Kierkegaard's writings

"Without authority," a phrase Kierkegaard repeatedly applied to himself and his writings, is an appropriate common title for this volume of five short works that in various ways deal with the concept and practice of authority. The Lily in the Field and the Bird of the Air presupposes the teaching authority of the lily and the bird, derived from the authoritative Gospel injunction to learn from them. Two Ethical-Religious Essays deal with the limits of authorization for a witness to the truth and with the contrast between the authority of the genius and that of the apostle. The reaming works - Three Discourses at the Communion on Fridays, An Upbuilding Discourse, and Two Discourses at the Communion on Fridays - presuppose Gospel authority in mediations on forgiveness and the power of love.

With Christian Discourse, Kierkegaard intended to conclude the signed "second authorship" following Concluding Unscientific Postscript as the end of the pseudonymous writings. Parts One and Three, "The Cares of the Pagans" and "Thoughts That Wound from Behind - for Upbuilding," contain a polemical element and constitute the overture to the collision with the established order of Christendom. The dominant theme of Parts Two and Four, "States of Mind in the Strife of Suffering" and "Discourses at the Communion on Fridays," is a reassuring affirmation of the joy and blessedness of the Christian life in a world of adversity and suffering. Written in ordinary language, the work combines simplicity and inwardness with reflection and presents crucial Christian concepts and presuppositions with unusual clarity. Among the discourses are some of Kierkegaard's masterpieces.

As a spiritual autobiography, Kierkegaard's The Point of View for My Work as an Author stands with such great works as Augustine's Confessions and Newman's Apologia pro vita sua - but with a difference. It is neither a confessional autobiography nor a defense. It is an author's story of a lifetime of writing, his understanding of the common aim and comprehensive coherence of the maze of his greatly varied pseudonymous and signed works. Entries in the Supplement document the context and development of the writings on the authorship as a whole. In addition they disclose Kierkegaard's considerations as he wrestled with decisions about publishing the three works and other works that were "the fruit of the year 1848...the year of my richest productivity."

"In his praise for Part I of Upbuilding Discourses in Various Spirits, the eminent Kierkegaard scholar Eduard Geismar said, "I am of the opinion that nothing of what he has written is to such a degree before the face of God. Anyone who really wants to understand Kierkegaard does well to begin with it." These discourses, composed after Kierkegaard had initially intended to end his public writing career, constitute the first work of his "second authorship."" "Characterized by Kierkegaard as ethical-ironic, Part One, on the theme of "Purity of Heart Is to Will One Thing," offers a penetrating discussion of double-mindedness and ethical integrity; the irony lies in the relation between factuality and ideality. Part Two, "What We Learn from the Lilies in the Field and from the Birds of the Air," is humorous for Kierkegaard in that it exposes an inverted qualitative difference between the learner and the teacher. In Part Three, "The Gospel of Sufferings, Christian Discourses," the philosopher explores the theme of joy, as in "The Joy of It That the School of Sufferings Educates for Eternity.""--BOOK JACKET.

The 'sickness' which Kierkegaard's book refers to as 'unto death' is resistance to this belief. It is the inclination to accept that as far as the individual is concerned, death is indeed the end. Now why should Kierkegaard want to call that a sickness? After all, even in his own time there must have been people strong both in might and body who rejected the Christian teaching of sin and salvation, and who faced what they accepted as total extinction with equanimity. And today, of course, even in societies that once proudly professed Christian principles, the rejection of Christian belief--or at least the failure unequivocally to accept it--is the rule rather than the exception. So in what sense can the denial of Christian dogma constitute an illness?