Belloc to Chesterton to Lewis ...(or Tinkers to Evers to Chance)
Tom of Disputations has an interesting post discussing to what degree sharp sarcastic humor is acceptable for the Christian.
Three famous apologists defended the faith with varying degrees of "sharpness": Hilaire Belloc was bellicose enough to make an enemy of atheist H.G. Wells; Chesterton warm enough to count Wells a good friend. In Joseph Pearce's biography of Belloc, Pearce makes a compelling case that Chesterton's conversion was brought about in part by Belloc. And C.S. Lewis has said that Chesterton's "Everlasting Man" was instrumental in his conversion.
So we have Belloc - to - Chesterton -to- Lewis. Kinder and gentler was each succeeding one, to the point where Lewis, in an effort not to offend, suggested only mere Christianity was needed, while he himself believed in the Real Presence of the Eucharist and the doctrine of Purgatory (even though the latter was explicitly ruled out by his Anglican Church).
The kindler/gentler trend is not limited to apologists. From Trent to Vatican II, the swing has been towards the pastoral and away from the sectarian. Is this bad? I think not. But one could say: the state of Christianity got worse during that period of time - how effective could the "kindler/gentler" approach be? But what we do not know is how badly things could be. Imagine a world without C.S. Lewis and we imagine how much worse things would be. But Lewis did depend on Chesterton and Chesterton on Belloc. So Belloc deserves respect.
No comments:
Post a Comment