I just finished reading “Heretics” by G.K. Chesterton. Well, actually I just finished listening to it since I purchased it as an audio book. Leaving aside for now the importance of the narrator, it was a fabulous read (or, listen).
The way that Chesterton articulates his objections to ideas by responding to individual persons is intriguing, whether it was Mr. H.G. Wells or Mr. Rudyard Kipling, or any one of the persons that he chose to quarrel with over their perceived heterodoxy, he did so in a manner that I found uplifting, that didn’t demean or put down his opponents. I found myself often quoting lengthy passages of the book and posting them on Facebook for everyone else to see.
Obviously, Mr. G.K. Chesterton is from a different age than we live in today, but I found his style so refreshing that I purchased a couple more of his books (in audio format). I have no doubt that “What’s Wrong With the World” and “The Everlasting Man” will be just as good, if not better than the two books I’ve read so far – Heretics and Orthodoxy.
I’ll end this short little ode to Mr. Chesterton with a brilliant paragraph from the final chapter of his book “Heretics”:
A common hesitation in our day touching the use of extreme convictions is a sort of notion that extreme convictions specially upon cosmic matters, have been responsible in the past for the thing which is called bigotry. But a very small amount of direct experience will dissipate this view. In real life the people who are most bigoted are the people who have no convictions at all. The economists of the Manchester school who disagree with Socialism take Socialism seriously. It is the young man in Bond Street, who does not know what socialism means much less whether he agrees with it, who is quite certain that these socialist fellows are making a fuss about nothing. The man who understands the Calvinist philosophy enough to agree with it must understand the Catholic philosophy in order to disagree with it. It is the vague modern who is not at all certain what is right who is most certain that Dante was wrong. The serious opponent of the Latin Church in history, even in the act of showing that it produced great infamies, must know that it produced great saints. It is the hard-headed stockbroker, who knows no history and believes no religion, who is, nevertheless, perfectly convinced that all these priests are knaves. The Salvationist at the Marble Arch may be bigoted, but he is not too bigoted to yearn from a common human kinship after the dandy on church parade. But the dandy on church parade is so bigoted that he does not in the least yearn after the Salvationist at the Marble Arch. Bigotry may be roughly defined as the anger of men who have no opinions. It is the resistance offered to definite ideas by that vague bulk of people whose ideas are indefinite to excess. Bigotry may be called the appalling frenzy of the indifferent. This frenzy of the indifferent is in truth a terrible thing; it has made all monstrous and widely pervading persecutions. In this degree it was not the people who cared who ever persecuted; the people who cared were not sufficiently numerous. It was the people who did not care who filled the world with fire and oppression. It was the hands of the indifferent that lit the faggots; it was the hands of the indifferent that turned the rack. There have come some persecutions out of the pain of a passionate certainty; but these produced, not bigotry, but fanaticism—a very different and a somewhat admirable thing. Bigotry in the main has always been the pervading omnipotence of those who do not care crushing out those who care in darkness and blood.