G.K. Chesterton, Heretics (affiliate link) Nashville: Sam Tarode Book Arts. Originally published in 1905. 133 pages.
I have read G.K. Chesterton quotes for years. He wrote brilliantly about his culture and is preeminently quotable. He was Roman Catholic and held strong convictions. He tends to overstate his case, which makes him all the more memorable.
In this book, he addresses “heretics,” the artists, authors, and culture-influencers who challenge age-old values and assumptions. Chesterton boldly and brilliantly takes on literary giants such as George Bernard Shaw and H.G. Wells. In short chapters, Chesterton examines the claims of modern thinkers who reject traditional thought, and he finds them wanting.
This book is essentially a collection of quotes, so I will provide a sampling that demonstrates Chesterton’s thought and style. He begins by claiming, “The word ‘heresy’ not only means no longer being wrong; it practically means being clear-headed and courageous. The word ‘orthodoxy’ not only no longer means being right; it practically means being wrong” (1). George Bernard Shaw was a contemporary of Chesterton’s. Shaw promotes a “Superman.” He argues that “The golden rule is that there is no golden rule” (2). Chesterton posits, “. . . the most practical and important thing about a man is still his view of the universe” (3). He asks, “Is literature better, is politics better, for having discarded the moralist and the philosopher?” (3). He claims that “The time of the big theories was the time of big results” (4). He adds, “. . . but will anyone say that there are any men stronger than those men of old who were dominated by their philosophy and steeped in their religion?” (4). He concludes, “Never in the world of politics nor that of literature, then, has the rejection of general theories proved a success” (50).
Chesterton bemoans the efforts of some to discard tried-and-true wisdom for current fads. He argues, “There is nothing which is so weak for working purposes as this enormous importance attached to immediate victory. There is nothing that fails like success” (5). He notes, “. . . I for one have come to believe in going back to fundamentals. Such is the general idea of this book” (6).
Chesterton critiques the “modern morality” that rejects Christian values but has nothing with which to replace it. He states, “A modern morality, on the other hand, can only point with absolute conviction to the horrors that follow breaches of law; its only certainty is a certainty of ill. It can only point to imperfection. It has no perfection to point to” (7). I found this point fascinating. In today’s culture, sin and suffering are loudly condemned in others, yet the world has nothing of substance to offer as a higher good.
Chesterton defends religion from accusations of naïvity. “Strong and genuine religious sentiment has never had any objection to realism; on the contrary, religion was the realistic thing, the brutal thing, the thing that called names” (8). One can only imagine what Chesterton would say about culture’s views of reality today! He adds, “But if it was the chief claim of religion that it spoke plainly about evil, it was the chief claim of all that it spoke plainly about good” (9). Chesterton argues that modern culture could no longer see the true and good because it had been blinded. He writes, “. . . which the eye that can perceive what are the wrong things increases in an uncanny and devouring clarity, the eye which sees what things are right is growing mistier and mistier every moment, till it goes almost blind with doubt” (9). He notes, “To us, as to Milton’s devils in Pandemonium, it is darkness that is visible. The human race, according to religion, fell once and in falling gained knowledge of good and evil. Now we have fallen a second time, and only the knowledge of evil remains to us” (10). This knowledge should compel Christians to uphold God’s ideal in a world that has long since lost sight of it.
Chesterton also challenges the liberal view that those who hold no solid convictions are more free than those with strong beliefs. He notes, “The truth is, that it is quite an error to suppose that absence of definite convictions gives the mind freedom and agility. A man who believes something is ready and witty, because he has all his weapons about him . . . Millions of mild black-coated men call themselves sane and sensible merely because they always catch the fashionable insanity” (22). Chesterton would be amused by today’s society in which people, in the name of freedom, succumb to whatever view is currently politically correct.
He observes, “All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link” (25). He continues, “The truth is that there are no things for which men will make such herculean efforts as the things of which they know they are unworthy” (26).
