Kierkegaard's Journals and Notebooks, Volume 11, Part 1: Loose Papers, 1830-1843 0691188793, 9780691188799

Citation preview

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS

B RU CE H . KIRMMSE GE N E RAL EDITOR

KIERKEGAARD’S JOURNALS AND NOTEBOOKS VOLUME 11, PART 1 Loose Papers, 1830–1843

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

Published in cooperation with the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Copenhagen

Princeton University Press Princeton and Oxford

KIERKEGAARD’S

JOURNALS and NOTEBOOKS Editorial Board Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Alastair Hannay, Bruce H. Kirmmse, David D. Possen, Joel D. S. Rasmussen, and Vanessa Rumble in cooperation with the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre, Copenhagen Volume 11, Part 1, Loose Papers, 1830–1843 Originally published under the titles Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: 27 Løse Papirer and Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter: K27 Kommentarer til Løse Papirer © 2011 by the Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Foundation, Copenhagen The Søren Kierkegaard Research Centre Foundation at the University of Copenhagen was established with support from the Danish National Research Foundation. English translation Copyright © 2019 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: 978-0-691-18879-9 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 Katalin Nun Stewart, Bratislava, Slovakia Text design by Bent Rohde Printed on acid-free paper. ∞ Printed in the United States of America

CO NTENTS

Overview Volume 11, Part 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Loose Papers, 1830–1843 Volume 11, Part 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Loose Papers, 1843–1852 and 1852–1855

Introduction to the English Language Edition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction to the Loose Papers

vii

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxix

Loose Papers, 1830–1843 Paper 1–Paper 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notes for Paper 1–Paper 304

1

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

283

Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

649

Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653

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.

I. Danish Editions of Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Writings In November 1855, shortly after Kierkegaard’s death, his nephew Henrik Lund visited his apartment accompanied by a clerk named Nørregaard from the Copenhagen Probate Commission. What Lund and Nørregaard encountered when they entered Kierkegaard’s apartment was “a great quantity of paper, mostly manuscripts, located in various places.”1 Lund viewed himself

) Flemming Christian Nielsen, Alt blev godt betalt. Auktionen over Søren Kierkegaards indbo [Everything Fetched a Good Price: The Auction of Søren Kierkegaard’s Personal Effects] (Viborg: Holkenfeldt, 2000), p. 7.

1

viii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

not merely as a relative but also as a disciple of his famous and controversial uncle, and he initially believed that he had been called to sort through and catalogue the mass of Kierkegaardian papers, with an eye to their eventual publication. Lund proceeded systematically, probably beginning as early as the end of November 1855, and during December of that year and the first half of January 1856 he worked his way through the great trove of papers and manuscripts. As the work progressed, Lund noted where each pile, case, box, roll, folder, and notebook lay when Kierkegaard had died, e.g., “in the desk,” “in the lower desk drawer,” “in the left-hand case,” or “in the second chest of drawers, ‘B,’ top drawer, to the left.”1 And he took careful note of which pages, scraps, and slips of paper were found together with which others. Although Lund eventually tired of the task and left the job of publication to others, he is the one who has provided the earliest account of Kierkegaard’s papers, and he compiled a valuable and quite detailed―though never completed―inventory of Kierkegaard’s posthumous writings, entitling it “Catalogue of the Manuscripts of S. Kierkegaard, Drawn up after His Death.” After a rather vagabond existence, these papers eventually found their way to the residence of Kierkegaard’s elder brother, Peter Christian, bishop of Aalborg in Jutland, Denmark, and in February 1865 they were entrusted to Hans Peter Barfod, a former newspaper editor to whom the bishop had assigned the task of “examining, registering, etc. Søren’s papers.”2 Much of what confronted Barfod (and before him, Lund) in the welter of papers was of course drafts and other materials related to works that Kierkegaard had published during his lifetime and to works that lay ready or almost ready for publication at the time of his death (that is, the above-mentioned materials that constitute categories 1 and 2 of SKS), plus letters and other biographical documents (category 4 of SKS). But there was also another group of materials, an enormous quantity of writing that did not fit into the other categories, an amorphous mass of journals, notebooks, and loose sheets, pages, and scraps of paper (category 3 of SKS). ) Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Joakim Garff, and Johnny Kondrup, Written Images: Søren Kierkegaard’s Journals, Notebooks, Booklets, Sheets, Scraps, and Slips of Paper, trans. Bruce H. Kirmmse (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003), p. 11.

1

) Carl Weltzer, Peter og Søren Kierkegaard [Peter and Søren Kierkegaard] (Copenhagen: Gad, 1936), p. 311.

2

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

Faced with this daunting pile of paper, but armed with Lund’s above-mentioned “Catalogue,” Barfod plunged into the papers to construct his own inventory, and in November 1865, ten years after Kierkegaard’s death, Barfod completed his own “Catalogue of the Papers Found after the Death of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard.” Barfod’s “Catalogue” had 472 numbered items, and up through number 382 its enumeration was identical to that of Lund’s “Catalogue,” which itself appeared in Barfod’s as number 473. Two years later, in the autumn of 1867, after much hesitation, Bishop P. C. Kierkegaard gave Barfod “a free hand to deal with Søren Kierkegaard’s literary remains”1 and indicated his intention that they be published. Barfod set to work preparing the material for publication. Though not a trained philologist, Barfod (who has been much maligned for reasons that will become evident) was merely acting in accordance with the standard practice of his day when he wrote his own corrections, notes, and printer’s instructions on the pages of Kierkegaard’s journals, after which he sent them off to the printer. Sometimes he cut manuscript pages into several pieces, rearranged the order of the entries, and apparently glued them onto larger sheets of paper before sending them to the printer. Some of the original manuscripts themselves were lost―thrown away by the printer or by Barfod. Thus, some archival materials have been damaged, and others―including, for example, Journal AA, which contained the famous line about “a truth for which to live and die”―have been almost completely lost, so that the only source we have for these entries are the versions in Barfod’s published edition, or in a number of cases, merely the fragmentary headwords listed in Barfod’s “Catalogue.” Of the ten journals AA through KK from the period 1833–1846, only the final one, KK, is completely intact today. For all the remaining volumes―some entirely dismantled, some still in their original bindings―varying numbers of pages have been lost. As has been noted, Barfod was not particularly culpable, for he shared the view of his times, according to which literary remains had served their purpose after they had been examined and their contents published. Barfod’s principal responsibility was to serve Bishop P. C. Kierkegaard as secretary and treasurer of the Aalborg diocese, and he was thus unable to work full-time on Søren Kierkegaard’s ) Søren Kierkegaard, Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer [From Søren Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Papers], ed. H. P. Barfod, vol. 1 (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 1869), p. ix.

1

ix

x

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

posthumous papers. Therefore, even though Barfod received permission to publish portions of Kierkegaard’s papers in 1867, the first volume of his Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (hereafter, EP) [From Søren Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Papers] did not appear until December 1869. This first volume―in fact a double volume (EP I–II) covering the period 1833–44―was generally accorded a rather chilly reception by reviewers, not so much because of Barfod’s editorial practices but because the publication of the papers was seen as an indiscretion or even as a violation of the rights both of the deceased and of those still living. The next volume (EP III), covering the period 1844–46, did not appear until more than two and one-half years later, in mid- and late 1872 (the volume appeared in two installments), and it was also the subject of scathing reviews. Another five years would pass before Barfod managed to publish the volume covering 1847 (EP IV, published in 1877). By this time Barfod had become increasingly occupied with his diocesan duties for Bishop Kierkegaard, and it was thus a stroke of good fortune when, in the summer of 1878, he chanced to meet Hermann Gottsched, a German educator who had become extremely interested in Kierkegaard, to the point of beginning to teach himself Danish. The very next year, 1879, Gottsched moved to Aalborg and began a collaboration with Barfod, who soon became Gottsched’s assistant, while Gottsched became the official editor of Kierkegaard’s papers. The remaining volumes of EP now appeared in rapid succession: EP V (covering 1848), EP VI (covering 1849), and EP VII (covering 1850), all came out in 1880; EP VIII (covering 1851–53) and EP IX (covering 1854–55) both came out in 1881. And at about the same time that Gottsched took over the task, the critical climate changed, so that the publication of Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers was now seen as a valuable contribution. Still, Barfod and Gottsched’s edition was admittedly only a selection of those materials which the editors believed to be most relevant for an intellectual biography of Kierkegaard. The Barfod-Gottsched nine-volume set of Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers was thus far from a complete edition, and furthermore the philological principles on which it was based were in general quite heavy-handed. Within less than three decades these shortcomings called forth a new and much more comprehensive edition (eleven volumes in twenty tomes), Søren Kierkegaards Papirer (hereafter, Papirer or Pap.) [The Papers of Søren Kierkegaard], edited by P. A. Heiberg with assistance from V. Kuhr and E. Torsting, which appeared over a period of almost forty years, from 1909 to 1948. (The Papirer were reissued, now

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

with two additional volumes, by Niels Thulstrup from 1968 through 1970, and a three-volume index appeared from 1975 through 1978.) This edition was far more complete than Barfod and Gottsched’s, but it imposed upon the welter of Kierkegaardian materials two principles that modern scholarship regards as utterly untenable. First of all, even though a great deal of the material defies such ordering, Heiberg’s edition forcibly sequenced the materials into an absolute chronology, interrupting the continuity of individual journal volumes by removing pages and rearranging their sequence and by inserting undated entries from various loose papers at points the editors deemed chronologically appropriate. And secondly, Heiberg’s Papirer forced the material into categorical compartments, even though the materials, as they actually came into being (as well as the order in which they were found upon Kierkegaard’s death), were often quite mixed. Thus, in the Heiberg edition of the Papirer, “Group A” consists of material that Heiberg and his colleagues deemed to be of the “diary” type; “Group B” is composed of material related to works subsequently published, ranging from the early stages of a work, to various drafts, and finally to fair copies; and “Group C,” a category the editors created out of whole cloth, consists of material deemed by Heiberg and his colleagues to be notes, remarks, and lengthy excerpts connected to Kierkegaard’s studies, to lectures he attended, his reading, etc. The result is that the scholar using Heiberg’s edition of the Papirer is confronted with an artificial sense of order, both chronological and categorical. In order to remedy the defects of earlier editions, the Danish National Research Foundation, an agency of the Danish government, established the Søren Kierkegaard Research Center at the University of Copenhagen in 1994, and by 1997 the first volumes of SKS began to appear. In contrast to earlier editions, this new edition is governed by modern philological principles regarding the establishment of a scholarly text from handwritten materials. The new edition thus attempts to preserve the archival integrity of the original materials, organizing them in a manner that respects the order in which Kierkegaard himself kept the documents. Where the individual journals and notebooks themselves display chronological sequence, as they commonly do (though often not without inconsistencies and subsequent alterations and emendations attributable to Kierkegaard himself), the archival principle underlying SKS of course permits that chronology to remain visible. Similarly, when Kierkegaard himself organized his materials into various categories―for ex-

xi

xii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

ample, journals, notebooks, and loose papers―those categories remain visible in SKS. But SKS imposes no artificial timeline or categorical compartmentalization upon the materials.

II. Previous English Language Editions of Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Papers Several English language editions of selections from Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers have been published. The first to appear was Alexander Dru’s single volume of selections, The Journals of Søren Kierkegaard (London: Oxford University Press, 1938). Dru’s work was based on the Heiberg edition of the Papirer, which had not yet been completed at the time Dru published his selection. Accordingly, in 1965 Ronald Gregor Smith published a much smaller volume of selections, Søren Kierkegaard, The Last Years: Journals 1853–1855 (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), which concentrated on what was then believed to be the final volume of the Papirer―volume XI, which appeared in three tomes. (In fact, as already noted, volume XI was subsequently accompanied by two additional volumes of text and three index volumes.) The Dru and Smith volumes were organized almost entirely in accordance with the chronological order that their editor-translators had inherited from the Heiberg Papirer. Shortly after the appearance of Smith’s volume, Howard and Edna Hong began publishing their six volumes of selections (plus one index volume), Søren Kierkegaard’s Journals and Papers (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1967–1978). Though far more comprehensive than its predecessors, the Hongs’ edition was likewise a selection, and like its predecessors it, too, was based on the Heiberg edition of the Papirer. Unlike Dru and Smith, however, the Hongs’ edition was primarily organized topically, with four of the six text volumes devoted to Kierkegaard’s views on various subjects, arranged alphabetically from “Abstract” to “Zachaeus.” The final two volumes of the Hong edition are devoted to what the Hongs judged to be autobiographical passages from Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers, arranged in a chronological order taken from the Papirer. The most recent volume of selections from Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers is Alastair Hannay’s Søren Kierkegaard, Papers and Journals: A Selection (London: Penguin, 1996). This, too, is based on the Papirer, and the organization is strictly chronological, with the chronology supplied, as in the other cases, by Heiberg’s edition.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

III. 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, 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 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”); 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; a series of thirty-six quarto-sized, bound journal volumes to which Kierkegaard affixed labels designating them journals “NB,” “NB2,” “NB3,” through “NB36”; and 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

xiii

xiv

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

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. 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.)

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

IV. 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 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, and again in a number of the Loose Papers in the present volume, our only source for a portion of the material 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 most such proposed readings without comment, though in a number of cases such proposed readings are discussed in the explanatory notes. 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

xv

xvi

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

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. 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 and Reference Format 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

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

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,” “NB34:6” etc., which refer to the first entry in Journal AA, the eighth entry in Journal DD, the second entry in Notebook 3, the sixth entry in Journal NB34, etc. 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. Loose papers are numbered sequentially, “Paper 1,” “Paper 2,” “Paper 3,” etc. Some of these papers constitute a single unit (e.g., Paper 134), but many consist of more than one item and are subdivided using colons as separators, as, e.g., “Paper 3:2,” or in the striking instance of Paper 365, which is subdivided into twen-

xvii

xviii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

ty-four items: “Paper 365:1,” “Paper 365:2,” . . . “Paper 365:24.” If an item has a marginal note associated with it, the designation of such notes is in the same format as that used for marginal notes in the notebooks and the NB journals, e.g., “Paper 371:2.c.” Because of the great mass of material included KJN 11, the volume is divided into two tomes, Volume 11 (Part 1) and Volume 11 (Part 2). Page references to the papers in these volumes are in the format: “Paper 45:1, KJN 11.1, 91,” “Paper 583, KJN 11.2, 297,” etc. 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 1 entry, with the numbering beginning at “ ” for each new journal 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).” Occasionally, Kierkegaard numbered a footnote and placed it immediately following the paragraph to which it pertained; in these cases, KJN follows the usage in SKS and inserts Kierkegaard’s footnote at the end of the paragraph rather than at the bottom of the text column or at the end of the entry, as in other cases. b) Translator’s footnotes appear below the solid horizontal line at the foot of the page.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

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 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

xix

xx

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

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. 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

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

it has seemed appropriate a number of commonly used (or easily decipherable) English abbreviations have been employed in order to provide a sense of Kierkegaard’s “journal style.” b) Abbreviations used in “Critical Accounts of the Texts” and in “Explanatory Notes” ASKB

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

B&A

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

B-cat.

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

Bl. art.

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

d.

Died in the year

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

xxi

xxii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

KJN

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

KW

Kierkegaard’s Writings, 26 vols., ed. Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978–2000) Occasionally, the explanatory notes will employ different English translations of the titles of Kierkegaard’s works than those used in KW. For example, Kierkegaard’s En literair Anmeldelse, which is translated Two Ages in KW, may appear in the explanatory notes as A Literary Review. All such departures from the English titles as they appear in KW will be explained in the explanatory notes in which they appear. Generally, however, the English titles used in KW will be used; these titles have been assigned standard abbreviations as follows: AN BA C CA CD CI COR CUP EO 1 EO 2 EPW EUD FPOSL FSE FT

“Armed Neutrality” in KW 22 The Book on Adler in KW 24 The Crisis and a Crisis in the Life of an Actress in KW 17 The Concept of Anxiety in KW 8 Christian Discourses in KW 17 The Concept of Irony in KW 2 The “Corsair” Affair; Articles Related to the Writings in KW 13 Concluding Unscientific Postscript in KW 12 Either/Or, part 1 in KW 3 Either/Or, part 2 in KW 4 Early Polemical Writings: From the Papers of One Still Living; Articles from Student Days; The Battle Between the Old and the New Soap- Cellars in KW 1 Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses in KW 15 From the Papers of One Still Living in KW 1 For Self-Examination in KW 21 Fear and Trembling in KW 6

I NTRODUCTION JC JFY LD M

NA NSBL OMWA P PC PF PV R SLW SUD TA TDIO UDVS WA

WL WS

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

“Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est” in KW 7 Judge for Yourself! in KW 21 Letters and Documents in KW 25 “The Moment” and Late Writings: Articles from Fædrelandet; The Moment, nos. 1–10; This Must Be Said, So Let It Be Said; What Christ Judges of Official Christianity; The Changelessness of God in KW 23 “Newspaper Articles, 1854–1855” in KW 23 “Notes on Schelling’s Berlin Lectures” in KW 2 On My Work as an Author in KW 22 Prefaces in KW 9 Practice in Christianity in KW 20 Philosophical Fragments in KW 7 The Point of View for My Work as an Author in KW 22 Repetition in KW 6 Stages on Life’s Way in KW 11 The Sickness unto Death in KW 19 Two Ages: The Age of Revolution and the Present Age, A Literary Review in KW 14 Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions in KW 10 Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits in KW 15 Without Authority: The Lily of the Field and the Bird of the Air; Two Ethical-Religious Essays; Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays; An Upbuilding Discourse; Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays in KW 18 Works of Love in KW 16 “Writing Sampler” in KW 9

L-cat.

Henrik Lund, “Fortegnelse over Manuscripterne af S. Kierkegaard optaget efter hans Død af Henr. Lund. d. 17 januar 1856” [Catalogue of the Manuscripts of S. Kierkegaard Drawn up after His Death by Henrik Lund, January 17, 1856]

NKS

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

xxiii

xxiv

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

NRSV

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

NT

New Testament

OT

Old Testament

Pap.

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

SKS

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

SV1

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

SV2

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

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

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

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

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

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

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

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

xxv

xxvi

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

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

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

Song of Thr Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews Sus Susanna Bel Bel and the Dragon 1 Macc 1 Maccabees 2 Macc 2 Maccabees 3 Macc 3 Maccabees 4 Macc 4 Maccabees Pr Man Prayer of Manasseh

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

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

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

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

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

changes determined by the editors of SKS to have been made in the manuscript at the time of original

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

E NGLISH L ANGUAGE E DITION

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

enclose text the editors of SKS deem an uncertain reading of Kierkegaard’s manuscript

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

xxvii

xxix

Introduction to the Loose Papers I. The Prehistory At Kierkegaard’s death on November 11, 1855, a large collection of literary remains was found at his final address in Copenhagen, 5–6 Klædeboderne (which corresponds to present-day 38 Skindergade / 5 Dyrkøb). Kierkegaard’s estate was inspected twice by personnel from the Probate Commission. In the commission’s first report, which was written three days after Kierkegaard’s death, the posthumous papers received only brief mention, described as “a mass of paper, mostly manuscripts, that were found in various places” and were placed “in a writing desk that was sealed by the court, as well as in a small chest of drawers and a cabinet.”1 On the occasion of the commission’s second visit, November 19, the day following Kierkegaard’s burial, the seal was broken, and the notes were similarly brief: “The writing desk and small chest of drawers belonging to the deceased contained nothing but manuscripts.”2 ) See Provincial Archives for Zealand et al., Copenhagen, sec. DC008, Landsover- samt Hof- og Stadsretten, Københavns Skiftekommission 1771–1863 [Provincial, Court, and City Superior Court Probate Commission for Copenhagen, 1771–1863], 1854–1855, sealed ledger 3, 1–76, estate no. 71, p. 134.

1

) Ibid., p. 135. Kierkegaard’s secretary, Israel Levin, reported that at Kierkegaard’s death, “everything in his room was found to be in order, as if he were going to travel” (Bruce H. Kirmmse, ed. and trans., Encounters with Kierkegaard: A Life as Seen by His Contemporaries [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996], p. 212). Levin also reported Peter Christian Kierkegaard’s agitation when he received a pair of testamentary letters, addressed specifically to him, containing his brother’s decisions regarding the disposition of his possessions. The event recounted by Levin must have taken place during the Probate Commission’s second inspection of Kierkegaard’s apartment, but from the report of the commission it appears that Levin himself had not been present in the apartment on that occasion (which is not made clear in Levin’s account) and that he therefore must have acquired this intelligence at second hand. Those present in the apartment on that occasion, other than P. C. Kierkegaard and the book dealer H.H.J. Lynge, were Balthasar Christensen, chairman of the Probate Commission;

2

xxx

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Soon afterward (November/December 1855–January 1856), Kierkegaard’s nephew, Henrik Lund (1825–1889), who was present during both inspections by the Probate Commission, began, as a representative of the family, the first cataloguing of the posthumous papers and produced both an overview, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], and a catalogue, “Fortegnelse over Manuscripterne af S. Kierkegaard optaget efter hans Død af Henrik Lund. d. 17 januar 1856” [Catalogue of the Manuscripts of S. Kierkegaard, Drawn up after His Death by Henrik Lund, January 17, 1856], abbreviated hereafter as L-cat.1 Thereafter, a bit more than a year passed during which the papers remained in storage at the home of Henrik Lund’s parents, because Lund himself had left Denmark to accept a position as a physician on the island of St. John―part of what were then the Danish West Indies (since 1917, the U.S. Virgin Islands). After exchanges of letters among Henrik Lund; his father, Johan Christian Lund; and Kierkegaard’s older brother, Peter Christian Kierkegaard, the material was sent, in late May 1857, to the latter’s episcopal residence in Aalborg.2 After a number of years of hesitation concerning what to do with his brother’s papers, P. C. Kierkegaard accepted the editorial assistance of H. P. Barfod (1834–1892), a jurist and former newspaper editor. The bishop himself had already published (in 1859) the manuscript of The Point of View for My Work as an Author, which had been among Søren Kierkegaard’s papers. On February 24,

Kierkegaard’s nephew, Henrik Lund; attorney Julius Maag, tax collector for estates; as well as M. C. Muhle, clerk of the superior provincial court, and J. P. Gudum, messenger with the Probate Commission. The testamentary letters were given to P. C. Kierkegaard; this was recorded as follows: “Two letters, both sealed, and with the inscription ‘to Hr. Pastor, Doctor Kierkegaard, to be opened after my death,’ were given to Hr. Pastor and opened by him, but nothing was found to be enclosed, after which they remained in Hr. Pastor’s possession” (ibid.). ) For more information in this connection, see Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard; and KJN 1, pp vii–xi.

1

) See Finn Gredal Jensen, “To genfundne breve. Fra J. C. Lund til P. C. Kierkegaard og fra Regine Schlegel til Henrik Lund” [Two Rediscovered Letters: From J. C. Lund to P. C. Kierkegaard and from Regine Schlegel to Henrik Lund], in Danske Studier [Danish Studies] (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2005), pp. 194–200.

2

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

1865, Barfod moved into the episcopal residence and began work on a new catalogue of Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers, which he completed at the beginning of November that same year, assigning it the title “Fortegnelse over de efter Søren Aabye Kierkegaards Død forefundne Papirer” [Catalogue of the Papers Found after the Death of Søren Aabye Kierkegaard], abbreviated hereafter as B-cat. Almost a decade later, in July 1875, during a visit to Copenhagen in connection with the funeral of Johan Christian Lund, P. C. Kierkegaard transferred his brother’s papers to the University of Copenhagen Library, and in the course of time the papers ended up at the Royal Library, where they are now kept in climate-controlled storage.1

II. Lund’s and Barfod’s Catalogues Apart from the Probate Commission’s brief account, Lund’s accounts of Kierkegaard’s posthumous materials―“The Order of the Papers” and “Catalogue of the Manuscripts” (L-cat.)―constitute the earliest testimony about how Kierkegaard had stored and arranged his many papers, notebooks, journals, drafts, preliminary studies, sketches, etc.2 ) For more information on this matter, see Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Joakim Garff, and Johnny Kondrup, Written Images: Søren Kierkegaard’s Journals, Notebooks, Booklets, Sheets, Scraps, and Slips of Paper, trans. Bruce H. Kirmmse (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003), pp. 19–29, 67, 76–77.

1

) L-cat. is dated January 16, 1856. Flemming Christian Nielsen has questioned whether Lund’s list should be regarded as the most authentic report of where and how Kierkegaard stored his manuscripts, inasmuch as he believes that the Probate Commission had “disturbed the scene.” The wording of the commission’s report does not support this skepticism, however. Nowhere is there any mention of the commission’s having “straightened up” the posthumous material or of its having been greeted with “a surprising sight” in the form of masses of paper that were then “hastily” put out of the way in a chest of drawers and a desk. Nor does the commission report indicate that “the papers had lain around in a mess,” as Nielsen puts it in Alt blev godt betalt. Auktionen over Søren Kierkegaards indbo [Everything Fetched a Good Price: The Auction of Søren Kierkegaard’s Personal Effects] (Viborg: Holken-

2

xxxi

xxxii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

L-cat. begins in reverse chronological order, that is, with the most recently written materials being among those listed first, although this chronology is not adhered to in every detail. Lund’s “The Order of the Papers” records where the material was located; for example, item numbers 159–231 are said to have been “In the second chest of drawers. B. / In the top drawer. / . . . To the right” together with item number 155, The Moment No. 9 (see illustration 1 at the end of this section).1 Lund did not complete the work of registering Kierkegaard’s papers and stopped, with few exceptions, with the papers from the period 1844–1846; thus, generally speaking, materials from before that period were not registered. “The Order of the Papers” simply mentions that some of the later and most of the earliest materials were found in a large sack and three bags.2

feldt, 2000), pp. 7–8. To be sure, as has been noted, the Probate Commission did place in a writing desk, a small chest of drawers, and a cabinet some of the material (“a mass of paper, mostly manuscripts”) that had not been put away, but by and large this is in fact all that was said about the posthumous papers. Furthermore, an inspection of “The Order of the Papers” and of L-cat. reveals a high degree of systematization―including those papers that might have been moved by the commission―which could not have been accidental, but which must be attributable to Kierkegaard’s own arrangement. The fact that Henrik Lund was present during the commission’s work also makes it less likely that the material was subjected to utterly arbitrary treatment. ) See also Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Joakim Garff, and Johnny Kondrup, Written Images, pp. 11–22, for a description of the manner in which Lund most likely undertook his work with the papers.

1

) The contents of the sack, which also included a white linen bag containing item numbers 383–389, are described as follows: “In addition, this sack contained only a quantity of old, used mss. of Either/Or, Stages on Life’s Way, logical problems, etc., etc. (generally in great disorder and scattered).” The contents of the three bags are described as follows: “A bag with mss. of The Moments and the final polemic / A bag with drafts, fair copies, printer’s proofs, and a little note that was not used. / A bag w/ bills, etc.” In addition, in the preface to his list, H. P. Barfod writes that the contents of “Cardboard box A,” in which B-cat. items 424–454 were found, was covered with a thick layer of mold, indicating that it was scarcely likely that Henrik Lund had opened it, and in any case he did not register its contents.

2

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

Illustrations 2 and 3 are attempts at reconstructing how the posthumous papers may have been situated in Kierkegaard’s writing desk and chest of drawers at his death. It must be emphasized that this only applies to the placement of the later materials, that is, from the period after October 1852 (see below), and that these are schematic depictions that do not claim to depict the furniture precisely as it looked.1 H. P. Barfod’s “Fortegnelse over de efter Søren Aabye Kierkegaards Død forefundne Papirer” (B-cat.) comprises 472 numbers, which, up to number 382, are identical with the numbers in Henrik Lund’s list (L-cat.), which itself appears as no. 473 in B-cat.2 ) In his “The Order of the Papers,” Henrik Lund provides only a partial description of the writing desk, and Kierkegaard’s own description of “the desk” contains so many interpretive possibilities that no unequivocal description is possible. It cannot be ruled out that, prior to 1855, Kierkegaard may have used a number of desks for his papers. In this connection, see the following journal entries and drafts: NB14:44.b (KJN 6, 376); NB20:18 (KJN 7, 408); Pap. X 5 B 12, Pap. X 5 B 163, and Pap. XI 3 B 295:1; plus the information in B-cat. concerning Kierkegaard’s cover sheets for B-cat. 235, 237, 239, 240, 314, 315, and 319. In “The Order of the Papers,” there is mention of two chests of drawers, chest A and chest B. In the list of Kierkegaard’s estate, three chests of drawers are listed―under point 8: “2 mah[ogany] chests,” and under point 12: “1 mah[ogany] chest” (Landsover- samt Hof- og Stadsretten, Københavns Skiftekommission 1771–1863, 1854–1855, sealed ledger 3, 1–76, estate no. 71, p. 133). Two chests of drawers appear in the auction catalogue of his estate, Københavnske Politi- og Domsmyndigheder 1852–1919, Landsoversamt Hof- og Stadsretten, Auktionskontoret, katalog Nr. XLVII: Fortegnelse over endeel gode Meubler og Effecter, tilhørende afdøde Bogholder Kirketerps, Dr. phil. Søren Kierkegaards [sic], Major Soells og flere Boer [Copenhagen Police and Judicial Authority 1852–1919, Provincial, Court, and City Superior Court, Auction Office, catalogue no. xlvii: List of a Quantity of Good Furniture and Effects Belonging to the Late Bookkeeper Kirketerps, Dr. phil. Søren Kierkegaards [sic], Major Soell, and Other Estates] (Copenhagen, 1856), p. 11, Zealand Provincial Archives, et al. In this connection, see Flemming Christian Nielsen, http://www.mardi.dk/betalt, pdf, pp. 13–14.

1

) As has been noted, the last numbers in L-cat., numbers 383–390 (the last of which Lund listed without any description of content) were in a sack that had not been available to Barfod at the time he compiled his B-cat.―though he subsequently gained access to

2

xxxiii

xxxiv

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Unlike Lund, Barfod included everything in his catalogue, apart from several lesser articles and letters that were in the bishop’s “repository.”1 Furthermore, Barfod provides far more detailed descriptions of the individual items. Owing to its greater detail, and because it includes L-cat., B-cat. has been the principal guideline for the arrangement and organization of the loose papers in KJN 11. In every case, the information in B-cat. was also compared with that in Lund’s “The Order of the Papers.” In some cases, B-cat. provides precise identification of the content of the various groups of individual papers, while in other cases it lists only the number of papers that had been found in a given location. In connection with their own arrangement of the materials, the editors of Søren Kierkegaards Papirer (Pap.) attempted to reconstruct a more detailed content for B-cat. by consciously striving to match up the original materials that had survived undisturbed―plus the materials that had been transmitted indirectly (typically, these were materials for which the original documents had been lost, but which had been published in Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer, see below)―with the contents and the numbers of the items that appear in B-cat. (see illustration 4).2 The editors of SKS have relied to a considerable degree on the reconstruction project carried out by the editors of Pap., but in a number of cases they have made choices that diverge from it.

this material. Thus, when Barfod continued his list with number 383, in the belief that he was starting where Lund had left off, the result is that the contents of item numbers 383–390 in L-cat. differ from the contents of item numbers 383–390 in B-cat. ) B-cat., p. 221.

1

) In practice, however, this reconstruction was not applied to Pap., which builds, primarily, on a chronological, and secondarily, on a systematic principle of organization, but this reconstruction can be seen in the descriptions of the manuscripts provided in the back matter of the individual volumes of Pap. In order to make them fit into the absolute chronology of their edition, the editors of Pap. carried out such a fundamental redistribution of the papers from the period 1830–1843 that it rendered reconstruction of the material by the editors of SKS extremely difficult.

2

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

III. “Loose Papers” “Loose papers” covers the body of surviving material that is connected to Kierkegaard’s lifelong practice of keeping journals and notebooks (published as KJN 1–10), but that exists independently of these and cannot be connected to them on the basis of the information provided by B-cat.1 At some points, Kierkegaard himself employs the category “Loose papers” to designate this material; thus he calls item 144 in B-cat. “Loose papers from ’48 that lay in the Bible case” (SKS 27, 481–497; KJN 11.2). The material is extremely varied, both physically and with respect to its content.2 The contents range from lecture notes and reading excerpts made during Kierkegaard’s years as a university student (and stemming from his own wide-ranging studies), to notes from the early beginnings of his authorship, and to the polemics, toward the end of his career as a writer, in opposition to the manner in which Christianity was being preached by the established Church. Physically, the material consists of individual loose pages, folio sheets, scraps of paper, pieces of cardboard, sewn signatures, and more.3

) Paper 255–Paper 258, “Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA” (in the present volume), ought to have appeared in KJN 1 together with Journal AA. Barfod mentions these items in B-cat. at the conclusion of his description of that journal: “[4 loose, small pages are included.―The rest of the book has not been written in.]” (B-cat., p. 195; see KJN 1, 293 n. 1). One example of a journal that was begun as loose papers is Journal FF (KJN 2, 67–107), which consists of a fair copy of a number of small loose pages and scraps of paper; see the “Critical Account of the Text of Journal FF” in KJN 2, 398–402.

1

) In the Critical Accounts of the Texts, no attempt has been made to characterize Kierkegaard’s handwriting, which underwent significant changes over time. In general, it can be said that with time, the elegant and easily readable hand of the earlier material becomes looser and more difficult to read. In places, the papers from the final years (1852–1855) are in fact very difficult to read, marked as they are of having been written in great haste.

2

) The material does not include sketches, drafts, preparatory work, fair copies, and the like of Kierkegaard’s own published works or unpublished writings (the materials that were included in the B section of Pap.). These are available in electronic form at http://sks.dk

3

xxxv

xxxvi

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Owing to Barfod’s practice of sending original manuscripts to the printer as the basis for the printed version, portions of the material have been transmitted to us only indirectly, via his selection that was published as Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer [From Søren Kierkegaard’s Posthumous Papers] (Copenhagen, 1869–1881) (hereafter, EP). In addition, a portion of the missing material has been preserved only in the form of transcripts made by Barfod or by P. A. Heiberg, one of the editors of Pap. Lastly, KJN 11 includes some previously unpublished material.1 The material in KJN 11 has been organized into the following levels (here listed in ascending order): ― ― ― ―

division into Papers and entries division into archival units based on B-cat. division into groups of B-cat. units overarching division into specific chronological units (the groups from 1830–1843, 1843–1852, and 1852–1855)

Papers and Entries A “Paper” is the fundamental unit in KJN 11. Papers have been numbered sequentially (from 1 to 591). A Paper can consist of one or more entries, and as a rule, each entry corresponds to a number in Pap. A Paper can consist simply of a single loose page or scrap of paper, but it can also consist of several attached pages. In a few cases, a Paper can also consist of several different sorts of paper materials on which the text is continuous. and in SKS 15 and 16. Not infrequently, however, the distinction between a Loose Paper and material that should be counted among the preparatory work, etc. has been difficult to maintain and has had to give way to pragmatic criteria of selection. To a certain extent, the information provided in Lund’s “The Order of the Papers” has been used in determining whether material ought to included or excluded. As a general rule, material that exists in two or more versions in Kierkegaard’s own hand has been viewed as having been written with an eye to publication and has therefore not been included among the “Loose Papers” (an exception from this is the subscription invitation, Paper 382 [SKS 27, 453–455; KJN 11.2], for which a draft exists; see the Critical Account of the Text for that paper. ) Namely, excerpts and notes on Schleiermacher from 1834 (Paper 13 in the present volume).

1

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

Archival Units Based on B-cat. B-cat. constitutes the fundamental framework around which the materials in KJN 11 have been organized; thus, to the extent possible, papers grouped under the same number in B-cat. have also been grouped together in KJN. As has been noted, the work of reconstruction that undergirds Pap. has been used in this connection, but at some points―where matters of content or chronology have been determinative, or where the editors of the present edition have adopted a divergent interpretation of B-cat.―KJN departs from Pap. in its decisions regarding the placement of individual units. The sequence of the numbers in B-cat. is determined by the earliest dated (or datable) entry within each number; thus, B-cat. 457 is the oldest and therefore the first number in the period 1830– 1843 because it contains Kierkegaard’s Church history excerpts from Philip K. Marheineke’s Geschichte der teutschen Reformation. Erster Theil [History of the German Reformation: First Part] (Berlin, 1816), which are estimated to be from the period 1830–1831.1 Within one B-cat. number―that is, when a number consists of several units―an attempt has also been made to place the units in a chronological sequence that in some cases deviates from the sequence indicated in B-cat.2 In the case of larger units―for example, B-cat. 319 and 353―subgroups within these units have been viewed as independent units.3

) See the “Critical Account of the Text of Paper 1” in the present volume. With respect to the undated papers, it is explained in the “Dating and Chronology” section of the critical account that―on the assumption that Kierkegaard placed the papers together not only because of their content, but also because of when they had been written―the editors of SKS took “soundings” in an attempt to account for their likely dates. Where this is clearly not the case, the critical account makes explicit mention of that fact.

1

) In some cases it has been possible, based on B-cat., to break up and rearrange text that has been indirectly transmitted. This is the case, for example, with the entries concerning the Master Thief, which are arranged in a slightly different sequence in KJN than in EP; see Papers 97–98 and 103 in the present volume.

2

) This means, for example, that Papers 327–328, “ ‘Minor Pieces’ ” (KJN 11.2; SKS 27, 343–345), which have B-cat. number 353x, and Papers 339–340, “‘Berlin, May 5th–13th 46’” (KJN 11.2; SKS 27,

3

xxxvii

xxxviii

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

Groups of Archival Units As noted, the grouping of the material, which is reflected in the table of contents on the part title pages for each of the three chronological periods, has been determined by the units in B-cat., and here again, the sequence is determined by the date of the earliest dated entry within each unit. Many of the units were dated by Kierkegaard himself, typically by supplying a cover sheet with a title, while other units have names assigned by the editors of SKS, based on their contents. In the latter case, it has turned out to be practicable and possible to bring together a number of B-cat. units under the same title (in all cases, the B-cat. numbers have been provided in the critical accounts of the texts). In addition, each of the first two chronological units has a concluding group labeled “Diverse,” that is, material that could not meaningfully be placed among the other materials but nonetheless is deemed to belong to the chronological unit in question. The final chronological period is characterized by the special circumstance that, as a general rule, each paper has its own B-cat. number. For this period, Lund’s “The Order of the Papers” was consulted because, as noted, that document contains information concerning the specific locations in Kierkegaard’s writing desk and his chest of drawers in which the later papers were found and that also provides a sketch of which materials were found together with what other materials. Against this background, the material in this group falls into three subdivisions, corresponding to three specific time periods, namely, October 1852–October 1853, March–December 1854, and April 18–September 25, 1855. These three periods have been labeled, respectively: “After the Final Change of Address,” “Toward the Battle with the Church,” and “During the Publication of The Moment.”

349–363), which have B-cat. number 353a, are each presented separately, and that Papers 341–344, “ ‘Encomium to Autumn’ ” (KJN 11.2; SKS 27, 349–363), which has B-cat. number 353b, as well as the group consisting of Papers 372–377, “On Rosenkilde, Mynster, Goldschmidt, et al.” (KJN 11.2; SKS 27, 437–443), which contains B-cat. numbers 353n, 353k, 353r, 353h, and 353g, are similarly presented in separate sections.

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

Overarching Division into Chronological Units The overarching division into chronological units was made by the editors of SKS and was dictated both by content of the materials themselves and by matters related to Kierkegaard’s writings and to the external circumstances of his life. Thus, the division between groups 1830–1843 and 1843–1852 was determined, first of all, by the publication of Either/Or, which appeared on February 20, 1843, and which, in retrospect, Kierkegaard viewed as the beginning of his career as an author. The content of the loose papers from then is thus very much marked by the change from having been primarily notes and entries related to his wide-ranging studies and reading, to being reflections, ideas, sketches, and so forth that were related to his published work. The break between the group covering the years 1843–1852 and the group covering 1852–1855 was determined by Kierkegaard’s move, on October 9, 1852, from the Østerbro district (then on the edge of Copenhagen) to Klædeboderne (right in the heart of the city). On the occasion of that move, he collected and wrote up descriptions of some of his manuscript materials, after which he put them aside.1 In other words, this break provides an important chronological marker for the point at which Kierkegaard collected and organized various separate materials. In addition, 1852 was the first year since 1842 during which Kierkegaard did not publish anything.2

) This is clear from, for example, L-cat. and B-cat. 237, to which Kierkegaard added the following information on their contents: “from the desk, when I moved to Klædeboderne.” That Kierkegaard organized his papers in connection with moving to a new address is also seen from, for example, L-cat. and B-cat. 319, which explain that Kierkegaard had described the papers as “That which lay in the midmost, wide drawer, when I moved out to Østerbro.”

1

) Kierkegaard’s self-imposed silence lasted from the publication of For Self-Examination: Recommended to the Present Age on September 12, 1851 (FSE, 1–87; SKS 13, 29-108), until December 18, 1854, when he published the article “Was Bishop Mynster a ‘Witness to the Truth,’ One of ‘the Real Witnesses to the Truth’―Is This the Truth?” (M, 3–8; SKS 14, 121-126).

2

xxxix

xl

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

IV. Typographical Signals et al. The reproduction of original materials in KJN 11 includes several new initiatives not employed in KJN 1–10. By making use of varying widths for headings and margins, KJN 11 attempts to reflect the varied appearance of the manuscript materials themselves. Thus, pages in KJN 11 may have narrow or broad text columns, or the text may extend across the entire page, with correspondingly broad or narrow margins. Similarly, an attempt has been made to reproduce diagrams, tables, and so forth to reflect the original as faithfully as possible. In connection with his earliest papers, and especially with entries relating to his varied studies, Kierkegaard not infrequently scrawled various “doodles,” for example, random words, word fragments, names, letters, numbers, symbols, lines, etc., sometimes also including drawings, especially profiles of faces. In KJN 11, an attempt has been made, to the extent possible, to provide transcriptions of these, down to the level of words and letters, but where this has not been possible, and where there are drawings and the like, an illustration has been provided. In a couple of instances, special symbols in Kierkegaard’s manuscript have also been reproduced in the text itself―for example, his drawing of a circle in Paper 21:2 in the present volume―in order to illustrate the thought contained in the entry. Steen Tullberg, for the editors of SKS

I NTRODUCTION

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

1. Henrik Lund’s “The Order of the Papers,” p. 1.

xli

xlii

1A 1B 1C 1D 1E 1F 1G 1H 2 3

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS

AND

N OTEBOOKS

2. The placement of materials in Kierkegaard’s chest of drawers. A number of copies of The Moment. A book in long octavo format with pages of cardboard and a cover of a book in a slip case. A book with white pages in octavo format. The Moment No. 10 (L-cat. 156). Journals NB35 and NB36 (L-cat. 157–158). A note concerning Three Ethical-Religious Essays (L-cat. 232). The Moment No. 9 (L-cat. 155). Loose papers from April to September 1855 et al. (L-cat. 159–231). Three spaces containing L-cat. 235–364. A drawer containing L-cat. 365–382.

I NTRODUCTION

1A 2 3A 4A

4B 4C 4D 4E 4F

TO THE

L OOSE P APERS

xliii

3. The placement of materials in Kierkegaard’s writing desk. Manuscripts of articles that led up to and formed the beginning of his attack on the Church and loose papers from March to December 1854 et al. (L-cat. 2–12). Material not included in L-cat. Loose papers from January to October 1853 et al. (L-cat. 19–55). A box containing manuscripts of various unpublished writings and of “Sermon Delivered at the Pastoral Seminary,” the probationary sermon, plus “Loose papers from ’48 that lay in the Bible case” (L-cat. 139–154). A package containing copies of Fædrelandet from December 18, 1854 to May 26, 1855, containing all the articles by Kierkegaard in that newspaper during that period (L-cat. 1). Loose papers from March to December 1854 (L-cat. 56–123). Manuscript of the article “Bishop Martensen’s Reply in Berlingske Tidende” (L-cat. 138). Loose papers from October to December 1852 (L-cat. 13–18). Unused sketches and drafts from December 1854 to January 1855 (L-cat. 124–137). Drawing by mollers.dk—Hans Møller

4. Barfod’s list (B-cat.), pp. 192–193. A note on which the editor of Pap., P. A. Heiberg, has set forth his reconstruction of the contents of B-cat. 434, “Philosophica Ældre” [Philosophica. Older], can be seen fastened in the crease between the pages.

LOOSE PAPERS, 1830–1843

Paper 1: Excerpts on Church History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

Paper 2–Paper 29: Church History, Biblical Exegesis, Excerpts from Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics and from Baader’s Dogmatics, et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

Paper 30–Paper 47: Philosophica. Older . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

87

Paper 48–Paper 94: Theologica. Older . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

93

Paper 95–Paper 246: Aesthetica. Older . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

117

Paper 247–Paper 251: Biblical Exegesis, Readings of Faust, Dogmatics, et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

175

Paper 252–Paper 253: Literature on Faust et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

185

Paper 254: “Our Journal Literature” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

193

Paper 255–Paper 258: Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

211

Paper 259: “Telegraph Messages from Someone Who Sees Unclearly to a Clairvoyant concerning the Relation between Xnty and Philosophy” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

215

Paper 260: The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

221

Paper 261–Paper 263: Aphoristic Sketches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

229

Paper 264: Pages from an Older Journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

235

Paper 265–Paper 269: “My Umbrella, My Friendship,” et al. . . . . . . . . . . .

243

Paper 270: “The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary” . . . . . . . . . . . . .

247

Paper 271–Paper 276: “The First Rudiments of Either/Or. The Green Book. Some Particulars That Were Not Used” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

261

Paper 277–Paper 282: On Transition, Category, Interest, et al. . . . . . . . . . .

267

Paper 283: On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

273

Paper 284–Paper 304: Diverse, 1830–1843 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

277

PAPER 1 Excerpts on Church History

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Elise Iuul, Rasmus Sevelsted, and Steen Tullberg

2

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

Geschichte der teutschen Reformation 1st part. 1816 in Berlin

9 1:1

Dr. von Phillip Marheinecke. Professor of Th[eology] in Berlin p. 6. Carlstadt confesses that he had been a dr. of

th[eology] for some time before he got to see the Bible. p. 11. The number of clergy was so great that just in what is now Gotha, which then had at most 700 houses, there were 14 canons, 40 priests, 30 Augustinian monks, 2 administrators of districts for mendicants, and 30 nuns. pp. 26 and 27. Erasmus has preserved for us a sermon that was given in Italy in the presence of Pope Julius II, in which the speaker compared the pope with a second Jupiter, who rules the world with thunderbolts in his hand, who calls to mind a Decius and a Curtius when he speaks of Chr[ist’s] sufferings; who, when he wants to encourage gratitude toward Chr[ist], calls to mind the fact that pagans honored such men with monuments; the death of Chr[ist] is compared to the innocent death of a Socrates or a Phocion; with a Scipio, who, for his countless good deeds, was rewarded with wretchedness; with an Aristides. pp. 35 and 36 Luther was born on Nov. 10, 1483 in Eisleben. His father was a miner, his mother was Margretha, née Lindemann. At age 14 he went to school in Magdeburg; at age 15 he went to school in Eisenach, where he was obliged to beg, but was taken in by Conrad Cotta’s widow, who permitted him to eat at her house. He made good progress at the Franciscan school. He also learned music, playing the flute. At 18 years of age he entered the high school in Erfurt, where he studied dialectic and classical authors. At 20 years of age he earned the degree of mag. phil. and then studied law. p. 37. In 1503 he became sick from his endless studying. a German priest came and consoled him, saying that he was not to die, but that God would

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History

5

10

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

surely make a great man of him. This is the first prophecy concerning him. In 1505 Alexius was killed in the night in Erfurt, and there was a terrifying thunderbolt, which deafened him, striking very close to him. p. 38. [Blank in the original.] p. 39. he studied God’s Word and Augustine under Jodocus, whom everyone called the Dr. of Eisenach. p. 40. In 1508, at age 25, he was employed at Wittenberg to lecture on phil[osophy]; subsequently to lecture on theo[logy]. In 1510 he was sent on to Rome on official business. After his return he became a dr. theol. p. 43. In 1516, when Staupitz was sent to bring relics back from the Netherlands for the castle church in Wittenberg, he [Luther] served as the replacement. The same year he wrote the preface to The German Theology. p. 45. In 1517, Staupitz sent him to Dresden, where he preached in the presence of Duke Georg. That same year, Tetzel arrived in the vicinity of Witt[enberg]. p. 47. A number of princes indeed protested against it, but on the other hand, they themselves made use of indulgences; thus, Frederick III of Saxony leased the trade [in indulgences] in order to build a bridge across the Elbe at Torgau. p. 48. The pope even sacrificed canon law in order to serve states by means of indulgences. (Leipzig was fortified in 1430, Freiberg was rebuilt after a fire in 1492.). pp. 53 and 54. Leo X claimed that he needed money to build St. Peter’s Church in Rome, but it was well known that he spent a lot of money, and also his sister was married to a Prince Cibo. In order to collect these indulgences, the pope made use of commissioners, of whom the first was Angelo Arcimboldi, a Milanese dr. jur., papal pronotary, and referendary, who visited the Rhenish provinces, the Netherlands, and Burgundy in 1514. In 1515, his next commission sent him to Bavaria, Austria, Westphalia, Holstein, Sweden, and the dioceses of Kamin and Meissen.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

3

4

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

p. 54. Christoph de Forli, the general of the Francis-

can order, was the holder of a separate commission on indulgences for Switzerland; he made use of Samson of Milan. The third commission was the one held by Albrecht, archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg and bishop of Halberstadt, the brother of Joachim I of Brandenburg. pp. 60, 61. The most important of the 95 Theses: 1) When Chr[ist] says “Repent,” he wants the believers’ entire lives to be continual repentance. 6.) The pope cannot forgive sinners, etc. p. 68. Tetzel publicly burns Luther’s theses; in retaliation, the students at Wittenb. posted a notice that whoever wanted to attend the burial of Tetzel’s theses could show up at 2 o’clock, when they burned a great many of them. p. 69. On Apr. 13th 1518 he traveled to Heidelberg and was greatly celebrated in his debate there. p. 79. Luther’s sermons and writings served to enlighten the people (explanation of the 10 Commandments; the explication of the Lord’s Prayer; his sermons on repentance). p. 81. A papal court was convened in Rome, with Silvester Prierio as chief prosecutor and judge. Aug. 7th: a papal letter to Luther arrived, ordering him to come to Rome within 60 days. p. 83. On Aug. 8th Luther wrote to Spalatin, asking him to arrange that he be heard before a commission in Germany, not in Rome. Leo X now commanded Cajetan to investigate the matter in Augsburg. p. 84. On Oct. 7th L. arrived in Augsburg. pp. 86 and 87 On Oct. 12, having been granted safe-conduct, Luther went to the legate. At this hearing, Luther and the cardinal had a disagreement concerning a bull issued by Clement VI, termed the Extravagantes, and the cardinal quickly noted L’s superiority. The following day, Luther appeared for a second time before him along with Staupitz, 4 of the emperor’s most important counselors, a notary, witnesses, along with figures sent by the Elector, namely Phil[ip] von Feilitsch and Johan Rühel. In this hearing Luther submitted to the judgment of 4

5

11

15

20

25

30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History univers[ities]: Basel, Freiburg, Louvain, and Paris.

5

10

12

15

20

25

30

35

40

p. 89. The cardinal said: Ego nolo amplius cum hac bestia colloqui, habet enim profundos oculos et mirabiles speculationes in capite suo. p. 93. It was only in Nuremberg that Luther got to

see the pope’s letter to Cajetan. It was signed by Jacob Sadoletus and had been written August 23, 1518. In it, Luther was called a heretic and Cajetan was ordered to seize him and hold him prisoner until further notice. p. 97 On Oct. 30 he again came to Wittenberg. The Elect[or] forbade him to publish the documents relating to his talks with Cajetan, and also preferred that Luther leave. Luther’s departure was very much accelerated by the Elect[or]. He therefore held a farewell dinner, and in the course of this dinner a message came from the Elect[or], via Spalatin, wanting to know why he had not in fact already left. p. 98 While the meal was still in progress, yet another message arrived from Spalatin, who now said that he could remain, because there was hope that the matter could be decided by new negotiations. p. 99. Philip Melanchthon was born in Bretten in the Palatinate on Feb. 16, 1497. He studied gr[ammar] in Pforzheim, was taught by Georg Simmler, and was a friend of Reuchlin. p. 100. Studied diligently in Heidelberg, but became sick and goes to Tübingen. Became a Master of Philos. in 1514. When the Elector of Saxony was in Augsburg, he convinced Melanchthon to accept a position at his university. He came to Wittenb. on Aug. 25, 1518. p. 107. On Nov. 22, 1518, the University of Witt. submitted an intercessory letter for Luther, just as, on Sept. 25, it had lodged a protest in his behalf with the papal court. The Elector ordered Degenhard Pfeffinger, his minister at the imperial court, to ask the emperor whether the matter might not be dropped or at least investigated in Germany. p. 108. On Nov. 9, 1518, a decree was issued in Rome, subsequently published by Cajetan in Linz on Dec. 13, in which the doctrine concerning indulgences was set forth without making mention of Luther, 3 Ego nolo . . . capite suo.] Latin, I refuse to speak further with this beast, because he has deep-set eyes and strange ideas in his head.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

5

6

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

presumably in order to give Luther a chance to issue a retraction. p. 110. Now (i.e., 1519) Carl von Miltitz, the papal nuncio and canon of Mainz, Trier, and Meissen, was sent; he was also supposed to present the sacred rose to the Elect[or] of Saxony. (Maximilian †). p. 111. In January there were talks between L. and Miltitz, who flattered L., indeed, he even wept, kissing him. p. 114. Luther had promised Miltitz that he would write a humble letter to the pope (see p. 112), which he then in fact wrote on March 3, 1519. p. 115. The other thing L. had promised Miltitz was to publish a piece in which he encouraged everyone to be obedient to the Rom. Church; he did so, and there is much in this work that accords with false doctrine. p. 121. Luther had yet another meeting with Miltitz in Liebenwerda on Oct. 8, 1519, but without consequences. pp. 127 and 128. There was now a debate in Leipzig between the Wittenberg people and Eck. Eck showed up and the people from Wittenberg arrived on June 17th. Carlstadt arrived first, in his own carriage, but it overturned and he was thus unkempt when he arrived in the city. Next came Duke Barnim of Pomerania, who was at the time rector of the University of Witt., accompanied by Luther and Melanch.; they were followed on foot by a crowd of (200) armed university students. Duke George himself came in order to attend the debate, also renting a palace in which there were 2 chairs placed opposite one another, tables at which the secretaries sat; the benches and the chairs were upholstered with beautiful tapestry. p. 129 On June 27th they assembled in the great body, with an address delivered in the name of the university; thereafter they proceeded to St. Thomas Church to attend mass; from thence they went to the palace. Guards were present to keep order from 7 to 9 in the morning and from 2 to 5 in the afternoon. Carlstadt and Eck debated about free will for 8 days.

5

10

13 15

20

25

30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History

5

10

15

20

14

25

30

35

40

p. 130. The next week he [Eck] debated with L. concerning the primacy of the pope, on the councils. and in the 3rd week about purgatory and about indulgences. Last, Carlstadt and Eck debated for another 3 days. The duke of Pomerania ordered L. to read the gospel in the palace chapel, but he [Luther] could not obtain permission to give a sermon. 133. In the month of July L. received two letters from the Hussites in Bohemia, one from Johannes Paduska, a priest in Prague, the other from Rosdialovinus, dean in Prague, in which they encouraged him to continue, saying that he will become for Saxony what Hus [is] for Bohemia. pp. 140 and 41. In his sermon on the Holy Eucharist L. said that it would be good if people could partake under both kinds. On Jan. 24, 1520, Johan von Schleinitz, bishop of Meissen, published a sermon containing a decree in opposition to this, and a rumor was spread to the effect that L. had been born in Bohemia and brought up in Prague. L. subsequently issued a vigorous rebuttal of Schleinize’s decree. pp. 149. 150. The universities of Louvain and Cologne condemned his writings, including a specific group of theses that had been published in Basel. L. consoled himself with the examples of L[orenzo] Valla and Reuchlin.―He was also attacked in a Latin piece addressed to the German princes and estates in the name of an Italian theologian, Thomas Rhadinus, though many people believed it had been written by Emser in Leipzig (see p. 133, bottom of page.―the Hussites). Melanchthon wrote a Latin piece in defense, addressed to the imperial princes and estates: In his defense of L., he shows that L. was simply declaiming against the abuses of previous centuries, against scholasticism’s errors and distortion of scripture, showing how this is in keeping with the pope’s supremacy in Germany. p. 151. In May of that year Sylvester von Schaumburg, a knight and member of the nobility, promised to protect L.―Franz v. Sickingen did so as well; p. 152 also Ulrich von Hutten (Awaken, Thou Noble

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

7

8

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

Freedom). p. 155. June 20, 1520, he published his book: An Kaiserliche Majestæt und den christlichen Adel teutscher Nation von des christlichen Standes Besserung, mit einer Vorrede an Nicolaus von Amsdorf. On p. 156 he says that the pope has surrounded himself with three walls 1) worldly power has nothing to say concerning him 2) only he can properly interpret the Bible 3) no one other than the pope can convene councils. p. 162 As early as September, 4000 copies of this book were in circulation. p. 163 L. then wrote Tractat von der Babylonischen Gefangenschaft, in which he not only points out external abuses in the Church, but also the errors of doctrine that lie deeper. p. 164. A new work that was now published was “Sermon von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen,” in which he calmly sets forth the doctrine concerning faith. Here he sets forth 2 things: 1) a Christian is a free master of all things; 2) a Christian is subjected to everyone. The former is owing to faith, the latter to love. (p. 167.). p. 182. At a conclave to which Cajetan, who was ill, had to be carried, and at which Eck had great influence, the Roman court composed a bull in which 41 of Luther’s principles were declared heretical, misleading, etc., and he was ordered to retract them within 60 days or be excommunicated. p. 183. Hutten published the bull accompanied by highly critical commentary, preface, and epilogue. p. 184. Eck had the bull published in Meissen on Sept. 21st, in Merseburg on the 25th, in Brandenburg on the 29th. Duke Georg honored him [Luther] with a gold goblet and many ducats; but at Michaelmas threats against him were posted in 10 places, so he withdrew to the Paulist monastery. People sang street songs mocking him. p. 185. When Eck demanded that the bull be published in Erfurt, the university students gathered together and ripped it to pieces. The bishop of Merseburg, by contrast, posted the proclamation until April 1521. The bishop of Meissen first announced it on January 7.

5

10

15

20

25

15

30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History

5

10

15

20

16

30

35

40

p. 186. On Nov. 17th, L. repeated his appeal to a genrl council, calling the pope a heretic, a tyrant, the Antichrist, a despiser of councils. p. 195. His writings had been burned in Louvain, Cologne, and Mainz. In return, he announced that he would burn the papal decrees and bulls at 9 a.m. on Dec. 10th. A magister arranged the fire upon which canon law and the writings of Eck and Emser were cast. After the fire was ignited, L. himself cast the bull onto it with the words, “Because you have grieved the holy ones of the Lord, therefore the eternal fire consumes you.” To prevent misunderstanding of the motive for this action, L. published a book titled [“]Ursachen, warum des Papsts und seiner Jünger Bücher von D.M.L. verbrannt sind.” p. 198. Augustinus von Alveld, a Franciscan, wanted to serve as a knight in opposition to Luther and defend the power of the pope. At first, others wrote in opposition to him, finally L. himself wrote a book bearing the title “Von Papstthum zu Rom, wider den hochberühmten zu Leipzig.” He shows that it was not necessary for there to be only one physical church, despite the fact that there only was one spiritual church. As for the doctrine of the pope as the vicar of Christ, he shows that a head in a physical sense has influence over, and imparts to its body, all life, thought, and activity. This is indeed what earthly princes do, but indeed no hum. being can engender faith in another, which only Christ is capable of―thus, neither can the pope be the vicar of Christ, because a vicar must of course do the same as the person in whose place he is standing. p. 221. In addition to Eck, 2 other papal nuncios had come, Marino Caraccioli was one, Hieronymus Aleander was the other. They now urged the Electors not only to have L.’s books burned, but also to have him punished, or at any rate arrested. At the same time, the important thing was that they influence the Elect[or] of Saxony, because if he were convinced, they believed, the situation would resolve itself. p. 223. The Elect[or] replied that it would be best for the matter to be decided by trustworthy men in a place in which L. would be safe, and that until then

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

9

10

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

his person and his books would not be disturbed. p. 224. People wanted to move Erasmus to write in opposition to Luther, but he was too shrewd to do so. p. 225. But Erasmus did speak well of L. to the Elect[or] of Saxony when the latter asked him to come to Cologne, where he Eras[mus] came on Dec. 5th: he said (see p. 226) Lutherus peccavit in duobus, nempe, quod tetigit coronam pontifices et ventres monachorum. p. 236. On Jan. 3rd 1521, a new bull of excommuni-

cation was issued against him and his adherents of whatever social class they might be. More suggestions for bringing about peace also came in, thus from Glapio, the papal confessor, from someone anonymous, from Johann Faber, the Dominican prior in Augsburg. All these suggestions proposed that the matter ought not be decided solely by the pope. (pp. 238–241.) p. 242 the papal nuncio Hieronymus Aleander sought to raise suspicion concerning L., and when he and the emperor and the ministers were challenged to point out the places at which L. was in conflict with H[oly] Scriptures, he gave an address on Feb. 13th, lasting 3 hours, in which the papal bull constituted his text. p. 251 On March 6th came the imperial summons in which L. was ordered to come to Worms within 21 days together with a letter of safe conduct bearing the strange inscription: To the Honorable, Our Beloved, Devoted Dr. M. Luther, of the Augustinian Order. p. 252. L. set off, accompanied by Justus Jonas, subsequently a prof. at Wittenberg, Nicolaus von Amsdorf, Petrus v. Schwaben, a Danish nobleman, and Hieronymus Schurf, a jurist at Wittenberg. p. 253 March 28th, also known as Maundy Thursday, the pope also included him in the bull in coena Domini, in which damnation is pronounced upon all heretics. p. 254. In 1523 Hans Sachs composed Die Wittenbergisch Nachtigall, so man jetzt höret überall. p 255. Wittenberg gave him a carriage. In Erfurt he was received by Rector Crotus of the university 11 Lutherus peccavit . . . monachorum] Latin, Luther has done wrong in two matters: first, he has attacked the papal tiara, and second, he has attacked the monks’ paunches. 40 in coena Domini] Latin, at the Eucharist of the Lord.

5

10

15

20

25

17 30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History

5

10

15

20

25

30

18

35

40

and by Eobanus Hessen et al. 2 miles before they reached the town. p. 257. He arrived at Worms on April 16th. An imperial herald rode ahead of the carriage. Justus Jonas and his assistant followed the carriage. Many nobles came to meet him, and when he arrived at 10 o’clock in the morning, more than 2000 peop. accompanied him to his quarters. The next day, he was summoned to a meeting of the imperial diet that aftern[oon]. Von Pappenheim, the Imperial Marshal, himself accompanied him at 4 o’clock in the afternoon. p. 258 Commanding General Georg Frundsberg clapped him on the shoulders and said that he was walking a path that he had never walked. (Hutten encouraged him in 2 works) 259. Eck stepped forward and asked if he acknowledged these books as his own and if he would retract them. He requested time to consider the second question, which he in fact was granted, and was given until 4 o‘clock the following day; but he had to stand amid a great crowd of people until 6 o’clock when he was led forward and spoke. p. 268. They continued efforts to move L. to recant; Cochleus (rlly Löffel or Löffelman) achieved nothing whatever. Some people also thought that the best way to negotiate with L. would be if he were denied safe conduct for his return journey―this was the view of the Margrave of Brandenburg; but Emperor Charles, the Elector of the Palatinate, and Duke George of Saxony opposed this. p. 269. People tried to move L. in private conversations. At one such meeting, the chancellor of Baden, Dr. Vehus, spoke, and the Elect[or] of Trier took L. to his rooms in the presence only of Eck and Cochleus. During the morning and afternoon of the following day, April 25th, Vehus and D. Peutinger continued their efforts. Finally, the Elec[tor] of Trier took him aside, but now L. used Gamaliel’s words. p. 270. L. left Worms on April 26th. In Friedberg, which he reached on the 28th, he sent the herald back, because he was now on Hessian soil. p. 272. When L. wanted to travel via Salzungen in 1 Die Wittenbergisch . . . höret überall.] Latin, The Wittenberg Nightingale, as one now hears everywhere.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

11

12

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

order to visit someone, he was seized not far from Altenstein and Waltershausen―by order of the Elector, and with the knowledge of Johannes von Berlepsch, the prefect of Wartburg, and Burchard Hund, the lord of Altenstein―and led about in the forest for several hours, after which he was brought to the Wartburg [castle] at 11 o’clock at night. p. 273 On May 26th an imperial edict proclaimed that L. and his adherents were under imperial ban. p. 282. L. assumed the name Junker Jørgen, let his hair and his beard grow, went hunting.― In Erfurt, the students and the people rose up against the clergy and used force, of which L. disapproved. p. 283. Here at the Wartburg L. wrote a book on confession, which he dedicated to Frantz von Sickingen. p. 284. Here he wrote his interpretations of the 22nd Ψ, 68th Ψ, 119th, and 37th Ψ, his Church Postil, and his book on ecclesiastical and monastic vows, which is dedicated to his father. L. wrote that work in Latin, but it was translated by Justus Jonas. p. 286. People began to deal with matters concerning the priestly vow. Feldkirch, a dean in Kemberg, had already married. The Elect[or] of Mainz demanded that he be extradited by the Elect[or] of Saxony, but the latter refused. Carlstadt also wrote about the priestly vow. p. 287. L. began work on translating the Bible. p. 288. Meanwhile, L. continued the struggle, writing against Jacob Latomus, a theologian from Louvain, and demonstrated that for us Chr[ist] was more than a teacher. At this time a piece came out against the hair-splitting of Ambrosius Catharini, a Dominican. p. 289. The Univ. of Paris wrote a censure of L.’s writings, which occasioned Melanchthon to write a Latin apologia. p. 290. Now Elect[or] Albrecht of Mainz came up with the idea of establishing an indulgence market in Halle. Then L. wrote bluntly in opposition to him in a book titled “über den Abgott zu Halle,” which, however, was not published, but with which he

5

10

15

20

25

30

19 35

40

Excerpts on Church History

5

10

15

20

25

30

20

40

threatened the Elect[or], so that the latter refrained from trafficking in indulgences. p. 298. Around Novbr., L. went on a secret journey to Witt[enberg]; he stayed with Amsdorf for several days, very pleased and cheerful, but he did not want the Elect[or] to know of it. p. 299. Melanchthon’s “loci communes rerum theologicarum sive Hypoteses theologicæ[”] had already appeared in 1521. p. 300. Now the gospel began to blossom in many places. They began to hold biblical sermons, e.g., in Zwickau, first with Friedrich Mecum, subsequently with Nicolaus Hausmann; in Freiburg; in Halberstadt; in Frisia; in Denmark. In Erfurt, first Eoban Hesse, Joachim Camerar, and Euricius Cordus taught; subsequently Johann Lang and Forchheim did so, winning great approval. Theobald Gerlacher also was outstanding in Nördlingen. Johann Bugenhagen taught in Pomerania, as did Andreas Cnophen and Christian Kettelhut, but Erasmus von Manteufel, bishop of Kamin, persecuted them, and then Bugenhagen fled to Witt[enberg] and there came to know L. That year an imperial edict was issued that ordered that the ban be put into effect. p. 302. Freedom was greatest in Saxony. The Augustinian monks in Wittenb[erg] had stopped celebrating private masses, and in his delight over this, L. wrote to the Augustinian monks in Wittenb[erg] about the abuse of the mass, but Spalatin delayed the work, so that it did not appear until 1522. p. 303. Not only did the Augustinian monks completely abolish the mass, but they dissolved monastic life. A commission consisting of Justus Jonas, Amsdorf, Joh[ann] Doltz, Andreas Karlstadt, Hieronymus Schurf, and Melanchthon, was established to judge the matter, applauded what had been done and encouraged the Elect[or] to abolish the mass everywhere. p. 305. Karlstadt marries a nobleman’s daughter, Anna von Mochau, which L. approved. p. 306. Karlstadt had also established connections with a society of fanatics that had formed in Wit-

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

13

14

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

t[enberg] as early as 1521; they boasted of having div[ine] revelations. The most important were: Nicolaus Storch, a manufacturer of cloth, Marx Stübner von Elsterberg, and Thomas Münzer. p. 307. M. Stübner declared that L. was not right about everything and that a higher spirit would come after him, that the Turks would conquer Germa[ny], that the popes would perish, that the world would undergo a great transformation. p. 310 Karlstadt and his adherents went about and tore images out of churches, persecuted priests, belittled Lent. p. 311. L. left the Wartb[urg] at the beginning of 1522. His letter to the Elect[or], written while he was traveling, in which he excuses himself because he left the Wartburg against the will of the Elect[or], is dated March 5th. p. 316. The Elect[or] received the letter on the 6th of M[arch] and immediately thereafter sent an order to Hieronymus Schurf, telling him to negotiate with L. after having first given him a gracious greeting. Thereafter he [Schurf] was to move L. to issue a feigned letter in which he relates his reasons for leaving the Wartb[urg] and in which he expresses that it was against the Elector’s will.―L. in fact did this. p. 322. L. preached against Karlstadt etc. for 8 days in very gentle and very popular fashion. p. 330. The troublemakers had to leave Wittenb[erg]; L. came to a complete agreement with Karlstadt; but he [Karlstadt] later departed for Orlamünde, renounced his doctoral dignity, and went about as a peasant, calling himself Brother Anders. p. 357. In 1522, Henry 8 wrote his book de septem sacramentis against L. p. 359. L. wrote very harshly in opposition to Henry, treating him as one of his least worthy opponents, calling him king by the non-grace of God. p. 366. On March 6th, Duke George turned to the government of the Empire and demanded that L. be punished for his remarks against Henry 8, but on the 16th he received a reply consisting only of polite turns of phrase.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

21 40

Excerpts on Church History

5

p. 374. In 1522 the N.T. and the 5 books of Moses were published in L.’s translation, and in the same year a new edition of the N.T. p. 375. Among the earlier translations to be noted are those from Nuremberg from 1477; 1483; 1490. and in Augsburg 1518; but they are not German.

End of 1st Part. 10

15

1:2

20

25

30

35

22

Historical Information about The Symbolic Books of the Danish Church by Jac. Chr. Lindberg. Cph. 1830. p. 18. On July 2, Frederick I convened a diet in Copenhagen. 1530, where both Prot[estant] and Catholics were to meet and debate religion. The Cath[olic] side did not have enough learned members and therefore received 2 German magisters, Dr. Stagefyhr and another anonymus. p. 19. From the Ca[tholics], in addition to the bishops and the German doctors, came the Carmelite monk, lecturer Paul Eliesen Turncoat; lecturer Christian Muus from Aarh[us]; magister Jørgen Samsing, cantor in Aarh[us]; Brother Johan Nielsen from Funen; Adzer Pedersen, cantor in Lund; Ulf, Joh[an] Wulff, canon in Ribe; and from the Protest[ants]: magister Hans Tausen, parish priest in Copen[hagen]; Peder Lorentsen; Frands Wormordsen, Ole Chrysostomus, Niels Mortensen, and Johan Olsen, preachers in Malmø; Johan Skjønning and Jørgen Jensen from Viborg; Morten Hegelund from Aalborg; Peder Thomsen and Peder Jensen from Saling; Niels Christensen, personal chaplain to Mogens Gjøe; Anders Liung from Landskrone; Christian Skrock from Assens; Hans Nielsen from Falsterbro; Thyge Christensen, Anders Madsen, Anders Nielsen, and Mr. Jacob from Ystad; Mads Jensen and Mr. Rasmus from Trolleborg.―On July 9th, Hans Tausen presented the king with the Confession of Faith, 27 anonymus] Latin, anonymous person.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

15

16

1

5

Excerpts on Church History

a

They are found in Latin and in Danish in M. Wöldike, “Confessio Hauniensis” (Haun. 1536. 4to) also in Mynter’s Dansk Reformationshistorie, 2nd part. pp. 109f.

[b]

On the Apostles’ Creed.

c

Cyrilli opp: ed. Ant: Aug: Touttèe Parisiis 1720 Folio p. 9. Procatechesis XII.

10

[d]

Irenei Op. ed. Massuet lib 1. cap. 10 p. 48. lib. III. cap. IV. p. 178.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

comprising 43 articles.a p. 32. In 1533 Sadolin translated the Augsburg Confession into Danish. We must be in possession of the Apostles’ Creed, as far as its meaning is concerned, because: 1) if one person were baptized on the basis of one [creed], another on the basis of something different, the congregation would certainly have objected; 2) the heretics would have objected. Because the heretics would surely not have remained silent if people made changes of this sort in order to exclude them from the Church. The earliest congregations also attributed great importance to the Creed, as can be seen from Cyril,c where it is forbidden even to communicate the creed to catechumens until several days before their baptism. This also helps us understand why there are no written versions of the document from the earliest period. For, of course, either they would have had to write it down in order to use it in instruction, not in order to preserve it, but they of course wrote it only for Chr[istians]: they did not need it in order to learn their confession of faith, nor did they have any doubts that the Chr[istians] surely held on to their Creed. But people have thought that they could find the Creed in the Church Fathers, and they like to cite a passage in Irenaeus,[d] but if we compare this with another passage, we see that these two passages differ greatly; now, there can be no doubt that the main import of these passages must have been contained in the Apostles’ Creed, but that these words themselves supposedly are the Creed [and] that they should appear so differently in the writings of the same man: who would be so foolish as to believe that[?]―for it is clear that his intention was in fact merely to remind the reader about the faith with which they themselves must all be familiar, and then, with additional words, to explicate the individual elements upon which he [Irenaeus] here focused and to which he had to give special emphasis. “The Church Fathers never cite the Creed word for word―which they viewed as absolutely super-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Excerpts on Church History

23 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

fluous―but merely describe and explain individual elements upon which they wanted to place special emphasis, and in so doing often passing over others.” (p. 63.) But if we were able to derive the Creed of the Church from Ireneus, etc., then we would of course also be able to derive our Creed from our modern th[eological] works. But we cannot. This is illustrated with an ex[ample] from Grundtvig’s Søndags Bog, pt. 2, p. 441. Nor have there been any changes in this Creed directed at heretical groups―this is something we can see from the fact that, e.g., they never confuse the Nicene Creed, which was drawn up after the Apostles’ Creed, with the Apostles’ Creed. It has been claimed that the dogma concerning Chr[ist’s] descent into hell is also a later addition, because it was said that it was not found in Cyril’s catechetical works on the Creed. But that isn’t true. People have denied it because the sermon, which is called [“]On the 10 Articles of Faith[”](περι των δεϰα δογματων), is divided into shorter sections each of which has a brief heading, e.g., [“]On the Cross[”], [“]On the Interment[”], etc., and here there is indeed no heading on the descent into hell. But despite this, Cyril treats this in the section “On the Grave.” It has in fact been said that this dogma is inserted in opposition to the Apollinarists, who denied that Chr[ist] had a human soul. Jan. 21st 1530 Charles summoned the imperial diet to Augsburg. This diet was supposed to have opened on April 8th, but the emperor hesitated until June 15th. On March 14th, the Elect[or] of Saxony commanded L[uther], Mel[anchthon], Justus Jonas, and Bugenhagen to produce the principal articles of the faith. On April 3rd, Elect[or] John departed from Torgau, accompanied by the electoral prince the duke of Lüneburg, the prince of Anhalt, the count of Mansfeld, several counts and barons, 70 Saxon nobles, and by Justus Jonas, L[uther], and M[elanchthon]. Luther remained behind in Coburg. On May 2nd the Elect[or] made his entry into Augsburg; on May 12th the landgrave of Hesse. On June 15th, 29 περι των δεϰα δογματων] Greek, On the Ten Articles of Faith.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

[e]

On the Augsburg Confession.

17

1

18

Excerpts on Church History

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

toward evening, Charles V arrived. The estates were convened at 3 in the afternoon of June 25th in the chapel chambers in the episcopal palace; present were Charles V, Ferdinand, 3 elect[ors], 3 cardinals, 4 archbish[ops], 15 bishops, 34 princes, 19 emissaries of princes, 22 imperial counts, 45 emissaries from the imperial assemblies. The Confession was read by Dr. Beyer and lasted around 2 hours, starting at 4 o’clock.

5

24 10

End.

15

PAPER 2—PAPER 29 Church History, Biblical Exegesis, Excerpts from Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics and from Baader’s Speculative Dogmatics, et al.

Translated by David D. Possen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, and Steen Tullberg

20

Church History

•

P a p e r 2 1830–1831 •

Stenersen, pt. I, p. 121. Gregory VII had already declared his opposition to scripture being translated into the vernacular, on the grounds that it would only be misunderstood and despised by the people. The Synod of 1129 in Toulouse proscribed completely the reading of scripture by the common man. Innocent III declared that what was said in Ex 19:12–13, “That even if an animal touches it, it should be killed,” applied to script[ure], and he sent a number of abbots to Metz to burn the translations of script[ure] that were found there. Finally, Gregory IX made this prohibition against the reading of the Bible by laypeople into a general Church law at the Council of Toulouse in 1229. pp. 141, 142, 143. Thomas Aquinas’s Summa contained 15,000 arguments, i.e., questions presented and answered with great art. Albert the Great presented 230 questions about the Annunciation of Mary. e.g.: why did it happen by means of an archangel, in what form did he come, as a snake or as a dove, etc., at what time of day, etc. Was Mary beautiful? how old was she? why was she named Mary, rather than Eve? Did the angel come to her through closed doors, or not?―It was probably from among such things that the notorious question was posed about Chr[ist] becoming man, whether he could not have taken on a nature other than hum.? Perhaps that of an animal, or a plant? Or perhaps that of a gourd? Whether he could still have performed miracles as a gourd? etc.― p. 152. Mariale i.e., 60 sermons in honor of Mary given in 1493 by the Franciscan friar Bernardino de Bustis. He refers to the Pandects, Roman poets, Aristotle. Recounts that the devil had wanted to tempt Mary to enter into marriage with him, and on that occasion had cited the laws of the Twelve Tables of the Law and the Pandects, but was rejected. Johan Tauler Dominican †1361 in Cologne Henrich Suso. Johan Ruysbrock. Gerhard Groot born in Deventer 1340. †1384.

27

2:1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Church History et al.

•

P a p e r 2–4 1830–1833 •

Thomas à Kempis born 1380 †1471. Johan Wessel (Gansfoet) †1489. 28

Herman von dem Büsches. Began his travels in 1498. 1502 in Erfurt. Luther?―1522―1534.

2:2

Melanchtoni loci edidit Augusti, p. 127. Imo et vilissima fuerit libertas Chr. et plus quam servitus, si solas ceremonias tollat, partem legis omnium facillime ferendam. Quis enim non pecus mactet minore negotio quam iræ, amori aut similibus cupiditatibus imperet?

3:1

see Stenersen Reformat. Hist. 2, p. 155. Munkebjerg. northeast of Heide Henrich von Zütphen. (His martyrdom is described by Luther. L. W. XXI, 94.) Dec. 10 and 11, 1524. Gichtel by Kanne.―†Jan. 21, 1710.

10

3:2 15

20

4:1

25

Poul Gerhard born in Gräfenheinichen in Saxony, the year 1606. †1679. I A. Franke born in Lübeck 1663, where his father was physician. 1694 was when he came to Halle, (orphanage). †1727. Spener. Born 1633. in Alsace. 1666 pastor in Dresden; 1686 to Berlin? †1707. see Thisted for Christne. 5th vol.

Lk 3:1. In the year 753, Chr. was born, according to Dionys. 767 (according to Dionys.) Tiberius came to the throne. hence 14 + 15 = 29 hence Chr. 29 years old

5 Melanchtoni loci edidit Augusti, p. 127. Imo et vilissima fuerit . . . similibus cupiditatibus imperet] Latin (book title), Melancthoni loci, ed. [J.C.W.] Augusti, p. 127. No doubt Christian freedom would be worth least of all, even less than slavery, if it only abolished the ceremonies, the part of the law that is easiest of all to fulfill. For who would not find less trouble in sacrificing a lamb than in ruling over anger, love, or similar lusts? (See also explanatory note.)

21

22

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

But Dionys. says Herod came to the throne in 713 or 714 and Josephus says that he reigned for 37 years, hence 713 37 750 v. 751 †Herod

5

But now it is known that Chr. was born under Her., and indeed that the massacre of the children of Bethlehem took place under him, hence Dionys. was mistaken by 6 or 7 years. Lk 3:1. Archel. was exiled in his 9th year of rule, after which procurators were introduced. Pontius Pil. was the 5th Lk 3:1. In Josephus another Lysanias is mentioned, who had been killed 30 years earlier by Antony. Lk 11:39. ? Should not this passage be understood as follows: “You clean the exterior of the dishes and the bowls,” i.e., you clean the ext.; yet the apostle here wanted to provide an example; but in the initial phrase he held fast to the example as if it were no example at all, inasmuch as he saw that the same observation could be made of dishes, etc. (because here, precisely as with hum. beings, the point was to distinguish betw. something int. and ext.)―following which, in the second part, το δε εσωϑεν, he returns into the metaphor. In this way the whole thing seems to make sense, because we assume an error in thinking. Mk 4:27. homo solita ratione vitam degebat, sed interea semina progerminabant, ipso homine

5 v.] Latin, properly “vel,” or. 25 το δε εσωϑεν] Greek, but the interior. 28 homo solita. . . quam ex gratia Dei] Latin, the human being spent his life in the usual way, but in the meantime the seeds germinated while the man himself was unaware; for God granted the prosperity so that it would become apparent that this success depends not so much on human beings as on the grace of God.

29

15

20

25

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

20

25

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833

ignorante, nam deus prosperitatem concedebat, ita ut appareat, hunc successum non tam pendere ex hominibus quam ex gratia Dei see 1 Cor 3:6. Mt 13:36 etc. The meaning of the parable is this. Here on earth, there live good and wicked among one another; surely someday there will be a separation; but this is something we must leave to God. The wicked must not be understood here as referring to crimes against the laws of the state, but to hum. beings’ wicked interior. The Novatians, the Donatists, et al. wanted to separate good and evil already in this life. Mt 15:5. Constructio difficilis aut dicta sunt per aposiopesin ita ut apodosis suppleatur hoc modo “si quis dixerit patri matrique donum etc tum is innocens est.[”] Aut apodosis incipit a verbis ϰαι ου μη, ergo non est ϰαι conjunctivum sed ϰαι illativum. Mk 7:11. ϰορβαν ex hebr: ‫ קָ ְרבָ ן‬donum sacrificium, legitur bis in N. T. Mk 7:11 Deo devotum est. Josephus commemorat, Naziræos sese appellasse ϰορβαν, quia sacerdotibus s. templo dare debuissent triginta siclos.―hinc ϰορβανας, α, ὁ est thesaurus sacer in N. T. Mt 27:6. ‫ קָ ַרב‬appropinquare.

10 Constructio difficilis . . . sed ϰαι illativum] Latin with Greek, The sentence construction is difficult. Either it is stated with an aposiopesis, so that the apodosis is supplemented as follows: “if one said to his father or mother, the gift etc., then he is innocent.[”] Or the apodosis begins with the words ϰαὶ οὐ μή (and no “not”), in which case ϰαὶ is not used as a conjunctive (i.e., “and”) but as the illutive ϰαὶ (namely, as a marker of the start of the apodosis). (See also explanatory note.) 16 ϰορβαν ex hebr: ‫ קָ ְרבָ ן‬. . . thesaurus sacer in N. T. Mt 27:6] Latin with Greek and Hebrew, ϰορβαν from the Hebrew word ‫קָ ְרּבָ ן‬, gift, offering, appears twice in the N. T. In Mk 7:11, as what is devoted to God. Josephus mentions that the Nazarenes called themselves ϰορβᾶν, because they were obliged to give thirty shekels to the priests or the temple.—from this, ϰορβανᾶς, ᾶ, ὁ, which is the holy treasure in the N. T., at Mt 27:6. (See also explanatory note.) 21 ‫ קָ ַרב‬appropinquare] Hebrew and Latin, approach. (See also explanatory note.)

•

23

24

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

Mt 15:32 εϰλυϑωσιν ne languescant, deficiant, deliquium patiantur. Lk 12:54ff. Should not the connection be as follows: [“]I have now foretold you that much strife will arise concerning my teaching.[”] Because he is now speaking about this strife, he comes to think about strife in general, and says: You are already so worldly-wise, and know how to read the weather; can you not recognize that you ought to reconcile yourselves with your enemies; μηποτε ϰατασυρη σε προς τον ϰριτην, etc. ??? Mt 16:16. Χριςος indicat munus hac in terra, υιος ϑεου nexum cum Deo. Mt 16:21. Απο τοτε ηρξατο ο Ιησους δειϰνυειν τοις μ. αυτου etc. If one were not able to conclude from this that Mt 12:40 must be explained in accordance with L[uke], so that σεμειον is understood as referring to a teaching that is not of Chr.’s death, for Mt here expressly remarks that from that time on, Chr. began to teach of his death, for it seems that by these words the apostle, as it were, points out that a new section was added to Chr.’s teaching. ??? Mt 16:27. Alii judicium futurum εν τη συντελεια των αιωνων sed describitur reditus ut proxime instans, alii de eversione Hierosolymæ. Nexus inter v. 27 et 28 ita constituendus videtur, αμην λεγω υμιν sed quod dico, non opus est ad illud judicium provocare, jam enim initium habebit ab eo tempore, quo ecc: mea condita est.―?

1 εϰλυϑωσιν ne languescant . . . patiantur] Greek and Latin, so that they not be exhausted, lose their grip, fall faint. 10 μηποτε . . . ϰριτην] Greek, or you may be dragged before the judge. (See also explanatory note.) 12 Χριςος indicat munus . . . ϑεου nexum cum Deo] Greek and Latin, Christ indicates the task here on earth, the Son of God, the connection to God. 14 Απο τοτε . . . αυτου] Greek, From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples. 17 σεμειον] Greek, sign. 24 Alii judicium futurum . . . mea condita est] See the explanatory notes for translation.

30 5

10

15

20

25

30

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

31 20

25

30

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833

Mt 17:24. Admodum urbane tributum exigunt, unde concluserunt nonnulli, doctores judaicos fuisse immunes ab hoc tributo solvendo, sed plerosque pietate ductos sponte solvisse; sed est mera conjectura. Tradunt Rabbini, exactores tributi sacri a die 15 Adar comiter ac benigne singulos rogare, a 25 vi adhibita exigere. Mt 18:15: μεταξυ σου ϰαι αυτου μονου ‫ּובֵ ינֹו לְ בַ ְדכֶם‬ ‫ בֵ ינְ ָך‬αμαρτανειν εις τινα i.e. αδιϰειν Mt 18:24. ταλαντον ‫ ּכִ כַר‬Erant diversa genera talentorum atticum, syriacum, babylonicum. h: l: sine dubio talentum syriacum = 3000 sicli = 500 Th. Alii one shekel 4 marks one drachma 1 mark one talent 2000 rix-dollars. one denarius 1 mark 1 Assyrian first 1/10 drachma, then 1/16. one codrans ¼ Assyrian λεπτος = ½ codrans. one stater = 1 shek. 4 marks[.] mina = 10 rix-dollars. one stater = 2 marks. Lk 10:26. πως αναγινωσϰεις formula inter Rabb. solita ָ‫מָ ה קָ ָראת‬ 27. εξ ολης της ισχυος ‫כָל־מאֹ דָך‬ Mt 16:18 The first man who pressed this claim of the primacy of the pope, based on the primacy of Peter, was Pope Gelasius I †496.―It is odd, by the way, that the explanation that Luther made use of was repeated in modern times, namely, with Stolberg’s conversion, when they tried to stop him from it.―Grundtvig, in one of his sermons, has called to mind that one must distinguish betw. πετρος and πετρα. You are the rock, and on this rock I will build my Church; so that the rock was Chr.―

1 Admodum urbane . . . adhibita exigere] See the explanatory notes for translation. 8 μεταξυ σου ϰαι αυτου μονου] Greek, between you and him alone. (See also explanatory note.) 8 ‫ ]בֵ ינְָך ּובֵ ינֹו לְ בַ ְדכֶם‬Hebrew, between him and you alone. 9 αμαρτανειν εις τινα i.e. αδιϰειν] Greek with Latin, to sin against someone, i.e., to commit injustice. (See also explanatory note.) 10 ταλαντον ‫ ּכִ כַר‬Erant diversa . . . 500 Th. Alii] Greek, Hebrew, and Latin, There were different kinds of talents: Attic, Syrian, Babylonian. In that connection, without a doubt the Syrian talent = 3,000 shekels = 500 Th. Others. 16 λεπτος] Greek, penny. 19 πως αναγινωσϰεις formula inter Rabb. solita ָ‫ ] מָ ה קָ ָראת‬Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, What have you been reading? the usual formula among the rabbis. 21 εξ ολης της ισχυος ‫ ]כָל־מאֹ דָך‬Greek and Hebrew, from all your might and with all your might. (See also explanatory note.) 30 πετρος . . . πετρα] Peter [and] rock.

•

25

26

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

Mt 16:14 Jeremiah. They believed that Jeremiah, amid the general tumult, had hidden the holy vessels, and so that it was necessary that he come in order to restore everything as it had been. This is discussed in 4 Ezra.― Lk 17:19. η πιστις σου σεσωϰε σε. It seems odd that Chr. adds this; for he always insisted that they have faith as condition for being saved; but how, then, were the others saved who did not show their faith, indeed, who did not even seem to have ever had it, inasmuch as they did not return in order to give God the glory. ?? 1 see p. 1. Lk 17:16. ϰαι αυτος ην Σαμ: inde cognoscere discipulum Pauli. Videtur enim hæc esse observatio ipsius Lucæ, qui ut ipse Paulus erexit gentiles præ Judæis. Lk 17:20. Videtur hæc quæstio esse ab Pharisæis ironice proposita hoc sensu: Institutio vestra semper eo redit, ut inculcetis poenitentiam ante quam venerit regnum Messianum. Quando vero illud regnum venturum est. Lk 17:24. Fulgus adhibetur ad maximam celeritatem indicandam ita de Satana Lk 10:18.

6 η πιστις σου σεσωϰε σε] Greek, your faith has saved you. 14 ϰαι αυτος ην Σαμ] Greek, an abbreviated version of ϰαὶ αὐτὸς ἦν Σαμαρείτης, and he was a Samaritan. (See also explanatory note.) 14 inde cognoscere . . . præ Judæis] Latin, Thus is the disciple of Paul recognized. This observation seems to derive from Luke himself, who, like Paul, elevated the Gentiles above the Jews. 18 Videtur hæc quæstio . . . venturum est] Latin, This question seems to have been posed by the Pharisees ironically, in the following sense: Your instruction always returns to inculcating penitence before the arrival of the kingdom of the Messiah. When is that kingdom actually coming. (See also explanatory note.) 23 Fulgus adhibetur ad maximam celeritatem indicandam ita de Satana] Latin, Lightning is used to indicate maximum speed, as in the case of Satan.

5

10

15

20

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4–5 1832–1834 •

Paper 4:1 with Paper 5:1 enclosed; a symbol on the left-hand margin of Paper 4:1 is repeated on the upper left-hand corner of Paper 5:1, indicating where the additional material is to be inserted.

27

28

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

Mt 19:7. Jussit Moses hoc in Deut 24 initio. Jesus respondet: Moses non jussit (ενετειλατο) sed permisit (επετρεψεν), ratione habita duri vestri cordis (‫)קָ שֵ ה־לב‬. Chr. igitur malit ενετειλατο in επετρεψεν. Hiericho [Jericho] lay in a beautiful region 7 miles 5? (Bram̄ er) from Jerusal. 2 miles from Jordan, known for its palm trees. The valley at Jericho was traversed by a brook, which at one time was salt water, but Elisha transformed it into fresh water.―Joshua.―Herod died here―It was an important customs station, as most of the Jews from the Galilee traveled through it. Luc. 19:1. Ζαϰχαιος ex ‫ ַזכ ִָאי‬ex ‫ ָזכָה‬purus fuit. Mt 21:33 ληνον torcular 2) vas, in quo uvæ calcantur ‫ גַת‬3.) ut h: l:‫ יֶקֶ ב‬lacus torcularis v. fovea, in quam excipiebatur succus. Mt 21:44. συνϑλαω (ex συν et ϑλαω tero, tundo) contero, h: l: salute excidet. bis occurrit Lk 20:18. Lk 20:16 μη γενοιτο Alii statuunt eos metu perculsos hoc dixisse “aver[r]uncet hoc Deus” alii rectius ironice: certe non fiet, major enim erit Gratia Dei.―

1 Jussit Moses . . . Chr. . . . ενετειλατο in επετρεψεν] Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, Moses commanded this at the beginning of Deut 24. Jesus responds: Moses did not command it (ενετειλατο), but permitted it (επετρεψεν) on account of your hard hearts (ֵ‫)קָ שֵ ה־ל‬. Christ thus prefers (changing) ἐνετείλατο into ἐπέτρεψεν. 15 Ζαϰχαιος ex ‫ ַזכ ִָאי‬ex ‫ ָזכָה‬purus fuit] Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, Ζαϰχαιος from ‫“( ַזּכ ִַאי‬deserving,” “innocent”) from the verb ‫“( ָזכָה‬he was clean”). (See also explanatory note.) 16 ληνον torcular 2) vas . . . excipiebatur succus] Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, ληνόν, a press 2) a trough in which wine is pressed ‫“( ּגַת‬vat, winepress”) 3.) as here, a ‫“( יֶקֶ ב‬vat, winepress”) a basin belonging to a press, or a vat in which the juice was gathered. (See also explanatory note.) 19 συνϑλαω . . . salute excidet. bis occurrit] Greek and Latin, συνϑλάω (from σύν [“with”] and ϑλάω [“I crush, I bruise”] I tear in twain, slay) I destroy utterly, here: he will lose salvation. Occurs twice. (See also explanatory note.) 21 μη γενοιτο Alii statuunt . . . Gratia Dei] Greek and Latin, μὴ γένοιτο, heaven forbid (lit., “may it never happen!”) some claim that they were overwhelmed by fear when saying this: “May God avert this”; others, more plausibly, ironically: Certainly this will not happen, for the grace of God will overcome.

5

33 10

15

20

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

20

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833

Mt 23:16 etc. Chr: refutat doctrinam Pharisæorum de jurejurando. Is enim, qui jurat, semper jusjurandum refert ad Deum. Nam inde pendet omne pretium jurisjurandi. Mt 24:24. Docet Chr: quam lubricum sit modo miraculis fidem superstruere, nam ut distinguantur falsa miracula a veris, requireretur plena naturæ cognitio. Igitur in iis dijudicandis respicimus non naturam sed consilium. Mt 26:3. Καιαϕα. Observandum, Josephum narrare nomen ejus fuisse Josephum, ergo Cajaphas erat cognomen ejus vel ex ‫ כַיפָא‬πετρα ob duritiem vel ex ‫ ַכיָבָא‬oppressor. Lk 22:48. Sensus horum verborum pendet ex pronuntiatione aut: num tanta est impudentia tua ut osculo signo amoris turpiter abutaris, ita si emphasis quæritur in ϕιληματι. aut noli credere me latere animum tuum erga me hostilem. Mt 26:61. δυναμαι ϰαταλυσαι respiciunt hæc verba ad Joh: 2, 20. verba incertæ interpretationis, certe false explicarunt ea Judæi. Act. 6, 14 simillima occurrunt de Stephano.

1 Chr: refutat doctrinam Pharisæorum . . . omne pretium jurisjurandi] Latin, Christ refutes the Pharisees’ teaching about oaths. For the one who takes an oath always refers his oath back to God. This, after all, is what the oath’s whole worth depends on. 5 Docet Chr: quam lubricum sit . . . sed consilium] Latin, Christ teaches how dangerous it is to found one’s faith on miracles alone, for in order to distinguish the false miracles from the true, one needs a complete knowledge of nature. Therefore we look not to nature, but to judgment, in order to adjudicate between them. 10 Καιαϕα . . . ex ‫כַיפָא‬ oppressor] Greek, Latin, and Aramaic, Caiaphas. It should be noted that Josephus relates that his name was Joseph, hence Caiaphas was his nickname, either from ‫“( כֵיפָא‬rock”) πετρα (“rock”) on account of his hardness, or from ‫“( ַכיָבָ א‬captor”), oppressor. (See also explanatory note.) 14 Sensus horum verborum . . . me hostilem] Latin and Greek, The meaning of these words depends on their pronunciation, either: your impudence is so monstrous that you brazenly abuse the kiss, the sign of love, provided one lets the emphasis fall on ϕιλήματι (“kiss,” in the dative case). Or: do not believe that your soul, which is hostile toward me, is hidden from me. 19 δυναμαι ϰαταλυσαι . . . simillima occurrunt de Stephano] Greek and Latin, I am able to break apart; refers to the words in Jn 2:20. Words of uncertain interpretation; certainly the Jews explicated them falsely. In Acts 6:14 very similar words appear about Stephen.

•

29

30

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 4–5 1832–1834 •

Lk 23:30 etc. ex hac narratione de mulieribus Chr: prosequentibus orta est legenda de Veronica pia matrona Hierosolymitana, quæ accurrit et linteo Jesu abstersit sudorem, atque ut ei esset præmium perenne effecit Jesus ut facies sua linteo impressa maneret, quod sudarium servatur Romæ in basilica Petri, et ostenditur una cum lancea, qua latus Chr: perfossum est

5

34

σιτιστος ex σιτιζω saginatus, altilis Mt 22:4. Φιμοω (ex ϕιμος capistrum) 1) capistro os obturo 1 Cor 9:9. 2) obmutescere facio―ϕιμοομαι obmutesco. διυλιζω (ex δια et υλιζω defaeco ex υλη faeces) percolo, percolando purgo―δ. τον ϰωνωπα vinum percolando purgare a culice. αϑωος (ex a pr: et ϑωη poena, mulcta persolvenda LXX pro ‫ )נָקִ י‬qui culpa vacat. insons. apud profanos genitivo conjungitur αϑωος τινος immunis, liber ab aliqua re, nostri vero scriptores secuti hebr: ‫ נָקִ י ִמן‬dicunt αϑωος απο τινος.

4:2

In Grundtvig’s sermon he notes that it was surely necessary that faith was present; for if the words “Lord Chr., save us” had merely been idle talk, then he would not have been saved; but what is discussed in the former passage is the immed. faith that can be called forth by sufferings, etc., and in the latter passage, if I may call it that, a potentiated faith.

5:1

1

1 ex hac narratione . . . legenda de Veronica . . . qua latus Chr: perfossum est] See the explanatory notes for translation. 8 σιτιστος ex σιτιζω saginatus, altilis] Greek and Latin, σιτιστός from σιτίζω fed, fattened. (See also explanatory note.) 9 Φιμοω (ex ϕιμος capistrum) . . . ϕιμοομαι obmutesco] Greek and Latin, Φιμόω (from ϕιμός muzzle) 1) I bind the mouth with a muzzle, 1 Cor 9:9. 2) I make someone keep quiet—ϕιμόομαι, I keep quiet. (See also explanatory note.) 12 διυλιζω . . . percolando purgo . . . vinum percolando purgare a culice] Greek and Latin, διυλιζω (from διά [“through”] and ὑλίζω [“I remove pomace”], from ὕλη, dregs) I filter, I clean by filtering—δ[ιϋλίζειν] τὸν ϰώνωπα, by filtering, I purge the wine of fleas. (See also explanatory note.) 15 αϑωος . . . qui culpa vacat . . . ‫ נָקִ י ִמן‬dicunt αϑωος απο τινος] See the explanatory notes for translation.

10

15

20

25

Biblical Exegesis 5:2

5

10

15

35

20

5:3

25

•

P a p e r 5 1833–1834

overhasty exstinguere exsting overhasty exstinguere syst[ems] overhasty overhasty grace exstinguere Wieland ― systems overhasty exs known Wieland ‫ ש‬grace syst overhasty W ַ‫ְשפַל־רּוח‬ system W Wieland. syst― systems systems systems. 1 Tim. 5:17. ‫משפת‬ systems systems cultivation systems. ַ‫הֹוכִ יח‬ ‫הֹוכִ יח‬ ַ‫הֹוכִ יח‬

W. W W W W Systems

Passages on Chr’s imminent παρουσια. 1 Cor 10:11. 1 Thess 4:15. 1 Cor 15:51. Jas 5:7–9. 1 Jn 2:18. Phil 4:5. πιστευομαι significat 1) fidem invenio creditur mihi. 2 Thess 1:10 2) committitur s: concreditur mihi. Rom 3:2. 1 Thess 2:4.

1 exstinguere exsting] Latin, to quench quench. 7 ‫ ש‬. . . ַ‫]שפַל־רּוח‬ ְ Hebrew, humble (sh’fal ruaḥ, lit. “downtrodden [shafêl] in spirit [ruaḥ]” [‫ש‬, shin, which resembles a W, is the first letter in ַ‫)]שפַל־רּוח‬. ְ (See also explanatory note.) 12 ‫]משפת‬ Hebrew, likely a misspelling of ‫מ ְׁשּפָט‬, ִ seat of judgment, trial, verdict, legal case, law. 16 ַ‫ ]הֹוכִ יח‬Hebrew, he proved, judged, disciplined, punished. 21 παρουσια] Greek, presence, nearness, return. 24 πιστευομαι significat . . . 1 Thess. 2:4] Greek and Latin, πιστευομαι means 1) I find faith, it is believed by me. 2 Thess 1:10 2) it is committed or entrusted to me. Rom 3:2, 1 Thess 2:4. (See also explanatory note.)

•

31

32

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 5 1833–1834

Paper 5:2.

•

Biblical Exegesis 6

5

10

15

20

•

P a p e r 6 1833–1834

(Rom 6:7. Rom: 9:28.) Acts: 12:6 αλυσις―εως. vinculum, catena 2) status vincti, status custodiæ Eph 6:10; 2 Tim 1:16.―13:4. αποπλεω―ευσω. navigo, nave discedo. quater: Acts 14:26; 20:15; 27:1.―13:50 παροτρυνω (παρα et οτρυνω instigo) instigo ad aliquid, incito, concito. est apud profanos poeticum. ― 13:50 οριον― ου. ‫ לּובְג‬neutrum ex οριος ad terminum spectans. terminus finis. 14:1 ϰατα το αυτο simul. 14:10 ἡλατο aor. 1. 3 sing. ex ἁλλομαι. 14:13 στεμμα― τος (ex στεϕω perf. pass. εστεμμαι corona circumdo, cingo) vitta, infula potissimum vittæ, quibus victimæ ornabantur. 14:16 παροιχομαι, f. παροιχησομαι perf. παρῳχημαι. (ex παρα et οιχομαι abeo discedo.). 15:20 αλιςγημα apud profanos non legitur, nec αλιςγεω ex quo deducendum. αλιςγεω (est ex αλιω voluto) volutando inquino, contamino, polluo, et legitur in versione Alex. pro ‫ לֶאֵג‬hinc substantivum de carne e victimis gentilium residua.

2 αλυσις―εως. . . . status custodiæ] Greek and Latin, fetter, chain 2) the state of being in chains, the state of being in prison. (See also explanatory note.) 4 αποπλεω―ευσω. . . . quater] Greek and Latin, I sail, I depart by ship. Four times. (See also explanatory note.) 6 παροτρυνω . . . poeticum] Greek and Latin, παροτρυνω (παρά [“from,” “because of,” “beside”] and ὀτρύνω I instigate) I instigate something, I urge, I incite. It is poetic in worldly (non-Christian) authors. (See also explanatory note.) 7 οριον―ου. ‫ גְ בּול‬neutrum . . . finis] Greek, Hebrew, and Latin, οριον―ου. ‫גְ בּול‬, neuter form of (the adjective) ὅριος, which concerns a boundary. Boundary, end. (See also explanatory note.) 9 ϰατα το αυτο simul.] Greek and Latin, simultaneously. (See also explanatory note.) 10 ἡλατο aor. 1. 3 sing. ex ἁλλομαι] Greek and Latin, ἥλατο (“he jumped”) aorist 1, 3rd-person singular of ἅλλομαι (“I jump”). (See also explanatory note.) 10 στεμμα―τος (ex στεϕω . . . cingo) . . . ornabantur] Greek and Latin, στεμμα―τος (from στέϕω [“I crown”], perfect passive ἔστεμμαι [“I was crowned”], encircle with a crown, surround) band, headband, particularly the bands with which sacrificial victims [i.e., animals] are decorated. (See also explanatory note.) 13 παροιχομαι, . . . (ex παρα et οιχομαι abeo discedo.)] Greek and Latin, I have passed by, future παροιχήσομαι, perfect παρῴχημι. (from παρά [“from,” “because of,” “beside”] and οἴχομαι [“I go away”], go away, be separated). (See also explanatory note.) 15 αλιςγημα apud profanos non legitur . . . de carne e victimis gentilium residua] See the explanatory notes for translation.

•

33

34

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 6–7 1833–1834 •

17:4 προςϰληροω. sorte alicui aliquid tribuo, de sorte, quæ a Deo s. fato definitur pass. ex Dei voluntate attribuor, adjungor. ― ― 17:6 αναστατοω ex αναστατος (surgens, expulsus; destructus), sedibus suis expello―destruo, perturbo ― ―18:2 προςϕατως ex προςϕατος (προ et σϕαζω macto) nuper mactatus deinde in universum recens. ―18:7. συνομορεω (ex συν―ὁμου―ὁρος finis) confinis. 19:12 χρως (cognatum nominibus χροα, χροος ex χραω) superficies rei alicujus, hinc etiam color ejus, superficies corporis humani, cutis hic: quæ cutem corporis, nudum corpus contegerant ―19:35 ϰαταστελλω 1) demitto, contraho ut vela 2) mitigo tranquillo. 36 opportet vos esse tranquillos.

Gal 3:19–4:8. De nexu nonnulla præmonenda videntur. In cap: 3 duobus momentis probat homines ad salutem per legem pervenire non posse. Alterum argumentum est ex historia petitum; docet, Abrahamo salutem contigisse, non ob circumcisionem, non ob facta, sed

1 προςϰληροω . . . adjungor] Greek and Latin, I alot. I distribute something to someone as a lot; concerns the lot that is determined by God or fate; in passive form: I am assigned, attached by virtue of God’s will. (See also explanatory note.) 3 αναστατοω ex αναστατος . . . destruo, perturbo] Greek and Latin, I unsettle, from ἀνάστατος (insurgent, expelled, destroyed), I expel him from his residence―I destroy, I disturb. (See also explanatory note.) 5 προςϕατως ex προςϕατος . . . in universum recens] Greek and Latin, προσϕάτως, from πρόσϕατος (πρό [“before”] and σϕάζω [“I slaughter]”), recent, hence in general recently slaughtered. (See also explanatory note.) 7 συνομορεω (ex συν―ὁμου―ὁρος finis) confinis] Greek and Latin, I border on (from σύν [“with”]―ὁμοῦ [“the same”]― ὅρος [“boundary”] end) bordering on. (See also explanatory note.) 8 χρως . . . contegerant] Greek and Latin, χρως (“skin”) (related to the nouns χροα [“color of the skin”], χροος [“skin”] from χραω [“I fall upon”]) the surface of something, also including its color, the surface of the human body, skin, here what covers the skin of the body, the naked body. (See also explanatory note.) 12 ϰαταστελλω . . . 36 opportet vos esse tranquillos] Greek and Latin, ϰαταστέλλω (“I arrange”) 1) I let sink, I draw together, as with sails, 2) I mitigate, I calm down. 36 You (pl.) should be tranquil. (See also explanatory note.) 16 De nexu nonnulla præmonenda videntur . . . sese non potuisse legem explere (Mt 5:17.)] See the explanatory notes for translation.

37

10

7

20

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

20

•

P a p e r 7 1833

ob fidem (Gen 12:3.). In altero testem argumentationis suæ ipsam legem inducit, afferens verba Deut 27:26; Lev 18:5: Hanc argumentationem vero penitus pertractanti apparebit, P: hoc loco argumentationem accommodare lectoribus; quæ res quamquam explicatu facillima, tamen, cum multos interpretes (Calvin) torserit, silentio non prætermittenda videtur. P: enim h: l: a priori statuit, homines omnino non posse legi satisfacere, atque adeo salutem ex ea non adipisci; id vero non probat. Hæc vero difficultas, si ad lectores respexerimus, prorsus evanescit. Habebant enim ii, prouti Chr: religioni dediti, sibi persuasum, sese non potuisse legem explere (Mt 5:17.). Ita ad liquidum perducto, homines non posse salutem petere ex lege, ad rem fortasse a Judæis objiciendam respondit. Sæpius P:, ubi de auctoritate legis deque efficacia ejus ad homines salvos præstandos agit, huic objectioni obviam it. Atque non possumus non fateri, hance quæstionem, si aliquando Judæorum cogitationes respexerimus, jure suo esse propositam. Jam vero si quæritur, quid insit huic quæstioni τι ουν ὁ νομος, ratione habita comma|tis, quod sequitur; statuendum puto duas quæstiones in hacce latere. Si enim tenemus, Judæos plurimum tribuisse legi M:,

14 Ita ad liquidum perducto . . . respondet hisce verbis: των παραβασεων ενεϰα] See the explanatory notes for translation.

•

35

36

1

[a]

19.

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 7 1833 •

eamque pignus benevolentiæ Dei habuisse, atque videmus P:vehementer invehi in legem, eundemque demonstrare, homines per legem æternam salutem consequi non posse, eumque adeo statuere, legem hominibus, quod promiserit, non posse præstare,― tum necesse est, Judæi hanc quæstionem proponant: »Quid est igitur lex«. estne illa divinæ an humanæ originis.―Ad hanc quæstionem respondet P: hisce verbis ετεϑη διαταγεις δι’ αγγελων. Nam aliter, cur hæc verba adjecerit P, equidem non video.―Altera qæstio est: cur igitur lex data est. Judæos enim hoc sibi persuasum habuisse, homines posse per legem salvos præstari, ostendit et doctrina Pauli; si enim Judæi negassent homines posse per legem salvos esse, tum omnino superfluum fuisset, hoc iis inculcare; et vivendi ratio Judæorum, nam summam operam dederunt, legi satisfacerent, quare etiam legalitas maxime inter eos floruit. Ad hanc quæstionem respondet hisce verbis: των παραβασεων ενεϰα. των παραβασεων ενεϰα. primum de singulis verbis. παραβαςις indicat peccatum, cujus sibi conscius est auctor, quo ille certam legem transgreditur. (Verbum synonymon est παραπτωμα.) Hanc notionem inesse verbo ex etymologia videre licet, derivatur enim ex παρα et βαινω. Inde etiam ortum est, ut P: semper hoc vocabulum usurparet, ubi est sermo de peccato Adami. Adhibet vero αμαρτια ubi sermo est de peccatis cujus auctor non est sibi conscius.― De sensu, quod attinet, nonnulli statuerunt hunc esse sensum: legem datam esse, ut cohiberet peccata. Sed observ: est. 1) si hoc fuisset consilium legis, nondum ad scopum sibi propositum pervenisset; re igitur infecta abrogata est, quod nonconvenit cum sapientia Dei; et si pervenisset, tum religio Chr:, cum lex homines salvos præstare potuisset (Lev. 18, 5.), opus non fuisset. 2) hic sensus omnino non congruit cum doctrina Pauli. Docet enim ille tantum abesse, ut lex removere peccata possit, ut etiam ansam det pec20 των παραβασεων ενεϰα. primum de singulis verbis] Greek and Latin, on account of their transgressions. First about the individual words. 21 παραβαςις indicat peccatum . . . auctor non est sibi conscius] See the explanatory notes for translation. 29 De sensu, quod attinet . . . ad deum convertatur] See the explanatory notes for translation.

38 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Biblical Exegesis

5

39 10

15

20

25

30

35

•

P a p e r 7 1833

cati (1 Cor: 15, 56.).―Si igitur analogiam spectamus hic sensus evadit: lex data est, ut homines peccatorum sibi conscii fiant, atque adeo animus ad deum convertatur. (Rom: 3, 20. 7, 8.13.). διαταγεις δι’ αγγελων. Constat Judæos semper narrationem de lege Mosaica auxisse et exornasse. Hujus rei etiam h: l: documentum habemus. De præsentia enim angelorum nihil exstat in libro Ex.Hæc traditio est serioris originis, nec quidquam in V. T. occurit. In LXX vero in libro Deut: XXX, 2 adduntur hæc verba οι αγγελοι εξ δεξιων αυτου. Rabbini multa simplici narrationi sacræ scripturæ addiderunt, ita tradiderunt, Mosem de monte decedentem oblitum fuisse verba Dei, sed duos angelos missos esse, qui ei verba Jehovæ in memoriam revocarent. Statuerunt enim Rabbini Deum semper apparere hominibus angelis cinc|tum, ut majestatem ejus indicarent. Occurrit hæc traditio etiam in Act: 7, 53.εις διαταγας αγγελων. (quæ verba tamen nonnulli de variis classibus angelorum explicarunt); Heb: 2, 2. εν χειρι μεσιτου. μεσιτης qui medius inter duas partes stat, mediator. εν χειρι ‫ בְ יָד‬occurrit hæc formula etiam Act 7, 35; fere idem indicat quod δια cum genitiv:, quod sæpissime occurrit, ubi Chr:commemoratur ut instrumentum Dei ita in creatione mundi etc. (Heb 1:2. Jn 1:3. Col 1:16. etc.). ὁ δε μεσιτης ενος ουϰ εςτιν. fDifficultas in vocabulo ενος absolute posito. Nonnulli subintelligunt πραγματος, muneris, ministerii, consilii ɔ: omnibus mediatoribus non idem est consilium, Deus vero unus est. Alii subintelligunt σπερματος hoc sensu: mediator non est unius partis s. factionis; nam semper duæ partes adesse debent. Alii subintelligunt νομου. Hæc explicatio maxime in hunc locum quadrat. Ita fere apostolus ratiocinatur: lex Mosaica quidem data est per mediatorem, sed inde non sequitur, legem Mosaicam ita per se sufficere, ut religio perfectior in locum ejus succedere non possit; nam in notione mediatoris ni5 διαταγεις δι’ αγγελων. . . . de variis classibus angelorum explicarunt); Heb: 2, 2] See the explanatory notes for translation. 21 εν χειρι μεσιτου. μεσιτης qui . . . ita in creatione mundi etc.] See the explanatory notes for translation. 27 ὁ δε μεσιτης ενος ουϰ εςτιν. Difficultas in vocabulo ενος . . . Alii subintelligunt σπερματος hoc sensu: . . . Alii subintelligunt νομου . . . plures mediatores admittamus] See the explanatory notes for translation.

•

[b]

NB.

[c]

v. 20.

37

1

38

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 7–9 1833–1834 •

hil est, quod prohibeat, quo minus plures mediatores admittamus.― Decemb. 3rd 1833.

after all, it is identified as something characteristic of him that he continues to sink deeper. (Perhaps the phrase απ’ αιω〈νος〉 Lk 1:70, too, could be understood in similar fashion, so that it was declared thereby that it was especially essential for the prophets to proclaim the coming of the Messiah?) The passage Jn 8:44. would thus be understandable as follows: The devil killed (in a spiritual and, flowing from it, a physical sense) hum. beings, and it was an essential part of his being that he lured hum. beings and lures them. However, here in this passage the imperf. ην is used, meaning that now with the coming of Chr[ist], the devil’s power is abolished; he may well have continued to sin (αμαρτανει 1 Jn 3:8), but he has ceased to be ανϑρωποϰτονος, except to the extent that hum. beings themselves have put themselves into his power. The expression απ’ αρχης thereby marks a determination of time, as e.g. in this case: as long as there have been hum. beings, the devil has tried to seduce them, that is, right from the very first hum. beings. March 10, 1834.

p. 5 at the top. If ethics is to provide this concept of the Ch[urch] a priori, I do not see how it [this concept] will be able to determine the places where the individual figures are found, once they are historical; for it could well be that the history never corresponded to our notion of it; if it [ethics] is to provide it [this concept] a posteriori, how, then, does its activity differ from the philosophy of religion[?]―The concept Ch[urch] must indeed be put forth in such a way that all manner of ch[urches] fall under it; for otherwise it could happen that we by chance come upon something that we might call a Ch[urch], and which nonetheless did not permit itself to be classified under the provided con[cept]. p. 6. wissenschaftlichen Disciplinen. These must surely also be pervaded by the Chr. spirit; for would we not otherwise come to build with foreign materials?

6 απ’ αιω〈νος〉] Greek, from of old. 14 ην] Greek, not. 17 αμαρτανει] Greek, he sins. 18 ανϑρωποϰτονος] Greek, lit. “human-killer,” murderer. 20 απ’ αρχης] Greek, from the beginning. 34 wissenschaftlichen Disciplinen] German, scientific-scholarly disciplines.

8 5

10

40

15

20

9:1

30

35

Biblical Exegesis 9:2

P a p e r 9 1834 •

39

I cannot see it otherwise than that S[chleiermacher] straightforwardly posits self-consciousness instead of feeling (p. 16) in contrast (to p. 8. 2.)

§ 4..

9:3

5

•

If we in some way or another came to be ourselves from within, without some other being thereby posited as well, then this would be the simple relation of a thing remaining essentially self-identical. m.m.m. m. C V

41

9:4

9:5

20

25

An absolute feeling of freedom it cannot be; for the feeling of freedom asserts a self-activity emanating from us, and hence this must have an object that in some way or other is given to us, which could not take place without its having an effect on our receptivity

Dogmatics is a Theological Scien[ce]

Church―(Piety)

Our proposition will oppose the view that this feeling of dependence is itself conditioned by one or another prior knowledge about God.― so that God most nearly signifies for us what is codeterminant in this feeling, and that to which we refer our being-such, whereas all other content of this notion must first be developed from the indicated Grundgehalt.

After all, the feeling of absolute dependence indeed asserts [“]where our receptive and self-active (p. 22) existence. comes from.” How can one then say (p. 26) das schlechthinnige Abhængigkeitsgefühl, in welchem dieser Gegensatz wieder verschwindet―How can one say (p. 26) that everything that the subj. opposed at the most central standpoint reveals itself as identical with him. Nature, too, is a part of this. The highest self-consciousn. in and for itself, because it does not depend on externally given obj[ects] that could affect us at one point, but not at another, and because as a feel. of abs. depend. it is wholly einfach, and continually remains the same The sensible self-consciousn. can be divided according to its nature into the agreeable and the disagreeable.― 19 Grundgehalt] German, fundamental content. 21 das schlechthinnige Abhængigkeitsgefühl . . . verschwindet] German, the feeling of absolute dependence, in which this contradiction again vanishes. 27 einfach] German, simple.

40

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 9 1834 •

The highe[r] self-consciousn. does not contain an inner contradiction in itself. ― Its first manifestation is life’s continual uplifting―If we conceive of it in its self-identical being, without reg[ard] to the sensible se[lf]-cons[ciousness], then it would bring about an unchangeable sameness in life, which excludes every such contradiction. *

5

If the feeling of abs. dependence, in the manner in which it expresses itself as consciousness of God, is the first level of immediate self-consciousn., then it is also an element essential for hum. nature.― ―

9:6

But if the feeling of abs. dependence is the highest, how, then, is it related to prayer? Then prayer is merely to be regarded as a fiction

42

In the opposite direction, the subordination reveals itself in its completeness when self-consciousness of a state of activity is taken up into the feeling of abs[olute] depend[ence] only with respect to how the condition itself manifests itself as the result of the relationship that exists betw. the subj[ect] and the collectivity of all other being.

9:7

15

But how can Schl. simultaneously maintain that Xnty tends toward teleological piety and nonetheless assume predestination.― #. Jochum Nielsen

20

Well

The reigning view is that most of what is found at the highest level of all religions is the same, and that in addition to that which is common to all, something idiosyncratic is added to each. Yet I would not wish to accept the definition that it is an influence on hum. beings as knowers; for then revelat. is also originally and essentially doctrine.―

9:8

25

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 9 1834

Paper 9:7-8.

•

41

42

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

Paper 9:8-9.

•

P a p e r 9 1834 •

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 9 1834 •

=

43

65 2 67 67

R

5

R R R VI

VI

R R R

Vens―

45

if one does not wish to revert to [the claim] that revelation is only to be assumed where an entire existence―not one single moment―is determined by such a div. communication, and what is declared about such a [communication], that is div. rev.

9:9

Schiller Sch

R R

VI

VI

R

20rd

15

Schiller Hauff

Schiller.

90 R

VI

Calvin

90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 60 25 90 90

20

25

30

§ § R R § 100

W W 70 W 70

44

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 10–11 1834 •

# m. m.

10

But the relation to redemption exists in every Chr[istian] pious conscious[ess] only because the founder of the Chr[istian] society is the Redeemer; and Chr[ist] is founder of a pious community only in the sense that the latter’s limbs gain consciousness of redemption through him.

Their main occupation is to found a society upon a distinct doctrine and in a distinct form. But if a significant difference in the free development of the consciousness of God persists in the society, then there are some in which it is bound, who are more in need of redemption, and others in whom it is higher, who are more fit for red[emption], and thus from the effect of the latter on the former there comes an approximation to redemption, but no farther than to [the point where] the difference between the two is overcome, simply by the society continuing to exist.― # 2√496 lmg mg √ Mg √

4)

Dogmatic propositions are articles of faith of the presentational, didactic sort, aimed at attaining the greatest possible definiteness. 600 his 30 his

5

10

46 15

20

11:1

800

ψ. ψ. ψ. Psi # R † ψ. but also all doctrinal propositions that are a dogmatic expression of what in the public proceed[ings] of the Church, even if only in particular regions of it, is heard as a representation of the shared piety without giving rise to strife or schism

25

11:2

30

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics 12

5

13:1 10

13:2 47 15

20

13:3 25

30

1. Hum. nature such that no redempt[ion] c[an] take place.

•

P a p e r 12–13 1834

2. The redeemer such that he cannot accomplish it.

If hum. beings are to be redeemed, they must need it, and actually be able to receive it.

1st Section Description of our pious self-consciousness, insofar as the relation between God and the world expresses itself in it

§39 The doctrine of creation is to be developed primarily with the aim of warding off what is foreign [to it], in order―owing to the way in which the question of the origin is answered elsewhere―to prevent anything that stands in contradiction to the pure expression of the feel[ing] of abs[olute] depend[ence] finding its way into our area. The doctrine of preservation [is to be developed] primarily in order thereby to present that fundamental feeling completely.

If the concept of creation is to be developed further, then the origin of the world must indeed be attributed wholly to the div. activity; though not in such a way that this is defined in hum. fashion; and the origin of the world must be presented as the temporal fulfillment upon which all changes are conditioned, though not in such a way that the div. activity itself becomes a temporal one.― Did creation itself take up time? Has time existed since before the world, or only with it? Can God’s being be conceived without Creation?

•

45

46 1

5

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

[a]

Does Schl. assume that hum. being is created sinful.―(Theory of the Fall of the Angels.)―Sichverfü[h]renlassen (p. 232) presupposes something evil.

[a]

re p. 242― Because, however, those who connect belief in Chr[ist] to belief in the devil generally also assume that the devil deceived man, which is how sin entered into the world, it seems to me that they could, with justification, take ownership of their claim.

10

•

P a p e r 13 1834 •

―The notion of the devil, as it has taken shape among us, is so entirely without substance, that one cannot recommend that anyone be convinced of its truth; but it is true that our Church has indeed never made doctrinal use of it.―

13:4

The passage Lk 22:31 appears to make use of a proverb. ―

13:5

Here it should be noted that on the one hand, an undue value is not infrequently placed on tracing even the smallest things explicitly to this relation; and on the other hand, that we often, with no greater right, work against such a derivation.

13:6

#. For in the totality of finite being, each individual is only granted a peculiar and partial causality, since each one is not dependent on another, but on everything else; the general is only in that of which the totality of this subdivided causality is itself dependent.―

62.

[a]

15

[b]

50–

[c]

4. 5.

2nd On the div[ine] attributes that relate to the pious self-consciousn[ess], insofar as it expresses the gen. relation between God and the world.

§50. All of the attributes that we attribute to God must not signify anything peculiar in God, but only something peculiar in the way of referring the feeling of absolute dependence to him.

3 Sichverfü[h]renlassen] German, letting oneself be tempted.

5

48

20

13:7

25

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics 13:8

Unchangeableness Substance.― (Einfachheit.)

Existence.― (Eternity.)―

10

15

The denial of all removal expresses the contrast to the final causality that is weakened by removal from its original location or midpoint.

P a p e r 13 1834 •

S. spatial

mg S. mg.

47

mg

mg S. mg. 〈συνουσια〉 mg

5

αδιαστασια ― συνουσια.

•

ενεργητιϰη ― υποστατιϰη.―

S.

The separation of the div. omnipresence into an inactive and an active attribute unerringly abolishes the div. causality’s self-identical being.

immensity either = infin.

50

or infin.

20

13:9

substance existence (immeasurability) (eternity)

if ― ―

25

means ―

if

teleo

if =

3 Einfachheit] German, simplicity. 5 συνουσια] Greek, being present. 6 αδιαστασια ― συνουσια] Greek, not being absent; being present. (See also explanatory note.) 7 ενεργητιϰη ― υποστατιϰη] Greek, active, or effective; substantial. (See also explanatory note.)

48

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

Paper 13.8.

•

P a p e r 13 1834 •

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics 13:10

5

•

P a p e r 13 1834

49

•

§54. The concept of the div. omnipotence not only includes that the natural system encompassing all space and time is grounded in the div., which as eternal and omnipresent is opposed to all finite causality―but also that the div. causality, as our feeling of dependence articulates it, is represented completely in the totality of finite being, moreover that everything for which causality is given in God does actually take place. Actual―Possible. God can effect everything that is possible, or that does not conceal any self-contradiction in itself:

10

15

mediate―immed. | absolute―ordered. absolute div. will―conditioned.― It seems to me that one ought to be able to show, in that way, how unreasonable it would be to distinguish between an immed[iate] and med[iate] activity of God. It belongs to the concept of a med[iate] act[ivity] that one uses means; but the object I use as a means must eo ipso make an appearance as something given, over which I then exert power, but that in turn exerts power over me; but such a relation cannot be thought to coexist with God’s absolute freedom. Oct. 1st 1834.

51 20

necessary ― free (what God wills according to his essence.) (what he, according to his essence, equally well could not will) active―inactive

§55.

13:11

25

By the div. omniscience must be understood: the absolute spirituality of the div. omnipotence.― However, even leaving this aside, it will follow that if anything at all is possible for God apart from what is actual, then infinitely much is also possible at every point, and because every point is co-determining for all others, there arises for every case, from every point, another world.

15 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

50

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 13–14 1834 •

But to want to determine the likeness betw. God and the spiritual element in finite being.― Add to this the fact that, undeniably, there is at least great likelihood that one is attributing to God, on the one hand, a double self-consciousness (an original and a reflected), and on the other hand also presupposing a partitioning of knowledge in him.

Einheit―Unendlichkeit―Einfachheit. ―strictly speaking, it cannot be an attribute of a thing that it is only available in a certain number. = God has no equal. (Einzigkeit) = The attribute according to which no difference is found in God between essence and exis[tence]. Einfachheit Material is eliminated from God, or all that is part or composition is excluded. derived from the pious self-consciousness in the manner in which it is already presupposed in every Chr. pious moment of life.

The emergence of a hum. life can be regarded [in a dou]ble way as ein Ergebniβ in the little n the immed. reverts to and as of hum. nature in genrl. the unification is that the unification of both appears that the person J. Chr. with a constituting much more as an action of go We We We W We go

5

13:2

10

14:1 15

52 20

entirely

7 Einheit―Unendlichkeit―Einfachheit] German, unity―infinitude―simplicity. 9 Einzigkeit] German, uniqueness. 15 ein Ergebniβ] German, a result.

25

Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics 14:2

5

14:3

14:4 10

15

20

14:5

•

P a p e r 14 1834 •

51

We fication of the div. nature with the the div. alone efficacious or ive, and ing or fication ge

The Paths of Fate p. 31. . . . the young man shouted lustily, shot his heart up into life, and took up a manly stance.

Lund G. W. G G GGWG W. G Gerhard. Groot. P Lund. S Kierkegaard Likew L Likewise L Likewise.

Mt 5:45.―Lk 15:11. Eph 2:7. Tit 3:4. Jn 3:16. 1 Jn 4:10, 16, 19. Rom 5:8.

52

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 14–15 1834–1835 •

Word. διδαςϰαλος. (understanding)

προϕητης.

γλωςςαις λαλων

χαριςμα ϰυβερνηςεως.

(potentiated God- (absol. retreat of conscious[ness])

λογος

Deed

self-consciousn[ess].)

λ.

γνωςεως. σοϕιας.

ερμενεια

(Theory) (Practice)

γλωςςων.

53

14:6 The natural side, as

or

most dependent upon

―

του προεςταναι.

development of hum.

―

διαϰονιας

powers

―

αντιληψεως.

5

διαϰριςις πνευματων

To the other side belongs the gift of performing miracles, of healing the sick. The charisma from which this gift is derived is πιςτις; for πιςτις cannot, in such cases, be the general Chr. faith; but something peculiar must be designated here, namely, “the practical power of will that is animated and potentiated in faith.”

Ephesians.

Secundum Rückert.

1:8 εν παση σοϕια ϰαι ϕρονησει. Some have connected these words with γνωρισας, which follows them, but there is no further reason for this. In general it is understood as follows, that σοϕια and ϕρονηςις are explained as referring to the goods that God has granted to hum. beings, through which he has thus displayed his grace (χαρις). But this explanation does not seem to harmonize with the context as a whole. Here, where he speaks of God’s grace with reference to hum. beings’ salvation in Chr., it seems odd to move on so quickly to gifts of God like these. More correctly, therefore, these words are understood as referring to God, who had displayed his σοϕια and ϕρωνηςις precisely by the free provision of grace with which he also called pagans to Xnty; see Rom 11:33.―(See 1 Cor 1:24, where Paul says that, for those who were called, the crucifixion of Chr. was ϑεου σοϕια, meaning that this divine initiative was precisely a proof of God’s wisdom).

2 διδαςϰαλος. προϕητης. γλωςςαις λαλων] Greek, teacher, prophet, one who speaks in tongues. 2 χαριςμα ϰυβερνηςεως. . . . του προεςταναι. διαϰονιας αντιληψεως] Greek, the grace of governing [or] the grace of being a leader, the grace of ministering (to the poor), the grace of succours. (See also explanatory note.) 5 λογος γνωςεως] Greek, word of knowledge. 5 λ. σοϕιας] Greek, word (λ[όγος]) of wisdom. 6 ερμενεια γλωςςων. διαϰριςις πνευματων] Greek, the interpretation of tongues (the decoding of glossalia), the judgment of spirits. (See also explanatory note.) 12 πιςτις] Greek, faith. 18 Secundum Rückert] Latin, following Rückert. 20 εν παση σοϕια ϰαι ϕρονησει] Greek, in all wisdom and understanding. (See also explanatory note.) 20 γνωρισας] Greek, he made known. (See also explanatory note.) 22 σοϕια . . . ϕρονηςις] Greek, wisdom [and] understanding. 23 χαρις] Greek, grace. 30 ϑεου σοϕια] Greek, God’s wisdom.

10

15

15

20

25

30

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 14 1834

Paper 14:1–5.

•

53

54

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 14 1834

Paper 14:6.

•

Biblical Exegesis

5

54 10

15

20

25

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

55

v. 12 προηλπιϰοτας. ελπιζειν εν τινι is to place one’s trust in someone or something. προελ. εν Χ. is, accordingly, to place one’s trust in Chr. in advance (either earlier in time, or before others). If one now bears in mind 1) that Composita with προ are never applied to persons in P[aul], but to objects (see 3:3), and that 2) ἡμας has no emphasis at all; so one must here regard the Christians in general as the sub[jects]; and additionally, because the proper ειναι εις επαινον etc., does not follow immediately, we could not assign these words any meaning other than: that we have placed our trust in God formerly, that is, before it came to this, that is, in advance. In spirit, then, the apostle is already at the standpoint of completion.―Others have explained this with ref. to præscientia Dei. Others have explained this “we” as referring to the Jewish Christians, who already as Jews had placed their hope in Chr[ist] This they certainly did; but neither does such a specific reference appear here, nor does ελπιζειν εν τινι mean the same as exspectare aliquem. v. 14. εις απολυτρωςιν της περιποιησεως. περιποιεν means to act so that something remains; in the mid. voice, to act so that something remains for oneself; derived from this, to acquire, hence to act [so that] something does not perish, derived from this, to safeguard. In the N. T. only in the mid. voice, to acquire something. Derived from this, περιποιηςις, which does not appear in good classic Greek. Acquisition; but also property. Hebr. ‫ס ֻגלָה‬, ְ by which the people of Israel were designated as God’s special property, instead of the other rendering περιουςιος. If we take this genitive as [representing] a genitive obj[ect], then we must also assume that an abstraction is here used in place of a concretion. And so we come to think of the Jews. Yet P. tends to transfer to the Christians the expressions that genrlly were used of the Jews. v. 15 ϰαϑ’ υμας is genrlly explained as if it stood in place of ὑμων. Winer notes that it in fact signifies: fides, quæ ad vos pertinet. Rückert holds that the local meaning must be preserved, hence: the faith that is found among you.― v. 17. πατηρ της δοξης. Some of the Ch. Fathers, in order that this passage not provide any evidence against the homoousia, explained the word δοξα as referring to Chr.’s div. nature. But that is contrived. More correctly, it is explained with ενδοξος.

30

v. 17. σοϕια must here be understood as referring more to the extent and depth of knowledge than to its practical competence.

1 προηλπιϰοτας. ελπιζειν εν τινι] Greek, those who had hoped (i.e., we who had hoped), place hope in someone. (See also explanatory note.) 2 προελ. εν X] Greek, those (= we) who had hoped in Christ. (See the preceding note.) 3 Composita . . . προ] Latin and Greek, composite words [with] “before” or “forth.” 4 ἡμας] Greek, us. 6 ειναι εις επαινον] Greek, being for the praise. 9 præscientia Dei] Latin, God’s foreknowledge. 12 ελπιζειν εν τινι . . . exspectare aliquem] Greek and Latin, [nor does] placing hope in someone [mean the same as] waiting (or longing) for someone. (See also explanatory note.) 13 εις απολυτρωςιν της περιποιησεως. περιποιεν] Greek, for the redemption of the possession. To keep safe. 17 περιποιηςις] Greek, safekeeping. 18 ‫]ס ֻגלָה‬ ְ Hebrew, possession. 19 περιουςιος] Greek, special, chosen. 23 ϰαϑ’ υμας] among you. 23 ὑμων] Greek, of you. 24 fides, quæ ad vos pertinet] Latin, the faith that belongs to you. 26 πατηρ της δοξης] Greek, Father of glory. 27 δοξα] Greek, opinion, reputation, expectation, or glory―here glory. 28 ενδοξος] Greek, held in repute. 29 σοϕια] Greek, wisdom.

56

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

v. 18. πεϕωτισμενους τους οϕϑαλμους is to be referred to δωη. In order to simplify the explanation, some have wished to read ειναι as implicit here; or to find a Hebraism in it. v. 18. ο πλουτος της δοξης της ϰληρ. εν τοις αγιοις. Some (Koppe) connect these words with τις εςτιν: how great, among the saints, is the hope and the glory of the div. inheritance; but in this way it becomes plodding. Others connect these words with ϰληρον. Then we are of course missing the article; but that is something we find more often in P[aul]; but that would change the meaning of ϰληρονομια, for then instead of referring to the salvation we should inherit, it would now refer to the position we take on toward others as a result of our inheritance: what great glory there lies in the fact that you, among and with the holy ones, are God’s inheritors. εν τοις αγιοις has been taken by some as neuter, referring to the heavens; but this idiom cannot be confirmed.

5

10

2nd Chapter v. 3. τεϰνα ϕυσει οργης. ϕυσει some (Koppe) have explained by revera; in this they have appealed to Gal 4:8: but are they indeed gods, who are not gods ϕυσει, not true gods; but that is not enough to prove that ϕυσει means “in truth.” The word means: derivation, descent, etc. To be sure, Rückert holds that hereditary sin is indeed taught here; but in point of fact, there is not actually talk of that in this passage (see Usteri); rather, here there is only talk of how we become conscious of our own state.― v. 5. (χαριτι εςτε σεσωμενοι). Is an expression of the inner feeling that a hum. being needs only to recognize grace in what happens with him in Chr., and the fervent wish that his readers will also recollect this. v. 8. σεσωςμενοι. Precisely this verb was chosen judiciously here. It does not, as some have opined, signify purgare a vitiis, nor “ad fidem evangelicam perducere.” But it is used with respect to what he had said in the preceding: that they were dead by their sins, and τεϰνα οργης. Such a state could not but lead to απωλεια: they were now torn away from this state, and were transferred to a happier state, which was now actually a σωτηρια (1:13; Rom. 1:16); the latter was already complete, and therefore past tense. 1 πεϕωτισμενους τους οϕϑαλμους] Greek, the enlightened eyes. 1 δωη] Greek, would give. 2 ειναι] Greek, to be. 3 ο πλουτος της δοξης της ϰληρ. εν τοις αγιοις] Greek, the wealth of the glory of his inheritance among the holy ones. (See also explanatory note.) 4 τις εςτιν] Greek, what is, here: [how great, among the saints . . .]. 6 ϰληρον.] Greek (abbreviation of κληρονομίας), inheritance. 8 ϰληρονομια] Greek, inheritance. 11 εν τοις αγιοις] Greek, among the holy ones (i.e., among the saints). 14 τεϰνα ϕυσει οργης] Greek, children of wrath, by nature. 14 ϕυσει] Greek, by nature. 14 revera] Latin, properly “re vera,” in truth. 20 χαριτι εςτε σεσωμενοι] Greek, by grace you are saved. (See also explanatory note.) 23 σεσωςμενοι] Greek, you are saved. (See also explanatory note.) 24 purgare a vitiis] Latin, to cleanse of sins. 24 ad fidem evangelicam perducere] Latin, to lead on to the evangelical faith. 26 τεϰνα οργης] Greek, children of wrath. 26 απωλεια] Greek, destruction. 28 σωτηρια] Greek, deliverance.

15

57

20

25

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

20

25

58

30

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

57

v. 10. επ’ εργοις αγαϑοις. with the aim of completing εργα αγαϑα (see Gal. 5:13. επ’ ελευϑερια εϰληϑητε). The meaning, then, is: God has accordingly placed us in this new relation by means of Chr., in order that an ethical life may grow from it. Now, it could be thought that this does not belong to the argument of the main clause; but P[aul] reached beyond that clause’s boundaries in order also to remind provisionally of the Christians’ ethical duties. But if one recalls that he had previously said ουϰ εξ εργων, then one discovers the intention. Not εξ εργων have we attained σωτεριαν, but επι εργοις αγαϑοις. These are not the justification for our admittance to the new order of things; but they should follow from it, and not merely εργα, commanded works, at that; but in truth good deeds. εργα αγαϑα in plur. is rarer; singul. is more common; but never εργα νομου αγαϑα.― v. 11. Transition. The discussion of the great good deeds that God has displayed toward the entire hum. race in Xnty now leads the apostle to show his readers (pagan-Christians; for only to such readers is the letter written) the great difference between what they once had been and what they have now, in enjoyment of the highest goods, become. v. 12. Χωρις Χ. Some have explained this as: they did not await Chr., but R[ückert] says that however great that advantage could have been, the words nonetheless seem to express something more. Not only is it deeply rooted in Pauline doctrine to assume an activity by Chr. (as creator of the world) in the O. T. as well; but we also have a very certain proof of this (1 Cor 10:4).―? ? απηλ[λ]οτριωμενοι. οω. abalieno alienum reddo (entfremden) cum acc: pers. et Genit: rei. destituo aliquem aliqua re.― Med. me abalieno, desero. With regard to the passage at hand, R[ückert] notes that απαλλ. entfremden; actually means entfremden but for it to be possible for this to happen, then strictly speaking, a connection must have been in place beforehand. One can also find this in Col 1:21, inasmuch as the pagans, by their sins, must really be regarded as foreign and separated from God. But in πολιτεια Ι. the pagans had after all never taken part, and for that reason it could be thought that he simply should have said αλλοτριοι. But if we note that πολιτεια perhaps does not refer to citizenship here, but in every case πολιτεια designates a constitution, and that by constitution P[aul] understands nothing less than theocracy, not as it was in reality, but ideally―then perhaps one could here think of hum. beings’ most ancient condition. ? ? ?

1 επ’ εργοις αγαϑοις] Greek, for good works. (See also explanatory note.) 1 εργα αγαϑα] Greek, good works. 1 επ’ ελευϑερια εϰληϑητε] Greek, called for freedom. 6 ουϰ εξ εργων] Greek, not from works. 7 εξ εργων] Greek, from works. 7 σωτεριαν] Greek, deliverance. 7 επι εργοις αγαϑοις] Greek, for good works. 9 εργα] Greek, works. 10 εργα αγαϑα] Greek, good works. 11 εργα νομου αγαϑα] Greek, good works of the Law (or good deeds of the Law). 16 Xωρὶς Χ.] Greek (abbreviation of χωρὶς Χριστοῦ), without Christ. (See also explanatory note.) 21 απηλ[λ]οτριωμενοι . . . Med. me abalieno, desero] See the next six translator’s footnotes and the explanatory notes for translation. 21 απηλ[λ]οτριωμενοι] Greek (passive perfect participle of the verb ἀπαλλοτριόω), I alienate, I estrange (see the next translator’s note). (See also explanatory note.) 21 οω] Greek (an ending indicating the Greek form ἀπαλλοτρι]όω), I alienate, I estrange. (See also explanatory note.) 21 abalieno alienum reddo] Latin, I alienate, I make something foreign to someone. (See also explanatory note.) 21 (entfremden)] German, alienate, render foreign. (See also explanatory note.) 21 cum acc: pers. et Genit: rei. destituo aliquem aliqua re] Latin, with the person in the accusative and the object in the genitive, “I deprive someone of something.” (See also explanatory note.) 22 Med. me abalieno, desero] Latin, I distance myself, I abandon. (See also explanatory note.) 23 απαλλ.] Greek (abbreviation of ἀπαλλοτριοῦν), alienating, estranging. (See also explanatory note.) 26 πολιτεια I.] Greek (abbreviation of πολιτεία [τοῦ] ᾿Ισραὴλ), the commonwealth of Israel. 28 αλλοτριοι] Greek, others. 29 πολιτεια] Greek, commonwealth.

58

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

αϑεοι can be used of hum. beings who deny God’s existence, and of hum. beings who do not draw back in awe and reverence (Frevler). Here he calls the pagans αϑεοι, because of course he declares that the gods that they profess are not gods (Gal 4:8). v. 15. ινα τους δυο ϰτιση etc. We are more than familiar with P[aul]’s teleological tendency to know that wherever he discusses one or another arrangement made by God with hum. beings, he also refers to the purpose of such an arrangement. But this often means that he repeats himself: namely, what he said in v. 14, and what he now says at the close of v. 15, are entirely the same. v. 16. αποϰτεινας την εχϑραν. R[ückert] understands this την εχϑραν as referring to the enmity between God and hum. beings, albeit not from God’s side, for indeed it all emerged from God’s love (Rom 5:8). v. 21. εν ϰυριῳ. Here it must be noted that ϰυριος designates Chr., not God. At the very least, says R[ückert], I cannot recall any passage, apart from citations from the O. T., in which it appears otherwise. Some explain ναος εν ϰυριῳ as ναος ϰυριου; but that immediately fails; for the temple must not be Chr[ist]’s, but God’s. Others assume that the phrase takes the place of the dative. But that is equally uncertain. Still others provide an instrumental explanation: per Chr. But as convenient as this would be, it does not seem to make sense here on account of the preceding εν ω, for otherwise a burdensome tautology would arise. It is most correct, then, to refer εν ϰυριῳ to αγιον, and even if this does not yield an especially clear concept, one could nonetheless call this temple holy in the Lord, in order to indicate that its holiness was not something peculiar to it, but was solely a result of the connection with Chr.

5

10

15

20

Chapter 3. v. 2. After composing these last words (v. 1), it seems to have occurred to the apostle that his readers might nonetheless possibly need an explanation of how this υπερ υμων applies, namely, how he was in fact the apostle to the pagans appointed by God.―ειγε ηϰουσ. is in literal Danish: if, you indeed, i.e., you had truly indeed heard; which clearly would have been expressed as follows: ηϰουσατε γαρ που. ἡ χαρις η δοϑεισα μοι must be understood,

1 αϑεοι] Greek, godless ones. (See also explanatory note.) 2 Frevler] German, evildoer. 4 ινα τους δυο ϰτιση] Greek, in order that he might found in the two (cited from Eph 2:15 “in order that, in place of the two, he might create in himself one”). (See also explanatory note.) 9 αποϰτεινας την εχϑραν] Greek, having killed the enmity. 9 την εχϑραν] Greek, the enmity. 12 εν ϰυριῳ] Greek, in the Lord. (See also explanatory note.) 12 ϰυριος] Greek, Lord. 14 ναος εν ϰυριῳ] Greek, temple in the Lord. 14 ναος ϰυριου] Greek, temple of the Lord. 17 per Chr.] Latin, by means of Christ. 18 εν ω] Greek, in whom. 19 εν ϰυριῳ . . . αγιον] Greek, in the Lord [to] the Holy One. 24 υπερ υμων] Greek, for your sake, in your behalf. 25 ειγε ηϰουσ.] Greek, if, then, you have heard. (See also explanatory note.) 27 ηϰουσατε γαρ που] Greek, for you have somehow heard. (See also explanatory note.) 27 ἡ χαρις η δοϑεισα μοι] Greek, the grace granted me.

25

Biblical Exegesis

59 5

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

59

as usual, as referring to his apostolic office and to the competence for it that was granted him by God.―οιϰονομια must not be understood here as referring to provincia officium dispensandi gratiam; but of administration, and οιϰ. της χ. about the div. administration and arrangement based on the fact that he, in a miraculous manner, was called to be an apostle, and had received the task of proclaiming the name of Chr. among the nations. v. 4. προς ὁ with reference to which, i.e., by which

10

v. 5. τοις υιοις των ανϑρωπων. This formula does not otherwise appear in P[aul]; accordingly, it is difficult to determine whether he simply wished to designate hum. beings in general, or whether he used this expression with some special emphasis. Rückert holds that he may have wished to use it to designate humanity in genrl (Jews and pagans) inasmuch as neither was privileged above the other. v. 6. εν τω Χρ. may not be referred, as some have done, to επαγγ. αυτου; but rather to all the preceding words συγϰληρον., συσσ., συμμ.. v. 10. ινα Koppe, Rosenmüll[er]., Flatt read it consequutiv, but without justification.

15

20

v. 11. ϰατα προϑεσιν των αιωνων. These words must be connected to v. 10 (ινα γνωρ.), and not with ϕωτισαι παντας; or with σοϕια (as others do). This genitive, των αιωνων, some have taken as designating the obj.: the decision about the centuries. But αιωνες is not actually used by P[aul] to refer to centuries, and προϑεσις does not itself make reference to the long stretch of time, but rather to that which was once completed in Chr[ist]. Hence whereas we may well explain such an expression as οιϰονομια των αιωνων in that way, we should preferably read this genitive as synonymous with αιωνιος. And we have also noted in P[aul] that he regards the div. essence in such a way that he regards each of God’s resolutions as eternal.―

2 οιϰονομια] Greek, household management, stewardship. 2 provincia officium dispensandi gratiam] Latin, the business, the office, of dispensing grace. 3 οιϰ. της χ.] Greek (abbreviation of οἰϰονομίαν τῆς χάριτος), administration of the grace (i.e., the grace of God). 6 προς ὁ] Greek, by which. (See also explanatory note.) 7 τοις υιοις των ανϑρωπων] Greek, to the children of human beings. (See also explanatory note.) 12 εν τω Χρ.] Greek (abbreviation of ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ), in Christ. (See also explanatory note.) 12 επαγγ. αυτου] Greek (abbreviation of ἐπαγγελίας αὐτοῦ), of his promise. 13 συγϰληρον., συσσ., συμμ.] Greek (abbreviations of συνκληρονόμα, σύνσωμα, συμμέτοχα), fellow inheritors, fellow members of his body, fellow sharers. 14 ινα] Greek, in order that. 14 consequutiv] Latin with a German suffix, as consecutive. (See also explanatory note.) 15 ϰατα προϑεσιν των αιωνων] Greek, according to the eternal purpose. (See also explanatory note.) 15 ινα γνωρ.] Greek (abbreviation of ἵνα γνωρισθῇ), in order that it might be made known. (See also explanatory note.) 16 ϕωτισαι παντας] Greek, to make all see. 16 σοϕια] Greek, wisdom. 16 των αιωνων] Greek, of ages, of eternity. (See also explanatory note.) 17 αιωνες] Greek, ages. 18 προϑεσις] Greek, decision, purpose. 20 οιϰονομια των αιωνων] Greek, administration of eternity. 21 αιωνιος] Greek, eternal.

60

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

v. 13. μη εγϰαϰειν The subj. can be either εμε or υμας The latter is the best. v. 18. εν αγαπῃ ερ. either one must assume, with Koppe, an inversion instead of ινα εν αγαπη etc εξισχυσητε; or an anacoluthon for ερριζωμενων. v. 19. ινα πληρωϑητε εις παν etc. Koppius jungit ινα. cum præcedentibus, et explicat de ecclesia: accipi in ecclesiam omnes complectentem; sed obstat παν, quod non multitudinem sed totalitatem omnium membrorum, tum igitur παν superfluum esset; quare de summa beneficentia, quæ ex multis membris composita est, explicandum: ut impleamini tota, integra copia beneficiorum Dei.―

5

Chap. 4. v. 9. ϰατωτερα μερη Calvin: “Hoc inepte torquent quidam ‘ad inferos’, quum P. de præsentis tantum vitæ conditione agat, et argumentum, quod sumunt ex gradu comp: nimis infirmum est, comparatur enim non una pars terræ cum altera sed tota terra cum coelo, ac si diceret: ex sede tam excelsa in hoc nostrum barathrum descendit.”― v. 13. πληρωμα. 1) fartum, fartura, id, quo impletum est aliquid. Hinc. copia, plenitudo 1) omnia, quæ continet aliquid 2) copia, quæ implet, multitudo.―Quum πληρουν etiam dicatur de iis, quæ se diffundunt per spatium, idque implent et tenent πληρωμα 2) transfertur ad locum s. spatium impletum ab aliquo. Sic sens. metaph. Paulus a) quemcunque Christianum apellat πλ. του ϑεου v. Χρ., quatenus plenus esse debet a Chr. b) ecclesia dicitur πληρ. Χρ. quasi templum, in quo habitat, quod occupat et regit, ut anima corpus.―

10

60

15

v. 16. επιχορηγια. (επι―χορηγια choragium, ludus choricus) largitio, impensæ. Hinc επιχ: apud profanos est suppeditatio, subministratio et sic. Phil 1:19. Sed Eph. 4:16 de constructione dicitur, qua alterum alteri ordine jungitur, ut fit in choris, σωμα i: e: ecclesia connexum et compactum δια παςης αϕης της επιχ. per juncturas quascunque constructionis, quod pro δια παςης επιχ. των αϕων per summum perfectissimum nexum juncturarum.―

20

v. 19 απηλγηϰοτες from απαλγειν from αλγος dolor, dolorem non sentire. Indicatur captus membris 2) metaph. animi obduratio ‫הִ קְ שָ ה לֵב‬.

25

1 μη εγϰαϰειν] Greek, do not act culpably (traditionally rendered as μὴ ἐϰϰαϰεῖν, do not lose heart). (See also explanatory note.) 1 εμε . . . υμας] Greek, me [or] you (pl.). 2 εν αγαπῃ ερ.] Greek (abbreviation of ἐν ἀγάπῃ ἐρριζωμένοι), rooted in love. 2 ινα εν αγαπη etc εξισχυσητε] Greek, in order that (you who are) rooted and grounded in love may be strengthened (abbreviated citation of Eph 3:19). (See also explanatory note.) 3 ερριζωμενων] Greek, of the rooted ones. 4 ινα πληρωϑητε εις παν etc. Koppius jungit ινα . . . integra copia beneficiorum Dei] See the explanatory notes for translation. 10 ϰατωτερα μερη Calvin . . . in hoc nostrum barathrum descendit] See the explanatory notes for translation. 14 πληρωμα. 1) fartum, fartura, id . . . ut anima corpus] See the explanatory notes for translation. 20 επιχορηγια. (επι―χορηγια . . . ludus choricus) . . . per summum perfectissimum nexum juncturarum] See the explanatory notes for translation. 25 απηλγηϰοτες . . . απαλγειν . . . αλγος . . . animi obduratio ‫ ]הִ קְ שָ ה לֵב‬Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, απηλγηϰοτες (“having become despondent”) [from] ἀπαλγεῖν (“to cease to feel pain”) [from] ἄλγος (“pain”), not to feel pain. Indicates numbness in the limbs 2) metaphorically, obstinacy of the soul ‫הִ קְ ׁשָ ה לֵב‬ (“he hardened his heart”). (See also explanatory note.)

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 15–16 1834–1835 •

61

v. 26. ο ἡλιος μη επιδυετω Ps 4:5. simile quid. Deut 24:15 jubet Moses, mercedem mercenariis solvere antequam occiderat sol. Plutarchus dicit, legem fuisse Pythagoræis, non licere iis iram in alterum diem proferre.

Chap 5. 5

10

16

15

61 20

25

v. 4. ευτραπελια versatilitas dexteritas, deinde urbanitas et sensu malo scurrilitas. v. 18 ϰαι μη μεϑυσϰεςϑε etc. Offendit, quod h: l: transit P. subito a vitiis inebriationis ad celebrationem. Koppius statuit, eum respexisse ad compotationes, quas instituebant Christiani in cultibus sacris. Tum: Nolite in conventibus sacris indulgere inebrietati, sed satisfacite piis ritibus. Sed nihil est, quod indicat, P. has respexisse; amat sermonis audaciam, qua iisdem verbis utitur ad res physicas et spirituales describendas.

Col. 1:14 how does it work in v. 14. In the student notes, it says that God cannot be thought to remit the punishment arbitrarily; but the punishment aims at their true welfare, and by means of the punishment they are bettered; and so they again become pleasing to God; but now the student notes remark: “thus the word απολυτρωςις refers to non solum veniam poenæ, sed liberationem a peccatis.”― 〈····〉 Samarit Samarit S Col 1:24. παϑημασιν υπερ υμων ita etiam 2 Tim 2:10 similia occurrunt de Chr:, ideo antiqui dogma de satisfactione passiva ɔ: Chr: pertulisse poenas omnium hominum, hoc vero eodem jure si respicimus alia loca N. T. dicitur de apostolis ergo υπερ non vertend: pro sed propter. 1 ο ἡλιος μη επιδυετω . . . in alterum diem proferre] Greek and Latin, let not the sun go down. At Ps 4:5 something similar. At Deut 24:15 Moses commands that the wages of the hired hand be paid before the sun sets. Plutarch says that it was a law of the Pythagoreans not to permit them to carry anger over to the next day. (See also explanatory note.) 5 ευτραπελια versatilitas dexteritas, deinde urbanitas et sensu malo scurrilitas] Greek and Latin, wit, ribaldry, versalitity, dexterity, later urbanity and, in the negative sense, scurrilousness. (See also explanatory note.) 6 ϰαι μη μεϑυσϰεςϑε . . . ad res physicas et spirituales describendas] See the explanatory notes for translation. 18 απολυτρωςις] Greek, ransoming, redemption. 18 non solum veniam poenæ, sed liberationem a peccatis] Latin, not only the remittance of punishment, but liberation from sins. 23 παϑημασιν υπερ υμων ita etiam . . . pro sed propter] See the explanatory notes for translation.

62

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 16–17 1834–1835 •

2 Cor how is verse 27 to be understood and translated. Constat Judæos plurimum semper tribuisse circumcisioni, erat enim ea signum externum foederis cum Deo facti. Ita dicit Philo circumcisio est εϰτομη των ηδονων, Sens: ratione quidem physica non circumcisi estis, at doctrina chr: pariter ac circumcisione omni peccato omittendo omnique virtuti colendæ adstricti estis.” Circumcisio igitur indicat obligationem moralem. Col 2:22 α εστι παντα εις ϕϑοραν τη αποχρησει. Nonnulli statuunt esse verba Pauli concedentis aliquid adversariis: quæ certe omnia nocent per abusum―alii ad ipsos doctores referunt: num omnia illa usu nocent―potius ad Paulum declarantem: hisce præceptis nulla vis inest sed omni〈a〉 per usum perniciosa sunt.―αποχρησις enim sæpe indicat usum.

2 Thess 2:1–12. Opponuntur sibi in omnibus hisce ο ανϑρωπος της αμαρτιας, ο αντιϰειμενος, ὁ υιος της απωλειας et ab altera parte ο ϰατεχων. Omnes fere interpretes antiquiores eccl: protest: explicarunt de pontificibus Romanis et imperatore. Sed obstat, quod Paulus docet prope eminere. 3 Constat Judæos . . . obligationem moralem] See the explanatory notes for translation. 11 α εστι παντα εις ϕϑοραν τη αποχρησει. . . . enim sæpe indicat usum] See the explanatory notes for translation. 19 Opponuntur sibi in omnibus . . . ab altera parte ο ϰατεχων] Latin and Greek, In all of these (passages), there stand opposed (on the one side) the person of sin, the one opposing, the person of perdition, and on the other side the one who holds fast. 22 Omnes fere interpretes antiquiores . . . quod Paulus docet prope eminere] Latin, Just about all of the older exegetes of the Protestant Church explicated this as referring to the Roman high priests and emperors. But that is refuted by what Paul teaches will soon manifest itself.

5

10

15

17 20

Biblical Exegesis

62

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

P a p e r 17 1834–1835

Hugo Grotius explicat ο απολλυμενος etc de Caligula, ο ϰατεχων de Vitellio, tum Syriæ et Palæstinæ præfecto, cujus metuit Caligula auctoritatem multitudinemque copiarum. Obstat tempus. Constat enim hanc epistolam scriptam esse post mortem Caligulæ; P: loquitur de tempore futuro. (H: G: ex conjectura statuit epistolam esse scriptam antea). Bastholm explicat de Nerone, cujus atrocitas cohibebatur per aliquod tempus per Burrhum et Senecam. Recentiores explicarunt de exitio Hierosolymæ, tum ο απολλ: est gens Israelit:, nominatim Pharisæi Rabbini, vel inprimis gens Flaviana (Titus et Vespasian), ο ϰατεχων vero Christiani e Judæis, qui pietate sua ad tempus vastationem retardabant. Obstat ( 1) contextus, qui docet sermonem esse de judicio extremo, de universali omnium rerum commutatione, non de excidio singularum urbium.) NB. Adhibet P: nomina numm: singl: ideo arbitrium est hoc sumere sensu collectivo. Koppe expl: ο απολ. de omnibus impiis et ο ϰατεχων de ipso Apostolo, sed obst: 1) sensus collect: est arbitrarius et 2) articulus ὁ. Statuendum est ap: indicasse res | privatas Thess:, et verba hæc intelligenda esse de duumviris invicem sibi resistentibus, et forsan ο αντιϰ: erat sum̄ æ auctoritatis inter Thess:; ideoque fugit ap: perspicuitatem, ne odium sibi contraheret.― Sensus sic constituendus erit: Adest inter vos, uti nostis homo nomini Chr: infestissimus, alius adest nominis patronus, quo sublato impius ille demum sua

1 Hugo Grotius explicat ο απολλυμενος etc . . . esse scriptam antea] See the explanatory notes for translation. 8 Bastholm explicat de Nerone . . . per Burrhum et Senecam] Latin, Bastholm explains this as referring to Nero, whose atrocities were endured for some time by Burrhus and Seneca. (See also explanatory note.) 10 Recentiores explicarunt de exitio Hierosolymæ . . . hoc sumere sensu collectivo] See the explanatory notes for translation. 20 Koppe expl: ο απολ. . . . et 2) articulus ὁ] Latin and Greek, Koppe explains ὁ ἀπολλύμενος (“the one who perishes”) as referring to all the godless ones, and ὁ ϰατέχων (“the one who holds fast”) as referring to the apostle himself, but this is refuted by: 1) the collective meaning is arbitrary and 2) the article ὁ (the nominative singular masculine definite article). (See also explanatory note.) 23 Statuendum est . . . ne odium sibi contraheret] See the explanatory notes for translation. 28 Sensus sic constituendus erit: . . . in medio reliquendus est] See the explanatory notes for translation.

•

63

64

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 17–18 1834–1835 •

consilia patefaciet.―Sed res privatæ Thess: nobis sunt ignotæ. Neque mirum est, P: de hisce rebus obscurius dixisse, si quidem ipsa verba ostendunt, P: antea de hisce rebus cum illis locutum esse. Hic igitur locus in medio reliquendus est.

On the words ευλογειν, ευλογητος, ευλογια and ϰαταρασϑαι, επιϰαταρατος. The true meaning of these words must be derived from the Hebrew: ‫ברך‬, ‫ברוך‬, ‫ברכה‬, ‫ארר‬, ‫קלל‬, ‫ארור‬, ‫קללה‬. 1. on ευλογ., ευλ. ευλ: These are used A about hum. beings: 1) when hum. beings bless other hum. beings, where this means to α) pray that good things befall one β) act beneficently toward one γ) greet one. α) They are used in this sense particularly about the patriarchs, whose blessing was regarded as of paramount importance, on account of their venerableness and holiness. Heb 7:1, 7:6, 7:7, 11:20, 11:21. Mk 10:16. Lk 2:34. 1 Cor 4:12. β) Mt 5:44. Lk 6:28. Acts 3:26. Rom 12:14. 1 Pet 3:9. γ) This meaning, it seems to me, does not at all fit the passage listed by Pott, Lk 24:51. On the other hand, it seems to fit better in the following passages listed by Pott, namely Lk 1:28, 1:42. Mt 21:9, 23:39, etc., though here the concept of praying for something good is also present. From these different meanings of the verb, there naturally arise nouns: though ευλογια appears with an evil sense in Rom 16:18.

6 ευλογειν, ευλογητος, ευλογια . . . ϰαταρασϑαι, επιϰαταρατος] Greek, to bless or to praise, blessed, blessing or praise [and] to call down curses upon. (See also explanatory note.) 9 ‫ברך‬, ‫ברוך‬, ‫ברכה‬, ‫ארר‬, ‫קלל‬, ‫ארור‬, ‫ ]קללה‬Hebrew, properly ‫ּבֵ ַרְך‬, he blessed; ‫ּבָ רּוְך‬, blessed (as present passive participle or adjective); ‫ּבְ ָרכָה‬, blessing; ‫אָ ַרר‬, he cursed; ‫קִ ּלֵל‬, he cursed (from ‫קָ לַל‬, be condemned [the spelling Kierkegaard uses, ‫קלל‬, could refer to either of these verbs, but very likely refers only to the former]); ‫ארור‬, cursed (as present passive participle or adjective); ‫קְ ָללָה‬, curse. (See also explanatory note.) 10 ευλογ., ευλ. ευλ] Greek (abbreviations of εὐλογεῖν, εὐλογητός, εὐλογία), to bless or to praise; blessed; blessing or praise. (See also explanatory note.) 29 ευλογια] Greek, blessing or praise (primary meaning; can also mean “flattery”). (See also explanatory note.)

5

18

10

63

15

20

25

30

Biblical Exegesis

5

10

15

20

25

64

30

•

P a p e r 18 1834–1835

2) on the hum. being over against God. Here it is to honor God, whether this takes place in prayer, or by thanking him or by praising him in any way or another. Thus it is used about Jesus over against God Mt Mt 14:19, 26:26. on hum. beings in genrl Lk 1:64, 24:53. Jas 3:9, etc. From this the word is ευλογητος, which is used in doxologies whether ϑεος is present or not. B. God is said ευλογειν 1) hum. beings, i.e., he shows them acts of kindness. Heb 6:14. etc. here from the phrase ευλογημενος του Θεου ‫ ברוך יי‬Mt 25:34. 2) bless other things thus at Gen 2:2 God is said to bless the Sabbath, i.e., God commanded that this day be a day of rejoicing above others. Thus Heb 6:7 about the earth. From this it follows easily how to explain the opposing concepts. ϰαταρ. επιϰ: A on hum. beings over against 1) other hum. beings. Jas 3:9 Mt 5:44. Lk 6:28. Rom 12:4. 2) things. Mk 11:21. B. about God. 1) hum. beings. here it means to punish. Mt 25:41. Gal 3:10, 3:13. 2) about things in this sense the verb does not appear, but the noun does ϰαταρα and this only once Heb 6:7 about the earth, where the meaning is that it shall become unfruitful.

7 ευλογητος] Greek, blessed. 8 ϑεος] Greek, God. (See also explanatory note.) 9 ευλογειν] Greek, to bless. (See also explanatory note.) 11 ευλογημενος του Θεου ‫ ]ברוך יי‬Greek and Hebrew, blessed by God; blessed by God (same meaning in both languages). (See also explanatory note.) 19 ϰαταρ. επιϰ] Greek (abbreviation of καταρᾶσθαι επιϰ), to call down curses upon (thus, επιϰατάρατος, “accursed”). (See also explanatory note.) 28 ϰαταρα] Greek, curse. (See also explanatory note.)

•

65

66

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 19–21 1834–1838 •

Marheineke. “der Skepticismus, der innerhalb des Zweifels stehen bleibt, beweiset die Unmöglichkeit eines Wissen[s] von Gott so wenig, daß er vielmehr die Ungewißheit nur für gewiß ausgebend, sein Zweifel und Nichtwissen selbst nur mittelst eines Wissen[s] von Gott geltend machen kann.”

Mr. 〈P······〉



#



19

5

20

Leaving aside the fact that this denial of evil contradicts――it is irrational of the concept of the creature’s necessary restriction―by which precisely as the determined it distinguishes itself from all others―to wish to exclude sin, which, on the contrary, strives precisely to destroy the limits and definiteness of the creature, and thereby its truth. (A 3rd error is the Kantian, which presumes evil as having primally arisen in the hum. being, and terminated in him.)

6th lecture. The author justifies why he has adopted the anthropological standpoint. 1) Hum. beings shall be God’s image in the world and for the world. 2) That which from the fall of hum. beings and

10

15

21:1

20

) )

1. 2.

# #

shall

shall 4)

P

1) √

1) √ 1) √2,000.

〈prim〉

2 der Skepticismus, der . . . von Gott geltend machen kann] German, the skepticism that remains caught within doubt hardly proves the impossibility of a knowledge of God; rather, it passes off the uncertainty as certain; it can only assert its own doubt and lack of knowledge by means of a knowledge of God. (See also explanatory note.)

25

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 20 1837–1838

Paper 20.

•

67

68

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 21–22 1837–1838 •

1)

66

This known and knowable other is, as an ob[ject], one that knows itself just as well, i.e., one eye sees another, one ear hears another, and this or rather the thing known, seen, knows, sees, is aware not only of its being and becoming known, but thereby knows its knower as well― 2) Or this other is something selfless, without feeling

5

This false Sucht cannot be quenched immed., but only mediat., by awakening another.― Deus est sphæra, cujus centrum ubique, circumferentia nusquam.

what I know I look at and look through, and my looking is free, active, non-neces[sitated]

den sk. udt.

21:2

10

22:1

ligesa d. 〈E. S.〉 sk.―s〈aal bl〉

15

#

G.

as intellig. spirit. W=W

Nihil est in intellectu quod non ante fuit in sensu. Nihil est in sensu, quod non fuit in intellectu.―

22:2

20

W. = W

K

generatio unius―destructio alterius.―immateriell

8 Sucht] German, desperate search, dependency, addiction. 10 Deus est sphæra . . . circumferentia nusquam] Latin, God is a sphere whose center is everywhere, whose circumference is nowhere. (See also explanatory note.) 19 Nihil est . . . fuit in sensu] Latin, Nothing is in the intellect that was not previously in sensation. (See also explanatory note.) 20 Nihil est . . . fuit in intellectu] Latin, Nothing is in sensation that has not been in the intellect. (See also explanatory note.) 22 generatio unius . . . immateriell] Latin and German, the generation of the one―the destruction of the other.―immaterial. (See also explanatory note.)

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 22–23 1837–1838 •

Kier Philosophical 〈if〉 Kierkeg Usteri Usteri| 5

67

22:3

10

22:4 15

23:1 20

23:2

Indeed, von B[aader] claims that evil is older than man; yet he holds that evil came into the world through man, so that the corruption of nature is conditioned by the Fall of man, and man’s return to God will bring the world with it; although here p. 84 he seems to claim that evil has come into the world through evil beings other than man.

Should one call God’s productions immanent, or emanental? Hum. creation may of course also be called an emanent production; and if it presupposes a ground as [its] locus (p. 87), where is that found, then? Here, it seems to me, the question of the creation of matter asserts itself?

One must distinguish the fundamental essence with its 3 fundamental powers (thinking―willing―effecting) from the three attributes or organs given thereby: (mind, soul, body)

kierkegaard W = W. W = W = W.

69

70

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 21 1837–1838

Paper 21:2.

•

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 21 1837–1838

Paper 21:1.

•

71

72

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 23–24 1837–1838 •

The hum. being indeed went forth as comp[lete], i.e., entered into complete existe[nce], but he needed to secure and take lasting possession of this completeness (integrity). However, because here in the spirit there was and is the image of God (Idea), or God’s being in the image of himself, the hum. being needed to subordinate himself to the spirit, which would have made hi[s] soul and body spiritual This the hum. being did not do, and by an abuse or a perversity of the organs given him he lost them, and found himself bereft of them, thus his shame. Instead of his div. spirit, there came to be another for him―

Volume 3 The hum. being continually finds himself in a 5-fold rapport[:] to and with God, with himself, with other hum. beings, with other intelligent beings, with non-intelligent natural beings. Of these 5, the one, namely the one to God, is central par excellence.―

23:3

5

10

70

24:1

15

2nd Lecture. 3rd Lecture If, to such a scientific-scholarly treatm[ent] of the religious discipl[ine], one were to object that theology is a closed discipl[ine], then one must remember that revelation, as a gift to the faculty of knowledge, is also a task for us, with the help of this gift, like a light, to carry our research further.

1) One must not conflate the signs with the authors (Sabais-

20

24:2

mus). 2) One must not believe that such a knowledge of the heavens and stars has been supplanted by a more detailed graphical or descriptive astronomy. 3) the merely descriptive familiarity with the stars, too, had reached a degree of completeness, among those anc[ient] peoples, which we find all the more inconceivable inasmuch as they did not have our optical instruments. 4) This astrology always bore higher religious significance, making reference to one or another cult. 25 Sabaismus] Latin, Sabaism or Sabianism (worship of the stars).

30

35

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 22 1837–1838

Paper 22:1–2.

•

73

74

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 24 1837–1838 •

We distinguish freedom of choice or arbitrariness from true freedom or unfreedom, which is conditioned by the individual’s upliftedness to God or non-upliftedness to God, and argue against those who conflate individuality, as selfhood, with evil. The first immed. individ. is, as innocent, fixed neither as good nor evil.

24:3

If all being (immed. or med.) did not derive from one and the same cause and persist in it, then nothing would have had a cause.―Then there would have been no science, for to know a thing is to look into its cause (per causas scire).―

24:4

Thus such a body moves freely everywhere in such a medium, inasmuch as it is borne everywhere by it, reposes in it. Nowhere and never does this medium strike him as something other, even if it is always [encountering him] as different, and always reveals itself as the same

24:5

T 〈q〉

5

72 10

15

ein gottlose[s] Sein

X. The theologians have readily made use of philos., and accordingly some have taken up the philosop[hy] of identity, or the identity of subj[ect] and obj[ect] (fundamentally being one). It is astonishing that they have not noticed that this doctrine is rlly nothing other than that older one concerning active-reactive, or the identity of agent and reagent, in consequence of which the ancients already long ago perceived the duplicity of every causality in action and reaction, as equally inseparable and insusceptible of combination―and because each in turn, passing over into one another, ends up in an action as joint activity―their triplicity, i.e., every causality’s [triplicity] as such. Expansivity

10 per causas scire] Latin, to know by means of the causes. (See also explanatory note.) 16 ein gottlose[s] Sein] German, a godles[s] being. (See also explanatory note.)

24:6 20

25

30

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 23 1837–1838

Paper 23:1–3.

•

75

76

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 24 1837–1838 •

What phys[ical] or natural philos. call expansitivity (repulsivity) or compressivity (attractivity), the drive for “Fülle und Hülle,” is nothing other than that [same] active-reactiveness; and like the perception of oneself, or self-feeling and self-intuition, they simply give expression to the identity of the being that expands and compresses itself, that fills itself up and grasps (envelops) itself―so, too, the sensation and intuition of another also take place only under the same condition of an identity, which now, as a midpoint, stands within and above both. Whereby

The Imper[ative] of Knowledge:

5

24:7 74

#.

24:8

from a being’s given deformation to discover the error within the constitutive elements.― This proposition is already acknowledged by the aesthete in his own way, inasmuch as he establishes the unity and purity of form, as its impurity and disunity in certain configurations of its elements.―

15

destructio unius―constructio alterius

XIII. The word truth is applied either to knowledge of an existing, knowable thing, or to [the thing] itself, in which latter sense the ancient philos. held that a thing’s truth was equivalent to its imperishableness, as, e.g., Plato distinguishes static from dynamic being. This is contradicted by experience, inasmuch as there often arise such cases in which what is to be known comes, as it were, to meet the knower, indeed imposes itself.―The imper[ative] of knowledge.―Ignorance can be a crime―A triple relation between the knower and the known (mutual or one-sided nach oben nach unten. 2 Fülle und Hülle] German, filling and wrapping (a play on in Hülle und Fülle, meaning “in abundance”). 18 destructio unius―constructio alterius] Latin, the destruction of the one―the construction of the other. (See also explanatory note.) 30 nach oben nach unten] German, up, down. (See also explanatory note.)

24:9 20

25

30

Baader’s Dogmatics

•

P a p e r 24 1837–1838

Paper 24:6.

•

77

78

Biblical Exegesis, Schleiermacher

•

P a p e r 24–26 1837–1839 •

The logicians take it in the latter sense cognoscibile. They had no inkling of the fundamenta[l] truth that everything knowable only makes itself knowable by itself, whether as a self-conscious (intelligent) being it itself effects this manifestatio sui, expresses itself; or whether the known being is destined for this by an intelligence.

*

5

25

το ον the Eleatics (Parmenides)

pure being.― 1) it is universally valid 2) most general. simple―immed. 3) not a disti[n]ction as if it were something objective 4) copula without predicate or subj[ect] to that extent it is nothing. (i.e. nothing is predicated of it). existence.― το ἑτερον (τατερον). emerges from the lack― being presupposes an other, i.e., is existence.―boundary.―

10

Every negation contains an affirmation, inasmuch as it would otherw[ise] itself be completely meaningless. This is what Heiberg calls infinite conclusions. The abstract beginning is neither something nor nothing; for if it were nothing, it would not have begun, and if it were something it would have been more than the beginning.―

20

76 15

25

=F== # F 〈fe〉 〈fet〉 They blamed religion. With respect to actions, on the grounds: 1.) that it gave rise to indecent, ghastly actions against the common civic-moral life.― ― His argumentation I do not understand; for he aims to show that religion can easily be found in a hum. being together with the immoral, because the one belongs to feeling, the other to action 2 cognoscibile] Latin, knowable. (See also explanatory note.) 5 manifestatio sui] Latin, manifestation of itself. (See also explanatory note.) 9 το ον] Greek, being, what is. 16 το ἑτερον (τατερον)] Greek, the other, the one . . . the other.

26

30

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 26–27 1839–1840 •

2) such actions, which have no significance for sensibility, none for morality.

5

10

And yet we are supposed to believe that these actions, which are the nearly immed. manifestations of the feelings in life, must be good, for feelings themselves are of course good and true.―

Some are of the view that, if imagination is subjugated to the work of realizing the miniaturized images in their full magnitude, then this Erschöpfung is the feeling for what is great and majestic in nature.

Erschöpfung Erschöpfung 77

15

Erschöpfung Erschöpfung E Ers Ersch

egoist eg Erschöpfung § 16.

4 2

√

20

27:1

25

Erschöpfung

4

√

§ 16. √

Erschöpfung √ √ √

2

√ √

4.

√

Shouldn’t Rom 1:17 εϰ πιστεως εις πιστιν serve to explain (with r[eference] t[o] the dichotomy found throughout the epistle “to the Jew first and then to the pagan,” and which indeed is already begun in the 16th verse) about the faith of the Jews (after all, in other passages as well he refers, e.g., to Abraham as πρωτοτυπος for the Xn) which becomes potentiated in Xnty.―

30

11 Erschöpfung] German, exhaustion (here in the sense of utter completeness). (See also explanatory note.) 22 εϰ πιστεως εις πιστιν] Greek, through faith for faith. 28 πρωτοτυπος] Greek, prototype, archetype. (See also explanatory note.)

79

80

Schleiermacher

•

P a p e r 25 1837–1838

Paper 25.

•

Schleiermacher

•

P a p e r 26 1838–1839

Paper 26.

•

81

82

Biblical Exegesis

•

P a p e r 27–29 1839–1840 •

The error with respect to the doctrine of predestination, which one ultimately will find in the N. T, led astray by such a single word as προϑεσιν, e.g. here at Rom 8:28, lies in this: προϑεσις does indeed mean a predesigned plan, but this should be understood as referring to all of Xnty, that the whole of its appearance has been decided from eternity; the single individual, by contrast, is called according to a doctrine whose entire relationship to time is determined from eternity, though not in such a way that it can be said that his call is from eternity.―

Usteri p. 265. Now, because not all hum. beings to whom the gosp. has been proclaimed did take hold of the proffered salvation, it is asked how it would be determined which ones should partake of the salvation, and which not.

27:2

5

10

28

15

80

Acts.

29

Chap 1. Ps 69:26. about Davides or the author, who is deploring his enemies and wishing div. punishment upon them; the ancients held, with respect to Xt, and it may indeed be understood typologically in this way: Jn 11:7. (Mt 27:34), επαυλις = ‫ ִטיר‬palace.―αυτου plural in the text Ps 109:8. the same. ‫פְ קֻ דָ ה‬

3 προϑεσιν] Greek (accusative singular form of πρόϑεσις), purpose, proposition. (See also explanatory note.) 4 προϑεσις] Greek, purpose, proposition. 24 επαυλις = ‫ ] ִטיר‬Greek and Hebrew, encampment, dwelling. 24 αυτου] Greek, his. (See also explanatory note.) 26 ‫ ]פְ קֻ דָ ה‬Hebrew, office (in the sense of “position”). (See also explanatory note.)

20

25

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840

Chap. 2.

5

10

15

Joel 3. απο του πν. in the text my spirit, hence not partial εσχαταις ημ ‫ןֵכ־יֵרַחֲא‬. v. 18 μου is added in LXX. v. 20 επιϕανη ‫נֹורא‬. ָ v. 21. Rom 10:13. Ps 16:8. by the ancients, about a real resurrection from death, by the moderns, he hopes not to die. v. 26 γλωσσα ‫בֹודי‬ ִ ְ‫כ‬ οσιον = ‫ חַ ִסידֵ יָך‬your pious ones, Septuagint reads it in singular without the second ‫י‬. Acts 13:35 Ps 110:1. Mt 22:44. Heb 1:12. Chap. 3. Deut 18:15, 18:18 the moderns understand as referring to the whole prophetic order.

20

Chap. 4. Ps 2:1–2 Some as about David, some as about Solomon.

2 απο του πν] Greek, from the spirit. (See also explanatory note.) 3 εσχαταις ημ ‫ ]אֲחַ ֵרי־כֵן‬Greek and Hebrew, in the last days, afterward. (See also explanatory note.) 4 μου] Greek, my. (See also explanatory note.) 6 επιϕανη ‫]נֹורא‬ ָ Greek and Hebrew, splendor, awesome. (See also explanatory note.) 11 γλωσσα ‫בֹודי‬ ִ ְ‫ ]כ‬Greek and Hebrew, tongue, my glory. (See also explanatory note.) 12 οσιον = ‫ ]חַ ִסידֵ יָך‬Greek and Hebrew, pious one = you pious ones.

•

83

84

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

Chap. 7. Gen 12:1. Am 5:25. σϰηνην του Μολοχ ‫ ִסכּות מַ לְ כְ כֶם‬the tent of your king, which the Septuagint has taken as a nomen proprium v. 43. the two phrases are in the wrong order; for in the text ‫ כִ יּון צַ לְ מֵ יכֶם‬comes first, and only thereafter αστρον του ϑεου. The Septuagint has taken ‫ כיּון‬as a proprium and translated it as Ρεμϕαν, a Coptic name for Saturn. προςϰυνειν αυτοις is not found in the text.― the last words are from an entirely different passage; for the text reads: “I will exile you to the other side of Damascus.” Isa 66:1–2.

81

5

10

15

Cap. 8. Isa 53:7–8. belongs to the part of Isa[iah] that begins with chap. 40 and continues to 66, which is regarded by the moderns as not being by Isa[iah], but by a prophet in the Exile. (discrepant language b) presupposes that Hierusalem is destroyed, the people exiled c) explicitly names Cyrus.) here a certain ‫ יי עֶבֶ ד‬is discussed, whom all the ancients regard as Xt; to this it is objected that Xt is never called this elsewhere; in the passage itself, it is sometimes Cyrus; and throughout the entire passage, it proves to be the people of Israel 44:1, the moderns accordingly

3 σϰηνην του Μολοχ] Greek, the tent of Moloch. (See also explanatory note.) 3 ‫]סכּות מַ לְ כְ כֶם‬ ִ Hebrew, Sakkuth [or Sikkuth], your king. (See also explanatory note.) 5 nomen proprium] Latin, proper name. (See also explanatory note.) 7 ‫]כִ יּון צַ לְ מֵ יכֶם‬ Hebrew, your idols. 7 αστρον του ϑεου] Greek, star of God. (See also explanatory note.) 9 ‫ כִ יּון‬. . . proprium . . . Ρεμϕαν] Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, Kiyyun (possibly meaning “the arrangement”) [as a] proper name [and translated it as] ῾Ρεμϕάν (“Remphan”). (See also explanatory note.) 12 προςϰυνειν αυτοις] Greek, to worship them. (See also explanatory note.) 24 ‫ ]יי עֶבֶ ד‬Hebrew, servant of God. (See also explanatory note.)

20

25

Biblical Exegesis et al.

5

10

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840

explain this as referring to the Israelite people, whose sufferings in exile were supposedly for the sake of the pagans (impossible); or to the pious among the people, who must suffer for the sake of the others; others as referring to the prophets in general; others as referring to the author Pseudo-Isaiah. v. 33 in the text: but he is removed from anxiety and from judgment. ―he is separated from the land of the living.

•

85

PAPER 30—PAPER 47 “Philosophica. Older”

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

88

“Philosophica. Older”

•

P a p e r 30–33 1834 •

Philosophica.

85

30

Older. You always need 1 light in order to see another distinctly. For if you were to imagine yourself in total darkness and then saw one point of light, you would be absolutely unable to determine where it was, because it is course impossible to determine any spatial relation in darkness.―Only when there is another light would you be able to determine the location of the first in relation to the other. 15th/4 34.

31

There are surely only a few branches of knowledge that give a person the calm and happy spirit that natural science does. He steps forth into the natural world, he is acquainted with everything, it is as if he had previously conversed with plants and animals; not only does he see their usefulness to human beings (for that is something utterly subsidiary), but he also sees their significance in the entire universe. He is situated as Adam was in days of yore, and all the animals come to him, and he gives them names. Nov. 22nd 34.

32

Is a great man to be judged in accordance with principles other than those for everyone else? This question has often been answered with “Yes,” but I think “No.” For a great man is great precisely because he is a chosen instrument in the hand of the Divine; but the moment he imagines that it is he himself who acts, that he can see into the future and, seeing it, can let the intention justify the means―then he is small. Right and duty apply to all of us, and their violation can no more be excused in the great man than in governments, where people nonetheless imagine that it is permitted for politics to commit injustice. True, injustice of this sort often has beneficial consequences, but for this we give thanks neither to that man nor to the state, but to Providence. Dec. 23rd 34.

33

5

10

15

20

25

30

“Philosophica. Older” 34

86 5

10

35

15

36

20

37 25

30

•

P a p e r 34–37 1835–1836 •

In a certain respect there is something right in what the orthodox say: that the Church must be immediately conscious of its existence; it is something I find just as right as that every human being is immediately conscious of his existence. But just as unreasonable as it would be if a person were to say: “I am conscious of myself, I exist, ergo I existed yesterday,”―because he is not in fact conscious of this latter point―it is equally unreasonable for the Church to say: I am aware of my existence, ergo I am the original apostolic Church. This latter definition is of course something it must demonstrate and prove, because it is a historical question.

It is the same with Christianity or with becoming a Christ[ian] as with every other radical cure, one puts it off as long as possible. Oct. 9th 35. The philosopher can also acknowledge the deficiency of his knowledge, but there remains the question of whether he is to acknowledge that the basis of this lies in his limitations, (someone who sits on the periphery of a circle a mile in diameter will probably only have an overview of a small area, but it does not follow from this that he isn’t in possession of excellent abilities) or whether he is to assume that this has its basis in the hum. being himself and in his sinfulness.

In speculating, what is rlly important is the ability to see the individual in the whole. Just as most people never rlly enjoy a tragedy, but for them it falls to pieces, into nothing but monologues, and an opera into arias, etc.―this is how things go in the physical world, when, e.g., I walked on a road parallel to which―duly separated by intervening areas of ground―there run 2 other roads: then, most people would only see the road, then the area of ground, and then the road, but they would be incapable of seeing the whole as a piece of fabric with various stripes. Jan 7th 36

89

90

“Philosophica. Older”

•

P a p e r 38–42 1836 •

Various ways of grasping life’s dialectic, e.g., in the popular legends and fairy tales of the Middle Ages involving battles with wild animals and monsters; in China, with an examination; in the Church, with doubt. (In Greece with journeys. Pythagoras. Homer). Jan. 1836.

38

5

87

Note also a characteristic way in which the solution of life’s dialectic was understood in earlier times (see, also, another scrap of paper that may be found in my desk): a riddle that a person is to solve. see, e.g., Erzählungen und Märchen by F. H. von der Hagen. 2nd vol. pp. 167 et seq. Feb. 36.

39

On the significance of participles for philosophical language―parentheses are the opposite―a system in a single sentence―Even if one found someone who could write it, one would scarcely find anyone who could read it

40:1

10

15

The novel has come into reflection―

40:2

There are metaphysicians of a certain type who, when they cannot go any farther, take themselves by the scruff of the neck just like Münchausen, and thereby they get something a priori. April 1836.

41

But how can it be that Fichte assigns Jacobi, Fries, and Eschenmayer positions among the reflective philosophers? First of all, have these people developed an epistemology? Or do they appeal to the Kantian theory? In general, it seems to me that this situation of theirs is insufficiently emphasized, which of course is the main thing, for in other respects they should be assigned a place among the constructive [philosophers].

42:1

20

25

30

“Philosophica. Older” 42:2

43 5

88

10

44

15

20

25

45:1

30

•

P a p e r 42–45 1836 •

Why strict Xns are so easily tempted by trifles (food and drink, which we do not―

Because, in my view, every development is finished only with its parody, it will thus become apparent that politics is the parodic element in the development of the world―first, gen[uine] mythology (God’s side); next, hum. mythology (the hum. side), and then a realization of the world’s goal within the world (as the highest), a sort of Chiliasm that, however, brings the individual politicians, in their enthusiasm for abstract ideas, into contradiction with themselves. Nov. 20th 36.

When the dialectical (the romantic) has been lived through world-historically (a period that I could very appropriately call the period of individuality (something that can also be easily demonstrated historically)), social life must again come to play its role, and ideas, such as the state (e.g., as with the Greeks; the Church in its older, Catholic sense) must necessarily return in a richer, more expansive manner, that is, with all the content that the surviving differences of individuality can impart to the idea, so that the individual as such has no significance, but is everything as a link in the chain. Thus, the concept of the Church begins to assert itself more: the concept of a fixed, objective faith, etc., just as the tendency to form societies is a forerunner―albeit thus far a poor one―of this development. Dec. 11th 36.

The square is the parody of the circle; all life, all thinking is a circle, but the petrifaction of life indeed assumes crystalline forms that never become circles; therefore it is so characteristic that the Chinese, among whom everything is petrified, assume that the world is square and that their kingdom is the innermost square― this is something for square heads.― Dec. 24th 36.

91

92

“Philosophica. Older”

•

P a p e r 45–47 1837 •

Would that I knew, at all, whether there is any crystal whatever in the form of a circle; if this were in fact the case, then the matter would be understood, for angularity is in fact the tendency to remain standing―to die. Jan 8th 37.

With many peop., including philosophers, coming to a result is as it is in the novel: to see her and to love her was the one and the same. NB naturally, this is found only among scribblers of fiction, who do not know what love is and therefore omit it.

45:2

5

46 89 10

Febr. 37.

Presentiment’s apparent polar elevation― historical anticipations― the prophetic pronouncement is obscure, because just as in various mirages, it can, as it were, see distant regions (e.g., troops), but it sees them inverted.

47:1

Guldkorset―Guddrun―

47:2

Lies in the stories. at the same time that people praise them for heroic courage―they get the weapon that protects them

15

PAPER 48—PAPER 94 “Theologica. Older”

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

94

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 48–50 1834 •

Theologica.

93

48

Older.

A strict doctrine of predestination traces back the origin of evil to God and in so doing is not even as consistent as Manicheanism, inasmuch as the latter system presupposes 2 beings; the former unites these two opposites into a single being. 30th/5 34.

49

It astonishes me that none of the theologians who otherwise have often enough remarked that the Christianity in the N.T. still tasted a great deal like Judaism―that they have not treated the absolute predestination of grace in the same fashion. If, namely, we note that with the Jews particularism appeared in its very strictest form, so that it even bordered on fetishism (see Schleiermacher), then it would of course be reasonable that Christianity’s universal tendency would not please the Jews. Examples of this sort of displeasure are amply present in Acta. Nevertheless, this element, so essential to Xnty (its universality) still had to assert itself. Then the Jewish Christians went a step further (at first, of course, they believed that one had to let oneself be circumcised, etc.) because they of course believed that the other Xns were also the object of divine concern, though still in such a way that Jewish Christians must have certain prerogatives. This was how things stood with the Jewish Christians. But how easily this could in turn infect the Gentile Christians. Inasmuch as they were always accustomed to regarding themselves as a whole vis-à-vis the Jews, their particularism was not defined with respect to nation and geography, as with the Jews, and because they acknowledged the Jews as situated on the same level as themselves, they believed that this particularism was not restricted in that way―but they did assume that within the larger whole there were some individuals who were more excellent than others. July 8th 34.

50

5

10

15

20

25

30

“Theologica. Older” 51:1 94 5

51:2 10

•

P a p e r 51–52 1834 •

The concept of predestination must absolutely be regarded as a monstrosity, because it undoubtedly arose in order to establish a connection between freedom and God’s omnipotence, etc., solving the riddle by negating one of the concepts, and thus explains nothing. Aug. 19th 34. see below

αϕεςις των παραπτωματων. This expression is always used in connection with justification. It thus seems not so much to signify remission of sins as easing off of sins. That is, that by means of the act of justification, a person is placed in the right relationship so that the sins are thereby cut away, so to speak. But of course a pers. can very well continue feeling residual pain from them. Aug. 19th 34.

51:3

20

25

52:1

30

see above If we consider how the doctrine of predestination has arisen, it is clear that as long as there is no talk of any freedom asserting itself in the world, it is also impossible that the question of predestination could arise―thus, only when the notion of hum. freedom developed and then, via reflection, was placed in connection with the notion of God’s governance of the world― only then could it arise, and it would have to arise as an attempt to resolve the problem. But, oddly, in this way the supposed solution to the problem now confronts us as the problem, namely, how these 2 notions are to be unified. Nov. 23rd 34.

I think that the following psychological experiment will easily illuminate how difficult it is to truly accept the theory of predestination. If I were to imagine that it had been foretold to a person that he would become one of the most learned of people, then, assuming that this was something he wished for, he would probably say, right away: [“]Yes, so I will begin reading very diligently[”]―or, if it was something he did not wish for―[“]I won’t look at a book.[”] Both of which statements are indeed equally wrong. 8 αϕεςις των παραπτωματων] Greek, forgiveness of our trespasses (Eph 1:7). (See also explanatory note.)

95

96

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 52–53 1834 •

For of course, he would in any case become what he was to become, and he completely forgot that everything had been predetermined, so what he said had also been predetermined, and thus he entangled himself in the worst self-contradictions. Sept. 26th 1834.

5

95

[Same location:] If, on the other hand, I considered that God’s arrangement of everything was grounded in God’s foreknowledge, and that it thus granted human beings an actual freedom, it all took on a different appearance, for now I considered that if a person were permitted to look into the future and saw that he had become a criminal, then it could perhaps have the consequence of his changing himself. With respect to God, there was nothing to object to in this, for of course, as a consequence of his foreknowledge he must also know that the person would change in that way. Dec. 6th 1834.

52:2

It seems to me the same discovery that Copernicus made in astronomy was made in dogmatics when people discovered that God was not the one who changed (God could neither become mild nor angry), but that a hum. being changed his position in relation to him―in other words: the sun did not go around the earth, but the earth around the sun. Septbr. 29th 1834.

53:1

As a parallel to the doctrine of predestination, which leads the person who believes it into self-contradiction, one could certainly cite the following: If we imagine a person who attributes everything to egotism, he would, by so doing, be continually entangled in contradiction: he would think to himself that something was a noble sacrifice, and according to his theory he would have to say that it was egotism. (Fichte’s doctrine of identity is also an example) Sept. 29th 1834.

53:2

10

15

20

25

30

“Theologica. Older”

54

5

10

96 15

20

25

55:1

30

35

•

P a p e r 54–55 1834 •

Inspiration must either be thought of as being limited solely to the activity of the apostles while they authored the N.T., or it must be expanded to the entirety of their lifetimes. We find no support for the former position in the N.T.; on the contrary, what it states is that the communication of the Holy Spirit is something that must be thought of as extending throughout the entirety of their lifetimes. (Something that is generally characteristic of the N.T.: this coming upon them.) So, were we to think of inspiration in the strictest sense, it would of course have to extend throughout the entirety of their lifetimes. But if we cannot assume that those whom Christ himself had chosen and taught were capable of grasping Xnty correctly, then they were of course provided with certainty by that inspiration, but then the next generation would misunderstand it, and so on, unless we also assume for it an infallibility through inspiration, and, in so doing, say that Xnty is something absolutely irreconcilable with hum. life, because an inspiration would have indeed placed them beyond the universal hum. standpoint.―Indeed, the Catholic theory of papal infallibility was insufficient because the true doctrine abided in him only as a relic, but in being declared, it was misunderstood. Nor was it sufficient for it to be broadened to include the teachers, for their actual activity as teachers would not help at all, and one was compelled to presuppose infallibility in every single hum. being, and then of course no teachers were needed at all. Octbr. 10th 34.

Christian dogmatics must, in my view, be a development of Xt’s activity, all the more so because Xt did not set forth any doctrines, but acted; he did not teach that there was redemption for peop., but he redeemed peop. A Mohammedan dogmatics (sit venia verbo) would be an exposition of Mohammed’s doctrines, but a Xn dogmatics is a development of Xt’s activity. Through Xt’s activity his nature was also given: his relation to God, to hum. nature, to the hum. situation conditioned by Xt’s activity (which rlly was the main thing). All the rest is only to be regarded as an introduction.― Novb. 5th 1834.

30 sit venia verbo] Latin, excuse the word. (See also explanatory note.)

97

98

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 55–56 1834 •

This means: the entirety of his life in all its elements must provide the norm for the subsequent lives of Christians and thus for the entire Church. One must therefore take every individual element of Christ’s life, right from his baptism to his resurrection, and then show that there was a corresponding feature in the Church.―Incidentally, it is natural that, in opposition to the view that Christ existed only in order to act (a view that, incidentally, I will not insist upon, all the less so inasmuch as the preaching of the Word continues within the Church and must thus be regarded as corresponding to Christ’s teaching)―it is, I say, natural that many people have much to object to, both those who believe that Christ was indeed rlly sent in order to communicate a perfect moral doctrine to humanity and also, for example, the Catholics, who believe that they would still be capable of fulfilling the Law. But nonetheless, I believe that his activity was, after all, the main thing, because the way of living that he enjoins (Mt 5) cannot blossom forth except after rebirth, so that this is thus the conditio sine qua non, and, on the other hand, this life must of necessity develop in the person who has truly been reborn.―

55:2

1 Cor 5:7―Eph 5:2―Rom 3:25.

20

5

10

97 15

Nov. 26th 34.

Genrlly, it is a major thesis among rationalist dogmaticians that God is unchanging (loving), and that the appearance of Christ was rlly only a declaration of this. So one can thus bring a shrewd philosophical mind to the Christian standpoint without naming Christ if that person can in fact grasp the notion of God’s unchangingness, for that is of course the specifically Xn element. But then, in order to guarantee some significance for Xnty, people say that one cannot convince people of this (God’s unchangingness),―or that they are unable to cling to it,―without some extraordinary means, and this then becomes the appearance of Christ. But it cannot, however, be denied that this thus becomes a peculiar way for God to demonstrate his love: that he lets the person who has been sent simply to inform people about this suffer and die while no punishment befalls the sinful people. Novb. 8th 34.

56

25

30

35

“Theologica. Older” 57

5

58 10

•

P a p e r 57–59 1834 •

It seems to me that the stone that was laid before Christ’s grave could appropriately be called the philosophers’ stone inasmuch as overturning it has given not only the Pharisees, but now, for 1800 years, the philosophers so much to do. Novb. 24th 34.

Faith in fact surely involves an expression of will, and does so, indeed, in a different sense than when, for example, I might say that all cognition involves an expression of will, for how else can I explain to myself that it says in the N.T. that whoever does not believe is to be punished.― Novb. 25th 34.

98

59

20

25

30

35

I think that one could bring the issue between Catholics and Protestants to a head by asking whether the choice with which a pers. accepts div. grace is prepared through the activity of the H[oly] Spirit or whether it has its sole basis in the hum. being. For one thing, the Protestants have certainly declared themselves in favor of the former by assuming that the whole of hum. nature was incapable and must first be, so to speak, re-created. But as for the Catholics, Dr. Möhler (for it is primarily him I have in mind) seems not to declare himself definitively; he says (Clausen’s and Hohlenberg’s Tidskrift, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 137), namely: “the divine call that goes forth to humanity for the sake of Christ does not merely announce itself in the external invitation through the proclamation of the gospel, but also in an internal activity of the Holy Spirit, which awakens slumbering powers in a person”―for are we to conclude from this that, according to the doctrine of the Catholics, hum. beings are not themselves capable of receiving the grace (which is offered to them?), but must first be inwardly prepared to receive it, so that a person’s powers are awakened―thus one probably cannot accuse them of Pelagianism. But at other points Möhler appears unwilling to concede this. In general, I believe that answers to this question by both sides would lead them to better understand one another.― Nov. 26th 34.

99

100

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 60–61 1834–1835 •

Insofar as the Catholics (Möhler, Clausen’s and Hohl[enberg]’s Tidsskrift, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 182) require the fulfillment of the moral law, they seem to attribute only subordinate worth to Paul’s development of the hum. relationship to the Law―namely, that it was impossible for the sinful hum. being who has not been born again to fulfill it―and do not perceive the far deeper significance. For, as far as I can see, either the Law must appear to a pers. as something extrnl―and then this already involves an impossibility of fulfilling it―or it must have entered entirely into a pers. and have been taken up within him as a principle, but then it is no longer Law.― Nov. 26th 34.

60

It seems to me that―specifically with respect to Christianity―the idea of the damnation of the pagans must have consequences that are the opposite of those the defenders of that doctrine thought they would have, for it obviously diminishes the value of Christianity inasmuch as it no longer appears as God’s universal plan, as a resting point for all, but as an arrangement calculated for a specific time and place. But according to that theory, Xnty naturally cannot grant humankind an eternal blessedness, but only a temporal one, and Xnty is placed on an equal footing with the teachings of Mohammed, etc., where indeed it is also clear that pagans (i.e., those who have no knowledge of those doctrines) are excluded from the blessedness that Mohammed would provide for humanity―the only difference being that Mohammed and Moses acknowledged the temporal nature of their arrangements and thus did not regard it as something that would hold for eternity. Dec. 2nd 34.

61:1

With resp[ect] to the hum. condition after death, one often sees examples of how people who have been magnetized come to know that everything centers on Christ, that the person who has not believed wholeheartedly according to the gospel is consigned to eternal suffering, etc.―; in this respect, it could be quite interesting, as Tutti Frutti remarks at one point (vol. 3) to undertake a magnetic experiment with a pers. of the Mohammedan religion and see if it had the same results. Jan. 22nd 1835.

61:2

5

10

15

99

20

25

35

“Theologica. Older” 62

5

63 10

•

P a p e r 62–65 1834–1835 •

As a contribution to a definition of the concept “faith,” it may be noted that, as we say of a sick person who is afraid of dying, it is precisely when the expression of will is lacking that he believes he will die, so, too, with someone who is afraid of ghosts—on the other hand we can say: [“]I would like to believe, but I cannot,” for here of course it is precisely the expression of will that seems to be present. Dec. 31st 1834.

The same thing happens with the concept “orthodoxy” as with the concept “consistency”: many people hold the view that the latter means always doing the same thing, and because people walk with an umbrella in the rain, they presumably would also want people to walk with one when the sun is shining.― Jan. 28th 1835.

100

64:1

20

64:2 25

65 30

It seems to me that the question of the perfectibility of Christianity can only be answered by taking into account the fact that it is linked to Judaism. For inasmuch as Christianity itself acknowledges Judaism as being only relatively true, and it links itself to Judaism, it can never itself be the absolute truth, for it would never be able to acknowledge the relative and even less attach itself to it.―x Feb. 3rd 1835.

Therefore, perhaps it is significant that just as the coming of the Messiah is proclaimed in the O.T., thus does Christ himself proclaim his return. (1 Cor 11:26) Feb. 3rd 1835.

In developing the concept of inspiration, people talk of the close relation in which the apostles stood to Xt as a reason why their

101

102

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 65–68 1835 •

understanding exceeded that of all others―but on the other hand they fail to bear in mind the great advantage possessed by those who live after 1800 years of Xnty’s existence, because Xnty has now asserted its presence in every life situation, has increasingly developed, whereas the apostles, on the other hand, had to struggle with all sorts of abuse,―misunderstandings, etc., precisely because Xnty was only then beginning to develop.―

5

Feb. 5th 1835.

What the Jews and, subsequently, many have required of Ch[rist], that he should prove his divinity, is unreasonable, because if he really were God’s son, the proof would be ludicrous, just as ludicrous as if a hum. being wanted to prove his existence, since in this case, for Chr[ist], his existence and his divinity are of course the same thing―and if he were a deceiver he would certainly be able to assume the role so well that he would realize that precisely at the moment he proved his divinity he would be contradicting himself.―

66

15

April 19th 35.

It seems to me that on the whole the enormous mass of interpreters has done more harm than good for the understanding of the New Testament. As at a play, when a mass of spectators and commentators wants, as it were, to hinder us in enjoyment of the actual play and instead serve up little vignettes, one is compelled to ignore them, if possible―or to take care to enter by a path that has not yet in fact been blocked. May 1st 35.

Now, it is certainly true that Paul, in the letter to the Galatians for example, calls it (4:3) στοιχεια του ϰοςμου; and right in this passage it is more or less placed on an equal footing with paganism. But this does not help us very much, for it only brings us into a contradiction, for at other points in the N.T. it x

29 στοιχεια του ϰοςμου] Greek, elemental spirits of the world. (See also explanatory note.)

67

101 25

68:1 30

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 68–69 1835 •

103

is clearly taught that Mosaism and Judaism were a div. revelation.― May 2nd 35.

68:2 5

10

15

69

25

102

30

For the Christian who now looks at Judaism, it certainly looks as if Judaism was only a transitional point. But who can assure us that the same is not the case with Christianity[?] For it is all very well that the Law was given in order to hinder transgressions, and was thus a paedagogos (Gal. 3:21–23); but how do we explain to ourselves that it actually promised salvation to peop. if they fulfill it[?] I can very well understand that it could contain punishment for transgressions, but of course the Divine (just as the Christian as well) must surely realize that it would be impossible to fulfill it, and how, then, could it promise salvation in connection with the acceptance of a condition that it itself admits is impossible? May 2nd 35.

Some Observations concerning Grundtvig’s Theory of the Church.― 1. Grundtvig believes that the Ch[urch] bases itself on the sacraments, and that whoever changes them seeks to change the Ch[urch] and has eo ipso left it. But in this connection I must remark. Why didn’t Grundtvig direct his attack against the Eucharist, as something actual [i.e., instituted], but directed it instead against baptism as something that was yet to take place, but had not yet been introduced into the Church[?]―(no changes in the words of institution.―Comment―The other side only requires: i.e., [“]evil[”]―dilemma either both are heretics or both are Christians.)―

9 paedagogos] Greek, disciplinarian. (See also explanatory note.) 24 eo ipso] Latin, by that very fact.

[a]

It seems to me that Grundtvig regards the development of Chr[istian] knowledge not as moving forward along an arduous path, but as steam-powered transportation rolling along a railroad, with steam generated by the apostles, so that Chr. knowledge is thus prepared in sealed machines.―

1

5

10

104

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

II. People had, after all, always regarded some things as essentially Christian and other things as less essentially Christian; in this respect, people believed that the Bible contained what was essentially Christian. In what, then, does Grundtvig’s theory differ from the others. In the fact that the others let it remain more indefinite, whereas Gr[undtvig], on the contrary, believes he has found an expression that decides, once and for all, what is and is not Chr[istian] faith. Now this, then, is what he must essentially maintain and must of course insist upon most emphatically, which Lindberg has also done very consistently; he must insist upon every letter, indeed, every thousandth of a tittle, for otherwise the door is immediately thrown open once again to determinations from the hum[an] side as to what is Chr[istian] and what is not, and in that case he thus must reasonably concede the same right to every other pers., and in that case his theory is put on the same level as the others.―But if we then look to the expression of Chr[istian] faith upon which he believes the Ch[urch] to be based, we must in fact confess that, regarded in and of itself, it is impossible that an idea can find a completely adequate expression in words, and that even if God himself spoke these words, a little snag will always arise as soon as a hum. being is to understand it. Here I grant something I will concede for the time being, that it was given by inspired hum. beings, but if we insist upon the concept of inspiration, as we must do here in accordance with Mag. Lindb[erg]’s theory, then we surely must also limit that activity to the language in which it was originally given, but now all the Ch[urches] which essentially have the same Creed have it in translation, and it is precisely the Greek Ch[urch] that deviates from the others in its Creed (which is also why Grundtvig says somewhere in Theol. Maanedsskrift that it is like a withered branch). But must we then concede a miracle with respect to the translation? No one entitles us to do that. (Assume also, that this applies to what has already been cited.―But now, with a translation, naturally, a number of additional snags and so forth have arisen with the translations―thus, the more consistently this theory is maintained, the more it diverges from the truth, but if it is not maintained consistently, we are no farther along than before, and Grundtvig’s theory has no meaning whatever.―

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

Paper 69, with a marginal note written vertically.

105

106

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

3. In what capacity did the apostles give this Creed―(superior―inferior―heretics―themselves belonged to the Church.). It seems to me much more natural to think that the Eucharist, as what is rlly central in the Ch[urch], had originally been adhered to quite vigorously, and that it was from this center that the outer contours were gradually filled in. This is why, as related in the N.T., Christianity is far more complex in its establishment of the Eucharist than it is with baptism, and if there was a reason for secrecy anywhere, it must far more likely have been here than with baptism. (the element of mystery for Gentile Christians as well as for Jewish Christians.). It has been demanded that Gr[undtvig] should prove that the present Creed was the original one; but if that is done, the Mag[ister] has maintained that it is incumbent upon the others to prove that it was not original. And in a way this cannot be denied, for Grundtvig can always appeal to the fact that this is in fact what we now have, and he does not know how things had been earlier, so let the others do it, then. It does, however, become an odd business for Grundtvig, for inasmuch as he himself has said that it does not depend upon dead letters (i.e., books), but upon the living Word, and it is not particularly reasonable that we should now be able to discover a living Word from 1800 years ago, then it can be seen that Grundtvig calls on us to disprove his theory, but at the same moment says, [“]You should indeed refrain from doing so, for with my very theory, I have cut you off from every possibility of proof[”].―Otherwise with the Mag[ister], on the other hand, for in order to get something removed from the service book he has directed attention to the fact that it was not there 300 years ago―thus he has involved himself in arguing on the basis of the dead letter, and thus one could in fact require of him―if not on legal grounds, then at any rate with a certain reasonableness―that he prove that this Creed was the original. The opposition has pointed out that the Creed is not found in the N.T. (to what extent is it proper, in principle, to attack him in this way??). To this Lindb., Grun[d]tvig, etc. have replied: 1) yes, of course, because he [Paul] wrote it for the Christians, and they knew the Creed so well that he didn’t need to quote it. But this then raises an awkward issue, for the Christians were surely also quite familiar with the Eucharist, and yet in 1 Cor 11 Paul cites the words of institution; now, it surely cannot be denied that the Christians also transgressed against the articles of the Apostles’ Creed: why do the apostles never quote them, if not in their entirety, then at any rate portions of them―but NB, with the emphasis that belongs to them as a Creed, just as, right there, in 1 Cor 11, he says εγω παρελαβον απο του ϰυριου, ὁ ϰαι παρεδωϰα υμιν. etc. 2) with respect to the circumstance that the Creed is not to be found in the earliest Church Fathers, either, Mag. Lindberg has suggested that they kept it secret. But then, assuming that this was the case, that reason would certainly not have deterred the apostles from citing it, since, after all, there is far greater reason for people to have regarded the Eucharist as something of a mystery (which they in fact did), and yet it is discussed fully in 1 Cor 11; but then, assume, too, that this was the case, then this much at least becomes certain: that we find it written down from ca. the 4th century― but not exactly in our own version―thus, here we can say (with reference to Mag. Lindberg, who argues from the dead letter): [“]Here we have something that we do in fact know 33 εγω παρελαβον απο του ϰυριου, ὁ ϰαι παρεδωϰα υμιν] Greek, For I have received from the Lord what I also handed on to you. (See also explanatory note).

104

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Theologica. Older”

105 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

107

exists; we do not know how it was previously, but we assume it was like this, and consequently we require of you that if you believe the opposite, the burden of proof lies with you. But inasmuch as the presently existing Creed and the one from the 4th century are not exactly the same―for on the contrary, the one from the 4th cent. lacks one or another article―nonetheless, if you want to be consistent, you must concede, precisely in keeping with your argument, that I can just as well say that the one is original as the other, then you must concede that we do not have the original. This conclusion is only unfortunate for you who think that if we don’t have the original, that then it’s all over with the Ch[urch], that then the covenant is broken, and hum. beings cannot partake of any blessedness―on the other hand, this is not the case for us who think that in its confessions, the Ch[urch] is essentially expressing itself in the concrete moment, and that they thus should be regarded as mileposts on the path of Ch[ristian] development.―[”] Grundtvig also thought that, theologically, this theory could help in the determination of what is Christian and what is not. He thought that the Bible was deaf and dumb, that people could give it every sort of interpretation, but then he thought that these words were so simple that no one could misunderstand them. But for one thing, it is in and of itself ridiculous to maintain that a narrative such as the one in the Bible, which was written by the same apostles, should bring confusion to the ideas, as if the clarity of a matter were damaged when it is illuminated from various sides, particularly by the same men. and what should be noted next―that now the Bible has continually had to endure being attacked, but―let us imagine that this theory about the Creed became just as universally accepted as that about the Bible―I would very much like to know whether it would be more difficult for an opponent to attack just the single phrase “the forgiveness of sins” than all the teachings in the Bible, as if the single phrase did not contain a great many more interpretive possibilities than the exposition of the whole in which precisely that single phrase has found its illumination in the whole.― Mk. it is quite strange that Grundtvig has not protested against the priests reading the baptismal formula aloud from the service book, for the dead letter does not become the living Word by being read aloud; for in that case we could quickly come to the assistance of the Bible. Mk. it seems to me that Clausen has erred in the dispute by getting involved in investigating whether there was or was not a fundamental change, for from Grundtvig’s standpoint there cannot be any question of that, because the theory has been put forth (see above) precisely in order to prevent human determinations concerning what is Christian and what is not.―But on the other hand, Grundtvig, Lindberg, Engelbrecht etc. have also erred by replying with respect to the authenticity of it―for in order to be consistent, they ought to have simply rebuffed the investigation. May 28th 1835.

108

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 70–73 1835 •

Misunderstanding of the theory of “λογος” applied to the Word, because the living Word, however living it is, is not creative in this sense; precisely because it is not absolutely creative―precisely for that reason its entire fullness does not emerge, and therefore there is no absolute difference betw. the living and the written Word. The same objections can be made against the Creed that they themselves make against the Bible―the entire extrnl way in which people come to conclusion―introductory scholarly science of the Creed―the Eucharist transformed.―

70

The entire O.T. (the standpoint of the Law), in contrast to the N.T., is indicated in very striking and pithy fashion in Heb 12:24 “αιματι ραντισμου ϰρειττον λαλουντι παρα τον Αβελ” (revenge. punishment―love. grace). Aug. 10th 35.

71

There is a remarkable correlation taking place between Protestantism and the modern political point of view―it is a struggle about the same thing, about the sovereignty of the people, which is also why it is interesting to see the real royalists―insofar as they do not in fact want to have one viewpoint on one matter and an essentially different one on another, which both, after all, must be based upon the same principles within an individual― approach Catholicism.― Oct 13th 35.

72

with respect to Luther’s views on this, see Clausen and Hohlenberg’s Tidskrift, vol. 3, pp. 548, bottom of page, and 557.

Wasn’t the insistence of the Bohemians and the Moravians that they would not accept the Latin liturgy, and the insistence of the Spanish on retaining their old Mozarabic one―the first attempt at a Reformation? Novb. 2nd 35.

1 λογος] Greek, word. (See also explanatory note.) 13 αιματι ραντισμου ϰρειττον λαλουντι παρα τον Αβελ] Greek, the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.

5

106 10

15

20

25

73 30

“Theologica. Older” 74

5

10

107

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 74 1835 •

Is the Church Justified in Writing a Bible at Particular Moment in Time? Now, people have pointed out for so long the great advantage the apostles had over every subsequent Christian. And now it is surely the case that the person who stands closest to the source must also have received the most powerful and immediate impression. But does it follow from this that it was in fact the purest impression? Here I must of necessity point out the very essential circumstance that now, after 1800 years have passed, Christianity has permeated the whole of life, so that the entire life within the Christian Church is essentially imbued with what is Christian (Chr. philosophy; Chr. aesthetics; Chr. history), and then point out that now, possibly, it might well be easier to discern what is essentially Christian. One must not study the plant in the bud, but in bloom. Did the apostolic Church and the Bible prefigure the Christian Church and its teachings[?] No! it is no prefiguration (an assumption that consistently leads to the assumption of inspiration, just as inspiration consistently leads to this assumption), it is the first stage of development; and the Bible is our first telegraph message.― And therefore I think that because I must to some extent walk that same path as those who in fact want to reinforce the boundary and knead bricks in order to build the church wall, namely in acknowledging the poor quality and dilapidated condition of the existing boundaries (the Bible constituting the Ch[urch]? No, the Church constitutes the Bible, this is shown, among other ways, also by the circumstance that it was written for the Christians. Protest[antism] views the Bible as hovering over the Church as Mohammed’s coffin hovers between the 4 magnets.)―that we absolutely must throw in the towel, that Christianity can surely tolerate a little fresh air, and that there will be true Christians in the world just as much when they are no longer hidden from the eyes of the world by such a heaven-high wall (I rightly term it such, because not even the Christians in heaven will permit any entry without the required admission ticket). I believe, indeed, that I also am acquainted with liberals and liberalism even though I cannot therefore point to a society anywhere that has issued a confession of faith in this connection, much less attempted to make such a confession of faith count not as the immed. expression of what lives and moves in that society―but as a customs tariff in accordance with which it can be determined which goods may come within its boundaries, as well as to determine the duration of the quarantine that they must observe.― Novb. 3rd 35.

109

110

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 75–78 1836 •

The relation betw. the Law as the solely external, objective given and its appropriation by the individual can be seen, for example, in the dietetic prescriptions of a doctor: for one thing, it is almost impossible to adhere to them, because he rlly ought to be standing there at every moment in order to say what one ought to do; for another, even if one could adhere to them, they bring no “salvation,” because it rlly depends on whether a person has appropriated the dietetic prescription in more inward fashion and is thus capable of deciding individual cases with certainty and discretion. April 1836.

75

5

10

108

Shouldn’t Mt 11:12 rlly be interpreted as referring to mystics (here I attribute a broader definition to this verse, so that it can also be applied beyond the realm of theology) who indeed believe that they have an immed. relationship to God and thus are unwilling to acknowledge that all hum. beings have only a mediate relationship. (The Church―in the political sphere, the state.)

76

15

June 6, 1836.

Is there not in 1 Cor 13:12 βλεπομεν γαρ αρτι δι’ εσοπτρου εν αινιγματι an acknowledgment of the necessity of allegory for our present standpoint?

77 20

The relation of allegory to the romantic?

Aug. 3rd 36. because in fact the whole idea cannot rest upon the actual expression and be apprehended in it.―the metaphor―

The thesis that it cannot be true that Xt was born of a virgin because people say something similar about Hercules, etc. and in the stories of the gods of India, etc., which are not true―is, after all, odd, for in a certain resp[ect] the opposite conclusion seems more correct: precisely because this is related in connection with so many other great men about whom it was not true, for this 19 βλεπομεν γαρ αρτι δι’ εσοπτρου εν αινιγματι] Greek, For now we see in a mirror, dimly [in a riddle].

25

78

30

“Theologica. Older”

5

•

P a p e r 78–81 1836 •

very reason it must therefore be true of Xt, because the fact that people have said it so often points directly at a hum. need for it. If there was talk of a new tendency that would manifest itself and that people now and then said had done so, without it on that account being true―if a person were to conclude from this that it would never emerge, couldn’t he very well be in error, and precisely the person who now expected it be more nearly right[?] Sept. 9th 36.

79 10

109 15

The solution of the problem of predestination is rlly to be found when it is said that they were chosen: “quos vocavit,” they were chosen for salvation or they were damned; for what else does the expression quos vocavit mean than those in whose consciousness Christianity has arisen―thus this view is exactly compatible with Schleierm[acher’s] relative predestination. Because those who have indeed lived here in the world but to whom no call came― they are of course not predestined, because they have not been called,1 but only the person in whose consciousness Christianity has become related to the rest of his view of life unless one were to say that the fact that they had not been called was itself predestination; but then one of course gets into a contradiction with the first statement, that the chosen were those who had been called.

1

20

Dec. 1st 36

80 25

81:1

How beautifully Judaism’s preparatory relation to Christianity is intimated in the legend of the Wandering Jew (see Ein Volksbuchlein, p. 27), where it is related that at the end of his life he continually accompanies those who come from afar to visit the Holy Land. Dec. 4th 36.

Just as there is an a priori certainty in comparison with which every empirical fact is something negligible, so (according to Protestant doctrine) is faith the a priori certainty before which the entire empirical realm of works disappears.―

12 quos vocavit] Latin, those whom he has called. (See also explanatory note.)

111

112

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 81–84 1836–1837 •

In this connection, however, it is strange that it is the Catholics who teach that a person can have faith despite the fact that he is in mortal sin, while the Protestants deny it. (see the Apology for the Augsburg Confession). 5

Of course, one can do to Hegel’s logical triad the same thing one can do to anything―push it to an extreme by applying it to the most utterly simple objects, where it is certainly true, but nonetheless ridiculous. Thus, if someone wanted to apply it to boots, demonstrating the immed[iate] standpoint; then the dialectical (that they begin to squeak); then third stage, that of union.―

81:2

10

Jan. 5th 37.

The fact that Christianity has not gone beyond the principle of contradiction is precisely what demonstrates its Romantic character. What did Goethe want to illuminate in his Faust other than precisely this principle? Jan. 22nd 37.

82

[“]It is quite remarkable that Christ lived to be exactly 33 years old, which of course is the number of years that ordinarily designates a generation, so that it in fact constitutes a sort of norm, while anything beyond this number is accidental.” 22 Jan 1837.

83

The kingdom of evil here in life―the tendency to construct a society―(the crows take to the air―the graveyard of those who have been executed) Jan 25th 37. own language

2 names, just like the Jews.

110

20

84 25

a sort of tradition verte

30

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 84–87 1834–1837 •

expectation of a chiliasm―Blocksberg―Children’s House Ballet (Andersen) and so on

5

The Nightmen people―see also Dorph on thieves’ jargon, p. 7, on the four castes of the Hindus―the outcasts.― The kingdom of evil is the Midgard serpent, is the ocean in the Greek sense. The dark land, where one hears only sighs (see Görres. p. 61―[)]

85

It was also a way in which to unite life and Christianity (just as in a later age, the Romantic, people went into monasteries): by postponing baptism until the last moment, until the deathbed. June 12th 37.

111

86

20

87

25

When one explains predestination as merely grounded in foreknowledge, then one of course comes to assume that man merits grace. This also seems to be implicit in Origen’s words in defense of this theory in his commentary on Rom[ans]: “The cause of predetermination lies in our own free will. Paul was destined for God’s gospel! Why? because he was worthy of it, owing to his actions foreseen by God.[”]―

In the exposition of the doctrine of atonement as maintained by Clausen, the incentive emphasized so much in scripture―namely love of God―disappears. With this insistence that no change whatever has taken place in God with respect to us, we are led back to a completely Kantian standpoint: then we ought to better ourselves because our reason tells us to do so, and God then comes to play a very subordinate role.

113

114

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 88–92 1834–1837 •

Sin cannot be produced by the hum. being on its own any more than the one sex can produce a new individual on its own; this is why the Xn doctrine of temptation by the devil is correct. It is the second element, and is also why hum. sin is specifically different from the devil’s (original sin―the possibility of conversion). The other principle would be incompatible with analogy.

88

I remain conscious that I exist. (the Ch.[urch]) not whether I have existed or how

89

5

10

consistent exposition introduction to the Ap[ostles’] Creed

Just as the consistent exposition of the Protestant view of the Bible as constituting the Ch[urch] led to the establishment of a new branch of learning, namely the introductory science with which people sought to prove that because of its origins in the apostles, it had the right to constitute the Ch[urch]―thus, too, must the theory of the Apostles’ Creed lead to an introductory science.

90

The subjectivity that, in my view, must be preeminent with respect to the Church―because it raises the same objection that has rightly been raised against the Bible, against every new norm that people want to erect for the Church,―is already prototypically present in the fact that the most objective portion of the Creed begins like this: I believe.

91

What Schleiermacher calls “religion” and the Hegelian dogmatists call “faith” is, after all, nothing other than the first, immed. condition for everything―the vital fluid―spiritually-intellectually speaking, the atmosphere we breathe―and which therefore cannot be properly characterized with those words.―

92

15

112

20

“Theologica. Older” 93

5

10

•

P a p e r 93–94 1837–1839 •

If we then look at what reason finds in this self-observation, whereby we thus, as the object of its observation, are always merely abstract, i.e., understanding, we would also call it understanding. But then, the law governing thought is nothing other than the essence of the understanding, expressed with the certainty that it alone possesses validity Schleiermacher again worshipped the unknown Divinity. necessary concepts, whose object lay beyond experience.

for all sensation and cognition of the understanding, but in both cases, the phenomenon is of course an essential element.

soul the thinking I’s necess[ary] unity the world the totality of all phenom[ena] God. The possibility of existence at all.

113

94:1

S.A. Kierkegaard. Mt

20

Lk Mt Mt Mt

6:24 . 11:19. 6:1. . 12:30 16:19 16:27.

March.―Adar.―Purim April―Nisan. Pascha Octbr.―Tishri. Tabernac.―f. expiationis. Dec―Kislev. f. encæniorum. sec. Collegia ―――

it is used against Stolberg.―Gelasius 1 † 496 asserted it first. Phil 3:10

25

Gal 4:21–31 Acts 3:16 Olshausen Part II pp. 673–674. how is Acts 10:11–16 compatible with Mt 5:17.

115

116

“Theologica. Older”

•

P a p e r 94 1839 •

on the eternity of punishment in hell. eternally continuing development. (contrad. in adjecto) eternal opposite of time, not an infinite series of moments in time children who die early― pagans― see Gynther, II. p 118 bottom of page.

2 contrad. in adjecto] Latin, properly “contradictio in adjecto,” contradiction in terms.

94:2

5

PAPER 95— PAPER 246 “Aesthetica. Older”

Translated by Vanessa Rumble Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

118

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 95–96 1834 •

117

Aesthetica.

95

Older.

The reason I cannot really say that I definitely enjoy Nature is that I cannot become properly clear as to what it is I enjoy. A work of art, by contrast, I can grasp; I can find―if I may say so―that Archimedean point, and when first I have found it, everything resolves itself effortlessly for me. I can then trace the single prodigious thought, and I see the manner in which all details serve to illuminate it. I see the author’s entire individuality as the ocean in which every detail mirrors itself. The author’s spirit is related to mine. It may well be far superior to mine, but it nonetheless is limited, as I am. The works of the Divine are too great for me. I must lose myself in the details. This is also the reason that people’s remarks, upon observing nature: [“]It is majestic, great, etc.―[”] are so insipid, for they are altogether too anthropomorphic. They halt at the external, unable to express what is internal and profound. In this respect, it seems to me most noteworthy that the great poetic geniuses (such as Ossian, Homer) are represented as blind. It is of course all the same to me whether or not they actually were blind. I limit myself to the fact that people have imagined them so, for this seems, as it were, to suggest that in celebrating the beauty of nature, what they saw was seen not with the outward eye but was something that appears only to inner intuition. How remarkable it is that one of the best, yes, the best author on bees was blind from early youth. It seems as though that even here, in a case in which external observation would seem to be so important, this indicates that he had found that [Archimedean] point and, by the activity of the unaided psyche, deduced all the details and reconstructed them in analogy with nature. Sept. 11th, 34.

[added later:]

Or, as it is so profoundly expressed in the story of Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:8): when his eyes were opened―he saw nothing.

96:1 5

10

15

20

25

30

96:2

June 26th, 37. 35

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 96–97 1834–1835 •

118

96:3

5

97:1

15

20

25

30

35

40

It is as though the doctrine of predestination pulls me into a funnel, just as the anteater does. The initial Fall conditions with an alarming consistency all those that follow. Just like the anteater, it makes a funnel (certainly a fitting image for such a logical train of thought) in the loose sand (the pious-religious feelings), and once someone has fallen, he is entwined in the consistency of his conclusions like the snakes around Laocoon. Sept. 11th, 34.

It amazes me that never (as far as I know) has anyone ever worked through the idea of a “Master Thief,” an idea that certainly lends itself, in the utmost, to dramatic treatment. We should note that nearly all nations have had such an idea and that the ideal of the thief has hovered before them. We see that however different a Fra Diavolo is from a Peer Mikkelsen or a Morten Frederiksen, they nonetheless have certain traits in common. Many stories about thieves are in circulation. These are attributed by some to Peer Mikkelsen, by others to Morten Frederiksen, and by still others to a third, etc., without it being possible to determine definitely their ultimate source, which shows precisely that people have fabricated a certain ideal of a thief as characterized by certain broad traits, and that these traits have then been attributed by them to this or that actual thief. We should keep in mind that wickedness, thievishness, etc. are by no means the sole basis for this. No, on the contrary, the master thief is also thought to be endowed with goodness, amiability, charity and also with surpassing tact, cunning, and cleverness; he has been imagined, moreover, as someone who actually does not steal for the sake of stealing, that is, to appropriate another’s property, but for some other reason. Often we may think of him as someone who is dissatisfied with the existing order and who then expresses his dissatisfaction by violating the rights of others and in so doing gains the opportunity to mock and confront the authorities. It is worth mentioning, in this connection, that (as is told of Peer Mikkelsen) he is depicted as stealing from the rich in order to help the poor, which bespeaks nobility, and that he does not steal for his own use. We could well imagine, in addition, his warm regard for the opposite sex, e.g., Foster (Feuerbach, 2nd part), something that, on the one hand, indicates a positive aspect of his character, and on the other hand contributes a romantic dimension to him and his life, which is re-

119

120

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 97 1835 •

quired if he is to be distinguished from a simple thief―whether the thievery serves, if possible, to create a better future for him in the arms of his beloved (as was the case with Foster), or he views his activity as a thief as a form of opposition to the existing order or as retaliation exacted by him against the authorities for an injustice that perhaps was done him. Now his lady appears at his side like a guardian angel of sorts, providing him solace in his difficulties while the authorities pursue him in order to capture him and the crowd looks upon him with suspicion as, after all, a thief, despite a voice within, which does at times speak in his defense―while he cannot find any comfort or encouragement among other thieves, for they are situated altogether too far below him, and vice prevails among them. The only form of association he can have with them is to make use of them in the attainment of his aims; in other respects he must despise them. Sept. 12th, 34.

119

Such a master thief, brazen and forthright (Kagerup, for example), will confess his crime and suffer the punishment for it like a man who knows himself to have lived for an idea, and precisely by doing so he acknowledges the reality of the state and does not deny it―as one perhaps could say―with his life; he only opposes injustices. We certainly might understand him as someone who wants to taunt the law, but in this we must then see a sort of mockery of everything and, in his deed, an expression of a vanity that is entirely a part of his idea. He will never forget open-hearted cheerfulness, and he will come forth with his own confession after he has shown how he could evade the law. Sept. 17th, 34.

97:2

[Added later at the same place:]

He is, of course, to be thought of as in possession of an excellent sense of humor,1 which may easily be combined with his sense of dissatisfaction, which in turn, makes him prone to satire―even if he is not always to be conceived of as discontented―this is nonetheless easily reconciled with his origin among the lower classes, the roots of the nation. In some cases he will resemble a Till Eulenspiegel. Jan. 29th, 1835.

5

10

15

20

25

97:3 30

35

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 120

97:4

5

97:5

15

20

25

97:6

35

•

P a p e r 97 1835 •

As an example, I will cite Peer Mikkelsen’s announcement to the appropriate authorities that he will now leave the city. Or when such a fellow replies to a police officer, who, upon running into him a second time, observes, [“]We know one another[”]―[“]Yes, we took a stroll together[”] (on the prior occasion, that police officer had had to run after him all the way out to Vibenshuus). Or when a Cartouche arrives on his own to collect the reward posted for him. Jan. 29th, 1835.

1

He is not one who tries to seduce others; on the contrary, he advises them against leading such a life; he has tasted its bitterness, and he endures it only because he lives for the idea; he despises vulgar thieves, though fate constantly joins him to them. The one who most closely allies herself with him, his true friend in life and in death, is no thief―loves him, is willing to sacrifice everything for him, would like to lead him away from the path he has chosen, but dares not speak to him of this, for she knows his vehemence. He (the master thief) often feels utterly unhappy with his situation, having been branded in the eyes of the many, he feels himself to be misunderstood (tragically). I would prefer to picture such a master thief as someone who at a young age had lost his father and who now has only an old mother whom he loves dearly, as she him―yet shudders at her son’s misdeeds―while his beloved entirely ignores his wicked side, feeling herself blessed to be in possession of his love, while she scarcely dares speak of her love for him lest she betray him. I especially want to emphasize this relation to the mother and the beloved in order to describe his good nature. Jan. 29th, 1835.

I would imagine him in a moonlit wooded setting. He appeals to the moon, “Thank you, moon, you silent witness of lovers’ assignations, of robbers’ stealth, of misers’ anxieties, of the policeman’s sleepiness―yet you especially favor the thief, you, who are yourself a thief, stealing your light from the sun!”― Perhaps my commentary on the policeman’s emblem could also be fittingly ascribed to him. See the accompanying note.1

121

122

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 97–99 1834–1835 •

I could also picture him in a tavern, by chance meeting a tramp (a government clerk fallen upon hard times or perhaps a titled secretary, seeking to make an impression with his title, his education, etc.―in addition a minor comic figure), who, with his speeches on the failings of those in charge, etc., now attempts to incite the peasants, and who in precisely this way would constitute a marked contrast to the master thief’s serious objections to much of established society. Feb. 9th, 35.

1

[The note reads thus:]

It is probably for this reason that the police use an emblem that depicts a hand with an eye in the middle, so as to show that it has an eye on every finger; but the fact that this eye does not extend to the thumb indicates that, when necessary, it also has a finger with which to cover the eye.

121 5

98

15

Dec. 16th, 34.

As an example of how a single thing, viewed from one side, may serve greatly to strengthen an illusion and, from the other side, to disturb it, I will cite “The Quaker and the Dancer.” There, the lord remarks: “It is a simulated movement.” This could either lead us to believe that everything else we see is real or remind us that the whole thing is a comedy. Octbr 5th, 34.

[Added later:]

This is the case, too, in The April Fools. Trine: “It is an old man named Rosenkilde who is copying you.” Novbr 6th, 34.

[same place:]

In Jacob v[on] Thyboe, if we think of him dying by tripping over his spurs in the 5th Act, or in “Lenore” (imagined as a play), if

99:1

20

99:2 25

99:3 30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 99–102 1834 •

Wilhelm were actually to come, and she were to die of joy―would these be tragedies? Oct. 5th, 34.

100 122

10

15

101

20

102:1 25

30

35

The difference between a writer who draws his materials from many sources but does not work them into an organic whole, and one who succeeds in doing so, strikes me as being the same as the difference between mock turtle and real turtle. Real turtle meat tastes at some points like veal, at others like chicken, etc., but the whole has been combined into one organism. In mock turtle meat, all these different sorts of meat are mixed together, but what binds the various parts together is a sauce―which at least is frequently more robust than the nonsense that appears in its place in a lot of writing. Nov. 22nd, 1834.

In the watchman’s song for 10 o’clock, the half of the verse, “Be wise and clever,” seems, as opposed to the one that follows, “Be wary of flame and fire,” to be addressed to thieves; for cleverness and wisdom are to be commended more to those who are awake than to those who are asleep. Nov. 27th, 34.

The most sublime of tragic situations consists without doubt in being misunderstood. This is why the life of Christ is the greatest tragedy, misunderstood as he is by the people, the Pharisees, the Disciples, in short by all, and this in spite of the fact that he wanted to convey the highest of ideas. This is why Job’s life is tragic. Surrounded by friends who misunderstand him, by a wife who mocks him, he suffers. This is why the situation of the woman in The Riquebourg Family is so moving―because her love of her husband’s nephew forces her to hide herself―hence her apparent indifference. For this reason, the scene in Goethe’s Egmont (act 5, scene 1) is so genuinely tragic; Clara is altogether misunderstood by the citizens. Surely for this reason, too, a number of Holberg’s comic figures become tragic. As an example, I direct you to the Fidget. He sees himself burdened with

123

124

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 102–104 1834–1835 •

a monstrous mass of undertakings; others smile at him and see nothing. This accounts as well for the element of the tragic in the life of the hypochondriac, and also in the life of the person who, in the grips of a longing for something higher, encounters people who misunderstand him. Novbr. 22nd, 34.

[same place:]

The proximity of the tragic and the comic (an observation for which we are particularly indebted to Holberg’s contributions to comedy, e.g., his Jeppe of the Hill, Erasmus Montanus, The Fidget, etc.) seems also to be the reason that a person can laugh until he cries. January 19th, 1835. On the other hand, the proximity of the comic to the tragic is so marked that one is, e.g., inclined to smile at the Dutchmen in Goethe’s Egmont, act 5, scene 1.

5

102:2

10

123

15

When one compares the master thief with the Italian robber, one will see an essential difference: in the latter, the social element is dominant. We cannot picture him other than at the head of a band of robbers among whom, once the dangers and difficulties of the robbery are past, he surrenders himself to jubilation, while with the master thief something much more profound asserts itself, a certain streak of melancholia, a self-encapsulation, a dark intimation of life’s circumstances, a deep-seated dissatisfaction. March 15th, 35.

103

Eulenspiegel would seem to represent the satirical element in the Scandinavian. March 16th, 35.

104

20

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 105

5

106 10

•

P a p e r 105–108 1835 •

Just as there are people who, like French boutiques, display everything they have, so, too, are there people in whom one continually senses something profound but whose entire depth is nonetheless only like a puddle of water, or a mirror―everything shows itself there. April 3rd, 35.

Adversity serves not only to draw peop. closer, but it also produces the beauty of that interior communion, just as winter’s cold creates figures on the window pane that the sun’s warmth erases. Sept. 14th, 35.

124

107 15

20

25

108

30

It occurs to me, that artists move forward by going backward―in and for itself, this is something to which I do not object as long as it is, as in the better instances, a reproduced turning-back. But it seems wrong that they remain stationary at the previously given historical subjects and topics, and, as it seems, believe that these alone lend themselves to poetic treatment because precisely these topics, which in and of themselves are no more poetic than others, are after all given life and soul by a great poetic nature. When this happens, artists move forward by marching in place.―Why are not the heroes of more recent times, etc. just as poetic? Is it because, with so much already having been done with respect to the presentation of the content, the formal aspect can be increasingly perfected? Sept. 29th, 35.

The critical period relates to the current one as panning for gold relates to the bank that mints the bits of gold and puts them into circulation. Oct. 7th, 35.

125

126

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 109–111 1835 •

As far as the criticism of the various treatments of Faust is concerned, they may be grouped, and an overview may be more easily gained, by noting how such an idea must reflect itself in different ages, or how, owing to its individual characteristics, each age has to see the idea refracted through its own peculiar lens. For example: a moralizing age might use Faust as an involucrum in order to see what is wrong in life; a critical age might limit itself to seeing the exaggeration implicit in it, explaining it as an invention on the part of monks, etc. A more recent age might see what is more profound. Oct. 7th, 35.

109

Literary scholarship often resembles an impenetrable primeval forest in which a few spots may be found in which to pray; or it may resemble a family that lays claim to familiarity with the paths through the local area, but only possesses reports of these from tradition rather than from personal experience of having walked its paths. Flocks of wild animals (reviewers) also inhabit this literary primeval forest, and all sorts of noisy instruments must be used to keep them at bay, thus, for example, by making alliances with other reviewers. Perhaps the very best thing would be if one could proceed in the same way with reviewers as with rats: train each to bite the others. Oct. 9th, 35.

110

5

10

15

125

25

Is everything, then, fantasy and illusion―do the inspiration of the natural scientists and the ecstasy of a Novalis consist of clouds of opium,―is this what I grasp there, where I believed I encountered the ideal in its most beautiful and purest form, the material― Oct. 11th, 35.

111:1

It is not merely because there is a hum. race that the world, as it were, required a stage for sin and another stage for the consciousness of sin (if I may put it so); the life of the individual

111:2

6 involucrum] Latin, a wrap or cover.

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 111–113 1835 •

shows the same thing: first sin, and then, often when it has de facto ceased, comes consciousness of: sin. Oct. 11th, 35.

111:3

112

10

15

113:1 126 20

113:2

25

74, 2nd floor.

It would have pleased me exceedingly had Goethe never continued Faust. I would then have called it a masterpiece; but here human weakness has conquered him. A certain strength is needed to witness the hero of a work lose his battle, as here, despairing over his doubt; but it was precisely this that made Faust great; precisely by his conversion, he is drawn downward into the more everyday. His death represents the consummate harmony of the piece, and we may very well sit and cry at his grave without it ever occurring to us to lift the curtains that, in death, have made him invisible to our eyes. Nov. 1st, 35.

There are authors who, just like beggars who attempt to awaken sympathy by exposing the flaws and deformities of the body, try to create a sensation by revealing their broken hearts. Novb. 1st, 35.

There are critics who, because they utterly lack an eye for what is individual, try to observe everything from a universal standpoint, and who therefore―in order to achieve the greatest universality possible―climb as high as possible, until they fundamentally see nothing at all except a wide horizon, precisely because their standpoint is too high. Novb. 2nd, 35.

127

128

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 114–116 1835–1836 •

We often deceive ourselves by embracing as our own many an insight and observation that either burst forth vividly at the time we read it or that lies in the consciousness of an entire age―yes, precisely at this moment, when I make this observation, this, too, is perhaps the result of the experience of the age. Novbr. 13th, 35.

114

Certainly, it is often a sad and depressing affair when a person wants to accomplish something in life through his words but in the end sees he has accomplished nothing, while the person in question clings, stiff-necked, to his views; but on the other hand, there is nonetheless something great about the fact that this other person―and indeed every other person―is a world unto himself, has his holy of holies into which no alien hand can force its way.

115:1

Jan. 36.

5

10

15

Adversity binds peop. to one another and imparts harmony and beauty to life’s relationships, just as the fantasy borne of winter’s cold conjures forth flowers on the window pane that vanish with warmth. Jan. 36

115:2

Superstition is an odd thing. One would expect that the person who once had seen that his sickly dreams failed to materialize would abandon them from that point on, but instead they gain in strength, just as the urge to gamble increases when first one has lost in the lottery. Jan. 36.

115:3

On occasions when I have read one or another great poem or encountered a work of genius, it has struck me that it was

116

20

127 25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 116–119 1836 •

a good thing that I had not authored it; for this now gives me permission to give voice to my joy without fear of being accused of vanity. Jan. 36. 5

117

10

Sentimentality is related to true, sound feeling as the sparrow to the swallow, who lets the latter build its nest and get everything ready, in order thereafter to lay its young in it. (Incidentally, I do not know whether this is in fact the case with the sparrow and the swallow; but I do know that there are two species of birds who comport themselves in this manner.). Jan. 36.

118 15

20

119 25

30

The same difficulty that appears in the realm of knowledge with respect to the quantity of empirical detail is also apparent, for example, in the realm of feeling. Imagine, for example, that a person who had lost someone through death were to become aware that, for example, 100,000 people die every day in Europe―then his sorrow would seem to him ridiculous. From this can be seen the necessity, in the realm of knowledge, of holding onto that which is specific to a nation. Jan. 15th, 36.

It is very interesting to see the results of life examinations that have been passed by the very great individuals. Practicum. Thus, for example, Goethe’s “vanitas vanitatum vanitas.” Ich hab’ mein Sach auf Nichts gestelt Juche etc. or Kingo’s “Then fare thee, world, farewell”; or Herder, for example, in a little poem adapted from the English, in which he explains that only two flowers remain to him, Liebe und Freundschaft Schleiermacher: the spiritual pulse of my soul shall beat with the same lively beat until my last breath, etc. Feb. 36. 25 Practicum] Latin, concerning the realm of practice; an examination concerned with the application of theory to practice. 26 vanitas vanitatum vanitas] Latin, vanity, vanity’s vanity. 26 Ich . . . gestelt Juche] German, I rest my case on nothingness, hurrah. 30 Liebe und Freundschaft] German, love and friendship.

129

130

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 120–123 1836 •

I have drawn attention to the juxtaposition of Sancho Panza and D. Quixote; D. Juan and Leporello; Faust and Wagner. Figaro is also set in opposition to a stock character; similarly, a princess in a fairy tale is usually accompanied by a nurse who serves as her adviser. Feb. 1836.

People understand me so little that they do not even understand my complaints about the fact that they do not understand me.

128

120

5

121

Feb. 36.

It is strange that our age, so enthusiastic about that which is useful, has not come to the point of, e.g., abolishing burial and all forms of piety toward the dead and recommended, for example, the burning of corpses[;] people could of course make artificial fertilizer from it.― Feb. 36

122

Life’s irony must necessarily belong to childhood, to the time of imagination; therefore it is so striking in the Middle Ages; therefore it is present in the Romantic School. Manhood, as that which has become more engrossed in the world, does not possess as much of it.― Feb. 36.

123

15

20

# The whole of human life could easily be understood as a long discourse in which the various peop. come to represent the various parts of speech (this might also apply to nation states in relation to one another). How many hum. beings are mere adjectives, interjections, conjunctions, adverbs, and how few are nouns, verbs, etc.; how many are copulae.

124 25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 129

124:2

•

P a p e r 124–125 1836 •

Human beings in relation to one another are like irregular verbs in different [languages], all the verbs are irregular. March. 1836.

125:1 5

10

Is it not the case that the Romantic rlly consists in the absence of a relative standard of measure, which becomes apparent at just this point: if we but consider the manifold, some things that surely are Romantic would nonetheless not be capable of being subsumed under this concept. I think of the wide desert,1 the North African, for example, which according to Ehrenberg’s description (see note) is quite Romantic, and similarly the Jutland heath (Blicher); the beginning of the novella Telse see the interesting piece in Dansk Ugeskrift. vol. 4, pp. 153ff; p. 154. Note: “Already a number of travelers have noted that the absence of a standard by which to gauge the relative size of bodies in the great emptiness of the African deserts gives rise to odd confusions. I myself have often been deceived in such a manner that, believing a vulture or some other large bird to be perched on a nearby hill, I have begun to approach with raised shotgun only to realize that it is not a nearby bird but a camel on a hill far away. Similarly, I have often been on the verge of taking a shot at a bird but decided against it, believing it to be a large animal in the distance. . . . . . And the same thing holds with hearing. The deathly silence that reigns at night in these deserts is as unaccustomed to European ears as the flat uniform plain is to the eye. Footsteps can be heard at an unbelievable distance, as can speech, even a low whisper.”―For neither is it possible to tell whether the sound comes from far away or close by. 1

15

20

25

#. 125:2 30

The differences in play might perhaps also be considered: the Ancients used physical exercises, threw the discus―in the Romantic era, there was hunting and fishing (both the epitome of the Romantic. The whole dream of what one might possibly catch, etc.). March 1836.

131

132

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 126–129 1836 •

Why did most, or at least the most significant, members of the Romantic School convert to Catholicism? Was it not because [the] Reformation, in returning to something original, indicated precisely in so doing that it represented the formal dimension of the becoming of the Idea, a Present that it sought to make Present once again, while Cathol[icism] essentially aspired forward (though not, of course, because of the more sensual nature of the Cathol. worship service etc.)― March 1836.

126

Antiquity is a division problem, of the real by the ideal, with no remainder. Romanticism always yields a remainder.

127

130 5

March. 1836.

A truly romantic situation such as that of Ingeborg, who sits at the water’s edge, pursuing Frithiof with her eyes as he sails away, though the romantic aspect would vanish here if one were to imagine her dwelling more on the thought of her loss than on being preoccupied with Frithiof’s journey and situation.

128:1 15

March. 36.

The ancient is in the present tense; the romantic in the aorist. March. 36.

This is the difference betw. the person who is willing to face death because of enthusiasm for an idea and the mimic who is in search of martyrdom: while it is scarcely in death that the former lives most in relation to his idea, the latter savors more the strange and bitter feeling of defeat; the former rejoices in his victory, the latter in his suffering. March 36.

128:2 20

129

25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 130

5

131 10

15

•

P a p e r 130–131 1836 •

The opposition betw. the Romantic age and our own epoch of the understanding shows itself clearly in the circumstance that, while the former dwelled primarily on the thought of a large tree that reached up to the heavens so as to connect heaven and earth (the ash tree Ygdrasill―giants?), our age attempts to display everything to the eye, one thing next to the other; while the one age sought to concentrate the whole race, so to speak, in one individual, our age attempts to get all nations lined up side by side, the so-called cosmopolitan system. No one objects that the former was also a kind of cosmopolitan view, for the difference is that the Rom[antic] Age dwelled on the notion of the greatness, the sublimity, etc. of this single individual, while our age dwells more on the thought of the multiplicity, the heterogeneity, that is joined into a unity. For this reason, while the earlier age held fast to nationality, with each nation, so to speak, distilled in its representative, our age dwells more on the thought of the many individuals, joined in one state, the multiplicity of interests that intersect here,―and thus once again on multiplicity. March. 1836.

131

25

30

35

The Romantic is actlly found in the two halves of one idea being held apart from one another by some foreign intermediary. When Adam was created, the idea of Adam required Eve as supplement (the animals came up to him and he gave them names― here is multiplicity―here is the chorus, if I may say so―here is irony―) then Eve arrives and the Romantic is past, there is peace.―Man is created, he sins, this fact demands its supplement, namely Chr[ist]. Among the nations, this halfness of existence [sin] then became conscious, Romanticism developed; the others formed the chorus, and irony, etc. Chr[ist] comes, there is peace.―Christ’s second coming could, in turn, also be treated in this way. What is presented here can easily be demonstrated, both in the Middle Ages in general, and in the achievements that are attributed to the Romantic. March. 1836 is Echo Romantic[?] Yes, but when it answers, the Romantic is past. the Romantic Age always has something in mente. 37 in mente] Latin, in mind.

133

134

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 132–135 1836 •

It is strange to see how in all of life’s relations and tendencies (political―religious, etc. etc. also in minor matters) a point of view has formed that is called juste melieux, but which I would prefer to call life’s neuter gender; for these are the very most tiresome sort of people to deal with; they are true hermaphrodites.

132

5

March. 1836.

With the Romantic, it depends in turn upon whether it is more the yearning-filled gazing toward eternity (this is the more sentimental form) or the varied situation brought about by powerful action. March. 36.

I am in no way surprised, since it is reasonable enough, that that mighty age would be strongly affected by every external detail, that something such as boulders would appeal to it. This is presumably because they came to believe that trolls live under stones and, moreover, that simply standing in the way of a troll who was trying to scramble underneath a stone would force him to produce one or another gift. But the Nemesis that tended to come along when one involved oneself with them, was strange indeed; for how often have we not heard that, when someone had received the good sword, the bow, the arrow, etc., for which he asked, a little “aber” was attached, and he often became an instrument in the hand of fate, destroying his own family, etc.; how many sinister consequences has not this little circumstance led to: that this sword, once drawn, could not be returned to its scabbard without first having been dipped in warm human blood.

132

133

10

134

15

20

25

March. 1836.

The strange comedy that is played with the world in, e.g., the Nordiske Kjæmpehistorier is quite interesting, since the person from whom one would least expect anything suddenly steps forward with a power and a force that is not particularly fortunate for those who had used his apparent madness as an excuse for ridiculing him. (Everything relating to Hamlet; as an example I 3 juste melieux] French, properly “juste-milieu,” happy medium. 22 aber] German, but.

135 30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

10

133 15

20

25

•

P a p e r 135–136 1836 •

can also introduce Ketil Hængs Saga, vol. 3, sec. 2, pp. 3ff.; Buesvingers Saga, vol. 3, sec. 2, p. 211.). However, it is not so strange that Nature, after having, as it were, allowed the embers to smolder under the ashes for ages, suddenly flames up all the more powerfully, as is here the case, where a sudden disappearance constitutes the transition to a subsequent period of brilliance.― More noteworthy still is the case of a strange sort of ironizing over the world―in which the world, in all its cleverness, confronts an individual who plays a madman yet surpasses them all―as I find in “Schwab, Buch der schönsten Geschichten und Sagen,” in Robert der Teufel, p. 347, where the hermit he consults says of him that he is to take on the bearing of a fool and a mute, eat only with the dogs and sleep with them, etc. Nonetheless he accomplishes great things for the king, though without anyone having an inkling of this except for the king’s daughter―but once again he plays the part of the fool.―From this, we could move to an investigation of the significance of the fool in the Middle Ages; how fools in general played the part of the chorus, if I may say so, in the world’s tragedies that were performed in the Middle Ages; how, in particular, the relation of the fool to his master was the fruit of the divide that was established between the nobility and the lower classes; how this formed the transition to Wagner’s, Leporello’s and Sancho Panza’s relations to their respective lords. In this way we approach, from a different direction, the same idea that we mentioned on another occasion. March 1836.

30

136

It almost appears as though two individuals are needed in order to form one whole person; this explains the enthusiasm that the fool often showed for his prince or lord. When I say that it is as if two are needed to make one individual, I am of course not referring to the relationship of the knight to his squires―for they played no independent role whatsoever―but of the fool, who represented intelligence.

I think that it would be a very interesting idea to work out a comic novel: “A literary Don Quixote.” In the learned world a complete misunderstanding of the significance of books has arisen. Instead of understanding them as a necessary supplement to life,

135

136

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 136–138 1836 •

people have come to regard reading as much as possible as the main thing. The comic element would thus consist of a despairing attempt to “keep up,” accompanied by a complete inability to accomplish anything in the world, because they are preoccupied with producing learned works and lose themselves in footnotes; a fine irony would result from a juxtaposition with a simple unpretentious effort at writing―e.g., that of a Claudius―who did, however, know how to make the whole tantalizing striving into fruitful reading. Alongside this, there could also be an irony that consisted in his repeatedly being the one who followed after and tidied up, just like the girl who follows the farm laborer’s steps; every time he wanted to say something that he believed to be novel but which, in the final analysis, was something old that he had read (for this side of things, too, was quite interesting), someone else would already have said it;―from this could be spun a decidedly comical battle over ideas (which in turn would shed new light on him). It might also be a very a good feature to have such a man get the idea of writing for the common man. (Dansk Folkeblad). March 1836.

5

10

15

134

20

A very interesting comparison could be drawn between our Danish heroic ballads and the sort of drinking songs that were common here half a century ago, primarily because both display the quintessential colors of folk life; it could be significant to see the musical tones that have their source at the roots of the nation. (Beranger). March. 1836.

137

It would be interesting to observe, via a systematic historic investigation, the various forms of poetic meter as the necessary offspring of the entire age in which they have their home. Our age has the novel and the novella. March 1836.

138

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 139

5

140

10

141 135

20

25

30

35

•

P a p e r 139–141 1836 •

It is the tragic element that consists in the impossibility of having someone to whom one can make oneself comprehensible that is so beautifully expressed in Genesis, where Adam names all the animals, but finds nothing for himself. March. 1836

The three great ideas (D[on] Juan, Faust, and the Wandering Jew) represent, so to speak, the three aspects of life in the absence of religion, and only when these ideas enter into the individual hum. being and are mediated, only then do the moral and the religious come; such is my understanding of these three ideas in relation to my dogmatic standpoint. March 36.

A. Such a sudden disappearance, coming in the wake of an otherwise noteworthy and striking life (be it for good or evil)―in order, as it were, to prevent it from becoming elevated above all others, is then to be darkened with a death like all the others, and, in setting the imagination in motion, care is taken that it be as grandiose as possible―such a sudden disappearance is not unusual, whether I think of Elijah, or Romulus, or the most elevated instance in this regard, the ascension of Christ. (It is as though a life that was elevated above the whole is to be saved from the dark finality that engulfs all others by setting the imagination in motion and in this way making everything as grandiose as possible.) But what I really want to call attention to here is how consistent this mode of disappearance is with respect to the entire outlook exhibited in this form of literature. In the case of ascension, the principal idea is clearly the presentation of the glory into which the figure in question has entered, and in this way it is, in a sense, all over―at any rate, one’s spirit finds peace and composure in the thought of this glory and does not concern itself with imagining what he, in his glory, is going to do (because this majesty of his is construed precisely as a kind of passivity, as repose in some shady region with the scent of ambrosia etc., etc.). If here, once again, the thought arises of having him embark on a host of adventures, one cries in vain for him to cease (see Rafn, p. 627, middle of the page)―he rushes off like an eternal Jew, though

137

138

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 141–142 1836 •

with the difference that his surroundings in their entirety (dogs, horses, falcons) call to mind the powerful hunter who encounters a new animal at every moment, each one stranger than the last. A continuation of such stories also includes the tale of the wild hunt that one hears in so many regions, and the farmer who is acquainted with such stories (and it is surely quite mistaken to think that these tales alarm the farmer; on the contrary, he is in no way frightened by them, in fact feels at home with them) hears at nighttime the baying of dogs and the pounding of horse hooves, etc. All of these things are but remnants of the time when the entire world was an enormous forest inhabited by dragons and lions, etc. It is the consistent development of their entire view of life as a metaphor of all its efforts―while classical antiquity had Sisyphus roll his stone uphill until it fell down again and so forth (the Danaïdes pouring water into a tub as it runs out again), in the same way, in the fairy tale, the Romantic Age had the knight remain undefeated. It has been said that it was Christianity that actually developed the Romantic, but if it was Christianity that did this (which, incidentally, is subject to doubt, for while it is true that Christianity lures thought out past what is earthly, to something beyond, and to this extent is Romantic, but this beyond is a judgment or a sleeplike state preceding a judgment), then it was still only through contact with the Nordic, which precisely through its marriage to Christianity produced the institution of chivalry―and precisely owing to the notion, so peculiar to Northerners, of life as a battle, both here and beyond, and death, as a fall here in life parallel to the fall in the other life, as a transition in order to arise again―that the genuinely Romantic was brought forth. March. 1836.

Humor [stands] in opposition to irony, and therefore they could well be united in an individual, both parts conditioned by a refusal to be reconciled with the world. But with the one, this refusal takes the form of not caring a whit about it, while with the other, by contrast, one makes an attempt to influence the world, but is ridiculed by it for doing so. These represent the two ends of a see-saw (wave motion); for the humorist experiences moments when the world teases him, just as the other, in his battle with life, must often succumb and in turn often rise above it and laugh at it. (When, for example, Faust does not understand the

5

10

15

20

25

136

30

142

35

40

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 142–145 1836 •

world and yet also smiles at the world that does not understand him.). April 1836.

143 5

The presence of the Romantic is indicated in Baggesen’s [“] Thora from Havsgaard[”] by the catchphrase, The One Who Will Return, I Will Return― Is Joan of Arc a Romantic figure and to what extent.

10

144 15

20

137

25

145

Does the Romantic consist in the variegated, the multifarious? No; for antiquity of course had its nymphs and Nereids etc. etc., but the Romantic element in what is variegated and motley consists in its having been conjured forth by an unsatisfied desire without finding satisfaction in doing so. April. 1836.

Conversation with J. Jürgensen, April 18th, 1836. He was drunk, which was evident first and foremost by observing the corners of his mouth. He expressed the view that poetry was, after all, really of minor importance, a mere excrescence; he praised philosophy, praised memory, envied me my youth, spoke of the falling leaves, the whistling wind, the blast of the storm. “Half of life is for living, and the other half is for regretting, and I am fast entering upon the latter.” “In youth it is possible to make many mistakes and make them good again.”―“I have led a very active life, have been involved in everything of importance nowadays, am on familiar terms with every person of talent―ask me about them.”―

The omnipresence of wit. April 1836.

139

140

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 146–149 1836 •

For this reason, it is necessary that a hum. being assume a God’s assistance in order to change, not because one cannot indeed change without being conscious of it, but then there is a different misstep that lies close at hand―pride at being able to do so. Tieck tells a story of a man who weaned himself from drink, but who soon came to believe himself a prophet (in his novel, Der junge Tischlermeister. Berlin, 1836. beginning of 1st volume.)

146

5

June 6th, 1836.

A wandering musician played the minuet from Don Juan on a reed pipe or something similar (I could not see what it was; he was in another courtyard), and the apothecary pounded his medicine, and a maid scrubbed in the courtyard1, etc., and they did not notice anything, nor perhaps did the flute player, and I felt so fine. June 10th, 1836.

147 10

15

and a stable-boy curried his horse and knocked the brush against a stone, while far away, from another side of town, came the voice of a shrimp seller.

1

It is obvious that, with time, the Romantic tends more and more to diminish, and in the same degree necessity exerts its rights (Hegel), so that Christ[ianity] does not remain Rom[antic] (e.g., Schl. a necessary development.). To what extent does the antiquity that emerges in this way resemble actual so-called antiquity. (The present tense of beauty.). June 12, 1836.

148

When I speak of the opposition betw. the Ancient and the Romantic, I naturally do not have in mind any particular aesth[etic] species, but rather a basic contrast that must give a different color to every single aspect of aesthetics. June 12th, 36.

149

28 species] Latin, form.

20

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 138

150

5

10

•

P a p e r 150–154 1836 •

Christianity is actually the consciousness of the medi[ated] relationship into which a hum. being must always enter in his relationship to the div[ine]; therefore, to pray in the name of Chr[ist], for example, is to pray in such a way that we are each conscious of being a link in the development of a race, for indeed, only in this way can a hum. being position himself in relation to God, whether he acts or prays; therefore, almost all nations have had one or another in whose name they prayed, but it was limited to those nations because they did not possess the entire world-consciousness, but only their national consciousness, local consciousness―thus, praying through the saints, and Cathol[ics’] praying through the Mother of God, is something similar. June 12th, 1836 (Josty).

151 15

152 20

153

154:1

It is strange that people are so angry with the Jesuits; in a certain sense everyone who is enthusiastic about an idea and wants only to realize it is a Jesuit. June 17th, 1836.

Why do we prefer to read comedies in society, and tragedies alone.― June 19th, 1836.

There are people who constantly exist in tens rather than in the ordinary ones. June 20th, 36.

Now I understand what I have so often wondered about, namely, that it is precisely Thorvaldsen who has emerged in our time; he is a true contemporary of Hegel. The Romantic has vanished and Necessity’s (antique) present tense has come in (the art of sculpture belongs to classical antiquity), and thus we have

141

142

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 154–156 1836 •

experienced a new antique stage. The Romantic is reconciled with the world. The same is the case with monasticism, which of course has long since finished historically, but whose final stage was in fact ancient in form, and in this form it must return if it ever does. In the first instance monks lived wholly apart from the world, then at war with the world, in special dress, so they could be recognized by all; finally they came to live in the world, reconciled with it. (Jesuits, etc.). July 2nd, 1836.

5

139

And for this reason, edifying discourses, which teach one to despise what is close at hand and hasten into eternity, are no longer called for, but the stories by the author of Stories of Everyday Life.― July 2nd, 1836.

154:2

Grundtvig regards the Apostle’s Creed as the watchword1 that Christ whispered into humanity’s ear, and that he wants to hear again from the last hum. being on Judgment Day. July 6th, 1836. 1 Password (also in connection with what Grundtvig so often recounts, namely, that in the most ancient Church they did not dare utter it out loud. Each whispered it in the ear of next, and so forth.)

155

Even the most ancient unrest (e.g., Laocoön, who is crushed by serpents) is nonetheless peace, the ultimate Romantic rest―unrest, e.g. Waldeinsamkeit Wie liegst Du weit! O dich gereut Einst mit der Zeit.― Ach einzige Freud Waldeinsamkeit. (Tieck, Phantasus, vol. 1, Samtlige Verke, 4 vols., p. 161, “der blonde Eckbert[”].)

156

July 10th, 36.

26 Waldeinsamkeit . . . einzige Freud Waldeinsamkeit] German, Forest solitude, how distant! Oh, you regret, Then and now.―Ah, singular joy, forest solitude.

20

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 157

5

140

158 10

15

20

159 25

160

•

P a p e r 157–160 1836 •

Situation Two individuals, both of whom are vain, tell each other about a splendid episode from their own lives in such a way that neither really listens much to the other, but nonetheless such that at the end, each makes the same remark to the other, namely, that it is a pity that he always speaks only of himself.― July 11th, 36.

To what extent is illusion necessary for a pers.[?]―this in relation to the Romantic.―What about the theory that the course of the world is a necessary development, and how may this theory function in life? Would it not paralyze all activity, since it annuls what is clearly egotistical, but also the natural and enthusiastic certainty, at least in the heat of battle, that one is fighting for the one right thing[?] Or is this philosophy only applicable to the past, so that it teaches me to solve its enigmas, while allowing life in the present to remain an enigma that the subsequent generation must solve[?] Of what use is such a philosophy to me[?] Are those who prefer it themselves capable of such resignation and of allowing the world to follow its crooked course, and what is one to think of them, does the error rest with them or with the System― July 11th, 36.

Action not in the interest of an idea is like dialectic that is not in the interest of intellect―sophistry―It is therefore quite interesting that, contemporaneously with the greatest Sophists (in the realm of knowledge), there also lived the greatest Sophists in the realm of action, namely, those who practiced abstinence through self-mortification.― July 16th, 36.

Shouldn’t the irony of Christ[ianity] consist in the fact that it attempted to encompass the whole world, but the seeds of the impossibility of its doing so lay within it itself, and thereby it is conjoined to something other―the humorous―and to this other’s view of what it rlly calls the world (and this concept is

143

144

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 160–162 1836 •

in fact part and parcel of it and therefore stands in a sense at the midpoint), because everything that hitherto has made and continues to make its mark in the world was placed in relation to what is ostensibly the Christian’s only truth, and therefore kings and princes, powers and principalities, philosophers and artists, enemies and persecutors, etc.―etc. appear to them as nothing, and, in their belief in their own greatness―ridiculous―

5

July 19th, 36.

Everything, after all, becomes more tragic by making it, if I may put it thus, historic, i.e., making it into something that happens not only to me, but to the whole world; but naturally this applies only in the situation in which one has first grasped one’s own distress and, afterward, given it this historical context. Thus Heine: es ist eine alte Geschichte, wird immer aber neu, und wem sie jetzo passiret, ihm springt das Herz entzwei―though here there is already more reflection on the matter; but it emerges primarily in its naive form in several of the poems in Knaben Wunderhorn.―There is an ex[ample] in the novellas of the brothers Bernhard, in “Børneballet,” in which one sees, at the end, the same lieutenant who has poisoned the life of the heroine―indeed, who has as good as killed her―now pursuing a young, not-fully-matured girl, whereby the story, so to speak, begins anew. Having the story begin again like this can in a certain sense also become comic, since one turns life into a music box that plays each piece over every time it has reached its end.

161 10

141

15

20

25

July 20th, 36.

When the Indian learning construes the doctrine of evil in such a way that it posits (see Schlegel, Wercke 1, p. 213) God as the source of evil as well as good, (in a way the devil is then included in the Trinity (see Schlegel ibid.)[)] is this, then, not Hegelianism, and to what extent can it be reconciled with the notion of the Romantic that is otherwise normally attributed to Indian thought? Aug. 1st, 36.

14 es ist eine alte Geschichte . . . springt das Herz entzwei] German, It is an old story, that ever again is new, and he to whom it happens―his heart breaks right in two.

162

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 163

•

P a p e r 163–168 1836 •

Which προτυπος for the individual hum. life is found in the fact that we always see the poetic development of nations begin with the epic, and only subsequently followed by the lyrical[?] Aug 2nd, 36.

164

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages, which I illustrated by means of the figure of the fool, can also be seen in the fact that they had one language for science and another for poetry (Latin/ Romance languages). Aug 2, 36.

165

Insofar as Christ[ianity] clung to the doctrine of the God-Man ϑεαντρωπος to this extent it is not Romantic; this is also the aspect that Hegel primarily emphasized. Aug. 4th, 36.

142

166 15

167 20

168

25

Corresponding phenomena: The scholastic in the Middle Ages’ epoch of fantasy; the Romantic School in our age’s epoch of understanding. Aug. 4th, 36.

The Romantic has miracles; this the Ancient cannot have (Hegelians―Schleiermacher). Aug 4th, 36.

The Romantic is also visible, in a sense, in the drapery that modern art furnishes its paintings and sculptures (an allegory of a kind) see Görres p. 276. l. 7ff. from top p. 302. l. 5ff. from top.

Aug 4th, 36. 1 προτυπος] Greek, properly “προτυποv,” prototype. 11 ϑεαντρωπος] Greek, God-Man.

145

146

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 169–172 1836 •

With respect to the difference between Ancient and Romantic, one may also note that the actor’s presentation (in the Rom[antic] Age) is a constant striving to confront the spectator with an image from the imagination, without the actor ever producing it completely or at any single moment, but communicating its lineaments with fitting facial expressions, dialogue, etc.; whereas the Greek and Roman actor, clad in his thick-soled shoes or slippers, with the help of masks, etc., immediately appeared on stage as he was to be throughout the entire evening, without so much occasion for impersonation, somewhat automaton-like.

169

5

10

Aug 9th, 36. see Schlegel Werke, vol. 5, p. 61, middle of the page

The struggle betw. the orthodox and the rationalists could be presented as the battle between the old and new soap-cellars, which has in common with religious controversies that it develops a great deal of terminology, whose end result was (1) the old soap-cellar, where the new soap-cellar people live (the rationalists who bought out the old soap-cellar people, thereby commandeering the Church), (2) the new soap-cellar, where the old soap-cellar people live (the orthodox people, who make progress (Grundtvig), abandon Luther, etc.[)] Aug 10th, 36.

170

. . . . . Instead of the ideal of beauty, a national aesthetic, indeed city and class taste, and the most perfect imprint of it.

171

Aug. 11th, 36.

It is certainly strange that I, after having been occupied for so long with the concept of the Romantic, see only now that the Romantic becomes what Hegel calls the dialectical, the other standpoint in which: Stoicism―Fatalism Pelagianism―Augustianism. Humor―Irony etc.

15

143

20

25

172

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

10

•

P a p e r 172–175 1836 •

belong, standpoints that in themselves do not rlly have any continuing existence, but between which life makes a constant pendulum motion. I realize now, too, that when Heiberg transferred Hegelianism to the field of aesthetics and believed himself to have found the trinity of lyric, epic, and lyric-epic (dramatic), he was indeed correct; but that this is capable of being carried through on a much larger scale, the Ancient―the Romantic―and Absolute Beauty, and in such a way that precisely Heiberg’s trinity takes on its significance, since the Ancient and the Romantic and Absolute Beauty [each] has its lyrical―its epic―its dramatic. To what extent is it correct to begin with the lyrical[?] the history of poetry seems to suggest a beginning with the epic. Aug 19th, 1836.

144

173 15

174

20

25

Goethe surely has irony and humor, but hovers over both―different, in this respect, from Greek tragedy. Aug 19th, 36.

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages, which I have observed in a number of its facets, is also apparent in the way in which nature and art are part of creating a great poet; in the Middle Ages the two poles were thus developed separately―the nature poets and the art poets, and they rarely or never trespassed upon one another. In general, it is characteristic of the Middle Ages that the two powers that are to be united with one another, merge with one another, are kept separate from one another and are represented as two directions―(e.g., the scholastics―chivalry, etc.). Aug 21st 1836.

175

30

Why are the tunes of an organ grinder so often appealing to us, it is surely because of the Romantic aspects implicit in their mode of appearance. It is just like something poetic in popular life. One does not expect music at all, and suddenly he begins to play. Aug. 25th, 36.

147

148

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 176–179 1836 •

The Hegelian cud-chewing process with three stomachs: first the immediate, then it is regurgitated up again, then down again, and perhaps a subsequent master could continue with 4 stomachs, etc., then down again, then up again. I don’t know whether the master understands what I mean.― Aug. 25th, 36.

176

When Goethe had formed the transition to the Ancient, why did the times not follow him[?] why don’t the times follow him, since Hegel had done it[?] why isn’t it effective[?] because these two had reduced the aesthetic and speculative development to this; but the political development had to live out its Romantic development, and for this reason the entire recent Romantic School are precisely―politicians. Aug. 25th 36.

177

[August 25th, 1836.] “Isn’t the enthusiasm for knowledge, which, after all, must be seen as characteristic of Faust, really lacking in Goethe’s treatment?―What I expressed on another occasion is true, of course― that Faust subsumes Don Juan in himself; nonetheless, his love life, his sensuousness, can never develop in the same way; in him that latter is already mediated, is something into which he hurls himself, driven by despair.”

178

August. 36. Among the anc[ients], the divine was continually merged into the worldly, hence no irony.

The modern development exhibits opposition to the Ancient also with respect to poetic meter―in the lack of a relative criterion (the modern accentuated languages)

5

10

145 20

179:1

25

179:2

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 179 1836

179:3

Verse mapped out in meter is the scholasticism of poetry.

179:4

So here I have the parody of the troubadours’ musical development in rhyme, etc. and wordplay, see Diez, pp. 101ff. Just as H. Steffens speaks of how music can transport a person “in die Selbstsucht der wildbewegten Töne[”] (see Karikaturen des Heiligsten pt. 2, p. 103). Oct. 9th, 36.

5

10

179:5

The musical consists in rhyme. The great importance of the refrain, especially in earlier times (Knabens Wunderhorn), e.g., Bürger’s Lenore.

179:6

The theory of a written language is a miniature version of the theory of a common language for scholars.

146

179:7 20

179:8 25

The Romantic is expressed in the Middle Ages in a singular way―by presenting everything as wandering about: wandering knights; fahrende scholars; wander[ing] singers, musicians, monks, etc.― “flyer, loose sheet of paper”

NB All these remarks were found on some slips of paper, and they appear to be from the month of August. The statement by H. Steffens and its relation to the main comment is of a later character and date.― Oct. 9th, 36. 8 in die Selbstsucht der wildbewegten Töne] German, in the egoism of frenzied tones. 21 fahrende] German, wandering.

•

149

150

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 180 1836 •

To what extent is Faust an immediate drama? as J. L. Heiberg says; (is there such a thing?). To what extent is it correct to have F[aust] see Mephisto as humorous on the occasion of his first entrance (Lessing, Klinger, folk songs in Knaben Wunderhorn 1, 214.― analogous to the passage in Goethe, p. 85: Was wilst du armer Teufel geben etc., et al.)? By the way, Goethe first did this in the second passage, p. 69: “das also war des Pudels Kern, Ein fahrender Scolast? Der Casus macht mich lachen.” This, however, is the first time Mephisto appears. Is it perhaps Goethe’s intention to distinguish between the Spirit (p. 34) and Mephisto (all that is non-bodily―and “bescheidne Warheit sage ich Dir.”). What form does Goethe’s irony and humor take[?] it is like lightning and thunder observed by one who, standing on a mountain, is elevated above it―he has survived it, and to that extent more than the classical (Romantic-classical). F. is at home in the ebb and flow of irony. Thus in the first scene he immediately runs through the whole climax. He wants to embrace the macrocosm, is rejected, then storms at the microcosm, too, and, rejected, falls into the arms of Wagner (irony); but this irony must as such give birth to his humor, which now expresses itself in relation to [“]Wagner” pp. 36ff. Incidentally, here I cannot fail to mention a misunderstanding of which I was guilty on an earlier reading of this poem. p. 35, l. 3 from the bottom: nicht einmal dir. Here I overlooked [“]einmal[”] and understood this passage to indicate that the devil wanted to tempt F. with the thought of his resemblance to God, which would thus elevate him far above the devil. Now I see that this was not, at least, G’s intention, though there might be something correct in having Mephisto enter into such a relationship with F. at his first appearance―

7 Was wilst du armer Teufel geben] German, What do you have to give, poor devil? 9 das also war . . . macht mich lachen] German, Was that, then, the core of the poodle, a wandering scholar? The casus [Latin, “case,” whether grammatical or real] makes me laugh. 14 bescheidne Warheit sage ich Dir] German, I tell you the humble truth. 31 nicht einmal dir] German, not even you.

180

5

10

15

20

25

147 30

35

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

148 40

•

P a p e r 180 1836

Irony is understood in a humoristic way by F[aust] himself (“meine Schüler an der Nase herum”). Wagner’s entire relationship to him is irony; but then, just at the moment he has decided to immerse himself in the sensual, a new disciple arrives (profound irony). It is irony when the peasants receive him with jubilation because he had once saved them; irony, when W[agner] rejoices in this, though he immediately understands the peasants’ jubilation humoristically. Irony is present in the whole scene with the dog. p. 57. top of the page, is a truly prophetic insight into the soul of every profoundly religious doubter. He himself senses very well how important it is for hum. beings to have a religious starting point of this sort, and therefore it does not occur to him to rob them of it through ridicule. p. 64. Jehovah was not in the storm; the peace that meanwhile has descended upon F. is merely an easing off. He has already entered too closely into relation with the devil, which of course causes him to misinterpret the gospel. The reinterpretations of God’s kingdom have in fact ceased. Thus a certain calm must also arise at the moment the Commandant lets go of D. Juan’s hand, because the constant battle betw. the warring powers has in a way come to an end.― What is the significance of Mephisto’s demand that F[aust] say “herein” three times before he enters[?] Compare Goeth[e’s] F. with the poem in Knaben Wunderhorn.―e.g., F., p. 75, where he lulls him to sleep because he is unable to escape, and the exchange in Kn. W., where instead of painting Christ, which he cannot do, he paints Venus. It is strange to see the younger generation, which indeed has something Faustian in itself, attach itself precisely to Goethe’s treatment of this [theme], which nonetheless is in no way seductive, as, at certain moments, D. Juan is (and F[aust] not at all); it is more as if Goethe were the gray man in Peter 2 meine Schüler an der Nase herum] German, [lead] my student around by the nose. 29 herein] German, [come] in.

•

151

152

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 180–182 1836 •

Schlemihl, who pulled F[aust’s] shadow out of his pocket and said: justo judicio Dei damnatus sum. Sept. 8th, 36. Should there not also be some individual moments of inspiring knowledge1 (might it not be combined with the notion of, say, the devil’s assistance, or then, prior to the association with him) how much of this comes in the Second Part? and are they not, then, of a wholly different kind? Lord Byron’s Manfred is probably F[aust] without a Goethean Mephisto to bring him up?

5

10

at least a striving in that direction, such as is also, in its way, hinted at in the book of folktales I have in Danish. see p. 10.

1

Is it his usual Goethean worldliness that causes G[oethe] in his F[aust] to have Mephisto lead the new student astray p. 93 precisely as regards the faculty’s course of study, since he simultaneously ridicules all wide-ranging ambition by referring him to a field of study prescribed by the faculty, and at the same time leads him astray concerning it, scaring him away from it, deterring him and destroying his great plans, which could have emerged strengthened from such pressure[?] Hamann, who also in this regard is a προτυπος comes readily to mind, his “Life,” part 1 of his Schriften, p. 172. Sept 9th, 36.

181

In an age in which it is the order of the day for one auth[or] to plunder another, it is indeed a happy circumstance occasionally to encounter men whose individuality so stamps and molds every word with their likeness, that it is incumbent upon anyone who encounters it in an unaccustomed place

182:1

2 justo judicio Dei damnatus sum] Latin, I have been found guilty by God’s righteous judgment.

20

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 182–184 1836 •

to say to those concerned: “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.” Sept. 10th, 36.

149

182:2 5

10

15

183

20

184 25

Irony is only at home in the immediate (where, however, the individual does not become aware of it as such) and at the dialectical standpoint. Whereas in the 3rd [standpoint] (that of character), the reaction to the world does not emerge as irony, since resignation has now developed in the individual, which is precisely the consciousness of the limit that all striving, insofar as it wants to exist in the world order, must have, for as striving it is infinite and unlimited. Irony and resignation are opposite poles, the opposed directions of movement. Sept. 13th, 36.

Everything ends with hearing―the rules of grammar end with hearing―the commandments of the Law with hearing―the basso continuo with hearing―the philosophical system with hearing― for this reason, too, the life to come is represented as sheer music, as a great harmony―would that the dissonance of my life might soon be resolved into it. Sept. 11th 36.

Fundamentally, it is the same striving that (in the age of fantasy), if I may put it thus, caused people to translate poetry into prose (the entire development that issued forth from songs of mythological heroes―popular forms of literary entertainment)―that now, in the age of the understanding, causes people to translate actual science into a sort of poetry―novellas―. Sept. 12th, 36.

153

154

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 185–186 1836 •

It is a very interesting parallel that Hamann draws betw. the Law (the L[aw] of Moses) and reason. He attacks Hume’s proposition: “die letzte Frucht aller Weltweisheit ist die Bemerkung der mslichen Unwissenheit und Schwacheit.”……… Unser Vernunft, Hamann then says, ist also eben das, was Paulus das Gesetz nennt―und das Gebot der Vernunft ist heilig, gerecht und gut; aber ist sie uns gegeben uns weise zu machen? Eben so wenig als das Gesetz der Juden, sie gerecht zu machen, sondern uns zu überführen von dem Gegentheil, wie unvernünftig unsere Vernunft ist, und daß unsere Irrthümer durch sie zunehmen sollen, wie die Sünde durch das Gesetz zunahm.” Sept. 12th, 36. see Hamann Schr[iften]: 1st Part, p. 405. Another passage, p. 425. “Ist es nicht ein alter Einfall, den du oft von mir gehört: incredibile sed verum? Lügen und Romane müssen wahrscheinlich sein, Hypothesen und Fabeln; aber nicht die Wahrheiten und Grundlehren unseres Glauben.”

Elvira (in D. Juan) is actlly not a character. She lacks the firm and clear outline needed for this; she is a transparent, pellucid figure, through whom one sees the finger of God, Providence, which in a way softens the impression of the all-too-vengeful Nemesis in the Commandant, since she continually holds open for D. Juan a possibility of avoiding it―Elvira is all too ethereal to be a character, she is like the elfin girls who have no back. Sept. 13th, 36. 3 die letzte Frucht . . . und Schwacheit] German, The final fruit of all philosophy is the awareness of hum[an] uncertainty and weakness. 5 Unser Vernunft . . . durch das Gesetz zunahm] German, Our reason is therefore that which Paul calls the Law, and the law of reason is holy, just, and good; but is it given to us to make us wise? Just as little as the Law of the Jews was given to make them righteous; rather, it is given to convince us of the opposite, of how unreasonable our reason is, and in order that our errors might increase through it, just as sin increased through the law. 17 Ist es nicht ein alter Einfall . . . unseres Glauben] German, Is it not an old idea that you often have heard from me: incredibile sed verum [Latin, incredible but true]? Lies and novels must be probable, as must fables and hypotheses, but not the truths and doctrines of our faith.

185

5

10

150

15

20

186

25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 187

5

10

15

188 151 20

189 25

•

P a p e r 187–189 1836

Will not the vaudeville, in the form in which it has developed here, end by annulling itself, because the musical element in it is allowed such great significance, and the point is always to seek the musical number’s relation to the opera from which it is taken; but the supply of these will soon be exhausted, at least insofar as it is usable in vaudeville (universally known―popular), and therefore the new vaudeville will seek its point by making use of the same musical numbers in another vaudeville (such as has already happened, if I am not mistaken, in Nei!) and so on, until it annuls itself, and is this not proof of vaudeville’s transitory significance―significance as a stage of development.― Sept. 14th, 36.

How little the understanding can accomplish in speculative matters can best be seen from the fact that, at its highest, it has to use a self-contradictory expression in order to explain what is highest. Numerous expressions in the formula Concordiæ can serve as examples. Sept. 19th, 36.

What rlly is the source of the comic that can be produced simply by presenting the same idea in new clothing[?] E.g., I believe that it is in “Clara’s Skriftemaal” (by the author of the Stories of Everyday Life) that a woman is described in such ethereal fashion that it is said that she does not walk but floats about, lifting herself above the earth with every step; she

•

155

156

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 189–191 1836 •

was created out of the mountain mist―and one then recalls Hoffmann’s tailor, who inhaled the balloon gas and thus began to rise up toward the ceiling of the pharmacy, but when pushed out of there, he sank down again, and so forth.―Or when, instead of saying, [“]Just as the farm laborer with his scythe walks through the field,[”] one says [“]Just as the barber with his razor moves over the thick-bearded cheek.[”]

5

Sept. 19th, 36.

10

It is quite strange that no one, as far as I know, has yet hit upon the idea of summoning authors from their graves and having them present at an auction of their own immortal works. Sept. 20th, 36.

190:1

During the Fr[ench] Revolution, people wished to see the last king hanged with the guts of the last priest―this wish easily brings to mind the wish of Caligula that the heads of all the Romans should sit on a single neck, so that they might all be hacked off at once. Sept. 20th, 36.

190:2

When it comes to understanding the history of one’s own time in relation to past development, many peop. resemble the man who, while out walking, hears the striking of a church clock, but because he is walking along, he cannot know whether the clock began to strike with the first stroke he heard; so he walks along in the illusion (that it was the first strike), and from this it follows easily that he counts 2 o’clock while it is actually 7 o’clock, etc. Sept. 20th, 36.

191

15

20

25

152

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 192

5

10

15

193:1

20

•

P a p e r 192–193 1836

Steffens has expressed (in a completely different context, in his Caricaturen des Heiligsten, Part 1, p. 350) the difference I have sought to establish, with reference to the concept of the Romantic, betw[een] ancient languages (of quantity) and the modern (of accentuation) in this way: [“]Die europäischen Sprachen sind nur Ton; die Buchstaben, die Sylben, die Worte haben nur Bedeutung für das Ohr, der Klang schließt sich an das innerste, lebendigste, beweglichste Dasein an, und diejenige Sprache vor allen, die den Ausdruck betont, wo die Töne sich, steigend und fallend, hervorgehoben oder zurückgedrängt, an die innere Bedeutung an jede Gemüthsbewegung eng und leicht anschmiegen, kann recht eigentlich eine christliche1 Sprache genannt arden, und deutet auf den Sieg der Liebe über das Gesetz.” Sept. 28th, 36. what I would call Romantic.

1

Like Simeon Stylites, Fichte stands upon an enormously high pinnacle while making the most supple (dialectical) movements, and the crowd stands and marvels at him and does not follow him, and the few who attempt to climb up parody him. (the Fichtean school). Oct. 1st, 36.

193:2

25

153

193:3 30

•

Fichte had, to a high degree, a spiderlike moisture that made it possible for him, as soon as he found the slightest point of support, to dive immediately down with the absolute certainty of the form of a conclusion. Aug. 36.

One must guard against entering too soon into holy matrimony with scientific scholarship; it is good for a person to live unmarried for a time, even if it is also bad to end as a bachelor. Oct. 8th, 36.

5 Die europäischen Sprachen . . . über das Gesetz] German, The European languages are based only on sound. The letters, the syllables, the words have meaning only for the ear; the sound fastens upon the innermost, most vibrant, most mobile existence; and that language, above all others, which emphasizes expression, where the sounds, rising and falling, emphasized or subdued, cling closely and lightly to the inner meaning, to every shifting mood, can rightly be called a Christian1 language and point toward the victory of love over Law.”

157

158

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 194–196 1836 •

It is quite strange―the remarkable way in which something long past can suddenly spring up in consciousness, e.g., the memory of something wrong of which one was scarcely conscious at the moment of action―a flash of lightning that hints at a thunderstorm. They do not simply appear, but actlly spring forth with a tremendous power and a demand to be heard. It is probably more or less along these lines that one is to understand that passage in the gosp[el], that on Judgment Day peop. will have to account for every improper word they have spoken.

194

5

10

Oct. 8th, 36.

What I call the mythological-poetic in history is that nimbus that hovers above every genuine striving in history, not an abstraction, but a transfiguration, not the prosaic actuality, and every true historic trend will give birth to such an ideomythology.

195 15

Oct. 17th, 36.

Should not certain aspects of what I have called irony verge on what the Greeks termed Nemesis, for example, the overvaluation of an individual at the precise moment he feels unhappiest about some guilt, e.g., the scene in Faust in which the jubilant peasants welcome him and thank him for his and his father’s skill during the epidemic, which also is often the case with Wagner’s sort of admiration. Oct. 27th, 36.

196

25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 197 154 5

•

P a p e r 197–201 1836

It is undeniable that the picture from Faust’s life, in Auerbach’s cellar, when he is sitting at the table with the students, (see v[on] Raumer, Historisches Taschenbuch, 5th annual volume, preceding front of the title page) is quite reminiscent of Don Juan, also the large goblet he has in his hand. Oct. 29th, 36.

198

10

15

199

200 20

201 25

•

Precisely because life’s various aspects were not unified, either in the single individual or in the race as a whole, life had to end with the heroes going to the monastery, and even though they are utterly disapproving of the idea that someone in his youth had chosen to do so (see the story about the beautiful Melusina [in which] Geoffroy murders his brother Freymund), they find it completely natural that they themselves, at the end of a tumultuous life, should do so. e.g., Geoffroy Nov. 1st, 36.

People wrote on flyers, loose sheets of paper. Nov. 3rd, 36.

The mythology produced in the Middle Ages was, if I may say so, human; that is, true mythology creates God in the image of man; this mythology creates the hum. being in his image (more epically) it was life that was supposed to clarify itself. Nov. 3rd, 36.

How is the page in Figaro related to D[on] Juan? Nov. 10th, 36.

159

160

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 202–205 1836 •

Something that also speaks in favor of interpreting Mephistopheles’ behavior toward Faust as humorous is also the host of examples of the devil getting tricked; see, e.g., the story of Virgilius in v[on] der Hagen’s Märchen, vol. 1. Nov. 12th, 36.

202

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages is also apparent in the fact that while the congregation ate the bread, the priest drank the cup― Nov 20th, 36.

203

When I consider the matter wholly in abstracto, I must quite consistently conclude that the Romantic resolves itself into a classicism, while of course every attempt to point out the classical period is an exercise in mythology and only arises from the hum. weakness that can never hold fast to the concept in the entirety of its unending disappearance, but must always stake it out with the help of boundaries; in this way the expectation of the Jews was tied to the coming of Christ, and Christ’s coming to his return, which in turn must be thought of as pointing toward a return, and so forth, because every attempt to say, [“]Now it is finished,[”] is an attempt to turn it into mythology. Nov. 30th, 36.

155

204

15

20

/verte.

ad lin 3 on the previous page, the Romantic striving is in fact self-consuming; and I cannot make it eternal because I would then get an eternity consisting of an infinite mass of moments― though all this in abstracto.

The motley multiplicity that one finds in Indian poetry and that has caused some to designate it as Romantic―is not Romantic, it is Vegetative-Multiplicity. Life in the Orient is on the whole vegetative; their gods, etc. are borne upon a calyx, grow out of flowers.

10 in abstracto] Latin, abstractly. 22 verte] Latin, turn (the page). 23 ad lin 3] Latin, to line 3. (See also explanatory note.)

5

25

205

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

206:1 10

156 15

20

206:2

25

207

30

•

P a p e r 205–207 1836–1837 •

see “Speculative Darstellung des Christenthums” by M., Leipzig, 1819. p 168: “Daher rühren die vielen Reitze des Pflanzenreichs, das unendliche Spiel von Formen und Farben, welches die Pflanzen in unschuldiger bewußtloser Offenheit vor den Augen des Zu entfalten.― Dec. 25th, 1836. (I own the work.)

There must be a stage in the development of mythology that corresponds to the entire period in childhood in which the individual has differentiated himself so minimally from the whole that he says, me hit the horse, when the individual is so little separate from the whole that he could only, as it were, appear in fleeting moments, something like «die Wellenmädchen» in a drawing found among the copper engravings for Wollmer, Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie, on plate cxv, where it is depicted with such accuracy and made visible like a procreative power in its process of becoming. Jan. 7th, 37.

I see that Heiberg has made a similar observation with resp. to Oehlenschläger in the Flying Post of 1828, in article no. 3 of his response to Oeh., page 2, column 1, top. Jan. 17th, 37.

Writings exist in which one or another borrowed idea or inspiration appears again in an altogether external fashion, so it is almost the same as refrains in the old ballads. NB. those that occur in the middle of the verse, and that do not stand in any relation whatever to the poem itself. Feb. 5th, 37.

2 Daher rühren die vielen Reitze . . . Zu entfalten] German, This is why we are moved by the many charms of the plant kingdom: the ceaseless play of form and color, which plants in their innocent and unconscious openness unfold before the eye of the spectator.”

161

162

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 207 1837 •

Paper 207. Text copied by Barfod is in the upper portion of the left-hand marginal column. See p. 114 of the manuscript of Journal BB.

P a p e r 40:2 P a p e r 145 P a p e r 211 1835–1836 •

•

Paper 40:2.

Paper 145.

Paper 211.

•

163

164

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 208–210 1834–1837 •

The mythology of the North took its own life, just as Solon commanded that his laws be burned 100 years after his death.― Feb. 37.

208

5

But if I have (see another slip of paper) grasped the Romantic standpoint as a see-saw whose ends designate irony and humor, it follows of itself that its oscillation can take very different trajectories, from the most heaven-storming humor to the most despairing surrender to irony, just as, indeed, there is also a certain peace and equilibrium in this standpoint (Wieland’s “irony”), for irony has only been outlived when the individual, elevated over everything and looking down upon it, is then at last elevated over himself and has seen himself in his nothingness from those dizzy heights and thereby has found his true elevation.―see Princess Brambilla. June 2nd, 37.

209

This self-overcoming of irony is the crisis of the higher spiritual life, the individual is now acclimatized―bourgeois philistinism, which basically conceals itself in the other standpoint, is defeated, the individual reconciled. Irony’s standpoint as such is nil admirari; but irony, when it kills itself, has through humor despised everything, itself included.―

157

10

15

20

160

Would a play in which the hero or heroine died of joy (e.g., if one reworked Lenore as a drama), or would a play such as, e.g., Jacob v. Thyboe, if one were to have Leander accidentally take up a loaded pistol and shoot Jacob―would, I ask, such plays be tragedies[?]

210:1

30

I think, too, that one might be able to produce proof of Chr[ist’s] actual death in an altogether a priori fashion; for of course it must be assumed to have been a part of his actual human development.

22 nil admirari] Latin, Let nothing astonish you. (See also explanatory note.)

210:2

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 211–215 1834–1836 •

211

Following the path set forth by commentators is often like traveling in London. The road leads to London, but if you want to get there, you must first turn around.―

212

There are certainly people in whom genius makes its appearance in a manner as bothersome as when cattle show their genius by stampeding.

5

213 10

There are people who, when they really want to accomplish something, turn to such grandiose methods that they entirely miss the mark, just like the dwarf in the fairy tale who, when he wanted to pursue the fleeing prince and princess, put on his seven-league boots, and not until he had arrived in Turkey did he recall that the fugitives had most likely not used the same type of transport.

15

214

20

161

215

25

30

What was truly lovely in Lemming’s playing (he is a Danish Musicus; I heard him at the Student Union) was that he stroked the guitar. These vibrations became almost visible, just like, for example, when the moon shines on the surface of the ocean and the waves become almost audible.

see The endings assigned to a number of peop. in the legends are quite poetic, see, thus vol. 1, p. 138. “der Höllenjäger.” It is told that Donatus was Emperor of Rome and that at the same time there lived a knight Laurentzius, whose land the Emperor wanted, so he commanded him to go and find him (the emperor) a black horse, a black dog, and a black falcon, and, should he fail to do so, he was never to come back. The knight then rode off and actually obtained what the emperor had wanted (the way in which he did so was quite interesting, by the way―his wife advised him to 17 Musicus] Latin, musician.

165

166

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 215–219 1836 •

go to his confessor and confess all his sins, etc.), he returns, and then the emperor wants to go hunting with the black dog, black horse, and black falcon, but he is never seen again. See Nordiske Kiæmpehistorier, by Rafn, part 2, p. 628 concerning Didrik of Bern (though here, as it seems, in a positive sense) see in this connection the accompanying comments under the letter A.

The so-called entelle (Semn. Entellus) is a particular sort of monkey, which is light gray, but with a black face and hands . . . . . . . . In Sumatra the French naturalist Duvaucel had great difficulty getting to shoot these entelles, because the native inhabitants regarded them as transfigured princes and princesses with divine powers. Dansk. Ugeskrift. vol. 4, p. 338. (in a lecture by Escricht on “Apes”)

The historical aspect of stones and trolls.

5

216

15

217

Schiller has correctly drawn the boundary betw. the naive and the sentimental by saying that the former moves us or affects us with its naturalness, its sensuous, objective truth, its living presence; the sentimental, on the other hand, which arises through reflection on an impression that the poet himself receives from his object, has its effect only by reproducing the same reflection in others. see Molbech, Lectures, Part 2, p. 234.

218

First, I must protest against the view that the Romantic can be grasped as a concept, for the Romantic consists precisely in overflowing all boundaries. [On a carpenter’s bill from March 27. . . . . probably 1836]

219

20

162 25

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 220

5

221 10

15

222 20

25

163 30

223:1

•

P a p e r 220–223 1836 •

What is rlly the source of the tendency that expresses itself among people who are in one way or another derelict, to rush right ahead into the world instead of shying away from it? Thus, for example, J. Jürgensen says that when he is drunk he feels an almost irresistible urge to go up to people, to go precisely to where there are many people. see Goethe’s Faust p. 197, l. 10ff.

Heyne’s fervent criticism (Romantische Schule) of A. W. Schlegel’s crablike movement, by which the latter always has some earlier work as his standard of measure, and is thus always oriented backward, is quite true, but Heyne himself and his consorts in fact occupy the opposite extreme, since they judge everything by the duodecimo scale handed down by the earliest of their contemporaries and here again, within this short period of time, they always use a work that is 1 year or ½ year older as a point of comparison. Aug. 12th

On the whole, some quite interesting investigations have been undertaken concerning the various uses of metaphor in various languages and stages of development; in the living languages we tend to sketch images casually; there is a certain scent pervading the style, but that usually does not repress the actual expression―continual glimpses, that in a pleasing way, affect one’s temperament as one reads.―By contrast, the Latins and Greeks stop the story’s momentum and execute the image so completely that in a sense one must also search for the actual expression. For ex[ample], Virgil “as often, . . . with blow of heavy stone, a wayfarer, etc.” The nature philosophers, who see in all of nature an image of hum. life, e.g., Steffens’ Karrikaturen des He[i]ligsten, vol. 2, Introduction―also contribute a tendency of their own.

Although we ourselves seldom strive to create community, to work together for a common goal, but on the contrary tend to be quite egotistical, isolated, and separated, nonetheless we are always interested

167

168

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 223–225 1836 •

in the life that is bound together in that way (monks―thieves―robbers―the bourgeois philistine life―the religious life’s monstrosities, or parasitic plants??? the political life in revolution―chivalry); at any rate, in our time the associative element manifests itself in an external fashion, for example, through monetary contributions (the English Bible societies―associations in support of the Greeks― foundations to help morally delinquent persons―[)]

5

Schleiermacher as Stoicism reborn in Christianity.

223:2

The Ancient has no ideal for which to strive; the Romantic, by contrast, does. Because in fact the Ancient must disapprove of any striving that goes beyond the actual, inasmuch as perfection, or in any case the world’s closest existing approximation to perfection, is already given in actuality (in this case the two coincide, since humans would otherwise have been advised to strive for that which surpasses the actual). It has no ideal―not in the moral, intellectual realm, not in that of the beautiful―it has no ideal or, what amounts to the same thing, in equivalent terms, it has one that can be attained here, in the world. Here, instead of a moral ideal, there is a repose in what, according to the conventions of the period in question, is understood as appropriate; instead of an ideal of knowledge there is a modest compendium of the knowledge of the age as the highest possible for the age (as an example of a striving for an ideal of knowledge, I may cite the zeal of the orthodox for an eternal and unchanging divine Word, elevated above all time and the vicissitudes of time, whatever their twists and turns. Yes, even if it is not wholly vouchsafed to him here in this life, the orthodox believes it will come in the hereafter, but NB as an ideal, something the Hegelian, for example, can never believe, probably indeed that in the course of time a greater intelligence will come, but never as ideal, neither with respect to the previous stage of knowledge, which

When I notice that my head has started to fight back.―The poet must indeed have what the Northmen expected to find in Gimle: a swine from which one might cut a slice, which always grew back again―

224

15

20

25

30

164

225 35

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 225–229 1836 •

Shoots a bullet in his head, and now the story’s done, and bum, bam, bim, a new one can begin.

226 5

Precisely because, in Holberg, what comes to the fore is actually the mood, it therefore, at many points (Erasm[us] Montanus, Jeppe, etc.) goes over into the tragic, leaping over the standpoint of irony that moderates it; just as, from the standpoint of immediacy, tragedy easily takes on a touch of the comical (through the accidental, which as such becomes laughable), or irony is already dormant, as, e.g., in heroic tales.

10

227

15

228 20

229:1 25

165

229:2

It could be quite interesting to show all the falsity lurking in all kinds of expressions, e.g., [“]Someone could make something out of that[”]; (Yes, of course, because someone who can make anything can also make it out of nothing). [“]I was busy.[”] [“]disparage the predecessor[”]

There must, after all, be a limit to enthusiasm, and yet there are things that are so poor that they are in no way worthy of enthusiasm, and one ought to castigate them―even though Pythagoras was allowed, when he cried ευρηϰα, to run naked through the streets, we would surely feel quite amazed if someone who had found a needle were to do the same.―

Politicians―Spartans―Opposites in sacrificing life. The gospel teaching concerning the Law is the same.

The Romantic in Solon, who wanted his laws to last for only 100 years. 21 ευρηϰα] Greek, eureka, I have found it.

169

170

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 229–233 1836 •

When the state has taken on its proper significance, to be exiled will become what it was to the Greeks―the harshest punishment.

On crystallography A crystalized editor A crystalized philosopher a Hegelian.

229:3

230:1 5

pulvis temperans camphoratus.

230:2

Krieg den Philistern by Eichendorff. Berlin, 1824. p. 62 Fool: ich glaube gar ich bin der Doppelgänger aller menschlichen Thorheiten.―

231

An old saying that the Antichrist is to be born of a nun and a monk (at the time was also used in connection with Luther’s marriage)

232

Someone who was walking and pondering suicide―at just that moment a stone fell and killed him, and his last words were, “God be praised.”

233:1

begins his speech with.

But if actual cognition is still understood to be deficient, how can the abstract [cognition] be perfect[?]

7 pulvis temperans camphoratus] Latin, cooling camphor powder. 10 ich glaube . . . menschlichen Thorheiten] German, I do believe I am the Doppelgänger of all human idiocy.

10

233:2

233:3

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 234

166

235:1

5

•

P a p e r 234–239 1836 •

What is actlly the different illumination for the painting.?

[On loose strips of paper.] I have just come home from a gathering at which I was the life the party; witticisms leapt from my lips, everyone laughed and admired me―but I left, yes, the dash ought to be as long as the radii of the earth’s orbit and wanted to shoot myself. *

235:2

Death and Hell, I can abstract from everything but not from myself; I cannot even forget myself when I sleep. *

235:3

Is it true that I must not laugh at my own jokes?

236

Hereditary Sin―Redemption―Angels―“You shall become as the angels”―Eternal punishment in hell.

237

Why do people speak so often, or rather, where has the idea come from to speak of the devil’s great-grandmother.―

238

The Children’s Crusade should be regarded as an enormous piece of sarcasm on the part of world history, directed against everything having to do with chivalry.

20

239

Might not it seem the right thing, just as in that old sect (see Church hist[ory] ), to explore all the vices precisely in order to gain life experience.―

171

172

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 240–245 1834–1838 •

The sin is committed in secret, but scarcely does one know of it before the clamor begins to rise, however faintly, and the flame is lit by which people increasingly limit his movement, just as with a wild animal.

240

5

The more intense earthly life is, the duller eternity becomes. For this reason, the Greeks’ life after death can only be viewed as the shadow of real life, whereas among the Northmen, the Christians, etc., the present life is only a shadowy outline of the life to come, despite the fact that they have not been successful in portraying their heaven. Could the image of a life to come ever have developed from the individuality of the Greeks, or was help from another source necessary?

167

241

10

On the whole, “de 4 Nordmænd” is strangely foreboding―the oppressive fore[boding] that is developed, almost to the point of monotony―is not the sense of the ominous found primarily in relation to evil―original sin―

242

A sigh as powerful as when ice covers the lake in winter and someone drains the water away.

243

[on a little strip of paper]

Oh, how unhappy I am―Martensen has written an essay on Lenau’s Faust!

. . . . yes, you don’t believe, dear unbelievers!―Such skepticism!―But it is nonetheless only in Aaron’s hand that it bears ripe fruit.

20

244

245 25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 246

5

10

15

20

25

30

•

P a p e r 246 1838 •

Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder, und Schmähschriften aus der ersten Hälfte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts v[on] Johannes Voigt. v[on] Raumer’s Taschenbuch, vol. 9, 1838. pp. 323ff. Pasquillo and Marforio.― (the most important collections are: Ein hundert deutsche Volkslieder, by Leonard v[on] Soltau, Leipzig, 1836. Samlung historischer Volkslieder und Gedichte der Deutschen, by O.L.B. Wolff, Stuttgardt, 1830.) p. 379. the German pasquil uses parody, parodies passages now from the gospels, now from the “Lord’s Prayer,” “Benedic[i]te,” “Gratias,” Ave Maria. p. 402. In one of these pasquils the devil wants to prove to the pope that he is his friend and, with this aim in mind, wants to base his case on the Bible, but the pope will have none of it: “Fine, then,[”] says the devil, “then I will prove it to you with a card game.[”] the so-called Karnöffel game the sixth card was the pope, the seventh the devil: die böse Sieben galt daher als “teufelsfrei” Karnöffel [is] from Cardinal.―the 4 Kings, the 4 Monarchs, Daniel [chapter] 7. 8 and 9 and 10 in the Karnöffel game represent the three worldly estates subordinated to the emperor,―“der faule Fritz.” Spangenberg wider die sieben Bösen in Teufels Karnöffelspiel, Eisleben, 1562?

24 die böse Sieben galt daher als “teufelsfrei”] German, therefore the evil Seven counts as “the devil’s free card.” 30 der faule Fritz] German, the lazy Fritz. (See also explanatory note.)

173

PAPER 247—PAPER 251 Biblical Exegesis, Readings of Faust, Dogmatics, et al.

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Finn Gredal Jensen, Stine Holst Pedersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

176

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 247 1834 •

171

It is generally assumed that because he was also supposed to visit other places in Macedonia, Timothy, who was sent out by P[aul] in order to journey to Corinth, had remained there [in Macedonia] and returned to Ephesus without having visited Corinth;1 that Paul therefore sent Titus to Corinth in order to obtain information from the congregation and to see what impression his letter had made upon them. Bleek, on the other hand, assumes that Timoth[y] had actually gone to Corinth, but had brought back such troubling news from there that P[aul] then sent Titus with a new letter, and this letter, which is now lost, is what is referred to in 2 Corinthians.― Acts 19:22, in which Macedonia is simply mentioned as the destination for Timothy’s journey, also appears to be in agreement with this.―

247

5

1

After remaining in Ephesus for 2½ years P[aul] went on to Macedonia, where he again spent ½ year, and perhaps also broadened his activity into Illyria at that time. 2 Cor 10, 14, 15, 16 seem to indicate Achaia as the farthest destination (even though αχρι does not always exclusively designate “as far as” see Rom 5:13.)―on the other hand, Rom 15:19 Illyria; but the latter passage certainly does not mean that P[aul] himself preached the gospel in Illyria.― If we could determine precisely the dates of Felix’s departure and Festus’s accession, it would be very important for the chronology. We cannot do that, however. People appeal to the fact, related by Josephus, that when Felix resigned his position, the Jews accused him of oppression, and that he would have been punished had not his brother Pallas, who was at that time very influential with the emperor, rescued him. But now Pallas was poisoned by Nero in the year 62. Thus that year becomes the latest terminus ad quem. But according to Tacitus, Pallas had lost his influence long before this. Right at the beginning of his reign, Nero removed Pallas from the position he had held under Claudius. From this, and from what Josephus relates, we ought to conclude that Felix had been recalled right at the beginning of Nero’s reign. To be sure, Schrader thinks he has found a definite chronological basis by identifying the time of Festus’s accession with the date of Nero’s wedding to Poppæa, for that would mean that inasmuch as Nero married Poppæa in the year 62, this was when Festus first acceded to his office. But Josephus’s words ϰατα τον ϰαιρον τουτον cannot be counted as a precise indication of time: Poppæa had had great influence over Nero long before she married him. One ought not attribute much significance to the fact that Josephus calls her Nero’s consort. Thus, it is clear that there is a great deal of fluidity with respect to chron[ological] determinations, and it simply cannot be regarded as certain that Felix resigned his office in 62. We could very well assume that it happened several years earlier.―

13 αχρι] Greek, up to, as far as. 22 terminus ad quem] Latin, up to, as far as. 29 ϰατα . . . τουτον] Greek, at about that time.

10

15

20

25

30

Biblical Exegesis et al. 248

172

10

15

25

30

35

P a p e r 248–249 1835–1836 •

177

Probably, there is no one among the gentlemen present who has not indeed experienced quite vividly the fact that in every view there is something that, in the final analysis, is so light, so ethereal, so fleeting, that it continually disappears between fumbling hands, and, innocently teasing, escapes the watchful eye—a truly holy noli me tangere. But, G[entlemen], just as most of you will have experienced how difficult it is to keep one’s mind free of every profane impression, so will you also surely agree with me that it is only within the truly humanistic charmed circle “procul o procul este profani” that I have dared say what every university student feels and ought to feel, but that has been betrayed, misunderstood, and distorted by being proclaimed and trumpeted on the streets and alleys. For, what better forum, what more competent assembly, could I wish for than the humanistic congregation: the Student Union, which although certainly strict and incorruptible in its judgment, is nonetheless also in possession of what matters most to me: that ear for intellectual things that, with sympathetic creativity, gives the words the ineffable fullness they possess in the speaker’s breast, though not on his lips. [..........]

20

249

•

It seems, however, only to contain Namely, the regarding of life as a struggle―and consequently to regard the life that is essentially moved by religion―as a struggle between the devil and God, is, i[f] I m[ay] p[ut] i[t] t[hus], in no way different from modernity’s specifically different way of viewing things, and it would be easy―by simply abstracting from a Goethean poetic position (more, subsequently, however, on whether this applies precisely to his F[aust])1, which sees these 2 worlds more as being in and with each other, seeing these 2 powers in a higher concentricity and not in phenomenological eccentricity―to come up with examples of this both in the more recent development and in an older one that predates the Middle Ages. where, however, this struggle is nonetheless implicitly present see Tieck. in the present book.

1

6 noli me tangere] Latin, touch me not. (See also explanatory note.) 9 procul . . . profani] Latin, away, away, you that are uninitiated. (See also explanatory note.)

[a]

explain the poem as a view of conflicting elements.

1

[b]

dwelling upon how poets in the Middle Ages understood life—no specific difference—Schill[er]’s objectivity—on the other hand, I am speaking of the historical life.

5

178

1

5

Biblical Exegesis et al.

[c]

where is the opposit[ion] to life in F[aust], is the univ[ersal] salvific C[hurch] where is the one side of F[aust]

[d]

I mean the idea and its counterbalance (the parody regarded from a different side)

e

10

15

and it remains a question whether these [representatives], in turn— just as they themselves let the world and its movements manifest itself to them—whether they must not themselves, in turn, repeat this same two-sidedness to the observer who, in his development, has outlived the Middle Ages. [f]

precisely in that, with the one effort, the second one also enters into consciousness.

20

[g]

therefore, Faust, world-historically understood, also has his counterweight in the salvific Church.

•

P a p e r 249 1836 •

If, next, we ask how, then, the difference betw. the earlier and the later Goethean view is to be understood, we get no further enlightenment then, either; because the specific diff[erence] betw. them―which the auth[or] has not seen―is that Goethe has written a second part of F[aust], while on the other hand, I cannot see at all that he has let this struggle play out within F[aust] himself, for of course a parallel is drawn between him and Klingsor, who also, of course, had his better beginnings, and of course F[aust] is only F[aust] starting from the moment that the development of his conflict with the world conjures forth the devil (if I say that he is only F[aust] from that point on, and thereby imply an earlier existence―this is owing to the weakness of language, which must continually permit a confusion between F[aust] the indiv[idual] and F[aust] the idea; with respect to the latter, the biblical expression [“]in the beginning was[”] is valid), except that F[aust] is now developed in more lyrical fashion (everything is thus thrown aside), whereas the older poet viewed the struggle in more epic fashion; but naturally, this difference in viewing the matter can also repeat itself within the circle of more recent times. In general, I believe that it is not at all a question of how the poets viewed the age―notwithstanding the fact that they may be viewed as representativese―but of how it presents itself to us world-historically. And here I believe that while they crisscrossed over one another in many ways, they did not―if I may put it this way―know of one another and did not see how (I am speaking only of the world’s side) the one was being ironical with respect to the other, while, on the other hand, more recent times, being more umsichtig, did not live in an enthusiastic illusion like this, becoming aware of what earlier times called nixies, trolls, devils, etc. as the cold irony of the world to which one must yield. Therefore, the Middle Ages could very well― and grounded in the depths of their entire being― regard life as a struggle, as in this case, betw[een] the childlike, pious Wolfram and the cunning Klingsor; but they [the Middle Ages] never found 35 umsichtig] German, circumspect.

5

173 10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Biblical Exegesis et al.

5

250

10

174 15

20

25

30

35

•

P a p e r 249–250 1836–1838

rest;h for if Christianity was indeed victorious, it was, after all, only a view of life that announces itself as a struggle―in which, therefore, the struggle had to begin, even if within another sphere, which does not concern the matter at hand.

= The begetting of this in spirit and by means of thought is only its essential form, not an emergence of this itself and an sich but only for us and in our spirit ― The true concept of the positive is that of a God’s self-positing or position in Reason and, with this, the entirety of the most solitary being and true-being. Without this positive, which in addition is this given, it cannot begin with its own thinking; furthermore, cannot itself truly begin; God’s knowledge must also have begun for it, without itself having been posited―it can posit nothing: reason leads to faith in God only insofar as it is led to it. Upon this rests all the div[ine] necessity of the truths of religion, a necessity they have in hum. thought principally through the div[ine] being, which not only is their Ansichsein, but is also their div[ine] Offenbarsein, that is, to the spirit, which is first itself precisely by means of this revelation. But precisely because God wants to be known, the hum. spirit must think him. The thinking that corresponds to this Offenbarsein and offenbaren Sein leads to an inner need and necessity, an internal compulsion through which the true being in thinking manifests itself and becomes Wahrsein, becomes truth (cogitare from cogere) All teachings of religion, which in accordance with its nature are the testimony that religion produces concerning itself in its being and its essence, in our thinking, are only as true as God is; but this in turn means that he is truly known 9 an sich] German, in itself. 24 Ansichsein] German, being-in-itself. 29 Offenbarsein] German, revealed being. 29 offenbaren Sein] German, revealed being. 32 Wahrsein] German, truth, true being. 33 cogitare from cogere] Latin, thinking from drawing a conclusion.

•

h

179

see, in this connection, what Schlegel notes concerning the 3 types of tragedies

1

180

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 250–251 1838–1839 •

§4. So little does the skepticism that continually remains within doubt prove the impossibility of knowledge of God, that, far more―insofar as it claims that only uncertainty is certain―it is only capable of asserting its doubt and not-knowing owing to one or another knowledge of God. The criticism that contains within itself sk[epticism] certainly does stride forward in order to prove things, but it permits things to remain in the negative-dialectical movement

5

10

Faith has its actuality in living and acting; this its truth in faith. 175

Evangelium Mathæi. Regarding 2:23, see the inserted paper notation. 3:2. This formulation, β. των ουρανων, occurs only in this passage. Similar formulations (β. επουρανιος only in 2 Tim 4:18) are: β. του Θεου, του Χρ or simply β. with Θεου understood. The idea of such a kingdom of God runs through the entire O.T. Daniel depicts this situation, expected by all the prophets, as a kingdom that would continue eternally. This is also why Chr[ist] is often called a king.― The idea of a kingdom necessarily contains the separation betw. one who decides and one who obeys. In the kingdom of God, God’s will of course manifests itself as absolutely dominant. In this respect, in a sinful world God’s will is only something that will come, something hoped for. Thus, β. του Θεου constitutes an opposite of β. της αμαρτιας. But in the O.T. there is never any development of the idea in its ongoing progress in time; rather, it is, as it were, concentrated in one picture. The O.T. contains the outlines of a picture in which sin’s dominance, both internally and externally, is annihilated and the dominance of God’s will is totally substantiated.―In the N.T. there is a clear distinc-

13 Evangelium Mathæi] Latin, the Gospel of Matthew. 15 β. των ουρανων] Greek, the k[ingdom] of heaven. 16 β. επουρανιος] Greek, heavenly k[ingdom]. 17 β. του Θεου, του Χρ] Greek, God’s, Christ’s k[ingdom]. 18 β. ] Greek (here, an abbreviation for βασιλεία), “kingdom.” 18 Θεου] Greek, God’s. 28 β. του Θεου] Greek, the k[ingdom] of God. 29 β. της αμαρτιας] Greek, the k[ingdom] of sin.

251

15

20

25

30

35

Biblical Exegesis et al.

5

10

15

20

176

25

30

•

P a p e r 251 1838–1939

tion between the internal and the external aspects of this β. In the former aspect, it reveals itself as something really present, not merely as something in the Savior’s person, but also within the believers. thus Lk 17:21.―It is depicted in the external sense as a kingdom that will come.―With respect to this ext. sense, the sphere within which Chr[ist’s] element is dominant (the Church) is thought of as a society in the ext[ernal] sense. In this respect, β.τ. Θ. reveals itself as something that is to come, which indeed does develop in this world, but as something that is relative and is mixed with sinful elements. But on the other hand, the external aspect is also understood as something penetrated by God’s will, and in this sense β. reveals itself as something perfect, but as something that is to come. Everywhere in the N.T. is found the idea that with Chr[ist’s] parousia, the kingdom of God will outwardly reveal itself as dominant. (Mt 20:21, 26:29; Lk 21:31; Jn 18:36)[.] In the N.T. there is also a separation, within the idea of a kingdom of God, referring, on the one hand, to an individual, on the other, to the entirety of the hum. race.― Now, in the N.T. the idea of a kingdom of God is thought of differently. The ideal side is emphasized in opposition to the materialistic view of the Pharisees (who clung only to the visible revelation of the Messiah). In the apostolic period, Gnostic idealism emerged, denying the kingdom of God as an external, real revelation, and thus, in defense against this, the real aspect was emphasized. The later Alexandrines stood against raw chiliasm.―

The Sermon on the Mount. 35

40

it must not be regarded as having been delivered in this form. see Clausen’s Tab. synop.― To one definite fact, M[at]th[ew] adds a number of related things. L[uke] provides precise information regarding this fact. According to L[uke] 6:12, Jesus had gone up the mountain to pray; on the morning of that day, he chose the 12 and went down to

9 β. τ. Θ.] Greek (abbreviation for βασιλεία του Θεου), the kingdom of God. 17 parousia] Greek, presence, arrival, Second Coming.

•

181

182

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 251 1838–1839 •

the plain (L[uke] 6:17) and taught the people. M[at] th[ew] relates that Chr[ist] ascended the mountain; these narratives can be harmonized by assuming that M[at]th[ew] either combined Jesus’ earlier ascent of the mountain with his discourse, or that the mass of people compelled him to climb back up again.―In M[at]th[ew], Chr[ist’s] words appear as the giving of a new Law, different from that from Sinai, with a freer, more spiritual understanding of the commandments, by presupposing μετανοια and preaching grace. In L[uke] one can find a thread that runs through the whole. Because, first of all, the 4 [“]blesseds[”] and the 4 [“]woes[”] correspond to one another (21–26); next, this is opposed by encouraging pure love (27–31). The depiction of calculating l[ove] (32– 34) and then the disciples are encouraged toward this pure l[ove] (35–38).―Then it is as if L[uke] inserts a pause for a moment and remarks in v. 39 that Chr[ist] was speaking in parables. In all these parables Chr[ist] points out to the disciples that if they wanted to emphasize the element of the higher life, they must make it a part of themselves. V[erse] 40 does not really seem to fit in, but upon closer inspection it in fact does. V[erse] 39 (μητι δυναται τυϕλος τυϕλον οδηγειν) and the following v[erse] 41 (ϰαρϕος) seem to be directed at the Pharisees, so that the meaning is: “Tear yourselves entirely free from connection with the old διδαςϰαλος; the Pharisees cannot lead you any further than to where they themselves are, for the disciple is not above the master.” There is also unity in M[at]th[ew], though not of the same sort as in L[uke], inasmuch as in the latter we have Chr[ist’s] train of thought, but in its composition, M[at]th[ew] has followed a thread that we can in turn try to follow. The beginning and the end are the same in both apostles. In the 5th chap., M[at]th[ew] now goes through the difference betw. the Law and the Gospel. But just as the Law is made stricter, so is the Gospel developed by praising as happy those who suffer. Thus true repentance is presupposed as a necessary condition for receiving 10 μετανοια] Greek, metanoia, repentance, spiritual conversion. 25 μητι δυναται τυϕλος τυϕλον οδηγειν] Greek, Can the blind lead the blind? 27 ϰαρϕος] Greek, mote, speck. 29 διδαςϰαλος] Greek, teacher.

5

10

15

20

25

177 30

35

40

Biblical Exegesis et al.

•

P a p e r 251 1838–1839

the Law of love. The difference between the N. and the O.T. is emphasized in 6 examples, and then follows the genrl prescription: εσεσϑε ουν υμεις τελειοι (v. 48). In chap. 6

3 εσεσϑε ουν υμεις τελειοι] Greek, Be perfect, therefore.

•

183

PAPER 252—PAPER 253 Literature on Faust et al.

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Stine Holst Pedersen, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

186

Literature on Faust et al.

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

181

Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt in fünf Büchern― neue verbesserte Auflage. 1799.― This work is by a man named Klinger see Conversations Lexic[on]: Faust is presented as the inventor of the art of book printing (see p. 3), and Satan promises that this invention will saddle the world with a great deal of misery (see his speech pp. 28–37). So the idea of having the world perish because of books, which is found in Andersen’s Fodreise, chap. 1, is thus derived from the Faust legend.― p. 65. Faust: “ich wol[l]te einen Teufel haben und keinen meines Geschlechtes” p. 221. Here a fanatic is described: Ueberdem sog er (namely, the fanatic) gleich einem trocknen Schwamme die Thorheiten und Charlatanerien ein, die andre ausheckten, ein Umstand, wodurch sich die Schwärmer von den Philosophen gänzlich unterscheiden; denn diese hassen und verachten die Hypothesen eines andern, da jene allen Unrath des mens[ch]lichen Geistes annehmen, und sich zu eigen machen.― It is also quite remarkable how Satan (see 378 etc.) shows Faust the dreadful consequences of his deeds, which have harmful effects at many points, and how in a note (p. 385) Klinger then recounts that, taken together, the entire hum. race, from king to beggar, each according to his strength, is the creator of the so-called moral world. Klinger promises to expound upon this further in his Giafar.―

252:1

5

10

15

20

25

Faust im Gewande der Zeit.―Ein Schattenspiel met Licht von Harro Harring dem Friesen von Ibenshof an der Nordsee. Leipzig 1831.

252:2

Szenen aus Fausts Leben. von Schr[eiber]. Offenbach, 1792. (presumably the same whom von Raumer discusses on p. 196 and calls Schreiber).1

252:3

In his preface he remarks there is a side from which to view Faust, by which he presumably means that he is suited for dra-

10 ich . . . meines Geschlechtes] German, I wanted to have a devil, and not one of my kind. 12 Ueberdem . . . eigen machen] German, Moreover, like a dry sponge, he [namely, the fanatic] absorbed the folly and charlatanism that the others contrived, a situation that entirely separates the fanatics from the philosophers, for the latter hate and despise the hypotheses of others, while the former embrace all the rubbish of the human spirit, making it their own.

30

Literature on Faust et al.

•

P a p e r 252 1835

matic treatment: “daß nämlich der Mensch nicht gemacht ist für den Umgang mit höhern Wesen, und daß er es nicht ungestraft wagen dürfte, aus dem Kreise der Menschheit heraus zu treten.”― 5

182

10

15

20

25

30

1

this book belongs to the university library.―

He has the scene begin between Faust and Wagner in a cemetery.―Here he relates to him the whole of his deep longing, his dissatisfaction, and refuses the remedies that Wagner proposes.―Then he sets out on a journey, and then Schr[eiber] produces a great many scenes in dialogue form. His parting from his father is moving. His encounter with the traveler (see p. 24) is comical.―Then he has him continue his wandering, encountering life’s various characters of both the more pleasant and the more ridiculous sort, e.g., p. 28, his encounter with the young man who is actually a teacher in a reform school, but who is also a devotee of physiognomy and is extremely taken with Rousseau’s Emile. The scene with the young man in the peasant hut is excellent. the scene at the learned society is also quite comical. Faust’s observations at the Baltic (p. 41) are also quite remarkable.―He finally arrives at the Ganges, encounters a Brahmin who finally teaches him how to come into contact with the spirits. A spirit (Helim) now accompanies him, after Faust has demanded that he appear before him as a youth, just as he himself is. Faust is now brought to the standpoint from which spirits may observe the world; he gradually loses all hum. tendencies, affects, etc. (p. 92, Helim: Aber Wohlwollen hast du noch; nicht für das einzelne Geschöpf sondern für die Gattung). He returns home. Feels unhappy in his changed situation.―his old father dies. We again find Faust in a cemetery. He dies there see p. 144: Helim: Do you hear the thunder above your head? Faust: Would that its flash would strike all of us at once! Helim: Take a word of consolation from me: you will become your son’s guardian spirit. Faust: Now I can depart life in peace. (A stroke of lightning kills him.)

1 daß nämlich . . . zu treten] German, that the human being is of course not made for association with higher beings, and that he may not venture unpunished beyond the circle of humanity. 26 Aber Wohlwillen . . . die Gattung] German, But you still have good will, not for the individual creature, but for the race.

•

187

188

Literature on Faust et al.

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

Of individual beautiful items I will note only the fisherman’s song p. 108. Mein Hüttchen ist nur klein! Doch scheinen Sonn und Mond hinein. Die Schwalbe nistet gern bei mir, Denn kein Gezänke stört sie hier.

Mein Gärtchen ist nur klein! Doch kehrt auch da der Frühling ein, und läßt gedeihn, was früh und spät Mein liebes Weibchen pflanzt und sät.

Mein Kahn ist leicht und klein! Doch bringt er Brod und Butter ein. Dazu lieb Weibchens froh Gesicht ― So viel hat mancher König nicht.

Mein Glück dünkt euch nur klein! O lerntet ihr genügsam sein! Bei Arbeit, Liebe und Gesang Wird uns das Leben nicht zu lang. ―

Der Faust der Morgenländer oder Wanderungen Ben Hafis. Erzählers der Reisen vor der Sündfluth. Baghdad. 1797. p. 39 Über dem Kaukasus, Beherscher der Kinder des Apostels, erhebt sich auf Wolkensaülen ein Gezelt, gewebt aus Aether, den Strahlen der Sonne und des Mondes, dem Ausfluß der Gestirne, den Düften der Blumen und den Wolgerüchen der 3 Mein Hüttchen . . . nicht zu lang] German, My little hut is but small! / Yet the sun and the moon shine in. / The swallow likes to nest near me, / For no quarrels disturb it here. // My garden is but small! / But spring stops by there, too, / And lets flourish what, early and late, / My beloved little wife has planted. // My boat is light and small! / But it brings in bread and butter. / Moreover, my beloved little wife’s happy face― / Many a king has not so much. // My happiness looks but small to you! / Oh, learn to be frugal! / With work, love, and song / Life does not get too long for us. 25 Über dem Kaukasus . . . verfinstern] German, Beyond the Caucasus, the ruler of the children of the Apostle, a tent, woven of ether, of the rays of the sun and moon and the world, the emanations of the stars, the scent of flowers, and the fine fragrances of flowers of our earth, rises upon columns of clouds . . .

5

10

183 15

20

252:4

25

Literature on Faust et al.

5

10

15

20

184 25

30

35

•

P a p e r 252 1835

Pflanzen unsrer Erde..... p. 40. Aber höheres Entzüken gewährt den Geistern das, was die Menschen durch die moralische Kraft ihres Geistes und Herzens hervorbringen und schaffen, denn an den ätherischen Wändern mahlen sich die Thaten guter edler Menschen, von dem Augenblicke an, da sie in ihrer Brust aufkeimen bis zur Vollendung in sanft schimmernden Bildern, und verlöschen nur, wenn Schwäche, Furcht, Selbstsucht, Eigennutz und Zweifel über den Werth der Handlungen und derer, für die sie unternommen wurden, die schöne Begeistrung verfinstern.― Ben Hafi then continues to tell the story and now presents an Abdallah who was vizier for the sultan of Guizurat, where he was very influential, because he, the sultan, was certainly a good man; but lacking in character (p. 67. “Ich weiss, dass ein solcher Regent für gewisse Leute seinen Hof zum Paradiese macht; wer aber ausser diesem Paradiese lebt, s[ch]me[c]kt, wie sie sagen, hier die Hölle schon im Voraus”) The country was not harmed by this, for he meant well and was enthusiastic about what was good. But then the sultan also had another man whose name was Ebu Amru, of whom the sultan did not think much, but whom he kept at his court because he was the son of his deceased chancellor. And in fact, this man remained unobtrusively within his boundaries, but his chilliness tended somewhat to dampen the enthusiasm of the other man. Now, this pained Abdallah, who then thought that it would be best to make use of powerful means to deal with the matter once and for all. Now he contacted a magus, who taught him his arts and put him in touch with the spirits, who then presented themselves, as a youth, namely a perfect ideal figure, p. 76: “Sein erhabne Gestalt entsprach dem wunderbar schönen Angesicht – ein Ideal, nach allen Regeln der im Geiste abgezogenen Schönheit gebildet; aber dabei so kalt, gleichgültig und empfindungslos, daß das Verwundern und Bewundern plötzlich in ein erstarrendes ängstliches Gefühl übergieng. Auf seinen wunderschönen Gesicht war keine Mine, keine Spur eines Zuges oder einer Mine zu finden, welche dem ihm gegen Ueberstehenden den Weg zu dem p. 40. But greater charms persist for the spirit that hum. beings create and produce with the moral strength of their spirits and their hearts, painting the deeds of good and noble people on the ethereal walls, from that instant, then, when they germinate in their breast, until completion, in blessed, shimmering images, and are expunged only if the beautiful enthusiasm is darkened by weakness, fear, selfishness, and doubt about the worth of the actions undertaken on its behalf.― 14 Ich weiss . . . im Voraus] German, I know that such a regent makes his court a paradise for certain people; but whoever lives outside this paradise here surely comes, as we say, to taste hell in advance.] 29 Sein erhabne . . . anzeigte] German, His sublime form matched his wonderfully handsome face―an ideal depicted in accordance with all the rules drawn from the spirit of beauty; but also so cold, so indifferent and devoid of feeling that wonder and admiration were suddenly overcome by a numbing sense of anxiety. On his wonderfully handsome face no features, no traces of any expression were found that indicated the way to the heart or the spirit.

•

189

190

Literature on Faust et al.

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

Herz oder Geiste desselben anzeigte.” etc., which is depicted quite wonderfully.––Then this cold, unfeeling spirit is sketched p. 79. der Geist: “ob ich mich in den Strahlen der Sonne, oder den feuchten, kalten Dünsten bade, ist einerlei für mich; denn mir sind die Strahlen der Sonne nicht warm, und der Nebel nicht kalt.” To Abdallah’s question of what a hum. being is, he replies (p. 83): [“]er ist alles das nicht, was er gern sein wol[l]te, und wär er alles dieß, so wol[l]te er wieder sein, was er vorher gewesen ist.” p. 99 The caliph: darum sagt der Weise mit allem Recht: “der gefärlichste Bes[ch]wörer ist der Schmeichler, und nur der taube Heilige hört nicht mehr auf seinen Ruf.”― Up to this point, the Spirit had only come to him on a few occasions, permitting him to see the terrible consequences that his nonetheless so well-intended steps will have. Now, he finally demands from Abdallah that he enter into a pact p. 150 der Geist: [“]Sprich ein Ja und sage: der Großvizir und Günstling des Sultans handelt von nun an um seiner Größe und Erhaltung willen.” The Spirit, after having accompanied him for a long time, and by showing him the consequences, involved him in all sorts of intrigues; it ends with Abdallah―by having thus been able to see what the consequences would be―doing nothing whatever, losing his former glowing enthusiasm, and sinking down into inactivity. He describes his condition p. 267. [“]Ich gleiche nun dem Manne, dessen Verstand durch Aufklärung und Erfahrung so ausgebildet ist, daß er jeden zu Zeiten erwachenden Reitz seines Herzens zu einer guten uneigennutzigen That durch einen klugen und gegründeten Einspruch niederschlägt. Dem Geitʒigen gleiche ich, der bei Anblick des Elenden Thränen

3 der Geist: “ob ich mich . . . Nebel nicht kalt.”] German, The Spirit: “whether I am bathed by the sun’s rays or by the cold, damp mists, it is all the same to me, for to me the rays of the sun are not warm and the fog is not cold.” 7 [“]er ist alles . . . vorher gewesen ist.”] German, he is not all that he would like to be, and were he all those things, he would want to be again what he used to be. 10 darum sagt . . . auf seinen Ruf.”] German, of this, the wise man said, entirely rightly: “the most dangerous magician is the flatterer, and only the deaf saint no longer heeds his call.”― 16 der Geist: [“]Sprich ein Ja . . . und Erhaltung willen.”] German, The Spirit: Say yes and say: From now on, the grand vizier and favorite of the sultan will act for the sake of his greatness and preservation. 25 [“]Ich gleiche nun . . . zusammendrückt.”] German, I am now like the man whose understanding has been so developed by enlightenment and experience that he crushes every awakening impulse in his heart toward a good, unselfish act with a clever and well-founded objection. I am like the miser who cries at the tears of the wretched while with clenching fingers he squeezes the gold in his belt all the more tightly.”

5

10

15

20

25

185 30

Literature on Faust et al.

5

•

P a p e r 252–253 1835

weint, während er das Gold in seinem Gurtel mit krampfigten Fingern fester zusammendrückt.”― p. 269. der Geist: die Wa[h]rheit, Thor, ist ein nackendes, hagres, trocknes, zermalmendes, alles i[n] seinem Ursprung und Ende zerlegendes und auflösendes Gespenst, ohne Licht und Wärme. Wirft das Licht nicht Schatten? Täuscht die Wärme nicht die Sinne?― March 7th 1835.

252:5 10

15

On the whole, it is remarkable how much this book has in common with Fichte, Die Bestimmung des Menschen. What in Fichte is developed more for the understanding is here addressed more to the senses; Fichte’s moral world order and new heaven here become a tent in which good deeds are hung upon the wall (see p. 39); but both are nonetheless in agreement that a pers. is to do the good entirely without taking into account the consequences of doing it. March 16th 35.

253

20

1835 It is also remarkable that Germany has its Faust, Italy and Spain their D[on] Juan, the Jews (??) the Wandering Jew, Denmark and northern Germany [Till] Eulenspiegel, etc. Octbr. 1st 35.

3 der Geist: die Wa[h]rheit . . . nicht die Sinne?] German, The truth, Thor, is a naked, haggard, dried-out, downcast specter that decomposes and disintegrates everything in its beginning and its end, without light and warmth. Does the light cast no shadow? Does the warmth not deceive the mind?

•

191

PAPER 254 “Our Journal Literature”

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup

194

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

189

Our Journal Literature. Study from Nature in Noonday Light. Lecture delivered at the Student Union, Nov. 28th 1835. Gentlemen! May I begin with a couple of observations before I turn to my actual topic. Inasmuch as I am still among the younger members, perhaps unfamiliar with many of the conventions―without a practiced eye for what I might call the laws of perspective governing eloquence that permit a person to see immediately how something written in the study will look when it makes its appearance in a larger gathering―how something that has been spoken of among a small group must be modified when it wishes a larger public; I am saying that when I come forward here, it is as much in a belief in your humanity as in the conviction that a person who stands at this lectern is absolutely not, by doing so, transformed into the priest of the assembly, but, as an individual amid the totality of the association, enunciates that which perhaps is already shared by many other members, so that, without claiming to be presenting anything new, he thus already cherishes the hope of not being unwelcome in repeating what is, in fact, something already to some extent familiar―and all the more so in connection with this matter, which another member has recently attempted to point out and illuminate from another angle and which already exists as a given in the consciousness of most members―and in any case, I did not wish that this point of view―if not an opposite, then, at any rate, a modified observation―should lack a spokesman before this forum to which the matter has now in fact been brought. Thus, if my presentation is faulty, I especially ask the indulgence of those among the gentlemen present who possibly share my way of looking at the matter; the others can at most complain about time wasted and about the tediousness of such an indirect proof that their way of viewing the matter is right. It is surely not without reason that artists rarely or never paint a landscape in noonday light, but more frequently in morning light. The characteristic freshness, the strange quiver, the manifold changeableness of light and shadow call forth an especially favorable total impression that prevents the emphasis of any single point apart from the whole, even though it were merely for a moment’s observation. Something similar is repeated in other

254

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature” 190

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

spheres. We prefer to concentrate on the first emergence of an idea in world history; we want people to come from East and West to admire it in its swaddling clothes, and in no way do I deny the significance of such a poetic view; but just as, when entire races of people as well as single individuals prefer to flee from the perhaps rather Novemberish flower of life to its fresh buds and, with the help of imagination, to take refuge in visualizing for themselves the flowers that were denied them in life, so, too, where there is talk of a new life that is to break through, does a human being also have a great tendency to give free rein to the imagination and allow a mighty tree to spring forth from the mustard seed that has in fact been given. Time will have to decide whether they are disappointed in their hope; but reflection cannot and will not involve itself in investigating anything other than what is factually given and observing it in noonday light. And if the results of these reflections get a bit touched by frost, we do, after all, know that early frost does not harm the seed if it is indeed winter seed and not the spring seed that sprouts quickly and, equally quickly, is ripe for cutting down. In general, I believe that with the individual person, as also with every individual life, it is beneficial to bring the wheel of development to a halt, to look back upon what has happened and see how far one has come, to see whether dust and things of that sort have not caused rapid progress to engender the resistance of harmful friction. I may now express great approval both of energetic action and of reflection as that which bring together and secure the strengths that are often dissipated in the moment, and in so doing―like the pregnant silence before the battle―create the condition for new and powerful activity; yet I must nonetheless equally much disapprove of a phenomenon that often assumes the form of reflection, a certain sickly fantasy that hinders both action and true reflection and that, if it once permits the reflection to emerge, then, if there has been any movement at all, depicts the past more as something approaching a caricature than as approaching the ideal, immediately permitting a person to lapse back into the old dreams. It is certainly good and encouraging for a person to become conscious of himself as having accomplished something, but imagining that one has accomplished more than one has is, and will always be, deleterious, and easily leads to those dreams. Let us carefully consider with whom we are comparing ourselves, and then―this has already been said here―let the liberal newspapers bear in mind that even if they accomplish more than

•

195

196

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

the conservative ones, that does not in fact say very much, especially for the liberals themselves who so deeply disdain them. Now, just as I do not share many of our contemporaries’ ferociously sanguine expectations, so do I also counsel people against joining the many hypochondriacs in climbing Mount Tabor in order to assure people that they will not come into the Promised Land: both of these positions because, at least this evening, I will let reflection speak first. And even if I must disapprove of the intrepid soul who dares ascend Odin’s throne, and with the calm of the gods’ eternal viewpoint, smile at the struggles and foolishness of human beings, and I take joy in the fact that, just as that time is long past when people sought the company of wild animals instead of building and living among human beings, so, too, is the time now past when human beings were transformed into hermits in the midst of life’s noisy hubbub, whether as moralists they were solely concerned, every moment of their lives, with issuing promissory notes on heaven without taking note of what was going on in their immediate vicinity―or whether, as indifferentists, it was only when they heard the cry of “Fire” that they felt the wall to see if it was hot;―I must nonetheless in practice disapprove of the error of the age, sprung from admittedly beautiful, but also rather busy strivings (to induce people to set aside narrow-minded bourgeois philistinism and the moonshine gossamer of family sentimentality and work together toward a single goal), namely this: that a person immediately has a party label ready at hand to apply to the person who makes a bit of an approach to one or another of the prevalent positions, without remembering the countless mass of nuances that may be present here, as surely as it is a natural and healthy life that does not possess a fully worked-out confession of faith (which generally is a sign of one of the terminal stages of life)―I must say, disapprove of it in practice, while I want to stand here solely as a reflecteur. Now, as I go over to my actual subject, I shall first of all attempt a historical recapitulation.1 Mr. Ostermann begins his reflections with Winther’s Raket. I entirely share Mr. Ostermann’s appreciation of Winther’s talent, in which I recognize, as characteristic, the particular style that characterizes and colors each one of his pieces. But if we want to

1) I owe it to myself to note that a portion of this historical part was written before I came into possession of Ostermann’s manuscript.

33 reflecteur] French, properly “réflecteur,” reflector, one who reflects.

191 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

192

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

look into them, seeking one with the germs of the subsequent development, I must protest. Raketten, with all of its good and its weak points, was the finest, the most individual, flower on the stem of Politivennen, and it is surely true that most of his successors were totally devoid of his talent and adopted his weak aspects. But the tendency remained the same. It was in general satisfied with the existing constitution; it faulted only the supposedly illegal behavior of individual government officials: the devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor; outpost skirmishes. Hannibal Sehested. Its successors followed in its footsteps, and I cannot recall having seen, in a single newspaper of that sort, an attack on any important function in the body politic, on the actual institution and not on its abuse by a concrete individual; the only exception is perhaps Sandhedsfaklen, and it is also naive enough to believe that it is in a way walking hand-in-hand with Kjøbenhavnsposten. Or does Mr. Ostermann supposedly believe that, insofar as it was in the opposition, Raketten was to be regarded as the seed[?] Or had not Raketten coexisted for a long time with Kjøbenhavnsposten without exercising any influence on the latter? Or did not Raketten continue with its tone after the time arrived that altered the tone and character of Kjøbenhavnsposten? Or was there no rather striking cause that called forth such a difference of principle? I view liberal journalism as a new development that may certainly have had many connections with a previous development―e.g., by pointing out what Mr. Ostermann himself notes, the extent to which the law concerning freedom of the press permitted a person to enter upon a polemic in a certain direction without necessarily defining the direction, but what has really made it into what it is are surely a number of new factors that have come into play. And in this respect I may cite as proof the way in which it has in fact been acknowledged by people―if I may put it this way―greeting one another with a [“]Happy New Year,[”] or, as the chosen poet of this new life puts it: “Denmark’s May and Denmark’s morning.” And now I will attempt to point out where these new factors are likely to be found. The July Revolution of 1830. The course of revolutions is like that of illnesses; when cholera was endemic in Europe, the attacks were not so violent. The July Revolution distinguished itself, among other ways, by its elegance and refinement; it was a successful operation performed by a practiced surgeon. All the violent episodes that accompanied the Revolution of ’89 were not present here, and thus the July Revolution stands as a nota-

•

197

198

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

ble example of a pure and simple revolution, free of all extraneous ingredients. Meanwhile, the rest of Europe stood as spectators and (to use an expression of Börne’s) saw what time it was. News reports concerning it were played in every key, but because people did not in fact have anything more than the name, and thus few were able to see how smoothly the whole business had transpired, this sort of popular recitative with chorus could not of course fail to have an impact on the other governments and peoples. Here, too, it was not without its effect, and even if I cannot agree with a view articulated in the address of thanks―a view that indeed makes it inexplicable how, after all, the order sent to the Chancery concerning the Estates could encounter people who were more or less prepared for it―I must nonetheless note that here I am dealing solely with journalistic literature, and I do not know of any Danish newspaper having uttered any wish or opinion on this matter before the order to the Chancery concerning the Estates was officially announced. Now, whether, before this time, a number of people had clearly and distinctly wished such a thing, or whether it was rather something obscure and indistinct―one of those vibrations by which people in various places were set in motion by the French Revolution―I do not know, nor is that what I am dealing with here, but I doubt that such a wish had found journalistic expression before that order. After that time, the signs of this are more distinct, both in life―the Society of May 28―and in journalistic literature and literature proper. But just as we cannot deny that in this case it was the government that was the active agent, and that that order was the ray of sunshine that called forth the flowers of literature, and just as nothing whatever in the world comes forth without two factors, so, too, did the Liberals, as I here designate them, in whom the receptivity for such institutions was awakened also, of course, have their share; but I nonetheless think that prior to that order, the government and the Liberals confronted one another as two entities that had a great deal to say to one another in connection with the July Revolution, but who did not really know how they should begin until the government broke the silence. To avoid misunderstanding, I repeat that I am speaking solely about literature. And now I am standing at the point at which the new development begins, and therefore, in order to avoid confusion about my subsequent exposition, I will here set a milepost with the following inscription:

5

193

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

194

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

“Owing to a natural elasticity, the July Revolution and its echoes, which resounded in many places throughout Europe, held people and government apart from one another in literary, if not total, silence until the government gave the signal.”2 Mr. Osterman has made the transition to the genuinely new development by discussing the well-known piece by Lornsen and the blunt article in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur. As for the former, I shall―whereas as I cannot, after all, refrain from noting that, both as something written in German and as something not falling into the category of journalism, it is not truly of concern to me―note that it must both be regarded as a consequence of the July Revolution, primarily having its effect by way of the Polish ditto, and also―which is the main point here―note that our journalistic literature (here I am focusing on Kjøbenhavnsposten) does not recommend it very highly3 or draw any further conclusions from it. Thus you will see that this piece did not find a particularly favorable reception in the newspapers, and as for the other literature, you will recall that both here and in Holstein, which does not really concern me, it also elicited a number of pieces opposed to it, including, I believe, even sermons. Nonetheless, in this connection I must note that in “The Address from the Prelates and Nobility of Schleswig-Holstein” it is said: “that also, in accordance with their most humble opinion (. . . ‘inasmuch as they indeed remain convinced that devious efforts by several malicious persons are in no way in agreement with public opinion’ . . .), the requirements of the times ever more insistently require consideration of the wishes that have been ex2) Of course, Mr. Ostermann also emphasizes the step taken by the government, and it is in order to emphasize even more the timing and the action taken by the government that I permit myself this exposition. 3) “Councillor of Chancery Lornsen’s Rebellious Conduct and Arrest.” (Kjøbenhanvsp. no. 282, Nov. 29,1830). “From a recent piece published and printed in Kiel: ‘Ueber das Verfaßungswerk in Schleswigholstein,’ written by Counc. L., and others published on the occasion of publication of same in the duchies―which, together with the piece by L., have been available at bookshops in the capital―we have learned both of the rebellious intentions and conduct that Counc. L., who was named sheriff of Sylt a little over a month ago, has manifested, both by publishing and distributing the above-mentioned piece as well as by other illegal actions.”―His arrest and his subsequent sentencing and imprisonment in Rendsburg Fort are related briefly and tersely, without any exclamation or question marks, which the press of course likes to use when it dare not say more.

•

199

200

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

pressed.” Furthermore, I must also point out that the entire document must be regarded more or less as a consequence of the July Revolution exerted primarily through the Polish [Revolution] (my first impulse); that, in addition, it is German, and, lastly― and here is what seems to me to be main thing―that the Danish newspapers report the entire affair tersely, without a single sidelong glance.―As for the latter (the piece in Maanedskriftet), you will recall what Mr. Ostermann himself rightly noted, that is more recent than that order. With reference to the Danish newspapers, I will now, for the sake of greater completeness, do my best to provide an explanation of Danish developments―which thus far have been viewed in relation to those in Europe―with respect to determining the element of timing. I will show both that prior to that order [establishing the Estates] no wish was expressed in the newspapers (this, then, becomes the negative side)―and, when I go over to the positive side, that, owing to the contrast that the striking fecundity bears in contrast to the barrenness that preceded it, there can never be a mistake concerning the moment in time. In order to demonstrate my first point, I shall now go through Kjøbenhavnsposten for 1829,4 ’30, and ’31 up to Feb. 12. 1829: aesthetic concerns are omnipresent (Master Erik does not show himself); but neither do patriotic subjects disappear from view: praise of the nuptials of Prince Ferdinand and Princess Caroline and the illumination on that occasion; the smallpox; also foreign topics, albeit a la Riise’s Archiv, e.g., Muhamed II and Tsar Alexander; Turkish jurisprudence; Migueliana. “Nyhedsposten” carries aesthetic matters and news of the arts, anecdotes, and other literary confections. Thus the paper is not political. 1830: Liunge continues as an aesthetician and as such attends confirmation class at Heiberg’s; starting in September, considerable attention is paid to the strange volcanic eruptions at various points in Europe, though always theoretically, not practically. 1831: Up until Feb. 12th, everything remains in the same tone. In order to point out the contrast even more, I will make a comparison between the first one and one-half months and a couple of the following months, e.g., up to May. At the start of the year 4) I do not need to pay attention to 1827 and ’28 because Mr. Ostermann himself has noted correctly that at that time Kjøbenhavnsposten concerned itself primarily with aesthetic matters; nor did I really need 1829, but it is simply for the sake of completeness.

5

195

15

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

196

15

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

(the 1½ months) attention is paid to foreign matters, but purely and simply as history; on the whole, “Nyhedsposten” concerns the arts. From this point on, “Nyhedsposten” pays more attention to domestic issues, e.g., the remarks made in several issues concerning censorship, in some cases extracted from longer works, in others from foreign newspapers, and now, beginning especially in March, a man who signs himself T. (and who NB. has only delivered one single piece in the previous 1½ months, and that a translation) begins to write a great deal, almost every day. In a great mass of articles, which are headed “Miscellanies,” he tried to show what flattery is, etc.―elaborates on: What is a good heart (“puts up with everything, accepts being spit in the eye”); what is “malicious”; what is egotism―arousing spirits by means of fables; speaks of the national economy, of what is meant by aristocrats and democrats―and finally turns directly to the decree of April 14, 1831. Here, however, a remarkable change emerges: now the pulse, which previously had been calm, begins to race a bit.―A striking bounty also begins to be seen outside the journals: the pieces about the Provincial Estates by David and both of Tscherning’s pieces appeared even before the end of March. From this point on, Maanedsskrift for Litteratur also begins to carry political articles, which, the editors themselves point out in a note, the demands of the time now seem to require. Thus, I have now sought to show that with respect to the beginning of the new development, it was the government that imparted the impulse to the journalists, not the journalists to the government. Here I owe it to Mr. Ostermann to include a couple of words concerning his view that Raketten was one of the germs of the new development, which I had previously passed over; I had in fact regarded it as an attempt to make journalism more into the active factor in this entire development. In what I have said thus far I hope I have contributed to answering the question as to whether this is the way things actually are. I now proceed further with my historical exposition of the activity of our liberal journalism―both the circumstances of the times and the relation of my presentation to that of Mr. Ostermann, which focused more or less solely on those circumstances, make it clear beyond any doubt that this is the only thing I want to deal with here. My presentation up to this point necessarily gives rise to the presumption that just as, with respect to newspaper articles, it was the government that set the tone, it will also continue to do so in similar fashion in what follows. This― as I have already suggested thus far―is not, by any means, to

•

201

202

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

say that journalism has not been active at all, but merely that the government has been the primus motor. As when two resilient bodies―one of which is at rest, the other of which, by contrast, has been set in motion―collide, precisely this collision produces a reaction on the part of the previously passive body, and this reaction in turn produces a primary impact, but in such a way that we always insist that the reaction is conditioned by the primary impact―this is how I think of this relationship, albeit with the modification that it sometimes happens that the reaction is too weak and too momentary to produce a new impulse from body no. 1, so that if all activity is not to cease, this body must put itself in motion once again. Now, in order to verify what I have said, I will refer to the nodal points at which, so to speak, the two powers encounter one another, and show whether the energy of journalism indeed produces steps by the government or whether the latter, by its steps, induces action by journalism― just as much when it encourages and assists new developments as when it exerts pressure and prevents the creek of journalism from turning into a stagnant pool and forces it to become a stream. However, the fact that it was only in ’34 that a question was raised that had major significance for journalism―namely the question of freedom of the press―surely leads one more or less to conclude that it was not until 1834 that one could expect much in the way of results, and instead of the practical experimentation one would have expected in this connection, there were instead theoretical investigations. I continue with my historical recapitulation. In 1831 came the next step by the government, the provisional decree of May 28; it did not arouse particular attention in the newspapers, however. From now on, the news section is concerned with cholera, and “Nyhedsposten” is concerned with investigations of Denmark’s military defense. In 1832 the first item is the convocation of the wise men, followed, I think, by a couple of articles on this institution in April; later in May, news concerning the Society of May 28, which it would not in fact be entirely erroneous to regard as related to that convocation. In 1833 the government takes no steps. The effect of the decree of April of that year regarding censorship will be discussed subsequently. A number of articles from the Hamb[urgische] Correspondent, the Kieler Corresp[ondent], the Zeitung für die elegante Welt, der Eremit, etc. appear in “Nyhedsposten” at the beginning of the

2 primus motor] Latin, prime mover.

5

10

197 15

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

10

15

198

20

25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

year. Research concerning the Latin language. Tscherning travels. The king travels; his illness. In 1834 a major battle is provoked by investigations of the aforementioned Decree of April ’33, and Algr. Ussing proves, with fair success, that generally speaking, we do not have censorship. Now come the well-known pieces concerning the leadership of the Society for Moral Delinquents.―The Decree of May 15th concerning the Estates. From now on, people begin in fact to make use of the freedom of the press that is acknowledged in theory. From now on begins a running battle between Kjøbenhavnsposten and the censor, which began with the piece about political guarantees; then the conflict about the Norwegian Morgenpost, and Kjøbenhavnsposten finally gets a proper trial. In this connection I do, however, continually recall that the Decree of May 15th comes prior to this activity. Now emerge the first journalistic sprouts of the liberal chaos, though in the beginning people tried to stake up the tender seedling with several wellknown theorems. From this point on, the steps, both those taken by the government as well as those taken by journalism―steps that until now have, at appropriate intervals, been a bit piano―begin to become a bit more forte, and―while approaching the moment in which we live, pointing out in addition the great difficulties connected with a vivisection of this sort―I must discuss, among the positive steps taken by the government, the elections and the convocation of the Estates; among its repressive steps, the legal proceedings against Prof. David, the well-known recitative “We, we alone,” the ban on publishing matters related to the Estates. From the side of the people, I regard the petition as the most pronounced step, though in this connection I must note that, regarded as a literary document, it drifts entirely without an anchor―unless one recalls that it was elicited by the fear that freedom of the press would be restricted. But because it did not emanate from the newspapers, I will not discuss it further, while on the other hand, as is well known, it was that recitative by the government that first set the newspapers here―indeed, even those in England―in motion. Now the government’s steps― both those that stimulated and those that repressed―followed rapidly upon one another, and in consequence of this, so did the reaction by journalism, so there is a great deal of difficulty connected with showing which of the parties provided the primary impulse. But with respect to the government’s positive steps, one must nonetheless bear in mind how great a role is played by

•

203

204

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

the election and convocation of the Estates. And with respect to the repressive steps, one recalls that it was the legal proceedings against David that evoked Haagen’s contribution. If I am now to draw up the results, I will say that just as the government provided the first impulse, so can the relationship between the government and journalism be characterized in the following manner: the government was active-passive (or affected through an activity); journalism was passive-active (or acting through a passivity). I have now finished my historical recapitulation, in which I have sought to show what our journalism has accomplished in relation to the government; I shall now consider its weaker aspects a bit more closely. Because I am essentially following Mr. Ostermann, I discuss only Kjøbenhavnsposten and Fædrelandet. Kjøbenhavnsposten. Our entire age is characterized by a formal striving. This was what brought us in everyday life to set aside what is comfortable and familiar and to emphasize symmetrical beauty, preferring convention over warm personal relations. To use the words of another author, this entire striving is well described as the attempt, by Fichte and the other philosophers, to create systems by sharpness of intellect, and the attempt, by Robespierre, to do so with the help of the axe; it is what encounters us in the butterfly-light flowing verses of our poets and in Auber’s music; it is, in the end, what evokes the many revolutions in the world of politics. I am in complete agreement with the whole of this effort to hold fast to form, insofar as form is always the medium through which we have the idea, but we must nonetheless bear in mind that it is the idea that is to determine the form, not the form that is to determine the idea. We must remember that life is not something abstract, but is something highly individual. One must not forget that form―for example, from the standpoint in immediacy of the poetic genius―is nothing other than the idea’s coming-into-existence in the world, and that reflection is to investigate only whether the idea has in fact assumed the form properly corresponding to it. One must constantly bear in mind that it is not through the form that one has life, but through life that one has the form. If I imagined a man who had become infatuated with the Greek way of life and then, when he possessed the means to do so, had his dwelling arranged in the Greek style and his domestic life conducted in the Greek manner―there would nonetheless still be a great question as to whether he would then

5

10

15

199

20

25

30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

10

15

20

200 25

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

be satisfied, or whether he would not soon come to prefer some other form, precisely because he had not sufficiently tested himself and the stage of development in which he lived. But, just as a leap backward is wrong (which, on the whole, the age tends to recognize), so, too, is a leap forward―in both cases because natural development does not take place by leaps, and life’s earnestness will ironize over every such experiment, even if it succeeds momentarily. Now, after these preliminary observations regarding the path taken by Kjøbenhavnsposten, I hope, gentlemen―as I point out that I have diligently sought to portray the underpinnings of the entire striving of the age (for here a single example is of no help whatever)―that you are in agreement with me when I characterize it as fussy busyness. But I already hear one or another of you saying, [“]Of course, you are contradicting yourself, for you previously asserted that it was precisely the government that played the active part.[”] This only seems so, however, for it is in no way my intention to deny that Kjøbenhavnsposten, especially in “Nyhedsposten,” is characterized by a certain mean-spirited pettiness, but I did not want to speak of that earlier, where the discussion solely concerned the growth of a new development through journalism and of journalism’s merits in that respect, and I cannot regard that [pettiness] as any sort of step. I have sought to designate this entire striving as fussy busyness, for fussy busyness is not action, but fickle fumbling. Fussy busyness is―to use the words a poet spoke in another connection: “a restless ramble―from castles in the air―to mousetraps―and home again.” True action goes hand in hand with calm circumspection. All of you have surely been in the situation of having traveled along a road on which one does not exactly arrive at one’s destination while sleeping in a carriage, but where, unfamiliar with the road, a person must ask directions, and a peasant says to you: “So you turn first to the right and then to the left and then to the left again at the willow-lined road there by the little pond, and then you will probably have as much as a half mile to go; then you turn to the right, and then you’re there”;―but all of you have surely also experienced that in that way one never arrives at one’s destination. One must first drive to the nearest village and there acquaint oneself with the road to the next village, and so on. And here, where there is talk of a new development, here one must be very careful and keep one’s eye diligently on the compass. And even if the development and progress of other nations can help us very much and teach us many precautions, one must

•

205

206

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

nonetheless surely bear in mind that it does not do to travel in Zealand with a map of France.5 Now, that a striving such as this may easily come to exercise a disturbing influence on life, is something I of course may dare assume to be in confesso, inasmuch as we have so often experienced in other circumstances that nervousness is something very harmful. Now I shall attempt, by noting that Kjøbenhavnsposten lacks unity, to show how this fussy busyness and the disturbing activity that flows from it can be explained by the entire essence of Kjøbenhavnsposten. As, according to scientists, a heavenly body is formed from a cloud mass through a harmony of centrifugal and centripetal forces in combination with rotating on an axis, it seems to me that Kjøbenhavnsposten is like such a cloud mass whose existence as a planet has, however, not yet been realized through the harmony of centrifugal and centripetal forces in combination with rotation on an axis. Thus we are not surprised that, just as in an earlier period, there has been a certain instability in the articles, inasmuch as at one point it was the centrifugal, and at another the centripetal direction that dominated, just as, recently, there has been an overabundance of the centrifugal tendency. I scarcely need to point out that by the axis around which a planet is to rotate I mean a competent editor, and that by centrifugal and centripetal forces I have sought to designate what people have hitherto called by such popular party names as the liberal and conservative tendencies. That, nonetheless, in recent days Kjøbenhavnsposten has attained somewhat greater unity, and that the center of our political solar system, the Assembly of Estates in Roskilde, has exercised some force of attraction upon it, thereby helping it to find its orbit and contributing to the regulation of its course; that, on the other hand, the centrifugal force, that was accustomed to having the upper hand, has recently exerted itself to retain it: this is natural and surely cannot be denied. However, as stated, inasmuch as the harmony of the forces has not yet established itself, nor has rotation around an axis, it can easily be susceptible to being drawn into another solar system, because the centrifugal direction (from [Here were inserted the following lines, later crossed out:] There must always remain something quixotic in such a striving; one sounds the alarm at every instant, gives Rosinante the spurs, and rushes in―at the windmills; furthermore, it is of course not a lack of perspicacity that causes a person to see that one or another evil demon has transformed the giants into windmills, despite the fact that Sancho Panza gives the most solemn assurances that they were, are, and continue to be windmills.

5

10

15

201

20

25

30

35

5)

5 in confesso] Latin, beyond any doubt.

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

10

15

20

25

202

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

the point of view of our solar system) must appear as centripetal in relation to another.― Mr. Ostermann has also cited several complaints against Kjøbenhavnsposten and has sought to excuse it. He assigns them to 2 classes: 1) accusation of bitterness and an improper tone, and 2) of untruthfulness and dishonesty. I shall permit myself to elucidate them in a bit more detail. After having noted that he is in no way a blind admirer of every utterance that bears the label of liberalism, and that, on the contrary, he is frequently compelled to acknowledge what is true and well-founded in those complaints, and after having investigated the source of these accusations and shown that they are in fact lodged by frank, honest, and truth-loving men, Mr. Ostermann goes on to examine the accusation under class 1. He notes that one cannot expect that an opposition party “is to sweeten what is bitter”; using a metaphor, he tries to show how innocent strong language can be. “There is a truth,” he says, “we must never forget, that when a person of energetic and powerful character expresses himself, his words take on a particular, characteristic coloration because the thought is particular and characteristic and, however easy it might seem to many people to omit a word here and there, one must nonetheless consider how essential this little word―as people might call it―is for the writer, how completely and utterly the thought contained in it is a part of the writer’s individual character, and how this word is precisely a matter of major importance to him”―etc. I do not think that the Danish ear is so coddled that it cannot tolerate one or another blunt word; I do not think the Danish people are so hard-hearted that they do not know how to forgive one or another bitter word spoken in indignation. But―gentlemen!―I really believe that it is not about this that we are speaking. When, in heat and ardor, a writer uses words that he perhaps is not in a position to prove, people are perhaps more willing to permit themselves to be carried along by him than they are to pass harsh judgment on him, because what comes from that heart also goes to the heart. But it must be borne in mind that there is a gun battery of which our authors must be wary―I mean the existing ordinance concerning freedom of the press. It follows from this that people attempt―and I think this is the right way to put it―to come as close as possible to the free press ordinance; and from this it follows, in turn, that authors must exercise caution precisely in order to avoid the law’s punishment, so that the expression we previously would excuse by referring to heatedness and circulation of blood now appears as cool and carefully cal-

•

207

208

“Our Journal Literature”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

culated. I certainly do not blame an author for trying to get said absolutely as much as is permitted, but what is more natural for him than, in seeking to dance on the narrow line between what is legally permissible and impermissible, that―frightened by the desperate somersault of one or another of his predecessors into the Siberia of freedom of the press―he moves as adroitly as possible. Indeed, if he stepped forward―perhaps a bit daringly, yet precisely for that reason, exuberantly―and let himself be carried away, making himself vulnerable to judgment: yes, then we would judge differently. But we must bear in mind that these tightrope walkers also are most often masked (pseudonymous or anonymous). And if people permitted themselves such supple acrimony in what were in other respects good and trenchant pieces―well, then, it might have been better had they not appeared, but one would not really be so bothered by it. But we must, however, remember that these acrimonious words in fact conceal themselves in notes and footnotes, in question marks and exclamation points. Now, Mr. Ostermann gets to the main point and attempts to show that such minor acrimony in a daily newspaper is not so dangerous. I do not think so either. But it is nonetheless just as wrong. I would never have spoken of this entire nuisance if attention had not been directed to it in the first place. First and foremost, I disapprove of it because it is not action, and next, because it is cowardice. As for the fact that Kjøbenhavnsposten has more subscribers than Fædrelandet―I daresay that can be explained by the fact that it is published every day, by the great multitude of interests with which it concerns itself, and by the summaries it provides of the most important domestic newspapers. Mr. Ostermann now goes over to the second accusation, that of dishonesty and untruthfulness. In this connection I must remark that I have never heard anyone directly accuse Kjøbenhavnsposten of dishonesty and untruthfulness; that people have at times said that it has spoken untruthfully in a particular article is quite another matter. Mr. Ostermann attempts to show how a man who believes that he has the truth on his side, without, however, possessing fully valid legal proof, can easily come to make use of the press to get his views expressed. Inasmuch as Mr. Ostermann in general recommends great caution in such matters, I shall only make a couple of remarks. First of all, one can surely require that every such accuser sign his name, for scarcely anyone will obey a summons to a secret court, and it also seems reasonable to require that an accuser of this sort be publicly branded a liar when the

5

10

15

20

25

203 30

35

40

“Our Journal Literature”

5

10

15

20

25

204

30

35

40

•

P a p e r 254 1835

accused has cleared his name. Next, such a person should indeed bear in mind that because, on the one hand, his accusation must be sufficiently expressive for people to understand him, and on the other hand, not so expressive that he can be sued for defamation―he should bear in mind how easily he could hit a number of people and―if an innocent person actually responded and cleared his name―how much people are inclined, if not to say, then at any rate to hint, that, after all, he did perhaps feel that it did in fact apply to him, because he did defend himself. He should bear this in mind in order that he be deterred all the more from making use of such means. I now go over to Fædrelandet, and here we are met with a more felicitous phenomenon. After Fædrelandet had weathered the storm associated with the court proceedings against David, it rose up with rejuvenated strength and especially in recent times has gained a strong and healthy life. Fædrelandet appears to have found the direction in which it wants to move, and in an honest, free-spoken editor it has a hand that will prevent every sort of eccentricity. It seems to have understood that myth (this is what I am almost tempted to call it) about the conflict over freedom of the press in this country, from which one learns, among other things, to look a bit more closely into what one has of freedom of the press before one sounds the alarm. My presentation is now concluded. I have discussed our liberal journalism and in so doing have principally spoken of Kjøbenhavnsposten and Fædrelandet (among the other newspapers, perhaps Dansk Ugeskrift which―in a fashion that is possibly a bit more modest and subdued than the others, has come out with a number of interesting pieces―is perhaps most deserving of mention);―however I will not go into this further. I have sought to show that, perhaps with the exception of the most recent past, it (liberal journalism) has not, in general been as active as people perhaps tend to believe; that Kjøbenhavnsposten, especially, has often made use of a surrogate instead of genuine activity.―I have not discussed the conservative newspapers because I did not think that time would permit them to be included in a single talk. This honored gathering is the best judge of whether my presentation has succeeded―and whatever the verdict may be, it will always be a source of joy to me if the gathering will acknowledge my efforts this evening to stand solely as a reflecteur.

•

209

PAPER 255—PAPER 258 Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, and Steen Tullberg

212

Small Notes Inserted in Journal AA

•

P a p e r 255–256 1837 •

the strange redemptive power inherent in children

209

255:1

the 12th a wonderful certainty like the wind, of which no one knows whence it cometh or whither it goeth.―

the 13th Conversion goes slowly. As F[ranz] Baader correctly observes, one must walk back on the same path on which one previously walked forth. A person easily becomes impatient; when it doesn’t happen right away, one can just as easily give up or start on it tomorrow and enjoy today; it is temptation.―Isn’t this the meaning of the words: to take God’s kingdom by force―? And that is why it is said that we are to work out our salvation in fear and trembling, because it is in fact neither finished nor completed, but a relapse [is] possible.―And it is certainly to some extent this unrest that caused people to seek so eagerly to become martyrs in order to make the trial as brief and as momentarily intense as possible, a trial that is always easier to endure than one that lasts a longer time.

255:2

All-embracing―powerlessness―blessing (Serbian folk legend).―Stillness silence God’s side (Muhammed Pythagoras Chr[ist]). strange oscillation what is past quickly gathers itself for me into a poetic intuition, and then it seems extremely interesting to me―I quickly feel the unhappiness in it, precisely because (to take a line from The Golden Cross) the notion is not from someone else, but from myself.―

256:1

small, mathematically vanishing quantities.―

10

15

20

25

30

256:2

Small Notes Inserted in Journal AA 256:3 208 5

it is dangerous to cut oneself off too much, to withdraw from the ties of society. If you do not need the leading strings of society, you can do without the assistance of a walking frame given to you by your contemporaries.―

257:1

strange anxiety, every time I have awakened in the morning after having drunk too much, it finally came to pass.

257:2

the orthodox appeal to God and conscience―something secretive―cut away the intermediate link.― The Romans made Augustus into God humble themselves before God courtiers―grand vis-à-vis others.

10

257:3 15

the present time is the time of despair, the time of the Wandering Jew (many reforming Jews)―

257:4

Someone who went mad by remaining continually conscious that the world was going around.

258:1

Prescience―intimation in life―of vari[ous] sorts according to the attitude one takes toward it―anticipation of st., e.g., how many books I have bought in response to a strange impulse, letting them lie until―also events inverse fata morgana. reminded of a scene in Scribe. also in Faust Ex. also in illness―

20

258:2 25

258:3

Don Juan by Hoffman. (melancholia as soon as the theater lights are extinguished――)―

little Peter understand. Lap―Madonna. M. Magdalene.

•

P a p e r 256–258 1837 •

213

214

Small Notes Inserted in Journal AA

•

P a p e r 258 1837 •

Children who rememb[er] thei[r] mother―

Letter from Wilhelm.

258:4

209

258:5

My situation, when I borrowed money from Rask and Monrad showed up.

258:6

P. E. Lind

258:7

Irony the ignorance with which Socrates began, the world created from nothing, the chaste virgin of whom Chr. was born. ―

258:8

Someone who went mad by remaining continually conscious that the world is going around.―

258:9

Kant despairs of attaining absolute clarity in understanding the world; therefore he goes over to another standpoint―modern philos. abandons the relative absolute.

258:10

I often enough had a premonition of losing from that letter bag. If orthodoxy continues to fixate itself in that constricted fashion, it will come to look like the paper cones at the greengrocer’s, each smaller one inside the other.

258:11

Situation Someone wants to confess something of great importance; but the person to whom he wants to open himself does not come right away; then he relates something completely different―

258:12

15

20

25

PAPER 259 “Telegraph Messages from Someone Who Sees Unclearly to a Clairvoyant concerning the Relation between Xnty and Philosophy” Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup

216

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s ”

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

213

Telegraph messages from someone who sees unclearly to a clairvoyant on the relation between Xnty and philosophy.

Motto If a man meets a man going down the road, and one man has a rake and one man has a spade, can a man do a man any harm[?]

Motto and they cast lots for his seamless tunic. Motto “Maledictus qui porcum alit et filium suum docet sapientiam græcum” a Jewish edict from the year 60 before Xt

259:1

Paganism is the sensory, the full development of the life of the senses―its punishment is thus, as we see in Prometheus, that the liver is hacked away and continually grows, the continually awakening and yet never satisfied desire―Xnty is the cerebral, therefore Golgotha is called the place of the skull.

Xnty will not negotiate with philosophy even if philosophy is willing to share the booty with it; it does not want the king of Sodom to be able to say: I have made Abraham rich.―

5

10

15

Preface. The difficulty is finding the clairvoyant who can free me from all the difficulties to which I―who see only in a metaphor and in obscure language―am exposed. I am altogether too cloudy in my vision to be able to discern whether such a person in fact actually exists or when he will make his appearance.

Xnty absolutely does not accentuate the earthly idea of beauty, which of course was everything to the Greeks; on the contrary, Paul speaks with genuine levity about the clay vessel in which the spirit dwells―The question is to what degree ought Xt be put forward as the ideal of hum. beauty.―and oddly enough, while in other respects many similarities have been found betw. him and Socrates, people have given no thought to this aspect; for, as is well-known, Socrates was uglier than original sin.― The great prominence of the altar ritual in the Middle Ages was a return to the pagan, the classical abdominal process―the sermon, on the other hand, lets the head come to play a part once again.― Oct. 22, 38.

13 Maledictus . . . græcum] Latin, Accursed is the person who raises a pig and instructs his son in Greek wisdom.

20

25

30

35

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s ”

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

217

214

The attempt by navel contemplators to concentrate upon oneself through the navel. Oct. 29th 38. 5

Now here is the place for the entire study of the significance of asceticism as something peculiarly Christian.―

10

15

20

25

30

Thus, the Mediterranean, as the point around which the entire ancient development rotated, can also be designated as Europe’s navel, something that the eye indeed confirms in looking at the continents involved (Europe as a whole―Africa). Oct. 29th 38.

The sciences on Golgotha, under the cross of Jesus, or the sanctified sciences. Presented during a dream, where the sciences come to worship under the cross. translated from the German. Cph. 1764. The Danish translator’s preface. “The book was immediately translated into a number of languages. In England it appeared on Good Friday in Loyd’s Evening Post.” “Golgotha is to be Parnassus.” Si Christum nescis, nihil est si cætera discis. Si Christum discis, satis est, si cætera nescis. (NB. I have the book from Ditlevsen’s subscription library of edifying literature.) p. 7. After her (history) comes worldly philosophy. Her eyes were downcast as with one who is bashful and ashamed. But at length she raised them, deeply moved . . . . there is truth in the world, but truth like moonshine.―

21 Si Christum . . . cætera nescis] Latin, If you are ignorant of Christ, what you learn of other things means nothing. If you are ignorant of other things, it is enough to learn to know Christ. (See also explanatory note.)

218

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s ”

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

At times, of course, one cannot but smile when the idea is to be realized by ridiculous scientific details, when, e.g., it says on p. 17: [“]But where the nails pierced him and in the opening in his side, the art of fortification found absolutely impregnable divine strongholds.― Nov. 29th 38.

Here, indeed, the entire question of androgyny―concerning the profound significance that the difference between the sexes had for the classical worldview, the purely sensual element in their notion of love―which so preoccupied ancient dogmatists, comes into play. see Scotus Erigena de divisione naturæ libri quinque. Oxonii 1681. II, p. 53:. . . saltem post ruinam suam de spiritualibus ad corporalia, de æternis ad temporalia, de incorruptibilus ad caduca, de summis ad ima, de spirituali homine in animalem, a simplici natura ad sexuum divisionem, ex angelica dignitate et multiplicatione ad pecorinam contumeliosam corruptibilemque secundum corpus generationem suum miserabilem interitum, tali poena admonitus etc. Dec. 17th 38.

1st Position pathological play of muscles and physiognomic postures in costume. NB. The profit (as well as what I myself gain as a reader) comes in the next section.―

215

5

10

The significance of celibacy is connected to this.

15

20

25

259:2 30

The world’s judgment of Xt Behold the man.

16 Scotus Erigena de divisione . . . saltem post ruinam . . . admonitus etc.] Latin, Scotus Erigena’s division of nature, in five books, Oxford, 1681, bk. II, p. 53: . . . at least after its own fall, having learned from such punishment, will acknowledge its wretched downfall from the spiritual to the corporeal, from the eternal to the temporal, from the incorruptible to the corruptible, from the peaks to the depths, from the spiritual person to the earthly, from the individual being to the being divided into sexes, from the dignity and multiplicity of the angels to a shameful and ephemeral lifetime that is subject to the body and is similar to that of cattle: and it would wish to return to its previous state of dignity by repenting and by putting aside its pride and by obeying the divine laws he had violated. (See also explanatory note.)

40

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s ” 216

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

219

a) “I would rather be in hell with family than in heaven with the Xns.” b) no salvation apart from Xnty. c) The virtues of the pagans are glittering vices.―

5

2nd Position exacerbatio cerebri.

259:3

7 exacerbatio cerebri] Latin, exacerbation of the brain.

PAPER 260 The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg

222

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

•

potestas clavium is given both in Mt 18 and, especially, in Jn 20:23 (αϕιεναι and ϰρατειν αμαρτιας). In the Church, at first public confession was used, later private [confession], sanctioned in 1215. Inasmuch as the Catholic Ch. appears to demonstrate great seriousness in this resp., it in fact deceived itself, for the individual could often experience anxiety about whether he had confessed everything, and the ecclesiastical principle that forgetting something would have no influence on the efficacy of absolution obviously touches directly upon the Protest[ant] sphere; and the Church advanced a distorted concept of sin merely as something ext[ernally] palpable. (Luther, on the other hand, says somewhere that there is no deadly sin other than unbelief.) The erroneous nature of repentance also followed from this: prayer, fasting, alms.―The Protest. Ch. argued vigorously against this, especially against the extremity: indulgences; but it did retain a universal confession: the Augsb. Conf.: confessio retinetur apud nos, quum propter maximum absolutionis beneficium, tum propter alias conscientiarum utilitates . . . . in the 11th article: docent, quod absolutio privata retinenda sit, docentur homines, ut absolutionem plurimi faciant, quia sit vox dei. Apologia c: vox evangelii remittens peccata et consolans conscientias. In Luther’s Small

1 potestas clavium] Latin, the power of the keys. (See also explanatory note). 2 αϕιεναι and ϰρατειν αμαρτιας] Greek, to forgive [and] to retain sins. (See also explanatory note.) 20 confessio retinetur . . . utilitates] Kierkegaard’s free citation from the conclusion of article 25, “De Confessione” [On Confession] in Confessio Augustana [Augsburg Confession]. (See explanatory note for context and translation of the full passage.) 23 docent . . . retinenda sit] Latin, Kierkegaard’s abbreviated citation from article 11, “De Confessione” in Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici, “Pars I” [Part 1], p. 12. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.) 24 docentur homines . . . vox dei] Latin, Kierkegaard’s abbreviated citation from article 25, “De Confessione” in Confessio Augustana in Libri symbolici, “Pars II” [Part 2], p. 27. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.) 25 Apologia . . . consolans conscientias] Latin, Kierkegaard’s abbreviated citation from article 25, “De Confessione et Satisfactione” [On Confession and Satisfaction] in article 12, “De Poenitentia” [On Penitence], 105 (8), in Ph. Melanchthon’s Apologia Confessionis Augustanae, in Libri symbolici, article 6, “De Confessione et Satisfactione,” 8, p. 181. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.)

219

260:1

5

10

15

20

25

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

5

10

Catech.: the Xn is to receive absolution as from God himself, not doubting, but believing that the sins assuredly are forgiven. absolutio declarativa et judiciaria; but it was nonetheless collectiva and exhibitiva i.e. confert et exhibet peccatorum remissionem; now the question was whether it was absolute or hypothetice? in the beginning they used the formula: deus te solvat a peccatis tuis, but in the 12th cent.: ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine etc.― The priest could forgive lesser sins, the bishop the greater sins, the pope alone certain individual sins, though of course there were cases in which it was impossible to obtain this.

15

220

260:2

20

25

The difference in church governance in the two Protest. churches can be summarized under 3 points: 1) the relations betw. clergy and clergy; 2) the relations betw. clergy and the congregation; 3) the relations betw. the congregation and its errant members.― The Augsb. Conf. teaches about the power of the clergy: ex jure divino jurisdictio competit episcopis, impios, quorum nota est impietas excludere ex communione ecc: sine vi humana sed verbo. Spiritual and worldly power are distinctly separated:

4 absolutio declarativa et judiciaria] Latin, absolution, both proclaimed and distributed. (See also explanatory note.) 5 collectiva . . . peccatorum remissionem] Latin, transfers and distributes the forgiveness of sins; “collectiva” is presumably an error for “collativa.” (See also explanatory note.) 7 absolute or hypothetice] Latin, in the absolute sense [or] the hypothetical sense. 8 deus . . . tuis] Latin, God absolves you of your sins. 9 ego te . . . nomine etc.] Latin, I absolve you of your sins in the name of etc. (See also explanatory note.) 22 ex jure divino . . . sine vi humana sed verbo] Latin, Kierkegaard’s free, abbreviated rendering of a passage from article 28, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica” (On the Power of the Church) from Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici, “Pars II,” article 7, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” 21, p. 39. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.)

•

223

224

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

Paper 260:1-2.

•

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

5

10

260:3

15

20

25

Non commiscenda est ecclesiastica potestas et civilis; ecc: suum mandatum habet evangelium docendi et administrandi sacramenta, non irrumpat in alienum officium, non transferat regnum mundi, non abroget leges magistratuum, non tollet legitimam obedientiam Itaque nostri docuerunt, utramque potestatem propter mandatum dei religiose venerandam. The Church is permitted to make changes. Adiaphora; the bishop’s power is entrusted to him and limited by the congregation and God’s Word.

The Protestant doctrine concerning the Euch[arist] constitutes the opposite of the Socinians et al. (to whom Zwingli comes close) because it does not view it merely as a memorial meal or an outw[ard] sign; it constitutes the opposite of Cathol[icism] because it does not assume a transformation of the substance, and even less does it see this transformation as an inherent post-consecration constitution (for the doctrine of ubiquity is put forward in order to explain the real and substantial presence in and under the partaking and is not a spatial property or a temporal one with respect to duration). But despite the fact that Luther insists upon the moment of appropriation, he nonetheless focuses more on the substantial and real presence than does Calvin, who, in restricting the presence to believers, one-sidedly emphasizes the subjective element.―It is expressed as follows in the Augs. Conf.: docent, quod corpus et sanguis Xsti vere adsint et distribuantur vescentibus in coena domini. 1 Non commiscenda . . . obedientiam] Latin, Kierkegaard’s free, abbreviated rendering of a passage from article 28, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica” (On the Power of the Church) from Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici, “Pars II,” article 7, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” 21, p. 38. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage). 6 Itaque nostri . . . venerandam] Latin, Kierkegaard’s free, abbreviated rendering of a passage from article 28, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica” (On the Power of the Church) from Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici, “Pars II,” article 7, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” 21, p. 37. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.) 28 docent . . . domini] Latin, They teach that the body and blood of Christ are truly present and are distributed to those who eat the supper of the Lord. (Kierkegaard’s abbreviated citation from article 10, “De Coena Domini” [On the Lord’s Supper]. (See explanatory note for translation of the full passage.)

•

225

226

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

•

Confessio variata approaches Calvin: quod cum pane et vino. The Schmalkaldic Articles emphasize that it is actually present both for the pious and for the impious. The Formula of Concord: We believe that Xt’s body and blood are present actually and as substance and that they are distributed and received together with the bread and the wine, just as the words themselves literally say. Insofar as the matter itself is to be taken up for a final decision, it has been pointed out that 1) either the exegetical reasons must be decisive (but here there is the difficulty that the word εστι simply cannot apply to Xt, if he spoke Syro-Chaldean―that if εστι is strictly insisted upon, we approach Cath[olicism]); 2) or, in order to explain the secret of the sacrament, decisive weight must be attributed to this or to the other view. But here it is the case that both elements are neces[sary], both the presence and the partaking, and in the different views of the matter, it is simply the case that lesser or greater emphasis is placed upon one or the other of these two aspects; 3) or decisive influence concerning the efficacy of the sacrament must be attributed to this or to the other understanding of it. But the same thing holds concerning this.

222

10

15

20

25

The earliest germs of the doctrine concerning Xt’s presence in the Euch[arist] or concerning the relation of the bread and the wine to the person of Xt, as well as later views, are present in the most ancient Ch[urch]. a) in Asia Minor, a mythical rationale that explained the situation by adverting to an analogy with the union of flesh and blood in λογος. b) a more materialist rationale that had appeal in North Africa and in the Latin Church: signa et figuræ sanguinis et corporis. (Tertullian), but which nonetheless also attributed a certain amount of significance to the moment of partaking. The Greek Ch[urch] has

1 Confessio variata] Latin, The Changed [Augsburg] Confession. (See also explanatory note.) 1 quod cum pane et vino] Latin, that with the bread and the wine. (See also explanatory note.) 12 εστι] Greek, is. (See also explanatory note.) 32 λογος] Greek, the word. (See also explanatory note.) 34 signa . . . et corporis] Latin, signs and images of the blood and the body [of Christ]. (See also explanatory note.)

260:4

30

35

The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist Paper 260 1839 •

5

remained at the halfway point, without implementing the concept. It assumes that the bread and the wine are a divinely active substance, but it does not get involved in determining their relation to the person of Xt.

•

227

PAPER 261—PAPER 263 Aphoristic Sketches

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup

230

1

5

10

[a]

Aphoristic Sketches

not a great box office success. It is precisely this enormous freedom: now I think I would write a big book, now that I was more mute than a fish the male and the masculine stride, in which the genuinely humorous is found, which therefore women can never understand, because it goes beyond what is written.

•

P a p e r 261–262 1839 •

Whoopee the ecstatic―to sneeze―. The earnest seriousness of our system development forbids doing it while under arms. nonetheless, I permit myself to do so and to cough and, in short, all secernationes et quidem sensu metaphysico

225

The criticism has been created by the devil―we all enjoy worshipping the unknown divinity, but he will scarcely manifest himself before we have much to offer.

261:2

I read it during my first stay in Gilleleje; I tended to spend most of my time there walking in the woods, I read it aloud to the animals, I spoke louder than the birds sang, and they did not understand me; what could be more natural, then, that I came to think of my most recent stay in the country, when I didn’t need to go out and take a walk in order to avoid misunderstanding and at least guarantee myself a non-understanding, and that, after all, is a good deal,―and one is actually tempted to establish a sort of freemasonry because, in general, it must be regarded as good fortune that one is totally misunderstood by people.

261:3

Right Reverend I went out to walk yesterday afternoon at 6 o’clock.

262:1

Get up, dear, and put on your boots and put on leather leggings and wander away from your home and the cities of your forefathers and be for a short while a foreigner in Reitzel’s shop[.] And he pulled on his boots and was a stranger to his home, and he said, [“]If, beloved, I have found grace in thine eyes[”]

My style non solum claudicat like the ancestral father of the Jews, sed omnino prorsus judaizat. verte 4 secernationes . . . metaphysico] Latin, distinctions, even in the metaphysical sense. 32 non . . . claudicat] Latin, not only limps. 33 sed . . . judaizat] Latin, but it is fully in accord with Jewish custom. 34 verte] Latin, turn.

261:1

5

15

20

25

30

262:2

Aphoristic Sketches 226

•

P a p e r 262–263 1839 •

231

262:3

not only do I suffer like Tantalus, not only am I desperate for water at every instant, but at the same instant I am almost overfull

263:1

What is truth, that is the question that for me continually stands as the heading on a very thick, very properly bound book―with blank pages. Until now, the only truth I have found has not only had happy unpleasant consequences for me. Namely, after my manservant, in entering my bedchamber, had intimated that it was already day, and after a short overview of the events of the day and the night (unfortunately, there had been no fires, for example, and I could see very well why I had slept so soundly, because, in fact, the night had been so unusually boring), he had prepared my temperament (awakened from its slumbers) for the question of the day―one of the most difficult and significant with respect to the problem that is decisive for the whole domestic economy―that of obtaining the necessary supply of firewood for the winter. After having listened to my highly trusted manservant’s considerations with respect to a provisional investigation of the weather, an investigation that, owing to its special importance and interest, as it were, and because of the Umsicht with which it was treated, I listened to while half sitting-up in bed (in connection with less important matters I generally lie completely stretched out), he thought that he could with full certainty suggest that the purchase of firewood take place today. However, inasmuch as I could not from my bed observe the heavens with much advantage and profit, I decided to stand up and investigate the heavens. I decided not to purchase it[.] I saw that it was decidedly going to rain. I went out for a walk and got sopping wet.

5

10

15

20

―A cultivated man of about age 50, who is in good circumstances and who has been a widower for 2 years, but can no longer endure the torment of being deprived of marital bliss, seeks a cultivated girl of good background, possessed of a good heart, winsome and cheerful, which is very important; younger than 30 is not desirable because my youngest daughter is 27, and it is my intention that, as in the past, she continue to be in charge of the household in order to make things easier for my wife, inasmuch as it is my intention to strive to please her and to make life as pleasant as possible. The lady who considers this will please send a note to no. 12 Snaregade, 1st floor, with the mark [“]Hope 171.[”] As a cultivated man, it is unnecessary for me to provide assurances of discretion. The gentleman’s name and place of residence will be provided. No pranks, please.

263:2

25

30

35

14 Umsicht] German, caution, circumspection.

232

Aphoristic Sketches

•

P a p e r 263 1839 •

Paper 263:1–3, with personal advertisement attached.

Aphoristic Sketches

•

P a p e r 263 1839 •

233

228

263:3

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Thursday, Sept. 12th Comissionstidenen.―Life itself has taken on this shape―the goldsmith’s manual balance and the acute vision of a short story writer would immediately be able to say how much material: 1, 2, 3 volumes according to the circumstance.―The husband will do everything to provide the wife with a pleasant life in which the daughter will run the household. For the first 14 days, thoughts are only of joy and happiness, but when the last reverberations of the distant echo of the congratulations of well-wishers have died away, when all the wedding pastries have been consumed, when life’s serious side makes its demands, then she steps forward in a simple housedress, sleeves pushed up, in order to take hold, with a firm hand, of the entire household economy―no longer is she willing to enjoy the sweet tranquillity. The 27-year-old girl protests: there is a great deal that speaks for her, including her father’s express words in the advertisement as well as customary usage that, through a sort of system (e.g., with respect to preparation of meals) has drawn and bound everything to her. The 30-year-old wife asserts her maternal rights, her wifely influence, during many a quiet hour. The husband tries to smooth over the strife, but when he does not succeed, he tries to forget it. Now we have come to the point where there are two divergent paths: the one leads into the precincts of Folke-Bladet (“The husband goes to the pub and goes more and more downhill, unless he first squanders his money, then plays the lottery, and then goes downhill.[”] The moral turns out to be that one should look for a spouse neither in Adresseavisen nor in Comissionstidenen, but in Folke-Bladet); the other path vanishes into secondary observations from the Stories of Everyday Life. Ah, blessed, free-floating, poetic hovering above the subject: Not only do I see two paths, but these paths multiply to infinity―ah, but it is only for a while that one can take delight in this freedom: this is something I know, if not from my own experience, then from the experiences of all the poetic and novelistic heroes I have brought into the world. This episode can very successfully be retained―this is the French pattern. The plot says nothing definite as to whether, in addition, the aforementioned man has, or does not have, other children, but here poetic creativity can actualize things without assuming any responsibility, either with respect to the fellow’s character (if, for example, there were illegitimate children, for then our moral goes bankrupt) or with respect to their future maintenance, for we will of course take care of that in the novella. An infinite number of combinations can be made from this; I will not mention the sorts of cases that overstep too much the boundaries of the novella, e.g., if the above-mentioned husband had had an illegitimate daughter who, for example, was 31 years old and was thus 1 year older than her step-stepmother and 4 years older than her eldest sister―if she were suddenly to come forward like a deus ex machina from the place she had been living, forgetting the world and herself forgotten―we will not dwell upon this, because the man (a civil servant―if such great catastrophes took place) would instantly have to go downhill or (in accordance with the other version), precisely because the catastrophe was so great, would go to his rest, and by no means are we willing to let go of our civil servant, but instead have a great many more adventures for him. Now, when one thinks of the good that a novella could do by helping to make even better known the longing and desire of this searching civil servant, thereby making it even

234

Aphoristic Sketches

•

P a p e r 263 1839 •

more likely that a multiplicity of notes will come streaming in to no. 12 Snaregade, and in this way poetry does not lead one away from actuality but leads one to actuality (to no. 12 Snaregade, into the arms of the searching civil servant, etc.); if one adds to this the advantages that could accrue to the writer, that if the civil servant’s hopes are crowned with a happy outcome, the writer could expect with complete certainty an acceptable and good-tasting dinner on the wedding day―indeed, he could even count on some exceptional food and an affectionate glance from the now-happy wife; if we now consider that with this novella as with every other, in addition to this exceptional profit, he can with great certainty count on it multiplying―that he can say, like Attorney Tobias, that it would be a poor lawyer who cannot make 10 cases out of one, for of course a novella always ends with a marriage, and as a consequence of this, on average it also ends with children, and it is only very wealthy writers who, in their works, fail to think of the posterity (of their works), but in any case, for a practiced authorly eye, owing to its indwelling poetic power, a merely more or less complete―but by no means very populous―novelistic household, will, if fragmented, constitute a whole, and I have the honor to know an author who has had 14 different magnifying glasses ground: with no. 1 he has an overview of the ordinary hum. situations that can arise among the individuals he has gotten hold of; then, when he then takes up a pair of them and makes them the principal characters, the entire surroundings of course take on a different appearance―this is accomplished with the help of no. 2, which already is so powerful that it enlarges the 27-year-old daughter almost to the point of pushing aside the civil servant, who more and more disappears, and whereas with the help of no. 7 one is able to see the 27-year-old daughter’s children, one can scarcely glimpse the civil servant in the background as a wardrobe or some other piece of furniture through which spirits usually disappear at the Royal Theater.

I study Hebrew with someone in the aftern[oon], will hire someone else for the morn[ing] and yet another to take walks with me, thereby manufacturing knowledge of Hebrew inside sealed machines, as Deichmann’s produces chocolates.

229

10

15

20

263:4

PAPER 264 Pages from an Older Journal

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

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

236

Pages from and Older Journal

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

Now, it is certainly the case that the abstract, the metaphysical, ought continually be more and more foreshortened and abbreviated (both in the sense in which a painter foreshortens perspective and in the stricter sense in which one foreshortens, inasmuch as the doubt through which the system more and more works itself forward must be conquered and thereby become less and less talkative), but metaphysical thinking deceives itself in maintaining that, in thinking, it also thinks historical actuality. After the system has in fact completed itself and come to the category of actuality, the new doubt emerges, the new contradiction, the final and deepest one, whereby metaphysical actuality determines historical actuality (therefore the Hegelians distinguish between existence and actuality: the ext[ernal] phenomenon exists, but to the extent that it is taken up into the idea, it is actual. Now, this is quite correct, but Hegel[ians] do not define the boundary, the degree to which every phenomenon can become actual in this way; this is because they see the phenomenon from the bird’s-eye perspective of the metaphysical and thus do not see the metaphysical in the phenomenon from the perspective of the phenomenon.) the historical is namely the unity of the metaphysical and the accidental. It is the metaphysical insofar as this [metaphysical] is the eternal bond of existence without which the phenomenological would disintegrate; it is the accidental insofar as there is in every event a possibility that it could take place in infinitely many other ways; seen from the div[ine] standpoint, the unity of this is Providence, from the hum[an] standpoint, the historical. Now, the meaning of the historical is not that it is to be annulled, but that, under it, the individual is to be free, though also happy in it. This unity of the metaph[ysical] and the accidental is already present in self-consciousness, which is the point of departure for the personality. I become at the same time conscious of myself in my eternal validity, in my, so to speak, divine necess[ity], and in my accidental finitude (that I am this particular being, born in this country, at this time, under the influence of all these varied circumstances). And this latter aspect is not to be overlooked and not rejected, but the true life of the individual is its apotheosis, which does not consist in the empty content-less I stealing away, as it were, out of this finitude in order to be volatilized and evaporated in its emigration to heaven, but that the div[ine] dwells within and finds itself in the finite. July 4th 1840.

233

264:1

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Pages from and Older Journal 234

264:2

5

10

264:3 15

20

25

264:4

30

•

P a p e r 264 1840

The period of conflict within the Protestant Church itself that followed upon the Reformation is so interesting in a double respect, both because it provides proof that in the Reformation a world-historical element had been set in motion (for from one point of view, this is something we know also from a feeling of an inner need to reflect upon what the world has already experienced, which is also why these disputes furnish, as it were, an abbreviated life story of the whole of dogmatics), and also because all of the problems of dogmatics were here understood in their most profound concretion, even if at times they approached paradox or caricature. July 4th 1840.

