What Is Kierkegaard's Unchangeableness Of Religious Communication?

Kierkegaard’s discussion in his journal about the unchangeableness of Christianity and the changeableness of the ways in which communication is effectuated, opens up to a crucial point in his authorship: while it is true that any communication which is religious witnessing bears the imprint of its communicator, it is true that what is communicated is not the author’s own or of any of his contemporaries, and in this sense he nor any other can claim to be the authority with respect to this sort of direct communication – as opposed for example to the author of the gardening book, who might easily be the author and inventor of his theories concerning gardening, or perhaps drawing on a previous tradition of gardening theory. This, according to Kierkegaard,
If I place the requirement higher, I must express that this presentation is a poetic one. It is altogether appropriate for me to present it, since it may influence another to strive more, and I myself must define myself as one who is striving in relation to it, thereby distinguishing myself from the typical poet, to whom it never occurs to strive personally in relation to the ideality he presents.’32 So, since Kierkegaard acknowledges that he is not fully in simplicity with the Christian ideal, he devises a pseudonym who is in a relation of greater simplicity than him to Christianity. Thus, in Anti-Climacus we have the intertwining of the maieutic and of the most high human simplicity with the Gospel – the latter, being presented by a pseudonym, is cast in reflection and therefore into potentiality as a possible form of life to strive for, there at the same time pointing outside of reflection and into the realms of life, actuality, and
So he writes, ‘if it is an illusion that all are Christians, and if something is to be done, it must be done indirectly, not by someone who loudly declares himself to be an extraordinary Christian, but by someone who, better informed, even declared himself not to be a Christian.’33 In other words, someone who is completely engulfed in an illusion must be treated with a dose of reality, someone who admit with honesty of not being able to satisfy the Christian ideal, but who at the same time is willing not to lower that same ideal for his or her own convenience, and continues to proclaim it in all its stringency. However, against the journal entry mentioned above, this “humble proclamation” of the ideal could be done in theory from the position of witnessing, as it would simply take the witness’ admission that he is not completely satisfying what he is witnessing. Still, Kierkegaard does not seem to consider explicitly this possibility in his journal, simply mentioning an indirect action. Moreover, he dismisses direct communication as a strategy to be profitably used against Christendom in a passage within The Point of View: as he puts it ‘if he [the communicator of true Christianity]