{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018036664695446483, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.162112932604736, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Postmodern Saints of France: Refiguring ‘The Holy’ in Contemporary French Philosophy

loved.’ If God’s love can be characterized (also) as eros, this surely gives permission to human beings to be passionate. Mulder cites interpreters of Kierkegaard who point to the Dane’s recognition of the value of natural love, and later in the book, in Chapter seven, agrees with Daphne Hampson that one’s love of God is an elevated expression of eros. A few encouraging remarks here and there in Kierkegaard’s oeuvre, however, do not signal a paradigm shift in his thought. One is left with the impression that Kierkegaard’s underlying anthropology makes it practically impossible for him to admit that broken human beings could ever love in any satisfactory way. Fundamental differences about love again surface in Chapter six, which deals with hell and imperfect contrition. The Catholic tradition shows tolerance toward flawed contrition; Kierkegaard disapproves of it as doubleminded since it entails wanting to be good out of fear of being punished. He prefers the perfect contrition that reflects a pure love of God. Overall, Mulder provides the reader with detailed and carefully argued positions and counterpositions. His quest is for a more precise theoretical understanding, for clarity and coherence, and it is no surprise that he often invokes Thomas Aquinas, a master of system and rigour. Mulder demonstrates again and again that Kierkegaard employs reason to great effect—even when he is intent on dethroning its exaggerated pretensions. However, this focus also runs the risk of sidelining somewhat the unique contribution of Kierkegaard in terms of his shift toward subjectivity and interiority, and his consequent impatience with the static nature of theoretical considerations that do not allow space for existential questions to surface. Doctrine and dogma never come first for Kierkegaard, because he is aware of their impersonal and abstract nature and their tendency to objectify. Certainly, dogma and doctrine have their rightful place, but only after the encounter with the living God. For this reason it would have been instructive had Mulder explored the shaping influence of pietism upon Kierkegaard, since it was because of his passion for holiness that Kierkegaard first encountered Catholic authors such as Bernard of Clairvaux and Thomas à Kempis. Although Mulder’s study concentrates upon dogma and doctrine, Kierkegaard’s interest in Catholicism was intimately linked to the ‘imitatio Christi’ tradition, and in fact in one of his journal entries Kierkegaard criticized Aquinas for emphasizing doctrine at the expense of the imitation of Christ. Moreover, as someone of a Protestant background who mentions in the introduction to his study that he became Catholic at the time he was defending his dissertation on Kierkegaard, it would have been enlightening and profoundly Kierkegaardian to have read more about this journey (for instance, as part of a more personal introduction to the book or in the form of an appendix) that evidently involved a change in Mulder’s way of living in the light of a new faith understanding and new interests. These kinds of changes are at the heart of everything for Kierkegaard, because they give rise to the most fundamental philosophical questions about who one is and about what it means to be an authentic Christian.