What do you think?
Rate this book
Oeuvres complètes #14
Kjerlighedens Gjerninger
'The two parts of Works of Love deal respectively with the great commandment: 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God...' (and it's second: '... and thy neighbor as thyself') and with First Corinthians 13, the so-called love chapter. A few added textual treatments round out the whole...
367 pages, Paperback
First published September 29, 1847
596 people are currently reading
8943 people want to read
About the author
Søren Kierkegaard
1,137 books6,497 followersSøren Aabye Kierkegaard was a prolific 19th century Danish philosopher and theologian. Kierkegaard strongly criticised both the Hegelianism of his time and what he saw as the empty formalities of the Church of Denmark. Much of his work deals with religious themes such as faith in God, the institution of the Christian Church, Christian ethics and theology, and the emotions and feelings of individuals when faced with life choices. His early work was written under various pseudonyms who present their own distinctive viewpoints in a complex dialogue.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 223 reviews
November 18, 2014
Always with philosophy, it's so easy to become contracted into the box of what the individual is capable of and to ignore the social aspect. What with everybody being in deep erotic love with Nietzsche, Christianity gets a bad rap. Granted, I only read this because Kierkegaard was an existentialist. But I honestly have grown to love him more than any other philosopher because he answers the question of other people. In my experience, most other philosophers are too scared to ask this question, mainly because they seem to hate pretty much everyone because they "haven't seen the truth". Kierkegaard presupposes loving-kindness as the thesis of his book and then constructs logic around the concept. This technique is revolutionary in philosophy, where philosophers assume their "facts" around which philosophy is contrived to be empty voids to be theorized about, when indeed any "fact" is an absurdity that demonstrates certain qualities to make us accept it as reality, where these reality parameters are in themselves absurdities within the concept of acceptance anyway. So, any "purely deductive" theory has at its heart assumptions over which one constructs a larger system, and therefore to begin with "love" and construct around it is no real affront to philosophy. Kierkegaard is obviously an intelligent man and delves into each question to the point where any self-proclaimed intellectual would be satiated. He asks us to see our intelligence, looks, thoughts, etc. as simple contingencies...(which is many ways, through physics and neuroscience we see they are) and therefore should not hate other people for these things because they have as little control over them as you do over the shape of your nose. Instead, he states at one point that all people are like actors, and it is the folly of the actor to see themselves AS their character. Instead, we should learn to love this "metaphysical actor" within all people, one he says is equivalent in all ways to the things we like about ourselves. I guess you could easily translate that to subjectivity/consciousness. At the end of the day, I guess I'm just glad to see a philosophy book that answers to kindness. Being raised by a Christian mother, I guess it was more or less inevitable. But unable as I am to transcend my own context, this book for all its worth is written by an exceptionally brilliant man and I suggest everyone interested submerge themselves in his philosophy.
June 15, 2023
The book "Works of Love", written by the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, is an essential work in the philosophy of relationship and ethics, and has great relevance for modern psychology. In this book, Kierkegaard addresses the idea of love as a fundamental ethical and existential force that allows human beings to transcend themselves and connect with others on a deep and meaningful level. Throughout the pages of this work, Kierkegaard explores different aspects of love, such as self-acceptance, faith, redemption, and moral responsibility. From a psychological perspective, "Works of Love" has great value for understanding human nature and how love is related to the emotional and cognitive development of the human being.
One of the main contributions of this book to psychology is the notion that love is more than just a feeling or emotion. Kierkegaard argues that love is an action, a commitment of the will that requires a choice and a commitment to oneself and to others. According to Kierkegaard, love involves a deep internal transformation that allows the individual to overcome their selfishness and connect with others in a meaningful way. This approach to love as an action is highly relevant to modern psychology, as it provides a foundation for understanding the need for personal responsibility and conscious choice in our decisions and actions.
Another essential aspect of "Works of Love" is the idea that love cannot be separated from faith. Kierkegaard considers that faith is an indispensable condition for love, since love requires the unconditional acceptance of oneself and of others, just as they are, and that acceptance can only be possible if one has faith in one's worth and dignity. of the human being In this sense, love is an expression of faith, and faith is a manifestation of love. This connection between love and faith is especially relevant to psychology, as it provides a basis for understanding the spiritual dimension of human life and how it can influence people's emotional and mental well-being.
Furthermore, Kierkegaard makes a distinction between human love and divine love. Human love is based on reciprocity and the need to be loved and accepted by others. Instead, divine love is unconditional and is given without expecting anything in return. This divine love is the source of all true connection and meaning in life, and is the only way to transcend selfishness and human limitation. This approach to love as something divine has great relevance for modern psychology, as it allows us to understand the importance of spirituality and transcendence in human life and how this can influence psychological well-being.
Finally, Kierkegaard also addresses the idea of self-acceptance and personal responsibility in the search for love. According to Kierkegaard, it is necessary to accept oneself as one is, with all its limitations and mistakes, and only then can one begin to love others in a genuine and meaningful way. In addition, love also implies a moral responsibility towards others and towards oneself, and requires a conscious choice to commit to the well-being and happiness of others. This perspective of self-acceptance and personal responsibility has great relevance for modern psychology, as it provides a basis for understanding the importance of personal acceptance and self-acceptance in the emotional and cognitive development of the individual.
In conclusion, Kierkegaard's "Works of Love" is an essential work in the philosophy of relationship and ethics, and has great relevance for modern psychology. Through this book, Kierkegaard addresses the idea of love as a fundamental ethical and existential force that allows human beings to transcend themselves and connect with others on a deep and meaningful level. From a psychological perspective, "Works of Love" has great value for understanding human nature and how love is related to the emotional and cognitive development of the human being, and provides a basis for understanding the importance of personal responsibility, choice consciousness and self-acceptance in the search for love and a meaningful life.
One of the main contributions of this book to psychology is the notion that love is more than just a feeling or emotion. Kierkegaard argues that love is an action, a commitment of the will that requires a choice and a commitment to oneself and to others. According to Kierkegaard, love involves a deep internal transformation that allows the individual to overcome their selfishness and connect with others in a meaningful way. This approach to love as an action is highly relevant to modern psychology, as it provides a foundation for understanding the need for personal responsibility and conscious choice in our decisions and actions.
Another essential aspect of "Works of Love" is the idea that love cannot be separated from faith. Kierkegaard considers that faith is an indispensable condition for love, since love requires the unconditional acceptance of oneself and of others, just as they are, and that acceptance can only be possible if one has faith in one's worth and dignity. of the human being In this sense, love is an expression of faith, and faith is a manifestation of love. This connection between love and faith is especially relevant to psychology, as it provides a basis for understanding the spiritual dimension of human life and how it can influence people's emotional and mental well-being.
Furthermore, Kierkegaard makes a distinction between human love and divine love. Human love is based on reciprocity and the need to be loved and accepted by others. Instead, divine love is unconditional and is given without expecting anything in return. This divine love is the source of all true connection and meaning in life, and is the only way to transcend selfishness and human limitation. This approach to love as something divine has great relevance for modern psychology, as it allows us to understand the importance of spirituality and transcendence in human life and how this can influence psychological well-being.
Finally, Kierkegaard also addresses the idea of self-acceptance and personal responsibility in the search for love. According to Kierkegaard, it is necessary to accept oneself as one is, with all its limitations and mistakes, and only then can one begin to love others in a genuine and meaningful way. In addition, love also implies a moral responsibility towards others and towards oneself, and requires a conscious choice to commit to the well-being and happiness of others. This perspective of self-acceptance and personal responsibility has great relevance for modern psychology, as it provides a basis for understanding the importance of personal acceptance and self-acceptance in the emotional and cognitive development of the individual.
In conclusion, Kierkegaard's "Works of Love" is an essential work in the philosophy of relationship and ethics, and has great relevance for modern psychology. Through this book, Kierkegaard addresses the idea of love as a fundamental ethical and existential force that allows human beings to transcend themselves and connect with others on a deep and meaningful level. From a psychological perspective, "Works of Love" has great value for understanding human nature and how love is related to the emotional and cognitive development of the human being, and provides a basis for understanding the importance of personal responsibility, choice consciousness and self-acceptance in the search for love and a meaningful life.