In general, one must say that the whole of modern philosophy, even in its most grandiose manifestation, is after all actlly only an introduction to making philosophizing possible. Undeniably, Hegel constitutes a conclusion―but only of the development that began with Kant and was directed toward cognition; with Hegel we have in a deeper sense come to the result that the preceding philos[ophy] took in an immediate sense as its beginning: that there was any reality at all in thinking; but all the thinking that, starting from this immed[iate] point of departure (or that is now happy with this result), proceeded to enter into genuine anthropological contemplation: this has not yet been begun. see K.K. pp. 20 and 21 July 5th 1840.

A condition for the unity of the div[ine] and the hum. that is given in faith is the doubt (which corresponds to prior doubt about the unity of the div[ine] and hum., the infinite and the finite, that is given in knowledge) concerning whether sinful humanity, after the original relationship has been altered, is capable of turning back to union with God―is a doubt or, to use a more pathological and concrete expression, a care (as of course everything Xn is concretion.). July 5th 1840.

•

237

238

Pages from and Older Journal

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

When he says that all knowledge is recollection, Plato expresses a thought that is as beautiful as it is profound and correct; for how sad it would be if that which was supposed to reassure a pers. so that he rlly could find peace in it, lay outside him and in a way would always lay outside him, and if the sole source of reassurance was the assistance of the busy, noisy clamor of that external science (sit venia verbo) to drown out the inner need that was never satisfied. This point of view reminds one of what has in recent times found expression in the observation that all philosophizing is a calling to mind of what is already given in consciousness, except that this latter point of view is more speculative, the former point of view more pious and therefore even a bit mystical insofar as it gives rise to a polemic against the world that is supposed to subjugate knowledge of the external world in order to bring about the stillness―not the infinite silence σιγη, so characteristic of the abstract―in which these recollections become audible. But one ought not remain at that point―on the contrary, here, in the world of knowledge, a curse (blessing) rests upon a pers., bidding him to eat his bread in the sweat of his face. But just as, with respect to the physical sphere, it does not mean that he is to give the earth the power of germination, etc., but that he is to do everything so that it can come to express itself; thus, too, with knowledge, and one can therefore say that the finite spirit is as it is, the union of necess[ity] and freedom (it shall not, by means of an infinite development, determine to become something, but, by means of a development, determine to be what it is.) thus it is also the unity of result and effort (i.e., it shall not, by means of development, bring forth something new, but through development acquire that which it has) July 10th 40. see EE. p. 37. DD. p. 59n.

8 sit venia verbo] Latin, excuse the word. silence.

19 σιγη] Greek,

264:5

235 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Pages from and Older Journal 264:6

5

Hegel’s hatred of the edifying, which asserts itself everywhere, is strange; but the edifying is not an opiate that lulls one to sleep, it is the Amen of the finite spirit and is an aspect of knowledge that ought not be overlooked. July 10th 40.

236

264:7

10

15

20

25

30

It was only through the accidental and arbitrary use of his own principle that Socrates did not become positive, but solely negative; for the art of questioning is only the dialectical side of the art of answering (and if one says that one fool can ask more than 7 wise men can answer, then one owes the wise men this apology: that the reason they cannot answer is that the other cannot question), but Socrates only used his art polemically, in order to show that N.N. was unable to reply. In this connection it could be a quite interesting task to show how Socrates’ words, when he speaks of immortality and (assuming that there is another life) of being together with Homer, etc., he also wanted to put questions to them; for of course this must either be in order to show them that they knew nothing and thus to topple every υψωμα in the einfache, empty infinity of ignorance; or here the positive aspect asserts itself: a questioning in order to learn something. That with which modern philosophy is so busy―getting every presupposition removed in order to begin with nothing―Socrates did the same thing, in his way, in order to end with nothing. July 10th 40.

264:8

Mysticism lacks the patience to wait for God’s revelation. July 11th 40.

264:9

It is all very well with all the talk about having experience as opposed to a priori knowledge, but

35

16 N.N.] Latin, abbreviation for “nomen nescio”: I do not know the name. 23 υψωμα] Greek, loftiness, arrogance. (See also explanatory note.) 23 einfache] German, simple.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

239

240

Pages from and Older Journal

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

nonetheless one cannot deny that it was laudable discretion that moved that conscientious judge who wanted to try out every punishment in order to be just in imposing them―it was truly laudable that he did not extend this to include the death penalty.―

. . . . for with nature, it is the opposite of how it is with hum. beings; the individual region increases in value for a person the more often one comes there; even if, each time, the moment of enjoyment becomes briefer, it also becomes even richer because the uncertain fumbling among objects gradually ceases, and the truly beautiful is grasped with greater certainty, and because what one enjoys and wishes to enjoy in nature is the uniformity, which has lasted from the first blessed moment; in a human being one seeks what is changeable (not in the sense in which, alas, all hum. beings are changeable, i.e., inconstant), i.e., the eternally youthful life, and when it is not found, the longer one involves oneself with them, the more boring hum. beings become.

5

237

264:10

10

15

20

July 15th 40.

If it really were the case that philosophers are presuppositionless, there would also have to be an account of language and its entire significance and relation to speculation, for in language specul[ation] of course has a medium that it has not provided for itself; and what the eternal secret of consciousness is for spec[ulation] as the union of a natural determination and a determination of freedom, so, too, is language both something originally given and something that freely develops itself. And just as little as the individual, no matter how freely he develops himself, can ever come to the point of absolute independence, because, on the contrary, true freedom consists in freely appropriating what is given, and thus becoming, through freedom, absolutely depen-

264:11 25

30

35

Pages from and Older Journal

5

10

238

15

264:12

dent, so, too, with language, and indeed, at times we certainly do encounter this ill-conceived tendency to refuse to take language as the freely appropriated given, but to give it to oneself, whether it manifests itself in the loftiest regions, where it generally ends witha silence or in the personal isolation of nonsensical gobbledygook. This is perhaps also how the story of the Babylonian confusion of tongues can be explained: that it was an arbitrary attempt to constitute a capriciously formed common language, an attempt that, precisely because it lacked all cohesive common properties, necessarily broke up into the most diffuse differences, for what holds here is totum est parte sua prius, which was not understood. July 18th 40.

When one understands the words of Brorson: When the heart is most distressed The harp of joy resounds its best

20

264:13 25

not in the religious sense in which they are written, but aesthetically, one has in them, as it were, a motto for all poet-existence, which necess[arily] must be unhappy. Aug. 9th 40.

These words by Plato (the Egyptian priest speaks them to Solon) Ω Σολων, Σολων ῾Ελληνες αει παιδες εστε, γερων δε ῾Ελλην ουϰ εστιν, is the best and pithiest aphorism on Greekness. Aug. 10th 40.

14 totum . . . prius] Latin, the whole comes before its parts. 25 Ω Σολων . . . ουϰ εστιν] Greek, O Solon, Solon, you Hellenes are never anything but children, and there is not an old man among you. (See also explanatory note.)

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

a

the negation of language.

241

1

PAPER 265—PAPER 269 “My Umbrella, My Friendship,” et al.

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, and Jon Tafdrup

244

“My Umbrella, My Friendship” et al.

•

P a p e r 265–268 1840 •

[Loose Pages] The arrogant courage that dares scorn everything differs as much as heaven and hell from the humble courage that dares hope for everything. Nov. 15th 40.

I have the courage to doubt, I believe, about everything; I have the courage to fight―I believe, against everything; but I haven’t the courage to acknowledge anything, not the courage to take possession of or own anything. Most peop. complain of the world being so prosaic, that life is not as in novels where the lovers are so fortunate; I complain that life is not as in novels where one has hard-hearted fathers to contend with, maidens’ bowers to force, the cloister’s walls to storm. All I have to contend with are the pale, bloodless, tenacious, nocturnal forms to which I myself give life and existence. Nov. 16th 40

There are animals that cannot eat as soon as someone looks at them, animals that gain their sustenance in the most remarkable and artful ways,―likewise myself with my moods; what I seem to scorn, I absorb, in this hidden and unnoticed way.

The older one gets, the more one feels on certain occasions like shouting: Allah is great, as the Arabs do in almost every situation in life. Today a paper was missing; it was of the utmost importance to me to know whether it was there or not; it was capable, if it existed, of destroying the whole point of a very intricate piece of work,―I open a hiding place to look for quite different things, and behold, there it is―and I shouted: Allah is great.

241

265

5

266

10

15

267 20

268 25

30

“My Umbrella, My Friendship” et al. 242

269

5

10

•

P a p e r 269 1840

My Umbrella, My Friendship. It never deserts me; it did that only once. It was a terrible storm; I stood alone and deserted by everyone, alone on Kongens Nytorv; then my umbrella turned inside out. I dithered as to whether I should abandon it because of its faithlessness and become a misanthrope. It has become so dear to me that I always carry it, rain or shine; yes, to show it that I do not love it merely for its usefulness, I sometimes walk up and down in my room and pretend I am outside, lean on it, open it, rest my chin on the handle, bring it up to my lips, etc.

•

245

PAPER 270 “The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Stine Holst Pedersen, and Steen Tullberg

248

1

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

[a]

The sermon held at the Pastoral Seminary

b

lost in contemplation

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

Father in Heaven! Draw our hearts to you that our longing may be there, where our treasure is meant to be, turn our minds and our thoughts there, where our citizenship is―in your kingdom, so that, when one day you call us away from here, our passing may not be a painful separation from the world but a blessed union with you. But we do not know the day and the hour, perhaps there still lies a long road ahead for us, and when at times the strength is taken from us, when exhaustion spreads a mist over our eyes so that we peer out as into a dark night, and restless desires stir within, impatient, wild longings, and the heart groans in fearful anticipation of what is to come, O Lord Our God, then teach us, fix in our hearts the conviction that also while we are living we belong to you. Amen. Philipp. 1: 19–25. It was from his imprisonment in Rome that the Apostle P. wrote the letter to the congregation in Philippi from which our text is taken. And truly, if the beginning of the letter did not inform us that he was living in the emperor’s palace in chains as a man in captivity, then the words we read would certainly give rise to no such thoughts. For it is not the idea that the prison gate might yet open just once, in order for him to be led to death that evokes his sorrowful longing to depart and to be with Xt. It is as if, living free and unfettered in the world, as if in the midst of his restless activity, he had for an instant surrendered himself to quiet, solitary reflections on the meaning of life and death―that is how his words sound to us. He longs for the congregation he had founded, for the many he had led from the ways of perdition to the knowledge and blessedness of truth; he longs for the congregation he loved; he longs for the Lord and Master who had called him, too, back from the way of offense, for the Lord and Master who loved him. Thus he standsb before our thoughts like a beautiful, an elevating, an invigorating image, like an object that our eyes can rest upon, not like a treacherous, disappointing

245

270

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

246

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

247

illusion that in the hour of peril, when a storm rages in our own breast, vanishes from our sight, but on the contrary shines even more clearly―he does not stand high above the world as Moses of old in order to gaze longingly at a promised land he could never set foot upon; he gazes out over the blessing he had propagated all around in the world, and from afar there echo in his ears the congregations’ hymns of praise, devout prayers, and supplications for him, their founder and father in Christ. But he did not take this honor in vain. The earth does not hold him captive, for him the world is too narrow. Powerful longings, a holy homesickness, turn his gaze up yonder―toward heaven, and he, the Apostle Paul, who could look upon an undertaking significant as few others, eternally unforgettable as that of fewer, he knows nevertheless a beyond that is even greater, even more blessed; it is no presentiment (and how could a mere presentiment bring him to want to abandon such a life?)―no, he knows that to depart this life and to be with Xt is so much better. It is, accordingly, not because life has become a painful burden, the world vanity, his apostolic call to him a foolishness, that he wants to depart from here. Truly, he had not lived in vain; he had not been beating the air. His longing is sound and strong, conscious of its object, firmly and unshakably directed at it. His longing therefore does not eat away at his strength, does not make him unfit for his task. Invigorated, his thoughts turn back again to his call; rejuvenated, he feels new life in himself. And this, he says, I know and am assured of, that I shall stay and continue to be with you all, for the sake of your progress and joy in the faith. As though he had thus far accomplished nothing in the spreading of Xt’s name, he hastens onward this way to new activity. Forgetting what lies behind and reaching for what lies ahead, he hastens toward the goal. He thinks with pain of the many who lost the faith and went about as enemies of the cross of Xtc; he is reminded with sorrow of the frail in the congregations, who needed to be fortified in order to take firm strides along the way. He who declares himself as being in

c

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

249

if only his voice might reach their ears

1

250

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

debt to both Greek and barbarian, to the wise and the unwise, aspires to make Xt known again among the Gentiles, and to praise his name among the nations, to shout to them: rejoice, you Gentiles, with his people, and again praise the Lord, all Gentiles, and praise him, all nations. He turns himself again into a servant to all; it is not to seek praise that he wants to preach the gospel once again, but because a necessity lies incumbent upon him, and he has become all things to all people in order, by being all things, yet to be able to save some. And this same apostle who witnesses that if we hope in Xt only for this life, then we are the most pitiable of all hum. beings; and in addition, with his life he proves that he hoped also for this life; for if to live in the flesh, he says, gains for me the fruits of my labor, then I do not know what I should choose; his conduct teaches us that he knew what it is to make the most of the time. Observations and reflections such as these that the apostle expresses in the text that has been read to us, have surely never disappeared altogether from the world. For even if there have always been many whose busy pursuits have not granted them the opportunity to reflect upon the things that are above, whose distracted minds could never collect themselves for earnest meditation, many who, enslaved in the service of the moment, diverted themselves for a short while, enchanted by the lust of the eye and the world’s vanity, and now, vanished like fleeting shadows, snatched away in the confusion of life; many who grew old among us but learned nothing, experienced nothing, found out nothing, whose lives disappeared in the world without trace, upon whose inner being life itself had left no impression; and many who drifted about unsteadily, who thought themselves free and yet were time’s most wretched slaves―yet there will nevertheless always be many left who did not altogether refuse such thoughts. Some of these soon discovered that basically it was a waste of time to think of what is beyond, that the time given to such reflection was really lost, since the insight one gained was looked

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

248

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

249

upon as nothing. This shrewdness of theirs they did not keep to themselves; they gladly initiated others into it, would gladly be guides for the deluded. Activity in the world became their watchword. But then when everything went wrong for them, when insurmountable obstacles mocked their most zealous endeavors, when unforeseeable difficulties brought their great expectations to naught, they despaired without consolation in life, without hope in death. And when a longing for a hereafter awoke at times within them, it was an unmanly sigh, a soft, plaintive cry that was incapable of giving strength and nourishment because it had nothing to hold on to. d Others did not let go of such observations so easily; they were not so readily convinced, not so rapidly enlightened. They struggled as if to halt time’s hurried flight, to bring the transient moment to rest in order to devote themselves with due profundity and intensity to such deliberations. No moment was to go unused, but every day their reflections began over again; their lives were consumed in constant deliberation and testing; they never came to choose because they were never finished with their anxious calculations. Vacillating and without import, their lives were tossed about between equally empty thoughts. They longed to get away from a life whose meaning they did not understand; they yearned for a life whose meaning they misunderstood. Like clouds emptied of water, their thoughts were driven about by every breeze, and their yearnings became fruitless labor pains. Like shadows they lived out their time intoxicated by dreams. And if they happened to wake up, and sensed with grief that this life, if it had any meaning, was for them now forfeited, they consoled themselves with an insipid and feeble illusory image of a beyond that would give them compensation for what was lost. Without the strength to live, too timorous to bear the burdens of life, they tried to affect a courage that dares to hope. They longed to get away from this world. They longed for a blessedness that this earth cannot give but heaven alone possesses. And when they had decked out these

d

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

251

Or they let the thought of activity in the world broaden into that of the human race’s enthusiastic cooperation toward a common goal. They bade welcome everyone who would join the immortal band, who would with the courage of youth bring their task to completion. But the individual who was unable to come altogether to terms with such thoughts, whose soul harbored an inexplicable hidden secret after whose glorious revelation he sighed—they had no time to wait for him, for him they could provide no consolation except insofar as he would follow their advice to give up and forget such thoughts, to assuage these longings by intoxicating himself in contemplation of the human race’s eternal undertakings. They let him wither and die. And then, when the individuals had spent their energy in cooperation of this sort, when they felt that they were no longer able to follow the young band that was to solve their riddle, that once again had no comfort to offer them. Their time was past, they had indeed survived, buried while still alive, they still had the consolation that death would be more compassion-

1

5

10

15

20

25

30

252 1

5

10

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

ate, and, through its visitation, free them from their last pain and the only joyous memory of a life that was past and could never again be experienced. The age required new forces, and just as nature squanders its products, coldly and carelessly blowing away the pollen that conceals within itself the germ of life for a whole world, so does the hum. spirit squander rational creatures.

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

expectations with their sickly fancies, when they had created for themselves a heaven as they wished it, the longing became stronger and stronger; then they felt convinced and would gladly convince others of the same thing―that dying is a gain. To be sure, they made certain that such thoughts as the Lord’s apostle nurtured, that to be with Xt is far better, did not get mixed up in their ideas. And this did not disturb them, for their heaven was far more glorious, far more merciful, far more hospitable, much less petty than the apostle had been able to imagine in his day and from his standpoint. All these many now stood there to some extent like the apostle pondering the meaning of life and death, but they did not stand there hard-pressed betw. strong and powerful thoughts, but, confused and perplexed, torn apart by opposing thoughts, as unlike the apostle as could be. It is therefore with an earnest that judges the secular mind, the frivolous effort, the vain longing, but that also consoles the anxious despondency, lifts up and fortifies the dispirited longing and the shattered hope, that the apostle speaks the words that have been read: [“]For I am hard-pressed betw. two things, in that I want to depart from here and be with Xt, for that would be so much better, but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for your sake.” And we, χn f[riends], we will not sneak our way slyly under the apostle’s words in order to grasp the worldly wise in their foolishness with his power; we will humble ourselves under his apostolic authority, we will let his words judge the conflicting thoughts, let his discourse punish and discipline our wayward minds, but also let his words comfort and calm the fearful heart that does not wish to be without God in the world, that longs to be with Xt in the beyond, but is troubled by the thought of how weak it still is and how insecure. We will therefore, with God’s help and following the apostle’s directions, consider together the meaning of the words: For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain We will consider in what sense one may say, for me, to live is Christ, in order that we could add: to die is gain.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

250 40

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

251

We encounter in scripture expressions and ideas used there with a special emphasis, figurative descriptions in which the contrast between the Xn and the secular is sharply grasped, the separation uncompromisingly firm. They describe the situation in the world prior to Christ as one of ignorance, darkness, death; they describe the individual prior to Christ as having gone astray, ignorant, dead. But, in the fullness of time, there resounded for the second time over the earth: Let there be light. He our Lord Jesus Christ, the Prince of Life, who himself is life, he brought the believers from death to life, from darkness to light. Even if these contrasts do not repeat themselves so strongly in our consciousness, we whose earliest life was illuminated by Xnty’s truth, who were preserved in a bosom of Christian fellowship, and who did not need to wait longingly for the break of day, but needed only to look about us, to open our eyes to become aware of the truth, yet this contrast is experienced in stronger or weaker form by every believer. Or was there not a time also in your consciousness, my listener, when cheerfully and without a care you were glad with the glad, when you wept with the weeping, when the thought of God was meaninglessly mixed up with your other conceptions, mixed up with your happiness, but without sanctifying it, mixed up in your grief, but without allaying it? And was there not a later time when this, in a certain sense guiltless, life, that never called itself to account, vanished? Did there not come a time when your thoughts were unfruitful and barren, your will incapable of all good, your feelings without strength and warmth, when hope had died out in your breast, and memory clung painfully to individual recollections of happiness and these, too, soon became disgusting to you, when everything became of no consequence to you, and the secular grounds of consolation found their way to your soul only to wound even more your troubled mind, which turned away from them, impatient and embittered?

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

253

254

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

Was there not the time when you found no one to whom you could turn, when the darkness of quiet despair brooded over your soul, and yet you had not the courage to let it go, but would rather hold fast to it and even brood once more upon your despair? When heaven was closed to you, and the prayer died away on your lips, or it became a shriek of angst that called heaven to account, and still you sometimes found within yourself a longing, an intimation to which you might attach meaning, but soon this was crushed by the thought that you were a nothing, and your soul had vanished in infinite space? Was there not a time when you felt that the world did not understand your grief, could not heal it, not give you any peace, that this had to be in heaven, if it was anywhere to be found: alas, but then it seemed to you that the distance between heaven and earth was infinite, and just as you yourself lost yourself in contemplating the immeasurable world, so too God had forgotten you and was not concerned about you? And yet, despite all this, was there not a defiance in you that forbade you to humble yourself under God’s mighty hand? Was it not so? And what would you call this condition if not death, and how would you describe it except as darkness? But then hope, heaven’s messenger, penetrated this darkness, when you felt your soul’s form renewed, felt the vigor of new life stir within you, and when the abundance of God’s grace then overwhelmed you, you felt so happy, so rich, so trusting, so assured of your fellowship with God, so strong in faith, so burning in spirit, so powerful in withstanding all the wiles of the tempter, so blessed that it seemed to you as though all anxiety and unrest, all strife and trouble, all doubt and fear, lay behind you, were fought and conquered, far behind you, as on a hallowed, still evening, yes, as if even the last enemy were vanquished, as if you did not need to bow your head in order to walk through the valley of the shadow of death, but as if heaven were open and your hand already reaching for the jewel, for the victor’s crown that is set aside for all who keep the faith―did you

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

252

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

253 40

not then burst out in jubilation: I who was dead, I am alive? And if, then, you would not forfeit this blessedness, would not shrewdly think it was all a celestial joy that in a happy moment visits the hum. being’s joyless abodes to refresh him with its sweetness but quickly vanishes with no one knowing whence it comes or whither it is going, and you would not let your soul again become frigid and indifferent at the thought that there was no one you could thank for it―if this is not how you would have it, but on the contrary, with deep-felt humble thanksgiving you assured yourself of God’s presence, that not only did you live and move and have your being in him, but that he was now near you as from the beginning, when he loved the world in Christ, when you sensed that the yawning abyss separating you from your God had been filled in, that a way had been cleared connecting you with him, a way by which your sigh and your lament could ascend to him, and by which comfort and strength could descend to you, and that this way was your Lord and Savior, Our Lord, Jes. Xt, who is the truth and the way and the life―did you not then say: for me, to live is Christ. But in his words the apostle adds: to die is gain. We would not wrest from the repentant soul its last comfort, we do not doubt that the penitent thief was with Xt in paradise that very same day; but you do not believe, either, my listener, that such transfigured moments would disappear so that their place recognized them no more; you know very well that they contain a promise for a time that is to come, you have in them the spirit’s pledge for a time that is to come. And if, in such a moment, you were to say: to die is gain, this would indeed be distrust in God, which had its basis in a secret fear that the heaven’s riches would not always be so abundant, its mercy not always so ready to help, its grace not always so willing to bear witness to itself. But you became aware also of another voice, in your inner being, a gratitude that wanted to feel how much you owed to your God, a fervor that wished that your life might thank him for it, a love of neighbor that wished, through God’s

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

255

256

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

help, to be an instrument for saving, even though it were only one single hum. being, and for hiding the multitude of sins, and then you cried out: for me, to live is Christ. And even if you confessed that your peace and your salvation were a gift of grace that no life, no deed, and that not the whole world could earn or deserve, and even if you brought your thank-offering in shame and with averted face because you felt how lowly it was, because you felt that God’s grace and love became even greater by his noticing it―ah, then it was, after all, not untruth in you, vanity and pride, that you wanted to live. And was it not the same with Paul? From the moment our Lord and Master had stopped him on the way of offense, had thrown the blinded and proud Saul to the ground in order to raise up the humble Paul and draw him to himself, from that moment on he found no more rest on earth. He proclaimed the Word by day; he worked by night. He witnessed in the populous places, in the din of the city, he witnessed in the still recess of the prison. He witnessed to the humble and despised among the people, he witnessed to princes and kings, in the synagogues of the Jews, in the assemblies of the pagans, he witnessed on land, he witnessed at sea, he witnessed in life, and he witnessed in death. My soul is strangely moved; it is anxious at the spectacle of the powerful images floating past it; it again sighs despondently: to die is gain. But you, my listener, you surely know that these great men, God’s chosen instruments, were not in the world for us to be appalled at our own wretchedness, but so that we should praise and thank God; you know that no man can add one inch to his height―you know, and for you this is enough: that you too are called with a godly calling, that the spirit is the same even if the gifts of grace differ; you know that you too are God’s coworker. There is a godly grief; weary of the world, it draws no nourishment from it, esteems it no more, is not diverted by its multiplicity, is not disturbed by its noise, but in its grief quietly and deeply seeks God. This too is a testimony. There is a joy, a victory over

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

254 40

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

255 40

the world, even if the world is not sensible of it, even if it does not shine transfigured for the eyes of all in the hour of death, it witnesses aloud in the still of the night. There is a hope; light as the bird it glides over the abysses, a hope of God’s glory. There is a strength of soul; it was not tested in strife with the external enemies, but is tried in combat with the shrewd wisdom of the passions, with the blind impulses of the instincts. There is a gentleness, a mildness, the indestructible essence of a quiet spirit, that witnesses more powerfully than many a vociferous confession; it does not incite opposition, it dampens and alleviates it. There is a love that loves first, a love that loves enemies, a love that loves in life and loves in death. There is a compassion that visits widows and orphans, that gives away everything for the sake of Xt. There is a sympathy that goes poor and empty-handed through life, that does not own gold or silver; it owns only one earthly treasure, a precious linen cloth with which it wipes away tears, it owns only one sort of wealth― tears. There is a conciliatory spirit; it wins the most beautiful victory in the world, it wins those who are vanquished. There is a peace; lack of appreciation and derision do not disturb it, it survives all strife: to the world it is an inexplicable riddle, a God’s peace that surpasses all understanding. All these testimonies have, first and foremost, now and for all eternity, one witness―the spirit that witnesses in heaven; but beside this, they all have a promise for the life that is now. Alas, but we all bear the spirit in fragile vessels of clay―and when our work seems at times so insignificant, when, dissolved in quiet sadness, we sigh in humble grief over our being given so little, we may at times impatiently complain of this; if at times our own weakness occasions now willful, now unintended misunderstanding, then it seems to us that the holy name is being disgraced rather than glorified; when it seems that our witness denies rather than confesses our Lord and Master, then we dare justly say: to die is gain. We will let the apostle Paul answer. He writes: “For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as the

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

257

258

1

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

which is why we say, with the apostle, we seek to win men, but before God we are revealed.

e

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

least of all, as though sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels and to hum. beings, . . . up to this very hour we suffer both hunger and thirst, and are naked and beaten and homeless . . . we have become as the rubbish of the world, the dregs of all things, to this very hour. I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children.” We would let him speak to us: “I exhort you, then, be imitators of me.” Your mind will again find strength, your courage again be raised up to bear witness, even if it is ignored, misinterpreted, disdained. And even if you feel that your external, your visible appearance often corresponds very imperfectly to the inner life, that the earthly life is subject to infirmity, that much that is thought to be good can be turned to evil, Oh, precisely then is this inner life all the more important. About this, too, you say: for me, to live is Christ. And even if the thought that we are all members of one body, that we are all each other’s debtors, calls upon you again to perfect the external revelation as far as you can, you nevertheless also know that you stand alone, that there is an inner life within you, and you know that it is your blessedness that this life be unfolded and lived out in all its richness. For of what use is it to you if you could witness not merely in words but also in your external life so that others accepted your witness, but you did not have the witness within yourself[?] Of what use would it be to you if you were able to convince them of what you yourself did not accept, if you could confirm them in that about which you yourself vacillated[?]e There is life within you; it is not seen, it is not heard, it escapes all scrutiny, it flees from the world, in the midst of its confusion you are alone with your God. Yet, however secretive and obscure, it is not something strange and unknown to you that I mention. Scripture speaks of it with a meaningful presentiment. This life is a concealed life; it is hidden from us; for our life is hidden in Xt; it is revealed within us, for this life is Xt within us. It is not our life, it is the life of spirit within us, where there waxes a

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

256 40

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

257

divine growth. There is a benediction of prayer when your lips are dumb, but your heart has expanded, that is the benediction of prayer that possesses the assurance of being heard; there is an assurance of being heard that holds fast to God, because the Spirit, which is given to each person individually, is what prays within you, because the Spirit helps in your weakness when it comes forth with unutterable sighs, and he who searches the heart knows what is the mind of the spirit. There is a blessedness of contemplation; it unites what God has united, joins together what God has joined together―man with God and God with man; it shows you the image of your Lord and Master, the image of man in God and the image of God in man; it humbles you with the representation of your unlikeness, and you sink in adoration; it raises you up with the hope of likeness, and you rise up humble and full of confidence. There is a presence of God in us. Your mind is not unsettled, does not hover in longing, does not tremble with fleeting anxiety, your thought is not straining up toward heaven; your God takes up residence within you, is within you beyond all measure, is present within you, even if you first notice it with his disappearance. This life has also a growth, a development, a coherence, a constancy in itself, a constancy that is not seen; you sense only its individual utterances but have an expectant premonition of their inner connection. For just as this life flees the world, so too it escapes your own scrutiny, will not be taken possession of by it. For self-scrutiny begets unrest, and unrest begets spiritual trial, and spiritual trial begets despondency, and despondency halts growth and grieves the Holy Spirit. Only God knows this life, and it is not yet revealed how we shall come to be. And when this life expands more and more abundantly within us, when it attains man’s maturity and the adulthood of the fullness of Xt, when even if the outer pers. is wasting away, the inner being is renewed every day, then indeed we dare to say: to die is gain; not because death frees us from the world’s hardships, but because in death we win complete and undis-

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

259

260

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

turbed possession of what here in life we had only in part and uncertainly. And what was hidden from us and concealed in life, God, who sees in secret, shall then give to us openly. Then you will not pass away, for you were already away; you will not then go to foreign places, for you will come home; you then leave nothing behind, for you take everything with you; then you lose nothing but win everything. Amen!

5

PAPER 271—PAPER 276 “The First Rudiments of Either/Or. the Green Book. some Particulars That Were Not Used”

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Stine Holst Pedersen, Rasmus Sevelsted, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

262

The First Rudiments of Either/Or

•

P a p e r 271–274 1841 •

261

The first rudiments for Either/Or. the green book. some particulars that were not used.

271

and even to have been just once subjected to the stricter judgment, even if one had improved oneself, that is after all something that can’t be forgotten.

272:1

the only thing to fear is that it should occur to the prostitutes to refuse her wish, for then all is lost, they would have won an apprearance of truth, and the girl would have lost everything.

272:2

The Skeptic Just as the seducer should give a reflected image of the abortive effort that would be realized in relation to “the woman,” similarly the skeptic in relation to the man as an attempt to wrest everything from him

Pages from a street watchman’s journal It was on the 1st April 1830 that I became district officer under the Exchange. a) Observation over a fish tank in one of the fish barges. the vast horizon, still-life in contrast b) A Laplander idyll. Kultorvet Halmtorvet—

gl. Torv.

a gutter plank’s tale Overflow.

The publisher has been unable to refrain from inserting a few observations.

5

273

274:1 15

20

The First Rudiments of Either/Or 262

•

P a p e r 274–275 1841 •

263

It is Sunday afternoon―everything is quiet―a man is hawking shrimp― a man with stalks of English grass―the out-of-the-way place where they grow― a woman selling oranges―tidings of spring― a little story of infatuation in the district―

Story of the Rat That Became a Misanthrope.―

274:2

275:1

Either/Or

So reit’ ich hi in alle Ferne Über meiner Mütze nur die Sterne.

a fragment. 10

275:2

20

“As I have said to you over and over again, I write it for you once more―either/or, and one aut is not enough, for the one view does not lend itself to being linked as a coordinate to the other but is exclusively aut/aut. Whether this makes you angry and break with me as you have broken with so many others―or you take it in a friendly way, I will in any case remain: either/or―.”―

Everything is calm―the horn-blower at Nørreport pronounces his blessing upon the country, it echoes far off1― ―everyone is sleeping―only love is awake, either at the sickbed―or waiting in solitude or happily dreaming while awake―people think that love sleeps at night―on the contrary, like other ghosts, it awakens only in the night hour―it has become a ghost―a light beckons me. she hears the signal―the hunter’s call―it is also my call―This call seems to be summoning people into the city, no it is a blessing I take with me―the light moves―She puts it in the other room so as to be able to stare undisturbed out into the darkness―The hour is quarter to twelve―it is still day. Soon it will be night― he goes inside the gate and his notes echo1 even further off than when he stood outside the gate.―Sk Sk 1

they set the night’s quiet spirits in motion and one generation repeats it to the next―

1

7 So reit’ ich . . . die Sterne] German, I’ll be riding footloose, free, and far; / And above my cap, many a star. (See also explanatory note). 11 aut] Latin, properly in paired form: “aut aut,” either or. 12 aut/aut] Latin, either or.

264

The First Rudiments of Either/Or

Paper 275:2.

•

P a p e r 275 1841 •

The First Rudiments of Either/Or 264

276:1

•

P a p e r 276 1841 •

265

the seducer― either so young that they had only an intimation of love― or an unlucky experiment in prosaic eroticism― and what, after all, are all the world’s diplomatic secrets compared to a young girl’s secret.

5

The Seducer and the Seduced

10

15

One doesn’t expect to see here a list of seduced girls whose lost honor excluded them from hum. society, on the contrary, there was no change in them visible to the eyes of those around them, only he and she knew it, he had beguiled them, known that they would offer him everything, and with that he was content― either they were so young that they had only a presentiment or, waking, dreamt of love, or he let an obvious suitor intervene. Once he had given them a distaste for love, he followed up, but did not speak of love; on the contrary, he did everything to neutralize it, developed the intellectual side for them so that they became capable of grasping love ironically. During all this he preserved a great intellectual superiority. It was as if he had no receptivity whatever for sensuality, until, suddenly, a single word, a gesture, like a thrust of a dagger, brought them to blush; now he was their accomplice―they felt his superiority and had no one to turn to except him―every sort of mystification― In the end he himself became infatuated like Narcissus

20

276:2

276:3

30

and the fact that I love someone, it is a secret that can only be betrayed in the still of the night, never repeated to the same person, and woe unto the one who wrested this confession from me. This moment is the highest, most lustrous point, and how could it be repeated without sounding like a flagrant parody[?]

Letter from the Seduced ―At times he was so intellectual that I felt my womanly existence obliterated in his presence, sometimes so sensual that I trembled before him, and then when he gave himself up to me, and I embraced him, I held him in my arms, then he was gone, I embraced the cloud, to recall an expression he used, not that I didn’t know this expression before he familiarized me with it, but he has captivated me, has possessed

266

The First Rudiments of Either/Or

•

P a p e r 276 1841 •

me, so all my thoughts include him―I have always loved music, he was a peerless instrument, soft and elastic, one could always play on him, he had a range as no instrument ever had, he was an epitome of all emotions and moods, no thought too lofty for him, no delirium too desperate, he could rush like an autumn storm or whisper soundlessly―not a word of mine was without effect, but that doesn’t mean that I can say that my word did not fail of its effect, since what effect it would make was impossible to know; I listened, with an indescribable but secretively blessed unnamable anxiety, to this music I myself called forth but then again did not call forth; there was always harmony, he always swept me along

But marriage is impossible without confidence

265

5

276:4

PAPER 277—PAPER 282 On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg

268

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

•

P a p e r 277 1842–1843 •

269

277:1

Can the transition from a quantitative to a qualitative determination occur except with a leap? And does not all of life lie here?

What is the historical significance of the category? What is a category? Is the category to be derived from thought or from being?

What is the relation between the speculating subject and historical existence? What is continuity, what is primitivity?

every specification for which being is an essential specification lies outside immanent thought, accordingly outside logic.

To what extent imagination is at work in logical thinking, to what extent the will, to what extent is the conclusion a resolution[?]

A pathos-laden transition—a dialectical transition.

22 τελοs] Greek, goal, end.

5

10

How does this relate to the now so much employed world-historical development? In all ages, hum. beings have had everything, the transaction takes place in knowledge, emotion, and will; they are equally important. There are two ends, every hum. being is τελοs, and the world-historical development is τελοs, but this τελοs is one we cannot penetrate.

The ideas of Beauty, Good, Truth, how do they relate to one another? Are they coordinates? Are they united in something higher? Which is it? Truth? So then Truth was not a coordinated idea?

15

20

25

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al. 277:2

5

270

278

10

15

279

20

280

•

P a p e r 277–280 1842–1843 •

269

Every individual life is incommensurable with the concept; therefore what is highest cannot be to live as a philosopher―With what is this incommensurability commensurable?―with action―That in which all human beings are united is passion. So all religion is passion, faith, hope, and love―the great thing is to live one’s life in what is essential for all and, in it, to have a difference of degree.―Being a philosopher is just as good a difference as being a poet.―

Lectures on the Greek Sophists According to the Sources.

Introduction On the importance of studying the sources―on Greek philosophy in particular.― this lecture will not be without importance for the problems that occupy our age. The category to which I intend to refer everything, just as it is the category lying dormant in Greek sophistry if one views it world-historically, is: motion (ϰινησις.), which is perhaps one of the most difficult problems in all philosophy. In modern philosophy it has been given another expression, namely, transition and mediation.

I will also go through each textual source philologically. Among these I count: Plato’s Theaetetus, Euthydemus, Sophist, Gorgias, Protagoras―Aristotle’s work on Gorgias and περι των σοϕιστιϰων ελεγχων. What is known of them from Sextus Empiricus, from Athenaeus etc. is simply to be consulted and may not be presented directly.

Interested Cognition and Its Forms

25

What cognition is disinterested[?] it has its interest in a third factor (e.g., beauty, truth, etc.), which is not myself. has therefore no continuity.

14 ϰινησις] Greek, movement. (See also explanatory note.) 18 περι των σοϕιστιϰων ελεγχων] Greek, on the sophistical refutations. (See also explanatory note.)

270

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

•

P a p e r 280–282 1842–1843 •

Interested cognition came in with Xnty. Question of authority. of historical continuity. of doubt of faith.

5

Is knowledge higher than faith? By no means.

On the Concepts Esse and Inter-esse.

271

281

A methodological attempt. the various sciences should be ranked according to the different way in which they accentuate Being; and to how the relation to Being gives reciprocal advantage. Ontology Mathematics.

10

The certainty of these is absolute—here thought and Being are one, but on the other hand these sciences are hypotheses.

Existential science.

A.

15

282

Das Wesen als Grund der Existents a. Die reinen Reflexions Bestimmungen α) Identitæt. β) Unterschied, γ) Grund. b. die Existents. c) das Ding.

7 Esse] Latin, being. 7 Inter-esse] Latin, being-between or between-being (with allusion to the word “interest). (See also explanatory note.) 17 Das Wesen als Grund der Existents] German, Essence as Ground of Existence. (See also explanatory note.) 18 Die reinen Reflexions Bestimmungen] German, the pure principles or categories of reflection. 19 α) Identitæt. β) Unterschied, γ) Grund b. die Existents. c) das Ding.] German, properly “. . . b. die Existenz, . . .” α) identity. β) difference, γ) ground b. existence. c) the thing.

20

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

•

P a p e r 282 1842–1843 •

271

B. Die Erscheinung

5

a) Die Welt der Erscheinung b) Inhalt und Form c) Das Verhaltniß

C Die Wirklichkeit.

2 Die Erscheinung a) Die Welt der Erscheinung b) Inhalt und Form c) Das Verhaltniß Die Wirklichkeit] German, properly, “. . . c) Das Verhältniß, . . .” the appearance a) the world of appearance b) content and form c) the relation C Actuality.

PAPER 283 On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Elise Iuul, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg

274

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

275

How does a new quality arise from a continuous quantitative determinant?

I am a poor man who does not have so many ideas, so if I get one, I must take care to hold on to it.

283:1

A leap.

The Platonic moment.

5

unsre Zuthat (see somewhere in the Phenomenology). hinter den Rücken

Accordingly, every quality arises through a leap Are these leaps then entirely homogeneous[?] The leap whereby water turns to ice, the leap whereby I understand an author. and the leap that is the transition from good to evil. more suddenly Lessing’s Faust, the evil spirit that is as swift as the transition from good to evil. a qualitative difference betw. the leaps. The paradox Xnty’s entry into the world. 1) Influence upon the whole of Hegel’s contribution—to have thought through a skepticism—method—impossible 2) Transition from aesthetics to ethics 3) from ethics to religion The paradox can no doubt be overcome and, as it were, digested for retrospective thought is there not something similar in relation to world history[?] Can one forget that it is through a paradox that one has come into Xnty. That which did not arise in any hum. being’s heart, even though he can grasp it afterward but never forget that it did not arise in his heart.

10

15

20

25

30

Dialectical and pathos-laden transitions. What follows from this for logic. 35

6 unsre Zuthat] German, something contributed by us. (See also explanatory note.) 6 hinter den Rücken] German, behind the back. (See also explanatory note.)

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

275

276

5

10

Who has forgotten that fine Easter morning when Prof. Heiberg arose to grasp the Hegelian philosophy, in the way he himself so edifyingly explained it—was this not a leap? Or was there someone who had dreamt of it[?]

Hegel’s transition in relation to Kant. Fichte the yngr., etc. express it in this way: that philosophy gets its start in Erkennen als selbst-Erkennen—Schelling (in Berlin) “Hegel frowned on the bad intellectual intuition” (which is nevertheless a combined viewing of contrasts, but unmediated, by means of a leap) and discovered the logical idea—consequently, no doubt, the method.

Hegel in the Logic with the transition from the doctrine of measure.

15

Adler says: if the quantitative determination becomes indifferent, then there enters a new quality.—when? Werder is more correct. Heiberg’s Perseus see the penciled remark in the margin to the first §§ of the Logic. See Rosenkrantz’s latest work on Schelling pp. 58. 59. 86. 155. 212. All noted in my copy.

20

In the older skepticism. The doctrine of motion. (the transition). (not on the spot and not beyond the spot) Here is the leap—therefore the human gait is a falling. The doctrine of what it means to learn (Sextus Empiricus see Tennemann 5th vol. p. 297.). The transition from probability to truth.

25

The different types of change and transition (ϰινησις, μεταβολη) See Aristotle. Tennemann 3rd vol., p. 126.

The thought of God emerges with a leap. The result (resultare to leap backward) in the proofs for the existence of God occur with a leap.

3 Erkennen als selbst-Erkennen] German, knowledge as self-knowledge. 25 μεταβολη] Greek, change.

276

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

The way Hegel cuts off the bad infinity is a leap. The leap of sin-consciousness.

277

The leap of inference in induction and analogy.

The leap of the atonement. The transition from eudaimonism to the concept of duty is a leap or, assisted by a more and more developed understanding of what is most prudent, is one finally supposed to go over directly to virtue[?] No, there is a pain of decision that the sensuous (the eudaimonistic), the finite (the eudaimonistic) cannot endure. Man is not led to do his duty by merely reflecting that it is the most prudent thing to do; in the moment of decision reason lets go, and he either turns back to eudaimonism or he chooses the good by means of a leap. Lessing uses the word leap. Jacobi on Lessing. (the famous discussion) Jacobi something similar in connection with Claudius Wandsb. B. see S.W. 3rd vol., p. 331.

Basically all acknowledge the leap and use it in psychological and ethical presentations but explain it away in logic. Thus I note that Rötscher, Cyclus dramatischer Charaktere (Berlin: 1844), p. 105, uses the category: qualitativer Sprung―Even though he is a Hegelian.

With respect to: How does a new quality emerge from a continuous quantitative determinant?

see H. Steffens, was ich erlebte

5

10

15

283:2

X B pp. 118 et seq.

But one cannot see whether these are reflections on nature, a bold expression of wonder, or whether the objection against a generatio æquivoca, or immed. transition, is drawn from ethics, from which it should be drawn. The dialectical point is altogether lacking.

Trendlenburg Erlaüterungen zu den Elementen der aristotelischen Logik. p. 72.

15 qualitativer Sprung] German, qualitative leap. 21 generatio æquivoca] Latin, spontaneous generation.

20

25

PAPER 284—PAPER 304 Diverse, 1830–1843

Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Text source Løse Papirer in Søren Kierkegaards Skrifter Text established by Lena Wienecke Andersen, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, Thomas Eske Rasmussen, Rasmus Sevelsted, and Jon Tafdrup

278

Diverse, 1830–1843

•

P a p e r 284-288 1837–1841 •

Humorists develop God’s side

Pythagoras

281

(Muhammed. etc.

Realists―the hum. side

284

5

You poor wretches, you poor man, the poor men

The birth of Christ is an event not just on earth but also in heaven, but our justification is also not an event merely on earth but also in heaven.―

285

the sympathetic egoistical irony

286

the hypochondriac egoistical humor everyone looks out for himself

There are these two sides of the circulation in the state, the one development leads from the heart to the extremities (these are the government officials) the other from the extremities to the heart (the municipal, representation in the Assembly of Estates, etc.) on the other hand nothing abstract

In what sense does a real redintegratio in statum pristinum take place with the forgiveness of sins, also where it is a question of the forgiveness of actual sins? This is of the utmost importance with resp. to Christianity’s view of actuality. In what relation does the repentant who has received the forgiveness of sins stand to the punishment that actuality itself can hold[?] Is he to continue treating it as punishment, or has a transformation taken place whereby it can be grasped as something providential[?]

19 redintegratio in statum pristinum] Latin, restoration to the original state or condition.

287 15

288 20

25

Diverse, 1830–1843

•

P a p e r 289–291 1840–1842 •

279

282

289

5

the entire Xn life is a complete life and as such has its 1) Immediacy, i.e., faith (differing from that which in the merely humanistic development is called the immediate, in that there is an outstanding historical account (reckoning― sin etc.), and nonetheless immed. faith is at once itself and the condition for itself, the most subjective and the most objective (Faith can thus never emancipate itself from this: I believe even if this “I” is an ideal I. The striving of the sciences is precisely to let the I vanish in its object. That of faith to conserve it in and with the object. 2) Mediacy, i.e., the Church. (corresponds to what the state is from a purely human standpoint.

10

15

290

20

291 25

3) The identity whereby every external phenomenon of the Church is overcome, yet not in such a way that the Church is thereby abolished, but in such a way that the individual is now not a mere moment in the order of things in the way that the Church is, does not strive through the visible to the invisible, but by virtue of the invisible (which in the single individual is not merely as an element of the whole, but as something that abides in the single individual) penetrates the visible and fulfills itself in the visible.―

Everyone takes his revenge on the world. Mine consists in bearing my grief and affliction enclosed deeply within me, while the laughter entertains everyone. If I see someone suffer, I am sorry for him, console him as best I can, listen to him calmly when he assures me “that I am fortunate.” If I can keep this up until the day I die, I shall have had my revenge.

In the old days, as we know, people wrote one word into the next without interruption, the one sentence into the next without separation; to think of reading such a work makes one shudder. Now, however, people have gone over to the other extreme, they write nothing but the punctuation, no words, no meaning, nothing but exclamation and question marks.

280

Diverse, 1830–1843

•

P a p e r 292–298 1841–1842 •

If I didn’t know that I was a genuine Dane, I could almost be tempted to explain the contradictions at work within me by supposing that I was an Irishman. That nation hasn’t the heart to immerse its children totally in baptism; they want to keep a little bit of paganism in reserve, and whereas one usually immerses the child under the water completely, they leave the right arm free, so that with it he can wield a sword, can embrace the girls.

292

My head is as empty and dead as a theater in which the play is over.

293

… And when one has lived half a score years in this frightful still life, then this poor, meager life has separated out as much cream as one can swallow in a single moment without gorging oneself. That is not a tempo I can march to.

294

What is sin: a bad conscience’s pact with the devil,―and what has memory like a bad conscience?

295

My health is getting worse by the day; soon I will no doubt be decrepit; but I do not fear death; like the Roman soldiers, I have learned that there are worse things.

296

Older than January 1843.

297

In Shacspear’s Midsummer Night’s Dream Act 2, scene 1 there is mentioned (in Tieck’s trans., p. 213) a flower: Lieb im Mußiggang

298

Ihr Saft getraüfelt auf entschlafne Wimpern Macht Mann und Weib, in jede Kreatur, Die sie zunächst erblicken, toll vergafft.

25 Lieb im Mußiggang . . . toll vergafft] German, Love-in-idleness . . . The juice of it on sleeping eyelids laid / Will make or man or woman madly dote / Upon the next live creature that it sees. (See also explanatory note.)

283 5

10

15

25

Diverse, 1830–1843 299

284

300

10

15

20

301

30

35

•

P a p e r 299–301 1841–1843 •

281

This is how love transforms itself into hate. The sculptor Pheidias had two disciples, Alcamenes from Athens and Agoracritus from Paros. Each prepared a statue of Aphrodite; when, however, Alcamenes won the prize, Agoracritus sold his work on condition that it would not remain in Athens, changed it to a “Nemesis,” which was set up in Rhamnus.

For a moment the stage is empty, except for a girl poking her head out and looking around―Alex enters from the same side.―steps forward in the proscenium. Alex.: Sure enough she is at her post. Just see how she keeps watch. Down there in the street she would recognize me among hundreds. (sneaks beneath the window and in through the door. comes forward and bends his head over her) (aloud) “but what became of him”[?] Rosalia: which way did you come[?] I’ve been looking out for half an hour now. Alex.: of course you could have saved the 29 minutes if you had taken care during the minute I used to sneak in from the street door. Ros.: but why sneak in Alex.: partly in order, if possible, through a little surprise to increase the value I flatter myself that I possess in your e[yes].―by means of a little surpr[ise], to make uncertain for an instant my possession of what I know I possess lawfully―partly Ros.: partly because you are afraid of the neighbors both this side and opposite, but it is not nice of you, out of fear, to deprive me of one of

[a loose slip] I would have liked to write a piece that would be called: Life on Trial. It would have to be kept very imaginative. Here, both the hypochondriac worrier and the egoistic pleasure addict could manifest themselves in all sorts of ways, so that the piece would abolish itself when all the powers that distanced themselves from one another in this way finally see themselves captivated in an actuality that they themselves had hypothetically posited, but that now, owing to the power actuality always possesses, gave birth to an actuality they did not at all anticipate. Thus, e.g., a hypothetically arranged marriage where the children become an obstacle. A hypothetical civil service appointment that involved a person inactuality. A hypothetical country that got into difficulties with actuality.

282

Diverse, 1830–1843

•

P a p e r 302–304 1843–1845 •

285

The journal is divided up in this way.

302

Præmonenda. 1. Examinatio How does a new quality proceed through a continuous quantitative determinant?

2nd volume 1. Examinatio to what extent is Being a category.—a quality.

2. Contemplatio de omnibus d.

2. Contemplatio P. Møller volatized poetically 3. Exædificatio a) on the edifying in always thanking God. b) on the benefits of studying the sources, their significance for the personality.

3. Exædificatio about faith’s expectation

Miscellanea. Question for Prof. Martensen concerning the Aristotelian doctrine of virtue.

Miscelania Question for Prof. Heiberg. what is poetry. the hidden (a young girl has said it.) Weisse something similar right away in the first part.

The quiet exaltation in driving in the early evening twilight and seeing a single star, until darkness falls more and more, and one sees more and more (for they of course were visible, but the light prevented it), until the whole company becomes visible,—thus to count stars.

*

5

10

15

20

303

25

*

Situation: Behind me: the organ, my place on the bench in the Church of Our Savior; in the foreground a window, outside it a tree with its stirred branches and their summer breath of air.

2 Præmonenda] Latin, preface. 3 Examinatio] Latin, examination. 7 Contemplatio] Latin, contemplation. 8 de omnibus d.] Latin, that everything [is to be doubted]. (See also explanatory note.) 9 Exædificatio] Latin, edification. 14 Miscelania] Latin, miscellaneous.

304

30

Notes for PAPER 1–PAPER 304 1830–1843

Notes for Paper 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

285

Notes for Paper 2–Paper 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

307

Notes for Paper 30–Paper 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

363

Notes for Paper 48–Paper 94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

371

Notes for Paper 95–Paper 246 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

411

Notes for Paper 247–Paper 251 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

479

Notes for Paper 252–Paper 253 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

489

Notes for Paper 254 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

497

Notes for Paper 255–Paper 258 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

549

Notes for Paper 259 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

557

Notes for Paper 260 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

567

Notes for Paper 261–Paper 263 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

583

Notes for Paper 264 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

589

Notes for Paper 265–Paper 269 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

603

Notes for Paper 270 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

607

Notes for Paper 271–Paper 276 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

613

Notes for Paper 277–Paper 282 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

619

Notes for Paper 283 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

629

Notes for Paper 284–Paper 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

641

Notes for PAPER 1 Excerpts on Church History

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, and Steen Tullberg

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn

Edited by Anders Holm

Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber

Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse

Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

286

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Excerpts on Church History”1 is no. 457 in B-cat. and is presumably among the portion of Kierkegaard’s papers that was placed together with various other material in “a large sack.”2

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 1 consists of excerpts from Ph. K. Marheineke’s Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1816), and excerpts from Jacob Christian Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger (Copenhagen, 1830). The excerpts from Marheineke’s book (Paper 1:1) are presumably connected with the lectures on Church history during the period of the Reformation given by Jens Møller at the University of Copenhagen during the 1830–1831 academic year, and which Kierkegaard may have attended.3 The notes are written continuously, one after another, with the handwriting and other features presenting a uniform appearance. It is therefore likely that Paper 1:2 was written not long after Paper 1:1 and presumably not long after the appearance of Lindberg’s book, that is, in the period 1830–1831.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to the contents.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “The Order of the Papers” in L.-cat. (see “Introduction to the Loose Papers”).

2

) See Index Lectionum in universitate regia hauniense per semestre hibernum a kalendis novembribus a. MCCCCXXX habendarum, p. 3, in INDEX Lectionem in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. At this time, Kierkegaard was reading for his “Examen philosophicum,” an examination in general knowledge that students at the University of Copenhagen had to take the year after they matriculated, and his name does not appear on the list of those who attended these lectures.

3

Explanatory Notes 2

1

5

5 8

13

Geschichte der teutschen Reformation . . . Phillip Marheinecke. Professor . . . Berlin] The full title is Geschichte der teutschen Reformation. Erster Theil. Von Dr. Philipp Marheineke Professor der Theologie an der Königl. Universität zu Berlin [History of the German Reformation, Part One: By Dr. Philipp Marheineke, Professor of Theology at the Royal University of Berlin] (Berlin, 1816; abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1). The entire work consists of four volumes, published in Berlin, 1816–1834. ― 1816 in Berlin: Variant: “in Berlin” has been added. ― Dr. von: Variant: first written, instead of “Dr.”, “Ludvig”, and “von” has been added. ― Phillip Marheinecke: Philipp Konrad Marheineke (1780–1846), German evangelical theologian; professor at Erlangen from 1805; at Heidelberg from 1807; at Berlin from 1811. p. 6. Carlstadt confesses . . . before he got to see the Bible] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 5–6. ― Carlstadt: Or Karlstadt, Andreas von (actually, Andreas Rudolf Bodenstein von Karlstadt), (1486–1541), German priest, dr. theol. 1510, professor at Wittenberg the same year; broke with the Roman Catholic Church in 1520 and became an adherent of Luther. In the course of the 1520s, his views on worship services and his spiritualistic theology led to a break with Luther. dr. of th[eology]] Variant: before “dr.”, “Prof” has been deleted. p. 11. The number of clergy was so great . . . 2 administrators . . . and 30 nuns] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 11. ― what is now Gotha: Capital city of the duchy of Thuringia, Germany. pp. 26 and 27. Erasmus has . . . with an Aristides] Abbreviated excerpt from Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 26–27. ―

Erasmus: Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466/1469–1536), Dutch Roman Catholic theologian and philologist; famed for his learning and scholarliness; a leading figure in the northern European humanist movement. His edition of the Greek NT with philological explanations, published in 1516 along with a Latin translation and commentaries, was of fundamental importance for the Reformation and for textual criticism. At first, Erasmus was favorably disposed toward Luther’s reformist ideas, but later increasingly distanced himself from them, not least as a result of their dispute about freedom of the will; see Erasmus’s 1524 treatise, De libero arbitrio [On the Free Choice of the Will], and Luther’s response in the same year, De servo arbitrio [On the Bondage of the Will]. ― Pope Julius II: Giuliano della Rovere (1443–1513), Pope Julius II from 1503 until his death. ― Jupiter: The supreme deity in the Roman pantheon (Greek, Zeus). ― Decius: Presumably, a reference to Publius Decius Mus, who, as tribune during the Roman war against the Samnites (343 b.c.) supposedly consecrated himself to the gods of the underworld, and by dying in battle he thus gained victory for his countrymen. ― Curtius: Presumably, a reference to the mythical Roman hero Marcus Curtius, of whom legend recounts the following: When the oracle had spoken that the cleft which supposedly had opened up in the Roman Forum could only be filled by the sacrifice of Rome’s greatest good, Curtius had the idea that this must mean the courage and strength of Roman soldiers, and, mounted on his horse and in full armor, he sprang into the cleft as a sacrifice. ― Socrates: Greek philosopher (ca. 470–399 b.c.). With his maieutic method (i.e., midwifery), and by developing his thoughts in dialogue with his contemporaries, he sought to deliver others who were already pregnant with knowledge, thus helping them get rid of their errors. He was condemned to death by a court of the Athenian

288

26

38

Excerpts on Church History

people for acknowledging gods other than those recognized by the state and for corrupting the youth of Athens; the sentence was carried out when he drank hemlock and died. He left no writings, but the main outlines of his character, activity, and teachings were depicted by three of his contemporaries: Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds; Xenophon, in his four “Socratic” writings, including the Memorabilia; and Plato, in his dialogues.― Phocion: (402–317 or 318 b.c.), Greek military leader and statesman; here the reference is to the fact that he was accused of treason and executed with hemlock because he had failed to prevent a Macedonian general from occupying Piraeus. ― Scipio: Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus Major (236–183 b.c.), Roman general and statesman; one the of the most important and meritorious military and political figures of the times. When he was accused (by Cato the Elder) of having embezzled money and accepted bribes, he refused, out of pride, to defend himself, and instead retreated to his estate, where he died a few years later. ― Aristides: (530–468 or 467 b.c.), Greek military leader and statesman. After a dispute with Themistocles, Aristides was sentenced to exile but was recalled a couple of years later, owing to the threat of a war with Persia; after victory over the Persians, he participated in the further development of democracy. pp. 35 and 36 Luther . . . Nov. 10, 1483 . . . then studied law] Compressed excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 35–36. ― and 36: Variant: added. ― Luther: Marheineke has “Doctor Martin Luther.”: ― Eisleben: German town in Saxony-Anhalt. ― Magdeburg: German town in Saxony-Anhalt, situated on the Elbe River. ― Eisenach: German town in Thuringia, situated ca. twenty-five miles west of Erfurt. ― Conrad Cotta’s widow: Ursula Cotta, née Schalbe (d. 1511), widow of Conrad Cotta, who had been the mayor of Eisenach. ― Erfurt,: Variant: first written “Erfurt.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. German city in Thuringia, ca. sixty-five miles southwest of Leipzig. p. 37. In 1503 he became . . . thunderbolt . . . striking very close to him] Compressed excerpt from

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 37. ― Alexius: Marheineke describes him as “one of Luther’s best friends.” p. 39. he studied . . . under Jodocus . . . the Dr. of Eisenach] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 39–40. ― Augustine: Aurelius Augustinus, or St. Augustine (354–430), theologian, philosopher, and rhetorician; born to a pagan father in North Africa and educated as an orator in Carthage; active in Italy from 383; converted to Christianity and was baptized by Ambrose of Milan; priest from 391, and bishop of Hippo from 395; one of the four Roman Catholic Church Fathers. ― Jodocus: Jodocus Isenacensis or Jodocus from Eisenach (died ca. 1519), known as “Doctor Isenacensis,” German Catholic (scholastic) theologian and author; professor of theology and philosophy and priest at St. Maria Church in Erfurt, 1505–1510; professor of theology at the newly established university in Wittenberg, but quickly returned to Erfurt. p. 40. In 1508 . . . at Wittenberg . . . to Rome on official business] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 40. ― at Wittenberg: Marheineke has: “at the university, which had been founded not long before” in Wittenberg (→ 3,23), a German city in Saxony-Anhalt, situated on the Elbe River. After his return he became a dr. theol.] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 40. ― dr. theol.: Marheineke has “Doctor of Holy Scripture.” p. 43. In 1516, when Staupitz was sent . . . The German Theology] Compressed excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 43. ― Staupitz: Johannes von Staupitz (ca. 1468–1524), German Catholic theologian and monk; from 1497, prior of the Augustinian monastery in Tübingen; from 1500, prior in Munich; first dean of the theology faculty in Wittenberg when it was first established in 1502; from 1503 also vicar general for the congregation of Augustinian monasteries in Saxony and Thuringia. After transferring his professorate to Luther, Staupitz concentrated especially on evangelizing the laity through sermons and

7

9

12

14

3

Excerpts on Church History

19

23

28

32

edifying writings. ― The German Theology: Kierkegaard owned Die Deutsche Theologie, eine sehr alte, für jeden Christen äußerst wichtige Schrift, mit einer Vorrede von Dr. Martin Luther und dem gewesenen Generalsuperintendenten Johann Arnd [The German Theology: A Very Old, and for Every Christian, Most Important, Writing, with a Preface by Dr. Martin Luther and the Former General Superintendent Johann Arnd], ed. F. C. Krüger (Lemgo, 1822; ASKB 634). p. 45. In 1517 . . . to Dresden . . . Tetzel arrived in the vicinity of Witt[enberg]] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 45. ― Dresden: German city in Saxony, situated in the Elbe valley. ― Duke Georg: George the Bearded (1471–1539), duke of the Duchy of Saxony, 1500–1539. ― Tetzel: Johann Tetzel (ca. 1465–1519), Catholic theologian and monk; joined the Dominican order in the late 1480s; inquisitor from 1509; 1505–1510 and from 1516, subcommissioner for indulgences. In the spring of 1517, he preached on indulgences in the vicinity of Wittenberg. p. 47. A number of princes . . . to build a bridge across the Elbe at Torgau] Compressed and freely adapted excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 47. ― Frederick III of Saxony: Frederick III (or Frederick the Wise) (1463–1525), elector of Electoral Saxony, 1486–1525; founded the new University of Wittenberg in 1502. ― bridge across the Elbe at Torgau: A wooden bridge across the Elbe River at Torgau, a German town in northwestern Saxony, was completed in 1503. p. 48. The pope even sacrificed canon law . . . a fire in 1492.)] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 48. ― Leipzig: German city in Saxony. ― Freiberg: German city in Saxony. pp. 53 and 54. Leo X . . . the dioceses of Kamin and Meissen] Excerpts from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 53. ― and 54.: Variant: added. ― Leo X: Giovanni de’ Medici (1475–1521), pope as Leo X 1513–1521. ― his sister was married to a Prince Cibo: Maddalena de’ Medici was married to Franceschetto Cibo or Cybo, son of Pope Innocent

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

289

VIII, who made him count of Anguillara. ― Angelo Arcimboldi: (d. 1550), member of a noble Milanese family; appointed at age thirty as apostolic pronotary (i.e., first secretary) and referendary (attorney and counselor) to Pope Leo X, who in 1514 made him papal legate and general commissioner for the indulgence trade in large parts of northern Europe, including Scandinavia; he came to Copenhagen in 1516; became archbishop of Milan in 1550. ―Westphalia: Presumably refers to the lower Rhenish-Westphalian Imperial District (established 1512), corresponding to North Rhine–Westphalia and Lower Saxony in present-day Germany. ― Kamin: German diocese in the Duchy of Pomerania. ― Meissen: German diocese in the Duchy of Saxony. p. 54. Christoph de Forli . . . of a separate commission on indulgences . . . Albrecht, archbishop . . . brother of Joachim I of Brandenburg] Excerpt from chap. 2 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 54. ― Christoph de Forli: Christopher Numar from Forli, Italy (d. 1528); from 1514, vicar general and from 1517, general, of the Franciscan Order; made a cardinal by Pope Leo X in 1517. ― Samson of Milan: Bernhardin Samson, or Sanson, from Milan (birth and death dates unknown), Franciscan monk; arrived in Switzerland in 1518 as the papal commissioner for the Swiss indulgence trade. ― Albrecht, archbishop of Mainz and Magdeburg: Albrecht II of Brandenburg (1490–1545), German count and archbishop; initially he was margrave of Brandenburg together with his brother, Joachim I; subsequently he entered the clergy and became archbishop of Magdeburg and bishop pro tempore for the vacant see of Halberstadt in addition to being archbishop of Mainz, and thus head of the ecclesiastical province of Mainz and an elector; subsequently also a cardinal. He was deeply involved in the indulgence trade in Germany, and the third commission on indulgences, mentioned here, was under his supervision. ― Mainz: German city in RhinelandPalatinate, situated on the left bank of the Rhine, where the Rhine is joined by the River Main. ― bishop of Halberstadt: Variant: “bishop of Halberstadt” has been added. See Marheinecke,

1

4

290

8

12

17

19

23

27

Excerpts on Church History

Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 56. Halberstadt is a German city in the Harz district of Saxony-Anhalt. pp. 60, 61 . . . the 95 Theses . . . pope cannot forgive sinners, etc.] Free Danish rendering from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 60. ― the 95 Theses: Marheineke reproduces the following theses: 11, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 32, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 47, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 62, 63, 64, 79, 80, 81, 82, 86, 90. p. 68. Tetzel . . . Luther’s theses . . . burned a great many of them] Excerpt from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 68. p. 69. On Apr. 13th 1518 he traveled to Heidelberg . . . celebrated in his debate there] Excerpt from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 69. ― Heidelberg: Variant: first written, instead of “Heidelberg”, “Witt”. p. 79. Luther’s sermons and writings served to enlighten the people . . . sermons on repentance] Excerpt from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 79–80. ― and writings: Marheineke has “some German writings.” p. 81. A papal court . . . in Rome . . . to Rome within 60 days.] Excerpt from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 81. ― Silvester Prierio: Silvestro Mazzolini da Prierio or Sylverster Prierio (1456–1523 or 1527), Italian Catholic theologian, Dominican monk; taught theology in Bologna, Pavia, Venice, and Rome; from 1515, papal court theologian; in the spring of 1518, he completed “Dialogus potestate papae” [Dialogue on Papal Power] as a theological response to Luther’s Ninety-five Theses. ― Aug. 7th: In 1518. ― days.: Variant: added. p. 83. On Aug. 8th Luther wrote to Spalatin . . . the matter in Augsburg] Compressed excerpts from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 83. ― Aug. 8th: In 1518. ― Spalatin: Georg (Burkhardt) Spalatin (1484–1545), German jurist and priest; from 1512, director of the newly established university library in Wittenberg; from 1516, private secretary, spiritual counselor, and court priest for the Saxon

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

elector, Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23); from 1517, served as the decisive link between Luther and the elector. ― Cajetan: Tommaso de Vio Gaetani Cajetan (Thomas de Vio of Gaeta) (1469–1534), known as Cardinal Cajetan, Italian Catholic philosopher and theologian, Dominican monk; from 1508, general of the Dominican order; made a cardinal by Pope Leo X in 1517; in 1518, functioned as the papal legate in Germany. ― Augsburg: German city in the province of Bavaria. p. 84. On Oct. 7th L. arrived in Augsburg] Excerpt from chap. 3 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 83. ― Oct. 7th: In 1518. pp. 86 and 87 . . . submitted to the judgment of . . . Basel, Freiburg, Louvain, and Paris] Excerpts from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 86–87. ― and 87: Variant: added. ― Oct. 12: In 1518. ― the legate: Cardinal Cajetan → 4,27. ― Clement VI: Pierre Roger (1290 or 1291–1352), pope as Clement VI 1342–1352 (in Avignon). ― Extravagantes: Latin legal term for a supplement to papal decree or to the Corpus juris canonici (the official body of canon law). ― Staupitz: → 3,14. ― Phil[ip] von Feilitsch: Philipp von Feilitsch or Feilitzsch (1473?–after 1532), counselor to the elector of Saxony. ― Johan Rühel: Johann Rühel (ca. 1490– after 1541), dr. jur. and counselor to the elector of Saxony. ― Basel: City on the bank of the Rhine in northwestern Switzerland. ― Freiburg: Freibrug im Breisgau, German city in Baden-Württemberg. ― Louvain: (Flemish, “Leuven”) Belgian city in Flanders. p. 89. The cardinal said . . . in capite suo] Cited from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 89n. ― The cardinal: Cardinal Cajetan (→ 4,27). p. 93. It was only in Nuremberg that Luther . . . prisoner until further notice] Excerpt from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 93. ― Nuremberg: German city in Bavaria. ― Cajetan: → 4,27. ― Jacob Sadoletus: Or Jacopo Sadoleto (1477–1547), Italian Catholic theologian and author; from 1513, private secretary to Pope Leo X; from 1517, bishop of Carpentras; from 1536, cardinal.

32

33

3

6

5

Excerpts on Church History 12

20

24

28

34

41

p. 97 On Oct. 30 he again came . . . why he had not in fact already left] Compressed excerpt from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 97. ― Oct. 30: In 1518. ― The Elect[or]: Frederick the Wise, elector of Saxony (→ 3,23). ― Cajetan: → 4,27. ― He . . . held a farewell dinner: i.e., Luther. ―Spalatin: → 4,27. p. 98 While the meal was still in progress . . . by new negotiations] Excerpt from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 98. p. 99. Philip Melanchthon . . . friend of Reuchlin] Excerpt from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 99. ― Philip Melanchthon: Philipp Melanchthon (1497–1560), German philologist and Lutheran theologian, reformer; from 1518, professor of Greek at Wittenberg. A close friend and colleague of Luther (→ 17,41). ― the Palatinate: Today Rhineland-Palatinate, one of the federal states of Germany. ― Pforzheim: German city in BadenWürttemberg. ― Georg Simmler: (1475–1536); from ca. 1498 to 1510, rector of the Latin school in Pforzheim. ― Reuchlin: Johannes Reuchlin (1455–1522), humanist; Melanchthon was Reuchlin’s nephew. p. 100. Studied diligently in Heidelberg . . . came to Wittenb. . . . 1518] Excerpts from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 100. ― Heidelberg: German city in Baden-Württemberg. ― Tübingen: German city in Baden-Württemberg. ― Elector of Saxony: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). ― his university: The University of Wittenberg, recently established by the elector (→ 3,23). p. 107 . . . 1518, the University of Witt. submitted an intercessory letter . . . at least investigated in Germany] Excerpt from chap. 4 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 107. ― The Elector: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). ― Degenhard Pfeffinger: (1471–1519), finance minister and “Electoral Saxony counselor” to Frederick the Wise. ― the emperor: Maximilian I (1459–1519), emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, 1493–1519. p. 108. On Nov. 9, 1518, a decree . . . to issue a retraction] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 4 in

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

291

Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 108. ― Cajetan: → 4,27. ― Linz: City in upper Austria. p. 110 . . . 1519 . . . Carl von Miltitz . . . to the Elect[or] of Saxony] Excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 110. ― i.e., 1519: Variant: added. ― Carl von Miltitz: (ca. 1490–1529), German Catholic priest; from 1512 or 1513, attached to the Roman Curia as secretary to Pope Leo X, who appointed him a papal nuncio in 1518. ― Mainz: → 4,1. ― Trier: German city on the Mosel River in the Rhineland-Palatinate. ― Meissen: → 3,32. ― present the sacred rose to the Elect[or] of Saxony: Marheineke writes, “to present to the elector of Saxony the consecrated golden rose which the pope only gives to crowned heads and great princes of unusual distinction.” Maximilian †] → 5,34. In chap. 5 of Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation vol. 1, p. 109, the reader is informed of the death of Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I, who died on January 12, 1519. p. 111. In January . . . talks between L. and Miltitz . . . wept, kissing him] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 111. ― January: In 1519. ― talks: Took place in Spalatin’s (→ 4,27) house in Altenburg, Thuringia. ― Miltitz: → 6,4. p. 114. Luther . . . promised Miltitz . . . wrote on March 3, 1519] Excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 114. ― to the pope: Variant: added. ― see p. 112: Refers to p. 112, where the following is related that as a result of his conversation with Miltitz, Luther was “to write to the pope in the humblest fashion and to acknowledge that he had been altogether too harsh and fervent.” p. 115. The other thing L. had promised . . . with false doctrine] Excerpts from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 112 and 115. p. 121. Luther had yet another meeting . . . without consequences] Excerpts from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 112 and 121.

4

7

8

11

14

19

6

292 22

37

7

1

3

8

11

Excerpts on Church History

pp. 127 and 128 . . . a debate . . . beautiful tapestry] Excerpts from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 127 and 128. ― Eck: Johannes Eck, or Johann von Eck (originally Johannes Mayer or Johann Maier, 1486–1543), German Catholic theologian; from 1510 professor of theology at Ingolstadt. Following Eck’s attack on Luther in 1518, Carlstadt (→ 2,5) published a series of theses against Eck, which led to this debate in Leipzig. ― Duke Barnim: Barnim XI (1501–1573), duke of Pomerania-Stettin; rector of the University of Wittenberg during the summer semester of 1519. ― Melanch.: Philipp Melanchthon → 5,24. ― Duke George: George the Bearded → 3,19. p. 129 On June 27th they assembled in the great body . . . 2 to 5 in the afternoon] Excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 129. ― June 27th: In 1519. Carlstadt and Eck debated about free will for 8 days] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in chap. 5 in Marheineke Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 129. ― Carlstadt: → 2,5. ― Eck: → 6,22. p. 130 . . . Carlstadt and Eck debated for another 3 days] Excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 130. ― Carlstadt: → 2,5. ― Eck: → 6,22. The duke of Pomerania ordered L. . . . not to give a sermon] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 131. ― duke of Pomerania: Barnim XI, duke of Pomerania-Stettin (→ 6,22). 133. In the month of July L. received two letters . . . Hus . . . for Bohemia] Excerpt from chap. 5 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 133. ― July: In 1519. ― L. received: Variant: “L.” has been added. ― the Hussites: Adherents of Jan Hus; see below in this note. ― Bohemia: Region in central Europe; today a part of the Czech Republic. ― Johannes Paduska: Or Johann Paduska (years of birth and death unknown), Hussite priest at Maria Church, the principal church in Prague. ― Rosdialovinus: Wenceslaus Rosdialovinus or Wenzel Rozdalowski (years of birth and death unknown), Hussite dean at the Carolinska

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

Collegium in Prague. ― Hus: Johann or Johannes Hus (ca. 1370–1415), Bohemian theologian and reformer; ordained a priest in Bethlehem Chapel in Prague in 1400; served as rector of the university in Prague in 1402–1403 and 1409; excommunicated in 1412, and in 1415, declared a heretic and burned at the stake. pp. 140 and 41. In his sermon on the Holy Eucharist L. said . . . L. subsequently issued a vigorous rebuttal of Schleinize’s decree] Excerpts from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 140–141 and 144. ― it would be good if people could partake under both kinds: Marheineke writes that in his sermon, Luther “wished, among other things, that the chalice be returned to the laity and that the Eucharist be enjoyed under both kinds.” In the Roman Catholic Church, it had become increasingly common, from the 12th century and onward, that the laity might only enjoy the Eucharist under one form (Latin, sub una specie), i.e., receive only the bread but not the wine, whereas enjoying the Eucharist under both forms (Latin, sub utraque specie) was reserved for the clergy. When the Hussites (→ 7,11) began to distribute the Eucharist under both forms, it was condemned by the Council of Constance in 1415. See Paper 203, with accompanying notes, in the present volume. ― Johan von Schleinitz: Johann von Schleinitz (1470–1537), German Catholic bishop; from 1499, cantor in Meissen and priest in Naumburg; from 1518, bishop of Meissen as Johann VII. ― in opposition to this,: Variant: first written “in opposition to this.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― born in Bohemia and brought up in Prague: i.e., linking Luther to Jan Hus (→ 7,11). pp. 149. 150. The universities . . . the pope’s supremacy in Germany] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 149–150. ― 150.: Variant: added. ― Louvain: → 4,33. ― Cologne: German city in North Rhine–Westphalia, located on both banks of the Rhine. ― his: Luther’s. ― Basel: → 4,33. ―Valla: Laurentius Valla or Lorenzo della Valle (1405 or 1407–1457), Italian humanist, Catholic priest, and rhetorician; ordained

17

26

Excerpts on Church History

42

8

4

1431, though without receiving a post, but later that year became professor of rhetoric at Pavia, where he became involved in a dispute with a legal scholar and left Pavia to teach at a number of other universities. For a period, Valla was in the service of the king of Aragon, and after being accused of heresy by the inquisition (1444)― an accusation subsequently retracted―ended as secretary to the Roman Curia and priest of the Church of the Lateran in Rome. Despite his having earlier criticized both the papacy and the Church, he then enjoyed widespread acclaim for his critical and scholarly accomplishments and for his works. ― Reuchlin: → 5,24. ― an Italian theologian, Thomas Rhadinus: Thomas Rhadinus Todiscus or Tommas Radini Tedeschi (1488–1527), Italian Catholic theologian and Dominican monk, professor of theology in Rome; his work appeared in Rome in August 1520 and was reprinted in Leipzig in October of that year. ― Emser in Leipzig: Hieronymus Emser (1478– 1527), German Catholic theologian, professor in Leipzig (→ 3,28); from 1505, in the service of Duke George of Saxony (→ 3,19). p. 151. In May of that year . . . Ulrich von Hutten (Awaken, Thou Noble Freedom)] Abbreviated excerpts from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 151–152. ― May of that year: May 1520. ― Sylvester von Schaumburg: (d. 1536), Franconian knight. ― Franz v. Sickingen: (1481–1523), commander of the Rhenish and Swabian knights. ― Ulrich von Hutten: (1488–1523), humanist, Latin author; studied at a number of universities, including several in Germany―Erfurt, Leipzig, Wittenberg, and Frankfurt―and at Pavia and Bologna in Italy; employed by the archbishop of Mainz, Albrecht von Brandenburg (→ 4,1), 1514–1520; became an adherent of Franz von Sickingen and opposed the Roman Curia with his “Klageschriften” [Complaints]. ― Awaken, Thou Noble Freedom: Marheineke writes: “Ulrich von H . . . also a poet and long in conflict with Rome, wrote a letter to Luther that began with the words, ‘Awaken, Thou Noble Freedom!” p. 155 . . . An Kaiserliche Majestæt . . . Nicolaus von Amsdorf] Excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke,

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

293

Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 155. ― he published his book: i.e., Luther published his book. ― Nicolaus von Amsdorf: Or Nikolaus von Amsdorff (1483–1565), German theologian; 1511, licentiate in theology from the University of Wittenberg; became an adherent of Luther in 1516; participated in the debate in Leipzig in 1519 (→ 6,22). p. 156 . . . 3) no one other than the pope can convene councils] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 156–157. p. 162 As early as September, 4000 copies of this book were in circulation] Excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 162. p. 163 . . . errors of doctrine that lie deeper] Excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 163. ― Tractat von der Babylonischen Gefangenschaft: Luther’s On the Babylonian Captivity [of the Church], published in October 1520. p. 164 . . . Sermon von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen . . . (p. 167.)] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 166– 167. ― Sermon von der Freiheit eines Christenmenschen: Luther’s On the Freedom of a Christian, published in November 1520. p. 182. At a conclave . . . a bull . . . or be excommunicated] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 6 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 182. ― Cajetan: → 4,27. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― a bull in which: Variant: added. p. 183. Hutten published the bull . . . epilogue] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 183. p. 184. Eck had the bull published . . . mocking him] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 184. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― Meissen: → 3,32. ― Sept. 21st: In 1520.― Merseburg: German town in Saxony-Anhalt, situated on the Saale River. ― Brandenburg: At that time a German electoral state. ― Duke Georg: → 3,19. ― ducats: Coins minted of fine gold. ― Michaelmas: Catholic holy day for the archangel Michael, which, as a

7

12

14

18

25

31

33

294

40

9

3

6

18

23

Excerpts on Church History

consequence of the Synod of Mainz in 813, was celebrated in Germany on September 29. ― in 10 places,: Variant: first written “in 10 places.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― the Paulist monastery: The monastery of the Paulist order in Leipzig. p. 185. When Eck . . . The bishop of Meissen . . . on January 7] Excerpts from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 185. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― Erfurt: → 2,36. ― Merseburg: → 8,33. ― Meissen: → 3,32. p. 186 . . . L. . . . calling the pope a heretic . . . a despiser of councils] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 186–187. ― Nov. 17th: In 1520. p. 195 . . . Ursachen, warum des Papsts und seiner Jünger Bücher von D.M.L. verbrannt sind] “The Reason Why the Books of the Pope and His Disciples Are Being Burned, by Doctor Martin Luther,” abbreviated excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 195. ― His: Luther’s. ― Louvain: → 4,33. ― Cologne: → 7,26. ― Mainz: (→ 4,1. ― Dec. 10th: In 1520. ― canon law: i.e., the collection of all the laws promulgated by popes and councils. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― Emser: → 7,26. p. 198. Augustinus von Alveld . . . L. . . . “Vom Papstthum zu Rom . . . zu Leipzig.”] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 198. ― Augustinus von Alveld: Or Augustin von Alvelt or Alfeld (ca. 1480–after 1535), German Catholic Franciscan monk; from 1520, lecturer on the Bible at the Franciscan monastery in Leipzig. ― “Vom Papstthum zu Rom . . . zu Leipzig.”: D. Mart. Luthers Schrift vom Pabstthum zu Rom, wider den hochberühmten Romanisten zu Leipzig [Doctor Martin Luther’s Writing on the Papacy in Rome, against the Famous Romanist of Leipzig] (1520), in D. Martin Luthers Samtliche Schriften [Complete Writings of Dr. Martin Luther], ed. J. G. Walch, 24 vols. (Halle, 1739–1750), vol. 18 (1746), cols. 1196–1258. He shows that . . . there only was one spiritual church] Refers to chap. 7 in Marheineke Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 203–209.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

As for the doctrine of the pope as the vicar of Christ . . . the person in whose place he is standing] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 209–211. p. 221. In addition to Eck, 2 other papal nuncios . . . would resolve itself] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 221–222. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― Marino Caraccioli: (1468–1538), Italian Catholic diplomat; from 1518, papal nuncio in Germany; from 1520, ambassador to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. ― Hieronymus Aleander: Or Girolamo Aleandro (1480–1542), Italian Catholic humanist and cardinal; from 1509 to 1513, he taught Hebrew, Greek, and Latin at the university in Paris; thereafter served as a papal nuncio. ― the Electors: Marheineke states that this involved Emperor Charles V and the elector of Cologne. ― the Elect[or] of Saxony: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 223. The Elect[or] replied . . . his books would not be disturbed] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 223. ― The Elect[or]: Elector Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 224. People wanted . . . he was too shrewd to do so] Abbreviated excerpt chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 224. ― Erasmus: Erasmus of Rotterdam (→ 2,13). p. 225. But Erasmus did speak well . . . Dec. 5th . . . ventres monachorum] Excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 225, and quoted material from p. 226. ― Erasmus: Erasmus of Rotterdam (→ 2,13). ― Elect[or] of Saxony: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). ― Dec. 5th: In 1520. ― Eras[mus]: Variant: added. p. 236. On Jan. 3rd 1521, a new bull of excommunication . . . ought not be decided solely by the pope. (pp. 238–241)] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 7 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 236–237, in which reference is made to an account on p. 238. ― against him: Against Luther. ― Glapio: Johann Glapio or Johannes Glapion (d. 1522), Italian Catholic Franciscan monk and priest; from 1520, confessor and counselor to Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. ― Johann Faber: Or Johannes Faber (ca.

26

35

1

5

8

14

10

Excerpts on Church History

23

30

35

39

11

1

1470 or 1475–1530), Catholic Dominican monk and humanist; dr. theol.; from 1507, prior of the Dominican monastery in Augsburg; from 1511, vicar general and imperial counselor. p. 242 the papal nuncio Hieronymus Aleander . . . the papal bull constituted his text] Excerpt from chap. 8 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 242. ― Hieronymus Aleander: → 9,35.― the emperor: Charles V. ― Feb. 13th: In 1521. p. 251 On March 6th . . . come to Worms . . . Dr. M. Luther, of the Augustinian Order] Excerpt from chap. 8 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 251. ― March 6th: In 1521. ― Worms: German city in RhinelandPalatinate, site of imperial diets of the Holy Roman Empire. p. 252. L. set off . . . jurist at Wittenberg] Excerpt from chap. 8 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 252. ― Justus Jonas: (1493–1555), German humanist, jurist, reformer; from 1519, rector of the university in Erfurt. ― prof. at Wittenberg: 1523–1533, professor and dean of the theology faculty at Wittenberg. ― Nicolaus von Amsdorf: → 8,4. ― Petrus v. Schwaben: Or Peter Swabe or Peter Suawe (1496–1552), German theologian, subsequently a Lutheran evangelical priest; in 1519, he came to study at the University of Wittenberg; subsequently a Danish diplomat. ― Hieronymus Schurf: Or Hieronymus Schurff (1481–1554), German philosopher and jurist; 1504, rector of the University of Wittenberg; from 1505, attached to the law faculty, becoming a professor in 1507, lecturing on canon law, served as “counselor to the elector.” p. 253 . . . upon all heretics] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 253. ― March 28th: In 1521. ― the pope: Leo X (→ 3,32). ― him: Martin Luther. ― in coena Domini: A collection of papal bulls against heretics, containing excommunications, threats of punishment, etc., which had been continually augmented since the 13th century. p. 254. In 1523 Hans Sachs composed Die Wittenbergisch Nachtigall, so man jetzt höret überall] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke,

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

295

Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 254. ― Hans Sachs: (1494–1576), German shoemaker, Meistersinger, and dramatist. p. 255. Wittenberg . . . 2 miles before they reached the town] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 255. ― Wittenberg: → 3,9. ― a carriage: The carriage in which Luther rode to Worms. ― Erfurt: → 2,26. ― Crotus: Crotus Rubeanus, originally Johann Jäger (1480–1545), German theologian, humanist, magister in 1507, dr. theol. in 1517; from 1520, rector of the university in Erfurt. ― Eobanus Hessen: Helius Eobanus Hessus (1488–1540), German humanist, neo-Latin poet; from 1517, professor of classical languages, poetry, and rhetoric at the university in Erfurt. p. 257. He arrived at Worms . . . at 4 o’clock in the afternoon] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 257. ― He: Luther. ― Worms: → 10,30. ― April 16th: In 1521. ― Justus Jonas: → 10,35.― Von Pappenheim: Ulrich von Pappenheim (d. 1539). p. 258 Commanding General Georg Frundsberg . . . (Hutten . . . 2 works)] Excerpts from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 258. ― Georg Frundsberg: Georg von Frundsberg or Fronsberg (1473–1528), German general in the service of the Habsburg imperial dynasty. ― (Hutten . . . 2 works): Variant: added. ― Hutten: Ulrich von Hutten (→ 7,42). 259. Eck stepped forward and asked . . . he was led forward and spoke] Excerpts from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 259. ― Eck: Johann von Eck (→ 6,22). p. 268. They continued . . . Duke George of Saxony opposed this] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 268. ― Cochleus (rlly Löffel or Löffelman): Johann Cochleus or Johannes Cochlaeus (originally Dobeneck, 1479–1552), German Catholic humanist, theologian; dr. theol. 1517; ordained a priest in Rome in 1518; priest in Frankfurt from 1520 and wrote in opposition to Luther that same year; was on occasion called Cochlaeus (Latin, from the word for “spi-

3

7

17

21

28

296

36

12

1

4

Excerpts on Church History

ral staircase,” from Wendelstein [German, “turning stone”], his home parish in Bavaria), also known as Löffelmann and Löffler. ― Margrave of Brandenburg: Marheineke has “elector of Brandenburg,” i.e., Joachim I, Nestor (1484–1535), prince elector of Brandenburg, 1499–1535. ― Emperor Charles: Charles V (1500–1558); from 1515, duke of Burgundy; from 1516, king of Spain; and from 1519, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. ― Elector of the Palatinate: Ludvig V (1478–1544), elector of the Palatinate, 1508–1544. ― Duke George of Saxony: → 3,19. p. 269. People tried to move L. . . . now L. used Gamaliel’s words] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 269. ― the chancellor of Baden, Dr. Vehus: Hieronymus Vehus (1484–1543 or 1544), humanist, jurist, and politician; 1510, dr. jur. in both canon and civil law; from 1514, in the service of Margrave Philip I of Baden, serving as chancellor from 1517. ― Elect[or] of Trier: Richard von Greifenklau zu Vollrath (1467–1531), archbishop and prince elector of Trier, 1512–1531. ― Eck: → 6,22. ― Cochleus: → 11,28. ― April 25th: In 1521. ― D. Peutinger: Dr. Peutinger, i.e., Konrad Peutinger (1465–1547), German Catholic humanist, jurist; studied law at a great many European universities; earned doctorate at Padua in 1497; city clerk of Augsburg. ― Elect[or] of Trier: Marheineke has “archbishop of Trier.” ― used Gamaliel’s words: See Acts 5:33–39, esp. 38–39. p. 270. L. left Worms on April 26th . . . on Hessian soil] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 269. ― Worms: → 10,30. ―April 26th: In 1521. ―― Friedberg: Friedberg in Wetterau, German town in Hesse. ― herald back,: Variant: The editors of SKS substituted the comma for Kierkegaard’s period. p. 272. When L. wanted to travel . . . brought to the Wartburg [castle] at 11 o’clock at night] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 272. ― Salzungen: Bad Salzungen, German town in Thuringia by the Werra River, thirteen miles south of Eisenach (→ 2,26). ― Altenstein: The castle of Altenstein in Thuringia, near Eisenach

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

(→ 2,26). ― Waltershausen: German town in Thuringia, situated at the crossroads connecting Salzungen with Erfurt and Eisenach with Saalfeld. ― the Elector: Frederick the Wise of Saxony (→ 3,23). ― Johannes von Berlepsch, the prefect of Wartburg: Johann or Hans von Berlepsch (ca. 1480–1533), German knight, steward of the Wartburg castle, near Eisenach in Thuringia. ― Burchard Hund: Marheineke has “Burkhard Hund” or “Burkhard von Hund” (birth and death dates unknown), German knight and proprietor of the castle Altenstein. p. 273 On May 26th . . . L. and his adherents were under imperial ban] Excerpt from chap. 9 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 273. ― May 26th: In 1521. p. 282. L. assumed the name Junker Jørgen . . . went hunting.―In Erfurt] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 282. ― Junker Jørgen: Marheineke has “Junker Jürgen.” ― Erfurt: → 2,36. p. 283. Here at the Wartburg L. wrote . . . Frantz von Sickingen] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 283. ― a book on confession: D. Martin Luthers Büchlein von der Beichte [Dr. Martin Luther’s Little Book on Confession] (1521), in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 19 (1746), cols. 1015–1087. p. 284 . . . book on ecclesiastical and monastic vows . . . translated by Justus Jonas] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 284. ― book on ecclesiastical and monastic vows: D. Mart. Luthers Urtheil von den Geistlichen und Klostergelübden. “Verdeutscht durch Just. Jonam, Probst zu Wittenberg” [Dr. Martin Luther’s Judgment Concerning Spiritual and Monastic Vows: Translated into German by Justus Jonas, provost at Wittenberg] (1522), in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 19 (1746), cols. 1808–2042. ― his father: Hans Luther. ― Justus Jonas: → 10,35. p. 286. People began to deal with matters concerning the priestly vow . . . Carlstadt also wrote about the priestly vow] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 285–286. ― matters concerning the

12

14

19

22

27

Excerpts on Church History

33

34

priestly vow: Marheineke has “matters concerning priestly marriage.” ― Feldkirch, a dean in Kemberg: Bartholomäus Bernhardi (1487–1551), also known as Feldkirch after his place of origin; German Augustinian monk, priest, and reformer; Luther’s companion in school and at the university; in the winter semester of 1512–1513, he served as dean of the philosophy faculty at the University of Wittenberg; in 1518–1519, he served as rector of the university; in 1518, he was chosen as priest and dean in Kemberg, a town in SaxonyAnhalt not far from Wittenberg; despite his vow of celibacy, he married on August 24, 1521. ― Elect[or] of Mainz: Albrecht II of Brandenburg (→ 4,1). ― Elect[or] of Saxony: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 287. L. began work on translating the Bible] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 287. p. 288 . . . L. continued the struggle . . . the hair-splitting of Ambrosius Catharini, a Dominican] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 288–289. ― against Jacob Latomus: Jacobus Latomus (originally Jacques Masson, ca. 1475– 1544), Belgian Catholic theologian; magister, 1500; dr. theol. from Louvain, 1519; in 1521, he wrote a piece that formed the basis of the condemnation of Luther that was adopted by the theology faculty of Louvain (→ 4,33). Here the reference is to D. Martin Luthers Widerlegung der Ursachen Latomi, so er für die Mordbrenner, die Sophisten der Schule zu Löwen, angegeben [Doctor Martin Luther’s Refutation of the Motives of Latomus, as He Attributed Them to the Incendiaries and Sophists of Louvain] (1521), in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 18 (1746), cols. 1301–1479. ― a piece . . . against . . . Ambrosius Catharini, a Dominican: Ambrosius Catharinus (originally Lancelotto de’ Politi, 1484–1553), Catholic jurist, theologian, Dominican monk, wrote in opposition to Luther in 1521. Here the reference is to D. Mart. Luthers Offenbarung des Antichrists aus dem achten Capitel des Propheten Daniels, wider Ambrosium Catharinum [Dr. Martin Luther’s Revelation of the Antichrist in the Eighth Chapter of the Prophet Daniel, against Ambrosius Catharini] (1521), in D.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

297

Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 18, 1746, cols. 1756–1944. p. 289. The Univ. of Paris . . . Melanchthon . . . apologia] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 289. ― The Univ. of Paris: According to Marheineke, it was the theology faculty of the University of Paris. ― Melanchthon: → 5,24. ― a Latin apologia: Philipp Melanchthonis Schutzrede für D. Martin Luthern, wider das wütende Urtheil der Pariser Theologen (1521). “Durch Lutherum selbst verdeutschet” [Philipp Melanchthon’s Defense of Dr. Martin Luther against the Mad Judgment of the Theologians of Paris (1521): Translated into German by Luther Himself], in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 18 (1746), cols. 1146–1169. p. 290. Now Elect[or] Albrecht of Mainz . . . refrained from trafficking in indulgences] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 290. ― Elect[or] Albrecht of Mainz: → 4,1. ― Halle: Refers to Halle an der Saale, German town in SaxonyAnhalt. ― opposition to him: Variant: first written “opposition to him.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― with which he threatened the Elect[or]: Luther wrote a threatening letter to the elector of Mainz. ― refrained from trafficking in indulgences: See Marheineke’s rendering of the elector’s letter to Luther, p. 294. p. 298. Around Novbr., L. . . . journey to Witt[enberg] . . . did not want the Elect[or] to know of it] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 298. ― Novbr.: In 1521. ― L. went on a secret journey: Variant: “L.” has been added ―Amsdorf: → 8,4. ― the Elect[or]: Presumably refers to Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 299. Melanchthon’s “loci . . . sive Hypoteses theologicæ” . . . in 1521] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 299–300. ― loci . . . sive Hypoteses theologicæ: Common Basic Concepts in Theological Subjects, or Outline of Theology; the title is indicated in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 300n.

40

1

8

12

13

298 15

Excerpts on Church History

p. 300. Now the gospel began . . . Bugenhagen fled to Witt[enberg] . . . came to know L.] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 300. ― sermons, e.g.,: Variant: first written “sermons.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. ― Zwickau: German city in Saxony, situated on the left bank of the Zwickau Mulder River. ― Friedrich Mecum: Or Friedrich Myconius (1490–1546), German priest, Franciscan monk; arrived in Weimar in 1512 and ordained a priest in 1516; supporter of Luther. ― Nicolaus Hausmann: (1478 or 1479–1538), German priest; ordained in Altenburg in 1519 and served as a priest in Schneeberg; close ally of Luther. ― Halberstadt: → 4,1. ― Frisia: Province in northern Holland. ― Erfurt: → 2,26. ― Eoban Hesse: i.e., Eobanus Hesse → 11,3. ― Joachim Camerar: Or Joachim Camerarius the Elder (1500–1574), German Catholic humanist, classical scholar, rhetorician, and poet; studied in Leipzig from 1512; in Erfurt from 1518, and from 1521 in Wittenberg, where he became a close friend of Melanchthon, and from 1522 professor of rhetoric at the university. ― Euricius Cordus: (Originally Heinrich Ritze, 1486–1535), German humanist, physician, botanist, and poet; teacher in Kassel ca. 1509–1511; studied in Erfurt from 1513, became friends with Eoban Hesse and Joachim Camerarius; in 1516, he became magister rector of the diocesan school in St. Marien; became a dr. med. in Ferrara in 1521, while traveling in Italy; a fervent supporter of Luther, he used his poetic talents in service to the Reformation. ― Johann Lang: (1486 or 1488– 1548), German humanist, Augustinian monk, and theologian; ordained a priest, 1508; studied in Wittenberg from 1512; professor of ethics at Wittenberg from 1512 to 1516; dr. theol. from University of Erfurt in 1519; served as Luther’s district administrator for Thuringia and Meissen, 1518–1520. ― Forchheim: Georg Forchheim (birth year unknown, died July 1522); German priest; magister; delivered the first evangelical sermon in St. Michael’s Church in Erfurt, 1520; from 1521, priest in Erfurt. ― Theobald Gerlacher: Or Theobald Billicanus (1490 or 1495–1554), German priest; from 1510, studied in Heidelberg, where

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

he became a friend of Melanchthon; strongly influenced by Luther in 1518; from 1522, priest in Nördlingen, where he introduced evangelical arrangements. ― Nördlingen: German town in Bavaria. ― Johann Bugenhagen: (1485–1558), German humanist, priest, reformer; ordained a priest, 1509; from 1517, lecturer in Holy Scripture at the monastery of Belbuck in Pomerania; from 1520, studied theology in Wittenberg, where he lived with Melanchthon; served as Luther’s replacement while the latter was in Worms; married in 1522; priest in Wittenberg from 1523; subsequently important in organizing the Lutheran Church in Denmark. ― Andreas Cnophen: Or Andreas Knopken or Knöpken (ca. 1468–1539), German priest, reformer; taught in Frankfurt an der Oder; influenced by Bugenhagen, he turned from Erasmus to Luther; from 1517, chaplain and, from 1522, priest at St. Peter’s Church in Riga, where he earned the doctorate the same year. ― Christian Kettelhut: Or Christian Ketelhot (ca. 1492–1546), German Premonstratensian monk; as choirmaster in the Belbuck monastery in Pomerania, he was influenced by Bugenhagen; preached Reformation doctrine as a priest at St. Nicholas Church in Stolp (then a German city in Pomerania, now in Poland) in 1522, and was dismissed, but continued working for the Reformation in Stralsund. ― Erasmus von Manteufel: Or Erasmus Manteuffel-Arnhausen (ca. 1475–1544), Catholic bishop; from 1504, in service to Duke Bogislaw X of Pomerania as ducal counselor; from 1522, bishop of Kamin. ― Kamin: → 3,32. That year an imperial edict . . . ordered that the ban be put into effect] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 301. ― That year: 1521; Marheineke has “at the end of the year.” p. 302. Freedom was greatest in Saxony . . . abuse of the mass . . . appear until 1522] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 301–302. ― private masses: i.e., a mass celebrated by a priest only for himself, without participation of a congregation, or a mass, held in exchange for money, for the soul of someone deceased. ― L. wrote to the Augustinian

29

31

Excerpts on Church History

37

14

3

5

monks in Wittenb[erg] about the abuse of the mass: D. Martin Luthers Schrift vom Mißbrauch der Messe, an die Augustiner zu Wittenberg [Dr. Martin Luther’s Work on the Abuse of the Mass, for the Augustinians in Wittenberg] (1521), in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 19 (1746), cols. 1304–1437. ― Spalatin: → 4,27. p. 303. Not only did the Augustinian monks . . . to abolish the mass everywhere] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 303. ― Justus Jonas: → 10,35. ― Joh[ann] Doltz: Johann Doltz (or Toltz or Doltsch or Dolizius or Dolscius) from Feldkirch (or Veltkirch), alternatively, also Johannes Piliatoris (ca. 1486–1523), German theologian and priest; magister from Wittenberg, 1506; ordained a priest, 1507; dean of the philosophy faculty, 1511; rector of the University of Wittenberg, winter semester 1516–1517; dr. theol. and professor of theology at Wittenberg and priest at the palace church, 1521; became an adherent of Luther in 1521. ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. ― Hieronymus Schurf: → 10,35. ― Melanchthon: → 5,24. ― the Elect[or]: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 305. Karlstadt marries . . . Anna von Mochau . . . L. approved] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 305. ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. ― Anna von Mochau: (Born ca. 1507, year of death unknown); the wedding to Karlstadt took place on January 19, 1522. p. 306. Karlstadt . . . society of fanatics . . . Thomas Münzer] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 306. ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. ― Nicolaus Storch: (1500–1536), weaver, radical reformer, and lay preacher from Zwickau; went to Wittenberg with a number of his adherents in 1521. ― Marx Stübner von Elsterberg: Or Marcus Stübner from Elsterberg (years of birth and death not determined); studied in Wittenberg; came to Wittenberg with Storch in 1521. ― Thomas Münzer: Or Thomas Müntzer (1489–1525), Catholic priest, radical Reformationist theologian and preacher; stayed in Wittenberg in 1517 or 1518–1519, when he became acquainted with

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

299

the Lutheran reformers; in 1519, pastor at the Cistercian cloister in Beuditz; immersed himself in mysticism and in 1520 came to Zwickau and became an adherent of Storch and his circle. p. 307. M. Stübner declared . . . that the world . . . a great transformation] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 307. ― M. Stübner: → 14,5. p. 310 Karlstadt and his adherents . . . belittled Lent] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 310. ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. p. 311. L. left the Wartb[urg] . . . letter to the Elect[or] . . . dated March 5th] Excerpt from chap. 10 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 311. ― the Elect[or]: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). p. 316. The Elect[or] received the letter . . . L. in fact did this] Excerpts from chap. 11 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, pp. 316–317. ― The Elect[or]: Frederick the Wise (→ 3,23). ― 6th of M[arch]: March 6, 1522. ― Hieronymus Schurf: → 10,35. p. 322. L. preached against Karlstadt . . . popular fashion] Excerpt from chap. 11 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 322. ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. p. 330. The troublemakers . . . Karlstadt . . . calling himself Brother Anders] Abbreviated excerpt from chap. 11 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 330. ― troublemakers: The “Zwickau prophets.” ― Karlstadt: → 2,5. ― Orlamünde: German town in Thuringia, situated at the confluence of the Orla and the Saale Rivers. p. 357. In 1522, Henry 8 wrote his book . . . against L.] Excerpt from chap. 12 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 357. ― Henry 8: Henry VIII (1491–1547), king of England, 1509–1547. ― de septem sacramentis: On the Seven Sacraments; Marheineke does not give the Latin title. p. 359. L. wrote very harshly in opposition to Henry . . . king by the non-grace of God] Excerpts from chap. 12 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 359. ― harshly in opposition to Henry: D. Mart. Luthers Antwort

11

16

19

24

33

35

40

1

15

300

4

9

12

15

16

Excerpts on Church History

auf König Heinrichs des VIII von Engelland Buch wider seinen Tractat von der Babylonischen Gefängniß [Dr. Martin Luther’s Reply to King Henry VIII of England’s Book against His Treatise on the Babylonian Captivity] (1522), in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 9,18), vol. 19 (1746), cols. 295–435. ― Henry: Henry VIII (→ 14,40). p. 366. On March 6th, Duke George . . . Henry 8 . . . turns of phrase] Excerpt from chap. 12 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 366. ― March 6th: Marheineke has “on the 6th of August” 1522. ― Duke George: George, duke of Saxony (→ 3,19). ― Henry 8: Henry VIII (→ 14,40). p. 374. In 1522 the N.T. and the 5 books of Moses were published in L.’s translation, and in the same year a new edition of the N.T.] Compressed excerpt from chap. 12 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 374. p. 375. Among the earlier translations . . . 1477; 1483; 1490 . . . but they are not German.] Excerpt from chap. 12 in Marheineke, Geschichte der teutschen Reformation, vol. 1, p. 375. ― Nuremberg: → 5,6. ― Augsburg: → 4,27. End of 1st Part] Marheineke’s history of the German Reformation (→ 2,1) consists in all of four volumes, including vol. 2 (Berlin, 1816), vol. 3 (Berlin, 1831), vol. 4 (Berlin, 1834). Historical Information . . . Cph. 1830] Jacob Christian Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger. Tredie Mindeskrift i Anledning af den augsborgske Confessions Jubelfest [Historical Information Regarding the Symbolic Books of the Danish Church: Third Commemorative Work on the Occasion of the Anniversary of the Augsburg Confession] (Copenhagen, 1830; abbreviated hereafter as Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger). ― Jac. Chr. Lindberg: Jacob Christian Lindberg (1797–1857), Danish theologian and philologist; 1822, cand. theol. and adjunct instructor of Hebrew at the Metropolitan School in Copenhagen; magister degree, 1828; discharged “honorably” from the Metropolitan School, 1830; in the course of the 1820s, Lindberg became an adherent of N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 17,13).

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

p. 18. On July 2, Frederick . . . Dr. Stagefyhr and another anonymus] Abbreviated excerpt from the introduction to Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 18. ― Frederick I: Frederick I (1471–1533), king of Denmark and Norway, 1523–1533. ― Dr. Stagefyhr: Nikolaus Stagefyr, sometimes (and with great uncertainty) identified as Nicolaus Ferber (1485–1534), Catholic theologian, Franciscan monk, and in charge of the Franciscan province of Cologne, appointed by the pope as vicar general of the order in England, Germany, Spain, and Belgium. p. 19. From the Ca[tholics], in addition to the bishops . . . Mr. Rasmus from Trolleborg] Excerpt from the introduction to Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 19 n. 1. ― From the Ca[tholics] . . . came: Lindberg has “from the papal side came.” ― lecturer Paul Eliesen Turncoat: Or Paul Eliae or Hilae, Latin name for Povl Helgesen (ca. 1480 or 1485–ca. 1535?), Danish Catholic humanist, theologian, and historian; Carmelite monk; from 1519 to 1522, founder and leader of the Carmelite college in Copenhagen and lecturer in theology at the University of Copenhagen; provincial leader of the Scandinavian province of the Carmelite order, 1522–1534; greatly inspired by Erasmus of Rotterdam and critical of abuses in the Roman Catholic Church; thus he looked favorably on Luther’s cause, though was subsequently critical of the ideas of the Reformation―hence the epithet “Paul Turncoat.” ― lecturer Christian Muus from Aarh[us]: No additional identification is available. ― magister Jørgen Samsing, cantor in Aarh[us]: Jørgen Pedersen Samsing (birth date unknown, died 1548), Danish Catholic priest, earned the magister degree abroad, cantor at the cathedral church in Aarhus, serving as chancellor for Archbishop Ove Bille. ― Brother Johan Nielsen from Funen: Or Hans Nielsen, born on Funen (birth date unknown, died between 1544 and 1550), Dominican monk, provincial leader of the Dominican order in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark; earned the licentiate degree in 1525 and dr. theol. shortly thereafter; in 1530, dedicated to the bishop of Odense a piece he published

22

28

Excerpts on Church History against the Lutheran Reformation. ―Adzer Pedersen, cantor in Lund: Or Adser Pedersen (birth and death dates unknown), Danish Catholic prelate, member of cathedral chapter of Lund and chancellor for Archbishop Birger of Lund. ― Ulf, Joh[an] Wulff, canon in Ribe: Lindberg has “Ulf, apostolic pronotary (i.e., first secretary), and Johannes Wulf, canon in Ribe,” whereas Frederik Münter, in Den Danske Reformationshistorie, vol. 2 (→ 16m,1), p. 96, to which Lindberg refers in his notes, writes: “Ulf, probably the same apostolic pronotary or canon in Ribe, Johannes Wulff, who had announced the proclamation against the bishop of Viborg.” According to Münter, this is the same person as Hans Ulf, or Johan (Johannes) Wulf (1470–ca. 1541), Catholic prelate; from 1497, priest in Schleswig diocese, thereafter acquiring countless vicariates and posts as priest and dean―e.g., in Copenhagen, Aarhus, Haderslev, and Ribe; appointed papal apostolic pronotary (i.e., first secretary, a high-ranking office in the papal administration), and it was in that capacity that he announced the papal proclamation against Bishop Jørgen Friis of Viborg in 1530. ― magister Hans Tausen, parish priest in Copen[hagen]: (1494–1561), Danish monk, priest, and Lutheran reformer; earned magister degree at Rostock in 1519, when he presumably was also ordained; theological studies at the University of Copenhagen, 1521; matriculated in 1523 at the University of Wittenberg, where he was sympathetic to the ideas of the Lutheran Reformation; ca. 1526, he moved to the Johnannine monastery in Viborg, then expelled by his order; from 1529, parish priest at the Capuchin church in Viborg and from the summer of that year, parish priest at St. Nicholas Church in Copenhagen; bishop of Ribe from 1542. ― Peder Lorentsen: Or Peder Laurentsen (born before 1490, died 1552), Danish Carmelite monk, Lutheran preacher and reformer; from 1519, lecturer at the Carmelite college at the University of Copenhagen; moved to the Carmelite monastery in Assens in western Funen; in time, he became an adherent of Lutheran reform tendencies and left his order; from 1529, lecturer in biblical theology at the evangelical seminary in Malmö. ― Frands Wormordsen: Or

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

301

Frands Vormordsen (1491–1551), Danish Carmelite monk, Lutheran preacher and reformer; had to leave Copenhagen in 1529 because of his Lutheran preaching and became a teacher at the evangelical seminary in Malmö. ― Ole Chrysostomus: Or Oluf Chrysostomus (d. 1553), Danish linguist and Lutheran reformer; on the faculty of the University of Copenhagen from 1527; in 1529, presented a lecture at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen that made clear his support of biblical-humanistic reform tendencies; from 1530, rector of the evangelical preparatory school and instructor of classical languages, theology, and philosophy at the evangelical seminary in Malmö. ― Niels Mortensen: Actually, Claus Mortensen Tøndebinder (ca. 1499–1575), Danish priest and Lutheran reformer; while a priest, during a period of study at the University of Copenhagen, his sermons at the Church of Our Lady in Copenhagen contained such pointed attacks on the Church that the bishop forbade him to preach in his diocese; in 1527, he began working for the Lutheran Reformation in Malmö; for a period he was in Haderslev, Jutland, at Scandinavia’s first Lutheran seminary; from ca. 1528, began holding the Danish Lutheran mass sub utraque specie (→ 7,17); from 1529, parish priest in Malmö. ― Johan Olsen: Actually, Hans Olufsen Spandemager (d. 1571), Danish monk of the order of the Holy Spirit; Lutheran reformer; preached in support of the Lutheran Reformation in Malmö; for a period he was in Haderslev, Jutland, at Scandinavia’s first Lutheran seminary; in 1528, published (together with Claus Mortensen Tøndebinder) a book of songs for the seasons, which in 1529 appeared in an enlarged edition with a liturgy (“the Malmö mass”). ― Johan Skjønning: Actually, Jakob Skønning (d. 1549), Danish priest, Lutheran reformer; earned the magister degree abroad; member of the cathedral chapter in Viborg from ca. 1518, in addition to becoming rector of the Latin school in Viborg and priest at St. Hans Church; was attracted to Lutheran reform tendencies after hearing Hans Tausen’s sermons; opened his church to Tausen, and he himself became a Lutheran reformist preacher. ― Jørgen Jensen: Actually, Jørgen

302

Excerpts on Church History

Jensen Sadolin (ca. 1499–1559), Danish priest; after completing his studies, presumably in Germany, he returned to Viborg as a magister and a zealous adherent of Lutheran reformist tendencies; became Hans Tausen’s most important collaborator, training new Lutheran preachers; from 1529, ordained by Hans Tausen, served as parish priest at the former Dominican church in Viborg. ― Morten Hegelund: Or Morten Mortensen Hegelund (died ca. 1565), Danish priest; founded a Lutheran congregation in Aalborg ca. 1527; after 1530, priest at Budolfi Church in Aalborg. ― Peder Thomsen: Or Peder Thomesen (died ca. 1560), Danish Premonstratensian monk in the Børglum monastery and priest; in 1523, he enrolled at the University of Wittenberg and was attracted to Lutheran reform tendencies; from 1525, personal priest and teacher for the royal butler Mogens Gøye; from 1528, parish priest in Thorum on Salling, a peninsula in the Liim Fjord in northern Jutland. ― Peder Jensen from Saling: Danish priest on Salling, not further identified. ― Niels Christensen, personal chaplain to Mogens Gjøe: Or Niels Christiernsen, Danish house priest or chaplain to Mogens Gøye (see below); not further identified; perhaps active in Randers ca. 1530; see N. K. Andersen, Confessio Hafniensis. Den københavnske Bekendelse af 1530 [Confessio Hafniensis: The Copenhagen Confession of 1530] (Copenhagen, 1954; abbreviated hereafter as Confessio Hafniensis), p. 47. ― Mogens Gjøe: Or Mogens Gøye (ca. 1471–1544), Danish nobleman, knight, and royal butler; from 1503, member of the council of the realm; from 1523, royal butler under King Frederick I; from 1526, adherent of Lutheran reform tendencies. ― Anders Liung: Or Andreas Ljung Jensen (1490 or 1495–1555), Danish Carmelite monk, Lutheran reformist preacher and priest; studied under Povl Helgesen at the Carmelite college in Copenhagen; from 1529, presumed to have been a teacher at the evangelical preparatory school in Malmö; from 1529, parish priest in Landskrona, a coastal town in Scania, which was then a part of the Danish kingdom. ― Christian Skrock: Or Christian Clausen Skrok (died ca. 1568), Danish priest and Lutheran reformer; enrolled in the

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

University of Wittenberg, presumably in 1518; from 1524, priest at St. Nicholas Church in Svendborg in southern Funen; from ca. 1526, served as a vicar in Assens in western Funen; presumably attracted to Lutheran reform tendencies and, together with Peder Laurentsen (see above), introduced the Reformation in Assens. ― Hans Nielsen: Danish preacher of the Lutheran Reformation in Falsterbro (see below); not further identified. ― Falsterbro: Lindberg has “Falsterbo,” a town in southwestern Scania. ― Thyge Christensen: Or Tyge Christiernsen; not further identified, perhaps a preacher of the Lutheran Reformation in Ystad, southern Scania; see Andersen, Confessio Hafniensis, p. 47. ― Anders Madsen: Not further identified; perhaps a preacher of the Lutheran Reformation in Copenhagen; see Andersen, Confessio Hafniensis, p. 47. ― Anders Nielsen: Not further identified; perhaps a preacher of the Lutheran Reformation in Copenhagen; see Andersen, Confessio Hafniensis, p. 47. ― Mr. Jacob: Not further identified. ― Mads Jensen: Not further identified; perhaps a preacher of the Lutheran Reformation in Copenhagen; see Andersen, Confessio Hafniensis, p. 47. ― Mr. Rasmus: Not further identified. ― Trolleborg: Frederik Münter, Den Danske Reformationshistorie (→ 16m,1), vol. 2, has “Trelleborg,” a coastal town in southwest Scania. On July 9th, Hans Tausen presented the king with the Confession of Faith] Excerpt from the introduction to Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 19. ― Hans Tausen: → 15,28. comprising 43 articles] See the introduction to Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 21–31, where Lindberg reproduces the Danish version under the heading “The 43 Copenhagen Articles”; Lindberg further informs the reader that “the Danish reformers had posted [the Copenhagen Articles] without knowledge of the Augsburg Confession with which its doctrinal content agrees” (p. 21). p. 32. In 1533 Sadolin translated the Augsburg Confession into Danish] Excerpt from the introduction in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om

7

9

10

16

Excerpts on Church History

12

13

16

21

25

34

den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 32, n. 1. ― Sadolin: Jørgen Jensen Sadolin (→ 15,28). ― the Augsburg Confession: The first Lutheran confession of faith, composed in 1530. We must be in possession . . . as its meaning is concerned] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol” [On the Apostles’ Creed], in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 49. if one person . . . the congregation would certainly have objected] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 50. the heretics would have objected . . . exclude them from the Church] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 50–51. The earliest congregations also attributed great importance to the Creed, as can be seen from Cyril . . . several days before their baptism] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 53–54. ― Cyril: Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 313–386 or 387), bishop of Jerusalem from 348. This also helps us understand why . . . they surely held on to their Creed] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 55–56. But people have thought . . . a passage in Irenaeus . . . differ greatly] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 57. ― Irenaeus: i.e., Irenaeus of Lyon (ca. 135–ca. 200), bishop, Catholic Church Father and martyr; from 177, bishop of Lyon; traditionally believed to have been martyred ca. 200.

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

303

there can be no doubt that . . . the Apostles’ Creed . . . should appear so differently . . . special emphasis] Free rendering of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 60–61. Kierkegaard writes “there can be no doubt that,” whereas Lindberg has “one can reasonably assume.” Kierkegaard omits Lindberg’s “extremely” before “differently.” They are found in Latin and in Danish . . . Dansk Reformationshistorie, 2nd part. pp. 109f.] Excerpt from the introduction to Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 21, n. 1. ― M. Wöldike: Marcus Wöldike (1699–1750), Danish theologian and philologist; from 1731, professor of dogmatics at the University of Copenhagen; dr. theol. 1736; treated the history of the Danish Reformation exhaustively. ― Confessio Hauniensis: The Copenhagen Confession. ― Haun.: Abbreviation of Hauniae, the Latin locative genitive form of “Copenhagen.” ― 1536: On page 19, n. 1, Lindberg has, properly, “1736.” ― Mynter’s Dansk Reformationshistorie, 2nd part. pp. 109f.: Frederik Münter, Den Danske Reformationshistorie [The History of the Danish Reformation], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1802), vol. 2, pp. 109–119, has the Danish version of the forty-three articles. Frederik (or Friedrich) Christian Carl Heinrich Münter (1761–1830), Danish bishop, Church historian, and archaeologist; from 1788, extraordinary professor and from 1790, ordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen; dr. theol., 1790; from 1808, bishop of the diocese of Zealand. On the Apostles’ Creed] Refers to chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 47–82. Cyrilli opp: ed. Ant: Aug: Touttèe Parisiis 1720 Folio p. 9. Procatechesis XII] Cited freely from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 53, n. 1. The reference is to section 12 of the “Procatechesis” [Prologue to Catachesis], in S. Cyrilli archiepiscopi Hierosolymitani opera quæ extant omnia, et ejus nomine circumferuntur [The Complete Extant Works

38

1

6

7

16m

304

10

12

17

7

13

Excerpts on Church History

of St. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Including Works That Have Circulated under His Name], ed. A. A. Touttée (Paris, 1720), folio format, p. 9. ― Cyril: → 16,21. ― Ant: Aug: Touttèe: Antoine Augustin Touttée (1677–1718), French Benedictine monk, priest, and editor of patristic authors. Irenei Op. ed. Massuet lib 1. cap. 10 p. 48] Cited freely from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 58, n. 1. The reference is to bk. 1, chap. 10, in Irenaeus (→ 16,34), Contra hæreses [Against the Heretics], in Sancti Irenæi episcopi Lugdunensis et martyris, opera [The Works of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon and Martyr], also published under the longer title, Sancti Irenæi episcopi Lugdunensis et martyris, detectionis et eversionis falso cognominatæ agnitionis, sev contra hæreses libri qvinqve [Investigation and Refutation by St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon and Martyr, of What Is Falsely Called Knowledge [cf. 1 Tim 6:20], or Five Books against the Heretics], ed. R. Massuet (Paris, 1710) p. 48. ― Massuet: René Massuet (1666– 1716), French Benedictine monk, theologian, and editor of patristic authors. lib. III. cap. IV. p. 178] Abbreviated passage from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 60, n. 1. The reference is to bk 3, chap. 4 in Irenaeus (→ 16,34), Contra hæreses, in Sancti Irenæi episcopi Lugdunensis et martyris, opera, (→ 16m,10) p. 178. “The Church Fathers never cite . . . often passing over others.” (p. 63.)] Free, abbreviated rendering from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 63. But if we were able to derive the creed . . . from Grundtvig’s Søndags Bog, pt. 2, p. 441] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol.” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 63–64, including n. 1. ― from Ireneus, etc.: Lindberg has “from the writings of the Church Fathers.” ― Ireneus: → 16,34. ― Grundtvig: Nicolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish priest, poet, hymn

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

writer, historian, politician, educator; cand. theol., 1803; ordained, 1811; priest in Præstø in southern Zealand, 1821–1822; and from 1832, served as a non-stipendiary preacher at Frederik’s German Church (now Christian’s Church) in the Christianshavn quarter of Copenhagen. ― Søndags Bog, pt. 2, p. 441: Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224), vol. 2 (1827), pp. 440–441, where in connection with 1 Pet 4:7–11, the epistle for the sixth Sunday after Easter, Grundtvig writes: “we must indeed work so earnestly that when one omits the testimony that love has sealed in such divine fashion―no salvation can be found for Adam’s children but in Jesus Christ our Lord, that there must be nothing whatever in all our words and deeds that the world itself could by any means call unloving, but there must be a great deal, a very great deal, that testifies to our having received the spirit of him whom the world indeed hated, persecuted, and crucified because he testified that its deeds were evil and led to corruption, but whose wondrous love could only be doubted by one in despair! And if we but do that, the Lord will bless the Word of God upon our lips so bountifully that even in the midst of the throng of the world’s people it shall be known by the mutual love; that He who is one with the Father, who gave his life for his friends; that he still has his true disciples on the earth, his little flock, to whom it pleases the Father to give the kingdom, the promised land that flows with milk and honey, upon which God’s glory shines, so that the inhabitants have no need for the sun and the moon, but have the Lord himself for their light and wander in him, in the light of the living, before the face of the Father.” Nor have there been any changes . . . they never confuse the Nicene Creed . . . with the Apostles’ Creed] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 66–67. ― the Nicene Creed: Adopted at the Council of Nicea (the first ecumenical council) in 325.

19

Excerpts on Church History 24

28

35

38

39

It has been claimed that . . . it was not found in Cyril’s catechetical works . . . that isn’t true] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the sense of the next section of chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 70. ― Cyril’s catechetical works on the Creed: Reference to Cyril’s (→ 16,21) catechetical sermons on the Apostles’ Creed. People have denied it because . . . Cyril treats this in the section “On the Grave.”] Excerpt from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 72. ― περι των δεϰα δογματων: On p. 72, n. 1, the title is rendered as follows: “Περι τῶν δεϰα δογματων” [On the Ten Articles of Faith]. ― Cyril: → 16,21. It has in fact been . . . denied that Chr[ist] had a human soul] Excerpt from chap. 1, “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 76–77. ― Apollinarists: Adherents of Apollinarius of Laodicea (ca. 315–before 392); from 360 or 361, bishop of Laodicea (he was also active in Antioch). See p. 77, n. 1, where Lindberg states: “The heresy of Apollinaris, when he said that he [Christ] had not had a human mind, consisted in his denial that Christ was a true human being.” Jan. 21st 1530 Charles summoned the imperial diet to Augsburg] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession” [On the Augsburg Confession], in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 98. ― Charles: Charles V (1500–1558); from 1515, duke of Burgundy; from 1516, king of Spain; from 1519, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. ― the imperial diet: Lindberg states that this diet was to deal “with the two important points: serious preparations for war against Turkey, and religious unity.” The second matter was in response to Luther’s pointed attack on the Roman Catholic Church and the demand for reforms. ― Augsburg: City in Bavaria. This diet . . . the emperor hesitated until June 15th] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

305

om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 99. ― April 8th: In 1530. On March 14th, the Elect[or] of Saxony . . . the principal articles of the faith] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 100. ― the Elect[or] of Saxony: John the Constant (1468–1532), elector of Electoral Saxony, 1525–1532. ― L[uther]: Martin Luther (1483–1546), German theologian, Augustinian monk (1505–1524), professor at Wittenberg, Protestant reformer. ― Mel[anchthon]: Philipp Melanchthon (1497–1560), German philologist and evangelical theologian, reformer (→ 5,24). ― Justus Jonas: (1493–1555), German humanist, reformer (→ 10,35). ― Bugenhagen: Johann Bugenhagen (1485–1558), German humanist, priest, reformer (→ 13,15). On the Augsburg Confession] Refers to chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, pp. 93–114. On April 3rd, Elect[or] John . . . Justus Jonas, L[uther], and M[elanchthon]] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 100. ― Elect[or] John: John the Constant (→ 17,41). ― Torgau: German town in northwestern Saxony. ― the electoral prince: John Frederick (1503–1554), son of Elector John the Constant, elector of Saxony as John Frederick I or John Frederick the Magnanimous. ― the duke of Lüneburg: Ernest I (1497–1546), duke of Brunswick-Lüneberg; from 1520–1546, prince of Lüneberg; introduced the Lutheran Reformation in Lüneberg in 1527; one of the signers of the Augsburg Confession in 1530. ― the prince of Anhalt: Wolfgang (1492–1566), prince of Anhalt-Köthen, 1508–1562; introduced the Lutheran Reformation in Anhalt-Köthen in 1525; one of the signers of the Augsburg Confession in 1530. ― the count of Mansfeld: Albrecht VII (1480–1560); one of the signers of the Augsburg Confession in 1530. ― Justus Jonas: → 10,35. ― L[uther]: → 17,41. ― M[elanchthon]: → 5,24. Luther remained behind in Coburg] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,”

41

1

17m

1

18

6

306

6

8

17m

9

15

Excerpts on Church History

in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 101. ― Coburg: German city in Saxony-Anhalt situated on the Itz River; the reference here is to the Coburg Fortress, Veste Coburg, situated above the city. On May 2nd the Elect[or] made his . . . the landgrave of Hesse] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 101. ― the Elect[or]: Prince Elector John the Constant (→ 17,41). ― the landgrave of Hesse: Phillip (1504–1567), reached the age of majority in 1518 and attended the Diet of Worms in 1520–1521, where he met Luther; in 1526 allied with John the Constant (later also with several other northern German princes in the League of Torgau); in 1527, founded the University of Marburg for the education of priests in order to assure the diffusion of the evangelical Lutheran faith in Hesse. At the Diet of Augsburg, he opposed the Augsburg Confession, which he believed was too weak. On June 15th, toward evening, Charles V arrived] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 102. ― Charles V: → 17,38. The estates were convened at 3 in the afternoon of June 25th . . . 45 emissaries from the imperial assemblies] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 107. ― Charles V: → 17,38. ― Ferdinand: Lindberg has “King Ferdinand of Hungary,” i.e., Emperor Charles V’s brother Ferdinand (1503–1564), subsequently Emperor Ferdinand I (1558–1564); he received the Habsburg lands in Germany from his brother in 1521; in 1526, he became king of Bohemia and Hungary, and in 1531, he was chosen Holy Roman emperor. The Confession was read by Dr. Beyer and lasted around 2 hours, starting at 4 o’clock] Excerpt from chap. 4, “Om den augsborgske Confession,” in Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger, p. 108. ― The Confession: The Augsburg Confession, which was presented in Latin and German versions, was read aloud. ―

•

P a p e r 1 1830–1831 •

Dr. Beyer: Christian Beyer or Bayer (1482–1535), German jurist and chancellor to the prince elector; professor of law and dr. jur. from the University of Wittenberg in 1510; in 1513, he became “prince elector’s counsel” for the Saxon Prince Elector Frederick the Wise; mayor of Wittenberg several times; from 1528, chancellor for the Prince Elector of Saxony John the Constant.

Notes for Paper 2–Paper 29 Church History, Biblical Exegesis, Excerpts from Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics and from Baader’s Speculative Dogmatics et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg

Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn

Edited by Hermann Deuser, Anders Holm, Stine Holst Petersen, and Rasmus Sevelsted

Quotations and references checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber

Translated by David D. Possen

Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

308

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Church History, Biblical Exegesis, Excerpts from Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics and from Baader’s Speculative Dogmatics et al.”1 is no. 459 in B-cat. and is presumably among the portion of Kierkegaard’s papers that upon his death was found together with various other material in “a large sack.”2

II. Dating and Chronology This group of twenty-eight papers includes three papers marked with dates: Paper 7, dated December 3, 1833; Paper 8, dated March 10, 1834; and Paper 13:10, dated October 1, 1834. Among the undated papers, Paper 2 and Paper 3 consist primarily of excerpts from Stener Johannes Stenersen’s Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation, med en Indledning om Kirkens Tilstand før samme [Overview of the Lutheran Reformation, with an Introduction on the Preceding State of the Church], 2 vols. (Christiania [Oslo], 1818–1819), vol. 1. Kierkegaard may have transcribed these excerpts in connection with the lectures on Church history held by Jens Møller at the University of Copenhagen during the winter semester of the 1830–1831 academic year.3 Paper 4 consists of

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “The Order of the Papers” in L-cat. (see “Introduction to the Loose Papers”). The original manuscripts are found in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) of the Royal Danish Library.

2

) See Index Lectionum in universitate regia hauniensi per semestre hibernum a kalendis novembribus a. MDCCCXXX habendarum, p. 3, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. Kierkegaard’s name does not appear on the list of those who attended these lectures; see Den kgl. Direktion for Universitetet og de lærde Skoler 1805–1848, Henlæggelsessager til referat- og resolutionsprotokol, I E 1831–1834, The Danish National Archives, F9-20-6.

3

Critical Account of the Text a lengthy exegesis of the synoptic Gospels. It is presumably connected to the lectures on that subject offered privately by H. N. Clausen during the winter semester of the 1832–1833 academic year.1 Paper 5 may be presumed to be from 1833–1834, as Paper 5:1 refers to a sermon preached by N.F.S. Grundtvig on September 8, 1833.2 Paper 6 contains linguistic commentaries in Latin on the Greek text of Acts 12–15 and 17–19 following Karl Gottlieb Bretschneider’s Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum in libros Novi Testamenti [Greek-Latin Hand Lexicon of the New Testament], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1829 [1824]; ASKB 73–74). This may be linked to H. N. Clausen’s lectures on difficult sections of Acts, held during the winter semester of the academic year 1833–1834.3 Paper 9–Paper 14 consist almost entirely of excerpts and commentaries on F.D.E. Schleiermacher’s Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsäzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith, Presented in Context, in Accord with the Fundamental Tenets of the Evangelical Church], vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1830). These papers must have taken form no earlier than mid-1834 and after, as Kierkegaard was tutored by Hans Lassen Martensen on that very book in the early summer of that year (see Paper 13:10, which is dated October 1, 1834).4 Paper 15 consists of a thorough exegesis of the Epistle to the Ephesians following L. I. Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser erläutert und vertheidigt [Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians Explicated and Defend-

) See Index Lectionum in universitate regia hauniensi per semestre hybernum a kalendis novembribus a. MDCCCXXXII habendarum, p. 3, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. Kierkegaard’s name does not appear on the list of those who attended these lectures; see Den kgl. Direktion for Universitetet og de lærde Skoler 1805–1849, undervisning m.m.: universitetet og Polyteknisk Læreanstalt, Danish National Archives, F9-52-1.

1

) See the explanatory notes to Paper 5:1.

2

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet i Vintersemestret 1833– 34, p. 3, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. The list of those who attended these lectures is no longer extant.

3

) In the autumn of 1834, Martensen began an extended tour of Europe; see his memoir Af mit Levnet, 3 vols. (Copenhagen 1882– 1883), vol. 1, p. 84. On Martensen’s time as Kierkegaard’s tutor, see pp. 78–79.

4

309

310

P a p e r 2–29 C h u r c h H i s t o r y , B i b l i c a l E x e g e s i s e t a l . •

ed] (Leipzig, 1834), which may have been studied in association with C. E. Scharling’s lectures on the Epistles to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and the Philippians, delivered during the winter semester of the 1834–1835 academic year.1 Paper 16–Paper 18 are similarly exegetical notes on the New Testament. These notes may have been taken as part of Kierkegaard’s plan, which he later abandoned, to complete his theological examinations as early as 1835.2 Paper 19 consists of a short passage cited from Philip[p] Konrad Marheineike, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft [The Foundational Doctrines of Christian Dogmatics as a Science] (Berlin, 1827; ASKB 644). This is presumably linked to H. L. Martensen’s “Forelæsninger over Indledning til speculative Dogmatik” [Lectures on the Introduction to Speculative Dogmatics,” delivered during the winter semester of the 1837–1838 academic year (see Not4:3 in KJN 3, 125). Paper 20–Paper 24 consist of excerpts from Franz Xaver von Baader’s Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik [Lectures on Speculative Dogmatics], 5 vols. (vol. 1, Stuttgart, 1828; vols. 2–5, Münster, 1830–1838; ASKB 396), which presumably were also read in association with the above-mentioned lectures by Martensen. The contents of Paper 25 may be related to the lectures on ontology delivered by Poul Martin Møller during the winter semester of the academic year 1837–1838.3 Paper 26 includes transcriptions of passages in Schleiermacher’s Ueber die Religion. Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern [On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers], 4th ed. (Berlin, 1831 [1799]) and may be linked to Martensen’s lectures on “Philosophiens Historie fra Kant til Hegel” [The History of Philosophy

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1834–35, p. 2, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. The list of those who attended these lectures is no longer extant.

1

) In Paper 16, Kierkegaard mentions “student notes,” i.e., one of the folders containing lecture notes and other materials relevant for university studies that were in wide circulation among student subscribers during that period.

2

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1837–38, p. 7, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. The list of those who attended these lectures is no longer extant. See also the explanatory notes to Paper 25.

3

Critical Account of the Text from Kant to Hegel], delivered during the winter semester of the 1838–1839 academic year.1 Paper 27–Paper 29 consist of exegetical notes and commentaries that are presumably related to Kierkegaard’s preparations in 1839–1840 for his theological examinations. Paper 27 and Paper 28 are notes on the Epistle to the Romans, on which C. E. Scharling held lectures during the winter semester of the 1839–1840 academic year. Paper 29, meanwhile, concerns Old Testament citations in Acts, a subject that presumably was covered in M. H. Hohlenberg’s Christology lectures, held during that same semester, concerning citations from the Old Testament in the New Testament.2 In sum, it can be established that the papers in this group must have been written over a period of approximately ten years, from 1830–1831 to 1839–1840.

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1838–39, p. 2, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. The list of those who attended these lectures is no longer extant. Kierkegaard owned a pamphlet of student notes covering these lectures, printed as Pap. II C 25 (vol. XII, pp. 280–331).

1

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1839–40, p. 3, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51. The list of those who attended these lectures is no longer extant.

2

311

Explanatory Notes 20

1

1

1

14

Stenersen] Stener Johannes Stenersen (1789– 1835), Norwegian theologian; received the cand. theol. degree in 1811 from the University of Copenhagen; from 1814 was associate professor, and from 1818 professor, of theology (New Testament, ethics, and Church history) at the University of Christiania (Oslo) in Norway. pt. I, p. 121] This refers to S. J. Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation, med en Indledning om Kirkens Tilstand før samme [Overview of the Lutheran Reformation, with an Introduction on the Preceding State of the Church], 2 vols. (Christiania [Oslo], 1818–1819; abbreviated hereafter as Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation), vol. 1 (= “pt. I”), p. 121, in Stenersen’s introduction. ― pt. I: Variant: added. Gregory VII had already declared . . . the Council of Toulouse in 1229] Almost a word-forword transcription of Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 121, though Kierkegaard omits the words “the holy mountain” in the citation from Exodus. ― Gregory VII: Born Hildebrand ca. 1020; pope, 1073–1085. ― Innocent III: Born Lothar in 1160 or 1161); pope, 1198–1216. ― of scrip[ture]] Variant: added. ― Gregory IX: born Hugo, between 1145 and 1170; pope, 1227– 1241. Thomas Aquinas’s Summa contained 15,000 . . . questions presented and answered with great art] Paraphrase of the following passage in Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 141: “In the Summa, or theological textbook, by the Dominican monks’ famous teacher Thomas Aquinas alone there were 15,000 arguments; these are questions presented, for the most part unnecessarily, and then answered with great art.” ― Thomas Aquinas’s: Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), Italian theologian and philosopher; Dominican monk from ca. 1243; taught at the University of Paris ca. 1255–1261 and again ca. 1269–1271, subsequently opened a university

in Naples. His principal work is Summa theologiae (1265–1272), a handbook in theology or theological encyclopedia. Canonized as a saint in 1323; declared a teacher of the Church in 1567. Regarded as the greatest of the medieval scholastics. Albert the Great presented 230 questions . . . through closed doors, or not?] Paraphrase of the following passage in Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, pp. 142–143: “Or what even greater similarity with chaos must theology have had in the writings of Thomas Aquinas’s teach[er] Albert, called The Great by the admiring age, when he managed to present and respond to 230 questions on the occasion of the Gospel [account] of the Annunciation of Mary alone, questions such as: ‘Could not the Annunciation have taken place by means of a human being? Why did it happen by means of an angel? Why by means of an archangel? Could it not also have taken place by means of an angel of the higher classes, or by means of the Holy Spirit, or by means of the Son, or by means of the Father? Next: in what form did the angel appear? As a snake, or a dove, or a woman, or a man, or a young man, or a boy? In what clothing? At what time of day? In what state was Mary at that moment: in contemplation, or in action? How old was she? Was she beautiful? What color was her hair? What color were her skin and eyes? Was it appropriate for her to be beautiful in the flesh? Why was she not called Eve, rather than Mary? Did the angel come to her through a closed door, or not, etc.?’ ” ― Albert the Great: Albert von Bollstädt (1193–1280), called Albert the Great or Albertus Magnus, German scholastic theologian and philosopher, Dominican; professor in Paris and Cologne. among such things . . . could still have performed miracles as a gourd? Etc.] Citation from Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 143. The words “among such

16

23

Church History

29

36

things” refer to a prior phrase that Kierkegaard does not cite: “how [theology] came to appear in the hands of such men, who sought blindly, and with poor ability, to imitate those admired patterns” (p. 143). Mariale i.e., 60 sermons . . . but was rejected] Paraphrase of the following passage in Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, pp. 152–153: “Further [examples can] be taken from the Mariale, or 60 sermons in honor of Mary, which the Franciscan monk Bernardino de Bustis published in 1493. Here, to prove his claims, he cites not only biblical passages from the Vulgate and passages by the Church Fathers and scholastics, but also―as had already become customary in the thirteenth century, indeed perhaps in the twelfth―the Pandects (these are the ancient Romans’ laws), Aristotle, the ancient Roman and Christian poets, and comes forward with the most outrageous fables, e.g., that the devil had wanted to tempt Mary into marrying him, and had on that occasion cited the laws of the Twelve Tables of the Law and the Pandects, but was rejected; that after the Ascension of Christ, [the devil] had demanded dominion over the human race, and had argued about this with Mary, who was the spokeswoman for the human race, but was ultimately condemned, etc.” ― Bernardino de Bustis: Italian monk, preacher, and aesthetic-homiletic author; best known for his Mariale, published in Milan and Strasbourg in 1493; d. 1500. ― Pandects: or Pandectæ (from the Greek πᾶν, “all,” and δέχεσθαι, “to include”), also called Digesta, designates a comprehensive, fifty-book compendium of responsa, rulings, interpretations, etc., by Roman jurists, commissioned by the Roman emperor Justinian in 530 and brought into force in 533, as part of the Corpus juris civilis, the Roman compendium of civil laws assembled under Justinian in 528–534. ― Aristotle: Aristotle of Stagira (384–322 b.c.), Greek philosopher, logician, and naturalist, pupil of Plato; founded the Peripatetic school at the Lyceum in 335 b.c. Johan Tauler Dominican †1361 in Cologne . . . Johan Ruysbrock] See the following passage in Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation

•

P a p e r 2 1830–1831 •

313

(→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 202: “In Germany there had also lived a number of men who had recognized that salvation is obtained solely by faith, namely, by the faith that issues in love, and who had taught in accordance with this conviction, without attracting attention enough that they were punished harshly, or without gathering any real faction. Among these [can] be numbered the famous Johan Tauler, a Dominican monk who died in Cologne in 1361, and his two contemporaries Henrik Suso and Johan Ruysbroch. All three of these men belonged to the same class, which people called mystics, and despite all their differences, they nonetheless had a remarkable likeness to one another.” ― Johan Tauler: Johann Tauler (ca. 1300–1361), German Dominican priest, mystic. ― Henrich Suso: Heinrich von Berg, known as Heinrich Seuse or Henry Suso (ca. 1295–1366), German Dominican friar, mystic. ― Johan Ruysbrock: Jan van Ruusbroec, or John/ Johan/Johannes of Ruisbroek (1294–1381), Flemish priest, Augustinian friar, mystic. Gerhard Groot born in Deventer 1340. †1384] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, pp. 206–207. ― Gerhard Groot: Geert or Gerard Gro(o)te, Dutch deacon, traveling preacher, mystic. Thomas à Kempis born 1380 †1471] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 209. ― Thomas à Kempis: Thomas Hemerken of Kempen (ca. 1380–1471), German monk, mystic, and writer of edifying literature. Johan Wessel (Gansfoet) †1489] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 211 (“Johan Wessel, or Gansfoet, as he was called by those of his hometown”) and p. 213. ― Johan Wessel (Gansfoet): Wessel Harmensz Gansfort or Goesevort (ca. 1420–1489), Dutch philosopher and theologian; often considered one of the “Reformers before the Reformation.” Herman von dem Büsches. Began his travels in 1498] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 232, where it is related that Hermann von dem Busche (called “von dem Büsches” by Stenersen) “began his erudite wanderings around 1498,” and that wherever he went, he “held lectures on the classical authors in

40

1

2

3

21

314

4

4

5

Church History

public schools or other institutions.” ― Herman von dem Büsches: Hermann von dem Busche or Hermannus Buschius (ca. 1468–1534), Dutch humanist, held teaching posts at numerous universities. 1502 in Erfurt. Luther?] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 233, where it is related that inasmuch as Hermann von dem Busche “arrived at Erfurt in 1503, while Luther had arrived there in 1501 and only entered the monastery in 1505, it is thus quite reasonable to assume that Luther too heard [von dem Busche], even though, to be sure, he is nowhere named as Luther’s teacher.” ― Luther: Martin Luther (1483–1546), German theologian, Augustinian monk (1505–1524), professor at Wittenberg. As a reformer of the Church, Luther was the central figure in breaking with the medieval theological tradition, papal power, and the Roman Church, which resulted in a transformation of worship services and ecclesiastical life and in the founding of a number of evangelical Lutheran churches, particularly in northern Europe. Luther was the author of a great many theological, exegetical, and edifying works, as well as works on ecclesiastical policy and organization and many sermons and hymns. Luther also translated the Bible into German. 1522–1534] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 1, p. 233, where it is related of Hermann von dem Busche that “subsequently, when he was dean of the school in Wessel, he came to read the writings of Luther and Melanchthon (→ 21,5). This provoked such serious misgivings in him that, in 1522, he resigned his position and traveled to Wittenberg in order to hear these men himself, and to have the heavy doubts―which presumably had been awakened in his soul―removed by these men. From now on he was a true and eager Protestant, and died in 1534 still fighting, as it were, for the Church.” Melanchtoni loci edidit Augusti, p. 127] Refers to Philippi Melanchthonis loci theologici ad fidem editionis primae MDXXI [Philipp Melanchthon’s Theological Topics, based on the first edition of 1521], ed. J.C.W. Augusti (Leipzig, 1821; abbre-

•

P a p e r 2–3 1830-1833 •

viated hereafter as Melanchthonis loci theologici), p. 127. The first edition of 1521 was titled Loci communes rerum theologicarum seu hypotyposes theologicae [Basic General Concepts concerning Theological Matters, or Fundamental Theological Themes]. Philipp Melanchthon (1497–1560), German philologist, theologian, and Reformer. He was professor of Greek at Wittenberg from 1518 and from 1519 a member of its theology faculty. He was a close friend and colleague of Luther and played a large role in composing the Lutheran confessional writings Confessio Augustana [Augsburg Confession] (1530), Apologia confessionis Augustanae [Apology for the Augsburg Confession] (1530–1531), Confessio Augustana variata [Augsburg Confession with Changes] (1540), and Repetitio confessionis Augustanae [Repetition of the Augsburg Confession] (1551). Imo et vilissima fuerit . . . similibus cupiditatibus imperet?] Cited, with changes, from Melanchthonis loci theologici, p. 127. Kierkegaard abbreviates “Christiana” to “Chr:,” separates “plusquam” into two words, and omits commas after “mactet,” “negotio,” and “amori.” see Stenersen Reformat. Hist. 2, p. 155] Refers to Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 2, p. 155. Munkebjerg] Lit. “Monks’ Mountain”; location unidentified. This toponym does not appear in Stenersen. northeast of Heide] Heide, in the Dithmarschen region of Holstein, where Heinrich von Zütphen (→ 21,10) died a martyr’s death; Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified. However Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 2, p. 155, states that Heinrich was martyred near the town of Meldorf, which is to the south of Heide. Henrich von Zütphen] Heinrich von Zütphen, Hendrik van Zutphen, or Henry of Zutphen, from Zutphen in the duchy of Geldern in Holland (1488 or 1489–1524); Dutch Augustinian friar and hermit; removed his Augustinian cloak in October 1524 and was martyred in Dithmarschen in December of that year (→ 21,12). He is regarded as the Reformer of Bremen.

5

9

10

10

10

21

Church History 11

12

12

14

(His martyrdom is described by Luther. L. W. XXI, 94)] See Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation (→ 20,1), vol. 2, p. 156, where it is said of Heinrich von Zütphen that “his martyrdom is described by Luther himself,” with a note referring to “L. W. XXI, 94 fgg.,” i.e., D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften (→ 25,25), vol. 21 (1749), cols. 94–98, which contains the letter by Luther (→ 21,4) titled “An die Christen zu Bremen, Historie von Bruder Heinrichs von Zütphen Märtyrertode, nebst einer Auslegung des IX. Psalms” [To the Christians of Bremen, the Story of the Martyr’s Death of Brother Heinrich von Zütphen, along with an Interpretation of Psalm 9]. Dec. 10 and 11, 1524] On December 10, 1524, Heinrich von Zütphen was killed with a hammer, and his body was thrown onto a pyre outside the town of Heide. Because the pyre would not light, on the following day (December 11) the head, hands, and feet were chopped off of the corpse and burned, while the rest of the corpse was buried to the accompaniment of mocking songs and dance. Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified. Gichtel by Kanne.―†Jan. 21, 1710] Johann Georg Gichtel, a German jurist and mystic, was born in 1638. Kierkegaard’s source on Gichtel’s death is the German philologist, orientalist, and historian Johann Arnold Kanne (1773–1824), whose Leben und aus dem Leben merkwürdiger und erweckter Christen aus der protestantischen Kirche [The Life and from the Life of Remarkable and Awakened Christians of the Protestant Church], 2 vols. (Bamberg, 1816–1818; see ASKB 589, the 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1842; abbreviated hereafter as Leben und aus dem Leben merkwürdiger und erweckter Christen) contains a chapter on Gichtel’s life, vol. 2, pp. 1–168. On p. 161, Kanne states that Gichtel died on January 21, 1710. Poul Gerhard born in Gräfenheinichen . . . the year 1606. †1679] Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified. ― Poul Gerhard: Paul Gerhardt (1607–1676), German Lutheran pastor and pietist composer of hymns, born in Gräfenhainichen, a small town between Halle and Wittenberg in Saxony.

•

P a p e r 3 1830–1833 •

315

I A. Franke born in Lübeck 1663 . . . his father was physician . . . †1727] See Kanne, Leben und aus dem Leben merkwürdiger und erweckter Christen (→ 21,12), vol. 2, pp. 171–172, where Kanne writes that August Hermann Francke, a central figure of German pietism, was born in March 1663 in Lübeck, where his father, Johann Francke, served as “Syndikus bei dem Domkapitel des dortigen Stifts und bei gesammten Landständen des Fürstenthums Ratzeburg” (German, “syndic for the local monastery’s cathedral chapter, and for all the country estates of the principality of Ratzeburg”). On p. 189, it is related that the younger Francke came to Halle in January 1692, where he became not only professor of Greek and Oriental languages at the newly founded university there, but also pastor in the suburb of Glaucha. August Hermann Francke’s death is described on pp. 199–200. ― orphanage: On pp. 206–209, it is related that in 1695, August Hermann Francke founded a school for the poor and an orphanage in Halle, which grew to include extensive property and businesses, such as an orphanage pharmacy, printing press, and Bible society. Spener. Born 1633. in Alsace. 1666 pastor in Dresden; 1686 to Berlin? † 1707] Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified. However, in the article “Træk af Philip Jakob Speners Liv” [Episodes in Philip Jakob Spener’s Life] in For Christne. Et Tidsskrift (→ 21,21), vol. 6, pp. 111–128, it is related that Philipp Jakob Spener―a German Protestant pastor and central figure in German pietism―was born in Rappolsweiler, Alsace, on January 13, 1635; that he became pastor in Frankfurt am Main on August 1, 1666; high court preacher in Dresden in 1686; and Church provost in Berlin in 1691. Although the article does not mention it, Spener died in 1705. see Thisted for Christne. 5th vol.] See For Christne. Et Tidsskrift [For Christians: A Journal], ed. Jørgen Thisted, 6 vols. (Copenhagen, 1823–1825; ASKB 364–369), vol. 5 (1825), where an article is found on pp. 1–9, “En Martyrhistorie fra det sextende Aarhundrede” [A Story of Martyrdom from the Sixteenth Century], describing how the Protestant family of Robert and Johanne Oguier, with their sons Baudicon and Martin, were burned at

16

19

21

316

Church History, Biblical Exegesis

the stake in the French city of Lisle in 1556. ― Thisted: Jørgen Overgaard Thisted, Danish priest, born 1795; cand. theol. in 1820, afterward personal chaplain at Budolfi Church in Aalborg; from 1822–1824, personal chaplain at Trinity Church in Copenhagen; and from 1825 until his death in 1855, parish priest in Gyrstinge and Flinterup on Zealand. Thisted was affiliated with the Society of Brethren in Copenhagen, and in 1830, he published a Danish translation of the Moravian Brethren’s confessional compendium, namely, August Gottlieb Spangenberg, Idea fidei fratrum, eller kort Begreb af den christelige Lærdom i de evangeliske Brødremenigheder [Idea of the Brotherhood of Faith, or a Brief Outline of the Christian Doctrine of the Evangelical Society of Brethren (Århus, 1830). 21

22

23

23

Lk 3:1] Paper 4:1 contains interpretations of passages from the first three gospels in an order identical to that found in H. N. Clausen, Quatuor evangeliorum tabulae synopticae [Synoptic Tables of the Four Gospels] (Copenhagen 1829; ASKB 467; abbreviated hereafter as Tabulae synopticae). Luke 3:1 is included in the pericope Lk 3:1–18; see no. 12 in Tabulae synopticae, p. 9. In the year 753, Chr. was born] According the chronology developed by the Roman scholar and author Marcus Terentius Varro, or Varro Reatinus (116–27 b.c.), known as ab urbe condita (Latin, “from the founding of the city”), with a start date traditionally fixed at 753 b.c.―so that the traditional year of Christ’s birth would be 753 years ab urbe condita. according to Dionys] i.e., according to the calculations of the Romanian monk and abbot Dionysius Exiguus (ca. 470–ca. 544), who lived in Rome from ca. 500, and developed the traditional Christian chronology in approximately 525. His aera Dionysiana (“Dionysian reckoning of time”) established the convention of anno Domini (“year of the Lord”) (a.d.), according to which the birth of Jesus was fixed to the 754th year ab urbe condita (→ 21,23). Because Dionysius’s chronology does not include a year 0, it is assumed that he held that Jesus was born in either 1 b.c. or a.d. 1.

•

P a p e r 3–4 1830–1833 •

767 (according to Dionys.) Tiberius came to the throne] i.e., that Tiberius Claudius Nero, known as Tiberius, became Roman emperor in the year 767 ab urbe condita (→ 21,23), corresponding to anno Domini 14 (→ 21,21). hence 14 + 15 = 29] Namely, the date of the appearance of John the Baptist (see Lk 3:2), namely, 767 – 753 = 14, plus the 15 years that Tiberius had reigned according to Lk 3:1, which begins: “In the fifteenth year of Emperor Tiberius.” Dionys. says Herod came to the throne in 713 or 714] Namely, that Herod became king of Judaea in the year 713 or 714 ab urbe condita (→ 21,23), corresponding to forty or thirty-nine years before anno Domini (→ 21,23). This, it should be noted, is Herod the Great―who was appointed king of Judaea in 40 or 39 b.c. and retained power until his death in the year 4 b.c.―rather than the Herod spoken of in Lk 3:1, who was Herod Antipas, son of Herod the Great, and Roman tetrarch, or governor, of the Galilee and Peraea from 4 b.c. to a.d. 39; see Johann Georg Benedict Winer (→ 55,23), Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Dictionary of the Bible, for Use by Students, University Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71; abbreviated hereafter as Biblisches Realwörterbuch), vol. 1, pp. 566–569. Josephus says that he reigned for 37 years] For Josephus’s comments on the reign of Herod the Great, see bk. 17, chap. 8, 1, in Antiquitates Judaicae [Jewish Antiquities, or Antiquities of the Jews] by the Jewish historian Titus Flavius Josephus (a.d. 37–100); see Flavii Iosephi Hebraei opera omnia graece et latine [Complete Works of the Hebrew Flavius Josephus in Greek and Latin], ed. F. Oberthür, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1782–1785; abbreviated hereafter as Iosephi opera omnia), vol. 2 (1783), pp. 802–803. Chr. was born under Her.] See Mt 2:1. The reference is to Herod the Great (→ 22,1 and → 22,2). the massacre of the children of Bethlehem took place under him] See Mt 2:16–18. Archel. was exiled in his 9th year of rule] Refers to Herod Archelaus (23 b.c. – a.d. 18), son of Herod the Great; was appointed Roman ethnarch

25

27

1

2

6 7 11

22

Biblical Exegesis

12

13

17

23

11

of Judaea, Samaria, and Idumaea in 4 b.c. but was expelled to Gaul by the emperor Augustus nine years later―in a.d. 6―following protests against his tyrannical rule. On this see Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae, bk. 17, chap. 13, 1, Iosephi opera omnia (→ 22,2), vol. 2, pp. 848–849; and Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 1, p. 96. procurators were introduced. Pontius Pil. was the 5th] See, e.g., Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 2, p. 328, who notes that the term procurator was used for Roman provincial governors “who raised revenues for the imperial treasury and decided related court cases.” Winer remarks that “such procurators were . . . also established in Palestine, after the ethnarch Archelaus’s transferal (ca. a.d. 6) of Judaea and Samaria to . . . the province of Syria was rebuffed. The first of these procurators of Judaea was Coponius . . . but in the gospels only Pontius Pilate, sixth in the series, is mentioned.” Pontius Pilate was procurator of Judaea and Samaria from a.d. 26 to 36. In Josephus another Lysanias . . . killed 30 years earlier by Antony] Refers to Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae, bk. 14, chap. 7, 4, and chap. 12, 1, along with bk. 15, chap. 4, 1, where Josephus discusses a certain Lysanias, who ruled over Chalcis in Lebanon, and relates that in the year 718 ab urbe condita (→ 21,23), corresponding to 34 b.c., this Lysanias was executed by the Roman conqueror Marc Antony (83–30 b.c.); see Iosephi opera omnia (→ 22,2), vol. 2, pp. 402–403, 452–453, and 534– 537. See also Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 1, p. 9. the apostle] i.e., the evangelist Luke, who was not in fact an apostle, but is mentioned in Philem 24 as one of the apostle Paul’s fellow-workers; see also 2 Tim 4:11 and Col 4:14. The Novatians] Followers of the Roman priest and Latin scripturalist Novatian, who according to tradition suffered martyrdom in 257. When the bishop of Rome was martyred in 250, Novatian became the de facto leader of the Roman congregation, but when another candidate was elected in 251, Novatian refused to recognize him and had himself elected bishop by his own followers; they were then excommunicated by a Roman syn-

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

317

od the same year. Novatian was a proponent of strict Church discipline and penance and claimed that the Church’s holiness was dependent on the purity of its members, for which reason apostates could not be readmitted. Novatian’s strict conception of the Church won support across the entire Christian world, and Novatian churches arose everywhere, especially in Asia Minor and Syria. Because the Novatians were regarded as heretics, the Christian political authorities took measures against them starting in the late 4th century; but Novatian congregations still existed as late as the 7th century. the Donatists] A schismatic movement among North African Christians―named for Donatus Magnus (d. ca. 355), a bishop of Carthage―which Augustine successfully worked to root out in the early fifth century. In 313, Donatus had been chosen as antibishop of Carthage in opposition to Bishop Caecilian, who was less opposed to those who wished to make the Church into the spiritual fundament of the Roman Empire. Under Emperor Constantine the Great, the situation developed into open rebellion, but the Donatist church gained an increasing number of adherents, especially among the lower social classes, and by ca. 400 it was stronger than ever. Augustine sought to mobilize the entire North African church against the Donatists and had them condemned as heretics, but when new unrest emerged, he sought help from the imperial authorities, which issued laws against the Donatists and began systematic persecutions aimed at eliminating the schismatic church. aposiopesin] i.e., aposiopesis, a rhetorical figure involving sudden interruption in the middle of speech, representing a break in thought. The English word is derived from the Greek and Latin nominative forms, ἀποσιώπησις (Greek, lit., “keeping silent”). ϰορβαν ex hebr: ‫ קָ ְרבָ ן‬. . . thesaurus sacer in N. T. Mt 27:6] Paraphrased excerpt from the article “Κορβᾶν” [Gift] (sacrificial offering), in Karl Gottlieb Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum in libros Novi Testamenti [Greek-Latin Hand Lexicon of the New Testament], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1829 [1824]; ASKB 73–74; abbreviated

11

15

20

318

25

24

10 17

21

24

25

1

Biblical Exegesis

hereafter as Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum), vol. 1, p. 686. Kierkegaard omits a comma after donum and a colon after the second occurrence of est. ― Josephus: Bretschneider makes reference to Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae, bk. 4, chap. 4, 4, and Contra Apionem, bk. 1, 22, in Iosephi opera omnia (→ 22,2), vol. 1, pp. 360–363, and vol. 3, pp. 1180–1181. ‫ קָ ַרב‬appropinquare] See the article “‫[ ”קָ ַרב‬Bring Near], in [Heinrich Friedrich] Wilhelm Gesenius, Lexicon manuale hebraicum et chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti libros [Hand Dictionary of Hebrew and Chaldean for the Books of the Old Testament], (Leipzig, 1833; ASKB 72; abbreviated hereafter as Lexicon manuale hebraicum), p. 903, where Gesenius defines the verb as “appropinquavit, prope accessit” (Latin, “he approached,” “came near”), col. 1. μηποτε ϰατασυρη σε προς τον ϰριτην] Citation from Lk 12:58. L[uke] Presumably, a reference to Lk 11:29–30. See no. 49 in H. N. Clausen’s Tabulae synopticae (→ 21,22), p. 63, where Mt 12:40 is included in the pericope Mt 12:22–45, which is compared to Lk 11:14–36. the apostle] Matthew, one of the twelve apostles; according to Church tradition, author of the gospel of Matthew; see Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 2, p. 73. Alii judicium futurum . . . mea condita est] Latin with Greek, “Others [imagine] the future judgment at the end of ages, but the return is described as immediately imminent; others about the destruction of Jerusalem. The connection between v. 27 and v. 28 should probably be constituted as follows: [‘]Amen, I say to you, but what I say does not serve to provoke that judgment, for that judgment will first have its beginning from the time when my Church has been established.[’]” Admodum urbane . . . adhibita exigere] Latin, “They collected the tax in a polite manner, from which some have concluded that Jewish teachers were exempted from paying this tax, yet most paid voluntarily anyway, motivated by piety; but this is mere conjecture. The rabbis tell that those who collected the holy tax asked each individual for it in a friendly and mild manner starting on the 15th day of Adar, but starting on the 25th

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

they began to use force.” ―Adar: A winter month of twenty-nine days―the sixth month of the civil year and the twelfth month of the ecclesiastical year in the Hebrew calendar, roughly corresponding to the month of March in the Gregorian calendar; see the article “‫[ ”אֲדָ ר‬Adar], in Gesenius, Lexicon manuale hebraicum (→ 23,25), p. 17, col. 2. On the timetable for payment of the temple tax, see Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 2, p. 685, which relates that “the temple tax levy (in Palestine) [was] proclaimed on Adar 1; on Adar 15, the moneychangers opened their bureaus in the outlying areas, and on Adar 25 they moved them to the Temple. The Jews who were liable to pay the tax needed the opportunity to exchange [their money] into the (old) coins in which the tax was to be paid.” μεταξυ σου ϰαι αυτου μονου] A Greek expression that is often regarded as a Hebraism. αμαρτανειν εις τινα i: e: αδιϰειν] See the article “῾Αμαρτάνω” [To Miss the Mark] (hence, to make a mistake, to sin), in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 58, in which Bretschneider explains the expression ἁμαρτάνειν εἴς τινα as “aliquem laedere, offendere” (Greek and Latin, “to insult, offend someone”). The expression appears at the start of Mt 18:15. Th.] It is not known what “Th.” is an abbreviation for. 2000 rix-dollars] The rix-dollar, properly “Rigsbank dollar” (rigsbankdaler), was a Danish currency denomination in use from 1713 to 1875, when it was replaced by the krone (crown), at the rate of two crowns to one rix-dollar. According to a law of July 31, 1818, passed in the wake of the Danish state bankruptcy of 1813, the rix-dollar was divided into six marks, each of which was further subdivided into sixteen shillings; thus there were ninety-six shillings in a rix-dollar. A judge earned 1,200–1,800 rix-dollars a year; a mid-level civil servant earned 400–500 rix-dollars a year; a qualified artisan would receive 5 rix-dollars a week; a maidservant received at most 30 rix-dollars a year addition to room and board. ‫ ]כָל־מאֹ דָך‬The Hebrew phrase ‫ָל־מאֹ דֶ ָך‬ ְ ‫ ּובְ כ‬is found in Deut 6:5.

8 9

12 14

20

Biblical Exegesis 22

24

25

26

the primacy of the pope, based on the primacy of Peter] The primacy of the pope consists in his elevation over all other claimants to authority. This is grounded in the idea that as the apostle Peter’s successor or vicar (Latin, vicarius Petri), and as the possessor of the “chair of Peter” (Latin, cathedra Petri), the pope is not only bishop of Rome but also the head, both with respect to doctrine and to jurisdiction, of the entire Church and the guarantor of its unity. This is based on Mt 16:18–19, 28:20; Lk 22:31–32; Jn 21:15–19. Pope Gelasius I †496] Gelasius was bishop of Rome from 492 until his death in 496; he was later known as Pope Gelasius I. Against the bishop of Constantinople, Gelasius insisted that the bishop of Rome outranked all Church synods and all other bishops. the explanation that Luther made use of] Presumably refers to Luther’s commentary on Mt 16:18, where he writes, citing Augustine: “St. Augustine’s view is as follows: that Christ speaks in different ways at once. First to Peter, inasmuch as he says: You are Peter . . . Second, he speaks to himself, when he says: And on this rock I will build my congregation . . . Thus Augustine, too, says: Christ does not say, I wish to build myself up on you, but rather: I wish to build you up on me . . . For the word build cannot be understood as though something were to be built upon Peter, since he does not say ‘upon you’ but ‘upon this rock.’ ” D. Martin Luthers Auslegung des Neuen Testaments [Dr. Martin Luther’s Explanation of the New Testament], translated into German in 1538 by J. J. Greiff; see D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften, ed. J. G. Walch, 24 vols. (Halle 1739– 1750), vol. 7 (1741), col. 435. ― Luther: → 21,4. repeated in modern times, namely, with Stolberg’s conversion . . . stop him from it] What is specifically meant by this has not been determined. Presumably, however, the reference is to Friedrich Leopold Stolberg, count of StolbergStolberg, often called Fritz Stolberg (1750–1819), nobleman from the Danish duchy of Holstein, diplomat and poet; 1789–1791, Danish envoy to Berlin; 1791–1800, president of the episcopal court at Lübeck. In 1800, however, Stolberg converted to Catholicism and resigned his post.

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

319

Stolberg’s conversion aroused opposition and opprobrium in many of his (Protestant) friends, especially J. H. Voß, F. H. Jacobi, and J. C. Lavater, but also F. G. Klopstock, J.W.L. Gleim and J. W. Goethe. See, e.g., Voß und Stolberg oder der Kampf des Zeitalters zwischen Licht und Verdunklung. Eine nöthige Sammlung von Belegen zur Beurtheilung des dritten Heftes des Sophronizons und des richtigen Unterschieds zwischen Katholicismus und Pabstthum. In Gesprächen [Voß and Stolberg, or the Battle of the Age between Light and Obscurity: A Necessary Collection of Materials for Assessment of the Third Volume of the Sophronizon and the Proper Difference between Catholicism and Popery; In Dialogues], ed. C.F.A. Schott (Stuttgart, 1820); Heinrich Heine, Die romantische Schule [The Romantic School] (Hamburg, 1836; ASKB U 63), pp. 62–68; A. Nicolovius, Friedrich Leopold Graf zu Stolberg [Friedrich Leopold, Count of Stolberg] (Mainz, 1846); Th. Menge, Der Graf Friedrich Leopold Stolberg und seine Zeitgenossen [Count Friedrich Leopold Stolberg and His Contemporaries], 2 vols. (Gotha, 1862), vol. 2, pp. 95–129; and J. Lagaude, Die Konversion des Friedrich Leopold Graf zu Stolberg―Motive und Reaktionen [The Conversion of Friedrich Leopold, Count of Stolberg―Motives and Reactions] (Leipzig, 2006). Grundtvig] Nikolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish priest, poet, hymnodist, historian, politician, educator; obtained the cand. theol. degree in 1803, ordained 1811; thereafter served as priest in various places on Zealand and in Copenhagen, including as chaplain in residence at the Church of Our Savior in the Christianshavn quarter of Copenhagen in 1822–1826, and as non-stipendiary evensong preacher in 1832–1839 at Frederik’s German Church (now Christian’s Church), also in Christianshavn (see map 2, B3–4). in one of his sermons . . . distinguish betw. πετρος and πετρα . . . the rock was Chr.] Refers to sermon no. 20, “Klippen er Christus” [The Rock Is Christ] about 1 Cor 10:1–13, in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Christelige Prædikener eller SøndagsBog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224), vol. 3, pp. 449–469 and 455–456, where Grundtvig writes: “the idle rumor that the Lord should have

28

28

320

26

1

Biblical Exegesis

declared St. Peter to be the Rock of the Church, and thereby his successors in the Roman bishopric as his deputies, is manifestly no rock but merely sand on which to build. Furthermore, if we reflectively read the passage (Mt 16:15–18) upon which the papists rely, we find their foolish claim in no way supported . . . If we merely know that Petra means ‘a rock’ in Greek, then it is clear not only what the Lord meant with the words that people have so grossly misunderstood, but also that only a gross misunderstanding has given occasion for the idle rumor on which papists wish to build the Church, but which we, with Luther, expose to the laughter of the world . . . One who has the enlightened eyes of understanding, but does not see with crystal clarity that the Lord, by Rock, means the apostle’s Declaration of Faith, and calls him Man of the Rock only because he builds his hope of salvation upon the immutable truth that Jesus was or is Christ, or Messiah (the one anointed with the Holy Spirit) and the Son of the living God (the Creator, God the Father), then the idle rumor of Peter’s being as firm as a rock can only have arisen by the grossest confusion of the rock itself with the one who lives and builds upon it.” Grundtvig continues, on pp. 457–458, by remarking that when Protestants argue that “the Church of Christ is built on a rock, and the rock is Christ, they normally also err by misunderstanding the scriptures and misjudging the majesty of God, who is not the God of the dead, but of the living (Mk 12:24–27).” They believed that Jeremiah . . . This is discussed in 4 Ezra] In commentaries to Mt 16:14, reference is often made to 4 Ezra (= 2 Esd) 2:18, in which both Jeremiah and Isaiah are mentioned, ostensibly as precursors to Christ; see, e.g., L. Bertholdt, Christologia Judaeorum Jesu apostolorumque [The Christology of the Jews and of the Apostles of Jesus] (Erlangen, 1811), §15, pp. 58–68; and H. Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments zunächst für Prediger und Studirende [Biblical Commentary on All the Writings of the New Testament, Firstly for Preachers and Students], 2 vols., 2nd improved ed. (Königsberg, 1833–34 [1830–1832]; abbreviated hereafter as Biblischer Commentar; see ASKB

•

P a p e r 4 1832–1833 •

96–100), vol. 1, p. 519. The legend of Jeremiah discussed by Kierkegaard, however, does not appear in 4 Ezra / 2 Esd 2:18; it is found, instead, in Bar 4 (also called the Paralipomena of Jeremiah), in the part in which Jeremiah is the main character. Bar 4:3 recounts how Jeremiah, at God’s command, buried the holy vessels of temple service in the ground to protect them in advance of the conquest of Jerusalem by the Babylonians and their expulsion of the people of Israel to Babylonia. 1 see p. 1] → 30,21. Variant: added. The reference is to Paper 5:1. Σαμ] Abbreviation for Σαμαρείτης (Greek, “Samaritan”), a person from the area called Samaria north of Jerusalem; there were both political and religious tensions between the Jews and the Samaritans. Pharisæis] Latin, ablative of Pharisaei, “Pharisees.” The Pharisees were one of the most influential movements in Judaism during the HellenisticRoman 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. In Jesus’ time there were approximately six thousand Pharisees. 5? (Bram̄ er)] Variant: added. Presumably, a reference to the Danish priest and theological licentiate Gerhard Peter Brammer (1801–1884), Det hellige Land paa Herrens Tid. En statistisk-geographisk Beskrivelse for dannede, men ulærde Bibellæsere [The Holy Land in the Age of the Lord: A StatisticalGeographical Description for Cultivated but Not Learned Bible Readers] (Copenhagen, 1832; abbreviated hereafter as Det hellige Land paa Herrens Tid), p. 93, where it states that Jericho was “a significant city 5 miles from the capital,” i.e., Jerusalem. known for its palm trees] See, e.g., Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 1, p. 639. a brook, which at one time was salt water, but Elisha transformed it into fresh water] A reference to the tale of the prophet Elisha and the water of Jericho in 2 Kings 2:19–22.

14 15

19

7

8 9

28

Biblical Exegesis 11

11

11

14 15

18

29

1 10

30

1

Joshua] Refers both to the account in Josh 2 of the spies sent by Joshua to Jericho, and to the account in Josh 6 of Joshua’s subsequent conquest and destruction of the city. Joshua was Moses’ successor as leader and military commander of the Israelites. Herod died here] Refers to Herod the Great (→ 22,1); see G. P. Brammer, Det hellige Land paa Herrens Tid (→ 28,7), p. 93, which states under “Jericho” that “Herod the Great, too, met his death here.” It was an important customs station . . . from the Galilee traveled through it] See G. P. Brammer, Det hellige Land paa Herrens Tid (→ 28,7), p. 93: “Its location made it into an important customs station (Lk 19:2), as most of the Jews, avoiding Samaria, passed through this city on their travels to Jerusalem from the Galilee or lands farther to the north and east.” ‫ ָזכָה‬purus fuit] Excerpt from Gesenius, Lexicon manuale hebraicum (→ 23,25), p. 300, col. 1. ληνον torcular 2) vas . . . excipiebatur succus] Freely excerpted from the article “Ληνός” [A Vat Belonging to a Winepress] (or the winepress itself), and in part from the article “Υπολήνιον” [The Lower Vat of a Winepress], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, pp. 17 and 558. συνϑλαω . . . salute excidet. bis occurrit] Excerpt from the article “Συνϑλάω” [Shall Be Broken to Pieces], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 471. Pharisæorum] → 26,19. Καιαϕα . . . ex ‫ ַכיָבָ א‬oppressor] Caiaphas was high priest of the Jews during the trial of Jesus; he was deposed in a.d. 36. ― Josephum narrare nomen ejus fuisse Josephum: See Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae, bk. 18, chap. 2, 2; see Iosephi opera omnia (→ 22,2), vol. 2, pp. 866–867. ex hac narratione . . . legenda de Veronica . . . qua latus Chr: perfossum est] Latin, “From this story about the women who followed Christ there arose the legend of Veronica, the pious, married woman from Jerusalem, who ran to Jesus and dried his sweat with a linen cloth, and in order that it might be a lasting reward for her, Jesus made it so that his face remained imprint-

•

P a p e r 4–5 1832–1834 •

321

ed on the linen, which is preserved in Rome in the Basilica of St. Peter and is displayed together with the lance with which the body of Chr. was pierced.” σιτιστος ex σιτιζω saginatus, altilis] Abbreviated excerpt from the article “Σιτιστός” [Fatten], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 410, which begins: “Σιτιστός, ή, όν, (a σιτίζω, frumento alo, sagino, perf. pass. σεσίτισται, saginatus, altilis Mt 22:4).” [“Σιτιστός, ή, όν, (from sitizô, I nourish with grain, I feed, perfect passive of σεσίτισται, fed, fattened; Mt 22:4).”] Φιμοω (ex ϕιμος capistrum) . . . ϕιμοομαι obmutesco] Excerpt from the article “Φιμόω” [Muzzle], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 583. See Mt 22:12. διυλιζω . . . percolando purgo . . . vinum percolando purgare a culice] Excerpt from the article “Διϋλίζω” [Filter], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 313. See Mt 23:24. αϑωος . . . qui culpa vacat . . . ‫ נָקִ י ִמן‬dicunt αϑωος απο τινος] Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, “ἀϑῷος (from the privative α and ϑωή, punishment, fine that must be paid―Septuagint for ‫נָקִ י‬ [“clean”]) which is free of guilt. Blameless. Among the profane ones [i.e., non-Christian writers], it is combined with the genitive ἀϑῷός τινος immune to something, our authors use rather ἀϑῷος ἀπό τινος [“blameless from something”] by following the Hebr. ‫[ ִמן נָקִ י‬lit., “clean from”].” Excerpt from the article “Αϑῶος” [Innocent], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 28. Kierkegaard writes “a pr:” instead of “α pr:” (i.e., the privative α) and omits Bretschneider’s dash before LXX (→ 37,5); he also writes apud with a small a, and conjungitur instead of Bretschneider’s iungitur. See also Mt 27:24. ― LXX: the Septuagint (→ 37,5). In Grundtvig’s sermon . . . had merely been idle talk . . . not have been saved . . . a potentiated faith] ― 1In: Variant: the superscript number refers to Paper 4:1. ― sermon: Refers to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s (→ 25,28) sermon on Lk 17:11–19 (on Jesus’ healing of the ten lepers) for the fourteenth 1

8

9

12

15

21

30

322

31

4

8

24

33

2

Biblical Exegesis

Sunday after Trinity Sunday in 1833. See N.F.S. Grundtvigs Prædikener 1822–26 og 1832–39 [N.F.S. Grundtvig’s Sermons: 1822–1826 and 1832–1839], ed. Chr. Thodberg, vol. 6, 1832–33 (Copenhagen, 1984), pp. 304–308, especially the following passage on p. 306: “First and foremost, we should recall that by faith all ten were truly cleansed; had it merely been idle talk when they had cried out, ‘Jesus, master, have mercy on us,’ then they would not have been cleansed, not have been healed of the plague; but they truly believed that Jesus, if he so wished, doubtless could indeed help them, and their faith truly helped them―and so they were freed of the plague. And thus it still is, spiritually, today and every day until the end of the world: every human being who feels burdened by sin and cast down by despondency . . . needs only raise up his mouth and cry out: ‘Jesus, master, have mercy on me,’ and then . . . briefly put, the plague is ended.” In 1833, the fourteenth Sunday after Trinity Sunday fell on September 8. According to Adresseavisen, no. 209 (September 6, 1833), Grundtvig preached at “evensong” on that Sunday in Frederik’s German Church, now Christian’s Church, in the Christianshavn district of Copenhagen (see map 2, B3–4). ― in the former passage: Lk 17:12–14. ―and in the latter passage: Lk 17:15–19. Wieland] Presumably, Christoph Martin Wieland (1733–1813), German author, translator, and publisher, from 1769 professor of philosophy at the University of Erfurt. ַ‫]שפַ ל־רּוח‬ ְ See the article “‫[ ”ׁשָ פֵל‬Humble], in Gesenius Lexicon manuale hebraicum (→ 23,25), p. 1032, col. 2, which states: “Inf. ַ‫ ְׁשפַל רּוח‬demissi animi esse” [“Infinitive ַ‫ׁשפַל רּוח‬, ְ to be humble (lit., lowered in spirit)”], referring to Prov 16:19. πιστευομαι significat . . . 1 Thess 2:4] Excerpt from pt. 2 in the article “Πιστεύω” [To Believe], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 284. αλυσις―εως. . . . status vincti, status custodiæ] Excerpt from the article “Αλυσις” [Chain], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 57. ― εως: the Greek noun’s ending when in the genitive case.

•

P a p e r 5–6 1832–1834 •

αποπλεω―ευσω. . . . quater] Excerpt from the article “Αποπλέω” [To Sail], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 142. ― ευσω: Bretschneider writes “f. ευσω,” i.e., the Greek verb’s ending when in the future tense. παροτρυνω . . . poeticum] Excerpt from the article “Παροτρύνω” [To Instigate], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 241. οριον―ου. ‫ גְ בּול‬neutrum . . . finis] Excerpt from the article “῞Οριον” [Boundary], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 169. ― ου: Bretschneider has -ιου, the Greek word’s ending in the genitive case. ― ‫גְ בּול‬: Bretschneider has ‫“( ּגְ בּול‬boundary”), and notes that the Septuagint (→ 37,5) renders this Hebrew word as ὅριον. Kierkegaard omits the commas after ὅριος and after terminus. ϰατα το αυτο simul.] Excerpt from “II) cum accusativo . . . 2) ad tempus” [II) with the accusative . . . 2) of time] in the article “Κατά” [According To], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 631. ἡλατο aor. 1. 3 sing. ex ἁλλομαι] Excerpt from the article “῞Αλλομαι” [Jump], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 55. Bretschneider defines this word as “salio, tripudio” (Latin, “I leap, I hop”). στεμμα―τος (ex στεϕω . . . cingo) . . . ornabantur] Excerpt from the article “Στέμμα” [Crowned], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 435. Kierkegaard writes ex instead of a, and omits corono (“I crown”) and a comma after infula. ― τος: the Greek noun’s ending in the genitive case. παροιχομαι, . . . (ex παρα et οιχομαι abeo discedo.)] Excerpt from the article “Παροίχομαι” [To Go Away], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 240. Kierkegaard adds the word ex before παρά and omits commas after both οἴχομαι and abeo. αλιςγημα apud profanos non legitur . . . de carne e victimis gentilium residua] Greek, Latin, and Hebrew: “ἀλίσγημα [“pollution”] is not found among the profane ones [i.e., non-Christian writers], nor is ἀλισγέω [“I pollute”], from which ἀλίσγημα is derived. ἀλισγέω (comes from

4

5

7

9

10

10

13

15

Biblical Exegesis

34

1

3

5

7

8

12

ἀλίω, rotate), by rotating (something) I infect, contaminate, pollute, and occurs in the Alexandrine version [i.e., the Septuagint] [as a translation] for ‫“[ גֵאֵ ל‬render unclean”], from which comes the noun (i.e., ἀλίσγημα) for the meat that remains of the pagans’ sacrificial animals.” Paraphrase of the article “Αλίσγημα” [To Pollute], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 52. Kierkegaard shortens and alters Bretschneider’s text, omitting est after deducendum and writing ressidua as residua. προςϰληροω . . . adjungor] Excerpt from the article “Προςϰληρόω” [To Allot Something to Someone] (concerning what has been allotted by God), in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 352. αναστατοω ex αναστατος . . . destruo, perturbo] Excerpt from the article “Αναστατόω” [To Destroy], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 85. προςϕατως ex προςϕατος . . . in universum recens] Excerpts from the article “Προσϕάτως” [Recently Slaughtered], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 358, accompanied by a Latin definition, “mactatus deinde in universum recens,” that is Kierkegaard’s own paraphrase. συνομορεω (ex συν―ὁμου―ὁρος finis) confinis] Excerpt from the article “Συνομορέω” [Borders On], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 474. Kierkegaard adds συν, writes finis instead of terminus, and omits sum in connection with confinis. χρως . . . contegerant] Excerpt from the article “Χρώς” [Surface of Something] (its color, human skin), in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 626. The word hic: is an addition by Kierkegaard. ϰαταστελλω . . . 36 opportet vos esse tranquillos] Excerpt from the article “Καταστέλλω” [To Calm], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 650. Kierkegaard writes opportet instead of oportet. For Acts 19:36, Bretschneider writes: “decet vos tranquillos, mitigatos esse” (Latin, “You should be tranquil, calm”).

•

P a p e r 6–7 1833–1834 •

323

De nexu nonnulla præmonenda videntur . . . sese non potuisse legem explere (Mt 5:17.)] Latin, “With regard to this connection, there are certain things that need to be borne in mind. In chapter 3, [Paul] demonstrates in two steps that human beings cannot come to salvation by means of the Law. The one argument is derived from history: [Paul] teaches that salvation took place for Abraham not because of circumcision, not because of facts, but because of faith (Gen 12:3). In the other [argument, Paul] calls the Law itself as witness for his argument by citing the passages Deut 27:26 and Lev 18:5. From careful examination of this argumentation, it is evident that P. here adapts the argumentation to the readers; but although this much is easiest to explain, it should not be passed over in silence that [the argumentation] has also brought challenges to many interpreters (Calvin). For P. has here asserted a priori that human beings cannot fulfill [satisfacere, Latin, lit., “satisfy”] the Law at all, and therefore cannot attain salvation by it in that way―though he does not prove this. But this difficulty vanishes entirely if we consider the readers. Because they had already dedicated themselves to Christianity, they were already persuaded that they themselves were not able to fulfill [explere, lit., “fill up”] the Law (Mt 5:17).” ― P:: i.e., Paul, is the most important figure of the earliest Christian era; he was probably executed in Rome ca. a.d. 65. In Kierkegaard’s day, all thirteen epistles (letters) in the NT that are attributed to Paul were regarded as genuine; today only seven or nine of them―including the letter to the Romans, the two letters to the Corinthians, and the letter to the Galatians― are believed to have been written by Paul. In the latter four epistles, Paul appears as an apostle who claims to have obtained his calling, and thereby his authority, directly from the resurrected Christ. The Acts of the Apostles, another major source of our knowledge of Paul, reflects what seems, to modern eyes, a later portrait of the apostle to the Gentiles. ― Calvin: Jean or John Calvin (1509– 1564), French theologian and jurist, Reformer. This refers presumably to Calvin’s interpretation of Gal in Ioannis Calvini in Novi Testamenti epistolas commentarii [John Calvin’s Commentaries on the

16

34

324

35

14

Biblical Exegesis

Epistles in the New Testament], pt. 2, in Ioannis Calvini in Novum Testamentum commentarii [John Calvin’s Commentaries on the New Testament], ed. A. Tholuck, 7 vols. (Berlin, 1833–1834; ASKB 92–95; abbreviated hereafter as Calvini in Novum Testamentum commentarii), vol. 6 (1834), pp. vii–xi and 29–47. Ita ad liquidum perducto . . . respondet hisce verbis: των παραβασεων ενεϰα] Latin and Greek, “By thereby making clear that human beings cannot win salvation from the Law, [Paul] responds to an objection that was possibly raised by the Jews. Paul repeatedly encounters this objection when he treats of the Law’s authority and its efficacy in saving human beings. And if we consider what the Jews actually thought [lit., si aliquando Judæorum cogitationes respexerimus, “if we finally take a look back at the thoughts of the Jews”], then we cannot but admit that this question is legitimately raised. For if one inquires into what the question τί οὖν ὁ νόμος [“Why then the law?”―Gal 3:19] implies, taking account of the phrase that follows, then I think the two questions can be set on [the same] side. For if we postulate that the Jews set the greatest store by the Law of M[oses] and regarded it as a guarantee of God’s benevolence, and when we observe Paul vehemently inveighing against the Law and that he himself demonstrates that human beings cannot attain eternal salvation by means of the Law, and furthermore asserts that the Law cannot fulfill [praestare + genitive, “discharge”] for human beings what it has promised―then it is necessary that the Jews pose this question: What, then, is the Law?―is it of divine or human origin?―To this question Paul responds with these words: ἐτέθη διαταγεὶς δι᾿ ἀγγέλων [“it was given, appointed, by angels”―cited freely from Gal 3:19]. For otherwise I cannot at all see why Paul added these words.―The other question is: why, then, was the Law given[?] That the Jews were indeed persuaded that human beings can be become saved by means of the Law is shown both by the teachings of Paul―for in fact if the Jews themselves had denied that human beings can be saved by means of the Law, then it would have been entirely superfluous to inculcate this in them―and

•

P a p e r 7 1833 •

by the Jews’ manner of living, for they made the utmost efforts to fulfill [satisfacerent, lit., “satisfy”] the Law, which is why legality was so exceedingly well-developed among them. To this question these words respond: τῶν παραβάσεων ἕνεϰα [“on account of their transgressions”].” παραβαςις indicat peccatum . . . auctor non est sibi conscius] Greek and Latin, “παραβαςις refers to a sin of which the agent is conscious, so that he transgresses a fixed law. (A synonym is παράπτωμα.) This meaning is implicit in the word, as can be seen from its etymology: namely, it derives from παρά [“from,” “because of,” “beside”] and βαίνω [“walk”]. This is also the source of why P[aul] always employs this noun when there is talk of the sin of Adam. He chooses ἁμαρτία [“sin”], meanwhile, when his discourse is about sins of which the agent is not conscious.” See the article “Παράβασις” [Parabasis], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 214, where the word’s main meaning is specified as “transgredi limites” (Latin, “crossing boundaries”), and, further: “intransitive: peccatum, delictum” (Latin, “with the intransitive meaning sin, error”). ― ex παρα et βαινω: See the article “Παράβασις” in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 214, where reference is made to the verb παραβαίνω, and the article “Παραβαίνω” [To Transgress], p. 214, where it is explained that the word is composed of “παρά et βαίνω, gradior, incedo” [Latin and Greek, “παρά and βαίνω, I walk, I proceed”], and that this means: “transgredior limites, excedo e via; metaphorice: transgredior legem, praecepta, violo, seq. accusativo” [Latin, “I cross borders, deviate from the road; metaphorically: I transgress the law, prohibitions, violate, with the accusative”]. De sensu, quod attinet . . . ad deum convertatur] Latin, “With regard to the meaning, some asserted that the meaning was as follows: the Law was given to contain sins. But [the following] is to be noted: 1) If this had been the purpose of the law, then it would not yet have reached the purpose it had set for itself; and hence, with this purpose unaccomplished, it is abolished, which is inconsistent with the wisdom of God; and had it accomplished its goal, then because the Law

21

29

36

Biblical Exegesis

37

5

would have been capable of saving human beings (Lev 18:5), there would have been no need of the Christian religion. 2) This meaning is entirely inconsistent with the teachings of Paul. For he teaches that it is so far from being the case that the Law can take away sins that it in fact gives occasion for sin (1 Cor 15:56).―If, then, we contemplate this analogy, the following meaning emerges: the Law was given so that human beings would become conscious of their sins, and as a result the soul would be turned back toward God.” διαταγεις δι’ αγγελων. . . . de variis classibus angelorum explicarunt); Heb: 2,2] Greek and Latin: “it was ordained through angels [citation from Gal 3:19]. It is well known that the Jews have always augmented and enhanced the narrative of the Mosaic Law. We have proof of this from this passage as well. In the book of Exodus, nothing indicates the presence of angels. This tradition has a more serious origin, but it does not appear in the Old Testament. In the Septuagint, however, the following words are added to Deut 30:2: οἱ ἄγγελοι δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ [“the angels on his right side”]. The Rabbis added much to Holy Scripture’s simple narration, passing it down as follows: when Moses descended from the mountain, he forgot the words of God; but two angels were sent, who called Jehovah’s words back into his memory. Indeed, the Rabbis claimed that God always appears to human beings surrounded by angels, in order to make his majesty manifest. This tradition also appears in Acts 7:53: εἰς διαταγὰς ἀγγέλων, [“as ordained by angels”] (which words some have explicated in terms of the various classes of angels) Heb 2:2.” ― LXX: Roman numeral for 70, i.e., the Septuagint, from Septuaginta [Latin, “seventy”], the Alexandrine translation of the entire Old Testament into Greek. According to the Alexandrine Letter of Aristeas, which presents itself as having been written in the second century b.c., this translation was undertaken by 72 Jewish scripturalists over the course of 72 days in Alexandria, ca. 250 b.c.; later the number was rounded down to 70. ― Deut: XXX, 2: Presumably, an erroneous transcription of Deut 33:2; see the following. ― οι αγγελοι εξ

•

P a p e r 7 1833 •

325

δεξιων αυτου: Freely cited from the Septuagint’s Greek rendition of Deut 33:2: ἐϰ δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ ἄγγελοι μετ’ αὐτοῦ [“on his right side, angels with him”]. See Vetus Testamentum graecum iuxta Septuaginta interpretes ex auctoritate sixti qvinti pontificis maximi editum [The Old Testament in Greek according to the Seventy Translators, edited by Sixtus V, Supreme Pontiff], ed. L. van Ess, facsimile ed. (Leipzig, 1824; ASKB 12; abbreviated hereafter as Septuaginta). ― Jehovæ: Latin, “Jehovae,” genitive of Jehova, “Jehovah,” believed by certain modern interpreters to be the Hebrew name of God, which appears in the OT simply as the four consonants Y(or J)HWH. Because Jews were forbidden to say God’s name, they supplemented these four consonants 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, for example, Yahweh. This is the source of the erroneous reading “Jehovah,” which was still common in Kierkegaard’s day. ― quæ verba tamen nonnulli de variis classibus angelorum explicarunt: See, e.g., the commentary on Acts 7:53 in Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar (→ 26,1), vol. 2, pp. 679–680, who notes that διαταγαί (Greek, plural of διαταγή, “order,” “command”) also appears in Acts 7:53 in the accusative plural as διαταγὰς; the phrase in Acts 7:53, εἰς διαταγὰς ἀγγέλων (lit., “according to the commands of angels”), has been interpreted by some as referring to “orders” in the sense of classes or ranks of angels. Olshausen, however, rejects this reading, citing Gal 3:19 and Heb 2:2; with reference to Acts 7:53, he remarks that “here, too, the angels appear mediating forces between God and human beings.” ― de variis classibus angelorum: Compare §16 of Kierkegaard’s rendition of H. N. Clausen’s “Lectures on Dogmatics” in Not1:5, from 1833–1834, in KJN 3, 14: “The comprehensive debates in the early Church as well as more recently about the nature, creation, and activity of angels, and of their various types and orders, have been promoted on the one side by the N. T.’s silence on all these questions.” εν χειρι μεσιτου. μεσιτης qui . . . ita in creatione mundi etc.] Greek, Latin, and Hebrew: “In the hand of one who stands in the middle, between

21

326

27

Biblical Exegesis

two parties, mediator. In the hand, this formula appears also in Acts 7:35; means just about the same as διά [“through,” “by means of”] with the genitive, which appears most commonly when Christ is called to mind as God’s instrument, as in the creation of the world, etc.” ― μεσιτης qui medius inter duas partes: Compare the article “Μεσίτης” [Mediator], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 62, where the word is defined as “qui medius est inter duos, mediator” (“the one who is between two, mediator”). ὁ δε μεσιτης ενος ουϰ εςτιν. Difficultas in vocabulo ενος . . . Alii subintelligunt σπερματος hoc sensu: . . . Alii subintelligunt νομου . . . plures mediatores admittamus] Greek and Latin: “Now a mediator involves more than one party [lit., “But the mediator is not of one”]. The difficulty [lies] in the word ἑνός [“of one”] used in isolation. Some infer πράγματος [“deed” in the genitive case]―of one deed, of one task, of one purpose, etc.―i.e., there is not one shared purpose among all mediators, but God is one. Others infer σπέρματος [“seed” in the genitive case], with the following meaning: the mediator does not stand for one party or faction; for there should always be two parties present. Others infer νόμου [“law” in the genitive case]. This explanation fits this passage best. Accordingly, the apostle reasons more or less as follows: the Mosaic law was indeed given by means of a mediator, but it does not follow from this that the Mosaic law suffices on its own, so that a more perfect religion cannot replace it; for in the concept of a mediator there is nothing that prohibits that we admit additional mediators.” See, e.g., F. A. Stroth, “Umschreibende Uebersetzung und Erklärung einiger schweren Stücke des Briefs Pauli an die Galater” [Paraphrastic Translation and Explanation of Certain Difficult Passages in Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians], in Repertorium für Biblische und Morgenländische Litteratur [Handbook for Biblical and Oriental Literature], ed. J. G. Eichhorn, vol. 4 (Leipzig, 1779), pp. 41–56; pp. 53–54; J. B. Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Galatas” [Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians], p. 47, in Novum Testamentum graece perpetua annotatione, vol. 6

•

P a p e r 7 1833 •

(→ 56,4); and C. Th. Anton, Locus Galat. Cap. III. Vers. XX. critice, historice et exegetice tractatus [The Passage Gal 3:20 Examined Critically, Historically, and Exegetically] (Leipzig, 1800), pp. 48–49. ― ὁ δε μεσιτης ενος ουϰ εςτιν: Citation from Gal 3:20. ― Alii subintelligunt σπερματος: See, e.g., J. G. Rosenmüller, Scholia in Novum Testamentum [Commentaries on the New Testament], 6 vols. (Nuremberg, 1777–1782), vol. 4, Pauli Epistolas ad Corinthios et Galatas [Paul’s Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians] (1780), p. 367; J. Chr. Fr. Steudel, “Auch ein Versuch, die Stelle Gal. III, 16. zu erklären, nebst einer Anfrage über die Deutung von Gal. III, 19. 20” [Another Attempt to Explain the Passage Gal 3:16, along with an Inquiry into the Interpretation of Gal 3:19–20], in Archiv für die Theologie und ihre neuste Literatur, ed. E. G. Bengel, vol. 1 (Tübingen 1816), pp. 124–143; pp. 141–143; J. F. von Flatt, Vorlesungen über die Briefe Pauli an die Galater und Epheser [Lectures on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians], ed. posthumously by C. F. Kling (Tübingen, 1828), pp. 124–136, 127– 129, and 135–136; and L. I. Rückert, Commentar über den Brief Pauli an die Galater [Commentary on Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians] (Leipzig, 1833), pp. 158–163. ― Alii subintelligunt νομου: See, e.g., J. B. Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Galatas” [Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians], p. 47, in Novum Testamentum graece perpetua annotatione, vol. 6 (→ 56,4); C. G. Hensler, Paulus Brief an die Galater und der erste Brief von Petrus übersetzt [Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians and 1 Peter, Translated] (Leipzig, 1805), p. 11; and J. F. von Flatt, Vorlesungen über die Briefe Pauli an die Galater und Epheser, pp. 132– 133. For all three readings compared, see also C. Fr. Bonitz, Plurimorum de loco Pauli Gal. III. 20. Sententiae examinatae, novaque eius interpretatio tentata [Some of the Many Views on Paul’s Passage Gal 3:20 Examined: With an Attempt Made at a New Interpretation of It] (Leipzig, 1800), and Spicilegium observationum ad locum Pauli nobilissimum Gal. III, 20 [A Gathering of Observations on Paul’s Most Noble Passage Gal 3:20] (Leipzig, 1802), along with C.A.T. Keil, “Proponitur exemplum iudicii de diversis singulorum scripturae sacrae locorum interpretationibus feren-

Biblical Exegesis di, examinandis variis interpretum de loco Gal. III, 20. Sententiis” [A Model Is Proposed for Passing Judgment on the Various Interpretations of Individual Passages in Sacred Scripture by Examining the Various Views of Interpreters of the Passage Gal 3:20], in D. Car. Aug. Theoph. Keilii opuscula academica ad N. T. interpretationem grammatico-historicam et theologicae christianae origines pertinentia [Dr. Carl August Theophilus Kiel’s Minor Works on the Grammatical-Historical Interpretation of the New Testament and Matters Pertaining to the Origins of Christian Theology], ed. J. D. Goldhorn (Leipzig, 1821), pp. 211–317. 38

4

10

13 14

it is identified as something characteristic . . . continues to sink deeper] See, e.g., Olshausen’s commentary on Jn 8:44 (→ 38,10) in his Biblischer Commentar (→ 26,1), vol. 2, pp. 207–208: “The devilish, like everything else, is to be conceived in its development. It became what it is in accordance with its nature by the fall [of Lucifer], hence by an isolated deed; but in this nature it runs through all of the stages of development, inasmuch as the unceasing power of light afflicts it with a curse, so that it seals itself off against it more and more.” ― continues: Variant: the ms. has been damaged from this point up to the end of Paper 8. Jn 8:44] In this verse, Jesus criticizes Jews who claim to be free children of Abraham: “You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” lures] Compare the role of the snake in the tale of the Fall in Gen 3. the imperf. ην is used] Refers to the portion of Jn 8:44 (→ 38,10) that reads ἐκεῖνος ἀνϑρωποϰτόνος ἦν ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς (lit., “that one was a murderer from the beginning”); the word ἦν is in the imperfect past rather than the perfect, and so refers to an uncompleted state, namely, the devil was murdering throughout the past.

•

P a p e r 7–9 1833–1834 •

327

p. 5 at the top . . . philosophy of religion[?]―The concept Ch[urch] . . . the provided con[cept]] See §2.2 in chap. 1 of Friedrich Schleiermacher (→ 39,1), 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], 2 vols., 2nd rev. ed. (Berlin 1830–1831 [1821–1822]; compare the 3rd ed., 1835–1836, ASKB 258; abbreviated hereafter as Der christliche Glaube), vol. 1, p. 5, translated into English by Donald MacPherson Baillie in Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, ed. H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart (Edinburgh 1922), p. 4: “But if Ethics establishes the concept of the ‘Church,’ it can, of course, also separate, in that which forms the basis of these societies, the permanently identical from the changeable elements, and thus by dividing up the whole realm it can determine the places at which the individual forms could be placed as soon as they put in an appearance historically. And the task of thus exhibiting in a conceptually exhaustive way, according to their affinities and gradations, the totality of all those ‘Churches’ which are distinguished from one another by peculiar differences of basis―this task would be the business of a special branch of historical science, which should be exclusively designated Philosophy of Religion . . .” p. 6. wissenschaftlichen Disciplinen . . . with foreign materials?] See §2.3 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 6; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 5: “Thus the first part of our Introduction has only to collate and apply borrowed propositions, i.e., propositions which belong to other scientific studies, in this case to Ethics, Philosophy of Religion, and Apologetics.” that S[chleiermacher] . . . self-consciousness . . . feeling (p. 16) in contrast (to p. 8. 2.)] See the following passage in §3.2 of chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 8; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 6: “When Feeling and Self-consciousness are here put side by side as equivalent, it is by no means intended to introduce generally a manner of speech in which the two expressions would be

25

38

35

1

39

328

3 4

10

13

14

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

simply synonymous.” Compare the conclusion of §3.5, p. 16 (p. 12 in Baillie’s translation). ― S.: Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834), German Reformed theologian, philosopher of religion, and classical philologist, became a priest in Berlin in 1796; from 1804, extraordinary professor at Halle; from 1810, professor of theology at Berlin. §4] i.e., §4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 16–24. If we in some way or another . . . a thing remaining essentially self-identical] Kierkegaard’s free and truncated Danish rendering of a line from §4.2 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 18; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 14: “But when we become such-and-such from within outwards, for ourselves, without any Other being involved, that is the simple situation of the temporal development of a being which remains essentially self-identical, and it is only very improperly that this can be referred to the concept ‘Freedom.’ ” ― the simple relation: Schleiermacher writes: “das einfache Verhältniß der zeitlichen Entwiklung” (German, “the simple relation of the temporal development”). An absolute feeling of freedom it cannot be; . . . on our receptivity] A condensed excerpt from §4.3 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 20–21; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 15. Dogmatics is a Theological Scien[ce]] See §2 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 3; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 3: “Since Dogmatics is a theological discipline, and thus pertains solely to the Christian Church, we can only explain what it is when we have become clear as to the conception of the Christian Church.” Church―(Piety)] See §3 and §3.1 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 7; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 5: “piety forms the basis of all ecclesiastical communions . . . That a Church is nothing but a communion or association relating to religion or piety is beyond all doubt for us Evangelical Christians.” Baillie’s phrase “religion or piety”

•

P a p e r 9 1834 •

translates Schleiermacher’s single German word Frommigkeit (lit., “piety”). Our proposition will . . . one or another prior knowledge about God] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §4.4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 23; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 17: “Our proposition is intended to oppose the view that this feeling of absolute dependence is itself conditioned by some previous knowledge about God.” so that God . . . signifies for us . . . the indicated Grundgehalt] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §4.4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 23; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 17: “So that in the first instance God signifies for us simply that which is the co-determinant in this feeling and to which we trace our being in such a state; and any further content of the idea must be evolved out of this fundamental import [Grundgehalt] assigned to it.” ―this feeling: Variant: first written “the feeling”. ― being-such: This corresponds to Baillie’s “being in such a state”; Schleiermacher’s word is Sosein. ― indicated: Variant: changed from “given”. the feeling of absolute dependence . . . self-active (p. 22) existence. comes from] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following phrase in §4.4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 22; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 16: “the Whence of our receptive and active [selbstthätigen] existence.” How can one then say (p. 26) . . . dieser Gegensatz wieder verschwindet] Kierkegaard cites from §5.1 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 26; see Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 19– 20. Kierkegaard writes “Gegensatz” instead of Schleiermacher’s “Gegensaz.” How can one say (p. 26) that everything . . . reveals itself [to b]e identical with him] Kierkegaard here renders in Danish the following passage in §5.1 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 26; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 20: “. . . and the subject unites

15

17

20

21

22

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

25

28

40

6

and identifies with everything which, in the middle grade, was set over against it, as the highest.” The highest self-consciousn. in and for itself . . . externally given . . . continually remains the same] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following phrase in §5.3 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 28; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 21: “The highest self-consciousness is in no wise dependent on outwardly given objects which may affect us at one moment and not at another. As a consciousness of absolute dependence it is quite simple, and remains self-identical while all other states are changing.” ― feel. of abs. depend.: Schleiermacher here writes “schlechthiniges Abhängigkeitsbewußtsein” (German, “consciousness of absolute dependence”). The sensible self-consciousn. . . . The highe[r] self-consciousn. . . . excludes every such contradiction] Kierkegaard’s compressed Danish rendering of the following two passages in §5.4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 31; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 23: “The sensible self-consciousness splits up also, of itself and from its very nature, into the antithesis of the pleasant and the unpleasant, of pleasure and pain . . . The higher consciousness, on the other hand, bears within it no such antithesis. Its first appearance means, of course, an enhancement of life, if a comparison arises with the isolated sensible self-consciousness. But if, without any such reference, we think of it in its own self-identity, its effect is simply an unchanging identity of life, which excludes any such antithesis.” If the feeling of abs. dependence . . . an element essential for hum. nature] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §6.1 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 36; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 26: “If the feeling of absolute dependence, expressing itself as consciousness of God, is the highest grade of immediate self-consciousness, it is also an essential element of human nature.” ― the first level: Schleiermacher here writes “die höchste Stufe” (German, “the highest level”); Baillie writes “the highest grade.”

•

P a p e r 9 1834 •

329

But if the feeling of abs. dependence . . . how, then, is it related to prayer?] This is not a citation from Schleiermacher, but presumably a comment by Kierkegaard on the passage cited immediately prior to this line; see the preceding note. In the opposite direction . . . the collectivity of all other being] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following passage in §9.1 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 58; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 42: “The reverse form of this subordination appears in its completeness when the self-consciousness of a state of activity is taken up into the feeling of absolute dependence only in proportion as the state itself appears as a result of those relations which exist between the subject and all the rest of existence.” ― In the opposite direction: i.e., in the direction of what Schleiermacher immediately thereafter calls “ästhetische Frömmigkeit” [German, “aesthetic piety” (Baillie: “æsthetic Religion”)]. ― result: The emphasis on the word “result” is Kierkegaard’s. But how . . . teleological piety . . . assume predestination] This is not a citation from Schleiermacher, but presumably a comment by Kierkegaard on the passage cited immediately prior to this line; see the preceding note. ― predestination: See §§117–120 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 2, pp. 270–306. See also Schleiermacher’s essay “Ueber die Lehre von der Erwählung” [On the Doctrine of Election] in Theologische Zeitschrift [Theological Journal], ed. F. Schleiermacher, W.M.L. de Wette, and Fr. Lücke, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1819), pp. 1–119. On predestination more generally (→ 82,1). Jochum Nielsen] The person to whom Kierkegaard is referring has not been identified. The reigning view . . . common to all, something idiosyncratic is added to each] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §10.2 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 64; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 45–46: “The prevailing view, on the contrary, is that the greater part is the same in all communions of the highest level, and that to this common matter there is simply added in each some special element of its own.”

10

12

17

20 22

330

24

43

5

10

13 15 17

19

44

2

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

― of all religions: Schleiermacher here writes “in allen Gemeinschaften”; Baillie: “in all communions.” Yet I would not wish to accept . . . originally and essentially doctrine] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in the “Zusaz” [Postscript] to §10 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 70; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 50: “But I am unwilling to accept the further definition that it operates upon man as a cognitive being. For that would make revelation to be originally and essentially doctrine.” ― as knowers: Schleiermacher here writes “als erkennendes Wesen”; Baillie: “as a cognitive being.” R . . . VI] Rex VI, presumably a monogram for King Frederik VI (1768–1839, king of Denmark from 1808 to 1839). if one does not wish to revert . . . that is div. rev.] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following passage in the “Zusaz” [Postscript] to §10 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 71–72; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 51: “. . . unless we are prepared to fall back on the position that revelation is only to be assumed when not a single moment but a whole existence is determined by such a divine communication, and that what is then proclaimed by such an existence is to be regarded as revealed.” Schiller] Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805), German poet and philosopher. 20rd] 20 rix-dollars (→ 25,14). Hauff] Presumably, Wilhelm Hauff (1802–1827), German philosopher, theologian, and Romantic author. Calvin] → 34,16. But the relation to redemption . . . gain consciousness of redemption through him] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §11.3 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 79; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 56: “The reference to redemption is in every Christian consciousness simply because the originator of the Christian communion is the Redeemer; and Jesus is Founder

•

P a p e r 9–11 1834 •

of a religious communion simply in the sense that its members become conscious of redemption through Him.” ― founder: Schleiermacher writes “der Anfänger” (Baillie: “the originator”) at first, but then “Stifter” (Baillie: “founder”) the second time; Kierkegaard uses “Stifter” (“founder”) on both occasions. Chr[ist]: Schleiermacher writes “Jesus.” ― limbs: Schleiermacher writes “Glieder” (lit., “limbs,” figuratively “members”) (as in Baillie). Their main occupation . . . the society continuing to exist] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following passage in §11.4 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 80; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 57: “Their main business is the founding of the communion upon definite doctrine and in definite form. If, however, there are within the communion differences in the free development of the God-consciousness, then some people, in whom it is most cramped, are more in need of redemption, and others, in whom it works more freely, are more capable of redemption; and thus through the influence of the latter there arises in the former an approximation to redemption; but only up to the point at which the difference between the two is more or less balanced, simply owing to the fact that there exists a communion or fellowship.” ― Their: i.e., the members’ (→ 44,2). ― society: Danish, Samfund; Kierkegaard’s rendering of Gemeinschaft (Baillie: “communion”). ― higher: Schleiermacher here writes “freier” (Baillie: “more freely”). Dogmatic propositions . . . aimed at attaining the greatest possible definiteness] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §16 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 111; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 78: “Dogmatic propositions are doctrines of the descriptively didactic type, in which the highest possible degree of definiteness is achieved.” but also all doctrinal propositions . . . without giving rise to strife or schism] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §19.3 in chap. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp.

8

21

27

44

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics 126–127; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 89–90: “. . . but rather all doctrines which are dogmatic expressions of that which, in the public proceedings of the Church (even if only in certain regions of it), can be put forward as a presentation of its common piety without provoking dissension and schism.” 45

2

4

45

8

12

1. Hum. nature . . . 2. The redeemer . . . cannot accomplish it] A schematic summary of the following comments by Schleiermacher in §22.2 in chap. 2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 137–138; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 98: “Now, if the distinctive essence of Christianity consists in the fact that in it all religious emotions are related to the redemption wrought by Jesus of Nazareth, there will be two ways in which heresy can arise . . . either human nature will be so defined that a redemption in the strict sense cannot be accomplished, or the Redeemer will be defined in such a way that He cannot accomplish redemption.” If hum. beings are to be redeemed . . . need it, . . . receive it] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following line in §22.2 in chap. 2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 138; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 98: “if men are to be redeemed, they must both be in need of redemption and be capable of receiving it.” 1st Section . . . expresses itself in it] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the title of pt. 1., sec. 1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 199; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 142, as follows: “A Description of Our Religious Self-Consciousness insofar as the Relation between the World and God Is expressed in It.” §39 The doctrine of creation . . . present that fundamental feeling completely] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §39 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 208; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 148: “The doctrine of Creation is to be elucidated preeminently with a view to the exclusion of every alien element, lest from the way in which the question of

•

P a p e r 11–13 1834 •

331

the Origin is answered elsewhere anything steal into our province which stands in contradiction to the pure expression of the feeling of absolute dependence. But the doctrine of Preservation is preeminently to be elucidated so as to bring about this fundamental feeling itself in the fullest way.” If the concept of creation . . . itself becomes a temporal one] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §41 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 214–215; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 152: “If the conception of Creation is to be further developed, the origin of the world must, indeed, be traced entirely to the divine activity, but not in such a way that this activity is thought of as resembling human activity; and the origin of the world must be represented as the event in time which conditions all change, but not so as to make the divine activity itself a temporal activity.” Did creation itself take up time?] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following question raised in §41.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 218: “ob die Schöpfung selbst eine Zeit eingenommen [hat]”; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 154: “whether the creation [itself] occupied time.” ― time?: Variant: changed from “time.” Has time existed since before the world, or only with it?] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following question raised in §41.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 219: “ob eine Zeit vor der Welt gewesen oder ob die Zeit erst mit der Welt begonnen habe”; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 156: “whether there was time before the world existed or whether time began with the world.” ― time: Variant: first written “the world”. Can God’s being be conceived without Creation?] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following question raised in §41.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 219: “ob es Sein Gottes ohne Geschöpfe gedacht werden könne oder müsse”; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 155: “whether it is possible or necessary to conceive of God as existing apart from created things.”

23

31

32

33

332 46

1

46m

1

2

3

46

7

46m

6

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

The notion of the devil . . . has indeed never made doctrinal use of it] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §44 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 228; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 161: “The idea of the Devil, as developed among us, is so unstable that we cannot expect anyone to be convinced of its truth; but, besides, our Church has never made doctrinal use of this idea.” Does Schl. assume that hum. being is created sinful] It is not clear what in Schleiermacher Kierkegaard is referring to here. Theory of the Fall of the Angels] Refers to §44.1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 228–231. Sichverfü[h]renlassen (p. 232) presupposes something evil] Refers to §44.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 232; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 163: “But, indeed, the fact that man allowed himself to be tempted presupposes aberration and evil.” The entire English phrase “the fact that man allowed himself to be tempted” here translates Schleiermacher’s “das Sichverführenlassen” (German, lit., “the allowing-oneself-to-be-seduced”). The passage Lk 22:31 appears to make use of a proverb] Kierkegaard’s Danish paraphrase of a sentence in §45.1 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 235; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 165: “The expression that ‘Satan had desired to have the disciples that he might sift them’ bears the stamp of a proverb.” In a note to this line, Schleiermacher refers to Lk 22:31. re p. 242―Because, however. . . sin entered into the world] Presumably refers to the following passage at the close of §45.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 242; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 169: “But those who actually go so far as to maintain that living faith in Christ is in some way conditioned by belief in the devil ought to be on their guard lest, by so doing, they depreciate Christ and unduly exalt themselves.” ― the devil deceived man: → 38,13.

•

P a p e r 13 1834 •

Here it should be noted . . . work against such a derivation] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following passage in §46.1 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 247; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 172: “But here it should be remarked that frequently, on the one hand, an undue value is placed on expressly tracing back the least detail to this relation; while on the other hand, with no greater justice, we frequently oppose such a relation.” ― to this relation: Namely, the relation of absolute dependence. For in the totality of finite being . . . is itself dependent] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering― with emphasis added by Kierkegaard―of the following passage in §46.3 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 250; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 175: “For in the totality of finite being only a particular and partial causality is given to each individual, since each is dependent not on one another but on all the others; the universal causality attaches only to that on which the totality of this partial causality is itself dependent.” 2nd On the div[ine] attributes . . . the gen. relation between God and the world] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering―with italics removed by Kierkegaard―of the title of pt. 1, sec. 2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 280; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 194: “The Divine Attributes which are related to the Religious Self-Consciousness so far as it expresses the General Relationship between God and the World.” §50. All of the attributes . . . referring the feeling of absolute dependence to him] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §50 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 280; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 194: “All attributes which we ascribe to God are to be taken as denoting not something special in God, but only something special in the manner in which the feeling of absolute dependence is to be related to Him.” Unchangeableness] Refers to Schleiermacher’s postscript on “the unchangeability of God,” appended to §52 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche

10

46

16

22

26

1

47

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

2

2

3

6

Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 299; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 206. Substance.― Existence.―] Refers to the following passage in Schleiermacher’s postscript on “the unchangeability of God,” appended to §52 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 299; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 206: “It appears to be different if, setting out from a distinction between substance and existence in God, eternity is presented merely as one aspect of unchangeability.” A note to this sentence reads: “See Reinhardt Dogm., p. 105. If we regard unchangeableness in relation to the essence of God, it is simplicity; if in relation to his existence, it is eternity. But previously he had treated simplicity as a separate attribute, and eternity was unendingness contemplated as belonging to God’s existence.” Schleiermacher’s reference is to D. Franz Volkmar Reinhards Vorlesungen über die Dogmatik mit literärische Zusätzen [Dr. Franz Volkmar Reinhard’s Lectures on Dogmatics with Additional Literary Remarks], ed. J.G.I. Berger, 5th expanded ed. (Sulzbach, 1824 [1801]), p. 105. ― Substance.: See also §50.3 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube, vol. 1, especially p. 287; The Christian Faith, p. 198: “the most perfect Substance.” S.] i.e., space. (In Kierkegaard’s text “R .” stands for Rum [Danish, “space”] or Raum [German, “space”].) See §53 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 300–305; The Christian Faith, p. 206–211. (Einfachheit.) (Eternity.)] See the previous note. ― Einfachheit: See also the final portion of §56 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 337–338; The Christian Faith, pp. 231– 232. ― Eternity: See also §52 in Der christliche Glaube, pp. 295–299; The Christian Faith, pp. 203– 206. αδιαστασια ― συνουσια] See the following passage in §53.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 302; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 208: “In relation to the first, we may not without advantage employ the description of the divine causality, as current in Greek theology, by the expressions ἀδιαστασία

•

P a p e r 13 1834 •

333

and συνουσία―both, of course, related to God’s almighty presence.” ενεργητιϰη ― υποστατιϰη] See the following passage in §53.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 303; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 208–209: “For not only is the συνουσία ἐνεργητιϰὴ [“effective presence,” namely, of God] related to finite causality, but also the ὑποστατιϰὴ [“substantial,” namely, God’s substantial presence] in so far as it lays down the divine omnipresence as the maintenance of things in their being and in their powers.” The denial of all removal . . . its original location or midpoint] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §53.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 302; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 208: “For the negation of all remoteness expresses the contrast with finite causality, which―as well in the case of the spiritual as well as in the case of the corporeal―becomes weakened by distance from its place of origin or central point.” S.] → 47,2. The separation of the div. omnipresence . . . causality’s self-identical being] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following passage in §53.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 304; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 209: “the distinction between the divine omnipresence as an inactive and as an active attribute almost inevitably destroys the central self-identity of the divine causality.” ― self-identical being: Danish, Sigselvligeværen (lit., “being identical to oneself”), Kierkegaard’s literal Danish rendering of Schleiermacher’s “Sichselbstgleichsein” (German, “being identical to oneself”; this word is translated by Baillie, above, merely as “self-identity”). immensity either = infin. . . . (eternity)] A schematization of concepts employed in the “Zusaz” [Postscript] to §53 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 305–307, esp. the following passage on pp. 305–306; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 210: “Its use [i.e., of the term “the immensity of God” as “the designation of a special divine attribute”] is bound up

7

9

9 14

17

334

49

1

7

8

10

11

Schleiermacher's Dogmatics

with the greatest difficulties. Partly it is equated with the infinity of God, and in part it is derived therefrom; since of course infinity regarded as substance yields immensity, but regarded as existence eternity.” §54. The concept of the div. omnipotence . . . does actually take place] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §54 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 307–308; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 211: “In the conception of the divine Omnipotence two ideas are contained: first, that the entire system of Nature, comprehending all times and spaces, is founded upon divine causality, which as eternal and omnipresent is in contrast to all finite causality; and second, that the divine causality, as affirmed in our feeling of absolute dependence, is completely presented in the totality of finite being, and consequently everything for which there is a causality in God happens and becomes real.” Actual―Possible] Refers to §54.2 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 309–311; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 212–214. God can effect everything . . . does not conceal any self-contradiction in itself] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following line in §54.3 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 311; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 214: “God is able to effect all that is possible, or all which contains no contradiction in itself.” mediate―immed. | absolute―ordered] Refers to concepts employed in §54.4 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 313–314, esp. the following passage on p. 313; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 215: “[There are] many distinctions within the divine omnipotence, as well as divisions of it, given currency especially by the scholastics, which can be ruled out without loss. To these belongs, in the first place, the contrast between a mediate and immediate, or absolute and ordered, exercise of the divine omnipotence, i.e. between cases when it acts without or with intermediary causes.” absolute div. will―conditioned.―] Refers to concepts employed in §54.4 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 314–315,

•

P a p e r 13 1834 •

esp. the following passage on p. 314; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 216: “The case is similar with the distinction almost everywhere drawn between the divine will as absolute and as conditioned.” necessary―free . . . (what he . . . could not will)] Refers to concepts employed in §54.4 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 315–317, esp. the following passage on p. 315; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 216– 217: “But the whole idea of the divine omnipotence appears most endangered, when an active and an inactive, and a free and a necessary, divine will are set one over against the other. The necessary will would be related to what God wills in virtue of his essence, the free to that which, so far as His essence is concerned, He could just as well not will; where it is assumed that it does not belong to His essence to reveal himself.” active―inactive] Refers to concepts employed in §54.4 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 317–318, esp. in the passage cited in the previous note and in the following passage on p. 317; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 218: “And finally as to the contrast between the active and inactive divine will: it first of all contradicts the generally recognized proposition that the divine will extends no further than divine ability. For how should a true and real will be inactive unless it lacked the ability?” §55. By the div. omniscience . . . the div. omnipotence] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of §55 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 319; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 219: “By the divine Omniscience is to be understood the absolute spirituality of the divine Omnipotence.” However, even leaving this aside . . . from every point, another world] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following line in §55.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 328; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 225: “However, even apart from this it would follow that if anywhere even for God anything is possible outside the real, then infinitely much is possible at every point, and as each point is co-determinant for the rest, a different world arises for each.”

19

21

24

26

Biblical Exegesis 50

1

3

7

8

But to want to determine the likeness . . . in finite being] Kierkegaard’s abruptly truncated Danish rendering of the following passage in §55.1 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 320; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 219–220: “But to define the similarity between God and the spiritual in a finite sense [Kierkegaard’s Danish rendition breaks off here] is certainly a problem only to be solved by endless approximation; for owing to the intermixture of receptivity and passivity in some degree to be found (even if unrecognized) in every available term, we inevitably co-posit something which then must be got rid of again by the use of another term.” Add to this the fact . . . a partitioning of knowledge in him] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in §55.3 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 330–331; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 226: “If one adds to this the fact that unquestionably there exists at least a strong appearance as though, on the one side, a dual self-consciousness―an original and a reflected―and as though, on the other, the pieceby-piece character of His knowledge were being assumed.” ― partitioning: Schleiermacher here writes “Vereinzelung” (German, lit., “singling out”; Baillie renders this as “the piece-by-piece character”). Einheit―Unendlichkeit―Einfachheit] Refers to concepts employed in §56 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 333–338, esp. the section’s opening lines on p. 333; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 228: “Among the divine attributes usually mentioned, the Unity, Infinity, and Simplicity of God might conveniently come in here, as having no relation to the antithesis in the excitations of the religious consciousness; only they could not be regarded as divine attributes in the same sense as those already dealt with.” strictly speaking, it cannot be . . . only available in a certain number] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the following line in §56.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 334; Baillie’s translation, The Christian

•

P a p e r 13–14 1834 •

335

Faith, p. 229: “strictly taken, it can never be an attribute of a thing that it only exists in a certain number.” God has no equal] See Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 334, where he writes of “dem allgemeinen Ausdruck . . . daß Gott nicht seines gleichen habe”; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 229: “the general expression that God has no equal.” The emphasis is Kierkegaard’s. (Einzigkeit) = The attribute . . . between essence and exis[tence]] See the following line in §56.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, pp. 335; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 229: “It might be said that the uniqueness of God is that attribute in virtue of which there is no distinction of essence and existence.” Einfachheit Material is eliminated . . . composition is excluded] See the following line in §56.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 337; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, p. 231: “The idea of Simplicity too is constantly treated as a negative―although regarded literally it is not so―either as simply negating matter of God or as excluding all idea of parts or composition.” ― all that is part . . . is excluded: Variant: added. derived from the pious self-consciousness . . . every Chr. pious moment of life] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the second half of the following sentence in the “Zusaz” [Postscript] to §56.2 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 1, p. 338; Baillie’s translation, The Christian Faith, pp. 231–232: “The whole circle of divine attributes here dealt with thoroughly illustrates the characteristic feature of this First Part of Dogmatic[s], namely, that of being derived from the religious [German, frommen, lit., “pious”] self-consciousness as it is presupposed in every Christian religious [frommen, lit., “pious”] life-moment.” The emergence of a hum. life . . . hum. nature in genrl.] Compare the following passage in §94.3 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 2, p. 48; Baillie’s translation in The Christian Faith, p. 388: “The origin of every human life may

9

9

11

12

14

50

336

17

51

2

7

8

9

Biblical Exegesis

be regarded in a twofold manner, as issuing from the narrow circle of descent and society to which it immediately belongs, and as a fact of human nature in general.” ― The emergence: Variant: from this point to the end of Paper 14:2, the text was written lengthwise on the page, and the ms. has been damaged. that the unification of both . . . much more as an action of] Compare the following passage in §96.1 in Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 2, p. 53; Baillie’s translation in The Christian Faith, pp. 391–392: “We must warn the reader against the very confusing of the subject that results when the expression ‘Jesus Christ’ is used, to indicate not only the subject of the union of the two natures, but also the divine nature of the Redeemer from all eternity before its union with the human nature; so that this union no longer appears as an element that goes to constitute the person, Jesus Christ, but rather as an act of this person Himself.” fication of the div. nature . . . alone . . . fication ge] Corrupted Danish rendering of §97 of Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 38,25), vol. 2, p. 63; Baillie’s translation in The Christian Faith, p. 398: “Second Theorem.―In the uniting of the divine nature with the human, the divine alone was active or self-imparting, and the human alone passive or in process of being assumed; but during the state of union every activity was a common activity of both natures.” ― the div. nature: Variant: changed from “both natures”. The Paths of Fate] A reference to the August Lafontaine’s novel Die Wege des Schicksals [The Paths of Fate], 2 vols. (Vienna, 1820), translated into Danish as Skjebnens Veie. Roman af A. Lafontaine [The Paths of Fate: A Novel by A. Lafontaine], trans. H. P. Møller, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1826–1827; abbreviated hereafter as Skjebnens Veie). p. 31. . . . the young man shouted . . . took up a manly stance] Citation from Skjebnens Veie (→ 51,2), vol. 1, p. 31. Lund] It cannot be determined to whom Kierkegaard is referring. In 1824, Kierkegaard’s sister Nicoline Christine (d. September 10, 1832) was married to Johan Christian Lund, and in 1828

•

P a p e r 14 1834 •

his sister Petrea Severine (d. December 29, 1834) was married to Johan Christian’s brother Henrich Ferdinand Lund. Gerhard. Groot.] Known in Latin as Gerardus Magnus (1340–1384), a Dutch deacon, traveling preacher, and mystic. See Paper 1 in the present volume. Word] What follows is a schematic overview of the various gifts of grace mentioned in 1 Cor 12, based on August Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche durch die Apostel, als selbstständiger Nachtrag zu der allgemeinen Geschichte der christlichen Religion und Kirche, 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1832–1833; abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche); translated into English by J. E. Ryland as History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, 2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1842). Neander’s original work was published in two versions with identical text but different amounts of text per page; in the longer version, the relevant pages are found in vol. 1, pp. 168–177; in the shorter version, in vol. 1, pp. 115–121. χαριςμα ϰυβερνηςεως. or του προεςταναι. διαϰονιας αντιληψεως] See the following passage in Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche (→ 52,1), vol. 1, p. 176; shorter version, pp. 120–121; Ryland’s translation, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 164: “Let us now proceed from those gifts which relate to the ministry of the word, to that class which relates to other kinds of outward activity, for the advancement of the kingdom of God. Here again we must distinguish between those in which, as in διδασϰαλία, a peculiar capability founded in human nature, and developed and applied according to its usual laws, was rendered effective, under the influence of a new divine principle of life; and those in which the natural human development was put in the background, and what was more purely divine became prominent, similarly to the γλώσσαις λαλεῖν and the προϕητεύειν. To the former belong the gifts of church government, the χάρισμα ϰυβερνήσεως or τοῦ προεστάνα, and the gifts for various services, which were required in administering the concerns of the

14

1

2

52

Biblical Exegesis

2

2 3

5

church, as distributing alms, tending the sick, etc., the χάρισμα διαϰονίας or ἀντιλήψεως.” Neander then refers to 1 Cor 12:28 and Rom 12:7. διδαςϰαλος. . . . λαλων] See Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche, vol. 1, esp. pp. 168–174; in the shorter version, vol. 1, pp. 115–119. The natural side . . . development of hum. powers] → 52,1. (understanding) . . . (absol. retreat of self-consciousn[ess].)] See the following passage in Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche (→ 52,1), vol. 1, p. 171; shorter version, p. 117; Ryland’s translation, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 157: “If the connected addresses of the διδάσϰαλος tended to lead those further into a knowledge of the gospel who had already attained to faith, or to develop in their minds the clearer understanding of what they had received by faith; the προϕητεία [Greek, “prophecy”] served rather to awaken to faith those who were not yet believers, or to animate and strengthen those who had not attained to faith, to quicken afresh the life of faith. On the contrary, in the γλώσσαις λαλεῖν [Greek, “speaking in tongues”], the elevated consciousness of God predominated, while the consciousness of the inner world vanished. To a person who expressed himself in this manner, the medium of communication between the external world and his deeply moved interior was altogether wanting.” λογος γνωςεως.―λ. σοϕιας] See 1 Cor 12:8, along with the following passage in Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche (→ 52,1), vol. 1, p. 175; shorter version, p. 120; Ryland’s translation, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, pp. 161–162: “In the charism of διδασϰαλία [Greek, “teaching”], there appears again to have been a difference, according as any one had an ability for developing the truth in its theoretic elements, or in its application to the various relations of life; the one was λόγος γνώσεως, the other λόγος σοϕίας.” In a note to this line, Neander writes: “Σοϕία [Greek, “wisdom”] principally denoted a practical power of the judgment, corresponding

•

P a p e r 14–15 1834–1835 •

337

to the idea of wisdom or prudence; while γνῶσις [Greek, “knowledge”], in the New Testament and contemporary writings, was used for the theoretical, the more profound knowledge of religion.” ερμενεια γλωςςων. διαϰριςις πνευματων] See 1 Cor 12:10, along with the following passage in Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche (→ 52,1), vol. 1, p. 174; shorter version, p. 119; Ryland’s translation, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 161: “In these charisms we may also distinguish the gift of a productiveness of religious intuition . . . and the gift which enabled a person to explain or to pass judgment upon what others communicated by means of their charism . . . the ἑρμηνεία γλωσσῶν and the διάϰρισις πνευμάτων.” To the other side . . . “the practical power . . . animated and potentiated in faith.”] See the discussion of πίστις in Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche (→ 52,1), vol. 1, pp. 176–177; shorter version, p. 121; Ryland’s translation, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, p. 164, culminating in the line cited by Kierkegaard: “The term πίστις [Greek, “belief,” “faith”] evidently denotes the practical power of the will animated and elevated by faith.” Secundum Rückert] Namely, following Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser erläutert und vertheidigt [Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians Explicated and Defended] (Leipzig, 1834; abbreviated hereafter as Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser). ― Rückert: Leopold Immanuel (Emanuel) Rückert (1797– 1871), German Protestant theologian and pastor; from 1825, professor at the preparatory school in Zittau; in 1836, received an honorary doctorate in theology at the University of Copenhagen; from 1844, professor of theology at the University of Jena. Rückert’s New Testament commentaries are considered pioneering works of historical-critical exegesis. εν παση σοϕια ϰαι ϕρονησει . . . a proof of God’s wisdom)] Kierkegaard’s free and abbreviated Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:8 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 37–38. ― Some have

6

52

10

18

20

52

338

55

1

13

23

Biblical Exegesis

connected these words with γνωρισας, which follows them: On p. 38, Rückert lists a number of theologians, including Koppe (→ 56,4), who have indeed connected these words with the following verse, reading them as tied to its first word, γνωρίσας. v. 12 προηλπιϰοτας. ελπιζειν εν τινι . . . nor does ελπιζειν εν τινι mean the same as exspectare aliquem] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:12 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 49–50. On p. 49, Rückert defines ἐλπίζειν ἔν τινι as “seine Hoffnung, sein Vertrauen auf Etwas, oder auf Jemand setzen” (German, “to place one’s hope, one’s trust, in something or someone”). Kierkegaard here writes only of placing one’s Tillid (Danish, “trust” or “confidence”) in someone or something. ― see 3:3: See Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:3, pp. 132–133. ― have placed our trust in God: Danish, “have sat vor tillid til Gud.” Rückert’s words on p. 50, however, are “auf Christum unser Vertrauen gesetzt haben warden” (German, “will have placed our trust in Christ”). Kierkegaard thus replaces “Christ” with “God” and changes the verb tense from future perfect to perfect. περιποιεν means to act . . . were used of the Jews] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:14 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 56. ― which does not appear in good classic Greek: Rückert’s words on p. 56 are: “der guten Gräcität, wie es scheint, fremd” (German, “alien, as it is appears, to good classic Greek”). ϰαϑ’ υμας is genrlly explained . . . the faith that is found among you] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:15 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 58–59. ― Winer: Johann Georg Benedict Winer (1789–1858), German Protestant theologian; from 1823, professor of theology at Erlangen; from 1832, professor of theology at Leipzig. Rückert refers to Winer’s Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms als einzig sichere Grundlage der neutestamentlichen Exegese [Grammar of the New Testament Linguistic Idiom as the Only Secure Foundation

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

for Exegesis of the New Testament], 3rd improved ed. (Leipzig, 1830 [1822]), p. 135. ― the local meaning: i.e., the meaning of ϰατά (Greek, “according to,” “toward”). Some of the Ch. Fathers . . . Chr.’s div. nature] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:17 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 60. ― Some of the Ch. Fathers: Rückert refers to Athanasius the Great (297–373, Greek Church Father; bishop of Alexandria); Theodorus of Mopsuestia (ca. 350–428, Greek theologian; bishop of Mopsuestia in Cilicia, southeastern Asia Minor); and Gregory of Nazianzus (ca. 330–390, Greek Church Father; bishop of Constantinople). ― homoousia: Greek, ὁμοουσία (lit., “same being”), a concept from the Christological controversies in the 4th century on the relation between the Father and the Son, signifying that the Son has the same essence, or substance (ὁμοούσιος, “consubstantial”), as the Father, a claim especially identified with Athanasius the Great and his followers, often made in opposition to the Arians, and formalized in art. 2 of the Nicene Creed. σοϕια must here be understood . . . its practical competence] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:17 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 62. πεϕωτισμενους τους οϕϑαλμους is to be referred to δωη] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:18 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 63. some have wished . . . to find a Hebraism in it] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:18 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 64. v. 18. ο πλουτος της δοξης της ϰληρ] Abbreviated citation from Eph 1:18. εν τοις αγιοις. Some (Koppe) connect these words . . . among and with the holy ones, are God’s inheritors] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:18 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 65. ― Koppe: Johann Benjamin Koppe (1750–1791), German Protestant theologian and

26

29

1

2

3 4

56

Biblical Exegesis

11

14

17

philologist; from 1775, professor of theology at Göttingen; from 1784, supreme consistory councillor and general superintendent in Gotha; from 1788, court pastor, consistory councillor, and general superintendent in Hanover. Rückert is here referring to Koppe’s “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” [Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians], p. 36, in Novum Testamentum graece perpetua annotatione [The New Testament in Greek, Completely Annotated], vol. 6, Epistolae Paulli ad Galatas, Ephesios, Thessalonicenses [Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, and Thessalonians], ed. Th. Chr. Tychsen, 2nd expanded ed. (Göttingen, 1791 [1778]; abbreviated hereafter as “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios”). ― but in this way it becomes plodding: Rückert’s words are: “so stehn die Worte unglaublich schleppend und überflüssig da” (German, “then the words stand there, unbelievably plodding and superfluous”). εν τοις αγιοις . . . but this idiom cannot be confirmed] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 1:18 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 65–66. ϕυσει some (Koppe) have explained by revera . . . derivation, descent, etc.] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:3 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 88. ― some (Koppe) have explained by revera: Rückert refers to the fact that Koppe added a special excursus on this phrase; see “Excursus II. / ad II, 3. τεϰνα ϕυσει οργης,” in “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), pp. 146–148. To be sure, Rückert holds that hereditary sin is indeed taught here] A reference to Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 88–89, where Rückert writes that it is evident from Rom 5:12 that Paul “was by no means averse to the view, already expressed in Ps 51:7, that man is born as a sinner; and because we are not making our interpretation on behalf of any system, we will not refuse to acknowledge the thought here too, that we were born children of wrath, i.e., that from birth on we were such as to deserve divine wrath, as the true meaning of the words.”

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

339

see Usteri] Leonhard Usteri (1799–1833), Swiss Protestant theologian and pedagogical expert; from 1824, professor at the University of Bern. Kierkegaard is referring here to pt. 1, sec. 2, “Beziehung der Sündhaftigkeit aller Menschen auf die Sünde des ersten Menschen, oder von der sogenannten Erbsünde” [The Relation of the Sinfulness of All Human Beings to the Sin of the First People, or of What Is Called Hereditary Sin], in Usteri’s main work Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes in seinem Verhältnisse zur biblischen Dogmatik des Neuen Testamentes. Ein exegetisch-dogmatischer Versuch [The Development of Pauline Doctrine in Relation to the Biblical Dogmatics of the New Testament: An ExegeticalDogmatic Attempt], 5th ed. (Zurich, 1834 [1824]; see ASKB 850, a Danish translation (1839) of the 5th ed.; abbreviated hereafter as Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes), pp. 30–31, where Usteri writes: “Even in Eph 2:3, which one has tended to cite as a proof-text on account of the expression τέϰνα ϕύσει ὀργῆς, that view is not found.” Usteri then concludes his examination of Eph 2:3 as follows: “Inasmuch as what is spoken of here is not an original state of the human race, but one that has arisen historically and is factually given, this passage does not at all fit into the doctrine of hereditary sin.” (χαριτι εςτε σεσωμενοι). Is an expression . . . also recollect this] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a line from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:5 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 91. Just prior to the line that Kierkegaard cites, Rückert remarks that the words χαριτί ἐστε σεσωσμένοι “machen eine wahre Parenthese” (German, “form a true parenthesis”) in scripture―and Kierkegaard places these words in parentheses. σεσωςμενοι. Precisely this verb . . . and therefore past tense] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:8 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 95. επ’ εργοις αγαϑοις. with the aim . . . never εργα νομου αγαϑα] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary

18

20

23

1

57

340

12

16

21

22

58

1

Biblical Exegesis

on Eph 2:10 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 99. The discussion of the great good deeds . . . in enjoyment of the highest goods, become] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:11 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 101. Χωρις Χ. Some have explained this as . . . proof of this] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:12 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 103. απηλ[λ]οτριωμενοι. οω . . . Med. me abalieno, desero] “απηλ[λ]οτριωμενοι” is cited from Eph 2:12, “remember that you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise.” The rest of the passage cited is excerpted from the article “Απαλλοτριόω” [Alienation], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20) vol. 1, p. 111. ― οω: The Greek verb’s ending when in the first-person present active singular, i.e., ἀπαλλοτριόω (“I alienate”). ― cum acc: pers. et Genit: rei. destituo aliquem aliqua re: Bretschneider writes: “cum accusativo personae et genitivo rei: destituo aliquem aliqua re” (Latin, “with the accusative for persons, and the genitive for things: I forsake someone [accusative], something [ablative].”) Bretschneider presumably intended the ablative case, rather than the genitive (see, e.g., the entry for destituo in Lewis and Short’s A Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1879). ― Med.: Refers to the middle Greek verb form. With regard to the passage at hand, R[ückert] notes . . . hum. beings’ most ancient condition] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:12 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 103–104. ― by constitution P[aul] understands nothing less than theocracy, not as it was in reality, but ideally: Rückert adds: “nehmlich als eine wahrhaft göttliche Regierung” (German, “namely, as a truly divine government”). ― theocracy: A state in which all power and authority belongs to God. αϑεοι . . . deny God’s existence . . . the gods that they profess are not gods (Gal 4:8)] Kierkegaard’s

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:12 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 106. ινα τους δυο ϰτιση etc. We are more than familiar. . . are entirely the same] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:15 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 115. ― teleological: Focused on the end or goal. αποϰτεινας την εχϑραν . . . this την εχϑραν . . . from God’s love] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:16 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 119. εν ϰυριῳ. Here it must be noted that ϰυριος . . . a result of the connection with Chr.] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 2:21 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 127. ― as convenient as this would be: Rückert writes: “jo bequem sie an und für sich seyn würde” (German, “as convenient as this would be on its own terms” [lit., “in and for itself”]). After composing these last words . . . ειγε ηϰουσ . . . the name of Chr. among the nations] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:2 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 131. ― ειγε ηϰουσ: See Eph 3:2. ― in literal Danish: if, indeed, i.e., you had truly indeed heard: Rückert writes: “wörtlich: wenn Ihr nehmlich gehört habt, d. h. Ihr werdet nehmlich wohl gehört haben” (German, “literally: if you had namely heard, i.e., you will indeed surely have heard”). ― ηϰουσατε γαρ που. ἡ χαρις η δοϑεισα μοι: Citations from Rückert. ― provincia officium, dispensandi gratiam: Kierkegaard omits a comma between provincia and officium. προς ὁ with reference to which, i.e., by which] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of a line from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:4 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 134. τοις υιοις των ανϑρωπων. This formula does not otherwise appear in P[aul] . . . privileged above the other] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph

4

9

12

23

6

7

59

Biblical Exegesis

12

14

15

3:5 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 134. εν τω Χρ. may not be referred . . . but rather to all the preceding words συγϰληρον., συσσ., συμμ.] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:6 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 137. ― εν τω Χρ.: In his text-critical edition of the Greek text of Eph 3:6, in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 8, Rückert instead writes: “ἐν Χριστῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ” (“in Christ Jesus”), though with a note citing [ἐν] τῷ Χριστῶ (“in Christ”) as an alternate reading. In his commentary, cited here, he cites the former words: “ἐν Χ. ᾿Ι.” ινα Koppe, Rosenmüll[er]., Flatt read it consequutiv, but without justification] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:10 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 143. ― Koppe: See Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), p. 69. ― Rosenmüll[er]: Johann Georg Rosenmüller (1736–1815), German Protestant theologian; from 1773, professor and pastor in Erlangen; from 1783, superintendent and consistorial judge in Gießen; from 1785, professor at the University of Leipzig and pastor at its Church of St. Thomas. The reference here is presumably to Rosenmüller’s Scholia in Novum Testamentum (→ 37,27), vol. 5, Pauli Epistolas ad Ephesios, Philippenses, Colossenses, Thessalonicenses, Timotheum, Titum, Philemonem, et Hebraeos [Paul’s Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and the Hebrews] (1781), p. 39. ― Flatt: Johann Friedrich von Flatt (1759–1821), German Protestant theologian and philosopher; from 1785, professor of philosophy at Tübingen, and from 1792, professor of theology there; from 1820, a pastor as well. Reference is here made to his Vorlesungen über die Briefe Pauli an die Galater und Epheser [Lectures on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians], ed. posthumously by C. F. Kling (Tübingen, 1828), p. 434. ϰατα προϑεσιν των αιωνων. These words . . . or with σοϕια (as others do)] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:11 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 145.

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

341

This genitive, των αιωνων . . . each of God’s resolutions as eternal] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage from Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:11 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 145–146. μη εγϰαϰειν The subj. can be . . . The latter is the best] Compare Rückert’s commentary on Eph 3:13 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), pp. 147–148. ― εγϰαϰειν: Rückert has ἐγϰαϰεῖν (“to behave culpably”) here, as well as in his text-critical edition of the Greek text of Eph 3:13, on p. 9, but provides a note informing the reader that ἐϰϰαϰεῖν (“to lose heart”) is the traditional reading. ― subj.: in this case, the subject of an accusative-infinitive phrase, namely, the noun(s) or pronoun(s) in the accusative. εν αγαπῃ ερ. either one must assume, with Koppe, an inversion instead of ινα εν αγαπη etc ερριζωμενων] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendition of Koppe’s commentary on Eph 2:17, in Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), pp. 74–75: “Nominativos ερριζωμενοι et τεϑεμελιωμενοι per anacoluthon orationis interpretari non dubito, pro ερριζωμενων see 4, 2. possunt tamen etiam cum Grotio jungi versui sequenti, ut regantur a conjunctione ἱνα” (Latin, “I have no doubt that the nominatives ἐρριζωμένοι [Greek, “rooted” (pl.)] and τεϑεμελιωμένοι [Greek, “founded” or “grounded” (pl.)] should be interpreted as a rhetorical anacoluthon for ἐῤῥιζωμένων [Greek, “of the rooted ones”], see 4:2. Yet the words can also, with Grotius (→ 63,1), be appended to the following verse, so that they are governed by the conjunction ἵνα.” (An anacoluthon is a Greek term, from ἀνακόλουθον [“what does not follow”], meaning an unexpected omission or break in sentence structure.) ― inversion: i.e., a reversal of the usual order, here so that the participles (ἐρριζωμένοι and τεϑεμελιωμένοι) are found prior to the conjunction (ἵνα) that governs them. ― ινα εν αγαπη etc εξισχυσητε: The phrase rewritten without inversion, so that the governing conjunction (ἵνα) is placed at the start. ινα πληρωϑητε εις παν etc. Koppius jungit ινα . . . integra copia beneficiorum Dei] “Koppe connects the word ἵνα with the preceding words [τήν ἀγάπην τοῦ Χριστοῦ, “the love of Christ”],

16

1

2

4

60

342

10

14

Biblical Exegesis

and explicates it as referring to the Church: to be accepted into the Church that encompasses all; but this is refuted by πᾶν [Greek, “all”], which would not mean a multitude but the totality of all the members, in which case πᾶν would have been superfluous. Hence it should be explained as referring to the greatest beneficence that is composed of many parts: so that you can be filled up with a total, integral overflow of God’s beneficences”―remarks by Kierkegaard on Koppe’s interpretation of Eph 3:19; see Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), p. 77. ― ινα: Here as a consecutive conjunction, i.e., “so that.” ϰατωτερα μερη Calvin . . . in hoc nostrum barathrum descendit] Greek and Latin: Kierkegaard’s free citation from Calvin’s commentary on Ephesians in Calvini in Novi Testamenti epistolas commentarii (→ 34,16), vol. 6, p. 128; see Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians, trans. William Pringle (Edinburgh, 1854), p. 275: “Into the lower parts of the earth. These words mean nothing more than the condition of the present life. To torture them so as to make them mean purgatory or hell, is exceedingly foolish. The argument taken from the comparative degree, ‘the lower parts,’ is quite untenable. A comparison is drawn, not between one part of the earth and another, but between the whole earth and heaven; as if he had said that from that lofty habitation Christ descended into our abyss.” ― Calvin: → 34,16. πληρωμα. 1) fartum, fartura . . . 2) copia . . . multitudo . . . ut anima corpus] Greek and Latin: “1) filled up, filling up, that with which something is filled up. Hence abundance, plentiude 1) all that a thing contains. 2) abundance, what fills up, multitude. Because πληροῦν [filling, filled] is also predicated on the things that extend themselves through space, filling it up and taking possession of it, πλήρωμα is used 2) figuratively to refer to the place or space that is filled up by someone. In a metaphorical sense, Paul thus calls a) every Christian πλήρωμα τοῦ ϑεοῦ [Greek, “the fullness of God”] or Χριστοῦ [Greek, “Christ”], inasmuch as a Christian should be filled up by Christ, b) the Church is called πλήρωμα Χριστοῦ [“the fullness of Christ”], as it were the temple in which he lives, in which he occupies and rules, as the soul does the body.” Condensed citation from the article

•

P a p e r 15 1834–1835 •

“Πλήρωμα” [Fullness], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, pp. 297–298. επιχορηγια. (επι-χορηγια choragium, ludus choricus) . . . per summum perfectissimum nexum juncturarum] Greek and Latin: “επιχορηγια (επι―χορηγια [Greek, “upon sponsorship”] for the mounting of a play and the equipping of the chorus with the necessary requisites and costumes, drama with chorus) generous donation of gifts or money, expenses. From this ἐπιχορηγία: among the profane ones [i.e., non-Christian writers], it means more-than-sufficient supplies, bestowing something―e.g., in Phil 1:19 [“the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ” (King James version)] . But in Eph 4:16 it is predicated on a construction in which one thing is properly joined to another, as is done in the choruses, σῶμα [Greek, “the body”], i.e., the Church, which is connected and bound together διὰ πάσης ἁϕῆς τῆς ἐπιχορηγίας, by any of the joints whatever in its construction―as opposed to διὰ πάσης ἐπιχορηγίας τῶν ἁϕῶν, by the most utterly perfect conjoining of the joints.” Cited freely from the article “Επιχορηγία” [Joined Together], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 483. Kierkegaard omits ex before ἐπί, uses a hyphen instead of et between ἐπί and χορηγία, and adds a period after sic. v. 19 απηλγηϰοτες] Greek, cited from Eph 4:19, ἀπηλγηϰότες, perfect participle of ἀπαλγεῖν (see next note). from απαλγειν from αλγος dolor, dolorem non sentire] Compare the following passage from the article “Απαλγέω” [Cease to Feel Pain], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 111: “᾿Απαλγέω, ῶ, f. ήσω, (ex ἀπό et ἀλγέω doleo) Graecis est 1) dedoleo, dolorem vinco; 2) occalesco, torpeo, sensum exuo, gefühllos seyn.” [Greek, Latin, and German, “To the Greeks ᾿Απαλγέω, ῶ, futurum ήσω [“in the future”] (from ἀπό [“from”] and ἀλγέω [“I feel pain”]) means: 1) I cease to feel pain, overcome sadness; 2) I grow warm, stiff, numb to pain, to be unfeeling.”] Indicatur captus membris 2) metaph. animi obduratio ‫]הקְ שָ ה לֵב‬ ִ The source of this line has not been identified.

20

25

25

25

Biblical Exegesis 61

1

1

2

5

6

Ps 4:5. simile quid] Compare Rückert’s commentary on Eph 4:26 in Rückert, Der Brief Pauli an die Epheser (→ 52,18), p. 216, where this reference to Ps 4:5 is discussed. Deut 24:15] Koppe refers to this verse in his commentary on Eph 4:26, in Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), pp. 97–98. Plutarchus dicit . . . non licere iis iram in alterum diem proferre] In his commentary on Eph 4:26, Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), pp. 97–98, cites Plutarch, De amore fraterno 17, 488b: “We should next pattern ourselves after the Pythagoreans, who, though related not at all by birth, yet sharing a common discipline, if ever they were led by anger into recrimination, never let the sun go down before they joined right hands, embraced each other, and were reconciled.” Plutarch, Moralia, trans. W. C. Helmbold (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1939), p. 303. ― Plutarchus: Plutarch (ca. a.d. 50– 125), Greek philosopher and historian. versatilitas dexteritas . . . et sensu malo scurrilitas] Compare the article “Εὐτραπελία” [Eutrapelia], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 516: “Εὐτραπελία, ας, ἡ . . . urbanitas;―lepor, facetiae;―deinde in malam partem: ioci indecentes, scurrilitas vel potius sermones ambigui, qui in obscoenum sensum facile flecti possunt” (Greek and Latin, “Εὐτραπελία, ας, . . . ―urbanity;― charm, wit;―subsequently in the negative sense: indecent jokes, buffoonery, or rather ambiguous speech that easily could be bent into an obscene meaning.”) ϰαι μη μεϑυσϰεςϑε etc. . . . ad res physicas et spirituales describendas] Greek and Latin. ― ϰαι μη μεϑυσϰεςϑε etc.: “and do not get drunk with wine” (Eph 5:18). ― Offendit, quod h: l: transit P. subito a vitiis inebriationis ad celebrationem: “It is disturbing that P[aul], in this passage, shifts immediately from the vices of inebriation to celebration.” See the article “Μεϑύσϰω” [Drunk with Wine], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 52, where the meaning of the verb in the middle voice, μεϑύσϰομαι, is given as “inebrior, vino me obruo” (“I get drunk, bury myself in wine”). ― Koppius statuit . . . ad

•

P a p e r 15–16 1834–1835 •

343

res physicas et spirituales describendas: “Koppe states that he [Paul] has in mind the symposia that the Christians instituted during their sacred prayers. Then it would be: In your sacred gatherings, do not indulge to inebriation, but fulfill the holy rites. Yet there is nothing indicating that Paul was thinking of these; [rather,] he loves the audacity of speech that uses the selfsame words to describe physical matters as it does for spiritual ones.” For remarks by Kierkegaard on Koppe’s interpretation of Eph 5:18; see Koppe, “Paulli epistola ad Ephesios” (→ 56,4), p. 112. Col 1:14] i.e., the Epistle to the Colossians. Kierkegaard translated Colossians from Greek into Latin; see CC:3, “Epistola ad Colossenses,” KJN 1, 154–158. Kierkegaard translates Col 1:14 as follows: “in quo habemus redemptionem sanguine ejus, remissionem peccatorum” (KJN 1, 155). ― Col. 1:14: Variant: added. the student notes remark: “thus the word απολυτρωςις . . . liberationem a peccatis.”] This citation has not been verified. ― student notes: Presumably refers to a pamphlet with student notes from exegetical lectures on Colossians, among other texts. Such Collegier or Collegieabonnementer, as they were called, were copied out in large numbers and then offered for sale or for rent, and it was common for university students to read the student notes instead of actually attending the relevant lectures. See, e.g., M.G.G. Steenstrup Det theologiske Studium ved vort Universitet [The Course of Study in Theology at Our University] (Copenhagen, 1848), pp. 12–13, and esp. p. 84: “The student notes are the libraries from which the various editions and annual versions of the ‘textbook’ are available for borrowing; from the student notes―available by subscription―more students learn what the lecturers are teaching than they do from the university’s lecture halls.” παϑημασιν υπερ υμων ita etiam . . . pro sed propter] Greek and Latin, “sufferings for your sake, so also at 2 Tim 2:10, where similar things appear about Christ; from this comes the classical dogma of passive satisfaction, i.e., that Christ fully endured the sufferings of all human beings;

11

17

23

61

344

62

2

3

11

Biblical Exegesis

and if we consider other N. T. passages, the same may be said of the apostles with equal justification; hence ὑπὲρ should not be rendered as for, but as because of.” and translated] Kierkegaard’s Latin translation of Col 1:27 in CC:3 (→ 61,11) reads as follows: “quibus voluit deus significare, quæ sit copia gloriæ hujus mysterii inter gentes, qui est Chr: [Christus] in vobis, spes gloriæ” (KJN 1, 155). Constat Judæos . . . obligationem moralem] Latin and Greek, “It is well known that the Jews always attributed the greatest significance to circumcision, for it was an external sign of the covenant they had made with God. Thus Philo says that circumcision is ἐϰτομὴ τῶν ἡδονῶν [“the amputation of desires”]. ‘Meaning: While you may not be circumcised by physical means, you are bound to Christian doctrine equally by circumcision or by avoiding every sin or by cultivating every virtue.’ Circumcision, accordingly, indicates a moral obligation.” See Col 2:11. ― Ita dicit Philo circumcisio est εϰτομη των ηδονων: See Philo, De specialibus legibus [On the Special Laws], bk. 1, 211, where Philo gives a symbolic interpretation of circumcision. ― Philo: Hellenistic Jewish philosopher (ca. 20 or 10 b.c.–ca. a.d. 45), born in Alexandria, where he was part of the leadership of that city’s large Jewish community. ― Sens: ratione quidem physica non . . . adstricti estis.”: Paraphrase of Col 2:11. α εστι παντα εις ϕϑοραν τη αποχρησει. . . . enim sæpe indicat usum] Greek and Latin, “All of which perish with use. Some hold that Paul, with these words, makes some concession to the adversaries: for it is certain that all things cause harm when they are abused.―Others refer [the words] to the teachers themselves: now all these things cause injury by use―more compellingly, to Paul, who declares: there is no power in such precepts, but all things are injurious through use.― ἀποχρήσις [“using up”] in fact means frequent use.” Compare the article “Απόχρησις” [Using (Something) Up], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 1, p. 149, where the word is defined as “consumtio rei per usum, das Verbrauchen, Aufbrauchen” (Latin

•

P a p e r 16–17 1834–1835 •

and German, “consumption of a thing by use,” “employment,” “using up”). 2 Thess] Kierkegaard translated 2 Thess from Greek into Latin; see CC:5, “2 Thess.” (KJN 1, 161–163). Hugo Grotius explicat ο απολλυμενος etc . . . esse scriptam antea] Latin and Greek, “Hugo Grotius explains ὁ ἀπολλύμενος [“the one who perishes”] as referring to Caligula, and ὁ ϰατέχων [“the one who holds fast”] as referring to Vitellius, then governor of Syria and Palestine, whose power and multitude of soldiers Caligula feared. Yet chronology refutes this. For it is common knowledge that this epistle was written after Caligula’s death; Paul is speaking of a future time. (H. G. states as a conjecture that the epistle was written earlier.)” The reference is to Hugonis Grotii annotationes in Novum Testamentum [Hugo Grotius’s Annotations to the New Testament], new ed. by C. E. de Windheim, vol. 1 and vol. 2, bks. 1–2 (Erlangen and Leipzig, 1755–1757 [1641–1650]), vol. 2.2, p. 724, col. 1; p. 276, col. 2; along with p. 733, cols. 1–2. ― Hugo Grotius: Dutch jurist, philosopher of law, theologian, and poet; from 1607, advocate general of the Fisc of Holland, Zeeland, and Friesland; from 1613, pensionary of Rotterdam. ― ο απολλυμενος: Presumably, a combined reference to ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας (“the son of destruction”), ὁ ἄνϑρωπος τῆς ἁμαρτίας (“the man of sin”), and ὁ ἀντιϰείμενος (“the one who opposes”), 2 Thess 2:3–4. ― Caligula: The Roman emperor Gaius Julius Cæsar Germanicus, known as Caligula (a.d. 12–41). After his ascendancy in a.d. 37, Caligula became intoxicated with his power, which he regarded as divine. He carried out countless executions, went insane, and was ultimately assassinated. ― Vitellio: According to Grotius, this is Lucius Vitellius the elder (ca. 5 b.c.– a.d. 51), Roman consul; named governor of Syria in a.d. 35; supported both Caligula and Claudius as emperors. ― H: G: ex conjectura statuit epistolam esse scriptam antea: See Grotius’s preface to 2 Thess in Hugonis Grotii annotationes in Novum Testamentum, where he argues that 2, Thess must

18

62

1

63

Biblical Exegesis

8

10

have been written before the other Pauline epistles, and before the death of Caligula. Bastholm explicat de Nerone . . . per Burrhum et Senecam] A reference to C. Bastholm, Det Nye Testamente oversat efter Grundsproget og oplyst med Anmerkninger [The New Testament, Translated from the Original Language, and Illuminated with Notes], 2 vols. (Copenhagen 1780), vol. 2, p. 26, where Bastholm, in a note to Thess 2:4, expresses the view that “the one who opposes” must have been Nero, i.e., Nero Claudius Caesar (a.d. 37–68), Roman emperor from a.d. 54 to 58. ― Bastholm: Christian Bastholm (1740–1819), Danish theologian and priest; from 1768, priest in Smyrna; from 1772, priest at the Citadel of Copenhagen; from 1777, priest at the Church of St. Olai in Elsinore; from 1778, court preacher; from 1783, royal confessor. ― Burrhum: Sextus Afranius Burrus, or Burrhus (a.d. 1–62), prefect of the Praetorian Guard; served together with Seneca as tutor to the young Nero and later as adviser to Nero as a grown man, where the two joined forces in attempting to moderate his violent, cruel rule; possibly died of poisoning by Nero. Burrus is not mentioned by Bastholm.― Senecam: Lucius Annaeus Seneca (4 b.c.– a.d. 65), Roman politician, author, and Stoic philosopher; ordered to commit suicide by the Emperor Nero in a.d. 65. Seneca is not mentioned by Bastholm. Recentiores explicarunt de exitio Hierosolymæ . . . hoc sumere sensu collectivo] Latin and Greek, “Recent [interpreters] have explicated this as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem; thus ὁ απολλύμενος [“the one who perishes”] refers to the people of Israel, namely, the Pharisaic rabbis, or the Flavian line (Titus and Vespasian), ὁ ϰατέχων [“the one who holds fast”] as referring specifically to the Christians among the Jews, who by their piety postponed the devastation for a time. This is refuted by (1) the context, which teaches that the topic is the ultimate judgment, the universal transformation of all things (and not the destruction of individual cities.) NB. Paul declines the nouns in the singular; accordingly, it is an arbitrariness to use them in the collective sense.” ― gens Flaviana (Titus et Vespasian): The Flavians were a Roman family of plebeian

•

P a p e r 17–18 1834–1835 •

345

origin that rose to prominence in the late republic and, during the empire, included Emperors Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian. ― Titus: Titus Flavius Vespasianus (a.d. 9–79), Roman emperor a.d.79–81; had previously commanded the Roman army in Judaea, where he conquered and destroyed Jerusalem in a.d. 70. Koppe expl: ο απολ. de omnibus impiis . . . 2) articulus ὁ] Reference to Koppe’s interpretations of 2 Thess 2:10 and 2:17 in “Paulli epistola utraque ad Thessalonicenses” (→ 56,4), pp. 80 and 76–77, respectively. Statuendum est . . . ne odium sibi contraheret] Latin and Greek, “It must be assumed that the apostle discussed the Thessalonians’ private affairs, and that these words should be understood as referring to two officials who were fighting each other, and perhaps ὁ ἀντιϰ[είμενος] [“the one opposing”] was the one with the greatest authority among the Thessalonians; for that reason, the apostle avoids clarity in order not to attract hatred to himself.” Sensus sic constituendus erit: . . . in medio reliquendus est] Latin, “The meaning should be constituted as follows: As you know, there is among us a man who is most inimical to the name of Christ; but there is another who defends his name, who if he is attacked, the impious one will immediately lay bare his plans.―But the Thessalonians’ private affairs are unknown to us. Nor is it surprising that Paul spoke obscurely of these affairs, as indeed the words themselves indicate that Paul had spoken to them about these affairs previously. This passage is therefore to be left undetermined.” On the words ευλογειν, ευλογητος, ευλογια and ϰαταρασϑαι, επιϰαταρατος] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of the title of D. J. Pott, Excursus 1, “De vocabulorum ευλογειν, ευλογητος, ευλογια, et ϰαταρασϑαι, επιϰαταρατος, ϰαταρα, in N. T. significatione” [On the Meaning of the Words ευλογειν, ευλογητος, ευλογια, and ϰαταρασϑαι, επιϰαταρατος, ϰαταρα, in the N. T.], in Epistolae Catholicae graece perpetua annotatione illustratae [The Catholic Epistles in Greek Illuminated with

20

23

28

6

64

346

9

10

11

15

20

21

Biblical Exegesis

Comprehensive Annotation], 2 vols. (Göttingen, 1790; abbreviated hereafter as Epistolae Catholicae graece), vol. 2, pp. 269–277; p. 269. David Julius Pott (1760–1838), German theologian; from 1786, privatdocent, from 1787, professor extraordinarius, and from 1788, professor ordinarius of theology at Helmstedt; from 1810, doctor of theology, professor, and councillor of the consistory in Göttingen. The true meaning of these words must be derived from the Hebrew: ‫ברך‬, ‫ברוך‬, ‫ברכה‬, ‫ארר‬, ‫קלל‬, ‫ארור‬, ‫ ]קללה‬Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the introduction to Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 269. 1. on ευλογ., ευλ. ευλ:] According to Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 270. These are used A about hum. beings . . . γ) greet one] Danish excerpt, with outlining added by Kierkegaard, of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 270. ― greet one: Pott’s words are: “vel denique salutare atque valedicere” (Latin, “or, finally, to greet or to say farewell”). α) They are used . . . particularly about the patriarchs . . . Lk 2:34. 1 Cor 4:12] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, pp. 270–271. ― the patriarchs: Refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, traditional patriarchs of the Israelites (see Gen 12–50). β) Mt 5:44. Lk 6:28. Acts 3:26. Rom 12:14. 1 Pet 3:9] Citation from Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 271. γ) This meaning, it seems to me . . . praying for something good is also present] See the following passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 271: “Tertia denique valedicendi significatio verbi ευλογειν, ‫ברך‬, deprehenditur . . . et ευλογημενος in ipsis salutandi formulis, beneprecandi tamen sensu, legitur.” (Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, “Finally, the third reading of the word ευλογειν is ‫ברך‬, to bid farewell . . . and ευλογημενος is read within the formula of greeting, indeed in the sense of wishing well.” Pott cites Lk 24:50–51 as an example of the former meaning and Lk 1:28, Lk 1:42, Mt 2:19, Mt

•

P a p e r 17–18 1834–1835 •

23:39, Mk 11:9–10, Lk 13:35, Lk 19:38, and Jn 12:13 as examples of the latter. ― Pott: → 64,6. From these different meanings of the verb, there naturally arise nouns] See the following passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 271: “Jam a varia hac verbi ευλογειν significatione nomen etiam ευλογιας similem significationis varietatem mutuatur, siquidem modo pro benedictione solo ore pronuntiata.” (Latin and Greek, “From these different meanings of the verb ἐυλογεῖν, there also obtain a similar variety of meanings of the noun ἐυλογία, albeit only for a blessing that is solely pronounced verbally.”) Pott cites Cor 10:16, Heb 12:17, and 1 Pet 3:9 as examples. ευλογια appears with an evil sense in Rom 16:18] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of a line in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 272. 2) on the hum. being over against God . . . on hum. beings in genrl Lk 1:64, 24:53. Jas 3:9, etc.] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 272. From this the word is ευλογητος . . . whether ϑεος is present or not] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 273. B. God is said ευλογειν] See Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 273, item 2. 1) hum. beings, i.e., he shows them acts of kindness . . . ευλογημενος του Θεου ‫ ברוך יי‬Mt 25:34] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, pp. 273–274. 2) bless other things . . . the opposing concepts. ϰαταρ. επιϰ] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 274. ― ϰαταρ. επιϰ: Pott in fact lists three Greek words, of which Kierkegaard notes only the first two: καταρᾶσθαι, επιϰατάρατος, and ϰατάρα (“curse”).

27

29

1

6

9

10

13

65

Baader's Dogmatics 20

21

23

24 25

27

66

1

2

A on hum. beings over against] See Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 275, item 1. 1) other hum. beings: Jas 3:9 Mt 5:44. Lk 6:28. Rom 12:4] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated excerpt from Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 275. 2) things. Mk 11:21] Excerpt from Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 275. B. about God] See Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 275, item 2. 1) hum. beings. here it means to punish. Mt 25:41. Gal 3:10, 3:13] Excerpt from Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, p. 276. 2) about things . . . Heb 6:7 about the earth . . . shall become unfruitful] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendering of a passage from Excursus 1 in Pott, Epistolae Catholicae graece (→ 64,6), vol. 2, pp. 276–277. Marheineke] Philip Konrad Marheineke (1780– 1846), German evangelical theologian; professor at Erlangen from 1805, at Heidelberg from 1807, at Berlin from 1811. Marheineke was strongly inspired by Hegel and was one of the most prominent representatives of Right Hegelian speculative theology. See Paper 1:1 in the present volume, with Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Marheineke’s Geschichte der teutschen Reformation. The full title is Geschichte der teutschen Reformation. Erster Theil. Von Dr. Philipp Marheineke Professor der Theologie an der Königl. Universität zu Berlin [History of the German Reformation, Part One: By Dr. Philipp Marheineke, Professor of Theology at the Royal University of Berlin] (Berlin, 1816). The entire work consists of four volumes, published in Berlin, 1816–1834. “der Skepticismus . . . mittelst eines Wissen[s] von Gott geltend machen kann.”] Citation from Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft [Principles of Christian Dogmatics as a Science], 2nd improved ed. (Berlin, 1827 [1819]; ASKB 644), p. 4. Kierkegaard does not capitalize the initial Der, writes Zweifel instead of Zweifeln, and omits irgend after mittelst.

•

P a p e r 18–21 1834–1838 •

347

Leaving aside the fact that this denial of evil . . . and thereby its truth] Kierkegaard’s condensed Danish rendering of a passage in Franz von Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik [Lectures on Speculative Dogmatics] 1 vol. in 5 pts. (Stuttgart, 1828–1838; ASKB 396), no. 1, p. 104. Franz Xaver von Baader (1765–1841) was a German Catholic philosopher and theologian; from 1826 professor at Munich. ― Leaving aside . . . contradicts: Baader writes: “Leaving aside the fact that this denial of evil directly contradicts the dogma of imputation, and conscience punishes lies as much as religion [does].” (A 3rd error is the Kantian . . . terminated in him.)] Variant: added. Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 1, p. 105. ― Kantian: Refers to Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), German philosopher; privatdocent, 1755–1769; professor at Königsberg from 1770.

9

6th lecture] Refers to “VI. Vorlesung” in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 32–36. The author justifies . . . the anthropological standpoint] Refers to the introduction to Baader’s sixth lecture in Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 32, where he writes: “After explaining, in the previous lectures, the reasons that led me to treat speculative theology in a separate lecture series . . . I now turn to listing the reasons that lead me, further, to adopt the anthropological standpoint for the propaedeutic component of this speculative theology as dogmatics.” 1) Hum. beings shall be God’s image . . . 2) That which from the fall of hum. beings and] Kierkegaard’s abruptly truncated Danish rendition of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 33. Where Kierkegaard breaks off, Baader writes: “the distortion and occlusion of the God-image in the human being arising . . . from the fall of man and his turning away from God and turning toward the world.” 1) This known and knowable other . . . 2) Or this other is something selfless, without feeling] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendition of a passage in

17

66

15

66

18

20

2

68

348

68

8

10

68

12

17

18 19

20

Baader's Dogmatics

Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 37. ― something selfless, without feeling: Baader continues: “. . . also nicht selber ein Auge, Ohr u. s. f.” (German, “thus not itself an eye, an ear, etc.”) This false Sucht . . . only mediat., by awakening another] Kierkegaard’s condensed Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 90. Deus est sphæra, cujus centrum ubique, circumferentia nusquam] Citation from Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 91. what I know I look at . . . my looking is free, active, non-neces[sitated]] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 42–43. intellig. spirit] Refers, presumably, to the following passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 53: “I say that the word ‘spirit’ here is taken in opposition to matter, as intelligent spirit, even though spiritual substance is otherwise understood as the immaterial substance into which immaterial mode of being there is led, or there proceeds, the same essence as that which is derived from material substantiality.” W = W] It is not known what the abbreviation “W” stands for. Nihil est in intellectu quod non ante fuit in sensu] Cited from Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 53. Baader then adds: “man meint hier den materiellen Sinn” (German, “this refers to the material sense”). See the next note. Nihil est in sensu, quod non fuit in intellectu] Citation from Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 53. In connection with the meaning of this formulation, Baader refers to the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel. See §8 in Hegel’s “Introduction” to Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], 2nd ed. (Heidelberg, 1827 [1817]), pp. 12–13; English translation: Hegel, The Encyclopedia

•

P a p e r 21–22 1837–1838 •

Logic, with the Zusätze: Part I of the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences with the Zusätze, ed. T. F. Geraets, W. A. Suchting, and H. S. Harris (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1991), p. 32: “There is an old saying that is usually (but falsely) attributed to Aristotle―as if it were supposed to express the standpoint of his philosophy: ‘Nihil est in intellectu, quod non fuerit in sensu.’ If speculative philosophy refused to admit this principle, that would have to be considered a misunderstanding. But, conversely, philosophy will equally affirm: ‘Nihil est in sensu, quod non fuerit in intellectu’―in the most general sense that the nous, and more profoundly the spirit, is the cause of the world, and more precisely that feelings concerning right, ethical life, and religion are feelings―and hence an experience―of the kind of content that has its root and its seat in thinking alone.” generatio unius―destructio alterius] Citation from Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 53. immateriell] Variant: added. Refers to the following passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 53–54: “Generatio unius destructio alterius, no matter whether this being is a self-oriented (intelligent) being or not; even if, in the latter case, it owes its immaterial [immaterielle] mode of being (simplicity) only to the first [kind of being], and accordingly is more accurately called a spiritualized being (spiritueux) than spirit (esprit).” Usteri] → 56,18. Indeed, von B[aader] claims that evil . . . p. 84 . . . through evil beings other than man] See, e.g., the fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth lectures in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 1, pp. 91–113, along with the following passage (ibid., no. 2, p. 84): “For just as one has no rational reason in the world to deny the presence of intelligent beings (apart from human beings) alongside the nonintelligent ones, so too one cannot deny the influence that the former exert on human beings in favorable as well as unfavorable ways; and human beings are all the more in need of protection and insurance against this latter influence, the more it asserts itself in a

22

22

4 6

69

Baader's Dogmatics

14

69

72

18

1

hidden and, as it were, enshrouded way.” ― v. B[aader]: → 66,9. ― von B[aader] claims: Variant: before “claims”, the word “nonetheless” has been deleted. Hum. creation may . . . be called an emanent production. . . if it presupposes a ground as [its] locus (p. 87), where is that found, then?] This refers to a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 86–87, containing the following passage, which Baader attributes to the fifth-century pagan neo-Platonist philosopher Proclus: “The union is that which is simultaneously causal and caused, and it is independent only because it never abandons itself, but proceeding from itself always returns to itself, which is not the case by emanent production, which persists apart from itself (in another ground, distinct from itself, thus already presupposed by it as a locus).” On this Baader remarks: “For this reason, the identity of being (homoousia) does not occur here either, and what is caused is only similar to the causal, or its image.” One must distinguish the fundamental essence . . . (mind, soul, body)] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 60. ― fundamental powers: Baader’s word is “Wurzelvermögen” (German, “root faculties”). The hum. being indeed went forth as comp[lete] . . . there came to be another for him] Kierkegaard’s abruptly truncated Danish rendition of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 61–62. ― God’s being: Baader writes: “die Selbheit Gottes” (German, “the self-ness of God”). ― spiritual: Baader writes: “vergeistigt” (German, lit., “spiritualized”). ― Instead of his div. spirit, there came to be another for him: Baader writes: “Instead of his divine spirit, there came to be another for him; instead of his true soul, there came to be another; and so also instead of his true body, another was assigned to him, with which he found himself led away from his prior, immaterial mode of being and into the material mode of being.”

•

P a p e r 22–24 1837–1838 •

349

Volume 3] Refers to Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3. The hum. being continually finds himself in . . . with non-intelligent natural beings] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendition of Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 8, with emphasis added by Kierkegaard. ― rapport: Baader writes: “Bezug (Rapport), Verhältnisse oder Gemeinschaft” (German, “reference (report), relation, or communion”). Of these 5, the one, namely the one to God, is central par excellence] While no such claim is made explicitly by Baader, a bit later―and in a different context―he does use the phrase “p. exc.,” i.e., “par excellence.” 2nd Lecture] Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, pp. 11–14. 3rd Lecture] Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, pp. 14–18. If . . . one were to object that theology . . . with the help of this gift . . . to carry our research further] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 14. Baader italicizes the words Gabe (“gift”) and Aufgabe (“task”). ― theology: Baader writes: “die Theologie (Dogmatik)” [German, “theology (dogmatics)”]. 1) One must not conflate . . . (Sabaismus)] Kierkegaard’s paraphrase of item 1 in the seventh lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, pp. 29–30. ― Sabaismus: Baader writes: “Sabaismus oder Gestirndienst” (German, “Sabaism, or star-worship”). 2) One must not believe . . . graphical or descriptive astronomy] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the introduction to item 2 in the seventh lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 30. 3) the merely descriptive familiarity with the stars, too . . . our optical instruments] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the introduction to item 3 in the seventh lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 30. 4) This astrology . . . religious significance . . . one or another cult] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the introduction to item 4 in the sev-

12 13

15

17 18 19

25

27

30

34

72

350

74

1

7

9

11

16

Baader's Dogmatics

enth lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 30. Baader italicizes the word Cultus (“cult”). ― religious: Variant: added. We distinguish freedom of choice or arbitrariness . . . fixed neither as good nor evil] Kierkegaard’s Danish paraphrase of the introduction to the seventeenth lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, pp. 84–85. The emphases are Kierkegaard’s own. ― upliftedness: Danish, opløftelse. The corresponding German word used by Baader is “Wiederaufhebung” (“reconciliation”). If all being . . . then nothing would have had a cause] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 104. Baader writes that this was demonstrated by Proclus (→ 69,14), among others. Then there would have been no science . . . (per causas scire)] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 2, p. 105. Baader writes that this was stated by Proclus (→ 69,14). Thus such a body moves . . . always reveals itself as the same] Kierkegaard’s free and abruptly truncated Danish rendition of the following passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 19: “So too such a body moves freely in this medium, inasmuch as it is carried everywhere by it or rests in it. This medium nowhere and never strikes him as another, even if it is always encountering him as other, and reveals itself everywhere as the same object as its object, and similarly as the [same] subject as its subject.” ein gottlose[s] Sein] May refer to a complaint about the present, comparatively godless state of humanity in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, pp. 32–33. See also no. 2, p. 15, as well as no. 4, p. 26, where Baader writes: “In order to be for itself and not for God, the created being ought also to be able to be absolutely from itself; but because it cannot do this, because it may wish to be godless [gottlos seyn], but cannot do so, it finds itself caught in this contradiction.”

•

P a p e r 24 1837–1838 •

X. The theologians have readily . . . every causality’s [triplicity] as such] Kierkegaard’s condensed Danish rendition of a passage from the tenth lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 40. ― because each in turn, passing over into one another, ends up in an action as joint activity: Danish, “da begge igjen gaaende i hver andre gaa ud i en Aktion som fælleds Virker.” Kierkegaard’s placement of the word igjen (“again” or “in turn”) differs from that in Baader, who writes: “da beide in einander gehend wieder in Eine Aktion als gemeinsamen Wirker ausgehen” (German, “because both, impinging on one another, again dissolve [i.e., dissolve in turn] into one action as joint operations”). Note that Baader also emphasizes the singularity of the resulting action, by capitalizing the E in Eine. Kierkegaard, however, does not correspondingly write een Aktion (“one action”), but merely en Aktion (“an action”). Thus he does not emphasize the word “one” by adding a second “e” to the Danish word for “one,” which is normally written en, with one “e,” though in Kierkegaard’s day, for emphasis, it could be written een, with two “e’s”―in modern Danish the same effect is achieved with an acute accent: én. What phys[ical] or natural philos. . . . stands within and above both. Whereby] Kierkegaard’s truncated Danish rendition of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 41.― Whereby: Corresponds to Baader’s word Wobei, with which he introduces his next point: “Wobei ich nur noch bemerke, daß . . .” (German, “On which note I would merely observe, moreover, that . . .”). The Imper[ative] of Knowledge] → 76,27. from a being’s given deformation to discover the error within the constitutive elements] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendition of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 52. The emphasis is Kierkegaard’s. ― deformation: Danish, Vanform. Baader writes, more bluntly: “Miß- oder Ungestalt” (German, “deformity or monstrosity”). ― error: Danish, Forkeerthed. Baader writes, more bluntly: “Entstellung und Versetzung” (German, “disfiguration and dislocation”).

18

1

10 12

76

Baader's Dogmatics 14

18

19

25

27

This proposition is already acknowledged . . . in certain configurations of its elements] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the opening line of the second footnote in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 53. ― This proposition: The footnote in question is appended to the following passage, pp. 52–53: “As for the first or natural philosophers, they take this natural form to be the primitive, solely possible and thus normative form, which is why they deny that there is any deformation in it, or try to explain such deformation away, and which is also why they cannot have any notion [reading Ahnung, “notion,” for Baader’s Ahndung, lit., “punishment”] that the composition of these material-temporal entities coincides with the displacement of their consitutive elements, or that the addition or loss of one of the latter [elements] does not compose it or make it simple, but rather merely the particular way in which these same elements are positioned or connected.” destructio unius―constructio alterius] Citation from Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 49. XIII. The word truth . . . static from dynamic being] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of the introduction to the thirteenth lecture in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 54. ― Plato: (427–347 b.c.) Greek philosopher, student of Socrates. This is contradicted by experience . . . indeed imposes itself] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 54. ― This is contradicted: Baader specifies: “Gegen diese Annahme einer Indifferenz des Erkannten gegen sein Erkanntsein . . .” (German, “Against this presumption of the indifference of the known to its being known . . .”). The imper[ative] of knowledge.―Ignorance can be a crime] Presumably refers to the following passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 55: “Hence it is a mistake if one, with Kant, does not admit an imperative of knowledge . . . On the contrary, one must acknowledge an ignorance whose crime

•

P a p e r 24–25 1837–1838 •

351

[Verbrechen] is not merely infirmity [Gebrechen, i.e., “a commanded knowledge”]. A triple relation . . . (mutual or one-sided nach oben nach unten] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 55. The logicians take it in the latter sense cognoscibile] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 55. ― cognoscibile: This word recurs a few lines later in Baader’s discussion regarding God “nur als ein Cognoscible” (German and Latin, “only as an object of knowledge”). They had no inkling of the fundamenta[l] truth . . . destined for this by an intelligence] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of a passage in Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik (→ 66,9), no. 3, p. 56. ― They: Baader writes of “mehrere Philosophen” (“multiple philosophers”), who “auf solche Weise von Gott als von einem unserm Erkennen exponirten wo nicht gar unterworfnen Objekt sprachen” (German, “spoke of God in the manner of an object illuminated by our knowledge, if not entirely subject to it”). ― a self-conscious (intelligent) being: Baader writes: “ein sich selber wissendes (intelligentes) Wesen” [German, “a being that knows itself (intelligent)”]. *] Variant: deleted by Kierkegaard, but restored by the editors of SKS. The Eleatics] The Eleatic School has its name from the Ionian Greek colony of Elea, today known as Velia, on the southwestern coast of Italy. It was founded ca. 540 b.c. by the philosopher Xenophanes of Colophon, who questioned the validity of human knowledge. Eleatic skepticism was further developed by Xenophanes’ friend and student, Parmenides of Elea (→ 78,9), and was then carried further by Parmenides’ students, especially by Zeno of Elea and the military commander Melissus of Samos. See W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826), vol. 1 (1799), pp. 150–209, esp. pp. 150–153. Parmenides] Eleatic philosopher (→ 78,9). Poul Martin Møller discusses Parmenides briefly in his “Udkast til Forelæsninger over den ældre

28

1

78

3

8 9

9

78

352

10

Biblical Exegesis

Philosophies Historie” [Draft of Lectures on the History of Ancient Philosophy], in Efterladte Skrifter af Poul M. Møller [Posthumous Writings of Poul M. Møller], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839– 1843; ASKB 1574–1576; abbreviated hereafter as Efterladte Skrifter), vol. 2, ed. F. C. Olsen (1842), pp. 328–329. See also → 78,18. pure being] See the following passage in a fragment from Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” given at the University of Copenhagen in the winter semester 1837–1838, published in his Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, ed. Christian Thaarup (1843), p. 350: “It has become customary, following the authority of Hegel, to regard pure being as the category on which the Eleatics’ worldview was based. Without deciding whether philosophy can properly be compared with this portion of the ontology (which must perhaps be denied from a strictly historical point of view), it is here noted in passing that τὸ ὄν [Greek, “what is”] in the Eleatics―instead of τὸ εἶναι [Greek, “what it is to be”]―at the very least does not correspond precisely to pure being or to what it is to be, inasmuch as the hypostasis implicit in the Greek word makes the concept more concrete than it here ought to be, according to its definition. The Danish Væren [“being”] is here more adequate than the corresponding words among many other cultivated nations. The French être is more ambiguous, for example, as is the German Seyn, which―at least when it is used with the definite article―is also used to designate the epitome of all that is.” See Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], ed. L. von Henning, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1833–1834 [1812–1816]; ASKB 552– 554), vol. 1.1 in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Works: Complete Edition], vols. 1–18 (Berlin, 1832–1845); vol. 3, ed. by L. von Henning (1833 [1812]; ASKB 552), pp. 77–78; Hegel, The Science of Logic, ed. and trans. George di Giovanni (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), p. 59: “Being, pure being―without further determination. In its indeterminate immediacy it is equal only to itself and also not unequal with respect to another; it has no difference

•

P a p e r 25 1837–1839 •

within it, nor any outwardly. If any determination or content were posited in it as distinct, or if it were posited by this determination or content as distinct from an other, it would thereby fail to hold fast to its purity. It is pure indeterminateness and emptiness.” See also the following remark on Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik, pp. 79–80; The Science of Logic, p. 61: “The Eleatics were the first to give voice to the simple thought of pure being―notable among them Parmenides, who declared it to be the absolute and sole truth. In his surviving fragments, he did it with the pure enthusiasm of thought which has for the first time apprehended itself in its absolute abstraction: only being is, and nothing is not absolutely.” it is universally valid] See the following passage in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, pp. 348–349: “As the beginning of all determinations of thought, the concept of being must be the most abstract of all; it does not permit different determinations to be distinguished within it as its content; it is entirely simple and indissoluble. Accordingly, it is impossible to offer any definition of it in the usual sense of the word definition. For that would demand that a more abstract concept be provided under which it could be subsumed; but then that concept would need to be regarded as a more proper starting-point for ontological thought than the concept of being. The concept of being is defined solely by its place in the entire system of the categories. A consequence of being’s abstract nature is its universal validity.” most general] See the following passage in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, pp. 348–349: “Everything that admits of definition by means of another category, as cause, effect, or substance, etc., also admits of definition by means of this most general concept upon which all of them are based. Whenever one of the more concrete categories is predicated of a subject, being is indirectly predicated of it; conversely, with pure being not a single one of the other determinations of thought is [also] expressed of a subject.”

11

12

Biblical Exegesis 12 12

13

14

simple] → 78,11. immed.] See the following line in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, p. 347: “Because ontology is here presented without its scientific-scholarly introduction, the concept of being is here taken as immediate.” not a disti[n]ction as if it were something objective] See the following passage in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, p. 349: “Because being abstractly encompasses all actuality, and is included in all other determinations of thought about actuality, the concept is thought of incorrectly if it is regarded as a contrast to thinking. For, in accordance with its immediate meaning, the word [“being”] can also be understood in that manner. But [when it is understood] in accordance with the all-encompassing meaning that is here attributed to being, it applies both to everything subjective and to everything objective. Thinking, too, falls under the determination ‘being.’ As the transition to real thinking, or as the beginning of that transition, being is at the same time both determination and non-determination. This contradiction means that one cannot remain standing at this concept, but is driven away from it to other concepts by which it is to be completed. By making use of a couple of different approaches, we will attempt to produce a clearer consciousness of the need/impulse toward a more specific definition, which comes along with the concept of being.” copula without predicate or subj[ect]] See the following passage in “A. Being” in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, p. 349: “Being can be regarded as the mere copula with an entirely undetermined subject that is seeking its predicate. This asserts neither that something is nor what it is. x is x is the formula by which this complete lack of determinateness can be articulated. With this reflection―that from the form of the statement we can only have the copula ‘―is―,’ it becomes very

•

P a p e r 25 1837–1839 •

353

clear that we are concerned with an unfinished thought that requires its supplement.” to that extent it is nothing] See the following passage in “A. Being” in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, p. 349: “Completely undetermined being is still nothing. One is entitled to express oneself like this even in immediate language usage. That which cannot be defined by any predicate, that which is not anything, is nothing. (This is one of many senses in which the word ‘nothing’ can be taken.)” emerges from the lack] See the following passage in “A. Being” in Poul Martin Møller’s unfinished lectures on “Ontology or the System of the Categories,” in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 3, pp. 349–350: “The ontological movement of thought in fact only first begins with the consideration that being is nothing, or, rather, that it is at this point nothing for us. As with every movement, it presupposes, as it were, two points: one from which the movement starts out, and one to which it goes. Through this movement, it is brought to determinate consciousness that there is a lack or void in the concept of being. [‘]Nothing[’] here designates the vacant place for a predicate. [‘] Pure being is nothing[’] means the same as [‘]to be is still nothing unless it is thought of as being something.[’] Something is hence the new category that takes the place of nothing; only when I have uttered the sentence ‘Being is something’ have I made clear progress in thinking.” boundary] See Poul Martin Møller’s “Udkast til Forelæsninger over den ældre Philosophies Historie” [Draft of Lectures on the History of Ancient Philosophy], in Efterladte Skrifter (→ 78,9), vol. 2, pp. 273–527, esp. p. 331, where he writes of Parmenides’ knowledge of pure being: “One of Parmenides’ propositions about what is seems strange at first glance. He says: ‘it is not (ἀτελεύτητον [Greek, “unbounded”] ἄπειρον [Greek, “infinite”]), because it does not lack anything,’ not even the boundary, ‘but it is only the not-being that lacks everything.’―This must surely mean that it is not undefined; one does not think of it properly by setting and removing boundaries for it in an indefinite series. Implicit in

15

17

18

354

21

Biblical Exegesis

this is the correct thought that the eternal must not be thought by addition―Hegel’s: the bad, popular infinity;―it must be thought as having its boundary in itself―it includes everything in itself, and has nothing outside itself; it has no being and no non-being outside itself, but is indeed complete in itself. Necessity (ἀνάγϰη, δίϰη [Greek, “necessity,” “law”]) constrains it within bonds of the limitation and encloses around it.” This is what Heiberg calls infinite conclusions] Refers to a passage in §144 in Heiberg’s 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), pp. 90–91; 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), p. 165: “With respect to quality, judgments are purportedly able to be positive, negative, and infinite. But every judgment is positive, for the universal, under which the individual is subsumed, is determined either positively or negatively, so that the subsumption itself is always a positive act. Moreover, the difference between the positive and the negative has proved to be a difference of reflection, in which each is only what the other is, so that the negative predicate is always a positive determination of the subject. The negative judgments are therefore positive. This is the case with respect to so-called ‘infinite judgments,’ where subject and predicate belong to mutually exclusive spheres, and therefore no subsumption or judgment can take place but only a proposition, and a meaningless one at that (for example, the proposition mentioned in connection with the law of contradiction: ‘An elephant is not a cube root.’).” See also §142, p. 88 (English translation, p. 161), where Heiberg writes: “Insofar as the thing and its properties are more concrete determinations than something and another, subject and predicate must be classed with the former rather than with the latter. But insofar as the former are determinations of reflection, in

•

P a p e r 25 1837–1839 •

which the one member is not the other, but has the other, whereas in the Concept no sublation or transition takes place, but every member is the whole Concept . . . and is immediate Being . . . , then subject and predicate are reduced to immediacy’s determinations of something and another. The predicate is thus attributed to the subject as immediate being, i.e., with the help of the word ‘is,’ the so-called ‘copula.’ Hereby arises the judgment, which consists in the fact that the subject is posited as being other than itself. In other words, the subject is the predicate, which means that the individual is the universal . . . or that the universal, on account of its wider scope, subsumes (includes) the individual.” Finally, see also the following statements in §144, p. 92 (English translation, p. 167): “The inference [Danish, Slutningen, alternatively, “the conclusion”] is immediately contained in [the] judgment, and it does not need to be developed to what it already is.” And see, as well, §145, p. 93 (English translation, p. 168): “The judgment is thus already in itself an inference [en Slutning, alternatively, “a conclusion”], and the inference [Slutningen, alternatively, “the conclusion”] is the complete judgment or the truth of the judgment.” ― 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. The abstract beginning] See, e.g., §26 in Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie (→ 78,21), p. 11 (English translation, p. 55): “If one abstracts from every determination in everything―which is necessary in order to exclude all presuppositions, for here it is a matter of reaching a beginning which is the abstract immediate―then only one

23

Biblical Exegesis thing remains from which one cannot abstract further because it is itself without presupposition and is consequently the abstract immediacy or beginning. This one thing is being in general or abstract or absolute beginning, the utmost abstraction from everything.” See also §14 and §15, p. 7 (English translation, pp. 49–50), where it is stated that the first of the three moments in the philosophical method is “the immediate,” and that this “first member in the triad, the immediate, is the abstract.” See also Heiberg’s review of W. H. Rothe’s Læren om Treenighed og Forsoning [The Doctrine of the Trinity and Reconciliation] (Copenhagen, 1836), in the journal Perseus, ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 1 (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 569), pp. 35–37; available in English as “Review of Dr. Rothe’s Doctrine of the Trinity and Reconciliation,” trans. Jon Stewart, in Heiberg’s “Perseus” and Other Texts (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum, 2011), pp. 109–111, where Heiberg states that “ ‘the beginning’ of philosophy” will here be understood as “the beginning of the philosophical system,” namely, “doubt,” and then refers to the fact that the first moment in the Hegelian triad is “immediacy.” It follows that “the immediacy which is . . . absolute” is “the system’s absolute beginning,” which is “being = nothing.” Heiberg then continues, on p. 37 (English translation, p. 110): “Thus, a demand is made on philosophy that its origin or beginning should be both given and not given. This demand is fulfilled with being = nothing. On the basis of the identity of being and nothing both are the same original thing; but as being it is given, and as nothing it is not given.” The source of this being that is given to philosophy is “the immediate knowledge which is the mother of philosophy,” and the concept of being is received from God and only from Him, for he is “being in all becoming.” Heiberg continues: “Indeed, being, with which logic begins, is none other than God’s own existence, even though the system makes it unrecognizable by reducing it to the abstract determination of being in general because it otherwise could not be identical with the presuppositionless beginning: nothing.”

•

P a p e r 25–26 1837–1839 •

355

They blamed religion. With respect to actions . . . common civic-moral life] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the following passage in Schleiermacher (→ 39,1), Ueber die Religion. Reden an die Gebildeten unter ihren Verächtern, 4th ed., corresponding to the 3rd expanded ed. of 1821 (Berlin, 1831 [1799]; see ASKB 271, the 5th ed., Berlin, 1843) p. 67; English translation, Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers, trans. John Oman (London, 1893), p. 57: “In the first place, you charge religion with causing not infrequently in the social, civil, and moral life, improper, horrible, and even unnatural dealings.” His argumentation . . . the one belongs to feeling, the other to action] Refers to the following passage (which appears in continuation of the passage cited in the preceding note) from Schleiermacher, Ueber die Religion (→ 78,28), p. 67; On Religion, p. 57: “But in the very utterance of your accusation, you separate religion and morality. Do you mean then that religion is immorality, or a branch of it? Scarcely, for your war against it would then be of quite another sort, and you would have to make success in vanquishing religion a test of morality. With the exception of a few who have shown themselves almost mad in their mistaken zeal, you have not yet taken up this position. Or do you only mean that piety is different from morality, indifferent in respect of it, and capable therefore of accidentally becoming immoral? Piety and morality can be considered apart, and so far they are different. As I have already admitted and asserted, the one is based on feeling, the other on action.” 2) such actions, which have no significance for sensibility, none for morality] Refers to the following passage in Schleiermacher, Ueber die Religion (→ 78,28), p. 71; On Religion, p. 60: “There are, however, other actions you often speak of. The distinct purpose of them is to produce religion. Being of no importance for morality, they are not moral, and being of no importance for sense, they are not immoral, but they are nevertheless disastrous, because they accustom man to attach himself to what is void and to value what is worthless. Let them be ever so inane and

28

78

31

2

79

356

7

79

24 26

82

1

3

Biblical Exegesis

meaningless, they, far too often, take the place of moral action or hide its absence.” Some are of the view that, if imagination . . . what is great and majestic in nature] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated Danish rendition of the following passage in Schleiermacher, Ueber die Religion (→ 78,28), p. 79; On Religion, p. 66: “The next thing to meet us in corporeal nature is its material boundlessness, the enormous masses which are scattered over illimitable space and which circulate in measureless orbits. Many hold that the exhaustion of the imagination, when we try to expand our diminished pictures of them to their natural size, is the feeling of the greatness and majesty of the Universe.” “to the Jew first and then to the pagan,” . . . in the 16th verse] Cited freely from Rom 1:16. in other passages . . . Abraham as πρωτοτυπος for the Xn] See, e.g., Rom 4:1–25. ― πρωτοτυπος: This word does not appear in Paul’s Epistles. the doctrine of predestination] The dogma of predestination, which has assumed various forms in the Church’s history and maintains that God (either from all eternity or since the Fall) has predestined every individual human being either for eternal salvation or eternal damnation. Scriptural sources for the doctrine include Rom 8:28–30 and Eph 1:5, where the Greek verb προορίζειν (“to determine beforehand”) is employed; this verb is translated in the Latin Vulgate as praedestinare (“predestine”). προϑεσιν] See the article “Πρόϑεσις ” [Proposition], in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 336, where two definitions are given: “1) propositio, appositio, exponere in conspectu, vel in ordine et serie, Aufstellung, Ausstellung” [Latin and German, “1) proposition, setting before one, to bring for consideration, in an order or in a series, disposition, exposition”], with reference, e.g., to Mt 12:4, Mk 2:26, and Lk 6:4; and “2) propositum, decretum, consilium, sive voluntas quatenus proponit, decernit” [Latin, “2) plan, decree, decision, to the extent that one proposes or decides a thing”], with reference, e.g., to Acts 27:13, Rom 8:29, and Rom 9:11.

•

P a p e r 26–29 1839–1840 •

Usteri p. 265 . . . which ones should partake of the salvation, and which not] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendition of the following excerpt from Usteri, Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes (→ 56,18), pp. 265–266: “Now, because not all of the people to whom the gospel was preached seized the salvation offered to them, the question became unavoidable how the emergence of faith, through which the human being could take part in the kingdom of God, would be arranged, that is, according to what principle would the kingdom of God expand.” Usteri then remarks that the only “authentically didactic” scriptural text on this matter is Rom 9–11. Compare Kierkegaard’s exegesis of Rom 9–16 in KK:7, from 1839–1840, in KJN 2, 330–339.

12

82

Ps 69:26] In Acts 1:20, Peter cites two passages from Psalms: “For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his homestead become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘Let another take his position of overseer.’ ” The former citation evidently derives from Ps 69:26 (in some editions, Ps 69:25): “May their camp be a desolation; let no one live in their tents.” For the latter citation, → 82,25. Davides] Greek, Δαυίδης, the Greek version of the name of King David (ca. 1000–960 b.c.), who is traditionally regarded as the author of the Book of Psalms, even though his name only appears in connection with 73 of the book’s 150 psalms. the ancients held, with respect to Xt] A reference to the Messianic or Christological interpretation of Ps 69. See the outline of Ps 69 in the 1740 Danish translation of the Bible, which was the authorized version in Kierkegaard’s day: “(I) The Messiah prays to his Father for salvation from his heavy sufferings, 2–22. (II) For vengeance against his evil and obdurate enemies, 23–29. (III) Prays for help, and will therefore praise God; yes, many shall be converted and praise God, who shall abide and benefit his Zion, 30–37.” Mt 27:34] In the account of the crucifixion at Mt 27:34, Jesus is offered “wine to drink, mixed with gall.” See Ps 69:22 (in some editions, Ps 69:21): “They gave me poison [Hebrew, ֹ ‫ ]ׁשאר‬for food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink”;

19

82

19

21

23

Biblical Exegesis

24

25

83

2

2 2

3

4

in the Septuagint edition of this verse, the “poison” is specified as gall (Greek, χολή), the same word as in Mt 27:34. αυτου] The text of the original Hebrew and Septuagint editions identifies the encampment not as “his” but “theirs,” namely, ‫“( ִט ָירתָ ם‬their encampment”) and ἔπαυλις αὐτῶν (“their encampment”); hence Kierkegaard writes “plural in the text.” Ps 109:8. the same. ‫ ]פְ קֻ דָ ה‬The latter of Peter’s two citations from Psalms in Acts 1:20 (→ 82,19) evidently derives from Ps 109:8: “Let another take his position of overseer [Hebrew, ‫]פְ קֻ דָ ה‬.” The Greek word for “position” or “office” here―both in Acts 1:20 and in the Septuagint version of Ps 109:8―is ἐπισκοπή. Joel 3] Refers to Joel 3:1–5, which in some editions of the Bible appear as Joel 2:28–32. In Acts 2:17–21, these verses are cited by Peter in his speech to the crowd at Pentecost. απο του πν.] The phrase ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός appears in both Acts 2:17 and 2:18. in the text my spirit, hence not partial] This refers to the fact that the Hebrew phrase ‫אֶ ת־רּוחִ י‬ (“my spirit”) (Joel 3:1 and 3:2, in some editions Joel 2:28 and 2:29) includes the Hebrew object marker ‫אֶ ת־‬, indicating that “my spirit” as an entirety is the object of the verb ‫“( ְךֹו ּׁפְשֶא‬I will pour out”), i.e., “I will pour out my spirit.” In the Septuagint text, however, as in Acts 2:17 and 2:18 (which cite these verses from Joel), the Greek wording is ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου (lit., “I will pour out from my spirit”) which might be taken to suggest that God is only pouring out part of his spirit. εσχαταις ημ ‫ ]אֲ חַ ֵרי־כֵן‬Refers to a difference between Acts 2:17 and the verse that it is quoting, namely, Joel 3:1 (in some editions, Joel 2:28). The verse from Joel begins: “And it will happen afterwards [Hebrew, ‫ ]אֲחַ ֵרי־כֵן‬that . . .” while the citation of that verse in Acts 2:17 begins: “In the last days [Greek, ‘ἐν ταῖς ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις’] it will be . . .” In the Septuagint version of the verse from Joel, the corresponding phrase is μετὰ ταῦτα (Greek, “after these things”). v. 18 μου is added in LXX] In Acts 2:18, Peter cites Joel: “Even upon my slaves, both men and

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

357

women [Greek, ἐπὶ τοὺς δούλους μου καὶ ἐπὶ τὰς δούλας μου, lit., “upon my male slaves and upon my female slaves”] in those days I will pour out my spirit.” This evidently refers to Joel 3:2 (in some editions, Joel 2:29): “Even on the male and female slaves [Hebrew, ‫ ]עַל־הָ עֲבָ ִדים וְ עַל־הַ ְּׁשפָחֹות‬in those days, I will pour out my spirit.” Note that the slaves, here, are not identified as “mine.” In the Septuagint (→ 37,5), however, the first phrase of Joel 3:2 / 2:29 appears in Greek as follows: ἐπὶ τοὺς δούλους μου ϰαὶ ἐπὶ τὰς δούλας (“upon my male slaves and upon the female slaves”), with the word μου (“mine”) after τοὺς δούλους (lit., “the male slaves”), though not after τὰς δούλας (“the female slaves”). ― LXX: The Septuagint (→ 37,5). v. 20 επιϕανη] Greek citation from Acts 2:20. v. 21 Rom 10:13] Both Rom 10:13 and Acts 2:21, the verse that Kierkegaard is evidently reviewing here, include citations from Joel 3:5 (in some editions, 2:32). Ps 16:8. by the ancients . . . he hopes not to die] At Acts 2:25–28, Peter cites Psalms as containing a prophecy regarding Jesus: “For David says concerning [Jesus], ‘I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand so that I will not be shaken.’ ” This evidently refers to Ps 16:8–11: “I keep the Lord always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.’ ” Ps 16:10, in particular, reads as follows: “For you do not give me up to Sheol, or let your faithful one see the Pit.” In Acts 2:27, Peter renders this line as a promise that Jesus will be resurrected: “For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One experience corruption.” v. 26 γλωσσα ‫בֹודי‬ ִ ְ‫ ]כ‬The Greek portion alludes to Acts 2:27, while the Hebrew is cited from Ps 16:10. Acts 13:35] Both Acts 13:35 and Acts 2:27, the verse that Kierkegaard is evidently reviewing here, include citations from Ps 16:10. Ps 110:1. Mt 22:44. Heb 1:12] At Mt 22:43–44, Jesus asks: “How is it then that David by the Spirit calls him Lord, saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet?” ’ ” This is evidently a reference to Ps 110:1: “The Lord says to my

6 7

8

11

14

15

358

17

17

20

Biblical Exegesis

lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’ ” With regard to “Heb 1:12,” Kierkegaard is presumably thinking of Heb 1:13―“But to which of the angels has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?’ ”―which also includes what is evidently a citation from Ps 110:1. Ps 110:1 is also cited in Acts 2:34–35, the verses that Kierkegaard is evidently reviewing here: “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.” ’ ” Deut 18:15, 18:18] At Acts 3:22–23, Peter cites Moses: “Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you from your own people a prophet like me. You must listen to whatever he tells you. And it will be that everyone who does not listen to that prophet will be utterly rooted out of the people.’ ” This evidently refers to Deut 18:15―“The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you shall heed such a prophet”―and Deut 18:18–19: “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command. Anyone who does not heed the words that the prophet shall speak in my name, I myself will hold accountable.” the moderns understand as referring to the whole prophetic order] See, e.g., the commentary on Acts in Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar (→ 26,1), vol. 2, p. 687, where Olshausen writes: “According to the context, the passage first refers to the prophetic order as a whole; but in the Messiah, the character of the prophetic order appears in its highest, most absolute completion, and therefore this passage, too, refers in its highest and final sense to him.” Ps 2:1–2] At Acts 4:25–26, the followers of Jesus pray to God: “It is you who said by the Holy Spirit through our ancestor David, your servant: ‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the peoples imagine vain things? The kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers have gathered together against the Lord and against his Messiah.’ ” This

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

evidently refers to Ps 2:1–2: “Why do the nations conspire, and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and his anointed [Hebrew, ‫ֹוח ׁיִשְמ‬, lit., “his anointed one,” “his Messiah”].” See also Isa 45:1, cited at → 84,18. Some as about David, some as about Solomon] For an interpretation referring to David, see, e.g., H.A.W. Meyer, Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Apostelgeschichte [Critical Exegetical Manual on the Apostolic History] (Göttingen, 1835), pp.70– 71. For an interpretation referring to Solomon, ca. 965–926 b.c., son of King David (→ 82,19) and Bathsheba, no source has been identified. ― about Solomon: Variant: added. Gen 12:1] At Acts 7:3, Stephen states: “And [God] said to [Abraham], ‘Leave your country and your relatives and go to the land that I will show you.’ ” This is evidently a citation from Gen 12:1: “Now the Lord said to Abram: ‘Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you.’ ” Am 5:25. σϰηνην του Μολοχ] At Acts 7:42–43, Stephen cites Amos: “as it is written in the book of the prophets: ‘Did you offer to me slain victims and sacrifices forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel? No; you took along the tent of Moloch, and the star of your god Rhemphan, the images that you made to worship; so I will remove you beyond Babylon.’ ” This evidently refers to Am 5:25–27: “Did you bring to me sacrifices and offerings the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel? You shall take up Sakkuth [or Sikkuth], your king, and Kiyyun [or Kaiwan], your star-god, your images which you made for yourselves; therefore I will take you into exile beyond Damascus, says the Lord, whose name is the God of hosts.” ‫]סכּות מַ לְ כְ כֶם‬ ִ Cited from Am 5:26. It is possible to read the verse as “Sakkuth [or Sikkuth], your king,” or as “the tent [i.e., sukkah, “tabernacle”] of your king.” nomen proprium] While the Hebrew Bible reads ‫סּכּות מַ לְ ּכְ כֶם‬, ִ the Septuagint understands the word ‫ מַ לְ ּכְ כֶם‬as referring not to the indefinite “a king” (‫)מֶ לְֶך‬, but to the proper name of the pagan god Μολόχ (Moloch).

20

2

3

3

5

84

Biblical Exegesis 5

9

12 13

14

16

18

v. 43. . . . for in the text ‫ כִ יּון צַ לְ מֵ יכֶם‬comes first, and only thereafter αστρον του ϑεου] Refers to the fact that, whereas Acts 7:43 has the following order―“τὸ ἄστρον τοῦ ϑεοῦ ὑμῶν ῾Ρεμϕὰν τοὺς τύπους, οὓς ἐποιήσατε προςϰυνεῖν αὐτοῖς” (Greek, “. . . the star of your God Rhemphan, the images that you made to worship”), Am 5:26 has the opposite order, namely: ‫אֱֹלהֵ יכֶם אֲשֶ ׁר ע ֲִשׂיתֶ ם ָלכֶם‬ ‫( וְ אֵ ת כִ ּּיּון צַ לְ מֵ יכֶם ּכֹוכַב‬Hebrew, “and Kiyyun, your images, the star of your gods, which you made for yourselves”). ‫ כיּון‬as a proprium . . . translated it as Ρεμϕαν, a Coptic name for Saturn] Kierkegaard’s free rendering of a passage from the article “Ρεμϕάν” [Remphan] (Coptic name for Saturn; in the NRSV translation of Acts 7:43 it is spelled “Rephan”), in Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum (→ 23,20), vol. 2, p. 382. ― Saturn: On the planet Saturn regarded as a divinity, see Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 22,1), vol. 2, pp. 455–457, to whom Bretschneider refers. προςϰυνειν αυτοις is not found in the text] → 84,5. the last words are from an entirely different passage] Refers to the final phrase of Acts 7:43 (→ 84,3), ϰαὶ μετοιϰιῶ ὑμᾶς ἐπέϰεινα Βαβυλῶνος (Greek, “so I will remove you beyond Babylon”). the text reads: “I will exile you to the other side of Damascus.”] A reference to the first half-verse of Am 5:27 (→ 84,3). Isa 66:1–2] At Acts 7:48–50, Stephen cites Isaiah: “. . . as the prophet says: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is my place of rest? Did not my hand make these things?’ ” This evidently refers to Isa 66:1–2: “Thus says the Lord: Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, and what is my resting place? All these things my hand has made, and so all these things are mine, says the Lord. But this is the one to whom I will look, to the humble and contrite in spirit, who trembles at my word.” Isa 53:7–8] Acts 8:32–33 depicts an Ethiopian eunuch reading the following text from the book of Isaiah: “Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before the shearer, so he

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

359

does not open his mouth. In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.” This evidently refers to Isa 53:7–8: “. . . like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By a perversion of justice he was taken away. Who could have imagined his future? For he was cut off from the land of the living . . .” The Hebrew of Isa 53:8 has ambiguities that support a variety of translations, and at the end of this entry, Kierkegaard attempts his own. The first Hebrew phrase of the first half-verse, ‫מֵ עֹ צֶ ר לֻּקָ ח‬ ‫ּומ ִּמ ְׁשּפָט‬, ִ literally means “he was taken from oppression and from judgment”; Kierkegaard renders this as “he is taken from anxiety and judgment” (→ 85,8). The first phrase of the second half-verse, ‫חַ ּיִים נִגְ זַר מֵ אֶ ֶרץ‬, literally means “he was exiled living from the land,” or perhaps “[his] life was exiled from the land”; Kierkegaard renders this as “he is separated from the land of the living” (→ 85,10), following a traditional reading in which the last two words, ‫חַ ּיִים מֵ אֶ ֶרץ‬, are taken as a variant of the much more common phrase ‫“( חַ ּיִים אֶ ֶרץ‬land of [the] living”) (see e.g., the many occurrences at Ezek 32:23–32). the part of Isa[iah] . . . chap. 40 . . . to 66 . . . by of the moderns . . . here a certain ‫ ]יי עֶבֶ ד‬Paraphrase of the mainstream argument for the “modern” view of Isa 40–66, as it is found, for example, in §208, “Unächtheit des zweiten Theils der ihm zugeschribenen Weissagungen” [Inauthenticity of the Second Half of the Prophecies Attributed to Him], pt. 3, sec. 2, chap. 1, “Isaiah,” in W.M.L. de Wette, Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die kanonischen und apokryphischen Bücher des Alten Testamentes [Textbook for a Historical-Critical Introduction to the Old and New Testaments of the Bible], 2 vols., 4th enl. ed. (Berlin, 1833–1834 [1817–1826]; ASKB 80; abbreviated hereafter as Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung), vol. 1, pp. 261–265. Special reference is made in de Wette to §525, “Im Jesaias finden sich Stücke von sehr später Abfassung” [In Isaiah There Are Passages of Much Later Composition] in J. G. Eichhorn, Einleitung ins Alte Testament [Introduction to the Old Testament], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1780–1783), vol.

18

360

25

Biblical Exegesis

3, pp. 83–97, where Eichhorn argues for the view that Isa 40–60 presupposes the Babylonian exile and was written later than the first thirty-nine chapters. De Wette also refers to J. Chr. W. Augusti, Grundriss einer historisch-kritischen Einleitung in’s alte Testament [Outline of HistoricalCritical Introduction to the Old Testament] (Leipzig, 1806), §204, pp. 246–247; L. Bertholdt, Historischkritische Einleitung in sämmtliche kanonische und apokryphische Schriften des alten und neuen Testaments [Historical-Critical Introduction to All the Canonical and Apocryphal Writings of the Old and New Testaments], 6 vols. (Erlangen, 1812–1819), vol. 4 (1814), pp. 1374–1385; and Wilhelm Gesenius, Philologisch-kritischer und historischer Commentar über den Jesaia [PhilologicalCritical and Historical Commentary on Isaiah], vols. 1.1–1.2 and vol. 2 (Leipzig, 1821; abbreviated hereafter as Commentar über den Jesaia), vol. 2, pp. 1– 35. (Vol. 2, which covers Isa 40–66, also appeared as vol. 3 in Der Prophet Jesaia. Uebersetzt und mit einem vollständigen philologisch-kritischen und historischen Commentar begleitet [The Prophet Isaiah: Translated and Accompanied by a Complete Philological-Critical and Historical Commentary], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1820–1821).) ― the Exile: A reference to the mass deportation of Israelites and Judeans―thenceforth known as Jews―from Jerusalem and its surroundings by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylonia in 597 and 587–586 b.c. ― Hierusalem: Transcription of the Greek name for Jerusalem, ῾Ιερουσαλήμ. ― Cyrus: Cyrus the Great, founder of the ancient Persian Empire, ruled 559–529 b.c., conquered Babylon in 539 b.c. Following his conquest of Babylon, he faced high expectations that he would release the many Jews who had been exiled by the Babylonians. These expectations, which Cyrus met, are reflected in Isa 40–66: in 44:28, Cyrus is called the Lord’s shepherd; in 45:1, he is called the Lord’s anointed (Hebrew, ‫ֹוח ׁיִשְמ‬, lit., “his anointed one,” “his Messiah”); see also Ps 2:2, cited at → 83,20. ― ‫יי עֶ בֶ ד‬: Kierkegaard has reversed the order of the Hebrew words. all the ancients regard as Xt] See, e.g., the section on the Messianic interpretation of “the Lord’s servant” in Gesenius, Commentar über den Jesaia

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

(→ 84,18), vol. 2, pp. 160–162, where Gesenius first describes how the NT doctrine of Christ’s death as constituting a sacrifice and reconciliation reflects the influence of this passage on “the Lord’s servant,” and then writes that the early Church regarded this passage “even more definitely than the NT as a prophetic depiction of the fate of Jesus, and as the classic OT passage on the doctrine of sacrificial death and reconciliation.” Gesenius then cites Origen (ca. 185–ca. 254), Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150–215), and Lactantius (ca. 250–325) as having understood the passage as referring to Christ. See also Calvin’s strongly Christological account of Isa 53:7–8 in his interpretation of Acts 8:32–33 in Ioannis Calvini in Novum Testamentum commentarii (→ 34,16), pp. 164–166. to this it is objected that Xt is never called this elsewhere] Compare, e.g., Gesenius, Commentar über den Jesaia (→ 84,18), vol. 2, p. 163: “The name God’s servant never appears with reference to the Messiah.” in the passage itself, it is sometimes Cyrus] → 84,18. throughout the entire passage . . . the moderns . . . others as referring to the prophets in general] These views are presented by Gesenius in Commentar über den Jesaia (→ 84,18), vol. 2, pp. 10–12 and 16–17; on pp. 164–169, where he discusses the interpretation of “the Lord’s servant” as the Jewish people; as well as in his notes to Isa 53:8 on p. 183. The same views are also found in commentaries on Acts 8:32–33 such as that of H. Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar (→ 26,1), vol. 2, p. 746. ― the people of Israel 44:1: Isa 44:1, where “the Lord’s servant” is understood as (in God’s voice) “Jacob my servant, Israel, whom I have chosen.” In addition to Isa 44:1, de Wette also cites Isa 41:8–9, 42:19, 44:21, 45:4, and 5:20 in his Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung (→ 84,18), pp. 261–262. ― the prophets in general: In Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung (→ 84,18), p. 262, de Wette cites Isa 42:1, 44:26, 49:3–5, 52:13, and 53:11 as passages in which “the Lord’s servant” is understood as referring to “the prophet.”

25

26 28

Biblical Exegesis 85

6

8

10

the author Pseudo-Isaiah] Gesenius repeatedly refers to the author of Isa 40–66 as “PseudoIsaiah”; see, e.g., his Commentar über den Jesaia (→ 84,18), vol. 2, pp. 26 and 164. At p. 171, Gesenius discusses the view that “the Lord’s servant” was understood as referring to the prophet Isaiah himself. v. 33 in the text: but he is removed from anxiety and from judgment] A translation of the beginning of the first half-verse of Isa 53:8 (→ 84,18), cited in Acts 8:33. he is separated from the land of the living] A translation of the beginning of the second halfverse of Isa 53:8 (→ 84,18), cited in Acts 8:33.

•

P a p e r 29 1839–1840 •

361

Notes for Paper 30–Paper 47 “Philosophica. Older”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Hermann Deuser Quotations and References checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

364

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Philosophica. Older” is no. 434 in B-cat. and belongs to the portion of the papers that upon Kierkegaard’s death lay in “a large cardboard box” marked “A” and with the inscription “Journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). Papers 32, 33, and 34 have been lost; their texts have been transmitted indirectly in H. P. Barfod’s edition Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The preserved manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Of the eighteen papers, of which the first (Paper 30) is the cover sheet, thirteen bear dates that cover the period from April 15, 1834 (Paper 31) to February 1837 (Paper 46). In Paper 31, Kierkegaard concerns himself with the Church in a way that recalls his discussion of Grundtvig’s ecclesiology in the spring of 1835 (see Paper 69 in the present volume). The contents of Paper 36 are similar to those in AA:13, which is dated October 17, 1835, where Kierkegaard is concerned with the relation between philosophy and Christianity (see KJN 1, 25–26). The first of the two short entries in Paper 40 calls to mind Paper 124, in the present volume, which dates from March 1836. Paper 42:1 includes remarks on I. H. Fichte that call to mind similar comments from August and October 1836 (see Paper 136 in the present volume). Lastly, the subject matter of the two entries in Paper 47 is related to the contents of the latter portion of Journal CC, which is presumably from the beginning of 1837 (see KJN 1, 195–199).

Explanatory Notes 88

1

Philosophica. Older] See the Critical Account of the Text.

18

as Adam was in days of yore . . . the animals come to him, and he gives them names] Refers to Gen 2:18–20.

25

a chosen instrument] Allusion to Acts 9:10–19, esp. vv. 15–16. Providence] See 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] (often referred to as Balles Lærebog [Balle’s Primer]) (Copenhagen, 1824 [1791]; ASKB 183), chap. 2, “On God’s Works,” paragraph 2, § 2.a: “God provides for all his creatures, the least as well as the greatest, and gives them all they need in order to live, and watches over them and protects them” (p. 22), and paragraph 3, § 3: “God is almighty, and he can do everything that he wants without effort. But he does only that which is wise and good, because that is what he wills, and that alone” (p. 13). See also chap. 2, “On God’s Works,” paragraph 2, § 5: “What we encounter in life, whether it be sorrowful or joyful, is sent to us by God with the best intentions, so we always have reason to be well pleased with his governance and direction” (p. 25).

33

89

1

the orthodox say: that the Church must be immediately conscious of its existence] See Paper 69 in the present volume. ― the orthodox: N.F.S. Grundtvig and the Grundtvigians often referred to themselves as “the orthodox,” i.e., as those who stood for and represented the true and correct Christian faith and doctrine. For example, in Skribenten Nik. Fred. Sev. Grundtvigs Literaire Testamente [The Literary Testament of Author Nik. Fred. Sev. Grundtvig] (Copenhagen, 1827), p. 35, Grundtvig refers to himself as “the

hyperorthodox Lutheran priest”; in Om den Clausenske Injurie-Sag [On the Clausen Libel Case] (Copenhagen, 1831), p. 15, he refers to himself and his adherents as “the hyperorthodox and the old-fashioned believers”; and in Om SogneBaandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Loosening of Parish Bonds and Mr. Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834), p. 21, he refers to himself and his adherents as “the orthodox.” radical cure] A medical treatment that seeks to root out an illness entirely, as opposed to a palliative or symptomatic treatment, which seeks only to alleviate the symptoms of the illness.

14

89

has its basis in the hum. being himself and in his sinfulness] See AA:13, dated October 17, 1835, concerning the relation between philosophy and Christianity, where Kierkegaard remarks: “Ultimately it is here the yawning chasm lies: Christianity stipulates the defectiveness of human cognition due to sin, which is then rectified in Christianity. The philosopher tries qua man to account for matters of God and the world. The outcome can therefore very well be admitted to be limited inasmuch as man is a limited being, but also as the best possible [outcome] for man qua man” (KJN 1, 26).

22

89

in China, with an examination] It has not been possible to determine what Kierkegaard is referring to, but see the Oriental tale, “Geschichte des Prinzen Kalaf und der Prinzessin Turandokt” [The Story of Prince Calaf and Princess Turandot] in Erzählungen und Mährchen [Stories and Fairy Tales], vol. 2, pp. 90–221 (→ 90,10), where a note on p. 150 states the following: “In every city in China there are two Hiokongs, that is, scholarly mandarins, who have the authority to examine those who apply for academic degrees.”

3

90

366 4

4

5

90

8 10

“Philosophica. Older”

In Greece with journeys] Presumably, a reference to Homer’s description of Odysseus’ journeys in The Odyssey, bks. 9–11, which contain elements from folk tales. Pythagoras] Presumably refers to the various journeys undertaken by the Greek philosopher and mathematician, Pythagoras of Samos (580– ca. 500 b.c.); see, e.g., bk. 8, chap. 1, sec. 3 of Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s Philosophical History, or the Lives, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Eminent Philosophers, in Ten Books], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111), vol. 1, p. 366: “While still young, so eager was he for knowledge, he left his own country and had himself initiated into all the mysteries and rites not only of Greece but also of foreign countries. Now he was in Egypt when Polycrates sent him a letter of introduction to Amasis; he learnt the Egyptian language, so we learn from Antiphon in his book On Men of Outstanding Merit, and he also journeyed among the Chaldaeans and Magi. Then while in Crete he went down into the cave of Ida with Epimenides; he also entered the Egyptian sanctuaries, and was told their secret lore concerning the gods. After that he returned to Samos to find his country under the tyranny of Polycrates; so he sailed away to Croton in Italy, and there he laid down a constitution for the Italian Greeks, and he and his followers were held in great estimation; for, being nearly three hundred in number, so well did they govern the state that its constitution was in effect a true aristocracy (government by the best).” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 2, p. 323. Homer] Greek poet (ca. 750 b.c.), author of the heroic poems The Iliad and The Odyssey (→ 90,4). another scrap of paper] Refers to Paper 38 in the present volume. a riddle . . . see, e.g., Erzählungen und Märchen . . . 2nd vol. pp. 167 et seq.] See the Oriental tale “Geschichte des Prinzen Kalaf und der Prinzessin

•

P a p e r 38–41 1836 •

Turandokt” [The Story of Prince Calaf and Princess Turandot] in Erzählungen und Mährchen [Stories and Fairy Tales], ed. Fr. von der Hagen, 2 vols. (Prenzlau, 1825–1826), vol. 2, pp. 90–221; esp. pp. 167–174, which tells of the three riddles that the Chinese princess Turandot poses for Prince Calaf, who has written and asked for her hand in marriage. If he can solve the riddles, he wins her; if he cannot, he is condemned to die. The princess’s first riddle (p. 167) is: “What creature is at home in every country, a friend to all the world, and cannot ever tolerate his own kind?” The prince answers correctly: “It is the sun.” The prince also answers the next two riddles correctly, but even though he had thus won the beautiful princess, he chooses to pose a riddle for her, so that, if she answers correctly, she can escape marrying him, while if she cannot answer it, she must marry him. His riddle (p. 174) is: “What is the name of the prince who, after having endured thousands of difficulties and having begged for his bread, at this instant finds himself at the pinnacle of honor and joy?” After the prince resists various schemes, and after the princess weeps over having to marry, it turns out that, contrary to all expectations, she is able to answer the riddle―but gradually it also becomes clear that she has become just as enamored of the prince as he is of her, and they are happily married. ― F. H. von der Hagen: Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen (1780–1856), German philologist; from 1810, extraordinary professor at Berlin; from 1811, extraordinary professor, and from 1818, ordinary professor, at Breslau; and from 1824 until his death, extraordinary professor at Berlin. take themselves by the scruff of the neck just like Münchausen] Refers to the German baron and officer Karl Friedrich Hieronymus von Münchhausen (1720–1797), who gained fame for the many extravagantly tall tales he told about himself. After having published some of his stories in 1781, they were translated into English in 1785, and in 1787 were translated back into German by the poet G. A. Bürger. This collection, which was subsequently augmented, appeared in Danish translation as Baron von Münchhausens

19

90

“Philosophica. Older” vidunderlige Reiser, Feldttog og Hændelser fortalte af ham selv [Baron von Münchhausen’s Wonderful Travels, Campaigns, and Episodes, Told by Himself], ed. A. C. Hanson (Roskilde, 1834). The anecdote to which Kierkegaard refers is related on p. 27 of this Danish edition and tells of how Münchhausen once landed in a swamp he had wanted to jump across with his horse, and he was up to his neck in the swamp, so that both he and his horse would have perished had he not had the idea of pulling himself out of the swamp by the hair on the top of his head, while clasping the horse firmly with his knees. 90

23

Fichte assigns Jacobi, Fries, and Eschenmayer . . . the reflective philosophers] Refers to chap. 2, “Die subjektive Richtung: (Die reflektirende Philosophie)” [The Subjective Direction: (The Reflective Philosophy)], § 44–57, in “Erster kritischer Theil” [First, Critical Part] of I. H. Fichte, Über Gegensatz, Wendepunkt und Ziel heutiger Philosophie [On Antithesis, Turning Point, and Goal in Contemporary Philosophy] (Heidelberg, 1832), pp. 165–202. In the unpaginated “Wissenschaftliche Uebersicht” [Scholarly Overview], the contents of chapter 2 are described as follows: “Their general relationship to both of the preceding standpoints (§ 44). First idea of a scholarly-scientific total mediation of this: dialectic and self-destruction of the principle of reflection (§ 45, 47). Possible forms of the philosophy of subjectivity: Kant, supplemented by Jacobi; but outwardly, a not entirely sublated schism (§ 48–49.) Attempted mediation of both by Fries: critique of his philosophy (§ 50–54). The remaining contradiction in this brought to consciousness by Fr. Bouterweck; his older apodictic and the later transformation of his teachings (in ‘the religion of reason’: § 55). ― Alternative between absolute doubt, denial of all objective truth . . . or absolute belief as the final result of this standpoint (§ 56). The connection of the latter with mysticism and the elements of positive Christianity in Eschenmayer. (§ 57).” ― Fichte: Immanuel Hermann Fichte (1796–1879), German philosopher, son of the philosopher J. G. Fichte and therefore commonly referred to as “Fichte the

•

P a p e r 41–44 1836 •

367

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). ― Jacobi: Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819), German philosopher, opposed rationalism with a philosophy of life in which the concepts of faith and feeling occupied a central place. ― Fries: Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773–1843), German philosopher; from 1806, professor of philosophy and mathematics at Heidelberg; from 1816–1817, professor of philosophy and mathematics at Jena; from 1824, professor of physics at Jena, and from 1825, also of philosophy. ― Eschenmayer: Adam Karl August Eschenmayer (1768–1852), German physician and philosopher; from 1811, extraordinary professor, and from 1818, ordinary professor of medicine and philosophy at Tübingen. Kantian] Refers to the epistemology developed by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804); 1755–1769, privatdocent; from 1770, professor at the University of Königsberg. the constructive] Refers to chap. 1, “Die objektive Richtung: a) die konstruirende und dialektische” [The Objective Direction: a) the constructive and dialectical], §§ 6–35, in I. H. Fichte, Über Gegensatz, Wendepunkt und Ziel heutiger Philosophie, pp. 28–129, in which Fichte primarily concerns himself with the philosophers Baruch Spinoza, J. G. Fichte, F.W.J. Schelling, and G.W.F. Hegel. Why strict Xns are so easily tempted by trifles (food and drink] Cf. AA:28, from mid-1837, in KJN 1, 39–40, where the same subject is discussed.

27

30

1

91

Chiliasm] Chiliasm, better known today as “millenarianism,” is the belief in a thousand-year reign of Christ on earth; the principal scriptural sources for this are Rev 20:1–6 and 1 Cor 15:20– 28. The notion of a thousand-year reign with a charismatic leader is known both from antiquity and in modern times.

8

91

the dialectical (the romantic)] See Paper 172, dated August 19, 1836, in the present volume. the state (e.g., as with the Greeks] Presumably, an allusion to the understanding of the state (the

12

91

16

368

17

“Philosophica. Older”

polis) in bk. 1, chap. 2 of the Greek philosopher Aristotle’s (384–322 b.c.) Politics. After having described the origin of the state, Aristotle explains his theory of society as something natural for human beings in the following fashion: The state arises out of primitive, natural ties because human beings would not be able to manage without it (1252b–1253a). The human being is by nature a political animal, and nature, which does nothing in vain, has equipped human beings with the capacity for discussing moral concepts, which are the nucleus of domestic life and society (1253a 1–18). The state naturally precedes the individual because, Aristotle maintains, individuals cannot realize their natural capacities outside the state and are not capable of surviving without it (1253a 18–29). This is the context in which Aristotle sets forth the well-known pronouncement that someone who cannot live in fellowship with others cannot be part of the state and must therefore be either an animal or a god. See Aristoteles graece [Aristotle in Greek], ed. I. Bekker, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1831; ASKB 1074–1075), vol. 2, pp. 1252–1253; for a standard English translation, see Jonathan Barnes, ed., The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), vol. 2, pp. 1987–1988. the Church in its older, Catholic sense] See the article “Katholisch / Katholische Kirche” [Catholic / Catholic Church] in W. D. Fuhrmann, Handwörterbuch der christlichen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte [Manual of Christian Religious and Church History], ed. W. D. Fuhrmann, 3 vols. (Halle, 1826–1829; ASKB 75–77), vol. 2 (1828), pp. 536–537: “The Origin of the Idea and the Doctrine of Catholicism, i.e., of the only true, universal, and ruling Church, is to be sought in the second century . . . At that time, this unity of the Church with the concepts clergy and laity, could develop in the synod. Along the way, the uniting of more congregations, or rather, more teachers, developed the particular forms of association which on account of their great extension were called the Catholic Church . . . which subsequently found its central point in the person of the Roman pope, with one doctrinal concept and one rite

•

P a p e r 44–45 1836 •

. . . The more zealously the many heretics were damned, persecuted and extirpated―and, subsequently, the more the Roman bishops developed their hierarchical principles―the more did the words: universal (catholic) Church become synonymous with the words orthodox and ruling Church and with the expression only saving Church. All those who thought and believed otherwise were denied salvation . . . The attempt to trace understandings of faith and usage to an uninterrupted and uncorrupted line of transmission, as well as to papal infallibility also contributed greatly to universality and unity of belief. ― Thus arose those articles of faith that characterize Catholicism: The apostolic-Roman Church is the mother and the head of all churches; the pope is not merely the vicar and successor of Peter, but also of Christ, to whom one must―owing to his infallibility―be obedient.” the concept of the Church begins to assert itself . . . a fixed, objective faith] Presumably, a reference to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s theory of the Church or “ecclesiastical view”; see Paper 69, dated May 28, 1835, with its accompanying explanatory note, in the present volume. the tendency to form societies] Cf. Paper 223:1, from the autumn of 1836, with its accompanying explanatory note, in the present volume. crystalline forms] See, e.g., § 20 in H. C. Ørsted, Videnskaben om Naturens almindelige Love [The Science of the Universal Laws of Nature] (Copenhagen, 1809), vol. 1, pp. 33–34: “All matter strives to attain a specific shape, and this is called its crystallization. It is true that this form is not recognized in each body; but in nature we nevertheless find that all matter assumes it. Such crystallization, albeit of a higher sort, even takes place in organic nature.” the Chinese, among whom everything is petrified] No source for this has been identified, but see the second lecture (“Om det chinesiske Sprog og Chinesernes Tegnskrift” [On the Chinese Language and Chinese Characters]) in Christian Molbech, Tolv Forelæsninger ved Kiøbenhavns Universitet over den videnskabelige Culturs og Literaturens Historie i den gamle Verden, særdeles

21

23

27

28

“Philosophica. Older”

29

92

1

92

13 20

20

•

i Orienten [Twelve Lectures at the University of Copenhagen on the History of Scholarly Culture and Literature in the Ancient World, Especially in the Orient] (Copenhagen, 1831), pp. 28–56; p. 42, where it is stated that the Chinese language, in its “older, more ceremonial―according to the Chinese, classical―form,” was only spoken “in simple, unmodified, style, and, as it were, petrified concepts.” And p. 49, where it is said that China is “the only country in Asia that has preserved its ancient, distinctive civil constitution, the fundamental principle of which is unchanging continuation of what has been handed down from the ancestors for millennia.” See also the third lecture (“Om Chinesernes Civilisation og Cultur” [On the Civilization and Culture of the Chinese]), pp. 59–80; p. 79, where Molbech says that in China there are “the most ancient remains of a still-existing state and social life of a people, its civic laws and arrangements, its politics and system of government, whose age reaches back to prehistoric times.” assume that the world is square and that their kingdom is the innermost square] No source for this has been identified. any crystal whatever in the form of a circle] → 91,27. apparent polar elevation] Apparent standpoint, stage of development. Guldkorset] Refers to Guldkorset. Lystspil i to Acter efter det Franske [The Gold Cross: Comedy in Two Acts, from the French] by J. L. Heiberg, no. 79 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater] (Copenhagen, 1836). From its premiere on March 4, 1836, to early February 1837, the comedy was performed a total of fourteen times at the Royal Theater. Guddrun] Refers to Queen Gudrun, one of the principal female figures in “Volsunga-Saga eller Historien om Sigurd Fafnersbane” [The Völsunga Saga, or the Story of Sigurd, Bane of Fafnir], in Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier efter islandske Haandskrifter [Tales of Nordic Champions according to Icelandic Manuscripts], trans. C. C. Rafn, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1821–1826; ASKB 1993–1995; abbreviated hereafter as Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier),

P a p e r 45–47 1836–1837 •

369

vol. 1, B [with separate title page and pagination] (1822). Gudrun was married to Sigurd, Bane of Fafnir; see chaps. 33–35 and chaps. 37–38, pp. 83– 90 and 96–108. After he was killed, she married King Atle; see chap. 41, pp. 117–121. After he was killed, she married King Jonakur; see chap. 48, p. 142. When her daughter Svanhild was killed, she incited her sons to avenge the death, which resulted in her sons being stoned to death; see chaps. 50–51, pp. 145–148. Lies in the stories] Cf. the first part of AA:26, from mid-1837, in KJN 1, 38–39, where the same subject is developed with several examples from “Hervør og Kong Hejdreks Saga” [Hervor and King Heidrik’s Saga], in Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier (→ 92,20), vol. 3, sec. C [with separate title page and pagination] (1822). See also the explanatory notes for AA:26. at the same time that people praise them for heroic courage . . . weapon that protects them] Cf. the second part of AA:26, from mid-1837, in KJN 1, 39, where the same topic in Nordiske KæmpeHistorier is developed more fully. See also the explanatory notes for AA:26.

21

22

Notes for Paper 48–Paper 94 “Theologica. Older”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Hermann Deuser Quotations and References checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

372

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Theologica. Older” is no. 433 in B-cat. and belongs to the portion of the papers that upon Kierkegaard’s death lay in “a large cardboard box” marked “A” and with the inscription “Journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). Papers 52, 57, 67, 82, 83, 85, 87, and 91 have been lost; their texts have been transmitted indirectly in H. P. Barfod’s edition Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The preserved manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Of the forty-seven papers, of which the first (Paper 48) is the cover sheet, thirteen bear dates that cover the period from May 30, 1834 (Paper 49) to June 12, 1837 (Paper 85). Paper 70 is an undated scrap of paper that was bound fast in the string with which Paper 69, dated May 28, 1835, was tied. The last nine papers (Paper 86–Paper 94) are undated and belong to the subgroup B-cat. 433e. Chronologically, the first of this group (Paper 86) constitutes a backward step in relation to the paper that immediately precedes it (Paper 85). Paper 86 discusses predestination and was presumably written in mid-1834, when Kierkegaard concerned himself with the matter in the course of his reading of Friedrich Schleiermacher’s Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirch im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith, Presented in Context, in Accord with the Fundamental Tenets of the Evangelical Church] (Berlin, 1830) (see Paper 9–Paper 14:2 in the present volume). Paper 87 discusses H. N. Clausen’s interpretation of the doctrine of atonement and could also be from mid-1834, because Clausen lectured on dogmatics at the University of Copenhagen during the winter semester of 1833–1834 and in the summer semester of 1834,

Critical Account of the Text presumably discussing Christology in the summer semester.1 The contents of Paper 88 call to mind the excerpts Kierkegaard made from Schleiermacher’s above-mentioned work in October 1834 (see Paper 13:10 in the present volume). Paper 89 is reminiscent of thoughts Kierkegaard entertained in connection with his discussion of Grundtvig’s ecclesiology in May 1835 (see Paper 69 in the present volume), and both Paper 90 and Paper 91 may be assumed to be a continuation of that discussion. Lastly, Papers 92, 93, and 94 appear to have been written in the period 1837–1839, when Kierkegaard concerned himself both with exegesis and with the synoptic Gospels. Papers 92 and 93 are thus probably connected with H. L. Martensen’s “Forelæsninger over Indledning til speculative Dogmatik” [Lectures on the Introduction to Speculative Dogmatics], from the winter semester of 1837– 1838, perhaps specifically to the seventh lecture, from December 13, 1837 (see KJN 3, 134–135), while Paper 94 may be connected to H. N. Clausen’s lectures on the synoptic Gospels from the winter semester of 1838–1839.2 In sum, it can be ascertained that the papers in this group were written during a period of just under five years, from May 1834 to March 1839.

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Sommersemestret 1834 [Lectures at the University of Copenhagen and the Polytechnical Institute in the Summer Semester of 1834], p. 2, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51 [List of Lectures at the University of Copenhagen, 1824–1851: Lectures 1833–1851]. Lists of those who attended the lectures are not extant. Kierkegaard took detailed notes from Clausen’s lectures on dogmatics; see Not1:1–8 in KJN 3, 3–60.

1

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1838–39 [Lectures at the University of Copenhagen and the Polytechnical Institute in the Winter Semester of 1838–1839], p. 2, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51. Forelæsninger 1833–51 [List of Lectures at the University of Copenhagen, 1824–1851: Lectures 1833–1851]. Lists of those who attended the lectures are not extant. In Paper 94:2, Kierkegaard refers to one of the series of lecture notes to which university students could purchase subscriptions; see the expression “sec. Collegia” in Paper 94:1, with its accompanying explanatory note.

2

373

Explanatory Notes 94

1

Theologica. Older.] See the Critical Account of the Text.

94

3

traces back] Variant: first written “puts sin in God”. A strict doctrine of predestination] The dogma of predestination, which has assumed various forms in the Church’s history and maintains that God (either from all eternity or since the Fall) has predestined every individual human being either for salvation (eternal blessedness) or perdition (eternal damnation). Scriptural sources for the doctrine include Rom 8:28–30 and Eph 1:5, which has the Greek verb προορίζειν, “predestine, predetermine,” translated in the Latin Vulgate as praedestinare, “predestine”). The dogmatic view that God has chosen in advance those who will receive his grace, i.e., predestination, can be traced back to Origen (→ 113,17), but it received its specific dogmatic formulation from Augustine (4th–5th century) and, later, by the Swiss reformer Calvin (1509–1564), in the second, greatly augmented edition of his principal Reformation work, Institutio christianae religionis [Institutes of the Christian Religion] (1539 [1536]; see ASKB 455– 456, an edition from 1834–1835). God equipped Adam with free will to choose between good and evil. When Adam fell and chose evil, his fall was due to God’s predestination but it was nevertheless of Adam’s own doing since God can never be the cause of sin. And thus it is with every human being after Adam: it is impossible to sin against God’s will. If he sins, then it is God’s will, but God never commands that he sin. Every human being’s life is thus determined beforehand by God, so that a human being can only follow God’s will. See § 66 in Kierkegaard’s rendering of H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] in Not1:8, from 1833– 1834, in KJN 3, 64–65.

3

Manicheanism . . . system presupposes 2 beings] A syncretistic sect, Manichaeism was founded by the Persian Mani (ca. 216–276). It incorporated elements from ancient Persian and Babylonian religions, Christianity, and Buddhism, as well as Gnosticism. Manichaeism, which is strongly dualistic in its view of the world and of human beings and which is ascetic and anti-sensual in its ethics, spread quickly. Around the year 300, Manichaeans could be found from India to the countries of the Mediterranean.

4

the absolute predestination of grace] Refers to the dogmatic view that God has from eternity chosen some people for grace, i.e., for eternal blessedness, as opposed to those who were rejected and assigned to eternal damnation; see the doctrine of predestination (→ 94,3). with the Jews particularism appeared in its very strictest form] Refers to the Jewish view that God has chosen the Jewish people alone as his people, and that the Jews thus have a special position, both as a people and as a religion; on God’s covenant with the people of Israel as his chosen people, see Ex 19 and 24. According to Ex 33:12–19, it is owing to God’s free grace that he places the people of Israel ahead of all the other peoples of the earth. bordered on fetishism (see Schleiermacher)] Presumably, a reference to § 8, pt. 4, in Friedrich Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith according to the Doctrines of the Evangelical Church, Presented in Context], 2nd rev. ed. (Berlin, 1830–1831 [1821–1822]; see ASKB 258, a 3rd ed. from 1835; abbreviated hereafter as Der christliche Glaube), vol. 1, p. 52: “In its limitation of Jehovah’s love to the descendants of Abraham, Judaism displays yet another affinity to fetishism.” ― Schleiermacher: Friedrich Daniel Ernst

9

11

12

94

“Theologica. Older”

13 14

17 17

20

23

Schleiermacher (1768–1834), German Reformed theologian, philosopher of religion, and classical philologist, became a priest in Berlin in 1796; from 1804, extraordinary professor at Halle; from 1810, professor of theology at the newly established university in Berlin. Kierkegaard owned a number of his works; see ASKB 238–242, 271, 769, 1158–1163. Christianity’s universal tendency] See, e.g., the commandment to missionize in Mt 28:18–20. Examples of this sort of displeasure . . . in Acta] See, e.g., Acts 15. ― Acta: Latin, “deeds”; traditional abbreviation for Acta Apostolorum, the Acts of the Apostles. Jewish Christians] → 94,14. at first, of course, they believed that one had to let oneself be circumcised] → 94,14. See also Gal 2:1–10. Jewish Christians must have certain prerogatives] Perhaps a reference to the fact that the leading figures in the Christian congregation of Jerusalem were Jewish Christians; see, e.g., Gal 2:2, where Paul writes that it was to “the acknowledged leaders” that he presented the gospel he preached; see also Gal 2:9, where Paul writes that Jesus’ brother James, Cephas (i.e., Peter), and John were “acknowledged pillars.” See bk. 2, chap. 1, “Om Apostlenes Virksomhed efter Christi Himmelfart” [On the Activity of the Apostles after Christ’s Ascension], in Kirkens Historie gjennem de tre første Aarhundreder af Eusebius [Eusebius’s History of the Church in the First Three Centuries], trans. C. H. Muus (Copenhagen, 1832; ASKB U37), pp. 57–58, where the following is related of the period after the stoning of Stephen: “At the same time, Jerusalem’s episcopal chair had been occupied for the first time with James, called the brother of the Lord, because he was a son of Joseph, who is known as the Lord’s father . . . This was the same James whom the elders called the righteous on account of his strict virtue. ‘Peter, James, and John,’ Clement of Alexandria says, ‘were all of them surely singled out by the Lord, but after his ascension, they chose James the Righteous, without any mutual dissension regarding precedence, as bishop of Jerusalem.’ ” Gentile Christians] → 94,14.

•

P a p e r 50–51 1834 •

375

their particularism was not defined with respect to nation and geography] Presumably refers to the circumstance that Gentile Christians modified the Jewish notion that God had chosen the Jewish people alone for salvation and had given to them the land of Israel; this was modified into a Christian doctrine of being specially chosen to receive grace, so that Christ died for those who have been exclusively destined for grace beforehand. See Rom 11:24. but they did assume that . . . there were some individuals who were more excellent than others] Perhaps this refers to the apostles, but also to Paul, who viewed himself as “a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle” (Rom 1:1).

24

predestination] → 94,3. arose in order to establish a connection between freedom and God’s omnipotence, etc.] It has not been possible to identify what Kierkegaard is referring to. See, however, the following statement by Philip Melanchthon, who is cited in Kierkegaard’s rendering of H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” in Not1:8, from 1833–1834, in KJN 3, 64m: “quandoquidem omnia, quæ eveniunt, necessario juxta prædestinationem divinam eveniunt, nulla est voluntatis nostræ libertas” (Latin, “because everything that takes place, indeed takes place by necessity as a result of divine predestination, we have no freedom of will”), cited from “Respon.” (i.e., Response) in the section “De hominis viribus adeoque de libero arbitrio” [On Human Powers, or, More Correctly, on Free Will] in Loci theologici [Fundamental Theological Concepts]. See Philippi Melanchthonis Loci theologici ad fidem editionis primae MDXXI [Philip Melanchthon’s Loci theologici, First Edition, 1521], ed. J.C.W. Augusti (Leipzig, 1821), p. 12. ― God’s omnipotence: See, e.g., chap. 1, “Om Gud og hans Egenskaber” [On God and His Attributes], sec. 3, § 3: “God is almighty and can do anything he wills without difficulty. But he does only that which is wise and good, because he wills nothing other than this and this alone,” in Lærebog i den Evangelisk-christelige Religion indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [A Primer for the Evangelical Christian Religion, Prepared for

1

28

2

95

376

7 8

8

15 15 20

95

27

96

7

“Theologica. Older”

Use in Danish Schools], by N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm (Copenhagen, 1824 [1791]; ASKB 183; abbreviated hereafter as Balles Lærebog [Balle’s Primer]), p. 13. see below] See Paper 51:3 in the present volume. αϕεςις των παραπτωματων] Cited freely from Eph 1:7: τὴν ἄϕεσιν τῶν παραπτωμάτων (Greek, “the forgiveness of sins”). This expression is always used in connection with justification] If the reference is to the NT, Kierkegaard could have in mind passages such as Acts 13:38–39. See also Rom 5:15–21 and 2 Cor 5:17–21. ― is always used: Variant: first written “is always linked with”. see above] See Paper 51:1 in the present volume. how the doctrine of predestination has arisen] → 94,3 and → 95,2. God’s governance of the world] See chap. 2, sec. 2, “Hvad Skriften lærer om Guds Forsyn og de skabte Tings Opholdelse” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Providence and the Sustaining of Creation], § 3: “God, who is the 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,” in Balles Lærebog (→ 95,2), pp. 23 and 24–25. the theory of predestination] → 94,3. that God’s arrangement . . . in God’s foreknowledge . . . human beings an actual freedom] See the following passages in § 120,4 in Friedrich Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 94,12), vol. 2, p. 302: “For if a determination of the divine decree by faith foreseen be opposed to a determination by the free divine good-pleasure, the inference is hardly to be avoided that faith is grounded, independently of the divine influence, in the free will of man; and this semblance of Pelagianism [→ 99,33] cannot be removed by any artificial qualifications, so as to leave the formula any definite content at all.” And, further, pp. 302–303: “The other formula, to the effect that the

•

P a p e r 51–53 1834 •

divine good-pleasure draws on one person and leaves another behind . . . seems only too easily to imply favouritism to the one and repression of the other, and this in such wise that on such a beginning the end must follow, no matter what may happen in between.” English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, ed. H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart (London: T & T Clark, 1999; first published 1928), p. 557. ― God’s foreknowledge: See, e.g., chap. 1, “Om Gud og hans Egenskaber” [On God and His Attributes], sec. 3, “Hvad Skrivten lærer om Guds Væsen og Egenskaber” [What Scripture Teaches about God’s Being and His Attributes], § 4: “God is omniscient and simultaneously knows whatever has happened, or is happening now, or is to happen in all posterity. Our most secret thoughts are not concealed from him,” in Balles Lærebog (→ 95,2), pp. 13–14. discovery that Copernicus made in astronomy] Refers to the Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (Mikolaj Kopernik) (1473–1543), who was the first person in modern times to formulate a heliocentric theory, with the sun at the center of the universe while the planets, including the earth, orbited around the sun. discovered that God was not the one who changed] Refers to the rationalist dogmatic view of God as unchanging; see Paper 56 and Paper 87 in the present volume. the doctrine of predestination] → 94,3. Fichte’s doctrine of identity is also an example] Refers to J. G. Fichte’s Grundlage der gesamten Wissenschaftslehre [Foundations of the Science of Knowledge], which investigates the basis for all our knowledge, cognition, and reason and which posits the “I” as the point of departure for the system of philosophy. The first principle of the science of knowledge is the activity or deed by means of which the “I” becomes identical with itself and knowledgeable concerning itself (“I” = “I”). Next comes the principle of the acting subject who posits or produces a “not-I” (object), and from the opposition between the “I” and the “not-I” can be derived all the concepts characteristic of our cognition of actuality. ― Fichte’s:

19

20

26 32

96

“Theologica. Older” Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814), German philosopher; from 1794, professor at Jena; from 1810, professor at the newly established university in Berlin. 97

2

5

9

11

Inspiration . . . the activity of the apostles . . . authored the N.T.] Refers to the dogmatic teaching that each of the biblical writings was inspired (“breathed into” its author) by God, and that therefore the Bible, Holy Scripture, is God’s revealed and infallible word, which thus constitutes the highest authority for the Church’s faith and doctrine. The dogmatic tradition differentiates between two aspects of the Bible’s inspiration: It was written by men who were in a state of inspiration, i.e., under the influence and guidance of the Holy Spirit; or it was written by men whom the Holy Spirit both prompted to write down what was revealed to them and also “inspired” what they wrote and how they were to write it. See, e.g., § 37, “Inspiration des N. T.” [Inspiration of the N.T.], in K. G. Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Handbook of the Dogmatics of the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Leipzig, 1828 [1814]; see ASKB 437–438, a 4th ed. from 1838; abbreviated hereafter as Handbuch der Dogmatik), vol. 1, pp. 291–301. The dogmatic doctrine of the divine inspiration of the Bible builds on 2 Tim 3:16. what it states . . . the communication of the Holy Spirit] Presumably refers to the many passages in the NT where there is talk of getting or receiving the Holy Spirit, of having the Holy Spirit poured out upon one, or of being filled with the Holy Spirit; see, e.g., Lk 1:15, 41, 67; Jn 20:22; Acts 2:4, 33, 38; 4:8, 31; 6:5; 7:55; 8:15–19; 9:17; 10:44, 45, 47; 11:24; 13:9, 52; 15:8; 19: 2, 6; Rom 5:5, 8:15–19; 1 Thess 4:8; 2 Tim 1:14; Heb 2:4, 6:4. coming upon them] Presumably, a reference to the passages in the NT that speak of the Holy Spirit being, or having been upon, a person; see, e.g., Lk 2:25; Acts 1:8, 10:44. we cannot assume . . . were capable of grasping Xnty correctly] Refers to the passages in the NT where it is related that the disciples did not understand what Jesus taught them and what was happening; see, e.g., Mt 16:9, 11; Mk 4:13, 7:18; Jn

•

P a p e r 53–56 1834 •

377

12:16; 13:7, 28; 16:18; 20:9. It is also related that the disciples did not understand what Jesus said in connection with his prophecies of his own suffering and death; see Lk 9:45, and see also Mk 9:32 and Lk 18:34. In Mt 16:22–23, it is related that the apostle Peter protested against the prophecy, for which Jesus took him to task. the Catholic theory of papal infallibility] Refers to the Catholic dogmatic view that the doctrines the pope pronounced “ex cathedra” (i.e., from Peter’s chair) are infallible.

19

sit venia verbo] The expression stems from Pliny the Younger (a.d. 63–113), Epistolae [Letters], bk. 5, letter 6, sec. 46, where it appears in the form venia sit dicto. Mohammed’s] Mohammed ibn Abdallah ibn Abdel-Muttalib (ca. 570–632), Arab prophet and founder of Islam. He was born in Mecca, where he received revelations and from which he fled to Medina in 622, which is the year from which Muslims (Arabic, “believers”) reckon the beginning of their calendar. dogmatics is a development] Variant: preceding “development”, the abbreviation “scholarly-scientif” was added and subsequently deleted. his nature] Variant: “his” has been added. his baptism] See the account in Mt 3:13–17. his resurrection] See the account in Mt 28:1–7. those who believe that Christ was . . . to communicate a perfect moral doctrine] Presumably, a reference to the liberal theology of the Enlightenment, as expressed by, e.g., G. E. Lessing and Immanuel Kant. Catholics, who believe that they would still be capable of fulfilling the Law] No source for this has been identified. the way of living that he enjoins (Mt 5)] Refers to the first chapter of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount in Mt 5–7. 1 Cor 5:7 . . . Rom 3:25] Variant: written along the edge of the scrap of paper.

30

it is a major thesis . . . that God is unchanging (loving) . . . the appearance of Christ was rlly only a declaration of this] See, e.g., § 41 in the third main division, “Christelig Soterologi”

22

97

31

32

33 4

98

4 11

13

16

20

98

378

29

99

1 2

3 3

99

11

“Theologica. Older”

[Christian Soteriology], in Kierkegaard’s rendering of H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] in Not1:7, from 1833–1834: “The N.T. speaks of an eternal counsel grounded in God’s unalterable loving will as the true ground for Chr.’s mission,” and furthermore that in the NT “Chr. is said to have been foreordained to this office from eternity and that he was sent in the fullness of time,” and finally that “this div. resolve is grounded solely in God’s love” (KJN 3, 38). ― (loving): Variant: added, written above “unchanging”. (God’s unchangingness)] Variant: added. the stone that was laid before Christ’s grave] Refers to Mt 27:57–61. the philosophers’ stone] Alludes to the expressions “to seek the philosophers’ stone” or “he will find the philosophers’ stone,” both of which are listed in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 3, p. 357; see also “Who has found the philosophers’ stone?” which is listed as no. 2564 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Sayings and Adages] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 98. overturning it] See Mk 16:1–8 and Mt 28:1–7. the Pharisees] Presumably, a reference to Mt 28:11–15. 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. In Jesus’ time there were about six thousand Pharisees. it says in the N.T. that whoever does not believe is to be punished] The passage referred to has not been identified, but see Mk 16:16, Jn 3:18, and especially Jn 3:36; see also Jude 5.

•

P a p e r 56–59 1834 •

For one thing, the Protestants . . . hum. nature was incapable . . . re-created] Presumably refers to article 2, “On Original Sin,” in the oldest Lutheran confessional document, the Confessio Augustana [Augsburg Confession] from 1530, which states: “It is also taught among us that since the fall of Adam all men who are born according to the course of nature are conceived and born in sin. That is, all men are full of evil lust and inclinations from their mothers’ wombs and are unable by nature to have true fear of God and true faith in God. Moreover, this inborn sickness and hereditary sin is truly sin and condemns to the eternal wrath of God all those who are not born again through Baptism and the Holy Spirit. Rejected in this connection are the Pelagians and others who deny that original sin is sin, for they hold that natural man is man righteous by his own powers, thus disparaging the sufferings and merit of Christ,” Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession Together with the Apology for Same by Ph. Melanchthon], trans. A. G. Rudelbach (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386; abbreviated hereafter as Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse), pp. 46–47. English translation from The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, trans. and ed. Theodore Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), p. 29. Dr. Möhler . . . “the divine call . . . slumbering powers in a person”] A reference to and citation from Symbolik eller Fremstilling af de dogmatiske Modsætninger imellem Katholikerne og Protestanterne efter deres offentlige Bekendelsesskrifter, af Dr. J. A. Möhler, Professor i det katolske theologiske Fakultet i Tübingen. 1832 [Symbolics, or Presentation of the Dogmatic Differences between Catholics and Protestants, from Their Public Confessional Documents, by Dr. J. A. Möhler, Professor on the Catholic Theology Faculty in Tübingen. 1832], a Danish translation of portions of the original, German version of Möhler’s book, Symbolik, oder Darstellung der dogmatischen Gegensätze der Katholiken und Protestanten, nach ihren öffentlichen Bekenntnißschriften (Mainz,

19

22

99

“Theologica. Older”

30

33

1832), that had been published in Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur [Journal for Foreign Theological Literature], ed. H. N. Clausen and M. H. Hohlenberg, vol. 2, no. 1 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 107–208; p. 137. According to the subscription lists provided by the editors, which cover the period up to 1840, Kierkegaard subscribed to this journal beginning in 1833; see ASKB U29. Kierkegaard omits the continuation of the passage cited: “which have more or less fallen into a moral death-sleep and prompts it to attach itself to the power that is on high in order to gain a diametrically opposed life-experience and to renew communion with God (prevenient grace).” ― Möhler: Johann Adam Möhler (1796–1838), German Catholic theologian and priest; from 1826 extraordinary professor and from 1828, ordinary professor of Church history on the Catholic faculty at the university in Tübingen. ― Clausen’s: → 107,31. ― Hohlenberg’s: Matthias Hagen Hohlenberg (1797–1845), Danish theologian; from 1827, extraordinary professor, and from 1831, ordinary professor of theology (Old Testament) at the University of Copenhagen. the grace (which is offered to them?),] Variant: changed from “the grace, which is offered to them”; the question mark was added under “is offered”. Pelagianism] Named after Pelagius, a British monk and ascetic preacher, active in Rome ca. 400. In ca. 410, he went to Africa, and from there to Palestine, where he was not heard from after 418. Pelagius denied the doctrine of original or hereditary sin and asserted that free will is sufficient to lead a sinless life in accordance with the will of God. He regarded sin as an action, not a state, and believed that all are born good and uncorrupted, like Adam, as originally created by God. He did not reject the idea of grace, however, which he believed to have been given through Christ and which assists us in becoming holy by Christ’s inspiring example. His teachings were condemned at Augustine’s instigation by two African Synods in 416 and 418, and by a Western imperial edict in 419. He was not, however, formally condemned in the East.

•

P a p e r 59 1834 •

379

Möhler appears unwilling to concede this] Presumably, a reference to the Danish translation of J. A. Möhler’s Symbolik, in Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur, vol. 2 (→ 99,22), pp. 146– 147, where Möhler writes: “In this connection, the accusation that adherents of the Lutheran way of presenting the matter so incessantly direct against Catholic doctrine must still be noted, namely, that it is Pelagian and that this is simply what explains the situation. Indeed, one discovers everywhere a . . . deliberate distortion of Catholic doctrine, and in this connection Melanchthon even goes beyond Luther; an unmistakable portion of this accusation is also attributable to a lack of basic historical study, which becomes especially clear when the Thomists are called Pelagians, indeed in every case when Luther’s way of presenting the relation between nature and grace is presented in this way, as if it contained the opposition to the Pelagian view by the early Catholic Church, where it was in fact never taught, not even by Augustine, that original sin had utterly deprived human beings of their religious-moral foundation . . . The Catholic dogma, that even in the fallen human being there still are religious-moral powers present, powers that in and of themselves do not simply sin all the time, and which also may be used in the course of rebirth, gave occasion for understanding the activity of these powers . . . as the natural transition to grace, in such a way that people believed that, according to our doctrine, the best possible use of these powers brought about (merited) grace. Such a view would certainly be Pelagian, and man, not Christ, would merit grace―or, rather, grace would cease being grace. Now, in order to avoid such errors the Reformers embraced the notion that human beings were absolutely incapable of achieving anything, and that only after rebirth does a person once again receive those powers that can be active in and for God’s kingdom. But the higher and excellent significance of Catholic dogma―which very carefully guards the separation of nature and grace― escaped their notice: indeed, if the finite is permitted to expand in every direction―it will never reach that which is in itself infinite; let nature even conscientiously develop all of its powers―it

34

380

“Theologica. Older”

will never, by itself and of itself, be transfigured into the supernatural; what is human will not become divine by its own efforts, by any exercise of power; there would always be an eternal gulf between them unless it is filled by grace; the divine must become human if the human is to become divine.” 100

1

14

Insofar as the Catholics . . . require the fulfillment of the moral law . . . do not perceive the far deeper significance] Reference to the Danish translation of portions of J. A. Möhler’s Symbolik, in Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur, vol. 2 (→ 99,22), pp. 182–183, where Möhler writes with respect to the Protestant dogma of justification by faith, that it excludes “both the works performed before as well as those performed after conversion to Christ, and, in addition, also the holy state of mind and holy feelings, when it attributes salvific power to faith alone―a doctrine that, noted in passing, does not have the least bit of foundation in Holy Scripture. Paul never even thought about such an opposition between faith, love, and works, and James has directly opposed it.” Concerning the Catholic doctrine of good works, Möhler writes, in addition: “By good works, the Catholic Church understands the whole of the justified human being’s moral actions and sufferings, or the fruits of the sanctified mind, of the love that has faith . . . When the above-mentioned Church acknowledges an actual liberation from sin, a tendency of will that is truly sanctified and pleasing to God, then it necessarily follows that it maintains the possibility and actuality of truly good works, and thus also their meritoriousness. In this connection it is also obvious that it can and must require fulfillment of the moral law.” ― Paul’s development of the hum. relationship to the Law: See, e.g., Rom 3:19–20. the idea of the damnation of the pagans] See “Om Hedningernes Fordømmelse” [The Idea of the Damnation of the Pagans] at the conclusion of § 64 in Kierkegaard’s rendering of H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] in Not1:8, from 1833–1834, in KJN 3, 63.

•

P a p e r 59–61 1834 •

the defenders of that doctrine] See § 88, “Anhang von der Seligkeit des Nichtchristen” [Appendix on the Salvation of Non-Christians], in K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche. Ein dogmatisches Repertorium für Studirende [Hutterus Redivivus, or a Dogmatics for the Evangelical Lutheran Church: A Dogmatics Sourcebook for Students], 2nd improved ed. (Leipzig, 1833 [1829]; see ASKB 581, a 4th ed. from 1839; abbreviated hereafter as Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik), pp. 250–251: “Because the pagans are utterly corrupted by original sin, Augustine has, not inappropriately, called their virtues glittering vices, while salvation is only granted through Xt: thereby, their eternal damnation is thus pronounced . . . It must . . . be regarded as an Augustinian exaggeration when the doctrine of exclusive salvation through Xt is pronounced in such a way that pagans are thereby excluded from salvation.” In a note on this passage (on p. 251) we learn that, since Augustine, the doctrine of “the condemnation of the pagans” has been assumed, and that, e.g., it is expressed in Catechismus major D. Martini Lutheri [Dr. Martin Luther’s Large Catechism] (1529), pt. 2, 66 (the explanation of the third article of the Apostles’ Creed): “Inasmuch as those who are outside of Christendom, be they pagans, Turks, Jews, or false Christians and hypocrites, although they believe in and worship only one true God, they nonetheless know nothing of how he is disposed toward them, nor, as well, can they receive the love or boons of God for them; therefore they remain in eternal wrath and damnation.” Mohammed] → 97,31. Moses] the central figure in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, who, at God’s command, leads the Israelites out of Egypt, and who on Sinai imparts God’s revelation to the people. magnetized] Hypnotized. as Tutti Frutti remarks at one point (vol. 3)] Refers to the following passage in no. 2, “Aus meinen Zetteltöpfen. Dritte Ziehung” [From My Jar of Notes: Third Drawing], in Tutti Frutti. Aus den Papieren des Verstorbenen [Tutti-Frutti: From the Papers of a Dead Person (pseudonym for the German prince, author, and landscape architect

16

23 26

31 35

“Theologica. Older”

37

101

6

101

15

22 24

28

101

29

Hermann Ludwig Heinrich von Pückler-Muskau, 1785–1871)], 5 vols. (Stuttgart, 1834), vol. 5, p. 202: “In order to get to the bottom of the matter, Herr Dr. Kerner was to travel to Constantinople and attempt to bring a Muslim woman to see things clearly. One could bet 10 to 1 that in this case the somnambulist, like her apparent Turkish spirits, would find the Koran and Mohammed to be just as infallible and exclusive a means to salvation as Mrs. H finds the Bible and Christ to be―the heightened religious feeling, the intense worship and love of God, on the other hand, would indeed be certain.” results. Jan. 22nd 1835.] Variant: ms. has been damaged; the date is written in pencil, perhaps by Barfod. I cannot”] Variant: “not” has been added. the perfectibility of Christianity] i.e., Christianity’s capacity to develop, to progress, to become perfect; its becoming perfect. See, e.g., § 46 in K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik (→ 100,16), p. 129. x] Refers to Paper 68:1 in the present volume. the coming of the Messiah is proclaimed in the O.T.] Refers to 2 Sam 7:12–13; Isa 8:23–9:6, 11:1– 10; Jer 23:5–6; Mic 5:1–4. Feb. 3rd] Variant: ms. has been damaged; “Feb. 3rd” has been added in pencil, perhaps by Barfod. In developing . . . inspiration . . . the close relation in which the apostles stood to Xt . . . all others] See, e.g., § 37, “Inspiration des N. T.” [Inspiration of the NT], in K. G. Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik (→ 97,2), vol. 1, pp. 296– 297: “One could expect, however, that even without inspiration the apostles could properly present the teachings and the stories of Jesus and of revelation. Because: a) they were in the closest connection to Jesus when he taught, accompanying him everywhere, daily heard him teach, and because he had others who heard him almost every day, they themselves often taught. By so doing they were in a position to grasp his sayings, teachings, and parables quite precisely and thereafter write them down, also when they were lengthy . . . b) Furthermore, they were specially

•

P a p e r 61–68 1834–1835 •

381

chosen by Jesus to preach his teachings, and were therefore carefully instructed. This is especially the case with respect to the Twelve . . . who are preeminently called Christ’s apostles (i.e., the emissaries of the Messiah), and who had the vocation both of being witnesses to Jesus’ life and works . . . and to disseminate further his religion . . . They therefore often received from Jesus―as we see in numerous examples (e.g., Mk 4:10ff.)― more detailed elucidations of his discourses to the people. c) Lastly, as Jews, they were already prepared to understand and appropriate the two principle doctrines of Christianity: concerning one God and concerning salvation, as well as what Jesus taught concerning the afterlife, which conformed to the ideas they already had.” ― inspiration: → 97,2. ― of the close: Variant: changed from “while people also pay much attention to the close”. the Jews . . . required of Christ, that he should prove his divinity] Refers, e.g., to Mt 12:38–42, 16:1–4, 26:63, 27:40–43; Jn 2:18, 4:48, 6:14, 9:16, 10:36. for Ch[rist], his existence and his divinity are of course the same thing] Refers to the doctrinal dogma of Christ’s two natures, that he is both true human being and true God; see, e.g., article 3 in the oldest Lutheran confessional document, the Augsburg Confession (1530): “God’s Son has taken on human nature in the womb of the chaste Virgin Mary, that the two natures, the divine and the human, are thus inseparably united in one person, are one Christ, true God and true human being, who was born of the Virgin Mary,” (Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse [→ 99,19], p. 54). ― Chr[ist]: Variant: first written “God”.

10

x] Refers to Paper 62 in the present volume. Paul, in the letter to the Galatians for example, calls it (4:3) στοιχεια του ϰοςμου] The Greek phrase means “the elemental spirits [or rudiments] of the world.” See Novum Testamentum graece [The New Testament in Greek], ed. G. C. Knapp (Halle, 1829; ASKB 14–15). ― Paul: Paul (originally Saul), the most important figure in

28

102

14

28

102

382

33

103

8 9

103

20

“Theologica. Older”

early Christianity; born in Tarsus in Asia Minor; Hellenistic Jew; educated as a Pharisee; participated in persecutions of fellow Jews who had come to believe in Jesus as the Christ; became the first Christian missionary; understood himself to be “a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures” (Rom 1:1–2); believed to have been executed in Rome ca. a.d. 65 during Nero’s persecution of Christians after a large fire in Rome. In Kierkegaard’s day, the first thirteen letters in the NT, all bearing Paul’s name, were generally accepted as having actually been written by Paul; today only seven (or nine) are usually counted as authentic, including 1 Thessalonians, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. In the last four of the above-mentioned letters Paul appears as an apostle who claims his authority directly from God and from the resurrected Christ. The Acts of the Apostles, which is the other major source of knowledge concerning Paul, is now believed to reflect a later period’s image of the apostle to the pagans. in the N.T. . . . Mosaism and Judaism were a div. revelation] See, e.g., Jn 9:29; Acts 7:2–53; Gal 3:19; Heb 8:5–6. the Law was given in order to hinder transgressions] Presumably, a reference to Gal 3:19. paedagogos] Refers to Gal 3:24. Grundtvig’s Theory of the Church] In Grundtvig’s view, it is not the Bible, but “the living word,” i.e., the Apostles’ Creed at baptism and the words of institution at the Eucharist, which have been passed down orally and spoken aloud in the Christian congregation since apostolic times, that make the Church a “Christian” Church and constitute the source and norm for its faith and doctrine. Grundtvig set forth portions of this view as early as his Kirkens Gienmæle mod Professor Theologiæ Dr. H. N. Clausen [The Church’s Rejoinder to Professor of Theology, Dr. H. N. Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1825; abbreviated hereafter as Kirkens Gienmæle), a reply to Clausen’s book Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus [The Church Constitutions, Doctrines, and Rites

•

P a p e r 68–69 1835 •

of Catholicism and Protestantism] (Copenhagen, 1825), in which Grundtvig asserts that the Apostles’ Creed is the Christian Church’s “fundamental confession,” which unites all Christians at all times, and that the Church has no other “rule of interpretation except that Scripture is to be understood in accordance with the Creed” (p. 29). See also the following passage in Grundtvig’s sermon, no. 21, “Kirke-Troen og Traditionen” [The Faith of the Church and the Tradition] (on 1 Cor 15:1–14), in Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224), vol. 3, p. 487: “indeed, we all know that the book [the NT] has gone from hand to hand in the same congregation in which the Word of faith has gone from mouth to mouth, only with the difference that the Word of faith, summed up briefly at baptism and the Eucharist, was in the mouth of the entire congregation, while throughout many centuries the book was only in the hands of some few scribes who, furthermore, were only slightly acquainted with its contents.” See also the following passage in vol. 3, no. 26, “Ordet og Skriften” [Word and Scripture] (on 1 Cor 1:4–9), p. 591: “even I, who understood very well that the spoken word and not the book language was the living word of human beings, I was as if struck by lightning when it at last became clear to me that without the spoken Word of God at baptism and the Eucharist there were no means of grace, no Christian Church and congregation.” The idea that the Apostles’ Creed originates with Christ himself is already mentioned in Kirkens Gienmæle, but it is expressed more emphatically in Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog, vol. 3, no. 20, “Klippen er Christus” [Christ Is the Rock] (on 1 Cor 10:1–13), 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.” See also the following passage in the third and last part of Grundtvig’s series of articles titled “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes” [Shall

“Theologica. Older” the Lutheran Reformation Actually Continue] in J. C. Lindberg, ed., Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie [Monthly Journal of Christianity and History], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1831–1832), vol. 1, pp. 455–456: “of course we cannot certainly state the year in which any of these books [in the NT] was written, much less say when they generally became well-known, but it is as certain that all of them were written, not before, but after the foundation of the Christian Church as that they all presuppose it [the Church] and are a manifest contribution to the Church’s earliest history. We will therefore claim to have the same rule of faith and baptismal convenant as the original apostolic Church, because we must see these in something that can be as old as the Church, and―above all―not in something that is clearly, according to its own admission, younger. Now, it is obvious that our creed can be as old as the Church, but the fact that the books of the New Testament cannot be is equally obvious, and, inasmuch as this circumstance by itself must, when it is made clear, always be so decisive that only the enemy can counsel the Christians to assert what refutes itself.” See, further, Grundtvig’s review “Om Begrebet af den christelige Dogmatik, ved J. P. Mynster, Dr. theol. o. s. v. Kbhavn 1831 i den Gyldendalske Boglade” [On the Concept of Christian Dogmatics by J. P. Mynster, dr. theol. etc., Copenhagen, 1831 in the Gyldendal Bookshop], in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie, vol. 1, pp. 582–612; p. 595: “Because we of course believe that the apostles had received the Lord’s command concerning everything pertaining to the establishment of God’s Kingdom and carried it out honestly in the light and the power of the Spirit, therefore, to us an objection directed at the appropriateness of the apostolic arrangements is an objection directed at the wisdom of the Lord, and, in fact, if a person could honestly affirm the Apostles’ Creed at baptism without being in fundamental agreement with the Christian faith, the Lord would obviously have built his house on sand, which is something only his enemies can assert.” ― Grundtvig’s: Nikolai Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish theologian, pastor, hymnodist, historian, politician, et al.; cand.

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

383

theol., 1803; private tutor, 1805–1808; delivered his trial sermon, 1810; ordained 1811; assisted his father as a stipendiary curate, in rural Zealand, 1811–1813; from 1821, parish priest in Præstø, also in rural Zealand; from 1822, resident curate at the Church of Our Savior in the Christianshavn district of Copenhagen. In 1826 as a consequence of the legal case against him, he was placed under prior censorship for having published libelous statements concerning professor of theology H. N. Clausen, and he resigned his pastoral call. After receiving support from the Crown, Grundtvig undertook three study journeys to England, and with royal support, he functioned as preacher at vesper services at Frederick’s German Church (present-day Christian’s Church) in Christianshavn, Copenhagen (see map 2, B3–4). Grundtvig believes that the Ch[urch] bases itself on the sacraments] See, e.g., Grundtvig’s Kirkens Gienmæle (→ 103,20), p. 9, where he advances the view “that the Christian Church (Ecclesia Christiana) is a society of faith with a confession of faith that it presents to all who wish to be included in it, including them only by means of baptism and the Eucharist when they subscribe to the confession, and it views them as lapsed if they subsequently reject the faith or refuse to subscribe to the Creed, declaring them to be false Christians, i.e., heretics if, in demonstrably deviating from the Creed, they obstinately assert the right to nonetheless be called Christians.” And further, on p. 10, where Grundtvig writes: “There is, at the present time, a society of faith that calls itself the only true Christian Church, and in which no one is included through baptism and the Eucharist without embracing the so-called Apostles’ Creed, and from which one thus excludes oneself if one refuses to embrace the Creed, all the more so if they want to found a new church whose members are simply not bound, either by faith or doctrine, to any creed.” And, finally, p. 24: “Now, this singular thing upon which the most ancient Church built and upon which it was recognizable not only to its enemies, but especially to its friends―this must undeniably be found in every Church that can truly be called Christian, and this, I maintain, is found in our Church, is found everywhere in

22

384

“Theologica. Older”

which people make the apostolic Creed the exclusive condition for inclusion in the society and attribute to the means of grace―baptism and the Eucharist―a salvific power corresponding to a Creed.” See also Grundtvig’s article “Nye Skrifter om Troes-Regelen i den Christne Kirke” [New Pieces on the Rule of Faith in the Christian Church] in Theologisk Maanedsskrift [Theological Monthly] (Copenhagen, 1825–1828; ASKB 346– 351), vols. 1–6 (1825–1826), ed. N.F.S. Grundtvig and A. G. Rudelbach; vols. 7–12 (1826–1828), ed. A. G. Rudelbach; in vol. 12, pp. 29–84; pp. 32–33. See also the following passage in Grundtvig’s sermon no. 20, “Klippen er Christus” [Christ Is the Rock] (on 1 Cor 10: 1–13), in his Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog (→ 103,20), vol. 3, p. 466: “Both in the times of popery as in the times of our Lutheran forefathers, people indeed had the feeling that whatever people called the rock and the foundation of the Church, in any case neither the Apostles’ Creed at baptism nor the words of institution of both sacraments may be altered, and, therefore, however unreasonably people spoke and wrote about it, Christ’s Church stood immovable on its rock-solid foundation.” See also sermon no. 21, “Kirke-Troen og Traditionen” (→ 103,20) in vol. 3, p. 488, where Grundtvig writes of “the living Word that, through the sacraments, expresses the unchanging faith and imperishable hope of the Christian Church.” See, lastly, Grundtvig’s polemical piece “Om DaabsPagten. I Anledning af S. T. Hr. Stiftsprovst Clausens Barne-Daab og offentlige Erklæring” [On the Baptismal Covenant: On the Occasion of S. T. Hr. Archdeacon Clausen’s Child Baptism and Public Statement] (Copenhagen, 1832; abbreviated hereafter as Om Daabs-Pagten), p. 7, where Grundtvig asserts: “even though it is absolutely clear that although thousands of customary usages can be introduced and practiced without it having any important impact on the Church, it thus stands and falls with its means of grace because they are the only fundamentally actual, objective elements in it. It is surely clear to all priests, at least, that the pope reckons seven means of grace (sacraments), even though he himself concedes that baptism and the Eucharist, as instituted by the Lord himself,

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

and as universal for all Christians, are the most excellent, and Luther maintained that they were the only ones.” whoever changes them seeks to change the Ch[urch] See, e.g., Om Daabs-Pagten (→ 103,22), p. 8, where Grundtvig writes: “Until the contrary is proven, we assert, rightly, that our baptism is the genuine Christian [baptism], and it is in any case undeniable that we are only in ecclesiastical association with those who have their baptism in common with us. But, indeed, our baptism is not communicated to us unconditionally: the Church has established a baptismal covenant with us, containing questions and answers that are found not only in our service book and were not introduced by Martin Luther, but are present in the Episcopal and papal churches as well as in our church―indeed, they are present, fundamentally, at every place in Christendom where people have not demonstrably changed them since the time of the apostles. This baptismal covenant is certainly, as we dare assert, inseparable from genuine Christian baptism, is at any rate inseparable from our baptism, so if one changes the covenant in our children’s baptism, the covenant―and, thereby, also the ecclesiastical association―is also changed.” See also Om Sogne-Baandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Relaxing of Parochial Restrictions and Hr. Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834), p. 20, where Grundtvig “maintains that the forsaking of the enemies of Christ is an essential part of the oath of faithfulness taken by Christians, and that the abolition of the old baptismal covenant is the abolition of the old ecclesiastical association.” This same view, that fundamental changes in the form and content of the sacraments is synonymous with an essential change of the Church, is regularly expressed in Grundtvig’s piece, Den Danske Stats-Kirke upartisk betragtet [The Danish State Church, Viewed without Partisanship] (Copenhagen, 1834). left it] See, e.g., Grundtvig’s Kirkens Gienmæle (→ 103,20), p. 10, and his series of articles “Om Christendommens Sandhed” [On the Truth of Christianity], in Theologisk Maanedsskrift (→ 103,22), vol. 8 (1827), p. 226 (→ 107,13). See Om Daabs-Pagten (→ 103,22), p. 12, where Grundtvig

23

25

“Theologica. Older”

26 28

writes: “With the Eucharist, no new covenant is entered into, for the new covenant named in the words of institution is precisely the baptismal covenant, and thus these words of the Lord and the corresponding distribution are all what we must call unchangeable; but, when we limit ourselves in this manner to requiring that our baptismal covenant be adhered to unswervingly and that the words of institution of both sacraments be scrupulously set forth and followed, we have indeed clearly pushed tractability so far that we cannot go a hair’s breadth further without ourselves leaving ecclesiastical association with the Lord’s Apostles and with those who are to lift up their heads when he himself returns to judge the living and the dead, and from this he will know to preserve his own.” See also Grundtvig’s article “Om Daabspagten, det Theologiske Seminarium og Hr. Stiftsprovst Clausen” [On the Baptismal Covenant, the Theological Seminary, and Hr. Archdeacon Clausen], in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende, et Uge-Skrift for Kirken og Skolen [Nordic Church Times, a Weekly for Church and School], ed. J. C. Lindberg, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833–1834; abbreviated hereafter as Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende); vol. 2, no. 5 (February 2, 1834), col. 67, where he emphasizes the importance of the immutability of the baptismal ritual “for us old-fashioned Christians, who remain faithful with our old baptismal covenant because we believe that it has been abolished in the Danish State Church when we were promptly excluded from it,” and further, in cols. 67–68, where he asks that people “pay attention to the matchless declaration of the old-fashioned orthodox, which I have done―and do again here―so that I will never complain that people alter the baptismal covenant in the Danish State Church―as long as they immediately either simply grant freedom of religion or relax the parochial restrictions and grant the priests of the State Church free choice concerning whether they will adhere to the old or the new baptismal covenant!” the Eucharist, as something actual] → 106,5. baptism . . . yet to take place . . . not yet been introduced into the Church] → 106,5.

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

385

no changes in the words of institution] In modifying the previous service book from 1812, the new service book of 1830 included no changes in the words of institution of the Eucharist, though there were certain changes in the Apostles’ Creed that is recited at baptism (→ 104,12). This also refers to Grundtvig’s emphatic resistance to alterations of any sort in the words of institution both of baptism and of the Eucharist (→ 103,22 and → 103,23). Grundtvig does, however, hint at a slight uncertainty with respect to the oral transmission of the words of institution; see the following passage in the third and final installment of his article series “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes” in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie, vol. 1 (→ 103,20), p. 451: “If we now proceed to the words of institution of the Eucharist, we cannot, of course, quite say the same thing about them that we can about the Creed and about everything inseparably connected with baptism, for precisely because the Christian life begins with baptism, it does not begin with the Eucharist, and because, without any other condition than that which is part of the nature of matter―i.e., that, since their baptism, they must not, either in word or deed, have openly violated their baptismal pact with the Church―this latter [the Eucharist] is shared with all who have been baptized, then I do not really know whether one dare say that the words of institution at the Eucharist have the testimony of the entire congregation, but it is clear that they do have most solemn testimony of all the [congregation’s] teachers, so there can never be any question of altering them in accordance with some other text, nor any question that everything the Bible says concerning the Eucharist is to be explained in accord with the Word.” The other side only requires: i.e., [“]evil[”]] Refers to Prof. H. N. Clausen’s unsigned review “Om Daabspagten. Af N.F.S. Grundtvig, Præst. Kbh. 1832, paa den Wahlske Boghandels Forlag, 19 S.” [On the Baptismal Covenant: By N.F.S. Grundtvig, Priest, Copenhagen, 1832, from the Press of the Wahl Bookshop. 19 pp.], in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], published by “a society,” vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1832), pp. 600–618. Clausen’s piece was published

30

31

386

“Theologica. Older”

the following year as a separate pamphlet under the title Belysning af Pastor Grundtvigs Skrift om Daabspagten [Elucidation of Pastor Grundtvig’s Piece on the Baptismal Pact] (Copenhagen, 1833); on the title page is stated “Reprinted from Maanedsskrift for Literature, 1832, no. 12,” and a brief epilogue is added (pp. 24–28) in which Clausen takes issue with an unsigned article, “Nogle Bemærkninger om Liturgie” [Some Remarks on Liturgy], in Christelig Kirke-Tidende [Christian Church Times], ed. L. Westengaard and C. H. Kalkar, vol. 2 (Odense, 1833), nos. 1–2 (January 10, 1833), pp. 1–7, which supports Grundtvig against Clausen. In his review, Clausen defends the change of language from forsaking the devil to forsaking “sin and all evil,” and he asserts that belief in a personal devil is not “necessary and essential to the Christian faith” and that forsaking a devil is not “necessary and essential to Christian baptism” (p. 605). There is also an allusion to Clausen’s unsigned article “Tillægsbetragtninger: Om Djævlelæren og Forsagelse af Djævelen” [Additional Observations: On the Doctrine concerning Devils and Forsaking the Devil], in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, vol. 11 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 23–61, which was also published that same year as a separate pamphlet under the title Om Djævlelæren og Djævleforsagelsen ved Daaben. Betragtninger, anbefalede til tænksomme og retsindige Christnes Overveielse [On the Doctrine concerning Devils and Forsaking the Devil at Baptism: Observations Recommended for Consideration by Thoughtful and Honorable Christians] (Copenhagen, 1834; the title page states that it is a “reprint from Maanedskrift for Lit., 1834, no. 1”). Here Clausen argues for forsaking “evil” instead of a personal devil, and on pp. 33–34, he juxtaposes the following two forms of renunciation: either “Do you forsake the Devil, his being, and his works?” or “Do you forsake evil and all that is ungodly?” And, with direct address to Grundtvig, he writes on p. 35: “Forsaking the Devil―this is the claim―as the personal enemy and slanderer of the Christian faith and the Christian Church is an absolutely essential part of the baptismal covenant, so that forsaking sin and all evil which is unpleasing to God is a dis-

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

tortion of Christian baptism, an abolition of the baptismal covenant, a dissolution of ecclesiastical association with the Fathers and the genuine Christian congregation. (See Grundtvig on the baptismal pact.)” See Om Daabs-Pagten (→ 103,22), p. 11, where Grundtvig writes: “Furthermore, we all know that when, by entering into Christ’s Church, we forsake the Devil and all his works and all his being, we are thus thereby forsaking the personal enemy and slanderer of the Christian faith and the Christian Church, along with everything that mocks and denies them, but on the other hand, when we merely say that we forsake all evil, this is something so indistinct that there are even, indeed, many people who will say that the Christian faith and the Christian Church is itself evil.” In a baptism in Copenhagen’s Church of Lady, Prof. Clausen’s father, Archdeacon H. G. Clausen, had changed the forsaking of the devil to the forsaking of “sin and everything that is evil and displeasing to God” (see H. N. Clausen, Henrik Georg Clausens Eftermæle. Hans Venner helliget [In Memory of Henrik Georg Clausen: Dedicated to His Friends] [Copenhagen, 1840], p. 56). See, furthermore, Grundtvig, Om DaabsPagten, p. 9: “Now, to be sure, Hr. Archdeacon maintains that his changes are without significance, and in so doing he says, to our astonishment, that he is even willing to alter our baptismal covenant for insignificant reasons; but if, as I do not doubt, he has actually altered the question ‘Do you forsake the Devil and all his works and all his being’ to ‘Do you forsake sin and all evil’―or something of that sort―then in my view the change is so significant that I solemnly declare myself withdrawn from every ecclesiastical association that has adopted or hereafter will adopt the change.” See A. G. Rudelbach’s article “Er Forsagelsen ved Daaben i den gammel-kirkelige Form et væsentligt Stykke af vor Daabspagt, eller ikke?” [Is or Is Not the Renunciation at Baptism in the Manner of the Ancient Church an Essential Part of Our Baptismal Covenant?] in nos. 17–20 (April 28 and May 5, 12, and 19, 1833) of Den Nordiske KirkeTidende (→ 103,25), vol. 1 (1833), cols. 276–279, 291–297, 307–315, and 324–331, esp. col. 276. See also J. C. Lindberg’s article “Om Prof. Clausens

“Theologica. Older”

104

4

6

7 12

‘Djævlelære’ i Maanedsskrift for Literatur” [On Prof. Clausen’s ‘Devil Doctrine’ in Maanedsskrift for Literatur] in nos. 9 and 10 (March 2 and 9) in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende, vol. 2 (1834), cols. 129– 144 and cols. 145–160. the Bible contained what was essentially Christian] Presumably refers to the orthodox Lutheran view that the Bible, as divinely inspired, contains “what is essentially Christian.” differ from the others.] Variant: first written “different from the others,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. Gr[undtvig], on the contrary . . . what is and is not Chr[istian] faith] → 103,20 and → 103,22. Lindberg . . . very consistently . . . must insist upon every letter . . . every . . . tittle] Refers to J. C. Lindberg’s article “Om den christne TroesBekjendelses Form i den sidste Udgave af den danske Alterbog” [On the Form of the Christian Confession of Faith in the Latest Edition of the Danish Service Book] in nos. 49 and 50 (December 7 and 14, 1834) of Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende (→ 103,25), vol. 2 (1834), cols. 817–832 and cols. 844–848. As a consequence of the new authorized translation of the NT from 1819, the Chancery had assigned F.C.C.H. Münter, bishop of Zealand―an assignment he delegated to Pastor C. H. Visby― to make all epistle and gospel texts in the service book harmonize with the new translation of the NT; this resulted in the Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381; abbreviated hereafter as Forordnet Alter-Bog). In this connection―despite the fact that it was not part of the assignment from the Chancery―the versions of a number of other texts, including the Apostles’ Creed, that had appeared in the previous service book (Forordnet Alter-Bog udi Dannemark og Norge [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark and Norway] [Copenhagen, 1812]) (→ 106,40) were updated for the new edition. It was these changes that Grundtvig and his adherents disapproved of and that were the object of Lindberg’s investigation, in which he examined the least details in even the most minor of changes. In the 1830 edition of the service book, no changes were made in the introductory renunciation of the devil, but

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

387

a change made in the first article of the Apostles’ Creed induced Lindberg to write (p. 820): “The first article of faith in the changed service book now reads as follows: ‘I believe in God the father, almighty Creator of heaven and earth,’ whereas our Christian creed, known by the faithful, reads: ‘I believe in God the Father, the Almightiest, Creator of heaven and earth.’ ” Lindberg continues, in cols. 820–821: “We know very well, also from our own experience, that when one takes the Latin symbol [creed] by itself, as it can be written on paper: credo in deum patrem omnipotentem creatorem coeli et terrae, and want―without paying attention to the living Word in the Church―to translate it into Danish, one can waver between the following three translations: I. I believe in God the almighty Father, Creator of heaven and earth. II. I believe in God the Father, the Almightiest, Creator of heaven and earth. And III. I believe in God the Father almighty Creator of heaven and earth. We by no means believe that one is oneself, by way of the dead letter, able to come to full certainty concerning the sole way in which these words ought properly be translated, for we need only see how the words appear with the Greeks, from whom they came to the Latins, in order to convince ourselves that it is impossible for them to be translated otherwise than as ‘I believe in God the Father, the Almightiest, Creator of heaven and earth’ for in Greek it says Πιστεύω είς ϑεὸν πατέρα, παντοϰράτορα, ποιητὴν ὀυρανοῖ ϰαὶ γῆς. But because the person involved was not charged with making a translation of the Creed from the Latin, but to publish the old service book without alteration except to the extent that the new translation of the New Testament and the Danish language necessitated alteration, these instructions could not have any influence in explaining the case of the alteration mentioned here. Here, the question can only be whether a real alteration has been made, that is, whether the First Article in the new service book says exactly the same thing as that in the old one.” After a lengthy investigation Lindberg comes to the conclusion that this is a matter of a “real” alteration, which changes the meaning, and he concludes (col. 824): “If someone asks us, Do you believe in God the Father,

388

20 27

29

“Theologica. Older”

almighty Creator of heaven and earth―we answer Yes, in good conscience. But if someone asks us: Are you willing to be baptized on this faith― then we answer No, not on this, but on the full confession of the omnipotence of the Father, for we must pass the faith on to our children in the same extent that it has come down to us from the forefathers, and no one has given us license to involve ourselves here with any abridgment of any sort whatever. For Christians this is and must be a matter of conscience.” Lindberg goes through all the other alterations in the same detailed fashion, and he ends with a discussion of the change in the baptismal words themselves, cols. 847–848: “In the new edition of the service book, the baptismal words read as follows: ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,’ instead of the correct wording in the old edition: ‘I baptize you in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.’ ” And he continues: “to be sure, this is a matter of a little ‘and,’ but if it is a matter of indifference whether or not one puts it in, then take away as well the next little ‘and,’ and how does it read then? . . . This much, at any rate, can be seen by anyone, that both the trinity and the unity are emphasized precisely by this ‘and’; . . . is it without significance that the Lord himself spoke, saying, Mt 28:19: Go forth and teach all people and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that the words have thus accompanied baptism up to our own times!” ― Lindberg: 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, from which he was dismissed in 1830, presumably because of his active participation in Grundtvig’s dispute with the Danish Church. the expression of Chr[istian] faith upon which he believes the Ch[urch] to be based] → 104,12. to understand it.] Variant: first written “to understand it,” with the comma apparently indicating that the sentence was to continue. the concept of inspiration] → 97,2.

