after itself, and so forth—this is precisely what Christianity regards as a sign
of health.”
Martensen, whoimagined himselfhealthy, would neverhave understood
anything like this. We cannot but be a bit relieved that in his decidedly
aggressive, manic reading, Kierkegaard had apparently only managed to
skim the preface of theDogmatics. For here Martensen’s sarcasm soared to
its highest level, making merry at those “who do not feel the tendency
toward coherent thought, but are able to satisfy themselves by thinking in
random thoughts and aphorisms, sudden discoveries and hints.”
This bit of venom was directed at Kierkegaard, who also knew how to
administer a thrashing. He delivered the goods in an attack aimed at this
world’s many Martensens, who go through life getting straight A’s—egregie
[Latin: “distinguished”]—on their report cards, but who regrettably have
forgotten what really matters: “Haveegregieon your theological diploma,
on top of that be the most capable of all those who received that grade,
stand on the very summit of the cultivation of the age; and then read one
of those old theological works by someone who took the cure of souls
seriously; and then learn to be disgusted with all your knowledgequatheo-
logical knowledge; learn to be disgusted with this Sunday devotional rub-
bish, this dissertation nonsense.”
A Sunday in the Athenæum
Kierkegaard’s irritation with Martensen’s trash found a sympathizer in Ras-
mus Nielsen, the professor of philosophy who on Friday, July 20, 1849,
could inform his “Dear Mr.Magister” that he had now received “the Sys-
tem”; Nielsen meant theDogmatics, published the previous day. It was now
to be studied—and sabotaged. The result was available on October 15,
1849, in the form of a detailed review, actually an entire little book, titled
Mag. Søren Kierkegaard’s “Johannes Climacus” and Dr. H. Martensen’s “Chris-
tian Dogmatics”.
In his memoirs Martensen plainly admits that Nielsen’s criticism caught
him off guard. Forpreviously Nielsen had in fact “had afriendly and sympa-
thetic relationship, indeed a friendship with me,” and therefore Martensen
had viewed Nielsen as a “brilliant colleague who wished to fight alongside
meforthecommoncause.”Infact,before theDogmaticshadbeenpublished
Martensen had let Nielsen see a number of sections of it, which had won
his full approval. “Now he declared the entireDogmaticsto be a totally
erroneous piece of work.” Martensen had no doubts about the reason for
Nielsen’s reversal, which was obviously that Nielsen’s “easily influenced