April 26, 2013
In his genius Kierkegaard wants us to know that by “works of love” he is describing the rigor of being a loving Christian. Kierkegaard advises that God wants us to love our neighbors, which Kierkegaard considers God’s “royal law.” Kierkegaard stresses this point three times with the emphasis on three different points: YOU shall love your neighbor. You SHALL LOVE your neighbor. You shall love YOUR NEIGHBOR. But who is your neighbor? Your neighbor is anyone whom you see. Your neighbor lives next to you. He is a homeless man in the street. Your neighbor collectively is humanity. So how shall we love our neighbor? Kierkegaard believes that in his words: “Love builds up.” By this he means that love is a constructive spiritual force working for humanity in our universe. The opposite of love tears down, deconstructs and destroys. So a loving person builds up his neighbor and in doing so strengthens both himself and his neighbor, as well as their community. This continuous method of conducting yourself every day in the best interests of your neighbor may be considered “eccentric” by many of your neighbors. You are expected by your neighbors always to act of out of self-interest. But it is by conducting yourself as a loving person by acting in the best interest of others that you achieve integrity and integrity has a positive power of its own. Through self-renunciation one gives up oneself to gain one’s own soul -- very gnostic. K. says that we should, however, not conduct ourselves with love with the expectation that it will be reciprocated because then this act of love simply becomes another expression of self-interest. “Love seeks not its own,” he advises us. Kierkegaard says that love believes all things and yet is never deceived. We are not deceived by our works of love because an omniscient God sees them and expects them no matter what other people may think. This is the height of understanding and can never be perceived as leaving you a victim of deception because God is love and God knows what you’re doing when you love your neighbor: an omniscient God cannot be deceived. Love hides the multiplicity of sin. This recognizes that sin has a natural tendency to have a multiplying effect on other people, including you. But you do not need to add to the effects of a sin. You often have an opportunity to prevent its damage from multiplying and spreading to create more damage. When a loving person sees an opportunity to keep sin from multiplying he or she can seek to prevent its multiplicity. How? You can through your own love offer forgiveness. Kierkegaard writes: “Christianity’s view is: forgiveness is forgiveness; your forgiveness is your forgiveness; your forgiveness of another is your own forgiveness: the forgiveness that you give you also receive… If honestly before God you wholeheartedly forgive your enemy, then you dare to hope for your own forgiveness.” You can also prevent the multiplicity of sin through your own love when you offer mercy. You can act through love not to make matters worse. If you are a victor over an adversary, then you can build up your adversary. When you love your adversary in this way, then you construct a bridge for both of you to build up an enduring relationship based upon love. Is there a neighbor whom you cannot love or forgive or offer mercy? If so, why is that so? Perhaps, you harbor illusions about why you consider that neighbor unworthy of your love, forgiveness and mercy. Kierkegaard writes:” You can expect good from even the lowest fellow, for it is still possible that his baseness is an illusion.” As a homeless man, Kierkegaard knew this truth from his own experience. "Christianly understood, loving is loving the very person one sees." “Christian love teaches love of all men, unconditionally all.” You can offer love, forgiveness and mercy to your neighbor because God is your omniscient partner, your co-worker, and God is love. Mercy and forgiveness are works of love. "They are the ways that love conducts itself." Rather than argue to God for self-interest “the lover who forgets himself is remembered by love. There is One who thinks of him in God and in this way it comes about that the lover gets what he gives.” So is hope, which is to pray for the best possible result for your neighbor -- whose future is unseen and in jeopardy: this is the divine use of hope and it is a work of love. God knows what to do: leave God's business to God. Only a loving person hopes because hope is "a faith in the possibility of the good... Blessed is the man of faith: he believes what he cannot see. Blessed is the lover: he believes away what he can see.” Kierkegaard advises that the work of love of remembering one who is dead is a work of the most unselfish love. A proof of human love is that it abides. When loves abides within you, then you know that you are experiencing love within the context of God’s view of time. God’s view of time is one that looks toward eternity: infinitising the moment. And “love is the flower of eternity.” Love is the most powerful force on earth and "it is God who put love in man." Kierkegaard also wrote “Fear and Trembling” about the miraculous faith of Abraham when he understood that God wanted him to sacrifice his beloved son as a proof of faith. In his faith Abraham became father of three of the world’s great religions. Kierkegaard quotes Paul on love in 1st Corinthians: 13 – “Love is patient…Love does not insist on its own way… Love does not rejoice at wrong… Love bears all things. Love believes all things… Love hopes all things… Love endures all things.” God is love. “Beloved, let us love one another.” Because to love human beings is still the only thing worth living for.
December 14, 2014
Works of Love, along with its companion Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing, is one of Kierkegaard's best works. Although this direct discourse is linguistically a lot easier to read than his pseudonymous works, it is (with respect to content) one of his most challenging pieces. The thesis is that it is a duty to love your neighbor. Throughout the 360 page book, Kierkegaard argues that the only disinterested and selfless form of love is love of neighbor. All other forms of love (erotic, friendship) are really just self-love.
Instead of attempting to summarize this lengthy work, I will leave you with some memorable quotes from Works of Love:
"At a distance one's neighbour is a shadow which in imagination enters every man's thought and walks by - but alas, one perhaps does not discover that the man who at the same moment actually walks by him is his neighbour. At a distance every man recognizes his neighbour, and yet is is impossible to see him at a distance. If you do not see him so close that you unconditionally before God see him in every man, you do not see him at all."
"For to love God is to love oneself in truth; to help another human being to love God is to love another man; to be helped by another human being to love God is to be loved."
[This is a shocking, coming from Kierkegaard]: "All through the ages everyone who has thought deeply over the nature of man has recognised in him this need for community...In the busy, teeming crowd, which as community is both too much and too little, man becomes weary of society, but the cure is not in making the discovery that God's thought was incorrect. No, the cure is precisely to learn all over again the most important thing, to understand oneself in one's longing for community."
"But Christianly to descend from heaven means limitlessly to love the person you see just as you see him. If, then, you will become perfect in love, strive to fulfil this duty, in loving to love the person one sees, to love him just as you see him, with all his imperfections and weaknesses, love him as you see him when he is utterly changed, when he no longer loves you, when he perhaps turns indifferent away or turns to someone else, love him as you see him when he betrays and denies you."
I could go on and on. This is a work that would make Socrates (Kierkegaard's muse) proud! I do not know if there are other translations available but the Hongs' translation of Works of Love is the best.
Instead of attempting to summarize this lengthy work, I will leave you with some memorable quotes from Works of Love:
"At a distance one's neighbour is a shadow which in imagination enters every man's thought and walks by - but alas, one perhaps does not discover that the man who at the same moment actually walks by him is his neighbour. At a distance every man recognizes his neighbour, and yet is is impossible to see him at a distance. If you do not see him so close that you unconditionally before God see him in every man, you do not see him at all."
"For to love God is to love oneself in truth; to help another human being to love God is to love another man; to be helped by another human being to love God is to be loved."
[This is a shocking, coming from Kierkegaard]: "All through the ages everyone who has thought deeply over the nature of man has recognised in him this need for community...In the busy, teeming crowd, which as community is both too much and too little, man becomes weary of society, but the cure is not in making the discovery that God's thought was incorrect. No, the cure is precisely to learn all over again the most important thing, to understand oneself in one's longing for community."
"But Christianly to descend from heaven means limitlessly to love the person you see just as you see him. If, then, you will become perfect in love, strive to fulfil this duty, in loving to love the person one sees, to love him just as you see him, with all his imperfections and weaknesses, love him as you see him when he is utterly changed, when he no longer loves you, when he perhaps turns indifferent away or turns to someone else, love him as you see him when he betrays and denies you."
I could go on and on. This is a work that would make Socrates (Kierkegaard's muse) proud! I do not know if there are other translations available but the Hongs' translation of Works of Love is the best.
February 7, 2018
OH. MY. GOSH. This book is one of the most heart-wrenchingly lovely things I have ever read.
Kierkegaard has a very odd writing style--it's rambling, full of exclamation points and drawn-out hypothetical scenarios and rarely slowing down to let the points it's making be felt. I was reading bits of C.S. Lewis and Camus in between chapters of Works of Love, and both writers have a habit of setting their words in the perfect places to tug at the heart-strings or stir the spirit; Kierkegaard does niether. He wanders, and peters off, and seems given to melodrama; the whole book reads a bit like an argument you might have with yourself on a long and music-less car ride.
But, I think that is essentially what this book is--an argument a man is having with himself. And as it unfolds point by point, kicking off from scriptures on love and its works, it unfolds into a deeper and deeper beauty.
Kierkegaard does not ask what love is, but what it does. He's a very somber writer, looking for no happiness in what he calls temporality, but there is a wild joy he finds in the eternity and hope of love; and it's an inspiring joy, a beautiful hope, to witness.
My favorite quote (though I kinda underlined half the book) is in the very first chapter, when Kierkegaard is comparing Christian love to secular (largely erotic) love: "No one, if he understands himself, would think of saying of Christian love that it blossoms; no poet, if he understands himself, would think of celebrating it in song. For what the poet shall celebrate must have in it the anguish which is the riddle of his own life; it must blossom and, alas, must perish. But Christian love abides and for that very reason is Christian love. For what perishes blossoms and what blossoms perishes, but that which has being cannot be sung about--it must be believed, and it must be lived."