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

the language in which it was originally given] Presumably Greek (→ 104,12). the Greek Ch[urch] . . . deviates from the others in its Creed] Refers to the fact that the Greek Orthodox Church does not use the Apostles’ Creed, but rather the Nicene Creed as its “symbol,” and in a version without filioque (Latin, “and [from] the Son”). In the 8th century, the phrase “and from the Son” was added by the Roman Catholic Church to the third article of the Nicene Creed, which concerns the Holy Spirit. Thus, the Roman version of the Nicene Creed states that the Holy Spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son,” while the Greek Orthodox Church does not. See the following passage from the third and last article in Grundtvig’s article series “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes” (→ 103,30), vol. 1, pp. 463–464, concerning the condemnation of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius at the Council of Nicea: “If one can become a heretic despite the fact that, as far as human beings can see, one has held to one’s baptismal covenant, then it is more or less a matter of indifference whether one is condemned in accordance with a majority vote at an assembly of bishops or in accordance with whatever is the dominant interpretation of scripture at a given moment, for in both cases the approach is equally arbitrary and indefensible. The feeling of this indeed gave rise to the arrangements in the East that the Nicene Creed instead of the Apostles’ Creed would thereafter be used in connection with the baptismal covenant, but for one thing, in so doing they made a poor defense of such a rule’s retroactive effect on Arius, and for another, the cure was worse than the disease, for by altering the baptismal covenant they botched it and actually made the whole of the Eastern Church into a society of the dead.” Grundtvig . . . in Theol. Maanedsskrift . . . a withered branch] Refers to the following passage in Grundtvig’s article series “Om Christendommens Sandhed” (→ 103,25) in Theologisk Maanedsskrift, vol. 6 (1826), p. 239: “Thus have both Jews and Greeks . . . while alive, journeyed down to the kingdom of the dead as witnesses to their own deaths, and to the faith and the Book whose

32 34

35

“Theologica. Older”

106

1

blessings they have lost, but whose judgment they bear! Equally dead, withered branches, they are on the oak of Mamre, on the great Abrahamic genealogical tree over which the blessing hovered with the voice of angels and under which the faith rested upon the promise, while, on wings of longing, hope visited the forlorn paradise of the heart!” the apostles give this Creed] Refers to the view that the Apostles’ Creed stems from the time of the apostles, a traditional view held earlier in the Church’s history and that Grundtvig and his adherents wished to maintain, but upon which the historical-critical research of their time cast grave doubt. See, e.g., Grundtvig, Kirkens Gienmæle (→ 103,20), p. 25: “All scholars of the Church know that it would be an easy matter for me to cite scores of accounts by witnesses to the effect that our Creed is actually the one that has been upon the tongue of the Christian Church from the very first moment it opened its mouth in order to audibly defend its spiritual riches against open enemies and against false friends.” And, on pp. 32–33: “When our congregation built upon the gospel story and upon the Creed that the apostles themselves, as members of the congregation, deposit in their writings, they undeniably built upon the Apostles’ Creed and in accordance with it, and duly interpreted the words of Scripture into learning.” See also “Om det apostolske Symbol” [On the Apostles’ Creed], in J. C. Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger. Tredie Mindeskrift i Anledning af den augsburgske Confessions Jubelfest [Historical Information Regarding the Symbolic Books of the Danish Church: Third Commemorative Work on the Occasion of the Anniversary of the Augsburg Confession] (Copenhagen, 1830; abbreviated hereafter as Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger), pp. 47–82, where Lindberg, after his attempt to prove the traditional view, writes in conclusion, p. 82: “We must end here with these remarks on the Apostles’ Creed. It is by no means my view that this has exhausted the subject, but it is my hope that they show that the recent assertion that the Apostles’ Creed is not apostolic is utterly unjustifiable, that it is baseless and

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

389

fundamentally false, and that the learned must certainly be ashamed of themselves for such indefensible testimony against the fundamental Christian element of the faith into which they are baptized, just as we are.” See also Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Lindberg’s work in Paper 1:2 in the present volume. In addition, see Grundtvig’s review of “Om Begrebet af den christelige Dogmatik, ved J. P. Mynster” (→ 103,20), pp. 592–593: “Incidentally, it is clear that on Pentecost Day, before there was yet a single page of the New Testament, the apostles must have made a certain faith into a condition for baptism, and if the apostolic Church founded then still exists, its confession of faith must still be the same, for even if it was never written down, as it nonetheless is the case that there shall always be the same faith and the same baptism in the Christian Church, it was entirely in the nature of the matter that the transformation of the faith abolished the previous society of believers and created another. Thus, if our Christian Church is apostolic, so, through baptism, is our confession of faith as well, and it must have sprung forth entirely independent of Scripture.” as related in the N.T., Christianity is far more complex . . . than with baptism] The account of Jesus’ establishment of the Eucharist is included in the account of Jesus’ last supper with his apostles, and it is related in varied form in each of the three synoptic Gospels: Mt 26:17–29, esp. 26–28; Mk 14:12–25, esp. 22–24; and Lk 22:7–23, esp. 19–20. See also 1 Cor 11:23–25. With respect to baptism, the reference is presumably to Mk 10:13–16, which was a part of the baptismal ritual in Kierkegaard’s time (see Forordnet Alter-Bog [→ 104,12], p. 245). See also the command to missionize in Mt 28:16–20. and if there was . . . with baptism.] Variant: added. secrecy . . . (the element of mystery . . . Gentile Christians as well as for Jewish Christians.)] Refers to the early Church phenomenon “discipline of the arcane” (Latin, disciplina arcani), which required that believers keep secret the Christian mysteries (e.g., baptism and the Eucharist). See the article “Disciplin (die Geheim-), Disciplina arcani” [Discipline (the Secret-) Disciplinia arcani], in W. D. Fuhrmann, Handwörterbuch der christli-

5

7 7

390

“Theologica. Older”

chen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte [Manual of Christian Religious and Church History], ed. W. D. Fuhrmann, 3 vols. (Halle, 1826–1829; ASKB 75–77), vol. 1, pp. 617–618: “The practice of maintaining secrecy from all unbaptized persons that prevailed primarily from the middle or the end of the 2nd cent[ury], into the 3rd [century], and up to the beginning of the 4th cent[ury] mostly with respect to the most sacred observances of the Christian worship, as the principal doctrines of Christianity . . . First, Irenaeus, Tertullian, . . . and Clement of Alexandria wrote in praise of this . . . John Chrysostom wrote . . . that the mysteries were held behind closed doors, and the uninitiated (also catachumens) were denied access . . . Not only the rituals of baptism and the Eucharist, the Church’s public prayers, but also the consecration of priests were the objects of the discipline of secrecy. Also, in particular, the Lord’s Prayer, the confession of the Holy Trinity (symbolum fidei [Latin, “confession of faith”]) or the invocation of them, and the holy unction (anointment). Specifically, since the 6th century the Church’s public prayers, the Lord’s Prayer and the Creed during the celebration of the holy Eucharist have been closely connected to all this. We can learn most about the Discipl. arc. from Cyril of Jerusalem’s Catechetical Lectures and and Mystagogical Discourses.―The cause of this was not imitating the pagan mysteries, but: 1) the period of persecution by pagans. Because in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, the Christians were not permitted to practice their religion publicly, they had to keep their sacred practices secret . . . 2) The separation of catachumens from the faithful (πιστοῖς [Greek, “the believers”]), which arose at the time. They did not want to permit the sacred doctrines and customs to be distorted by the children of the pagans. At the same time, in so doing they wanted the catachumens to display greater reverence for the holy doctrines of the religion.” Concerning Lindberg’s emphasis of Archbishop Cyril’s keeping the Apostles’ Creed secret, → 106,34. ― element of mystery: Variant: first written “element of mystery.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

It has been demanded that Gr[undtvig] should prove that the present Creed was the original] Presumably refers to Bishop R. Møller’s “Fortale” [Preface] to C. C. Boisen’s piece Om Kirken og Præstens Forhold til samme [On the Church and the Priest’s Relation to It] (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. v–xvi; pp. viii–x, where, with respect to “the socalled Apostles’ Creed,” R. Møller writes: “If, on its own, it is supposed to be a certain source of faith for us, it would of course have to be proven that it is not human words, but God’s Word, that it was communicated by the Lord himself to us via his apostles as a source of divine revelation; and I cannot conceive how a person could reject this requirement as unreasonable, for if the person who holds to Scripture as the rule of his faith assures himself about being able to prove its divine origin, doesn’t he have the right to assert that, before he lets go of this, his old rule of faith, one must provide him with the same certainty, the same decisive proof, for the other thing that someone wishes to give him in its place? But from where do we obtain the proof for the apostolic origin of the Church’s creed? It can deserve the name apostolic because it is worthy of the apostles and in agreement with their doctrine known from other sources, but this is not the object of investigation here. It is to be called apostolic, people say, as having originated from the apostles themselves, as something reported by one of their first disciples, and as the creed subscribed to by them at their baptism. But history is absolutely silent on this . . . On the contrary, it is certain that in the course of time it has been, if not lengthened with new sentences (which has been proposed, and not entirely without reason), then at any rate changed in form, but in so brief and concise a summary of our Christian doctrines, every change, even in simple expressions, can be of great significance and that already makes it unusable as a completely certain and reliable testimony to revelation. And that is simply what we must have if we are to be able to rely on it.” This is also cited in the first part of J. C. Lindberg’s article “Om Hans Høiærværdigheds Hr. Biskop Dr. R. Møllers og Hr. Pastor C. C. Boisens offentlige Yttringer om Daabs-Pagten” [On the Public

10

“Theologica. Older”

11

15

Remarks by His Reverence Hr. Bishop Dr. R. Møller and Hr. Pastor C. C. Boisen concerning the Baptismal Covenant], in Den Nordiske KirkeTidende (→ 103,25), vol. 2, no. 11, [March 16] 1834, cols. 164–176; cols. 168–169. the Mag[ister] . . . incumbent upon the others to prove that it was not original] Refers to the first part of Magister J. C. Lindberg’s (→ 104,12) article “Om Hans Høiærværdigheds Hr. Biskop Dr. R. Møllers og Hr. Pastor C. C. Boisens offentlige Yttringer om Daabs-Pagten” (→ 106,10), cols. 164–176; cols. 171–172, where Lindberg states the following view: “the person who maintains that the Christian Church nowadays no longer has its original baptismal covenant must also maintain that the Church no longer has its original hope of salvation or that it builds upon an indefensible foundation. Thus one must indeed leave it exclusively to the enemies of the Christian faith and the Church to make such an assertion, and, when they do so, ask them to prove their validity. Here, indeed, as always, one must be very aware of which party has the burden of proof, and one must guard carefully against assuming it oneself when it rests upon the opponent; because, for one thing, people confuse illuminating a matter with proof, despite the fact that they are very different and only summon up confusion. Thus we are not to take it upon ourselves to prove that the Christian Church has not changed or distorted the baptismal covenant, but we are to demand of enemies, who maintain that it [the Church] has changed or distorted it, the proof of their coarse accusation.” See the following passage in the first part of Lindberg’s article “Om den christne TroesBekjendelses Form i den sidste Udgave af den danske Alterbog” (→ 104,12) col. 822: “The first question we must ask is namely this: Can you who want to introduce a change in our baptismal covenant give us a valid basis for it? The provision of enlightenment and proof is in fact in no way a burden upon us, but upon those who want to introduce the change.” he himself has said . . . not depend upon dead letters . . . upon the living Word] In connection with his vehement criticism, in Kirkens Gienmæle (→ 103,20), of H. N. Clausen’s emphasis on the

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

391

Protestant principle of scripture as the sole “rule of faith,” which Grundtvig calls “the crudest faith in letters,” “a blind faith in scripture,” Grundtvig hit upon his idea of the Apostles’ Creed as “the living Word, which provably emanated from Christ’s mouth” (p. 15). In sermon no. 26, “Ordet og Skriften,” in Christelige Prædikener eller SøndagsBog (→ 103,20), vol. 3, p. 586, Grundtvig developed further the theory of the “living” word as the orally transmitted and “spoken” word, as opposed to the “literalist,” “powerless,” or “dead” written word as follows: “As the living word of God came to the world through the tongues of the Lord and the apostles, so was it spread and propagated from mouth to mouth”; furthermore, “only the living, audible, vociferous word of God can glow upon the lips of the faithful, glow through their hearts, and open in them the source that springs forth to an eternal life; for only in this word is there present the Holy Spirit which neither can nor wants to abide in bindings or pages like a moth or a bookworm, but which flies solely in its invisible cloak of feathers―as the voice may well be called―and abides only in hearts that lovingly embrace the word that went forth from God’s mouth” (pp. 586–587). See also the introduction to Grundtvig’s Nordens Mythologi eller Sindbilled– Sprog [Nordic Mythology or Symbolic Language], 2nd rev. ed. (Copenhagen, 1832 [1808]; ASKB 1949), pp. 59–63, where on p. 59, Grundtvig writes of “the little word from the divine” that “in the Christian Church . . . is solemnly propagated by both sacraments and in the confession of faith at baptism expresses succinctly and clearly the entirety of the fundamental Christian understanding of the world’s Creator”; see, in addition, p. 62 on the necessity of throwing away “the most baseless of all prejudices, the most vacuous of all fancies, which is undeniably the one concerning the life, power, and voice of letters.” the Mag[ister], . . . 300 years ago . . . arguing on the basis of the dead letter] Refers to the following note in the first part of Magister J. C. Lindberg’s article “Om den christne TroesBekjendelses Form i den sidste Udgave af den danske Alterbog” (→ 104,12), cols. 824–825: “We still have an ancient Danish book printed

20

392

25 27

“Theologica. Older”

in 1510, thus prior to the Reformation, which makes clear that in the papist darkness our forefathers nonetheless had the same baptismal covenant that we have. It is Lucidarius, which has the title [‘]Her begynes Lucidarius [Here Begins Lucidarius][’], and which has as conclusion [‘] printed in Copenhagen by Godfred in Our Year of the Lord One Thousand Five Hundred Ten[’], and in which it says: [‘]The first article, began Saint Peter, and said, I believe in God the Father Almighty who has created both heaven and earth.[’] From the period of ferment during the Reformation we have [‘]The Twelve Articles of Our Christian Faith with Explications and Interpretations of the Holy Scripture in Which They Have Their Basis and Origin, Rostock 1527[’], in which the first article reads as follows: [‘]I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth.[’] Similarly, from the same period, [‘]Christen Pedersen’s The Right Way to the Kingdom of Heaven Can Be Learned Here in the Ten Commandments of God, in the Creed, and the Lord’s Prayer. Antwerp 1537[’], in which the first article reads as follows: [‘]I believe in God the Father Almighty, who created heaven and earth.[’] This remained unchanged after the Reformation except as the language developed, the form Alsommectigste [almightiest] appeared less often and only Almægtigste [almightiest] was used.” The opposition has pointed out that the Creed is not found in the N.T.] → 106,10. 1) yes, of course . . . the Christians . . . knew the Creed so well . . . didn’t need to quote it] Refers to “Om det apostolske Symbol” [On the Apostles’ Creed], in J. C. Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger (→ 106,1), pp. 55–56, where Lindberg, after describing how Archbishop Cyril stressed the importance of keeping the Creed secret (→ 106,34), writes: “even if all the Fathers had not been as strict as he, they nonetheless could not have written the Creed in their writings. For had they done so, they would have had to have a reason to do so, namely either to instruct or to preserve the Creed. But as for the first, it would have been impossible for them to have written it down―because for whom would

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

they have written? For the Christians, of course, and now who could come up with the foolish idea of wanting to teach the Christians their Creed? They themselves had of course sworn it at their baptism; they heard it repeated every year. They truly did not need to obtain from books and from dead letters a historical knowledge concerning a faith they had in their hearts and confessed to the Lord every day. Could the Fathers perhaps have written it down in order to preserve it? Truly, the Fathers did not indeed have such little faith that they could have thought that the faith in the Lord needed to be written down in order to be preserved in their memory, and they surely were not so devoid of understanding to have thought that posterity was to become Christianized by their books.” ― 1): Variant: added. 1 Cor 11 Paul cites the words of institution] See 1 Cor 11:23–25. 1 Cor 11, he says εγω παρελαβον απο του ϰυριου, ὁ ϰαι παρεδωϰα υμιν] Cited freely from 1 Cor 11:23. the Creed . . . the earliest Church Fathers . . . Mag. Lindberg has suggested . . . kept it secret] Refers to the following passage in “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in J. C. Lindberg’s Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger (→ 106,1), p. 53, where Lindberg emphasizes that it is “clear from so many remarks by the Church Fathers that the Creed was kept as a great secret, not only from unbelieving pagans, but even from those who were instructed in order to be included within Christianity, so that they did not even come to know the Creed until shortly before baptism itself. And they were indeed strictly forbidden to share with the uninitiated the lengthy explanations and sermons they heard about it; indeed, this point was emphasized so much that it was regarded as a betrayal of Christianity.” And to prove his point, Lindberg cites (both in Greek and in Danish) a lengthy passage from section 12 of the “Procatechesis” [Prologue to Catechesis] in S. Cyrilli archiepiscopi Hierosolymitani opera quæ extant omnia, et ejus nomine circumferuntur [The Complete Extant Works of St. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Including the Works That Circulated

29 33

34

“Theologica. Older”

40

under His Name], ed. A. A. Touttée (Paris, 1720), p. 9. written down from ca. the 4th century―but not exactly in our own version] Refers to the version of the Creed that was used in the Roman Church at baptism and is found in written form in an apologia written by Rufinus of Aquilea (d. 410); see “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in J. C. Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger (→ 106,1), pp. 74–82, esp. pp. 81–82. In a note, pp. 81–82, Lindberg presents “the Roman Creed” as transmitted by Rufinus: “Credo in deum patrem omnipotentem; Et in Christum Jesum, unicum filium ejus, dominum nostrum, qui natus est de spiritu sancto ex Maria virgine, crucifixus sub Pontio Pilato, et sepultus; tertio die resurrexit a mortuis; adscendit in coelos, sedet ad dextram patris; inde venturus est judicare vivos et mortuos. Et in spiritum sanctum, sanctam ecclesiam, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem” (“I believe in God, Father, the Almighty; and in Jesus Christ his only son, our Lord, who through the Holy Spirit was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and buried; arose from the dead on the third day, was transported up to heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, from whence he shall come to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Spirit, the holy Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body.”) In the catechism that is included at the end of the Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 104,12), pp. 289–290, the Apostles’ Creed reads as follows: “I believe in God the Father, almighty Creator of heaven and earth. And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; descended into hell, on the third day arose from the dead, ascended to heaven; sitting at the right hand of God the Almighty Father, from whence he shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, a holy Christian Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and an eternal life.” According to the ritual for baptism, pp. 246–247, this is the version that, in interrogative form and preceded by the forsaking

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

393

of the devil, was to be used in the baptism ritual. The same was the case in the older edition of the service book from 1812 (→ 104,12), where (p. 291) the Apostles’ Creed reads as follows: “I believe in God the Father, almightiest Creator of heaven and earth. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead, and buried; descended into hell, arose from the dead on the third day, was transported up to heaven. Sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty, from whence he shall come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, that there is one holy Christian Church which is the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and an eternal life after death.” Lindberg, who argues from the dead letter] → 106,20. See also “Om det apostolske Symbol,” in J. C. Lindberg’s Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger (→ 106,1), pp. 57–66, where Lindberg, in arguing that the Church Fathers did not cite the Apostles’ Creed in the form in which it is used at baptism, refers, e.g., to Irenaeus and Tertullian, with long passages in Greek, Latin, and in Danish translation from their writings; in similar fashion, he illustrates his argument with a passage from sermon 25, “Seiglet paa de Christnes Himmel-Brev” [The Seal on the Christians’ Letter from Heaven] (on 1 Pet 4:7–11), in Grundtvig’s Christelige Prædikener eller SøndagsBog (→ 103,20), vol. 2, p. 441; see the note, p. 64; see also pp. 69–77, where, in his attempt to prove that the Church Fathers believed in Jesus’ descent into hell (or the underworld), he refers to Cyril and Irenaeus and includes a number of passages in Greek and Danish from Cyril’s catecheses (→ 106,34). know exists;] Variant: following this, the word “originally” has been deleted. the covenant] The baptismal covenant, i.e., the covenant with God and the Church that is established when affirmative answers are given to each of the three questions concerning forsaking the devil, as well as each of the three articles of the Apostles’ Creed (cast in interrogative form),

41

42 9

107

394

13

“Theologica. Older”

and the question “Will you be baptized upon this faith?” Grundtvig also thought that . . . this theory . . . what is Christian and what is not] See, e.g., the following passages in Grundtvig’s series of articles “Om Christendommens Sandhed” (→ 103,25), in Theologisk Maanedsskrift, vol. 8 (1827), p. 226, where Grundtvig writes, “that at baptism the Creed is . . . a fully valid testimony to what all who want to be Christians are to believe, so that whoever denies or in the least way rejects the faith that not only Lutherans but also Catholics confess is clearly no Christian unless the Christian faith has been falsified in the Church since time immemorial, something he will find out whether he can prove, but first he will have to leave our Church in which none can remain who denies and rejects his baptismal covenant. Now we can calmly leave it to everyone: which assurance of genuine Christianity they prefer to believe in― either the solemn testimony given at baptism for many centuries by the entire Church and the congregation, or the assertions by some book-learned scholars who have fallen away from their baptismal covenant and who, in addition, want to lead us to believe that Christianity was sheer paganism right from the beginning.” Grundtvig writes, further (p. 226), that “the public and universal Creed . . . teaches us both how scripture is to be understood in a Christian manner and also teaches us how to differentiate between the Christian faith that we have in common with those who have been Christians before we were and those who shall be Christian after us.” And, lastly, he writes (p. 227): “Only if we cling firmly like this to the word of faith that is the living voice of the Spirit in accordance with which the letter of scripture is to be interpreted and explained, can we successfully defend the faith against its enemies and strengthen it among the perplexed―for as long as we want to derive the faith from scripture, the opponents can quarrel with us until doomsday about the definition of the Christian faith that is to be defended―and that is how long the congregation would necessarily be confused by each of the countless doubts (which, furthermore, are insoluble until doomsday) that can arise in con-

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

nection with an ancient book that has passed through so many hands and has such a wealth of contents that are as profound―and therefore at many points, as obscure―as the Bible.” See also the third and last part of Grundtvig’s series of articles “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes” (→ 103,20), in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie, vol. 1, pp. 417–484; p. 439, where Grundtvig makes a number of assertions, including the following three: “a. That the spoken Creed at baptism is independent of all scripture, and, as the congregation’s unanimous testimony concerning its faith, is the most valid historical testimony that can be given concerning what all Christians have believed from the beginning. b. That as the condition for inclusion in the society of the Christian Church, this Creed is the Church’s immutable rule of faith and fundamental law that, in indissoluble union with baptism, puts in place the only defensible division between the Church and the world, or between what is and is not real Christendom. c. That the spoken word in the sacraments, and especially the Creed, is the fundamental rule for interpretation of the Bible in Christendom, in accordance with which every book-learned scholar who wants to remain in the Christian Church shall and must conduct himself.” See also pp. 442–443. He thought that the Bible was deaf and dumb . . . give it every sort of interpretation] See, e.g., the following passages in Grundtvig’s series of articles “Om Christendommens Sandhed” (→ 103,25) in Theologisk Maanedsskrift, vol. 6 (1826), p. 141: “Our Holy Scriptures do not in themselves constitute a divorce between us and the world, for as scriptures they are in themselves a book, that is, a dead thing that is subject, both internally and externally, to all the possible objections, alterations, and distortions to which a book can be subjected. Thus it is necessarily the great apple of discord between Christian and worldly booklearned people, which the world, without abandoning its hatred of the Word of the Kingdom of God, can very well appropriate because it can of course assert that when one reads it properly and has an appropriate degree of book-learning, one does not find God’s Word depicted there at

14

“Theologica. Older”

15

all, but precisely the opposite.” See, further, pp. 142–143: “The fact is simply that inasmuch as Scripture does not sanctify the Church, but it is the Church that sanctifies Scripture―or, because the Words of faith that we confess and proclaim are the Church’s living concept, while Scripture, on the contrary, is its dead concept, it is clearly not Scripture that either can or shall defend the Church, but the Church that shall defend Scripture, just as it is not the capital city that is to defend its inhabitants, but them who are to defend it, and, just as certainly as a capital city can be in the grasp of the enemy without having on that account been lost―if the inhabitants have the courage and the strength to retake it, it is equally certain that Scripture can be taken by force without this either disproving our Christian faith or our right to declare that Scripture, properly interpreted, is entirely in agreement with it.” See also the third and final installment in Grundtvig’s series of articles “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes” (→ 103,20), in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie, vol. 1, pp. 417–484; p. 427, where Grundtvig writes, with reference to the Bible, that “the book, as we know, is deaf and dumb.” See also the preceding note. thought . . . these words . . . so simple that no one could misunderstand them] → 107,13. See also the following passage in Grundtvig’s review of “Om Begrebet af den christelige Dogmatik, ved J. P. Mynster” (→ 103,20), pp. 596–597: “this much is clear as day without any other evidence: that, compared to the Bible, the Apostles’ Creed is in every way a peerlessly convenient and definite rule of faith and a unified point of agreement for the Church. The Creed, namely, can be equally well communicated orally to those who cannot read as to those who can, and this is already an essential advantage for a faith’s source of knowledge that is supposed to be universal; next, it is so brief that it can be learned and remembered without difficulty, and can be repeated daily by even the simplest and most enslaved of people, and this is a necessary characteristic for a rule of faith that is to be binding on all members of the society and to serve as the touchstone of the Christian character of their hopes and their thoughts.”

•

P a p e r 69 1835 •

395

from various sides] Variant: the editors of SKS have deleted Kierkegaard’s period after the word “sides”. particularly by the same men.] Variant: added. universally accepted] Variant: preceding this, the word “essentially” has been deleted. than all the teachings in the Bible] Variant: added. Mk.] The meaning of this abbreviation is uncertain. the baptismal formula] The three parts involving forsaking the devil and the three articles of the Apostles’ Creed plus the question: “Are you willing to be baptized on this faith?” the service book] The baptismal ritual is found under “Dåbsritualet” [The Sacrament of Baptism] both in the older and in the newer edition of the service book (→ 104,12). Clausen has erred in the dispute . . . was or was not a fundamental change] Refers to H. N. Clausen’s review of Grundtvig’s polemical piece Om Daabs-Pagten (→ 103,22), published both in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, published by “a society,” vol. 8 (Copenhagen, 1832), pp. 600–618, and as separate pamphlet (→ 103,31). See also Clausen’s review of Engelbrecht’s piece (→ 107,35) in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, vol. 12 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 361-395. The “change” to which Kierkegaard refers is both the change, proposed by Clausen in the above-mentioned article and pamphlet, with respect to forsaking the devil, and the change that Clausen’s father, Archdeacon H. G. Clausen, had introduced into the baptismal ritual at the Church of Our Lady (→ 103,31). ― Clausen: Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793–1877), Danish theologian and politician; dr. theol., 1826; from 1821, a lecturer at the University of Copenhagen, where he became extraordinary professor in 1822 and ordinary professor (of dogmatics) in 1830. Grundtvig] Refers to Grundtvig’s article “Om Daabs-Pagten,” in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende (→ 103,25), vol. 1, no. 2, (January 13, 1833), cols. 17–25, where Grundtvig replies to Clausen’s anonymous review in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, vol. 8 (see the preceding note). This also refers to Grundtvig’s article “Om Hr. Dr. og Prof. H. N. Clausen” [On Herr Dr. and Prof. H. N. Clausen], in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende, vol. 1, no. 5 (February 3, 1833), cols. 67–73, in which Grundtvig reacts to Clausen’s

19

19 21 23 27 27

28

31

35

396

35

35

103m

5

“Theologica. Older”

publication of his review in a pamphlet accompanied with a postscript (→ 103,31). See also the third and last installment in Grundtvig’s series of articles “Skal den Lutherske Reformation virkelig fortsættes,” in Maanedsskrift for Christendom og Historie, vol. 1 (→ 103,20), pp. 417–484; pp. 450– 451. Lindberg] Refers to J. C. Lindberg’s article “Om Prof. Clausens ‘Djævlelære’ i Maanedsskrift for Literatur,” in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende (→ 103,31). Also refers to the first installment in J. C. Lindberg’s series of articles “Om den christne Troes-Bekjendelses Form i den sidste Udgave af den danske Alterbog,” in Den Nordiske Kirke-Tidende, vol. 2, no. 49 (→ 104,12), cols. 817–832; col. 820. Engelbrecht] Refers to W. F. Engelbrecht, Sendebrev til Høiærværdige Hr. Dr. theol. Prof. Clausen, i Anledning af hans Afhandling om Djævlelæren og Forsagelsen af Djævelen ved Daaben [Open Letter to Hr. Dr. Theol. Prof. Clausen on the Occasion of His Dissertation on the Doctrine of the Devil and on Forsaking the Devil at Baptism] (Copenhagen, 1834), esp. pp. 81–98. The book received a critical review by H. N. Clausen in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur (→ 107,31). ― Engelbrecht: Wolf Frederik Engelbrecht (1771–1862), Danish theologian and priest; cand. theol., 1790; from 1795, parish priest in Lyderslev and Frøtslev in Zealand; archdeacon for Stevns district, 1798–1806; from 1829, a member of the consistorial council (a title that was awarded to deserving priests; according to the Danish system of rank and preferment, adopted in 1746 and revised in 1808, it ranked third in the sixth class). steam-powered transportation rolling along a railroad] Railroads were the great construction projects of the era. The first were established in England ca. 1830 and thereafter spread to the Continent. The first fragmentary railroads in Germany were built in the mid-1830s, and in 1838, the first Prussian railroad (from Berlin to the suburb of Potsdam) opened. During the 1840s, German railroads developed further, with Berlin at the center of the rail net. The first Danish railroad was from Altona to Kiel in the duchy of Holstein, opening in September 1844. The steam engine, which is frequently attributed to James

•

P a p e r 69–70 1835 •

Watt (1736–1819), was introduced into Denmark in the 1790s and in the first half of the nineteenth century was widespread in manufacturing applications as well as in steamships and―by midcentury―in railroads. sealed machines] Presumably a reference to steam engines, which consist of a closed cylinder containing a moving piston and a mechanism that alternately injects steam into the two ends of the cylinder. the theory of “λογος”] Allusion to Jn 1:1–5. applied to the Word . . . the living Word] See, e.g., the concluding portion of N.F.S. Grundtvig’s sermon no. 20, “Klippen er Christus,” (→ 103,20), vol. 3, p. 469, where he says it will take place “everywhere that living faith remains, that the Church of Christ will again elevate itself upon its rock, to the rejoicing of its friends and the shame of its enemies, elevate itself with the blessed consciousness that it rests not upon worldly power and royal approval, and not upon the word as taught by the wisdom of men, but in the living, imperishable, and universal Word of Him who is Himself the Word of the beginning, and who therefore is in truth spiritually, divinely present everywhere that this Word of faith lives in the heart and resounds upon the tongue (Rom 10:6, 8). So precisely because we do not confuse the Word with the letter, which is only a dead sign, precisely for that reason it is literally true that the rock upon which the Church rests is Christ himself, who spiritually inspires, enlivens, and fulfills his Word until the end of days and unto the eternity of all eternities, for heaven and earth shall pass away, and with them, all writings, the sacred as well as the others, but my words, says the Lord, shall never pass away, and whoever believes in them shall have eternal life! Amen!” See also the following passage in Grundtvig’s sermon no. 26, “Ordet og Skriften,” in Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog, vol. 3, pp. 586–587 (→ 106,15). See, lastly, the following passage in Grundtvig’s sermon on Mk 7:31–37 (on Jesus’ healing of the deaf and dumb man), for the twelfth Sunday after Trinity Sunday, 1834, in N.F.S. Grundtvigs Prædikener 1822–26 og 1832–39 [N.S.F. Grundtvig’s

9

1 1

108

“Theologica. Older”

3

7 9

108

11

13

Sermons 1822–1826 and 1832–1839], ed. Chr. Thodberg, vol. 7 (sermons from 1833–1834) (Copenhagen, 1984), p. 290: “Yes, my friends! The Word that was in the beginning, the divine Word without which nothing would have happened: it exists until the end, and without a living Word from the Divine that addresses the human being and creates what it names, gives what it offers― without that, human beings are at all times, spiritually speaking, impoverished, and wretched and naked, indeed, as if dead and buried.” ― the living Word: → 103,20 and → 106,15. sense; precisely . . . written Word.] Variant: changed from “sense.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. The same objections . . . they themselves make against the Bible] → 106,15 and → 107,14. introductory scholarly science of the Creed] By “introductory scholarly science” is meant the scholarly discipline, also called isagogics, that concerns itself with the study of the evolution of the biblical writings and of groups of scriptures, their textual evolution and history of transmission, as well as questions concerning the origin, provenance, and authenticity of individual scriptures, including matters concerning their authors and intended readers; see, e.g., W.M.L. de Wette, Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die Bibel Alten und Neuen Testamentes [Textbook for a Historical-Critical Introduction to the Old and New Testaments of the Bible], 2 vols., 4th enl. ed. (Berlin, 1833–1834 [1817–1826]; ASKB 80), vol. 1, Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die kanonischen und apokryphischen Bücher des Alten Testamentes [Textbook for a Historical-Critical Introduction to the Canonical and Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament]. The “Creed” refers to the Apostles’ Creed (→ 103,20, → 104,12, → 106,1, → 106,10, and → 106,40). O.T. . . . in contrast to the N.T., is indicated in . . . Heb 12:24] See Heb 12:24. ― O.T. (the standpoint of the Law), in contrast to the N.T.: Variant: changed from “standpoint of the Law”. αιματι ραντισμου ϰρειττον λαλουντι παρα τον Αβελ] The second half of Heb 12:24.

•

P a p e r 70–72 1835 •

397

There is a remarkable correlation . . . approach Catholicism] It has not been possible to identify the referent here. with respect to Luther’s . . . Clausen and Hohlenberg’s Tidskrift, vol. 3, pp. 548, bottom of page, and 557] Refers to “Tydsklands Reformationshistorie indtil efter Rigsdagen i Worms / Af Frederik v. Raumer. / 1833” [The History of the German Reformation until after the Diet of Worms: By Frederik von Raumer, 1833] in Tidsskrift for udenlandsk theologisk Litteratur (→ 99,22), ed. H. N. Clausen and M. H. Hohlenberg, vol. 3, no. 1 (Copenhagen, 1835), pp. 513–580; p. 548, bottom of page: “Luther’s friends extolled his decided superiority in every respect. His enemies, on the other hand (without taking into account the content of his teachings) found fault with the fact that he would rather have poets or lay people―indeed, the great mass of people―as judges and arbitrators than the most expert theologians, and that it was only with difficulty that he was induced to appeal to the theology faculties.” And pp. 556–557: “When Luther saw that the matter that inspired him and that he believed to be the most important thing in the world was viewed with indifference by the emperor and the estates, or that, owing to unrelated matters, they at any rate refrained from taking any outward steps; when he noted that many bishops thought more about exploiting their offices than about improving the Church, and that even the best of them counseled him to remain within certain boundaries―he momentarily entertained doubts about what he ought to do. But he was propelled forward by his conviction that the entire matter would be subject to the judgment of the pope and that nothing would be changed or improved, and all the more so because, as a consequence of untiring study and research, his present views had broadened extraordinarily in comparison with his earlier views and, from being an opponent of indulgences, had made him an opponent of virtually the entire foundation of the Roman Church. Whether he was right or wrong, neither an almighty superior, nor princes, nor bishops, but every individual, using his own understanding and conscience, is to test and then

16

25

108

398

“Theologica. Older”

to decide the matter in accordance with the content of the gospel. [‘]I will have only one master,[’] he says, [‘]whose name is Christ; I regard all others as fellow disciples.[’] Taking this position, in June 1520 he published a book addressed ‘to the nobility of the German nation,’ because he depended more on the unprejudiced character of their sense of freedom than upon that of others. This declaration of war against the Catholicism of the times, drafted with the greatest of daring at the moment the danger was growing, reads essentially as follows: ‘It is unchristian to pit the laity and the clergy against one another; they constitute one estate even though they do not have the same task; faith, not the marital state, is what makes a person a cleric. Worldly authorities are permitted to punish all wicked people, including priests, and we must use all means to put a stop to the Roman avarice that commits so many sorts of theft. The pope has no right whatever to interpret Scripture and to summon Church councils. Investiture is the right of the emperor, and the pope has made use of illegal and improper means to acquire worldly possessions, for Christ’s kingdom is not of this world.[’ ”] ― Luther’s: Martin Luther (1483–1546), German theologian, Augustinian monk, professor at Wittenberg. As a reformer of the Church, Luther was the central figure in breaking with medieval theological tradition, papal power, and the Roman Church; this resulted in a transformation of worship services and ecclesiastical life and in the founding of a number of evangelical Lutheran churches, particularly in northern Europe. Luther was the author of a great many theological, exegetical, and edifying works, as well as works on ecclesiastical policy and organization, and many sermons and hymns. Luther also translated the Bible into German. 108

28

the Bohemians and the Moravians . . . would not accept the Latin liturgy] See, e.g., the following passage in § 14 in the introduction to S. J. Stenersen, Udsigt over den Lutherske Reformation, med en Indledning om Kirkens Tilstand før samme [Survey of the Lutheran Reformation, with an Introduction concerning the Condition of the

•

P a p e r 72–74 1835 •

Church Prior to It], 2 vols. (Christiania [Oslo], 1818–19), vol. 1, pp. 195–196: “Bohemia had been converted to Christianity by Greek teachers and had thus never revered the pope as much as did other European countries. Also, in the 14th century, Bohemia was home to three teachers who were without peer in all the rest of Europe: Conrad Stieckna, Jan Milič, and Mathias von Janow; all three of them had in fact clearly realized that the outward form of devotion that was praised as holiness at that time was actually closer to ungodliness . . . Milič had also emphasized that worship should be conducted in the local language and that the Bohemian priests could have a place where they could proclaim the word of God in their mother tongue, because before then, if they had wanted to do so, they would have been compelled to go to private houses, and 2 pious men had built a little chapel in an out-ofthe-way place they called Bethlehem, and it was there that Johan Hus was appointed preacher in 1402, when he was 18 years old.” insistence of the Spanish on retaining their old Mozarabic one] See the article “Mozarabische Liturgie” [Mozarabic Liturgy] in W. D. Fuhrmann, Handwörterbuch der christlichen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte (→ 106,7), vol. 3, pp. 181–182. people have pointed out . . . the great advantage the apostles had] → 101,29. the assumption of inspiration] → 97,2 and → 101,29. the boundary] Variant: added. the Bible constituting the Ch[urch]] See, e.g., H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus [The Church Constitutions, Doctrines, and Rites of Catholicism and Protestantism] (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB Appendix 1, 42), pp. 222–223: “Both in its tendency and in its means, the activity of the Protestant Church is defined by the relation in which it places itself to the Holy Scriptures. It defines the goal of its efforts not merely as the general promotion of the Christian knowledge and fear of God, but also―in order to guard against its efforts straying from the proper path―to promote them through Scripture and in the spirit of Scripture. Scripture is

29

2 16 20 23

109

“Theologica. Older”

23

the foundation upon which alone it can build in certainty, and it must first of all, and foremost, take care to lay this foundation. Thus the first obligation of the Church is to guide its members so that they possess and use the Holy Scriptures.” See, further, pp. 303–304: “The Protestant Church takes its stand, . . . rightly, on the Holy Scriptures alone, for inasmuch as it believes that the revelation has been carried through by God’s gracious provision and has been transmitted to human beings in its purity, so, too, must it assume that the spoken words, which could possibly still be preserved in the Church―though without this possibility permitting itself to be transformed into certainty by means of a valid conclusion―cannot have been assigned by God to human beings as an authentic source of knowledge, but rather, that the written words―which are the only form in which the teachings have retained their demonstrable integrity, so that they resound for us as they resounded to the Christians of the first centuries―which have been given by God as the source of our knowledge, are indeed the only rule for our faith.” See also p. 323, where Clausen draws the boundary between Catholicism and Protestantism as follows: “every real faith in the Church is lack of faith in the Scriptures; either the Church is everything, or Scripture is everything.” See also J. P. Mynster, Om Begrebet af den christelige Dogmatik (Copenhagen, 1831) (→ 107,15), esp. § 24, pp. 28–30; p. 30: “Thus, as original testimony to our Christian revelation we have solely the Holy Scriptures”; and § 25, p. 31, where Mynster writes, that with respect to “external testimony” to the Christian revelation, “the Church, as such, has no more validity than those who are outside the Church; for there are also false churches, and indeed, inasmuch as the truth of a Christian Church can only be recognized by its agreement with the words of Christ, it must have the confirmation of these words from somewhere other than the Church, which is confirmed only through the Word.” the Church constitutes the Bible] Cf. N.F.S. Grundtvig’s position (→ 107,14). See also the following passage in sermon no. 21, “Kirke-Troen og Traditionen” (on 1 Cor 15:1–14), in Grundtvig’s

•

P a p e r 74 1835 •

399

Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog (→ 103,20), vol. 3, p. 478, where he writes that the Lutherans erred, “both because we know that the gospel in the Church is older than the gospel in Scripture, and because speech is the actual Word, while all writing is only the sign and show of the Word, and, finally, because the oral testimony at the sacraments in the Church is far more reliable than the written [word] in study chambers and is the only thing that has been known at all times to all the believers without exception.” See also no. 26, “Ordet og Skriften,” vol. 3, pp. 574–595. Protest[antism] views the Bible as hovering over the Church] See, e.g., H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus (→ 109,23), pp. 68–69: “Protestantism transports itself . . . directly to the birth of Christianity; it retreats from the dark, unruly labyrinth of conflicting accounts, interpretations, and assertions based on them to Christ as the only Lord and Master, to Scripture as the only rule and guiding principle that is sufficient in itself. Two main principles follow from this: that Christians can have no authority other than Holy Scripture, which is for Christians the absolute source of faith, and that no ecclesiastical association can invoke hereditary rights or other historical reasons to set itself up as the true Church.” Shortly thereafter, Clausen writes the following with respect to Protestantism: “Its positive characteristic is expressed by the appellation evangelical, for even though this name is applicable to every Christian society, it is nonetheless especially significant in relation to the Protestant Church, which relates itself exclusively to the written Word of the evangelium [Greek and Danish, “gospel”].” Further on (p. 214), Clausen notes: “When, owing to Scripture, the Protestant Church places itself in immediate connection with Christ . . . and teaches that God has revealed himself in Christ and has preserved and revealed his will in the Holy Scriptures, the Church also assumes that in this revelation human beings have a sufficient means of salvation and blessedness, and that having received this they shall, through their own study of the Scriptures, acquire for themselves the knowledge that saves. The Church, which unites the Christians in this effort, is a holy, spiritual so-

26

400

27

36

“Theologica. Older”

ciety, but nonetheless is always a human society that works its way forward through errors and aberrations, and that can work its way forward as long as it keeps before its eyes the shining lodestar.” See the contrast in the following passage in sermon no. 20, “Klippen er Christus,” in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog (→ 103,20), vol. 3, pp. 458–459: “It is . . . clear that the Protestants are wrong when they call Scripture a rock-solid foundation for the Church of Christ, because it goes without saying that no book can be that, least of all a book whose original language is foreign to more or less the entire congregation, while the book-learned are capable only of reading it one syllable at a time.” Mohammed’s coffin hovers between the 4 magnets] Refers to the legend of Mohammed’s (→ 97,31) iron coffin in Medina, which is said to be kept hovering in the air by magnetic stones; see, e.g., “Mahomed” [Mohammed], in Ludvig Holberg, 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. 10 (1807), pp. 75–76. confession of faith] Refers to the central position held by the Apostles’ Creed in Grundtvig’s theory of the Church (→ 103,20 and → 107,13).

110

13

broader] Variant: preceding this, the word “much” has been deleted.

110

24

because in fact . . . ―the metaphor―] Variant: added. ― the actual expression: Variant: preceding “actual” the word “single” has been deleted.

110

26

that it cannot] Variant: first written “Xt was born of a virgin cannot”. that Xt was born of a virgin] See Mt 1:18 and Lk 1:26–38, as well as the second article of the Apostles’ Creed: “And in Jesus Christ, his only son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary . . .” (→ 106,40).

26

•

P a p e r 74–79 1835–1836 •

people say something similar about Hercules] Refers to the miraculous way in which the legendary Greek hero Heracles (Roman, Hercules) was conceived and born. When Electryon, king of Argos, had to go to war, he entrusted his daughter Alcmene to the care of Amphitryon with the command that he was to respect her virginity until they were married. Shortly after Electryon returned, Amphitryon accidentally killed him while rounding up some cattle. Alcmene’s brother Sthenelos then assumed power over the Teleboans, and Alcmene and Amphitryon had to go into exile in Thebes. But before they could marry, they had to avenge themselves upon Sthenelos, so Amphitryon went to war against the Teleboans. But while he was away, Alcmene was visited by Zeus, who had assumed the form of Amphitryon, and she became pregnant with Hercules. There is thus talk of a virgin birth. See, e.g., the article “Hercules” in Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [Paul F. A. Nitsch’s New Dictionary of Mythology], ed. Fr. G. Klopfer, 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945), vol. 1, pp. 812–856; p. 812. in the stories of the gods of India] See, e.g., § 138, on Christ’s human nature, in K. G. Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik (→ 97,2), vol. 2, pp. 170– 179; p. 174 n. 137, where Bretschneider refers to E.F.K. Rosenmüller, who states “also Buddha and Fohi were represented as having been begotten without human intervention.” The reference to Rosenmüller is to his article “Ueber die Geburt des Heilandes von der Jungfrau. Jesai. VII, 14. Mich. V, 1. 2. Matth. I, 18-23. Luc. I, 26-36” [On the Savior’s Birth from a Virgin: Isa 7:14; Mic 5:1–2; Mt 1:18–23; Lk 1:26–36], in Journal für auserlesene theologische Literatur [Journal for Select Theological Literature], ed. J. Ph. Gabler, vol. 2 (Nuremberg, 1806), pp. 253–267; see esp. pp. 260– 263. now and then]Variant: first written “often”.

27

4

111

predestination] → 94,3. when it is said that they were chosen: “quos vocavit,”] Allusion both to Rom 8:30, where Paul writes that those whom God “predestined, he also called,” and to article 11 (“De

9

111

27

10

“Theologica. Older”

14

16

111

25

25

aeterna Praedestinatione et Electione Dei” [On God’s Eternal Predestination and Election]) of the Formula of Concord, the last of the classical Lutheran formulae of faith, written by a number of leading Reformation theologians to hinder the threat of schism after 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 (Leipzig, 1827; see ASKB 624, a 2nd ed. from 1837), pp. 617–622 and 797–823; p. 619. Schleierm[acher’s] relative predestination] See “Von der Erwählung” [On Election], §§ 117–120 in Friedrich Schleiermacher, Der christliche Glaube (→ 94,12), vol. 2, pp. 270–306, “Erster Lehrsaz. Von der Vorherbestimmung” [First Thesis: On Predestination], § 119, “Die Erwählung derer, die gerechtfertigt werden, ist eine göttliche Vorherbestimmung zur Seligkeit in Christo” [The Election of Those Who Are Justified Is a Divine Predestination to Salvation in Christ], pp. 284–293, and the following passage in § 119,3, p. 292: “Es giebt Eine göttliche Vorherbestimmung, nach welcher aus der Gesammtmasse des menschlichen Geschlechts die Gesammtheit der neuen Kreatur hervorgerufen wird.” (“There is a divine predestination in accordance with which, out of the entirety of the human race, the totality of the newly created is called forth.”) because they have not been called1] Variant: added. the legend of the Wandering Jew] The Wandering Jew, or Ahasuerus, is known from a number of legends, first written down in chronicles in England and southern Europe in the 13th century and subsequently elaborated and reworked in many popular books and poetic presentations. see Ein Volksbuchlein, p. 27] See “Geschichte des ewigen Juden” [The Story of the Wandering Jew], in Ein Volksbüchlein, Enthaltend: Die Geschichte des ewigen Juden, die Abenteuer der sieben Schwaben, nebst vielen andern erbaulichen und ergötzlichen

•

P a p e r 79–81 1836 •

401

Historien [A Little Popular Book Containing the Story of the Wandering Jew, the Tale of the Seven Swabians, Together with Many Other Edifying and Amusing Stories], ed. Ludwig Aurbacher, 2 vols., 2nd enl. and improved ed. (Munich, 1835–1839; ASKB 1460–1461; from a receipt in the Kierkegaard Archive at the Royal Library, it can be seen that Kierkegaard purchased this book from book dealer C. A. Reitzel on February 3, 1836). See vol. 1, pp. 1–27; pp. 26–27: “From that time on there has been a constant escort who accompanies those who travel from distant regions to visit the Holy Land and to perform their devotions at the holy sepulcher, and he serves them as a faithful interpreter of all that Jesus Christ did, taught, and suffered on earth, conducting them to all the sacred locations where the Savior left a trace of his miraculous grace and mercy. Nor was he silent about his own story, although he unbosomed his soul only to few and very pious souls; and to those who, impelled by holy curiosity to ask him of the fate that for so many centuries had befallen him and passed before him and onto the human race, he recounted it in pleasant, detailed fashion, and overflowing unction, so that no one left him without having been strengthened in faith, love, and hope . . .” Protestant doctrine . . . faith . . . the entire empirical realm of works disappears] See art. 4, “Of Justification,” in the Augsburg Confession (→ 102,14): “Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ’s sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake, who, by his death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in his sight. Rom. 3 and 4” (Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse [→ 99,19], p. 48). See also art. 6, “Of New Obedience”: “Also they teach that this faith is bound to bring forth good fruits, and that it is necessary to do good works commanded by God, because of God’s will, but that we should not rely on those works to merit justification before God. For remission of sins and justification is

32

111

402

112

1

“Theologica. Older”

apprehended by faith, as also the voice of Christ attests: When ye shall have done all these things, say: We are unprofitable servants” (Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse, p. 49). English translation from The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, trans. and ed. Theodore Tappert (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1959), p. 29. the Catholics . . . the Protestants deny it. (see the Apology . . . Augsburg Confession] Presumably refers to the following passage in the section “Til Confessionens anden Artikel om Arvesynd” [On the Second Article, “On Original Sin”], in the Apology for the Augsburg Confession by Ph. Melanchthon (1530): “The Scholastic teachers speak of original sin as weakness of a feeble nature, which they call fomes [the inclination toward evil], and thus demonstrate sufficiently that they do not understand how the Holy Fathers understood it when they spoke of the nature of original sin. Furthermore, they teach that this fomes is a property of the body . . . [W]hen they speak of original sin they do not touch at all upon the greatest and most coarse sins of human nature, which are that, by nature, we do not know God or revere him, do not fear God or properly have faith in him, that we hate and flee from God’s judgment, murmur against his will, despair of his grace, place our confidence in these temporal things, etc. These highest and greatest sins, which are in greatest opposition to God’s law, escape the scholastics―indeed, they even teach that human nature still, of itself, retains the strength to love God above all things and to keep God’s commandments with respect to the substance of our acts . . . For the scholastics, after having conversed with the pagan philosophers concerning the perfection of nature and having mixed such error together with Christian doctrine, they believe too much in free will and our works . . . These are the reasons why, in our description of original sin, we spoke of the evil desire and said, in addition, that no one, on the basis of his natural powers, can fear God or believe in him. For by this, we wish to make known the injurious defects and weaknesses that original sin contains within itself: The darkening of our understanding in connection with knowing God, that we do not fear

•

P a p e r 81–82 1836 •

and honor him, that we cannot love him above all things. These are the most important faults of human nature, which actually are in opposition to the first table of the Ten Commandments” (Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse [→ 99,19], pp. 126–128). Hegel’s logical triad] Refers to G.W.F. Hegel’s speculative logic, in which a concept is “mediated” or “reconciled” with its opposite, whereby a new (third) concept is formed in which the original concept and its opposite remain as “sublated” (German, aufgehobene) moments. Thus the abstract concept of “pure being” posits its opposite, “nothing,” and is united with it in the concept “becoming” (German, werden). According to Hegel, a movement such as this, from “being,” through “nothing,” to “becoming,” is a logical movement. See, e.g., Hegel’s Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], ed. L. von Henning, vol. 1 (in two parts) and 2 (Berlin, 1833–1834) [1812–1816], ASKB 552–554); vol. 1, pt. 1 “Die Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being], in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [The Works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Complete Edition], 18 vols. (Berlin, 1832–1845; ASKB 549– 565), vol. 3 (1833), pp. 77–79 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 87– 89). ― Hegel’s: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), German philosopher and theologian, professor at Heidelberg from 1816 and at Berlin from 1818 until his death. principle of contradiction] Also called the principle of the excluded middle, it is one of the three fundamental principles of the traditional logic. It maintains that it is impossible for the same statement to be both valid and not valid in the same sense for the same thing, e.g., for something to possess a certain quality and at the same time not to possess it. Goethe] Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749– 1832), German poet, playwright, essayist, jurist, politician, and scientist. his Faust] Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie [Faust: A Tragedy] (1808) in Goethe’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe letzter Hand [Goethe’s Works: Complete Edition, with the Author’s Final Changes], 55 vols. (Stuttgart, 1828–1833; ASKB 1641–1668), vol.

6

13

15

16

112

“Theologica. Older” 12 (1828). See also Goethe’s Faust. Der Tragödie zweiter Theil in fünf Acten. / (Vollendet im Sommer 1831.) [Faust: The Second Part of the Tragedy, in Five Acts; Completed in the Summer of 1831]. Part 2 of Faust was first printed in full in 1832 as vol. 1 of Goethe’s nachgelassene Werke [Goethe’s Posthumous Works], which constitutes vol. 41 (1832) of Goethe’s Werke. 112

18

19

112

23

24

Christ lived to be exactly 33 years old] In Kierkegaard’s day it was widely believed that Jesus was thirty years old when he was baptized by John the Baptist and that his public ministry lasted three years. See G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Specialized Biblical Dictionary for Use as a Handbook for Students, Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71), vol. 1, pp. 654–667, where it is related that according to the synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ public ministry lasted only one year, but that according to the gospel of John, it lasted three years. designates a generation] This reflects the traditional view that a human generation is thirty-three years long. tendency to construct a society] See the following passage in AA:12, dated August 1, 1835, where Kierkegaard writes that what is important is “to find the idea for which I am willing to live and die,” and continues “what use would it be in that respect to be able to work out a theory of the state, and put all the pieces from so many places into one whole, construct a world which, again, I myself did not inhabit but merely held up for others to see?” (KJN 1, 19). the graveyard of those who have been executed] As late as Kierkegaard’s day, executed criminals and “dishonorable” prisoners (i.e., prisoners guilty of particularly heinous crimes, the sentence for which included the forfeiture of civic honor and respect) were buried in unconsecrated ground. The “dishonorable” prisoners in the House of Punishment, Rasping, and Betterment were buried in the prison’s unconse-

•

P a p e r 82–84 1836–1837 •

403

crated cemetery outside Amagerport (see map 2, B4); the “dishonorable” slaves from the prison on Stokhusgade and from the Copenhagen citadel of Frederikshavn were buried in a special part of Garnisons Kirkegård (Garrison Cemetery) outside Østerport (see map 2, G1). 2 names, just like the Jews] It has not been possible to identify the referent here. expectation of a chiliasm] The doctrine of the coming of the kingdom of Christ, which will last for a thousand years, a “kingdom of heaven” on earth, as mentioned in Rev 20:1–6 and with support in 1 Cor 15:20–28. Notions of such a thousand-year kingdom have recurred during the entire history of the Church. In particular, two principal variants of Chiliasm are well-known: chiliasmus crassus (“coarse chiliasm”), which wishes to force the creation and actualization of the thousand-year kingdom by means of struggle and, if necessary, with violence, and chiliasmus subtilissimus (“refined chiliasm”), which views the thousand-year kingdom as a time of spiritual bloom for the Church and of the spread of Christianity prior to the return of Christ. Notions of such a thousand-year kingdom with a charismatic leader (a messiah, a prophet) and the overthrow of existing relations have been seen in apocalyptic movements from ancient to modern times. Blocksberg] 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 on the night of April 30. Kierkegaard is presumably referring to the scenes on Brocken, “Walpurgisnachtstraum, oder Oberons und Titanias golden Hochzeit” [Walpurgisnacht Dream or the Golden Wedding of Oberon and Titania], in the first part of Goethe’s Faust (→ 112,15), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 202–231, 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 notes 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

28 1

1

113

404

1

2 3

3

“Theologica. Older”

them. The name “Blocksberg” has also been applied to other mountains in Germany, Hungary, and Sweden. Children’s House Ballet] Presumably refers to the novella “Børneballet” [Children’s Ballet] included in Carl Bernhard (pseudonym for the Danish author A. N. de Saint-Aubain), Noveller [Novellas], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1836–1837; ASKB U 18), vol. 2 (1836), pp. 135-364. From a receipt in the Kierkegaard Archive at the Royal Library, it can be seen that Kierkegaard purchased this book from book dealer C. A. Reitzel on December 27, 1836. The Danish for “children’s house” is Børnehuset, which was the name of a penal institution in Copenhagen, originally established as a reform school for ill-behaved children. Andersen] Hans Christian Andersen (1805–1875), Danish poet and author. Nightmen people] See De jydske Zigeunere og en rotvelsk Ordbog (→ 113,3), where it is explained that the gypsies (Roma) were called by various names, including “Nightmen people, among other reasons because of their occupation of skinning horses and the like, which not long ago was regarded by our common folk as unclean and dishonorable” (p. 9). On subsequent pages, the author, N. V. Dorph, uses the appellation “the Nightmen people” or “the Nightmen peoples” in referring to the Roma of Jutland. see also Dorph on thieves’ jargon, p. 7, on the four castes of the Hindus―the outcasts] Refers to N. V. Dorph, De jydske Zigeunere og en rotvelsk Ordbog [The Jutland Gypsies and a Dictionary of Thieves’ Jargon] (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 1036), p. 7, where Dorph endorses the view that the gypsies (Roma) “originally came from the Ganges, because their language coincides in many respects with the languages of the Hindus, whose common source is Sanskrit.” Dorph goes on to write that “the Hindus are divided into 4 castes: 1) priests, 2) warriors, 3) farmers and merchants, 4) artisans and artists. These castes included the nobler portion of the people. The so-called pariahs, on the other hand, belonged to none of these castes. They were regarded as the dregs of the human race, as being unclean and without honor, and they were oppressed by those who were

•

P a p e r 84 1836–1837 •

noble and were only used by them to perform tasks that the nobles viewed as defiling―so they sank into the deepest moral and physical depravity.” ― Dorph: Niels Vinding Dorph (1783–1858), Danish theologian and philologist. the Midgard serpent] A monster told of in Nordic myths. See, e.g., J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte indtil Frode 7 Tider [Superstitions, Gods, Fables, and Heroes of the Nordic People up to the Times of Frode VII] (Copenhagen, 1800; ASKB 1947), pp. 303–304: “In accordance with the will of the gods, the Midgard Serpent or Jormungandar, a frightful monster sired by Loki Laufeiason with the giantess Angerbode, was brought up in the land of the giants, but in accordance with the command of the Father of the Universe [Odin] it was taken from there and sunk to the bottom of the sea, where it grew so strong that its body wrapped itself around the earth, and it could even bite its own tail; it was supposed to remain lying there until Ragnarok. Then it leaps out of the sea, thereby causing the sea to become turbulent, which floats the ship Nagelfara that is so fatal for the gods; it takes on the form of a giant, and, with its father Loki, its siblings, as well as the sons of Surtur and Muspel, it does battle against the gods and in so doing is killed by Thor, but before its death it spews out so much venom that Thor perishes in it.” the ocean in the Greek sense] Refers to Okeanos (᾿Ωϰεανός) in Greek mythology; see, e.g., the article “Oceanus,” in Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch (→ 110,27), vol. 2, pp. 339–341, where the following is stated with respect to the titan Okeanos: “His birth is connected to the genesis of the seas. While these were formed, after the waters of the earth had gathered into their beds, they formed upon the ocean later than the Pontus, because the formation of the kingdom of the waters began from the center of the earth and halted at its boundaries. Here, then, Oceanus circled the disk of the [flat] earth, and behind it, on all sides, the vault of the heavens descended to the earth; therefore, it could be called the son of Gaea (earth) and of Uranus (heaven), but this was not the case with Pontus (the inner sea), which the vault of the heavens did not touch and which

6

6

“Theologica. Older”

8

the earth bore on its own, without the embrace of the heavens” (p. 339). Thus Okeanos marked the end of the earth, and toward the south, in the marginal areas of civilization, which bordered on Okeanos, there lived happy people like the Ethiopians and the pygmies; see Homer’s Iliad, bk. 1, vv. 423–424, and bk. 3, vv. 5–6, whereas to the west lived monsters and frightful beings such as harpies; see Homer’s Iliad, bk. 16, v. 150. According to Homer’s Odyssey, bk. 11, vv. 13–19, on the northerly shores of Okeanos there lived the people called Cimmerians, who are in eternal darkness. The dark land, where one hears only sighs (see Görres. p. 61] See J. Görres, ed., Die teutschen Volksbücher. Nähere Würdigung der schönen Historien-, Wetter- und Arzneybüchlein, welche theils innerer Werth, theils Zufall, Jahrhunderte hindurch bis auf unsere Zeit erhalten hat [The German Popular Books: Detailed Evaluation of the Beautiful Chapbooks about History, Weather, and Medicine Which Have Been Preserved up to Our Time, Partly Owing to Their Intrinsic Value and Partly Owing to Chance] (Heidelberg, 1807; ASKB 1440), p. 61: “The stories from the dark regions from which human voices continually resound, and in which the descendants of a pagan king who had persecuted the Christians because of their prayers to heaven were banned and lived imprisoned.” The passage cited is from remarks concerning the work Das vortrefflich welterfarhrnen auch hoch und weitberühmten Herren Doctor und engländischen Ritters Johannis de Montevilla, kurieuse Reisebeschreibung, wie derselbe in das gelobte Land Palästinam, Jerusalem, Egypten, Türkey, Judäam, Indien, Chinam, Persien und andern nah und fern anund abgelegene Königreiche und Provinzen zu Wasser und Land angekommen, und fast ganzen Weltkreis durchzogen seye. Von ihme selbst beschrieben. Köln am Rhein und Nürnberg [The Interesting Travelogue by the Excellent, World-Experienced, and WorldFamous Hr. dr. Johannis de Montevilla, English Knight, Who Himself Reached the Promised Land of Palestine, Jerusalem, Egypt, Judea, India, China, Persia, and Other Lands, Near and Far and Out-of-the Way Kingdoms and Provinces, by Sea and by Land, and Traveled Almost around the World: Described by Himself (Cologne and

•

P a p e r 84–86 1834–1837 •

405

Nuremberg).] ― Görres: Joseph Görres (1776– 1848), German Catholic literary critic and publisher as well as author on political, philosophical, and religious subjects; from 1800, professor of physics at the gymnasium in Coblenz; 1806–1808, professor of the history of literature at the university in Munich. the Romantic, people went into monasteries] Presumably, a reference to the monastic movement of the Middle Ages. postponing baptism until the last moment, until the deathbed] Refers to the practice in the ancient Church of postponing baptism until the deathbed; the most famous example of this is Emperor Constantine, who did not submit to baptism until shortly before his death, when he was baptized by Bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia.

11

explains predestination . . . grounded in foreknowledge . . . man merits grace] → 96,7. ― predestination: → 94,3 and → 95,2. Origen’s . . . his commentary on Rom[ans]: “The cause . . . lies in our own free will] Free rendering of Origen’s exegesis of Rom 8:28–30 in his Commentarii in epistulam ad Romanos [Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans], bk. 8, sec. 7–8; see, e.g., Origenis opera omnia quae graece vel latine tantum exstant [Origen’s Extant Collected Greek and Latin Works], ed. C.H.E. Lommatzsch, 25 vols. (Berlin, 1831–1848); vol. 7 (1837), pp. 119–132. ― Origen: Church Father (ca. 185–ca. 255), leader of the Alexandrian School, dismissed because of charges of heresy. He was among the first to use textual criticism in relation to the biblical sources, and he wrote commentaries on many biblical books, including Romans. Paul was destined for God’s gospel!] Possibly a reference to Rom 1:1, where Paul (→ 102,28), as author of the letter, writes the following with respect to himself: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God.”

15

the exposition of the doctrine of atonement . . . no change whatever has taken place in God] → 98,22. ― Clausen: (→ 107,31). ― the incentive emphasized so much in scripture―namely love of

22

113

12

113

17

19

113

406

26

114

“Theologica. Older”

God: Presumably, a reference, in particular, to the commandment to love as formulated, e.g., in Mt 22:37; see also Deut 6:5; Mk 12:30; Lk 10:27. Kantian] Refers to the ethical theory of reason developed by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804); 1755–1769, privatdocent; from 1770, professor at the university in Königsberg.

6

the Xn doctrine of temptation by the devil] Refers in particular to the doctrine of the temptation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden; see the account in Gen 3; see also the account in Mt 4:1–11 of Jesus’ temptation in the desert. original sin] → 99,19.

114

11

introduction] See Paper 90 in the present volume.

114

12

the Protestant view of the Bible as constituting the Ch[urch]] → 109,23 and → 109,26. a new branch of learning, namely the introductory science] → 108,9. sought to prove that . . . it had the right to constitute the Ch[urch] See, e.g., H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus (→ 109,23), pp. 308–309: “When we observe the entire economy of our Holy Scripture, considering that no word has been transmitted to us directly by Jesus himself, nor is any word expressly sealed with his highest authority; . . . that the reports in the four gospels can only with difficulty be brought into chronological harmony . . . ; that the individual characteristics of the apostles are unmistakably visible in the treatment of the Christian dogmas and already provide us with a picture of the theological differences that have characterized the Christian Church since then; that only with philological learning and philosophical criticism is it possible to fill out what is missing, to illuminate what is obscure, to provide definition to what is vague, and to produce a higher unity from the various sorts of doctrine and methods of exposition; lastly, when we consider that the proof of the authenticity of the holy books cannot be established in a manner different than that for every other book . . . that biblical criticism and hermeneutics exhibit problems that will scarcely ever cease to be points of conflict in the Christian world: then

3

13 15

•

P a p e r 86–91 1834–1837 •

a truth here forces itself upon us, opening a profound insight concerning God’s management of his Church and giving us important hints with respect to the application of the Christian revelation.” Later, on p. 310, Clausen writes the following with respect to the Holy Scripture: “Its authenticity is to be proven by historical criticism, its content tested by philosophical criticism, and only through scholarly treatment does unity and firmness, light and clarity, come to the multiplicity of doctrine.” See, also, p. 355, where Clausen writes the following concerning the importance of biblical scholarship to the Protestant Church: “it marks itself as the evangelical Church by the veneration and confidence with which it conducts its research into the Holy Scriptures . . . Thus, the discipline of sacred philology also dates its existence from the time of the Reformation; biblical criticism was engendered and born in the womb of Protestantism; since Melanchthon and Calvin, hermeneutics and exegesis have had their home in Protestant institutions of higher learning; and the first requirement the Church poses to its clergy is knowledge of the sacred languages.” And subsequently, on p. 355: “this much is beyond all doubt: that thorough knowledge of languages and insight into the thought and languages of the Orient constitute the essential and indispensable basis for biblical exegesis; for only under this condition can the scripture become its own interpreter, and every one of the holy authors appears himself as his own commentator.” the theory of the Apostles’ Creed] Refers to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s ecclesiology (→ 103,20). has rightly been raised against the Bible] Refers to the objections that, according to N.F.S. Grundtvig, can be directed against the Bible as a book (→ 107,14). the Creed begins like this: I believe] Refers to the first article of the Apostles’ Creed, which begins “Credo” (Latin, “I believe”); see Libri symbolici ecclesiae evangelicae (→ 111,10), p. 1; see also “Catechismus” (Danish, “catechism”) on the last pages of Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 104,12), where the Danish translation of the Apostles’ Creed also begins with “I believe” (p. 289).

16

19

22

114

“Theologica. Older” 114

25

25

What Schleiermacher calls “religion”] Refers to Friedrich Schleiermacher’s understanding of religion as “feeling”; see esp. § 3 in Der christliche Glaube (→ 94,12), vol. 1, p. 7: “The piety which forms the basis of all ecclesiastical communions, considered in itself, is neither a Knowing nor a Doing, but a modification of Feeling, or of immediate self-consciousness.” English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, ed. H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart (→ 96,7), p. 5. See, in addition, § 4, p. 16: “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 being absolutely dependent, or, which is the same thing, of being in relation with God.” English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, ed. H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart (→ 96,7), p. 12. See also the “Zusaz” [Postscript] to § 6, pp. 40–42, which is Schleiermacher’s overview of the various modes in which the term “religion” is used. the Hegelian dogmatists call “faith”] See, e.g., “Einleitung” [Introduction] concerning the concept (§§ 1–17), content (§§ 18–78), and form (§§ 79–123) of dogmatics, in Ph. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft [The Fundamental Doctrines of Christian Dogmatics as a Science], 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1827 [1819]; ASKB 644), pp. 3–72. See esp. the following passage in § 8, pp. 6–7: “The essence of religion is not only a believing and a knowing, but also a living and acting determined by them.” See also § 34, p. 19: “The first and most common state that appears in religion, is feeling. In itself it is sheer indefiniteness and is capable of being appropriated in the most various and contradictory ways. It is pure receptivity. Defined by something that is not in itself feeling, it is at the same time the most powerful definiteness of the spirit and of religion. In its primitivity, it is nothing other than the feeling of the I, and therein it has its entire, unconscious content. Stemming from nature, it is originally nothing but natural feeling. In this immediacy there cannot be a feeling of God or a religious feeling: God can no more be

•

P a p e r 92–93 1834–1837 •

407

felt than experienced.” See, in addition, § 86, pp. 48–49: “As faith in knowledge, religion has the form of immediate knowledge of God and of all divine truths, and the revelation and truth in itself, or the idea, contains within it the form of a representation. In science, on the other hand, the idea is not merely the immediate, abstract, which has indeed emanated from it, but which cannot remain within it, but rather has from it―or from the representation, the movement in itself toward the concept, and is its own infinite mediation and is the immediate being only in the sense that, having undergone the difference, it returns in simple immediacy.” See, lastly, § 116, p. 67: “this absolute knowledge is neither a transcendental and mystical loss of oneself in God nor a metaphysical abstraction from all history, but is rather a becoming immediacy, it is reflection.” See Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Marheineke’s dogmatics in Paper 250, from 1837–1838, in the present volume. as the object of its observation,] Variant: preceding this, the word “always” has been deleted. But then, the law governing thought . . . it alone possesses validity] Perhaps a reference to “I. Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements,” “First Division. Transcendental Analytic,” “Chapter II. The Deduction of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding,” “Section 2. Transcendental Deduction of the Pure Concepts of Understanding,” in Immanuel Kant, Critik der reinen Vernunft [Critique of Pure Reason], 4th ed. (Riga, 1794 [1781]; ASKB 595), pp. 129–169. English translation from Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (London: Macmillan, 1929), pp. 129–175. Schleiermacher again worshipped the unknown Divinity] The critique of Schleiermacher here put forward by H. L. Martensen presumably corresponds to the critique Martensen sets forth in his licentiate dissertation, 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), p. 108, where he avers that Schleiermacher teaches “that God’s attributes are a reflection of human piety―

2 5

8

115

408

9

10

10

“Theologica. Older”

not the reverse―they display nothing other than the various ways in which pious feelings are related to the absolute causality, but they do not in any way reveal to us anything of God’s essence,” p. 88 in the Danish translation by L. V. Petersen, Den menneskelige Selvbevidstheds Autonomie i vor Tids dogmatiske Theologie (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 651). On p. 109 (p. 89 in the Danish translation), Martensen cites the following passage from § 50 in Fr. Schleiermacher’s Der christliche Glaube (→ 94,12), vol. 1, p. 280: “All attributes which we ascribe to God are to be taken as denoting not something special in God, but only something special in the manner in which the feeling of absolute dependence is to be related to Him.” English translation from Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, ed. H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart (→ 96,7), p. 194. ― unknown Divinity: Allusion to Acts 17:22–31, which reports on Paul’s discourse to the Athenians on Areopagus, where he asserts that when he looked at their holy sites, he found “an altar with the inscription, ‘to an unknown god’ ” (v. 23). necessary concepts, whose object lay beyond experience] Refers to “I. Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements,” “Second Division. Transcendental Dialectic,” “Book I. The Concepts of Pure Reason,” “Section 2. The Transcendental Ideas,” in Immanuel Kant, Critik der reinen Vernunft, pp. 377–389; pp. 383–384. English translation from Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (→ 96,7), pp. 315–321; pp. 318–319. for all sensation and the cognition of the understanding . . . an essential element] Refers to “I. Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements,” “First Division. Transcendental Analytic,” “Book II. Analytic of Principles,” “Chapter III. The Ground of the Distinction of All Objects in General into Phenomena and Noumena,” in Immanuel Kant, Critik der reinen Vernunft, pp. 294–315. English translation from Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (→ 96,7), pp. 257–275. soul the thinking I’s necess[ary] unity . . . existence at all] Refers to “I. Transcendental Doctrine of the Elements,” “Second Division. Transcendental Dialectic,” “Book I. The Concepts of Pure Reason,” “Section 3. System of the

•

P a p e r 93–94 1834–1839 •

Transcendental Ideas,” in Immanuel Kant, Critik der reinen Vernunft, pp. 390–396. English translation from Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (→ 115,5), pp. 322–326. See Not4:9 in KJN 3, 136, with the accompanying explanatory note. Adar] The name of the twelfth month, from the new moon in March to the new moon in April, in the Jewish lunar year; see the article “‫ ”אֲדָ ר‬in W. Gesenius, Lexicon manual hebraicum et chaldaicum in Veteris Testamenti libros [Hand Lexicon of the Hebrew and Chaldaean of the Books of the Old Testament] (Leipzig, 1833; ASKB 72; abbreviated hereafter as Lexicon manuale hebraicum), p. 17, col. 2. Purim] Jewish festival, celebrated the 14th and 15th of Adar (→ 115,16), to commemorate the salvation, through Esther’s actions, of the Jews of Persia from the murderous plot of Persian chief minister Haman (Esth 9:30–32); see the article “Purim” in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, pp. 344–345. 11:19] i.e., Mt 11:19. Nisan] The name of the first month in the Jewish lunar year; see the article “Monate” [Months], in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, p. 121, where it is stated that the “Paschafest” [Passover] falls in Nisan, which corresponds approximately to April in the Gregorian calendar. Pascha] From the Hebrew ‫“( ּפֶסַ ח‬Pesach,” i.e., Passover), celebrated the fourteenth day in the month of Nisan (see Lev 23:5) to commemorate the Israelites’ successful flight from Egypt; see the article “Pascha,” in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, p. 230. Tishri] The name of the seventh month in the Jewish lunar year; see the article “Monate” [Months], in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, pp. 121–122, where it is also explained that Yom Kippur, the feast of atonement, and Succot, the feast of booths (or tabernacles) fall in the month of Tishri. Tabernac.] Presumably, an abbreviation for Festum Tabernaculorum, the Latin name of the Jewish feast of booths (or tabernacles), which is celebrated for seven days, starting on the fifteenth day of the seventh month (see Lev 23:39–43), as a festival of thanksgiving for the completed harvest;

16

16

17 17

17

18

18

115

“Theologica. Older”

18

19

19

20

see the article “Laubhüttenfest” [Feast of Booths], in G. B. Winer Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, pp. 7–10; p. 7. See also G. P. Brammer, Det hellige Land paa Herrens Tid. En statistisk-geografisk Beskrivelse for dannede, men ulærde, Bibellæsere [The Holy Land in the Time of Our Lord: A StatisticalGeographical Description for Cultivated, but Unscholarly Readers of the Bible] (Copenhagen, 1832), p. 31, where it is stated “that the feast of booths is intended to reproduce in lively fashion the wandering of the forefathers in the desert with the tabernacle.” f. expiationis] Abbreviation for festum expiationis, the Latin name for the Jewish feast (or day) of atonement, which is held the tenth day of the seventh month (see Lev 23:27–31); see the article “Versöhnungstag” [Day of Atonement], in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, pp. 762–768; p. 762. Kislev] Name of the ninth month in Jewish lunar year; see the article “Monate,” in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch (→ 112,18), vol. 2, p. 122. Kislev corresponds to December in the Gregorian calendar (→ 115,19). f. encaeniorum] Abbreviation for festum encaeniorum, the Latin name for the Jewish festival of dedicating the Temple, which was celebrated to commemorate the purification at the rededication of the Temple in 165 b.c. (see 1 Macc 4:36–61 and 2 Macc 10:1–8) after King Antiochus IV Epiphanes had desecrated it three years earlier; the festival is mentioned in Jn 10:22. See the commentary on Jn 10:22 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments (→ 115,26), vol. 2 (1838), p. 273, where it is explained further that “The time of the festival fell in the month of Kislev (December).” sec. Collegia] Abbreviation for secundum Collegia, (Latin, “according to the ‘kollegier,’ ” i.e., the notebooks with notes from lectures at the university; see the explanatory note to Paper 16 in the present volume). Here the reference is apparently to notes from H. N. Clausen’s lectures on the synoptic Gospels during the winter semester of 1838–1839; see the Critical Account of the Text.

•

P a p e r 94 1839 •

409

it is used against Stolberg] See Paper 4 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. Gelasius 1 † 496 asserted it first] See Paper 4 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. Acts 3:16] Acts 3:16, which is part of Peter’s sermon in Solomon’s Portico. After he had healed the lame man at the Beautiful Gate, Peter said, “And by faith in his [Jesus’] name, his name itself has made this man strong, whom you see and know; and the faith that is through him [Jesus] has given him this perfect health in the presence of all of you.” Olshausen Part II pp. 673–674] Refers to H. Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments zunächst für Prediger und Studirende [Biblical Commentary on All the Books of the New Testament, Chiefly for Preachers and Students], 4 vols.; vols. 1–2, 3rd improved ed. (Königsberg, 1837–1838 [1830– 1832]; vol. 3, 2nd improved ed., Königsberg, 1840 [vol. 3, pts. 1 and 2, 1835–1836]; vol. 4, 1st ed., Königsberg, 1840; ASKB 96–100; abbreviated hereafter as Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments), vol. 2 (1838), pp. 673–674, which has the beginning of the commentary on Acts 2:42–47 about conditions in the first Christian congregation following the apostle Peter’s first sermon at Pentecost. ― Olshausen: Hermann Olshausen (1796–1839), German evangelical theologian; from 1820, privatdocent in Berlin; from 1821, extraordinary professor, and from 1827, ordinary professor of the NT at Königsberg until he was called to Erlangen in 1834. how is Acts 10:11–16 compatible with Mt 5:17] See the conclusion of the commentary on Acts 10:9–16 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments (→ 115,26), vol. 2 (1838), pp. 772–773, where Olshausen writes: “According to Mt 5:17 we are not justified in choosing passages from the OT to take their godly character; and just as little does the NT permit such important events as the conversion of the pagans to be left to the daydreaming of the apostles. But here the NT appears to lift up the OT,

22

22

25

26

27

410

116

1

4

5 6

“Theologica. Older”

which, however, is contradicted by the definite pronouncement of Christ (Mt 5:17).” the eternity of punishment in hell] Refers to the doctrine of the eternal damnation of the ungodly, who are to be punished with everlasting torment in hell. See, e.g., Kierkegaard’s rendering of § 30, point 3, “Om den evige Fordømmelse og Helvedstraffene” [On Eternal Damnation and Punishments in Hell], in H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics], in Not1:6, from 1833–1834, in KJN 3, 26–27. NT passages such as Mt 25:41, Mk 9:47–48, and 2 Thess 1:9 are cited as support for the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell. See also article 17 in the oldest of the Lutheran confessional documents, the Augsburg Confession, from 1530. children who die early] If this refers to children who die before being baptized, they will, according to Lutheran doctrine, be condemned to eternal death in accordance with article 2 in the Augsburg Confession (→ 116,1); see Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse (→ 99,19), p. 46, where, with respect to original sin, it is proclaimed “that the inborn sickness or original flaw is in truth sin, which condemns and indeed also causes the eternal death of so many who have not been reborn by baptism into the Holy Spirit.” In older Catholic theology there was a notion of an “intermediate state” called limbo, which was a part of the realm of the dead, on the border of hell; this was the abode of souls who are excluded from heaven by no fault of their own, in particular the pious figures from the OT and unbaptized children, but sometimes also pious pagans. pagans] See the preceding and following explanatory notes. see Gynther, II. p 118 bottom of page] See Anton Günther, Vorschule zur speculativen Theologie des positiven Christenthums. In Briefen [Elementary Course in the Speculative Theology of Positive Christianity: In Letters], 2 vols. (Vienna, 1828– 1829; ASKB 869–870), vol. 2, Die Incarnationstheorie [The Theory of the Incarnation], p. 118, where the first half of the page states the following: “in short, no salvation, for original guilt is no more possible than original merit, because they cannot be inherited where there is no becoming.” A foot-

•

P a p e r 94 1839 •

note at the bottom that page states: “The negation of time discussed here concerns only empirical, though not pure, time, which, as such, cannot on the one hand, be denied to any creature in its development, and on the other hand, does not necessarily include within itself the empirical.” ― Gynther: Anton Günther (1783–1863), Czech, Austrian, Catholic priest, philosopher, neoscholastic; wanted to reformulate and refound the teachings of the Catholic Church on the basis of the philosophical tendencies of the period. Kierkegaard owned a number of his works (see ASKB 520–524, 869–870, 1672).

Notes for Paper 95–Paper 246 "Aesthetica.Older"

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Joakim Garff Quotations and references checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Joel D. S. Rasmussen Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

412

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Aesthetica. Older” is designated no. 435 in B-cat. and belongs to the portion of the papers that upon Kierkegaard’s death lay in “a large cardboard box” marked “A” and with the inscription “Journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). Papers 96–100, 102–105, 107, 109–110, 112–114, 116, 135–136, 153, 171, 178, 199, 207–208, 212–214, 219, 226, 235, 240–241, and 243–245 have been lost, while Papers 158 and 205 have been partially lost. Of these, Papers 171, 243, and a portion of 158 have been transmitted indirectly in a transcription by P. A. Heiberg, while Papers 153, 199, 207–208, 219, 244–245, and a portion of 205 are found in a transcription by H. P. Barfod; the remainder of the lost original material has been transmitted indirectly in Barfod’s edition Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The preserved manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Of the 152 papers, of which the first (Paper 95) is a cover sheet, 114 bear dates that cover the period from September 11, 1834 (Paper 96:1), to June 26, 1837 (Paper 96:2). Papers 97–98 and 103, in which Kierkegaard reflects on the idea of a “master thief,” have been transmitted indirectly via EP, but must at some point have been redacted, since details in B-cat. contradict Barfod’s arrangement of the entries in EP. And Paper 179, dated October 9, 1836, is a fair copy of some older sketches, probably from August 1836. The last thirty-seven papers (Papers 210–246) are undated (except for Paper 221, which is missing the year) and belong to the subgroup B-cat. 435e. The first of these (Paper 210) shows signs of having been written prior to its antecedent (Paper 209), which is dated June 2, 1837. In what follows, some possible dates for these undated papers are proposed. In terms of content, Paper 210:1 strongly resembles Paper 99:3, which is dated October 5, 1834. Papers 211–213 are hard to date precisely, but Paper 211 seems to concern Kierkegaard’s extensive exegetical studies in 1834–1835. Paper 214 refers to Kierkegaard’s experience of hearing the musician Frederik Carl Lemming in the

Critical Account of the Text Student Union, which must have occurred in October 1835 (see the note to Paper 214 in the present volume). Paper 215 contains a reference to Not3:16 (KJN 3, 116), which dates to March 1836. Papers 216–218 must be from the same period. Paper 216 contains a reference to Dansk Ugeskrift [Danish Weekly], vol. 4, which was published in 1834, but to which Kierkegaard also refers in Paper 125, which dates from March 1836. The short sentence fragment of Paper 217 is closely related in terms of content to Paper 134, dated March 1836. Paper 218 contains a reference to the second part of Christian Molbech’s Forelæsninger over den nyere danske Poesie [Lectures on Modern Danish Poetry] (Copenhagen, 1832), which Kierkegaard excerpts in BB:1 (KJN 1, 53–56), dated March 24, 1836. Paper 219 has been transmitted indirectly by Barfod, who added the note: “On a carpenter’s bill from March 27. . . . . probably 1836.” In Paper 220, Kierkegaard mentions the police secretary Jørgen Jørgensen, with whom he had a conversation on April 18, 1836 (see Paper 144 in the present volume), while Paper 221, which is dated “Aug. 12th,” bears similarities to BB:6 (see KJN 1, 69–70) and accordingly must be from August 12, 1836. Paper 222 contains a reference to Henrich Steffens’s Caricaturen des Heiligsten [Caricatures of the Holiest] (Leipzig, 1819–1821; ASKB 793–794), which also occupies Kierkegaard in Paper 192, which is dated September 28, 1836. The concise Paper 229:3 bears resemblance to Paper 44 from December 11, 1836 (see Paper 44 in the present volume). A series of short entries, Papers 230–239, resist any very precise dating, but in content, style, and tone seem to go together with many of the other entries from 1836. Paper 242 is about the phenomenon of foreboding in Henrich Steffens’s De fire Nordmænd. En Cyclus af Noveller [The Four Norwegians: A Cycle of Novellas] (Copenhagen, 1835; ASKB 1586–1588), which Kierkegaard also addresses in AA:23 (see KJN 1, 37–38) from March 1837. In Paper 244, Kierkegaard refers to the fact that H. L. Martensen has written a work on Nicolaus Lenau’s Faust. The sketch is a transcription by Barfod, which can be found in journal AA (see the illustration of this in KJN 1, 49), and in EP I–II, p. 124. Barfod has printed the short entry with the following note: “On a loose strip, roughly from the month of June,” which is to say June 1837 (see the note for Paper 244 in the present volume). The concluding Paper 246 is presumably from sometime in 1838, since it contains a reference to Friedrich von Raumer’s Historisches Taschenbuch [Historical Handbook], volume 9, published in Leipzig in 1838. In summary, therefore, it can be said that the loose papers constituting this group were all written in the period between September 11, 1834, and sometime in 1838.

413

Explanatory Notes 118

1 5

18

“Aesthetica. Older”] See the “Critical Account of the Text,” just above. that Archimedean point] Refers to a saying attributed to the Greek mathematician, physicist, and inventor Archimedes of Syracuse (ca. 287–212 b.c.). See Plutark’s Levnetsbeskrivelser [Plutarch’s Lives], trans. S. Tetens, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1800–1811; ASKB 1197–1200), vol. 3 (1804), p. 272. The passage in question is found in Plutarch’s treatment of Marcellus, 14.7: “And yet even 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 [world].” English translation is from Plutarch, Parallel Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin, Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1917), vol. 5, p. 473. Ossian] A legendary Irish warrior and bard, believed to have lived in the 3rd century a.d. However, the prose poems ostensibly composed by Ossian and published in 1760–1763 by the Scotsman James Macpherson soon proved to have been written by Macpherson himself. This nevertheless did not prevent the Ossian poems from exercising considerable influence on pre-Romantic and Romantic literature across the whole of Europe, and in Denmark especially on Johannes Ewald (1743–1781) and Steen Steensen Blicher (1782–1848). Concerning Ossian’s blindness, see, for example, the “Preface” to Ossians Digte [Poems of Ossian], trans. Steen Steensen Blicher, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1807–1809), p. xii, where Blicher relates how Ossian lost his beloved Everallin, his friends, his brothers, and even his only son, and then adds, “Only the old blind man was left, alone among the graves of all his friends, and he the remnant of his family. So Ossian sang,

and down through the centuries the mountains of Scotland resounded with his song.” Homer] Greek poet or poetic name (ca. 750 b.c.) to whom or which was attributed the heroic epics The Iliad and The Odyssey. The legend of Homer’s blindness was widespread in early antiquity and probably stems from line 172 of the Homeric hymn “To Apollo,” in which the poet describes himself as blind (see “To Apollo” in The Homeric Hymns, ed. Michael Crudden [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001], p. 29), and from the character of Demódokus, the famous blind poet in book 8 of The Odyssey (see, for example, lines 63– 64), “whom the Muse loved above all other men, and gave him both good and evil; of his sight she deprived him, but gave him the gift of sweet song” (The Odyssey, trans. A. T. Murray, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945], vol. 1, p. 263). It should be added that (owing to a false etymology) people in antiquity understood the name ῞Ομηρος (“Homer”) as ὁ μὴ ὁρῶν (“he who is unable to see”). author on bees was blind from early youth] Refers to François Huber (1750–1831). See, e.g., the article “Huber (Franz),” in F. A. Brockhaus, Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände. (Conversations-Lexikon.) [Universal German Encyclopedia for the Educated Classes (Encyclopedia)], 12 vols., 8th ed. (Leipzig, 1833– 1837; ASKB 1299–1310), vol. 5, 1834, pp. 425–426, where by way of introduction it states that Huber was “one of the most distinguished naturalists, whose observations seem all the more noteworthy owing to the fact that in his youth he was deprived of his sight.” And it explains further: “Through Bonnet [the Swiss naturalist and philosopher Charles Bonnet (1720–1793)] H[uber] had become aware of bees and how obscure they remained to natural historians, and so the blind man undertook to enlighten them. He taught his

18

24

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

32

119

1

2

6

servant, Franz Burnens, the difficult art of observation . . . What Burnens had seen was also shown to H[ubert]’s wife and friends, and from their concurring observations H[ubert] drew his conclusions, which in 1792 he first communicated to Bonnet in letters under the title: “new observations on bees.” That same year, the book was published under the title Nouvelles observations zur les abeilles, adressées à M. Charles Bonnet [New Observations on Bees, Addressed to Monsieur Charles Bonnet]. story of Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:8) . . . he saw nothing] Refers to the story of the conversion of Paul (who at the time was called Saul) found in the Acts of the Apostles, 9:8. the doctrine of predestination] The dogmatic doctrine of predestination, which throughout the history of the Church has been articulated in various ways, maintains that God in his electing grace has selected (either eternally or after the Fall) every single person either for salvation (eternal bliss) or for perdition (eternal damnation). Grounds for the doctrine are adduced from many passages in the NT, not least in Rom 8:28–30 and Eph 1:5, which have the Greek verb προορίζειν (“to predetermine, establish”; in the Latin translation of the Vulgate Bible rendered as prædestinare). The doctrine of predestination, which traces back to Origen (185–254) has its particular dogmatic imprint and articulation from Augustine (354–430) and later from the Swiss reformer John Calvin (1509–1564). the anteater, it makes a funnel . . . in the loose sand] More correctly, the larvae of antlions or lacewings, which dig into loose sand in such a way as to create a funnel ringed by a small swell. The larva waits at the bottom of the funnel, and when an insect comes too near the funnel and rolls into it, the larva attacks and sucks the fluids from its prey. entwined . . . like the snakes around Laocoon] Refers to the Trojan priest Laocoön who with his two sons was killed by a couple of enormous snakes, which slithered up out of the sea while he was making a sacrifice. His death was punishment by the gods because Laocoön had warned his fellow townspeople (in vain) against

•

P a p e r 95–97 1834 •

415

the massive wooden horse that the Greeks had placed outside the city wall, and in which their soldiers were hidden (Virgil, The Aeneid, bk. 2, vv. 201–232). See the Danish version of Kierkegaard’s time, Virgils Æneiden [Virgil’s Aeneid], trans. J. H. Schønheyder, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812), vol. 1 pp. 63–65. For an English translation, see Virgil, Eclogues, Georgics, Aeneid 1–6, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough, rev. G. P. Goold, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), pp. 331–333. a “Master Thief,”] See the following notes. Fra Diavolo] “Brother Devil,” a nickname for Michael Pezza (1771–1806), a notorious Italian criminal and leader of a band of thieves who lived near Naples. In 1799, he participated in the resistance against the French invasion and was for that reason pardoned from the death penalty to which he had previously been sentenced, and moreover was appointed colonel and granted an annual stipend. In 1806, he once again took part in battling the French forces but was discharged on grounds of bad conduct. He then led a gang of three hundred paroled criminals from Sicily but was soon betrayed, arrested, and put to death in Naples. The dramatic treatment in free verse of Fra Diavolo eller Værtshuset i Terracina. Syngespil i 3 Akter af E. Scribe; oversat til Aubers Musik af Th. Overskou [Fra Diavolo, or The Tavern in Terracina: A Musical in 3 Acts by E. Scribe, Set to Auber’s Music by Thomas Overskou] is no. 37 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater], vol. 2 (Copenhagen, 1831); from its premiere on May 19, 1831, until September 15, 1834, this work was performed a total of twenty-eight times at the Royal Theater. Peer Mikkelsen] Refers to Peter (or Peder) Mikkelsen (1792–1809), a notorious Danish criminal. See the entry “Peder Mikkelsen, saakaldt Mestertyv” [Peder Mikkelsen, So-Called Master Thief], in Archiv for danske og norske Criminalhistorier [Archive for Danish and Norwegian Criminal History], ed. T. Ph. Hansen (Copenhagen, 1834), vol. 1, pp. 55–63.

11 15

15

119

416 15

17

37

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

Morten Frederiksen] Morten Johan Frederiksen (born ca. 1786), notorious Danish criminal. See the entry “Kort Omrids af Morten Frederiksens Levnetsløb; oplæst i Studenterforeningen den 11 Februar 1826” [Short Outline of the Course of Morten Frederiksen’s Life: Read in the Student Union on February 11, 1826], in Criminalhistorier uddragne af Danske Justits-Acter [Crime Stories, Taken from Danish Judicial Records], ed. P. L. Benzon (Copenhagen, 1827), vol. 1, pp. 46–60; see also Den berygtede Mestertyv og Rasphuusfange Morten Frederiksens sandfærdige Levnetshistorie; hvorledes han nemlig, efter at have taget Tjeneste ved det Militaire, flere Gange blev afstraffet som Tyv og Deserteur baade her i Danmark og i Udlandet; hvorledes han herpaa blev hensat i Slaveriet og senere i Rasphuset, hvorfra han brød ud, for at begaae nye Forbrydelser, indtil han endelig efter mangfoldige sælsomme Eventyr blev hensat i Citadellet. / Efter Criminalacter [The Notorious Master Thief and Rasping House Prisoner Morten Frederiksen’s True Life Story: How, after Having Done Military Service, He Was Punished Many Times as a Thief and a Deserter, both Here in Denmark and Abroad, How He Was Then Put into Slavery, and after That in the House of Rasping, from Which He Escaped, Thereafter to Commit New Crimes, until, after Many Strange Adventures He Was Put in the Citadel: From Criminal Records] (Copenhagen, n.d.). attributed by some to Peer Mikkelsen . . . stealing from the rich in order to help the poor] Nothing of this sort is related concerning Peder Mikkelsen in Archiv for danske og norske Criminalhistorier (→ 119,15). warm regard . . . Foster (Feuerbach, 2nd part) . . . thievery serves] Refers to chapter 3 of “Johann Paul Forster, der zweifache Raubmörder. Auch als Beitrag zu der Lehre vom Beweis aus Anzeigungen” [Johann Paul Forster, Robber and Double Murderer: Also Serving as a Contribution to the Doctrine of Proof from Indications], in A. R. von Feuerbach, Aktenmäßige Darstellung merkwürdiger Verbrechen [Recorded Account of Notable Crimes], 2 vols. (Giessen, 1828–1829); vol. 2, pp. 123–216; see esp. pp. 141–151, where, among other things, Forster’s relationship with his girlfriend,

•

P a p e r 97 1834–1835 •

Margaretha Preiß, is discussed in relation both to his numerous thefts and to the double murder he committed in Nuremberg on September 20, 1820, and for which he was convicted on July 22, 1821. See also § 6, “Forsters Leben und Charakter” [Forster’s Life and Character], pp. 195–216, which, among other topics, builds on the autobiographical “abentheuerlichen Lebens- und Liebesbeschreibung” (“adventurous description of life and love”) that Forster authored “during his residence in the penal house in Schwabach in the years 1817–1818” (p. 195), and wherein he also writes about his relationship to his beloved Margaretha (pp. 196–198 and 200). Kagerup] Refers to Søren Andersen Kagerup (1811–1832), Danish thief and murderer, sentenced to death and beheaded on May 1, 1832. See C. H. Visby, “Psychologiske Bemærkninger over den, med Øxen henrettede, Morder Søren Andersen Kagerup” [Psychological Remarks concerning the Beheaded Murderer Søren Andersen Kagerup] in Borger-Vennen [Citizen Friend], ed. “Understøttelses-Selskabet” [The Support Society], issues 20–25 (May 19, May 26, June 2, June 9, and June 23, 1832), pp. 141–187; see also the entry “Søren Andersen Kagerup, Morder og Tyv” [Søren Andersen Kagerup, Murderer and Thief], in Archiv for danske og norske Criminalhistorier (→ 119,15), pp. 220–255, which for the most part (pp. 229–255) consists of quotations from Visby’s article. confess his crime and suffer the punishment . . . like a man] C. H. Visby’s account repeats a number of times that Søren Kagerup faced his execution with undismayed calm and complete fearlessness; see, e.g., Borger-Vennen (→ 120,17), p. 170. knows himself to have lived for an idea] C. H. Visby’s account mentions no such thing. He does, however, write of Søren Kagerup that “it was precisely the sense of justice that was the basic feature of his character; it was the most noble source of all his misdeeds” (Borger-Vennen [→ 120,17], p. 159). He also says of Kagerup that “according to his sense of justice, he believed that when he gave his life for taking a life no one could require anything more of him” (Borger-Vennen (→ 120,17), p. 170). And lastly, Visby explains that Kagerup was opposed to all “snitching” (Borger-Vennen

17

18

19

120

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

20

35

(→ 120,17), p. 148), and he relates the following: “I asked him why he wanted to kill the prisoner known by the name ‘the snake,’ who had never done him any harm and had in fact much more often shared his bread with him and showed him considerable goodwill. He answered that he was a traitor to the other prisoners and it was for their sake that he had wanted to kill him” (BorgerVennen (→ 120,17), p. 160). he acknowledges . . . the state and does not deny it] The opposite was true of Søren Kagerup. In his report concerning how Kagerup perceived his luck, C. H. Visby relates the following: “For his first theft, when he was only 18 years old, he was sentenced to public whipping and life imprisonment with hard labor, which he saw as a great injustice; for he had known many who had committed more and (in his opinion) much worse robberies, and yet had only been sentenced to three years . . . After that sentence, therefore, he felt no great respect for the law or public authority, and he became confirmed more strongly in this view by the prisoners, who highly respected those whom the judge had not been unable to crack, while they mocked those who, as they put it, had been stupid enough to confess or to let themselves be persuaded” (Borger-Vennen [→ 120,17], pp. 161–162). Till Eulenspiegel] Refers to the legendary German character Till Eulenspiegel, who points out human stupidity by, among other things, making fun of it, and by pretending to be stupid and taking all assertions at face value. He is the main character of an eponymous folktale based on oral and written sources from the late Middle Ages. The first Low German edition was from perhaps the end of the 15th century, but the first known edition was printed in Strasbourg in 1515. The oldest Danish translation is probably from the end of the 16th century. According to the satirical stories in the folk book, after his many travels Till Eulenspiegel died in 1350 and was buried in the northern German town of Mölln, near Lübeck, where his grave shows an owl and a mirror chiseled into his tombstone; it is highly doubtful, however, that this was originally a story about a historical person. Kierkegaard owned Underlig

•

P a p e r 97 1835 •

417

og selsom Historie, om Tiile Ugelspegel, En Bondes Søn, barnefød udi det Land Brunsvig [The Strange and Mysterious Story of Till Eulenspiegel, a Farmer’s Son, Born in the Province of Brunswick], translated from German (Copenhagen, “printed this year” [presumably between 1812 and 1842]; ASKB 1469); he also owned En gandske ny og lystig Historie om Ulspils Overmand, Eller Robertus von Agerkaal, Mester udi Sammensyer-Amtet [An Entirely New and Hilarious Story about Eulenspiegel’s Superior, or Robert von Turnip, Master of the Country of Discord] (Copenhagen, “printed this year” [year of publication has not been identified]; ASKB 1467). Peer Mikkelsen’s announcement . . . that he will now leave the city] Nothing of this sort is recorded about Peder Mikkelsen in Archiv for danske og norske Criminalhistorier (→ 119,15). Vibenshuus] or Great Vibenshus. An inn, the first of which was built in 1629 (its successor burned down in 1925), located north of Fælleden (“The Commons”), next to what is now Vibenshus Circle, a major junction in Copenhagen. Cartouche arrives on his own to collect the reward] Refers to the infamous French criminal Louis Dominque Cartouche (1693–1721). He was originally connected to a band of thieves in Normandy and later became the leader of a gang that committed a long series of thefts, robberies, and murders in Paris and the surrounding area. Cartouche, who on many occasions challenged the police, was finally betrayed, arrested, convicted, and put to death. See Den over al Verden bekiendte Spidsbube, Louis Dominique Cartouche, Hans Levnet og Bedrifter. Tilligemed Hans og Hans Kameraters Heele Proces, Døds-Dom og Execution [The Life and Exploits of the World-Famous Scoundrel, Louis Dominique Cartouche, Including His and His Comrades’ Trial, Death Sentence, and Execution] (Copenhagen, 1755), as well as the more succinct version in Den Franske Ertzspidsbube Cartouche og hans Kameraters Levnets-Beskrivelse. Uddragen af Proces-Acterne og andre særdeeles Efterretninger [The Life Story of the French Arch-Scoundrel Cartouche and His Cronies, Drawn from the Trial Records and Other Special Information] (Copenhagen, 1759). It is reported here (on p. 63

1

6

7

121

418

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

in the former, and p. 43 in the latter) that large rewards were promised to anyone who could capture Cartouche or hand him over; there is no indication, however, that Cartouche came to retrieve the reward himself. On the contrary, the reward was paid to the chief prison guard and his soldiers, who arrested Cartouche and led him to the prison for criminal offenders. 122

11

an emblem that depicts a hand with an eye in the middle] Beginning in 1701, Danish police used an emblem depicting a hand with an eye in it, symbolizing vigilance and vigor.

122

13

has an eye on every finger] A figure of speech expressing extraordinary vigilance. a finger with which to cover the eye] An expression indicating a willingness to overlook something inappropriate (or perhaps merely inconvenient) “when necessary.”

15

19

25

“The Quaker and the Dancer.” . . . “It is a simulated movement.”] Kierkegaard’s free rendering from the conclusion of scene 12 in Qvækeren og Dandserinden. Lystspil i een Act af Scribe og Duport [The Quaker and the Dancer, a Comedy in One Act by Scribe and Duport], written in French in 1831 and translated by J. L. Heiberg; no. 39 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater] (Copenhagen, 1832), vol. 2, p. 11, where Lord Darsie says to the dancer Georgina Barlow, who is trying to refuse his advances, “Ah, it’s only a game! It’s good, very good! It is a studied movement.” This comedy was performed at the Royal Theater a total of nineteen times from its premiere on June 30, 1831, until April 18, 1834, and then once more on January 11, 1835. in The April Fools. Trine: “It is an old man . . . who is copying you.”] Refers to scene 23 in J. L. Heiberg’s vaudeville Aprilsnarrene eller Intriguen i Skolen [The April Fools, or the Intrigue in the School] (Copenhagen, 1826), where the main character, Trine Rar, reproaches her sweetheart, the schoolboy Hans Mortensen, for speaking loosely about their relationship so that the entire town knew about it, and a lampoon called “Hans and Trine in Rosenborg Garden” had even been

•

P a p e r 97–99 1834–1835 •

made about them. On p. 79, Trine says, “Now listen, that’s not even the worst of it. The other day they played the scene in a ‘declamatorium’ [i.e., a public artistic presentation at an evening performance], and the two playing us resembled us so vividly that anyone would have believed it actually was us. Just think―the one who played you was an old guy named Rosenkilde; he had decked himself out to look like a schoolboy.” What Trine refers to―but has misunderstood― is the comical dialogue between Hans and Trine in Poul Martin Møller’s poem titled “Scenes in Rosenborg Garden,” which was recited in a declatorium on February 12, 1826, with the actors Christen Niemann Rosenkilde (1786–1861) and Johanne Pätges (later Johanne Luise Heiberg) as Hans and Trine, respectively. From the premiere on April 22, 1826, until December 31, 1833, the vaudeville was performed a total of thirty-seven times at the Royal Theater; the play was reprised on November 7, 1834. During the first two years, the roles of Hans and Trine were played by Christen Niemann Rosenkilde and Johanne Pätges, respectively. Jacob v[on] Thyboe] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Jacob von Tyboe Eller Den stortalende Soldat [Jacob von Thyboe, or the Big-Mouthed Soldier] (1725). tripping over his spurs in the 5th Act] Refers to act 5, sc. 11 in Jacob von Tyboe Eller Den stortalende Soldat (→ 122,29), where the stage directions read, “(Thyboe runs. Leonard pursues him, and stabs him in the back with the shaft of his rapier).” Whereupon Jacob von Thyboe shouts, “Ah . . . ah . . . I am fatally wounded through and through, ah . . . ,” after which he runs out. See Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567); vol. 3. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. “Lenore” . . . if Wilhelm were actually to come, and she were to die of joy] Refers to the ballad “Lenore” (1774) by the German poet Gottfried August Bürger (1749–1794). See Bürgers Gedichte [Bürger’s Poems], in Hand-Bibliothek der Deutschen Classiker [Compact Library of German Classics], 2 vols. (New York, 1828) (abbreviated hereafter

29

29

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” as Bürgers Gedichte), vol. 1, pp. 48–57. The ballad tells the story of a girl named Lenore, who awaits the return of her beloved Wilhelm, who has been called out on active service. She fears that he has been killed; her mother tries to comfort her and also mentions the possibility that he has perhaps found another sweetheart. But late at night the dead warrior comes for his beloved and rides with her to his grave in the cemetery. 123

123

17

25

27

28

In the watchman’s song for 10 o’clock . . . “Be wise and clever,” . . . “Be wary of flame and fire,”] Quotation from the 10 p.m. verse of the watchman’s song that was sung in Copenhagen: “If you wish to know the time, master, girl and boy, then it is time one went to bed; commend yourself freely to the Lord; be bright and clever; be careful with flame and fire; our clock has struck ten” (Instruction for Natte-Vægterne i Kiøbenhavn [Instructions for Night Watchmen in Copenhagen] [Copenhagen, 1784], p. 20). In Kierkegaard’s time, the watchmen walked through Copenhagen’s streets; they were to light the streetlamps, maintain peace and order, and take measures against fire―and they were also supposed to sing the prescribed watchman’s song every hour. the Pharisees] The Pharisees were one of the most influential movements of ancient Judaism in the Hellenistic-Roman period, i.e., from ca. 100 b.c. until the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. They emphasized a strict adherence to the Mosaic Law, including the complex regulations concerning ritual purity that related to the priesthood. From the Mosaic Law they created a comprehensive oral tradition for the interpretation of its commandments. They also believed in the resurrection of the dead, final judgment, and in angels as intermediaries. In Jesus’ time, they numbered about six thousand. Job’s life] Refers to the account in the Book of Job concerning the righteous and honorable Job, who was stricken by calamities that deprived him of everything and killed his children, after which he was afflicted by disease and loathsome sores. friends who misunderstand him] Refers to the three friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, who

•

P a p e r 99–102 1834–1835 •

419

come to comfort Job when he is afflicted by his great calamities. Every time they speak and present the view that because God is just, Job’s misfortune can only be explained as being his own fault (see Job, chaps. 4–5, 8, 11, 15, 18, 20, 22, and 25), the righteous Job complains that they consider him guilty (see Job, chaps. 6–7, 9–10, 12–14, 16–17, 19, 21, 23–24, and 26–31). a wife who mocks him] Refers to the dispute between Job and his wife after he was afflicted by all the calamities and now sat in the ashes scraping himself with a potsherd. “Then his wife said to him, ‘Do you still persist in your integrity? Curse God, and die.’ But he said to her, ‘You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?’ In all this Job did not sin with his lips” (Job 2:9–10). the situation of the woman in The Riquebourg Family] Refers to the subplot of Familien Riquebourg. Drama i een Act af Scribe [The Riquebourg Family: A Drama in One Act by Scribe], written in French in 1831 and translated by J. L. Heiberg; it is no. 40 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire (→ 119,15), vol. 2. The young Hortensia Riquebourg, born into a noble family and for economic reasons coerced by her parents to marry the considerably older and well-to-do merchant Riquebourg, has fallen in love with the son of her husband’s sister, Frederik (see sc. 14). As early as scene 11, Hortensia is reproached by her husband because she is always so reluctant to be friendly toward Frederik. In scene 13, when Frederik confides in her that he is unhappily in love, she behaves coolly toward him and advises him to leave Paris; when he does not accept her counsel, she turns her back on him. When in scene 15 her husband proposes that Frederik should enter the business with him and live in the house, she immediately requests his permission to move down to their country estate for a time―just as she had the previous summer been away for a three-month stay at a health resort in order to avoid Frederik. In scene 20, it becomes clear that Frederik is miserable because he loves Hortensia, and he now has an inkling that she perhaps loves him too. When in scene 21 their

28

29

420

32

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

mutual love is indirectly confirmed, Frederik promises that for her sake he will flee to the end of the world, which she bids him to do. In scene 23, she asks her husband to permit Frederik to go on a long journey, but he reproaches her for plainly seeming to want to push Frederik away. It ends with Frederik insisting on his right to travel to Havana in order to expand his uncle’s business with a branch there. When he leaves home, Hortensia shows her feelings for Frederik by bursting into tears, and he confesses to her that he now departs in happy certainty of her love. From the premiere on December 30, 1831, until October 13, 1834, the drama was performed at the Royal Theater a total of twenty-two times. Goethe’s Egmont (act 5, scene 1) . . . Clara . . . misunderstood by the citizens] Refers to the first scene, titled “Straße. Dämmerung” [A Street. Twilight], in the fifth and final act of Goethe’s tragedy Egmont (1788); see 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); vol. 8 (1827), pp. 167– 300, esp. pp. 268–272. As leader of the aristocratic opposition to Spanish rule in the Netherlands, Count Egmont, Prince of Gaure, seeks to mediate between the interests of the common people, the aristocracy, and the royal power. Egmont is in mortal danger after arriving with his army in order to establish order in the wake of an iconoclastic riot. Egmont’s beloved is the middle-class girl Clara or, as she is known, Clärchen. In act 5, sc. 1, Clara is told that Egmont has been captured, and she seeks to persuade the Dutch people to rebel. They do not understand her, however, and are not moved by her eloquence, so they go home. From its premiere on June 2, 1834, until December 20, 1834, the play was performed a total of four times at the Royal Theater. The text used was Egmont. Et Sørgespil [Egmont: A Tragedy], trans. P. T. Schorn (Copenhagen, 1818); the first scene of the fifth act is found on pp. 109–115, and the portion to which Kierkegaard refers is on pp. 109–113; the performance was accompanied by Beethoven’s music. See A. Aumont

•

P a p e r 102 1835 •

and E. Collin, Den danske Nationalteater 1748–1889. En statistisk Fremstilling af Det kongelige Teaters Historie fra Skuepladsens Aabning paa Kongens Nytorv 18. December 1748 til Udgangen af Sæsonen 1888–89 [The Danish National Theater, 1748–1889: A Statistical Presentation of the History of the Royal Theater from the Opening of the Theater Building on Kongens Nytorv on December 18, 1748, to the End of the 1888–1889 Season], 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1896–1900), vol. 2 (1898), pp. 175– 176. ― Goethe’s: Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832), German poet, dramatist, essayist, jurist, statesman, and natural scientist. Holberg’s comic figures] Refers to characters in the comedies of the Danish-Norwegian author and scientist, Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754). See Paper 102:2, dated January 19, 1835, in the present volume. the Fidget] A reference to the main character in act 1, sc. 6, of the comedy Den Stundesløse [The Fidget] [or The Busy Trifler] (1731) by Ludvig Holberg (1684–1754), Danish-Norwegian writer and scientist. The fussy Mr. Vielgeschrey (whose name means “Much Fuss”) refuses to allow his daughter Leonora to marry Leander, because Leander has not studied bookkeeping and so cannot assist him in his great business enterprises. This leads Leander to remark: “I do not know what business a man who does not occupy any position can be in!” Vielgeschrey responds: “I am so busy with business that I have no time to eat or drink. Pernille! He says that I have no business. You can testify in my behalf!” Maidservant Pernille: “Master has enough work for ten men. It is only his enemies who say that he has no business. After all, apart from me Master keeps 4 scribblers on staff, which is proof enough that he has plenty of business.” To which Vielgeschrey adds: “And I’m about to hire another pair!” See act 1, sc. 6 of Den Stundeløse in Den Danske SkuePlads (→ 122,29), vol. 5. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. Holberg’s] → 123,34. Jeppe of the Hill] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Jeppe paa Bierget, eller Den forvandlede Bonde [Jeppe of the Hill, or the Transformed Peasant] (1723). See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→

34

36

9 10

124

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

10

10 15

124

18 18

122,29), vol. 1. The volume is undated and unpaginated. Erasmus Montanus] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg [Erasmus Montanus, or Rasmus Berg] (1731). See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 122,29), vol. 5. The volume is undated and unpaginated. The Fidget] → 123,36. smile at the Dutchmen in Goethe’s Egmont, act 5, scene 1] → 123,32. the master thief] See Paper 97:1–6, in the present volume. with the Italian robber] Refers to Fra Diavolo (→ 119,15).

124

28

Eulenspiegel] → 120,36.

125

27

The critical period] Refers to the last quarter of the 18th century, which was dominated by the critical philosophy of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) who, through his consideration of the conditions for the possibility of human knowledge, experience, and rationality provided a new starting position for philosophy. Kant was a privatdocent (1755–1769), and from 1770 a professor at the University of Königsberg. panning for gold] The operation of extracting gold from sedimentary sand (often in or near a stream) using a pan.

27

•

P a p e r 102–111 1835 •

421

cially starting with and after Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie [Faust: A Tragedy] (1808), the figure of Faust became the epitome of striving and searching for the truth. In the mid-1830s, Kierkegaard studied the Faust legend and its development, including C. L. Stieglitz’s essay “Die Sage vom Doctor Faust” [The Legend of Doctor Faust], published in Historisches Taschenbuch. Mit Beiträgen von Förster, Gans, Loebell, Stieglitz, Wachsmuth [Historical Handbook, with Contributions by Förster, Gans, Loebell, Stieglitz, Wachsmuth], ed. Fr. Von Raumer, 5th annual ed. (Leipzig, 1834), pp. 125–210. rats: train each to bite the others] Refers to an antiquated method of rat control. The method, dating back to the Middle Ages, consisted of catching a certain number of male rats―ideally ten―and confining them in a cage without food. “The weakest of the ten was eventually killed and consumed by the other rats. The process continued until one rat only was left. This aggressive male was sterilized and released, in the hope that it would kill all the males it encountered and that it would mate with all the females, thus automatically reducing the rat population. If merely one female is added to the group of caged rats, it is she that will be the last survivor (pregnant, of course).” See Martin Hart [Maarten ‘t Hart], Rats (London: Allison & Busby, 1982), p. 143.

22

27

126

1

Faust] The historical Faust lived in Germany in the first half of the 16th century. The legend of Faust goes back to a German chapbook from 1587. Kierkegaard was familiar with various editions of the legend and pays particular attention to a Danish version, Den i den gandske Verden bekiendte Ertz-Sort-Kunstner og Trold-Karl Doctor Johan Faust, og Hans med Dievelen oprettede Forbund, Forundringsfulde Levnet og skrækkelige Endeligt [The World-Renowned Arch-Practitioner of the Black Arts and Magician, Doctor Johan Faust, and the Pact He Made with the Devil, His Astonishing Life and Frightful Doom] (Copenhagen, n.d. [prior to 1823]; ASKB U 35), and it has since been adapted in countless literary works. After G. E. Lessing’s version (never completed), and espe-

a Novalis] Pseudonym for Friedrich von Hardenberg (1772–1801), German philosopher and Romantic poet. Kierkegaard owned Novalis Schriften [Works of Novalis], edited by Ludwig Tieck and Friedrich Schlegel, 2 vols., 4th ed. (Berlin 1826 [1802]; ASKB 1776). ― a: Variant: added. its most beautiful and purest form] Variant: the editors of SKS and Pap. state that Kierkegaard’s handwriting is unclear and that the word translated as “form” (Danish, Form) could also be read as “color” (Danish, Farve). 74, 2nd floor.] It has not been possible to identify the referent here. Variant: immediately preceding this, the paper has been torn off.

126

29

4

127

422 127

5

10

11

128

14

25

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

had Goethe never continued Faust] Refers to Goethe’s Faust. Der Tragödie zweiter Theil in fünf Acten [Faust: The Second Part of the Tragedy, in Five Acts], which was published posthumously as vol. 1 in Goethe’s nachgelassene Werke [Goethe’s Posthumous Works], which constitutes vol. 41 of Goethe’s Werke [Goethe’s Works] (→ 123,32). Goethe completed part 1 of Faust. Eine Tragödie [Faust: A Tragedy] in 1808, and in 1828 he added a short part 2; both parts are found in Goethe’s Werke, vol. 12 (1828), which ends with the words: “(Ist fortzusetzen.)” [(to be continued.)]. his conversion] Presumably refers to the final scene of act 5 of Goethe’s Faust. Der Tragödie zweiter Teil in fünf Acten (→ 127,5), which takes place in heaven after Faust’s death; here Gretchen, whom Faust had deceived in the first part, intercedes for him, with the result that he appears to be saved. See Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 4 (1832), pp. 333–344. His death represents the consummate harmony of the piece] Refers to the penultimate scene in act 5 of Goethe’s Faust. Der Tragödie zweiter Teil in fünf Acten, in which Faust dies and is buried, and one hears the singing of a heavenly host and choir of angels, who strew roses about and, finally, ascend, leading away Faust’s immortal soul. See Goethe’s Werke, vol. 4 (1832), pp. 318–332. his holy of holies] An allusion to the most holy inner sanctuary in the tabernacle, and later in the Jerusalem temple, separated by a curtain; this is where the Ark of the Covenant was kept and where only the High Priest was permitted to enter on the great Day of Atonement. See Exodus 26:33–34; 1 Kings 6:23–28, 8:6–9; and Hebrews 9:3–7. A consecrated space inaccessible to others. the lottery] Presumably, a reference to the official numbers lottery that was established in Denmark in 1771 by G.D.F. Köes. In 1773, it was taken over by the Danish state, which was responsible for it until it was legally abolished in 1851. The numbers lottery was extremely popular, especially among the lower classes. Numbers were drawn every week both in Copenhagen and Altona, and from 1773 also in Vandsbek.

•

P a p e r 112–119 1835–1836 •

the sparrow to the swallow] As Kierkegaard implies, this is not the case with the sparrow and the swallow. there are two species of birds who comport themselves in this manner] Certain cuckoos, for example, are “parasites”―that is to say, they lay their eggs in the nests of various other birds and thus get their chicks hatched by them.

6

the results of] Variant: added. Practicum] Variant: added by Kierkegaard. (A practicum is an examination that demonstrates the skill of the examinee in the execution of his or her profession.) Goethe’s . . . Ich hab’ mein Sach auf Nichts gestelt Juche etc.] Quotation from the first stanza of J. W. Goethe’s poem “Vanitas! Vanitatum Vanitas!” [Vanity! Vanity of Vanities!], part of “Gesellige Lieder” [Convivial Songs] in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 1, pp. 145–147. See The Poems of Goethe: Translated in the Original Metres, trans. Edgar Alfred Bowring (London: George Bell and Sons, 1874), pp. 85–86: “My trust in nothing now is placed, Hurrah! / So in the world true joy I taste, Hurrah! / Then he who would be a comrade of mine / Must rattle his glass, and in chorus combine, / Over these dregs of wine. // I placed my trust in gold and wealth, Hurrah! / But then I lost all joy and health, Lack a day! / Both here and there the money roll’d, / And when I had it here, behold, / From there had fled the gold! // I placed my trust in women next, Hurrah! / But there in truth was sorely vex’d, Lack-a-day! / The False another portion sought, / The True with tediousness were fraught, / The Best could not be bought. // My trust in travels then I placed, Hurrah! / And left my native land in haste, Lacka-day! / But not a single thing seem’d good / The beds were bad, and strange the food, / And I not understood. // I placed my trust in rank and fame, Hurrah! / Another put me straight to shame, Lack-a-day! / And as I had been prominent, / All scowl’d upon me as I went, / I found not one content. // I placed my trust in war and fight, Hurrah! / We gain’d full many a triumph bright, Hurrah! / Into the foeman’s land we cross’d, / We put our friends to equal cost, / And

24

129

10

25

26

129

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

27

28

there a leg I lost. // My trust is placed in nothing now, Hurrah! / At my command the world must bow, Hurrah! / And as we’ve ended feast and strain, / The cup we’ll to the bottom drain; / No dregs must there remain!” Kingo’s “Then fare thee, world, farewell”] Refers to the hymn “Far, Verden, far vel” [Fare, World, Fare Well] by the Danish bishop and hymnodist Thomas Kingo (1634–1703). See “Kjed af Verden, og kjær af Himmelen” [World-Weary, and Heaven-Adoring], no. 93 in Psalmer og aandelige Sange af Thomas Kingo [Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Thomas Kingo], ed. P. A. Fenger (Copenhagen, 1827; ASKB 203), pp. 253–256. See esp. the first stanza, p. 252, which translates as: “Then fare thee, world, farewell! / I now weary of your thrall, / The burdens that had upon me lain, / I now cast off and them disdain, / I tear myself free / from vanity, / from vanity.” And the ninth stanza, p. 255: “So fare thee, world, farewell! / No longer will you my soul deceive, / Deceitful world, I take my leave, / And bury you in the grave of forgetfulness, / For I long to mend my sorrow and distress, / In the bosom of Abraham, / In the bosom of Abraham.” Herder, for example, in a little poem . . . only two flowers . . . Liebe und Freundschaft] Refers to the fourth stanza in J. G. Herder’s poem “Der Gewinn des Lebens. Nach dem Englischen” [The Profit of Life: From the English], printed as no. 23 in “Erstes Buch. Bilder und Träume. Erste Abtheilung” [First Book: Images and Dreams; First Division], in Johann Gottfried v. Herder’s Gedichte [Poems of Johann Gottfried von Herder], ed. J. G. Müller, vol. 1, in Johann Gottfried von Herder’s sämmtliche Werke. Zur schönen Literatur und Kunst [Johann Gottfried von Herder’s Complete Works: On Literature and Art], 20 vols. (Stuttgart, 1827–1830; ASKB 1685–1694); see vol. 3 (1827), pp. 35–36: “Weary, without sorrow and scorn, / I now sought roses among the thorns. / Alas, the roses were all faded / and their thorns pricked me― / Here were there but two little buds, / That remained for me―love and friendship.” ― Herder: Johann Gottfried von Herder (1744–1803), German evangelical theologian, philosopher, literary critic, and polymath.

•

P a p e r 119–120 1836 •

423

Schleiermacher: the spiritual pulse of my soul . . . until my last breath, etc.] Refers to no. 5, “Jugend und Alter” [Youth and Age], in Monologen. Eine Neujahrsgabe [Soliloquies: A New Year’s Gift], by F. Schleiermacher (Berlin, 1800), pp. 131–155. See esp. the following passage, p. 134: “Why should I not successfully fight off the death that lurks in hiding for me, even longer than he who has maintained his prime the longest? Ignoring the toll of years and the body’s decay, why should I not by sheer force of will cling to youth’s dear divinity until my last breath is drawn?” And p. 140: “Yes, in my advanced years I shall still have the same strength of spirit, and I shall never lose my keen zest for life. That which now rejoices me, shall ever give me joy; my will shall remain strong, and my imagination active, and nothing shall wrest from me the magic key which opens the mysterious portals of the higher world; nor shall love’s ardent flame ever be quenched. I will not see the dread infirmities of old age; I vow a mighty scorn of all adversity that does not touch the aim of my existence, and I pledge myself to an eternal Youth.” And finally, p. 155: “[F]or from the consciousness of inner freedom there blossoms eternal youth and joy. On these have I laid hold, nor shall I ever give them up, and so I can see with a smile my eyes growing dim, and my blond locks turning white. Nought can happen to affright my heart, and the pulse of my inner life will beat with vigor until death.” English translation from Schleiermacher’s Soliloquies, trans. Horace Leland Friess (Chicago: Open Court, 1926), pp. 90, 94, 102–103. ― Schleiermacher: Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768–1834), German, Reformed theologian, philosopher, and classical philologist.

30

I have drawn attention to] Where Kierkegaard has done this has not been identified. Sancho Panza and D. Quixote] Don Quixote is the main character, and Sancho Panza is his squire, in the picaresque novel by the Spanish author Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote (1605–1615), trans. Charlotte D. Biehl as Den sindrige Herremands Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og

1 1

130

424

2

2

3

130

13

27

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

Bedrifter [The Life and Deeds of the Clever Lord Don Quixote of la Mancha], 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1776–1777; ASKB 1937–1940). D. Juan and Leporello] Don Juan is the main character, and Leporello is his servant, in W. A. Mozart’s opera Don Giovanni, or Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni [The Reprobate Punished, or Don Giovanni] (1787), with libretto by Lorenzo da Ponte. See Don Juan. Opera i tvende Akter bearbeidet til Mozarts Musik [Don Giovanni: An Opera in Two Acts, Adapted to Mozart’s Music], by L. Kruse (Copenhagen, 1807; abbreviated hereafter as Don Juan. Opera i tvende Akter). From its premiere on May 5, 1807, until November 10, 1835, and again on March 12, 1836, Don Giovanni was performed at the Royal Theater a total of seventy-one times. Faust and Wagner] Faust is the main character, and Wagner is his scientific assistant, in J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke, (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828). Figaro is also set in opposition to a stock character] Figaro is the main character in W. A. Mozart’s opera Le nozze di Figaro [The Marriage of Figaro] (1786), with libretto by Lorenzo da Ponte, based on P.A.C. de Beaumarchais’s play Le mariage de Figaro [The Marriage of Figaro] (1778). See Lorenzo da Ponte, Figaros Givtermaal eller Den gale Dag. Syngestykke i fire Akter, oversat til Musik af Mozart efter den italienske Omarbeidelse af Beaumarchis’ franske Original [The Marriage of Figaro, or the Day of Madness: An Opera in Four Acts, Set to the Music of Mozart after the Italian Adaptation of Beaumarchais’s French Original] by N. T. Bruun (Copenhagen, 1817). From its premiere on January 9, 1821, until November 14, 1835, and again on May 6, 1836, the opera was performed at the Royal Theater a total of fifty-nine times. the burning of corpses] The freedom to choose cremation was first permitted by law in Denmark in 1892. The Association for Cremation was founded in 1881, and the first crematorium was built in 1886. adverbs] Variant: added over “conjunctions”.

•

P a p e r 120–125 1836 •

according to Ehrenberg’s description (see note)] Refers to the article “De nordafricanske Ørkner” [The North African Deserts], by C. G. Ehrenberg, in Dansk Ugeskrift [Danish Weekly], published by “et Selskab” (A Society), ed. J. F. Schouw, nos. 95 and 96, December 1833, vol. 4 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 153–164. ― Ehrenberg’s: Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg (1795–1876), German naturalist, founder of microbiology and micropaleontology. ― see note: See the note on p. 131, line 12. the Jutland heath (Blicher)] Refers to the Danish priest and author Steen Steensen Blicher (1782–1848), known especially for his poems and short stories, in which there are many descriptions of the Jutland heath. See, for example, the introduction to the short story “Præsten I Thorning” [The Priest in Thorning], in Samlede Noveller [Collected Short Stories], vol. 1, 2nd ed. (Copenhagen, 1833), and vols. 2–5, 1st ed. (Copenhagen, 1833–1836), and supplementary volume Nyeste Noveller og Digte [Recent Short Stories and Poems] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 1521–1523), vol. 1, pp. 58–59. See also the following description in the short story “Røverstuen” [The Bandit’s Living Room], in Samlede Noveller, vol. 1, p. 108: “When at long last you reach the edge of Jutland, the immense, flat heath stretches before your eyes, initially strewn with barrows, but their number steadily decreases, such that one can reasonably surmise that this stretch of land has never before been cultivated . . . On the eastern side of this heathery plain, however, one finds here and there some short, small, scrub oak, which can serve as a compass for those who have lost their way, since the crowns of the trees are all bent toward the east . . . Where a brook or small river runs through the heath, neither meadows nor bushes betray its presence; nestled deep in its groove between hills it swiftly twists by in secret, as though it were hurrying away from the desert.” See also the introduction to the short story “Hosekrämmeren” [The Stockinger], in Samlede Noveller, vol. 1, pp. 213–214, and the introduction to the section “Langebæk Præstegaard” [Langebæk Parsonage] in the short story “Fjorten Dage i Jylland” [Fourteen Days in Jutland], in Samlede Noveller, vol. 5, pp. 76–77.

9

10

131

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 11

12

25

132

1

the beginning of the novella Telse] Refers to the beginning of Steen Steensen Blicher’s short story “Telse” in Samlede Noveller (→ 131,10), vol. 2, pp. 1–2: “The earth was covered with snow, the heavens with stars; the moon was waning, and the winds were all at rest. Here below nothing stirred, but the firmament above was in endless motion: the countless stars in the dark sky glimmered, twinkled, trembled, blinked―and smiled―like eyes of angels from the dark and distant eternity.” Dansk Ugeskrift. vol. 4, pp. 153ff; p. 154. Note: “Already a number of travelers . . . a low whisper.”] Quotation from the long note in Ehrenberg’s article about the north African desert in Dansk Ugeskrift (→ 131,9), vol. 4, pp. 154–155. Kierkegaard’s transcription contains some deviations in orthography and punctuation. For neither is it possible to tell . . . far away or close by] Short gloss of the last part of the long note in Ehrenberg’s article in Dansk Ugeskrift, vol. 4 (see the previous note), p. 155: “At Qasr Eschdaebie we were nearly attacked by Bedouins; I had just come on watch, and I heard the footsteps and whispers of the advancing Arabs so far in the distance that we had time to prepare our defense, and even send out some of our Arabs on reconnaissance. Some days later we heard a similar sound and believed that it too came from far away, but through reconnaissance found a wounded Negro who had become separated from us, but now had been lying in the vicinity of our tent without knowing it.” Why did . . . the most significant . . . convert to Catholicism?] See, for example, Die romantische Schule (→ 167,8), p. 52: “For many of the followers of the Romantic school―Mr. Görres and Mr. Klemens Brentano, for example―there was no need for a formal conversion since they were Catholics from birth, and they merely renounced their former free-thinking views. But others were born and raised in the bosom of the Protestant Church―for example, Friedrich Schlegel, Mr. Ludwig Tieck, Novalis, Werner, Schütz, Carové, Adam Müller, etc.―and their conversion to Catholicism required an official act.”

•

P a p e r 125–130 1836 •

425

Ingeborg . . . pursuing Frithiof with her eyes] Refers to the ninth song (“Ingeborg’s Lament”) in the Swedish author Esaias Tegnér’s (1782–1846) romance cycle Frithiof’s saga (Stockholm, 1825), pp. 71–72. In the scene, Ingeborg is sitting on the shore watching her beloved Frithiof sail out to sea. She exclaims: “Long did I see / The sail in the West, it flew on its way. / Alas, it is happy to follow / Frithiof on the waves.” aorist] Greek verb form indicating the action perceived, independently of time and duration.

13

scarcely in death] Variant: “scarcely” (Danish, næppe) is perhaps an error for “precisely” (Danish, netop), which is how Pap. reads it.

23

132

the ash tree Ygdrasill] An immense ash tree that plays a central role in Nordic mythology. See, for example, J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte indtil Frode 7 Tider [The Superstitions, Gods, Fables, and Heroes of the Nordic People up to the Times of Frode VII] (Copenhagen, 1800; ASKB 1947), p. 478: “Ygdrasil, an ash tree under which the gods assembled daily for court. This tree was the best and greatest of all, and its branches extended over the entirety of heaven and earth. Similarly, it had three outstretched roots, all equidistant from one another. The one was with the gods; the other was under the former abyss and the place where the Hrimthusser lived; the third covered Niflheim, and under it was the well Huergelmer, in which the monster Nydhoggur lived.” giants] Presumably refers to the enormous beings of Greek mythology, such as Gaia (“earth”) who was born from the blood of the castrated Uranus (“sky”). See, for example, Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [Paul F. A. Nitsch’s New Dictionary of Mythology], ed. F. G. Klopfer, 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Leipzig and Sorau, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945; abbreviated hereafter as Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch), vol. 1, p. 751. the so-called cosmopolitan system] Presumably refers to the Enlightenment-era theory of cosmopolitanism. See, for example, Immanuel Kant’s Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht [Idea for a Universal History

5

133

132

19

5

9

426

133

11

133

21

24

25 26 26 30

36

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

with a Cosmopolitan Aim] (1784) and Über den Gemeinspruch. Das mag in der Theorie richtig Sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis [On the Common Saying: That May Be Correct in Theory, but It Is of No Use in Practice] (1793), esp. the third part, titled “Vom Verhältniß der Theorie zur Praxis im Völksrecht. In allgemein-philanthropischer, d. i. kosmopolitischer Absicht betrachtet” [On the Relation of Theory to Practice in the Right of Nations Considered from a Universally Philanthropic, That Is, Cosmopolitan Point of View] and Zum ewigen Frieden. Ein philosophischer Entwurf [Toward Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch] (1795). Kant argued for a federation of free states in which the nations would all be equal, while at the same time he was highly skeptical of the idea of a federal world republic. Rom[antic]) Variant: changed from “preceding”. When Adam was created . . . Eve as supplement . . . animals came up . . . he gave them names] Refers to the account in Genesis 2:18–20. 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. While the hero of the tragedy was an eminent individual, the chorus represented ordinary citizens. Typically, it was through the chorus that the observer sensed the fate that befell the hero. In modern drama and opera, the chorus often represents a mass or mob, and “public opinion” and thus becomes “the voice of the people.” Eve arrives] Refers to the account in Genesis 2:21–24. Man is created] Refers to the accounts in Genesis 1:26–27 and 2:21–22. he sins] Refers to the account of the Fall in Genesis 3:1–24. Christ’s second coming] Variant: Kierkegaard’s ms. has “Christ’s second coming.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Echo] According to Greek mythology, Pan desired the mountain nymph Echo; when she rejected him, she was torn to pieces by the jilted suitor so that only her voice remained. Ovid tells anoth-

•

P a p e r 130–134 1836 •

er story in his Metamorphoses, bk. 3, vv. 356–401: Since Echo had kept the goddess Hera busy with talk while Zeus lay with other nymphs, she was punished for her loquacity: she retained only the ability to repeat the words of others. Afterward, she wasted away from unrequited love for the beautiful youth Narcissus, so all that remained of her was her voice, which was the resonance of other voices from cliffs and forests. See W. Vollmer, Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie aller Nationen (→ 161,15), p. 653. that mighty age] Refers to the setting for ancient and Romantic-era Nordic sagas that take their material from the time before ca. 850 and are characterized by supernatural and fantastic subject matter. See Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier (→ 134,29). Vol. 3 bears the title Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier eller mythiske og romantiske Sagaer efter islandske Haandskrifter [Heroic Tales, or Mythical and Romantic Sagas, Based on Icelandic Manuscripts]. believe that trolls live under stones . . . one or another gift] See, for example, An Buesvingers Saga (→ 135,2), pp. 211–12. See also Hervørs og Kong Hejdreks Saga (→ 134,20). the Nemesis] In Greek mythology, Nemesis was the goddess of retribution and punitive justice who set herself against undeserved happiness and overweening pride. She also preserved balance in things and was therefore also the goddess of vengeance and punishment. See Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch (→ 133,5), vol. 2, pp. 304–305. when someone . . . the good sword . . . his own family] See, for example, Hervørs og Kong Hejdreks Saga, efter den islandske Grundskrift [The Saga of Hervør and King Heidrek, Based on Icelandic Manuscripts], trans. C. C. Rafn (Copenhagen, 1826), included with separate pagination in Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier (→ 134,29), vol. 3, pp. 6–8, where it relates that King Svafurlame, Odin’s grandson, had once “ridden so deep into the forest that he had become completely lost. At sundown, he saw two dwarves standing beside an enormous stone; he cast a spell on them with a rod of iron (note: a rod bearing a magic inscription) so that they could not escape into the stone;

13

15

18

20

134

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” he then swung his sword above them; they begged him to spare their lives. Svafurlame asked them their names; one was named Dyrin, and the other was Dvalin. When Svalfurlame learned that they were the greatest artisans of all the dwarves, he ordered them to make for him the most excellent sword they could make . . . He demanded a sword that could never be broken and would never rust, that would cleave both iron and stones as if they were cloth, and that would bring victory in battle and one-to-one combat to anyone who carried it. By doing so they would save their lives. They acceded to his demands, and the king rode home. On the appointed day when Svafurlame returned to the stone, the dwarves were outside and they gave him the sword, which was exceedingly beautiful. Then Dvalin, who stood in the doorway to the stone, said: ‘Svafurlame! This sword will be the death of a man every time it is drawn, and with this sword three evil deeds will be committed―it will also be the death of you.’ Then Svafurlame swung at the dwarves, but they ran into the stone. The swing put the sword into the stone, burying both its edges, for the door was closed. So Svafurlame took this sword, which he named Tyrfing, and he carried it into battle and one-to-one combat, and had constant victory.” Shortly thereafter, the saga tells how Arngrim the Berserker took the sword Tyrfing from Svafurlame and cleaved him lengthwise with it in a duel (p. 8). And it later relates how King Hejdrek’s servants murdered him with Tyrfing, stating that this “accounts for the third evil deed that the dwarves had predicted would be committed by Tyrfing; the sword’s destiny was thereby fulfilled” (p. 98). 134

29

33

the Nordiske Kjæmpehistorier] Refers to Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier efter islandske Haandskrifter [Heroic Tales Based on Icelandic Manuscripts], trans. C. C. Rafn, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1821–1826; AKSB 1993–1995 (abbreviated hereafter as Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier). Everything relating to Hamlet] In particular, here Hamlet’s simulation of madness. The figure of Hamlet, known from as early as the 13th-century chronicle of Denmark by Saxo Grammaticus

•

P a p e r 134–135 1836 •

427

as the legendary prince Amleth of Jutland, is best known from Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (1603). Ketil Hængs Saga, vol. 3, sec. 2, pp. 3ff.] Refers to Ketil Hængs Saga [The Saga of Ketil Trout] in Ketil Hængs og Grim Lodinkins Sagaer, Ørvarodds Saga, An Buesvingers Saga og Romund Grejpssøns Saga efter islandske Haandskrifter [The Sagas of Ketil Trout and Grim Shaggy-Creek, the Saga of Orvar-Odd, The Saga of An Bow-Bender, and the Saga of Romund Grejpssøn, Based on Icelandic Manuscripts], trans. C. C. Rafn (Copenhagen, 1826), included with separate pagination in Nordiske Kæmpe-Historier (→ 134,29), vol. 3, pp. 3–39. The saga tells the story of Ketil, son of Halbjørn. Halbjørn longs for a strong and useful son; Ketil is very strong, but as a child is very lazy and prefers to be in the kitchen with his mother sitting by the fire with his head in his hands. One day, his father urged him to get out of doors. Ketil said nothing, but he went out and disappeared for three nights. When he returned, he carried a chair on his back, which he gave to his mother, expressing his greater love for her than for his father. Despite his early indolence, however, Ketil grows up to be a strong and powerful man. Buesvingers Saga, vol. 3, sec. 2, p. 211] Refers to An Buesvingers Saga [The Saga of An BowBender] in Ketil Hængs og Grim Lodinkins Sagaer, Ørvarodds Saga, An Buesvingers Saga og Romund Grejpssøns Saga efter islandske Haandskrifter (→ 135,1), pp. 211–212. The saga tells the story of An, the grandson of Ketil Hæng, and his feud with the king of Namdalen. As a child, An was very strong, very lazy, and preferred to sit in the kitchen with his mother much more than he desired to help his father in the fields. But when he was twelve years old, An disappeared into the woods for three nights and nobody knew where he was. While in the woods, An managed, by interposing himself between a dwarf and the stone in which the dwarf hid himself, to enchant and command a dwarf to make for him a bow suited to his strength, and five magic arrows that could be drawn and released all at the same time. The dwarf also made An a beautiful chair, which An

1

1

135

428

5

10

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

presented to his mother, because, as he said, he owed her most of all. a sudden disappearance . . . a subsequent period of brilliance] Refers to Ketil Hæng (→ 135,1) and to An Buesvinger (→ 135,2), both of whom suddenly disappeared for three nights, which for both also initiated an increasingly glorious period. “Schwab . . . Sagen” in Robert der Teufel, p. 347 . . . sleep with them, etc.] Refers to the French legend “Robert der Teufel” [Robert the Devil], in G. Schwab, Buch der schönsten Geschichten und Sagen für Alt und Jung wieder erzählt [A Book of the Most Beautiful Stories and Legends Retold for Young and Old], 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1836–1837; ASKB 1429–1430), vol. 1, pp. 335–337. The legend tells of a duke and duchess in Normandy who were unable to have children; in her despair, the duchess promised the devil that if she has a son, he would belong completely to him. She gave birth to Robert, who proved to be evil and cruel. One day he wanted to know the truth about himself and the cause of his wickedness, and he asked his mother to tell him. She tried to evade the question, but when he urged her again she revealed everything, including how she had promised him to the devil. Robert grew deeply unhappy, and he decided to travel to Rome as a pilgrim in order to confess his terrible crimes. He arrived in Rome at Easter, and he forced his way forward to the pope, and on bended knee he cried out repeatedly for the pope to show compassion and asked him to hear his confession. The pope, who realized it was “Robert the Devil,” heard his confession and instructed Robert to seek out a hermit, who was the pope’s own father confessor; Robert was to confess all his sins before this recluse. Robert visited the hermit and told him of his devilish life and about all his terrible offenses. The hermit invited him to stay the night in the chapel, and on the following day would hear his confession. During the night, an angel showed himself in a dream to the recluse and instructed him what penance he should enjoin upon Robert when he desired to receive forgiveness for his sins. The recluse thanked God for the message he had received, and when the day dawned, he

•

P a p e r 135–136 1836 •

felt moved by love for Robert. “He called to him and spoke the consoling words: ‘My son, come here for confession!’ Robert came in all humility and repeated the confession of his sins. When he was finished, the hermit said to him, ‘I know now what penance to enjoin upon you, my friend! You must conduct yourself as a fool and a mute, eat only with the dogs and sleep with them; all this, so long as it pleases God,” p. 357. ― Schwab: Gustav Benjamin Schwab (1792–1850), German evangelical theologian and writer; from 1817, professor of classical languages at the gymnasium in Stuttgart; from 1825, also a contributor to Blätter für literarische Unterhaltung [Pages for Literary Entertainment], and from 1828, a member of the editorial board of Morgenblatt für gebildete Stände [Morning News for the Cultured Classes]. Nonetheless he accomplishes great things . . . plays the part of the fool] Refers to the continuation of the legend of “Robert the Devil” in Schwab’s Buch der schönsten Geschichten und Sagen (→ 135,10), vol. 1, pp. 360–366, where Robert serves as the mute jester in the court of the Holy Roman Emperor. On three different occasions, Rome is attacked by enemy forces. On each occasion―and unknown to everyone save the emperor’s mute daughter, who watches him from her window in the palace―Robert rides out as a knight in white armor to secure victory and deliver the city from invasion. significance of the fool in the Middle Ages] See, for example, Karl Friedrich Flögel, Geschichte der Hofnarren [History of the Court Jester] (Liegnitz, 1789; ASKB 1401). the chorus] → 133,24. Wagner’s] (→ 130,2. Leporello’s] → 130,2. Sancho Panza’s] → 130,1. we mentioned on another occasion] Refers to Paper 119, in the present volume. Don Quixote] → 130,1. a Claudius] Presumably refers to the German author Matthias Claudius (1740–1815), who wrote under the name “Asmus den Wandsbecker Boten” (Asmus, Messenger of Wandsbeck), among other names. See ASMUS omnia sua SECUM portans,

13

17

18 22 23 23 25

36

135

7

136

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

11

19

oder Sämmtliche Werke des Wandsbecker Bothen [Everything I Have I Carry with Me, or the Complete Works of the Wandsbeck Messenger], 8 vols. (Wandsbeck, 1774–1812; see ASKB 1631– 1632, a 5th edition in four volumes from 1838). the girl who follows the farm laborer’s steps] Refers to the agricultural practice of Kierkegaard’s time in which a farm laborer would reap grain with a scythe and a servant girl would follow after him to bind the grain into sheaves. Dansk Folkeblad] Dansk Folkeblad [Danish People’s Paper], published by “Selskabet for Trykkefrihedens rette Brug” (Society for the Proper Use of the Freedom of the Press), edited by “its Publication Committee,” vol. 1, nos. 1–55 (Copenhagen, 1836). The first issue came out on May 29, 1835, and the last issue on March 25, 1836. Kierkegaard is probably here thinking of no. 48 (February 19, 1836), p. 190, which makes reference to the “Judging of six prize essays in history, submitted to the Society.” Here it states, “On the occasion of the Society’s advertised prize of 100 rix-dollars for a ‘Historical Account of the Introduction of the Reformation into Denmark,’ six replies had been received in answer to this. The Society’s purpose for the advertised prize has undoubtedly been to obtain a clear, simple, worthwhile, and generally easy-to-read historical account of the Reformation of the Church in Denmark that could―both now, with respect to the coming jubilee festival, but, more generally, also in times to come―become a people’s book, or a popular reader for every citizen in the land.” Regarding the Society’s goal of publishing easyto-read, popular works, see “Love for Selskabet til Trykkefrihedens rette Brug” [Rules of the Society for the Proper Use of the Freedom of the Press], printed on unnumbered pages at the end of the first volume, where in § 2 the following is established: “Through prize awards, the Society seeks to elicit popular works suitable for all classes of citizens to ennoble the mind, improve taste, and disseminate knowledge, the feeling of community spirit, trade and other industries, together with whatever else concerns civic life.”

•

P a p e r 136–140 1836 •

429

Danish heroic ballads] Danish folk songs with mythical-heroic content. See the first section of “Kjæmpeviser” [Heroic Ballads], in Udvalgte Danske Viser fra Middelalderen [Selected Danish Ballads from the Middle Ages], ed. W. Abrahamson, R. Nyerup, and K. L Rahbek, 5 vols. (Copenhagen 1812–1814; ASKB 1477–1481); vol. 1, pp. 1–172. drinking songs] See the section titled “Drikkeviser” [Drinking Songs], 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], ed. Andreas Seidelin (Copenhagen, 1814; ASKB 1483), pp. 177–266. See also the following note. see the musical tones that have their source at the roots of the nation] See the fourth lecture in Christian Molbech’s Forelæsninger over den nyere danske Poesie [Lectures on Contemporary Danish Poetry] (→ 166,19), vol. 1, pp. 74–100, esp. pp. 91–93, where he speaks of the poetical and musical tone of lyrical folk poetry (from the middle of the 16th century to the middle of the 17th century), comedic poetry (from the time of Frederik V [1746–1766]), as well as club poetry and party songs (from the time of Christian VII [1766– 1808]). Beranger] Pierre-Jean de Béranger (1780–1857), French poet and songwriter; made a name for himself with the satirical song “Le Roi d’Yvetot” [The King of Yvetot] (1813), which mocked Napoleon. He was widely praised for his popular and simple songs, such as, for example, Chansons nouvelles et dernières [New and Recent Songs] (1833). Béranger is named in the first of Molbech’s Forelæsninger over den nyere danske Poesie (→ 166,19), vol. 1, p. 16.

23

Adam names all the animals, but finds nothing for himself] See the account in Genesis 2:20.

3

137

D[on] Juan] The legend of Don Juan goes back to an old Spanish account of the dissolute aristocrat Don Juan Tenorio of Seville, who abducted the daughter of Don Gonzalo of Ulloa and then killed Don Gonzalo. Heaven is supposed to have punished the murderer of this respected commander

6

137

136

23

25

27

430

6 6

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

of the Holy Order of the Knights of Calatrava by having his statue throw Don Juan into hell. Writing under the pseudonym Tirso de Molina, the Spanish priest Gabriel Tellex composed the first fictional account of Don Juan, El Burlador de Sevilla [The Seducer of Seville], in about 1620. This work was followed in 1665 by the comedy Don Juan ou le festin de pierre [Don Juan, or the Stone Guest] by Molière (pseudonym of the French comic poet Jean Baptiste Poquelin), and in 1786 by Giovanni Bertati’s Italian libretto for the opera Don Giovanni o sia Il convitato di pietra [Don Giovanni and the Stone Guest] by Giuseppe Gazzaniga. These three works are the most important prototypes for Lorenzo da Pontes’s Italian libretto for W. A. Mozart’s 1787 opera Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni. Faust] → 126,1. the Wandering Jew] The legend of the Wandering Jew (also known as Ahasverus, or “the eternal Jew”) appears in various southern European and English sources beginning in the 13th century and is later found in various embellished forms across Europe (see, e.g., Joseph Görres, Die teutschen Volksbücher [German Popular Books] [Heidelberg, 1807; ASKB 1440], pp. 200–203). In some versions, which possibly trace back to Armenia, the “eternal Jew” is supposed to have been the doorman of Pontius Pilate who contemptuously struck Jesus in the back with a clenched fist when Jesus was dragged from the praetorium. He is also supposed to have shouted at Jesus, “Walk faster!” Whereupon Jesus is supposed to have turned to him and said, “I’m going, but you will have to wait until I come again.” See other legends in which “the eternal Jew” is supposed to have refused to allow Jesus to rest on the threshold of his house when Jesus was carrying his cross to Calvary. In later versions of the legend he was said to have been a shoemaker, and hence was called “the shoemaker of Jerusalem”; see, e.g., B. S. Ingemann, Blade af Jerusalems Skomagers Lommebog [Pages from the Diary of a Jerusalem Shoemaker] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 1571). As punishment for what he had done to Jesus, he was condemned to walk the face of the earth forever.

•

P a p e r 140–141 1836 •

Such a sudden disappearance] Refers both to the disappearance of the knight Laurentzius in the tale “Der Höllenjäger” (→ 165,24 and → 165,25), and to the disappearance of King Didrik in the Saga om Kong Didrik af Bern og hans Kæmper (→ 137,36). Elijah] See 2 Kings 2:1–14. Romulus] Romulus, together with his twin brother Remus, was the legendary founder of Rome, which is usually said to have been founded in 753 b.c. The reference here is to the legend of the disappearance of Romulus from the earth. See, for example, S. Tetens’s translation of the biography of Romulus in Plutarch’s Vitae parallelae [Parallel Lives], where it states: “Romulus disappeared from the earth and his people at the age of 54, and in the 38th year of his rule” (Plutark’s Levnetbeskrivelser [Plutarch’s Lives], trans. S. Tetens, 4 vols. [Copenhagen, 1800–1811; ASKB 1197–1200], vol. 1, p. 144). the ascension of Christ] See Luke 24:50–53 and Acts 1:9–11. one cries in vain for him to cease (see Rafn, p. 627, middle of the page)] Refers to “Tredivte Fortælling. Didriks Endeligt” [Thirtieth Tale: Didrik’s End], chap. 393 in Nordiske KæmpeHistorier (→ 134,29), vol. 2, Saga om Kong Didrik af Bern og hans Kæmper efter islandske Haandskrifter [Saga of King Didrik of Bern and His Battles, Based on Icelandic Manuscripts], trans. C. C. Rafn (Copenhagen, 1823), pp. 625–628. The tale relates how King Didrik, weakened by age, climbed up on a great, black horse in order to hunt a large animal. The horse was able to run faster than any bird could fly. When his squire, trying to ride after him along with all the dogs, called to him, “My Lord! When will you come back? Why do you ride so fast?” Didrik answered: “I ride badly, . . . I must be sitting on a devil. I wonder whether I won’t return until God and the Saint Mary desire it” (p. 627). Thereupon, the squire lost sight of King Didrik, and from then on there was no one who saw him or knew what had become of him. “Accordingly, Germans say they have been told in dreams that God and Saint Mary let Didrik enjoy the benefit of recalling their names in the hour of his death” (p. 628). ― (see Rafn, p.

14

20 20

21 36

137

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

37

138

1 4

627, middle of the page): Variant: added. ― Rafn: Carl Christian Rafn (1795–1864), Danish researcher of antiquities, editor, and translator; co-founder (and later secretary) of the Royal Danish Society for Nordic Antiquities in 1825, and made titular professor in 1826. an eternal Jew] → 137,6. dogs, horses, falcons] → 137,36 and → 165,25. the wild hunt . . . the farmer . . . hears . . . baying of dogs and the pounding of horse hooves, etc.] See Kierkegaard’s discussion of the legend of King Valdemar Atterdag’s “wild hunt in the air on the white horse,” when one can hear “the sound of the horns and the baying of the hounds,” in AA:2, from the summer of 1835, in KJN 1, p. 6. See also the legend of “Kong Valdemars Jagt” [King Valdemar’s Hunt], in J. M. Thiel, Danske Folkesagn [Danish Folk Legends], 4 collections in 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1818–1823; ASKB 1591–1592), vol. 1, pp. 89–93, where it is related that King Valdemar “is known throughout the land as the flying hunter, and in some places he is called the flying Markolfus, who was a figure of Scandinavian legend similar to the German Till Eulenspiegel (→ 120,36), known for his foolishness and recklessness. When he approaches, one first hears shouting and hollering and cracks of the whip in the air, and then people flee and take refuge behind the trees. Immediately thereafter, the entire hunting party follows. In front rush his coal-black dogs, who run here and there along the roadside sniffing the earth, their long, glowing tongues hanging out of their mouths. Then comes ‘Wolmar,’ sitting on his white horse, sometimes holding his own head under his left arm . . . When he roars by in this way, the gates are heard crashing behind him, and in many places across the land where there is a thoroughfare across the farms, he leads his hunting party in through one gate and out the other, and no lock is so strong that it cannot be broken when he comes. It is his habit, especially at Christmastime, to come riding four white horses through Ibsgaard at Høibye in Oddsherred, and there is said to be a farm near Bistrup near Roskilde, where they let the gate stand open during the night because he has broken the lock so many times. In some places,

•

P a p e r 141 1836 •

431

his hunting route even goes right over the houses, and in the vicinity of Herlufsholm there is a house whose roof sags deeply in the middle because he has ridden over it so often . . . Between Søllerød and Nærum, he hunts with black dogs and horses on the so-called Waldemar’s Way” (pp. 90–92). On the attitude of the peasants to events of this sort, see also the legend recounted on pp. 94–95. had Sisyphus roll his stone uphill . . . so forth] Refers to the Greek legend of Sisyphus, who was punished in the kingdom of the dead by being forced again and again to roll a boulder to the top of a mountain, after which it rolled down again. See bk. 11, vv. 592–600, in The Odyssey, trans. A. T. Murray, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945), vol. 1, p. 429. the Danaïdes pouring water into a tub as it runs out again] Refers to the Greek legend of the fifty daughters of King Danaus of Argos. In order to settle a dispute with his twin brother, Aegyptus, it was agreed that the fifty daughters (the Danaïds) would be married to the fifty sons of Aegyptus. Following their father’s direction, forty-nine Danaïds murdered their husbands on their wedding night―only Hypermnestra spared her husband, Lynkeus. In the underworld, the Danaïds were punished for their crime by having to continually pour water into a vessel with holes in it. See, e.g., the article “Danaus,” in Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch (→ 133,5), vol. 1, pp. 593–596. sleeplike state] Variant: changed from “state”. the notion, so peculiar to Northerners, of life as a battle] See, for example, chap. 3, “Nordens KæmpeAand” [The Battle Spirit of the North], in the introduction to N.F.S. Grundtvig, Nordens Mythologi eller Sindbilled-Sprog historisk-poetisk udviklet og oplyst [The Mythology of the North or Symbolic Language Historically-Poetically Analyzed and Explained], 2nd rev. ed. (Copenhagen, 1832 [1808]; ASKB 1949), p. 96, where the “Nordic view of the temporal life of gods and people” is described “as a constant battle that calls for being as noble, as strong, and as clever as possible, so that any real peace that can befall the gods and those of noble

14

15

22 25

432

27

138

40

139

4

5

7

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

descent in the course of time comes from victory in battle.” the fall in the other life . . . in order to arise again] Refers to life in Valhalla, the blissful abode of people and heroes after death, concerning which Nordic mythology says that every morning Odin marched out to battle with numerous heroes and a host of spectators. Every day many of the heroes would fall, but were revived for new battles, and in the evening everyone returned happily to the feast at Odin’s table. See, e.g., the article “Valhalla,” in J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte (→ 133,5), pp. 456–458. Faust] → 126,1. Baggesen’s [“]Thora from Havsgaard[”]] Refers to “Thora. Et Fragment i ni Sange” [Thora: A Fragment in Nine Cantos] (1811/12–1817) in Jens Baggesens danske Værker [Jens Baggesen’s Danish Works], ed. by the author’s sons and C. J. Boye, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1832; ASKB 1509– 1520), vol. 7 (1831), pp. 307–527. ― Baggesen’s: Jens Immanuel Baggesen (1764–1826), Danish poet; from 1790, professor; from 1798, co-director of The Royal Theater; from 1811–1814, professor of Danish language and literature at the University of Kiel. The One Who Will Return, I Will Return] See the conclusion of the “First Canto” of Baggesen’s “Thora. Et Fragment i ni Sange” (→ 139,4). “The story portrays the wily Thora and her family’s persistent feud with a gang of thieves led by a red-bearded villain. Eventually, the whole clan is beheaded and their bodies displayed on the gallows hill, but their rough laughter can still be heard when the moon is full, and every eleventh night the words ‘Jeg kommer igien!’ [I will return!] echo in the ringing of the church bell,” Henrik Blicher, “Jens Baggesen: Kierkegaard and His Master’s Voice,” in Kierkegaard Research: Sources, Reception and Resources, vol. 7, tome 3: Kierkegaard and His Danish Contemporaries―Literature, Drama and Aesthetics, ed. Jon Stewart (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2009), pp. 36–37. Joan of Arc] (1412–1431), French saint and national heroine; commander in the Hundred Years’

•

P a p e r 141–144 1836 •

War against the English. In 1429, she led the army of the uncrowned French king to victory in Reims, in whose cathedral Charles VII held his coronation. She was subsequently captured and tried by pro-English clergy on charges of practicing witchcraft, going to war against the will of her parents, and having worn men’s clothing; she was sentenced to death, and burned in Rouen on May 30, 1431. About twenty years later, the case was reopened, and in 1456, she was pronounced innocent of witchcraft, and the sentence was reversed. See Friedrich Schiller, Die Jungfrau von Orleans. Eine romantische Tragödie [The Maid of Orleans: A Romantic Tragedy] (1801). nymphs] In Greek mythology, female nature spirits inhabiting springs and woodlands. See the article “Nymphae” [Nymphs], in Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch (→ 133,5), vol. 2, pp. 335–337. Nereids] In Greek mythology, the fifty sea nymphs who were daughters of the friendly god of the sea, Nereus. See the article “Nereides” [Nereids], in Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch (→ 133,5), vol. 2, pp. 320ff. J. Jürgensen] Jørgen Jørgensen (dates of birth and death unknown), Danish jurist; university student, 1808; law degree, 1816; secretary of police, functionary in the Criminal and Police Court of Copenhagen, retired in 1846 (according to Juridisk Stat [The Juridical Branch of Government], ed. G.D.C. Bruun [Copenhagen, 1849], p. 19). In Wilhelm Andersen’s biography of Poul Martin Møller, Poul Møller. Hans Liv og Skrifter [Paul Møller: His Life and Writings] (Copenhagen, 1894), Andersen describes Møller’s circle of university students who gathered on Sunday evenings at the home of his friend N. C. Møhl, and relates: “One of the sharpest wits in the group― whom Paul Møller certainly valued very highly, because he treasured verbal wit so much―was Jørgen Jørgensen, universally known as Jørgen, later a humane police officer, at the time a good-natured libertine, who consoled himself about the miseries of life with melancholy witticisms of unusual content” (p. 27).

9

9

14

139

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 139

26

The omnipresence of wit] Presumably refers to the following passage in Poul Martin Møller’s review of “Nye Fortællinger af Forfatteren til en Hverdagshistorie [Thomasine Gyllembourg]. Udgivne af Johan Ludvig Heiberg. Andet Bind: Extremerne. Kjøbenhavn. Paa Universitets-Boghandler Reitzels Forlag, trykt hos J. D. Qvist, Bogog Nodetrykker. 1835. 223 S. 8” [New Stories by the Author of A Story of Everyday Life (Thomasine Gyllembourg), edited by Johan Ludvig Heiberg, vol. 2, The Extremes. Copenhagen. From the University Bookseller Reitzel’s Publishing House, printed by J. D. Qvist, printer of books and sheet music. 1835. 223 pp. 8o], in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], edited by “A Society,” vol. 15, no. 2 (Copenhagen, 1836), p. 137: “Through the frequent use of the mannerism of having wit appear in isolated instances of an address, there has come a rather common prejudice that it is the nature and essence of wit to appear in this way. There are many who assume that wit only shows itself as the aptitude for producing such isolated sui generis caprices, so that the word [i.e., “wit”] has to some extent lost its original linguistic significance, not just in daily speech but even in writing. Many simply have no sense for the better sort of wit that can so permeate an intelligent address that it is omnipresent in it. This prejudice has been exacerbated by the fact that, in attempting to elucidate the concept of wit, works of psychology and aesthetics have made use of such tangible witticisms as the most conspicuous examples.”

140

5

Tieck tells a story of a man . . . came to believe himself a prophet] Refers to a story told by the young carpenter, Leonhard, to a master, in the first part of Ludwig Tieck’s Der junge Tischlermeister. Novelle in sieben Abschnitten [The Young Master Cabinetmaker: A Novel in Seven Parts], 2 vols. (Berlin, 1836), vol. 1, pp. 13–16. The story tells of an old carpenter who, although he was a pious Catholic, was unable to resist drinking, which is why he was usually seen to be drunk on Sundays. And although he did not drink very much, a few glasses would go straight to his head such that he didn’t know who he was

•

P a p e r 145–148 1836 •

433

or what he was doing; he was often completely fleeced when playing cards or dice, and sometimes when he found this unfair and started a row he would unfortunately bring a thrashing upon himself. On every other day of the week he was a humble, modest, and jovial person. This life of contradiction meant that he could never resolve to settle down in a town as a master. Years later, when Leonhard met the old journeyman again, he was astonished at the great transformation that had come about: he had stopped drinking. Asked directly, he explained that two years earlier he had been so drunk that he had forgotten himself and had mistreated a priest who had attempted to admonish him; when he sobered up and realized what he had done, he vowed never again to drink anything but water. Later, the priest gave him a book of devotions steeped in mysticism showing how, in addition to reason and faith, a new consciousness must be opened, through which one can come to a new realization of God and one’s being, and to the acceptance of an incomprehensible being in oneself. Such ideas took possession of the man to such a degree that he read more and more books and desired to convert both Lutherans and Catholics to his conviction. And Leonhard further relates, “he read at night, he preached in the solitude of the field, he believed that he was called to be an apostle, so that it seemed his life would not exactly just run out its course, but instead become entangled and unbalanced by passion and imagination.” ― Tieck: Ludwig Tieck (1773–1853), German author, translator, and editor. the minuet from Don Juan] Refers to the minuet in act 1, sc. 19 in Mozart’s opera Don Giovanni (→ 137,6); act 1, sc. 21 in Don Juan. Opera i tvende Akter, by L. Kruse (→ 130,2).

9

140

, with time, the Romantic] Variant: “, with time,” has been added. necessity exerts its rights (Hegel)] Refers to G.W.F. Hegel’s dialectical method, according to which concepts develop from one another by necessity with the help of their opposites; for example, the concept “being” necessarily produces

19

140

20

434

21

22

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

the concept “nothing,” and together they necessarily produce the concept “coming into being.” The same logic of concepts is also employed in Hegel’s philosophy of history in order to explain the “necessary development” of historical forces. The reference here, however, presumably concerns the notion in Kierkegaard’s day that antiquity finds its dialectical opposite in the Romantic, and that with dialectical necessity this brings about a third stage. ― Hegel: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), German philosopher and theologian; from 1818 until his death, professor in Berlin. Christ[ianity] does not remain Rom[antic]] Refers to the widespread view in Kierkegaard’s day that the Christian is the Romantic. See, e.g., the introduction to § 23, “Quelle der romantischen Poesie” [The Source of Romantic Poetry], in Jean Paul (pen name of the German author Johann Paul Friedrich Richter), Vorschule der Aesthetik [School for Aesthetics], 3 vols., 2nd improved and expanded ed. (Stuttgart, 1813 [1804]; ASKB 1381–1383), vol. 1, pp. 156–157: “The origin and character of all modern poetry can so easily be deduced from Christianity that romantic poetry could just as well be called Christian. Christianity, like a day of Judgment, destroyed the entire material world with all its charms, crushed it into a grave mound, made it into a ladder leading to heaven, and replaced it with a new spiritual world.” English translation from Horn of Oberon: Jean Paul Richter’s School for Aesthetics, trans. Margaret R. Hale (Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1973), p. 64. Schl. a necessary development] Presumably refers to Friedrich Schleiermacher’s (→ 129,30) development from being a literary and philosophical Romantic to being an ecclesiastical dogmatician. For the Romantic Schleiermacher, see, e.g., the anonymously published Vertraute Briefe über Friedrich Schlegels Lucinde (Lübeck, 1800); Kierkegaard mentions a later edition, Schleiermachers Vertraute Briefe über die Lucinde. Mit einer Vorrede von Karl Gutzkow [Schleiermacher’s Confidential Letters concerning Friedrich Schlegel’s Lucinde: With a Preface by Karl Gutzkow] (Hamburg, 1835); see also Not2:5

•

P a p e r 148–151 1836 •

and Not3:2 in KJN 3, pp. 89 and 95, with their associated explanatory notes. For Schleiermacher’s mature dogmatics, see Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsäzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith Presented in Context, in Accordance with the Fundamental Principles of the Evangelical Church], 2 vols., 3rd ed. (Berlin, 1835–1836 [1821– 22]; ASKB 258); in English translation, Christian Faith, trans. Terrence Tice, Catherine L. Kelsey, and Edwina Lawler, 2 vols. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2016). the antiquity that emerges in this way] Refers to Weimar classicism (→ 142,1). actual so-called antiquity] The Greek classical period. The present tense of beauty] See Paper 128:2, dated March 1836, in the present volume.

22 23 24

pray in the name of Chr[ist]] Allusion to John 16:23–24. or prays;] Variant: first written “or prays.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. praying through the Mother of God] Praying with the Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus the Son of God, who intercedes with God in behalf of the one who prays. Josty] Refers to Josty’s Pavilion, a favorite destination for visitors to Frederiksberg Garden. Originally known as “Taddey’s Pavilion,” it was opened in 1813 by the Italian sculptor Agostino Taddey, and from 1825 it was run by the Swiss pastry chef Anton Josty. It was situated at what is today Pile Allé 14 A.

3

the Jesuits] Members of the Roman Catholic priestly order founded in 1534 by the Spanish Basque, Ignatius Loyola. The Jesuit order was founded in reaction to the Reformation and sought both to win the faithful back to the Roman Catholic Church and generally to preserve the pope’s authority over the Church. According to the stereotypes of many Protestants, the Jesuits sometimes used heavy-handed methods, such as force and intrigue to compel Christians to submit to the order and the Church. The tactics

14

141

7

11

13

141

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” attributed to the Jesuits came to be associated with the saying “the ends justify the means.” See, for example, § 464, “Ignatius von Loyola” [Ignatius of Loyola], and § 465, “Entwicklung des Jesuitismus” [The Development of Jesuitism], in Karl Hase, Kirchengeschichte. Lehrbuch zunächst für academische Vorlesungen [Church History: A Manual for Academic Study], 2nd improved ed. (Leipzig, 1836 [1834]; ASKB U 52; abbreviated hereafter as Kirchengeschichte), pp. 477–479. 141

26

27 27

28

142

1

5

Thorvaldsen] Bertel Thorvaldsen (1770–1844), Danish sculptor, a central figure in European neoclassicism, a style of art and architecture prominent from 1750 until 1850. Hegel] → 140,19. The Romantic . . . Necessity’s (antique) present tense has come in] See Paper 128:2, dated March 1836, and Paper 148, dated June 12, 1836, both in the present volume. ― (antique): Variant: added. the art of sculpture belongs to classical antiquity] Refers to a widespread notion in Kierkegaard’s day influenced by, among others, J. J. Winckelmann, Gedanken über die Nachahmung der griechischen Werke in der Malerei und Bildhauerkunst [Thoughts on the Imitation of Greek Works in Painting and Sculpture] (1755); see Johann Winckelmanns sämmtliche Werke. Einzige vollständige Ausgabe [Johann Winckelmann’s Collected Works: Only Complete Edition], ed. J. Eiselein, 12 vols. (Donauöschingen, 1825–1829; ASKB 1855–1866), vol. 1, pp. 1–56; G. E. Lessing; J. W. Goethe; Fr. Schiller; and G.W.F. Hegel. See, for example, the following passage at the end of the introduction to Hegel’s Vorlesungen über die Aesthetik [Lectures on Aesthetics], ed. H. G. Hotho, 3 vols. (Berlin 1835–1838; ASKB 1384–1386), in Hegel’s Werke) (→ 145,11), vol. 10.1, p. 116; in English translation, Hegel’s Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975), p. 90: “For the classical form [of art], sculpture is its unqualified realization.” a new antique stage] Refers to Weimar classicism, a literary and artistic movement at the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th centuries. In the first instance monks lived wholly apart from the world] Refers to the monks who in the

•

P a p e r 151–154 1836 •

435

early period of Christianity lived as (ascetic) recluses or hermits, called Anchorites, of whom some lived completely secluded in the desert, while others remained connected to a monastery. See, for example, § 183, “Einsiedler. Simon Stylites” [The Hermit: Simeon Stylites], in K. Hase, Kirchengeschichte (→ 141,14), p. 177. at war with the world, in special dress] See, for example, § 327, “Gründung der Bettelorden” [Founding of the Mendicant Orders], and § 328, “Wirksamkeit der beiden großen Bettelorden” [The Effectiveness of the Two Great Mendicant Orders], in K. Hase, Kirchengeschichte (→ 141,14), pp. 331–335. Jesuits] → 141,14. edifying discourses . . . despise what is close at hand and . . . into eternity] Refers to pietistic edifying discourses, in which common themes were despising temporal life on earth in order to free oneself completely from everything worldly and finite and to live in longing for prompt salvation in eternity. Presumably, Kierkegaard is thinking here especially of German Lutheran theologian and priest Johann Arndt’s edifying discourses, Vier Bücher vom wahren Christenthum [Four Books on True Christianity] (Magdeburg, ca. 1605–1610; first translated into Danish in 1690). This 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, 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

6

8 10

436

12

142

15

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

Christian], 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1737 [1733]; ASKB 276), and in an abridged Danish-Norwegian 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 277). ― at hand and: Variant: According to the editors of SKS, “and” is a doubtful reading of Kierkegaard’s manuscript. the author of Stories of Everyday Life] Refers to the very popular novels and short stories that came out anonymously during the period 1827–1845, and from 1828 were attributed to “The Author of Stories of Everyday Life,” all published by J. L Heiberg. The works play out among Copenhagen’s middle class, usually in the intimate setting of domestic life, and the plots are concentrated on love and marriage. The author was Heiberg’s mother, Thomasine Gyllembourg (1773–1856), who as one of the country’s most prolific and well-read authors across a score of years created the type of prose that was described as “stories of everyday life.” Grundtvig regards the Apostle’s Creed . . . Christ whispered . . . the last hum. being on Judgment Day] Allusion to the centrality of the Apostle’s Creed in N.F.S Grundtvig’s ecclesiology, or view of the Church; see Paper 69, with its accompanying explanatory note, in the present volume. See also the following passage in Christelige Prædikener eller Søndags-Bog [Christian Sermons, or Sunday Book], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1827–1830; ASKB 222–224), vol. 3, no. 21, “KirkeTroen og Traditionen” [The Faith and Tradition of the Church] (on 1 Cor 15:1–14), p. 481: “If, therefore, our faith and our hope really, in truth, are rooted in God’s Word, then there must also be a real Word in the Church of Christ that God has spoken, and which, when it resounds in accordance with His command, has the same quickening power as when it came from the mouth of God, and therefore all Christians must believe that the Word that Jesus Christ, God’s only begotten Son, had heard from his heavenly Father and handed down to His apostles, whom He consid-

•

P a p e r 154–155 1836 •

ered blessed, because they received it with heartfelt sincerity (John 17:8–20)―this Word of God is never silenced, but is faithfully disseminated and passed down with the means of grace from generation to generation in the congregation of the Lord.” And further, on p. 483: “See, this faith that originates audibly from the apostolic witness is undoubtedly the faith of the Church in the Christian sense, and it is expressed in summary form through the questions and answers at baptism, and these questions with their answers are the living tradition of the Word of the Lord and the teachings of the apostles, which must never fall silent in the Church, and are at the same time the Lord’s spiritual swaddling-clothes for all Christian children, and the sure, solemn testimony for all generations of what all Christians believe and confess.” Additionally, see the following passage in Grundtvig’s sermon (on the Apostle’s Creed) from the second Sunday of Pentecost, June 8, 1835, in N.F.S. Grundtvigs Prædikener 1822–26 og 1832–39 [N.F.S. Grundtvig’s Sermons, 1822–1826 and 1832–1839], ed. C. Thodberg, vol. 8 (containing sermons from 1834 to 1835) (Copenhagen, 1984), p. 236: “I dare say the Apostle’s Creed does not sound like the Word of God to us, but rather as our word to God; yet by no means is it a Word that we ourselves have imagined, but a Word of God that the Lord Himself has put in the mouths of His Apostles, and thereby His entire Church, in order to express the new covenant that He establishes with His people: The baptismal covenant of our election to be children of the Most High and heirs to the Kingdom of Heaven, the unfailing covenant that He by His Spirit with His Word seals when, through baptism, he incorporates us into the Godhead: the fellowship of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! Only when we in this way regard our covenant of baptism as the Word of grace and truth, the highest summation of the gospel, put in our mouth by the Lord Himself, only then is it clear to us that it is immutable, and only then does it bring us comfort and joy, does it not encumber us as a heavy burden, but becomes more precious to us every day, as the Lord’s easy yoke and light burden under which our soul finds rest.” And fur-

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

19

ther, on p. 239, Grundtvig says: “I had a vision of the faithful witness of the Lord, which makes wise those without authority, the great, incomparably valid testimony of the faith and hope of the Christian, which the Lord Himself laid upon the tongue of his Church and preserved from generation to generation, so that we have also heard the Word that is from the beginning . . . [I]t was to me whom angels whispered: See, it is the pearl hidden in the field, sell everything you have and buy it, then you will have enough eternally.” And then Grundtvig speaks of “remaining in his baptismal covenant, with the help of the Holy Spirit, until his final, blessed end.” ― Grundtvig: Nikolaj Frederik Severin Grundtvig (1783–1872), Danish theologian, priest, hymnodist, poet, historian, mythologist; took his theology degree in 1803; from 1805–1808, a house tutor on the island of Langeland; delivered his probational sermon in 1810; ordained 1811; made curate in his father’s church from 1811 to 1813; from 1821, a parish priest in Præstø; and from 1822, was permanent curate in Church of Our Savior in the Christianshavn district of Copenhagen. He resigned his position in 1826 on the occasion of the trial against him for having made libelous statements against H. N. Clausen. Grundtvig lost the case, and he was sentenced to censorship of his writings. With royal support, Grundtvig made three study trips to England between 1829 and 1831, and with royal permission, he served as a free preacher at evening services in Frederiks Tyske Kirke [Frederik’s German Church], which is today known as Christians Kirke, in Christianshavn (see map 2, B3–4). ― Christ whispered: Variant: “Christ” has been changed from “God”. Grundtvig . . . in the most ancient Church they did not dare utter it out loud] See the following passage in “On the Apostle’s Creed,” in J. C. Lindberg, Historiske Oplysninger om den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger. Tredie Mindeskrift i Anledning af den augsburgske Confessions Jubelfest [Historical Information concerning the Symbolic Books of the Danish Church: Three Commemorative Works on the Occasion of the Jubilee Celebration of the Augsburg Confession] (Copenhagen, 1830), p.

•

P a p e r 155–158 1836 •

437

53, where Lindberg emphasizes that it is “clear from so many expressions by the Church Fathers that the Apostle’s Creed was kept a great secret, and not only from unbelieving pagans, but even from those under instruction for acceptance into Christianity, so that the Apostle’s Creed remained unknown to them until very shortly before their baptism. And, indeed, it was given such weight that they were strictly forbidden to disclose to the uninitiated even the discursive explanations and sermons they heard concerning it, for that was considered a betrayal of Christianity.” As evidence for this, Lindberg cites a long quotation (both in Greek and in Danish) from section 12 of “Procatechesis” [Prologue to Catechism], in S. Cyrilli archiepiscopi Hierosolymitani opera quæ extant omnia, et ejus nomine circumferuntur [Complete Extant Works of Saint Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, Together with Works Circulating under His Name], ed. A. A. Touttée (Paris, 1720; folio-format), p. 9. Laocoön, who is crushed by serpents] → 119,6. Waldeinsamkeit . . . Waldeinsamkeit. (Tieck . . . “der blonde Eckbert[”].)] Quotation from Tieck’s “The Blonde Eckbert: 1796,” in Phantasus, printed in Ludwig Tieck’s Schriften [Ludwig Tieck’s Writings], vol. 4 (Berlin, 1828), p. 161. Kierkegaard writes einzige for einzge and ends with a period instead of an exclamation mark.

24

the theory that the course of the world is a necessary development] → 140,19. clearly egotistical] Variant: “clearly” has been added. allowing . . . enigma] Variant: This passage is from Heiberg’s copy of Barfod’s now-lost copy of Kierkegaard’s original manuscript. the System] Refers to the philosophical system that G.W.F. Hegel (→ 140,20) developed in Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences] (see ASKB 561–563), but also to Hegelianism more generally, including the attempts of such Danish thinkers as J. L. Heiberg and Rasmus Nielsen, among others, to build a comprehensive logical system.

9

142

26

12 15

20

143

438 143

24

25

26

144

14

17

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

sophistry] The use of sophisms, i.e., fallacious chains of reasoning designed to mislead. The term refers to a dominant tendency in Greek philosophy in the 5th century b.c. on the part of “Sophists,” who offered instruction on a professional basis in philosophy, rhetoric, statecraft, and so forth. They are particularly known as Socrates’ opponents in Plato’s dialogues, where, among other things, they are criticized for taking money for their instruction (in contrast to Socrates). the greatest Sophists (in the realm of knowledge)] Perhaps a reference to the scholastics of the Middle Ages (between the 9th and 15th centuries) who, by drawing on Aristotelian philosophy and the existing teachings of the Church Fathers, sought to foster increasingly deeper theological cognition in order to create unity in the dogmatic system of the Roman Catholic Church. The late scholastics developed such penetrating elaborations of logic and metaphysics that “scholastic” became the characterization of a person who enjoys subtleties and hair-splitting. the greatest Sophists in the realm of action . . . through self-mortification] Perhaps a reference to those among the monastics of the Middle Ages who lived as ascetics and who, for example, made use of self-flagellation as an effective means of penance (see the Flagellants, who in the 13th and 14th centuries went about in groups while whipping their naked torsos and praising Christ, who had let himself be whipped for them). Heine: es ist eine alte Geschichte . . . ihm springt das Herz entzwei] A free rendering from the third and final stanza of a poem by the GermanJewish poet, author, and critic Heinrich Heine, “Ein Jüngling liebt ein Mädchen” [A Youth Loved a Maiden], no. 40 of “Lyrisches Intermezzo. 1822– 1823” [Lyrical Intermezzo: 1822–1823] in Buch der Lieder [Songbook] (Hamburg, 1827), p. 144. poems in Knaben Wunderhorn] Reference to a famous Romantic collection of traditional folk poems, Des Knaben Wunderhorn. Alte deutsche Lieder [The Boy’s Magic Horn: Old German Songs], ed. L. Achim v. Arnim and Clemens Brentano, 3 vols., 2nd ed., (Heidelberg, 1819 [1806–1808]; ASKB 1494–1496; abbreviated hereafter as Des Knaben

•

P a p e r 159–161 1836 •

Wunderhorn); vol. 1, pp. 214–217. According to a receipt from C. A. Reitzel issued December 31, 1836, Kierkegaard bought Des Knaben Wunderhorn on March 14, 1836 (see KA, D packet 7, folder 6). in the novellas of . . . Bernhard . . . “Børneballet,” . . . not-fully-matured girl] Refers to the short story by Carl Bernhard (pseudonym of the Danish author A. N. de Saint-Aubain [1798–1865]), “Børneballet” [Children’s Ballet], in Noveller [Short Stories], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1836–1837; ASKB U 18), vol. 2 (1836), pp. 135–364; pp. 363–364. According to a receipt from C. A. Reitzel dated December 31, 1836 [KA, D packet 7, folder 6], Kierkegaard bought this work on December 27, 1836. Following the death and burial of the story’s main character, Lise, her father and separated husband have just returned to Copenhagen from her funeral in the countryside. The story relates that their coachman had to pull up the horses with a jerk because a “young lady walked across the street, her cape fluttered about her and thereby divulged that her figure was scarcely developed,” and because a “young mustachioed gentleman in a riding cloak and spurs followed behind her at some distance.” Owing to the abrupt stop, the husband of the deceased Lise looked out the carriage window “and recognized Lieutenant Scholler.” This lieutenant, who had been in love with Lise and she with him, had visited her in her home a year and a half earlier, after her marriage to a widower; she was so badly shaken by this meeting that she became seriously ill, became separated from her husband and moved alone to the countryside of North Zealand, where she died. ― the brothers Bernhard: In the third and final short story, “The Brothers Bernhard,” vol. 1, pp. 339–385, Carl Bernhard tells how one evening when he was to read his latest short story “Commisionairen” [The Commissionaire] (no. 1, in vol. 2) to four invited gentlemen friends, he found in his pocket another short story, “Declarationen” [The Declaration], which he read instead of his own. When Carl Bernhard had completed his reading and the short story had been thoroughly discussed, it was revealed that its author was Carl’s brother, Julius Bernhard, who had remained at home

18

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” and attended the reading, even though he actually ought to have visited the girl with whom he was in love. Carl Bernhard concluded by saying, “It might as well have been a decision of fate . . . that Julius and I should share the risk, and since ‘Declarationen’ is really no. 2 in the first volume of the stories, I will leave it in its place. I will relate the circumstances to the public and put my name on the title page as its editor in the hope that no one will find it arrogant and think that I, who only a few months ago could not even go it alone, now think so highly of myself that I could help someone else get ahead” (p. 383). The short story “Declarationen” was written by Martin Hammerich and de Saint-Aubain’s cousin, Andreas Buntzen, and the two cousins wrote “Brødrene Bernhard” together. See Dansk biografisk Leksikon [Danish Biographical Lexicon], vol. 12, 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1982), p. 568, col. 2. 144

27

the Indian learning . . . God as the source of evil as well as good . . . devil is then included in the Trinity (see Schlegel ibid.)] Refers to the following passage in the fifth lecture of Friedrich Schlegel’s Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur. Vorlesungen gehalten zu Wien im Jahre 1812 [The History of Literature, Ancient and Modern: Essays Delivered in Vienna in 1812], 2nd improved and expanded ed. (abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur), published in Friedrich Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke [The Complete Works of Friedrich Schlegel], 10 vols. (Vienna, 1822–1835; ASKB 1816–1825; abbreviated hereafter as Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke), vol. 1, p. 213; in English translation, Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, trans. J. G. Lockhart (New York, J. & H. G. Langley, 1841), pp. 130–131: “The Indian idea of a threefold Godhead is one, I confess, upon which I am inclined to lay very little stress. Some such division, some allusion to a threefold principle is to be in the religion of most peoples, as well as in the systems of most philosophers. It is the universal form of being given by the first cause to all his works, the seal of the Deity, if we may so speak, stamped on all the thoughts of the mind and all the forms of nature. The Indian doctrine of a

•

P a p e r 161–162 1836 •

439

threefold principle is extremely different from ours, and, at least in the manner in which they themselves explain it, is extremely absurd; for the cause of destruction is by it supposed to form part of the higher being. That principle of evil, which, in the Persian theology is represented as in perpetual opposition to the Godhead, is by the Indian divines united with the creating and preserving power, to make up the being of the Deity himself. God is, according to their first maxim, ‘all in all,’ and they think that it is as much a part of his prerogative to be the cause of all the evil in the world as of all the good.” ― Schlegel: Friedrich Schlegel (1772–1829), German critic, author, and philosopher; converted to Catholicism in 1808 (→ 132,1) and entered into service for the Austrian court. Hegelianism] Presumably refers to the fact that, according to Hegelian philosophy, good and evil must both be internal to “the System” (→ 143,20). the Romantic . . . normally attributed to Indian thought] See, for example, the following passage in § 22, “Wesen der romantischen Dichtkunst, Verschiedenheiten der südlichen und nordischen” [The Character of Romantic Poetry, and Differences between Southern and Northern Forms], in Jean Paul, Vorschule der Aesthetik (→ 140,21), vol. 1, p. 147: “Who is the mother of this romanticism? Certainly not in every land and century the Christian religion. Every other religion, however, is related to this mother of god. Two Romantic species outside of Christianity, strangers to one another in culture as in climate, are that of India and that of the Edda.” And further, on pp. 148–149: “Indian romanticism is active within an all-animating religion which breaks down the barriers of sense by breathing a spirit into it. This world becomes as great as the world of spirits, and full, not of scolding poltergeists, but of flattering spirits; earth and heaven sink into each other as the horizon sinks into the sea. For the Indian the flower is more alive than is a man for the Norseman. Now add to this the Indian climate, this luxuriant bridal night of nature, and imagine the Indian like a bee resting in the honeyed chalice of a tulip, cradled by zephyrs and lulled by its sweet swaying. For just that reason,

30

31

440

145

145

2

5

7

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 162–165 1836 •

Indian romanticism has had to dissolve further into the magic of the senses; and if moonlight and fading cadences are signs and emblems of other kinds of romanticism, then a dark perfume may characterize the Indian, particularly since perfume so often plays a role in their lives as well as in their poems.” English translation from Horn of Oberon: Jean Paul Richter’s School for Aesthetics, trans. Margaret R. Hale (Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1973), pp. 61–62.

it of the north on the other, are the two elements from which the new world proceeded, and the literature of the middle ages remained, accordingly, at all times a double literature. One literature, Christian and Latin, was common to the whole of Europe, and had for its sole object the preservation and extension of knowledge; but there was another and a more peculiar literature for each particular nation in its vernacular tongue.” See also p. 265 in the seventh lecture.

the poetic development of nations . . . the epic . . . followed by the lyrical] See, for example, the following passage in the seventh lecture of Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 1, p. 287; in English translation, Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, trans. J. G. Lockhart (New York, J. & H. G. Langley, 1841), p. 179: “Epic poetry belongs altogether to the world which had gone before us. That poet of any refined and polished age who dares to be a poet after the manner of the minstrels of antiquity―to be truly epic―will always be looked upon as a remarkable exception; he will be honoured and reverenced by all posterity, as a high gift of nature to the age and country in which he appears. But in dramatic poetry art maintains her pre-eminence; it is only in an age of knowledge and elegance that tragedies and comedies can be written. As youth in individuals is the period most abounding in feeling, so does lyrical poetry flourish most in the youth of nations.”

the doctrine of the God-Man] The doctrine of the ϑεαντρωπος (“God-Man”) expresses the dogmatic teaching that Jesus Christ―as the human being in whom God revealed himself―is truly God and truly human in actual unity; the expression was first used by Origen in the third century. See Kierkegaard’s transcription of § 46 of H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] (1833–1834) in Not1:7, from 1833– 1834, in KJN 3, 32–53, with accompanying explanatory notes. the aspect that Hegel primarily emphasized] See, for example, chap. 2, “Die ewige Idee Gottes im Elemente des Bewußtseyns und Vorstellens, oder die Differenz, das Reich des Sohnes” [The Eternal Idea of God in the Elements of Consciousness and Representation, or the Differentiation: The Kingdom of the Son], in pt. 3, “Die absolute Religion” [The Consummate Religion], in G.W.F. Hegel (→ 140,20), Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion [Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion], ed. Philipp Marheineke, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1832; see ASKB 564–565, a 2nd ed. from 1840); vol. 2 in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Works: Complete Edition], 18 vols. (Berlin, 1832–1845; abbreviated hereafter as Hegel’s Werke); vol. 12, pp. 204–256, esp. the subentry “Die Versöhnung” [Reconciliation], pp. 228–256 (Jub. vol. 16, pp. 247–308, esp. pp. 277–308), where among other things it reads, pp. 238–239 (Jub. p. 286): “In the Church Christ has been called the ‘God-man.’ This is a monstrous compound, which directly contradicts both representation and understanding. But what has thereby been brought into human consciousness

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages . . . the figure of the fool] Refers to Paper 135, from March 1836, in the present volume. they had one language . . . for poetry (Latin/ Romance languages)] See, for example, the following passage in the sixth lecture of Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 1, p. 229; in English translation, Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, trans. J. G. Lockhart (New York, J. & H. G. Langley, 1841), p. 142: “Christianity (as given to the Teutonic nations by the Romans) on the one hand, and the free spir-

10

11

145

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” and made a certainty for it is the unity of divine and human nature, implying that otherness, or, as we also say, the finitude, weakness, and frailty of human nature, does not damage this unity, just as otherness does not impair the unity that God is in the eternal idea.” English translation from Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion: The Lectures of 1827, trans. Peter Hodgson (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), pp. 457–458. 145

14

The scholastic] → 143,25.

145

18

the Ancient] → 140,23. Hegelians] It has not been possible to determine to whom this refers. See, however, the following passage under subheading 2, “Die entgötterte endliche Welt” [The Finite World Bereft of God], under point B, “Die Kunst der Erhabenheit” [The Art of the Sublime], in chap. 2 of pt. 2 in G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 140,20) Vorlesungen über die Aesthetik [Lectures on Aesthetics] (→ 141,28), vol. 1; in Hegel’s Werke (→ 145,11), vol. 10.1, p. 482 (Jub. vol. 12, p. 498): “In India everything is miracle and therefore no longer miraculous. On a ground where an intelligible connection is continually interrupted, where everything is torn from its place and deranged, no miracle can tread. For the miraculous presupposes intelligible consequences and also the ordinarily clear consciousness which alone calls a ‘miracle’ that interruption of this accustomed connection which is wrought by a higher power.” English translation from Aesthetics: Lectures on Fine Art, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975), p. 375. Schleiermacher] → 129,31.

18

19

145

21

the drapery . . . paintings and sculptures . . . see Görres . . . p. 302. l. 5ff. from top] See J. Görres, ed., Die teutschen Volksbücher [German Popular Books] (Heidelberg, 1807; ASKB 1440), p. 276: “The old, austere, clear, light, malleable femininity had melted away in the fire of love, and a halo streamed forth and now surrounded the marvelous image, and the features receded into a mystical glowing light and, as mild oil flowed from it, soothed the storms of time. In this way devotion, love and a sense of heroism flowed to-

•

P a p e r 165–169 1836 •

441

gether into a great stream, and the stream flowed through all minds and fertilized the rich sensuousness, and the new garden of poetry, the Eden of Romanticism, blossomed.” See also pp. 301– 302: “The Middle Ages did not produce any pure classical work, but they broke through the sensuous limitations of the old school of classicism, and established another superior one on which all subsequent ages must build, because the proverbial squaring of the circle cannot be found in any isolated age. The ancient Greek period produced the glorious torso of art, but ancient sculpture was blind, just as its splendid figure was; it was the Romantic age that first gave him an eye for deep emotional passion, and yet admittedly the Nordic sense of shame has covered the beautiful body in the drapery of apparel, symbolically indicating only the forms of the limbs.” Both quotations come from the postscript. ― Görres: Johann Joseph von Görres (1776–1848), German Catholic literary critic, editor, politician, and philosophical and religious author; from 1800, professor of physics at the gymnasium in Koblenz; 1806–1808, privatdocent in Heidelberg; from 1827, professor of the history of literature in Munich. Ancient] → 140,23. masks] Concerning the function and significance of masks in relation to facial expression, see, for example, the third lecture of A. W. Schlegel’s Ueber dramatische Kunst und Litteratur [On Dramatic Art and Literature], 2 vols. (Heidelberg, 1809–1811; ASKB 1392–1394), vol. 1, pp. 91–99; A Course of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature, trans. John Black (Philadelphia: Hogan and Thompson, 1833), pp. 37–51. see Schlegel Werke, vol. 5, p. 61, middle of the page] Refers to a passage in “Ueber das Studium der griechischen Poesie” [On the Study of Greek Poetry] (1795–1796), in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 5, pp. 61–62, where, concerning “the characteristic evident throughout the aesthetic development [Kunstbildung] of the moderns,” Schlegel says, “The characteristic also rules absolutely in the dramatic arts. A virtuoso of mimicry must―in terms of organization and spirit―be a physical and intellectual Proteus in order to meta-

1 8

12

146

442

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

morphize himself into every style and into every character so that he incorporates even the most individual traits. In the course of which beauty is neglected, propriety is often offended, and the mimic rhythm is entirely forgotten, by means of which among the ancients ultimate beauty in the rhythmic movement of artistic dance was joined to the merely imitative and passionate or mimetic components of drama to form a complete whole.” English translation from On the Study of Greek Poetry, trans. Stuart Barnett (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001), pp. 31–32, 114–115. (NB: The clause beginning with “by means of which . . .” was subsequently added by Schlegel in his Sämmtliche Werke and is thus included in the English translation only in an endnote.) 146

13

13

14

the orthodox] N.F.S. Grundtvig (→ 142,15) and the Grundtvigians regularly referred to themselves as “the orthodox” (i.e., as those who stood for and represented the true and correct faith and doctrine). For example, in Skribenten Nik. Fred. Sev. Grundtvigs Literaire Testamente [The Literary Testament of the Writer Nik(olaj) Fred(erik) Sev(erin) Grundtvig] (Copenhagen, 1827), p. 35, Grundtvig refers to himself as “the hyperorthodox Lutheran priest”; in Om den Clausenske Injurie-Sag [On the Clausen Libel Case] (Copenhagen, 1831), p. 15, Grundtvig describes himself and his adherents as “the hyperorthodox and the old-fashioned believers”; and in Om Sogne-Baandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Loosening of Parish Bonds and Herr Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834), p. 21, he refers to himself and his adherents as “the orthodox.” the rationalists] Presumably refers to the Clausens, i.e., Archbishop H. G. Clausen, who was a rationalist, and his son Professor H. N. Clausen, whom Grundtvig accused of being a rationalist, as well as their adherents, the Clausenians. See, for example, the previous note, as well as Paper 56 and Paper 69, together with their explanatory notes, in the present volume. the battle between the old and new soap-cellars] A phrase with a background in a dispute that took place in Copenhagen around 1810 between

•

P a p e r 169–172 1836 •

a soap dealer, A. Møller, with his shop in a cellar on Ulfelts Plads 110 (today, Gråbrødre Torv 3 [see map 2, BC2]) and a new competitor nearby; Møller put up a sign above his shop with the words: “Here is the genuine old soap-cellar, where the genuine old soap-cellar people live”; see Historiske Meddelelser om København [Historical Information about Copenhagen], vol. 2.2 (Copenhagen, 1925– 1926) pp. 406–407. Luther] Martin Luther (1483–1546), German theologian, Augustinian monk (1505–1524), professor at Wittenberg. As a Protestant reformer, Luther was the central figure in the clash and break with medieval theological tradition, papal power, and the Roman Church, which resulted in a transformation of worship services and ecclesiastical life and in the founding of a number of evangelical Lutheran Churches, particularly in northern Europe. Luther was the author of a great many theological, exegetical, and edifying works, as well as works on ecclesiastical policy and organization; many sermons and hymns; and he also translated the Bible into German. what Hegel calls the dialectical, the other standpoint] See, for example, the compressed summary in §§ 79–82 in G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 140,20) Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], 3rd ed. (Heidelberg, 1830 [1817]), pp. 95–97, on the three formal positions of logic: the abstract (§ 80), the dialectical (§ 81), and the speculative (§ 82). ― the dialectical,: Variant: first written “the dialectical.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. Stoicism] A philosophical school founded in Greece by Zeno around 300 b.c. and continued in Rome in the first centuries a.d. by Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus Aurelius, among others. According to Stoicism, the world is governed by an absolute world order, and yet freedom of the will is claimed. For the Stoics, it was important that one attain peace of mind by making oneself independent of external circumstances and of inclinations and passions. Fatalism] A deterministic view of the world present in ancient philosophies and religions.

21

29

31

31

146

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

32

32

According to fatalism, the world is governed or completely determined by the gods, especially the Fates, which is why human beings have neither free will nor control over their own destiny. Pelagianism] A theological doctrine attributed to Pelagius (ca. 354–425), a British monk and ascetic preacher, active in Rome ca. 400. In ca. 410, he went to Africa, and soon thereafter to Palestine, where he was not heard from after 418. Pelagius denied the doctrine of original or hereditary sin and asserted that free will is sufficient to lead a sinless life in accordance with the will of God; he regarded sin as an action and not a state; and he believed that all people are born just as good and uncorrupted as the human being God originally created. He did not reject the idea of grace, however, which he believed to have been given through Christ and which assists us in becoming holy by Christ’s inspiring example. At the instigation of Augustine (→ 146,32), his teachings were condemned by two African Synods in 416 and 418, and subsequently by the Synod at Ephesus in 431. Augustianism] i.e., Augustinianism, a theological doctrine attributed to Aurelius Augustin(us) (354–430), rhetorician, philosopher, and theologian; born in North Africa, active in Italy beginning in 383; bishop of Hippo beginning in 395; the most important Church Father in the Latin Church. With Augustine, hereditary (or original) sin became dogma, i.e., an obligatory doctrine that states that sin is active in the sexual act and thereby in the coming into existence of every human being, and that every human being has lost the ability to do good because he is born in and with sin. Since the human being is held by sin in an impotent slavery, he cannot himself contribute to his salvation, which depends completely on God’s redeeming and undeserved grace. Augustine conceived this grace as an infusion of divine love that, on the one hand, changes the person’s worldly desire into love of God and, on the other hand, creates anew a person’s will to follow God’s will. From 411 until his death, Augustine did everything he could to refute the Pelagian doctrine (→ 146,32).

•

P a p e r 172 1836 •

443

Heiberg . . . the trinity of lyric, epic, and lyric-epic (dramatic)] Refers to the second of J. L. Heiberg’s nine articles, which constitute his critical essay titled “Svar paa Hr. Prof. Oehlenschlägers Skrift ‘Om Kritiken i Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, over Væringerne i Miklagard’  ” [Response to Hr. Prof. Oehlenschläger’s Article “On the Critique in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post concerning The Varangians in Constantinople”], printed in nine articles in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post [Copenhagen’s Flying Post] from January 25 to February 25, 1828 (nos. 7–8, 10–16). In the second article, published in no. 8 (cols. 1–8; esp. cols. 4–5), Heiberg writes: “The lyric is poetry in its immediate form; from this develops the epic, which is the reflection of the immediate in the objective; and from here poetry develops into the unity of these two stages of development (the immediate and the objective)―a unity that was undeveloped in the lyric, but divided in the epic; and this third and final stage to which poetry can develop is the dramatic. By the lyric-epic art of poetry I thus do not mean the drama, which presupposes both the lyric and the epic, but the transition from the lyric to the epic, accordingly a kind of poetry that has no other basis than the lyric, from which it must itself develop the as-yet-unarisen epic. Thus, lyric-epic poetry stands so much farther behind the dramatic, since it even stands behind the epic (which is to say, not in worth and merit, but only in the degree of development of the idea). Just as the transition from the lyric to epic poetry passes through the lyric-epic, so, in turn, does the transition from the epic to dramatic poetry pass through the epic-dramatic. I will now consider both of these transitions more closely, as I will pursue poetry in its gradual development straight from the end of the lyric to the beginning of the dramatic. The point at which the lyric art of poetry goes beyond itself, when the subjective becomes objective, is the romance, and the transition from the lyric to the epic occurs thereby. The romance is epic, insofar as it is objective; but it is at the same time lyrical insofar as it appeals in a subjective mode to feeling. When expanded, the romance becomes a romance cycle, and thus gradually becomes the actual epic, wherein

3

147

444

147

10 11

11

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

everything is objective or plastic. The Romantic épopées [epics] of more recent times have in this way emerged from the romance, and in all likelihood the earliest Greek rhapsodies of antiquity were similarly the beginning from which the Homeric songs emerged. The romance can thus be included under the heading both of lyric and of epic poetry. If we class it as the latter, then it is regarded as the first, immediate form of the epic; then, in the épopée [epic], it elevates itself to the reflected condition in which the objective has completely absorbed the subjective; and from here the epic rises to the unity of the immediate and the objective, a unity that (to use the same expression as previously) was undeveloped in the romance, but divided in the épopée; and this unity is the novel in the broad sense of the term. Although in this the trinity established in the nature of the idea recurs anew.” ― Heiberg: Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), Danish author, critic, philosopher, and journal editor; 1822–1825, lecturer in Danish at the university in Kiel; 1828– 1839, translator and theater director at the Royal Theater; from 1829, titular professor; 1830–1836, docent in logic, aesthetics, and Danish literature at the Royal Military College; and from 1839, censor at the Royal Theater. has its lyrical] Variant. Preceding “lyrical”, “epic―” has been deleted. To what extent is it correct to begin with the lyrical] See, e.g., § 75 in Jean Paul, Vorschule der Aesthetik (→ 140,21), vol. 2, pp. 591–592: “The epic presents the event which develops out of the past, the drama the action which extends to the future, the lyric the feeling which is enclosed within the present. The lyric precedes properly all other poetic genres, since feeling in general is the mother and tinder-spark of all poetry, the formless Promethean fire which gives limbs and life to forms.” English translation from Horn of Oberon: Jean Paul Richter’s School for Aesthetics, trans. Margaret R. Hale (Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1973), p. 196. the history of poetry seems to suggest a beginning with the epic] → 145,2. See also chap. 1, “Geschichte der epischen Dichtkunst der Griechen” [History of Greek Epic Poetry], and

•

P a p e r 172–174 1836 •

chap. 2, “Bruchstücke zur Geschichte der lyrischen Dichtkunst” [Fragments toward the History of Lyric Poetry] in the first part of “Studien des classischen Altherthums” [Studies of Classical Antiquity], in Schlegels sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27). Goethe] → 123,32.

