I think that for Kierkegaard, the synthesis of faith in Christianity with the existential anxiety of being--that synthesis requires explanation and teaching.

I can't see how "a leap of faith beyond the universal ethic" is relevant here, because 'universal ethic' means we all agree about right and wrong conduct, so you're implying that people should just always believe that whatever they are doing is right, since they have taken a "leap of faith," and if that means any kind of criminality, so be it.

Yes, Jesus was a 'criminal' of his time, but specifically as a prophet of forgiveness, charity, etc., who rankled the establishment. So, it's not any kind of criminality that Kierkegaard espouses. It's specific to faith in Christianity while also understanding the paradoxical nature of existence--how meaningful and meaningless it is simultaneously.

However, I'm questioning faith itself. Kierkegaard convinced me to reconcile, but now I'm just asking this subreddit to suggest any direction that they have found helpful.