Again, this book is like an argument inside someone's head, and there is no more perfect tone for the subject at hand than that. We begin the book with the assumption that love is God, God is love, and that our lives and all our love belongs to God; and from there it is hammered out, detail-by-detail in all the feverish angst of a midnight epiphany, what this God and his love will do with the soul we have handed him. It is the story of a struggle that will shape a life, one way or the other. This book has certainly had a hand in shaping mine.
So, yes. again, this is one of the most beautiful and inspiring books I have ever read, and I want to buy forty thousand copies of it and shower them on random strangers like confetti.
Kierkegaard has a very odd writing style--it's rambling, full of exclamation points and drawn-out hypothetical scenarios and rarely slowing down to let the points it's making be felt. I was reading bits of C.S. Lewis and Camus in between chapters of Works of Love, and both writers have a habit of setting their words in the perfect places to tug at the heart-strings or stir the spirit; Kierkegaard does niether. He wanders, and peters off, and seems given to melodrama; the whole book reads a bit like an argument you might have with yourself on a long and music-less car ride.
But, I think that is essentially what this book is--an argument a man is having with himself. And as it unfolds point by point, kicking off from scriptures on love and its works, it unfolds into a deeper and deeper beauty.
Kierkegaard does not ask what love is, but what it does. He's a very somber writer, looking for no happiness in what he calls temporality, but there is a wild joy he finds in the eternity and hope of love; and it's an inspiring joy, a beautiful hope, to witness.
My favorite quote (though I kinda underlined half the book) is in the very first chapter, when Kierkegaard is comparing Christian love to secular (largely erotic) love: "No one, if he understands himself, would think of saying of Christian love that it blossoms; no poet, if he understands himself, would think of celebrating it in song. For what the poet shall celebrate must have in it the anguish which is the riddle of his own life; it must blossom and, alas, must perish. But Christian love abides and for that very reason is Christian love. For what perishes blossoms and what blossoms perishes, but that which has being cannot be sung about--it must be believed, and it must be lived."
Again, this book is like an argument inside someone's head, and there is no more perfect tone for the subject at hand than that. We begin the book with the assumption that love is God, God is love, and that our lives and all our love belongs to God; and from there it is hammered out, detail-by-detail in all the feverish angst of a midnight epiphany, what this God and his love will do with the soul we have handed him. It is the story of a struggle that will shape a life, one way or the other. This book has certainly had a hand in shaping mine.
So, yes. again, this is one of the most beautiful and inspiring books I have ever read, and I want to buy forty thousand copies of it and shower them on random strangers like confetti.
January 19, 2026
Kierkegaard goes about trying to describe what it means to love one’s neighbor and winds up describing the God who is love in such a way that I am absolutely compelled to love my neighbor. I kept thinking I had learned all I could from this book, but the challenges to my inmost parts kept coming with every page turned. This is truly the most beautiful and demanding book I have encountered, and I owe the salvation of my most precious relationships to it (of course, ultimately, to God—he is certainly to be found in it).
December 21, 2016
Very good. I want to go back and lower all my other book ratings by one star so that this five-star rating is all the more emphatic, but I'm too busy freaking out about how good this is to go do that.
February 15, 2013
I finished Kierkegaard's text yesterday (Valentine's Day), the forwards today . . . if you care to know.
Though only about 350 pages, Works of Love is not easy reading. Well, I suppose it's easy in a way. There aren't many difficult concepts to grasp and in that way it's certainly not like The Concept of Anxiety. But the work seems long because Kierkegaard belabours certain points, points he no doubt believes essential, such as the neighbour, the difference between Christian and pagan love, and God as the third in every relationship.
Since I don't feel like summarizing the entire work, here are a few points I found interesting:
(1) The Christian's obligation to love the neighbour s/he sees: "When it is a duty in loving to love the men we see, there is no limit to love. If the duty is to be fullfilled, love must be limitless. It is unchanged, no matter how the object becomes changed" (164). And again, "Christianly understood, loving is loving the very person one sees [along with whatever defects one sees] . . . . If this were not so, Christ would never have loved, for where could he have found the perfect man!" (169). Finally, "we men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees" (170).
(2) We are, in this life, only really living as souls dressed up in costumes. Our external differences - race, intelligence, class - are not necessarily eternal distinctions. The rich man is only acting as a rich man while the poor woman is only acting as a poor woman: "It seems to be forgotten that the distinctions of earthly existence are only like an actor's costume or like a travelling cloak and that every individual should watchfully and carefully keep the fastening cords of this outer garment loosely tied, never in obstinate knots, so that in the moment of transformation the garment can easily be cast off . . . . [I]n actual life one laces the outer garment of distinction so tightly that it completely conceals the external character of this garment of distinction, and the inner glory of equality never, or very rarely, shines through, something it should do and ought to do constantly" (95-96).
(3) God must be the middle term in every loving relationship: "Worldly wisdom thinks that love is a relationship between man and man. Christianity teaches that love is a relationship between: man-God-man, that is, that God is the middle term" (112-113).
(4) Love that ends is not love: "if one ceases to love, he has never been loving at all. What is so mild as love and yet so rigorous, so strict with itself, so disciplining as love!" (282). Again, "Let us never forget that to remain faithful in one's love is a noble womanly deed, a great and glorious act" (288).
I confess that I began reading this book as an aesthete, hoping to become more familiar with Kierkegaard's thought! But after reading a few chapters I realized that I had to continue not as someone merely interested in Kierkegaard but as a Christian who knows little about love.
Though only about 350 pages, Works of Love is not easy reading. Well, I suppose it's easy in a way. There aren't many difficult concepts to grasp and in that way it's certainly not like The Concept of Anxiety. But the work seems long because Kierkegaard belabours certain points, points he no doubt believes essential, such as the neighbour, the difference between Christian and pagan love, and God as the third in every relationship.
Since I don't feel like summarizing the entire work, here are a few points I found interesting:
(1) The Christian's obligation to love the neighbour s/he sees: "When it is a duty in loving to love the men we see, there is no limit to love. If the duty is to be fullfilled, love must be limitless. It is unchanged, no matter how the object becomes changed" (164). And again, "Christianly understood, loving is loving the very person one sees [along with whatever defects one sees] . . . . If this were not so, Christ would never have loved, for where could he have found the perfect man!" (169). Finally, "we men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees" (170).
(2) We are, in this life, only really living as souls dressed up in costumes. Our external differences - race, intelligence, class - are not necessarily eternal distinctions. The rich man is only acting as a rich man while the poor woman is only acting as a poor woman: "It seems to be forgotten that the distinctions of earthly existence are only like an actor's costume or like a travelling cloak and that every individual should watchfully and carefully keep the fastening cords of this outer garment loosely tied, never in obstinate knots, so that in the moment of transformation the garment can easily be cast off . . . . [I]n actual life one laces the outer garment of distinction so tightly that it completely conceals the external character of this garment of distinction, and the inner glory of equality never, or very rarely, shines through, something it should do and ought to do constantly" (95-96).
(3) God must be the middle term in every loving relationship: "Worldly wisdom thinks that love is a relationship between man and man. Christianity teaches that love is a relationship between: man-God-man, that is, that God is the middle term" (112-113).
(4) Love that ends is not love: "if one ceases to love, he has never been loving at all. What is so mild as love and yet so rigorous, so strict with itself, so disciplining as love!" (282). Again, "Let us never forget that to remain faithful in one's love is a noble womanly deed, a great and glorious act" (288).
I confess that I began reading this book as an aesthete, hoping to become more familiar with Kierkegaard's thought! But after reading a few chapters I realized that I had to continue not as someone merely interested in Kierkegaard but as a Christian who knows little about love.
June 3, 2018
From the midst of a complacently Christian culture, Kierkegaard sought to make Christianity weird again—and by God, he succeeded. It may be difficult to convert the heathen, even more so to convert the apostate; but the greatest challenge of all is to convert someone to a religion they think they already follow. Kierkegaard brought to this project an inclination toward the absurd and paradoxical unmatched by any except perhaps the divine apostle himself. His Christianity is the question for all your answers; the making crooked of straight priorities; the loosening up of tied ends.
Works of Love is primarily an effort to problematize the familiar Christian commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves. Kierkegaard distinguished Christian, agapic love from the erotic love of the pagan by noting that whereas the latter is rooted only in the subjective desires of two particular people—the two lovers—Christian love is rooted in the eternal, in the very nature of God, who is love, and is thus both as necessary as God’s being and as indiscriminate as God’s love for all of humanity.
Christians are commanded to love, which to the pagan sensibility is a revolting absurdity. And not only are Christians commanded to love, but they’re commanded to love their neighbor, which is to say that they’re commanded to love everyone as they love themselves. Neighbor is the original human category; we are neighbors to one another even before we are family, friends, or lovers to one another. Likewise, we must love the neighbor firstly and without discrimination. We must love the people in our lives as our neighbors before we love them as people set apart for their special significance to us.
If this weren’t challenging enough, Kierkegaard also goes far into the weeds in a ruthless exploration of what love is, how it manifests itself, and the myriad ways in which we deceive ourselves about it.
This book is like a Sunday school lesson from an insane asylum.
Works of Love is primarily an effort to problematize the familiar Christian commandment to love our neighbor as ourselves. Kierkegaard distinguished Christian, agapic love from the erotic love of the pagan by noting that whereas the latter is rooted only in the subjective desires of two particular people—the two lovers—Christian love is rooted in the eternal, in the very nature of God, who is love, and is thus both as necessary as God’s being and as indiscriminate as God’s love for all of humanity.
Christians are commanded to love, which to the pagan sensibility is a revolting absurdity. And not only are Christians commanded to love, but they’re commanded to love their neighbor, which is to say that they’re commanded to love everyone as they love themselves. Neighbor is the original human category; we are neighbors to one another even before we are family, friends, or lovers to one another. Likewise, we must love the neighbor firstly and without discrimination. We must love the people in our lives as our neighbors before we love them as people set apart for their special significance to us.
If this weren’t challenging enough, Kierkegaard also goes far into the weeds in a ruthless exploration of what love is, how it manifests itself, and the myriad ways in which we deceive ourselves about it.
This book is like a Sunday school lesson from an insane asylum.
October 5, 2025
Wow wow wow wow wow
It’s been a long time coming to finish this book and by His grace it only took three months. Whether you know anything about Soren Kierkegaard or his work, please hear me out: this is one of the most significant works I’ve ever read. There really aren’t many books that I can think of that have challenged so many of my thoughts, desires, habits, way of life, like Works of Love has. The author really stays true to his objective the whole time which could be paraphrased as, what does it look like to love God and your neighbor practically, based off Scripture. He deals with topics like the temporal vs. the eternal, the importance and irrelevance of the individual, and desiring external objects vs. willing inward treasures.
Is it pretty dense and hard to understand at times? Yes. Does it take a long time to read? Well evidently, yes. But it was so worth it. Worth it to take it slow. Worth it to read just one chapter and then spend the rest of the day processing everything. I’ll leave you with a few quotes to end:
“Men think that it is impossible for a human being to love his enemies, for enemies are hardly able to endure the sight of another. Well then, shut your eyes—and your enemy looks just like your neighbor, for you cannot see that he is your enemy. No. Then love your neighbor, for you cannot see that he is your enemy. When you shut your eyes, you do not see the distinctions of earthly existence, but enmity is also one of the distinctions of earthly existence.”
“When one wishes to help a child with a very great task, how does one go about it? Of course, one does not lay out the whole task at once, for then the child despairs and abandons hope; one lays our a portion at a time, yet always enough so that the child never reaches a stopping point as if it were done, and yet not so much that the child cannot accomplish it…If the eternal were to lay out the task for man all at once and in its own terms, without regard for his poor capacities and weaker powers, man would despair.”
“Alas, but we men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees…in Christ perfection looked down to earth and loved the person it saw.”
It’s been a long time coming to finish this book and by His grace it only took three months. Whether you know anything about Soren Kierkegaard or his work, please hear me out: this is one of the most significant works I’ve ever read. There really aren’t many books that I can think of that have challenged so many of my thoughts, desires, habits, way of life, like Works of Love has. The author really stays true to his objective the whole time which could be paraphrased as, what does it look like to love God and your neighbor practically, based off Scripture. He deals with topics like the temporal vs. the eternal, the importance and irrelevance of the individual, and desiring external objects vs. willing inward treasures.
Is it pretty dense and hard to understand at times? Yes. Does it take a long time to read? Well evidently, yes. But it was so worth it. Worth it to take it slow. Worth it to read just one chapter and then spend the rest of the day processing everything. I’ll leave you with a few quotes to end:
“Men think that it is impossible for a human being to love his enemies, for enemies are hardly able to endure the sight of another. Well then, shut your eyes—and your enemy looks just like your neighbor, for you cannot see that he is your enemy. No. Then love your neighbor, for you cannot see that he is your enemy. When you shut your eyes, you do not see the distinctions of earthly existence, but enmity is also one of the distinctions of earthly existence.”
“When one wishes to help a child with a very great task, how does one go about it? Of course, one does not lay out the whole task at once, for then the child despairs and abandons hope; one lays our a portion at a time, yet always enough so that the child never reaches a stopping point as if it were done, and yet not so much that the child cannot accomplish it…If the eternal were to lay out the task for man all at once and in its own terms, without regard for his poor capacities and weaker powers, man would despair.”
“Alas, but we men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees…in Christ perfection looked down to earth and loved the person it saw.”
March 20, 2024
Some chapters are absolutely astounding, full of truly staggering insight into love and human psychology. Where Kierkegaard is a bit weird in some areas (lovingly recollecting the dead and a perhaps overly dualistic view of spiritual vs. earthly love) he more than makes up for in other parts of this books. The chapters on 1 Corinthians 13 are definitely the highlight.
September 1, 2022
Kierkegaards hoofdboek over de liefde is een uiteenzetting van wat de christelijke liefde is, of eerder wat de liefde doet. Op veel vlakken ben ik akkoord met zijn analyse, of beter gezegd, vind ik het een mooie invulling van wat liefde zou kunnen zijn. Op andere vlakken, kan ik niet anders dan gefrustreerd mijn hoofd heen en weer schudden.
Als eerste zegt Kierkegaard dat liefde soms een onzichtbaar gegeven is. Wanneer iemand anders een handeling doet tegenover ons, kan dat uit liefde gedaan zijn of niet, maar op het eerste zicht kan dit perfect dezelfde handeling zijn. Wat verschilt is de intentie. Goed, het is dus moeilijk om bij anderen uit te maken of dit liefde is. En het maakt eigenlijk niet zoveel uit. Wat belangrijk is, is dat wij liefde geven. Want liefde is volgens Kierkegaard een plicht. All right, so far so good.
Je moet volgens Kierkegaard dus ook liefhebben. Wat ik hier van opsteek is dat je moet liefhebben wil je een moreel goed leven leiden. Als het die interpretatie is dan ben ik mee aan boord. Maar soms komt er een fase van zelfverloochening naar boven. Je moet liefhebben, ongeacht wie het is! Mijn excuses maar dat gaat misschien wat te ver? Moet ik echt de persoon die mijn huis heeft beroofd, liefhebben? Het zou toch bijna belachelijk zijn dat ik in een lege kamer zit, waarbij alles is meegenomen, en dan toch nog opper: "Ik hoop dat hij geniet van Shrek 2 op mijn playstation". Toch, kunnen we misschien een bepaald soort van respect naar bovenhalen voor iemand die zo zou reageren. Alhoewel ik me ook vragen zou stellen bij de persoon die hetzelfde reageert wanneer haar partner haar verlaat voor een andere. Geeft dit dan niet de indruk dat het die persoon allemaal niet zoveel kon schelen?
Ook het idee dat we blijvend bij elkaar in de schuld staan in de liefde, vind ik moeilijk om te volgen. Is het niet juist mooier om te denken dat we de romantische dingen doen ongeacht of we in de schuld staan? Neemt het niet juist romantiek weg wanneer iemand je meeneemt op restaurant omdat die de vorige week iets heeft mispeuterd? In plaats van in de schuld te staan bij elkaar, zou je kunnen zeggen dat het eerder om een samenwerking zou kunnen gaan, waarbij we elkaar beloven om de nodige moeite te doen voor de relatie. (Wanneer ik het heb over een relatie betekent dat niet per se erotische relaties.) Neemt het niet wat 'magie' weg als iemand je enkel een bericht stuurt omdat de ander al zoveel had gestuurd en dat je je schuldig voelt dat je nooit eerst iets stuurt. Uiteraard, is dat beter dan niet sturen, maar het verzwakt de liefde denk ik.
Zelfliefde is voor Kierkegaard iets wat we moeten verwerpen. Liefde geven aan anderen is de boodschap! Leven voor de ander! Maar wat kan je geven dat je zelf niet hebt? Ik denk dan aan de gouden regel van het christendom. "Doe bij een ander dat je zou willen dat ze bij jou doen." (geparafraseerd uiteraard) Als je geen zelfliefde hebt en geloofd dat je zelf geen liefde waard bent, hoe kan je ooit in die zin meer liefde aan een ander geven? Ik denk dit vaak te zien in de praktijk, dat mensen die zichzelf niet graag zien, moeilijk andere mensen oprecht graag kunnen zien. Op het eerste gezicht kan een handeling lijken op een liefdevolle handeling, maar zoals in het begin aangegeven, is de liefde een onzichtbaar gegeven dat moeilijk te vinden is. Die zogenaamde liefdevolle handeling kan evengoed een pathologische manier zijn om anderen bij jou te houden zodat je angst om eenzaam te sterven even gestild kan worden.
