Tumgik
#g.k. chesterton
apesoformythoughts · 4 months
Text
“I know that [eugenics] numbers many disciples whose intentions are entirely innocent and humane; and who would be sincerely astonished at my describing it as I do. But that is only because evil always wins through the strength of its splendid dupes; and there has in all ages been a disastrous alliance between abnormal innocence and abnormal sin.”
— G.K. Chesterton: Eugenics and Other Evils
155 notes · View notes
momentsbeforemass · 4 months
Text
The best argument against Christianity
Tumblr media
One of the saddest things in ministry is finding out why someone left.
Why someone turned away from your church. Or worse, turned away from God.
It’s humbling and heartbreaking. All in the same moment.
Because it usually comes down to one of two things.
One, as they see it, God didn’t do something. Or God allowed something terrible to happen.
Which means that we (official church people, parents, other teachers of the faith, etc.) have failed them. By leaving them with a defective understanding of God and God’s love for them. Setting them up to have exactly this happen, when they hit the hard things in life.
Or two, someone they understood to be a Christian said or did something that so completely repulsed them that they (understandably) want nothing to do with the Faith.
This is the more subtle one. And it’s because of something that Jesus points out in today’s Gospel, “You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden.”
Translation – as followers of Christ, you and I are always visible. There is no time when what we say or do does not reflect back on God. There is no time when what we say or do does not impact someone’s understanding of God.
You and I may not intend to teach the Faith. But rest assured that every waking moment, you and I are teaching the Faith to someone.
Whether we know it or not, someone is looking at what we say, what we do, what we post online, and saying to themselves, “that’s what Christians do.”
That time that you treated the clerk like a thing, and not like a person? Someone saw that and said, “that’s what Christians do.”
That “just for fun” repost of nasty stuff about the people whose politics you disagree with? Someone saw that and said, “that’s what Christians do.”
When you and I let that be our witness? It should be no surprise that they want nothing to do with us or our Faith.
“The best argument against Christianity is Christians.” – G.K. Chesterton
Today’s Readings
105 notes · View notes
Text
Tumblr media
"A people that forgets its ancestors will care little for its descendants."
G.K. Chesterton
403 notes · View notes
fictionadventurer · 4 months
Note
"but my regret here is not quite as bad as my regret that we never got chesterton-penned star trek"
No offense, but I don't think Gene Roddenbury would have been caught dead letting a devout Catholic like Chesterton into Star Trek.
H.G. Wells brought him in. Under a pen name. Gene didn't know it was Chesterton until after it became everyone's favorite episode of all time.
80 notes · View notes
francesderwent · 1 year
Text
But is the comfortable doctrine...that we are all inevitably mild. We cannot be monsters of vice. We need not be monsters of virtue. And everyone loses sight of the true and terrible and inspiriting doctrine—the old doctrine that unless we strive every instant to be monsters of virtue, we ourselves may easily be monsters of vice. There is nothing nearer to us than madness; as every man knows who recalls some one moment of his life. “Inhuman monsters do not really exist, except in fairy-tales”! There are plenty of inhuman monsters in the modern world; inhuman monsters control commerce and rule continents. The only real difference between fairy-tale and modern fact is this: that in fairy-tales the monsters are fought. That is one of the very many superiorities of fairy-tales.
--G.K. Chesterton, Illustrated London News, February 3, 1906
267 notes · View notes
hexagr · 2 months
Text
G.K. Chesterton waxes poetic about defending seemingly pointless things and lost causes:
In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.” This paradox rests on the most elementary common sense. The gate or fence did not grow there. It was not set up by somnambulists who built it in their sleep. It is highly improbable that it was put there by escaped lunatics who were for some reason loose in the street. Some person had some reason for thinking it would be a good thing for somebody. And until we know what the reason was, we really cannot judge whether the reason was reasonable. It is extremely probable that we have overlooked some whole aspect of the question, if something set up by human beings like ourselves seems to be entirely meaningless and mysterious. There are reformers who get over this difficulty by assuming that all their fathers were fools; but if that be so, we can only say that folly appears to be a hereditary disease. But the truth is that nobody has any business to destroy a social institution until he has really seen it as an historical institution. If he knows how it arose, and what purposes it was supposed to serve, he may really be able to say that they were bad purposes, that they have since become bad purposes, or that they are purposes which are no longer served. But if he simply stares at the thing as a senseless monstrosity that has somehow sprung up in his path, it is he and not the traditionalist who is suffering from an illusion.
40 notes · View notes
idratherdreamofjune · 3 months
Text
"By Jove!" said Flambeau; "it's like being in fairyland." Father Brown sat bolt upright in the boat and crossed himself. His movement was so abrupt that his friend asked him, with a mild stare, what was the matter. "The people who wrote the medieval ballads," answered the priest, "knew more about fairies than you do. It isn't only nice things that happen in fairyland." "Oh, bosh!" said Flambeau. "Only nice things could happen under such an innocent moon. I am for pushing on now and seeing what does really come. We may die and rot before we ever see again such a moon or such a mood." "All right," said Father Brown. "I never said it was always wrong to enter fairyland. I only said it was always dangerous."
