter” [Søren Kierkegaard and Aftenbladet in a Theological Tarentella with Castanets] in Corsaren, no. 381-a, January 8, 1848; see the drawings in COR, 137, and in Peter Tudvad, Kierkegaards København [Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 2004), p. 384. the words of Paul … there must be justice―in the hereafter] Reference to Rom 3:5–6. I indeed can never thank God sufficiently … more than I had expected] → 110,4. a grain of wheat must die in order to sprout] Allusion to Jn 12:24. feels pain as a woman … when the child is born!] Allusion to Jn 16:21. “the point outside the world,” … moves the whole world] A reference to the Greek mathematician, physicist, and inventor Archimedes (ca. 287–212 b.c.) of Syracuse, to whom is attributed the saying: “Give me a place to stand, and I will move the earth.” See the biography of Marcellus, 14.7 in the Greek author Plutarch’s Vitae parallelae [Parallel Lives]: “Archimedes, who was a kinsman and friend of King Hiero, wrote to him that with any given force it was possible to move any given weight; and emboldened, as we are told, by the strength of his demonstration, he declared that, if there were another world, and he could go to it, he could move this [one].” English translation from Plutarch’s Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin, 11 vols. (London: William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1914–1926), vol. 5 (1917), p. 473. See Kierkegaard’s Danish translation, Plutark’s Levnetsbeskrivelser [Plutarch’s Lives], trans. S. Tetens, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1800–1811; ASKB 1197–1200), vol. 3 (1804), p. 272. ― the world,: Variant: first written: “the world.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. That syllogism: that because there is no justice in the world … justice exists] → 137,34.

•

1850

fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. in more recent times … proving that Xnty has its beginnings in myth] A reference 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. Strauß had a powerful influence on Danish scholars, e.g., Fr. Beck; see Beck’s dissertation, Begrebet Mythus eller den religiøse Aands Form [The Concept of Myth, or the Form of the Religious Spirit] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 424). Knabrostræde] A street in Copenhagen (see map 2, B2). 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. in the form of a servant Xt was God] Refers to Phil 2:6–11, esp. vv. 6–7. first sweep clean your own doorstep] Allusion to two proverbial sayings: “to sweep one’s own doorstep” (i.e., to mend one’s own errors instead of dwelling on those of others), and, conversely, “to sweep the doorsteps of others and forget one’s own”; see C. Molbech, Danske Ordsprog, Tankesprog og Riimsprog [Danish Proverbs, Maxims, and Rhymed Apothegms] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 1573), pp. 308, 311.

31

the “Three Notes”] “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work 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); no. 3, “Preface to the ‘Friday Discourses,’” originally written in 1847 (see Pap. IX B 63,14, pp. 375–377). In 1848, when Kierkegaard decided to append the three notes as a supplement to The Point of View for My Work as an Author, he gave them the title “Three Friendly ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author,” but

31

34

1

139

12

15 20

139

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 61–64

32 34

35

140

9

9

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 notes 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). perhaps] Variant: added. on “Crowd” and “the Single Individual.”] This is the overall theme of note no. 1 in “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author.” passages] Variant: first written: “theses”. By insisting on one single point] In Mag. S. Kierkegaards ‘Johannes Climacus’ og Dr. H. Martensens ‘Christelige Dogmatik.’ En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 137,21), Rasmus Nielsen raises the decisive “question of principle”: “Does Christianity, in accordance with its nature, want to be an object of objective knowledge?” (p. 4). And inasmuch as he understands Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) as “an energetic protest against modernity’s objective knowledge of Christianity,” Nielsen answers the question on behalf of Johannes Climacus with “an unconditional No” (p. 6). In what follows, Nielsen explains that Johannes Climacus has “dialectically tightened the Christian problem” (pp. 9–21). Nielsen then goes on to emphasize the following three points: “truth, inwardness, is subjectivity,” (pp. 21–26); “for the existing subject, the paradox is the highest truth” (pp. 27–34); and “in opposition to the objective knowledge of speculation, Christianity is to be designated as an existence communication” (pp. 34–42). In connection with the second point cited above, Nielsen writes: “The paradox! Yes, here is the point, the delicate point at issue, the problem, the Gordian knot, which ‘science’ cannot solve” (p. 27). Shortly after this he adds, “Thus, the truth is the paradox” (p. 28), as if it were a new, personal perception. R. Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, winter semester 1840–1841; from 1841, Poul

•

1850

603

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). Kierkegaard appears to have brought Nielsen into his confidence concerning the ideas behind his writings; see the draft of an unpublished article, “Concerning My Relationship with 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). Concerning the polemic against Nielsen contemplated by Kierkegaard (→ 137,21) and (→ 137,24). Basil the Great, Bishop of Caesarea … 379] Loosely cited from H. N. Clausen, Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik (see the next note), p. 164. ― Basil the Great: ca. 330–379, bishop of Caesarea in Cappodocia in Asia Minor, one of the most famous fathers of the Greek Church. Variant: first written: “Basil (the Great); prior to that was written: “Basil, not the great, but”. In opposition to the allegorists … their own ingenuity … (see Clausen’s hermeneutics, p. 165)] Quoted, with minor orthographic variants, from H. N. Clausen, Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik [New Testament Hermeneutics] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 468), p. 165. ― the allegorists: Clausen calles them “the Origenists,” i.e., adherents of Origen and his allegorical interpretation of scripture. The Church Father Origen (ca. 185–255) became the leader of the Alexandria School in 202, but he was removed in 231 after being accused of heresy. ― Clausen: Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793–1877), Danish theologian and politician; dr. theol., 1826; from 1821, a lec-

20

22

140

604

29

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 64

turer at the University of Copenhagen, where he became extraordinary professor in 1822 and ordinary professor in 1830. In the period 1840– 1846, Clausen served as a representative in the Roskilde Advisory Assembly of Estates, where he was elected president three times; in 1848–1851, he served in the so-called November Ministry as minister without portfolio, and in 1849–1853, he served as a member of parliament (→ 106,31). This is what H. H. has done … into other categories] Refers to the following passage in “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (1849), by the pseudonym H. H.: “Doubt and unbelief, which make faith something vain, have, among other things, also made human beings ashamed of obeying, of submitting to authority. This rebelliousness even finds its way into the thinking of the better sort of people, perhaps without their being conscious of it, and this is the beginning of all this confusion––which, deep down, is treason––about profundity and the profound and the miraculous-delightful that a person can glimpse, etc. Thus, if one were to describe Christian religious discourse, as it is heard and read nowadays, with one specific adjective, one would have to say that it is affected … what is corrupting is when the train of thought behind the sermon is affected, when its orthodoxy is attained by placing the emphasis in absolutely the wrong place, when it fundamentally calls upon us to believe in Christ, and preaches belief in him, on the basis of something that absolutely cannot be the object of faith. If a son were to say, ‘I have faith in my father, not because he is my father but because he is a genius, or because his commands are always profound and brilliant,’ this filial obedience is affected. The son emphasizes absolutely the wrong thing, emphasizing what is brilliant, what is profound, about a command, whereas, with a command, these categories are utterly indifferent. The son wants to obey by virtue of the father’s profundity and brilliance, and he simply cannot obey him on this basis because his obedience is undermined by his critical stance about the command being profound and clever” (WA, 104; SKS 11, 107–108). ― the business about the lofty and the

•

1850

profound and the miraculous-delightful: These and similar expressions are used frequently by N.F.S. Grundtvig in his writings and sermons; see NB15:59 in the present volume. See also an unused draft of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where there is a caricatured depiction of Grundtvig: “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). ― affectation: In JJ:497, from the summer of 1846, Kierkegaard translates the term as “acquiring something by lying” (KJN 2, 281; see also the accompanying explanatory note). the Romans … the yoke of Augustus … he was a god … categories] Augustus (63 b.c.–a.d. 12), Roman emperor; his original name was Gaius Octavianus, but the Senate bestowed on him the honorific Augustus (Latin, “lofty,” “holy”). Augustus was adopted by his maternal uncle Caesar, so that when Caesar was elevated to the status of a god two years after his death, Augustus became divi filius (Latin, “son of someone divine”). Later he permitted the worship of the Genius Augusti (Latin, “Augustus’s guardian spirit”), thus approaching the divine status that was granted to him after his death. See, e.g., chaps. 5, 7–8, and 97 in Suetonius’s biography of Augustus in De vita Caesarum [Of the Lives of the Caesars]; see Caji Svetonii Tranqvilii Tolv første Romerske Keiseres Levnetsbeskrivelse [Suetonius’s Biographies of the First Twelve Roman Emperors], trans. Jacob Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1802–1803; ASKB 1281), vol. 1, pp. 87–88, 89–91, 191. No source has been found for Kierkegaard’s specific assertions, which do not appear in Suetonius or other ancient authors. See, however, the article “Augustus (Cajus Julius Cæsar Octavianus)” in O. Wolff, Historisk Ordbog eller kortforfattede Levnetsløb over alle Personer, som have giort sig et Navn ved Evner, Dyder, Misgierninger, Opfindelser, Vildfarelser, eller nogenslags mærkværdig Daad, fra Verdens Skabelse indtil vore Tider [Historical Dictionary or Brief Biographies of All Persons Who Have Made a

33

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 64 –67 Name for Themselves through Their Abilities, Virtues, Misdeeds, Inventions, Mistakes, or Any Kind of Noteworthy Deed, from the Creation of the World to Our Times], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1815), pp. 461–469. In his account of Octavian’s triumphal return to Rome in 29 b.c. Wolff writes: “The title of emperor in perpetuity was conferred on a person who had caused rivers of blood to flow in order to obtain power. Games and festivals were enhanced in his honor. Temples and altars were raised to him. The Senate conferred upon him the name Augustus” (p. 466). Toward the end of the article, in which Wolff depicted Augustus as a bloody, barbarian warrior and as a hard, cunning tyrant, he writes: “Nonetheless, altars were raised to this man while he was still alive, because by maintaining prosperity, entertainments, and peace in Rome, he caused it to forget his outlawry” (p. 468). ― a god … categories: Variant: first written: “a god.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. 141

10 13

13

24

Christian VIII] (1786–1848), king from December 1839 to his death, January 20, 1848. The first time I spoke with him] Refers to Kierkegaard’s first audience with King Christian VIII, which took place at Amalienborg Castle on Saturday, March 13, 1847; see “Allerunderdanigst Rapport fra Adjudant du jour den 13de Marts 1847,” [Most Humble Report from the Adjutant of the Day for March 13, 1847], in which Kierkegaard is listed as number thirteen of a total of thirty-one audiences (Audience Reports, 1846– 1848, in the National Archives). Things here are on much too small a scale … to work so hard] In NB9:41, from January 1849, Kierkegaard provides a retrospective summary of his conversation with Christian VIII during his first audience: “I said: Your Majesty’s sole misfortune is that your wisdom and intelligence are too great and the country is too small―it is a misfortune to be a genius in a market town. To which he replied: Then one can do all the more for individuals” KJN 5, 228–229. ― you can no longer afford: → 125,2 and → 136,38. want your expenses to be covered out of public funds] The “Finance Deputation” was established

•

1850

605

in 1816 to provide financial support to authors. In 1845, Hans Christian Andersen, who had been receiving 400 rix-dollars (→ 130,12) annually since 1838, had his annual support increased by 200 rix-dollars on the initiative of Christian VIII, who that same year also granted Adam Oehlenschläger 600 rix-dollars a year so that he could continue publishing his works. On the other hand, Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. The mob rages against me] → 109,35. is far over a priest’s understanding] Presumably, an allusion to the saying, “That is over my head and far into the priest’s,” collected as no. 2344 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 131,21), vol. 1, p. 248. as I have always said it was: the relationship to spirit is an examination] See NB15:75 and 75.b, from January 1850, in the present volume. See also NB5:48, from June 1848, in KJN 5, 392–393, and NB7:99, from November 1848, in KJN 5, 134– 135, plus exposition no. 4 in “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,” the third part of Practice in Christianity (→ 99,1) (PC, 181–199; SKS 12, 181–194). aware of spirit.] Variant: first written: “aware of spirit;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue.

37

2

142

5

9

30

“the innermost”] Rural householders who rented from a farm owner or a cottager. the extreme Left] The extreme left wing of the “Friends of the Peasant” or “the Left”; perhaps this is an allusion to politicians like J. A. Hansen, who had worked as a shoemaker and had lived in very humble circumstances, but who in 1842 was one of the founders of the journal Almuevennen [The Friend of the Common People], which became the principal organ for the peasant movement. Hansen was a member of the Society of Friends of the Peasant, and in 1849, he was elected to the lower house of parliament, where he was a part of the extreme left wing of the Left.

32

So intellectuality was situated … love of young peop. … in an innocent sense] Perhaps a ref-

5

142

34

143

606

15

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 67–74

erence to Plato’s dialogue Symposium, 211b–c, in which Socrates recounts his dialogue with Diotima; see Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, pp. 562–563. Alternatively, Kierkegaard may have confused Socrates’ remark with a passage in Pausanias’ speech in the same dialogue, 184c–e; see ibid., p. 538. Cf. The Concept of Irony (1841) (CI, 42; SKS 1, 104, with accompanying explanatory note) and Stages on Life’s Way (1845) (SLW, 33; SKS 6, 38, with accompanying explanatory note). per abusum: Variant: first written: “combines”.

144

14

simply existence,] Variant: first written: “simply existence.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

144

20

can no longer afford it] → 125,2, → 136,38. to suffer bestial abuse every day] → 109,35, → 137,28, and → 124,32. beating the air] Allusion to 1 Cor 9:26.

20 30

145

2

Kant puts it pertly … or walks ahead, carrying the torch] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a statement in Kant’s essay “Vom Verhältnisse der Facultäten” [On the Relation of the Faculties] in Imanuel Kant’s vermischte Schriften (→ 130,35), vol. 3, pp. 490–93; p. 491.

145

8

Litera gesta docet ... quo tendas Anagogia] Medieval mnemonic verse, presumably cited from H. N. Clausen, Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik (→ 140,22), p. 242, where, in discussing the prologue of Nicolaus Lyranus’s great work, Postillæ perpetuæ s. Commentaria brevia in universa Biblia [Running Exegeses or Brief Commentaries to the Entire Bible], Clausen states that it “became a principal bulwark against the allegorical interpretation.” Nicolaus Lyranus, or Nicholas of Lyra, (1270–ca. 1349) was a learned biblical exegete and head of the Franciscan order in Burgundy.

11

creates omnipotently from nothing] Since the 2nd century, the doctrine that God created everything from nothing has been a broadly held Christian interpretation of the creation story in Gen 1; see also 2 Macc 7:28.

•

1850

on the basis of long experience] Variant: added. have had Anti-Climacus … the attack is to be directed at the congregation] Presumably, a reference to exposition no. 4 in “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,” the third part of Practice in Christianity (→ 99,1), where the pseudonymous author Anti-Climacus (→ 115,5) writes: “When applied to this life, a concept such as ‘congregation,’ with which people have been so preoccupied in these times, is really an impatient anticipation of the eternal. Struggling corresponds to ‘the single individual,’ that is, when struggling is understood in a spiritual and Christian sense, not in the physical sense of military battle, where things depend not so much on the single individual as on how many thousands there are, how many cannon they have, and the like. From the Christian point of view, it is always individuals who struggle, for spirit is precisely this: that before God everyone is an individual, that ‘fellowship’ is a lower category than ‘the single individual,’ which everyone can and ought to be … Therefore, the congregation really belongs only to eternity; ‘the congregation’ is, at rest, what ‘the single individual’ is in unrest. But of course this life is precisely the time of testing, of unrest―therefore, ‘the congregation’ has no place in time, but only in eternity, where it is, at rest, the gathering of all the single individuals who survived the struggle and the test” (PC, 223; SKS 12, 218).

8

Directing Attention] → 124,28. a fortune sufficient … an author for the whole of my life] → 125,2 and → 136,38. meritoriousness] 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 in the Augsburg Confession (→ 100,31). And to my way] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. the reduplication] → 139,12. 1000 Christian priests] According to the list in Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Clerical Calendar for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848, concluded

9

146m

19

146

10 15

1 18 25

147

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 74–78

26

28

148

5

11

148

149

35

19 25

28 34

35

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 ca. 120 stipendiary curates. vulgarity … literally the only thing that flourished in Denmark] Presumably refers to the consequences of the attack on Kierkegaard by the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 109,35), and specifically to the fact that he was abused on the street (→ 124,32) and that people gossiped about him (→ 119,24). in it all:] Variant: first written: “in it all.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. loving one’s neighbor),] See Mt 22:37–39; 19:19; and Lk 10:25–37. ― neighbor),: Variant: first written: “neighbor.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the teaching: the fact … suffer for it.] Variant: changed from: “the teaching.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the distance between the rich man and Lazarus … frightful] Allusion to Lk 16:19–31. The Corsair] The satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 109,35). an entire issue … nothing but insults directed at me] There was no entire issue of Corsaren that contained nothing but “insults” directed at Kierkegaard; but see no. 278, January 16, 1846, in which various attacks on Kierkegaard, alias Frater Taciturnus (→ 109,35), take up eight of the paper’s fourteen columns, and six of the paper’s eight caricature drawings are directed at Kierkegaard. Goldschmidt] → 109,35. ordered by myself] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard himself, alias Frater Taciturnus, asked “to come in Corsaren” (→ 109,35). Goldschmidt … his earlier encomium] When The Concept of Irony (1841) was reviewed by one of Corsaren’s part-time employees, Goldschmidt thought that the reviewer had treated the contents of the dissertation too superficially, and

•

1850

607

he added this postscript: “When we acknowledge that despite its surprising language, Mr. Kierkegaard’s dissertation is of interest to those who have the patience to read it through, this acknowledgment―be it noted, when viewed in combination with what has been written above― grants Mr. K. all the justice that is his due” (Corsaren, no. 51, October 22, 1841, col. 8; see COR, 93). Subsequently, Goldschmidt reviewed Either/Or in the March 10, 1843, issue of Corsaren, praising the work to the skies: “This author is a mighty spirit, he is an intellectual aristocrat: he mocks the entire human race, shows its wretchedness, but he has a right to do so, he is an unusual intellect” (Corsaren, no. 129, col. 1; see COR, 93– 95). Finally, Kierkegaard received positive mention on November 14, 1845, when his pseudonym Victor Eremita was praised at the expense of the National Liberal politician and journalist Orla Lehmann: “for Lehmann will die and be forgotten, but Victor Eremita will never die” (Corsaren, no. 269, col. 14; see COR, 96). differently,] Variant: first written: “differently.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the entire allegorical interpretation] See H. N. Clausen’s description of the period “Fra Apostlenes Tid til Slutningen af det sjette Aarhundrede” [From the Time of the Apostles to the End of the Sixth Century] in his “Oversigt over den Ny-Testamentlige Hermeneutiks Historie” [Survey of the History of New Testament Hermeneutics] in Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik (→ 140,22), p. 97: “During these centuries, subjective interpretation in the form of allegorization is to be regarded as the dominant type.” See also Clausen’s statement on pp. 107–108: “It is obvious how the allegorical interpretation is rooted in a religious tendency that is nourished by a fantasy-laden view that leaps over intermediate, connecting links and directs sensory phenomena immediately back to the realm of ideas.” See also Clausen’s strong criticism of “the typical allegorical treatment of the holy books” as being “just as uniform and spiritually suffocating” as it is “misleading and subversive of all positive authority of scripture” (pp. 143–144).

6

150

14

150

608 23

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 78

the Reformation … introduced a sounder philological interpretation] See H. N. Clausen, Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik, p. 267: “As for the allegorical interpretation, it originated from narrow-minded notions of the holiness of scripture, which had to give ground when confronted with clear considerations of the nature of the holy books. The universal use of allegorization, which had held sway until the time of the Reformation was to a great extent attributable to a lack of philological education that now was increasingly remedied.” ― what had to some extent been previously asserted in principle … in getting it said: See the introduction to the section “Fra Reformationens Begyndelse indtil Slutningen af dens Aarhundrede” [From the Reformation’s Beginning to the End of Its Century], in H. N. Clausen’s “Oversigt over den Ny-Testamentlige Hermeneutiks Historie” in Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik, p. 262: “It would be historically incorrect and unfair to attribute to the Reformation the merit of having been the first to revive the true principles of interpreting scripture or of having … made the first use of these principles, supported by humanistic learning. Whether one views the work of [biblical] interpretation negatively―as an objection to and an opposition against an alien law for interpretation, namely, the dictatorship of the Church―or positively, as working with scripture on the basis of scripture itself―we have found these principles acknowledged and asserted prior to the Reformation by representatives of ecclesiastical freedom and theological scholarship and applied by Erasmus in a satisfying fashion, with philological learning and a tastefulness of form that places him alongside Melanchthon and Calvin.” See also pp. 43– 44, and esp. p. 309: “Philosophical investigation of the holy books had early become a characteristic of Protestant interpretation of scripture, as opposed to the historical-traditional treatments of Catholic commentaries.” ― “in agreement with the Catholic Church,”: No source for this quotation has been identified. ― Erasmus: Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536), Dutch Catholic theologian and philologist; famed for his learning and scholarliness; a leading figure in the north-

•

1850

ern 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. now we are once again absolutely drowning in sound scholarly interpretation] Presumably, a reference to the section “Philologisk Fortolkning” [Philological Interpretation] in H. N. Clausen, Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik, pp. 389–463, which is divided into twenty-one paragraphs and contains an enormous number of examples of philological issues in the Greek text of the NT. quickly forgotten that the Bible is Holy Scripture] See the section “Fra Midten af det 18de Aarhundrede indtil vore Dage” [From the Middle of the 18th Century until Our Times] in H. N. Clausen’s “Oversigt over den Ny-Testamentlige Hermeneutiks Historie” in Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik, pp. 356–357, where Clausen discusses an assertion that has characterized hermeneutical and exegetical works since the latter half of the 18th century: “that no differentiation dare be made between the Holy Scriptures and every other ancient book,” a position that could be “in conflict with theological interests and with the Christian faith in revelation.” See also p. 505, where it is stated, with respect to “the historical interpretation” of the following period, “that the term ‘Holy Scripture’ survived primarily as an empty honorific.” “hasty letters”] No source for this expression has been identified. In the 17th century … Holy Scripture as doctrine … notion of inspiration … every letter had been allegorical] See the section “Fra Begyndelsen af det 17de indtil Midten af det 18de Aarhundrede” [From the Beginning of the 17th to the Middle of the 18th Century] in H. N. Clausen’s “Oversigt over den Ny-Testamentlige Hermeneutiks Historie” in Det Nye Testamentes Hermeneutik, pp. 294–250: “This concept [of scripture as “Holy Scripture”] was worked on so long, giving it greater content, greater fullness and definiteness, to the point that the dogma of verbal inspiration, which made every word in the scriptures into an

32

33

2

151

1

150m

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 78–85 absolutely divine oracle, stood complete, worked through with all the art of scholastic dialectics. This supernaturalistic concept of scripture not only has to have a paralyzing and binding effect on exegesis, but also―inasmuch as the human character of scripture was in actuality abolished― on the theory of interpretation itself, importing a covert contradiction into investigations concerning the principles and methods of scriptural interpretation; and domination by the dogma of inspiration is thus to be regarded as characteristic of the hermeneutics of this period.” See also p. 334. 151

151

152

20

superior power,] Variant: first written: “no power”.

29

qui timide rogat, docet negare] Cited from act 2, sc. 3 in the Roman author and Stoic philosopher Seneca’s tragedy Phaedra, vv. 393–394, which, however, was not in the Latin editions of Seneca’s works owned by Kierkegaard; see ASKB 1274– 1279. Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified.

33

the idea of eternal punishment] See, e.g., Mt 25:41 and Thes 1:9. On the dogma of eternal punishment, see § 39, section 3 “Om den evige Fordømmelse og Helvedstraffene” [On Eternal Damnation and the Punishments of Hell], in Kierkegaard’s notes on H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] in Not1:6 in KJN 3, 26–27; see also article 17 of the Augsburg Confession (→ 100,31) and K. G. Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Handbook of the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1838 [1814]; ASKB 437–438), § 174 in vol. 2, pp. 456–472.

8

the orthodox] N.F.S. Grundtvig and the Grundtvigians commonly 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

•

1850

609

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 (ultraorthodox).” the police are watchful, making sure that “poisons” are not delivered without great precautions] See the chancery proclamation of April 19, 1843, “containing specifications concerning the existing ordinances governing commerce involving poisons,” in which it is stipulated: (a) that druggists must keep poisons in “a separate, spacious, locked room or compartment”; (b) that “packaging of the poisons they sell must take place in the abovementioned room or compartment, and the poison must not be delivered unless it is in a sufficiently strong crock or package that is tied shut, sealed with the signet of the firm, and labeled with the word ‘Poison’”; and (c) that “poisons may not be delivered to manufacturers, artists, and artisans without their written requisition, which signed requisition must be sealed with their seal and include the name of the poison, its quantity and use, as well as the date.” That which] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12.

22

29 30

the orthodox] → 152,8. object to me … altogether too rigorous, etc.] No such objection has been identified. complicit] Variant: first written: “guilt”.

5

Everyone is the best interpreter of his own words] Proverb recorded as no. 68 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Sayings and Adages] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 26. the lover] Variant: changed from: “the lover.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

10

sound pattern produced by vibrations of the air] Symmetrical figure made in dry sand spread on a horizontal pane of glass or metal sheet when stroked on the edge with a violin bow that makes

11

153

6 11

154m

13

154

610

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 85–91

it vibrate. The phenomenon was demonstrated in 1787 by the German physicist E. F. F. Chladni and was discussed by the Danish physicist H. C. Ørsted, who in 1808 received the silver medal of the Royal Danish Scientific Society [Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab] for his treatise, “Forsøg over Klangfigurerne” [Experiments with Acoustic Figures], in Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Skrifter for Aar 1807 og 1808, vol. 5 (Copenhagen, 1810), pp. 31–64. 154

27

meritoriousness] → 146,15.

155

25

supported him, and] Variant: first written: “supported him. But”. martyr] Refers to the fact Socrates was sentenced to death by a court of the Athenian people.

38

156

2 9 30

36

39

Reduplication] → 139,12. also] Variant: added. After I published Either/Or, I had of course already had the brilliant success] Either/Or, published in a first edition of 525 copies on February 23, 1843, attracted much attention and was sold out as early as 1845; see the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten―Eller in SKS K2– 3, 7 and 61. publish Two Edifying Discourses after Either/ Or] Two Edifying Discourses was published on May 16, 1843; see the “Critical Account of the Text” of To opbyggelige Taler in SKS K5, 9. what the times required] In Kierkegaard’s day, this was a frequently occurring expression, often used 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 (→ 113,3) 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 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

•

1850

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. A more general development of the relationship between the requirements of the times and work of eternal validity can be found in the article “Gjensvar paa Herr Professor Hauchs Svar” [Rejoinder to Herr Professor Hauch’s Reply] in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post [Copenhagen’s Flying Post], ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 37, March 26, 1830, footnote (see ASKB U 55). hurl myself into all the dangers of mockery] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard himself, alias Frater Taciturnus, asked “to come in Corsaren” (→ 109,35). R. Nielsen] → 140,9.

2

157

7

Gregory of Nyssa put it … “One does not … by changing one’s place.”] Kierkegaard’s translation of a remark made by Gregory of Nyssa upon his return from a trip to Jerusalem, cited in German by A. Neander in Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), p. 155. ― Gregory of Nyssa: (ca. 335–after 394), one of the three great Cappadocian Church Fathers, from 372, bishop of Nyssa in Cappodocia (the eastern portion of Asia Minor); participated in the ecumenical Synod of Constantinople in 381.

10

157

The Socratic anecdote―“that … people could get so angry … wanted to bite him”] Loosely cited from Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus, 151c. After describing his art of midwifery to Theaetetus, Socrates offers to deliver him of his foolish conceptions, warning him not to “be savage with me like a woman robbed of her first child. People have often felt like this toward me and been positively ready to bite me for taking away some foolish notion they had conceived” (English translation from Hamilton and Cairns, Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, p. 856). ― even more powerfully than: Variant: changed from: “it is like”.

16

157

God creates out of nothing] → 145,11.

2

158

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 92–97 158

14

24

34

159

1

4

159

10

Augustine draws attention … prevented an additional injustice from happening] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a statement by Augustine in opposition to a literal understanding of Mt 5:39 and Lk 6:29; cited in German by A. Neander in Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), pp. 227– 228. ― “when someone strikes you … turn the left one toward him”: Loosely cited from Mt 5:39. ― when one of the servants of the high priest … why do you strike me: Loosely cited from Jn 18:22–23. see my discourses “The Gospel of Sufferings”] See no. 2 in “The Gospel of Sufferings,” which is the third part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 245; SKS 8, 344–345, where Kierkegaard also cites Mt 5:39). when it is carried through absolutely without regard to the consequences] Variant: added. Augustine … non benefacere prohibet militia, sed malitia] Refers to Augustine’s remarks about being a Christian and a soldier, cited by A. Neander in Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), pp. 226– 232; on p. 229 Augustine is cited both in German and in Latin. In addition he appeals … be content with your wages] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of a portion of Augustine’s remarks about being a Christian and a soldier, cited by A. Neander in Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), p. 229. ― Do no violence or injustice to anyone, and be content with your wages: Loosely cited from Lk 3:14. In demonstrating … as Ambrose does … must be faithful to that office] Kierkegaard’s free rendering in Danish of A. Neander, Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), p. 226. ― (which at one time was a major issue of concern): See Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2, pp. 225–226, where Neander writes: “We saw that in the early period the views of Christians were divided with respect to the question of whether

•

1850

611

a Christian could venture to serve in a position of civil authority or as a soldier. Nowadays the spokesmen for the Church generally answer Yes to these questions”; see also the second part of vol. 1, separately paginated, pp. 136–138. ― Ambrose: (ca. 339–397) Roman Catholic teacher and saint; from 374, bishop of Milan; left many letters and discourses as well as a number of writings dealing with ethics and dogmatics. –– a person who holds an office must be faithful to that office: Presumably a reference to 1 Cor 4:1–2. hum. beings must not put asunder what God has joined together] Reference to Mt 19:4–6.

16

I read somewhere … [“]No pers. is to believe another in connection with this … must do so even less.”] No source for this citation has been identified.

28

159

by no means] Variant: first written: “not”. selfishness] Variant: preceding this, the word “esteem” has been deleted.

36

159

6

160

in the first centuries [a.d.] … one must stick with the old gods] Summary of the introduction to A. Neander’s endnote to p. 16 of Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums (→ 160m,2), vol. 2 (1823), p. 254. Neander’s Denkwürdigkeiten 2nd volume, somewhere in the notes] Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums und des christlichen Lebens [Memorable Occurences in the History of Christianity and the Christian Life], ed. A. Neander, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1823–1824; ASKB 179–180; abbreviated Denkwürdigkeiten aus der Geschichte des Christenthums), vol. 2 (1823), pp. 254–255, endnote 4 to p. 16 (this “note” extends from p. 249 to p. 302). 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.

17

160

2

160m

612 160

26

161

3

161

33

34

38

162

1

J O U R N A L NB 16 : 98–101

The Corsair] The satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 109,35). Goldschmidt] M. A. Goldschmidt as editor of Corsaren (→ 109,35). it was his mission to bring a slavish-minded people to freedom] Refers to Moses having been sent back to Egypt by God in order to free the Israelites from their slavery under Pharaoh; see Ex 3:1–4:31. Every day he had to endure the bestiality, etc. of this slavish-minded people] Refers to the circumstance that during the first forty years after their liberation, the Israelites wandered in the desert and repeatedly reproached Moses, e.g., for the absence of water (Ex 15:22–27 and 17:1–7), for hunger (Ex 16), and for lack of meat (Num 11). And when God punished the Israelites because they rebelled against Moses after the forty years had passed, and they refused to capture the promised land, so that they were forced to wander forty more years in the desert (Num 13–14), they again challenged Moses’ leadership and rebelled against him a number of times (Num 16– 17), complaining yet again about the lack of water (Num 20:1–13). Holy Scripture calls him the most tormented of men] Presumably, a reference to Num 11:11–15 and 11:17; see also Deut 1:12. in mythology … night is the mother of everything] See, e.g., the article on “night” in Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [Paul Fr. A. Nitsch’s New Dictionary of Mythology], ed. Fr. G. Klopfer, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945), vol. 2, pp. 333–334, where it is explained that night is “the mother of the gods and men.” See also Karl Philipp Moritz’s Gudelære, oversat og tilligemed et Omrids af den nordiske Mythologie [Karl Philipp Moritz’s Mythology, Translated and Including an Outline of Nordic Mythology], ed. Chr. Winther (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 1946), pp. 9–10 and esp. p. 29: “Night hides, conceals; therefore it is the mother both of everything beautiful and everything frightful. From its womb comes the light of day in which all shapes develop.”

•

1850

this free constitution] Danmarks Riges Grundlov of June 5, 1849 (→ 112,22).

19

all of life is an upbringing] A notion often presented in pietistic literature, with a background in Heb 12:4–13, esp. vv. 7 and 10. The notion takes its origins in the OT; see Prov 3:11–12, which is cited in Heb 12:5–6.

14

164

Notes for JOURNAL NB17 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB17 615

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB17 623

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB17

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, and Anne Mette Hansen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Vanessa Rumble

Explanatory Notes by Tonny Aagaard Olesen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

615

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB17 is a bound journal in quarto format. A label in Kierkegaard’s hand, designating the journal “NB17” and bearing the date March 6, 1850, has been glued to the front cover (see illustration 3). The manuscript of Journal NB17 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand (see illustration on pp. 210-211), with some passages in his Latin hand. Six entries (NB17:1, 2, 96, 97, 101, and most of 102) are written in a distinct latin hand (see illustration on p. 246), and a Latin hand is also used for Latin, French, and Italian words and occasionally as a form of calligraphy for headings and titles. One entry (NB17:59) was begun in a latin hand, which was replaced by a gothic hand after two pages; another entry (NB17:95) was begun in a gothic hand and finished in a latin hand; and one more entry (NB17:102), written in a latin hand, includes a number of passages in a gothic hand. The entries written on the inside front cover and the first page of the journal contain a listing of some of the journal’s contents and were written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format). In entries NB17:7 and NB17:16 Kierkegaard made use of the marginal column in order to have space for additions begun in the main column. Entry NB17:23.a is an addition that was begun in the marginal column and concluded in the main column. Entry NB17:71 includes an addition under the main text column, with its position indicated by brackets (see illustration on p. 220). Deleted hash marks (#) at the point where an entry, which originally was to have ended, continues, occur in entries NB17:49, 59 (twice), 64, 71 (twice), 76 (twice― see illustration on pp. 226–227), 79 (twice), and 81.

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB17 was begun on March 6, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than May 15, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next jour-

616

J O U R N A L NB 17 nal, Journal NB18. Kierkegaard dated entry NB17:71 “the 18th and 19th of April 50,” and in entry NB17:81, he indicates that he had a conversation with Rasmus Nielsen on “Wednesday April 30th” (though according to the calendar, April 30 was a Tuesday). A number of entries contain references to events or situations that make it possible to assign an approximate or exact date. This is the case for entry NB17:15, where in connection with “something very comical in Goldschmidt lately,” reference is made to M. A. Goldschmidt’s two pieces in volume 3 of Nord og Syd [North and South], pp. 268–277 (March 8, 1850) and pp. 361–368 (March 26, 1850). In entry NB17:28, the remark “Joh. Climacus himself declares that he does not have faith. Theophilus Nicolaus presents the believer,” refers to the theologian Magnús Eiríksson, who (under the name Theophilus Nicolaus) published the book Er Troen et Paradox og “i Kraft af det Absurde”? [Is Faith a Paradox and “by Virtue of the Absurd”?] (Copenhagen, 1859; ASKB 831). The book was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 59, March 11, 1850.1 As previously noted, entry NB17:71 is dated “the 18th and 19th of April 50.” This means that the entry’s opening words, “Last Thursday,” refer to Thursday, April 11, 1850, and that the passage, “I thought that this Thursday I would raise the same subject again … But no, today I received a letter in which he renounces walking with me on Thursdays” can be dated to Thursday, April 18, 1850.2 In entry NB17:71.c, mention is made of Rasmus Nielsen’s “3 books.” This is in part a reference to Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og Theologien [The Faith of the Gospels and Theology] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 702). The book was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 80, April 6, 1850. In entry NB17:99, Kierkegaard writes: “The other

) See the relevant explanatory note to NB17:28 in the present volume.

1

) Rasmus Nielsen’s letter is printed in LD, 348 (B&A 1, 273) and is dated “Thursday, March 19, 1850.” Gottsched, one the editors of EP, realized that Nielsen’s indication of the month as “March” must have been an error for “April.” Furthermore, the contents of the letter indicate clearly that the letter must have been written on a Thursday, so it can be dated Thursday, April 18, 1850. See the relevant explanatory note to NB17:71 in the present volume and the discussion in B&A 2, 109.

2

Critical Account of the Text

3. Outside front cover of Journal NB17.

617

618

J O U R N A L NB 17 Sunday I heard a theology graduate, Clemmensen, at vespers in the Church of Our Savior (it was my birthday).” Kierkegaard’s birthday was May 5, and the Saturday edition of Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 103, May 4, 1850, included a notice that the next day, Sunday, May 5, Clemmensen would lead vespers at the Church of Our Savior. As with the marginal additions in other journals, the marginal additions in the present journal may have been made somewhat after the original entries they accompany. An example is entry NB17:71.a, where it is written, “see p. 139,” which is a reference to entry NB17:76. It cannot be determined whether the appended lists of contents of the journal (entries NB17:2, 3, and 4) were written while the journal was still in use or subsequently.

III. Contents Eight entries in Journal NB17 bear the title “About Myself,” but Kierkegaard could easily have used this title more frequently because he himself is present in most of his entries, which thus contribute to the biographical narrative that forms part of the contents of his journals. As his own historian, Kierkegaard attempts not only to understand and interpret himself, but also to guard against future misunderstandings and erroneous interpretations of himself and his works. A key chapter in this narrative consists of Kierkegaard’s confrontation with Corsaren [The Corsair], which ruined his relationship with portions of the population of Copenhagen, but which also caused an enormous expansion of Kierkegaard’s horizon of experience, both with respect to social psychology and to Christianity: “Ah, and what significance it has had, how I have learned to understand myself, learned to know ‘the world,’ and learned to understand Xnty―yes, otherwise an entire aspect of Xnty, and a crucial aspect, would probably not have occurred to me at all” (NB17:13; see also NB17:38). Kierkegaard holds Goldschmidt, in particular, responsible for his unfortunate social fate, which became all the more intolerable when Goldschmidt took on the new role of “a respectable man, almost an aristocrat,” in his capacity as editor of his new journal Nord og Syd (NB17:15). In Kierkegaard’s view, Goldschmidt’s “personal existence” is sheer “nonsense,” which can be of use to Kierkegaard in his studies of “Copenhagen in moral dissolution” (NB17:32), but which must also infuriate everyone who can remember how as editor of Corsaren Goldschmidt made use “of all the weapons that no respectable author ought

Critical Account of the Text even dare touch” (NB17:42). Kierkegaard remembers in sadness how he had taken note of Goldschmidt before most other people had done so, and how he had wanted all the best for him―“but 6 years of crime as editor of The Corsair must not and ought not disappear as nothing” (NB17:46). The fact that no one had taken the opportunity to so much as mention such a “crime” embittered Kierkegaard’s relations with the literary world, which had never shown him the requisite appreciation: “But my times refused to accept the achievement. My writings were not read―on the contrary, the provincial market town amused itself by caricaturing me and making fun of me. With this, matters came to a deadlock. If people had immediately engaged with the matter, showing decent respect for what had been achieved, appreciating the great sacrifices I had made as an author, things would have gone easier” (NB17:49). Kierkegaard attributes the absence of recognition to the paradoxical circumstance that, owing to his remarkable talents, he was “envied by the literary bigwigs,” who consequently chose to ignore him to death. This symbolic execution, carried out by the mutual efforts of the intellectual class and Corsaren, also had enormous consequences for Kierkegaard’s relations with his fellow Copenhageners: “known by every servant, every scoundrel, every child, whose passing glances remind me of the mockery; my name is used as an invective that is shouted after me―as good as nothing is said in print concerning me and my work as an author; my price is not quoted on the exchange, while every day the abuse continues” (NB17:16; see also NB17:65). In other entries, Kierkegaard gives a more detailed social and biographical explanation of his extraordinary fate as an author, which is connected to his all-too-strict Christian upbringing (NB17:45) and with the circumstance that he had never been “free and unrestrained and in conformity with the universal” (NB17:14). Starting with his debut as an author, Kierkegaard felt himself to be in intellectual respects “100 years older than the eldest among us” and therefore did not let himself be particularly bothered by his “unfortunate exterior” and his “thin legs” (NB17:64). A number of the journal’s entries concern Kierkegaard’s problematic relationship with Prof. Rasmus Nielsen, with whom he for a time carried on a correspondence and took regular walks. Despite the fact that Nielsen was “warped by scholarliness” and did not know what it means to be “a personality” (NB17:7), Kierkegaard regarded him as the least inferior among the younger intellectuals and thus viewed him as a possible candidate to further his cause: “Given the thought that I was to die, I wanted to initiate N. into

619

620

J O U R N A L NB 17 the cause―but I kept on living” (NB17:78). For his part, Nielsen continued to write and publish books, and it was these activities in particular that aroused Kierkegaard’s disapproval. Thus, during the walk they took on Thursday, April 11, 1850, Kierkegaard was compelled to tell Nielsen not only that his works had no sense for “the cause,” but also that he was plagiarizing from Kierkegaard’s works―indeed, even from their private conversations―in a most embarrassing way. Similarly, Kierkegaard informed Nielsen that he had no desire to get involved in Nielsen’s polemics against H. L. Martensen. Nielsen did not fail to react: “He became somewhat angry or, rather, testy. But I changed course and spoke of other things and we strolled home in bona caritate … I bear no grudge against him, not in the least way, and I would be very willing to involve myself with him again, though it would scarcely be of any service to me, because his physical robustness is a poor match for my scrupulosity” (NB17:71). This psychological asymmetry seems to have been a real problem for Kierkegaard, who notes unambiguously that with his “physical robustness,” as well as “a certain coarseness,” and “a frightful vehemence,” Nielsen would become “a plague” to him if their relationship took on a more personal character (NB17:76). Therefore, when he received Nielsen’s “letter of divorce,” Kierkegaard breathed a sigh of relief and consoled himself with the belief that their conflict had presumably served a higher purpose: “For myself, however, I do believe that all this suffering is beneficial: it predisposes one to act religiously and is a tonic against the poetic capriciousness by which I have always been somewhat affected” (NB17:76). The journal also bears traces of Kierkegaard’s reading. One entry reveals his involvement with Johann Arndt (NB17:18), but Kierkegaard was also willing to comment on his own works, and he gives full support to Johannes de silentio’s Fear and Trembling, in which an emphasis on “passionate concentration” (NB17:21) is the prerequisite for becoming conscious of one’s own nature. Nor is passion absent from Kierkegaard’s reaction to Magnús Eiríksson’s pseudonymously published work Er Troen et Paradox og “i Kraft af det Absurde”?, with which Kierkegaard was very displeased (NB17:28). And as always, Socrates is a more or less conspicuous figure in Kierkegaard’s reading (NB17:25, 33, 35, 36), as is Luther, whom Kierkegaard continues to read with both admiration and with reservations (NB17:88, 111). To a degree this is also true of Rousseau and his work Emile, or On Education, which is accompanied by praise for being “very well put” (NB17:75) and for its “psychological profundity” (NB17:79). During this period, the Stoics also interested Kierkegaard, who at one point empha-

Critical Account of the Text sizes Stoicism’s differences from Christianity and from his own “sadness” (NB17:82), and at another point singles out “a curious self-contradiction in Stoicism,” related to its view of “suicide … as the ultimate escape route” (NB17:83). According to a parenthetical remark in entry NB17:94―“(I have only just now begun to read Seneca.)”―Kierkegaard’s intensive preoccupation with Seneca had begun fairly recently, but the encounter was a happy one: “I am now reading Seneca’s letters, which I find excellent; the short sentences by Epicurus that have been inserted are also splendid” (NB17:98). Despite expressions of significant disagreement, Kierkegaard was delighted with the aphoristic elements in Seneca’s letters: “In general, Seneca’s letters contain nuggets of nourishment” (NB17:103; see also NB17:100). Quite a number of entries in Journal NB17 contain theological reflections. At several points, Kierkegaard emphasizes Christianity’s character as an “existential communication” (NB17:33; see also NB17:30), and he defines the believer’s dialectical relationship to “the absurd” (NB17:19), which he links so closely to Christianity’s scandalous essence as to take away the breath of even the most zealous critic of religion: “Not one single objection against Xnty has arisen, not even from the most rabid rationalist and the most scandalized person, to which the ‘actual Xn’ cannot reply quite calmly: Yes, that is the way it is” (NB17:20). Christianity’s divergence from all that is familiar in this world describes the law of inversion that characterizes the suffering nature of a Christian’s life, but this nonconformity with the world is also the source of a wonderful communion with God that makes it permissible for one to forget one’s transgressions: “Here what matters is a trusting sigh that takes only a second to make itself understood by God―and then away, to forgetting” (NB17:22; see also NB17:39). Above all, however, a Christian is obligated to act “immediately” (NB17:56, NB17:57), and in this respect, being a Christian has not become any easier over the course of time: “How difficult it is to have faith now, now in the 19th cent., now when everything has become a chaos of reflections and deliberations” (NB17:50). Kierkegaard sees this chaos exemplified in professors of theology, who with their aloof, academic scholarliness constitute sheer irony in comparison with the simplicity of original Christianity: “‘The truth’ is crucified as a thief―before that, it is mocked, spat upon―in dying it cries out, Follow me. Only ‘the professor’ (the unhuman) does not understand a word of this; he regards it as a matter for the learned” (NB17:59). As in many of the preceding journals, in Journal NB17 Kierkegaard carries on a polemic against the sort of interpreta-

621

622

J O U R N A L NB 17 tion that invokes scholarship in order to drown straightforward biblical prescriptions in a flood of confusing ambiguities. Combating “this boundlessly bloated, theological-scholarly confusion of Xnty” (NB17:63) is not a task for hermeneutics but depends on a maneuver that can lead the reader down into something utterly elemental. In one of the longest entries in the journal, titled “The Issue,” Kierkegaard lays bare portions of the wish for ease and convenience that motivates modern exegesis in its efforts to make it more difficult to understand the direct address characteristic of New Testament texts: The matter is quite simple. The N.T. is extremely easy to understand. But we human beings, we are really rather cunning rogues, and we pretend that we cannot understand it because we understand very well that if it could be understood immediately, we would immediately have to act in conformity with it … It [the human race] has invented Christian scholarship in order to interpret, clarify, more closely illuminate, etc., etc., the N.T. Sure, thanks a lot! … I open up the N.T. and I read, “If you wish to be perfect, then sell all your goods and give to the poor and come and follow me.” Good Lord, all the capitalists, the big government officials, and those living on pensions, too―just about the entire race excepting the beggars―we would be done for, were it not for scholarship. (NB17:102) Kierkegaard goes on to depict scholarship as a cynical prison guard who restrains the New Testament as one restrains a psychiatric patient in order that he not constitute a danger to his surroundings: “In vain does it shout and scream, rage and gesticulate―it does not help: we perceive it only through scholarship … But it is obvious that no insane person, no prisoner of the state, would ever be as dangerous to us hum. beings as would the N.T. if it were set free” (NB17:102). But nothing that has profound and genuine significance can be repressed forever. Sooner or later, the voice of truth will surely break through. And even though the entry cited below bears no title indicating that Kierkegaard is writing about himself, one can hardly avoid reading personal prophecy into its words: “With respect to every living person, one at least has certainty that his talk must come to an end―but once a dead person … has begun with this strange business of crying out, how can one stop up his mouth” (NB17:73).

Explanatory Notes 167

1

NB17 …1850.] Label on front cover of volume.

168

1

About Myself … p. 79] Written on the inside front cover of the volume. p. 10] See NB17:14 in the present volume. p. 26] See NB17:23 in the present volume. p. 70] See NB17:47 in the present volume. p. 71] See NB17:48 in the present volume. p. 72] See NB17:49 in the present volume. p. 79] See NB17:51 in the present volume.

1 2 3 4 6 7

169

1

2 3 3

169

4 5 6 7 8 9

170

31

Texts for Friday Sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held on Fridays in Vor Frue Kirke [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 part 3 of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Friday Discourse] → 169,1. p. 30] See NB17:24 in the present volume. p. p. p. p. p. p.

17] See NB17:19 in the present volume. 38] See NB17:29 in the present volume. 90] See NB17:60 in the present volume. 148] See NB17:78 in the present volume. 191] See NB17:101 in the present volume. 194] See NB17:102 in the present volume.

Look, people call it wit … in the deepest sense, crime] Here and in what follows, the reference is

to Kierkegaard’s collision with the satirical weekly Corsaren [The Corsair] (→ 187,33). In December 1845, Kierkegaard had published a newspaper article in which he provoked Corsaren into attacking him (→ 174,6), and as consequence of this, in the following years, and especially during the first part of 1846, Kierkegaard was ridiculed in the columns of Corsaren, and, as a result, he was abused on the street (→ 171,7). This was what the vulgarity of the mob wanted … to present me to the mob as someone mad] In 1846, Corsaren presented Kierkegaard as an eccentric or even as a mad person; see, e.g., no. 278 (January 16), no. 280 (January 30), and no. 285 (March 6). Kierkegaard frequently adverted to this situation in his journals; see, e.g., NB10:166 in KJN 5, 349 and NB12:138.c in KJN 6, 230–231. the cultivated world transformed itself … this villainy] In his journals, Kierkegaard often complains that no one (and especially not “the cultivated world”) supported him when he took up the battle against Corsaren; see, e.g., NB10:166 and 181 in KJN 5, 349, 361; NB12:110 and NB13:33 in KJN 6, 204–206, 296–297; and NB17:64 in the present volume. Things went so far … attacks on the street] In his journals, Kierkegaard often complains that he was abused on the street as a result of Corsaren’s ridicule (→ 192,17); see, e.g., NB12:80 in KJN 6, 186–187, with its relevant explanatory note. At a number of points he also expresses the fear that he might eventually be exposed to physical attack; see, e.g., NB:211 in KJN 4, 123. And how much has been gained] Variant: “And” changed from “But”. R. N.] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, winter semester 1840–1841; from 1841 Poul Martin Møller’s successor as extraordinary professor

33

4

171

7

21

25

171

624

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 7

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, NB7:114, NB10:32 in KJN 5, 80–81, 145, 283, and Pap. X 6 B 124). 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 (→ 221m,46) 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. 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 (→ 172,1), which included a preface in which he heaped scorn on Kierkegaard’s writings, Rasmus Nielsen attacked 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. Kierkegaard’s relationship with Nielsen, which reached the breaking point in the course of Journal NB17, is illuminated by quite a number of journal entries (→ 221,24), as well as in a series of letters (printed in LD), relating to a

•

1850

number of topics, including the break, which took place in April 1850 (→ 221m,18). Kierkegaard’s mention of Nielsen’s “scholarliness” in the present journal entry was probably occasioned by Nielsen’s work 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 (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), 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. these writings] i.e., Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings, esp. Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). offended by the preface to Martensen’s Dogmatics] In the preface to Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), Martensen writes that the views on dogmatics he advances in that work are the same as those he held at the start of his career as a writer, and he states that the extent to which he has been influenced by “signs of the times” must be judged from the contents of the book itself. He emphasizes the necessity of “coherent theological thought―indeed, theological speculation” (p. ii), even while conceding that those who feel no need to think about faith are certainly within their rights. And, alluding to Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works, he adds: “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 great-

37

1

172

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 7 est 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 put 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. This much I have been able to learn from this: that just as there was a time when there were more than a few among us who had altogether too soon become absolute in knowledge, so now are there more than a few among us who have altogether too soon become absolute in faith. 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, perhaps even rather sickly life of faith into a rule for all believers. Only that great individual [i.e., the Church], as the Apostle teaches us, shall in the course of time mature into a perfect man who can fully actualize the concept of the believer in its spirituality, in its entire universality and multiplicity, and who alone can possess the fullness of faith and the gifts of grace” (p. iii). These remarks were emphasized and rebutted by R. Nielsen in his work Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 171,25); see, e.g., pp. 8, 42, 45ff., 48, 67, 129, 131. ― Martensen: Hans Lassen Martensen (1808– 1884), from 1840 extraordinary professor and from September 1, 1850, professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen; licentiate in theology, 1837; honorary doctorate from University of Kiel, 1840; appointed court preacher, 1845; Knight of the Dannebrog, 1847. Martensen had recently published his major work, Den christelige Dogmatik, which was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 167, July 19, 1849;

•

1850

625

from a surviving receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers, it can be seen that Kierkegaard had already purchased a copy on July 18, 1849. Martensen had not yet defended his dogmatics against criticism, which he did in Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift [Information on Dogmatics: An Occasional Piece] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), which was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 136, June 13, 1850; from a surviving receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers, it can be seen that Kierkegaard had already purchased a copy on June 12, 1850. the diversion against Martensen] i.e., the attack on Martensen expressed in Nielsen’s most recent books (→ 171,25). I have never done battle with anyone … victory would bring honor] Kierkegaard may have in mind the conclusion to Rasmus Nielsen’s Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 171,25), where Nielsen writes, “If Dr. M. can rebut my contention, he will of course win a victory, not merely over me (for that is not of much significance), but possibly over every individual who, as the preface puts it, is capable only of thinking in ‘random thoughts and aphorisms, sudden discoveries and hints’ [→ 172,1]. If, on the other hand, he does not find it appropriate to involve himself in further battle (for such a battle might cause difficulties), he does not need to be at a loss about what to do: he can of course remain silent. With me, it is an entirely different matter. Even if it turns out that I am right, I nonetheless do not win a victory, for here I am not relying on my own original work, but am merely appropriating what I believe I have learned from someone else” (p. 131). the battle with Heiberg was self-defense] Probably because he felt provoked by Heiberg’s rather careless review of Either/Or (1843) and a bit later by Heiberg’s one-sided mention of Repetition (1843), Kierkegaard replied with a series of satirical attacks on Heiberg; see esp. the article, “A Word of Thanks to Hr. Professor Heiberg” (Fædrelandet, no. 1168, March 5, 1843; COR, 17– 21), signed “Victor Eremita,” and Prefaces: Light Reading for Various Stations in Life, as Time and

5

6

8

626

12

14

15

20

21

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 7–13

Opportunity Permit, by Nicolaus Notabene (1844); P, 1–67). ― Heiberg: Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), author, head of the Royal Theater, at this time in his second decade of being Denmark’s leading tastemaker, even though he had all but ceased publishing criticism. almost 2 years have now passed] i.e., since Kierkegaard had initiated his friendship with Rasmus Nielsen in the summer of 1848. the situation would have been,] Variant: first written “the situation would have been.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. without disciples or anything of that sort] Rasmus Nielsen came to be regarded as a disciple of Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB14:91 (KJN 6, 405) and its relevant explanatory note. a former speculative professor] Refers to the fact that Rasmus Nielsen had been one of the principal spokesmen for speculative (Hegelian) philosophy (→ 171,25). And how clear … is so obvious.] Variant: added, partially in the marginal column.

34

Generally speaking,] Variant: added. those ascetics] Perhaps a reference to the ascetic movement of the early centuries of Christianity.

173

13

have the honor to] Variant: added.

173

19

today a teeming capital city perishes in an earthquake] Presumably an allusion to the powerful earthquake that devastated Lisbon on November 1, 1755, when a great many of the city’s buildings were destroyed and thousands of people perished.

172

174

26

6

that stroke of the pen with which I hurled myself against the vulgarity of the mob!] A reference to the so-called Corsair affair of 1846. When one of Corsaren’s anonymous contributors, P. L. Møller (→ 176,29), published a critique of Kierkegaard’s Stages on Life’s Way (1845) in his aesthetic annual Gæa [Gaea] (→ 174,13) for 1846, Kierkegaard published a newspaper article in which he identified P. L. Møller with Corsaren (→ 187,33) and then asked that he “come in Corsaren,”

•

1850

because he could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused but only praised by the paper (→ 174,16); 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 [The Fatherland], on December 27, 1845, no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). 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, but the teasing continued after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor in October 1846, lasting until the issue of 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). I thought of stopping as an author … delivered to Luno] All evidence indicates that Concluding Unscientific Postscript, with which Kierkegaard had wanted to conclude his work as an author, was delivered to Bianco Luno’s Printing House on December 30, 1845, though the book’s final pages, “A First and Last Explanation,” were delivered later. The printing was finished on February 20, 1846, and the book was for sale on a commission basis at C. A. Reitzel’s Booksellers on February 27, 1846. that article in Gæa] Refers to P. L. Møller’s (→ 176,29) article ”A Visit to Sorø,” published December 22, 1845, in Møller’s annual Gæa for 1846 (pp. 144–187, esp. pp. 172–180; COR, 96– 104). The article contained a harsh criticism of Stages on Life’s Way (1845). take a magnanimous step for the sake of “the others.”] → 176,33. Goldschmidt had immortalized me] Refers to the circumstance that in 1845 Kierkegaard’s first pseudonym, Victor Eremita, the editor of Either/ Or, had been immortalized in the columns of Corsaren at the expense of Orla Lehmann, the pop-

9

13

13 16

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 13–15

21

29 32

175

13

ular leader of the liberal opposition: “for Lehmann will die and be forgotten, but Victor Eremita will never die” (Corsaren, November 14, 1845, no. 269, col. 14; see COR, 96). ― 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 (→ 187,33) 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]. unselfishly used my own money to be an author] An assertion often made by Kierkegaard and one that may reasonably be interpreted by considering Kierkegaard’s cost of living and the total expenses associated producing his books in the light of his rapidly diminishing fortune; see Frithiof Brandt and Else Torkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]). See also NB11:122 in KJN 6, 64, with its relevant explanatory note. probably] Variant: first written “perhaps”. a consummate … reputation as an author … begin all over again!] Prior to his battle with Corsaren, Kierkegaard had earned a reputation as an author from his pseudonymous works ranging from Either/Or (1843) through Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846); after the battle with Corsaren he had acquired a new reputation as an author of edifying works such as Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), Christian Discourses (1848), and his most recently published work, the communion discourses, The High Priest, the Tax Collector, the Woman Who Was a Sinner: Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (November 14, 1849). meritoriousness] In Lutheran doctrine, this signifies the erroneous view that a person can by his own accomplishments make himself deserving of God’s grace. See, e.g., articles 2 and 4 of the Augsburg Confession.

•

1850

627

establishing schools] A number of ironic voices had noted that Kierkegaard was in fact in the process of forming a school; see, e.g., J.M.L. Hjort, who wrote in Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift [New Theological Journal], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1850): “It is an irony of fate that Mag. K, the proclaimed enemy of all schools and systems, is now himself coming forward as founder of a literary school that thus far includes three members: Hr. Z. (Breve af Cornelius [Letters by Cornelius]), Prof. Nielsen, and a certain H. H. (Two Ethical Religious Essays), in addition to what has seeped into Mag. Adler’s writings” (p. 136). See also NB14:98 in KJN 6, 409, with its relevant explanatory note. to the times,] Variant: added. seriousness and] Variant: first written “seriousness.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. This has become increasingly forgotten since the time of Luther] Kierkegaard has in mind the Pauline and Lutheran doctrine of the relation between Law and Gospel, in which the Law judges human beings, disciplining us 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.

