Abstract
This paper aims to develop the notion of ‘therapy of desire’ as a hermeneutic key for understanding Kierkegaard’s view of desire. First, I develop the notion of ‘therapy of desire’ as it has appeared in the secondary literature on Kierkegaard and Augustine, particularly in Lee C. Barrett. In my reading, I underscore how a ‘therapy of desire’ implies that the desire can be ‘healed’ and that the desirer has ‘agency’ over his/her desires. Second, I conduct a textual analysis of Kierkegaard’s discourse on Lk 22:15, which deals with the desire for the Eucharist. In employing the notion of ‘therapy of desire’ as a hermeneutic key to interpret it, I characterize Kierkegaard’s view of desire as a lack of satisfaction and verify how the ideas of ‘agency’ and ‘healing’ appear in Kierkegaard’s text. Finally, I show how the characterization of desire as a constant lack of satisfaction that consists in a gift from God, that implies the possibility of undertaking a healing process and that underscores the agency of the desirer, differs from some Lutheran ideas, namely the relationship between grace and deeds and the understanding of original sin.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
As Carl S. Hughes has claimed, Kierkegaard has historically been interpreted as opposite to the Augustinian theme of eros for God precisely because of the Lutheran context in which he is usually presented: ‘After all, the Lutheran theological tradition that Kierkegaard inherits has frequently been hostile to it [the central place of eros for God]. Moreover, Kierkegaard was first received on the world stage in association with Anders Nygren and Karl Barth, both strident opponents of spiritual eros.’ (Hughes, 2015, p. 76).
(Hughes, 2014, pp. 5–7, 10) Concerning Kierkegaard’s rhetoric, Paul R. Kolbet claims a shared theological rhetoric is to be found in Augustine and Kierkegaard. In the fascinating realm of studies opened by the intersections of Augustine and Kierkegaard in the Kierkegaard scholarship, this is another thread which deserves study. In addition, and concerning the topic of desire, the literature on the philosophical meaning of Kierkegaard’s use of language would benefit from an awareness that the elicitation of desire for God is one of the reasons for some of Kierkegaard’s uses of language and is deeply connected to a specific mode of doing theology. (See Kolbet, 2015, p. 57.).
For more details on how to justify the complementarity of eros and agape in Augustine and Kierkegaard, see Janna Gonwa’s discussion of Barrett’s Eros and Self-Emptying: (Gonwa, 2015, pp. 84–85).
As Jamie M. Ferreira has noted, the main topics of this work are how questions of partiality, alterity, and self-sacrifice function in human relations, as well as how God is present in the human relations undertaken by a religious person. Indeed, Ferreira instantiates a line of Kierkegaard scholarship which has focused on the relations between neighbor-love, desire for inferior things and love for God and desire for Him. Naturally, Barrett touches on all these questions. However, my aim here is not to unravel that topic, but to deepen the meaning of the few but significant references to this ‘therapy of desire.’ (See Ferreira, 2001, p. 4.).
Jack Mulder, in his 2010 book on Kierkegaard and the Catholic tradition, foresaw what Barrett argued later in 2013: Kierkegaard’s conception of love ‘belies’ his ‘official position’ that erotic love and Christian love are distinct. (Mulder, 2010, p. 93). To argue for this point, Mulder synthetizes Benedict XVI’s discussion on the unity of eros and agape in Deus Caritas Est. For Ratzinger, Christian eros does not imply intoxication and divine madness—as in Greek fertility cults—but is connected to the ‘yearning’ nature of the human soul and can offer a ‘foretaste of the pinnacle of our existence, of that beatitude for which our whole being yearns.’ This ecstatic capacity of eros ‘calls for a path of ascent, renunciation, purification and healing’ (Benedict, 2005, p. §4–5).
Only discourses II and III were really delivered by Kierkegaard in Frue Church (Kierkegaard, 1997, p. 249).
The question of Kierkgaard’s relationship with the Eucharist as a Christian is a complicated but important one. Recently, Paffenroth and Russell have written that ‘Kierkegaard’s critique of Christendom kept him from even taking communion on his death bed […].’ (Russell & Paffenroth, 2017, p. x).
Although this is, indeed, a topic in Kierkegaard’s biography which is very relevant to the interpretation of the text I am analyzing, the literature dealing with this topic is scarce. One exception is a 1992 essay by Michael Plekon, where he shows how, in the time of Kierkegaard, the Danish church was undergoing a renovation of its worship by means of Pietism. At the same time, Plekon notes the simplicity of the Friday communion ceremonies in which Kierkegaard participated: they consisted in a preparatory prayer, scriptural lesson chosen by the preacher, hymns, and a simple eucharistic liturgy. Finally, Plekon makes interesting notes on Kierkegaard’s frequency of communion. He used to receive it on Fridays, only twice or once a year. After his father’s death, between 1838 and 1852, there was less than one communion per year. Finally, Plekon notes that his last recorded communion was in 1852, three years before his death. Although he understands that this could be linked to Kierkegaard’s polemics with the Church of Denmark, he also notes that ‘this lack does not categorically preclude the possibility that he did attend and receive the sacrament in those years.’ (Plekon, 1992, pp. 215–216, 218).
Throughout this text, I take longing and desire as synonyms, although later on in the text I will make a consideration on the term in the Gospel which Kierkegaard translates as ‘longing.’.
None of the consulted sources mentions the importance of Kierkegaard’s For Self-Examination to understand Kierkgaard’s relationship with Luther. He refers to Luther as ‘a man from God and with faith’ and as ‘Luther—this man of God, this honest soul!’ (Kierkegaard, 1990, pp. 16, 24).