Ook kan vaak het boek als naïef geïnterpreteerd worden. Liefde gelooft alles en wordt nooit bedrogen. Liefde blijft. Etc. Als we bedrogen uitkomen dan was er nooit liefde om te beginnen. En als liefde verdwijnt dan is het nooit ontstaan. Dit kan logisch in onze oren klinken. Ik denk dat we allemaal wel al eens hebben getwijfeld of de liefde die iemand voelde voor ons wel echt was. Maar dit gaat uit van een zekere starheid in de mens, terwijl die nu juist eeuwig veranderend is. Dat liefde bouwt is dan weer een mooie invulling, want bouwen is een actieve ingesteldheid die nooit stopt. Misschien wordt dat wel bedoeld dat liefde blijft? Ook al is de geliefde weg, het gebouwde blijft.
Het boek heeft in ieder geval wat losgewerkt in mij en daarvoor kan ik het aanraden voor zij die dichter bij de liefde willen geraken. Toch voelt de Nietzscheaan in mij de drang om dit als christelijke dweperij onder de bank te schijven. Zelfverloochening? Weg daarmee. Zelfoverwinning! Daar gaan we voor.
Als eerste zegt Kierkegaard dat liefde soms een onzichtbaar gegeven is. Wanneer iemand anders een handeling doet tegenover ons, kan dat uit liefde gedaan zijn of niet, maar op het eerste zicht kan dit perfect dezelfde handeling zijn. Wat verschilt is de intentie. Goed, het is dus moeilijk om bij anderen uit te maken of dit liefde is. En het maakt eigenlijk niet zoveel uit. Wat belangrijk is, is dat wij liefde geven. Want liefde is volgens Kierkegaard een plicht. All right, so far so good.
Je moet volgens Kierkegaard dus ook liefhebben. Wat ik hier van opsteek is dat je moet liefhebben wil je een moreel goed leven leiden. Als het die interpretatie is dan ben ik mee aan boord. Maar soms komt er een fase van zelfverloochening naar boven. Je moet liefhebben, ongeacht wie het is! Mijn excuses maar dat gaat misschien wat te ver? Moet ik echt de persoon die mijn huis heeft beroofd, liefhebben? Het zou toch bijna belachelijk zijn dat ik in een lege kamer zit, waarbij alles is meegenomen, en dan toch nog opper: "Ik hoop dat hij geniet van Shrek 2 op mijn playstation". Toch, kunnen we misschien een bepaald soort van respect naar bovenhalen voor iemand die zo zou reageren. Alhoewel ik me ook vragen zou stellen bij de persoon die hetzelfde reageert wanneer haar partner haar verlaat voor een andere. Geeft dit dan niet de indruk dat het die persoon allemaal niet zoveel kon schelen?
Ook het idee dat we blijvend bij elkaar in de schuld staan in de liefde, vind ik moeilijk om te volgen. Is het niet juist mooier om te denken dat we de romantische dingen doen ongeacht of we in de schuld staan? Neemt het niet juist romantiek weg wanneer iemand je meeneemt op restaurant omdat die de vorige week iets heeft mispeuterd? In plaats van in de schuld te staan bij elkaar, zou je kunnen zeggen dat het eerder om een samenwerking zou kunnen gaan, waarbij we elkaar beloven om de nodige moeite te doen voor de relatie. (Wanneer ik het heb over een relatie betekent dat niet per se erotische relaties.) Neemt het niet wat 'magie' weg als iemand je enkel een bericht stuurt omdat de ander al zoveel had gestuurd en dat je je schuldig voelt dat je nooit eerst iets stuurt. Uiteraard, is dat beter dan niet sturen, maar het verzwakt de liefde denk ik.
Zelfliefde is voor Kierkegaard iets wat we moeten verwerpen. Liefde geven aan anderen is de boodschap! Leven voor de ander! Maar wat kan je geven dat je zelf niet hebt? Ik denk dan aan de gouden regel van het christendom. "Doe bij een ander dat je zou willen dat ze bij jou doen." (geparafraseerd uiteraard) Als je geen zelfliefde hebt en geloofd dat je zelf geen liefde waard bent, hoe kan je ooit in die zin meer liefde aan een ander geven? Ik denk dit vaak te zien in de praktijk, dat mensen die zichzelf niet graag zien, moeilijk andere mensen oprecht graag kunnen zien. Op het eerste gezicht kan een handeling lijken op een liefdevolle handeling, maar zoals in het begin aangegeven, is de liefde een onzichtbaar gegeven dat moeilijk te vinden is. Die zogenaamde liefdevolle handeling kan evengoed een pathologische manier zijn om anderen bij jou te houden zodat je angst om eenzaam te sterven even gestild kan worden.
Ook kan vaak het boek als naïef geïnterpreteerd worden. Liefde gelooft alles en wordt nooit bedrogen. Liefde blijft. Etc. Als we bedrogen uitkomen dan was er nooit liefde om te beginnen. En als liefde verdwijnt dan is het nooit ontstaan. Dit kan logisch in onze oren klinken. Ik denk dat we allemaal wel al eens hebben getwijfeld of de liefde die iemand voelde voor ons wel echt was. Maar dit gaat uit van een zekere starheid in de mens, terwijl die nu juist eeuwig veranderend is. Dat liefde bouwt is dan weer een mooie invulling, want bouwen is een actieve ingesteldheid die nooit stopt. Misschien wordt dat wel bedoeld dat liefde blijft? Ook al is de geliefde weg, het gebouwde blijft.
Het boek heeft in ieder geval wat losgewerkt in mij en daarvoor kan ik het aanraden voor zij die dichter bij de liefde willen geraken. Toch voelt de Nietzscheaan in mij de drang om dit als christelijke dweperij onder de bank te schijven. Zelfverloochening? Weg daarmee. Zelfoverwinning! Daar gaan we voor.
January 12, 2023
"Ningún ser humano puede poner los cimientos del amor en el corazón de otro ser humano; sin embargo, el amor es el fundamento, y sólo es posible edificar desde los fundamentos; por tanto, solamente se puede edificar presuponiendo amor." ▪️ Si me preguntáis hace unos cuantos años qué es el amor es probable que hubiera tenido que pensar la respuesta un tiempo largo o que directamente hubiera evitado la reflexión enfatizando algo así como "El amor es complicado". Y es que a menudo las cosas nos parecen mucho más rocambolescas de lo que son. "Las obras del amor" de Søren Kierkegaard llega a mi vida en un momento en el que mis respuestas se han vuelto algo más claras y sobretodo, sencillas. De hecho siento que muchas de las respuestas ya estaban en mí solo que de una forma desorganizada o algo opaca. Este libro ha sido para mí una forma de cerrar la puerta al camino de lo aprendido en estos últimos 4 años y dejar que por fin sean nuevas enseñanzas las que vengan. Se trata de una recopilación de discursos cristianos a través de los cuales el autor medita y nos invita a practicar el ejercicio a nosotros también. Escribe sobre todo aquello de lo que es capaz el amor entendido de una forma cristiana: el Amor como deber. Parte de una idea concreta: Dios no es otra cosa si no el amor absoluto: "Si la infatuada sagacidad, que se jacta de no dejarse engañar, tuviese razón cuando afirma que no debe creerse en nada que no se vea con los ojos de la carne, entonces en lo que primeramente habría que dejar de creer sería en el amor". Para Kierkegaard las respuestas a muchos dilemas existenciales se resuelven confiando, amando y haciendo el bien. Tres prácticas que nos ocupa una vida llevar a cabo, porque siempre se interpondrán en nosotros las dudas que la razón nos plantea. Y no se trata de abandonar las dudas, si no de resolverlas precisamente siendo aquello que buscamos: amor. Esto será mucho más complicado para unos que para otros, pues todo depende también de las definiciones que uno tenga sobre las cosas, de sus motivaciones e intereses. Kierkegaard nos plantea el concepto entendido de una forma cristiana. Al transformarse la concepción de este como un deber, simplemente lo haremos o trataremos de hacerlo. Escribe: "Hay personas acerca de las cuales se puede afirmar que no han tomado forma, que su realidad todavía no se ha afianzado, porque en lo más íntimo no están de acuerdo consigo mismas sobre lo que son y lo que querían ser. Pero con esta manera de ver las cosas, se hace también que la figura del otro ser humano oscile o sea irreal, ya que el amor que debería amar al ser humano que ve, todavía no ha podido decidirse, sino que tan pronto quiere suprimir tal defecto del objeto, como quiere que tenga tal perfección; me atrevo a decir: algo así como si aún no se hubiera cerrado la compra por completo". Muchas veces he escuchado aquello de: "Volver a creer en ti y en los demás para amar" y es que a las personas se nos acaba hiriendo por muchos motivos, incluso puede que ni lleguen a herirnos del propio miedo a intentar algo que abandonamos antes de tiempo. Las experiencias que nos atraviesan son las que también nos harán alejarnos del amor. Para sanar hay que volver, en cierta forma, a ver la vida con inocencia y a ver el amor en los otros seres humanos. Y esto conlleva verlos con todas sus imperfecciones. Confiar, creer y hacer el bien. La respuesta es sencilla, tan sencilla que ya la conocemos aunque no la veamos. A menudo necesitamos tiempo y ayuda para encontrarla. Para la práctica, lo más difícil, tenemos la vida. "¿Qué es amor? Amor es presuponer amor; tener amor es presuponer amor en los demás". 🌿
June 3, 2016
Love. Where to start??