14

Goldschmidt lately] Refers to Goldschmidt’s (→ 174,16) signal transformation after his foreign travels in 1847, which were made clear in the first year he published Nord og Syd, in which he presented himself as a voice of reason and common sense; maintained that he had entered into a new, positive stage of development; and publicly broke with P. L. Møller’s “aesthetic” life view (see Nord og Syd, vol. 1, 1848, pp. 226–227 and 166–176, esp. p. 167). See Kierkegaard’s more detailed description of this situation on two loose papers bearing the title “An Ethical Judgment on Student Goldschmidt’s Later Period, or on His Transition to the Later Period” (paper 388 in KJN 11; SKS 27, 460–463). on the occasion of Schak’s article … names of the famous, etc.[”]] Refers to a passage in Goldschmidt’s (→ 174,16) literary battle with the

38

175

1

176

17 22

23

628

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 15–16

politician and author Hans Egede Schack (1820– 1859). In May 1849, Schack had attracted attention with an essay titled Om Slesvigs Deling [On the Partition of Schleswig] in which he recommended the cession of the German portions of Schleswig, a suggestion that provoked much criticism. He reiterated his views in a journal edited by himself, 1848. Ugeblad for politik og litteratur [1848: A Weekly for Politics and Literature], which appeared in a prospectus issue on September 24, 1849, and in twenty-six subsequent four-page issues, published between October 7, 1849, and March 31, 1850. Schack, who had been a member of the constitutional convention, did not win a seat in the first parliamentary elections in December 1849, but in February 1850, he won a seat in a by-election in the Præstø district. Goldschmidt had been actively hostile to Schack’s “partition theory” from the start, and after Schack was elected to parliament, Goldschmidt asserted that in his political platform Schack had concealed his ideas of partition in order to win the election. Goldschmidt’s critique and Schack’s defense and counterattack were carried on throughout February and March 1850; see, e.g., Goldschmidt in Nord og Syd, 1850, vol. 3, p. 172 (February 15); pp. 214–16 (February 22); p. 247 (March 1); pp. 268–277 (March 8); and pp. 361–363 (March 26), and Schack in Fædrelandet, 1850, no. 52, pp. 206–207 (March 2) (“Journalistisk Fripostighed” [Journalistic Effrontery]) and no. 65, p. 259 (March 18). In the article “‘Flyveposten’ & ‘Nord og Syd’ contra ‘1848’” [“The Flying Post” and “North and South” vs. “1848 ”] in the weekly 1848, no. 20 (February 17, 1850, cols. 156–160), Schack turned to face Goldschmidt’s attack, and in the next issue’s “Tilbageblik paa Ugen” [The Week in Review], he provided a polemical overview of the debate (see no. 21, February 24, 1850, cols. 167–168). The latter of these two articles caused Goldschmidt to exclaim: “It is impossible to carry on a discussion when one’s opponent’s views border on madness, that is, when he is so angry that he does not know what he is saying and merely lets loose with violent and unreasonable remarks in order to have the last word. Mr. Schack, who has now counted us among ‘the ra-

•

1850

vens who live off the names of the famous,’ and simply accuses us of ‘impudent lies,’ again maintains that he has not gone over to Fædrelandet’s partition theory … This is too much. Discussion and proofs are now impossible, and we will not serve Mr. Schack by avenging his coarse remarks” (Nord og Syd, 1850, vol. 3, p. 247 [March 1]). Kierkegaard subsequently returns to this dispute (→ 187,33). ― the ravens who live off the names of the famous: Kierkegaard cites Goldschmidt inaccurately, whereas Goldschmidt had accurately cited from the tenth song of Frederik PaludanMüller’s epic poem Adam Homo, in which a group of journalists are described with these words; see Adam Homo. Et Digt [Adam Homo: A Poem], 3 pts. (Copenhagen, 1842–1849), pt. 2 (1849), p. 246. Svend Andreas Olsen] Fictional character. position … triumphantly conquered by Either/ Or and occupied thereafter] Kierkegaard’s first pseudonymous work, Either/Or (1843), created a great sensation and was sold out in the course of a couple of years. The work was reviewed positively and in detail, and its author, the pseudonym Victor Eremita, was in fact immortalized in Corsaren (→ 174,16). that little article by P. L. Møller] → 174,13. ― P. L. Møller: Peder Ludvig Møller (1814–1865), Danish aesthetician, author, and critic, served as editor of the polemical journal Arena in 1843, and in the years 1845–1847, he published the aesthetic annual Gæa. Møller also contributed articles to various journals, including “a number of satirical critiques and poems in Corsaren,” as he himself described his work in T. H. Erslew’s Almindeligt Forfatter-Lexicon [Universal Encyclopedia of Authors], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1843–1853; ASKB 954–969), vol. 2 (1847), p. 406. He published some of his literary pieces in Kritiske Skizzer fra Aarene 1840–47 [Critical Sketches from the Years 1840– 1847], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1847). At the end of 1847 he traveled abroad and never returned to Denmark. Gjødvad] Jens Finsteen Giødwad (1811– 1891), Danish jurist and journalist; editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post] 1837– 1839, and from 1839 coeditor and publisher of

16 27

29

33

176

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 16

33

39

177

10 13

14

Fædrelandet. He assisted Kierkegaard with proofreading and as a middleman in dealings with his printer. But (something I also told Gjødvad … in my article itself)] Kierkegaard writes about this conversation with Giødwad in a journal entry from May: “When I hurled myself against the literature of the mob, Gjødvad [see the previous note] was there, impatiently waiting for the article, which was the greatest service that could be done at that time for Fædrelandet, which had itself proclaimed that the spread of mob literature was so disproportionate that it could not be ignored. ― So I took action” (KJN 8; SKS 24, 525–526). In his article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner” (→ 174,6) Kierkegaard writes that in itself P.L. Møller’s article was of no importance and that he had written in opposition to it because he “actually thought of doing someone a service.” But this motive is not emphasized as much in the article as it is in Kierkegaard’s later recollection; it was only in the subsequent article, “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action,” which was directed in particular against Corsaren, that Kierkegaard unambiguously declared that he had taken “the step for the sake of others,” i.e., of “demanding that I myself be abused” (COR, 47; SKS 14, 87). So I hurled myself against the rabble] → 174,6. for the 4th year] Corsaren began its attack on Kierkegaard on January 2, 1846 (→ 174,6). my name is used as an invective that is shouted after me] Kierkegaard writes in many journal entries that his first name, which he never used in his writings, had begun to gain currency as a nickname; see, e.g., NB14:85 in KJN 6, 399; NB7:109 in KJN 5, 140–141; NB10:99 in KJN 5, 317–318. as good as nothing is said in print concerning me and my work as an author] Kierkegaard often complained, with a certain amount of justification, that his writings were not really reviewed (see, e.g., NB14:81 in KJN 6, 396–397). In an overview of the year’s homiletic literature, Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], vol. 12 (Copenhagen, 1849), reports, in connection with

•

1850

629

one of Kierkegaard’s works: “Owing both to their number and to their contents, Mag. Kierkegaard’s works occupy such a remarkable and unusual position among the great many edifying works that have so enriched our literature in recent times that we have long had the wish to provide a more detailed review of them; but because we preferred that this be provided by ‘that single individual’ whom the author regards as his real reader (see his prefaces), making this interesting literary phenomenon the subject of more detailed investigation in this journal has been postponed hitherto” (p. 180). C. E. Scharling’s review of Martensen’s Dogmatik from the same period makes the following remarks apropos of Kierkegaard: “It is odd that no one has yet made this author’s writings the subject of a detailed analysis, both because they merit this in their own right and because this seems to be especially called for owing to the approval they have won from readers of varying levels of cultivation” (Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift, vol. 1 [Copenhagen, 1850], p. 355). See also the introduction to the later anonymous piece by Martensen’s disciple Ludvig Gude, Om Magister S. Kierkegaards Forfattervirksomhed. Iagttagelser af en Landsbypræst [On Magister S. Kierkegaard’s Work as an Author: Observations of a Country Priest] (Copenhagen, 1851). At the same time, however, some of Kierkegaard’s works received a great deal of attention, inasmuch as it was Kierkegaard who had been enlisted into the contemporary debate about the relationship between faith and knowledge, particularly by R. Nielsen (→ 171,25) and P. M. Stilling (→ 223,29) in opposition to Martensen and speculative theology. now, e.g., Martensen dares to swagger in a preface] Refers to H. L. Martensen’s preface to Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 172,1). my brother Peter … a frivolous acknowledgment] A reference to a lecture Søren Kierkegaard’s brother Peter Christian gave at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle on October 30, 1849, and which was published on December 16, 1849, in Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times]. In the lecture, Peter Christian compares the work of his brother Søren to that of Martensen (→ 172,1). See NB14:81 in KJN 6, 396–

12

22

24

630

28 30

33

33

36

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 16–18

397, with its relevant explanatory notes. ― my brother Peter: Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805– 1888), Søren Kierkegaard’s elder brother; 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 in central Zealand. He was a close ally of Grundtvig and a respected member of Grundtvig’s circle. one might dare offer a pinch of me] i.e., as one takes a pinch of tobacco or snuff. magnanimous,] Variant: changed from “magnanimous.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Bishop Mynster] Jakob Peter Mynster (1775– 1854), Danish priest, author, politician, from 1834 bishop of Zealand and as such primate of the Danish State Church; preached frequently in Copenhagen churches, particularly in the Church of Our Lady and in Christiansborg Castle Church. here on the hill] A reference to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg [Erasmus Montanus or Rasmus Berg] (1731), where Jesper, now that the eponymous Rasmus Berg (whose surname means “hill” or “mountain”) has returned from Copenhagen with the idea that the world is round, says that “here on the hill no one is going to believe that” (act 3, sc. 2). Her paa Bjerget (“here on the hill”) has become a common saying, meaning something like “in this neck of the woods.” See Den Danske SkuePlads [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. At one point a couple of years ago he said to me: “But those … are taking direct aim.”] Kierkegaard’s visits to Mynster are known only from Kierkegaard’s accounts. According to Kierkegaard, he visited Mynster in the spring of 1846, which would have been the first time since he had made his debut as an author (see NB:57 in KJN 4, 50–51). In the succeeding years, Kierkegaard made a number of additional visits to the bishop’s residence, though it is not certain

•

1850

which visit he is referring to when he speaks of “a couple of years ago,” i.e., in the spring of 1848. fatal for] Variant: first written “fatal.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. while on the other hand … a position.] Variant: started in the main text column; continued and concluded in the marginal column. ― his effusions … would grant me too lofty a position] i.e., P. C. Kierkegaard’s lecture on Søren Kierkegaard and Martensen (→ 177,24) was fundamentally motivated by the prominent position Søren Kierkegaard had assumed when Rasmus Nielsen used him against Martensen (→ 172,1). Søren Kierkegaard frequently makes ironic use of such Grundtvigian adjectives as “hearty” in connection with his brother Peter Christian; see also NB17:106 (→ 250,35). an example (which Arndt also cites in the preface to the 3rd book p. 667)] Kierkegaard’s translation of a passage from Johann Arndt, Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum, Welche handeln Von heilsamer Buße herzlicher Reue und Leid über die Sünde wahrem Glauben auch heiligem Leben und Wandel der rechten wahren Christen [All Insightful Books on True Christianity, Which Treat of Healthy Repentance, Heartfelt Regret, and Remorse over Sin, True Faith, as well as the Holy Life and Doings of the Genuinely True Christian], 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1737 [1733]; ASKB 276; abbreviated hereafter as Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum), p. 667. The books “on true Christianity” by the German theologian Johann Arndt (1555–1621) were published in countless editions; the famous Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Four Books on True Christianity] was published ca. 1605–1610, and by the end of the 17th century, it had been supplemented by two additional books. See also 2 Sam 23:15–16. the story of Alexander … magnanimity and heroism] Refers to an anecdote about Alexander the Great (356–323 b.c.), military leader and king of Macedonia, 336–323 b.c. The anecdote is related in the chapter “Alexanders Tog indtil Slaget ved Arbela (333–331 før Chr. Fødsel)” [Alexander’s

7

178

1

177m

24

178

29

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 18–23 Campaign up to the Battle of Arbela (333–331 b.c.)] in Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie, omarbeidet af Johan Gottfried Woltmann [Karl Friedrich Becker’s World History, Reworked by Johan Gottfried Woltmann], trans. J. Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983), vol. 2 (1822), pp. 647–648: “indeed, Alexander also exhibited examples of strength under privation, especially one time when the army and the king were marching through the desert and suffered terribly from thirst and a soldier brought Alexander a helmet full of water that he had found. ‘Were I alone to drink, these men here would lose heart,’ said Alexander, while he gestured to the army and poured the water out onto the ground. This gesture―which was a splendid proof of the king’s free strength as well as an expression of the human feelings with which he, in the Greek spirit, never ceased to treat his soldiers―also awakened such enthusiasm among the soldiers that they no longer felt hunger or thirst, but cried out to him, saying that he had but to lead them further on unknown roads, and they would surely follow him.” 179

25

scholarly science that wants to comprehend faith] i.e., speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology.

179

32

“actual Xn”] The expression alludes to the system of rank and precedence, which made a distinction between “titular” and “actual” (i.e., someone actually functioning in the assigned position) titles. The decree governing rank was published annually in the Kongelig Dansk Hof- og Stats-Calender og Veiviser eller Anviisning til Kiøbenhavns, Christianshavns, Forstædernes og Frederiksbergs Beboere [Royal Danish Court and Government Almanac and Directory, or Instructions for the Inhabitants of Copenhagen, Christianshavn, the Suburbs, and Frederiksberg] (Copenhagen, 1810–present), in which all persons of rank were listed with the forms of address appropriate to each. Yes, that is the way it is] Reference to the German author J. G. Hamann’s reaction to the English philosopher David Hume’s objections

32

•

1850

631

to Christianity; see AA:14.1 in KJN 1, 25–26 and Stages on Life’s Way (SLW, 106; SKS 6, 101). Fear and Trembling] i.e., Fear and Trembling: A Dialectical Lyric by Johannes de silentio (Copenhagen, 1843), in FT, 1–123; SKS 4, 99–210. Joh. de s. rightly says that passionate concentration … standpoints] Johannes de silentio, the pseudonymous author of Fear and Trembling; the reference is to FT, 78–79; SKS 4, 169–170. Cf. FT, 42–43; SKS 4, 137–138. Sarah gets a child … age of childbearing] Abraham, who is the principal figure in Fear and Trembling, is one hundred years old, and his wife Sarah is ninety years old when God tells them that Sarah will have a son named Isaac; see Gen 17:15–21 (FT, 18–19, 102–103; SKS 4, 115–116, 191– 192). Joh. d. s. continually repeats that he is unable to understand] See, e.g., FT, 32–33, 66–67, 99, 112– 120; SKS 4, 128, 159, 188–189, 200–207. the ethical constitutes a spiritual trial] See, e.g., FT, 76–77; SKS 4, 167–168. Everything, he says, depends on passionate concentration] → 180,3. when someone comes and wants to correct him] e.g., Magnús Eiríksson under the pseudonym Theophilus Nicolaus (→ 185,6). “he rejected before he began.”] No source has been identified for this apparent quotation.

2

prayer is the silent, trusting accord with God] Presumably an allusion to Lessing’s comedy Minna von Barnhelm (1767), act 2, sc. 7, where Minna says that one single grateful thought directed to heaven is the most perfect prayer; see Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) (TDIO, 16; SKS 5, 397) and entry JJ:291 in KJN 2, 213.

30

181

Martensen] → 172,1. He has written a dogmatics] i.e., H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (1849) (→ 172,1). one point he slides over … to thinking] The question of the relation of faith to thought was precisely the main topic of the dispute that Rasmus Nielsen began when he launched his

1

182

180

3

9

11

13 28 29

35

30 35

632

39

183

1

2

183m

3 4

5 6

183

8

183

14

17

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 23–26

Kierkegaard-inspired attack on H. L. Martensen’s dogmatics (→ 171,25). faith―as opposed to my efforts.] Variant: changed from “faith.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. everyone to run along with] From the Danish idiom, “to run with half a wind,” i.e., not knowing the whole of what one passes on to someone else. detailed] Variant: changed from “big”. He is a prof.; he has an important position] → 172,1. a velvet sash or paunch] In accordance with a sumptuary decree from 1683, among the clergy, only bishops, the royal confessor, and those who had taken the theological doctorate were permitted to wear a priestly cap and gown of velvet, with a silk cape. Inasmuch as Martensen had an honorary doctorate (→ 172,1), he was thus permitted to wear velvet. knight] → 172,1. have spent money in order to be an author] → 174,21. Friday Discourse] → 169,1. Socrates’ defense … condemned him to death] Refers to the ironic speech in his own defense that Socrates delivered before the court of the people when he had been accused of believing in different gods than those venerated by the state and of corrupting the youth of Athens. He was found guilty by a narrow majority, after which he was supposed to recommend an appropriate punishment. He wished either to be subjected to a trivial fine, which he could pay immediately, or to be accorded the highest of the city’s honors, being permitted to dine at the city hall gratis for the rest of his life, but a large majority now condemned him to death instead. The trial and Socrates’ defense are best known through Plato’s presentation in his dialogue, Apology; see Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), pp. 3–26. Socrates had been viewed as an eccentric] See, e.g., Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus (149a), in which Socrates, prior to explaining his special art of

•

1850

midwifery, remarks: “don’t give away my secret. It is not known that I possess this skill; so the ignorant world describes me in other terms as an eccentric person who reduces people to hopeless perplexity” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, p. 854). See also Alcibiades I (106a), the Platonic authorship of which has been disputed, and Symposium (215a). popular assembly] i.e., the court of the people, consisting of 501 members, which condemned Socrates. Wieland in his Aristipp und seine Zeit 2nd part pp. 12 and 13] See C. M. Wieland, Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen [Aristippus and Some of His Contemporaries], 4 vols., in C. M. Wielands sämtliche Werke [The Complete Works of C. M. Wieland], vols. 33–36 (Leipzig 1800– 1801; abbreviated hereafter as Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen), vol. 2 (1800), pp. 12–13. ― Wieland: Christoph Martin Wieland (1733–1813), German author, from 1769 professor of philosophy at the University of Erfurt. The “Aristipp” in the title of Wieland’s work is the Greek philosopher Aristippus (ca. 435–ca. 365 b.c.), founder of the Cyrenaic school of Greek philosophy, who appealed to Socrates as his authority, just as Epicurus later appealed to the authority of Aristippus. good observations are also to be found on pp. 38, 39, 40 … ought to have fled … pp. 55 et al.] Variant: started in main text column; continued and concluded in the marginal column. ― pp. 38, 39, 40: See C. M. Wieland, Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen, pp. 39–41. ― H. H.’s two essays: i.e., Kierkegaard’s Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays, published pseudonymously on May 19, 1849: “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” and “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle”; see WA, 47–108; SKS 11, 49–111. ― see in addition pp. 55 et al.: See C. M. Wieland, Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen, pp. 55–59. The Daily Press] Variant: added. the press does not kill anyone―as is said hypocritically] No source has been identified for this quotation.

24

30

14

183m

2

184

9

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 27–32 184

26

185

6

9

10

Poetic Lines.] Variant: added. Theophilus Nicolaus] Under this pseudonym Magnús Eiríksson published the book Er Troen et Paradox og “i Kraft af det Absurde”? et Spørgsmaal foranlediget ved “Frygt og Bæven, af Johannes de silentio”, besvaret ved Hjelp af en Troes-Ridders fortrolige Meddelelser, til fælles Opbyggelse for Jøder, Christne og Muhamedanere, af bemeldte Troes-Ridders Broder Theophilus Nicolaus [Is Faith a Paradox and “by Virtue of the Absurd”? A Question Occasioned by Fear and Trembling by Johannes de silentio, Answered with the Assistance of Confidential Communications from a Knight of Faith, for the Common Edification of Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans, by the Aforementioned Knight of Faith’s Brother, Theophilus Nicolaus] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 831). The book was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 59, March 11, 1850. Kierkegaard elsewhere wrote the draft of a polemic against Eiríksson’s book; see Pap. X 6 B 68–82. Joh. Climacus himself declares that he does not have faith] Refers to Johannes Climacus’s parting declaration in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where he writes: “The undersigned, Johannes Climacus, who has written this book, does not claim to be a Christian … He is a humorist” (CUP, 617; SKS 7, 560). Theophilus Nicolaus presents the believer] In his work (→ 185,6) Magnús Eiríksson presents a vigorous critique of the concept of faith as presented by Johannes de silentio in Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous work Fear and Trembling (1843) and as subsequently presented by another pseudonym, Johannes Climacus, in Concluding Unscientific Postscript. Throughout his entire book, but especially in the chapter “The Paradox of Faith as It Appears in Concluding Unscientific Postscript” (pp. 149–181), Eiríksson attacks the concept of faith presented by Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms (the principle of absurdity) on the basis of his own experience of faith; the pseudonyms demonstrate a “lack of true and certain knowledge of the true faith, a lack of life experience in the region of faith, because when there is sufficient life experience in this connection, one can-

•

1850

633

not avoid the conviction that the abovementioned point of departure not merely can, but must be abandoned” (pp. 178–179). Eiríksson’s critique of Climacus is also aimed at R. Nielsen (→ 171,25) and P. M. Stilling (→ 223,29), who had taken hold of the absurdity principle in order to use it against H. L. Martensen (→ 172,1). I am simply identified with my pseudonyms] In his journals, Kierkegaard often complains that views he has articulated through his pseudonyms are simply attributed directly to him. In an appendix to Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) (CUP, 625–630; SKS 7, 569–573), he had expressly requested that this distinction be made. Eiríksson does, however, seem to respect the pseudonymity even if, according to Kierkegaard, he mixes together Johannes de silentio and Johannes Climacus (Pap. X 6 B 71).

23

God’s Chosen Instruments] See Acts 9:15–16. Paul’s having been called by a revelation] See Acts 1:1–19.

28

185

7

186

different ways and] Variant: first written “different ways including”.

23

186

Goldschmidt] → 174,16. what he has hit upon, that The Corsair is a first stage―] Refers to M. A. Goldschmidt’s (→ 174,16) signal transformation when he founded Nord og Syd (→ 175,38) and to Goldschmidt’s dispute with H. E. Schack (→ 176,1). Schack had called Goldschmidt’s interpretation of his own (i.e., Schack’s) views “true Corsair effrontery” (Fædrelandet, March 2, 1850, no. 52, p. 207), to which Goldschmidt replied: “In concluding, Hr. Schack invokes the memory of Corsaren against us. Yes, we have written in Corsaren. ― Some people still count that as something evil, and they do not give us credit for having given up ‘the evil.’ Those who prefer to see us as still being Corsaren are merciful and virtuous people, or they are geometrical-psychological people, who cannot or will not understand a human development, and with great love of mankind they wish, at our present stage, to throw at our feet a stage of development we have left behind so that we might stumble―or

29

187

33

634

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 32–34

they are quite simply enemies, people whose vanity we have wounded―and of course, the more sensitive one’s vanity is, the deeper is the resentment. But Hr. Schack is not among them, nor is it his intention to invoke their instincts in order to enlist them against us and gain an ally―is it? Or does Hr. Schack count it against us and Corsaren that we have before us an authority, a man to whom Hr. S. is certainly at times a bit beholden, but whom he cordially loves and respects. Last autumn this man said that Corsaren had distinguished itself ‘not merely with ordinary Danish good humor,’ but also ‘with a higher element that was scarcely as well appreciated.’ He cited examples and exclaimed: ‘What fitting irony, what earnest regret!’ He praised its ‘ingenious eye for what is false and especially for what is tasteless,’ and called upon us not to shackle this gift of God, but to ‘properly cut loose.’ This man was Hr. Schack himself in the November 11, 1849, issue of 1848. But now Hr. Schack has perhaps abandoned this theory. Yet when Hr. Schack goes over from one theory to another, he always does so with the finest of nuances: he still thinks that we should really cut loose, but not at him. We think that we can ‘cut loose’ at all times, provided the wish to do so is in the service of truth―the reader must decide whether we have spoken the truth in this matter” (Nord og Syd, March 8, 1850, vol. 3, pp. 275–277). Schack’s reply included several reasons why Goldschmidt seemed so offended: “Or is it my saying that Corsaren puts in an appearance in Nord og Syd, and is my disapproval of this in conflict with my earlier remarks? I will not concede that either: Now, as earlier, in my view Corsaren was good at being what it was, and Nord og Syd is not good at being what it is but it becomes even less good when ‘the stage of development that was left behind’ is permitted ‘to cut loose’ … Either Caesar (that is, Corsaren) or Nothing (that is, Nord og Syd)” (Fædrelandet, March 18, 1850, no. 65, p. 259). ― The Corsair: i.e., Corsaren, a satirical and political weekly journal, founded in 1840 by M. A. Goldschmidt, who was actual editor and contributor until October 1846. The journal’s satirical articles were accompanied by drawings by Peter Klæstrup, which helped it gain broad

•

1850

readership; in the mid-1840s it had a press run of about three thousand copies, twice as many as the leading liberal paper, Fædrelandet, and only a few hundred fewer than the semi-official government newspaper, Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times]. ― a first stage―: Variant: first written “a first stage.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. In other cases, after all, the comic is usually the last stage] Refers to speculative Hegelian aesthetics, which assigned a higher truth value to the comic than to the tragic; see Concluding Unscientific Postscript (CUP, 35 and 512; SKS 7, 42 and 464, with relevant notes). comedy certainly concludes Hegel’s Aesthetics] See the last pages of Hegel’s Vorlesungen über die Aesthetik [Lectures on Aesthetics], ed. H. G. Hotho, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1835–1838; ASKB 1384– 1386). Aristophanes] Greek comedic playwright (ca. 445–388 b.c.), eleven of whose comedies survive, including The Clouds, in which the depiction of Socrates, according to Kierkegaard, comes closest to the historic Socrates, because the comic view is always the final view. See The Concept of Irony (1841), in CI, 128–156; SKS 1, 179–206. it has been used in service of pseudonyms] See, e.g., Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), in which Johannes Climacus develops an entire theory of the comic; see CUP, 512–525; SKS 7, 465–477.

36

37

1

188

10

virtue cannot be taught] Socrates discusses what virtue is and the extent to which it can be taught in a series of Plato’s dialogues; see Kierkegaard’s presentation in The Concept of Irony (1841) (in CI, 59–60; SKS 1, 119) and in Philosophical Fragments (1844) (in PF, 9–10; SKS 4, 218–19 and relevant notes). existing, an existential reformation] Variant: changed from “existing.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

22

When a fire breaks out … the place that is on fire] A cacophony of shouting, whistles, drums did sound when a fire broke out in Copenhagen, but it has not been possible to verify that the per-

2

188

24

189

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 34–38

7

189

15

16

17

23

30

190

12

son who beat the drum stood outside the burning building. Kierkegaard could have a specific event in mind, namely, the fire that consumed Pjaltenborg (Danish, literally, “castle of rags”), an extremely shabby building that offered very inexpensive overnight lodging to the poorest of people. The building, which burned down on March 26, 1850, was located at the corner of Aabenraa and Rosenborggade (see map 2, C1), directly opposite the place where Kierkegaard was living at the time (he moved to another apartment on April 16). when a man was to be executed … to the authorities] The death penalty was still in force in Kierkegaard’s day. In addition to curious onlookers, representatives of the law enforcement authorities and the Danish State Church were present at executions. in the Republic Plato wants to have “the poets” exiled from the state] Refers specifically to bk. 10 of Plato’s Republic (595a–608b), where it is argued that the ideal state ought not include poets, in part because they do not depict true reality, in part because they appeal more to feelings than to reason. attacks “the poets” frequently] See, e.g., Apology (22a–b) or the dialogues Phaedrus and Ion (passim). himself a poet] Variant: first written “himself a poet.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. μεταβασις εις αλλο γενος] In a proof or an argument, a sudden shift to something other than the matter at issue; a commonly used expression traceable to Aristotle. words of … by our declared enemy of poets.”] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from C. M. Wieland, Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen (→ 183,30), vol. 4 (1801), p. 34. ― Aristippus: (→ 183,30). the entire excellent presentation … lest he be tempted by the reward] Kierkegaard is probably referring to Wieland’s presentation in Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen (→ 183,30), vol. 4 (1801), pp. 64–66, and specifically to bk. 2 of Plato’s Republic.

•

1850

635

the world must] Variant: first written “the world can”. this is precisely where the secret is lodged] A saying recorded in E. Mau, Dansk OrdsprogsSkat [Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 404. excellent praise of this world … nothing to give.”] Kierkegaard’s careful Danish rendering of Wieland, Aristipp und einige seiner Zeitgenossen (→ 183,30), bk. 4, pp. 70–71.

27

12

190m

people make it look as if I am eccentric, a bit mad, etc.] → 170,33.

10

191

On the Abuse I Have Suffered] i.e., in connection with the attack by Corsaren (→ 174,6). They took my first name … in the street I was called by that name again and again] See, e.g., NB7:109 in KJN 5, 140–141; NB10:99 in KJN 5, 317–318; and NB14:85 in KJN 6, 399, where Kierkegaard makes sarcastic remarks concerning the apparently increasing use of the name “Søren,” which Kierkegaard himself never uses in his books. They made me into a caricature, known by every child] See, e.g., NB:15 in KJN 4, 24–25, where Kierkegaard describes how the boys of Copenhagen recognized him from the caricatures in Corsaren. that they wrote that my trousers … shorter than the other] In the period January–May 1846, Corsaren (→ 187,33) made fun of Kierkegaard’s physical appearance by various means, including caricature drawings of Peter Klæstrup where, in particular, Kierkegaard’s trousers were depicted as being too short and of uneven length, and his legs were shown as very thin (see, e.g., illustrations 4, 6, 11, 12, 13, and 14, in KJN 4, 453–456). The result, according to Kierkegaard, was that he often had to endure being abused on the street by the mob and by young boys. yield] Variant: before “yield” the word “perhaps” has been deleted. in Flyveposten with P. L. Møller … become too long] See NB13:55, where Kierkegaard writes: “On the other hand, I was depicted and mocked in The Corsair, much to the delight of the rab-

5

192

30

11

15

17

27 34

636

193

15

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 38–40

ble. In Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post] P.L.M. [P. L. Møller] poured scorn on it [on Concluding Unscientific Postscript] and on me; in Flyve-Posten [The Flying Post, which Kierkegaard spells both “Flyveposten” and “Flyve-Posten”] they wrote of my trousers, that they had now become too long; this was written to whip up the rabble’s ridicule of me” (KJN 6, 311). It has not been possible to verify a reference to Kierkegaard’s trousers in Flyveposten; see the relevant explanatory note to NB13:55 in KJN 6, 604). In the Sunday paper Kjøbenhavns Charivari [Copenhagen Charivari], which imitated Corsaren’s cartoons and humor, a supplement to issue no. 7, July 19, 1846, parodied the layout of Flyveposten; in col. 3 of this issue the article “Tidsforandringer” [Changing Times], included the following: “It is remarkable how the times change. Whereas 5 or 6 years ago people were so much in favor of a republic that a sansculotte would have had great success, nowadays one trousers reformer after another appears; Corsaren pulls so hard on Søren Kierkegaard’s short pants until they become so long that he could use straps under his feet …” See also Corsaren, January 1, 1847, no. 1, where it is stated that Frater Taciturnus’s trouser legs have become “approximately the same length” (col. 1). ― Flyveposten: Conservative daily newspaper, founded in 1845 by Eduard Meyer, who also served as its editor until 1852. It was a popular source of news and entertainment, with about seven thousand subscribers in the period 1848– 1850; 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. ― P. L. Møller: (→ 176,29). the embarrassment of my tailor … public life, etc.] It is not known who Kierkegaard’s tailor was at the time, as there are no extant bills from tailors from 1846. In a satirical article in Corsaren, January 9, 1846 (no. 277, col. 2), tailor Peter M. Ipsen, of St. Købmagergade 65 (present day Købmagergade 11; see map 2, C2), is named as Kierkegaard’s tailor and thus responsible for the fact that his trouser legs were of unequal length (→ 192,17). In 1845, Ipsen had replaced the fashionable tailor Michael Fahrner, who also may

•

1850

have been Kierkegaard’s tailor, but in later bills, dated 1848–1850, it can be seen that Kierkegaard’s tailor was one J.C.M. Künitzer. my servant’s] i.e., Anders Christensen Westergaard (1818–1867), who had been Kierkegaard’s personal servant since May 1844. to earn 10 rd.] On the front page of every issue of Corsaren (→ 187,33) it was announced that contributors to the paper “received a royalty of 1 to 3 Rbd. per column.” ―rd.: The abbreviation “rd.” or “Rbd.” was commonly used for the rix-dollar, properly “rigsbankdaler,” which 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 housemaid earned at most thirty rix-dollars a year, plus meals and lodging. A pair of shoes or a book such as Concluding Unscientific Postscript cost three rix-dollars, and a pound of rye bread cost between two and four shillings.

17

5

193m

have never made use of authority] i.e., never exercised the authority that in Kierkegaard’s view became associated with the priestly office through ordination. In the introductions to his collections of edifying discourses, Kierkegaard points out that he speaks “without authority.” In a note (dated October 1849) that he included in On My Work as an Author (1851), Kierkegaard emphasized his pseudonymous work Two Minor Ethical-Religious Discourses (1849), which pertains to his entire literary career and which stresses the distinction between being a “genius” and an “apostle.” A genius is “without authority,” Kierkegaard writes, because he is “in reflection”: “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).

34

193

Psyche would not be satisfied … what she lost] 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). The tale relates how Amor, despite his mother Venus’s warnings,

1

194

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 40–45 fell in love with the wondrously beautiful Psyche, and how he brought her to his luxurious palace and, while himself remaining invisible, intended to make her happy as his spouse. Psyche, who had been warned not to look at her husband when he slept by her side at night, was induced by her evil sisters to steal out of bed one night and get hold of a lamp so that she might see, and a knife in order to kill her husband, who supposedly was a monster. When, however, she saw Amor himself, she was captivated by love, but she spilled a drop of oil on him so that he awakened and discovered that he had been betrayed. Soon thereafter Psyche was exiled, pursued, and tormented by Venus, who was furious, but finally ended up happy among the gods. See bks. 4–6 in Æslet eller Forvandlingen, en Fortælling i 13 Bøger af Apuleius fra Madaura [The Ass, or the Metamorphosis: A Tale by Apuleius of Madaura in 13 Books], trans. Fr. Schaldemose (Copenhagen, 1842), pp. 128–187. Kierkegaard owned Latin and German editions of the work; see ASKB 1215–1217. 194

17

21

194

26

As I have said it here] See NB17:6, the entries immediately preceding the present entry (NB17:38– 39), and NB17:44, 46, 60, 65, 93, and 107 in the present volume. then of course they would have to go into it] That is, “go into danger”; the expression alludes to H. A. Brorson’s hymn “Jeg gaaer i Fare, hvor jeg gaaer” [I Go into Danger Wherever I Go] (1734), which was included in his Troens rare Klenodie [Faith’s Rare Treasure] (1739); see 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; ASKB 199), p. 279. In consideration of … ought even dare touch] Reference to M. A. Goldschmidt’s (→ 174,16) and Corsaren’s (→ 187,33) satirical journalism, which was often disrespectful. ― licensed: Allusion to Adresseavisen and Berlingske Tidende, which were the sole newspapers in Copenhagen licensed to accept paid advertising. Thus Corsaren had a “license” to make fun of respectable people in its columns.

•

1850

637

for him to become en passant and without further ado a respectable author … without making a very official apology] Refers to the fact that Goldschmidt had never officially repented or regretted Corsaren’s treatment of Kierkegaard in 1846. After a year’s travel abroad, Goldschmidt returned home in December 1847 and founded the highly respected monthly journal Nord og Syd. In his journals, Kierkegaard often gives vent to his anger at the fact that Goldschmidt had never paid for his attack on Kierkegaard. ― a respectable author: Variant: first written “a respectable author.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. parents] Variant: deleted before “parents”: “foolish”.

35

6

195

the injustice and abuse I suffer] i.e., as a consequence of the teasing by Corsaren, which was at its height in 1846 (→ 174,6). to hold onto,] Variant: first written “to hold onto.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. I can appeal.] Variant: first written “I can appeal;” with the semicolon indicating that the sentence was to continue. stick] Variant: first written “turn”.

33

195

12

196

melancholia.] Variant: first written “melancholia,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. then I would have been confronted] Variant: preceding this, “but” has been deleted. the thorn in the flesh] See 2 Cor 12:7–9. in Denmark it cost me money] → 174,21. Insults were heaped upon me] Refers to Corsaren’s attack (→ 174,6) and possibly to the critique mounted by P. L. Møller (→ 174,13) prior to that attack. provincial market town] Here used to designate Copenhagen, which according to the 1850 census had 129,695 inhabitants; see Statistisk Tabelværk [Statistical Tables], new series, vol. 3 (Copenhagen, 1851), p. ii. I would gladly accept an official position] Kierkegaard had earlier had plans to become either a priest (an official position in the Danish State Church) or a teacher (an official position at the university or at the pastoral seminary).

28

13

21

196

31 37 10 10

17

20

197

638 31 32

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 46–50

Goldschmidt] → 174,16. It is likely that scarcely anyone in this country … had such good intentions with respect to him] According to vol. 1 of Goldschmidt’s Livs Erindringer og Resultater [Memoirs and Results of My Life] (Copenhagen, 1877), the two first met one another in 1837 (probably an error for 1838), a second time in 1841, and frequently thereafter throughout the 1840s, until Corsaren ruptured the friendship. Excerpts from Goldschmidt’s memoirs and a number of letters, which provide a detailed account of their relationship, are available in Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996). 6 years of crime as editor of The Corsair] Goldschmidt founded Corsaren in October 1840 and sold the journal in October 1846 (→ 187,33). taking the step I did at that time] A reference to 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 (→ 174,6).

•

1850

a pronounced “man of reflection,” who can himself see the comic (and the tragic) in his constant preoccupation with the story of the engagement; see, e.g., SLW, 235–238, 365–368, 404–446; SKS 6, 220–222, 339–341, 375–412 (§§ 1–3 of “Letter to the Reader”).

198

8

the abuse] i.e., in connection with the attack by Corsaren (→ 174,6).

the Times, … the Problem.] Variant: changed from “the Times.” on the contrary, the provincial market town … making fun of me] Refers to Corsaren’s mockery of Kierkegaard and the consequent abuse he suffered on the street (→ 171,7). ― provincial market town: i.e., Copenhagen (→ 197,17). the common man] Kierkegaard’s preferred term for people of the lower social classes. out on the 70,000 fathoms of water] A stock term in Kierkegaard’s writings, introduced in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), where the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus writes: “Spiritual existence, especially a religious existence, is not easy; the believer constantly lies upon the deep, has 70,000 fathoms of water under him” (SLW, 444; SKS 6, 411). But it is clear] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

198

21

in the last section of the review of Two Ages] Reference to the last part of Two Ages: A Literary Review (1846), in which Kierkegaard uses the novel To Tidsaldre [Two Ages] (1845) by Thomasine Gyllembourg as a vehicle for a detailed critique of his times; see TA, 76–110, esp. 84, 107–110; SKS 8, 73–104, esp. 85, 102–104. the time of immediacy is past] As in speculative Hegelian philosophy; see e.g., Frater Taciturnus’s remarks in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), in SLW, 414–416; SKS 6, 384–385, and relevant notes. Just as … in the “Psychological Experiment” … immediacy is over] Refers to the diary “‘Guilty?’/‘Not Guilty?’: A Story of Suffering. An Imaginary Psychological Construction,” and to the account of the experiment in the “Letter to the Reader from Frater Taciturnus” in Stages on Life’s Way. Quidam (Latin, “someone or other”), the narrator and principal character of the diary, is

Purely Psychologically.] Variant: added. able to do it) can also … stoical conceitedness.] Variant: The editors of SKS have moved Kierkegaard’s closing parenthesis to its present position from a position immediately following “conceitedness”. ― stoical conceitedness: i.e., the proud illusion that one can by one’s own efforts make oneself independent of external influences and internal passions; see NB17:82 in the present volume. giving due notice] Refers to legally required notice, specifically to a priest’s reading of the banns for an intended marriage, which in Kierkegaard’s day was still required to be done on three consecutive Sundays prior to a proposed marriage. could say among other things] Variant: changed from “can say”. he let it be said in advance] Presumably an allusion to 1 Cor 1:18–25.

34

36

31

31

2

3

199

11

28 32

35

200

25

28

6 10

201

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 51–60 201

15

I hurled myself against it] Refers to 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 (→ 174,6).

202

2

the abuse I have suffered] i.e., in connection with the attack by Corsaren (→ 174,6).

203

33

the four journeys of Paul] In Kierkegaard’s day, it was generally believed that Paul undertook four missionary journeys, the fourth of which had been to Spain. See G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Biblical Dictionary for Practical Use by Students, Scholars, Schoolteachers, and Preachers], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71), vol. 2, pp. 260–261. There are] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. passages in the N.T. … propriety of having bishops, priests, deacons] See Acts 6:1–6. Why does one come to laugh involuntarily … leaders of congregations] Presumably an allusion to Eph 4:11. something put into the world by a couple of fishermen] According to the gospels, several of the twelve apostles were fishermen; see Mt 4:8– 22. That Xnty should be capable of triumphing over the world … prophesied by the founder himself] Refers to 1 Jn 5:4–5. unless it was where there is … “falling away” from the faith] Reference to 1 Tim 4:1. 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). “The truth” is crucified as a thief] Refers both to Jesus’ description of himself as “the truth” (see

34 34 38

204

14

15

20 24

28

•

1850

639

Jn 14:6) and to his being crucified between two thieves (see Lk 23:32–43). before that, it is mocked, spat upon] See Mt 27:29 and Mk 14:65. in dying it cries out, Follow me] Presumably a reference to Mt 4:18–22. In “the pseudonyms” I have only made use of “the privatdocent,”] A persistent satire on “the privatdocent” can be found in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) in particular, but “the professor” is present in the work as well. ― In: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. 10 rd. … 10,000 rd.] → 193m,5. Miss Hansen] Fictional character. a newspaper with 10,000 subscribers] An exaggerated figure. In the mid-1840s, Fædrelandet sold about 1,500 copies, Corsaren about 3,000, Berlingske Tidende about 5,000, and Adresseavisen about 7,000. a tradesman and officeholder] In provincial towns, citizens had the duty of paying the priest an assessed sum called “priest money,” while peasants in rural parishes were to pay the priest a certain percentage of their agricultural yield, especially grain, known as a tithe. The size of these payments was established by the Ministry for Church and Educational affairs. 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 such clerical acts as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In provincial towns, there was also an additional sum for a housing allowance, whereas rural priests had income from the fields and farms attached to their call. Let a newspaper appear … concerning his person twice a day for 14 days] i.e., analogously to Corsaren (→ 187,33), which, however, only appeared once a week, though it did conduct a focused campaign against Kierkegaard for half a year. There are 1,000 priests] According to the list in Geistlig Calender for Aaret 1848 [Clerical Calendar for the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848; ASKB

29 29 33

7

205

12 14

8

206

24

8

207

640

13 19 20

208

34

34

209

12

22

25

212

36

40

213

7

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 60–66

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. like the one involving the vermin in Egypt: it can fall to earth] See Ex 7–11. if not] Variant: added. an irritation] Variant: added. Dichtung und Wahrheit] A reference to the title of Goethe’s autobiography, Aus meinem Leben, Dichtung und Wahrheit [From My Life: Poetry and Truth] (1811–1822), which became an idiomatic expression meaning a mixture of things that are true and untrue. but in other respects] Variant: first written “and yet”. So I declare unto you the gracious forgiveness … in the name of the Father, etc.] Cited from the priest’s prescribed words to those seeking absolution in the ritual of confession. nothing to you,] Variant: first written “nothing to you.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. And a man is supposed to give me money for saying this to him] Weddings were among the clerical acts regarded as “perquisites,” for which one was to pay (→ 206,8). And people still think they can use a new book … confusion of Xnty] Reference to H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik, which was attacked by R. Nielsen (→ 171,25) and P. M. Stilling (→ 223,29), because they believed it was simply wrong to treat faith as a subject for scholarship. ein, zwei, drei] An allusion to the Hegelian tendency to think of everything as having three elements or stages. knight] i.e., a Knight of the Dannebrog. Professors of theology were often decorated with membership in this order; for example H. L. Martensen (→ 172,1) and R. Nielsen (→ 171,25) both became members of the order in the summer of 1847.

•

1850

the common man] 199,28. my unfortunate exterior (my thin legs, etc.)] → 192,17. then the bourgeoisie … in particular my clothing] i.e., in connection with Corsaren’s bullying of Kierkegaard (→ 174,6). a person who … has thin legs … wearing stuffed leggings] In Kierkegaard’s day, people still used stuffed leggings of this sort. and I thought I knew what irony was] Kierkegaard had acquired the magister degree with a dissertation on The Concept of Irony (1841). But the problem] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Goldschmidt] → 174,16. it was cowardice for everyone to remain silent] → 171,4. Heiberg] → 172,8. Ploug] Carl (Parmo) Ploug (1813–1894), Danish journalist, politician, and author, from May 1841 editor of the National Liberal newspaper Fædrelandet, in which Kierkegaard published his articles. Hage] (Edvard Philip) Hother Hage (1816–1873), Danish jurist and politician, for a period employed by Fædrelandet, editor of Dansk Folkeblad from January 1847 to May 17, 1848. thanked me.] Variant: preceding this, “certainly” has been deleted. the top literary figure] i.e., J. L. Heiberg.

17

What I have said so many times … a dead man is what Denmark needs] See, e.g., NB10:166 in KJN 5, 349; NB12:142 in KJN 6, 233; and NB14:99 in KJN 6, 410. the abuse I suffer] i.e., in connection with attacks by Corsaren (→ 174,6). external to oneself.] Variant: first written “external to oneself;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue.

18

The distinction that I have thought ought to be made] The analogy between “wisdom”/“lover of wisdom” and “Christian”/“lover of Christ” is developed in entry NB6:73 in KJN 5, 54–55.

5

213

19 26

39

3

214

5

8 9 12 13

13

13 14

214

24 37

215

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 66–71

6

11

215

23

the wise were are at first called σοϕοι … and thereafter ϕιλοσοϕοι] In the preface to Diogenes Laertius’s history of philosophy, it is recounted that the Greek mathematician and philosopher Pythagoras (ca. 570–497 b.c.) was the first to “give philosophy its name and to call himself a philosopher, because no human being, only God, is wise. In ancient times, it was called wisdom, and the person who professed it was called wise and was thus required to be a person whose soul makes the effort to investigate things painstakingly. But a philosopher is the person who loves wisdom” (Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: Navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn [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], vol. 1, p. 5). the earlier distinction, when a difference was drawn … historical reasons, etc.] Refers to the view of Lutheran orthodox dogmatics regarding the authority and infallibility of the scriptures, partly because of their apostolic origin, partly because of their being divinely inspired (→ 248,7). A difference was drawn between fides humana (Latin, “human certainty”) concerning the apostolic origins of the scriptures, which is based on historical arguments and proofs, and fides divinam (Latin, “divine certainty”) concerning their divine inspiration, which is granted by the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit (“testimonium Spiritus Sancti internum”). See, e.g., K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche. [Hutterus redivivus or the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1828] ASKB 581), §§ 42–43, pp. 100–102. Rasmus Nielsen discusses the distinction in Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 171,25), pp. 109–111. demand upon them;] Variant: first written “demand upon them.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1850

641

the language of God’s chosen people: it must be read backward] i.e., Hebrew, which is written from right to left. Moses saw the back of God, not his face] Reference to Gen 33:23.

32

5

216

Bishop Mynster] → 177,33. not a poor and lowly hum. being] Variant: “hum. being” added.

21

217

10

218

in the worldly] Variant: preceding this, “completely healthy” has been deleted. he limps, as it is said] Reference to Gen 32:25–32.

35

218

R. Nielsen] → 171,25. Last Thursday I took a walk with him] i.e., Thursday, April 11, 1850. Kierkegaard had probably taken walks with Rasmus Nielsen every Thursday, whenever possible, since the summer of 1848. his entire diversion―both the big book and the 12 lectures] i.e., both Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed, which came out in May 1849, and Evangelietroen og Theologien, which had just come out in April 1850 (→ 171,25). ― diversion: (→ 172,5). the entire business with Martensen] i.e., Nielsen’s attack on Martensen (→ 171,25). was personal animosity] Rasmus Nielsen, who earlier had been good friends with Martensen, had supposedly felt himself shunted aside in favor of Martensen; see entry NB14:120 in KJN 6, 419. moreover] Variant: changed from “lastly”. gentle tones … vehemence;] Variant: changed from “as gently as possible;”. apply to myself.] Variant: deleted, following this, “But it is certain that I managed to get clearly said to him what I wanted to say.” this Thursday] i.e., Thursday, April 18, 1850. today I received a letter … on Thursdays] This must be a reference to the letter from Rasmus Nielsen to Kierkegaard that is printed in LD as no. 252, and that reads as follows: “Dear Hr. Magister! First of all, owing to circumstances, I must give up our Thursday walks, and for that

17

39

219

18

19

24 26

26 31 34

1 8

221

642

15

20

24

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 71

reason I must ask you not to expect me today. When the situation is once again such that I am again able to have the pleasure of doing so, I shall permit myself to send you a message inquiring as to whether it might possibly be convenient for you as well. Yours, R. N.” (LD, 348; B&A, 273). The letter, which is dated, “Thursday, March 19, 1850” (which was actually a Tuesday; ― see note 2 in the “Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB17”) must be the letter Kierkegaard received on April 18, 1850; see also Kierkegaard’s draft reply (LD, 348–351; B&A, 273–275), which mentions Copenhagen’s spring moving day―it was customary for rental contracts to expire on a spring or autumn “moving day”―Tuesday, April 16, which was the spring moving day in 1850. hypochondria] In addition to its present-day meaning―i.e., a continual fear of illness and an excessive concern for one’s health―hypochondria still had the older meanings of melancholia and of obsession with minor details (see Ludvig Meyer, Fremmedordbog [Dictionary of Foreign Words], 3rd ed. [Copenhagen, 1853]; ASKB 1035), and Kierkegaard not infrequently used the word in these senses, both in his journals and notebooks and, e.g., in The Concept of Anxiety (BA, 162n; SKS 4, 460n). his physical robustness] Refers to Rasmus Nielsen’s robust and healthy physique (→ 232,22) and perhaps also to his passionate and heated manner. Incidentally … my relationship with him … various journals … papers] In the period from the summer of 1848, when Kierkegaard established a friendship with Rasmus Nielsen, until May 1849, when Nielsen published Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed, Nielsen appears in a good number of journal entries; see journals NB6 (NB6:67a, 74–76, 78 in KJN 5, 49, 56–59); NB7 (NB7:6–7, 9–10, 34, 114 in KJN 5, 80–81, 82–84, 97, 144–145); NB9 (NB9:13–16, 52 in KJN 5, 213– 215, 239); and NB10 (NB10:9, 13–14, 32–33, 199 in KJN 5, 271, 271–272, 283–284, 375–377). In the period from the publication of Evangelietroen to the “break” here recorded in Journal NB17, there is an additional series of entries on Nielsen; see

•

1850

journals NB11 (NB11:46, 51, 115, 193 in KJN 6, 28, 30–32, 60–61, 113–114); NB12 (NB12:93, 129, 143a, 165 in KJN 6, 192, 221–222, 234, 245–246); NB13 (NB13:61 in KJN 6, 312–313); NB14 (NB14:81, 90, 91, 97, 102, 120, 125 in KJN 6, 396–397, 402–405, 405, 408–409, 411, 419, 421–422); NB15 (NB15:23, 77 in the present volume); and NB16 (NB16:63, 88 in the present volume). In addition to these journal entries, there are about ten loose papers of varying contents, including the drafts of articles against Nielsen; see esp. Pap. X 6 B 83–89. Additional entries on Nielsen followed those described above. I thought that I would die … with the cause] → 171,25. ― I thought: Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. ― make: Variant: first written “familiarize”. hypochondriacal] → 221,15. in fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. afraid] Variant: first written “hoping”. he has written a big book] A reference to Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed, which was Rasmus Nielsen’s first book after he and Kierkegaard established their friendship (→ 171,25). Next, he took several theses … to attack Martensen] A reference to Rasmus Nielsen’s polemical piece Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 171,25). finally he has made an attempt to transform it into doctrine] Presumably a reference to Rasmus Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og Theologien (→ 171,25). Perhaps the problem] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. if he is to be] Variant: first written “as”. cause better.] Variant: following this a hash mark (#) has been deleted. p. 139] See NB17:76 in the present volume. the 18th and 19th of April 50] April 18, 1850, was a Thursday; on the preceding Tuesday (April 16) Kierkegaard had moved from Rosenborggade 156 A to Nørregade 43 (see map 2, C1 and B1). ― 18th and: Variant: added. his 3 books] i.e., Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed, Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus”

32

36 37 38 41

1

222

3

6

12 16 1 2

5

219m

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 71–72

7

19

221m

3

18

40 46

og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse, and, most recently, Evangelietroen og Theologien (→ 171,25). And yet, … withdraw.] Variant: started in main text column; continued and concluded in the marginal column. and―with my view … familiar with] Variant: added. financial sacrifices he may have made … unpleasantness] In entry NB12:165.b, Kierkegaard writes that the world “has now almost become angry with R. N. because he has wanted to resemble me”; cf. entry NB15:77 in the present volume. In another entry, it is related that because of his resemblance to Kierkegaard, Nielsen “has supposedly already been exposed to much unpleasantness from influential people” (Pap. X 6 B 125, p. 167). In addition to this, Nielsen’s relationship with Kierkegaard was apparently disapproved of by Nielsen’s wife (see NB12:165 in KJN 6, 245–246). See also NB17:76 in the present volume. It is unclear what financial sacrifices Kierkegaard was thinking of. At first I thought … until I hear from him] In reaction to Rasmus Nielsen’s “letter of divorce” (→ 221,8), Kierkegaard drafted several replies that he did not send (see LD, 348–353; B&A, 273–277). Kierkegaard sent the final version of his reply at the end of April; see NB17:81 in the present volume. his writings thus far] i.e., Rasmus Nielsen’s three most recent books (→ 171,25). when I drew him to me … asked me to dance] Kierkegaard has given accounts of his meeting with Rasmus Nielsen in several journal entries, e.g., in NB7:114: “This past summer I drew R. Nielsen a bit closer to myself” (KJN 5, 145), and on a loose paper: “I chose Prof. Nielsen, who himself sought an approach and very much welcomed the invitation” (Pap. X 6 B 121, p. 160). In entry NB14:90, Kierkegaard relates: “I noticed how R. N. exclusively concerned himself with my writings, and I had to fear that he would suddenly go out and begin lecturing on them … Also in order to prevent this, the best thing was to draw him a little closer to me―and on his part, he made the most decisive effort to be drawn” (KJN

•

1850

643

6, 402). This is developed further in a loose paper: “At that time, when I took note of Prof. Nielsen (who for many years had had a hostile relationship to me, so that he would not even say hello to me―one day he said hello to me, whereupon I spoke to him from the other side of the street and he came over to me) I spoke more often with him on walks” (Pap. X 6 B 99). the thought that death was imminent] → 171,25. to make an attempt … sought to make an approach] → 221m,46. endure this for 1½ or 2 years] The relationship with Nielsen had been initiated in the summer of 1848 (→ 172,12). Imagine] Variant: first written “From this comes perh[aps]”. Stilling, who certainly has never complained of injustice] For Kierkegaard’s relationship to Stilling, see NB14:112 in KJN 6, 416–417 and NB16:56, and NB17:76.b in the present volume. Kierkegaard believed that Stilling’s great difficulties with Christianity could be explained by the circumstance that after only one year of marriage, Stilling had become a widower following the death of his wife in December 1847, and he wanted to remarry. ― 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, influenced by Kierkegaard, he fully rejected this position. After a study tour, he worked as a privatdocent during the period 1846–1850. At the end of December 1849, he published the polemical work 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.

18

222

19 4

9 29

223

644

33

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 72–76

Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics: Critical and Polemical Essay] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 802), which was strongly influenced by Kierkegaard, to whom he sent a copy with a dedication; this polemical work was noted in Berlingske Tidende, no. 303, December 22, 1849, as having appeared. 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 Christelige Dogmatik] (Copenhagen, 1850), which was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 113, May 16, 1850, as having appeared. But … what I said last time.] Variant: added. ― what I said last time: See NB17:71 in the present volume.

224

22

becomes ridiculous―] Variant: first written “becomes ridiculous.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

224

26

the 4th book of Rousseau’s Emile, where the vicar speaks] See Emil eller om Opdragelsen. Af J.J. Rousseau, Borger i Genf. Oversat af Fransk og udgiven med Tydsklands Opdragelsesrevisorers og en Deel Danske oplysende, bestemmende og rettende Anmærkninger [Emile, or On Education. By J. J. Rousseau, Citizen of Geneva. Translated from the French and Published with Illustrative, Determinative, and Corrective Notes from German and Some Danish Educators], 6 vols. (Copenhagen, 1796–1799; ASKB 941–943; abbreviated hereafter as Emil eller om Opdragelsen). This is Rousseau’s principal work on pedagogy and was published in French in 1762, after which it appeared in many editions; see ASKB 939–940. The main portion of vol. 4 consists of “The Confession of Faith of a Vicar of Savoy” (pp. 74ff.); see also the vicar’s story, vol. 4, pp. 63ff. [“]Now, my young friend … ever confess it.”] Cited by Kierkegaard, with minor deviations, from Emil eller om Opdragelsen, vol. 4, p. 256. “As long as any good faith is … still being supported] Cited by Kierkegaard, with minor deviations, from Emil eller om Opdragelsen, vol. 4, pp. 256–257.

27

31

•

1850

Prof. Nielsen] → 171,25. in much fear and trembling] → 221,37. I had considered … to restore the relationship] → 221m,18. to have received the letter of divorce] → 221,8. personal relationship.] Variant: first written “personally,”. and of course I have had examples of this] This is most likely a reference to a letter from Kierkegaard to Rasmus Nielsen, dated August 4, 1849, concerning the relationship between Johannes Climacus and Anti-Climacus (LA, 310– 311; B&A, 243–244). Nielsen did not react and, to Kierkegaard’s grave concern, later wrote that he had never received the letter in Lyngby, where he had been spending his summer vacation (see letter no. 223 [by Rasmus Nielsen] and nos. 222, 224, 226 [by Kierkegaard] in LD, 313–314, 313, 314–315, 316–317; B&A, 246, 246, 247, 248). I had indeed looked forward with pleasure to next Thursday … absorbed the shock] See NB17:71 in the present volume, with its marginal additions in which Kierkegaard discusses his criticisms of Nielsen during the walk they took together on April 11, 1850. sufficient self-esteem] Variant: changed from “strength”. who hates himself] Variant: added. Had he been able] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. clear to me] Variant: “to me” added. __________] Variant: horizontal dividing line has been changed from a hash mark (#) that apparently had indicated the end of the entry. I have reined in my enormous speed for 1½ years] → 223,4. the two books] Most likely Rasmus Nielsen’s two books, Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed and Evangelietroen og Theologien (→ 171,25). the subtle conspiracy against me in this country] See also NB18:7 in the present volume, where Kierkegaard writes of a “provincial market town conspiracy” against him in an entry titled “The Tactic against Me.” worshipfully―] Variant: first written “worshipfully.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

6

225

7 7 10 13 16

22

27 29 36

7 11

15 26

28

34

228

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 76–81

38

229

22 37

225m

1

229m

6

230

5 7

9 11

230

22 23

231

4 11

231

21

here on the hill] → 177,33. he may hear from others that he is mad … in this way] → 221m,3. he would have come next Thursday] i.e., Thursday, April 18, when Rasmus Nielsen instead sent his “letter of divorce” (→ 221,8). see p. 127] See NB17:71 in the present volume. as free as that with Stilling] → 223,29. Oh, it is so true, so true: what Denmark needs is a dead man] → 214,18. all the business about my thin legs and my trousers, and the nickname “Søren”] Refers both to Corsaren’s caricatures of Kierkegaard, including the abuse he suffered as a result (→ 171,7), and to the apparently flourishing use of the name “Søren” (→ 192,11). no,] Variant: first written “yes”. those who are to witness for me] i.e., those who had remained silent instead of witnessing for him (→ 171,4). Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (→ 171,25). I have always said that N. was and is the only possibility here] i.e., that Rasmus Nielsen was the only person who could familiarize himself with Kierkegaard’s cause and serve it, and that he was the person from whom it would be possible to learn about the cause if Kierkegaard were to die. my notion that I would die before the cause had rlly taken hold] → 171,25. for 1-3/4 years I have now endured] i.e., since the summer of 1848, when Kierkegaard initiated the relationship with Nielsen (→ 171,25). lines in Emile (in the story called, “Emile and Sophia, or the Solitaries”] See the concluding epistolary story, “Emil og Sophie, eller de Eensomme. Et Fragment” [Emile and Sophia, or the Solitaries: A Fragment”] in Rousseau’s Emil eller om Opdragelsen (→ 224,26), vol. 6 (1799), pp. 213–324. Kierkegaard is referring to a passage in which Emile complains about his unfaithful wife: “Sophia will never love a man she has given the right to despise her … She does not love me any more … The ingrate, has she not even said it

•

1850

645

herself? Faithless one, she does not love me any more! Alas! It is her greatest offense: I could have forgiven her everything but that” (vol. 6, p. 271). And then, “with bitter feeling,” he adds his subsequent remark; see the next note. I talk incessantly about forgiving … the person who offends never does] Cited by Kierkegaard from Emil eller om Opdragelsen, vol. 6, p. 271. forgive?] Variant: first written “forgive,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. This is the source of] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. “undoubtedly, it was her intention … she must hate me.”] Cited by Kierkegaard, with minor deviations, from Emil eller om Opdragelsen, vol. 6, p. 271.

22

26

27

31

that?] Variant: added. heaven?] Variant: changed from “heaven,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. your image] Variant: preceding this, “the sight of” has been deleted. might convince me] Variant: preceding this, “after all” has been deleted.

5

R. Nielsen] → 171,25. I wrote a note to N.] Kierkegaard drafted, but did not send, a series of letters (→ 221m,18) in reply to Nielsen’s “letter of divorce” (→ 221,8). A letter from Kierkegaard has survived, bearing the notation “This note was sent / see Journal NB17, p. 154,” which corresponds to the present journal entry. The letter is dated “Tuesday,” which must be Tuesday, April 30, 1850; see the next note. The letter has been published as no. 259 in LD and B&A: “Dear Friend, Last Thursday, when I spoke with you I was under the impression―and of course this was quite natural―that I would meet you again the next Thursday. It did not happen. A note from you informed me of your future absence. I fear that a misunderstanding has now arisen: what had been said dialectically with respect to a next, and what had been said teleologically with respect to a next has now perhaps

21

232

5

7 7

22

232

646

24

29 29

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 81–84

become something else―but of course this is not rlly my fault. One ought to deal with misunderstandings in timely fashion―at least that is my opinion. Doing so requires a little patience and meekness, of which I perhaps have somewhat more, whereas you in turn have greater strength, are much stronger than I, almost as though one of us were alive, the other dying. By the way, it is also my wish that in the future no particular day be set for our possible meetings; let it depend upon chance and inclination; after all, I am not so difficult to find, and it would always be no less a pleasure to see you when I know, as I do, that you and I are quite free. But when I am bound to a particular day the criterion easily gets distorted, owing partly to altogether too much conscientiousness on my part. I could wish to speak to you about this further verbally in order to explain myself. My suggestion―well-intended as always, even when I am zealous about an idea and possibly become momentarily misunderstood by you, who believe that you have understood me best and have believed me most―is that we may meet tomorrow at the usual time and place in order to see where we are. Please reply. Your, S. K.” (LA, 353–354; B&A, 277–278). Wednesday April 30th] April 30, 1850, was a Tuesday, so this could refer to Wednesday, May 1; alternatively, Kierkegaard could have erred in his reference to the day of the week, in which case the reference would be to Tuesday, April 30, 1850. the big book] i.e., Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed from 1849 (→ 171,25). That behavior―after what happened … continued for a year] A reference to the period from the summer of 1848, when Kierkegaard and Nielsen established their relationship, until May 1849, when Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed appeared. Kierkegaard had hoped that Nielsen’s book would show that he had appropriated Kierkegaard’s works, had understood them, and was now aiding Kierkegaard’s cause, but now he felt that he had been made a fool of, because Nielsen’s book appeared to have plundered both Kierkegaard’s works and their private conversations.

•

1850

The difficulty] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. wanting to move ahead … attacking Martensen] → 171,25. his big book, with his artfulness] i.e., Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed from 1849 (→ 171,25); see Kierkegaard’s critique of the book’s “scholarly apparatus” etc. in Pap X 6 B 83–94.

5

My Life] Variant: first written “Xnty”. when I read a Stoic] This remark might have been occasioned by Kierkegaard’s renewed reading of Seneca’s letters (→ 242,7). ― Stoic: Adherents of a philosophical school founded by the Greek thinker Zeno (ca. 340–265 b.c.) and further developed in the first century a.d. by Roman thinkers, including Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius. the common man] → 199,28. love] Variant: preceding this, “my” has been deleted. like that”] Variant: first written “like that.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. A journalist who cheats the common man … is regarded as a benefactor] e.g., Goldschmidt (→ 174,16).

38

Napoleon … always carried a dose of poison] According to the literature on Napoleon that was popular in Kierkegaard’s day, starting at least as early as the Russian campaign (1812), when there was a great risk that he would be captured, Napoleon always carried a dose of poison. See, e.g., Napoleon Bonaparte og den store Armee. En folkelig Historie af Emil Marco de Saint-Hilaire [Napoleon Bonaparte and the Grand Army: A Popular History by Emil Marco de Saint-Hilaire], trans. H. P. Holst (Copenhagen, 1844), pp. 451– 452. “let us eat and drink,”] Cited from 1 Cor 15:32.

12

known] Variant: first written “dail[y]”. gadfly] A reference to Socrates’ analogy in Apology (31a), where he warns his judges against condemning him to death: “If you put me to

25

233

7 33

233

40

13

234

14 17

23

17

26

235

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 84–93 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 that because of its great size is inclined to be lazy and needs the stimulation 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” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961], pp.16–17). 237

2

3

15

237

21

that as a child Xt “was submissive to his parents”] See the account of the twelve-year-old Jesus in the temple in Lk 2:51, where it is related that Jesus “was obedient” to his parents. as Luther rightly puts it … gathered up wood shavings, etc.] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Lk 2:42–52, the gospel for the first Sunday after Epiphany, 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 En christelig Postille), vol. 1, pp. 142–150. Here Luther interprets Lk 2:51: “Luke expresses it very beautifully in this way: He was submissive to them―as if to say: He did it voluntarily and gladly, even though he was God, and thus Joseph and Mary’s Lord. His obedience to them was out of obedience to his heavenly Father, out of heartfelt love for his parents and all human beings as an example of their due obedience and humility. For this is how one is to understand those words, that the child Jesus, in his parent’s house, did everything required of him, gathered up wood shavings, fetched food and drink, in brief, did everything possible without resentment” (149–150). falling among thieves] See Lk 10:30. a certain little knack to doing it] The exact meaning of the Danish original, Det er en lille Streg om at gjøre, is uncertain. The reading here follows

•

1850

647

the suggestion of the editors of SKS, who suggest that it probably means something like, “only a little change is required,” or “the whole thing depends on a slight distinction.” The editors of SKS suggest a comparison with entry NB14:47.a, where the same phrase occurs; there it has been translated as “a tiny change has to be made” (KJN 6, 378). in general they officially observe the most profound silence] e.g., as they did in connection with the Corsair affair (→ 171,4).

35

In the old days people were thrown to wild beasts] Presumably a reference to early Christian martyrs who were persecuted and put to death because of their Christian beliefs. Thus Eusebius reports in a number of places that martyrs were thrown to wild animals; see 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 U 37), e.g., bk. 4, chap. 5, pp. 205– 206.; bk. 5, chap. 1, pp. 259–268; bk. 8, chap. 7, pp. 496–498. be served up] Variant: changed from “be used”. their lives,] Variant: first written “their lives.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. God created hum. beings in his image] Cited from Gen 1:27. insignificant lives] Variant: changed from “wretched lives”. of “the journalist.”] Variant: preceding this, “especially” has been deleted.

10

qualitative difference,] Variant: first written “qualitative difference.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

5

240

that I am as young as I am] Kierkegaard had had his thirty-seventh birthday on May 5, 1850. all the business about my thin legs and my short trousers] → 230,7. my best years] Variant: preceding this, “almost” has been deleted.

4

241

238

16 1

239

6 27 31

5 15

648 242

7

9

13

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 94–98

I read yesterday or the day before in one of Seneca’s letters] According to a bill from the bookseller A. G. Salomon, in April 1850, Kierkegaard purchased “Seneca Abhandl. u. Briefe (Römische Prosaiker),” i.e., Lucius Annäus Seneca des Philosophen Werke [The Philosophical Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca] (abbreviated hereafter “Seneca, Werke,”), trans. J. M. Moser, G. H. Moser, and A. Pauly, 15 vols. with continuous pagination (vols. 19–20, 25, 33, 41, 45–46, 50, 53– 55, 67, 73, 111, 115 in Römische Prosaiker in neuen Übersetzungen [Roman Prose Authors in New Translations]) (Stuttgart, 1828–1836; ASKB 1280– 1280c). In this edition, vols. 12–15 are titled Briefe [Letters], trans. August Pauly, 4 vols., (1832–1836), and constitute Seneca’s letters to Lucillius, i.e., the first ninety-four letters. The remaining thirty letters came out the next year (1851) as vols. 16–17 of Seneca, Werke (which also constitutes vols. 5–6 of the Briefe), trans. A. Haakh. This is the edition to which Kierkegaard refers. ― yesterday or the day before: i.e., a day in early May, inasmuch as entry NB17:81 makes reference to April 30 and entry NB17:99 is from the week after May 5. ― Seneca: Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 b.c.–a.d. 65), Roman politician, author, Stoic philosopher. Frater Taciturnus’s lines … I am content with being the author] Refers to the beginning of the final section of the newspaper article “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner” (→ 174,6), in which Kierkegaard, alias Frater Taciturnus, writes: “An author who is aware of the dialectical difficulty and strain of his task naturally expects only a few readers … He is happy to be contented with few readers, with one, he is contented with less, for he is contented with being the author, enchanted by the contradiction of infinity: to be contented with the divine pleasure of thinking” (COR, 44; SKS 14, 83). I am contented with few, with one, with none] The version included in the main text is an English translation of Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of his German translation (Seneca, Werke [(→ 242,7)], vol. 12 [1832], p. 1497) of a passage from the next-to-last paragraph of Seneca’s seventh letter to Lucillius. In context, the standard

•

1850

Loeb translation from the Latin reads: “The following also was nobly spoken by someone or other, for it is doubtful who the author was; they asked him what was the object of all this study applied to an art that would reach but very few. He replied: ‘I am content with few, content with one, content with none at all,’” Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 1, p. 35. a person whom the teacher has most assiduously acquainted with the truth] Kierkegaard is probably thinking of Rasmus Nielsen (→ 171,25), whom he acquainted with his ideas in private conversations during the period 1848–1850.

18

more favorable] Variant: first written “the more rigorous”.

34

242

lives are,] Variant: first written “lives are.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

13

243

Tertium non datur] The expression signifies the principle of “the excluded middle” which was formulated by Aristotle and constitutes one of the building blocks of classical logic.

