| |

A Simple Thought | G. K. Chesterton | From The Thing: Why I Am a
Catholic | Ignatius Insight
Print-friendly
version
"There is no single one of these faults alleged against the
Catholic institution, which is not far more flagrant and even flamboyant in
every other institution."
Most men would return to the old ways in faith and morals if they could broaden
their minds enough to do so. It is narrowness that chiefly keeps them in the
rut of negation. But this enlargement is easily misunderstood, because the
mind must be enlarged to see the simple things; or even to see the self-evident
things. It needs a sort of stretch of imagination to see the obvious objects
against the obvious background; and especially the big objects against the big
background. There is always the sort of man who can see nothing but the spot
on the carpet, so that he cannot even see the carpet. And that tends to
irritation, which he may magnify into rebellion. Then there is the kind of man
who can only see the carpet, perhaps because it is a new carpet. That is more
human, but it may be tinged with vanity and even vulgarity. There is the man
who can only see the carpeted room; and that will tend to cut him off too much
from other things, especially the servants' quarters. Finally, there is the
man enlarged by imagination, who cannot sit in the carpeted room, or even in
the coal-cellar, without seeing all the time the outline of the whole house
against its aboriginal background of earth and sky. He, understanding that the
roof is raised from the beginning as a shield against sun or snow, and the door
against frost or slime, will know better and not worse than the rest the
reasons of the rules within. He will know better than the first man that there
ought not to be a spot on the carpet. But he will know, unlike the first man,
why there is a carpet.
He will regard in the same fashion a speck or spot upon the records of his
tradition or his creed. He will not explain it ingeniously; certainly he will
not explain it away. On the contrary, he will see it very simply; but he will
also see it very largely; and against the background of larger things. He will
do what his critics never by any chance do; he will see the obvious thing and ask
the obvious question. For the more I read of the modern criticisms of
religion, especially of my own religion, the more I am struck by this narrow
concentration and this imaginative incapacity to take in the problem as a
whole. I have recently been reading a very moderate condemnation of current
Catholic practices, coming from America, where the condemnation is often far
from moderate. It takes the form, generally speaking, of a swarm of questions,
all of which I should be quite willing to answer. Only I am vividly conscious
of the big questions that are not asked, rather than of the little questions
that are.
And I feel above all, this simple and forgotten fact; that whether certain
charges are or are not true of Catholics, they are quite unquestionably true of
everybody else. It never occurs to the critic to do anything so simple as to
compare what is Catholic with what is Non-Catholic. The one thing that never
seems to cross his mind, when he argues about what the Church is like, is the
simple question of what the world would be like without it.
That is what I mean by being too narrow to see the house called the church
against the background called the cosmos. For instance, the writer of whom I
speak indulges in the millionth mechanical repetition of the charge of
mechanical repetition. He says that we repeat prayers and other verbal forms
without thinking about them. And doubtless there are many sympathisers who
will repeat that denunciation after him, without thinking about it at all.
But, before we come to explaining the Church's real teaching about such things,
or quoting her numberless recommendations of attention and vigilance, or
expounding the reason of the reasonable exceptions that she does allow, there
is a wide, a simple and a luminous truth about the whole situation which
anybody can see if he will walk about with his eyes open. It is the obvious
fact that all human forms of speech tend to fossilise into formalism; and that
the Church stands unique in history not as talking a dead language among
everlasting languages; but, on the contrary, as having preserved a living
language in a world of dying languages. When the great Greek cry breaks into
the Latin of the Mass, as old as Christianity itself, it may surprise some to
learn that there are a good many people in church who really do say Kyrie
eleison and mean exactly what they say.
Articles By and About G. K. Chesterton
Ignatius Press Books about G. K. Chesterton
Books by G. K. Chesterton
But anyhow, they mean what they say rather more than a man who begins a letter
with "Dear Sir" means what he says. "Dear" is emphatically
a dead word; in that place it has ceased to have any meaning. It is exactly
what the Protestants would allege of Popish rites and forms; it is done
rapidly, ritually, and without any memory even of the meaning of the rite.
When Mr. Jones the solicitor uses it to Mr. Brown the banker, he does not mean
that the banker is dear to him, or that his heart is filled with Christian
love, even so much as the heart of some poor ignorant Papist listening to the
Mass. Now, life, ordinary, jolly, heathen, human life, is simply chockful of
these dead words and meaningless ceremonies. You will not escape from them by
escaping from the Church into the world. When the critic in question, or a
thousand other critics like him, say that we are only required to make a
material or mechanical attendance at Mass, he says something which is not true
about the ordinary Catholic in his feelings about the Catholic Sacraments. But
he says something which IS true about the ordinary official attending official
functions, about the ordinary Court levee or Ministerial reception, and about
three-quarters of the ordinary society calls and polite visits in the town.
This deadening of repeated social action may be a harmless thing; it may be a
melancholy thing; it may be a mark of the Fall of Man; it may be anything the
critic chooses to think. But those who have made it, hundreds and hundreds of
times, a special and concentrated charge against the Church, are men blind to
the whole human world they live in and unable to see anything but the thing
they traduce.
