Dami Kim ’20… Is Colin Kaepernick a Knight of Faith?: An Application of Kierkegaardian Criteria

Is Colin Kaepernick a Knight of Faith?: An Application of Kierkegaardian Criteria

Dami Kim ’20

Who is a Knight of Faith? Abraham, according to Søren Kierkegaard. In the Biblical story, God promises Abraham that he will father generations of a great nation. And despite the couple’s doubts about conceiving a child at their old age, Sarah finally conceives Isaac. Soon thereafter, however, God commands Abraham to sacrifice Isaac on Moriah. In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard explicates Abraham’s dilemma, claiming that the patriarch’s method of obedience to God’s will qualifies him as a “Knight of Infinite Resignation” and subsequently a “Knight of Faith.” In his other works that criticize institutionalized Christianity, Kierkegaard makes clear that not all churchgoers qualify for either knighthood. The question arises, then, who does? Must he be of Christian faith? Follow a typical “religion?” Although Kierkegaard has an unmitigated personal commitment to Christ, he prioritizes the virtues that stem from the individual’s relationship with the absurd over institutionalized Christianity, revealing that one can achieve the Kierkegaardian absolute without a faith in Jesus.

Kierkegaard intentionally distances himself from Christendom, criticizing the system for leading Churchgoers astray from true Christian virtues. In The Attack Upon “Christendom,” Kierkegaard criticizes institutionalized Christanity. He claims that Christian values are “fundamentally falsified in what he calls Christendom (the rationalization of Christian values in pagan terms)” (Polka 53). First, he finds fault in the fact that the system attempts to “rationalize” eternal values that are absurd––by its very nature, the absurd escapes comprehension by human faculties. Moreover, much like Kant, who believes that enlightenment cannot occur by systematically educating the public, Kierkegaard “most respectfully [refuses] all theocentric helpers and the assistance of helper’s helpers to help [him] into Christianity” in his Concluding Unscientific Postscript (Kierkegaard 16). He claims that the generalized title of “Christendom” misleads the public to believe that it has achieved the Knight of Faith status merely by attending weekly services. The Church cannot simply indoctrinate the public with values; the individual must actively pursue them. Furthermore, in The Attack, he commands his readers to “shun the priests [...] those abominable men whose livelihood it is to prevent thee from so much as becoming aware what Christianity is, and who thereby would transform thee, befuddled 10

Makers of the Modern Mind by galimatias and optical illusion, into what they understand by a true Christian, a paid member of the State Church, or the National Church, or whatever they prefer to call them” (468). Kierkegaard continues his condemnation of “pagan” priests who deliberately deceive the Churchgoer, demanding conformity to a corrupted system which prioritizes worldly profit over Christian values.

The true Knight of Faith endeavors to establish an individual relationship with the absurd, reclaiming the freedom to act upon its virtues. Central to Kierkegaard’s criticism of Christendom is that “one secures oneself against all sorts of inconveniences and discomforts” (437), trapped in an “assured, nonpassionate faith, which, in comparison to the concrete life and sacrificial spirit of Christianity in the New Testament, he [judges] as ‘playing Christianity’” (Fitzpatrick 259). Kierkegaard claims that the security that Christendom offers churchgoers induces complacency. He once again echoes Kant’s sentiments that true Knight of Faith status requires freedom from certainty and comfort. A genuine relationship with the absurd “throws the life of human beings into crisis—in demanding choice, freedom, decision on their part regarding what he calls coming into existence” (Polka 54). Kierkegaard encourages this “crisis,” or “angst,” which indicates that the individual is on the right path. In Fear and Trembling, he claims that one must become a Knight of Infinite Resignation by completely giving up earthly desires prior to entering the realm of the absurd because only then does “eternal validity become transparent” (Kierkegaard 75). At this point, the individual must rely on his relationship with the absurd to provide him a telos, or purpose. And importantly, one exists in a perpetual state of angst, never knowing for sure that one’s decision was the right one to fulfill one’s telos. Indeed, even Kierkegaard expressed his uncertainty, manifesting under a pseudonym in the Concluding Unscientific Postscript: “I, Johannes Climacus, born and bred in this city and now thirty years old, an ordinary human being like most folk, assume that a highest good, called an eternal happiness, awaits me just as it awaits a housemaid and a professor. I have heard that Christianity is one’s prerequisite for this good. I now ask how I may enter into relation to this doctrine” (15). Johannes Climacus turns to Christianity in search of the “highest good,” but Kierkegaard leaves room for interpretation about what “faith” may be.

