To: the invisib1e hand
There are many things that I find of value in Chesterton, but I will take Luther over Aquinas. Chesterton has an obvious bias against Luther, which I can understand; however, even scholars within the Roman Catholic Church have judged Luther far more kindly than Chesterton. I fear that Chesterton has become guilty of those very same principles which he disdains in others. I would also say that Chesterton has a distorted understanding of the teachings of Luther. Half truths can do more harm than out and out lies. I have always found the best way to judge someone is to actually read their writings and not take someone's views at face value. I have read Thomas and Luther, and I use many of Thomas's arguments in apologetics, and Luther at times gives high praise to Thomas. If you think that Luther is anti-philosophy, read St. Paul's view of philosophy. It is very easy to accept as true things that we want to be true. For those that for whatever reason want to vilify Luther, I can understand the joy that comes from reading Chesterton's tirade against Luther.
posted on 06/19/2010 11:39:42 AM PDT
There are many things that I find of value in Chesterton, but I will take Luther over Aquinas.
Chesterton took Aquinas over Luther and Augustine. You take Luther over Aquinus. And I will merely take all three.
I fear that Chesterton has become guilty of those very same principles which he disdains in others.
I think it was CS Lewis who said that Chesterton sometimes fell for the excesses of Belloc. Chesterton was a great writer, but he sometimes went to excess with exaggeration and caricature in his criticism.
Half truths can do more harm than out and out lies.
That is a very good point. If Chesterton had spent as much time trying to understand Luther as he did Aquinas, that last chapter on Aquinus would have been more balanced.
posted on 06/19/2010 12:28:52 PM PDT
("That if gold rust, what shall iron do?" --Chaucer)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson