Kierkegaard’s Condemnation; Socrates’ Censuring

 Kierkegaard’s Condemnation; Socrates’ Censuring (3/3/21)

I have posted a few blogs on the nature of Socrates' stance on the beliefs of his fellow Athenians in ancient Greece, and how the Dane Soren Kierkegaard esteemed the 2400-year-old teachings of his mentor. While Socrates reproached his fellow citizens for their meaningless beliefs in the gods and their behaviors in public life, Kierkegaard condemned the Danish Lutheran Church for the meaningless practices of its so-called Christian practitioners in their lives.

They both declared that their societies had strayed from the true path of their religious and moral origins. In a previous posting I described how both Socrates and Kierkegaard perceived that people in their culture had become deluded by erroneous beliefs. Their denouncement of their respective cultures' spiritual practices stemmed from that delusion, they felt.

Socrates' challenge to Athenian practices was a general one that targeted the democratic process, claiming that it no longer informed citizens appropriately. Because Athenian religious and social issues were entwined, he was also challenging their religious conventions. They interpreted his accusations as attacking the foundations of society. The Athenian leaders put him on trial for violating a law of impiety and teaching dangerous ideas to youth and thus corrupting them. He was condemned to death, after having been found guilty.

In 19^th century Denmark, Kierkegaard—influenced by Socrates' charge that Athenians were conducting meaningless rituals—came to feel similarly about Danish religious practices. Kierkegaard was a devout Christian, and came to believe that, in order for one to follow the lessons of Jesus, it demanded risk and sacrifice. He believed that it was extremely difficult to take on and practice the true discipline of Christianity. He claimed that the Lutheran Church leaders in Copenhagen had become affluent and lazy. 

People were born into a Christian setting, and thus were automatically entitled to become a Christian, whereas Kierkegaard insisted one needs to choose to take on the hard work of Jesus—which demands simplicity and surrender. Although Kierkegaard's accusations made him very unpopular in proper Danish circles, his well-being, unlike his mentor Socrates, was never really threatened.

What I find inspirational about Socrates and Kierkegaard is their insight that it is not a complacent or facile task to faithfully follow an authentic spiritual path. Too often, the perpetuation of the institutions that subsequently came into being—after the originator of the religion died—became the focal point of the followers. When this happens, the real message—the hard work—becomes lost to shallow ritual. We need those prophetic voices that prick our conscience and remind us of how we have strayed. However, most of the time—like the prophets of old—we do not welcome that opinion.