We live in an age that revels in rebellion, that idolizes the myth of “thinking for myself.” In such an environment, adherence to a set of philosophic, historic, and theological norms is seen as silly at worst and oppressive at best. Orthodoxy is safe, boring, on this reading; the post-moderns tell us orthodoxy is the teaching of the powerful, the “winners” of history. And, as the so-called Occupy Movement has taught us, nobody wants to pull for the winners anymore. The effect of this cultural suicide in the church is the love-affair with the heterodox, seen in the odd passion for long-dead Gnostic sects and the popularity of speakers like John Shelby Spong (who jumped the shark years ago).
But alas, there is a balm in Gilead. His name is G.K. Chesterton. I’d heard much about Chesteron, but never read any of his major works. Now I’m most of the way through his most famous work, Orthodoxy. It is marvelous. Arguments aside, it is quite simply written beautifully. The man has a way with the language. He brings his considerable talents to bear describing how he came to discover the truth and then, to his surprise, discovered that he had arrived at orthodox Christianity.
This is the thrilling romance of Orthodoxy. People have fallen into a foolish habit of speaking of orthodoxy as something heavy, humdrum, and safe. There was never anything so perilous or so exciting as orthodoxy. It was sanity; and to be sane is more dramatic than to be mad. It was the equilibrium of a man behind madly rushing horses…she swerved to the left and right, so exactly as to avoid enormous obstacles…The orthodox church never took the tame course or accepted the conventions: the orthodox church was never respectable. It would have been easier to have accepted the earthly power of the Arians. It would have been easy, in the Calivinist seventeenth century, to fall into the bottomless pit of predestination. It is easy to be a madman; it is easy to be a heretic.
He argues that orthodoxy is a game of balance, and that the delicacy of that balance explains all the so-called hairsplitting over theological debates. If you’re balancing on the tip of a needle, it becomes a game of millimeters. Of course, I have to applaud him for taking a shot at the Calivinists right after the Arians (though I wouldn’t put them that close together). But what a grand vision of basic Christian teaching!
He concludes the chapter on “the paradoxes of Christianity” writing:
To have fallen into any one of the fads from Gnosticism to Christian Science would indeed have been obvious and tame. But to have avoided them all has been one whirling adventure; and in my vision the heavenly chariot flies thundering through the ages, the dull heresies sprawling and prostrate, the wild truth reeling but erect. (Orthodoxy [New York: Dover 2004], 94.)
Orwell once wrote, “We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.” Chesterton fulfilled this duty admirably. May we be so bold in our own time.