"The life of a plant is hidden, the fruit is the manifestation. Love itself is in a certain sense hiding and therefore can be known only by its revealing fruits."
The introduction perfectly sets the focus for this tome on love. Kierkegaard is concerned with the inner life of love, the mindsets towards others that we carry around, confident that if those are adjusted accordingly, the "fruit" of love will simply manifest itself. This would be contrary to a focus on doing more "good" for others or a "fake it 'til you make it" mentality.
SK leaves no thought unturned. Another reviewer says that here is wisdom and insight buried under 350 pages of belaboring the point. While I find that funny, I disagree. Kierkegaard simply does not assume anything.
His treatment of 1 Corinthians 8:1 provides a good example. "Love builds up." It is easy to breeze past this and think to oneself, "ok. Got it. Encourage other people." Or something like that. But Build up from what? We are building UP versus simply building. What are we building on? There must be a foundation. And so on. In short, the very foundation we are building on is love. What is the significance of picking apart this phrasing? Actually, the implications of carrying this mindset are huge, and very relevant for us today. It means that in order to build up others, we must first assume love is present in others. If we do not presuppose love in others, then mistrust "takes the very ground level away by pre-supposing that love is not present; therefore mistrust cannot build up." In our world, where intelligence and cleverness are highly valued, not being deceived is of high priority. But SK throws that mentality under the bus. We MUST presuppose love in others in order to build them up, in order to love them. Cynicism has no place in love.
Does this mean that we are to walk around in a perpetual state of ignorance of others? No. His next chapter is titled, "Love Believes All Things-And Yet Is Never Deceived". :-)
(An aside: I think it is important when reading this to remember that he is mostly concerned with the inner life of love. When he is talking of duty and sacrifice, it does not mean that those in dangerous relationships should remain there, but that they should remove themselves from said situation while maintaining a mindset of love.)
Truly, this work is worth reading. The mixture of brilliant insights with Socratic irony is a compelling blend.
"The life of a plant is hidden, the fruit is the manifestation. Love itself is in a certain sense hiding and therefore can be known only by its revealing fruits."
The introduction perfectly sets the focus for this tome on love. Kierkegaard is concerned with the inner life of love, the mindsets towards others that we carry around, confident that if those are adjusted accordingly, the "fruit" of love will simply manifest itself. This would be contrary to a focus on doing more "good" for others or a "fake it 'til you make it" mentality.
SK leaves no thought unturned. Another reviewer says that here is wisdom and insight buried under 350 pages of belaboring the point. While I find that funny, I disagree. Kierkegaard simply does not assume anything.
His treatment of 1 Corinthians 8:1 provides a good example. "Love builds up." It is easy to breeze past this and think to oneself, "ok. Got it. Encourage other people." Or something like that. But Build up from what? We are building UP versus simply building. What are we building on? There must be a foundation. And so on. In short, the very foundation we are building on is love. What is the significance of picking apart this phrasing? Actually, the implications of carrying this mindset are huge, and very relevant for us today. It means that in order to build up others, we must first assume love is present in others. If we do not presuppose love in others, then mistrust "takes the very ground level away by pre-supposing that love is not present; therefore mistrust cannot build up." In our world, where intelligence and cleverness are highly valued, not being deceived is of high priority. But SK throws that mentality under the bus. We MUST presuppose love in others in order to build them up, in order to love them. Cynicism has no place in love.
Does this mean that we are to walk around in a perpetual state of ignorance of others? No. His next chapter is titled, "Love Believes All Things-And Yet Is Never Deceived". :-)
(An aside: I think it is important when reading this to remember that he is mostly concerned with the inner life of love. When he is talking of duty and sacrifice, it does not mean that those in dangerous relationships should remain there, but that they should remove themselves from said situation while maintaining a mindset of love.)
Truly, this work is worth reading. The mixture of brilliant insights with Socratic irony is a compelling blend.
October 18, 2010
I am usually an avid highlighter but the first essay from this collection had me so stunned with its relevancy to all of the things that had been knocking about in my head and heart for the past year or so*** that I didn't bother having a highlighter in my hand at any point in time that I was reading this book. Had I done so, I would have ended up with more text highlighted than not highlighted.
***I am admittedly all of these things: already a fan of Kierkegaard, already religious, and OK with moral arguments that say equate "the good" with religion. I am also OK with multiple clauses in sentences. Even if some of these things do not describe you, I still think this is just an incredible piece of work and you should be able to set aside your judgment to see what he does it. It is truly masterful.
***I am admittedly all of these things: already a fan of Kierkegaard, already religious, and OK with moral arguments that say equate "the good" with religion. I am also OK with multiple clauses in sentences. Even if some of these things do not describe you, I still think this is just an incredible piece of work and you should be able to set aside your judgment to see what he does it. It is truly masterful.
May 29, 2011
This book is certainly a long laborious read. However, I was able to push my way through it fairly quickly because all the ideas were so novel to me. I have not ventured very far into the theological realm, but this book breathes some seriously fresh and insightful life into the idea of "Loving thy neighbour as thyself." It also explores many different consequences and viewpoints of this idea.
I would recommend this book highly to anyone wishing to improve themselves and their relationships with others, Christian or otherwise; some seriously high ideals propounded in this book that can make everyone cower in humility.
I would recommend this book highly to anyone wishing to improve themselves and their relationships with others, Christian or otherwise; some seriously high ideals propounded in this book that can make everyone cower in humility.
May 30, 2025
Kurz und extrem gut. Habs gleich drei mal gehört.
Paar Gedanken, die ich besonders gefeiert habe:
- Wer nicht an Liebe glaubt, betrügt sich selbst um die Liebe. Der liebt nur so, wie er geliebt wird und hat Angst zu viel zu geben oder zu wenig zu bekommen.
- Liebe bleibt, ist ewig. Du kannst nicht um deine gegebene Liebe betrogen werden.
- „Liebe den Geliebten treu und zärtlich, aber lass die Liebe zum Nächsten das Heiligmachende sein im Bunde eurer Vereinigung mit Gott“
Paar Gedanken, die ich besonders gefeiert habe:
- Wer nicht an Liebe glaubt, betrügt sich selbst um die Liebe. Der liebt nur so, wie er geliebt wird und hat Angst zu viel zu geben oder zu wenig zu bekommen.
- Liebe bleibt, ist ewig. Du kannst nicht um deine gegebene Liebe betrogen werden.
- „Liebe den Geliebten treu und zärtlich, aber lass die Liebe zum Nächsten das Heiligmachende sein im Bunde eurer Vereinigung mit Gott“
July 31, 2020
Dense, heady stuff, but very rewarding.
May 17, 2023
Mesterværk om pligten at elske. Den er spækket med guldkorn 🎯
September 26, 2014
Works of Love is a searching exploration of the distinctive and demanding character of Christian love. It is not a "feel good" book but one that might leave you wondering whether you really have loved at all, or loved well.
Kierkegaard begins with the paradox of love's character as both hidden and yet bearing fruit in works of love. He then explores the great command to love neighbor as oneself. He plumbs the challenges of loving a neighbor in all the ways we love ourselves, and the fact that it is the neighbor we are to love, literally anyone, and not just the friend or the lover.
He then considers how love is the fulfillment of the law, seen most fully in how Christ fulfilled the law. The law is always indeterminate--we can never know if we've met all its demands, but if we love as Christ, we can be sure of this. He also introduces here an idea also found in Bonhoeffer that God is the middle term between us and the person we love. We love others in God and to God. And so also, this is how we love with a clear conscience. We first are transparent with God, and so then with the neighbor we love.
Perhaps even more challenging is to love those we see. We are not to look for those who are lovable but to love those in our sight apart from anything "deserving in them". But it doesn't stop there. Kierkegaard's chapter on the debt of love argues that this is a debt that is never discharged toward another person as long as we live. We can never say we have loved "enough".
He turns to 1 Corinthians 13 and takes this phrase by phrase. He talks about love building up and, in this, love presupposes the love of the other, that is we upbuild others by presupposing the best in them. Love believes all things, that is it believes, and persists in believing the best of others. It isn't self protective and thus never truly deceived. Similarly, love hopes all things, is always hopeful of the good in another. Love never seeks its own because there is no "mine" in love. Love hides a multiplicity of sins because this is not what it is looking for, and even when this is unavoidable responds in forgiveness. Love abides and never knows the breaking of a relationship because love keeps loving.
