Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Kierkegaard and the Pietists

Expand Messages
  • vigilius_haufniensis
    Does anyone know of any good resources discussing Kierkegaard in connection with the Lutheran pietists, esp. Philipp Spener? Gouwens says that Kierkegaard
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Does anyone know of any good resources discussing Kierkegaard in
      connection with the Lutheran pietists, esp. Philipp Spener? Gouwens
      says that "Kierkegaard evulated highly the wiritngs of Johan Arndt,
      Johann Gerhard, Philipp Spener, A.H. Francke, and Gerhard Tersteegen"
      (Kierkegaard as a Religious Thinker, pg. 49), but then he only follows
      up on Arndt and citations are somewhat sparce. Can someone point me
      in the right direction here? Also, does anyone know if Kierkegaard
      attended Pietists meetings as an adult? Apparently, he attended a
      Herrnhut congeration with his family as child, though I'm not sure how
      often or long.

      Aaron
    • Will Brown
      Aaron, the following group used to be the Hong Library List at St. Olaf s College. It is now run by Anders Klitgaard, to whom I have gone from time to time to
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 3, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Aaron, the following group used to be the Hong Library List at St.
        Olaf's College. It is now run by Anders Klitgaard, to whom I have gone
        from time to time to translate Danish for me, he being Danish. It
        might still have a few of the high-powered scholars that used to be in
        it. I have fond memories of trying to peddle my wares to them.

        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorenkierkegaard/?yguid=87110174


        --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "vigilius_haufniensis"
        <vigilius_haufniensis@...> wrote:
        >
        > Does anyone know of any good resources discussing Kierkegaard in
        > connection with the Lutheran pietists, esp. Philipp Spener? Gouwens
        > says that "Kierkegaard evulated highly the wiritngs of Johan Arndt,
        > Johann Gerhard, Philipp Spener, A.H. Francke, and Gerhard Tersteegen"
        > (Kierkegaard as a Religious Thinker, pg. 49), but then he only follows
        > up on Arndt and citations are somewhat sparce. Can someone point me
        > in the right direction here? Also, does anyone know if Kierkegaard
        > attended Pietists meetings as an adult? Apparently, he attended a
        > Herrnhut congeration with his family as child, though I'm not sure how
        > often or long.
        >
        > Aaron
        >
      • Don Anderson
        Aaron, I don t know many good discussions in English of the influences on SK outside of the obvious ones such as Hegel and Luther. The best one I know is Bruce
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 3, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Aaron,
          I don't know many good discussions in English of the influences on SK
          outside of the obvious ones such as Hegel and Luther. The best one I know is
          Bruce Kirmmse's, "Kirkegaard in Golden Age Denmark" but I can't remember if
          he talks about any of these guys much less Spener. There is probably more in
          Danish but not much in English. Why don't you write a book on it?
          Don

          PS If you ever figure out what Willy is talking about let me in on it.
          -----Original Message-----
          From: kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com
          [mailto:kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of vigilius_haufniensis
          Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 7:16 PM
          To: kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [Kierkegaardians] Kierkegaard and the Pietists


          Does anyone know of any good resources discussing Kierkegaard in
          connection with the Lutheran pietists, esp. Philipp Spener? Gouwens
          says that "Kierkegaard evulated highly the wiritngs of Johan Arndt,
          Johann Gerhard, Philipp Spener, A.H. Francke, and Gerhard Tersteegen"
          (Kierkegaard as a Religious Thinker, pg. 49), but then he only follows
          up on Arndt and citations are somewhat sparce. Can someone point me
          in the right direction here? Also, does anyone know if Kierkegaard
          attended Pietists meetings as an adult? Apparently, he attended a
          Herrnhut congeration with his family as child, though I'm not sure how
          often or long.

          Aaron






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Médéric Laitier
          Dear James, How are we to understand what you have here* stated? Is it a formal approval by the Moderator? Like the king s seal applied upon Don s
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear James,

            How are we to understand what you have here* stated?

            Is it a formal approval by the Moderator? Like the king's seal applied
            upon Don's recommandation? Don, see, you are one lucky man indeed, you
            were not black-listed this time!

            Really, James, what's the point to write such comments?

            Are you going to state your opinion for every single suggestion by any
            single member?

            Why not write only when you have a suggestion of your own or an argued
            argument of your own to oppose?

            We don't need your 'yeah, I agree with that' nor your 'No I don't
            agree with that' if nothing else is added to the pot.

            Really, who cares about what you think if you don't explain why you
            think what you think?

            Or was it yet another attempt of yours to become the regulating/ruling
            authority in here?

            No?

            Well then drop this hell of a habit of yours!

            Sincerely apissed,
            MW


            * see below:


            --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira"
            <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
            >
            > Don's recommendation is probably your best bet. I have the book on
            my shelf
            > and I'll check the index for these names.
            >
            > Jim R
            >
            > On 10/4/06, Don Anderson <don@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Aaron,
            > > I don't know many good discussions in English of the influences on SK
            > > outside of the obvious ones such as Hegel and Luther. The best one
            I know
            > > is
            > > Bruce Kirmmse's, "Kirkegaard in Golden Age Denmark" but I can't
            remember
            > > if
            > > he talks about any of these guys much less Spener. There is
            probably more
            > > in
            > > Danish but not much in English. Why don't you write a book on it?
            > > Don
            > >
            > > PS If you ever figure out what Willy is talking about let me in on it.
            > >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • Médéric Laitier
            Hello Jimbo, When did I say it was intimidating to me? Perhaps you wish it were. OK... Now that you mention it, I understand you much, much better! Thanks!
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Jimbo,

              When did I say it was 'intimidating' to me? Perhaps you wish it were.
              OK... Now that you mention it, I understand you much, much better!
              Thanks! All you secretly desire /is/ to be intimidating! Gotcha!

              "Perhaps you should either learn to express your own opinion about the
              issue--perhaps suggest another source?--"

              I have no personal opinion on the subject, and I wasn't aware my lack
              of was eo ipso an interesting piece of information for anyone. But
              since /you/ insist upon my expressing my opinion, so that I should
              -learn- from you, well then, let it be done and see what it gives:

              'I hereby declare I have no opinion thereabout.'

              Woaw, you're just so damn right! It feels much better then! Just
              impressive! Just like pissing when it urges...

              'Grow a backbone?' No, thank you, I am rigid enough with one so that
              two would presumably be unbearable even to myself... But thanks for
              the piece of advice! By the way, what's the matter yours is made of? I
              ask because it looks really robust. Not so flexible but, man! what a
              stiff deportment it gives you! Very, very old-style-professor like! So
              much, it reminds me of the good old XIXth century german professors...
              Oh, but then again I must be really ill, as if I could know anything
              about the XIXth century...

              "It's getting to the point that you have nothing to say about K"

              May I amend this one a bit? It has reached the point when I cannot
              state anything about K on this forum, thanks to /You/, dear Jim.You
              have brought the forum to a point when it is impossible to have a
              pleasant, balanced and reasonable conversation about K, so much you
              have to comment upon -every- single thing, even when, or /preferably/
              when, you have nothing to add.

              This was the first complaint of mine for the day, the next one is in
              the tube, and I am presently repeating the first one, because
              apparently, you didn't get it right. the first time...

              'Perverse?' Hmm... A big word. In what sense? Freudian, Lacanian,
              Kierkegaardian or Rovirian? Do you mind developping a bit? I fear I
              can't keep up with you...

              'Obsessive' Yes! I agree with that one! You are obessive and obsessing
              by your constant need to comment upon -every-, -single-, -thing-.

              Apparently you are not aware of this, so I've designed a way to
              reflect that back at you: to do you exactly as exasperating a tour of
              systematic comments as that you inadvertantly but constantly do every
              another member. I shall comment upon every single chatter of yours
              until you realise how unpleasant such relentless chattering are to the
              people who have to suffer them. The method of mine may be called,
              chattering raised to the power two. I must apologise to other members
              for this and invite them not to, NOT TO, read any* of my posting that
              in fact only concern but you. You could ignore them, but somehow your
              irreprescible need to control everything will inevitably force you to
              read them. I am quite sure of that.

              This is my maieutic and it is designed especially for you. I hope you
              will appreciate my gift at his fair market value, I know it may seem
              quite unpleasant first but, you have worked your own burden out of the
              original clay by the by developping your very /own/ perversion: when
              you began commenting upon every single statement by every single
              member of this forum.

              If I may be allowed to suggest this to my master, the fewer things you
              throw in my direction, the fewer you shall get back in the face. But
              ultimately, you decide as always and as is your perverted liking...

              Chatterings mirroring chatterings,
              perversion shadowing perversions,

              endelessly obsessive M-eddies, Wirrors of sorts, in a chain...

              * Should I resume postings of another kind, I shall mark them in the
              Subject field by an * sign. But I fear the conditions are not so close
              to be back to that yet.


              --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira"
              <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
              >
              > Mederic, I'm sorry it's so intimidating to you that I express my
              opinion.
              > Perhaps you should either learn to express your own opinion about the
              > issue--perhaps suggest another source?--or grow a backbone.
              >
              > It's getting to the point that you have nothing to say about K, but only
              > post to this list to complain about me. You need to understand that
              this is
              > your problem, and a particularly perverse, obsessive problem at that.
              >
              > Jim R
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >
            • Médéric Laitier
              Dear Jimbo, I must admit I am speachless... Chapeau bas! You have captured the single individual within 35 words - or 57 depending how one counts. /This/ is
              Message 6 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Jimbo,

                I must admit I am speachless...

                Chapeau bas!

                You have captured the single individual within 35 words - or 57
                depending how one counts. /This/ is collectedness.

                One question only, how do you relate to the words you have expressed?

                Or if you prefer a reduplicated set of question thereabout:

                a) Is it subjectively appropriated a truth or just an "objective"
                truth thrown at the face of others when they have walked on your
                boundaries?

                b) Does this distinction make any sense for you when considering
                precisely these words of yours: "I don't see how you can any more
                effectively deny your own responsibility for your actions"?

                c) And finally, do you think your definition of 'the single
                individual' is in line with that of SK or is it only with your own fancy?

                ~ ~ ~

                a1)Postfinally, if it is not exactly in line with K., isn't it /your
                doing/ exactly that which /you/ blame /me/ for namely transforming
                this list into a James Rovira list?

                a2)Postpostfinally, if it is in line with SK, do you mind to elaborate
                a bit upon how you ground your assertions into Kian ones? Or is it
                sufficient for you to state that what you say is in line with K. for
                other to have to accept it as such? Then how are we -the others-
                supposed to make any difference between your conception of SK and your
                personal conception? Again aren't you transforming this list into a
                James Rovira list? Or do /you/ think you are SK, by any chance?

                I hope you may agree to answer these questions as they don't really
                deal with James Rovira per se but more with SK and James Rovira, as
                the latter relates the former.

                For myself, don't worry, will you? I have repeatedly said in one of my
                previous paper that /I/ take /all the responsibility/ of what I have
                said, all of it, including that that I have said about you.

                Absurd as it may be.

                I don't blame /you/ for what /I/ say. I blame you for what you have
                said and, worse, for what you have done.

                I do take complete responsibility for this blaming deed of mine. I do
                realise the bold character of it, yet I feel what you have done
                affects me, myself, moi enough to have a right in the blaming field.

                Don't worry! I am aware of my tremendous responsibility in the words I
                have expressed about you. Do you, reversely, take all the
                responsability which is yours for what you have done? Do you agree
                with me that you continue to act as you have always done right now by
                keeping the archives status as it is, stubbornly your own little way,
                not caring about the other's opinion?

                Or will you claim you are forced by someone else?

                Is it my fault, perhaps?

                My reproaches to you are not a way to fly away from my responsability.

                My reproaches are a way to /express/ my responsability. I care for
                what this forum is to become and I thus engage anyone who has an
                influence over its fate. As you do, I engage you.

                That you fail to grasp this, or fake it is no surprises to me, but
                eventually of no matter which so ever in the field which is mine,
                right now...

                Intransigently yours,
                Mederic

                --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira"
                <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
                >
                > Mederic, if you're saying it's my fault that you're constantly
                talking about
                > me and not K on this forum, I don't see how you can any more effectively
                > deny your own responsibility for your actions--again, you don't know
                what a
                > single individual is. Do you want me to tell you? It means you
                first of
                > all admit that what you do is because of -you- and no one else. You
                accept
                > responsibility for the self that you are and its behaviors and quit
                blaming
                > others. I express my opinions about K--you're free to express your own,
                > always have been, always will be.
                >
                > This is really my last post about the subject.
                >
                > Jim R
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Médéric Laitier
                ... _________________________ Dear Jim, Well, as to the passive-agressive character of my fault here pinned down by you, I am not certain. Especially the
                Message 7 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira"
                  <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Here is where you descend into groupspeak, groupthink, overall
                  >passive-aggressivity, in my most deeply humble opinion with all
                  >recognition
                  >that I could be wrong (this caveat will heretofore be shortened to the
                  >acronym IMDHOWARTICBW, just to save time.

                  ><<Or is it sufficient for you to state that what you say is in line
                  >with K.
                  >for
                  >other to have to accept it as such? Then how are we -the others-
                  >supposed to make any difference between your conception of SK and your
                  >personal conception?>>

                  _________________________

                  Dear Jim,

                  Well, as to the passive-agressive character of my fault here pinned
                  down by you, I am not certain. Especially the passive part, :)

                  But you are right, I did extend my self a little too much in this
                  assertion, so I shall amend it and say in replacement of the passage
                  you quote:

                  "Or is it sufficient for you to state that what you say is in line
                  with K. for /Me/ to have to accept it as such? Then how /am I/ -the
                  other- supposed to make any difference between your conception of SK
                  and your personal conception?"

                  Is it better formulated, Sir, this way?

                  Now, can you answer the question? Will you?

                  Oh, but I realise you have, for you have vested the doule coat of you
                  pseudo-responsability and carelessness.

                  Have I understood you right: whether I can understand anything you say
                  or nothing at all is none of your bloody business, is that it?

                  Well then, fair enough.

                  For the archives, I suppose we'll have to wait for the polls results?

                  Have I understood all right? The recognition of your responsability
                  does not extend beyond the limit of the present status quo and does
                  not bring us back to a status quo ante.

                  Thus, you cheat out of your true responsability once more, but wish to
                  look like you don't.

                  Well, of course this is but my opinion, as humble as yours...

                  :)

                  You still have the power to put an end to this whole mess before the
                  term, if you decide to be reasonable. But you don't.

                  Yes, indeed, Will has convinced me that parrotting is /the/ way to
                  getting to one's end in this forum...

                  :)

                  Well enough parrotting.

                  Good day,
                  Mederic
                • Médéric Laitier
                  ... K with ... ________________________________________________________________ Until this point, I would say you had almost won the day... :) But... You
                  Message 8 of 8 , Oct 4, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In kierkegaardians@yahoogroups.com, "James Rovira"
                    <jamesrovira@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >--but what
                    > difference does it make -to you- what I believe is right?
                    >
                    > More groupthink, hmmm?
                    >
                    > I am posting my opinion here -to work out my own opinion-. I am not
                    > interested in prosyletizing for my own opinion. When people discuss
                    K with
                    > me, it helps me work out my own opinion. I hope my expression of my own
                    > opinion helps them work out theirs. If our respective opinions never
                    > coincide, again, K is not Christ, his writings are not the NT, and our
                    > eternal happiness is not dependent upon properly understanding them.

                    ________________________________________________________________
                    Until this point, I would say you had almost won the day... :)

                    But... You inevitably fall back and wish Me to agree with you, Me and
                    everyone, including that Clown of Climacus:
                    ________________________________________________________________

                    >To act
                    > as if it were is perverse, and I'm pretty sure SK would agree.
                    Climacus,
                    > who said he revoked everything he wrote at the end of Postscript,
                    certainly
                    > would agree.
                    >
                    > All, of course, IMDHOWARTICBW.
                    >
                    > Jim R


                    Again your argumentation seems to me to be to be flushed with your own
                    wastes for you do personally all that which you have hereby meant to,
                    adequately enough until that fatal instant, to reproach me with.

                    As a consequence, I think we have a tie and I am confident you will
                    apparently agree with me in your next post, until the moment, the
                    inevitable moment, when you try again to show /me/ how wrong I am, in
                    order to establish /FOR ME/ and for every one in an accessory manner,
                    that you are right and I am wrong.

                    This is precisely the tendancy in you I wished to outline, to prompt
                    and to question - which ever meaning you wish to put in this verb, :)

                    Thanks for helping me out, at the precise moment when you were about
                    to have me drawned. This was an unexpected and quite hopeless rescue.

                    Cheers,
                    ML
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.