14

147

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages] Refers to Paper 135 and Paper 164 in the present volume. nature poets] Naturally gifted (lyric) poets, who poetize in a popular style based on their natural mood and feeling, without any artistic training. See, for example, the following passage in the first of A. W. Schlegel’s dramaturgical lectures, Ueber dramatische Kunst und Litteratur (→ 146,8), vol. 1, p. 22: “Chivalry, love, and honor are, along with religion itself, the objects of nature poetry, which in the Middle Ages poured forth with incredible abundance and preceded a more artistic formation of the Romantic spirit. This age also had its mythology, consisting of fables and legends about knights, but their miracles and their heroism were the complete opposite to those of ancient mythology.” See also the subsection “Ursprung” [Origin] in the first section, “Geist und Schicksale der Poesie” [Spirit and Fate of Poetry], in F. Geiz, Die Poesie der Troubadours (→ 149,4), pp. 13–22. See also the first portion of Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Die Poesie der Troubadours in BB:2, dated April 22, 1836 in KJN 1, 56–57. art poets] Poets whose poetry is due to consciously artistic labor, especially (according to the view of the Romantics) referring to a single individual’s poetry as opposed to popular poetry. See, for example, the following passage in the subsection “Strophe” [Stanza] in the second section, “Form,” of Die Poesie der Troubadours by F. Diez (→ 149,4), pp. 88–89: “In the structure of the stanza, the true significance and full brilliance of artistic poetry can be seen. The formal characteristics of popular poetry are these: firstly, popular poetry always rhymes together in a continuous way two or more similar verses; secondly, it concludes the thought, or a part thereof, with the verse. Artistic poetry does away with these features in the spirit

17

147

20

21

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

21 25 25

of more simply grounded rules. It links together dissimilar verses and rhymes, combining them primarily according to the fittingness of the meaning.” This passage is quoted in Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Die Poesie der Troubadours in BB:2, dated April 22, 1836; see KJN 1, 61. or never] Variant: added. the scholastics] → 143,25. chivalry] Life in the age of chivalry, i.e., the later Middle Ages (12th and 13th centuries). At this time, there were knightly orders in Europe with chivalrous ideals colored by Christianity. These ideals included military training and special “courtly” education (politeness, courtesy, elegance).

148

1

The Hegelian cud-chewing process with three stomachs] Refers to G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 140,19) dialectical method, according to which concepts develop from one another by necessity with the help of their opposites, e.g., the concept “being” necessarily produces the concept “nothing,” and together they necessarily produce the concept “coming into being.” There is accordingly a threefold movement in the concept (e.g., immediacy, mediation, and mediated immediacy).

148

7

Goethe] → 123,32. the transition to the Ancient] Refers to Weimar classicism (→ 142,1). Hegel] → 140,20. the entire recent Romantic School are precisely―politicians] Presumably refers to such authors as L. Börne, H. Heine, H. Laube, Theodor Mundt, and K. Gutzkow, as well as T. Gautier and A. de Musset, who in the 1830s became known as “Young Germany” and “Young France,” a literary, social, and political movement characterized by opposition to absolutism, orthodox religiosity, and social conventions, and by the struggle for individualism and freedom in political and religious matters. The clash of this younger Romantic school with idealism and Biedermeier apoliticism resulted in demands for realism and a closer connection between literature and political struggle that formed the background for the 1830 July Revolution in France, as well as such radical authors as G. Sand and L. Saint-Simon.

7 9 12

•

P a p e r 174–179 1836 •

445

Faust] → 126,1. Goethe’s treatment] Refers to J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828). What I expressed . . . that Faust subsumes Don Juan in himself] Refers to Not2:7, dated December 1835, in KJN 3, 90, where Kierkegaard includes Don Juan (immediacy) and the Wandering Jew (despair) within the idea of Faust. ― Don Juan: → 137,6.

17

The modern development . . . (the modern accentuated languages)] See the following passage in the subsection “Vers. (Bau desselben―Versarten)” [Verse: Structure of the Same―Types of Verse], in pt. 2, “Form,” of Die Poesie der Troubadours by F. Diez (→ 149,4), p. 85: “In Provençal and other Romance languages, the verse is essentially distinct from the high poetry of Latin. Whereas the structure of the Latin verse is based on the law of quantity, or the measurement of syllables, it is the accent―which in the Romance languages plays such a peculiar role―that defines the verse structure of Romance poetry. In the latter, the structure of the verse no longer depends on the measurement of syllables or the metric foot. The basis of the verse is formed by the number of syllables of the scheme, with the accent signifying the stresses of the syllables and giving the scheme its rhythmic character; the verse is either ascending or descending, which is called iambic or trochaic, although improperly so. Although it can generally be known by the accent whether the verse is ascending or descending, the former can apply to virtually every syllable, and it is precisely on the change of accent in the scheme of the verse that the sonority and quality depend.” The first half of this passage is cited by Kierkegaard in his excerpts from Die Poesie der Troubadours in KJN 1, 60–61. In marginal note BB:2.c, Kierkegaard includes a quotation about Greek and Latin meter from § 811 of C. G. Zumpt, Lateinische Grammatik [Latin Grammar], 6th ed. (Berlin, 1828 [1818]; ASKB 1009), p. 597. Additionally, in marginal note BB:2.d, Kierkegaard refers to the following four pages of lecture 15 in Friedrich Schlegel’s Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur, pt. 1,

27

17

18

148

446

149

1 4

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 2, pp. 264–267, concerning, among other things, rhyme in German-language poems; alliteration in Icelandic, Old Norse, and German-language poems; and accentuation of the important syllables in the German language. “In energetically accented languages, such as Italian and Spanish, rhyme easily takes the form of a mere musical play on syllables and words,” it reads on p. 266. And on p. 267: “The distinctive character and the correct path for German versification, however, consists in this: that we abandon all foreign syllabic meter, both the ancient rhythmic fashion and the artistic Romantic fashion of rhyming, as mere preliminary exercises to a more ductile formation, which as such were of value for their time, and return to the simple German forms of verse.” ― the Ancient: → 140,22. ― accentuated languages: → 157,4. scholasticism] → 143,25. the parody of the troubadors’ . . . development in rhyme . . . see Diez, pp. 101ff.] See the subsection “Reim” [Rhyme], in pt. 2, “Form,” of F. Diez, Die Poesie der Troubadours. Nach gedruckten und handschriftlichen Werken derselben dargestellt [The Poetry of the Troubadours: Depicted in Accordance with Their Printed and Manuscript Works] (Zwickau, 1826; abbreviated hereafter as Die Poesie der Troubadours), pp. 101–103: “Certain trifles with rhyme come into play here; either the same word is modulated a few times in succession, or the compounds of a word are arranged in a way that is organized by the same rhyme. In one instance (and in the case of Bernard de Ventadour, no less) the five vowels appear all in a row in the rhymes of every stanza. Even that insignificant sort of alliteration wherein, so far as possible, all the words of a verse begin with the same letter (a familiar trifle in the poetry of the cloister) has sometimes been used. And finally, one encounters a similar trifle when a word occurs twice in a verse although in different forms, or once in each verse of the stanza, or even across the entire song, or if each rhyme is repeated at the beginning of every verse, and similar subtleties by which the most reasonable poets were moved by the predominant penchant

•

P a p e r 179 1836 •

of their time.” See Kierkegaard’s summary of this passage in BB:2, dated April 22, 1836, in KJN 1, 62. ― Diez: Friedrich Christian Diez (1794–1876), German linguist, professor of Germanic studies and Romance philology at the University of Bonn. H. Steffens . . . “in die Selbstsucht der wildbewegten Töne[”] . . . (see Karikaturen . . . pt. 2, p. 103)] Quotation from the introduction of H. Steffens’s Caricaturen des Heiligsten [Caricatures of the Most Holy], 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1819–1821; ASKB 793–794), vol. 2, p. 103; according to a receipt from C. A. Reitzel’s bookstore dated December 31, 1836, Kierkegaard purchased the work on January 13, 1836 (see KA, D packet 7, folder 6). ― H. Steffens: Henrich Steffens (1773–1845), Norwegian, Danish, German philosopher, natural scientist, and author; professor at Halle from 1804 to 1806, and again from 1808 to 1811; thereafter professor in Breslau, and from 1832 in Berlin. The musical consists in rhyme] See, e.g., the following passage in the fifteenth lecture of Friedrich Schlegel’s Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur, pt. 1, in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 2, p. 266: “In energetically accented languages, such as Italian and Spanish, rhyme easily takes the form of a mere musical play on syllables and words.” The great importance of the refrain, especially in earlier times] See, for example, the following passage from the subsection “Lied” [Song] in pt. 2, “Form,” in Die Poesie der Troubadours by F. Diez (→ 149,4), p. 92: “In a fair number of songs one encounters the refrain; indeed, it is indispensable to certain types of songs; as a rule it comes at the end of each stanza―only rarely does it occur in the middle of a stanza or at the beginning of a song. The Provençals seem to have named the refrain (i.e., a re-echoing), although this is nowhere expressly stated. But, of course, the troubadours did not invent it; they found it in the hymns of the Church and, no doubt, also in popular song, and made use of it as an excellent means of evoking deep feeling by repeatedly striking a certain chord as the focal point around which the entire poem turns.”

7

12

13

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 14

14

15

Knabens Wunderhorn] Refers to Des Knaben Wunderhorn (→ 144,17), in which there are various examples of different kinds of refrain. Bürger’s Lenore] Refers to the ballad “Lenore” by the German poet Gottfried August Bürger (1747– 1794); see Bürgers Gedichte (→ 122,30), vol. 1, pp. 48–57. See esp. stanzas 6, 7, and 10, which all begin with the phrase, “Hilf Gott, hilf!” (“Help God, help!”), as well as stanzas 23 and 26, which share the final two lines in common: “Daß Roß und Reiter schnoben, / Und Kies und Funken stoben” (“The steed and rider snorted, / and sparks and gravel sported”). The theory of a written language . . . the theory . . . for scholars] See, for example, the section “Herleitung des romanischen Sprachzweiges” [Derivation of the Branch of Romance Languages] in “Ueber die provenzalische Sprache” [On the Provençal Language], in Die Poesie der Troubadours by F. Diez (→ 149,4), pp. 285–291, esp. pp. 286– 287: “It is certain, meanwhile, that the migration of peoples accelerated the development of the Romance languages. But it was not the grammar of the conquerors that wrought these changes, because these have left only a few traces in the Romance languages; rather, it was the political conditions that accompanied the conquest. Up until then, the higher Latin was maintained as the language of the state and of educated people, but thereafter it was virtually neglected, owing to the fact that the conquerors preferred their own dialects, and this made way for the lower Latin of the people, which, without external inhibition, rapidly followed this trend.” Also pp. 289–290: “If we look about for an explanation of these relationships in our contemporary languages, we discover the same dynamics. Let us take the German. Here we note, on one hand, types of vernacular well-suited to the analytic method, and on the other, a literary language that on the whole tends toward a synthetic method, although it has absorbed quite a few analytic principles from the lower-level vernacular over the course of time.” And the following passage on p. 328: “The vernaculars would undoubtedly have been used and maintained as written languages earlier if two other languages of higher position had not stood in the way: Latin, as

•

P a p e r 179 1836 •

447

the language of state, Church, and scholarship, and German, retained by the Germanic victors even centuries after the conquest of the western part of the Roman Empire.” Additionally, see F. Schlegel’s lectures on Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur, pt. 1, in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 1, pp. 229 and 264 (→ 144,27). wandering knights] → 149,22. fahrende scholars] It was typical in the Middle Ages that scholars would walk from university to university; there are also reports of wayward scholars in the late Middle Ages who occupied themselves with magic arts and the like. See, for example, the scene “Studirzimmer” [Faust’s Study] in J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 69, where Mephistopheles emerges “gekleidet wie ein fahrender Scholasticus” (“dressed as a goliard”), i.e., a wandering scholar, and where Faust uses the expression “Ein fahrender Scolast” (“a wandering scholar”). See Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works, 12 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014), vol. 2, p. 35. wander[ing] singers, musicians, monks, etc.] Presumably refers to the subdivisions “Begriff von Troubadour und Jongleur” [The Concept of Troubadour and Jongleur], “Kunstbereich der Jongleurs” [Artistic Classification of the Jongleurs], and “Poetische Unterhaltungen” [Poetic Amusements] in the first sections “Geist und Schicksale der Poesie” [The Spirit and Fate of Poetry] and “Lohn und Ehre der Sänger” [Reward and Honor of the Singers] of Die Poesie der Troubadours by F. Diez (→ 149,4), pp. 30–34 and 40–57, where, among other things, Diez reports of the wandering “jongleur” (a designation in the age of chivalry for those who pursued the role of poet, singer, musician, and actor as their occupation) that “an important aspect of the role of the jongleur consisted of accompanying the court poets, who were ignorant of performance, on their journeys, in order to support them with song and drama, or to recite at the courts the songs of distinguished poets who would not profit from their art” (p. 43). He further relates, “The

21 21

22

448

23

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

castles of kings and princes, as well as those of nobles, served as haunts for poets and minstrels to showcase their talents. The code of chivalry made it obligatory not to refuse any wanderer the threshold of the house, particularly in the cases of wandering combatants and singers of all classes” (pp. 46–47). Many of these “jongleurs” were made knights (see p. 55), just as a number of the court poets were knights (see pp. 53–55). Moreover, on p. 34, Diez says that certain monks “such as Peire Rogier, preferred to exchange the clerical office for that of the vocation of minstrelsy and, steeped in worldliness, Jausbert de Puycibot sprang from the monastery for that reason―so great was the appeal of the free life of the poet. If we believe the manuscripts, then the ‘Monk of Montaudon’ was even permitted by his superiors to lead the life of a wandering singer, undoubtedly on the condition that he gave the income from his art to the monastery.” See Kierkegaard’s excerpts from Die Poesie der Troubadours in BB:2, dated April 22, 1836, in KJN 1, 56–59. “flyer, loose sheet of paper”] Presumably refers to the indication of source for many of the songs and ballads in Des Knaben Wunderhorn (→ 144,17)―just over thirty in vol. 1, barely forty in vol. 2, and just over five in vol. 3. See, e.g., in vol. 1, “Die schwarzbraune Hexe. / Fliegendes Blatt” [The Dark Brown Witch. / Pamphlet], pp. 34–35, and “Doktor Faust. / Fliegendes Blatt aus Cöln” [Doctor Faust: Pamphlet from Cologne], pp. 214–217; in vol. 2, “Von der Belagerung der Stadt Frankfurt, ein Lied im Ton: Frisch auf in Gottes Namen. 1552. / Fliegendes Blatt, gedruckt in Frankfurt” [On the Siege of Frankfurt, a Song Sung to the Tune: “Newly Presented in the Name of God” (1552). / Pamphlet, Printed in Frankfurt], pp. 336–338, and “Müllerlied. / Altes fliegendes Blatt aus 1500” [Song of the Miller: / Old Pamphlet from 1500], pp. 393–395; and in vol. 3, “Ein hübsch Lied, genannt der Striegel, gar lustig zu singen und zu lesen in des Lindenschmids Ton. / Fliegendes Blatt, gedruckt zu Zürich, bei Augustin Fries. 1530” [A Lovely Song, Known as “Currycomb,” Quite Enjoyable to Sing and Read to the Tune of “Lindenschmid”: / Pamphlet, Printed in Zurich by Augustin Fries (1530)], pp. 99–102.

•

P a p e r 179–180 1836 •

All these remarks] Refers to Papers 179:1–7 in the present volume. statement by H. Steffens] Refers to the note added to Paper 179:4 in the present volume.

24

To what extent is Faust an immediate drama? as J. L. Heiberg says] Refers to the fourth of J. L Heiberg’s nine articles constituting his critical dissertation “Svar paa Hr. Prof. Oehlenschlägers Skrift: ‘Om Kritiken i Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, over Væringerne i Miklagard’ ” (→ 147,3), in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, no. 11, February 8, 1828, in which Heiberg elaborates on his theory of aesthetics. Heiberg’s fundamental philosophical idea “consists in bringing the concept in a continuous movement through the three discrete positions of the immediate, the reflective (or dialectical), and the unity of both (or the speculative),” no. 16, col. 5. In determining the genre of the dramatic, the concept is brought through the immediate, the tragic, and, finally, the comic. In the articles in Flyveposten, no. 11, col. 5, and no. 12, col. 7, J. W. Goethe’s Faust (→ 127,5) is discussed as one of many examples of “the immediate drama.” Mephisto] or Mephistopheles, the name of the devil in the Faust tradition. The name is used even in the old German popular books about Faust. See Den i den gandske Verden bekiendte Ertz-Sort-Kunstner og Trold-Karl Doctor Johan Faust, og Hans med Dievelen oprettede Forbund, Forundringsfulde Levnet og skrækkelige Endeligt (→ 126,1), p. 9. The figure is particularly well known from J. W. Goethe’s Faust (→ 127,5). Lessing] Refers to the surviving fragments of G. E. Lessing’s work with the Faust legend. See Kierkegaard’s excerpts from “Lessing’s adaptation of Faust, a fragment found in: / Gothold Ephraim Lessings sämtliche Schriften, Berlin 1794 / Band XXII pp. 213–231,” in BB:8, dated September 7, 1836, in KJN 1, 83–84. Lessing’s Doctor Faust is included in the first part of Theatralischer Nachlaß [Posthumous Works for the Theater]. See Gotthold Ephraim Lessings sämmtliche Schriften [Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s Complete Works], ed. K. G. Lessing, J. J. Eschenburg, and F. Nicolai, 31 vols. (Berlin 1793–1825); vol. 22 (1794), pp. 213–230. See also Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s sämmtliche Schriften

1

26

3

4

150

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

5

6

[Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s Complete Works], 32 vols. (Berlin, 1825–1828; ASKB 1747–1762), vol. 23 (1827), pp. 176ff. ― Lessing: Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729–1781), German librarian, poet, critic, and philosopher. Klinger] Presumably refers to both of the two works by F. M. v. Klinger that Kierkegaard had dealt with previously, namely, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt. in fünft Büchern. Neue verbesserte und vermehrte Ausgabe [The Life, Works, and Journey to Hell of Faust, in Five Books: New Improved and Enlarged Edition] (Leipzig, 1799; 1st ed., St. Petersburg, 1791; 2nd rev. and enl. ed., St. Petersburg, 1794); and Der Faust der Morgenlaender, oder Wanderungen Ben Hafis. Erzaehlers der Reisen vor der Sündfluth [The Faust of the Orient, or the Wanderings of Ben Hafi: By an Antediluvian Narrator of the Journey] (Baghdad, 1797). See Paper 252:1, from 1835, and Paper 252:4, dated March 7, 1835, in the present volume. ― Klinger: Friedrich Maximilian von Klinger (1753–1831), German poet; lived in St. Petersburg from 1780 with increasingly higher positions in the Russian army; from 1811, he was a lieutenant general. folk songs in Knaben Wunderhorn 1, 214] Refers to “Doktor Faust. Fliegendes Blatt aus Cöln” (→ 149,23), in Des Knaben Wunderhorn (→ 144,17), vol. 1, pp. 214–217. the passage in Goethe, p. 85: Was wilst du armer Teufel geben etc.] Refers to Faust’s reply in the second scene of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” [Faust’s Study] in J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 85. Kierkegaard also owned the separate special edition with the same text and pagination, Faust. Eine Tragödie von Goethe. Beide Theile in Einem Bande [Faust: A Tragedy by Goethe: Both Parts in One Volume] (Stuttgart, 1834; ASKB 1669; abbreviated hereafter as Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande); in English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works, 12 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014), vol. 2, pp. 43–44: “And what have you to give, poor devil! / Has any human spirit and its aspirations / ever been understood by such as you? / Of course

•

P a p e r 180 1836 •

449

you’ve food that cannot satisfy, / gold that, when held, will liquefy / quicksilverlike as it turns red, / games at which none can ever win, / a girl who, even in my arms, will with her eyes / pledge her affections to another, / the godlike satisfaction of great honor / that like a meteor is gone at once. / Show me the fruit that, still unplucked, will rot and trees that leaf each day anew!” Goethe first did . . . p. 69: “das also war . . . mich lachen.”] Quotation from Faust’s reply to Mephistopheles in the first of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe, Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 69. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; see English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 35. Kierkegaard has written das (“that”) with the first letter in lowercase, and has put a comma instead of an exclamation mark after Kern (“core”). perhaps Goethe’s intention . . . the Spirit (p. 34) . . . (all . . . “bescheidne Warheit sage ich Dir.”] Refers to the scene “Nacht” [Night], in J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 34; in English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 16, where in a stage direction it says of Faust that “He takes the book and mysteriously utters the sign of the spirit. / In a flash of reddish flame the EARTH SPIRIT appears.” Then the “Spirit” and Faust hold a conversation. Mephistopheles first enters, “dressed as a goliard” (i.e., a wandering scholar), in the first of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” [Faust’s Study], p. 69 (→ 150,8) (p. 35 in the Atkins translation). Then a bit later (p. 71; p. 36 in the Atkins translation) Faust asks, “You call yourself a part, yet stand before me whole?” To which Mephistopheles answers, “I only speak the sober truth. / You mortals, microcosmic fools, / may like to think of yourselves as complete, / but I’m a part of the Part that first was all, / part of the Darkness that gave birth to Light― / proud Light, that now contests the senior rank / of Mother Night, disputes her rights to space; / yet it does not succeed, however much it strives, / because

8

11

450

15

20

26

30

33 35

151

2

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

it can’t escape material fetters. / Light emanates from matter, lends it beauty, / but matter checks the course of light, / and so I hope it won’t be long / before they both have been annihilated.” Goethe’s irony and humor . . . he has survived it] See Paper 173 in the present volume, dated August 19, 1836, which reads: “Goethe surely has irony and humor, but hovers over both―different, in this respect, from Greek tragedy.” Thus in the first scene he immediately runs through the whole climax] Refers to the scene “Nacht” in Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 29–36; see Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, pp. 13–23. Wagner” pp. 36ff.] After Faust has spoken with the “Spirit” (→ 150,11), Faust’s scientific assistant, Wagner, is introduced with the following stage direction: “Enter WAGNER, in dressing-gown and nightcap, a lamp in his hand. FAUST turns, irritated.” J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 36. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; see English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 17. After some pages of dialogue, Wagner retires and leaves Faust alone. p. 35, l. 3 from the bottom: nicht einmal dir] Refers to Faust’s remark after the “Spirit” has vanished, Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 35. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; see English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 16. Faust has said to the “Spirit”: “How close I feel to you, industrious spirit, / whose strands encompass all the world!” To which the “Spirit” responds, “Your peer is the spirit you comprehend; / mine you are not!” Hereupon the “Spirit” disappears, and Faust “collapsing,” says, “Not yours? / Whose then? / I, made in God’s image, / not even your counterpart!” F.] Faust. not, at least, G’s intention] Variant: “not” has been added. ― G’s: Goethe’s. meine Schüler an der Nase herum] Refers to Faust’s initial reply in the scene “Nacht” [Night] in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 29; see English transla-

•

P a p e r 180 1836 •

tion, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 13: “I’ve studied now, to my regret, / Philosophy, Law, Medicine, / and―what is worst―Theology / from end to end with diligence. / Yet here I am, a wretched fool / and still no wiser than before. / I’ve become Master, and Doctor as well, / and for nearly ten years I have led / my young students a merry chase, / up, down, and every which way― / and find we can’t have certitude. / This is too much for heart to bear!” Atkins translates “Und ziehe . . . / Meine Schüler an der Nase herum” [lit., “and led my students around by the nose”] with the phrase “led my young students a merry chase.” just at the moment . . . a new disciple arrives] Refers to the second of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” [Faust’s Study] in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, where Mephistopheles, “in Faust’s langem Kleide” (“in Faust’s long robe”), takes on a student who was seeking Faust. Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 92–101; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 47. See also Kierkegaard’s excerpts from K. E. Schubarth, Ueber Goethe’s Faust. Vorlesungen [On Goethe’s Faust: Lectures] (Berlin, 1830; ASKB U 96) (abbreviated hereafter as Ueber Goethe’s Faust), in BB:7, dated September 2, 1836, in KJN 1, 70–83; p. 74. when the peasants . . . jubilation because he had once saved them] Refers to the scene “Vor dem Thor” [Outside the City Gate] in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 54–57; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, pp. 23–28. when W[agner] rejoices in this] Refers to the scene “Vor dem Thor” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, where Wagner―after he and Faust have taken leave of the peasants (→ 151,6)―says to Faust: “What feelings, sir, you must derive / from the respect of all these people for your greatness! / How happy is the man who is allowed / to turn his talents to such good account! / Some father points you out to his young boy, / and people ask your name, stand still and crowd about you, / the fiddle stops, the dancers pause. / As you move on, they stand in rows / and fling their caps into the air― / a little more, and they would genuflect / as if the blessed sacrament were going

4

6

8

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

10

12

18

by!” Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 57; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 28. the whole scene with the dog] Refers to the beginning of the first of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 64– 67; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, pp. 32–40, which begins with stage direction, “Enter FAUST, with the poodle.” p. 57. top . . . prophetic insight into the soul of every profoundly religious doubter] Refers to the scene “Vor dem Thor” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, where Faust―after the villagers have said, “Good health to one who’s tried and true, / and may he be our help for many years to come!”― says, “Offer your homage to the Helper above / Who teaches that we all should help each other.” Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 57. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ kp1281) has the same text and pagination; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 28. p. 64] Refers to the beginning of the first of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, where Faust says: “I’ve left behind the fields and meadows / that night now veils in darkness― / night, whose presentient holy dread / awakes in us our better soul. / Forces of passion are lulled to sleep / as restless action ceases; / love of our fellow man is rousing, / and with it love of God as well. // Easy, Poodle! Stop running about! / Why are you sniffing the sill of that door? / Lie down behind the stove― / here’s my best cushion! / Your running and jumping along the road / entertained us out on the hillside, / now let me entertain you in my turn― / a welcome guest if you’ll stay quiet. // Ah, when within our narrow chamber / the friendly lamp again is lit, / our inner being too is brightened / our heart, that then can know itself. / The voice of reason is heard again, / and hope again begins to flower; / we thirst for life-giving waters, / we long for life’s fountainhead.” Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 64–65. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 32.

•

P a p e r 180 1836 •

451

Jehovah was not in the storm] Refers to the account in 1 Kings 19:11–12 concerning the prophet Elijah on Mt. Horeb, where the Lord God promised Elijah he would pass by. ― Jehovah: A name often used to translate the Old Testament “JHWH,” which, in the original Hebrew text, was not written with vowels and can thus be rendered both as “Jehovah” and, in more recent versions, “Yahweh” (transliteration of “J” and “Y” also being variable). Many translations, such as the King James version and the Danish of 1740, use “the Lord.” the moment the Commandant lets go of D. Juan’s hand] Refers to the judgment scene, act 2, sc. 15, at the end of the opera Don Juan or Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni (1787) (→ 130,2). See Don Juan. Opera i tvende Akter, in L. Kruse’s adaptation (→ 130,2), pp. 123–127. At the beginning of the opera, Don Juan kills the Commandant. In the judgment scene, the Commandant appears (in the form of the statue on his grave) at the home of Don Juan to call him to account. When the ghost invites Don Juan to be his guest, Don Juan accepts and gives him his hand as a pledge. When Don Juan recognizes the Commandant, he withdraws with dismay, but will not repent, whereupon the Commandant pronounces, “Now your end is near,” and disappears amidst thunder and lighting. As a choir sounds from the netherworld, Don Juan prays for a stay but―as the stage direction states―“he collapses, dead, amidst thunder, lightning, and flames.” Mephisto’s demand that F[aust] say “herein” three times before he enters] Refers to the beginning of the second of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 79; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 40, where Faust says, “A knock? Come in! Who bothers me this time?” Mephistopheles: “It’s me.” Faust: “Come in!” Mephistopheles: “That must be said three times.” Faust: “Come in, then!” Mephistopheles (entering): “Now you’ve done it right!” Goeth[e’s] F.] Goethe’s Faust. the poem in Knaben Wunderhorn] → 150,5.

18

24

28

30 30

452 31

32

39 40

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

e.g., F., p. 75, where he lulls him to sleep . . . unable to escape] Refers to a passage in the first of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust, in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 77. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, pp. 39–40. Here Mephistopheles gets spirits to sing Faust to sleep, after which Mephistopheles says: “The rest, my insubstantial lads, can keep; / You’ve done your duty, he’s lulled to sleep, / and for your concert I am much obliged.― / But you’re not yet the man to hold a demon captive!― / Encompass him with lovely apparitions, / plunge him into a sea of mad illusion! / But to undo this doorsill-magic, / tooth of rat is what I need. / I will not have to conjure long; / the one I hear scurrying will quickly hear me.” the exchange in Kn. W., where . . . he paints Venus] Refers to the last part of “Doktor Faust. / Fliegendes Blatt aus Cöln” [Doctor Faust: Pamphlet from Cologne], in Des Knaben Wunderhorn (→ 144,17), vol. 1, pp. 216–217. The work is a ballad (of ninety-two lines) on Faust and Mephistopheles, in which at one point Mephistopheles (“Der Teufel”), unwilling to paint a picture of Christ, instead paints Venus, and thus leads Faust to perdition. ― Venus: The Roman goddess of love and beauty, the equivalent of the Greek Aphrodite. D. Juan] Don Juan (→ 137,6). Goethe were the gray man in Peter Schlemihl . . . damnatus sum] Refers to the tale of the tall, thin, gray, aged man in Adelbert von (properly Louis Charles Adelaide de) Chamisso, Peter Schlemihl’s wundersame Geschichte [Peter Schlemihl’s Wondrous Tales], 3rd ed. (Nuremberg, 1835 [1814]; ASKB 1630). On p. 117, it relates how once, when Peter Schlemihl asks the tall, gray man who Thomas John is―Schlemihl had previously visited him at his country house―the tall man slowly reaches his hand down into his bag, and by the hairs pulls forth Thomas John’s ashen, distorted face, and the lifeless blue lips speak the hard words: “justo judicio Dei damnatus sum” (“I have been found guilty by God’s righteous judgment”). Previously, the tall, gray man (the Devil) had tempted Peter

•

P a p e r 180 1836 •

Schlemihl to sell his shadow for an inexhaustible bag of good luck, whereupon he rolled the shadow up into a ball and kept it in his pocket, so that Peter Schlemihl no longer cast a shadow (pp. 30– 32). See Peter Schlemihl’s forunderlige Historie [Peter Schlemihl’s Strange Story], trans. F. Schaldemose (Copenhagen, 1841), p. 75 and pp. 10–11. ― justo judicio Dei damnatus sum: The background for the expression is found in a hagiographic tradition associated with Bruno of Cologne. It is said that Raimond Diocre (d. 1084), a canon of NotreDame of Paris, woke up three times during his funeral and exclaimed, “justo judicio Dei damnatus sum”; “justo judicio Dei damnatus sum”; “justo judicio Dei damnatus sum.” Bruno was among those who witnessed the miracle, which ostensibly was influential on his founding of the Carthusian order. The episode is discussed in the article “Diocre, Raimond,” in Le grand dictionnaire historique, ou le mélange curieux de l’histoire sacrée et profane [The Great Dictionary, or the Curious Mixture of Sacred and Profane History], 6 vols. (Basel, 1731–1732; ASKB 1965–1969); vol. 3, p. 570. Should there not . . . moments of inspiring knowledge] Compare Paper 178, from August 1836, in the present volume. Lord Byron’s Manfred is probably F[aust] without a Goethean Mephisto to bring him up?] See the following summary in Kierkegaard’s excerpts from K. E. Schubarth Ueber Goethe’s Faust (→ 151,4), in BB:7, dated September 2, 1836, in KJN 1, 82: “He [Schubarth] shows that some have simply understood the poem to be a complaint that he was denied the highest pleasures of life, and that Lord Byron has reproduced the matter and content in F[aust] from this standpoint.―” The summary is from Ueber Goethe’s Faust, pp. 81–82. See also Ueber Goethe’s Faust, pp. 45–46, where Schubarth quotes J. W. Goethe’s pronouncements on Lord Byron’s Manfred: “Byron’s tragedy, Manfred, was to me a wonderful phenomenon, and one that closely touched me. This singular intellectual poet has taken my Faustus to himself, and extracted from it the strangest nourishment for his hypochondriac humour. He has made use of the impelling principles in his own way, for his

4

10

152

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

13

own purposes, so that no one of them remains the same; and it is particularly on this account that I cannot admire his genius enough. The whole is in this way so completely formed anew that it would be an interesting task for the critic to point out, not only the alterations he has made, but their degree of resemblance with, or dissimilarity to, the original; in the course of which I cannot deny that the gloomy heat of an unbounded and exuberant despair becomes at last oppressive to us. Yet is the dissatisfaction we feel always connected with esteem and admiration. We find thus in this tragedy the quintessence of the most astonishing talent born to be its own tormentor. The character of Lord Byron’s life and poetry hardly permits a just and equitable appreciation. He has often enough confessed what it is that torments him. He has repeatedly portrayed it; and scarcely any one feels compassion for this intolerable suffering, over which he is ever labouriously ruminating.” English translation from chapter 16, “Goethe on Manfred,” in Lord Byron: The Critical Heritage, ed. Andrew Rutherford (London: Routledge, 1995 [1970]), p. 119. ― Lord Byron’s: George Gordon Byron (1788–1824), English poet. 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). In his dramatic tragedy Manfred (1817), Byron has his hero with a tortured conscience conjure up demonic spirits, who nonetheless are unable to grant him the oblivion he desires. See Manfred. Trauerspiel [Manfred: A Tragedy], in Lord Byron’s sämmtliche Werke, vol. 5, pp. 42–96. the book of folktales I have in Danish. see p. 10] Den i den gandske Verden bekiendte Ertz-SortKunstner og Trold-Karl Doctor Johan Faust, og Hans med Dievelen oprettede Forbund, Forundringsfulde Levnet og skrækkelige Endeligt (→ 126,1). See p. 10, where it is related that the Spirit forbade Faust “to read the Holy Bible and to dispute about matters of faith. If he absolutely had to read something, he could peruse the books of Genesis, Exodus, and Deuteronomy, along with the apocryphal books; and in the New Testament: The Interpreter, the Painter, and the Doctor (Matthew,

•

P a p e r 180–181 1836 •

453

Mark, and Luke), but totally shun the Psalms, John, and the prattler Paul. In the discourse he could choose themes concerning the councils, ceremonies, Moses, and purgatory, which Faust entered into, although reluctantly. He did not, however, have the power to be able to suppress completely and entirely the anxiety of his conscience; for he soon asked the Spirit such questions as the following. What kind of Spirit had there been in the beginning? Were there many evil spirits? On what grounds were the demons cast away from God in Heaven? Did the devils also have an order and government among themselves as do worldly princes? What was hell like? And soon again: What was the nature of heaven? How great was the esteem and enjoyment of the angels there? And how pleasant had it been to see the paradise of our first parents? Did the demons also once hope to be saved?” And further, pp. 10– 11, “Ultimately, he burst out one time and wanted to know: what would the Spirit have done if it had been in his position? Had the devil, even before entering into this pact with him, ruled and spiritually possessed him as other safe and sinful people? About which the Spirit reasoned so very well against its nature and attributes, and thereby doubled the anxiety of his soul.” G[oethe] in his F[aust] . . . lead the new student astray p. 93 . . . from such pressure] Short summary of the conversation between Mephistopheles and “a student” in the second of two scenes called “Studirzimmer” in J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5), in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), pp. 93–101. Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande (→ 150,6) has the same text and pagination; see English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins, in Goethe’s Collected Works (→ 150,6), vol. 2, pp. 48–52. ― p. 93: Variant: added. Hamann] Johann Georg Hamann (1730–1788), German philosopher and writer; his writings― rich with allusions and highly accessible―became an important philosophical source in the nineteenth century for the confrontation with the one-sided emphasis on reason of the Enlightenment era.

16

24

152

454 25

153

153

“Render unto Caesar what Quotation from Mark 12:17.

6

the dialectical standpoint] → 146,28. opposite poles,] Variant: first written “opposite poles.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence.

17

18 19

153

his “Life,” part 1 of his Schriften, p. 172] Refers to J. G. Hamann “Thoughts on My Course of Life” (dated “London, April 21, 1758”), printed in Hamann’s Schriften [Hamann’s Writings], ed. Fr. Roth and G. A. Wiener, 7 vols. (Berlin and Leipzig, 1821–1825), and vol. 8.1–2 (index) (Berlin, 1842–1843; ASKB 536–544); vol. 1, pp. 149–242; see pp. 172–173, where among other things Hamann writes: “So I enrolled to study law. In my folly I always envisioned a kind of magnanimity and loftiness in studying not for a livelihood but from one’s disposition, as a way of using one’s time, and from a love of the sciences themselves, thinking it better to be a martyr than to be a hired wage earner of the muses. What nonsense can be expressed in round and resonant words! So, without being serious or devoted, I heard what the institutions and pandects had to say, without preparation and repetition of what I heard, in order to become a lawyer―just as I lacked the seriousness and devotion to become a theologian.”

1

13

153

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

23 25 26

is

Caesar’s.”]

basso continuo] Accompaniment indicated in musical scores from 1600 to 1750 by notation with numbers and characters above and below the bass line. Used to reinforce the harmony, the basso continuo was in earlier periods often improvised; later, it became customary to perform particular arrangements of basso continuo. the philosophical system] → 143,20. the life to come is represented as sheer music . . . harmony] No source for this statement has been identified. the age of fantasy] Compare Paper 123, from February 1836, in the present volume. songs of mythological heroes] → 136,23. popular forms of literary entertainment] Presumably refers to R. Nyerup, Almindelig

•

P a p e r 181–185 1836 •

Morskabslæsning i Danmark og Norge igjennem Aarhundreder [Popular Light Reading in Denmark and Norway throughout the Centuries] (Copenhagen, 1816). Kierkegaard probably has in mind particularly § 2, “Ridderromaner” [Novels of Chivalry], in chap. 2, “Romanerne” [The Novels]. parallel that Hamann draws betw. the Law . . . and reason] The parallel appears in J. G. Hamann’s (→ 152,24) letter to his friend J. G. Lindner dated July 3, 1759, no. 45 in “Briefe. / Von 1752 bis 1760” [Letters: 1752–1760] in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 152,25), vol. 1, pp. 402–408; p. 405 (→ 154,5). ― Hamann: Variant: changed from “Paulus” (i.e., St. Paul). ― Moses: The central figure in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, who, at God’s command, led the Israelites out of Egypt, and who at Mt. Sinai communicated God’s revelation to, and covenant with, the people of Israel, and left a number of laws and statutes, including the Ten Commandments. Hume’s proposition: “die letzte Frucht aller Weltweisheit . . . Schwacheit.”] Quotation from Schriften (→ 152,25, vol. 1, p. 405. Kierkegaard writes “mslichen” for “menschlichen” and “Schwacheit” for “Schwachheit.” The quoted sentence is found, with the words in somewhat different order, in J. G. Sulzer’s translation of Hume’s Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, translated as “Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Erkenntnis,” in Vermischte Schriften über die Handlung, die Manufacturen und die andern Quellen des Reichthums und der Macht eines Staats [Selected Writings on Trade, Manufacturing, and Other Sources of a State’s Wealth and Power], 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1754–1755). ― Hume’s: David Hume (1711–1776), Scottish philosopher and historian; key figure in British empiricism. Unser Vernunft . . . die Sünde durch das Gesetz zunahm” . . . see . . . 1st Part, p. 405] Quotation from Hamann’s Schriften (→ 152,25), vol. 1, p. 405. Kierkegaard adds “Hamann then says” and omits dashes between “uns gegeben” and “uns weise,” and there are other minor deviations in punctuation and orthography. Another passage, p. 425. “Ist es nicht . . . incredibile sed verum . . . unseres Glauben.”]

1

3

5

17

154

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” Quotation from Hamann’s letter to his brother dated July 16, 1759, no. 48 in “Briefe. / Von 1752 bis 1760” [Letters: 1752–1760], in Hamann’s Schriften (→ 152,25), vol. 1, pp. 423–429, p. 425. Kierkegaard writes “unseres Glauben” for “unseres Glaubens” and makes one other orthographic deviation. 154

22

24

25

26 27

Elvira (in D. Juan)] The main female protagonist in the opera Don Juan or Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni (1787) (→ 130,2). From its premiere on May 5, 1807, until March 12, 1836, the opera was performed a total of seventy-eight times, and then again on September 29, 1836. sees the finger of God] Expression for the notion that one can see God’s action or intervention in life, or see God’s providential activity in a life. The expression “finger of God” is used with this significance in the story of the third plague of Egypt, which is seen by Pharaoh’s magicians as a sign of “the finger of God” in Exodus 8:19. The expression is also known from the Danish figure of speech, “Jeg ser Guds finger deri” (“I see God’s finger in it”); see E. Mau, Dansk OrdsprogsSkat [Treasury of Danish Proverbs], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879); vol. 1, p. 220. Providence] See chap. 2, sec. 2, in N. E. Balle and C. B. Bastholm, Lærebog i den Evangeliskchristelige Religion indrettet til Brug i de danske Skoler [A Primer for the Evangelical Christian Religion, Prepared for Use in Danish Schools] (Copenhagen, 1791; ASKB 183 is an edition from 1824), pp. 23 and 24–25: “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 suitable,” and § 5: “Whatever we encounter in life, whether distressing or pleasing, gets allotted to us by God for the best purposes, so that we always have reason to be gratified with his reign and governance.” the all-too-vengeful Nemesis] → 134,18. the Commandant] Refers to the judgment scene, act 2, sc. 15, at the end of the opera Don Juan or

•

P a p e r 185–187 1836 •

455

Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni; see Don Juan. Opera i tvende Akter, in L. Kruse’s adaptation (→ 130,2), pp. 123–127. The Commandant, Donna Anna’s father, whom Don Juan has killed but who later, in the cemetery, is invited to be Don Juan’s guest, appears as a ghost (in the form of the statue from his grave) at Don Juan’s home in order to take revenge. D. Juan] Don Juan, the title character in the opera Don Juan or Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni (→ 130,2). the elfin girls who have no back] According to the tradition of ballads and folk legends, elfin girls have no back. See, for example, J. M. Thiele, Danske Folkesagn [Danish Folk Legends] 1st–4th collections, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1818–23; ASKB 1591–1592); vol. 2, 4th collection, p. 26: “the elfin wife is young and attractive to look at, but from behind she is as hollow as a kneading-trough.” ― the elfin girls: Daughters of the elfin people. According to folklore and popular belief, elves lived in (elfin)woods, (elfin)marshes, or in mounds, and as a rule were believed to wish to harm people or lure them to themselves. See Irische Elfenmärchen [Irish Elf Tales], trans. J.L.K. and W. K. Grimm (from Thomas Crofton Croker, Fairy Legends and Traditions of the South of Ireland [London, 1825]) (Leipzig, 1826; ASKB 1423). Will not the vaudeville, in the form in which it has developed here] Inspired by German and especially by Parisian theater life, the vaudeville was introduced to the Royal Danish Theater by J. L. Heiberg (→ 147,3) in 1825 and became enormously popular. As a genre, vaudeville is typically a bourgeois comedy of intrigue with songs written to simple and usually already well-known melodies. The figures are unheroic and often comical. The conflicts are of a local character and always include complicated love entanglements that get resolved. Heiberg translated and adapted a number of vaudevilles and authored nine of them himself, mostly during the period 1825– 1827, and, partly in order to overcome the opposition of the press to the first four, he followed them up with a critical account of the merits of the new genre: Om Vaudevillen, som dramatisk Digtart,

28

29

1

155

456

2

5

7

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

og om dens Betydning paa den danske Skueplads. En dramaturgisk Undersøgelse [On the Vaudeville as a Dramatic Genre, and on Its Importance for the Danish Theater: A Dramaturgical Investigation] (Copenhagen, 1826; abbreviated hereafter as Om Vaudevillen, som dramatisk Digtart). After the initial opposition was overcome, the genre became immensely popular and secured Heiberg’s place as Denmark’s leading dramatist. Heiberg’s most important vaudevilles are Kong Salomon og Jørgen Hattemager [King Solomon and Jørgen the Hatmaker] (1825), Aprilsnarrene [The April Fools] (1826), Recensenten og Dyret [The Reviewer and the Beast] (1826), Et Eventyr i Rosenborg Have [A Fairy Tale in Rosenborg Garden] (1827), and Nei [No] (1836). the musical element . . . such great significance] See J. L. Heiberg’s treatise Om Vaudevillen, som dramatisk Digtart (→ 155,1), p. 47, where he defines the vaudeville as “a situational piece that has loosely sketched characters and in which the song takes the place of dialogue wherever the dialogue becomes most interesting.” the opera from which it is taken] See, for example, the sixth of J. L. Heiberg’s nine articles, which constitute the critical treatise “Svar paa Hr. Prof. Oehlenschlägers Skrift: ‘Om Kritiken i Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, over Væringerne i Miklagard’ ” (→ 147,3), in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, no. 13, February 15, 1828, cols. 5–6, where Heiberg gives an overview of the various kinds of comedy and their reciprocal relations. Concerning the vaudeville, see the following passage: “In its immediate form, universal comedy constitutes a poetic form that, until now, could not be found anywhere other than in Aristophanic comedy. It is still necessary to develop the Aristophanic comedy into something new, something more appropriate to the requirements of modern times. The reflection of this is the musical comedy, which in lyric form is the opera, and in epic form the melodrama. The unity of opera and melodrama is a poetic form that includes the singspeil, the operetta, and the vaudeville.” See also the following note. usable in vaudeville (universally known―popular)] See, for example, the following passage in the eleventh of A. W. Schlegel’s dramaturgical

•

P a p e r 187–188 1836 •

lectures Ueber dramatische Kunst und Litteratur (→ 146,8), vol. 2, pp. 280–281: “The vaudeville is but a variation of the comic opera. The essential difference is that it dispenses with the composition by which the comic opera forms a musical whole, as the songs are written to well-known melodies. The incessant skipping from the song to the dialogue, often after merely a few scrapes on the violin and a few words, with the accumulation of melodies mostly common, but frequently also in a style altogether different from the poetry, drives an ear accustomed to Italian music to despair. If we can once get over this, we shall not infrequently be richly recompensed in comic drollery; even in the choice of a melody and the allusion to the common text, there is often a display of wit.” English translation (slightly modified) from A Course of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature, trans. John Black (Philadelphia: Hogan and Thompson, 1833), p. 263. the new vaudeville . . . same musical numbers . . . (such as . . . in Nei!)] Refers to the fact that the same melody (called “Af Lulu: Kloden maatte styrte sammen” [The Globe Had to Go to Pieces: By Lulu]) is used for the song “Taarnet skulde styrte sammen” [The Tower Would Topple Down] in scene 8 of J. L. Heiberg’s vaudeville Nei [No] (Copenhagen, 1836), pp. 53–54, as is used for the song “Først til Gammelmynt jeg iilte” [First I Went to Gammel Mønt Street] in scene 9 of Heiberg’s vaudeville Aprilsnarrene eller Intriguen i Skolen [The April Fools, or The Intrigue in the School] (Copenhagen, 1826), p. 26. Nei was performed at the Royal Theater five times between its summer premiere on June 1, 1836, and September 13, 1836, and then several times again in the 1836–1837 season. Aprilsnarrene was performed a total of forty-eight times between its premiere on April 22, 1826, and April 8, 1836. formula Concordiæ] Refers to the last of the Lutheran confessional books, which was authored by several prominent theologians of the Reformation in 1577 and published in German in 1580, and in Latin in 1598, in order to avoid the split that threatened the doctrinal unity of the young Lutheran Church. (For an English trans-

8

20

155

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” lation, see The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, ed. Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Weigert, trans. Charles Arand, Eric Gritsch, Rolbert Kolb, William Russell, James Schaaf, Jane Strohl, and Timothy Weigert [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000].) 155

25

26

“Clara’s Skriftemaal” (by the author of the Stories of Everyday Life)] Refers to “Clara’s Skriftemaal. (Affattet i et Brev til hendes Tante Sophie)” [Clara’s Confession: (As Written in a Letter to Her Aunt Sophie)], the second part of the novella Familien Polonius [The Polonius Family], in Noveller, gamle og nye, af Forfatteren til “En Hverdags-Historie” [Novellas, Old and New, by the Author of “A Story of Everyday Life”], abbreviated hereafter as Noveller, gamle og nye, ed. J. L. Heiberg, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1833–1834); vol. 3, pp. 29–98. “The Author of A Story of Everyday Life” was the pseudonym for Thomasine Gyllembourg, who was the mother of J. L. Heiberg. “Clara’s Skriftemaal” was printed in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, ed. J. L. Heiberg, pub. F. Printzlau, nos. 12–19, February 9–March 5, 1827. Heiberg writes in the editor’s “Anticipatory Recollections” (vol. 3, p. iii), that Familien Polonius is “a common title under which the narrative developed in epistolary form across the first year’s issues of the Flyvende Post: Clara’s Skriftemaal, and the lesser letters that served as preface and afterword are here presented together.” The aforementioned “lesser letters” are the novella’s first and last parts, titled, respectively, “Preliminaries” and “Catastrophe” (vol. 3, pp. 3–28 and pp. 99–129). a woman is described in such ethereal fashion . . . created out of the mountain mist] Refers to the following passage in “Catastrophe” (see the previous note), in Noveller, gamle og nye (→ 155,25), vol. 3, pp. 122–123: “Down the long aisle of the church processed a couple, a gentleman and a lady, whose appearance I found striking and as if an echo of the ideas that had hovered around me all day. They seemed to me like shadows of a past glory, like a forthright and noble knight of yore escorting a lovely virgin unable to hide her ethereal character under her assumed earth-

•

P a p e r 188–190 1836 •

457

ly form, so easily did she float across the floor of the church, so entirely apt was the expression from the Chinese novel: ‘Her body was formed as though from the white mountain mist.’ ” Hoffmann’s tailor, who inhaled the balloon gas . . . sank down again, and so forth] Refers to the fairy tale “Geschichte des Schneiderleins aus Sachsenhausen” [The Story of the Little Tailor of Sachsenhausen] by E.T.A. Hoffman, which tells of a tailor who, after church one day, was given permission by his wife to go to the pharmacy for a glass of schnapps, but an unskilled apprentice instead gave him a glass of the liquid used for filling balloons, which caused him to float up toward the ceiling. When the door was thrown open, a window sprang up, a draft seized hold of him, and he floated out through the window and up into the air. In the evening he illuminated the sky like a ball of fire, which eventually burned out, and he fell back to earth as a little lump of ashes and various other items, including the black knob of a walking stick, which a very learned man determined to be a meteorite. The fairy tale is the sixth story in Hoffmann’s Meister Floh [Master Flea] (1822), in E.T.A. Hoffmann’s ausgewählte Schriften [Selected Writings of E.T.A. Hoffmann], 10 vols. (Berlin, 1827–1828; ASKB 1712–1716), vol. 10, pp. 240–242. (An English translation of this tale is available in E.T.A. Hoffmann, The Golden Pot and Other Tales, trans. Ritchie Robertson [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992].) ― Hoffmann’s: Ernst Theodor Amadeus Hoffmann (1776–1822), German author, publisher, jurist, and musician. During the Fr[ench] Revolution . . . the last king hanged with the guts of the last priest] No source for this has been identified. But see the French Catholic priest Jean Meslier (1678–1733), who in his atheistic testament, Mon testament [My Testament] (1729) writes, “Je voudrais que le dernier des rois fût étranglé avec les boyaux du dernier prêtre” (“I would like for the last king to be strangled with the bowels of the last priest”). the wish of Caligula . . . might all be hacked off at once] Refers to a bitter exclamation by the Roman emperor Caligula (a.d. 12–41, emperor

2

156

16

156

18

458

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

from 37): “I wish the Roman people had but a single neck!”―with the implication that the head could then be hacked off in one stroke. See chap. 30 in Caji Svetonii Tranqvilli Tolv første Romerske Keiseres Levnetsbeskrivelse [Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus’s Description of the Lives of the First Twelve Roman Emperors], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1802–1803; ASKB 1281), vol. 1, p. 312. English translation from Suetonius, trans. C. Rolfe, Loeb Classical Library, 2 vols. (London: Heinemann, 1914), vol. 1, p. 453. 157

2 4 4 5

157

16

16

the difference I have sought] See Paper 179:2 in the present volume. of quantity] Designation for long or short (heavy or light) syllables. of accentuation] Designation for heavily stressed and lightly stressed syllables. [“]Die europäischen Sprachen . . . den Sieg der Liebe über das Gesetz.”] Quotation from the section “Preßfreiheit als ein nothwendiges Element des Staats” [Freedom of the Press as a Necessary Element of the State] in the appendix to H. Steffens, Caricaturen des Heiligsten (→ 149,7), vol. 1, pp. 350–351. Kierkegaard omits the comma after “innere Bedeutung” (“inner meaning”). Simeon Stylites] Simeon (also called “Simon”) Stylites (ca. 390–459), Christian ascetic and hermit; in ca. 420 he climbed atop a nine-foot―and subsequently a sixty-five-foot―pillar outside of Antioch, Syria. There he spent the rest of his life. He preached twice a day before a large crowd and gave spiritual counsel. Fichte] Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814), German philosopher; professor of philosophy at Jena from 1794 until 1799, when he was accused of atheism and forced to leave; from 1810, professor of philosophy at the newly founded university in Berlin. Kierkegaard owned Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s sämmtliche Werke [Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s Complete Works], ed. I. H. Fichte, 11 vols. (Berlin, 1834–1846; ASKB 489–499); and Fichte’s Die Bestimmung des Menschen [The Vocation of Man], new ed. (Berlin, 1838 [1800]; ASKB 500).

•

P a p e r 190–197 1836 •

the Fichtean school] Presumably refers to Fr. Schlegel (→ 144,27), L. Tieck (→ 140,5), Novalis (→ 126,27) and K.W.F. Solger. Fichte] → 157,16.

20

that passage . . . account for every improper word they have spoken] Refers to Mt 12:36.

10

158

a transfiguration, not the] Variant: first written, instead of “not the”, “just like”.

16

158

what I have] Variant: According to the editors of SKS, “have” is a doubtful reading of Kierkegaard’s manuscript. the Greeks termed Nemesis] → 134,18. the scene in Faust in which the jubilant peasants . . . skill during the epidemic] → 151,6. Wagner’s sort of admiration] → 151,8; concerning Wagner, → 150,26.

20

158

the picture from Faust’s life . . . (see v[on] Raumer, Historisches Taschenbuch . . . preceding front of the title page)] See Historisches Taschenbuch. Mit Beiträgen von Förster, Gans, Loebell, Stieglitz, Wachsmuth (→ 126,1), “Fünfter Jahrgang. Mit den Faust’schen Bildern aus Auerbach’s Keller zu Leipzig” [Fifth Annual Volume: With the Faustian Picture from Auerbach’s Cellar in Leipzig] (Leipzig, 1834), where the picture, which is printed on thin cardstock and is folded on one side because it is somewhat larger than the format of the book, is inserted as “Taf. I” [Pl(ate) 1] between the half-title page and the title page. See illustration on page 457. Kierkegaard also mentions this picture in his excerpts from C. L. Stieglitz’s essay “The Sage vom Doctor Faust” [The Legend of Doctor Faust] (printed in Historisches Taschenbuch, pp. 125–210) in Not2:2, from the beginning of 1835, in KJN 3, 86 (see illustration, KJN 3, 501). ― v[on] Raumer: Friedrich Ludwig Georg von Raumer (1781–1873), German historian and politician; 1819–1853, professor of political science and history at Humboldt University in Berlin. Don Juan, also the large goblet he has in his hand] Refers to act 2, sc. 17 of Don Juan. Opera

1

22

21 24 27

4

159

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 197 1836 •

Faust and the students in Auerbach’s cellar in Leipzig. (→ 159,1)

459

460

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

i tvende Akter in L. Kruse’s adaptation (→ 130,2), pp. 114–117, in which Don Juan enters a beautiful, well-lit hall and sits down at the table to eat while waiting for the Commandant (→ 154,27); when he senses the anxiety of his servant, Leporello, he commands him, “fill the cup,” and then drinks. 159

9

life had to end with the heroes going to the monastery . . . the beautiful Melusina . . . do so. e.g., Geoffroy] Refers to the story “Die schöne Melusina” [The Beautiful Melusina], in G. Schwab, Buch der schönsten Geschichten und Sagen (→ 135,10), vol. 2 (according to the receipt dated December 31, 1836, from the university bookseller C. A. Reitzel [KA, D packet 7, folder 6], Kierkegaard acquired this work September 17, 1836), pp. 287–414. Among other things, the story tells of two brothers, Geoffroy and Freymund, the sixth and seventh sons, respectively, of the great knight Raimund and the beautiful nymph Melusina (see p. 356). While Geoffroy was a valiant and plainspoken knight who decided to go abroad to the country Garande to save it from the terrible giant Gedeon (p. 352), Freymund was a reserved and scholarly youth with a devout temperament who wished to be received into a monastic order and go into a monastery. Both parents were absolutely against Freymund’s desire to dedicate his life to God. When they could not turn him from it, they allowed him to choose between different clerical offices; but Freymund persisted in his desire, and finally he was able to enter the monastic order at the monastery in Mallieres (pp. 352–353). In the meantime, Geoffroy had reached Gedeon’s castle, and after a tremendous battle, Geoffrey succeeded in cleaving the giant’s head, and then cut it off; victory was won and Garande was liberated. Geoffrey sent an express messenger to his parents with news of victory, and his father, Raimund, sent the messenger back wishing Geoffroy congratulations on the victory, and at the same time informed him that his brother Freymund had become a monk in the monastery in Mallieres (pp. 359–365). When Geoffroy received this message from his father, he grew absolutely livid over the fact that his brother had exchanged chivalry for a

•

P a p e r 197–198 1836 •

cowl and tonsure, and he swore he would avenge this indignity by burning down the entire monastery. Geoffroy rode directly to the monastery, and although all the monks, with the abbot leading the way, greeted him humbly and with great joy and many demonstrations of honor, Geoffroy roared with anger that he would avenge their offense with arson, so they would all burn to death. Then Freymund stepped forward and explained that he had entered the monastery of his own free will in order to serve God, and he asked why all the innocent should have to suffer the punishment of the guilty; if he was culpable, he added, then heaven would have to punish him. This speech only made Geoffroy even more irate, and he hauled wood, hay, and straw together into a pyre, which he ignited so the wind could fan the flames toward the monastery and set it on fire. And the abbot and all the monks, including Freymund, who had fled into the church, fell victim to the smoke and the fire. When Geoffroy realized what he had brought about, and how it had stirred up God’s wrath, his conscience awoke and he fled. When the parents received news of Freymund’s death on account of Geoffroy’s atrocity, the father shut himself up in a room in order to mourn in solitude what had happened. And at the same time, he admitted that his brother had been right when he had previously informed him that his wife, Melusina, was not a natural woman but a sea creature and nearly a ghost (pp. 366–370). It now came to a fierce confrontation between Raimund and Melusina, and it ended with Melusina informing Raimund that she would be leaving him. He begged and pleaded with her to stay, but it was impossible for her, since fate had made its decision. In the twinkling of an eye she transformed herself and, taking a form most nearly resembling a siren or a fish, she jumped for the window in order to swing herself out; but before that she made her courageous and moving departure from Raimund, and when she had wished him the happiness of heaven, and with a threefold shriek she jumped out through the window, to the horror of everyone, in the form of a detestable serpent (pp. 370–376). Meanwhile, Geoffroy had set out for the country of Norheim, whose leading

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” men had summoned him in order to kill a giant who had already murdered many brave knights and had recently slain about one hundred all at once. Geoffroy marched to the mountain where the giant resided, but although after a violent battle Geoffroy inflicted huge gashes and wounds upon the giant, the giant managed to flee into a rocky cave. During the fight, the giant had persuaded Geoffroy to tell him his name; the people of Norheim were thus certain that the giant had received a prediction that he would be killed by someone of that name, and that he therefore would never leave the cave again. Nevertheless, the next morning Geoffroy went deep into the mountain in order to find and kill the giant. Here he came into a light-filled chamber where there was a sublime sepulcher; it turned out to hold the corpse of the mighty King Helmas of Nordland. Once inside, he was informed in a strange manner that his mother was the youngest of King Helmas’s three daughters, and he realized that she was a nymph. While continuing to look for the giant, he discovered a terrible prison in a tower in which two hundred prisoners were held because they had not been able to pay the tribute the giant had demanded from them. Suddenly the giant turned up, and during yet another fierce battle Geoffroy plunged his sword so deep into him that he fell to the ground and gave up the ghost with a ghastly scream. When Geoffroy had found the key to the prison, he freed all the prisoners and promised them that they would get a share of the treasure of gold, silver, and precious gems that were hidden in the mountain. The people of Norheim rejoiced over Geoffroy’s victory against the giant, and the leading men of the country offered him the royal crown if he would stay, but he very politely declined, since he had decided to travel home to his parents (pp. 379–391). In the meantime, the report of Geoffroy’s homecoming reached his father, Raimund, who rode out to meet his son, and when they met, he confided in Geoffroy, telling him everything that had happened with his mother, Melusina. Geoffroy now realized that he had been a part of the cause of the dreadful thing that had happened, and his heart was filled with sincere remorse and emotion. And

•

P a p e r 198 1836 •

461

he told his father about what he himself had learned about his mother’s royal origin. When the father returned home, he was still filled with despondency and deep remorse, and he decided to travel to Rome to do penance and end his life in a monastery. He summoned Geoffroy and entrusted him to rule the country, and to do so as a father and not as a tyrant; Geoffroy swore his father unbreakable obedience (pp. 391–395). In the following months, Geoffroy rebuilt the monastery in Mallieres bigger and more beautiful than the one he had burned. In the meantime, Raimund had reached Rome, had made confession, and had received his absolution; he told the pope that he desired to seclude himself from the world and thus go to the monastery in Montserrat in Aragon, whose pure and beautiful religious services pleased him more than anything else. He was sent along, together with a priest and a student, and as they neared the place, he made monastic habits for himself and the priest, and devoted himself to serving God for as long as he lived. Geoffroy then traveled to Rome to visit his old father; when he arrived there, he also was shriven by the pope, telling him that as penance for burning down the monastery he had rebuilt it, larger and more glorious, which would have room for 120 monks; the pope accepted this as satisfactory penance and wished the added grace of heaven upon him. Geoffroy then visited his father in the monastery at Monserrat and, after a heartfelt farewell, returned to Mallieres. Shortly after his return home, he had the rebuilt monastery occupied with the promised number of monks and provided for their livelihood in every way. Then, when Geoffroy had grown old, and the life of his very old father approached its conclusion, he journeyed once again to Aragon, where he arrived in time to receive his father’s blessing before he could shut his father’s eyes and give him a proper burial (pp. 395–399). Once, while sitting with good company at a banquet in the garden at his castle, it happened that a message arrived to request that a knight might come to Aragon to save the country from a troublesome mountain spirit, who had surrounded himself with poisonous serpents and terrible beasts, and who had already cost the life of

462

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

several knights. Geoffroy immediately summoned his younger brother Dietrich to entrust him to rule the country while he himself traveled to Aragon in order, with God’s help, to free the country of all its evil. But Geoffroy had yet to experience the truth of how empty and meaningless are all human machinations with respect to God’s unfathomable decrees. When everything was ready for departure, there came yet another message; but this message was death. Geoffroy suddenly fell ill, and since he was advanced in years and exhausted from all his great deeds of chivalry, his illness worsened more and more, and shortly thereafter he died―so his journey to the mountains of Aragon was exchanged for a journey to the grave (pp. 412–414). 159

18

loose sheets of paper] → 149,23.

159

24

the page in Figaro] i.e., Cherubino, the young man who is in love with the countess (but also with every other woman he meets) in Mozart’s opera Le nozze di Figaro [The Marriage of Figaro]. The opera was composed in 1786 to the text of Lorenzo da Ponte and based on P.A.C. de Beaumarchais’s play Le marriage de Figaro (1778). See N. T. Bruun, Figaros Givtermaal eller Den gale Dag. Syngestykke i fire Akter, oversat til Musik af Mozart efter den italienske Omarbeidelse af Beaumarchis’ franske Original [The Marriage of Figaro, or the Crazy Day: A Ballad Opera in Four Acts, Set to Music by Mozart Following the Italian Adaptation of Beaumarchais’s Original] (Copenhagen, 1817). From its premiere on January 9, 1821, until November 11, 1836, the opera was performed at the Royal Theater sixty-two times. D[on] Juan] → 154,28.

24

160

1

2

interpreting Mephistopheles’ behavior toward Faust as humorous] See Paper 180 in the present volume, dated September 8, 1836, where Kierkegaard addresses the same theme. ― Mephistopheles: → 150,3. ― Faust: → 126,1. the host of examples . . . devil getting tricked . . . v[on] der Hagen’s Märchen, vol. 1] In vol. 1 of Erzählungen und Mährchen [Stories and Fairy Tales], ed. Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen, 2

•

P a p e r 198–202 1836 •

vols. (Prenzlau, 1825–1826), the medieval legend of the magician Virgilius, who is associated with the Roman poet Virgil (Publius Vergilius Maro, 70–19 b.c.) is found in two completely different versions, both the short “Der Zauberer Virgilius” [Virgilius the Magician], from an old manuscript, and the long “Leben und Tod und wunderbare Thaten und Werke des Zauberers Virgilius” [The Life and Death and Wonderful Deeds and Works of Virgilius the Magician], from a Dutch book of popular stories. Kierkegaard’s remark probably refers to the section “Virgilius lernt die Schwarzkunst” [Virgilius Learns the Dark Arts] in the long version, vol. 1, pp. 161–163. Here it relates of the young Virgilius that one day, while attending school in Toledo, he found a cave in a mountain; he went deeper and deeper into the grotto until he came to a place where light streamed in from above. “Then he heard a voice that called, ‘Virgilius, Virgilius!’ He looked around, but did not see anyone. So he asked, ‘Who is calling me?’ Then he heard the voice again, and it said to him, ‘Virgilius, don’t you see the little seal marked with the letter Tau?’ Virgilius answered, ‘Yes.’ The voice continued: ‘break the seal and let me out.’ Virgilius asked, ‘Who are you?’ The answer: ‘I am a devil, bound to this place until the day of judgment by a Jew’s spell, unless I am freed by human hands. If you let me out, I will show you many books from which you can learn the dark arts, and you’ll be able to know and do anything you desire―you’ll be able to help and enrich your friends, and harm your enemies, just as you’d like.’ Such great promises tempted Virgilius, yet he first wanted to get assurance from the devil concerning where the books were to be found and how to obtain them. When he was reassured enough, he went and pulled the seal back on one side, and underneath was a small hole through which the devil slipped out like an eel. When he was out, he stood before Virgilius as a large man, and Virgilius was simply astounded that such a large man could pass through such a small hole. Then Virgilius asked, ‘Could you possibly creep through the little hole again, now that you are so large’?―‘Yes, indeed,’ answered the devil. ‘I wager my best possession that you can’t manage it,’

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” said Virgilius. ‘Well,’ said the devil, ‘I’m happy with that.’ And he slipped back in through the hole. But when he was in, Virgilius pulled the seal over the hole again, so that the devil was duped and could not get out again, but remained sealed inside. Then he began to cry out: ‘Virgilius, Virgilius! What have you done?’ Virgilius answered, ‘You must remain inside until the appointed day.’ And ever since, Virgilius has been very powerful in the dark arts.” ― v[on] der Hagen: Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen (1780– 1856), German philologist; from 1810, extraordinary professor in Berlin; from 1811, extraordinary professor, and from 1818, ordinary professor in Breslau; and from 1824 until his death, extraordinary professor in Berlin. 160

6 7

160

10 12

16

The two-sidedness of the Middle Ages] → 147,17. the congregation ate the bread, the priest drank the cup] Refers to the fact that beginning in the twelfth century it became increasingly common during the Eucharist for the wine not to be distributed to the laity but to be consumed exclusively by the priest. Lay people thus only received the bread, so the Eucharist was consumed sub una specie (Latin, “in one form”―viz., of the bread), while the priests continued to receive both the bread and the wine, and thus consumed the Eucharist sub utraque specie (Latin, “in both forms”―viz., of the bread and the wine). See, for example, H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of Universal Church History], 2 vols. (Halle, 1833; see ASKB 158–159, a 3rd ed. from 1838); vol. 1, pp. 436–438. This practice was affirmed by the Council of Constance in 1415 and restated by the Council of Trent (often referred to as the Tridentine Council), 1545–1547, 1551–1552, and 1562–1563. I must] Variant: first written, instead of “I must”, “I can very well admit,”. classicism] Greek classicism, in this connection, presumably especially as an expression of Platonic eternity. the expectation of the Jews] Refers to the expectation of the Jews of the messiah as an earthly king in time.

•

P a p e r 202–205 1836–1837 •

463

the coming of Christ] Refers to God’s incarnation in Jesus Christ in time. Christ’s coming to his return] The words “is tied” are implicit here; i.e., Christ’s coming is tied to his return. The mention of Christ’s “return” refers to the expectations that the resurrected and ascended Christ will come again. ad lin 3] Latin, “to line 3” (in the manuscript), i.e., to the statement: “the Romantic resolves itself into a classicism.” an eternity] Variant: “an” has been added.

17

The motley multiplicity . . . in Indian poetry . . . it as Romantic] → 144,31. See also the fifth of Friedrich Schlegel’s lectures on Geschichte der alten und neuen Litteratur, pt. 1, in Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke (→ 144,27), vol. 1, pp. 175–220, where Schlegel addresses Indian religion, mythology, philosophy, and poetry. In the context of Paper 205, see, for example, the following passages, concerning Indian poetry: “The first things which strike us in the Indian poetry are, that tender feeling of solitude and the all-animated world of plants, which is so engagingly represented in the dramatic poem of the Sokuntola; and those charming pictures of female truth and constancy, as well as of the beauty and loveliness of infantine nature, which are still more conspicuous in the older epic version of the same Indian legend.” English translation from Friedrich Schlegel, Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, trans. J. G. Lockhart (New York: J. & H. G. Langley, 1841), p. 122. See also p. 124 in the same translation, where it reads: “all is animated with a deep and lovely tenderness of feeling; an air of sweetness and beauty is diffused over the whole. If the enjoyment of solitude and musing, the delight which is excited by the beauty of nature, above all, the world of plants, are here and there enlarged upon with a gorgeous profusion of images, this is but the clothing of innocence. The composition is throughout clear and unlaboured, and the language is full of a graceful and dignified simplicity.” In a footnote following the words “Indian legend” (in the first passage above), Schlegel refers to his book Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier.

27

17

23

25

160

464

30

161

1

7

161

9

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

Ein Beitrag zur Begründung der Alterthumskunde [On the Language and the Wisdom of Indians: A Contribution to the Foundation of Knowledge of Antiquity] (Heidelberg, 1808; ASKB 1388), pp. 308-324, which contains “Aus der Geschichte der Sokuntola nach dem Mohabharot” [From the History of Shakuntala according to the Mahabarata] in the section “Indische Gedichte” [Indian Poems]. their gods . . . grow out of flowers] A source for this has not been identified. see “Speculative Darstellung des Christenthums” . . . vor den Augen des Zu entfalten] Quotation from § 2 of the appendix to Speculative Darstellung des Christenthums [A Speculative Account of Christianity] by “M.” (Leipzig, 1819; ASKB 787), pp. 166–171; p. 168. The emphasis is Kierkegaard’s. ― M.: Jacob Nicolai Møller or Nicolaus Möller (1777–1862), Norwegian-German jurist and philosopher; passed the legal examination at the University of Copenhagen in 1795; a couple of years later he went to Freiburg with his friend H. Steffens (→ 149,7) and was drawn to natural philosophy. In 1804, he converted to Catholicism along with Ludwig Tieck’s sister-in-law, Charlotte Elisabeth Alberti, whom he married, and thereafter went by the name Nicolaus Möller. After a time in Münster, he became a teacher at the gymnasium in Nuremberg, where G.W.F. Hegel (→ 140,20) was the rector. After stays in Prague and Dresden, he settled for a while in Vienna in 1822 but moved again a few years later to Bonn and then to Düsseldorf. A year after his son became a professor at the Catholic University in Leuven in 1834, he became an honorary professor of philosophy at that university. Möller’s philosophy was influenced by I. Kant, J. G. Fichte (→ 157,16), and F.W.J. Schelling. I own the work] See ASKB 787 (→ 161,1). the entire period in childhood . . . says, me hit the horse] See the following passage in the portion of AA:12 that is dated August 1, 1835, in KJN 1, 19: “Just as a child takes time to learn to distinguish itself from objects and for quite a while so little distinguishes itself from its surroundings that, keeping the stress on the passive side, it says

•

P a p e r 205–206 1837 •

things like ‘me hit the horse,’ this same phenomenon repeats itself in a higher spiritual sphere.” See also the following passage in BB:25, “Something on life’s four stages, also with regard to mythology,” dated January 27, 1837, in KJN 1, 111: “The first is the stage in which the child has not separated himself from his surroundings (‘me’). The I is not given, but its possibility is, and to that extent it is a conflict. It appears in the form of indistinct and fleeting outlines, like the sea-maidens produced by ocean waves (see a copper etching) which give way to new ones at the same moment; and just as I would imagine all these multiple and fleeting forms formed into a unity by a stroke of magic, so too, in childhood, these innumerable moments stand alongside each other, jostling with each other to be taken up into the presence of the eternal I; in childhood, then, what is given is an atomistic multiplicity, in the I, the one in the many. So far as I can see, in mythology this stage corresponds to Oriental mythologies.” “die Wellenmädchen” . . . copper engravings . . . plate cxv] Refers to the copper engraving “Wellenmädchen” [Sea-Maidens], plate 115 in the supplemental volume with illustrations of W. Vollmer’s Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie aller Nationen [Comprehensive Glossary of the Mythologies of All Nations] (Stuttgart, 1836; ASKB 1942–1943). See illustration on page 463. ― “die Wellenmädchen”: The motif here derives from the Nordic myth about the nine daughters of the sea god Æger (also known as Gymir) and his wife Ran. These young girls swam around their mother in the storm-tossed sea. They could be at one moment mild and delicate, at the next, frightful and gigantic. See the article “Wellenmädchen,” in Vollständiges Wörterbuch der Mythologie aller Nationen, p. 1537. Jan. 7th, 37.] Variant: The editors of SKS have substituted “37” for Kierkegaard’s “36”. Heiberg . . . in the Flying Post . . . no. 3 of his response to Oeh., page 2, column 1, top] Refers to the following passage in the third of J. L. Heiberg’s nine articles that constitute his critical essay “Svar paa Hr. Prof. Oehlenschlägers Skrift: ‘Om Kritiken i Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, over Væringerne i Miklagard,’ ” (→ 147,3), in

15

20 21

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 206 1837 •

Wellenmädchen.” Copperplate engraving (→ 161,15).

465

466

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, no. 10, February 4, 1828, top of col. 5, where Heiberg speaks of lyrical poetry as the first form of poetry when considered in terms of the idea of poetry, but hardly the first form of poetry to appear historically. And he continues: “for genius in its immediacy turns toward the external world, not to itself, since introspection is in the first instance a product of reflection. Genius has this in common with consciousness, which likewise in its immediacy (e.g., in the child) is a consciousness of objects before it becomes self-conscious. Yet just as this emerging objective consciousness is imperfect, even in its character as objective, because in order to be clearly conscious of the objects, it is challenged to become conscious of itself, without which it cannot yet place limits on the former (it only becomes defined by limitation, by the distinction from my ‘I’), so, too, poetic genius in its immediacy is unsuitable for the highest level of objective representation, as well as for the most extreme point of subjective apprehension. Accordingly, the genius of immediacy is neither epic nor lyrical, but rather lyrical-epic.” ― Oehlenschläger: Adam Oehlenschläger (1779–1850), Danish poet; from 1809, titular professor, and from 1810, extraordinary professor of aesthetics at the University of Copenhagen. 161

28

refrains in the old ballads . . . middle of the verse . . . poem itself] See “Kjæmpeviser” [Heroic Ballads], in Udvalgte Danske Viser fra Middelalderen (→ 136,23), vol. 1, pp. 1–172, where many of the ballads have refrains, but at the end of the stanzas, not in the middle of the verse. In the subsequent section, “Viser om Trylleri, Forvandlinger, Gjengangere og andre seldsomme Eventyr” [Ballads of Magic, Metamorphoses, Ghosts, and Other Unusual Fairy Tales], pp. 173–353, there are some ballads that have refrains of the sort Kierkegaard mentions. See, for example, no. 28, “Den Dødes Igjenkomet. / 2den Gjengangervise” [The Return of the Dead: / 2nd Ghost Ballad], pp. 205–209; and no. 43, “Den onde Svigermoder eller Runernes Magt” [The Evil Mother-in-Law, or the Power of the Runes], pp. 271–276.

•

P a p e r 206–209 1837 •

The mythology of the North took its own life] What this refers to has not been identified. Solon commanded that his laws be burned 100 years after his death] A source for this has not been identified, but see Plutarch’s biography “Solon,” 25, where it reads: “All of Solon’s laws should remain binding for a hundred years.” Plutark’s Levnetsbeskrivelser [Plutarch’s Lives], trans. S. Tetens, 4 vols. (Copenhagen, 1800–1811; ASKB 1197–1200), vol. 1, p. 349. ― Solon: (ca. 640 b.c.–ca. 560 b.c.) Greek legislator and poet; one of the seven sages; as one of the chief magistrates in Athens, he introduced extensive legislation to the advantage of the indebted rural population and implemented essential parts of the political constitution of Athens.

1

see another slip of paper] See Paper 142, dated April 1836, in the present volume. Wieland’s] Refers to Christoph Martin Wieland (1733–1813), German poet, writer, and translator; from 1769, professor of philosophy at the academy in Erfurt. see Princess Brambilla] Refers to E.T.A. Hoffman’s story Prinzessin Brambilla, ein Capriccio nach Jakob Callot, “Mit 8 Kupfern nach Callotschen Originalblättern” [Princess Brambilla, a Capriccio after Jacques Collot, “with 8 Copperplate Engravings from the Pages of Callot’s Original”] (1820), in E.T.A. Hoffmann’s ausgewählte Schriften (→ 156,2), vol. 9 (1828), pp. 127–282. See BB:3, probably from autumn 1836, where Kierkegaard refers to “ ‘Prinzessin Brambilla ein Capricio nach Jacob Callot,’ which richly deserves perusal so as to uncover ‘humor’ grasped there in an artistic light” (KJN 1, 69). nil admirari] Latin, “marvel at nothing”; familiar quotation following the opening words in bk. 1 of Horace’s letters (Epistolarum I), no. 6.1; see Q. Horatii Flacci opera, stereotype ed. (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 1248), p. 232. J. Baden translates the first sentence of the letter: “Intet at beundre . . . er næsten det første og eneste, som kan tilveiebringe og vedligeholde Lyksalighed” (“ ‘Marvel at nothing’―that is perhaps the one and only thing . . . that can make a man happy and keep him so”); and he adds the following remark to

6

164

2

11

15

22

164

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” the first statement: “intet at ansee som Stort, intet værd at attraae, eller at frygte for” (“regard nothing as great, desire nothing, and fear nothing”); Horatius Flaccus’s samtlige Værker [Complete Works of Horatio Flaccus], trans. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1792–1793), vol. 2, pp. 299 and 304. English translation quoted from Horace, Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1961), p. 287. 164

26

27

27

33

reworked Lenore as a drama] Refers to the ballad “Lenore” (1774) by G. A. Bürger. See Bürgers Gedichte (→ 122,30), vol. 1, pp. 48–57. Variant: “reworked Lenore” has been changed from “had Lenore reworked”. Jacob v. Thyboe] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Jacob von Tyboe Eller Den stortalende Soldat (→ 122,29). Leander] or Leonard, the young and aristocratic rival to both Jacob von Thyboe and Magister Stygotius, since all three are in love with the same girl, Lucilia, daughter of the aristocratic but poor widow, Leonora. The mother wishes for her daughter to become engaged either to Jacob or to Stygotius, while the daughter is in love with Leonard. See Den Danske Skue-Plads (→ 122,29), vol. 3. The volumes are undated and unpaginated. his actual human development] Refers to the doctrine that Jesus Christ is both truly human and truly God (→ 145,10).

165

2

The road leads to London . . . you must first turn around] A source for this has not been identified.

165

10

the dwarf in the fairy tale . . . put on his seven-league boots . . . type of transport] The fairy tale referred to has not been identified. The widely known fairy-tale motif of magical boots with which one can travel vast distances in a short time is recorded as D.1521.1 in Stith Thompson, Motif-Index of Folk-Literature, rev. and enl. ed. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1955– 1958 [1932–1936]).

165

16

Lemming’s] Frederik Carl Lemming (1782–1846), Danish violinist and guitarist; in 1818, he was

•

P a p e r 209–215 1834–1836 •

467

named a royal court musician in Copenhagen; from 1833–1835, Lemming was a violist with the royal court in Stockholm and toured in concert numerous times in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. heard him at the Student Union] It is logged under the entry for October 17, 1835, in “Rapportbog for inspektionshavende 1833 okt.–1837 april” (Studenterforeningens arkiv, Senioratet 7, Det Kgl. Bibliotek) [Inspection Report Book, October 1833–April 1837 (Student Union Archive, The Executive Committee 7, The Royal Library)] that “chamber musician Lemming from Stockholm” and two other named individuals had been given entry to the Union for fourteen days as “visiting members.” When exactly he played at the Student Union is not recorded in the report book, and it has not been possible to identify the date through other sources. ― the Student Union: The Student Union was formed in 1820 by the student community of Regensen College. Its rented rooms served as a gathering place for different activities, and included a growing library from which members could borrow books. Kierkegaard was a member of the Student Union from November 1833 until January 1839. stroked the guitar] Lemming earned particular fame for his virtuosity on the guitar. The endings assigned] Variant: preceding this paper there is a reference mark to Not3:116 in KJN 3, 116. see, thus vol. 1, p. 138. “der Höllenjäger.”] See the story “Der Höllenjäger” [The Hell Hunter], included in the section “Altdeutsche Erzählungen” [Old German Stories], in Erzählungen und Mährchen [Stories and Fairy Tales], ed. Fr. v. der Hagen (→ 160,2), vol. 1, pp. 138–141. It is told that Donatus was Emperor of Rome . . . he is never seen again] A short summary of the story “Der Höllenjäger” (→ 165,24). Kierkegaard calls the knight “Laurentzius” rather than “Laurenzius” and, among the things the knight is supposed to gather for the emperor, Kierkegaard omits “a black horn.” ― by the way . . . confess all his sins, etc.: The story relates it this way: “He [the knight Laurenzius] came home

17

17

23

24

25

165

468

166

5

8

166

10

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

to his wife and lamented over the matter to her; and she had a particular devotion for Our Lady of Adoration, and feared God, and fixed her gaze with constancy. The woman spoke: ‘You must first go to a confessor, and confess all your sins and vow to God that you will reform, so that he will help you out of every affliction’ ” (p. 139). See Nordiske Kiæmpehistorier, by Rafn, part 2, p. 628 . . . Didrik of Bern] → 137,36. ― Didrik of Bern: Legendary Gothic hero and figure in German and Nordic poetry from the Middle Ages; the Ostrogothic king Theoderic the Great (d. a.d. 526) is usually mentioned as the historical precursor for the Didrik figure, and Bern is usually identified as Verona in northern Italy. accompanying comments under the letter A] Refers to Paper 141, from March 1836, in the present volume. The so-called entelle . . . In Sumatra the French naturalist Duvaucel had . . . on “Apes”] An abbreviated quotation from “Populært Foredrag over Aberne, holdt den 2den Marts 1834 i den naturhistoriske Forening” [A Popular Lecture on Apes, Delivered March 2, 1834, to the Natural History Association], by Prof. Eschricht, printed in Dansk Ugeskrift, vol. 4 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 329–345; p. 338: “The so-called entelle (Semn. Entellus) is a particular sort of monkey, which is light gray, but with a black face and hands. Although the animals can be vicious (as we call it), or gruesome, or odious―yet one trait we almost always see in them, which can soften us toward their character, is the love of the mother for her offspring. In Sumatra the French naturalist Duvaucel had great difficulty getting to shoot these entelles, because the native inhabitants regarded them as transfigured princes and princesses with divine powers. One day, when he―moved by these notions of theirs―abandoned a particularly favorable hunting ground, he nonetheless was overwhelmingly tempted to shoot at a remarkably beautiful princess. He lay down and shot her in the heart. The animal had only a minute left to live, and no doubt felt it. It grabbed its young, seemed to search for a very safe bough, placed it up there, and dropped

•

P a p e r 215–218 1836 •

dead.” ― Semn. Entellus: Semn[opithecus] entellus, i.e., the scientific classification of entelles in terms of their genus (Semnopithecus) and species (entellus). ― Duvaucel: Alfred Duvaucel (1773– 1824), French natural scientist and explorer; he traveled to Sumatra in 1818–1819 and sent home to the museum of natural history in Paris about two thousand species of animals, including skins, skeletons, and drawings. ― Escricht: Daniel Frederik Eschricht (1798–1863), Danish physician, physiologist, and zoologist; took the surgical and medical examination in 1822 and worked for two years as a physician; after studying for several years in Europe, he became assistant professor in 1829, and in 1830, professor of physiology at the University of Copenhagen. The historical aspect of stones and trolls] See Paper 134 (dated March 1836), with its accompanying explanatory notes, in the present volume.

18

166

Schiller . . . the boundary betw. the naive and the sentimental . . . see Molbech . . . Part 2, p. 234] Cited from Christian Molbech’s Forelæsninger over den nyere danske Poesie, særdeles efter Digterne Evalds, Baggesens og Oehlenschlägers Værker [Lectures on Modern Danish Poetry, Especially with Reference to the Works of Evald, Baggesen, and Oehlenschläger], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1832; abbreviated hereafter as Forelæsninger over den nyere danske Poesie), vol. 2, pp. 233–234. The quotation contains some orthographical deviations. For example, Kierkegaard does not reproduce Molbech’s emphasis on the expression “living presence.” Kierkegaard wrote out excerpts from part of volume 1 in Notebook 3 and from part of volume 2 in Journal BB, see Not3:18 and BB1, both dated March 1836, in KJN 3, 119–121, and KJN 1, 53–56, respectively. –– Schiller: Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805), German poet and philosopher. Schiller’s distinction between the naive and the sentimental is found in his work “Ueber naive und sentimentalische Dichtung” [On Naive and Sentimental Poetry], originally published in his monthly periodical Die Horen [The Hours] in 1795 and 1796; see Schillers sämmtliche Werke in zwölf Bänden [Schiller’s Collected Works in Twelve Volumes],

19

166

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” 12 vols. (Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1838; ASKB 1804–1815), vol. 12, pp. 167–281. ― Molbech: Christian Molbech (1783–1857), Danish historian, philologist, critic, and author; from 1829, professor of the history of literature at the University of Copenhagen, and from 1830, member of the board of directors of the Royal Theater. 167

4 7

167

8

J. Jürgensen] → 139,14. see Goethe’s Faust p. 197, l. 10ff] See J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie (→ 127,5) in Goethe’s Werke (→ 123,32), vol. 12 (1828), p. 197 (Faust. Beide Theile in Einem Bande [→ 150,6] has the same text and pagination), where Valentine, Gretchen’s brother, says: “No sooner is Dishonor born / than where she is kept a secret, / and then they draw the veil of night / about her brow and ears / and would in fact be glad to kill her. / But when she grows, gets to be big, / she even goes unveiled by day, / yet isn’t any prettier. / The uglier her face becomes, / the more she seeks the light of day.” English translation, Faust I & II, trans. Stuart Atkins (→ 150,6), vol. 2, p. 96. Heyne’s fervent criticism . . . of A. W. Schlegel’s crablike movement . . . oriented backward] Refers to chap. 1 in bk. 2 of Heinrich Heine’s (→ 144,14) Die romantische Schule [The Romantic School] (Hamburg 1836; ASKB U 63; according to the receipt from university bookseller C. A. Reitzel (KA, D packet 7, layer 6), Kierkegaard acquired the book February 16, 1836), pp. 113–149; pp. 127–134. See esp. p. 127, where Heine writes about A. W. Schlegel: “For example, if he wishes to disparage the poet Bürger, then he compares his ballads with the Old English ballads collected by Percy, and he shows how these are much simpler, more naive, more antiquated, and accordingly more poetically composed.” And further, pp. 128–129, “But death is not more poetic than life. The Old English poems collected by Percy express the spirit of their time, and Bürger’s poetry expresses the spirit of ours. Mr. Schlegel did not understand this spirit.” See also p. 131: “Mr. Schlegel . . . was only ever able to understand the poetry of the past, and not of the present. All that modern life is must have seemed prosaic to

•

P a p e r 218–222 1836 •

469

him, and the poetry of France, the loamy topsoil of modern society, remained inaccessible to him.” And finally, pp. 133–134: “But when he wanted to demonstrate Racine’s deficiencies in comparison with older poets, his attacks were unfounded. Not only did he know nothing of the infinite charm, the sweet jest, the deep appeal that lay in the fact that Racine was dressing his new French heroes in antique garb, and thereby merging the interest of modern passion with the interestingness of an intellectually stimulating costume, but Mr. Schlegel was even so ridiculous as to take that costume at face value, to assess the Greeks of Versailles according to the Greeks of Athens, and to compare the Phèdra of Racine with the Phaedra of Euripides. This way of measuring the present by the standard of the past was so deeply ingrained in Mr. Schlegel that he always tended to lash the backs of the younger poets with a switch of laurel from an older poet, and that even when critiquing Euripides himself, nothing served better than to compare him to the older Sophocles, or even to Aeschylus.” ― A. W. Schlegel’s: August Wilhelm Schlegel (1767–1845), German literary historian, poet, author, translator, and publisher; 1798–1801, professor at the University in Jena; following a long stay with Madame de Staël in Switzerland and travels in Europe, in 1818 he became professor of literature at the university in Bonn. Both he and his brother Friedrich Schlegel are considered among the founders of German Romanticism. consorts] Young Germany (→ 148,12). duodecimo scale] i.e., small scale; the small “duodecimo” book format, where the sheet of paper is folded into twelve pages. Virgil “as often . . . with blow of heavy stone, a wayfarer, etc.] Probably alludes to bk. 5, pp. 273– 280, and bk. 10, pp. 803–810, in the Aeneid by the Roman poet Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil) (70– 19 b.c.). See P. Virgilii Maronis opera [The Works of Virgil], ed. J. Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1778–1780), vol. 2, pp. 21–22: “Just as often, when caught on the highway, a serpent which a brazen wheel has crossed aslant, or with blow of a heavy stone a wayfarer has crushed and left half-dead,

11 13

27

167

470

29

168

7

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

vainly tries to escape and trails its long coils; part defiant, his eyes ablaze and his hissing neck raised aloft; part, maimed by the wound, holding him back, as he twists in coils and twines himself upon his own limbs―with such oarage, the ship moved slowly on . . .” And vol. 2, p. 328: “And as, when at times storm clouds pour down in showers of hail, every ploughman, every husbandman flees the fields, and the wayfarer cowers in a safe stronghold, a river’s bank or a vault of lofty rock, while the rain falls upon the lands, so that, when the sun returns, they may pursue the day’s task: just so, overwhelmed by javelins on all sides, Aeneas endures the war cloud until its thunder is spent . . .” English translation from Virgil, Eclogues, Georgics, Aeneid, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough, rev. G. P. Goold, 6 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999), p. 491, and Virgil Aeneid 7–12, Appendix Vergiliana, trans. H. Rushton Fairclough, rev. G. P. Goold, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000) p. 229. Steffens’ Karrikaturen des He[i]ligsten, vol. 2, Introduction] Refers to “Einleitung” [Introduction], in Henrich Steffens, Caricaturen des Heiligsten (→ 149,7), vol. 2, pp. 1–215. English Bible societies] Reference to the British and Foreign Bible Society, which was founded in 1804 and established many affiliated societies (twenty-seven in England, seven in Scotland, and three in Ireland) and a series of sister societies in North America; additionally, the British and Foreign Bible Society contributed to the establishing of Bible societies in Germany, Denmark (1814), Sweden, and Norway; Bible societies were also subsequently established in Russia and France. The Bible societies received financial contributions and provided financial support for the printing and dissemination of complete Bibles and selections from the Bible. See Jens Møller’s article, “Authentisk Beretning om det britiske Bibel-Selskabs Fremgang” [Reliable Report on the Progress of the British Bible Society], in Theologisk Bibliothek [Theological Library], ed. Jens Møller, 20 vols. (Copenhagen, 1811–1821; ASKB 325–335); vol. 3 (1812), pp. 315–335; and the

•

P a p e r 222–224 1836 •

section “Bibelselskaberne” [The Bible Societies] in Jens Møller’s article “Monumentum pietatis Christianæ, eller: Efterretninger om christelige Velgjørenhedsanstalter” [Monumentum pietatis Christianæ, or: Information concerning Christian Charitable Institutions], in Nyt theologisk Bibliothek [New Theological Library], ed. Jens Møller, 20 vols. (Copenhagen, 1821–1832; ASKB 336–345); vol. 18 (1830), pp. 57–62. associations in support of the Greeks] Refers to the philhellenic associations or societies that were established in central and western Europe in order to contribute economic assistance to the Greeks living under desperate economic conditions both at the end of the Greek War of Independence (which ended in secession from Turkey in 1829) and when Greece had become a kingdom under the Bavarian prince Otto as King Othon from 1832 (until 1862). foundations to help morally delinquent persons] See Kierkegaard’s lecture “Vor Journal-Litteratur” [Our Journal Literature], delivered November 28, 1835, to the Student Union, in the present volume, pp. 194-209, as well as its accompanying explanatory note. Schleiermacher] → 129,30. See Paper 79, dated December 1, 1836, in the present volume, and its accompanying explanatory note. Stoicism] → 146,31. The Ancient] → 140,23. the zeal of the orthodox for an eternal and unchanging divine Word] Presumably refers to N.F.S. Grundtvig’s theory of the Church, in which “the living word” (i.e., the Apostle’s Creed at baptism and the words of institution at the Eucharist) are said to be handed down from Christ through the apostles as the living word and eternally unchanging “divine Word” (→ 142,15). See Papers 69 and 70, from May 1835, with their accompanying explanatory notes, in the present volume. Concerning the use of the designation “the orthodox,” → 146,13. the orthodox believes it will come in the hereafter] No source for this view has been identified. the Hegelian] i.e., someone who subscribes to Hegel’s philosophy (→ 140,20).

8

9

10

10 11 25

29 30

168

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

168

169

169

33

knowledge, which] Variant: the continuation of this text is missing.

35

the Northmen expected to find in Gimle: a swine . . . grew back again] The swine or, rather, the boar Sæhrímnir, found in Valhalla. When, after their deaths, the heroes found themselves in Valhalla, the flesh of Sæhrímnir was served as their food “prepared by the cook Andhrímnir, it could never be completely consumed; for in the place where the flesh was carved off during the day, it grew back before evening.” J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte (→ 133,5), p. 376. According to Møinichen (p. 163), Gimle is “the outermost place in heaven toward the south, in the country of Okolm in the third heaven, leafed with pure gold more dazzling than the sun, and inhabited by white elves. This place was the second heavenly kingdom of the gods where, after the twilight of the gods [Ragnarok] and the destruction of Valhalla, the gods were to be gathered together with the father of the universe in eternal happiness. The great hall called Brymer was also there, where all sorts of the best drinks were to be found.” bum, bam, bim, a new one can begin] Kierkegaard’s Danish (“snip, snap, Snude”) is a variant on a colloquial formula for concluding a thought, which is also found in numerous variations in German and English. See, for example, J. M. Thiele, Danske Folkesagn (→ 154,29), vol. 2, 3rd collection, p. 154: “Snip, snap Snude! / Nu er mit Æventyr ude! / Tip, Top Tønde! / Nu kan en Anden begynde!” (“Snip, snap, snout! / Now the story’s out! / Bum, bam, bim! / Now a new one can begin!”)

1

3 4

5 5 9

Holberg] → 123,34. Erasm[us] Montanus] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Erasmus Montanus eller Rasmus Berg (→ 124,10). Jeppe] Refers to Ludvig Holberg’s comedy Jeppe paa Bierget, eller Den forvandlede Bonde (→ 124,10). over into the tragic] See Paper 102:2, dated January 19, 1835, in the present volume. heroic tales] → 134,29.

•

P a p e r 224–229 1836 •

471

Pythagoras was allowed, when he cried ευρηϰα, to run naked through the streets] Alludes to the anecdote about Archimedes (287–212 b.c.), the Greek mathematician, physicist, and inventor from Syracuse on the island of Sicily, who is said to have discovered the “the Archimedean principle”―that a body immersed in a fluid loses as much weight as the weight of the displaced fluid―while he himself lay submerged in a bathtub. Out of sheer enthusiasm for the discovery, he leaped up out of the bath and ran naked through the streets, crying, “Eureka” (Greek, “I have found it”). ― Pythagoras: Pythagoras (ca. 580–500 b.c.) from Samos; Greek philosopher and mathematician. The anecdote is told by the Roman architect and engineer Vitruvius (1st century b.c.) in De architectura [On Architecture], bk. 9, preface, 10.

20

169

Spartans] Inhabitants of the ancient Greek city of Sparta, capital of the region of Laconia on the Peloponnese peninsula. The Spartan men were known to be hardy and courageous soldiers, willing to sacrifice themselves in battle. The gospel teaching concerning the Law is the same] What this refers to has not been identified. Solon, who wanted his laws to last for only 100 years] → 164,2. to the Greeks―the harshest punishment] In ancient Athens, the harshest punishment was the death penalty, which, for example, was the sentence for intentionally killing a citizen of Athens, whereas the intentional killing of a resident alien without the rights of a citizen was punishment by exile. Kierkegaard presumably thinks that exile was seen as a feared punishment owing to the exceptionally high regard the ancient Greeks had for their fatherland. This is a pervasive theme throughout the literature. In both of the Homeric poems, for example, the pain of being away from the homeland plays a central role, as is expressed directly in The Odyssey in the words of Odysseus: “So true is it that naught is sweeter than a man’s own land and his parents, even though it be in a rich man’s house that he dwells afar in a foreign land away from his parents” (The Odyssey, trans.

24

169

25 26 2

170

472

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

A. T. Murray, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945], vol. 1, p. 305). Theognis of Megara, too, describes how he traveled from town to town, and “everywhere I went they welcomed me with kindness. But no pleasure came to my heart from any of them: so true is it, after all, that nothing is dearer than one’s homeland.” See vv. 783–788 of Theognis’s elegiac verse in Greek Lyric: An Anthology in Translation, ed. Andrew M. Miller (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1996), pp. 91–92. The painful longing for the homeland also occupies a central place in Sophocles’ tragedy Oedipus at Colonus. 170

3

6

170

170

8

12

crystallography] The scientific investigation of crystals. See, for example, § 20 in H. C. Ørsted, Videnskaben om Naturens almindelige Love [The Science of the General Laws of Nature] (Copenhagen, 1809), vol. 1, p. 33–34: “Each thing seeks its particular figure, and this is called its crystallization. Admittedly, this form is not perceived in every body; yet in nature, however, we discover that everything assumes it. Such a crystallization even occurs in organic nature, although at a higher level.” a Hegelian] Someone who subscribes to Hegel’s philosophy (→ 140,20). Krieg den Philistern . . . p. 62 . . . menschlichen Thorheiten] Abbreviated quotation from “Zweites Abentheuer” [Second Adventure] in the German Romantic poet Joseph Freiherr von Eichendorf’s (1788–1857) Krieg den Philistern. Dramatisches Mährchen in fünf Abenteuern [War of the Philistines: Dramatic Fairy Tales in Five Adventures] (Berlin, 1824), pp. 55–90; p. 62, where a fool in conversation with a look-alike says, “Oh! My dear friend, you’ve made me quite confused―I do believe I am the Doppelgänger of all human idiocy.” Asked directly by the fool, the Doppelgänger introduces himself as “the Doppelgänger of the Lord Mayor, his true ‘I’ [i.e., his actual self]” (p. 60). An old saying that the Antichrist . . . of a nun and a monk (. . . Luther’s marriage)] See, for

•

P a p e r 229–237 1836 •

example, C.F.G. Stang, Martin Luther. Sein Leben und Wirken [Martin Luther: His Life and Work] (Stuttgart, 1838; ASKB 790), p. 237, col. 2, where the following is related concerning Erasmus of Rotterdam: “Erasmus, who at that time was already very perturbed with Luther, wrote to Franz Sylvius on May 15, 1526, noting: that Luther had married is clear; but that the woman he took as his wife was lying abed was a false report, although she could now be pregnant. If, as is purported, the fable that the Antichrist would be born of a monk and a nun were well founded, then how many thousands of Antichrists must the world have had already long ago.” ― Luther’s marriage: The year after Martin Luther (→ 146,21) definitively abandoned the Augustinian monastery in 1524, he married Katharina von Bora, who had fled a cloister in Nimbschen with eight other nuns in order to come to Wittenberg, where Luther had granted them refuge. begins his speech with] Variant: the text preceding this has been lost; the ms. has been torn.

18

170

Hereditary Sin] → 172,18. “You shall become as the angels”] Freely quoted from Mt 22:30. Eternal punishment in hell] Refers to the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell―i.e., the doctrine of the eternal condemnation of the ungodly, who are to be punished with eternal pain in hell. See, for example, Kierkegaard’s summary of § 30, point 3, “Om den evige Fordømmelse og Helvedstraffene” [On Eternal Damnation and Punishment in Hell], in H. N. Clausen, “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics] (1833–1834), in Not1:6 (KJN 3, 36–37). New Testament scriptural support for the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell is found in Mt 25:41, Mk 9:47–48, and 2 Thess 1:9– 10. See also article 17 of the Augsburg Confession from 1530.

15

171

the devil’s great-grandmother] Refers to the colloquial Danish expression “Fanden og hans oldemor” (“The devil and his great-grandmother”), meaning: all the evil powers one could possibly

18

15 16

171

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ” reel off, or every imaginable useless thing. See also the expression “Han slap Fanden og tog ved hans oldemor” (“He let go of the devil and took hold of his great-grandmother”), recorded in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 154,24), vol. 1, p. 201, with the following clarification: “used when one slips out of one unfortunate circumstance and immediately gets into another one that is even worse.” 171

19

21

171

22

The Children’s Crusade] A crusade that, in the beginning of the thirteenth century, set out with children from France and Germany with the intention of conquering the Holy Land. See Karl Friedrich Beckers Verdenshistorie [Karl Friedrich Becker’s History of the World], revised by Johan Gottfried Woltmann, trans. J. Riise, 12 vols. (Copenhagen, 1822–1829; ASKB 1972–1983), vol. 4 (1823), p. 568: “To what extent the holy frenzy of those days enabled the recruitment of more and more warriors to the banner of God can be established by the almost unbelievable episode in 1213 in which 30,000 children from France and 20,000 from Germany marched to the East, led by a priest. Of these, the greatest number eventually perished from hunger and exhaustion, but not before a number of them fell into the hands of slave traders, who sold entire shiploads of them to the Saracens in Egypt. chivalry] → 147,25. that old sect . . . to explore all the vices . . . life experience] This perhaps refers to the Carpocratians, an Alexandrian Gnostic sect founded by Carpocrates (2nd century); see Eusebius’s history of the Church, 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), bk. 4, chap. 7, p. 191; and G. Arnold, Kirchen-und Ketzerhistorie [History of the Church and of Heretics], 4 vols. (Frankfurt am Main, 1699–1700; ASKB 154–155), vol. 1, pp. 67– 68. Kierkegaard is perhaps also thinking of the Nicolaitians, a Gnostic sect founded by Nicolaos (2nd century); see H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of Church History],

•

P a p e r 237–242 1836 •

473

2 vols., 3rd ed. (Halle, 1838 [1833]; ASKB 158– 159), vol. 1, p. 155. Both sects were anti-Jewish and antinomian and taught that one must defeat the vices by devoting oneself to them. the Greeks’ life after death . . . the shadow of real life] Refers to the view in Greek mythology of the underworld (the realm of Hades) as a place where the souls of the dead resided as shadows or apparitions, for which reason the realm of death was also referred to as “the realm of shadows” or “the world of shadows.” See the description of the underworld in bk. 11 of Homer’s Odyssey, where it tells of Odysseus’s visit to the realm of shadows in order to consult the soul of the prophet Tiresias; there he also meets Achilles who, in vv. 489–491, complains: “I should choose, so I might live on earth, to serve as the hireling of another, of some portionless man whose livelihood was but small, rather than to be lord over all the dead that have perished.” See Homers Odyssee [Homer’s Odyssey], trans. Christian Wilster (Copenhagen, 1837), p. 160. English translation from The Odyssey, trans. A. T. Murray, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945), vol. 1, p. 421. the Northmen] About life in Valhalla → 138,27. After Ragnorok, “when the gods battle their enemies and everything is burned and destroyed, whereupon the happy ones begin an even better state of existence with the father of the universe in Gimle”; see J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte (→ 133,5), pp. 457– 458. Concerning life in Gimle, → 168,35.

7

de 4 Nordmænd] Refers to H. Steffen’s (→ 149,7) De fire Normænd. En Cyclus af Noveller [The Four Norwegians: A Cycle of Novellas], trans. J. R. Reiersen, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1835 [German original, 1828]; ASKB 1586–1588). These volumes constitute vols. 4–6 of Henrich Steffens’s samlede Fortællinger [Collected Short Stories of Henrich Steffens], ed. C. Fr. Güntelberg, 9 vols. (Copenhagen, 1834–1839). the oppressive fore[boding] . . . is developed almost to the point of monotony] See AA:23, probably from March 1837, where Kierkegaard writes:

15

172

8

15

172

474

18

172

22

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

•

P a p e r 242–246 1836–1838 •

“Regarding presentiment, there is also quite a lot in Steffens’s The 4 Norwegians, not scholarly research, that is, but elements of it, except that, with him, it has become rather monotonous, almost as much so as his Norwegian mountains, in that each of his heroes begins practically every one of his more important and, in the novel, more gripping lines by talking about the Norwegian mountains, so that besides the vagueness it must needs have, their presentiment also has something abstract about it. Their consciousness contains too few other factors that might at least let such things be intimated. For although all presentiment is obscure and comes to consciousness all at once, or at least fills the soul with anxiety so gradually as not to appear as a conclusion from given premises, but pointing constantly beyond itself into an indeterminate something, I nevertheless believe that one should now more than ever set about getting to the bottom of subjective receptivity, and not as something sickly and unsound but as present in a normal constitution” (KJN 1, 37–38; see also the accompanying explanatory notes). original sin] The Danish term is Arvesynd, which like its German cognate, Erbsünde, literally means “inherited sin.” The usual English language term for this theological concept, stemming especially from Augustine, is “original sin.” The dogmatic doctrine of original sin as the first 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. See Paper 59, dated November 26, 1834, in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory notes.

Faust. Ein Gedicht [Faust: A Poem] (Stuttgart and Tübingen, 1836) and Goethe’s tragedy Faust (→ 127,5), and argues that Lenau’s Faust is an entirely Christian poem. Martensen reworked this treatise in his essay in Danish, “Betragtninger over Ideen af Faust. Med Hensyn paa Lenaus Faust” [Observations on the Idea of Faust: With Reference to Lenau’s Faust], in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus: Journal for the Speculative Idea], ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 1 (June 1837; ASKB 569), pp. 91–164. ― Martensen: Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884), Danish theologian and author; cand. theol. in 1832; journeyed abroad 1834–1836 (especially to Berlin, Heidelberg, Munich, Vienna, and Paris); he obtained the degree of lic. theol. in 1837, and in 1838 was appointed lecturer in theology at the University of Copenhagen. ― Lenau’s: Nicolaus Lenau was the pseudonym for Austrian Romantic author Nikolaus Franz Niembsch Edler von Strehlenau (1802–1850), with whom Martensen became close friends during his stay in Vienna in 1836. only in Aaron’s hand that it bears ripe fruit] Refers to the account in Numbers 17:11 concerning the selection of Aaron, brother of Moses, as priest for the Israelites in the wilderness. In accordance with God’s command, Moses was to take twelve staves, “one for each ancestral house. [And] place them in the tent of meeting before the covenant” (vv. 3–4). Moses wrote Aaron’s name on the staff of the house of Levi, and God said to Moses that the staff of the one he would choose would sprout shoots. When Moses came into the tent the next day, Aaron’s staff had “put forth buds, produced blossoms, and bore ripe almonds” (v. 8).

25

172

Martensen has written an essay on Lenau’s Faust!] Refers to Ueber Lenau’s Faust. Von Johannes M.......n [On Lenau’s Faust: By Johannes M.......n] (Stuttgart, 1836). “Johannes M.......n” is a pseudonym for H. L. Martensen. Bibliographischer Anzeiger [Bibliographic Advertiser], no. 6 (Leipzig, 1837) reported that the book was published in November 1836. Martensen interprets the difference between Lenau’s epic-dramatic poem

Ueber Pasquille . . . Johannes Voigt. v[on] Raumer’s Taschenbuch . . . 1838. pp. 323ff.] Refers to no. 3, “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften aus der ersten Hälfte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts” [On Pasquils, Satirical Songs, and Parodies from the First Half of the Nineteenth Century] by Johannes Voigt, in Historisches Taschenbuch. Mit Beiträgen von Barthold, Jacob, Schubert, Voigt [Historical Handbook: With

1

173

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

5

Contributions by Barthold, Jacob, Schubert, Voigt], ed. Fr. V. Raumer, “Neunter Jahrgang” [Ninth Annual Edition] (Leipzig, 1838) (abbreviated hereafter as “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften,” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838), pp. 321–524. ― Pasquille: See the following note. ― Johannes Voigt: (1786–1863), German historian; studied theology, philology, and history in Jena; from 1809, a teacher in Halle; and from 1817, a professor in Königsberg. ― v. Raumer’s: → 159,1. Pasquillo and Marforio] See the following section from “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), pp. 340–342: “Now in this period, however, another kind of writing developed alongside satire and parody―namely, the pasquil. The term originated in Rome where, as is known, around the year 1500 a shoemaker named Pasquino became so well known for his humorous notions and witty, often biting satire, that everyone who wanted to make merry by mocking and satirizing the events and news of the city through witty sarcasm about the fashionable world and the great and good of Rome would hurry into the shoemaker’s workshop, for the wit-endowed shoemaker knew how to extract some aspect of everything that rose up above common life, both good and evil, upon which he could pour forth his satire and his wit, even though he received vexations a thousandfold in return. Happenstance immortalized his name, for soon after his death a previously reworked but really very battered and unrecognizable marble statue was unearthed from his residence and placed in a corner of the Orsini Palace in the Campo de’ Fiori near the Piazza Navona. Soon the wit and sarcastic humor of the entire city gathered by it: in short, it represented the revived cobbler Pasquino, as it were, and also inherited his name, for whenever one of the wits of the city had conceived a happy, humorous idea about any event of the day, or had some provocative truth to tell, they would most often attribute it to the cobbler Pasquino on a piece of paper attached to the plinth, and in this way entertain the inquisitive world of Rome. The originally simple form, however, soon became

•

P a p e r 246 1838 •

475

more varied. Across from that statue stood another equally battered one that had previously stood in the forum of Mars [i.e., the Forum of Augustus with the Temple of Mars], and had therefore come to be called Marforio. It soon became his role to call on reticent Pasquino for wisecracks and mockery (perhaps on behalf of the Romans, for commonly the question was attached during the night), to which Pasquino usually replied with witty humor on the following day.” the most important collections are . . . Soltau, Leipzig, 1836 . . . Wolff, Stuttgardt, 1830] Abbreviated summary of the following note in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 332: “The two main collections of historical folk songs, to which we often refer here, are: Ein Hundert Deutsche Historische Volkslieder. Gesammelt und in urkundlichen Texten chronologisch geordnet, published by Fr. Leonard von Soltau, Leipzig 1836, and the Sammlung historischer Volkslieder und Gedichte der Deutschen, by O.L.B. Wolff, Stuttgart 1830.” In the main text where the note appears, there are remarks on “the German song, particularly the historical folk song.” The complete bibliographical information for the two works mentioned above is as follows: Fr. Leonard von Soltau, Ein Hundert Deutsche Historische Volkslieder. Gesammelt und in urkundlichen Texten chronologisch geordnet herausgegeben [One Hundred German Historical Folk Songs: Collected and Chronologically Arranged According to the Documentary Texts] (Leipzig, 1836); and O.L.B. Wolff, Sammlung historischer Volkslieder und Gedichte der Deutschen. Aus Chroniken, fliegenden Blättern und Handschriften zusammengetragen [Collection of Historical Folk Songs and Poems of the Germans: Gathered from Chronicles, Pamphlets, and Manuscripts] (Stuttgart, 1830). ― Leonard v[on] Soltau: Friedrich Leonard von Soltau (1800–1846), German collector and publisher of folk songs. ― O.L.B. Wolff: Oskar Ludwig Bernhard Wolff (1799–1851), German-Jewish man of letters, translator, and publisher; from 1827, extraordinary professor of literature in Jena. p. 379. the German pasquil . . . Ave Maria] Abbreviated summary of the following pas-

6

11

476

15

22

23

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

sage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 379: “Furthermore, the German pasquil uses the form of parody from time to time; it parodies passages now from the gospels, now from the Lord’s Prayer, the Benediction, the Gratia [prayer of thanksgiving], the Ave Maria, etc.” p. 402. In one of these pasquils . . . prove it to you with a card game] Free, abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), pp. 401–402: “Then, immensely disconcerted, the pope tells Satan to leave the place, [since] by no means does he wish to know of him as his companion [unless] he furnishes him with clear proof for mutual companionship. The devil is indeed prepared to do that, and proposes to base his case on the Bible. [‘]No, no,[’] cries out the pope fearfully, [‘]just do not mention the Bible to me, for the Bible is precisely what has brought me into all my misfortune.[’] [‘]Well, all right, then I will prove it to you with a card game,[’] answers the devil, and the pope is entirely satisfied with that.” This pasquil―with the title “Pasquillus. New Zeyttung vom Teuffel” [Pasquil: Recent News of the Devil] (printed in 1546)―is described this way, p. 398: “The entire character of this pasquil expresses itself as a genuine satanic-satirical caprice, in which the devil amuses himself, in the most delightful way, by getting the best of the pope through satire and mockery of his holiness.” the so-called Karnöffel game] Abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 402: “The card game proposed by the devil is the so-called Karnöffel game.” ― Karnöffel: Karnöffelspiel (“Karnöffel game”), which dates to the 15th century, is one of the older German card games. the sixth card was the pope, the seventh the devil] Abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 404: “On the fifth card, or [‘]the last emperor,[’] one encountered the (at that time) most recently reigning emperor, precisely because

•

P a p e r 246 1838 •

he too was called Charles the Fifth. In the game this card was also called ‘the chosen deuce.’ Next to him stood the pope on the sixth card and the devil on the seventh. The sixth card was called, as one would expect . . . the pope.” die böse Sieben galt daher als “teufelsfrei”] Quotation from the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), pp. 404– 405: “The seventh card, the devil, was a free card; therefore the evil seven counted as ‘the devil’s free card’ and could neither be taken by the emperor, nor by the pope, nor the Karnøffel; it appears that only in certain cases did they have to take him.” Karnöffel [is] from Cardinal] Refers to the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 403, where the name Karnöffel is explained: “This name originated from cardinal, the pronunciation of which common people twisted into Karnöffel, as the cardinals were often mockingly called in Germany at the time.” the 4 Kings, the 4 Monarchs, Daniel [chapter] 7.] Free, abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 403: “The second, third, fourth, and fifth cards were four emperors; they represented (according to Daniel c[hapter] 7) the four world monarchies into which at the time the entirety of world history was divided.” ― 7.: Variant: added. 8 and 9 and 10 . . . represent the three worldly estates] Abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 405: “The eight, nine, and ten in the Karnöffel game represented the three secular estates subordinate to the emperor: the ten was the nobility, the nine was the bourgeoisie, and the eight was the peasantry.” ― 8 and 9 and 10: Variant: changed from “7 and 8 and 9”. “der faule Fritz.”] Refers to the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 405: “Finally, the ‘faule Fritz’ [lazy Fritz] also played a role in the Karnöffel game. He

24

26

26

28

30

“A e s t h e t i c a . O l d e r ”

31

took the ten, nine, and eight. He represented the ‘faulfräßigen Mönchen’ [lazy monks], who lived off the worldly goods of the nobility, bourgeoisie, and peasantry, or the canon priests, who consumed and frittered away the goods of the kings, princes, and lords.” Spangenberg wider die sieben Bösen . . . Eisleben, 1562?] Abbreviated summary of the following passage in “Ueber Pasquille, Spottlieder und Schmähschriften” in Historisches Taschenbuch, 1838 (→ 173,1), p. 406n: “I have not been able to obtain the old treatise by Spangenberg against the evil seven of the devil’s Karnöffel game, Eisleben 1562.” This refers to the treatise by the German priest Magister Cyriacus Spangenberg (1528–1604), Wider die Böse Sieben ins Teuffels Karnöffelspiel [Against the Evil Seven in the Devil’s Karnöffel Game] (Eisleben, 1562).

•

P a p e r 246 1838 •

477

Notes for Paper 247–Paper 251 Biblical Exegesis, Readings of Faust, Dogmatics, et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Steen Tullberg Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

480

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Biblical Exegesis, Readings of Faust, Dogmatics, et al.”1 is no. 456 in B-cat. and is presumably among the portion of Kierkegaard’s papers that at his death was found placed together with various other material in “a large sack.”2 Paper 248 has been lost but has been transmitted indirectly through H. P. Barfod’s edition of Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The preserved manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology None of the five papers is dated. Paper 247 consists of excerpts from A. Neander, Die Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirch durch die Apostel, vol. 1 (Hamburg, 1832), a work from which Kierkegaard also excerpts in Paper 14:6, which may have been written in October 1834 (see Paper 13:10, which is dated October 1, 1834, in the present volume). Paper 248 is presumably a draft of the beginning of a lecture to the Student Union, perhaps of the lecture “Our Journal Literature” (Paper 254, in the present volume), which Kierkegaard delivered on November 28, 1835. Paper 249 is a rough draft of the latter half of BB:14 (KJN 1, 97–99), which is dated December 3, 1836. Paper 250 consists of excerpts from Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft (Berlin, 1827; ASKB 644) and presumably has a connection to H. L. Martensen’s “Forelæsninger over Indledning til speculative Dogmatik” [Introductory Lectures on Speculative Dogmatics] from the winter semester of 1837–1838 (see Not4:3 in KJN 3, 125–126, and Paper ) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], in L-cat. (See “Introduction to the Loose Papers” in the present volume).

2

Critical Account of the Text 19 in the present volume). Lastly, Paper 251 is an exegesis of the Gospel of Matthew that follows H. Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Königsberg,1837; ASKB 96) and has a reference to H. N. Clausen, Tabulae Synopticae. It can thus have been written in connection with Clausen’s private lectures on the synoptic Gospels given in the winter semester of 1838–1839.1 In summary, it can be said that the papers in this group were probably written in the period from the autumn of 1834 to the winter of 1838–1839.

) See Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt i Vintersemestret 1838–39 [Lectures at the University of Copenhagen and the Polytechnical Institute in the Winter Semester of 1838–1839], p. 2, in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824–51 [List of Lectures at the University of Copenhagen, 1824– 1851]. Lists of those who attended the lectures are not extant.

1

481

Explanatory Notes 176

1

It is generally assumed . . . impression his letter had made upon them] A compressed account of A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche durch die Apostel, als selbstständiger Nachtrag zu der allgemeinen Geschichte der christlichen Religion und Kirche [History of the Implanting and Guiding of the Christian Church by the Apostles, as Separate Postscript to the General History of the Christian Religion and Church], 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1832–1833; abbreviated hereafter as Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche), vol. 1, pp. 332–333. (There are two versions of the work with identical contents but with different amounts of text on each page; in the more compressed version, the passage in question is found in vol. 1, pp. 226–227.) ― Timothy: Paul’s closest colleague; accompanied Paul on the latter portion of his second missionary journey; co-sender of most of Paul’s letters (2 Cor, Phil, 1 Col, 1 and 2 Thess, Philem) and recipient of two letters from him; ordained and installed by Paul as leader of the congregation in Ephesus. ― P: Paul (originally Saul) of Tarsus, a Hellenized Jew, educated as a Pharisee and participated in persecution of Jews who came to believe in Jesus as the Christ. He experienced a call ca. a.d. 40 in which the resurrected Christ presented himself to him, and thereafter appears to have founded a mission that did not require conversion to Judaism. Paul was thus the first Christian missionary. He was presumably executed ca. a.d. 65 during Nero’s persecutions of Christians in the wake of the fire that had broken out in Rome. Paul is known directly from a series of letters written in the period a.d. 51–55 and included in the NT. In Kierkegaard’s day, the first thirteen letters in the NT, all bearing Paul’s name, were generally accepted as having actually been written by Paul; today only seven (or nine) are usually counted as authentic, including 1 Thess (the oldest writing in the NT), Romans, 1

and 2 Cor, and Gal. In the latter four of the writings mentioned, Paul appears as an apostle who asserts that he has received his call, and thus his authority, directly from God and from the resurrected Christ. According to modern scholarship, the book of Acts, which is the other major source of knowledge concerning Paul, presents a portrait of Paul that was held in a later period. ― Corinth: Greek city situated on the isthmus between the Peloponnesus and northern Greece; in NT times, it was the capital of the Roman province of Achaia. According to Acts 18:1–8, Paul founded the Christian congregation in Corinth in the course of his second missionary journey. ― Macedonia: In NT times, an independent Roman province situated north of Achaia. ― Ephesus: City in western Asia Minor, in NT times under Roman rule. According to Acts 18:19–21 and 19:1–10, Paul visited Ephesus twice, once on his second, and once on his third missionary journey. ― Titus: One of Paul’s trusted co-workers; accompanied Paul on his travels; according to Titus 1:4, Titus encountered Christianity through Paul, and according to Titus 1:5, Paul left him on Crete to attend to the congregation there. Bleek, on the other hand, assumes . . . referred to in 2 Corinthians] Compressed account of the following portion of note 1 in A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche), vol. 1, p. 333 (compressed ed., vol. 1, p. 227). ― Bleek: Friedrich Bleek (1793–1859), German evangelical theologian; from 1829, professor at Bonn. The reference here is to his essay “Erörterungen in Beziehung auf die Briefe Pauli an die Korinther” [Debates Related to Paul’s Letters to the Corinthians], in Theologische Studien und Kritiken. Eine Zeitschrift für das gesammte Gebiet der Theologie [Theological Studies and Criticism: A Journal for All Branches of Theology], ed. C. Ullmann and F.W.C. Umbreit (Hamburg, 1830), vol. 2, issue 3, pp. 614−632.

5

Biblical Exegesis et al. 176

9

11

12

17

Acts 19:22 . . . appears to be in agreement with this] Excerpt from n. 1 in A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche, vol. 1, p. 333 (compressed ed., vol. 1, p. 227). After remaining in Ephesus for 2½ years P[aul] went . . . into Illyria] Free summary of A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche, vol. 1, p. 342 (compressed ed., vol. 1, p. 233). The time periods given are by Kierkegaard. ― Illyria: In NT times, a Roman province north of Macedonia. 2 Cor: 10, 14, 15, 16 seem . . . preached the gospel in Illyria] Kierkegaard’s free summary of n. 3 in A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche, vol. 1, pp. 342–343 (compressed ed., p. 233). ― Achaia: → 176,1. If we could determine . . . Festus’s accession . . . several years earlier] Excerpt from n. 1 in A. Neander, Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche, vol. 1, pp. 364–366 (compressed ed., vol. 1, pp. 248–249). ― Felix: Roman procurator in Palestine, known for his arbitrary and bloodthirsty rule. ― Festus: Roman procurator in Judaea, a.d. 59 or 60–62. ― Josephus: Titus Flavius Josephus (a.d. 37–100), Jewish historian. Neander here refers to Josephus’s Archaeologia Judaica [Jewish Archaeology] (or Antiquitates Judaicae [Jewish Antiquities]), bk. 20, chap. 8–9. ― Pallas: Powerful director of imperial finances under Roman Emperor Claudius; brother of Felix; removed from his position by Emperor Nero in a.d. 55. ― Tacitus: Publius Cornelius Tacitus (ca. a.d. 55–120), Roman historian, praetor, and consul. Neander refers to Tacitus’s Annals, bk. 14, chap. 65. ― Claudius: Tiberius Claudius Drusus Nero Germanicus (10 b.c.–a.d. 54), Roman emperor a.d. 41–54. ― Schrader: Karl Schrader (birth and death dates uncertain), German evangelical theologian, priest, dr. theol. The reference here is to his book Der Apostel Paulus. Erster Theil, oder Chronologische Bemerkungen über das Leben des Apostels Paulus [The Apostle Paul: First Part, or Chronological Notes on the Life of the Apostle Paul] (Leipzig, 1830). ― Poppæa: Poppaea Augusta Sabina (d. a.d. 65), from a.d. 62, Roman empress as Emperor Nero’s second wife; prior to that, his mistress. ― Josephus’s words: Neander

•

P a p e r 247–249 1834–1835 •

483

refers to Josephus’s Archaeologia Judaica, bk. 20, chap. 8, 1. Probably . . . his lips. From EP I−II, pp. 79–80. noli me tangere] Cited from Jn 20:17, where Jesus says this to Mary Magdalene when she encounters him after his resurrection. Student Union] In Kierkegaard’s time, the most important forum for young scholars, founded in 1820. Kierkegaard was a member from 1833 to 1839.

1

It seems] For “It,” see BB:14, dated December 3, 1836, in KJN 1, 96–98. According to the explanatory note to BB:14 (KJN 1, 400), the reference is to August Koberstein, Ueber das wahrscheinliche Alter und die Bedeutung des Gedichtes vom Wartburger Kriege, ein litterar-historischer Versuch, Mittheilungen aus dem Gebiet historisch-antiquarischer Forschungen [On the Apparent Age and Significance of the Poetry of the Wartburg Castle Contests: A Literary-Historical Essay, a Report from the Domain of Historical-Antiquarian Research], 2 vols. (Naumburg, 1823; ASKB 1742). In this work, Koberstein investigates the historical context of the poem cycle Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg [The Contest of the Singers on the Wartburg] from ca. 1260. See the explanatory notes for BB:14 in KJN 1, 399−401. way of viewing things,] Variant: first written “way of viewing things.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. a Goethean poetic position] i.e., a poetic presentation by the German poet, dramatist, essayist, statesman, and natural scientist Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832). his F[aust]] Goethe’s tragedy Faust (pt. 1, 1808, and pt. 2, 1831 (→ 178,4); see ASKB 1669: Faust. Eine Tragödie von Goethe. Beide Theile in Einem Bande [Faust: A Tragedy by Goethe; Both Parts in One Volume] (Stuttgart, 1834). phenomenological eccentricity] Variant: first written “phenomenological eccentricity.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. see Tieck. in the present book] Presumably refers both to the undated BB:6 in KJN 1, 69−70 and

21

177

6

15

26

28

30

32

38

177

484

178

4

Biblical Exegesis et al.

to two dated entries, BB:10, from September 19, 1836, and BB:11, from October 22, 1836, both in KJN 1, 84. In BB:6, Kierkegaard cites a passage from the first part of Phantasus, which had been published in Ludwig Tieck’s Schriften [Writings of Ludwig Tieck], vol. 4 (Berlin, 1828) p. 129. In BB:10, Kierkegaard notes that he has found a remark concerning Goethe’s activity as director of the theater in Weimar in “Die verkehrte Welt. Ein historisches Schauspiel in fünf Aufzügen” [The Inverted World: A Historical Play in Five Acts], in the second part of Phantasus. Eine Sammlung von Märchen, Erzählungen, Schauspielen und Novellen [Phantasus: A Collection of Fairy Tales, Stories, Plays, and Novels], in Ludwig Tieck’s Schriften, vol. 5 (1828), p. 462. And in BB:11, Kierkegaard notes that in the second section of “Der getreue Eckart und der Tannenhäuser. In zwei Abschnitten. 1799” [Faithful Eckart and Tannhäuser: In Two Parts, 1799], from the first part of Phantasus, in Ludwig Tieck’s Schriften, vol. 4, pp. 199–213, he has found examples of the Faustian as the sensual element that wants to be satisfied (see, e.g., p. 202), as well as intimations of Goethe’s Faust (e.g., on p. 210). See also the explanatory notes to the three entries mentioned above. ― Tieck: Ludwig Tieck (1773–1853), German author, translator, and publisher. which the auth[or] has not seen . . . a second part of F[aust]] J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Der Tragödie zweiter Theil in fünf Acten. / (Vollendet im Sommer 1831.) [Faust: The Tragedy, Part Two, in Five Acts (Completed in the Summer of 1831)] appeared posthumously as vol. 1 of Goethe’s nachgelassene Werke [Goethe’s Posthumous Works], which corresponds to vol. 41 of 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). Thus the second part of Goethe’s Faust appeared nine years later than Koberstein’s book (→ 177,21). Another work of Goethe’s that appeared later than Koberstein’s book was “Helena / klassisch-romantische Phantasmagorie. / Zwischenspiel zu Faust” [Helena: ClassicRomantic Phantasmagoria; Intermezzo for Faust],

•

P a p e r 249 1835–1836 •

published in Goethe’s Werke, vol. 4 (1827), pp. 229–307―which subsequently came to constitute act 3, plus two-thirds of act 1, of Faust, Part Two― was published in Goethe’s Werke, vol. 12 (1828), pp. 249–313, as an addition to the first part, which had concluded with the parenthetical remark “(Ist fortzusetzen)” (“to be continued”). F[aust]] In his fair copy of BB:14, Kierkegaard wrote “the individual”; see KJN 1, 98:12. Klingsor] Literary figure who appears as a magician in Parzival [Parsifal], the epic poem of chivalry (written ca. 1210) by the German poet and minnesinger Wolfram von Eschenbach; see ASKB 1635, an edition from 1836. In Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg [Contest of the Singers on the Wartburg], Klingsor or Klinsor, king of Hungary, is a magician who, with the backing of the devil, seeks to destroy the arguments in favor of Christianity advanced by the pious Wolfram von Eschenbach. See A. Koberstein, Ueber das wahrscheinliche Alter und die Bedeutung des Gedichtes vom Wartburger Kriege (→ 177,21), pp. 56–57, which Kierkegaard cites in BB:14 in KJN 1, 97:9–23; see also the explanatory note to BB:14 in KJN 1, 399−401. the biblical expression [“]in the beginning was[”]] Refers to Jn 1:1–2. lyrical fashion (everything]. Variant: changed from “lyrical fashion. Everything”. it presents itself to us world-historically] Here “it” refers to “the age”; see the fair copy in BB:14 in KJN 1, 98:29. the childlike, pious Wolfram and the cunning Klingsor] → 178,9. Christianity was indeed victorious . . . a view of life . . . a struggle] See, e.g., Eph 6:10–12. See also the classical dogmatic expressions ecclesia militans (“the Church militant”), (cf., e.g., Eph 6:12) and ecclesia triumphans (“the Church triumphant”) (cf., e.g., Heb 12:23). the poem] The anonymous song cycle Sängerkrieg auf der Wartburg from ca. 1260, which consists of a series of poems in various forms, divided into two parts (“Das Fürstenlob” [The Princely Praise] and “Das Rätselspiel” [The Mystery Game]). The poems concern a singing contest that took place in 1206–1207 at the castle of Count Herman of

6 9

18 20 28

42 1

179

1

177m

Biblical Exegesis et al.

5

179m

179

1

7

12

21

•

P a p e r 249–251 1836–1838 •

485

Thuringia, featuring famous minnesingers; for more information, see the explanatory notes to BB:14 in KJN 1, 399−401. Schill[er]] Presumably, a reference to Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805), German poet and philosopher. It is unclear what Kierkegaard refers to here, but perhaps he has in mind Schiller’s essay “Ueber naive und sentimentalische Dichtung,” [On Naive and Sentimental Poetry]; see Paper 218, from March 1836, with accompanying explanatory notes in the present volume. what Schlegel notes concerning the 3 types of tragedies] Presumably refers to Friedrich Schlegel’s essay Ueber das Studium der griechischen Poesie [On the Study of Greek Poetry] (1795– 1796), published in Friedrich Schlegel’s sämmtliche Werke [Collected Works of Friedrich Schlegel], 10 vols. (Vienna, 1822–1825; ASKB 1816–1825); vol. 5 (1823), pp. 5–218. In the preface, Schlegel suggests a division between objective (i.e., antique, Greek), interesting (i.e., Shakespearean), and French (i.e., Corneille, Racine, Voltaire) tragedies, pp. 22–23. In chap. 1, pp. 63–70, using Hamlet as his point of departure, Schlegel develops further the relation between the first two of the above-mentioned categories. ― Schlegel: Friedrich Schlegel (1772– 1829), German critic, author, and philosopher; converted to Catholicism in 1808 and entered into service of the Austrian court.

rendering of a passage in § 26 in “II. Vom Inhalt der Dogmatik” in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, p. 15. But precisely because God wants to be known . . . (cogitare from cogere)] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 26 in “II. Vom Inhalt der Dogmatik” in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, p. 15. All teachings of religion . . . he is truly known] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 28 in “II. Vom Inhalt der Dogmatik” in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, p. 16. § 4. . . . the skepticism . . . the negative-dialectical movement] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 4 in “I. Begriff und Nothwendigkeit der Wissenschaft” [The Concept and Necessity of the Science] in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, pp. 4–5. Faith has its actuality . . . its truth in faith] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 4 in “I. Begriff und Nothwendigkeit der Wissenschaft” in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, p. 6.

The begetting of this . . . for us and in our spirit] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 24 in “II. Vom Inhalt der Dogmatik” [On the Content of Dogmatics], in the “Einleitung” [Introduction], in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft [The Fundamental Doctrines of Christian Dogmatics as a Science], 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1827 [1819]; ASKB 644), p. 14. The true concept of the positive . . . insofar as it is led to it] Kierkegaard’s Danish rendering of a passage in § 25 in “II. Vom Inhalt der Dogmatik” in the “Einleitung” in Ph. K. Marheineke, Die Grundlehren der christlichen Dogmatik als Wissenschaft, p. 15. Upon this rests . . . is first itself precisely by means of this revelation] Kierkegaard’s Danish

Evangelium Mathæi] Concerning H. N. Clausen’s (→ 181,35) lectures on the three synoptic Gospels; see the Critical Account of the Text. see the inserted paper notation] No such paper notation appears to have been found among Kierkegaard’s papers. 3, 2. This formulation, β. των ουρανων . . . with Θεου understood] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Biblischer Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments zunächst für Prediger und Studirende [Biblical Commentary on All the Works in the New Testament, Primarily for Preachers and Students], vols. 1–2, 3rd rev. ed. (Königsberg, 1837–1838); vol. 3, 2nd rev. ed. (Königsberg, 1840); vol. 4, 1st ed. (Königsberg 1840; all four volumes constitute ASKB 96–100; abbreviated hereafter as Commentar

27

34

1

180

11

13

14

15

180

486

18

23

30 36

181

5

6

24

Biblical Exegesis et al.

über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments); vol. 1, p. 158. ― Similar formulations: Olshausen has “the customary formulations.” The idea of such a kingdom of God . . . Chr[ist] is often called a king] Compressed excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 158. ― Chr[ist]: Olshausen has “Messiah.” The idea of a kingdom . . . God’s will . . . absolutely dominant] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 159. The O.T.] Olshausen has “The prophetic communications.” In the NT there is a clear distinction . . . within the believers. thus Lk 17:21] Compressed excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 160. It is depicted in the external sense as a kingdom that will come] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 160. With respect to this ext. sense . . . on the other, to the entirety of the hum. race] Compressed excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, pp. 160–161. ― the sphere: Olshausen has “the sphere of life” and also writes that it is only “once” in the NT that this sphere is understood “in its visible appearance” “as an outward society.” the idea of a kingdom of God . . . The later Alexandrines stood against raw chiliasm] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, pp. 161–162. ― the Pharisees: The Pharisees were one of the most influential movements in Judaism during the Hellenistic-Roman period from ca. 100 b.c. until the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70, emphasizing legalistic adherence to Mosaic law, e.g., complex rules of ritual cleanliness for the priesthood. They believed themselves to be in possession of a comprehensive oral tradition regarding the ap-

•

P a p e r 251 1837–1838 •

plication of the Mosaic legal framework and held other beliefs, such as the existence and importance of angels and the resurrection of the dead. In Jesus’ time, there were about six thousand Pharisees. ― Gnostic idealism: i.e., Gnosticism, a wide range of eclectic, often dualistic Christian and Jewish sects in the 1st century a.d. The Gnostics emphasized religious experiences that revealed hidden knowledge (gnosis) that could save a person. ― Alexandrines: The Church Fathers who stemmed from the theological school that had been founded in 2nd century Alexandria on the model of earlier philosophical schools and in which the first Christian scholarship took form under the influence of Platonic and gnostic philosophy. ― chiliasm: Technically, the teaching and the belief concerning an imminent thousand-year reign of Christ on earth, based on Rev 20:1–6 and 1 Cor 15:20–28. Here the term is a broad designation for the fanatical expectation of an imminent thousand-year kingdom. The Sermon on the Mount] Designation for Mt 5–7; see Mt 5:1–2. it must not be regarded as having been delivered in this form] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 3:2 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 195. see Clausen’s Tab. synop.] See H. N. Clausen, Quatuor evangeliorum tabulae synopticae [Synoptic Table for the Four Gospels] (Copenhagen, 1829; ASKB 467), no. 23, pp. 37–43. ― Clausen: Henrik Nicolai Clausen (1793–1877), Danish theologian and politician; dr. phil. and dr. theol.; from 1822, extraordinary professor, and from 1830, ordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen. To one definite fact, M[at]th[ew] . . . compelled him to climb back up again] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, pp. 196–197. ― the 12: The 12 disciples, whom Jesus called apostles; see Lk 6:13. In M[at]th[ew], Chr[ist’s] words appear . . . μετανοια . . . and preaching grace] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 197. ― the giving of a new

33 34

35

36

7

182

Biblical Exegesis et al.

12

18

23

33

183

4

Law: Olshausen has “a second giving of the Law.” ― that from Sinai: i.e., the Law handed down on Mt. Sinai, where Moses received the two tablets with the Ten Commandments; see Ex 20–24, esp. Ex 20:1–17. In L[uke] one can find a thread . . . this pure l[ove] (35–38)] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 198. Then it is as if L[uke] inserts a pause . . . they must make it a part of themselves] Compressed excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 198. ― Chr[ist]: Olshausen has “the Redeemer.” V[erse] 40 does not really seem to fit in . . . is not above the master] Excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, pp. 198–199. ― the Pharisees: → 181,24. ― the Pharisees cannot: Olshausen has “the Law and the Pharisees cannot.” ― for the disciple is not above the master: See Lk 6:40. There is also unity in M[at]th[ew] . . . εσεσϑε ουν υμεις τελειοι (v. 48)] Free, compressed excerpt from the commentary on Mt 5:1 in H. Olshausen, Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 199. ― the difference betw. the Law and the Gospel: Olshausen has “the opposition between O[ld] and N.T.”kp/2599 In chap. 6] The beginning words of the following passage in Olhausen’s commentary on Mt 5:1 in Commentar über sämmtliche Schriften des Neuen Testaments, vol. 1, p. 200: “In the sixth chapter the evangelist further develops his comparison of Old Testament piety with New Testament piety (with reference back to Mt 5:20), depicting the Pharisees (admittedly unfairly, but determined by conceptions of the religious life of the people at that time) as the representatives of the O[ld] T[estament].”

•

P a p e r 251 1838–1839 •

487

Notes for Paper 252–Paper 253 Literature on Faust et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Flemming Harrits Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

490

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript Literature on Faust et al.”1 consists of two papers: Paper 252, which is no. 436 in B-cat. and is thus among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were found in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189), and Paper 253, which has been transmitted indirectly by H. P. Barfod. The manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 252 includes two dates: Paper 252:4 is dated March 7, 1835, and Paper 252:5 is dated March 16, 1835. Paper 253 is dated October 1, 1835.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

Explanatory Notes 186

1

3

4

5

7

Faust’s Leben, Thaten . . . neue verbesserte Auflage. 1799] Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt. In fünf Büchern. neue verbesserte und vermehrte Ausgabe [Faust’s Life, Deeds. and Descent into Hell: New Improved and Enlarged Edition] (Leipzig, 1799; 1st ed., St. Petersburg, 1791; 2nd rev. and enl. ed., St. Petersburg, 1794). This work is . . . Klinger . . . Conversations Lexic[on]] See the article “Klinger” in F. A. Brockhaus, Allgemeine deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände. (Conversations-Lexikon) [Universal German Encyclopedia for the Educated Classes (Encyclopedia)], 8th ed., 12 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1837 [1796–1811]; ASKB, 1299– 1310), vol. 6 (1835), pp. 234–235, where it is stated that Friedrich Maximilian von Klinger (1753–1831) had published “a series of novels,” including Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt (St. Petersburg, 1791).” This source also indicates that Klinger was the person whose works, over a period of fifty years, caused the German literary genre to which they belonged to be called the “Sturm und Drang” (“storm and stress”) period, which took its name from one of Klinger’s dramas, and that Klinger settled in St. Petersburg in 1780 and held various positions in the Russian army, reaching the position of lieutenant general in 1811. Faust is presented as the inventor of the art of book printing (see p. 3)] See bk. 1, chap. 1 in F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, p. 3. Satan promises . . . (see his speech pp. 28–37)] See Satan’s speech in bk. 1, chap. 5, in F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, pp. 28–37; esp. pp. 29–30, 31–32. So the idea . . . the world perish because of books . . . Andersen’s Fodreise, chap. 1] Refers to chap. 1, “Hvorledes Satan faaer Magten over Forfatteren.―Syndfloden No. 2, en Mythe” [How Satan Gains Power over the Author―The

Flood, No. 2, a Myth], in Fodreise fra Holmens Canal til Østpynten af Amager i Aarene 1828 og 1829 [Journey on Foot from Holmen’s Canal to the East Point of Amager in the Years 1828 and 1829], ed. Hans Christian Andersen (who is actually the author) (Copenhagen, 1829), pp. 3–4. Here Andersen relates that on New Year’s Eve, 1828, “an evil spirit, whom people call Satan, entered me and inspired me with the sinful thought of becoming an author” (p. 3). After this, he gives an account of “The Flood, No. 2,” in reference to the account in Genesis 8 in which God makes a pact with Noah after the Flood, promising that the world will never again be destroyed by a flood. But because Satan wanted to combat God’s grace, Andersen relates, he thought about it “for three millennia, and in the fourth he jumped up and shouted: ‘Eureka! I have it!―The evil shall spring forth from human beings themselves; a new flood shall cover the world . . .’ And Satan called all his vassals and said: ‘Gentlemen, go out to the whole world and seduce the sons of Adam into becoming bad writers―from them shall flow the flood that will corrupt the earth. I will do my part, now you do yours.’ And they did as he said, and the waters immediately flowed in the East and the West, in the South and in the North― they are still flowing and will corrupt the earth.” ― Andersen’s: Hans Christian Andersen (1805– 1875), Danish author and poet. p. 65. Faust: “ich wol[l]te einen Teufel . . . keinen meines Geschlechtes”] Quoted, with minor variations, from bk. 1, chap. 8, of F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, p. 65. p. 221 . . . Ueberdem sog er . . . sich zu eigen machen] Quoted, with minor variations, from bk. 1, chap. 9, of F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, p. 221. It is also quite remarkable how Satan (see 378 etc.) . . . at many points] Refers to bk. 5, chap.

10

12

19

492

21

24

26

28

28

Literature on Faust et al.

6, of F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, pp. 378–380. how . . . Klinger . . . the creator of the so-called moral world] Refers to bk. 5, chap. 6, of F. M. von Klinger, Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt, p. 385n. Klinger promises to expound upon this further in his Giafar] Refers to the continuation of Klinger’s note, cited in the preceding note (→ 186,21). Klinger’s reference is to his novel, Geschichte Giafar’s des Barmeciden in fünf Büchern. Ein Seitenstück zu Faust’s Leben, Thaten und Höllenfahrt [The Story in Five Books of Giafar the Barmecide: A Pendant to Faust’s Life, Deeds, and Descent into Hell] (St. Petersburg, 1792). Faust im Gewande der Zeit . . . von Harro Harring . . . Leipzig 1831] Faust im Gewande der Zeit. Ein Schattenspiel mit Licht. Von Harro Harring, dem Friesen von Ibenshof an der Nordsee [Faust in Contemporary Dress: A Shadow-Play with Light] (Leipzig, 1831). ― Harro Harring: Harro Paul Harring (1798–1870), German-Danish writer, painter, revolutionary. Szenen aus Fausts Leben. von Schr[eiber]. Offenbach, 1792] Szenen aus Fausts Leben von Schr. [Scenes from the Life of Faust, by Schr[eiber]] (Offenbach, 1792). ― Schr[eiber]: Aloys Wilhelm Schreiber (1761–1841), German theologian, philosopher, author; prof. of aesthetics at Heidelberg, 1804–1813; earned doctorate in philosophy, 1807; court historian at Karlsruhe, 1813–1825. presumably the same whom von Raumer discusses on p. 196 and calls Schreiber] Refers to the section “Dichterische Behandlungen” [Poetic and Literary Treatments], in no. 2, “Die Sage vom Doctor Faust. Von Dr. Christian Ludwig Stieglitz. d. Aelt.” [The Saga of Doctor Faust: By Dr. Christian Ludwif Stieglitz, the Elder], in Historisches Taschenbuch. Mit Beiträgen von Förster, Gans, Loebell, Stieglitz, Wachsmuth [Historical Notebook: With Contributions by Förster, Gans, Loebell, Stieglitz, Wachsmuth], ed. Fr. von Raumer, “Fünfter Jahrgang. Mit den Faust’schen Bildern aus Auerbach’s Keller zu Leipzig” [Fifth Year of Publication, with Faust Illustrations of Auerbach’s Cellar in Leipzig] (Leipzig, 1834; abbreviated hereafter as Historisches Taschenbuch), pp. 193–210; see

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

p. 196, where it states, under no. 11: “Scenes from the Life of Faust, by von Schreiber; (Offenbach, 1792) p. 8.” ― Raumer: Friedrich Ludwig Georg von Raumer (1781–1873), German historian and politician; from 1819 to 1853, professor of political science and history at Humboldt University in Berlin. ― Schreiber: → 186,28. In his preface he remarks . . . “daß nämlich der Mensch . . . heraus zu treten.”] Summary and quoted material from the “Vorrede” [Preface] to Szenen aus Fausts Leben, unpaginated. In Schreiber, the remark―“the human being is . . . not made for association . . . that he may not venture unpunished beyond the circle of humanity” is in quotation marks, as though from an unnamed source. the university library] Until 1861, the library of the University of Copenhagen, officially dedicated in 1657, was situated in the loft over Trinity Church (see map 2, C1). Starting in 1834, the library was open for borrowers on weekdays from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.; the reading room, newly opened in 1837, was open from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. It was also possible for university students to borrow books for use outside the library. He has the scene . . . Faust and Wagner in a cemetery] Refers to the scene “Auf einem Kirchhofe. / Faust. Wagner” [In a Cemetery. / Faust. Wagner], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 1–10. Wagner is Faust’s assistant. Here he relates . . . his dissatisfaction . . . Wagner proposes] A brief summary of the cemetery scene (→ 187,6). Then he sets out on a journey . . . scenes in dialogue form] Refers to Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 24–114, where Faust is on a journey. His parting from his father is moving] Refers to the scene “Zimmer in Fausts Wohnung. / Faust. Dessen Vater” [Room in Faust’s Dwelling. / Faust. His Father], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 17–19, where Faust bids farewell to his father before his coming journey. His encounter with the traveler (see p. 24) is comical] Refers to the scene “Auf dem Postwagen. / Faust. Ein Reisender” [On the Mail Coach. / Faust. A Traveler], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 24–25.

31

5

6

7

9

10

11

187

Literature on Faust et al. 12

17

18

19

Then he has him continue . . . more ridiculous sort, e.g., p. 28 . . . Rousseau’s Emile] Refers specifically to the scene “Auf der Landstrasse. / Faust. Ein junger Mann” [On the Country Road. / Faust. A Young Man], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 28–31. The young man refers to J. C. Lavater (the founder of physiognomy, i.e., the teaching that a person’s exterior, particularly one’s facial features, are an expression of the characteristics of one’s soul) “Though I occupy myself with the study of physiognomy quite nearby. I’m actually a teacher at an educational institute” (p. 28). And a bit later, when Faust speaks of “nature,” the young man says that nature is “the true goddess” and that he is “her consecrated priest.” He also refers to Emile as “the book of the man of nature” and says that he sleeps with the book under his pillow, as “the conqueror of Persia” (i.e., Alexander the Great) slept with Homer under his pillow (p. 29). By Emile, he means Rousseau’s principal work of pedagogy, Émile ou De l’éducation [Emile, or Education], 4 vols. (1762; see ASKB 939–940, an edition from 1792, and ASKB 941–943, a Danish translation of 1796–1799). The scene with the young man in the peasant hut is excellent] Refers to the scene “Stube in einer Bauernhütte. Gewitter. / Ein Greis. Ein junges Weib. Ein Kind in der Wiege” [Room in a Peasant Hut. Thunderstorm. / An Old Man. A Young Wife. A Child in the Cradle], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 31–36, where the following directorial remark is included at the beginning of the scene: “(Faust and the young man enter.)” the scene at the learned society is also quite comical] Refers to the scene “In einer deutschen Stadt, wo eine gelehrte Gesellschaft sich befindet. / Zimmer des Präsidenten. / Der Präsident. Der Secretair” [In a German City, Where There Is a Learned Society. / The President’s Room. / The President. The Secretary], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 37–39; and the scene “Versammlungssaal. / Faust. Der Secretair” [Meeting Room. / Faust. The Secretary], p. 40. Faust’s observations at the Baltic (p. 41) are also quite remarkable] Refers to the scene “Hügel an

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

493

der Ostsee. / Faust” [Hill on the Baltic. / Faust], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 41–42. He finally arrives at the Ganges . . . contact with the spirits] Refers to the scene “Ländliche Gegend am Ganges. Ein Hain im Hintergrund. / Ein Mädchen schöpft Wasser an einer Quelle. Faust” [Rural District on the Ganges. A Grove in the Background. / A Young Woman Draws Water from a Spring. Faust], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 55–57; and to the continuation, “Faust. Der Bramine. Das Mädchen” [Faust. The Brahmin. The Young Woman], pp. 58–62. Also a reference to the scene that is set the following day, when Faust is alone with the Indian Brahman, who teaches him how he can come into contact with the spirit world by leading him into a cave before sunset, where he is to remain until midnight, fasting, after which a secret word will be entrusted to him (pp. 70–71). A spirit (Helim) now accompanies him . . . a youth, just as he himself is] Refers to the scene “Felsenhöle. Mitternacht. Faust spricht die geheimnißvollen Worte. Ein Dämmerlicht erhellt die Höle, und ein süßer Duft verbreitet sich darinn” [Mountain Cave. Midnight. Faust Speaks the Mysterious Words. A Twilight Illuminates the Cave, and a Sweet Aroma Is Diffused in It], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 72–90, where Faust concludes a pact with the spirits, though he still must undergo a trial lasting three days before he is to return and the pact can be fulfilled. When he returns at midnight on the third day, a voice says that he has passed the test and that he is included in the pact. And when the spirit asks in what form he is to show himself, Faust replies, “Assume the form of a young man of my age. Then my heart will cleave more closely to you” (p. 84). Then Faust learns that the spirit’s name is Helim, who thereafter accompanies him. Faust is now . . . (p. 92, Helim: Aber . . . für die Gattung)] Summary, with a cited passage, from the scene “Hütte des Braminen. / Faust. Helim. Idli” [Hut of the Brahmans. / Faust. Helim. Idli], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 91–108. When the old Brahman’s daughter, Idli, tells Faust that her father is dead, he remains unmoved by her sorrow; he says to Helim: “I have more tears

20

22

24

494

28

28

29

29

188

1

22

25

189

1

Literature on Faust et al.

for the sorrows of humanity” (p. 92). Thereafter Helim speaks the words Kierkegaard cites. He returns home . . . unhappy in his changed situation] On Faust’s return to Germany together with Helim, see Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 97–108. Here it is related that “Faust was doubly unhappy in his new situation” (p. 105). his old father dies] Refers to the scene “Am andern Morgen. Ländliche Gegend. / Faust wirft sich unter einer Buche nieder” [On the Second Morning. Rural District. / Faust Lies down under a Beech Tree], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 133– 136, where Helim comes and informs him that his father has quietly died (pp. 134–135). We again find Faust in a cemetery] Refers to the scene “Zwei Tage nachher. / Kirchhof. Abend. / Faust. Therese” [Two Days Later. / Cemetery. Evening. / Faust. Therese], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 141–144. Therese is Faust’s former lover and mother of his son, Karl, who is now five years old. He dies there see p. 144 . . . (A stroke of lightning kills him.)] Summary, with a cited passage, from the scene in the cemetery (→ 187,28) in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, p. 144. the fisherman’s song p. 108. Mein Hüttchen . . . Wird uns das Leben nicht zu lang] Quoted from the scene “Fischerhütte. / Ein Fischer sizt auf einer Rasenbank, und bessert an seinem Nezze. Er singt:” [Fisherman’s Hut. / A Fisherman Sits on a Grassy Bank, Mending His Nets. He Sings], in Szenen aus Fausts Leben, pp. 108–109. Der Faust der Morgenländer . . . vor der Sündfluth. Baghdad. 1797] i.e., F. M. von Klinger (→ 186,3), Der Faust der Morgenlaender, oder Wanderungen Ben Hafis. Erzaehlers der Reisen vor der Sündfluth [The Faust of the Orient, or the Wanderings of Ben Hafi: By an Antediluvian Narrator of the Journey] (Baghdad, 1797; abbreviated hereafter as Der Faust der Morgenlaender). p. 39. Über dem Kaukasus . . . Wolgerüchen der Pflanzen unsrer Erde] Quoted from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 39. p. 40. Aber höheres Entzüken . . . die schöne Begeistrung verfinstern] Quoted from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 40.

•

P a p e r 252 1835 •

Ben Hafi then continues . . . an Abdallah . . . lacking in character . . . The country . . . enthusiastic about what was good] A brief summary of Ben Hafi’s tale about Abdallah in Der Faust der Morgenlaender, pp. 44–67, esp. pp. 46, 66−67. p. 67. “Ich weiss, dass . . . die Hölle schon im Voraus”] Quoted from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 67, where this is said not of Ben Hafi, but of the caliph. But then the sultan . . . p. 76: “Sein erhabne Gestalt . . . anzeigte.” . . . depicted quite wonderfully])] Summary, with a cited passage, from Ben Hafi’s tale about Ebu Amru and Abdallah in Der Faust der Morgenlaender, pp. 68–76. ― p. 76 “Sein erhabne Gestalt . . . anzeigte.”: Cited from p. 76. Then . . . p. 79. der Geist: “ob ich mich . . . der Nebel nicht kalt.”] Brief summary, with a cited passage, from the continuation of Ben Hafi’s tale on the spirit that was conjured up, in Der Faust der Morgenlaender, pp. 78–79. To Abdallah’s question . . . (p. 83): [“]er ist alles das nicht . . . gewesen ist.”] Summary, with a cited passage, from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, pp. 82–83. p. 99 The caliph: darum sagt der Weise . . . seinen Ruf] Quoted from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 99. Up to this point, the Spirit had . . . so well-intended steps will have] Refers to Ben Hafi’s continuing tales about the spirit and Abdallah in Der Faust der Morgenlaender, esp. pp. 107–113, 146–150. Now, he finally demands . . . der Geist: [“]Sprich ein Ja . . . seiner Größe und Erhaltung willen.”] Summary, with a cited passage, from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 150. The Spirit, after having accompanied him . . . Abdallah . . . doing nothing whatever . . . Ich gleiche . . . zusammendrückt] Brief summary, with a cited passage, from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, pp. 174–267, esp. pp. 249–256, 260–267. p. 269. der Geist: die Wa[h]rheit . . . Täuscht die Wärme nicht die Sinne?] Quoted from Der Faust der Morgenlaender, p. 269. this book] i.e., Der Faust der Morgenlaender (→ 188,22).

11

14

19

2

190

6

10

13

15

20

3

191

Literature on Faust et al. 9

11

Fichte, Die Bestimmung des Menschen] J. G. Fichte, Die Bestimmung des Menschen [The Vocation of Man] (Berlin, 1800; see ASKB 500, a later edition from 1838). ― Fichte: Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814), German philosopher and father of I. H. Fichte, thus often referred to as “Fichte the elder”; from 1794, professor at Jena; in 1799, accused of atheism and had to leave Jena; from 1810, professor of philosophy at newly established university in Berlin. In addition to Die Bestimmung des Menschen, Kierkegaard owned Johann Gottlieb Fichte’s sämmtliche Werke [Complete Works of Johann Gottlieb Fichte], ed. I. H. Fichte, 11 vols. (Berlin, 1834–1846; ASKB 489–499). Fichte’s moral world order and new heaven] See, e.g., the following passage from “Drittes Buch. / Glaube” [Third Book: Faith], in Die Bestimmung des Menschen: “I say, it is the law which commands me to act that of itself assigns an end to my action; the same inward power that compels me to think that I ought to act thus, compels me also to believe that from my action some result will arise; it opens to my spiritual vision a prospect into another world, which is really a world, a state, namely, and not an action, but another and better world than that which is present to the physical eye; it constrains me to aspire after this better world, to embrace it with every power, to long for its realization, to live only in it, and in it alone find satisfaction . . . I cast a glance on the present relations of men towards each other and towards Nature . . . A voice within me proclaims with irresistible conviction. ‘It is impossible that it can remain thus; it must become different and better’ ” (pp. 217–218, 219; English translation from Johann Gottlieb Fichte, The Vocation of Man, trans. William Smith [Chicago: OpenCourt, 1931], pp. 112–113). See also: “It is not necessary that I should first be severed from the terrestrial world before I can obtain admission into the celestial one; I am and live in it even now, far more truly than in the terrestrial; even now it is my only sure foundation, and the eternal life on the possession of which I have already entered is the only ground why I should still prolong this earthly one. That which we call heaven does not lie beyond the grave; it is even here diffused around

•

P a p e r 252–253 1835 •

495

us, and its light arises in every pure heart. My will is mine, and it is the only thing that is wholly mine and entirely dependent on myself; and through it I have already become a citizen of the realm of freedom and of pure spiritual activity” (p. 258; English translation from Johann Gottlieb Fichte, The Vocation of Man, trans. William Smith, pp. 134–135). See in addition pp. 292–293: “[T]hus do I approach that Infinite Will; and the voice of conscience in my soul, which teaches me in every situation of life what I have there to do, is the channel through which again His influence descends upon me. That voice, sensualized by my environment, and translated into my language, is the oracle of the Eternal World which announces to me how I am to perform my part in the order of the spiritual universe or in the Infinite Will who is Himself that order . . . Thus do I stand connected with the one who alone has existence, and thus do I participate in His being. There is nothing real, lasting, imperishable in me, but these two elements: the voice of conscience, and my free obedience. By the first, the spiritual world bows down to me, and embraces me as one of its members; by the second I raise myself into this world, apprehend it, and react upon it” (English translation, pp. 152–153). Germany has its Faust] The historical Faust lived in Germany in the first half of the 16th century. The legend of Faust, or Dr. Faustus, goes back to a German folk book from 1587 (see Den i den gandske Verden bekiendte Ertz- Sort- Kunstner og Trold-Karl Doctor Johan Faust, og Hans med Dievelen oprettede Forbund, Forundringsfulde Levnet og skrækkelige Endeligt [The World-Renowned Arch-Doctor of Black Arts and Magic Johan Faust and His Pact Concluded with the Devil, His Life Full of Wonders, and His Terrible End] [Copenhagen, n.d., prior to 1823; German, 1587; ASKB U 35]); according to this legend, Faust made a pact with the devil, Mephistopheles, in order to gain knowledge and insight. The legend was subsequently subjected to countless literary variations. According to G. E. Lessing’s (never completed) version, and, especially, starting with J. W. Goethe’s tragedy Faust (part 1, 1808; and

18

191

496

18

19

Literature on Faust et al.

part 2 , 1831; see ASKB 1669: Faust. Eine Tragödie von Goethe. Beide Theile in Einem Bande [Faust: A Tragedy by Goethe; Both Parts in One Volume] [Stuttgart, 1834]), the Faust figure became the essence of striving and seeking for truth. In the mid-1830s, Kierkegaard studied the Faust legend and its development in C. L. Stieglitz’s essay “Die Sage vom Doctor Faust” [The Saga of Doctor Faust], published in Historisches Taschenbuch, ed. Fr. von Raumer, “Fünfter Jahrgang” (→ 186,28), pp. 125–210; see BB:12, from 1836, in KJN 1, 85– 96. Italy and Spain their D[on] Juan] The legend of Don Juan goes back to an old Spanish account of a dissolute nobleman, Don Juan Tenorio of Seville, who abducted the daughter of Don Gonzalo de Ulloa and thereafter killed Don Gonzalo. Heaven supposedly punished the murder of this respected commander of the clerical order of Calatrava by letting his statue cast Don Juan into hell. Under the name Tirso de Molina, the Spaniard Gabriel Tellez, a high-ranking cleric, wrote the first fictional account of Don Juan, El Burlador de Sevilla [The Trickster of Seville], ca. 1620. This was followed by the comedy, Don Juan ou le festin de pierre [Don Juan, or the Stone Banquet] by Molière (pseudonym for the French comic dramatist Jean Baptiste Poquelin) from 1665 and by G. Bertati’s Italian libretto to the opera Don Giovanni tenorio o sia Il convitato di pietra [Don Juan or the Stone Guest], by Giuseppe Gazzaniga from 1786. These three works are among the most important predecessors of Lorenzo da Ponte’s Italian libretto for W. A. Mozart’s opera Il dissoluto punito ossia Il Don Giovanni [The Dissolute Punished, or Don Giovanni] from 1787. the Wandering Jew] Ahasuerus, known from several legends recorded in chronicles in southern Europe and England at the beginning of the 13th century, which have lived on in popular books; see, e.g., J. Görres, Die teutschen Volksbücher [German Popular Books] (Heidelberg, 1807; ASKB 1440), pp. 200–203. According to one of the legends, which possibly has its origin in Armenia, the Wandering Jew is supposed to have been Pontius Pilate’s watchman who disdainfully struck Jesus on the back with his fist when Jesus

•

P a p e r 253 1835 •

was being led out of the palace; he is also said to have shouted to Jesus: “Go faster!” whereupon Jesus turned and replied: “I am going, but you shall wait until I come again.” According to other legends, the Wandering Jew is supposed to have refused to allow Jesus to rest on the doorsill of his house when bearing the cross to Golgotha. Later legends claim that he was a cobbler in Jerusalem, from which the term “Jerusalem’s cobbler” originates. As a punishment for what the Wandering Jew did to Jesus, he is supposed to wander the earth eternally, without rest and in despair. Denmark and northern Germany [Till] Eulenspiegel, etc.] The merry fool and mischievous trickster Ugelspegel, Ugelspejl, or Tiile Ugelspegel, Till Eulenspiegel is the main character and the title of a popular book that was based on oral and written sources from the late Middle Ages. The first Plattdeutsch edition stems from perhaps the end of the 15th century, but the earliest known printed edition was published in Strasbourg in 1515; the oldest Danish translation is probably from the end of the 16th century. According to the satirical tales in the popular book, after much wandering Till Eulenspiegel died in 1350 and was buried in the north German town of Mölln, near Lübeck, where his monument is engraved with an owl and a mirror; it is, however, very doubtful that the original tale concerns a historical person. Kierkegaard owned Underlig og selsom Historie om, Tiile Ugelspegel, En Bondes Søn, barnfød udi det Land Brunsvig [Wonderful and Strange Story of Till Eulenspiegel, a Son of a Peasant, Born in the Province of Brunswick], translated from the German (Copenhagen, n.d. [the title page says “printed this year,” presumably between 1842 and 1848]; ASKB 1469); see also En gandske ny og lystig Historie om Ulspils Overmand, Eller Robertus von Agerkaal, Mester udi Sammensyer-Amtet [An Entirely New and Merry Story of One Who Bested Eulenspiegel, or Robertus von Agerkaal, Master of the District of Discord] (Copenhagen, “printed this year” [year of publication has not been identified], ASKB 1467).

19

Notes for Paper 254 “Our Journal Literature”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Flemming Harrits Quotations and References Checked by Bjarke Mørkøre Hansen Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

498

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “ ‘Our Journal Literature’ ” is no. 448 in B-cat. and is among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were found in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). Paper 254 has been lost but has been transmitted indirectly through H. P. Barfod’s edition of Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP).

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 254 is a lecture that was delivered in the Student Union on November 28, 1835. The lecture is not registered in the Student Union’s “Report Book for the Inspector” for the period October 1833 to April 1837, but it consists of a reaction to J. A. Ostermann’s lecture on the most recent journal literature that had been delivered at the same location fourteen days earlier, on November 14, 1835. In a letter to H. P. Barfod, dated May 28, 1867, Ostermann confirms that the lecture was given (or, more correctly, read aloud), and he explains the following with respect to the circumstances: He [Kierkegaard] borrowed my essay after having informed the leadership of the Student Union that he wanted “to give a reading,” and the manuscript that you [Barfod] have found can scarcely be―indeed, I would say that it is impossible that it can be―anything other than the essay that he read aloud at the Student Union shortly thereafter, perhaps fourteen days after I did. There was a very large crowd present. People had expected a debate between us on the issue. But for one thing, I had only fleetingly heard him read his essay; and for another, as an eager politician I had no desire to take on such an opponent, whom I knew had only a slight interest in the reality of the matter. As far as I can remember it, Kierkegaard’s essay was

Critical Account of the Text rather ponderous; it bore the hallmark of his unique intellectual talents and was received with great applause. The essay was read aloud, but it would have been impudent and shameless to have offered it as a talk to such a learned public. If I remember correctly, it was not until a couple of years later, after an agreement with Lehmann, that I gave such an informal talk.”1

) KA, D pk. 5 [II]. Barfod published the letter in loose, abbreviated form in a note in EP 1–II, p. 188. It has been printed in full in Teddy Petersen, Kierkegaards polemiske debut. Artikler 1834–36 i historisk sammenhæng [Kierkegaard’s Polemical Debut: Articles from 1834 to 1836 in Historical Context], and in part in Bruce H. Kirmmse, ed. and trans., Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 21–22; translation slightly modified here.

1

499

Explanatory Notes 194

2 4

8

Journal Literature] i.e., newspapers. Lecture delivered . . . Nov. 28th 1835] The lecture is not registered in the Student Union’s “Rapportbog for inspektionshavende 1833 okt.– 1837 april” [Report Book for the Inspector for the Period October 1833 to April 1837], but in a letter to H. P. Barfod dated May 28, 1867 (KA, D pk. 5[II]; see the “Critical Account of the Text” above), J. A. Ostermann (→ 196,36) confirmed that it was delivered at the Student Union. ― Lecture: See Ostermann’s letter: “The essay was read aloud, but it would have been impudent and shameless to have offered it as a talk to such a learned public. If I remember correctly, it was not until a couple of years later, after an agreement with Lehmann, that I gave such an informal talk”; see Teddy Petersen, Kierkegaards polemiske debut. Artikler 1834-36 i historisk sammenhæng [Kierkegaard’s Polemical Debut: Articles from 1834 to 1836 in Historical Context] (Odense, 1977; abbreviated hereafter as Kierkegaards polemiske debut), and Bruce H. Kirmmse, ed. and trans., Encounters with Kierkegaard (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 21–22; translation slightly modified here. ― Student Union: In Kierkegaard’s time, the most important forum for young scholars, as well as a setting for concerts and parties, founded in 1820. The Student Union, originally housed in rented rooms on Købmagergade, moved ca. 1830 to a building at the corner of Boldhusgade and Admiralgade; in December 1835, it acquired a building on Holmens Kanal. The Student Union also had a continually growing library from which members could borrow books. Kierkegaard was a member from 1833 to 1839. still among the younger members] Kierkegaard had become a member of the Student Union on November 2, 1833; see “Forhandlingsprotokol 1832 5/5–1836 6/6” [Minutes, May 5, 1832–June 6, 1836] (Studenterforeningens arkiv, Senioratet

1) [Archives of the Student Union, Executive Committee, 1], Royal Library, Copenhagen, where under Monday, November 4, 1833, it is stated on p. 63 that Kierkegaard was “inscribed” as a “regular” member on November 2 of that month. this matter, which another member . . . given in the consciousness of most members] Refers to J. A. Ostermann’s (→ 196,36) lecture, delivered in the Student Union on November 14, 1835; see “Rapportbog for inspektionshavende 1833 okt.– 1837 april” (→ 194,4), where the following is noted: “Saturday, November 14th: Mr. Ostermann, philosophy student delivered a lecture. Nothing else.” In his letter to H. P. Barfod (→ 194,4), Ostermann writes the following in this connection: “In those days, the movements of the times tore some of us young people out of our poetic dreams and hurled us into political life, because in those days only a few individuals―at least among the trend-setting group in the Student Union―were taken with the idea [of politics]. But the alpha and omega of politics in those days was freedom of the press, which was exposed to persecution from above and to grumbling criticism from the public. Under these conditions I read my essay to a large crowd. It attracted a bit of attention, and I was immediately requested to turn it over to Joh[annes] Hage, who printed it in Fædrelandet [The Fatherland] in unedited form, except that the introduction, which had had a comic form, now took on a more serious dress” (Teddy Petersen, Kierkegaards polemiske debut, p. 53; Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard, p. 20). Ostermann’s lecture was published under the title “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” [Our Most Recent Journal Literature], in Fædrelandet, no. 71, January 22, 1836, cols. 521–530. In a note accompanying the published version, Ostermann remarks (col. 530): “This essay was originally intended for a smaller circle at the Student Union, where it was read in a somewhat different form. A number of

24

“Our Journal Literature” people have generously thought that it could also be of interest to a larger public, and this is primarily what has moved the author to permit it to be printed.” The printed article reads as follows: “Our Most Recent Journal Literature by J. Ostermann. About 4 years ago our journalistic literature first began to awaken interest and take on life among the people. This beginning occurred with Winther’s well-known Raketten [The Rocket]. Winther believed that he had been personally wronged and made use of the press to give vent to his anger and, in his helplessness, create for himself a source of income. As he possessed a certain virtuosity of expression and knew how to set forth his complaints in a manner that, though quite crude, was also very amusing, he not only gained a considerable number of readers, especially among the lower classes, but he also gave the people a taste for using the press to present their complaints and dissatisfactions. The mass of gutter newspapers with which literature was flooded during that period is still fresh in our memory. If we were to pass judgment on them as they were in and of themselves, we surely could not do otherwise than support the general view of the matter, inasmuch as these newspapers often operated with untruths, though more often with half-truths, and almost always lacked propriety in the way they expressed themselves. But there is another question as to whether there was not a healthful and permanent element in that literature. We have already said what this was: they awakened a desire to read and write. Six years ago, newspaper reading was still quite uncommon among the lower classes of the citizenry, and thus it was indeed necessary for there to be [col. 522] something quite special, which properly appealed to the taste of those people, to awaken their desire to read, and we cannot imagine anything better suited for this than that mocking of “the great,” that continual insistence about rights having been violated in quite individual cases. If this was not always the best sort of reading material, the poorer portions of it seemed to be a necessary evil in promoting a greater good. What was also very important was the influence which

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

501

that literature―namely Winther’s Raket―had in awakening the desire to write. There are many situations in relation to the government in which the individual can be personally harmed without his either being able or willing to make use of the risky business of a legal case, and in such cases the press can often come to the assistance of the person who has been wronged; and in many cases, even when one makes use of the courts in order to obtain justice, it is also desirable that the public be involved in the matter so that those who are guilty have a monitory example, and the innocent are shown the path to find the justice they have lost. It was not very long ago that the people in this country remained silent in the face of everything when they did not believe it advisable to make use of the assistance of the courts; but this shackle, which lay upon the people in that manner, became a convenient cover for the dishonest government official. But Rakketen came and the victims of injustice saw in the press a means to regain the justice they had lost, and those who perpetrated injustice began to fear the power that lies in the general consciousness of the people. It was also owing to this newspaper that people finally came to learn more about our press laws. Many in the public [col. 523] were surprised that a person dared speak out so boldly against government officials. But people quickly came to see that as long as one had the truth on one’s side, one did not need to fear the consequences of making bold use of the press; nor did it take very long before people began, in a much more lively and free fashion, to remove the veil from what had previously been closely wrapped and hidden from the world. These were the essential and lasting consequences of that gutter literature, and it is surely not saying too much to maintain that such newspapers have had an unconscious influence upon many, perhaps upon the most zealous opponents of that journal. We take leave of this first development of a more lively journalistic literature in order to proceed from it to point out several greater and more essential features that are present in the background. In the duchies, a more robust political life began somewhat earlier than among our-

502

“Our Journal Literature”

selves. Here we recall Lornsen’s little piece and everything it called forth. This piece took on historic significance by enunciating what the king subsequently decided to do: the establishment of the Provincial Estates. From that moment on, everyone began to become interested in politics; people expressed themselves, in writings great and small, on the significance of the institution, its suitability, its appropriate form, et al., and people expressed themselves on many political subjects with greater freedom than had formerly been the case. Our best journal, Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly] supplied a number of outspoken articles on matters connected with this. If, shortly before, it had only been from Raketten that people feared sharp attacks, now our premiere critical journal began―of course, in completely high-minded fashion―to raise serious complaints. Who doesn’t remember the courageous article on the system of mutual instruction [i.e., students teaching one another without teachers] that garnered so much attention? This was when our respected writing public first began to speak out; this was when we first saw what our law governing freedom of the press gives us the right to say and to write. Those articles were fruits [col. 524] of the spirit of the times, and in turn they had a reflexive impact on that spirit. However dissatisfied people were with those attacks by Raketten, it is nonetheless the case that, unfailingly, the government in general (and, especially, individuals in the government) were even more dissatisfied. The ordinance concerning the authors who had been punished for violations of the freedom of the press law makes clear the hesitation the government felt about allowing those attacks. Thus, there is no reasonable likelihood that it would have been completely satisfied with the expansion of greater freedom among the better class of the public. On the other hand, greater political consciousness had awakened among the popular classes; there were demands for greater openness; then information was supplied, and people thought they saw something dubious in it, so they became all the more curious to see more. If such information was denied, people thought something must be being concealed. People be-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

came increasingly eager―indeed, insistent―in their demands; ‘one must pay one’s taxes, one must, after all, know what they are used for,’ etc. Among the people, these ideas were also strengthened by the idea that forms the basis for the institution of the Estates: that it would in fact be an advantage to the whole if, as far as possible, the individuals―those who live in the actual situations―come to express themselves. The government itself had said the words: See with your own eyes and judge! And the people took up this call willingly, indeed, more willingly, than many could wish. In many respects, it was the government that had built things up―what wonder, then, if it was reluctant to see its own work torn down? It had familiarized itself with many situations, and in many respects it had seen them more clearly than the people had―how natural for it to insist upon its experience! And inasmuch as it had granted greater freedom, how easily must it not find it presumptuous that people demanded more than what was given[?] The people, on the other hand, were quite quick to complain about fruitless half-measures and demanded something whole as a condition for further progress. The people had thus become bolder and kept a closer watch [col. 525] on their superiors. Now, this was far from introducing a tension of a sort that could be a cause for fear, but the people’s former resignation and almost unthinking devotion were no longer present. Thus, here we see an opposition that arises naturally between a government and a people, and we ask the reader to keep this in mind. But now, as the people came increasingly to have the conviction that they ought to have more rights, have more information about the established order, participate more themselves in many matters: in our journalistic literature, as the organ of the people, this realization was accompanied by a steadily increasing forthrightness, a more stringent criticism of the established order. From now on, Kjøbenhavnsposten [The Copenhagen Post], which previously had largely devoted itself to aesthetic matters, adhered to the Liberal party, carrying many well-written contributions from talented contributors. Somewhat after Kjøbenhavnsposten began to

“Our Journal Literature” attract the attention of the public, Prof. David announced the launch of Fædrelandet [→ 204,13], and people awaited its publication with heightened attention. It arrived. It was much read and people found a number of especially good pieces in it: and if people had things to object to in a few other articles, on the whole, they were nonetheless well satisfied. However, the external circumstance that aroused even greater attention is quite wellknown. This prosecution did not exactly please the people―this is something we know. We shall strive to go through this matter as objectively as possible. First, a couple of general remarks. It is the nature of the matter that every reasonably liberal law concerning freedom of the press is drafted in rather indistinct and vague terms, even if the lawgiver, at the moment he wrote, placed a certain interpretation on the term, conditioned by the development of the spirit of the time at that particular period. But if the spirit of the time moves onward at a brisk pace, and the reading public thus gains a freer intellectual development, then it is clear that what could, for example, signify displeasure with the existing form of government at an earlier time―this same view could be heard and read without any offense at a later time. In other countries this development has indeed also ended up with matters concerning press freedom being decided by a jury. Thus, the spirit of the time conditions the interpretation of the law, though without, of course, offending against its spirit. It follows as a matter of course that in so rapidly progressing a time as ours, a free-spirited man has a tendency to put the broadest interpretation on the legal requirement. If to this one adds the circumstance that Prof. David’s predecessors had already, in a way, tempted the law―if I may use this expression― then it was very natural that, without slavishly having the law in mind in each and every detail, he essentially took into account what people had now become accustomed to communicating to the public, and that he thus stood at the boundary between the permissible and impermissible before he himself knew [col. 526] it. So much for the editor. What appeared natural to him also seemed so to the people: they were so accus-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

503

tomed to seeing daring and outspoken utterances that in a certain sense they had perhaps forgotten the limits on freedom of the press imposed by our laws, and therefore, when the public saw Fædrelandet, it did not think it found anything culpable in it: people spoke of “the right to petition” and “what good can it do,” and in them they found one or another thing expressed quite daringly, but in accordance with the whole manner in which people had begun to speak, people saw it as a part of the order of the day. People no longer became so astonished as when people all around town had shuddered over the article about the system of mutual instruction. Thus it did not occur to the public that those articles could induce people to express dissatisfaction with the existing form of government, much less cause rebellion. This is how one must view the legal proceedings against David from the people’s standpoint. The government saw the matter differently. When Fædrelandet appeared, it appears that the government had already looked upon the increasing freedom of the press―which in the view of those in power, was of a far more serious character than in the view of the people―with displeasure and fear, and this seems to have evoked the government’s wish to, in one way or another, set a limit to what was, to its way of thinking, a pernicious abuse. The people believed that the spirit of the time permitted the most lenient interpretation of the law, but this surely did not readily occur to the government. Thus the prosecution was begun. Here we again ask the readers to bear in mind the naturally developing opposition, in which it would be difficult for the government to go over to the people’s view of things, and for the latter to go over to the government’s. Simultaneously with David’s case, a less significant legal case was brought, in which an author was convicted of having spread a rumor. Shortly thereafter, a popular petition was presented to the king, asking that the law courts retain ultimate jurisdiction in matters concerning freedom of the press. The king responded. In the meantime, David’s trial was decided by the law courts, and here and elsewhere were heard expressions of joy from the people. The govern-

504

“Our Journal Literature”

ment, on the other hand, thought it necessary to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. If in the preceding historical development we have succeeded in presenting clearly the naturally progressing opposition between the government and the people, then we have now come to the point from which we believe we are able to provide an overview of the case we here want to illuminate. We confess that what has primarily given us occasion to write these lines is the general displeasure expressed by the public, if not against the liberal tendency generally, then against individual expressions of it as they are found in our liberal [col. 527] newspapers. With this, our wish is not to defend any particular political creed any more than we would want to give unconditional praise to every particular expression of it; rather, there is a certain aspect of the life of the people that we will here attempt to present in its proper light. What has particularly been complained about is: 1) bitterness and an improper tone, 2) a certain lack of honesty and openness that is so dear to Danes. We declare that so far are we from being blind worshippers of every utterance that bears the badge of the Liberal party that, on the contrary, we are often compelled to grant what is true and well-founded in those complaints; but it has been unpleasant for us to hear these lamentations every day, to hear much that is good torn down every day, often only because the form was weak. Were it merely a single coterie that despaired, it would truly not be worth wasting ink and paper on illuminating this matter. We respect that just as little as we do certain young liberals who, cigar in mouth, puff an entire state into the air on a single cloud of smoke. If this complaint emanated from individuals among the sort of people whose Liberalism or non-Liberalism is based on the magnitude of the office that the government has granted them, then one could also remain silent. But these complaints emanate from many free-spoken, honest, and truth-loving characters. Had these people put forth their complaints in one or another piece of writing or a newspaper, those who had been attacked would surely have sought to defend themselves; but this is not in fact what has happened. In general, it

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

looks as if our Liberals have captured the journalistic press, and in many respects this is irreparable damage; had our Liberals, in positive fashion, presented opinions to combat, the truth would gain infinitely from it. But in fact the situation is that there are many among us who would rather tiptoe around and grumble than acknowledge their views to the world honestly and openly. We confess that this situation―that our Conservatives shy away from the light of day―must awaken reasonable doubt concerning them. If the device on their banner is truth, then they certainly have no reason to conceal themselves: they can enter into battle with much greater security and much less danger of sacrificing their temporal well-being and future happiness―and yet, how rarely this happens. ― If our Conservatives themselves believe in the doctrines they espouse, why then do they tolerate another party exerting upon the people a tendency that is entirely opposed to the one they themselves espouse? But, to the matter at hand. If one assumes the above-mentioned relationship between the government and the people to be as stated, and if in the light of what we have explained thus far one thinks of what Liberal journalism must become, one will easily see how the tension that has arisen between the government and the people must summon forth a rather active opposition that does not always sweeten what is bitter. Had matters been otherwise [col. 528], one would in fact have expected a more unbounded confidence in the people. It is quite well known that the Danish government, which generally is on a friendly footing with the people, has recently exhibited a certain unease, and in several cases during times of trouble, it has shown―indeed, we know no other word for it―mistrust. If, in some cases, this actual or presumed mistrust was more likely a source of sadness than of bitterness in many people, it is nonetheless readily explained that, in an opposition party, what had annoyed many people now took on a somewhat more serious and starkly defined profile. It will, of course, be granted that the bitterness that is found here is nothing in comparison with that exhibited in the periodical press of other countries. But, one replies, if this mistrust is

“Our Journal Literature” indeed something real, should it be avenged with bitterness? Could we not better say what we want to say in a calmer and more thoughtful manner?―We have nothing against this, when it happens, but if indeed it occasionally does not happen thus, then let us, after all, beware that we do not, on account of all this sobriety, ourselves fall asleep and prattle others to sleep. There is a truth we must never forget, that when a person of energetic and powerful character expresses himself, the words take on a particular, characteristic coloration because the thought is particular and characteristic; however easy it might seem to many people to omit a word here and there, one must nonetheless consider how essential this little word―as people might call it―is for the writer, how completely and utterly the thought contained in it is a part of the writer’s individual character, and how this word is precisely a matter of major importance to him. To force a certain form upon a writer is to put a muzzle on him.― But viewed from the aspect of reality, one indeed regards such bitter words as untimely and unhelpful because they irritate the people and irritate the government. Irritate the people―it would indeed not be good if the people had such little confidence in the government that a single word in a newspaper incited it to rebellion. The ill will with which such words are often greeted is proof of the opposite. Never forget that whatever good emerges does so only by means of struggle; never forget that the government can err just as the people can. The government has the power, and everyone who means honestly and well by his fatherland must wish that this power be respected and obeyed; but if, as is human, it has erred in one thing or another, then it is only reasonable that another voice be heard, and the greater the power the people have granted others over its weal and woe, the more natural it is that the opposition also be powerful. This opposition from the press―as history tells―has always been accompanied by a more powerful political development, and a government that is in general as moderate as the Danish truly has nothing [col. 529] to fear from a little bitterness in a newspaper. But bear in mind also that such words only

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

505

acquire power when they encounter a truth that lies in the consciousness of the people, and thus that what constitutes the danger is the people itself, or that which has had an effect upon the people; but by no means is it the press that is so much to be feared; it possesses only an awakening, not a creative, power. People feel the lack of a certain honesty and openness. We have great respect for this accusation. If something has been reported that is manifestly false and mendacious, let it be given its proper stamp. At the same time, let us be cautious in passing judgment. It is well known that just as many branches of the government administration still remain concealed, so, too, could (and indeed can) many government officials commit a great deal of deception and dishonesty without the people having any easy way to get hold of the proofs necessary to support a legal indictment. Inquisitorial judicial methods are absent from our legal system, and this ought to regarded as something good, but because of this, an accuser is in many cases prevented from producing evidence, even in cases where he is most clearly in the right. If, however, a man has the firm conviction that the truth is on his side in such a case, and it is absolutely necessary for him to get this truth expressed, it is quite natural―at any rate very much blameless―if he makes use the press as a covert means to air his views. The people will understand the outcry; the civil servant will understand it; and the fact that a truth of this sort is expressed in print always has some deterrent effect. This is one of the cases in which one will probably dare permit himself the use of such covert means; but―this we concede―the most sparing use of them. There is also another observation that seems essential here. Not long ago there was a lively debate in our literature concerning whether or not we have censorship. We are not going to involve ourselves in a terminological dispute here. It does seem undeniable, however, that we have the courts instead of a censorship committee as the highest authority for deciding matters concerning freedom of the press; but on the other hand we nonetheless share one essential disadvantage with those states in which censorship, in the strict sense, has been intro-

506

“Our Journal Literature”

duced, and that is that an author who is convicted of a violation of the law concerning freedom of the press loses his right to acquaint the public with the matter for which he was convicted. Now, it could indeed easily happen for an author to become guilty of the law that has been adopted without being guilty with respect to the moral law, and it would be a great consolation to him if the people’s consciousness provided him with moral compensation for the loss he must suffer under the law; but because this is not now the case among us, it truly does not seem strange to me if an author exercises the greatest [col. 530] caution in connection with every expression that could entail legal jeopardy. If, however, he now has something to say in connection with an action taken by the government, and he has an inner conviction that this truth must be spoken in a manner that is more outspoken and urgent than the press law permits, then, under such circumstances, an author easily comes to seek a way out, and thus he comes away from the straight path he had wished to tread. And with this, enough said about that. If, then, we hold fast to the fact that this tendency in our journal literature has been summoned forth, as the fruits of a particular seed, by the transformation that has taken place in the entire life of our people; and that one or another action taken by the government can provide grounds for complaint; that this is what most often occasions the utterances of the publicist; that these utterances can only take on substance when they encounter something that resides in the general consciousness of the people; that the growth and true welfare of the state rest upon the people’s own living interest in its affairs; and if one adds to this that our press law sets very narrow limits for the journalist: then we hope that people will not judge these utterances all too strictly and that people will never forget the truth concerning the reality because of an error in the form. Let us beware of a one-sided deification of one or another party, but let us acknowledge the good wherever we find it. In general, what we have had in mind here have been attacks on the government, because so-called personal attacks seem less important to us. At the

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

same time, we do not deny that we have several times found such crude vehemence and unabashed coarseness in these that they deserve to be banished from all literature. Nonetheless we will maintain that every attack is more or less personal to the extent that what is being attacked has its basis in a person, and that, conversely, when one attacks a person, one can say that one is attacking an action that has its origin in a person. If a person is the actual cause of a bad effect, what wonder, then, that the attack is more upon the person and not upon the action?” a mighty tree . . . from the mustard seed] Allusion to Lk 13:18–19. the liberal newspapers] Refers primarily to the newspapers Kjøbenhavnsposten (→ 197,16) and Fædrelandet (→ 204,13) ; the latter, in particular, was the preferred organ of “the Liberals,” which from ca. 1835 became the unofficial collective designation for those opposed to absolute monarchy in Denmark. But a newspaper such as Den Frisindede [The Liberal] also devoted space to liberal writers. the conservative ones] Refers primarily to the conservative newspaper Den Berlingske politiske og Avertissements-Tidende [Berling’s Political and Advertisement Times], generally referred to as Berlingske Tidende, founded in 1748; it appeared twice a day, with the morning edition carrying primarily advertisements and announcements, while the evening edition carried articles and editorials. Refers also to the conservative newspaper Dagen [The Day] (founded 1803), which came out six days a week with Danish and foreign news. But the designation could also refer to Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post [Copenhagen’s Flying Post], which was edited by J. L. Heiberg, who also supplied a great deal of the material himself; it appeared twice weekly from January 1, 1827, to December 21, 1828; in 1830, it came out three times a week; it appeared at irregular intervals (ca. once a week) as Interimsblade [Occasional Pages] in the years 1834–1837. Starting ca. 1830, and especially in the later period (1834–1837) Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post became more political, with a conservative tendency.

11

195

42

1

196

“Our Journal Literature” 3

5

9

12

our contemporaries’ ferociously sanguine expectations] Presumably, a reference to the Liberals’ hope for a constitutional monarchy with a free constitution (→ 195,42). in climbing Mount Tabor . . . not come into the Promised Land] Allusion to Deut 34:1–4. A Christian tradition has it―probably incorrectly―that Jesus’ transfiguration on a mountain (see Mt 17:1–8) took place on Mount Tabor; see, e.g., the article “Thabor” in G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Dictionary of the Bible, for Use by Students, University Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71), vol. 1, p. 696. dares ascend Odin’s throne . . . the struggles and foolishness of human beings] In Nordic mythology, Odin was “the highest god and was called the Father of All or the Creator, Sustainer, and Lord of all Things”; he lived in Valhalla in a splendid palace “where he ascended his throne―upon which no one dared sit unpunished―every morning, overseeing all the earth and the people” (J. B. Møinichen, Nordiske Folks Overtroe, Guder, Fabler og Helte indtil Frode 7 Tider [The Superstitions, Gods, Fables and Heroes of the Nordic Peoples up to the Times of Frode VII] [Copenhagen, 1800; ASKB 1947], pp. 346–348). ― smile: Perhaps an allusion to the laughter of the Olympian gods; see Homer’s Iliad, song 1, v. 599, and Odyssey, song 8, v. 326, both of which read, “But enormous laughter shrilled forth from the blessed gods” (Christian Wilster, trans., Homers Iliade [Homer’s Iliad], pt. 1 [Copenhagen, 1836], p. 17, and Christian Wilster, trans., Homers Odyssee [Homer’s Odyssey], pt. 1 [Copenhagen, 1837], p. 108). that time . . . when people . . . company of wild animals instead of . . . living among human beings] Perhaps an allusion to the description of the beginnings and subsequent development of human society that Aristotle sets forth in his Politics, 1252b–1253a. According to Aristotle, human beings at first lived in scattered families that in time coalesced into small kingdoms, finally reaching their perfection in the city-state (polis). According

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

507

to Aristotle, a person who is not a part of a society is either an animal or a god. hermits] Refers to the monks who in the early Christian period lived an ascetic, solitary existence and were called anchorites, some of whom lived in complete isolation in the desert, while others were attached to monasteries; see, e.g., § 73 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Allgemeinen Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of General Church History], 2 vols. (Halle, 1833; see ASKB 158–159, a 3rd ed. from 1838), vol. 1, pp. 194–198. Mr. Ostermann] Johannes Andreas Ostermann (1809–1888), Danish teacher and politician; entered the University of Copenhagen in 1829, took his examination in philology. In a letter to H. P. Barfod, dated, April 25, 1868, Ostermann related the following concerning his relationship to Kierkegaard: “When you met him he was usually in the company of somebody; he was on the same footing― equally close or distant―with most of these companions. We met often at the Student Union or at tearooms, and we frequently went on from there to take walks around the lakes. Despite all his work, he was constantly on the street or in public places. Thus oral communication was so easy and convenient that it was unnecessary to write” (Bruce H. Kirmmse, Encounters with Kierkegaard [→ 194,4], pp. 63–64, p. 63). Winther’s Raket] Refers to Raketten, founded by Mathias Winther ca. October 1, 1831, who served as its editor until the first quarter of 1834, when it was published and edited by G. L. Baden, and thereafter by R. Philipp from August 16, 1834, to June 7, 1835, when the paper ceased publication, though from September 23 to November 11, 1835, it continued as Cometen [The Comet], published and edited by R. Philipp. Raketten came out once a week, though in 1833 and early 1834 it appeared twice weekly. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 [Danish Newspapers, 1634–1989], vol. 1, 1634–1847 (Odense, 1989), p. 153. Both Raketten and Cometen were of a sensational character, and together with other scandal sheets such as Sandhedsfaklen [The Torch of Truth] (→ 197,14), Raketten med Stjerner [The Rocket with Stars] (November 1832–March 1834), Lynstrålen [The Lightning Flash] (April 1833–

15

36

36

508

37

41

197

1

4

“Our Journal Literature”

January 1834), Riim- og Prosa-Posten [The Rhymed and Prose Post] (April–August 1834), and Sværmeren [The Fanatic] (June–September 1834), they were often known as “rocket literature.” ― Winther’s: Mathias Winther (1795–1834), Danish author and publisher; for a time functioned as a military surgeon and as military librarian for the dragoon regiment in Odense (→ 197,9); published a number of collections of poetry and two major bibliographic works. His publication of Raketten, which garnered much attention and sold well, involved him in a number of legal cases, and in 1832 he was sentenced to bread and water for libel, a judgment he appealed to the Supreme Court, but by the time a more lenient sentence was handed down (see “Nyheds-Post” [News Column], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 113, May 12, 1835, p. 451), he had died (on February 26, 1834). Mr. Ostermann’s appreciation of Winther’s talent] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 521. I came into possession of Ostermann’s manuscript] According to Ostermann’s letter to H. P. Barfod of May 28, 1867 (→ 194,4), Kierkegaard borrowed Ostermann’s essay; see the “Critical Account of the Text” above. the germs of the subsequent development] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), cols. 521–523. Politivennen] Copenhagen weekly newspaper, founded in 1798 by newspaper publisher and book printer K. H. Seidelin, who served as editor until his death in 1811, when the paper ceased publication. In 1815, it was acquired by Kristian Kristensen, a writer and a major in the civil guard, who served at the paper’s publisher and editor from January 1816. Politivennen [Friend of the Police] carried local material, with the intention of serving as an organ through which private citizens could voice their complaints and dissatisfaction, focusing on failures and weaknesses in public administration. Despite the fact that it declared itself to be a friend of the police, the paper also kept watch on abuses of power and authority by the police. Because it favored reform

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

and was critical of state power, it was regarded as an opposition newspaper. In the 1830s, owing to competition from Raketten (→ 196,36) and Sandhedsfaklen (→ 197,14), Politivennen increasingly lost circulation and importance. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 (→ 196,36), vol. 1, pp. 132–133. his successors] i.e., the historian, jurist, and author Gustav Ludvig Baden (1764–1840) and the military surgeon and newspaper publisher Rasmus Philipp (d. 1839). the existing constitution] Denmark had been an absolute monarchy since 1660; see Kongeloven [The Royal Law] (1665, first published in 1709). the devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor] See the back page of Raketten (→ 196,36), no. 10, [November] 1831, p. 160, where the following is stated: “At Stormgade 192, 2nd floor, one can acquire Noget om en Fattigbestyrerdjævel [Something about the Devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor], in an amicable address to the Director of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor, Mr. Major Mangor, by M. Winther, bearing the motto: ‘When the devil takes on the form of the director of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor, he is the worst of all devils.’ 16 Shill.[ings].” The same advertisement was repeated on the back page of Raketten, no. 11, 1831, p. 176, with the addition of following: “Appeal to the king and the people concerning Major and Director of the Poor Mangor in Copenhagen, and Chamberlain Jens Benzon in Odense, by M. Winther; 3 signatures, with a nice cover, 2 marks.” This refers to two books by M. Winther (→ 196,36): Skrivelse til Hr. Major, Ridder og Fattigdirektør Mangor om en Fattigbestyrerdjævel, med et Par Ord om hvorledes en Fattigbestyrer ikke bør være [Letter to Mr. Major, Knight, and Director of the Poor Mangor concerning a Devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor, with a Few Words about How a Director of the Poor Ought Not to Conduct Himself] (Copenhagen, 1831) (the pamphlet, which is sixteen pages long and bears the above-mentioned motto, was published in second and third enlarged editions in that year); and Appel til Kongen og Folket

4

7

8

“Our Journal Literature” om Major, Ridder og Fattigdirektør C.F. Mangor i Kjøbenhavn og Kammerh., Ridder og Fattigdirektør J. Benzon i Odense [Appeal to the King and the People concerning Major and Director of the Poor Mangor in Copenhagen, and Chamberlain Jens Benzon in Odense] (Copenhagen, 1831; preface dated November 14, 1831). See also the article “Skrivelse til Hr. Stud. chir. R. Philipp om Fattigbestyrerdjævelen” [Letter to Mr. R. Philipp, Student of Surgery, concerning the Devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor], in Raketten, no. 12 (1831), pp. 178–179, where Winther refers to a challenge to “my view in my amicable letter to Mr. Major Mangor.” See also the article “Et meget velmeent Tilbud” [A Very Well-Intended Offer], in Raketten, no. 2, January 14, 1832, pp. 20–21, in which the paper’s editor offers “all the poorhouses of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor a number of copies of his piece, ‘The Devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor,’ published some time ago,” and offers “to give every poorhouse an illuminated engraving that depicts a Devil of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor in conversation with a dignified lady and an actual poor person, in addition to which I―for reasons that one can read about in my ‘Appeal to the King and the People’―have occasion to make a gift of two such engravings to [The Church of] Our Savior’s Workhouse.” See also the article “Af Abderas Avis” [From Abdera’s Paper], in Raketten, no. 3, January 21, 1832, pp. 47–48, where it is related that there has recently been much talk concerning the spurs, gilded with genuine gold, of the director of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor, which suddenly disappeared from his heels about 6 or 8 weeks ago.” See also the article “Endnu mere om Kjøbenh. Fattigvæsen” [Even More concerning the Copenh[agen] Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor], in Raketten, no. 5, February 4, 1832, pp. 69–72, where criticism is directed at the bureaucracy in the Poorhouse Administration under Major Mangor, pp. 71–72; the article “Skrivelse fra Helved til Magisteren” [Letter from Hell to the Magister], in Raketten, no. 6, February 11, 1832, pp. 89–91, which notes

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

509

that the devil “walks around in the form of a Director of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor,” pp. 89–90; and the article “Noget som vil interessere alle” [Something That Will Interest Everyone], in Raketten, no. 33, April 27, 1833, pp. 407–408, where it is revealed that the director of the Welfare Assistance Administration for the Poor, Major Mangor, has a total annual salary of 2,200 rix-dollars, while the inspector at the institutions under the Welfare Administration for the Poor has a monthly salary of only 20 rix-dollars. See, lastly, the article “Een Stemme til Fordeel for Hr. Major Mangor” [One Voice in Support of Mr. Major Mangor], in Raketten, no. 40, October 6, 1832, pp. 653–654. outpost skirmishes] See M. Winther (→ 196,36), Forpostfægtning med Oberst Christian Høegh-Guldberg og Stabskirurg Tønder, med et Par Livsbilleder [Outpost Skirmish with Colonel Christian HøeghGuldberg and Staff Surgeon Tønder, with a Couple of Sketches from Life] (Copenhagen, 1831; with an introduction dated “in January 1831”), in which Winther presents a harsh critique of the poor provisions―which to some extent were deleterious to health―provided for recruits in the dragoon regiment on Funen; in addition, Winther repeats an accusation against Lieutenant Hannibal Sehested for having flogged many recruits and for having threatened to flog the executioner’s son (→ 197,10). In this same piece, Winther further relates how he―in his view―had been improperly dismissed by Colonel Høegh-Guldberg and Staff Surgeon Tønder for reasons of “weakness,” in order to get him removed from the regiment, which is why he had sent a complaint to the king. See also Supplement eller Randgloser til Forpostfægtningen med Oberst Christian Høegh-Guldberg og Stabskirurg Tønder, indeholdende et Par Blade af min Portefeuille og en lille Skjærmyssel [Supplement or Marginal Notes, Containing a Couple of Pages from My Portfolio and a Little Quarrel] (Copenhagen, 1831), and Læsning for Publicum, eller Sagen: Oberst Christian Høegh-Guldberg og Stabschirurg Tønder, contra Eskadronschirurg M. Winther [Reading Matter for the Public, or the Case: Colonel Christian HøeghGuldberg and Staff Surgeon Tønder vs. Squadron Surgeon M. Winther], ed. M. Winther, nos. 1–8

9

510

“Our Journal Literature”

(Copenhagen, 1838; with the preface to the first issue dated August 10, 1831). See the continuation of this in the articles “Nogle meget uskyldige Spørgsmaale til Hr. Stabschirurg Tønder” [Some Very Innocent Questions Directed at Mr. Staff Surgeon Tønder], in Raketten (→ 196,36), no. 1, 1831, pp. 12–15; “Mere om Stabschirurgens Hjerte” [More on the Staff Surgeon’s Heart], in Raketten, no. 2, 1831, pp. 31–32; “Skræddermester Lau og Stabschirurg Tønder” [Master Tailor Lau and Staff Surgeon Tønder], in Raketten, no. 3, 1831, pp. 44–45; and “Raketskud” [Rocket Salvo], in which the first piece concerns Staff Surgeon Tønder, in Raketten, no. 10 (1831), pp. 158–159. See also the articles “Dokumenter, som afgive Beviis paa, at Rekrutterne i fynske Dragonregiment have stærke Rygge og god Taalmodighed” [Documents That Provide Proof That the Recruits in the Dragoon Regiment on Funen Have Strong Backs and Plenty of Patience], pts. 1–3, in which reference is made to Col. Christian Høegh-Guldberg, to accusations concerning the rough treatment to which the recruits at the training school in Odense had been subjected, and to the subsequent demand that a court-martial be convened, in Raketten, no. 7, February 18, 1832, pp. 99–103; no. 10, March 10, 1832, pp. 145–147; no. 40, October 6, 1832, pp. 654–664; and no. 41, October 13, 1832, pp. 665– 670; and the article “Regimenternes Hestelæger, contra Regimenternes Menneskelæger” [The Regiment’s Horse Doctors vs. the Regiment’s Human Being Doctors] in Raketten, no. 11, March 17, 1832, pp. 161–164. See also the last page of Raketten, no. 14, April 7, 1832, p. 224, where there is an advertisement for the second printing of the little piece Stævning, Indlæg og Dom i Sagen Oberst, Kommandør af Dannebroge og Dannebrogsmand, samt Chef for det fynske Regiment lette Dragoner og Medlem af det nordiske Oldskriftselskab etc. etc. etc. von Høegh Guldberg, hans gule Moppe Ami, contra Raketten [Summons, Pleading, and Judgment in the Case of Colonel, Commander and Knight of the Order of the Dannebrog, as Well as Chief of the Funen Regiment of Light Dragoons and Member of the Nordic Ancient Text Society, etc. etc., von Høegh Guldberg, His Yellow Pug Dog Ami, vs. Raketten], ed. M. Winther, a “Squadron

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Surgeon most graciously dismissed, without pension, ‘owing to infirmity’ ” (Copenhagen, 1832); the article “Oberst, Kommandør af Dannebroge og Dannebrogsmand, samt Chef for det fynske Regiment lette Dragoner og Medlem af det nordiske Oldskriftselskab etc. etc. etc. von Høegh Guldberg, hans gule Moppe Ami’s aabne Skrivelse til Raketten” [Colonel, Commander and Knight of the Order of the Dannebrog, as Well as Chief of the Funen Regiment of Light Dragoons and Member of the Nordic Ancient Text Society, etc. etc., von Høegh Guldberg, His Yellow Pug Dog Ami’s Open Letter to Raketten], decorated with a naive drawing of a dog, in Raketten, no. 17, April 28, 1832, pp. 257–259; the article “Nok en Proces med Oberst Guldberg” [Another Legal Case with Colonel Gulberg], in Raketten, no. 19, May 12, 1832, pp. 301–302; the article “Doctor Nølcke, Escadronschirurg ved det fynske Regiment lette Dragoner, stadig Medlem af Postgaardens Conversationsstue, Medlem af alle Auctioner i og om Odense, p. t. ustadig Medlem af Regimentets Sygehus etc. hans sorte Kjøter Nettes aabne Skrivelse” [Doctor Nølcke, Squadron Surgeon of the Funen Regiment of Light Dragoons, Regular Member of the Post Office Conversation Society, Member of All Auctions in and around Odense, at Present Occasional Member of the Regimental Infirmary, etc.: His Black Mongrel Nette’s Open Letter], decorated with a naive drawing of a dog, in Raketten, no. 26, June 30, 1832, pp. 422–423; and the article “Rejsebilleder fra Fyen” [Illustrations from a Journey on Funen], in Raketten, no. 48, December 1, 1832, p. 780, where Colonel Guldberg’s late dog Ami is mentioned. After a bit more than a year as publisher and editor, M. Winther writes of his “outpost skirmishes” in “Afregning med Læseren” [Settling of Accounts with the Reader], in Raketten, no. 52, December 29, 1832, p. 854, and, as an example that no organ is stronger and more direct than the press, Winther points out that in the absence of the most gracious free permission with which Raketten has spoken out until now, “the abuses protested against in this newspaper― among others, those in the dragoon regiment on Funen―would, scarcely have come to the foot of

“Our Journal Literature”

10

the throne, because the person who had himself been abused would never have requested protection, out of fear of greater abuse to come, and only few people possess sufficient endurance to expose themselves to hatred, persecution, and the opinions of others by speaking for the cause of the injured.” And further, p. 855, Winther notes that after having focused attention, during the previous year, on the abuses Guldberg perpetrated on his regiment, he had occasion to observe “the condition of the regiment after a year’s time. Instead of the faces that formerly had been so dispirited and sad, I now saw nothing but people who took joy in living, who were happy in serving the garrison because they were no longer being abused.” In this connection, see also no. 1, “Til Oberst von Høegh-Guldberg” [To Colonel von Høegh-Guldberg], in the article “Julespøg og Nytaarsløjer” [Christmas Fun and New Year’s Jollity], in Raketten, no. 5, January 19, 1833, pp. 56–58. See also the following: “Rejsebilleder fra Fyen” [Travel Sketches from Funen], in Raketten, no. 9, February 2, 1833, pp. 108–109; “Guldbergiana” in Raketten, no. 23, March 23, 1833, pp. 281–285, as well as the back page of the same issue, p. 288; Raketten, no. 27, April 6, 1833, p. 336; Raketten, no. 39, May 18, 1833, pp. 465–469 (→ 197,10) ; Raketten, no. 43, June 1, 1833, pp. 513– 516; Raketten, no. 41, May 25, 1833, pp. 496–497; Raketten, no. 104, December 31, 1833, p. 1234. Hannibal Sehested] See M. Winther’s (→ 196,36) introduction to the article “Dokumenter, som afgive Beviis paa, at Rekrutterne i fynske Dragonregiment have stærke Rygge og god Taalmodighed. II” [Documents That Provide Proof That the Recruits in the Dragoon Regiment on Funen Have Strong Backs and Plenty of Patience: II], in Raketten (→ 196,36), no. 10, March 10, 1832, pp. 145–146, where it is stated that the lieutenant who is discussed in the letter in the paper from the executioner in Odense, was named “Hannibal Sehested, a young hopeful and a special favorite of the regiment chief, Mr. Colonel von Høegh-Guldberg, known for his profoundly generous heart.” The letter from the executioner, J. H. Stengel, makes it clear that Hannibal Sehested had flogged recruits on many

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

511

occasions and had threatened Stengel’s son with flogging; Stengel accuses Sehested of in fact delighting in flogging the soldiers (pp. 146–147) (→ 197,9). See, in addition, “Erklæring i Anledning af et Besøg” [Declaration on the Occasion of a Visit], in Raketten, no. 12, March 24, 1832, pp. 189–192, where M. Winther relates the following: “Midday on Saturday, between 1 and 2 o’clock, Mr. Kammerjunker and Lieutenant Hannibal von Sehested, of the Dragoon Regiment on Funen, paid me the honor of visiting me, armed, in my rooms, and gave me to understand, in a manner concerning which I am uncertain whether to interpret as a threat or a request, that I had better take care if I wrote anything concerning him.” See also “Dokumenter, der afgive Bevis paa, at Rekrutterne i fynske Dragonregiment have stærke Rygge og god Taalmodighed. III” [Documents Which Prove That the Funen Dragoon Regiment Has Strong Backs and Is Quite Patient: III] in Raketten, no. 40, October 6, 1832, pp. 654−664 and no. 41, October 13, 1832, pp. 665–670; “Beretning fra Smedemester Aber om hans Fataliteter Veddeløbsdagene” [Report from Master Blacksmith Aber on His Misfortunes on the Days during the Races], in Raketten, no. 45, November 10, 1832; “Spørgsmaal til Kammerjunker Hannibal Sehested” [Question Addressed to Kammerjunker Hannibal Sehested], in Raketten, no. 50, December 15, 1832, pp. 822–823; “Afregning med Læseren” [Settling of Accounts with the Reader], in Raketten, no. 52, December 29, 1832, p. 854; “III. Til Kammerjunker og Ljeutenant Hannibal von Sehested” [III: To Kammerjunker and Lieutenant Hannibal von Sehested], in “Julespøg og Nytaarsløjer” [Christmas Fun and New Year’s Jollity], in Raketten, no. 5, January 19, 1833, pp. 60–63; “Anmodning til Kammerjunker Hannibal Sehested” [Request Directed to Kammerjunker Hannibal Sehested], in Raketten, no. 15, February 23, 1833, pp. 184–187, and “Rejsebilleder fra Fyen” [Travel Sketches from Funen], in the same issue, pp. 189–191; “Guldbergiana” in Raketten, no. 23, March 23, 1833, pp. 281−285, as well as the back page of the same issue, p. 288; “Uddrag af det Passerede i den Kongelige Landsoverrets samt Hof- og Stadsrets 1ste Vidnekammer, i

512

14

16

“Our Journal Literature”

Sagen: afskediget Eskadronschirurg M. Winter c. Oberst Guldberg m. Fl. Onsdagen d. 24 April 1833” [Excerpts of Occurrences at the First Witness Hearing Room of the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court in the Case: Dismissed Squadron Surgeon M. Winther vs. Colonel Guldberg et al., Wednesday, April 24, 1833], in Raketten, no. 39, May 28, 1833, pp. 465–469; and “Nok et Par Dokumenter i Sagen: Oberst Guldberg, kontra Eskadronschirurg M. Winther” [Yet Another Couple of Documents in the Case: Colonel Guldberg vs. Squadron Surgeon M. Winther], in Raketten, no. 43, June 1, 1833, pp. 513–516; and the last page of Raketten, no. 73, September 14, 1833, p. 880, where it is advertised that Hannibal Sehested once again has taken up lodgings opposite M. Winther and can be met at midday in the closed portion of the riding grounds. Sandhedsfaklen] Copenhagen weekly newspaper, founded by military judge H. J. Hald, who served as its publisher and editor from April 1, 1834 (nos. 1–88); from December 9, 1835 (nos. 89–108), it was edited by J. C. Lange, but with Hald as publisher. It carried local news, including market prices, suggestions for improvements in local arrangements, and anecdotes. Sandhedsfaklen is part of the “rocket literature” (i.e., newspapers similar to Raketten) of the period. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 (→ 196,36), vol. 1, 155. Kjøbenhavnsposten] A Danish newspaper founded by A. P. Liunge (→ 200,31), who served as its publisher from January 2, 1827. Until 1834, Liunge edited the paper together with senior librarian Ove Thomsen; in 1834, Liunge took over sole editorial responsibility; and in 1835, he shared the editorship with the jurists J. F. Giødwad and Orla Lehmann. The newspaper originally appeared twice a week. Starting in 1829, it appeared four times a week; in 1830, six times weekly; in 1832, five, and subsequently three, times weekly; and from October 1, 1835, seven times a week. Kjøbenhavnsposten carried cultural material, especially literary and theater criticism, plus news of civic affairs. In the period 1831–1833, the paper became increasingly political and developed into one of the leading liberal organs, with circulation

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

both in the capital and in the provinces. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 (→ 196,36), vol. 1, pp. 147–148. the time . . . altered the tone and character of Kjøbenhavnsposten] → 197,25, → 199,6, and → 200,21. what Mr. Ostermann himself notes . . . the law concerning freedom of the press . . . defining the direction] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), cols. 523–524. ― the law concerning freedom of the press: Refers to “Forordning, som nærmere forklarer og bestemmer Trykkefrihedens Grændser” [Ordinance That More Specifically Explains and Determines the Limits of Freedom of the Press], usually called the Law concerning Freedom of the Press of September 27, 1799, which in fact did not introduce general censorship in Denmark, though it did include a number of penalties directed at writers who criticized the constitution, the government, the king, religion, et al.; see Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger og Aabne Breve, samt andre trykte Anordninger [Chronological Register of Royal Ordinances and Open Letters as Well as Other Printed Ordinances], ed. J. H. Schou and J.L.A. Kolderup Rosenvinge (abbreviated hereafter as Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger), vol. 12, pt. 3 (Copenhagen, 1800), pp. 673–688. In addition, a Chancery ordinance of May 13, 1814, provided more detailed explanations of § 26 and § 27 of the Ordinance concerning Freedom of the Press; see Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger, vol. 17, pt. 1 (Copenhagen, 1815), pp. 136–137. the chosen poet of this new life . . . “Denmark’s May and Denmark’s morning.”] Refers to the reportage piece titled “Kjøbenhavn den 2den Juni 1835. / (Slutning af Beretningen om Festen den 28de Mai)” [Copenhagen, June 2, 1835. / (Conclusion of the Report on the Celebration of May 28)], Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 130, June 2, 1835, where it is related on p. 518, col. 2: “The original founders of the May 28 Society and Festival were then commemorated by Merchant W. Fiedler, in the conviction that―by first calling upon people to celebrate the day that the poet has so

20

25

33

“Our Journal Literature”

37 38

beautifully titled ‘Denmark’s May and Denmark’s Morning,’ and by realizing, even then, that even merely the hopes that attached themselves to that day, would call forth a new and better life in Denmark―they would always have a claim on the gratitude of Danes.” The celebration, which was held on May 28, 1835, and received full coverage in Kjøbenhavnsposten, nos. 127–130, May 29– June 2, 1835, supposedly celebrated the ordinance of May 28, 1831, by which the king, Frederick VI (→ 203,2), had in principle introduced the Advisory Council of Provincial Estates (→ 202,28) into Denmark, although they were only actually established by the ordinance of May 15, 1834 (→ 203,7). “May 28 Celebrations” such as this, with toasts and speeches and homage to the king, had been held since 1832 (→ 202,35). It has not been possible to identify with certainty the poet or the verse in question, but it is likely that the poet was the physician Prof. O. L. Bang, who, using the pseudonym “B―o,” wrote many songs and poems in celebration of May 28, which he frequently termed “Denmark’s May.” See, e.g., the article “Den 28de Mai” [The 28th of May], in Dansk Ugeskrift [Danish Weekly] (→ 209,27), nos. 73 and 74, from May 1833, vol. 3 (Copenhagen, 1833), pp. 222–224, where it is related that the festival ended with a song that is reprinted under the name “Dr. B―o,” and that has the words “Denmark’s May” in the last stanza; see also the article “Sange afsunget ved Festen d. 28de Mai 1834” [Songs Sung at the Festival of May 28,1834], in Dansk Ugeskrift, nos. 114 and 115, from May 1834, vol. 5 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 101–104, where the second song, “Alt tvende Gange sammen” [Everything Together, Two Times], signed by “Dr. B―o,” contains the expression “Denmark’s May,” in the choral responses after the second stanza and the eighth and final stanza (see reports on the festival in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 107, May 29, 1834, p. 424). The July Revolution of 1830] i.e., the French Revolution of July 1830. when cholera was endemic in Europe] The 19th century witnessed a series of cholera epidemics that spread from India, the disease’s probable area of origin, by means of fecal contamination

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

513

of food and water. The cholera bacterium, Vibrio cholera, was first discovered in 1883; prior to that, many Europeans believed that the disease could only be stopped by military means―e.g., by barricading entire towns and closing off shipping and trade routes. The first major cholera epidemic took place between 1817 and 1822, and spread from India east, west, and north to China, the Middle East, and southern Russia. The second major epidemic came in the period 1826–1838: then central Russia and much of Europe were hit hardest. Cholera reached Germany, Sweden, Norway, and the duchy of Holstein in the 1830s. Denmark proper was spared, though in June 1831, as the epidemic approached, the government issued a decree making it possible to bar access to individual houses and entire neighborhoods, wherever the disease might appear; see Forordning, indeholdende Foranstaltninger, som skulle føies i Anledning af den i adskillige Lande herskende Cholera-Sygdom, [Ordinance Containing Measures That Are to Be Taken on the Occasion of the Cholera Disease That Is Dominant in Various Countries] (Copenhagen, 1831), pp. 14–15. See also Anordning indeholdende nærmere Bestemmelser angaaende Quarantaine-Tiden for søeværts ankommende Skibe, Varer og Personer med Hensyn til den i adskillige europæiske Lande herskende CholeraSygdom, for Hertugdømmerne Slesvig og Holsten [Ordinance for the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein Containing More Specific Instructions concerning Quarantine Period for Ships, Goods, and Persons Arriving by Sea, with Reference to the Cholera Disease That Is Dominant in Various European Countries] (Copenhagen, 1831). the Revolution of ’89] The French Revolution of 1789. the rest of Europe . . . an expression of Börne’s . . . what time it was] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in Karl Ludwig Börne’s introductory note to “Ueber Herrn von Villele und dessen politische Stellung. Paris 1822. Aus dem Französischen. Mit Anmerkungen von Börne” [On M. de Villele and His Political Position: Paris, 1822; Translated from the French, with Notes by Börne], in Allgemeine politische Annalen [General Political Annals], ed. Fr. Murhard (“In

42 2

198

514

7

10

“Our Journal Literature”

Verbindung mit einer Gesellschaft von Gelehrten” [In Concert with a Society of Learned People]), vol. 8, pt. 2 (Stuttgart, 1823), pp. 124–142; pp. 124–125: “France is the clock face of Europe; here we see what time it is; in other countries one must first hear the clock strike in order to know what time it is―but one hears more easily than one sees. I have made use of my stay in Paris to make use of its signs in order to investigate the nature of our times, and to record my observations in the general political annals.” ― Börne’s: Karl Ludwig Börne (1786–1837), German author, critic, and political journalist; published the widely read journals Die Wage [The Scales] (1818–1821) and Die Zeitschwingen [Changing Times] (1819); owing to censorship, he moved to Paris in 1821 and remained there for two years thereafter. In the wake of the French revolution of July 1830, Börne returned to Paris, where he settled and worked as a journalist. Powerful influences from the July Revolution found expression is his famous Briefe aus Paris [Letters from Paris] (1831–1834), and he became one of the leaders of the literary and political voices of the “Young Germany” movement, which led to his work being banned in Germany. 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 represented ordinary citizens. Typically, it was through the chorus that the observer sensed the fate that befell the hero. In modern drama―opera and theater―the chorus often portrays a group of people and is thus “the voice of the people.” a view articulated in the address of thanks] Refers to the “Address of Thanks” that, at its first meeting in Roskilde, the Provincial Assembly of Estates for the Islands (→ 201,19) decided to compose and present to the king. The Assembly of Estates convened on October 1, 1835, and the “Address of Thanks” was presented to the king on October 4, 1835. In referring to a “view,” Kierkegaard presumably has in mind the following passage from the address, reprinted in Fædrelandet, no. 58, October 23, 1835, col. 307:

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

“ ‘Your Majesty,’ it begins, ‘would not have feared the labor and the difficulty if what was to be fulfilled had been a demand that Your Majesty’s wisdom had recognized as just and reasonable, as being directed at the constant goal of all Your Majesty’s efforts: the well-being of the people. But there was no demand here―there was perhaps, here and there, a wish entailed by the times and by the degree of development the people had attained; but this wish was scarcely conscious, much less expressed. The clear idea arose first in Your Majesty’s own soul; here, too, the longing of the people was anticipated by Your Majesty’s free gift.’ ” Under the heading “Address of Thanks,” this same issue of Fædrelandet also carried a lengthy critical evaluation of the address (cols. 305–311). Here we read (col. 307): “How is it? 300 years after the introduction of the Reformation . . . 300 years after an event that is such a powerful part of the more lively development of European culture; 150 years after England, 50 years after France, laid down the basis of a more independent life for the people; a year, lastly, after the July Revolution―these mighty impulses toward the freer development of humanity―after all this, we say, shouldn’t we have come further than that there was no demand (that is, for changes), that there was only a wish, here and there―that this wish was scarcely conscious, much less expressed!” And further, in col. 308: “Injustice has been done to the people. It was more than here and there that the wish concerning change was not merely conscious, but also expressed. Are we supposed to conclude the opposite: that the lower classes either did not entertain this wish, or that they were not clear about what they wished? Are we supposed to conclude something from the fact that there was no restless movement among the people to promote a change in the form of government? The Danish people are too steady and healthy of mind to fall into the madness of wanting to change the form of government in violent fashion; but that does not prove in any way that they do not wish a change.” On the drafting and content of the address, see, e.g., also Bishop J. P. Mynster’s memoirs, Meddelelser om mit Levnet [Reports on My Life] (Copenhagen, 1854), pp.

“Our Journal Literature”

11

249–252, where as part of his account, Mynster, who formulated the address, relates the following (p. 249): “After the election of the assembly’s officers, a member made . . . a suggestion that an address of thanks should be sent to the king . . . The assembly agreed to the suggestion and appointed me, Hvidt, and P. Bang to draft it; it was also agreed that the address should be ready the next morning, as it was thought that it must precede all the business of the assembly. . . Inasmuch as the assembly had not opened with any message from the king, and there was nothing to which the assembly had to reply, it was obvious that the address should simply consist of thanks for the institution of the Estates. My fellow committee members were in agreement with this, and they expressly prescribed . . . that I was to emphasize the same point with which the royal commissioner [A. S. Ørsted] had begun his address, namely that “the king did not regard it as defensible to venture any change in the very state constitution with which Denmark had now found itself satisfied for one and three-quarter centuries, but that inasmuch as he has reserved for himself and his successors the entire fullness of power that our forefathers deposited in the hands of Frederick the Third, he [Frederick VI] has with this state constitution united an arrangement that gives himself and his successors to the throne a new, comprehensive means to know continually what serves the best interests of the people, which cannot do other than coincide with the king’s own.” And further, on p. 251, where Mynster, quoting from the address, writes, with respect to “the institution of the Estates,” that “ ‘it was the ruler’s will and command before it was the utterance of the people’; it is true,” Mynster continues, “that people had begun to talk of a constitution, but one cannot say that the voices of individuals had at that point become the voice of the people, and no one expected beforehand that what in fact happened, should and could happen.” the order sent to the Chancery concerning the Estates . . . people . . . prepared] See, e.g., Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 37, February 12, 1831, p. 124, where readers are informed of the king’s (Frederick VI’s) (→ 203,2) order to the

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

515

Danish Chancery, published in Den Danske Statstidende [The Danish Governmental Times], no. 24, February 11, 1831 → 198,16), that it produce a proposal for an ordinance that would set up Provincial Assemblies of Estates; Kjøbenhavnsposten then continues: “With this measure, Frederick the Sixth, whose name has already been inscribed indelibly in the annals of history and will live in all Danish hearts until the end of time, has raised a new and eternal memorial, and whereas the friends of enlightenment once again have occasion to praise this noble and worthy monarch who moves forward with the spirit of the times, the father of the country has set forth a new claim on the gratitude of his faithful people. (The first expression of this occurred, immediately following the proclamation, (yesterday, in the Statstidende), at 11 yesterday evening when the university students in the capital, several hundred strong, went out to Amalienborg [the royal residence] and shouted Long live the King! several times. It pleased His Majesty to walk out among them and indicate his most high satisfaction with their fidelity and devotion to him and to the royal house―which remarks were again followed with a jubilant Long live for the beloved father of the country).” order to the Chancery concerning the Estates . . . announced] See Den Danske Statstidende, no. 24, February 11, 1831, where it is officially announced that the king, Frederik VI (→ 203,2), had given the Danish Chancery orders “to deliver a most humble suggestion regarding the preparations for the Kingdom of Denmark as well as to introduce―to the extent this is feasible in view of the geographical configuration of the country and the various locales―Provincial Assemblies of Estates in the form of the Assemblies of Estates introduced in the royal Prussian states in 1823 and in accordance with the principles followed in that matter, and to compose and submit to most exalted judgment a draft ordinance in this connection” (cols. [4–5]). Cited in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 37, February 12, 1831, p. 124. the Society of May 28] A society, founded May 28, 1832 (→ 202,35), with the purpose of holding an annual festival on May 28 to celebrate the roy-

16

25

516

199

6

“Our Journal Literature”

al ordinance of May 28, 1831, concerning the introduction in Denmark of Advisory Assemblies of Provincial Estates (→ 202,28). Mr. Osterman . . . piece by Lornsen . . . article in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 523. ― piece by Lornsen: Refers to the following piece by the jurist, civil servant, and political writer Uwe Jens Lornsen (1793–1838), Ueber das Verfassungswerk in Schleswigholstein (Kiel, 1830); on the title page, Lornsen describes himself as follows: “Provincial Constable on the Island of Sylt in north Frisia, Chancery official, formerly office chief in the Chancery for Schleswig-Holstein-Lauenburg in Copenhagen.” Lornsen puts forward the following suggestion in his fourteen-page article (pp. 6–9): “1) Convening a provisional assembly of the representatives of the provinces in the year 1831 . . . 2) Transfer of all the provincial assemblies from Copenhagen to the duchies [Schleswig and Holstein] . . . 3) Division of the court system . . . 4) Establishment of a supreme court for both duchies . . . 5) Appointment of two governmental councils, one for each of the duchies, Schleswig and Holstein.” The article appeared on November 5, 1830, and on November 23, 1830, Lornsen was arrested and taken to the fortress of Rendsburg. ― article in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur: Ostermann is presumably referring to H. N. Clausen’s article “Summarisk Extract af den ottende allerunderdanigste Hovedrapport om den indbyrdes Underviisning i Danmark for Aaret 1830. Af J. von Abrahamson, Hs. Maj. Kongens Divisions-Adjutant, Kammerjunker, Oberstlieutenant, Ridder af Dannebrogordenen o. a. fl.” [Summary Extract of the Eighth Most Humble Principal Report on Mutual Instruction in Denmark for the Year 1830: By J. von Abrahamson, His Majesty’s Division Adjutant, Kammerjunker, Lieutenant Colonel, Knight of the Order of the Dannebrog, et al.], in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, published by “a society,” vol. 6 (Copenhagen, 1831), pp. 357–390, where harsh criticism is directed at mutual instruction, an educational method that the absolute monarch had introduced as obligatory.

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

the Polish ditto] Refers to the fact that the July 1830 revolution in France led to a revolution in Poland, which started in November 1830 and continued into 1831; Polish resistance to Russian rule was crushed in the Russo-Polish War of 1830– 1831, and in February 1832 Poland was made a Russian province. See, e.g., chap. 6, “Revolutionen i Polen” [The Revolution in Poland], in J. L. Rohmann, Skildringer af den nyeste Tids Historie fra Julirevolutionens Udbrud 1830 [Sketches of the History of Recent Times, Beginning with the Outbreak of the July Revolution], vol. 1 (Odense, 1847), pp. 164–219. Kjøbenhavnsposten] → 197,16. Holstein . . . it also elicited a number of pieces opposed to it] See, e.g., H. Schröder, “Verzeichniß der Schriften über das Verfassungswerk in Schleswig-Holstein seit November 1830” [List of Writings concerning Constitutional Matters in Schleswig-Holstein since November 1830], in Neues Staatsbürgerliches Magazin, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Herzogthümer Schleswig, Holstein und Lauenburg [New Civic Magazine, with Special Consideration of the Duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg], ed. N. Falck, vol. 1, issue 1 (Schleswig, 1832; abbreviated hereafter as Neues Staatsbürgerliches Magazin), pp. 389–393, which lists thirty-three titles, including J. C. Lindberg, Ueber die Krankheit des Staates und Cancelleirath Lornsens Heilmittel [On the Sickness of the State and Chancery Councillor Lornsen’s Cure] (Copenhagen, 1830); and Nik. Fred. Sev. Grundtvigs Politische Betrachtungen, mit einem Blick auf Dänemark und Holstein [N.F.S. Grundtvig’s Political Observations, with a View toward Denmark and Holstein], German trans. by C. Harmsen (Copenhagen, 1831) (→ 201,20), as well as five additional titles on the constitutional situation in the duchies and four titles on the Provincial Assemblies of Estates in Denmark, published in Copenhagen, including C.G.N. David, Sendebrev til Grev F. A. Holstein (i Anledning af hans Skrift: om de danske raadgivende Provindsial-Stænders Væsen og Værd) [Open Letter to Count F. A. Holstein (on the Occasion of His Piece: On Existence and Value of the Danish Advisory Councils of Provincial Estates)] (Copenhagen, 1832) (Schröder

13

15 19

“Our Journal Literature”

21

22

lists the German version of this work); and F. C. Sibbern, Bemærkninger ved den kongelige Anordning angaaende Provindsialstænders Indførelse i Danmark med nogle almindelige Forerindringer, Undersøgelse og Forslag betræffende det endnu Ubestemte samt et Tillæg om Trykkefrihedstilstanden hos os [Remarks on the Royal Decree concerning the Introduction into Denmark of Provincial Estates, with Some Preliminary General Remarks, Investigation, and Suggestion concerning What Is as Yet Undetermined, and an Appendix concerning the State of Our Press Freedom] (Copenhagen, 1832) (Schröder lists the German version of this work). even sermons] See H. Schröder, “Verzeichniß der Schriften über das Verfassungswerk in Schleswig-Holstein seit November 1830” in Neues Staatsbürgerliches Magazin (→ 199,19), vol. 1, issue 1, pp. 389–390, where two sermons are mentioned: Wilh. Thieß, Arzenei wider das RevoluzionsFieber. Oder: Das Elend des Landes, das in Empörung steht gegen seinen König. Der gesegnete Zustand unsers Vaterlandes. Die Pflicht, die uns obliegt gegen unsern König. Eine Predigt [Medicine against the Revolution Fever, or: The Misery of Nations That Harbor Indignation against Their King; The Blessed Condition of Our Fatherland; The Duty That Obligates Us toward Our King; A Sermon] (Schleswig, 1830), and J. Chr. Biernatzky, Die Pflichten des Bürgers in einer unruhigen Zeit. Predigt, gehalten in Friedrichstadt an der Eider [The Duty of Citizens in a Restless Time: Sermon Given in Friedrichstadt on the Eider] (Friedrichstadt, 1830). “The Address from the Prelates and Nobility of Schleswig-Holstein” . . . “that also . . . wishes that have been expressed.”] Excerpts from an address to the king (→ 203,2), drawn up on November 22, 1830, by committee members of “the faithful deputation of prelates and nobles of Schleswig-Holstein,” reprinted in the article “De Slesvig-Holsteenske Prælaters og Ridderskabets Adresse” [The Address from the Prelates and Nobility of Schleswig-Holstein], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 293, December 13, 1830, p. 980, cols. 1–2. The address reads: “In a moment such as the present, when political movements have also emerged in our fatherland, the prelates and nobility of Schleswig and Holstein, joined by

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

517

the other owners of estates, regard it as a precious obligation, with the most humble veneration for Your Majesty, to voice their views of the events that attract the attention of everyone―all the more so because they are convinced that the underhanded efforts of malicious individuals do not coincide in any way with public opinion.―They cannot conceal from Your Majesty that indeed, according to their most humble opinion, the times increasingly require the consideration of wishes that have been expressed, though it is their view that at moments of widespread ferment, such as the present, the first obligation of all subjects is to avoid precipitate action in connection with serious questions involving the overarching interests of the country.―The prelates and nobility of Schleswig and Holstein, as well as the other owners of estates, believe that by openly expressing, in veneration, this sentiment, they meet the expectations that Your Royal Majesty holds with respect to a group who have always had openhearted courage in bringing their most humble wishes to the foot of the throne. Here, with the same openness and the same confidence, they express the conviction that Your Royal Majesty would assure the continuing maintenance of the most complete tranquillity in the country if in Your wisdom, Your Majesty might command that the nation’s wishes be sensed.” The king’s reply, which was delivered through the Chancery for Schleswig-Holstein on December 4, 1830, included the following: “With respect to the efforts of some malicious persons, which, owing to the faithful mindset of His people, have failed, His Majesty will not permit himself to be deterred from continuing, in the future as in the past, all necessary efforts to direct detailed attention to the wishes of his faithful subjects both in the duchy of Schleswig and in the duchy of Holstein” (p. 980, col. 2). Mr. Ostermann also emphasizes the step taken by the government] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), cols. 524–525. Councillor of Chancery Lornsen’s . . . From a recent piece . . . in Kiel] Cited from the article “Cancellieraad Lornsens Oprørsfærd og

29

32

518

39

41

“Our Journal Literature”

Arrestation” [Rebellious Behavior and Arrest of Councillor of Chancery Lornsen], under the rubric “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” [General News and News Column] (→ 200,28) in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 281, November 29, 1830, p. 940, col. 1. ― Kiel: Port city in northern Germany, capital of the present-day German state of Schleswig-Holstein. Sylt] German name for the north Frisian island off the west coast of Schleswig (Danish name, “Sild”). His arrest . . . related . . . without any exclamation or question marks] See the remainder of the article “Cancellieraad Lornsens Oprørsfærd og Arrestation” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 281, November 29, 1830, p. 940, col. 1: “We now learn that the order for his arrest came from the very highest level, and the Collegialtidenden from the 27th of this month reports the following in this connection: ‘Instead of taking up the office most graciously granted him, since his departure from the capital on the 18th of last month, Councillor of Chancery Lornsen, who was recently―on October 12th―appointed district official on the island of Sylt, has, at various places in the duchies, and specifically in Flensburg and Kiel, undertaken vigorous efforts―which are punishable and in direct conflict with his duties as a civil servant―to disturb the relation of trust between the government and the subjects and to mislead the peaceable inhabitants into undertaking joint actions that could have the most pernicious consequences for public safety and peace. His intentions and actions are made clear in the piece he published, which is also attested to in a letter to the president of the Royal Chancery for SchleswigHolstein-Lauenburg, dated November 5 this year, in which he included the above-mentioned piece, and the same is also clear from a report from the county official of the county of Tøner, which shows that, far from having abandoned his intentions, Councillor of Chancery Lornsen has expressed the firm intention of misusing his official positon in order to foment unrest among the inhabitants of the above-mentioned island.― This past November 15 His Majesty the King, who has been presented with these facts, has gra-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

ciously resolved that the Royal Superior Court of Schleswig should immediately make arrangements to have Councillor of Chancery Lornsen arrested and secured in Rendsborg Fortress; similarly, the above-mentioned Superior Court is to undertake the most thorough investigation of Councillor of Chancery Lornsen in connection with the above-mentioned unlawful conduct and, consonant with the results of these investigations, is to undertake what is further required by law and justice.―In consequence of this highest order, the Royal Chancery for Schleswig-HolsteinLauenburg has written to the above-mentioned Superior Court on the 16th of this month’ ”; see Collegial-Tidende (→ 202,38), no. 48, November 17, 1830, pp. 906–908. what Mr. Ostermann . . . noted . . . more recent than that order] → 199,6 and → 197,25. ― that order: Refers to the decree published on February 11, 1831 (→ 198,16). ’31 up to Feb. 12] Refers to the fact that Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 37, February 12, 1831, in the section “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28) under the heading “Stænders Indførelse i Danmark og Hertugdømmene” [Establishment of Assemblies of Estates in Denmark and the Provinces], summarized the announcement in Den Danske Statstidende, no. 24, February 11, 1831 (→ 198,16), that the king had ordered the Chancery for Schleswig-Holstein to prepare for the introduction of an Advisory Assembly of Estates in the duchy of Schleswig such as had already been done in the duchy of Holstein, and that the king had similarly ordered the Danish Chancery to come up with a suggestion for the introduction of Provincial Estates (→ 202,28) in the kingdom of Denmark. The newspaper also described the reaction this announcement elicited from university students in the capital (→ 198,11). Master Erik] Refers to “Mester Erich” [Master Eric or Erik], the name for the cane or whip with which Nille beats her husband Jeppe in Ludvig Holberg’s play, Jeppe paa Bierget, eller Den forvandlede Bonde [Jeppe of the Hill, or the Transformed Peasant] (1723). See Den Danske Skue-Plads [The Danish Stage], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, n.d. [1731– 1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 1; the volumes are

7

21

22

200

“Our Journal Literature”

24

undated and unpaginated. In act 1, sc. 1, Nille relates, “The only thing he [Jeppe] is afraid of is Mester Erich (that’s what I call the cane),” after which she shouts: “Hey Jeppe! You fool, haven’t you put your clothes on yet? Do you want to have a talk with Master Erich yet again? Hey, Jeppe! Get in here!” The reference may be to Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post, edited by J. L. Heiberg, which did not appear in 1829 (→ 196,1) ; see note 23 in Teddy Petersen, Kierkegaards polemiske debut (→ 194,4), p. 162. praise of the nuptials of Prince Ferdinand and Princess Caroline . . . illumination] See A. Gerner’s song “Den 1ste August 1829” [The 1st of August 1829], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 121, July 31, 1829, p. 491, where the last stanza ends: “Accept with grace, o princely pair! / The garland made by my heart which is stirred; / The bright crown of the fairies was of course / For Caroline and Ferdinand!” See also the detailed coverage of the wedding of Princess Caroline and Prince Frederick Ferdinand in the article “The First of August 1829” in Kjøbenhavnsposten. Extra-Blad [The Copenhagen Post, Extra Edition], August 2, 1829, pp. 495–498. Praise was also heaped on the newly wedded royal couple in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 122, August 3, 1829, p. 499 (a poem by Fr. Schaldemose); no. 123, August 4, 1829, p. 503 (a poem by F. J. Hansen); no. 124, August 6, 1829, pp. 507–508 (a poem by Chr. Winther and songs by P. F. Friis); no. 125, August 7, 1829, pp. 511– 512 (songs by C. F. Güntelberg and M. Winther, plus a song signed with the initial “M.”); no. 126, August 10, 1829, pp. 515–516 (a cantata by Adam Oehlenschläger); and no. 127, August 11, 1829, p. 519 (a poem by H. C. Andersen to Princess Caroline), and p. 522 (under the regular rubric “Kjøbenhavnspostens Nyheder” [News from Kjøbenhavnsposten]), where J. P. Mynster’s Tale og Prædiken ved Deres Kongelige Høiheders Kronprindsesse Caroline’s og Prinds Frederik Ferdinand’s Formæling [Discourse and Sermon at the Wedding of Their Royal Highnesses Crown Princess Caroline and Prince Frederick Ferdinand] (Copenhagen, 1829) is noted as having been published, and a lengthy passage from the wedding discourse is included. A poem by J. P. Miller,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

519

“Axelstads Hilsen til Kongen og hans Datter. Den 5te October 1829” [Copenhagen Greets the King and His Daughter, October 5th, 1829] was carried in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 158, October 5, 1829, p. 643, to celebrate the entry into the capital of the couple, along with the king and queen, on that day; the same issue of the paper included a detailed description of the palace to be occupied by the newly wed couple (pp. 644–645), and under the heading “Kjøbenhavnspostens Nyheder” [News from Kjøbenhavnsposten] there was a report on the couple’s ceremonious procession into the city (pp. 645–646), as well as a discussion of the portion of the bride’s trappings that were displayed in the palace’s chambers (p. 646). See, lastly, the article “Kjøbenhavns Illumination, den 5te October 1829” [The Illumination of Copenhagen, October 5, 1829], with its description of a selection of the most beautifully decorated and illuminated buildings, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 159, October 6, 1829, pp. 647–648. ― nuptials of Prince Ferdinand and Princess Caroline: Prince Frederick Ferdinand (1792–1863, grandson of Danish King Frederick V and presumptive heir to the throne from 1848 until his death), and Princess Caroline (1793–1881, Frederick VI’s eldest daughter) were wedded on August 1, 1829, at Frederiksberg Castle by Royal Confessor J. P. Mynster. the smallpox] See the article “Et Ord om KoppeQvarantainen paa Søe-Qvæsthuset” [A Word concerning the Smallpox Quarantine at the Naval Infirmary], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 126, August 10, 1829, pp. 516–518; and the article “En anden Anskuelse af Koppe-Qvarantainen. (Meddeelt)” [Another View of the Smallpox Quarantine (Reported)], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 131, August 18, 1829, pp. 535–537. Riise’s Archiv] Refers to Archiv for Historie og Geographie [Archive for History and Geography], comp. and ed. J. Chr. Riise, 75 vols. (Copenhagen, 1820–1838). The articles in the four quarterly issues that appeared in 1829 (vols. 36–39) were dominated by foreign topics, e.g., “Charakteristik af Pave Gregor den Syvende” [Description of Pope Gregory VII], “Spanske Criminalhistorier” [Spanish Crime Stories], “Charakteristiske

25

26

520

26

27

“Our Journal Literature”

Anekdoter om Frederik den Anden af Preussen” [Characteristic Anecdotes concerning Frederick II of Prussia] (vol. 36); “Anekdoter om Ludvig den Femtendes Charakteer, Levemaade og Død” [Anecdotes concerning the Character, Manner of Living, and Death of Louis XV], “Trappisterne” [The Trappists], “Blandede Bemærkninger om Staden Neapel og dens Folkeliv” [Miscellaneous Remarks concerning the City of Naples and the Life of Its People] (vol. 37); “Den franske Hofnar Brusquet” [The French Court Jester Brusquet], “Architecturens Forfald i England” [The Decline of Architecture in England], “Træk af Despotisme blandt Hinduerne” [Aspects of Despotism among the Hindus] (vol. 38); “Den muhamedanske Religion i det osmanniske Rige” [The Mohammedan Religion and the Ottoman Empire], “Engelsk Portviin” [English Port Wine], “Træk af den tydske Keiser og böhmiske Konge Wenzels Liv og Regjering” [Incidents from the Life and Rule of the German Emperor and Bohemian King Wenceslaus] (vol. 39). ― Riise’s: Johan Christian Riise (1794–1875), Danish translator and editor. Muhamed II] See the article “Mahmud den Anden” [Mahmud the Second], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, nos. 115 and 116, July 21−22, 1829, pp. 467–470, 471–473; see also the article “Mahmud den Anden. II” [Mahmud the Second: II], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 118, July 27, 1829, pp. 479–480. ― Muhamed II: Error for Mahmud II (1785–1839, son of Abd-ul-Hamid I), Turkish sultan, 1808–1839, member of the Ottoman dynasty. Tsar Alexander] See the article series “Mærkelige Oplysninger om Keiser Alexanders Characteer, hans Forhold til Fru Krüdener, og Stiftelsen af den hellige Alliance” [Remarkable Information on the Character of Tsar Alexander, His Relationship to Mrs. Krüdener, and the Formation of the Holy Alliance], pts. 1–4, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 2, January 5, 1829, pp. 5–6; no. 3, January 6, 1829, pp. 9–11; no. 5, January 9, 1829, pp. 21–23; and no. 7, January 13, 1829, pp. 29–30; see also the article “Keiser Alexander, og den hellige Alliance” [Tsar Alexander and the Holy Alliance], in no. 167, October 20, 1829, pp. 679–682. ― Tsar

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Alexander: Alexander (Pavlovitch), 1777–1825), tsar of Russia, 1801–1825 as Alexander I. Turkish jurisprudence] Refers to the article “Tyrkisk Jurisprudents” [Turkish Jurisprudence], begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 112, June 16, 1829, pp. 455–456, and concluded in no. 114, July 20, 1829, pp. 464–465. Migueliana] Refers to the article series “Migueliana,” pts. 1–5, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 120, July 30, 1829, pp. 487–488; no. 121, July 31, 1829, p. 492; no. 123, August 4, 1829, pp. 503–505; no. 124, August 6, 1829, pp. 508–509; and no. 125, August 7, 1829, pp. 512–514. ― Migueliana: Concerning Dom Miguel (1802–1866), ruler of Portugal, 1828–1834, who had himself proclaimed absolute monarch on June 25, 1828. Nyhedsposten . . . aesthetic matters and news of the arts . . . other literary confections] Refers to the regular section “Kjøbenhavnspostens Nyheder” [News from Kjøbenhavnsposten], often situated on the back page of Kjøbenhavnsposten. The title “Nyheds-Post” (or “Nyhedsposten”) [News Column] was first used at the start of 1832, while in 1831 it had been called “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” [General News and News Column]. During all of 1829, when 208 issues (including a few double issues) of Kjøbenhavnsposten appeared, the section was dominated by matters concerning theater, literature, and art, which can be seen from the overview provided below. During the entire year 1829, in the issues of Kjøbenhavnsposten in which the rubric “Kjøbenhavnspostens Nyheder” appears, pieces of varying length concerning the theater (esp. the Royal Theater), including concerts, ballets, and operas, appear in 154 issues; on literature and literary matters, in 83 issues; and on art, including the Art Academy and architecture, in 28 issues; in addition to the above there were pieces of a more anecdotal character in 9 issues. By comparison, there were pieces on, e.g., the royal family and matters pertaining to the king in 60 issues; on local Copenhagen matters, including shipping traffic in the harbor and the sound, in 91 issues; on Danish notables, especially obituaries, in 23 issues; on police and legal matters in 21 issues; on birth and death statistics in the capital in 18 is-

27

27

28

“Our Journal Literature”

31

31

32

35 38

sues; on the weather―especially cold winters and rainy autumns―in 13 issues; and there were various bits of news from the provinces in 20 issues. Liunge] Andreas Peter Liunge (1798–1879), Danish jurist, author, and journalist; founded Kjøbenhavnsposten in 1827 (→ 197,16). attends confirmation class at Heiberg’s] i.e., accepts the intellectual tutelage of Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), Danish author, critic, philosopher, and journal editor; lecturer in Danish at the University of Kiel, 1822–1825; appointed titular professor in 1829; in the period 1830–1836, he taught logic, aesthetics, and Danish literature at the Royal Military Academy; in 1828–1839, served as a playwright and permanent translator at the Royal Theater. Heiberg’s journal Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post (→ 196,1), which did not appear in 1829, appeared once in again in 1830. starting in September . . . volcanic eruptions at various points in Europe] Refers to the article, “Vesuvs nyeste Udbrud*” [The Most Recent Eruption of Vesuvius], pts. 1–3, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 213, September 10, 1830, pp. 709–711; no. 214, September 11, 1830, pp. 714– 715; and no. 215, September 13, 1830, pp. 717–719. In the note [*] on p. 709, it is stated that the report is “taken from Morgenblatt für gebildete Stände [Morning Newspaper for the Cultivated Classes], published in August of this year, from reports sent in by C. von H.” Feb. 12th] → 200,21. At the start of the year . . . foreign matters . . . purely and simply as history] With respect to Kjøbenhavnsposten’s plan for the contents of its regular column “Conversations- og NyhedsPost” (→ 200,28), see the following under the rubric “Annonce” [Announcements], in no. 1, January 1, 1831, p. 4: “Starting January 1, 1831, Kjøbenhavnsposten will appear daily, as in the past . . . From the start of the new year, its contents will be as follows.” Kierkegaard is thus presumably referring to the following reportage that appeared in Kjøbenhavnsposten in January 1831: “Bidrag til Tidshistorien. / Holland og Belgien” [Contribution to the History of the Times: Holland and Belgium] (according to a note, this is “From Thomas Campbell, New Monthly Magazine,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

521

November 1830”), begun in no. 2 January 3, pp. 6–8; continued in no. 3, January 4, pp. 9–12; no. 5, January 6, p. 15; no. 6, January 7, pp. 17–19; concluded in no. 7, January 8, pp. 21–23. “Bidrag til Tidshistorien. De spanske Konstitutionelles Felttog i 1830” [Contribution to the History of the Times: The Spanish Constitutional Campaign in 1830], begun in no. 11, January 13, pp. 35–36; continued in no. 13, January 15, pp. 42–43; no. 14, January 17, pp. 45–48; no. 16, January 19, p. 53; no. 17, January 20, pp. 55–56; concluded in no. 19, January 22, pp. 61–62; according to a note, this is “From Monthly Magazine, December 1830.” “Navnkundige Samtidige, Hovederne for det serville Partie i Spanien” [Well-Known Contemporaries: Leaders of the Servile Party in Spain], begun in no. 19, January 22, pp. 62–64; concluded in no. 20, January 24, pp. 65–68; according to a note, this is “From Athenæum, December 1830.” “The Discussion” (from Biblioteca Italiana [Italian Library], no. 175, July 1830), begun in no. 21, January 25, pp. 69–71; continued in no. 24, January 28, pp. 78–80; concluded in no. 25, January 29, pp. 83–84. And “Navnkundige Samtidige. De belgiske Journalister” [Well-Known Contemporaries: The Belgian Journalists], begun in no. 23, January 27, pp. 75–76; continued in no. 25, January 29, pp. 81–82; concluded in no. 26, January 31, pp. 86–87. Mr. Ostermann himself . . . Kjøbenhavnsposten . . . aesthetic matters] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 525. on the whole, “Nyhedsposten” concerns the arts] See the continuation, under the above-mentioned rubric “Annonce” [Announcements], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 1, January 1, 1831, p. 6, with respect to Kjøbenhavnsposten’s plan for the contents of its regular column “Conversationsog Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28) : “Conversations- og Nyheds-Artikler af blandet Indhold [General News and News Articles of Varied Content], original reportage, especially of such news as is the subject of conversation in the capital, as well as excerpts of general-interest material from the most recent domestic and foreign journals.” With respect to “the arts,” see the following note: “3. Aesthetic

39

2

201

522

“Our Journal Literature”

and other literary articles. 4. Reviews of, and notices concerning, the most notable news concerning scholarly-scientific matters and the arts. 5. The theater (critical reviews of performances at the Royal Theater; the weekly repertoire) . . . As, in previous years, when this journal has carried literary news concerning a significant number of known and respected Danish authors, so, too, for the future, has the publisher secured the continuing collaboration and assistance of many respected scholars, just as he has hope of being honored with contributions that are in harmony with the intention of the newspaper.” In the period from the beginning of January to mid-February 1831, the rubric “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” does not appear to include “artistic” material, but rather statistical overviews of births, deaths, and marriages (in no. 2, January 3, p. 8), causes of death (in no. 3, January 4, p. 12), and the number of “masters, journeymen, and boys” in the guilds (no. 5, January 6, p. 16) in Copenhagen in 1830; and, e.g., information concerning “the two famous English maidens” (in no. 9, January 11, p. 32), the northern lights (in no. 12, January 14, p. 40), “meteorological observations” (in no. 16, January 19, p. 54), on “masquerade scenes in Stockholm” and “curious counterfeiting in Malmö” (in no. 23, January 27, p. 76), on “curious proof of people’s happiness,” “victims during the three days in Warsaw,” “Napoleon on St. Helena,” and “botany in Denmark” (in no. 24, January 28, p. 80), on the “auction of the contents of Charles X’s wine cellar” (in no. 25, January 29, p. 84), and then on “the introduction of Assemblies of Estates in Denmark and the duchies” (→ 200,21). Perhaps Kierkegaard has in mind the following announcements: “The Theater” (in no. 1, January 1, p. 4; no. 6, January 7, p. 20; no. 7, January 8, p. 24; no. 19, January 22, p. 64; no. 22, January 26, p. 74; no. 25, January 29, p. 84; no. 26, January 31, p. 88; no. 27, February 1, pp. 91–92; no. 30, February 4, p. 100; no. 31, February 5, p. 104; no. 32, February 7, p. 108; no. 33, February 8, p. 112; no. 34, February 9, pp. 113–114; no. 37, February 12, pp. 123–124; and no. 38, February 14, pp. 126–128). “Notices on Literature and the Arts” (in no. 6, January 7, pp. 19–20); and “Notices on Literature” (in no. 10,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

January 12, p. 34; no. 12, January 14, pp. 39–40; no. 18, January 21, p. 59; no. 20, January 24, p. 68; no. 21, January 25, pp. 71–72; no. 22, January 26, p. 74; no. 28, February 2, p. 94; no. 32, February 7, p. 108; no. 35, February 10, p. 116; no. 36, February 11, pp. 119–120; no. 37, February 12, p. 124; and no. 39, February 15, p. 131). From this point on, “Nyhedsposten” pays more attention to domestic issues] See the following notices under the rubric “Conversationsog Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28) in the issues of Kjøbenhavnsposten in which that rubric appeared in the period from mid-February to mid-March 1831: “Schimmelmanns Jordefærd” [Schimmelmann’s Funeral] and “Veir-Iagttagelser i December 1830” [Weather Observations for December 1830], plus two foreign news items on the dismissal of the theater director in Stockholm; on the views of the German theologian, Prof. J. J. Griesbach, concerning the brain studies of the German physician, F. J. Gall; on the accusation concerning violation of the press law by the Swedish translator of “Den ægte parisiske Katechismus” [The Genuine Parisian Catechism] (in no. 39, February 15, pp. 131–132); “Af et Brev fra Skanderborg” [From a Letter from Skanderborg] (in no. 47, February 24, p. 156); “Mærkelige Forudbebudelse af Cholera morbus” [Strange Harbinger of Cholera morbus] and information concerning the articles of faith embraced by the English national figure “John Bull” (in no. 48, February 25, p. 160); “Høiesterets Aabning” [The Opening of the Supreme Court] and “Bal en Masque” [Masked Ball] at the Hotel D’Angleterre in Copenhagen (in no. 51, March 1, p. 172); “Udtog af et Brev fra Svendborg” [Excerpts from a Letter from Svendborg], “Musikalske Compositioner af Baron H. v. Løvenskjold” [Musical Compositions by Baron H. von Løvenskjold], and “Den nye svenske Toldanordning” [The New Swedish Tariff Rule] (in no. 52, March 2, pp. 173–174); “Høiesteret” [The Supreme Court]―on the ceremonious opening of the Supreme Court and on a verdict pronounced in the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court (in no. 53, March 3, p. 176); “Høiesterets-Sager i 1831” [Supreme Court Cases in 1831], “Preussen og dets Konge” [Prussia

3

“Our Journal Literature”

4

6

and Its King], and “En wiensk Skuespillerinde” [A Viennese Actress]―concerning her death in Vienna (in no. 54, March 4, pp. 179–180); “Cholera morbus,” and a communication concerning the eloquence of the English jurist, Lord Chancellor Henry Brougham (in no. 56, March 7, p. 188); “Roms politiske Charakteer” [The Political Character of Rome] and “ÆdruelighedsForeningen i Stockholm” [The Stockholm Sobriety Association] (in no. 59, March 10, p. 196); “Elektromagnetisme i Norge” [Electromagnetism in Norway] and “Et Par Noticer om Wit v. Dörring” [A Couple of Notices concerning Wit von Dörring], i.e., the Danish-German political and literary adventurer Ferdinand Johannes Wit von Döring (in no. 60, March 11, pp. 199–200); “Det polske Manifest” [The Polish Manifesto] (in no. 61, March 12, p. 204); “Høiesteret” [The Supreme Court]―concerning a verdict pronounced in a suit for damages, “Vilain XIV”―on the origin of this name for one of the principal figures in the Belgian Revolution, and “Censur” [Censorship], cited in Danish from Th. von Harleben, Geschäftslexikon für Landstände [Business Encyclopedia for Provincial Estates] (in no. 62, March 14, p. 208); “Thorvaldsens Fødselsfest” [Thorvaldsen’s Birthday Celebration] and “En Somnambule i Augsburg” [A Somnambulist in Augsburg] (in no. 63, March 15, p. 212). remarks made in several issues concerning censorship] See, e.g., the following notices under the rubric “Conversations- og NyhedsPost” (→ 200,28) in Kjøbenhavnsposten: “Censur” [Censorship] (cited in Danish from Th. von Harleben, Geschäftslexikon für Landstände) in no. 62, March, 14, 1831, p. 208, and “Russisk Censur” [Russian Censorship], in no. 70, March 23, 1831, p. 234. beginning . . . in March, a man who signs himself T.] Refers to the article “Et Blink―maaskee af en Lygtemand―for Naturphilosopher” [A Flash―Perhaps by a Will o’ the Wisp―for Natural Philosophers], signed with the initial “T.,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 58, March 9, 1831, p. 193, col. 1. ― T.: Initial for Eilert Peter Tscherning (1767–1832), Danish military officer; from 1830, vice commandant at Rosenborg

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

523

Castle. Tscherning, who frequently published in Kjøbenhavnsposten, was a supporter of a constitution and a constitutional monarchy. in the previous 1½ months, and that a translation] Refers to the article “Discussionen (Fra ‘Biblioteca Italiana’, No. 175, Juli 1830*)” [The Discussion (from “Biblioteca Italiana,” no. 175, July 1830*)], begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 21, January 25, 1831, pp. 69–71; continued in no. 24, January 28, 1831, pp. 77–80; and concluded in no. 25, January 29, 1831, pp. 83–84, which is signed “(Translated by T.),” where “T.” is the initial for E. P. Tscherning (→ 201,6). The following is stated in the note “*” to no. 21, p. 69, col. 1: “In the opinion of the present writer, this article, translated from the Italian, has two fundamentally good qualities. It can indeed serve as a calming potion for doctrinaire gentlemen of all persuasions, and it demonstrates how to carry on a discussion respectfully, which seems to have been forgotten among us. The present writer therefore dares to believe that its transplantation into our language will not be entirely without interest. T.” In a great mass of articles, which are headed “Miscellanies,” . . . show what flattery is] Refers to the article “Blandede Betragtninger” [Miscellaneous Observations], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 121, May 25, 1831, pp. 401–403, consisting of “1. Smiger” [1. Flattery] and “2. De menneskelige Tings Omskiftelighed” [2. The Changeableness of Things Human]; and in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 125, May 30, 1831, pp. 418–420, consisting of “3. Hvad forlanger Herren af Danmark?” [3. What Does the Lord Require of Denmark?] and “4. Drømmen” [4. The Dream]. What is a good heart (“. . . accepts being spit in the eye”)] Refers to the article “Gode Hjerter” [Good Hearts], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 70, March 23, 1831, pp. 233–234. ― “. . . accepts being spit in the eye”: Cited freely from the following passage, p. 233, col. 1: “There is a lazy, easygoing, slack, longeared meathead, who, given these excellent qualities, wastes his own education, is a source of many nuisances to his neighbor, a great sorrow to his parents, and finally becomes another mouth

8

9

11

524

12

13

14

14

15

19

“Our Journal Literature”

for the society to feed. It is a shame, but he has a good heart: he never contradicts anyone, and he accepts being spit right in the face.” what is “malicious”;] Refers to the article “ ‘Ondskabsfuld’ ” [Malicious], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 98, April 26, 1831, p. 327. what is egotism] Refers to the article “Egoisme” [Egotism], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 107, May 7, 1831, pp. 355– 356. speaks of the national economy] Refers to the article “Statsoekonomie” [National Economy], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 69, March 22, 1831, pp. 229–230. what is meant by aristocrats and democrats] Refers to the article “Aristokrater og Demokrater” [Aristocrats and Democrats], under the initial “T.” (→ 201,6), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 72, March 25, 1831, pp. 238–239. finally turns directly to the decree of April 14, 1831] Refers to the article “En Stemme om Forordningen af 14de April 1831” [A Voice concerning the Decree of April 14, 1831], under under the initial “I.” (which Kierkegaard read erroneously as “T.”), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 95, April 22, 1831, p. 316. The decree of April 14, 1831, concerns “Indførselstoldens og Extraafgiftens Ophævelse for adskillige Vareartikler m. m.” [The Abolition of Import Tariffs and Supplemental Duties for Various Goods, et al.]; see Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 20, pt. 3 (Copenhagen, 1832), p. 280. the Provincial Estates . . . both of Tscherning’s pieces] Refers to two pieces on the provincial assemblies of estates by the Danish military officer and liberal political writer Ant(h) on Frederik Tscherning (1795–1874), De preussiske Provindsialstænders Historie i korte Træk [Brief Outline of the History of the Provincial Assemblies of Estates in Prussia] (Copenhagen, 1831), reviewed in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 58, March 9, 1831, pp. 193–194; and to E. P. Tscherning (→ 201,6), Sammenlignet Oversigt over Communalog Municipal-Indretninger, Justitsvæsenet, Geistligheden, Skolevæsenet, det Militaire, Sømagten, Handelen, Postvæsenet og

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Regjeringen efter Hr. Rumpfs almindelige Oversigt over det preussiske Statsværtskab [Comparative Survey of Village and Municipal Arrangements, the Justice System, the Clergy, the Educational System, the Military, the Navy, Trade, Post Office, and Government, from Mr. Rumpf’s General Survey of the Prussian Government Administration] (Copenhagen, 1831), reviewed in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 65, March 17, 1831, p. 216. ― the Provincial Estates: Designation for the four Assemblies of Estates, one for each of the areas: the islands (i.e., the dioceses in Zealand, Funen, Lolland-Falster, plus Iceland and the Faeroes), northern Jutland, Schleswig, and Holstein; these bodies had advisory influence on legislation. ― David: Refers to work by the economist, extraordinary professor, and liberal political and economic journalist, Christian Georg Nathan David (1793–1874), Om de preussiske Provindsialstænders Væsen [On the Nature of the Provincial Assemblies of Estates in Prussia] (Copenhagen, 1831), advertised by the publisher C. A. Reitzel in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 37, February 12, 1831, p. 124, and anonymously reviewed on its day of publication in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 44, February 21 1831, pp. 147–148. From this point on . . . political articles . . . the time now seem to require] Refers to the anonymous article (by C. N. David) in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur (→ 199,6), vol. 5 (Copenhagen, 1831), pp. 147–166―which touches on the following works: U. J. Lornsen, Ueber das Verfassungswerk in Schleswigholstein [On the Constitution in Schleswig-Holstein] (Kiel, 1830); Chr. U. H. Freiherrn von Brockdorff, Betrachtungen veranlaßt durch die Schrift des Herrn Lornsen [Observations Occasioned by the Work of Mr. Lornsen] (Schleswig, 1830); C. A. Engel, Bemerkungen zu der Schrift des Herrn Lornsen [Remarks on the Work of Mr. Lornsen] (Schleswig, 1830); anonymous, Einige Worte über die Schrift des Herrn Lornsen [Some Words on the Work of Mr. Lornsen] (Schleswig, 1830); Landrath Fr. H. A. Rumohr, Noch einige Worte veranlaßt durch die Schrift des Herrn Lornsen [Some More Words Occasioned by the Work by Mr. Lornsen] (Schleswig, 1830); Syndic C. Klenze, Ueber das Verfassungswerk

20

“Our Journal Literature”

28

202

13

von Schleswig-Holstein [On the Constitution in Schleswig-Holstein] (Altona, 1830); Chr. U. H. Freiherrn von Brockdorff, Beleuchtung der Schrift des Herrn Syndikus Klenze [Examination of the Work by Mr. Syndic Klenze] (Schleswig, 1830); Wit von Dörring, Was uns Noth thut! [What Necessity Compels Us to Do!] (Hamburg, 1831); C. F. von Schmidt-Phiseldek, Ueber die neuerlichen Aufregungen in den Herzogthümern [On the Recent Agitation in the Duchies] (Copenhagen, 1830]); A.L.J. Michelsen, Sendschr[ei]ben an den Her[r] n von Schmidt-Phiseldek [Circular Letter to Mr. von Schmidt-Phiseldek] (Hamburg, 1831); J. C. Lindberg, Ueber die Krankheit des Staates [On the Sickness of the State] (Copenhagen, 1830); N.F.S. Grundtvig, Politiske Betragtninger med Blik paa Danmark og Holsteen [Political Observations with an Eye to Denmark and Holstein] (Copenhagen, 1831). A note by the editors on pp. 147–148 explains: “This contribution, which has been in the possession of the editors since January of this year, does not contain a review of the above-mentioned writings, but is an essay occasioned by the matter they discuss, an essay that is both of great general interest and that also, at precisely this moment, happily possesses twice as much interest for our fellow citizens. On occasion, the editors intend to communicate similar articles by reviewing political works of this sort, either by the above-mentioned authors or by future authors, which owing to their contents and tendency or which, owing to conditions and circumstances, provide an appropriate occasion to continue these observations. The editors. The recurring column will bear the title ‘Political Observations.’ ” ― the demands of the time now seem to require: See the following passage in the article, p. 149: “it seems to us that more than anything, the times require contributing to a proper knowledge of the state and of the citizens’ relation to it.” Raketten was one of the germs of the new development] → 197,1. nodal points] Points of equilibrium for a swinging body, at which it is at rest. See, e.g., the definition in § 402 of the section “Om Ligevægtspunkterne i svingende Legemer” [On the Points of Equilibrium in Swinging Bodies], in

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

525

H. C. Ørsted, Videnskaben om Naturens almindelige Love [Science of the General Laws of Nature], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1809), pp. 328–329. only in ’34 . . . the question of freedom of the press] → 203,3 and → 203,4. the provisional decree of May 28] Refers to the royal decree of May 28, 1831, concerning the introduction of Advisory Assemblies of the Provincial Estates in the kingdom of Denmark; see Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 130, June 4, 1831, where the decree is carried under the regular rubric “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28), with the heading “Anordning om Provindsialstænders Indførelse i Danmark” [Decree concerning the Introduction of Provincial Assemblies of Estates in Denmark], pp. 435–436; the decree of May 28, 1831, was temporary in the sense that the “establishment” of the Provincial Assemblies of Estates was only determined by the decree of May 15, 1834 (→ 203,7). From now on, the news section is concerned with cholera] Refers to Kjøbenhavnsposten’s regular rubric “Conversations- og Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28), which as early as the end of February 1831 carried notices concerning “Cholera morbus” (→ 197,38) and the notice “Strange Harbinger of Cholera morbus,” in no. 48, February 25, p. 160. See also the notice “Cholera morbus,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 221, September 19, 1831, p. 740, and the article “Cholera Morbus,” in no. 27, February 1, 1831, pp. 89–91, as well as the notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 1, January 1, 1832, p. 2, which mentions the royal announcement of December 26, 1831, concerning “the rules prescribed in the quarantine ordinance, to burn those ships that were to have been subjected to a quarantine against unloading,” because of the danger of cholera. investigations of Denmark’s military defense] Refers to the recurrent rubric “Literair Notice” [Literary Notice], under which was carried a lengthy discussion of Captain H. J. Blom, Landog Søemagt, med nærmest Hensyn paa Danmark [Land and Sea Power, with Specific Reference to Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1831); see Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 218, September 15, 1831, pp. 727–728.

20 28

30

32

526 33

34

“Our Journal Literature”

convocation of the wise men] Refers to the royal decree of March 6, 1832, whereby the king ordered twenty-nine named individuals to appear in Copenhagen on April 27 of that year, where they were to meet under the direction of Count Moltke, who was privy minister of state and president of the Chancery for Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg, in order to discuss and present their thoughts “concerning procedures in connection with the election of deputies to the Provincial Estates and with the gathering of these Estates.” The decree, including the titles and names of the twenty-nine men, was cited and summarized in the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” (→ 200,28) on the back page of Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 68, March 21, 1832, p. 230. The passage also refers to the royal decree of March 23, 1832, in which the king (in keeping with the decree of May 28, 1831 (→ 202,28) ordered thirty-five “enlightened men from various parts of the country” to come to Copenhagen on July 9 of that year, and, under the leadership of the president of the Danish Chancery, Privy Minister of State and Minister of Justice P. C. von Stemann, “to make suggestions both concerning the number of men who are to be appointed as members of each of the Provincial Assemblies in Denmark, and concerning the division of that number between the various districts, as also the more specific conditions concerning eligibility to vote and to be elected, as well as electoral procedures and procedures in the assemblies of the estates,” and “to submit . . . most humble consideration” so that by way of the Chancery it could be submitted to the king for final decision (→ 203,7). The decree, including the titles and names of the thirty-five “enlightened” men, was cited and summarized under the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 71, March 24, 1832, pp. 239–240. a couple of articles on this institution in April] Refers to the articles “Fædrelandets Forventning af de valgte erfarne og oplyste Mænd” [The Fatherland’s Expectations of the Experienced and Enlightened Men Who Have Been Chosen] (→ 202,33), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 77, March 31, 1832, pp. 257–258; and “Nogle Bemærkninger, i Anledning af Forberedelserne til den raad-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

givende National-Repræsentation for Kongeriget Danmark samt Hertugdømmerne Slesvig og Holsteen” [Some Remarks in Connection with the Preparations for the Advisory National Representatives for the Kingdom of Denmark and the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 85, April 10, 1832, pp. 285– 286; also to the articles “Fortsatte Bemærkninger i Anledning af Forberedelserne til en raadgivende National-Repræsentation” [Continued Remarks in Connection with the Preparations for the Advisory National Representatives], pts. 1–2, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 90, April 17,1832, pp. 301–302, and no. 94, April 26, 1832, pp. 329– 330; and to the article “Endnu nogle Ord om Provindsialstænderne” [Some Additional Words on the Provincial Estates], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 91, April 19, 1832, pp. 309–313. See also the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” on the back page of Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 94, April 26, 1832, p. 332, where the reader is informed that the twenty-nine men who are to submit their views concerning the Provincial Estates for the duchies had arrived in Copenhagen. later in May, news concerning the Society of May 28] Refers to the regular rubric “NyhedsPost,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 109, May 31, 1832, pp. 435–436, which carries a report from the celebration at the Royal Shooting Gallery (former site of the Copenhagen City Museum, near present-day Vesterbros Torv) on May 28, 1832, in honor of the ordinance of May 28, 1831, concerning the establishment of Provincial Assemblies of Estates in Denmark → 202,28). The celebration consisted of a grand dinner during which speeches were given and there were toasts in honor of the king, the crown prince, the king’s council, etc., as well as in honor “of public opinion; of the men whose writings have guided it; of the high schools of the kingdom and the duchies; of agriculture and trade; of freedom of the press as the mightiest protection of the truth and the firmest support of culture; as well as to the future good fortune and development of the beloved fatherland.” See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 111, June 5, 1832, pp. 446–447, which summarizes and quotes from a very lengthy account of the cele-

35

“Our Journal Literature” bration that had appeared in Den danske Bie eller Søndagstidenden [The Danish Bee, or the Sunday Times] (appeared in the years 1831–1832). The summary makes clear the following with respect to invitations to the celebration (p. 446, col. 1): “February 1832 had passed by silently; May 28, the anniversary of the ordinance, was approaching; no one noticed anything that heralded its celebration . . . Only on the 26th [of May], at the stock exchange, did one hear talk of a gathering for such a purpose. The merchant Owen, it was said, made a suggestion about it at the prompting of Capt. Tscherning. Because the matter was well received here, and the idea had also met with a good reception in many quarters, the above-mentioned gentlemen contacted friends and acquaintances, some in writing, some by word of mouth, about gathering participants on the 27th.―The celebration was planned to be held with a dinner at the shooting gallery at 4 o’clock on the 28th. Despite quite short notice, before the celebration began about 80 participants said they would come; some even showed up at the last moment. But there were not that many people at the celebration, because a number of people were absent owing to obstacles that suddenly arose. The number of those in attendance was only 66, men from the business world, the world of learning, jurists, physicians, civil servants, civilians, and military, Danes and Holsteiners. It was said that many had earlier expressed regret that they could not be present; indeed, it was said of some individuals that they had insisted on being regarded as members even though they were not able to attend.” With respect to the establishment of the Society, it is related (p. 447, col. 1) that at the conclusion of the dinner there arose a wish “to assemble again for the same reason―indeed, it was said, ‘every year when we take a step forward on the trodden path,’ and this resolution, which met with general approval, resulted in everyone at the table signing their names on a list. Captain Tscherning raised a glass to Denmark, that it might be supported by civic spirit during approaching storms.” When the last toast, which was to freedom of the press, was drunk, “the society stood up from the table, happy at having instituted a festival day that all

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

527

hoped would be repeated every year in the same spirit, a spirit typified by gratitude to the king and hope for the institution of the estates.” See also the summary of the celebration on May 28, 1832, in Dansk Ugeskrift (→ 209,27), no. 30, from May 1832, vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1832), pp. 479– 480. it would not in fact be entirely erroneous to regard as related to that convocation] Presumably, a reference to the following detail in the account from Den danske Bie eller Søndagstidenden that was carried in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 111, June 5, 1832, p. 446, col. 2: “Professor David proposed the next toast, to the nation’s enlightened men [→ 202,33]: ‘Give them the strength and the ability to fulfill their important calling, in accordance with the expectations of the people,’ was the wish that was placed at the bottom of this glass.” the decree of April of that year regarding censorship] Refers to the directive of April 25, 1833, concerning censorship, issued by the Danish Chancery and published in Collegial-Tidende [Collegial Times], ed. and pub. P. J. Monrad and A. S. Ørsted, no. 17, April 27, 1833, pp. 270–271. The directive was reprinted under the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 83, April 27, 1833, p. 331, col. 2. From this it is clear that the directive, which is addressed to “the civil servants concerned, to whom censorship and supervision of printed materials and newspapers is entrusted,” enjoined these officials to adhere to the terms of the Ordinance concerning Freedom of the Press of September 27, 1799, particularly with respect to § 20, which prescribes “compulsory censorship of writings and newspapers whose authors have been found guilty of the misuse of freedom of the press, because, just as censorship is by no means limited to eliminating everything concerning that it can be foreseen, with certainty, that the courts will find culpable, but, on the contrary, the censor is entitled and obligated to eliminate everything that he himself finds improper, so that in this connection he ought not merely take note of what can be offensive or harmful to the public, but also of what can be injurious or offensive to private fellow citizens, so that noth-

35

38

528

39 40

41

“Our Journal Literature”

ing is tolerated that bears the clear mark of defamation or that can be judged―under the cloak of allegory, irony or other such cover―to have as its object the dissemination of injurious accusations against anyone.” will be discussed subsequently] → 203,3. from the Hamb[urgische] Correspondent] Refers to the circumstance that the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” carried a lengthy translated piece (concerning the situation in Copenhagen) from Hamburgische Correspondent [The Hamburg Correspondent], nos. 8 et seq., from 1833, begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 11, January 15, 1833, p. 43; continued in no. 12, January 17, 1833, pp. 47–48; no. 16, January 22, 1833, pp. 62–63; and concluded in no. 17, January 24, 1833, pp. 66–67. See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 138, July 16, 1833, p. 552, where the reader is informed that the Hamburgische Correspondent on July 14, 1833, had reported that King Frederick VI had postponed his return journey because of illness (→ 203,2). The Hamburgische Correspondent, founded in 1714 and marked by the ideals of the Enlightenment, was one of the oldest German newspapers and among the few of that period that received reports from its own foreign correspondents. Kieler Corresp[ondent]] Refers to the circumstance that the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” carried pieces from the Kieler Correspondenzblatt [The Kiel Correspondence Newspaper] (concerning the unfortunate consequences of the tariff and wishes that it be abolished) in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 13, January 18, 1833, p. 52; from Kieler Correspondenzblatt, no. 24, March 22, 1833 (from a short piece with the title “Die Abneigung gegen den Militair-Dienst in Schleswig-Holstein” [The Aversion to Military Service in SchleswigHolstein]), in no. 67, April 4, 1833, p. 268; and from Kieler Correspondenzblatt (on the construction of a stone-paved highway between Kiel and Altona), in no. 113, June 11, 1833, p. 451. The Kieler Correspondenzblatt, founded in 1830 by the jurist and liberal politician Theodor Olshausen and edited by him, was the organ for the nationalist movement in Schleswig-Holstein.

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Zeitung für die elegante Welt] Refers to the circumstance that the regular rubric “NyhedsPost” carried pieces from the German newspaper Zeitung für die elegante Welt [The Elegant World Times], which, from the start of 1833, had become political under its new editor, Heinrich Laube, and that in this connection it had carried a long critical piece on Denmark, which was summarized, with quoted passages, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 48, March 8, 1833, p. 191. Until the end of 1832, Zeitung für die elegante Welt, which began publication in 1831, had specialized in articles on art, fashion, the theater, royalty, literature, culture, and a small quantity of political material. der Eremit] Refers to the circumstance that the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” carried translated pieces from the German newspaper Der Eremit [The Hermit], no. 142, 1833 (a letter of October 27, 1832, from the Danish painter and author Harro Harring, concerning the political “Hambach Festival”), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 18, January 25, 1833, pp. 71–72; from the December 1832 issue of Der Eremit (an article, “Bilder und Zustände” [Pictures and Situations] by J. Jacoby on Walter Scott), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 19, January 26, 1833, pp. 75–76; from an 1833 issue of Der Eremit (excerpts from a series of communications bearing the title “Mittheilungen aus Holstein und dessen nächster Umgegend” [Communications from Holstein and Its Neighboring Area]), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 43, March 1, 1833, pp. 170–171; the continuation of “Mittheilungen aus Holstein” from the preceding issue of Der Eremit (now concerning the most notable journals in the duchies), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 49, March 9, 1833, p. 196; from the March 1833 issue of Der Eremit (from an article titled “Hertugen af Berrys Enke og de franske Karlister” [The Widow of the Duc de Berry and the French Carlists, (i.e., adherents of the exiled King Charles X of France)], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 78, April 20, 1833, pp. 311– 312. Der Eremit, Zeitschrift für öffentliches Leben und Wirken [The Hermit: Journal for Public Life and Activity] began publication in 1835 in Altenburg under the device “Recht und Wahrheit” [Right and Truth].

41

“Our Journal Literature” 203

1

1

2

Research concerning the Latin language] Refers to the following articles: “Et godt Ord indlagt for Gerundium” [A Word in Favor of Gerunds], under the initial “C.,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 123, June 25, 1833, pp. 489–490; “Medvirkende Aarsager til det latinske Sprogs Ringeagt. I” [Causes Contributing to the Poor Repute of the Latin Language: I], under the initial “M.,” in no. 127, July 1, 1833, pp. 505–507; “Erklæring fra Prof. Madvig” [Statement from Prof. Madvig], signed by J. M. Madvig, who was professor of classics at the University of Copenhagen, in no. 130, July 5, 1833, pp. 517–519; “Medvirkende Aarsager til det latinske Sprogs Ringeagt. II” [Causes Contributing to the Poor Repute of the Latin Language: II], under the initial “M.,” in no. 134, July 11, 1833, pp. 533–535; and “Svar paa Prof. Madvigs Erklæring i No. 130 af dette Blad” [Response to Prof. Madvig’s Statement in Issue No. 30 of This Newspaper], under the initial “M.,” in no. 135, July 12, 1833, p. 538. Tscherning travels] Refers to the fact that―owing to his criticism of the military system under the absolute monarchy and his suggestion that universal military service be introduced, as well as to his articles in Kjøbenhavnsposten in opposition to the government―in 1833, A. F. Tscherning (→ 201,6) was dismissed by the king, and in consequence of a decree of June 6, 1833, was sent abroad (to Prussia, France, and Great Britain), ostensibly to study artillery methods (unofficially, a form of exile). His departure took place on June 20, 1833; see the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 119, June 20, 1833, p. 475, which also reports on the honorable departure of Tscherning from the military academy and of a banquet at the Royal Shooting Gallery (→ 202,35); there is a detailed report of that banquet in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 120, June 21, 1833, pp. 478–479. See also “Et Brev fra Capt. Tscherning” [A Letter from Captain Tscherning], dated “Vienna, in May 1834,” begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 105, May 27, 1834, pp. 417–419, continued and concluded in no. 108, May 30, 1834, pp. 427–429. The king travels] Refers to the continuing reports in the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” concerning

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

529

the king’s journey, in the summer of 1833, to Køge, Vordingborg, Nykøbing-Falster, Maribo, and Nakskov; from there to the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg, and thence back to Copenhagen, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 77, April 19, 1833, p. 307; no. 98, May 20, 1833, pp. 390–391; no. 111, June 8, 1833, p. 443; no. 113, June 11, 1833, p. 451; no. 115, June 14, 1833, p. 459; no. 117, June 17, 1833, p. 467; no. 118, June 18, 1833, p. 471; no. 119, June 20, 1833, p. 475; no. 120, June 21, 1833, p. 478; no. 122, June 24, 1833, p. 487; no. 123, June 25, 1833, p. 491; no. 127, July 1, 1833, p. 507; no. 128, July 2, 1833, p. 511; no. 130, July 5, 1833, p. 520; no. 132, July 8, 1833, p. 527; no. 133, July 9, 1833, pp. 531–532; no. 134, July 11, 1833, p. 535; no. 137, July 14, 1833, p. 547; and no. 151, August 3, 1833, p. 603 (on the king’s celebrated return to Copenhagen). ― the king: Frederick VI (1768–1839), Danish king, 1808–1839. his illness] Refers to the continuing reports in the regular rubric “Nyheds-Post” concerning the king’s journey in the duchies, where it was reported that his journey home was postponed because of illness (a cold), in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 132, July 8, 1833, p. 527; no. 133, July 9, 1833, p. 531; no. 134, July 11, 1833, p. 535; no. 135, July 12, 1833, p. 539; no. 137, July 14, 1833, p. 547; no. 138, July 16, 1833, p. 552; no. 139, July 18, 1833, p. 596; and no. 150, August 2, 1833, p. 600. a major battle is provoked by . . . Decree of April] Refers to articles containing investigations of and debates concerning the directive of April 25, 1833, concerning censorship (→ 202,38) as well notices concerning it, occasionally under the rubric “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten: no. 27, February 7, 1834, p. 108 (notice: “Opfordring til Hr. Professor David” [Request to Mr. Professor David] that he permit publication of his lecture “Publicitet og Trykkefrihed” [Public Domain and Freedom of the Press]); no. 32, February 14, 1834, p. 127 (notice in “Nyheds-Post” of a report in Hamburgische Correspondent [→ 202,40]), February 1, 1834, on the Danish debate concerning freedom of the press and censorship); no. 35, February 18, 1834, pp. 138–140 (summary in “Nyheds-Post” of T. Algreen-Ussings article “Om Forstaaelsen af Censor-Instruxen” [On Understanding of the

2

3

530

“Our Journal Literature”

Censorship Directive], in the daily newspaper Dagen, February 17, 1834 (→ 203,4) ; no. 55, March 18, 1834, pp. 218–220 (notice in “Nyheds-Post” concerning Den frie Presse contra Tage Algreen Ussing og hans Fremstillinger i Bladet Dagen af Danmarks Trykkefrihed, et Stridsskrivt [The Free Press vs. Tage Algreen Ussing and His Accounts of Denmark’s Press Freedom in the Newspaper Dagen: A Polemical Piece] by Balthazar M. Christensen (Copenhagen, [March] 1834); no. 56, March 20, 1834, p. 221 (notice: “Legal Case: Year 1834, March 18th, the supreme court of the public has taken up the case ‘The Free Press vs. Tage Algreen Ussing and His Accounts of Denmark’s Press Freedom in the Newspaper Dagen.’ Representing the plaintiff was Mr. Chief Manager Christensen, who submitted his printed piece dated today. The defendant was present in person and desired, on his own behalf and on that of Danish freedom of the press, an eight-day postponement in order to reply in the matter. The court granted the requested postponement. pro vera copia [(accepted as) genuine signature]: Algreen-Ussing”); no. 61, March 26, 1834, pp. 243–244, and no. 62, March 28, 1834, pp. 247–248, as well as no. 66, April 2, 1834, pp. 262– 264 (detailed account in “Nyheds-Posten,” with excerpts from Prof. C. N. David’s article “Om Trykkefrihed, i Anledning af Algreen Ussings Artikler i Dagen 1834 No. 41. 44. 46. 47. 50. 54. 57. 60” [On Freedom of the Press, Occasioned by Algreen Ussing’s Articles in Dagen, 1834, Nos. 41, 44, 46, 50, 54, 57, 60] (→ 203,4) in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur (→ 199,6), vol. 11 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 256–282); no. 72, April 10, 1834, pp. 285–287, and no. 73, April 11, 1834, pp. 289–291 (Balthazar M. Christensen’s double-length article “Et Par foreløbige Ord mod Professor Heibergs og Cancelliesecretair Ussings Angreb paa den ‘frie Presse’ (see Flyveposten No. 14, 15 og 16 samt Kjøbenhavnsposten No. 59 til 68)” [A Few Preliminary Words against Professor Heiberg’s and Chancery Secretary Ussing’s Attack on “the Free Press” (see Flyveposten Nos. 14, 15, 16 and Kjøbenhavnsposten Nos. 59 to 68)]; no. 79, April 19, 1834, pp. 315–316 (an account in “NyhedsPost” of Prof. Schouw’s article “Om Danmarks

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Trykkefrihed” [On Denmark’s Freedom of the Press], in Dansk Ugeskrift [→ 209,27], no. 109, April 1834, vol. 5 [Copenhagen, 1834], pp. 1–11); no. 87, May 1, 1834, pp. 346–347 (the article “Om vore politiske Blades Frihed for Caution” [On the Freedom of Our Political Newspapers from Having to Post a Bond]) and pp. 347–348 (citation in “Nyheds-Post” of the discussion in Norsk Morgenblad [Norwegian Morning Paper] of April 17, 1834, concerning the dispute between B. M. Christensen and T. Algreen-Ussing); no. 88, May 2, 1834, p. 352 (short article “Bemærkning i Anledning af det i Gaarsnummeret af Kjøbenhavnsposten optagne Stykke af Norsk Morgenblad” [Remark Occasioned by the Piece from Norsk Morgenblad included in Yesterday’s Issue of Kjøbenhavnsposten); no. 89, May 3, 1834, p. 356 (a notice “Bidrag til Kundskab om de frie Landes Trykkefrihedsforfatning” [Contribution to Knowledge of the State of Press Freedom in the Free Countries] by T. Algreen-Ussing, and a notice “Til Hr. T.A. Ussing” [To Mr. T. A. Ussing] by “En Normand” [A Norwegian]); no. 91, May 6, 1834, p. 364 (notice “Til Normanden i Kbhavnsposten No. 89” [To the Norwegian in Kjøbenhavnsposten no. 89] by T. Algreen-Ussing); no. 92, May 7, 1834, p. 368 (a song: “Lad kun Trykkefriheds Helte” [Just Let the Heroes of Press Freedom] under the name “I–n”); no. 93, May 9, 1834, p. 372 (short article “Svar til Hr. T. A. Ussing” [Reply to Mr. T. A. Ussing] by “En Nordmand” [A Norwegian]); no. 95, May 12, 1834, p. 380 (short article “Svar til Nordmanden i Kjøbenhavnsposten No. 93” [Reply to the Norwegian in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 93] by T. Algreen-Ussing); no. 101, May 21, 1834, p. 402 (excerpts in Danish translation in “Nyheds-Post” from the Foreign Quarterly Review, no. 26, May 1834, on the dispute that had taken place concerning the interpretation of the censorship directive). See also the article “Om Maanedsskriftet for Litteratur” [On Maanedsskriftet for Litteratur], begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 153, August 1, 1834, pp. 609–610, and concluded in no. 154, August 2, 1834, pp. 612–613, from which it emerges that Prof. C. N. David had withdrawn from the editorial board of Maanedsskriftet for Litteratur, pre-

“Our Journal Literature”

4

sumably because of the attack on David’s principal points of view that had been set forth by F. C. Bornemann in his article “Bemærkninger om Censuren i Danmark, foranledigede ved de nyeste Forhandlinger om denne Gjenstand” [Remarks on Censorship in Denmark, Occasioned by the Most Recent Discussions of This Topic], in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, vol. 12 (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 56–86. Algr. Ussing proves . . . that generally speaking, we do not have censorship] Refers both to T. Algreen-Ussing’s article “Om Forstaaelsen af Censor-Instruxen” [On Understanding the Instructions of the Censor] in the daily newspaper Dagen, no. 41, February 17, 1834, [cols. 5–7] (→ 203,3), and to its continuation in the series of articles titled “Om Trykkefriheden i Danmark” [On Freedom of the Press in Denmark], pts. 2–9, in Dagen, no. 44, February 20, 1834, [cols. 5–8] (it is explained in a note that the article that had appeared in issue 41 is to be regarded as pt. 1 in the series); no. 46, February 22, 1834, [cols. 5–7]; no. 47, February 24, 1834, [cols. 6–7]; no. 50, February 27, 1834, [cols. 4–8]; no. 54, March 4, 1834, [cols. 5–8]; no. 57, March 7, 1834, [cols. 5–8]; no. 60, March 11, 1834, [cols. 5–8]; and no. 63, March 14, 1834, [cols. 5–8]. Refers also to T. Algreen-Ussing’s review of Balthazar M. Christensen’s polemical piece, Den frie Presse contra Tage Algreen Ussing og hans Fremstillinger i Bladet Dagen af Danmarks Trykkefrihed [The Free Press vs. Tage Algreen Ussing and His Interpretations of Danish Press Freedom in the Newspaper Dagen] (→ 203,3), pts. 1–9, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 59, March 24, 1834, pp. 234–235; no. 60, March 25, 1834, pp. 237–239; no. 61, March 26, 1834, pp. 241–243; no. 62, March 28, 1834, pp. 245–247; no. 63, March 29, 1834, pp. 249–251; no. 66, April 2, 1834, pp. 261–262; no. 67, April 3, 1834, pp. 265–267; no. 68, April 4, 1834, pp. 269–270; and no. 69, April 5, 1834, pp. 273– 276. See also the preceding note. ― Algr. Ussing: Tage Algreen-Ussing (1797–1872), Danish jurist; from 1830, civil servant in the Chancery and from 1831, secretary of the Danish Chancery; with support of the public treasury, in 1831–1832 he traveled abroad for scholarly research; politically liberal.

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

531

pieces concerning the leadership of the Society for Moral Delinquents] Refers to the following articles in Kjøbenhavnsposten concerning the expediency of having the government appoint a board of directors for a private charitable institution for the improvement of moral delinquents, established and run by voluntary contributions from private citizens: “Bemærkninger i Anledning af de frivillige Bidrag til at begrunde en Indretning til moralsk fordærvede Personers, men især den opvoxende Ungdoms Forbedring” [Remarks in Connection with the Voluntary Contributions for Establishing an Organization for the Improvement of Morally Delinquent Persons, Especially the Developing Younger Generation], in no. 74, April 12, 1834, pp. 293–295; “Til Publikum” [To the Public] (reply to the preceding article) by C. H. Visby, in no. 83, April 26, 1834, pp. 329–331; “Nogle Ord om vore Arrester og Straffeanstalter, samt den paatænkte Stiftelse til moralsk fordærvede Menneskers Forbedring” [A Few Words on Our Jails and Penal Institutions and on the Contemplated Foundation for the Improvement of the Morally Delinquent], in no. 85, April 29, 1834, pp. 337–340; “Til Hr. Pastor Visby fra Forfatteren til Bemærkninger i Anledning af de frivillige Bidrag til Moralskfordærvedes Forbedring (see No. 74)” [To Mr. Pastor Visby from the Author of the Remarks in Connection with the Voluntary Contributions for Establishing an Organization for the Improvement of Morally Delinquent Persons (see No. 74)], pts. 1–5, in no. 92, May 7, 1834, pp. 365–366; no. 93, May 9, 1834, pp. 369–371; no. 95, May 12, 1834, pp. 377–378; no. 96, May 13, 1834, pp. 381–383; no. 98, May 16, 1834, pp. 389–391 (first part of pt. 5); and no. 99, May 17, 1834, pp. 393–395 (second and last part of pt. 5); “Om Bestyrelsen af de nordamericanske Stiftelser til moralsk fordærvede Menneskers Forbedring” [On the Governance of the North American Foundations for the Improvement of the Morally Delinquent], in no. 97, May 15,1834, pp. 385–386; “Til Committeen for en Indretning til moralsk fordærvede Personers Forbedring” [To the Committee for an Organization for the Improvement of Morally Delinquent Persons], in no. 118, June 14, 1834, p. 470; and “Committeen

6

532

7

11

“Our Journal Literature”

for at grundlægge en Indretning til moralsk-fordærvede Personers, men især den opvoxende Ungdoms Forbedring” [The Committee for Establishing an Organization for the Improvement of Morally Delinquent Persons, Especially the Developing Younger Generation], in no. 205, October 11, 1834, pp. 817–819. The Decree of May 15th concerning the Estates] Refers to the decree concerning the establishment of Provincial Estates for the Islands (→ 201,19), the decree concerning the establishment of Provincial Estates for northern Jutland, and to the decree concerning the establishment of Provincial Estates for Schleswig and for Holstein, all four from May 15, 1834; see Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 21, pt. 1, (Copenhagen, 1835), pp. 59–114. The decrees concerning the islands and northern Jutland, which include rules for the election to the Provincial Estates, are based on the recommendation produced in response to the decree on March 23, 1832, which called for the convocation of the “wise men” (→ 202,33), p. 60. See the notice about the publication of the four resolutions concerning the organization of the Provincial Estates for Denmark and the duchies, as well as “a brief excerpt from these noteworthy statutes” in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 106, May 28, 1834, pp. 421–422, and no. 107, May 29, 1834, pp. 423–426. the piece about political guarantees] Refers to the article “Om politiske Garantier. En publicistisk Skizze” [On Political Guarantees: A Sketch by a Writer on Politics], pts. 1–2, in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 103, May 24, 1834, pp. 409–411, and no. 104, May 26, 1834, pp. 413–415. See in addition the announcement “Til ‘Kjøbenhavnspostens’ Abonnenter” [To Kjøbenhavnsposten’s Subscribers], in no. 109, May 31, 1834, pp. 433–434; p. 433: “This newspaper’s honored readers will have learned from the ‘Announcement’ the editor permitted himself to send on the 27th, that last Monday’s issue (no. 104) was impounded by the censor, not because it contained anything presumably illegal, but because the censor believed that he dare not permit its publication with a blank column that had arisen because the editor,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

owing to the censor’s expressed refusal to permit publication of the concluding portion of an article in the above-mentioned issue, had removed that portion of the article. The editor also informed the subscribers that he had submitted a complaint to the Chancery over his [the censor’s] actions, and promised to inform the public of the authorities’ reply when it came, and also, in this connection, as well as in connection with related inquiry, regarding whether it may or may not permit the publication of the deleted piece.” This is then accompanied by the complete text of the complaint, with the above-mentioned query, as well as the reply from the Danish Chancery, which did not find that the law required that an editor fill with other material the “hole” that arises when a censor deletes a passage (“the censor hole”). See also the announcement “Til Kbhavnspostens Abonnenter” [To the Subscribers to Kbhavnsposten (sic)], in no. 112, June 6, 1834, p. 446, where it is noted that the previous day’s newspaper, no. 111, had been impounded by the censor because of the next installment (pt. 3) of the article “On Political Guarantees,” and that therefore issue no. 112 would not carry the concluding installment (pt. 4) of the article in question. See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 118, June 14, 1834, pp. 468–469, where the reader is informed that the Collegial-Tidende (→ 202,38) of June 6, 1834, published a royal resolution of that date that requires an editor to fill so-called “censor holes” with other text; the piece also includes the Chancery’s motivation for having suggested that the king make this resolution. See, in addition, the article “Til Kjøbenhavnspostens Abonnenter” [To Kjøbenhavnsposten’s Subscribers], in no. 125, June 23, 1834, pp. 495–497, where the newspaper publishes both the letter from the censor (police court judge Thomsen), of June 13, 1834, which reports that the Chancery had approved his impoundment of the article “On Political Guarantees,” and the letter by editor A. P. Liunge (→ 200,31) to the censor, requesting that he be informed of which material in the article’s last two sections was in conflict with the law. See, lastly, the article “Til Kjøbenhavnspostens Abonnenter. (Slutning, see f. No.)” [To Kjøbenhavnsposten’s Subscribers:

“Our Journal Literature”

12

13

(Conclusion, See Previous Issue)], in no. 126, June 24, 1834, pp. 499–501, in which the paper publishes the continuing correspondence between the censor and Liunge, which makes it clear that the censor did not produce the information requested. the conflict about the Norwegian Morgenpost] Refers to the article “Om Forbudet imod det norske Morgenblad” [On the Ban on the Norwegian Morgenblad], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 137, July 10, 1834, pp. 543–544 (a royal decree of July 3, 1834, banned the importation of the Norwegian newspaper Morgenbladet into Denmark, presumably because of an article concerning the Danish Provincial Estates, which in the view of the Danish government was in conflict with the law). See also the announcement “Til Kjøbenhavnspostens Abonnenter” [To Kjøbenhavnsposten’s Subscribers], in no. 138, July 11, 1834, p. 550, in which the reader is informed that the previous day’s newspaper (no. 137) had been impounded because it had included an article (presumably that concerning the prohibition of Morgenbladet), “the publication of which the censor did not believe he could permit.” ― the Norwegian Morgenpost: Morgenbladet, a Norwegian daily newspaper, founded in 1819 by N. Wulfsberg; A. B. Stabell became the newspaper’s editor in 1831, after which the paper became the organ of the (liberal) political opposition. Kjøbenhavnsposten finally gets a proper trial] Refers to the fact that the Danish Chancery indicted A. P. Liunge, publisher and editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten, for having written and published the article “Om Forbudet imod det norske Morgenblad” in the newspaper despite the fact that a royal decree had forbidden the possession and distribution of Morgenbladet (→ 203,12). See the following notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 142, July 17, 1834, p. 565: “On the 15th of this month, in accordance with the provisions of the royal Danish Chancery, an indictment has been filed against the editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten for violation of the decree of September 27, 1799, § 18.” The text of § 18 of the law concerning freedom of the press (→ 197,25) reads: “If anyone is indicted under the law for having misused freedom of the press, no print-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

533

er may accept for printing a material written by him as long as he is under public accusation unless a resident citizen provides a written declaration that he will vouch for the content of the written material. In the absence of such a bond, the printer will be held responsible and will be judged as if he himself were the author of the written material. When legal proceedings are instituted against someone for misuse of the press, it shall therefore, for the information of those concerned, be immediately be announced by the authority that orders the proceedings in all domestic newspapers” (Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 12, pt. 3 [Copenhagen, 1799], p. 684). See also the following articles and notices in Kjøbenhavnsposten concerning the legal proceedings against the paper’s editor: “Til Kjøbenhavnspostens Abonnenter” [To Kjøbenhavnsposten’s Subscribers], by the editor, in no. 144, July 19, 1834, pp. 571–572 (the case was presumed to have been brought because of the article about the ban on the Norwegian Morgenbladet in the impounded issue no. 137 (→ 203,12); notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 149, July 26, 1834, pp. 592–593; notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 151, July 29, 1834, p. 600 (noting that the newspaper’s editor had received a summons to appear in the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court); notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 155, August 4, 1834, p. 617 (on the editor’s defense before the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court in response to the case brought against him by the Chancery); “Et Par Ord i Anledning af den berlingske Tidendes nye Redaction” [A Couple of Words on the Occasion of the New Editor at Berlingske Tidende], in no. 156, August 5, 1834, pp. 619–620; notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 185, September 15, 1834, p. 736 (verdict of the Provincial and Municipal Superior Court in the case against the paper’s editor: “The court finds that the accused, merchant secretary A. P. Liunge, ought to be found not guilty of the prosecutor’s charge.―Attorney Benzon is granted the fee of 5 rix-dollars, which are to be paid by the public treasury”); notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 195, September 29, 1834, p. 777 (on the Chancery’s acquiescence in the verdict of the Provincial and

534

15

“Our Journal Literature”

Municipal Superior Court, so that it is not appealed to the Supreme Court); “Indlæg for den Kgl. Lands-Over- samt Hof- og Stads-Ret i den af det Kgl. danske Cancellie imod Redacteuren af ‘Kjøbenhavnsposten’ anlagte Sag for formeenlig Overtrædelse af Trykkefrihedslovgivningen” [Pleading before the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court in the Case Brought against the Editor of Kjøbenhavnsposten for Supposed Violation of the Law concerning Freedom of the Press], in no. 197, October 1, 1834, pp. 783–788. the first journalistic sprouts of the liberal chaos . . . well-known theorems] Refers to Fædrelandet (→ 204,13), no. 1, September 14, 1834; see “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 184, September 13, 1834, p. 734, where the reader is informed of the following: “Mr. Professor C. N. David has recently sent out an invitation for subscriptions to a new journal with the name Fædrelandet, which is to appear weekly, starting the next quarter. A trial issue has come off the press today.” This is followed by extensive quotation of material from David’s statement in the first issue, concerning the tendency and coloration of the newspaper. See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 201, October 6, 1834, p. 803, where the reader is informed that issue no. 2 of Prof. David’s weekly, Fædrelandet, had appeared the previous day, October 5, 1834, with “well-written articles of broad interest: ‘Om de forestaaende Valg, med specielt Hensyn paa Kjøbenhavn’ [On the Impending Elections, with Special Attention to Copenhagen] and ‘Finanzernes Offentlighed’ [The Public Aspect of Finance],” followed by summaries and lengthy citations of material from the articles. ― theorems: Presumably, a reference to C. N. David’s lengthy introduction to the weekly paper’s first issue, cols. 1–15, where he not only writes about the journal’s task, tendency, and coloration, but also puts forward a series of theoretical observations on the relationship between the people and the state, including that between the people and the government―between, on the one hand, the freedom of the citizens, and on the other hand, their social rights and obligations―between, on the one hand,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

the social conditions, the ferment and unrest in Europe, including the need for reforms, concerning social and individual development―between one-sidedness (partisanship) and many-sidedness (indifferentism) in the shape of the debate on the one hand, and unity of outlook and direction, on the other hand. See also C. N. David’s article “Hvad er Statens sidste Grund?” [What Is the Ultimate Rationale for the State?], in Fædrelandet, no. 3, October 12, 1834, cols. 35–40, where he refers to Aristotle’s theory of the state (col. 37): “It was said as early as Aristotle that people enter into the state because complete virtue and happiness can only be achieved within it. We find the ultimate rationale for the state implied in these words of the Greek philosopher.” David also expresses the theoretical view (col. 38) that “we find, in its concurrence with reason . . . the ultimate rationale for the state. But at each stage of development, the ultimate rationale for political connection is also based on the type of political connection corresponding to that stage. In whatever manner the connection is brought about . . . it must have its root in its rationality and derive its sanction from that.” Even though, in his considerations of the various forms of the state that accord with reason, David mentions both the monarchy and the republic, he writes (cols. 39–40): “Far from being dangerous to the security of the throne, this theory is new support for the monarchy, for it teaches that its continued existence is guaranteed by the rationality from which it has emerged. But conditions in Europe are such . . . in short, that everything in which our development finds voice is such that reason must acknowledge that the monarchy is the form of the state that conforms best with this development, and therefore the socalled monarchical principle will prevail over all one-sided or isolated efforts to make the republic the basic form of European states. But one must not overlook the fact that, in its development, the monarchy must keep pace with the development of the age, generally, and with the development of a particular people, specifically.” the elections] Refers to the elections, in keeping with the decree of May 15, 1834 (→ 203,7), of members of the Provincial Estates, and especially

25

“Our Journal Literature” to the continuing discussion in Kjøbenhavnsposten of the preparations for holding these elections. From the beginning of September 1834, the elections to the Estates were followed closely in Kjøbenhavnsposten, especially in “Nyheds-Post,” which often published daily notices with results from the individual electoral districts and reports concerning electoral matters, both in the entire kingdom of Denmark and in the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg. There are reports about the drawing up of lists of those entitled to vote and those entitled to serve as representatives; see, e.g., the reproduction in “NyhedsPost,” in no. 179, September 6, 1834, p. 714, of the magistrate’s notice concerning such lists for Copenhagen; see also the notice concerning the audit of the Copenhagen electoral lists, plus a supplemental page (to no. 222, November 4, 1834), “Fortegnelse over de Valgbare i Kjøbenhavn, (berigtiget efter den af Magistraten omsendte Liste)” [List of Eligible Candidates in Copenhagen (Corrected in Accordance with the List Circulated by the Magistrate], pp. 1–4. Concerning the members appointed by the king, see, e.g., the list of royally appointed members of the Assemblies of Estates for the kingdom of Denmark in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 189, September 20, 1834, pp. 752–753, and a similar list for the duchies in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 194, September 27, 1834, p. 773. On the declining interest in the elections in the capital, see, e.g., the article “Om Midler til at vække Opmærksomheden paa de forestaaende Valg af Deputerede i Kjøbenhavn” [On Ways of Increasing Interest in the Coming Election of Deputies in Copenhagen], pts. 1–2, in no. 200, October 4, 1834, pp. 797–780, and no. 201, October 6, 1834, pp. 801–803; see also notices concerning the lack of interest, particularly among “the lower classes of tradesmen” in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 208, October 16, 1834, p. 829, and on the trial elections and the nomination of candidates for the artisan class in Copenhagen in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 229, November 14, 1834, p. 915. On the postponement and, finally, the holding of elections in Copenhagen, see, e.g., the notice on the postponement of the date for the start of elections, in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 203,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

535

October 9, 1834, p. 811, and the notice of further postponement of the elections until November 17 in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 215, October 25, 1834, p. 859; see also the notice on the opening of electoral meetings in the eight districts in “NyhedsPost,” in no. 231, November 17, 1834, p. 923, and on electoral participation on the first day of voting as a very promising prognosis for the entire course of the election in Copenhagen in “NyhedsPost,” in no. 232, November 18, 1834, p. 928. On the electoral meetings and the trial election, see, e.g., the notice on the holding of “consultative assemblies” in Copenhagen in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 208, October 16, 1834, p. 829; notices concerning electoral meetings in Aalborg for all those entitled to vote in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 209, October 17, 1834, p. 835, and no. 214, October 24, 1834, p. 855; and reporting in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 222, November 4, 1834, pp. 886–887, on trial elections held by electoral groups; see also reports from the November 7 meetings held by “Selskabet, stiftet den 28de Mai 1832” (→ 202,35) and by those who had a financial interest in the Capital City Fire Insurance Company in order to nominate a combined slate of candidates at the approaching electoral meetings in Copenhagen in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 225, November 8, 1834, pp. 898–899, and no. 226, November 10, 1834, p. 901, where the reader also learns of preliminary meetings held in advance of the election in Århus, p. 903. On problems in connection with electoral procedures, see, e.g., a lengthy account of T. Algreen-Ussing’s (→ 203,4) article “Kunne de i Kjøbstædernes og de mindre Landeiendommes Valgdistrikter hidtil foretagne Valg af Deputerede til Provindsial-stænderne ansees gyldige?” [Can the Elections of Representatives to the Provincial Estates Held Thus Far in Provincial Towns and Lesser Rural Electoral Districts Be Regarded as Valid?], in Dansk Ugeskrift (→ 209,27), no. 133, October 1834, vol. 6, pp. 1–8; ibid. in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 199, October 3, 1834, pp. 793–795; and the notice carrying the resolution from the Chancery as a reply to Algreen-Ussing’s article in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 200, October 4, pp. 798–799, and no. 201, October 6, 1834, p. 803. On celebration of the re-

536

“Our Journal Literature”

sults of the elections, see, e.g., the notice concerning the elections in Schleswig and the festive celebration in Kiel of their outcome in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 188, September 19, 1834, pp. 748–750; see in addition the notice of the electoral results in Århus and Skanderborg and the report of shouts of jubilation and of musical performances by the citizens’ guard in front of the homes of successful candidates in “NyhedsPost,” in no. 240, November 28, 1834, p. 959; notice of university students’ congratulations to Prof. P. G. Bang on being the first representative elected for Copenhagen in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 242, December 1, 1834, p. 967. On the final results of the elections, see excerpts from Kieler Correspondenzblatt (→ 202,41) for the results of the elections in Schleswig and Holstein and a longer excerpt on the political complexion of the Schleswig and Holstein Assemblies of Estates in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 217, October 28, 1834, p. 867, and no. 219, October 31, 1834, pp. 875–876; see also the notice on the meeting, at the Copenhagen city hall, of the city magistrates, the citizens elected to the Assembly of Estates, and the secretary of the city government in order to certify the final results of the Copenhagen election in compliance with the decree governing the Estates in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 239, November 27, 1834, p. 955; and notices concerning the acceptance of the electoral results by the twelve representatives and alternates from Copenhagen in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 243, December 2, 1834, p. 971, and no. 244, December 4, 1834, p. 974; see, in addition, the article “Stændersforsamlingen i Roeskilde” [The Assembly of Estates in Roskilde], in no. 1, January 1, 1835, pp. 1–2, where the reader is informed: “As a consequence of the now-completed elections, the Assembly will come to consist of seventy members (in addition to the royal commissioner, who is yet to be appointed). These consist of A. The Learned Class 3 . . . B. Clergy 2 . . . C. Civil Servants 10 . . . D. Owners of Estates and Other Landowners 27 . . . E. Jurists 4 . . . F. Merchants 7. . . G. Other Tradesmen 8 . . . H. Persons Engaged in Agriculture and Owners of Smaller Estates 9”; and see the notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 3, January 3, 1835, p. 11,

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

on permission, in accordance with the royal resolution of December 27, 1834, for the civil servants from the islands to accept election to the Estates; see, lastly, the article “Stændersforsamligen i Viborg” [The Assembly of Estates in Viborg], in no. 34, February 9, 1835, p. 133, where the reader is informed that “the elections for Jutland have now been completed everywhere, and the gathering will come to consist of fifty-five members (in addition to the royal commissioner, who is yet to be appointed). These consist of A. The Learned Class 1 . . . B. Clergy 2 . . . C. Civil Servants and Military Officers 10 . . . D. Owners of Estates and Other Landowners 17 . . . E. Jurists 7 . . . F. Merchants and Other Tradesmen 5 . . . H. Persons Engaged in Agriculture and Owners of Smaller Estates 13”; and see the notice in “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 39, February 14, 1835, p. 155, on permission, in accordance with the royal resolution of February 7, 1835, for the civil servants from the northern Jutland to accept election to the Estates. The final conclusion of the elections was marked by two simultaneous decrees from the Chancery of March 11, 1835, one concerning the districts for Zealand, Fyn, and Lolland-Falster, and one concerning northern Jutland; see “Nyheds-Post,” in no. 69, March 20, 1835, p. 275, and see, in particular, the following notice from Fædrelandet, no. 27, March 22, 1835, col. 480: “The decree from the Danish Chancery of March 11, 1835, has . . . communicated a list of the names of all the chosen deputies and alternates. Inasmuch as all the conditions contained in the ordinance governing the elections have thus been fulfilled, the country dares hope all the more that the date for convening the Estates can no longer be far off, as it was stated in the proclamation of May 21, 1834, that His Majesty had most graciously decided ‘to convene the Assembly of Estates as soon as possible,’ for which reason the king had commanded the electoral commissioners ‘that the elections should begin and be concluded without delay,’ ” the convocation of the Estates] Refers to the proclamation of May 8, 1835, “whereby the Advisory Assembly of Provincial Estates for the dioceses of Zealand, Funen, and Lolland-Falster, as well as Iceland the Faeroes are called” to meet

25

“Our Journal Literature”

26

in Roskilde on October 1, 1835; simultaneously it is also stated that the king had “most graciously found it beneficial to appoint our attorney general for Denmark, Counselor Ørsted, as our commissioner at the thus appointed convocation of the Estates”; see Collegial-Tidende (→ 202,38), no. 20, May 11, 1835, pp. 305–307 (see also Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 21, pt. 2 (Copenhagen, 1836), pp. 191–192). See also Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 112, May 11, 1835, p. 447, where a notice states that a similar proclamation published that day in Collegial-Tidende had called for the meeting of the Provincial Estates for Holstein on October 1, 1835, in Itzehoe; see Collegial-Tidende, no. 20, p. 307. the legal proceedings against Prof. David] Refers to the fact that in December 1834 the government, i.e., the Danish Chancery, had brought charges against Prof. C. N. David for having violated the law concerning freedom of the press in the following issues of Fædrelandet: no. 7, November 9, 1834 (especially because of the article “Om Provindsialstændernes Petitionsret” [On the Right of the Provincial Estates to Petition], cols. 97–104); no. 10, November 30, 1834 (especially because of the article “Om Adskillelsen af de forskjellige Regjeringsfag” [On the Separation of the Different Branches of Government], pt. 2, cols. 149–153 [pt. 1 had appeared in no. 9, November 23, 1834, cols. 129–135]); and no. 11, December 7, 1834 (especially because of the article “Hvad kan det hjelpe?” [What Good Can It Do?], cols. 161–176). During the trial, the government was represented before the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court by Chief Prosecutor and Supreme Court Counsel F.W. Treschow; Treschow also directed accusations against two additional articles by David in Fædrelandet: “What Is the Ultimate Rationale for the State?,” in no. 3, October 12, 1834, cols. 35–40 (→ 203,15), and “Om vore raadgivende Provindsialstænders Betydning” [On the Significance of Our Provincial Estates], in no. 4, October 19, 1834, cols. 49–54. David’s defense counsel was Supreme Court Counsel C. W. Haagen (→ 204,3). See the following notices in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 253, December 16, 1834, p. 1011 (with notice from the

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

537

Danish Chancery of the charges brought against Prof. David for violation of the law concerning freedom of the press); no. 254, December 17, 1834, p. 1016 (with the―incorrect―rumor that Counsellor of Justice, Supreme Court Counsel P. E. Sporon had supposedly taken over David’s defense); no. 257, December 20, 1834, p. 1027 (with the information that Sporon was only to defend David before the Supreme Court, while Haagen was the defense counsel before the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court); no. 258, December 22, 1834, p. 1031 (with C. N. David’s notice “Til ‘Fædrelandets’ Læsere” [To the Readers of Fædrelandet] from Fædrelandet, no. 13, December 21, 1834, col. 208, in which David makes it clear that at that point his only knowledge of the Chancery’s charges against him had been gleaned from public sources); no. 262, December 28, 1834, p. 1047 (with a reference to David’s article “Hvad kan det hjelpe?”); no. 263, December 30, 1834, p. 1051 (with a report that Chief Prosecutor Treschow had filed charges against David and that David had been suspended from his professorship at the University of Copenhagen because of the legal case); no. 12, January 14, 1835, p. 48 (on the court granting permission to Counsel Haagen for another eight-day postponement of presenting the defense for David); no. 16, January 19, 1835, p. 63 (on Counsel Klein’s presentation of Haagen’s defense statement for David, and on the court’s granting Prosecutor Treschow’s request for a twoweek postponement of the case); no. 22, January 26, 1835, pp. 87–88 (with Prosecutor Treschow’s statement in the case against David and the latter’s response); no. 30, February 4, 1835, p. 118 (with news of the court proceedings of February 2, 1835, in the press freedom case against David); no. 35, February 10, 1835, p. 139 (on Prosecutor Treschow’s second statement, from February 9, 1835, in the case against David [→ 204,3]); no. 47, February 24, 1835, pp. 186–187 (with the news that at the legal proceedings of February 23, 1835, both Prosecutor Treschow and Counsel Haagen had submitted the case against David to the court’s judgment); no. 52, March 1, 1835, p. 208 (news concerning the publication in Fædrelandet

538

“Our Journal Literature”

of both C. W. Haagen’s and F. W. Treschow’s second statements in the legal case [→ 204,3], including lengthy citations from Haagen’s statement); and no. 117 (a), May 18, 1835, p. 465 (with the news that David had been acquitted that day by the Provincial and Municipal Superior Court, during audible shouts of approval from the notably large audience in the courtroom). See “Den Kongelige Landsoverrets- samt Hofog Stadsrets Dom i Sagen mod Redacteuren af ‘Fædrelandet’” [The Verdict of Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court in the Case against the Editor of Fædrelandet], in Fædrelandet, no. 36, May 20, 1835, cols. 609–624; and “Den fuldstændige Dom, med Præmisser, i Sagen: ‘Generalfiskal Etatsraad og Høiesterets-Advokat Treschow, paa Embeds Vegne, contra Tiltalte, Professor i Statsoekonomien ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet, Dr. philos. Christian Georg Nathan David’ ” [The Complete Judgment, with Reasons, in the Case Chief Prosecutor, Counsellor of State, Supreme Court Counsel Treschow, on Behalf of His Office, vs. the accused, Professor of Political Economy, dr. phil. Christian Georg Nathan David], in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 120, May 21, 1835, pp. 477–480. The verdict states that the acquittal applied to David with respect to all charges against Fædrelandet, nos. 7, 10, 11―but (because he had expressed himself ambiguously and in a manner prone to misunderstanding, which had given occasion to the trial), he was ordered to pay all the court costs, including a legal fee of fifty rix-dollars in silver to Treschow―and was also acquitted with respect to all charges related to Fædrelandet, nos. 3 and 4, but here, again, he had to pay Treschow a legal fee of fifty rix-dollars in silver. The Chancery appealed the verdict to the Supreme Court; see the notice “Til ‘Fædrelandets’ Læsere” [To the Readers of Fædrelandet], in Fædrelandet, no. 37, May 29, 1835, col. 640, where David informs readers the verdict “had been appealed to the Supreme Court by the people”; and “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 164, July 13, 1835, p. 655, where it is noted that there was scarcely any doubt that the case against David would be argued orally before the Supreme Court. David, who was defended

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

before the Supreme Court by P. E. Sporon and Supreme Court Counsel O. E. Høegh-Guldberg, was acquitted on December 2, 1835, but ordered to pay court costs and legal fees of one hundred rix-dollars to the prosecutor; see “NyhedsPost,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 295, December 2, 1835, p. 1180; and “Høiesteretsdommen i Sagen mod ‘Fædrelandet’” [The Verdict of the Supreme Court in the Case against Fædrelandet], in Fædrelandet, no. 64, December 4, 1835, cols. 414–416. the well-known recitative “We, we alone,”] The common rendering of King Frederick VI’s words in the resolution of February 25, 1835, in which he replied to the appeal addressed to him by 572 citizens of Copenhagen in response to rumors concerning legal changes that would restrict freedom of the press (→ 203,29). The resolution, which was published by the government on February 26 on the order of the king, states, in part, that just “as it has constantly been the object of our paternal solicitude to do all that lay in our royal power, tending to promote the welfare of the State, and the People, so, likewise, none but ourself alone can be in condition to judge of what is to the true good and benefit of both”; Collegial-Tidende (→ 202,38), no. 9, February 28, 1835, p. 137. See “NyhedsPost,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 51, February 28, 1835, p. 203, where both the king’s decree to the Chancery and the resolution itself are reprinted at length. See also the article “Kjøbenhavn i Februar Maaned” [Copenhagen in the Month of February], in Fædrelandet, no. 26, March 15, 1835, cols. 459– 464, which discusses the appeal by the citizens of Copenhagen, with the king’s reply reprinted at the end of the article, col. 464. the ban on publishing matters related to the Estates] Relates to the resolution of September 22, 1835, which was printed in its entirety in the article “Rescript af 22. Septbr.” [Decree of Sept. 22], in Fædrelandet, no. 56, October 9, 1835, cols. 249–256; see, esp., cols. 249–250. With reference to § 85 and § 87 of the decree of May 15, 1834 (regarding the establishment of the Estates [→ 203,7]) concerning the publication of a gazette dedicated to the proceedings in the Assembly of Estates, the decree establishes that “nothing con-

27

28

“Our Journal Literature” cerning the aforesaid proceedings may be carried or inserted in other periodicals or daily newspapers of any sort unless it has been reported in the gazette issued by the Assembly of Estates,” and that therefore the Chancery is to “direct the attention both of the censor for political journals and of the police officials to which inspection of other journals and periodicals is entrusted, and also to instruct them, without any further inquiry to the Chancery, to eliminate everything that might appear in these daily newspapers and periodicals relating to the proceedings in the Provincial Assemblies of Estates that had not already been reported in the gazette mentioned in the above-mentioned §§ of the decree of May 15, 1834.” In response to the question posed by the censor, Police Court Prosecutor C. Reiersen of Copenhagen, the Chancery had issued a response (printed in no. 56, col. 251) that “nothing concerning the proceedings of the Estates, also including proposals made to the Assembly of Estates, can be permitted to be included in published journals except as subject to the limitations in the aforementioned supreme decree.” According to Fædrelandet, col. 251, this conflicted with § 7 of the law concerning freedom of the press (→ 197,25), “that the king does not by any means desire that honest and enlightened men are to be prevented from openly―with frankness and propriety―expressing their thoughts concerning what, in their view, could contribute to furthering the common good,” inasmuch as―Fædrelandet adds―“it is expressly permitted to express oneself concerning what can be improved or corrected in the nation’s laws, regulations, or public arrangements.” Fædrelandet also expressed (col. 252) the view that in its reply to Reiersen, the Chancery’s interpretation of the revolution constituted an additional tightening of the terms of the resolution. In the article titled “Vil Døren blive lukket eller aabnet?” [Will the Door Be Closed or Opened?], in Fædrelandet, no. 54, September 25, 1835, cols. 205–209, the editor had also expressed the wish that there might be the greatest possible openness with respect to the proceedings of the Estates. See also Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 224, September 21, 1835, pp. 893–894, where―in an “Annonce”

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

539

[advertisement] concerning the journal’s new and larger format as a newspaper that would be published seven days a week―the paper argues vehemently, in connection with the convening of the Provincial Estates, that the business of the Assemblies of Estates be public. See also the emphatic article in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 232, October 1, 1835, cols. 925–926, “Den 1ste October 1835” [October 1, 1835], concerning the opening of the Assembly of Estates in Roskilde that day: “We have also painfully shared the complaint, voiced from all corners of the country, over the lack of full openness regarding the Assemblies of Estates, i.e., their meeting with open doors” (p. 925); following this, the resolution of September 22, 1835, is cited along with excerpts to the Chancery’s response to Reiersen (pp. 925–926). See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 268, November 6, 1835, p. 1071; the article “Stænderforhandlingernes Offentlighed” [Public Access to the Proceedings of the Estates], begun in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 277, November 15, 1835, pp. 1105–1106, and concluded in no. 278, November 16, 1835, pp. 1109–1110; see in addition the following passage in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 277, p. 1106: “The Chancery has now once again broadened that remarkable resolution [of September 22, 1835] in a new and extremely striking manner, inasmuch as, upon the zealous petition of Police Prosecutor Reiersen, that governing circle has now forbidden the publication of a lecture that one of the representatives for Copenhagen has had printed as a separate publication, and this despite the fact that royal decree―which, after all, is the law for the Chancery just as much as it is for us others―only makes mention of ‘periodicals and daily newspapers.’ According to our press laws . . . such a prohibition can have only an entirely temporary validity, and it will thus be a matter for the Chancery to take the necessary steps to have the legality of this interim prohibition decided in the courts. It is not difficult to foresee how these [courts] will decide the matter.” See, finally, “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 282, November 20, 1835, p. 1125, where there is a report of yet another prohibition from the Chancery concerning the print-

540

29

“Our Journal Literature”

ing of a lecture delivered by a representative for Copenhagen. the petition] Refers to the petition, dated February 20, 1835, which was signed by 572 of Copenhagen’s most important persons of the time and sent to the king on February 21. The initiative for the petition was taken by professors J. F. Schouw and H. N. Clausen, who, along with seven other leading men, invited a series of citizens to become cosigners; according to Clausen, the address itself was drafted by himself and not by Schouw (see Clausen, Optegnelser om mit Levneds og min Tids Historie [Notes on the History of My Life and Times] [Copenhagen, 1877], pp. 181– 182). The petition, which was both a response to the prosecution and suspension from the university of C. N. David (→ 203,26) and to reliable rumors that the king and the government were considering limitations on freedom of the press (see the next note), requested that the king continue to allow freedom of the press to be decided by law and that cases related to violations of the law concerning freedom of the press (→ 197,25) might continue to be decided by the courts. See also “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 51, February 28, 1835, p. 203, where the address is called an “appeal” and where it is stated that it “was signed by 572 civil servants and citizens of all classes, who had freely associated themselves for this purpose, among whom were found almost all the professors at the university and clergy of Copenhagen, the majority of the judges at the city courts and barristers admitted to the Supreme Court and to the Royal Provincial and Municipal Superior Court, a large number of civil servants from various ministries as well as businessmen, officers, especially from the navy, university students, physicians, artists, manufacturers, artisans, etc.” In it addition, the article notes that “petitions of similar import have come in since: last Monday from Roskilde (with forty signatures), last Tuesday from Helsingør (with seventy-five signatures).” See in addition “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 52, March 1, 1835, pp. 205–207, where the full text of the petition from the citizens of Copenhagen is reproduced, and pp. 207–208, where the pe-

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

tition from Roskilde (dated February 22, 1835) is reproduced; see also no. 54, March 5, 1835, p. 215, where it is stated that petitions to the king were also sent from Nakskov and its surrounding area (dated February 26, 1835), as well as from the southern and northern districts of Lolland (dated February 26, 1835); see, as well, no. 56, March 5, 1835, p. 223, where the text of the petition from Helsingør (dated February 23, 1835) is reproduced in full; a petition (with forty-three signatures, dated February 25, 1835) was also sent in from Randers. See also the article “Kjøbenhavn i Februar Maaned” [Copenhagen in the Month of February], in Fædrelandet, no. 26, March 15, 1835, cols. 459–464, which strongly endorses the Copenhagen petition and takes exception to those who out of fear or unwillingness refused to sign it. it was elicited by the fear that freedom of the press would be restricted] Refers to the rumors, mentioned in the preceding note, that on December 16, 1834, the king had sent the committee charged with writing the ordinance governing the Estates (→ 202,33) a decree requiring it to provide a recommendation concerning possible measures similar to those taken by the German Federal Assembly with respect to restrictions on freedom of the press, i.e., the introduction of administrative censorship. On February 20, 1835, the committee on the Provincial Estates produced its recommendation “concerning which rules for the prevention of the misuse of freedom of the press might be adopted for the kingdom of Denmark and the duchy of Schleswig” (National Archives, no. 1474, Cabinet secretariat, nonjournalized cases, 1830–1839, pk. 1084). See M. Rubin, Frederik VI’s Tid. Fra Kielerfreden til Kongens Død. Økonomiske og historiske Studier [The Age of Frederick VI: From the Peace of Kiel to the Death of the King; Economic and Historical Studies] (Copenhagen, 1895; abbreviated hereafter as Frederik VI’s Tid), pp. 521–522. even those in England] Refers to the reaction in English newspapers; see, e.g., the first part of the following unsigned letter to the editor, dated “Holstein, Feb. 21,” in The Times (London), no. 15733, March 9, 1835, p. 4: “Yesterday we received the intelligence from Copenhagen that a

32

36

“Our Journal Literature” petition, signed by about 1,000 persons, had been presented to the King praying for the liberty of the press. No person acquainted with the state of affairs in Denmark can doubt that this petition, the immediate inducement to which was the prosecution of Professor David, will be followed by many other equally important petitions. The inhabitants of Denmark are certainly as much interested in the publication of the financial affairs, and of the discussions of the Estates, as in the freedom of the press; but they hope to obtain these two through the Assembly of the Estates; but the other question seemed to admit of no delay, it being generally reported that in case Professor David should be acquitted, a far more rigorous law relative to the press might be expected. It is indeed scarcely credible that the new law can be more rigorous than that of 1799, but in practice it might prove much more severe, for precisely because the terms of the old law are so severe, that if it were executed to the letter, there would, in fact, be no liberty of the press at all; and yet, according to the concluding paragraph of the law, a liberal discussion of the public affairs is not to be prevented. The judges were authorized to allow of considerable deviations from the letter of the law to admit a certain rational interpretation, pretty much in the same manner as some of our theologians do with regard to the Bible. But after the publication of the new law on the press, it is not likely that such a shift will be allowed.” See also the following report, dated “Copenhagen, Feb. 28,” “from our own correspondent,” Morning Chronicle, no. 20447, March 10, 1835, p. 4: “I hasten to inform you that the address . . . signed by near 600 individuals, most of them persons of high standing in the esteem of their fellow-citizens, has been―not carried up by a deputation (marry, none chose to be the cat’s-paw on the occasion), but―smuggled by a back-door into the palace and presence of the King. Of the reception the address had met with, various reports have been in circulation. It was reserved for the Collegial Tidende (the official organ of Government) of to-day, to dispel all doubt upon the subject, his Majesty having been pleased, through its medium, to reply to

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

541

the petition of his subjects in the terms following: ‘We have seen with surprise that a body of our dear and faithful subjects have petitioned us to make an alteration in the existing law of the press; for, as it constantly has been the object of our paternal solicitude to do all that lay in our royal power, tending to promote the welfare of the State, and the People, so, likewise, none but ourself alone can be in condition to judge of what is to the true good and benefit of both―an object which it will be our care to promote, in the time to come, with the same real and unabated love for our people as heretofore. We pray God to take you into his holy keeping. Feb. 26.’ Which is, being interpreted, as much as to say: ‘We are very much astonished at our subjects’ insolence in giving us their advice unasked. If it please us, in our wisdom, to tie up Press neck and heels, we shall do so; if not, we shall let it alone. We have for fifty years, or thereabouts, governed Denmark as we saw fit, according to our Royal will and pleasure―and so we mean to do, with the blessing of the Holy Alliance, to the end of the chapter.’ Other addresses, like the Copenhagen one, have been sent in from the towns of Roskilde (the ancient capital of the kingdom), and Elsinore, and more are still expected. They are so much time and trouble lost. The Danes, I apprehend, will find themselves woefully mistaken in their expectation that the blessings of liberty were about to fly into their embraces, and that all they had to do was to open their arms and clutch them when they came. Roast pigeons, says a proverb of their own, don’t often, of their own accord, fly into people’s mouths”; see M. Rubin, Frederik VI’s Tid, p. 527n. Haagen’s contribution] Refers to “Procurator Haagens Defensions-Indlæg for Professor David” [Counsel Haagen’s Statement in Defense of Professor David] (→ 203,26) in Fædrelandet, nos. 20–21, February 1, 1835, cols. 321–374, reproduced, in part, in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 28, February 2, 1835, pp. 111–112, as well as to “Procurator Haagens andet Indlæg for Professor David” [Counsel Haagen’s Second Statement for Professor David], in Fædrelandet, no. 24, March 1, 1835, cols. 417– 432 (this second contribution was a reply to

3

204

542

12

13

18

“Our Journal Literature”

Prosecutor Treschow’s (→ 203,26) second statement in the case, delivered on February 9, 1835; see “Generalfiskalens andet Indlæg i Sagen mod Redacteuren af ‘Fædrelandet’ ” [The Prosecutor’s Second Statement in the Case against the Editor of Fædrelandet], published with Treschow’s permission in no. 23, February 22, 1835, cols. 393– [415]), reproduced, in part, in “Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 52, March 1, 1835, p. 208. ― Haagen’s: Christian Wilhelm Haagen (1792–1871), Danish jurist; passed his law examinations in 1812 and 1813; superior court counsel in Copenhagen from 1815; chosen as a representative to the Estates for Copenhagen in 1834. following Mr. Ostermann] Refers to the fact that in his analysis, J. A. Ostermann concentrates especially on two newspapers, Kjøbenhavnsposten and Fædrelandet; see his article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24). Fædrelandet] Newspaper founded September 14, 1834, as a weekly by Prof. C. N. David and senior teacher, cand. theol. J. D. Hage (1800– 1837). Under the editorship of David, and from September 5, 1835, under Hage’s editorship, the newspaper―which in 1835 increased its subscribed circulation from 535 to 800―quickly became an important organ for debate and information. this entire striving . . . by Fichte and the other philosophers . . . by Robespierre . . . with the help of the axe] Perhaps a reference to the following passage in Heinrich Heine’s “Einleitung” [Introduction] to Kahldorf über den Adel in Briefen an den Grafen M. von Moltke [Kahldorf on the Nobility―in Letters to Count M. von Moltke], ed. Heinrich Heine (Nuremberg, 1831), pp. 1–30; pp. 2–4: “Curiously, the practical actions of our neighbors on the other side of the Rhine nevertheless had a certain elective affinity with our philosophical dreams here in tranquil Germany . . . We, in the realm of thought, broke with our past tradition and present institutions, just as the French in the realm of society; our philosophical Jacobins gathered around the Critique of Pure Reason and would accept nothing which could not stand up to that critique. Kant was our Robespierre.―Afterwards came Fichte with his

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

“I,” the Napoleon of philosophy, the highest love and the highest egoism, the despotism of thought, the sovereign will, which improvised a quick universal empire which vanished just as quickly; idealism, despotic and horribly solitary.―The hidden flowers which had yet escaped the Kantian guillotine or had bloomed unnoticed in the meantime groaned under his resolute steps. The oppressed earth spirits stirred, the ground shook, and counterrevolution broke out; under Schelling, the past and its traditional interests again gained recognition . . . ―until Hegel, the Orléans of philosophy, founded, or rather, put into order a new regime, an eclectic one, which he leads, despite his own lack of importance, and in which he gave positions, fixed by constitution, to the old Kantian Jacobins, the Fichtean Bonapartists, the Schellingian high nobility, and his own appointees” (English translation from Heinrich Heine, On the History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany and Other Writings, ed. Terry Pinkard, trans. Howard Pollack-Milgate [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007], pp. 130−131). ― Fichte: Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814), German philosopher and father of I. H. Fichte, thus often referred to as “Fichte the elder”; from 1794, professor at Jena. In 1799, he was accused of atheism and had to leave Jena; and from 1810, professor at the newly established university in Berlin. ― Robespierre: Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre (1758–1794), French jurist and politician; elected to the Estates General (which later became the National Assembly) in 1789; one of the leading figures in the revolutionary Jacobin Club, founded in Paris in 1789; elected a member of the National Convention in 1792; became a member of the Committee for Public Safety in 1793 and thereafter a leading figure in the Reign of Terror, in which his opponents were removed from power, with many of them condemned and executed; was himself guillotined in July 1794. Auber’s] Daniel François Esprit Aubert (1782– 1871), French composer; wrote music to a number of the singspiels by A. E. Scribe that were staged at the Royal Theater in Copenhagen. Here the probable reference is to Den Stumme i Portici.

23

“Our Journal Literature” Opera i fem Acter af Scribe og Delavigne. Musiken componeret af Auber. Oversat, til Brug for den danske Skueplads [The Mute Girl of Portici: Opera in Five Acts by Scribe and Delavigne; Music by Auber; Translated for the Danish Theater (by J. L. Heiberg)], no. 26 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater], vol. 2. (Copenhagen, 1830 [French, 1828]). The opera was performed nine times between the premiere on May 22, 1830, and October 7, 1830, and by November 23, 1835, it had been performed a total of forty-three times. See the following report on the premier performance in “Conversationsog Nyheds-Post,” in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 237, October 8, 1830, p. 792: “Yesterday evening [Thursday] Den Stumme i Portici was presented at the Royal Theater Opera. That evening, the performance of this work, which has contributed to igniting the torch of rebellion and civil war in a number of places abroad, was the occasion for a beautiful and heart-felt expression of the warm love that the Danish people feel toward the noble father of their country and their devotion to the kingdom of Denmark. Indeed, it pleased their Majesties, the king and the queen and the royal princes and princesses, to honor this performance with their exalted presence. At the entry of His Majesty into the royal box, the people sitting in the orchestra resounded with a “Long live the King!” which was followed by thrice repeated triple cheer by the entire house. The people sitting in the orchestra then demanded that the final chorus of ‘Elverhøi’ be played and a printed text, perfectly suiting the beloved folk melody ‘King Christian Stood by the Lofty Mast’ [Denmark’s royal national anthem], was then sung: ‘Protect our King, great God / Protect his family! / Let the race of King Skjold, tall and proud / Always produce new branches! / Protect our King, great God / Protect his family! / With flowers in his silver hair, / He, stronger year by year, bears / As easily as he did in the spring of his youth, / The weight of his crown!’ During the performance it pleased their Majesties to express, along with the public, their approval of the piece and its performance.―When the curtain had fallen, and their Majesties departed from the royal box, there was

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

543

once again a unanimous and enthusiastic cheer.― Clearly, His Majesty was deeply moved by these signs―as unambiguous as they were unprompted―of the Danish people’s faithful devotion and of a love that, surely, no monarch has ever possessed in greater degree, nor in greater degree deserved.” Nyhedsposten] → 200,28. the words a poet spoke . . . “a restless ramble . . . and home again.”] Free rendering of lines from the fifth stanza of “Variationer over et bekjendt Thema: ‘Hvad er Livet? Et Pust i Sivet,’ o. s. v.” [Variations of a Well-Known Theme: “What is Life? A Puff of Air in the Reeds,” etc.], published under the initial “–I–”, in Kjøbenhavns flyvende Post (→ 196,1), no. 40, May 19, 1828. The fifth stanza reads: “What is thought? a restless ramble―from castles in the air―to mousetraps―and home again.” It has not been possible to identify the initial “–I–”. a heavenly body is formed . . . centrifugal and centripetal forces . . . an axis] Refers to the “nebular hypothesis,” a theory about the formation of the solar system from a gas cloud, originally proposed in 1734 by the Swedish scientist and theosopher Emanuel Swedenborg in his Principia rerum naturalium [The Principles of Natural Things] and developed further by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant in his 1755 Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels [General Theory of Nature and the Heavens]. Subsequently, the hypothesis was arrived at independently by the French mathematician, physicist, and astronomer Pierre-Simon Laplace in 1796 in bk. 5, chap. 6, “Considérations sur le système du monde, et sur les progrès futurs de l’astronomie” [Considerations on the System of the World and on the Future Progress of Astronomy], of Exposition du système du monde [The System of the World]. The hypothesis supposes that there is an enormous, hot, gaslike cloud, a “nebula,” in space, which rotates on its axis. With gradual cooling, the nebula undergoes a contraction to a central solar orb, with this contraction resulting in continually increased rotation, causing the formation of rings. When the centrifugal forces exceed the centripetal forces, these rings are thrown

17

205

24

10

206

544

27

37

38

“Our Journal Literature”

away from the core of the nebula and begin to rotate and move around the nebula, gradually condensing into planets. This theory is sometimes referred to as the Kant-Laplace nebular hypothesis. the Assembly of Estates in Roskilde] Refers to the fact that the Provincial Estates for the Islands assembled in Roskilde (→ 198,10). quixotic] Refers to Don Quixote, the hero in Spanish poet M. de Cervantes Saavedra’s eponymous parodic novel of chivalry (2 vols., 1605– 1615). Don Quixote is a penniless petty noble from La Mancha who, in his imagination, lives in a world of chivalric romance and feels impelled to carry out knightly exploits in mundane everyday Spain; see Den sindrige Herremands Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og Bedrifter. Forfattet af Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra [The Life and Exploits of the Clever Lord Don Quixote of Mancha: Written by Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra], trans. Charlotta D. Biehl, vols. 1–4 (Copenhagen, 1776–1777; ASKB 1937–1940; abbreviated hereafter as Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og Bedrifter). One of Don Quixote’s best-known exploits involves his taking a group of windmills to be ferocious giants whom he must attack (see the next note). gives Rosinante the spurs . . . Sancho Panza . . . were, are, and continue to be windmills] Refers to bk. 1, chap. 8 of Don Quixote af Mancha Levnet og Bedrifter, vol., 1, pp. 57–66; 57–59, where Don Quixote and his squire Sancho Panza see a group of thirty to forty windmills. Don Quixote immediately believes them to be “the most horrible giants” and determines to fight them and kill them all. He tells this to Sancho Panza: “ ‘What giants?’ asks Sancho Panza.’ ‘You can see them over there,’ answers his master, ‘with the long arms, some of them reaching almost two miles.’ ‘Look around, your Honor,’ says Sancho, ‘because what appear there are not giants, but windmills, and what seem to you to be arms are the sails that are turned by the wind to turn the mill wheels.’ ” But Don Quixote continues to insist that they are giants and “gave Rosinante the spurs, without noticing that his squire yelled as loud as he could and warned him that what he wanted to take on were not giants, but undoubtedly windmills.” After Don Quixote received a sound drubbing

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

when he, along with his horse Rosinante, was thrown aloft by one of the mill’s sails, Sancho Panza hurried to the spot on his donkey. “ ‘God have mercy on you,’ said Sancho, ‘Didn’t I tell your Honor that you had better look around carefully to see what they did, since they are nothing other than windmills, and the person who cannot see that must take a beating from them[?]’ ” But Don Quixote consoles himself with the idea that there was an evil magician who has tricked him once again and “has changed those giants into windmills to deprive me of the glory of victory”; nonetheless, he is convinced that he and his sword would put the magician to shame. “ ‘God grant that he can do so!’ said Sancho Panza, whereupon he helped his master to get up from the ground and upon Rosinante, whose back was almost broken in two.” Mr. Ostermann . . . 2) of untruthfulness and dishonesty] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 527. After having noted that he is in no way a blind admirer . . . acknowledge what is true and well-founded in those complaints] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 527. having investigated the source . . . truth-loving men] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 527. He notes that . . . “is to sweeten what is bitter”] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 527. “There is a truth,” . . . this word is precisely a matter of major importance to him”] Cited, with minor differences, from J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 528. what comes from that heart also goes to the heart] Alludes to a saying collected as no. 1122 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld [Danish Sayings and Adages] (Copenhagen, 1845; ASKB 1549), p. 42. the law’s punishment] Refers to the penal provisions of the law concerning freedom of the press

3

7

11

14

16

34

41

207

“Our Journal Literature”

208

11

(→ 197,25); depending on the seriousness of the crime or offense, these provisions could range from the death penalty to banishment, lifelong forced labor, the workhouse, prison on water and bread, and fines of varying size. See Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 12, pt. 3 (Copenhagen, 1800), pp. 673–688, esp. pp. 679–688. pseudonymous or anonymous] Many articles in the journals and newspapers of the day were either anonymous or pseudonymous, not infrequently written under initials. But see the prohibition in the law concerning freedom of the press (→ 197,25) : “And, as it has become clear that crafty and mean wickedness generally seeks concealment through anonymity, but justice requires that everyone ought to acknowledge what he allows to be printed publicly just as much as what he utters orally or in writing, and that he thus ought to be known by his name just as much in the former as in the latter, so does He [the king] view it as most beneficial to forbid all anonymity and to enjoin upon everyone who publishes any printed piece the duty to state his name.” See also the provision in § 16: “Everyone who permits something to be printed (smaller or larger) must on the title page state his name as author, using his full name, his office, or other characteristic, or trade, as well as whether he himself or someone else is publisher; thus as well with respect to the place where the piece is printed, as well as with the printer. Furthermore, nothing may be printed except by licensed printers. If anyone acts contrary to this, the work is to be confiscated, and both the publisher and the printer are to be sentenced to pay a 200 rix-dollar fine to the local poorhouse, in addition to punishment of the author if the content of the work published is found to be punishable.” See also the corresponding provisions in § 19: “Not only the publisher and the printer are to be named in all journals and periodicals, but also the author of every article as well as the editor; this latter person shall be held responsible, along with the author, for what is included in the journal or periodical. Similarly, in newspapers or public gazettes, the editor, along with the publisher, is to be named and held responsible. Those who offend

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

545

in this respect are to be punished in accordance with § 16 of this decree”; Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 12, pt. 3 (Copenhagen, 1800), pp. 678–679, 683–684, 684–685. Mr. Ostermann gets . . . minor acrimony . . . is not so dangerous] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), cols. 528–529. Kjøbenhavnsposten has more subscribers than Fædrelandet] In 1834, Kjøbenhavnsposten had ca. 500 subscribers and in 1835 ca. 1,000; in 1835, Fædrelandet experienced growth from ca. 535 subscribers to ca. 800. See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 (→ 196,36), vol. 1, pp. 147, 156. it is published every day] Refers to the fact that Kjøbenhavnsposten came out every day; Fædrelandet, on the other hand, came out only once a week (starting October 1, 1839, it appeared twice a week). See Jette D. Søllinge and Niels Thomsen, De danske aviser 1634–1989 (→ 196,36), vol. 1, pp. 147, 156. the summaries . . . of the most important domestic newspapers] Refers to the fact that Kjøbenhavnsposten, especially in its rubric, “Nyheds-Post,” regularly carried summaries and excerpts from articles in other newspapers published in the kingdom of Denmark as well as in the duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg. During the period January 1–November 25, 1835, it carried summaries or excerpts from the following newspapers in the kingdom of Denmark: Aalborg Stiftstidende og Adresse-Avis (three times), Aarhus Stifts-Tidende (often called Aarhus Avis, twenty-six times), Adresseavisen (five times), Bornholms Avertissements-Tidende (once), Collegial-Tidende (fourteen times), Dagen (nineteen times), Dansk Folkeblad (twelve times), Fædrelandet (fourteen times), Fyens Stifts Adresse-Avis og Avertissements-Tidende (called Hempels Avis, twenty-four times), Helsingør Avis (once), Lollands og Falsters Stifts Adresse-Contoirs Efterretninger (called Mariboe Avis, four times), Politivennen (twice), Randers Amtsavis og Avertissements-Tidende (twice), Ribe Stifts Adresse-Avis (twice), Roeskilde Avis og Avertissementstidende (once), Skanderborg Amtsavis

19

24

27

28

546

28

35

38

209

4

“Our Journal Literature”

og Avertissements-Tidende (once), Thisted Amtsavis og Avertissementstidende (called Thisted Avis, twice), Tidende for Forhandlingerne ved Provindsialstænderne for Sjællands, Fyens og Lollands-Falsters Stifter samt for Island og Færøerne (from the beginning of October, known as Stændertidenden, twelve times), Den Vest-Siællandske Avis (nine times), Viborger Samler (nine times); and the following journals: Dansk Litteratur-Tidende (eight times), Dansk Ugeskrift (twelve times), Maanedsskrift for Litteratur (six times); from the following newspapers in Schleswig: Apenrader Wochenblatt (three times); Wochenblatt für Eckernförder und die Umgegend (nine times); from the following newspapers in Holstein: Altonaischer Mercurius (called Altonaer Merkur, eleven times), Itzehoer Wochenblatt (twelve times), Kieler Correspondenzblatt (twenty-four times), Preetzer Wochenblatt für den Bürger und Landmann (once), and Zeitung enthaltend das Wesentliche Inhalt aus den Verhandlungen der Provinzialstände des Herzogthums Holstein (from the beginning of October known as Itzehoer Stændertidende, eleven times). Mr. Ostermann . . . dishonesty and untruthfulness] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 529. Mr. Ostermann attempts to show . . . to get his views expressed] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 529. Mr. Ostermann in general recommends great caution in such matters] See J. A. Ostermann’s article “Vor nyeste Journallitteratur,” in Fædrelandet (→ 194,24), col. 529. sued for defamation] Regarding defamation suits both against public officials and private citizens, see the provisions in §§ 10–12 of the law concerning freedom of the press (→ 197,25) ; see also Chronologisk Register over de Kongelige Forordninger (→ 197,25), vol. 12, pt. 3 (Copenhagen, 1800), pp. 681–683; the reference here is to bk. 6, chap. 21, pts. 2, 3, 7 of Chr. V’s Danske Lov [Christian V’s Danish Law] (1683); see Kong Christian den Femtes Danske Lov af det Iuridiske Fakultet giennemseet [King Christian the Fifth’s Danish Law, Revised by the

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

Faculty of Law], ed. J. H. Bærens (Copenhagen, 1797), cols. 998–1001. an honest, free-spoken editor] Refers to J. D. Hage (→ 204,13), who took over for C. N. David as editor on September 1, 1835; see the following notice, dated August 27, 1835, in Fædrelandet, no. 50, August 28, 1835, col. 152, where David writes: “Because I will be traveling abroad in a while, I have succeeded in getting senior teacher J. Hage to take over the editorship of Fædrelandet on a temporary basis, though I hope that while I am abroad I will have the opportunity and occasion to converse with the readers of this journal.” J. D. Hage served as editor on the front page of Fædrelandet from issue no. 51, September 4, 1835, to issue no. 143, June 24, 1837. (Starting July 1, 1837 the newspaper was again edited by C. N. David; see the front page of Fædrelandet, no. 144, July 1, 1837). Dansk Ugeskrift] Dansk Ugeskrift [Danish Weekly], founded in October 1831, published by “A Society,” edited by Prof. J. F. Schouw, appeared until the end of March 1836. The journal’s popular-scientific mission is described in a programmatic statement in nos. 1−2, pp. 1–4; p. 1: “This journal is not directed at providing learned or strictly scientific information, but it will treat in an accessible manner subjects that are of interest to all the cultivated classes of people. It is to be a popular journal, but not a journal of the common people.” The following “subjects” were to be treated: the character of various peoples; their intellectual and physical characteristics; their religious, moral, and civic condition as well as their history; the character, lives, and political significance of leading individuals; observations on natural history and science; poetic contributions and pieces that help develop a sense for―and knowledge of―the fine arts. The journal, which does not intend to carry reviews and polemical contributions, will not only carry articles by Danish authors, but also, in Danish translation, by those from abroad. In brief, “truth and humanity [are to be] . . . the journal’s principal characteristics” (p. 2). The programmatic statement concludes with the wish that the journal might become “an

17

27

“Our Journal Literature” organ for the knowledgeable, open, sober-minded, and well-intentioned fellow citizens who wish to participate in the dissemination of the true, the good, and the beautiful” (p. 4). As the title indicates, the journal came out once a week.

•

P a p e r 254 1835 •

547

Notes for Paper 255–Paper 258 Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Hermann Deuser Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

550

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA”1 is no. 437 in B-cat. and is among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). The four papers were found at the back of Journal AA and are discussed by H. P. Barfod at the conclusion of his description of that journal: “4 loose small pages are found there as well.―The rest of the book has not been written in” (B-cat., p. 195). Some of the text of Paper 255 is missing and has been transmitted indirectly in Barfod’s edition, Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 255 contains two dates, though without indication of the month or the year: “the 12th” (Paper 255:1) and “the 13th” (Paper 255:2). The contents of Paper 255:2 are very reminiscent of the marginal addition at the end of Journal AA (see AA:51 in KJN 1, 46), which is dated October 11, 1837. The entry also contains a reference to Franz von Baader’s Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik, pt. 1 (Stuttgart, 1828; ASKB 396), which Kierkegaard excerpted at the end of 1837 (see Paper 21 in the present volume). The two dates, “the 12th” and “the 13th” are thus probably from one of the months October–December 1837. Papers 256−258 may be estimated to be from the same period and were probably placed in Journal AA in anticipation of subsequently entering them into that journal.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

Explanatory Notes 212

2 6 6

12 14 20

212

24

the wind . . . no one knows whence it cometh or whither it goeth] Refers to Jn 3:8. Conversion . . . to work] Text is from EP I–II, p. 26. As F[ranz] Baader correctly observes, one must walk back . . . previously walked forth] Refers to the following passage in “XII. Vorlesung” [12th Lecture], in Franz Baader, Vorlesungen über speculative Dogmatik [Lectures on Speculative Dogmatics], “Erstes Heft” [First Group] (Stuttgart, 1828; ASKB 396), p. 80: “Incidentally, one important consequence of what has been said is the insight won through it, namely, that time is a period or institution of grace and salvation for the human being who has fallen or reverted to it [time]. For during this time, the original and fundamental lie that he suddenly spoke within himself, and as a result of which he, of his own devices, can speak only evil forevermore, is transformed―as it were en détail, or in each individual application―into a new affirmation or negation. He is thereby granted the power to eradicate all of the evil foundation within himself regressively, by laying down a good foundation.” ― F[ranz] Baader: Franz X. von Baader (1765−1841), German Catholic philosopher and theologian; from 1826, professor at Munich. the words: to take God’s kingdom by force] Reference to Mt 11:12. it is said . . . our salvation in fear and trembling] Reference to Phil 2:12. as possible, . . . time] Text is from EP I−II, p. 26. blessing (Serbian folk legend)] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in “Bärensohn. Ein Serbisches Volksmährchen” [Bear’s Son: A Serbian Folktale], in Erzählungen und Mährchen [Stories and Fairy Tales], ed. Friedrich Heinrich von der Hagen, 2 vols. (Prenzlau, 1825−1826), vol. 2, pp. 317−329; pp. 323−324, where it is related that Bärensohn came to a peasant with whom he made a bet about how much he could eat. When

the peasant’s daughter had put the food on the table, the peasant interjected (p. 324): “Stop, you may not touch the food until you have made the cross as I have done, and have said, ‘In the name of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost!’ ” At first Bärensohn refused to do it, but hunger compelled him to do so. And he ate, but before he had eaten scarcely half the food, he was full. Kierkegaard excerpted this fairy tale in Not3:14, from March 1836, in KJN 3, 113−114; this episode is related on p. 113. Muhammed] Muhamed ibn Abdallah ibn AbdelMuttalib (ca. 570−632), Arab prophet and military leader, founder of Islam. He was born in Mecca, where he received revelations; subsequently he fled to Medina in 622, the year from which Muslims date the beginning of their calendar. Pythagoras] Presumably, a reference to the practice attributed to the Greek mathematician and philosopher, Pythagoras (ca. 570–497 b.c.), who required that his students first acquire wisdom during a long period of silence before inducting them into the order of philosophers that he had founded. See bk. 8, chap. 10 of Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: Navnkundige Filosofers Levnet, Meninger og sindrige Udsagn, i ti Bøger [Diogenes Laertius’s Philosophical History, or the Lives, Opinions, and Clever Sayings of Eminent Philosophers, in Ten Books], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111), vol. 1, p. 368: “For five whole years they had to keep silence, merely listening to his discourses without seeing him.” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 2, p. 329. a line from The Golden Cross) the notion . . . but from myself] Refers to act 2, sc. 21 of Guldkorset. Lystspil i to Acter efter det Franske [The Golden Cross: Comedy in Two Acts, from the French]

25

26

30

552

213

2

213

9

S m a l l N o t e s o f Va r i e d C o n t e n t s P a p e r 256–257 1837

by J. L. Heiberg (no. 79 in Det kongelige Theaters Repertoire [Repertoire of the Royal Theater]) (Copenhagen, 1836), p. 26, where Corporal Remi relates that he has wandered about in the Siberian snow for thirteen months, adding: “But of course, one has to walk on the earth, even if it is glowing hot―and not less when it is frozen . . . This notion, by the way, is from myself; it’s not something I learned from the old military.” The comedy had its premiere on March 4, 1836, and was performed at the Royal Theater four more times that month. If you do not need . . . contemporaries. ―] Variant: added. the orthodox appeal to God and conscience] In connection with the conflict between Pastor N.F.S. Grundtvig and Prof. H. N. Clausen regarding renunciation of the devil at baptism prior to repeating the Apostles’ Creed, Grundtvig pleaded that for him and his adherents it was a matter of salvation and of conscience to retain the renunciation of the devil and to preserve the ancient wording, handed down by their forefathers, of the rituals for both sacraments, baptism and the Eucharist. In order to annul the compulsion of conscience―with which Grundtvig and his adherents believed the State Church would burden them if Clausen’s views were introduced―and to promote freedom of conscience and of religion, Grundtvig argued that the laity be freed from the regulations that bound Christians to the parish in which they resided and that the clergy be granted dogmatic and liturgical freedom. See especially Om Daabs-Pagten [On the Baptismal Pact] (Copenhagen, 1832), pp. 4−5, 8, 13−14, and Om Sogne-Baandets Løsning og Hr. Professor Clausen [On the Loosening of Parish Bonds and Mr. Professor Clausen] (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 5, 7, 9−18, 21−22; on p. 16, Grundtvig writes: “This is how the loosening of parish bonds appears to me, as a simple and easy means by which not only does the compulsion of conscience and the bitterness it causes disappear, but by which, in addition, all the liberality and scholarly freedom anyone could want becomes possible without wronging anyone . . . Where I am indeed speaking for the

•

•

cause of ecclesiastical freedom as something we, on both sides, ought to value much more than the sad triumph of doing violence to each other’s consciences, there he [H. N. Clausen] accuses me as someone who wants to place the yoke of my faith upon every soul, and at the same time he pushes for the abolition of the baptismal pact which is a thousand years old, without taking the least notice of those of us for whom it is a matter of conscience and of salvation to remain true to this until death!” See also Den Danske Stats-Kirke upartisk betragtet [The Danish State Church Viewed without Partisanship] (Copenhagen, 1834), pp. 2−3, 5−6, 7, 16, 19−29, 32, 35, 41−48, 56, 65, 68, where he writes (pp. 28−29): “when the government is neither able nor willing to compel all priests in the State Church both to follow the old altar book with respect to the means of grace, and to instruct confirmands in keeping with the baptismal pact, then the loosening of parish bonds is the only way that we who stand by the faith of our fathers can have actual freedom of religion and conscience in the State Church, and for me this is naturally the main issue, because it concerns our salvation.” ― the orthodox: 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. See Paper 170 and its associated explanatory note in the present volume. The Romans made Augustus into God] Augustus (63 b.c.– a.d. 14), Roman emperor; his original name was Gaius Octavianus, but the Senate bestowed on him the honorific Augustus (“lofty,” “holy”). Augustus had been 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 (“son of someone divine”). Later he permitted the worship of the Genius Augusti (“Augustus’s guardian spirit”), thus approaching the divine status that was granted to him after his death. See, e.g., chaps. 5, 7–8, 97 in Suetonius’s biography of Augustus in De vita Caesarum [Of the Lives of the Caesars]; see also Caji Svetonii Tranqvilii Tolv første Romerske Keiseres Levnetsbeskrivelse [Suetonius’s Biographies of the First Twelve Roman Emperors], trans. Jacob

11

S m a l l N o t e s o f Va r i e d C o n t e n t s P a p e r 257–258 1837 •

14

213

19

Baden, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1802–1803; ASKB 1281), vol. 1, pp. 87–88, 89–91, 191. See also bk. 1, chap. 10 in Tacitus’s Annals, in Cajus Cornelius Tacitus, trans. J. Baden, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1773–1797; ASKB 1286–1288), vol. 1, p. 23, where it is related, “After the funeral was held, he was awarded a temple and divine honors.” the time of despair, the time of the Wandering Jew] See Not2:7, dated December 1835, where Kierkegaard has the Faust idea incorporate Don Juan (immediacy) and the Wandering Jew (despair) (KJN 3, 90). See also AA:38, presumably from April or May 1837, where Kierkegaard entertains the idea that Faust could “end with despair (the Wandering Jew). Despair is Romantic” (KJN 1, 43). ― the Wandering Jew: Ahasuerus, known from several legends recorded in chronicles in southern Europe and England at the beginning of the 13th century, which have lived on in popular books; see, for example, J. Görres, Die teutschen Volksbücher [German Popular Books] (Heidelberg, 1807; ASKB 1440), pp. 200–203. According to one of the legends, which possibly has its origin in Armenia, the Wandering Jew is supposed to have been Pontius Pilate’s watchman who disdainfully struck Jesus on the back with his fist when Jesus was being led out of the palace; he is also said to have shouted to Jesus: “Go faster!” whereupon Jesus turned and replied: “I am going, but you shall wait until I come again.” According to other legends, the Wandering Jew is supposed to have refused to allow Jesus to rest on the doorsill of his house when bearing the cross to Golgotha. Later legends claim that he was a cobbler in Jerusalem, from which the term “Jerusalem’s cobbler” originates. See Blade af Jerusalems Skomagers Lommebog, udgivne af B. S. Ingemann [Pages from the Notebook of a Jerusalem Shoemaker, Edited by B. S. Ingemann] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 1575). As a punishment for what the Wandering Jew did to Jesus, he is supposed to wander the earth eternally as an outcast. anticipation of st.] It is not clear what the abbreviation “st.” (Danish, “St.,” with the capital “S” indicating that it is a noun) stands for. The editors of Pap. suggest “Studier (?),” i.e., “studies?”

•

553

scene in Scribe] It is not clear what is being referred to. ― Scribe: Augustin Eugène Scribe (1791–1861), French dramatist, dominated Parisian theater life for forty years with close to 350 opera libretti, vaudevilles, and comedies in which love is often shown to be a fleeting illusion. In the half-century from 1824 to 1874, Scribe’s dramas were those most often performed at the Royal Theater in Copenhagen, where, with the assistance of J. L. Heiberg, about one hundred of his pieces were performed. Faust] Presumably, a reference to J. W. Goethe’s Faust. Eine Tragödie [Faust: A Tragedy] (part 1, 1808, and part 2, 1831); see Faust. Eine Tragödie von Goethe. Beide Theile in Einem Bande [Faust: A Tragedy by Goethe; Both Parts in One Volume] (Stuttgart, 1834; ASKB 1669). Don Juan by Hoffman] Refers to E.T.A. Hoffmann’s novella “Don Juan. Eine fabelhafte Begebenheit, die sich mit einem reisenden Enthusiasten zugetragen” [Don Juan: A Fabulous Occurrence That Befell a Music Enthusiast on His Travels] (1813). The novella is the fourth piece in part 1 of Hoffmann’s Phantasiestücke [Fantasies] (1814); see E.T.A. Hoffmann’s ausgewählte Schriften [Selected Writings of E.T.A. Hoffmann], 10 vols. (Berlin, 1827–1828; ASKB 1712–1716), vol. 7 (1827), pp. 81–97. ― Hoffman: Ernst Theodor Amadeus Hoffmann (1776−1822), German author, publisher, jurist, and musician. Lap―Madonna. M. Magdalene] Variant: added. ― M. Magdalene: Even though it is not said directly in the Bible, the sinner or prostitute in Lk 7:36−50 has traditionally been identified with Mary Magdalene. According to Lk 8:2, she became a disciple of Jesus after he had cured her from demonic possession. She was present at Jesus’ crucifixion (Mt 27:56) and burial (Mt 27:61) and is named as being among the women who went to the grave to tend to Jesus’ body, but was informed by an angel that he had arisen from the dead (Lk 24:1−12); according to Jn 20:1−18, she had gone to the grave alone and had been the first to encounter Jesus after the resurrection. Letter from Wilhelm] Possibly Peter Wilhelm Lund (1801–1880), naturalist, paleontologist, brother of Kierkegaard’s brothers-in-law J. C.

23

23

24

27

2

214

554

3

4

5

6

S m a l l N o t e s o f Va r i e d C o n t e n t s P a p e r 258 1837

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 in Lagoa Santa, Brazil. Rask] Variant: changed from “R.” Hans Kristian Rask (1805−1875), Danish theologian, priest; admitted to the University of Copenhagen from Borgerdydskolen (the School of Civic Virtue) in Copenhagen in 1828; from 1833, a teacher at Borgerdydsskolen; from April 1834 until 1838, a student resident at Borchs Collegium in Copenhagen. See T. H. Erslew, Almindeligt Forfatter-Lexicon [Universal Encyclopedia of Authors], 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1843–1853; ASKB 954–969), vol. 2 (1847), p. 629. Monrad] Ditlev Gothard Monrad (1811−1887), Danish theologian, bishop, politician, and cabinet minister; admitted to the University of Copenhagen in 1830; cand. theol., 1836; magister, 1838; from April 1835 to 1838, a student resident at Borchs Collegium in Copenhagen. See T. H. Erslew, Almindeligt Forfatter-Lexicon, vol. 2, p. 299. P. E. Lind] Peter Engel Lind (1814−1903), Danish theologian and bishop; admitted to the University of Copenhagen from Borgerdydskolen in Copenhagen in 1831; cand. theol., 1837; from 1837, teacher at a Copenhagen secondary school for young ladies; from 1838, a student resident at Borchs Collegium in Copenhagen. See T. H. Erslew, Almindeligt Forfatter-Lexicon, vol. 2, p. 143. the ignorance with which Socrates began] In the conversations included in Plato’s dialogues, Socrates often points out his ignorance, as in the Apology (21a–23b), where he explains that the oracle at Delphi had in fact denied that anyone was wiser than he, because he knew that he knew nothing, unlike the many, who imagine that they know something; see Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), pp. 7–9. See also Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R.

•

•

D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann, 1925), vol. 1, p. 163, and Aristotle, Sophistical Refutations, chap. 34 (183b), in Jonathan Barnes, ed., The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), vol. 1, p. 313. ― Socrates: The Greek philosopher Socrates (ca. 470–399 b.c.). With his maieutic method (i.e., midwifery), and developing his thoughts in dialogue with his contemporaries, he sought to deliver others who were already pregnant with knowledge, thus helping them get rid of their errors. He was condemned to death by a court of the Athenian people for acknowledging gods other than those recognized by the state and for corrupting the youth of Athens; the sentence was carried out when he drank hemlock and died. He left no writings, but the main outlines of his character, activity, and teachings were depicted by three of his contemporaries: Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds; Xenophon, in his four “Socratic” writings, including the Memorabilia; and Plato, in his dialogues. the world created from nothing] Since the 2nd century, the Christian understanding of the Creation story in Genesis 1 has more and more been that God created everything out of nothing. See also 2 Macc 7:28: “I beg you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. And in the same way the human race came into being.” See also chap. 2, “Om Guds Gierninger” [On God’s Works], sec. 1, § 1, in N. E. Balle and C. 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), p. 17: “From the beginning God has created heaven and earth out of nothing, solely through his almighty power, for the benefit and joy of all his living creatures.” the chaste virgin of whom Chr. was born] See article 3 in the first of the Lutheran confessional writings, the Augsburg Confession (1530), where it is stated that “the Son of God did assume human nature in the womb of the chaste

6

7

S m a l l N o t e s o f Va r i e d C o n t e n t s P a p e r 258 1837 •

12

14 14

16 17

Virgin Mary”; Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession together with the Apology for Same by Ph. Melanchthon], trans. A. G. Rudelbach (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386), p. 47. Similarly, in his translation, J. C. Lindberg has “in the chaste Virgin Mary’s womb”; Den danske Kirkes symbolske Bøger [The Symbolic Books of the Danish Church] (Copenhagen, 1830), p. 11. Kant despairs of attaining absolute clarity in understanding the world] In his Critik der reinen Vernunft [Critique of Pure Reason] (1781; see ASKB 595, a 4th ed., Riga, 1794), Kant maintains that human beings cannot attain knowledge of absolute actuality and thus neither can they do so with respect to the world as a totality of all phenomena. ― Kant: Immanuel Kant (1724−1804), German philosopher; privatdocent, 1755−1769; from 1770, professor at the University of Königsberg. modern philos.] Philosophy since Kant. the relative absolute] Term for Kant’s philosophy. According to his Critique of Pure Reason, human beings can only know actuality in relation to the subject. Nonetheless, this knowledge is based on the a priori principles of the understanding that are absolutely valid and therefore independent of individual differences between human beings. I often enough . . . letter bag.] Variant: added. orthodoxy] i.e., Lutheran or early Protestant orthodoxy, a dogmatic tendency that―especially in the 17th century―sought to produce a systematic, at times almost scholastic, presentation of Luther’s theology in order to defend it against Catholicism.

•

555

Notes for Paper 259 “Telegraph Messages from Someone Who Sees Unclearly to a Clairvoyant concerning the Relation between Xnty and Philosophy”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Jon Tafdrup, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Hermann Deuser Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

558

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “ ‘Telegraph Messages from Someone Who Sees Unclearly to a Clairvoyant concerning the Relation between Xnty and Philosophy’ ” is no. 426 in B-cat. and is among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were found in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). The manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 259 contains five dates: “Oct. 22, 38,” Oct. 29th 38” (two times), “Nov. 29th 38,” and “Dec. 17th 38,” all in Paper 259:1. It may be supposed that Paper 259:2 and Paper 259:3 were written not long after. The texts are thus from a period of ca. two months, from October 22 to December 17, 1838.

Explanatory Notes 216

1 1

2 5 6

10

11 14

Telegraph messages] i.e., messages from afar. someone who sees unclearly] The word Kierkegaard uses is “Mousvoyant,” a word adapted from French. clairvoyant] French, one who sees clearly. If a man meets a man . . . can a man do a man any harm] No source for this has been identified. Prometheus, that the liver is hacked away and continually grows] According to Greek myth, Prometheus stole fire from heaven and gave it to humankind, which he had created from clay. Zeus punished him by chaining him to a cliff, where a vulture tore out his liver every day, which then grew back during the night. Prometheus is often regarded as the progenitor of human culture; see F. G. Klopfer, ed., Paul Fr. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [Paul Fr. A. Nitsch’s New Dictionary of Mythology], 2nd ed., vols. 1–2 (Leipzig, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945), vol. 2, pp. 492−496. Golgotha is called the place of the skull] See Mt 27:33, which makes mention of a place called Golgotha (which means Place of a Skull). See also the article “Γολγαϑᾶ” [Golgotha], in K. G. Bretschneider, Lexicon manuale graeco-latinum in libros Novi Testamenti [Greek-Latin Hand Lexicon of the Books of the New Testament], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1829 [1824]; ASKB 73–74) vol. 1, p. 251, where it is explained that Golgotha is from the Hebrew and means “cranium” and that the Latin name is locus calvarii, i.e., “the place of the skull.” they cast lots for his seamless tunic] Refers both to Mt 27:35 and to Jn 19:23−24. does not want the king of Sodom to be able to say: I have made Abraham rich] Refers to Gen 14:17−21:24. ― Sodom: Name of a city that in Abraham’s time was situated where the Dead Sea now is; see G. B. Winer, Biblisches Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Studirende, Kandidaten, Gymnasiallehrer und Prediger [Specialized Biblical

Dictionary for Use as a Handbook for Students, Graduates, Preparatory School Teachers, and Preachers], 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1833–1838 [1820]; ASKB 70–71), vol. 2, p. 557. a Jewish edict from the year 60 before Xt] Kierkegaard’s source has not been identified, but the reference is to a proclamation or an edict that was issued during the conflicts over succession to the throne during the 60s b.c. between the Hasmonean brothers Hyrcanus II, who was high priest, and Aristobulus II, who was king. During these conflicts, the one brother was in Jerusalem while the other brother was besieging the city from without. Every day, those who were inside the city went to a place along the city wall, where they lowered a basket containing money so that they could haul up animals for daily sacrifices in the temple. Among those besieging the city was an old man who had some familiarity with Greek wisdom. One day, he said to the besiegers that the siege would never end as long as the besieged in Jerusalem could continue sacrifice services in the temple. The next day, when the basket was once again lowered, it was returned with a pig in it. When the basket was halfway up the wall, the pig stuck its hoof in the wall and the entire land of Israel was shaken. That was when the proclamation or the edict was issued. This account is related in various versions in the three treatises Bava Kamma (fol. 82b), Sotah (fol. 49b), and Menachot (fol. 64b) in the Babylonian Talmud. In Bava Kamma, for example, the version is “Maledictus vir qui educaverit porcos, & maledictus homo qui filium suum Græcorum sapientiam docuerit.” (“Cursed be the man who has raised a pig, and cursed the man who has instructed his son in Greek wisdom.”) The proclamation is also related in whole or in part in exegetical works on the New Testament, e.g., the commentary on Lk 15:15 in J. J. Wettstein, Novum Testamentum graecum editionis receptae cum lection-

16

560

21 22

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s "

ibus variantibus codicum MSS., editionum aliarum, versionum et patrum nec non commentario pleniore ex scriptoribus veteribus hebraeis, graecis et latinis historiam et vim verborum illustrante [The Greek New Testament in the Accepted Edition with Variant Readings from Manuscripts, Other Editions, Tradition, and the Church Fathers, with Ample Commentary That Illuminates the History and Meaning of the Words, Making Use of Jewish, Greek, and Latin Authors] (Amsterdam, 1751), vol. 1 (containing the four Gospels), p. 759, where with reference to Bava Kamma, fol. 82b, the reader is informed that at the time of the Hasmonean brothers Aristobulus and Hyrcanus, it was said, “Maledictus sit homo qui alit porcos.” (“Cursed be the man who raises pigs.”) See also the commentary to Acts 2:4 in C. T. Kühnöl, Novi Testamenti libri historici græce. Textui recepto appositæ sunt lectiones Griesbachianæ. Cum commentariis [The Historical Books of the New Testament in Greek: With Griesbach’s Readings of the Received Text; With Commentary] (London 1835), vol. 3 (containing Acts), p. 34, col. 2, where the following passage is quoted from Menachoth, fol. 64b: “maledictus sit, qui alit porcos, et qui docet filium suum sapientiam Græcorum.” (“Cursed be the person who has raised a pig, and cursed the person who has instructed his son in Greek wisdom.”) See, in addition, the commentary to Col 2:8 in C. E. de Windheim, Hugonis Grotii annotationes in Novum Testamentum [Hugo Grotius’s Annotations on the New Testament], new ed. (Erlangen, 1756), vol. 2, pt. 1, p. 678, where the reader is informed that the following decree was issued in the time of the Hasmoneans: “Maledictus sit, qui docet filium suum philosophiam Greacam.” (“Cursed be the person who instructs his son in Greek philosophy.”) only in a metaphor and in obscure language] Reference to 1 Cor 13:12. Paul speaks . . . about the clay vessel in which the spirit dwells] Refers to 2 Cor 4:7. ― Paul: Paul is the most important figure of the earliest Christian era; he was probably executed in Rome ca. a.d. 65, during Nero’s persecutions of Christians. In Kierkegaard’s day, all fourteen letters in the NT (including the letter to

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

the Hebrews) that are attributed to Paul were regarded as genuine; today only seven or nine of them―including the letter to the Romans, 1 Thessalonians, the two letters to the Corinthians, and the letter to the Galatians―are believed to have been written by Paul. Present-day scholars believe that the Acts of the Apostles, which is the other major source of knowledge concerning Paul, reflects a view of the apostle from a later period. in other respects many similarities have been found betw. him and Socrates] See, e.g., F. C. Baur, Das Christliche des Platonismus oder Sokrates und Christus. Eine religionsphilosophische Untersuchung, [The Christianness of Platonism, or Socrates and Christ: An Investigation in the Philosophy of Religion] (Tübingen, 1837; ASKB 422). Socrates was uglier than original sin] Presumably, a reference to Alcibiades’ discourse in Plato’s dialogue 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; see Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), pp. 566−573. ― Socrates: The Greek philosopher Socrates (ca. 470–399 b.c.). With his maieutic method (i.e., midwifery), and by developing his thoughts in dialogue with his contemporaries, he sought to deliver others who were already pregnant with knowledge, thus helping them get rid of their errors. He was condemned to death by a court of the Athenian people for acknowledging gods other than those recognized by the state and for corrupting the youth of Athens; the sentence was carried out when he drank hemlock and died. He left no writings, but the main outlines of his character, activity, and teachings were depicted

27

30

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s "

32

by three of his contemporaries: Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds; Xenophon, in his four “Socratic” writings, including the Memorabilia; and Plato, in his dialogues. ― uglier than original sin: An expression collected by J. F. Fenger in the quarterly journal For Literatur og Kritik [For Literature and Criticism], vol. 4 (Odense, 1848); see also E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat [A Treasury of Danish Sayings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1879), vol. 2, p. 373. The great prominence of the altar ritual in the Middle Ages] Probably a reference to the fact that the liturgy for the Eucharist was transformed in the course of the Middle Ages; e.g., starting in the mid-12th century, there was an addition to the ritual, the elevation of the host, so that the laity, kneeling, could worship it, a worship that became obligatory from the mid-13th century; see sec. 2, “I. An welchen Orten und unter welchen Feyerlichkeiten und Gebräuchen verwalteten die Geistlichen das h. [heilige] Abendmahl?” [I. To Which Words and with What Ceremonies and Usages Did the Clergy Administer the Eucharist?], in the article “Abendmahl (heiliges)” [(Holy) Eucharist], in W. D. Fuhrmann, Handwörterbuch der christlichen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte [Manual of Christian Religious and Church History], ed. W. D. Fuhrmann, 3 vols. (Halle, 1826–1829; ASKB 75–77), vol. 1, pp. 9–12. This change in the liturgy of the Eucharist was a consequence of the doctrine of the transubstantiation of the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ, and of the doctrine of the sacrifice of the mass, i.e., that the performance of the mass constitutes an unbloody sacrifice of Christ on the cross; see the article “Messe (Missa)” [Mass], in Handwörterbuch der christlichen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte, vol. 3, pp. 111−115; pp. 112−113. Kierkegaard might also have in mind the circumstance that during the course of the Middle Ages, more and more altars were introduced into churches, so that these different altars could be the sites of various sorts of religious services or various forms of the mass, including private masses; see the articles “Altäre. (christliche) ” [Altars (Christian)] and “Messe (Missa),” in Handwörterbuch der christlichen

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

561

Religions- und Kirchengeschichte, vol. 1, pp. 74−76; p. 75, and vol. 3, pp. 111−115; pp. 114−115. attempt by navel contemplators to concentrate upon oneself through the navel] Refers to the Greek Orthodox monks, the omphalopsychites (“navel gazers”) or hesychasts on Mount Athos (14th century); by remaining absolutely still and concentrating all their attention, during prayer, on staring at their navel, they sought to attain a state of complete peace (hēsychía), and they believed that by so doing they could receive a divine joy in their souls and become bathed in a light that emanated from God and was God’s dwelling place, which they believed they could see with their naked eyes. See the article, “Hesychiasten oder Hesychasten” [Hesychiasts or Hesychasts], in W. D. Fuhrmann, Handwörterbuch der christlichen Religions- und Kirchengeschichte (→ 216,32), vol. 2, pp. 278−279, where they are also called “Nabelseher (omphalopsychi)” [Navel Gazers (omphalpsychi)]. See DD:76, dated November 23, 1837, in KJN 1, 237. The sciences on Golgotha . . . translated from the German. Cph. 1764] Videnskaberne paa Golgatha, under Jesu Kors, eller de helligede Videnskaber. Forestillet under en Drøm, hvor Videnskaberne komme, at tilbede under Korset. Oversat af N. M. [The Sciences on Golgotha, under the Cross of Jesus: Or the Sanctified Sciences; Presented during a Dream in Which the Sciences Come to Worship under the Cross; Translated by N. M.] (Copenhagen, 1764; abbreviated hereafter as Videnskaberne paa Golgatha). “N. M.” are the initials of the Danish priest Niels Mygind (1736−1809). ― translated from the German: See the beginning of the preface, “Til Læseren” [To the Reader], p. 3: “The present little piece is translated from the German language.” The author is described as follows, pp. 3−4: “A few years ago an author, who did not reveal his name, had this published in the Learned Gazette of Dresden, published in that city, under the title Gelehrte Anzeigen [Learned Notes].” The Danish translator’s preface] “Til Læseren,” in Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), pp. 3−12. “The book was immediately translated into a number of languages. In England . . . Loyd’s Evening Post.”] Kierkegaard’s free render-

1

11

16 16

217

562

19

21

25

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s "

ing of the following passage in the preface to Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), pp. 5−6: “Nor did it take very long before this little work became known, translated, and printed, even in foreign countries. With what eagerness it was received in England, when it first appeared in English, and on Good Friday of that same year it was carried in Loyd’s Evening Post, the second, large printing of the book, which was done quickly, testifies to this.” Following this there is discussion of the French edition on pp. 6−7. “Golgotha is to be Parnassus.”] Cited from the following passage in the preface to Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), p. 9: “Here he [the author] guides every science in particular to the cross of Jesus and sprinkles them with His blood; he wants them to be taught under the cross; Golgotha is to be Parnassus, and to that end they are explained and taught only in order that they can be used and employed in the service of the kingdom of Jesus.” ―Golgotha: → 216,10. ― Parnassus: A mountain in central Greece; according to Greek mythology, it is particularly associated with Apollo and the muses; see Videnskaberne paa Golgatha, p. 3, where Parnassus is called “the mountain of the pagan muses.” Si Christum nescis . . . Si Christum discis, satis est, si cætera nescis] Cited at the end of the preface to Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), p. 12. Ditlevsen’s subscription library of edifying literature] Refers to the book dealer Niels Christian Ditlewsen (d. 1853), who had a business at Store Kjøbmagergade 49 (see map 2, C2), and to the “Christian Reading Library,” for which he served as librarian. See, e.g., the following advertisement in Adresseavisen (abbreviated form of Kjøbenhavns kongelig alene privilegerede Adressecomptoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office]), no. 275, November 20, 1838: “Inasmuch as some Christian friends, in association with the signer of this announcement, have believed that the right thing to do was to initiate a change in the so-called ‘Christian Reading Library’ here in the city, so that it can be more gainful than it has been hitherto, everyone and anyone who might have donated either books or money to

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

the above-named library, are called upon to meet at bookseller Ditlewsen’s, Store Kiøbmagergade no. 49, on Wednesday the 28th of November at 5 o’clock in the afternoon, when the interests and needs of the library will be given careful consideration and the views of the generous donors will be heard. / M. C. Rønne, priest.” From a subsequent article, “Det christelige Læsebibliothek” [The Christian Reading Library], by M. C. Rønne in Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 60, March 1, 1839, p. 244, it can be seen that the library had been founded in 1828 by Pastor B. F. Rønne “in association with some like-minded friends,” that one could borrow books free of charge for four weeks, and that in March 1839 the collection had consisted of about five hundred volumes. It is also clear that the library not only contained writings of the sort “that one generally tends to call edifying and devotional books, but also books on historical subjects,” though it was “a requirement that everything that is included must contain what is religious and profitable.” p. 7. After her (history) . . . truth like moonshine] Kierkegaard’s free, abbreviated rendering of the following passage in Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), pp. 7−8: “After her [i.e., ‘History’; the various sciences appear in the form of heavenly maidens] followed worldly wisdom (Philosophia). Her eyes were somewhat downcast, as with a person who is bashful and ashamed. But after a time she lifted them up, inwardly moved, to gaze upon the tree of the Cross. O, Redeemer! she cried, How long I have sought! There is truth to be found in the world, but truth like moonshine. Now that you have come into the world: in you there is truth like the sun! I desire to be instructed in your secrets; you are wisdom and the truth itself. Yes Lord! God’s foolishness is wiser than men. She fell silent and was happy.” ― (history): Variant: added. p. 17. . . where the nails pierced him . . . fortification . . . divine strongholds] Cited from Videnskaberne paa Golgatha (→ 217,12), pp. 17−18. question of androgyny . . . preoccupied ancient dogmatists] See, e.g., the chapter “Johannes Scotus Erigena,” in F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Versöhnung in ihrer geschichtlichen

27

4

9

218

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s "

16

Entwicklung von der ältesten Zeit bis auf die neueste [The Christian Doctrine of Atonement in Its Historical Development from the Earliest Times to the Most Recent, by Dr. Ferdinand Christian Baur, Ordinary Professor of Evangelical Theology at the University of Tübingen] (Tübingen, 1838; ASKB 423; abbreviated hereafter as Die christliche Lehre von der Versöhnung), pp. 118−141, esp. pp. 124−126, where Bauer writes in n. 1, p. 125: “Erigena attributes the separateness and disruption of nature particularly to the difference between the sexes,” and writes in the main text: “If man had not sinned, there would be no difference of the sexes in him [here footnote 1, cited above, is marked], but he would simply be human; in him the world would not be cut off from paradise, but rather all of earthly nature would be paradise within him, i.e., spiritual life . . . Heaven and earth would not be separated within him, for he would be entirely heavenly, and nothing earthly; nothing heavy, nothing bodily would manifest itself in him. He would be like an angel, and would multiply to the number determined by his creator, just as the angels multiply . . . But because the first human being did not remain in this blessed state, but he fell out of pride, and the unity of human nature fell apart into infinitely many parts and forms, divine love took the form of another human being in order to restore to its original unity the degraded nature in the old human being. Christ is therefore the beginning in whom the divided state into which man has fallen returns to unity. What is separated in sin is bound to unity in Christ. In Christ, since his resurrection, the difference of the sexes has been abolished, the world has been placed equal to paradise, and the spiritual and sensory are tied together in unity.” For further content in footnote 1, cited above, see → 218,16. See also KK:6, presumably from December 1838, in KJN 2, 329, where Kierkegaard excerpts from the first pages of Baur’s account, in Die christliche Lehre von der Versöhnung, pp. 118−120, of John Scotus Erigena (in Baur, pp. 118−141) and a note concerning his place in history (pp. 136−138). see Scotus Erigena . . . libri quinque. Oxonii 1681] Refers to Joannis Scoti Erigenæ de Divisione

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

563

Naturæ libri quinque, diu desiderati. / Accedit appendix ex Ambiguis S. Maximi græce & latine [Johannes Scotus Erigena’s “Division of Nature,” in Five Books, Which Had Long Been Wished For: In Addition, as an Appendix, “Ambigua” by St. Maximus (the Confessor), in Greek and Latin], ed. Thomas Gale (Oxford, 1681). See F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Versöhnung (→ 218,9), p. 121 n. 1: “De divisione naturae libri quinque, diu desiderati. Oxonii 1681.” ― Scotus Erigena: Johannes Scotus Erigena (ca. 800−ca. 877), Irish Christian theologian and philosopher; his work combined the Neoplatonic tradition from PseudoDionysius with Augustinian theology. De divisione naturæ, completed ca. 867, is his principal work. celibacy] At the synod in Rome of 1074, Pope Gregory VII reinstated the ancient, strict laws governing celibacy of the clergy and established that no clergy might marry; see § 132 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte [Handbook of Church History], 3rd ed., 2 vols. with continuous pagination (Halle, 1838 [1833]; ASKB 158–159), vol. 1, pp. 497–503; p. 499. II, p. 53: . . . saltem post ruinam suam . . . tali poena admonitus etc.] Abbreviated citation from F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Versöhnung, p. 125 n. 1 (→ 218,9). The passage Kierkegaard cites is introduced as follows by Baur: “Der von Gott vorhergesehene Fall und Untergang des ersten, die Einheit seiner Natur verlassenden, Menschen ist die Ursache, daß die Welt in eine unendlich große Vielheit verschiedener Theile und Formen zerfallen ist, damit der Mensch . . .” (“The fall, foreseen by God, and the ruin of the first human being, who abandoned his nature, caused the world to fall into an infinitely great number of different pieces and forms, through which the human being . . .”). The passage then continues with the Latin Kierkegaard cites in the main text. pathological] i.e., simultaneously related to illness, the senses, and the passions. In F. C. Sibbern’s work on psychology, Menneskets aandelige Natur og Væsen. Et Udkast til en Psychologie [Human Nature and Essence: A Draft of a Psychology], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1819), pt. 2, “Psychological Pathology,” treats the instincts, passions, and

16

17

30

564

32

40

219

1

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s "

affects; in chap. 1, § 1, Sibbern writes: “we have termed the study of these urges psychological pathology because through them the individual is subjected to much πάϑος [pathos], or conditions of the soul in which, owing to a certain impact or influence, it suffers, feels itself put in an internal movement of the spirit that involves or relates to its own well-being.” physiognomic postures] i.e., figurative, physical postures, gestures. The adjective “physiognomic” can also have to do with interpreting facial expressions. In this sense, it refers to “physiognomy,” which in Kierkegaard’s time was regarded as a science and which held that a person’s exterior, especially the face, expresses one’s moral and spiritual disposition. Physiognomy was founded by Johann Caspar Lavater (1741– 1801), Swiss priest and author, whose principal work on the subject was Physiognomische Fragmente zur Beförderung der Menschenkenntniß und Menschenliebe [Physiognomic Fragments for the Promotion of the Knowledge and Love of Humanity], 4 vols. (Leipzig, 1775–1778; ASKB 613–616). Behold the man] Cited from Jn 19:5. “I would rather be in hell . . . than in heaven with the Xns.”] No direct source for this has been identified, but see bk. 2, chap. 1, pt. 3, “Erste Bekanntschaft der Dänen mit dem Christenthum bis zum Zeitalter Karls des Großen” [First Encounter of the Danes with Christianity, up to the Age of Charlemagne], in the work by the Danish Bishop Frederik Münter, Kirchengeschichte von Dänemark und Norwegen [Church History of Denmark and Norway], 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1823−1833); vol. 1, Geschichte der Einführung des Christenthums in Dänemark und Norwegen [History of the Introduction of Christianity into Denmark and Norway], pp. 214−221; p. 219, where the Frisian King Redbad relates that in the year 718, when the missionary Bishop Wulfram had been preaching among the Frisians for five years, he decided, from political reasons or out of conviction, to go over to Christianity. When he stood naked at the edge of the cistern where he was to be baptized, he asked Wulfram where the souls of his forefathers had gone. “To hell!” replied

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

Wulfram with thoughtless zeal. “So,” replied Redbad, “I would rather remain with Odin along with my forefathers, those magnificent and brave men, than with you pathetic Christians and baldheaded monks in heaven!” Redbad stepped back from the cistern and nothing came of his baptism. no salvation apart from Xnty] Presumably, an allusion to the Latin expression extra ecclesiam nulla salus (“no salvation outside the Church”); see § 19, point 2, a. “Extra ecclesiam nulla salus,” in G. B. Winer, Comparative Darstellung des Lehrbegriffs der verschiedenen christlichen Kirchenparteien [Comparative Presentation of the Doctrinal Concepts of the Different Christian Church Parties] (Leipzig, 1824; see ASKB 178 [2nd ed., 1837]), pp. 169−170. As an expression of the Catholic position, Winer cites, among other sources, from Catechismus Romanus [Roman Catechism] (1566), 1, 10, 16: “Universalis etiam ob eam causam dicitur (ecclesia), quod omnes, qui salutem aeternam consequi cupiunt, ean tenere et amplecti debeant, non secus ac qui arcam, ne deluvio perirent, ingressi sunt” (“People also call (the Church) universal because everyone who has a burning desire for eternal salvation shall find it and be accepted with open arms as those who went aboard the ark in order that they not perish in the deluge.”) As an expression of the Lutheran position, Winer cites, among other sources, from Catechismus major D. Martini Lutheri [Dr. Martin Luther’s Large Catechism], also known as the Deutsch Katechismus [German Catechism] (1529), pt. 2, “The Apostles’ Creed,” article 3, 56: “Extra christianitatem, ubi evangelio locus non est, neque ulla est peccatorum remissio, quemadmodum nec ulla sanctificatio adesse potest” (“Outside of Christianity, where the gospel is not found, neither is there any forgiveness of sins, just as there cannot be any sanctification”)―freely rendered from Libri symbolici ecclesiae evangelicae sive Concordia [The Symbolic Books of the Evangelical Church, or the Concordia], ed. K. A. Hase (Leipzig, 1827; ASKB 624), pp. 500−501. The virtues of the pagans are glittering vices] Stock phrase that renders a Latin saying from the Middle Ages (“Virtutes paganorum splendida vitia” [“The virtues of the pagans are splendid

3

4

“ Te l e g r a p h M e s s a g e s " vices”]), which is frequently―though incorrectly―attributed to the Roman Catholic bishop and teacher of the Church, Augustine (354−430). See, e.g., W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798−1819; ASKB 815−826) vol. 7 (1809), p. 268, where, with respect to Augustine, it is related that in his later years there arose “not only his peculiar notion of grace and the election of grace, but also the assertion that the virtues of the pagans are merely glittering vices, which Lactantius had already asserted before him.” In a note, Tennemann refers to Institutiones divinae [The Divine Institutions] by the Latin rhetorician and author Lactantius (ca. 250–ca. 325), where the same view is voiced, but not the expression itself. Concerning Augustine’s view, Tennemann continues: “Inasmuch as even the most enlightened and most respected of the pagans did not know of this relation to God as the highest good, their actions did not have God as their object and goal, so they lack the necessary character of genuine virtue and are merely glittering vices, which have the appearance of virtue” (pp. 268–269). Following this, a note refers to Augustine’s De civitate Dei [City of God], bk. 19, chap. 25, where, however, the expression does not appear. Augustine’s principal point is that true virtues can only be found together with the true religion. Only the person who takes his point of departure in God is in possession of virtues, whereas if virtues are sought for their own sake and for no other reason, they are not virtues, but vices. See also 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), § 88, p. 250: “Since the pagans are entirely corrupted by original sin, this is why it is not inappropriate for Augustine to call their virtues glittering vices.”

•

P a p e r 259 1838 •

565

Notes for Paper 260 The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn and Stine Holst Petersen Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Hermann Deuser Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

568

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “The Doctrine concerning Confession and the Eucharist”1 is no. 462 in B-cat. and is presumably among the portion of Kierkegaard’s papers that at his death was found placed together with various other material in “a large sack.”2 The manuscript is in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology The paper is undated, but Kierkegaard probably wrote the entries in connection with the lecture series “Den christelige Symbolik” [Christian Symbolics] begun by H. L. Martensen in the winter semester of 1839−1840 and concluded in the summer of 1840.3 It is uncertain whether Kierkegaard, who was busily engaged in read-

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “The Order of the Papers,” in L.-cat. (see “Introduction to the Loose Papers” in the present volume).

2

3

) See “Fortegnelse over de theologiske Forelæsninger fra 1/11 1836 – 1/11 1845” [List of Theology Lectures from November 1, 1836, to November 1, 1845], in Den kgl. Direktion for Universitet og de lærde Skoler 1805−1849. Undervising m.m.: Universitetet og Polyteknisk Læreanstalt, Det theologiske Fakultet 1805−1849 [The Royal Overseers of the University and the Learned Schools, 1805−1849: Instruction et al; The University and the Polytechnic Institute, the Theology Faculty, 1805−1849], National Archives: F9-52-1, and Forelæsninger ved Kjøbenhavns Universitet og den polytechniske Læreanstalt I Vintersemestret 1839−40 [Lectures at the University of Copenhagen and the Polytechnic Institute in the Winter Semester, 1839−1840], on p. 3 in INDEX Lectionum in Universitate HAUNIENSI 1824−51. Forelæsninger 1833−51 [List of Lectures at the University of Copenhagen, 1824−1851: Lectures 1833−1851].

Critical Account of the Text ing for his examinations, followed Martensen’s lectures,1 but because it was expected that when they were examined, students would be familiar with the contents of lectures, Kierkegaard must be presumed to have carried out his studies on confession, the Eucharist, and symbolics related to them at about the same time these lectures were to be given.

) The list of auditors at the lectures has not been preserved.

