Theological Fragments

Listen here . (Unfortunately the recording was cut off right before the conclusion, but the body of the sermon is all there. Sorry for the abrupt ending!)

Listen here .

Listen here .

[From Part II, Chapter X: “ The Work of Love in Praising Love ”] “[B]ut just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts.” 1 Thessalonians 2:4 (ESV) “The world has never been so good, and so good it will never be, that the majority [want] the truth or have the true conception of it so that upon its proclamation it promptly and necessarily wins the approval of all. No, he who wills in truth to proclaim something true must prepare himself in some other way than with the aid of such a beguiling expectation; he must be willing essentially to relinquish the moment.” [1] Last week we posed the question, “how do we continue to learn about the nature of Christian love?” Kierkegaard provides two answers. Last week we examined his first answer: “the work of praising love must be done inwardly in self-renunciation [or self-denial].” This week we will take on his second claim: “the work of praising l

Listen here .

[From Part II, Chapter X: “ The Work of Love in Praising Love ”] “Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love…. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.” 1 John 4:8, 10 (ESV) Even as Works of Love draws to a close, there is still infinitely more that can be said about love. This one book is not enough to guide us completely in understanding the nature of Christian love. How, then, do we proceed when the book is over, the study is finished? How do we continue to pursue and understand love? Kierkegaard engages this question in a chapter on the importance of praising love—which we might (roughly) equate to “appreciating love.” Kierkegaard has two points to make about how we should appreciate love. We will cover the first one here, and the second on in the next post. Kierkegaard’s first claim is that “the work of praising love must be done inwardly in self-renunciation [or self-denial]

[From Part II, Chapter IX: “ The Work of Love in Remembering One Dead ”] “Weep less bitterly for the dead, for he is at rest.” Sirach 22:11 (NRSV) [1] With chapter 9 of part 2, Works of Love is beginning to come to a close. With entry 17, this blog series is also nearing its end. As Kierkegaard has given us a detailed view of what Christian love is supposed to look like, now he gives us a way to test the purity of our own love: look at the way you love those who have died. [2] We are to love everyone, and loving means remembering, and so we are to love the dead. But loving those who have died is a special circumstance, and it shows us what kind of love we are showing. If we reflect on the way we love the dead, we can see whether we are showing truly Christian love. Kierkegaard identifies three ways that love for the dead is unique. First, he says that showing love for the dead is “a work of the most unselfish love.” He writes, “If one wants to make sure that love is

[From Part II, Chapter VIII: “ The Victory of Reconciliation in Love Which Wins the Vanquished ”] “[B]e reconciled to your brother...”~ Ephesians 5:24 (ESV) There is certainly honor in fighting for righteousness. No matter your conception of what is right, no matter your scruples of how one ought to fight for what is right, we all find honor in standing up against evil, injustice, cruelty, and oppression. And yet, according to Kierkegaard, to fight against evil is only the first battle. Christian love involves two battles: first, to oppose and defeat the enemy, and second, to be reconciled with the enemy. After all, Christ has famously said , and we have previous discussed , that we ought to love our enemies. That means that, even when we find it necessary to oppose and fight our enemies, they are still the rightful objects of our love. And to love them requires that we fight to be reconciled with them. Now, it is important to understand that, for Kierkegaard, forgiveness is d

[From Part II, Chapter VII: “ Mercifulness, a Work of Love, Even if It Can Give Nothing and is Capable of Giving Nothing ”] “And he called his disciples to him and said to them, ‘Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.’” ~ Mark 12:43-44 (ESV) “‘Do not neglect to do good and to share’[Hebrews 13:16]—but also do not forget that this perpetual worldly talk about doing good and well-doing and charity and charities and gifts and gifts is almost merciless. Let journalists and tax-collectors and parish clerks talk about charity and calculate and calculate; but let us never fail to hear that Christianity speaks essentially of mercifulness, that Christianity would last of all reward this mercilessness, as if poverty and wretchedness were not only lacking in money, etc ., but also were excl