G.K. Chesterton, The Innocence of Father Brown
38 notes · View notes
eternal-echoes · 9 months
Text
“But it is obvious, anyhow, that when we call a man a coward, we are in so doing asking him how he can be a coward when he could be a hero. When we rebuke a man for being a sinner, we imply that he has the powers of a saint.” 
- G.K. Chesterton
136 notes · View notes
twistedtummies2 · 1 month
Text
Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes - Number 14
Welcome to A Gathering of the Greatest Gumshoes! During this month-long event, I’ll be counting my Top 31 Favorite Fictional Detectives, from movies, television, literature, video games, and more!
SLEUTH-OF-THE-DAY’S QUOTE: “You attacked reason. It’s bad theology.”
Number 14 is…Father Brown.
Tumblr media
Originally created by author G.K. Chesterton, Father Brown is one of the most famous detectives in English literature. Having said that, I must immediately make a confession: I’m not THAT well-versed (perhaps surprisingly) with the original “Father Brown” short stories Chesterton wrote. I’ve read some of them; specifically, I’ve now read all the ones collected in the book “The Innocence of Father Brown.” (My favorite is “The Invisible Man,” which, for the record, has absolutely nothing to do with anyone named Griffin). However, beyond that, I’m not especially familiar with the original writing. I also have not seen either of the two English-language film versions I know about (one played by Walter Connolly, another by Alec Guinness), both of which were based on the story “The Blue Cross.” And I should also immediately state that I have seen only one episode of the TV series starring Kenneth More from the 1970s, which I know has been highly lauded in years since.
So…since it seems like I am unfamiliar with nearly EVERYTHING that has brought this character into popular culture…how DO I know Father Brown, and why is he so high on the list? Well, because there is one version of the character and his universe that I am VERY familiar with: the most recent TV series adaptation of the stories, which began in 2013 and is still going strong today (with a new season coming this year). This show, simply and appropriately titled “Father Brown,” stars Mark Williams (whom many may recognize for playing Mr. Weasley in the Harry Potter films). While it frequently changes a LOT from the original Chesterton stories, the show is still EXTREMELY good. In my opinion, it modernizes the stories in a way that is pretty decently handled, so that even if you haven’t read the originals, you can still get a lot out of what’s being given to you. The spirit of Chesterton’s work is still intact. Much of what I say here will be informed by Williams’ portrayal of the character, which is why I wanted to make all this clear right off the bat.
Father Brown is an example of what might be called “the busybody detective,” or even more appropriately “the accidental detective.” What I mean by this is that he’s not in any way officially tied to the police; in fact, the police frequently see him as a nuisance, who gets in the way of their work and often makes them look like fools. He also never makes a career or a proper hobby out of his detective work. Being a detective just…kind of happens to him. Father Brown, on the surface, is a simple and humble local priest; a God-fearing, God-loving man of the cloth who is charitable, good-hearted, and at times seems sort of fumbling and shambolic. He’s not someone, therefore, you’d expect would make a great sleuth.
A great sleuth, of course, is exactly what this mild-mannered Catholic priest is. Father Brown’s rather simple demeanor belies a steely will, an even more steely faith, and a very cunning and alert mind. He typically ends up playing detective not so much out of a desire to one-up the police or some obsessive desire, but simply because he notices something amiss and begins to question why that is. His greatest assets as a sleuth can be summed up as two simple attributes: common sense, and, above all, human empathy. Father Brown doesn’t necessarily look for fingerprints or psychoanalyze criminals like a forensic profiler, but simply notices things that don’t make sense and then tries to make sense of them. He uses his understanding of people’s personalities, looks at their character traits and ideals, and uses them to his advantage; if he feels it isn’t in someone’s nature to shoot in cold blood, he follows his instinct, and he’s usually proven correct. If he sees someone showing some weakness or vulnerability, he latches onto that to try and sway them. He tries to redeem his enemies more often than he tries to ruin them. Contrariwise, this man also knows when NOT to trust people. While he’s noble and forgiving, Father Brown isn’t a pushover. In fact, the Williams version is revealed to be a war veteran; he’s seen some action (and horror) in his lifetime. This, combined with his devotion to the confessional booth, means that he knows very well that people are not perfect. With that said, despite being a religious soul, he isn’t superstitious, and tries to be tolerant of others with different beliefs. In short, Father Brown seems to understand that good people are good people, and tries to find the good in everyone, even those he seeks to defeat. Whether you’re spiritual or not, he’s not only a good detective, but arguably a good role model: I think a lot of us wish we had a Father Brown in our lives.