18

243

I am now reading Seneca’s letters] i.e., presumably in the week following Kierkegaard’s birthday, May 5. the short sentences by Epicurus that have been inserted] Seneca often concludes his letters to Lucillius with some edifying or provocative sentences, not infrequently by the Greek philosopher Epicurus (341–270 b.c.). In the 22nd letter a passage by Epicurus … “a happy way out … when the time has come”] The version included in the main text is an English translation of Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of his German translation (Seneca, Werke [(→ 242,7)], vol. 12 [1832], p. 1497) of a passage from Seneca’s twenty-second letter to Lucillius. In context, the standard Loeb translation from the Latin reads: “Read the letter of Epicurus which bears on this matter; it is addressed to Idomeneus. The writer

21

243

21

24

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 98–101 asks him to hasten as fast as he can, and beat a retreat before some stronger influence comes between and takes from him the liberty to withdraw. But he also adds that one should attempt nothing except at a time when it can be attempted suitably and seasonably. Then, when the longsought occasion comes, let him be up and doing. Epicurus forbids us to doze when we are meditating escape; he bids us hope for a safe release from even the hardest trials, provided that we are not in too great a hurry before the time, nor too dilatory when the time arrives,” Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 1, p. 153. 243

29

30 33

244

6

244

15

The other Sunday I heard … Clemmensen … Church of Our Savior] According to the list of preachers published in the newspapers (e.g., Fædrelandet, no. 102, May 4, 1850, p. 408) “Cand. Clemmensen” preached on Sunday, May 5, at vespers in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn. Carl Frederik Clemmensen (1820–1891), received his cand. theol. degree on November 4, 1850, but he had passed all his examinations excepting the one on the OT in May 1848; see Meddelelser angaaende Kjøbenhavns Universitet for 1849–1856 [Communications Concerning the University of Copenhagen, 1849– 1856], ed. A.C.P. Linde (Copenhagen, 1860), p. 496; see also Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], vol. 12 (Copenhagen, 1849), p. 395. my birthday] Kierkegaard had had his thirty-seventh birthday on May 5, 1850. He had preached about life as a going-forth … as in the gospel text] The gospel text for May 5, 1850, the fifth Sunday after Easter, was Jn 16:23. And when the hour of death finally comes … the child goes in to the father] Clemmensen’s sermon was not printed; Kierkegaard gives his account from memory. Seneca’s 22nd letter quotes … under difficulties] The version included in the main text is an English translation of Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of his German translation (Seneca, Werke [(→ 242,7)], vol. 12 [1832], p. 1497) of a

•

1850

649

passage immediately following the previously cited passage (→ 243,24) from Seneca’s twenty-second letter to Lucillius. In context, the standard Loeb translation from the Latin reads: “Now, I suppose, you are looking for a Stoic motto also. There is really no reason why anyone should slander that school to you on the ground of its rashness; as a matter of fact, its caution is greater than its courage. You are perhaps expecting the sect to utter such words as these: ‘It is base to flinch under a burden. Wrestle with the duties which you have once undertaken. No man is brave and earnest if he avoids danger, if his spirit does not grow with the very difficulty of his task.’ Words like this will indeed be spoken to you, if only perseverance shall have an object that is worth while, if only you will not have to do or to suffer anything unworthy of a good man; besides, a good man will not waste himself upon mean and discreditable work or be busy merely for the sake of being busy. Neither will he, as you imagine, become so involved in ambitious schemes that he will have continually to endure their ebb and flow. Nay, when he sees the dangers, uncertainties, and hazards in which he was formerly tossed about, he will withdraw,― not turning back to his foe, but falling back little by little to a safe position,” Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 1, pp. 153–155. In Christendom teachers promise … with the N.T.] Presumably a reference to priests, who took an oath to work in accordance with the prophetic books of the OT, the NT, and the confessional books of the Danish Church. a protracted conflict has arisen … about which entire libraries have been written] Many of the writings by Grundtvig and his followers are contributions to the enormous literature concerning the status that should be attributed to the symbolic books, i.e., the Church’s confessional documents (the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed, as well as the Augsburg Confession and Luther’s Small Catechism). See also, e.g., “Om den dan-

22

24

244

650

244m

2

245

19

247

9 13 41

248

7

10 10 14 18

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 101–103

ske Geistligheds Forpligtelse med Hensyn til den Eed som aflægges paa de symbolske Bøger. En Brevvexling imellem Pastor T. M. og Udgiveren” [On the Obligations of the Danish Clergy with Respect to the Oath That Is Taken in Connection with the Symbolic Books: An Exchange of Letters between Pastor T. M. and the Editor], Nyt theologisk Bibliothek [New Theological Library], ed. Jens Møller, 20 vols. (Copenhagen, 1821–1832; ASKB 336–345), vol. 1, pp. 337–373. the “voluntary” is actlly what is specifically characteristic of Christianity] See, e.g., Christian Discourses (1848) (CD, 178–179; SKS 10, 189–190) and Practice in Christianity, No. 2, C, addendum 2 (PC, 106–120; SKS 12, 114–127); Practice in Christianity was published on September 25, 1850. rogues―] Variant: first written “rogues.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. frightful to fall into the hands of the living God] Cited from Heb 10:31. do not yet] Variant: “yet” has been added. “If you wish to be perfect … come and follow me.”] Freely cited from Mt 19:21. “inspired”] Reference to the dogmatic view that the biblical writings were inspired (literally, “breathed into [the writer]”) by God, as it says in 2 Tim 3:16 (→ 215,11). the N.T. raise] Variant: first written “cry out and shout”. Abel’s blood, which cries out to heaven] Reference to Gen 4:10. foreigner] Variant: changed from “passionate man”. As those screams of people tortured in Phalaris’s ox … the tyrant’s ear] 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 (570/65–554/49 b.c.) roasted his prisoners. See the Greek author Lucian’s work, Phalaris, 1, 11–12, in Luciani 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. See also the

•

1850

“Diapsalmata” in the first part of Either/Or (EO 1, 19; SKS 2, 27). a tinkling cymbal] An allusion to 1 Cor 13:1. we Protestants … own a copy of the N.T.] Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, in which the laity were not supposed to have access to the Bible, the Protestant Church saw it as its task to distribute the Bible to the general population. In the course of the 18th century, Protestant countries experienced a great surge in Bible reading, and the early 19th century witnessed the founding of Bible societies, such as the Danish Bible Society, established in 1814, with the mission of publishing and distributing Bibles. In the 26th letter of Seneca. Cited from Epicurus … indeed to understand it] The version included in the main text is an English translation of Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of his German translation (Seneca, Werke [(→ 242,7)], vol. 12 [1832], p. 1517) of a passage from Seneca’s twenty-sixth letter to Lucillius, in which Seneca is ready to conclude the letter, but wants first to insert a passage by Epicurus and then comment on it. In context, the standard Loeb translation from the Latin reads: “I was just wanting to stop, and my hand was making ready for the closing sentence … meanwhile, Epicurus will oblige me with these words: ‘Think on death,’ or rather, if you prefer the phrase, on ‘migration to heaven.’ The meaning is clear―that it is a wonderful thing to learn thoroughly how to die. You may deem it superfluous to learn a text that can be used only once; but that is just the reason why we ought to think on a thing. When we can never prove whether we really know a thing, we must always be learning it” Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 1, p. 191. Note that the sentence Kierkegaard quotes from his German translation, “Prepare yourself for death, whether it is better that it comes to you or you come to it,” does not appear in the Loeb edition, which instead has: “‘Think on death,’ or rather, if you prefer the phrase, on ‘migration to heaven.’” ― we must prepare ourselves: Variant: preceding this, “it it so important” has been deleted.

20 38

13

249

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 104–111 249

250

22

10

11 18

250

26 30 35

37

53rd letter of Seneca … of our errors.”] The version included in the main text is an English translation of Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of his German translation (Seneca, Werke [(→ 242,7)], vol. 13 [1833], p. 1609) of a passage from Seneca’s fifty-third letter to Lucillius. The standard Loeb translation from the Latin reads: “Why will no man confess his faults? Because he is still in their grasp; only he who is awake can recount his dream, and similarly a confession of sin is a proof of sound mind. Let us, therefore, rouse ourselves, that we may be able to correct our mistakes,” Seneca, Ad Lucilium Epistolae Morales, trans. Richard M. Gummere, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917–1925), vol. 1, p. 357. the brotherhood of officeholders] i.e., the priests. The ceremonious term “brother in office” was often used by, and pertaining to, priests to indicate their shared calling; here Kierkegaard uses the term ironically. The fact that I make no money] → 174,21. The Corsair] → 187,33. Peter] i.e., Kierkegaard’s elder brother (→ 177,24). to write a little article like that about me] → 177,24. “heartily”] Kierkegaard uses the term ironically to refer to Grundtvig and his followers, including P. C. Kierkegaard; see, e.g., NB15:29 and its relevant explanatory note. decides to serve the state] A reference to P. C. Kierkegaard, who was elected to the upper house of parliament on December 29, 1849, as a representative of the Society of Friends of the Peasant, i.e., the Venstre Party, but soon thereafter―February 11, 1850―he joined the group of Center Party members in the upper house; see entry NB15:82 and the relevant explanatory notes. half-hour article] An allusion to the introduction to P. C. Kierkegaard’s article on Søren Kierkegaard and Martensen (→ 177,24), in which P. C. Kierkegaard states that the moderator of the meeting at which the article had originally been delivered as a lecture had granted him only “half an hour’s time”; see NB14:81 in KJN 6, 396–397 and its relevant explanatory notes.

•

1850

651

wants:] Variant: first written “wants.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

19

251

the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world] Cited from Gal 6:14. Do not say that Xt himself went to a wedding] Refers to Jesus’ presence at the wedding in Cana, Jn 2:1–11. his disciple] i.e., Paul (→ 186,7). I know nothing except Xt and him crucified] Cited freely from 1 Cor 2:2. the beginning,] Variant: first written “the beginning.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. its abuse] i.e., in connection with Corsaren’s attack on Kierkegaard (→ 174,6).

14

253

Luther’s sermon on Xt’s temptations … the spirit does not drive one to do so] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 4:1–11 (concerning Jesus’ temptations in the desert), the gospel for the first Sunday in Lent, in En christelig Postille (→ 237,3), vol. 1, pp. 201–207. Here Luther writes: “The Lord Jesus was led into the desert by the spirit [Mt 4:1]; that is, the Holy Spirit called him out into the desert. The evangelist wanted to report this in order to teach us to beware of our own judgment. For by no means is Christ following an idea of his own when he goes out into the desert and battles the devil. To be sure, there are many who take on all sorts of tasks on their own, without the prompting of God’s Word; but it ought not be so. Therefore, with this example of Christ we must carefully consider the fact that he did not run out into the desert in response to his own prompting, but in response to that of the Holy Spirit, so that no one is to follow this example by his own choice, turning it into a self-interested, willful, self-chosen fast, but await the prompting of the Holy Spirit: and indeed there will come fasts and temptations enough. For whoever―despite having been blessed by God so bountifully that he can eat and drink and prosper in other respects― willfully takes upon himself to fast or to suffer other temptations without being commanded to do so by the Spirit, tempts God. We should not

3

20

22 23 30

34

254

652

19

32

254m

1

J O U R N A L NB 17 : 111

seek out want and spiritual trials: they will come of themselves, and when they come what matters is to do one’s best and struggle honestly (202).” To say that he could not do otherwise] An allusion to the reply generally attributed to Luther at the Diet of Worms in 1521, when, referring to God’s word and his conscience, he refused to retract his teachings, which had been condemned by the Church: “Here I stand, I can do no other. God help me! Amen!” in C.F.G. Stang, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), p. 123. in the story of the temptations … Luther makes his remark] → 254,3. Xt had it in his power to obtain bread] Reference to Mt 14:13–21.

•

1850

Notes for JOURNAL NB18 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB18 655

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB18 663

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB18

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, Finn Gredal Jensen, and Steen Tullberg Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Alastair Hannay

Explanatory Notes by Richard Purkarthofer Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Alastair Hannay

655

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB18 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB18.” by Kierkegaard (see illustration 4). The manuscript of Journal NB18 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copehagen. Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand, with some passages in his latin hand. Ten entries (NB18:1, 61, 71, and 98–104) are written in a distinct latin hand, and a latin hand is also used for Latin and French words and occasionally as a form of calligraphy for headings and titles. The entries written on the first page of the journal contain a listing of some of the journal’s contents and were written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format). The long marginal addition NB18:44.a extends across two pages (see illustration on pp. 284-285). The same is true of marginal additions NB18:21.a, NB18:50.a, NB18:60.c and e (see illustration on pp. 296-297), as well as marginal addition NB18:74.a. Owing to lack of space, marginal addition NB18:44.b was written at the bottom of the journal page, across almost the entire width of the page. At three points in entry NB18:60, the text in the main column is subdivided by three short horizontal lines, and marginal additions NB18:60.c–e are separated by similar dividing lines (see illustration on pp. 296-297).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB18 was begun on May 15, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than June 9, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next journal, Journal NB19. Entry NB18:13 begins with the words, “Today, the first day of Pentecost, Mynster preached against monasteries and hermits,” which indicates that the entry was written on Sunday, May 19, 1850. Two entries contain references that make it possible to date them approximately. In entry NB18:20, Kierkegaard writes, “Today I was struck by an observation by Kofoed-Hansen in a ser-

656

J O U R N A L NB 18 mon for the 2nd day of Pentecost [May 20, 1850].” The entry must therefore have been written in the latter part of May. In NB18:26, Kierkegaard remarks, “Privately, you would say to me … ‘of course, Mag. K., we all acknowledge that we have been influenced by you’―but publicly, no, not one word; publicly Martensen was to be put on display, even after his impudent preface.” Kierkegaard here refers to the preface to the second edition of H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850), which was advertised in the May 22, 1850, issue of Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]) as having “appeared.” Entry NB18:21.a is dated “24 June 1850.,” which confirms earlier observations that Kierkegaard might go back and write comments in older journals after he had moved on to subsequent volumes.1 It cannot be determined whether the appended list of contents, NB18:3, was written while the journal was still in use or subsequently.

III. Contents In Journal NB18, we begin to see the outlines of Kierkegaard’s radical critique of the way in which his times presented Christianity. Kierkegaard appears to be testing his rhetorical skills and is extending his range from satire and parodic tableaux to carefully orchestrated collisions between the radicalism of the New Testament and the complacent bourgeoisie who have toned down religious passion so that it does not conflict with bourgeois morality. A recurrent term in Kierkegaard’s critique of “Christendom” is the concept of “reduplication,” which indicates the existential actualization of the demands of Christianity and thus corresponds to figures such as “the witness” and “the martyr”: “Xnty can only be communicated by witnesses, i.e., those who existentially express what is said, actualize it” (NB18:16). These “witnesses” have their effect through their silent actions rather than by virtue of their theological learning and education, and thus function as nonverbal manifestations: “‘witnesses’ are those whose existences (personal existences) are the transparency of the teachings, so that

) See KJN 4, 578.

1

Critical Account of the Text

4. Outside front cover of Journal NB18.

657

658

J O U R N A L NB 18 they could indeed shut their mouths and proclaim the doctrine nonetheless, because their lives are ‘bearing witness’” (NB18:58). This is the only way Christianity can be preached, which is why Kierkegaard can insist, as a sort of maxim, that “where persecution is absent, there is something wrong with the preaching” (NB18:74.a). In a number of entries, Kierkegaard emphasizes reduplication’s implications for social ethics and more material matters. For example, a priest is not permitted to avoid those who are at the bottom of the social order, i.e., “to ignore the rabble” (NB18:81), and a priest ought never give in to the temptation to depict poverty idyllically or celebrate its blessings, “speaking of the poor as being so much happier than the rich” (NB18:84) This is merely a consolation for the rich so that they can feel freed from having to provide economic support to the society’s poor: “The rich man goes home from church to his treasure, to which he now clings all the more firmly, edified by the beautiful lecture that spoke the language of compassion” (NB18:84). Kierkegaard takes his stand on the following formula: “it is Xnty that is supposed to benefit from having priests and not priests who are supposed to benefit from Xnty” (NB18:85; see also NB18:69), and then proceeds to inflict a series of reversals on the opportunism that cloaks itself in the name of Christianity. Money also gets implicated in Kierkegaard’s fictive draft prospectus for a public course on reduplication in the New Testament, and the clerical class is subjected to special treatment: Invitation. If there should be five or 6 like-minded people who together with me and without a lot of solemn ceremonies are willing to commit themselves simply to try to understand the N.T. and simply to strive to express its demands in deeds, I propose to begin holding religious gatherings at which I will interpret the N.T. Admission will be open to all with the exception of the clergy. For clergy, admission will require the payment of 10 rd. each time, which will be distributed to the poor. (NB18:71) Bishop J. P. Mynster serves as a more or less emblematic figure for the absence of reduplication, and in connection with the bishop Kierkegaard remarks: “I was brought up on Mynster’s sermons― aber by my father, a simple and unassuming and earnest and strict man to whom it would never in all the world have occurred

Critical Account of the Text not to act in accordance with what he read” (NB18:77). Kierkegaard’s veneration for the aging bishop had long remained intact, but many entries reveal his growing reservations, for example, an entry criticizing Mynster’s sermon on Pentecost Sunday, where the bishop had an easy time of it, inveighing against “monasteries and hermits” (NB18:13). It was profoundly painful for Kierkegaard to experience Mynster’s silence regarding Martensen’s dismissal of Kierkegaard’s work in the preface to the latter’s Den christelige Dogmatik. In one entry, Kierkegaard contrasts past and present: “Then I had the pleasure of transforming my existence into a sort of celebration in honor of Mynster … And now Martensen writes a preface that is supposed to make my work something trivial, and Mynster remains silent” (NB18:49; see also NB18:58). Martensen merely gives lip service to Christianity, merely declaims, but could never dream of assuming the character of an actual Christian: “that it is a declaimer speaking is of course something people know from the explanation they have of his life” (NB18:12). Kierkegaard concedes that he might feel tempted to direct “half a score of those devastating comic lines” against Martensen, but given the way the situation has developed, he believes that he “can scarcely write a newspaper article, especially anything polemical, because I live constantly surrounded by the mob and the risk of violence is real” (NB18:43). Kierkegaard’s recurrent desire to employ satire emerges a number of times in Journal NB18. He produces a rather macabre portrait of a professor who is present at the crucifixion on Golgotha and thereupon establishes himself rather tastelessly as a professor of theology, specifically as “a professor of the fact that someone else was put to death” (NB18:72). Kierkegaard also produces a rather savage depiction of a theatrical religious service in which an actor portrays a priest who, clad in “historical dress,” reads a sermon by Luther that causes the congregation to weep “just as they indeed weep in the theater when a tragedy is presented” (NB18:47). Similarly, though less dramatically, Kierkegaard breathes a sigh of relief over the fact that “the old edifying writings” still present us with the possibility of studying the “psychological states” that come to light “when treating hum. beings as spirit,” thus taking religious crises seriously, whereas nowadays people are automatically “cured … by traveling to a spa, by leeches, bloodletting, etc.” (NB18:35). At some points, however, Kierkegaard could also have doubts about his personal qualifications for mounting a critique of “Christendom.” He honestly confesses to his readers that “I love being

659

660

J O U R N A L NB 18 a hum. being; I do not have the courage entirely to be spirit in that way” (NB18:33). In a number of entries, Kierkegaard focuses on this conflict between his own psychic makeup and the absolute character of Christianity, between his inclination to continue his work as an artist and the obligation to communicate the truth to his contemporaries (NB18:26). This conflict obliges him to reconsider the boundary between Law and Gospel in the preaching of Christianity: “Ah, a person can certainly proclaim leniency … But proclaiming rigorousness! Sheer spiritual trial: whether you can endure it yourself; whether you ought not spare yourself” (NB18:27). Kierkegaard can define leniency as “indulgence,” and he does not believe that it can properly be preached in church, because the specific terms of any leniency are dependent on the individual’s “private understanding with God” (NB18:28; see also NB18:41). This dialectic of rigorousness and leniency is related to a series of entries on Luther, whom Kierkegaard reads with equal parts of respectful approval and critical modification (NB18:15, NB18:31, NB18:76). His objections concerning the turn toward the world that Luther occasioned are directed less against Luther himself than against his theological heirs, and Kierkegaard insists that Luther’s project can only be continued if it is accompanied by a thoroughgoing critique of the ever-increasing secularization characteristic of recent times. He notes “Coupling worldliness and religiousness together was done a little too quickly,” and comes to the conclusion that “Luther’s true successor would come to precisely the opposite result of Luther, because L. came after fantastical exaggerations in the direction of asceticism, whereas he would come after the frightful deception to which Lutheranism gave birth” (NB18:101). The ordinary, everyday world and its various nuisances also show up in the journal. The relationship with Rasmus Nielsen continues to be problematic (NB18:23, NB18:49), and as time goes by, it remains so painfully unresolved that Kierkegaard associates the situation with his relationship to Regine: “Never have I suffered, qua author, as I have suffered with him … But finally, it will in fact end with him, just like that girl, regarding me as the most cunning deceiver” (NB18:82). Kierkegaard’s relationship with J. F. Giødwad was rather more tolerable, but still far from harmonious. “Over the past three to 4 years” Kierkegaard had spoken with Giødwad “every single evening” and regarded him as his “friend,” but in his capacity as editor of Fædrelandet [The Fatherland] Giødwad had been a silent witness to Corsaren’s [The Corsair’s] attack on Kierkegaard and is thus depicted as a somewhat

Critical Account of the Text dubious figure in Kierkegaard’s account of the events of 1846 and their consequences (NB18:44). The drastic and disturbing experiences resulting from the collision with Corsaren are frequently the subject of both social analyses and biographical reflections in Journal NB18: “Oh, if only there had been truth in the situation: then I would have had my place. I had come in order to have my say―I who am surely one of those who has the most to say. But now I was to be elbowed aside, ignored, treated as though I were mad: this made me more and more introverted, and in turn I developed more and more … To whom shall I speak? There is no one” (NB18:29; see also NB18:38, NB18:46, NB18:62). Kierkegaard sits in this social isolation, reading the works of Johann Georg Hamann (ASKB 538–544), where he finds parallels to his own complicated situation (NB18:25, NB18:45). Nor are Kierkegaard’s physical surroundings tolerable. His new apartment on Nørregade 43, into which he had moved in April 1850, did not at all live up to his expectations, and he writes that the placement of the windows was such that “in the afternoons I suffer so much from reflected sunlight that I feared at first that I might go blind” (NB18:92). The occupant of the apartment above had a dog that lay by the open window all day long and with his zealous barking provided a running commentary on every little thing taking place on the street below: “If a coachman drives past and cracks his whip, it barks; if another dog barks, it also barks. Thus there is not the least little incident in the street that I do not receive in a second edition, thanks to this dog” (NB18:48). Despite these distractions, in Journal NB18 Kierkegaard is able to arrive at greater clarity concerning his future task, which he sums up in an almost programmatic formulation: About Myself. Christianity is rlly as good as abolished, as it were. But first a poet’s heart must break, or a poet must stand in the way in such a manner as to block the way for all illusions. This is the stopping; and in our petty circumstances, it is my task. (NB18:100)

661

Explanatory Notes 257

1

NB18. … 1850.] Label on the front cover of the journal.

259

1

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, 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 3 of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). See the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Friday Discourse] → 259,1. Journal NB17 p. 30] See entry NB17:24 in the present volume.

2 3 3

259

4 5

5

260

2

p. 33] See NB18:28 in the present volume. The Gospel the Great Supper] Refers to Lk 14:16–24, the gospel for the second Sunday after Trinity Sunday. p. 86] See NB18:60 and NB18:61 in the present volume. “Stopping”] Or “Halt,” an expression used a number of times by Kierkegaard in opposition to the Hegelian idiom of “going further” (than, e.g., faith or Christianity). See NB12:62 in KJN 6, 176, with its relevant explanatory note. Thus in Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847),

Kierkegaard writes: “For stopping is not sluggish calm; stopping is also movement: it is the inward movement of the heart, it is the deepening of the self in inwardness; but merely going further is the direction forward on the surface. One does not come to will one thing that way” (UDVS, 153; SKS 8, 249). See also Practice in Christianity (1850), no. 3, the section titled “The Stopping” (PC, 23– 68; SKS 7, 35–80). the natural hum. being] Reference to 1 Cor 2:14, where some Danish translations, following Luther’s German translation, use the term “natural man,” as does the King James Version: “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” to what limitless] Variant: “limitless” added. power.] Variant: first written “power;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. the story of the thief on the cross] Reference to Lk 23:39–43. All, all have fallen away, even the apostle has denied Xt] Refers to Jesus’ disciples and specifically to Peter; see Mt 26:56 and 26:69–75. affectation] In JJ:497, Kierkegaard writes: “Affectation is best translated into Danish with ‘acquiring something by lying’; the affected person doesn’t lie, but he acquires something by way of lying, either straightforwardly, or by doing the opposite, or by not doing something” (KJN 2, 281). See also Poul Martin Møller, “Forberedelser til en Afhandling om Affectation” [Preliminaries to an Essay on Affectation], in Efterladte Skrifter af Poul M. Møller [Poul Martin Møller’s Posthumous Writings], 3 vols., vol. 1, ed. Christian Winther; vols. 2–3, ed. F. C. Olsen (Copenhagen, 1839; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 3, pp. 291–302, where Møller states that affectation is a combination of falseness and self-deception (pp. 294, 301).

10

17 17

27 28

21

261

664 31

38

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 5–7

the lepers … publicans, and flagrant sinners] See various reports in the synoptic Gospels, e.g., Lk 5:30, 15:1, 17:11–19, 18:11; Mt 9:10–11, 9:32–33, 11:19, 21:31–32, 26:6. Seneca tells … he was disgusting] Kierkegaard is relating a story recounted by the Roman politician and philosophical author Seneca (ca. 4 b.c.–a.d. 65) in his essay De ira (On Anger), bk. 3, chap. 17. The story tells of Telesphorus, who was mistreated by Lysimachus (ca. 355–281 b.c., king of Thrace from 305 b.c. of Macedonia from 286 b.c.). The standard Loeb translation of the story follows below: “Though Lysimachus escaped by some good luck from the lion’s teeth, was he therefore, in view of this experience, a whit more kind when he himself became king? Not so, for Telesphorus the Rhodian, his own friend, he completely mutilated, and when he had cut off his ears and nose, he shut him up in a cage as if he were some strange and unknown animal and for a long time lived in terror of him, since the hideousness of his hacked and mutilated face had destroyed every appearance of a human being; to this were added starvation and squalor and the filth of a body left to wallow in its own dung; furthermore his hands and knees becoming all calloused―for by the narrowness of his quarters he was forced to use these instead of feet―his sides, too, a mass of sores from rubbing, to those who beheld him his appearance was no less disgusting than terrible, and having been turned by his punishment into a monster he had forfeited even pity. Yet, while he who suffered these things was utterly unlike a human being, he who inflicted them was still less like one,” Seneca, Moral Essays, trans. John W. Basore, 3 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1928–1935), vol. 1, pp. 299–301. According to a bill from the bookseller A. G. Salomon, in April 1850 Kierkegaard purchased Seneca Abhandl. u. Briefe (Römische Prosaiker) [Seneca: Essays and Letters (Roman Prose Authors)], i.e., Lucius Annäus Seneca des Philosophen Werke [The Philosophical Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca], trans. J. M. Moser, G. H. Moser, and A. Pauly, 15 vols. with continuous pagination (vols. 19–20, 25, 33, 41, 45– 46, 50, 53–55, 67, 73, 111, 115 of Römische Prosaiker

•

1850

in neuen Übersetzungen [Roman Prose Authors in New Translations]) (Stuttgart, 1828–1836; ASKB 1280–1280c). The passage Kierkegaard cites is in vol. 2 (1828), p. 145. nonetheless you are love.] Allusion to 1 Jn 4:16; see also 1 Jn 4:8. ― love.: Variant: first written “love;”, with the semicolon apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue.

16

262

daily derision] Refers to the so-called Corsaren [The Corsair] affair and its consequences for Kierkegaard. In response to P. L. Møller’s (→ 283m,27) critique of Stages on Life’s Way (1845) in the article “Et Besøg i Sorø,” published in the annual Gæa for 1846, Kierkegaard wrote a newspaper article in which he identified P. L. Møller with the satirical weekly Corsaren (→ 274,11 and 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 [The Fatherland], on December 27, 1845, no. 2078, cols. 16653–16658 (COR, 38–46; SKS 14, 77–84). 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. The teasing went on sporadically after M. A. Goldschmidt’s departure as editor, continuing until February 16, 1849, no. 439. Corsaren’s attacks resulted in Kierkegaard’s being abused on the street; see, e.g., NB:7, dated March 9, 1846, where Kierkegaard writes: “Every butcher boy believes that he is entitled practically to insult me on orders issued by The Corsair; the young university students smirk and giggle and are happy that a prominent person is trampled down” (KJN 4, 16). See also NB8:110: “year in and year out, day after day, to be reminded of the same thing―my legs―and that it is these that people write about. The animal health with which a shoemaker’s apprentice, a journeyman butcher, etc., guffaw, seiz-

27

262

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 7–8

28

29

31

ing on my physique: it is disgusting. And to endure it every single day!” (KJN 5, 199). not compensated for it in any way] Presumably, an allusion to the fact that Kierkegaard asked “to come in Corsaren” (see the preceding note) and took up the fight “for the sake of others,” as he put it in the article “The Dialectical Result of a Literary Police Action” (COR, 47–50, p. 47; SKS 14, 85–89, p. 87), which appeared under the name Frater Taciturnus in Fædrelandet (→ 282,13), no. 9, January 10, 1846, cols. 65–68. Kierkegaard repeatedly noted that despite his efforts, he had not received any recognition, not to mention support, in his battle with Corsaren; see, e.g., NB10:166 and 181 in KJN 5, 349 and 361, and NB12:110 in KJN 6, 204–206. I am increasingly regarded by the public as an eccentric or a madman] Here Kierkegaard is referring to the consequences of the Corsair affair (→ 262,27) and to his depiction as an eccentric or even as a madman in Corsaren (→ 274,11), which had identified Kierkegaard’s pseudonym Frater Taciturnus―and by extension, Kierkegaard himself―with “crazy Nathanson,” a horse dealer who had been put in Bidstrupgård, the city insane asylum; see Corsaren, no. 278, January 16, 1846, esp. col. 14, where Taciturnus himself is admitted to Bidstrupgård; see also Corsaren, no. 280, January 30, 1846, cols. 9–11, and no. 285, March 6, 1846, col. 8. See also NB10:166 in KJN 5, 349, and NB12:138.c in KJN 6, 230–231. Mynster at any rate knows] Kierkegaard appears to assume that Bishop J. P. Mynster is acquainted with his financial situation, presumably because he had visited the bishop in March 1849 and had “casually mentioned an appointment” at the pastoral seminary; see NB10:89 in KJN 5, 313. ― Mynster: Jakob Peter Mynster (1775–1854), Danish pastor, writer, and politician. Parish priest in Spjellerup and Smerup from 1802; 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 priest at Christiansborg Palace Church. In 1834, he was appointed bishop of the diocese of Zealand. As bishop of Zealand, Mynster was primate of the Danish Church and

•

1850

665

the king’s personal counselor. Mynster preached frequently in Copenhagen churches, particularly in the Church of Our Lady and in Christiansborg Palace Church. the financial sacrifices become more and more burdensome for me] Presumably, a reference to the circumstance that Kierkegaard could no longer live from a considerable fortune without diminishing his capital and that he found the income from his writings insufficient (→ 290,25). See NB11:114 from May 1849, where Kierkegaard, referring to his literary activity, writes: “Pecuniary sacrifices are becoming heavier and heavier” (KJN 6, 60). the treason committed against me] At a number of points, Kierkegaard regards the Corsair affair and its consequences as a conspiracy directed against him, because he was exposed to derision from the lower classes while “the more cultivated classes” refrained from supporting him (→ 271,13). Thus in NB11:233 from mid-July 1849, he writes: “For a few years now I’ve borne the treachery and ingratitude of a tiny country, the envy of the respectable, and the mockery of the mob” (KJN 6, 139). See also NB18:44 and NB18:44.a in the present volume, with relevant explanatory notes. what I have said so often: a provincial market town conspiracy] See NB17:76 in the present volume. A similar formulation can be found as early as entry NB:27, presumably from August or early September 1846, where Kierkegaard writes: “If I lived in an actual market town things would be even worse. Basically the situation is that most people have the secret notion that I am, sure enough, the man [in question], but then they think: If we all get together and tease him, he will have to give in. A negative conspiracy of this sort is only thinkable in a small country” (KJN 4, 30). See also NB2:67, from early June 1847, in KJN 4, 167. Argus-eyes] Refers to the Greek classical hero Argos (Latin, Argus), who was given the attribute panoptes (all-seeing) because he always kept open at least one of the hundreds of eyes that were located all over his body. He is mentioned in the legend of the romantic involvement of Zeus with

31

4

263

5

10

263

666

12

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 8–12

Io: when Hera, Zeus’s wife, discovered the relationship, she had Argos keep watch on Io; see Ovid’s version in Metamorphoses, bk. 1, vv. 625ff. Hamann (3rd volume letter no. 67): “that Argus was a pers. who had nothing to do, which is indicated by his name.”] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage from a letter by the German scholar and philosophical author J. G. Hamann (1730–1788) to his brother in Riga, in which he writes: “The hundred-eyed Argus was a person with nothing to do, as his name indicates.” Letter no. 67 from 1760, in Hamann’s Schriften [Hamann’s Writings], ed. F. Roth, 7 vols. (Berlin, 1821–1825) and vol. 8, pts. 1 and 2, ed. G. A. Wiener (Berlin, 1842–1843; ASKB 536–544; abbreviated hereafter Hamann’s Schriften); vol. 3 (1822), p. 10. ― which is indicated by his name: Pun on “Argos” (Ἂργος and ἁργός), “who does not work, idle.”

263

31

Hamann … (3rd volume p. 68): [“]das höchste Decorum … feyerlichsten Convention.”] Cited from J. G. Hamann’s letter to J. G. Lindner, dated March 21, 1761, no. 86 in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 263,12), vol. 3 (1822), p. 68.

264

1

Solomon’s judgment] See 1 Kings 3:16–27. the Church, the true mother] The Latin expression vera mater ecclesia (“the Church, the true mother”) is used by several Church Fathers as a term for the Church in the world. Hamann (3rd bk. p. 72) … Mutter nicht gedient] Cited from Hamann’s letter to J. G. Lindner, dated March 21, 1761, no. 86 in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 263,12), vol. 3 (1822), p. 72.

4

9

264

26

Prof. Martensen] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808– 1884), cand. theol., 1832. After returning from a journey abroad, Martensen served as a privatdocent and as tutor for university students, including Søren Kierkegaard. He received the lic. theol. degree in 1838 and became a lecturer in theology at the University of Copenhagen the same year. In 1840, he received an honorary doctorate from the theology faculty of the University of Kiel and that year was appointed extraordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen, where from

•

1850

September 1, 1850, he was ordinary professor of theology. On Bishop Mynster’s recommendation, Martensen was appointed court preacher in 1845, and he became a knight of the Dannebrog in 1847. Bishop Mynster] → 262,31. genius] Kierkegaard is referring to frequent descriptions of Martensen as a “genius” by contemporaries. See the review of Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (→ 271,4), in Flyveposten [The Flying Post], no. 174, July 28, 1849; see NB13:86 in KJN 6, 329–332, with its relevant explanatory note. See also “Den Danske Kirke, betragtet af en Engelskmand” [The Danish Church as Seen by an Englishman], in the Grundtvigian journal Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], ed. R. Th. Fenger and C. J. Brandt, 8 vols. (Copenhagen, 1845–1853; ASKB 321–325), vol. 4, August 19, 1849, no. 47, cols. 753– 768, and August 26, no. 48, cols. 772–784, where the anonymous author writes (col. 783) that H. L. Martensen’s Grundrids til Moralphilosophiens System [Outline of a System of Moral Philosophy] (Copenhagen, 1841), “bears the stamp of his genius.” In Liv i Norden af Frederikke Bremer, Forfatterinde til de svenske Hverdagshistorier [Life in Scandinavia by Fredrika Bremer, Author of the Swedish Stories of Everyday Life] (Copenhagen, 1849) (the Danish translation was announced as having been published in Adresseavisen, the abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office], no. 214, September 12, 1849), Fredrika Bremer (→ 294,41) describes H. L. Martensen as “that richly gifted thinker,” who can “present the deepest speculative principles,” adding that “the interesting, ingenious character of his presentation makes him a popular writer” (p. 37). Rasmus Nielsen also seems to be referring to this when he calls H. L. Martensen an “organic genius” and a “dogmatic genius” in 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), pp. 45, 65.

32 36

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 12–15

38

265

1

265

14

He became court preacher … and then preached―every 6th Sunday] H. L. Martensen was appointed court preacher on May 16, 1845 (see Ny Collegial-Tidende [New Collegial Times], no. 22, May 24, 1845, p. 464), and as a rule he preached every sixth week at Christiansborg Palace Church (see map 2, B2); see also NB10:28, with its relevant explanatory note, in KJN 5, 282 and 533. In the second half of 1848, for instance, Martensen preached as court preacher at Christiansborg Palace Church on July 23, August 27, September 24, October 22, and December 10; in 1849, he preached for the first time on February 11 and then six weeks later on March 25. See the list of preachers in Copenhagen churches published in Adresseavisen. See also NB13:86, with its relevant explanatory note, in KJN 6, 329–332. People declaimed about the profound religiosity in Martensen … from the pulpit as well] No source has been found for this. Today, the first day of Pentecost, Mynster preached against monasteries and hermits] According to Adresseavisen, May 18, 1850, no. 115, Bishop Mynster (→ 262,31) preached at the 10 a.m. service in Christiansborg Palace Church on Sunday, May 19. His sermon is printed under the title “Herrens Forjættelse til sine Troende, at de skulle faae den Hellige Aands Gave. Paa første Pintsedag” [The Lord’s Promise That His Believers Would Receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit: On Pentecost Sunday], in J. P. Mynster, Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Given in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 215–230. Kierkegaard is referring to the following passage on pp. 220–221: “But when the hermits were in their huts, the monks in their cells―even if they did not sink into torpor or merely look after their bodily needs, but, on the contrary, consumed body and soul in self-chosen torments―it was not the spirit of God that drove them to renounce the joys and sorrows of society, to flee from life’s struggles, to exchange the duties God had assigned them with such as they themselves arbitrarily imposed upon themselves; it is not the spirit of God that teaches us to put our hands in our lap and sigh over the

•

1850

667

world’s corruption while we ourselves do not do our part to make it better, so that the kingdom of God can come.” albeit] Variant: first written “whose life”. adoringly] Variant: first written “they feel”. Mary says: All generations will call me blessed] Refers to Lk 1:48. a sword would pierce her heart] Refers to Lk 2:34–35. Now the priest declaims … in Mary’s words] Presumably, a reference to J. P. Mynster’s sermon “Hvorledes kunne vi udbrede og befæste Christi Rige? Paa Mariæ Bebudelses Dag” [How Could We Expand and Fortify Christ’s Kingdom? On the Day of the Annunciation], on the gospel text Lk 1:26–38, where Mynster says: “At this time we will not dwell upon what must take place in Mary’s spirit through this annunciation, which certainly heralded dire sufferings for her but also that all generations would call her blessed; [nor will we dwell] on the combination of humility and confidence with which she said: “Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word!” Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret [Sermons for All the Sundays and Holy Days of the Year], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1823]; ASKB 229–230; abbreviated hereafter Prædikener paa alle Søn- og HelligDage), vol. 1, pp. 267–268. ― in Mary’s words: Refers to Lk 1:38 and 48 (→ 265,31). 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 some 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.

27

4

265m

the observation Luther makes … eternal blessedness] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on Lk

11

266

265

29 31 34 36

668

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 15–21

1:26–38, the gospel text for the day of the annunciation, 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 En christelig Postille), vol. 1, pp. 229–238; pp. 236–237: “But those who cling to the goods of this world and seize them with both hands, to the detriment of their neighbor, do not have faith. For if they had faith, they would certainly have at least had the confidence that God would provide nourishment for their temporal lives. But, seeing as they do not have faith in him in earthly matters, how could they have faith in him in heavenly matters?” abeyance;] Variant: first written “abeyance.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. 266

27

There is disagreement about which sort of discourse is the proper one] Considerations both of the theory and practice of the sermon were discussed in, e.g., J. P. Mynster, “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. 80–129, and in Claus Harms, Pastoraltheologie. I Foredrag for theologiske Studenter [Pastoral Theology in Lectures for Theology Students], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1844–1847; ASKB 547 [from the German 2nd ed., 1836]), vol. 1, Prædikanten [The Preacher], trans. Hans Egede Glahn.

267

2

to fear that he is tempting God … written about in the word of God] Regarding not fearing that one is tempting God (→ 290,27), see Jas 1:13. ― that the Bible is the word of God: See N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangeliskchristelige 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 Balle and Bastholm, Lærebog), p. 7, § 6: “It is cer-

•

1850

tain that God’s will with respect to human beings is contained in the Bible, which therefore is also called the word of God.” a quiet hour] An expression favored by J. P. Mynster (→ 262,31), referring to devotions as well as to a person’s solitary presence in church. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on the Christian Faith], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1837 [1833]; ASKB 254–255), vol. 1, p. 240; vol. 2, pp. 298, 299, 301, 306; and Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Delivered in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), p. 63. Mynster appeared to have used the expression most recently in a sermon given on May 19, 1850, and subsequently published in Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 265,14), pp. 215–230; p. 216.

14

267

an observation by Kofoed-Hansen … 2nd day of Pentecost] Hans Peter Kofoed-Hansen (1813– 1893), Danish theologian, teacher, and priest; theology graduate, 1837, following which he became a teacher at the Odense Cathedral School; starting in 1840, he authored novels under the pseudonym “Jean Pierre.” He was appointed perpetual curate at the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn in June 1849 and installed in September of that year. He delivered his farewell sermon on November 3, 1850, after which he became the principal priest at the Church of Our Lady in Haderslev, Jutland. According to Adresseavisen, May 18, 1850, no. 115, on the second day of Pentecost, which in 1850 fell on Monday, May 20, Kofoed-Hansen preached at the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn (see map 2, C4). According to the Forordnet AlterBog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381), p. 101, the reading for that day was Acts 10:42–48. One could ask why God, who disrupted Babel (that is, he willed dispersal), why he then wanted ‘the Church’ (that is, unity).] H. P. KofoedHansen’s sermon was not published. With reference to Babel, see Gen 11:1–9.

28

267

To the piece: Come unto Me, All You Who Labor, etc.] Refers to the first of the three piec-

8

29

268

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 21–23

10

13 14

20 22

es―“Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest,” “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me,” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself”―which were written in 1848 and were subsequently collected and published as Practice in Christianity (1850), with Anti-Climacus as the author and Kierkegaard as the editor. ― Come unto Me: See Mt 11:28. Entry NB18:21 and the first half of NB18:21.a are also found almost word for word in the undated loose papers (Pap. X 5 B 85, 86). It is perhaps best that the passage where there is an allusion to Christ’s entry be omitted] In “Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest” Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem is referred to twice―both times using the term “procession”―both of which appear in “B. The Second Part of His Life” (the second section of “II. The Inviter”), first in the sentence: “And who is he, he who in this procession is nevertheless the object of the persecutions of the mighty?” (PC, 54; SKS 12, 66); thereafter in the passage: “Is he, the inviter, is he a mad fanatic? The procession corresponds to this … A teacher, a wise man, or whatever you want to call him, a sort of failed genius who says that he is God―surrounded by a crowd of people who cheer him, he himself accompanied by several tax collectors, convicts, and lepers; closest to him, the select circle of the apostles” (PC, 55; SKS 12, 66). That these references have caused difficulties for Kierkegaard can be seen from the fact that later in 1849, during subsequent reworkings of the manuscript, he returned to them several times (see loose papers, Pap. X 5 B 74, 76, 77, 80). the entry on Palm Sunday] See Mt 21: 1–11; Mk 11:1–11; Lk 19:28–40; and Jn 12:12–19. in any case the entry cannot have been an absolutely triumphal procession … the disciples only understood the whole business afterward (Jn XII:16)] Refers to Jn 11:57; see also Jn 12:12–16. the Pharisees themselves say … Look, all the world is following him] Reference to Jn 12:19. it is immediately preceded by the awakening of Lazarus] See Jn 12:17–18 and Jn 11:1–44. According to Jn 12:1, the awakening took place only a few days before Easter.

•

1850

669

“procession,”] → 268,10. hypochondriacal] In addition to its present-day meaning―i.e., a continual fear of illness and an excessive concern for one’s health―hypochondria still had the older meanings of melancholia and of obsession with minor details (see Ludvig Meyer, Fremmedordbog [Dictionary of Foreign Words], 3rd ed. [Copenhagen, 1853; ASKB 1035]), and Kierkegaard not infrequently used the word in these senses, both in his journals and notebooks and, e.g., in The Concept of Anxiety (BA, 162n; SKS 4, 460n). Alas, … June 1850.] Variant: added. see Journal NB10 p. 116] See NB10:85, from early 1849, in KJN 5, 311, which is titled “A Comment on the Work ‘Come unto Me All You, etc.’” (KJN 5, 311–312), where Kierkegaard writes, “There is no specific reference to Christ’s entry into Jerusalem, but then on the whole there is no reference at all to the historical” (p. 311).

5

Meritoriousness] In Lutheran doctrine, this signifies the erroneous view that a person can by his own accomplishments make himself deserving of God’s grace. See, e.g., articles 4 and 6 of the Augsburg Confession.

28

268

R. Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, winter semester 1840–1841; from 1841, Poul Martin Møller’s successor as extraordinary professor of 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). Kierkegaard seems to have considered establishing a close relationship with Rasmus Nielsen in order to acquaint him with his thoughts about his own 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

1

269

268m

10

13 19

670

269

4

10 20

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 23–25

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). Then came N.; he was supposed to improve things. He goes and changes it into a debate] Refers to Rasmus Nielsen, 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; abbreviated hereafter Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed). The book was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 116, May 19, 1849, as having “appeared.” According to the book’s preface, the lectures that form the basis of the book “were delivered in the university building during the winter of 1848 before a respectable number of listeners of both sexes” (pp. vi–vii). In this same preface, Nielsen explains the method he employs in the book, which consists of putting three possible positions with respect to the gospels―“the believer,” “the freethinker,” and “the school theologian”―in conversation with one another, in which they “go through the four gospels, each speaking from his own point of view” (p. vi). According to Nielsen, it was not possible for any of the participants in this “philosophical thought-experiment of a sort” to refute the others (see p. viii). either with authority or without it] That is, with or without authority in direct discourse. Eulenspiegel never did find the tree … choose the tree himself] A reference to a motif in the German folk book on the mischievous antihero Till Eulenspiegel (first known print version, 1515, which refers to earlier oral and written versions from the 14th century). After having done mischief in Lübeck, Eulenspiegel is condemned to death. The citizens want to hang him, and Eulenspiegel asks to be granted one last wish, which is granted, namely, to choose the tree from which he is to be hanged. When, after a lengthy search, he fails to find a satisfactory tree, the citizens tire of it and set him free. The motif is known

•

1850

as K558 in Stith Thompson, Motif-Index of Folk Literature (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1966 [1955–1958]). Kierkegaard owned Underlig og selsom Historie om, Tiile Ugelspegel [Wonderful and Strange Story of Till Eulenspiegel], translated from the German (Copenhagen, n.d. [the title page says “printed this year,” presumably between 1842 and 1848]; ASKB 1469). This edition includes a somewhat different version of the story in which the protagonist evades execution through a clever last request; see story no. 57, pp. 94–95. It has not been possible to identify Kierkegaard’s source. Erasmus concludes a letter to Zwingli … Hamann 3rd vol. p. 145] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the words with which J. G. Hamann introduces a citation from a letter from Erasmus to Zwingli, which Hamann included in a letter to J. G. Lindner, dated April 16, 1762; no. 104 in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 263,12), vol. 3 (1822), p. 145. ― Erasmus: Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466 or 1469–1536), Dutch Renaissance humanist and theologian. ― Zwingli: Ulrich (or Huldrych) Zwingli (1484–1531), Swiss Reformer. Scharling, too, thinks that Martensen has emphasized … just as strongly as I have] Carl Emil Scharling (1803–1877), Danish theologian and editor; cand. theol. 1825; after a study tour to Paris, Tübingen, and Basel, appointed lecturer at Sorø Academy, 1830–1834; professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen from 1834; dr. theol. 1836. Together with C. T. Engelstoft, Scharling edited Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], new series (Copenhagen, 1847–1849) and Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift [New Theological Journal] from 1850. Kierkegaard is referring to Scharling’s review, “Den christelige Dogmatik. Fremstillet af Dr. H. Martensen” [Christian Dogmatics Presented by Dr. H. Martensen] in Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift, ed. C. E. Scharling and C. T. Engelstoft, vol. 1 (1850), pp. 348–375: “It is well known that in Denmark Prof. Martensen’s name was linked to the concept of speculative philosophy in the Hegelian sense, and it was not infrequently heard that the opposition against Hegelian philosophy mounted by, e.g., Mag. Kierkegaard, in practice

2

6

270

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 25–26 applied to Dr. Martensen’s efforts in dogmatic theology. But from the work before us it can now be seen very clearly how much Martensen’s views diverge from and oppose Hegel’s views on some of its most important points; and with respect to Kierkegaard, the determination―often ascribed by his friends to that author as a new discovery―that religion is an existential relationship: this is emphasized by Martensen with no less emphasis than by many older theologians and dogmaticians. Not less characteristic of both authors’ divergence from Hegelian philosophical views is the importance that both of them attribute to the ethical element, which perhaps emerges with even greater energy in Martensen’s clear, concise, and earnest presentation than it does in Kierkegaard, who, yielding all too often to his humor, disturbs the intended effect and, owing to his many affected dialectical twists not infrequently leaves one with a feeling as if his presentation were not quite in earnest, but only an essay in higher intellectual gymnastics” (pp. 357–358). 270

14

23

Verily, verily] Frequently occurring rhetorical figure in the gospel of John when introducing Jesus’ words. ignored me] Kierkegaard often complained, with some justification, that his writings were not really reviewed (see, e.g., NB14:81 in KJN 6, 396–397). In an overview of the year’s homiletic literature, Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], vol. 12 (Copenhagen, 1849), reports, in connection with one of Kierkegaard’s works: “Owing both to their number and to their contents, Mag. Kierkegaard’s works occupy such a remarkable and unusual position among the great many edifying works that have so enriched our literature in recent times that we have long had the wish to provide a more detailed review of them; but because we preferred that this be provided by ‘that single individual’ whom the author regards as his real reader (see his prefaces), making this interesting literary phenomenon the subject of more detailed investigation in this journal has been postponed hitherto” (p. 180). C. E. Scharling’s review of Martensen’s Dogmatik from the same period makes the following remarks apropos of Kierkegaard: “It is odd

•

1850

671

that no one has yet made this author’s writings the subject of a detailed analysis, both because they merit this in their own right and because this seems to be especially called for owing to the approval they have won from readers of varying levels of cultivation” (Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift, vol. 1 [Copenhagen, 1850], p. 355). See also the introduction to the later anonymous piece by Martensen’s disciple Ludvig Gude, Om Magister S. Kierkegaards Forfattervirksomhed. Iagttagelser af en Landsbypræst [On Magister S. Kierkegaard’s Work as an Author: Observations of a Country Priest] (Copenhagen, 1851). At the same time, however, some of Kierkegaard’s works received a great deal of attention, inasmuch as Kierkegaard had been enlisted into the contemporary debate about the relationship between faith and knowledge, particularly by R. Nielsen (→ 269,1) and P. M. Stilling (→ 274,27) in opposition to Martensen and speculative theology. when we perhaps] Variant: “perhaps” added. also out of respect for you, had been made as gentle as possible] In many of Kierkegaard’s writings, ideas are put forward in experimental fashion with the help of pseudonyms. Another portion of his writings consists of edifying discourses that insist they are “without authority” (→ 276,28). On Kierkegaard’s respect for J. P. Mynster, see NB6:55: “my reverence for Mynster was something I was granted, something I was to display” (KJN 5, 38). Privately] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. it was the first time I spoke with you … after the publication of Concluding Postscript] Presumably, this conversation took place when Kierkegaard brought a copy of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (which appeared on February 27, 1846) to Bishop J. P. Mynster (see paper 571 in KJN 11; SKS 27, 668–669). It is not known when Kierkegaard first spoke with Mynster following his father’s death in 1838, but according to NB:57, dated November 5, 1846 (KJN 4, 50–51), Kierkegaard had already spoken with Mynster by that time. which is now to be labeled an error] The preface to H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik

34 1

2 2

4

271

672

4

5

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 26

[Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), was advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen, no. 167, July 19, 1849, and according to a receipted bill from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers, Kierkegaard had already acquired the book on July 18. Alluding to Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous works, Martensen remarks: “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 put 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” (p. iii). that we were “complements of one another”] See NB2:210, from 1847, where Kierkegaard also discusses Mynster’s remarks: “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). privately, you would say (when R. N.’s Faith of the Gospels was published) “of course, Mag. K., we all acknowledge that we have been influ-

•

1850

enced by you”] See NB12:165.b from mid-September 1849: “The last time I spoke with him, Bishop Mynster said: ‘To surrender oneself like this and copy someone else is just all wrong, dashing from the one extreme (absolute Hegelian) to the other. Of course we are all influenced by you and your works, we all acknowledge that’” (KJN 6, 246). Inasmuch as Rasmus Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 269,4) was announced as having been published on May 19, 1849, the conversation between Kierkegaard and Mynster must have taken place after that date (see also the explanatory note to NB12:165.b in KJN 6, 570). See also NB11:193, from June 25, 1849, in KJN 6, 113– 114, where Kierkegaard mentions several meetings with Bishop Mynster in the month of June; the conversations do not seem to have concerned Nielsen’s book, however. ― Mag. K: (→ 288,16). Martensen was to be put on display, even after his impudent preface] Refers to the preface to the 1st ed. of Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik, where, in an aside, and without mentioning Kierkegaard by name, Martensen polemicizes against Kierkegaard and the pseudonymous works (→ 271,4). When Kierkegaard notes Mynster’s public mention of Martensen, he is perhaps alluding to J. P. Mynster, “Bemærkninger ved ‘Aanden i Naturen. Almeenfattelige Bidrag til at belyse Naturens aandelige Indhold af H. C. Ørsted. Kjøbenhavn 1850’ af Biskop Dr. Mynster” [Comments on “The Soul in Nature: A Contribution to Illuminating the Spiritual Content of Nature for the General Reader by H. C. Ørsted. Copenhagen 1850” by Bishop Dr. Mynster] in Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift, ed. C. E. Scharling and C. T. Engelstoft, vol. 1 (1850), pp. 291–315. On p. 304 of the review, Mynster refers to Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4), p. 29 (§ 17) in order to support his own objections to H. C. Ørsted’s presentation of the relation between the laws of nature and God’s Providence. the rabble permitted to eat away at my reputation] Presumably, a reference to the so-called Corsair affair (→ 262,27), as a result of which Kierkegaard felt himself reviled on the street. That Kierkegaard’s name was misused can be seen, e.g., from Georg Brandes’s recollection: “[W]hen,

8

10

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 26–30

13

21

271

27 32

34

272

5 7

273

8

as a child, I failed to pull my trousers down carefully and evenly over my boots, which in those days were serviceably long, the nurse would admonish me, saying, ‘Søren Kierkegaard!’” (Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996], p. 97). See also NB3:55, from December 6, 1847: “Mr. Hostrup writes a student comedy, naturally with all possible lack of consideration, taking all possible license … Fine. But then should it not remain a student comedy, i.e., for students[?] But what happens, the play tours the whole country, ends up being performed in the Royal Theater― and now, as I see today in Flyve-Posten [The Flying Post], in Norway, and in Rigs Tidenden [National Times] the character who is supposed to be me is called outright: Søren Kierkegaard. I’ve no doubt that to attract interest in the play the placards already have carried my name openly” (KJN 4, 272; see also relevant explanatory notes). all you who ought to witness in my behalf remain silent] In his journals Kierkegaard often complains that no one (especially from among “people of cultivation”) supported him when he took up the battle against Corsaren (→ 262,27); see, e.g., NB10:166 and 181 in KJN 5, 349 and 361, with their relevant explanatory notes; NB12:110 and NB13:33 in KJN 6, 204–206 and 296–297; and entry NB17:64 in the present volume. financially I can so little afford it] → 262,31. the many happy and smiling people] Variant: added. benefiting,] Variant: first written “benefiting.” with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. fear and trembling] Allusion to Phil 2:12. you became a sword through the heart of your mother] → 265,34. appeared to be] Variant: added. contentment and edification] Allusion to Ludvig Holberg’s (1684–1754) comedy Barselstuen [The Delivery Room] (1724), act 2, sc. 7, where Else the Schoolmaster uses the expression “contentment and enjoyment” in an affected tone of voice.

•

1850

673

See Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 2; the volumes are undated and unpaginated. indulgence, which, after all, is one of the prerogatives of God’s majesty] “Majesty” is a medieval expression (Latin, jus regale), for a prerogative over which the king alone disposes.

11

now I was to be elbowed aside, ignored, treated as though I were mad] → 270,23 and → 262,29. The Corsair actlly constituted public opinion] Corsaren, a satirical and political weekly journal, was founded in 1840 by M. A. Goldschmidt (→ 282,40), who was its actual editor and contributor until October 1846. The journal’s satirical articles were accompanied with drawings by Peter Klæstrup, which helped it gain broad readership; in the mid-1840s it had a press run of about three thousand copies, twice as many as the leading liberal paper Fædrelandet and only a few hundred fewer than the semi-official government newspaper, Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times]. I did an absolutely good deed] Specifically, by challenging Corsaren and asking that he be abused in the paper as other honorable people had been (→ 262,27).

4

Hypocrisy … of religion.] Variant: deleted. Prof. Martensen’s preface to the 2nd printing of Dogmatics] i.e., the “Preface to the Second Printing,” dated May 1, 1850, of H. L. Martensen, Den christelige Dogmatik, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1850 [1849]), p. vi. In its entirety the preface reads: “Inasmuch as a new printing of this work has become necessary so quickly, it will scarcely surprise anyone that in this short interval I have not seen occasion to rework or alter it. I am therefore issuing it unchanged in the wish and the hope that it will continue to find well-disposed readers. As for the opposition it has already evoked from various quarters, I intend to express my views in a short piece that, if time and circumstance permit, I hope to be able to publish as soon as this summer.” The book was advertised as having been published in Adresseavisen, no. 117, May 22, 1850, and again in issue no. 136, June 13, 1850,

21

274

11

12

24

274

674

25

27

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 30

this time together with the publication announcement of H. L. Martensen, Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift [Information on Dogmatics: An Occasional Piece] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654); from a surviving receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers, it can be seen that Kierkegaard had already purchased a copy on June 12, 1850. Recently, his entire tactics] See H. L. Martensen’s letter to L. Gude, dated April 1, 1850: “The printing of my Dogmatics is proceeding at a brisk pace. Over half of it has already been printed. With respect to the question the two of us have discussed so much, I confess that―however many things weigh in favor of the plan on which we agreed―I have more and more come back to my original plan about a pamphlet [i.e., Dogmatiske Oplysninger; see the preceding note]. I feel a need to say something and from many quarters I have also heard that it is expected that something be said. That will happen as it will. The relationship with K. is to be kept as neutral as possible. There is to be no talk of an attack from my side. If he nonetheless wants to see himself as attacked in my response to N. [i.e., Rasmus Nielsen] and support N., he is naturally free to do so, and he will have to consider: respice finem [Latin, “how will it end!”]. I have myself thought of this respice finem and cannot see that I have anything to fear concerning the final disposition of the matter. Now, and with no rushing whatever, during these vacation days I will again turn to my pamphlet,” Biskop H. Martensens Breve. Breve til L. Gude [Bishop H: Martensen’s Letters: Letters to L. Gude], ed. Bjørn Kornerup, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1955–1957), vol. 1, pp. 8–9. It has been almost 9 months since the appearance of Nielsen’s review and Stilling and Paludan-Müller] Rasmus Nielsen’s (→ 269,23) lengthy review of Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4) appeared under the title Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik”. En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 264,36); it was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen on October 15, 1849. ― Stilling: Peter Michael Stilling (1812– 1869), philosopher, abandoned his theology studies shortly before his examinations but was later

•

1850

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, influenced by Kierkegaard, he fully rejected this position. After a study tour he worked as a privatdocent in the period 1846–1850. Among Stilling’s writings is the piece to which Kierkegaard here refers, 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), which was strongly influenced by Kierkegaard, to whom he sent a copy with a dedication; this polemical work was noted in Berlingske Tidende, no. 303, December 22, 1849, as having appeared. ― Paludan-Müller: Jens Paludan-Müller (1813–1899), Danish theologian and priest; cand.theol., 1837; from 1840, adjunct at the Sorø Academy School in central Zealand; from 1847, resident curate at Budolfi Church and hospital priest in Aalborg. Kierkegaard here refers to Paludan-Müller’s first lengthy piece, Om Dr. Martensens christelige Dogmatik [On Dr. Martensen’s Christelige Dogmatik] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 709), advertised in Berlingske Tidende, no. 17, January 21, 1850, as having been published; from a surviving receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers it can be seen that Kierkegaard had already purchased a copy on January 14, 1850 (KA, D packet 7, layer 8). Now the word is … by summer] → 274,24. he adds [“]if time and circumstance permit[”]] → 274,24. Mynster] → 262,31. Martensen vis-à-vis Nielsen] Originally, R. Nielsen had a close relationship to H. L. Martensen. Under the influence of Kierkegaard, with whom he established a friendship in the summer of 1848, Nielsen distanced himself from

29 31 34 35

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 30–33

35

275

7

275

15

Martensen and was sharply critical of Den christelige Dogmatik in the review he wrote of that work (→ 274,27). The polemic between Martensen and Nielsen continued with Martensen’s publication of Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift, in which he defended himself against criticisms of his dogmatics. Mynster vis-à-vis Lindberg] Refers to the lengthy polemic between J. P. Mynster and Jacob Christian Lindberg (1797–1857), Danish theologian, numismatist, and Bible translator. Starting in 1822, Lindberg taught Hebrew as an adjunct at Metropolitanskolen, one of Copenhagen’s preparatory schools. After publishing several pieces in which he accused the Danish theologian Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793–1877) of disseminating false doctrine, Lindberg became involved in a libel case that led to his suspension in 1828 and his resignation in 1830. Lindberg wrote his magister dissertation in 1828, and in the period 1833–1840, he served as editor of Nordisk KirkeTidende [Scandinavian Church Times]. In 1844, he was appointed as priest to a call at Tingsted on the island of Falster. For a time, Lindberg could almost be regarded as the focal point of the ongoing “awakening” or religious revival movement, and he channeled a portion of his following into the Grundtvigian movement. After J. P. Mynster became bishop in 1834, Lindberg attacked him for the way in which he formulated the Apostles’ Creed in a catechism he had developed for the Copenhagen orphanage in 1814, a formulation that also appeared in the new altar book, i.e., Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark (→ 267,28), from 1830. Mynster defended himself against the attacks in articles of his own, and the polemic attracted additional participants, continuing until 1840. Amagertorv] Very busy square between Vimmelskaftet and Østergade on the pedestrian street now know as “Strøget” (see map 2, C2). reply, with Luther: [“]Hold your tongue, dear fellow … [”]] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on Lk 2:21, the gospel text for New Year’s Day, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 118–126; see esp. p. 119: “When He [i.e., God] says or does

•

1850

675

something, then you are to hold your tongue and fall on your knees and neither worry nor ask about anything else, but simply do what He bids you do, hear what He says to you, and praise Him for what He does.” Cf. Christian Discourses (1848): “Because understood in the Christian sense, the only weapon against doubt is to keep quiet, or as Luther puts it, Shut your mouth! Doubt, on the other hand, says, ‘Get involved with me, fight me―with my own weapons’” (CD, 190; SKS 10, 200). Xt … at the dinner (when the woman anointed him)] Reference to Jn 12:3–8. immediately after the entry … sorrowful, even unto death] Presumably, a reference to Mt 26:38; see also Jn 12:27.

29

hum. being;] Variant: first written “hum being.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. originally] Variant: added. in the days of youth] Allusion to Eccl 11:9. was warm] Variant: changed from “beat soundly”. the heart beat soundly] Perhaps an allusion to Plato’s Symposium, 215d–e, where Alcibiades eulogizes Socrates: “And speaking for myself, gentlemen, if I wasn’t afraid you’d tell me I was completely bottled, I’d swear on oath what an extraordinary effect his words have had on me― and still do, if it comes to that. For the moment I hear him speak I am smitten with a kind of sacred rage, worse than any Corybant, and my heart jumps into my mouth and the tears start into my eyes,” Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), p. 567. In the Danish translation of Plato that Kierkegaard owned, Udvalgte Dialoger af Platon [Selected Dialogues of Plato], trans. C. J. Heise, 8 vols. (Copenhagen, 1831–1859; vols. 1–3, 1830–1838; ASKB 1164–1166), vol. 2 (1831), pp. 88–89, Alcibiades says his “heart beat more soundly than the Corybants.” [“]Without authority,[”] that was my category] See “The Accounting,” which constitutes the first part of On My Work as an Author (1851), where

11

275

30

15 20 21 22

28

276

676

29

277

9

277

13

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 33–35

Kierkegaard writes: “‘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). In the preface to his first collection of edifying discourses, Two Edifying Discourses (1843), Kierkegaard notes that he “does not have authority to preach,” (EUD, 5; SKS 5, 13). This is repeated unchanged in the prefaces to the subsequent collections of edifying discourses (1843–1844; see EUD, 53, 107, 179, 231, 295; SKS 5, 63, 113, 183, 231, 289), and in variant forms in the prefaces to Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) (TDIO, 5; SKS 5, 389) and to the two first parts of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 5, 157; SKS 8, 121, 257). See also 2.B in Works of Love (1847): “we [i.e., Kierkegaard] are well-taught and trained in Christianity from childhood on, and in our more mature years we have dedicated our days and our best powers to this service, even though we always repeat that our discourse is ‘without authority’” (WL, 47; SKS 9, 54). presented matters as does Xnty: that love of God is hatred of the world and vice versa] Allusion to Jas 4:4, presumably in Kierkegaard’s own translation; see also Lk 14:26 and Jn 12:25. proclaiming … missionary.] Variant: changed from “proclaiming.” Father’s] Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756–1838). After an apprenticeship with his uncle, hosier Niels Andersen, he became a licensed hosier in 1780 in Copenhagen and, eight years later, received permission to import and sell foreign goods, such as sugar, syrup, and coffee (wholesale). Skillful business practices made him a rather wealthy man, so that he could retire at the age of forty with a sizable fortune, which continued to grow, presumably through accumulated interest and the return on investments. In May 1794, he married Kirstine Røyen, who died childless in March 1796. A year later, on April 26, 1797, he married Ane Lund; he had

•

1850

seven children by her, of whom Søren Aabye was the youngest. In 1803, M. P. Kierkegaard moved with his family to Hillerød, but returned in 1805 to Copenhagen and settled in 9 Østergade (see map 2, C2). In 1809, he bought the house at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B1–2), where he lived until his death. He died on August 2, 1838, at the age of eighty-one. Be Preserved.] Variant: first written “be Preserved,”, with the comma apparently indicating that the heading was to continue. I was a prodigal son] Reference to Lk 15:11–32. my sister Nicoline] Nicoline Christine Kierkegaard (October 25, 1799–September 10, 1832) lived in Kierkegaard’s childhood home at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B1–2), until she married the silk and textile merchant Johan Christian Lund (1799–1875) on September 24, 1824, following which she moved to 4 Nyegade (see map 2, B2). the old edifying writings] Edifying literature, i.e., writings for private devotional use and spiritual guidance, constituted a significant portion of religious literature in the 17th and well into the 18th centuries, and was still common in Kierkegaard’s time. Among “old edifying writings” Kierkegaard frequently mentions Johann Arndt, Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum (→ 279,12), published for the first time in 1605–1609, which, often in expanded form, gained broad acceptance in various confessions (see, e.g., EUD, 344; SKS 5, 332 and UDVS, 102; SKS 8, 206; as well as JJ:451 in KJN 2, 268, and NB18:39 in the present volume). Books 1 and 3 of Arndt’s work make much use of writings by Johannes Tauler and Thomas à Kempis; bk. 2 makes use of writings by Angela of Foligno; and bk. 4 includes writings by Raymond of Sebonde. In one of his edifying discourses, Kierkegaard also mentions Die Deutsche Theologie [The German Theology] (Lemgo, 1822; ASKB 634) as an “old edifying writing” (EUD, 98; SKS 5, 103). cured nowadays by traveling to a spa] Hydrotherapy was quite popular in Kierkegaard’s day. Denmark is devoid of natural mineral springs, so mineral water had to be imported or manufactured. Alternatively, one could travel to

13

16 18

31

35

277

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 35–39

36

278

3

10 12

278

17

278

28

279

4 5

baths in Germany and elsewhere. A great many foreign spas are described in E. A. Nørgaard, Mineralvandenes Nytte og Anvendelse, med nærmest Hensyn paa Rosenborg-Sundhedsbrønde, efter de nyeste og bedste Hjælpekilder [The Benefits and Uses of Mineral Waters, Specifically with Reference to Rosenborg Health Spa, According to the Best and Most Recent Sources] (Copenhagen, 1833); the work has a preface by Kierkegaard’s physician, Oluf Lundt Bang (1788–1877), who was a great advocate of internal and external hydrotherapy. leeches, bloodletting, etc.] Treatments generally administered by barbers who had passed the surgical examination at the surgical academy. served the idea … gratis] Reference to the fact that Kierkegaard had no paid position, e.g., as a priest in the State Church. other] Variant: added. professors] Variant: first written “philos”. “In this world … the unjust”―this “sometimes”] Allusion to Mt 5:45. In NB11:77, presumably with reference to Mynster, Kierkegaard writes: “This, then, is the deception heard in sermons: sometimes the Xn becomes something great in this world and enjoys honor and respect, and sometimes he’s persecuted” (KJN 6, 42). Kierkegaard is presumably referring to one of Mynster’s sermons, but it has not been possible to identify the source. Then there was a villainous phenomenon in this country] Reference to Corsaren (→ 274,11). these criminals] Reference to those behind Corsaren (→ 274,11). they betrayed me] Presumably, a reference to the role played by Fædrelandet (→ 282,13) in the so-called Corsair affair. Cf. an entry on a loose sheet of paper from 1854 or 1855 with the title “The Relation of Fædrelandet to My Work as an Author”: “So I took action. What did Fædrelandet do then? When it saw that the matter had become dangerous, it remained silent, absolutely―and the whole business came to look like madness on my part. What Fædrelandet was obligated to do was to deliver an interpretation in which my action was not madness but selfless sacrifice. I required

•

1850

677

nothing from Fædrelandet; far from it: I even supported it in doing nothing―but what Fædrelandet owed itself and what I thought deep down is something else. This was the first betrayal of me” (Pap. XI 3 B 12). In an old edifying work (Arndt) … as soon as the child moves] Refers to a work by the German Lutheran priest and edifying author, Johann Arndt (1555–1621), Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum, Welche handeln Von heilsamer Buße herzlicher Reue und Leid über die Sünde wahrem Glauben auch heiligem Leben und Wandel der rechten wahren Christen [All Insightful Books on True Christianity, Which Treat of Healthy Repentance, Heartfelt Regret, and Remorse over Sin, True Faith, as Well as the Holy Life and Doings of the Genuinely True Christian], 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1737 [1733]; ASKB 276; abbreviated hereafter as Sämtliche geistreiche Bücher Vom Wahren Christenthum), bk. 5, chap. 5, p. 959: “And this is what the Lord God says, Jer 31:25: I will quicken the weary and satisfy the worried souls by whom I am awakened and who have slept so peacefully; it is just as with a nursing child who needs food night and day and must sleep peacefully, and also with a sick person: So God sleeps lightly (though he does not sleep, for it is only a simile) and our hungry souls soon awaken him.” In one of the morning or evening prayers … “While we sleep, you keep watch, o God”] Cited freely from the introductory words 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 … 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.” ― morning or evening: Variant: added. This observation is surely in an earlier journal] i.e., in NB12:90, from the beginning of August 1849, in KJN 6, 191: “Father in Heaven! When

12

17

23

279

678

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 39–44

we get ready to go to sleep in the evening, it is our consolation that you are the one who watches over us―and then, when we awaken in the morning, when we are awake all day long―alas, how distressing if you were not after all the one who watched over us. That is why the difference we make between sleeping and waking is only a sort of joke―as if we only needed you to be on watch as long as we are sleeping, not when we ourselves are awake.” 279

27

31

280

5

7

24

281

12

20

281

30

Catachesis] Christian religious instruction for children through a series of questions and answers; instruction in elementary knowledge by means of questions and answers. Was The Corsair Danish public opinion] → 274,11. my action] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard started the polemic by requesting that he appear in Corsaren, because he could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused, but only praised, in the paper (→ 262,27). yet The Corsair still perpetuates the untruth … make myself more than a hum. being] No source for this has been identified. those who had a clear view … but remained silent] → 271,13. when I saw the confused revolt from below that characterizes the times] Refers to the political changes of the 1840s, culminating in the tumult after the death of King Christian VIII in January 1848 that led to the fall of absolutism and the democratic constitution of June 5, 1849. judged me as a fantast, an eccentric, who was rightly a victim of the mob] → 262,29. the tyranny of vulgarity that was despotic toward everyone―with myself as the deified exception] A reference to the early days of Corsaren (→ 274,11). Until the beginning of the so-called Corsair affair (→ 262,27), Kierkegaard’s works received positive reviews. When The Concept of Irony (1841) was reviewed by one of Corsaren’s part-time staff writers, Goldschmidt (→ 282,40) thought that the reviewer had treated the contents of the dissertation too superficially, and he added this postscript: “If we now acknowledge that de-

•

1850

spite this surprising language, Mr. Kierkegaard’s dissertation is of interest to those who have the patience to read it, this admission―of course, when it is put into the context of what has been said above―presumably grants Mr. K. all the justice that is his due” (Corsaren, no. 51, October 22, 1841, col. 8; see COR, 93). Subsequently, Goldschmidt reviewed Either/Or in the March 10, 1843, issue of Corsaren, praising the work to the skies: “This author is a mighty spirit, he is an intellectual aristocrat: he mocks the entire human race, shows its wretchedness, but he has a right to do so, he is an unusual intellect” (Corsaren, no. 129, col. 1; see COR, 93–95). Finally, Kierkegaard received positive mention on November 14, 1845, when his pseudonym Victor Eremita was praised at the expense of the National Liberal politician and journalist Orla Lehmann: “for Lehmann will die and be forgotten, but Victor Eremita will never die” (Corsaren, no. 269, col. 14; see COR, 96 ). Now … Prof. Martensen thought he could make use of the moment] Presumably, a reference to H. L. Martensen’s preface to his Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4) and (→ 288,7). 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. In 1848, it had about one thousand postal subscribers (i.e., out-of-town subscriptions), but hardly more than double that number of subscribers in all; see Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 [Danish Newspapers, 1634–1989], 3 vols. (Odense, 1989–1991), vol. 1, p. 109. how Fædrelandet winced under the vulgar press] → 282,18. Gjødvad stood impatiently at my side, waiting for the article in which I demanded to be abused] Jens Finsteen Giødwad (1811–1891), Danish jurist and journalist; editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten [Copenhagen Post], 1837–1839, and from 1839, coeditor and publisher of Fædrelandet. He assisted Kierkegaard with proofreading and as a middleman in dealings with his printer and his

2

282

13

282

15 18

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 44

30

40

publisher. The article referred to here is “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); Taciturnus writes: “Would that I might soon come in Corsaren. It is really hard for a poor author to remain singled out like this in Danish literature, for him … to be the only one who is not abused there” (p. 467; COR, 46; SKS 14, 84). 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. 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 were 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). After a long while, they finally dropped their subscription to The Corsair] It is not known when the editors of Fædrelandet dropped their subscription to Corsaren. 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 (→ 274,11) in October 1840 and was the journal’s actual editor until October 1846, i.e., during the period of the so-called Corsair affair. Even though Goldschmidt sold the paper in 1846 and embarked on a yearlong journey abroad,

•

1850

679

the paper continued to caricature Kierkegaard, e.g., in the issues of January 8, 1848 (no. 381-a); February 11, 1848 (no. 386); June 30, 1848 (no. 406); and, finally, February 16, 1849 (no. 439). my achievements are so extraordinary … to review] → 270,23. Kierkegaard’s magister dissertation The Concept of Irony (1841) was, however, reviewed by Andreas Frederik Beck in Fædrelandet, nos. 890 and 897, May 29 and June 5, 1842; Either/ Or received anonymous mention in Fædrelandet, no. 1155, February 20, 1843, and was also reviewed by J. F. Hagen in Fædrelandet, nos. 1227, 1228, 1234, and 1241, May 7–21, 1843 (see ASKB U39). An excerpt from Prefaces was published in 1844 in Fædrelandet, no. 1604, 1844, p. 5. 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, 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. Heiberg was Denmark’s premier arbiter of literary taste in the period 1825–1850. Mynster] → 262,31. not having witnessed in my faveur] → 271,13. I call Gjødvad my personal friend] → 282,18. prior to my taking action] Variant: added. The Corsair’s subscription numbers increased] In Corsaren, no. 9, January 1, 1841, col. 1, there is a comical allusion to “all 939 of our subscribers.” On the other hand, the journal announced in the issue of November 21, 1845 (no. 270, col. 14): “In its sixth year of publication Corsaren has completely sold out its press run; this pleases us so highly that we cannot refrain from announcing the fact ceremoniously. Now only a couple of hundred subscribers are needed to reach the round figure of 5000.” Goldschmidt (→ 282,40) himself wrote in Livs Erindringer og Resultater [Memoirs and Results of My Life], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1877) vol. 1, p. 264: “As time went by―most likely as

3

283

11

11 11 15 1 9

282m

680

10

26

283m

6

13

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 44–45

the result, in part, of the attention aroused by legal cases and seizures of issues of the journal― Corsaren had a great many subscribers (though never over 3000; it never became a journal for the common people), but in the beginning there were few subscribers and I could scarcely have kept the paper going if Steen, the book dealer, had not given me an advance for the printing and Reitzel for the paper.” the other newspapers’ decreased] Regarding Fædrelandet, (→ 282,13); in 1846, Berlingske Tidende had about four thousand subscribers, but there were significantly more who read the paper; in 1845, Almuevennen [The People’s Friend] had about six hundred subscribers and in 1846, it had about eight hundred; in 1843, Nyt Aftenblad [New Evening Paper] had about 700–800 subscribers, and in 1845 only 343. otherwise,] Variant: first written “But no”. I was the country’s greatest younger luminary] Before the Corsair affair, Kierkegaard had been praised not only by Corsaren (→ 281,30), but also by the anonymous reviewer [Andreas Frederik Beck (1816–1861)] in Neues Repertorium für die theologische Literatur und kirchliche Statistik [New Review for Theological Literature and Church Statistics], ed. H. Th. Bruns, vol. 2, pt. 1 (Berlin, 1845), pp. 44–48, where he was called one of the “most productive writers in Denmark” (p. 44). A reviewer writing under the mark “–n.” in Berlingske Tidende, no. 108, May, 6, 1845, praised Kierkegaard as the author of Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) and as the presumed author of Stages on Life’s Way, for possessing “a profundity of thought that pursues its object down to its least details and in so doing displays a rare beauty and elegance of language, but in particular, the author has a fluency with which no living Danish writer can compare.” immediately after the first article was published (that is, before he had begun the attack)] Refers to Kierkegaard’s 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).

•

1850

Corsaren replied by publishing a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and drawings of Kierkegaard, starting with the issue of January 2, 1846, no. 276 (→ 262,27). Ploug] Carl Parmo Ploug (1813–1894), Danish journalist, politician, and author, from May 1841, editor, and from July 1842, also publisher, of the National Liberal newspaper Fædrelandet (→ 282,13), in which Kierkegaard published his articles. Ploug was a leading figure in the student movement of his times and the driving force behind the Scandinavianism movement. “Have you read that article―it utterly annihilates P. L. Møller.”] Peder Ludvig Møller (1814– 1865), Danish aesthetician, author, and critic, served as editor of the polemical journal Arena in 1843, and in the years 1845–1847, he published the aesthetic annual Gæa [Gaea]. In Gæa, æsthetisk Aarbog 1846 [Gaea, Aesthetic Annual for 1846], ed. P. L. Møller (Copenhagen, 1846), Møller published his article “Et Besøg i Sorø” [A Visit in Sorø], in which he presented his critique of Stages on Life’s Way. Here Kierkegaard is referring to his own rejoinder to Møller’s article, “The Activity of a Traveling Aesthetician and How He Still Happened to Pay for the Dinner,” in which he identified Møller with the satirical weekly Corsaren. P. L. Møller had hoped that publishing his annual Gæa would improve his chances for being appointed to the professorship in aesthetics previously held by Adam Oehlenschläger. In this connection, Goldschmidt wrote: “Kierkegaard pounced on him with such vehemence, used such peculiar words, had, or seemed to have, such an effect on the public that the professorship, instead of having been brought closer by Gæa, was placed at an immeasurable distance, and during the struggle Møller was seized with a desire to leave Denmark, which he satisfied shortly thereafter” (Livs Erindringer og Resultater, vol. 1, p. 414). Hamann 3rd vol. p. 400 … die wahre Muse] Cited from J. G. Hamann’s letter to J. G. Herder, dated April 9, 1769, no. 184 in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 263,12), vol. 3 (1822), p. 400, where an allusion is made to Ps 111:10 and to the expression that God searches our hearts and reins; the expression

18

27

26

283

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 45–49 occurs a number of times in the OT, e.g., Ps 7:9, 20:12 and Jer 11:20, 20:12; see also Rev 2:23 (all in King James Version). 283

35

286

1

11 13 13

286

21

287

3

in recent times I have had to stop my literary productivity … because of financial considerations] → 262,31. me alive and] Variant: first written “me alive.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. are relieved] Variant: first written “put up”. life;] Variant: first written “life.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. provincial market town] Here, a derogatory term for Copenhagen, Denmark’s capital and its city of royal residence, which had about 130,000 inhabitants in the 1850 census. witness to the truth] i.e., martyr. because the Cultus Minister is of course also the Theater Minister] Until the fall of absolutism, the Royal Theater was under the crown. By a royal resolution of June 25, 1849, the Royal Theater was subjected to the state and came to be placed under the Cultus Minister, i.e., the minister who oversaw the Church, educational institutions, and various other cultural institutions, including the zoo. The classical scholar Johan Nicolai Madvig (1804–1886) served as cultus minister from November 18, 1848, to December 7, 1851.

287

14

In the place where I am now living on Nørregade] On spring moving day―it was customary for rental contracts to expire on spring or autumn “moving days”―Tuesday, April 16, which was the spring moving day in 1850, Kierkegaard moved from 7 Rosenborggade (→ 324,27) to 35 Nørregade (see map 2, B1). While Kierkegaard was living on the second floor (→ 324,31), the third floor was probably inhabited by Kristoffer Sehested or Sophus Pretzmann.

287

27

Bishop Mynster] → 262,31. received no pay of any kind] → 262,28. now Martensen … make my work something trivial] Reference to the preface to Den christelige Dogmatik in which Martensen, indirectly refer-

36

288

7

•

1850

681

ring to Kierkegaard, described some of the latter’s views as misunderstandings and “errors” (→ 271,4), and in addition noted: “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, perhaps even rather sickly life of faith into a rule for all believers … At all costs I do not want to disagree with the believer [i.e., the universal Church], and I am willing to abandon all of my views if it can be shown to me that they really lead to such a difference [between faith and knowledge], assuming that this word is not being used as a category that is employed indefensibly in order to stamp as universally valid that which is only something individual, only characteristic of some believers with whom it could perhaps have psychological validity” (pp. iii–iv). Mag. K.] Magister Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard defended his dissertation, On the Concept of Irony, for the degree of magister in philosophy on September 29, 1841. the way things actually were with R. Nielsen … approach me privately] Kierkegaard mentions numerous times that Rasmus Nielsen (→ 269,1) had sought to approach him before Kierkegaard himself initiated a closer acquaintance in 1848. See an entry on a loose paper from ca. 1849–1850, where Kierkegaard writes that he viewed it as his “duty at least to make an attempt to familiarize another person with my cause. I chose Prof. Nielsen, who had himself sought to approach me and who decidedly welcomed the offer. Then, in the course of 1¾ or 1½ years I used a great deal of time and many conversations to familiarize him with my entire way of thinking” (Pap. X 6 B 121, p. 160). In a later entry, also on a loose paper, Kierkegaard summarizes his conversations with Nielsen, who confessed “that he wanted to get ahead, but that he realized that it was impossible to do it in such a way that he slipped past me; he confessed to me that he himself understood that what he had to do was to head off on his own, running the risk that I would mount a flank attack against him … but he did not feel that he had the strength to do this, and therefore he sought a personal approach” (Pap. X 6 B 99, p. 111).

16

3

288m

682 289

16 32

35

290

4

290

19

25

27

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 50–51

suffer unto death] Allusion to Phil 2:7–8. Excellency] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence established in 1746, the title “excellency” was reserved for persons in the first rank class (out of nine), e.g., the country’s bishops, excepting the bishop of Zealand, J. P. Mynster (→ 262,31), who was the only bishop granted the title “eminence.” rubbish of the world] Allusion to 1 Cor 4:13. could be satisfied with fishermen] Among the apostles, Simon Peter, Andrew, James, and John were fishermen; see Mt 4:18–22 and Mk 1:16–20. If I had had no fortune] Kierkegaard’s father, M. P. Kierkegaard (→ 277,13), died in 1838, leaving an estate that was reckoned in 1839 at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 304,38). Søren Kierkegaard’s share amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars (→ 304,38), in real estate, stocks, and bonds. Kierkegaard gradually 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. 67–69. See also the next explanatory note. as I still do have money] After the sale of his last inherited stock in March 1847 and his last bond in December 1847 (see preceding explanatory note), Kierkegaard sold his childhood home at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B1–2) on December 24, 1847. 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 mortgage was sold on August 25, 1854; the stocks were sold between March and December 1852; the bonds were presumably sold prior to March 1852. In addition to this, starting in 1847, Kierkegaard also had income from royalties related to the sale of his books, which amounted to 693 rix-dollars in 1849. See Brandt and Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, pp. 83–92 and 35. grieving the Spirit] Allusion to Eph 4:30.

•

1850

tempting God] Biblical expression for provoking or challenging God. The financial crises of 1848 suddenly plunged me into this situation] Presumably, a reference to the fact that after selling his childhood home at 2 Nytorv (→ 290,25) in December 1847, Kierkegaard used the proceeds to purchase stocks and bonds, which turned out to be unfortunate when bond prices fell soon afterward, owing to the war in Schleswig that broke out in the spring of 1848. In NB7:114, from November 1848, Kierkegaard writes of his “buying royal bonds with cash that I otherwise would not have touched―the stupidest thing I have done and that I probably should regard as a sort of lesson, for now I have indeed lost ca. 700 rd. on them” (KJN 5, 144). See also NB4:158, from early May 1848, in KJN 4, 360–361, with the relevant explanatory note. what now seems imminent is a tax on wealth] On May 15, 1850, a war tax was imposed to help finance the Schleswig war that had broken out in April 1848. 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, nos. 231 and 232, October 4 and 5, 1850, pp. 921–922 and 925–926. Denmark first imposed a tax on wealth in 1903. have been prodigal] According to a very approximate calculation in Brandt and Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene (→ 290,19), pp. 154–155, from the time of his father’s death in 1838 until his own death in 1855, Kierkegaard spent a total of about 45,000 rix-dollars (→ 304,38), an average of about 2,600 per year. also] Variant: added. here, as everywhere, I am in the wrong before him] The thesis that a human being is always in the wrong before God was developed for the first time in the “Ultimatum,” a sermon titled “The Edification in the Thought That We Are Always in the Wrong before God,” in the second part of Either/Or (1843) in E/O 2, 339–354; SKS 3, 315–332. Subsequently, the theme is developed further in “The Joy in the Fact That a Human Being

27 29

30

32

32 38

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 51–57

291

15 24

291

36

38

Always Suffers as Guilty in Relation to God,” no. 4 in “The Gospel of Sufferings,” which is pt. 3 of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) in UDVS, 264–288, esp. 272–273; SKS 8, 361–383, esp. 369. he who nonetheless eternally is and remains love] Allusion to 1 Jn 4:16. has to be waited for,] Variant: first written “has to be waited for.” with the period apparently apparently indicating the end of the sentence. I was once offered 100 rd. per sheet by Carstensen … for an article against Heiberg] Georg Johan Bernhard Carstensen (1812–1857), Danish military officer, newspaper publisher, founder of Tivoli and other places of amusement. From January 1839 to June 1841, he published the weekly Portefeuillen [Portfolio] and an associated quarterly journal. This was succeeded, from July 1841 to June 1842, by the weekly Figaro. Journal for Literatur, Kunst og Musik [Figaro: A Journal for Literature, Art, and Music], which was accompanied by Figaros Supplementsblade for Literatur-, Kunst- og Musiknyheder [Figaro’s Supplement for News of Literature, Art, and Music], plus a fiction quarterly. From April through December 1842, Figaro was also supplemented by the quarterly Nye Intelligensblade [New Intelligencer], which polemicized against J. L. Heiberg (→ 283,11) and Heiberg’s journal Intelligensblade [Intelligencer], which appeared from March 15, 1842, to March 1, 1844. Figaro was replaced by Ny Portefeuille [New Portfolio], with Carstensen as publisher and J. C. Schythe as editor. Ny Portefeuille was published as a quarterly, and in addition to fiction it included contributions concerning theater and art; from July 1843 to December 1844 these volumes were supplemented with a four-page weekly. ― 100 rd.: i.e., 100 rix-dollars (→ 304,38). ― sheet: Folded in quarto format, a sheet of paper comprised eight printed pages. I have spent very significant sums in publishing one or another large work] An assertion often made by Kierkegaard that may reasonably be read in the light of his living costs and the total expenses associated with producing his books, and against the background of his rapidly dimin-

•

1850

683

ishing fortune (→ 290,32). See also NB11:122 in KJN 6, 64, with its relevant explanatory note. 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. thought,] Variant: changed from “thought and”.

2

292

3

292

this formula for “the apostle”: He begins by persecuting it] Reference to Paul; see Acts 7:58– 8:3 and 9:1–22.

18

292

a quiet hour] → 267,14. it,] Variant: changed from “it.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

27

292

in the sermon “The Life of the Apostle Paul,” Mynster exclaims … being defamed, we entreat] Refers to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 262,31) sermon “Om Apostelen Pauli Levnet. Paa ellevte Søndag efter Trinitatis” [On the Life of the Apostle Paul: On the Eleventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday], on 1 Cor 15:1–10, in which Mynster, referring to Paul, says: “Who can do anything other than love this man who from the bottom of his heart writes to one of the congregations that had foolishly forgotten what it owed him: ‘Being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it; being defamed, we entreat,’ [I Cor 4: 12–13]” (no. 49 in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage [→ 265,36], vol. 2, pp. 196– 210; pp. 208–209). we entreat,] Variant: first written “we entreat.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

31

You ought to refrain from stealing] Reference to Ex 20:25; see also Lk 18:20 and Rom 13:9. ethical.] Variant: first written “ethical,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. flesh and blood] An idiom designating human mortality; occurs six times in the NT, e.g., in 1 Cor 15:50; Mt 16:17; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12. aesthetic] Variant: first written “dif”.

17

29

292

34

22

26

28

293

684 294

5 9 25

27

40

41

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 58–60

Prof. Martensen thinks that he can dismiss … in a preface] → 288,7. indirection] e.g., through pseudonymity. Neither “the professor” nor “the court preacher”] In 1840, H. L. Martensen had been appointed an extraordinary professor, and in 1850, he became an ordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen. At Bishop Mynster’s suggestion, Martensen had been appointed court preacher in 1845. ― the professor: Variant: changed from “professors”. the N.T., which speaks only of “witnesses,”] The term is used in the NT, e.g., in Lk 24:48; in Acts and Jn, where the term is used frequently, it refers to those who witnessed Jesus’ resurrection, but also of those who suffer for the sake of their preaching. Berlingske Tidende … this is Martensen’s conviction] Refers to an anonymous review of H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4) in Berlingske Tidende, no. 205, August 30, 1849. The reviewer speaks of “the profound inner conviction that is expressed on every page of the book.” concerning which Miss Bremer and Flyveposten also provide assurances] Refers to the Finnishborn Swedish writer Fredrika Bremer (1801– 1865), who visited Copenhagen from the autumn of 1848 through June 1849. She collected her impressions of Danish cultural life in a series of articles titled “Lif i Norden” [Life in Scandinavia] (see KJN 6, 549–551), which were translated into Danish and published as Liv i Norden af Frederikke Bremer, Forfatterinde til de svenske Hverdagshistorier (→ 264,36). In her work, Bremer describes H. L. Martensen as follows: “A seedsman in the highest sense of the word, H. L. Martensen, still young and at the peak of his powers, with his living words and his philosophical writings (highly regarded in Sweden as in Denmark), he broadcasts the seeds of a new development of the Church’s religious life and of scientific scholarship through a more profound understanding of what they essentially are, transfiguring the life of faith into the life of reason by wedding deep feelings with logical thought. In his Dogmatics [Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4)], soon to be published, we await a more complete presentation of his views.

•

1850

And what we have seen of the works he has already published awakens hope of a rebirth of ecclesiastical life in matters both great and small, in the state and in the heart of the individual. The unusual clarity and distinctness of language with which this richly gifted thinker can present the most profound speculative principles, and the interesting and ingenious manner of his teaching make him a popular writer. In his Dogmatics we await a major work, and not only for the learned” (pp. 36–37). See as well the anonymous review of Magnús Eiríksson’s (1806–1881) Speculativ Rettroenhed, fremstillet efter Dr. Martensens ‘christelige Dogmatik,’ og Geistlig Retfærdighed, belyst ved en Biskops Deeltagelse i en Generalfiskal-Sag [Speculative Orthodoxy, Presented in Accordance with Dr. Martensen’s Christian Dogmatics, and Ecclesiastical Righteousness, Illuminated by a Bishop’s Participation in a Supreme Court Case] (Copenhagen, 1849) in Flyveposten, no. 249, October 24, 1849, in which the reviewer defends H. L. Martensen against M. Eiríksson’s criticisms, writing: “If as Eiríksson alleges, M. were a hypocrite who wanted to ‘hoodwink people,’ then it would be indeed very strange if E. were the only person who saw it and came to this conclusion, and it would be even more strange and unreasonable for M. to continue to be capable of attracting an audience: No, the only explanation of this can be that a religious life really dwells in him, that there dwells in him a spirit that is in the service of truth and of Christ. This does not exclude the possibility that M. may be in error in a number of his theological views; it is possible, then, that E. is not entirely wrong, despite the fact that on other points―according to our best conviction, on most points―he is wrong.” God―] Variant: first written “God.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

19

295

The Gospel: The Great Supper] → 259,5. mediation] → 265m,4. seeking the eternal “first”] Allusion to Mt 6:33. a quiet hour] → 267,14. it was a wedding … they excused themselves by saying that they had to go to a wedding] A com-

25

295

30 31 3 25

298

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 60–62

295m

1

295m

4 6

298m

3 19 29

298

32 34

299

1

299

6 8

bination of parables in Mt 22:2–14 and Lk 14:16– 24; in Lk 14:20, someone invited to a wedding says he cannot come because he had just married. had thought I would preach on this gospel and therefore have studied it a bit] According to church law in effect at the time, only a person who was a theology graduate, who had been ordained and installed in a priestly office, and who fulfilled the necessary prerequisites was permitted to preach; see J.L.A. Kolderup-Rosenvinge, Grundrids af den danske Kirkeret [Outline of Danish Church Law] (Copenhagen, 1838), pp. 66–86. Nonetheless, an ordinance of February 13, 1801, confirmed a long tradition that had permitted theology graduates and theology students to preach. Kierkegaard had himself preached at the Friday communion services at the Church of Our Lady (→ 259,1). see p. 177] See NB18:103 in the present volume. you, who received our earliest promise, to whom we promised to be faithful when we were baptized] See Balle and Bastholm, Lærebog (→ 267,2), § 5, p. 105: “At confirmation we ourselves must repeat and renew in solemn fashion the holy promise that was made on our behalf in our childhood by others at our baptism, namely, that we will forsake all ungodliness and believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and that we will give proof of our faith through good deeds. But this promise ought to be remembered constantly through our entire life.” we who did not even excuse ourselves … as they did in today’s gospel] Reference to Lk 14:18–20. royal prerogative] → 273,11. the gospel about the king who prepared his son’s wedding … one went to his fields, the other to his business] Reference to Mt 22:2–14. The Gospel of the Great Supper] → 259,5. like those in the gospel who excused themselves from accepting the invitation] → 298m,3. Yes (in baptism) and promised to come] → 295m,6. From My Life] Variant: added. on very rare occasions I have been present at general meetings of the Student Association or the insurance company] The Student Association

•

1850

685

was founded ca. 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. Among the property Kierkegaard inherited following the death of M. P. Kierkegaard (→ 277,13) were six shares of Det Kongelige Octroierede Kjøbenhavnske Brandassurance Compagnie [The Royally Chartered Copenhagen Fire Insurance Company] and fifteen shares of Det Kongelige Octroierede Almindelige Brandassurance Compagnie [The Royally Chartered General Fire Insurance Company]. In January 1848, he purchased additional shares (→ 290,19). As a shareholder, Kierkegaard had voting rights at shareholder meetings. It was at the second general meeting … following the accession of Christian VIII] King Frederik VI died on December 3, 1839, and that same evening the National Liberal politician Orla Lehmann (1810–1870) convened a meeting of university students at Knirsch’s café in the Hotel d’Angleterre on Kongens Nytorv in Copenhagen. Lehmann drafted an address to the new king, Christian VIII, which called for a free constitution. The address received about 250 signatures and was read aloud at Amalienborg, the royal residence, on December 4. This caused other students to meet that same day at the Student Association’s quarters in Boldhusgade, where a much less critical and more unambiguously loyal address was suggested. Kierkegaard is referring to this second meeting of December 4, 1839. a Levin] Not identified. not Israel] Israel Salomon Levin (1810–1883), man of letters and philologist, editor of various editions, including those of Ludvig Holberg and J. H. Wessel. In the period ca. 1844–1850, he assisted Kierkegaard with various tasks related to his works, including the proofreading of Stages on Life’s Way (1845) and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). French Bierring] Could refer either to Vilhelm Jakob Bjerring (1805–1879) or to his brother Niels

13

20 20

32

686

37

300

1 2

8

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 62–66

Christian Bjerring (1804–1871), who was known as “citoyen Bjerring” at the Student Association. N. C. Bjerring studied theology for a number of years but abandoned his studies to travel to France in 1829. He returned to Copenhagen in 1833 and made his living as a language teacher. In 1836, V. J. Bjerring traveled abroad, visiting Paris, and in years 1837–1840, he taught French at the Military Academy; subsequently he became a National Liberal politician. my brother came over to me … was supposed to have been debated at the general meeting] Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805–1888), Søren Kierkegaard’s elder brother; 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 in central Zealand. P. C. Kierkegaard and a number of others were dissatisfied with Lehmann’s address (→ 299,13), and at the meeting on December 4, 1839, they called for a new one. he himself said] Variant: first written “I”. the petition would be available for signature at his rooms] At this time P. C. Kierkegaard was living in the old family home at 2 Nytorv (→ 290,25), where the new, loyal petition was available for signature. He writes of this in the entry for December 1839 in his diary for 1828–1850 (NKS 2656, 4o, I): “on the 3rd Frederik 6 died, the same evening a meeting at Knirsch’s to present a petition by university students, next day our meetings, which ended by the retreat home to me and signing it there, continued on the 5th. Delivered the 7th and printed in the three principal newspapers the same day” (p. 411). The petition received 426 signatures and was read by P. C. Kierkegaard at Amalienborg on December 8. It was published in various newspapers, including Fædrelandet. Extrablad [Extra Edition], no. 2, December 8, 1839, pp. 87–88. when I spoke with Christian VIII for the second time … that general meeting] Kierkegaard’s first audience with King Christian VIII (1786–1848, king from December 1839) took place on March

•

1850

13, 1847. His second audience at Sorgenfri Palace seems to have taken place on July 18, 1847. See NB9:42, from January 1849, in KJN 5, 229–235, where Kierkegaard writes that the following conversation took place during his third audience, on October 3, 1847: “I had said [to the king] that I had already made some of these observations as early as the day he ascended the throne. To this he replied, [‘]Yes, isn’t that right―that was the time there was a general meeting where you were the president.[’]―He did have a memory” (p. 233). divorce is possible] Divorce was possible under various conditions, including mutual agreement. According to bk. 3, chap. 16, § 15 of Christian V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683), which was still in effect, infidelity, desertion, and barrenness were the other conditions under which divorce was possible.

13

300

he had to leave the land of his forefathers for a foreign land] Reference to Gen 12:1. Being an alien, being in exile] The OT mentions being an alien or living in exile many times, e.g., Job 19:15. In the present entry, Kierkegaard appears to be alluding to Heb 11:13; see also Eph 2:19 and 1 Pet 2:11.

24

300

affected] → 261,25. enviously] Variant: added. That which is to be immortalized in song must die] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the last lines of Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller’s (1759–1805) poem “Die Götter Griechenlands” [The Gods of Greece] (1788), where the poet writes of the Greek gods’ retreat from the world: “That which is to live immortally in song, must perish in life,” Schillers sämmtliche Werke [Complete Works of Schiller], 12 vols. (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 1804–1815), vol. 1, pp. 98–104; p. 104. exposed] Variant: deleted preceding this “more”.

6

one―] Variant: first written “one.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. This was followed by a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

41

27

301

13 27

36

301

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 66–70 302

5

one who is, nonetheless, infinitely incapable of doing anything] Perhaps a reference to Lk 12:26.

302

29

303

17

Christ’s Life] Variant: first written “Christ’s Suffering!”. the way in which speculation talks about the God-Man] Refers to the explanations of the incarnation proposed by speculative theology and philosophy. On the one hand, that God’s Son became a human being in Jesus can be regarded as a logical and/or historical necessity, as, e.g., in G.W.F. Hegel. On the other hand, the entire human race can be regarded as the incarnation, as, e.g., in David Friedrich Strauß. See Practice in Christianity (1850): “Naturally, speculation has believed itself capable of ‘comprehending’ the God-Man―that is something we can comprehend very well, because speculation takes away the categories of temporality, contemporaneity, and actuality from the God-Man … No, the situation is a part of the God-Man, the situation that an individual human being who is standing next to you is the GodMan. The God-Man is not the unity of God and man; that sort of terminology is a profound optical illusion” (PC, 81–82; SKS 12, 92).

303

20 14

304

24

31 31 38

Xnty,] Variant: first written “Xnty.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the heading. thank him―] Variant: first written “thank him.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. 1000 clerical livings] According to the list 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. that!] Variant: changed from “that;”. the natural hum. being] → 260,10. 100 rd.] i.e., 100 rix-dollars. In accordance with a law of July 31, 1818, Danish money consisted of the rix-dollar, properly rigsbank dollar (rigsbankdaler), which was divided into six marks, each of which was further divided into sixteen shillings;

•

1850

687

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 journeyman in a skilled trade earned five rix-dollars a week, and a serving maid received about thirty rix-dollars a year in addition to food and lodging. the difference from an “apostle” is still the fact that he has div. authority] See “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle,” which was begun in the summer of 1846 and was the second the two essays in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (1849); see WA, 91–108, esp. 94–96; SKS 11, 95–111, esp. 98 and 100. Ordination] 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.” “quiet, serious hours.”] → 267,14. at an earlier point in this journal … a burglary on Amagertorv] See NB18:30 in the present volume. the zealous clergy] Variant: added. the gifts of grace that are communicated to them through ordination] The extent to which those who were ordained were granted special gifts of grace and were part of an unbroken chain of those who had held that office, descending directly from the apostles, was a matter of debate. That was how priestly ordination was understood in

11

15

17 21 24 28

305

688

30

33 33 33

34

306

3 4

306

12 16

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 70–74

the Roman Catholic Church, in which ordination is a sacrament, which is not the case in Protestant churches. At the same time … a learned theological battle … ordination from a speculative point of view] Perhaps a reference to H. L. Martensen’s treatment of ordination in Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4), § 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 situate 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. For part of the concept of the office, which was instituted by the Lord, is that it includes a power and an authority and that it is accompanied to a certain extent by the promises that were fulfilled in extraordinary fashion by the apostles and the disciples whom the Lord himself sent forth” (pp. 533–534). genius] → 264,36. ecclesiastical] Variant: added. senior court preacher] Kierkegaard uses a term, overhofprædikant, (which he himself seems to have coined) in imitation of other terms for court officials, e.g., overhofmester (“senior butler”). A number of court priests had royal appointments as court preachers (particularly as preachers at Christiansborg Palace Church], e.g., J. P. Mynster; it is likely that Kierkegaard is here referring to H. L. Martensen (→ 264,26), who had been appointed court preacher in 1845. mystery] Variant: deleted following this “obscure”. desire and] Variant: added. Xndom.] Variant: first written “Xndom,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. without] Variant: first written “are willing to commit”. religious gatherings] Private religious meetings of Christian lay people. Until the introduction of freedom of religion in the constitution of 1849, such gatherings were subject to legal restrictions.

•

1850

10 rd.] Ten rix-dollars (→ 304,38), about two weeks’ pay for a skilled journeyman. Peter and Paul’s having been flogged] See Acts 5:40–41, 16:22; 2 Cor 11:24–25.

20

the apostles were flogged] → 306,29. It could] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Then Peter and James … were flogged] Reference to Acts 5:40–41. Only Peter is mentioned by name; it is not clear which James Kierkegaard is here referring to. Then the council forbade the apostles to preach Xt] Reference to Acts 5:40. (→ 307,26). one ought to fear God more than hum. beings] Allusion to Acts 5:29. of theology] Variant: added. the acts of the apostles] Variant: changed from “the story”. Here Kierkegaard is referring both to the biblical book and to the events mentioned in it. the apostle being crucified] Refers to the martyrdom of the apostle Peter, which is hinted at in Jn 21:18–19. According to NT apocryphal texts, Peter was crucified in Rome. This, you see] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

13

The Proclamation of Xnty.] Variant: added. rlly, the gospel says, surely, that the poor, the unfortunate, etc. are closer to the gospel … than are the fortunate, etc.] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 11:5; see also Lk 7:22.

22

Reduplication] → 292,2. Luther says that Christian life includes … faith and love] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Lk 17:11– 19, the gospel text for the fourteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 501–514, where Luther writes: “[T]his gospel depicts the whole of a Christian life, with all its chance events and sufferings. For its principal parts are faith and love. Faith received the good, love shares it. Faith makes us into God’s property, love into our neighbor’s. So when such a life has begun, God comes and improves it with testing and spiritual trials though which a person grows; the longer he does so, the more he does so,

13

309

6

309m

29

307

23 26

31 34 43 1

308

4

8

308

25

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 74–75

309

10

11

22

309

25 32 36

in faith and love, until through his own experience God becomes so dear to him that he no longer fears anything” (p. 513, col. 2). Earlier in the sermon Luther says that love teaches a Christian how “he is to practice good works,” using the expression “Christian works of love” (p. 506, col. 2). Luther goes on to tell his listeners: “[P]ermit yourself to be encouraged by this [Christ’s] example to practice good works, not only toward your friends and toward the pious, but also toward those who reward you with ingratitude and hatred! Then you will be walking in the proper path of Christ the Lord. But you should not regard yourself as a complete Christian before you get to this point” (p. 507, col. 2). the passage is noted in my copy of his sermon] Kierkegaard’s own copy of Luther’s En christelig Postille has not been found. At another point … where persecution is absent, there is something wrong with the preaching] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 8:23–27, the gospel text for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 168–175, where Luther writes: “For if they [i.e., all Christians, especially preachers] preach Christ properly, they must prepare themselves to suffer persecution … And it is a sure sign that a sermon is a genuine Christian sermon when it is persecuted, especially by the great holy men and by the learned and the wise” (p. 174, col. 1). commend ourselves into God’s hands] Allusion to a line from the song sung by Copenhagen watchmen 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 Natte-Vægterne i Kiøbenhavn [Instruction for Night Watchmen in Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 1784), p. 21. About Myself] Variant: added. same thing] Variant: changed from “true thing”. to live unnoticed] Probably an allusion to the proverbial expression “bene qui latuit, bene vixit”

•

1850

689

(Latin, “He who conceals himself well, lives well”) from the Roman poet Ovid’s Tristia [Sorrows], bk. 3, chap. 4, 25; see P. Ovidii Nasonis quae supersunt [Ovid’s Extant Works], ed. A. Richter, 3 vols., stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1265), vol. 3, p. 207. “making it a point of honor to live quietly” (Thessalonians)] Cited freely from 1 Thes 4:11. in a sermon … Mynster does indeed declaim … live in concealment] Refers to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 262,31) sermon “Hvad Christi Vidner have udrettet. Paa anden Juledag” [What Witnesses to Christ Have Accomplished: For the Day after Christmas] on the text Acts 6:8–15 and 7:54–60: “For when we refresh our memory of them [the martyrs], we will not grant entry to the apathetic notion that wishes that they had only acted more shrewdly, that they had not stepped forward so energetically, that they had worked quietly, made every effort to keep the peace, and then―let us speak the truth―then had let the world go on its way. It is certainly more comfortable to live out one’s days in peace and to retreat when the opposition grows too strong, cloaking what one believes to be true in half-truths that are susceptible of every interpretation and behind which one can conceal one’s true meaning when people might take offense. But, dear listeners, surely you do not want Christ’s witnesses to have spoken like this. Even though there are times and circumstances when the Lord only requires that his servants act quietly, there are also times when he requires that they shall not retreat from the commotion they awaken, by which they are to show whether they will be faithful unto death,” Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 265,36) vol. 1, pp. 68–80; p. 71. First I acquired renown as an author] In addition to several minor newspaper articles, From the Papers of One Still Living (1838), the dissertation The Concept of Irony (1841), and A Literary Review (1846), Kierkegaard’s work as an author up to the beginning of the so-called Corsair affair included the following pseudonymous works: Either/ Or (1843), Fear and Trembling (1843), Repetition (1843), Philosophical Fragments (1844), The Concept of Anxiety (1844), Prefaces (1844), Stages on Life’s

1 4

11

310

690

12

13

310

22 23

310

31

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 75–78

Way (1845), and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846). Parallel to all this, Kierkegaard published under his own name a total of eighteen edifying discourses (1843–1844) and Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845). In 1845, an anonymous reviewer (Andreas Frederik Beck) called him one of “the most productive writers in Denmark” (→ 283m,6). then … I broke entirely with worldliness] Presumably, a reference to the fact that Kierkegaard, under the pseudonym Frater Taciturnus, challenged Corsaren in a polemical article in Fædrelandet, December 27, 1845 (→ 262,27). began in earnest as a religious author] After the Corsair affair, Kierkegaard published, under his own name, writings including Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits (1847), Works of Love (1847), Christian Discourses (1848), and The High Priest―The Tax Collector―The Woman Who Was a Sinner: Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1849). In addition to this he published Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays (1849) under the pseudonym H. H., and The Sickness unto Death (1849), with Anti-Climacus listed as author and Kierkegaard as editor. Luther’s collection of sermons] i.e., En christelig Postille (→ 266,11). a great many propositions … noted in my copy] → 309m,10. I was brought up on Mynster’s sermons] J. P. Mynster, who preached frequently in the churches of Copenhagen, served as the confessor for Kierkegaard’s father, M. P. Kierkegaard (→ 277,13), in the period 1820–1828. Mynster was also the priest who confirmed Kierkegaard on April 20, 1828, in Trinity Church. (The congregation of the Church of Our Lady, where Mynster was permanent curate at the time, met in Trinity Church because the Church of Our Lady was still being rebuilt after the fire that destroyed it as a result of the British bombardment of the city in 1807. The new Church of Our Lady was dedicated in 1829.) This is presumably the period when Kierkegaard as a child had heard Mynster preach. Kierkegaard owned quite a few volumes

•

1850

of Mynster’s sermons; the most important in connection with Kierkegaard’s formative years are Mynster’s sermons from his early period in Spjellerup, Prædikener [Sermons], vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1826 [1810]; ASKB 228 and 2191) and vol. 2, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1832 [1815]; ASKB 228 and 2192) and Prædikener paa alle Sønog Hellig-Dage (→ 265,36). the natural hum. being] → 260,10. out-of-the-way places … where we chase them] Presumably refers to the fact that, in accordance with the founding charter of Frederik’s Hospital, located on Bredgade in Copenhagen, the mentally ill could not be admitted to that institution but were placed far from town in the city-owned asylums: St. Hans Hospital, near Roskilde, or Bidstrupgård, northwest of Roskilde, about twenty-two miles from Copenhagen. See NB12:159 in KJN 6, 242. you who are admired and who surely admire yourselves for your kinship with the classicism of a Goethe] 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) writes that Mynster would “necessarily [put one in mind of] Goethe, even if the influence of that great mind on Mynster had not revealed itself unmistakably in the aforementioned fragment of a tragedy [“Isabella af Aragon” (Isabella of Aragon) (1824)], which in the elegance of its diction bears comparison with the most beautiful things in our literature” (unpaginated [p. 2]). The notion of cultivation developed by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832) made a profound impression on Danish intellectual life. who knew how to distance himself] See “Some Reflections on Marriage in Answer to Objections,” in Stages on Life’s Way (1845) (SLW, 154– 155; SKS 6, 144–145), where Judge William criticizes Goethe: “In Aus meinem Leben that poet is a master of this distance theory … Thus every time a situation in life wants to overwhelm him, he must distance himself from it by poetizing it.”

35

311

38

4

6

312

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 78–82 See also NB5:37, from May or June 1848, where Kierkegaard writes of J. P. Mynster: “What is great about him is a personal virtuosity a la Goethe … because he personally wants to shore up his own life and keep his distance” (KJN 4, 385–386). 312

32 39

313

6 7

313

17

the natural hum. being] → 260,10. for as long as possible] Variant: added. also] Variant: changed from “also quite definitely”. “have world” enough] i.e., be sufficiently acquainted with the customs of the higher or cultivated circles, have sufficient worldly experience. see the discourse, “The High Priest” in the Friday discourses] Refers to the first of the three discourses in The High Priest―The Tax Collector― The Woman Who Was a Sinner: Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1849): “The person who unconditionally suffers the most is the one of whom―through his doing it―it can truly be said that he unconditionally has no consolation other than that of consoling others; for this and only this is the expression of the truth that no one can truly put himself in his place, and also that it is truth in him. And thus it is with Him, the Lord Jesus Christ: He was not a sufferer who sought consolation from others; even less did He find it in others; less still did He complain about not finding it in others―no, He was the sufferer, whose only, unconditionally only, consolation was to console others” (WA, 119; SKS 11, 255).

313

23

loving one’s neighbor] Refers to Mt 22:39; Lk 10:27; Rom 13:9; Gal 5.14; and Jas 2:8.

313

34

314

7

R. Nielsen] → 269,1. doing him] Variant: first written “doing him great in”. that I had resolved before God to make the attempt with him] Presumably, a reference to the fact that Kierkegaard considered bringing Nielsen into his confidence concerning the ideas behind his writings. See the draft of an unpublished article, “Concerning My Relationship with Hr. Prof. R. Nielsen,” from ca. 1849–1850 (→ 269,1). Kierkegaard also wanted to have someone who

14

•

1850

691

could publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74, from August 1848, in KJN 5, 56–57, and NB14:90, from December 1849, in KJN 6, 402–405. But finally] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. with him, just like that girl, regarding me as the most cunning deceiver] Refers to Regine Schlegel (née Olsen) (1822–1904), youngest daughter of Regina Frederikke Olsen (née Malling) and Terkild Olsen. Kierkegaard had been engaged to her for more than a year, from September 10, 1840, until the final break on 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” (entries Not15:1–15 in KJN 3, 429–445). In NB8:33, from 1848, Kierkegaard writes the following with respect to the 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). his big book] i.e., R. Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 269,4). basically the public took my side] The assertion that others took Kierkegaard’s side refers to the reactions to R. Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 269,4). Nielsen, who only rarely mentions Kierkegaard in this book, was criticized from various quarters for having adopted Kierkegaard’s ideas and his style. See the review, presumably by H. F. Helweg, under “Bog–Nyt. (April–Juni)” [Book News: April–June], in Dansk Kirketidende, July 22, 1849, vol. 4, no. 43, cols. 714–718: “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

19 19

24 31

692

33

315

14

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 82–84

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 come forward unreconciled to one another! 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 P. C. Kierkegaard’s (→ 299,37) lecture at the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle on October 30, 1849, Nielsen was criticized for making repeated use of material from Søren Kierkegaard’s works. Nielsen was also criticized for closely imitating Kierkegaard’s style and his partiality to dialectics, without, however, attaining the passionate stamp of his model. P. C. Kierkegaard’s lecture was printed in Dansk Kirketidende (→ 264,36), December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, cols. 171–193; see esp. col. 191. acknowledge that he is rlly just a reviewer] Although Nielsen scarcely mentioned Kierkegaard in Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 269,4), in Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik”. En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 264,36) he 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). Mynster’s sermon, “Observation … Abilities Are Denied,”] Reference to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 262,31) sermon “Betragtning af deres Skiebne, hvis Legeme mangler de sædvanlige Evner. Paa tolvte Søndag efter Trinitatis” [Observation of the Fate of Those Whose Bodies Lack the Usual Abilities:

•

1850

For the Twelfth Sunday after Trinity Sunday], on the gospel text Mk 12:31–37, in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 265,36), vol. 2, no. 50, pp. 211–224. those who suffer … gospel speaks so frequently] See, e.g., Lk 14:21 and Mt 15:29–31. there are cases … in which the deaf have been profound thinkers] Recounts a passage from Mynster’s sermon (→ 315,14): “Even here below we not infrequently learn of cases in which it has been gainful to lack those abilities the loss of which they themselves and others surely lamented: that when bodily light was extinguished for them, they saw all the more clearly with the eye of the soul, that when they did not sense the tumult of the world around them, they were moved from within, all the more earnestly, by greater thoughts” (p. 222). ― Homer: A tradition dating back to the 7th century b.c. holds that Homer was blind. scale―] Variant: first written “scale.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. egotism] Variant: first written “compassion”. a la Goethe] → 312,6. Mynster has indeed modeled himself on him] → 312,6. Him, compassion, … putting himself entirely in their place] Refers to the first of the three discourses in The High Priest―The Tax Collector―The Woman Who Was a Sinner: Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1849), where Kierkegaard writes, with respect to Christ: “You who suffer, what do you require? You require that the compassionate person is to put himself entirely in your place: and He, compassion itself, did not merely put himself entirely in your place, He came to suffer infinitely much more than you!” (WA, 117; SKS 11, 253). all the more] Variant: added. “the Christian state”] According to bk. 2, chap. 2 of Christian V’s Danske Lov (→ 300,13], the evangelical Lutheran religion was the only religion permitted in Denmark, and subscription to the Augsburg Confession, its chief confessional document, continued in principle to be required of all who were not specifically excepted (e.g.,

21 26

34

37 1 1 3

15 20

316

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 84–85

35

317

5 9 11

13

Denmark’s small Jewish population) until the Danish constitution of June 5, 1849, which, although establishing freedom of religion, also stated that “the evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish people’s church and as such is supported by the state,” wording that can be read either as descriptive or as prescriptive, and “the Danish People’s Church” exists to this day. he must be a knight of more or less the same orders of knighthood] i.e., a Knight of the Dannebrog (→ 317,11) and belong to one of the three classes of the order existing in Kierkegaard’s day. I have heard a priest rant … but not a bit more] No such priest has been identified. mark and shilling] → 304,38. I have heard a priest rant … stars and sashes of various orders] No such priest has been identified. The Order of the Dannebrog was established by King Christian V on October 12, 1671. On June 18, 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. In Kierkegaard’s day the Order of the Dannebrog included three classes, in descending order: those permitted to bear the Great Cross; those who bore the title “Commander”; and those who bore the title “Knight.” Membership in the order was an “external sign of acknowledged civic virtue,” regardless of age or social estate. It now became possible for clergy and professors to be decorated with membership in the order. The reference here is to the highest class, i.e., those awarded the Great Cross, which in the case of a cleric, meant that one was permitted to bear a gold cross on a ribbon around one’s neck, so that it hung below the clerical collar, plus a Great Cross ornamented with silver rays that formed a star, fastened to the vestments a cleric wore on his vest. Knight of the Dannebrog] i.e., a member of the lowest class of the Order of the Dannebrog (→ 317,11). Whereas the higher classes of the order wore a gold cross suspended from a ribbon around the neck or the right shoulder, an ordinary Knight of the Dannebrog wore it in a buttonhole on the left breast of his gown.

•

1850

693

1000 clergy] → 304,24. a living, for some of them a very handsome income] Priests did not have a regular salary but instead received their income from various sources. In provincial towns, citizens had the duty of paying the priest an assessed sum called “priest money,” whereas peasants in rural parishes were to pay the priest a certain percentage of their agricultural yield, especially grain, known as a tithe. The size of these payments was established by the Ministry for Church and Educational Affairs. 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 such clerical acts as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In provincial towns, there was also an additional sum for a housing allowance, whereas rural priests had income from the fields and farms attached to their call. See C. C. Boisen, Om Kirken og præstens Forhold til samme [On the Church and the Priest’s Relationship to It] (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 61–70. superfluity,] Variant: changed from “superfluity; that is how real Xnty is shouldered aside”. the schoolteacher of course instructs children in Xnty] According to an ordinance of March 20, 1844, concerning the school system in Copenhagen, only theological graduates and those who had attended the pastoral seminary were permitted to provide religious instruction in public schools. The city’s schools were charged with “ensuring that young people who were becoming adults should be properly taught both the truths of Christianity and the knowledge and skills needed in civic life.” Different rules were in effect in the provinces. If religious instruction was provided by ordinary schoolteachers, the local parish priest was charged with supervising their work. Instruction was usually dependent on Luther’s Small Catechism and Balle and Bastholm, Lærebog (→ 267,2), which first appeared in 1791 and was authorized for use in all schools in 1794; it remained the official textbook for religious instruction until 1856. by the time we have reached the age of 25] In Kierkegaard’s day, the legal age of majority was twenty-five.

23

317

23

34 15

22

318

694 319

1

12 26 32

36

320

14

20

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 85–89

•

1850

Then a number of years pass, years of expectation … begin to seek a position] Reference to Hans Peter Kofoed-Hansen (→ 267,28), who received his cand. theol. degree in 1837 and did not receive a parish call until 1849. A laborer is worthy of his hire] Cited from Lk 10:7; see also 1 Tim 5:18. the state has made arrangements for these 1000 clerical livings] → 304,24. the city, e.g., arranges for 50 bakeries] An ordinance adopted in 1739 that “it is established that there shall be a specific number of bakers in Copenhagen, namely 50, and the rights of being a baker shall include an equal number of bakeries.” This rule was still in force in Kierkegaard’s day, and in the 1840s, the bakers’ guild fought hard to preserve its monopoly, which was not broken until 1860. The God in Heaven who concerns himself with sparrows] Allusion to Lk 12:6–7; see also Mt 10:29 and 6:26.

Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 8:23–27, the gospel for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 168–175. Luther writes on p. 168, cols. 1–2: “The Lord Jesus gets into the boat with his disciples. The skies still indicate gentle, pleasant weather; the sea as well is calm and quiet … But no sooner do Christ and his disciples sit in the boat, no sooner do they shove off from land and get out on the sea than a storm arises that is so powerful that the boat was hit by one roller after another … That is how things are when Christ gets into the boat; then calm weather is soon over; then a storm will quickly arise!” See also p. 169, col. 2: “Dear friends, have you never read in the gospel that a storm arises as soon as Christ gets into the boat and you are out at sea?” See NB9:22 in KJN 5, 218, where Kierkegaard refers to this passage. which lived in peace and quiet … says in one of Luther’s sermons] The passage has not been identified.

In one and the same sermon … Luther … corruption and damnation upon the country and the people] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Jn 14:23–31, the gospel text for Pentecost, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 341–354. On p. 348, col. 2, Luther writes: “Yes, a Christian is a gentle, patient person who serves everyone with learning, counsel, consolation, and gifts, a person for whose sake God spares the country and the people―in a word, the sort of man through whom God speaks, lives, and performs that which he speaks, lives, and fulfills.” And a few sentences later, on p. 348, col. 2, Luther writes: “But he is hidden from the world and unknown to it. Nor is it worth it to the world that it should know such men of God, but it must regard them as the rubbish of the world, the offscourings of all things, as St. Paul says, 1 Cor 4:13. Yes, it must view them as birds of evil portent who bring corruption and damnation upon the country and the people, and for that reason they ought as soon as possible to be made one head shorter, to the glory of God and purification of the world.” Luther also … says that a storm immediately arises wherever there is … true Xn confession]

in the days of my youth] → 276,20. also find] Variant: first written “also gradua”. do it with a good will] Allusion to the expression “He who does not do it with a good will [i.e., of his own free will] will do it with a bad will [i.e., under compulsion],” which is listed as no. 3178 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 352. I constantly say that I am without authority] → 276,28; see also NB8:15 in KJN 5, 158; NB9:56 in KJN 5, 242; NB10:19 in KJN 5, 275–276, and NB15:46 in the present volume.

17

dies every day] Allusion to 1 Cor 15:31. anxious … conscience] In NB:79, in KJN 4, 67–68, the expression “anxious conscience” is attributed to Martin Luther, who describes a person in the midst of spiritual trials as having a “stupid, despondent, terrified, timorous, guilty, anxiety-ridden conscience”; see Luther’s sermon on the gospel for the first Sunday in Advent in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 1, pp. 15–30, esp. pp. 18, 20–21, 27–28. indeed like] Variant: prior to “like”, “almost” has been deleted.

6

24

321

41 3

322

11

6

8

323

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 89–92

9

11

323

28 32 36

like a fairy tale in which the cruel stepmother … in order to torment the stepchild] Refers to a well-known motif in folktales, assigned no. H913.1.3 (see also no. S31) in Stith Thompson, Motif-Index of Folk-Literature (→ 269,20). The motif is also found in e.g., “Die drei Männlein im Walde” [The Three Little Men in the Woods] (no. 13), “Aschenputtel” [Cinderella] (no. 21), and “Frau Holle” [Madam Holda] (no. 24) in Kinderund Haus-Märchen [Fairy Tales], ed. J.L.K. and W. K. Grimm, 2nd ed., 3 vols. (Berlin, 1819–1822 [1812]; ASKB 1425–1427). the God of love] Refers to 1 Jn 4:7–8. to love “the neighbor.”] Refers to Mt 22:39; Lk 10:27; Rom 13:9; Gal 5:14; and Jas 2:8. the common man] Kierkegaard’s preferred term for people of the lower social classes. Xndom! … are Xns] Variant: changed from “Xndom!”

324

5

2 shillings] → 304,38. In Kierkegaard’s day, a pound of rye bread cost 2–4 shillings.

324

27

Last summer, when I was at the tanner’s place … the stench] On September 28, 1848, Kierkegaard entered into a contract with tanner Johan Julius Gram (KA, D packet 8, layer 21) to rent the apartment on the second floor of Gram’s property on Rosenborggade (see map 2, C1); according to the contract, Kierkegaard was to move in on the autumn moving day, October 17, 1848. Thus, in the summer of 1849, Kierkegaard was living in the tanner Gram’s building, and his host seems to have tanned skins both in the interior courtyard of the house as well as on the street in front of the building. Kierkegaard mentions the foul odors associated with this in NB12:143, titled “This Past Summer,” in KJN 6, 233–235: “the tanner at whose place I live has tormented me with a stench all summer long.” the whole thing was too expensive] According to Kierkegaard’s rental contract with J. J. Gram, the rent for six months in the approximately 2,000 square foot apartment was 200 rix-dollars (→ 304,38); the apartment had six rooms, a maid’s room, kitchen, and a garret (KA, D packet 8, layer 21).

30

•

1850

695

Where I now live] After having lived at 7 Rosenborggade from October 17, 1848, until the spring moving day, April 16, 1850, Kierkegaard moved to 35 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. 35 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). the worries about Strube] Frederik Christian Strube (1811–1867), Icelandic journeyman cabinetmaker, who along with his wife and two daughters lodged with Kierkegaard in the period 1848–1852. In the period December 1–9, 1848, Strube was a patient at Frederik’s Hospital in Copenhagen, medical department A, ward MM; see Peter Tudvad, Kierkegaards København [Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 2004), pp. 348–354. the man I inherited from my father, have known for twenty years] In 1824 Strube came to Copenhagen from Iceland and started his apprenticeship as a cabinetmaker. Kierkegaard had presumably known Strube since June 1837, when the latter married Elisabeth Sørum (1807–1886), who was a serving maid in the household of Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (→ 277,13). See also a letter from Andreas Ferdinand Schiødte (1816– 1887) to Hans Peter Barfod (1834–1892), dated September 12, 1869, in which Schiødte mentions that Kierkegaard was “associated with a carpenter who had been a childhood acquaintance, whose family most likely kept house for him and his servant,” Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 195–196; see also pp. 208–209. become unbalanced … admitted to the hospital … wants to reform the whole world] According to the hospital journal, Strube suffered from “monomania,” i.e., a moderate form of mental

31

34

36

1

325

696

6

12

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 92–94

illness. The cause is listed as being “reasonably occasioned by brooding over the problems of the times in connection with annoyances associated with what was presumably harassment.” Furthermore, the patient “has supposedly shown signs of mental confusion for about 14 days. These are attributed to a number of annoyances and possible harassment to which he had been exposed as a member of a commission appointed to evaluate the guild system; in general, his thoughts appear to be much engaged with political and social problems” (RA. 257, Frederiks Hospital. “Medicinske Journaler. December 1848.” Medicinsk Afdeling, 1757–1851 Journaler, 1848 September–December, 1849) [“Medical Journals: December 1848.” Medical Department, 1757–1851, Journals, September 1848–December 1849]. all these provisions to be made for him] Kierkegaard seems to have taken it upon himself to get Strube admitted to Frederik’s Hospital. See Kierkegaard’s undated draft of a letter of thanks to Prof. Seligmann Meyer Trier (1800–1863), senior physician at Frederik’s Hospital: “Permit me to thank you yet again for my carpenter. He is once more what he has had the honor of being for twenty-five years, a worker with heart and soul, a worker who, although he thinks while doing his work, does not make the mistake of wanting to make thinking into his work. You see, therefore I hope that I am not wrong in thinking that he is now essentially cured, which is why I have let him continue living with me, inasmuch as I indeed noticed that it would distress him very much if he had to move now. Thus, everything is in order. But, indeed―as you yourself said when I last had the pleasure of speaking with you, which I appreciated and continue to appreciate as additional evidence of your kindness toward me―indeed, you will please remember, if it ever happens that he has a relapse, then I am to let you know at once, and he will be admitted to the hospital as quickly as possible” (LD, 176; B&A 1, 217). And now from another quarter … especially pleased because] This passage originally deleted by Kierkegaard, but restored by the editors of SKS ― in my desk and in one of my chests,

•

1850

the mahogany one: Among the items sold at the auction of Kierkegaard’s effects held on April 2 and 3, 1856, were a writing desk (about 49 inches H x 45 inches W x 31 inches D) and a mahogany chest; see Alt blev godt betalt. Auktionen over Søren Kierkegaards indbo [Everything Fetched a Good Price: The Auction of Søren Kierkegaard’s Personal Effects], ed. Flemming Chr. Nielsen (Viborg, 2000), pp. 26–27, 29, 56. In an entry on a loose sheet, probably dating from December 1849, Kierkegaard mentions a mahogany chest for storing manuscripts: “The aforementioned preface mentioned on the title page of [“]Two Notes[”] is in a little separate packet, ‘loose papers related to The Accounting and Three Notes’; this packet in turn is in the larger packet On My Work as an Author, which is in this (the mahogany) chest” (Pap. X 5 B 164). ― Anders:] Anders Christensen Westergaard (1818–1867), son of a peasant family, and hence subject to conscription, had been Kierkegaard’s servant since May 1844. See NB4:158 in KJN 4, 360, with the relevant explanatory note. I can no longer afford to produce literary work] → 262,31. pers.] Variant: deleted preceding this “and most respectable”. R. Nielsen] → 269,1. finally, he revealed his source … familiarize him with my cause] Refers to Kierkegaard’s conversations with Rasmus Nielsen during their walks together (→ 269,1). When Nielsen published Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 269,4), Kierkegaard wrote the following entry in his journal in May 1849, NB11:46 in KJN 6, 28: “R. Nielsen’s book is out,” and he continued, “His writings plunder in a myriad of ways, mostly from the pseudonyms, whom he never cites, perhaps with deliberate cunning because they are the least read. And then my conversations!” Later, in Nielsen’s review of H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 271,4), titled Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 264,36), Nielsen cited extensively from Kierkegaard’s pseudonymous writings.

