The existential outworking of presumptuousness corresponds with Kierkegaard’s definition of sin and despair in Sickness Unto Death: ‘Sin is before God, or with the conception of God, in despair not to will to be oneself, or in despair to will to be oneself’ (SUD: 77). Presumptuousness, like sin, occurs before God. It entails an encroachment of the Creator-creature distinction through an attempt to posit an illegitimate self, either destructively (disbelief) or creatively (superstition). In each case, the individual both wills and does not will to be himself and worry (despair) is the result of each movement. Kierkegaard also brings the terminology of anxiety into close proximity with the concept of worry. In a summary statement of the discourse he writes, ‘just as grace comes through God to each person who as a Christian draws near to him, so anxiety comes through himself to the person who presumptuously withdraws from God or presumptuously draws near to him’ (CD: 69). This is one of several places Kierkegaard equates the term with worry or care in the discourse. His definition of presumptuousness also feeds his interpretation of 6:27.
From the perspective of modern Matthew studies, Kierkegaard takes the minority view by rendering the text as adding a foot to one’s growth; the majority of translations present the idea of adding time to one’s life span. Luz also goes against the common reading of verse 6:27. He sees the image as ‘a pessimistic wisdom’ and as something ‘in contrast to the two images [bird and lily], this intervening idea of v.27 breathes an air of
resignation. People cannot change the measure God has set for them’.152 Kierkegaard’s comments on finding satisfaction in God seem more positive and proactive than Luz’s idea of mere resignation. The Creator-creature distinction not only humbles the individual, it also brings energy, draws him closer to the heavenly Father, infuses joy into his life, and protects against the two pitfalls of this variety of worry. To want to add a foot to one’s growth is to desire to become the exception or the extraordinary; this manifests in the arrogance that either wants to alter the self so that it does not need God or the arrogance that wants to change its being so that it has God on its own terms. Both individuals remain in care. Kierkegaard contends strongly that God’s wrath remains upon them until they flee to the grace of God (CD 69).
Through his depiction of self-torment and his exploration of different unhealthy relationships with the next day, Kierkegaard offers a commentary on Matthew 6:34. To worry about tomorrow amounts to a fatalistic view of the future and a fear of death. This outlook manifests in two ways. First, there is the dread, rooted in a condition of God- forsakeness, that at any moment everything good will crumble. It also surfaces in a hedonistic lifestyle that ignores the spiritual nature of the self and attempts to drown out the ‘day of annihilation’ (CD: 77). To not worry about tomorrow reverses the two tendencies reviewed above. The believer turns her back on the next day and concentrates her full efforts on becoming a true self in the present. Kierkegaard’s reading of 6:34 does not deny the presence of all care. Instead, he limits its range. This fosters the existential outlook commended continually in the discourses and adds an important image to the presentation of Christian sanctification (artful living) in the Matthew writings. The presence of enough care for each day creates the opportunity to cast these cares upon the heavenly Father, keeps the individual from getting too far ahead of himself, and provides
152
Luz,Matthew 1-7, 344. See also here Luz’s justification for this translation of the text, which is rooted in linguistics, rabbinic thought, and the history of interpretation.
a reminder that true life in the ‘now’ can only occur in cooperation with God and in full awareness of being both physical and spiritual beings.
Jesus’ words, ‘no one can serve two masters,’ do not permit love and devotion to mammon, even for the person who claims to fully commit to the task. Not only is undivided service of all non-God entities forbidden, it is also impossible. Matthew’s text calls the disciple to an unalloyed loyalty to God which also results in a genuine unification of the self; purity of heart is to will one thing, says Kierkegaard, and from 6:24 he clarifies who that one thing is and what it is not. The text, with its language of service, love, and devotion, repackages the summary of the Law: Love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. Kierkegaard’s discourse once again puts the spotlight on the gift of choice and depicts a grim picture of what happens when the most important either/or in life is neglected or put off due to intellectual arrogance and doubt. Attempts to master self-will, instead of yielding it to God, end in being mastered by doubt and subjected to its destructive forces. Kierkegaard’s imaginative construction of the pagan shows the dark side of the possibility of choice; even more, it reads out of 6:24 the principle that delay is not the same as standing still. Timely decision for God is a must. In
Either/Or Judge William belabours this same point with the illustration of an indecisive boat captain. While out at sea, he can certainly entertain doubt about what to do next; however, he is foolish to think that he is not simultaneously drifting from the spot in which the decision is best made (E/O II: 164). The either/or of Matthew is not an invitation to a calm, objective, sustained deliberation. It is an alarm sounded to generate the impatience of faith and need that loves and devotes to the heavenly Father.
Throughout the chapter several accounts of how to properly respond to the cares of the pagans have been organized under the heading of artful living. By returning to this
idea briefly now I wish to highlight how artful living relates to another important theme inThe Cares; namely, imitation of Christ.