As we turn to this challenging and complex work, I offer a very brief overview of the journey ahead.
Anti-Climacus writes of what it is and how it is to exist âbefore God,â given that there is an âinfinite qualitative differenceâ between the Creator and the creature. Thereâs no choice about being in some relationship with God, in the becoming self that is a given from/by the âConstituting Power.â But there is life-determining choosing to be done about how one relates to God, for thereâs a calling in whatâs given for the human self. To choose to be wrongly related to God is to be in despair, whether or not one acknowledges that openly or feels it inwardly. That is the sickness unto death. The first part of this âChristian psychological expositionâ offers a detailed analysis of the various forms to be found in the variegated territory of despair. In being related to the eternal God, the creaturely self finds the proper measure for assessing lifeâs afflictions. All other problems and perils pale before despair, which, as ever present, is indeed the sickness âuntoâ death.
This becoming self is a relation as a duality of the temporal and the eternal, the finite and the infinite. But the selfâs narrative is the story of a third elementâa âpositive thirdââas the self relates itself to itself, choosing how the elements of the self will come together. Thus, despair can be analyzed in terms of an imbalance in the constituting elements: freedom and necessity, infinitude and finitude. Or the selfâs despair can be analyzed in terms of the degree of consciousness to be found in the selfâs relating to itself and to the Constituting Power. Varying degrees of consciousness characterize the selfâs choosing either not to be the self it is being called to be or choosing to be a self other than that calling.
The second part, âDespair Is Sin,â advances the analysis through the explicit judgment that this âmisrelationâ to God is sin, which is always against God. Again, the growing consciousness of the self marks a despairing deepening of the sinful condition. Anti-Climacus depicts this development in terms of the Trinity. As constituted, one exists âbefore God,â and one is invited to live âon the most intimate terms with God.â But the self may find that news too good to be true and in weakness or in strength be offended and go its own way. That going astray is not a matter of ignorance, but is rooted in a willed choosing. Anti-Climacus offers a sharp critique of his beloved Socrates, who is here understood to fail to recognize that one can know the good and yet not choose it. Moreover, the pseudonym tightens the knot of judgment by an appeal to the doctrine of hereditary sin. The intensification in consciousness and sin continues before God, who came to be born, suffer, and die for this self. Finally, there is the sin against the Holy Spirit, as in dismissing Christianity or as in saying that one has no opinion about the gospel that has been truly preached to them.
Thus a grim account awaits us, but throughout Anti-Climacusâs message for âupbuilding and awakening,â there are pointed references to the saving action of God toward the despairing creatures. There too, one is before a God who is marked by an âinfinite qualitative differenceâ from the creatures. For the creatures, this radical God is risking the possibility of offense. Yet all the same, in no way does God differ from the creature more than in forgiving sins. In that difference there lies the hope that one may come to be grounded transparently in God after all, which is the definition of faith.
Preface
Kierkegaard was on the verge of publishing this book under his own name, but at the last minute, Anti-Climacus appeared as the author. As we have noted in the biographical sketch, Kierkegaard did not regard himself as âa Christian on an extraordinarily high level,â the ranking Anti-Climacus receives from him. As Johannes Climacus in 1846, Kierkegaard had already made the point that while he did not claim to be a Christian, he could present Christian claims and use them as a measuring stick in relationship to what was going on in Danish Christendom. Kierkegaard will not bind Anti-Climacusâs presentation of those claims to his own flawed example, though the pseudonym does identify the direction of his striving and S. Kierkegaard appears on the title page as âeditor,â the one who âgives outâ (udgivet) the message. There is a claim, a calling, in that message. Johannes Climacus offers his readers a âthought project,â but âAnti-Climacus is thetical.â A truth claim is at stake in the pages of SUD.
The claim is presented in a âChristian psychological exposition.â This is not the first time that the word psychological appears in a pseudonymâs title. Back in 1844, in The Concept of Anxiety, Vigilius Haufniensis had offered âa simple psychologically orienting deliberation on the dogmatic issue of hereditary sin.â There we are told that when psychology deals with sin, the âmood becomes that of persistent observation, like the fearlessness of a secret agent.â Thus Vigilius is âthe watchman of Copenhagen.â He is fearless in his observance of Copenhagen, but he lacks âearnestness [Alvor] expressed in courageous resistance.â Nonetheless, his book has a direction in mind. Its last sentence is, âAs soon as psychology has finished with anxiety, it is to be delivered to dogmatics.â In Anti-Climacus, the delivery has arrived. The first part of SUD is richly theological, but its category is despair as the sickness unto death. The second part completes the delivery already in its three-word title, âDespair Is Sin.â Thatâs unambiguously theological talk. It will be clear in the analysis to follow that each part speaks to the other in this âChristian psychological exposition.â
The title page for SUD employs varying font sizes and selective use of bold face. Now in a smaller (down two steps) font size but reclaiming the bold face of Sickness unto Death we find the words âfor upbuilding and awakening.â That gets us to a crucial point in Anti-Climacusâs preface. He writes:
Many may find the form of this âexpositionâ strange; it may seem to them too rigorous to be upbuilding and too upbuilding to be rigorously scholarly. . . . From the Christian point of view, everything, indeed everything, ought to serve for upbuilding. . . . It is precisely Christianityâs relation to life (in contrast to a scholarly distance from life) or the ethical aspect of Christianity that is upbuilding. . . . It is Christian heroismâa rarity, to be sureâto venture wholly to become oneself, an individual human being, this specific individual human being, alone before God.
The âdiscourses,â signed by Kierkegaard, carry âupbuildingâ in their titles. In each preface, Kierkegaard stresses that what he offers is âânot sermons,â because its author has no authority to preach.â But the discourses are located somewhere short of SUD in the progression of Kierkegaardâs authorship, for that sentence continues by saying the discourses are ââupbuilding discourses,â not discourses for upbuilding, because the speaker does not claim to be a teacher.â In other...