His concluding chapters explore the character of mercy, the nature of reconciliation, and something I've never seen before, an exploration of love in the remembering of the dead, a love that cannot be reciprocated and is therefore the freest love. His concluding chapter truly sums everything up in the idea of "like unto like". We love and we believe we are loved, we forgive (or not) as we believe we are forgiven. We either live in a world of judgment where we judge others and live under the fearsome judgment of God, or we believe the God of love and forgiveness in Christ and live in that love and forgiveness toward others. Hence, the works of love really are an expression of faith.
If this summary of the book seems a bit 'dense' or even perplexing, this probably reflects the book's character. Kierkegard leaves no stone unturned in his exploration of love. This is a book to be read slowly and perhaps repeatedly and only if one is willing to wrestle with the uncomfortable challenge of what it truly means to practice Christian love. Perhaps this is implicit in Kierkegaard but all this is fact an impossibility apart from Christ's indwelling fullness. This isn't simply a more demanding ethic, but one that leads us first to repentance of how poorly we have loved and casts us back onto the empowering presence of God's Spirit. In every sense then, this is a hard book, but because of that, all the more worthwhile.
Kierkegaard begins with the paradox of love's character as both hidden and yet bearing fruit in works of love. He then explores the great command to love neighbor as oneself. He plumbs the challenges of loving a neighbor in all the ways we love ourselves, and the fact that it is the neighbor we are to love, literally anyone, and not just the friend or the lover.
He then considers how love is the fulfillment of the law, seen most fully in how Christ fulfilled the law. The law is always indeterminate--we can never know if we've met all its demands, but if we love as Christ, we can be sure of this. He also introduces here an idea also found in Bonhoeffer that God is the middle term between us and the person we love. We love others in God and to God. And so also, this is how we love with a clear conscience. We first are transparent with God, and so then with the neighbor we love.
Perhaps even more challenging is to love those we see. We are not to look for those who are lovable but to love those in our sight apart from anything "deserving in them". But it doesn't stop there. Kierkegaard's chapter on the debt of love argues that this is a debt that is never discharged toward another person as long as we live. We can never say we have loved "enough".
He turns to 1 Corinthians 13 and takes this phrase by phrase. He talks about love building up and, in this, love presupposes the love of the other, that is we upbuild others by presupposing the best in them. Love believes all things, that is it believes, and persists in believing the best of others. It isn't self protective and thus never truly deceived. Similarly, love hopes all things, is always hopeful of the good in another. Love never seeks its own because there is no "mine" in love. Love hides a multiplicity of sins because this is not what it is looking for, and even when this is unavoidable responds in forgiveness. Love abides and never knows the breaking of a relationship because love keeps loving.
His concluding chapters explore the character of mercy, the nature of reconciliation, and something I've never seen before, an exploration of love in the remembering of the dead, a love that cannot be reciprocated and is therefore the freest love. His concluding chapter truly sums everything up in the idea of "like unto like". We love and we believe we are loved, we forgive (or not) as we believe we are forgiven. We either live in a world of judgment where we judge others and live under the fearsome judgment of God, or we believe the God of love and forgiveness in Christ and live in that love and forgiveness toward others. Hence, the works of love really are an expression of faith.
If this summary of the book seems a bit 'dense' or even perplexing, this probably reflects the book's character. Kierkegard leaves no stone unturned in his exploration of love. This is a book to be read slowly and perhaps repeatedly and only if one is willing to wrestle with the uncomfortable challenge of what it truly means to practice Christian love. Perhaps this is implicit in Kierkegaard but all this is fact an impossibility apart from Christ's indwelling fullness. This isn't simply a more demanding ethic, but one that leads us first to repentance of how poorly we have loved and casts us back onto the empowering presence of God's Spirit. In every sense then, this is a hard book, but because of that, all the more worthwhile.
March 28, 2013
A book so soft and delicate and tolerant and close to my heart, that I find it difficult to externalize any sort of detail about it. A book that has confirmed and reinforced my most ardent belief, the element that I appreciate the most when it comes to human relationships/interaction: the most important and the most beautiful thing that a human being can have/give is their heart ('the highest good is to love, then that of being loved').
Kierkegaard encourages us gently ('gently' being of high importance here, as the book obviously pleads for Christian love, however it never felt as an absolute obligation) to learn to love without distinction, in any condition, to employ our heart, kindness, tolerance, hope, faith and understanding when it comes to the people around us, when it comes to our neighbour.
The most nourishing book for that 'heart-room' we all have, but often fail to employ / invest in / take care of. The purest, freest and healthiest forms and particularities of true love/lovers, all beautifully presented with the hands and mind of a magical man, beloved Søren Kierkegaard.
(words fail me now, so I'll leave it at that.)
Kierkegaard encourages us gently ('gently' being of high importance here, as the book obviously pleads for Christian love, however it never felt as an absolute obligation) to learn to love without distinction, in any condition, to employ our heart, kindness, tolerance, hope, faith and understanding when it comes to the people around us, when it comes to our neighbour.
The most nourishing book for that 'heart-room' we all have, but often fail to employ / invest in / take care of. The purest, freest and healthiest forms and particularities of true love/lovers, all beautifully presented with the hands and mind of a magical man, beloved Søren Kierkegaard.
(words fail me now, so I'll leave it at that.)
Read
May 31, 2024It's just ridiculous how good Kierkegaard is. I haven't encountered another author quite like him, and I'm doubtful I ever will. His beautiful and witty writing style is so fun to read, his metaphors and stories and thought experiments bring so much life to whatever topic he is focusing on, and his honest pursuit of the truth (even when it takes him on winding, meandering paths) is so rewarding to follow. He gets to the hearts of his readers with such force and compassion at the same time, and it leaves me feeling both convicted and overjoyed. And while there's lots in this book that I don't understand, it only makes me more excited to reread it someday.
"We men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees. We men want to look upward in order to look for the perfect object, but in Christ perfect looked down to earth and loved the person it saw."
"We men talk about finding the perfect person in order to love him. Christianity speaks about being the perfect person who limitlessly loves the person he sees. We men want to look upward in order to look for the perfect object, but in Christ perfect looked down to earth and loved the person it saw."
November 3, 2021
Could've used a professor to hold my hand through this one.
February 2, 2026
It's probably only a slight exaggeration to say that from first to last, Kierkegaard's sprawling body of work has only ever concerned itself with this: to insist upon the distinction between the eternal and the temporal, the divine and the worldly. As an explorer and an adventurer of the yawning chasm that separates the two, Kierkegaard often hit on those moments of 'negative' feeling: despair, fear, anxiety, dread - psychological and existential indexes of the incommensurable difference between God and man (always 'man'...), signals that one has come close to the divine, all the better to give oneself over to it. In Works of Love, a different note is struck. Not difference but affinity is the object of investigation here: love, that which is shared between God and man, and in fact is none other than God himself: God is love, as is written in the New Testament. To speak of 'works of love' then, is just to speak of works of God.
Yet precisely for this reason is Kierkegaard keen to delineate between love itself: erotic and familial love on the one hand, and divine and eternal love on the other. Love, common to both, bewitches all the more that the one can be confused for the other, sealing - whether by sin or by seduction - the eternal from the temporal. Or put otherwise, love, in its already nearness to God, threatens, by that very proximity, to keep us at a distance all too far from Him if not grasped in its holiness. To guard against just this fallenness of love, love reduced to its all-too-human dimension, is the work of Works of Love. For Kierkegaardian love is love in the strictly Christian mode: to love is to love one's neighbor as oneself. It's a formula and a universalism that cuts against any amorous exclusivity: no partner, no family and no friend is to be elevated over the neighbor, who, in being loved 'as oneself', equally divests the loving self of any partiality to this or that finite being.
This is love as universal and love as infinite. To speak of infinite love is to speak against love as an economy: no trading of love for love, no forgiveness bound by conditions, not even a preference of love for the living against love for the dead is admitted: in all cases, love, in its divine form, abides throughout - and without - change: "Meet all the terrors of the future with this comfort: love abides; meet all the anxiety and listlessness of the present with this comfort: love abides... He becomes the one who loves by abiding in love; by abiding in love his love abides." While breathtaking in its amorous fastidiousness, it's needless to say that this is also a love that demands. No sunset stroll on the beach, Kierkegaardian love asks for the infinite and rejects all half-measures: even 'the poets', who sing, intoxicated of love, are here chastised over and over for indulging in visions of love-as-passion over love as eternal.
