Soren Kierkegaard

Mynsterandhisofficialswouldunderstandthat“inwantingtogothrough
withthissortofcompulsorybaptism,itisbynomeansthepastorofPeder-
sborgonwhomtheyarebeingtough,butrathertheyaredefyingOurLord
Christ,thehistoryoftheChurch,andsoundreason.”
AsthesupremerepresentativeoftheStateChurch,BishopMynsternei-
ther could nor would accept Peter Christian’s decision, and the bishop
thereforerequestedhimtoreconsiderthesituationcarefully.PeterChristian
didnotfinditadvisabletoactagainsthisconscience,however,soMynster
had to find another pastor to baptise the child. But the principle at stake
hadnowbecomecritical,andafteranumberofshockingepisodesinwhich
women abducted their little baptismal babies just as the State Church had
readied its entire ritual, Peter Christian received an ultimatum from the
government on February 16, 1845, to the effect that if he did not begin
carryingoutcompulsorybaptismswithinfourteen dayshewouldbesum-
marilydismissed.
A few days before these threatening words reached Peter Christian, his
youngerbrotherinthecityhadheardrumors,andonFebruary10hesent
off a letter several pages long in which he fidgeted dialectically between
his allegiance to Mynster in principle and his personal sympathy for Peter
Christian: “I support both of you, as always, and it could be wished that
youhadnevercollidedwitheachother.”PeterChristianwasquiteunder-
standablyratherpuzzledandinanotherletteraskedforfurtherclarification.
Søren Aabye burned this letter shortly after receiving it, but from his re-
sponsewelearnthatinhisopinionPeterChristianoughttostandhisground
because“intheend,theBishopwillnotprevail.”Thebishopdidnotprevail
andhadtoapprovemorelenientregulationswithrespecttothematter.
The situation had been quite painful for the two brothers, for even
thoughbloodisthickerthanwater,PeterChristianwasaGrundtvigianand
SørenAabyewasmoreorlessoftheoppositeobservance;hewasMynster’s
man,forMynsterhadbeenhisfather’spastor.Andindeed,onFebruary9,
1845—that is, the day before his dialectical epistle to Peter Christian—he
had heard Mynster preach in the Palace Church and had found it “excel-
lent.”ThereafterhewenthomeandworkedonthemanuscriptofhisCon-
cluding Unscientific Postscript, in which Grundtvig is subjected to phenome-
nally parodic treatment that drew on (and expanded on) many of the
unflattering comments and reflections that had been accumulating in the
journalsforyears.
From the point of view of intellectual history it is striking that the two
men whotogetherhave had the most vital significance for modern Danish
theology and ecclesiastical life—Kierkegaard and Grundtvig—individually
hadviewsaboutasdifferentfromeachotheroneveryissueaswashumanly