There are, even in this record, any number of other cases of this queer and
uncanny unconsciousness. The writer complains that priests are led blindfold
into their calling and do not understand the duties involved in it. That also
we seem to have heard before. But we have seldom heard it in so extraordinary a
form as in his statement, that a man can be finally committed to the priesthood
while he is still "a child." He would appear to have odd and elastic
ideas about the duration of childhood. As Mr. Michael Williams has pointed out
in his most thoughtful and illuminating collection of essays, "Catholicism
and the Modern Mind," this is playing about with a matter of plain fact;
since a priest is twenty-four at the earliest when he takes his vows. But here
again I myself am haunted by this huge and naked and yet neglected comparison
between the Church and everything outside the Church. Most critics of
Catholicism declare it to be destructive of patriotism; and this critic says
something about the disadvantages of the Church being merely "attached to
an Italian diocese." Well, I for one have always been a defender of the
cult of patriotism; and nothing that I say here has any connection with what is
commonly called pacifism. I think that our friends and brethren fell ten years
ago in a just war against the hard heathenism of the north; I think the
Prussianism they defeated was frozen with the pride of hell; and for these
dead, I think it is well with them; and perhaps better than with us, who live
to see how evil Peace can be.
But really--when we come to talk about the Church involving young people in
vows! What are we to say to those who would pit patriotism or pagan
citizenship against the Church on that issue? They conscript by violence boys
of eighteen, they applaud volunteers of sixteen for saying they are eighteen,
they throw them by thousands into a huge furnace and torture-chamber, of which
their imaginations can have conceived nothing and from which their honour
forbids them to escape; they keep them in those horrors year after year without
any knowledge even of the possibility of victory; and kill them like flies by
the million before they have begun to live. That is what the State does; that
is what the World does; that is what their Protestant, practical, sensible,
secular society does. And after that they have the astounding impudence to come
and complain of us, because in dealing with a small minority of specialists, we
allow a man finally to choose a charitable and peaceful life, not only long after
he is twenty-one, but when he is well on towards thirty, and after he has had
about ten years to think quietly whether he will do it or not!
In short, what I miss in all these things is the obvious thing: the question of
how the Church compares with the world outside the Church, or opposed to the
Church, or offered as a substitute for the Church. And the fact obviously is
that the world will do all that it has ever accused the Church of doing, and do
it much worse, and do it on a much larger scale, and do it (which is worst and
most important of all) without any standards for a return to sanity or any
motives for a movement of repentance. Catholic abuses can be reformed, because
there is the admission of a form. Catholic sins can be expiated, because there
is a test and a principle of expiation. But where else in the world to-day is
any such test or standard found; or anything except a changing mood, which
makes patriotism the fashion ten years ago and pacifism the fashion ten years
afterwards?
The danger is today that men will not sufficiently enlarge their minds to take
in the obvious things; and this is one of them. It is that men charge the Roman
tradition with being half-heathen and then take refuge from it in a complete
heathenism. It is that men complain because Christians have been infected with
paganism; and then flee from the plague-spotted to take refuge with the
pestilence. There is no single one of these faults alleged against the
Catholic institution, which is not far more flagrant and even flamboyant in
every other institution. And it is to these other institutions, the State, the
School, the modern machinery of taxation and police, to which these people
actually look to save them from the superstition of their fathers. That is the
contradiction; that is the crashing collision; that is the inevitable
intellectual disaster in which they have already involved themselves; and we
have only to wait as patiently as we can, to see how long it is before they
realise what has happened.
Related Ignatius Insight Links, Excerpts, and Articles
The Problem of the Plantagenets | G. K. Chesterton on St. Thomas Becket
G. K. Chesterton on Dan Brown: The Interview | Carl E. Olson
"I despise Birth-Control" | G.K. Chesterton on Babies and Distributism
The Emancipation of Domesticity | G.K. Chesterton
The God in the Cave | G.K. Chesterton
What Is America? | G.K. Chesterton
Mary and the Convert | G.K. Chesterton
Chesterton and Orthodoxy | Carl E. Olson and Dale Ahlquist | Ignatius Insight Podcast | May 21, 2008
Seeing With the Eyes of G.K. Chesterton | Dale Ahlquist
Recovering The Lost Art of Common Sense | Dale Ahlquist
Common Sense Apostle &
Cigar Smoking Mystic | Dale Ahlquist
Chesterton and Saint Francis | Joseph Pearce
Chesterton and the Delight of Truth | James V. Schall, S.J.
The Life and
Theme of G.K. Chesterton | Randall Paine | An Introduction to The Autobiography of G.K. Chesterton
Hot Water and Fresh Air: On Chesterton and His Foes | Janet E. Smith
ChesterBelloc | Ralph McInerny
If you'd like to receive the FREE IgnatiusInsight.com
e-letter (about every 2 to 3 weeks), which includes regular updates
about IgnatiusInsight.com articles, reviews, excerpts, and author appearances,
please click here to sign-up today!
| | | |