Chesterton's Everlasting Man
A few days ago I noticed I was exactly halfway through the Fourfold Gospel plan, a chronological compilation and commentary on the gospels I've been working through since March. As Jesus faced more crowds and opposing, I began feeling worn out too. Unlike the disciples, I know the road ahead of him and need a break to refresh my mind and prepare myself for the intensity of leg two.
So, the gospels will be on hold for awhile. During the break, I plan to read the psalms quickly (well quickly for me) and Chesterton's Everlasting Man, published in 1925.
*********************
I wrote the lines above a few weeks ago now and have been making strides in both books. Chesterton has been busy laying an extensive attack against evolutionary theory (up to p. 27 in this electronic edition).
How do I find him thus far? In his calm and persistent theological plodding, I find him much like C.S. Lewis, who was deeply impacted by this work of Chesterton's as an atheist. I see the influence in Lewis's similar approach in Mere Christianity, a book that was foundational in my faith journey. Chesterton asks and answers a lot of questions in these beginning chapters, guiding the reader gently and humorously along his train of thought and conclusions. Here's an example of his playful use of repetition:
"One of my first journalistic adventures, or misadventures, concerned a comment on Grant Allen, who had written a book about the Evolution of the Idea of God. I happened to remark that it would be much more interesting if God wrote a book about the evolution of the idea of Grant Allen" (10).
Ha! I believe we take ourselves too seriously most of the time. Below are more of Chesterton's thoughts in these early chapters with no particular focus. I love his storytelling approach and gentle spirit---his vibe is more of a gentle guide than a dry apologist.
"There are two ways of getting home; and one of them is to stay there. The other is to walk round the whole world till we come back to the same place; and I tried to trace such a journey in a story I once wrote."
".... I do not believe in being dehumanized in order to study humanity. I do not believe in dwelling upon the distances that are supposed to dwarf the world; I think there is even something a trifle vulgar about this idea of trying to rebuke spirit by size" (10).
"Art is the signature of man" (18).
"In other words, every sane sort of history must begin with man as man, a thing standing absolute and alone" (19).
"Man is the microcosm; man is the measure of all things; man is the image of God These are the only real lessons to be learnt in the cave, and it is time to leave it for the open road" (19).
Reading this book ninety plus years later, it also strikes me that our culture's firm belief in evolutionary theory has moved far beyond where it was in 1925. Now, it is entrenched to the extent that we shape all of our medicine, diet, history, and social understanding around it as if it is to be expected.
I like the way Chesterton sorts the ideas about evolution into big and small potato piles. He asserts that we can conclude some things by approaching history from an evolutionary perspective but qualifies that our common sense insists that we cannot solve the initial riddle--something out of nothing. Nor can we fail to conclude that man is different from any other creature on this earth. These are his two main points of attack.
So, the gospels will be on hold for awhile. During the break, I plan to read the psalms quickly (well quickly for me) and Chesterton's Everlasting Man, published in 1925.
*********************
I wrote the lines above a few weeks ago now and have been making strides in both books. Chesterton has been busy laying an extensive attack against evolutionary theory (up to p. 27 in this electronic edition).
How do I find him thus far? In his calm and persistent theological plodding, I find him much like C.S. Lewis, who was deeply impacted by this work of Chesterton's as an atheist. I see the influence in Lewis's similar approach in Mere Christianity, a book that was foundational in my faith journey. Chesterton asks and answers a lot of questions in these beginning chapters, guiding the reader gently and humorously along his train of thought and conclusions. Here's an example of his playful use of repetition:
"One of my first journalistic adventures, or misadventures, concerned a comment on Grant Allen, who had written a book about the Evolution of the Idea of God. I happened to remark that it would be much more interesting if God wrote a book about the evolution of the idea of Grant Allen" (10).
Ha! I believe we take ourselves too seriously most of the time. Below are more of Chesterton's thoughts in these early chapters with no particular focus. I love his storytelling approach and gentle spirit---his vibe is more of a gentle guide than a dry apologist.
"There are two ways of getting home; and one of them is to stay there. The other is to walk round the whole world till we come back to the same place; and I tried to trace such a journey in a story I once wrote."
".... I do not believe in being dehumanized in order to study humanity. I do not believe in dwelling upon the distances that are supposed to dwarf the world; I think there is even something a trifle vulgar about this idea of trying to rebuke spirit by size" (10).
"Art is the signature of man" (18).
"In other words, every sane sort of history must begin with man as man, a thing standing absolute and alone" (19).
"Man is the microcosm; man is the measure of all things; man is the image of God These are the only real lessons to be learnt in the cave, and it is time to leave it for the open road" (19).
Reading this book ninety plus years later, it also strikes me that our culture's firm belief in evolutionary theory has moved far beyond where it was in 1925. Now, it is entrenched to the extent that we shape all of our medicine, diet, history, and social understanding around it as if it is to be expected.
I like the way Chesterton sorts the ideas about evolution into big and small potato piles. He asserts that we can conclude some things by approaching history from an evolutionary perspective but qualifies that our common sense insists that we cannot solve the initial riddle--something out of nothing. Nor can we fail to conclude that man is different from any other creature on this earth. These are his two main points of attack.
Comments