A corrective to close: despite my own emphasis on Kierkegaard's hard and fast line between the divine and the earthly, it bears mentioning that ultimately, for Kierkegaard, it's only by honoring the infinite that the finite too can be given the edification it deserves. Thus: not the infinite in place of the finite, but the infinite for the sake of the finite are the decisive stakes of eternal love. Taken as a whole, this is, so far, my favourite of the Kierkegaard that I've read. As I mentioned earlier, while perhaps better known for his darker, moodier themes (anxiety, etc), I think precisely because this work of love lies so close to his heart, that it illuminates, all the brighter, what Kierkegaard never stopped searching for across all his work. And while slow-going at times, to read an intelligence such as this, with his vast repertoire of philosophical and literary learning at hand, piecing together his monument to love, aspect by aspect, chapter by chapter, is just to witness a small miracle in itself.
Yet precisely for this reason is Kierkegaard keen to delineate between love itself: erotic and familial love on the one hand, and divine and eternal love on the other. Love, common to both, bewitches all the more that the one can be confused for the other, sealing - whether by sin or by seduction - the eternal from the temporal. Or put otherwise, love, in its already nearness to God, threatens, by that very proximity, to keep us at a distance all too far from Him if not grasped in its holiness. To guard against just this fallenness of love, love reduced to its all-too-human dimension, is the work of Works of Love. For Kierkegaardian love is love in the strictly Christian mode: to love is to love one's neighbor as oneself. It's a formula and a universalism that cuts against any amorous exclusivity: no partner, no family and no friend is to be elevated over the neighbor, who, in being loved 'as oneself', equally divests the loving self of any partiality to this or that finite being.
This is love as universal and love as infinite. To speak of infinite love is to speak against love as an economy: no trading of love for love, no forgiveness bound by conditions, not even a preference of love for the living against love for the dead is admitted: in all cases, love, in its divine form, abides throughout - and without - change: "Meet all the terrors of the future with this comfort: love abides; meet all the anxiety and listlessness of the present with this comfort: love abides... He becomes the one who loves by abiding in love; by abiding in love his love abides." While breathtaking in its amorous fastidiousness, it's needless to say that this is also a love that demands. No sunset stroll on the beach, Kierkegaardian love asks for the infinite and rejects all half-measures: even 'the poets', who sing, intoxicated of love, are here chastised over and over for indulging in visions of love-as-passion over love as eternal.
A corrective to close: despite my own emphasis on Kierkegaard's hard and fast line between the divine and the earthly, it bears mentioning that ultimately, for Kierkegaard, it's only by honoring the infinite that the finite too can be given the edification it deserves. Thus: not the infinite in place of the finite, but the infinite for the sake of the finite are the decisive stakes of eternal love. Taken as a whole, this is, so far, my favourite of the Kierkegaard that I've read. As I mentioned earlier, while perhaps better known for his darker, moodier themes (anxiety, etc), I think precisely because this work of love lies so close to his heart, that it illuminates, all the brighter, what Kierkegaard never stopped searching for across all his work. And while slow-going at times, to read an intelligence such as this, with his vast repertoire of philosophical and literary learning at hand, piecing together his monument to love, aspect by aspect, chapter by chapter, is just to witness a small miracle in itself.
November 19, 2023
Solid! But my brain hurts. I just don’t know if I agree with him completely on all his ideas. A couple are awesome, but with one especially I really don’t think I agree. He makes this command that you should love everyone the same and without distinction or that otherwise your love is not Christian love. Like he really kinda looks down upon friendship and erotic love as selective and unChristian. On some level yes we should love everyone! Nevertheless, the way I love my parent cannot be the same way I love my fraternity brother or classmate or romantic partner. People are different and relationships are different and love has to be given in different ways to different people, and this book felt very detached from that reality or any reality at all. But good LORD he figured out how to purify any form of selfishness at all from love. Good book, anyways. Lots of good one-liners and unique perspectives on Scripture
July 28, 2015
One of the most beautiful books I've read. This book is novel, provocative and revolutionary. It's strenuous but gentle and mild at the same time. Kierkegaard breathes a new life to many Christian teachings most notably "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39) which becomes the center piece of this book. If you think that Christian teaching has to be dogmatic, inflexible or forceful, try reading this book and you might be proven wrong. Such a beautiful book, not too hard to read as well in my opinion considering it's a philosophy book. Have a feeling that unreligious people might flinch at the constant mention of "God" but try reading it with an open mind as a book on existential philosophy.
The entire gist of this book is how Christianity changes the abstract concept of love. It elevates "love" into a thing that goes beyond the human tendencies and passion. On one hand there is what he calls the "worldy" or "pagan" view of love, which is what humans are fully naturally inclined to - humans are naturally inclined to love those that are lovable, beautiful, those that are of their own kinds, similar to them, their friends and families, etc. So in this case love is something very divisive and exclusive. Then with Christianity, the "eternal" standard is introduced. This "eternal" standard stands at odds with human nature because it requires people to love everyone equally - everyone without any distinctions. This new "love" is made possible by introducing a third party in the relationship between two humans and that is "God". Everyone becomes equal in the presence of the "eternal". This new "love" then becomes something universal and unifying. He urges the readers to love equally with equanimity, to be as tolerant as possible to those who are different from them, to love under all conditions. "Love" then is transformed into "Works", something that requires efforts that are accessible to all. It requires humans to fight against their natural tendencies - that's why it is "Works".
There are many other themes in this book, but I felt what was aforementioned is the main message of the book. The other sub-theme which I think is most interesting is his view on charity in Part 2 Chapter 7: "Mercifulness has nothing to give... and this is of great importance, since really to be able to be merciful is a far greater perfection than to have money and consequently to be able to give." He talks about how "the greatness of a gift increases in proportion to the greatness of poverty, consequently in reverse to what the world thinks (That the greatness of the gift is in proportion to one's wealth)" because the world has an understanding for money while Christ has an understanding for mercifulness. He also adds that "the eternal has the sharpest eye and the most developed understanding for mercy, but no understanding of money, no more than the eternal has financial problems or, as the saying goes, has anything to use money for." This really blows my mind! It also makes me think deeply about a certain local church embroiled in some financial fraud issues...
Kierkegaard then gives a last warning that the "apostles of love" who advocate this new concept of love might become an object of scorn in the eyes of the world with its "worldly" standards.
The entire gist of this book is how Christianity changes the abstract concept of love. It elevates "love" into a thing that goes beyond the human tendencies and passion. On one hand there is what he calls the "worldy" or "pagan" view of love, which is what humans are fully naturally inclined to - humans are naturally inclined to love those that are lovable, beautiful, those that are of their own kinds, similar to them, their friends and families, etc. So in this case love is something very divisive and exclusive. Then with Christianity, the "eternal" standard is introduced. This "eternal" standard stands at odds with human nature because it requires people to love everyone equally - everyone without any distinctions. This new "love" is made possible by introducing a third party in the relationship between two humans and that is "God". Everyone becomes equal in the presence of the "eternal". This new "love" then becomes something universal and unifying. He urges the readers to love equally with equanimity, to be as tolerant as possible to those who are different from them, to love under all conditions. "Love" then is transformed into "Works", something that requires efforts that are accessible to all. It requires humans to fight against their natural tendencies - that's why it is "Works".
There are many other themes in this book, but I felt what was aforementioned is the main message of the book. The other sub-theme which I think is most interesting is his view on charity in Part 2 Chapter 7: "Mercifulness has nothing to give... and this is of great importance, since really to be able to be merciful is a far greater perfection than to have money and consequently to be able to give." He talks about how "the greatness of a gift increases in proportion to the greatness of poverty, consequently in reverse to what the world thinks (That the greatness of the gift is in proportion to one's wealth)" because the world has an understanding for money while Christ has an understanding for mercifulness. He also adds that "the eternal has the sharpest eye and the most developed understanding for mercy, but no understanding of money, no more than the eternal has financial problems or, as the saying goes, has anything to use money for." This really blows my mind! It also makes me think deeply about a certain local church embroiled in some financial fraud issues...
Kierkegaard then gives a last warning that the "apostles of love" who advocate this new concept of love might become an object of scorn in the eyes of the world with its "worldly" standards.
February 9, 2020
A hole lotta chaff for some winter wheat.
May 6, 2007
Greatest Book I have ever Read.
Before anyone gets into a relationship of any kind, it would be imperative that they read this book with someone they love and talk about what it means for them to continue loving each other.
Before anyone gets into a relationship of any kind, it would be imperative that they read this book with someone they love and talk about what it means for them to continue loving each other.
September 1, 2016
As an essay this could have been spectacular. As is, it's a series of beautiful insights and metaphors buried amidst 350 pages of belabouring the point. Utterly different from Fear and Trembling, which is all the more striking for its brevity.
April 19, 2021
I knew, going in, that Kierkegaard's work is.... predominantly of a pious nature, but this has become quite Unbearable, therefore I black-flag it at 47% as there are better things out there for me.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 223 reviews