Orthodoxy -- G.K. Chesterton

[Major K.]

Anyone ever read G.K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy?

I'm listening to it on Librivox right now, and he makes some rather convincing arguments pro Catholicism. I don't think he's going to turn me into a Catholic, but it has led me to appreciate what the Catholoic church has accomplished over the last few thousand years. At its core, it was a civilizing force. Also, Chesterton is such an amazing writer -- I can't help but smile and laugh throughout the work. He's hilarious (though he does argue against materialism -- quite well, I might add -- in a not dissimilar vein that Marx argued against the materialism of his time).

Anyone ever read the book? Opinions?

[Armchair Partisan]

Oh yeah, the Catholic Church as a civilizing force. Do tell... I guess it did 'forcefully' 'civilize' a lot of people...

I'd probably write something wittier and more scathing, but you're the guy who's admitted to trolling us all, so I'm still just waiting for the BA to take a break from banning the most established members of the board and get on your case.

[Major K.]

Hello to you too, Armchair!

I'm not a troll so much as a... learner through contrast ;)

Chesterton touches upon how the catholic church created a space where people weren't aloud to fight, sell goods, and were supposed to get cleaned up for (wash their face, etc.). I recommend the book though -- it's quite rational -- I can't give you any quotes though -- what with me listening to it through librivox.

P.S. Who was banned? Hopefully none of my especially entertaining friends were banned...

[Luís Henrique]

Anyone ever read G.K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy?

I'm listening to it on Librivox right now, and he makes some rather convincing arguments pro Catholicism. I don't think he's going to turn me into a Catholic, but it has led me to appreciate what the Catholoic church has accomplished over the last few thousand years. At its core, it was a civilizing force. Also, Chesterton is such an amazing writer -- I can't help but smile and laugh throughout the work. He's hilarious (though he does argue against materialism -- quite well, I might add -- in a not dissimilar vein that Marx argued against the materialism of his time).

Anyone ever read the book? Opinions?

I very much like Chesterton - as in, I like his style, his humour, his rhetorics. And I think he is one of the best representatives of what Marx has called "reactionary socialism". He is bright, and he is often able to put things under an unsuspected, even refreshing, perspective.

I wouldn't however take his content very seriously. He is good at destroying other people's delusions, and particularly the hypocritical aspects of those delusions, but he doesn't put up much of an alternative, and to the extent he does, it reminds me again of Marx deriding reactionary socialists: the coats of arms are still there, barely disguised, so it is impossible to not get the impression of an epic troll.

What his tirades are best for is to confound modern reactionaries who are more of far-right liberals than actual conservatives, in order to show that they don't understand their own political positions.

And of course, it is impossible not to like Father Brown and his bizarre mystery short stories.

Luís Henrique

[Aslan]

Anyone ever read G.K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy?

I'm listening to it on Librivox right now, and he makes some rather convincing arguments pro Catholicism. I don't think he's going to turn me into a Catholic, but it has led me to appreciate what the Catholoic church has accomplished over the last few thousand years. At its core, it was a civilizing force. Also, Chesterton is such an amazing writer -- I can't help but smile and laugh throughout the work. He's hilarious (though he does argue against materialism -- quite well, I might add -- in a not dissimilar vein that Marx argued against the materialism of his time).

Even if the Catholic church has ''advanced'' society it has outlived it's usefulness. Today it is a rotting cesspool of deceit and fetishism, just it always has been.The catholic church is an oppressive hierarchical organization, which has a long history of constituting to reactionary though. The church itself also contributed to the Roman empire's degradation, which led to a 500 year period of degradation. The church contributed to the inquisition and kept information from being spread across world, instead keeping them in old archives.

I'd say that Protestantism had a better effect on the enlightenment, revolutionary though, right of man stuff than the hierarchical catholic church. Anabaptism is basically proto-socialism, and led to early revolutionary thought that eventually led to the French revolution.

[blake 3:17]

Chesterton is quite wonderful. I'm more familiar with his lighter works, and have only taken a glimpse at some of more serious writings. I have not come across Orthodoxy but am now curious about it. Thanks.

Edited to add: Just on looking it up found this quote:
It is always perilous to the mind to reckon up the mind. A flippant person has asked why we say, "As mad as a hatter." A more flippant person might answer that a hatter is mad because he has to measure the human head. Very funny and very provocative.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Chesterton for me goes in the same category as D. H. Lawrence or Yukio Mishima, i.e. that they were all incredible authors and literary geniuses who also happened to have EXTREMELY reactionary politics.

[perardua]

Chesterton is an absolute joy to read. There is an ominous streak of inhumanity running through the most enthusiastic proponents of technological utopianism, whether the year is 1900 or 2017. This is a major concern of Chesterton’s, and I appreciate it. He is quite skeptical of “the new”, since he usually sees in “the new” a mere rehash of earlier fads. Then he goes into a long story about the intellectual milieu of the ancient world and its correspondences to the modern age and so on. I’m especially fond of the way he pictures the psychology of the people he is telling about – I really feel as though I’m right there in the Roman family, with their myriads of gods flying about the house like bats.

He also had a very matter-of-fact, down-to-earth way of piercing right through the hypocrisies and self-justifications of the apologists for cruelty and privilege of his day.

Calling his views ”extremely reactionary” is a bit harsh. Neither is the comparison with Mishima very solid - Chesterton thoroughly despised militarism, for one. He did say some silly things, and a few things that were downright vile (like his reflections on the fate of Oscar Wilde). As Luis Henrique alluded to, he had a pining for medieval society with its orderly patriarchal family and so on. There is that particularly shameful fling he had with Mussolini, which is very strange and quite out of character.

Despite all that, I detect in his writings a profoundly democratic mind. I definitely count him as “one of the good guys”.