29 6

325m

13

326

21

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 95–98

29

33

327

9 11 14

16

22 24 25 30

327

33 35

Deer Park Hill] i.e., Dyrehavsbakken (“the Hill at Deer Park”), in Jægersborg Dyrehave, a wooded area adjacent to Klampenborg, a village north of Copenhagen, which was a favorite recreational destination for Copenhageners. Dyrehavsbakken is the site of Kirsten Piil’s Spring, which supposedly had curative properties and which in summer was surrounded by a market with various booths and tents featuring jugglers, sideshows, acrobats, and other forms of popular entertainment. In Kierkegaard’s day, the market was open from Midsummer Day (June 24) to the Day of the Visitation (July 2). long after silence has fallen upon] Variant: added. tempting God] → 290,27. meritorious] → 268,28. where there is danger, there truly I am not to go] Allusion to H. A. Brorson’s hymn “Jeg gaaer i Fare, hvor jeg gaaer” [I Go into Danger Wherever I Go] (1734), which was included in the section “Om Tilliid paa Gud” [On Confidence in God] in Brorson’s Troens rare Klenodie [Faith’s Rare Treasure] (1739); see 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; ASKB 199), p. 279. have an easy life] The Danish is dandse paa Roser (“dance upon roses”), an allusion to the proverb, “One cannot always dance upon roses,” recorded as no. 2184 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Proverbs and Sayings] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 83. to suffer, even if it were unto death] → 289,16. I am supposed to rejoice, always rejoice―“in God”] Allusion to Phil 4:4; see also Phil 3:1. a suffering witness to the truth] i.e., a martyr. flesh and blood] → 293,26. How much Peter endured during the 3 days … after having denied him] See Mt 26:69–75. was not repudiated, but was forgiven and became the apostle he was] i.e., Peter was not pushed aside, but forgiven. After the death and resurrection of Jesus, Peter became the leader of the Christian congregation in Jerusalem; see, e.g., Acts 15:7.

•

1850

697

Jehovah’s] Because the Jews were forbidden to say God’s name, the four consonants―Y(or J) HWH―in the Hebrew text were supplemented with the vocalization marks “o” and “a” from Adonai, the Hebrew word for “the Lord,” in order to remind the reader to read Adonai instead of Yahweh. This is the source of the erroneous reading “Jehovah,” which was still common in Kierkegaard’s day. who did not enter the Promised Land simply because he doubted] Reference to Num 20:12; see also Deut 34:4.

37

nowadays Xnty was no longer embattled] A reference to the Latin dogmatic expression ecclesia militans, which early Christian theology used to designate 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 the ecclesia triumphans or Church triumphant. See, e.g., Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Hutterus Redivivus or the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1828]; ASKB 581), § 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.” one another, etc.] Variant: first written “one another:”. And yet … it is … commonly remarked that this is what would happen to him] See, e.g., J. L. Heiberg (→ 283,11), 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), 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

8

38

10 13

328

698

20

328

32

329

9

329

27

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 98–104

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. 3] Variant: changed from “4”. hymn 595 in the Evangelical Hymnal] Reference to Bernhard Severin Ingemann’s hymn “Til Naadens store Aandefest” [To the Great Spiritual Festival of Grace], which Bishop J. P. Mynster included as hymn no. 595 in a supplement to the Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog (→ 279,17). The text of the hymn reads: “The Lord’s voice calls me / to the great spiritual festival of grace: / Let what has most delighted me here begone, / It does not belong with God! / Let what cannot follow me begone! / No gold, nor goods, nor lands / Are to burden the Spirit of the Lord. / Burst, burst, every bond that holds me fast / And draws me away from my God! / If my heart were to burst with the bonds, / If the wounded soul complains, / O Lord, give me strength and courage! / If I did not forsake all for you, / With you I would lose my all” (pp. 37–38). the stopping] → 260,2. married and yet as if not married, within worldliness and yet as if alien to it despite partaking of everything, etc.] Refers to 1 Cor 7:29–31. See Luther’s sermon on 1 Pet 2:11–20, the epistle for the third Sunday after Easter, in En christelig Postille (→ 266,11), vol. 2, pp. 240–248, where he cites (p. 245, col. 2) Paul’s text in 1 Cor 7:29 and then continues: “How can this be reconciled? … A Christian lives this earthly life: he builds, purchases, acts and deals with others, and does everything associated with this life, but in no fashion other than as a guest who acts in accordance with what the host requires of him, with what is customary in the country, the city, the hostelry,

•

1850

but does not count on remaining there.” ― everything etc.: Variant: changed from “everything.” the enormous offense that was awakened by the step he took in marrying] Luther, who had been an Augustinian monk in the period 1505–1524, became engaged on June 13, 1525, and on June 27 the same year was married to the former nun Katharina von Bora (1499–1552). C.F.G. Stang in his biography of Luther, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), writes of the “many wicked epithets and disparaging comments that were heaped upon Luther on account of his entry into the married state” (p. 303). See N. M. Petersen, Dr. Martin Luthers Levnet [The Life of Dr. Martin Luther] (Copenhagen, 1840): “This marriage awakened offense in the world and provided the occasion for all sorts of mockery, all the more so because according to an old legend the Antichrist was to be the offspring of a monk and a nun, who had here been united” (p. 109).

8

330

scoundrel,] Variant: first written “scoundrel.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

23

330

The Great Supper] → 259,5. by what right does the inviter … put to death because they did not come] Reference to Mt 22:1–14. we of course promised to come when we were baptized] → 295m,6. see pp. 86, 87] See NB18:60 in the present volume.

26

330

1

330m

People accuse the Middle Ages of overwrought spirituality] Presumably, a reference to the J. P. Mynster’s (→ 262,31) sermon delivered at Christiansborg Palace Church (see map 2, B2), on Pentecost Sunday, May 19, 1850, in which he criticized hermits and monks (→ 265,14). child’s play―] Variant: first written “child’s play.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. in velvet with stars and sashes] Kierkegaard may be thinking of J. P. Mynster, who as bishop of

2

331

27

31

13

14

J O U R N A L NB 18 : 104

17

Zealand and royal confessor was the only cleric permitted, in accordance with an ordinance from 1683 and still in effect in Kierkegaard’s day, to “wear black velvet-lapelled gowns.” Furthermore, as a clerical member of the Order of the Great Cross of the Dannebrog (→ 317,11), Mynster was also to wear a gold cross suspended from a ribbon around his neck, so that it hung below his clerical collar, and on the velvet vestment on his left breast he was to wear a great cross decorated with silver rays in the form of a star. and he gets to be 70 years old] J. P. Mynster had celebrated his seventieth birthday in 1845, though here it is more likely that the reference is to the traditional term for the length of a human life; see, e.g., Ps 90:10.

•

1850

699

Notes for JOURNAL NB19 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB19 703

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB19 711

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB19

Critical Account of the Text by Niels W. Bruun, Joakim Garff, and Anne Mette Hansen Translated by Joel D.S. Rasmussen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse and K. Brian Söderquist

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by Joel D.S. Rasmussen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse and K. Brian Söderquist

703

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB19 is a bound journal in quarto format, labeled “NB19.” by Kierkegaard. The manuscript of Journal NB19 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. An oval label marked “NB19.” and bearing the date June 9, 1850, has been pasted on the front cover (see illustration 5 on p. 705). Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic script, with some passages in his latin hand. Additionally, a latin hand is used for Latin and French words and sometimes calligraphically for headings and titles. The entries written on the inside front cover and the first page of the journal were written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format), and include two entries (NB19:2 and 3) consisting of references to later entries in the journal as well as to Journals NB14 and NB17. Entry NB19:82 was written across the entire width of page, and in order to have more space to write, Kierkegaard wrote the last part of the entry lengthwise in the margin (see illustration on p. 391). The lengthy marginal addition NB19:57.b continues in the margins of three pages. Underlining is used to emphasize just over a third of the journal’s headings. The headings for NB19:32, “My Boundary,” and for NB19:57, “Luther,” are double underlined, while the heading for entry NB19:30, “Actual Renunciation—The Important,” is separated from the entry by a horizontal line. For internal division within an entry, a horizontal line of separation is used in NB19:13 and 61, and asterisks are used in NB19:87. Throughout the entire journal there are some minor corrections in the form of overwritings, deletions, and additions. In entry NB19:73, an addition under the text of the main column has been inserted under a bracket (see illustration on p. 384).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB19 was begun on June 9, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than July 11, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next jour-

704

J O U R N A L NB 19 nal, Journal NB20. Two entries contain references that allow an approximate dating. Entry NB19:7 reads: “In Information on Dogmatics M. complains that Stilling addresses the issue with ‘unwashed hands,’ which is why one cannot become involved with him.” H. L. Martensen’s book Dogmatiske Oplysninger [Information on Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654) was advertised as published in the newspaper Adresseavisen on June 14, 1850, but Kierkegaard had already acquired the book from Reitzel’s bookshop on June 12, 1850.1 And in NB19:80.b, he remarks: “Recently I saw that a lieutenant and Knight of D. has become a clergyman (presumably he was in the war as a volunteer and distinguished himself).” This refers to theology graduate J.C.G. Schleppegrell, who is mentioned in the newspaper Berlinske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 142, June 21, 1850. Generally, the marginal additions in the journal were introduced somewhat later than the main entries to which they relate. One such example is NB19:18.a, where a different type of ink is used than that in the main entry. It cannot be determined whether the table of contents NB19:2 and entry NB19:3 were written while the journal was still in use or thereafter.

III. Contents In Journal NB19, Kierkegaard moves along a number of boundaries: the boundary between the undeserved grace of God and the ethical striving of human beings, between true Christianity and false Christendom, between quiet inwardness and radical extremism, between religious satire and unutterable seriousness. One of these boundaries goes straight through Kierkegaard himself and concerns his own distance from his ideals, which he honestly acknowledges in many entries. Under the heading “My Boundary,” he cites the first of four points in this way: “There is in me a predominantly poetic element, which I am not spiritual enough to be able to slay” (NB19:32; cf. NB19:29). For this same reason, Kierkegaard decides to let “the writings that are ready” remain unpublished, since “such a communication” would imply

) See H. P. Rohde, “Om Søren Kierkegaard som bogsamler. Studier i hans efterladte papirer og bøger paa Det kongelige Bibliotek” [On Søren Kierkegaard as Book Collector: Studies in His Unpublished Papers and Books at the Royal Library], Fund og Forskning [Discovery and Research], (Copenhagen, 1961), vol. 8 p. 122.

1

Critical Account of the Text

5. Outside front cover of Journal NB19.

705

706

J O U R N A L NB 19 an “obligation on my part immediately to express it existentially, which is beyond my powers” (NB19:31; cf. NB19:50). This distance between reflection and action also appears clearly when Kierkegaard compares his own way of life with that of an ascetic: “Just as my own life hardly resembles an ascetic’s, so have I not in the slightest way demanded such a life of any other hum. being or passed judgment upon a single hum. being for not having done it” (NB19:28). In other words, Kierkegaard says he is not suited to “live in a monastic cell” (NB19:57), and in fact one of the journal’s longest entries centers on his great extravagance. This appears under the heading “Judgment upon Myself”: “God knows I have been prodigal—I willingly recognize that and admit my guilt.” At the same time, however, these extravagant habits have been associated with his intense literary production: “Thus everything was squandered on me in order to keep me in a productive condition. I now understand that it would have been more pleasing to God or more truly Christian if on the contrary I had been thrifty as well.” Kierkegaard never had a carefree relation to his profligacy, however, for every time he “needed to resort to a costly diversion” he hoped for God’s fatherly approval of the coming amusements. “I prayed to God that I might justifiably amuse myself with such a tour” (NB19:20), Kierkegaard explains, and a few pages later he adds: “I have taken childlike delight in many, many a pleasure, and then been delighted once more when that has helped me find the strength to achieve again something I could understand was true and right, for which I have then thanked God” (NB19:30). In a series of retrospective reflections on his personal and artistic development, Kierkegaard often brings together thoughts on “Governance,” through which God had hidden an unfathomable loving will in the seemingly so random and terrible events to which Kierkegaard was exposed over the course of time, yet by means of which in all things “that which happened was the only thing, the only right thing” (NB19:11; cf.NB19:61, NB19:62, NB19:66). God has thus taken care of Kierkegaard’s “Upbringing” (NB:23), but has indeed sometimes had recourse to drastic measures in order to complete the process of individualization: “A lovely girl, my beloved—her name will go down in history with me—was to some degree squandered on me, so that through new sufferings (alas, it was a religious collision of a special sort) I might become what I became” (NB19:11). In a series of entries in which he expounds the history of the world as a history of decline that quietly liquidates and eradicates what at one time was genuine seriousness and veritable pathos, Kierkegaard draws the conclusion that when past events are in-

Critical Account of the Text terpreted by posterity, they seldom gain in contour and depth and that more often they lose their radicality. In this connection, Kierkegaard makes the difference between the historical Luther and Luther’s historical aftermath the subject of many critical comments. He sketches out his own counternarrative to the official history of Luther under the heading “Luther’s Transformations,” discussing there the mutability in the perception of Luther that can be followed down through history. Luther’s contemporaries considered him to be a melancholy and tested “hero of faith”; later he came to be “regarded as a political hero”; and after the victorious outcome of his fight against the pope, people interpreted him “as a cheery man of the world and good company …. Nowadays, one could quite colloquially say that the perception is: the significance of the Reformation is that Luther set girls and wine and card games in their rightful place in the Christian Church as an essential feature, yes, as the true perfection in contrast to the imperfect: poverty, prayer, and fasting” (NB19:73). As in many of the previous journals, in NB19, Kierkegaard approaches Luther with equal parts approval and reservation. As a rule, the reservations apply to a remark in one of Luther’s sermons (NB19:13, NB19:60) or a weakness in his dialectical skills: “Oh, but Luther was not a dialectician” (NB19:57; cf. NB19:51). But from Kierkegaard’s perspective, these limitations are nothing in comparison to the unchristian caution that J. P. Mynster shows both in discharging the duties of his office and in his personal conduct. In the first of two entries directly contrasting Luther and Mynster, Kierkegaard writes: “M. is a clever, prudent man, who shrinks from nothing, nothing, as much as he shrinks from scandal, in relation to which he has an idiosyncratic aversion like one can have in relation to sharpening a saw, etc.” Such idiosyncrasy, according to Kierkegaard, is all the more mistaken precisely because Christ himself was fully conscious of the scandalous aspect of his conduct; indeed, Christianity “is from first to last scandal” (NB19:58; cf. NB19:86). As we see in a longer account of a conversation with Mynster regarding whether from a Christian perspective the human being should be construed as a unity or a duality, Kierkegaard tried to explain himself to the bishop and in this connection among others vigorously emphasized the difference between the human and the divine: “God cannot be the highest superlative of the hum.; he is qualitatively different” (NB19:27). The requirement to die to the world runs through many of the entries in NB19 and is connected with the notion that the Christian through existential practice finds him- or herself in a “situation of contemporaneity” with Christ: “What does Xt express? Xt

707

708

J O U R N A L NB 19 expresses dying away from the world, living in poverty, in contempt, in persecution. Should you now in the situation of contemporaneity wish to hold fast to him, then you must conform to his existence” (NB19:14; cf. NB19:9, NB19:18). It is only in this “situation of contemporaneity” out on the streets and alleyways that the true character of the Christian requirements is revealed to the Christian, who then begins to understand how deeply he needs the grace and consolation that Christianity also offers (NB19:21). Only when one finds herself in complete powerlessness and misery can she really hope for healing and salvation: “To be made healthy by the aid of Xnty is not the difficulty; the difficulty is to become truly and thoroughly sick” (NB19:25; cf. NB19:46). Kierkegaard’s sketches for “3 Christian Discourses,” which are based on the parables of “The Missing Coin,” “The Lost Sheep,” and “The Prodigal Son” (NB19:53; cf. NB19:54), develop a kind of theology of the experience of loss. One of the recurring reflections in the journal is the question of whether and to what extent the Christian must contribute to his own salvation, or whether he can simply rely completely on the undeserved grace of God. Thus, Kierkegaard comments fairly early on “The Parable of the Lost Sheep” (NB19:8), which makes it clear “in the strongest terms” that a human being has “nothing at all to contribute toward his own salvation,” but which also includes “severity” as its “dialectical moment” which is something that is often conveniently overlooked by human beings. Human beings can often have less noble motives for excluding this “dialectical moment” from their lives, something attested to in the case of H. L. Martensen, whom Kierkegaard found it difficult to take seriously because Martensen’s great “seriousness,” in Kierkegaard’s view, became a rhetorical gesture somewhere between affectation and invocation. Under the heading “The Difference between Prof. Martensen and Me,” Kierkegaard proclaims with unmistakable irony: “Then he studied, and fixed his gaze upon all kinds of magnificent scholarly problems—a most serious man such as he was, he talks incessantly about seriousness and more seriousness” (NB19:5). This outward seriousness is combined with the insistent arrogance (NB19:7) and disinterested objectivity with which Martensen discusses weighty problems in Dogmatiske Oplysninger [Information on Dogmatics] (NB19:6). Nor do Martensen’s remarks on Kierkegaard’s pseudonyms manage to compel much respect (cf. NB19:37; NB19:65). In complete contrast, Kierkegaard accords quite gentle treatment to the German mystic, poet, and lay preacher Gerhard Tersteegen (NB19:26, NB19:43, NB19:45, NB19:68, NB19:78), whom he

Critical Account of the Text reads with a particular inwardness and to whom he clearly feels deeply connected, something that is also evident in the superlatives he attaches to his reading of Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegens Schriften, nebst dem Leben desselben [Selections from the Writings of Gerhard Tersteegen, Including His Biography], ed. G. Rapp (Essen, 1841; ASKB 729). It is obviously not the number of words that matters. Thus Kierkegaard seizes upon a fine little situation, which could be taken from a summer day outside his window, when he wants to show precisely what he means. The journal’s fourth entry bears the heading “Light—To Lighten,” and begins: “Rigor lightens decision (as one says: I will lighten your load); from rigor the decision is lightest, light as the bird that takes off from the swinging branch which, rocking, assists” (NB19:4).

709

Explanatory Notes 335

1

NB19. June 9, 1850] Variant: label on the outside front cover of the book.

336

1

My concern … p. 54] Variant: written on the inside front cover of the book. ― My concern … p. 52: See NB19:31 in the present volume. ― My boundary … p. 54: See NB19:32 in the present volume.

337

1

2 3

Friday Sermons] One of the names Kierkegaard and his contemporaries frequently used for the sermons at the Friday communion service. Confession and communion were held at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen every Friday at 9:00, where in addition to the reading of scripture and the confession, a short sermon was also delivered between the confession and the communion. Kierkegaard himself preached at these Friday communion services three times, on June 18, 1847; August 27, 1847; and September 1, 1848. All three of these were published as discourses (→ 337,3), two 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 (→ 342,33) (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). the blank sheet preceding Journal NB14] Refers to NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Friday Discourse] In the journals, Kierkegaard oscillates between the terms “Friday discourse” and “Friday sermon” (→ 337,1). In published form, he always uses the designation “discourse for the Friday communion service”; see, for example, the 1848 “Discourses for the Friday Communion Service,” the fourth part of Christian Discourses (CD, 247–300; SKS 10, 255–325), and the 1849 Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (“The High Priest”―“The Tax Collector―“The Woman

Who Was a Sinner”), published in mid-November, 1849 (WA, 109–160; SKS 11, 243–280). p. 30] Refers to NB17:24 in the present volume.

3

This thought was … expressed in an initial draft] This thought could not be traced to an initial draft of the first discourse of The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air: Three Godly Discourses (1849), the second part of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits (UDVS, 155–212; SKS 8, 255– 307). it may be found recorded some other place] See NB7:104, from November 1848, in KJN 5, 138–139.

7

Prof. Martensen] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808– 1884), Danish theologian and pastor; cand. theol. in 1832, lic. theol. in 1838. Martensen became a lecturer at the University of Copenhagen in 1838, was appointed extraordinary professor of theology at that university in 1840, and ordinary professor in 1850. He was granted an honorary doctorate from the University of Kiel in 1840, and he was made a member of the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters in 1841, court preacher in 1845, and Knight of the Dannebrog in 1847. his work as an author] Martensen’s writings include the following: Ueber Lenau’s Faust [On Lenau’s Faust] (Stuttgart, 1836), included in “Betragtninger over Ideen af Faust. Med Hensyn paa Lenaus Faust” [Reflections on the Idea of Faust, with Reference to Lenau’s Faust], in the journal Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus, Journal of the Speculative Idea], ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 1, June 1837 (ASKB 569), pp. 90–164; his licentiate dissertation, De autonomia conscientiæ sui humanæ, in theologiam dogmaticam nostri temporis introducta (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 648), trans. from Latin into Danish by L. V. Petersen as Den menneskelige Selvbevidstheds

14

338

10

15

338

712

21

339

19

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 5–7

Autonomie i vor Tids dogmatiske Theologie [The Autonomy of Human Self-Consciousness in the Dogmatic Theology of Our Time] (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 651); Mester Eckart. Et Bidrag til at oplyse Middelalderens Mystik [Meister Eckhart: A Contribution toward Illuminating Medieval Mysticism] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 649); Grundrids til Moralphilosophiens System. Udgivet til Brug ved academiske Forelæsninger [Foundations of the System of Moral Philosophy: Published for Use with Academic Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 650); Den christelige Daab betragtet med Hensyn paa det baptistiske Spørgsmaal [Christian Baptism Considered with Respect to the Baptist Question] (Copenhagen, 1843; ASKB 652); Prædikener [Sermons] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 227); Prædiken, holden i Christiansborg Slotskirke paa femte Søndag efter Hellig-Tre-Kongers-Dag, den 6te Februar 1848 [Sermon, Delivered in the Chapel of Christiansborg Palace on the Fifth Sunday after Epiphany, February 6, 1848] (Copenhagen, 1848); Tale i Selskabet “for Efterslægten” [Address to the Society for Future Generations] (Copenhagen, 1848); Prædikener. Anden Samling [Sermons: Second Series] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 227); Den christelige Dogmatik. Fremstillet [Christian Dogmatics: A Compendium of the Doctrines of Christianity] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653); a second printing was already published on May 22, 1850; Sendschreiben an den Herrn Oberconsistorialrath Nielsen in Schleswig [Circular Letter to Lord HighCouncilor of the Consistory Nielsen in Schleswig] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB U77); and Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 339,33). In addition to this, Martensen published a number of articles and reviews. Then he became a student] Martensen graduated from secondary school in 1827 and in the same year began theological studies at the University of Copenhagen. write systems, organize the doctrine of Xnty] This refers to Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik. See Dogmatiske Opysning (→ 339,33), p. 104, where Martensen writes of his dogmatics as follows: “I nevertheless confess that I have sought a theological system in which no point stands in isolation, but in which each doctrine can only be

•

1850

understood in terms of the whole”; see also pp. 56, 57, 103. ― “systems”: refers to Kierkegaard’s earlier polemic, directed not only against the philosophical system that the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel develops in Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences, but also more generally against Hegelianism, especially the attempts by Danish Hegelians such as J. L. Heiberg and Rasmus Nielsen to construct a comprehensive logical system (see, for example, CA, 51; SKS 4, 356, and P, 14, 65; SKS 4, 478, 525). By “system,” “the system,” or “systems,” Kierkegaard means to allude generally to the philosophical attempt to understand and explain the world in its unity by means of abstract logical categories or discursive thinking; “system” sometimes seems to be almost a synonym for objective knowledge. Kierkegaard puts forth his most extensive polemic against “the system” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (see, for example, CUP 12–17, 106–125; SKS 7, 22–26, 103–120). Martensen] → 338,14. He talks … about the entire Church … the entire succession of famous doctors of the Church] Presumably, refers to H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15) and Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 339,33). Christ says … upon my return] Kierkegaard here freely translates Luke 18:8. In the NRSV, the translation reads, “And yet, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” he is objective] → 339,19.

22

In Information on Dogmatics … Stilling … one cannot become involved with him] The reference is to a passage in H. L. Martensen’s (→ 338,14) Dogmatiske Oplysninger [Information on Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), pp. 7ff. Here Martensen takes issue with P. M. Stilling’s critical examination of Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15), about which he writes, “But concerning this method, as well as the entire spirit expressed in the polemic of the esteemed magister, as examiners would no doubt discover, these serious subjects cannot bear to be touched with unwashed hands …. I do not

33

339

22

27

30

339

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 7–9

38

340

6

know whether others will attempt closer examination of the esteemed magister’s writings; I for my part have immediately laid it aside, never again to pick it up.” Dogmatiske Oplysninger was advertised as published in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 136, on June 13, 1850, but Kierkegaard had already acquired the book on June 12, 1850, according to the year-end bill of receipt issued by the bookseller C. A. Reitzel on December 31, 1850. ― Stilling: Peter Michael Stilling (1812–1869), Danish philosopher, abandoned his studies of theology shortly before his examinations but later was granted a dispensation and earned the magister degree in philosophy 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 period 1846–1850. The allusion here is to his polemical treatise, very much influenced by Kierkegaard, titled 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: Polemical Essay] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 802); it was advertised as “appeared” in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 303, December 22, 1849. Xt himself … says: whether or not one eats with unwashed hands is of no significance] See Mt 15:1–20. Lady Macbeth can wash her hands … yet they do not become clean] Kierkegaard here alludes to the sleepwalker scene in act 5, scene 1 of Shakespeare’s tragedy Macbeth. Kierkegaard owned a Danish translation of Shakespeare, William Shakspeare’s Tragiske Værker [William Shakespeare’s

•

1850

713

Tragedies], trans. P. Foersom and P. F. Wulff, 9 vols. (Copenhagen, 1807–1825; ASKB 1889–1896). H. L. Martensen also discusses this passage in Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15), p. 572. Pilate of course also washed his hands] See Mt 27:24, 26. crucify the truth] Crucify Christ. Kierkegaard likely alludes here to the passage in John 18:28–38 where Pilate interrogates Jesus. See Mt 18:37–38. ― the truth: Variant: added.

8 1

340m

The Parable of the Lost Sheep] See Lk 15:3–7. one moment] → 340,25. the dialectical moment … transformed into its opposite] See the terminology of the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel’s dialectical methodology. According to Hegel, every given category or “moment” posits its opposite, as, for example north implies south, and being implies nothingness. No moment can really exist without its opposite or “negation.” In Hegel’s lexicon, the first moment is “sublated” (aufgehoben) by the second. These two moments are finally unified in a higher unity that contains them both, as, for example, becoming contains both being and nothingness. In Kierkegaard’s entry, “severity” and “mildness” are conceived as opposing moments.

12

340

Die Away from the World] By this phrase, Kierkegaard means to turn away and detach oneself completely from secular concerns and finitude. This and similar expressions (e.g., “to die away from the temporal”) are often used in mysticism and in pietistic theology and literature. One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ a human being is dead to sin (see, for example, Rom 6:2: “How can we who died to sin go on living in it?” See also Col 2:20: “If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to the world?”). Pietistic theology intensified these ideas such that human life was to become a daily dying away from sin, from the temporal, from the finite, and from the world through self-denial, whereby the emphasis was shifted from the view that in Christ the human being is dead to sin to the view that through faith the human being must also

1

18 25

341

714

7

342

11

15

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 9–13

die away from sin; see, e.g., bk. 1, chap. 12, “A Christian must die to his heart’s desires and to the world and live in Christ,” and bk. 1, chap. 13, “For love of Christ and for the sake of the eternal glory for which we are created and redeemed, we must die to ourselves and the world,” in Johann Arndt’s Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom. Paa ny oversatte efter den ved Sintenis foranstaltede tydske Udgave [Four Books on True Christianity: Newly Translated from Sintenis’s German Edition] (Kristiania [Oslo], 1829; ASKB 277). How many are there] Variant: preceding this, the words “my God” have been deleted. that I am never able to thank God enough … dared expect] 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 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); see also The Point of View for My Work as an Author: “And now when I am to speak about my relationship to God, about what is repeated every day in my prayer, which gives thanks for the indescribable things he has done for me, so infinitely more than I ever had expected” (PV, 72; SKS 16, 52). A lovely girl, my beloved] Refers to Regine Schlegel (née Olsen) (1822–1904), youngest daughter of Regina Frederikke Olsen (née Malling) and Terkild Olsen. Kierkegaard had been engaged to her for more than a year, from September 10, 1840, until the final break on 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

•

1850

in “My Relationship to ‘her.’ Aug. 24th 49. somewhat poetical” (Not15:1–15 in KJN 3, 429–445). her name will go down in history with me] See Not15:14 in KJN 3, 443–444. it was a religious collision] See Not15:4 in KJN 3, 442.

15 17

The fundamental confusion in Christianity … converted into doctrine] See, e.g., Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) in CUP, 326ff., 379– 381, 607–610; SKS 7, 297ff., 345–347, 552–554, and “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me”: A Biblical Exposition and Christian Definition,” no. 2 of Practice in Christianity, by Anti-Climacus, ed. by Søren Kierkegaard (Copenhagen, 1850; advertised as published in Adresseavisen, no. 225, September 25, 1850), PC, 69ff.; SKS 12, 81ff. See also NB17:101, from May 1850 in the present volume. give your fortune to the poor] See Mt 19:16–22. the final] Variant: first written “death’s”. flesh and blood] See Mt 16:17; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12.

33

342

22

343

The Pharisee―And the Tax Collector] See Lk 18:9–14. ― The Pharisee: 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. ― the Tax Collector: Tax collectors were usually despised and excluded from participation in religious and national life. In Jesus’ time, Palestine was occupied and ruled by the Roman Empire, which outsourced the collection of duty on imported and exported goods to the highest bidder. In turn, the tax collectors exploited their privileges to secure additional revenues at higher rates than those prescribed (see, e.g., Lk 2:13 and 19:8). The New Testament often refers to tax collectors in connection with sinners (see, e.g., Mt 9:10–11, 11:19; and Lk 5:30, 15:1),

1

34 39

344

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 13–20

2

9 12

14

344

17 20

•

1850

715

with prostitutes (see Mt 21:31–32), with robbers, rogues, and adulterers (see Lk 18:11), and with Gentiles (see Mt 5:46–48, 18:17). In his sermon on this, Luther … feeling superior] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Lk 18:9–14 for the eleventh Sunday after Trinity Sunday in En christelig Postille, sammendragen af Dr. Morten Luthers Kirke- og Huuspostiller [A Collection of Christian Sermons, 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. 467–482. See pp. 471ff., where Luther says: “Instead of helping and saving him [the tax collector], he [the Pharisee] commits the grossest injustice. He sees and recognizes that his neighbor sins against God, and yet he does not think to save him from God’s wrath and judgment by leading him to repentance; he does not show the slightest mercy or compassion for a poor sinner’s misery; he judges that the tax collector gets his due when he comes to perdition and condemnation; he evades his duty of love and service, and in this way defies God’s command, which enjoins him above all else to drive his neighbor from sin and the power of condemnation through teaching, exhortation, and punishment, and to lead him to the kingdom of God. Indeed, what remains is the worst of all―he rejoices that his neighbor dwells in his sins, and that he must sigh under God’s wrath.” the gospel … Christian prayer in the mouth of the tax collector] See Lk 18:13. Luther also holds the opinion … the tax collector has heard Xnty’s proclamation] See En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, p. 474, where Luther says of the tax collector’s prayer (see previous commentary): “And here we stand with the sermon of the beloved evangelist about God’s grace and mercy in Christ, which is proclaimed and offered to condemned sinners who are without the least merit. The tax collector must have heard this sermon.” ― in the same sermon: Variant: added. the parable] → 344,1.

at this price a good can] Variant: first written, “is” instead of “can”. It does not speak immediately … Xt in relationship to the disciples] Refers to Jn 16:2–4.

31

that a teacher of Xnty be paid by the learners] See Lk 10:7; see also 1 Tim 5:18.

18

345

speculation] speculative (Hegelian) philosophy and theology.

34

345

one or another way―] Variant: changed from “one or another way.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. and then note … deathbed] Variant: marginal note begun in main text column.

15

346

1

346m

the mortician’s manner] A verbose and preposterous mode of expression that is also obscure and unintelligible. See act 3, scene 4 of Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Den Stundeløse [The Busy Trifler] (1731) where, responding to Vielgeschrey’s question about what “the exaltation” means, Pernille answers: “It’s called that in the mortician’s style. Such people always have a complete repertoire to make their discourse prolix. They have their own stock phrases as, for example, calling the young housemaids ‘daughters,’ or when speaking to me about the Lord saying ‘Dear Father’ instead of ‘Thou, Lord God.’” And a moment later she adds: “For this reason one makes a distinction between mortician’s style and the ordinary human way of speaking.” See Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Stage], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, n.d. [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 5. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. In a Copenhagen bylaw, dated June 26, 1818, it was decreed that everyone except the poor (who received a slapdash and cost-free funeral) was obliged to let one of Copenhagen’s official undertakers arrange the funeral. In Kierkegaard’s time, the undertakers were sharply criticized for taking advantage of this privilege by charging exorbitant fees for the many services included.

16

347

Dying Away] → 341,1. Peter also says: To whom shall we go] See Jn 6:68.

I have been prodigal] According to a rough calculation in F. Brandt and E. Thorkelin, Søren

21

347

33

716

31

348

10 17

19

22

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20

Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed. [Copenhagen, 1993 (1935)], pp. 154ff., between his father’s death in 1838 (→ 349,3) and his own death in 1855, Kierkegaard spent approximately 45,000 rix-dollars (→ 372,29), corresponding to approximately 2,600 rix-dollars per year. made “her” unhappy] Made Regine Olsen unhappy by breaking his engagement with her (→ 342,15). See NB:210, from May 1847, in KJN 4, 123, and Not15:4 (→ 342,15) in KJN 3, 431ff. such a tour] → 349,31. the thought that I would not live long] Presumably an allusion to the fact that Kierkegaard thought that he would die before he reached the age of thirty-four, but to his surprise he did not do so; see NB:210, from May 1847, in KJN 4, 123, and Hans Brøchner’s recollections of Kierkegaard in Bruce H. Kirmmse, ed. and trans., Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 240. See also NB10:200, dated April 25, 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “It is now so clear to me; everything I came to understand last year about God’s guidance has led me precisely toward this aim: to throw light on Christianity and to portray the idea of being a Christian. At the time, I certainly didn’t imagine it; I thought that I should die” (KJN 5, 378). I was … qualified to become a country priest … desired that] Refers to the circumstance that even as early as the period following publication of Either/Or (1843), and again following the publication of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), and repeatedly thereafter, Kierkegaard had considered stopping his writing and seeking a position as a priest in the country. See, e.g., JJ:415 in KJN 2, 257; NB:7, NB:57, and NB2:136 in KJN 4, 16, 50, 193–194). 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). The writings of that period still remain unpublished] Presumably, a reference to three writings titled “Come unto Me, All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I will Give You Rest” and “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,”

•

1850

the first two of which were written in the period ca. April–November 1848, and the third written early in 1849 (all three were combined as Practice in Christianity, published in 1850 [→ 337,1]); and A Cycle of Ethical-Religious Essays, edited in the summer of 1848, but written in 1846–1847 and consisting of five essays from The Book on Adler and a later essay, “Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?” (see NB10:3, from February 1849, in KJN 5, 269, and its accompanying explanatory notes), of which the third essay (“Does a Human Being Have the Right to Let Himself Be Put to Death for the Truth?”) and the sixth (“On the Difference Between a Genius and an Apostle”) were published pseudonymously on May 19, 1849, as Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays and attributed to the pseudonym H. H. (see WA, 47–108). Presumably, Kierkegaard is also referring to the following pieces concerning his work as an author: The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 342,11), written in the course of the summer of 1848; “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author”; “One Note Concerning My Work as an Author” (→ 358,8), with the accompanying appendix “Armed Neutrality, or My Position as a Christian Author in Christendom” (→ 368,6); and “Everything in One Word,” presumably written in 1848 (see Pap. X 5 B 144). And finally, Kierkegaard also appears to be referring to “Mr. Phister as Captain Scipio (in the Comic Opera Ludovic): A Recollection and for Recollection” (see Pap. IX B 67–73, pp. 383–407), from the end of 1848 (concerning this, see NB12:133, from ca. September 1, 1849, in KJN 6, 224, and its accompanying explanatory note). The Sickness unto Death, which also originates from 1848, was published on July 30, 1849. Prof. Nielsen, whom I in the meantime had drawn close] Kierkegaard initiated his friendship with Rasmus Nielsen in 1848 (see, e.g., NB7:6, from August 1848, in KJN 5, 80–81, and NB10:32, from February 1849, in KJN 5, 283). At the time, Kierkegaard believed that he would soon die and therefore wanted someone to publish his literary remains (see, e.g., NB6:74, from August 1848, in KJN 5, 56–57, and NB14:90, from December 1849,

24

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20

33 35

42

349

3

in KJN 6, 402ff., and a draft for a never-published article from around 1849–1850 titled “Something Concerning My Relationship to Prof. Nielsen” (Pap. X 6 B 99, pp. 110–112), and considered making Nielsen familiar with his thoughts on the writings. See a draft of a never-published article titled “Concerning My Relationship to Hr. Prof. R. Nielsen” from around 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). See also a draft of a never-published article from the summer of 1850: “Concerning Hr. Prof. Nielsen’s Relation to My Work as an Author” (Pap. X 6 B 93, pp. 102–104). ― Prof. Nielsen: Rasmus Nielsen (1809–1884), Danish theologian and philosopher; theology graduate, 1837; licentiate in theology, 1840; privatdocent, winter semester 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. perhaps] Variant: added. That first misunderstanding with Nielsen] Presumably refers both to Kierkegaard’s consideration of assigning the publication of his literary estate to Rasmus Nielsen and to familiarizing Nielsen with his thoughts about his works; see the previous explanatory note. deny me … a clerical living] As a country priest (→ 348,19), or possibly at the Royal Pastoral Seminary in Copenhagen; see, e.g., NB10:89, from around March 1849, in KJN 5, 313. think about my livelihood] 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), his fortune had been greatly diminished (→

•

1850

717

347,21). Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (→ 360,3), died in 1838, leaving an estate―inherited by Søren Kierkegaard and his brother Peter Christian (→ 353,5)―that in 1839 was reckoned at 125,000 rix-dollars (→ 372,29). Søren Kierkegaard’s share amounted to 31,335 rix-dollars, in real estate, stocks, and bonds; see Brandt and Thorkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene, 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 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; 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. 34 years … expected would be the age of my death] → 348,17. I had set Nielsen to work … what could be counted on from him] Presumably refers to Kierkegaard’s waiting before deciding how useful Rasmus Nielsen might be until after Nielsen had published his next book. On May 19, 1849 (→ 365,17), 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 (→ 365,14), 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, from May 1849, in KJN 6, 28). Nielsen

4 19

718

29

30

31

42

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 20–22

presented Kierkegaard a gift copy of the book in hardcover with black morocco binding, gilt decorations on the spine and cover, and the following dedication: “S T [Salvo Titolo, Latin, “title omitted”] / Hr. Magister S. Kierkegaard / from / Your / R. Nielsen” dated Sunday, May 13, 1849 (the copy is privately owned). ― publishing mine: Perhaps refers to The Sickness unto Death, which was published July 30, 1849. Strube] Frederik Christian Strube (1811–1867), an Icelandic journeyman carpenter, and his wife and two daughters lodged with Kierkegaard during the period 1848–1852. Strube was admitted to Frederick’s Hospital in Copenhagen, Medical Department A, room MM, from December 1 to December 9, 1848 (RA. 257, Frederik’s Hospital. Medical Journals 1757–1850; 1848–, 683, p. 356). According to the patient journal, Strube suffered from “monomania,” i.e., partial psychosis. See also Kierkegaard’s undated letter to Prof. Seligmann Meyer Trier (1800–1863), senior physician at Frederik’s Hospital, where he thanks Trier because “my carpenter … is now essentially cured” (LD, 176; B&A 1, 217). stench of the tanner in the warm weather] The tanner Johan Julius Gram seems to have tanned skins both in the interior courtyard of the house as well as on the street in front of the building while Kierkegaard lived from April until October 1848 in the apartment on the second floor of his property at number 9 Rosenborggade in the Klædebo district (see map 2, C1); from October 1848 until April 1850, Kierkegaard lived in the apartment on the second floor of Gram’s other property at number 7 Rosenborggade. See Peter Tudvad, Kierkegaards København [Kierkegaard’s Copenhagen] (Copenhagen, 2004), pp. 44–50. spend considerable money on carriage rides] Refers to the fact that over the years Kierkegaard went for many drives in horse-drawn carriages, e.g., to the Deer Park, Bellevue, Røjels Inn (in Nyholte), Lyngby, Hørsholm, Fredensborg, Grib Skov, and Frederiksborg, all in northern Zealand. This is attested to by bills from the hired coachman Lassen of Lille Helliggejststræde in Copenhagen; see EP III, pp. 872–873. die away from the world] → 341,1.

•

1850

the journals from the time] See especially the following journals: NB6, begun July 16, 1848; NB7, begun August 21, 1848; NB8, begun November 26, 1848; NB9, begun January 2, 1849; NB10, begun February 9, 1849; NB11, begun May 2, 1849; and NB12, begun July 19, 1849. Presumably, Kierkegaard thinks here especially of journal entries such as NB6:61, NB6:64, NB6:66–71, NB6:81, NB6:93, NB7:8, NB7:53, NB7:68, and NB8:38–39 in KJN 5, 42–43, 45–46, 48–53, 62–63, 69–70, 81–82, 105, 114–115, 167–170. the publication during my life of the writings about myself] See especially NB9:56, NB9:78–79, NB10:4, NB10:6, NB10:19, NB10:39, NB10:48, NB10:69, NB10:169, NB10:185, NB10:192, NB10:200, NB10:202 in KJN 5, 242–243, 258–262, 270, 270, 275–276, 287–289, 292–293, 304–305, 351, 362–363, 370–371, 378–379, 379; and NB11:6, NB11:8, NB11:105, NB11:122–123, NB11:132, NB11:192–195, NB11:202–204, NB11:211, NB12:27, and NB12:72 in KJN 6, 6, 8, 55, 64–66, 75,112–118, 122–125, 128, 158, 182. ― the publication during my life of: Variant: added.

2

there was one] Refers to Christ.

12

350

They all abandoned Xt] Refers to the fact that Judas betrayed Jesus; see Mt 26:14–16, 48–49, 56, 69–75. even the apostle denied him] Refers to the apostle Peter’s denial of Jesus; see Mt 26:69–75. the thief on the cross remained faithful to him until the end] See Lk 23:39–43. under the same sentence] Refers to the words of the thief in Lk 23:40; see the previous explanatory note. mocked, ridiculed, spat upon, cursed] See Lk 18:32; Mk 14:65; Mt 27:27–31; and Gal 3:13. gives one a place in paradise] Refers to Jesus’ words to the thief. See Lk 23:43. this crucified one himself cries] See Mt 27:46. Tersteegen has called attention to this] Variant: added. Kierkegaard refers here to Tersteegen’s discourse no. 3, “Am Charfreitage” [On Good Friday], in which he preaches on Jesus’ words to the criminal on the cross in Lk 23:43, in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 352,29), p.

23

350

349m

4

23 24 2

3 7 10 12

350m

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 22–26 169, where Tersteegen writes: “The thief would have reason to think: Yes, the one who said to me, ‘today you will be with me in Paradise,’ now laments that God has forsaken him; he who promised me the refreshments of Paradise says, ‘I am thirsty’; the one who told me it would go well for me, is now different. Where shall I go now? What now will come of it? See, it sometimes goes like this even for the faithful ones with truly converted souls.” ― Tersteegen: Gerhard Tersteegen (1697–1769), German Reformed mystic, hymn writer, and lay preacher (especially active in the awakening movement of 1750–1760). He was trained in business and acquired a grocery store, but abandoned it in 1719 and thereafter eked out a living as a weaver of silk ribbon, as he understood it to be his calling to work for revival and edification. He was strongly influenced by German, Spanish, and French mystics and ascetics both in the Catholic and Reformed traditions, translating several of their writings; his pietistic ideal was the imitation of Christ through interiorization, worship, and sanctification in an ascetic, quietistic life. In addition to Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften, Kierkegaard also owned Des gottseligen Arbeites im Weinberge des Herrn: Gerhard Tersteegen’s gesammelte Schriften [Godly Work in the Vineyard of the Lord: Gerhard Tersteegen’s Collected Writings], 8 parts in 4 vols. (Stuttgart, 1844–1845; ASKB 827–830), which, among other writings, contains Tersteegen’s reflections, psalms, and spiritual songs titled Geistliches Blumengärtlein [Spiritual Flower Garden] (1729) and his edifying sermons titled Geistliche Brosamen [Spiritual Crumbs] (1769–1773). 350

32

351

4 6

351

33

thorn in the flesh] An allusion to 2 Cor 12:7–9. pray … God to take this thorn from him] See the previous explanatory note. died away from the world] → 341,1. something by an edifying author (Scriver) … as he grew] A loose translation of a passage from § 82 of “Vom Creutz der gläubigen Seelen, Die VII. Predigt, Darinnen einige der schwersten und fürnehmsten Sorgen betrachtet und mit Trost gelindert werden” [From the Cross of Believing

•

1850

719

Souls, Sermon VII, Considering therein Some of the Weightiest and Most Important Concerns and Lightened by Consolation], in Christian Scriver, Seelen-Schatz [Soul Treasury], 5 vols., 8th ed., with a new introduction by Johann Georg Pritius (Magdeburg and Leipzig, 1723 [1675–1692]; ASKB 261–263); vol. 4, p. 213, with running title “Concerning the Poverty of Faithful Souls,” col. 1: “You have only one garment, which is not much to speak of? Well, you are in keeping with the fashion of your Lord Jesus, who also has only one, which, as it was for continual keeping, he wore for a lifetime, [and thus] one reasonably thinks that his virgin mother had knitted and made it by hand for him in his childhood, that little by little it grew with him and, as the clothes of the Israelites in the desert, it did not become outdated and torn.” ― Scriver: Christian Scriver (1629–1693), German Lutheran theologian, priest, edifying writer, and poet; from 1653 a priest in Stendal, from 1667 a priest in Magdeburg, and from 1690 consistorial counselor and chief court preacher in Quedlinburg diocese. Scriver at the same time laid great emphasis on both the Lutheran doctrine of justification and the interiorization of faith, and he was one of the leading pioneers of pietism. Seelen-Schatz is his most famous edifying work, and it was widely distributed both in Germany and across Scandinavia. is not the difficulty] Variant: added.

10

352

Tersteegen … Psalm 77:3 … “would not accept consolation,”] Refers to a passage in the first part of discourse no. 10, titled “Nach der Beerdigung einer Freundin. Am 21. Juni 1755” [Following the Funeral of a Friend: June 21, 1755] (on Jesus’ words to Martha in Lk 10:42: “there is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her”) in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften, nebst dem Leben desselben [Selections from the Writings of Gerhard Tersteegen, Including His Biography], ed. G. Rapp (Essen, 1841; ASKB 729), pp. 369ff., where Tersteegen (→ 350m,12) writes: “Let us go to work wiser and be satisfied with God alone in time and for all eternity. Mary was needful of

29

352

720

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 26–27

one thing only, and in that one she discovered everything. Therefore, let us detach ourselves from all created things and from finding consolation in created things, in confessing that God alone is our God and nothing else, and that he alone can and wants to be our joy in time and eternity. Let us persevere with God alone, and with David say: my soul refuses to be comforted. Psalm 77:2.” Note that Kierkegaard cites Ps 77:3, which is correct in the Danish versions current both in Kierkegaard’s day and today, though the German and English translations assign the verse quoted to Ps 77:2. ― in those words in the Letter to the Hebrews … “would not accept consolation,”: Presumably refers to 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.’” The Greek word translated into English (King James Version and NRSV) as “exhortation” is παρακλήσεως and can equally mean “encouragement” or “consolation” (Danish, trøst). 353

5

my brother Peter also read a little article on this at the convention] Refers to the lecture that Kierkegaard’s elder brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard (1805–1888), delivered to the Roskilde Pastoral Conventicle in Ringsted on October 30, 1849. The lecture was printed in the Dansk Kirketidende [Danish Church Times], published by R. Th. Fenger and C. J. Brandt (vols. 1–8, 1845–1853; ASKB 321–325), on December 16, 1849, vol. 5, no. 12, cols. 171–193, and an introductory note indicates that it is a reconstruction of the lecture. After developing the concepts of ecstasy and composure from Paul’s teaching in 2 Cor 5:13, Peter Christian Kierkegaard undertakes a longer, partly critical, review of “Magister S. Kierkegaard’s well-known works” as representative of “ecstasy” and of “Professor Martensen’s Dogmatics and dogmatic endeavors as a whole” as representative of “composure.” Here in this entry Kierkegaard presumably refers to a note attached to Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s mention of “the decisive choice between the good and the evil principles” expressed by Paul in 2

•

1850

Cor 6:14–7:1. The note reads: “I let the expression ‘the evil principle’ stand, not in any Manichean sense or nonsense, but because it can help to notice the sharpness in the apostle’s argumentation when we are reminded quite decisively that even the least shadow of some still-persisting wrong among Christians is an expression of his (i.e., the devil’s) nature and works, which we renounce through baptism, and is therefore principally and radically different from our true nature by the power of creation and redemption” (cols. 177ff.). ― my brother 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” [The Left]), but on February 11, 1850, he joined the Centrum group; see Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s “Dagbog for 1828–50” [Diary for 1828–1850] (National Archives, NKS 2656, 4o, I), p. 158. When I last spoke with Bishop Mynster] It is not known when Kierkegaard had most recently spoken with Bishop J. P. Mynster. If Mynster’s mention of Stilling’s tone is a reference to Stilling’s polemical treatise Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden (→ 339,33), then it must have happened after its publication on December 22, 1849; but if, concerning Rasmus Nielsen, Mynster refers not only to Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19) but also to Evangelietroen og Theologien [The Faith of the Gospels and Theology], then the conversation must have taken place after its publication on April 6, 1850 (see the following explanatory note). ― Bishop Mynster: Jakob Peter Mynster (1775–1854), Danish theologian, priest, writer, and politician; from 1802, parish priest in Spjellerup in southern Zealand; from 1811, permanent curate at Vor Frue Kirke

9

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 27–28

10

11

15

[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; 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 connection with R Nielsen] Presumably, in connection with Rasmus Nielsen’s (→ 348,24) 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); it might also concern Nielsen’s 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), which was advertised as published in Adresseavisen, no. 80, April 6, 1850. Stilling] Presumably refers to P. M. Stilling’s polemical treatise Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden, directed against H. L. Martensen (→ 338,14). Right Reverend] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence established by decree on October 14, 1746 (with amendments on August 12, 1808), “Høiærværdighed” was the title for the higher and the highest members of the clergy, e.g., the bishop of Zealand and Copenhagen’s parish priests, court preachers, and doctors of the-

•

1850

721

ology, 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; (→ 374,7). Xndom] Christendom. Defined in Christian Molbech’s dictionary as “the whole society of Christians, all the countries inhabited by Christians.” See Christian Molbech, Dansk Ordbog [Danish Dictionary], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 1032), vol. 1, p. 149, col. 1. our speculative age] i.e., influenced by (Hegelian) speculative philosophy and theology. fear and trembling] An allusion to Phil 2:12. insubordinate souls,] Variant: first written “insubordinate souls.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. apostasy from] Variant: first written “apostasy.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. from Christianity,] Variant: first written “from Christianity.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the nation’s 1000 clergy] 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. flesh and blood] → 343,39. Just] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. what I have been mindful of from the start: that I am without authority] Refers to the preface to his first collection of edifying discourses, Two Edifying Discourses (1843), where Kierkegaard notes that he “does not have authority to preach,” (EUD, 5; SKS 5, 13). This is repeated unchanged in the prefaces to the subsequent collections of edifying discourses (1843–1844; see EUD, 53, 107, 179, 231, 295; SKS 5, 63, 113, 183, 231, 289), and in varying form in the prefaces to Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions (1845) (TDIO, 5; SKS 5, 389)

7

354

10 19 6

355

20

20

12

25 30 37

356

722

39

357

1 20

20 21

23 32 38

43

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 28–30

and to the two first parts of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 5, 157; SKS 8, 121, 257). In Works of Love (1847), Kierkegaard writes that “we [i.e., Kierkegaard] are well-taught and trained in Christianity from childhood on, and in our more mature years we have dedicated our days and our best powers to this service, even though we always repeat that our discourse is ‘without authority’ ” (WL, 47; SKS 9, 54). the established order] the existing, established community of Christians; the Danish Church and its senior clergy; Danish Christendom. Xndom] → 354,7. at my own expense] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard has not held a position (as a priest in a church). As an author he had, however, received payments for all of his books since 1847, with the exception of Two Ethical-Religious Essays. I have had wealth] → 349,3. Among the clergy … it is not customary to do anything gratis] In provincial towns, citizens had the duty of paying the priest an assessed sum called “priest money,” while peasants in rural parishes were to pay the priest a certain percentage of their agricultural yield, especially grain, known as a tithe. The size of these payments was established by the Ministry for Church and Educational Affairs. 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 such clerical acts as weddings, baptisms, and funerals. In provincial towns, there was also an additional sum for a housing allowance, while rural priests had income from the fields and farms attached to their call. seeking first the kingdom of God] Refers to Mt 6:33. dangerous that we] Variant: “we” has been added. lieutenant in the military reserve … war] An officer with the rank of lieutenant who has resigned from service and now has another profession, but who is available for mobilization in the event of war. the highest;] Variant: changed from “the highest.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

1850

for one] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

43

I have never permitted myself to use authority] → 356,37. See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (which corresponds to “One Note Concerning My Work as an Author” [→ 348,22]), presumably written in 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “I have never made use of ‘authority’; on the contrary, from the very beginning (the preface to the Two Edif. Discourses 1843) I have stereotypically repeated and insisted that ‘I am without authority,’” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 350; see “The Accounting,” which constitutes the bulk of On My Work as an Author (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). Asaph … God will give him neither wealth nor poverty but moderation] Refers to Prov 30:8, where it is not Asaph, but Agur, the son of Jakeh, who says (in the NRSV translation): “Remove far from me falsehood and lying; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that I need.” the entire Nielsen-ian diversion against Martensen] Refers to Rasmus Nielsen’s (→ 348,24) review article titled Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 353,10). ― Martensen: → 338,14.

8

sobriety] Several passages in the New Testament encourage the recipients of letters to be or to remain sober or disciplined; see, e.g., 1 Thess 5:6–8; 1 Pet 1:13, 4:7, 5:8. my father] Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (1756– 1838). In 1780 he received a license as a hosier, and eight years later he was granted a license as an importer and wholesaler of colonial goods (sugar, coffee, molasses, etc.). He retired at the age of 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.

13

359

3

360

358

19

28

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 31–35 360

13 20

26

the Writings That Are Ready] → 348,22. it shall be used to intensify the need for grace] See the 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. 1 of Practice in Christianity, where Kierkegaard writes: “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). I should first secure an official appointment] → 348,19 and → 348,42.

361

17

means] Variant: first written “means.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

361

26

there are 1000 priests] → 356,12. sacristans] (Danish, Klokkere); general church officers responsible for helping the priest during the worship service and for handling office work, including producing certificates of baptism. sextons] (Danish, Gravere); subordinate officers of the church (assistants to the sacristan) responsible for the performance of funerals, but especially as assistants in the worship service, where they made sure people were seated in the church according to rank and station.

28

28

361

32 34

362

3 20

362

39

this alone] Variant: “alone” has been added. A hum. being comes to Xt … you come and follow me] An allusion to Mt 8:21–22. Truly, no hum. being has ever spoken this way] An allusion to Jn 7:46. he could easily prevail] Variant: added. Lord Jesus Xt, draw me to you completely] Under the heading “Friday Sermon / Jn 12:32 / And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself” Kierkegaard committed to paper an idea and sketch for a discourse at the Friday communion service in NB2:247, from October 1847, in KJN 4, 233–234. One line of the sketch reads, “Yes, draw us entirely to yourself,” and Kierkegaard remarks that this thought is “from an old hymn” (KJN 4, 234). In NB9:53,

•

1850

723

from January 1849, in KJN 5, 239–240, it becomes clear that the old hymn is “Saa kom, o Jesu, stærke Helt” [So Come, O Jesus, Powerful Hero] (1739, based on the German hymn “So komm, o Liebste” [So Come, O Beloved]), and of which the end of stanza 9 reads: “O, with your sweet name, accept the embrace of my poor heart, that I might have the balm of your sweetness when I come to you in need, indeed, when all the world’s consolation is dead, then be to me all the more sweet, o, Jesus, friend of the poor sinner, o draw me entirely to yourself”; 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), no. 104, pp. 319–323; stanza 9, p. 322. Kierkegaard subsequently developed the draft for the “Friday Sermon” and delivered it at the Friday communion service on September 1, 1848, in the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. It was later included as the first discourse in “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself,” published as the third part of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 163–169). Toward the end, this discourse reads: “You have come here today because you feel drawn to him, but from this it does not follow that you dare to think that he has already drawn you wholly to himself. Lord, increase my faith [Lk 17:5]. The person who prayed this prayer was not an unbeliever but a believer; so also with this prayer, ‘Lord, draw me wholly to yourself.’ The person who will pray this prayer aright must already feel himself drawn” (PC, 156; SKS 12, 168). dying away from the world] → 341,1. “Tear me away from everything that holds me back.”] A quote from the first stanza in the hymn “Jesu, din søde Forening at smage” [Jesus, How Sweet Your Companionship to Taste] (1712), probably by the German Lutheran priest and pietist hymn writer J.L.C. Allendorf, and translated (1740) by the pietist priest P. J. Hygom, slightly reworked by Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9) as no. 562 in Tillæg til den evangelisk-christelige Psalmebog [Supplement to the Evangelical Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845), pp. 4ff., in Evangelisk-christelig Psalmebog [Evangelical

8 15

363

724

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 35–37

Christian Hymnal] (Copenhagen, 1845 [1798]; ASKB 197]. Stanza 1 reads: “Jesus, how sweet your companionship to taste, yearning and permeating my heart and mind. Tear me from everything that holds me back, draw me to yourself, my beginning. Show me quite clearly my wretchedness and troubles, reveal the abyss of corruption within me, so that nature must bow to death, and the spirit alone live for you” (Den Danske Salmebog [2002], no. 460). 363

34

364

11

17

364

26 28

28

29

33

Nielsen] Rasmus Nielsen (→ 348,24). (and least of all ... involved)] Variant: added. ― personal animosity involved: Refers to R. Nielsen’s strained and critical personal relationship to H. L. Martensen (→ 338,14). the direct attack] Refers to R. Nielsen’s review article 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] (→ 353,10). Martensen] H. L. Martensen (→ 338,14). N.] Rasmus Nielsen (→ 348,24), referring to his review article article Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 353,10). Stilling] P. M. Stilling, referring to his polemical treatise titled Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden, med særligt Hensyn til Prof. Martensens “christelige Dogmatik.” Kritisk-polemisk Afhandling (→ 339,33). the pseudonyms] i.e., the pseudonymous writings from 1843 to 1846. Presumably, the reference here is especially to Johannes Climacus, primarily as the author of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), since it is to this work that Rasmus Nielsen compares Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15); by contrast, Nielsen makes only very little use of Philosophical Fragments (1844), which is the other writing by Climacus. his Dogmatiske Oplysninger] Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 339,33), where Martensen takes issue with Rasmus Nielsen’s review article (see pp. 9–76), but only briefly and off-handedly touches on Stilling’s polemical treatise (pp. 7ff.).

•

1850

pretend he was superior to the pseudonyms] Refers to Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 339,33), pp. 12–14, where Martensen writes: “Now, as for Johannes Climacus and the other pseudonyms, surely in this connection they are irrelevant. I suppose I should confess that I have had an entirely different conception of these writings than the reviewer [Rasmus Nielsen]. Namely, I have not assumed that these writings were intended to present us a new system or to establish any philosophical school whatsoever. Least of all have I assumed that their intention was to substantiate a reform of dogmatics. From the little acquaintance I have with these works, I had rather suspected that the idea was in a Socratic way to set in motion a deeper skepticism on the part of the reader, in order thereby to awaken him to seeking the problem that is higher and more significant than all philosophical and theological problems of scholarship, namely, the personal life-problem that no system can give us or solve for us, but which only the individual human being himself must take up and must solve on his own, in Godgiven individuality. I have therefore assumed that these writings were moving in an entirely different direction than that marked out by Pr. [Professor] Nielsen.… At the same time, I must admit that I give absolutely no weight to my conception of the pseudonyms, since my familiarity with this rambling literature is, as I mentioned, only exceedingly slight and fragmentary, which among other things is due to the fact that I―both owing to my course of study and to my individual intellectual orientation―am less susceptible to an experimenting presentation of the highest truths and primarily seek my instruction concerning these truths among such authors as use direct communication. Fortunately, Christianity has of course also employed not experimenting but direct communication, with which since times of old it has obliged the need of human beings.―I therefore consider these writings to be utterly irrelevant to me in the present context. I consider the statements the reviewer puts forward against me to be statements for which no one but he himself is responsible. Whether these statements perhaps have an entirely different meaning in

34

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 37–39 the humorous context among the pseudonyms, whether the reviewer here understands, does not understand, or misunderstands, all this lies beyond the confines of my investigation. I will here confine myself only to the much humbler and more modest task of putting my own house in order by showing that I have entirely no use for the doctrines the reviewer with such great importunity has wanted to communicate to me, because concerning these I may use the old motto that the truth in it is not new and the new in it is not true; just as I shall also show that regardless of how it might relate to his understanding of the pseudonyms, nonetheless it is indisputably certain that he has not understood me, but has most haphazardly misunderstood and misinterpreted my thoughts.” 365

3 5

365

10 10

14

Christendom] → 354,7 and → 356,39. reads on a painted board … over the glacis … Violators Will Be Arrested] The reference has not been verified. ― glacis: the embankment that lies in front of a moat, and whose surface slopes gently down toward the surrounding flat terrain. Before Copenhagen’s ramparts were demolished beginning in 1867, they lay outside Vestervold, Nørrevold, and Østervold quarters as open, wooded areas toward St. Jørgen’s Lake, Peblinge Lake, and Sorte Dam Lake, respectively (see map 3, CD 1–3); in 1843, however, G. Carstensen received permission to build his summer amusement park “Tivoli” outside Vesterport; see Tudvad, Kierkegaards København, pp. 297ff. and p. 451. R. Nielsen’s] Rasmus Nielsen (→ 348,24). His Big Book] The book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19), which in its entirety runs to 542 pages. ― Variant: added. want to turn everything to his own account] According to the marginal note, this concerns Kierkegaard’s “literary accomplishments,” especially his pseudonymous writings; see NB11:46, from May 1849, where concerning Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19), he writes: “His writings plunder in a myriad of ways, mostly from the pseudonyms, whom he never cites,

•

1850

725

perhaps with deliberate cunning, because they are the least read” (KJN 6, 28). Since Nielsen is particularly inspired by the pseudonymous writings emphasizing the paradoxical character of Christianity, the mention of “the pseudonyms” refers to Fear and Trembling (1843) by Johannes de Silentio, and Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) by Johannes Climacus. Furthermore, Rasmus Nielsen refers to “Anna’s Patience in Expectation” in Two Upbuilding Discourses (1844), in the note on p. 189, and the note on pp. 383ff.; and to a passage in Works of Love (1847), concerning the way Christ looked at Peter after the denial (see WL, 170). In the copy Rasmus Nielsen presented to Kierkegaard of Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 353,10), on p. 120, next to line 8, which reads, “I comprehend, that I cannot comprehend,” Kierkegaard has noted in the margin “NB” and at the foot of the page wrote, “NB: This statement really ought to be attributed to Joh. Climacus, to whom it belongs.” The gift copy of the book is in hardcover with black morocco binding, gilt decorations on the spine and cover, and the following dedication: “S T [Salvo Titolo, Latin, “title omitted”] / Hr. Magister S. Kierkegaard / from / Your / R. Nielsen”. I had personally coached him for an entire year] Kierkegaard had begun his relationship with Rasmus Nielsen in the middle of 1848 (→ 348,24). Nielsen’s book Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19) was announced as published in Adresseavisen, no.116 on May 19, 1849. the man who steps up and pronounces judgment on “mediocrity.”] See, e.g., the “Preface” to Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19), where Rasmus Nielsen (→ 348,24) writes: “How is the doctrine of the happy medium supposed to be refuted, considering that moderation is not only a cardinal virtue, but that mediocrity itself is a power in the world?” (p. ix). By “the doctrine of the happy medium” Nielsen understands “the mediating view, which prefers to keep to the middle way” between “the faith of the Gospels” and “modern consciousness” (p. vi).