Chesterton constantly champions the ordinary and humble as opposed to the powerful and elite. He suggests, “Humility is so practical a virtue that men think it must be a vice. Humility is so successful that it is mistaken for pride” (27). Chesterton offers brilliant satire at times. Of H.G. Wells he comments, “He has come to the most dreadful conclusion a literary man can come to, the conclusion that the ordinary view is the right one” (29).
Chesterton holds no punches when critiquing the liberal media and writers who seek to destroy culture but offer nothing of substance in its place. He charges, “and over all the heartless and fatuous unity spreads this new and wearisome and platitudinous press, incapable of invention, incapable of audacity, capable only of servility all the more contemptible because it is not even servility to the strong” (49). He continues, “The chief characteristic of the ‘New Journalism’ is simply that it is bad journalism. It is beyond all comparison the most shapeless, careless, and colorless work done in our day” (49). One wonders what Chesterton would say about today’s media! He concludes, “The only question now is how much longer the fiction will endure that journalists of this order represent public opinion” (52).
Chesterton accuses modern media of being a tool of the elites. He suggests, “. . . an enormous amount of modern ingenuity is expended on finding defenses for the indefensible conduct of the powerful” (73).
Chesterton includes an interesting discussion about families. He critiques those who search the world for adventure while the most noble and challenging undertaking may be to make a life with our family and neighbors. He writes, “We make our friends; we make our enemies; but God makes our next door neighbor. Hence he comes to us clad in all the careless terrors of nature; he is as strange as the stars, as reckless and indifferent as the rain. He is man, the most terrible of beasts” (80). He adds, “It is a good thing for a man to live in a family for the same reason that it is a good thing for a man to be besieged in a city” (81). And finally, “But I dare say that anything is bad and artificial which tends to make these people succumb to the strange delusion that they are stepping into a world which is actually larger and more varied than their own. The best way that a man could test his readiness to encounter the common variety of mankind would be to climb down a chimney into any house at random, and get on as well as possible with the people inside. And that is essentially what each one of us did on the day that he was born” (81).
Chesterton expresses his usual venom toward the elites, especially the scientific elites. He suggests, “With the adequate brain-power we could easily finish any scientific discovery, and be certain that we were finishing it right. But not with the most gigantic intellect could we finish the simplest and silliest story and be certain that we were finishing it right” (83). He notes the power of story and of the novel: “Of all these great limitations and frameworks which fashion and create the poetry and variety of life, the family is the most definite and important” (83).
Chesterton possesses a jaundiced view of much of science. He argues that “Science means specialization, and specialization means oligarchy” (99). One wonders what he would have written about the scientific approach to Covid-19. He adds, “. . . the expert is more aristocratic than the aristocrat, because the aristocrat is only the man who lives well, while the expert is the man who knows better” (99). He continues, “If Scientific Civilization goes on (which is most improbably) only one man will laugh, because he can laugh better than the rest” (99).
Finally, Chesterton claims that “Ideas are dangerous, but the man to whom they are least dangerous is the man of ideas. He is acquainted with ideas and moves among them like a lion tamer. Ideas are dangerous, but the man to whom they are most dangerous is the man of no ideas” (130). In the end, Chesterton challenges people to think. The greatest danger to society is when people forgo independent thought and simply allow others to think for them. You may not always agree with G.K. Chesterton, but at least he will make you think!
G.K. Chesterton was a famous and brilliant writer who fearlessly challenged the contemporary thought of his day. He was also a committed Catholic who cherished many longstanding traditions. Though a friend to many leading authors, no one was exempt from his remarks. His brilliant turns of phrases and British air of humility made him a fearsome opponent if he turned his artillery against you.
Because this work was written in Britain at the turn of the century, some references will be foreign to the North American reader. You might need to do a quick Google search to be sure you understand his references. But you cannot miss the earnest way in which he challenges thought that many accept today without question. He appears prophetic in many of his warnings, such as in challenging the elitist nature of the scientific experts or those in media who attack common virtues and then protect those in power.
I recommend everyone wading in to at least one G.K. Chesterton book to get an up-close view of a brilliant mind using words to combat the evils of the age.
Rating: 3