For instance, football players like Colin Kaepernick who knelt during the U.S. National Anthem can be considered Kierkegaardian Knights of Faith. First, it is important to recognize the “angst” that the players must have experienced, uncertain about what may be their teleological course of action. While they could have stood with aesthetic motivations to pre11

serve their physical self-interest (i.e. to protect their reputation), they also could have stood to serve the universal standard of morality to show respect to what the flag and anthem symbolize: patriotism for America and its institutions. With countless potential motives and courses of action, the kneelers became Knights of Infinite Resignation when they committed to a telos beyond the aesthetic or universal. Both options have the same result, but Kierkegaard addresses the universal (more common) alternative in Problema I of Fear and Trembling. He claims that a Knight of Faith, like Abraham, experiences “teleological suspension of the ethical,” in which the individual becomes higher than the universal (95). He explicitly ranks the absurd above the ethical, which is rationally accepted by social conventions. Thus, when the players kneeled to fulfill their telos, they embraced the “interiority that is incommensurable with the exterior” despite the consequences of defying social norms (97). They put their individual loyalty to the American values over the superficial facade of patriotism to a corrupted system. If they had stood to display respect to the flag and anthem, they would have fallen into the trap of a “fundamentally falsified” illusion of the American identity (Polka 53). The players did not owe allegiance to an American institution like a discriminatorily violent police force that betrays American values like equity and justice. In fact, they followed the Kierkegaardian faith model by acting upon what they believed was their telos as Americans: protecting those very values despite challenging the institution. Thus, they became Knights of Faith who determined that their relation with the absolute depends on serving American virtues, undeterred by very real and dire consequences.

Like Kierkegaard criticizes institutionalized Christanity for limiting the freedom to pursue his eternal telos, Colin Kaepernick acted upon American virtues to protest the racism of the police who betrayed their telos. Labeling the Christian world “Christendom,” Kierkegaard accuses the system of attempting to indoctrinate churchgoers with corrupted worldly values rather than Christian ones. He claims that Christendom hinders the public from living in angst in search of a direct relationship with Christ or any other manifestation of the absurd. However, his criteria for the title of “Knight of Faith” can be applied beyond Christianity in today’s world. For instance, football players like Kaepernick who knelt during the U.S. anthem transcended the aesthetic and universal realms, acting upon what they determined was their telos. By undermining the American institution, they displayed commitment to American values of equity and justice. While Kierkegaard demonstrates a deep personal connection with Christ, his preference for an individualized relation with the absurd over insti- 12

Makers of the Modern Mind tutionalized Christianity suggests that the Knight of Faith title may be awarded to those of non-Christian faith.

Works Cited

Fitzpatrick, Mallary. “Kierkegaard and the Church.” The Journal of Religion, vol. 27, no. 4, 1947, pp. 255–262. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/ stable/1198867. Accessed 2 Mar. 2020. Kierkegaard, Søren. “The Attack Upon Christendom.” A Kierkegaard Anthology, edited by Robert Bretall, New York, Random House, 1946, 434-68. Kierkegaard, Søren. Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments, edited and translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong, Princeton University Press, 1992. Kierkegaard, Søren. “The Expectancy of Faith.” Eighteen Upbuilding Discourses, edited and translated by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong, Princeton University Press, 1990, pp.7-30. Kierkegaard, Søren. Fear and Trembling. London, Penguin Books, 1985. Polka, Brayton. Rethinking Philosophy in Light of the Bible : From Kant to Schopenhauer, Lexington Books, 2014. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/lawrenceville-ebooks/detail. action?docID=183267.