17

22

726 25

365m

1

9

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 39–40

for God all things are possible] Refers to Mt 19:26. almost with concealment of his source] In addition to the direct references to Two Upbuilding Discourses (1844) and Works of Love (1847) (→ 365,14), in Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19) there are two general references to Kierkegaard’s writings without specific indication of titles: a note on p. 411 reads, “Without being able to cite any particular location, the author simply recalls in general the many associated dialectical definitions that are found in Mag. Kierkegaard’s writings”; and a note on p. 441 reads, “Concerning the specific dialectic of the God-relationship, see Kierkegaard’s writings.” Scharling] Carl Emil Scharling (1803–1877), Danish theologian; cand. theol. in 1825; first studied French philosophy in Paris and then theology in Tübingen, where he came under the influence of F. C. Baur’s radical New Testament research, which he nevertheless criticized in his theological dissertation, De Paulo apostolo ejusque adversariis [On the Apostle Paul and His Opponents] (Copenhagen 1836; ASKB 105). Before that, Scharling had published Hvad er Hensigten, Betydningen og Resultaterne af Theologernes videnskabelige Undersøgelser om det Ny Testamentes Skrifter? [What is the Purpose, the Significance, and the Result of the Scientific Examination by Theologians of the New Testament Writings?] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 761). From 1834, Scharling was professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen, and its rector in 1842– 1843. He engaged primarily in New Testament exegesis and isagogics, and championed free historical-critical biblical research. From 1837, together with his colleague C. T. Engelstoft (see the following explanatory note), Scharling edited Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], and from 1850, Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift [New Theological Journal]. In his review “Den christelige Dogmatik. Fremstillet af Dr. H. Martensen” [Christian Dogmatics Presented by Dr. H. Martensen] in Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift, vol. 1 (1850), pp. 348–375, Scharling had recently written positively of H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15) while at the same time

•

1850

speaking critically of Rasmus Nielsen’s investigative review article Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik” (→ 353,10) and P. M. Stilling’s polemical treatise Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og― Viden (→ 339,33). Here Scharling also criticized Nielsen’s “sarcastic” attack on the theologians in Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 349,19) (p. 361n). Engelstoft] Christian Thorning Engelstoft (1805– 1889), Danish theologian and bishop; cand. theol. in 1827; lic. theol. in 1832. Engelstoft became a lecturer at the University of Copenhagen in 1833, was appointed extraordinary professor of theology in 1834, and ordinary professor in 1845 at that same university. He worked primarily in church history, especially the history of the Danish Reformation, which was the topic of his 1836 theological dissertation. Engelstoft was also knowledgeable in canon law, which beginning in 1850 he taught at the pastoral seminary, and in liturgical history, which, among other things, came to expression in his Liturgiens eller Alterbogens og Kirkeritualets Historie i Danmark [History of the Liturgy or the Book of Service and Ritual of the Church in Denmark], published in 1840, which includes a critical review of J. P. Mynster’s Udkast til en Alterbog og et Kirke-Ritual for Danmark (→ 353,9). From 1837, together with his colleague C. E. Scharling (see the previous explanatory note), Engelstoft edited Theologisk Tidsskrift [Theological Journal], and from 1850, Nyt Theologisk Tidsskrift [New Theological Journal]. In 1852, he became the bishop of the diocese of Funen. Martensen] H. L. Martensen (→ 338,14). personal approach to me,] See the draft of a never-published article titled “Concerning My Relationship to Hr. Prof. R. Nielsen” (→ 348,24). ― approach to me,: Variant: first written “approach to me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. tax collectors and sinners … who kept company with Xt] Refers to Lk 15:1; see also the accounts in Lk 5:27–32; Mt 9:9–13; and Mt 11:19 (→ 366,23).

9

10 17

7

366

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 41–43 366

10

15 23

30

Xt, a Friend We Have in Heaven] A familiar idea in the edifying writings and hymns of pietism. See, e.g., H. A. Brorson’s revised hymn “Saa kom, o Jesu, stærke Helt” [So Come, O Jesus, Powerful Hero], stanza 11: “O, who will go to my Jesus, and say to my soul’s friend, that he really should come down soon; I lie sick with love, what melts with love for you is sweet, my friend; I long and yearn, day and night, for you alone, my sweet treasure” (Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson (→ 362,39), p. 322). See also Brorson’s version of “Min Død er mig til Gode” [My Death, I Welcome] (1742, revised from a 1609 German hymn), where the first stanza reads: “My death, I welcome, for Jesus is my friend; so I die in good spirits, from the wretchedness of the world” (Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson (→ 362,39), no. 265, pp. 780ff.). a holy spirit, who … witnesses with his spirit] Alludes to Rom 8:16. one may call Xt the friend of sinners] See Mt 11:19. See also the hymn “Jesus han er Synd’res Ven” [Jesus, He Is the Friend of Sinners] (1735), H. A. Brorson’s Danish revision of the hymn by the German Lutheran priest, professor, and pietistic hymn writer J. J. Rambach, “Jeus nimmt die Sünder an” [Jesus Accepts the Sinner], in which each of the twenty-three stanzas begins and ends with the phrase, “Jesus, he is the friend of sinners” (Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Hans Adolph Brorson (→ 362,39), no. 117, pp. 358– 364). See also the expression “O Jesus, friend of poor sinners” in Brorson’s hymn “Saa kom, o Jesu, stærke Helt” (→ 362,39). a friend “on whose breast I can lean my tired head” (… one of Mynster’s sermons)] A paraphrase of J. P. Mynster’s (→ 353,9) sermon on Jn 3:1–15 for Trinity Sunday, no. 38, “Christus vil, at vi ganske skulle [skal] høre ham til” [Christ Desires That We Belong to Him Entirely] in 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]), vol. 2, pp. 51–64; p. 63: “When I was no longer alone, but had found the one who by no means refuses anyone who comes to him, I had won a

•

1850

727

friend of whom I did not need to fear he might in turn forsake me, that he might seem changed; as the woman who was a sinner of old, I could place myself at his feet and cry out all my distress; as the apostle of old, I could lean my head on his breast, and no matter what gnawed at me, no matter what disheartened and humiliated me, I could still say: Lord, you know all things, you know that I love you!” Jehovah is revealed to Solomon … wisdom such as no other has ever had] A retelling of 1 Kings 3:5–15. ― Jehovah: Because the Jews were forbidden to say God’s name, the four consonants―Y(or J)HWH―in the Hebrew text were supplemented with the vocalization marks “o” and “a” from Adonai, the Hebrew word for “the Lord,” in order to remind the reader to read Adonai instead of Yahweh. This is the source of the erroneous reading “Jehovah,” which was still common in Kierkegaard’s day.

36

366

Tersteegen … the scribes … did not … look for him] Refers to a passage in the second part of discourse no. 2, “Am Erscheinungsfeste 1755” [On the Feast of the Epiphany 1755] (on Mt 2:1–12, concerning the wise men from the East), in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 352,29), p. 131, where G. Tersteegen (→ 350m,12) says: “The wise men came to Jerusalem, where they were heard by Herod, the crafty man who sent them on to Bethlehem but himself remained in Jerusalem. The scribes knew well enough about it to say where he must be born, as it was written in Micah: And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who is to shepherd my people Israel [Mt 4–6]. That he must be born there―this, the chief priests and scribes could report precisely, but they themselves remained at home and did not travel with the wise men. What a tremendous temptation could the wise men have been spared had they not been able to think: surely it must be only our imagination, here we are in the royal city, and the people know so little about it; Herod himself needed to make enquiries at first;

7

367

728

13

17 17 19 21 24

367m

3

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 43–44

the scribes, who do know about it, nonetheless remain at home and only point the way; they probably take us to be deceived; our arduous and tedious journey will probably be in vain, and thus it is unnecessary for us to continue any further. To just such a temptation could they have succumbed, if the good Lord had not protected them.” ― [das] Erscheinungsfeste: the Feast of Epiphany, celebrated on January 6, originally in memory of Christ’s baptism, where the voice of the father from heaven revealed the glory of the son, and later in memory of Christ’s revelation to the Gentiles, namely, the three wise men or three kings from the East, hence the alternative name of Feast of the Three Kings. ― in Jerusalem: Variant: first written “in Jerusalem.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. This power that moved heaven and earth] Presumably refers to Hag 2:6, which in turn is referenced in Heb 12:26. Alas,] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. the three kings had only a rumor to go on … great long distance] See Mt 2:2. The scribes knew the message a different way entirely] → 367,7. Where, then] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Tersteegen … “Surely we have been fooled, the kings must have thought”] → 367,7. an earlier passage in the same sermon … what I particularly wanted to emphasize] Refers to a passage in the discourse “Am Erscheinungsfeste 1755” (→ 367,7) in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften, p. 123, where Tersteegen writes: “If the wise men from the East had only seen the star and made a great commotion about it―‘To us has such a wonder appeared, we have seen such a vision’―and they had remained sitting in their land: would this not have been foolishness? The star had indeed appeared to them in order to bring them out of their land, so that they should find Christ. Equally foolish are we if truly we pride ourselves on the scripture, the means of grace, the emotions, the convictions―‘Here and there I have been awakened and convinced’―and

•

1850

yet we do not follow him, we remain sitting there just making a commotion, but do not travel along the way; if we boast―‘We have the clear Word of God, we have the pure, sound doctrine, we have such and such a preacher, seeing that such and such has spoken so earnestly and emphatically’―and we do not also really let ourselves be brought along by means of such stars, it means we must turn to our God in honest repentance and conversion, so that we start along the way.” What in our day is called humanity] see, e.g., the remark in H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 338,15), p. 164: “Modern world civilization regards having developed the idea of humanity as its most praiseworthy accomplishment, and regards its leaders and teachers, its thinkers and poets as the heroes of humanity. ‘Humanity’ has become a common watchword in recent times, an expression of freedom and multifaceted development in contrast to bondage and barbarism. Indeed, among many in our time every positive determination has perished, and it is fittingly said that the newer world has acquired for itself, in place of the old Catholic saints, a new saint, namely, Humanus, whom it seeks out in all epochs, among all peoples, and in all religions and churches. But all too often in connection with this Humanus we think sooner of paganism than of the human being as created by God.” Martensen develops this further on pp. 164–167. what I have developed in Armed Neutrality … much greater] “Armed Neutrality” was written by Kierkegaard in 1848 and was originally intended to be a periodical, the program of which, according to NB6:61, was “to give the times a definite and non-reduplicated impression of what I say I am, what I want, etc.” (KJN 5, 42; SKS 21, 44). In 1849, when Kierkegaard instead wanted to use it as an appendix to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 348,22), the title was changed to “Armed Neutrality, or My Position as a Christian Author in Christendom. Appendix to The Point of View for My Work as an Author” (see Pap. X 5 B 106–109, pp. 287–302). Herein Kierkegaard writes: “But the ideality in relation to being Christian is constant inward appropri-

36

367

6

368

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 44–51 ation. The more ideally being a Christian is understood, the more inward it becomes, and the more difficult. Being a Christian thus undergoes a change that I will illustrate by means of a worldly analogy. In Greece, first there were wise men σοϕοι [Greek, “wise ones”]. Then Pythagoras came along and with him came the category of reflection with respect to being a wise man, reduplication, so he did not even dare call himself a wise man, but he called himself a ϕιλοσοϕος [Greek, “lover of wisdom”]. Was this a step backward or a step forward―or wasn’t it because Pythagoras had understood more ideally what it would really mean to be a wise man––what would be required of one in order to call oneself a wise man―that there was wisdom in his not even daring to call himself a wise man” (AN, 137; Pap. X 5 B 107, p. 297). ― the change happened whereby instead of σοϕοι one got ϕιλοσοϕοι: In the preface to Diogenes Laertius’s history of philosophy it is recounted that the Greek mathematician and philosopher Pythagoras (ca. 570–497 b.c.) was the first to “give philosophy its name and to call himself a philosopher, because no human being, only God, is wise. In ancient times it was called wisdom, and the person who professed it was called wise and was thus required to be a person whose soul makes the effort to investigate things painstakingly. But a philosopher is the person who loves wisdom”; Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: Navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn [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), vol. 1, p. 5. 368

12

Tersteegen … from the love feast … Gethsemane] Refers to no. 15 in “Thoughts” in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 352,29), p. 607, where Tersteegen (→ 350m,12) writes: “When Jesus got up from the love feast or last supper with the disciples, he then went with them to the Garden of Gethsemane. In the same way, it is his wont to journey with us still.” This alludes to Jesus’ last Passover meal with his disciples and his subsequent visit to the Garden of Gethsemane; see Mt 26:17–46.

•

1850

729

a scandalous sin] Danish, en himmelraabende Synd (“a sin that cries out to heaven”); see the expression “peccata clamantia” (Latin, “sins that cry out”) used of particularly glaring sins; see e.g., Gen 4:10, 18:20, and Jas 5:4; see also § 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), p. 211. the man who … covered up the burning candle] A source for this reference has not been identified.

12

In the gospel about the hemorrhaging woman … two miracles] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on Mt 9:18–26, the gospel text for the twenty-fourth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 602–613; p. 613, col. 1, where Luther writes: “All things are possible for the believer. So powerful is faith. A thing may be as great as it can be, yet if you only believe it will happen and await Christ, then it will indeed happen, and neither death nor the devil will be able to prevent it. We see this in both miracles.” Luther’s reference to “both miracles” refers, first, to Jesus’ healing of the hemorrhaging woman (Mt 9:20–22), and second, to his awakening of the daughter of the leader of the synagogue (Mt 9:23–25). in other places Luther … to expect miracles is to tempt God] Presumably refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 4:1–11 (concerning Jesus’ temptations in the desert), the gospel for the first Sunday in Lent, in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 201–207; p. 205, where he writes: “For where the devil feels a heart trusts God in times of want and distress, he soon ceases his temptation concerning worldly necessities and thinks: Wait now, if you wish to be very spiritual and believing, I will assist you!―And then he approaches and attacks on the other side, so that we might believe where God has not commanded us to believe, nor wills that we should believe. For example, if God gave you bread in your homes, as He of course does through the entire year, and you would not

15

369

15

20

370

730

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 51–52

use it, but instead would cause yourselves shortage and distress and say: ‘Why, we are supposed to trust in God; I will not eat the bread, but will patiently wait until God sends me bread from heaven.’―See, that would be tempting God, for he does not require that you believe, so long as you have at hand all that you need.” 370

23 24

25

The Hemorrhaging Woman] See Mt 9:20–22. The words: if only I touch the hem … I will be made well] Refers to Mt 9:21; see the previous explanatory note. cannot be used immediately … did not even insist upon speaking with Xt] See En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, p. 606, where Luther writes concerning the faith of the hemorrhaging woman: “In the first place, her faith is so strong that she takes the following as settled: ‘If I could just touch his garment, I will be helped. I do not need,’ she thinks, ‘to come to him and present my complaint with many words, or have others pray for me. It is enough if I can only reach him and touch him.’ So little did she doubt his power and willingness to help, that she did not deem it necessary to speak with him, but believed she would be helped if she could merely touch him with the tip of her finger! … Undeniably, it must be the result of a great and extraordinary illumination of the spirit and an excellent knowledge of the faith that this poor, simple woman credits to this man such power to help that he does not need words to be informed of her distress, but is able to see what is hidden, as it were. … Indeed, this means that she believes this man must possess divine power and authority, so that he knows and understands the secret thoughts and desires of the heart, even though not a word is spoken to him …. Here, then, you see what faith which clings to the person of Christ is and does, namely, a heart that regards him as the Lord and Savior, as the Son of God, through whom God has revealed himself and promised to grant our prayers and help us. This is the correct, spiritual, inward worship of God; here the heart associates with Christ and calls upon him, even though it does not speak a single word.”

•

1850

according to the Law of Moses the hemorrhaging woman was unclean … touch his garment] See En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 606ff., where Luther writes: “The other masterpiece of her faith is that she is able to overcome the feeling of her own unworthiness and roll from her heart the great stone that had weighed heavily upon her, and which still makes her so afraid that she dares not step forward to meet Christ publicly as other people do. It is the judgment of the Law against her that she is an unclean woman and dare not show herself in human society. For, as it says in Lev 15 [vv. 25–27], a woman shall be unclean as long as she has the issue of blood, and everything she has on or about her shall likewise be unclean, and whoever touches her or that which she has touched shall also be unclean, etc. … Her distress, indeed, her despair compels her … so she thinks: ‘this Savior must be laid hold of, and the Law, my own heart, the whole world, indeed, even he himself may say what they will. Here is the man who can help; … Now, let it happen to me as he wills it―however, it is better for me that I should be covered by shame, than the irreparable damage I would receive should I neglect to seek him while he is to be found.’ Therefore, she fixed herself wholeheartedly to the idea that if she could only get close to this man, then her distress would be removed such that she would even be healed.” holds her back.] Variant: first written “holds her back,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. He will not … secretive communication … somewhat judgmental] See En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 608ff., where Luther writes: “This faith is so pleasing to Christ that he does not wish it to remain hidden within her, but reveals the powerful work that has happened thereby. Each and every one must learn what is in her heart, so that her faith may be praised before the entire world and strengthened within her. For this reason, he begins to look around, asking and wanting to know who has touched him, since he felt that power has gone out from him. … Therefore, when she is in fear and danger of having the greatest disgrace befall her before the en-

29

6

10

371

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 52–57

21

371m

371

1

23

23 23

372

27 29

39

tire world, probably even condemned according to the Law, indeed, compelled to make a public confession, Christ begins to confirm her faith. She has acted properly and well, he declares, in pushing through despite Moses and the Law―that is, despite its judgment of unworthiness―yes, he even then publicly breaks with the judgment of the Law; he wants her to be unaccused and uncondemned, and he esteems her faith so highly that he ascribes to it alone the power and efficacy that helped her, just as though he himself had not done the slightest in the matter.” ― He therefore draws her forward: See Mt 9:22. judgment.] Variant: first written “judgment, that he”. Therefore, neither does she … Xt at the banquet] Variant: marginal note begun in the main text column. ― the woman who was a sinner: Refers to Lk 7:36–50; See Kierkegaard’s 1849 discourse titled “The Woman Who Was a Sinner” in Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (WA, 135–144; SKS 11, 271–280). “The Missing Coin”] Refers to Jesus’ parable of the missing coin in Lk 15:8–10; the coins referred to in the parable are drachmas, which had only small value in the New Testament era. “The Lost Sheep”] Refers to Jesus’ parable of the lost sheep in Lk 15:3–7. “The Prodigal Son”] Refers to Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son in Lk 15:11–32. Such is the joy … one sinner who repents] Paraphrases Lk 15:7. shillings] There were sixteen shillings in a mark, and six marks in a rix-dollar, i.e., a rigsbank dollar (rigsbankdaler); thus, there were 96 shillings in a rix-dollar. A statutory regulation of July 31, 1818, divided the rix-dollar (abbreviated “rd”) into marks and shillings. A pair of shoes cost three rix-dollars, and a pound of rye bread cost between two and four shillings. A judge earned ca. 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a middle-level civil servant earned ca. 400–500 rix-dollars a year. A housemaid earned at most thirty rix-dollars a year, plus meals and lodging. ten coins] Refers to Lk 15:8.

•

1850

731

The Prodigal Son] (→ 371,23). The Only Begotten Son] i.e., God’s only begotten son, Jesus Christ; see e.g., Jn 3:16–18. In this gospel … an older brother … will do nothing to save the prodigal] Refers to Lk 15:25– 32. loses his life in order to save the prodigal] Allusion to Jn 10:11. in agreement with the father on this from the beginning] Presumably, an allusion to Jn 10:15, 17–18; see also Jn 3:16–18.

13

Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9). read in the N. T. that proclaiming Xnty … persecuted, killed] See, e.g., Mt 10:17–20, 24:9; Lk 21:12–19; Mk 13:9–13; Jn 16:1–4; Acts 4:18–22, 5:17–32, 6:8–7:60, 8:1–4, 22:19–21, 26:9–11. if there is no eternal life, he is the most wretched of all] Alludes to 1 Cor 15:19. Excellency] According to the system of rank and precedence (→ 353,15), the title “excellency” was reserved for persons in the first rank class, e.g., the country’s bishops, excepting Bishop of Zealand J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9), primate of the Danish Church, who, according to the system of rank and preference was ranked as number 13 in the first class and was therefore the only bishop with the title “eminence.”

22

7

374

Yes, had Cato Uticensis refrained from committing suicide] Alludes to the fact that Marcus Porcius Cato, called Cato Uticensis or Cato the Younger (95–46 b.c.), champion of the Roman Republic, follower of Stoic philosophy, committed suicide in Utica in North Africa shortly before his enemy Caesar would attack the city. See Plutarch’s biography “Cato Minor” [Cato the Younger], chap. 70.5–71 in Vitae Parallae [Parallel Lives], see Plutarchi vitae parallelae [Plutarch’s Parallel Lives], 9 vols., stereotype ed., (Leipzig, 1829; ASKB 1181–1189), vol. 7, p. 212.

11

374

voluntary poverty … it does not depend on all such things―it is faith] See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on Mt 24:15–28 (concerning the abomination of desolation and the coming of the Son of Man) for the twenty-fifth th Sunday after Trinity

20

374

373

13 14

18 19

373

23

30

732

28

30

375

1 13 21

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 57

Sunday in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 613–621; p. 616, where he writes: “But this sin, which is called idolatry and really is nothing other than unbelief and denial of God, condemns the human entirely. For where one believes correctly and teaches correctly, where one knows that our works are nothing, and that we only please God and serve him rightly through faith:– there is a truly godly person, there is light and truth …. Where, on the other hand, faith and correct teaching are not present, everything is false; for there it is impossible for the human being to do anything but establish for himself a false worship and adore his own self-selected imagination and work, with which he then really denies God and his Word. And it is for that reason that God turns aside entirely and withdraws all his grace. Such an abomination is in the majority of human lives regarded as the greatest and purest holiness. Outwardly they are adorned with the semblance of magnificent deeds; but inwardly they are full of impurity. This we find everywhere among them, even where it is best done … in the service of God. However, there are also some who are not like the former in their deeds and character, but indeed are holy before God.” meritoriousness] 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 in The Augsburg Confession (1530). the man who had shown … the former] Alludes to the fact that Luther was originally an Augustinian monk (1505–1524). the corrective] i.e., partly as the remedial alternative; partly as the test of the truth. not even] Variant: changed from “Frightful misuse!” husbands, fathers, and reigning champions of the shooting club] Paraphrase of lines in Concluding Unscientific Postscript, by Johannes Climacus (CUP, 244 and 386; SKS 7, 222 and 352). ― champions of the shooting club: This translates the Danish word Fuglekonge (literally, “bird king”), which was the title given annually to the victor of a shooting contest in which the goal was to shoot a wooden bird from its mount on a pole. Bird shooting, dating from the Middles Ages,

•

1850

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, and the victor was crowned “reigning bird king” until the following year’s contest. members of the Friendship [Club]] Presumably refers to members of 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 enjoy themselves with various types of games, especially billiards. See Love for Det Venskabelige Selskab, antagne i Generalforsamlingen den 14 April 1819 [Articles of Association for The Friendship Society, adopted by the General Assembly April 14, 1819] (Copenhagen, 1819). monastic cell,] Variant: first written “monastic cell.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. And] Variant: first written “But what wonder, indeed, that it is difficult”. 37 years old] Kierkegaard became thirty-seven years old on May 5, 1850. many years a theol. graduate] Kierkegaard had taken 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. at age 16] Kierkegaard was confirmed in Trinity Church on April 20, 1828, by J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9), who at the time was the first resident curate at the Church of Our Lady] in Copenhagen (the newly built church was first inaugurated on Whitsunday, 1829). he could barely … bit of money for … schoolteachers] See the following explanatory note. Thus … L. complains … the gospel … brought forth into the light of day] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 25:31–46 (concerning judgment day) for the twenty-sixth Sunday after Trinity Sunday in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 622–631; pp. 635ff., where he writes: “It seems, however, as though he [Christ] meant by this to show that many Christians, after having heard the preaching of the Gospel of forgiveness of sins

22

28

29 30 30

34

17 24

376m

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 57–59

37

and grace through Christ, became even worse than the heathens, for he also says in Mt 19:30 that many who are first shall be the last, and that those who are the last shall be first. In the same way, it happens here that those who should be true Christians because they have heard the Gospel have become far worse and merciless than before. Indeed, we already see these words fulfilled even now all too well, unfortunately! Formerly, when we would do good works under the false worship, every man was willing and ready, and a prince or a city at that time could found greater institutions and give more alms than the emperor and all kings are now able to give. But now the entire world knows nothing other than to rob and steal, by lies, fraud, usury, etc.… Everyone wants to take everything for himself; nobody gives the least for his neighbor. This goes on every day and is constantly increasing among all classes … in all cities and villages, indeed, in nearly all houses. Tell me, which city is now so strong or so pious that it could raise enough for a schoolmaster or parish priest to live on? Yes, if we did not already have generous alms and bursaries from our ancestors, the Gospel would have long ago disappeared, and a poor priest would get neither food nor drink.… Here and everywhere, we calculate what those who enjoy the Gospel give or contribute to its promotion, and conclude only that we must advise that both church and school lie so completely desolate that posterity could not know what we had taught or believed! … We should stand ashamed before our ancestors, before departed lords and kings, princes and others, who have given so abundantly and generously to churches, schools, hospitals, etc., without them or their descendants becoming poorer thereby! What would they have done had they had the evangelical light that is granted to us!” See also p. 629. ― among other places: Variant: added. See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on Mt 6:24–34 (on the birds of the air and the lilies of the field) for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday in En christelig Postille, vol. 1, pp. 514–524; pp. 522ff. his marriage] The year after Luther had definitively left the Augustinian monastery in 1524, he married the former nun Katharina von Bora, who had left the cloister in Nimbschen with eight oth-

•

1850

733

er nuns and fled to Wittenberg, where they were granted refuge with Luther’s approval. in Tishreden ... Luther says: also ist es jetzt ... leider dahin kommen ... und wohl thut etc.”] Quotation from part of “Von einem fürsten, der in seinem letzten ende geld auf wucher ausliehe” [On a prince, who in his last days lent money at usury], in chap. 38, “Vom weltlichen Regiment und Oberkeit, Kaiser, Königen, Fürsten und Herren etc.” [On the Secular Government and Authority: Emperor, Kings, Princes and Lords, etc.] in D. Martin Luthers Geist- und Sinnreiche auserlesene Tisch-Reden und andere erbauliche Gespräche [Selections from D. Martin Luther’s Brilliant and Profound Table Talk and Other Edifying Conversations], ed. B. Lindner, 2 vols. (Salfeld, 1745; ASKB 225–226), vol. 2, pp. 229ff.; p. 229.

44

Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9). σϰανδαλον] Greek, “snare,” “stumbling block,” “offense.” The word occurs many times in the New Testament. himself a monk] → 374,30. with a nun] → 376m,37. Xndom] → 354,7. All is vanity, says the preacher] Alludes to Eccl 1:2.

37

375

9

376

Qvantum] Variant: above this, the words “On Myself” have been deleted. affected] Of affectation, dissimulation, or feigned character, which seeks to gain an immediate advantage. In JJ:497, from 1846, Kierkegaard defines affection as “acquiring something by lying” (KJN 2, 281). takes the entire hand … give it the little finger] Plays on the Danish saying, “Byder man en finger frem, så vil han have den hele hand” [If you offer him a finger, he will take the entire hand]. Recorded in E. Mau, Dansk OrdsprogsSkat [Treasury of Danish Proverbs], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 1, p. 220. See also the saying, “Giver du Fanden en finger / en lillefinger, tager han hele hånden” (If you give the devil a finger / a little finger, he will take the whole hand), recorded as no. 617 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld, [Danish Sayings

30

17 18 20 28

376

37

2

377

734

5

377

12

19

378

11

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 59–65

and Adages] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 23. principiis obsta] The expression is taken from the Roman poet Ovid’s Remedia amoris [The Remedies of Love], v. 91. The standard English translation is “Resist beginnings”; see Ovid, The Art of Love and Other Poems, trans. J. H. Mozley, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), p. 185. In his sermon on the gospel for the 26th Sunday … compassion toward a Xn.”] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 25:31–46 for the twenty-sixth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (→ 376m,24) in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, p. 624, where he writes: “Why does the Lord praise these works [works of compassion] so highly, these works which also shine among Turks and heathens? He certainly does not mean to say by this that those who are not Christians deserve eternal life by means of such works. Not at all. For he himself shows that he is speaking about works of believing Christians when he says: I was hungry and you gave me food, etc. [Mt 25:35–36]. Additionally: just as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me [Mt 25:40]. It is indeed beyond all doubt that the one who performs such works of compassion toward Christians must himself be a believing Christian, for whoever does not believe in Christ will surely not love any Christian, much less Christ himself, so much that he, for his sake, would show compassion toward his poor, distressed brothers.” In an even more bitter relationship … Jew and Samaritan … compassion toward the Jew] Refers to Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan in Lk 10:30–35. your Governance] 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], § 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 suit-

•

1850

able,” 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] (Copenhagen, 1791; ASKB 183 is an edition from 1824), pp. 23ff. lovingly disposing over these millions of possibilities] Alludes to Mt 19:26. to thank you unceasingly for the indescribable good … dared to have expected] → 342,11.

13 23

Discourse] Variant: first written “Prayer”. I thought] Variant: first written “I thanked”. you are love] See 1 Jn 4:8, 16.

35 3

379

in seeing whether God will help him, as they say] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 27:43.

14

379

The Scandal] → 376,9.

23

379

Martensen Information on Dogmatics] H. L. Martensen’s (→ 338,14) Dogmatiske Oplysninger (→ 339,33). He himself indicates … significance of the pseudonyms … awakening personal life] Refers to Dogmatiske Oplysninger, p. 12 (→ 364,33). he deprecatingly says: all these phrases about … the risk of faith, etc.] Refers to Dogmatiske Oplysninger, pp. 10ff. (→ 364,33), where Martensen writes concerning Rasmus Nielsen’s (→ 348,24) Mag. S. Kierkegaards “Johannes Climacus” og Dr. H. Martensens “Christelige Dogmatik,” En undersøgende Anmeldelse (→ 353,10): “But unfortunately he has only summarized and for the most part reprinted various passages from the writings of the pseudonyms, such that throughout the entire work he only speaks in the words of the pseudonyms, in their well-known parables and phrases about happy and unhappy lovers, about marital love, about the risk of faith, about the passion of faith as infinite interest, these phrases whose inner substance of truth I had just been awaiting, he now wanted to open for me.”

32

379

378

38

33

2

380

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 65 –71

380

7

cannot remember from one moment to the next] Kierkegaard uses the Danish saying, “kan ikke huske fra Næsen til Munden” [cannot remember from the nose to the mouth], recorded in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 377,2), vol. 2, p. 26.

11

blessed] Variant: added. you are love] See 1 Jn 4:8, 16. wisdom and merits] Variant: changed from “my wisdom and my merits”. Oh, no] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

12 29 36

381

14

Tersteegen says it … keinen Raum in der Herberge!”] Quotation from the second part of Gerhard Tersteegen’s (→ 350m,12) discourse “Zu Weinacht 1754” [For Christmas, 1754] (on Is 9:6), no. 1 in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 352,29), p. 108.

381

24

as Helveg observes … alienate itself from its own development] Paraphrase of a passage in “Indledning til Esra Bog” [Introduction to the Book of Ezra] in “Esra Bog oversat fra Grundtexten” [The Book of Ezra Translated from the Original Text] by Fr. Helweg in Bibelen eller den hellige Skrift, paany oversat af Grundtexten og ledsaget med Indledninger og oplysende Anmærkninger. Udgivet i Forbindelse med Pastor Helweg, Prof. Hermannsen og Candidat Levinsen [The Bible or the Holy Scripture, Newly Translated from the Original Text and Accompanied with Introductions and Informative Notes. Edited Jointly by Pastor Helweg, Prof. Hermannsen, and Candidate Levinsen], 2 parts in 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 8–10); pt. 1, vol. 1, p. li: “The older the nations became, the more they distanced themselves from the faith of their fathers. Some hundreds of years later, Cyrus was already mocking the children of the pagans for what their fathers had believed. But at the same time we see in Israel the opposite situation: the same people whose eyes had previously wandered to the gods of the pagans and, quite contrary to the ways of all the pagans (Jer 2:10–11), preferred to follow foreign gods instead of their own, eventually embraced the faith of their fathers with ever greater

•

1850

735

steadfastness the older they became. That which they rejected in the age of their youth, became in old age their consolation. But thereby arose the new and not inconsiderable danger for the people that they could easily overlook how the Law by no means heralded itself as the fulfilled revelation; on the contrary, the revelation to Israel was only designed for another and more complete proclamation of the divine will, which would not take place until the future. Additionally, it happened that about 60–70 years after the return of the people from Babylon the prophetic voice ceased, and in all writings preserved from this long period, besides those recorded in the canon, there are only a few obscure traces of any expectation of the promised son of David.” ― Helveg: Hans Friedrich Helweg or Helveg (1816–1901), Danish theologian and priest; took the theology examination in 1839 in Gottorp (in the province of Schleswig), from 1842, he was curate in Starup-Nebel in eastern Jutland; in 1848–1849, army chaplain; from 1846, deacon and then, from 1856, the main priest in Haderslev (in the province of Schleswig); strongly influenced by N.F.S. Grundtvig; in Bibelen eller den hellige Skrift [The Bible or the Holy Scripture], edited by Kalkar, he translated Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Psalms, the twelve minor prophets, the letters of Paul, and The Revelation to John. ― Kalkar’s: Christian Andreas Hermann Kalkar (1803–1886), Danish theologian and priest; converted from Judaism to Christianity in 1823 (was baptized by J. P. Mynster); took the theology examination in Copenhagen in 1826; from 1827, adjunct and then, from 1834, senior teacher of Latin, Hebrew, and religion in Odense; from 1843, vicar in Gladsaxe near Copenhagen; main editor of Bibelen eller den hellige Skrift, which came out in installments from 1844 until 1847. Kalkar published a wide range of theological writings, especially in biblical and ecclesiastical history, including Forelæsninger over den bibelske Historie [Lectures on Biblical History], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1837–1839; ASKB 188). humility] Variant: following this an exclamation point has been added and then deleted.

23

382

736 28 33

34

383

9 10

11

11 12

14 17 19

383

27 31

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 71–74

make sacrifices … consequently to suffer … put to death] → 373,23. Apostolicity is … by divine authority] See “On the Difference between a Genius and an Apostle,” in Two Minor Ethical-Religious Essays by H. H. (1849), (WA, 91–108; SKS 11, 95–111). witnesses to the truth … suffered unto death] Alludes to the Christians who in the first centuries of Christianity witnessed to the truth of Christianity, for which reason some were persecuted, tortured, and suffered, while others were slain as martyrs. the Sermon on the Mount] Designation for Mt 5–7. for us (] Variant: first written “for us.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. “he turned to the disciples,”] See Mt 5:2 and the previous explanatory note. See also Jesus’ “Sermon on the Plain” in Lk 6:20–49. he had 70 disciples, after all] See Lk 10.1. absolute the requirement is … cases where someone … wants to be a disciple] Presumably refers to Mt 8:21–22. the apostle has divine authority] → 382,33. “Blessed are the eyes that see what you see,”] See the following explanatory note. reads … the disciples in particular … Blessed are the eyes] Refers to Lk 10:23. a stranger in the world] Presumably plays on 1 Pet 2:11. Hear me, o Pope, etc.] Refers to the Danish verse, “Hør mig, du Pavst, jeg være vil / din Pestilents, mens du er til! / Naar jeg er død, skal du forgaa: / det siger Luther, va’r derpaa!” [Hear me, oh Pope, I shall be / your pestilence while you live! / When I die, you shall perish: / So says Luther, pay attention!]. Recorded in Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 377,2); vol. 2, p. 118. The verse is often found printed in various Danish editions of Luther’s Small Catechism, e.g. in Dr. M. Luthers lille Catechismus (Copenhagen, 1847), where it appears following the title page beneath an engraving of Luther. It is not, however, found in the edition Kierkegaard owned, namely, Dr. M. Luthers liden Catechismus (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 189).

•

1850

good company,] Variant: first written “good company.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. wer nicht liebt Weiber, Wein, Gesang etc.] Refers to the German aphorism, “Wer nicht liebt Wein, Weib und Gesang, Der bleibt ein Narr sein Lebenlang” [Who does not love wine, women, and song, remains a fool his whole life long], which in Kierkegaard’s day was attributed to Luther, although probably incorrectly. It was taken up in the refrain to “Der Wein erfreut des Menschen Herz” [Wine Gladdens the Heart of Man] (1797), a popular drinking song by the German civil servant and author Karl Müchler; see no. 30 in Visebog indeholdende udvalgte danske Selskabssange; med Tillæg af nogle svenske og tydske [Songbook Containing Selected Danish Party Songs, with the Addition of Some Swedish and German Songs], ed. by Andreas Seidelin (Copenhagen, 1814; ASKB 1483), p. 412. In view of this] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Let us now toast Martin Luther … still one more time―Hurrah, Hurrah] A party song that is sung before toasting the one being celebrated; Kierkegaard’s source is presumably act 2, scene 1 in J. C. Hostrup’s Gjenboerne. Vaudeville-Komedie [The Neighbors across the Way: Vaudeville Comedy] (Copenhagen, 1847), where a choir sings: “Let us now toast Mr. Smidt! And dishonor to the one who will not drink a toast to Mr. Smidt, / Hurrah, Hurrah, the toast was fine, … Hurrah; still one more time―Hurrah! hip hip Hurrah!” (p. 70). Gjenboerne was first performed in the Student Association in 1844, then in provincial towns in 1845–1846, and finally twenty-one times in the Royal Theatre from June 27, 1846, until May 9, 1849. See also NB15:80 in the present volume, and related explanatory notes.

34

On Good Friday … the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world] In Forordnet AlterBog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381) there are no prescribed Bible readings for Good Friday. The biblical passage Kierkegaard mentions here is Gal 6:14.

21

35

6

385

8

385

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 74–78

31

34

36

386

13

386m

2

386

20 23

386

29

387

9 19

387

27

they asked Xt to leave … afraid of him] Refers to the end of the narrative about the Gadarene demoniacs in Mt 8:28–34. his … Reverence] To each class ranking within the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 353,15) was assigned a particular title and form of address, according to which “Your Reverence” (or in the third-person form “his Reverence”) was used in referring to clerics of the lowest rank or to those who were not included in the system Mynster’s sermons] Many of J. P. Mynster’s (→ 353,9) sermons were published. See Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage i Aaret (→ 366,30); Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Delivered in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231); Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Delivered in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232); and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Held in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233). tragedy,] Variant: first written ”tragedy.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. my father’s brother when he was over here one summer] Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard’s (→ 360,3) younger, unmarried brother Peder Pedersen Kierkegaard (1763–1834); the dates of his visit to Copenhagen are not known. Christendom] → 354,7 and → 356,39. daily] Variant: added. Seeking First the Kingdom of God] → 357,23. living] → 357,21. the established order] → 356,39. Wilhelm Lund] Peter Wilhelm Lund (1801– 1880), naturalist, paleontologist, brother of Kierkegaard’s brothers-in-law J. C. Lund and H. F. Lund. Resided in Brazil from 1825 to 1829, where he undertook meteorological, biological, and zoological field studies. He was in Copenhagen during the summer of 1829, following which he took a long tour of centers of scientific inquiry in Europe, returning to spend the summer of 1831 in Copenhagen. In 1833, he journeyed again to Brazil and never returned; he died

•

1850

737

in Lagoa Santa, Brazil. Lund took his doctorate at the University of Kiel in 1829 and became a member of the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences in 1831. During his second stay in Brazil he focused his exploration particularly on the excavation of limestone caves to discover fossil remains of extinct animals; he published his groundbreaking results in the proceedings of the Academy of Sciences, mostly under the collective title Blik paa Brasiliens Dyreverden før sidste Jordomvæltning [Survey of the Fauna of Brazil before the Last Cataclysm] (1837–1846). In 1845, he donated his extensive and unique collection of fossils, including those of large extinct mammals, to the Royal Natural History Museum in Copenhagen; his collection of Brazilian plants, a herbarium of twelve thousand specimens, is found at the Botanical Garden and Museum in Copenhagen. antediluvian fossils] Fossils of animals and plants that lived before the flood. In Kierkegaard’s time, it was a typical view that a massive flood (Latin, “diluvium”) had destroyed all species of plants and animals, and that they had subsequently been recreated with certain exceptions. Evidence of these exceptions was discovered in fossils of extinct plants and animals. A more radical theory postulated that all species had been entirely newly created after the flood, and that human beings were a product of this second creation. P. W. Lund dealt with precisely these questions and unearthed antediluvian discoveries in Brazil; see the previous explanatory note. Christendom] → 354,7 and → 356,39. 1000 clergy] → 356,12. Tersteegen correctly says … he gets in contact with this physician] Refers to a passage in mediation no. 3 “Von dem Glauben und der Rechtfertigung” [On Faith and Justification] in Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 352,29), p. 475, where Tersteegen (→ 350m,12) makes use of the following parable: “To the badly wounded one says: ‘Your wound is very dangerous, if you wait long, the gangrene will certainly get you; just go and see the doctor who understands the matter, do not delay, or else it might be too late.’ Now, how do I know whether he has believed this warn-

30

33 35 1

388

738

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 78–86

ing? Well, if he really sets out for the doctor, and entrusts himself to his cure.” ― a sick person: Variant: changed from “someone”. ― believe: Variant: first written “know where there is”. 389

6

9

19

31 32

389m

6 11

13

he is supposed to be … cattle breeder] Refers to the fact that the priests in rural parishes also farmed (→ 357,21). Knight of the D.] i.e., Knight of the Dannebrog, a Danish knightly order to which some prominent citizens, including some clergymen, belonged. to wear the decoration on his clerical gown] Decorated priests wear their decorations, e.g., a knight’s cross, on the left side of the gown. champion of the shooting club] → 375,21. his mark of distinction] The “reigning” champion of the shooting club (→ 375,21) wore a ribbon to mark this distinction. perhaps] Variant: added. a lieutenant and Knight of D. has become a clergyman] See, e.g., the section called “Appointments, etc.” in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 142, June 22, 1850, p. 564: “On June 16th Theol[ogy] Cand[idate] J.C.G. Schleppegrell, First Lieutenant, Knight, was most graciously appointed as vicar of Vaagøe [or Waagø] parish in the Faroe Islands.” The same news could be read in the “Appointments” section of Berlingske Tidende, no. 142, June 21, 1850, except that there it states “R. af D.” [Knight of the Dannebrog] (→ 389,9). Concerning the parish of Waagø, C. F. Nielsen’s Færøernes Geistlige Stat eller Geistlighedens Personalhistorie i Færøernes Provstie [The Clerical Estate of the Faroe Islands, or the Personal History of the Clergy in the Parishes of the Faroe Islands], 2nd ed. (Faaborg, 1879) provides the following: Julius Carl Gerhard v[on] Schleppegrell (b. 1811), cand. theol. in 1842; after some years as a volunteer teacher in the war of 1848, commissioned as a second lieutenant and then, on August 19, 1850, first lieutenant; knight of the Dannebrog on September 9, 1850; called as vicar of Waagø on June 16, 1850, but after an indication of annulment it states, “Did not come to the Faroe Islands.” in the war as a volunteer] See the previous explanatory note. According to the “Kongelig dansk

•

1850

Hof- og Stats-Calender for 1850” [Royal Danish Court and State Calendar for 1850], Julius Carl Geert v[on] Schleppegrell was “First Lieutenant of the War Reserve Infantry” (→ 357,38). ― the war: Refers to the Schleswig-Holstein civil war between the German and Danish portions of the Danish monarchy; known as the Three Years’ War or the First Schleswig War, hostilities lasted from April 1848 until February 1851, with the pro-German population in Schleswig and Holstein receiving support from Prussia for the incorporation of the duchies in a united Germany. ― Variant: first written “in the war as a priest”. proves from the N.T. that this is how it should be] Presumably refers to Tit 1:5–6. These verses are among the texts that bishops always read out (and perhaps preached on) at the ordination of a priest. See chap. 10, art. 2 in Dannemarks og Norges Kirke-Ritual [Ecclesiastical Rites for Denmark and Norway] (Copenhagen, 1762 [1685]; abbreviated hereafter as Kirke-Ritual), pp. 367ff. The ritual was still authorized in Kierkegaard’s time. a living] → 357,21.

8

Let Xnty … to the world] Variant: added. ― the world was crucified to them and they to the world: See Gal 6:14.

14

390

it is, as they say, “so sincere of him”] “So sincere of him” translates Kierkegaard’s Danish phrase saa sandt i En (literally, “so true in someone”), but scholars have not verified this as a common expression of the period.

29

390

Paul does not say: “I cannot be perfect.” He says: “I press on.[”]] See Phil 3:12.

15

392

Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 353,9). Luther says somewhere … for this faith and these works of love] Refers to Martin Luther’s sermon on Lk 17:11–19, the gospel text for the fourteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 344,2), vol. 1, pp. 501–514, where Luther writes: “This gospel depicts the whole of a Christian life, with all its chance events and sufferings. For its principal parts are faith

20

392

390

11

21

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 86–87

25

392

28 29

and love. Faith receives the good, love communicates it. Faith makes us into God’s property, love into our neighbor’s. So when such a life has begun, God comes and improves it with testing and spiritual trials through which a person grows; the longer he does so, the more he does so, in faith and love, until through his own experience God becomes so dear to him that he no longer fears anything” (p. 513, col. 2). Earlier in the sermon Luther says that love teaches a Christian how “he is to practice good works,” using the expression “Christian works of love” (p. 506, col. 2). Luther goes on to tell his listeners: “permit yourself to be encouraged by this [Christ’s] example to practice good works, not only toward your friends and toward the pious, but also toward those who reward you with ingratitude and hatred! Then you will be walking in the proper path of Christ your Lord. But you should not regard yourself as a complete Christian before you get to this point” (p. 507, col. 2). And regarding praising and thanking God (as one of the ten lepers in the biblical passage does) he says that it “consists in the fact that we break out in a loud voice, and thus confess outwardly before the world what inwardly binds our hearts to God. This is nothing other than to incur upon oneself the enmity of the world and to send out many requests for crucifixion and death” (p. 512, col. 1). And along the way, he sums up “how much a Christian’s life surpasses the natural life: first of all, it is contemptuous of itself. Second, it craves contempt. Third, it punishes everything that will not suffer contempt, thereby incurring all the misfortunes of the world. Fourth, it is despised and persecuted because of this contempt and punishment. Fifth, it does not consider itself worthy of suffering such persecution” (pp. 512ff.). legality] Refers here to the fact that works are motivated by the demand to act in accordance with the Law, and do not arise from the command to do works of love after the model of Christ. Xndom] → 354,7 and → 356,39. in the still-authorized litany … a sudden death] Refers to the litany in Forordnet Alter-Bog for

•

1850

739

Danmark (→ 385,21), p. 229, where under the third bidding prayer, “Deliver Us, Dear Lord God!” it reads: “From all sins / From all error / From all that is evil / From an unexpected cruel and sudden death / From pestilence, hunger, and scarcity / From war and bloodshed / From rebellion and discord / From unseasonable weather / From eternal death.” See “Against Pestilence and Other Plagues” under “Prayers after the Litany,” where the prayer bids God: “Graciously avert from us our merited punishment, pestilence, scarcity, war and enmity, sudden death and all manner of dangerous disease” (p. 237). According to Kirke-Ritual (→ 390,8), pp. 47ff., the litany should be sung after the sermon at church services on Wednesdays and Fridays. In its Latin form the litany probably dates back to the fourth century. It was reworked, shortened, and translated into German by Luther in 1529, and shortly thereafter translated into Danish to be included in the service books and hymn books of the Reformation era. * *] Variant: the asterisks are changed from a hash mark (#), which apparently indicated the end of the entry. Well, I thank you ever so much] An ironic outburst of contempt. precisely that … and greater.] Variant: changed from “just the reverse.” ― one’s day of death is one’s day of birth: Alludes to the fact that the Christians in the first centuries of Christianity believed that the martyrs went directly to paradise, such that their day of death was seen and celebrated as their actual day of birth. See, e.g., Polycarps Martyrium [The Martyrdom of Polycarp] chap. 18, where the Christians in Smyrna reported that they took the bones of Bishop Polycarp and gave them “a fitting place, where we … shall come together every year to celebrate with joy and gladness the birthday that made him a martyr”; Aposteldiscipelen den Smyrnensiske Biskop Polykarps Brev til Philippenserne samt Beretningen om hans 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), p. 30. The Martyrdom of Polycarp

32

2 3

393

740

7

J O U R N A L NB 19 : 87–90

is included as one of the works of the Apostolic Fathers. one who barely even assumes immortality] See K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen (→ 369,12), § 129, p. 330: “The Christian concept of death already contains the idea of immortality as a self-conscious, eternal continuation of individual life.” Shortly after Hegel’s death there was extensive and bitter debate, among both his adherents and his opponents, concerning the extent to which his thought allowed for individual immortality. The debate was regularly summarized in reports carried in the Danish Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur [Periodical for Foreign Theological Literature], edited by H. N. Clausen and M. H. Hohlenberg, to which Kierkegaard subscribed beginning in 1833. See also “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 Poul Martin Møller], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839– 1843; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 2 (1842), pp. 158–272.

393

26

living as a spy] See, e.g., The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 348,22), where Kierkegaard writes: “In the spheres of the intellectual and the religious, and with my sights on the concept ‘to exist’ and then on the concept ‘Christendom,’ I am like a spy in a higher service, the service of the idea. I have nothing to new to proclaim, I am without authority” (PV, 87; SKS 16, 65–66).

394

2

Socrates did not have the true … conception of sin] See the chapter titled “The Socratic Definition of Sin” in the second part of The Sickness unto Death (SUD, 87–96; SKS 11, 201–208). the world is crucified to me and I to the world] Alludes to Gal 6:14 (→ 385,21). He therefore maintained irony … folly of the world] See the conclusion of the section titled “The Condemnation of Socrates” in chap. 2 of The Concept of Irony (1841) (CI, 196–197; SKS 1, 243). Xndom] → 354,7.

4 5

9

•

1850

Notes for JOURNAL NB20 Critical Account of the Text of Journal NB20 743

Explanatory Notes for Journal NB20 753

NOTES FOR JOURNAL NB20

Critical Account of the Text by Joakim Garff, Anne Mette Hansen, and Steen Tullberg Translated by K. Brian Söderquist Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn and Tonny Aagaard Olesen Translated by David D. Possen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse and K. Brian Söderquist

743

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Journal NB20 is a bound journal in quarto format. Kierkegaard placed the label “NB20.,” bearing the date “July 11th 1850,” on the outside of the front cover of the book (see illustration 6 on p. 745). The manuscript of Journal NB20 is preserved in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen. Most of the journal is written in Kierkegaard’s gothic hand. Five entries (NB20:120, 142, 158, 161, and 162) are written in a distinct latin hand, and a latin hand is also used for Latin and French words and occasionally as a form of calligraphy for headings and titles. The entry written on the inside front cover of the journal (NB20:2) was written across almost the entire width of the page (i.e., ignoring the normal two-column format). Entry NB20:120 was written parallel to the spine of the journal, and NB20:158 was written diagonally across the page (see illustration on p. 485). In the above-mentioned cases, Kierkegaard’s usage is indicated in the present volume by allowing the text to run across the entire page. In writing the final entry in the journal, NB20:176, Kierkegaard flipped the volume end over end and wrote on the very first page—which was thus upside down in relation to the rest of the journal, of which it was the very last page (see illustration on pp. 496–497). The marginal notes to entry NB20:38.a and NB20:65.a continue on to the other side of the page. Additions that continue into the margins have been made to each of the last two paragraphs of entry NB20:55 (see illustration on p. 429).

II. Dating and Chronology According to the label affixed to its front cover, Journal NB20 was begun on July 11, 1850, and must have been concluded no later than September 11, 1850, which is the beginning date of the next journal, NB21. Only one date is indicated in the journal, namely, in entry NB20:160. It begins as follows: “The 8th of September! The gospel: No one can serve two masters (my beloved gospel)! My favorite

744

J O U R N A L NB 2 0 hymn: “Commit Thy Way,” which Kofoed-Hansen chose today!” The list of sermons published in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]) from September 7, 1850, confirms that Kofoed-Hansen preached a sermon that day. A few other entries can be dated indirectly. In NB20:22, Kierkegaard expresses interest in the current debate about the censorship laws in France. A debate of this kind took place in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland] during July 4–25, 1850, and thus the entry was probably written around the middle of July.1 Entry NB20:42 was written on July 21, 1850. Here, Kierkegaard writes: “Today (in the sermon on the gospel about the false prophets), Visby correctly observed that sometimes one judges wrongly, believing a person’s fine words and manner of speech while his life shows the opposite.” On the above-mentioned date, C. H. Visby preached on the gospel text Mt 7:15–21 (“beware of false prophets …”) in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn.2 In NB20:120, Kierkegaard writes: “But if I am to go on living, there is not a moment to waste—and I have therefore now sent a manuscript to press.” The manuscript in question is Practice in Christianity, which was delivered to the printer on August 20, 1850.3 Kierkegaard also mentions the delivery of that manuscript in NB20:130, which includes two other dates, namely, the day of his father’s death (August 9) and the day of his engagement (September 8); both these dates fall within the period of composition for this volume.4 As noted, the last entry in the volume, NB20:176, is written upside down on the last page preceding the back cover (thus a verso page in relation to the rest of the journal), and is separated from

) See Fædrelandet no. 152, July 4; no. 153, July 5; no. 154, July 6; no. 157, July 10; no. 159, July 12; no. 161, July 15; no. 162, July 16; no. 163, July 17; no. 164, July 18; no. 165, July 19; no. 166, July 20; and no. 170, July 25.

1

) See the announcement in Adresseavisen, no. 168, July 20, 1850.

2

) See Erindringsbog for Bianco Luno. 1850 [Memorandum Book for Bianco Luno, 1850] (Copenhagen: Archives of Bianco Luno Printing, Aller Press).

3

) See the explanatory note that accompanies NB20:130.

4

Critical Account of the Text

6. Outside front cover of Journal NB20.

745

746

J O U R N A L NB 2 0 the rest of the entries by the recto page immediately preceding it, which was left blank. In this final entry, Kierkegaard mentions an idea for a future book titled “Conversations between My Wife and Me.” Despite the fact that this entry is separated in this way from the other entries in the journal, there is nothing to indicate that the entry was recorded outside the period of composition for the rest of the journal.

III. Contents “Imagine that the world of thieves had discovered a way of making it impossible to discover the perpetrator; what joy among the thieves!” (NB20:22). This thought experiment is a succinct summary of the growth of falsity, scheming, and dishonesty that Kierkegaard notes in the world—and in his journal, where he indignantly sketches the chaos that threatens when nonsense and the crowd and general hypocrisy become established as the highest authorities. Kierkegaard’s thought experiment is situated in the midst of a series of sociopsychological and theological reflections about the depraved adroitness with which the daily press is able to mask its desire for power, and its ability to convince the people that journalism’s aim is to reveal the truth—and that for that reason, journalism is indispensible. But exactly the opposite is true. In essence, “the daily press” is fueled by “fear of man,” which is not only a suppression of the fear of God that characterized earlier epochs, but is also an intensified collective intolerance of “superiority.” This attracts the destructive attention of the anonymous press: “Oh, of all the corrupters of the human race, the most abominable, you journalists! Oh, of all tyrants most detestable, you journalists, you who tyrannize through craven fear of man” (NB20:22; see also NB20:25, NB20:26). Kierkegaard’s judgment on Danish priests is scarcely more lenient: “I wish all these priests were at Brocken. They do nothing but demoralize peop. with their Sunday rubbish” (NB20:108). With the help of their of state-sponsored rubbish (NB20:174), priests want nothing other than to keep themselves and their congregations at a comfortable distance from true Christianity. This authentic Christianity demands conformity with the exemplar (NB20:32, 136, 172), which people avoid because every form of “imitation” will bring about a “collision” with one’s surroundings (NB20:28).

Critical Account of the Text The tension between strict Christianity, which is the mark of a true disciple, and its secularized counterpart is the theme of a host of entries. This tension is frequently developed via finely wrought tableaux, caricatured fragments, or absurd scenes (NB20:136, 137, 138, 155). Kierkegaard can also be extremely malicious in characterizing the theatricality of the sort of priest who seems less concerned with sorrowing over the crucified one than with worrying about his own reputation as a “paragon of virtue” (NB20:171). “On Sunday the priest stirs up his own imagination as well as that of the congregation—in a quiet hour; and on Monday the priest is the first to shout ‘crucify him’ about anyone who dares to act accordingly” (NB20:172). An interest in a clerical “living” (Danish, levebrød, literally “living bread”) is often said to be the corrupting motive, and with linguistic creativity, Kierkegaard anoints the priest “a worthy member of the newest religious order: the bread and butter brothers” (Danish, Levebrødrene) (NB20:74; see also NB20:142). But from a more general perspective, modern priests are simply acting in accordance with the relentless logic that regulates the history of Christendom by gradually dissipating the original passion. Under the heading “Christianity Is in Proportion to the Person Who Proclaims It,” Kierkegaard explains the history of this decline: When Xt preaches it, no hum. being can stand being Xn, they all betray him. When an apostle preaches it, we hum. beings begin to go along with it. And then it goes downhill—and when a Mr. Muddlehead preaches Xnty, all of us are Xn, millions of us. (NB20:146; see also NB20:148) Many of the entries can be read as radical, reformative attempts to reinstate early Christianity as a contemporary existential practice that must manifest itself as “reduplication” in the single individual (NB20:24). The Christian must liberate himself from his cultural and social relations as well as the values of the time. He must perform a revaluation of all values, inwardly as well as externally, and develop a new perspective on life—dying away from the world—which also means being able “to see everything as one will see it at the moment of death” (NB20:80; see also NB20:91, 92, 101), and thus it is also an ultimate action through which God is discernibly bound to the human person.

747

748

J O U R N A L NB 2 0 With his strong emphasis on “imitation” as the most pronounced sign of Christian existence, Kierkegaard is compelled to clarify the relationship between the rigorous nature of the law and the mild nature of grace. In these reflections, he sometimes expresses the view that salvation is completely dependent on the grace that is bestowed on the sinful individual, but at the same time he also underscores that neither sin nor grace must keep a person from continual Christian striving (NB20:16, 24, 93, 117, 148, 149). A Christian must live in this world, to be sure, and can no longer seek refuge in a medieval monastery (NB20:14, 19, 41, 140), but it is also incumbent on him to indicate in the world his difference from the world. To do anything else would be to take grace in vain (NB20:17, 24), as if grace gave the individual carte blanche to engage in lighthearted activities and frivolous entertainment: It does not really do to move from the crucified one to a dance hall, to let him be crucified so that I live according to this melody: Rejoice at life—and rejoice once again, quite unconcerned, because there is a person who has let himself be crucified for you. (NB20:19) In many of his entries about stringency and leniency, Kierkegaard follows Luther, whose sermons he often reads approvingly (NB20:45, 135). But he is critical of the worldly manner in which Luther’s influence has been received, and thus he adds short theological commentaries (NB20:14, 65.a, 76, 148). Nor is he under any illusions concerning the reception of his own Practice in Christianity, which was published on September 25, 1850: Now there will surely be yet another howl that I preach only the Law, that I insist too strongly on imitation, etc., etc. (even though I point to grace in the preface to my new book Practice in Xnty). And it will go: we cannot stop here, we must go further—to grace, in which there is stillness and rest. Yes, you are preaching nonsense. (NB20:150) A handful of entries concern his current or recently completed work (e.g., NB20:12, 144), while others look back at the placement of his long since published works in the production as a whole (NB20:89) and their significance for Kierkegaard’s own “development” (NB20:5), “progress” (NB20:51), and “upbringing” (NB20:61). Difficulties arise in particular with regard to publica-

Critical Account of the Text tion of On My Work as an Author, which Kierkegaard fears will disturb the publication of Practice in Christianity: “It seems to me it would come too disturbingly close to Practice in Christianity, to the impairment of both, even if in another sense I understand that it might create a greater impression” (NB20:161, see also NB20:120). Traces of his study of other authors are also apparent in the journal. Kierkegaard copies some lines from the German preacher and mystic Gerhard Tersteegen (NB20:6), whom he also cites subsequently, but only after removing a few lines so that the “beauty” of Tersteegen’s poem will emerge (NB20:32). Kierkegaard also reads and comments on the work of the poet G. A. Bürger (NB20:48) and the philosophers Hamann (NB20:62) and Montaigne (NB20:111, 151). Extra attention is given to the Austrian writer Abraham a Sancta Clara’s “incomparable story” about a “wanton woman” in a remote grotto (NB20:163), and to German priest and hymn writer Christian Scriver, who tells an “excellent story” about a monk who cannot fast out in the desert but manages to fast for “2 or 3 days” when he is observed by others (NB20:147). Existence as an “ascetic” is discussed in several journal entries, but Kierkegaard must frankly admit that a life with “bread and water” as his only food runs counter to his “nature and entire upbringing” (NB20:72; see also NB20:82). Moreover, asceticism in his case would awaken an uneasiness about becoming “overwrought” in an existential sense and perhaps lead him into the “temptation of meritoriousness” (NB20:85), but more than anything, it would be completely irreconcilable with his need for the “enjoyment and comfort” (NB20:83) that were indispensable if he was to toil as an author. The “abuse and boorishness” to which he was exposed generated a desire to be surrounded by “a certain extravagance, which cost me much” (NB20:85). In an entry titled “Christian Order of Precedence” (NB20:87), which is unmistakably related to his own economic circumstances, Kierkegaard emphasizes that the way an individual manages his money is not a neutral matter for a Christian. Another example of his candor appears as he shifts focus from lofty theological demands to himself and to the existential sphere to which his Christian striving has led him. In one of the many entries titled “About Myself” (NB20:43, 52, 53, 72, 83, 85, 118, 127, 128), we read: But then who am I? Am I some devil of a pers. who understood it from the start, and who had the personal strength to hold on to it in daily existence? Oh, far from it. I have been

749

750

J O U R N A L NB 2 0 helped. By what? By a fearful melancholia, a thorn in the flesh. (NB20:53) In several places, Kierkegaard touches on the dialectical assistance of Governance, admitting his purely human wretchedness and his lack of religious strength while openly confessing to a strong tendency to allow his own predispositions and preferences to influence his interpretation of Christianity’s requirements. In this way, Christ appears to be more an “examiner,” testing his disciples, than a “savior”—and on further reflection, this viewpoint seems “impious” to Kierkegaard (NB20:66; see also NB20:40). Such projections seem inevitable, however, inasmuch as the object of faith and the believer him- or herself are more or less unconsciously united. With a resolute psychological wave of the hand, Kierkegaard must therefore conclude: “As a hum. being is, so is his image of Christ” (NB20:165). To exemplify, he adds in the margin that Mynster’s Christ would be unimaginable “without a certain refined distance from actuality,” while Martensen would no doubt envision Christ “holding forth” on one or another academic topic (NB20:165.a). Among his contemporaries, Mynster is most frequently named in this journal. Kierkegaard focuses in particular on his declamatory emptiness, his earnest self-promotion, and his deft advancement of his own career (NB20:35, 54, 98, 109, 110, 140, 153, 156, 173). But Kierkegaard also has an eye for Mynster’s capabilities (NB20:141) and is able to call attention to “an excellent passage” in one of his sermons (NB20:64). Kierkegaard’s bitterness is less qualified in his remarks about Martensen’s private and theological motivations for preaching the way he does (NB20:8, 21, 34). Kierkegaard’s problematic relationship with Rasmus Nielsen, whom he has included in his God-relationship, has not improved with time; quite the opposite. Nielsen is said to be an egotist, pure and simple. Not only has Nielsen plagiarized Kierkegaard’s work, but he actually wishes that the genius who is the source of his inspiration were “dead” (NB20:36.b). The last two entries in the journal are not only very interesting when read separately, but also when read together. In one, Kierkegaard declares straightforwardly that “pietism”—when “properly understood”—is the only true “consequence of Xnty” (NB20:175). And in the other entry, he confesses a desire to write a book called “Conversations between My Wife and Me,” which would be a humoristic sketch of the way a newly married couple—the husband, who has a “superior intellect,” the wife, who

Critical Account of the Text is “charming in her naïveté”—converse with each other during the first six months of marriage. Even though Kierkegaard would ensure that these conversations would be “so upright and decent that our Lord himself, if you will, could listen” to them, he chooses to allow the conjugal conversations to remain a mere whim because “the time for aesthetic production” has long since passed, and thus a book of that sort might seem inappropriate (NB20:176).

751

Explanatory Notes 397

1

NB20 July 11th 1850.] Variant: label on the outside front cover of the book.

398

1

Concerning a remark in the Postscript … p. 1] See NB20:5 in the present volume. Concerning a remark … p. 250] Variant: written on the inside cover of the book. How the new pseudonym Anti-Climacus came about … p. 11] See NB20:12 in the present volume. Concerning publication of the later writings … p. 47] See NB20:34 in the present volume. Concerning … that has now begun … p. 189] See NB20:120 in the present volume. The established Church―my position … p. 242] See NB20:154 in the present volume. Concerning publication … my activity as an author … p. 250] See NB20:161 in the present volume.