1

569

Explanatory Notes 222

1

1 2

2

3

potestas clavium] “The power of the keys,” i.e., the authority by which the clergy can give or withhold absolution; see, e.g., the following passage in § 126, “Potestas ecclesiastica” [Ecclesiastical Power], in K. Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik der evangelisch-lutherischen Kirche [Hutterus Redivivus, or a Dogmatics for the Evangelical Lutheran Church], 4th ed. (Leipzig, 1839 [1828]; ASKB 581; abbreviated hereafter as Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik), pp. 323–324: “Potestas clavium, imparting of the forgiveness of sins, earned by Xt, absolutio, et declarativa et exhibitiva [absolution both proclaimed and distributed]. In accordance with ancient custom, this is done prior to the Eucharist and is connected with confession.” A footnote refers to Mt18:19. Mt 18] The reference is in particular to Mt 18:18– 19. See the previous note. Jn 20:23] Where Jesus says to the disciples: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” αϕιεναι and ϰρατειν αμαρτιας] These are the three key words in Jn 20:23, meaning “forgive,” “retain,” and “sin.” In the Church, at first public confession . . . later private . . . sanctioned in 1215] See the following passages in chap. 5, “Vom Sacrament der Taufe, der Priesterweihe und Buße und von deren Theilen, der Reue, der Beichte und der Genugthuung” [On the Sacraments of Baptism, Consecration of Priests, and Penance, and on Their Subdivisions: Remorse, Confession, and Satisfaction], in Ph. Marheineke, Christliche Symbolik oder historischkritische und dogmatischkomparative Darstellung des katholischen, lutherischen, reformirten und socinianischen Lehrbegriffs: Das System des Katholicismus in seiner symbolischen Entwickelung [Christian Symbolics, or HistoricalCritical and Comparative Dogmatic Presentation of the Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, and Socinian

Doctrinal Concepts: The System of Catholicism in Its Symbolic Development], 3 vols. (Heidelberg, 1810–1813), vol. 3, p. 193, where confession in the age of the Church Fathers is described as follows: “All the statements of the Church Fathers can refer only to public confession, which at any rate was an important part of Church life at all times. In that age, public transgressions were subjected to public confession; there are no clear traces of confession in secret.” And on p. 194: “Only in very special cases did confession take place in private, as when, for example, public confession would expose the sinner as a capital criminal; but the Church Fathers themselves called such cases extraordinary, and it was unusual to punish even ecclesiastical personages, priests, with public penance.” And further, on pp. 195–196: “Starting in the fourth century, individual cases emerged more and more frequently in which it was seen as necessary to transform public confession into a quiet, secret kind. The reason for this can hardly be overlooked. Many shied away from the penance in church and the accompanying contempt and derision, which were bound up with the public confession of sin. So they were advised to confess their sins first to the priest and to leave it up to him to determine whether or not it was necessary to confess them publicly, before the entire congregation, as well. Pope Leo the Great at first abolished public confession as an institution that would deter many from penance altogether.” In addition, on pp. 196–197: “Until the end of the eighth century, there are no clear signs of an ecclesiastical prescription or general custom of confession to a priest.” Finally, see p. 198: “The expression ‘penance,’ inasmuch as it designates any kind of confession, must always be read as referring to the prevailing species of the practice. In the earliest times, and as long as the ancient canonical discipline obtained, the word was consistently understood to refer only to public con-

The Doctrine concerning Confession

7

9

fession; from the fifteenth century onward, only to secret confession or shrift; and in the period in between, up to the thirteenth century, to both at the same time. From now on, however, it was for the sake of the freedom of conscience―inasmuch as Pope Innocent, at the Lateran Council of 1215, made secret confession at least once a year a required practice.” The term “confession by ear” is a translation of the Latin confessio auricularis, also known as “auricular confession,” i.e., secret or private confession in which the person who confesses speaks as if into the ear of the confessor. the individual could often experience anxiety . . . confessed everything] See, e.g., the following passage in the longer, German version of article 25, “Von der Beicht” [On Confession], in the Augsburg Confession (Confessio Augustana / Die augsburgische Konfession) (→ 222,17): “Recently the preachers, who had taught so much about confession, spoke not a word about these necessary elements, but simply tortured consciences with long narratives about sins, satisfaction by indulgences, pilgrimages, and the like. And many of our adversaries themselves admit that this portion of proper Christian penance was being written about and acted upon much more properly than it had in a long time.” Die drey ökumenischen Symbola, die Augsburgische Confession und die repetitio confessionis Augustanae [The Three Ecumenical Symbols, the Augsburg Confession, and the Repetition of the Augsburg Confession], ed. A. Twesten (Kiel, 1816), pp. 67–68. See also the conclusion of the article (p. 69), where it is stated that despite the fact that confession is not required in scripture, it was introduced by the Church: “[I]t is diligently taught by the preachers that although the recounting of sins is not required, private absolutio [“secret confession”] should be preserved for the consolation of terrified consciences. Such confession is also useful for hearing how the people have been instructed in the faith, and, when necessary, to instruct them better.” that forgetting something . . . no influence on the efficacy of absolution] See, e.g., H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus [The Church Constitutions, Doctrines, and Rites of Catholicism

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

571

and Protestantism] (Copenhagen, 1825), pp. 490– 491, where the following is stated in connection with confession in the Roman Catholic Church: “When . . . the necessity of confession is based on the circumstance that the Church alone possesses the power to forgive sins and that it cannot exercise this power in connection with different persons without having knowledge of their moral condition, it follows of itself that completeness and accuracy in the confession of sins is an utterly inflexible condition for the efficacy of the sacrament and that no penitence can be taken into account, no honest will can compensate, if the confession itself does not have the appropriate property, quantitatively or qualitatively . . . because whether something essential has been deliberately concealed or passed over in forgetfulness, the effect would necessarily be equally pernicious. But here we have one of many instances in which the Catholic Church has thought it necessary to reduce its requirements, which it does . . . when it declares forgetfulness to be harmless; that is, it realizes that a detailed account is physically impossible and that it would be blasphemy to make the salvation of a soul dependent upon the reliability of memory and chance circumstances, and therefore it is quick to console anguished spirits with mitigating embellishments.” See also p. 492, where Clausen writes that “absolution must nevertheless be regarded as valid in such cases” i.e., owing to the “the excuse of forgetfulness.” a distorted concept of sin merely as . . . ext[ernally] palpable] See, e.g., the following passage in Ph. Marheineke, Das System des Katholicismus (→ 222,3), vol. 3, pp. 188–189: “What . . . makes the enumeration of sins reprehensible is precisely that it deals only with individual sins, and not with the heart, which is the ground from which the evil thoughts and inclinations arise. As for the inner, common, and lasting inclination to evil that gnaws at the heart of the world, this system of confession excludes it; for according to the same [system], concupiscence in itself does not even have the nature of a true sin. This private confession, in other words, must leave the deepest and hidden ground of evil untouched; while on the

12

572

14

The Doctrine concerning Confession

other hand, it busies itself so garrulously with individual, fleeting, or striking manifestations of sin that while it is impossible to overlook the number of his individual sins, it is easy to overlook the field and region of the heart from which they grow―or the fact that before God, it depends much less on this or that sin than on the sinful state of mind and the root of all evil, and that these be rooted out. And because the Catholic Church demands of the penitent that he confess his individual sins only to the extent that he remembers them, it makes the recounting of them a matter of contingency, and places those that the penitent cannot remember in the category of forgivable sins just as if the contingent fact that he cannot remember them makes a difference for the liability of a crime to punishment.” Luther . . . says somewhere . . . no deadly sin other than unbelief] The saying has not been identified, but it expresses the Lutheran understanding of the matter; see, e.g., the following passage in the section “V. Verschiedene Arten der Sünde” [V. Various Forms of Sin], in the article “Sünde” [Sin], 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. 4, p. 299: “Popes and bishops have understood and have considered that there were no other deadly sins than those that consisted only in external deeds against God’s command, such as murder, adultery, theft, etc., but they have not seen that the true deadly sin is in fact that one does not truly recognize God, that in one’s heart one is his enemy, despising him, that one is ungrateful to him, grumbles against him, opposes his will”; cited from section 172 in D. Martin Luthers Ausfürliche Erklärung der Epistel an die Galater [Dr. Martin Luther’s Detailed Exposition of the Epistle to the Galatians] (1523) in D. Martin Luthers Sämtliche Schriften [Complete Works of Dr. Martin Luther], ed. J. G. Walch, 24 vols. (Halle, 1739–1750); vol. 8 (1742), col. 1808. At the Council of Trent, held in the years 1545–1547, 1551–1552, and 1562–1563, the view that unbelief is the only deadly sin was anathematized; see sessio 6 [session 6], “De ius-

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

tificatione” [On Justification], canon 27: “Si quis dixerit, nullum esse mortale peccatum, nisi infidelitatis (. . .): anathema sit” (“If anyone says that there is no deadly sin other than unbelief . . . he shall be declared anathema,”) in Canones et decreta sacrosancti oecumenici concilii Trindentini sub Paulo III. Iulio III et Pio IV. Pontificibus Maximis. Cum patrum subscriptionibus [Canons and Decrees of the Holy and Ecumenical Council of Trent under Popes Paul III, Julius III, and Pius IV: With the Signatures of the Fathers] (Leipzig, 1839), col. 14. ― Luther: Martin Luther (1483–1546), German theologian, Augustinian monk, professor at Wittenberg. As a reformer of the Church, Luther was the central figure in breaking with the medieval theological tradition, papal power, and the Roman Church, which resulted in a transformation of worship services and ecclesiastical life and in the founding of a number of evangelical Lutheran churches, particularly in northern Europe. Luther was the author of a great many theological, exegetical, and edifying works, as well as works on ecclesiastical policy and organization, and many sermons and hymns. Luther also translated the Bible into German. erroneous nature of repentance also followed from this: prayer, fasting, alms] See, e.g., the following passage in Ph. Marheineke, Das System des Katholicismus (→ 222,3), vol. 3, p. 205: “The other arbitrary accomplishments that the Catholic Church also attributes to satisfaction-suffering, though they are not directly grounded in Christianity, all of the self-conceived self-temptations, the petty privations and the arduous actions―such as selecting and depriving oneself of many foods; fasting; pilgrimage; rosaries; and similar childish trifling―these cannot be regarded as anything other than mere superstition in light of the Protestant system. Although in some cases, these may amount to a very innocent, playful, childlike, and pious amusement to which individuals may attach all sorts of religious sentiments, within the system they appear in their proper place, and have the quality of true satisfactions only in a reprehensible form.” The Protest. Ch. argued vigorously . . . against the extremity: indulgences] See, e.g., the old-

15

17

The Doctrine concerning Confession est Lutheran confessional writing, the Augsburg Confession (1530), which states the following in article 20, “On Good Works”: “1) Our teachers are falsely accused of forbidding Good Works. 2) For their published writings on the Ten Commandments, and others of like import, bear witness that they have taught to good purpose concerning all estates and duties of life, as to what estates of life and what works in every calling be pleasing to God. 3) Concerning these things preachers heretofore taught but little, and urged only childish and needless works, as particular holy-days, particular fasts, brotherhoods, pilgrimages, services in honor of saints, the use of rosaries, monasticism, and such like.” Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie [The True, Unaltered Augsburg Confession with an Apology for Same, Written by Ph. Melanchthon], introduced, trans., and with commentary by A. G. Rudelbach (Copenhagen, 1825; ASKB 386), pp. 62–63; see also “Concluding Remarks,” p. 113: “These are the chief articles which seem to be in controversy. For although we might have spoken of more abuses, yet to avoid undue length, we have set forth the chief points, from which the rest may be readily judged. There have been great complaints concerning indulgences, pilgrimages, and the abuse of excommunications. The parishes have been vexed in many ways by the dealers in indulgences” (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988; originally published 1959]). On Luther’s earlier attack, in his Ninety-Five Theses, on the abuses occasioned by the indulgence trade, see, e.g., § 172, “Geschichte der Reformation in den Jahren 1517 und 1518” [History of the Reformation in the Years 1517 and 1518], in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 218,16), vol. 2, pp. 740–751; p. 741, where the following is related: “He [Luther] therefore fulminated earnestly against [Johann Tetzel’s sale of indulgences] in the confessional and on the pulpit, and when that bore little fruit, then without consulting with flesh and blood, on October 31, 1517―the evening before All Saints’ Day, when a great throng

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

573

of people streamed to Wittenberg to the Church of All Saints―he publicly posted on the door of that same church (the Castle Church) 95 theses (Latin) against the abuse of indulgences.” A German translation of the Ninety-Five Theses is included in Luthers Werke. Vollständige Auswahl seiner Hauptschriften. Mit historischen Einleitungen, Anmerkungen und Registern [The Works of Luther: A Comprehensive Selection of His Principal Writings, with a Historical Introduction, Notes, and Index], 10 vols. (Berlin, 1840–1841; ASKB 312–316), vol. 1, Martin Luthers reformatorische Schriften [Martin Luther’s Reformation Writings], pp. 27–41. but it did retain . . . the Augsb. Conf.: confessio retinetur apud nos . . . conscientiarum utilitates] Kierkegaard’s abbreviated citation from article 11, “De Confessione,” in Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici, “Pars I” [Part I], p. 12. See Libri symbolici ecclesiae evangelicae sive Concordia (→ 219,3), Pars II [Part II], article 4, p. 28. The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is: “Verum confessio, cum propter maximum absolutionis beneficium, tum propter alias conscientiarum utilitates apud nos retinetur.” (“Nevertheless, on account of the great benefit of absolution, and because it is otherwise useful to the conscience, confession is retained among us.”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede Apologie (→ 222,17), p. 85 (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord (→ 222,17). in the 11th article: docent, quod absolutio privata retinenda sit] The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is: “De Confessione docent, quod absolutio privata in Ecclesiis retinenda sit.” (“Concerning confession they teach that private absolution is to be retained in the churches.”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), p. 53. docentur homines, ut absolutionem . . . quia sit vox dei] The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is from article 25, “De Confessione,” in Confessio Augustana in Libri symbolici (→ 219,3), “Pars II” [Part II], p. 27: “Docentur homines, ut absolutionem plurimi faciant, quia sit vox Dei et

19

22

24

574

25

26

The Doctrine concerning Confession

mandato Dei pronuntietur.” (“People are taught that they are to value absolution very highly, because it is God’s voice and is pronounced in obedience to God’s mandate.”) A. G. Rudelbach draws on the German version in his translation, which reads. “For absolution [is not merely the voice or words of the human being who is present, but is] God’s Word and is spoken [in God’s place and] at God’s command.” Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), p. 83. Apologia c: vox evangelii . . . et consolans conscientias] The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is: “Et quidem [ministri in Ecclesia] absolvunt ab his, quae non meminimus, quare absolutio, quae est vox Evangelii remittens peccata et consolans conscientias, non requirit cognitionem.” (“They [the servants of the Church] shall also absolve from [the sins] we do not know or remember, which is why absolution, which is the voice of the gospel, which forgives sins and consoles consciences, does not require an enumeration of that sort.”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), “Til Confessionens tolvte Artikel, Om Skriftemaal og Fyldestgjørelse,” [To the Article Twelve of the (Augsburg) Confession, on Confession and Satisfaction], p. 288. ― Apologia c: Apologia Confessionis or Apologia Confessionis Augustanae [Defense of the Augsburg Confession], written in Latin by the German Reformer Philipp Melanchthon in 1530−1531 (translated into German by Justus Jonas). In Luther’s Small Catech.: the Xn . . . the sins assuredly are forgiven] Kierkegaard’s free Danish rendering of the first responsio (“reply”) under “De Confessione” [On Confession], in Catechismus minor D. Martini Lutheri [Dr. Martin Luther’s Small Catechism] from 1529, in Libri symbolici (→ 219,3), “De Confessione” (appendix), sec. 16, p. 378: “Confessio duo comprehendit, unum est peccata confiteri, alterum est absolutionem sive remissionem a Confessionario sive praecone Evangelii accipere, tanquam ab ipso Deo, et non dubitare, sed firmiter credere, peccata per illam

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

absolutionem coram Deo in coelo remissa esse.” (“Confession embraces two parts: the one is, that we confess our sins; the other, that we receive absolution, or forgiveness, from the confessor, as from God Himself, and in no wise doubt, but firmly believe, that our sins are thereby forgiven before God in heaven.”) (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17].) absolutio declarativa et judiciaria . . . collectiva and exhibitiva] → 222,1. See also H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus (→ 222,9), pp. 506–507, where the following is stated concerning the Protestant Church: “it expressly rejects . . . the prejudice that a detailed account of the sins should be necessary for the validity of the absolution, and that absolution is to be understood not as an application of the consoling doctrine of divine mercy under the conditions set forth in the gospel, but as an official declaration (annuntiatio judiciaria [official or public announcement]), that owing to the antecedent repentance and confession, the sins have already been forgiven; thus Protestantism regards absolution rather as an annuntiatio declarativa [declarative announcement]; though in such a way that, because it draws immediate support from the teaching of the gospel, it can, in a limited, conditional sense, also be called collativa et exhibitiva [transferred and distributed] insofar as it confirms the believing spirit, which leads to the forgiveness of sins.” ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine etc.] See, e.g., H. N. Clausen, Catholicismens og Protestantismens Kirkeforfatning, Lære og Ritus (→ 222,9), p. 480, where the following is explained in connection with confession in the Roman Catholic Church: “Confession is followed by absolution, which is pronounced by the priest, who uses the following expression: ‘ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, Filii et Spiritus S.’ [I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit].” ex jure divino . . . sine vi humana sed verbo] The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is: “Porro secundum Evangelium, seu, ut loquuntur, de jure divino, nulla jurisdictio competit Episcopis,

4

9

22

223

The Doctrine concerning Confession

225

1

6

ut Episcopis, hoc est, his, quibus est commissum ministerium verbi et Sacramentorum, nisi remittere peccata, item, cognoscere doctrinam, et doctrinam ab Evangelio dissentientem rejicere, et impios, quorum nota est impietas, excludere a communione Ecclesiae, sine vi humana, sed verbo.” (“According to the gospel, or as they also express it, by divine right, there belongs to the bishops as bishops, that is, to those to whom has been committed the ministry of the Word and the sacraments, no jurisdiction except to forgive sins, to judge doctrine, to reject doctrines contrary to the gospel, and to exclude from the communion of the Church wicked men, whose wickedness is known, and this without human force, simply by the Word].”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), pp. 103–104 (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17]). Non commiscenda est ecclesiastica potestas et civilis . . . non tollet legitimam obedientiam] The full text from which Kierkegaard cites is: “De Potestate Ecclesiastica” [On the Power of the Church], from Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici (→ 219,3), “Pars II,” article 7, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” sec. 12–13, p. 39: “Non igitur commiscendae sunt potestates Ecclesiastica et civilis: Ecclesiastica suum mandatum habet Evangelii docendi et administrandi Sacramenta. Non irrumpat in alienum officium, non transferat regna mundi, non abroget leges Magistratuum, non tollat legitimam obedientiam.” (“Therefore the power of the Church and the civil power must not be confounded. The power of the Church has its own commission to teach the Gospel and to administer the sacraments. Let it not break into the office of another; let it not transfer the kingdoms of this world; let it not abrogate the laws of civil rulers; let it not abolish lawful obedience.”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), pp. 102–103 (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17]). Itaque nostri docuerunt, utramque potestatem . . . venerandam] The full text from which

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

575

Kierkegaard cites is: “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” from Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici (→ 222,19), “Pars II,” article 7, “De Potestate Ecclesiastica,” sec. 4, p. 37: “Itaque nostri ad consolandas conscientias coacti sunt ostendere discrimen Ecclesiasticae potestatis et potestatis gladii, et docuerunt utramque propter mandatum Dei religiose venerandam et honore afficiendam esse, tanquam summa Dei beneficia in terries.” (“Therefore our teachers, for the comforting of men’s consciences, were constrained to show the difference between the power of the Church and the power of the sword, and taught that both of them, because of God’s commandment, are to be held in reverence and honor, as the chief blessings of God on earth.”) Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), p. 101 (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17]). Adiaphora] Matters of indifference with respect to faith or morality. The Protestant doctrine concerning the Euch[arist]] See the next note. the Socinians et al. . . . a memorial meal or an outw[ard] sign] See the following passage (in opposition to the Lutheran doctrine of the Eucharist) in § 123, “Sacra Coena” [Holy Eucharist], in Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik (→ 222,1), p. 306: “ZWINGLI regards the bread and the wine as mere symbols of the body of Christ, [and] the sacred acts merely as commemorations (ritus mnemonicus [“memorial rites”]); the Arminians and the Socinians do likewise.” ― Socinians: An anti-Trinitarian movement named after Lelio Sozzini (1525–1562) and, especially, his nephew, Fausto Sozzini (ca. 1537–1604), whose radical critique of dogma anticipated later rationalist theology. Socinians rejected those dogmas that they regarded as opposed to reason. ― Zwingli: Huldrych (or Ulrich) Zwingli (1484–1531), Swiss Reformer and leader of the Reformation in Zurich. See, e.g., the following passage in § 128 in A. Hahn, Lehrbuch des christlichen Glaubens [Textbook of Christian Faith] (Leipzig, 1828; ASKB 535), p. 575: “Ulrich Zwingli . . . eliminated all supernatural and inexplicable elements and

8 11 12

576

16

17

The Doctrine concerning Confession

accepted only a symbolic presence of the body and blood of Christ, i.e., in the symbols of blood and wine he saw only figura corporis et sanguinis Christi [“images of the body and blood of Christ”], or significant signs of remembrance of the body and blood of Jesus Christ in heaven, and assigned all the efficacy of this holy meal to the strengthening and animation of the faith in redemption through the crucifixion and death of the intercessor and to the stimulation of thankfulness and love. In the words of institution (i.e., Jesus’ words in instituting the Eucharist), ἔστι translated, is: ‘signifies.’ ” does not assume a transformation of the substance] Refers to the Catholic dogmatic teaching concerning transubstantiation, i.e., the transformation of the elements of the Eucharist from bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (→ 225,27). See, e.g., the following passage in § 128 in A. Hahn, Lehrbuch des christlichen Glaubens (→ 225,12), p. 575: “Luther, as decidedly as he declared himself to be an opponent of the doctrine of the transformation of the substance of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, taught and claimed just as decidedly and insistently the real and substantial presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, which comes about not through transformation of the outer, earthly elements, but through a supernatural (hyperphysical) albeit incomprehensible and intrinsically exclusive unification (unio sacramentalis [“sacramental union”]) of the body and the blood of Jesus with the sanctified bread and wine so that in, with, and through bread and wine, the body and the blood of the Lord are truly there in the Eucharist, and are communicated to the comrades to the worthy as a blessing, and to the unworthy as a condemnation.” even less does it see this transformation as an inherent post-consecration constitution] No source for this has been identified, but the reference is to the Roman Catholic understanding that the transubstantiation of the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ remains as an “enduring constitution,” i.e., an essential characteristic that is enduring or permanent after the consecration and participation in the Eucharist. For the Protestant rejection of this un-

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

derstanding, see, e.g., pt. 2, “Solida Declaratio” [The Solid Declaration (i.e., of the Formula of Concord)], article 7, “De Coena Domini” [On the Eucharist], sec. 14–15, in Formula Concordiae (→ 226,4), in Libri symbolici (→ 222,19), p. 729: “Et . . . negant, fieri transsubstantiationem, nec sentiunt fieri localem inclusionem in pane, aut durabilem aliquam conjunctionem extra usum Sacramenti: tamen concedunt, sacramentali unione panem esse corpus Christi, hoc est, porrecto pane sentiunt simul adesse et vere exhiberi corpus Christi. Nam extra usum, dum reponitur, aut asservatur in pixide, aut ostenditur in processionibus, ut fit apud Papistas, sentiunt non adesse corpus Christi. (“And although they believe in no transubstantiation . . . nor hold that the body and blood of Christ are included in the bread localiter, that is, locally, or are otherwise permanently united therewith apart from the use of the Sacrament, yet they concede that through the sacramental union the bread is the body of Christ, etc. [that when the bread is offered, the body of Christ is at the same time present, and is truly tendered]. For apart from the use, when the bread is laid aside and preserved in the sacramental vessel [the pyx], or is carried about in the procession and exhibited, as is done in popery, they do not hold that the body of Christ is present.” (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17]. Brackets are in the original.) the doctrine of ubiquity . . . presence in and under the partaking] Refers to the Lutheran doctrine of Christ’s “ubiquity,” according to which Christ is actually present both at the right hand of the Father in Heaven and as the body and blood in the elements of the Eucharist. See, e.g., the following passage in § 123 in Karl Hase, Hutterus redivivus oder Dogmatik (→ 222,1), p. 306: “Luther held fast to the real commun[ion], a[nd] following the word of the H[oly] S[cripture] about the tru[e] Being of the bread & the body: ‘Bread & wine remain, but Chr. is, by means of the comm. idiomm. [communicatio idiomatum, transfer of attributes from the divine to the human nature in Christ] present wherever he wants to be, shares his true flesh & blood in, with & through the outer

19

The Doctrine concerning Confession

23 25

27

signs (that is, not just signa [“signs”], but vehicula et media collativa [“active bearers and communicators”]) to the communicands along with, by virtue of substitution, the believers and the unbelievers. F. C. VII.” F. C. signifies Formula Concordiae (→ 226,4), article 7, concerning the Eucharist, esp. pt. 2, “Solida Declaratio”; article 7, sec. 35; and article 7, sec. 4; see Libri symbolici (→ 222,19), pp. 735, 726. See also Kierkegaard’s notes on § 47 in H. N. Clausen’s “Dogmatiske Forelæsninger” [Lectures on Dogmatics], in Not1:7, from 1833–1834, in KJN 3, 38–39. Luther] → 226,14. Calvin . . . restricting the presence to believers] See, e.g., § 128 in A. Hahn, Lehrbuch des christlichen Glaubens (→ 225,12), pp. 576–577, where the following is stated with respect to Calvin: “With Luther, he accepted a true and essential, albeit merely spiritual, enjoyment of the body of Christ as raised to the right hand of God. Inasmuch as the communicant is reminded of and awakened to faith precisely by visible signs, his spirit rises during consumption of the bread and wine above all the heavens to his glorified and almighty Redeemer, and by the power of the spirit of Christ with his body and blood, or with all that Christ alone is and has, he is nourished to eternal life. According to this theory, then, only the believer (chosen one), with his spirit raised by faith to heaven, receives the body and the blood of Christ that are found in heaven, or put another way, the whole Christ in spiritual consumption (spiritualis manducatio, [“spiritual eating”]), while with his mouth he enjoys nothing but bread and wine; the unbeliever whose mind remains on the earth receives only these earthly elements without benefit.” Moreover, Hahn also relates the following about Calvin: “With Zwingli he declared bread and wine to be mere external signs (mera figura, symbola, [“mere pictures, symbols”]) that represent and remind us of the invisible objects, the body and blood of Christ that are exalted and glorified in heaven, or the invisible sustenance we receive from them.” ― Calvin: Jean Calvin (1509– 1564), French theologian and jurist, Reformer. in the Augs. Conf.: docent, quod corpus et sanguis Xsti . . . coena domini] Abbreviated cita-

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

577

tion from article 10, “De Coena Domini” [On the Eucharist], in Confessio Augustana, in Libri symbolici (→ 222,19), p. 12: “De Coena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint, et distribuantur vescentibus in Coena Domini, et improbant secus docents.” (“Of the Supper of the Lord they [the Reformers] teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present [under the form of the bread and the wine],1 and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those who teach otherwise.”) From A. G. Rudelbach, trans. and ed., Den rette uforandrede Augsburgske Troesbekjendelse med sammes, af Ph. Melanchthon forfattede, Apologie (→ 222,17), pp. 52– 53 (English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord [→ 222,17]). In the footnote, Rudelbach writes: “From the words in parentheses that one reads in the German version [i.e., ‘under the form of the bread and the wine’] by no means does it follow―as both the Roman Catholics and the Reformed have accused us of believing―that we thereby accept the doctrine of the transformation of the bread and the wine into the body and blood (the transubstantiation).” Confessio variata approaches Calvin: quod cum pane et vino] See, e.g., H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 218,16), vol. 2, pp. 1025–1026, where it is related that Melanchthon did not cling firmly to the Lutheran doctrine of the Eucharist, but wished “to take hold of the main point of difference hovering between the Lutheran and the Reformed Church, the doctrine of the Eucharist, so that even Calvin, the Calvin he loved like a brother, could make peace with it . . . In the new (Latin) edition of the Augsburg Confession, he allowed himself―just as if he could regard it as his own literary product― to alter and Calvinize the tenth article on the Eucharist, by replacing the words: ‘Quod corpus et sanguis Domini vere adsint et distribuantur vescentibus in coena Domini, et improbant secus docents’ [‘Whereas the body and blood of Christ are truly present and distributed to those eating the Supper of the Lord, and let those who teach otherwise be rebuked’] with these alone: ‘quod cum pane et vino vere exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christri

1

226

578

2

The Doctrine concerning Confession

vescentibus in coena Domini’ [‘that together with bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are actually distributed to those who partake of the Eucharist’].” In note 224, Guerike makes clear: “On this basis, and also from certain modifications by Melanchthon, favoring his own views (particularly about this synergy), we obtain the difference between a changed and an unchanged Augsb. Confession.” ― Confessio variata: Or Confessio Augustana variata [The Altered Augsburg Confession], a later version of the Augsburg Confession, produced by Melanchthon, which included substantial differences, particularly with respect to the question of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. The Schmalkaldic Articles . . . actually present both for the pious and for the impious] Kierkegaard’s free, abbreviated rendering of the introduction to article 6, “Vom Sakrament des Altars” [Of the Sacrament of the Altar], sec. 1, in De schmalkaldiske Artikler [The Schmalkaldic Articles]; see Libri symbolici (→ 219,3), article 6, “De Sacramento Altaris” [Of the Sacrament of the Altar], sec. 1, p. 330: “De Sacramento Altaris sentimus, panem et vinum in Coena esse verum corpus et sanguinem Christi, et non tantum dari et sumi a piis, sed etiam ab impiis Christianis.” (“Of the Sacrament of the Altar we hold that bread and wine in the Supper are the true body and blood of Christ, and are given and received not only by the godly, but also by wicked Christians.”) English translation from Theodore G. Tappert, trans. and ed., The Book of Concord (→ 222,17). ― The Schmalkaldic Articles: A work composed in German by Martin Luther in 1536 in preparation for a council that was to be held in Mantua in 1537, where it was to be presented as a comprehensive confessional document for Protestants. The work is named for the Protestant conventicle held in Schmalkalden, a town in Thuringia, Germany, in February 1537, where it was presented, though not officially signed by the theologians present; thus it did not become an official Church document at that point. The Schmalkaldic Articles were translated into Latin as Articuli christianae doctrinae [Articles of the Christian Faith] in 1541 by the Dane Petrus Generanus and in 1580 by the

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

German Nikolaus Selneccer. The Articles were included in the Formula Concordiae; see the next note. The Formula of Concord: We believe . . . just as the words themselves literally say] Compressed rendering of article 7, “De Coena Domini” [On the Eucharist], sec. 6–7, in G. B. Winer, Comparative Darstellung des Lehrbegriffs der verschiedenen christlichen Kirchenparteien [Comparative Presentation of the Doctrinal Concepts of the Different Christian Church Parties] (Leipzig, 1824; see ASKB 178 [2nd ed., 1837]), p. 144: “Credimus, quod in coena domini corpus et sanguis Christi vere et substantialiter sint praesentia, et quod una cum pane et vino vere distribuantur atque sumantur. Credimus, verba testamenti Christi non aliter accipienda esse, quam sicut verba ipsa ad literam sonant.” (“We believe that the body and blood of Christ are actually and substantially present in the Eucharist and that they are actually distributed and received together with the bread and the wine. We believe that the words in Christ’s testament are not to be understood differently from what the words themselves literally say.”) See the full wording in article 7, “De Coena Domini,” sec. 6–7, in “Affirmativa” [Affirmations], in the first part, “Epitome,” of Formula Concordiae, in Libri symbolici (→ 219,3), p. 599: “I. Credimus, docemus et confitemur, quod in Coena Domini corpus et sanguis Christi vere et substantialiter sint praesentia, et quod una cum pane et vino vere distribuantur atque sumantur. II. Credimus, docemus et confitemur, verba Testamenti Christi non aliter accipienda esse, quam sicut verba ipsa ad literam sonant: ita, ne panis absens Christi corpus, et vinum absentem Christi sanguinem significent, sed ut propter sacramentalem unionem panis et vinum vere sint corpus et sanguis Christi.” (“I. We believe, teach, and confess that the body and blood of Christ are actually and substantially present in the Eucharist and that they are actually distributed and received together with the bread and the wine. II. We believe, teach, and confess that the words in Christ’s testament are not to be understood differently from what the words themselves literally say: consequently, the bread does not mean that the body of Christ is absent,

4

The Doctrine concerning Confession

13

13

and the wine that the blood of Christ is absent, but that by virtue of the sacramental union, the bread and the wine are actually the body and blood of Christ.”) ― Formula of Concord: The last of the Lutheran confessional documents. Following Luther’s death in 1546, it was written by a number of leading Reformation theologians in order to prevent a threatened doctrinal schism in the young Lutheran Church. It was written in German and signed in 1577–1578 by a long series of princes, imperial cities, and about eight thousand theologians and thus attained status as a confessional document (though never for the Danish Evangelical Lutheran Church). The Formula of Concord was first published in The Book of Concord on June 25, 1580, and after various attempts and a great deal of discussion, it was published in a definitive Latin edition in 1598. εστι] Refers to the interpretation of the Greek verb ἔστι in the words of institution of the Eucharist; see the account in Mt 26:26–28: “While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is my body.’ Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ ” See also the wording of the liturgy for the Eucharist in the Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381), pp. 253–254: “In the night in which he was betrayed, our Lord Jesus Christ took the bread, gave thanks, and broke it, gave it to his disciples, saying, ‘Take this and eat! It is my body, which is given for you! Do this in memory of me!’ After the evening meal, he took the cup in the same manner, gave it to them, and said: ‘Drink from it, all of you! This is the cup of the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins! Do this as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” On Zwingli’s understanding of ἔστι, see → 225,12. Syro-Chaldean] The language spoken in Palestine, and thus by Jesus, in Jesus’ time, corresponding to what today is known as Aramaic; see, e.g., H. F. Pfannkuche, “Ueber die palästinische

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

579

Landessprache in dem Zeitalter Christi und der Apostel” [On the Provincial Language of Palestine in the Time of Christ and the Apostles], in Allgemeine Bibliothek der biblischen Litteratur [General Library of Biblical Literature], ed. J. G. Eichhorn, vol. 8, pt. 3 (Leipzig, 1798), pp. 365–480, esp. pp. 468–469. See also G. B. Winer, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprachidioms als sichere Grundlage der neutestamentlichen Exegese [Grammar of New Testament Idiomatic Speech as a Sure Basis for New Testament Exgesis], 3rd improved ed. (Leipzig, 1830 [1822]), p. 431n, where it is stated that Jesus’ discourses were delivered in Syro-Chaldean. See also the commentary on Acts 2:4 in Novi Testamenti libri historici græce. Textui recepto appositæ sunt lectiones Griesbachianæ. Cum commentariis [The Historical Books of the New Testament in Greek, with Griesbach’s Readings of the Received Text: With Commentaries], ed. C. T. Kühnöl, vol. 3 (containing Acts) (London, 1835), p. 34, col. 2, where it is stated that the Jews of Jesus’ day spoke Syro-Chaldean. the efficacy of the sacrament] See the following passage in § 199 in 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; abbreviated hereafter as Handbuch der Dogmatik), vol. 2, pp. 664–666: “About the power and the effect of this sacrament, it is taught that its objective effect is the forgiveness of sin, and the consequent life and salvation, or the claim to both, a power, however, that sustains the sacrament only by the word of promise; the subjective element, meanwhile, is that it renders the rebirth begun in baptism fixed and gives new strength to faith, so that in his battle with sin, he might conquer . . . At the same time, the enjoyment of this sacrament should be a public confession of faith and a grateful commemoration of the death of Jesus and his benefactions. On man’s side, the sole condition under which the enjoyment of the body and blood of Christ becomes useful is the belief in Christ as reconciler. Apart from this belief, he needs no other external preparation; and in any case, the purpose of the Eucharist is rather to strengthen faith, and

22

580

29

The Doctrine concerning Confession

thus is mainly for the weak. Nevertheless, earnest penance and the commitment to improve also belong to the essence of faith. For the one who lacks faith, the sacrament will serve him only as condemnation; accordingly, it is wise to advise wild and wicked people to abstain from this sacrament.” the most ancient Ch[urch] . . . an analogy with the union of flesh and blood in λογος . . . signa et figuræ sanguinis et corporis. (Tertullian)] See the following passage in § 202 in K. G. Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik (→ 226,22), vol. 2, pp. 688–689: “All of the ecclesiastical parties sought to present their opinions, derived from the Church Fathers, as those of the old Church, and none could be entirely frustrated in this attempt, for the old Church had not fixed any dogmatic subject, and opinions had been extremely varied. Generally speaking, one did not regard the bread and wine of the Eucharist as ordinary foods, they were attributed a special power; but many nonetheless . . . imagined those elements merely as symbols of heavenly goods. In this vein, for example, Tertullian and Cyprian called bread and wine figuras corporis et sanguinis Chr. [“images of the body and blood of Christ”]. Others, such as Clement of Alexandria, Justin Mart[yr], and Irenaeus, believed that the divine Logos united with bread and wine as it had once united with the man Jesus, and considered enjoying the Eucharist an effective means of achieving immortality.” ― λογος: Greek, “word.” See Jn 1: 1–5: “In the beginning was the word [ὁ λόγος], and the word [ὁ λόγος] was with God, and the word [ὁ λόγος] was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.” ― signa et figuræ sanguinis et corporis. (Tertullian): The expression does not occur directly in Tertullian but is often cited as an expression that represents his position, referring to his polemical-dogmatic piece Adversus Marcionem [Against Marcion], bk. 4, 40, in Qu. Sept. Flor. Tertulliani opera [Tertullian’s Works], ed.

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

E. F. Leopold, 4 vols. (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 [Leipzig: Tachnitz, 1839]), vol. 3, p. 248, where it states: “Professus . . . se concupiscentia concupisse edere pascha ut suum . . . acceptum panem et distributum discipulis corpus suum illum fecit, hoc est corpus meum discendo, id est figura corporis mei. Figura autem non fuisset, nisi veritatis esset corpus.” (“When he [Jesus] had declared that he very much wished to eat the Passover supper with his disciples, he took the bread, distributed it to his disciples, and made it into his body, saying: ‘This is my body, that is, an image of my body. But it could not have been an image if it had not been an actual body.’ ”) ― Tertullian: Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullian(us) (ca. a.d. 155–ca. 240), born in Carthage in North Africa and one of the Latin Church Fathers. Originally a jurist, he converted to Christianity and was baptized ca. 195. Most of his apologetic writings were composed during the persecutions of Christians in 197–198; his trilogy against Marcion, including Adversus Marcionem, were written in the period 202–212. but which nonetheless] Variant: “nonetheless” has been added. The Greek Ch[urch] . . . a divinely active substance . . . the person of Xt] See, e.g., W. Münscher, Handbuch der christlichen Dogmengeschichte [Handbook of the History of Christian Dogma], 4 vols. (Marburg, 1797–1809; cf. ASKB 168); vol. 4, pp. 387–388, where Münscher adduces the following reasons in opposition to seeing “eine eigentliche Brodverwandlung” (“an actual transformation of the bread”) in the Greek Church in the period 320–604: “First of all, the teachers of the Church compare the changes that take place during the Eucharist at consecration with baptism, with the anointing oil (Chrisma), and with the ordination of priests. However, with all these things, which they place in a single category with the Eucharist, one is not to think of a transformation of the substance[s], but of a change in which they are granted higher powers and effects. Second, it is the Church Fathers’ favorite thought to explain the

35 37

The Doctrine concerning Confession Eucharist by comparing it with the incarnation of Christ. Here Justin Martyr was prescient with his example. Such comparisons cannot already have existed with transubstantiation. For, according to general Church doctrine, the humanity of Christ has by no means been transformed by union with the divine nature, and the call to the Eucharist, if one had accepted such transformation, would have been absurd . . . Third, this remark is greatly strengthened by the fact that many Fathers of the Church, insofar as they do compare the Eucharist with the incarnation, expressly add the proviso that the bread’s nature remains unchanged.” See also p. 395: “The purpose of the Eucharist is unanimously articulated by the Church teachers as a physical unification with Christ, whereby the body is made immortal. Bread and wine, by union with the Logos, become its body, and thereby gain an indestructible, sanctifying, and divinizing power. Through enjoyment [of the Eucharist] these are now absorbed into the substance of man, transformed into the flesh and blood of that substance. Now they serve a seed of immortality, whose efficacy is also shared with the rest of the body. So Christians are united not only morally with Christ, but also physically, because they are nourished from his body and blood.”

•

P a p e r 260 1839 •

581

Notes for Paper 261–Paper 263 Aphoristic Sketches

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Stine Holst Petersen Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

584

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Aphoristic Sketches”1 is no. 442 in B-cat. and is among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were found in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). Paper 261:3 has been lost; the text has been transmitted indirectly through H. P. Barfod’s edition of Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP). The other manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology In the undated paper 261:3, Kierkegaard recalls reading an unnamed work during his “first stay in Gilleleje,” which indicates that Paper 261 was in any event written after the summer of 1835, when Kierkegaard had visited Gilleleje for the second time,2 but no more precise dating is possible. Paper 263:3, which is dated “Thursday, Sept. 12th,” consists of Kierkegaard’s idea for a short story, occasioned by a personal advertisement (Paper 263:2) that appeared that day in Almindelig Commissions-Tidende [General Advertiser], no. 212, September 12, 1839. The immediately preceding entry (Paper 263:1), which is undated, is found at the top of the page and may be assumed to have been written on September 12 or on the days immediately prior to that, just as Paper 263:4, which is found on the same page, must also have been written at about this time. Paper 262, which is undated, cannot be assigned to any specific time, but is presumably contemporaneous with Paper 263, i.e., from 1839.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See AA:1 in KJN 1, 3–6, and P. C. Kierkegaard’s diary, NKS 2656, vol. 1, p. 58.

2

Explanatory Notes 230

3

6 10

230

23

26

28

while under arms] While on active military duty, e.g., during maneuvers, sorties, marches, parades, etc. we all enjoy worshipping the unknown divinity] Allusion to Acts 17:23. I read it . . . misunderstood by people] EP I−II, p. 457. ― my first stay in Gilleleje: In July 1834, Søren Kierkegaard’s older brother Peter Christian wrote the following in his diary: “Then, even though things were not rlly better with Mother, Søren finally left for Gilleleje on the 26th, in order to spend 14 days there for the sake of his health” (P. C. Kierkegaard’s diary, NKS 2656, 4o, vol. 1, p. 58). Kierkegaard’s mother, who had been ill since the end of May, died during the night between July 29 and 30, 1834. In his diary, P. C. Kierkegaard relates further that his brother Søren did not arrive at home before his mother died; early on the morning of July 30, their brother-inlaw Johan Christian Lund sent an office messenger to Gilleleje to fetch Søren, who, however, did not arrive home in Copenhagen until the morning of July 31. 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 (“Right Reverend”) 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 theology, among others; see C. Bartholin, Almindelig Brev- og Formularbog [Universal Book of Letters and Formulae], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1844; ASKB 933), vol. 1, pp. 49–56. wander away from . . . the cities of your forefathers and be . . . a foreigner] Allusion to Gen 12:1. ― foreigner: See, e.g., Stephen in Acts 7:6. Reitzel’s shop] Refers to C. A. Reitzel’s bookshop, founded in 1819 by Carl Andreas Reitzel (1789–1853), which from 1827 was situated on

Købmagergade, at the site of today’s number 44 (see map 2, C2). Reitzel, who had been appointed university book dealer in 1829, also had a publishing business and gradually became the publisher for the leading writers of the time. If, beloved, I have found grace in thine eyes] Allusion to the Danish translation of 1 Sam 27:5; see similar language in Gen 18:3, Num 32:5, 2 Sam 15:25, and Esth 7:3. like the ancestral father of the Jews] Refers to Gen 32:25−32. Variant: added. – sed omnino prorsus judaizat: Variant: “prorsus” has been added. suffer like Tantalus] Refers to the legendary Greek king Tantalus, whom the gods condemned to be plagued by hunger and thirst. In the underworld, he stood in water up to his chin and with a fruit-laden branch hanging over his head, but when he wanted to drink, the water receded, and when he wanted to eat, the branch moved away. See Homer, Odyssey, bk. 12. What is truth] Allusion to Jn 18:33−38, esp. v. 38. has not only had happy unpleasant consequences for me] Variant: The words “only” and “unpleasant” have been added, but without replacing any of the other words. A cultivated man of about age 50 . . . No pranks, please] Variant: A newspaper clipping that Kierkegaard pasted to the margin of the page. See the illustration on p. 232. Cited from a personal advertisement in Almindelig CommissionsTidende [General Advertiser], ed. and pub. by C. Larsen, no. 212, September 12, 1839, p. 1, col. 6. Published from autumn 1837 until autumn 1839. ― Snaregade: Street in Copenhagen (see map 2, B2). The upper left-hand corner of the newspaper’s first page carried the following announcement: “All sorts of announcements for Almindelig Commissions-Tidende are accepted every day―except holidays―from 8 o’clock in the morning

30

32

1

231

3

231

5

22

586

233

1 17

20

21

Aphoristic Sketches

until 6 in the afternoon at Snaregade 12, ground floor.” Thursday, Sept. 12th Comissionstidenen] → 231,22. Folke-Bladet] i.e., Dansk Folkeblad [Danish People’s Paper], published by “The Society for the Proper Use of Freedom of the Press”; from May 1839, it was edited by F. C. Olsen. The first issue appeared on May 29, 1835, edited by the Society’s “writing committee.” The intent of the journal is indicated as follows in § 2 of the “Rules for the Society for the Correct Use of Freedom of the Press,” printed on unnumbered pages at the end of the newspaper during its first year of publication: “The society arranges for the publication of a weekly journal whose principal intent is to disseminate such abilities as can serve to enlighten the people and form its judgment concerning matters that must be of importance to everyone. In order to support what is good and work against what is deleterious, the journal will, on appropriate occasions, also concern itself with widely read popular writings and journals.” See also, in the present volume, Paper 136, dated March 1836, and its accompanying note. Adresseavisen] The common name for Kiøbenhavns Kgl. allene privilegerede Adresse Contoirs Efterretninger [Information from Copenhagen’s Only Royally Licensed Advertising Office], published 1759–1909. The name underwent many changes in the course of time. Mainly a newspaper for advertisements, it also contained announcements, eulogies, and at certain periods, news, literary contributions, and political articles. Starting in 1800, the newspaper was published six days a week. Stories of Everyday Life] i.e., “HverdagsHistorierne,” the very popular novellas and novels that appeared anonymously in the period 1827–1845. After a couple of brief, unsigned pieces in 1827, En Hverdagshistorie [A Story of Everyday Life] appeared in 1828, after which a long series of works appeared, all attributed to “The Author of A Story of Everyday Life” and published by Johan Ludvig Heiberg. The stories are set in bourgeois Copenhagen, preferably in intimate domestic situations, with plots featuring love and marriage.

•

P a p e r 263 1839 •

The author was Johan Ludvig Heiberg’s mother, Thomasine Gyllembourg (1773–1856), who, as one of Denmark’s most productive and most read authors for two decades, created the type of prose that was called “stories of everyday life.” deus ex machina] Latin, from the Greek ἀπὸ μηχανῆς ϑεός (literally, “a god from the crane”―in a theater), i.e., a god who intervenes in the action at a decisive point of a drama. The term appears in Plato’s dialogue Cratylus, 425d (“gods waiting in the air”; see Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961], p. 460), and refers to a cranelike device by which a god could be lowered onto the stage in ancient Greek theater; Aristotle is critical of this artifice in his Poetics, 1454b, as is Horace in his Ars Poetica, vv. 191−192. in addition to] Variant: added. he can say, like Attorney Tobias . . . a poor lawyer who cannot make 10 cases out of one] Refers to act 5, sc. 4 in Ludvig Holberg’s fiveact comedy Mester Gert Westphaler eller den meget talende Barbeer [Master Gert Westphaler, or the Very Talkative Barber] (1724), where the attorney Tobias says: “The competence of a lawyer does not consist in his ability to understand a case, but in his ability to turn one case into many; that was the main thing for which I praised my late boss― that he never went to court with one case without coming back with four”; Ludvig Holbergs udvalgte Skrifter [Selected Works of Ludvig Holberg], ed. K. L. Rahbek, 21 vols. (Copenhagen, 1804–1814), vol. 6 (1806), p. 228. There are two versions of the comedy Gert Westphaler; originally, it was a fiveact comedy, and Holberg had it printed in his first volume of comedies in 1723; when that volume was reprinted in 1724, the comedy was reworked and shortened into a one-act piece. The line by Attorney Tobias to which Kierkegaard here refers is found only in the original version and not in the one-act version, which is the version found in Den danske Skueplads [The Danish Theater], 7 vols. (Copenhagen, 1758 or 1788 [1731–1754]; ASKB 1566–1567), vol. 5. The volumes are undated and unpaginated.

35

8 9

234

Aphoristic Sketches 23 27

28

furniture . . . Theater.] Variant: changed from “furniture.” manufacturing . . . inside sealed machines] See, e.g., the following advertisement under the heading “For Sale” in the “Supplement” to Adresseavisen (→ 233,20), no. 225, September 22, 1838: “Rosenlund. All the chocolate that comes from this factory is manufactured inside sealed machines driven by horsepower, without fire, using only friction, whereby it attains an excellent fineness; chocolate prepared in this way must also be very healthful and good, which is why it is recommended both as chest- and as health-chocolate with sauce.” The advertisement goes on to mention three businesses in Copenhagen proper and one in Christianshavn where the chocolate can be purchased “at factory prices,” which are then listed. The advertisement is signed “R. T. Kehlet,” who was the proprietor of a Copenhagen pastry shop and café, and in 1829 was also the founder of the amusement park “Rosenlund” on Værnedamsvej on the western edge of the city. Deichmann’s . . . chocolates] See, e.g., the following advertisement under the heading “For Sale” in the “Supplement” to Adresseavisen (→ 233,20), no. 225, September 22, 1838: “Chocolate prepared to perfection at P. C. Deichmann’s Manufacturing Company’s Steam Chocolate Factory, at Elisabethsminde, is sold at factory prices . . .” A price list follows, after which there is a list of twelve shops in Copenhagen where the chocolate can be purchased at the indicated prices. The advertisement ends as follows: “It is to be noted that not only is the product the equal of chocolate produced abroad, but it indeed has the superior quality of being heavier and not insignificantly less expensive.” The advertisement, which appears in a parallel column directly opposite the advertisement for Kehlet’s chocolate mentioned in the preceding note (→ 234,27), was again carried in Adresseavisen, no. 270, November 16, 1839.

•

P a p e r 263 1839 •

587

Notes for Paper 264 Pages from an Older Journal

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Ettore Rocca Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Bruce H. Kirmmse Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

590

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Pages from an Older Journal”1 is no. 431 in B-cat. and was among the portion of papers that at Kierkegaard’s death were found in “a large cardboard box” bearing the letter “A” and the inscription “journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). The manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library in Copenhagen.

II. Dating and Chronology Paper 264 appears to be a fair copy of a number of loose pages, which is evident from the careful handwriting and the small number of corrections and additions as well as from the internal references: “see K.K. p. 20 and 21” and “see E.E. p. 37. DD. p. 59n” in Paper 264:3 and Paper 264:5. The loose journal pages, which according to EP bore the inscription “From an Old Journal,” contain only dated entries, though with a single exception, Paper 264:9. Kierkegaard originally wrote the entries in the period from July 4, 1840 (Paper 264:1–2) to August 10, 1840 (Paper 264:12). Judging from its position in the sequence, the undated paper (Paper 264:9) was written in the period July 11–15, 1840. Kierkegaard began marking his Journals AA–KK in 1842, shortly after he began Journal JJ.2 Because the references in Paper 264 are contemporaneous with the rest of the text, Kierkegaard must have written his entries in a notebook or a journal from which he subsequently tore out the pages.3 It is not possible to determine when he wrote the entries

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See the “Critical Account of the Text of Journal JJ” in KJN 2, 455–459.

2

) Paper 264 is not the only example of this practice. In similar fashion, Kierkegaard inserted loose pages into Journal FF; see the “Critical Account of the Text of Journal FF” in KJN 2, 395.

3

Critical Account of the Text in Paper 264, but given his very exact references to Journals KK, EE, and DD, he presumably had those journals available on his desk, and a likely date could thus be at some point in 1842, when, as mentioned, he assigned his journals alphabetical names.

591

Explanatory Notes 236

3

5

in the sense in which a painter foreshortens perspective] See, e.g., the following passage from chap. 16 in G. E. Lessing, Laokoon, oder über die Grenzen der Malerei und Poesie [Laocoön, or On the Limits of Painting and Poetry] (1766), chap. 3; see also Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s sämmtliche Schriften [Complete Writings of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing], 32 vols. (Berlin, 1825–1838; ASKB 1747– 1762), vol. 2 (1825), p. 269: “Painting, in its coexistent compositions, can use but a single moment of an action, and must therefore choose the most pregnant one, the one most suggestive of what has gone before and what is to follow” (English translation from Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, Laocoon, an Essay upon the Limits of Painting and Poetry, trans. Ellen Frothingham [Boston, 1887], p. 92.) the doubt through which the system more and more works itself forward] See, e.g., the following passages in H. L. Martensen’s review of “Indledningsforedrag til det i November 1834 begyndte logiske Cursus paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole. Af J. L. Heiberg, Lærer i Logik og Æsthetik ved den kgl. militaire Høiskole” [Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course at the Royal Military College That Began in November 1834, by J. L. Heiberg, Teacher of Logic and Aesthetics at the Royal Military College], published in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], published by “A Society,” vol. 16 (Copenhagen, 1836), pp. 515–528; p. 521: “By carrying out dialectical doubt, Hegel sought such a point that was independent of experience and consciousness.” And p. 522: “One could question the use of such a beginning point which says nothing, but Hegelian philosophy will answer that it is not a question of use but of the independence of philosophy. It will say that knowledge of that poor, but independent, thought is worth more than the entire mass of internal or external experiences. It will answer further that philosophy has made itself poor in or-

der to become rich. For this immediate thought is driven forward by its inner dialectical force and elasticity and is determined as the logical Idea from which it develops all the forms of actuality” (English translation from Heiberg’s “Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart [Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2007], pp. 80−81). See also A. P. Adler’s magister thesis, Den isolerede Subjectivitet i dens vigtigste Skikkelser, “Første Deel” [Isolated Subjectivity in Its Most Important Forms: Part One] (Copenhagen, 1840; abbreviated hereafter as Den isolerede Subjectivitet), which he defended on June 25, 1840, pp. 3−6; pp. 5−6, where, referring to “absolute doubt,” Adler describes the being that sets the limit for philosophy’s doubt: “This being, which at once is the driving force of thought and the innermost pulse of life, is both logical and empirically given, in which I feel both the inwardness of thought and the pressure of existence, is the outermost and necessary point of departure and presupposition for philosophy―as long as I do not want to declare thought and life to be nothing and myself to be a shadow . . . This presupposition of philosophy is both the outermost boundary of everything . . . and is also fruitful for development, as it . . . immediately shows itself as a concrete unity from which one thing and another, thinking and being, consciousness and the surrounding world, subjectivity and objectivity, spirit and matter, freedom and necessity, the I in its independence and dependence, emerge and ramify into the multiplicity of the world and of life.” See also G.W.F. Hegel (→ 237,16), Phänomenologie des Geistes [Phenomenology of Spirit], ed. J. Schulze (Berlin, 1832 [1807]; ASKB 550), in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe [The Works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Complete Edition], 18 vols. (Berlin, 1832–1845; abbreviated hereafter as Hegel’s Werke); vol. 2, pp. 63−64 (Jub. vol. 2, pp. 71−72): “The road [to

Pages from an Older Journal

8

consciousness] can therefore be regarded as the pathway of doubt, or more precisely as the way of despair. For what happens on it is not what is ordinarily understood when the word ‘doubt’ is used: shilly-shallying about this or that presumed truth, followed by a return to that truth again, after the doubt has been appropriately dispelled―so that at the end of the process the matter is taken to be what it was in the first place. On the contrary, this path is the conscious insight into the untruth of phenomenal knowledge, for which the supreme reality is what is in truth only the unrealized Notion” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. A. V. Miller [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977], pp. 49−50). After the system has in fact completed itself and come to the category of actuality] A critical reference to the attempt by G.W.F. Hegel (→ 237,16) to analyze “actuality” as a logical category; see his Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], ed. L. von Henning, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1833–1834 [1812– 1816]; ASKB 552–554), vol. 1,1 (vol. 1 is in two parts) in Die objektive Logik [The Objective Logic], pt. 2, “Die Lehre vom Wesen” [The Doctrine of Essence], sec. 3, chap. 2, “Die Wirklichkeit” [Actuality], in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 4, pp. 199−218 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 677−696). See also Hegel’s “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” in Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], ed. L. von Henning, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1840–1845 [1817]; ASKB 561−563; abbreviated hereafter as Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften), vol. 1, Die Logik [The Logic], sec. 2, “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” “C. Die Wirklichkeit” [Actuality], § 142−159, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 281−314 (Jub. vol. 8, System der Philosophie. Erster Theil. Die Logik [System of Philosophy: Part One; The Logic], pp. 319−352). In Denmark, “actuality” is treated the same way by J. L. Heiberg; see II.B.2, “Virkelighed” [Actuality], § 105−107, in his Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie eller den speculative Logik. Som Ledetraad ved Forelæsninger paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole [Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy, or Speculative Logic] (Copenhagen, 1832; abbreviated hereaf-

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

593

ter as Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie), pp. 59−63; available in English translation as Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy, or Speculative Logic, as a Guide to Lectures at the Royal Military College, pp. 122−128, which is included in Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2006). the Hegelians distinguish . . . existence and actuality . . . it is actual] Refers to Hegel’s (→ 237,16) distinction between Existenz and Wirklichkeit; see Wissenschaft der Logik (→ 236,8) vol. 1,2 “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” sec. 2, chap. 1, “Die Existenz” [Existence], in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 4, pp. 120−144 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 598−622), and sec. 3, chap. 2, “Die Wirklichkeit” [Actuality], in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 4, pp. 199−218 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 677−696). See also Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, vol. 1, Die Logik, sec. 2, “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” “A. Das Wesen als Grund der Existenz” [A. Essence as the Ground of Existence], “b. Die Existenz,” § 123−124, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 250−253 (Jub. vol. 8, System der Philosophie. Erster Theil. Die Logik, pp. 288−291), and sec. 2, “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” “C. Die Wirklichkeit,” § 142−159, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 281−314 (Jub. vol. 8, pp. 319−352). While Existenz is everything that exists, Wirklichkeit is the subset of what exists that exhibits reason and concept (Begriff). The speculative idea is the unity of the abstract concept (Begriff) and its actualization in actuality; see the following passage from the Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften, vol. 1, Die Logik, sec. 3, “Die Lehre vom Begriff” [The Doctrine of the Concept], “C. Die Idee” [The Idea], § 213, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, p. 385 (Jub., vol. 8, p. 423): “The Idea is truth in and for itself―the absolute unity of the notion and objectivity. Its ‘ideal’ content is nothing but the notion in its detailed terms: its ‘real’ content is only the exhibition which the notion gives itself in the form of external existence, while yet, by enclosing this shape in its ideality, it keeps it in its power, and so keeps itself in it.” English translation from Hegel’s Logic: Being Part One of the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1830), trans. William Wallace (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975, pp. 274−275). See also Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften,

12

594

15

21

Pages from an Older Journal

vol. 1, Die Logik, “Einleitung” [Introduction], § 14, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 22−23 (Jub. vol. 8, pp. 60−61), and § 18, in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 6, pp. 26−27 (Jub. vol. 8, pp. 64−65). not define the boundary . . . every phenomenon can become actual] See, e.g., II.B.1 “Absolute Phenomenon,” “c. Actuality,” § 104 in J. L. Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie (→ 236,8), p. 57: “The infinite series of contingency is sublated in its third member, which is the return of impossibility to possibility: 1) possibility; 2) impossibility; 3) impossibility’s possibility = possibility. This resulting possibility, which is presupposed by and has sublated impossibility, is actuality, which is the determinate being of the phenomenon. Put differently, as result of the sublated possibility and impossibility, this third member is the resulting ground, that is, the possibility that is . . . but this is actuality. In other words, actuality is contingency posited in its positive moment, as possibility, so that the negative becomes its limit, i.e., the impossible is the limit for the actual” (English translation from Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart [→ 236,8], p. 119, translation slightly modified). See also p. 57 n. 1: “The opposition of impossibility to possibility sublates itself; only in its opposition to actuality does it become real, just as nothing is sublated in its opposition to being and only becomes real in its opposition to something as its limit or quality . . . Since the impossible is thus the limit for the actual, everything which is not actual is impossible” (English translation from ibid.). the accidental] See, e.g., G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 237,16) Wissenschaft der Logik (→ 236,8), vol. 1,2, “Die Lehre vom Wesen,” sec. 3, chap. 2, “Die Wirklichkeit,” in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 4, pp. 202−207 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 680−685, esp. 683−685). See also J. L. Heiberg, Der Zufall, aus dem Gesichtspunkte der Logik betrachtet. Als Einleitung zu einer Theorie des Zufalls [Contingency, Regarded from the Point of View of Logic: As an Introduction to a Theory of the Contingent] (Copenhagen, 1825); see, in addition, II.B.1 “Absolut Phænomen” [Absolute Phenomenon], “b. Tilfælde” [Contingency], § 103 in J. L.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie (→ 236,8), pp. 55−57; available in English translation in Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy, or Speculative Logic, as a Guide to Lectures at the Royal Military College, pp. 115−120, in Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart (→ 236,8). Providence] See, e.g., the following passages in the “Einleitung” to G.W.F. Hegel, (→ 237,16), Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Geschichte [Lectures on the Philosophy of History], ed. E. Gans (Berlin, 1837), in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 9, p. 16 (Jub. vol. 11, pp. 39, 39−40, 40): “We have next to notice the rise of this idea―that Reason directs the World―in connection with a further application of it, well known to us―in the form, viz. of the religious truth, that the world is not abandoned to chance and external contingent causes, but that a Providence controls it. I stated above, that I would not make a demand on your faith, in regard to the principle announced. Yet I might appeal to your belief in it, in this religious aspect, if, as a general rule, the nature of philosophical science allowed it to attach authority to presuppositions. To put it in another shape― this appeal is forbidden, because the science of which we have to treat, proposes itself to furnish the proof (not indeed of the abstract Truth of the doctrine, but) of its correctness as compared with facts. The truth, then, that a Providence (that of God) presides over the events of the world―consorts [i.e., is in accord with] with the proposition in question; for Divine Providence is Wisdom, endowed with an infinite Power, which realizes its aim, viz. the absolute rational design of the World. Reason is Thought conditioning itself with perfect freedom” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree [New York: Dover, 1956], pp. 12−13). See, further, pp. 16−17: “But to explain History is to depict the passions of mankind, the genius, the active powers, that play their part on the great stage; and the providentially determined process which these exhibit, constitutes what is generally called the ‘plan’ of Providence. Yet it is this very plan which is supposed to be concealed from our view: which it is deemed presumption, even to wish to

26

Pages from an Older Journal

27

recognize” (English translation from ibid., p. 13). And see also, p. 17: “In isolated cases this plan is supposed to be manifest. Pious persons are encouraged to recognize in particular circumstances, something more than mere chance; to acknowledge the guiding hand of God; e.g., when help has unexpectedly come to an individual in great perplexity and need. But these instances of providential design are of a limited kind, and concern the accomplishment of nothing more than the desires of the individual in question. But in the history of the World, the Individuals we have to do with are Peoples; Totalities that are States. We cannot, therefore, be satisfied with what we may call this ‘peddling’ view of Providence, to which the belief alluded to limits itself. Equally unsatisfactory is the merely abstract, undefined belief in a Providence, when that belief is not brought to bear upon the details of the process which it conducts. On the contrary our earnest endeavor must be directed to the recognition of the ways of Providence, the means it uses, and the historical phenomena in which it manifests itself; and we must show their connection with the general principle above mentioned” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, pp. 13−14). the historical] See, e.g., § 18 in A. P. Adler, Den isolerede Subjectivitet (→ 236,5), pp. 48−52, esp. p. 48: “The great forms and stages of history have an eternal stereotype in the human soul, in the process of consciousness and development in individuals. Before it departs, every form of the world spirit has written an eternal memorial in the interior of individuals and has marked its objective existence with an eternal and recurring element in the consciousness of the subject. The old form of the world spirit continually reproduces itself anew in the soul of the individual. The historical form steps aside, making room for a future one, retreating in the pantheon of ideas while the individuals continually provide it with an eternal metempsychosis. What has governed the generations reproduces itself in the individuals . . . The historical moments have an eternal life in the eternally recurring psychological [moments]. What is old is born in individuals

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

595

as something new and takes on the form of the new. Human freedom inheres in this reproduction of what has disappeared.” And p. 49: “In the psychological sense, infinite subjectivity is an eternally recurring phenomenon, a moment that will continually arise as long as there are human beings, [a moment] that, born in the world spirit in historical form, will have eternal rebirth in individuals, [a moment] that will have the eternal life of the human race as it has the age of the historical form; [a moment] that has its origin in the necessity of the world spirit; [a moment] that will only come to its end with the freedom of the human race. But when the bygone is born anew in this way, it no longer possesses its original validity; when the bygone moments and stages of the world spirit are born in individuals, they no longer possess historical truth and justice.” And further, p. 50: “When one clings to a bygone moment one remains standing in the negation, that is, in that which the world spirit has already negated and which therefore the individuals, too, are to negate. Just as it is necessary to have the negation as a moment―for without it there is no self-knowledge and world consciousness―so, too, is the sublation of it necessary in order not to remain standing in finitude, lost in it; for finitude is precisely the standpoint at which the world spirit has brought things to an end and at which individuals therefore shall also bring things to an end. By remaining in it, one transports oneself into a sphere that the world spirit, through sublation, has declared to be finite.” The period of conflict within the Protestant Church . . . followed upon the Reformation] Presumably, a reference to the period from Luther’s death in 1546 to the publication of the final Lutheran confessional document, Formula Concordiae (→ 226,4), which appeared in German in 1580; a Latin translation did not appear until 1598. The period saw a number of conflicts. There was disagreement concerning objective and subjective justification, or concerning imputed (forensic) justification and communicated (physical, or healing) and acquired (inner) justification. There was conflict over Philipp Melanchthon’s authority, or disagreement between the old University

1

237

596

13

16

17

22 24

Pages from an Older Journal

of Wittenberg, which sought compromise, and the new, strictly Lutheran, University of Jena, especially concerning the question of how the Eucharist is to be understood―this conflict was also called the conflict over adiaphora, i.e., over which things were matters of indifference and could be abandoned, and which were not matters of indifference and could not be given up. There was conflict concerning the necessity of good works, or conflict concerning the justifying power of good works, i.e., about the degree to which there is or is not any necessary relationship between good works and eternal salvation. And there was the synergistic conflict, or the conflict concerning predestination and original sin, as well as concerning a human being’s synergy, i.e., one’s free “participation” in one’s salvation. See, e.g., §§ 419−423 in K. Hase, Kirkehistorie. Lærebog nærmest for akademiske Forelæsninger, [Church History: Textbook for Use with Academic Lectures], trans. C. Winther and T. Schorn (Copenhagen, 1837 [German ed. 1834, 2nd German ed. 1836]; ASKB 160–166), pp. 450–454; and §§ 202−203 in H.E.F. Guerike, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (→ 222,17), vol. 2, pp. 1011−1039. modern philosophy] Presumably refers to philosophy in the period after the French philosopher, mathematician, and natural scientist René Descartes (1596−1650). Hegel] Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770−1831), German philosopher and theologian; professor at Berlin from 1818 until his death. Kant] Immanuel Kant (1724−1804), German philosopher; privatdocent, 1755−1769; from 1770, professor at the University of Königsberg. genuine anthropological contemplation] See the next note. see K.K. pp. 20 and 21] See the following two passages in KK:2, the first of which is dated August 13, 1838, and reads: “Now that I have reached this point I cannot refrain from the comment that the reason why many of the writings produced by recent philosophy leave behind so little by way of outcome that is really satisfying, once the admiration that their displays of talent must elicit from all sides has subsided, is because their entire attention is turned toward questions that have

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

never been voiced in the Chr. consciousness, focusing on problems that are to justify the acceptance of the actuality of a relationship between God and human beings, while the Chr. consciousness, without asking about this conditio sine qua non, seeks to grasp the concretions that this relationship has assumed. Thus, when Schaller here develops the concept of reconciliation, he is only developing the possibility of God’s relation to hum. beings, which one can certainly concede to him could take place only when the existence of a personal God is assumed; but the wrathful God is still not reconciled by this, and the satisfaction and repose one finds in such an answer is only illusory, since this question has no real meaning for Chr. consciousness, though it may well be very important for philosophical ‘Vorstudien’ ” (KJN 2, 302). The second is undated and reads: “But when every antithesis between God and the world is thus abrogated, then this indeed shows that the antithesis was purely logical and that the antithesis that comes under the rubric of religious-moral views (sin, etc.) has not been touched upon, the simple reason for which is, naturally, that one hasn’t yet arrived at that point” (KJN 2, 303). These two passages, both of which are signed “K.,” i.e., Kierkegaard, were written across the entire width of Kierkegaard’s journal page, between his excerpts from chap. 5, “Die Idee der Versöhnung” [The Idea of Atonement], in Julius Schaller, Der historische Christus und die Philosophie. Kritik der Grundidee des Werks das Leben Jesu von Dr. D. F. Strauss. Von Julius Schaller. Dr. d. Philos. u. Privatdocent an der Universität Halle [The Historical Christ and Philosophy: A Critique of the Basic Idea of the Study The Life of Jesus, by Dr. D. F. Strauss; by Julius Schaller, Dr. of Philosophy and Privatdocent at the University of Halle] (Leipzig: Otto Wigand, 1838; ASKB 759). Kierkegaard dated the entire group of excerpts in KK:2 in KJN 2, 292−307, as follows: “beg. 23 July―finished 21 Aug. 1838” (KJN 2, 292m). prior doubt about the unity of the div[ine] and hum. . . . given in knowledge] See, e.g., § 5 in H. L. Martensen’s licentiate dissertation, De autonomia conscientiæ sui humanæ, in theologiam dogmaticam nostri temporis introducta (Copenhagen,

27

Pages from an Older Journal

32

238

1

1837; ASKB 648), trans. from Latin into Danish by L. V. Petersen as Den menneskelige Selvbevidstheds Autonomie i vor Tids Dogmatiske Theologie [The Autonomy of Human Self-Consciousness in the Dogmatic Theology of Our Time] (Copenhagen, 1841; ASKB 651), pp. 19−23 (pp. 16−19 in the Danish translation), where Martensen relates how the all-encompassing Cartesian doubt (see René Descartes’ motto “de omnibus dubitandum est” [“one is to doubt everything”]) precedes the identity of thought and being (see Descartes’ principle “cogito ergo sum” [“I think, therefore I am”]). Martensen expressed this same point in his lectures on “The History of Philosophy from Kant to Hegel” in the winter semester of 1838−1839; see the notebook Kierkegaard owned that contained these lectures (published as Pap. II C 25, in vol. XII, pp. 280−331; p. 282). pathological] See Paper 259:2 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. When he says that all knowledge is recollection, Plato] Refers to Plato’s dialogue Meno, 81d, where Socrates, conversing with Meno, says: “Thus the soul, since it is immortal and has been born many times, and has seen all things both here and in the other world, has learned everything that is. So we need not be surprised if it can recall the knowledge of virtue or anything else which, as we see, it once possessed. All nature is akin, and the soul has learned everything, so that when a man has recalled a single piece of knowledge―learned it, in ordinary language―there is no reason why he should not find out all the rest, if he keeps a stout heart and does not grow weary of the search, for seeking and learning are in fact nothing but recollection” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns [Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961; abbreviated hereafter as Plato: The Collected Dialogues], p. 364). See also the Meno, 82−86, where Socrates shows that by using a figure he draws and employing his technique of posing questions, he can get a slave to reveal that he has knowledge of geometry. The slave must always have had this knowledge; it has been present in his soul, or it has been seen by him in an earlier, ideal existence. Socrates has not taught him

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

597

anything―he has merely got him to remember knowledge he had previously acquired. See also Plato’s dialogues Phaedrus, 246a−249d and Phaedo, 72e−78b. ― Plato: Greek philosopher (427–347 b.c.) and a pupil of Socrates (→ 239,8). the observation that all philosophizing is . . . what is already given in consciousness] Presumably, a reference to J. L. Heiberg, Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid. Et IndbydelsesSkrift til en Række af philosophiske Forelæsninger [On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age: An Invitation to a Series of Philosophical Lectures] (Copenhagen, 1833; ASKB 568), pp. 49−50, where Heiberg writes “that neither in the Hegelian system nor in any other true system can philosophy be regarded as something new, which comes to what exists just like a panacea, which once taken is supposed to quickly free us from all evils. But it is this goal to which our political activity, our science, our art, our poetry and our religion, in short, all our interests strive according to their own inner force, so that philosophy cannot be anything other than the knowledge of the truth to which these undertakings have already come. And on that basis the Hegelian system must be recognized as heretofore the most comprehensive one, which has grounded the greatest mass of these undertakings and most correctly comprehended the common direction in which they converge in a central science” (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], p. 116). Heiberg continues by stating: “Here it is merely a matter of opening our eyes to that which we already see without knowing it, of unfolding our consciousness and showing ourselves what it contains. The art, which one must use as a means to this end, is to tie the philosophical concepts to our representations, or, so to speak, translate the latter into the language spoken by the former. For we are all at home in representations, but we feel alienated in the Concept until we realize that it also rests in representations, like an unknown room in a house in which we live. Philosophy lies unconsciously in ordinary

11

598

19 23

38

Pages from an Older Journal

common sense” (English translation from ibid., p. 117). not the infinite silence . . . of the abstract] Variant: added. a curse . . . rests upon a pers. . . . to eat his bread in the sweat of his face] Refers to the account of the Fall in Gen 3:17−19. see EE. p. 37] See the following two entries in Journal EE: EE:151, dated July 30, 1839: “The philosophers think that all knowledge, even the existence of God, is something humnty itself produces, and that there can only be talk of a revelation in an improper sense, roughly the same sense in which one can say that rain falls from the heavens, although this rain is nothing but the vapor produced by the earth; but they forget, to stay with this image, that in the beginning God divided the waters of heaven and earth, and that there is something higher than the atmosphereb” (KJN 2, 48). With this, see also EE:151.a: “I have discussed the opposite case in one of my other books in the assertion that all knowledge is respiration” (KJN 2, 48m). See, as well, EE:151.b: “knowledge of this higher level is naturally in parta,” including the note: “acf. Jn 16:16: In a little while you shall not see me, and again a little while and you shall see me” (KJN 2, 48m). See also the explanatory notes for these entries. See, in addition, EE:152: “But hum.1 knowledge nevertheless has objective reality and anthropomorphism (in the broadest sense not just concerning expressions about God but also about everything that exists) is not transcendence, as indeed we see in Gen 2:19 when God leads all the animals to Adam in order to see what he will call them,a and the name that he gave to each particular one, it kept it” (KJN 2, 49). See also footnote EE:152.1: “1how constrictingly limited it may still be, as long as we are living in the status constructus (“compound condition”) of earthly existence” (KJN 2, 49). And see, lastly, EE:152.a: “this act of naming will, naturally, always be different from the div. act of naming that is identical with creation: God called the light to be day ‫( לָ אֹור‬note ‫)ל‬ ְ this was not attributing a name, but the attribution of what is substantial, real” (KJN 2, 49m). See also the accompanying explanatory notes.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

DD. p. 59 n.] See DD:176, dated December 2, 1838: “Developing a priori basic concepts is like prayer in the Chr. sphere, for one would think that here man placed himself in relation to the Deity in the freest, most subjective way; and yet we are told that it is the Holy Spirit that effects prayer, so that the only prayer left to us would be to be able to pray, although upon closer inspection even this has been effected in us―similarly there is no deductive development of concepts, or whatever one wants to call that which has some constitutive power―man can only call it to mind, and willing this, if this willing is not an empty, unproductive gaping, is what corresponds to this single prayer and, just like it, is effected in us” (KJN 1, 261). See also DD:176.a, dated December 3, 1838: “One can therefore also say that all knowing is like the drawing of breath, a respiratio” (KJN 1, 261m). See also the accompanying explanatory notes. Hegel’s hatred of the edifying, which asserts itself everywhere] See, e.g., the “Vorrede” [Preface] to G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 237,16) Phänomenologie des Geistes [Phenomenology of Spirit], in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 2, pp. 8−9 (Jub. vol. 2, pp. 16−17), where he writes, p. 9 (p. 17): “This modest complacency in receiving, or this sparingness in giving, does not, however, benefit Science. Whoever seeks mere edification, and whoever wants to shroud in a mist the manifold variety of his earthly existence and of thought, in order to pursue the indeterminate enjoyment of this indeterminate divinity, may look where he likes to find all this. He will find ample opportunity to dream up something for himself. But philosophy must beware of the wish to be edifying” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. A. V. Miller [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977], pp. 5−6). See also Hegel’s piece “An den königl. Preußischen Regierungsrath und Professor Friedrich von Raumer. Ueber den Vortrag der Philosophie auf Universitäten” [To Royal Prussian Councillor and Professor Friedrich von Raumer: On the Philosophy Lecture at the University] (1816), in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s vermischte Schriften [Miscellaneous Writings of Georg Friedrich

38

1

239

Pages from an Older Journal

8

8

11

Wilhelm Hegel], ed. Förster and L. Boumann, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1834−1835; ASKB 555−556), vol. 2 (in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 17), pp. 349−356 (Jub. vol. 3, pp. 317−324); p. 352 (p. 320), and p. 355 (p. 323), where Hegel writes: “Before, I referred to the edification [p. 352], which is often expected of philosophy; in my opinion, even when it is presented to the youth, it should never be edifying.” See also the “Vorrede” to Hegel’s Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, oder Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse [Elements of the Philosophy of Right, or Natural Law and Political Science in Outline], in Hegel’s Werke, vol. 8, ed. Eduard Gans (Berlin 1833 [1821]; ASKB 551), p. 15 (Jub. vol. 7, p. 31); see also § 272, p. 352 (p. 368). his own principle] Refers to the circumstance that Socrates (see the next note) in his conversations in Plato’s dialogues, often refers to his ignorance, e.g., in the Apology, 21a−23b, where he explains that the oracle at Delphi had flatly denied that anyone was wiser than Socrates, because he knows that he, unlike many people, does not imagine that he knows anything. A bit later (in 28e and 33c) Socrates also states that, from various sources, including the words of the oracle and dreams, he has been appointed by God to test himself as well as those who think that they are wise, but who are not. Socrates] Greek philosopher (ca. 470–399 b.c.). With his maieutic method (i.e., midwifery), and by developing his thoughts in dialogue with his contemporaries, he sought to deliver others who were already pregnant with knowledge, thus helping them get rid of their errors. He was condemned to death by a court of the Athenian people for acknowledging gods other than those recognized by the state and for corrupting the youth of Athens; the sentence was carried out when he drank hemlock and died. He left no writings, but the main outlines of his character, activity, and teachings were depicted by three of his contemporaries: Aristophanes in his comedy, The Clouds; Xenophon, in his four “Socratic” writings, including the Memorabilia; and Plato (→ 238,1), in his dialogues. one fool can ask more than 7 wise men can answer] Proverb found in different versions; col-

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

599

lected as no. 2542 in N.F.S. Grundtvig, Danske Ordsprog og Mundheld (→ 207,34), p. 97. Other variants are noted under no. 9528 in E. Mau, Dansk Ordsprogs-Skat (→ 216,30), vol. 2, p. 350. Socrates’ words . . . speaks of immortality and . . . wanted to put questions to them] Refers to the following passage in Socrates’ speech, after the verdict has been pronounced and the death sentence ordered, in Plato’s Apology, 41a−c: “If on the other hand death is a removal from here to some other place, and if what we are told is true, that all the dead are there, what greater blessing could there be than this, gentlemen? If on arrival in the other world, beyond the reach of our socalled justice, one will find there the true judges who are said to preside in those courts. Minos and Rhadamanthus and Aeacus and Triptolemus and all those other half-divinities who were upright in their earthly life, would that be an unrewarding journey? Put it this way. How much would one of you give to meet Orpheus and Musaeus, Hesiod and Homer? I am willing to die ten times over if this account is true. It would be a specially interesting experience for me to join them there, to meet Palamedes and Ajax, the son of Telamon, and any other heroes of the old days who met their death through an unfair trial, and to compare my fortunes with theirs―it would be rather amusing, I think. And above all I should like to spend my time there, as here, in examining and searching people’s minds, to find out who is really wise among them, and who only thinks that he is. What would one not give, gentlemen, to be able to question the leader of that great host against Troy, or Odysseus, or Sisyphus, or the thousands of other men and women whom one could mention, to talk and mix and argue with whom would be unimaginable happiness? At any rate I presume that they do not put one to death there for such conduct, because apart from the other happiness in which their world surpasses ours, they are now immortal for the rest of time, if what we are told is true” (Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 25). υψωμα] See 2 Cor 10:5, where (in the King James version, which conveys Kierkegaard’s meaning better than does the NRSV) Paul speaks against

18

23

600

26

28

240

2

Pages from an Older Journal

“every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God.” modern philosophy . . . getting every presupposition removed . . . to begin with nothing] See From the Papers of One Still Living (1838), where Kierkegaard refers to “Hegel’s great attempt to begin with nothing” (EPW, 61; SKS 1, 17). In the introduction to his Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic] (→ 236,8), G.W.F. Hegel (→ 237,16) demands that logic begin with “pure being,” which, however, is identical with “nothing”; see the chapter “Womit muß der Anfang der Wissenschaft gemacht werden?” [With What Must the Science Begin?], in bk. 1, “Die Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being], in Wissenschaft der Logik, vol. 1,1, in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5), vol. 3, pp. 59−74 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 69−84); p. 68, where Hegel writes: “The beginning is not pure nothing, but a nothing from which something is to proceed; therefore being, too, is already contained in the beginning. The beginning, therefore, contains both, being and nothing, is the unity of being and nothing; or is non-being which is at the same time being, and being which is at the same time non-being” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, Hegel’s Science of Logic, trans. A. V. Miller [London: Allen and Unwin, 1969], p. 73). The Danish Hegelian J. L. Heiberg made the idea that philosophy must “begin with nothing,” into a sloganlike principle; see, e.g., § 1−8 in Heiberg’s article “Det logiske System” [The Logical System], in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus: Journal for the Speculative Idea], no. 1, June 1837, and no. 2, August 1838, ed. J. L. Heiberg (Copenhagen, 1837−1838; ASKB 569; abbreviated hereafter as Perseus), no. 2, pp. 1−45; see also § 26−27 in Heiberg’s Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy (→ 236,8), p. 11; for an English translation, see Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts (→ 236,8), pp. 55−56. ― getting every presupposition removed: → 240,23. in his way, . . . end with nothing.] Variant: changed from “in his way.” that conscientious judge . . . did not extend this to include the death penalty] No source for this has been identified.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

philosophers are presuppositionless] Refers to the debate in Kierkegaard’s day concerning a presuppositionless beginning to philosophy. In the chapter “Womit muß der Anfang der Wissenschaft gemacht werden?” [With What Must the Science Begin?], in bk. 1, “Die Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being], in Wissenschaft der Logik, vol. 1,1, in Hegel’s Werke (→ 236,5) vol. 3, pp. 59−74 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 69−84), Hegel (→ 237,16) asserts, p. 63 (p. 73), that speculative thinking begins without presuppositions. The beginning of the science thus “may not presuppose anything, must not be mediated by anything nor have a ground; rather it is to be itself the ground of the entire science. Consequently, it must be purely and simply an immediacy, or rather merely immediacy itself. Just as it cannot possess any determination relatively to anything else, so too it cannot contain within itself any determination, any content; for any such would be a distinguishing and an interrelationship of distinct moments, and consequently a mediation. The beginning therefore is pure being” (English translation from G.W.F. Hegel, Hegel’s Science of Logic, trans. A. V. Miller [London: Allen and Unwin, 1969], p. 70). In Denmark, Hegel’s principle became the subject of a wide-ranging discussion concerning the beginning of philosophy. See J. L. Heiberg’s review of W. H. Rothe, Læren om Treenighed og Forsoning. Et speculativt Forsøg [The Doctrine of Trinity and Atonement: A Speculative Essay] (Copenhagen, 1836) in Perseus, no. 1 (→ 239,26), p. 36: “One must recognize that the system really delivers what it promises: a presuppositionless beginning” (English translation from Heiberg’s Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart [Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2007], p. 92). F. C. Sibbern wrote in opposition to this in his review of J. L. Heiberg’s Perseus, no. 1, in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly], published by “A Society,” vol. 19 (Copenhagen, 1838), pp. 315−316: “In other respects it is, after all, quite striking that the assertion that philosophy is to begin without any presuppositions itself contains a very great presupposition, which one cannot seek to justify without entering into a discussion of the essence of philosophy, as well

23

Pages from an Older Journal

37

as of its possibility and of its entire process and method―a discussion that would immediately lead right into the middle of philosophy itself,” and Sibbern concludes “that philosophy cannot begin like that, from an immediate first point, as Hegel wants to have it begin―thus, right here a great objection is indeed made against Hegel’s first concept concerning philosophy, and the debate we thus bring forward must thus be thought to be decided before his beginning can asserted”; see also pp. 334−335. In opposition to this, J. L. Heiberg insists, in his article “Det logiske System,” on the necessity of a presuppositionless beginning to logic; see Perseus, no. 2 (→ 239,26), § 4, p. 11: “The path by which we here move to come to the absolute beginning may well be called an explicative or exoteric introduction, if one will but take note of the fact that it is without any influence on the beginning of the system itself, for it does not include any presupposition whatever in prejudice of the absolute beginning. It in fact cannot do so because it moves toward the very presuppositionlessness that has the consequence that instead of including something, it on the contrary casts off everything, for otherwise it could never come to the point where nothing is presupposed. But when one has indeed reached that point, the way by which one has reached it is a matter of complete indifference, for under any circumstances, presuppostionlessness is the right beginning, and it does not become any less presuppositionless because one has come there by way of presuppositions.” In Den isolerede Subjectivitet (→ 236,5), A. P. Adler includes a lengthy “Anmærkning” [Note], pp. 4−6, “on the presupposition of philosophy that, when it appears, as if with necessity, to be intrusive, can immediately be called its presuppositionlessness.” On p. 5, Adler writes that philosophy only seeks “a fixed point of departure, a presupposition, which is so poor and abstract that it must be declared to be nothing, and in addition so necessary that we cannot let go of it.” becoming, through freedom, absolutely dependent] Variant: “dependent” has been changed from “independent”.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

601

nonsensical gobbledygook] The Danish word Kierkegaard uses is Rotwelsk, an unusual term meaning a language that consists of made-up words that are incomprehensible to those uninitiated in speaking it; it can also mean thieves’ cant or jargon, as well as the secret language supposedly spoken by Roma (“gypsies”); see N. V. Dorph, De jydske Zigeunere og en rotvelsk Ordbog [The Jutland Gypsies and a Dictionary of Thieves’ Jargon] (Copenhagen, 1837; ASKB 1036), p. 28: “In order not to be understood by others, the so-called itinerant nightwork people of Jutland, who call themselves merely the travelers, speak among themselves a peculiar language that they call Rotvelsk (which is derived from Rot, a beggar or tramp, which in turn is regarded as the root of the word sammenrotte sig [to conspire]) or Præveliqvantsproget (i.e., the language of those who speak beautifully, from præveler [to speak] and qvant [beautifully]). Other people generally call this language tramp-Latin.” Dorph also states (p. 1): “There is a widespread legend, probably not without some basis, that gypsies, wherever they are and dwell, punish with death the ‘squealers’ who turn out to have revealed their secret language to outsiders.” the story of the Babylonian confusion of tongues] Refers to the story of the Tower of Babel in Gen 11:1−9. the words of Brorson . . . The harp of joy resounds its best] Cited from the sixth stanza of a Christmas hymn by the Danish bishop and pietist hymnodist Hans Adolf Brorson (1694−1764), “I denne søde Juletid” [In This Sweet Christmastime] (1732 and 1739): “And though joyful song must vie / With tears and many a heartfelt sigh, / Yet, the heavy cross / Shall never still my voice; / When the heart is most distressed, / The harp of joy resounds its best, / That it might better sing. / And broken hearts best feel / What this happy meal / Of joy can bring.” Troens rare Klenodie, i nogle aandelige Sange fremstillet af Hans Adolph Brorson [Faith’s Rare Treasure, Presented in Some Spiritual Songs by Hans Adolph Brorson], ed. L. C. Hagen (Copenhagen, 1834; ASKB 199), pp. 11−12.

6

7

16

241

602 24

Pages from an Older Journal

Plato (the Egyptian priest . . .) Ω Σολων . . . γερων δε ῾Ελλην ουϰ εστιν] Cited freely from Plato’s (→ 238,1) dialogue Timaeus, 22b: “one of the priests, who was of a very great age, said, O Solon, Solon, you Hellenes are never anything but children, and there is not an old man among you.” Plato, Platonis opera quae extant [Surviving Works of Plato], ed. Fr. Ast, 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1819–1832; ASKB 1144–1154), vol. 5 (1822), pp. 122−123; English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, p. 1157. The remark is made in the course of the dialogue Timaeus, in which it is reported that Solon, while on a journey to Egypt, learned that in that country people had knowledge of events that took place long before the earliest events the Greeks knew of (21a−25a). The Egyptian priest explains this both by citing the circumstance that Egypt has been spared from the natural catastrophes that in other places regularly annihilate the peoples of the world, and by noting the Egyptians’ early invention of writing. Thus, the oldest myths of the Greeks are like children’s tales to the Egyptians (23b). Then the priest goes on to relate the story of Atlantis, which has since perished, but which, one thousand years before the founding of Egypt―which was founded eight thousand years ago―had been at war with the city that was then Athens. ― Solon: (ca. 640−560 b.c.), Greek statesman, lawgiver, and poet; one of the seven wise men.

•

P a p e r 264 1840 •

Notes for Paper 265–Paper 269 “My Umbrella, My Friendship,” et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Joel D. S. Rasmussen

604

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “ ‘My Umbrella, My Friendship,’ et al.”1 belongs to the portion of the papers that upon Kierkegaard’s death lay in “a large cardboard box” marked with the letter “A” and with the inscription “Journals and other such from an earlier period” (see B-cat., p. 189). All the manuscripts have been lost but have been transmitted indirectly through H. P. Barfod’s edition of Af Søren Kierkegaards Efterladte Papirer (EP).

II. Dating and Chronology Two dates are found in the texts: Paper 265 bears the date “Nov. 15th 40,” and Paper 266 is dated “Nov. 16th 40.” The three remaining papers in the group cannot be closely dated but may be assumed to date from 1840.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS, in part

1

on the basis of Kierkegaard’s own heading on Paper 269.

Explanatory Notes 244

25

Allah] Arabic, “God.” In the Koran, Allah has ninety-nine different names.

245

3

Kongens Nytorv] Literally, “the King’s new market” in Copenhagen (see map 2, C-D2-3).

Notes for Paper 270 “The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Herman Deuser Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

608

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary” is no. 146 in B-cat., and at Kierkegaard’s death it lay in “the box in the writing desk” (see illustration 3. on p. xliii.1 The manuscript is in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library.

II. Dating and Chronology The sermon is undated, but during the winter of 1840–1841 and the summer of 1841 Kierkegaard took part in the pastoral seminary’s homiletic and catechetic exercises and in that connection held a trial sermon on Phil 1:19–25 in Holmen’s Church on January 12, 1841.2 Accordingly, the sermon can be dated to the beginning of January 1841.

) See Henrik Lund, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], enclosed in L-cat. (see introduction to Loose Papers, pp. xxxi–xxxiv in the present volume).

1

) See Homiletiske protokolloer for Pastoralseminariet 1809–1900 [Homiletic Registers for 1809–1900], 9 vols. (Rigsarkivet [National Archives], Copenhagen). An excerpt from the Pastoral Seminary’s register for the 1840–1841 winter semester can be found in B&A, vol. 1, pp. 13– 16.

2

Explanatory Notes 248

2 3 4 5 7

9 9 15 18

where our treasure is meant to be] Allusion to Mt 6:19–21. and our thoughts] Variant: added. where our citizenship is―in your kingdom] Presumably, an allusion to Phil 3:20. passing] Variant: first written “death”. we do not know the day and the hour] A New Testament turn of phrase; see, e.g., Mt 24:36, Acts 1:7, 1 Thess 5:1. and when] Variant: “and” has been changed from “but”. at times] Variant: added. also while we are living we belong to you] Presumably, an allusion to Rom 14:8. It was from his imprisonment in Rome . . . wrote the letter] In Phil 1:12–13, Paul writes: “it has become known throughout the whole imperial guard and to everyone else that my imprisonment is for Christ.” ― the Apostle P.: Paul, the most significant figure in earliest Christianity. Born in Tarsus in Asia Minor; a Hellenized Jew, educated as a Pharisee; took part in the persecution of his Jewish compatriots who had come to believe in Jesus as Christ. Circa a.d. 40, he had a vision of the resurrected Christ, and from that time proclaimed the gospel of Christ, especially to non-Jews, and seems to have been the founder of a mission that did not require conversion to Judaism. Presumed executed ca. a.d. 65 during Emperor Nero’s persecution of the Christians after the burning of Rome. Paul is known firsthand from a series of letters written in the years 51–55, which are included in the NT. The thirteen letters in the NT that bear Paul’s name were generally considered authentic in Kierkegaard’s time; today only seven or nine are so regarded, among these the first Thessalonian epistle, the oldest writing in the NT, together with the epistle to the Romans, the two epistles to the Corinthians, and the epistle to the Galatians. In the four latter epistles, Paul appears as an apostle, claiming to have his calling

and hence his authority immediately from God and the arisen Christ. The Acts of the Apostles, which is the other main source of our knowledge of Paul, is currently viewed as reflecting a later portrayal of the “Apostle to the Gentiles.” in the emperor’s palace in chains as a man in captivity] Refers to Phil 1:13; see the previous note. sorrowful longing . . . to be with Xt] Allusion to Phil 1:23. He longs for the congregation he had founded] Allusion to Phil 1:3–11, esp. v. 8. ― the congregation he had founded: See Acts 16:9–40 and 1 Thess 2:1–2. the many he had led from the ways of perdition] Presumably, an allusion to Phil 3:18–19. he longs for the congregation he loved] Allusion to Phil 4:1. The Lord and Master who had called him . . . from the way of offense] Allusion to the account of Paul’s conversion in Acts 9:1–19. ― Master: A term often used of Jesus in the NT. ― of offense: Variant: changed from “of perdition”. our own breast] Variant: “own” has been added. as Moses . . . a promised land he could never set foot upon] Refers to Deut 34:1–4. ― a promised land: Variant: changed from “the promised land”. ― never: Variant: changed from “not”. hymns of praise] Variant: added. up yonder] Variant: added. his apostolic call] According to Rom 1:1, Paul saw himself as “a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God.” to him a foolishness] Allusion to 1 Cor 1:23. he had not lived in vain] Allusion to Phil 2:16. he had not been beating the air] Allusion to 1 Cor 9:26. this, he says, I know . . . for the sake of your progress and joy in the faith] Allusion to Phil 1:25. ― he says: Variant: added.

22

27 32

33 35 36

2 4

8 13 23

23 25 25 31

249

610 37 39 43

250

2

6 7

9 12

15

18 18

25

251

8 13 16 24 25 30

252

5 7

13

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

Forgetting what lies behind . . . he hastens toward the goal] A free rendering of Phil 3:14. went about as enemies of the cross of Xt] Allusion to Phil 3:18–19. He who declares himself as being in debt to both Greek and barbarian] A free rendering of Rom 1:14. make Xt known again among the Gentiles . . . and praise him, all nations] A free rendering of Rom 15:9–11. He turns himself again into a servant to all] Allusion to 1 Cor 9:19. not to seek praise . . . a necessity lies incumbent upon him] Allusion to 1 Cor 9:16, where Paul writes: “If I proclaim the gospel, this gives me no ground for boasting, or an obligation is laid on me.” ― not to seek: Variant: following these words, “unceasing” has been deleted. he has become all things to all people . . . able to save some] Allusion to 1 Cor 9:22. if we hope in Xt only for this life . . . the most pitiable of all hum. beings] A free rendering of 1 Cor 15:19. ― hope: Variant: first written “only”. for if to live in the flesh, he says, . . . I do not know what I should choose] A free rendering of Phil 1:22. ― , he says,: Variant: added. what it is] Variant: added. make the most of the time] Traditionally rendered “redeeming the time,” an allusion to Eph 5:16; see also Col 4:5. things that are above] An allusion to Col 3:1–2. despaired] Variant: changed from “doubted”. it had nothing] Variant: first written, instead of “nothing”, “no object”. struggled as if] Variant: first written, instead of “as if”, “if possible”. Vacillating] Variant: changed from “Fruitless”. their lives] Variant: changed from “they”. their thoughts] Variant: changed from “they”. that dying is a gain] Allusion to Phil 1:21. to be with Xt is far better, did not] Variant: changed from “to depart from here and be with Xt”. extent like] Variant: first written: “extent confused and perplexed, torn apart by opposing thoughts, but nonetheless they are as unlike the apostle as possible”.

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

hard-pressed betw. strong and powerful thoughts] Allusion to Phil 1:23. the apostle . . . the words . . . more necessary for your sake] Cited from Phil 1:23–24. grasp the worldly wise in their foolishness] Cited from 1 Cor 3:19. his power] Variant: “power” has been changed from “authority”. judge the conflicting thoughts] Variant: first written, instead of “judge”, “punish our wayward”. descriptions] Variant: changed from “expressions”. in the fullness of time] Refers to Gal 4:4. resounded for the second time over the earth] Refers to Gen 1: “God said ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.” the Prince of Life] Peter’s designation of Christ according to Acts 3:15. (The NRSV has “Author of life.”) who himself is life] Allusion to Jn 14:6; see also Jn 5:26, 11:25. he brought the believers from death to life] Allusion to John 5:24. from darkness to light] Allusion to Acts 26:18. illuminated] Variant: first written “touched”. is experienced] Variant: first written “is repeated”. were glad with the glad, when you wept with the weeping] Allusion to Rom 12:15. incapable of all good] Allusion to 2 Cor 13:7. heaven was closed] An expression of God’s wrath; see Lk 4:25 and Rev 11:6. the immeasurable] Variant: changed from “the infinite”. you? And yet, . . . was there not] Variant: changed from: “you; and yet despite all this there was”. humble yourself under God’s mighty hand] Allusion to 1 Pet 5:6. powerful in withstanding all the wiles of the tempter] Refers to Eph 6:11. the last enemy were vanquished] Refers to 1 Cor 15:26. walk through the valley of the shadow of death] Alludes to Ps 23:4. as if heaven were open] Presumably, an allusion to John 1:51. the jewel, for the victor’s crown . . . set aside for all who keep the faith―] An allusion to Phil 3:14 and 2 Tim 4:7–8. ― the jewel, for the victor’s

15 17 28 29 31 4

253

10 10

12

12 13 14 16 21 24 34 6 19 21 23 33 38 40 41 42

254

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

43

255

1 6 7 13 14 15 16 22 26 27 30 33 36 43

256

2 15

18

crown: Variant: changed from “the victor’s crown”; first written “the jewel”. Written in the margin and deleted (presumably by Barfod) “the jewel, for”. ― the faith―: Variant: first written “the faith.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. did you not then burst out in jubilation] Variant: changed from “Would you not then burst out with joy jubilation:”. I who was dead, I am alive] Allusion to Lk 15:11–32. no one knowing . . . whither it is going] Refers to John 3:8. you would not let your soul again become] Variant: changed from “your soul again became”. live and move and have your being in him] Allusion to Acts 17:28. near you] Presumably an allusion to Rom 10:8; see also Deut 30:14. he loved the world in Christ] Allusion to John 3:16. the yawning abyss] Allusion to Jesus’ parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Lk 16:19–31. our Lord, Jes. Xt, who is the truth . . . and the life] A free rendering of Jn 14:6. the repentant soul] Variant: preceding “repentant”, the word “Xn” has been deleted. the penitent thief was with Xt in paradise] Refers to the account in Lk 23:39–43. disappear so that their place recognized them no more] Allusion to Job 7:10. spirit’s pledge] Allusion to 2 Cor 1:22. heaven’s riches] Variant: first written, instead of “heaven’s,” “his”. a love of neighbor] Allusion to Gal 5:14. hiding the multitude of sins] Allusion to Jas 5:20 and 1 Pet 4:8. had thrown . . . and proud Saul to the ground in order to raise up the humble Paul] Allusion to Saul’s conversion; in Acts of the Apostles, Paul is called Saul until 13:9. ― and proud: Variant: added. He proclaimed the Word by day; he worked by night] This is not explicit in the NT, though Kierkegaard could have it from a textbook, S. B. Hersleb, Lærebog i Bibelhistorien. Udarbeidet især med Hensyn paa de høiere Religionsklasser i de lærde

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

611

Skoler [Textbook in Biblical History: Prepared for Use in Advanced Religion Courses at Institutes of Higher Education], 3rd ed. (Copenhagen, 1826 [1812]; ASKB 186–187), pp. 281–282, where Paul is said to have preached during the day and worked as a tentmaker at night in order to provide the necessities of life. ― proclaimed: Variant: first written “worked”. He witnessed to the humble and the despised among the people] See, e.g., 1 Cor 1:26–29. he witnessed to princes and kings] See Mt 10:16– 19, but the reference could also be to Acts 9:15–16. in the synagogues of the Jews] See, e.g., Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14–47; 14:1; 16:13; 17:1–4; 18:4–19; 19:8. in the assemblies of the pagans] See, e.g., Acts 14:14–18; 17:18, 22–33; 18:11; 19:9–10; Gal 2:2; Eph 3:8. he witnessed at sea] See, e.g., Acts 27. God’s chosen instruments] Allusion to Acts 9:15. no man can add one inch to his height] Allusion to Mt 6:27 (in Kierkegaard’s NT; see also King James version; not in NRSV). this is enough] Variant: “this is” has been changed from” “will be”. called with a godly calling] Allusion to 2 Tim 1:9. the spirit is the same even if the gifts of grace differ] Free rendering of 1 Cor 12:4. you too are God’s co-worker] See 1 Cor 3:9 and 2 Cor 6:1. godly grief] See 2 Cor 7:9–10. See also EE:16, dated February 10, 1839: “The deep, all-pervasive meaning of original sin shows itself in the way in which all Xnty begins in the individual with grief―grieving for God” (KJN 2, 7). a victory over the world] Allusion to 1 Jn 5:4. glides over the abysses] Allusion to Gen 1:2. a hope of God’s glory] Allusion to Rom 5:2. the indestructible essence of a quiet spirit] Allusion to 1 Pet 3:4. a love that loves first] Refers to 1 Jn 4:19. a love that loves enemies] Allusion to Mt 5:43– 44. a compassion that visits widows and orphans] Allusion to Jas 1:27. gives away everything for the sake of Xt] Presumably, an allusion to Mt 19:16–22.

20 23 24 24

25 31 34

35 36 37 38 39

43 5 5 10 13 14 15 16

257

612 19 20 21 26 29 30 31

258

2 3 5 7 9 9 20 41 43

259

7 9 15 34 35 38 39

260

1 3

248m

1

“The Sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary”

does not own gold or silver] Allusion to Acts 3:6. a precious linen cloth] Presumably, a reference to Lk 24:12 and Jn 20:5−7. wipes away tears] Possibly an allusion to Rev 7:17. God’s peace that surpasses all understanding] Allusion to Phil 4:7. the spirit that witnesses in heaven] Presumably, an allusion to 1 Jn 5:7–8. promise for the life that is now] Allusion to 1 Tim 4–8. all bear the spirit in fragile vessels of clay] Allusion to 2 Cor 4:7. a spectacle to the world, to angels and to hum. beings] Cited from 1 Cor 4:9. to this very hour . . . are . . . beaten and homeless] Cited from 1 Cor 4:11. we have become . . . the dregs of all things, to this very hour] Cited from 1 Cor 4:13. I am not writing this to make you ashamed . . . my beloved children] Cited from 1 Cor 4:14. speak to us:] Variant: changed from “speak:”. “I exhort you, then, be imitators of me.”] Cited from1 Cor 4:16. all members of one body] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 12:12; see also 1 Cor 12:20. for our life is hidden in Xt] Presumably, an allusion to Col 3:3. waxes a divine growth] Cited from Col 2:19. the Spirit helps in your weakness . . . unutterable sighs] Allusion to Rom 8:26. he who searches . . . knows what is the mind of the spirit] Cited from Rom 6:27. the image of God in man] Allusion to Gen 1:26–27. grieves the Holy Spirit] Allusion to Eph 4:30. it is not yet revealed how we shall come to be] Cited freely from 1 Jn 3:2. man’s maturity and the adulthood of the fullness of Xt] Cited freely from Eph 4:13. even if the outer pers. . . . the inner being is renewed every day] Free rendering of 2 Cor 4:16. had only in part] Allusion to 1 Cor 13:9 and 13:12. God, who sees in secret, shall then give to us openly] Allusion to Mt 6:18. The sermon Held at the Pastoral Seminary] As part of the teaching in homiletics at the Pastoral

•

P a p e r 270 1841 •

Seminary, Kierkegaard delivered this exercise sermon on January 12, 1841. The sermon was evaluated by two fellow students, T. T. Fenger and I. H. Linnemann. ― Pastoral Seminary: The Royal Pastoral Seminary in Copenhagen, founded by Bishop F. Münter in 1809, was where future priests were taught in pastoral theology, preaching, catechetics, liturgy, canon law, and pastoral care. To apply for a pastoral living, theology graduates had to take part in the seminary’s teaching and exercises for at least one semester and conclude their studies with an examination in catechetics and homiletics, including a qualifying sermon. Kierkegaard attended the seminary during the winter term of 1840–1841 and the summer semester of 1841. glorious revelation] Variant: “glorious” has been added. we say, with the apostle . . . win men, but before God we are revealed] Cited freely from 2 Cor 5:11.

13

251m

1

258m

Notes for Paper 271–Paper 276 “The First Rudiments of Either/Or. The Green Book. Some Particulars That Were Not Used”

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Jon Tafdrup Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

614

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “ ‘The First Rudiments of Either/Or. The Green Book. Particulars That Were Not Used’ ”1 is no. 288 in L-cat. and and at Kierkegaard’s death it lay in an envelope in “the space of the chest of drawers itself.”2 The manuscripts are Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library.3

Some B-cat., upper in the

II. Dating and Chronology The label on the wrapper (which itself is Paper 271) in which Papers 272–276 were collected indicates that the papers were arranged by Kierkegaard at some time after the publication of Either/ Or (1843). Which of the manuscripts Kierkegaard calls “some particulars” and which he calls “the first rudiments” cannot be definitely determined, because none of the texts are found in Either/Or in the form in which they present themselves in the manuscripts, and because all of the texts can to some extent be categorized as “rudiments.” Papers 272–274 do seem, however, to derive from an earlier stage in the work’s development than do Papers 275–276,

) “The Green Book” is not included in the present volume (KJN 11, part one) but is discussed as ms. 17 in the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten ― Eller in SKS K2–3, 29.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], enclosed in L-cat. (see introduction to Loose Papers, pp. xxxi–xxxiv in the present volume).

2

) The following information concerning yet another bit of manuscript of Either/Or is noted on an errata sheet inserted in EP I–II, p. xxii: “. . . that a card dated Decbr. 20, 1839, contains, almost word for word, the following piece from the ‘Diapsalmata’ in Either/Or vol. 1: ‘What a strange, sad mood came over me’ etc.” The ms. referred to is not mentioned in Barfod’s catalogue of Kierkegaard’s posthumous papers, nor is it to be found in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA).

3

Critical Account of the Text and for that reason are counted here as “The first rudiments of Either/Or.”1 The Papers are undated but appear to stem from the time immediately prior to Kierkegaard’s departure for Berlin on October 25, 1841. In several of his letters to his friend Emil Boesen, Kierkegaard discusses a work that he has recently begun writing. On December 14, 1841, he writes: “I am writing for life and death. As of now I have written fourteen printed sheets. I have thereby completed one part of the treatise which, volente deo, I shall show you some day,” and on January 1, 1842, he mentions it by title, writing: “You ask what I am working on . . . it is the further development of Either/Or.”2 The reason for a dating prior to the departure for Berlin is that in one of his draft notebooks from his time in Berlin, Kierkegaard refers to “letter from the seduced,” that is, Paper 276:3, with the words “The note may be found among my papers. I had written it up before my departure.”3

) In the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten ― Eller, Papers 275–276 are judged to be “the first rudiments of Either/Or”; see SKS K2–3, 46.

1

) LD, 116.

2

) See SKS K2–3, 46.

3

615

Explanatory Notes 262

8

262

14

15

17

19

20 20 21

22

would have won] Variant: first written, instead of “won”, “given”. street watchman] A surveillance officer under the police and responsible for order and cleanliness in the street. Exchange] Copenhagen’s stock exchange was built under Christian IV in the period 1620–1640 (see map 2, B3). fish tank] Floating vessel holding seawater for preserving live fish, in particular that used for transporting fish from fishing grounds to the market. A Laplander idyll] See Not8:21, written in Berlin in November 1841, where Kierkegaard writes: “Just now here is an organ grinder down in the street playing and singing―it is strange that it is the accidental and insignificant things in life that acquire meaning. I think of the ship boys, of the Laplanders who played in the moonlight on board ship―A Laplander: who would ordinarily pay attention to him[?] (KJN 3, pp. 226–227). ― Laplander: An inhabitant of Finland, a term applied almost exclusively to Finnish skippers, seamen, or (esp.) ships that carried Finnish goods (primarily lumber) to Copenhagen. Kultorvet] “The Coal Market,” a market square in Copenhagen (see map 2, C1). gl. Torv] “Old Market,” a market square in Copenhagen (see map 2, B1). Halmtorvet] “Straw Market,” a market square in Copenhagen, which in Kierkegaard’s time lay where the Town Hall Square now lies (see map 2, A1–2). gutter plank’s] A board covering a street gutter, esp. outside doors and gateways. There were no underground sewers in Kierkegaard’s time; instead, there was a system of gutters and ditches to lead waste water and other waste out into the harbor. There were regulations concerning where these were to be covered over, and only

on Østergade, a fine commercial street, was there complete covering. Overflow] In bad weather with heavy rainfall, the gutters could turn into evil-smelling streams that could take the gutter planks with them. stalks of English grass] Presumably of Armeria vulgaris, a popular flowering plant known as “thrift” or “sea pink,” common in British marshes, where a subspecies (tall thrift) is known for its long stems. So reit’ ich hi in alle Ferne . . . nur die Sterne] Cited freely from J. W. Goethe’s poem, “Freisinn” [Free Spirit], which is included in his collection West-östlicher Diwan [West-East Divan], published in 1819; the full stanza from the poem cited from reads, “Laßt mich nur auf meinem Sattel gelten! / Bleibt in euren Hütten, euren Zelten! / Und ich reite froh in alle Ferne, / Über meiner Mütze nur die Sterne.” (“Let me get my saddle, don’t need rest! / Stay in hut and tent, for you they’re best! / I’ll be riding footloose, free and far / And above my cap, many a star.”) English translation from Martin Bidney, trans. and ed., East-West Poetry: A Western Poet Responds to Islamic Tradition in Sonnets (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010) p. 109. Goethe’s West-östlicher Divan was included in Kierkegaard’s edition of Goethe’s Werke. Vollständige Ausgabe letzter Hand [Goethe’s Works: Complete Edition with the Author’s Final Changes], 60 vols. (Stuttgart, 1828–1842; vols. 1–55 [1828–1833] [NB: Both ASKB and the Danish Royal Library have 1828, not 1827] constitute ASKB 1641–1668); see vol. 5 (1827), p. 7. Everything is calm] Variant: changed from “the night is calm”. Nørreport] One of the four gates in the ramparts that protected Copenhagen. Nørreport, which Christian IV had newly constructed in 1671, lay directly facing Frederiksborggade (see map 2, C1).

23

2

263

7

263

15 15

The First Rudiments of Either/Or

265

19

my call] Variant: deleted, following this: “(the time is 11:45. it is still day)”.

4

and what, after all, . . . secret.] Variant: added. sensuality,] Variant: first written “sensuality.”, with the period apparently indicating the end of the sentence. In the end he himself became infatuated like Narcissus] Variant: added along the edge of the page. Refers to the Greek myth of Narcissus, a beautiful and idolized youth who, after a hunt, lay down by a pool to quench his thirst. On catching sight of his own mirror image, he fell in love with it and, captivated in self-infatuation, remained there until he died; see, e.g., Ovid, Metamorphoses, bk. 3, vv. 402–510, in P. Ovidii Nasonis opera, ed. A. Richter, 6 vols. (Leipzig, 182; ASKB 1265), vol. 2, pp. 65ff. woe unto the] Variant: following this, “happy one” has been deleted. sensual] Variant: first written “spiritual”. embraced the cloud] Refers to the Greek myth of Ixion, king of the Thessalian Lapiths, and who was invited to the gods’ table but became so excited that he was about to seize hold of Hera (Latin, “Juno”), the goddess queen, and violate her sexually. Her husband Zeus (Latin, “Jupiter”) prevented this by creating a cloud in the shape of Hera, so that Ixion instead embraced the cloud, which gave birth to Centaurus, who in turn engendered the race of Centaurs. Zeus punished Ixion by having him bound to an eternally turning wheel. See Paul F. A. Nitsch neues mythologisches Wörterbuch [Paul F. A. Nitsch’s New Dictionary of Mythology], ed. F. G. Klopfer, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1821 [1793]; ASKB 1944–1945), vol. 2, pp. 122ff.

16

19

22 27 29

•

P a p e r 275–276 1841 •

617

Notes for Paper 277–Paper 282 On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Rasmus Sevelstad Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

620

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.”1 consists of material that is nos. 407, 412, 413, and 463 in B-cat., and presumably belongs to that part of Kierkegaard’s papers that at his death lay together with other material in “a large sack.”2 The manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library.

II. Dating and Chronology The papers in this group are undated but with the help of Kierkegaard’s other writings can be placed from the end of 1842 to mid-1843. Paper 277, a table of categories, bears several similarities to a number of entries under the heading “Problemata” in Notebook 13. For example, there are thoughts about the concept of category, such as “What is a category? . . . is being a category? By no means[.] [W]hat is quality[?] [I]t is determinate being, determinate in itself; the accent lies on determinate, not on being” in Not13:41 (KJN 3, 404). Another example is “the world’s development,” which Kierkegaard also investigates (in Not13:49 [KJN 3, 412]): “If understanding, feeling, and will are essential determinants of a hum. being, [if they] belong essentially to hum. nature, then all this chatter about the world’s development now occupying a higher plane than before disappears.” In addition to this, in the portion of the notebook that is labeled “Philosophica” (Not13:1– 36), marginal entry Not13:8.a (KJN 3, 384m:1–19), Kierkegaard writes of dialectical and pathos-laden transitions, another theme that reappears in Paper 277.

) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) Mentioned in Kierkegaard’s nephew Henrik Lund’s “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], enclosed in L-fort. (See introduction to Loose Papers, pp. xxxi–xxxiv in the present volume).

2

Critical Account of the Text According to the label marked “Philosophica,” Kierkegaard began using Notebook 13 on December 2, 1842. It is uncertain when he began writing the “Problemata,” which were written from the back of the book, but the major part of those entries can be dated with reasonable certainty to March–April 1843.1 This suggests a tentative dating of Paper 277 to the beginning of 1843, more specifically, February–April. As with Paper 277, Paper 278 and Paper 279 can be dated with the help of Notebook 13 and Journal JJ. The two papers contain the idea for a series of lectures on the Greek Sophists, centering on the concept of ϰίνησις (“movement”). Reflections on ϰίνησις are also to be found in “Philosophica” in Notebook 13, which similarly bears the mark of Kierkegaard’s reading of Tennemann’s Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826). In Not13:27 (KJN 3, 392–393), where there are reflections on the section on Aristotle in Tennemann, Kierkegaard writes, among other things, about Tennemann’s translation of the concept of “change” and about the three “kinds of ϰίνησις.” Movement is also the theme of JJ:65 (KJN 2, 148), where, as in Paper 278, Kierkegaard draws a line from Greek to modern philosophy. Entry JJ:65 is in a part of Journal JJ that, like Notebook 13, bears the mark of Kierkegaard’s reading of Tennemann, and may therefore also be presumed to be more or less contemporary with the entries in Notebook 13. Inasmuch as JJ:65, which resembles Paper 278 in terms of content, can be dated to March–April 1843,2 Papers 278 and 279 may also be presumed to be from that same time. The remaining entries in the group cannot be more closely dated but presumably are also from March–April 1843.

) See the “Critical Account of the Text of Notebook 13” in KJN 3, 731– 732.

1

) See the “Critical Account of the Text of Journal JJ” in KJN 2, 456.

2

621

Explanatory Notes 268

1

Can the transition . . . to a qualitative determination occur except with a leap?] In his discussion of the transition from quantity to quality, G.W.F. Hegel uses the concept Sprung (German, “spring” or “leap”); a thing can only increase quantitatively up to a certain point at which there occurs a “leap” or a change in quality; e.g., at a certain point, the gradual, quantitative increase or decrease in the temperature of water results in qualitative transformation either to steam or ice. See bk. 1, “Die Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being], in G.W.F. Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], 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 (1833), p. 448 (Jub. vol. 4, p. 458): “From the qualitative side, therefore, the gradual, merely quantitative progression which has no limits in itself, is absolutely interrupted; and since in its merely quantitative connection the newly emerging quality is with respect to the vanishing one an indeterminate other, one which is indifferent to it, the transition is a leap; the two are posited as wholly external to each other . . . As it [water] alters in temperature, it does not become just more or less warm, but passes through the states of solid, liquid, and vapor; and these different states do not occur gradually, but, on the contrary, even the otherwise merely gradual increase in temperature is interrupted and inhibited at these points: the irruption of another state is a leap.” English translation from Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, The Science of Logic, trans. and ed. George di Giovanni (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 320–322. The notion of “leaps” and “nodes” and the example of water transforming to ice or steam is also to be found in A. P. Adler’s Populaire Foredrag over Hegel’s objec-

tive Logik [Popular Lectures on Hegel’s Objective Logic] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 383); see pp. 97– 98: “While the temperature of water is to a certain extent a matter of indifference with respect to the water’s quality as a substance that flows in drops, when a reduction or increase in temperature occurs, there is a sudden qualitative change, in that it becomes either ice or steam. And this change is not a sudden transition, but this turnaround to another quality occurs as if with a leap. The same thing occurs in chemical and musical contexts; see Hegel’s Works, vol. 3, p. 448 . . . This creation, by quantity, of a new, real quality, these sudden, qualitative caprices and leaps, untie the knots that interrupt the straight path of existence, the unexpected caprices that we call chance events, the sudden transitions that we call mysteries; they show us why ‘crooked branches grow on straight trees,’ why we say ‘heute roth, morgen todt’ [German, “today in the pink of condition, tomorrow dead”], why good turns into evil, love into aversion, life into the beginning of death; they show us that existence is not exhausted with qualitative relationships and calculations by setting aside quantity, but that it reveals an aspect from which everything much more reveals itself as an unexpected leap and reversal from a quantitative to a qualitative transformation.” What is a category?] See Not13:41, from 1842– 1843: “What is a category?” in KJN 3, 404 with its accompanying explanatory note. primitivity] Kierkegaard often uses forms of the Danish noun Primitivitet, meaning “primitivity” or the “primal state” or condition of someone or something. Similarly, he employs related forms, e.g., primitiv (adjectival) and primitivt (adverbial). Here, and elsewhere in KJN, these words have been rendered in English as “primitivity,” “the primal state,” “primitive,” “primal,” etc., signifying something or someone original, primal, immediate.

2

4

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al. 5

7

13

13

18

Is the category to be derived from thought or from being?] See Not13:41, from 1842–1843: “What is a category?” in KJN 3, 404 with its accompanying explanatory note. every specification for which being is an essential specification lies . . . accordingly outside logic See Not13:50, from 1843, in KJN 3, 413, where Kierkegaard writes: “Being does not belong to logic at all. It ought to begin with dichotomy.” to what extent the will] See Not13:35, from 1842– 1843, in KJN 3, 413: “Doubt is in no way halted by the necessity of knowledge (that there is something one must acknowledge) but by the categorical imperative of the will, that there is something one cannot will. This is the concretion of the will in itself, by which it shows itself to be more than a rarefied phantom.” the now so much employed world-historical development] Presumably, a reference to G.W.F. Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Geschichte [Lectures on the Philosophy of History], in Hegel’s Werke (→ 268,1), vol. 9 (Jub. vol. 11). knowledge, emotion, and will] A triad first presented by Immanuel Kant in his aesthetics. See the following passage in chap. 3 in the “Einleitung” [Introduction] to Critik der Urteilskraft [Critique of Judgment], 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1793 [1790]; ASKB 594), pp. xxii–xxiv: “For all faculties of the soul, or capacities, are reducible to three, which do not admit of any further derivation from a common ground: the faculty of knowledge, the feeling of pleasure or displeasure, and the faculty of desire. For the faculty of cognition understanding alone is legislative . . . For the faculty of desire, as a higher faculty operating under the concept of freedom, on reason . . . prescribes laws a priori.” English translation from Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Judgement, trans. James Creed Meredith (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1953), pp. 13– 14. This triad is also to be found in §23 of F. C. Sibbern’s work of psychology, Menneskets aandelige Natur og Væsen, Et Udkast til en Psychologie [The Spiritual-Intellectual Nature and Essence of the Human Being], pt. 1 (Copenhagen, 1819), pp. 117–129, where he writes of the three “fundamental expressions of the life of the spirit,” namely,

•

P a p e r 277 1842–1843 •

623

knowledge, feeling, and will. In his Bemærkninger og Undersøgelser, fornemmelig betreffende Hegels Philosophie, betragtet I Forhold til vor Tid [Remarks and Investigations, Primarily concerning Hegel’s Philosophy, Viewed in Relation to Our Times] (Copenhagen, 1838; ASKB 778), p. 96, Sibbern remarks “that in Hegel we do not encounter the familiar triad: knowledge, feeling, and will, that anyone who looks properly into the human soul must recognize is basic to the human being’s spiritual existence.” A pathos-laden transition―a dialectical transition] See Not13:8, from 1842–1843, where in a marginal note Kierkegaard says of Descartes, “Having eliminated everything in order to discover himself as a thinking being in such a way that this thinking is precisely myself, he then discovers that he thinks God with the same necessity” (KJN 3, 384). In a marginal note to this entry (Not13:8.a), Kierkegaard remarks, “This transition is apparently a pathos-laden transition, not [a] dialectical [one]; for dialectically speaking, nothing can emerge from it. This is important to me. Anyone can understand a pathos-laden transition if he wants to, because courage is all that belongs to the infinitude that lies in pathos” (KJN 3, 384m). See also marginal note Not13:8.c, where Kierkegaard writes that the “pathos-laden transition” is also found in Spinoza. See also the explanatory notes accompanying these entries. The ideas of Beauty, Good, Truth] Presumably, a reference to the three aspects of speculative logic in J. L. Heiberg, Grundtræk til Philosophiens Philosophie eller den spekulative Logik, Some Ledetraad ved Forelæsninger paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole (Copenhagen, 1832), §189 on “The Beautiful,” §190 on “The Good,” and §191 on “The True,” pp. 122–124, where the three ideas are viewed as a logical syllogism in which the beautiful and the good are understood as the premises, and the true is understood as the conclusion; see §192, note 1: “The true is not only the abstract unity of the beautiful and the good or that in which the beautiful and the good come into agreement; it is also their result or the concrete unity in which they are dissolved” (p. 124). English translation from Outline of the Philosophy of Philosophy, or

26

26

624

269

1 4 4

269

7

14

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

Speculative Logic, as a Guide to Lectures at the Royal Military College, in Heiberg’s “Speculative Logic” and Other Texts, trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2006), p. 210. incommensurable with the concept] Variant: first written, instead of “the concept”, “the idea”. faith, hope, and love] Presumably, a reference to 1 Cor 13:13. the great thing . . . one’s life in what is essential for all . . . a difference of degree] See the following passage in Not14:49, from 1843, in KJN 3, 412: “the great individual is not thereby different from the insignificant one because he has something essentially different or because he has something in a different form (for according to contemporary form theory this would indeed also be an essential difference) but that he has everything to a greater degree.” the Greek Sophists] Common designation for a group of teachers who in the 5th century b.c. offered instruction on a professional basis in philosophy, rhetoric, statesmanship, etc.; known not least as Socrates’ opponents in Plato’s dialogues, where they are criticized among other things for (as distinct from Socrates) taking money for their teaching. Among the most prominent figures were Protagoras from Abdera, Gorgias from Leontini, Prodicus from Ceos, and Thrasymachus, Critias, and Hippias from Elis. See the tenth section of “Geschichte der Sophisten” [History of the Sophists], in W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826), vol. 1, pp. 344–402, where all the writings mentioned in Paper 279 are listed and used as sources. motion . . . one of the most difficult problems in all philosophy] See Not13:27, from 1842–1843, where Kierkegaard says that motion “is difficult to determine; for it belongs neither to possibility nor to actuality; [it] is more than possibility and less than actuality; cf. p. 128” (KJN 3, 393). He refers to W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 3 (1801), p. 128, where Tennemann writes that, in motion, “change” is something “incomplete,” something “uncertain and difficult to clarify. Because in a real sense it

•

P a p e r 277–278 1842–1843 •

can be reckoned neither as possibility nor as actuality, and it is more the possible and less the actual.” See also the following passage in Paul Martin Møller, “Udkast til Forelæsninger over den ældre Philosophies Historie” [Draft of Lectures on the History of Ancient Philosophy], where, in discussing efficient cause, which Aristotle introduces in bk. 2, chap. 3 of his Physics (194b 29–39), Møller writes: “All beings consist of material and form, but how are these two elements united; how does the design or plan of it become actual? Aristotle calls this transition from possibility to actuality movement (ϰίνησις), and believes that by so doing he has gotten rid of the difficulties that arise in defining this concept: movement is both actual and not actual, it is the transition from possibility to actuality.” Efterladte Skrifter af Poul M. Møller [Posthumous Writings of Poul M. Møller], ed. F. C. Olsen, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1839–1843; ASKB 1574–1576), vol. 2 (1842), p. 481. Arguments against motion or change have their source in Aristotle’s account and discussion of the paradoxes of motion attributed to Zeno of Elea (ca. 490 b.c.), whom Aristotle regarded as the inventor of “dialectic.” See Aristotle, Physics, bk. 4, chap. 2, and bk. 6. ― ϰινησις: See, e.g., Not13:50, from 1843: “Hegel has never justified the category of transition. It could be important to compare it with the Aristotelian doctrine of ϰίνησις” (KJN 3, 413). See also Not13:50a: “cf. Tennemann 3rd vol. p. 125; he translates the word κινησις as transformation” (KJN 3, 413m). The reference to Tennemann, p. 125, is to a passage on Aristotle, and reads as follows: “The word ϰινησις was indeed used by Plato in a broader and in a narrower sense. Aristotle used it in the broad sense. He could also be fully justified in designating all transformations with the word movement.” See also Not13:27, from 1842–1843, where Kierkegaard, excerpting Aristotle, notes: “The transition from possibility to actuality is a transformation; that is how T[ennemann] translates κινησις; if this is right, then this proposition is of the uttermost importance (cf. p. 127[)]” (KJN 3, 393). See also Not13:27b: “All this deserves attention with re. to the movements in logic” (KJN 3, 393m). In referring to “p. 127,” Kierkegaard has

14

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

15

16

in mind Tennemann, pp. 126–127: “Transformation takes place only with actual objects. Everything that is, is either possible or actual, and as substance, the actual is thinkable as being of a specific quantity and quality, and so forth with respect to the other categories . . . Now, the transition from possibility to actuality is transformation (ϰινησις). One would express oneself more specifically if one said: transformation, movement, is the actualization of the possible to the extent that it is possible.” In modern philosophy . . . another expression . . . transition] Hegel, especially in his Science of Logic, shows how in the dialectic of reason the central categories of logic go over into their opposite, so that the truth is found in a higher unity or synthesis that preserves their (apparent) difference in their identity; see bk. 1, “Di Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being], in Wissenschaft der Logik (→ 268,1), in Hegel’s Werke (→ 268,1), vol. 3, (1833), pp. 105–106 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 115–116). Rasmus Nielsen deviates from Hegel’s logic; in his Den speculative Logik i dens Grundtræk [Fundamental Characteristics of Speculative Logic], nos. 1–4 (Copenhagen, 1841–1844), he introduces a special section, which he calls “Transition,” between all the main categories, e.g., between the two sections on “Quality” and “Quantity” and between the two sections on “Quantity” and “Modality.” In his study Philosophiske Betragtninger over den speculative Logiks Betydning for Videnskaben [Philosophical Observations on the Significance of Speculative Logic for Science] (Copenhagen, 1842), P. M. Stilling reviews the first portions of Nielsen’s logic and argues that “the result of the transitional category” should be the third element of the dialectical process instead of the “category of transition” itself (pp. 69–70). mediation] The term itself does not occur in Hegel but is used by Hegelians as a translation (also in English) of Hegel’s Vermittlung, literally “negotiation,” here the reconciliation in a higher unity of apparently contradictory notions. See, e.g., § 9 in Danish theologian and Hegelian A. P. Adler, Populaire Foredrag over Hegels objective Logik (→ 268,1): “The dialectical movement characteristic of the Hegelian system does not consist merely in negation. In Hegel, dialectic expresses both the

•

P a p e r 278–279 1842–1843 •

625

objective necessity with which immediacy passes over into its opposite, and that by which both immediacy and thought pass over into a common, higher unity; thus it comprises both negation and mediation. We have said that negation is the transition of immediacy into its opposite; mediation is the reconciliation of opposites in a higher unity” (p. 19). See also p. 20: “mediation only . . . wants to involve itself with those moments between which there is actual conflict; there is no difficulty in making progress with apparent negations, mere differences (any more than there is in arranging triads) . . . The negation is thus the first part of the process of the dialectic, the mediation is the second part. Dialectic is the common name for the entire movement of the particular case in question, whereby what is one-sided goes over into the opposite (is negated), and both go together into a higher unity (are mediated).” See also J. L. Heiberg, “Det logiske System [The Logical System],” in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus, Journal for the Speculative Idea], ed. J. L. Heiberg (Copenhagen, 1837–1838; ASKB 569), no. 1, June 1837, and no. 2, August 1838, pp. 18, 21, and esp. 30. See also “The Debate Surrounding Hegel’s Criticism of the Laws of Classical Logic in Golden Age Denmark,” the introduction to Mynster’s “Rationalism, Supernaturalism,” and the Debate about Mediation, ed. and trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2009), pp. 3–45. And see, lastly, Rasmus Nielsen, De speculativa historiae sacrae tractandae methodo commentatio [A Treatise on the Speculative Method of Treating Sacred History] (Copenhagen, 1840; ASKB 697), pp. 4–5; Nielsen’s Latin work was translated into Danish as Den speculative Methodes Anvendelse paa den hellige Historie [The Application of the Speculative Method to the Sacred History] (Copenhagen, 1842), see p. 5. Plato’s Theætetus . . . Protagoras] Plato (427–347 b.c.), Greek philosopher, student of Socrates, who is the main speaker in his dialogues; founded the Academy in Athens in 387 b.c.; numbered Aristotle among his students. Theaetetus, Euthydemus, Sophist, Gorgias, and Protagoras are all among Plato’s dialogues and are cited as sources

17

269

626

18

18

19

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

by Tennemann in his Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 269,7), vol. 1; see the notes on pp. 353–402. Aristotle’s work on Gorgias] Refers to De Gorgia [On Gorgias], cited as a source by W. G. Tennemann in his Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 269,7); see the notes on pp. 365–373. The attribution to Aristotle has later been disputed. ― Aristotle: Aristotle of Stagira (384–322 b.c.), Greek philosopher, logician, and natural scientist; wrote pioneering works in philosophy and science; studied at the Academy as a student of Plato but distanced himself from Plato (→ 269,17) and in 335 b.c. founded the Peripatetic school at the Lyceum in Athens, allegedly so-called because he lectured under the covered walk (peripatos); in 324 b.c. Aristotle had to leave Athens to avoid becoming subject to accusations similar to those that had been directed at Socrates. περι των σοϕιστιϰων ελεγχων] Sophistical Refutations by Aristotle (→ 269,18); see W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 269,7), vol. 1, pp. 355 n. 6b, 359 n. 8, and 360 n. 9, where the work is cited as a source under the Latin title De sophisticis elenchis. Sextus Empiricus] Alludes to Sextus Empiricus’s Adversus mathematicos [Against the Mathematicians]; see W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 269,7), vol. 1, pp. 362–395 nn. 12, 14, 16–21, 29, 34, 37, 46, 49, 50, 52, where this work is cited as a source. Also alludes to Sextus Empiricus’s Pyrrhoneioi hypotyposeis [Outlines of Pyrrhonism]; see W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 1, pp. 383–386 nn. 37–40, where this work is cited as a source. ― Sextus Empiricus: Greek physician and philosopher (a.d. ca. 160–ca. 210), known from two works, Pyrrhoneioi hypotyposeis, in three books, and Adversus mathematicos, in eleven books, of which this title is often used to cover bks. 1–6, while bks. 7–11 are titled Adversus dogmaticos [Against the Dogmatists]; in addition, however, bks. 7–8 are sometimes also given the title Adversus logicos [Against the Logicians]. In Pyrrhoneioi hypotyposeis, Sextus Empiricus provides an exposition of the fundamental points of view of earlier Greek Skepticism, whereas in Adversus mathematicos he develops his own skep-

•

P a p e r 279–280 1842–1843 •

tical philosophy in opposition to “dogmatic” philosophy and theory of knowledge. from Athenæus] Alludes to Athenaeus’s Deipnosophistai [The Learned Dinner Guests], cited as a source in W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 269,7), vol. 1, pp. 351–352 n. 1. ― Athenæus: Athenaeus of Naucratis, a 3rd-century a.d. Greek rhetorician and grammarian. Interested Cognition] See the following passage in the unpublished “Johannes Climacus or De omnibus dubitandum est” [Johannes Climacus or, On Everything Having to Be Doubted]: “Reflection is the possibility of the relation. This can also be expressed as follows: Reflection is disinterested. Consciousness, on the other hand, is the relation and is thus interest, a duality that is expressed fully and with pregnant ambiguity in the word ‘interesse’ (interest). Therefore, all knowledge that is disinterested (mathematics, aesthetics, metaphysics) is only the precondition of doubt. As soon as interest is abolished, doubt is not overcome but neutralized, and every knowledge of this sort is merely a retrogression. Therefore, to the extent that someone thought of conquering doubt by means of so-called objective thinking, it is a misunderstanding; for doubt is a higher form than all objective thinking since it presupposes this [objective thinking], but has something more, a third, that is interest or consciousness . . . for doubt lies in interest, and all systematic knowing is disinterested. From this one sees that doubt is the beginning of the highest form of existence, because it can have everything else as its presupposition . . . let ideality and reality combat one another for all eternity, as long as there is no consciousness, no interest, there is no consciousness that has an interest in this combat, as long as there is no doubt; let them reconcile, and the doubt can continue just as fully” (Pap. IV B 1, pp. 148–149). What cognition is disinterested . . . e.g., beauty] Presumably refers to Immanuel Kant’s concept of “disinterested pleasure,” which is the feeling awakened in the observer by beauty, without the observer desiring the object and which is charac-

19

21

24

269

On Transition, Category, Interest, et al.

270

4 6

270

7 9

270

17

terized by beauty being experienced as something fitting without serving any practical purpose, thereby creating harmony between the observer’s imagination (“Einbildungskraft”) and understanding. See, e.g., Critik der Urteilskraft [Critique of Judgment], 2nd ed. (Berlin, 1793 [1790]; ASKB 594), pp. 5–7; see, e.g., the title of § 2: “The Satisfaction That Determines the Judgement of Taste Is Disinterested.” of doubt] → 269,21. Is knowledge higher than faith?] Presumably, a reference to G.W.F. Hegel’s hierarchy of knowledge in which religion represents in graphic and therefore contingent forms the abstract truths in which philosophy represents them abstractly and thus as the highest form of knowledge. The conceptual knowledge of philosophy is purged of all accidental, empirical elements, and precisely for this reason it represents the highest form of knowledge. Inter-esse] → 269,21. the various sciences . . . accentuate Being . . . Ontology . . . Existential science] In vol. 1 of The Science of Logic, Hegel deplores the disappearance of metaphysics from “the ranks of the sciences,” decrying the fragmentation that arises when “the spirit engaged with its pure essence no longer has any real presence in its life,” and denouncing the renunciation of “speculative thought” in which science is properly considered in relation to Being. See G.W.F. Hegel, The Science of Logic, trans. and ed. George di Giovanni (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2010), pp. 7–8. ― Ontology: Derived from the Greek for “being” and used for the branch of metaphysics that concerns what exists. Das Wesen als Grund der Existents . . . C. Die Wirklichkeit] List of contents quoted, with some divergences in punctuation and spelling, from, “Zweite Abteilung der Logik. Die Lehre vom Wesen” [Part Two: The Logic; The Doctrine of Essence], §114, in G.W.F. Hegel, Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], ed. L. von Henning, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1840–1845 [1817]; ASKB 561–563); vol. 1 Die Logik

•

P a p e r 280–282 1842–1843 •

627

[The Logic]; vol. 6, p. [416] (Jub. vol. 8, p. vii) in Hegel’s Werke. The translations of all these terms are taken from G.W.F. Hegel, The Logic of Hegel, Translated from the “Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences,” trans. William Wallace (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1874), pp. 212–257.

Notes for Paper 283 On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Steen Tullberg Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Steen Tullberg Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

630

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.”1 is no. 417 in B-cat. and presumably belongs to that part of Kierkegaard’s papers that at his death lay together with other material in “a large sack.”2 The manuscript is in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library.

II. Dating and Chronology The opening question, “How does a new quality arise from a continuous quantitative determinant?” appears to link the contents of this group to The Concept of Anxiety, most of the draft of which was written in the period December 1843–January 1844.3 This connection is also to be seen in the notelike passage in Paper 283:1, “Adler says: if the quantitative determination becomes indifferent, then there enters a new quality.―when?,” which in the draft of The Concept of Anxiety becomes: “He says (p. 48) ‘Quantity appears as determinative when quality is indifferent.’ One could be tempted to reply with even greater emphasis than the Lacedaemonians: when?―.”4 Paper 283 has in its entirety the character of a storage depot for a topic and is probably the result of several writing sessions, although the time it was begun is unclear. On the verso side of the first page there is a reference to “Rosenkrantz’s latest work on Schelling . . . All noted in my copy,” which means that at least ) The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

1

) See Henrik Lund, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], enclosed in L-cat. (see “Introduction to Loose Papers, pp. xxxi–xxxiv in the present volume).

2

) See the “Critical Account of the Text” of Begrebet Angest [The Concept of Anxiety] in SKS K4, pp. 317–322.

3

) See Pap. V B 49,5 p. 108.

4

Critical Account of the Text this part was not written earlier than the beginning of May 1843, because Kierkegaard bought his copy of that book on April 30, 1843.1 On the other hand, the final portion of the paper, in which Kierkegaard refers to H. T. Rötscher’s Cyclus dramatischer Charaktere [Cycle of Dramatic Characters] (Berlin, 1844; ASKB 1802), cannot have been written before the summer of 1844, because Rötscher’s book was first advertised as a new publication in Adresseavisen on June 20, 1844―three days after The Concept of Anxiety appeared.2 Finally, an addition to Paper 283:2 on a separate sheet must be from the winter of 1844–1845, because it alludes to the tenth volume of H. Steffens’s Was ich erlebte [What I Experienced] (Breslau, 1844), which was not published until December 1844.3 “On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.” is thus located between the spring of 1843 and the winter of 1844–1845; the major portion of it, however, is assumed to be from about the time of the writing of the draft of The Concept of Anxiety, December 1843–January 1844.

) See the explanatory note for Paper 283:1 in the present volume.

1

) See Adresseavisen, no. 143, June 20, 1844. According to a receipted bill of December 31, 1844, from Reitzel’s Bookshop (KA, D pk. 7 læg 6) Kierkegaard had bought the book on June 25, 1844.

2

) Volume 10 of Was ich erlebte was advertised as newly published and available at C. A. Reitzel’s Bookshop in Adresseavisen, no. 306, December 27, 1844. According to a receipted bill of December 31, 1844, from Reitzel’s Bookshop (KA, D pk. 7 læg 6), Kierkegaard purchased it on December 26, 1844.

3

631

Explanatory Notes 274

1 4 5

6

How does a new quality arise . . . ?] → 274,9. A leap] → 274,10. The Platonic moment] Presumably, a reference to Plato’s concept of the “sudden” (τὸ ἐξαίϕνης), also rendered “the instant,” in the dialogue Protagoras 156d: “When does it make the transition, then? Not while it is at rest or while it is in motion, or while it is occupying time. Consequently, the time at which it will be when it makes the transition must be that queer thing, the instant. The word ‘instant’ appears to mean something such that from it a thing passes to one or other of two conditions. There is no transition from a state of rest so long as the thing is still at rest, nor from motion so long as it is still in motion, but this queer thing, the instant, is situated between the motion and the rest; it occupies no time at all, and the transition of the moving thing to the state of rest, or of the stationary thing to being in motion, takes place to and from the instant.” English translation from Plato: The Collected Dialogues, Including the Letters, ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1961), p. 947. unsre Zuthat . . . see somewhere in the Phenomenology). hinter den Rücken] Reference to the introduction to G.W.F. Hegel (→ 274,18), Phenomenology of Spirit, where Hegel talks of consciousness as, first, consciousness of an object in an ordinary sense and then (as a “second object”) of the fact of its being this consciousness of itself, something that “shows itself to have come about through a reversal of consciousness itself. This way of looking at the matter is something contributed by us.” But the “new pattern of consciousness” comes to consciousness as it were “behind the back of consciousness,” that is, without our knowing how. Cited from G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. A. V. Miller, with analysis of the text and foreword by J. N. Findlay (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), pp. 55–

56. See Not13:34, from 1842–1843: “The secret of all existence: movement, Hegel easily explains; for he says somewhere in the Phenomenology that something is happening behind the back of consciousness. (cf. Intro. p. 71 n.)” (KJN 3, 397). every quality arises through a leap] → 274,9. The leap whereby water turns to ice, . . . understand an author] Variant: added. See the first question in Paper 277:1 in the present volume, and see the explanatory note with quotations from the first book of “Die Lehre vom Seyn” [The Doctrine of Being] in G. W. F. Hegel, Wissenschaft der Logik [Science of Logic], 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), vol. 3 (1833), pp. 448 and 450 (Jub. vol. 4, pp. 458 and 460), as well as from § 21 in A. P. Adler’s (→ 275,13) Populaire Foredrag over Hegels objective Logik [Popular Lectures on Hegel’s Objective Logic] (Copenhagen, 1842; ASKB 383), pp. 97–98. See G.W.F. Hegel, The Logic of Hegel, Translated from the “Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences,” trans. William Wallace (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1874), p. 202. the leap that is the transition from good to evil] See Adler’s Populaire Foredrag over Hegel’s objective Logik (→ 274,13), p. 98: “This creation, by quantity, of a new, real quality, these sudden, qualitative caprices and leaps, untie the knots that interrupt the straight path of existence, the unexpected caprices that we call chance events, the sudden transitions that we call mysteries; they show us why ‘crooked branches grow on straight trees,’ why we say ‘heute roth, morgen todt’ [German, “today in the pink of condition, tomorrow dead”], why good turns into evil, love into aversion, life into the beginning of death; they show us that existence is not exhausted with qualitative

7 9

10

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

12

18

relationships and calculations by setting aside quantity, but that it reveals an aspect from which everything much more reveals itself as an unexpected leap and reversal from a quantitative to a qualitative transformation.” more suddenly Lessing’s Faust . . . as swift as the transition from good to evil] Variant: added. Reference to G. E. Lessing, Doktor Faust, “3. Faust und sieben Geister” [Faust and Seven Spirits], mentioned in a contribution to a magazine (1759), but otherwise left unfinished and collected and published posthumously (1784) in its original, incomplete form. Faust asks of seven spirits who is the quickest, and the seventh answers that he is, to which Faust replies; “Ha! You are my devil! As fast as the transition from good to evil!―Yes, that is fast, nothing is faster than that! I have experienced it.” Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s sämmtliche Schriften [Complete Writings of Gotthold Ephraim Lessing], 32 vols. (Berlin, 1825–1838; ASKB 1747– 1762), vol. 23 (1827), pp. 174–177; Doktor Faust is also included in the first part of Theatralischer Nachlaß [Posthumous Writings on the Theater], in Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s sämmtliche Schriften, ed. K. G. Lessing, J. J. Eschenburg, and F. Nicolai, 31 vols. (Berlin, 1793–1825), vol. 22 (1794), pp. 213–230. ― Lessing: Gotthold Ephraim Lessing (1729–1781), German dramatist, critic, and writer on philosophy and aesthetics. Hegel’s contribution―to have thought through a skepticism] Refers to the introduction to G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenologie des Geistes: “The skepticism that ends up with the bare abstraction of nothingness or emptiness . . . must wait to see whether something new comes along and what it is, in order to throw it too into the empty abyss. But when . . . the result is conceived as it is in truth . . . as a determinate negation, a new form has thereby arisen, and in the negation the transition is made through which the progress through the complete series of forms comes to itself”; translation from G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit (→ 274,6), p. 51. ― Hegel’s: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831); extraordinary professor from 1801 to 1806 at Jena, professor at Heidelberg from 1816 to 1818, and professor in Berlin from 1818 until his death.

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

633

method] Presumably, a reference to G.W.F. Hegel’s (→ 274,18) Phenomenologie des Geistes, where the introduction “say[s] something about a method of carrying out the inquiry” (G.W.F. Hegel, Phenomenology of Spirit [→ 274,6], p. 52). Transition from aesthetics to ethics] See Not12:4, presumably from November 1842, where Kierkegaard writes: “The relation between aesthetics and ethics.―the transition―pathos-laden, not dialectical, which begins a qualitative, different dialectic.―To what extent are poetry and art reconcilable with life.―One thing is true in aesthetics, another in ethics?” (KJN 3, 373). come into Xnty.] Variant: “Xnty.” has been changed from “Hegel.” That which did not arise in any hum. being’s heart] Allusion to 1 Cor 2:9. Dialectical and pathos-laden transitions] See Not13:8, from 1842–1843, where Kierkegaard writes the following with respect to René Descartes: “Having eliminated everything in order to discover himself as a thinking being in such a way that this thinking is precisely myself, he then discovers that he thinks God with the same necessity” (KJN 3, 384). In a marginal note to this, Not13:8a, Kierkegaard writes: “This transition is apparently a pathos-laden transition, not [a] dialectical [one], for dialectically speaking, nothing can emerge from it. This is important to me. Anyone can understand a pathos-laden transition if he wants to, because courage is all that belongs to the infinitude that lies in pathos” (KJN 3, 384m). See also Not13:8c, where Kierkegaard notes that “pathos-laden transition” is also to be found in Baruch de Spinoza (KJN 3, 384m). See also the accompanying explanatory notes for these entries. Kant] Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), German philosopher; from 1770, professor of philosophy at Königsberg. Fichte the yngr . . . its start in Erkennen als selbst-Erkennen] Refers to I. H. Fichte, Grundtzüge zum Systeme der Philosophie [Principles for a System of Philosophy] , 2 vols. (Heidelberg, 1833–1836; ASKB 502–503); vol. 1, titled Das Erkennen als Selbsterkennen [Knowledge as SelfKnowledge]. ― Fichte the yngr: Immanuel

20

21

28 29 33

1

2

275

634

4

5

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

Hermann Fichte (1796–1879), German philosopher, son of J. G. Fichte, and therefore usually referred to as the younger Fichte; from 1840, professor of philosophy at Bonn; from 1842, professor at Tübingen. Apart from Grundzüge zum Systeme der Philosophie, Kierkegaard possessed a number of other books by the younger Fichte (ASKB 501–511 and 877–911). Schelling (in Berlin) “Hegel . . . the bad intellectual intuition”] Refers to the following passage in Kierkegaard’s notes from Schelling’s tenth lecture in Not11:10: “Therefore Hegel did not have, as he himself said, the bad [form of] intell. intuition. On the contrary, he has logic as the science that must prove the existence of the Absolute, at which point he proceeds to another science” (KJN 3, 313). Kierkegaard attended Schelling’s Berlin lectures on “Philosophy of Revelation,” and in Notebook 11 transcribed his notes from lecture nos. 1–41, delivered November 15, 1841–February 3, 1842. ― Schelling: Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775–1854), German philosopher; studied philosophy and theology together with Hegel at Tübingen, 1790–1795; extraordinary professor at Jena, 1798; ordinary professor at Würzburg, 1803; taught at Erlangen, 1820–1827; professor at Munich, 1827–1841; called in 1841 as a professor to Berlin, where he was supposed to counteract Hegel’s influence; retired 1846. that fine Easter morning . . . Heiberg . . . the Hegelian philosophy . . . explained it] Refers to J. L. Heiberg’s reported breakthrough in grasping the Hegelian philosophy, while in Hamburg in 1824 on his way back to Kiel from Berlin, where he had become acquainted with Hegel; see the account in Dansk poetisk Anthologie [Danish Poetic Anthology], ed. Christian Molbech, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1830–1840), vol. 3, p. 275. See the account in Heiberg’s “On the Significance of Philosophy for the Present Age” and Other Texts, ed. and trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2005), p. 65 (translation slightly amended): “While resting on the way home in Hamburg, where I stayed six weeks before returning to Kiel, and during that time was constantly pondering what was still obscure to me, it happened one day that, sitting in my room in the König

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

von England with Hegel on my table and in my thoughts, and listening at the same time to the beautiful hymn melodies that sounded from the carillon of St. Peter’s Church, suddenly, in a way that I have experienced neither before nor since, I was gripped by a momentary inner vision, as if a flash of lightning had illuminated the whole region for me and awakened in me the theretofore hidden central thought. From this moment the system in its broad outline was clear to me, and I was completely convinced that I had grasped it in its innermost core, regardless of however much there might be in the details that I still had not made my own and perhaps never will. I can say, in truth, that that strange moment was just about the most important juncture in my life, for it gave me a peace, a security, a self-awareness that I had never known theretofore.” ― Heiberg: Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1791–1860), Danish author, critic, philosopher, and editor; 1822–1825, lecturer at the University of Kiel; 1828–1839, dramatist and translator at the Royal Theater; from 1829, titular professor; 1830–1836, teacher in logic, aesthetics, and Danish literature at the Royal Military College; from 1839, censor at the Royal Theater. Hegel in the Logic with the transition from the doctrine of measure] Presumably refers to the following passage in G.W.F. Hegel (→ 274,18), Wissenschaft der Logik, vol.1,1: “Since the progress from one quality [to another] is in an uninterrupted continuity of the quantity, the ratios which approach a specifying point are, quantitatively considered, only distinguished by a more and a less . . . On the qualitative side . . . the gradual, merely quantitative progress which is not in itself a limit, is absolutely interrupted; the new quality in its merely quantitative relationship is, relatively to the vanishing quality, an indifferent, indeterminate other, and the transition is therefore a leap.” English translation from “Real Measure,” in Hegel’s Science of Logic, trans. A. V. Miller, foreword by J. N. Findlay (Amherst, NY: Humanity Books, 1991), p. 368. Adler . . . the quantitative determination . . . indifferent, then there enters a new quality] Presumably, a reference to a passage in A. P. Adler, Populaire Foredrag over Hegels objective Logik

12

13

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

15

16

(→ 274,9), p. 48, on quantity being cancelled (i.e., “annulled” or “sublated”) quality, which appears as determinative when quantity is “indifferent and cancelled.” ― Adler: Adolph Peter Adler (1812–1869), Danish theologian, magister in 1840 on the basis of a treatise Den isolerede Subjektivitet in dens vigtigste Skikkelser [Isolated Subjectivity in Its Most Important Guises]; from 1841, parish priest in Hasle and Rutsker on Bornholm; in 1842, published Populaire Foredrag over Hegels objective Logik. Werder is more correct] It has not been possible to identify the reference, but see Kierkegaard’s notes from Werder’s lectures in Not9:2–9, esp. Not9:3 and 5–6 in KJN 3, 274–276, with the accompanying critical account and explanatory notes. Kierkegaard also owned Werder’s Logik. Als Commentar und Ergänzung zu Hegels Wissenschaft der Logik [Logic: As a Commentary upon and Supplement to Hegel’s Science of Logic] (Berlin, 1841; ASKB 867). ― Werder: Karl Werder (1806–1893), German philosopher and poet; from 1834, privatdocent and from 1838, extraordinary professor at the University of Berlin. Heiberg’s Perseus see the penciled remark . . . the first §§ of the Logic] Refers to J. L. Heiberg’s (→ 275,5) “Det logiske System. Første Afhandling, indeholdende: Paragrapherne 1–23 [The Logical System: First Section, Containing; Paragraphs 1–23], in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee (→ 269,16), ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 1, June 1837 and no. 2, August 1838 (ASKB 569), pp. 1–45. Since Kierkegaard’s copy cannot be identified, neither can the penciled remark. In the draft of the introduction to The Concept of Anxiety, presumably from December 1843, Kierkegaard writes: “Prof [Heiberg] explains to us how to make the transition from quality to quantity” (Pap. V B 49,5, p. 107), and then he freely quotes the following passage from the conclusion of § 22 in “Det logiske System,” p. 43, where Heiberg writes: “It would . . . not be sufficient to define quantity through quality-free being in general, but it must . . . be expressly defined through the sublated quality; that is to say: quantity is not the first, presuppositionless being, but the being that, after being presupposed and then sublated quality, returns to

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

635

indeterminacy.” Kierkegaard’s critical comments on, and quotation from, “Det logiske System” were not included in the printed edition of The Concept of Anxiety. See SKS 4, p. 320 n. 1. See Rosenkrantz’s . . . on Schelling pp. 58. 59. 86. 155. 212] See K. Rosenkranz, Schelling. Vorlesungen, gehalten im Sommer 1842 an der Universität zu Königsberg [Schelling: Lectures Given in the Summer of 1842 at the University of Königsberg] (Danzig, 1843; ASKB 766; abbreviated hereafter as Schelling. Vorelsungen); according to the surviving receipt, Kierkegaard purchased the work from bookdealer P. G. Philipsen on April 30, 1843. See Rosenkranz, Schelling. Vorlesungen, pp. 58–59, 155, and 212, where Schelling, in his Ideen zu einer Philosophie der Natur [Ideas toward a Philosophy of Nature] (Leipzig, 1797), is said to have found corroboration in a doctoral disputation for his own view that in chemistry all differences in quality can be reduced to differences in quantity, but later (in 1801) censured its author for this very view. All noted in my copy] Kierkegaard’s copy of Rosenkranz, Schelling. Vorlesungen is not known. In the older skepticism . . . (not on the spot and not beyond the spot)] See Not13:27c, from 1842–1843, where Kierkegaard writes: “Also the way in which the Skeptics denied movement, cf. Diogenes Laertius book 9 chapter 11 §99” (KJN 3, 393m). See Diogen Laërtses filosofiske Historie, eller: navnkundige Filosofers Levnet,Meninger og sindrige Udsagn [Diogenes Laertius’s History of Philosophy, or the Life, Opinions, and Ingenious Propositions of Renowned Philosophers], trans. B. Riisbrigh, ed. B. Thorlacius, 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1812; ASKB 1110–1111), vol. 1, p. 445 (bk. 9, chap. 11, § 99): “Furthermore there is no motion; for that which moves either in the place where it is or in a place where it is not. But it cannot move in the place where it is, still less in any place where it is not. Therefore there is no such thing as motion.” English translation from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans. R. D. Hicks, 2 vols., Loeb Classical Library (London: William Heinemann; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1925), vol. 1, p. 511.

17

18 19

636 21

22

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

the human gait is a falling] A common understanding at the time and still current according to some research; sources available to Kierkegaard include H. C. Ørsted, Videnskaben om Naturens almindelige Love [The Science of the General Laws of Nature], vol. 1 (Copenhagen, 1809), p. 174: “The gait of human beings and animals is a continually interrupted falling, inasmuch as one alternately permits the center of gravity to fall forward, and using the uplifted foot for support, raise it again.” See also J. von Muller, ed., Johann Gottfried von Herder’s Ideen zur Geschichte der Menschheit. Dritter Theil. 1787 [Johann Gottfriend von Herder’s Ideas toward a History of Humanity: Part Three; 1787], ed. J. v. Müller, in Herder’s sämmtliche Werke. Zur Philosophie und Geschichte [Herder’s Complete Works: Toward Philosophy and History], 22 vols. (Stuttgart, 1827–1830, ASKB 1695–1705), vol. 6 (1827), p. 311, where Herder writes: “Our gait, a continual falling, is to the right and to the left, and nevertheless we come farther with each step.” See also Neue Rheinisches ConversationsLexicon oder encyclopädisches Handwörterbuch für gebildete Stände [New Rhenish Conversational Lexicon or Hand Encyclopedia for the Educated Classes], 3rd. ed., 12 vols. (Cologne, 1830–1837), vol. 4 (1833), p. 952: “The natural gait of human beings is actually a continual falling.” And see H. Lotze, “Leben. Lebenskraft” [Life, Life Force], in Handwörterbuch der Physiologie mit Rücksicht auf physiologische Pathologie. In Verbindung mit mehren Gelehrten [Manual of Physiology, with Respect to Physiological Pathology: In Conjunction with Other Scholars], ed. R. Wagner, vol. 1 (Braunschweig, 1842), p. l where the author notes that “the gait of the human being is a continual falling.” The doctrine . . . to learn (Sextus Empiricus see Tennemann 5th vol. p. 297.)] In the section on Sextus Empiricus in W. G. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie [History of Philosophy], 11 vols. (Leipzig, 1798–1819; ASKB 815–826), vol. 5 (1805), p. 297: “[T]he transition from being unlearned to being learned [is] quite incomprehensible. Neither can the unlearned person, at the point of time when he is still unlearned, become a learned person, nor at the point of time where he is learned,

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

can the learned, since he cannot become what he already is.” Tennemann refers in a note to book 1, § 31–32, in Sextus Empiricus, Adversus mathematicos and continues: “Besides no one can master the propositions of the sum and substance of a science, not at once, but by grasping one after the other. As long as he possesses only one of these principles, he is still no learned person; accordingly, he cannot be further taught step by step, since he can never determine whether this or that principle must belong to the complete epitome of the science. And without being initiated into an art or science, how can anyone grasp and comprehend one part, a disconnected piece? Similarly, and for the same reason, he is also unable to provide learning.” Tennemann refers here to a note in bk. 3, §§ 260–261, in Sextus Empiricus, Pyrrhoneioi hypotyposeis. ― Sextus Empiricus: See Paper 279 and its accompanying explanatory notes in the present volume. The different types of change . . . Aristotle. Tennemann 3rd vol., p. 126] W. G, Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie (→ 275,22), vol. 3 (1801), p. 126: “Transition only takes place in actual objects.” Tennemann then goes on to quote from Aristotle’s Physics (200b, 33–34 and 201a, 1–2) dealing with the concepts of ϰίνησις (“movement”) and μεταβολή (“transition”). The thought of God emerges with a leap] See Kierkegaard’s summary in Not9:1 of Marheineke’s lectures on Die christlige Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics] in Berlin in the winter term 1841–1842: “The divine creation . . . when regarded cosmologically, the world is the effect of a cause and the cause is God; there is a leap here from the finite (world) to the infinite, and this occurs by means of a deduction” (KJN 3, 245). By “cosmological,” Kierkegaard is referring to the proof a contingentia mundi (Latin, “on the basis of the contingent nature of the world”), i.e., the proof of God’s existence on the basis of the contingency―the accidental nature―of what exists; if what is contingent exists, there must be a reason for it, and this reason must itself exist with necessity. The result (resultare to leap backward) in the proofs for the existence of God . . . a leap] See the previous note. ― resultare to leap back-

25

27

28

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

276

1

2 4

10

ward: See, e.g., the article “Resulto” in Imann. Joh. Gerhard Schellers ausführliches und möglichst vollständiges lateinisch-deutsches Lexicon oder Wörterbuch [Immanuel Johann Gerhard Scheller’s Comprehensive and as Far as Possible Complete Latin-German Lexicon or Dictionary], 3rd expanded ed., 5 vols. (Leipzig, 1804 [1783–1784]; ASKB 1016–1020), vol. 4, col. 9413, where the first definition given is zurück springen (German, “to leap backward”). the bad infinity] i.e., the notion of the infinite as an infinite continuation of the finite rather than Hegel’s “speculative” understanding of the concepts of the finite and the infinite, which presupposes a unity of the two. The leap of inference in induction and analogy] → 276,25. eudaimonism] Ethics based on the Aristotelian notion of eudaimonia (“human flourishing”), but often, as here, with an emphasis on sensual pleasure. Lessing uses the word leap] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in G. E. Lessing’s treatise 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), 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. pp. 82–83, where Lessing writes: “That the Christ, against whose resurrection I can raise no important objection, therefore declared himself to be the son of God; that his disciples therefore believed him to be such; this I gladly believe from my heart. For these truths, as truths of one and the same class, follow quite naturally on one another. But to jump with that historical truth to a quite different class of truths, and to demand of me that I should form all my metaphysical and moral ideas accordingly; to expect me to alter all my fundamental ideas of the nature of the Godhead because I cannot see any credible testimony against the resurrection of Christ: if that is not a μεταβασις εἰς ἀλλο γενος [“transition to another conceptual sphere”], then I do not know what Aristotle meant by this

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

637

phrase. 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.’ But unfortunately, that also is only historically certain, that these historians who were inspired could not err. 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.” English translation from Lessing’s Theological Writings: A Selection in Translation, ed. Henry Chadwick (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press,1957), pp. 54–55. Regarding “μεταβασις εἰς ἀλλο γενος”: This is a concept in Aristotle’s Posterior Analytics, bk. 1, chap. 7, 75a 38; “One cannot, therefore, prove anything by crossing from another genus.” English translation from Jonathan Barnes, ed., The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, 2 vols. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984), vol. 1, p. 122. Jacobi on Lessing] Refers to a famous conversation between F. H. Jacobi and G. E. Lessing (→ 274,12) that took place in July 1780 at Wolfenbüttel and is referred to in Jacobi’s Ueber die Lehre des Spinoza, in Briefen an Herrn Moses Mendelsohn [On the Teachings of Spinoza, in Letters to Mr. Moses Mendelsohn] (1785), reprinted in Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi’s Werke [The Works of Heinrich Jacobi], ed. F. Roth and F. Köppen, 6 vols. (Leipzig, 1812–1825; ASKB 1722–1728; abbreviated hereafter as Jacobi’s Werke); vol. 4, (1819), p. 74. Kierkegaard alludes to the following part of their exchange, where Jacobi has just suggested that a salto mortale (“full somersault”) can get you to where reason cannot reach, to which Lessing replied: “Generally speaking, your salto mortale does not displease me; and I can see how a man with a head like that will want to stand on it to

11

638

11

14

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

get somewhere. Take me with you if it works.” Jacobi then invited Lessing to “step on the elastic spot that catapulted me out and it will go of its own accord,” to which Lessing responded: “That already requires a leap that I can no longer ask of my old legs and heavy head.” ― Jacobi: Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743–1819), German philosopher, originally merchant, later public official. Strongly influenced by his friend J. G. Hamann, Jacobi had extensive discussions with his contemporaries (I. Kant, J. G. Fichte, F.W.J. Schelling, M. Mendelssohn). Jacobi . . . Claudius Wandsb. B. see S. W. 3rd vol., p. 331] See a passage in Jacobi’s Von den Göttlichen Dingen und ihrer Offenbarung [On Divine Things and Their Revelation] (1811), reprinted in Jacobi’s Werke (→ 276,11), vol. 3 (1816), pp. 331–332, where Jacobi refers to the German writer and translator Mathias Claudius (1740–1815), who used the name Asmus den Wandsbecker Boten (“Asmus, the Messenger from Wandsbeck”). Rötscher . . . p. 105 . . . the category: qualitativer Sprung] Refers to a passage in chap. 2, “Hamlet,” in H. T. Rötscher, Cyclus dramatischer Charaktere. Nebst einer einleitenden Abhandlung über das Wesen dramatischer Charaktergestaltung [Cycle of Dramatic Characters: Together with an Introductory Treatise on the Nature of Character Forming] (Berlin, 1844; ASKB 1802), p. 105, where it is explained that the consciousness that one must transcend one’s sickly condition is also the beginning of the guilt in which the individual is enmeshed if he persists in remaining within the merely theoretical situation: “Then the guilt merely oppresses the individual who knows what is to be done and does not proceed to put that knowledge into practice, and it necessarily increases along with the scope of the individual’s knowledge. This guilt is the lack of the energy that is needed for converting into the flesh and blood of real life a recognition of something necessary and reasonable. This transition, to be sure, is the most difficult that is required of the spirit; it is a qualitative leap; but therefore it also remains the highest task, because it is only in this transition that the spirit experiences itself as the real, positive power, as the true unity of thought and being.” This

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

Cyclus dramatischer Charaktere constitutes the second part of Die Kunst der dramatischen Darstellung. In ihrem organischen Zusammenhange wissenschaftlich entwickelt [The Art of Dramatic Presentation: Developed Scientifically in Its Organic Context], vol. 1 (Berlin, 1841; ASKB 1391). On the timing of the book’s publication and Kierkegaard’s purchase of it, see the “Critical Account of the Text” above. ― Rötscher: Heinrich Theodor Rötscher (1803–1871), German philosopher and theater critic; from 1828, professor at the Royal Gymnasium in Bromberg, strongly influenced by Hegel (→ 274,12). With respect to: How does a new quality] → 274,9 and → 275,12. see H. Steffens, was ich erlebte X B pp. 118 et seq.] H. Steffens, Was ich erlebte. Aus der Erinnerung niedergeschrieben [What I Have Experienced: Written Down from Memory], 10 vols. (vols. 1–2, improved ed., Breslau, 1844; vols. 3–10, 2nd ed., Breslau 1841–1844; ASKB 1834–1843), vol. 10, pp. 118–120: “My observation . . . went through all of nature in its sensorily apparent transitions from a lower to a higher, or more specifically, from an outer, more constricted, to a more interior, more free. What I now found here, to begin with, was the doctrine of spontaneous generation and the struggle against it . . . Those who assert that living forms of life arose from the dead appeal to those sensorily faint transitions that can be followed from one to the other . . . No doubt the belief was also that on this basis one could know that a living thing could arise from purely inorganic matter; one saw throughout organic differentiation, as in the nutritional process, also here an imperceptible change through a chemical process. Here, too, the boundary could not be pointed out any more than in the final instance, if the organic process of separation ended chemically . . . In this way, the life principle was regarded as a modified chemical process, and the vital appearances were explained as evolving chemically. On the other hand, for those for whom the life process is a new birth, life must be regarded as a new creation, a new God’s world, in which he is observed directly . . . Therefore there is no transition from death to the living. Rather, the me-

16 18

On Quality, Leap, Transition, et al.

25

diation between the two occurs only through an original creative act.” And further (pp. 121–122), where the question is one of a transition from animals to humans: “Also here there came attempts to explain the higher from the lower, the human soul from an ever more advanced animal life process. But this view made no breakthrough; it was rebuffed by immediate consciousness and never acquired a historical significance as did the fight for spontaneous generation. This view nevertheless concealed another conflict, namely, one where the question was raised of whether different races were not different shoots that had sprouted from the various regions of the earth, or whether, regarded from a higher standpoint, it was not necessary to have the race stem from one couple and, as the scripture says: ‘God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.’ Genesis 2:7.” On the timing of the book’s publication and Kierkegaard’s purchase of it, see the “Critical Account of the Text” above. ― Steffens: Henrich Steffens (1773–1845), Norwegian, Danish, German philosopher, natural scientist, and writer; 1804–1806 and 1808–1811, professor at Halle, thereafter at Breslau, and from 1832, at Berlin. Trendlenburg Erlaüterungen . . . p. 72] Refers to §§ 34–36 in A. Trendelenburg, Erlaüterungen zu den Elementen der aristotelischen Logik. Zunächst für den Unterricht in Gymnasien [Commentary on the Elements of Aristotelian Logic, Primarily for Instruction in the Gymnasium] (Berlin, 1842; ASKB 845), p. 72, where induction is said, according to Aristotle, to form the basis of science because it is derived from experience or “intuition,” though owing to this it lacks the conclusiveness of a demonstrative syllogism. See A. Trendelenburg, Outlines of Logic, an English Translation of Trendelenburg’s “Elementa Logice Aristotelæ,” trans. R. Broughton (Oxford, 1898), pp. 12–13, 26. ― Trendlenburg: Friedrich Adolph Trendelenburg (1802–1872), German philosopher and philologist; from 1833, extraordinary professor, and from 1837 until his death, ordinary professor in Berlin.

•

P a p e r 283 1843–1844 •

639

Notes for Paper 284–Paper 304 Diverse, 1830–1843

Critical Account of the Text by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn, Elise Iuul, Stine Holst Petersen, and Jon Tafdrup Explanatory Notes by Niels Jørgen Cappelørn Edited by Steen Tullberg Quotations and References Checked by Irene Ring and Gerhard Schreiber Translated by Alastair Hannay Edited by Bruce H. Kirmmse

642

Critical Account of the Text I. Description of the Manuscript “Diverse, 1830–1843”1 is nos. 402, 408, 409, and 411 in B-cat.2 and presumably belong to that part of Kierkegaard’s papers that at his death lay together with other material in “a large sack.”3 Papers 290–295, 301, and 303–304 have been lost; their text has been indirectly transmitted in vol. I-II, pp. 156–157, 317, 318, 329, and 381 of Barfod’s edition Af Søren Kierkegaard’s Efterladte Papirer. The preserved manuscripts are in the Kierkegaard Archive (KA) at the Royal Library.4

II. Dating and Chronology All the papers in “Diverse, 1830–1843” are undated, although Papers 298–300 lay in a folder marked “Older than January 1843” (the folder itself constitutes Paper 297) and are presumably from the previous year, 1842. Judging from their contents, Papers 285 and 286, together with Paper 284, a small scrap whose text begins “Humorists develop God’s side (Muhammed. etc. Pythagoras,” could well be contemporary with Paper 256:1, which includes the passage “― Stillness silence God’s side (Muhammed Pythagoras Chr[ist]).” Paper 256,

1

)

The name of this material was assigned by the editors of SKS on the basis of criteria related to its contents.

) Papers 284–287, 290–296, and 303–304 cannot be identified in B-cat.

2

) See Henrik Lund, “Ordenen af Papirerne” [The Order of the Papers], enclosed in L-cat. (cf. “Introduction to Loose Papers, pp. xxxi–xxxiv in the present volume).

3

) Paper 284 is not included in KA but is in the New Royal Collection (NKS).

4

Critical Account of the Text together with other small notes, was enclosed in Journal AA and is tentatively dated to the end of 1837.1 In Paper 287, which deals with “the circulation in the state,” Kierkegaard mentions the Assembly of Estates. The Assembly convened for the first time on October 1, 1835,2 and must have been functioning for some time when Kierkegaard wrote his entry, because it is mentioned as a governmental institution on a par with “the municipal.” On this basis, Paper 287 can be dated tentatively to the end of 1837. Paper 288, which concerns confession and pastoral care, and Paper 289, which deals with the “Xn life,” including in particular the understanding of the relationship between the Church and the faithful, could very well have been written in the period 1840–1841, when Kierkegaard attended the Pastoral Seminary, where there was instruction in preaching, catechetics, liturgy, ecclesiastical law, and pastoral care. Papers 290–296, which resemble the texts in “Diapsalmata” in Either/Or, are presumably from 1841–1842, which was the period when Kierkegaard was particularly occupied with writing and collecting these short, pointed texts.3 No definite dating is possible, however. Paper 301 contains the idea for a play and, with its introductory sentence―“I would have liked to write a piece that would be called: Life on Trial”―it seems to be from the beginning of the period during which Kierkegaard saw himself as an author, that is, 1841–1843. Paper 302, which contains an outline for a journal, seems to be from the period around the origin of The Concept of Anxiety, because there are several topical similarities, which means that the paper can presumably be dated to 1843–1844. Papers 303–304 are presumably from 1843 to 1845, because their style is reminiscent of that in Either/Or, Three Discourses on Imagined Occasions, and Stages on Life’s Way, all of which are from that period.

) See the “Critical Account of the Text for ‘Small Notes of Varied Contents Inserted in Journal AA’ ” in the present volume.

1

) See the explanatory notes for “Our Journal Literature” in the present volume.

2

) See the “Critical Account of the Text” of Enten ― Eller in SKS K2–3, 48–50.

3

643

Explanatory Notes 278

1

1 2 4 6

278

16

17

278

21

Humorists] Variant: The editors of SKS state that Kierkegaard’s writing of this word can also be read as “Humanists”. God’s side] See Paper 256:1 in the present volume. Muhammed] See Paper 256:1 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. Pythagoras] See Paper 256:1 in the present volume, with its accompanying explanatory note. You poor wretches . . . the poor men] Cited freely from Adam Oehlenschläger’s poem, “Morgen Vandring” [Morning Walk], in his Poetiske Skrifter [Poetic Writings], 2 vols. (Copenhagen, 1805; ASKB 1597–1598); vol. 1, p. 364: “You poor wretches! The poor man!/ The poor men!/ Who can spend their lives/ Without blessed joys, / Who do not grasp what God has done,/ Who know only, That the mouth is the nearest gate/ To bliss.” the municipal] i.e., that which pertains to a town or city as an administrative unit. According to an edict from January 1, 1841, by forming its own municipality (Kommune) with a mayor, Copenhagen was to be an exception to the rule in which Denmark was otherwise divided into counties (Amter). representation in the Assembly of Estates] i.e., in an advisory assembly of representatives of the various social classes, or Estates, proposed by Frederik VI in February 1831. The assemblies (one for the islands, one in North Jutland and one each for Schleswig and Holstein) met first in 1835 and every second year thereafter in order to discuss legislation proposed by the Crown and to formulate their own legislative proposals. The assemblies had no power to appoint or dismiss ministers of Chancery or to levy taxes. Absolute monarchy in Denmark was abolished in 1848. actual sins] i.e., sins of commission.

its 1) Immediacy, i.e., faith . . . 2) Mediacy . . . 3) The identity] Underlying these concepts is G.W.F. Hegel’s methodological conception of how the “immediate” and “the mediate” relate to one another, and how they are combined into “identity.” See, e.g., §§ 12, 67, and 113–114 in Hegel’s Encyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], ed. L. von Henning, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1840–45 [1817]; ASKB 561–563), vol. 1, Die Logik [The Logic], in Hegel’s Werke: Vollständige Ausgabe [The Works of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: Complete Edition], 18 vols. (Berlin 1832– 1845; ASKB 549–565), vol. 6 (which is vol. 1 of Die Logik), pp. 18–21, 135–136, 228–229 (Jub. vol. 8, pp. 56–59, 173–174, 266–267). For an English translation, see The Logic of Hegel, Translated from the “Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences,” trans. William Wallace (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1874). See also J. L. Heiberg’s review of W. H. Rothe, Læren om Treenighed og Forsoning. Et speculativt Forsøg [The Doctrine of Trinity and Reconciliation: A Speculative Essay] (Copenhagen, 1836), in Perseus, Journal for den speculative Idee [Perseus, Journal for the Speculative Idea], ed. J. L. Heiberg, no. 1, June 1837 (ASKB 569), p. 35, where, Heiberg―referring to H. L. Martensen’s review of his Indlednings-Foredrag til det i November 1834 begyndte logiske Cursus paa den kongelige militaire Høiskole [Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course at the Royal Military College That Began in November 1834] (Copenhagen, 1835), which had appeared in Maanedsskrift for Litteratur [Literary Monthly] (Copenhagen), vol. 16, 1836, pp. 515– 528―writes that what one finds in Martensen is “the immediate knowledge determined as the idea itself in its immediacy, thus just as objective as subjective, namely, as faith.” And further, pp. 35–36: “As we know, the Hegelian system moves through nothing but triads. In each of these the first term is immediacy . . . , the second media-

2

279

Diverse, 1830–1843 tion or the development of the first, and finally the third, the new and synthetic unity, no longer immediate, that is brought about by mediation.” 279

23

In the old days . . . people . . . without interruption] Presumably, a reference to the “cursive” handwriting in Greek antiquity and to Greek transcriptions of the Bible, in which there was no separation between words, nor punctuation or accents.

280

3

That nation . . . to immerse its children totally in baptism . . . embrace the girls] No source for this is known.

280

13

still life] An expression from art, designating a painting of lifeless objects and dead animals; here the reference is to the depiction of inanimate subject matter.

280

17

a bad conscience’s pact with the devil] Presumably, an allusion to 1 Pet 3:21. The expression forms part of the priest’s introductory remarks in baptism; see Forordnet Alter-Bog for Danmark [Prescribed Service Book for Denmark] (Copenhagen, 1830 [1688]; ASKB 381), p. 243.

280

21

death; like the Roman soldiers . . . there are worse things] A possible reference to the Roman soldiers’ attitude to death according to Marcus Porcius Cato the Elder’s (234–149 b.c.), Origines [Origins (i.e., of Rome)], a work handed down in fragments largely through quotation by later writers, such as in Cicero’s two dialogues, Tusculanae disputationes [Tusculan Disputations], bk. 1, 42, 101, and in Cato Maior de senectute [Cato the Elder on Old Age], 20, 75. See also M. Tullii Ciceronis opera omnia [Complete Works of Cicero], ed. J. A. Ernesti, 2nd ed., 6 vols. (Halle, 1757 [1756]; ASKB 1224–1229), vol. 4, pp. 310–311, 956–957. In De senectute, the Roman soldier’s scorn of death is attributed to youthful appetite and a healthy lack of reflection on death; when a person grows older and enters new periods of life, it is an expression of sustained renewal of interests and goals, which last into old age, when the interests wane, a symptom of weariness with life. In Tusculanae disputa-

•

P a p e r 289–299 1841–1842 •

645

tiones, the passage about the Roman soldier serves as a picture of the rational relationship to death, which with its basis in the Socratic tradition characterizes Roman stoicism; because death is both a natural thing for every person without exception and an eternal phenomenon, it cannot be an evil. In Shacspear’s Midsummer Night’s Dream . . . (in Tieck’s trans., p. 213) a flower: Lieb im Mußiggang . . . toll vergafft] Quoted from a speech by the fairy king Oberon in act 1, sc. 2 of the comedy by William Shakespeare (1564–1616), A Midsummer Night’s Dream (1600), in Shakspeare’s dramatische Werke [Shakespeare’s Dramatic Works] trans. A. W. von Schlegel, supplemented and with commentary by L. Tieck, 9 vols. (Berlin, 1825– 1833; see ASKB 1883–1888, a 2nd ed. in 12 vols. [Berlin 1839–1840]), vol. 3 (1830), p. 213. ― in Tieck’s trans.: According to Tieck’s “Vorrede zum dritten Theil” [Foreword to the Third Part], pp. v–vi (at the end of vol. 3), the German translation of A Midsummer Night’s Dream was actually made by A. W. von Schlegel. ― Tieck’s: Ludwig Tieck (1773–1853), German author, translator, and publisher. ― Lieb in Mußiggang: The German name for love-in-idleness, Viola tricolor, a common wild pansy in Europe and North America.

24

280

The sculptor Pheidias . . . a “Nemesis,” which was set up in Rhamnus] Kierkegaard’s rendering of the account by the Roman public official and writer Gaius Plinius (Pliny the Elder) in bk. 36, sec. 16–17 of his Naturalis historiae [Natural History]. Pheidias: or Phidias, born in Athens ca. 490 b.c., Greek sculptor; one of the most important artists of antiquity. ― Alcamenes: Late 5th-century b.c. Athenian sculptor and pupil of Pheidias; originally from the Greek island of Lemnos (now Limnos) in the Aegean Sea, associated with the statue Aphrodite of the Gardens, now lost. ― Agoracritus: Late 5th-century b.c. sculptor, born on the island of Paros in the Aegean Sea, who in Athens became a pupil of Pheidias. The head is all that remains of his statue of Nemesis outside the ancient Greek city of Rhamnous (or Ramnous) in Attica; it is now preserved in the British Museum.

1

281

646

Diverse, 1830–1843

281

17

surprise to increase the value] Variant: preceding the word “value”, the word “little” has been deleted.

282

4

How does a new quality proceed . . . determinant?] See Paper 283:1 and 283:2 in the present volume, with their accompanying explanatory notes. to what extent is Being a category.―a quality] See Not13:41, from 1842–1843, in KJN 3, 404, with its accompanying explanatory notes. de omnibus d.] Abbreviation of de omnibus dubitandam est (Latin, “one must doubt everything”). The philosophical requirement to doubt everything stems from René Descartes (1596–1650), who writes in the heading of pt. 1, § 1, of his penultimate work, Principia philosophiae [Principles of Philosophy] (1644): “Veritatem inquirenti, semel in vita de omnibus, quantum fieri potest, esse dubitandum” (“He who seeks the truth ought once in his life doubt, so far as possible, everything”). See Renati Des-Cartes opera philosophica [René Descartes’s Philosophical Works], 6th Elzevier ed., 4 vols. (Amsterdam, 1677–1678; vol. 1, 1678, vols. 2–4, 1677; ASKB 473), vol. 2, p. 1. The proposition expresses Descartes’s attempt, by doubting everything, to reach a firm basis for scientific knowledge and thus a point of departure for his philosophical system. Hegel cites the phrase in his lectures on the history of philosophy, and Kierkegaard criticized it as early as his Johannes Climacus, or De omnibus dubitandum est, which was never completed. Descartes’s phrase was frequently cited and discussed by Danish Hegelians, as, e.g., by H. L. Martensen and J. L. Heiberg. P. Møller] Poul Martin Møller (1794–1838), Danish writer and philosopher; 1822, adjunct in Latin and Greek at the Metropolitan School in Copenhagen; from 1826, lecturer; from 1828, associate professor; and from 1830, professor of philosophy at Kristiania (Oslo); from 1831 until his death, professor of philosophy at the University of Copenhagen, where he was one of Kierkegaard’s teachers; he died on March 13, 1838. Kierkegaard dedicated The Concept of Anxiety to Poul Martin Møller. on the edifying in always thanking God] See the second discourse, “Every Good and Perfect Gift Is from Above” in Two Edifying Discourses (1843), where Kierkegaard, referring to Jas 1:17, says

5

8

8

10

•

P a p e r 300–302 1842–1843 •

to “his listener,” “You interpreted the apostolic words in the expanding of your heart. You did not insist on learning much from life, you wished to learn but one thing: always to thank God and thereby to learn to understand one thing: that all things serve for good those who love God” (EUD, 42). Above the epistle text from Jas 1:17–22 Kierkegaard wrote in his copy for the Forordnet Alter-Bog (→ 280,17), p. 87: “1 Tim 4:4. ‘all things are good provided they are received with gratitude / always to thank God (not to pray, for in that there is no rest, but to give thanks).’ ” Kierkegaard underlined the two words here italicized. on the benefits of studying the sources] See “On the importance of studying the sources” in Paper 278. Prof. 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. Prof. Martensen] Hans Lassen Martensen (1808–1884), Danish theologian and priest; licentiate in theology from the University of Copenhagen in 1837; honorary doctorate from the University of Kiel in 1840; appointed extraordinary professor of theology at the University of Copenhagen in 1840. In the summer term of 1834, Kierkegaard was privately tutored by Martensen on Friedrich Schleiermacher’s Der christliche Glaube nach den Grundsätzen der evangelischen Kirche im Zusammenhange dargestellt [The Christian Faith According to the Basic Principles of the Evangelical Church], 2nd rev. ed. (Berlin 1830–1831; see ASKB 258, an ed. from 1835); see Papers 9–14 and the “Critical Account of the Text of ‘Church History, Biblical Exegesis, Excerpts

11

15

16

Diverse, 1830–1843

16

17

19

from Schleiermacher’s Dogmatics, et al.’ ” in the present volume. what is poetry] See Not12:4–18, from 1842, in KJN 3, p. 375, which contains, among other things, excerpts from Aristotle’s Poetics, but also Kierkegaard’s “Ideas for My Lectures,” where the first point is “On the Concept of Poetry,” p. 377. See also J. L. Heiberg’s (→ 282,15) introductory lecture to the logic course that began in November 1834 at the Royal Military College, Copenhagen (→ 279,2), pp. 16–21, where he says that “[t]he only art that, when it turns toward its ideal side, manages to nullify the distinction [between form and matter], and thereby positions itself at the standpoint of the infinite, is the art of poetry; but just for that reason it should no longer be called the poetic art, but poetry. For poetry is not an art, just as little as philosophy is a science; it belongs to quite another and embracing sphere, superior to the arts and their finite differences. This is a straightforward matter of poetry having its source in the poetic art, but its real matter is language, that is, the expression peculiar to thought. While, therefore, artists simply seek thought and strive to express it in the recalcitrant matter of reality, resistant to absolute perfection, poetry possesses it already in language. The artists therefore require an ideal, and their finiteness reveals itself in their never being able to attain it, but in poetry the ideal of art is realized; that for which artists must forever strive, poetry already possesses from birth.” J. L. Heiberg, Heiberg’s “Introductory Lecture to the Logic Course” and Other Texts, ed. and trans. Jon Stewart (Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel, 2007), pp. 52–53. the Aristotelian doctrine of virtue] See Not13:10, from 1842–1843, in KJN 3, p. 385, which contains Kierkegaard’s excerpts relating to the doctrine of virtue in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. Weisse something similar right away in the first part] Presumably, a reference to the following passage in § 9 in C. H. Weisse, System der Aesthetik als Wissenschaft von der Idee der Schönheit [The System of Aesthetics as Science of the Idea of Beauty], 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1830; ASKB 1379– 1380), where, if we assume that “something similar” alludes to “the hidden,” the reference may

•

P a p e r 302–304 1843–1845 •

647

be to a passage in vol. 1, pp. 56–57: “That beauty will be conceived as a concealed truth, as is also the case in the system of Hegel, will not be enough to reach the concept of sublated truth. For then the truth that is in beauty―the speculative thoughts and concepts that are to be imputed to and inscribed within what is beautiful―would be the only element in beauty that exists in truth, whereas the images and ideas in which beauty is enveloped would be an external by-product; and the concepts that compose the absolutely spiritual element in beauty, and which liberate [beauty] from the latter images and ideas, would be far purer and more perfect themselves than in conjunction with those [images]. Accordingly, whoever regards beauty as a concealed truth, rather than a sublated one, is necessarily caught up in the delusion that there exists an adequate conception for every single instance of beauty, a conception in which the essence or innermost core of beauty is encapsulated more completely than in the beautiful thing itself. This delusion, along with many other misunderstandings besides, has also issued in a philosophy of art and art criticism that reproduces the best and most truly spiritual element―as it were the quintessence―of every actual work of art in ‘intellectual artworks,’ thereby making the original artworks expendable, along with all beauty, by reinscribing them in the higher and nobler elements of pure thought. Or so, if expressed logically, would be the view that lies at the base of those attempts to translate beauty into reality without detracting from its spiritual content; even if most of those who subscribe to this view, compelled by the power of truth itself, have misgivings about articulating it so candidly and rudely.” ― Weisse: Christian Hermann Weiße (1801–1866), German philosopher; from 1828 to 1837, extraordinary professor and from 1845, ordinary professor of philosophy at the University of Leipzig. Church of Our Savior] i.e., Vor Frelsers Kirke in the Christianshavn quarter of Copenhagen (see map 2, C4).

28

282

MAPS Map 1, Copenhagen Locator Map 650

Map 2, Copenhagen with outer Suburbs 652

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 1

C

|

D

E

|

F

|

G

|

H

1

| 2

| 3

| 4

A

|

B

|

|

1

|

2

|

3

4

Map 2

C

|

D

CONCORDANCE From Søren Kierkegaards Papirer to Kierkegaard’s Journals and Notebooks 655

655

Concordance Pap.

KJN Paper

Pap.

KJN Paper

Pap.

KJN Paper

Pap.

KJN Paper

IA1 IA2 IA3 IA4 IA5 IA6 IA7 IA8 IA9 I A 10 I A 11 I A 12 I A 13 I A 14 I A 15 I A 16 I A 17 I A 18 I A 19 I A 20 I A 21 I A 22 I A 23 I A 24 I A 25 I A 26 I A 27 I A 28 I A 29 I A 30 I A 31 I A 32 I A 33 I A 34 I A 35 I A 36 I A 37 I A 38 I A 39 I A 40 I A 41

31 49 88 50 51:1 51:2 51:3 96:1 96:2 96:3 97:1 97:2 97:3 97:4 97:5 97:6 98 103 52:1 52:2 53:1 53:2 99:1 99:2 99:3 54 55:1 55:2 56 87 32 100 102:1 102:2 57 58 59 60 101 61:1 61:2

I A 42 I A 43 I A 44 I A 45 I A 46 I A 47 I A 48 I A 49 I A 50 I A 51 I A 52 I A 53 I A 54 I A 55 I A 56 I A 57 I A 58 I A 59 I A 60 I A 61 I A 62 I A 82 I A 83 I A 84 I A 85 I A 86 I A 87 I A 88 I A 89 I A 90 I A 91 I A 92 I A 93 I A 102 I A 103 I A 104 I A 105 I A 106 I A 107 I A 108 I A 109

33 86 62 63 64:1 64:2 68:1 68:2 65 104 105 66 67 211 91 89 34 90 69 70 69.a 71 212 213 106 107 108 109 35 110 111:1 111:2 72 36 214 112 113:1 113:2 73 74 114

I A 110 I A 111 I A 112 I A 113 I A 114 I A 115 I A 116 I A 117 I A 118 I A 120 I A 121 I A 122 I A 123 I A 124 I A 125 I A 126

234 37 118 38 115:1 115:2 115:3 117 116 39 119 120 121 122 123 124:1 124:2 40:1 40:2 218 219 125:1 125:1.1 125:2 216 126 127 128:1 128:2 129 130 131 132 133 217 134 135 137 138 139 140

I A 151 I A 152 I A 153 I A 154 I A 155 I A 156 I A 157 I A 158 I A 159 I A 160 I A 161 I A 162 I A 163 I A 164 I A 165 I A 166 I A 167 I A 168 I A 169

241 75 41 142 143 225 231 233:1 233:2 233:3 235:1 235:2 235:3 145 220 144 146 76 147 147.1 148 149 150 255:1 255:2 256:1 256:2 256:3 256:3 257:1 257:2 257:3 257:4 258:1 258:2 258:3 258:4 258:5 258:6 258:7 258:8

I A 127 I A 128 I A 129 I A 130 I A 131 I A 132 I A 133 I A 134 I A 135 I A 136 I A 137 I A 138 I A 139 I A 140 I A 141 I A 142 I A 143 I A 144 I A 145 I A 147 I A 148 I A 149 I A 150

I A 170 I A 171 I A 172 I A 173 I A 174 I A 175 I A 176 I A 177 I A 178 I A 179 I A 180 I A 181 I A 182 I A 183 I A 184 I A 185 I A 186 I A 187 I A 188 I A 189 I A 190

656 I A 191 I A 192 I A 193 I A 194 I A 195 I A 196 I A 197 I A 198 I A 199 I A 200 I A 201 I A 202 I A 203 I A 204 I A 205 I A 206 I A 207 I A 208 I A 209 I A 210 I A 211 I A 212 I A 213 I A 214 I A 215 I A 216 I A 217 I A 218 I A 219 I A 220 I A 221 I A 222 I A 223 I A 224 I A 225 I A 226 I A 227 I A 228 I A 229 I A 230 I A 231 I A 232 I A 233 I A 234 I A 235 I A 236 I A 237 I A 238 I A 239 I A 240

K IERKEGAARD’S J OURNALS 258:9 258:10 258:11 258:12 258:11 151 228 152 153 154:1 154:2 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 210:1 210:2 162 163 164 77 165 166 167 168 169 170 224 171 221 173 172 174 178 175 176 177 193:2 78 181 182:1 183 184 185 226 182:2 186

I A 242 I A 243 I A 244 I A 245 I A 246 I A 247 I A 250 I A 251 I A 252 I A 254 I A 255 I A 256 I A 257 I A 258 I A 259 I A 260 I A 261 I A 262 I A 263 I A 264 I A 265 I A 266 I A 267 I A 268 I A 269 I A 270 I A 273 I A 274 I A 281 I A 282 I A 283 I A 284 I A 285 I A 294 I A 295 I A 299 I A 304 I A 305 I A 307 I A 308 I A 309 I A 310 I A 311 I A 312 I A 313 I A 314 I A 315

187 188 189 190:1 190:2 191 192 192.1 222 193:1 194 193:3 179:1 179:2 179:3 179:4 179:4 179:5 179:6 179:7 179:8 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 92 202 238 239 232 203 43 204 79 79.1 80 223:1 223:2 44 229:1 229:2 229:3 230:1 230:2 45:1 45:2 205

AND

N OTEBOOKS

I A 316

81:1

I A 317 I A 319 I A 320 I A 324 I A 325 I A 326 I A 92 a IB1 IB2

81:2 206:1 206:2 82 83 84 111:3 248 54 254.1 254.2 254.3 254.4 254.5 1:1 1:2 1:2.a 1:2.b 1:2.c 1:2.d 1:2.e 2:1 2:2 3:1 3:2 4:1 4:2 5:1 5:2 5:3 6 7 7.a 7.b 7.c 8 14:6 14:3 14:4 14:5 247 247.1 9:1 9:2 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:6

IC1 IC2

IC3 IC4 IC5 IC6 IC7 IC8 IC9 I C 10 I C 13 I C 14

I C 15 I C 16 I C 17 I C 18 I C 20

I C 21 I C 22 I C 23

I C 24 I C 25 I C 26 I C 27 I C 28 I C 29 I C 30 I C 31 I C 32 I C 33

I C 34 I C 35 I C 37 I C 38 I C 39 I C 40 I C 41 I C 45 I C 46 I C 47 I C 48 I C 49 I C 50 I C 61 I C 84 I C 85

9:7 9:8 9:9 10 11:1 11:2 12 13:4.a 13:5.a 13:10 14:1 14:2 250 19 20 21:1 22:1 22:2 23:1 23:2 23:3 22:3 22:4 21:2 24:1 24:2 24:3 24:4 24:5 24:6 24:7 24:8 24:9 26 15 16 17 27:1 27:2 28 18 252:1 252:2 252:3 252:3.1 252:4 252:5 253 215 141

C ONCORDANCE I C 102 I C 114

II A 582 II A 585 II A 586 II A 587 II A 588 II A 589 II A 590 II A 591 II A 592 II A 593 II A 594 II A 597 II A 601 II A 604 II A 610 II A 626 II A 627 II A 628 II A 629 II A 630 II A 649 II A 668 II A 718 II A 786 II A 787 II A 788 II A 789 II A 790 II A 791 II A 792 II A 793 II A 794 II A 795 II A 796 II A 797 II A 798 II A 799 II A 800

180 180.1 249 249.1 249.a 249.b 249.c 249.d 249.e 249.f 249.g 249.h 227 207 46 208 242 47:1 47:2 284 42:1 42:2 285 244 237 240 243 286 209 85 236 94:2 290 287 245 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:1 259:2 259:2

II A 801 II A 802 II A 803 II A 804 II A 805 II A 806 II A 807 II A 814 II A 815 II A 816 II A 817 II A 818 II A 819 II A 820 II A 821 II A 822 II A 823 II C 1 II C 2 II C 10 II C 21 II C 33

II C 37 II C 63 III A 1 III A 2 III A 3 III A 4 III A 5 III A 6 III A 7 III A 8 III A 9 III A 10 III A 11 III A 12 III A 13 III A 215 III A 216 III A 217 III A 218 III A 219 III A 220 III A 221 III A 222

259:3 305:1 305:2 305:3 305:3 305:4 305:5 261:1 261:1.a 261:2 261:3 262:1 262:2 262:3 263:1 263:2 263:3 263:4 251 94:1 29 93 260:1 260:2 260:3 260:4 25 246 264:1 264:2 264:3 264:4 264:5 264:6 264:7 264:8 264:9 264:10 264:11 264:11.a 264:12 264:13 288 289 265 266 267 268 269 291

III A 223 III A 224 III A 225 III A 226 III A 242 III A 243 III A 244 III A 245 III A 246 III B 31 III B 32 III B 33 III B 34 III B 35 III B 36 III B 37 III B 38 III B 39 III C 1

IV A 194 IV A 195 IV A 196 IV A 197 IV C 87 IV C 88 IV C 89 IV C 90 IV C 91 IV C 92 IV C 93 IV C 94 IV C 95 IV C 96 IV C 97 IV C 98 IV C 99 IV C 100 IV C 101 V A 100 V A 101 VC1 VC2 VC3

657 292 293 294 295 272:1 272:2 273 274:1 274:2 275:1 275:2 275:2.1 275:2.1.1 276:1 276:1 276:2 276:1 276:1 276:3 276:4 270 270.a 270.b 270.c 270.d 270.e 298 299 300 301 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:1 277:2 278 279 280 281 282 302 302 283:1 283:1 283:1

VC4 VC5 VC6 VC7 VC8 VC9 V C 10 VII 1 A 230 VII 1 A 231

283:1 283:1 283:1 283:1 283:1 283:2 283:2 303 304