Tomorrow, the countdown continues with Number 13!
CLUE: “Are you with me? You might even be way ahead of me.”
12 notes · View notes
a8ra · 6 months
Text
Tumblr media
“The center of every man’s existence is a dream. Death, disease, insanity, are merely material accidents, like a toothache or a twisted ankle. That these brutal forces always besiege and often capture the citadel does not prove that they are the citadel.”
~G.K. Chesterton
21 notes · View notes
apesoformythoughts · 2 months
Text
“In one letter [to Frances, Chesterton] signs himself as ‘always your own adoring nuisance,’ adding as a postscript: ‘By the way,—I love you. I thought the fact might interest you.’”
— Ian Ker: G. K. Chesterton: A Biography
120 notes · View notes
momentsbeforemass · 3 months
Text
If it's worth doing
Tumblr media
In today’s Gospel, Jesus calls the Pharisees out on their BS. Again.
This time? It’s their focus on doing exactly the right things exactly the right way. And being so into doing exactly the right things exactly the right way, that they lose sight of why they were doing them in the first place.
Next Wednesday is Valentine’s Day. And there are a lot of ways to ruin.
Imagine that you know exactly what would mean the most to your significant other. And it’s something surprisingly affordable. Because the love of your life is a good person with simple tastes.
You get it for them and give it to them on Valentine’s Day. Sure enough, they love it.
They say, “How did you know? It’s perfect. Thank you so much!”
At this point, most of us would say something like, “I’m so glad you like it. I wanted to get you something you really wanted. Happy Valentine’s Day!”
If you really mean it, they’ll know it. And that gift will in fact be the perfect gift. Because of what’s behind it.
But if your response is something like, “Good. Now maybe you’ll shut up about Valentine’s Day.”
That changes everything. And what would have otherwise been the perfect gift will be ruined. Because of what’s behind it.
This is what Jesus is calling out.
It’s surefire way to take anything – no matter how good or holy it may be, no matter how perfectly you may do it – and ruin it.
Because the good and holy things that God is calling us to do aren’t to be done grudgingly or through clenched teeth. And they’re not about perfect performance.
The important part of the good and holy things that God is calling us to do is what’s behind them.
That we do them out of love. Out of love for God. And out of love for others.
In fact, it’s so important that you and I do them out of love, that it’s worth the risk that we might do them imperfectly.
This is what Chesterton meant when he said that “if a thing is worth doing, it’s worth doing badly.”
Not because you don’t care how it’s done, not because you’re not trying to do it well. But because the important part isn’t doing it perfectly. The important part is what’s behind it.
Because in the end, that’s what God’s looking for.
Not perfect performance from us, but perfected love through Him.
Because it’s not what you do, it’s what’s behind it. That’s the part that matters to God.
Today’s Readings
23 notes · View notes
withnailrules · 1 year
Text
“Madness does not come by breaking out, but by giving in; by settling down in some dirty, little, self-repeating circle of ideas; by being tamed.”
G.K. Chesterton
54 notes · View notes
the-oddest-inkling · 2 years
Text
"We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green." - G.K. Chesterton
200 notes · View notes
fictionadventurer · 1 year
Text
Not to make yet another It's a Wonderful Life post, but I keep thinking about the fact that George Bailey comes back from the alternate reality seeing everything he didn't like about his life as a blessing. That's not a deep insight--it's the explicit message of the film--but what strikes me is how specific it is. It's not just the big things he's grateful for; every little annoyance from his meltdown is turned into a blessing in the final scene because of his alternate universe experience.
The bleeding lip that pushed him over the edge of despair becomes a cause for joy because it means he's alive again. His wrecked car is a cause for rejoicing because it means he exists. When he was having his meltdown, he raged against their drafty, rundown house, but seeing it as a wreck made him ecstatic to have the chance to come back to it as a cozy home. He sniped at Mary, "Why do we have to have all these kids?" but comes back home and gathers them all up in his arms because he's so grateful they exist.
Even down to--for some reason, this is the detail that really gets me--even the annoying Christmas carol that his kid was playing over and over on the piano becomes the joyful anthem that the entire community sings in that final moment of triumph. Everything is a blessing now that George has the proper perspective. The things he thought he didn't want became the things he was overjoyed to have after a short time in a world where they were gone. The way to love anything is to realize that it may be lost and the ending of this movie is a wonderfully detailed illustration of that message.
604 notes · View notes
francesderwent · 1 year
Text
My trouble is that I never can really feel that there is such a thing as a different subject. There is no such thing as an irrelevant thing in the universe; for all the things in the universe are at least relevant to the universe. It is my psychological disease (since one must have a psychological disease of some sort nowadays, and this is the best I can do) it is my psychological disease that I never can see disconnected things without connecting them together in a train of thought. --G.K. Chesterton, Illustrated London News, February 17, 1906
Tumblr media
94 notes · View notes