The Instant, No. 10

Little observations

August 2.

1. Little observations

Take a perfectly arbitrary example, in order the better to see the truth.

Let us assume that God's will was that we men must not go out to the Deer Park.⁷⁷

This of course "man" could not put up with. What then would be the upshot? The upshot would be that the "priest" would make out that if, for example, one blessed the four-seated Holstein carriage and made the sign of the cross over the horses, then taking a drive to the Deer Park would be well pleasing to God.

The consequence therefore would be that people would go out to the Deer Park just as much as they do now, without any change, except that it had become dearer, cost perhaps five dollars for persons of rank, five dollars for the priests, and four cents for poor people. But then the excursion to the Deer Park would also have the enchantment of being at the same time...divine worship.

Perhaps the priests would have hit upon the thought of taking in hand themselves the business of hiring out horses and carriages, so that if it were to be thoroughly pleasing to God that one went out to the Deer Park, the carriage must be hired from the priests, perhaps a priest would go along, perhaps even (so that it might be singularly well pleasing to God) a priest would be the coachman, perhaps even (so that it might be well pleasing to God in the highest degree) a bishop would be the coachman. But to attain this, the absolute maximum of wellpleasingness to God, would be so costly that divine worship of this sort could only be enjoyed by those who, according to perfected Christianity (for the New Testament, it is well known, has another view) are also the only ones who have the means to please God perfectly...the millionaires.

2. The priests — the actors.

The actor is an honest man who says plainly, "I am an actor."

One never gets a priest to say that, at any price.

No, the "priest" thinks he is the very opposite of an actor. Entirely without prejudice (because he knows that it does not apply to him) he will raise and answer the question whether an actor may be buried in Christian ground. It never occurs to him (a masterpiece of scenic art, if it is not stupidity) that he is cointerested in the decision of this question, yes, that even if it is decided in favor of the actor, it nevertheless might be doubtful whether it is justifiable for the priest to be buried in Christian ground.

3. The priest as a screen.

As in the business world, one has a partner, something close to a fictitious entity,⁷⁸ a mere formality — but when there is a question of acting a bit disinterestedly, a bit leniently, not being too egoistic, yea, then the word is: "My good man, I would serve you with pleasure, I am soft-hearted; but my partner — there can be no thought of moving him." The whole thing of course is a knavish trick, calculated for the sake of living as hard-heartedly, as commercially minded as possible, and yet at the same time assuming the appearance of being something different...if only one did not have that partner.

As in everyday life, one has a wife — and when there comes an occasion when it would be seemly for one to act a bit courageously, a bit stoutheartedly, one says then, "Yes, my friend, be assured that for my part I have my heart in the right place; but my wife — it doesn't help me a bit to think of such a thing." Of course the whole thing is a knavish trick, whereby one would manage at one and the same time to be a coward and enjoy the advantage of it in life, and also to be a stouthearted fellow...if only one were not so unlucky as to have that wife.

So the existence of the "priest" has the significance of making society feel secure in its hypocrisy. "We have no responsibility, we are privates, we abide by the priest, who has taken an oath." Or, "We dare not criticize the priest, we abide by what he says, he is a man of God who has taken an oath upon the New Testament." Or, "We should be willing enough to renounce everything, if that is required, but whether that is required we dare not assume to decide, we are only laymen, the priest is the authority, we do not dare to withdraw, he says that it is an exaggeration," etc.

All the shrewdness of "man" seeks one thing : to be able to live without responsibility. The priest's significance for society ought to be to do everything to make every man eternally responsible for every hour he lives, even for the least thing he undertakes, for this is Christianity. But his significance for society is: to make hypocrisy feel secure, while society shoves responsibility away from itself upon the priest.

4. Paganism — the Christianity of "Christendom."

The difference is that between the dram a drinking man drinks as a matter of course, and the dram which a man drinks as a reward for his temperance. The latter is infinitely worse than the former, for it is a refinement; the former is honest intemperance, the latter is refined intemperance, being at the same time temperance.

5. A frightful situation.

The situation is not this, that for every man who truly has willed the truth (the consequence of which would be that he became a sacrifice) there are one hundred thousand sensual, worldly-minded, mediocre men. No, the situation is this: for every one man who truly has willed the truth there are — shudder! — one thousand priests who, with their families, live by preventing the sensual, the light-minded, the worldly-minded men, the prodigious multitude of the mediocre, from getting a truer impression of that one who truly would will the truth.

6. Heartiness — heartlessness.

People who themselves have their heart in the throat, upon the lips, in the trousers, in short, everywhere except in the right place, quite naturally blame for heartlessness precisely that man who has his heart in the right place.

That is to say, after they have vainly looked for his heart in every place they know of, they are convinced that he has no heart; for he has it in the right place, and it does not occur to them to look there.

7. The refined meanness

is in a certain sense not seen in this world: precisely that is its crowning glory, that it looks like exactly the opposite.

What one sees in this world, and sees branded as odious and mean, may be frightful enough, but it is a small thing in comparison with the refined sort, which, when refined, counts for exactly the opposite of meanness. We speak of the "heaven-crying" sin; but the most "heavencrying" sin is that which — refined — knows how to give itself the appearance of holiness, so that least of all sins can it be said to cry to heaven, which nevertheless it does, precisely because with the soundlessness of hypocrisy it is more "heaven-crying" than the so-called "heaven-crying" sin.

Let me devise an example.

In a town there lives a stranger; he possesses only one thing, but that is a bank note for a very large amount. However, no one in the town recognizes this note, so that for them it is = 0, and of course no one will give him anything for it.

Then a man, a stranger it may be, who recognizes the value of the note very well, comes to him and says, "I am your friend, as is becoming in a friend I will help you out of your embarrassment, I offer you" — and then he offers him the half of its value. This, you see, is refined! It is calculated to look like friendship and devotion, which must be admired and extolled by the inhabitants of that town, and at the same time it is cheating him out of 50 per cent. But that is not seen; the inhabitants of that town could in fact not see it, they see on the contrary the very unusual magnanimity, etc.

As it is in a commercial relation, so it is with relation to intellect.

A man may be so situated in his generation that no one of the many has any conception of who he is, of his value, of his significance. In this of course there is nothing to be indignant about, that the many regard him and all that is his as null and naught.

Then there comes to him a man who knows his real value and says to him, "I am your friend, I wish to bear witness to you" — and thereupon he gives him publicly one half the recognition he knows is due him. This is refined, it is calculated to count in the eyes of the contemporaries as a rare, rare example of disinterested devotion, a rare courage and enthusiasm which does justice to an unappreciated man; and yet, by putting himself to the least possible pains, he does the unappreciated man the greatest possible injury, for the fact that he procures for him a new and still greater difficulty than that of remaining unappreciated, namely, a half appreciation. That is not seen; the contemporaries could not in fact see anything else but the refined man's noble, disinterested, courageous enthusiasm.

[July 7, '55, on the rough draft of Nos. 8-10.]

8. "It is for the sake of the successor."

After all, perhaps I do the priests injustice. True enough, when one sees how stoutly they stand up for their rights, require every shilling that is due them, and like the lawyers hardly take a step without being paid — then one is tempted to take with a grain of salt their protestations that the worldly does not concern them at all.

But perhaps it is I that am at fault, I who am so impractical that I have entirely overlooked something which alters the case entirely. So when Bishop Martensen makes application for 600 tons of barley instead of 300,⁷⁹ it is perhaps I who have overlooked something, namely, that it is not by any means because earthly things of this sort concern such a holy man, but His Holiness does this for the sake of his successor, because it is the duty of His Holiness towards his successor, who then in his turn does the same thing.. .for the sake of His Holiness who will be his successor. Yes, that's something different. So this is even a noble act...for the sake of the successor!

Now I understand Bishop Martensen, I find his application in harmony with what I know from his own mouth — so it certainly is true — into which I do not hesitate to initiate the others, since it conduces to his glorification. He said that it was a sense of duty, that and that alone, which moved him to be willing to accept the election as Bishop. Truly, just such a man as that it was we needed for the episcopal see of Seeland — that is certain.

So then it was for the sake of the successor, for that and for that alone, out of a sense of duty towards the successor — so that if, for example, Bishop Martensen were to encounter this change of affairs, that there would not any more be a successor, he would at once withdraw his application; or, if it had already been granted, he would at once relinquish the 300 tons — for indeed it was not for his own sake he made the application, by no means, it was for the sake of the successor. Or if there was a Cultus-Minister who, in consideration of the fact that it was simply and solely for the sake of the successor, resolved that the 600 tons of barley should be granted, but in such a form that the 300

were regularly put aside for the successor (for this indeed was only for the sake of the successor), or that the extra grant (300 tons) should commence only with the coming of the successor — then Bishop Martensen would thank the Cultus-Minister who helped to remove from the Bishop every possible suspicion that after all it might perhaps be also, perhaps "at the same time," for his own sake, yea, that he might be very much delighted if only he were sure that he would get the 600 tons, whatever happened to the successor.

9. Convent beer.

This was one of the points where I was happy — my fond recollection! — to be in complete agreement with the late Bishop Mynster. He too regarded the Convent performances⁸⁰ as thin beer.

It was therefore with a certain satisfaction that I happened a short while ago to see in a book what I had not known before, that thin beer is called "convent beer." In case Bishop Mynster was unacquainted with that term, he would have been delighted to know it.

10. The higher wisdom in the consideration that there is a predecessor and a successor.

Everything bad is ascribed to the predecessor: that we strive for earthly goods is for the sake of the successor.

In that way, by the help of having a predecessor and a successor, we go pleasantly through life, and are at the same time witnesses to the truth. God help him who has no predecessor and no successor! For him truly life becomes what according to the will of Christianity it should be: an examination in which one cannot cheat.

Translator's Footnotes

⁷⁷Dyrehaven, an immense park rather remote from Copenhagen, and the favorite excursion.

⁷⁸He seems to have had in mind the relation between Spenlow and Jorkins in David Copperfield.

⁷⁹By Royal Resolution of June 29, 1854, there was accorded to the Bishop of Seeland, besides his ordinary income, 600 tons of barley, to be paid to him in money. The Danish editors remark that Mynster's income was much greater than that of Martensen.

⁸⁰The party of Grundtvig held regularly a convention of ministers which they called "the Convent." S. K. and the Bishop agreed perfectly in their dislike of this party and its Convent, in which Peter Kierkegaard had a prominent place.