Kierkegaard’s Philosophy of Religion by Reidar Thomte (review)

880 BOOK REVIEWS sidious error in this field must be attacked not only from the viewpoint of the educator, but also from the viewpoint of the theologian." 2 Fenwick High School, Oak Park, Ill. THOMAS c. DONLON, 0. P. Kierkegaard's Philosophy of Religion. By REIDAR THOMTE. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1948. Pp. fl30, with index. $3.50. This is a straightforward, synoptic account of Soren Kierkegaard's views, with special stress upon his religious thought. Now that Kierkegaard 's personal life is fairly well known and his works made accessible in English, the main need is for a series of analytic studies which will advance our understanding of his mind. There are many literary, esthetic, philosophical, and theological aspects which are yet to be uncovered and assessed. But Kierkegaard himself was most concerne,d about what it' means to become a Christian in a world that is Christian in name alone. Thomte's book is orientated to this major preoccupation of his life's work and hence provides an introduction to the very heart of his outlook. In his arrangement of materials, the author follows a pattern which has become by now almost traditional with scholars in this field. The early chapters explain the various stages of life; a central group of chapters consider the transition from natural religion to Christianity; the latter part of the book is devoted to some specifically Christian concepts. One of the later chapters-an explanation of " Socratic midwivery " or the method employed by Kierkegaard in his literary productions-might well have been placed earlier in the discussion. The reader needs advance preparation for the puzzling use of pseudonyms in almost all of Kierkegaard 's early books. But whereas most Kierkegaardian students are content with paraphrasing the original text, Thomte supplies the reader with generous quotations at every phase of the exposition. As he rightly observes (pp. 17; 73, n. 69), direct samplings are essential to an appreciation of the moods and nuances embodied in the various pseudonyms. Moreover , Thomte employs his knowledge of the Danish' language to make direct translations from previously inaccessible portions of the copious Journals and from important secondary studies. Occasionally, he corrects the accepted English version of ·Kierkegaard's books in regard to key passages. At the outset, it is admitted that Kierkegaard cannot be called a philosopher in the usual sense. Thomte refers to his stand as a Lebens- • Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of the Catholic Theological Society of America, New York, Paulist Press: 1949, p. 8. BOOK REVIEWS 381 anschauung (p. vii) . This designation is exact enough, provided that the point of contrast-between a life-view and an absolutist system is set forth. When Kierkegaard rejected the literary conventions and standpoint of philosophy, he was reacting against Hegelianism with the aid of the Romantic reverence for "life" and individual destiny. Similarly, in maintaining that metaphysics does not constitute a distinctive stage of life, he was underlining the radical inability of an idealistic systematism to treat of the contingent act of existing. Yet this does not preclude the presence of some implicit metaphysics of a non-absolutist sort. This i.s admitted at least twice by Thomte himself, when he refers in passing to the" metaphysical" background of Kierkegaard's conception of the human self and subjectivity (pp. ~11-lfl; fll5) . But the relation between this latent metaphysics and the formal religious teaching is left undetermined. Because of this omission, there are some shortcomings in the present treatment. What is lacking is a fundamental discussion of the meaning of existence in relation to time, history, and eternity. Unavoidably, such a consideration would penetrate deeper into philosophical and theological issues than Thomte has deemed it advisable to go. Thus, in mentioning Kierkegaard's attitude towards the proofs for God's existence (pp. Hl-H!), he does not bring out clearly enough that Kierkegaard reserves the term " existence " for Christ alone and usually speaks of the " eternity " of God rather than'of His existence. From the philosophical standpoint, we would like to know whether Kierkegaard would grant that human reason can ascertain the eternal being of God, even when the term " existence " is restricted to temporal realities...