1 3

4 5 6 7

399

1

2 3 3

400

2

Concerning texts for Friday sermons] i.e., biblical passages for sermons at the communion services that in Kierkegaard’s day were held on Fridays in Vor Frue Kirke [The Church of Our Lady]. Kierkegaard had preached at three communion services in the Church of Our Lady, on June 18, 1847, on August 27, 1847, and on September 1, 1848. 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 3 of Practice in Christianity (PC, 151–156; SKS 12, 151–160). See the blank sheet at the beginning of Journal NB14] See NB14:3 in KJN 6, 347. Friday Discourse] → 399,1. NB17 p. 30] See NB17:24 in the present volume. It is often said … put to death] Compare NB18:98 in the present volume, from June 1850,

where Kierkegaard refers to the same statement but adds that “in Xndom it is in fact commonly remarked that this is what would happen to him.” See also NB10:109 from March or April 1849, in KJN 5, 323. not Xnty,] Variant: first written “not Xnty.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Christendom] i.e., the “whole society of Christians, all the countries inhabited by Christians” (C. Molbech, Dansk Ordbog [Danish Dictionary], 2 vols. [Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 1032], vol. 1, p. 149, col. 1). On Danish Christendom, see → 471,23. Concerning a Remark … “Concl. Postscript”] See “A First and Last Explanation” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript, where Kierkegaard acknowledges that he is the author of the pseudonymous writings. See CUP, 625–630; SKS 7, 569–573. Publication … Activity as an Author] A reference to The Point of View for My Work as an Author, a manuscript on which Kierkegaard worked in the summer and autumn of 1848, which was published after Kierkegaard’s death by his brother, P. C. Kierkegaard, in 1859, and to “Three ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author,” consisting of no. 1, “On 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 Relation 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,’” originally written in 1847 (see Pap. IX B 63,14, pp. 375–377). In 1848, when Kierkegaard decided to add the three notes to The Point of View for My Work as an Author as an appendix, he gave them the title “Three Friendly ‘Notes’ Concerning My Work as an Author,” but he then deleted the word “friendly” (see Pap. IX

6

10

13

14

400

754

16

27

28

401

2

6

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 5–7

B 58); subsequently no. 3 was used instead as the preface to Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays (1851), while nos. 1 and 2 were posthumously published 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, 99–124; SKS 16, 79–104). In addition to this, see “The Accounting,” with its accompanying appendix (→ 400,27) and “Everything in One Word,” presumably written in 1848 (see Pap. X 5 B 144). Thus in the pseudonymous books … annihilation of the pseudonyms] A quote from “A First and Last Explanation” in Concluding Unscientific Postscript. See CUP, 626; SKS 7, 570. “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 (→ 486,18), (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19). the pseudonyms are spoken of directly … the guiding thought throughout] See On My Work as an Author, (PV, 3–12; SKS 13, 9–19). in the writings on my activity as an author … their significance as maieutic] See On My Work as an Author (PV, 7; SKS 13, 15). ― maieutic: From the Greek maieúesthai, “to deliver” (i.e., in childbirth), an allusion to Socrates’ midwifery, whereby in his conversations with others he was able to help them deliver themselves by recollecting the knowledge they already possessed but had simply forgotten. See, e.g., Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus, 148e–151d. This is how I understand the whole thing now … form of a poetic outpouring] See On My Work as an Author, where Kierkegaard writes, “This is how I understand it all now; in the beginning I

•

1850

could not foresee what indeed has also been my own development” (PV, 12; SKS 13, 18). Tersteegen] German mystic, hymn writer, and lay preacher Gerhard Tersteegen (1697–1769). See also NB19:22.a in the present volume. Wer glaubet, der ist gross … Herr Dich erbarm] Cited from stanza 26 in Gerhard Tersteegen’s poem “Stimme aus dem Heiligthum” [Voice from the Sanctuary], consisting of sixty-seven stanzas in all, in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften, nebst dem Leben desselben [Selections from the Writings of Gerhard Tersteegen, Including His Biography], ed. G. Rapp (Essen, 1841; ASKB 729), p. 509.

14

there are 1000 people] A reference to Denmark’s priests. According to the list 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. ―1000 people: Variant: changed from “1000 clerics”. livelihoods] → 453,15. Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. antiquity’s corruption] A reference to the downfall of ancient Athens. See Kierkegaard’s magister thesis, On the Concept of Irony, where he describes the downfall and the “dissolution and corruption” of the Athenian state (see, e.g., CI, 198–211; SKS 1, 244–255) and refers to the satirical sketch of politics in the comedy The Knights (424 b.c.) by Aristophanes. the glory of giving everything away … wholly to Christ] See Mt 19:16–22. one must first seek the kingdom of God] A reference to Mt 6:33, which is part of the gospel reading for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (→ 469,18). See the Forordnet Alter-Bog [Prescribed Service Book] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB, 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog), pp. 147–148. there will surely be as many as 1100] → 401,24.

24

401

5

402

401

15

12 14

21 23

31

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 7–12

32

402m

1

403

2

3

6

a holy number that brings the 1100 martyrs to mind] Perhaps a reference to the eleven thousand virgins who, according to legend, were promised to those who suffered a martyr’s death on a pilgrimage to Rome together with the holy princess Ursula of Britannia. This legend was widespread during the Middle Ages. we appeal with good conscience to the lives we have so far led] → 472m,1. Martensen] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884); 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, appointed extraordinary professor at the University of Copenhagen; in 1845, appointed preacher at the royal court. On July 19, 1849, Martensen’s major work, Den christelige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 653), was published. a dispute about terms] Kierkegaard had been enlisted into the contemporary debate about the relationship between faith and knowledge, particularly by R. Nielsen (→ 420,1) and P. M. Stilling (→ 430,30), who mounted an attack, very much inspired by Kierkegaard, against Martensen and speculative theology. Martensen responded to the criticism in Dogmatiske Oplysninger. Et Leilighedsskrift [Information on Dogmatics: An Occasional Piece] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB 654), 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. 136, June 13, 1850; from a surviving receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s booksellers it can be seen that Kierkegaard had already purchased a copy on June 12, 1850. Kierkegaard did not directly participate in the debate, which continued for another year. I consider him to be far, far, far stronger than me at the moment] See also NB18:58 in the present volume.

•

1850

755

Martensen’s path … a brilliant career] See also NB18:58 in the present volume. Martensen assures us is so] See also NB18:58 and accompanying explanatory notes in the present volume. ― Martensen: Variant: changed from “Martensen, Berlingske Tidende, Flyveposten”. I am without authority] → 469,12. scholarly conflict] → 403,3.

13

what it costs to support priests] → 453,15.

7

404

New Pseudonym Anti-Climacus] Anticlimacus or Anti-Climacus is mentioned for the first time in May 1848 as a possible pseudonym in NB5:8 in KJN 4, 373, and used for the first time as the author of The Sickness unto Death (→ 405,24), published in July 1849. Kierkegaard decided early on to use the pseudonym again as the author of Practice in Christianity (→ 465,6), published in September 1850. This is recorded in the journals from that time] See, e.g., NB12:7 in KJN 6, 152, from July 1849, and NB14:12 in KJN 6, 354–355, from November 1849. Kierkegaard has described this same course of events several times, including in NB12:28–30 in KJN 6, 159–160, from July 1849, and NB13:78 in KJN 6, 324, from October 1849. the finished production] An allusion to the material that later became The Sickness unto Death (1849) and Practice in Christianity (1850) as well as various texts on the aim of the authorship (→ 400,14). a seminary] The Royal Pastoral Seminary, where Kierkegaard considered applying for a position as instructor. See, e.g., NB10:89, from ca. March 1849, in KJN 5, 313; see also its 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.)

1

405

16

26 29

3

4

5

756 9 11

14

15

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 12–18

which is all related in the journals] → 405,3. I wrote to Luno about starting the printing] The letter to Bianco Luno has not been preserved. ― Luno: Royal court printer Bianco Luno (1795– 1852) was named royal court printer in 1847. His press, which was the most technically and typographically advanced press in Copenhagen, was located on Østergade (see map 2, C2). Aside from Two Minor Ethico-Religious Essays, which was produced at Louis Klein’s Press, all of Kierkegaard’s works were printed at Bianco Luno’s Printing House. “her”] Refers to Regine Olsen (1822–1904), to whom Kierkegaard was engaged from September 10, 1840, until October 12, 1841. On August 28, 1843, Regine became engaged to Johan Frederik Schlegel, whom she married on November 3, 1847. Kierkegaard wrote a retrospective account of his relationship with Regine Olsen in “My Relationship to ‘her’ / Aug. 24th 49” in Notebook 15; see KJN 3, 429–445. Then the odd thing happened … councillor of state Olsen had died] See NB12:28, from July 1849, when Kierkegaard writes: “Only after I had come to an agreement with Luno about printing The Sickness unto Death did I learn that Councillor of State Olsen was dead. I was very loath to weaken the printer’s impression of my business sense, and I therefore went ahead with the printing” (KJN 6, 159). The Sickness unto Death was delivered to Bianco Luno’s Printing House on June 29, 1849; 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. 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] Regina Olsen, née Malling.” ― councillor of state: 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 address were assigned to persons in various official

•

1850

positions. 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. Terkild Olsen had been granted the title “actual councillor of state” on June 28, 1840. the printing began] The printing of The Sickness unto Death was finished on July 27, 1849, and the book was advertised as “published” on July 30, 1849, in Adresseavisen, no. 176. the tension of real life] Variant: changed from “the tension”.

24

24

Xndom] → 400,10. Protestantism’s watchword became: we are all priests,] Refers to the Lutheran doctrine of universal priesthood, which teaches that every baptized member of the church is a priest. ― priests,: Variant: first written “priests.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. gospels say give everything to the poor] See Mt 19:21. Draconian laws] Refers to laws that according to legend were promulgated by Dracon of Athens, ca. 624 b.c., and that supposedly imposed the death sentence for almost all crimes, including vagrancy, and were therefore soon softened and subsequently abolished; see, e.g., Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie, omarbejdet af J. G. Woltmann [Karl Friedrich Becker’s History of the World, Revised by J. G. Woltmann], trans. and augmented by J. Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983), vol. 1, pp. 417–418.

35

405

31

406

15

407

particularly the gospels] Variant: added. We have now grown accustomed … does not apply to us] → 407,38. as has been said in another place … but to div. authority] See NB19:72 in the present volume.

30

407

Xndom] → 400,10.

16

408

Peter denied [Christ]] See Mt 26:69–75.

24

408

42

32 38

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 18–21

26 29

Paul had persecuted the congregation] See Acts 8:1–3, 9:1–2, 22:4–5; Phil 3:6, 1 Tim 1:13. there are some remarks … lie in a bundle … in the desk] Refers to an undated loose paper, presumably from 1849, containing a draft of a “pseudonymous little article” titled “Who Shall Preach the Truth?”, which concludes with the following: “Ah, humanly speaking, the truth, the absolute truth, is terrible. In order to proclaim it, one must almost be a god―or a sinner, who hates himself and is doing penance in this way” (Paper 389 in KJN 11; SKS 27, 464). ― Bible case: This case is also mentioned in NB:49 in KJN 4, 47.

409

8

according to this melody: Rejoice at life―and rejoice once again] A reference to the then popular song “Fryd dig ved Livet” [Rejoice at Life] by the Danish medical doctor and songwriter Rasmus Frankenau (1767–1814). Each of the seven verses begins with the following four lines: “Rejoice over life / In the springtime of your days / Pick the rose of joy / Before it is no more.” See Visebog indeholdende udvalgte danske Selskabssange; med Tillæg af nogle svenske og tydske [Songbook with Selected Danish Party Songs: With a Supplement Including Some Swedish and German], ed. A. Seidelin (Copenhagen, 1814; ASKB 1483), pp. 86–87.

409

19

Bishop Mynster] Jakob Peter Mynster (1775– 1854), Danish priest, writer, and politician; from 1811, 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 and 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 (→ 419,31); 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

•

1850

757

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). Martensen] H. L. Martensen (→ 403,2). “sound teaching” … originally an illness] Presumably refers to a passage in H. L. Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 403,2), p. 475: “The individual can only 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 egotistical and sickly fashion as an ‘individual,’ but only by joining his life to the life of the congregation. 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.” In NB12:76, from July or August 1849, Kierkegaard writes that he takes this passage to be about him: “M. appears to be directing sarcasm at me with this talk of a sickly, egotistic life as an individual.” He continues: “This calls for a rejoinder: What Xnty understands by health is something entirely different from what the worldly pers. understands by health. By health, the worldly pers. understands saying good-bye to infinite effort but being shrewd about finite goals, getting oneself a lucrative living and a velvet-covered paunch.… And when, in addition to this, a man has been married two times, a worldly pers. will regard him as very healthy, indeed he will even see it as proof of unusual health that, in his ethical doctrines [in 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)], the man himself is capable of teaching that second marriages are not praiseworthy. In this sense, you see, I am certainly a sickly person―and an egotist” (KJN 6, 185); see also that entry’s accompanying explanatory notes.

33

409

3

410

758 37

411

1

11

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 22–23

Debate about the press laws] A reference to the debate about a new censorship law that was presented to the French National Assembly in July 1850. The purpose of the law was to curb the flourishing opposition press though a series of restrictions and economic burdens. After much debate, the law went into effect on July 19, 1850. The debate was monitored by a host of Danish newspapers. journalists’ squeal … without anonymity] It is not clear whether Kierkegaard is referring to specific newspaper articles or whether he is speaking of the press in general. Even though the restrictive Danish law regarding freedom of the press, passed on September 27, 1799, forbade anonymity, this restriction was not enforced in Kierkegaard’s day, when anonymity and pseudonymity were common. A provisional law that was promulgated on March 24, 1848, and formally adopted on June 5, 1850, abolished the older censorship laws. But there remained the task of passing a press law that fulfilled the promise made in § 91 of the Constitution of June 5, 1849: “Everyone has the right to express his thoughts in print, though subject to legal liability. Censorship and other preventive procedures can never be reintroduced” (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]). As early as February 1850, the ministry of justice submitted to the parliament a draft of a new “law regarding the use of the press.” This draft was published (see Fædrelandet [The Fatherland], no. 29, February 4, 1850, p. 112) and was the subject of public debate. A revised version of the law was passed on January 3, 1851, though it did not contain any special provisions regarding anonymity or pseudonymity, nor did these issues play any significant role in the public debate about the law. one of the] Variant: changed from “the”.

•

1850

Christendom]→ 400,10. Judaism] Variant: first written “Judaism.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. as I have remarked elsewhere] See, e.g., NB7:44, NB8:41, NB8:49 in KJN 5, 102, 170–171, 174; NB12:188, NB13:13 in KJN 6, 261, 282–283; and NB15:35, NB18:105 in the present volume. God controls everything] See, e.g., chap. 2, sec. 2, “Hvad Skriften lærer om Guds Forsyn og de skabte Tings Opholdelse” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Providence and the Conservation of All Creation], § 3: “God, who is the lord and ruler of the world, governs with wisdom and goodness over everything that happens in the world, such that both good and evil events result in something he finds most beneficial,” and § 5: “Whatever happens to us in life, whether it be joyful or sorrowful, is assigned to us by God for the best reasons, such that we always have reason to be joyful about his governance and management.” 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), pp. 23–25. God has written his law on the hum. heart] See Rom 2:14–15. Xt is also the exemplar] → 478,17. merit] An allusion to the Lutheran notion that some Christian traditions erroneously believe that one is capable of justifying oneself before God through good works. See, e.g., articles 4, 6, and 20 of the Augsburg Confession. quid nimis] Alludes to ne quid nimis (Latin, “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. and F. Schmieder, 2nd ed. (Halle, 1819 [1794]; ASKB 1291), p. 11.

3

412

4

5

9

18 25 28

413

8

412m

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 23–32

10

413m 413

1 32

35

415

8

English translation from Terence, The Woman of Andros, The Self-Tormentor, The Eunuch, trans. John Barsby, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), p. 55. 100,000 rd] i.e., 100,000 rix-dollars, an expression for a large sum of money. ― rd: Abbreviation for the rix-dollar, properly rigsbank dollar (rigsbankdaler), the currency that was introduced after the Danish state declared bankruptcy in 1813. give everything] See Mt 19:21–22. reduplication] Kierkegaard often uses this term to describe a condition of reflection in which something abstract is made actual in concrete praxis or existence. dying away] i.e., turning away and releasing oneself entirely from everything connected with immediacy, temporality, and finitude. Similar expressions are often used in mysticism and in pietist theology and literature. One of Paul’s central ideas is that through Christ we have died to sin; see, e.g., Rom 6:2 and Col 2:20. In pietism this idea was made more stringent, so that human life is 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. See, e.g., bk. 1, meditation 12, “A Christian must die to his heart’s desires and to the world and live in Christ,” and meditation 13, “Out of love for Christ and for the sake of the eternal glory for which we are created and redeemed, we must die away from ourselves and the world,” in Johann Arndt, Fire Bøger om den sande Christendom. Paa ny oversatte efter den ved Sintenis foranstaltede tydske Udgave [Four Books on True Christianity: Newly Translated from Sintenis’s German Edition] (Kristiania [Oslo], 1829 [German, 1610]; ASKB 277). Jesuits] Members of the Roman Catholic order of monks founded in 1534 by the Spanish Basque Ignatius Loyola. 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

•

1850

759

over the Church. According to the stereotypes of many Protestants, the Jesuits used aggressive tactics, including slander, intrigue, and the use of force, to compel non-Catholics to submit to the Jesuit order and to the Church. The tactics attributed to the Jesuits came to be associated with the saying “the end justifies the means.” in their degeneration] Variant: added.

9

p. 43] See NB20:31 in the present volume. Xndom] → 400,10. anxiety of conscience] In NB:79 in KJN 4, 68, the expression “the struggle of an anguished conscience” is attributed to Luther; see also NB10:55 (“struggles and distress of an anguished conscience”), from ca. February 1849, and NB10:112 (“the anxiety of the anguished conscience”), from ca. March 1849, in KJN 5, 296, 327. See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on the gospel for the first Sunday in Advent in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 1, pp. 15–30, esp. pp. 18, 20–21, 27–28. See also the article “Gewissen” [Conscience] in Geist aus Luther’s Schriften oder Concordanz [The Spirit of Luther’s Writings, or Concordance], ed. F. W. Lomler, G. F. Lucius, J. Rust, L. Sackreuter, and E. Zimmermann, 4 vols. (Darmstadt, 1828– 1831; ASKB 317–320), vol. 2 (1829), pp. 327–346; see also art. 20 in the Augsburg Confession. fear of judgment] See Mt 12:36; Rom 9:28; 1 Pet 4:5; see also Mt 25:31–46.

1

to seek a post as a theol. graduate] → 453,15. everything split apart … the whole of existence] See Mt 27:51–53.

15

Christendom] → 400,10. The apostle says: rejoice always] See 1 Thess 5:16; see also Phil 3:1, 4:4. ― the apostle: The apostle Paul. p. 38 in the margin] See NB20:27.a in the present volume.

12

1

417m

hymn for Ascension Day] A reference to hymn 36 (“The Ascension”) in the section “Lieder” in Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften (→ 401,15), pp. 79–81.

28

417

415m

3 20

21

416

30

417

17

760 30

418

1

418

5

418

16 18

418

419

28

2 11

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 32–34

Lehr’ mich nur … abgeschieden drinnen] quoted from the last of the seven stanzas. See Auswahl aus Gerhard Tersteegen’s Schriften, p. 81; see also the next note. Instead, Tersteegen has a period, and then two more lines] Tersteegen’s (→ 401,14) entire verse is as follows: “Deine Auffahrt bringt mir eben / Gott und Himmel ewig nah; / Lehr’ mich nur im Geiste leben, / Als vor deinen Augen da. / Fremd der Welt, der Zeit, den Sinnen, / Bei dir abgeschieden drinnen, / In den Himmel schon versetzt, / Da mich Jesus nur ergötzt” [Thy ascent raises me up / To God and heaven eternally near /Teach me to live in spirit alone /As there before your eyes / Stranger to the world, to time, the senses / In thee, isolated within / Already brought to heaven / Jesus my only joy]. lèse-majesté] This would be the equivalent, on a personal level, of the most serious of criminal offenses against the state, crimen majestatis; see Christian V’s Danske Lov [Danish Law] (1683), bk. 6, chap. 4. that loving God … hating the world] See Jn 12:25; Jas 4:4; Lk 14:26. (→ 421,6). “insurrection,”] Variant: first written “insurrection.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Publication of the Later Writings] In 1848, Kierkegaard had finished several works he hesitated to publish. These included the works about his authorship (→ 400,14) and The Sickness unto Death and Practice in Christianity by AntiClimacus (→ 405,1). an egotist] → 410,3. Martensen … great genius … a fugitive bird, a diffuse mind, etc.] A reference to author Fredrika Bremer’s series of articles titled Lif i norden [Life in Scandinavia], translated into Danish, and published as the Liv i norden af Frederikke Bremer, Forfatterinde til de svenske Hverdagshistorier [Life in Scandinavia by Fredrika Bremer, Author of the Swedish Stories of Everyday Life] (Copenhagen, 1849). She writes the following about Martensen (→ 403,2): “A seedsman in the highest sense of the word, H. L. Martensen, still young and at the

•

1850

peak of his powers, with his living words and his philosophical writings (highly regarded in Sweden as in Denmark), he broadcasts the seeds of a new development of the Church’s religious life and of scientific scholarship through a more profound understanding of what they essentially are, transfiguring the life of faith into the life of reason by wedding deep feelings with logical thought. In his Dogmatics [Den christelige Dogmatik (→ 403,2)], soon to be published, we await a more complete presentation of his views. And what we have seen of the works he has already published awakens hope of a rebirth of ecclesiastical life in matters both great and small, in the state and in the heart of the individual. The unusual clarity and distinctness of language with which this richly gifted thinker can present the most profound speculative principles, and the interesting and ingenious manner of his teaching make him a popular writer. In his Dogmatics we await a major work, and not only for the learned. It is about time that theology developed popular appeal. That was what Our Lord did eighteen hundred years ago” (pp. 36–37). She writes the following about Kierkegaard: “Whereas from his central standpoint the brilliant Martensen sheds light upon the entire sphere of existence and upon all the phenomena of life, Søren Kierkegaard stands on his isolated pillar like a Simeon Stylites, his gaze fixed uninterruptedly on a single point. He places his microscope over this point, carefully investigating the tiniest atoms, the most fleeting motions, the innermost alterations. And it is about this that he speaks and writes endless folios. For him, everything is to be found at this point. But this point is―the human heart. And―because he unceasingly has this changeable heart reflect itself in the Eternal and Unchangeable that ‘became flesh and dwelt among us,’ because in the course of his exhausting dialectical wanderings he says divine things―he has gained a not inconsiderable audience in happy, pleasant Copenhagen, particularly among ladies. The philosophy of the heart must be of importance to them. Concerning the philosopher who writes on these matters, people speak well and ill―and strangely. He who writes for ‘that single individual’ lives alone, inacces-

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 34–36 sible and, when all is said and done, known by no one. During the daytime one sees him walking in the midst of the crowd, up and down the busiest streets of Copenhagen for hours at a time. At night his lonely dwelling is said to glow with light. The cause of this [behavior] seems to be less his wealth and independence than a sickly and irritable nature, which finds occasion to be displeased with the sun itself when its rays shine in a direction other than what he wishes. Something like the transformation about which he writes so often seems to have taken place within him, however, and it has led the doubt-plagued author of Either/Or through Anxiety and Trembling [sic] to the brilliant heights from which he speaks with inexhaustible bombast about The Gospel of Sufferings [see the title of the third part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits from 1847], about Works of Love, and about ‘the mysteries of the inner life.’ S. Kierkegaard is one of the rare, involuted types who have been found in Scandinavia (more frequently in Sweden than in Denmark) since the earliest days, and it is to like-minded spirits that he speaks of the sphinx within the human breast and of the quiet, mysterious, and all-powerful heart” (pp. 37–38). See NB12:115, from August 1849, NB12:157, from September 1849, and NB13:86, from November 1849, in KJN 6, 209–210, 241–242, 329–332. ― great genius: Kierkegaard is referring to the frequent description of Martensen as a “genius” by contemporaries. See the review of Martensen’s Den christelige Dogmatik in Flyveposten [The Flying Post], no. 174, July 28, 1849; see NB13:86 in KJN 6, 329–332 with its relevant explanatory note. 18

19

Now Mynster pontificates … I am a king] A reference to Mynster’s (→ 409,19) sermon on Jn 18:33–38 (on Pilate’s interrogation of Jesus) “Christ Is a King,” in J. P. Mynster, Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 [Sermons Delivered in the Year 1848] (Copenhagen, 1849; ASKB 232), pp. 26–40; see, e.g., p. 36: “ ‘Yet I am a king,’ said the Lord [before Pilate], and when he said it there was not a human being on earth who believed his words.” then Mynster weeps] In the sermon mentioned in the preceding note, Mynster cites from 1 Cor

•

1850

761

7:29–31, where Paul writes about “those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing.” Miss Jespersen … wholesaler Grønberg] Presumably, fictional characters. Pilate] Pontius Pilate, Roman administrator in Judaea. For the biblical view of his role in Christ’s trial and execution, see Mt 27:11–26 and Jn 18:28– 19:22, 38. excellency] According to the Danish system of rank and precedence (→ 450,11), the address “Your Excellency” was reserved for persons in the first rank class. Kierkegaard is here alluding to Mynster, who, as bishop of Zealand, was placed thirteenth in the first class by the ordinance respecting rank and precedence and was to be addressed as “Your Eminence.” 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 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), was published; it profoundly disappointed Kierkegaard. The book, which scarcely makes

20 26

31

1

420

762

5

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 36 –37

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 (→ 403,2), which included a preface in which he heaped scorn on Kierkegaard’s writings, Rasmus Nielsen attacked 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. I lost money] An assertion often made by Kierkegaard and that may reasonably be understood by considering the total expenses associated with producing Kierkegaard’s books in the light of his rapidly diminishing fortune; see Frithiof Brandt and Else Torkelin, Søren Kierkegaard og pengene [Søren Kierkegaard and Money], 2nd ed.

•

1850

(Copenhagen, 1993 [1935]), pp. 23–64. See also NB16:59 in the present volume, with its relevant explanatory note. On Kierkegaard’s economic worries, (→ 423,34). I was derided] Kierkegaard was convinced that he was abused on the street as a result of articles that appeared in the weekly journal, Corsaren [The Corsair]. Kierkegaard had earlier challenged Corsaren to make him the object of public ridicule; see KJN 4, 453–456. The paper obliged by carrying a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and caricatures of him. The first of these appeared on January 2, 1846, no. 276, and continued periodically until February 16, 1849, no. 439. the Xndom of this age] → 471,23. submits the matter for debate with another professor] i.e., with H. L. Martensen (→ 420,1). the big book] A reference to Rasmus Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 420,1). privately tutored by me] A reference to the conversations Kierkegaard presumably had with Rasmus Nielsen. Kierkegaard claims to have initiated Nielsen into his plans during these conversations. I had taken him into my God-relationship] Kierkegaard alludes frequently to his relationship with God. See NB6:76, NB6:78, NB7:7, NB7:10 in KJN 5, 57–59, 60, 81, 83–84; NB14:90 in KJN 6, 402–405; NB17:71, NB18:82, NB19:39, in the present volume. independent magnum opus] A reference to Rasmus Nielsen’s Evangelietroen og den moderne Bevidsthed (→ 420,1). circumstances stood in his way … into the truth] An allusion to the circumstance that even though Rasmus Nielsen apparently tried to hide his indebtedness to Kierkegaard, reviewers nonetheless called him a disciple of Kierkegaard (→ 420,1). also somewhat … subordinate position in relation to Martensen] Kierkegaard makes similar observations throughout the journals. See, e.g., NB14:120 in KJN 6, 419. hatred of father and mother] See Lk 14:26. Xnty is alienation from this world] See 1 Pet 2:11. Xnty is hatred of this world] → 418,16.

6

9 22 24 29

35

13

420m

1

421m

4

6 8 10

421

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 38 –47 421

17 19 24

421m

20

422m

1

422

4 4 7

422

18 19 33 36

423

6

20

423m

423

3

23

Die Away] → 413,35. it is said: you shall love Xt] Jn 14:15–24. Xndom] → 400,10. flesh and blood] Mt 16:17; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12, 1 Cor 15:50. piety] Variant: preceding this, the word “uncommon” has been deleted. Xt says: come hither] Mt 11:28. everyone takes flight] → 456,2. Right Reverend] Specific forms of address were attached to the various different levels of rank and precedence (→ 450,11). Clergy in rank classes two through six were addressed as “Right Honorable Reverend.” Bishop Mynster was ranked in the first class (→ 419,31). the testimony of spirit] → 455,1. you, who indeed dispose over everything] → 412,9. fatherly discipline] Heb12:5–11. the narrow road] See Mt 7:13–14. Then they let “the monastery” fall away] An allusion to the abolition of religious orders during the Lutheran Reformation. See, e.g., articles 15, 20, and 27 the Augsburg Confession. he has faith,] Variant: changed from “he has faith.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. a person has faith,] Variant: first written “a person has faith.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Visby correctly observed … a person’s life is better than his speech] Refers to a sermon by C. H. Visby in the Church of Our Lady on the eighth Sunday after Trinity Sunday on July 21, 1850. See Adresseavisen, no. 168, July 20, 1850. According to the Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 402,23), the text for the service was Mt 7:15–21. 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

•

1850

763

Year and for Assistance in Formulating Sermons on Those Texts] (Copenhagen, 1866), pp. 634–648, esp. p. 644. ― Visby: Carl Holger Visby (1801– 1871), Danish theologian and priest, 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 that church in 1844. economic concerns] Even though Kierkegaard had received small royalties for his writings― with the exception of Two Ethical Religious Essays, which he financed himself― he could no longer draw upon the estate he had inherited from his father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard (→ 470,2). Concerning Kierkegaard’s economic situation, see NB19:20 and the accompanying commentaries in the present volume.

34

423

the sermon … 4th Sunday after Epiphany] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Rom 13:8–10 for the fourth Sunday after Epiphany 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. 118–126. He explains that to love God … during affliction and lamentation] A loose rendition of a passage in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 122– 123. As it says in the gospel … on account of the Word] See Mt 13:21.

26

424

11

425

Grundtvigian talk about the dead letter] Refers to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s theory that the “living” word is the orally transmitted and “spoken” word as opposed to the “literalist,” “feeble,” or “dead” word of scripture. This theory is associated with his “ecclesiastical view” according to which it is not the Bible, but “the living word,” i.e., the Apostles’ Creed that is recited at bap-

35

425

29

764

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 47–51

tism and the words of institution that are spoken at the eucharist, which for centuries have been transmitted orally and spoken by the Christian congregation, that makes a church a “Christian” Church and constitutes the source and norm of its faith and doctrine. Kierkegaard’s criticism of Grundtvig had earlier been formulated in a draft of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846; Pap. VI B 29, p. 101). For more on his thoughts about “the written word,” see NB15:53 in the present volume. In the present entry, Kierkegaard makes a humorous reference to 2 Cor 3:6. 426

2

3 9

426

18

29

426

36

Bürger’s Lenore] Refers to the ballad “Lenore” (1773) by German poet Gottfried August Bürger (1747–1794). See Bürgers Gedichte [Bürger’s Poems], vol. 1, in Hand-Bibliothek der Deutschen Classiker [Compact Library of German Classics] (Gotha and New York, 1828), pp. 48–57. The ballad tells the story of Wilhelm, Lenore’s fiancé, who goes to war but fails to return with the other soldiers. Lenore searches in vain for him among the returned soldiers and falls into despair. Her mother attempts to comfort her to no avail. One night Wilhelm’s ghost appears to Lenore and leads her to his grave, where she then dies and joins him. Mutter, Mutter … kein Sacrament] See v. 7 of “Lenore,” in Bürgers Gedichte, p. 50. Her mother’s remark … prescribing the sacrament] Refers to v. 7 of “Lenore” where Lenore refuses her mother’s comfort, in Bürgers Gedichte, p. 50. great pasha] The highest military officers and civil servants in the Ottoman Empire held the title of “Pasha,” which stems from the title of the Persian title of the Ottoman sultan, “Padishah,” i.e., “great ruler.” In a metaphorical sense, it means someone who is served by others. worldliness in the forecourt] An allusion to the cleansing of the temple spoken of in Mt 21:12–16. mendicant friar] A monk belonging to the mendicant orders which arose in the 12th and 13th centuries, especially the Dominicans, Franciscans, and Carmelites. Mendicant monks took a vow of poverty and lived on alms.

•

1850

the “daily bread” for which we pray] A reference to the Lord’s Prayer in Mt 6:11.

1

427

under a Socratic influence] The first part of Kierkegaard’s magister dissertation, On the Concept of Irony, treats Socrates. “the single individual”] Kierkegaard speaks of his reader as the “the single individual” in the prefaces to the six collections of edifying discourses from 1843 and 1844; the preface to his Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions from 1845; the preface to “An Occasional Discourse,” the first part of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits from 1847; the prefaces to the first and second parts of Works of Love from 1847; the preface to The Lily in the Field and the Bird of the Air: Three Devotional Discourses from 1849; and the preface to The High Priest―The Tax Collector―The Woman Who Was a Sinner: Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays from 1849. when I first introduced it … personal significance for me as well] Kierkegaard mentioned on several occasions in his journals the relationship between “that single individual” and his earlier fiancée Regine Olsen. See NB10:185 in KJN 5, 363 and Not15:4 in KJN 3, 436. When I used it a second time … the ed. discourses in various spirits] The dedication in the first section of Edifying Discourses in Various Spirits reads: “This small piece is dedicated to ‘that single individual’ ” (UDVS, 4; SKS 8, 120). When I broke off my engagement] Kierkegaard broke his engagement with Regine Olsen on October 12, 1841. See NB14:44.a in KJN 6, 373 and the accompanying explanatory note. give up plans to become a priest] Refers to the fact that as early as the publication of Either/Or (1843) and again after the publication of Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), Kierkegaard had considered stopping his career as a writer and seeking appointment as a priest in a rural parish. See, e.g., JJ:415 in KJN 2, 257; NB:7, NB:57, and NB2:136 in KJN 4, 12–18, 50–51, and 193–194; NB10:16 in KJN 5, 274; and NB12:110 and NB13:35 in KJN 6, 205–206, 298. See also chap. 3, “Governance’s Part in My Writings,” in the second part of The Point of View for My Work as an Author (PV, 86; SKS 16, 65).

10

427

12

12

16

19

22

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 51–57

427

28

My God, my God … forsaking me] See Mt 27:46.

32

see everything] Variant: first written “see everything.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. all the bestiality … that surrounds me] → 420,6.

34

428

3 8 11 15

428

24 32

430

2 10

11 15

430

23 29 30

“the single individual”] → 427,16. thorn in the flesh] See 2 Cor 12:7–9. Governance] i.e., God’s Providence (→ 412,9). perhaps] Variant: added. Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). sensuously] the sensuous world, worldliness. etc.] Variant: first written “or reforme”. without predicates] In classical logic, a judgment consists of a subject and that which modifies the subject, a predicate. To be without a predicate would be the abstraction in which nothing can be said of a given subject. And the accusation … go.] Variant: added. And his eulogy … go.] Variant: added. proclaiming] Variant: changed from “saying”. Having drawn Nielsen to me] → 420,1. 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 SoCalled 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 period 1846–1850. At the end of December 1849, he 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

•

1850

765

802; abbreviated hereafter as Om den indbildte Forsoning af Tro og―Viden), which was strongly influenced by Kierkegaard. It was noted as having appeared in Berlingske Tidende [Berling’s Times], no. 303, December 22, 1849. 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 Christelige Dogmatik] (Copenhagen, 1850), which was advertised as having appeared in Adresseavisen, no. 113, May 16, 1850. With these two works, Stilling and Rasmus Nielsen had formed a common front against Martensen and his followers. a direct attack on Mynster and Martensen] Even though Rasmus Nielsen and P. M. Stilling were primarily allied against H. L. Martensen (→ 420,1), neither of them, perhaps Nielsen least, had sympathy for Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). the thorn in the flesh] → 428,8. very probably] Variant: added. swimming with the help of a belt of cork:] A reference to a method of learning to swim in which the beginner puts on a shirt covered with pieces of cork or the cork is tied on the beginner’s back. ― cork,: Variant: first written “cork.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Dying Away] → 413,35. flesh and blood] → 421m,20. such a pers.] Variant: changed from “such a man”. Lord Byron] George Gordon Byron (1788–1824), English poet, who had one deformed foot. His demonic and melancholic poetry had a great following, not least the unfinished poem Don Juan, which he worked on from 1819 until his death. Kierkegaard owned a German translation of Byron’s works, Lord Byron’s sämmtliche Werke [The Collected Works of Lord Byron], trans. by several translators, 10 vols. (Stuttgart, 1839; ASKB, 1868–1870). Of the 10 lepers only one turned back] See Lk 17:11–19.

31

3

431

5 33

2

432

16 24 39

10

433

766 433

22 23

433

35 36

434

434

7

22 23 26

37

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 58–64

Xndom] → 400,10. Socrates could not prove the immortality of the soul] Presumably, a reference to Plato’s Apology (40c–42a), in which Socrates, after having been sentenced to death, poses some hypothetical observations on death (see also CI, 79–96; SKS 1, 138–150). Kierkegaard emphasized that thought in Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), where Socrates provides no objective proofs but says, “if the soul is immortal” (CUP, 201; SKS 7, 185). See also NB5:30 in KJN 5, 382, and NB15:75 in the present volume. At the same time, Kierkegaard had also earlier mentioned two proofs by Socrates for the immortality of the soul, first, in Philosophical Fragments (1844), where Plato’s doctrine of recollection in the Meno (81c and 86b) serves as proof, and second, in NB:93, from December 1846, where he references the Republic (608d–611a), where Socrates argues for the immortality of the soul (see KJN 4, 75). In Christian Discourses (1848), the latter proof is mentioned (CD, 102; SKS 10, 114). The Wedding in Cana] See Jn 2:1–11. Christendom] → 400,10. Xt was frequently present at banquets and with Pharisees] See Lk 5:29–32, 7:36–50, 11:37–52, 14:1– 24; Jn 12:1–8. ― 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. To Pray in Xt’s Name] See Jn 16:23–24,14:13–14. Xndom] → 400,10. Xt has made up for it] An allusion to the doctrine 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 accepting the punishment that the guilty would otherwise have suffered for their sins, thereby atoning for the insult to God’s justice. See Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 402,23) and art. 4 in the Augsburg Confession. dying to the world] → 413,35.

•

1850

When I had published Concl. Postscript] Concluding Unscientific Postscript was published on February 27, 1846. withdraw] → 427,22. the external circumstances] When Kierkegaard published Concluding Unscientific Postscript, he was involved in a feud with the tabloid Corsaren. See, e.g., NB:7 in KJN 4, 12–18.

1

Hamann quotes a passage… ihr Thun strafte Ψ 99] Refers to a collection of letters from 1752 to 1760 by German philosopher and author Johann Georg Hamann (1730–1788). Hamann makes the cited remark in letter no. 40 (April 27, 1759), addressed to J. G. Lindner; see Hamann’s Schriften, ed. Fr. Roth and G. A. Wiener, 7 vols. (Berlin and Leipzig, 1821–1825), and vol. 8, 1–2 (index volume) (Berlin, 1842–1843; ASKB 536–544); vol. 1, p. 369. ― Ψ 99: The Greek letter “psi” is an abbreviation for “psalms,” i.e., the Book of Psalms; see Ps 99:8. “two opposing concepts that seem to rescind each other.”] Kierkegaard cites this (in Danish) from Hamann’s letter. In one of my earliest journals] Refers to AA:51 in KJN 1, 46, dated August 26, 1837.

9

In his sermon on “Christian prudence,” … never called him a fool] A loose rendition of a passage in J. P. Mynster’s (→ 409,19) sermon on Eph 5:15-21 on the twentieth day after Trinity Sunday, no. 58, “Den rette Klogskab” [Proper Prudence], in 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, 2191, abbreviated hereafter as Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage), vol. 2, pp. 312–324, see esp. pp. 321–323: “But just as we often find that there is no real prudence where people nonetheless often think there is, so also is it the case that prudence often is not lacking when the majority thinks it is absent. For when someone turns down a seeming advantage for the sake of conscience, duty, justice, or God, there are immediately thousands of voices prepared to ask why that person was not more prudent, why he did not protect his own interests better. This

5

435

2 3

435

12

15

436

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 64–65 happened to Jesus himself and his apostles and similarly to all the zealous warriors of truth and justice. Thousands of people called them fools and imbeciles because they were not prudent enough to protect themselves from all the difficulties and persecutions they brought upon themselves. They knew, or soon discovered, however, what would happen to them if they carried out the work the world opposed so much. So when they nonetheless continued with their work, it must have been their free, firm resolution. Would it have been better if they had escaped difficulties and persecutions by acting according to the prudence of the most sensuous, animalistic people? Is there anything that has done us more damage than the cowardly, selfish prudence that sacrifices duty for the sake of temporal advantage? And is it really a lack of reason when someone refuses to follow along? Nonetheless, we hear a similar judgment in the world every day from those who think it is prudent to act according to one’s own interests. When someone accepts a position, which he needn’t have accepted; when he takes on more burdens than he is paid for; when he chooses stress and trouble instead of the peaceful days that were offered him; when he fails to seek the approbation of the masses, which he could indeed procure; when he fails to accumulate all the wealth on this earth that he could otherwise have accumulated; when he fails to do everything in the manner agreed upon by those who are best at looking after themselves: are there not then thousands of voices that cannot express loudly enough their astonishment that he is not reasonable enough to arrange everything to be as comfortable and advantageous for himself as possible? But can anything possibly be more disgraceful than such condemnation? Is there anything that better reveals how deeply people have fallen? Has the thought never arisen in your hearts, you people, who make such judgments, that the person who does not live as you do is not lacking in understanding but in the will to do so? Perhaps he has discovered the justice and love that God requires of him, perhaps he has decided to serve God with all his might―and this is what is called unreasonable by the world! But let

•

1850

767

us never call it unreasonable, you, who believe in God and who honor your consciences! Let it be known in your judgments and your actions, that you recognize the fear of God as wisdom and that it is reasonable to flee evil!” What Luther says … why faith saves] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Mt 21:1–9 for the first Sunday after Advent in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 1, pp. 15–30. See, e.g., p. 17, where Luther writes: “If you desire to be a Christian, you must pay attention to these words for you―for you― ponder them and believe without doubting that what they say will happen to you. You must not assume this is presumption that you compare yourself with the holy ones, but rather a highly necessary sign of humility and distrust of yourself, not distrust of God’s grace. Under threat of the loss of eternal blessedness, we must attribute this bold comfort to grace offered by God. If you will not become like the holy ones and holy like they are, how will things turn out for you? But if you boldly believe that you are holy through Christ, it is through God’s proper honor and law that you confess, love, and praise his grace and work, you have, on the other hand, condemned yourself with your actions, and you discard any trust in yourself―yes, that is what I call being a Christian.” See also Luther’s sermon on Mt 11:2–10 for the third Sunday of Advent in En christelig Postille, vol. 1, pp. 39–51. See, e.g., p. 42: “You must feel one of these two emotions: presumption or despair. Presumption occurs when a person seeks to fulfill the Law through works and does everything possible to fulfill what the letter demands.… Despair, on the other hand, arises when a person notices how weak is the foundation upon which he has built and admits that is it impossible to love God’s Law, for he finds nothing good in himself but instead discovers nothing but hatred of the good and a desire to do evil. He then discovers that he cannot fulfill the Law through works and thus despairs of his own works and takes no note of them.” Luther himself … dependent upon it] See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on 2 Cor 6:1–10 for the first Sunday of Lent in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 162–169; p. 165.

17

1

436m

768 11

437m

4

436m

17

438

3 5

8

9

438

12

439

2 12

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 65–71

dead faith] See Jas 2:17. lost,] Variant: first written “lost?”. the sermon on the epistle for the 1st Sunday in Lent and many other places] → 436m,1. ― in Lent: Variant: changed from “in Lent.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― many other places: See, e.g., Luther’s sermon on Mt 4:1–11 for the first Sunday during Lent in En christelig Postille, vol. 1, pp. 201–207. Can a Theol. Graduate … Appointment?] Variant: added. As things are … no desire for an appointment] The conditions Kierkegaard is thinking of here have not been identified. the State Church … a livelihood] See Chr. V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683), bk. 2, chap. 3, art. 9: “No one may be ordained to the office of priest unless he is expressly called to a specified post,” in Samling af Forordninger, Rescripter, Resolutioner og Collegialbreve, som vedkommer Geistligheden [Collection of Ordinances, Decrees, Resolutions, and Circular Letters Concerning the Clergy], ed. J.L.A. KolderupRosenvinge, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1838–1840), vol. 1, p. 98. See also the ritual for the ordination of priests, chap. 10, art. 2, in Dannemarks og Norges Kirke-Ritual (Copenhagen, 1762 [1685]). the State Church … dissolved] See § 3 of the state constitution, Danmarks Riges Grundlov (→ 411,1), from June 5, 1849: “The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the Danish People’s Church and is supported as such by the state” (p. 6). See also § 80: “The People’s Church is to be governed by law” (p. 26). Anonymity] → 411,1. “concentrating on the issue itself.”] It has not been possible to identify the reference here. schoolboys became reformers … an individually named teacher] It has not been possible to identify the reference here; see, however, Isa 3:4; see also F. Welding’s account to H. P. Barfod in Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), p. 9.

•

1850

police notice … serving alcohol to schoolboys] Refers to a police regulation of January 28, 1811: “It is illegal for owners of taverns, pool halls, cafés and restaurants in Cph. to allow students of local civil and military institutions entrance to their respective establishments, or to sell these minors any goods unless they are accompanied by an adult, who is responsible for their actions. Offenses are punishable under threat of fine, dependent on the nature of the offense, from 5 to 20 rix-dollars, to be divided equally between the accuser and the police treasury.”

13

They have said … most perfect Greek] Presumably refers to the development of the theory of inspiration advanced by orthodox Lutherans in the 17th century. See marginal note NB16:78.a and the accompanying explanatory note in the present volume. As ruler of the world] → 412,9. God is love] See 1 Jn 4:8, 16. In the Middle Ages … to “tempt” faith] Refers to followers of the Benedictine theologian Paschasius Radbertus (ca. 790–ca. 860), who argues for the transubstantiation of the Eucharist in his Liber de corpore et sanguine Domini [Book on the Body and Blood of the Lord] (831). Though the bread and wine are changed to the true body and blood of Christ, the appearance and flavor remain unchanged in order to test faith. Clement of Alex. … heretics would not be able to understand it] Titus Flavius Clemens or Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–ca. 215), Church Father born in Athens, moved to Alexandria, where he worked as a teacher until he was forced to flee to Cappadocia. In section 5.9 in his Stromata [Miscellaneous], he reminds his reader that he is writing allegorically for initiates out of fear of profaning the holy truth in the presence of pagans.

15

in former times … emulate the exemplar] → 478,15. barking at the moon] Plays on the Danish proverb “the dog barks at the moon”, which is used to describe a person of no rank who attacks a

26

441

3

442

440

31 37 1

441m

9

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 71–77 person of social significance in order to attract attention. See no. 6253 in E. Mau, Dansk OrdsprogsSkat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 2, pp. 4–5. 442

9 11 17

442

23 25

443

1 1

15 26

33

444

8 21

28

444

35

About Myself.] Variant: added. Moses … he was not a gifted speaker] See Ex 3:1–4:17. something I lack;] Variant: first written “something I lack.” with the period indicating the end of the sentence. Xt cries … to those by whom offense comes] See Mt 18:7. Xt repeats … “blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.”] See Mt 11:6. Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. and the World] Variant: first written “and the World.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Xnty … hatred of the world] → 418,16. make a living] → 453,15. ― Variant: first written “make a living.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). Xnty to immediately draw ridicule, persecution, etc.] → 468,2. I have understood that it was my duty to operate as a spy] See The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 400,14), where Kierkegaard writes that he is fully aware that he is an author in need of “education” or “upbringing” (Danish, opdragelse) and that he is acting as a spy in the service of a higher idea (PV, 87; SKS 13, 65–66). direct attack,] Variant: first written “direct attack.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. In one of his Table Talks … work during the day and sleep at night] A reference to a passage in the section called “Wie der teufel doctor Martin Luthern des nachts angefochten, und wie er ihm geantworter” [How the Devil Tempted Dr. Martin Luther at Night and How He Responded] in chap. 19, “Vom Creutz, Anfechtung, Verfolgung

•

1850

769

etc.” [On the Cross, Temptation, Persecution, etc.] in D. Martin Luthers Geist- und Sinn-reiche auserlesene Tisch-Reden und andere erbauliche Gespräche [Selections from D. Martin Luther’s Brilliant and Profound Table Talk and Other Edifying Conversations], ed. B. Lindner, 2 vols. (Salfeld, 1745; ASKB 225–226; abbreviated hereafter as Martin Luthers Tisch-Reden), vol. 1, pp. 754–758; pp. 754–755, where Luther writes: “If the devil were to come to me at night in order to plague me, I would respond like this: Devil, I must sleep now, since this is God’s command and order, to work during the day and sleep during the night. Then, if he refused to leave me alone and brought up my sins, I would say, ‘Dear Devil, I’ve heard the whole list [of sins] long ago.’ ” Luther complains … the Law rather than a proclamation of the Gospel] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Gal 4:21–31 for Laetare Sunday in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 179–187. Here Luther remarks that “those who preach the Law have far more disciples than those who preach the Gospel, which is the word of the cross, 1 Cor. 1:18” (p. 182). For the relationship of the Law to the Gospel, see → 478,40. Then comes Luther … made faith the important thing] See, e.g., art. 4 in the Augsburg Confession: “In the same way, the reformers teach that humans beings cannot be justified before God through their own powers, efforts, or works, but are justified undeservingly through faith in Christ” (A. G. Rudelbach, Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse, med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede Apologie, overs. af A. G. Rudelbach [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession, with an Apology for the Same Written by Ph. Melanchthon, trans. by A. G. Rudelbach] [Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386], p. 48). fast, to go on pilgrimages, etc.] → 413,28. draconian laws] → 407,15.

3

Today I was speaking with a Right Reverend] The person to whom Kierkegaard might be referring has not been identified. ― Right Reverend: → 422,7.

36

445

16

19 27

445

770 37

446

17 19

446

25

26

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 77–86

mendicant friars] → 426,36. Look] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. bigger post to become vacant] → 453,15. The Moravian Brothers] Rooted in a Protestant movement in Moravia in what is now the Czech Republic, the Moravians were reorganized by Count Zinzendorf in Herrnhut in Saxony in 1722. A Moravian colony was founded in Christiansfeld in southern Jutland in Denmark in 1773, and a society was founded in Copenhagen in 1783. Kierkegaard’s father was a member of the Copenhagen society from 1815 (or earlier) until his death in 1838. lyrical blood-theory, all that staring at Xt’s suffering] The expression “blood-theory” is either an ironic reformulation of, an error for, or a synonym for “blood theology,” which describes both Zinzendorf’s view that faith in the power of Christ’s blood is the basis of every Christian confession and the more general Moravian emphasis on the blood, wounds, and suffering of Christ, which is often expressed in their hymns and sermons.

446

31

needs Xnty,] Variant: first written “needs Xnty.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

446

34

To die away] → 413,35.

447

24

Here I am] Variant: changed from a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. Xt approves … expensive ointment on him] See Mt 26:6–13.

33

448

2 4 16 20

thorn in the flesh] → 428,8. If I had not been wealthy … work for a living] → 423,34 and → 420,5. or as much control as possible] Variant: added. I have been used to much enjoyment and comfort] Concerning Kierkegaard’s lavish lifestyle, see NB19:20 and the accompanying explanatory note in the present volume.

•

1850

the abuse and boorishness I have been exposed to] → 420,6. little able to afford it] → 423,34. live extravagantly] → 448,20. an official appointment] → 405,5 and → 427,22. meritoriousness] → 413,28. others and what is beautiful about hum. existence] Variant: changed from “others.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. thorn in the flesh] → 428,8.

2

2

449m

Year ’48] Presumably, a reference to the fact that in the beginning of 1848 Europe was marked by a series of revolutions and political upheavals; in Denmark this culminated in the fall of absolutism on March 21, 1848, and the outbreak of the first Schleswig War (or “Three Years’ War,” 1848–1851) in April 1848. During this period of political unrest, Kierkegaard had his most productive year, writing, among other things, The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 400,14), in which 1848 is described as a time of dissolution in which everything has been made political. See also Pap. IX B 63,7, p. 363. socialist and communist movements] The socialist and communist movements in Europe received a boost from the revolutions of 1848. In Denmark, people only knew of communism from reports in local newspapers, e.g., Fædrelandet. Rasmus Sørensen, one of the leaders of the workers’ movement, made a plea at an open political meeting on March 11, 1848, to take up the issue of human rights. The following day, the Workers’ Education Union met and demanded more radical political rights such as the right to vote for every male over twenty-five years of age; abolition of privileges pertaining to nobility, rank, and title; equal taxation; universal military conscription; freedom of religion and the press; and broader rights for unions. These demands are also recorded in P. F. Lunde’s Forslag til Forbedring i de arbeidende Classers Kaar [Suggestions for Improving the Conditions of the Working Classes], which had been published in the summer of 1848, and which gave rise to a critical review in Fædrelandet

36

449

1

450

449

4 9 19 33 34

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 86–97

3

450

11

12 20

450

25

33

(no. 219, August, 28; no. 220, August 29; no. 222, August 31; no. 223, September 1, 1850). See, e.g., the response in no. 219, col. 1734: “The absurd theories of communism and socialism, the empty doctrines on the organization of the working class, and all the talk about the happiness and prosperity that will come to the working class, which has been fed to the lower classes, has finally led to the horrific scenes we have recently witnessed in the French capital.” loving one’s “neighbor,”] See Mt 22:37–40, where Jesus says that besides the “greatest and first” commandment (“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul”) there is a second: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” See Works of Love, especially the first series, 2.A. “You shall love,” based on Mt 22:39 (WL, 17–43; SKS 10, 25–50). Works of Love was published on September 29, 1847. Christian Order of Precedence] Kierkegaard is playing on 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. If you have wealth … give everything to the poor] See Mt 19:21–22. Xnty is suspicious of earning money] See Mt 6:24. The Bible―for “The Single Individual.”] This theme is also treated in NB16:84 in the present volume and was further developed in For SelfExamination, published in 1851 (FSE, 26–27; SKS 13, 54–55). learned apparatus … countless generations] Presumably, a reference to a critical edition of a work called the editio variorum, which is an abbreviation of a sentence often published on the title page: editio cum notis variorum editorum (Latin, “edition with notes from various editors”). Such editions contained not only the current editor’s own notes, but also notes and commentary from previous editors.

•

1850

771

I ended up beginning with “that single individual,”] → 427,12, → 427,12, and → 427,16.

7

451

Christ opens his arms and says: come to me] See Mt 11:28. Perhaps a reference to the sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen’s altarpiece in the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen. See also the second of the Friday communion discourses that constitute the fourth part of Christian Discourses (1848) (CD, 266; SKS 10, 282). He calls himself life] See Jn 14:6. dead, you would have died away] → 413,35.

34

451

1

452

Xt dies to save you] See Rom 5:8–9. die away] → 413,35.

5

saved solely and completely by grace] See Eph 2:1–10.

16

452

Pastor Smith said something] It is recorded in the communion register at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen that Kierkegaard attended communion service on August 9, 1850; see NB20:130 in the present volume. The pastor conducting the services was Andreas Niels Christopher Smith (1797–1863), who was ordained in 1821 and was a resident chaplain at the Church of Our Lady from 1831 to 1857. It is uncertain when Kierkegaard chose Smith as his confessor, but it must have been after April 1, 1842, when he went to confession for the last time with E. C. Tryde, and before June 2, 1843, when he first went to confession and communion with Smith (see communion register for December 2, 1841–July 7, 1848). The content of Smith’s sermon has not been verified.

21

452

long time;] Variant: first written “long time.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

4

453

A man seeks a clerical living … income, the parsonage, etc.] 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.

15

453

2

452

5

772

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 97–105

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). 453

22

Bishop Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19).

454

12

God is love] See 1 Jn 4:8,16. flesh and blood] → 421m,20.

28

455

1

The Testimony of the Spirit … a testimony within you] An allusion to the doctrine testimonium Spiritus Sancti internum (“the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit”). See, e.g., K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche. Ein dogmatisches Repertorium für Studierende [Hutterus Redivivus or the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church: A Dogmatics Sourcebook for Students], 4th improved ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1828]; ASKB 581), p. 85. See also Rom 8:16.

456

2

everyone fled] See Mt 26:14–16, 48.

456

9

God is love] See 1 Jn 4:8, 16.

456

21

Thisted] Jørgen Overgaard Thisted (1795–1855), Danish priest; received cand. theol. in 1820 and in the same year was appointed chaplain of Budolfi Church in Ålborg; in 1822, became chaplain at Trinity Church in Copenhagen; appointed priest at Gyrstinge and Flinterup Church in Zealand. He

•

1850

published a series of comedies, stories, and poems, along with devotional literature containing sermons, psalms, and hymns. He translated En christelig Postille by Luther (→ 424,26). Kierkegaard owned Thisted’s For Christne. Et Tidsskrift [For Christians: A Journal] 6 vols. (Copenhagen, 1823– 1825; ASKB 364–369), which included sermons Thisted held at Trinitatis Church. He was associated with the Moravian Society in Copenhagen and published a translation of Idea fidei fratrum, eller kort Begreb af den christelige Lærdom i de evangeliske Brødremenigheder, af A.G. Spangenberg [Idea fidei fratrum, or a Short Compendium of the Christian Doctrine of the Moravian Brethren] (Århus, 1830). He was a strong critic of rationalism and supported an orthodox interpretation of Christianity. His sermons, which were often emotional and written in metric form, attracted hosts of listeners from spiritually awakened movements and lower social classes. testimony of the spirit]→ 455,1. the Jew … the Norwegian constitution … it expelled Jews from the country] See Kierkegaard’s unpublished article, “As the Priest Says, ‘You Will Be Eternally Happy, Be Assured,’ and Proves That It Is Absolutely Certain―If Only This Were Not Virtually the Worst Thing That Could Happen to You” (Pap. XI 3 B 153); the draft is dated July 15, 1855. Kierkegaard writes: “At the accession [of Christian VIII, who was crowned on December 3, 1839] in 1839, a mass political meeting was held at one of our hotels [Hotel d’Angleterre]. People interrupted each other, everyone was zealous to take the floor, and among all these eager souls, one of the most zealous was Jewish. He was asked ‘What is your business?’ ‘We demand [a constitution modeled after] the Norwegian constitution.’ ‘Why the Norwegian? Did you know, that it expels Jews from the country?’ ‘No, I didn’t know that. In that case, I don’t want the Norwegian constitution’ ” (Pap. XI 3 B 152, p. 242). Paragraph two of the Constitution of the Norwegian Kingdom from May 17, 1814 (as well as a later version from November 4, 1814, after Norway had become part of a union with Sweden), stipulates: “From this time forth,

25 30

456

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 105–111 Jews are denied admission to the kingdom” (Hans Kongelige Majestæts naadige Kundgjørelse angaaende den af Norges Riges overordentlige Storthing i Christiania, den 4de November 1814, bestemte, og af Hans Majestæt antagne, Kongeriget Norges Grundlov, [The Gracious Proclamation Concerning the Constitution of Norway, Established and Ratified by His Royal Majesty and the Parliament of the Norwegian Kingdom in Christiania on November 4, 1814] (Christiania (Oslo), 1814, p. 1). The exclusion of Jews was abolished on July 21, 1851. It has not been possible to identify the person Kierkegaard refers to, but it might be the same Mr. Levin mentioned in NB18:62, from May 1850, in the present volume. 457

10 35

458

15 17

19

459

2

deliverance from our sin] See Rom 3:23–24. Xndom’s] → 400,10. I remember having read in a sermon] This sermon has not been identified. words of Peter … what then will we have] See Mt 19:27. ― it was presumptuous to say: This quote has not been verified. were at Brocken] i.e., a long way from here. According to local superstitions, Brocken (or “Bloksbjerg” or “Bloksberg”), the highest mountain in Harzen in what is now central Germany, was a place where witches and evil spirits gathered to celebrate on Walpurgis Night (the night of April 30–May 1). Mynster now pontificates … visions and dreams] Refers to J. P. Mynster’s (→ 409,19) sermon on Mt 2:19–23 on the first Sunday after New Year, no. 9, “Joseph, Jesu Pleiefader” [Joseph, Jesus’ Foster Father], in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage (→ 436,5), vol. 1, pp. 105–118; pp. 114–115: “For it is not only men of old, who were called by God through special revelations to their positions as chosen instruments for God’s wondrous works, and who were right to believe that God reveals his will to them, showing them which direction they should go. God reveals what he demands of us, as well. The things happen to me when I cannot avoid where I am led, when I can go no other way, this is God’s will for me.” See also p. 110,

•

1850

773

where Mynster writes that an angel of the Lord showed himself to Joseph “in a dream, in miraculous visions.” When Xnty came into the world … revelations prevailed] See Mt 1:20, 2:12–13, 2:19, 2:22. Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). In a sermon … seems ridiculous to most peop.] Free rendering of Mynster’s sermon “Om Alvorlighed i vor Christendom” [On Earnestness in Our Christianity] on 1 Cor 9:24–27 and 10:1–5, for the ninth Sunday before Easter (Septuagesima Sunday), no. 15 in Prædikener paa alle Søn- og Hellig-Dage (→ 436,5), vol. 1, pp. 178–191; p. 179: “Who wants to save his soul[?] … or have we perhaps here named a goal that no one shares anymore? Is this word that we have spoken foolish and laughable, just as it is old, indeed so outmoded that it no longer comes up in men’s speech?” bishop of the Zealand diocese] Mynster was bishop of the diocese of Zealand (→ 409,19).

10

In Montaigne … keep my helm constantly straight] An abbreviated rendering of the following passage in bk. 2, chap. 16, “Ueber Lob, Preiß und Ruhm” [On Praise, Glory, and Fame] 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) (abbreviated hereafter as Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen), vol. 4 (1794), pp. 152–184; p. 169: “An ancient mariner said the following to Neptune: ‘O God, you can save me if you wish; if you wish, you can let me drown; but I will always hold my rudder straight. In my time I have seen a thousand supple, anxious, double-minded men, none of whom doubted that they were more worldly-wise than I, and they have perished while I saved myself.’” ― Montaigne: Michel Eyquem de Montaigne (1533–1592), French jurist, philosopher, and essayist. 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.

26

459

14 15

23

459

774

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 112–118

459

34

so too, because of blessedness, one can become] Variant: first written “there is a blessedness”.

460

30

460m

4

die away] → 413,35. But enamorment is self-love; amorous love is self-love] See, e.g., sections 2.A, “You shall love,” and 2.B, “You shall love the neighbor,” in Works of Love (1847), first series of discourses (WL, 17–43, 44–60; SKS 9, 26–29, 51–67). faith more than conquers] Likely a play on Rom 8:31–37, where Paul writes: “What then are we to say about these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not withhold his own Son, but gave him up for all of us, will he not with him also give us everything else? … Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will hardship, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? ―As it is written: ‘For your sake we are being killed all day long; we are accounted as sheep to be slaughtered.’ No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.”

21

461

13

To Die Away] → 413,35.

461

38

Xndom] → 400,10.

462

1 5 7

14

18

Come to Me] See Mt 11:28. everyone ran away from him] → 456,2. reduplication that is in everything Xn.] → 413,32. ― in everything Xn.: Variant: changed from “in everything”. what the effect would be,] Variant: first written “what the effect would be.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Socrates … “the single individual.”] Socrates, who often described himself as a “private individual,” adopted the Delphic oracle’s pronouncement “Know thyself” as his life’s task. By means of his maieutic method (→ 401,2), Socrates tried to help others rid themselves of their delusions, always by engaging them in dialogue as individuals. In his dissertation, The Concept of Irony, with Continual Reference to Socrates (1841), Kierkegaard sought to show how Socrates was the first to separate himself from the mass of humanity in order to win “personality.” Socrates represented “irony

•

1850

as a standpoint,” subjectivity’s first approximation. In NB21:35 (September 1850), Kierkegaard bemoans the fact that in his dissertation, under the influence of “Hegel and everything modern,” he had criticized Socrates for attending only to the “the individuals” and not to the totality; whereas it is precisely this behavior on Socrates’ part that “is the great proof of how great an ethicist Socrates was” (KJN 8; SKS 24, 32). In NB3:77 (December 1847), meanwhile, Kierkegaard claims that Socrates used the category of “the single individual” in order to dissolve paganism (KJN 4, 280–282; SKS 20, 281–282). In point of fact, this reference to the “new” category expresses the same account of Socrates as was present in The Concept of Irony. All that has changed is Kierkegaard’s evaluation of Socrates and his relationships. About Myself.] Variant: added. a pers. who, in his 25th year … as I demonstrated in my dissertation] On May 5, 1838, Kierkegaard turned twenty-five. That he was already occupied with Socrates at this point is clear from numerous journal entries, including DD:37 and DD:38 (both from August 1837), DD:75 (dated November 1, 1837), and FF:145 (May 1838) (KJN 1, 226, 236–237; KJN 2, 94). “My dissertation” is a reference to On the Concept of Irony, with Continual Reference to Socrates, for which Kierkegaard was awarded the degree of Magister on September 29, 1841. The topic of the dissertation’s first part is “The Standpoint of Socrates, Conceived as Irony” (CI, 7–237; SKS 1, 69–278) (→ 427,10). See NB28:15, dated March 25, 1853, in which Kierkegaard retrospectively speaks of Socrates as “the man to whom I have had an inexplicable connection from my earliest years, long before I really began to study Plato” (see KJN 9; SKS 25, 225). live in hiding, rarely be seen] Plays on the proverbial expression bene qui latuit, bene vixit (Latin, “He who has concealed himself well, has lived well”) from the Roman poet Ovid’s Tristia [Sorrows], bk. 3, chap. 4:25; see P. Ovidii Nasonis quae supersunt, ed. A. Richter, 3 vols., stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1265), vol. 3, p. 207.

1 4

8

463

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 118–126

465

9

Then I began my activity] Probably refers to Kierkegaard’s formal beginning of his authorship in 1843, with the publication of Either/Or: A Fragment of Life and Two Upbuilding Discourses.