[From Part II, Chapter VI: “ Love Abides ”] “…Love abide[s]…” ~ 1 Corinthians 13:13 (ESV) A relationship of love—whether it be romance, family, or friendship—requires two parties. Both sides must be invested in order for there to be a relationship. We have been commanded to love and, “so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Romans 12:18 ESV). But what about when it doesn’t depend on me? What about when our neighbor chooses to end the friendship? If a relationship of love requires two people, and it is impossible to force another person back into the relationship, then how are we to live out our command to love? Do we walk away from them? Do we cling desperately to them? Do we chase them down, pleading with them to remain with us? The common reaction might be to walk away—mourning the loss, but resigned to it. After all, what else can we do? Love has been broken. There’s nothing else we can do, right? Well, according to Kierkegaard, there is one thing that we can

[From Part II, Chapter V: “ Love Hides a Multiplicity of Sins ”] “Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.”  ~ 1 Peter 4:8 (NASB) I honestly never really thought about what this verse meant until now. After all, how can love cover a multitude of sins? I know how Christ’s love covers my sins, but Peter is not talking about Christ’s love for me. He is talking about our love for each other. How can my love cover someone else’s sin? What does that even mean? For Kierkegaard, one of the ways that love covers up sin is through forgiveness, which actually removes or erases sin. This is a path that most of us probably don’t want to follow, however, because we like to be pragmatic. We like to focus on what we can see happening, and you cannot see sin being erased. As Kierkegaard argues, it requires faith: “The lover sees the sin which he forgives, but he believes that forgiveness takes it away. This of course, cannot be seen, although

[From Part II Chapter IV, " Love Sees Not Its Own "] “Love… does not seek its own.” ~ 1 Corinthians 13:4-5 (NASB) “Justice is recognizable in that it gives to each his own, just as each requires its own in return. This means that justice is concerned with what is one’s own: it partitions and divides; it determines what each one has the right to call his own; it judges and punishes if anyone does not make the distinction between mine and yours. With this contentious and yet legally-entitled mine , the individual has the right to do as he pleases, and when he seeks his own on no other basis than that which justice grants, justice has nothing to reproach him for and no right to upbraid him for anything.” [1] Political theory divides justice into two types: retributive , which is how we respond to crime, and distributive , which is how distribute wealth and power in society. Here Kierkegaard is concerned with distributive justice—an issue that is admittedly far more load

[From Part II Chapter III: " Love Hopes All Things and Yet is Never Put to Shame"] “Love… hopes all things.” ~ 1 Corinthians 13:7 Hope, like love itself, is difficult to command with our conscious mind. It is hard to decide to be hopeful, just as it is hard to decide to love someone—hard, but by no means impossible. But we do often choose to give up hope, even if we are not aware of the choice. There are two reasons that we give up hope for the people we love. The first reason is despair: that is, we lose faith in love. The experiences of our life convinces us that hope is mistaken, that the world we live in does not reward hope. This experience leads us to focus on the negative possibilities of what can happen in our relationships. As Kierkegaard writes,  “’It is possible,’ says despair, ‘it is possible that even the most sincere enthusiast nevertheless becomes weary, gives up the struggle, and sinks into the service of the second-rate; it is possible that even the

[From Part II Chapter II, " Love Believes All Things and Yet is Never Deceived "] “Love… believes all things.” ~ 1 Corinthians 13:7 “ Love believes everything—and yet is never to be deceived. Amazing! To believe nothing in order to never be deceived—this seems to make sense. For how would a man ever be able to deceive someone who believes nothing! But to believe everything and thereby, as it were to throw oneself away, fair game for all deception and all deceivers, and yet precisely in this way to assure oneself infinitely against every deception: this is remarkable.” [1] When it comes to trusting people, we modern Americans tend to be very careful. We consider it an essential skill, knowing who and when to trust. “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” That proverb teaches us that if I allow myself to be deceived because I trusted when I should have known better, it’s really my fault, not the deceiver’s. And we desperately don’t want to be deceived