C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton have introduced many to the riches of Christianity, but Elliot Milco urges those of us who have benefited from their writing not to linger at the fringes of the faith:
Most of us go through a period of inquiry that marks the transition between the thoughtless practice of our parents’ faith and the adoption of faith as a living force in our own lives. This period of inquiry is sparked by different events in different people. Sometimes, as our friends shift toward the comfortable agnosticism of the age, we pause and look back and ask what we’re leaving behind. For others, after a period of rejection or doubt, some merit in the old ideas is revealed, or the tassels of popular theology brush up against us and alleviate our sorrows. Whatever it is that strikes us while we are ungrounded and brings us gracefully back to earth, we tend to see those first intimations of eternal glory as the touchstone and key to our theological lives. In my generation many people are touched this way by the Theology of the Body, or by the works of Chesterton and Lewis and their descendants. A spark of grace and hope leaps from these fringes of the Christian Tradition into the lives of young people and they hold fast to it.
Once we grab hold of faith, we tend to enshrine the voices that first called us to it, and, in accord with our delight and satisfaction with the gifts received, we tend to take these first hints of meaning and insight as fundamental: the most important, the most wonderful, the most accessible and upbuilding and beautiful. This tendency springs from our longing to have finished, to have understood once and for all what’s in store for us, not to need to strive for further transformation and development as participants in the divine truth handed down to us from the Apostles.
In fact, the longing to be done with thinking — to have divided the world cleanly between what is intelligible and already known, and what is mysterious and utterly unknowable — is one of the perpetual harbingers of heresy, ideology, and errant fideism. And, by contrast, the cautious recognition that the mysteries are both definitely intelligible and infinitely profound has been one of the continuous hallmarks of the Catholic Church throughout its history. The fullness of the Christian faith is in the Catholic Church, in the monuments of the tradition, in the liturgy and scripture and the writings of the saints. But this is a faith that is always being recorded, because no tablet of stone or stack of paper can contain the richness of its truth. Rather, it is written on the table of the heart, and the contents of this revelation, though perpetually the same, shine forth in ever new and different ways. To have the mystery truncated by enshrining those glimmers of it closest to hand and easiest to hear, is to kill the mystery and deprive ourselves of the elevation and spiritual wealth which make those glimmers so delightful in the first place. Instead we need to reach deeper and deeper into the past, to grab hold of that garment more insistently and greedily so that by embracing all of it, and not just the fringes closest to us, we find ourselves embracing Christ and seeing him face to face.




January 28th, 2013 | 1:45 pm
While Milco’s overall point is well-taken, I find his choice of Chesterton as an example curious. Obviously, there is always the temptation to make the gateways of our faith the endpoints, but nothing about Chesterton makes him particularly dangerous in that way.
For me, an appreciation of GKC came after advanced degrees in philosophy and theology and several years of daily mass attendance. Still, I found in Chesterton an excitement for daily living, a wonder at existence – and a theology/philosophy that made sense of it – that was sorely needed and can be of use to those who have known and loved the faith for years.
January 28th, 2013 | 2:48 pm
Obviously most people don’t discover GKC and Lewis “after advanced degrees in philosophy and theology and several years of daily mass attendance”. There’s not necessarily anything in this sort of stuff that makes people stop there (Lewis even laments at one point that people don’t read old books.) but they frequently do. I wasn’t commenting on Chesterton, Lewis, West, etc. in themselves, just on the way they’re lingered over by many people, who are either unaware that the riches of the tradition aren’t exhausted by popular theology, or are told that the greater works of the past are all, like St. Thomas’s Summa, too dry and inaccessible for the average reader (who doesn’t have advanced degrees and hasn’t studied theology).
Of course, this is false. Anyone who bothered to look at the works of of Bernard of Clairvaux, Gregory of Nazianzus, John Chrysostom, Athanasius, Jerome, etc. would find them not only accessible and beautifully written, but also Relevant and spiritually rich. There’s so much to gain from reading deeper into the tradition, I think it’s worthwhile to remind people that it’s waiting there for them.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact