What do you think?
Rate this book
Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing: Spiritual Preparation for the Office of Confession
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, the Danish writer Soren Kierkegaard is regarded as one of the most significant and influential figures in contemporary thought. In Kierkegaard's view, faith is the most essential task of life. Faith is not a matter of dogmatic adherence, but rather of subjective passion. In "Purity of Heart", Kierkegaard discusses different aspects of living, particularly the responsibility of single-minded spiritual seeking and ethical integrity, offering clues to the nature of the good while insisting that each reader must work this out for themselves.
220 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1846
304 people are currently reading
2416 people want to read
About the author
Søren Kierkegaard
1,089books6,104followersSøren Aabye Kierkegaard was a prolific 19th century Danish philosopher and theologian. Kierkegaard strongly criticised both the Hegelianism of his time and what he saw as the empty formalities of the Church of Denmark. Much of his work deals with religious themes such as faith in God, the institution of the Christian Church, Christian ethics and theology, and the emotions and feelings of individuals when faced with life choices. His early work was written under various pseudonyms who present their own distinctive viewpoints in a complex dialogue.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews
May 4, 2025
Many Christian apologists will tell you their conversion experience, and digging deeper you will find that therein is their skewed justification displayed to your eyes like Goya’s flayed and bloody beef carcass. I am more guilty than they are, in my former self-justification.
But Karl Barth, Kierkegaard’s postmodern heir, sets us right: a personal justification is NOT justification by faith.
You may remember that in my review of Kierkegaard’s Either/Or I set up a Last Judgement-like scenario of our life as Christian sheep - over against the goats.
The goats, of course, are amoral nemeses to ethically-minded folks. They’re our Death in Life, as Coleridge says in his Rime of the Ancient Mariner. They’ve resisted the Good.
For the Mariner is ultimately laid low, like Job, for breaking the law. God’s Law. The law, under the New Covenant, is that we should return Good for Evil.
But NONE of us can do that all the time.
So we, too, are laid low. God truly sees all.
To take another example, we are condemned - like Merseault in Camus� The Stranger - until, like Merseault, we return good for evil, AND just go on, reforging our swords into ploughshares!
But at times it seems impossible - we must then say, as Samuel Beckett bleakly says, “I can’t go on. (OK...) I’ll go on (!)�
That sorta stamina takes guts.
So we ALL fail to do good - or to do our jobs RIGHT. And the paradox is that unless we get up again and face the music we are lost.
And so Kierkegaard says that Purity of Heart (without which we are lost) is to will ONLY one thing - doing THE GOOD.
Otherwise, again, we are lost.
We must always get back into the fray.
We must all, at the radiant beginning or the tragic end of our lives, once again take up our crosses -
Or else we are doomed to suffer for a long time, like the Mariner. Or like our current cultural gnostics.
That’s life.
And that’s the law.
This work was written by Kierkegaard as a sermon. A sermon to continue, whether in pleasure or pain, the struggle...
And so, we must all go on - because there’s always:
One more river -
And that’s the River Jordan.
One more river -
And that’s the river to cross.
But Karl Barth, Kierkegaard’s postmodern heir, sets us right: a personal justification is NOT justification by faith.
You may remember that in my review of Kierkegaard’s Either/Or I set up a Last Judgement-like scenario of our life as Christian sheep - over against the goats.
The goats, of course, are amoral nemeses to ethically-minded folks. They’re our Death in Life, as Coleridge says in his Rime of the Ancient Mariner. They’ve resisted the Good.
For the Mariner is ultimately laid low, like Job, for breaking the law. God’s Law. The law, under the New Covenant, is that we should return Good for Evil.
But NONE of us can do that all the time.
So we, too, are laid low. God truly sees all.
To take another example, we are condemned - like Merseault in Camus� The Stranger - until, like Merseault, we return good for evil, AND just go on, reforging our swords into ploughshares!
But at times it seems impossible - we must then say, as Samuel Beckett bleakly says, “I can’t go on. (OK...) I’ll go on (!)�
That sorta stamina takes guts.
So we ALL fail to do good - or to do our jobs RIGHT. And the paradox is that unless we get up again and face the music we are lost.
And so Kierkegaard says that Purity of Heart (without which we are lost) is to will ONLY one thing - doing THE GOOD.
Otherwise, again, we are lost.
We must always get back into the fray.
We must all, at the radiant beginning or the tragic end of our lives, once again take up our crosses -
Or else we are doomed to suffer for a long time, like the Mariner. Or like our current cultural gnostics.
That’s life.
And that’s the law.
This work was written by Kierkegaard as a sermon. A sermon to continue, whether in pleasure or pain, the struggle...
And so, we must all go on - because there’s always:
One more river -
And that’s the River Jordan.
One more river -
And that’s the river to cross.
August 11, 2015
What a great book. Kierkegaard has a way with words that make his writing difficult to read, yet absolutely worthwhile and satisfying. This book is to be taken slow, and one must be willing to read and reread and continue to reread.
Purity of Heart is to will the Good in love. Kierkegaard is fighting the double-mindedness of some professing Christians. This book is not written for one to give to a neighbor. This book is for the individual to soak in and be honest with themselves. For S. K., pure religion is to stand alone before God.
We must look past ourselves to the eternal. This book is a mirror; it is about intentions. "You are not obliged to have an opinion about what you do not understand. You are eternally responsible to render an account for your opinion and for your judgement."
This book is not just a mere conversation and discussion with the reader. It is Kierkegaard himself demanding the readers own decisive activity. It is entirely convicting. So read this book, and continue to ponder the question: Am I living with purity of heart, willing the good in truth and love? Am I willing to do all and suffer all for the truth? Will I choose the eternal?
Purity of Heart is to will the Good in love. Kierkegaard is fighting the double-mindedness of some professing Christians. This book is not written for one to give to a neighbor. This book is for the individual to soak in and be honest with themselves. For S. K., pure religion is to stand alone before God.
We must look past ourselves to the eternal. This book is a mirror; it is about intentions. "You are not obliged to have an opinion about what you do not understand. You are eternally responsible to render an account for your opinion and for your judgement."
This book is not just a mere conversation and discussion with the reader. It is Kierkegaard himself demanding the readers own decisive activity. It is entirely convicting. So read this book, and continue to ponder the question: Am I living with purity of heart, willing the good in truth and love? Am I willing to do all and suffer all for the truth? Will I choose the eternal?
December 6, 2010
This is a great book for Christian self-examination, dedicated by the author and recommended by this reviewer to "that solitary individual" who desires to commit himself to One Thing and guard himself against double-mindedness, hypocrisy and mediocrity.
Like Socrates, his role model, Kierkegaard excels, not so much in establishing the true religious or philosophical belief, as in distinguishing falsehood from truth, thereby prompting the reader to reflect and re-examine his own beliefs and practices.
In his books, Kierkegaard not only gives an incisive diagnosis of the human condition, but also makes confessions about himself, his sufferings and struggles. Reading his books is almost like getting to know the author, even to the extent that the reader might feel an affinity for him.
Like Socrates, his role model, Kierkegaard excels, not so much in establishing the true religious or philosophical belief, as in distinguishing falsehood from truth, thereby prompting the reader to reflect and re-examine his own beliefs and practices.
In his books, Kierkegaard not only gives an incisive diagnosis of the human condition, but also makes confessions about himself, his sufferings and struggles. Reading his books is almost like getting to know the author, even to the extent that the reader might feel an affinity for him.
April 8, 2025
Changed my life. Review later; I have acute senioritis.
January 12, 2024
«كسي كه واقعا خير را طلب ميكند بطور حتم به یک چيز بدل ميشود :او به یک دوست بدل ميشود به یک عاشق خاطره و به اين تربيت ،زماني كه در ساعت خاموشي* به سراغ او مي آيد به او ميگويد «آيا آن زمان را به خاطر مي آوردي ؟ آن زمان كه عزم و تصميم به تمناي خير شما را به تسخير خود آورد؟ »حافظه ادامه ميدهد «آیا همه ی آن رنج و مصیبت هایی را که برای خاطر این تصمیم متحمل شده ای به یاد می آوری؟ »و او پاسخ میدهد: «خیر عزیز من !فراموشش کرده بودم-بگذار فراموش شده بماند!.»آن هنگام ممكن است به نظر برسد كه انگار آنچه را كه صادقانه به آن باور داشته بودم به فراموشي سپرده شده است .اي حافظه؛ تو اي رسول ابديت ،در آن ساعت به ملاقاتم بيا و با خود آن خواستني هميشگي را بياور ،آن ديداري كه آرزويش را داشتي با خود بياور و خاطره در فراق پاسخ ميدهد «به تو قول ميدهم ،تا ابد »پس از يكديگر جدا ميشوند زيرا ميبايست ،اينجا بوده باشند ،اينجا در جهاني وابسته به زمان. او که عمیقا متاثر شده ،یکبار دیگر به آن شکل ناپدید شونده خاطره نگاه میکند،بدان صورت که به یک قدیس ستایش شده بنگرد. حالا او رفته است و ساعت آرامش نيز لحظه بزرگي نبود با اين حساب او اميدوار بود كه خاطره به وعده خود عمل كند .او آن سكون را در روح خود حفظ كرد كه در آن هنگام خوشحالي از ديدار او با خاطره خود ِخاطره مواجه شد.»
*ساعت خاموشي :اشاره به يك قاعده حقوقي ست كه طبق آن زماني تعيين شده در روز يا شب براي رعايت حقوق ديگران و رعايت سكوت و آرامش .
«به راستي به روي مردي هم كه اسير است يك در باز است: دريچه ابديت، و به راستي كه در بند است هماني كه براي هميشه آزاد است. وقتي پولس گفت: «من يك شهروند رومي هستم» داروغه جرات نكرد او را به زندان بياندازد پس او را در حبس داوطلبانه قرار داد و آن زمان كه انساني جرات كند و بگويد من :«شهروند آزاد ابديتم» ديگر ضرورت ،نميتواند او را محبوس كند مگر در حبس داوطلبانه. شنوندگان من !اگر انسان تنها يك چيز را طلب كند پس بايد خير را بخواهد زيرا تنها از اين طريق است كه ميتواند يك چيز واحد را طلب كند اگر بخواهد اصالتي داشته باشد بايد حقيقتا خير را طلب كند .»
دوستتان داشتم آقاي كيركگور ،دوستتان داشتم گرامي. ترجمه توسط جناب آقاي پوريا پرندوش صورت پذيرفته و به نظرم پاکیزه و شایسته بود.
خيال مي كنم كه باران براي لحظه اي درنگ مي كند ،باد بزن هاي جهان از حركت مي ايستند و لب ها دميدن را از ياد مي برند ، خيال مي كنم كه ،شمع كوچكم را در دست مي گيرم و به سمت اتاق خواب خدا در حركتم، به قفسه ي شمع هاي خاموش شده نزديك مي شوم و پيشاني شمع نيمه روشنم را آرام بر پيشاني شمع هاي فرو سوخته مي سايم ،بر جملگي شان.خيال مي كنم كه خدا از پشت شيشه ي پنجره اتاقش براي من دست تكان مي دهد ،من با دست برايش بوسه اي مي فرستم و دنيا تمام مي شود،خاموشي پايان را مي پذيرد.خوبي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها به يكباره از معنا و من تهی ميگردند ،فاقد هیچ درد و اعتبار.خيال ميكنم عزيز من، تنها خيال كه عاقبت همه ي شمع ها در تمناي يك چيز و ابديت،پيشاني يكديگر را پیوسته و بی وقفه مي بوسند.
به تاریخ ِ«ِباب� چیزی که هستی ازت ممنونم عزیزم »گفتن ها
*ساعت خاموشي :اشاره به يك قاعده حقوقي ست كه طبق آن زماني تعيين شده در روز يا شب براي رعايت حقوق ديگران و رعايت سكوت و آرامش .
«به راستي به روي مردي هم كه اسير است يك در باز است: دريچه ابديت، و به راستي كه در بند است هماني كه براي هميشه آزاد است. وقتي پولس گفت: «من يك شهروند رومي هستم» داروغه جرات نكرد او را به زندان بياندازد پس او را در حبس داوطلبانه قرار داد و آن زمان كه انساني جرات كند و بگويد من :«شهروند آزاد ابديتم» ديگر ضرورت ،نميتواند او را محبوس كند مگر در حبس داوطلبانه. شنوندگان من !اگر انسان تنها يك چيز را طلب كند پس بايد خير را بخواهد زيرا تنها از اين طريق است كه ميتواند يك چيز واحد را طلب كند اگر بخواهد اصالتي داشته باشد بايد حقيقتا خير را طلب كند .»
دوستتان داشتم آقاي كيركگور ،دوستتان داشتم گرامي. ترجمه توسط جناب آقاي پوريا پرندوش صورت پذيرفته و به نظرم پاکیزه و شایسته بود.
خيال مي كنم كه باران براي لحظه اي درنگ مي كند ،باد بزن هاي جهان از حركت مي ايستند و لب ها دميدن را از ياد مي برند ، خيال مي كنم كه ،شمع كوچكم را در دست مي گيرم و به سمت اتاق خواب خدا در حركتم، به قفسه ي شمع هاي خاموش شده نزديك مي شوم و پيشاني شمع نيمه روشنم را آرام بر پيشاني شمع هاي فرو سوخته مي سايم ،بر جملگي شان.خيال مي كنم كه خدا از پشت شيشه ي پنجره اتاقش براي من دست تكان مي دهد ،من با دست برايش بوسه اي مي فرستم و دنيا تمام مي شود،خاموشي پايان را مي پذيرد.خوبي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها و بدي ها به يكباره از معنا و من تهی ميگردند ،فاقد هیچ درد و اعتبار.خيال ميكنم عزيز من، تنها خيال كه عاقبت همه ي شمع ها در تمناي يك چيز و ابديت،پيشاني يكديگر را پیوسته و بی وقفه مي بوسند.
به تاریخ ِ«ِباب� چیزی که هستی ازت ممنونم عزیزم »گفتن ها
July 15, 2018
“As the sea, when it lies calm and deeply transparent, yearns for heaven, so may the pure heart, when it is calm and deeply transparent, yearn for the Good.�
This may be the most en-courage-ing and deeply challenging book I have ever read. Purity of Heart calls itself a “stage prompt� whispered to the actor � the reader � to help him or her perform good acts before the audience who is none other than God. Framed as a talk, it exhorts the listener � that solitary individual � to consider what it means to will one thing � the Good. By means of examples, it uncovers barriers and evasions � and finally lays out what a person � any person at all, regardless of circumstance � must do to will only the Good. If taken to heart, its spiritual refreshment � and rigorous demand � have the power to radically transform a person’s life. May they do so, and continue to do so, to mine! As preparation for Confession, Purity of Heart calls for honest examination of conscience and discernment. Does any one of us will purely the Good, Kierkegaard asks � including himself? Likely not � but nevertheless, we are called to do so. Let us not excuse ourselves � especially not by hiding behind others � or behind the demands of worldly success. “Eternity asks solely about faithfulness.�
Kierkegaard takes aim at the reader with some level of worldly success or advantage who justifies misdeeds � perhaps exploitation of workers, dishonest business practices, political finagling, or clever manipulation of others to one’s own advantage � as well as the reader who, deep inside, thinks him- or herself superior � and therefore worthy of more than fellow human beings. To will one thing means to will the same good for all human beings, and explicitly not to will any advantage to oneself, one’s family or one’s clan. He also calls out the person who excuses misdeeds by his low position or lack of advantage. More subtly, he calls out the reader who acts with seeming integrity � but for reward, or because of fear of punishment, or to look good, or for other egocentric reasons � not for the sake of the Good. In contrast to the lives of active individuals, in “the extreme case of the incurable sufferer� Kierkegaard calls forth a liberating courage for all who suffer.
Written in Kierkegaard’s own name, the language is intentionally simple and accessible to the general reader (unlike Kierkegaard’s difficult pseudonymous works Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death � the only other books by SK that I’ve read � so far). I found it greatly inspiring of quiet reflection, courage in thought and action, and humility.
This may be the most en-courage-ing and deeply challenging book I have ever read. Purity of Heart calls itself a “stage prompt� whispered to the actor � the reader � to help him or her perform good acts before the audience who is none other than God. Framed as a talk, it exhorts the listener � that solitary individual � to consider what it means to will one thing � the Good. By means of examples, it uncovers barriers and evasions � and finally lays out what a person � any person at all, regardless of circumstance � must do to will only the Good. If taken to heart, its spiritual refreshment � and rigorous demand � have the power to radically transform a person’s life. May they do so, and continue to do so, to mine! As preparation for Confession, Purity of Heart calls for honest examination of conscience and discernment. Does any one of us will purely the Good, Kierkegaard asks � including himself? Likely not � but nevertheless, we are called to do so. Let us not excuse ourselves � especially not by hiding behind others � or behind the demands of worldly success. “Eternity asks solely about faithfulness.�
Kierkegaard takes aim at the reader with some level of worldly success or advantage who justifies misdeeds � perhaps exploitation of workers, dishonest business practices, political finagling, or clever manipulation of others to one’s own advantage � as well as the reader who, deep inside, thinks him- or herself superior � and therefore worthy of more than fellow human beings. To will one thing means to will the same good for all human beings, and explicitly not to will any advantage to oneself, one’s family or one’s clan. He also calls out the person who excuses misdeeds by his low position or lack of advantage. More subtly, he calls out the reader who acts with seeming integrity � but for reward, or because of fear of punishment, or to look good, or for other egocentric reasons � not for the sake of the Good. In contrast to the lives of active individuals, in “the extreme case of the incurable sufferer� Kierkegaard calls forth a liberating courage for all who suffer.
Written in Kierkegaard’s own name, the language is intentionally simple and accessible to the general reader (unlike Kierkegaard’s difficult pseudonymous works Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death � the only other books by SK that I’ve read � so far). I found it greatly inspiring of quiet reflection, courage in thought and action, and humility.
Read
April 13, 2025The entire book is convicting, but the last few chapters especially cut to the heart and challenge the audience. Kierkegaard in short says that if you read and are not changed in how you act, then you haven't really read well at all. A simple idea, but so impactful and so easy for me to forget. May God grant the strength so that I do not merely know what purity of heart is, but that I would actually strive after it by willing one thing alone.
February 21, 2019
Most influential book in my life. It will be in yours, too.
Perhaps the first book that you should read if you want to get to know Kierkegaard. Yes, it is also perhaps the least philosophical/theological of all his work, and so in that regard is not at all representative of his body of work, but it is easier to read and understand. More than that, Purity of Heart does explain S.K.'s basic purpose in writing anything and everything: to will one thing, God in particular.
It is easier said than done, however, to will one thing, to will the Good. We say we do but are often double-minded. Therefore, the confessional tone of the book is absolutely critical and meaningful. Take it seriously.
Perhaps the first book that you should read if you want to get to know Kierkegaard. Yes, it is also perhaps the least philosophical/theological of all his work, and so in that regard is not at all representative of his body of work, but it is easier to read and understand. More than that, Purity of Heart does explain S.K.'s basic purpose in writing anything and everything: to will one thing, God in particular.
It is easier said than done, however, to will one thing, to will the Good. We say we do but are often double-minded. Therefore, the confessional tone of the book is absolutely critical and meaningful. Take it seriously.
March 7, 2007
From the translator's intro - "This isolation of man from the flock, from the mass, from the crowd and the heightening of his consciousness as an individual which the Eternal accomplishes is a central theme of Purity of Heart Is to Will One Thing. Before the quiet gaze of the Eternal, there is no hiding-place. As individuals we are what we are before God, and no mass opinion affects this in the least. Kierkegaard believed that his generation was seeking to live in mere time and to make the Eternal superfluous. He reminded them of the Eternal’s power to dissolve away time and to separate the crowd into individuals. In memory, in conscience, in remorse, in work at a calling, in the solitude, the Eternal still impinges upon the individual and awakens him to a consciousness both of himself and of his responsibility and of his worth to the Eternal."
October 29, 2022
Kierkegaard is relentless in his insistance that one's responsibility to the Good is the only thing that matters. That 'only' can get misleading if it is taken to imply neglect of other responsibilities, but the point is that 'other' responsibilities must be derivitave of wholehearted devotion to God.
August 17, 2023
Core filozofii Kierkegaarda a może filozofii w ogóle czyli pytanie o konceptualizacje życia, doświadczenia itd.
December 31, 2020
An excellent religious-philosophical work on individual responsibility toward integrity. Cogently and creatively argued with literary skill I can only hope rubbed off on me as I was reading.
July 17, 2011
If I could give this a 3 1/2 stars, I would.
Dense throughout, but if taken in small bites, Kierkegaard's labor against "double-mindedness" is very good and convicting. He is, of course, very thorough. Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death are much better works and gives a clearer sense of Kierkegaard's thought, so not a great starting point.
Dense throughout, but if taken in small bites, Kierkegaard's labor against "double-mindedness" is very good and convicting. He is, of course, very thorough. Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling and The Sickness Unto Death are much better works and gives a clearer sense of Kierkegaard's thought, so not a great starting point.
September 4, 2011
Read NOV 2002
Best quotes, "But even if the world gathered all its strength, there is on thing it is not able to do, it can no more punish an innocent one than it can put a dead person to death" (p. 97); "the lazy man always has a disproportionate power of imagination" (p. 116); and "in the eternal order, if the circumstances are difficult the obligation to speak is doubled" (p. 213).
Best quotes, "But even if the world gathered all its strength, there is on thing it is not able to do, it can no more punish an innocent one than it can put a dead person to death" (p. 97); "the lazy man always has a disproportionate power of imagination" (p. 116); and "in the eternal order, if the circumstances are difficult the obligation to speak is doubled" (p. 213).
Read
April 3, 2008Examines the barriers preventing us from willing one thing and what it really means to will one thing. Sometimes the writing is somewhat dense or obscure, but often I find myself in complete intuitive agreement with Kierkegaard’s outlook.
September 20, 2017
Don't read reviews of Kierkegaard. Read Kierkegaard instead.
February 3, 2019
Come forth, Kierkegaard! Cast aside your obfusc cloak and show the world the bona fide philosopher you are!
True to his overall style, Kierkegaard wishes to make the reader give themselves a thorough, inner once-over once-again. He does not preach, for he is not worthy of such officiousness � he wants the reader to understand what it takes to be truly will the One and Only, the Good. Entwined with the narrative we get the familiar themes of suffering, individuality, disinterestedness, and fidelity, all of them expounded upon with the poetic pulchritude and philosophical clarity that truly warrants the attribute Kierkegaardian, with or without paradoxes.
This book is supposed to be an edifying one, a buttress to one's own castle of faith. For me, it had both edifying (sans the spirituality, alas), and poetical aspects, for not only did it impart the sense of faithfulness and loyalty towards one's ideals with terrific gusto, but it also gave me a glimpse of how it might feel when a believer encounters such phrases as "God is all" or "God is love". This might be blasphemous or wholly redundant for someone who actually vows fidelity towards the Halls of Heaven, but I think it is still a very considerably achievement in poetical terms (indeed, the aforementioned phrases came across as bloody trite to me before). Such sensual luxuriousness of course goes strictly contrariwise as the author meant the book to be read, but one must keep one's head in face of opposition and ridicule, mustn't one, Søren?
Kierkegaard's honesty and painstaking desire to get his points across for the edification of his brethren is nothing short of commendable. It's also unqualifiedly disarming. This time around, writing under his own moniker, K. let the jocularity and invective rest, and he concentrate on the bare rudiments of what he saw was the sole path to Truth. Now, I saw it fit the simply keep the review short and succinct, while allowing the penmanship of the not-so-gloomy Dane to speak for himself.
"[W]ith excuses it is even worse than with a virulent disease, for no one dies of a disease simply because others have died of it."
"But talk takes the name of enthusiasm in vain by proclaiming loudly from the housetops what is should work out in silence."
"For like a poisonous breath over the fields, like a mass of locusts over Egypt, so the swarm of excuses is a general plague, a ruinous infection among men, that eats off the sprouts of the Eternal."
And to conclude with this masterful epigram:
"He whose means are invariably just as important as the end, never comes too late."
True to his overall style, Kierkegaard wishes to make the reader give themselves a thorough, inner once-over once-again. He does not preach, for he is not worthy of such officiousness � he wants the reader to understand what it takes to be truly will the One and Only, the Good. Entwined with the narrative we get the familiar themes of suffering, individuality, disinterestedness, and fidelity, all of them expounded upon with the poetic pulchritude and philosophical clarity that truly warrants the attribute Kierkegaardian, with or without paradoxes.
This book is supposed to be an edifying one, a buttress to one's own castle of faith. For me, it had both edifying (sans the spirituality, alas), and poetical aspects, for not only did it impart the sense of faithfulness and loyalty towards one's ideals with terrific gusto, but it also gave me a glimpse of how it might feel when a believer encounters such phrases as "God is all" or "God is love". This might be blasphemous or wholly redundant for someone who actually vows fidelity towards the Halls of Heaven, but I think it is still a very considerably achievement in poetical terms (indeed, the aforementioned phrases came across as bloody trite to me before). Such sensual luxuriousness of course goes strictly contrariwise as the author meant the book to be read, but one must keep one's head in face of opposition and ridicule, mustn't one, Søren?
Kierkegaard's honesty and painstaking desire to get his points across for the edification of his brethren is nothing short of commendable. It's also unqualifiedly disarming. This time around, writing under his own moniker, K. let the jocularity and invective rest, and he concentrate on the bare rudiments of what he saw was the sole path to Truth. Now, I saw it fit the simply keep the review short and succinct, while allowing the penmanship of the not-so-gloomy Dane to speak for himself.
"[W]ith excuses it is even worse than with a virulent disease, for no one dies of a disease simply because others have died of it."
"But talk takes the name of enthusiasm in vain by proclaiming loudly from the housetops what is should work out in silence."
"For like a poisonous breath over the fields, like a mass of locusts over Egypt, so the swarm of excuses is a general plague, a ruinous infection among men, that eats off the sprouts of the Eternal."
And to conclude with this masterful epigram:
"He whose means are invariably just as important as the end, never comes too late."
January 21, 2025
What is striking in Kierkegaard's writing is the themes of suffering, isolation, shame, and punishment. How you understand these concepts in relation to God clearly depends on your conception of Him, and so in making these remarks, I will stick as closely to the canonical God as Kierkegaard understood Him. Kierkegaard begins this devotional address by dedicating it to "that solitary individual". He attempts to strip the reader down so that he stands before himself as he would stand before God.
What he describes in this devotional address is impossible, the path he describes, the one he suggests is necessary, is one filled with welcomed punishment and suffering. He describes striving toward an unattainable ideal. This is forgotten in modern Christianity; they neglect that it is not enough to merely conceptualize such an ideal, to fragmentize it, and wander only vaguely toward those portions that appear most within reach. What is required is faith, and faith demands resignation. It constitutes a handing over of one's life in exchange for nothing. "It does not dare to promise you earthly gain if you enter upon and in dedication persevere in this conviction. On the contrary, if persevered in, it will make your life more taxing, and frequently perhaps wearisome" (pg. 195).
I have a great deal of respect for Kierkegaard's theology. In many ways, it emphasizes the extremity of one line of Christian thought that isolates the individual and with regard to mortal life, describes something strenuous and excruciating. This is the view of Christianity that I am most sympathetic towards. Whether his theology obtains is of no real consequence. It provided a means to drive him to an extremum. What is there is of little import; what takes precedence is that he arrived there.
What he describes in this devotional address is impossible, the path he describes, the one he suggests is necessary, is one filled with welcomed punishment and suffering. He describes striving toward an unattainable ideal. This is forgotten in modern Christianity; they neglect that it is not enough to merely conceptualize such an ideal, to fragmentize it, and wander only vaguely toward those portions that appear most within reach. What is required is faith, and faith demands resignation. It constitutes a handing over of one's life in exchange for nothing. "It does not dare to promise you earthly gain if you enter upon and in dedication persevere in this conviction. On the contrary, if persevered in, it will make your life more taxing, and frequently perhaps wearisome" (pg. 195).
I have a great deal of respect for Kierkegaard's theology. In many ways, it emphasizes the extremity of one line of Christian thought that isolates the individual and with regard to mortal life, describes something strenuous and excruciating. This is the view of Christianity that I am most sympathetic towards. Whether his theology obtains is of no real consequence. It provided a means to drive him to an extremum. What is there is of little import; what takes precedence is that he arrived there.
April 25, 2019
Wonderful short book by SK. Touches on some of his major themes and is a great introduction to his work. You can hear the passion coming through (especially if read aloud) with the italics, exclamation points, repetition. Similar to Nietzsche. So much feeling and depth. Here are my notes:
1. Intro: Man and the Eternal
- SK carefully distinguishes between the earthly/temporal and the Eternal/"the Good" as the former being the external, tangible things and the latter the internal, invisible things. "Only the Eternal applies to each human being." It is the only thing that is the same within each of us, i.e. the soul.
2. Remorse, Repentance, Confession
- SK talks about becoming "friends" with remorse, embracing it, instead of running away from it, because it is benefitting you. It is the Eternal trying to have a dialogue with you. This reminds me of the "healthy shame" spoken of in the book "Healing the Shame that Binds You" and is distinguished from a toxic, unhealthy shame.
- Wonderful quote: "When we are thinking of divine things, the deeper the stillness the better."
- Also, "The prayer does not change God, but it changes the one who offers it."
3. Barriers to Willing One Thing
- SK suggests that the only thing can be willed alone is the Good. He talks at length about being "double-minded" and how they are many avenues to this kind of thinking, which can come upon us very subtly. We may think we are willing one thing (the Good) but are actually deceiving ourselves with double-mindedness and ulterior motives.
- Quote: "To change it into small coins is not to use love rightly. No, he [must] love with all of his love."
- Also, "When the lover gives away his whole love, he keeps it entire--in the purity of his heart."
- SK reminds us that this internal work must be done in silence, not loudly proclaimed from the rooftops.
- SK suggests that all coveted things lack unity (only the Good has true unity), and so to covet any external thing makes one double-minded, because his mind takes on the quality of the thing he covets.
5. Barriers...
- Quote: "There is only one proof that the Eternal exists: faith in it."
- SK personifies the abstract (Eternal) so that we can understand it in human terms.
- Beautiful analogy of seeking the Good as a child seeks its mother by walking towards it from across the room. The mother does not actually support the child. She imitates the child's movements and so the child believes it is not walking alone. Her face beckons to it. "So the child walks alone with eyes fixed upon the mother's face, not on the difficulties along the way; supporting himself by arms that do not hold on to him...he is proving that he can do without her."
- Quote: "You cannot shame someone without incurring shame yourself. You cannot injure someone without injuring yourself."
- SK finds that boundary (limit) of the world, because it must always exist in the temporal, subject to time and decay, and not the Eternal.
- Quote: "When the good man truly stands on the other side of the boundary line inside the fortification of eternity, he is strong, stronger than the whole world."
7. Barriers...
- SK warns against "busyness" because of its ability to rob us of inward reflection and dialogue with the Eternal.
- Quote: "The poet pulls us into the very complex center of life."
10. The Price of Willing One Thing
- SK discusses suffering and the difference between "active" (meaningful) suffering and that which has no significance.
- Quote: "Go with God to God, continually take that one step more, that single step that even you, who cannot move a limb, are still able to take; that single step, that even the prisoner, who has lost his freedom, even the one in chains, whose feet are not free, is still able to take: and you are committed to the Good. Nobody, not even the greatest that has ever lived, can do more than you."
- Also, "When the sufferer actually takes his suffering to heart, then he receives help from the Eternal toward his decision."
11. The Price...
- Quote: "Thus patience...performs an even greater miracle than courage. Courage voluntarily chooses suffering that may be avoided; but patience achieves freedom in unavoidable suffering."
13. What Then Must I Do?
- SK abhors the crowd, the mob, the mass and how an individual can lose himself and the connection with his conscience while absorbed into the crowd.
- Quote: "For in the infinite there is no place; the individual is himself the place."
- SK challenges the reader to take responsibility for himself as an individual, rather than going along with the crowd because it's easier.
- He also distinguishes between the voice of our mind/ego and the voice of the Eternal. He doesn't use the word ego but it is essentially what he's speaking of.
14. What Then...
- SK asks what our attitude of mind is within our occupation. What are you doing here on this earth? And what is your approach to it?
- My thoughts while reading this book kept coming back to the idea of how impossible it seems to will one thing (the Good) and yet how simple it is, too. It can become a daily practice, like anything else.
- SK lived what he preached: he wrote 12 hours a day, prayed morning and night, walked among the people at noon, held to his beliefs despite ridicule, and suffered emotionally and physically, yet embraced that suffering. In this respect he was similar to Kafka and Dostoevsky.
15. Conclusion
- Quote: "Pausing is not a sluggish response; it is also movement. It is the inward movement of the heart. To pause is to deepen oneself in inwardness."
Translator's Introduction
- SK's real goal was the "awakening of the individual"
- The root of equality is in the unchanging personal relation between the individual and God
- Final quote: "The most important thing of all is that a man stand right toward God, does not try to wrench away from something, but rather penetrates it until it yields its explanation. Whether or not it turns out as he wishes; it is still the best of all."
1. Intro: Man and the Eternal
- SK carefully distinguishes between the earthly/temporal and the Eternal/"the Good" as the former being the external, tangible things and the latter the internal, invisible things. "Only the Eternal applies to each human being." It is the only thing that is the same within each of us, i.e. the soul.
2. Remorse, Repentance, Confession
- SK talks about becoming "friends" with remorse, embracing it, instead of running away from it, because it is benefitting you. It is the Eternal trying to have a dialogue with you. This reminds me of the "healthy shame" spoken of in the book "Healing the Shame that Binds You" and is distinguished from a toxic, unhealthy shame.
- Wonderful quote: "When we are thinking of divine things, the deeper the stillness the better."
- Also, "The prayer does not change God, but it changes the one who offers it."
3. Barriers to Willing One Thing
- SK suggests that the only thing can be willed alone is the Good. He talks at length about being "double-minded" and how they are many avenues to this kind of thinking, which can come upon us very subtly. We may think we are willing one thing (the Good) but are actually deceiving ourselves with double-mindedness and ulterior motives.
- Quote: "To change it into small coins is not to use love rightly. No, he [must] love with all of his love."
- Also, "When the lover gives away his whole love, he keeps it entire--in the purity of his heart."
- SK reminds us that this internal work must be done in silence, not loudly proclaimed from the rooftops.
- SK suggests that all coveted things lack unity (only the Good has true unity), and so to covet any external thing makes one double-minded, because his mind takes on the quality of the thing he covets.
5. Barriers...
- Quote: "There is only one proof that the Eternal exists: faith in it."
- SK personifies the abstract (Eternal) so that we can understand it in human terms.
- Beautiful analogy of seeking the Good as a child seeks its mother by walking towards it from across the room. The mother does not actually support the child. She imitates the child's movements and so the child believes it is not walking alone. Her face beckons to it. "So the child walks alone with eyes fixed upon the mother's face, not on the difficulties along the way; supporting himself by arms that do not hold on to him...he is proving that he can do without her."
- Quote: "You cannot shame someone without incurring shame yourself. You cannot injure someone without injuring yourself."
- SK finds that boundary (limit) of the world, because it must always exist in the temporal, subject to time and decay, and not the Eternal.
- Quote: "When the good man truly stands on the other side of the boundary line inside the fortification of eternity, he is strong, stronger than the whole world."
7. Barriers...
- SK warns against "busyness" because of its ability to rob us of inward reflection and dialogue with the Eternal.
- Quote: "The poet pulls us into the very complex center of life."
10. The Price of Willing One Thing
- SK discusses suffering and the difference between "active" (meaningful) suffering and that which has no significance.
- Quote: "Go with God to God, continually take that one step more, that single step that even you, who cannot move a limb, are still able to take; that single step, that even the prisoner, who has lost his freedom, even the one in chains, whose feet are not free, is still able to take: and you are committed to the Good. Nobody, not even the greatest that has ever lived, can do more than you."
- Also, "When the sufferer actually takes his suffering to heart, then he receives help from the Eternal toward his decision."
11. The Price...
- Quote: "Thus patience...performs an even greater miracle than courage. Courage voluntarily chooses suffering that may be avoided; but patience achieves freedom in unavoidable suffering."
13. What Then Must I Do?
- SK abhors the crowd, the mob, the mass and how an individual can lose himself and the connection with his conscience while absorbed into the crowd.
- Quote: "For in the infinite there is no place; the individual is himself the place."
- SK challenges the reader to take responsibility for himself as an individual, rather than going along with the crowd because it's easier.
- He also distinguishes between the voice of our mind/ego and the voice of the Eternal. He doesn't use the word ego but it is essentially what he's speaking of.
14. What Then...
- SK asks what our attitude of mind is within our occupation. What are you doing here on this earth? And what is your approach to it?
- My thoughts while reading this book kept coming back to the idea of how impossible it seems to will one thing (the Good) and yet how simple it is, too. It can become a daily practice, like anything else.
- SK lived what he preached: he wrote 12 hours a day, prayed morning and night, walked among the people at noon, held to his beliefs despite ridicule, and suffered emotionally and physically, yet embraced that suffering. In this respect he was similar to Kafka and Dostoevsky.
15. Conclusion
- Quote: "Pausing is not a sluggish response; it is also movement. It is the inward movement of the heart. To pause is to deepen oneself in inwardness."
Translator's Introduction
- SK's real goal was the "awakening of the individual"
- The root of equality is in the unchanging personal relation between the individual and God
- Final quote: "The most important thing of all is that a man stand right toward God, does not try to wrench away from something, but rather penetrates it until it yields its explanation. Whether or not it turns out as he wishes; it is still the best of all."
July 29, 2023
Kierkegaard was a god fearing and anxious man and this is so intensely woven into his work. It can be a little repetitive in places, but generally Purity of Heart is a great mirror of a book that asks the reader to analyze their life and actions and thoughts, and the ultimate reason for them. Not the worldly material-social reasons, but an internal individual sense of "Good". Parts of this I was very engaged in and others I found a tad tedious to push thru, but each was important and wrapped up in an effective and satisfying couple of conclusion chapters. Will need to read again but the thought provoking ability of the first read left me more satisfied than I expected to be.
November 14, 2021
Great wisdom in here! It was hard to get through/grasp sometimes. Reading out loud helped a lot!
August 7, 2024
Reading the translator’s intro and note made me appreciate the book even more. Definitely an “opbyggelig� work; I feel like anyone who wants to be built up by examining their faith as a present individual (as opposed to a community or heritage) should read this.
Read
May 14, 2020Kierkegaard's 'polemic against the mass' (9)...
Søren Kierkegaard (SK) has been in my general consciousness for a while now (see timeline at end if interested), so this feels very satisfying and rewarding to finish. Now that I am finished, let me just say that I do not understand philosophers' need to write in the passive voice and to write unbelievably long run-on sentences. Reading this was like wading through sand.
This is an address concerning the office of confession, and is part of a volume called Edifying Addresses of Varied Tenor, published in 1847. According to the translator's introduction, in this address, Kierkegaard abandons the more indirect method of writing in his other philosophical works. Those works develop a sort of exposition, fleshing out the categories of life that are aesthetic, ethical, and religious. Here, it dives directly into the religious way of life. SK '[uses] the knife' (7) and is not afraid to convict. Yet, he does not seek to win over the reader by rhetoric but only asks the reader for an honest examination of his or her intentions.
SK is very meta. He set aside a chapter to describe the role of the speaker during an address (which is to speak and let the reader appropriate it into his own knowledge and will) and in his preface, he describes the metaphor of a woman who has embroidered an altar cloth with beautiful flowers to honor God and facilitate worship. The issue would be if later, a worshipper fixated on a mistake in the cloth or the beauty of the art (the cloth itself) instead of the meaning/purpose of the cloth, which is to direct attention to God. And so he tells the reader to focus not on the eloquence of his words or on critiquing the work but to focus on the truth it is trying to communicate to the reader. This reminded me very much of CS Lewis' Screwtape Letters, where in a later chapter, Screwtape delights in the fact that many modern intellectuals argue so much over the text itself that no one ever asks "is this true?" and never gains anything from reading. It also reminds me of a description I once read of Aquinas which said that Aquinas purposefully wrote in a very dry manner so that the reader would not be taken up by the beauty of the language but focus on the truth.
All this to say, I did not expect this address to read like an edifying Christian book. I was ready to analyze SK's philosophy, take caution against any existential threads that might stray from orthodoxy; but instead, what I found seemed to resound with truth. Ironically, when I was wary of controversial claims, I found statements that seemed rather familiar and even hackneyed. A lot of his messages were what I would hear a pastor say today. Hidden in the malaise of lethargy and the single moment of salvation that the entire lifestyle of Christianity, of devotion, is forgotten. Such an all-in lifestyle is not merely for saints, as SK very clearly shows that Christianity is the great equalizer� even the sufferer can partake in willing the good and pursuing purity of heart. (On a side note, I feel like SK provides a compelling case against the worldly cure of Marxism... in fact, I believe he criticized Marx).
I find it utterly fascinating that in existentialism, a philosophy that is seen to throw off fetters of traditional ethics and institutions, finds in Kierkegaard's Christian worldview an approach to virtue that is perhaps more severe than even Old Testament law! Please do not extrapolate, but what I mean is that as Jesus said in the gospels that whoever merely hates a brother really commits murder, SK drives through to the purity of motive, of the will. Not external actions, but internal orientation matters.
*I cannot help but feel that Kierkegaard brings in existentialism to help understand what it means to be a Christian with scintillating clarity. Something about Christianity may seem absurd to the outsider. Suffering as a source of blessing? Giving up prosperity, comfort in this world? But the Christian understands that suffering is a source of blessing because it can draw us nearer to God; giving up building a name for oneself in this world means nothing because one will be known by name in eternity. Yet, he flips the tables on the believer too, because even these things can be done externally, deceitfully. The two greatest evils are to him, indolence and cleverness, signs of evasion. Entering into suffering cannot occur if one kills the wish to get better; if one detaches oneself from all emotion. The suffering must be brought to God. Giving up riches in this world does not matter if it is done out of fear of punishment, if it indicates only a certain degree of commitment, or if it is done with egocentric motives.*
In a sense, this also reminded me of Heschel's book on the Sabbath as well, due to SK's emphasis on the fear and trembling we must have before God and the very reality of the eternal versus the temporal. It reminded me of Corrie Ten Boom's story, of how no matter what circumstance she was in, she found hope in God... how even in the midst of intense injustice still found things to repent of.
And now! Most importantly, I pray that the things I read do not foolishly stir up emotion in me and affect no change whatsoever in my behavior. I feel like I am applying it little by little though, in conjunction with prayer. I find myself reminding myself the importance of my will and my priorities in life. I still hope to read Either-Or someday, but for now I think I basically have what his main thesis for life was and what he wanted to communicate. Plus, I do not have that kind of stamina.
____________
Remaining question:
-We need certain emphases at certain points in our lives, so I don't think Kierkegaard's focus on the individual does not mean that he is casting off all society or even endorsing the life of a hermit over any domestic matters (see end of chapter 13). Yet, it cannot be denied that community is an essential part of Christianity. How do we remain faithful as individuals while living in community, and how do we as members of a community encourage purity of heart? (I think one clue is seen in his description of a friend who gives counsel in conjunction with conscience)
-Would it be accurate to say that Puritanism resembles a lot of SK's sentiments? (Interestingly, the translator mentions that SK was disappointed at Luther's action stopping at mere rebellion against the Pope, instead of laying the even costlier responsibility of vocation before God, the 'inward reformation' p.8)
____________
Narwhal's Kierkegaard Timeline:
-I first heard Kierkegaard's name in high school... in Zee Avi's song 'Just You and Me' where she goes "You were sitting at the coffee table where you're reading Kierkegaard." I literally had no idea what Kierkegaard was, let alone how to spell it and tried to google it I think. I asked my mom and was shocked and delighted that she knew who this person was. I'm sure my mom said something like we have one of his books at home, etc.
-At a certain age I became really attracted to all philosophy and unsuccessfully attempted to tackle Fear and Trembling. I was just confused / felt that something was unorthodox about his ideas (probably a vague distrust towards existentialism)
-I learned about existentialism & Hannah Arendt in school. I think I was just really attracted to existentialism for some reason because it seemed like a truly modern philosophy, and something that flipped tradition on its head, yet not explicitly siding with a typical conservative or progressive worldview (though with caution... nihilism and existentialism are not strangers). I also learn that Pascal is existential at turns and evocative of SK. Growing desire to read his works... At this point he's vaguely on my reading list.
-Peter Kreeft in Back to Virtue succinctly summarizes SK as the movement from aesthetic to authentic life by taking a spiritual & religious leap. Desire to read intensifies...
-I am learning about Sartre and Camus very little here and there, trying to glean stuff from a podcast (unsuccessfully), generally fascinated because I am convinced a lot of modern thought is existential. Then at Oxford my friend mentions existential psychology, and then another friend jokes that he's going to read Either-Or on the plane. Then I also hear that The Plague is sold out across the bookstores. I add Either-Or to my booklist and during my last few days at Oxford, actively go around secondhand bookstores to see if they have copies, but to no avail.
-I come home and later on I ask my mom again if we have any books by Kierkegaard, hopefully Either-Or? I find out that Either-Or comes in two parts and we only have part 2. We still have fear and trembling... and my mom pulls out this one and says so many people have recommended it to her. It looks slim and I am ready to dig in. Little did I know...
Søren Kierkegaard (SK) has been in my general consciousness for a while now (see timeline at end if interested), so this feels very satisfying and rewarding to finish. Now that I am finished, let me just say that I do not understand philosophers' need to write in the passive voice and to write unbelievably long run-on sentences. Reading this was like wading through sand.
This is an address concerning the office of confession, and is part of a volume called Edifying Addresses of Varied Tenor, published in 1847. According to the translator's introduction, in this address, Kierkegaard abandons the more indirect method of writing in his other philosophical works. Those works develop a sort of exposition, fleshing out the categories of life that are aesthetic, ethical, and religious. Here, it dives directly into the religious way of life. SK '[uses] the knife' (7) and is not afraid to convict. Yet, he does not seek to win over the reader by rhetoric but only asks the reader for an honest examination of his or her intentions.
SK is very meta. He set aside a chapter to describe the role of the speaker during an address (which is to speak and let the reader appropriate it into his own knowledge and will) and in his preface, he describes the metaphor of a woman who has embroidered an altar cloth with beautiful flowers to honor God and facilitate worship. The issue would be if later, a worshipper fixated on a mistake in the cloth or the beauty of the art (the cloth itself) instead of the meaning/purpose of the cloth, which is to direct attention to God. And so he tells the reader to focus not on the eloquence of his words or on critiquing the work but to focus on the truth it is trying to communicate to the reader. This reminded me very much of CS Lewis' Screwtape Letters, where in a later chapter, Screwtape delights in the fact that many modern intellectuals argue so much over the text itself that no one ever asks "is this true?" and never gains anything from reading. It also reminds me of a description I once read of Aquinas which said that Aquinas purposefully wrote in a very dry manner so that the reader would not be taken up by the beauty of the language but focus on the truth.
All this to say, I did not expect this address to read like an edifying Christian book. I was ready to analyze SK's philosophy, take caution against any existential threads that might stray from orthodoxy; but instead, what I found seemed to resound with truth. Ironically, when I was wary of controversial claims, I found statements that seemed rather familiar and even hackneyed. A lot of his messages were what I would hear a pastor say today. Hidden in the malaise of lethargy and the single moment of salvation that the entire lifestyle of Christianity, of devotion, is forgotten. Such an all-in lifestyle is not merely for saints, as SK very clearly shows that Christianity is the great equalizer� even the sufferer can partake in willing the good and pursuing purity of heart. (On a side note, I feel like SK provides a compelling case against the worldly cure of Marxism... in fact, I believe he criticized Marx).
I find it utterly fascinating that in existentialism, a philosophy that is seen to throw off fetters of traditional ethics and institutions, finds in Kierkegaard's Christian worldview an approach to virtue that is perhaps more severe than even Old Testament law! Please do not extrapolate, but what I mean is that as Jesus said in the gospels that whoever merely hates a brother really commits murder, SK drives through to the purity of motive, of the will. Not external actions, but internal orientation matters.
*I cannot help but feel that Kierkegaard brings in existentialism to help understand what it means to be a Christian with scintillating clarity. Something about Christianity may seem absurd to the outsider. Suffering as a source of blessing? Giving up prosperity, comfort in this world? But the Christian understands that suffering is a source of blessing because it can draw us nearer to God; giving up building a name for oneself in this world means nothing because one will be known by name in eternity. Yet, he flips the tables on the believer too, because even these things can be done externally, deceitfully. The two greatest evils are to him, indolence and cleverness, signs of evasion. Entering into suffering cannot occur if one kills the wish to get better; if one detaches oneself from all emotion. The suffering must be brought to God. Giving up riches in this world does not matter if it is done out of fear of punishment, if it indicates only a certain degree of commitment, or if it is done with egocentric motives.*
In a sense, this also reminded me of Heschel's book on the Sabbath as well, due to SK's emphasis on the fear and trembling we must have before God and the very reality of the eternal versus the temporal. It reminded me of Corrie Ten Boom's story, of how no matter what circumstance she was in, she found hope in God... how even in the midst of intense injustice still found things to repent of.
And now! Most importantly, I pray that the things I read do not foolishly stir up emotion in me and affect no change whatsoever in my behavior. I feel like I am applying it little by little though, in conjunction with prayer. I find myself reminding myself the importance of my will and my priorities in life. I still hope to read Either-Or someday, but for now I think I basically have what his main thesis for life was and what he wanted to communicate. Plus, I do not have that kind of stamina.
____________
Remaining question:
-We need certain emphases at certain points in our lives, so I don't think Kierkegaard's focus on the individual does not mean that he is casting off all society or even endorsing the life of a hermit over any domestic matters (see end of chapter 13). Yet, it cannot be denied that community is an essential part of Christianity. How do we remain faithful as individuals while living in community, and how do we as members of a community encourage purity of heart? (I think one clue is seen in his description of a friend who gives counsel in conjunction with conscience)
-Would it be accurate to say that Puritanism resembles a lot of SK's sentiments? (Interestingly, the translator mentions that SK was disappointed at Luther's action stopping at mere rebellion against the Pope, instead of laying the even costlier responsibility of vocation before God, the 'inward reformation' p.8)
____________
Narwhal's Kierkegaard Timeline:
-I first heard Kierkegaard's name in high school... in Zee Avi's song 'Just You and Me' where she goes "You were sitting at the coffee table where you're reading Kierkegaard." I literally had no idea what Kierkegaard was, let alone how to spell it and tried to google it I think. I asked my mom and was shocked and delighted that she knew who this person was. I'm sure my mom said something like we have one of his books at home, etc.
-At a certain age I became really attracted to all philosophy and unsuccessfully attempted to tackle Fear and Trembling. I was just confused / felt that something was unorthodox about his ideas (probably a vague distrust towards existentialism)
-I learned about existentialism & Hannah Arendt in school. I think I was just really attracted to existentialism for some reason because it seemed like a truly modern philosophy, and something that flipped tradition on its head, yet not explicitly siding with a typical conservative or progressive worldview (though with caution... nihilism and existentialism are not strangers). I also learn that Pascal is existential at turns and evocative of SK. Growing desire to read his works... At this point he's vaguely on my reading list.
-Peter Kreeft in Back to Virtue succinctly summarizes SK as the movement from aesthetic to authentic life by taking a spiritual & religious leap. Desire to read intensifies...
-I am learning about Sartre and Camus very little here and there, trying to glean stuff from a podcast (unsuccessfully), generally fascinated because I am convinced a lot of modern thought is existential. Then at Oxford my friend mentions existential psychology, and then another friend jokes that he's going to read Either-Or on the plane. Then I also hear that The Plague is sold out across the bookstores. I add Either-Or to my booklist and during my last few days at Oxford, actively go around secondhand bookstores to see if they have copies, but to no avail.
-I come home and later on I ask my mom again if we have any books by Kierkegaard, hopefully Either-Or? I find out that Either-Or comes in two parts and we only have part 2. We still have fear and trembling... and my mom pulls out this one and says so many people have recommended it to her. It looks slim and I am ready to dig in. Little did I know...
April 20, 2018
I really wanted to like this, but after rereading at least three pages without ANY memory of reading them before, I decided that I may just not be cut out for understanding Kierkegaard.
April 29, 2021
The title summarizes the book. The one thing which Kierkegaard would have us will is the Good. Ah, that’s not so easy, Søren. Even if the nature of the Good were well known, the distractions and self-deceptions that interfere with that single-mindedness in willing it are legion. It doesn’t help, Søren, that you never get around to telling us what the Good is, or rather how to recognize it and avoid those same snares that hobble our single-minded willing of it. For those who know, or think they know, the essence of the Good, this book can serve, as the author intended, as a preparation for the Office of Confession. For others, the book serves as literature rather than moral edification, which would be a deep disappointment to the author.
July 23, 2009
I had to take a break from the food/farming books, so I went back to my other favorite: Kierkegaard.
I gave this one 2 stars and that is an average of 190 pages of one star "didn't like it" and about 20 pages of four star "really liked it." Chapter 13 is called "What Then Must I Do? Live as an "Individual"" and is vintage Kierkegaard. Beyond that, the book really isn't worth reading. That chapter is probably a decent first plunge into Kierkegaard though. It doesn't get to the depth of explaining the individual that Sickness Unto Death gets to, but it is much easier to understand.
Back to the food/farming books!
I gave this one 2 stars and that is an average of 190 pages of one star "didn't like it" and about 20 pages of four star "really liked it." Chapter 13 is called "What Then Must I Do? Live as an "Individual"" and is vintage Kierkegaard. Beyond that, the book really isn't worth reading. That chapter is probably a decent first plunge into Kierkegaard though. It doesn't get to the depth of explaining the individual that Sickness Unto Death gets to, but it is much easier to understand.
Back to the food/farming books!
April 15, 2008
Christian Existentialism clean and easy. If you have never read Kierkegaard and would like to, try this one on for size. It just might turn your definition of good to Good (like changing Lego blocks into a house).
Read
August 18, 2016If someone wanted to know something about Kierkegaard, I would recommend this to them.
Nowhere in the history of philosophy or even of literature as a whole is their a writer whose insights square better experience, and have more to say. Always a humbling guy to read.
Nowhere in the history of philosophy or even of literature as a whole is their a writer whose insights square better experience, and have more to say. Always a humbling guy to read.
Read
July 5, 2020To read this book is to be pinned on a cushion like an insect and examined closely with a magnifying glass. Utterly unlike anything I have ever read; I will return to it next weekend once I have some distance
July 5, 2012
Thanks, buddy.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 110 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.