Ernst Meyer wrote:

>> There are three elements of your letter
>> with which I found myself in disagreement.
>> The first is its implicit denial of
>> Kierkegaard's conventional religiousness. 

and Locke Breaux replied:

> I really find it hard to believe you are writing this,
> if you have in fact read SK.  His entire project basically
> consisted of denying conventional religiousness,
> which to him was not religiousness at all,
> not even paganism, but mostly aesthetical creations
> mixed with a bit of ethics.  Ethics which,
> by the way, bowed without fail to careerist interests.

Your description of (Kierkegaard's) "Ethics, which ... bowed
without fail to careerist interests." startles and stuns me.
It suggests that you and I entertain diametrically opposed
intuitions of Kierkegaard as theologian, philosopher and poet.
It would be very useful for me, and perhaps for you also, to
explore our respective interpretations of Kierkegaard's ethics
in a systematic manner, and I will make some specific suggestions
of how we might do this, if you were interested.

The ambiguity of the term "conventional religiousness"
may best be clarified by specifying what Kierkegaard
appears to me to have "believed in". To make a beginning
of this important task, permit me to quote from a
"Stichwortregister" (index of key-words) to my German
Kierkegaard edition by Hajo Gerdes, one of its principal
translators:

     Orthodoxie - Kierkegaard hat das Christentum
     in der Form der pietistische gefaerbten
     lutherischen Orthodoxie kennengelernt
     und ist niemals an der inhaltlichen Richtigkeit
     der orthodoxen Lehre irre geworden.
     Rationalismus, Liberalismus und die beginnende
     historisch-kritische Erforschung der Bibel
     haben keinerlei Eindruck auf ihn gemacht.
     Kierkegaards Lebensfrage in Bezug auf den
     christlichen Glauben ist stets die der
     persoenlichen Aneignung gewesen; Anfechtung als
     Zweifel an der Wahrheit der Lehre oder der
     Ueberlieferung war ihm fremd.
     
     Eben diesen Vorwurf aber, dasz sie die christliche
     Lehre allein auf die Anerkennung der Lehre beziehe,
     erhebt Kierkegaard gegen die Orthodoxie als
     kirchliche Gruppe. So richtet sich denn sein
     spaeterer Angriff gerade auch gegen die Orthodoxie,
     sofern ihr Leben dem, was sie lehrt, in keiner Weise
     entspricht. 
                         Hayo Gerdes,
        Registerband zu den gesammelten Werken SK, p. 114

This summary which is supported by 29 citations of the text,
I paraphrase as follows:

     Orthodoxy: Kierkegaard learned to know Christianity
     in the form of pietistically tinted Lutheran orthodoxy,
     and never doubted the validity of orthodox teachings.
     Rationalism, liberalism and the incipient historical-
     critical investigation of the Bible make no impression
     on him whatever.
     The vital question for Kierkegaard with respect to
     Christian faith was always one of personal appropriation.
     Any temptation to doubt the truth of the teachings or
     the genunineness of their provenance was alien to him.
     
     The complaint which Kierkegaard made against orthodoxy
     as ecclesiastical establishment was that it contented
     itself with the mere acknowledgement of doctrine,
     and in his later years he attacked orthodoxy for the
     lack of correspondence between its conduct and its
     teachings.
                     Hayo Gerdes,
           Indexvolume to the Collected Works SK, p. 114

                      * * * * *

     Neues Testament - Das Neue Testament ist fuer
     Kierkegaard die authentische Urkunde der in
     Jesus Christus geschehenen Offenbarung Gottes.
     Ein Zweifel an der geschichtlichen Wahrheit der
     neutestamentlichen Berichte ist fuer Kierkegaard
     nicht moeglich.
     Selbst den ihn anfechtenden Zweifel an der
     Himmelfahrt Christi hat Kierkegaard unterdrueckt
     mit der Ueberlegung, dasz sein Mangel an Glaube
     oder richtiger seine mangelnde Verwirklichung
     der Nachfolge Christi ihn hier zweifeln lasse.
     
     Gleichwohl hat das Neue Testament fuer Kierkegaard
     nur insofern Glaubensbedeutung, wie es durch
     die glaubende Subjektivitaet als existenzbestimmend
     angeeignet wird. So werden z.B. die neutestamentlichen
     Wunder, die Kierkegaard fuer selbstverstaendlich
     so geschehen haelt, zu Zeichen des Aergernisses
     und der Erniedrigung des Herrn; denn Wunder zu tun
     ist des Traegers der Geistreligion nicht wuerdig,
     ist leidentliche Herablassung zu der wundersuechtigen 
     Art seines Volkes.
     
     Dergestalt kommt Kierkegaard in seinem lebendigen
     Verhaeltnis zum Neuen Testament zu einer Auswahl
     des Wesentlichen, wie es erstaunliche genau den
     Hauptergebnissen der historisch-kritischen Forschung
     am Neuen Testament entspricht. Daher erklaert
     sich der Schein der Modernitaet, der sein durch
     die Orthodoxie gepraegtes Verhaeltnis zum Buchstaben
     des Neuen Testaments leicht uebershen laeszt.
              Hayo Gerdes,
           Registerband zu den gesammelten Werken SK, p. 111

(supported with 80 citations of the text)

I paraphrase:

     For Kierkegaard, the New Testament is the authentic
     record of God's revelation of himself in Jesus Christ.
     Kierkegaard is incapable of doubting the historical
     accuracy of the accounts given in the New Testament.
     He even suppressed the doubts which tempted him
     concerning Christ's Ascension into heaven, explaining
     to himself that it was a deficiency of his faith,
     or more precisely, his deficinet imitation of Christ
     that was responsible for his doubt.
     
     At the same time, belief in the New Testament is
     significant for Kierkegaard only to the extent that
     it is subjectively appropriated by the believer
     whose existence it then determines.
     The miracles of the New Testament, for example, which
     Kierkegaard, of course, believes to be literally true,
     are signs of scandal and of humilation of the Lord;
     for to perform miracles is unworthy of the him who
     proclaims the religion of the spirit, who deigns
     (nonetheless) to condescend to the miracle-thirst
     of his people.
     
     In this manner, Kierkegaard, in his vital relationship
     to the New Testament, arrives at a selection of what
     is essential; a selection that corresponds surprisingly
     closely to the main conclusions of historical-critical
     research into the New Testament.
     This explains the appearance of modernity which is
     prone to lead one to overlook Kierkegaards relationship,
     determined by orthodoxy, to the letter of the New Testament.

                 Hayo Gerdes,
         Indexvolume to the Collected Works SK, p. 111

Assuming that you are right and Hajo Gerdes is wrong,
do you think it is reasonable that we should nonetheless
trust his translations of Kierkegaard?

But I would say respectfully, that I think you are
wrong, and Gerdes is closer to the truth.

His account corroborates the impression that I have
received from my own limited reading of Kierkegaard's writing.
I infer that he "believed in" the immortality of the soul, in
the forgiveness of sins, in the redemption of the individual
by faith in God, and in the effectiveness of prayer in
securing God's guidance for the day-to-day decisions in
our lives. I was startled when I recently read in Kierkegaard's
journals how, at the time of the death of Regine Olsen's father,
Kierkegaard was perplexed whether or not he should publish
a certain manuscript. As I remember, he wrote that he prayed
to God for guidance, and then made his decision in consequence
of this prayer. Since I read this passage in the library stacks,
I can't cite volume, page and date, but I can certainly find it,
if you don't believe me.

I think it would be a useful project for the two of us
to review together each of the hundred and nine citations
with which Hajo Gerdes supports the interpretation of
Kierkegaard's formal religiosity that I have quoted above.

If you are interested, please let me know,
I will mail you the refernces, and we can get started.
Thereafter we might, as a second project,
look in similar fashion at Kierkegaard's Ethics,
of which you say that they "bowed without fail
to careerist interests."

Ernst Meyer
review@netcom.com