1

the Writing That Is Lying Ready] Refers to the three pieces―“Come unto Me All You Who Labor and Are Heavy Laden, and I Will Give You Rest,” “Blessed Is He Who Is Not Offended in Me,” and “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself”―which were written in 1848 and were subsequently collected and published as Practice in Christianity (1850), with Anti-Climacus as the author and Kierkegaard as the editor (→ 405,1). Probably refers in addition to Kierkegaard’s writings about his authorship (→ 400,14 and → 400,27). For a long time I believed that I had not long to live … a dead man] See NB10:200, dated April 25, 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “It is now so clear to me; everything I came to understand last year about God’s guidance has led me precisely toward this aim: to throw light on Christianity and to portray the ideal of being a Christian. At the time, I certainly didn’t imagine it. I thought that I should die. That didn’t happen, I didn’t die; I was therefore momentarily at risk of not understanding myself. I seemed to understand that the world, or Denmark, needed a martyr. I had everything ready in writing and really thought about whether it was possible to back up my writing in the most decisive manner, by laying down my life. The misunderstanding was this, or rather, this was part of a misunderstanding that would wound me: I was unable to do it” (KJN 5, 378; see also the relevant explanatory notes). allowing R. Nielsen the space to make his entrée] → 420,1. See, e.g., NB19:20 in the present volume, and the associated explanatory note. I have therefore now sent a manuscript to press] According to Bianco Luno’s (→ 405,11) Erindringsbog for 1850 [Memorandum Book for 1850], no. 590, Kierkegaard submitted the manuscript of Practice in Christianity on August 20, 1850. Incoming orders were recorded daily, together with the name of the customer, in the memorandum books of Bianco Luno’s Printing

2

5

6

•

1850

775

House, which are housed at Aller Press. Each order was assigned an order number and a reference to the calendar week in which the order was processed. The publication of Practice in Christianity was advertised in Adresseavisen, no. 225, on September 25, 1850. First they thought that Xt wanted to found an earthly kingdom] See Jn 6:14–15; see also Jn 18:36. “even the spirits submitted to them.”] Free rendering of Lk 10:20. they offer once again―they would risk their lives with him] See Mt 26:35. they were afraid] See Mt 26:56. denied him] → 408,24. all the time he was dead] Refers to the period between Jesus’ death on the cross on (Good) Friday and his resurrection on (Easter) Sunday morning. the ascension] Variant: added.

3

outwardly soon impoverished] → 423,34 and → 420,5. treated as a kind of half lunatic … laughed to scorn every day] In 1846, Kierkegaard says he was the subject of abuse on the street after he had appeared in the satirical weekly Corsaren; see (→ 420,6). Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. everyone is Xn,] Variant: first written “everyone is Xn.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. there are 1000 livings and public officials who proclaim Xnty] A reference to the clerical establishment. See → 401,24 and → 453,15. a knot must be tied] An expression that alludes to the knot at the end of thread while sewing.

9

all these officials who make public service a means of livelihood] A reference to the clerical establishment. See (→ 401,24 and → 453,15).

24

467

It means being cursed, hated, abominated by peop.] See Mt 24:9. a meritorious deed to persecute and abuse you] See Jn 16:2. fear and trembling] See Phil 2:12.

2

468

466

6 10 12 14 14

16

467

10

15 15

15

17

3 5

776

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 127–132

468

16

what Xnty is;] Variant: first written “what Xnty is.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

468

24

Presenting the story of Xt’s suffering … a lot of suitable material] See numerous loose papers and folders with assorted drafts of “Lidelses– Historien! / Christelige Taler” [The Story of Suffering!/ Christian Discourses], from 1850 or possibly 1849 (see Paper 424–430 in KJN 11; SKS 27, 505–509). See also NB4:96, probably from March 1848, in KJN 4, 334. without authority] See the manuscript of the two separate pages at the conclusion of “The Accounting,” presumably written in 1849, where Kierkegaard writes: “I have never made use of ‘authority’; on the contrary, from the very beginning (the preface to the Two Edif. Discourses 1843) I have stereotypically repeated and insisted that ‘I am without authority,’ ” (Pap. X 5 B 148, p. 350; see the two pages of “The Accounting,” which constitutes the bulk of On My Work as an Author (→ 400,27) (PV, 12; SKS 13, 19). And thus] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

469

12

15

469

18

29 33

470

2

“No One Can Serve Two Masters,”] A reference to Mt 6:24, which is part of the gospel reading for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (Mt 6:24–34). See the Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 402,23), pp. 147–148. In 1850, this Sunday fell on September 8. The temporal] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. willing one thing] See the section “Purity of Heart Is to Will One Thing” in “An Occasional Discourse,” part 1 of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits (UDVS, 3–154; SKS 8, 115–250). This year, August 9th … on a Friday] Kierkegaard’s father, Michael Pedersen Kierkegaard, born 1756, died on Thursday, August 9, 1838; see DD:126 (KJN 1, 249). He received a license as a hosier in 1780, and eight years later he was granted a license as an importer and wholesaler of colonial goods (sugar, coffee, molasses, etc.). He retired at age forty in possession of a consid-

•

1850

erable 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. M. P. Kierkegaard settled at 9 Østergade in 1805 (see map 2, C2), and lived there until 1808, when he bought the house at 2 Nytorv (see map 2, B2), where he lived until his death. I also went to communion that day] → 452,21. the sermon I read in Luther … from the Epistle of James] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Jas 1:17– 21 for the fourth Sunday after Easter, in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 248–255. ― in Luther: Variant: added. The day I sent the manuscript to the press] August 20, 1850 (→ 465,6). the daily sermon I read in Luther … the tribulations of the age, etc.] Refers to Luther’s sermon on Rom 8:18–23 for the fourth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 339–349. according to the lectionary] Presumably alludes to the order Kierkegaard had established for his reading of Luther’s En christelig Postille (→ 424,26). Sept. 8 (which I consider my engagement day)] See Not15:4 (→ 405,14), where Kierkegaard relates that on September 8, 1840, he met Regine Olsen (→ 405,14) in the street, accompanied her home, and said to her: “It is you that I seek, you that I have sought for two years” (KJN 3, 431). Immediately thereafter Kierkegaard approached Regine’s father, State Councillor Terkild Olsen (→ 405,15), who responded neither affirmatively nor negatively. Kierkegaard requested a conversation, which took place on September 10; Regine said yes. See KJN 3, 432. The engagement lasted until the final break on October 12, 1841 (→ 427,19). No man can serve two masters] → 469,18.

3 4

7 7

8

13

14

Speculation] Presumably refers to (Hegelian) speculative philosophy and theology.

17

470

the man … bury his father first] See Mt 8:21–22. dying away from the world] → 413,35. flesh and blood] → 421m,20.

29

470

4

471

7

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 133–137 471

16

testimony of the spirit] → 455,1.

471

23

472

10

the Established Order] A reference to the “established” society of Christians, the Danish Church and its leading clergy. In the sermon on the epistle for the 10th Sunday … acknowledge him as Lord] Free rendering of the following statement by Luther in his sermon on 1 Cor 12:1–11 for the tenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 394–404; p. 397: “One who does not accept him [Christ] as Lord cannot have the Holy Spirit. Much less so can one who pronounces a curse over him … One of two things must be true: either Christ must be accepted and believed, honored and praised as the only Lord, or else he must be cursed. Here there is no middle way.” odium totius generis humani] The source for this expression is possibly the Church Father Tertullian, 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 for 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 “hatred of humankind.” Cajus Cornelius Tacitus [Tacitus], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1773–1797; ASKB 1286–1288), vol. 2 (1775), p. 282.

16

472

19 23

“Christendom”] → 400,10 and → 471,23. On the appointed Sunday, “seeking first God’s kingdom”] A reference to Mt 6:24–34, the gospel text for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (→ 469,18), where Mt 6:33 reads: “But strive first

•

1850

777

for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all of these things will be given to you as well.” See the Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 402,23), pp. 147–148. somewhat respectable appointment] → 453,15. studies] Here, the Danish stoderer is either a deliberate or ironic misspelling or mispronunciation of studerer (“studies”). inwardly assures himself that he is willing to sacrifice everything ] Cf. NB6:57, from August 1848, where Kierkegaard writes: “But Mynster, he weeps at the thought that he is willing to sacrifice everything; even if everyone should fall away, he would stand fast. God knows what he has risked” (KJN 5, 40). In both passages, Kierkegaard is likely thinking of Mynster’s (→ 409,19) 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 (→ 436,5), 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, 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). Bishop Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). Judgment Day] See Mt 12:36, 25:31–46; Rom 9:28; 1 Pet 4:5. “Have you sought first the kingdom of God?”] See Mt 6:33. Phoenician] Phoenician was a Semitic language, closely related to Hebrew, which was spoken

29 30

1

472m

4

473m

25

473

28 35

778

474

474

3

11

13

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 137–142

in Phoenicia, a coastal and mountainous region covering much of present-day Lebanon, western Syria, and northern Israel. the trumpeting angel] A reference to the Book of Revelation’s depictions of the angels of justice, who mark each new epoch of the end time by blowing on their trumpets (Rev 8:2–9:21 and 11:15–19). See also Mt 24:31. a refined Goethe-type person… tearfully assures us] See, e.g., NB5:37, where Kierkegaard says of Bishop Mynster (→ 409,19): “What is great about him is a personal virtuosity à la Goethe” (KJN 4, 385; SKS 20, 385), and NB10:28, from February 1849, where Kierkegaard speaks of “this Mynster-Goethe-like position of making one’s contemporaries the final authority” (KJN 5, 281). Beyond this, Kierkegaard also compares Mynster to Goethe in NB14:62, from November 1849, in KJN 6, 385. ― Goethe-type: Derived from Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832), German poet, playwright, essayist, jurist, politician, and scientist. In “Some Reflections on Marriage in Answer to Objections,” in Stages on Life’s Way (1845), Goethe is criticized as an aesthetician lacking pathos (SLW, 149–155; SKS 6, 140–145). longed to have been contemporary with Xt] Likely refers to an idea for a sermon for the thirteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, where the gospel text is Lk 10:23–37 (with the parable of the Good Samaritan); see Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 402,23), pp. 141–142. In his sermon on that same Sunday in 1850 (August 25), Bishop Mynster remarked: “We speak of love’s peace, joy, and blessedness―and now, fellow Christians! Can we forget what we found in the company of our Lord and Savior? ‘Blessed are the eyes that see what you see!’ he said to his disciples, and surely his words echoed in their innermost being, they who had lived the blessed days, when they saw what many prophets and kings longed to see. And should this not also echo in our own innermost being, for though we have not seen him, we do love him, and ‘rejoice with an indescribable and glorious joy’ [1 Pet 1:8]? But no one can be admitted to the Savior’s company, no one can lie at his feet, no one can rest at his breast, except one who

•

1850

brings a loving heart with him.” Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 [Sermons Delivered in the Years 1849 and 1850] (Copenhagen, 1851; ASKB 233), pp. 256–257. “quiet hour.”] An expression favored by J. P. Mynster referring to private devotions as well as to a person’s presence in church. See, e.g., Betragtninger over de christelige Troeslærdomme [Observations on 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 (→ 436,5), vol. 1, pp. 8, 38; vol. 2, p. 127; Prædikener holdte i Kirkeaaret 1846–47 [Sermons Delivered in the 1846–1847 Church Year] (Copenhagen, 1847; ASKB 231), p. 63; Prædikener holdte i Aaret 1848 (→ 419,18), p. 14; and Prædikener holdte i Aarene 1849 og 1850 (→ 474,13), pp. 204, 216.

16

pass me by] A reference to a popular party game in which the value of a player’s piece is determined by a figure (cuckoo, dragon, cat, horse, house, pot, owl, or joker) and a number (12–0). A player draws a piece from a hat, which can then be traded with another player. If a player has the piece with the house, he can refuse the trade by saying “pass” (Danish, hus forbi, “pass by this house”). See S. A. Jørgensen, Nyeste dansk Spillebog [Newest Danish Book of Games], 2nd ed., (Copenhagen, 1802), pp. 360–364. like the gate clerk … the superior to read] The source has not been identified. However, the same story is alluded to in JJ:344 in KJN 2, 233, from May or June 1845, as well as in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), at CUP, 191; SKS 7, 176.

30

Christendom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. praying,] Variant: added. Bishop Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19).

2

Bishop Mynster] J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19).

20

475

prey to laughter] Refers to the fact that Kierkegaard identified P. L. Møller with Corsaren and then requested that he become the object of satire in the pages of Corsaren because he

2

476

474

32

475

4 15

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 142–147 could not accept being the only Danish author who had not yet been abused by the paper, but only praised by it; 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). Corsaren obliged by carrying a series of satirical articles about, allusions to, and caricatures of Kierkegaard; see (→ 420,6). 476

476

20

26 31

the relevance of ordination … are not clear to me] See the ritual for the ordination of priests, chap. 10, art. 2 in Kirke-Ritualet (→ 438,8), which was still 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 and usage.” Wishing to Have Been Contemporary with Xt] → 474,13. in one of the Friday discourses … the same for me as for everyone else] Refers to the conclusion to a lengthy passage in the first discourse on Lk 22:5 in “Discourses at Communion on Fridays,” part 4 of Christian Discourses (1848), where Kierkegaard uses the first person to describe how an individual “I” imagines himself contemporary in thought with the mob that mocked Jesus and ultimately called for his execution: “Good heavens, I certainly would have taken part in the mockery―in order to save my life I would have

•

1850

779

screamed with the others, ‘His blood be on me’― in order to save my life; yes, it is true, it would be in order to save my life!” (CD, 259–260; SKS 10, 272–273). I have turned the situation around rhetorically … I have taken myself and judged myself] Refers to the passage immediately following the one cited in the previous explanatory note. Here Kierkegaard writes: “I know well enough that the priest speaks in another way. When he speaks, he describes the dreadful blindness of these contemporaries―but we, we who are present at his sermon are not that kind of people. Perhaps the priest does not have the heart to speak severely to us―yes, if I were the priest, I would not talk any other way either. I would not dare to tell any other person that he would have behaved in this way; there are things one person does not dare to say to another. Ah, but to myself I do dare say it, and regrettably I must say it: I would have acted no better than the crowd of people!” (CD, 260; SKS 10, 273).

33

Wider die himmlischen Propheten] A reference to Luther’s Schrift wider die himmlischen Propheten [Treatise against the Heavenly Prophets] of January 1525 (see the next explanatory note), which was directed against the nomism and doctrine of communion promoted by the radical and mystically inclined reformer Andreas Rudolph Bodenstein von Karlstadt. Ich hatte mich schier zur Ruhe gestellt … so muß er anheben] Cited from Luthers Werke. Vollständige Auswahl seiner Hauptschriften. Mit historischen Einleitungen, Anmerkungen und Registern [Luther’s Works: A Comprehensive Selection of His Principal Writings, with Historical Introductions, Notes, and Indices], 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 (1841), p. 157. Luther’s Schrift wider die himmlischen Propheten extends over vol. 6, pp. 157– 184, and vol. 7 (1841), pp. 5–150.

3

an excellent story by Scriver … one day in the desert] Free rendering of a passage in § 44 of

19

477

6

477

780

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 147–148

the thirteenth sermon, on 2 Cor 12:7–9, in M. Christian Scrivers, Fürstl. Sächs. Ober-Hof-Predigers und Consistorial-Raths zu Qvedlinburg, / SeelenSchatz, / Darinnen / 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 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-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 and Leipzig 1723 [1675–1692]; ASKB 261–263), vol. 4, p. 463: “[It is] like the monk who could fast for several days in a row in his cloister, but could not last a single day in the wilderness; who then had to acknowledge that the sight of his brothers in the cloister had been a substitute for food and drink, that his fasting had been mock-fasting, and his goal had been not so much to gain skill in the service of God, but to acquire a reputation for an extraordinary holiness in the eyes of human beings.” ― Scriver: Christian Scriver (1629–1693), German Lutheran theologian, priest, devotional writer, and composer of hymns. He became archdeacon in Stendal in 1653, and priest 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

•

1850

inner appropriation of faith. Seelen-Schatz [SoulTreasure], cited above, is his best-known devotional work; it became widely known not only in Germany, but throughout Scandinavia as well. He places infinite emphasis on the death of Xt as the atonement] See Rom 3:23–26, 5:8–11, 6:10–11; 1 Cor 15:3–4; 2 Cor 5:14–21; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14–20; and 1 Thess 5:9–10. Then, in the course of time, emphasis … again misconceived] 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 after virtue, especially pure love of God. Thomas à Kempis’s De imitatione Christi [The Imitation of Christ] (early 15th century) contributed greatly to spreading the idea of imitating Christ in late medieval Europe. Luther later turned the relationship in the right direction again] See, e.g., Luther’s preface to En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 1, pp. xii–xiv, where Luther warns against “making Christ into a Moses, as if he was nothing more than a teacher and an exemplar―something other saints also are―or as if the gospel was a textbook and a law book. Thus you should grasp Christ, his words, works, and sufferings, in a twofold manner―first, and rightly so, as an example that is set before you for you to imitate, as St. Peter writes: ‘Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example’ (1 Pet 2:21). Thus when you see him praying, fasting, helping, and having compassion for people, then you should also do thus, both toward yourself and toward your neighbor. But this is the least of the gospel, and in this respect it does not really deserve the name of gospel, for here Christ is of no more help to you than another saint: his life remains his own affair, and does not help

31

477

15

478

17

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 148–152

30

478

40

you at all. Briefly put, this mode makes no one Christian; it makes only hypocrites. You must reach much higher.―One must admit, however, that though this [higher mode] has been the very best mode of preaching for a long time now, it has been used quite seldom indeed.―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. Thus when you see or hear that he does or suffers something, you must not doubt that Christ is yours with this deed or suffering of his, and that you may trust in this as surely as if you had done these things yourself, yes, as if you were Christ himself … 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 an 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 … Now, once you have seen how Christ worked and how he helped all those whom he approached and all those who were brought to him, then you should know that faith works the same in you, and that he offers your soul the same help and grace by means of the gospel. If you pause here and allow yourself to be comforted by this, then you have grasped that Christ is yours, that he is given to you as a gift as soon as you have faith that he is the one who comforts and helps you. The necessary next step is that you follow his pattern, helping your neighbor and offering yourself to him as a gift and exemplar as well … This double good―gift and Exemplar―we have in Christ.” meritoriousness] → 413,28. the Law] Kierkegaard has in mind the Pauline and Lutheran doctrine of the relation between

•

1850

781

Law and Gospel, in which the Law judges human beings (Rom 7), disciplining us to Christ, (Gal 3:23–24), 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). the Law] → 478,40. imitation, etc.] Variant: first written “imitation,”. I point to grace … my new book Practice in Xnty] Refers to the “Editor’s Preface” to the first part of Practice in Christianity (→ 465,6), 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 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). presents Christianity’s passionate elements] A reference to requirement and grace or Law and Gospel (→ 478,40).

6

Nothing fixes a thing … Montaigne … p. 395] Free rendering of the following passage in bk. 2, chap. 12, “Rettung des Raymond de Sebonde” [Apology for Raymond Sebond] in Montaigne’s Gedanken und Meinungen (→ 459,26), vol. 3, 1793, pp. 254–557; p. 395: “Yes, there is nothing that impresses a thing more deeply into our memory than the wish to forget it.”

23

479

his existence in the guise of a servant] See Phil 2:7–8. demonic … but as with, e.g., Socrates] A reference to the divine voice Socrates says he heard, his “daemon.” See, e.g., Plato’s Apology (31c–d): “It may seem curious that I should go round giving advice like this and busying myself in people’s private affairs, and yet never venture publicly to address you as a whole and advise you

7

480

479

6 7

15

11

782

17

19

24

43

481

5 6 8

10

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 152–153

on matters of state. The reason for this is what you have often heard me say on many other occasions―that I am subject to a divine or supernatural experience, which Meletus saw fit to travesty in his indictment. It began in my early childhood―a sort of voice which comes to me, and when it comes it always dissuades me from what I am proposing to do, never urges me on” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961], p. 17). in a selfish way (i.e., demonically in the bad sense)] See § 2, “Anxiety about the Good (The Demonic),” in chap. 4 of The Concept of Anxiety (CA, 118–154; SKS 4, 420–453), and “β”) In Despair to Will to Be Oneself: Defiance,” at the close of C.B.b in part 1 of The Sickness unto Death (SUD, 67–74; SKS 11, 181–187). I have frequently felt a need to use indirect communication … short periods] Refers, presumably, to The Point of View for My Work as an Author: A Direct Communication, Report to History (→ 400,14) and to “The Accounting” (→ 400,27). spare myself,] Variant: first written “spare myself.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. by becoming an author … what my plan was] See the manuscript of the two separate pages, likely written in 1849, which were originally to be inserted at the conclusion of “The Accounting” (→ 400,27); see PV, 12; SKS 13, 18–19. fermenting] Variant: first written “dwelling”. “her” ] Regine Olsen (→ 405,14). created the illusion that I was a scoundrel] When he broke the engagement, Kierkegaard himself ostensibly wanted people―and, especially, Regine―to regard him as a scoundrel so that she could become engaged to someone else without having to consider him. See journal entry Not15:4.l (→ 405,14), 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” (KJN 3, 434–435). ― illusion: Variant: changed from “enigma”. my relationship to her] → 405,14.

•

1850

only when I had her engaged again and married] Regine Olsen was engaged to J. F. Schlegel on August 28, 1843, and married him on November 3, 1847, in the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn. ― again: Variant: added. ― married: Variant: following this the word “again” has been deleted.

16

Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). Mynster preaches about Christianity… there you see it] This sermon by Mynster has not been identified. Luther … temptations of suicide] Refers to a passage in chap. 9, “Von dem Teufel und seinen Wercken” [On the Devil and His Works] in Martin Luthers Tisch-Reden (→ 444,35), vol. 1, pp. 296–297: “M. Leonhard, pastor of Guben, said that when he was imprisoned, the devil plagued him maliciously, laughing heartily when he merely took a knife in hand, and often saying to him: ‘So stab yourself!’―and so he often had to throw the knife away. And similarly, if he saw a piece of thread lying on the ground, he would pick it up and gather enough of it that he could have made a rope to hang himself; yes, and he [the devil] pushed him so far that he could not say the Lord’s Prayer or read the Psalms, as he was wont to do. Then Dr. Luther responded: ‘This has happened to me often as well: when I have picked up a knife, such evil thoughts have come over me that I often could not pray, and then the devil would chase me out of the room. Of course, we have the great devils, namely doctors theologiae [doctors of theology]. The Turks and Papists have poor and weak devils―not theological but merely juridical devils.’ ” authority] → 476,20. give out livings] Applications for ecclesiastical positions in the diocese of Zealand were to be sent to Bishop J. P. Mynster, who then forwarded them to the cultus minister (minister responsible for the Church and school system) with his recommendation. Mynster thus had influence on who was appointed to a vacant position, and in this sense can be said to have handed out appointments, thereby winning adherents for himself (→ 401,24 and → 453,15).

25 26

27

35 38

481

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 154–160 482

3

10

11

15

24

only a militant Church] Corresponds to the Latin expression ecclesia militans (“the Church militant”), which early Christian theology used to designate 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 the ecclesia triumphans (“the Church triumphant”). through me,] Variant: first written “through me.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. the aid of a pseudonym] Refers to Anti-Climacus, pseudonymous author of Practice in Christianity (→ 465,1 and → 465,6), specifically to the fifth exposition in part 3, “From On High He Will Draw All unto Himself: Christian Expositions,” on the relation between the Church militant and the Church triumphant (PC, 201–232; SKS 12, 198– 227). I stand in between … recoil on me] A reference to the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity, part 1 (→ 479,7). the good that has been done for me … dared to expect] 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); see also The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 400,14): “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). ― ever: Variant: added.

•

1850

783

the time graduates spend seeking livings] The word “graduates” designates those who have completed the university’s final examination in theology and have been awarded the title cand. theol. (→ 453,15). running from Herod to Pilate] An expression that means 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 (→ 442,3), vol. 1, p. 665.

31

Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). in Denmark, it is impossible … without seeking a living] → 438,8.

2

journalists … unmarried] Thus, for example, the two editors of the daily Fædrelandet, J. F. Giødwad (→ 489,2) and Carl Ploug (1813–1894), as well as E.P.H. Hage, who worked for Fædrelandet in the 1840s and served as editor of Dansk Folkeblad from January 1847 until May 1848, were all unmarried―though Ploug did marry in 1854 and Hage in 1856. On the other hand, Edvard Meyer, Peter Larsen, and J.P.M. Grüne, the editors of Flyveposten [The Flying Post], Morgenposten [The Morning Post], and Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post], respectively, were all married.

8

483

Christendom has abolished … dying away … blown away] Variant: written diagonally on the page; see illustration on p. 485 ― Christendom] → 400,10. ― dying away from this world: → 413,35.

1

484

You who have loved us first, O God] See 1 Jn 4:19. And so] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry.

2

486

The 8th of September] → 470,13. The gospel: No one can serve two masters (my beloved gospel)] Mt 6:24–34 is the gospel text for the fifteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday (→ 469,18). It is this NT text that forms the basis of

14

482

32

483

4

10

14

486

784

15

16

18

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 160–162

“What We Learn from the Lilies of the Field and the Birds of the Air: Three Discourses,” part 2 of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits (1847) (UDVS, 155–212; SKS 8, 253–307); “The Cares of the Pagans: Christian Discourses,” part 1 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, 5–48). “Commit Thy Way”] The pietistic hymn “Befiehl du deine Wege” [known in English as “Entrust Your Days and Burdens”] (1653), by the German Lutheran priest Poul Gerhardt, was translated into Danish in 1826 by the Norwegian professor of theology Stener Johannes Stenersen, and revised in 1840 by the Norwegian Grundtvigian priest Wilhelm Andreas Wexels. It then found a place as hymn no. 39 in Psalmebog. Samlet og udgivet af Roskilde-Konvents Psalmekomite [Hymnal: Collected and Edited by the Roskilde Conventicle Hymn Committee] (Copenhagen, 1850; ASKB, 198), pp. 29–31. Kofoed-Hansen] Hans Peter Kofoed-Hansen (1813–1893), Danish theologian, teacher, and priest; theology graduate, 1837, following which he became a teacher at the Odense Cathedral School; starting in 1840, he authored novels under the pseudonym “Jean Pierre.” He was appointed perpetual curate at the Church of Our Savior in Christianshavn in June 1849 and installed in September of that year. He delivered his farewell sermon on November 3, 1850, after which he became the principal priest at the Church of Our Lady in Haderslev, Jutland. According to a list published in Adresseavisen, no. 210, on September 7, 1850, Kofoed-Hansen delivered the sermon at high mass in the Church of Our Savior on September 8, 1850. these days publishing On My Work as an Author and its accompanying dedication] “The Accounting” (→ 401,6), which makes up the greater part of On My Work as an Author, is dated “Cphagen in March 1849”; whereas the appendix that follows, titled “My Position as a Religious Author in ‘Christendom’ and My Strategy,” is dated “Cphagen in Nov. 1850.” A draft page bears witness to Kierkegaard’s continued work

•

1850

on the publication of On My Work as an Author. It reads as follows: “On My Work as an Author / By / S. Kierkegaard / Copenhagen 1850,” with the addition: “Format as in ‘Philosophical Fragments,’ but smaller type and closer together; a run of 525, with 30 on vellum” (Pap. X 5 B 207, s. 388, and X 5 B 259–260). Kierkegaard considered dedicating On My Work as an Author to Regine Schlegel (→ 481,16 and → 405,14); the manuscript material contains draft dedications with starkly varying formulations, e.g., “With this book there is dedicated to R. S. an authorship that belongs to her partially, by one who belongs to her entirely” (Pap., X 5 B 263) or “To a Contemporary / whose name must still not be mentioned, but whom / history will name―be it for a short time or long―as / long as it names mine, / is dedicated / with this little work / the whole of my work as an author, / as it was from the beginning” (NB15:130 in the present volume). Under the title “For ‘The Accounting.’ / Other Versions of the Dedication, / but which could not be used,” four further drafts appear (see Pap. X 5 B 262, p. 429–430). By 1850, Kierkegaard appears to have decided on the following formulation: “To one unnamed / whose name will one day be named / is dedicated / with this little work the / entire authorship, as it / was from the beginning” (see Pap X 5 B 261). In the end, no dedication at all appears in the published edition of On My Work as an Author, which appeared in August 1851. Instead, a dedication very similar to those above appears in Two Discourses for the Communion on Fridays, which was published simultaneously (WA, 163; SKS 12, 179). Publication of the Work: On My Work as an Author] See the preceding explanatory note. still be kept back] Variant: following this, the words “a little” have been deleted. Practice in Christianity] → 465,6.

1

an individual hum. being is God] The God-Man, i.e., Christ. Socratic simplicity … ignorance] In the conversations found in Plato’s dialogues, Socrates often mentions his ignorance; see, e.g., Apology (21a–23b), where he explains that the oracle at

4

487

2 3

20

488

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 162–163 Delphi had indeed denied that anyone was wiser than he, for he knew that he knew nothing, unlike the many who imagine that they know something. Somewhat later (33c and 28e), Socrates adds that he has been challenged by God, both in the oracle and in his own dreams, to test both himself and those who imagine themselves to be wise, but are not. 488

28

33

489

2

Stilpo] A Greek philosopher of the Megarian school (founded by Euclid in Megara, near Athens), though with intellectual affinities with the Cynics; author of philosophical dialogues. Active during the latter half of the 4th century b.c. Stilpo replied … if you want to talk of such things] See bk. 2, chap. 12 (“Stilpo”), sec. 117, in Diogenes Laertius’s history of philosophy: “When Crates asked him whether the gods take delight in prayers and adorations, he is said to have replied, ‘Don’t ask such a question on the street, simpleton, but when we are alone!’ ”Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: Navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s History of Philosophy, or the Lives, Opinions and Clever Sayings of the Eminent Philosophers in Ten Volumes], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111), vol. 1, p. 106. 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. 245. Giødwad’s] 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

•

1850

785

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 in the present volume from the summer of 1850, where Kierkegaard again calls Giødwad his personal friend and relates that “over the past three to 4 years I have spoken with him every single evening.” Martin Hammerich] Martin Johannes Hammerich (1811–1881), Danish theologian, educator, historian of literature, and politician; received the magister degree in 1836 for a dissertation, Om Ragnarokmythen og dens Betydning i den oldnordiske Religion [On the Ragnarok Myth and Its Significance for Old Norse Religion] (Copenhagen, 1836; ASKB 1950). Kierkegaard owned a copy with a dedicatory inscription by the author. Hammerich’s dissertation was the first written in the Danish language to be accepted by the University of Copenhagen (Kierkegaard’s was the third). In 1842, Hammerich became the headmaster of the Borgerdyd School in Christianshavn. The identity of the others present has been impossible to determine. By the way] Variant: first written a hash mark (#), apparently indicating the end of the entry. incomparable story … from Abraham a Sancta Clara] In the second lesson, “Von der Buße” [On Repentance], pt. 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 constitutes vols. 15–16 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 there lived a certain sinful woman, and in order to approach her, the holy Abbot Paphnutius put on worldly clothes. When he reached the wom-

3

9 13

786

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 163–170

an, 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 a considerable sum of money with him, and asked her to lead him to a secret place, so that he would be seen by no one, and so 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 except 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.” In his own copy of the work, which is now archived in the Danish Royal Library, Kierkegaard highlighted this story with a vertical pencil-stroke in the margin. Kierkegaard’s other reference to the story is in NB2:91, dated June 1847, in KJN 4, 177. ― 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. 489

37

39

490m

1 3

The greater danger … take lesser risks] See NB14:76, likely from December 1849, in KJN 6, 393. illusion in Xndom,] Variant: first written “illusion in Xndom.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). Martensen] Prof. H. L. Martensen (→ 403,2).

•

1850

The Gospel of Peace … and calls itself] Likely refers to Eph 6:15.

11

490

the lily and the bird] See Mt 6:24–34. that point in the world outside the world that can move all existence] A reference to the Greek mathematician, physicist, and inventor Archimedes (ca. 287–212 b.c.) of Syracuse, to whom is attributed the saying: “Give me a place to stand, and I will move the earth.” See the biography of Marcellus, 14.7 in the Greek author Plutarch’s Vitae parallelae [Parallel Lives]: “Archimedes, who was a kinsman and friend of King Hiero, wrote to him that with any given force it was possible to move any given weight; and emboldened, as we are told, by the strength of his demonstration, he declared that, if there were another world, and he could go to it, he could move this [one].” English translation from Plutarch’s Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin, 11 vols. (London: William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1914–1926), vol. 5 (1917), p. 473. See Kierkegaard’s Danish translation, Plutark’s Levnetsbeskrivelser [Plutarch’s Lives], trans. S. Tetens, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1800–1811; ASKB 1197–1200), vol. 3 (1804), p. 272. the established order] → 471,23.

31

490

6

491

Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. reduplication] → 413,32.

11

491

the world always wants to be deceived] From a Latin phrase, mundus vult decipi, which is usually followed by the phrase ergo decipiatur (“so let it be deceived”). 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!” (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 and India, in the Manner of Plutarch], in Ludvig Holbergs Udvalgte Skrifter [Selected Works of Ludvig Holberg], ed.

19

32

13

491

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 170–175

25

29

30

492

6 8

492

32

493

1

4 5 9

K. L. Rahbek, 21 vols. [Copenhagen, 1804–1814], vol. 9 [1806], p. 86). withdraw, be seldom seen] Alludes to the proverb bene qui latuit, bene vixit (Latin, “He who has concealed himself well, has lived well”); (→ 463,8). to live in the streets] Refers, presumably, 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). loafer] See the following journal entries, in which Kierkegaard describes himself as a gadabout or flâneur (French, “idler”): NB12:114 (August 1849); and NB12:147, NB12:178 (September 1849) in KJN 6, 207–208, 237, 252–253.

•

1850

787

for this is to build on works: “To get rid of an error of this sort, it would even be a good thing if people once and for all made all the world’s churches into rubble and preached in ordinary houses or out in the open, prayed there, baptized there, and did all their Christian duties.” Luther adds: “Christ preached for three years, though only for three days in the temple of Jerusalem. The other days he preached in Jewish schools, in the wilderness, on the mountain, in the ship, at the dinner table, and in houses … The apostles preached on Pentecost in the market and on the streets of Jerusalem.” See also Lk 13:26, where Jesus talks of having taught in the streets. J. Xt] Jesus Christ.

12

Mynster] Bishop J. P. Mynster (→ 409,19). Martensen] Prof. H. L. Martensen (→ 403,2).

20

32

493

in a quiet hour] → 474,16. the exuberant person] From Danish yppig: “lively, exuberant, opulent, powerful, choleric.” See the “Diapsalmata” in Either/Or: A Fragment of Life (1843), part 1: “The melancholy have the best sense of the comic, the exuberant [Yppigste] often the best sense of the rustic, the dissolute often the best sense of the moral, the doubter often the best sense of the religious” (EO1, 20; SKS 2, 28:26–28).

The state paternally appoints 1000 specially trained civil servants] → 401,24. According to Chr. V’s Danske Lov (→ 438,8), bk. 2, chap. 2, art. 1, and chap. 20, art. 5, respectively, pastoral appointments in the Danish church were open only to those who had passed their theological examinations and delivered an approved trial sermon. This requirement was confirmed in the charter of May 7, 1788, chap. 4. According to guidelines issued on October 5, 1792, theological candidates were also required to have passed a catechistic examination in order to be eligible for appointment as priests.

Xndom] → 400,10 and → 471,23. Church Fathers] Here, “Church Fathers” in the broad sense, referring to the great Christian theologians and teachers of Christianity’s first centuries. quiet hour] → 474,16. crucify him] See Lk 23:13–25. That which was taught in the marketplace, on the street] See Martin Luther’s sermon on the epistle Acts 6:8–14 and 7:54–59 for the day after Christmas, in En christelig Postille (→ 424,26), vol. 2, pp. 64–70; p. 66, where he speaks in opposition to the tendency of the times (according to which everyone wants to build his own chapel or altar),

pietism … abstaining from dance, and similar outward things] In the pietistic movement, commonly called “pietism,” that arose during the second half of the seventeenth century, it was often claimed that sanctification must extend throughout the reborn individual’s life, and that no acts are so insignificant that they are not subject to the revealed moral laws. For this reason, they forbade dance, card games, enjoyment of alcohol, luxurious living, smoking, the theater, wittiness, and inappropriate laughter. See DD:180, dated December 18, 1838, in KJN 1, 262, and the associated explanatory notes. a Xn] Variant: first written “a hum. being”.

2

494

493

22

7

788

J O U R N A L NB 20 : 175–176

494m

6

put up with it being said … grace and indulgence] See the “Editor’s Preface” to Practice in Christianity (→ 479,7).

495

2

If the time for aesthetic production had not long since passed … listen to it.] Variant: written upside down on the page; see illustration on pp. 496–497. ― the time for aesthetic production … long since passed: According to The Point of View for My Work as an Author (→ 400,14), the aesthetic writing consists 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). Given this, Kierkegaard’s “aesthetic production” certainly can be said to have been “long since” completed at this point, namely, with Stages on Life’s Way in 1845.

•

1850

MAPS Map 1, Copenhagen, 1839, by Severin Sterm 790

Map 2, Copenhagen Locator Map 792 Map 3, Copenhagen with Suburbs 795

Map 1

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 2

C

|

D

E

|

F

|

G

|

H

1

| 2

| 3

| 4

A

|

B

|

C

|

D

1

| 2

| 3

| 4

Map 3

CALENDAR For January 1, 1850, through December 31, 1850 798

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

5 S. a. Epiphany

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

798 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 799

1850

CONCORDANCE From Søren Kierkegaards Papirer to Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks 803

803

Concordance Pap. KJN

Pap. KJN

Pap. KJN

Pap. KJN

X 2 A 329 X 2 A 330 X 2 A 331 X 2 A 332 X 2 A 333 X 2 A 334 X 2 A 335 X 2 A 336 X 2 A 337 X 2 A 338 X 2 A 339 X 2 A 340 X 2 A 341 X 2 A 342 X 2 A 343 X 2 A 344 X 2 A 345 X 2 A 346 X 2 A 347 X 2 A 348 X 2 A 349 X 2 A 350 X 2 A 351 X 2 A 352 X 2 A 353 X 2 A 354 X 2 A 355 X 2 A 356 X 2 A 357 X 2 A 358 X 2 A 359 X 2 A 360 X 2 A 361 X 2 A 362 X 2 A 363 X 2 A 364 X 2 A 365 X 2 A 366 X 2 A 367

X 2 A 368 X 2 A 369 X 2 A 370 X 2 A 371 X 2 A 372 X 2 A 373 X 2 A 374 X 2 A 375 X 2 A 376 X 2 A 377 X 2 A 378 X 2 A 379 X 2 A 380 X 2 A 381 X 2 A 382 X 2 A 383 X 2 A 384 X 2 A 385 X 2 A 386 X 2 A 387 X 2 A 388 X 2 A 389 X 2 A 390 X 2 A 391 X 2 A 392 X 2 A 393 X 2 A 394 X 2 A 395 X 2 A 396 X 2 A 397 X 2 A 398 X 2 A 399 X 2 A 400 X 2 A 401 X 2 A 402 X 2 A 403 X 2 A 404

X 2 A 405 X 2 A 406 X 2 A 407 X 2 A 408 X 2 A 409 X 2 A 410 X 2 A 411 X 2 A 412 X 2 A 413 X 2 A 414 X 2 A 415 X 2 A 416 X 2 A 417 X 2 A 418 X 2 A 419 X 2 A 420 X 2 A 421 X 2 A 422 X 2 A 423 X 2 A 424 X 2 A 425 X 2 A 426 X 2 A 427 X 2 A 428 X 2 A 429

X 2 A 430 X 2 A 431 X 2 A 432 X 2 A 433 X 2 A 434 X 2 A 435 X 2 A 436 X 2 A 437 X 2 A 438 X 2 A 439 X 2 A 440 X 2 A 441 X 2 A 442 X 2 A 443 X 2 A 444 X 2 A 445 X 2 A 446 X 2 A 447 X 2 A 448 X 2 A 449 X 2 A 450 X 2 A 451 X 2 A 452 X 2 A 453 X 2 A 454 X 2 A 455 X 2 A 456 X 2 A 457 X 2 A 458 X 2 A 459 X 2 A 460

NB15:1 NB15:3 NB15:2 NB15:4 NB15:5 NB15:6 NB15:6.a NB15:7 NB15:8 NB15:9 NB15:10 NB15:11 NB15:12 NB15:13 NB15:14 NB15:15 NB15:16 NB15:17 NB15:17.a NB15:17.b NB15:18 NB15:19 NB15:20 NB15:21 NB15:22 NB15:23 NB15:24 NB15:25 NB15:26 NB15:27 NB15:28 NB15:29 NB15:30 NB15:31 NB15:32 NB15:33 NB15:34 NB15:35 NB15:36 NB15:37 NB15:38

NB15:39 NB15:40 NB15:41 NB15:42 NB15:43 NB15:43.a NB15:44 NB15:45 NB15:46 NB15:47 NB15:48 NB15:49 NB15:50 NB15:51 NB15:52 NB15:53 NB15:54 NB15:55 NB15:56 NB15:56.a NB15:56.b NB15:57 NB15:58 NB15:59 NB15:59.a NB15:60 NB15:60.a NB15:61 NB15:62 NB15:63 NB15:64 NB15:65 NB15:66 NB15:67 NB15:68 NB15:69 NB15:70 NB15:71 NB15:71.a NB15:72 NB15:73

NB15:73.a NB15:74 NB15:74.a NB15:75 NB15:75.a NB15:75.b NB15:76 NB15:77 NB15:77.a NB15:78 NB15:78.a NB15:79 NB15:80 NB15:80.a NB15:80.b NB15:80.c NB15:80.c.a NB15:81 NB15:82 NB15:82.a NB15:82.b NB15:83 NB15:83.a NB15:83.b NB15:84 NB15:85 NB15:85.a NB15:85.a.a NB15:86 NB15:86.a NB15:87 NB15:88 NB15:89 NB15:90 NB15:90.a NB15:91 NB15:91.a NB15:92 NB15:92.a NB15:93 NB15:94

NB15:95 NB15:96 NB15:96.a NB15:96.b NB15:97 NB15:98 NB15:99 NB15:100 NB15:101 NB15:101.a NB15:101.b NB15:101.c NB15:101.d NB15:102 NB15:103 NB15:104 NB15:104.a NB15:105 NB15:105.a NB15:106 NB15:107 NB15:108 NB15:109 NB15:110 NB15:110.a NB15:111 NB15:112 NB15:113 NB15:114 NB15:114.a NB15:115 NB15:116 NB15:117 NB15:118 NB15:119 NB15:120 NB15:121 NB15:122 NB15:122.a NB15:122.b NB15:122.c

804 X 2 A 461 X 2 A 462 X 2 A 463 X 2 A 464 X 2 A 465 X 2 A 466 X 2 A 467 X 2 A 468 X 2 A 469 X 2 A 470 X 2 A 471 X 2 A 472 X 2 A 473 X 2 A 474 X 2 A 475 X 2 A 476 X 2 A 477 X 2 A 478 X 2 A 479 X 2 A 480 X 2 A 481 X 2 A 482 X 2 A 483 X 2 A 484 X 2 A 485 X 2 A 486 X 2 A 487 X 2 A 488 X 2 A 489 X 2 A 490 X 2 A 491 X 2 A 492 X 2 A 493 X 2 A 494 X 2 A 495 X 2 A 496 X 2 A 497 X 2 A 498 X 2 A 499 X 2 A 500 X 2 A 501

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NB15:122.d NB15:122.e NB15:123 NB15:124 NB15:125 NB15:126 NB15:127 NB15:128 NB15:129 NB16:1 NB16:3 NB16:2 NB16:4 NB16:5 NB16:6 NB16:7 NB16:8 NB16:9 NB16:10 NB16:11 NB16:11.a NB16:12 NB16:13 NB16:14 NB16:15 NB16:16 NB16:16.a NB16:17 NB16:17.a NB16:18 NB16:19 NB16:20 NB16:21 NB16:22 NB16:23 NB16:24 NB16:24.a NB16:25 NB16:25.a NB16:26 NB16:27 NB16:27.a NB16:28 NB16:29 NB16:30 NB16:31 NB16:32 NB16:32.a NB16:32.b NB16:33

X 2 A 502 X 2 A 503 X 2 A 504 X 2 A 505 X 2 A 506 X 2 A 507 X 2 A 508 X 2 A 509 X 2 A 510 X 2 A 511 X 2 A 512 X 2 A 513 X 2 A 514 X 2 A 515 X 2 A 516 X 2 A 517 X 2 A 518 X 2 A 519 X 2 A 520 X 2 A 521 X 2 A 522 X 2 A 523 X 2 A 524 X 2 A 525 X 2 A 526 X 2 A 527 X 2 A 528 X 2 A 529 X 2 A 530 X 2 A 531 X 2 A 532 X 2 A 533 X 2 A 534 X 2 A 535 X 2 A 536 X 2 A 537 X 2 A 538 X 2 A 539

NB16:33.a NB16:33.b NB16:33.c NB16:33.d NB16:34 NB16:35 NB16:36 NB16:37 NB16:38 NB16:39 NB16:40 NB16:41 NB16:41.a NB16:41.b NB16:42 NB16:43 NB16:43.a NB16:44 NB16:45 NB16:46 NB16:47 NB16:48 NB16:49 NB16:50 NB16:51 NB16:52 NB16:53 NB16:54 NB16:55 NB16:55.a NB16:56 NB16:56.a NB16:57 NB16:58 NB16:58.a NB16:59 NB16:60 NB16:61 NB16:62 NB16:63 NB16:63.a NB16:64 NB16:65 NB16:66 NB16:67 NB16:68 NB16:69 NB16:69.a NB16:69.b NB16:70

AND

X 2 A 540 X 2 A 541 X 2 A 542 X 2 A 543 X 2 A 544 X 2 A 545 X 2 A 546 X 2 A 547 X 2 A 548 X 2 A 549 X 2 A 550 X 2 A 551 X 2 A 552 X 2 A 553 X 2 A 554 X 2 A 555 X 2 A 556 X 2 A 557 X 2 A 558 X 2 A 559 X 2 A 560 X 2 A 561 X 2 A 562 X 2 A 563 X 2 A 564 X 2 A 565 X 2 A 566 X 2 A 567 X 2 A 568 X 2 A 569 X 2 A 570 X 2 A 571 X 2 A 572 X 2 A 573 X 2 A 574 X 2 A 575 X 2 A 576 X 2 A 577 X 2 A 578 X 2 A 579 X 2 A 580 X 2 A 581 X 2 A 582 X 2 A 583

N OTEBOOKS NB16:71 NB16:72 NB16:73 NB16:73.b NB16:73.a NB16:74 NB16:74.a NB16:75 NB16:76 NB16:77 NB16:78 NB16:78.a NB16:79 NB16:80 NB16:81 NB16:82 NB16:83 NB16:84 NB16:84.a NB16:85 NB16:86 NB16:87 NB16:88 NB16:89 NB16:90 NB16:91 NB16:92 NB16:93 NB16:94 NB16:95 NB16:96 NB16:97 NB16:97.a NB16:98 NB16:99 NB16:100 NB16:101 NB16:101.a NB17:1 NB17:3 NB17:2 NB17:4 NB17:5 NB17:6 NB17:7 NB17:7.a NB17:7.b NB17:8 NB17:9 NB17:10

X 2 A 584 X 2 A 585 X 2 A 586 X 2 A 587 X 2 A 588 X 2 A 589 X 2 A 590 X 2 A 591 X 2 A 592 X 2 A 593 X 2 A 594 X 2 A 595 X 2 A 596 X 2 A 597 X 2 A 598 X 2 A 599 X 2 A 600 X 2 A 601 X 2 A 602 X 2 A 603 X 2 A 604 X 2 A 605 X 2 A 606 X 2 A 607 X 2 A 608 X 2 A 609 X 2 A 610 X 2 A 611 X 2 A 612 X 2 A 613 X 2 A 614 X 2 A 615 X 2 A 616 X 2 A 617 X 2 A 618 X 2 A 619 X 2 A 620 X 2 A 621

NB17:11 NB17:12 NB17:13 NB17:14 NB17:15 NB17:16 NB17:16.a NB17:17 NB17:18 NB17:19 NB17:19.a NB17:20 NB17:21 NB17:22 NB17:23 NB17:23.a NB17:24 NB17:25 NB17:25.a NB17:25.b NB17:26 NB17:26.a NB17:27 NB17:28 NB17:28.a NB17:29 NB17:30 NB17:31 NB17:31.a NB17:32 NB17:32.a NB17:33 NB17:33.a NB17:34 NB17:35 NB17:36 NB17:36.a NB17:36.b NB17:37 NB17:38 NB17:38.a NB17:39 NB17:40 NB17:41 NB17:42 NB17:43 NB17:44 NB17:45 NB17:46 NB17:47

CONCORDANCE X 2 A 622 X 2 A 623 X 2 A 624 X 2 A 625 X 2 A 626 X 2 A 627 X 2 A 628 X 2 A 629 X 2 A 630 X 2 A 631 X 2 A 632 X 2 A 633 X 2 A 634 X 2 A 635 X 2 A 636 X 2 A 637 X 2 A 638 X 2 A 639 X 2 A 640 X 2 A 641 X 2 A 642 X 2 A 643 X 2 A 644 X3A1 X3A2 X3A3 X3A4 X3A5 X3A6 X3A7 X3A8 X3A9 X 3 A 10 X 3 A 11

NB17:48 NB17:49 NB17:50 NB17:51 NB17:52 NB17:53 NB17:54 NB17:55 NB17:56 NB17:57 NB17:58 NB17:59 NB17:59.a NB17:60 NB17:60.a NB17:60.b NB17:61 NB17:62 NB17:63 NB17:64 NB17:65 NB17:66 NB17:66.a NB17:67 NB17:68 NB17:69 NB17:70 NB17:4 NB17:71 NB17:71.a NB17:71.b NB17:71.c NB17:71.d NB17:71.e NB17:71.f NB17:71.g NB17:71.h NB17:72 NB17:72.a NB17:73 NB17:74 NB17:74.a NB17:75 NB17:76 NB17:76.a NB17:76.b NB17:77 NB17:78 NB17:79 NB17:80

X 3 A 12 X 3 A 13 X 3 A 14 X 3 A 15 X 3 A 16 X 3 A 17 X 3 A 18 X 3 A 19 X 3 A 20 X 3 A 21 X 3 A 22 X 3 A 23 X 3 A 24 X 3 A 25 X 3 A 26 X 3 A 27 X 3 A 28 X 3 A 29 X 3 A 30 X 3 A 31 X 3 A 32 X 3 A 33 X 3 A 34 X 3 A 35 X 3 A 36 X 3 A 37 X 3 A 38 X 3 A 39 X 3 A 40 X 3 A 41 X 3 A 42 X 3 A 43 X 3 A 44 X 3 A 45 X 3 A 46 X 3 A 47 X 3 A 48 X 3 A 49 X 3 A 50 X 3 A 51 X 3 A 52 X 3 A 53 X 3 A 54 X 3 A 55 X 3 A 56 X 3 A 57

NB17:81 NB17:82 NB17:83 NB17:84 NB17:85 NB17:86 NB17:87 NB17:88 NB17:89 NB17:90 NB17:91 NB17:92 NB17:93 NB17:94 NB17:95 NB17:96 NB17:97 NB17:98 NB17:99 NB17:100 NB17:101 NB17:101.a NB17:102 NB17:102.a NB17:103 NB17:104 NB17:105 NB17:106 NB17:106.a NB17:107 NB17:108 NB17:109 NB17:109.a NB17:110 NB17:111 NB17:111.a NB18:1 NB18:2 NB18:3 NB18:4 NB18:5 NB18:6 NB18:7 NB18:8 NB18:9 NB18:10 NB18:11 NB18:12 NB18:13 NB18:14

X 3 A 58 X 3 A 59 X 3 A 60 X 3 A 61 X 3 A 62 X 3 A 63 X 3 A 64 X 3 A 65 X 3 A 66 X 3 A 67 X 3 A 68 X 3 A 69 X 3 A 70 X 3 A 71 X 3 A 72 X 3 A 73 X 3 A 74 X 3 A 75 X 3 A 76 X 3 A 77 X 3 A 78 X 3 A 79 X 3 A 80 X 3 A 81 X 3 A 82 X 3 A 83 X 3 A 84 X 3 A 85 X 3 A 86 X 3 A 87 X 3 A 88 X 3 A 89 X 3 A 90 X 3 A 91 X 3 A 92 X 3 A 93 X 3 A 94 X 3 A 95 X 3 A 96 X 3 A 97 X 3 A 98 X 3 A 99 X 3 A 100 X 3 A 101 X 3 A 102

805 NB18:14.a NB18:15 NB18:16 NB18:17 NB18:18 NB18:19 NB18:20 NB18:21 NB18:21.a NB18:22 NB18:23 NB18:24 NB18:25 NB18:26 NB18:27 NB18:28 NB18:29 NB18:30 NB18:30.a NB18:31 NB18:32 NB18:33 NB18:34 NB18:35 NB18:36 NB18:37 NB18:38 NB18:39 NB18:40 NB18:41 NB18:42 NB18:43 NB18:43.a NB18:44 NB18:44.b NB18:44.a NB18:45 NB18:46 NB18:47 NB18:48 NB18:49 NB18:49.a NB18:50 NB18:50.a NB18:51 NB18:52 NB18:53 NB18:54 NB18:55 NB18:55.a

X 3 A 103 X 3 A 104 X 3 A 105 X 3 A 106 X 3 A 107 X 3 A 108 X 3 A 109 X 3 A 110 X 3 A 111 X 3 A 112 X 3 A 113 X 3 A 114 X 3 A 115 X 3 A 116 X 3 A 117 X 3 A 118 X 3 A 119 X 3 A 120 X 3 A 121 X 3 A 122 X 3 A 123 X 3 A 124 X 3 A 125 X 3 A 126 X 3 A 127 X 3 A 128 X 3 A 129 X 3 A 130 X 3 A 131 X 3 A 132 X 3 A 133 X 3 A 134 X 3 A 135 X 3 A 136 X 3 A 137 X 3 A 138 X 3 A 139 X 3 A 140 X 3 A 141 X 3 A 142 X 3 A 143 X 3 A 144

NB18:56 NB18:57 NB18:58 NB18:59 NB18:60 NB18:60.a NB18:60.b NB18:60.c NB18:60.d NB18:60.e NB18:61 NB18:62 NB18:63 NB18:64 NB18:65 NB18:66 NB18:67 NB18:68 NB18:69 NB18:69.a NB18:70 NB18:71 NB18:71.a NB18:71.b NB18:72 NB18:72.a NB18:72.b NB18:73 NB18:74 NB18:74.a NB18:75 NB18:76 NB18:77 NB18:78 NB18:79 NB18:80 NB18:81 NB18:82 NB18:83 NB18:84 NB18:85 NB18:85.a NB18:86 NB18:87 NB18:88 NB18:89 NB18:90 NB18:91 NB18:92 NB18:92.a

806 X 3 A 145 X 3 A 146 X 3 A 147 X 3 A 148 X 3 A 149 X 3 A 150 X 3 A 151 X 3 A 152 X 3 A 153 X 3 A 154 X 3 A 155 X 3 A 156 X 3 A 157 X 3 A 158 X 3 A 159 X 3 A 160 X 3 A 161 X 3 A 162 X 3 A 163 X 3 A 164 X 3 A 165 X 3 A 166 X 3 A 167 X 3 A 168 X 3 A 169 X 3 A 170 X 3 A 171 X 3 A 172 X 3 A 173 X 3 A 174 X 3 A 175 X 3 A 176 X 3 A 177 X 3 A 178 X 3 A 179 X 3 A 180 X 3 A 181 X 3 A 182 X 3 A 183 X 3 A 184 X 3 A 185

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS NB18:93 NB18:94 NB18:95 NB18:96 NB18:97 NB18:98 NB18:99 NB18:100 NB18:101 NB18:102 NB18:103 NB18:103.a NB18:104 NB18:105 NB19:1 NB19:3 NB19:2 NB19:4 NB19:4.a NB19:5 NB19:6 NB19:6.a NB19:7 NB19:7.a NB19:7.b NB19:8 NB19:9 NB19:10 NB19:11 NB19:12 NB19:13 NB19:13.a NB19:14 NB19:15 NB19:16 NB19:17 NB19:17.a NB19:18 NB19:18.a NB19:19 NB19:20 NB19:20.a NB19:21 NB19:22 NB19:22.a NB19:23 NB19:24 NB19:25 NB19:25.a NB19:26

X 3 A 186 X 3 A 187 X 3 A 188 X 3 A 189 X 3 A 190 X 3 A 191 X 3 A 192 X 3 A 193 X 3 A 194 X 3 A 195 X 3 A 196 X 3 A 197 X 3 A 198 X 3 A 199 X 3 A 200 X 3 A 201 X 3 A 202 X 3 A 203 X 3 A 204 X 3 A 205 X 3 A 206 X 3 A 207 X 3 A 208 X 3 A 209 X 3 A 210 X 3 A 211 X 3 A 212 X 3 A 213 X 3 A 214 X 3 A 215 X 3 A 216 X 3 A 217 X 3 A 218 X 3 A 219 X 3 A 220 X 3 A 221 X 3 A 222 X 3 A 223 X 3 A 224 X 3 A 225 X 3 A 226

NB19:27 NB19:28 NB19:28.a NB19:29 NB19:30 NB19:31 NB19:32 NB19:32.a NB19:33 NB19:34 NB19:35 NB19:36 NB19:37 NB19:37.a NB19:38 NB19:39 NB19:39.a NB19:39.b NB19:39.c NB19:40 NB19:41 NB19:42 NB19:43 NB19:43.a NB19:44 NB19:45 NB19:46 NB19:47 NB19:48 NB19:49 NB19:50 NB19:51 NB19:52 NB19:52.a NB19:53 NB19:54 NB19:55 NB19:56 NB19:57 NB19:57.a NB19:57.b NB19:58 NB19:59 NB19:60 NB19:61 NB19:62 NB19:62.a NB19:63 NB19:64 NB19:65

AND

X 3 A 227 X 3 A 228 X 3 A 229 X 3 A 230 X 3 A 231 X 3 A 232 X 3 A 233 X 3 A 234 X 3 A 235 X 3 A 236 X 3 A 237 X 3 A 238 X 3 A 239 X 3 A 240 X 3 A 241 X 3 A 242 X 3 A 243 X 3 A 244 X 3 A 245 X 3 A 246 X 3 A 247 X 3 A 248 X 3 A 249 X 3 A 250 X 3 A 251 X 3 A 252 X 3 A 253 X 3 A 254 X 3 A 255 X 3 A 256 X 3 A 257 X 3 A 258 X 3 A 259 X 3 A 260 X 3 A 261

N OTEBOOKS NB19:65.a NB19:66 NB19:66.a NB19:66.b NB19:67 NB19:68 NB19:69 NB19:69.a NB19:70 NB19:70.a NB19:71 NB19:72 NB19:73 NB19:74 NB19:74.a NB19:75 NB19:75.a NB19:76 NB19:77 NB19:78 NB19:79 NB19:80 NB19:80.a NB19:80.b NB19:81 NB19:82 NB19:83 NB19:84 NB19:85 NB19:86 NB19:87 NB19:88 NB19:89 NB19:89.a NB19:90 NB20:1 NB20:3 NB20:2 NB20:4 NB20:5 NB20:6 NB20:7 NB20:7.a NB20:7.b NB20:7.c NB20:7.d NB20:7.e NB20:8 NB20:8.a NB20:8.a.a

X 3 A 262 X 3 A 263 X 3 A 264 X 3 A 265 X 3 A 266 X 3 A 267 X 3 A 268 X 3 A 269 X 3 A 270 X 3 A 271 X 3 A 272 X 3 A 273 X 3 A 274 X 3 A 275 X 3 A 276 X 3 A 277 X 3 A 278 X 3 A 279 X 3 A 280 X 3 A 281 X 3 A 282 X 3 A 283 X 3 A 284 X 3 A 285 X 3 A 286 X 3 A 287 X 3 A 288 X 3 A 289 X 3 A 290 X 3 A 291 X 3 A 292 X 3 A 293 X 3 A 294 X 3 A 295 X 3 A 296 X 3 A 297 X 3 A 298 X 3 A 299 X 3 A 300 X 3 A 301 X 3 A 302 X 3 A 303 X 3 A 304

NB20:9 NB20:10 NB20:11 NB20:12 NB20:12.a NB20:13 NB20:14 NB20:15 NB20:16 NB20:17 NB20:18 NB20:19 NB20:20 NB20:21 NB20:22 NB20:23 NB20:23.a NB20:24 NB20:24.a NB20:25 NB20:26 NB20:27 NB20:27.a NB20:28 NB20:29 NB20:30 NB20:31 NB20:31.a NB20:32 NB20:33 NB20:34 NB20:35 NB20:36 NB20:36.a NB20:36.b NB20:36.b.a NB20:37 NB20:38 NB20:38.a NB20:39 NB20:40 NB20:41 NB20:41.a NB20:41.a.a NB20:42 NB20:43 NB20:44 NB20:45 NB20:46 NB20:47

CONCORDANCE X 3 A 305 X 3 A 306 X 3 A 307 X 3 A 308 X 3 A 309 X 3 A 310 X 3 A 311 X 3 A 312 X 3 A 313 X 3 A 314 X 3 A 315 X 3 A 316 X 3 A 317 X 3 A 318 X 3 A 319 X 3 A 320 X 3 A 321 X 3 A 322 X 3 A 323 X 3 A 324 X 3 A 325 X 3 A 326 X 3 A 327 X 3 A 328 X 3 A 329 X 3 A 330 X 3 A 331 X 3 A 332 X 3 A 333 X 3 A 334 X 3 A 335 X 3 A 336 X 3 A 337 X 3 A 338 X 3 A 339 X 3 A 340 X 3 A 341 X 3 A 342 X 3 A 343 X 3 A 344 X 3 A 345 X 3 A 346 X 3 A 347 X 3 A 348 X 3 A 349 X 3 A 350

NB20:48 NB20:49 NB20:50 NB20:51 NB20:52 NB20:53 NB20:54 NB20:55 NB20:56 NB20:57 NB20:58 NB20:59 NB20:60 NB20:61 NB20:62 NB20:63 NB20:64 NB20:65 NB20:65.a.a NB20:65.a NB20:66 NB20:67 NB20:68 NB20:68.a NB20:68.b NB20:69 NB20:70 NB20:70.a NB20:70.b NB20:71 NB20:72 NB20:73 NB20:74 NB20:75 NB20:76 NB20:77 NB20:78 NB20:79 NB20:80 NB20:81 NB20:82 NB20:83 NB20:84 NB20:85 NB20:85.a NB20:86 NB20:87 NB20:88 NB20:89 NB20:90

X 3 A 351 X 3 A 352 X 3 A 353 X 3 A 354 X 3 A 355 X 3 A 356 X 3 A 357 X 3 A 358 X 3 A 359 X 3 A 360 X 3 A 361 X 3 A 362 X 3 A 363 X 3 A 364 X 3 A 365 X 3 A 366 X 3 A 367 X 3 A 368 X 3 A 369 X 3 A 370 X 3 A 371 X 3 A 372 X 3 A 373 X 3 A 374 X 3 A 375 X 3 A 376 X 3 A 377 X 3 A 378 X 3 A 379 X 3 A 380 X 3 A 381 X 3 A 382 X 3 A 383 X 3 A 384 X 3 A 385 X 3 A 386 X 3 A 387 X 3 A 388 X 3 A 389 X 3 A 390 X 3 A 391 X 3 A 392 X 3 A 393 X 3 A 394 X 3 A 395 X 3 A 396 X 3 A 397

NB20:91 NB20:92 NB20:92.a NB20:93 NB20:94 NB20:95 NB20:96 NB20:97 NB20:98 NB20:99 NB20:100 NB20:101 NB20:102 NB20:103 NB20:104 NB20:105 NB20:106 NB20:107 NB20:107.a NB20:108 NB20:109 NB20:110 NB20:111 NB20:112 NB20:113 NB20:113.a NB20:114 NB20:115 NB20:116 NB20:117 NB20:118 NB20:119 NB20:120 NB20:121 NB20:122 NB20:123 NB20:124 NB20:125 NB20:126 NB20:127 NB20:128 NB20:129 NB20:129.a NB20:130 NB20:131 NB20:132 NB20:133 NB20:134 NB20:135 NB20:136

X 3 A 398 X 3 A 399 X 3 A 400 X 3 A 401 X 3 A 402 X 3 A 403 X 3 A 404 X 3 A 405 X 3 A 406 X 3 A 407 X 3 A 408 X 3 A 409 X 3 A 410 X 3 A 411 X 3 A 412 X 3 A 413 X 3 A 414 X 3 A 415 X 3 A 416 X 3 A 417 X 3 A 418 X 3 A 419 X 3 A 420 X 3 A 421 X 3 A 422 X 3 A 423 X 3 A 424 X 3 A 425 X 3 A 426 X 3 A 427 X 3 A 428 X 3 A 429 X 3 A 430 X 3 A 431 X 3 A 432 X 3 A 433 X 3 A 434 X 3 A 435 X 3 A 436 X 3 A 437

807 NB20:136.a NB20:136.b NB20:137 NB20:138 NB20:139 NB20:140 NB20:141 NB20:142 NB20:143 NB20:143.a NB20:144 NB20:144.a NB20:145 NB20:146 NB20:147 NB20:148 NB20:149 NB20:150 NB20:151 NB20:152 NB20:153 NB20:153.a NB20:154 NB20:154.a NB20:154.b NB20:155 NB20:156 NB20:157 NB20:158 NB20:159 NB20:160 NB20:161 NB20:162 NB20:163 NB20:164 NB20:165 NB20:165.a NB20:166 NB20:167 NB20:168 NB20:169 NB20:170 NB20:171 NB20:172 NB20:173 NB20:174 NB20:175 NB20:175.a