Barrett claims that Kierkegaard’s main concern was the anesthetization of desire rather than its corruption. However, that Kierkegaard did not consider the redirecting of passions as the most important challenge of his church does not mean that the misdirection of the passion was not a concern for him. My focus in this paper has been on the corruption of desire, rather than its absence (Barrett, 2017, p. 250).
In For Self-Examination, Kierkegaard outlines his interpretation of the Lutheran problem of grace and works. In p. 16, he states that it would be misleading to claim that Luther was rejecting deeds because Luther’s life ‘expressed works—let us never forget that […].’ However, Kierkegaard talks about a secular mentality that wants to become Christian ‘as cheaply as possible’ and, thus, interprets Luther as freeing all the Christians from works. Kierkegaard understands this view as a vain ‘downright secular way.’ He claims, thus, that ‘Christianity’s requirement is this: your life should express works as strenuously as possible […].’ However, later in his revision of this doctrine (p. 24), Kierkegaard comes to what he considers to be the central problematic of Luther’s view of the sola fide: Luther ‘overlooked or perhaps really forgot […] what he himself was too honest to know, what an honest soul he himself was […]. It does not concern Lutheran doctrine—no, it concerns myself: I have become convinced that I am not an honest soul but a cunning fellow. Thus it certainly becomes most proper to pay a little more attention to the minor premise (works, existence, to witness to and suffer for the truth, works of love, etc.), the minor premise in Lutheran doctrine. Not that the minor premise should now be made the major premise, not that faith and grace should be abolished or disparaged—God forbid— […].’ Kierkegaard is moving in very clear terms in this text towards an underscoring of the works which finds an equilibrium in the grace–works debate (Kierkegaard, 1990, pp. 16–17, 24).
In fact, in a 2017 essay in an edited volume on Augustine and Kierkegaard, Mulder writes about the moldability of the possibility ‘for those on earth to mold their desires in the right way and ready themselves for the only peace that will last’ (Mulder, 2017, p. 283).
References
Barrett, L. C. (2015). The intersections of Augustine and Kierkegaard revisited. Toronto Journal of Theology, 31(1), 94–104.
Barrett, L. C. (2017). Augustine and Kierkegaard on the Church: Nurturing mother or challenging provocateur? In J. Doody, K. Paffenroth, & H. T. Russell (Eds.), Augustine and Kierkegaard (pp. 233–253). Lexington Books.
Barrett, L. C. (2013). Eros and self-emptying: The intersections of Augustine and Kierkegaard. William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.
Benedict XVI. (2005). Deus Caritas Est. https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20051225_deus-caritas-est.html. Accessed 25 Nov 2022.
Ferreira, M. J. (2001). Love’s grateful striving: A commentary on Kierkegaard’s “Works of Love.” Oxford University Press.
Gonwa, J. (2015). Eros, agape, and neighbour-love as ontological gift. Toronto Journal of Theology, 31(1), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt.3113
Hughes, C. S. (2014). Kierkegaard and the staging of desire: Rhetoric and performance in a theology of eros. Fordham University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt13x0bs9.7
Hughes, C. S. (2015). Contrasting Augustine and Kierkegaard as theologians of desire. Toronto Journal of Theology, 31(1), 75–83.
Kierkegaard, S. (1979). Søren Kierkegaard’s journals and papers. 4: S - Z (H. V. Hong & E. H. Hong, Trans.; 2. print). Indiana Univ. Pr.
Kierkegaard, S. (1990). For self-examination (H. V. Hong & E. H. Hong, Eds.). Princeton Univ. Press.
Kierkegaard, S. (1997). Christian discourses: The crisis and a crisis in the life of an actress (H. V. Hong & E. H. Hong, Trans.). Princeton University Press.
Kirkconnell, W. G. (2017). In praise of humility: From Augustine to Kierkegaard. In J. Doody, K. Paffenroth, & H. T. Russell (Eds.), Augustine and Kierkegaard (pp. 255–275). Lexington Books.
Kolbet, P. R. (2015). Augustine, Kierkegaard, and the seduction of the word: Rediscovering an unfamiliar theological style. Toronto Journal of Theology, 31(1), 57–65. https://doi.org/10.3138/tjt.3122
Luther, M., & Erasmus, D. (2013). Discourse on free will (E. F. Winter, Ed. & Trans.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Luther, M. (1989). Martin Luther’s basic theological writings (T. F. Lull, Ed.). Fortress Press.
Mulder, J. (2017). Augustine and Kierkegaard on martyrdom and “polite persecution.” In J. Doody, K. Paffenroth, & H. T. Russell (Eds.), Augustine and Kierkegaard (pp. 277–295). Lexington Books.
Mulder, J. (2010). Kierkegaard and the Catholic tradition: Conflict and dialogue. Indiana University Press.
Plekon, M. (1992). Kierkegaard and the Eucharist. Studia Liturgica, 22(2), 214–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/003932079202200207
Russell, H. T., & Paffenroth, K. (2017). Introduction. In J. Doody, K. Paffenroth, & H. T. Russell (Eds.), Augustine and Kierkegaard (pp. ix–xv). Lexington Books.
Søltoft, P. (2013). Kierkegaard and the sheer phenomenon of love. Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook, 2013(1), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1515/kier.2013.2013.1.289
Tappert, T. G. (Ed.). (1987). The Book of Concord: The confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (T. G. Tappert, Trans.; 16th Printing). Fortress Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The author declares no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Ayesta, J. The ‘Therapy of Desire’ in Kierkegaard’s Discourse on Lk 22:15. SOPHIA (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-023-00981-0
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-023-00981-0